Only 6% (12.6%)263 of the guardians of admitted collegium students belonged to the main category of primary producers. Mainly children of smallholders (0-3 hectares) and those of tenants and day labourers applied to the Collegium. Their proportions fall behind those of both the previous period and of the university’s academic year of 1900/1901 (cf. Kövér 2006: 182). This could be explained by the phenomenon that was also raised in relation to the territorial location of admitted applicants: members of the Collegium were selected from the more urbanised population of society, or from among members of the rural middle-class who were able to achieve a middle-class level of existence. The latter conclusion is less true for groups that was closer to the state of the agrarian proletariat, presumably this was reflected in their low proportion. However, the urban population that fell in the main category of industry, mining, metallurgy and transport was represented at a relatively low level in the institute: only 5% worked in industry, only 3% of guardians worked in the trade and catering industry and only 1% worked in the financial and credit fields. Their cumulative 9% (19.5%) data represents less than half of the early-century rates seen in higher education (ibid. 182).
43% (40.8%) of the guardians were in the main category of public service. This was higher than the similar data of the previous sub-period and the individual sub-categories clearly highlight the social groups, from which the institute admitted its members. 4%
of guardians were employed by the railway company and post office and 5% of them were Protestant pastors. The proportion of the former was unchanged compared to the early period of the Institute’s operation, the latter slightly decreased. Those working in the judicial service were represented by 4%, just as those working in other public admin-istration and ministry structures. The former included the chancery assessors, district court interpreters, municipal judges and royal magistrates; the latter included ministry secretaries, office chiefs, municipal clerks or office clerks; this covered mainly those who belonged to public servants in the 7th-8th remuneration category, thus they belonged to the lower segment of the middle class (Kende–Kovács 2011b: 181–182).264 Guardians working in the field of financial administration (3%) became part the “new public officials and workers not classified elsewhere” who worked as office clerks, financial advisors or
263 The denominational distribution of the parents of students at the Faculty of Arts of the Budapest University of Sciences in the academic year of 1909/1910 is presented in parentheses. (“Statisztika” 1911: 390).
264 Except for magistrates who, by their office, belonged to the 6th remuneration category and thus to the order of “nagyságos”.
98
6. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1911 and 1918 6. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1911 and 1918
city chief auditors at the Hungarian Land Credit Institution and were classified in the 9th–11th remuneration categories. Because of a lack of graduation, some of them did not belong to the middle class, they lived a petty bourgeois life (Kende–Kovács 2011b:
183–184). 1% of guardians belonged to each of these social groups, those who worked as technical advisers in technical, industrial and commercial administration and as forest masters and forestry advisers in agricultural administration. 21% of guardians were in the service of educational and scientific institutes. Thus, the Collegium retained, or further strengthened its profile based on self-recruitment of secondary school teachers. Among the parents of admitted students, in addition to 15 grammar school teachers and directors, three secondary school of sciences teachers and directors and two civil school teachers and directors, eight elementary school teachers and directors appeared as well. In the previous period, the latter were included only among rejected applicants.
1% (1.9%) of guardians were employed in the armed forces and only 6% (6.1%) belonged to the main category of intellectual freelancers. However, this still somewhat increased compared to the previous sub-period. Their persistently low numbers can be explained by the high level of self-recruitment of doctors (2% at that time) and lawyers, notaries (4%
in the era); their professions were more prestigious than a teacher’s career, which under-went major changes in the period. However, the proportion of guardians and admitted collegium students belonging to the main category of those receiving an allowance (5%) and those unemployed, or those dependent on orphanages (14%) was very high, 19% in total in the examined period. This was partly a result of the effects of World War II on society, but, at the same time, it did not mean that the Collegium would have become more open to lower social groups, as the retired guardians and the husbands of widowed guardians used to be part of the middle class as Evangelical-Lutheran or Reformed pastors, officials, judges or mayors.265
The average rate of selection in the period was 34.6%. 100 out of the 169 admitted students were able to complete their studies, 53 of them left the institute before the end of the training period and there is no data on 16 of them. The growth rate was more than 10% compared to the previous period, just as the increase in the number of people receiving wages and allowances can also be explained by the consequences of World War II. 38% of Collegium students who were unable to complete their studies voluntarily gave up their membership. In these cases, just as in the previous period, there were mainly academic reasons in the background. This is supported by the fact that, starting from the academic year of 1903/1904, the directorate in most cases expelled collegium students whose academic record was inadequate.266 21% of admitted students were unable to
265 For a breakdown of the social status of those admitted between 1911 and 1918, see Figure 5 in the Appendix.
There is no data on the occupation of 16% of guardians. For comparison of the occupations of guardians of admitted and rejected students with the corresponding data of students of the Faculty of Arts and the University of Budapest, see Table 6.
