Town and Countryside in early modern Hungary The Case of Sopron, c. 1500-1800

The town of Sopron (Ödenburg) is situated near the western border of Hungary at the junction of major routes of commerce, no further than 70 km from Vienna. As early as in 1291 the town had become a chartered town or free royal town, which meant the most fully-fledged municipial autonomy in this period. The town was subordinated only to the king and could represent itself in parliament from 1445. The surrounding seigniorial towns and villages often lodged an appeal with the Town Court due to its wide legal autonomy. The inhabitants of seigniorial towns and the villagers could have been under the necessity of going to the town, and the legal proceedings they experienced in Sopron may have meant a model pattern for them. The seigniorial town (oppidum) is a settlement under the landlord's authority, with limited legal privileges, concentrated mostly on agricultural production and on the exchange of products of its immediate hinterland. Sopron as a county town was gradually becoming significant during the early modern period. The county (megye) was not only the unit of administration in Hungary, but that of the autonomy of nobility, too. The importance of Sopron as a county town attracted many noblemen dwelling in Sopron county to the town. The county was one of the most densely populated in the 15-18th c., at the beginning of the 18th c., for example, the density was 32 person/km2 and it rose more than 40 p/km2 by the end of the century. The population of Sopron was approximately 3500-3700 in the middle of the 15th c., and due to the decline during the later decades some 3000 persons lived in the town in the early 16th c. According to the first national census the population of Sopron was 12600 in 1784-87. These data place Sopron at the high level of Hungarian urban hierarchy in this period. This paper will explore two significant aspects of the relation between the town and its countryside: the problems of mutual economic dependence and the role of Sopron as a centre of culture.

Adósság, pénz és szabadság = Taxation, money and freedom

A tanulmány a Déltengeri Társasággal foglalkozó tanulmány folytatása (Madarász [2011]). A 18. századi brit államadósság szerepéről és kezeléséről szóló modern gazdaságtörténeti értékelések áttekintése után a tanulmány részletesen bemutatja Davenant, Defoe, Bolingbroke, Hume, Wallace, Pinto, Steuart és Smith érvelését a \"közhitel\" lehetséges és szükségszerű gazdasági és politikai hatásairól, a háborús kiadások fedezésének módjairól. Részletesebben tárgyalja Hume és Smith álláspontját a papírpénz és a bankok szerepéről, a pénzmennyiség változásának következményeiről és a skóciai \"szabad\" bankrendszer jellemzőiről. A vita egyik oldalán a közhitelt szükséges, ám veszélyes eszköznek tekintették, amely válságba sodorhatja az országot, és aláássa a politikai szabadságot, a másik vélemény szerint a kereskedő állam adóssága szükséges és előnyös, ösztönzi a gazdaság fejlődését, és kifejezi a polgárok bizalmát a kormányzat iránt. / === / The study, following on from the author s previous work on the history of South Sea Company, focuses on the issue of public debt in 18th-century British economic writings. The first part reviews recent debates among economic historians: how to explain the growing credibility of British governments after 1689. The next details the arguments of some important protagonists in the early modern age - Davenant, Defoe, Bolingbroke, Hume, Wallace, Pinto, Steuart and Smith - on the expected economic and political consequences of an increasing public debt and on the methods of financing wars. This is followed by discussion of the monetary theories of Hume and Smith, notably their views on banks, credit, paper money, the effects of increasing money supply, and the features of free\" Scottish banking system. Two main lines of argument were advanced in the controversies on public debt. Several writers regarded it as a necessary but dangerous instrument that undermines political liberty and can lead the state into financial bankruptcy. Others described it as not only necessary, but advantageous to a commercial nation, by stimulating trade and development and symbolizing the public s confidence in their government.

Similarities and Differences in Polish and Hungarian History

In my lecture I would like to give a general introduction to a comparative approach of Polish and Hungarian history. I am convinced it could be not only an interesting, but a relevant issue as well. This approach could be touching emotionally for average Hungarian and Polish people because both nations strongly felt last centuries that they had common historical fate in East Central Europe. There is evidence which prove that Polish-Hungarian friendship is not only a modern phenomenon, but it is originated from the historical past. Historical memory calls the attention that Polish-Hungarian friendship was rooted already in the early modern history, and it was not constructed by historians, but a special relationship between the two nations was a widespread and accepted concept for the wider public in Hungary. I can cite the well-known proverb which represents it: „Pole and Hungarian – two good friends, joint fight and drinking are their ends.” In this lecture I don’t want to give a complete list of differences and similarities, but to call the attention to some interesting aspects of two nations’ common historical fate.