Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910
An academic year at the Collegium usually started in the presence of the director and the curator and was launched in a ceremonial manner where the newly admitted students introduced themselves and with their signature undertook to preserve the institution as a whole by observing the disciplinary rules and the code of conduct, as well as the library order (cf. Dénesi 1995: 99).
170 In 1908, István Király, a Collegium servant, caught several elementary school pupils stealing fruit – 14-year-old Károly Pümper, 16-year-old Ferenc Vida, 14-year-old Ferenc Bozlik, 9-year-old Imre Dolgos and 12-year-old Károly Novák. 452/1908. Géza Bartoniek’s report on the fruit thieves. Budapest, 15 September 1908. MDKL box 51, file 98/1/a.
171 27/1908. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the Royal Criminal Court on the return of stolen gardening tools.
Budapest, 23 April 1908. MDKL box 51, file 98/1/a.
172 8769/1906. Letter from György Lukács, MRPE Minister to Eötvös Loránd curator on the appointment of Sándor Mika, Frigyes Hoffmann and Gyula Gyomlay. Budapest, 21 February 1906. MDKL box 41, file 71/3.
78
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
In the Csillag Street building collegium students lived in suites of four interconnecting rooms, called a family system. “Freshers lived in the first room of the suites and fourth-year students in the inner room. Each suite was officially called a ‘family’. And each family chose from among the fourth-year students a family head, that is, a father who represented the suite towards the director and a mother who took care of the inner order of the suite” (Laczkó 1938: 246). Older collegium students introduced freshers into the institute’s internal life and supervised their studies. The primary forum for raising any issues related to collegium students was the gath-ering of family fathers where both educational and organisational issues were discussed. If this remained ineffective, the case was reported to the board of directors (cf. Dénesi 1995:
100). Thus, supervision was exercised primarily by collegium students themselves over the younger members. The family system was also used at common meals – lunch and dinner:
in the dining room families sat at the tables, meals followed a strict hierarchy, the oldest had the right to take food first, followed by the younger ones. The end of the meal was closed by a ceremonial gesture: the collegium student sitting at the head of the table stretched his right hand towards the centre of the table, followed by the rest of the collegium students and after the movements symbolizing unity, the meal was considered to be finished and the students left (Kucsman 2006: 118). Common meals had such an important communi-ty-building function that those who arrived late were usually mocked (Bassola 1998: 55–56).
Freshers could become full members of the institute in two stages. One was the so-called fresher exam, or repeated enrolment exam. Older collegium students told the new members that their enrolment was not final; it had to be repeated again in the presence of a ministerial commissioner. The fresher exam usually took place before the full body of the institute and the ministerial commissioner was played by an older collegium student. In the early period this was a type of a knowledge contest, in which they tried to break the confidence of newly admitted students who completed their secondary school graduation with excellent results (Laczkó 1938: 249). The exam usually took place at the end of the first week, during which each year one or two members left the institute. The following evening, with the ceremony of initiation, the elders inaugurated the new members of the institute as freshers. As a part of that, in the middle of the night, old collegium students, dressed in costumes, burst into the room of freshers and in a quick trial found them guilty of excessive confidence, made them lie onto their desk and hit them hard on their back side (Dénesi 1995: 104). Initiation qualified the newly admitted as members of the community, as freshmen. The very self-con-scious Dezső Szabó noted about the initiation that he wanted to challenge everyone from the participants to a duel, but senior students simply laughed at him. Only after the initiation did he feel a full member of the institute (Szabó 1965: 715–716).173 Freshers, however, could become “teachers” only after passing the basic examination at the end of the second year, which gave them the right to vote at a national assembly, or general assembly that was held only a few times a year. A collegium student who had just passed the basic examination at lunch was seated at the head of the table and solemnly inaugurated. Following this he had the right to be addressed with the highly distinguished title of “Teacher” (Kucsman 2006: 62).
There was only one place in the institute where a fresher was an equal partner of the
173 When there were festive occasions, so-called all-Collegium initiations were also held. First seniors initiated each other and then the younger ones (Kucsman 2006: 135).
