/kc/ - Krautchan

sword-of-a... jpg
(81.44 KB, 328x700)

gold-sheet-pokrovsk-h... png
(343.24 KB, 941x872)

hunnic-diadem-from-cs... jpg
(1.45 MB, 1200x1200)

hunnic-diadem-kerch jpg
(85.71 KB, 1200x586)

So here are some examples which are considered Hunnic findings.
1. Sword of Altlussheim, from Germany (Baden-Würtemberg). The Huns widely used what is called "spatha" in latin, which basically means longsword (in contrast with the gladius). They did not have sabers, which came with Hungarians, so this in itself is ok, because Scythians used similarly spathas. But the ornaments are Persian imitations on this basically. The lapis lazuli
2. Stamped faces on golden sheets, from a Hun kurgan in Ukraine. There are some parallels of this in other steppe findings, but not that typical.
3 and 4. Diadems, first from Csorna (Hungary), the other is from Kerch (Crimea).

Alucsajdengi hun... jpg
(285.48 KB, 1600x1431)

hun-cauldrons jpg
(189.94 KB, 978x728)

Compare those diadems with this Hun crown from NE China. I think we also talked about this particular piece in some other thread. The head of the falcon/buzzard/eagle is not fixed so when the wearer walked/rode it bobbed. Anyway it is very dissimilar even tho the diadem found at Kerch does have a bird on it.
So this is why Hunnic cauldrons became important. These can be found from the Korea to the Atlantic, all the way in Eurasia, and a typical item of the Huns. Some has a base/foot.

 >>/47763/
 >>/47769/
Thanks for the info. As for political sponsorship for research I thought parties like Jobbik would do that.

 >>/47775/
Parties themselves don't have a lot of money. And what they get from the state and donations they can't just spend it however they like. The Fidesz has a 2/3 in the parliament and through the ministries of the govt. they control the whole budget of the country.
Why they is it good for the Fidesz to meddle in the research? Well they build political capital from it. The Scythian-Hun origin was and still is favoured by people with nationalistic feelings and thinking. These people might support Jobbik, or Mi Hazánk, but Fidesz catering to them can show it is worth to vote for Fidesz instead of the other two.

 >>/47763/
 >>/47777/
What's the political subtext behind tying Hungarian origins to either group?

 >>/47787/
Probably the best to describe is as battle for identity.
The Scythian and Hun heritage reaches back to ancestors who broke empires and created empires themselves. Rulers of ours traced back their heritage to Attila himself and with the sure knowledge of their worthiness they entered in every undertaking of theirs.
When the idea of Finno-Ugric kinship rose in the second half of the 19th century, we just had almost broken an empire (the Habsburgs') and they could only save it with the help another empire (Russia). But the Finno-Ugrics were noones. In fact this group did not even exist until that point, and even in the written sources those tiny folks appear fairly late (liek in 16th century). So for many it felt as a slap in a face when this was pushed into the scientific thought, in a time when they (chiefly Germanics) started to tell us that we are small, weak, we are noones. And while that idea widened the prehistorical research - and indeed many who considered themselves nationalist followed that path -, soon the Finno-Ugric linguists demanded the sole control over Hungarian prehistory, and narrowed the research back, but towards another direction. Geopolitical interests demanded from us to accept our status as noones, be happy with our destroyed and divided country, not to turn on our neighbours, not to raise some ruckus. Then Soviet Union wanted us to accept our vassal status, not to rebel, to accept we are weak and noones. The Finno-Ugric ancestry very well fit into this and was supported politically by internationalists (and it seems still supported by them to date).
Meanwhile nationalists tried to hang into the tradition, and told that we aren't noones, but someones. We were and we can be. But nationalists in a Marxist-internationalist country are just a powerless obscure group. After the regime change they started to get louder and turned out lots of people have feelings towards their country and nation. There is a demand for nationalism. And they are curious about our history. Tales and myths also were told (and the Scytho-Hunnic kinship also was pushed into the world of tales) and these are more easily digestible than linguistic gibberish, so it was easy an easy reach towards the traditional explanations. And it is popular. People visit kurultaj and stuff in masses.
History of a nation gives an identity to her. Two different stories give two different identities. It is important what we tell ourselves who we are, and the sum of our past actions is what we are, this is true for individuals and folks.

Maybe a bit idealistic and oversimplified, but more or less that's it. I'm not sure if this answers your question.

One more note I wanna give however.
There is a series of historical questions that builds constant confrontations and hatered. One of which is the quarrel over our prehistory. Other example would be the person of Görgey:  >>/35167/

 >>/47801/
Additional thoughts.
The researchers in the Finno-Ugric "school" adopted the stance of scientific objectivity, claimed the sole representation of science for themselves, and declared that everyone who toys with the idea of Scythian and Hun kinship are doing it out of inferiority complex, or chauvinistic irredentism, and are at best romantic dreamers (as I noted before), but who are causing harm to Hungarian historiography (they published articles with titles: "Reality and mythical deformity" and such). The worst type attacks were made during the communism and the following decade ('90s) ofc.
Then they started to shit on previous scholars of the 19th century (and ofc on the "fascist" ones from the interwar era, no matter of their stance) who were considered prominent on their respective fields.
Medieval Hungarian primary sources also got unfair treatment - they all attest the Scythian-Hunnic ancestry - and were considered weak and bad sources, almost swept off from the table, and literally any other source was favoured as long as it was written by foreigners on foreign lands (joke is for a very long time all foreign sources also calls us Scythian, Hun, and Avar). We should take a look at the wildly different treatment of the saga's by northern historians. Those are treasured sources, even tho they are largely poetic inventions.

 >>/47730/
>  from the modern populations the closest genetically to those Hungarians who lived in the era of the Conquest of the Carpathian basin are the Bashkirs and Volga Tatars.
> Meanwhile nationalists tried to hang into the tradition, and told that we aren't noones, but someones.

