CEU eTD Collection Second Reader: Prof. Viktor Karády Prof. Viktor Reader: Second Supervisor: Prof. András Ger Between andStaat –TheHungarian Germanminority under Károlyi,Kun andBethlen, 1918-1924 In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Ę Central Central University European by Sebastian Garthoff by Sebastian History Department , Budapest, Master of Arts Submitted to Submitted 2008 CEU eTD Collection such instructions may no be made without the written permission of the Author. with in accordance made copies made.Further of such form any copies page mustapart This librarian. the from obtained be may Details Library. European Central in the lodged and Author bythe given instructions the with in accordance only made be may part, or Copyrightin the text of this thesis rests with the author. Copies by any process, either in full Statement ofCopyright i CEU eTD Collection Swabian problem in order to get away rhetoric.Swabian problemin victim-traitor togetaway from order short-sighted the Hungarian- of the the context widens paper this Moreover, seemedclear. already state, and minority sides, both on directions future the when regime, Bethlen the of consolidation the and Nationalities for Ministry the of abolishment the plebiscite, Sopron the till revolutions i.e.from lies1924, between Hungarian the My focusand time the period onthe of 1918 government. the against achieve with together or their to goals, tried awakening development. instate andminority rooted stoodbehind factors and– were time which this this both – sides 1930son inwhatfutureextent the radicalization the to answer thequestion In Iwill this leadership and sense, state. interaction between German Hungarian future the 1918 and 1919in regard to Germanthe minority and how thus show laidthis the basis for investigate is the time The main to paper of this of revolutions of Hungarian purpose the Abstract Beingboth boundto Volk and Staat , it is also of interest regarding how the political the how regarding interest of is also it , ii CEU eTD Collection Bibliography...... 76 Conclusion...... 72 5. Bethlen’s ...... 60 tactical moves 4. The metamorphosis ...... 50 of Jakob Bleyer 3. The long 1919...... 34 2. First steps...... 25 1. Nationalizing Hungary...... 12 ...... 1 Introduction Table of contents 5.3 The school problem...... 68 5.2 The Ungarländische Deutsche Volksbildungsverein...... 65 5.1 Dead end after Trianon...... 60 4.3 Opponents or united on one way ...... 56 – Bleyer and Gratz 4.2 Between ...... 53 state and people 4.1 For ...... 50 state and people 3.4 Trianon and the ...... 45 Sopron plebiscite 3.3 Bleyer in Jászi’s ...... 40 footsteps 3.2 Communism ...... 36 and nationalities 3.1 Post-war Hungary from ...... 34 ’s point of view 2.2 ...... 30 Jászi’s legacy 2.1 Károlyi, Jászi and ...... 25 the minority issue 1.3 The case of Gyula Szekf 1.2 Creating a state of Magyars...... 15 1.1 Nationalizing a state...... 12 5.1.1 Victory of opportunism – The ...... 63 case of György Steuer 3.3.1 Impact of Hungarian refugees on domestic politics...... 44 Ħ ...... 18 iii CEU eTD Collection , as mid-1980s, aslate the so-called during the remained one mostof the controversial inmodern history.topics German and European In Second World War.Furthermore, thehistory German minoritiesof in hasEurope Eastern the after Hungary from expulsion their of context the in seen widely is origin, Swabian of brought the problematic of this ‘people with the two souls’ to the point. iswho German isand who Hungarian MaybeintendingGerman?” without it, this guest Spannenberger wrote his dissertation about the “The the about dissertation his wrote Spannenberger in the summer of 2007 Mohács boat trip and myjournalisticBudapest to ina from inof resulting work the context speaking weekly German inthe in Trianon-Hungary” history “German title the under series piece three researching Istarted that topic a andfinally thispublished was war.Itdueto facton the Nazis during true before as 1939and as hadcolumn’ becausea ‘fifth fate, acted they their deserved ethnic the that was line official the hand, other the on Europe, Eastern In regime. Nazi the of crimes the relativize to used still was East the from Germans of place on February February 24 place on 2 November2006. scientific conference “The conference scientific of the be arguedaguest made”, hasto A Magyars. notdifference but “We areHungarians, Introduction 1 Sebastian Garthoff,„Donaugebunden. Eine ungarndeutsche Spurensuche.“ Sebastian Garthoff, „Deutsche Geschichte in Trianon-Ungarn.“ Geschichte „Deutsche Garthoff, Sebastian The history of the so-called Swabians, of whom just a minor percentage wasreally a minor percentage just of whom so-called Swabians, the of The history While doing research on Spannenberger. issue Norbertthe While doingon research Icontacted Pester Lloyd th 2 , 2007, inHe wentfurther Budapest. , 2007, is and “Who asked: Hungarian, , only convinced me more to make this the topic for my MA thesis. Volksbund 1 . My ongoing contacts with the Hungarian Germans, mainly Germans, Hungarian the with contacts ongoing My . of in of Germans the Hungary 1938-1945” which took 1 Volksbund Pester Lloyd Historikerstreit Pester Lloyd of the Germans in Hungary , 25 October; 10 November; 8 November; 10 October; 25 , , 30 May 2007. , the expulsion , the CEU eTD Collection December 5 December MinisterforNationalities, in 1923 founded he the became 1919 he In Budapest. of University the at teacher a private as German taught he Leipzig and Freiburg 6 politics till 1945. He was deportedHungarian of to old man’ the Soviet‘grand the as Unionacted he and diedresign his under After unsolved name. to his circumstances. connected were era Horthy the and leader of Hungarian the peace delegation inParis. As prime minister 1921-31 the ‘consolidation’ of Hungary workedhe as a local politician, 1918-1920 he acted as main organizerof counterrevolutionarythe forces und Ignác Romsics – “one of the last great figures of Hungarian conservative-nationalistic politics”. From 1901-18 understand with a look on understand look on with a timesthe of 1918/19,because revolutions the Horthy While Germans. asking himfor advicehe that whole the mentioned “is issue only to 5 World War II. Horthy was styled “His Serene Highness the Regent of the ”. 4 2002). Oldenbourg, minority policies of Bethlen of policies minority 1938-1945 underHorthy and Hitler” 3 infiltrated ethnic and forcedinfiltrated organizations upwardly mobile tochangetheir Germans names. leaders, harassedGerman publication community the of papers, German prevented ones, Hungarian with them merged or schools German down closed it campaign: assimilation Hungarian Atleastrevisionism. until Hungarian1936, the continuedgovernment its Bleyer demanded only cultural and rights hethough andhis organization supported leadervilified German of the the public figures maximize Hungarian and to in Inthe1920sandearly 1930s, theirpoliticians rights. order inandorganizations neighbouring states the the mobilization international of opinion public whenevertraitors they raised issueofminority the rights, andits own support of Hungarian as brand to quick were they whom Germans, ethnic towards policy its between contradiction recognize the failed to state Hungarian the line.Ironically, from assimilation this departed government Hungarian no that out comes It war. the after minorities surviving country’s the assimilate thelargestof thewas approximately 550.000 Germans, to determined minoritymuch for much liberalism respecttoo the Hungarianpolitical elite rights, too and of resultwas the i.e.tragedy national the Hungary, of traditional destruction from the lesson Jakob Bleyer was born on January 25 Count István Bethlen was born on October 3 Miklós Horthy (1868-1957) was theRegent of Hungary during the interwaryears and throughout most of Norbert Spannenberger, th , 1933, in Budapest. Der Volksbund der Deutschen unter Horthy undHitler, 1938-1945 5 were a sole result of this”. He argued that after having drawn a th , 1874 ,in the village Tscheb (Bacska).After hisstudies in Budapest, 3 and filledagapin thus history the of Hungarian the rd, 1874, in Gernyeszeg. He was – according to the words of Ungarländische Deutsche Volksbildungsverein 2 Kulturverein , Jakob Bleyer Jakob , (München: 6 , even though even , . He died on 4 and the and CEU eTD Collection Furthermore, a strong assimilation process took place after the placeafter took process a strong assimilation Furthermore, cultural historicaland traditions.Thus place. a common not take couldconscious linguistic, area, andcommon lackeda close settlement they , Transylvanian for the Except country. – the all over were dispersed Croats and Serbs, Slovaks, to the in contrast – Germans the that shows This andTolna. Pécs Baranya, of counties Hungarian i.e. western the Turkey, Swabian so-called and the the Bácska Bánát, the Swabians settled the occupation Turkish the of end the after century, nineteenth and eighteenth the During to TransylvaniaUpper Hungary Saxons) (the andto in today’s Slovakia ZipserSaxons). (the Árpáds the in of time the came settlers German earliest The period. asingle over developed nationalities in Hungary for avarious reasons. They did notform a tight community that had seemedclear. already and state, the consolidation of the Bethlen regime, when the future directions and on Nationalities both for sides, Ministry minoritythe of abolishment the plebiscite, Sopron the till revolutions My focus lies onthe betweenperiod 1918 and i.e. 1924, from timethe of Hungarianthe government. achievetogether with against the awakening Swabians or triedtheir to goals, lot of Hungarian Germans to magyarize their names in order to achieve social advance. i.e.both being boundto development. As Imentioned inthebeginning term the ‘peopleof souls’,the with two the stoodbehind in andwhichfactors state and minority this – were rooted time this whatin both futureradicalizationanswersides – extentthe the 1930son thequestion to Inthis Iwill sense, leadership state. and German interaction between Hungarian future the 1918 and 1919in regard tothe German minority and thusshowhowthis laid thebasis for 1835 and 1956. Together withkinsmen this affected approximately 500.000 persons. 7 According to Ferenc Szávai (Corvinus) 300.000 applications for changing names were handed in between in handed were names changing for applications 300.000 (Corvinus) Szávai Ferenc to According The situation of the Germans was essentially different from that of of other from the that different wasessentially Germans the of The situation My main willbe investigate purpose the to of time Hungarianthe of revolutions Volk and Staat , it is also of interest regarding how the political the how regarding interest of is also it , 3 Ausgleich in 1867, forcing a 7 Not CEU eTD Collection kept on fighting for concessions for the German minority. What followed was a period of in hisearly 1933 till of death a radicalization and Bleyer, who ledand state the minority to in Bethlen era.Thismarks history turning afirst between German relations point the the of back andfor the Nationalities Ministry inwas abolished 1922 after the beginning of the with hostilitiesstepped Bleyer Highly soon from Swabianbourgeousie. treated assimilated a politician Friedrich, István of cabinet the in Nationalities for Minister a time a short for became Bleyer Kun-regime, the in against Putsch the participating After period. interwar the minority during German of the figure became leading newcomerbut the in stage 1917 asa Hungary highly name with are associated of Bleyer, whoJakob stepped on politicalthe the the successor states as limitations of their sovereignty. by wereresented treaties The assumed. obligations of executions the practiceenforcing of Worldmeans Warthe minority grievances remove werefoundtreaties not and no could in in German year Party),Peoples’ 1908, one after Apponyithe Lex so-called the Party, Hungarian firstGerman the Hungarian (mainly Germans emerged,followedTransylvanian Saxons) by foundationthe of importance to prevent the culture of be emphasized. needs to persons the minorities. the or group the of origin ethnic the whenever study this throughout used is In Hungarian, than 1876 a political movementcase of Gyula of the Gömbös in be the seen as can theirpeople own against and ultranationalists into a fewlater turned with his rambling German origin. Thus, the word Magyar, rather impossible for minorities to almost passbecame them. it Thesethat difficulty regulations such of were tests valid competency not of onlylanguage forpassing state-supported the required It also institutions, Hungarian. teaching of Hungarianthe language in elementary schools inwhich the the language of mandated instruction it was not changes, curriculum Besides school. primary the in already minority of the assimilation 8 The ‘Lex Apponyi’ of 1907 was the culmination of the school system in Hungary that forced to achieve The political efforts of the traditionally apolitical and rural German minority in minority German rural and apolitical traditionally the of efforts political The afew upto Within schools disappeared, then decades,nationality significant of Ungarländische Deutsche Volkspartei 4 8 . After the First the . After (Hungarian CEU eTD Collection minister as well as presidentpublic life. Dueto highthe respect for his person –he wasfor example finance andforeign of the German sawminority, identity Gratz as a private goodthatshouldbe in cultivated in notprivate, different way of consciousness. While Bleyer stood for the self-consciousness of the a differentpath. Both Bleyer – and Gratz though friends inprivate life –represented a already radicalized purposes. Gustav Gratz, as further important figure of this time, followed 2005. and, is wishof the to author, according the alsoavailablein Hungarian translation since Spannenberger by whose investigated Norbert Swabiansthe just 1933,atopic from was side emerged after that German the well in interest real a this, from Apart issue. minority the with calculate always could Germany in toachieveorder her goal of revision. Knowing of Hungary’s aims for revision, tiesbound German the with to tried leadership Hungarian Germany.i.e.: The herself,than revision of Trianon. Toachieve these goals Hungary was dependent more on powerful allies forgetintegrity the later, not main the should and territorial thus, goal: preserving the disintegrating Hungary. post-war have To ahunch Hungary’sabout aims,political one 1919 under Béla Kunthis adopted minority in term,within especially regardof German the Republic Soviet Hungarian the whatextent to regard to interestis of It Empire. Tsarist the andminority. between government mediator of leaderthe later Basch, Anton Franz student Bleyer’s promises upto secondthe half of 1920swhenthe following the generation, by represented Gustav Gratz,“ 9 of the most supported that minority schools.denominations, religious various of the jurisdiction the under those for also but GünterSchödl, „Trianon-Ungarn und die deutsche Minderheitenpolitik.Zu den„Lebenserinnerungen von In 1916Lenin hadappeal non-Russians coined theto term ‘self-determination’ in to Südostdeutsches Archiv 26/27 (1983/84):139-151. 9 5 Volksbildungsverein Volksbund Volksbund soon turned into a standard work – as such he served as a , started his under work , started CEU eTD Collection incorporated were loyal to the sovereign power in the land. Otherwise, instead wereloyal intheland. of sovereign the promoting incorporated power Otherwise, to population strengthwould representgreater only if minority substantial the populations thus sizelarger and greater newstates for the convinced that were Powers The Great new war. chauvinismnot achieve which could butonlycreatenew anything, innerconvulsions and Hungarian German minority between minority German Hungarian extensively light totheissuecontributed to up the but basis for developmentof the the much German blood run in the veins of the ruling aristocracy, gentry and clergy. that disregarding maybe citizens, Hungarian all from nation political and cultural Magyar the to devotion undivided demanding began Magyars the war, the after dismemberment Hungary’s following But state. Hungarian the to loyalty their harmonizing difficulty by mostwere finally World terminated WarOne, Swabianshadno war.Before the beginnings ambitious but modest web.These a more to effective movements single German 1918 he 1918 he was memberof Hungarian,the 1919-1930 member ofthe Romanian parliament. 1931-1932 washe 12 Volkspartei magyarization. In kepthe onworking as a publicist and in 1906 founded against fight the his of because retire to forced was he 1892 In inparliament. districts Transylvanian several 11 the new Europe encouraged German leader like leader encouraged German Edmund Steinacker and discontent caused already of 1867 Law Nationality the of The non-compliance moving assimilated tothe after town. wassoon intelligence theanyway that Swabian rare overcome the difficultiesemerged thatfrom does not Hungarian the surprisechauvinism. It second, and, consciousness national own the up hold to necessary was it First, challenges. faced two place immediately they took Germans Hungarian of the amovement If thus ininterwar period. in Central states itthe Europe tothe of Brubaker put East regard 10 The teacher andpoliticianRudolf Brandsch was born in1880 inthe Transylvanian townMediasch. 1910- for representative was he 1875-1888 Debrecen. in 1839 in born was preacher, of a son Steinacker, Edmund Rogers Brubaker, It isnot aim the what paperthis of torepeat Spannenberger Norbert already Hungary, however, tried to continue her way as a ‘nationalizing state’, asRoger state’, continue a‘nationalizing herway triedas however, to Hungary, . (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). reframed. National minorities, nationalizing states and external homelands in Volk 6 and 11 and later Rudolf Brandsch Staat in the framework of national Ungarländische Deutsche 12 tolink the 10 CEU eTD Collection During the Hungarian Soviet Republic he fled from Hungary and spend most of the rest of his life in the in life of his Unitedrest States.of the most spend and Hungary from fled he Republic Soviet Hungarian the During journal 13 died in 1953 Romanianin prison. several rights for the minorities. Especially Oszkár Jászi Oszkár Especially minorities. the for rights several granted government the borders Hungary’s save to order In psychosis. war of state a in Republic 1919.Hungary Communist’s infoundherself till the at thisMarch timetakeover Trianon-Hungary. scholar, Gyula Szekf Hungarian the of case in the show will I as fashion, historical/political in a act and think to connection i.e.the and a‘consciousness of between historical politics scholarship, history’, in which issuesthe regardedin thesisthis place. took is It interest therefore of toconsider i.e. circumstances the in Hungary, nationalism interwar the lieon A focus will press. expert morein than afootnote not herself is Alsooften Hungary historiography.role inwestern effect. opposite the precisely have will they that proved experience all whereas Magyars, into Slovaks imagined that and still minorities on the Magyarization of forceexternals the duty to had apatriotic such effortsit believed that tradition (ethnic) among a chauvinistic internal strife. However, to dangerous through these states of weakening bedenationalize the would result stability,the greater the minorities will really turn Germans or Under State Secretary for ethnical minorities and founder of the founder and minorities ethnical for Secretary State Under 1918 till June 1920. Within experienced Hungary democracy,1918 till communism, June 1920. period this themselvespresented in disagreement. glorious side other the on Germans Hungarian the be shown, will As analysed. be will Nationalities Oszkár Jászi (1875-1957) was aHungarian Social Scientist Politician.and He founded the progressive Huszadik század In the second chapter my main focus will lie on the first months of of my first months Hungarian the lie the will main focus on In thesecond chapter a minor just plays minority German Hungarian the that show further will paper This The year 1919is in probably longest the history.Hungarian lastedfrom It October (20 Ħ , whose ideas had influence, whose a huge oncontemporary in thinking th Century). Under the Károlyi regime he served as Minister forNationalities. 7 Verband der Deutschen in Großrumänien 13 andhis workasMinister for . He CEU eTD Collection to create own associations or at least demand the fulfilment of their given rights. question in order to show the difficulties the of foundation the Germany minority faced as soon regime.as they tried The dissolution timethe after theHungarian of of revolutions 1918/19 andyears the first of Bethlen the the Ministry for Nationalities is my thesis of lastsection fifth and in the me concerns What power. assumed when Bethlen will be considered as well as the certain of his certain of speechesatthe beginninghis and end of political the activity. and the Peace . The changes inhis thinking will be evaluated through time revolutions the the of life after andsocial public changes inHungarian connected to the is directly nevertheless It life. his of issues problematic most the to belongs metamorphosis changes inthe conceptual of thinking Bleyer duringthe 1920s. Bleyer’sJakob for distrust the any towards inGerman element Hungary. mainlythe German inhabitedAustria Burgenland to and showthus how this paved theway Republic underBélaKun Soviet Hungarian the of time the on lay will attention main My in 1921. plebiscite Sopron the to up 1920 June in Trianon of Treaty the and soil Hungarian on regime communist first the of establishment the between time the on focus will I section this In thesis. my of centre eighttried out, cabinets andrival Hence, two ‘thelonggovernments. 1919’standsin the Romanian occupation and the White Terror of Horthy. Four systems of government were Paris until he turned against Rákosithe regime (1949). establish connections forDanube a .He returned toHungary in 1946and became ambassador in Bourgeois Democratic Revolution. He lived inexile in France and in England (from 1919) where he tried to fought for ending the War from 1916 onwards. He became Prime Minister of the Government of the successful15 Hungarian Soviet Republic, fora brief period in 1919. 14 Mihály Károlyi (1875-1955)was a Hungarian politician, memoir writer count.and As head of his party he BélaKun (1886-1938) was aHungarian Communist politician, who ruled Hungary, the as leaderof the In contrast to Károlyi In the fourth chapter of this thesis I move to the difficult task of working out the Ungarländische Volksbildungsverein Ungarländische Deutsche 14 . Furthermore, Iwill regard the Sopron plebiscite that transferred 15 and Kun, the Treaty of Trianon was already a 8 (UDV) and the school the and (UDV) fait accompli fait CEU eTD Collection York: Columbia Universitz Press,1977). 17 politics in counterrevolutionarythe regime) (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1975). including the minority policies Bethlenthe of andthe regime plebisciteSopron in which he of country, the picture contemporary asharp drew thus and hisexperiences relied own on period. inter-war the in Hungary on view expert’s an provides Macartney, C.A. scholar, British The conclusions. However,two partieshe the between compromise wasfair a losespsychosis war from always suffering Hungary a In consciousness. hindered himself by the deceitfula nationalizing promises inperiod. inter-war of in the relations thedetails Swabian-Hungarian Bethlen administration. view the on aconcise Spira offers Thomas andrecriminations. common stereotypes and describingand itsHungary timid political time of and revolutions the in after 1918/19. and articulation doesandnationality the of scientific Hungarian policiesat the development approach. Heregardsthe up tonot the a first comeGerman yearshistoriography. of theto Bethlenfruitful regime.minority He refusesIn HungaryVolksbund Béla andthatBellér modified conceptions was justSimilar newfigure stepped stage. on the different asBleyer 1917a with actors when other theappears firstin the person awakened whoof relations did minority between emerge againinand state just thebeginning of 1930s the Franz worked Anton Basch, later the on of foundation leaderthe of issuethe to presentsin witha little decisive pointfinally government sense the the that allowed the national a history in interwar Hungary isidentical quiet with cabinetthe Bethlen, year the 1924 16 Thomas Spira, Thomas Béla Bellér, Béla Strangely, the topic concerning me in this paper found rather less attention in found attention less me paper rather in topic concerning this Strangely, the firstThis Although of paper endswith year1924. period the Hungarianthe German . Az ellenforradalom nemzetségi politikájának kialakulása German-Hungarian Relations andthe Swabian Problem.From Károlyi toGömbös Ungarländische Deutsche Volksbildungsverein Deutsche Ungarländische 18 While visiting often in Hungary the 1920s and 1930sMacartney 16 9 He mainly focuses on the German minority German the on focuses mainly He 17 He describes the interaction between interaction the Hedescribes (The development of the Nationality . A turning point inA the . point turning (New CEU eTD Collection 21 20 2007). time of their expulsion after the Second World War. Friedrich Spiegel-Schmidt’s essays Spiegel-Schmidt’s Friedrich War.World Second the after expulsion time of their butnot only focusedon merely, the theirpeople,of on Spannenberger, history the worked German history. of buttopics unfortunatelyminor just a of percentage dealtauthors with explicit Hungarian Südostdeutsches Archiv and with hisquarrels Hungarian the for cultural government Periodicals likerights. convictions. Thiscontains the organisation of a HungarianGerman cultural representation political his as well as identity of concept Bleyer’s on light throw to able thus is She However, Schwind was the first and only one who had access to the literary estate of Bleyer. Swabianthe background be of workcannot authorthe the be expectedcritical. too to leader.of Swabian the biographeron HedwigSchwindtheboth politics lifeand the sides. Jakob Bleyer’s describes radicalization increasing the shows thus and articulation political for efforts German well as Trianon-Hungary. in policy minority honest in hisspeeches the period and essays theinter-warproblemsduring effectiveof an and in national Hungarian thinking. Itthus grouparoundGömbös. the changes continuitiesshows the and i.e Jászi’sradicals or citizenship and the understanding of what is ‘Magyar’ of certain actors in Hungarian history, 19 of Hungarian nationalism from the 19th century present times. nationalism of from to 19thcentury the Hungarian creation the reconsiders Gyurgyák János of publication recent most the Moreover, part. took 18 Hedwig Schwind, Gustav Gratz. János Gyurgyák. C.A. Macartney. It lies in the nature of things that scholars of Hungarian German origin, including The ‘Hungarian with German origin’, as Gratz himself described his identity, reflects Deutschungarische Probleme Hungary Ezzé lett magyar hazátok Jakob Bleyer 21 (1957-2004) (London: Ernst Benn, 1934). Written just a few years after Bleyer’s death and bearing in mind bearing and death Bleyer’s after years a few just Written (München: Süd-Ost-Institut, 1960). (This became out of your Hungarian home) (Budapest: Osiris, (Budapest: home) Hungarian your of out became (This or (Budapest:Neues Sonntagsblatt, 1938). SueviaPannonica 20 10 Gratz evaluates Hungarian minority policy as policy minority Hungarian evaluates Gratz are characterized by a wide by awide range arecharacterized 19 It includes viewon It the CEU eTD Collection footnote. Itis also the aim of this paper tolink these two approaches. contrary, when dealing with these topics the German minority is often worth not more than a the On studies. minority or nationalism recent to a reference find could I publication no Innearly isolated. rather be existence passits seems to historiography Hungarian Germans Deutschtümelei gradeof by as often interesta certain butdisturbed well they are were of great against ascan directed state, the befound in later propaganda. Hungarian nationalist way no in was that counterrevolution the in role important their shows thus He revolutions. Hungarian the of time the at played Germans role the and events ‘big’ the behind for me.interest great wereof thus (11/1983): 69-94. (11/1983): 4-18; Idem, „Jakob Bleyerin der neueren ungarischen Geschichtsschreibung, “ Archiv zwischen dem Putsch gegen Peidl und derÖdenburger Volksabstimmung (1919-1921),“ Deutschen in Ungarn,“ 22 FriedrichSpiegel-Schmidt, „Die Arbeiterbewegung 1918/19 in Ungarn mitbesondererBerücksichtigung der 30/31(1987/88): 78-111; Idem,„Die kulturpolitische KonzeptionJakob Bleyers, “ Numerous published and unpublished conference papers from published papersfrom Numerous historians unpublished conference and Swabian , i.e. the petty or excessive display of Germanness. It appears further thatthe appears It of Germanness. display excessive petty i.e.the or , Südostdeutsches Archiv 22 The author offers detailed information about the events the about information detailed offers author The 26/27 (1983/84): 100-109; Idem,„Das Deutschtum Ungarns 11 Südostdeutsches Sueva Pannonica Sueva Pannonica CEU eTD Collection not only not only local butalso on andracial thinking Social Darwinism, on cultural that traditions argued, ideathe between ofnational in superiority Hungary 1880 and 1918wasbased As by Hungary for Marius ‘making similar’. nationalism nationalities represented the of happened as early as after the compromise from 1867, and aimed eliminateto the danger the place. This took inlanguage thepolicy Magyarization of become and customs Magyar fromHungarian state a cultural a political into concept andby enjoining the nationalities to inHungarian nationalistic thought By period. interwar the transforming the unitary in element key a becomes nation’ Hungarian undividable and ‘one the of principle the Thus, enlightenment. the since historiography in Hungarian element a key was tribes, German and of in seaSlavic the declineof Hungariandom i.e. the prophecy’, ‘Herderian The fearof the astate 1.1 Nationalizing remaining nationalities. the among convulsions inner new created only they however, efforts, ‘nationalizing’ urged countries creation of the homogenized ethnically Central In Europe theirof states. policies for the interwar of framework wholeserves asa Thisconcept states’. of ‘nationalizing concept Brubaker’s of Central Europe. Iwill examineRogers serves Moreover, The superiority asakey element. of thinking. races After the breakdownconclusions about the interaction between historiographyof and contemporarythe political empires, The aim examine sectionthis isof to Hungarian inpolitical thought 1920s the and thusdraw the small 1. Nationalizing Hungary 12 CEU eTD Collection 25 24 2004), 6. the other hand, nationalization can be directed at spheres of practice rather than groups of groups atspheres than of rather practice otherthe hand, nationalizationcanbedirected On as awhole. citizenry for the asnormative conceived are characteristics whose putative Accordingit Brubaker,involves to population a target somesimilar to population, reference dominant elites as nation-states, as the states of and for particular ethno-cultural nations” ethno-cultural particular for of and states asthe nation-states, as elites dominant their by conceived are that “states are these definition, his In period. interwar the in Europe empires. situation of the new emerged domestic statesthe givesof impression an states ‘nationalizing’ ideasof Brubaker, whose Rogers in Central East Europe afterscholarship andcontemporary and politics Thethinking. overall is framework provided by the breakdown of the old Szekf Gyula scholar caseof Hungarian the the HungarianHanák Sugarabout nationalism Peter and Magyarization,and alsoexamine Iwill insecurity. inner ideas tothe of with Alongside combined irresponsibility a deep Péter deformed as well: befitting one’s own nation, national vanity, moral claims and moral political character the character, societal the thedeforming of and with consequence, logical society. Hungarian of fabric social and political intellectual, in the ingrained were 23 freedoms to secede from Hungary.secede from to freedoms lesson non-Hungarian nationalities1848/49 that the of speaking woulduse democratic the was it Bibó, István to According War. World First the following years in the continuing say to if not re-emerging superiority, national of idea the of definition Magyar the for becameof survival ideasof struggle ultimately of part nation’, the ‘ruling the race and politicians validated in theirnationalHungary about assumptions insuperiority. Seen terms and intellectuals which with rhetoric and imagery vocabulary, the provided traditions these Brubaker, István Bibó. István Marius Turda. Brubaker created the term of ‘nationalizing’ countries for the states of Central of East states the for countries term ‘nationalizing’ the of Brubaker created Nationalism reframed Die Misere der osteuropäischen Kleinstaaterei The idea of national superiority in Central Europe, 1880-1918 , 79. 24 Turning away from ideas seemedthe thus from democratic Turningaway 13 Ħ , in order to show the interaction between interaction toshow the , inorder (Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag Neue Kritik, 1992), 29. (Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 23 In turn, In 25 . CEU eTD Collection Hungaricums in, for instance, Vienna and in,for instance, Vienna . Hungaricums fundamentally foundationthe theeducationsupported system changed and Collegium the of by He forKunoKnebelsberg. Education, carried nationalism, out Minister the new so-called in the be seen can this, Hungary of case the In nation. thecore hegemony of political or welfare, flourishing, economic predominance, demographic language, cultural promote the to anddomains settings of variety in a needed is action specific idea that (4) the state, the of rightful its ownership despite expressed adequately or realized arenot interests of polity asthe polity exists the that polity, the owns legitimately nation core the idea that the distinguished from the citizenry or permanent resident population of the state as a whole, (2) sharply and terms, in ethno-cultural defined nationality, or nation core a of existence the characteristicsflourishing, political or hegemony of ethno-cultural core the nation. distinguishes Brubakers economic of preponderance, demographic language, the promote culture, actionto undertake a nationalizing state using the following seven elements: (1) the assimilationist. cultural and economic political, of and territory of but Germans, of not nationalization the at directed They were life within state. the of citizens it. unassimilated, if culturally loyal, into Thus, them turning at nor minorities, of Brubaker considers assimilation ethno-cultural the at neither directed were thus nationalization of and practices them as differentialist,fundamental difference. Instead of seeking alterto identities, it takes them as given. Policiesnot presumed on basis of their the treatment it differential prescribes similar, make people people. In this sense it involves dissimilation rather than assimilation. Far from seeking to 26 Ibd., 80. and for To compensate and to perceive past discrimination, nationalizing states urgeand nationalizing states perceive pastdiscrimination, compensate and to To the core nation, (3) the idea that the core nation is not flourishing, that its specific that flourishing, isnot nation core the idea that (3) the nation, core the 26 14 CEU eTD Collection formal and informal andpolicies practices informed by ideasthe above.outlined organizations, adoption the non-state of orof and(7) officialsagencies, state, within the or in an effort itsand interests, promote (6)mobilization thebasis ideas variety in on of these a of settings to shape the safeguardto own state haditbefore its nation the against previous discrimination for correct policies justificationor of such action as remedialpractices or compensatory, as needed to counterbalance and of the state, of particular organizations, (accessed 12 January 2008). January 12 (accessed 28 27 Magyar national Magyar national identity. a into loyalty citizen Hungarus former the of a transformation voluntary, overwhelmingly was in Hungary and Germans the of Magyarization Hanák, the Péter to According of Magyars astate 1.2 Creating World War the German minorities were indeed seen as a ‘fifth column’ of the Third Reich. Second the during and 1930s the of end the at However, Europe. East Central of whole in the minorities the among distinct sharply as seen were nation, the of membership cultural foreign aims.political Citizenshiplegal and nationality, membership andof state the ethno- nationality,if legal not a powerfulcitizenship, to state notunimportant for Hungary's fortune minoritiesinterwarby tobelong, period.TheGerman had ethnic-cultural the on the part of the gentry middle class. Béla Bellér pointed out that assimilation in terms of terms in assimilation that out pointed Bellér Béla class. middle gentry the of part the on more asasocial manifested Hungarianinto society. Magyarization –primarily was pressure popular strata of minoritiesthe than on their middle class intelligentsia, who were integrated Péter Hanák, „A national compensation for backwardness,”; available from available backwardness,”; for compensation national „A Hanák, Péter Ibd., 83-4. Brubakerfurther seesanelementof a nationalizing in state conception(5) the and Each of these elements can be applied to the states of East Central Europe in the 28 He was convinced that Magyarization was inflicted less on less on the was inflicted Magyarization that Hewasconvinced 15 27 CEU eTD Collection based on strength, but on weakness and fear. and weakness on but strength, on based not was Magyar the of policy nationalities the that stresses Sugar midst. their from exclude to choose between those have People loyalties. is basedon pre-existent It movement. with adiscrete –rather than state the whom they want to associate formalembracing both policies and existing informal and practices, within both and outside and – those politics of aspect an becomes whomNationalism nationalities. as state theyin their living others all want to lands. these with wasequated that state rule the to entitled itwas, therefore, that and Steven of Saint Crown 31 (31/2000): 130. 30 Ungarndeutschtum, ed. Wendelin Hambuch nation. individual asan survival their enabled otherpeoples, openness that butas aconsequence of towards superior racial qualities of Hungarian aspart only not was seen assimilate and Magyarize to capacity The identity. national of distinct their recognition demanded increasingly non-Magyars the other, the on transformation nationalist internal their by stimulated and hand, one the on assimilation Faced with non-Magyars. the and Magyars the between relationship the radicalized It rather a create not didhomogenizedMagyarization as theliberals national had space, anticipated. make to afraid concessions. weakare the the only the renewed barbarism. ita regarded forced as of Magyarization opinion imageinwestern The stereotype public language wasinfirst line carried outby socialthe environmentandnot from school.the 29 Peter Sugar, same,” the remains nationalism Hungarian more the changes, it more “The Sugar. Béla Bellér. “Jakob Bleyer als Minderheitenpolitiker,” in Minderheitenpolitiker,” als Bleyer “Jakob Bellér. Béla Indeed, between itIndeed, between became1880 and1918 clear thatthe policy of and assimilation Peter Sugar mentions the belief of Magyar nationalists that the Magyar nation was nation Magyar the that nationalists Magyar of belief the mentions Sugar Peter political East European nationalism, politics,and religion 30 nation capable of creating and maintaining a state in the Lands of the of Lands inthe a state maintaining and creating of capable nation This belief was expressed by referring to the Magyars as a nation and to and nation a as Magyars the to referring by expressed was belief This (Budapest: JBG, 1994), 33. 31 16 The strong can be generous and conciliatory; and be generous can strong The Jakob Bleyer. Ein Leben für das (Brookfield: Ashgate, 1999), 45. Austrian Yearbook 29 CEU eTD Collection and guardian of antidemocratic governmental governmental practices” andof antidemocratic guardian in encouragement of developmentadequate the individualities” theircultural own argues thatfurther He for Magyarization. possibility andthusfocused ontheearliest decades earlier “the non rulingnamed after him had which introduced Hungarianthe language in primary two schools races states” national should, however, onlyperfectlythus impossible Itis“geographically be create subordinated. homogenous to enjoythe bulwark againstcomplete threats from the east. The role of seizedthe non-Hungarianfreedom, with the desire nationalities to rule over couldothers. In the Hungarianand case the missioneven was seen to be period. surviving war,breakdown and revolutionsand shaping the image of in homogeneity, Hungary interwar the political of ideal the of expression supreme the was Magyarization Thus, –Magyar. identity of version of a singlenational existence emphasized the that programme cultural and a nationalist to referred It also non-Magyars. the of affairs economic and social and instanceof forregulation language,governmental 1908, the theLexApponyifrom in Magyar for education the suchassupport a variety of practices to referred Magyarization liberal ambition of replacing ‘Natio Hungarica’ with a political nation of citizens. The use of Assimilation was interchangeably.applied werenot commonly and Magyarization of assimilation concepts associated with the process of Jewish emancipation and the 35 34 12. Justice for Hungary. Review and criticism of the effect of the Treaty of Trianon 33 32 Bibó, Ibd. in detriment,“ to her aggrandised states the and of Hungary mission historic „The ed., Apponyi, Albert Turda, 79. Kleinstaaterei The Hungary of Bethlen, whom Bibó described as “wrong realist, an administrator The idea of a historic mission expresses the idea that the soul of a nation is often Turda stresses that in the political culture of early nineteenth century the Hungary, century nineteenth in early of political culture that the stresses Turda 33 , stated CountApponyi, stated Albert in late1920s,originator the of law the , 52-3. 17 35 , regarded thesituation her , regarded of (London: Longmans, 1928), Longmans, (London: 34 . 