Hollosi Information eXchange /HIX/
HIX HUNGARY 820
Copyright (C) HIX
1996-10-18
Új cikk beküldése (a cikk tartalma az író felelőssége)
Megrendelés Lemondás
1 40 years ago today: 16 October (mind)  14 sor     (cikkei)
2 Re: Logic, Church, and State (mind)  45 sor     (cikkei)
3 Re: Town in Hungary? (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
4 Re: The 1700s (mind)  22 sor     (cikkei)
5 Re: P.Soltesz or C'Sermon from the mount (mind)  1 sor     (cikkei)
6 Re: Himes Tojasok (mind)  11 sor     (cikkei)
7 40 years ago today: 17 October 1956 (mind)  15 sor     (cikkei)
8 Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind)  1 sor     (cikkei)
9 Re: How to get from Budapest to Timisoara (mind)  3 sor     (cikkei)
10 Re: What is history based on? (mind)  103 sor     (cikkei)
11 Re: Translation was IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind)  5 sor     (cikkei)
12 Re: Town in Hungary? (mind)  11 sor     (cikkei)
13 Re: 40 years ago today: 17 October 1956 (mind)  37 sor     (cikkei)
14 Tom Lantos :-(( (fwd) (mind)  68 sor     (cikkei)
15 Re: P.Soltesz or C'Sermon from the mount (mind)  7 sor     (cikkei)
16 Re: Town in Hungary? (mind)  18 sor     (cikkei)
17 Re: Amazing America (mind)  25 sor     (cikkei)
18 Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind)  6 sor     (cikkei)
19 Re: What's in a name? (mind)  2 sor     (cikkei)
20 Re: Town in Hungary? (mind)  10 sor     (cikkei)
21 Re: The 1700s (mind)  99 sor     (cikkei)
22 Re: Chancellery was: The 1700s (mind)  46 sor     (cikkei)
23 Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind)  6 sor     (cikkei)
24 Re: What is history based on? (mind)  128 sor     (cikkei)
25 Re: Comment: Ten Untaught Lessons about Central Europe (mind)  65 sor     (cikkei)
26 Re: Chancellery was: The 1700s (mind)  56 sor     (cikkei)
27 Hungarian Service (mind)  25 sor     (cikkei)
28 Re: The 1700s (mind)  35 sor     (cikkei)
29 Re: Amazing America (mind)  22 sor     (cikkei)
30 Re: Suicide in Hungary (mind)  19 sor     (cikkei)
31 Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind)  6 sor     (cikkei)

+ - 40 years ago today: 16 October (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

16 October 1956

Tito gives a reception for the Hungarian party and government delegation in
Belgrade.

Gomulka is a guest at the meeting of Polish Politburo.

The university students at Szeged re-establish the pre-coommunist era
student association, the MEFESZ.

The playwrite Gyula Hay makes a speech at Gyor. HIs audience demands the
withdrawal of Soviet troops from Hungary.

Where were you on that day?
+ - Re: Logic, Church, and State (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 05:35 PM 10/16/96 -0400 Zoli Szekely wrote:

>Blanket condemnation of countries involved in deportations
>is another question and I am against it. Jews were deported
>from Hungary and it is a shame on the country. But you can
>not say that Hungary as a country or Hungarians as a nation
>should be condemned. It would be a misunderstanding of the
>issue and a mistreatment of the Holocaust itself.

I don't think I ever said any of these things. I do blame the government,
however, a government that adopted gradually stricter laws and policies
against the Jews, preparing the ground for the "final solution". Also,
comparing Hungary to Denmark, more could have been done.

>The Holocaust was a tragedy for Hungarian people also. Some
>Hungarians took part in the deportations, but not everyone
>approved it. It was forced on the Hungarian politics by an
>exteme minority. The majority of the people were not
>enthusiastic about labeling and deporting fellow Hungarians.

To those who were deported it did not make to much of a difference whether
those who did it to them did it enthusiastically or not.

>(Also, Hungarian Jews were a part of the nation. The great
>Hungarian poet, Radnoti Miklos accepted Hungary as his
>homeland. He wrote very nice poems about Hungary and he did
>not only identify himself with the Hungarian culture, but
>also added to it significantly. Too bad he had to die.)

I agree with this completely. Those who deported Radnoti (and the others)
did not.

>> >In Hungary they still teach Darwinism as the only possible
>> >approach to the origin of the humankind.
>>
>> In most US public schools this is the case too.
>According to my knowledge, in US public schools the creation
>is also mentioned, as an alternative to the Darwinism.

This is possible.  But you said "teach", which is different from"mention".
And I doubt it that creationism is mentioned as a scientifically accepted
alternative. Any teachers on line who can confirm this? Or parents of
school-age children?

Gabor D. Farkas
+ - Re: Town in Hungary? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 3:07 PM 10/16/96, L & P Hall wrote:
>Any guesses would be appreciated.
>Was there a town in Hungary called "Oyhell"  (phonetic spelling)
>between the years 1867 and 1890?  If so, what is the correct spelling?
>Closest city?
>
>
>
>Thanks
>Lynn Mandel
>Lynn

>http://pathfinder.com/twep/mysterious_press/hall

Ujhely, short for Satoraljaujhely (maybe)
+ - Re: The 1700s (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

jeliko wrote:
>
> Peter Hidas writes:
>
> >At 10:39 AM 10/15/96, jeliko wrote:
> >
> >>>        Twelfth-century western "tourists" mention the plenty Hungarian
> >>>lands produced and the beauty of the countryside, but at the same time
> >>>notice that there are hardly any buildings built of stone.
> >>
> >>This is interesting, would you please cite some specific source from the
XII
> >>century.
> >
----

What about the Architect Villard de Honnecourt from the Cambrai region
of today's France (then France as we know it today hardly existed). He
traveled in Hungary around 1230's and describes large cities with wide
streets and Gothic cathedrals larger than those in his homeland.

