The Contribution of Former Market Towns to Regional

Development

by Ede Petrás1

Abstract

South Great Plain is a region of peripherical location and quite unfavourable socio-economical conditions.
However, regarding the basic regional indicators, it stands out that this backward region is strikingly the most
urbanised one in Hungary. Its settlement system consists mostly of former market towns – i. e. small and middle
towns with a long historical tradition of a specific peasant embourgeoisement based on self-organisation and a
widespread local autonomy. Some elements of this tradition, such as a relatively high level of infrastructure,
civic involvement and social solidarity, an adventurous but adaptive economic attitude and a long and fruitful
cooperation between some of the towns are still present in most of the former market towns, being a significant
innovative factor in the region. The features of market town traditions and their contribution to regional
development is demonstrated by case studies on two towns from the region.

Keywords: market towns, regional development, internal resources of innovation, South Great Plain Region.

1. A brief introduction to South Great Plain Region

South Great Plain Region is situated in the southeastern part of Hungary. It has a
peripherical location within the EU, and its socio-economical conditions are quite
unfavourable in comparison with the rest of Hungarian regions (Figure 1). However,
regarding the basic regional indicators, it stands out that this backward region is strikingly the
most urbanised one among Hungarian regions (Figure 2).
The high proportion of urban citizens not accompanied by the rest of socio-economic
indicators is related to the specific geographical and political conditions of South Great Plain
Region. Before the river regulations of the 19th century, Hungarian Great Plain2 used to be a
land of forests and swamps, dominated by the far-flung arms of River Tisza (Figure 3).
This swampy woodland was very suitable for semi-nomadic cattle husbandry, and on
the other hand, it generated a permanent challenge for the authorities, providing any outlaw
people with a perfect shelter. Due to its geographical conditions, a feudal villein system could
never evolve fully in the region. During the 150-year Turkish occupation (16th to 17th
centuries), local autonomies and semi-nomadic cattle husbandry became the dominant
features of The Great Plain. Though most of its settlements were depopulated, those surviving
1
sociologist (MSc), junior research fellow, "Great Plain" Institute of Centre for Regiunal Studies of Hungarian
Academy of Sciences – website: http://www.rkk.hu/ati/munkatarsak/petras.html, email: petrase@rkk.hu
2
South Great Plain Region is situated in the core area of Hungarian Great Plain.
wars and sackings were making up a unique formation – that of a rich, quasi free urbanised
peasant community containing many elements of western-style civil liberties, with the ability
of organising itself, of governing its territory, and that of developing its economy according to
market demands (BELUSZKY 2006).
Since the 18th century, the ’uniqueness’ of the region was slowly diminishing, due to
the rise of the centralised monarchy, the increase in crop production at the expense of cattle
husbandry and the drainage of the huge flooded area in the heart of The Great Plain. Despite
the change in the geo-political conditions and the foundation of many new settlements, the
region is still dominated by former, quasi free peasant towns originating from the Turkish era,
preserving a vivid tradition of innovation and self-government.
Nowadays, the region is facing several ecological, economical and social problems.
The dynamical balance of the Great Plain’s water system has been disintegrated by the
regulation of River Tisza, followed by the great extension of croplands. Lack of water is
getting a day by day more serious problem for the region once so rich in this vital element.
This endogene desiccation is also heightened by the global warming process (CSATÁRI et al
1994).
Apart from a number of dynamic areas, the economy of South Great Plain Region has
been in a depression since the early 1990s, caused by the crucial situation of agriculture and
the collapse of the communist industry located in the region, mostly based on an outworn,
second-class technology, compared to that of the central and Western part of Hungary. The
simultaneous recession of industry and agriculture led to a widespread unemployment and
impoverishment of the population, generating significant emigration, principally towards the
central and northwestern parts of Hungary.
A specific feature of the region is the appearance of several prosperous towns,
emerging from their environment as islands of economical and demographical stability (KISS
2003). Besides the county seats, the towns of relatively favourable conditions – like Szarvas,
Hódmezővásárhely or Szentes – possess a vigorous tradition of urbanised peasant community.