32 CEU eTD Collection 1.3 The case of Gyula Szekf ofGyula case 1.3 The judged as a sign of weakness. Hungary, on the other side, was striving to show strength. where he from” came voluntarily left home.that They “no singlehave tonationality assimilatefurther and categorywithin’. went becamedemanded Teleki latter the ‘outsiders and assuch has andthe whoright can to notcultivate do entitledlimited soto nationality rights. According is tothisthe the Germans fall withoutfree doubt under language only were who to goin Trianon-Hungary settle back minorities andvoluntary and the traditional only 1928, of customs of their historicshould reasons –dueto Teleki’s According– receive autonomy rights. to perception They minorities. latter andforced voluntary traditional, between Teleki.distinguished Teleki minorities within Hungary. justification rhetorical behaviour The from this derives of Pál thedoso with ready regard to not to butwas neighbouringminorities countries inthe Hungarians abroad. In case concerning the inmatters interfered issue itsteadily merely while domesticminorities as a of revision, Hungary would have granted certain rights to the 36 The Hungarian historian Gyula Gyula Szekf historian The Hungarian legitimate ruling elite of the Lands interest. is of crucial race therefore Magyar of the Crown representedof St. Stephen. had ahugework in influenceon contemporary Hungary thinking 1920s.Hismessage the of Twothe definitions officialUnion. Soviet Szekf the of to Hungary firstambassador becamelater nationalism and to of ideologythe hehistoriography from ofa pro-Dualism histhinking. driftedand political Throughout career the government. His concept of the decline of the Paul Ginder. „Jakob Bleyers Weg vom ungarischen Patrioten zur deutschenVolksgemeinschaft,“ in In the nineteenth century, the historical tradition asthe the Magyars tradition historical portrayed the century, In nineteenth the 36 . Thus compliance and the willingness for cooperation wouldbe Ħ Ħ can serve as a special case to the interaction between interaction tothe case aspecial as canserve 18 Jakob Ħ ’s CEU eTD Collection Magyar nation, and with St. Stephen it entered into the ‘Christian-German cultural ‘Christian-German the into entered it Stephen St. with and nation, Magyar social evolution” and historical with laws govern areobjective there that contention the rejects it and soul human the of manifestations the of history the essentially Szekf and Hungary interwar in orientation thinkers. spirit agebyexamining an intellectual currents andideas of leading andof statesmen the Thus, intellectual streams, mainlyby Wilhelm Dilthey and Friedrich Meinecke, i.e. examining the the concept yearsscholarly uptothe end First of the WorldWar, influenced hemuch by was German ofexerted a strong influence on Hungarianthe intellectual community. During his early articles and books his Similarly, society. Hungarian of segment influential politically the andhis writings on history politicspast and contemporary the predominantviewreflected of language words knowsthe contemporary thinking in Trianon-Hungary. ‘consciousness history’,of i.e. tothink andin act a historical-political fashion. a scholarship, andhistorical between ispolitics connection consider the interesting to is thus What role. minor no played Ideas nation. Hungarian the of interests and will state as a specifically ‘Hungarian’build the to sought initiatives Nationalizing toracial arguments. resorted often nationalism state, i.e. as a state that nineteenth-century Hungarian late inHungary, groups ethnic other nationalism of would embody and express the Facedwith emerging the non-Magyarethnicgroups. Magyarsto the and contrasted wasexclusive Stephen;latter the St. Crown of of the Lands inhabitantthe theory, every in incorporated, and inclusive was former The co-existed. racial, and political nations, 37 Bleyer. EinLeben für das Ungarndeutschtum see: Gyurgyák,291-312. According to Szekf According to The ideas of the Hungarian historian, Szekf Gyula The ideasofthe Hungarian beleélés Ħ , the Hungarian state was the product of the nation, was asingle of state theproduct Hungarian the , Geistesgeschichte (live into) and (liveinto) , ed., Wendelin Hambuch(Budapest: JBG, 1994), 67. Ħ 37 19 its master. It believes that “ is history “human that believes It master. its He wrote in a political and intellectual context intellectual and political ina wrote He átérzés became the dominant philosophical becamethedominant (feel through) for ofit. Ħ , had influenceon ahuge , 38 . The Hungarian . The CEU eTD Collection 39 the big the 60- or70-year old generation Magyar for the beingwas responsible ‘race’stillnot equalto andtraders” farmers simple for the part most“since they were culture higher German of as representatives be the described hardly could later immigrants German that stressed He in Trianon-Hungary. influence political high with and schools in primary textbooks forbade non-Hungarian 1907 which generation, Apponyi’of so-calledof ‘Lex originator the This is Apponyi, of expressed byAlbertsimilarly of representatives the Millenium one the ‘Herrenvolk’ liberalism in tocreate order a new form of political thinking. adopted Millenium Turda, the According to generation and generation. Millenium the incultural 1914: development Széchenyi, to Hungary prior generation the the of and political for were responsible who statesmen and politicians of generations three aftermath of Bolshevikthe many revolution and for yearsfollowed. that Szekf in the circumstances nation’s the about thought public dominated that past recent Hungary’s view of genrethe inascholarly expressed “Three by Generations” advocated Jews. the and carried ideas out Western with irreconcilable were ways Magyar Christian and that the community’. his mainIn work 38 effect: the blame was fixed. Failure by omission on the part of andclass of ruling Magyar the by part on the Failure fixed.omission blame the effect: was hadafar This reaching nationalism. and renewal religion by be of hadcombated to constant liberalism,inevitably revolution, leading to alien an andamorality,urban culture, atheism Szekf exactly was Turda, 72. Steven Bela Vardy, Bela Steven The messageof groups. In however,practice,it favoured ofthe superiority the overMagyars non-Magyarnational every integrated ethnic that group nation within of the its orbit,concept a a feature preached retained fromliberalism earlier theories‘Herrenvolk’ of HungarianIn theory, liberalism. Kulturvölker 39 Ħ Modern Hungarian Historiography ’s belief that the ruling classes of the time themselves, the by then 50-, by then the themselves, time the of classes ruling the that belief ’s . Három nemzedék Három Három Nemzedék was that the newfangled foreign ideology of ideology foreign newfangled the that was 20 (New York: East European Quarterly, 1976),63. (Three generations), he reflects his view his hereflects (Three generations), Ħ examines Ausgleich 40 . It . CEU eTD Collection instance, were the tillers of the soil. He considered neither racial nor the ethnic components ethnic the nor racial neither He considered soil.the of tillers were the instance, forof in nationalities history him the Hungary. non-Magyar To the of Swabians, the As early as number one problem historicalcontemporary of scholarship. the question minority national the of study the made historiography interwar of and regime orientation. Thus, Hungary's dismembermentand the revisionism bothof politicalthe disappearance of self-criticism finallyand collapse. to Magyar soul ledwhich prostitution tothe and scholarship, politics,of art and virtual tothe fallible the upon impact its and pseudo-liberalism of spirit alien the was it estimation traditional,moderately progressive and fundamentallyrevolution was it. Inhisalien to launched by Szekf Szekf In elements. cultural and ethnic alien of superficial assimilation lifethrough national and culture Magyar the denationalization of the to contributing by minorities; national the vis-a-vis Magyar the of position didundermineby helping much contributed It the downfall this nation.to the the of to and formunacceptable itbecame totally in its form, radicalized insoul’ classical its even Szekf as If, evolution. national Szekf liberalism, classical of ideas perceiving erawasruinous. ‘liberal’ While merits recognizing the and commending the the Therefore, result. the was Trianon conflicts. nationality the about bring not did it if Szekf According to Hungary. were free to conjure upwrong doing on the parttheir of the liberals and Jews were offered as explanation, and thesolution. readers This expressed the official views of contemporary 40 Apponyi,14. Széchenyi and the minorities both rhymed well with interwar Hungary’s ideological interwar Hungary’s with rhymed well both minorities the and Széchenyi Àllam és nemzet és Àllam Ħ , became an important forum for the discussions of nationality problems. (State and nation), Szekf andnation), (State Ħ , liberalism was the foremost cause of disorder. It aggravated, causeof disorder. foremost the liberalism was , Ħ asserted, liberalism was basically inimical to the ‘Magyar the to inimical basically was liberalism asserted, Ħ still regarded it as ultimately detrimental to Hungarian to detrimental ultimately as it regarded still 21 Ħ ’s view the Magyar soul was basically was soul Magyar the view ’s Ħ constituted the first serious treatment serious first the constituted Magyar Szemle , a journal CEU eTD Collection excellence, while re-gaining influence in politics as well as in society after the Treaty Treaty the after of asinsociety as influence inpolitics well excellence, while re-gaining circumstances. appropriate actto the to history were neverable dates of their contemporary whole. attitudes a insociety as a manifestationneo-Baroque led of to automatically time.that This of requirements the to contradictory quite movement Christian-national new a with along appeared to Szekf appeared to of nation.the A further point of his critics concerned contemporary society. The1920s hinder declinewouldleadership the that nationalities underMagyar of coexistence several was unwise and counterproductive. It was rather a [(accessed 17March 2008). 45 44 43 42 (Budapest:ÀKV-Maecenas, 1989), 389. making similar. For Szekf would for thefuture bedangerous of Hungary.As hestated: it and past the with be reconciled not could state the for basis a as nationalism modern that i.e.culture within state, a the Hungarian prevalent the of speak is merely to believed he nationality, evenaMagyar or race Magyar as apart but purely ethnic mixtureof group, Tospeak a ofvariedcomponents. ethnic Szekf creation. historic a be andnationality of and nationhood of a peopleimportance to considered deciding 41 István Bibó, “Deformierter ungarischer Charakter. Ungarische Geschichte auf Abwegen,”; available from available Abwegen,”; auf Geschichte Ungarische Charakter. ungarischer “Deformierter Bibó, István Ibd., 405. Ibd., 402-415. Ibd., 393-4. GyulaSzekf 44 An aspect of narrow-minded of the An aspect permanent. ofTrianon fate bitter the making but nothing is that Magyar of view.we ourselves If resign proof to where a a country there no otherare nationalities is butthe Magyarization country. our in home at feel nationalities other have If we want tobe leadingthe nation in Danubian basin the ever we [...] again will want to Here again István Bibó comes to mind. He stated that the Hungarians in the key in the Hungarians the that stated He mind. to comes Bibó István again Here Ħ , Három nemzedék és ami utána következik 45 It appears that forappears Szekf It that Ħ as a time of “neo-Baroque” asa of time Ħ saw the modern Hungarian nationality not as a membership in not a nationality modern Hungarian sawthe Ħ , Magyarization, carried out mainly by the Millenium generation, primus inter pares inter primus Kismagyar Ħ the Millenium generation was an illness an par was Millenium the generation 22 (Three generations and what comes after) comes what and generations (Three 43 , including anew ‘Herrenvolk’ ideology view alsoincluded theconviction of Nagymagyar . 41 Moreover, he was convinced he was Moreover, idea, i.e.idea, peaceful the 42 Kismagyar CEU eTD Collection disintegration of historic Hungary became a Hungary historic of disintegration the When Hungary. of integrity the save thus and government Hungarian the of benevolence membership in a purely butas a , part of a mixture of varied ethnic components. as a not nationality Hungarian themodern threatening of instead for alone, Magyars a state Hungary make to aim their continued and him follow not did time the of politicians leading Szekf justification for this. However, his anti-Semitism may have rooted more in the more rooted have may anti-Semitism his However, this. for justification parexcellence. Szekf scapegoats servedJews, who as denying their own responsibility the blame was transferred tominority groups, mainly to the achieved nothinga further but polarization Hungarianof neo-Baroque society. asSzekf Magyarization, However, nation. Hungarian the of diversity the reduce to undertaken were efforts policies domestic thought interwar throughout the period. All weresubordinated to inthispolicies aim. Hence, Hungarian political reviseTrianon aim The dominated appropriate. to seemed somewhat Although believingin of role the Magyarsthe as War. World Second accept Nazi tothe ideology prior in decade to the 1920s,butrefused the throughout nationalisthe account that actedasa into taking convictions, inhis own racial in of a sense However, nation. the declineof the for andpresent inthe past policies blamedHungarian rather dohis bestformeanstrying byno his but nationalities againstthe Heagitated to country. character. Trianon, they could only worsen situation country the of and deepenits xenophobic Ħ pointed out the dangerous impact of trying to ‘make similar’. In this sense the ‘make Inthissense similar’. to impactof trying dangerous outthe pointed Before Trianon, concessions towards the minorities could demonstrate the In mindsthe of contemporary politicians, the trauma of Trianon was fixed and while Gyula Szekf Gyula Ħ was no racist in the modern sense of the word but rather a patriot rather but word the of sense modern in the racist no was Staatsnotwendigkeit Ħ also stated, can stated, mistake and be seen asagrieve also (state necessity) (state policies Hungary’s in 1920s the 23 fait accompli fait primus inter pares Ħ , one has admit, gavescholarly the , one to , there was no reason anymore to reason no was , there in Carpathianthe basin, Zeitgeist than CEU eTD Collection just strengthened the claustrophobic of nature strengthenedjust claustrophobic the country the andits xenophobia. it Instead, system. formation a democratic of the haveencouraged Hungary and could thus historical the of out state nation homogenized a created such as Trianon permanent. Trianon fate of madeit the Moreover, convulsions. new inner only creating step, thewrong therefore demanded in thanmoreeven they been anymore. togrant rights would havefactor thusappropriate It order to keeplogical. The nationalities, due to theirthemlimited number, could not serve as a political power as a rightsgrant remaining tothe nationalities. theoppositewould However,have quite been political resource. ‘Nationalizing’ the state was 24 CEU eTD Collection compromise. “It was shouted outby defended out bythe was compromise.publicists, carried “It demagogues, the shouted the after of policy leadingHungarian conceptions became the bugbear nationality the and state nation Magyar the that fact the in lay practice into put not was Law Nationality the demanded therealisation of Nationalitythe Law1868. Jászi from identified thereason why victory of revolution,the was this further pushedby Oszkár Jászi’s CivilRadicals. They the to Due integrity. territorial neglecting than less nothing was this run, long the In them. for arrangement an find and Hungary of borders the within living minorities the with along and new ways in nationality policies. Soon,16 the aim of the government became tosave In theclear nationalorder integrity inMihályi Károlyi,his speech Hungary,of on October to get issue theminority and Jászi 2.1 Károlyi, been necessary. presented themselves in in disagreement atime,glorious would opposite wherethe have side other the on Germans Hungarian the shown, be will As analysed. be will One, asWar asearly World of eve the question hisideas minority the formulated concerning minorities.the to rights several granted government the borders Hungary’s save to order In psychosis. Especially in this March1919.Hungary inCommunist’s of time foundherself at astate war takeover the till Republic Hungarian the of months first the on lie will focus main my section this In the work 2. Firststeps of Oszkár Jászi as Minister for Nationalities, who th , 1918, demanded anew, 1918,demanded inforeign orientation policy, democratization country the of 25 CEU eTD Collection 50 49 by liberal press.Thenational the and respected heavily attacked was nationalitiesandtherefore towards the wide autonomic rights ranging alike. interests Hungarian with and reality historical with accorded that solution only the been have would nationalities, for waiting. out that this job was even too much for him and October 1918 was a month of senseless stands in of marketsquare the isa village that going upinflames, of andinstead doing givehe inable hisundivided attention. really itpolicy to wasnot general, negotiations andforeign for peace the preparing of question, of nationality importance the Litván suggests that howeverJászi clear might havebeeninmind the his overarching about impliesin hopeless that increasingly the Jászi situation wish topromise much. not did too 48 47 327. in Hungary” living nations the of self-determination to rights the for “tomakepreparations was ordered establish ministry that to instructed a Hewas minorities. underKárolyi. Nationalities for he Minister became face reality when of of languages seemed necessary. however, Soon, Jászi and his“intellectual illusions” use the legislation Hungarian,to regulate not declarednationality additional languagewas or ‘indivisible andunitary nation’, andHungarian did recognize Although in Hungary recognize lawdidnot the nationality liberalism thenationalities.” even by publicly advocated statesmen these toward who 46 For adetailed description of Jászi’s minority conceptions see: Gyurgyák,179-192. Ibd., 159. György Litván, György Gyurgyák,192. Oszkár Jászi, Jászi’s concept of a ‘ of the East’, i.e. afederal Hungary with autonomies As early thebeginning negotiationsas November, of Jászi started with the The Dissolution of theHabsburg monarchy A twentieth-century prophet.Oscar Jászi 50 Consequently, butgranted Jászi refused rights political 26 Pester Lloyd (Budapest: CEU Press, 2006), 167. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), describes him as someone who as him someone describes communities individuals 48 . The rhetoric already rhetoric . The 49 Indeed,it turned whose first whose within the 47 had to had 46 CEU eTD Collection adherents to join the club. Some weeks earlier, Bleyer had founded his own his founded had Bleyer earlier, weeks Some club. the join to adherents invited and hisfurthermore Jakob Bleyer Brandsch rights. their laws guarantee which would as aswell life, public of spheres and other courts in administration, mother tongue German autonomy in cultural,the in especially the educational unlimitedsector, the use of the is asitpossible” long “as task of the The Germans. and between Germans made anymore be should difference no that claimed Rudolf as Brandsch, a thenleading figure the Germans among in Carpathian basin,the Siebenbürgisch-Sächische Volkspartei ausleben ( consciousness own their follow to them for important itwas Therefore, community. in one settle not did Germans the fact that the due to applied be not could issue self-determination the of consider that to Itis interesting government. numerous German groups,The umbrella. institutional one under time among them the forunite first the allGerman of Hungary people possibility appearedto the was founded, 53 Jászi was blamed predominantly for his lack of would Theflourishing facts. for future country the if it be reachesit.worthless So never instead, who is responsiblea minister future, far the thinkabout to is allowed atheorist newspaper, the of opinion the for the fate of his country, has the duty to work on the given 52 anything he holds a talk on the importance of being able to differentiate parish parties. parish differentiate to ofbeingable the importance on heholdsatalk anything 51 Pester Lloyd Pester Lloyd Pester Lloyd When, November 16 on ). 