But that means that modern Hungarians are less related to these Conqueror Hungarians than some foreigners. And that tradition is about heritage of ruling conqueror class, not about general population.

 >>/47808/
Indeed.
But ethnicity has several components. "Blood"/genes, language, culture (spiritual: beliefs, tales, legends, songs, etc; physical: items, objects, building, clothing, decoration etc.), lifestyle, all moving parts, they change. That's why identity is important, because those are the descendants who preserve that identity.

Besides how different were those who lived here before the Huns arrived first? According to the study in those times the locals preserved genes reaching back to the bronze age. But since the bronze age steppe people lived in the Carpathian basin more or less continuously (Scythians, Sarmatians and their variants, like the Iazig people whom were around in the times of Huns and had their own fights with the Romans, and Germanics too, and whom in the end settled on the Hungarian Great Plains in the times of the Hungarian Christian kingdom, and they are called Jász, and also assimilated into the Hungarians).

The case however isn't this simple and the study doesn't solve mysteries. There is another study from some years before, and I do cite it sometimes, here I did couple of times. That one found that the conquest times Hungarians had genetic ties to Huns (~45%), Scandis (~45%), Caucasians (~6%, not American Caucasian, but those who actually live in the region of the Caucasus mountains), and Slavs (~2%). The Scandinavians are more likely the Goths living north of the Black Sea, South Russian Steppes, and not the Varyags, because judging by the remains of their physical culture they were fully assimilated, so no fresh incorporation. So these two studies also have to be reconciled.

 >>/47810/
> "Blood"/genes, language, culture [...] lifestyle
I forgot common historical background. The common struggle, which also shapes identity.

And I have to add, that from all the current languages of the Earth probably those in the Finno-Ugric family are the closest to Hungarian, both in grammar and core vocabulary. And this recent genetic study confirmed genetic relations too. What I said during the years I have had these discussions on imageboards is that it was a mistake to narrow down the research only to that direction. Quite a few Hungarians on the other hand stood by the opinion that it is completely wrong, probably due to the fact that many people can't think, but only in extremes, on one bit (0 or 1, all or nothing).
And I write about "current" languages, because there is no recorded languages Hungarian can be matched to prior to 16th century, because only the Hungarian appears in written form before that (back to the 11th century, 1055AD, in Latin letter, what remained from before that are all in Hungarian runes and their decipher isn't sure).
I also have to note that beside the Turkic people we don't know what languages were spoken by the Avars, Huns, Sarmatians, Scythians, and many other people, like Massagetas and so on. All just speculation based on sparse amount of words recorded by foreigners (they also have their own runes, it's just no decipher provided ever), and further speculations.

szent_istvan_kiraly_s... JPG
(1.46 MB, 2016x1512)

saint-stephen-sarcoph... jpg
(81.94 KB, 1273x717)

Customary for me to write something on these national holidays, so here it is.

Recently I saw in the news that in Belgium or England (I think) they introduced recently 4 days workweek for some fields or workers. A company here also did the same. It would be nice if we could reach the 5 days workweek tho, since I know many who work 6 still. But August 20 is a holiday since king Francis I so they don't have to work on this nice Saturday.
But I don't wish to discuss the merits of 4 days workweek (I think it would be better if they reduce the number of hours worked per day, noone works with his best effort over 3 hours anyway, the rest is half steam at best), but write something related to the celebrations, and Saint Stephen, our first Catholic king.

Maybe let's talk about his final resting place. Picrel, his supposed sarcophagus.

bazilika_1 JPG
(944.62 KB, 1355x2210)

The Basilica of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Székesfehérvár held a great importance in the life of the Medieval Hungary. It was the place where Hungarian kings had to be crowned to acknowledge them "officially" as kings. It isn't a coincidence, the church was founded by Saint Stephen and this is the place where traditionally believed that he was buried (I read he might had been crowned here, but since the basilica was built after he was crowned, it would surprise me; the other place they put his coronation is Esztergom). From 53 (actually 52, Joseph II was never a king) kings, 37 were crowned here, and all from the House of Árpád (23). Furthermore it is believed 15 were buried here. Which isn't that much considering. That's not all, from the House of Árpád, only 5 of them followed Stephen there, in fact the next 7 kings after him did not, they all have different burial places. They had to have serious reasons for this - which I won't unearth now.
The basilica is in ruins now - well basically only the foundations what we have, the very base of the walls. Storms of history destroyed it, but even in the 18th century an English traveler (certain Clements Simon?) noted the beauty of the remains, which means then it still had to had some structure. While the Turks turned it to mosque earlier, then the Habsburgs' Germans robbed the place (and the graves themselves) after that, the real destruction was done by us, and not simply by the people, but the direct controllers of the diocese, the various Hungarian archbishops, who used it up as a mine for building materials, especially when the palace of the archbishoprics was built. The "stone theft" went on up till the late 19th century, when they already did archaeological digging there. To be honest lots of historical place fell victim of this "recycling" activity.

Video, how it looked like and changed during the centuries when it still stood:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=fdoOesfubTU
https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=fdoOesfubTU

4szarko1 jpg
(107.61 KB, 950x390)

4szarko2 jpg
(95.68 KB, 902x372)

Mateóc-Saint-Em... JPG
(931.23 KB, 1452x1749)

Accidentally this whole post in another thread...

Maybe worthy to note, that there was another big church nearby, consecrated to Saint Peter and Paul, which doesn't exist anymore. The town had eleven churches in the middle ages.

Historical sources have a couple of words to say about the burial of Saint Stephen. His two legends, and the legend written by bishop Hartvik says he was laid to rest in the basilica consecrated to Virgin Mary, he founded in the town of Alba (fehérvár = white castle). Hartvik also notes two things: 1. his body was put into a carved marble sarcophagus at the center of the church; 2. his grave was below the level of the floor, covered by large marble slab, and they had to go down to his "coffin", apparently here he uses the words sarcophagus and "tumba", sometimes interchangeably, and from the text they figure the coffin itself might have been put together from stone slabs. Archaeological excavation in the 1970's proved that there was a facility partially below ground level in the middle of the basilica, essentially a crypt, with stairs leading down there, and which was changed during the centuries.
The sarcophagus' - which I posted earlier and widely knows as Saint Stephen's - origin is actually quite foggy. There is data, that in the 19th century it was used as trough for animals, other data says it was found in undisturbed ground. It do has a hole on one end however supporting the its use as a trough. The place of origin is also debated. Contemporary scholars either don't know, or state various places, among them Óbuda (now part of Budapest). The material is limestone (not marble), from local quarry (local as Hungarian, near from Budapest). The first time the idea raised that it was Saint Stephen's coffin was in 1930. Since then all the supporting points was debated, and indeed refuted. Btw the top cover is missing.
One info they cite so many times it's a cliche now, that it's a Roman a modified sarcophagus. I'm not sure where this comes from and I only see this as a statement, and read no supporting evidence or reasoning. Only three sides has decoration (two long and one short), which means it stood by a wall. The style has contemporary parallels in Hungary, and shows analogy with North Adriatic findings, both on the Italian and the Dalmatian sides. Some think it was a work of a Venetian craftsmen hired and invited to the court.
Also some think it was the coffin made for the son of Saint Stephen: Saint Emeric.

20190621_79563-47147 jpg
(199.01 KB, 1000x684)

19290629-del... png
(2.48 MB, 1200x1709)

A day late, but I don't have much to write anyway. Although it's a giant topic.
I found something mildly interesting, Hungarians emigrants in Argentine during the events.
They had a weekly newspaper the South American Hungarians, published in Hungarian, from 1929 to 1962, which followed the happenings in the home country, sometimes publishing articles listing the events from hour to hour, and ofc local news. Ideologically they reflected interwar Hungary, and were supportive towards the system of Perón, and they supported the movement of '56. They spread fliers all over Buenos Aires in the numbers of tens of thousands, they organized rallies, they lobbied so Argentine would put her voice next to the revolutionaries. They sent medical help (medicine, blood, bandages, etc.), but also gathered ~500 volunteer who planned to join to the freedom fighters. They weren't just Hungarians, but Poles, Croats, Northern Hungarians joined too, and even people from Caucasian countries. Due to various circumstances they never left for Europe.
After the defeat emigrant Hungarian women dressed in black did a procession on the streets of Buenos Aires.

While I search for a pic of the newspaper, I also found a sample from Brazilian-Hungarian press.

 >>/49087/
Ever heard of the Hungarian battalion in the 1924 revolution in São Paulo? The revolutionaries formed three foreign battalions, German, Italian and Hungarian, from the huge number of immigrant workers in the city. They weren't just from those three nationalities, that's just how the revolutionaries organized them. Foreigners were a valuable contribution as they had real World War I combat experience. Some also worked on maintenance in the rear.

 >>/49092/
I did not know about this.
In the past ~150 years, over 3 million people left the country for the New World (actually many left to Italy, or Turkey for example, they also could end up at different places). Up to 1921 2 million, but I think from all the ethnicities who lived in our Kingdom.
They all play their part in the history of the recipient countries, that seems to be evident, but I don't know how much they did as a separate group or community, and not just as "Americans", "Argentines", or "Brazilians".
If you know more, I would hear it. I'm also curious if these old newspapers are available online, in digitized formats.

 >>/49105/
> They all play their part in the history of the recipient countries, that seems to be evident, but I don't know how much they did as a separate group or community, and not just as "Americans", "Argentines", or "Brazilians".
Legalists made a big deal of revolutionaries recruiting foreign "mercenaries". To make matters worse, European immigrant factory workers were associated with radical ideologies such as anarchism. Though their sons were already far more paulista than European.

 >>/49125/
That make sense. From Europe not just those emigrated who wanted to find possibilities to create something for themselves, but many left for political reasons. And these people often followed radical ideologies.
And then no matter how they brought up their children, their circumstances were way different than it was in the old country.

The_Honvd_Arm... jpg
(321.3 KB, 960x1280)

egyenruhaviselet_1848 jpg
(134.53 KB, 800x622)

honvedzaszlo-1848 png
(641.96 KB, 574x559)

marias-honvedzaszl... png
(304.18 KB, 394x446)

I chose to write about the Hungarian army today, without going into it's actual history. I just want to give an idea what was it like.
Well, it was colorful.

First there were units inherited from the Habsburg's empire, regular units, with imperial training and equipment. Then there was the national guard, the fresh Parliament enacted a law to set up these units, the regulation gave an exact picture what to aim for, and as they started to set up the battalions. They were closer to regular units, since countering the Serbian revolt demanded such level of organization. This was the core of the Home Defense Forces. The term for an individual soldier is honvéd which translates to "homeland defender" in literal sense, or loosely "patriot" - and we use the term since then -, but it originates from the German "Landwehr", the mirror translation of it, which is sometimes translated as "home guard" to English. They entered for three years into service.
The regulars and the almost regular national guards (HDF) were rounded out with various volunteer units, some in the ranks of the national guard, some as very "civilian" militias, territorial units. At the end of 1848 a larger organization was set up, unifying the command over the whole thing, it was called, Hungarian Home Defence Army.

honved-gyalogsag jpg
(292.96 KB, 1600x909)

tuzerseg-2 jpg
(115.53 KB, 1000x670)

