Discussion Papers No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
CENTRE FOR REGIONAL STUDIES
OF HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
DISCUSSION PAPERS
No. 37
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning
of the 20th Century
by
Pal BELUSZKY
Series editor
Zoltan GAL
Pecs
2002
Discussion Papers No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
Publishing of this paper is supported by the
Research and Publishing Fund of the Centre for Regional Studies, Hungary
and
the National Scientific Research Fund (OTKA) No. 029183
ISSN 0238-2008
2002 by Centre for Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Technical editor: Ilona Csapo, Zoltan Gal
Maps: Valeria Fonyodi
Typeset by Centre for Regional Studies of HAS Printed in Hungary by Sumegi
Nyomdaipari, Kereskedelmi es Szolgaltato Ltd., Pecs
Discussion Papers No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
Contents
1 Introduction / 5
2 Theoretical and methodological problems / 6
3 Results: Spatial differences among some 'elements' of modernisation /14
4 The regions of modernisation in Hungary at the beginning of the 20 th
/28
century
4.1 Budapest — the bridgehead of modernisation / 29
4.2 Regions characterised by notable modernisation / 33
4.3 Regions with average modernisation /37
4.4 'Traditional' (least modernised) regions /39
5 Summary / 41
References /42
Discussion Papers No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
List of tables
Table 1 The number of telephone stations per 100,000 in 1911 /13
Table 2 The percentage of literacy among the total population (aged over 6),
between 1880-1910 / 14
Table 3 Counties with high percentage of literacy between 1880-1910 / 15
Table 4 Counties with high percentage of illiteracy between 1880-1910 / 15
Table 5 Literacy among the ethnic groups of Hungary in the year 1910 / 17
Table 6 The employment structure of the Hungarian population in 1900 /25
Table 7 A summary on the major indices of the regions of 'modernisation' /30
Table 8 The share of Budapest within the country, 1910 / 33
List of figures
Figure 1
The levels of modernisation determined by options and ligatures /8
Figure 2 Literacy as option and ligature / 10
Figure 3
The 'running' of the modernisation process (by W. W. Rostow) / / /
Figure 4 The proportion of literacy from the age 6 in each county, 1910 / 16
Figure 5 The percentage of medically treated persons from the total deceased,
1910 /18
Figure 6 The total of bank deposits in each county (including municipal cities,
excluding Budapest and Fiume [Rijeka]) 1911, crowns per head /20
Figure 7 The number of factory workers per 10,000 heads, 1910 /22
Figure 8 The level of urbanisation with regard to principal cities of urban
hierarchy /23
Figure 9 The share of urban residents living in functional cities /24
Figure 10 Telephone stations per 100,000 (1911) /26
Figure 11 High Elementary Schoolchildren per 10,000 (1910) /27
Figure 12 Modernisation zones in Hungary at the beginning of the 20 th
century /28
Figure 13 Counties, municipal cities and regions in Hungary, 1910 / 31
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
1 Introduction
Hungary, during its history, has made several attempts to catch up with the Western
European countries, the so-called 'modern world'. In most cases 'history' has
doomed these efforts to failure, and with this, modernisation (i.e. the catch up proc-
ess) was determined to stop for decades and even for centuries.
At the time of the establishment of the Hungarian Kingdom (in about 1000 AD.)
the Western countries had already built up their feudal regime. Hungary showed its
willingness to join the West European civilisation by joining to the West European
Christian Church, by the adoption of feudal law and order, and also by dynastic
relations (our first king married a Bavarian princess). However, it took a long time
for the social and the economic system to become similar — but not identical — to
the Western world. In the 15 th century, the catch up process had been or at least had
nearly been completed, but all this has been hindered by the restructuring of the
European social-economical regions (The 'core area of modernisation' moved
from Northern Italy to the Atlantic region, consequently Central-Europe became
peripheral and feudalism stabilised there) and the rise of the Ottoman Empire (the
Turks invaded Hungary's central area, half of its territory, at the beginning of the
16th century, and founded a feudal duchy in Transylvania). The country became a
war-devastated area for one and a half century. After chasing out the Turks (in the
1680's and 90's) it was the firmly established feudal conditions and the country's
peripheral position (within Europe and within the Habsburg Empire to which Hun-
gary belonged since 1526) that prevented the restart of the Hungarian catch up pro-
cess. It was possible only by the elimination of feudal circumstances, and by the
establishment of civil laws and order, the passing of proprietorship acts in 1848.
At this time, however, the modernisation with harmonisation process with
Western industrial societies progressed at an increased speed. This process showed
a significant improvement at the turn of the century and in the period before World
War I. Yet, the 'catch up' process within Hungary was characterised by significant
spatial differences.
This essay is an attempt for the assessment of these spatial differences in Hun-
gary, which became significant by the turn of the 19 th and 20th century.
5
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
2 Theoretical and methodological problems
Although there is a massive collection of literature on the historical, philosophical
and sociological aspects of modernisation and historical statistics provides a large
amount of relevant data for the assessment of the spatial differences of modernisa-
tion in Hungary in the early 1900s, there are some methodological problems in fig-
uring out quantitative indicators for the different regions. At first, modernisation
theories highly emphasised the importance of expansion and catch up elements.
Daniel Lerner considers a constant spatial expansion of modernity as the essence
of modernisation.' By considering S. N Eisenstad's view stating that modernisation
is ... 'a simple reproduction of the Western European and North American capitalist
systems in the less developed countries one can think that the mapping of the spa-
tial differences of modernisation might be free of problems. 2 But even geographers
should accept that modernisation is not simply a 'catch-up' process — this statement
may only be a slogan for the modernisation of the less developed 'lagging behind'
regions.
Zsolt Papp, a Hungarian expert of this problem, has formulated his theory on the
issue as follows: the theoretical and practical experts using the terms of 'post-
modernism' are seeking for such new practical-moral, aesthetic-expressive, human-
ecological expressions and sensitivities that cannot be described by the traditional
conceptual elements of modernisation.' Modernisation ...— apart from its descrip-
tive function — has often a political evaluation content. What makes it work so?
Claus Offe says that all the normative concepts and projects have been integrated in
the Western world that had been formulated during the English industrial revolu-
tion, the French revolution and the German idealism. In this sense `...the liberation
of the ratio and human subjectivity are the final products of modernisation.' 3
The extremely rich collection of 'modernisation literature' standing 'between'
the above-mentioned opinion and the simple catch-up theories provides alternatives
for geographers as well.
According to R. Dahrendorf's frequently quoted statement `...the essence of
modernisation is losing ligatures — obligations — and gaining options — alternatives'.
This special terminology carries a clear message: modernisation means the im-
Lerner, Daniel: The Passing of Traditional Society. Modernizing the Middle East. — New York,
1958.
2 Quoted by Farkas, Janos from his paper 'Theories on the modernisation of societies'. — Valosag,
1985. 9. Andorka, Rudolf a leading Hungarian sociologist said something similar: `... the word
modernisation is used to be understood as an ability of the economy and society to catch up with
more developed ones... By this interpretation the paradigm of modernisation is strongly related to the
core — periphery paradigm'.
' Papp, Zsolt: Whither modernisation? — Vilcigosscig, 1987. 10.
6
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
provement of living conditions in sociological aspects but these improvements de-
pend on the combination of options and ligatures. Dahrendorf and his followers
state that ligatures are social obligations, which secure the survival of traditions or
at least slow down the disappearance of these traditions and even resist the tenden-
cies and the spatial expansion of modernisation. Ligatures are composed not only
from abstract behaviour, customs and habits, concepts of the universal ideologies,
religion, moral-ethic norms, taste, unwritten law, scale of values, etc. — but also
from such 'material' factors as illiteracy. Regarding the possibilities of the scaling
of ligatures, modernisation theorists show some uncertainty. Although, Dahrendorf
anticipates that, for the definition of the level of modernisation, it would be essen-
tial to measure the level of ligatures: to assess the intensity of human, group, social
position, and age ligatures. 'Options — `... are endless variations of human behav-
iour and alternatives, therefore, they can be evaluated easier.
The above-mentioned Zsolt Papp supports this opinion. 'Maybe they can be
transferred into a single dimension: The gross social product and the per capita in-
come? Mobility indicators? They may be the final indicators of the above-men-
tioned options!' If these options and ligatures could be numerically be interpreted
on regional level the process of modernisation and its regional differences could be
expressed by figures as a combination of ligatures and options, as it is spectacularly
demonstrated by Figure 1.
As an addition to this historical philosophical interpretation of modernisation I
would like to remark that although obligations (ligatures) are regarded as the
`slowing-down' elements of modernisation they are indispensable for the func-
tioning of the society. The absence of ligatures ends up in social chaos; moderni-
sation will be a self-destruction process, even if individuals seem to have abundant
choice options.
Although the statistical data of Hungary of the early 1900s provide a relevant
background for the measurement of the regional differences of modernisation for
the support of this theoretical concept care should be taken for the following facts:
(1) Despite the above-mentioned hopes it is unlikely that a single index may be
a relevant indicator for the current state modernisation or option 'level'. The reli-
ability of the above-mentioned indicators — average income, migration, gross social
product etc. — to serve as a single measure unit of modernisation is rather dubious.
Neither because their high contingency nor because that — except migration — no
relevant data are available from that period. The problem with them is that they
express only a certain state of development but tell nothing about the level of mod-
ernisation. Modernisation is not identical with the state of development for the
following reasons:
4 Ibid.
7
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
• Some elements of the 'development' cannot be regarded as integral parts of
`modernity'. For instance, some agricultural regions may provide high-in-
come due to their optimal environmental conditions, to the division of landed
property, and to high production activity, even if they use very traditional
methods. Modernisation in agriculture may be measured by the use of fertilis-
ers, 'development' may be described by good crop indicators but may also be
`the result of' high-quality soil or the use of 'natural' fertilisers etc.
