Ságvári Ágnes (szerk.): Budapest. The History of a Capital (Budapest, 1975)
Foreword
gary remained within its present-day diminished borders. The relative importance of Budapest continued to increase, the capital’s share in Hungarian industrial production leaped from 28 to 50 per cent, and out of 7.8 million inhabitants of Hungary, 1.2 million lived in Budapest and a further half million in outlying districts. Although we knew in 1945 that in order to revitalize the economy of the country our immediate objective could be no more than the initial reconstruction of industry, commerce and transport, a number of attempts to control the imbalance due to such a rapid growth were nevertheless made. One of our most noteworthy achievements is our success in preventing further overcrowding of the central districts of Budapest. The outer districts of the city, united since 1950 as Greater Budapest, and the regions surrounding them, are today being urbanized at three times the speed of the preceding decades. Budapest, however, has not become a capital simply through its geographical situation and administrative scope, but by its deeds as well. In 1848 it was the spiritual centre of the bourgeois revolution. The workers’ associations of Budapest were the corner stone of the social democratic movement, and the Council of the Five Hundred, providing the Government of the Hungarian Soviet Republic grew out of the Budapest Workers’ and Soldiers’ Council. And during the twenty-five years of Horthy’s rule, Budapest, at the cost of great sufferings and sacrifice, remained the centre of the revolutionary labour movement. The political struggles that took place in the capital after the Liberation indirectly—but also directly—stimulated the revolutionary transformation to socialism, whether we consider the participation of the workers of Budapest in the agrarian reform, or the industrial reconstruction indispensable for the creation of a stable currency, the forint. The material sacrifices accepted in the socialist transformation of Hungarian society, together with the support given by science and technology, also bear witness to the contribution of the capital. The professional men and women trained at the universities of the capital and the constructive influence of its art and culture are a decisive presence in public life today, all this demonstrating that Budapest consciously carries out the tasks and responsibilities of a capital city. The pride of our city in its historical and constructive functions is reflected in the local patriotism of its inhabitants. A growing number of Budapest citizens are interested in research into its history and its popularization. In the past hundred years, and especially since the establishment of the council-system and the creation of Greater Budapest, their democratic attitudes, their desire for culture, their passionate zeal for greater knowledge of thenheritage has been a factor of increasing importance in the reconstruction of the city. Increasingly, suggestions and proposals for the solution of communal problems are put forward by members of the public. The citizen of Budapest comes and goes in his city with a pride of ownership. If he sees a badly designed building, if he goes into a dilapidated restaurant, if a building is being constructed which he thinks is ill-conceived in style he is shocked. Yet strongly felt concern with which he views his trouble and his achievements is not only a manifestation of public taste, but is also an unalienable part of our age-long attitude to history and our everyday activities. Budapest is a European metropolis. But its European quality is not simply to be seen in its size or in competition with other cities. It is rather in its interest in other capitals, in 8
