Historum - History Forums

Historum - History Forums (http://historum.com/)
-   European History (http://historum.com/european-history/)
-   -   Why did Hungary fail to Magyarize its non-Hungarian territories? (http://historum.com/european-history/134747-why-did-hungary-fail-magyarize-its-non-hungarian-territories.html)

Futurist March 19th, 2018 10:41 AM

Why did Hungary fail to Magyarize its non-Hungarian territories?
 
Why did Hungary fail to Magyarize its non-Hungarian territories in spite of the fact that it controlled these territories for 1,000 years? :

https://hungarynews.files.wordpress....pe_1100_ad.jpg

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/e...hun1910pop.gif

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3c/c2...ec274ff8c4.jpg

As you can tell by the maps above, Hungary already controlled almost all of its 1914 territory by 1100 and yet in the 800 years that it controlled its various territories, Hungary failed to Magyarize its non-Hungarian territories.

Why exactly did Hungary fail in regards to this? After all, the ethnic Germans who moved to Pomerania, Silesia, and East Prussia during the Ostsiedlung (Medieval German migration) had much more success at Germanizing these areas than Hungary had in Magyarizing Croatia, Slovakia, Subcarpathian Ruthenia, and Transylvania.

Anyway, any thoughts on this?

janusdviveidis March 19th, 2018 11:08 AM

I don't know why, but one of the reasons might be that Hungarians were more primitive, less developed culture. So, they ruled, but didn't assimilate other cultures. Lithuanians ruled huge territory for long period of time and ended up assimilated themselves. Chinese tended to assimilate all conquerors.

Lucius March 19th, 2018 11:09 AM

Perhaps nothing in their history/culture suggested the Magyarizing of other people?

Emperor of Wurttemburg 43 March 19th, 2018 11:26 AM

This isn't how empire building worked in middle age Europe. Holdings of a monarch weren't culturally homogeneous nation states, this is why the Hapsburg Empire was so different it was a relic of a time when what became modern states was a collection of territory connected by and only by the rule of a single person. There were home regions but Kings and Dukes weren't thinking along the terms you are.

Hungary and the Magyars were distinct from regions in the HRE but the King of Hungary was part of that same European system. To put it in reverse, why didn't Hungary become Austrian/German over the 300+ years between Mohacs and the creation of the Dual Monarchy? Also there were long stretches of history when Hungary's throne was occupied by non Hungarians whether they be Hapsburgs, Poles or Luxembourgians/Bohemians, so Hungary was to these places as Croatia would have been to Hungary.

Ethnic "German" is a much more all encompassing term than Hungarian.

Maki March 19th, 2018 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucius (Post 2914849)
Yeah. Perhaps nothing in their history/culture suggested the Magyarizing of other peoples?

They tried, especially during the early modern period. Layos Kossuth, the leader of the Hungarian Revolution stated that in Hungary there can be only one nation: Hungarians. They also pushed Magyarization on many non-Hungarians in the Kingdom for example Romanians, Serbs and Slovaks.

stevev March 19th, 2018 12:20 PM

It's too hard to learn Hungarian if you're not born unto it.:laugh:

deaf tuner March 19th, 2018 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maki (Post 2914861)
They tried, especially during the early modern period....

"especially" isn't the appropriate term. "only"/"mostly" is closer to reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by janusdviveidis (Post 2914848)
I don't know why, but one of the reasons might be that Hungarians were more primitive, less developed culture.
...

It's certainly not because of their less developed culture.

Hungary didn't fail to Magyarize its non-Hungarian territories simply because a very long time it didn't intended to.


Quote:

“As our guests come from different regions and provinces they bring different models and arms with them. All of
these blazon the country, elevate the splendour of the royal court and deter the foreigners from swaggering. The
country with one language and custom is weak and fallible
. Considering all of these reasons, I order you, my
son, to protect the newcomers with good will and hold them in high esteem, so that they prefer to reside in your
country than to live anywhere else.” ...

Stephen I of Hungary (975 (?) - 1038)
The "initial" Hungarian kingdom was (what some forget, some even hate it nowadays ... * ) what we would call today a multi-ethnic, multicultural state.

Magyarisation came more than half a millennium later.

The huge decline of Hungary came in the same time with the "magyarisation" policies, and to be very honest I am not sure that it isn't related.

____
* sorry, couldn't help it :o

Tulun March 19th, 2018 01:04 PM

until the middle of the 19th century there was no incentive for the mass linguistic assimilation (Latin was the state language and the majority of the population was serf anyways, so it was STFU for them) and even after the 1867 Ausgleich when the liberal nationalist political course came in charge the policies were half hearted and inefective, not systematic until cc the lex Apponyi (1907, that made compulsory goal for all elementary school pupils to be able to express themselves in Hungarian until the end of 4th grade). Sure if the old Hungarian state survived some decades more then the assimilation would speed up, but the game was over earlier.

Kirialax March 19th, 2018 01:22 PM

Why did the Bulgars "Slavicize" while the Magyars managed to retain their language?

Arminius March 19th, 2018 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirialax (Post 2914920)
Why did the Bulgars "Slavicize" while the Magyars managed to retain their language?

Great question! You don't have any ideas?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:21 PM.


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.