Tanulmány
The Foremen of the Construction of the Parliament in Budapest
The construction office of the Parliament in Budapest led by Imre Steindl was located in a puritanical, two-story building on the current Kossuth Square between 1885 and 1902, coordinating the work of architects, draftspersons, designers, and foremen. Contemporary sources allowed us to identify more than thirty people working on the project. The first section of the study attempts to demonstrate how the office functioned as a workplace. To do so the results of our monographic research regarding these individuals is also presented here, in more or less detail depending on the significance of the person’s role in the project. The careers of Steindl’s two deputies, Ottó Tandor and István Santhó are discussed in detail. We examine how they joined the construction of the Parliament, and how their careers progressed after its conclusion. The core of the construction office was formed by the generation born in the 1850s, who were Steindl’s students at the Budapest University of Technology in the 1870s. Many of them had become significant figures of the nascent Hungarian heritage preservation, while others took on office positions or worked as prolific designers. Besides Ernő Foerk and Ede Toroczkai Wigand, other like Ferenc Jablonszky, Gyula Sándy, Ottó Sztehlo, Ferenc Schömer, and Gyula Schweiger also deserve to be mentioned. The final section of the study examines the unrealized projects of Steindl and his associates, to see if the office serving this huge construction project also functioned as a think tank. How did it influence its members? Could the country’s largest Neogothic construction project launch a new school of architecture?
From Haven of Tyrants to the House of the Soviet Republic
Political parties have always utilized symbolism to get their messages across, or build, strengthen, and mobilise their base. It can be present in the public actions of political figures, or in the use of certain symbols either visually or in language. This study analyses the use of the Hungarian Parliament Building as a political symbol in the Socialist movement of the first half of the 20th century and during the period of the Hungarian Soviet Republic. The Parliament was used as a symbol to further society’s understanding of the political goals and ideology of the Socialist movement, and later the Communist dictatorship, as well as to mobilise the regime’s base. The first section of the article uses the articles of Népszava and the posters of Mihály Bíró to present how the Parliament was used in the political marketing and suffrage propaganda of the Social Democratic Party of Hungary. The second section examines the changes in the meaning of this symbol following the democratic revolution of October 1918. After the Social Democratic Party acquired leadership in Autumn 1918, and later when the Soviet Republic was established in March 1919, the symbol of the Parliament had to take on different meanings in propaganda. The final section of the article discusses the initial and long-term goals of this transformation process through the analysis of the works displayed at the Parliament Square during the regime’s May Day celebration, and the decorations of the soviet congress and party congress in June 1919.
Resturant-Owners in the Service of Representatives. The Restaurants of the Parliament and their Operators
The catering of representative by restaurants dates back to about one and a half centuries. Until the years following World War II, apart from a few years, this task was performed by prestigious restaurant-owners, who have previously proven themselves in their profession and for whom operating the Parliament’s restaurant was an honour and a great opportunity. However, they also had to deal with the practical downside of this task, the fluctuating number of guests, that made this endeavour unprofitable for almost every restaurant-owner. The leaders of the House of Representatives noticed the issues, and the option of granting subsidies to the restaurants was brought up several times, but these were given only for short periods of time: in 1913–14 from the House’s budget, and during World War II with the contribution of the representatives. Another attempt to make the task more appealing to restaurant-owners was to lend them the place, the furniture, and equipment free of charge. However, even this was not enough to make the work profitable, so in 1912 the applying restaurant-owners were allowed to open a public restaurant on the terrace of the Parliament on the side facing the Danube, and later in the basement of the building. But on the long run even this did not guarantee profit. After World War II the wave of nationalisations reached the restaurant industry, and nationalized enterprises – first KÖZÉRT, then Gundel – took over catering for the representatives and the employees of the House.
The Caricature Collection of the Museum of the National Assembly (1923-1949)
This study examines the caricature collection of the Museum of the National Assembly, which existed between 1923 and 1949. It was created by the regime in power between the two World Wars for propaganda purposes. The core assumption of the study is that the regime used political caricatures as a form of self-representation, therefore the way the institution operated was strongly determined by political and ideological factors. The study discusses the organization of the collection and the exhibitions showcasing the works along these ideas. By examining the circumstances of the acquisition of the caricatures, the social status of the previous owners, the artists, and their political affiliations, and of course the caricatures themselves, the study attempts to answer the question how purposefully the museum used its caricature collection as an instrument of propaganda. It also aims to call attention to this unique collection of the Museum of the National Assembly, which has barely been researched before. By creating a collection of more than 1500 items and collecting and examining these caricatures in a scientific manner as historical sources, political caricatures entered the spotlight of political history research in Hungary for the first time. The primary sources of the study were archival documents regarding the Museum of the National Assembly, contemporary press releases, and the caricature collection itself, which remained intact almost in its entirety and is currently available for research in the Graphic Collection of the Hungarian National Museum.
Works of Art in the Parliament Before 1945
While planning the Parliament Building architect Imre Steindl designated a minor role to paintings and sculptures, wanting to integrate the interior architecture into the Gothic style of the building. He accepted murals as a compromise but refused to have any oil paintings. However, he failed to execute his vision due to the approach of the Hungarian Millennium of 1896, a series of celebrations commemorating the thousand-year anniversary of the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin. For this event an oil painting portraying the conquest was ordered from Mihály Munkácsy, as well as a pair of statues depicting Franz Joseph I, and his wife, Elisabeth, with the intention of displaying them in the Parliament. Further orders were made in 1902, when the lawmakers occupied the building. From the very beginning they wanted to decorate their rooms and offices with paintings, sculptures, and works of applied art. As representations of their positions, they usually displayed portraits of their predecessors, or important events and figures of Hungarian history and law-making. In the 1920s and 1930s the number of artworks in the Parliament significantly increased due to two Speakers of the National Assembly, Béla Scitovszky and Tibor Zsitvay. Their contributions included the galleries depicting the former speakers and first officers of the National Assembly, the large tapestry by Gyula Rudnay depicting the national assembly in Ópusztaszer, the painting by Gyula Benczúr about the national Assembly paying respect to the king at the Millennium, as well as the depictions of monarchs (Franz Joseph I, Charles IV) and statesmen (István Széchenyi, Lajos Kossuth, Ferenc Deák, Miklós Horthy). This study discusses the history of the most exceptional works of art among these until the middle of the 1940s.
Műhely
Kitekintés
Múltidéző
Figyelő