"This is How it Became Saint Roch Church.. Church History in the Light of Written Sources

(1)

Júlia Вага - Orsolya Gyöngyössy

"This is How it Became Saint Roch Church..

Church History in the Light of Written Sources

The S ain t R och church stands at the edge o f the square narned after it, in the d istrict know n as Belsőváros (Inner Town). This d istrict is the old- est in h ab ited p art o f the tow n; it was once the tow n centre, en tirely surrounded by the River T isza. C songrád fortress m ay stood at the northern tip o f this island w ith the setdentent below it stretched out tow ards the w est an d steadily ex p an d in g.1 A fter Sándor K árolyi (1 6 6 9 - 1 7 4 3 ) purchased C so n grád in 1722 together w ith the lan d around it front C o u n t T eopold S ch lik (in H u n g árián : T ipót S ch lik ), an im p erial generál2, he b u ilt his ntanor house here, next to the ruins o f the fortress front the Turkish tinres.3 A fter the Turks w ithdrew , a tin y chapel b u ilt o f reeds and ntud stood on th is site, at w h at is to d ay No. 4 Saint R och Square.

In 1704, after the arrival in C songrád o f p ár

isit p riest Tászló G oricsánszky, the in h ab itan ts reb u ilt the chapel front w ood and reinforced it

w ith stone coluntns. This b u ild in g d id nőt stand fór lo n g eith er; in 1706 the church co n m iu n ity erected a n ew b u ild in g , this tinte o f lastin g m a

tériái.4 A cco rd in g to an episcopal church visitatio n in 1715 it was ded icated to Saint Steph en.5 S h o rd y after the episcopal visit the church burnt down, so in 1718 the visitato r found o nly an ora- to ry o f reeds.6 The present Saint Roch church was b u ilt to replace the destroyed S ain t Stephen church an d u n til 1769 (the consecration o f the church o f O ur Tady) it served as the tow n’s p ár

isit church.

The circunrstances o f its construction are un- clear, sonte o f the available data is contradictory.

A cco rd in g to Tajos D udás “a p a rt” o f the church h ad earlier been used as a n tilitary store th at was converted intő a church in 1722.7 Tászló Tari was o f the o p inion th at generál T ipót S ch lik h ad the b u ild in g erected, w h ile its san ctuary ntay have been the rentains o f the foundation o f a Turkish

(2)

m in aret d atin g front Turkish tintes.8 The records in official church docuntents are eq u ally vague:

front the first h a lf o f the 18th cen tu ry th ey nante eith er generál S ch lik 9, or the people o f Cson- g rád 10, as the builders o f the church, bút in sonte cases S ch lik figures o nly as a supporter.11

H ow ever the church docuntents - th at were alm ost ce rtain ly used as a source by late r lo cal his- to ry w ritin g s - are in conflict w ith contentporary sources found in the K árolyi fantily archive. These reveal th at in 1722 at m ost the prep arato ry w ork fór the construction could have started, and in re a lity w o rk on the b u ild in g o f the church began o n ly in the spring o f 1723 - by then at the orders o f Sándor K árolyi. There can be no doubt th at it m ust have been the people o f C songrád w ho itti tiated the w ork, th ey m ust have ü rgéd already in

1722 th at funds be co llected fór the construction o f the church, an d perhaps th ey alsó began to buy b u ild in g m aterials and d ig the foundations. In a le tte r w ritte n to h is w ife, K risztina B arkóczy on 29 N ovem ber 1722 Sándor K árolyi enthusiasti- cally reports th at the w h o lly “p ap ist” C songrád is in the process o f b u ild in g a church.12

Finally, because o f the unfavourable w in ter w eather, the w ork d id nőt b egin u n til M arch 1723. The construction w as supervised by János

Széplaky, the b a iliff o f Sándor K árolyi’s Cson- grád -V ásárh ely estate, w ho inform ed h is eni- p loyer in a letter w ritten on the 9 th o f M arch that he h ad begun to b u ild the C songrád C ath o lic church.13 Bút, as he w rote in one o f his letters, the “dreadful b itté r cold” h eld up the w o rk u n til the b eg in n in g o f Ju n e .14 The m aster builder, the stonem asons and other craftsm en w ho to o k p art in the w o rk were p ro b ab ly am ong those, w ho alsó w orked on the construction around th at tin ié o f Sándor K árolyi’s m anor house in C songrád and his casde in Szegvár.15

The co n g reg atio n m ust have rnade a sub- sta n tia l fin a n cial sacrifice in co n trib u tin g to the co n stru ctio n , b ú t w ith o u t th e su p p o rt o f the p atro n th e y w o u ld p ro b ab ly o n ly have been able to erect a m ore m odest b u ild in g . This is im p lie d b y th e b a iliff in one o f h is le tte rs ad- dressed to S án d o r K áro lyi, in w h ic h he reports th a t th e “p ap ists” o f C so n g rá d h ad offered to m ake m ű d b ricks fór the co n stru c tio n b ú t he reco m m en d ed th at th e y b u ild th e church o f bricks, because it w o u ld be “m ore co m fo rtab le an d m ore la s tin g ”.16

Because S ch lik was no lo n ger the C songrád landow n er at the tin ié w hen the w o rk began, he cannot be lin k e d to the construction o f the

26

(3)

church. H owever, it cannot be excluded th at be

idre his departure Sch lik m ay have m ade a dona- tio n fór the construction, or th ey m ay alsó have used m aterials front the dentolition o f the buildings he le it b eh in d .17

Since the sources in the K áro lyi fan tily’s archive confirnt the role o f Sándor K árolyi as the b u ild er o f the church, the question arises o f w h y h is narne does nőt appear in church docuntents d atin g front sh o rtly aíter contpletion o f the con

structio n w o rk. W e have no infornration on this b ú t can o n ly speculate th at a d islike on the p art o f the people o f C so n grád fór the person o f the n ew h o ld er o f the advow son lies b eh in d the “si- len ce”. W h ile gen erál S ch lik w as o n ly the nonti- n al lo rd o f C songrád, w ho larg e ly le it the tow n’s self-governntent alone p ro vid ed th at a sntall q u it-ren t o b ligatio n w as nret, inrnrediately aíter tak in g possession o f C so n grád K árolyi set about o rgan isin g it: he en d ed the free choice o f ntagis- trate, intposed a produce tax (discretio ) in addi- tio n to the ren tal fee on h is g razin g la n d lease- holders, raised taxes su b stan tially an d on several occasions, dentanded fór h in tse lf the revenues front the inns an d b u tc h er’s shops, an d occupied fór h is estate sonte o f the la n d th at h ad previ- ously been available fór anyone to cu ltiv ate.18 Sándor K árolyi m ust alsó have caused consider- able d issatisfaction w hen, in 1726 he o b liged his serfs to perfornt v iliéin Services.19 A cco rd in g to Széplaky, K áro lyi’s b a iliíf the people o f C so n grád

“are so angered [b y these nteasures] th at rather than p erfo rn tin g thent, th ey w ill be p rep ared to leave the tow n a w astelan d ”20

W h e n it w as conrpleted an d eq u ip p ed , the church w as co n secrated to the A ssun tp tio n o f M a ry (A ssuntptio B eatae M áriáé V irg in is). It is fírst n ten tio n ed in the v isitatio n p ro to co l o f 1726, w here it is n o ted th at it h ad rece n tly been e n tire ly reb u ilt an d th at the advow son b elo n ged to Sán do r K áro lyi.21 The p atro n p ro v id ed fór the ren o vatio n an d m ain ten an ce o f the church, as w e ll as the rem u n eratio n o f the p arish p riest an d h is assistants. The can to r an d p arish p riest

co u ld n ő t be ap p o in ted , the assistants dism issed or rep laced w ith o u t th e approval o f Sándor K áro lyi.22

V eneration o f S ain t R och, patro n saint w ho provided pro tectio n against the plague, appeared aíter the epidem ic broke out in C songrád.