The arms of the Defense Force were the infantry, cavalry, artillery, and a tiny engineer corps.
Infantry can be divided as I wrote above. The regulars of the Habsburg empire, the Hungarians were serving outside of the country, these units had to return home. Then there was the newly set up Home Defense Forces, and the national guard it grew out of. I think border guards also count here. Beyond were the volunteer militias, the "Freikorps". As auxiliaries forigners also fought alongside of our boys, first and foremost the various legions: the Viennese students, the Polish legion, and a German one, with skull and bones on their cap (srsly). Italians arrived too. (Curiously Vlahs did negoitiations with the Hungarian government for an own legion, even offered that the whole Avraham Iancu revolt side with us, and turn Wallachia and Moldova against the Russian. Srsly.)
Cavalry always remained hussar centric. It was the classic Hungarian role, the Emperor and King had no curiassiers from this part of his lands. There was a weak little step to set up such branch, but resulted in only one regiment. Other light cavalry units could be found too, eg. uhlans and chevau-légers.
As for the artillery corps, this stood on the most wobbly legs. They took the Austrian model as a template as the organized this branch of the military, which had a quite complicated structure since it also included logistical organs. This branch also included the artillery of garrisons and forts. Problem were that the troops of the arty units stationed on the Hungary were almost exclusively Austrian and Czech, on the other hand quite a few were willing to help setting up armament factories, if not involved in the struggle directly - sometimes as PoWs. Which was a great help since the inherited cannon park lacked the pipes that could be fielded in battles.
Despite the arty corps origin there were differences compared to the imperial. First a battery consisted only 8 cannons, this was lighter than the Austrian 10 (although I think they had light and heavy batteries too). So less firepower on paper. However the horse train Hungarians moved the pipes around were more maneuverable, which offered tactical advantage.
The engineers were sappers and pontooner battalions.

1842m-puska jpg
(48.6 KB, 965x158)

augustin-laukart jpg
(15.41 KB, 1289x275)

Flintlock mechanism... mp4
(1.02 MB, 1280x720 h264)

CapLock-Percussion-... mp4
(510.44 KB, 626x360 h264)

The weaponry.

Guns. The bread and butter of the armies.
For a long time there was no real change in muzzle loader guns. There were experiments, Prussians tinkered with various configurations (changing the shape of stock, stuff like that), but nothing revolutionary came from it. Then in the first half of the 19th century a new firing mechanism was introduced, the percussion cap, and the Austrian army also started to phase out the old flintlock system (which was introduced in the 1500s!), and 1842M Augustine infantry musket entered into service. This war of independence was the field test of the new guns.
Basically instead of the spark of the flint, a chemical reaction induced the ignition of the gunpowder which was stuffed down the barrel. See the animations.
The freshly organized Hungarian army's greatest challenge was the procurement of guns. They had what the regular units had with themselves, the new percussion cap ones, they had warehouses with the old flintlock system, but there was little to no manufacturing capacity, which needed to be set up. They also tried to alleviate the hunger with foreign purchases and requisition of civilian hunting arms, mostly flintlock muzzleloaders - often recruits simply brought their rifles from home with themselves. In the active phase of the war, after won battles and sieges, they also make good use of the captured equipment. They needed all guns, pistols, and carbines what they could get, from any source available.
The 1842M had a rifled version, sometimes called 1844M, used in way smaller numbers, mostly in border guard units, jäger, sharpshooters. While I "researched" I found a note that in general all over Europe, rifled guns were frowned upon, and their users were considered murderers. Early rifles were hard to use as the bullet was hard to press down the barrel, due to tight fit, but this 1844M was almost as easy to load as the smoothbore muskets.
Flintlock guns came at least in four variation, 1798M, 1807M, 1818M, 1838M. Imported weapons came from England and Belgium, percussion primer, some rifled.
Apparently a gunsmith in Kassa invented a breach loading system and offered the government his work. It could have been a paradigm shifting event, unfortunately the country was in no position to invest in a new and untried piece of equipment, especially not in a number that could make the difference.

laukart-szurony jpg
(6.13 KB, 516x234)

1807M-utászszablya png
(296.97 KB, 1553x324)

juratus-sa... jpg
(174.71 KB, 520x888)

akademische... jpg
(30.51 KB, 700x1049)

After the pike and shot era, the two type of weapons were married with the invention of bayonet. Ours were mostly of the Laukart system, with 4 edges, called 1838M, and other older models. The length were 460 or 600 mm.
This was complemented with infantry sabers, mostly used by officers, often made individually in large variety of looks. Two other characteristic swords were in use among the infantry, the jurátus sabre, the insignia of law students who joined the revolution by the thousands, and the straight sword of Viennese legionnaires.
The last thing worth nothing here is the sapper saber, with it's wide blade and saw spine.
The weapon shortage was so pressing, that territorial militias, often helped themselves with straightening the scythe, and used it as a substitution of pikes and bayonets.

lovassagi_karabely jpg
(21.37 KB, 800x331)

1798_pisztoly jpg
(71.18 KB, 1000x667)

ostor4 jpg
(879.31 KB, 3307x2201)

1824_M_huszrszablya jpg
(120.01 KB, 1000x604)

The cavalry used the carbines and pistols. Hussars had their sabers, uhlans lances (2630 mm long). Militias used what they had, civilian pistols, centuries old sabers, and since these soldiers were frequently cattle herders in their civilian life whips.

honved-tuzerseg-1848-... jpg
(206.46 KB, 640x525)

agyu3 jpg
(240.23 KB, 829x713)

hagyomanyorzok_03 jpg
(153.12 KB, 800x600)

röppenytyű-1849 jpg
(76.84 KB, 707x756)

The basic armament of the artillery were the 6 pounder cannons, made of bronze. Weight about 700 kgs, four horses pulled one piece, 9 man crew served each on paper, but three can make it work. Two shots could be fired per minute, with an effective range of ~1500 m.
The field artillery also used 3, 12, and 18 pdr cannons, siege guns were 18 and 24 pdrs. The stationary guns they used for defending forts were made of iron, and came in 12, 18, and 24 pdr versions.
Howitzers and mortars fired in a high angle. The first ones were used in mountainous terrain and in settlements, while the latter proved useful in sieges. They lobbed bombs, exploding projectiles, the largest mortars were 60 pdrs.
The last artillery piece were the Congreve rockets. I remember them from dramatic depictions of battles in literature.

That's it for today.

 >>/49962/
> foreign purchases
And from which ports and railways did they ship them? Ottoman territory? Anything in the Adriatic could get blockaded.

sztanko-soma jpg
(13.95 KB, 160x204)

 >>/49968/
In 1848 they had quite a few months to arrange foreign purchases.
The revolution basically was done on March 15th, then with the blessing of the king they started the legislative work, on the 22th they accepted the law about setting up the national guard, the recruitment started in May. The first military challenge was the Serbian revolt, started in late May - early June. While this was part of the Habsburg wider strategy, it did not meant the start of the war of independence. The Court was busy elsewhere, they had problems in Czechia, Vienna, and chiefly Italy. They had to consolidate the situation first. The war starts essentially with Jelacic's intervention, on September 11st he crosses the river Drava from Croatia, as the agent of the Court (and not like a Croatian separatist). Before the Croatian mobilization they might delayed the transports with bureaucratic bs, but from late March to early September it was peace on paper.
I found that the first, earliest purchase was the Belgian, they bought 4-5000 muskets. From England they also procured 19-20000. The officer entrusted with the deal was sent abroad on July 2. So the guns were brought in the next two months.
This officer, called Sztankó Soma (~Samuel Stanko, from Northern Hungary), during autumn also managed to smuggle machines and equipment necessary for manufacturing weapons, and percussion caps. Then he set up the factories.
To close down his history: he participated in the fights too. Got 12 years of prison, sit 3 years, got amnesty. Then teacher. After the Austro-Hungarian compromise officer again in the Hungarian Defense Force. Retired in 1875. Died in 1896, because of his illness - I dunno what it was - he committed suicide. May the soil be light for him.

 >>/49969/
Oh, the direction he managed the smuggling operation was Silesia and Galizia, basically via Polan.

yoyo png
(166.75 KB, 404x460)

 >>/49964/
 >>/49965/
 >>/49963/
 >>/49962/
Usually, technological advances always happen the most often during wartime. Has happened in almost every major war. The Italian Wars for example. Da Vinci was hired by one of the Borgias to develop military equipment for his army

> t. knower

 >>/49988/
They do.
And often remain unused. Leonardo's inventions did not become much realities. Funding and time.

C._Hirsch_d.... jpg
(696.24 KB, 1802x2560)

Maria-Terezia-koronaz... jpg
(395.13 KB, 1000x1000)

Maria-Terezia-koronaz... jpg
(350.53 KB, 1000x1000)

Very nice were having this festivity yearly, but when the tradition started? Because it did not right after Saint Stephen's canonization.
The first who categorized it as a national - "official state" - holiday was Queen Maria Theresia in 1771 when the pope, in order to reduce the number of religious holidays, took out Saint Stephen's feast from the list of those. In order to celebrate the patron saint of her apostolic kingdom, Maria Theresa also ordered the Holy Dexter to be taken to Buda - from Ragusa (today: Dubrovnik), with a stop in Wien - it was presented to the Saint Sigismund chapel in the Castle of Buda.
Since her legitimacy was on wobbly legs, essentially in all her countries, she made an effort to cater to traditions and formalities, to prove and show she has all the rights she needs to rule over her domains. In Hungary too. Related to the topic on hand she also used the title of "apostolic king/queen" of Hungary, which technically all the kings of Hungary were entitled to use (very few did in practice) since Saint Stephen gained the right to carry the apostolic cross in front of him. She had a minor disagreement with the pope Clement XIII over this, whom questioned this entitlement, had a bit of exchanges of mail, and in the end he authorized the use.

Maria-Theres... jpg
(72.25 KB, 415x599)

Szepes png
(291.46 KB, 800x529)

 >>/50889/
She took some other measures that catered to the Hungarian nation (the noble nation). She created the Order of Maria Therese, a military decoration, and rewarded soldiers from all the empire as the Queen of Hungary. Then she created the Order of Saint Stephen, a civilian decoration. She also refreshed and old medieval award specifically for the Hungarian nobility. She was the one who organized the Hungarian noble bodyguard unit for the court, taken the youth sent from the Hungarian counties.
Shel also did steps to mend the body of the country together. The 150 years of the Ottoman conquest and the following reconquest, or as some of the rulers thought about it: new conquest, did a number on the administration of the regions. She gave back the Banat to the country, and Fiume too. She reintegrated those towns of Szepes which were pawned by king Sigismund to the Poles over three centuries ago (on the occasion of the first partition of Polan...). She also created claims for the Hungarian crown onto Galicia and Lodomeria.

I don't want to go into the whole story of her rule - or the problems that left unmended -, so I'll just end this here. Generally she remembered positively, especially considering she was a Habsburg, and and absolutist monarch. Although people don't pay much mind to her these days. I think all in all she was a positive force for the country, but then she recognized she needed to give something to gain support, and she needed a lot of support to keep her countries.

Although there are gossips about her amorous relationships with equines.

 >>/50890/
>  She was the one who organized the Hungarian noble bodyguard unit for the court, taken the youth sent from the Hungarian counties.
This sounds like the strongest message out of any of those measures, she was entrusting her safety to her subjects.

 >>/50891/
I thought that was Katherine the great.

Though it was probably an insult hurled at many rulers in order to discredit them.