Albert Albu
+ - Re: P.Soltesz or C'Sermon from the mount (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

is this a political newsgroup or service for hungary?
+ - Re: Himes Tojasok (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

well what do you know about michael josvai born in szendro january
11, 1890 or barbara balas (or balasz( born april 10, 1897?  i
especially want to know anything about either or their parents and
copeis of documents if any


especiall the ship tht brought them to america between 1908 and 1916
thanks

they resided in pittsburgh since their marriage in 1916 on blair
street, then frayne street....help
+ - 40 years ago today: 17 October 1956 (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

17 October 1956

Negotiations in Belgrade are concluded.

The communist party cell of the Writers' Union demands the calling of a
party congress. The resolution is published in the IRODALMI UJSAG (Literary
Gazette) three days later.

In the Petofi Circle Gabor Pap's article on HUNGARY, A GARDEN STATE? is
discussed. The debate is lead by Ferenc Donath and Andras Magyar. Zoltan
Tildy comments on the modernization on Hungary's agriculture.

Premier of the film HANNIBAL TANAR UR (The Teacher Mr. Hannibal).

Were you there?
+ - Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

can "suzanne" be translated into hungaria?
+ - Re: How to get from Budapest to Timisoara (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

any current or historical information about city of szendro in the
county of borsod...postcards??? records? english speaking citizens?
 main type of work in tht city?  help
+ - Re: What is history based on? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Eva Balogh writes:
>        Jeliko, Where on earth do you get the idea that historians don't use
>documents of this sort? Especially such a famous one as the "Tihanyi
>alapitolevel," which is terribly important both historically and
>linguistically. In fact, it has been combed through with fine tooth comb by
>hundreds of historians. I happen to have here a bibliography, covering the
>works of Hungarian historians between 1945 and 1968. During this period
>there were five articles just on the "Tihanyi alapitolevel," starting with
>"the problems of the Tihanyi alapitolevel" and continuing with "traces of
>French latinity in the Tihanyi alapitolevel." Gyorgy Gyorffy, the famous
>medieval historian, wrote another article in which he claims that "the
>Tihanyi alapitolevel--hitherto considered to be a fake and dated 1055"
>actually has a section which is genuine and contains a gift to ten of Bela
>I's servants (1060-1063).
>
Yes, I am familiar with Gyorffy's analysis of Tihany, but I do not
understand, why the analysis of the "traces of French Latinity" was more
important than the traces of early Hungarian. Yes, one could estimate what
was the influence of various geography spheres of Christianity on the
developing Hungarian Church by analyzing the Latinity of the early document,
but when it gets to incorporating the analysis of such documents into the
generic history tomes, more Hungarian historians than not ignore this type
of information and fall back to copying the thoughts of previous generic
history writers.
If anything, there is a very large sectionalized history writing in Hungary,
but when it comes to a comprehensive integration of the available
information, most of the tomes
are wanting and furthermore are biased toward a particular view, whether
nationalist,
internationalist or west/east oriented, i.e. they are heavily politicised.

>        The kind of information Jeliko quoted from the Tihanyi alapitolevel
>has been thoroughly utilized in books like Istvan Szabo, *A falurendszer
>kialakulasa Magyarorszagon: X-XV. szazad," Budapest, 1966. In it, Istvan
>Szabo estimates the number of villages for a few thousand in the 10-11th
>centuries and about 20-21,000 in the 15-16th centuries. As for the "mansio,"
>which Jeliko mentions by name from the Tihanyi alapitolevel, here is another
>article just on that: Ilona Bolla, "A jobbagytelek kialakulasanak
>kerdesehez. (A "curia" es "mansio" terminusok jelentesvaltozasa az
>Arpad-korban.)" And one could go on and on but I will mention only one more:
>Otto Trogmayer, "Gyumolcsoskert 750 evvel ezelott." [Orchard 750 Years Ago.]
>Where do you think these gentlemen got their information from if not from
>contemporary documents?

Well, I have seen very little about gyumolcsoskert in the document,
vineyards yes, but not much on gyumpolcsoskert (orchard). I have put the
mansio in because a "house" is not the exact equivalent (it certainly, in
this context has nothing to do with mansion! Again, in the context of what I
am complaining about, I could not care less about the difference between
curia and mansion.) maybe "abode" would express the word better as used in
the document. But that is again a subanalysis of a word from the document.
The development of the falurendszer (village system) is again different from
an economic evaluation. The presence of specialized tradesman in the
community which was granted to the monastery is what I considered also
significant. These tradesman existed in these communities before the
monastery was established. Are these representative of other community
tradesmen compositions? Are they representative of population based on the
140 mansios (assuming 140 family heads, and possibly 560 souls)? What is the
significance of those trades that are This is what is not discussed in
additions to the hadiut (military road) in the publications I am aware of.


>        It is all fine and dandy to have an interest in history and I do
>hope that more and more people will read at least reliable secondary
>sources, but it is wrong to assume that historians are just a bunch of
>ignorami who don't even know how to use original sources; or, if they do,
>they simply neglect to consult them. I can assure Jeliko that a historian's
>life is a busy one.

Eva, you are not settle about your attempted patronizing "putdowns". They do
not bother me, I am used to them.