• The indices of personal property — such as 'housing' or 'traditional' farming
may surpass the data of modernising regions. A traditional burghers' town
housing, which is far from modernisation, may be of a higher standard than of
a town undergoing a rapid development process.
• Some effects of modernisation may diminish 'the level of development': the
diffusion of manufacturing industry plants — the most significant phenomenon
of modernisation — revives the proletariats, whose housing estates of 19 th
century were very far from being 'modern'.
Figure 1
The levels of modernisation determined by options and ligatures
A
1
•
2
4
3
Options
Key: 1 — Traditional stage; 2 — The take-off stage of modernisation;
3 — Mature stage of modernisation (with ligatures of struc-
turing force).
Source: Edited by the Author.
8
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
(2) The high ratio of contingency in the spatial expansion of the 'elements' of
modernisation works against the 'one-dimensional' approach; migration considered
to be a reliable indicator through Western Europe — based on the assumption that
people are migrating to economically prosperous, developed regions — showed a
different tendency in Hungary even in the 19 th century. The Hungarians' migration
to the Hungarian Plain was not motivated by modernisation: a large number of
families just went to settle down on the areas having been abandoned during the
Ottoman invasion. There were some other, special reasons for the migration be-
tween regions with ethnic minorities (e.g. very few Croatians came over the border
to settle down in Hungary but a large number of Hungarians migrated to Croatia'.
However, this positive migration balance on the Croatian side has no correlation
with modernisation.)
(3) As we have seen from the details of 'indices', the attempt to determine the
degree and `structure' of modernisation through the combination of options and
ligatures has failed. Illiteracy, as the most characteristic element of ligatures, may
emerge as an impediment in the process of modernisation (Lika-Krbava county
74.9%, Maramaros 73.2 %, Szolnok-Doboka 71.4% — among people with age over
6)6 but the same indicator on the side of the range was an option — in' the Transda-
nubian region the literacy rate exceeded 80% provided favourable condition for
modernisation. The ownership of money is also an option, which can be evaluated
by the saving deposits of credit banks. The question is how it is definable when
modest deposit amounts (ligature) turns into ample ones (option). This can be
shown in a co-ordinate system (like literacy in Figure 2), however, it is impossible
to give an overall view by this analogue and combination.
(4) By statistical-technical reasons a large number of 'indices' should have been
disregarded for analysis. Just because the dissemination of data series was too
small to show significant correlation with modernisation tendencies. It is a well-
known fact that the classic theorists of 'modernisation concepts' divide the process
of modernisation into different stages. For example, W. W Rostow describes 5
stages (see Figure 3).7 The first one is the so-called 'traditional phase;' This
`peaceful' period lacks significant differences among regions; any emerging differ-
ences (quality or development level) are due to other from modernisation factors —
such as the availability of natural resources for example. In the period of emerging
preconditions modernisation indices still seem unchanged (e.g. the passing of the
5 Croatia was a semi-autonomous part of the Hungarian Kingdom between 1868-1918.
6 Before World War 1 the Hungarian Empire — together with Croatia-Slavonia — was divided into 71
administrative units so-called counties. The average territory of each county was approximately
4,800 sq. kilometres, with a population of nearly 300,000.
7 W. W. Rostow: The Stages of Economic Growth. A Non-Communist Manifesto. Cambridge, 1960.
9
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Figure 2
Literacy as option and ligature
80 -
2
60 -
-r
LI 40 -
20 -
3
20
40
60
80
Literate people
Key: 1 — Maramaros county; 2 — Szilagy county; 3 — Moson county.
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
Public Education Act, the establishment of the primary school system showed their
effects on literacy only at a later phase) and still are unsuitable for a precise
evaluation of the process of modernisation. It is only the 'take off' period when re-
gional differences grow into an appropriate level for a further investigation from
the perspective of regional differences. The next two, the transition to maturity and
saturation periods (having been described by 'high level of consumption') ease
regional differences again. As the different elements of modernisation occur in dif-
ferent times within these five periods and the length of these periods varies, the
way these indices seem to fit for the measurement of regional differences differs
10
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
from phase to phase. The numbers that are available for us at the turn of the century
in Hungary do not fit into the evaluation criteria of regional differences. For exam-
ple the evaluation of such indices as distributed telegrams per capita, per year (one
single person sent only one telegram in every two years — on the average and dif-
ferences were too small among county indicators), the proportion of divorced peo-
ple (in the counties it was about 0,1% or 0,2% — at the age over 15, it was 0.9%
only in Budapest) was a failure, even if they seemed to be the most suitable indices
of traditions — the 'ligature' seeming the most difficult to express in figures. (In
Hungary the Civil Marriage Act enabling divorcement procedures was passed in
the end of the 19th century).
Figure 3
The 'running' of the modernisation process (by W. W. Rostow)
A
B
C
D
E
b • • al • • • • s a
4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
,/
*.
#0"
...............
• • • • •
„Traditional" phase Period of emerging
Take-off
„Transition to
Saturation period
preconditions
maturity"
Source: Edited by the Author.
1 1
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
(5) Even a draft evaluation of these 'indices' verifies that in several cases the
spatial expansion of modernisation follows a hierarchical model. The first settle-
ments having been reached by modernisation were on the top of settlement hierar-
chy. These places had the highest indices of modernisation in almost all categories.
However, some other indices of modernisation were in sharp contrast between cit-
ies of advanced development and 'rural areas' almost completely missing the ele-
ments of modernity. Urban development indices had no direct relationship with
their hinterland. Local legislative power was provided to big cities only. The
growth in the number of telephone stations was a typical example for this phe-
nomenon. Table 1 shows the number of telephone stations per 100 thousand in-
habitants in municipal cities. As the figures of Table 1 illustrate, telephone supply
indicators had no correlation with the state of development of the surrounding area
of cities. Zagrab (Zagreb), situated in the 'underdeveloped' area of Croatia, had
better indicators of telephone supply than Pozsony (Bratislava) or Sopron, located
in more prosperous economic areas. Even the indicators of Kolozsvar (Cluj-
Napoca) cannot be explained by the city's 'regional' development. Thus, several
counties had better 'modernisation indicators' due to their cities. Although a re-
gion's urbanisation level and the presence of its centres are very important factors
of a region's overall economic development, the modernisation indicators of re-
gions with booming centres, being in a striking contrast with the underdeveloped
economy of their environment, (as the example of the city of Zagreb with Croatia
may show it) should be interpreted in a different way from those that consist not
only of urban development poles (cities) but of modernised 'rural areas' as well.
I used a simplistic mode to summarise the 'elements (indices) of modernisation.
My aim was to describe the advanced state of modernisation, which means the
summary of the different levels of modernisation but does not mean the definition
of the 'regional types of modernisation' by the description of the relationship
among these 'elements'. More complicated methods — such as cluster analysis —
could have been applied for this purpose. However, as these two divergent methods
are in good correlation, they are likely to produce the same results.
Hence, I described the level of modernisation in the counties by using a kind of
point system. (The 12 indicators surveyed were as follows: (1) The ratio of literacy,
(2) Corpses seen by doctor, (3) The volume of saving deposits in banks per capita,
(4) The ratio of telephone stations per 100,000, inhabitants (5) The ratio of indus-
trial workers, (6) The ratio of non-agricultural workers, (7) The amount of fire in-
surance per person, (8) Mortgage credit per capita, (9) The ratio of high elementary
public school students, (10) Hospital beds per 100,000, inhabitants (11) Urbanisa-
tion level based on population data in high-rank settlements, (12) Urbanisation
level based on population data of other urban settlements. The summary has been
made by the 'ranking order' method, though, it did not differ much from the results
12
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
of the aforementioned procedure.) The different zones (regions) of modernisation
in Hungary have been set up on the basis of these indicators. While generalising, I
took into account the relationship between the principal cities of urban hierarchy
and their environment (the centres of modernisation have been marked in less de-
veloped areas). Counties at the same modernisation level have been amalgamated
into one large region, in some cases we eliminated county borders (e.g. in case of
Vas county being on an 'average' level of modernisation, the northern part with
Szombathely, a county seat featuring with the most developed economic and built
in environment, were added to the most developed zone of the West-Hungarian re-
gion). The microregional level and structure of modernisation could not be identi-
fied, though this level had several characteristic features and combinations regard-
ing the different elements of modernisation.
Table 1
The number of telephone stations per 100,000 inhabitants in 1911
City
Number of telephone stations per 100,000
1. Fiume (Rijeka)
3,337.8
2. Budapest
2,502.6
3. Zagreb (Zagreb)
2,214.0
4. Nagyvarad (Oradea)
2,165.4
5. Kolozsvar (Cluj-Napoca)
2,000.1
6. Temesvar (Timisoara)
1,892.4
7. Pozsony (Bratislava)
1,801.2
8. Eszek (Osijek)
1,762.5
9. Arad
1,564.0
10. Pecs
1,518,8
11. Gyor
1,459.6
12. Kassa (Ko§ice)
1,430.8
13. Sopron
1,330.4
14. Debrecen
1,239.2
Source: Hungarian Statistical Yearbook, 1910. Budapest, 1911.
13
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
3 Results: Spatial differences among some 'elements' of
modernisation
(1) Literacy has a primary role in modernisation. At the turn of the century lit-
eracy was in the take-off process: the percentage of literate people in 1880 there
were 41.8% (age above 6) in Hungary together with the Croatian-Slavic Country.
This figure increased to 66,7% by 1910 In the so-called municipal cities (big
towns) this figure went up to 85.4%, while in counties (in the Hungarian country-
side) the indicator was only 64.9% (Table 2). The spread of literacy showed wide
regional differences. The majority of adults could read and write in the Northern-
West counties (the level of literacy was over 80% in Moson-Sopron, Gyor, Vesz-
prem, Esztergom, Vas counties), while in other counties one third of the population
(among people whose age was above 6) could read and write (e.g. in Croatia Lika-
Krbava County 25.4%, in Northeast Hungary: Maramaros 26.8%, Szolnok-Doboka
28.6% etc.) (See Table 3 and 4). These regional differences describe the process of
development with data but the meaning behind them reveals that, on the one hand,
in the modernisation of the society and the economy there was a lot to do with lit-
eracy (due to joining to modern market, the requirement of some occupations
[trades], using modern gadgets in production), on the other hand, literacy was the
result of 'modernisation'.
Regarding the spatial differences of literacy Hungary was divided into three dif-
ferent regions in 1910 (see Figure 4).
Table 2
The percentage of literacy among the total population (aged over 6),
between 1880-1910
Area
Percentage of literacy (%)
1880
1890
1900
1910
1. The Hungarian Empire*
41.8
50.6
59.5
66.7
2. Hungary
43.5
53.2
61.8
68.7
3. Counties
39.2
48.6
56.8
64.9
4. Municipal cities
64.2
72.1
79.6
85.4
* Hungary with Croatia-Slavonia.
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
14
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Table 3
Counties with high percentage of literacy between 1880-1910
Area
Percentage of literacy (%)
1880
1890
1900
1910
1. Moson
76.4
83.1
85.9
88.9
2. Sopron
71.0
80.8
85.9
88.7
3. GyOr
64.9
75.5
81.1
85.4
4. Veszprem
63.5
72.5
79.5
83.9
5. Esztergom
58.2
71.2
77.4
83.9
6. Vas
61.4
72.2
77.2
83.6
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
Table 4
Counties with high percentage of illiteracy between 1880-1910
Area
Percentage of literacy (%)
1880
1890
1900
1910
1. Lika-Krbava
11.8
13.8
21.3
25.4
2. Maramaros
12.3
17.6
21.8
26.8
3. Szolnok-Doboka
10.7
15.7
21.6
28.6
4. Hunyad
15.0
15.8
24.9
33.9
5. Torda-Aranyos
15.0
21.6
27.1
37.3
6. Modrus-Rijeka
18.0
24.5
34.8
43.2
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
15
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Figure 4
The proportion of literacy from the age 6 in each county, 1910
NI
>88.0
ME 80.0-87.9
73.0-79.9
65.0-72.9
<64.9
Source: Census returns of year 1910.
a) The areas situated westward from Saros, Zemplen, Szabolcs, Bihar, Arad, To-
rontal counties, show a huge rate of literacy (right above the average) while moving
eastward the indicators of literacy gradually decrease, but in Southern and South-
east Transylvania — due to some ethnic reasons — they go beyond the average again.
This shows an almost symmetric pattern in the spread of modernisation: due to its
entry from westwards and following the flow of River Danube, the Transdanubian
regions show a fair amount of literacy. However, — even the Hungarian experts
were surprised to discover that the Great Hungarian Plain, having been considered
a disadvantageous area, is also among the well literate regions (reasons are shown
below), and the western and the central parts of Upper North-Hungary is also
among the highly modernised regions.
b) There is a huge modernisation gap between West and East Hungary, marking
a clear line for modernisation stage. The existence of the gap is due to the diffused
spread of modernisation, to the interaction of the different elements of modernisa-
tion, and also to the variety of ethnic groups. In the year 1910 there were significant
differences in the literacy of ethnic minorities living in Hungary (see Table 5).
16
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Trans-Carpathian Ukrainians and Romanians showing a high rate of illiteracy were
in a disadvantageous situation. The reading and writing abilities of the Transylva-
nian Saxon (German speaking) population (Szeben, Brasso, Nagy-Kiik0116) and the
Hungarian inhabitants of `Szekelyland' were far beyond the average of the Tran-
sylvanian region. Naturally, this raises the theoretical-methodological issue that all
of our researches are based on 'regional' — county, regional, city — data and the ob-
served phenomena are the results of several natural factors (regional records of
economic history, natural resources, traffic patterns, urbanisation level etc.) or the
`modernisation' attitude of the local population having been born in a diverse eth-
nic, religious demographic, behaviour and value preference environment. Naturally,
the literacy of ethnic groups depends on several factors: their cultural level is based
on the ethnic group's position within the country's social and economic system, on
their clerical position, on their share from the total urban population, on their pro-
fessional structure, value preferences etc.
c) River Drava, between Hungary and Croatia, was not only a constitutional
border (between the Hungarian and Croatian population but was also a sharp sepa-
ration marker in the spread of modernisation.
Table 5
Literacy among the ethnic groups of Hungary in the year of 1910
Native language
Percentage of literacy (%)
1900
1910
I. German
62.5
70.4
2. Hungarian
60.9
67.0
3. Slovak
50.0
58.0
4. Croatian
39.4
47.0
5. Serbian
32.7
40.4
6. Romanian
20.4
28.2
7. Russian
14.8
22.7
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
(2) The county-level 'corpses seen by doctor' indicators show some correlation
with the spatial pattern of literacy in the years 1910/11 (see Figure 5). There are
statistical records on the share of people having received medical treatment in their
lives compared to the total number of deaths. Large regional differences may be
observed in professional medical treatment, an element (indicator) of modernisa-
tion, at the time of the take-off period. On overall level half of the total population
(50.2%) received medical treatment in their lives but this percentage was far less in
counties such as Lika-Krbava 9.8%, Szolnok-Doboka 14.9%, Arva 13.6%, and far
17
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Figure 5
The percentage of medically treated persons from the total deceased, 1910
Ccorpses seen by doctors)
MI
>70.1
111. 54.1-70.0
42.1-54.0
28.1-42.0
<28.0
Source: Demographical trends in the Counrtries of the Hungarian Kingdom, in years 1909, 1910,
1911 and 1912. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 50, Budapest, 1916.
more in Bekes 92.2%, Csanad 88.3% and Hajdil 87,4% counties. At the same time
the 'corpses seen by doctors' indicators reflect the social scale of values, financial
situation, the culture of everyday life, the availability of medical treatment, which
latter one depended on settlement network features, urbanization level, the system
of medical and transport facilities etc. The 'sensitivity' of our indicators may be
illustrated by the fact that in counties with low level of health service indicators,
the share of children having received medical treatment was smaller than the share
of grown ups. In the county of Lika-Krbava out of children died under the age of 7
only 3.4% (!) were seen by doctor, while this figure was 14.3% in the elder genera-
tion. These pairs of figures were 9.3 and 14.2% in Szolnok-Doboka, 15.4 and
29.5% in Modus-Fiume, 8.7 and 37.1% in Pozsega counties, and so on. In the civi-
lised (?) counties of high medical treatment usage an opposing trend has been ob-
served: the percentage of children having been seen by doctor was higher than the
18
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
share of grown ups. (The percentage pairs are 94.4 and 89.9% in Bekes, 88.8 and
80.2% in Moson, 69.6 and 50.4% in Vas counties, and so on). This phenomenon
undoubtedly traces back a change in value preferences and shows the rise of a
bourgeois society.
From the point of medical culture and institutions we can observe that West
Hungarian counties (Moson, Sopron, Vas, GyOr, Pozsony, Komarom, Nyitra,
Esztergom (though in small villages the availability of doctors was insufficient) as
well as the Great Hungarian Plain were again in the frontline of modernisation.
This pattern is similar to the pattern of literacy. These results may verify the as-
sumption that high values are due to the features of settlement system: the majority
of population lived in agricultural towns and in 'giant villages' where the easy ac-
cess to medical services increased their potential use. The indicators on the use of
medical services in some Transdanubian counties (Zala, Somogy, Veszprem, Ba-
ranya) were only an average level, while Upper North Hungary has better results
than of literacy tendencies. On the area from Upper North Hungary to KrassO-
Szoreny the situation seems 'unchanged', though Temeskoz (Banat, the side area of
river Timisu) is in a better situation and the indicators of Southeast-Transylvania —
Saxony and Szekelyland — follow the `Transdanubian pattern'. The modernisation
in Croatia and Slavonia did not go beyond the 'traditional' level. Only 27.9% of the
total population received medical treatment (regarding children this rate was only
15.3%!). In Croatia the modernisation of medical treatment followed a 'hierarchi-
cal' model: in Zagreb 80.6% of population received medical treatment, whereas in
the county of Zagreb this figure was only 22.7%.
(3) The spatial distribution of the saving deposits per capita indicator (1911)
(Figure 6) is not easy to be interpreted. The predominance of the hierarchical pat-
tern of spread is clearly visible. The biggest cities and the counties of economically
`prosperous' cities show high values (Hajdii, Arad, Temes, Csongrad, and
Pozsony). The proportion of urban population compared to their county has pri-
mary role in this situation: the larger of urban population the higher are the values
of county indicators in city/county pairs as (Hajchl-Debrecen, Brasso—Brasow,
Gyor—Gyor, Kolozs—Kolozsvar (Cluj-Napoca). In areas where the majority of
population lives in the countryside the proportion of urban/rural population has not
much effect on county indicators (Nagyvarad [Oradea] — Bihar). Due to the urban
functions of banking activities no 'corrections' (e.g. the elimination of cities or
high rank cities from the counties' data in the comparison) should be made during
the analysis. 8 This map provides some 'unexpected' details: the significance of the
8 Gal, Z.: The financial functions of Hungarian cities at the turn of the 19 th and 20 th centuries. In:
Policy, Economy and Society in the 20 th Century Hungarian History I. Debrecen, 1999.
19
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
volume of saving deposits in the central part of Upper North-Hungary is remark-
able. Turocszentmarton (Martin) and Rozsahely (Ru'iomberok) are the central
places of Slovak 'national banks' (Tatra-Bank, Rozsahegyi Hitelbank). In Zolyom
and Gam& counties the large number of industrial plants stimulated banking fa-
cilities. Ethnic relations with the location pattern of ethnic groups had some influ-
ence on banking. The Saxons were powerful in banking their money was saved in
the banks of Nagyszeben (Sibiu) and Brasso (Brasov) and 'Romanian' banks were
working in the same two cities. The accumulated (excess) money of Croatia was
saved in the banks of Zagreb.