 >>/50894/
I can agree with that. It had other effects too, like it offered opportunities for the lower nobility to gain prestige and connections, or it added a unique cultural color to the court.
Most stuff prior are establishing relation with the Árpáds, the OG Hungarian dynasty, the marriage relation to them and the claim of ancestry that came with it gave the Habsburgs legitimacy. Some of em put emphasis on this, some not at all (such as Joseph, son of Maria Theresa).

 >>/50895/
I heard such gossips about Big K too. And you are probably right.

Should have written something for October 6. Perhaps will make up for it on the weekend.

kádár-jános jpg
(71.15 KB, 644x890)

Nagy_Imre_ret... jpg
(75.66 KB, 450x600)

rákosi-mátyás jpg
(50.7 KB, 644x644)

Well, I missed out on the October 6th commemoration day, but End was down so I'll blame onto that.
But this one is kinda mandatory due to its nature as national holiday.

Let's talk about the Aftermath.
Heh, now I'm thinking I should write about the Western "help", kek. Nah, gonna stick to the aftermath.

Well, let's set the scene:
The Soviet Union's mechanized divisions kicked the eastern door on us (1956. November 4th), and brought Kádár with themselves on their tanks.
Kádár János served as the communist Minister of Interior for a short period in 1948-50 while the Workers' Party monopolized the state power. Then he was imprisoned by Rákosi. His fault was not being a Moscowite communist (or at least a Jew). After the the position of Rákosi and co. solidified they started to purge the Party too, not just everyone else. Rákosi and 4 more Moscowite Jews formed a clique at the top of the food chain, and wanted all the power concentrated in their hands. They were hardcore Stalinist. Everyone outside of them were deemed to be a danger to them and their plans. One of these dangers were the home brew communists, such as Kádár.
But after Stalin's death their position weakened, and the revolution at least managed to let Moscow know the Hungarian people don't want them anymore. So Moscow gave up on this, and reached for other tools they considered sufficient. Kádár might posed a threat in Rákosi's twisted mind, but he was a trustable enough communist, despite some youthful faults in his past. Or perhaps for the faults, I dunno. I'm sure historians wrote about why Kádár was picked for the task, but that would deviate far from our current topic.

35723 jpg
(58.09 KB, 630x513)

35724 jpg
(40.57 KB, 630x489)

59052 jpg
(49.29 KB, 630x372)

So, while the revolution and war of independence was still ongoing they formed a government around Kádár, and when the Soviet intervetion begin they started a broadcast saying that Nagy Imre (the PM during the struggle, faithful communist himself, Muscowite but not part of the 5-man clique and had troubling social-democratic deviations) was weak and counter-revolutionaries sidetracked the reform movement. They are essentially labeled the revolution as a reactionary counter-revolution - since communists appropriated the term revolution - and said this is why they had to form a new government, and then this government asked the help of the Soviet comrades. On November 7th Kádár and his govt. arrived to Budapest. Fights were went on to the 11th.

The Reprisal was essentially a political murder spree in a legal coating.
Random executions basically started right after the new government came with the Red Army. During the revolution the political police, the AVH was abolished, members fled to the Soviet Union, and they came back, employed again in the state apparatus, mind set on revenge. The Red Army supported them, their local commander was a KGB general.
By 1957 March-April, the legal foundation was laid, but not by the legislation, but by the central committee of the party which issued statutes in the name of the government. They simplified the penal procedure, condensed it to the quickness of martial law. New judiciary bodies were set up entrusted with the retribution.
They were quite busy. They found 26-27 000 people guilty. 470 people got death penalty, 372 were executed by them (some execution were done outside the legal framework). Over 20 000 were sent to prison, and another 10-15 000 were gulaged. Over 200 000 people made the choice to emigrate.

biszku-béla png
(528.85 KB, 580x767)

biszku-2011 jpg
(90.94 KB, 700x467)

The era of Reprisal is usually considered the years between 1956 and 1963. But cases went on beyond that, verdicts were made at least to '66. But '63 was the year of the first general amnesty, when many were pardoned. Many rot in prison up to 1974.
Couple of interesting things to note.
In '57 December, they surveyed the work, and the Minister of Interior, Biszku Béla, pointed out, that "the numbers of physical extermination is relatively low". So they reopened the case of hundreds of people who served in various armed bodies of the state (from police, through prison guards, to army), stating their sentences were unproportionally light compared to their crime. 26 were got capital punishment.
Lot of people who participated in the fights against the Soviet forces were treated as common criminals and sentenced for attempted murder or murder. They were imprisoned as such, and 144 were executed as such. In relation to this those who were politically persecuted in 1989 got rehabilitated, the "common criminals" had to wait til 2000.
Biszku Béla was accused of various crimes after 2010, even war crimes, but all cases were dropped.

Metternich-K... jpg
(61.24 KB, 368x511)

Coat_of_Arms_of_the... png
(326.85 KB, 555x599)

emperor-fran... jpg
(95.75 KB, 478x690)

During our discussion of this national holiday, the name Metternich came up a couple of times. What do we know?
Apparently Metternich is an Austrian rock band formed in 2016.
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=mPAREt9aMUg
https://youtube.com/watch?v=mPAREt9aMUg
https://invidious.protokolla.fi/watch?v=h_4RUPlwOJc
https://youtube.com/watch?v=h_4RUPlwOJc

Okay, this probably not it.
We are, of course, talking about Prince Klemens von Metternich, Chancellor and Foreign Minister of the Austrian Empire, the great opposer of revolutionary movements, and the counterweight in the Habsburg Court that prevented any meaningful change from feudalistic order, whose actions to keep the lid forcibly on the pot of boiling water just hastened the emergence of a new revolutionary wave. Some might call him close-minded, some clear-sighted. He was one of the most influential person of his day and age, probably his greatest work was the redrawn Europe after the Napoleonic Wars, although he wasn't the sole author of it.
I don't want to present a biography, read Wikipedia for that. I just want to acknowledge his work that led to the Revolution (and War of Independence) which he was not part of since he was forced by the Viennese to resign two days prior to the events on Hungary. But again while it wasn't entirely his own construct, he made a great pair for Emperor and King Francis in his absolutist politics. And then he became one party in another duo - with Franz Anton von Kolowrat - which replaced the weak Ferdinand to hold the reigns when it came to real governing.

