Káldy–Nagy Gyula: A budai szandzsák 1546–1590. évi összeírásai. Demográfiai és gazdaságtörténeti adatok - Pest Megye Múltjából 6. (Budapest, 1985)

Introduction

administration was using these old data even in 1676/77, nearly a century later.

2 In reality, even the 1590 registrations were not of the same value as the previous ones

; the census takers no longer gathered new data on each and every settlement, but often merely copied the amounts of the collectible taxes and tenths from the previous (1580) defter. They did, however, register the names of the inhabitants in 1590, and these lists add substantially to the material of the earlier censuses of the sanjak of Buda.

3 As we know, the census taking started, in each settlement, with the registration of the inhabitants' names. Where there were Mohammedan, i.e. Turkish, residents, the list started with their names. This was the case for example in Gyula.

4 In Buda, on the other hand, they did not register them at all, although many Mohammedan families other than those with the garrison lived there; of the 310 shops rented out by the treasury {see data on Buda below), almost all were operated by Turkish merchants and craftsmen. It is also known that according to the town of Vác house register of ca.1510, almost a hundred dwelling houses were owned by Mohammedan civilians,

5 yet, in the sanjak census of Buda, their names do not appear either. On the other hand, in the town of Kovin (Ráckeve), the Serbians and the Turks were registered along with the ethnic Hungarians. In a half a century their numbers changed as follows: in 1546 there were 414 ethnic Hungarian and 122 Serbian families; in 1559, 510 Hungarian and 88 Serbian families; in 1562, 691 Hungarian, 35 Serbian, 19 Turkish and 1 Tartar family; in 1580, 468 Hungarian, 6 Serbian and 28 Turkish families, while by 1590 only 226 ethnic Hungarian families remained in the city of Kovin. Here, even the structure of the census differed from the usual, in that the Mohammedans were listed in a separate category only from 1580, while in previous years the inhabitants roster was mixed. The census takers, when preparing the roster of a given settlement, registered the head of the family, along with his unmarried sons (presumably from the age of 15, but this is debatable), his unmarried brother living in the household, at times his son-in-law, and even is male servant, although they often did not indicate his servant status (there is, however, one known example where four sons-in-law were listed as male servants; see below at Bodrogfalva). They registered the heads of families by their last names, 2. In proof of this, we have already collated the data for the collectible income for each settlement specified in the 1590 register of the sanjak of Buda with the corresponding data in the 1676-77 timar-ledger (ruznamce) of the sanjak of Buda. See: The administration of the sanjaq registrations in Hungary, in: Acta Orient. Hung. XXI. (1963), 221-23. More recently, we have shown the income registered as collectible for two vakif-villages, Szentiván and Bálvános, in 1579 to be identical to the amount registered as collectible in 1665. See: Gy, Káldy-Nagy, A gyulai szandzsák 1567. és 1579. évi összeírása (The censuses of the sanjak of Gyula in 1567 and 1579), Békéscsaba, 1982, p. 11. 3. Cf., for instance, the 1580 and 1590 censuses of the villages of Békásmegyer; in: The administration of the sanjaq registrations in Hungary, 219-221. 4. The Mohammedan inhabitants of Gyula castle and of the town of Gyula were registered at the start of the 1567 census separately from the indigenous population. See: A gyulai szandzsák 1567. és 1579. évi összeírása, 41-44. 5. L. Fekete, A törökkori Vác egy XVI. századi összeírás alapján (Vác in Turkish times as shown by a 16th century census), Budapest, 1942. 29