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

Introduction

and the tolls collected at trade route intersections. We should also mention that the census taker of 1562 taxed the churches at a number of locations in the amount of 50 akches per year.

11 Using the fine 16th century censuses of the sanjak of Buda, along with the corresponding period's four timar defters which contained the names of the beneficiaries of all collectible revenues, in this volume we have gathered (proceeding in alphabetical order by communities) and in some sense processed, the demographic and econo-historical data of the various settlements and pusztas.

12 Naturally, the source value of data is always determined by the circumstances under which the data are gathered. In the case of almost every registration for the purposes of taxation, contradictory interest clashed at the time the data were recorded. Going back to the Hungarian Kingdom, we already find that at the time the dica was levied „as early as in the 15th century, certain owners of large estates locked their gates to tax collectors and paid their taxes in one lump sum on the number of serfs living on their lands". The complaints we read as regards the 16th century can be summed up this way: ,,It would have been the duty of the county to facilitate and ease the task of the tax collectors, and what applied to the county, applied to the nobility as well. Yet not only did this not happen, but in many instances they in fact impeded the census takers in their task in an effort to secure the productivity of the serf for themselves."

13 The Turkish treasury was faced with similar problems. Our volume cites some relevant cases; for example the case of the 1562 census taker, generally known to be strict in many respects, who did not dare to update the taxes and tenths on many of the estates of Rüstern, pasha of Buda (Cinkota, Csaba, Ecseg, Előszállás etc.), although he made an exception in the case of Örs (Budaörs) village and with the town of Kecskemét, but probably only for appearance's sake, for he registered a lower expected income for the latter than for the former. Similar was the situation involving the holdings of janissary aga Sefer (Ferencszállás, Rád and Szentkirál), where in 1580 the expected revenues were stated at exactly their 1562 level. To illustrate the attitude the timar landlords had toward the censuses we have 11. We do not find the tax on churches in every census, but the tax was collected throughout the entire eyalet of Buda. For the amount collected on the basis of the census of the 965th year (Oct. 24, 1557 to Oct. 13, 1558), see op. cit., pp. 511, 573, 640. 12. We have already published the first three censuses of the sanjak of Buda, along with the relevant data from the Timar-Defters. See: Kanuni devri Budin tahrir defteri (1546-1562), Ankara, 1971, and A Budai szandzsák 1559. évi összeírása, Budapest, 1977. These Defters are in the Basbakanlik Arsivi in Istanbul (their call numbers are given in the works cited above), where the Í580 census likewise used in the present work is also kept, as are the related Timar-Defter (call numbers Tapu Defterleri No. 592 and 590), and the 1590 census (No. 611). The Timar-Defter compiled on the basis of the 1590 census has not survived. I am indebted to Dr. Dezső Dányi, Director of the Library of the Central Statistical Office, for his useful advice as to the systematic processing and evaluation of the data. 13. For the dica-tax, see the study by István Bakács, A diciális összeírások (The dica registers), in: J. Kovacsics, A történeti statisztika forrásai (Historical statistical sources), Budapest, 1957, p. 57. 34