hungarian-fashion jpg
(41.89 KB, 419x470)

young-Széchenyi jpg
(46.45 KB, 358x433)

I skimmed couple of stuff on the internet, flipped couple of pages of books and I got the impression that while he was a diplomat to the bone, who wielded words like a sword, and was a schemer, a central figure in the Court's intrigue he did believe in traditions, in the conservatism of his era, in Christianity (despite being a womanizer apparently), and the enlightened absolutism (although Francis' absolutism was way less enlightened than some previous notable monarchs). He probably wasn't really a cynic, but he thought about the new ideas as silly fads of the youngsters or some such. Most importantly he did not felt ill towards Hungarians or the Kingdom of Hungary - unlike the Czech Kollowrat.
I found his comments to various people about his visits of the 1925-27 Diet (the Hungarian legislation) amusing. Lemme quote him:
actually forces me to change my language and my robes. I have to speak Latin and dress like a Hussar, and the only liberty which I take on this occasion is a refusal to wear moustaches
Fun depiction of Hungarian noble fashion. And:
Today I am traveling back and forth between the two capitals, happily no farther from each other than two London suburbs; in one I am a German and in the other a Hungarian; a strange fate.
The two capitals he meant Vienna and Pozsony (Pressburg), where the assembly assembled in those years.
He did fear Hungarian nationalism tho, but not liberal and socialist notions. Even in case of the moderate Count Széchenyi, he felt suspicion and utilized the secret police to shadow him, just in case. His views also blindsided him, for he saw that the Hungarian nobility as a whole was even more conservative than himself (he even considered the Estates of Hungary as a support of the king), but never considered that the rest of the society will demand a change, with the leadership of couple of key figures from the reform-nobility.

kolowrat3 jpg
(1.05 MB, 1600x2196)

Couple of more things I wanna note.
It seems Metternich was fond of the extravagant lifestyle a politician of his stature enjoyed - and to keep that up he spent a copious amount of money, both from the imperial treasury and from loans. He was indebted to the Rothschilds throughout his life. Those guys however don't give just money not expecting more in return, but if someone is broke but in high office they surely accept "favors" in return.
Related to this. After he was forced to resign on 1848 March 13th he took his family out of Austria and traveled to London. Their stay was entirely financed by loans, this time besides the bankers he also got money from Czar Nicholas I. It is obvious he preserved his foreign contacts (aristocracy everywhere was all related anyway) and influence, and kept open lines. I bet later for the Russian intervention of 1949 he extended his influence and lobbied. Holy Alliance and all that.
Lastly it is not easy to tell his actual role and actions. As above noted he put the secret police on Széchenyi, but his main area was foreign politics and Kolowrat held the interior matters. Does this means that actually Kolowrat decided to watch Széchenyi? However Metternich was the senior, he was the Chancellor after all, he could have a say in anything. On the other hand it is noted that Francis took Kolowrat to counter Metternich, and they remained competitors forever.
It's obvious that the Court was full of intrigues, and as I noted in this thread it was also full of cliques and the courtiers had their own interests and belonged to various cliques depending on these interests. They tried to play to others to gain advantage and favors, gain more prestige, power, and access to the treasury. One thing unified them tho: they all had an interest to keep the current order , because their existence and the continuation of their games depended on it.

szent-istvan-kiraly-e... jpg
(229.9 KB, 600x600)

Always keep in mind that all men are born in the same state, and nothing elevates more but the humility, nothing sinks more than pride and malice.

King Saint Stephen dedicated the Admonitions to his son Saint Emeric, a short set if instructions, a so called mirror for princes, a guide on how to rule, about the ten pillars of kings. The actual author seems to be a high priest, close to the king, but it is surely was ordered by Stephen, and contains thoughts that implies he also gave his opinions what to cover and how.
It's fun that the introduction notes: soft things make you soft. Emeric as a child could not yet face the hardships of military campaigns and battles, which were important themes in the life of the adult king Stephen, and he needs not just the nourishment of soft mush he was fed until now, but has to taste the sour wine of life.

I. Keeping he Catholic faith
For starters this is an interesting point. He says only those can gain the title of the king who are faithful and Catholic. We shouldn't forget that when this was written, and when the Hungarian Kingdom formed, when the Hungarian rulers gained the kingship, the title Rex - instead of Dux, elevated from there - the conflict between Rome and Constantinople was deeper and deeper and culminated in the 1054's Great Schism. So firstly this point shows only Christians can become kings, it is a Christian title. Second while at that point still everyone was Catholic, perhaps this is a refusal of Orthodoxy.
The work mentions the importance the belief in the Holy Trinity as is, and warn against those who want to change or reduce or inflate it. Warns about heresy.
II. Honor the Church's order
The Church as institution not the building or ritual. As the title says, honor it, defend it, and make it grow.
III. Respect the high priest
The advice is: they should be the key officials. Absolution is in their hands and they can tie men to sin too. On the other hand if one of them turns to sin, the king should warn him and make him find him the path back to righteousness (or snitch on him to the Church).

istvan-kiraly-intelmei jpg
(169.75 KB, 1200x450)

IV. Respect the lay aristocracy and warriors
They are the wall defending the country, the protectors of the weak, the destroyers of enemies, and the expanders of the borders. They shouldn't be put to servitude. Don't be haughty with them, but lead them with virtue
V. True judgement and patience
I feel this one Machiavellian, perhaps I could find hints to previous points too, but this is a bit more apparent. Essentially leave judgements to the judges, and only serve justice in cases which suits well enough to make the king look good. Otherwise appear patient with everyone, don't swear oaths - don't pick sides essentially, he should distance himself from making enemies for decisions, leave that to the judges.
VI. About hosting guests and how to patronize them
Guests and newcomers enrich the country. They are basically sources of information, opportunities to learn. They bring knowledge and skills, weapons (literal, but information is a weapon too).
VII. The weight of the Council
Listen to the Council, listen to the old and wise. Avoid young, dumb, mediocre and proud ones.
VIII. Sons follow the predecessors
This is about continuity and traditions. The one about guests sounds progressive, this one is conservative. Fathers should direct the sons, and sons should obey their fathers. And then repeat when they become ones, follow the customs of the old. This point also says that each folk has their won customs and they should by ruled by that custom.
IX. Keep praying
X. Piety, mercy, and other virtues
Patience, strength, humility, temperance, gentleness, honourable, chasteness.

6FQS2GEGIYI6THLT4K5GX... jpg
(141.01 KB, 1484x1047)

I missed out the October 6th commemoration of the Martyrs of Arad. I wanted to take a look of other political martyrs of the era, Italy is bound to have some, and I heard something about the Fenians. But I missed the opportunity, oh well.

So I'm thinking now - in honour of our '56 Revoulution - to take a look at Czechoslovakia in 1968.
The Prague Spring
I don't know much, especially not the details, so this will more like a general inquiry into the topic on my behalf, and perhaps summary of things. See also: Wikipedia. All right maybe I'll try write something that Wikipee does not, I'm curious about Hungarian ties to it ofc.
As stated before politicians always mix daily politics with these national holidays so I don't listen their speeches.

antonin-novotny jpg
(64.04 KB, 537x660)

alexander-dubcek jpg
(43.79 KB, 750x625)

One could think the Hungarian Revolution of '56 had great impact to the other Eastern Block countries. It is hard to measure but it seems the opposite is the truth. Officialy it was labelled as a counter-revolution and the rest of the opinions were suppressed. There were little to no samizdat activity that could give a voice, censorship ruled.
We already had some understanding with Poland, but Romania was openly hostile, Czechosolovakia ditto (with serious anti-Hungarian chauvinist overtones in both countries). Officially in the latter country as a direct reaction there was a "secret" memorandum that declared support for the leadership of Antonin Novotny, securing his position of First Secretary of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia which he held since 1953, then he became president in 1957, held both offices till the Prage Spring removed him.
As our Revolution gained some of the ideas from the de-Stalinization and some wind too, Novotny's reign started with that - but as a counterweight. He seems he was more of a hardliner, who put effort into halting any thawing processes, and his "socialist" constitution of 1960 was even more formally communist than the previous one they accepted in 1948. So this "destalinization" went slow with occasional pushes from more reformist elements (such as writers, or the next First Secretary, Alexander Dubcek), eroding Novotny's popularity.
I can't say how wide was the popular support, but judging by the events that followed the later Soviet/Warsaw Pact invasion it seems that sympathizers were from all over the country from all level of the society - but not in any impactful numbers. People wanted changes but did not want to risk a more serious push for them. What we should see, that the changes were the product of the rise of an internal political opposition, and were introduced upside down, no armed uprising against the communist leadership happened unlike at Hungary.
In 1968 January Dubcek and a pal cornered Novotny, and Brezhnev (probably already probing the opinions of the leaders of the satellite states) decided to green light Novotny's retirement. The issue seemed to be decided but then Dubcek and many reformists started to talk nonsense about living standards, multi-party systems, democracies, building relations with the West and such. This compelled Brezhnev to engage them and tell 'em they should slow down a bit. They agreed, but The Head and Brow of the Soviet Union was not convinced, he saw that the process will lead to losing Czechoslovakia, and ordered the tanks of the SU and allied Warsaw Pact (Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary) countries' tanks rolling. No clash happened between the two sides, almost only civilians resisted, mostly with non-violent methods.
Dubcek had to go, he was replaced by Gustav Husak. All enacted laws and reforms were reverted, except the one that made Czechoslovakia a federation of two countries. Later some of the reforms were activated again as amendments if I understood correctly.

leonid-brezhnev jpg
(45.12 KB, 900x750)

kadar_janos jpg
(145.47 KB, 1920x1280)

As for Hungary.
It appears that at the same time the Czechoslovak reforms started, the Kádár regime here introduced new economical practices, trying to make the country's economy actually work. The changes put forward in the neighbour were mostly political in nature, so our leadership started to pray to Saint Lenin that they keep them very "moderate". They feared if things were getting out of hands then our economical project will be scraped, or perhaps even the thoughts of resistance will be reignited here or at least Moscow will think that's happening too.
Since their fears seemed to become true, they decided to show they are loyal subjects of Moscow, and they can march along with the Warsaw Pact, right into Czechoslovakia, when finally Brezhnev decided at the military solution. Kádár even declared that if it comes to counter-revolution in Czechoslovakia, he will vote wholeheartedly for military intervention. Well he did the same with his own country so I don't see how could he not applied the same principle elsewhere.
From his opinion we could also deduce, that the Dubcek-turn, was went far enough for him to consider it a counter-revolution. However this is not the case. He gave the opinion to Brezhnev (on the day of the invasion, on August 21), that the events in Czechoslovakia are closer to the Polish events of 1956 than to the Hungarian counter-revolution of the same year. Still, Hungarian forces were participated the same.

Supposedly later in 1988-89 when our socialist system started to collapse they considered the moral Czechoslovakian lesson and example.

ClipboardImage-168566... png
(375.41 KB, 770x574)

 >>/52518/
 >>/52517/
 >>/52516/

Interesting.

Where you or your parents alive when all these things happened Hungarybernd?

 >>/52567/
Luckily I'm not that old. But parents were around already. Maybe I'll ask them what they heard about things.