Search

Search Results

• „De Stefanuskroon niet Habsburgsch”: Alternatieven voor de oplossing van de Hongaarse ‘koningskwestie’ en de Nederlandse pers, 1919–1921

  77-107

  Róbert Kerepeszki

  Views:

  73

  Following the election of Miklós Horthy as Regent and the dethronement of Charles IV, a special public law situation developed in Hungary, during which the state form of the country remained, in fact, but no one had become authorized to occupy the Hungarian royal throne. The fact that a kingdom existed without a monarch in the heart of contemporary Europe served as an almost constant topic for the political and gossip columns of the domestic and international press, and also earned itself a prominent place among the conversation topics in the rather extensive network of European aristocracy. The importance of the Hungarian problem in the post-‘Great War’ period was also indicated by the lively interest taken by the diplomatic corps of some countries of the continent. Of course, many organizations and individuals tried to win their own ideas in the chaotic situation after the Trianon Treaty and get the Hungarian crown for their candidate or for themselves. This study attempts to introduce the Dutch press narratives in connection with the Hungarian ‘royal question’ between 1919 and 1921. During these years because of the fragile post-war Hungarian internal political situation this problem was at its most acute, and when most of the „candidates” and self-candidates for the Hungarian throne emerged. The paper also looks at the background to some of the motivations behind the candidates and how the news was spread in the international press of the time. The issue raised is of particular interest for the Hungarian-Dutch relations for two reasons. On one hand, there was a fundamental mutual sympathy between the two countries during this period. On the other hand, both countries were monarchies at the time, the public perception of a monarchical state about the predicament of another country with a similar form of government can tell us a lot about the public opinion of the time.

• H.C. Zentgraaff contra het echtpaar Székely-Lulofs: Wie was die man?

  133-143

  Gerard Termorshuizen

  Views:

  16

  In 1931 and 1932, Madelon Lulofs published her novels Rubber and Koelie; in 1935 Van oerwoud tot plantage appeared, a translation of the novel Őserdőktől az ültetvényekig by her spouse, László Székely, that came out in the same year. The novels give a realistic and revealing look into the harsh life on the plantations of Deli at the East Coast of Sumatra. Although the books were generally well received in the Netherlands and were considered by progressive critics to be accusations against the colonial administration, the Dutch East Indian press responded with indignation: the colony, as they concluded, was put in a bad light, which created a wrong impression amongst the general public abroad. Besides, equally importantly, these novels served as an evidence of colonial oppression for Indian nationalists, they argued. The Székely-Lulofs couple was heavily rebuked for it. The hate campaign against them was led by journalist H.C. Zentgraaff.