>Even those historian friends who had the good fortune in
>Hungary of not teaching worked more than eight hours a day by reading,
>taking notes, thinking, and writing. Not easy, I can assure you, especially
>if you add teaching and other administrative duties to research. For
>diplomatic historians there is another problem: archives must be consulted
>in different countries. Several languages must be mastered: at least Latin,
>French, German, and English, in addition to Hungarian in our case and
>depending on the topic it doesn't hurt to know the languages of the
>neighbors. As for the study of the Habsburg Monarchy, as Macartney said in
>the introduction to his book on the monarchy: it is almost an impossible
>task because one must learn so many languages and be familiar with so many
>national histories. Even he undertook the task with reluctance.

Well, I spend only 10 seconds a day on history (-:, and I am afraid my Greek
requires the use of a dictionary and those crazy Slavs use words which are
not always matched word for word in Russian. Except for King Alfred, which
was more Saxon than current English, there is only meager original
information in English. In some places after the Anjou times, a little
Italian helps also. I am also too old to learn reading or understanding
Turkish or Persian or Arabic, so in those cases I suffer through
translations. Besides,some reading is also required for my job also. But I
do comprehend a well constructed analysis of most historical texts relating
to the Carpathian basin and often can see the missing or biased information.
And unfortunately for my book budgets, and to my wife chagrin, I have a
chance to read the original sources and not only the bibliography, at least
for the times I am interested in. (Just a little return of the same medicine
you were dishing out (-:.) Of course, I would have the same feelings if a
historian criticised for example a transuranic accelerator driven
transmutation versus a fast reactor burnup discussion.

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: Translation was IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>can "suzanne" be translated into hungaria?

Try Zsuzsanna for a start.

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: Town in Hungary? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Peter I. Hidas wrote:
> At 3:07 PM 10/16/96, L & P Hall wrote:
> >Was there a town in Hungary called "Oyhell"  (phonetic spelling)
> Ujhely, short for Satoraljaujhely (maybe)
 My guess was Becsujhely, which was perhaps (relatively) bigger then?!

 --
 Zoli , keeper of <http://www.hix.com/hungarian-faq/>;
*SELLERS BEWARE: I will never buy anything from companies associated
*with inappropriate online advertising (unsolicited commercial email,
*excessive multiposting etc), and discourage others from doing so too!
+ - Re: 40 years ago today: 17 October 1956 (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Peter Hidas writes:
>17 October 1956
>
>Negotiations in Belgrade are concluded.
>
>The communist party cell of the Writers' Union demands the calling of a
>party congress. The resolution is published in the IRODALMI UJSAG (Literary
>Gazette) three days later.
>
>In the Petofi Circle Gabor Pap's article on HUNGARY, A GARDEN STATE? is
>discussed. The debate is lead by Ferenc Donath and Andras Magyar. Zoltan
>Tildy comments on the modernization on Hungary's agriculture.
>
>Premier of the film HANNIBAL TANAR UR (The Teacher Mr. Hannibal).
>
>Were you there?

The Petofi Circle discussion was very interesting. There was more between
the lines (sentences) than in what was actually said. The garden state issue
bordered between the romantic and the illusionary. It was somewhat based on
the Gyula Nemeth thoughts, without understanding that in the second half of
the XX century, a "garden state" concept would not help the other problems
of Hungary. Of course there was resentment of the haphazard heavy industry
promotion versus the potential changes in agriculture. This issue was also
relevant because of the differences in this regard between the Imre Nagy and
Rakosi groups. It was an exciting, but particularly in retrospect a naive
theory.

Several days earlier, I have attended the press review of the "Hannibal
tanar ur" movie. For the press review, the hirado (newsreel) showed the Rajk
funeral and when Imre Nagy was shown, the audience stood up and applauded.
The movie was also considered by some allegorical, which could be understood
if the Germans and the Italians were substituted for Russians. To me, the
allegory was significant, but I have talked to people years later in Hungary
who did not see it.

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Tom Lantos :-(( (fwd) (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

TISZTESSEGES MAGYAR ZSIDOKNAK IS TORKIG ELEGUK VAN A
SZELSOSEGES LIBERALIS, MAGYARELLENES LANTOS-KURZUSBOL

[Az alabbi levelet Hoffman George irta Lantosnak, tiltakozvan a
Lantos altal acsolt horribilis alapszerzodes ellen. Hoffman ur
ugyancsak magyarorszagi szuletesu zsido, raadasul kitunoen
tajekozott mind magyarorszagi ugyekben (hiszen most otthon,
Budapesten el, Hollywood-bol hazakoltozve), mind pedig jol ismeri a
szornyuseges erdelyi allapotokat, melyek a borzalmas
"alapszerzodes" nyoman meg csak sokkal rosszabbak lesznek.
Hoffman ur levelebol atsut az aggodalom, sot rossz sejteset nyiltan
kimondja, hogy Lantos a magyar zsidosagnak is oriasi karokat okoz
magyarellenes arulasaval - Nemzet kommentator]

From:   GEORGE HOFFMANN,
100324,1626 TO:
Congressman Lantos,
INTERNET:
DATE:   10/10/96 3:00 AM

RE:     Copy of: Hoke-Lantos Resolution

Dear Congressman Lantos,

I am a United States citizen with similar background as yours, having
been born in Hungary and a Jew. Furthermore, I have been a
California Machinist Union political activist, a Democrat, although not
from your District as I am from North Hollywood. I reside currently
in Hungary, due to the never realized conversion dollars for laid off
defense industry workers. I will cast my absentee vote for President
Clinton and will personally travel to California to join the
organization to defeat Pete Wilson, when his post is due for re-
election.

I would like to describe to you observations of a recent trip to
Brassov, Romania. I was visiting friends in that town and our only
mutually shared language is Hungarian. We had been reprimanded
several times by strangers for talking Hungarian in public. Trying to
find my mother's birthplace, we have driven through small villages
where I have spoken to simple peasants who spoke beautiful
Hungarian and several expressed their concern for this ill conceived
treacherous treaty among old comerades.

I am very familiar with your record about fighting for minority
rights and I am equally familiar with the important role you played
to discredit the previous Boross Administration of Hungary. Needless
to say that I agreed with both activities.

I am now concerned that you want to lend credibility to this horrible
pact between the old/new communist comerades in which they
signed away several rights of the Hungarian minority in Romania.
You must have read the text of the Treaty and I am sure that your
keen eyes were not misled by the wording of Articles 14 and 15. I
wonder what would be the feedback from the Mexican American
community if the two governments would sign a contract that would
prohibit educational, cultural and other public use of the Spanish
language. You must be aware of progroms in Kolozsvar where this
time not Jews but Hungarians were mistreated by mobs, encouraged
by the local Admisnistration.

I beg you to keep your civil rights records intact and do not
acknowledge the originators of this horrible bilateral treaty.

I would appreciate a real reaction rather than an automated reply.

Respectfully yours,

George A Hoffmann  1132 Budapest  Visegradi u 9. IV.7.  Hungary
+ - Re: P.Soltesz or C'Sermon from the mount (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Hopefully it acts as whatever is required related to Hungarian issues.
Peter Soltesz

On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, elvira wrote:

> is this a political newsgroup or service for hungary?
>
+ - Re: Town in Hungary? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>Any guesses would be appreciated.
>Was there a town in Hungary called "Oyhell"  (phonetic spelling)
>between the years 1867 and 1890?  If so, what is the correct spelling?
>Closest city?
>
>
>
>Thanks
>Lynn Mandel
>Lynn

>http://pathfinder.com/twep/mysterious_press/hall


This sounds like Ujhely; trouble is, that there is probably a specifier in
front of this, cf. Satoraljaujhely, in NE Hungary.

Louis Elteto
+ - Re: Amazing America (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

In article >, Zoltan Szekely
> writes:

>Anyway, you are kinda' curious about my financial status, aren't you! Why
>are you so caring for me? Why do I deserve this special treatment of
yours?
>May I know that? I'm just puzzled like a stone... Maybe you have a secret
>intention ...? ... huhh, to marry me, or what !? Oh boy, don't scare me
to
>death! Please!     ;-(      ;-(      ;-(
>
>

Attaboy! You're such a great catch for any woman on the face of the earth
that you have to be cautious about these babes coming onto you. And you're
"puzzled like a stone"? Dumb as a stump, yes. Puzzled like a stone? Who
can tell?
Sam Stowe

"Up next on NBC Nightly News, they're highly
prized by both parties -- soccer moms. Who are
they? And what do they want?"
-- NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw, Oct.
15, making an ill-considered attempt to practice
relevant journalism.
+ - Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, elvira wrote:

> can "suzanne" be translated into hungaria?
>--------------
   Yes. It can be either Zsuzsa or Zsuzsanna -
                                               Amos
+ - Re: What's in a name? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Thank you Jeliko.
Peter
+ - Re: Town in Hungary? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 03:07 PM 10/16/96 GMT, you wrote:
>Any guesses would be appreciated.
>Was there a town in Hungary called "Oyhell"  (phonetic spelling)
>between the years 1867 and 1890?  If so, what is the correct spelling?
>Closest city?

        Ujhely? But most likely that is also abbreviated because "ujhely"
very often simply tagged on to another word to form a placename.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: The 1700s (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 04:35 PM 10/16/96 -0400, Jeliko wrote:

>Unfortunately often the original work is based on the interpretation of
>other earlier generic works who's writers were not familiar with the basic
>documents either.

        Let's make a few distinctions. Something which we call a "monograph"
usually concentrates on a small topic. It is about 20-25 pages long. It is
full of footnotes. And normally based on original research. It is, of
course, unlikely that the author of a monograph is threading on virgin soil.
Most likely, dozens of other historians in the last 100-150 years have
already tackled the problem and came up with different conclusions. Our
author must be also familiar with the secondary sources of his topic in
order to present his own, hopefully unique, conclusion.

        On the other hand, a general history, usually in book form on a
larger topic, let's say Hungary's place in Europe between 900 and 1440,
covers hundreds of years and every facet of history. One cannot expect the
author to rely only on original research, he must also use respected
secondary sources. Moreover, different books are written with different
audience in mind. Pal Engel's book, for example, is targeting history
teachers of high schools and other laymen interested in history. Such a book
will most likely have no footnotes and will be relatively short.

        Admittedly, it can happen that a historian simply adopts the
conclusion of others before him. Therefore it is likely that our researcher
will be able to sort his secondary sources into categories A, B, C, etc.
Those who hold X, those who hold Y, and those who hold Z. But it doesn't
mean that they are all wrong, or that they did a lousy job at research, or
that they don't know foreign languages and mistranslate them. I think Jeliko
decided some time ago that historians are just a bunch of lazy idiots.

>Already the "beagyazottsag" gives me the wiilies. Is this an example of
>nyelvujitas?

        You may not like Glatz's prose but that doesn't mean that the series
under his editorship is useless.

>Certainly, nobody's history can be written in a vacuum. At least the
>contacts, wars
>and commercial aspects of any country need to be evaluated together with the
>archeological. etc, information. I am glad that the relevant to Hungarian
>Eouropean history takes up 70 odd pages. I wonder if it is an abstract.

