Administrative atlas of Hungary 1914


For the atlas use
The index in the atlas considerably differs from the usual index, because it also contains statistic type supplements. Though it still has the primary role that we can find the more than 15,000 objects on the maps fast enough, the data beside the names also enables, that we can obtain information regarding the inhabitants of the certain settlement.
For the production of the map and statistical database of the atlas we used the 1913 year's gazetteer of Hungary and the 1:400 000 scale administrative map published for the gazetteer in 1914. However, the two publications are not completely consistent with each other. The administrative lay-out of the gazetteer was recorded in principle according to the state as of February 1913 (in practice not in a consistent way), while the statistics of the settlements was made on the base of the national census data of 1910. On the other hand, on the map published in 1914 the administrative changes that occurred during 1913 and 1914 were also represented in many cases.
Considering the above, we recorded the administrative lay-out on the maps of our atlas according to the state as of 31st of December, 1914. However, we could prepare the settlement databases of our atlas only on the base of the available census of 1910.
This difference implies that the detailed data regarding the language and denominational affiliation of inhabitants are missing in the case of some settlements:
- a.) In the Hungarian designation material, there cannot be found detailed data in the case of those not independent settlement sections, which are region centres, and neither in case of those settlements, which were formed by separation between the closing date of editing the gazetteer and 31st of December, 1914. In the case of settlements being established by separation, after the name of the settlement we quote which settlement they separated from and when. However, the detailed data of the mother-settlements reflects the pre-separation states in all cases.
- b.) In the Croatian designation material, apart from the not independent settlement sections, we cannot find the detailed data either regarding the taxation settlements, since those were given only in the case of political settlements in the official gazetteer of 1910.

Both the Hungarian and the Croatian administrative systems had such features that made more difficult the mapping delineation and the data description alike.

In Hungary, in the case of enclaves (such settlements that lies not on the territory of that administrative unit, which they administratively belong to) we chose the solution, that we delineated them on their actual territory, but in the database we stated their administrative relation and we referred to their different territorial relation in a note. An example from the Hungarian index: Háromszlécs 3C3 Liptó vm. Rózsahegyi j. 1943 * 7m 1911sl ** 1914rk 20 ev [The settlement lies on the territory of Németlipcse region.]
The settlement named as Háromszlécs can be found on the map-section no. 3. in the field C3 of seeking net. Administratively the settlement belonged to Rózsahegy region of Liptó county and had 1943 inhabitants in 1910. Out of total number of inhabitants, 7 people avowed himself/herself to be Hungarian, and 1911 people to be Slovakian, while rest of the inhabitants belonged to other ethnic groups. Out of total number of inhabitants 1914 people avowed himself/herself to be Roman Catholic, and 20 people to be Lutheran according to the census of 1910. According to the note in the brackets Háromszlécs is such an enclave, though which lies on the territory of Németlipcse region (it can be found there on the map, too), administratively it is included in Rózsahegyi region.
As it is shown by the above data we do not state the nationality and denominational distribution of the inhabitants in full details. If the settlement's inhabitants are highly distributed, then we present its three most populous data both from nationality and denominational aspects, however if one of them constitutes a persuasive majority, then we do not go into details regarding the remained few percentages. If the Hungarian inhabitants are present on a settlement, then we indicate their data in most cases.

The administration of Croatia was founded by the Act on Administration introduced in 1886. In 1910 562 administrative authorities existed in total, meanwhile the number of settlements (cities, villages, ranches) exceeded 4000. Out of the 562 administrative authorities 545 were included among the political settlements. The political settlements were formed either from a single taxation settlement, or from several taxation settlements and their related settlement regions and other inhabited areas.
In our atlas, beside the cities and political settlements we also included all of the taxation settlements, therefore the number of Croatian settlements amounts to 2338. We note hereby, that on the map and in the Croatian index we indicated in both languages those settlements, which also had Hungarian designations.
We solved the delineation and data-type presentation of the political settlements as follows: On the map-sections we drew the border of the political settlements with thicker line at the settlement borders, and indicated the centre of the political settlement with broken underlining. In fact, these centres were emerged from the taxation settlements related to the political settlements. In most cases, they lend even their names to the political settlements. This is how it can happen that the same designation can be included twice in Croatia in the index of our atlas. Once as a taxation settlement, and once as the centre of the certain political settlement. The reason for the double designation is given by the settlement related inhabitant data. As taxation settlement we can find only the settlement's own number of inhabitants, but if the certain taxation settlement also functions as a political settlement at the same time, then its number of inhabitants includes jointly the number of residents of its every related taxation settlement and of other inhabited places, and regarding this data we also receive details about the ethnic and denominational distribution.

