{"id":5935,"date":"2022-12-15T13:54:36","date_gmt":"2022-12-15T12:54:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/?p=5935"},"modified":"2022-12-15T13:54:36","modified_gmt":"2022-12-15T12:54:36","slug":"holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/","title":{"rendered":"Holec, Roman: Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon – Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon"},"content":{"rendered":"

Holec, Roman. 2020. Trianon – triumf a katastrofa<\/em> [Trianon: Triumph and Tragedy<\/em>]. <\/em>Bra tislava, Maren\u010din PT, 256 p.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Roman Holec has been one of the influential Slovak historians during recent decades. His earlier research concentrated on issues of economic history, as well as assimilation, of the age of the dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary, but he was not uninterested in topics of post-1918 history. Furthermore, he has been one of the few historians who have realized that professionals must not allow \u201cpublic history\u201d to take over, – instead, they must meet the readers\u2019 expectations by producing texts suitable to a broad audience without a compromise in professional requirements. It is in this spirit of opening towards the readership that Roman Holec has recently published some books on Andrej Hlinka or Pozsony\/Bratislava Habsburgs, with a favourable reaction from both professionals and the wider audience.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, the Treaty of Trianon has not been a subject of special importance for Holec, but this is hardly surprising: after all, Slovak historiography in general has not been playing much attention to the Trianon issue, something that strikes the outsider as a surprise, unless we consider the range of publications emphasizing Slovak historical myths, such as a thousand years of oppression, sparkling the anti-Hungarian attitude of Slovak society, a favourite topic of which is justifying the Trianon Treaty, but which are in want of even the minimal professional standards.<\/p>\n

The fact that Trianon has been a \u201cnonissue\u201d for Slovak historians derives, to some extent, from Slovakia\u2019s winning position. Notably, from the conviction that the Treaty of Trianon, signed June 4th<\/sup>, 1920, was not merely justified, but so much unquestionable, too, that it cannot even be subject to professional debate. Based on this axiomatic stance, the huge Hungarian literature on Trianon has not been met with genuine professional counterarguments from Slovak side; instead, the only reaction has been to state that Trianon was a just (and justified) peace treaty, and anyone who questions this fact is a revisionist. Thanks to all of these factors, the Slovak historical literature on Trianon (I mean \u201cofficially sanctioned\u201d historiography), after the fall of communism, has been essentially (maybe exclusively) based on Mari\u00e1n Hronsk\u00fd\u2019s (1998) Boj o Slovensko a Trianon 1918-1920<\/em> (\u2018A fight for Slovakia and the Treaty of Trianon, 1918-1920\u2019 \u2013 Trans lator\u2019s note<\/em>), which provides a range of data concerning the military and diplomatic aspects of the subject, but it is quite biased too. The main problem about Hronsk\u00fd\u2019s book, however, is its afterlife, having been treated ever since as a canonical work of Slovak historiography; indeed, Hronsk\u00fd\u2019s mistakes and biases have remained unrevealed even by colleagues, Holec included, who seem to be aware of how biased the book is.<\/p>\n

The first (2020) edition of Trianon: Triumph and Tragedy<\/em> contains 350 pages, which may look discouraging to the average reader; yet, the length is counter-balanced by its readability as well as the author\u2019s use of endnotes rather than footnotes. Those who have been following Holec\u2019s scholarly activity will find the content familiar, with the individual chapters often reflecting upon his earlier topics, such as the fate of aristocracy, the issue of the Danubian shipping lane, the image of Trianon in<\/p>\n

Hungarian historiography, or people like Andrej Hlinka and \u013dudov\u00edt Bazovsk\u00fd. This makes the structural composition of the book somewhat mosaic-like, characterized by a kind of duality, too. Specifically, some chapters are deeper and more analytic, providing new insights to professionals, while other chapters give a summary of individual topics aimed at the general public, without adding new results of research to the professional discourse.<\/p>\n

Holec\u2019s book is mostly important due to the author\u2019s refreshingly new and co-operative\/constructive approach to the Trianon issue, which is in many a way \u201cunorthodox\u201d. For instance, he explicitly claims \u2013 against the accepted Slovak interpretation \u2013 that Trianon was not an inevitable consequence of the socalled \u201coppression of Slovaks by Hungarians for a millennium\u201d or the punishment of that oppression. Indeed, he keeps emphasizing that the extent to which Hungary was punished by the Trianon Treaty was unjust. At the same time, he also expresses his considering the historical Kingdom of Hungary\u2019s treatment of its ethnic minorities, Slovaks included, as equally unjust. Therefore, it seems justified that Hungary was given the bill to pay by the post-war peace conference for all it had committed before 1914 or, for that matter, during World War I. Put differently, it is Hungarian nationalism that is to blame for Trianon.<\/p>\n

The first two chapters are essentially intended to justifying this claim, providing, as it were, an inventory of the acts of Hungarian nationalism and imperial aspirations. These two chapters present the work and thought of authors such as B\u00e9la Gr\u00fcnwald, Jen\u0151 R\u00e1kosi, or \u2013 indeed \u2013 Alajos Paikert, but (of course) the assimilation of Slovaks in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy is given especial attention, too. Concerning the latter case, the author partially accepts, but \u2013 on the whole \u2013 rejects the arguments put forward by Hun garian historians who have emphasized \u201cvoluntary<\/em>\u201d as opposed to \u201cenforced<\/em>\u201d Hungariani zation<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The next chapter, Defeat and the Birth of a New Europe<\/em>, is devoted to the period when the First World War ended and the Czecho slovak Republic was born. Besides a tangible presentation of current affairs, a significant part of the chapter is devoted to the issue of how the boundary between Hungary and Czechoslovakia was drawn. Holec gives an overview of how the demarcation lines were being formed in a way that is rather unusual in the Slovak historiographic literature, stating that the demarcation line known as the Bartha\u2013Hod\u017ea line was drawn along ethnic boundaries, but the state borders finalized in June, 1919, were not; instead, they were drawn south of the Bartha\u2013Hod\u017ea line, based on poli tical considerations rather than ethnographic ones. Although this statement by Holec can hardly be considered as a merit by itself, it certainly shows the courageousness of the author, considering the fact that such views have long been regarded by Slovak historiography and public opinion as a downright questioning of Trianon itself.<\/p>\n

As far as the events of the autumn of 1918 in Upper Hungary are concerned, there are but a small number of moments where we perceive the presentation of them somewhat biased. For example, we find it difficult to interpret what Holec means by the \u201cterrorization\u201d of the population of Slovakia by Hungarian troops. Sure enough, there must have occurred some instances of violent demonstrations of force, but the claim appears to be exaggerated still, raising questions such as why Hungary\u2019s military might have terrorized the people of their own country, whom it actually terrorized \u2013 and what terror<\/em> means. Yet, we get no answer. The author would have done a better job by providing specific examples \u2013 as quite a few times in his book \u2013 of what he was suggesting.<\/p>\n

Holec gives a presentation of the Czecho slovak military occupation of the Felvid\u00e9k<\/em>7<\/sup> and the relations between Czecho slovak authorities and the local populace during the first few weeks of occupation based on a variety of perspectives, shedding light on individual stories which, however, have universal validity, – and he does so with plasticity and empathy. He also discusses issues relating to (dis)continuity during the change of sovereignty. Moreover, although the traditional approach is that the creation of Czechoslovakia marked a sharp boundary between past and present, with the new state starting from scratch, Holec seems to see, quite appropriately, that such a view is untenable. The new Czechoslovak state was, in many ways, a continuation of the foregoing period, which was not only perceivable to those who worked in the state administration, but in many walks of everyday life, too; that is hardly surprising, given that the entire population of<\/p>\n

Czechoslovakia had been socialized within the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.<\/p>\n