        It is not an abstract. It is a concise summary of important European
events. Again, you have to keep in mind what the goal of the series is. You
keep mixing up the concept and methods of a monograph with a book written
with high school teachers in mind.

>but is it good to base history strictly on a comparative basis without
>having all of the details?

        How do you know that Pal Engel or many other Hungarian historians
who also recognize the relative underdevelopment of Eastern Europe base
their findings "without having all of the details." This is outright
ridiculous. Behind such book is a lifetime of study and generations of
historians before him. I have never met Pal Engel but I resent the notion
that the four authors: Pal Engel, Ferenc Szakaly, Domokos Kosary, and Ferenc
Glatz are writing history without knowing all the details. Out of these four
I know personally only Domokos Kosary (just retired president of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences) who is in his eighties and an exceedingly
bright, very knowledgeable man on the Englightenment. And a real
old-fashioned European gentleman to boot. He will write on the period
between 1711 and 1867.

>Well, a few miles south or east of Brasso is and was not Hungary anymore.
>Outside Nagyszeben it was the farmlands and forrests of the Saxons, where
>the good folks preferred for logical reason to concentrate themselves in
>walled cities. Temesvar is a puzzler, but in those days it was a swamp, thus
>it could be called dismal (or protected wetlands if you are pc) Around Pecs,
>in the honfoglalas time there were many villages (outside the mountain area)
>but it is true that later many of them were destroyed by the Mongols.

        You are taking things too literally in the first place. What Pal
Engel means that Hungary was on the periphery of Western Europe. The very
edge. A few miles, a few days of travel and you were in the Balkans, where
things didn't look familiar anymore.

>The role of the historian is take all of the avilable information and
>discuss it in its entirety and when not sure based on the data avilable show
>the various possible interpretations instead of dogmatically picking one.

        "All the available information"? "Discuss it in its entirety"? You
must be kidding. Perhaps it is possible when we are talking about the tenth
century but surely it is impossible in later centuries. As I explained, in a
monograph the author will inform his readers (also historians for the most
part) about the findings and conclusions of others before him. What he will
do in the body of that paper is to argue, either basing his argument on new
evidence or on a rereading of old documents, with others who had tackled the
problem before him.

        What worries me is that you simply decided that historians in
general are incapable of writing history and it is better to sidestep their
works and go straight to the "sources." This way you will come up with
entirely new interpretations, vastly superior to those of professional
historians. I don't think that you are familiar enough with the methods of
history to make such determination.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Chancellery was: The 1700s (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Eva Balogh writes and quotes:
>
>        I am coming to the conclusion that it is not worth discussing this
>topic much further. Any argument I put forth is ignored: for example,
>nationality problems, general lack of capital, general lack of urbanization,
>and general lack of a growing middle class. If I bring up examples of
>foreign travelers, the answer is that Western travelers were biased. I
>myself is biased because I studied abroad. If I bring up a quotation from a
>Hungarian-educated scholar the meaning of his quotation is twisted around as
>if Pal Engel said that before 1200 there was no "irasbeliseg/literacy" in
>Hungary. This is not what he says. He says that it was only after 1200 that
>literacy due to the establishment of the royal chancellery became
>widespread. Prior to that date the number of documents are relatively few.
>Sizes of towns during the period I was talking about are doubted: they are
>overestimated, says Jeliko.

While preparing the "What's in a name list" I looked at the end of this
document from
1138 and at the end of the document it states: "A kancellar, aki ezt a
privilegiumot a kiralyi pecsettel megerositette Woth fia Janos volt;" (The
chancellor, who validated this privilage (document) by placing on it the
royal seal was the son of Woth, Janos.)

Now there are several possibilities. There were chancellors before 1200,
without an office of the chancellary (freelance). There were chancellors
just floating about and when one was needed, the king hollered, bring me a
chancellor. The kind reader can probably surmise other possibilities.
Howwever, it is also possible that Pal Engel was just plain wrong, or wrote
the statement in a misleading manner or his work is cited in a misleading
manner.

The major significance of the chancellery problem of Bela IV was that he
also kindly changed the rule of "szembesites" (the right to face your
accuser) during a trial of the nobles. The change permitted accusing and
trying folks by correspondance. This was probably a gimmick of the erstwhile
bar association. Naturally, the nobles were somewhat pissed and not
surprisingly the written documents started to proliferate. Now, anyone can
interpret what this meant both superficially and in actual practice on the
number of documents that were saved at the court. Does this indicate that
the people's literacy increased?

It is never as black and white as either side makes it to be, but unless the
background information is also treated and discussed, sooner or later the
statement will be used out of context, i.e. as was done above by Ms Balogh.

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 10:37 PM 10/16/96 -0700, Suzanne wrote:
>can "suzanne" be translated into hungaria?

        Of course! Zsuzsanna (zs = zh in English, like in Zsazsa Gabor)

        Eva Balogh, who is also Zsuzsanna.
+ - Re: What is history based on? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 10:28 AM 10/17/96 -0400, Jeliko wrote:

>Yes, I am familiar with Gyorffy's analysis of Tihany, but I do not
>understand, why the analysis of the "traces of French Latinity" was more
>important than the traces of early Hungarian.

        Jeliko, my blood pressure is going up because you are more
intelligent than playing this kind of game. I was simply giving you a few
examples of the kinds of monographs which appeared on the Tihanyi
alapitolevel. Now you object to a monograph on the "traces of French
Latinity" because you think that "traces of early Hungarian" were not
studied during this period. You are wrong. I simply didn't mention it
because surely one doesn't need a complete list of works on the tihanyi
alapitolevel. But since you insist here are a couple of more: Gyorgy Gyorffy
"A tihanyi alapitolevel foldrajzi nev-azonositasaihoz," Geza Barczi, "A
tihanyi apatsag alapitolevele mint nyelvi emlek." Satisfied? Those horrid
Hungarian scholars seemed to have paid some attention to the "Hungarian
traces" too.