The p lagu e reached the settlem en t in 1738, w hen G ergely V in tze w as parish priest. The ep i

dem ic claim ed 7 2 6 victim s in the space o f a year.

The parish priest alsó help ed to care fór the dying.

O n one occasion w hen the faith ful o f C songrád, fearing fór th eir lives an d th eir lóvéd ones, gath- ered in the church, parish priest V in tze called on the desperate parishioners to appeal to the pa- tronage o f S ain t Roch an d m ake a vow to b u ild a chapel. The assem bled congregation agreed, then led by parish priest V in tze b earin g the H őst, th ey h eld a procession around the tow n. “A t last the m e rc iíu l T örd to o k p ity on the tears o f his children, w ho [...] co m m itted n ő t o n ly them selves b ú t alsó th eir descendants fór as lo n g as C songrád stands, to celebrate the day o f th at patron saint w ith a p ilgrim age.”23 W h e n the epidem ic was

(4)

over th ey b u ilt a chapel in h o n o ur o f Saint Roch in the centre o f the cem etery24 on the site w here the church o f O u r L ad y n ow stands.25

The saint w ho gave pro tectio n again st physi- cal and m en ta! disorders becam e exceptionally p o p u lar in C songrád. The m ajo rity o f boys born in A ugust were trad itio n a lly christened as Roch (R ókus). W ith somé exaggeration, cantor A n tal Sohlya declared in 1860 th at “every th ird person in C songrád is called R och”,26 There was no change in this tren d righ t up to the First W orld W ar, despite the fact th at in the second h a lf o f the 19th cen tu ry the lo c a llib e ra l press to o k a stern view o f the spread o f the “horrid, foreign- sound- in g ” narne.27

R equiem masses were reg u larly h eld in the S ain t Roch chapel - as a funeral chapel - and on the day o f S ain t R och (1 6 A ugust) a feast day rnass. It is certain th at the chapel was d edicated n ő t only to S ain t Roch bút alsó to S ain t Sebastian an d S ain t R o salia.28

Thus, after 1738 there w as a parish church o f O u r Lady, an d a Saints R och, R osalia and Sebas

tian chapel. In 1754 A rch deacon G yörgy Né- m ethy w rote in h is report o f the b u ild in g that w as barely th irty years o ld: “the church b u ilt o f solid m atériái is nőt sufEcient fór the size o f the po p ulatio n , it has no tower, an d it is tolerably eq u ip p ed ”.29 Since the church h ad no Capital, it w as m ain tain ed w ith donations front the local people, charitable foundations an d the profit front its lan d. A b elfry first ntentioned in the 1745 visitatio n sub stituted fór a church tower. It w as presuntably ntade o f w ood, because by 1761 it w as in a ru in ed State. A t first it h ad three bells, late r this increased to (ive.4

The church h ad b arely th irty pew s nteaning th at o n ly a sntall fraction o f the parishioners co uld crowd intő it. E ventually even the K árolyi fantily recognised th at the construction o f a new church was unavoidable. Fór this reason th ey co n trib u ted a substan tial sunt fór construction o f to d ay’s parish church o f O u r L ad y th at w as com- p le te d b y 1769.

In 1856 the C songrád parish p riest record- ed in the H istó ria D ontus th at the S ain t Roch church w as used as a n tilitary store after 1769.®

H ow ever the contentporary visitatio n protoco l w ritte n in 1778 ntakes no m ention o f any such th in g , in d eed it w rites o f its three altars an d th eir appointm ents.32 W h a t appears to be certain is th at in 1781 the b u ild in g w as in need o f renovation.®

In 1784 parish priest A n drás Kanyó h ad the chapel o f Saints R och, Sebastian and R o salia dem olished, and its m ain altar erected in Belsőváros.34 It w as then th at the church th at was transferred to filial status was ded icated - now exclusively - to S ain t Roch.

