Page 197 [197]
OCR
THE INTELLECTUAL RESOURCES OF MODERN GOVERNANCE Debrecen, and Pál Magda (1770-1841), who, after teaching various disciplines at several institutions of Hungary, taught Staatenkunde at the Reformed College of Sárospatak, both regarded their own works as the “updating” of Schwartner’s well-documented and clearly-structured Statistik. This structure is kept throughout the 1840s, although some variations do take place in the meanwhile. An additional goal in the works of scholars like Ercsei and Magda is the translation of the terminology and contents of Staatenkunde into Hungarian. Indeed, translations became increasingly widespread, beginning with the 1820s, at the expense of the previously dominant Latin, and partly German, treatises.” The state descriptions by Magda, but also those of Elek Fényes (18071876) during the Hungarian Reform Era after the Napoleonic wars, are telling examples for the new demand to make Staatenkunde available in Hungarian and other vernaculars, while still using German to reach a broader international readership.” III How did the taxonomy of Staatenkunde in Hungary modify over time? The most significant change was the disappearance of the historical dimension of description. While Schwartner makes use of the diachronic comparison as an analytical tool in the Göttingen tradition, the next generation of Fenyes and Konek produces “presentist” accounts. Also, the explicit and implicit comparison with other states disappears, turning into standard rationalised calculations, such as population density — particularly visible in the works, published in 1847 and in 1868 by Konek.** Some authors concentrate on the first part of the triadic structure of Staatenkunde and turn to the material cause, as seen in the description by Demian, who leaves out the characterization of the legal and administrative spheres entirely. However, this classical division of state descriptions is preserved surprisingly long into the nineteenth century, as illustrated, again, by the table of contents in the Statistik by Konek. Robert Horvath is also right inasmuch as the first part focusing on “Land und Leute” becomes the most differentiated and richest domain of Staatenkunde. ” ErcsEI, Daniel, Statistica. Kozonséges statistica és Magyar Orszdgnak statisticdja, Vol. 1, Debreczen, Csäthy, MDCCCXIV.; Maapa, Pal, Magyar Orszagnak és a hatarérzé katonasäg vidékeinek legújabb statisztikai és geográfiai leirása, Pest, Trattner, 1819, 46—52. Magda does not follow the Göttingen methods fully, but amalgamates them with the earlier style, which described the administrative units of Hungary, the counties, one by one. 33 FÉNYES, Alexius von, Statistik des Königreichs Ungarn, 3 Vols., Pest, Trattner — Károlyi, 1843. 44 KONEK, A statistika, 23.