>Yes, one could estimate what
>was the influence of various geography spheres of Christianity on the
>developing Hungarian Church by analyzing the Latinity of the early document,
>but when it gets to incorporating the analysis of such documents into the
>generic history tomes, more Hungarian historians than not ignore this type
>of information and fall back to copying the thoughts of previous generic
>history writers.

        Yes, one could estimate and why not? Just as another Balogh (Albin)
wrote "A tihanyi alapitolevel mint XI. szazadi muvelodesi kapcsolataink
emleke." Why not? Forbidden? Not important in your eyes? What kind of sins
these men committed when they dared to write about French latinity's traces
in the tihanyi alapitolevel or Hungary's cultural connections?


>>        The kind of information Jeliko quoted from the Tihanyi alapitolevel
>>has been thoroughly utilized in books like Istvan Szabo, *A falurendszer
>>kialakulasa Magyarorszagon: X-XV. szazad," Budapest, 1966. In it, Istvan
>>Szabo estimates the number of villages for a few thousand in the 10-11th
>>centuries and about 20-21,000 in the 15-16th centuries. As for the "mansio,"
>>which Jeliko mentions by name from the Tihanyi alapitolevel, here is another
>>article just on that: Ilona Bolla, "A jobbagytelek kialakulasanak
>>kerdesehez. (A "curia" es "mansio" terminusok jelentesvaltozasa az
>>Arpad-korban.)" And one could go on and on but I will mention only one more:
>>Otto Trogmayer, "Gyumolcsoskert 750 evvel ezelott." [Orchard 750 Years Ago.]
>>Where do you think these gentlemen got their information from if not from
>>contemporary documents?
>
>Well, I have seen very little about gyumolcsoskert in the document,
>vineyards yes, but not much on gyumpolcsoskert (orchard).

        Well, maybe there were documents you didn't see (because, for
example, they were never published) and which talk about orchards. Because,
you see, if there were no such documents, Otto Trogmayer couldn't have
written about them.

>I have put the
>mansio in because a "house" is not the exact equivalent (it certainly, in
>this context has nothing to do with mansion! Again, in the context of what I
>am complaining about, I could not care less about the difference between
>curia and mansion.) maybe "abode" would express the word better as used in
>the document.

        "Mansio" is obviously a perfectly legitimate name with a definite
meaning which, according to Ilona Bola, changed over time. It is not my
field, I don't know the changing meanings of the word and I didn't read
Ilona Boba's article. What surprises me that you say things like "I could
not care less about the difference between curia and mansio." How come, your
intellectual curiosity, your interest in early Hungarian history doesn't go
that far? I for one would be interested in the difference between the two
and also in their changing meanings. Just because you are not interested in
something you shouldn't considered it a worthless undertaking.

>But that is again a subanalysis of a word from the document.
>The development of the falurendszer (village system) is again different from
>an economic evaluation. The presence of specialized tradesman in the
>community which was granted to the monastery is what I considered also
>significant. These tradesman existed in these communities before the
>monastery was established. Are these representative of other community
>tradesmen compositions? Are they representative of population based on the
>140 mansios (assuming 140 family heads, and possibly 560 souls)? What is the
>significance of those trades that are This is what is not discussed in
>additions to the hadiut (military road) in the publications I am aware of.

        You know what Jeliko, such studies do exist. Here is one: Istvan
Szabo, "The Praedium: Studies on the Economic History and the History of
Settlement of Early Hungary."

>>        It is all fine and dandy to have an interest in history and I do
>>hope that more and more people will read at least reliable secondary
>>sources, but it is wrong to assume that historians are just a bunch of
>>ignorami who don't even know how to use original sources; or, if they do,
>>they simply neglect to consult them. I can assure Jeliko that a historian's
>>life is a busy one.
>
>Eva, you are not settle about your attempted patronizing "putdowns". They do
>not bother me, I am used to them.

        I'm afraid you have been doing nothing else in the last few days but
"putting down" historians and after listening to these putdowns for a while
one's patience evaporates, especially when I am trying my darndest to
explain to you that Hungarian historiography is not as bad as you try to
make it out.

>And unfortunately for my book budgets, and to my wife chagrin, I have a
>chance to read the original sources and not only the bibliography, at least
>for the times I am interested in.
>(Just a little return of the same medicine
>you were dishing out (-:.)

        Misplaced. I could answer that in addition to about 2,000 books on
Hungarian history I also have quite a few bibliographies, which surely you
very badly need. I quoted a bibliography because it gives me an idea of what
was published on the particular subject you brought up. Moreover, consulting
bibliographies is an important part of historical research. Bibliographers
spent their days collecting and annotating bibliographies which helps us
greatly in making sure that we have covered every secondary source on the
subject. Because without being familiar with the secondary sources you don't
even know whether you are saying anything new!

        Don't put yourself so much above everybody else. It isn't nice.
Moreover, those historians you look down on are very bright people who know
their stuff very well. Hungarian historiography, with the exception of the
Rakosi period and the early Kadar period, is really quite outstanding,
especially compared to the state of history in the neighboring socialist
countries. Moreover, let me repeat it, without the knowledge of the
secondary literature you cannot do meaningful work in historical research.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Re: Comment: Ten Untaught Lessons about Central Europe (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Hugh Agnew writes:

>
>The ordering address is:
>Center for Austrian Studies
>Attention: Working Papers
>314 Social Sciences
>University of Minnesota
>Minneapolis  MN  55455
>
>Ingrao's paper has the paper number of 96-3.  There are a number of other
>papers, information about them could probably be found at the HABSBURG list
>website: http://h-net.msu.edu/~habsweb.  I believe the full text of Ingrao's
>paper can also be found there.

Thank you for the info. I will get a copy. It sounds interesting just from
the commentary it received.


>But (and here I get in trouble with myself for something I'll post soon
>in response to some of Jeliko's recent contributions), for a counter-
>factual possibility, it seems to me that during the period of Joseph II's
>reign, and possible thereafter until the restoration after the defeat of
>Napoleon, it _might_ have been possible to generate a genuine patriotism
>and who knows perhaps eventual national identity on an "Austrian" basis
>that went beyond dynastic or personal loyalty (Habsburgertreu).  Only,
>and here perhaps I lean towards believing that individuals _can_ have an
>effect on the course of history, Franz I was so limited that he actively
>discouraged such efforts as were being made.  History has no way of knowing
>whether these efforts would have been successful had they been continued,
>but certainly under Franz even their continuation was actively discouraged.

I hope you can post it before next Monday, otherwise while in town for a
very few days, I will be out of here until the end of November. I am also a
great believer that individuals have a great effect on the course of
history. My view of the Habsburg/Hungarian relations through the ages is
like a marriage, where both parties were unfaithful, but at time
voluntarily, at times by force tried divorce proceedings.
While the Habsburgs wanted to hold onto Hungary, in my opinion, the Austrian
poulation would have much prefferred German marriage. But those days are not
really the ones I am
interested in.

>Many contributors to the discussion of the "Ten Lessons" have pointed
>out that the national identity was not in fact the primary one for some
>people even towards the end of the nineteenth century, so the construction
>of some kind of other, empire-wide identity seems by implication to be a
>logical (if not a practical) possibility.  But it's hard not to share
>Istvan Deak's somewhat reluctant conclusion that the creation of a Europe
>dominated by putative "nation-states" was (is?) "inevitable."

I agree, if by national identity, you mean a separate country. Though the
problem, I see is that at least from a Hungarian standpoint all of the
minorities at that time had magnet countries (Romania, Serbia, Russia) or
populations (Czechs and within limits the Germans) next to them, which, at
that time, acted as a centripetal force. I feel that when the war was
declared, the Monarchy was doomed. The Hungarians major mistake was not to
deal with the minorities much earlier than even 1867. The only glimmering
hope would have been a more complete economic integration of the empire and
later of the Monarchy, as a result people would have been more comfortable
with each other. Education and wide based equal rights, while probably even
better medicins for the problem, are only slow acting medicines, and would
have an effect only if they were started much earlier.

Regards,Jeliko.
+ - Re: Chancellery was: The 1700s (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 01:58 PM 10/17/96 -0400, Jeliko wrote:

>While preparing the "What's in a name list" I looked at the end of this
>document from
>1138 and at the end of the document it states: "A kancellar, aki ezt a
>privilegiumot a kiralyi pecsettel megerositette Woth fia Janos volt;" (The
>chancellor, who validated this privilage (document) by placing on it the
>royal seal was the son of Woth, Janos.)
>
>Now there are several possibilities. There were chancellors before 1200,
>without an office of the chancellary (freelance). There were chancellors
>just floating about and when one was needed, the king hollered, bring me a
>chancellor. The kind reader can probably surmise other possibilities.
>Howwever, it is also possible that Pal Engel was just plain wrong, or wrote
>the statement in a misleading manner or his work is cited in a misleading
>manner.

        This is becoming ridiculous, Jeliko, because *you* are becoming
"plain wrong." This is a very simple proposition: the royal chancellery was
established at the end of the twelfth century (around 1200, says Pal Engel).
This is a fact every blessed Hungarian historian is familiar with. It was
Bela III who established the royal chancellery. Let me quote an old source,
the famous Homan-Szekfu History of Hungary, written in the 1930s. Balint
Homan, the medievalist, wrote this particular volume (I:409-410). This is
what he has to say about Bela III's court and the establishment of the
chancellery:

        "Az udvartartas kereteinek bovitesevel sor kerult az allando iroda,
kiralyi kancellaria felallitasara is. II. Istvanig a gyer szamban
kibocsatott kiralyi okleveleket ad hoc megbizott egyhazi szemelyek, Szent
Laszlo ota rendszerint udvari kaplanok irtak. II. Bela koraban a kaplanok
testulete, a kiralyi kapolna mar mint allando iroda mukodik a kapolnaispan
tisztet viselo fopap vezetese alatt, bar rendszeres kancellariai szervezet
meg nincsen. A kiralynak a szemelyes torvenykezetol valo fokozatos
visszavonulasa, a tarsadalmi es gazdasagi viszonyok valtozasa, az okleveles
bizonyitas eloterbenyomulasa azonban maga utan vonta az irasbeliseg
behozatalat. III. Bela--1181-ben kiadott oklevelenek tanusaga
szerint--elrendelte, hogy minden elotte es udvaraban letargyalt ugyrol es
jogi aktusrol irasos bizonysag, oklevel allittassek ki s e vegbol 1185-ben
nyugati ertelemben vett allando hivatalt, kancellariat szervezett. Elere
Parizsban kikepzett jeles udvari papjat, Adorjan budai prepostot nevezte ki
kancellarnak, kit 1190-ben Katapan fervaris perpost valtotta fel. Adorjan es
Katapan voltak a magyar kancellariai praxis megalapitoi. A kancellar mellett
tobb allando ejegyzo, notarius dolgozott."