52 Volksrat On the same occasion they claimed the integrity of the Hungarian fatherland , 12 November 1918. November , 12 , 12 November 1918. November , 12 , 21 December1918. was to represent the demands of the Hungarian Germans towards the 53 and demanded the democratization of anddemocratization demanded the country,the of total th , 1918, the , 1918, , German social democratic workers etc. The Saxon, etc.The workers democratic social German , 27 Deutsche Volksrat Deutsche Deutsche Volkspartei Deutsche Volksrat Realpolitik wasfounded by of representatives . sich nach seiner Eigenart voll (German People’s Council) People’s (German , Deutscher Bauernbund Volksrat with 51 In , CEU eTD Collection impossible. in from and make Swabiandom other each to order between them every cooperation Hungariandom separate to eager Saxonswerestill characterized later the years Even some fearedcircles, Bleyer innerpolitical serious problems asaresultof this joining together. personal Taking disgust. intothe account unpopularity of inBrandsch Hungarian nationalist elementary elementary wasschools his only demand,really significant butonly in total harmony with German of Restoration grounds. patriotic autonomy on rejected but grievances, legitimate Hungariandom” is that why silentwhen they keep one is talking aboutthefriendship sincere towards leader, Brandsch, no common Rudolf policy made.could be with ‘pan-German’excluded Heclaimedthat them Transylvanian and their Saxons. the for urging Hungary’s Germans demandto full autonomy. leader, of views He attacked Transylvanianthe Brandsch, 1917. several times Rudolf Saxon village school system As down, vigorous. thewarwound remained Bleyerhis clung to limited Germanprivate exclusively use,to Germans the would survive, provided their ethnic principles of Woodrow Wilson. representatives of Brandschthe movementdemanded a modern minority policy based on the the interests, of Hungarian in lay acceptance the priority Bleyer’s clear while and directions two the between difference the he a grown man. made marriedup Hence, to get should that girl born just a with Saxons the and Swabians the compared Bleyer Moreover, 57 56 the addition “ 55 beginning. the from followers more had Brandsch’s of a‘breakthrough’. speak not certainly can one Democrats Social the 54 Schwind, 58. OL K26, XXII, Report from György Steuer1921. It is not clear how strong this Pester Lloyd Bleyer believed in the vitality of German rural culture. Even if the Hungarians the if Even culture. rural German of vitality the in believed Bleyer 56 , 13 November 1918. November , 13 As Bleyer stated, “the Brandsch wing is hostile towards Hungariandom and von diesseits des Königssteigs 57 . Hence, it was the position towards Hungariandom that separated both. separated it that Hungariandom was theposition . Hence, towards Volksrat really was. Due to the fact that Bleyer excluded the Saxons as well as 28 ” 54 . This geographical term automatically . Thisgeographical term 55 58 However, it was not only Bleyer conceded certain Bleyer conceded Volksrat on the other side CEU eTD Collection health condition, found a more moderate tone and just named a certain foreignness between foreignness just namedacertain and tone moderate more a found condition, health charging them with pan-German activities. One decade later, Bleyer, already in a bad mental spiritual boundary and tobring hetried systematically into Protestants discredit, the in effect. still was level, educational first the on Magyarization targeted thus and schools elementary in textbooks elementary non-Hungarian forbade which Apponyi’, ‘Lex the law, school the German school system.The Germans also discovered that Count Albert Apponyi’s 1907 in leastimprovement some provide at to attempt regime’s blocked the effectively officials to implementproperly minority the Hungary,policies. Throughout village and county appeared. Obviously, the new government had neither the means nor really any strong desire German schools were confessional. Signs of German discontent with Károlyi soon includeinstitutions.expanded to church-run 21 November on ordered Religion, and Education of Minister the Lovaszy, Marton demands, these satisfy to order In affairs. German from excluded be should non-Germans that and areas, German predominantly of administration the and courts the in German official on schools, German the thereafter, shortly But regions. German predominantly in grades elementary two first in the instructions Hungarian abolish to right the obtained but demandfull national privileges. autonomy, reject integrity, Hungary’s defend would Germans all that pledged and program German administrative organization, the organization, administrative German the Hungarians. When, on November 1 November on When, Hungarians. the 59 58 Ibd., 63-4. Ibd. For Bleyer,For not ‘Hungary’just was ageographical but theexpressionterm a of Since the day of the establishment of the of establishment the of day the Since st , 1918, that the educational concessions granted a few days earlier be earlier afewdays granted educational the concessions that , 1918, st , 1918,Károlyi officially recognized Hungary’s first Deutschungarische VolksratDeutschungarische 29 59 This was important becauseimportant of nearly Thiswas 86% Volksrat , November 16 Volksrat , Bleyer announced its insisted on on separate insisted th , 1918, Germans , 1918, CEU eTD Collection expressions of expressions “itconvincedof politicians Brandschinis July 1919 that to say superfluous that the and German also the population disregarded districts practice. election The law into realization more less or impossible. Buteven reallypoliticiansnot did putting consider the meaning weakness within duetothe made minority and disagreements the German a that a practical than hadmore asymbolic law, however, Hungary. This in Western tendencies secessionist of the because mainly accepted, was in Hungary Germans law for the autonomy on January limits obvious became 27 tolerance of the However, governmental join the bypointingsuppression towards hithertoby Hungarian the government. administration and free cultural of development Germans.the Brandsch justified thisstepto Brandsch, gained farreaching from Romaniansthe promises concerning local self- 8 January on Mediasch in Saxons itslost influence duetotheresignation of Jászi andthedecision of Transylvanianthe FollowingMinister Jásziboth councilsunitedonJanuary the1 wishof German Oszkár legacy 2.2 Jászi’s Saxons. directed againstthe offensively a course course, political national Bleyer’s of realization practical the meant have would this because 1919, in 1919, so-called the Neue Post political chauvinistic and a nationalistic under subordinate to want not did Saxons the However, in of existSwabians. case not the would nation, which Hungarian Saxonsandthe the 60 Gustav Gratz, Zeitgeist . But when he mentioned the creation of a Deutschungarische Probleme . Bleyer on the other hand propagated his newspaper otherideasviahis hand on the . Bleyer patriotic propagated Deutsch-Ungarische Politische Verband th , 1919, to join , 1919,to Romania. TheSaxonleader,Rudolf (Budapest:Neues Sonntagsblatt, 1938), 13. 30 Kulturverein . Butthis unifiedinstitution it seemed too muchit seemed too th when the when st 60 , CEU eTD Collection 66 65 the cabinet’s objections that the Germans should not merit special treatment, the law VI of 64 of Western Hungary, that formed a majority in a contiguous area of the country. at the end groups of for January those of ethnic German, in primarily Burgenland the region Determination of the German people of Hungary’ that the government ratified and published Self-‘On theto for Law right aPeople’s model alsothe 1919/VI This endwas year. the of beKrajna’, or‘Subcarpathian Rus’, embodied wasto the that Law inPeople’s 1918/X at these was to elaborate and gain acceptance of an arrangement for an autonomous ‘Ruska 63 in foreign policies. in foreign as well as question nationality tothe in regard people the of self-determination the on based press affect shouldthis minority not the of Thesepolicies government. the still should be heafterwards inbut Jászigave ministry, resigned. up his opinion the contemporary of the German minority tookplacethat in this inearly time 1919. minorities and tried toprevent him from continuing this policy in the negotiations with the 62 the west Hungarian Germans, the German element is our most reliable nationality” reliable most is our element German the Germans, Hungarian west the basis. market a stock on his notcarry out policies he does that claimed by newspaperand the propagated restrictions press. liberal by the attacked wereheavily policies minority Jászi’s for Hence, Nationalities. Minister system” newwith the election newthe law autonomy onpaperand only now till firstexists place the that cheating took 61 Spannenberger, Pester Lloyd Pester Lloyd Pester Lloyd Pester Lloyd Pester Lloyd Jászi’s brief ministership achieved substantive success in just two areas. The first of first The areas. two in just success substantive achieved ministership brief Jászi’s It was not an easy task serve as minister in the time of the revolutions, especially as , 29 January 1919. , 20 January 1919. , 4 January 1919. , 4 January 1919. , 3 January 1919. Pester Lloyd Volksbund 65 , 24. 63 Hefurther out “disregarding pointed that aweakirredentism by blamed him for granting too extensive concessions to the to concessions extensive too granting for him blamed 61 . 31 62 Jászi refused to accept the to Jászirefused 66 Despite 64 . Soon CEU eTD Collection operetta, a tragic comedy” atragic operetta, follow “anwilling conceptanymoreto blindeagerness, and calledJászi’s adventure, an not was Bleyer changed. fundamentally Hungary that Entente the for sign a as serve also late 1918: published in 1920Jászi said followingthe about his activitiesas a inNationality minister memoirs his In in wait. Communists the with crisis into sliding was Hungary However, development”. andcultural economic unlimited guarantees that confederation depends much more an solutionon than forextra Tohim“the theGermans. future of lucky Europe our ability Jásziit goalsFor whyhavebeenachievedsoeasily. wondered should cherished was their to unite every nation of Central and East Europe in such a 70 that political autonomy conflicted with political with that his views. autonomy patriotic conflicted own helaw because new the claimed now Bleyer scorned nationality conflict. the exacerbated paradoxically Hungary of Germans the to Concessions defections. German further forestall to merely designed were regulations these German The sensed that government. administration,be outtogetherwith special worked and school hadto education; the tasks jurisdiction, covered its autonomy minister, the nation was German the of central organ The country. the in nation Hungarian one only knew which terminology traditional the breaks and asanation with inHungary thus Germans law recognized the and This religion. predominantly areas. German-speaking predominantly January 29 69 68 67 Ibd. Spiegel-Schmidt, Ibd., 70. Schwind, 69. the complete autonomy of each state within a vast based on territory or personal or territory on based federation vast a within state each of assure autonomy would complete that the of states union confederative anticipated an prepare to territories and disconnected; be to motherland the between cooperation transportation and economic national protect traditional to Hungary; new the of borders final the adjust favourable eventually My politics could haveonly rationalthree goals: save to ideathe ofthe plebiscite and th , 1919, granted granted , 1919, cultural and political Germansautonomy into Hungary’s Arbeiterbewegung 70 . He stepped back from the back. Hestepped from , 131. 67 This includedadministration,justice, education 32 Volksrat before it accepted the law. the it before accepted 68 The Germans also Germans The 69 It should CEU eTD Collection 231. Hungarian reconciliation efforts 1848-1998 Magyarization. A repetition of this ‘mistake’ should not be made. they would lost. neverhaveHence,fault been the was less, too and nottoolittle, magyarized been only had nationalities if the that were 1918 of lessons the Thus, principle. wrong in butfutile only not were nationalities the felt to concessions It that practices. unconscious, underwenta violentand perhaps a-natural reaction to oldthe ideas and 71 György Litván, “Oszkár Jászi’s Federation Theories,” in Theories,” Federation Danube Jászi’s “Oszkár Litván, György Jászi’s ideas should remain on theoretical nature. Hungarian opinion,the for conscious than present. future the for rather is my policy Namely, andpossible. is whichever land-register, 71 , eds., Ignac Romsics/BélaKirály (Budapest:CEU-Press, 1998), 33 Geopolitics in the Danube region. Danube the in Geopolitics CEU eTD Collection towards a friendly morecourse. German towards calculation descent –sothe awayfrom – Romania break Francecould its with boundaries German of politicians the of help the With there. living Germans million one approximately because of with Romania shared sympathies Germany. this,the Despite Germany following of necessity the meant hand, other the on Hungary, A small policies. East Middle interests” German with complies of Hungary power ifarenewed is “itquestionable that indicates Hungary’sstandpointtowards national integrity remained from ambiguous.A report 1919 diplomacy’s German time, this During governments. rival two and cabinets eight out, tried Romanian occupation June 1920.Within period this Hungary democracy andexperienced both and communism, the White Terror The yearof 1919isin probably longest the history.Hungarian Horthy. Four systems of governmentof view point Germany’s from Hungary 3.1 Post-war were German minority. the towards German inhabitedAustria Burgenlandlaid and to thus for thefoundation thefuture distrust policies. Iwill Furthermore, plebisciteexamine theSopron thattransferred mainly the includesunder standpointof Kun.This the also Communist’s Béla the Germany towards Sopron plebiscite in 1921. My main is focus on timethe of Hungarian the Soviet Republic the in June1920upto communist Treaty the Hungarian soil Trianon andof regime on first the of establishment the between time the on focus will I section following the In 3. Thelong1919 72 Gyula Tokody, Gyula 72 . Thelarger Hungary, bigger the would havebeeninfluence her in Germany’s Deutschland und die ungarische Rärerepublik 34 (Budapest: Akadémiai kiadó,1983), 14. It lasted from lastedfrom 1918till October It CEU eTD Collection 75 74 Landesregierungsrat they would, saved by the autonomy laws autonomy by the saved would, they Berlin. The economic situation in sorrow Budapestand seenwith tonational justwas consciousness Swabians awoke who was still Hungarian South the of future The awake. rural Hungary in South consciousness but national the kept “in the future national nationalityother from but groups midst sprung their likestate politicians, who Rudolf Brandsch, of Hungary the with cooperation from them excluded government Hungarian the with cooperation Their by Saxons. basis wererepresented organized force Transylvanian the important best and the 73 between the “principles of Bolshevism and Nationality policy”, a fact that was also fact that a policy”, andNationality Bolshevism of “principles the between acontradiction we face So minorities. againstthe measures hostile the for responsible administration district the made It Chauvinism’. ‘National as policies nationality Hungary’s described consulate general German The nationalities. of the treatment Hungary’s war was still an not lackessential of coal and the economic blockade existed that since thebeginning of the ended at thisnotRussia.” to time.and ) and German (i.e. states both Foreignin approaching best rule their save can they that dependenciessuppose regime actual the of “Leading persons head their westwards. eliteHungarian turned thus did also the place Paradoxically, time. this took during that Versailles at conferencethe not seem to affectideological the closeness Soviet tothe Union, influence butit thepossibility also offered to new for foreign line situation Berlin’s German wasinfirst policy. opinion dueto declining gradually importance” a magnificent achieve Ibd., 37. Tokody, 16. These laws were accepted at the end of January 1919, followed by the foundation of the Hence, the minority issue was regarded from the aspect of a Great Power. Themost Power. of a Great from aspect the regarded issue was minority Hence, the The declaration of the Hungarian Soviet Republic onMarch21 Republic Soviet Hungarian the of The declaration 75 This found Thisits in economic faced Hungary’s reason situation. Thecountry (German State Council) whichwas entitled to control the Minister forNationalities 73 , through , through culture andindustriousnesstheir […] 74 35 . st , 1919, brought a brought , 1919, Deutsche CEU eTD Collection 80 Hungary in therevolutions of 1918-1919 nationality problems. nationality of sources all eliminate Republic, would which international Soviet an of establishment the Germandom. Hungarian the of movement in the changes political expect not did changes, political radical the disregarding consulate, general rule. The German underHungarian firmly Germans remained 21 on power assumed Kun When nationalities and 3.2 Communism issue. in this role paramount a played minority German the shown, be will As alone. movementsSoviet in an now way.finallyunfavourable and Soviet Hungary stood European East the also affected isolation. These international Germany’s 1919 andsealed „betrayal of socialism to renounce the realisation of the self-determination of nations” the of self-determination of the therealisation renounce to socialism of „betrayal condemnedby government. the 79 78 (accessed 3April 2008). 77 76 justandfrom another“Far obstacle tocommunism.the hence seriously entertaining amateurish” and “dogmatic as diplomacy and politics minority into ventures Communists’ the describes inHungary. Spira German problem of the amore pragmaticreappraisal prompted however,Soon, foreign policy intriguesconsiderations, Austrian especially in Burgenland, Spira, Rudolf T Tokody, 47-8. Lenin, Wladimir, „Die Ergebnisse derDiskussion überdie Selbstbestimmung,“; available from Ibd., 47. According T to Swabian problem Ę kés, 80 . Kun deemed nationality problems a major nuisance, a bourgeois affectation, abourgeois major nuisance, a problems nationality . Kun deemed Béla KunBéla and the Hungarian Soviet Republic: the origins and role of the CommunistParty of 79 , 28. Ę He maybe ignored the minority situation entirely because of this. of because entirely situation minority the ignored maybe He kés, national self-determinationwasinconceivable Kun to without 78 76 Finally, the Treaty of Versailles was signed on June 28 Lenin in his note outthatit Leninbenote inhisof would pointed a 1916 (New York: Praeger, 1967), 107. st , 1919, only , 1919,only Ruthenians andWestHungary’sthe 36 77 th , . CEU eTD Collection Hungarian Hungarian Jewish or Marxists.TheKárolyi hadregime incurred only recently be to out all turned who executives, lesser leaders and new more their even resented because Hungarians comprised only one-half about Sopron’s population.of TheGermans pressures,Kun removed Sopron from the regime’sto the influential and determined Hungarianminority. their Bowing to nationalistic regime limited finally German Burgenland,autonomy again by blundered and to deferring status of status of Germans residingoutside constitutional the clarify to failed government the body, sovereign virtually a as functioned with pleasing suspected German nationalists. with suspected pleasing than with Marxists border posts reliable Hungarian vulnerable West instaffing interested more far was He rights. minority German block to meant Kun why explains this Partly, new Kun dismayedHungary’s leaders. Hungary their was unless subversions deposed, concern.Although Austria’s publicly Democrats Social pledged non-interference in Kun Hungary’s integrity.Indeed, measuresAllied had cause to diplomatic for detrimental counter and Austrian their to court support concessions wereto survival; in that their ethnic did not vanish from one day anotherto and the Germans recognized that Kun had nointerest Nationalism Russia. in Soviet minorities national the of Russification the to similar policies hinder the continuation Magyarization the of couldnot line that in first were propaganda but generous, Soviet Republic of seemed quiet nationality the decrees programme. the Hence, nationality, orcreed, into aCommunist nirvana.” Swabians’ ethnic and cultural aspiration, he wished to conduct Hungarians of every race, 82 81 Ibd., 30. Ibd. Although a Although nationality peculiar no existed there on Party Communist the of founding the From Gaurat für Deutschwestungarn für Gaurat Gaurat jurisdiction. After prolonged procrastinations, the Gaurat’s 82 37 81 jurisdiction. The Germans resentedthis,jurisdiction. TheGermans (District Council for West Hungary) West for Council (District CEU eTD Collection authorities to communicate with minority minority with in native tongue. communicate people their to authorities spurned Germanbordering Theconfusing directives, civilwarand Marxism. disaffection on favourable provisions for minorities. the ButGerman in opinion public Hungaryhad already soliciting Germansupport, unveiled its long-heralded final constitution, with certain June 23 On meaningful dialogue. anyfurther terminated and gulf, Hungarian-German growing the deepened basis this on problem nationality solve to Kun’s the attempts proletariat. the of self-determination principle of the repudiated People’s Bureau) andits journal, official the 86 appointed Commissioner, also managed the cultural managedbureau the cultural also Commissioner, appointed 85 84 interests to the hands of the People’s Commission Officer. Commission hands People’s of the tothe interests Deutscher Kulturbund Ungarn für Hungary. from of forsecession therightexcept nationality groups, to local autonomy grant economic to willing was controls, administrative centralized of system a Hungarian-run for return Republic. on Drawing appropriatethe section the 1918 Russianof constitution, Kun,in SovietRuthenian by minorities afederated Hungary into and German transforming Slovak, the over win to hoped Kun state. proletarian the inside policies nationality spreadthe of in wasworld revolution buttressed version EasternEurope byKun’s own of the sameconsequences. and sameblunder, committed the suffered Communists German by disaffection non-German higher using officialsin German-inhabited The areas. 83 bona fide German cultural association. The association. cultural German fide bona Schwind, 75. Schwind, 74. T Pester Lloyd Ę kés, 144. Within Kun’s biggest mistakes, the nationality issue seems the most striking. He striking. most the seems issue nationality the mistakes, biggest Kun’s Within Communist Hungary’s self-appointment and Moscow-inspired task as and centre forthe task Moscow-inspired Hungary’s Communist self-appointment 83 To demonstrate his concern for minority rights, Kun maintained the fiction of a of fiction the maintained Kun rights, minority for concern his demonstrate To , 25 March 1919. . 