Tanulmányok Budapest Múltjából 28. (1999) – Urbanizáció a dualizmus korában: konferencia Budapest egyesítésének 125. évfordulója tiszteletére a Budapesti Történeti Múzeumban

A VÁROSI ÁTALAKULÁS KÉRDÉSEI ÉS SZÍNTEREI - Güntner Péter: Az infrastruktúra kiépítése Sopronban a XIX. század második felében 103-114

PÉTER GÜNTNER THE BUILDING OF INFRASTRUCTURE IN SOPRON IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE I9TH CENTURY SUMMARY The 19th century was the period of the founding of modern, urban infrastructure throughout Europe. During this period, both the proportion of urban population and the number of towns increased at a staggering pace. Fast urbanization, however, caused severe health problems. The development of urban health infrastructure could not catch up with the development of the towns themselves. Without public utilities, towns were distinctly harmful to human health. Polluted rivers and creeks could not supply the urban population with suitable drinking water, and the existing primitive sewage systems could not fight the great epidemics of the time. The growing health problems were indicated in the high mortality rates and infant mortality figures, along with other typical urban diseases, such as tuberculosis, which were all considered as "punishments" for the towns. Sopron was one of the leading towns of Transdanubia in the first decades of the 19th century. By the turn of the century, however, the town lost its previous markets, and due to administrative decentralization, it was also deprived of its national institutions. Its animal markets also lost their earlier importance, and no remarkable industry developed in the town either. The economic situation of the town also influenced the financial situation of its citizens and the urbanization process. At the turn of the century, the development of the infrastructure was more advanced in Sopron than in the rest of the Hungarian towns, since with the exception of the sewage system, all the public utilities, including a tram service, were already in operation in 1900. Gas supply appeared in 1866, and electricity was established in 1898 as a private investment. At first sight, it might seem that urban initiative played an important role in the establishment of the infrastructure. At a closer look however, it is clear that the commitment of the citizens was insufficient. The town government of Sopron did not pay enough attention to the sewage system, and spent hardly anything on its development. With the exception of the water supply, the town council did not even consider the further development of the infrastructure to be its financial responsibility, and they were hardly even inclined to improve the existing public utilities in the 1890s. This was clearly indicated in the sewage trials and the debate about the number of public wells. Although the town bought the water works in 1905, the circumstances of the purchase were scandalous. The suspicion is great that the owners wanted to sell it under any conditions, because of the reoccurring problems and the meager profit it generated. The town government did not realize the possibilities offered by electricity either, and did not want to develop the electrical company under its own control. Even more, they gave the permit to the same company which had already provided the gas supply, thus creating a monopolistic position for this firm. The failure of creating settlements around Sopron, and the inadequate development of the infrastructure, apparently had ideological reasons too. Although Sopron had connections with German towns (e.g. Bamberg, Bonn, Nürnberg and Leipzig) where the above-mentioned urban development was always a priority, the ambition of its citizens to develop their infrastructure was very weak. The mentality, therefore, was very different from either the Austrian or the German attitudes. This inactivity cannot be fully explained by the stagnant economy, but rather, it reflects the mentality of the whole town. Relying upon these findings, we can conclude that the development in Sopron at the turn of the century proved insufficient, and the town lost its leading role in Hungary in the fields of public utility development as well as urbanization. The stagnant economy of the town, together with faulty town politics and finally, the passiveness of the citizens, can all be considered as contributing factors in this process. 114