Figure 6
The total of bank deposits in each county (including municipal cities, excluding
Budapest and Fiume [Rijeka]) 1911, crowns per head
- >250.0
=200.0-249.9
1 6 0 . 0 — 1 9 9 . 9
1111111111 110.0-159.9
75.0-109.9
<74.9
Source: Credit banks in the Counrtries of the Hungarian Kingdom between 1894-1909. Hungarian
Statistical Publications, Vol. 35, Budapest, 1913.
20
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Taking these figures into account, we can point out that in the central and west-
ern regions of Hungary savings volume indicators were above the average. The
South-Transdanubian indicators showed differed values from the Central and West
Hungarian indices in this respect too. The volume of bank accounts was high in the
central area of Upper North-Hungary and also in the Great Hungarian Plain — even
in counties with no big cities (Szabolcs, Jasz-Nagykun-Szolnok, and Bekes). In the
East, regions from Saros to KrassO-Sziireny, bank accounts were below the average
per capita amount, while in the 'Saxon' counties (Brass6, Szeben, Nagy-Ktik0116,
Beszterce-Naszod) the per capita values were registered at a far beyond the average
level. On the other hand, from this point of view the 'Szekelyland' showed unfa-
vourable conditions. Croatia's 'massive' disadvantageous position — the lagging
behind progress of modernisation — is clearly illustrated by these indices.
(4) The presence and the growing importance of manufactural industry was a
clear mark or more precisely, one of the most important elements of modernisation.
Researchers of Central European modernisation see industrialisation as the flagship
of modernisation and the major driving force for the other elements of the catch—up
process. However, here we should emphasise again that modernisation and the state
of development do not refer to the same things. The spread of manufacturing indus-
try (see Figure 7) (industrial plants with a staff of more than 20) was influenced not
only by the factors being in close relationship of modernisation (available capital
resources, urbanisation level, the formation of a large-scale consumer market, the
establishment of modern transport infrastructure) but also by other special factors,
such as the spatial pattern of available mineral and raw material resources. Thus,
industry appeared in areas not having been affected with general modernisation be-
fore (mining and metallurgy in KrassO-Szoreny and Hunyad, timbering in Trencsen
and Szekelyland). Industrialisation is an important element of modernisation but has
only a week correlation with other indices of the spatial expansion of modernisa-
tion. The 'industrialisation level' of municipal cities depends on several factors,
such as the degree of urbanisation, the presence of large cities, the general level of
modernisation, the availability of natural resources etc. The 'modernisation wedge'
spreading from the west Hungarian border to Budapest (Bratislava, Moson, Sopron,
Vas, Gyor, Komarom, Esztergom counties), the gravity force of cities on industry
(the dominance of Csongrad, Hajd6 counties on the Hungarian Plain, the advanta-
geous position of Kolozs and Maros-Torda counties due to the economic prosperity
of Kolozsvar [Cluj-Napoca] and Marosvasarhely [Tirgu Mure5]), the impact of raw
material resources on industrialisation (large industrial districts in Central Upper
North-Hungary — from Lipto to Borsod and from Nograd to Turk counties — the
manufacturing industry in Krasso-Szoreny County, the timber industry based on the
forests of Haromszek and Csik counties) are all clearly seen on the map.
21
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Figure 7
The number of factory workers per 10,000 heads, 1910
>300.0
MI 175.0-299.9
El 125.0-174.9
80.0-124.9
FT 50.0-79.9
<49.9
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
(5) The spatial distribution of urbanisation (the share of urban population)
hardly meets the criteria of Hungarian experts and even the geneial public. This is
true both in regional aspects regarding the share of urban population on the Great
Hungarian Plain, the Partium, an area between the Hungarian Plain and Transylva-
nia and Banat, the area between river Maros and the South-Hungarian border, To-
rontal and Temes counties, the plain areas of KrassO-Szoreny county) and in set-
tlement aspects regarding either the population of 'major cities' or the principal
cities of urban hierarchy (Figure 8) or the full range of functional cities (Figure 9).
In some counties of the Great Hungarian Plain 50-60 per cent of the total popula-
tion lived in urban settlements. The urban settlements of the Great Hungarian Plain
(`market towns' or agricultural towns) were special elements in the Hungarian set
tlement network. The majority of urban residents worked in agriculture (in 1900
67.6% of Hodmezovasarhely (a city with 60 thousand total population) 58% of
Kecskemet (a city with 58 thousand total population) 74.4% of Kiskunhalas (a city
22
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
with 20 thousand total population) 78.3% of Hajchlboszormeny (a city with 25
thousand total population) lived on agriculture). Some (25-40 per cent!) residents
lived in scattered farms (`tanya') in the neighbourhood of these market towns.
These towns had a low level of technical urbanisation, small hinterland, and even
their 'city rank' was questioned. But the spatial differences of the aforementioned
elements are in strong correlation with the urbanisation level on the Hungarian
Plain. The result is evident: high ratio of urban residents produces high schooling,
health service and bank account indicators. This surely contributed to the spread of
other 'modernisation' phenomena.
Figure 8
The level of urbanisation with regard to principal cities of urban hierarchy
>25.0
15.0-24.9
12.0-14.9
Rifilill 9.0-11.9
El 7.0-8.9
<6.9
Source: Author's calculation.
23
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Figure 9
The share of urban residents living in functional cities
>35.0
22.5-34.9
18.0-22.4
15.5-17.9
12.0-15.4
<11.9
Source: Author's calculation.
(6) The ratio of non-agricultural wage-earners is an important indicator of
modernisation, though agriculture itself may also undergo a modernisation process
(resulting less agricultural jobs, higher intensity of production, creating services
required by modern agricultural economy and increasing the importance of com-
merce and processing industries) but changes in the ratio of non-agricultural jobs
may result from other, non-modernisation factors. In Hungary, at the beginning of
the 20th century due to the predominance of agricultural sector in economy non-ag-
ricultural jobs had rather small proportion from the total jobs with an overall level
of 31.6% (33.5% in the territory of Hungary, 18% in the territory of Croatia-
Slavonia (see Table 6). Thus the difference among spatial (county) indicators was
very low. It is quite surprising that the county indicators of the Great Hungarian
Plain, an area of typical agricultural activities, are around the national average.
Only the indicator of Szabolcs County (24.3%) is far below the average level. On
the Great Hungarian Plain the non-agricultural workers were employed, instead of
manufacturing and mining mainly in handicraft industry or as daily workers, while
in the other parts of Hungary manufacturing and mining were the non-agricultural
24
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
jobs. Although the ratio of non-agricultural workers was also high in the 'core
areas' of Upper North-Hungary (46.6% in Szepes, 41.2% in Gomor and Kishont,
36.7% in Lipto counties), this is not the 'product' of modernisation but rather of
poor agricultural economy and due to the overpopulation of agricultural workers,
forcing people to undertake itinerant trading, handicraft or delivery services or even
to work as domestic servants in cities. The indicators of Southern-Transdanubia,
the eastern regions and mainly Croatia show that modernisation had a slow
progress in these areas. The ratio of non-agricultural jobs was only 6.2% (!) in
Varazdin, 7.4% in Lika-Krbava and 11.1% in Belovar-Koros counties).
Though the spatial indicators of the next two elements (`indices') of modernisa-
tion do not verify the aforementioned trends in all of their details, but they truly
illustrate the actual situation, thus their elimination would produce false final re-
sults.
Table 6
The employment structure of the Hungarian population in 1900
Employment sector
Percentage of the total population
Hungary
Croatia-Slavonia
Total
1. Agricultural farming
66.5
82.0
68.4
2. Mining and industry
15.2
8.4
14.4
Commerce and credit
3.1
1.5
2.9
Transport
2.4
1.4
2.3
Total industrial
20.7
11.3
19.6
3. Civil service
3.1
2.0
3.0
4. Military, defence
0.8
0.8
0.8
5. Day labourer
3.6
1.4
3.3
6. Domestic servant
2.4
0.9
2.2
7. Other
2.9
1.6
2.7
Total
100.0
100.0
100.0
Source: Census returns of year 1910. Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
(7) The 'density' of telephone stations does not match with the aforementioned
spatial pattern. This is explained by the intensive hierarchical top-down spread of
modernisation (the construction of telephone networks was only in the initial phase
of its 'take-off period') resulting an overwhelming majority of Budapest among
telephone users (from this perspective the Hungarian modernisation process may be
simplified to a development contrast between Budapest and the countryside) and
the key role of cities in the formation of regional identity and value preferences.
Thus, due to the urbanised culture of Debrecen, Nagyvarad (Oradea), Arad, Te-
mesvar (Timi§oara) it was the counties of the Partium (Western-Transylvania) that
25
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
reached a 'critical level' in the spread of telephone stations but they were followed
by several other counties — Szabolcs, .Csongrad Bekes, Csanad and Szolnok. The
existence of the West Hungarian 'modernisation zone' is verified by the high num-
ber of telephone subscribers (Bratislava, Moson, Sopron, Gyor, Komarom, Eszter-
gom have above the average indicators) and by other trends of modernisation. They
are shown on the map of telephone supply. Apart from Baranya County with Pecs,
the county seat, the modernisation indicators of Southern Transdanubia are below
the average. Some counties of Upper North Hungary show some extraordinary val-
ues again. Throe, Lipto, Zolyom, Szepes and Abadj Torna (this latter is due to
Kassa [Kosice], the county seat). The northeast part of Upper North Hungary was
excluded from modernisation processes. Regarding telephone supply indicators
Transylvania was a homogenous area but the counties of Szekelyland were 'under-
developed'. (The indicators of Maros-Torda were 'raised' by the city indicators of
Marosvasarhely [Tirgu Mure§]). Naturally, this raises the dilemma, whether hierar-
chically spreading modernisation may give way to 'spatial modernisation' or city
indicators should be included in county indicators or not (Figure 10).
