Zol­tán Klamár: Ter­ri­to­ry Mark­ing Prac­tice of Eth­nic Minori­ties Liv­ing in Mag­yarkanizsa in the 18th – 20th C.

From the study we can get a pic­ture on how impor­tant in the life of a com­mu­ni­ty is the role of coun­try bu­il­ding and area organ­i­za­tion of the church. The church­es were built – by Ser­bians between 1773–1775, Hun­gar­i­ans in 1768 and 1912 – in the cen­ter of the town, close to the ma­in square or at a busy point of the ter­ri­to­ry, in order to empha­size their pres­ence in the built envi­ron­men­t. This prac­tice was fol­lowed by the sol­vent peas­an­t-­civ­il lay­er, when placed sacral mon­u­ments in the ter­ri­to­ry.

The first sacral bu­il­ding was built by Catholics far from the town, on a hill. The Cal­vary built to the coun­try is the only mem­o­ry of the town from the 18th C. In the 19th C fur­ther eight sacral mon­u­ments were built, from which six were cre­at­ed by Catholic­s, and two by Ortho­dox­ies.
When we exam­ine these object­s, we can see that four of them were placed to the sacral area around the church­es, and the other four to the other sacral area of litur­gi­cal prac­tice.
In the 20th C. anoth­er nine sacral mon­u­ments appeared in the town street­s, squares thanks to the finan­cial con­tri­bu­tion of Catholic­s, from which two are stat­ues. Two chapel­s/cer­e­mo­ni­al rooms were built in the Catholic big ceme­tery, both at the begin­ning of the 20th C. The stat­ues were placed to the impor­tant and busy cen­ters of the town.
The Catholic com­mu­ni­ty of the town signed the sacral squares used by the com­mu­ni­ty by plac­ing eight­een mon­u­ments on its area.
The two Ortho­dox cross­es also express strong cen­ter of space struc­ture. When we exam­ine the ded­i­ca­tion­s, we can see that from the twen­ty mon­u­ments there are only two on which the name of its cre­ator is not pre­sen­t.
Although the author of the study agrees with state­ment that the prac­tice of plac­ing sacral mon­u­ments is of reli­gious char­ac­ter and serves pri­ma­ri­ly for ter­ri­to­ry mark­ing of reli­gion­s, but dis­cuss­es its rela­tion to nation­al minor­i­ty.
The pop­u­la­tion is prac­ti­cal­ly com­posed of the iden­ti­cal eth­nic group belong­ing to the reli­gious cul­tur­al cir­cle, but at its exam­i­na­tion we are faced with the fact that beside the eth­ni­cal, Serbian-Hungarian dual­i­ty we have to con­sid­er the Orthodox-Catholic reli­gious dual­i­ty.
For the Ser­bians liv­ing in the town the eth­nic iden­ti­ty was always an impor­tant part of reli­gious iden­ti­ty. More­over, their reli­gion made „true glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of God“ – ortho doxa – in moth­er lan­guage of its believ­ers that strength­ened them in their belief and their mis­sion con­scious­ness, as well.
The inte­grat­ing power of the Catholic reli­gion showed main­ly in that that it helped the small num­ber of Ger­man, Slo­vak, and Croa­t­ian set­tlers liv­ing beside the Hun­gar­i­ans to adapt and assim­i­late.