84 The 38 Volksrat Deutscher Volksrat Deutscher Volksblatt declared to hand German the over to declared rd . The government ordered all ordered government . The 85 , 1919, the Kun still regime, , 1919,the Deutsches Volksamt Deutsches Heinrich Kalmár, the newly the Kalmár, Heinrich metamorphosed into the 86 (German CEU eTD Collection regime fell on August 1 in finallya regimeRed Terror Kun. secessionists,Burgenland of against undercut His Communists the of policies nationality Also exist. the to ceased level local the on Magyarization are notthe that believe to reason no is there Hence, free Hungary. of integrity the preserving of of contradiction. rights. nationality of range a wide offered and governments Hungarian former of In policies nationality theory the with broke revolutions the indicates, thecorrectly As Tilkovszky problem? nationality Communists shared theportfolio of Minister for Nationalities in secondthe Friedrich cabinet. same inmiddleAugust 1919,heacceptedthe with alike of andGermans Hungarian the that, moment the at influence such enjoyed Bleyer minority. German Hungary’s for concessions sentiments, theyhated bolshevism and favoured and moderate republicanism, they 21 conservatives. The twomen shared a similar been oneof chief the inleague conspirators anti-Soviet Friedrich ultra- and with other by having Bleyerre-emerged Jakob However, for suffering the country. a further set-back cabinetturbulent authority. nor changesandhad neither power This a coupthrough backed by Austrian Josef. the archduke His ministry went through three days. Next, István Friedrich, a Károlyi Independence Party renegade, became prime minister German alienated public in Peidl The rule Hungary. of Kun’s lasted fivesuccessor only aggravated nationality Burgenland in crisis, aGerman and athoroughly shambles policy previousthe day. st , the prevision of the Treaty of St. Germain, which had allocated Burgenland to Austria Germain, hadallocated to Burgenland the ofSt. which of Treaty prevision , the Concluding, what did the Hungarian Soviet Republic contribute to the solution of the Kun bequeathed to Gyula Peidl, his short time Social Democratic successor, an successor, Social Democratic time his short Gyula Peidl, to bequeathed Kun 87 On the other side, these rights were without doubt connected to the hope st , 1919. One of officialdisapprove was Kun’s last onJuly of , 1919.One acts to 39 Weltanschauung . Both professed. Both pro-Habsburg coup d’etat was thus as CEU eTD Collection 90 89 88 Vol.1. (Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó,1988), 114. considered even liberal. pre-1918timesthe astoo the 1918 October revolutionmeantof failurethe infact Republic Soviet failure of the Hungarian the Hajdúargues that as well, and of any sort of democracy. The footsteps Jászi’s in 3.3 Bleyer new regime now wenton after the revolutions? awakened consciousnessof HungarianGermandom the just remained ifit anepisode or the thequestion place. emerges if Now took approaches only Swabian (i.e. Turkey) an region, elsewhere autonomous up to builtWestern Hungary was tendencies, secessionist government. The Sovietscould personal the exchange only staff. pressureof Under asawhole. nations Lenin’s Bucharin’s debatewhether isand selfdetermination for for proletariatonly the or in whole Kun when the brought Spiegel-Schmidt, According issuewascomplicated, to it fought for every meterstandpoint as Soviet Russia, i.e. the self determinationof nationsof up secession.to Hungarian Practically soil and tried to defend even the Western border. 1945,” in 87 include autonomy but 30 laws October sincethe all abolished he admits that the strongest, playedmajor a role in issue.this OnAugust8 the always was nationalism narrow-minded and anti-Semitism whose etc.), Bleyer Huszár, in are company” hands the an of uncultivated “allRepublic, OszkárJászi Soviet that complained also countries leading of the positions Gratz, TiborHajdú, Spiegel-Schmidt, Lórant Tilkovszky,“Die Nationalitätenpolitik Ungarns und das heimische Deutschtum zwischen 1919- Deutschungarische Probleme 300 Jahre Zusammenleben – Aus der Geschichte der Ungarndeutschen The Hungarian Soviet Republic Arbeiterbewegung 88 The autonomy laws already existed since the times ofthe Károlyi existed sincethetimes laws The already autonomy , 136. , 37. (Budapest: Akadémiai kiadó, 1979),169. th of of year. previous the Bellér claimsthis that didnot Deutsche Landesrat 40 90 . The Swabian bourgeoisie (Friedrich, bourgeoisie Swabian The . 89 After the downfall of the Hungarian th , 1919, the Friedrich government Friedrich , 1919,the and the Western Hungarian Western the and , ed. Wendelin Hambuch, Wendelin , ed. CEU eTD Collection then then they an Hungarianwould confront outraged public. otherthe hand, they equallingobtained concessions surpassing or of those radicalthe era, concessions to those they had enjoyed before, then they would reject accommodation. If, on were not without influence on the minority. nationality of duringTilkovszky, the revolutions policies According achievements the to the autonomy. on silent discretely remained Bleyer but essential; was transactions official all in German of use The plan. action political modest Bleyer demanded aneffective German elementary school and cultural program and a Hungarian butstate, retain theirnational identity, within linguistic and ethnicboundaries. Hungary hiswhich ministry would heal. would Germans themselves integrate into the place,Burgenland took anissue in discussed nextsection.the the debatesabout atthe asthe time same lawcame this bychance that more than groups, Bleyer ethnic andGerman balance elitism groups, particularism. Hungarian sought to of those than rather individuals of rights the stressing By Hungarians. the offend not would moderation its whereas minorities, the attract fairness could Its Lawof 1868. Nationality he became Minister for Nationalities he issued a position paper. In its spirit after days Several finda compromise. to it sought Bleyer resembledminority territories. the of creation the vacuum and to the same extent in a state of a just awakened consciousness. Burgenlandissue. Thus, Hungarian the Germans found themselves in a kindjurisdictional of it served was highly connectedtothe fact asaproblem autonomy still due tothe that 94 German self-administration immediately disappeared in practice. disappeared immediately self-administration German 93 92 91 Tilkovszky, Spiegel-Schmidt, Schwind, 80ff. Bellér, Communism hadinjured theGermans by exacerbating nationalisticin passions The communist rule just sharpened the national contrasts, mainly through the through mainly contrasts, national the sharpened just rule communist The Bleyer als Minderheitenpolitiker Nationalitätenpolitik Das Deutschtum Ungarns , 115. , 31. , 85. 94 41 If now the Germans were to be offered inferior 93 Yet other contradictions emerged. contradictions Yetother 91 The question of 92 It is It CEU eTD Collection chapter of this thesis, the German Section attempted to reach a to attempted Section German the thesis, this of chapter fifth inthe will beexamined whoserole Secretary Steuer, György State opinion. Under stem German tide embittered anti-Hungarian the He andhisaidestried to sweepingpublic still of Hungary part loyalties DualMonarchy.the both to Bleyer felt Germandom. and to inthought of terms onlyby Hungary ruled had Hungarians, ashewhen the Hungary was longer no Bleyer But patriots. Hungarian were Germans the that demonstrating of way the task of recapturing the allegiance of Hungary’s seceded nationalities. It was a convenient their addressed tarnished Bleyer image. somewhatand Hungary restore would was sincere, Germans had to face the hate of a newly rising Hungarian chauvinism that manifested itself manifested that chauvinism ofanewly hate Hungarian rising had facethe Germans to the out, turned indeed it As law. the by affected not were schools of majority the Thus and the local communities could decideuse language wantedto forwhich they teaching. churches the Second, by local offices. the sabotaged be itcould easily Thus rights. the out than publicity value. What is more, the ministry itself did not have any competences to carry German clergy would insist on pure Hungarian schools, so the provisions had little more from tochairskindergartens in universities. But the obviously, largelymagyarized the system, education minority a comprehensive of for the establishment hopes exaggerated aroused also law The individuals. magyarized ‘reliable’ or Hungarians predominantly were them enforcing and the werecumbersome local many offices regulations Unfortunately, distinctions. Thelaw new languagesalso establishednon-Hungarian in life. public beyond the 1868statute, which merely acknowledged racial national (i.e. ethnic) or interests. insulateHungary, them to pan-German influencesagainst safeguard and to their cultural Hungarians.the persuade Burgenland’s also to sought They toremain to Germans true His new course intended to convince the Hungarians that the Germans’ loyalty forloyalty Germans’ the that convince theHungarians intended to His newcourse The law designated non-Hungarian ethnic groups as national minorities. It thus went thus It minorities. national as groups ethnic non-Hungarian designated law The 42 modus vivendi of sorts with CEU eTD Collection cultural person of right” that is thrown to the wastebasket at home at the same time. Of time. same at the home at wastebasket the to is thrown that right” of person cultural “special a of speaks draft the that ironical is quite It offered. treaties minority official the than – minorities Hungarian the of line first in the thinking for were they course rights of – more minorities granted that framework jurisdictional a least at then integrity territorial to support their […]” cultural progress and people German the lawsof the respect to is nodanger There in country. the race worthy of rights all Iconsider races. the Germandom most the faithful,as hard-working andmost will the “thegovernment respect Bleyerandclaimedthat actual time beingagreedwith Karl short-timeoffice Huszár took inthebeginning successor 1919,heforDecember the of accusedWhen Friedrich’s stood functionaries sympathies. of wherepan-German German was being systematically by undermined Hungarian officials, especially in Western Hungary the Hungarians. At the Ministerialparamount. Hungary’s minorityissueobduracy on the undercutBleyer’s honeymoon with Council on September and exclusive Hungarians of the domination andthe weresacred state Hungarian 20 the of frontiers the that maintained government the occasions previous As on magyarized? administrativemoderate should or concessions, Law the and beignored be the ethnic groups poles fundamental on issue.a ShouldHungary’s minorities far-reachingreceive cultural and Hungarian propitiated minorities.the Once more, Bleyer and the governmentfaced opposite if but only Hungary be the form restored, could on Greater rationale tested ground. Nationality Law, Bleyer andhisfollowers took very statute the seriously indeed. Their 96 intimidation than open violence”, as Spiegel-Schmidt indicates as Spiegel-Schmidt violence”, open than intimidation in an irrational opposition to everything that was not ‘magyar’. “This was more a process of 95 Ibd. Spiegel-Schmidt, At the same time Count Apponyi in Paris tried to save what could be saved,if not the Whereas Friedrich hadapparently nointentions, or means,the of expediting the Das Deutschtum Ungarns , 85. 96 . 43 th . he complained that his law his that complained he 95 CEU eTD Collection their number rose 426.000. theirnumberto rose early inthe as end of March 1919ofrefugees numbers the werearound 150.000.By 1924 As country. the into coming ofrefugees stream the was for radicalization reason A further ondomesticpolitics 3.3.1 ImpactofHungarianrefugees expecttalks had worse. the –and Hungary to course there was no power that shared any sympathies with Hungary on the eve of the peace 98 97 “national awakening and spiritual rebirth” as aprerequisite losses and their for compensation they demanded Now Magyarization. partly they were circles. Partly lostthey in their property and status civilsociety due tonationalistic reforms; servants, facedaccount, intoMost from future. of with refugees taken the higher came an uncertain especially teacher, who served as the main defenders of associations, which, dominated interwar the period, the political throughout life of the interlocking of network political andsocial, publicandsecret, military and civilian and from other radicalizedform of extreme nationalism and national prejudices. Mócsy points out that “from elementsthis group of thein Vienna,nearly all forces came of andkinds counterrevolutionary formedtogether anew middle and upper classeswhere the majority of Germans lived, in Horthy’s Nationalthe Army. Here, in as well regimeas wove the inan real published orders Budapestpower could befoundHungary inTransdanubia, in Friedrich While government the course. aidedthe counterrevolutionary remained which Ibd., 88. Ibd., 87. The Hungarian Soviet Republic was defeated, but the sense of national crisis senseof butthe defeated, was Republic The Hungarian Soviet 97 Furthermore the homecoming prisoners of war had to be 98 . 44 CEU eTD Collection 100 Hungary’s domestic politics, 1918-192 country country and assured survivalof the radical the right” 99 historic Hungary minority the when law 4044/1919was delivered onAugust21 of for the disintegration responsible scapegoats seen as werealready minorities The ethnic plebiscite Sopron the and Trianon 3.4 columns of the Horthy era. the refugees became a major political factor in Hungary’s political life and one of the exploits of exploits of dreadedparamilitary the had smallbutmilitant driven Burgendland’s units, anti-Swabiancapped by notorious security the abuse, Hungary. “Yearsof of cultural manyharbouring so 270.000)agreatdangerfor Swabians(around disillusioned internal the of the prospects considered the out, Hungarians AsSpirapoints Swabianpredicament. the becomeimbedded in foreign policy Burgenland hadand the forced question progressively it considerable The Swabianhas history, buthad attracted problem attention. by then Republic of Austria. The Sopron Plebiscite ranks as a relatively minor incident in post-war created newly join the or with Hungary, remain areashould whether the on voted Sopron autonomy. mid-December of In 1921 the citizens of WestHungarianthe border town of prophetic. place“ take will Germandom the of AMagyarization state. national a homogenous to Hungary small the transform to try will and ever than more burns years last the of humiliations bitter numerous the after nationalism Hungarian “the way, this provoked that, Hungary’s secession about West peakof debates the Jakob Bleyer atthe said István Mócsy, István Schödl, However, the Germans of Western Hungary were still brave enough insistto on their Land an der Donau The effects of World WarI.TheUprooted: Hungarian refugees and their impact on , 460. 1 (New York: Social Science Monographs, 1983), 6. 45 99 . Indeed, with the victory of the right 100 . This seemed already st , 1919. CEU eTD Collection Hungarian Monarchy, even not havingfrom Bleyerforpraised reigned Budapest but occasionally bordered on intolerance. Colonel Lehár, a high ranking officer of the Austro- Hungary,notwithstanding harassment Hungarian of cultural German institutions that West forsupport Hungary’s claims to persuade theirfollowers to they evereffort made Kun’sto pacify and Butthroughout, Germans. the attempts government boycotted regime’s could thank Jakob Bleyer andhis followers for this. Theybarely Károlyi’stolerated Hungary won it and on January 1 destiny todetermine the supervised plebiscite town internationally the of andits hinterland. exchange the region for Sopron. A compromise agreement (October 11 Magyar-Swabian relations ever after in the post-war era. Spira points out that this incident laid the foundation for the mutual distrust that stigmatized West-Hungary. larger,of evacuatepredominantly the portion German-inhabited ordered to Bolshevik governmentsystem in centre of OnJulythe Europe. 20 of a theexistence tolerate willing to not obviously France were in The peace-makers BurgenlandremainHungary. its with to letthe original position reversed Peace conference West Hungary, andasaresultof dismaythe overHungary’s theParis Marxistgovernment, Hungary. in or Austria in live if they matter no Germans, remained have would they However, in Europe” minority German politicized least the “at time perhaps the Swabians, Moreover, Magyars.” alien the to than brethren Austro-German the to closer far emotionally minority Swabian 102 101 Ibd., 16. Ibd., 57. Responding Austrian diplomatic to pressure,byAustrophile in elements petitions 101 , generally inclined to be German Hungarians rather than rather Hungarians be German to inclined generally , st the town was town the handed Hungary. over to The Hungarians 46 102 Finally, Hungary agreed to th , 1919, Hungary , 1919, was th , 1921)called for an volksdeutsch . CEU eTD Collection finally theirthrew behind support Hungary. in butarea heededdecisive majority theirleaders, of and the Sopron thepleas Germans of asmall German preservation, sakeof forlong-range the and partly asHungarians, reasons speaking world, andbesubmerged in Hungarianmultitude.the Hence, partly for patriotic from German- the be isolated would Germans remaining The in Hungary. cause German fearedlosing that some 300.000West Hungarian Germans toAustria would weakenthe Hungarian remain patriotism.loyalurged BurgenlandersHungary. to They to they But also leaders German resume. unassimilated welded ethnic These nationalism with aggressive would amity Hungarian-German and subside, eventually would passions nationalistic that hoped They public. and establishment Hungarian the of short-sightedness and prejudice anti-German the deploring while even brethren, magyarized their as Stephen St. of Crown delegation.the non-Magyarized German intelligentsia Butthe justas true to the remained by arbitrary against the local obstruction blandly of Bethlen statutes the reassured officials. protection and solicitedjustice, Bethlen’s and administration, in education, especially laws, minority existing the of implementation immediate the demanded They minority. German Hungary,loyalty butfrustrationregretted the of and to diminishedHungary’s prospects clearly in now was danger.hegemony This nation. the in level literacy highest the German enjoyed had Hungary leaders called of Germans the For decades, schools. minority in their neglect gross revealing reports on Prime Minister Bethlen, German-speaking by were Hungarians press indeed disturbed Germans deteriorated. had assured him of their experience. communist the after ways inform new the Western population to about travelling the Hungaryinorder throughout 103 OLK26, XLII 1920/2035. However, on the eve of the plebiscite, Hungary’s treatment of Burgenland’s 103 47 CEU eTD Collection 106 105 Lang, 1994), 64. reflected coexistence of German and Magyar-Hungarian elements took place took elements andMagyar-Hungarian German of coexistence reflected in society an un- Foremost rural the very soon. accepted situation was Burgenland the 104 borders. The Treaty of Trianon from June 4 June from Trianon of Treaty The borders. extreme nationalismto have a king or not” than question “more questions the urgent nationality he the in regarded Hungary. Therefore persists consciousness racial the and peacestrengthened war of the the thehumiliations that stressed because that served programme. nationality as the bestSimonyi-Semadam(15 government way to save1920) did notoffermore just than pleasant rhetoric for aprogressive minority policy. The the Trianon relations” andyear “the 1921wasmarkedentire by in a steady Magyar-Swabian deterioration Swabians were“the toincident lose Burgenland the After inHungary. whatever Germandom whole the for concern of shred insofar of was issue credibilityBurgenland unsolved The minority. German the for rights certain grant to they still had within the Magyars” fast. emerged relatively intellectual faced a circles identity crisis abovetheirof but this acertain identity Burgenland have afriendly tolerated minority atall.programme 1918 Hungarian years the In to prior surprisingwas (24 newHuszár not thus thatthe government for Hungary,her Swabians would still have been persecutedasa distinctethnic group. It Ibd., 92. Spira, Peter Haslinger, With the solution of the Sopron question Trianon came to its official end. Within Guidoin the last Gündisch, Saxonin remaining Budapest inter-war period, the anymore reason no had now government Hungarian the however, Leitha, the of East Swabian problem 106 . It may be true that even had Austria and Germany shown greater consideration showngreater Germany may evenhad that and be Austria . It true Der ungarische Revisionismus und das Burgenland, 1922-1932 107 , 76. . It was, however, in the interest of the neighbouring states that the that states neighbouring the of interest in the however, was, It . th March-19 th 48 , 1920, created an would created not that , 1920, atmosphere th July 1920) did not even July not a out 1920) did work th November 1919-15 (Frankfurt a.M:Peter 104 th March . Only 105 CEU eTD Collection her real herface. real by a hostile Hungarian society, it was Backedbythemand and careerists demagogues. opportunists, speak of to not numerous the only a question of time till the old-new notary other, –clergyman,and the – on teacher magyarizedtriumvirate Swabian thoroughly elite showed and hand, one the on masses rural weak culturally but German-conscious the between thestruggle around be constructed decades may two succeeding the of history Swabian the residingneverHungarian anon-Magyar withinHungary. again trust group would Indeed, the thirdthe in major catastrophe history? their After Trianon the number of minorities was negligible. Could the Magyars be blamed for nation knew defenders enemywas:theunassimilatednationalities. and whothe state of the 109 of central Hungary, 1526-1699. 108 107 policy. nationality liberal too in the but war lost the of seen asaresult not was catastrophe’ ‘political for the reason Bellér the For state. least have failurethe for somethat defence nation might at the andthey of of responsibility Bellér, The first catastrophe was the Mongol invasion, 1241-42, and the second was the long Ottoman occupation Pester Lloyd Bleyer als Minderheitenpolitiker , 3 March 1922. , 37. 