Holec devotes Chapter 4 to the events of 1919, specifically, the first half of that year, a period exceptionally rich in (often tragic) turns, which are often reflected upon quite diametrically by Hungarian versus Slovak historians. Yet, Holec gives an excellent solution to this difficult problem by not aiming at defending positions or giving judgments; instead, he aims \u2013 yet again \u2013 at a multi-lateral presentation of events, be it about the Pozsony\/Bratislava fusillade resulting in several deaths, or the closing down of the Hungarian University of Elizabeth<\/em>. He clearly understands that the strike wave across Slovakia in 1919 cannot be attributed solely to national or social motives, since these aspects supplemented and occasionally reinforced each other. He attempts at staying unbiased concerning the fusillade of February 12th<\/sup>, which he succeeds in, while he takes the responsibility of evaluating those events, too. While he does see (and accept) the responsibility of all participants of the demonstration, including local citizens as well as the legionaries coming to keep law and order but also knocking out the city\u2019s Italian military commander, he still consi ders the tragic event, resulting in eight deaths, as a failure of the state administration.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, Holec perceives, quite appropriately, that this kind of misuse of power against citizens was by no means a unique event, and that the responsibility of the contemporary Slovak political \u00e9lite is beyond doubt. True, he criticizes \u0160rob\u00e1r and his associates quite indirectly, quoting the Czechos lovak President T. G. Masaryk, who expressed his criticism regarding the growing feeling of antisemitism and the acts of violence against Hungarians in Slovakia. Our perception of lack might not be unfounded: \u0160rob\u00e1r\u2019s activity, his dictatorial manners and his measures against Hungarians were criticized by his own contemporaries, cf. the hundreds (if not thousands) of ethnic Hungarians deported to Illava\/Ilava, and later on to Terez\u00edn.<\/p>\n

Similarly, the author seems to fail to seize an opportunity to provide a detailed account of an armed conflict in Kom\u00e1rom\/ Kom\u00e1rno on May 1st<\/sup>. Holec describes these events rather briefly, devoting but 3 to 4 lines to it, mentioning a letter by Lujza Esterh\u00e1zy, although the number of victims, amounting to between 300 and 400, might have deserved more attention. In a similar vein, the claim that the Italian officers\u2019 disapproval was caused by the Czechoslovak authorities executing some civilians after driving back Hungarian attacks is somewhat misleading. Reading the report by Piccione, Italian commander-in-chief, there emerges a rather different picture. Piccione, while (of course) disapproving the execution of civilians, was mostly worried about how cruelly the Czechoslovak troops treated the unarmed Hungarian soldiers. As he said, \u201cthe satisfaction resulting from defeating the enemy often got bitter by the acts committed by certain soldiers during and after the battle, against the founding principles of civilization. Among the less respectable members of the army, the highly regarded feelings of patriotism and individual braveness appear to be mixed with low instincts of hatred, revenge, and destruction\u201d.<\/p>\n

The complexity of the issue of the change of sovereignty, including several weeks of the population\u2019s attempts at adapting or confirming to, or rejecting, the new state, is shown via personal fates and stories. And that\u2019s a \u201cbull\u2019s eye\u201d indeed: via the stories of individuals, it becomes possible to give a shaded and detailed overview of sensitive issues such as \u201cchange of sovereignty\u201d. It is only regrettable that Holec fails to utilize the same device, viz. the presentation of individual lives, regarding the processes of assimilation and nation change in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, although there are lots of fitting examples.<\/p>\n

One of the most powerful chapters of the book is the one on \u013dudov\u00edt Bazovsk\u00fd (Hun garian: Bazovszky Lajos<\/em>), a Slovak politician of Losonc\/Lu\u010denec. The first ethnic Slovak count of the County of N\u00f3gr\u00e1d\/Novohrad, he was an extremely interesting and controversial person. The profile of him shown here, however, suggests a broader interpretation, exemplifying the characteristic behaviour of the contemporary Slovak political \u00e9lite, including its occasional inner discrepancies and unreadiness.<\/p>\n

The following chapter is devoted to the finalization of the Trianon borders, presenting the work carried out during the Paris peace conference, the diplomatic background of the Czechoslovak delegation, as well as the differing opinions among the members of that delegation, including the differences of emphasis between President Masaryk and Bene\u0161,<\/p>\n