79
5.6. Changes in the Collegium’s Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910 5.6. Changes in the Collegium’s Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910
teacher: the library. Collegium students spent much of their time here and in the event of causing a disturbance, even freshers could order their companions to be quiet by knocking with the end of their pencil, without risking retortion. It was the duty of the fathers in the first week to introduce the youngest members of the family into the “sanctuary” of the institute (Kosáry 1989: 18).
Already in the early period, there were signs that members of the institute developed tech-niques to ease tensions caused by intense, permanent mental work. Two ways to do this were established: cabaret and beer dinners. The former was associated with 25 February 1927, the name day of the director, the day of Géza. On those occasions students of the institute performed a play with musical inserts, followed by merriment. The Collegium teachers were invited to these occasions and after moving into the new building, due to more exclusive conditions, their family members as well. This was the only time in the year when ladies could come to the institute, from which later several relationships and marriages developed (cf. Dénesi 1995: 105; Kucsman 2006: 146–147). Beer dinners were occasions that also emerged in the early period. To these dinners – along with the curator and the teachers of the institute – all members of the Collegium were invited, which provided opportunities for informal conversations among them. In many cases, however, after the end of the dinner, collegium students left the institute and began unrestrained debauchery, although this was prohibited by the disciplinary rules.174 On 17 December 1905, 12 collegium students left the institute without permission and, with the exception of one student, spent most of the night outside of the Collegium. For this reason, a procedure was launched the following day against each of them, at the end of which the director reprimanded all of them and notified the curator about the incident.175 At the same time, it was part of the derring-do behaviour of collegium students that next day in the morning they went to the library as if nothing had happened the previous night (Laczkó 1938: 258).
Frequent domestic and foreign trips were also used during the early period of the institute to break away from the intensive work. Many times the whole Collegium went on excursions in the mountains of the Buda area. In 1897, an excursion was made to the Mogyoród mountains for geographic and artistic purposes, in which 43 people, that is, all members of the institute took part. However, due to Mr G.B.’s illness176, the tour was led by Frigyes Hoffmann and Móricz Szilasi. In September 1897, a study trip was made to Zsámbék177 and then in May 1898, again a geological and geographic study trip
174 According to the Time and Work Schedule and the House Rules, after 7 pm it was allowed to leave the building with the director’s permission (MDKL box 50, file 95/a). In this period only Zoltán Kodály had permission to do so, as being a member of the Academy of Music he returned to the institute late in the evening (MDKL box 10, file 11, lot 29). (Cf. Dénesi 1995: 100.)
175 138/1905. Géza Bartoniek’s warning to 12 collegium students who were missing during the night. Budapest, 12 December 1905. These 12 collegium students were: Herbert Bauer (Béla Balázs), József Holub, Ferenc Kräuter, Géza Laczkó, Dániel Nádasdi, Károly Novobátzky, Lajos Pintér, Ármin Scharbert, Miklós Szabó (later director), Dezső Szűcs, Béla Thomay and Zsolt Trócsányi. MDKL box 51, file 98/2.
176 Between each other collegium students called Géza Bartoniek only Mr G.B., because the announcements in the wall newspaper of the Collegium were usually signed using his initials.
177 367/1897. Géza Bartoniek: A report on the trip to Zsámbék. Budapest, 16 September 1897. MDKL box 36, file 56.
80
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
was also made, but the place is unknown.178 In 1900, Bartoniek, accompanied by 8-10 students, visited the Reformed College of Debrecen where, besides viewing the institute, they also visited lessons. This was made possible by the friendly relationship between the director and Imre Dóczi, the supervisor of the secondary schools of the Transtisza Reformed Church District, which existed until the end of their life.179 In 1901, a study trip to Visegrád was made.180 In addition, in 1905, during the All Saints’ Day holidays, they placed a wreath on the tomb of József Eötvös in Ercsi.181 There is no indication of this being regular, but it is certain that in later periods, the tombs of deceased teachers of the institute were regularly wreathed at the end of October or early November (Dénesi 1995). 101). In addition to domestic trips, collegium students could take part in trips abroad as well. At a suggestion put forward by Móric Szilasi, the head of the classi-cal philology section, Bartoniek started to organise a study tour, for which the curator
178 26/1898. Géza Bartoniek : A report on a trip to an unknown place. 21 collegium students took part in the study trip. Budapest, 02 May 1898. MDKL box 36, file 56.
