Hungary and neutrality in World War II

[Kelvin]

Hi Futurist,

Hungary only gained Ruthenia and parts of Slovakia on the back of German pressure on Czechoslovakia. It had implicit obligations from that moment on. If I remember correctly, Horthy had paid a state visit to Hitler shortly before. During it he has christened and launched the Prinz Eugen, named after a general important to both Germany and Hungary. Hungary was Germany's fellow traveller from 1938.

Cheers,

Sid.

Hi, Sid, were Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslava also fellow traveller ? German seemed to use trade to tight its ties with these three countries, German almost purchased most of Bulgaria tobacco. Also German was big buyer of Romanian petroleum and Yugoslav copper, lead and antimony.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Futurist,

The Romanians had had enough trouble absorbing territory with mixed Romanian/other populations such as Transilvania, Southern Dobrogea and Northern Bucovina, without trying to absorb territory where there was almost no Romanian-Speaking presence.

It is not absolutely clear if Hungarians or Romanians formed a relative majority in the limited area of Northern Transilvania. The populations were finely balanced in the area. Nevertheless, there was a better chance of absorbing Northern Transilvania than Transnistria.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Futurist]

For what it's worth, there is a way to Romanize additional territories--specifically through settler colonialism. That said, though, it was easier to do this in Northern Transylvania than in Transnistria due to the much higher initial Romanian % in the former in comparison to the latter--as you implied in your post here.

[Futurist]

You can see the success of the Romanization project over the last 90 years in this map series:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania#/ ... -2011).jpg



In 1930, the Romanian core of Romania consisted of the Romanian Old Kingdom (Regat) territories with the exception of Dobruja. Nowadays, the Romanian core of Romania consists of Romania's Antonescu-era (late 1940/early 1941) borders. Several decades from now, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Romania's Romanian core will consist of everything other than the Szekely Land in the center/middle of Romania.

[Futurist]

To clarify--nowadays even Northern Transylvania (other than the Szekely Land areas) is Romanian-majority--just not quite as solidly as the rest of Romania is right now.

Anyway, Yeah, border revision in that part of the world is just not going to happen. The demographics aren't there for this and even if this wasn't actually the care NATO would easily come to Romania's defense in any war with Hungary.

[steppewolf]

For what it's worth, there is a way to Romanize additional territories--specifically through settler colonialism. That said, though, it was easier to do this in Northern Transylvania than in Transnistria due to the much higher initial Romanian % in the former in comparison to the latter--as you implied in your post here.

First, the correct term is "Romanianize"

Not even Hungarians from Transylvania claim it was any sort of "settler colonialism" phenomenon. Ceausescu's "systematization" process, which is often mentioned as an assimilation instrument, affected the rural world in whole country, not only in Transylvania.

The raise of Romanian population in some areas is mainly due to Holocaust, mass emmigration of Germans, industrialization etc. There was never, not even in Ceausescu times a policy of settling certain areas to resemble colonialism.

Interesting how this thread evolved

[Futurist]

Thank you for this information!

Anyway, there does appear to have been a lot of Romanian migration to Transylvanian cities over the last 100 years--though not necessarily to Transylvania as a whole:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... DKG39N2gq4



Here's a website talking about the Romanianization of Transylvania over the last 100 years, though it might certainly be biased against Romania:

http://www.hunmagyar.org/taj/erdely/huntrans.htm

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Futurist,

Until the 1820s the Romanians were largely illiterate rural peasants ruled by Turks, Hungarians and Russians. The Romanian language was not much written prior to this. The cities were the centres of Turkish, Hungarian and Russian administrations and garrisons and not only contained numbers of these politically dominant peoples, but commercial and merchant groups such as the Armenians, Greeks and Jews.

National independence, literacy and urbanisation came together for most Romanians from the mid 19th Century, initially in the former Turkish parts, but later in the former Russian and Hungarian parts, as they began to administer more and more of their own territories. At the same time the urban-based Turkish, Hungarian and Russian administrators and garrisons left.