Since the n ew parish church w as designed on a larger scale to m eet the needs o f the tinié, the fantily h o ld in g the advowson presuntably ju d g e d it unnecessary (an d too expensive) to ntain tain tw o churches in C songrád an d so the settle- ntent becam e the h o ld er o f the advowson fór the Belsőváros church. U p to th at p o in t there is no record o f any negotiation s betw een the setdentent and the landlord-patro n fantily. The absence o f an official docum ent an d the resultin g uncer- ta in ty can alsó be deduced front an en try ntade in 1915 by the C songrád parish p riest K ároly T húry n an iin g the lo cal co un cil as the “quasi” th at is, the unoíftcial patron o f the Belsőváros church. This quasi-patron State is the result o f the trad itio n based on custoni (usus), th at the tow n

hadalivays

provided fór the renovation an d m aintenance o f the church.35

W h a t is certain th at after 1769 the K árolyi fantily m ain tain ed the n ew parish church, the presbytery and its outbuildings, w h ile the tow n cared fór the Belsőváros church, the can to r’s honié an d the tw o honies fór bell-ringers. W e alsó kn o w fór certain th at front 1784 the tow n alsó provided the everyday supplies n eeded in the Saint R och church.36

The b u ild in g o f the tow er represents an ini- p o rtan t stage in the construction h isto ry o f the church. The foundation stone was Iáid on 24

28

(5)

Septem ber 1818. Various conm iem orative docu- m ents an d coins were p laced in an iron box beside it.37 The statues o f S ain t Roch an d S ain t Joseph that can be seen on the edges o f the h alf-pedi m ents o f the tow er were p ro b ab ly p laced at the sarne tinié.

Together w ith the veneration o f Saint Roch, the veneration o f Saint Sebastian and R o salia alsó co n tin ued fór rnany years. R o salia w as one o f the m ost com m on fernale christian nam es in Cson- grád, an d in the 19th cen tu ry a statue o f her still stood in the Belsőváros church. The church’s “old b eli” th at was cast in 1825 an d then req u isitio n ed fór m ilita ry use in 1917, was decorated am ong others w ith a re lie f o f S ain t Sebastian/8

There w as a cem etery in use around the Saint Roch church front an unknow n date righ t up to 1 8 6 6 .'9 The places o f the graves со ü ld clearly

be seen on the ground fór decades afterw ards;

in tintes o f flood or in lan d w aters the people o f Belsőváros crossed the site on p lan ks Iáid betw een the graves.40

In 1904 the diocesan bishop o fV ác attentpted to ob tain reco gn itio n o f the R om án C ath o lic church’s ow nership exercised over the S ain t R och church in C songrád. H e h eld out the prospect th at he w o u ld o n ly drop the proceedings i f the righ t o f use w as transferred in p erp etu ity.41 The C songrád council accepted the offer w ith the co n d itio n th at the diocesan bishop o fV ác cover the fu ll court costs. Thus, altér 1905 the righ t o f use in p erp etu ity o f the S ain t Roch church was transferred to the R om án C ath o lic church. The ow ner o f the church to d ay is the State o f H un- gary.42

(6)

Endnotes

1 See: Bél 1980-1981/2. 50. C£: Map ofthe settlement of Csongrád made by Sámuel Mikoviny in 1731.

2 The Csongrád estate, that belonged to the Szeged pre- fectorate of the imperial chamber altér the Turks were driven out, was awarded to Lipót Schlik in 1702 in rec- ognition of the role he played in the Treaty of Karlowitz and his other military meríts. In 1722 he sold it to Sán

dor Károlyi, whose ownership was officially registered on 204 December 1722. Kovács 1929. 11-20; Éble

1911.7-16.

5 Sándor Károlyi’s manor house stood at No. 4 Saint Roch Square (Szent Rókus tér), beside the northern bastion of the fortress. Mátyás Bél alsó mentions it: “The remains of this once very strong fortress can be found in the bend of the Tisza. [...] The fortress is connected to only one, inner angle of the bend, that which looks toward the north, it is strengthened by the junction of the Körös op- posite and is surrounded by a System of extremely deep moats. The Turks alsó guarded it vigilantly. Nothing is lelt of it now except the remains of the moats, within which stands the manor house of Sándor Károlyi.” Bél 1980-1981/2.44. From 1722 to 1769 this dwelling that can still be seen was the Csongrád presbytery building.

NPI História Domus Vol. I, 107,

» VPL LVis. Lib. 17.147-150.

3 VPL LVis. Lib. 3. 92-94.

6 In addition to the donations of the inhabitants, profit from the vineyards owned by the parish ensured its up- keep. VPL LVis. Lib 3. 102-103;Tari 1977. 11.

f Dudás 2000b. 69.

8

^{T ári}

19

^.

11

^.

s VPL LVis. Lib 6.1761.37,

10 A church inventory made in 1754 gives the population of the town as the builder (“ex fundamentis erecta sump - tibus oppidanorum”). See: VPL APar. Cs. 1754. Status Ecclesia.

11 According to the Acta Cassae Parochorum inventory of 1734 the church was built at the expense in part of gen

erál Schlik and in part of the town people, in 1722. In:

ACP 1976. 54.

12 “Perhaps you did nőt know, so I am teliing you that Czongrád is entirely Papist, they are now building a whole church of stone, they do nőt tolerate Calvinists amongthem.” Kovács 1994. II. 436 (letterNo. 284).

® “Moreover I have begun the building of a Papist church.”

MNL OL, P 398,70873.

14 “I had wished to effect the work to be built fór the Pa- pists, bút because the dreadful bittér cold weather was unfavourable, I was obliged to defer, now I have had the timber brought because with the help of the Lord the weather is clearing and becoming more obedient, somé of the people offered to make műd bricks, bút I wish to build it from this, it would be more comfortable and more lasting.” MNL OL, P 398,70874.

13 MNL OL, P 398. 70863-70923. Letters from the

Csongrád-vásárhely bailiff János Széplaky to Sándor Károlyi.

16 MNL OL, P 398,70874.

9 Sándor Károlyi began new construction already in March 1723 on the site of Schlik’s former farm. We have no information on what buildings stood on the site at that time. MNL OL, P 398,70873. (“Judgingthe build

ings to be good, I have had the foundations Iáid on the site of Schlik Excellency’s farm, and have raised somé of the walls according to your Excellency’s instructions”).

18 Kovács 1929.25-32.

M Kovács 1929.36.

® Cited in: Kovács 1929. 32.

21 This entry in the protocol (as well as the findings of ar- chaeological and architectural exploration) and the uni

form structure of the church refute the views that the present church is the result of alterations to an earlier building.

*2 When in 1736 Csongrád parish priest Gergely Vintze replaced the cantor without the patron’s knowledge, Sándor Károlyi wrote a letter reaffirming his rights aris- ing from his power of advowson. VPL APar. Cs. 1 July 1736. Letter from Sándor Károlyi to the magistrate of Csongrád.

a Bodnár 1864. 364.

24 At that time the town had two cemeteries: one on the site of what is now the church of Our Lady, the other around today’s Saint Roch church. VPL LVis. Lib. 6.

1761.

23 NPI 1761. Canonica Visitatio, “De Capellis et Coemet- eris”; Bodnár 1864. 364. In the 19д-204 centuries as the Saint Roch day feast approached, the Csongrád press regularly wrote about this event, bút they gave mistaken information about the natúré of the epidemic, the year, the person of the priest or the number of victims.

® Sohlya (manuscript) 1857. 321.

27 “Bút why do they nőt enlighten the parents at christen- ings, in the registry offices, the schools, in public life, that it is a laughable thing to give their children such horrid-sounding names as Franci, Viktor, Henrik, Rókus instead of christian names like László, Ödön, Béla, Ár

pád, Aladár, Gyula, Géza, Atilla, Zoltán, Hajnalka, Gyöngyike or Sarolta.” Csongrádi Lap, 20 September 1903, Vol. XIII, No. 38, p. 2.

28 Palugyay 1855.477. It is worth briefly tracing the chang- es in the vernacular use of the terms little church - big church. On the basis of 181*1 century sources [VPL APar.

Cs. 6 March 1736. Letter from the Csongrád magistrates and residents to the Consistorium] it seems likely that at the time the people of Csongrád called the funeral chapel “little church” and the church of Our Lady (today’s Saint Roch) was the “big church” (1738-1769). After the construction of today’s church of Our Lady (1769) and the demolition of the funeral chapel (1784) the ver

nacular “little church” name was transferred to today’s

30

Saint Roch church [VPL APar. Cs. 28 May 1781. Letter from the Csongrád magistrates and Council], Since the Saint Joseph church was built in Csongrád-Piroskaváros (1928) this church came to be called “little church”, and the Saint Roch church is called “Roch church” or

“Belsőváros church”.

25 Zsilinszky 11:1898. 103. In the 1740s the revenues from a watermill on the Tisza alsó contributed to its mainte- nance. VPL LVis. Lib 4. 14 May 1745.

30 VPL LVis. Lib. 4. 14 May 1745. (“prope Ecclesiam in Turri campana trés”); VPL LVis. Lib. 6. 26-29 June

1761. (“campanili ruinato”) 31 NPI História Domus Vol. I, 108.

« VPL LVis. Lib. 7.

m Zsilinszky IL1898. 269.

34 Tari 1977. 12; NPI História Domus Vol. I, 108.

33 NPI História Domus Vol. II, 23.

36 In 1877 the following items appeared among the regular expenditures ofthe church: wax (forcandles),fabrics (fór the repair of vestments), fish fát (used on the bells), tal- low, soap (to wash clothing), firewood (to baké wafers) and communion wine. Repairing the beli straps and mi- nor carpentry work were tasks that had to be performed every year. We read on the invoice made out by master saddler Rókus Szemerédi: “I repaired the straps of the

bells during the year and sewed leather on the clapper four times during the year” [MNL CsML CsL Council Documents. Documents of accounts and expenditures of the Saint Roch church in 1877.] The church curator received a separate payment fór the cleaning and ironing of vestments, and the bell-ringer fór baking wafers and organ treading. The town authorities generally timed the completion of major investments (e.g. replacement ofpews, Windows, painting) to coincide with the church feast day.

37 In one corner of the tower there is an iron box containing a commemorative document written by notary Miklós,

“that chief magistrate György Adamovits dipped in wood oil and placed in the iron box together with the thrown coins, then placed the box in the foundation.”

Tari 1977. 15. Thrown coins: the money people threw intő the box when it was carried around. Dudás 2000b.

69.

38 NPI 1885. Inventory of Saint Roch church.

* NPI 1761. Canonica Visitatio, “De Capellis et Coemet- eris”; NPI História Domus Vol. I, 107.

40 Csongrádi Újság, 3 May 1908, Vol. VI, No. 18, p. 1.

41 MNL CsML CsL Council Documents, 9 January 1905 jk. No. 9.

42 NPI 6 September 1905. Extráét from the minutes.

31

(7)

Endnotes

1 See: Bél 1980-1981/2. 50. C£: Map ofthe settlement of Csongrád made by Sámuel Mikoviny in 1731.

2 The Csongrád estate, that belonged to the Szeged pre- fectorate of the imperial chamber altér the Turks were driven out, was awarded to Lipót Schlik in 1702 in rec- ognition of the role he played in the Treaty of Karlowitz and his other military meríts. In 1722 he sold it to Sán

dor Károlyi, whose ownership was officially registered on 204 December 1722. Kovács 1929. 11-20; Éble

1911.7-16.

5 Sándor Károlyi’s manor house stood at No. 4 Saint Roch Square (Szent Rókus tér), beside the northern bastion of the fortress. Mátyás Bél alsó mentions it: “The remains of this once very strong fortress can be found in the bend of the Tisza. [...] The fortress is connected to only one, inner angle of the bend, that which looks toward the north, it is strengthened by the junction of the Körös op- posite and is surrounded by a System of extremely deep moats. The Turks alsó guarded it vigilantly. Nothing is lelt of it now except the remains of the moats, within which stands the manor house of Sándor Károlyi.” Bél 1980-1981/2.44. From 1722 to 1769 this dwelling that can still be seen was the Csongrád presbytery building.

NPI História Domus Vol. I, 107,

» VPL LVis. Lib. 17.147-150.

3 VPL LVis. Lib. 3. 92-94.

6 In addition to the donations of the inhabitants, profit from the vineyards owned by the parish ensured its up- keep. VPL LVis. Lib 3. 102-103;Tari 1977. 11.

f Dudás 2000b. 69.

8

^{T ári}

19

^.

11

^.

s VPL LVis. Lib 6.1761.37,

10 A church inventory made in 1754 gives the population of the town as the builder (“ex fundamentis erecta sump - tibus oppidanorum”). See: VPL APar. Cs. 1754. Status Ecclesia.

11 According to the Acta Cassae Parochorum inventory of 1734 the church was built at the expense in part of gen

erál Schlik and in part of the town people, in 1722. In:

ACP 1976. 54.

12 “Perhaps you did nőt know, so I am teliing you that Czongrád is entirely Papist, they are now building a whole church of stone, they do nőt tolerate Calvinists amongthem.” Kovács 1994. II. 436 (letterNo. 284).

® “Moreover I have begun the building of a Papist church.”

MNL OL, P 398,70873.

14 “I had wished to effect the work to be built fór the Pa- pists, bút because the dreadful bittér cold weather was unfavourable, I was obliged to defer, now I have had the timber brought because with the help of the Lord the weather is clearing and becoming more obedient, somé of the people offered to make műd bricks, bút I wish to build it from this, it would be more comfortable and more lasting.” MNL OL, P 398,70874.

13 MNL OL, P 398. 70863-70923. Letters from the

Csongrád-vásárhely bailiff János Széplaky to Sándor Károlyi.

16 MNL OL, P 398,70874.

9 Sándor Károlyi began new construction already in March 1723 on the site of Schlik’s former farm. We have no information on what buildings stood on the site at that time. MNL OL, P 398,70873. (“Judgingthe build

ings to be good, I have had the foundations Iáid on the site of Schlik Excellency’s farm, and have raised somé of the walls according to your Excellency’s instructions”).

18 Kovács 1929.25-32.

M Kovács 1929.36.

® Cited in: Kovács 1929. 32.

21 This entry in the protocol (as well as the findings of ar- chaeological and architectural exploration) and the uni

form structure of the church refute the views that the present church is the result of alterations to an earlier building.

*2 When in 1736 Csongrád parish priest Gergely Vintze replaced the cantor without the patron’s knowledge, Sándor Károlyi wrote a letter reaffirming his rights aris- ing from his power of advowson. VPL APar. Cs. 1 July 1736. Letter from Sándor Károlyi to the magistrate of Csongrád.

a Bodnár 1864. 364.

24 At that time the town had two cemeteries: one on the site of what is now the church of Our Lady, the other around today’s Saint Roch church. VPL LVis. Lib. 6.

1761.

23 NPI 1761. Canonica Visitatio, “De Capellis et Coemet- eris”; Bodnár 1864. 364. In the 19д-204 centuries as the Saint Roch day feast approached, the Csongrád press regularly wrote about this event, bút they gave mistaken information about the natúré of the epidemic, the year, the person of the priest or the number of victims.

® Sohlya (manuscript) 1857. 321.

27 “Bút why do they nőt enlighten the parents at christen- ings, in the registry offices, the schools, in public life, that it is a laughable thing to give their children such horrid-sounding names as Franci, Viktor, Henrik, Rókus instead of christian names like László, Ödön, Béla, Ár

pád, Aladár, Gyula, Géza, Atilla, Zoltán, Hajnalka, Gyöngyike or Sarolta.” Csongrádi Lap, 20 September 1903, Vol. XIII, No. 38, p. 2.

28 Palugyay 1855.477. It is worth briefly tracing the chang- es in the vernacular use of the terms little church - big church. On the basis of 181*1 century sources [VPL APar.

Cs. 6 March 1736. Letter from the Csongrád magistrates and residents to the Consistorium] it seems likely that at the time the people of Csongrád called the funeral chapel “little church” and the church of Our Lady (today’s Saint Roch) was the “big church” (1738-1769). After the construction of today’s church of Our Lady (1769) and the demolition of the funeral chapel (1784) the ver

nacular “little church” name was transferred to today’s

Saint Roch church [VPL APar. Cs. 28 May 1781. Letter from the Csongrád magistrates and Council], Since the Saint Joseph church was built in Csongrád-Piroskaváros (1928) this church came to be called “little church”, and the Saint Roch church is called “Roch church” or

“Belsőváros church”.

25 Zsilinszky 11:1898. 103. In the 1740s the revenues from a watermill on the Tisza alsó contributed to its mainte- nance. VPL LVis. Lib 4. 14 May 1745.

30 VPL LVis. Lib. 4. 14 May 1745. (“prope Ecclesiam in Turri campana trés”); VPL LVis. Lib. 6. 26-29 June

1761. (“campanili ruinato”) 31 NPI História Domus Vol. I, 108.

« VPL LVis. Lib. 7.

m Zsilinszky IL1898. 269.

34 Tari 1977. 12; NPI História Domus Vol. I, 108.

33 NPI História Domus Vol. II, 23.

36 In 1877 the following items appeared among the regular expenditures ofthe church: wax (forcandles),fabrics (fór the repair of vestments), fish fát (used on the bells), tal- low, soap (to wash clothing), firewood (to baké wafers) and communion wine. Repairing the beli straps and mi- nor carpentry work were tasks that had to be performed every year. We read on the invoice made out by master saddler Rókus Szemerédi: “I repaired the straps of the

bells during the year and sewed leather on the clapper four times during the year” [MNL CsML CsL Council Documents. Documents of accounts and expenditures of the Saint Roch church in 1877.] The church curator received a separate payment fór the cleaning and ironing of vestments, and the bell-ringer fór baking wafers and organ treading. The town authorities generally timed the completion of major investments (e.g. replacement ofpews, Windows, painting) to coincide with the church feast day.

37 In one corner of the tower there is an iron box containing a commemorative document written by notary Miklós,

“that chief magistrate György Adamovits dipped in wood oil and placed in the iron box together with the thrown coins, then placed the box in the foundation.”

Tari 1977. 15. Thrown coins: the money people threw intő the box when it was carried around. Dudás 2000b.

69.

38 NPI 1885. Inventory of Saint Roch church.

* NPI 1761. Canonica Visitatio, “De Capellis et Coemet- eris”; NPI História Domus Vol. I, 107.

40 Csongrádi Újság, 3 May 1908, Vol. VI, No. 18, p. 1.

41 MNL CsML CsL Council Documents, 9 January 1905 jk. No. 9.

42 NPI 6 September 1905. Extráét from the minutes.