2. Market towns: typical settlements of the region

2. 1. Dawn and heyday of a specific kind of local communities

 The symbol and real scene of the ’uniqueness’ of the Great Plain society is the
network of market towns surrounded by hundreds of homesteads (i. e. scattered farms) owned
and cultivated by peasants – full members of the urban community. The oldest market towns
grew up in the 12th century, and they began to flourish in the 15th century. By that time,
market towns of the region had had nearly the same economical and social structures as the
first-class royal cities of Hungary (KUBINYI 1990). However, this equalising process was
held up by the Turkish occupation of the region in the 16th century, creating a radically
different political background for Great Plain market towns.
Due to the permanent menace of raids of military troops and tax collectors, the
majority of the population flocked together to the so-called ’khas-towns’ being under the
direct control of the Turkish Emperor. This migration led to a huge depopulation of the
region, but in the same time to the appearance and enrichment of populous market towns
surrounded by enourmous bleak areas.
The development of market towns was based economically on the mass exportation of
cattles bred in the great, depopulated forests and meadows. Its most characteistic features
were the early evolution of goods production and a powerful local autonomy. ’Khas towns’
were completely independent from Turkish authorities, as far as they paid the taxes reguralry
to the Emperor’s Treasury. Though this system was generally favourable for market towns, it
is worth mentioning that the privileged position of several market towns was question of
permanent negotiations between towns and different political actors, thus the well-being and
development of market towns strongly depended on the political talent of their magistrates
throughout the Turkish era.
This kind of early capitalistic development had many common features with that of
other peripheral areas of Europe (e. g. Scandinavia or Switzerland), where relatively
autonomous peasant communities were getting through a specific embourgoisment process in
the same century. In the case of both the Great Plain and the other European areas mentioned,
the cultural bases of this process were local, bottom-up organised Protestant congregations.
Besides organising local life, Protestant congregations played an essential role in maintaining
national culture in the course of the whole Turkish era. Furthermore, Protestant school centres
and their dense network of partner institutions were the root of many long and fruitful town-
to-town cooperations, some of which are still live today.
The relatively favourable conditions of the Turkish regime were changed by the
Habsburg occupation of the late 17th century. Market towns suffered great casualties, and
many of them were even ravaged during the long-lasting war period. In the new era, urbanised
peasant communities found themselves in a minority position within Habsburg Monarchy,
regarding both religion and nationality. Furthermore, their self-governing privileges were
restricted by the establishment of a centralised monarchy, and Protestant churches by that
time defending local autonomies were debilitated by a violent anti-Protestant campaign
(MÁRKUS 1991).
Despite all negative conditions, most of market towns could realise an economic
development after the end of the war period. The reason for their success is the evolution of a
homestead system, perfectly adequate to the geographical conditions and the new demand of
the market for wheat production instead of cattles. In 18th century market towns, each citizen
had his own share of the huge lands belonging to his town. A great part of this share was
located far away from the town, in the outer belt of its land. These remote estates became the
places of mass wheat production, being the main source of riches for market towns for two
centuries. Creation of this land use system was an innovation based totally on local resources,
as a response of market town communities to the challenge of new, unfavourable conditions
(Figure 4).
The uniqueness of this process was that farmers did not migrate to their estate,
founding new villages or separate farms (as ’mas’-s in Bretagne or Aquitaine) in the
depopulated areas. Instead, they built homesteads in the centre of their shares, making for
temporary shelter. Although they often spent quite a long time there according to the seasonal
works, they kept on being members of the town community, considering the town as their
home, keeping house and family in town, cultivating their inner estates (i. e. gardens and
stables) and bearing communal offices if delegated (Figure 5).
In the late 19th century, market town communities constituted a specific sort of local
communities within the modern civil state. Their most important distinguishing feature was
peasant embourgoisment – i. e. the urbanised lifestyle of a mostly agricultural population,
together with the decisive role of the wealthiest farmers. Within such a community, the
attitude of a conscious and active local citizen was created by the experience of private
business (i. e. farming) and local autonomy.
Such a social environment proved to be an excellent scene for civil organisations and
bottom-up communities, flourishing in late 19th century Hungary. According to a recently
fulfilled research, market towns of the Great Plain had a civil society dominated by social
clubs and casinos, with a relatively great proportion of benevolent and mutual associations
compared to other parts of the country, often having hundreds or sometimes even thousands
of members (VADÁSZ 1998). These facts reflect my above statements on peasant
embourgoisment, and the self-governing and self-managing character of market towns.