266 Such a collegium student was Miklós Dolinay who did not indicate the reason for his resignation, but the result of his basic physics exam was a pass mark, so he was no longer in the list of members after 1914 (MDKL box 4, file 4, lot 11). It was probably for the same reason that Tibor Eiszen left, as in May 1913 he received a pass mark in his Hungarian basic examination. He was no longer a member of the institute in the next academic year (MDKL box 4, file 4, lot 12).
99
6.3. Study of the Social Status of Applicants Admitted and Rejected 6.3. Study of the Social Status of Applicants Admitted and Rejected
complete their studies because they died during the period of their membership. Seven of the active members of the Collegium died a heroic death267 and another four died of illness during their membership.
19% of collegium students left the institute due to a career change. As in the previous period, this time they went mainly to the Technical University,268 or chose a medical269 or legal career.270 9% of admitted applicants had to leave the institute because a health condition did not allow them to take part in intensive intellectual work.271 Because of the tense work, neurasthenia was very common among members of the institution.272 7% of them were forced to give up their membership for financial reasons. This was even worse in the last years of the war and in the wake of the defeat in the war, when the economic blockade of the Entente Powers and returning from a military economy to the normal trail led to an economic downturn on the side of the central powers, including Hungary.273 Article III.9. of the Organisational Rules was enforced in the case of 6% of admitted applicants, thus, they were expelled due to their inadequate academic results.274 Although in April 1914, Eötvös reprimanded collegium students for failing to attend university lessons, severely damaging the institute’s reputation and threatened that in respect of those who are unable to complete a sufficient number of colloquiums necessary for the university tuition fee to be waved, he would have to suspend the payment of half of their remuneration (100 crowns), or withhold for a semester their applications submitted to
267 Antal Bader MDKL box 1, file 2, lot 2, Sándor Doby MDKL box 4, file 4, lot 11, Sándor Hofstetter MDKL box 7, file 8, lot 21, István Prékopa MDKL box 16, file 16, lot 47, László Scholtz MDKL box 17, file 18, lot 51, Dezső Szutórisz MDKL, box 20, file 19, file 59, Emil Thanhoffer MDKL box 21, file 20, lot 61. An addi-tional 11 former members died heroic deaths on battlefields, including outstanding physicist Győző Zemplén who Loránd Eötvös considered to be his own student (MDKL box 23, file 24, lot 69). Ata Refik, who was an exchange scholarship recipient of the Collegium between 1911 and 1913, also died a heroic death on the side of the central powers (MDKL box 34, file 50). Géza Bartoniek’s personal tragedy is that he lost his only son Emil in the war. Ernst Molden’s letter to Géza Bartoniek containing condolences. Vienna, 9 March 1915.
MTAKK Ms. 492/48.
268 Among others, Béla Ottenreiter also justified his resignation with his enrolment to the Technical University (MDKL box 15, file 15, lot 44).
269 For example, Elek Sélley: MDKL box 18, file 18, lot 52, József Sztraka: MDKL box 20, file 19, lot 59, Kálmán Tompa: MDKL box 21, file 20, lot 61.
270 Pál Lacsny was admitted in 1915, but on 7 March 1918 he resigned and, taking his family’s interests into account, admitted at the Faculty of Law of the Bratislava University (MDKL box 11, file 12, lot 33). Pál Liszka also resigned from his membership and continued his studies at the Reformed Law Academy in Kecskemét (MDKL box 12, file 12, lot 34).
271 That is why, on the suggestion of the Collegium’s physician, for example, István Holecz and Ernő Temesvári also had to resign (MDKL box 7, file 8, lot 21, MDKL box 20, file 20, lot 60).
