Notitia hungáriae novae historico geographica (Budapest, 2012)

Sopron vármegye

INTRODUCTION

35

F

1: EFK Hist. I. uu ff. 1-78. (see also ms. 1!)

2: Comitatus Semproniensis.

3: 78 ff. 330x210 mm.

4: Description of Sopron county.

5: Transcript by an unknown hand. Fair copy of the manuscript made in 1728-1729 (C), furthermore it contains the uncorrected text of the transcripted description of Ruszt (E).16 Most likely this is the manuscript that Bél sent to the Chancellary on 25th April 1729,17 because Bél inserted the objections18 of the Chancellary sent on 17th April 1731 (on the stemma: [Cane]) into this manuscript.19

6: The main text was prepared before 25th April 1729, the date of its sending to the Chancellary, while the corrections were made after the manuscript was sent back in April 1731 or partly even in 1733.20

G

1: EFK Hist. I. vv. Hist. I. uu. ff. 79-82.21 2: Comitatus Soproniensis.

3:168 pp. 300x210 mm.

4: Sopron county’s description.

5: Transcript by an unknown hand. Fair copy of the previous manuscript (F).22 Bél probably sent this copy to the county authorities on 27th January 1736 through the Locotenential Council.23 The Locotenential Council forwarded the document on 31st January; the letter of the Council was publicly read at the general assembly on 27,h February 1736.24 The county’s general assembly did not react at all in the matter. At Bél’s request the Locotenential Council wrote to the general assembly on 24th January 1738 to urge the correction of the county description.25 The letter was read at the general assembly on 6th March. In order to revise the description the general assembly decided to set up a committee. Its members were chairman István Roser (Rosner?), János György Handl, deputee sent by the Esterházys to the general assembly; the county notary; László Bogyay assessor of law, Zsigmond Bolla magistrate, Pál Nagy prosecutor, and last but not least György Kramer mayor of Sopron. It was prescribed for the committee to assemble on 26th March in Sopron and report on its work on 31st at the next general assembly.26 So it happened: on the given date the committee reported on

16 Tóth 2001.238.

17 Cf. Bél 1993. nr. 378.

18 Ibid. nr. 405.

19 Tóth 2001.249.

20 Ibid. 242.

21 Cf. Bél 2001-2006. II. 192. note 33.

22 Tóth 2001.238. note 28.

23 See Bél 1993. nr. 574.

24 See GYMSM SLIV. A. I. a. General and particular assembly protocols 1734—1738 (MOL Microfilm Collection, 14 109. mf.) pp. 654-655.

25 See the letter in GYMSM SL IV. A. 1. b. Documents of Sopron county’s general assembly, box 32., documents of the assembly on 6th March 1738, nr. 2.

26 “2" die 24. Ianuarii Anni currentis emanatum Beliani Historici operis revisionem et remissionem adurgens, cui ut satisfiat ordinata est deputatio pro revisione deputatique sunt Dnus Stephanus Roser qua Praeses Dnus Joannes Georgius Handl qua Celsissimi Principis ad Congregationes et Congressus Comitatenses deputatus Legatus, Dnus Notarius, Dnus Ladislaus Bogyay Tabulae Iudriae Cottus Assessor, Dnus Sigismundus Bolla Iudlium, Dnus Paulus Nagy Fiscalis, Dnus Georgius Kramer L. R. Civ. Soproniensis Consul, conclusumque ut haec Deputatio in memorata Civitate Soproniensi 26. Currentis Mense Martii congregetur, revisionemque perficiat et 3 t. ejusdem mensis