Cseri Miklós, Füzes Endre (szerk.): Ház és ember, A Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum évkönyve 15. (Tanulmányok Füzes Endre 70. születésnapja alkalmából. Szentendre, Szabadtéri Néprajzi Múzeum, 2002)
K. CSILLÉRY KLÁRA: A kanapé és a köznépi lakás modernizálása a 19. századi Magyarországon
1964 Meubles français en Hongrie. Budapest 19720 Magyarországi bútorművészet a 18-19. század fordulóján (európai kapcsolatok és stíluskérdések). Budapest SZABÓ T. Attila 1975-1993 Erdélyi magyar szótörténeti tár 1-VI. Bukarest-Budapest SZILY Kálmán 1908 A magyar nyelvújítás szótára. Budapest THORNTON, Peter 1990 Seventeenth-Century Interior Decoration in England, France and Holland 4. New Haven-London 1991 The Italian Renaissance Interior. 14001600. New York VADÁSZI Erzsébet 1970 Teniers parasztjai egy Esterházy ülőgarnitúrán. Ars Decorativa 12. 81-98. VAJKAI Aurél 1959 Szentgál. Egy bakonyi falu néprajza. Budapest VISKI Károly 1941 Bútorzat. In: A Magyarság Néprajza 2. I. (szerk.: VISKI Károly). 217-254. Budapest VOIT Pál 1993 Régi magyar otthonok 2. Budapest ZOLTAI Lajos 1936 Vázlatok a debreceni régi polgár házatájáról. A lakóház belseje. Debrecen Klára K. Csilléry THE SETTEE (SETTLE) AND THE MODERNISATION OF THE INTERIORS OF THE COMMON PEOPLE IN HUNGARY IN THE 19 th CENTURY The author analyses in this essay the type of seating furniture for several persons, completed with arched arms, which became popular by the name kanapé (settee or settle) among common people in Hungary. Furthermore, she deals with the changes in the interiors caused by the spreading of the furniture. The introductory part refers to similar furniture types made earlier. We can consider as forerunner of this shape the Ancient Greek and Roman bed with symmetric construction, which was completed in the first centuries AD. with a back (fig. 1) and which was reconstructed as seating furniture in the 16 th century, in the Italian Late Renaissance period (fig. 2). The development of the shape in Modern Times was promoted by the spreading of stuffed, upholstered seating furniture for more than one person. We meet this type of furniture in the rich and bourgeois houses in Hungary in the 18 th century and also their Rococo variety (fig. 3). The Classicist type of furniture, renewing the ancient shape, has been taught in the drawing schools as well (fig. 4). While the Rococo variety hardly reached the houses of the common people (fig. 11 ), the ancient shape (fig. 5) touched by the Biedermeier style and sometimes made even in Neo-Rococo style, however always without upholstery, became popular in fanners' houses almost everywhere in Hungary (fig. 12-17). It is often decorated with a tripartite leave (fig. 12). This motive was often applied also on other seating furniture (fig. 30). In fact, George Hepplewhite had designed it (fig. 6), and it came to the Hungarian furniture industry through SouthGermany (fig. 7-9). The first reference about the use of kanapé in a Hungarian farmer house is to be found in an inventory taken up in 1830. It was in the guestroom in the two rooms house of a well to do serf in a South-Transdanubian village. We can follow the spreading of the furniture with the help of pieces provided with date of year from the second half of the 19 th century (fig. 15). The furniture is well accepted, however, often assimilated to older, painted furniture. The well to do peasants who wanted to purchase the kanapé for purposes of keeping up an appearance, wanted to take over the bourgeois interior together with the set of settee (fig. 10), which served as accessory for social conversation. Impressed, probably, by the symmetrical arrangement of the set, they doubled the traditional decorative bed and placed them on both sides of the table and chairs and replaced the traditional arrangement of furnishing, which was cornerwise, by a parallel arrangement (fig. 18-21). So far, the profession considered the parallel arrangement as having unknown origin. We find the same system also in Czech and Polish territory; their development is probably not independent from each other. The type of bourgeois social contacts attached to the set of seating furniture, however, could not take hold among the farmers. This might be the main reason why the parallel arrangement was not generally widespread in Hungary. Without compromises, it was not possible to modify the arrangement or furniture in the limited space of peasant houses. When implementing the modern arrangement, the space near the table became narrow. The original purpose of the novelty faded and the attraction of the parallel arrangement decreased with the distance from the innovative centres. The appearance of the kanapé didn't necessary go together with this new arrangement. Sometimes, the concept was misunderstood: the parallel arrangement was taken over but the kanapé was left out. Sometimes, it was thought sufficient for the modernisation, to use two kanapés, however set in the corner as a comer-bench (fig. 22-23, 29). Finally, corner-benches were completed with amis, similarly to kanapés and this furniture was called kanapé (fig. 24-28).The kanapé was not attached to the same layer of local society within the same area in the 19 th century. At last, the author mentions a few examples for the new role of the kanapé in the second half of the 19 th century and in the 20 th century: it became more and more a desirable piece of prestige among the lowest social strata.
