Region and Denomination
In the first period of the Collegium’s history, 274 students were admitted in the institute in 15 years, while 741 were rejected by the management of the Institute. Personal files of 393 applicants have been preserved from among the rejected applicants and in the case of 348 only their name is known. Thus, due to the nature of the sources, the analysis covers the former group of rejected applicants.
Regarding the territorial distribution of admitted applicants in the area of historical Hungary, they concentrated rather in regions with a more dense school network: 19% of them came from the historic region of Upper Hungary, 18% from Transylvania, 15% from
50
5. The History of the Eötvös Collegium in the Early Period of the Institute Between 1895 and 1910 5. The History of the Eötvös Collegium in the Early Period of the Institute Between 1895 and 1910
Transdanubia, 12% from the Transtisza Region and 10% came from the Danube-Tisza Inter-fluve. Only 6% of applications from the historic region of Southern Hungary and 1% from Dalmatia were successful.64 The conclusion related to the school network is made significantly emphatic by the fact that 43% of those admitted came from the territories disannexed after the First World War, and only 37% from the post-Trianon regions. The county breakdown further supports the above finding: 7% of successful applicants were born in Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun County. This can be explained by the fact that in the second half of the 19th century internal migration was directed towards the central areas of the country, thus the population of Budapest reached 1 million by 1910, rising even slightly above it, and its school network was also denser than the rest of the country’s (cf. Romsics 2004: 67; Gyáni 2006: 208). 10.31% of the country’s population was concentrated in the capital and in Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun County (“Statisztika” 1911: 13–18) As a result of this, more than half of the successful applicants who were born in the Danube-Tisza Interfluve came from the capital city. The second place of the imaginary ranking was held Csongrád County with 5% (0.78% of the total population lived in this municipality in 1910 [“Statisztika” 1911: 18]) and the third place was shared by Pozsony and Szepes counties with 4-4% (in 1910, 2.1% of the country’s population lived in Pozsony, and 0.9% in Szepes [“Statisztika” 1911: 13–19]). Among the remaining counties the places of birth of the admitted applicants are distributed very evenly.65
Regarding the administrative classification of settlement types, it can be concluded that 26% of those admitted came from small villages with a population of less than 5,000, while 24% were born in municipality towns (the share of the capital in this subcategory was 20% taking the total of municipality towns as 100%); 20% of them in towns with their own councils (11.84% of the country’s population lived in this type of settlement in 1910 [“Statisztika” 1911: 13]), and 5% and 3% in large villages or district seats with a population of 5000-10,000. However, only 34% of admitted applicants graduated from secondary schools located in the place of their birth, a larger number of them – 46% – graduated in a different location. Spatial mobility was only made possible where a railway passed directly through or within reach of those small settlements (within a radius of 5–10 km). This data also provides guidance as to the sociological background of admitted applicants, as rail services could only be used by individuals with adequate financial resources at the time.
There are essentially similar trends in the data on the territorial distribution of those who were rejected: in the distribution of birth places by regions, here, too, Upper Hungary achieved the highest place in the ranking with 20% (19%); the second and third places were taken by Transylvania and the Danube-Tisza interfluve with 16% (18%) and 15% (10%) respectively.66 These regions are followed by Transdanubia with 13% (15%) and Délvidék (Southern Region) by 10% (6%). The Transtisza Region with its 6% (12%) ended up in the penultimate place, while Dalmatia took last place with its 1% (1%).67 In terms of county
64 There are no data about the place of birth of 19% of the applicants in the sub-period. Data on the territorial and county classification of those admitted and rejected are provided in Table 1.
65 For a detailed breakdown by counties for those admitted between 1895 and 1910, see Figure 1 in the Appendix.
Between 1895 and 1918, there were no successful applicants to the Collegium from Esztergom, Turóc, Ugocsa, Szilágy, Torda-Aranyos, Fogaras, Verőce, Belovár-Kőrös, Zágráb and Lika-Krbava counties.
66 In parentheses, similar details of the admitted applicants are shown for easier comparison.
67 For 19% of them there is no data on the place of birth. See Table 1 for information on the territorial and county
51
5.1. Breakdown of Applicants Admitted and Rejected Between 1895 and 1910 5.1. Breakdown of Applicants Admitted and Rejected Between 1895 and 1910
distribution, a slightly higher proportion compared to admitted applicants, 10% (7%) of those rejected came from Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun County. However, the second place of the ranking was taken by Szepes county in Upper Hungary with 6% (4%), and the lowest place was taken by Szatmár with 4% (2%). However, a triple tie developed in the fourth place with 3-3% between Bács-Bodrog (3%), Temes (1%) and Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok (2%) counties. In the remaining counties there was an even distribution of rejected applicants.68
Territorial distribution of admitted and rejected applicants (%) Admitted applicants
Breakdown by regions Breakdown by counties
Name Collegium Total
population Name Collegium Total
population
Dalmatia 1 1 Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun 7 10.3
Délvidék (Southern Hungary) 6 21 Csongrád 5 0.7
Transdanubian region 15 15 Pozsony 4 2.1
Danube-Tisza Interfluve 10 15 Szepes 4 0.9
Transylvania 18 17 Vas 3 2.3
Upper Hungary 19 17 Tolna 3 1.4
Transtisza Region 12 14 Fejér 3 1.1
No data 19 0 Bács-Bodrog 3 3.4
Rejected applicants
Breakdown by regions Breakdown by counties
Name Collegium Total
population Name Collegium Total
population
Dalmatia 1 1 Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun 10 10.3
Délvidék (Southern Hungary) 10 21 Szepes 6 0.9
Transdanubian region 13 15 Szatmár 4 1.9
Danube-Tisza Interfluve 15 15 Bács-Bodrog 3 3.4
Transylvania 16 17 Temes 3 2.1
Upper Hungary 20 17 Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok 3 2
Transtisza Region 6 14 Háromszék 3 0.7
No data 19 0 Hajdú 3 0.8
Table 1: Breakdown of admitted and rejected applicants by region and county compared to national population data69
division of the admitted and rejected applicants.