Minister of the Interior, regarding the issue of state borders. In this respect, Holec shares the majority view in the literature, claiming that Masaryk (unlike Bene\u0161) was not unwilling to make some concessions to Hungary; this might have been so, but one must also understand that the view contrasting a \u201cbenevolent Masaryk\u201d with a \u201cmalevolent Bene\u0161\u201d is not quite evidence-based. What is closer to historical reality is the image of a pragmatic Bene\u0161, paying attention to the general atmosphere at the Paris peace conference, with Masaryk being emotionally influenced by the predominant public feelings in Czechia. This is proved by the border conflict between Czechoslovakia and Poland, concerning Teschen (Czech T\u011b\u0161\u00edn<\/em>, Polish Cieszyn<\/em> \u2013 Translator\u2019s note), during which Masaryk would opt for a military solution, that is, attacking Poland, while Bene\u0161 favoured diplomatic negotiations. The same claim is substantiated by the fact that Mas aryk, who would have been prepared to give up the Csall\u00f3k\u00f6z region (an island between two branches of the Danube south of Po zsony\/Bratislava \u2013 Translator\u2019s note<\/em>) in March, 1919, changed his mind upon the outbreak of war between Czechoslovakia and (the Soviet Republic of) Hungary, demanding the border to be fixed south of the Rivers Danube and Ipoly, and suggested a punitive occupation of Budapest itself.<\/p>\n

While this chapter gives a relatively unbiased overview of the topic, some of the details are not uncontroversial, such as the issue of what is known as \u201cthe second demarcation line\u201d, regarding which Holec seems unable to rise above the (Czecho-)Slovak historiographic myths. Specifically, following the tradition established by Milan Kraj\u010dovi\u010d, Mari\u00e1n Hronsk\u00fd and Jind\u0159ich Dejmek, he claims that, upon launching an attack on Hungary on April 27th<\/sup>, 1919, attempting to reach the so-called \u201csecond demarcation line\u201d (i.e. Ver\u0151ce \u2013 M\u00e1tr a \u2013 M\u00e1lyi \u2013 Gesztely \u2013 T\u00e1llya \u2013 S\u00e1rospatak), Czechos lo vakia acted with the approval of the peace conference, writing, furthermore, that the \u201csecond demarcation line\u201d had been laid down in the Vix (or, Vyx) Note (received on March 20th<\/sup>). But this view is mistaken, for several reasons. On the one hand, the Vix Note is not concerned with the demarcation line between Czechoslovakia and Hungary at all, a fact that Holec might have found out with ease. On the other hand, Slovak historiography has been unable to come up with a single authentic source to prove that the \u201cse cond demarcation line\u201d had indeed been approved by the peace conference. Moreover, it was Bene\u0161 himself who admitted, albeit indirectly, in a letter to Masaryk, that they had had no approval to push forward; as he wrote, \u201cwhen we occupied Miskolc, we appeared to be violators of the peace agreement. I\u2019m not entirely sure, but I guess we indeed were\u201d. Well, it is hardly likely for Bene\u0161 to have written anything of the sort if he had been aware of the approval of the new demarcation line.<\/p>\n

Holec pays considerable attention to the issue of the Danube as the new state border and \u2013 related to it \u2013 the status of Csall\u00f3k\u00f6z<\/em>, coming to the conclusion that the initial rejection of the Csall\u00f3k\u00f6z populace of joining the Czechoslovak Republic (chiefly due to the creation of the Hungarian Soviet Republic) diminished, and they became more and more supportive of the idea that the region, inhabited almost exclusively by ethnic Hungarians, be part of Czechoslovakia. He seems to regard – as the most important piece of evidence – a memorandum by Samuel Zoch, Count of Pozsony and Vavro \u0160rob\u00e1r, Minister Plenip otentiary, concerning the issue of the County of Pozsony, saying, quite literally, \u201cthe inhabitants of the island [i.e. Csall\u00f3k\u00f6z<\/em> \u2013 Translator\u2019s note] keep on asking the signatory of the present text, as a representative of Pozsony County in the Government, to do all he can do within the Government to make the island part of the Czechoslovak state\u201d. As for me, I have no doubt that there might have been Hungarians whose economic interests or political sympathies made them require precisely that. At the same time, we would be na\u00efve to think, based solely on a Czechoslovak memorandum, that the majority of ethnic Hung arians in Csall\u00f3k\u00f6z were in favour of such a decision, especially because that claim is falsified by other sources, including the attitudes of Hungarians living in Pozsony\/ Bratislava, Dunaszerdahely\/Dunajsk\u00e1 Streda, or Kom\u00e1r om\/Kom\u00e1rno (see, for example, the above-mentioned general strike, the fusillade of February 12th<\/sup>, or the events at Kom\u00e1rom\/ Kom\u00e1rno on May 1st<\/sup>), but also by the plans of establishing a \u201cHungarian Republic of Csal l\u00f3k\u00f6z\u201d.<\/p>\n

