Hungarian Studies Newsletter, 1976 (4. évfolyam, 9-12. szám)

1976 / 11. szám

last quarter century. Though numerous studies have been published, these focus on institutional and cultural issues in the case of North American scholars, as well as with economic, social and demographic aspects of emigration in the case of the Hungarians. Three studies are analyzed in detail. Joshua A. Fishman’s Hungarian Language Maintenance in the U.S. identifies three waves of immigrants. The first one, in the decades before World War I, supported schools, libraries, theaters, churches and fraternal organizations. The second and third waves (after 1945 and 1956) emphasized assimilation and made no substantial contributions to language maintenance. Fishman also noted that while Protestant church organizations have supported language maintenance, the Catholic and Jewish churches did not. The second important study is John Kosa's Land of Choice; The Hungarians in Canada,which examines the importance of the extended family or sib system as a factor in preserving Hungarian traditions. Linda Degh’s studies focus on the “need to define the social and cultüral identity of immigrants with respect to their native traditions and also in relation to the social structure of the receiving country.” She recommends the study of ethnic groups as multicultural subsocieties, and suggests concentration on two essential aspects of ethnic life: the retention of cultural traditions and the impact of the American social environment. An extensive documentation providesa valuable bibliography on immigration studies.

It is worth noting that an extensive essay entitled Ungarn- Forschung in Nordamerika in den Jahren 1960-1972 (Hungarian Research in North-America during the Years 1960-1972) by Prof. Body has been published in the UNGARN-JAHRBUCH, Vol. 6, 1974-75, of the Ungarisches Institut, 8 München 40, Clemensstrasse 2, West Germany. Prof. Body is at Ohio State U. □

Braham, Randolph L. “The Kaments Podolsk and Délvidék Massacres: Prelude to the Holocaust in Hungary,” Yad Vashem Studies IX (1973) 133-156.

Hungarian policy toward the Jews before World War II was directed toward lessening their influence in the economic and cultural life, and until the German occupation, did not involve a physical threat. However, two massacres occurred. The first, at Kaments Podolsk, Poland, in August 1941, where some 18,000 Hungarian Jews had been taken for resettlement. The German military decided to eliminate this group, but the Hungarian troops refused to participate in the killing of the victims, and their reports succeeded in stopping all further deportations, and even in having several trains sent back from the border.

The massacre which took place in the territory regained from Yugoslavia in 1941, was of different nature. Of the total number killed, only a fraction were Jews, and the whole operation was undertaken ostensibly to clear the area of partisans, or in retaliation for partisan activity. Again, however, the civilian authorities opposed these actions, and the city prefect, Leo Deák, managed to notify the Minister of the Interior, who ordered the atrocities stopped. Furthermore, there were calls for an inquiry, although the government at first accepted the report of the military commander that the action had been taken against partisans. The inquiry was re-opened in March of 1942 with the inauguration of the Kallay Government, and 15 leading officers were brought to

ARTICLES (Continued)

NO. 11, 1976. HUNGARIAN STUDIES NEWSLETTER

trial, though some escaped their sentences with German assistance until after the war. □

Braham, Randolph L. “The Rightists, Horthy, and the Germans: Factors Underlying the Destruction of Hungarian Jewry," in Jews and Non-Jews in Eastern Europe, 1918-1945,

B. Vago and G.L. Mosse, eds. (New York: J. Wiley and Sons; Jerusalem: Israel Universities Press, 1974), 137-156.

Braham’s paper “aims to demonstrate the interrelationship between the (1) Hungarian drive to expel the ‘alien’ Jews in 1941; (2) precarious military position and manpower needs of Germany in 1943-44; and (3) the role played by and policies of Admiral Horthy.” In doing this, he cites the overtures (probably unofficial) of Generals József Heszlényi and Sa'ndor Homlok which began in January of 1942. A “resettlement” program was envisioned in three stages, the first being the removal of Jews from Carpatho-Ruthenia and Transylvania; the second those of the provincial Jews; and only last the Jews of Budapest. No measures were taken, however, until 1944 when German troops moved into Hungary and Horthy reluctantly agreed to “loan” a considerable number of “Jewish workers for German war production purposes.” The number was 100,000, though it is not clear whether they were to be selected from those already employed in war and military-related projects or from the “Galician Jews.” The emphasis in all these negotiations was on supplying workers who would not be harmed by the Germans. Braham concludes that in the current controversy over whether Horthy should bear the ultimate responsibility for the catastrophe or whether his policies were chiefly responsible for the survival of about half the Jews of Trianon Hungary, scholarship seems to favor the latter. In conclusion, Braham argues that “Horthy’s decision to stay on as Hungary’s Head of State was clearly beneficial for the Jews of Budapest,” and given “Hungary’s geo-political and power position vis a vis the Germans,” the options were severly limited. □

Congdon, Lee. “Karl Polányi in Hungary, 1900-1919,” Journal of Contemporary History, 11 (1975), 167-183.

Polányi, son of an Austrian Jewish father and a Russian mother, grew up in a household dominated by his father’s high moral standards and his mother’s intellectual salon, a center of Hungary’s emerging “counter-culture.” His life was devoted to combatting the economistic prejudice and to proving that “man is not an economic, butasocial being.” He was active in the work of the Huszadik Század, the Nyugat, supported Ady and played an active role in the Pikier affair, which led to the formation of the Galileo Circle in 1908, and of which he served as the first president. Even after his resignation from this post following his graduation from law school, he remained active in the Circle’s work of organizing lectures to combat religious, social and class prejudices, and of educating the trade unionists of Budapest. Theirchief goal was the moral regeneration of Hungarian society.

Polányi became involved in politics following István Tisza’s accession to the office of Minister President. “Students of society,” he said, “could not afford to hold themselves aloof from politics.” On June 6, 1914 he helped the formation of The National Citizens’ Radical Party (Országos Polgári Radikális Part). After his return from the front in 1917 (because of injuries), he resumed his political activity, and in December of 1918 called for fundamental reforms, including a distribution of latifundia and a federation of autonomous

(Continued on page 12)

11