Dénes Dienes: History of the Reformed Church Collég in Sárospatak (Sárospatak, 2013)

János Ugrai: „THE PERIOD OF NATIONAL ADVANCEMENT” 1777-1849 - Organizational changes - adumbration of episcopal power

88

matters: his assistance was required in the procurement of fire-extinguishers; he was expected to assuage the wider environment in cases of more serious student indiscipline; and employees whose situation had taken a turn for the worse would seek and count on his support (e.g. the consequences of the College kitchen closing down).

Student Disruption in the College

In the spring of 1794, an illustrious patron of the college, Lajos Kóji Komáromy, filed a complaint with the rector-professor about his son, Ferenc, having been cruelly beaten by his private teacher. Because of this “brutal chastisement”, the humiliated child was unable to put on his trousers for three days. According to the in-house investigations, the frequently disobedient child had truly been beaten by the otherwise meek-natured private teacher because “Ferkó”, despite numerous warnings, was not willing to discontinue his risky pastime of rowing on the Bodrog River. On the advice of chief lay officer József Baji Patay, the rector-professor Dávid Bar czafalvi Szabó discharged Vályi from his position. However, the by-passing of the schoolboard in the matter and the unauthorized naming of a new preceptor triggered ire within the student camp. Flyers mocking the rector suddenly appeared. Street tussles, fighting, rock-throwing and the breaking of windows all escalated things to demonstra- tion-like leveb.. Barczafalvi Szabó was life-threateningly menaced by one of the anonymous satirical flyers. The unrest led to the chief lay officer reducing the punishment meted out to the teacher but, at the same time, demanded that the rector-professor take severe steps to curb the turbulence. Barczafalvi Szabó, however, - mainly out of fear - reacted in a manner hardly befitting a stern leader: he neglected to supply sufficient information to Patay about the instigators and ordered only a half-hearted inquiry into why the activation of the relevant deputatio was so belated, this tardiness itself being due to the superintendent and the chief lay officer being at odds with one another. Despite giving assurances of good will towards all cooperative students, the committee under the leadership of the chief lay officer was unable to produce any worthwhile finding. Even after two series of sessions, the identity of the authors of the flyers and of the organizers of the street “disruptions” remained shrouded in mystery.

The corporal punishment administered by the private teacher, which launched the arising conflict, did not in itself contravene regulations. It was the degree of this punishment which was met with objection. The joint reaction of the rector-professor and the chief lay officer, however, ignited an elemental outrage among the students who feared for their traditional student government and who became intractable upon the indictment and dismissal of the teacher in question and the appointment of a successor. Through their united and intimidating actions, they were fully successful in achieving their goal, that of defending their collective rights which, somewhat earlier, had not only been trimmed but were here fundamentally questioned by their superiors. The lack of cooperation between the internal and external leadership of the school and the lack of concrete results issuing from the inquiry procedures of more than three months duration were the principal causes of the difficulties which ensued in the wake of the week-long disruption. The rector-professor formally gave the appearance of being subordinate to the wishes of the prefects but, in reality, as the virtual director of the school, acted alone in delaying the local investigations and in easing the severity ordered by his superiors. It thus appears that the superintendent, Ábrahám Szathmáry Paksi, had no significant role in the matter, neither on paper nor in reality. He had received relatively few missives and little information pertaining to the events and his possible recommendations were most likely disregarded. Head lay officer József Báji Patay, however, maintained matters in his hands throughout, formulating and issuing his ordinances in an unrelenting manner. In spite of this, the representatives of the culpable students and the professors of the school achieved success conspicuously often when submitting their petitions to him. It would seem that his importance and influence weighing on the events was tellingly less than what his authority granted him. All of this sheds light on the anomalies of the organizational-administrative relations existent in the College.

FROM THE ENLIGHTEMENT TO THE END OF THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE