The Hungarian social strata discontented with the economic, political and military reforms of the Habsburg Absolutism unleashed an uprising in 1670, which was almost right away eliminated by itself due to the inorganization, and the royal forces easily closed it down. The rebels (also known as “refugees” or “Kurucs”) went into exile before the retaliatory measures, settled in Transylvania and the Ottoman Occupied Territories, and forayed into Upper Hungary in every year from 1672 with the aim to establish a new and independent Hungarian state. But the Kurucian leaders entirely fell back upon the support and benevolence of Mihály Apafi, Prince of Transylvania, and the Pashas of the eastern part of the Ottoman Occupied Territories, moreover, they had no any qualified warlords, so they were not able to gain significant and permanent success until 1678. But one of the Kurucian leaders, Imre Thököly, adventured himself on an undertaking in September of 1678: counterplotting two Imperial armies, he launched a lightning-fast offensive from the Spiš County, passed through the Liptov, Orava and Turiec Counties, finally penetrated into the Trenčín County, moreover, he almost reached Bratislava and Moravia. Then he suddenly turned into south-eastward with his whole army, and in the course of a month, occupied each mining town in the Hron River territory, and seized several border castles with Imperial and loyal garrisons without any serious fight. Thököly moved and acted “as fast as the lightning”, and he totally amazed, terrified and made indecisive the commanders of the border castles having German and Hungarian loyal garrisons, as well as the aldermen of the mining towns, who rather preferred the voluntary submission and the abandonment of their posts than undertaking the desperate and forlorn resistance. But it can be stated that the success of Imre Thököly’s army in the autumn of 1678 was not exclusively caused by his ingenuity and captainship abilities glorified by the posterity, but his adversaries’ momentary shock, fright and confusion superabundantly contributed to it. Not only the serfdom and the lower-ranked social strata joined gladly to the Kurucs in the mining towns region, but under pressure, the members of magnate families. This was only a short time submission, because as soon as the Imperial troops approached to the mining towns from two directions, and Thököly was caught in the middle, every person contemporarily adhered to him, dropped away, and returned to the Emperor Leopold I’s allegiance. And Imre Thököly compelled to give up his every autumnal conquest, and slowly drew back to his point of departure, to Upper Hungary, and later to Transylvania. However, there was an achievement. With Imre Thököly’s appearance in the conduct of war in 1678, quantitative and qualitative changes came into existence in the history of the Kurucian movement: the military operations also spread to territories in Lower Hungary, the Kurucian manpower was significantly increased, and due to them, the movement also grew up to the “adulthood” of its diplomacy, as such a military power demonstrated by Thököly, expedited the Sovereign and his advisors to enter into discussion about armistice or peace treaty. The fact can be also stated that the Kurucian military action in the autumn of 1678 raised hope for those social strata which was expecting the continuation of the struggle with the Habsburg absolutism.
The first steam-powered public railway in the Kingdom of Hungary, then part of the Habsburg Empire, was inaugurated in 1846. Initially connecting Pest and Vác, this line was extended to link the capitals of Vienna and Pest by 1850. The development of this railway was significantly shaped by Austrian imperial objectives, with the primary driving forces rooted in the Empire’s political, economic, and social interests, despite the line being constructed by a private company pursuing its own economic goals. Over time, the motivations behind Hungarian railway development grew increasingly complex, influenced not only by the Empire’s political, economic, and military interests but also by individual ambitions (political and personal prestige) and a range of territorial factors (imperial/Austrian, national/state, regional, county, and local). In the years leading up to the Austro‒Hungarian Compromise of 1867, regional, county, and local interests began to influence the construction and routing of Hungarian railway lines significantly, despite the initial dominance of Vienna’s centralization policies‒particularly after the imperial economic crisis of 1854. However, imperial/Austrian interests, especially military considerations, remained predominant throughout this period, becoming increasingly influential from the 1850s onward. This study seeks to categorize the various interests that shaped the development of Hungarian railway lines leading up to the Compromise and to present the partial development of the Kingdom of Hungary’s main fixed-track railway network. The findings suggest that these developments resulted from a complex interplay of multiple factors rather than any single dominant interest. Given the lack of existing theoretical frameworks from this perspective, the analysis is grounded in Hungarian and Austrian literature, supported by contemporary press sources, relevant published documents, and archival materials.
Osualdus de Lasko (OFM Obs, ca. 1450–1511) composed two sermon collections, which were published in print at the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth centuries. However, the readers of his books did not know the name of the author, who was only introduced as “quodam frater hungarus ordinis minorum de observantia”. This paper considers this option for anonymity as a premise for further investigating Osualdus’ identity as an author of sermons and as a preacher, intending to answer questions such as: How is Osualdus presenting or representing himself as an author/preacher? For what reasons and purpose did he compile these sermon collections? How were his homiletic works related to real preaching? Which was his ideal of a preacher? How relevant are the Franciscan affiliation and Hungarian origins for his identity? Grounded on the idea that the author is embedded in his text, this essay explores the prologues of Osualdus’ works and three of his sermons that discuss precisely about preaching’s agents, role, and beneficiaries. The analysis emphasizes that Osvalus’ vision of the ideal preacher and self-representation as author of sermons is shaped by Franciscan concepts of humility, renunciation and imitatio Christi. Anonymity is also presented as a possible sign of humbleness, in the spirit of Franciscan values. Similarly, his understanding of the goal of spreading the Word of God follows the mission of the Friars Minor in general, and their actions in Hungary in particular: fighting heterodox beliefs, converting heretics and schismatic, defending and strengthening faith at the margins of Christendom. Osualdus’ concern for the catechization of simple people might have also been a consequence of the local experience of Franciscans and their contact with the peasantry in their rural convents. The paper concludes that in Osualdus’ case anonymity is not intended to hide or disguise his identity, which is clearly defined around the two elements used as a signature: the Hungarian origins and the Franciscan affiliation. His authority as a preacher and author of sermons resided in his special commission as a member of the Order of Friars Minor and his messages were mainly intended for the local public and for the safeguard of his homeland. The name of the author/preacher was most probably known to his primary audience. Only for the distant readers of his texts the author became anonymous, but they were made aware of the essential components of its identity, representative for the content as well.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.