        Yes, exactly, the king hollered if he needed someone to pen a
document, just as you said. In any case, very few documents were written.
Please, be aware that history is vast and you cannot come up with all sorts
of suspicions about the ignorance of Pal Engel or anyone else before you
know exactly what you are talking about. And let me add to this: I myself
don't have all that information at my fingertips because it is not my field.
I have to look it up and, believe me, it wouldn't be some kind of collection
of twelfth-century documents where I would start my search for the date of
the establishment of the royal chancellery.

        Eva Balogh
+ - Hungarian Service (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

MAGYAR - HUNGARIAN

Magyarnyelvu istentiszteletet tart a Washingtoni Magyar Reformatus Egyhaz
Oktober 20-an, vasranap del elott 11 orakor, a Wesley Seminarium
kapolnajaban.
Cime: 4500 Massachussetts Avenue, Washington, DC
Az Istentisztelet kereteben megemlekezunk az 1956 october 23-i
szbadsagharcrol.


ENGLISH - ANGOL

There will be a HUngarian language religioous service held by the
Hungarian Reformed Church on Sunday, October 2oth at 11 a.m. at the
Wesley Seminary

Address: 4500 Mass. Ave, Washington DC.

As part of the Service we will hold rememberances of the October 23, 1956
freedomfight.

Please attend if you can and let your Washington area friends also know.
Thank you

<Submitted by Peter Soltesz>
+ - Re: The 1700s (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

At 01:14 PM 10/17/96 -0400, Eva Balogh, responding to Jeliko, wrote:

<snip>
>
>        Let's make a few distinctions. Something which we call a "monograph"
>usually concentrates on a small topic. It is about 20-25 pages long. It is
>full of footnotes. And normally based on original research. It is, of
>course, unlikely that the author of a monograph is threading on virgin soil.
>Most likely, dozens of other historians in the last 100-150 years have
>already tackled the problem and came up with different conclusions. Our
>author must be also familiar with the secondary sources of his topic in
>order to present his own, hopefully unique, conclusion.
>
>        On the other hand, a general history, usually in book form on a
>larger topic, let's say Hungary's place in Europe between 900 and 1440,
>covers hundreds of years and every facet of history. One cannot expect the
>author to rely only on original research, he must also use respected
>secondary sources. Moreover, different books are written with different
>audience in mind. Pal Engel's book, for example, is targeting history
>teachers of high schools and other laymen interested in history. Such a book
>will most likely have no footnotes and will be relatively short.
>
>        Admittedly, it can happen that a historian simply adopts the
>conclusion of others before him. Therefore it is likely that our researcher
>will be able to sort his secondary sources into categories A, B, C, etc.
>Those who hold X, those who hold Y, and those who hold Z. But it doesn't
>mean that they are all wrong, or that they did a lousy job at research, or
>that they don't know foreign languages and mistranslate them. I think Jeliko
>decided some time ago that historians are just a bunch of lazy idiots.

Oh, such harsh language!  If I were Eva Balogh, I'd be trying to turn Jeliko
on to some good historical novels.  An historical novel would meet most, if
not all, of Jeliko's exacting requirements.

Joe Szalai
+ - Re: Amazing America (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

I believe Johanne L. Tournier wrote the following in a recent posting
concerning the Gulf War:

"In any case, the war was already won when the Allies
were
>massacring the Republican Guard on the road out of Kuwait City and thatwas
>very much protested at the time. The fact is that in order to get rid of
>Saddam thousands more innocent Iraqis would have had to die, and therejust
>was not the will to pursue that, plus it would have been contrary to the
>U.N. resolution."


I posit that the above is correct but is only one aspect of the reality.
As I understand the meaning of "Real Politics" and it's application, there is
another component to the reason why Saddam's armies were not annihilated:
Saddam is a tolerated and necessary evil in the region's balance of power
in keeping Iran's real and perceived ambitions in check. Consequently,
it was prudent to clip Saddam's wings but allow him to keep sufficient
armed might to make Iran think twice before engaging in expansionist
adventures.

                 Mark.O.F.
+ - Re: Suicide in Hungary (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

Gabor Farkas writes in Hungary#816:

>First, it would be much more productive for you to reply to individual
>instances of these manifestations of "self loathing, etc.", thus Eva may
>have a chance to answer to your accusations. Generalized statements like
>those above are hard to reply to.
>
>Second, would you prefer continuous self-adulation, even when it is not
>deserved or not true?

First: yes, I agree.  I will do it; it should not be too difficult, given the
wealth of material Hungary readers have all had the occasion to read from
Eva.  As soon as my present workload lets up, I should be able to compile a
list.

Second: in a word, no.  But I am just as opposed to continuous
self-flagellation, even when it is not deserved or not true.

Ferenc
+ - Re: IS THIS FOR REAL ? (mind) VÁLASZ  Feladó: (cikkei)

>can "suzanne" be translated into hungaria?
>

Zsuzsa  or Zsuzsanna

L. Monoki

AGYKONTROLL ALLAT AUTO AZSIA BUDAPEST CODER DOSZ FELVIDEK FILM FILOZOFIA FORUM GURU HANG HIPHOP HIRDETES HIRMONDO HIXDVD HUDOM HUNGARY JATEK KEP KONYHA KONYV KORNYESZ KUKKER KULTURA LINUX MAGELLAN MAHAL MOBIL MOKA MOZAIK NARANCS NARANCS1 NY NYELV OTTHON OTTHONKA PARA RANDI REJTVENY SCM SPORT SZABAD SZALON TANC TIPP TUDOMANY UK UTAZAS UTLEVEL VITA WEBMESTER WINDOWS