Institute of History, Research Centre for the Humanities, Hungarian Academy ofSciences

The British Image of Hungary, 1865/1870 by Tibor FrankReview by: Géza JeszenszkyActa Historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, T. 24, No. 3/4 (1978), pp. 316-318Published by: Institute of History, Research Centre for the Humanities, Hungarian Academy ofSciencesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42555235 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 22:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Institute of History, Research Centre for the Humanities, Hungarian Academy of Sciences is collaborating withJSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Acta Historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.12 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:50:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

316 Compte rendu de livres

Gyula Moravcsik: Einführung in die Byzantinologie.

Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 1976. 186 S., XI Tafeln.

Gyula Moravcsik, der ungarische Lehrmeister der Byzantinologie (f 1973) verfasste nach vierzigjähriger Tätigkeit als Professor für seine Studenten und die Interessenten für Byzantinologie sein Handbuch »Einführung in die Byzantinologie« in ungarischer Sprache (Budapest, 1966), in dem er jene Kenntnisse in bündiger Form zusammenfasste, die eine Orien- tierung in der Byzantinologie ermöglichen. Die vorliegende deutsche Übersetzung, in der Be- treuung des Münchner Byzantinologen Peter Wirth, weicht von der ungarischen Ausgabe insofern ab, dass der letzte Abschnitt unter dem Titel »Die ungarische Byzantinologie« ausge- lassen, die internationale Bibliographie hingegen erweitert wurde.

Die ausgezeichnete »Einführung« gliedert sich in folgende Abschnitte: (1.) Die Bedeutung des Begriffes , Byzantinologie'; (2.) Die Geschichte der byzantinischen Studien; (3.) Ethnische Zusammensetzung; (4.) Die Sprache; (5.) Die Schrift; (6.) Quellen; (7.) Gesellschaft und Wirt- schaft; (8.) Die Lebensgeschichte des byzantinischen Staates; (9.) Die Staatsorganisation; (10.) Kultur; (11.) Das byzantinische Erbe.

Alle einzelnen Abschnitte des Werkes sind von der gedrängten Zusammenfassung der wichtigsten Kenntnisse geprägt, die in der ausserordentlich klaren Vortragsweise von Gyula Moravcsik zu einer fesselnden Lektüre werden, und das Kennenlernen der Byzantinologie sowohl für die Anfänger als auch die schon besser Orientierten erleichtern. Er geht nicht auf überflüssige Einzelheiten ein und seine angeführten Beispiele erläutern seine Aussage auf eine charakteristische Weise. Als einzigen Einwand könnten wir vielleicht erheben, dass der Verfasser in einigen Fällen, z. B. bei der Darstellung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft die Probleme vereinfacht und die gegensätzlichen Auffassungen nicht bekanntgibt. Im Werk gibt es nach jedem Abschnitt, und sogar nach den »Quellen« nach jeder Quellengattung eine Zusammenstellung der einschlägigen wichtigen Literatur. Die Aufzählung der Handbücher, Fachwerke und der vorrangig wichtigen, allgemein interessanten Artikel ergänzen den Inhalt gut und weisen in jeder Beziehung in Richtung der weiteren Orientierung Weg. Bei der Zusam- menstellung einer ausgewählten Bibliographie kann man immer Einwände erheben: warum liess der Verfasser je einen, für wichtig gehaltenen Artikel, vielleicht zugunsten eines weniger bedeutenden aus. In dieser Hinsicht muss aber das auf reichen Erfahrungen beruhende Urteil des Verfassers beachtet werden, da ja jener, der sich für weitere Literatur interessiert, in den aufgezählten Fachwerken, Bibliographien und den Rezensionen der referierenden Zeitschriften alles andere findet. Vielleicht ist es auf die Ordnung des Materials zurückzuführen, dass z. B. das Werk »Römerreich und Gottesvolk« von E. v. Ivánka, Freiburg- München, 1968 weniger zum Thema »Staatsorganisation« gehört, wo es angeführt wurde, sondern viel mehr zum »Byzan- tinischen Erbe«. Der Band wird durch sehr gut ausgewählte paleographische Tafeln abgeschlos- sen, wodurch der didaktische Wert des Buches bedeutend erhöht wird.

György Györffy

Tibor Frank : The British Image of Hungary , 186511870

Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem, Budapest, 1976. 375 p.

