The Role of Ethnographical Maps of Hungary and Romania at the Peace Talks After the Great War

  • János JeneyEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


The First World War was mostly static, not only in Western Europe, but also in Central and Eastern Europe, leaving the borders of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy unchanged until the end of the war. Hungary was one of the two member countries of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy which was the largest state in Central Europe. Although Hungary opposed the war, she was allowed no independent policy on foreign or military affairs and was compelled to enter the war as part of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.

Hungary, the country that lost the most territory at the end of the war, had very few military operations conducted on its soil during the war itself. There were however many military operations subsequent to the cease-fire agreement until the signing of the Peace Treaty of Trianon which concluded the war for Hungary. In preparation of the peace conference in Trianon, France, the US president Woodrow Wilson suggested that the new borders should be drawn along ethnic lines. Hungary was a multi-ethnic state, with nearly half its population non-Hungarian. To justify their particular territorial claims, all parties prepared maps showing the ethnic composition in their particular regions. The reader of these maps gets a different picture from each map of the ethnic composition of the same area. This raises the question whether the changes made to national borders were the consequence of military operations, or merely the outcome of the peace negotiations.


Military Operation Peace Treaty Romanian Population Hungarian Population Peace Talk 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Anikó Kovács-Bertrand (1997) Der ungarische Revisionismus nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg. R. Oldenbourg Verlag, München.Google Scholar
  2. Miklós György Száraz, Zoltán Tóth (2011) Fájó Trianon. M-érték Kiadó, Budapest.Google Scholar
  3. Ignác Romsics (2005) Der Friedensvertrag von Trianon. Gabriele Schäfer Verlag, HerneGoogle Scholar
  4. László Csorba, Csaba Fazekas, András Gerő, Péter Hanák, Paul Hanebrink, John C. Swanson (2008) Österreich-Ungarn: Das Habsburgerreich von 1867–1918. Verlag Carl Ueberreuter, WienGoogle Scholar
  5. Ferenc Pollmann (2008) Trianon felé: A magyar hadsereg ügye a Kiegyezéstől Trianonig. Pueldo Kiadó, NagykovácsiGoogle Scholar
  6. Károly Kogutowicz (1927) Ethnographical Map of Hungary. M. Kir. állami Térképészet, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  7. N.P. Comnéne (1919) Roumania through the Ages: An Historical, Political and Ethnographical Atlas. Librarie Payot & Cie, ParisGoogle Scholar
  8. Count Paul Teleki (1920) Ethnographical Map of Hungary Based on the Density of Population. Klösz György és Fia Térképészeti Müintézet, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  9. Zsigmond Bátky, Károly Kogutowicz (1919) Magyarország néprajzi térképe település és lélekszám szerint. Magyar Földrajzi Intézet, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  10. Jenő Gergely, Lajos Izsák (2000) A huszadik század története. Pannonica Kiadó, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  11. György Lelkes (2011) Magyar helységnév-azonosító szótár. Argumentum Kiadó, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  12. The Peace of Bucharest (1918) Texts of the Roumanian “Peace”, Washington D.C. Last accessed 18 February 2015
  13. Katonai egyezmény a szövetséges hadseregek és a magyar kormány között (1918). Francia diplomáciai iratok. Révai Digitális Kiadó, Budapest. Last accessed 26 February 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technical University of DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Eötvös Loránd University BudapestBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations