[Table of Contents] [Previous] [Next] [Notes] [HMK Home] István I. Mócsy:The Effects of World War I ...

Chapter 9

[1.] IETI: 230. This police report described the mood and expectations of the workers. The revolutionary mood among the workers aroused some anxiety, especially since an estimated 100,000 weapons were hidden by the workers for the time of a second revolution.

[2.] FRUS PPCXII: 724.

[3.] IET 215-16.

[4.] The Friedrich electoral law of 1919 gave the franchise to 74.6 percent of the population above age 24, the minimum age. All prewar parliaments were elected according to the 1874 law, which gave the vote to only 15.5 percent of the population of inner Hungary. In 1922, Bethlen reduced the size of the electorate to 58.4 percent. Rezsö Rudai, ".Adalékok a magyar képviselöház szociológiájához" [Data to the Sociology of the Hungarian Parliament], Társadalomtudomány [Social Science] XIII, no. 3 4 (July-December 1933): 220. See also, Antal Balla, ed., A magyar országgyülés története, 1867-1927 [History of the Hungarian Parliament, 1867-1927] (Budapest, 1927), p. 464.

[5.] Ránki,Magyarország története VIII: 345. Also, Pölöskei, Horthy, pp. 35-36.

[6.] The perpetrators's names also became known; some were even taken into custody, though not the leaders of the group. Héjjas with some of his key men were given sanctuary by Prónay, whose detachment they were allowed to join. All criminal procedures against the accused were subsequently halted under considerable pressure from Horthy. Eventually the suspects came under the general amnesty decreed by Horthy for all politically inspired crimes committed by the right.IETI: 228. See also pp. 221-28.

[7.] Ibid., pp. 231-32, 168-69. A similar though less extensive spy system was already organized by the government. See also pp. 143- 44.

[8.] Gratz,A forradalmak kora, p. 261. For details of some of these see Markovits, Magyar pokol, pp. 193- 243.

[9.] In one institution alone, which under normal circumstances housed about 1000 prisoners, by mid-December, about 2500 inmates were kept. IETI: 142-43.

[10.] For a description of conditions and maltreatment of the prisoners by the army at the Hajmáskér concentration camp, see British Labour Delegation, The White Terror, p. 8. Cf. Markovits. Magyar pokol, pp. 75-77. According to one estimate by Count Albert Apponyi, a strong opponent of White Terror, the inmate population at the various camps was as follows: Hajmáskér 9000, Csepel 4000, Zalaegerszeg 2400, Eger 2000, Cegléd 30, Komáromhomokhegy 2000. Pölöskei, Horthy,p. 72. Also IET 1: 169.

[11.] Nemes. Az ellenforradalom története, pp. 216-17. The actual figures may be higher. Another source puts their number well above 70,000. Elek Karsai,Számjeltávirat valamennyi magyar királyi követségnek [Cypher Telegram to All Hungarian Embassies] (Budapest, 1969), p. 14. Ágnes Godó put the number of the imprisoned at 40,000; the number of refugees who fled abroad at 140,000. Godó, " A Horthy-rendszer." p. 140.

[12.] IETI: 239 41.

[13.] Ibid., p. 231.

[14.] For details of that smear campaign and political trial see Sándor Hegedüs,. Egy politikai per kulisszatitkai [Backstage Secrets of a Political Trial] (Budapest, 1976): see also Szabó and Pemlényi, Fejezetek, pp. 211-14.

[15.] The symbolism of these names needs some explanation. Etelköz is the Hungarian name of the place where the semilegendary blood alliance was formed between the seven Hungarian tribes before their entry into the Carpathian basin. There, Árpád was to have been raised on a shield by the seven chieftains, symbolizing his election as chief of chiefs. The apostolic cross refers to the archiepiscopal cross of St. Stephen in Hungary's coat of arms. In as much as the coat of arms, just as the Holy Crown of St. Stephen, symbolized the indivisibility of the crown-lands of Hungary, the name of the organization indicated the commitment of the members to the restoration of the ancient unity of the lands of the Holy Crown. The "Resurrection" refers similarly to this goal.

[16.] The other members were Miklós Kozma, László Magasházy, the two Görgey brothers, Kálmán Hardy, Miklós Koós, Gyula Toókos, Béla Márton, Antal Vetter, Lajos Keresztes-Fisher, and Géza IgmándyHegyessy. Nemes, Az ellenforradalom története, p. 153. Their proximity to Horthy assured, for all, excellent careers, during subsequent years. Gömbös ultimately became prime minister, Kozma his minister of interior, others rose to high positions within the army.

[17.] Borsányi, Páter Zadravecz. p. 133.

[18.] Magyar Tudományos Fajvédö Egyesület.

[19.] Even today, little is known about the operations of these societies. Information about them must be extracted from such journals and notes as those of Zadravecz and Prónay, who broke their oaths of silence after they fell out with the EKSz and freely discussed its affairs. Their opinions, laced with malice, cannot be taken at face value.

[20.] Borsányi, Páter Zadraveez, p. 129.

[21.] Ibid., pp. 130, 131, 134. At the same time, Zadravecz contradicted himself when he maintained that Gömbös "for a long time terrorized Horthy and Bethlen by warning that the Ex represented a great and frightfully powerful force, which was completely in his hands. For this reason Bethlen frequently conferred with Gömbös, and even authorized the use of state funds, but at the same time worked for the . . . weakening of the Ex." Ibid.. p. 141.

[22.] Ibid. The exact number of EKSz members in the First National Assembly, elected in 1920, is not known. but it is safe to assume that their strength was considerable .

[23.] IHHT, p. 190. Cf. Godó," .A Horthy-rendszer," pp. 127-38.

[24.] IHHT, pp. 208-12. A small Slovak force was indeed established in Poland, butthe movement soon collapsed.

[25.] FRUS PPC XII: 694, 700- 701, 680-81. HPN II: pp. 504- 505.

[26.] IETI: 268-69.

[27.] Ibid., pp. 270-71.

[28.] OMH Report, p. 37.

[29.] This estimate is based on 1920 census figures. The census does not distinguish between old and new residents of the city, merely records place of birth. Központi Statisztikai Hivatal, Recensement de la population en 1920, new series, (Budapest, 1928) 73: 8.

[30.] IHHT, p. 135. Subsequently, as Gömbös and Horthy drifted apart, all active officers were forced to resign from the MOVE. Ibid. , p. 137. Cf. Dósa, A MOVE, pp. 87, 118-19.

[31.] Ibid., pp. 105, 149.

[32.] Every officer had to surrender 1/30th of his salary to the MOVE for the purposes of economic aid to destitute officers. In addition, Gömbös was given large sums of money by the government for aid and other refugee-related expenses . For alleged mishandling of these funds Gömbös was attacked several times on the floor of the National Assembly by legitimist politicians. Nemzetgyülési Napló, 1920-1921 IV: 507-22, V: 95-102. The charge, however, was never proven.

[33.] Dósa, A MOVE, p. 89.

[34.] Of the 29 leading figures of the Awakening Hungarians about whom we were able to collect sufficient biographical data, 14 were born in the lost territories, or resided there in 1918. Ten came from Transylvania, the rest from other areas.

[35.] MPL, pp. 65, 96-97, 227, 238, 244. Vilmos Pröhle and Tibor Eckhardt were born in inner Hungary, but, at the time of collapse, they were officials in Transylvania.

[36.] For a history of one of the main institutions for the militarization of youth, the "Levente" organization, see Ferenc Gergely and György Kiss, Horthy leventéi [The Leventes of Horthy] (Budapest, 1976).

[37.] Pölöskei, Horthy, p. 17.

[38.] IET: 256.

[39.] Nemes, Az ellenforradalom története, p. 166.

[40.] Twenty-two of the uncontested seats went to KNEP members, mostly to party leaders, such as Károly Huszár, Odön Beniczky, István Haller, Jakab Bleyer, György Szmrecsányi, Lajos Hegyeshalmi, Sándor Ernszt, Gyula Pekár, and Bishop Ottokár Prohászka. Seventeen of the Smallholders ran unopposed, among them Gyula Rubinek, Istvan Nagyatádi Szabó, Baron Frigyes Korányi, Gaszton Gaál, and István Sokorópátkai Szabó. Similarly, two independent legitimists, Counts Albert Apponyi and Gyula Andrássy, Jr., were unopposed. Ibid., p. 187.

[41.] IET I: 244.

[42.] Balla, A magyar országgyülés, p. 433.

[43.] Pesti hirlap. February 12,andMarch 14, l920, cited in Pölöskei. Horthy, pp. 34, 130

[44.] Magyar királyi külügyminiszterium, Papers and Documents Relating to the Foreign Relations of Hungary (Budapest, 1939) I: 139-40. Also, IET I: 257-58.

[45.] For the highly complicated legal arguments for and against this theory see Dezsö Polónyi, A magyar királykérdés[The Question of the Royal Succession] (Budapest, 1928), specificallypp. 114-18, 162-72.

[46.] IET I: 256- 57.

[47.] Nemes, Az ellenforradalom története p. 205.

[48.] IETI: 394- 409: II: 230-45.

[49.] Surányi, Bethlen, pp. 50-52. Bethlen. according to Surányi, considered himself a follower of Epicurus, and his favorite philosopher was Montaigne.

[50.] Bethlen, Bethlen István 1: 158.

[51.] Surányi, Bethlen. p. 110; IET I: 245-54.

[52.] The total number of deputies after the June elections was only 207. But., subsequently, other elections were held in Baranya, which until 1921 was under Yugoslav occupation. Other vacancies, due to deaths, resignations, or appointments to high government posts, were filled through special elections. In all, we have collected biographical information on 464 individuals who served in the First and Second National Assemblies or in the 1926 parliament. Of these 150 individuals or 32.3 percent were born in the territories awarded to the Successor States. Data were collected in the following categories: place and date of birth, education, occupation, political party affiliation, membership in various organizations, military service during the war, participation in the revolutionary and counterrevolutionary movements, and property losses in the Successor States. In our statistics, those individuals who were born in the lost areas but moved to inner Hungary before the war were, nevertheless, grouped with the refugees. Those, however, who were born in areas retained by Hungary but moved to the lost territories before 1914 and returned to inner Hungary after the war were not counted with the refugees. Nor did we include in that group those individuals who suffered the loss of their estates in the Successor States but were born elsewhere, even if they closely identified with the refugees. Statistics, unless otherwise indicated, were based on my own calculations.

Chapter 10

[1.] The vast literature on this subject attest to this fact. It is possible only to sample some of the pamphlets and books that were written since the turn of the century. See, for example: Albert Berzeviczy, A gentryröl [About the Gentry]2 vols. (Budapest, 1905): Miklós Szemere, Gentry (Budapest, 1912); János Makkai, Urambátyám országa [The Country of Gentry] (2nd ed., Budapest, 1941): József Szücsi (Bajza), A gentry [The Gentry (Budapest. 1910); Szekfü, Három nemzedék; Lászlo Tóth, A gentry társadalom történetéhez [To theHistory of Gentry Society] (Budapest. 1939); Zoltán Szabó, Cifra nyomorúság[Gaudy Misery) (Budapest, 1938); János Árfa Nagy, " AzértelmiségifoglalkozásúkeresökszámaMagyarországonl890 óta'' [The Numbers ofIntellectual Wage Earners in Hungary since 1890] Statisztikai Szemle [Statistical Review] 6 (1935): 501-15; Gyula Kornis, Mi a középosztály? [What is the Middle Class?] (Budapest, 1926); Alajos Kovács,Ertelmiségünk nemzeti jellegének biztositása [Preservation of the National Character of Our Intelligentsia] (N.p., n.d. ); Lajos Sávoly, Miért jutott koldusbotra a magyar középosztály? [Why did the Hungarian Middle Class Become Impoverished?] (Budapest. n.d.)

[2.] Bethlen, Bethlen István II: 157.

[3.] Ibid., p. 162.

[4.] The most exhaustive study on the official class of the post-World War I period is Ottó Szabolcs'sKöztisztviselök. See also, by the same author, Munkanélküli diplomások a Horthy-rendszerben, 1919-1944 [Unemployed University Graduates during the Horthy Regime, 1919-1944] (Budapest, 1964). For a general treatment of the history of the middle classes, see Balázs, A középrétegek szerepe. For an older but still useful analysis of Hungarian society during the late 1920s, see István Weis, A mai magyar társadalom, and Dezsö Laky,Az értelmiség válságának gazdasági és társadalmi háttere [Economic and Social Background of the Crisis of the Intelligentsia] (Budapest, 1931).

[5.] Balázs,A középrétegek szerepe p. 94.

[6.]OMHReport p. 37.

[7.]League of Nations, Financial Reconstruction of Hungary. 25 Reports of the Commissioner-General of the League of Nations for HungaryMay 1924 to June 1926. Third Report,July 1-21, 1924. (Geneva, 1927). p. 6.

[8.] Központi Statisztikai Hivatal, Recensement general de la population en 1930, new series (Budapest, 1936) 96: 138, 147, 148. Of course, many of those recorded in 1930 received their degrees between 1920 and 1930, thus, in the refugee statistics, they were still registered as students.

[9.] HPPCSupplementary Documents, no. 2. Also, Buday. Megcsonkitott Magyarországpp. 259-60. It should be kept in mind that, during the last two decades before the war, the number of Hungarian teachers in the minority areas had sharply increased. Many teachers migrated to those areas from inner Hungary .

[10.] These are 1913 figures.

[11.] OMH Report p. 17.

[12.] See, for example, the pamphlet of the Hungarian Eugenic Society." The Consequences of the Division of Hungary from the Standpoint of Eugenics.'' reprint fromNemzetvédelem[Defense of the Nation] I (1919), no. 4.

[13.]ASzETp. 243.

[14.] Bocskay Szövetség,A magyar-román békeszerzödés magyarázata; az új állampolgárság; a magyar és székely kisebbség védelme a békeszerzödésben [Explanation of the Hungarian-Romanian Peace Treaty; the New Citizenship, the Protection of the Hungarian and Székely Minorities under the Terms of the Peace Treaty] (Budapest, 1921). p. 7.

[15.] Ibid., p. 21.

[16.] See, for example, theMagyar Irredenta, October 21, 1920, October 31, 1920, and March 13, l921 issues, or any issue ofSzózat.

[17.] MOVE, A MOVE budapesti föosztályának 1920. évi jelentése [Report of the MOVE, Budapest Division, for the Year 1920] (Budapest, 1920). pp.7. 19.

[18.] OMH Report,pp. 24. 25. 38.

[19.] Ibid.. pp.13. 25-26. The enterprise's eight divisions were clothing (77 employees), mass production, manufacturing toys and rattan goods (15 employees), arts and crafts (16 workers), janitorial service (25), carpenters (6), tinware (1), machinists (3), and moving. Some smaller shops were also established in other towns.

[20.] Ibid., pp. 30-32.

[21.] Ernö László, "Hungary's Jewry: A Demographic Overview, 1918- 1945," in Randolph L. Braham. ed., Hungarian Jewish StudiesII (1958): 147.

[22.] Balla, A magyar országgyülés, p. 483.

[23.] Szabolcs,Köztisztviselök,p. 28.

[24.] Szabolcs,Munkanélküli diplomások,pp. 22-23.

[25.] Nemes,Az ellenforradalom története,p. 387.

[26.] Szabolcs,Köztisztviselök,p. 85.

[27.] League of Nations,Financial Reconstruction of Hungary. Third Report, Annex IV, p. 11.

[28.] Ibid., p. 6.

[29.] League of Nations, The Financial Reconstruction of Hungary. General Survey and Principal Documents (Geneva, 1926), p. 123.

[30.] Szabolcs,Köztisztviselök,p. 87.

[31.] Ibid., p. 30.

[32.] League of Nations, Financial Reconstruction of Hungary. General Survey, p. 122.

[33.] Szabolcs,Köztisztviselök,p. 32.

[34.] The 1930 census figures reflect only the number of those who were born in the lost territories, without differentiating between the refugees and those who arrived before 1918. Between 1920 and 1930, the total number of those born in the lost territories dropped by about ten percent, but the proportion of the refugees in the group increased from an estimated 76 percent in 1920 to 82 percent in 1930.

Number of Individuals Born Outside the
Territory of Trianon Hungary

Born in Territories Ceded to

1920 Census
1930 Census
Yugoslavia (excluding Croatia)

Source: Központi Statisztikai Hivatal,Recensement de la Population en 1920, 73: 8 9: Recensement général de la population en 1930,96: 190-91.

The total decline is only partly attributable to natural causes. After the settlernent of the Burgenland question, some remigration to Austria took place. Also, in the case of Czechoslovakia, some families of Slovak national origin eventually resettled there. These figures, however, do not reflect those who though were born in inner Hungary at the time of the country's partition, resided in the lost areas. Their number was most significant in the case of Transylvania. In using these census figures, therefore, to illustrate the strength of the refugees from the various lost parts of the country, we may consider the number of those from Romania as the minimum; those from Czechoslovakia as the upper limit of the refugee strength. At the same time, it is safe to assume that, regardless of their place of residence at the moment of collapse the loss of their homeland was psychologically important for all these individuals and, therefore, even those who moved to Hungary before 1918 identified with the refugees to a greater degree than those born in inner Hungary.

[35.] Központi Statisztikai Hivatal, Recensement de la population en 1920, 72: 478-91; Recensement general de la population en 1930, 96: 132-53; 124-29. Also, HPPC,Supplementary Documents, no. 2. Clerks generally represented only a sixth to a quarter of the totals.

[36.] Központi Statisztikai Hivatal,Recensement general de la population en 1930, 96: 132-53.

[37.] Ibid.

[38.] Ibid.

[39.] Szabolcs, Munkanélküli diplomások, pp. 60-61. For 1921, Ladányi gives a slightly lower figure of 16,401. Ladányi, Az egyetemi ifjúság, p. 14.

[40.]Ibid., p. 41.

[41.]Szabolcs, Munkanélküli diplomások, pp. 51-52.

[42.] Ladányi, Az egyetemi ifjúság, p. 15.

[43.] Szabolcs,Munkanélküli diplomások, p. 51.

[44.] Ladányi, Az egyetemi ifjúság, p. 48.

[45.] Ibid., p. 41.

 [Table of Contents] [Previous] [Next] [Notes] [HMK Home] István I. Mócsy:The Effects of World War I ...