I think you will find that your last map just shows the population of the cities, not of Transilvania as a whole. The Romanians were a clear majority in rural areas except for the four/three Szekely counties in the east-south-east.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Futurist]

Yep, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if a lot of this Romanian population increase in Transylvanian cities was merely the rest of Romanians moving to Transylvanian cities from the Transylvanian countryside in huge numbers. As a side note, though, I wonder if Romanians were more fertile than Hungarians in Transylvania over the last 100 years.

[steppewolf]

Thank you for this information!

Anyway, there does appear to have been a lot of Romanian migration to Transylvanian cities over the last 100 years--though not necessarily to Transylvania as a whole:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... DKG39N2gq4



Here's a website talking about the Romanianization of Transylvania over the last 100 years, though it might certainly be biased against Romania:

http://www.hunmagyar.org/taj/erdely/huntrans.htm

First link is broken. The photo cannot be linked, I can't see what's there.

As for the last link, that comes from a strange website which spread the idea that Hungarian nation is subject to a world wide conspiracy. I hope you don't expect to take that seriously.

The European Union is a morally bankrupt and corrupt criminal organization aiming to eradicate the independent European Nations and sovereign Nation-States.
Major news organizations such as the BBC and human rights organizations such as Amnesty International systematically fail to report the rights violations committed against Hungarians. Facebook is also censoring mentions about Hungarian grievances: defending Hungarian national interests is just not politically correct.

Added to what Sid Guttridge said, I'll show you the dynamic of demographics in a small Romanian town, Pitesti (no Hungarian minority there, at all ); the phenomenon of urbanization was happening in the entire area, regardless of nationalities.

Historical population
Year Pop. ±%
1835 2,755 —
1859 7,229 +162.4%
1899 15,669 +116.8%
1930 19,532 +24.7%
1941 26,551 +35.9%
1948 29,007 +9.3%
1956 38,330 +32.1%
1966 60,113 +56.8%
1977 123,735 +105.8%
1992 179,337 +44.9%
2002 168,458 −6.1%
2011 155,383 −7.8%

As a side note, though, I wonder if Romanians were more fertile than Hungarians in Transylvania over the last 100 years.

You can't be serious

[Futurist]

Very interesting; thank you!

As for the more fertile part, I was actually completely serious in regards to this; after all, aren't rural people (and Romanians were more rural than Hungarians 100 years ago) more fertile?

Does my first link here work now?:

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy ... l3_qVygla5



Anyway, it's Map VI in the article above. Yes, the conspiracy article, which actually does appear to have some good information while also being full of crap in regards to some other things.

[Futurist]

It's worth noting that this 1865 book about Transylvania by a British person discusses the greater fertility of the Romanians (Wallacks) there in comparison to the Germans there:

https://books.google.com/books?id=vI8AA ... 3F&f=false

[steppewolf]

It's worth noting that this 1865 book about Transylvania by a British person discusses the greater fertility of the Romanians (Wallacks) there in comparison to the Germans there:

https://books.google.com/books?id=vI8AA ... 3F&f=false

Oh yes, abandoned people (my note: Romanians) entertained only by their priest "who daily practises with them the most abject superstition" . The remarks about South Africa are interesting as well

It's kind of odd to think to a greater birth rate increase and thus a greater population increase of the poorest people in Transylvania. Possible that birth rates were slightly better, but how was infant mortality, many made it to adulthood? These were issues for all peasant populations...

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Futurist,

If the charts you put up are correct, from about 2000 it appears that the proportion of Szekely has increased very slightly in the counties where they are a majority.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Futurist]

Hi Futurist,

If the charts you put up are correct, from about 2000 it appears that the proportion of Szekely has increased very slightly in the counties where they are a majority.

Cheers,

Sid.

Yes, that or maybe these areas simply saw an increase in their Gypsy/Roma %--or some combination of these two factors.