Search

The paper begins by discussing the loyalty-faith-betrayal triad in relation to the Crown, the empire, and one's one nation, and then it proceeds to analyze the situation of the Banat region in the aftermath of World War I and the attitude of the local German population towards the tumultuous events that took place after November 1918. Among the elements thus highlighted we find the confusion experienced by the region's multiethnic population (Romanians, Germans, Serbs, and Hungarians), the intervention of the Entente forces, as well as the attempts made by the authorities in Budapest to maintain control over Banat--among other things, by trying to set up an administrative unit of Banat sometimes referred to as a "republic," which was never actually proclaimed, was never granted international legal status and never acquired its own institutions or distinct legislation, and was therefore ephemeral and practically non-existent. The authors then examine the options available to the German population in what concerned their chances of still living as Germans in a land they had profoundly shaped in economic and cultural terms for the past 200 years, at a time what the Romanians had clearly opted for a union with Romania, the vacillations of a population that included a modest intellectual class between the old loyalty towards the Hungarian state, the loyalty towards one's own community (amid the renewed hope of a German revival), and also the loyalty expected by the Romanian state (of which they knew little, and the little they knew tended to be mostly negative), without forgetting the decision--otherwise influenced by the Saxon leaders (Rudolf Brandsch)--to accept the union with Romania and to support this decision at the Paris Peace Conference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines the role of urban renewal following the regime change within transformation of urban diversity in the case of Józsefváros. The rising of socio-economic status of local society can be detected based on the quantitative investigation in Józsefváros. The study showed that the rise of socio-economic status has been very unequal on the quarter-level. The increasing spatial segregation between different occupational groups was revealed by dissimilarity analyses at neighbourhood level between 1990 and 2001. Social homogenization took place in this period of time. Later on this trend has turned and the mixing of local society was observed in Józsefváros between 2001 and 2011. These results differ from the outcomes of citywide researches. The heterogeneity of population occurred in Józsefváros, while homogenization was dominant in Budapest. Józsefváros is seen as a rapidly changing part of Budapest, affected by urban renewal programmes and new waves of higher status people. According to the calculation of segregation index, it could be emphasized that the level of residential segregation in Józsefváros in 2011 was below the values measured in 2001. Based on this research it can be stated that urban renewal has a strong impact on urban diversity, it has less impact on social mobility, and somewhat more impact on social cohesion (negative) and economic performance (positive). It can be also concluded that it is necessary to consider the diversification of urban renewal practices carried out in Józsefváros. The investigations showed that different types of urban renewal interventions have different impacts on urban diversity. This paper highlighted that social and community improvements, which contribute in particular to preserving urban diversity, should be an integral part of interventions to counteract the negative social effects of urban renewal activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]