108 49 It was easier to find scapegoats than to admit thanto findscapegoats was easier to It 109 Bornoutof experiencesthe of 1918/19 CEU eTD Collection reason the framework for the continuance of the Swabians. Above this, he saw the necessity he the saw Above this, Swabians. of the forcontinuance the theframework reason wouldout of political state Hungarian thatthe himself from guarantee distanced thesis the from politicalthis lesson and metamorphosed of some his ideological early He convictions. of the government. Thus, agreement passive with the takeplace of presscouldonly the attacks the Moreover, jackals. they were somewhatKulturverein legitimized. Bleyer found andby György opposed Bleyer’s Steuer, aGerman press.Steuer the plan to took his consequencesgroup around the by hostilities only not faced Gyula and protagonist minority’s German the of Gömbös, role the in himself but alsofound he Soon minorities. the a concerning new programme minimal political his enemyrealise to aim his in the person of his hand,other hewas blamed by publicthe for his failurein Western StateHungary as well for as Secretary the on but, interests German of representative the become to Saxons, the against mainly will, his imposed He a dilemma. into him brought Nationalities for Minister as work Bleyer’s people and state For 4.1 show a differentpath of understanding the minority issue. in to order period, in theinter-war relations Swabian-Hungarian chief the protagonist another Gratz, Gustav views of the examine will also I a counterpart, present Trianon. To Hungarian public and socialthe most problematic issues hisof life life. It nevertheless is directly connected to theafter changes in the time of conceptual thinkingthe of Bleyer inthe Jakob Bleyer’s metamorphosisearly 1920s. belongs to revolutionsthe in changes the out working of task and difficult the to move the I section following Peace the In Treaty of 4. Themetamorphosis ofJakob Bleyer as early as in 1918. Now, in the 1920s, he should become one of Bethlen’s 50 CEU eTD Collection ‘ideological persons. ‘ideological reliable’ for consolidation the of regimethe leadershipthe and,third, shouldbe by recruited collective acting In basis asindividuals). this second, they form, become should instruments as components. ethnicminoritiesunderstood First,the a political subjects(i.e.were not on from Spannenberger, ideal Accordingthe to model sideincluded three Hungarian nationalities.” creates artificially which minorities national for ministry a but nationalities their grip onthosestill enough,hewavering. Oddly remainedvery his between uncritical decide to if soon toregain they lostreally wanted peoplestheir and territories andmaintain governmentcould nolonger pacify merethem bagatelles.with The Hungarians wouldhave the Consequently, minorities. Hungary’s among anew national awareness created issued a position paper on thenationality question. Inhisview, the recentupheavals had resign 16 December Bleyer wasforcedon loss to Burgenland of the after final It seems logical the that only by comrades. instrumenthis counterrevolutionary he was Bleyer slowly saw that himself political resource. used asafigurehead and possibilities of his movement. It did not, however, save him from hostilities. the limited consequently peasantry the on concentration one-sided His chauvinist. line and in Magyar i.e.first Germandom, partof Hungarian the orientated clerical organize themselves minoritiesnot couldit the tothiscooperate. that In was due willing Bleyer’s eyes to on a ‘patrioticwere who and system the stabilize to included were representatives no that fact in the basis’. Bleyeryears formerin minority mistakeof policies the two, Swabian greatest saw the the in chapter himself was seenin 1918,when memorandum Bleyer addressed Károlyi a to have mentionedwhich I already as the leader level. Asearly as cultural the on foremost and first interests, of community for anorganized of the 110 System System und „Katholische Renaissance“ Norbert Spannenberger, In November 1920the Die katholischeKirche inUngarn 1918-1939.Positionierung im politischen 111 Budapesti Hírlap Budapesti (: Steiner, 2006), 141. Thus, the minorities seemed to be nothing more than a than more be nothing to seemed minorities the Thus, 51 writes as follows: “We do not have any th , 1920. Before this he, 1920. 110 CEU eTD Collection 114 own merely i.e.on the concentrating by Bleyer, by used tactic same the status privilege their achieved Saxons the that history of irony is an It anti-Socialism. and anti-Semitism nearly including side,a aclerical other the radical presented standpoint, Swabian Bleyer,on Catholic The Liberals. and the Democrats with Social agreements the to could come Saxon, Protestant the Brandsch, voice. a united with spoke and together came nationalities and between As theI pointed out previously in chapter twotwo, the battle between these two convictionspersons, Bleyer and speaks now of “spiritsSchmidt the of againstBleyer” counterrevolution turned the that Brandsch, took place in a time when all other Germandom Germandom used getand hasto to this one-sided dependence. needed For him way. adifferent represented Hungariandom Saxon Rudolf the Brandsch, defended keep the policies of amalgamation as anelementto statealive.the opponent, His Bleyer agenda. part of Bleyer’s wasnot nationalities other with cooperation andthus other German of the as part extent same the to sense ethnic-cultural an in and nation Hungarian the of part as Swabians ( destiny of community German-Hungarian nationalistic the and fatherland love the for 113 112 111 paper German. Zsilinszky’s inside fact duetothe spirit the that of atthe time beginningthe highly of 1920swas the anti- However, theGerman minority lackseemed tofrom support outside aswell unity from as lowthe politization Germanin the of standsHungary opinion this on weak rather ground. Hungarians andled finally them the “slaughterbankto of Worldthe War” and the eradicate chase” to his have “neverstopped Germans the opinion, According to Zsilinsky,found that“the history Hungarian whole fightis aheroic Germandom” against Ibd., 34. Gratz, Spiegel-Schmidt, Ibd., 139. Deutschungarische Probleme Kulturpolitische Konzeption Jakob Bleyers Kulturgemeinschaft Szózat , 34. more than once attacked Bleyer andSpiegel- personally attacked once more than . According to him, both were dependent on on each him,both . According were dependent to 52 Schicksalsgemeinschaft Zeitgeist , 8. . Bleyer was always praising the 112 Others, like Endre Bajcsi- Endre like Others, ). He considered the 114 . Considering . 115 . 113 . CEU eTD Collection national Hungarian rule to all sides. In this sense, he supported the assimilation of the of assimilation the supported he sense, this In sides. all to rule Hungarian national nation. one only but nationalities two on based was conception Bleyer’s involved in its foundation as well in as keeping italive. However, from beginningthe Jakob highlyis doubtful. Hungary beginningwas from amultinational and the state Germans were development” of state in a “pre-national was minority German late andthe rather was development ledby for more than them century.”one “Hungary from was founded aunifiednational beginning the by state, and Hungarians the people and state 4.2 Between such akind of consciousness. created just consciousness, national oppress to was aim whose decrees, madethat had been And experience the state. faith the often towards the exceeding people own the towards was by the faith Step step belonging together. afeeling of of justconsciousness, country created save Thedisintegrating in chauvinism. re-emerging itthe against identity to ethnic order defendtheir to necessity feltthe WarWorld First earlier the than after not Germandom turningthe of 18 the point earlier place building at Germans Thenot took group group. than of process Hungarian the 117 (Budapest:Osiris, 2000), 102. 116 115 Spiegel-Schmidt, Gerhard Seewann,ed., “Das Ungarndeutschtum 1918-1988,” in Ibd., 102. The main task of the Hungarian Germans, according to Bleyer, was to strengthen the culturally. nor socially, nor politically, neither Hungariandom, from Germans want to createnot do We a state inprotest. the without state and in equalsacrifices for measure aready to were detachand the Hungarian directions all toward superiority national Hungarian the strengthen to help to have and want We 116 . A similar delay can be found in questions of identity. Hungarian identity. of in questions found be can delay A similar . Kulturpolitische Konzeption Jakob Bleyers th and 19 th 117 century. In contrast to other nationalities, this nationalities, other to contrast In century. The historical in truth quotation this from Bleyer 53 , 6. Ungarndeutsche und Ethnopolitik 118 CEU eTD Collection Hungarian politicians concerning the necessity of a minority compromise and thus creating thus and compromise minority a of necessity the concerning politicians Hungarian and the denial of nationalism on both sides. However, Bleyer’s belief in the reasonabilityGesellschaftsvertrag of a Magyar, and Germans between cooperation A reasonable movement. irredentist asan forinterest theGermandom abroad be and, by abused to this,state Germany’s parallel achieved consciousness during the Worldfrom War, taking a position inhejustparliament As he Swabiandom topreventthe out, wanted pointed that 1928. remained a governmental concept. is This confirmed by Bleyer himselfin hisspeech in minority’ German ‘Hungarian construct the in Hungary However, in parliament. present foundedGermans) minority and inYugoslavia waseven political parties theGerman and of a nation’s death ( death of a nation’s impression the that countries neighbouring in the minorities German the of development the wasmentionedbecause noword aboutthis inthe peacetreaties. about secondary schools, let alone higher schools, clubs or parties for the minorities, only also but applied in guaranteed areasmainlythe by inhabited minorities. the of the Hungarian Soviet Republic, where the right to teach in the mother tongue was not the mother tongue from the seem a progress at all. Just, in Hungary a chauvinisticIn the opinioneyes of contemporary minorityemerged politicians with this more thethan modest aim program to didban not villages. German in Hungarian the andculture mother tongue prevent German the limited to barriers” artificial creating by strength Hungarian of basin the into skills German of stream voluntary the allow never would “Hungariandom that he stated essays early his of one In intelligentsia. 119 118 Ibd., 7. Ibd., 9. Tilkovszky argued that the Hungarian government did not want to know anythingwant Hungarianthe to Tilkovszky governmentdid notthat argued 119 . Also Bleyer’s cultural-political program throughout the interwar was the period throughout . AlsoBleyer’scultural-political program , would have called for a mutual relationship between the two parties Volkstod Volksschule ) took place. InCzechoslovakia so-called) took (the Sudeten . This was the exact counterpart regarding the times regarding the exactcounterpart wasthe . This 54 120 It was due It to this andto against the Hungarian the CEU eTD Collection < 122 121 moral justification if Hungary did not treat her minorities in another way. in another minorities her treat not did ifHungary justification moral caused outrage by suppression the inof Hungarians neighbouringthe would states lose its incarried out Hungary.Apponyi, By he Count quoting pointed every out that popular claimed that the question of the Hungarian Hungarian national policy. revision is connected accuser him intosoon a bitter transformedof seems disappointment naïve.His rather to the nationality hegemony. Magyar Swabians andMagyars insteadof the policy between friendly mainly hisrelations establish falseto was basedaim on premises, concept Spira,it,According intendingbetween to he Bleyer’s political whole parties. drifted the a long loyalty term ‘his’ of towards turned state the Swabians outtobeillusionary.Without 120 character of this policy and when a new generation under the future leader of the ambitions. It was now in the early 1930s when thedeceased. for words only warmest he realized the exploitedpersonal conversation with Bleyer’s biographer Hedwig Schwindin 1935, Szekf and intransigenteven not in 1933, when German. On Bleyerthe other side, Szekf was highly attackedother. Among other things, Bleyer even arranged the translation of the historian’s works byinto Hungarian Szekf and Bleyer men, both that mention to important chauvinist circles. outSzekf already pointed In a Szekf Gyula historian Hungarian influential the by as well as section, next the in shown he stood alone with this opinion. A similar view was shared by Gustav Gratz, as will be http://www.jbg.n1.hu/keret.cgi?/sub.cgi-redeung.htm> (accessed 8February 2008). Jakob Bleyer,“Über die Frage der deutschen Minderheit in Ungarn,”; available from 117ff. problem, Swabian Spira, Loránt Tilkovszky, Loránt In his last speechin shortly parliament, hisbefore in death 1933, heonce more However, at his parliamentary speech Bleyer also admitted the failure of failurehis of admitted the also Bleyer hisspeech at parliamentary However, Zeitgeschichte der Ungarndeutschen seit 1919 Ħ ’s views in the first chapter of itseems ’s views of Moreover, this inthe firstchapter thesis. Ħ never changed his friendly position towards the Swabian, 123 55 Ħ , shared friendly relations with each with relations friendly shared , 121 (Budapest: Corvina, 1991), 51. Bleyer’s belief in achieving this 122 By now means Volksbund Ħ found Ħ . I . , CEU eTD Collection ‘patriotic deed’. As a consequence, the tone from Germany became rough while Bleyer sank while Bleyer rough became from Germany tone the As a consequence, deed’. ‘patriotic lacked unsatisfying Thelocal andany regardedMagyarization as a offices progress. school takeplace.not beginningwas still 1930sthe Atthe of the situation totally work for generations” 125 fighting object ( fighting object be as poisoned and abused side willnota theother “if theissueby or one Germandom friendly and culture of affecttradition patriotic,not Hungarian this the wouldthe Hungarian German great to the lively relation achievea to tried minorities youth of all the German that give. majority to ofthe willingness minority issue as long as there is no difference between the demands of the minority and the as a Hungarian politician of German origin. He stated that there would be no problems in the interests. Thus,as heregardedhimselfa Hungarian not minority German politician, rather government Justas most important task. after this came –inhis opinion – the protection of the and minority the between relation good a saw Gratz Germandom. to boundaries offensive if somebody with German origin theladders by climbed of society slipping off its nation was not possible.exemplary for theminority and assimilation problematic.A A career withoutsimilar integration in the view wasGustav shared by GratzGratz’s himself who didpath notand Gratz –Bleyer ononeway orunited find 4.3 Opponents from it the son of a preacher to theGerman, nowslowly ceased tofind supportany longer. Minister Basch,i.e.Bleyer’s of Franz Anton Hungarian adoubleconcept emerged. identity, of Foreign Affairs is 124 123 Ibd., 11. Gratz, Schwind, 32. Deutschungarische Probleme Kampfobjekt 126 , but obviously, every side lacked some patience and progress did ). 125 , 7. Gratz considered the solution of the minority question “a question minority the of solution the considered Gratz 124 In a letter to Gratz from 1928, Bleyer was convinced from Bleyer was toGratz 1928, Inaletter 56 and CEU eTD Collection rights rights than minorities the themselves claimed “in biggest regardof our andhighest more grantingidea of the therefore supported Gratz anymore. factor of power a represent not did they minorities national the of triviality numerical the account into taking Moreover, insufficient on not keepquite of and Hungary’s hithertoissue. Trianon deedsinthis did Treaty the after of obligations spoke Hungary’s openly Gratz views, many Hungary-centric law” findto anewformulation insteadon this of issue, rehashbeingforced to olda 55-year politician – provided itwas successful. Gratz, a new minority policy wouldhave been one of the most worthy deeds of Bethlen as a to According nation. political Hungarian the to connection harmonic the of disturbance Hungariandom. Speaking of grantlanguagehold rightsto relation for andto between Germandom upthe good and lovetraditional i.e. fatherland. Hence,heBleyer one’s for and same sharedthe convictions, preventto slidinglanguage their without oppositioninto andcustoms education, the to minority. 130 129 128 nobody is nobody considered Volksbildungsverein Germandom” great inbelieve the to “or tendencies assimilation accept the Germandom: to into depression. He was also convinced that there were only two ways for the Hungarian 127 126 Ibd. Minderheiten” “Nationale Gratz, Gustav Vince, 47. Gratz, Vince, 51. 129 , as Gratz , asGratz stated in 1923 referring Nationality tothe Law 1868. In contrastof to “It would be the crest of political impotence and barrenness, if andwould benot“It impotence barrenness, bethecrestof we would able political Gratz knew well that he touched a wasp’s nest when accepting the presidency of the presidency acceptingnestof the when he knew awasp’s touched Gratz wellthat Deutschungarische Probleme 128 He rather believed in the aims of Bethlen to grant possibilities to the Germans 127 . . As he pointed out later, he did not do it out of ambition, knowing that knowing ambition, of out it do not did he later, out pointed he As . volkstümlich , 13. who identifies himself with the aims of the German the of aims the with himself identifies who Pester Lloyd 57 , 19 May 1923. , as Bleyer used to, seemed rather as a 130 CEU eTD Collection daily politics. daily from politics,especially Bethlen he UDV stands apart the any that assured Furthermore, to period canhardlyone his inter-war findatoneof speechesthroughout the official critique. In mediator. as role his fulfilled and Bethlen for person a reliable remained Gratz politics. minority stalling Bethlen’s reality an of face the come endand hadyears to to of first the withbeing hopelessnessminority confronted in of kind a certain the optimism question. The Hungary.views, of Both and changes those Gratz Bleyer,undertook during the1920s while in Trianon- development for possibilities minority’s German the affecting consequently for rumination, the decided andindeed alonggo Gratz’s convictions did with not view official Hungary’s chapter, next the in shown be As will thesis. this of chapter first the According to this, Gratz’s views seem verythem. similar battering of instead to those of nationalities Gyulaattracts Szekfthat country be a thus would Hungary interests” 132 131 spirit. German a radical lead theawakeningof UDVcould to of the the work that sorrows minority without direct ties to Germany, the agrarian social structure without apeculiarGermany, direct structure to social agrarian minority ties without the of German the character diaspora i.e. the Bleyer, nor Gratz by neither becould influenced it.against Both however,options, remained highly outsidedependent on and factors which workingnot nation and state the with together acooperation towards tended beginning the from his argumentation that considering aparadox, seems life.This public from Hungarian and organisations. His concept,in contrast toGratz, would lead to tear out aclosed minority Bleyer workedassimilation. to lead for would run long the on anconcept Gratz’s alternative, that out turned nevertheless to represent the It alwayswith eachother. not congruent and were views official hisassumable private that German minority with the help of press OLK28 130/210,Gratz to Bethlen. Ibd. However, taking into account some of Gratz’s early statements outlined above it is it above outlined statements early someGratz’s of account into taking However, 131 , i.e. nothing more than the revision of Trianon. The prerequisite of an attractive an of prerequisite The Trianon. of revision the than more nothing i.e. , 132 Bethlen’s mistrust ratherderived from whoGyörgy expressedSteuer, his 58 Ħ , as I showed in 133 CEU eTD Collection between between assimilation and dissimilation, between loyalty and disloyalty and, last but noleast, years apawnin he wasrather and revisionism, game between the self-determination these In us. tell to wants legend the as Germans Hungarian the of awakener and father the not was Bleyer minority. of German theinterests of representation tothe himself dedicated he identity, minority German with state Hungarian to loyalty in joining illusions his lost he when policy, minority liberal Hungary’s of fall the After him. upon forced later was Franz Anton Basch, acted under already radicalized premises. What Bleyer wanted to avoid, leader of the later andthe former student Bleyer’s under following generation 1930s –from Germanthe side. political position and the influences from beoutside, from it Hungarian –laterthe inor the 133 OL K28 130/210, 2423, 47/1925, Steuer toBethlen. Bleyer himself and his concept turned out to be of a transitional character. The character. atransitional of be to out turned concept his and himself Bleyer Volk and Staat . 59 Volksbund , CEU eTD Collection 82. government the resultin any case would be the limitation of their rights. Anton Szentfülöpi, government” counterrevolutionary the of instrument political “a regions nationality inthe school or association club, every in saw phrases, criticizingsuchkindof On contrary, Bellér, the Béla states. neighbouring In contrast to Károlyi and Kun, the 5. Bethlen’s tactical moves Treaty of Trianon was already a 135 134 everything and nothing”giving motive” ulterior any heindeed “honest tosolve question in andwithout the determined nationality was Hungary to carry out the Nationality Law and the Decree on national minorities from 1919, itseemed When, beginning atthe of 1922, István Bethlen promised a from German delegation Sopron Trianon after end 5.1 Dead basedassimilation. on career nearly typical for the time after the revolutions. His role can serve as a perfect examplefor a identity appears, of a further conception Steuer Secretary György State While regarding inthe1920s. practices minority real and between rhetoric official the show contrast the Ungarländische DeutscheVolksbildungsverein the of foundation difficult the as well as considered be will Nationalities for Ministry yearsrevolutions firstthe of Thedissolution 1918/19 and Bethlen the regime. the of Hungarian the after time is the section in this me concerns What power. assumed Bethlen FriedrichSpiegel-Schmidt, Jakob Bleyerin neuerer Geschichtsschreibung,“ Pester Lloyd , 5 January 1922. 