68 See Figure 2 in the Appendix for a map showing the distribution of birthplaces of rejected students between 1895 and 1918. Between 1895 and 1918 there were no rejected applicants from Hont, Szeben, Fogaras, Verőce, Belovár-Varasd, Zágráb and Lika-Kravaba counties.
69 Data from the 1910 census statistics were used to determine national data (“Statisztika” 1911: 13–19).
52
5. The History of the Eötvös Collegium in the Early Period of the Institute Between 1895 and 1910 5. The History of the Eötvös Collegium in the Early Period of the Institute Between 1895 and 1910
Contrary to the results of the administrative classification of settlement types, signifi-cant differences can be observed here. 24% (24%) of the rejected applisignifi-cants were born in municipality towns (the share of the capital in this subcategory was 20% taking the total of municipality towns as 100%), and 23% (26%) were born in small villages with a population of less than 5,000. 18% (20%) were born in towns with their own councils with a population of 5-10,000, and only 8% were born in county seats with a larger population. Unlike those who were admitted, this group was not characterised by a high degree of willingness to move, as while 36% of them graduated in settlements other than those of their birthplace, 40% graduated in settlements of their place of birth.70
On the whole, it can be concluded from the geographical distribution of the place of birth that the outstanding proportion of municipality towns and towns with their own councils is not surprising, as according to the census of 1910, 20% of the country’s population lived in these types of settlements. The prominent proportion of small villages is also not striking, as 60% of the country’s population was concentrated in these settlements (Kövér 2006:
55–58). It is unusual, however, that, contrary to contemporary conditions, members of the social groups who were admitted in the Collegium were more mobile than their peers: in that period, 69% of the population lived their life in the settlement they were born in (ibid.
62). The different mobility data can be explained by the different cultural opportunities of the settlement types (lack of certain school types) and also by the different sociological factors of the two groups.
The denominational distribution of admitted applicants significantly differs from the conditions of the period. 35% of successful applicants (48.6%)71 belonged to the Roman Catholic denomination, the Protestant denominations together (19% [16.2%] of the Reformed and 17% [11.5%] of the Lutherans) somewhat exceeded their proportion.
Thus, Roman Catholics were significantly under-represented in the Collegium: between 1897 and 1915, 58.8% of the students who received teacher qualification at the Buda-pest Teacher Examination Committee belonged to the largest denomination, while the proportion of Reformed and Evangelical-Lutherans was 8.6% and 12.8%, respectively (Karády 2007: 414). Loránd Eötvös complained on several occasions about the low proportion of Catholics, trying to equalize denominational proportions besides social considerations, but his efforts failed.72 The more than double over-representation of the
70 There is no data available on 24% of rejected applicants.
71 The data provided in brackets in the section on denominational affiliation, which directly follow the data on the collegium students provide information on the denominational affiliation of students of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Budapest in 1910 (“Statisztika” 1911: 387–389).
72 In a letter written in Schulderbach dated 10 August 1899, Loránd Eötvös wrote to Géza Bartoniek that Gyula Bodnár, a Roman Catholic should be admitted instead of István Flütsch (MDKL box 25, file 31, lot 13), who was Evangelical-Lutheran. Flütsch asked to have only a part-time job, to be able to finish his university studies like Bodnár who was totally poor, so the denominational proportions would also have improved to the benefit of the suppressed Roman Catholics. Bodnár was admitted (MDKL box 2, file 2, lot 5) and Flütscht was rejected. In his letter of 20 July 1902 also written in Schulderbach, Eötvös explained to Géza Bartoniek that he would prefer to omit Loránd Szeremley Császár (MDKL box 19, file 19, lot 57) from among those to be admitted and to raise the number of Catholics, but that he could not do this due to his social position.
Dénes Márki (MDKL box 29, file 39, lot 32) was rejected, and Gyula Böhm (MDKL box 2, file 2, lot 6) was admitted who may have come from a wealthy family, thus, again a Protestant became a student at the institute
53
5.1. Breakdown of Applicants Admitted and Rejected Between 1895 and 1910 5.1. Breakdown of Applicants Admitted and Rejected Between 1895 and 1910
Evangelical-Lutherans compared to their national proportion (7.15% in 1910, see Kövér 2006: 139) can be clearly explained with their school network in Upper Hungary and the high number of graduates.73 The Reformers exceeded both their national rate (14.25%
in 1910, ibid. 139) and their university rates. This can be explained by the fact that there was a significant increase in the number of Reformers among secondary school students born after 1880; 16.3% (Kende–Kovács 2011a: 92.) The proportion of Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholics among admitted applicants was 4% (2.3%) and 2% (3.5%) respec-tively. Their proportion even together does not reach the almost 7% of the students who passed the teacher examination of the same denomination in Budapest (Karády 2007:
414.) Among admitted collegium students, 1.82% (15.9%) belonged to Judaism and only 0.36% (1.9%) to the Unitarian denominations. Unitarians were under-represented compared to universities, just as Jewish students who were far behind both in terms of their societal proportion (5%) and that among students who passed a teacher examination (16.6%, Karády 2007: 414).74 The low number of Jewish students can be explained by the fact that both the teaching career and the sciences of humanities did not belong to their frequented mobility channels and many of them who tried to specialise in natural sciences at the Collegium were not admitted to the institute due to the lack of places. The reason for this is that two-thirds of the places in the Collegium were maintained for the field of arts and humanities. Thus, it was much harder to become a student of natural sciences at the institute. This is confirmed by the data of rejected applicants: among the candidates rejected in that period, the proportion of the Jewish denomination was 4%. Of the 16 students, six had a combined specialisation in natural sciences, thus, only one of seven students in the examined period was admitted in this field. Thus, among the applicants, the proportion of those belonging to the Jewish denomination on the whole did reach their national proportion, but they were usually rejected for professional reasons.
The number of students of the Roman Catholic religion rejected somewhat increased compared to those admitted; their proportion was 43% (35%)75. Although their cumulative total proportion among the applicants was 39%, they were faced with such strong selection in the application process that it resulted in their under-representation among students at the national and university levels. The order of the Lutheran and Reformed denomi-nations became reversed within rejected applicants, as the proportion of the former was 19% (17%), and the latter’s 16% (19%) in this group., Protestants still lagged behind in terms of their cumulative results compared to Roman Catholics, but they were over-rep-resented among both successful and unsuccessful applicants in terms of their national and university proportions. The proportion of Greek Catholics and Orthodoxans was 4% (2%) and 1% (4%) respectively. As was the case with Protestants, the proportion between the two denominations became reversed here, too. This can be explained by the fact that more
instead of a Catholic (MDKL box 39, file 65).
73 9.03% of the grammar school graduates and 10.73% of graduates of secondary schools of sciences were Evan-gelical-Lutheran in 1910 (“Statisztika” 1911: 371).
74 For 19% of the students there is no data to establish their denomination. See Table 2 for information on the classification of admitted and rejected applicants.
75 For easier comparison, the denominational data of the admitted students are listed in brackets.
54
5. The History of the Eötvös Collegium in the Early Period of the Institute Between 1895 and 1910 5. The History of the Eötvös Collegium in the Early Period of the Institute Between 1895 and 1910
scholarship places were reserved for Greek Orthodox students at the institute than for those of the Greek Catholic denomination: the former were admitted to the Collegium to the foundation places maintained by the Archbishop of Sibiu and though the Gozsdu Foundation scholarships while the opportunity for the latter was only through receiving a Naszód Region (Năsăud-region) Scholarship Fund, for which not only Greek Catholics but also Orthodox candidates applied. All of them came from the Romanian community of Transylvania. Their cumulative proportion among the applicants was significantly below their national proportions due to their limited role in the practice of modern intellectual occupations (Karády 2007: 415). The proportion of Unitarians was 0.25% (0.36%) among rejected applicants, while the proportion of the Judaist denomination was 4% (1.82%).76
Distribution of admitted and rejected applicants by denominations (%)
Denominations Admitted applicants
Rejected applicants
Data on the Faculty of Arts of the University
Data on the Teacher Examination
Committee
National data (1910)
Roman Catholic 35 43 48.6 58.8 49.3
Greek-Catholic 2 4 3.5
6.9 11
Greek Orthodox 4 1 2.3 12.7
Reformed 19 19 16.2 8.6 14.2
Evangelical-Lutheran 17 16 11.5 12.8 7.1
Judaist 1.8 4 15.9 16.6 4.9
Unitarian 0.3 0.25 1.9 0.15 0.8
No data 19 13 0 0 0
Table 2: The denominational breakdown of admitted and rejected applicants compared to the data relating to students of the University’s Faculty of Arts, the Teacher Examination
Committee and national data.77
76 For 13% of the rejected students there is no data on denominations.
77 Information on the Faculty of Arts of the University of Budapest in: “Statisztika” 1911: 387–389. Denomination related data on the students who took the exam before the Teacher Examination Committee is available at:
Karády 2007: 414. National denominational data for 1910 in: Kövér 2006: 139.
55
5.2. The Breakdown of the Secondary Schools of Applicants Admitted and 5.2. The Breakdown of the Secondary Schools of Applicants Admitted and Rejected Rejected