The author touches upon several further issues in the remaining chapters. These include the importance of the Danube as a navigable river and its role in determining the state border; the activity of the international commission to establish the new borders; the fate of aristocracy after Trianon (an excellent chapter indeed); the position of cities, such as Losonc\/Lu\u010denec, finding themselves on the periphery due to the new borders; or, even the speech made by Albert Apponyi before the peace conference\u2019s audience. As in the whole book, he performs this in a sober and well-founded manner, relying on specific historical sources, just as he is concerned with Trianon\u2019s aftermaths, including how the treaty affected Hungary\u2019s subsequent history. In connection with this topic, and not for the first time in his book, he refers to Istv\u00e1n Bib\u00f3; specifically, Holec disagrees with Bib\u00f3, whom he otherwise appreciates, and who said that Hungary\u2019s history between the two world wars could have taken a different course, had the peace treaty been more just and favourable for Hungary. Holec, however, considers this stance to be an example self-deception, claiming that Hungary\u2019s political tradition had predestined the country to take an anti-democratic course, which, in Holec\u2019s opinion, was characterized by a strong rightward trend, an authoritarian regime, the stigmatization of nonHungarians, as well as the \u201cfirst anti-Semitic legal acts in Europe\u201d. While agreeing with the image of Hungary as described by Holec on the whole (with the reservation that the infamous Numerus Clausus Act of 1920<\/em> was not followed by other anti-Semitic acts up to 1938, the use of the plural being, thus, misleading), I do not personally believe that some nations (such as Germans or Hungarians) have been a priori <\/em>antidemocratic, versus others (such as Czechs), which have inherently been in possession of some democratic cultural attitude. Bib\u00f3\u2019s argu mentation, moreover, appears plausible because the Versailles peace treaties, having divided European nations into mutually exclusive groups of \u201cgood\u201d winners vs. \u201cevil\u201d losers, i.e. positively vs. negatively \u201cdiscriminated\u201d ones, had a significant impact on the history of these nations in the inter-war period.<\/p>\n

What I consider to be a less successfully developed aspect in the book is the author\u2019s quite negative evaluation of Hungarian historiography and the current treatment of the Trianon subject in Hungary. While it is obvious that there has indeed been a trend in Hungarian historiography, neglecting the basic scientific principles of the field, that has blamed Jews, freemasonry or the conspiracy by \u201cbackground\u201d powers, as scapegoats for Trianon \u2013 rather than making an attempt at self-reflection, a symbolic figure being Ern\u0151 Raffay. Yet, Raffay (or Gyula Pop\u00e9ly) are not mainstream historians in Hungary: instead, they are on the periphery, even though they are read by many, and they are also promoted by the media and the government. Nonetheless, it is not them, but Ign\u00e1c Romsics, Bal\u00e1zs Ablonczy, Mikl\u00f3s Zeidler (et altri), who represent the genuine academic tradition of historiography. In fact, just as one should not equate Slovak historiography with Martin Homza, department chair at Comenius University (Pozsony\/Bratislava), and Holec\u2019s supervisor, and with his views and the situation at his department.<\/p>\n

In sum, Trianon: Triumph and Tragedy<\/em> de serves to be considered positively, since Roman Holec creates his own image of Trianon on the basis of strictly professional criteria and a rich database. One may, of course, argue with him, and \u2013 indeed \u2013 one must: after all, that\u2019s a historian\u2019s job. One thing, however, is beyond doubt: the author approaches the topic with great empathy towards how we, Hungarians, perceive Trianon, stepping out of the traditional Slovak narrative space, providing the reader with a fresh perspective on the topic. We might as well say that Holec\u2019s image of Trianon is one which, perhaps for the first time, brings it closer to all of us than ever before to find a consensus between Slovak and Hungarian scholars. In order to achieve this goal, it is necessary for Hungarian historians to read Holec\u2019s book and interpret it in an appropriate way. I can but en courage them to do so, for it is worth the while.<\/p>\n

Attila Simon<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Holec, Roman. 2020. Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon: Triumph and Tragedy]. Bra tislava, Maren\u010din PT, 256 p. Roman Holec has been one of the influential Slovak historians during recent decades. His earlier research concentrated on issues of economic history, as well as assimilation, of the age of the dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary, but he […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[555,844],"tags":[],"post_year":[854,878],"coauthors":[150],"class_list":["post-5935","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-forum-social-science-review","category-reviews","post_year-854","post_year-2022-5"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nHolec, Roman: Trianon - triumf a katastrofa [Trianon - Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon - F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Holec, Roman: Trianon - triumf a katastrofa [Trianon - Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon - F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Holec, Roman. 2020. Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon: Triumph and Tragedy]. Bra tislava, Maren\u010din PT, 256 p. Roman Holec has been one of the influential Slovak historians during recent decades. His earlier research concentrated on issues of economic history, as well as assimilation, of the age of the dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary, but he […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-12-15T12:54:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simon Attila\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simon Attila\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Simon Attila\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/person\/7982806df747a1b999ac74f4566c97ed\"},\"headline\":\"Holec, Roman: Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon – Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-12-15T12:54:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\"},\"wordCount\":3522,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Forum Social Science Review\",\"Reviews\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\",\"name\":\"Holec, Roman: Trianon - triumf a katastrofa [Trianon - Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon - F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2022-12-15T12:54:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Kezd\u0151lap\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Holec, Roman: Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon – Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/\",\"name\":\"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle\",\"description\":\"Negyed\u00e9venk\u00e9nt megjelen\u0151 tu\u00addo\u00adm\u00e1\u00adnyos fo\u00adly\u00f3\u00adira\u00adt\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#organization\",\"name\":\"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/szemle-logo.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/szemle-logo.svg\",\"width\":225,\"height\":53,\"caption\":\"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/person\/7982806df747a1b999ac74f4566c97ed\",\"name\":\"Simon Attila\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/adatbank.sk\/?p=379281\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/author\/simonattila\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Holec, Roman: Trianon - triumf a katastrofa [Trianon - Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon - F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Holec, Roman: Trianon - triumf a katastrofa [Trianon - Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon - F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle","og_description":"Holec, Roman. 2020. Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon: Triumph and Tragedy]. Bra tislava, Maren\u010din PT, 256 p. Roman Holec has been one of the influential Slovak historians during recent decades. His earlier research concentrated on issues of economic history, as well as assimilation, of the age of the dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary, but he […]","og_url":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/","og_site_name":"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle","article_published_time":"2022-12-15T12:54:36+00:00","author":"Simon Attila","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simon Attila","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/"},"author":{"name":"Simon Attila","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/person\/7982806df747a1b999ac74f4566c97ed"},"headline":"Holec, Roman: Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon – Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon","datePublished":"2022-12-15T12:54:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/"},"wordCount":3522,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Forum Social Science Review","Reviews"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/","url":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/","name":"Holec, Roman: Trianon - triumf a katastrofa [Trianon - Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon - F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#website"},"datePublished":"2022-12-15T12:54:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/2022\/12\/15\/holec-roman-trianon-triumf-a-katastrofa-trianon-triumph-and-tragedy-reviewed-by-attila-simon\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Kezd\u0151lap","item":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Holec, Roman: Trianon – triumf a katastrofa [Trianon – Triumph and Tragedy] Reviewed by Attila Simon"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#website","url":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/","name":"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle","description":"Negyed\u00e9venk\u00e9nt megjelen\u0151 tu\u00addo\u00adm\u00e1\u00adnyos fo\u00adly\u00f3\u00adira\u00adt","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#organization","name":"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle","url":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/szemle-logo.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/szemle-logo.svg","width":225,"height":53,"caption":"F\u00f3rum T\u00e1rsadalomtudom\u00e1nyi Szemle"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/#\/schema\/person\/7982806df747a1b999ac74f4566c97ed","name":"Simon Attila","sameAs":["http:\/\/adatbank.sk\/?p=379281"],"url":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/author\/simonattila\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5935","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5935"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5935\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5936,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5935\/revisions\/5936"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5935"},{"taxonomy":"post_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/post_year?post=5935"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumszemle.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=5935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}