134 , well aware of the critics on the Hungarian minority politics in the 136 . If the nationalities supported or opposed the policy of oropposed thenationalities policy the the of supported . If 135 . He described Bethlen’s tactic as “promising Bethlen’s. Hedescribed tactic as 60 (UDV) and the school question in order to Suevia Pannonica fait accompli fait (11/1983): when CEU eTD Collection of of (Társadalmi TESZ Szövetsége/AssociationEgyesületek institutions) of social underthe Nationalitiesin December fateof 1920,thefuture ministry the meetingAtwas doubtful. a above seemedmoves. political of master a into turn to obliged say, not more thus,onecan spectrum. groups formed two Bethlen that political was the conservatives, than and liberals that.both weakened right new a powerful and left extreme an of creation At the time leadership historicthe of classes. The politicalspectrum, had expanded. however, The when Bleyer under interests bankingindustrial the andand capitalist agrarian united aristocratic resigned revolutionary toreturn Hewished change. pre-warpoliticalto the andsocial system which as Minister for that he favoured stability and the preservation of preservation the and stability he favoured that them. He was the 11 wasthe them. He by was andcarried out amongemerged old-newnew power Bethlen the political elite. with ideas in Pre-war Hungary. forpolitics any the deadend Trianon rational was Hence, practice” never into asign would come just law,that every decreewas every because canting assimilation of the nationalities were the main aims of the government. Furthermore, “it was canting.” and were reactionary “The nationality further: Hungarian policies son even Jakob Bleyer’saides, goes of one of 139 138 Geschichte der Ungarndeutschen in Volksbildungsvereins,” Deutschen Ungarländischen des Geschichte 137 136 Spannenberger, Ibd. Antal Szentfülöpi. “Zur Nationalitätenpolitik in Ungarn zwischen denbeiden Weltkriegen und zur Ibd., 72. meant a forced Magyarization. forced a meant that ‘national unity’ had conviction to achievedmore effectivelybe had the than happened to up to this time.led This state, homogenous a within achievable only is Trianon of Treaty Post ceding of Burgenland.the Allethnic minorities were marked as traitors and even the policies were responsible for thedissolution of theold empire of the Holy Stephen and the With convictionTrianon in took the Hungarian publicplace liberalthe thatthetoo minority 138 propagated: “If Hungary dies, you have killed it!” The belief that a revision of the of revision a that belief The it!” killed have you dies, Hungary “If propagated: . As Spannenberger putit: Volksbund th post-war minister post-war forming 15 the , 32. , ed. Wendelin Hambuch Vol.II (Budapest: Tankönvykiadó, 1988), 84. 137 139 He claimed that forced Magyarization and forced and forced Magyarization Heclaimedthat 61 Indeed, Bethlen’s promises mentioned promises Indeed, Bethlen’s status quo th cabinet. It does thus not surprise not thus does It cabinet. 300 Jahre Zusammenleben – Aus der over social innovation or innovation social over Neue CEU eTD Collection tasks tasks endangers the unity of government”.the nationality for organisation an as Nationalities for Ministry “the government the of opinion the accordingworked out to that Spannenberger required minorities wasnot anymore. the Plebiscite, behaviour agenerous towards Sopron With Burgenland. successful the springplacethe drawing1921 negotiations Austria with borders in took of the about Till policy. foreign for instrument an as used be still could issue minority the that fact the feeling. ministrythe because itwould inno way the creation support of a unified Magyar-national abolish to Teleki minister prime then the asked members the Bethlen, István of leadership 143 142 141 140 section. following in the demonstrated be will as clear, came policy minority on ideas Bethlen’s minority. German,and Slovak the for Romanian Bycommissioners governmental replaced bysocalled appointing György Steuer as responsible for the Germans the essence of make didnotNationalities senseanymore” for Ministry the of existence the treaties “with admitted that peace the Antal Pótz, secretary, Bleyer’s War, World afterthe Second practice. Later, into put ministry finally was the interests. ethnic their on than protecting and energy on pro-Hungarian propaganda aimedattheminorities athome rather andabroad funds time, its of most spent ministry the indicates, As Spira ineffectively. highly though nominally, existed still it although ministry the of abolition the completing for responsible Ibd., 36. Spannenberger, Spira, Ibd., 34. 140 Swabian problem Bleyer was overthrown on December 20 December on overthrown was Bleyer Volksbund , 92. , 34. 141 When Bethlen assumed power, the dispersal dispersal the assumed of WhenBethlen power, 142 62 . The government nevertheless did not forget not did nevertheless government . The 143 Soon, in 1922, itwas indeed abolished, th , 1920. György Steuer became Steuer György , 1920. CEU eTD Collection 146 145 5.1.1 Victory of opportunism – The case of György Steuer The caseof György – 5.1.1 Victory of opportunism 144 sabotages. “They created bitterness among the Hungarian and hopes among the among hopes and Hungarian the among bitterness created “They sabotages. which benot could carriedout, more not justification forseems than late thechauvinista just they that so far, too went governments former of decrees the estimation his In basis’? national support of feeling. (Magyar) the fatherland. Hungarian the to devotion lead them in a social way according to the order of the prime ministry and to strengthen the primethe ministry on cultural,and economic social of questions Germanpopulation,the to to a memorandum from István Bethlen, Steuer’s task was According governmental decrees. carry the out to refused local administration question,to the listen to complaints, to inform commissioner wasquite unthankful. did politicians Notonly the poisontheGerman basis’. a ‘Magyar-national minister that he would carry out his task –in contrast tothe radical minority politicians –on remind prime forgetnot to the did also Steuer in of tasks. state centre the population stood February 21 What were now Steuer’s guidelines in minority policy? According to his memorandum from Ibd., 39. Spannenberger, Bellér, What did Steuer understand now under carrying out his tasks on ‘Magyar-national on tasks his out carrying under now understand Steuer did What Counterrevolution st , 1921, the cultural and economic organization of speaking German the organization of the cultural and economic , 1921, Volksbund , 208. , 38. 145 He was well aware that the work of governmental 146 Thus, the priority lay on patriotic education and the and education patriotic on lay priority the Thus, 63 Mich täglichnenn’ denbesten Christ. Hauptsache sind mir doch dieKronen, Die der Graf Bethlen, meinBezahler, Die derGrafBethlen, Nennt michruhig’nenMagyaronen, Und schlüg gern alleDeutschen tot. Trotzdem wieich, Ihr alle wisst, Ich binauch sonst einPatriot, Ist jaein Christnationaler. 144 CEU eTD Collection Hungarian nation and thus shall never be unfaithful or ungrateful to it. to ungrateful or be unfaithful never shall thus and nation Hungarian the of pieces also are they home, new a find to Hungary to came German the that claiming nationalities.” 148 147 those even not i.e. question, minority the of promoters no were government the of members the even second, and, them, with conflict into come to interest no had government the and its from beginnings. thesocial First, and administrative resistance became already obvious by1922 doubtful was system this of effectiveness the protection minority successful a of point the From estimation. own its in policy minority a out carry to able was government in his hands. Due to forthe Nationalities fact thatand the creationno elected of of Ministry the abolishment The minority question. deal ideal the the with animagined way to alternative representatives showed how all decisions makes conceptand he structure clearhow Its minority policies. Bethlen’s characteristic for came together of the Germans existed, the reward. to generous equally punish,doso. Quick also has to legitimate inducementshewas alsooffered to them every pressedminorities her like noother Central European to abandonstate their nationality, she state, unpatrioticfor the dangerous as stigmatized and criminalized line, they orwere official the differs from disloyal. which aims Oneown their follow to aimed canminorities where moment the In argue point. peak the that Hungary was assimilation Forced interests. minority peculiar of has renouncement the including course, been consistent. political the to conformity absolute an demanded opinion IfPublic time. the of shemovement has understanding of Steuer’s can issue,one the imagine burdens for anyminority the surprise that the promotion of ‘national unity’ served as the basis for his work. Following notdoes publichistory everyclichéfavoured stereotype of It contemporary the and opinion. OL K28 130/210, 2423, 47/1925, Steuer toBethlen. Spiegel-Schmidt, The establishment of the governmental commission for the German minority is minority German the for commission governmental the of establishment The 147 His ideology differdid not from contemporary opinion.public While Bleyer in neuerer Geschichtsschreibung 64 , 73. 148 Hence, he Hence, CEU eTD Collection fatherland” road the of pure Christian andfaithfulcustoms love of traditionalthe Hungarian As Bleyerit in emphasized would be1926, only lead “our to Swabian our desire to people Steh’n fest zuSteh’n fest dirwir alleZeit. deutschem Herzen,Mit schwieliger Schwabenhand Du Heldenwall derChristenheit! Gott segne tausendmal dich,Ungarland, Dem Bruder Ungar immerfort! Not,von Treu auchinjeder Arglist frei Der Schwabenart, demdeutschenWort; der Ahnenbleibt der Dem Erb’ Enkel treu, Der Ähre Gold,derTrauben Glut. Da deutscher Schweiß undSchwabenarbeit schuf das Im Kampfe Ungarnblut: floss Huf, derTürkenpferde Wo einst gestampft Gesegnet reich vonGottesHauch. und DurchWildnis brach Sumpf seinMutsich Bahn Bracht deutschenFleißundSchwabenbrauch. der Ahn, vomRheinekam Fernher fromme zuSteh’n fest dirwir alleZeit. deutschem Herzen,Mit schwieliger Schwabenhand Du Heldenwall derChristenheit! Gott segne tausendmal dich,Ungarland, B. Schwabe: Swabian leaders. made by the state Hungarian the loyalty to and frequentpassionate even sincerity of 5.2 faced severe difficulties. of association a cultural section,in creation eventhe next the people supported a positive minority policy whose task was to carry it out. As will be shown 151 149 150 Bellér, Schödl, Macartney, The Counterrevolution Land an der Donau Ungarländische Deutsche Volksbildungsverein Deutsche Ungarländische 149 Hungary . The contemporary scholar, C.A. Macartney, also saw no reason to doubt the doubt to reason no saw also Macartney, C.A. scholar, contemporary The . 150 As can be As shownina can poem Bleyer published nomde underthe plume , 285. , 192. , 463-4. 151 65 CEU eTD Collection leadership should be taken over by already assimilated personalities. Therefore, Bethlen Therefore, personalities. assimilated be over byalready should taken leadership from the point of view of the Magyarinstrument nation’s for goals, his owncarry aims. out in UDVan the saw Bethlen rather its Ifof leader. a well as the acceptation as association the successfulsuch an association work” exist, it inHungary. Germans of the morals Christian the should at least be “useful and,language, and customs traditions, folkish peculiarities, care andstrengthen takinginterests, supportcultural of of – wasto education state surveillance – apartfrom the non-political 15 tendencies. separate toprevent order in association cultural German in a directions all anchor to wanted He policies. minority in initiative giveready upthe to not Bethlen was However, moregroup. radical maybe Bleyer,him while of but representative accepting minority hethe as limited thedangerof a his of aversion against madenosecret Bethlen side, On anymore. other government the the opposition buthe hadenoughexperience inminority at thispolitics and point didnottrust anykindof refused radical minority. Hestill of German the representative unquestioned the as it on insisted now he Wekerle, minister, prime then the of will the to due an organization fundamental change inBleyer’s Whilein thinking. he1918 renounced the creation of such finda Hereone can with Bethlen. inagreement create aGerman to cultural association hetried Thus, were the if government. only minority the side of ever, achievable at policy, of field in the successes that aware well was Bleyer minorities. national of together joining any however,burden, towards the rejection remained governmentthe organisational of 153 152 OL K28 130.csomó 210tétel, 2239/925. Bellér, th , 1923, with Bleyer elected as president. According to Bellér it was the aim of the UDV The As Bleyer poemshows, the surely lovedby greatest means, the hiscountry all Bleyer als Minderheitenpolitiker Ungarländische DeutscheUngarländische Volksbildungsverein , 37. 66 152 The governmentimmediately refused (UDV) was founded on July 153 . The . CEU eTD Collection Honorationen more more problems UDVbecame, popular village the the emergedbetween the the of abolition new beginning in the history of the Hungarian Germans after the FirstWorld War. Since the German organizations, the organizations, German 155 2005), 176. members. more35.000 than never UDVcontained the Szentfülöpi, to According magyarized. been hadalready population the that it wherewas believed certain atall intodistricts penetrate allowed to not were There to theprovince. went they when watched closely emissaries Germany. polarization within the German minority and strengthened the side waitingfor help from the intensified wing theGerman minority also moderate reliably of with the even cooperate no did government Hungarian the that experience the Tóth, Ágnes to According Berlin. with connections strengthen to tried other the Hungarians, the with coexistence peaceful following years the UDV moved into two directions. One focused on cooperation and 3 for association the August on him accepted clear,andhefinally was this, ‘profit’ Justafter the of factor innerdisturbance. a possible calmedalso down political accepting of UDVhethe did not only hisdemonstrate ‘generosity’ towards minority the but While moves. political of master a be to himself proved minister prime The Bethlen. of cabinet the and UDV the between as amediator act to rather was task Gratz’s Germans. Hungarian the of personality accepted widely and leading the as Bleyer doubt to intention with from some breaks, summer 1924till endof the 1930s.the However, henever had any insisted on Gustav Gratz as the formal head of the 154 Szentfülöpi, Àgnes Tóth, Àgnes 155 154 Although Márta Fata mentions the “defensive character” the mentions “defensive Fata Márta Although During its existence the headquarters were under constant surveillance and were under constant headquarters its the During existence Nationalitätenpolitik Ungarn National and ethnic minorities in Hungary, 1920-2001 and the people.Especially churchthe in village,the which always defended Volksräte , neither political nor cultural representation existed. However, the However, existed. representation cultural nor neither political , Ungarländische DeutscheVolksbildungsverein , 8. 67 Volksbildungsverein (Boulder: East EuropeanMonographs, . Gratz led UDV, the . Gratz 156 rd , 1924. During, 1924. the of Hungarian of all was, so to say, a CEU eTD Collection policy. assimilation, opposed the club and saw it as an institutionalization of an anti-assimilation 156 of their language in private life, religion, the press etc., and facilities use life, adequate for pressetc., the of of languagein the religion, their private employments, functions, orthe andhonours exercise of and industries; free use professions public to admission equal including rights, political and civil identical and law all her beforenationals,grant theto ofrace,language religion,with distinction equality or religion, and the free exercise of any religion notinconsistent with public order or morals; to liberty and her all distinction inhabitants to nationality,without of birth, language, race,or Trianon.Accordingit, Hungary to to assureundertakes full protectionand complete life of two heads. fell minorities under to law The applicable they received. Internationally, law treatment the actual the and Hungary decreased from 550.000 in 1920 to479.000 in 1930. was already had in Hungary Germans of number the time At this bound source. a political as Germans by the articles Hungarian the recognized government it German the as1930swhen was as the that early be emphasized to has it Nevertheless, Germany. with 54-60relations good demanded – Trianon of of the Treaty hand,this thepolicies other foreign mainly policy. in the revision Bethlen’s On – regardto of schools andthus weld together nation.the andassimilation Nationalism served as fortools forspeaking German refuse tacticany demand it to a probate served as As intimes pre-war problem school 5.3 The the UDV emerged, most obvious in the school question. 157 Ungarndeutschtum Márta Fata, “Minderheitenkonzeption und –politik Jakob Bleyers,” in Spannenberger, 157 A distinction has to be made between the treatment of the minorities as prescribed by as minorities of prescribed the be has made between treatment the to A distinction Soon, a united front of teachers, administrators and clerical representatives against representatives andclerical administrators of teachers, front aunited Soon, , ed. WendelinHambuch (Budapest: JBG, 1994): 24. Katholische Kirche , 146. 68 158 Jakob Bleyer. Ein Leben für das CEU eTD Collection 159 linguistic minority resides. members of a of wherea‘considerable schoolsproportion’ public the indistricts primary their expensegive instruction and own schools in adequate etc., to minority language a in in law and fact asis enjoyed by others Hungarian nationals, including the right tomanage at andgrant security the sametreatment to to minorities courts; the before languages minority 158 the Leaguethe in 1922. The‘solution’ of ‘suitablethe handling’ of minority the inproblem East 30 on August placed Leagueof Nations’ guarantee under the desired so.The minority protection sections of the Hungarian peace treaty (Art. 54-60) were with could ifthey Leagueof although haveNations their registered the treaties they, too, members 60).Countries(Art. bound which wereobviouslywere not not by regulation,this nations” League of of the guarantee international the under “placed was rights with these compliance the and state, given the of obligation” “international the was rights minority of granting the that that stated explicitly nevertheless was It in practice. guaranteed be to were problem: the treaties listed definite rights, but containedanother little face to informationhad Council the aboutabove, how these outlined anomaly the to addition In Nations. was fall procedures to tothe Leagueof itself.developingNations concrete and motion in protection this setting of task the but protection, internal minorities’ for the framework the created PeaceConference itsthe variousThrough legal constructs protection. minority of foundations the lay only could frontiers, new the sanctioning seen in the be case can as own, its from different of thelinguistically is majority whose Swabians. sovereignty a national to Nevertheless, the of language. areby means Thetwo noidentical; an may ethnic group belong Peacewell to prefer Conference, when drawinga people’sself-determination to right principlewith the of nationality defining on basis the and Available from (accessed 3April 2008). Macartney, The Peace Treaties incorporated minority rights to be guaranteed by the League of by League the be guaranteed to minority rights incorporated The PeaceTreaties Hungary , 271. 159 However, the Paris Peace Conference confused the concept of concept the confused Conference Peace Paris the However, 69 th , 1921.Hungary herself joined CEU eTD Collection According toMacartney, these provisions rankamong the most liberal in Europe. C-schools. and D- A-, so-called between choose then may They schools. elementary communal and state in the instructions minority for ask may commune, in any minority, guardiansor least representing at forty children of a linguisticschool age, belonging to by in with 1/5 ofthepopulation) (i.e. minority. mainly latter the the Parents areas populated use of mother dealings intheir citizens tongue the the agenciesto obliged government the literal quotation from Law i.e. Nationality the of 1868, law. refreshinga old 55-year It states could or wanted to follow the international rules and obligations. As Szarka László rules tofollow obligations. and international states could wanted the or newly created the what extent can askto one side, theother On Germans. Hungarian of the treatment own their to contradiction in stood minorities, Hungarian the for Entente Little the guaranteed rights, the Germans were blamed as ‘pan-Germans’. theirexercising by just However, border. Western atthe established merely were schools asaminority described increased all, German while A-the school at speaking continuously be hardly could which C-schools, the of number the that assimilation toward tendency the way proportionate to the numbers of the minority.It was characteristic for school policy and 191 B-schools together with 76 kindergartens faced265schools of C,type arelationin no and 1933,40A-schools unsatisfactory. In nevertheless remained schoolslanguage) teaching establishmentof so-called A-(Germanspeaking), B-(bilingual) and C-(Hungarian as concerned. parties such thetaskof really the but creation relationshipthis, was of the towards and theminorities. The institution of international minority protection could helpmovement state majority the between in arelationship befound only time could that at Central Europe 160 Macartney, Bethlen was well aware that the minority treatment, which Hungary expected from expected whichHungary treatment, minority the aware that waswell Bethlen On national level, the the decree 4/800 from June 22 Hungary , 282. 70 nd , 1923, was, in many, 1923,was, places, a 160 The CEU eTD Collection One the one hand it made the foundation of the of foundation the made it hand one the One strategy. double by a successful wascharacterized 1920s the minority of policy Hungarian minorities. own their to i.e. minorities, the to claims from a state where Hungary statedthat changed Gratz feudal generation. by old represented the ideas political the minorities claimed something, to a state where the nation raises 163 influence. a certain fear in Hungarianwould only be possible with Germany. Paradoxically,Macartney, existed,according there to minds, borne in run long the borders a revision of that of fact awareof the werewell hissuccessors well as past experience, of for because achieving asgoalspolitical therevisionist government, the of Bethlen resource all Germans and Germanhindered its activity on the local level. This might be seen as a way keepto the minority as a of historical Hungary.” communities national non-Hungarian former of the self-determination the endorsing to itself the controversial points of the Peace Treaty. There is no denying that Trianon did not restrict put it: “The inter-war development of Hungarian minorities created by Trianon exposed all 162 1995), 36. Antecedents and repercussions 161 inner politics. in factor beHungary’s asadangerous imagined would of organization a German cultural presence the that be calmed minorities andthuscould the society towards of Hungarian the Macartney, Gratz, in minorities,” Hungarian of emergence the and “Trianon Szarka, László Deutschungarische Probleme 163 But what is even more important, the government could trust in the intolerance in the trust could government the important, more is even what But Hungary , 285. 161 , eds. Béla Király/ László Veszprémy (New York: Social Science Monographs, The situation after Trianon demanded also a change of the of change a also demanded Trianon after situation The , 116. 71 Kulturverein 162 At this point one can argue that the possible, on the other side it Trianon and East Central Europe. CEU eTD Collection second part of the19 of second part of surviving. differentmotherorigin anddifferent tongue, wouldonly become and stronger more capable of citizens by inhabited states, that expression the was Stephen King of remains the of One Conclusion 164 side. other the firststep towards of instead hate taketheisbeing easier to ashamed it or Indeed, sometimes issuethe ona common Maybe ground. isa this inspeciality Hungarian inpolitics general. communication, radicalization took place and no side showed enough patience to work on limited and the Hungarian elite closed their ears to what they did notwant to hear. Instead of was like Gustav Gratz people sophisticated of such influence The their Magyarization. forcing it regarded effortthus as aminor had of this and beenwell aware Hungarian elite Germans, as untrained politically is importance, peaceful of what and, means.rather greater The with all the largestbackward country, inhabited by nationalities aim whose would have beenindependence remaining a been have would Hungary Trianon, without Even none. certainly was there possibilities, minority, have contemporary thinking. Would beenan there Disregarding theoretical alternative? couldHungarian in much too even seemed it not little, very demanded they although and One War present any largestthe minority suddenly national awakened to duringconsciousness andafter World serious threat.remained of the Land of the Holy Crown of St. Stephen. On the otherThe side, the Swabians as Hungary, by traumatized didTrianon, whatitbelieved ithad todo,i.e. nationalizing what actin way. not another could due totheirall convictions, involved, parties accept that Gratz, Deutschungarische Probleme 164 Turning away from this wisdom seemed dangerous. Hungary from Hungary from from seemed Turningaway dangerous. wisdom the this th century did so. However, one has to ignore common stereotypes and , 106. 72 CEU eTD Collection minorities. While offering something with one hand, they took it back with the other. The other. the with back it took they hand, one with something offering While minorities. economic level. and cultural policiesin of The 1923/24 continuedturn limit to of rights the Nationality Law1868 by of extensivegranting rights for thenationalities onthepolitical, the by provided framework the widened conception Communist’s The nationalities. 1918/19nationalitythe re-allure by policies, partially interestdominated to the the of acontinuation late 1919waspartially of system The different. was practical realization the be abolished, never could believed public Hungarian the a thought nation’, political Though both and relied Law ofthe Nationality ‘one onthe illusion the 1868 Hungarian of happened. disregardingthisframework provided state, leadership. the by Hungarian finally the This Staatsnation policy inminority German a consequent that Hungaryassume might one Thus, again. in time back astep took was not possible. Hungary illusions, it. thefailureof democratic After the all devote to his attention not could Out moreherself powerful to likeGermany.Hismeanspartners were of honest thoughts of but he the bounding privatethan rather nationalities her with arrangement in the independence Hungary’s existence one democratic sawof solution nationality OszkárJászihimself the question. theguarenteeof had to fit in shortminorities. time of oldmethod endedthe oppressing Itopened wayforthe a the ‘undividable’ Magyarnation. Thevictory of democraticthe revolution of 1918 onlyfor a and against the whoostensibly state astraitors thus the markalwaysagitated to quick those bitter accuser of Hungarian a rejection fight against the post-Trianon of himinto any turned Hungarian government nationalitythe means, honest with started he Although Bleyer. Jakob of leadership the under policy.Germans The Hungarian elite on the other side was The difference of the systems of 1919 and 1923/24 can be foundin canbe their principles. 1919 and1923/24 The of of systems the difference This paper has shown and examined the efforts undertakenThis by has shown andexaminedpaper theefforts Hungarian the . Onthe hand,other decide existedapossibility there to opposition for against 73 CEU eTD Collection German minority under the head of the of head the under minority German of War,the World parts Second the into After sliding the consequences. foresee them could of in None forward. back theminorities moved and stepped Hungary while time, but modernization not enemywas the the long run, logic.followed In but apolitical modernization, from dependent not was minorities of emancipation the Thus, rights. these of realization the towards aversion acertain showed always Hungary and will, political a matter of sameis extent to the minorities of fornational rights the respect but the Hungary, was never putinto practice. but liberal on lawexisted paper 1868, wherearather to similar seemedvery situation thus 165 in interested not are they seems thus it and possibilities legal their all use not do they hand, other the On usual. as weak as is system school German Hungarian the of situation the and the Hungarian German minority 18years political the state. change, ofanational regard them after as beingonthefringes is still at the beginning. TheyThe basic now is,question if isHungary willing tosupporta ‘mixed’do society rather or not have decision representation. parliamentary them promises which rights country, in the minorities the concerning parliament, complained Jen that the Hungarian political of speaks people minority.the astheactive of 50-60.000 core elite would be unable self-administration, German Hungarian the Heinek, headof Otto 1920s. the to very similar to realise a law expulsion. from them of most prevent not could It country. home Hungarian their towards faith their show to war the Germany. However, Germans in Hungary alsofounded the so-called Pester Lloyd Ę Kaltenbach, from 1995 to2007ombudsman for minorities in Hungarian the The decision assimilation individualregarding dictatedwas always innot and More than 60 years later, the situation of the German minority in Hungary seems Hungary in minority German the of situation the later, years 60 than More , 25 October 2006. October , 25 Volksbund 74 indeed acted as a fifth column of indeed asafifth Nazi column of acted 165 The Hungarian German, Hungarian The Treuebewegung during CEU eTD Collection uncertain” Hungarianthe find Germans in“adifficultwith “highly themselves state” future their that emphasized further He nothing. doing for country the of minority largest the as Roma out of it and how they use it. Kaltenbach blamed the political elite, the media and also the themselvesin avoluntarily ghetto. It is thus nota question of right, but also what they make their own survival. of Instead being partin decisionsall made in country,the they lock 166 answers. If they can do so is indeed uncertain. up totheHungariando soby Germans to honestposing honest questions and giving a balanced historical picture could improve the dialogue between minority and majority. It is minorities, towards society theHungarian viewof critical of the because least, not but Last, Hungarian-Swabian problem in get awayfrom order victim-traitor rhetoric. short-sighted the to take placeseems contest a perverted Sometimes victims. role as their emphasize Germans Hungarian about whotheir historiography. Jakob asa Bleyer servesasthe keystone, kind of whilethe godfather, sufferedBleyer worshipping part of the Hungarian most.Germans. This is to the same extentmanifested in ThisWhat disturbs even more is the display of empty phrasespaper mainly from the ultra-conservative, triedreasons tothat widenthey do not showthe themselves context and rather of feel thethe hopelessness of any efforts. Pester Lloyd The Swabians themselves can thusbeblamedis aswell.historical It maybe due to 166 . , 18 April 2007. 75 CEU eTD Collection Hambuch, Budapest:JBG, 57-74. 1994. in Volksgemeinschaft,“ Ginder, Paul. „Jakob Bleyers Weg vom ungarischen Patrioten zur deutschen das Leben für Ungarndeutschtum in Jakob Bleyers,“ Márta.„Minderheitenkonzeption –politik und Fata, Béla Király,New York: Social 479-489. Science 1982. Monographs, War A case studyI. onTrianon Chaszar, Edward. „Trianon and the problem of national minorities,” in Ungarndeutschtum Bellér, Béla. „Jakob Bleyer als Minderheitenpolitiker,“ in Trianon in detriment,” Apponyi, ed.,Albert, „The historic mission of Hungary and of states the aggrandised herto Essays inanthologies 12 January 2008]. [accessed from available backwardness“; for compensation „Anational Péter. Hanák, [accessed8February 2008]. from available Bleyer,im Jakob. „Rede Parlamentgegen Minderheitenpolitikdie derRegierung 1933“; 2008]. [accessed 17March from available aufAbwegen“; Ungarische ungarischer István.„Deformierter Geschichte Bibó, Charakter. online Essays minister. Department for Nationalities and Minorities) K 28: Miniszterelnökség. Nemzetiségi és Kisebbségi Osztály (Ministry of the prime minister) prime the of K 26: Miniszterelnökség központilag iktatott iratai (Central registered writings of the office Levéltár Archive) Magyar Országos National (Hungarian Unpublished documents Bibliography , 1-20. London: Longmans, 1928. Justice for Hungary. Justice Review for ofand criticismoftheeffect the Treaty of , ed. Wendelin, ed. 29-42. Budapest:JBG,Hambuch, 1994. Jakob Bleyer. Ein Leben Jakob Bleyer.EinLeben für dasUngarndeutschtum (=War and society in East Central Europe, Vol. VI), ed. , ed. Wendelin, ed. Budapest:JBG, Hammbuch, 13-28. 1994. 76 Jakob Bleyer. Ein Leben das Jakob Bleyer.Ein für Jakob Bleyer. Ein Essays on World on Essays , ed. Wendelin CEU eTD Collection 109. Berücksichtigung derDeutschen in Ungarn,“ Spiegel-Schmidt, Friedrich.„Die Arbeiterbewegung 1918/19in Ungarn mitbesonderer Minderheit in Minderheitder Bethlen-Ära,“ für „György Regierungskommissar dieSpannenberger, Norbert. deutsche Steuer. 151. vonGustav Gratz,“ ‚Lebenserinnerungen’ “Trianon-UngarnSchödl, Günter. und deutsche die Minderheitenpolitik. Zuden Bleyer, Jakob. „Nation, Volk, Staat,” Essays inperiodicals Volkstumspolitiker desSpitze Ungarländischen Deutschen inVolksbildungsvereins,“ Vince, Pál. „Kontrahenten oder Weggefährten? Jakob Bleyer und Gustav Gratz an der 1988, pp.114-137. Ungarndeutschen zwischen in1919-1945,“ Tilkovszky, „Die Nationalitätenpolitik Loránt. Ungarns unddas heimische Deutschtum 84-100. Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó,Vol.,1988. Zusammenleben –AusderGeschichte derUngarndeutschen und zurGeschichte des Ungarländischen Deutschen inVolksbildungsvereins,“ Szentfülöpi,Antal. „Zur Nationalitätenpolitik in Ungarn zwischen den zwei Weltkriegen 42. NewYork: Social Monographs,Science 1995. Central Europe. Antecedents and repercussions, eds. Király, Béla / Veszprémy, László, 29- Szarka, László. “Trianon and the emergence of Hungarian minorities,” Trianon and East Ethnopolitik Seewann,ed., „Das Gerhard, Ungarndeutschtum 1918-1988“ in eds. Romsics, Ignac/ Király, Béla, 317-345. Budapest: CEU Press, 1998. 1997),” in1997),” Pálok, Judit. “The protection nationalof and ethnicminorities' in rights Hungary (1989- 242. Budapest:CEU Press, 1998. region. Hungarian1848-1998 reconciliation efforts in Theories,” Federation Danube Jászi’s “Oszkár György. Litván, Király,Budapest: CEU Press, Béla,133-160. 1998. the Danuberegion. Hungarianreconciliation efforts 1848-1998 Katus, László. „József Eötvös and Ferenc Deák: Laws on Nationalities,” in Geopolitics in theDanuberegion. Hungarianreconciliation efforts1848-1998 , 107-128. Budapest:Osiris, 2000. , ed. Wendelin, ed. Hambuch,I.Vol., 114-137.Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó, , ed. Wendelin, ed. Budapest: Hambuch,39-58. JBG, 2004. 300 Jahre Zusammenleben – Aus der Geschichte der 300 JahreZusammenleben–Aus Suevia Pannonica Sueva Pannonica Südostdeutsches Archiv 77 Südostdeutsches Archiv (26/1998): (26/1998): 65-81. , eds. Romsics, Ignac/ Király, Béla, 227- (11/1983): (11/1983): 20-30. , ed. Wendelin Hambuch, II. , eds. Romsics, Ignac/ Ungarndeutsche und 26/27 (1983/84): 139- 26/27(1983/84): Jakob Bleyer als Jakob Bleyer Geopolitics in the Danube Geopolitics in the 26/27(1983/84):100- Geopolitics in 300 Jahre , CEU eTD Collection Monographs, 1992. Galantai, Jozsef. New York: Garland Publishing, 1987. Epstein, Irene. Epstein, 1988. Deák, István. Deák, external homelandsinthenew Europe Brubaker, Rogers. Monographs, 1993. Borsanyi, György. Kritik, 1992. Bibó, István. Bibó, nationality in politics counterrevolutionary the regime). Akadémiai Budapest: Kiadó, 1975. Bellér, Béla. Bellér, Departmentthe for Minorities and Nationalities). Budapest: Teleki LászlóAlapitvány, 1995. válogatott iratai, 1919-1944 András. Bán, Monographs,Boulder: European 2006. East Ablonczy, Balázs. Ablonczy, Monographies Zeitschriftfür Siebenbürgische Landeskunde Ungarn-Jahrbuch Suevia Pannonica. Archiv der Deutschen Ungarnaus ArchivSüdostdeutsches Lloyd Pester Jahrbuch der Ungarndeutschen Deutscher Kalender. Newspapers andperiodicals Austrian Yearbook thesame,” moreremains it Hungarian nationalism “Thechanges, the Peter. more Sugar, 69-94.(11/1983): Idem. „Jakob Bleyerin der neueren ungarischen Geschichtsschreibung;“ Idem. „Die kulturpolitische Konzeption Idem. Konzeption „Die Jakob Bleyers,“ kulturpolitische Volksabstimmung (1919-1921),“ Idem. „Das Deutschtum Ungarns zwischen dem gegen Putsch Peidl und derÖdenburger Die Misere derosteuropäischen Kleinstaaterei Az ellenforradalom nemzetségi politikájánakkialakulása Magyarok kisebbségbena Magyar Kisebbségi ésszorványban: Osztályának Hungary from 1918 Hungary from to 1945 Gyula Szekf Trianon andthe protection of minorities (31/2000): 127-174. (31/2000): Pal Teleki (1879-1941):thelife of acontroversial Hungarianpolitician Nationalism reframed: national minorities, nationalizingstates, and The lifeof acommunist revolutionary. Ħ . Astudyin the political basis ofHungarian historiography (Hungarians in minorities Selectedand loose. documents from Südostdeutsches Archiv . Cambridge: Cambridge. Cambridge: University Press, 1996. . New York: Institute on East Central Europe, 78 Sueva Pannonica 30/31(1987/88):78-111. . Boulder: Social Science Béla Kun . Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag Neue , Boulder: Social Science (The development of Sueva Pannonica Sueva (11/1983): 4-18. (11/1983): . . CEU eTD Collection Romanian Historical Studies, 1985. Paclisanu, Zenobius. 1983. impact onHungary’s domestic politics,1918-1921 Mócsy, István. Macartney, C.A. Press, 2006. Litván, György. University Press, 2003. Károlyi, Mihály. Idem. Press, 1964. Oszkár. Jászi, University Press, 1982. Janos, Andrew. Lang, 1994. Lendvai, Paul. 1997.Oldenbourg, publizistischegegen denFriedensvertrag Kampf vonTrianon(1918-1931) Aniko. Kovács-Bertrand, CentralGermans ofEast Europe between thewars Rebecca. Stockwell, Anthony/ Komjathy, Haslinger, Peter. Haslinger, Idem. Hajdú, Tibor. and nationalism). Osiris, Budapest: 2007. története János. Gyurgyák, Gratz, Gusztáv. Gratz, Budapest:Europe Institut, 1993. Ferenc. Glatz, Homage toDanubia The Hungarian Soviet Republic The Hungarian (This became out of your Hungarian home. History of Hungarian national ideas national Hungarian of History home. Hungarian your of out became (This Károlyi Mihály The Dissolution oftheHabsburg monarchy Minorities inEast-Central Europe: historical analysis and apolicyproposal The Hungarians:thousand years A of victory in defeat The effects ofThe effects World War The Uprooted:I. Hungarian refugeesandtheir The politicsofbackwardness inHungary, 1825-1945 Deutschungarische Probleme Hungary Faith without illusion Der ungarische Revisionismus unddas Burgenland A twentieth-century prophet. Oscar Jászi, 1875-1957 A twentieth-century prophet. Ezzé lett Magyar hazátok. AMagyarnemzeteszme és Ezzé lettMagyar nacionalizmus hazátok. Hungary’s struggle toannihilate itsnationminorities Der ungarische RevisionismusnachdemErstenWeltkrieg: der . London: Ernest Benn, 1934. . Lanham: RowmanandLittlefield, 1995. . Budapest: Akadémiai 1978. kiadó, . Budapest: Akadémiai 1979. kiadó, .London: Jonathan Cape, 1956. German minorities and theThird Reich: ethnic 79 . Budapest:NeuesSonntagsblatt, 1938. . New York: Social Science Monographs, . NewYork: Holmes and1980. Meier, . Chicago: University Chicago of . Frankfurt a.M.: Peter . Princeton: Princeton . Princeton: . Princeton: Princeton . Budapest: CEU . Budapest: . München: R. . München: . Miami Beach: . CEU eTD Collection European European Monographs, 2005. Toth, Ágnes. Toth, 1983. Tokody, Gyula. CommunistHungary inthe Party of revolutions of 1918-1919 7Ę 1991. Tilkovszky, Loránt. comes after). Budapest: ÁKV-Maecenas, 1989. Szekf Books, 1973. Stern, Fritz, ed., Sugar, Peter. Sugar, Gömbös Spira, Thomas. Renaissance“und „Katholische Idem. und Hitler Norbert. Spannenberger, Schwind, Hedwig. Berlin:1995. Siedler, Romsics, Ignac. Romsics, 1980. Ferenc. Pölöskei, Science 1983. Monographs, György. Peteri, and theBigThree Peter. , Schödl, Günther, ed. Günther, Schödl, of Press, 1992.Washington Rothschild, Joseph. Boulder: Social Science 1995. Monographs, kés, Rudolf. Ħ Die katholische Kirche inUngarn 1918-1939.Positionierung impolitischenSystem , Gyula. . NewYork:Columbia University Press, 1977. . München:2002. Oldenbourg, East European nationalism,politics, andreligion National andethnicminorities in Hungary, 1920-2001 Hungary between Wilson andLenin:theHungarianRevolution of 1918-1919 Béla Kunand the HungarianSoviet Republic: theorigins and role ofthe Három nemzedék következik ésamiutána German-Hungarian Relationsand the Swabian Problem. Károlyi From to Effects ofEffects : war inHungary communism Deutschland unddieungarische Räterepublik Istvan Bethlen:agreat conservative statesmanHungary, of 1874-1946 The varieties of history Voltaire tothepresentfrom Hungary after twoHungary after revolutions (1919-1922) . Boulder: European Quarterly, East 1976. Jakob Bleyer East Central Europebetween thetwo WorldWars Zeitgeschichte derUngarndeutschen seit1919 Land an derDonau Der Volksbund derDeutschen inUngarn1938-1944 unter Horthy . Stuttgart: Steiner,. Stuttgart: 2006. . München: Institut, 1960. Süd-Ost (=Deutsche Geschichte im Osten Europas, Vol. 5). 80 (Three generations and generations (Three what . Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, . New York:. Praeger,1967. . Budapest:Akadémiai Kiadó, . Brookfield: 1999.Ashgate, . Budapest:Corvina, . New York: Vintage . Boulder: East . Boulder: . New York: Social . Seattle: University . Seattle: . CEU eTD Collection Quarterly, 1976. Vardy, Steven Bela. Vardy, Steven Edwin Mellen, 2004. Marius.Turda, The ideaof nationalsuperiority in Central Europe,1880-1918 Modern Hungarian Historiography 81 . New York: East European . Lewiston: