Ideas on Territorial Revision in Hungary, 1920-1945. East European Monographs, 717 by Mikl�s Zeidler , Thomas J. DeKornfeld , Helen DeKornfeld (review)

REVIEWS 569 evidence of thisdissenting inner realm. The reader has to take iton trust that it existed. To a large extent Kuromiya is aware of these pitfalls and he repeatedly admits that the truth is elusive. At times, though, he perhaps overstates the possibilities provided by these files. Can the Voices of the dead' really be recovered fromNKVD files if the reader can never be fully surewhether the confessions and witness statements recorded were ever actually made? Iwould suggest that Stalinist Terror not only killed itsvictims but that italso silenced them. This should not detract from the importance ofKuromiya's research: even ifhe cannot make the dead speak, he does capture important detail from the diverse lives of Stalin's victims, many ofwhom have to date largely escaped the historical record. HistoryDepartment University of Sheffield Miriam Dobson Zeidler, Mikl?s. Ideas onTerritonalRevision inHungary, 1920?1945. Translated by Thomas J. and Helen DeKornfeld. East European Monographs, 717. Social Science Monographs and Center for Hungarian Studies and Publications, Boulder, CO and Wayne, NJ, 2007. xvi + 440 pp. Notes. Biographical notes. Illustrations. Maps. Index. $60.00. Trianon, the name of two palaces in the park atVersailles, isperhaps better known toHungarians than to the French, for itwas due to the peace treaty signed by the victors ofWorld War One in theGrand Trianon Palace on 4 June 1920 that the thousand-year-old Kingdom ofHungary was partitioned between itsnewly created or substantially enlarged neighbours, and a chunk given even to itsvanquished partner, Austria. Hungary was left with a quarter of its former territoryand one third of itspopulation, but what made that decision singularly painful forHungarians was the fact that three and a half million people, Hungarian in language and consciousness, essentially a third of the nation, were detached and assigned (without a plebiscite) to hostile neighbours. Zeidler, a younger specialist of twentieth-centuryHungary, who has already compiled a massive, thousand-page-long collection of documents on that treaty, has produced an enlarged version of a book published in Hungarian in 2001 on the impact of theTrianon Peace Treaty on Hungarian policy and thinking. Since 1945 European state borders have been stable, but during the interwar years most Hungarians were confident that the borders which they saw as grossly unjust would inevitably change, even though their neighbours were determined not to allow that to happen. The resultwas, as Hugh Seton Watson observed, that 'in each of the new states there prevailed a narrow officialnationalism', and the repressive policies used against national, religious and political minorities led to perpetual internal and external divisions and conflicts. 'This state of generalized and mutual hostilityprovided opportunities for any great power intenton disturbing thepeace' (H. and C. Seton-Watson, TheMaking ofaNew Europe:R. W. Seton-Watson and the Last Years of Austria-Hungary, 57? SEER, 88, 3, JULY 2010 London, 1981,p. 435), and it is this consequence of the 1920Hungarian peace treaty thatwarrants further attention to be paid to the subject. Much has been written on the fall of theHabsburg Empire (after 1867 the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy), and on the peace setdement. The story of Trianon and its various aspects was told in English in 1942 by Francis Deak, in 1990 by M?ria Ormos and in 2002 by Ign?c Romsics. Zeidler's masterful and balanced work offers new insights into why Hungary was treated so harshly, how Hungarian policy and society reacted, and what the repercussions were. The author is right to emphasize that 'the Great Powers were not motivated by any particular anti-Hungarian sentiment' (p. 17)but, rather, by their interests (as they saw them then) and not by themerits of the case (p. 27). But that does not alter the fact that even the staunchest advocate of the break-up of theMonarchy, R. W. Seton-Watson, argued that the terms were 'unduly severe' due to economic and strategic considerations and the persistent support of the 'successor States' by France. On pages 28-40 Zeidler provides a very thorough summary and analysis of the treaty and what it meant forHungarians ? both in the short and long term. Itwas the basis of and rationale forHungary's 'irredentism', and themovement for the revision of the Trianon Peace, mainly...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.