272 For example, Jenő Kási was recommended to take a rest time for the second semester of the academic year of 1912/13 because of neurasthenia, but this did not hinder him significantly in his studies and he successfully completed his training (MDKL box 9, file 11, lot 27).
273 Among others, Dániel Oszvald was forced to resign due to the severe economic crisis resulting from the defeat in the war (MDKL box 15, file 15, lot 44). Géza Radnóti who was admitted in 1917 and specialised in Hungarian and German left in 1920, because his mother was dismissed from her teaching position and thus he had to support the family (MDKL box 16, file 17, lot 48).
274 The membership of Béla Kiss ceased by a decision dated 12 August 1912, the justification for which was that he was unprepared for his basic examination and ignored the related warning from the professor (MDKL box 10, file 11, lot 28).
100
6. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1911 and 1918 6. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1911 and 1918
a higher-sponsored place.275 According to sources, such sanctions were eventually not applied. The lower rate of expulsions compared to the previous period can be explained by the fact that the directorate of the institute did not criticise the weaker academic performance of soldiers returning home from front service for a study leave, thus this penalty was not applied during the war. However, not all of the returning soldiers could reintegrate into the changed conditions. An example of this is the case of Gyula Némethy who was admitted to the institute in 1914 to specialise in geography and natural history, but a few months later he joined the army. He was captured on the Russian front and was taken to a Siberian detention camp and could return home only in 1922. In March 1922, however, Géza Bartoniek called him to resign from his membership because at the relocation camp in Csót where soldiers returning from the Russian front were kept under observation, the former collegium student was reported to hold unpatriotic, communist views. The director assumed that, due to the expected condemning outcome of a police inquiry, it would be better not to wait to be deprived of his membership, but to voluntarily resign from it.276 Although the investigation resulted in dropping the charges, the director nevertheless did not recommend his return to the institute, as from the correspondence between them the student seemed to be lacking commitment and the outcome of the investigation did not drop the charges in a reassuring way and the curator did not support his return because of his overage, as he would have been 32 years by the time of completing his studies.277 Bartoniek also obtained the teaching staff ’s consent to keeping him away from the institution, also referring to lack of commitment.278 Nonetheless, Némethy returned to the Collegium and until 1925 it is possible to track his participation in the training system of the institute, but finally he did not take the professional examination.279
The case of Némethy is twofold: on the one hand, it can be seen that collegium students had to lead an impeccable lifestyle from the point of view of social behaviour and politics.
Those who failed to meet this requirement were forced to resign or were deprived of their membership in order to preserve the good reputation of the Institute. On the other hand, the training system of the institute was heavily burdened by the mass of soldiers returning home from the front and by their reintegration into civilian life.
12% (6%)280 of guardians of rejected applicants belonged to the main category of primary producers (smallholders – 10%, tenants and day labourers – 2%). This data was twice as high as similar data of the previous sub-period, but was also one and a half times higher than the proportions at the university in the academic year of 1900/1901 (cf. Kövér 2006: 182). These data confirm the image that has emerged in connection with
275 42/1914. Loránd Eötvös’s reprimanding of the members of the Collegium due to failure to attend university classes. Budapest, 26 April 1914. MDKL box 51, file 97/1.
276 38/1922 Letter from Géza Bartoniek to Gyula Némethy on resigning from his membership. Budapest, 16 March 1922. MDKL box 15, file 14, lot 43.
277 134/1922. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to Gyula Némethy on his return. Budapest, 22 August 1922. MDKL box 15, file 14, lot 43.
278 Minutes of the staff meeting of 6 July 1922. MDKL box 54, file 102/a.
279 Ferenc Fodor’s report on geography lessons in academic year 1924/1925. Budapest, June 1925. MDKL box 52, file 101/3/b.
280 To facilitate comparison, information is provided in parentheses on the social status of admitted applicants.
101
6.3. Study of the Social Status of Applicants Admitted and Rejected 6.3. Study of the Social Status of Applicants Admitted and Rejected
Occupation of guardians of admitted and rejected applicants between 1911 and 1918 (%) Educational services and academic institutions 21 11
Judicial services 4 0 Officials of other civil services or ministries 4 8
Railway and postal service 4 4
Table 6: Occupation of guardians of admitted and rejected applicants compared with the data of all students of the Faculty of Arts and the University of Budapest.281
281 Data on students of the University of Budapest for the academic year of 1900/1901 in: Kövér 2006: 182, data on students of the Faculty of Arts for the academic year of 1909/1910 in: “Statisztika” 1911: 390.