Figure 10
Telephone stations per 100,000 (1911)
>320.0
IIIII 220.0-319.9
170.0-219.9
120.0-169.9
90.0-119.9
mm
<89.9
Source: Author's calculation on the basis of the Hungarian Statistical Yearbook, 1910. Budapest, 1911.
26
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
(8) The role of education in modernisation was measured by the ratio of high
elementary public school students. The volume of secondary school students was
influenced by the fact that the secondary school system was established in the 17 th
century — mainly by monastic orders — within a feudal system. This is still reflected
in the spatial distribution of secondary schools of the early 20 th century. Though the
high elementary class system was new at that time but it was quite popular to be
used as a modernisation indicator. The density indicators of high elementary class
students (Figure 11) include some extraordinary values, such as the figures of Fe-
jer, Moson and Csanad counties falling into the lowest category or the high posi-
tion of Ugocsa, Haromszek, Zolyom counties in the ranking system (Figure 11).
Figure 11
High Elementary Schoolchildren per 10,000 (1910)
Source: Hungarian Statistical Yearbook, 1910. Budapest, 1911.
27
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
4 The regions of modernisation in Hungary at the
beginning of the 20 th century
The regions of modernisation in the country were specified as we outlined earlier
(Figure 12). Regarding the territorial units, we should implement only a few re-
marks emphasising that the regions of modernisation were specified along with the
level of Hungarian modernisation (should be understood in this relation!).
Figure 12
Modernisation zones in Hungary at the beginning of the 20 th century
Key: 1— Budapest, the bridgehead of modernisation; 2 — modernisation centres with significant 'out-
ward radiation'; 3 — modernisation centres; 4 — zones with significant intensity of modernisa-
tion; 5 — zone undergoing through modernisation; 6 — zone at the initial phase of modernisation;
7 — 'traditional' regions (see text for the meaning of numbers on the map).
Source: Author's calculation.
28
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Some 'elements of modernisation' had reached their 'take-off period' in the
early 1900s (the expansion of manufacturing industries, the restructuring of job
structure, the construction of telephone networks, the rise of banking activities etc.
started in that period). The predominance of the hierarchical top-down spread of
modernisation resulted a sharp development contrast between cities and their envi-
ronment and a weak interaction of cities with their hinterland. Budapest — the
capital city — was in a privileged position from this aspect too. In the beginning of
the 20th century (on a smaller than the present area) Budapest was surrounded by
suburban cities forming an agglomeration supplier zone. The rise of the agglom-
eration zone was simultaneous with the organisation of suburban transport system
and with the spread of manufacturing industries aiming to sell off their products in
the local markets of Budapest. At the initial phase of modernisation some 'ran-
domly generated' factors also played a role in the shaping of regional differences.
For example, the availability of mineral resources was a major factor in the spread
of industry and was opposed to other factors, such as the available capital and hu-
man resources or market related demands.
The distribution of the ethnic population of Hungary had a special impact on the
spread of modernisation. (In 1910 only 54.6% of the population living on Hun-
gary's historical territory (without Croatia-Slavonia) were native Hungarians.
16,2% were Romanian, 10.7% were Slovak, 10.4% were German. This assumption
may be verified not only by the 'classical' indicators of literacy, the culturally and
socially determined traditions of medical treatment or schooling level but also by
the regional level indicators of the intensity of banking activities.
Table 7 shows some data of the regions of modernisation. For a general over-
view, the historical administrative map illustrates the location of counties and mu-
nicipal cities (Figure 13).
The 'early stage' of modernisation may be the reason for the significance of Bu-
dapest in Hungarian modernisation during the time of dualism.
4.1 Budapest — the bridgehead of modernisation
In the middle of the 19 th century there was a large gap between Hungary and West-
ern Europe regarding economical, technical development, urbanisation and social
development level. When the conditions for "catching up" were secured, the differ-
ence between the two "poles" generated large-scale and fast modernisation process
for Hungary. The coincidence of the preconditions and driving forces of moderni-
sation also granted a faster pace for the catch up process:
29
-
-
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
S
ott—tt
tt—tt
our
it—.
c
e:
W Is) ....
C..) N.) .-
(....) N.) —
CO
C
Auth
tTI rri Z H (-)
p
c tv
"
1
0
-0
BOID
or'
s
X X crc
, /7 . 4
r .
V 1
• .
t / ,
r .
s
-
ER
.
a.
S
S
c
=
cro
al
el
CFO
r..b
=
cul
$ $ 'ti E rzl.
cro
p
-r.
TIOA
0
ati
0•co =
0
$
EI
0.)
=2... p.
on
cr
-
o..
.
Z g X
meld
A
-1 w
n
g go>
sum
rn ,„. ,,
2u
`..< = m.
'''
e- n ro>
kin
mar
.),
a f,D, cr.
y
o
n
th
e
ma
jor i
NJ (...... i..>
IV I.) —
— L..> —,
CfN -- N.>
(7, 0 --
—, 1..) --..1
oo
I..) -A -4,
A A ON 0 00 0
00
nd
1,-.) t...... 00
IV t..) LA
'c IV L...)
o
i
ce
s
of
CA A
th
A N.>
H
IV 00 N.>
0 C> --I
c.)) 1,-) C>
75"
e
J s.0 00
LA s.0 ON ON C> A ...
0 0
re
0
0 000 s.0
C> 0 0
00C) 000 A
0
gi
ons
of '
mod
t
A
VI
1,-)
L..)
,ttC 0o vi
oo
oo c>
00
.
cc
Oa be c,
erni
sati
on'
W W
C LA A A ./:>
ON
L..) A w
C ON ON v 00 00 0
00
N> IV 0
.1:>
•
— A O
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
In Hungary the periods starting in 1848 and 1867 were characterised by the fol-
lowing trends:
• The emergence of the social, political and legal background for the develop-
ment of capitalist system (the fall of the feudalist system) and the fact that the
establishment of the legal and organisational framework of a capitalist society
had been finished before the actual capitalisation and 'modernisation' of the
economy and society took place. The previously established frames encour-
aged their 'acceptance'.
• The international conditions were benevolent for economic development; In
Europe the surplus of capital resources and the rising demands of industriali-
sation-urbanisation for food and raw material brought agricultural prosperity
for Europe in the mid-1800s.
• The claims of capitalist economy motivated technical-technological (`indus-
trial') revolution in Europe; Modern technical devices (railway, telegraph, ag-
ricultural machines) in Hungary appeared simultaneously with the rise of a
capitalist society (modernisation).
• Hungary regained its (limited) national sovereignty almost at the same time
when the rise of capitalist economy started (through a 'compromise' with the
Habsburg emperor after the fall of the 1848-49 Hungarian national revolu-
tion, giving a way to the establishment of the Austro—Hungarian Monarchy in
1867). This assured all opportunity for Hungary to implement an independent
economic policy, 'railway construction policy' and to win a state support for
the development of Budapest into a capital city of equal rank with Vienna.
The above-mentioned processes of modernisation 'intersected' in Budapest (The
regain of national sovereignty, made Budapest a national centre; Budapest became
Hungary's transport centre due to the traffic "revolution" and the national railway
policy. Beyond these, agricultural prosperity made Budapest the centre of crop-
trade, milling industry 9 and the contest of Budapest with Vienna was based on this
national sovereignty-filled spirit etc.). Otherwise, in the first run, modernisation
makes its 'assault' chiefly against one or two larger centres; the next turn targeted
against the country or regions follows after securing its bridgehead position.
Budapest was the bridgehead of the modernisation process in the Carpathian
Basin (Historical Hungary). The number and 'development stage' of modernisation
sub-centres were very low at the beginning of the century. Thus, the 'extraordinar-
ily big importance' of the capital is originated not from the Trianon Peace Treaty,
resulted the loss of 2/3 of Hungary's territory, having been declared in 1920. At the
9 Budapest was the largest milling industry centre of the world until Minneapolis (USA) took its
position in the 1890s.
32
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
turn of the century, in Budapest, compared to the number of inhabitants, moderni-
sation indicators, showed multiple values than in other parts of Hungary (Table 8),
and resulted 'qualitative' differences; at the turn of the century Budapest was the
only place where the civil society was in full blossoming. This bridgehead position
produced a rapid increase in the number of population (in 1851: 173,000, in 1910:
880,000), the city's quick restructuring and expansion, a sudden emergence of the
technical. innovations (in 1878: electrified public lighting, 1881: telephone stations,
1887: tramway, 1896: underground railway, etc.). At the beginning of the century,
besides the foreign capital, technical improvement, and innovation, Budapest be-
came the centre of new social ideas, and artistic trends. (Budapest was not only the
`recipient' of new things but was the 'birth place' of numerous innovations, such as
transformer, carburator, electrical engine, etc.)
Table 8
The share of Budapest within the country, 1910 *
Indicator
Absolute value
The share of
Budapest (%)
In Hungary
In Budapest
1. Population
18,064,533
880,371
3.8
2. Telephone calls x 1000
171,951
71,396
41.5
3. Saving deposits, thousand crowns
3,861,277
768,496
19.9
4. Telegrams sent x 1000
9,209
2,427
26.4
5. Mortgage loan on buildings x 1000 crowns
1,196,376
733,373
61.3
6. Workers in industrial plants with staff over 20
392,939
128,358
32.7
7. Traders
278,104
64,881
23.3
8. The number of university and college students
14,021
8,675
61.9
* Without Croatia-Slavonia.
Source: Author's calculation.
4.2 Regions characterised by notable modernisation
(1) Pozsony, Moson, Sopron, Gyor, Komarom, Esztergom Counties with the
Northern part of Vas and Veszprem counties belonged to the 'modernisation zone'
of West Hungary with a population of 1,700,000 and territory of 20,500 sq. kilo-
metres. The area's 'top quality features' are evident. Since the foundation of the
Hungarian State the region has had an excellent traffic position. Not only the
proximity of Vienna — the Viennese market in the era of feudalism urged the agri-
cultural production and the modernisation of agriculture — due to the establishment
of traffic corridor on both banks of river Danube between Vienna and Budapest,
33
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
but also the water transportation facilities, the agricultural exports, mainly after
grain corps exportation and before railroad construction had contributed to the for-
mation of modern cities with corn traders and entrepreneurs. Very soon, before
1848, this situation launched the so-called 'harmonised' process of modernisation.
Besides the modernisation of agriculture (the production of industrial plants, mod-
ern technologies, motorization, food industry, etc.) and the urbanisation (the for-
mation of regional centres [Pozsony, Gyor], 'developed' county seats (Szom-
bathely, Sopron], strong medium-sized towns [Komarom, Esztergom] and county
microcenters with various function) the modernisation process had an impact on
industrialisation and through them on the property status and general culture of
population and the winding up of the ligatures (in 1910 Moson, Sopron, Gyor, Vas,
Veszprem, Esztergom counties were among first ten regarding literacy). The lower
indicators in some counties of the region are due to some methodological limita-
tions. In Moson County, for example, the absence of large cities resulted a low
level of urbanisation and this is the reason of low secondary education and hospital
bed indicators. However the proximity of Bratislava, Sopron, Gyor and even Vi-
enna granted a good provision of urban goods and services for the county in ques-
tion.
(2) The classification of the Great Hungarian Plain as a 'respectively modern-
ised' region differs from the traditional Hungarian opinion (the region is considered
to be rather `undeveloped'). Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun, Bacs-Bodrog, Csongrad, Bekes,
Jasz-Nagykun-Szolnok, Hajd6 counties and the southern part of Heves and Borsod
counties belonged to this 'undeveloped' region. Its territory was over 42,000 sq.
kilometres with a population of 3,300,000. in 1910.
According to indicators, the good 'ranking' of the Hungarian Great Plain is in-
disputable. Regarding the aforementioned elements of modernisation, the counties
of the Great Hungarian Plain — apart from the indicators of industrialisation —
achieved the highest positions on the ranking list. (This is true even with the exclu-
sion of Budapest, surrounded by Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun County). The average
ranking of all the counties of the Great Hungarian Plain (among from the total 73
counties of Hungary) was 10.6. This value is better than the indicators of the West
Hungarian counties. Several counties (Bakes, Jasz-Nagykun, Szolnok, Baes, Bo-
drog, and Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun) were left without large cities (regional centres) to
`raise' their general indicators of modernisation. The 'most trustworthy' indicators
of modernisation may also illustrate the good position of the Hungarian Plain. Ac-
cording to 'corpses seen by doctor' indicators Bekes County achieved the 2' place
(to follow the winner Fiume [Rijeka] a city with special legal status on the Adriatic
Sea). Hajd6 County achieved the 4th, Csongrad the 6th, Jasz-Nagykun-Szolnok the
7th and Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun (excluding Budapest) the 8 th, position in the national
34
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
ranking of counties. The only question is why? The role of some elements is obvi-
ous:
• The special (market town and large village based) settlement structure of the
Great Hungarian Plain resulting a high level of urbanisation at the beginning
of the 20th century should be mentioned first. 65.2 per cent of the total popu-
lation of the Great Hungarian Plain lived in the top-ranked cities of settlement
hierarchy in Csongrad County. This figure is 58.4% in Pest-Pilis-Solt, 47.6%
in Hajdil and 38.5% in Bekes counties. Regarding the share of the population
of municipal towns the counties of the Great Hungarian Plain were among the
first ten counties of Hungary. The ratio of total urban residents exceeded 50
per cent in five counties (Bacs-Bodrog county was the only exception with
40% but here 69.3% of the total population lived in settlements having more
than 5 thousand residents). These figures increase the level of urbanisation —
which may be regarded as an indicator of modernisation as well. The back-
ward features of the (market) towns in the Great Hungarian plain have al-
ready been mentioned: the high proportion of agricultural workers, the low
proportion of workers employed in tertiary sector, the rather rural type town-
scape of settlements, the low level of technical infrastructure, the special po-
sition in the spatial division of labour (towns without hinterlands), the high
proportion of residents in the rural outskirts of cities etc. However, this type
of settlement structure received, applied and distributed innovations and ele-
ments of modernisation in a more flexible way than the traditional hierarchi-
cal city-village structure, especially in a period when — for example — only
11.1% of the Transdanubian population lived in cities and the linkages be-
tween cities and villages were very week.
• The fact that the high percentage of population lived in large, urban-sized and
urban-type settlements encouraged the expansion of innovations and mod-
ernisation; the 'corpses seen by doctors', the expansion of literacy (school
system), and the development of telephone system are the typical examples.
• Due to these facts and the local traditions of the cities in the Great Hungarian
Plain (local self-governing abilities) the population of the Great Hungarian
Plain had larger inclination to modernisation than the residents of small vil-
lages (having once been feudal settlements). This is clearly seen in the devel-
opment of rural economy — the formation of groups specialised on various ag-
ricultural activities — and in several areas: the majority of villages situated in
the Great Hungarian Plain had local reading societies, associations but the or-
ganisation of agrarian socialist political organisations, wheat harvesting
strikes may also be mentioned as characteristic features of the social life of
the Great Hungarian Plain. The name `Viharsarok' (Corner of Storms) given
to an area in the southeastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain commemo-
35
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
rates these events. Agricultural industry had a vital role in the modernisation
and economic development of the second half of the 19th century (by the de-
mands for railway construction, riverbed fortifications, against flood, and by
the rise of food processing into the most rapidly developing industry). Hence,
the vast majority of agricultural production concentrated on the area of the
Great Hungarian Plain (resulting a large amount of agricultural surplus).
It is also a piece of truth that the economic boom of the Great Hungarian Plain
was collapsing in the end of the 19 th century. This is explained on the one hand, by
the recession of the once prosperous agricultural sector, on the other hand by the
`key role' of industrial sector in modernisation beginning at the end of the 19' 1'
century. The social structure of market towns also turned into an unfavourable di-
rection (by the growth of the urban poor). The end of the 19 th century was the pe-
riod when the construction of modern infrastructure started. In this aspect of mod-
ernisation the settlements of the Great Hungarian Plain were in a lagging behind
situation compared to the Transdanubian regions.
(3) The modernisation indices of the central part of Upper North-Hungary
(TUroc, LiptO, Szepes, Gomor, Kishont, Abanj-Torna counties) were above the av-
erage granting the second tier following West-Hungary and the Great Hungarian
Plain regions on the modernisation ranking scale of Hungary. In the year 1910 this
region had approximately 1,1 million population on a territory of 15,600 sq. kilo-
metres. In most counties the expansion of the manufacturing industry was the
driving engine of the modernisation. Regarding the numbers of workers in the
manufacturing industries in 1910, Lipto County achieved the 3rd (607 workers per
10,000 heads), Tunic county the 4th (448 workers), Szepes the 6th (422 workers)
and Borsod the 7th (413 workers) position.
The relatively high level of industrialisation had attracted the additional ele-
ments of modernisation and ensured not only a higher proportion of workers on
these territories but stimulated the activities of financial institutions (among coun-
ties Tunic took the 2th place, Szepes 10th and Lipto the 21st place), secondary
education, literacy, the expansion of modern technologies (telephones), etc. Nev-
ertheless, the modernisation processes of several counties were unbalanced. On
regional level, in the case of the central part of Upper North-Hungary, we should
emphasise the difference between modernisation and 'development' for e.g. the
limitation of personal careers (the existence of strong ligatures among the chances
provided by industrialisation).
The existence of Kassa (Kosice) and Miskolc, the two major cities of the region,
`improved' the general position of the central area of Upper North-Hungary.
36
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
4.3 Regions with average modernisation
(1) The modernisation indices of the 5 counties (Nyitra, Bars, Hont, Mgt-ad,
Zolyom; with territory of approximately 17,600 sq. kilometres with a population of
the number of population 1,650,000 in 1910) of West Upper North-Hungary are
quite similar, the 'internal structure' of modernisation was unstable and considering
the range of the modernisation this region is clearly isolated from West-Hungary
and Central part of Upper North-Hungary. The 'social indicators' — literacy,
corpses seen by doctors, and the volume of total of deposits — were better than the
average of the country; in counties such as Zolyom and Nograd the manufacturing
industry was rather developed (Zolyom county had one of the most advanced
manufacturing industries in Hungary at that time). The level of urbanisation was
rather low, no regional centres had been established in the region, and the percent-
age of city-dwellers was low, the value of the elements of modernisation associated
with cities was poor. Western part of Upper North-Hungary belonged to the group
of regions with average modernisation.
(2) The general indices of Central and Southern Transdanubia, to which be-
longed Zala, Somogy, Baranya, Tolna, Fejer counties, the southern two-third part
of Veszprem county and a part of Vas county along the border of Zala county, on
the territory of 31,000 sq. kilometres together with 2 million citizens, were 'below'
the expectations. The Transdanubian region is considered to be on 'advanced' level
but this categorisation is not relevant both for the past and the present. Considering
the pure 'indices' of Central and Southern Transdanubia, at the beginning of the
20th century the modernisation level of these areas was lagging behind the other
regions — horribile dictu even behind the Great Hungarian Plain; in the ranking of
the counties Zala takes the 49th position, Somogy the 39th while the average rank-
ing of the counties of the Great Hungarian Plain was 10,6 (!) this value was ap-
proached by none of the Transdanubian counties. Due to the city of Pecs, Baranya
was the only county which achieved an above the average position. The indices of
the Transdanubian counties were mostly on average or below average level. As a
result, the evaluation of the level of modernisation in the county was rather moder-
ate. Only the level of literacy and in some counties the number of 'corpses seen by
doctors' was high. (The ligatures of society were dissolving the range of options
was very limited).
