Társadalomtörténeti múdszerek és forrástípusok. Salgótarján, 1986. szeptember 28-30. - Rendi társadalom, polgári társadalom 1. - Adatok, források és tanulmányok a Nógrád Megyei Levéltárból 15. (Salgótarján, 1987)
Angol nyelvi összefoglalók (English Summaries)
The sources and documents can be classified as follows: 1. registers, 2. records, and 3. personal documents. Registers mean all type of registration, census, conscription, inventory, and etc. which intended to register the inhabitants or the goods of the inhabitants for some purpose. These registers usually recorded or probated the legal cases, facts, and procedures. The studies in social history have already used the registers frequently; the systematic and comprehensive analyses of the censuses, the legal registers, and the inventories relating to the circulation of the property, however, have not been done yet. The personal documents mean all kind of document which was made for the purposes of probating the rights of property and some economic contracts (for example, the sale contract, testament, inventory, the partition of inheritance, and etc.) In spite of the great quantity of these documents, their survival in the family or public archives was fairly accidental. Anyway, the statistical analyses and case studies may be solidly done on the basis of them. Social history pays attention to the importance and value of these documents lately. Relying upon the established method of historical demography about the family reconstruction, Dr. Benda and his fellows attempt to make household reconstruction in order to analyze how the cyclical development of the household happened. The household reconstruction intends to serve the investigations of the mobility of the different social strata, the problems of the order of succession, the segregation of the social groups, and the formation of the communities. The main concern of the research project is not the history of the subsequent events of the local community but the descriptionn of the societal processes and structures in the local communities. Finally, Dr. Benda's essay outlines some methodological problems of his research which partly come from the unsettled usage of the family name and, it is the nature of things, the difficulty of the identification of the families by means of family name. JENŐ DARKÚ : The Greek-Orthodox population and the organization of the GreekOrtodox Church in 18th century Hungary An attempt is made to sketch organization of the Greek-Orthodox Church in Hungary on the basis of the surviving records of the department of the Governor-Council (" Consilium locumtenentiale regium ") dealing with the affairs of the " non-united Greeks ". At THe same time an answer is sought to the question, how many parishioners can be found in the parishes. It seems to be possible to refine the prevailing rather hasty views on the subject by turning to the census data that has remained unpublished up to now. The investigation is confined to the territory of the onetime bishopric of Buda, that falls by and large within the present-day boundaries of the country, except for Békés, Csanád and Csongrád counties that belonged to the bishopric of Arad. The bishopric of Buda was subordinated to the metropolit of Karlóca and consisted of — against the dispositions of the Regulamentum Illyricum of Maria Theresia — four " protopatus " (archdeaconry). In 1785 the bishopric of Buda returned 59 parishes and 122 " filiae " (affiliated parishes). There were three monasteries on the territory ÖT ihe bishopric: in Ráckeve, Grabóc and Szentendre. There were 86 priests in the bishopric of Buda and in those territories of the bishopric of Arad that are considered here. In addition to them there were returned: one vicar of the bishop, one guardian (abbot of monastery) four monks, 8 priests without a parish, four deacons, one " laicus clerious ".
