The History of Hungarian Passive Resistance 1849-67 By Rory Kinane.

The History of Hungarian Passive

Resistance 1849-67By Rory Kinane

Contents1. Introduction

2. Context

3. Timeline

4. Methods of Passive Resistance

5. Ferenc Deak

6. Historiography

7. Conclusions

Introduction Hungary between 1849-67 went through a period of passively

resisting their Austrian rulers

Passive resistance led and inspired (to a debatable degree) by Ferenc Deak

This is seen by many as the forerunner to much of what Gandhi would later do in India

Perhaps the first example of passive resistance and also it was successful

Richard B. Gregg - the first major populariser of nonviolence describes Hungary as the earliest example

Gene Sharp - in The Politics of Nonviolent Action talks of how Ference Deak was well ahead of his time

Context Hungary is a large part of Austrian empire, Sugar describes it as practically

half of the empire

Revolutions of 1848 impact the Austrian empire and Hungary in particular

The events of 1848 meant Hungary gained a Constitution

Emperor Ferdinand seen as weak in allowing Hungarians to gain constitution and give other concessions

Forced to abdicate bye nephew and subsequent Emperor Francis Joseph

New Emperor quickly repeals constitution

Violence erupts

Attempts by Kossuth and others at declaring Independence

Austrian Oppression 1848 Notoriously brutal General Haynauwas

given a free hand by the regime

In the city of Arad, thirteen Hungarian military revolutionaries executed

Lajos Batthyány - the first Hungarian head of state executed

Military courts sentenced some 500 to death, executed 114, and jailed 1,763. Around 50,000 ex-infantrymen were shanghaied into special "retribution" units

A new gendarme force was formed and a pervasive network of informants created

Timeline 1849-671849-59 resistance is largely directionless

Deak sets tone in 1850 by repeatedly refusing to join in governing with the Austrians

1859 Emperor visits and Hungarians refuse to celebrate and burn down an arch the Emperor was meant to pass through

1859 Emperor attempts to appease Hungarians by asking for representatives to go to Reichstag – only 3 out of 6 go

Emperor again concedes to Hungarian demands and allows a Diet in 1861

Timeline – The 1861 Diet The actions of the Diet

re-establish County Councils and also attack Austrian control: -

New Diet soon closed at gunpoint by Austrian soldiers

Decrees of 1861

Sack all Austrian officials

Ban all taxes that support the Imperial Army

Ban all future taxes unless approved by Hungarian parliament

Send a critical letter to the Emperor

Timeline – 1861 Onwards passive resistance begins Boycott of Austrian goods

Refusal to pay taxes

Refusal to co-operate

Refusal to speak German

Refusal to take part in Imperial Parliament

Austria responds by billeting soldiers Only increases polarisation and massively

unpopular with soldiers

Timeline -1863Conciliation attempted but Deak refuses

Austria and Prussia go to war with Denmark and seize Schleswig and Holstein

Bohemia also leaves Imperial parliament

Tension begins to build between Austria and Prussia over Danish spoils

Bismarck, realises Austria is weak and Prussian military advancements make war a good option

Timeline - 1865Emperor again offers Deak a settlement short of

constitutional revival, Deak refuses

Emperor visits Hungary to gain/gauge support

Asks Palffy (Governor) to get Hungary covered in Imperial flags

Hungarians respond by covering Pesth in Nationalist flags

Timeline – 1865 ContinuedEmperor realises support in Hungary is very

weak

Sacks Palffy

Emperor attempts to gain French support against Prussia but Bismarck had already squared them in neutrality

Position of Austria increasingly weak

Signs treaty of Lauenberg with Austria giving them the rest of the Danish spoils for the very cheap price of £500,000

Timeline – 1865 Continued20th September Manifesto - Emperor dissolves

Imperial parliament and restores Hungarian and Bohemian parliaments

December – Emperor opens new Hungarian parliament wearing Hungarian dress, speaking Hungarian with motif of “1848!” behind him

Gives eloquent address but little consolation

Spends time in Pesth giving dinner parties to every Hungarian patriot he could find

Tells people he is more of a Hungarian than an Austrian

Timeline – 1865 ContinuedDiet respond by continuing to demand restoration

of 1848 Constitution for Hungarian co-operation

Some back and forth with Emperor but ultimately he leaves Pesth baffled and to no fanfare

Diet begins to ignore Austria and act as 1848 laws were in existence

Austria impotent to stop this

Prussia now allied to Italy and Austria facing disaster

Timeline – 1866

Austro-Prussian War Italy beaten, but Prussians

devastate every Austrian army

Last ditch attempt by Emperor for Hungarian support

Even asks Deak if he restores Constitution would Hungary fight He says “No” – it was not a

matter to be bartered over Results of war: Austria looses

head of Germanic Confederation, some territory to Prussia, Italian provinces and has to pay a war debt

Timeline – 1866 ContinuedEmperor fires some old guard and turns to Baron

Beust

Deak strains to prevent rebellion in Hungary

Austrians fear Bismarck backed Hungarian uprising and so Deak suddenly becomes a very attractive option

But Deak also sees if a violent insurrection destroyed the Austrian empire and left Hungary weak – Russia may well take over

Timeline – 1867 Continued 18th February 1867 Emperor

recognises Hungarian Constitution

Under the Ausgleich Hungary controls it’s army, taxes and borders

Austria-Hungary becomes new name

Hungary pays only 1/3 of Imperial expenditure but gets equal vote in how it is spent

Emperor Francis Joseph proclaimed King of Hungary to sincere fanfare

Methods of Passive Resistance

Patrick Murray argues the most important tactic employed was the “steadfast refusal of the Hungarians to send representatives to the Imperial parliament in Vienna, as a means of securing the re-establishment of a separate Hungarian parliament in Budapest.”

This tactic does two things: -

First it denies the Austrians legitimacy

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, unlike open revolt or electing a National parliament, this tactic gives the Austrians nothing to aim a sword at

So it frustrates the Austrians as much as it undermines them

Methods of Passive Resistance

Refusal to pay Taxes, Griffith describes vividly how Hungarians refused to pay taxes, confiscate property of those that wouldn’t pay or but said property

This meant people had to be brought in to do all those tasks

The Austrians soon learned it cost more than was gained to collect taxes

Methods of Passive Resistance

Refusal of Hungarian leaders to participate

Boycott of Austrian goods

Nationalist Songs

Nationalist organisationsNational Agricultural and Industrial councils direct

economyNational Theatre attended as matter of patriotismHungarian spoken and taught in defiance of all

attempts at Germanification

Methods of Passive Resistance

Constant telling of every Austrian from taxmen, soldiers to the Emperor himself that their regime was illegalPsychological effect on the oppressors?

Playing the long game – Schmerling: “Austria can wait and win” – Deak: “She can’t wait half so long as we can.”

The Times warns : “Passive resistance can be so organised as to become more troubling than armed rebellion”

Ferenc Deak 1803-1876 “The Wise Man of the Nation”

Griffith calls him – not a “politician, but a statesman”

Walked the streets of Pesth playing with children, giving alms to beggars and conversing with all sorts of people

Refused position of Prime Minister and many other titles

Emperor offers gifts, money, favour, position and asks what Deak wants

Deak responds “Sire when I am dead you can say Ferenc Deak was an honest man.”

Retires to modest rural estate

Dies in 1876 and has a massively attended funeral – but personally requests a simple grave

Today a national hero and 200th anniversary of his birth recently celebrated

Historiography (1)Miller notes that it was not passive resistance alone,

but a combination of factors “It may be questioned whether the passive

resistance ... was responsible solely for Hungary's success, but it was doubtless a large factor.”

Csapody and Weber argue history is often constructed for fairly pragmatic reasons and Hungarian resistance triumph is an example of this. Serves as a National legend Has a “Great man” hero Serves histories looking to trace back Ghandi and

perhaps even attempts to steal his ideas to European parents (Euro-centrism?)

Historiography (2)Molnár looks at the passive resistance as a way

of life and not necessarily driven primarily by Deak

Griffith’s work is primarily propaganda and unashamedly idolises Deak

Péter Dávidházi argues Deak was a brilliant figure but not in charge. The movement was largely directionless and without vision. Furthermore the social environment largely produced the resistance movement, not individual actors.

Historiography (3)Kontler argues that the dimensions of passive

resistance have been greatly exaggerated by national legend, but still dominant political attitude in Hungary.

Uses Salman Rushdie to some up: "Sometimes legends make reality, and become more useful than the facts.”

Deak’s apparent uniting strength must balanced with the realisation people were unusually united by anti-Austrian and Nationalist sentiment

Griffith even admits this and Sugar also discusses it

ConclusionsGriffith’s work is a useful narrative but obviously

biased and in need of moderation

Miller is correct – the campaign was part of a larger picture that caused the success

Molnar and Dávidházi also make a good point that Deak was not in direct control of the movement

But he did lead by example

Kontler also rightly points out the obviously dubious simplicities associated with this period

Conclusions - ContinuedHowever this was still an incredible movement

that showed passive resistance was possible and could achieve results

It arguably showed passive resistance could be superior to violence

Deak’s role is perhaps overstated, but should definitely not be understated. He was a truly great leader and is comparable to figures as revered as Gandhi.

Sharp was right, he was very ahead of his time