The disadvantaged nature of the transport system may be one reason for the
"relative backwardness" of the South Transdanubian region. The transport system
of the South Transdanubian region was disadvantageous for a long time (the situa-
tion improved only after the construction of railway system), the level of agricul-
tural production was moderate and the expansion of manufacturing industries was
37
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
unimportant (Pecs and Baranya county were the only exceptions). As a result, the
level of urbanization was low (according to the proportion of urban residents in the
principal cities of urban hierarchy, Tolna County was on the 63th, Somogy the
59th, Zala in the 42th position in the general ranking of counties). At the turn of the
century, Zala, Somogy, Tolna, and South-Fejer counties had no major urban cen-
tres. The absence of cities restrained the process of modernisation in the same way
as the small village structure restrained the modernisation of rural areas.
(3) Between regions of advanced modernisation — the Great Hungarian Plain,
the central part of Upper North-Hungary — and the undeveloped part of the Eastern
Hungary there was a large 'intermediary' (transitional) zone of the territory east of
the River Tisza (40,5000 sq. kilometres, 2 million population) starting from
Szabolcs county and going through Bihar and Arad towards the southern border of
Temes county. Regarding the industrial and settlement history, the nationality and
religion structure of residents and the natural conditions this area was rather het-
erogeneous. There was no inward cohesion within the region. The correlation
among the 'elements of modernisation' within the region was insignificant. Some
large cities as Nagyvarad (Oradea), Arad, Temesvar (Timi§oara) belonged to this
region with fast development and rapid modernisation, but their very poor envi-
ronment lagging behind modernisation increased the disharmony of the general
situation (in 1910 in Bihar county the percentage of illiterates above the age of 6
was 56.4%). It must be mentioned that the ethnic structure of population — particu-
larly in Temes and Torontal counties — was rather mixed and always in change.
Various nationalities lived together — Romanian, Germans, Serbs, Hungarians, etc.
— but the 'modernisation' of these nationalities was also very diverse. Some micro-
regions were among the leaders of modernisation — as for example Temes or Arad
counties — but others were rather on the level of poorly developed East-Hungarian
regions (the mountainous area of Bihar County). In the present territory of Hungary
Szabolcs-Szatmar county was the most underdeveloped area in the second half of
the 20 th century. However, this county was not standing 'on the bottom' of regional
competition in the early 1900s. In 1910 Szabolcs held the 31s t position in the mod-
ernisation ranking of Hungarian counties but the indices of modernisation showed
an unbalanced situation; fairly good in 'corpses seen by doctors', bank deposit vol-
ume, telephone supply and urbanisation level indices, an average level of literacy
but poor indicators of manufacturing industry (65" position among the total 72
counties of Hungary!) employment structure and the volume of educational and
health organisations.
38
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
4.4 'Traditional' (least modernised) regions
The 'traditional' (lagging') areas of Hungary are divided into two coherent zones:
(1) The East-Hungarian region (Northeast Upper North-Hungary, Transylvania,
Krasso-Szoreny County) consisted of the northern and northeastern areas of Hun-
gary and the territory of Transylvania on a total area of 112,000 sq. kilometres and
a population of 5,390,000.
Within this area the northeastern part of Upper North-Hungary, the northern
foreground of Transylvania, and the Transylvanian territory itself may be regarded
as separate units. Not regarding the indicators of Croatia, the eastern part of Upper
North-Hungary and the Sub-Carpathian region are the least modernised, 'underde-
veloped' regions. This is verified by social aspects — (e.g. in Maramaros county the
percentage of illiteracy was 77%, only in the Croatian Lika-Krbava county had a
higher indicator. 18.7% of the dead were medically treated by' doctors — but in
Arva county this figure was only 13.6%(!); Arva county was the last in the ranking
of per capita volumes of bank deposits as well) — economic indicators, (e .g. on the
basis of the manufacturing industry Szilagy County took the 71th position, the last
before the worst, Ugocsa the 69th, Arva the 68th, Szatmar the 61th etc.) and ur-
banisation indices. Szilagy County achieved its best 49th position on the basis of
the mortgage loan values; considering the proportion of non-agricultural earners
(resulting from unfavourable agricultural circumstances) Maramaros County was
on the 48th place. After summing up all the indices Arva county took the 66th,
Maramaros the 65th, Szilagy the 63rd, Trencsen the 56th and Ung the 54th place.
The average ranking of the regions in the county on the list of the total 72 Hungar-
ian counties is 55.3 (the average of the counties of Croatia Slavonia is 59.8). There
is really long list of reasons (e.g. natural conditions, low production, moderate ur-
banisation, poor and uneducated citizens, ethnic structure — the Ukrainian being the
largest ethnic group living here at that time as the most hobbled nation within the
ligatures' of Hungary — the emigration of local population turning from outcome
into a driving force, etc.)
Although Transylvania was considered as the 'fortress' of traditionalism in
Hungary, regarding to the 'backwardness' of this region was not homogenous. Here
the difference between the modernisation and the state of development should be
emphasised again, because for e.g. the 'developed' and relatively developed territo-
ries endeavour to maintain local privileges and traditions (Szekelyland, Saxony).
Beyond the divided terrain, the long-term preservation of legal status (the isolation
of Szekelyland, Saxony, the border guard areas and 'counties') the economic his-
tory, ethnic structure resulted large differences behind the average trends of mod-
ernisation. From the total 16 counties of Transylvania — including Krasso-Szoreny
— 7 belonged to the most disadvantageous Hungarian counties (Hunyad, Also-Fe-
39
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
her, Torda-Aranyos, Kis-Kiikii116, Fogaras, Udvarhely, and Szolnok-Doboka). The
modernisation indices of Beszterce-Naszod, Maros-Torda, Csik, Nagy-Kiikii116
counties were also below the average in some cases with extremely low values (in
Szolnok-Doboka the proportion of illiteracy was 74.7% (enough for the 70 th posi-
tion) in Torda-Aranyos 67,7% (the 67th position), in Hunyad 70,2% (the 69th posi-
tion]; the situation is almost the same with the corpses seen by doctors indices:
11.9% were treated by doctors in Szolnok-Doboka, 16.2% in Torda-Aranyos etc.).
As a sharp contrast, the modernisation in Brasso and Szeben counties with the
Saxon population, despite of the aforementioned 'Saxon conservatism' — was more
developed than in other territories of Transylvania. The average ranking of Brasso
County was 7.3, and on the basis of general indices it was among the first ten
counties. Kolozsvar (Cluj-Napoca) was a principal city in the Hungarian urban hi-
erarchy — just behind Zagrab (Zagreb) and Pozsony (Bratislava) — but this ranking
was still insufficient to raise the position of its county. This was a relevant sign that
the rural territories of the county were in a similar situation to that of the neigh-
bouring Torda-Aranyos or Szolnok-Doboka counties. After all, Transylvania was
categorised into the group of the so-called traditional regions, with significant
modernisation centres as Kolozsvar (Cluj-Napoca], Brass6 (Brasov], Nagyszeben
(Sibiu) and with a certain ethnic division (Saxonian-Hungarian-Rumanian).
(2) River Drava was not only a constitutional border between the two countries
of the Hungarian Empire, not only a border in a sense of nationality and language
but also was a strong gap in the spread of modernisation. Croatia-Slavonia was the
least modernised region in the Carpathian basin, characterised by low 'general in-
dices' — compared even to the Hungarian situation — explicitly strong ligatures (e.g.
in 1910 the percentage of illiterates was 78.9%, the percentage of the 'corpses seen
by doctors' was below 10 % in Lika-Krbava etc.) and by the scarcity of options.
Although Zagreb was a modern 'provincial' city with a similar position to Budapest
in Hungary but had only a low 'radiation' (spreading) effect (just like our 'highly-
modernised' city of Fiume [Rijeka]). The advantageous indices of Zagreb County
resulted only from the mechanical averaging of city and county values.
40
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
5 Summary
An integrated spatial structure, a homogenous national economy, transport system
and urban network evolved in the Carpathian Basin (Hungarian Kingdom) in the
second half of the 19th century. However modernization itself resulted in sharp re-
gional disparities. The regional differences of modernization may well be repre-
sented and illustrated by statistical data. The existence of the hypothetic west-east
modernization gap within the Carpathian Basin is true only in a rough dimension;
the Central region of Hungary — the Great Hungarian Plain, which is considered as
backward — had good modernization indices, while in Transdanubia a moderniza-
tion slope is observed between its northern and southern areas. Transylvania, the
far-eastern region of Hungary also had modernizing areas, primarily on the areas of
Saxon population. From this point North-Eastern Hungary had the worst indicators
and the progress of modernization was also slow in Croatia-Slavonia, Hungary's
southern 'partner country'. Regional differences show a close correlation with the
spatial distribution of ethnic minorities (45.4% of Hungary's total population were
not Hungarians l° in year 1910). It was the Russian—Ukrainian territories that were
in the most disadvantageous situation). The hierarchical urban model — distin-
guishing large cities sharply from their hinterland — had crucial role in the regional
spread of modernization. This is the reason why Budapest had an outstanding posi-
tion within the settlement network of the Carpathian Basin (4.8% of Hungary's to-
tal population lived in Budapest, 19.9% of savings accounts were opened in Buda-
pest, 61.9% of students of higher education studied in Budapest and 61.3% of
mortgage loans were taken out for buildings in Budapest etc.).
I° Excluding the territory of Croatia Slavonia.
-
41
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
References
Beluszky, P. 1990: A polgarosodas torekeny vaza — varoshalezatunk a szazadfordulon (The
Fragile Structure of the Rising Bourgeois Society — The Hungarian Urban Network at the
Turn of the 19th and 20th Centuries). — Ter es Tdrsadalom. 3-4. pp. 13-56.
Beluszky, P. 1999: Magyarorszcig telepiilisfoldrajza. Altakinos resz. (The Settlement Geog-
raphy of Hungary). Budapest—Pecs, Dialog Campus Kiado, (Teriileti es Telepiilesi
Kutatasok, 13.) (Studia Regionum).
Beluszky, P. 1999: The Hungarian Urban Network at the End of the Second Millennium.
Pecs, Centre for Regional Studies. (Discussion Papers, 27.).
Beluszky, P. 2000: Egy felsiker het stacieja (avagy a modernizacio regionalis kiilOnbsegei a
szazadelo Magyarorszagan) (Seven Stages of a Partial Success: The Regional Differ-
ences of Modernisation in Hungary at the End of the 19 th Century) — Dovenyi, Z. (ed.):
Alfold es nagyvildg. Budapest, MTA Foldtudomanyi Kutato Kozpont Foldrajztudomanyi
Kutato Intezet, pp. 299-326.
Farkas, J. 1985: Elmeletek a tarsadalmi modernizacieral (Theories on the Modernisation of
the Society). — Valdscig. 9. pp. 11-25.
Frisnyak, S. 1990: Magyarorszag torteneti foldrajza (The Historical Geography of Hun-
gary). Budapest, Tankonyvkiado.
Gal, Z. 1999: A magyarorszagi varoshalozat penzintezeti funkcioi a szazadfordulOn (The
Financial Functions of Hungarian Cities at the Turn of the 19 th And 20th Centuries). —
Pfiski, L.—Timar, L.—Valuch, T. (eds.): Politika, gazdasag es tcirsadalom a XX. szcizadi
magyar tortinelemben I. (Policy, Economy and Society in the 20 th Century Hungarian
History I.). Debrecen, KLTE Tortenelmi Intezet Uj- es Legtijabbkori Magyar TOrtenelmi
Tanszeke, pp. 227-249.
Gerschenkron, A. 1984: A gazdascigi elmaradottscig — tortinelmi tclvlatbOl (Economic
Underdevelopment — From a Historical Perspective). Budapest, Gondolat Kiado.
Gyani, G.—Kover, Gy. 1998: Magyarorszcig tcirsadalomtortenete a reformkortol a mcisodik
vilcighcibordig (The Social History of Hungary Between the Early 1800s and the Second
World War). Budapest, Osiris Kiado.
Hanzik, P.—Mucsi, F. (eds.) 1988: Magyarorszcig tortenete, 1890-1918 (The History of Hun-
gary 1890-1918) Budapest, Akademiai Kiado.
Hungarian Statistical Yearbook, 1910. Budapest, 1911.
Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 35, Budapest, 1913.
Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 50, Budapest, 1916.
Hungarian Statistical Publications, Vol. 64, Budapest, 1921.
Kover, Gy. (ed) 1995: Magyarorszcig tcirsadalomtortenete 1. SzOveggyajtemeny, 1-2. kotet.
(The Social History of Hungary 1. Textbook, volumes 1-2) Budapest, Nemzeti Tan-
konyvkiado.
Kulcsar, K. 1981: A modernizacio — a fogalom es valosag. (Modernisation — the theory and
the reality). — Magyar Tudomdny. 6. pp. 444-453.
Kulcsar, K. 1983: Tarsadalmi valtozasok es a modernizacio Magyarorszagon (Social
changes and modernisation in Hungary). — Tdrsadalomkutatcis. 7-28. p.
42
Beluszky, Pál: The Spatial Differences of Modernisation in Hungary at the Beginning of the
20th Century. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2002. 43 p.
Discussion Papers, No. 37.
Lerner, D. 1958: The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East. New
York, Free Press.
Papp, Zs. 1987: Merre tart a modernizacio? (Whither modernisation?) — Vilcigossag. 10. pp.
622-630.
Rdnki, Gy. 1987: A magyarorszdgi modernizaci6 tortenetehez (Some remarks on the history
of Hungarian modernisation). — Vilcigossag. 10. pp. 611-621.
Rechnitzer, J. 1993: Szetszakadds vagy felzdrkozds (Disintegration or Catch Up?) — Gyor,
MTA Regiondlis Kutatasok Kozpontja.
Rostow, W. W. 1960: The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto.
Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
43
Discussion Papers 2002. No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
Papers published in the Discussion Papers series
No. 1
OROSZ, Eva (1986): Critical Issues in the Development of Hungarian Public
Health with Special Regard to Spatial Differences
No. 2
ENYEDI, Gyorgy — ZENTAI, Viola (1986): Environmental Policy in Hun-
gary
No. 3
HAJDU, Zoltan (1987): Administrative Division and Administrative Geogra-
phy in Hungary
No. 4
SIKOS T., Tamas (1987): Investigations of Social Infrastructure in Rural
Settlements of Borsod County
No. 5
HORVATH, Gyula (1987): Development of the Regional Management of the
Economy in East-Central Europe
No. 6
PALNE KOVACS, Ilona (1988): Chance of Local Independence in Hungary
No. 7
FARAGO, Laszlo — HRUBI, Laszlo (1988): Development Possibilities of
Backward Areas in Hungary
No. 8
SZORENYINE KUKORELLI, ken (1990): Role of the Accessibility in De-
velopment and Functioning of Settlements
No. 9
ENYEDI, Gyorgy (1990): New Basis for Regional and Urban Policies in
East-Central Europe
No. 10
RECHNITZER, Janos (1990): Regional Spread of Computer Technology in
Hungary
No. 11 SIKOS T., Minas (1992): Types of Social Infrastructure in Hungary (to be
not published)
No. 12 HORVATH, Gyula — HRUBI, Laszlo (1992): Restructuring and Regional
Policy in Hungary
No. 13
ERDOSI, Ferenc (1992): Transportation Effects on Spatial Structure of Hun-
gary
No. 14
PALNE KOVACS, Ilona (1992): The Basic Political and Structural Prob-
lems in the Workings of Local Governments in Hungary
No. 15
PFEIL, Edit (1992): Local Governments and System Change. The Case of a
Regional Centre
No. 16 HORVATH, Gyula (1992): Culture and Urban Development (The Case of
Pecs)
No. 17 HAJDU, Zoltan (1993): Settlement Network Development Policy in Hungary
in the Period of State Socialism (1949-1985)
No. 18 KOVACS, Terez (1993): Borderland Situation as It Is Seen by a Sociologist
Discussion Papers 2002. No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
No. 19 HRUBI, L. — KRAFTNE SOMOGYI, Gabriella (eds.) (1994): Small and me-
dium-sized firms and the role of private industry in Hungary
No. 20 BENKONE Lodner, Dorottya (1995): The Legal-Administrative Ques-
tions of Environmental Protection in the Republic of Hungary
No. 21 ENYEDI, Gyorgy (1998): Transformation in Central European Postso-
cialist Cities
No. 22 HAJDO, Zoltan (1998): Changes in the Politico-Geographical Position of
Hungary in the 20th Century
No. 23 HORVATH, Gyula (1998): Regional and Cohesion Policy in Hungary
No. 24 BUDAY-SANTHA, Attila (1998): Sustainable Agricultural Development
in the Region of the Lake Balaton
No. 25
LADOS, Mihaly (1998): Future Perspective for Local Government Finance in
Hungary
No. 26
NAGY, Erika (1999): Fall and Revival of City Centre Retailing: Planning
an Urban Function in Leicester, Britain
No. 27 BELUSZKY, Pal (1999): The Hungarian Urban Network at the End of
the Second Millennium
No. 28 RACZ, Lajos (1999): Climate History of Hungary Since the 16 th Century:
Past, Present and Future
No. 29 RAVE, Simone (1999): Regional Development in Hungary and Its Prepa-
ration for the Structural Funds
No. 30 BARTA, Gy6rgyi (1999): Industrial Restructuring in the Budapest Ag-
glomeration
No. 31 BARANYI, Bela—BALCSOK, Istvan—DANCS, Laszlo—MEZO, Barna
(1999): Borderland Situation and Peripherality in the North-Eastern Part
of the Great Hungarian Plain
No. 32 RECHNITZER, Janos (2000): The Features of the Transition of Hun-
gary's Regional System
No. 33 MURANYI, Istvan—PETER, Judit—SZARVAK Tibor—SZOBOSZLAI,
Zsolt (2000): Civil Organisations and Regional Identity in the South
Hungarian Great Plain
No. 34 KOVACS, Ter& (2001): Rural Development in Hungary
No. 35 PALNE, Kovacs Ilona (2001): Regional Development and Governance in
Hungary
No. 36 NAGY, Imre (2001): Cross-Border Co-operation in the Border Region of
the Southern Great Plain of Hungary
Discussion Papers 2002. No. 37.
The Spatial Differences of Modernisation
in Hungary at the Beginning of the 20th Century
The Discussion Papers series of the Centre for Regional Studies of the Hungarian
Academy of Sciences was launched in 1986 to publish summaries of research findings
on regional and urban development.
The series has 5 or 6 issues a year. It will be of interest to geographers, economists,
sociologists, experts of law and political sciences, historians and everybody else who is,
in one way or another, engaged in the research of spatial aspects of socio-economic
development and planning.
The series is published by the Centre for Regional Studies.
Individual copies are available on request at the Centre.
Postal address
Centre for Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
P.O. Box 199,7601 PECS, HUNGARY
Phone: (36-72) 212-755,233-704
Fax: (36-72) 233-704
www.dti.rkk.hu
www.rkk.hu
Director general
Gyula HORVATH
Editor
Zoltan GAL
Galz@dti.rkk.hu
Forthcoming in the Discussion Papers series
Before Schengen — Ready for Schengen
by
Bela BARANYI