The history of bilateral (mainly diplomatic) relations between states is a traditional genre of historical scholarship. Though at present it is not in high esteem, the opening up of the archives ensured its remaining an attractive subject - asfar as the number of works published is a reliable sign. The continuing interest in the history of connections has, however, other reasons, too. The investigation of the foreign reception, reflection, repercussions of some impor- tant event or period of a nation's (or country's) past widens the boundaries of this traditional field and gives it a sociological dimension as well. True, the study of past foreign opinion raises a lot of questions and is still at an elementary level. There is a wide variety as to the sources, methods and terminology to be used. The terms image, picture, attitude, public opinion and within the latter: mass opinion, elite opinion, press (editorial opinion) are understood and used differently by nearly each author. This can be observed also in the recent works of Hungarian scholars (e.g. E. Kovács, В. Köpeczi, К. Irinyi and now T. Frank) writing on the foreign reac- tion of Hungarian, or on the Hungarian reaction of foreign events.

Acta Histórica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricac 24, 1978

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.12 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:50:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Compte rendu de livres 317

There is ample justification for the reconstruction and analysis of British policy towards and opinion on the Habsburg monarchy in the second half of the 1860s, the period of the Com- promise between Hungary and the Habsburgs. For the Hungarians one of the most important lessons of the defeat of the Hungarian War of Independence was that the independence of Hungary can be ensured only through international support, or at least by acquiring some inter- national guarantee against foreign intervention. (That was essentially the meaning of the call for "intervention for non-intervention".) In this respect the attitude of England appeared to be of vital importance, since that country was at the peak of her international influence, showed sympathy and understanding both for the Habsburgs and for the Hungarians, and from 1849 considered "the Hungarian question" not only unsolved but in need of a solution. The agree- ment of contemporary Hungarian politicians (both at home and in exile) on the necessity of cultivating England was reflected among others in the distribution of the documents of the Hungarian Diet of 1861 among the English M. P.-s. True, Kossuth had already written off Britain as a possible source of help after the Italian war of 1859, seeing that the idea of an independent Hungary had little appeal there, but for those Hungarians who were ready to try to reach a settlement with Francis Joseph the principle set forth by Palmerston in 1849 appeared to be very attractive: Hungary is the right hand of Austria, and the stability of this Central European Great Power requires a mutually acceptable settlement between Austria and Hungary. Frank's book show how widely Palmerston's pronouncement was accepted in Britain, but also that within this framework opinions on the problems and future of Hungary showed great diversity.

The surprisingly rich contemporary English literature on the period of the Austro- Hungarian Compromise (28 books and pamphlets, numerous contributions in the reviews, and regular, detailed reports in the press) was practically unknown in Hungary. Its discovery by Frank is great merit in itself, but he did much more than simply utilizing this material. By painstaking researches in the Hungarian National Archives, in the Manuscript Depart- ments of the National Széchényi Library and of the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences respectively, as well as in archives in Vienna, he dug out a great number of documents on the Anglo- Hun garian/Austrian contacts of this period, from long forgotten books (memoirs and reference works) established the background of these connections and of the persons involv- ed in them. It is only to be regretted that his space and time did not make it possible to include the study of the files of at least one English daily newspaper throughout these years.

The first chapter is a useful summary of the theoretical and methodological questions of the study of the foreign image of a country or a people. The approach is sociological, and adds a few good observations to the survey of the major foreign and all the Hungarian works that deal with such questions. Then comes a somewhat sketchy overview of British foreign policy in the 'sixties, attributing too much to colonial as opposed to European interests in the policy followed. The most important part of the book is the one describing "the channels of informa- tion" on which the contemporary British image of Hungary was based. The following factors are considered: the social contacts maintained by the Austrian Embassy of Count Rudolf Apponyi and the resulting influence on the leading circles of society; the propaganda efforts directed from Vienna; the commercial negotiations dragging on between the two parties for five years; the weight and influence of the Hungarian exiles living in Britain; and finally, the journalistic production of these years dealing with Austria and Hungary. From the many inter- esting findings let us pick up one specimen. Frank's researches demonstrate how much the Hungarians expected both politically and economically from the commercial negotiations with England, and after the Compromise they wanted to combine the negotiations with their plans of attracting British capital for the development of the Hungarian economy, but we receive no answer for the failure of giving an economic basis for the partnership of Great Britain and Austria-Hungary, why Hungary did not succeed in making English capital more interested in Hungary. This chapter brings up other issues, too, to which no satisfactory answer is given, due mainly to the lack of evidence. The opinion of the British Foreign Office was not considered by the author since he was unable to conduct archival researches in Britain, but this does not justify his statement: "members of the British Embassy in Vienna exerted only a minor in- fluence on the British climate of opinion." Indirectly the views of the British diplomats did reach the public, whereas they were the most important factor in the formulation of the attitude of the Foreign Office, where after all any decision concerning Hungary was to be made.

