Századok – 2015
2015 / 1. szám - TANULMÁNYOK - Pál Lajos: Egy folyóirat a történész viták kereszttüzében, Századok (1931-1943)
86 PAL LAJOS A REVIEW IN THE CROSSFIRE OF HISTORIANS’ DEBATES - SZÁZADOK (1931-1943) by Pál Lajos (Summary) When the Hungarian Historical Society was established in 1867, a historical review called Századok was also launched with the aim of offering high-quality scholarship to historians, teachers and students and educated people interested in history. Consequently, the review not undeservedly laid claim to the role of being the central forum of historians. The question of which groups or persons would dominate the editorial board, and which intellectual trends would be guiding them was thus an important one. In the interwar period, as the possibilities of publication gradually diminished, the prestige of Századok further inceased, although the editor-in-chief had been Sándor Domanovszky without interruption since 1913. In 1931, referring to the overwhelming burden of his position, he asked the Supervisory Board of the review to entrust the bulk of the editorial work to István Hajnal and Elemér Mályusz, both of whom had already made a name in the historical science. Elemér Mályusz weis a follower of the German Volkstumgeschichte school, whereas Hajnal was rather attached to historical realism. This latter aimed at harmonizing sociology and history. The appointment of the two editors generated serious conflicts right from the outset, which only intensified later, especially after the German version of Volkstumgeschichte had moved towards extreme racial theory. Although the version of Volkstumgeschichte made by Mályusz did not follow the German model in that direction, he proved unable to rid himself of the suspicion that he also proclaimed a conception that was alien to the Hungarian character. Two among the greatest figures of Hungarian historiography in the interwar period, Gyula Szekfu and Bálint Hóman, strongly debated the conception adopted by Mályusz, and, although the latter left the editorial board in 1935, his close friendship with István Hajnal continued to cast a shadow on the staff thereafter. Since the historical debate later assumed political dimensions, the number of those who wanted to drive Századok back to its original course increased constantly. This finally happened in January 1943, when the editors were removed from office, and the direction of the review was assumed by historians who belonged to Szekfú’s circle.