102
6. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1911 and 1918 6. The History of the Eötvös Collegium Between 1911 and 1918
admitted applicants: the institute was not really open to applicants from lower social groups.
This is supported by the number of guardians in the main categories of industry, mining, metallurgy and trade: 13% (9%) had industrial and artisan occupations(factory workers, bakers, bootmakers), while 3% were engaged in the retail and catering industry. 33% (43%) of guardians were in the main category of public service. 10% of them were church ministers as Lutheran, Reformed or Greek Catholic pastors and one was a rabbi. 11% (21%) of them worked in educational services or in scientific institutions. However, in contrast to those rejected in the previous sub-period, it was not elementary school teachers who comprised the majority in this sub-category, but rejected children of grammar school teachers. This may be related to the phenomenon of the widespread polemic at the turn of the century about increasing the social and professional prestige of the profession of elementary school teachers. The Collegium could provide a good basis for their children who thus could rise to the middle class. 8% of them were employed as ministry officials, while 4% were in the service of the railway company and the post office. Only 3% of guardians belonged to the main category of intellectual freelancers, reinforcing the finding related to their self-recruit-ment and their different career orientation. More than a quarter of fathers and applicants – 27% (19%) – fell in the main category of those dependent on allowances (6%) and the unemployed and those supported by orphanages (21%).282 Compared to the previous period, their number increased by one and a half times, which can be explained by the effects of the First World War and the phenomenon that, from these social groups, the doors of the institute were open only to the former members of the middle class, or to outstandingly talented students.
The most common reason for rejection was professional inadequacy, which was deter-mined from secondary school results, or by Géza Bartoniek through his extensive network of relationships. 68% of applicants were rejected for this reason. With a good secondary school graduation283 or just with good high school conduct284 it was not possible to become a member of the institute. Rejections were not always acquiesced by the applicants, thus there were applicants who, later in the turbulent revolutionary period, tried to become regular members of the Collegium, repeatedly unsuccessfully.285 10% of applicants were rejected because their application was incomplete. Just as between 1895 and 1910, in the researched period as well, this in most cases meant a complete lack of recommendations or of the type of declarations of support that were relevant to the management of the institute
282 See Figure 6 in the Appendix for the social status of guardians of rejected applicants between 1910 and 1918.
For comparison of the occupations of guardians of admitted and rejected students with the corresponding data of students of the Faculty of Arts and of the University of Budapest, see Table 6.
283 Endre Breduán in 1915 (MDKL box 24, file 26, lot 6), Béla Raszlavszky in 1916 (MDKL box 30, file 43, lot 41), Antal Schreil in 1913 (MDKL box 31, file 44, lot 43) and Gusztáv Stéfán in 1914 (MDKL box 31, file 44, lot 45) were rejected for this reason.
284 It was probably for this reason that Dániel Wickert did not become a collegium student in 1912 (MDKL box 33, file 48, lot 56).
285 Balázs György was first rejected in 1913. In 1919, the Department of Social Affairs of Students at the National Commissioner’s Office of Public Education authorised admission for several students to the Collegium, including György Balázs who, after the fall of the Hungarian Soviet Republic on 19 August 1919, submitted a request for reclassifying his temporary stay at the boarding school into a permanent one, but was again rejected (MKDL box 24, file 26, lot 2).
103
6.3. Study of the Social Status of Applicants Admitted and Rejected 6.3. Study of the Social Status of Applicants Admitted and Rejected
(social dignitaries and an increasing number of former collegium students working in public education or in higher education). 4% of applicants were found suitable in all respects and Bartoniek, too, suggested their enrolment, but due to a lack of places, eventually they did not become members of the institute. 2% of applicants withdrew their application during the admission procedure, or proved to be unsuitable for cohabitation in the boarding school.
In the latter cases, the candidates were generally over-aged.286 1% of them did not become a collegium student because they died during the admission procedure, or submitted their
In the latter cases, the candidates were generally over-aged.286 1% of them did not become a collegium student because they died during the admission procedure, or submitted their