179 Dóczi informed Bartoniek that between 1 and 3 November 1900, an education meeting of the church district would be held, because of which he could guide his guests only after 6 o’clock in the evening. 374/1900. Letter from Imre Dóczi to Géza Bartoniek. Debrecen, 28 October 1900. MDKL box 36, file 56.
180 Géza Bartoniek’s note on the study trip to Visegrád. Budapest, 18 September 1901. MDKL box 36, file 56.
181 23/1905. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the station manager of the Keleti Railway Station of Budapest. 31 October 1905. MDKL box 36, file 56.
Image 5: Collegium students acting in a cabaret in the early period of the institute
81
5.6. Changes in the Collegium’s Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910 5.6. Changes in the Collegium’s Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910
received a financial contribution for the institute. Eötvös himself stated at the teachers’
staff meeting on 18 June 1897 that trips abroad could raise the interest of, or deepen the knowledge gained by collegium students and, therefore, he supported Szilasi’s initiative.
He noted, however, that it would be expedient to organise study tours not only to Greece or Italy, but also to Western countries.182 The curator asked the ministry for 500 forints for the trip, which he received,183 thus, between 23 May and 12 June 1898, 12 collegium students travelled on a study trip to Rome led by Géza Bartoniek and Móricz Szilasi.184
Image 6: Group photo taken during a study tour of the Collegium in Rome in 1898
182 Minutes of the staff meeting of 18 June 1897. MDKL box 54, file 102/a.
183 10/1898. Letter from Loránd Eötvös to Gyula Wlassics, MRPE Minister, requesting a 500 forint travel allowance. Budapest, 21 March 1898. MDKL box 36, file 56.
184 Ferenc Csürös, Jagello Fail, Béla Falusy, Alajos Gedeon, Zoltán Gombocz, Árpád Hercz, Ferenc Hirschmann, Ferenc Kuzmics, Henrik Schmidt, Sándor Szilágyi, Zalakán Székesz and Gyula Zemplén took part in the study trip. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the Rijeka station manager of MÁV to request discounted tickets.
Budapest, 23 May 1898. MDKL box 36, file 56.
82
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
The MRPE supported the Institute not only financially, but also with its recommenda-tion, as it issued a letter of recommendation in Hungarian and French for the travellers.185 The visit to Urbs Aeterna was so successful that in the next academic year the director asked for a 2,000 forint grant from the Ministry for a visit to Paris. Bartoniek argued that the success of the trip to Rome could be repeated by a visit to the French capital, as they were invited by the director of the École, Georges Perrot, to attend the Paris Exposition of 1900.186 However, the MRPE was unable to support the idea due to the lack of financial resources, so the study trip failed.187
In addition to the excursions, those living in the boarding school – in parallel with the refining of the mind – also had the opportunity to develop their bodies. Until 1905, colle-gium students could attend Norbert Sztrakay’s fencing classes to learn the skills of duelling twice a week, between four and five in the afternoon and on Sundays between eight and nine. The fencing room was at the corner of Csillag Street and Lónyai Street, so it was in the immediate vicinity of the institute (cf. Dénesi 1995: 102).188 In 1905, the Capital City Council authorised collegium students to use the gymnasium of the 9th district civic school for boys. In his submission Bartoniek stressed that the use would be temporary, as after the completion of the new Collegium building, the institute would have its own gym.189 For this the Council approved the application in return for the payment of a 180 crown usage fee per year.190 The next year, however, the Director asked the council supervising the Evangelical-Lutheran Church Grammar Schools to use the gymnasium of the Evangel-ical-Lutheran grammar school in the capital for a fee of 300 crowns and 100 crowns of cleaning fee per year.191 The reason for the early change was not revealed from the sources, but the Council gave its consent, thus, until 1911 when the handover of the Ménesi street building happened, collegium students had physical training there (cf. Dénesi 1995: 102).192
The versatility of the Collegium’s training not only manifested in the study trips and the possibilities for physical exercise, but also in the fact that, at the turn of the century, the students came from different strata and ethnic groups of Hungarian society. This was made
185 “The students of the ‘Báró Eötvös József Teacher Training Collegium’ are attending a study trip abroad. It is my honour to recommend them to all the authorities and to the directors of foreign institutions for their goodwill and support.” (the same in French). 2393/1898. Letter of recommendation of MRPE state secretary Mihály Zsilinszky. Budapest, 23 May 1898. MDKL box 36, file 56.
186 59/1899. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to Gyula Wlassics, MRPE Minister, on the study tour to Paris. Budapest, 1899. MDKL box 36, file 56.
187 48.1482/1900. Letter from MRPE ministerial adviser to Loránd Eötvös. Budapest, 24 July 1900. MDKL box 36, file 56.
188 MDKL box 51, file 98/a/1.
189 119/1905. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the Metropolitan Council on the use of the gymnasium of the 9th district civic school for boys. Budapest, 25 October 1905. MDKL box 51, file 98/a/1.
190 210107/1905-VII. Decision of the Metropolitan Council No. 210107/1905-VII in the matter of temporary use of the 9th district civic school by the students of the Eötvös Collegium. Budapest, 04 January 1906. MDKL box 51, file 98/a/1.
191 81/1907. Letter from Géza Bartoniek to the church council supervising the Ev. Ref. church grammar school.
Budapest, 10 September 1907. MDKL box 51, file 98/a/1.
192 414/1907. Permission of the Pest Ev. Ref. church council to use the gym. Budapest, 11 September 1907. MDKL box 51, file 98/a/1.
83
5.6. Changes in the Collegium’s Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910 5.6. Changes in the Collegium’s Internal Life Between 1895 and 1910
possible by the foundation of scholarships at the institute.193 The Prémontré order of Csorna maintained grammar schools in Szombathely and in Keszthely. The latter was a lower gram-mar school until 1883, thus it had only four grades, but as a result of the secondary school law, the order had to expand it to eight grades. As a result, a shortage of teachers emerged and Adolf Kuncz, the provost of the Prémontré order in Csorna, intended to remedy this by using the new teacher training institute. This was made possible through his old friendship with Géza Bartoniek, as well as the promise made by the Minister of Religion and Public Education that the order could place five of its members in the institute (cf. Kovács A. 1995:
49).194 Kuncz asked the ministry in advance to separate the consecrated priests from other members of the institute and to provide them with a special diet during Lent.195 For all this, the order paid 3,000 forints per year, that is, 600 forints for each admitted member.196 This was very favourable for the Collegium, as the institute’s budget in the early period was temporary within the budget of the Ministry of Religion and Public Education. The first five members of the order who were admitted in the institute were Ottó Berkes, Ernő Csigaházy, Emil Láng, Lajos Orbán and Miklós Steiner (1995). 49). Except for the lessons, members of the order did not interact with the other members of the Collegium at all, even their meals were at a different time. The collaboration was very fruitful on both sides, as Kuncz indicated to the director already in May 1896 that in the next academic year he would use the opportunity again.197 It was an indication of mutual satisfaction that Bartoniek offered three rooms for the members arriving to the Millennium Exhibition in 1896, but Kuncz did not make use of it. He explained his rejection saying that the members of the order who arrived at the exhibition received a lump sum and for any extra costs they had to pay themselves.198
Even the rooms were converted for the Prémontré guests: they bought wardrobes and bookshelves for themselves. In many cases, for their meals they had wild boar with mush-rooms or potatoes and during Lent they usually consumed fish with forest fruits.199 In 1897 Emil Láng was the supervisor in the Collegium; during his time Tibor Gaál, Gyula Maróthy, Béla Novák and István Vargha were admitted to the institute.200 The issue of super-vision was also raised during the school year. In October 1897, Bartoniek pledged to draw up a separate policy for the members of the Prémontré order, but he was unable to complete it because of his illness, which lasted for five months and because of the urgency of preparing
193 Resources on foundation scholarships were reviewed also by András Kovács in his study (Kovács A. 1995:
49–58). In this part of my work I rely on his findings and, with the help of other resource groups, I add new
49–58). In this part of my work I rely on his findings and, with the help of other resource groups, I add new