Examples from the Croatian index:

Martijanec 30A1 Varaždin (Varasd) vm. Ludbregi j. Martijanec pk. 1320
Martijanec taxation settlement can be found on the map-section no. 30. in the field A1 of seeking net. Administratively it belonged to Martijanec political settlement in Ludbregi region of Varaždin (Varasd) county and had 1320 inhabitants in 1910.
Martijanec 30A1 Varaždin (Varasd) vm. Ludbregi j. pk. 4785 * 16m 8n 4725h **4746rk 36 iz
Martijanec political settlement can be found on the map-section no. 30. in the field A1 of seeking net. Administratively it was a political settlement in Ludbregi region of Varaždin (Varasd) county and had 4785 inhabitants in the taxation settlements administratively connected to it and in other inhabited areas in 1910. Out of total number of inhabitants, 16 people avowed himself/herself to be Hungarian, 8 people to be German and 4725 people to be Croatian, while rest of the inhabitants belonged to other ethnic groups. Out of total number of inhabitants 4746 people avowed himself/herself to be Roman Catholic, and 36 people to be Jewish according to the census of 1910.

Other remarks

In the Hungarian index the designations of settlements follow the alphabetical order according to the spelling of the Academy. The long and short pairs of the vowels is considered to be same letter in ranking, while among the consonants the digraph ones are accounted as separate letters.
The Croatian index follows the alphabetic ordering rules of the Croatian language. The Hungarian designations presented there were also ranked according to this.
In both indexes we included the official designations being in effect in 1914, and according to the general spelling of that time.
Apart from the administrative lay-out of Hungary, the entire transport network of the state can also be found on the map-sections. With purposes of providing information, we also indicated other objects (such as baths, castles, ruins of castles). On the empty parts of the sections presenting the borderland of the country, we placed the overall maps of the major cities in Hungary. These maps were prepared at around the turn of the century, but not at the same time, and even differences in style can be noticed on them. Despite this, we decided to publish them, because we believe, that these contemporary, rare city maps also promote to study the era.
The thematic maps of the atlas, except for the data of the maps presenting the Post Directorates (1902.), were prepared by using the data of the census made in 1910.
We tried our best to avoid, that error could get into the database of the atlas, that contains several ten thousands data. We kindly request the dear readers to give a notice to our publisher, if they still observe error in the content.


In the below table we listed those settlements, the borderline of which could not been determined with full certainty not even from the source-maps. On the map-sections we indicated these border sections with broken line.

Abbreviation and signs

szfv.		capital
vm.		county
j.		region
tjv.		municipal (right) city
rtv.		city with sound council
pk.		political settlement (in Croatian-Slavonia)
ak.		taxation settlement (in Croatian-Slavonia)

m		Hungarian
n		German
sl		Slovakian
ro		Romanian
ru		Russniak
h		Croatian
sr		Serbian
v		Wend (Slovenian)
l		Polish
c		Gipsy
g		Greek
o		Italian
b		Bunievatz
so		Socatz
cs		Czech and Moravian
bo		Bulgarian
rk		Roman Catholic
gk		Greek Catholic
r		Calvinist
ev		Lutheran
go		Greek Orthodox
un		Unitarian
iz		Jewish
*		ethnic composition of the inhabitants
**		denominational composition of the inhabitants

Fordító megjegyzése: Az * jel helyett az eredeti anyagban egy ember figura szerepel, a ** jel helyett pedig egy fekete gömbön egy kereszt.

Translator's remark: In the original text instead of the * sign there is a man sign, and instead of the ** sign there is a globe sign with a cross on its top.