In two thirds of the book Frank is dealing with British attitudes towards the whole of the Habsburg monarchy, and this is natural: specifically Hungarian issues were considered only within the context of the whole structure. In the last part of the book the reader is con- fronted with the rich variety of British views on the past of Hungary (including the alleged similarity in the constitutional development of the two countries), the nationality question (from extremely favourable to very critical judgements on Hungarian supremacy), the Austro-

10* Acta Histórica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 24, 1978

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.12 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:50:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

318 Compte rendu de livres

Hungarian Compromise, and the place of Hungary in European foreign policy. However, varied the picture was, there were a few basic notions shared by most observers. Nobody seriously questioned the territorial integrity of Hungary, and many thought it best for the dynasty to shift their centre to Budapest and to become a Danubian Empire whose destiny lies in civilizing the Balkans. The idea of an independent Hungary was practically unanimously rejected (in 1867 just as much as in 1849 or in 1859 - 61), the Compromise was welcomed as the realization of "1848" (thus projecting "1867" back to "1848"), as the victory of reform over revolution. The new Hungarian hero of the educated classes was clearly Deák, replacing Kossuth. For most Englishmen the future of Hungary seemed to be well assured within the Monarchy. The author is inclined to see the British image of Hungary as fragmentated, mosaic- like, while the reviewer is struck by these elements of concensus, the more so as he found nearly identical views prevailing 30 - 40 years later, up to 1907/08.

Tibor Frank's book was originally a Ph. D. thesis at Budapest University, and it was published as such by its Department of English in a good English translation. The modest appearance of the publication is in contrast with the exemplary apparatus of the work: very informative notes, a thorough bibliography, and even an index, so often regrettably missing in Hungarian publications. It is to be hoped that it will reach as many readers abroad as the subject and its presentation deserve.

Géza Jeszenszky

Iván T . Berend-György Ránki: East Central Europe in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Akadémiai Kiadó. Budapest, 1977. 164 p. 11 illustrations.

Professors Berend and Ránki are internationally well-known for having gathered a rich material on the economic and social development of Hungary and East Central Europe. Many of their papers were published in foreign languages, not to speak about their most valuable contributions to international congresses of historians and economic historians. The two books published in English in 1974 give a summary of their research: Hungary. A century of economic development. Newton Abbot - New York, 1974. (263 p.); and Economic development in East Central Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries. New York - London, 1974. (402 p.) . Their new book published in English, entitled East Central Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries , is indicative of a significant new stage in their development. Still highly sensitive towards problems of economic and social development, they have extended their investigations to questions of political history and civilization as well. Resulting is a highly comprehensive synthesis of the modern history of some twenty peoples living in East Central Europe, in the region encircled by German and Russian inhabited areas.

The book is divided into two parts. In the first part, which is entitled: The beginnings of change 1848 - 1914, the authors primarily focus on the initial stage of modern development in these backward regions. They show how the stagnating traditional societies began to join in modern development in the early 19th century. The entire territory of East Central Europe was virtually under the domination of the Habsburg or the Turkish Empire, both comprised a lot of various nationalities. The change came in the middle of the century with the revolution of 1848 and the subsequent reforms, the territorial changes, and the liberation of the Balkan peoples from the domination of the feudal Turks. It was between 1848 and 1878 that the frame- work of modern social and economic development was elaborated. Before giving a thorough analysis of this development, the authors present an accurate picture of the extremely complicated ethnic composition of the territory, of how the various nationalities inhabited overlapping areas. This ethnical complexity was further complicated by social distinctions, since the ruling classes of a certain region were often of a different nationality than the exploited.

Naturally, the most significant factor of economic development is the development of industry. The authors distinguish three types of industrial development according to three regional divisions: closest to contemporaneous western development is the most highly devel- oped type found in Austrian- Czech regions; catching up with the former was the Polish- Hungarian type, and finally, there was the Balkan type of development. For the first two divisions, the rate of economic growth is estimated to have been 3 - 4 percent yearly. This rather rapid rate is accounted for by the great size of the territory integrated in the Austro- Hungarian Monarchy, and, likewise, in Poland's case, by its joining in the development of the Russian Empire. Unlike these areas, the Balkan countries failed to produce genuine economic growth in this period, due to the low level of their departure.

Acta Histórica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 24, 1978

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.12 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:50:16 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions