A diéta. A magyar rendek és az országgyűlés 1708-1792 by István M. Szijártó (review)

Abstract

162 SEER, 86, I, 2008 illustratesverywell, is itscomplexity and ambivalence. In today's context this is further problematized by Poland's radical marginalization in Russian cultural life, as well as in its contemporary political discourse. As Irena Grudziriska-Gross shows, the Polish influences on Brodsky's poetry during the period of Poland's popularity amongst the Soviet intelligentsia (1950s to 1970s) are neither straightforwardnor clearly identifiedby the poet. That these influ ences have shaped Russian identity ishard to question and thisvolume helps us not only to better understand the historic perceptions of Poland inRussia (and, in effect,Polish reactions toRussian discourses and policies) but also better contextualize contemporary Russian attitudes toward Poland and Poles. Institute for Social Studies Warsaw University T. Zarygki Szij?rt?, Istv?nM. A dieta.A magyar rendekes az orsz?ggy?l?sijo8-iyg2. Osiris kiad?, Budapest, 2005. 614 pp. Tables. Notes. Bibliography. Appendices. Index. Maps. 4,980 HFt. The Hungarian diet met for only eight years between 1715 and 1765, and was not called into session at all between 1765 and 1790.At first sight, then, it would seem that the Habsburgs were reasonably successful in largely sidelining the role of the estates in the governance ofHungary formost of the eighteenth century. However, Istv?n Szij?rt?'s substantial study of the Hungarian diet argues in the opposite direction. He acknowledges that the political power of the estates steadilyweakened from the end of theR?k?czi rebellion, a process which was only partially halted by theWar ofAustrian Succession. He also recognizes that the estates were largely excluded from involvement in decision-making by the executive, and that the court was able both to widen its prerogatives and to extend its authority into new areas of competence during this period. However, Szij?rt? stillfinds that the diet provided the key institutionalmeans through which theHungarian estates enjoyed a degree of political influence which was unusual in eighteenth century Europe. This role was grounded in the earlier political traditions of the kingdom and, he suggests, also provided the basis for the reforming diets of the early nineteenth century. Szij?rt?'s study analyses the diet's structure,membership and functions. He assesses the extent and nature of opposition to royal policy within the diet, and also considers the growing power of the Lower House and particularly of itsgentry representatives from the counties. The Hungarian diet was not primarily a forum for law-making, but rather acted as an arena for political compromise to be worked out between the court and the estates. The mon arch convened diets to discuss royal proposals and especially to seek increases in taxation. The estates were permitted in return to present their grievances to the crown, and to seek confirmation of their traditional rights and privi leges. Diets concluded when agreement was reached between the crown and the two houses over both royal proposals and the estates' grievances. The court could normally rely on support from themagnates and high clergy of REVIEWS 163 theUpper House, and from royal court judges and representatives of royal free towns in theLower House. However, both tax proposals and the nature of promises and oaths made by monarchs on their coronation were often challenged by representatives of the counties. Szij?rt? finds the core of this county party opposition among deputies from eastern counties which had high proportions of Protestants. For example, he details the response of theLower House to a request to raise taxes inJuly 1728. While the votes of clergy and townswere divided over how to respond, only five of twentywestern counties supported the court's request, and none of the twenty-one eastern counties voted in favour (p. 174). The court attempted to weaken this Protestant opposition by withdrawing the right of the estates to interfereon matters of religion. However, Szij?rt? argues that this decision had the long-term effect of creating a broader base of opposition to the crown on a non-confessional basis. Nevertheless, the estates stillhardly presented a united political front. Time in both houses was, for example, spent arguing over precedence in seating, including disputes between representatives of the towns of Buda and Pozsony (p. 104). Szij?rt?'s arguments about...