2. 2. The decline and perdition of market towns

Once flourishing urbanised peasant communities have been almost totally destroyed
by the successive tragical events of the last century. Since the late 19th century, market towns
have been facing a constant employment crisis caused by over-population, boosted by the fact
that they have lost a predominant part of their traditional inland market, due to the drastic
changes in the boundaries of Hungary after World War I. A further disadvantage was suffered
by a remarkable proportion of market towns due to the new boundaries running across the
whole territory of the Great Plain. Namely, the economical and cultural centres of the region
(Arad, Nagyvárad/Oradea and Szabadka/Subotica) got out of Hungary, leaving their nearby
market towns in a peripheral situation.
The adversities counted above were followed by the damages of World War II and the
anti-farmer policy of the communist regime, overwhelming local elites, destroying thousands
of homesteads and banning any discourse concerning local affairs for decades. This policy is
brightly reflected by the fact that settlements of the Great Plain had a very poor share in state
investments and financing compared to both its area and population through the communist
era (SZELÉNYI 1983). This long-lasting 'war' between state and society had a really harmful
effect on traditionally self-governing and self-managing urbanised peasant communities.
Communist modernisation of market towns consisted mainly of the location of
industrial subsidies applying second-class technology, and the architectural demolition of
historical town centres. Due to the above events and processes, a great proportion of towns are
now declining, suffering a serious socio-economical crisis. However, a few towns (e. g.
Szarvas or Orosháza) have relatively good conditions, based on both agricultural and
industrial production (Figure 6).

2. 3. Former market towns as a regional innovative factor

Though market towns no longer exist as a specific kind of settlement and way of life,
some elements of its traditions, such as a relatively high level of infrastructure, civic
involvement and social solidarity, an adventurous but adaptive economic attitude and a long
and fruitful cooperation between some of the towns are still present among former market
towns, what is potentially a significant innovative factor for the whole region.
 Former market towns have been important scenes of the country-wide localisation
process beginning in the late 70s and culminating in the early 90s, after the collapse of the
communist regime. According to the experiences of a field research in a former market town,
"small town mentality defended itself by a by-pass way of thinking, preserving not only the
spirit of bourgeois, but that of citoyen as well" (A. GERGELY 1996:16). A sociography on
another former market town claims that the reactions of individuals to external conditions and
historical processes are strongly determined by one's family preserving and transmitting local
traditions (MÁRKUS 1979). The same opinion is reflected by a study on the town network of
the Great Plain, namely that local patriotism can be an important innovative factor in former
market towns, as many elements of their traditional community are still present in most of
them (TÓTH 1988:93) (Figure 7).
Besides its negative socio-ecomical aftermaths, the collapse of the communist regime
had a few favourable effects on localities, such as the growing importance of local conditions
or the restoration of local self-governments. The development of settlements is no longer
question of their declared status and its network of informal relationships, but it depends on
many different factors. Thus nowadays, even the most remote or backward settlements can
follow any alternative way of development, based on local resources – in case they could find
one.
In our global era, localities have practically no voice in global politics. In addition,
localities in Hungary are hardly able to have any influence on the decisions respecting
themselves because of the overcentralised structure of government and especially financing
(BEKE 2001:169). On the other hand, regional development policy has some serious faults
regarding planning (FARAGÓ 2005), as well as financing (PÁLMAI 2006) and
administration (PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS 2001). Therefore an 'alternative' development based on
local resources can be a unique opportunity for many local communities (ENYEDI 1998),
especially in South Great Plain Region being situated far away from the main Hungarian
centres of investments and innovation (RECHNITZER 2000).
In spite of the long-lasting economical crisis of the region and the many defects of
local self-governments, several former market towns have managed to realise some kinds of
development, based on local resources, such as creation and transmission of a new town
image by the local authority and/or the local cultural elite, or the participation of local
entrepreneurs in local development, and last but not least the many successful campaigns of
civil organisations and active citizens on behalf of their local communities. I deeply agree
with a recent analysis of the conditions of urban development in the region, that this kind of
achievements, though their benefits are quite difficult to be reflected by statistical methods,
does play an essential role in the quality of urban life and the well-being of citizens (KISS
2003:53).

3. Case studies

The features of market town traditions and their contribution to regional development
are demonstrated by case studies from two former market towns, presenting the structures of a
local community and the motivations of a young farmer, reflecting the manifestation of
urbanised peasant traditions in human thoughts and acts, and its innovative effect on local
communities (Figure 8).

3. 1. Local community in a former market town

Hódmezővásárhely (or briefly Vásárhely – literally 'Market Place' in Middle
Hungarian) is a town of nearly 50.000 inhabitants, in the middle of South Great Plain region.
It has been a market town since the 15th century. Its modern development was based on its
high-quality wheat production. By the last few decades, the majority of its inhabitants used to
be separate smallholders, usually living in their homesteads. According to a study on local
history, by 1950 an approximate number of 7.000 homesteads could be found surrounding the
town, some of which are still inhabited now (SZENTI 2001) (Figure 9).
Albeit Vásárhely has a considerable industrial potential based mostly on local
resources as clay, crops or milk, and a significant proportion of commuters working in the
neighbouring Szeged, it is still preserving an agricultural character. After a serious crisis
caused by the collapse of communist economy, the town is now in a period of stabilisation,
marked by a relatively high level of local cultural and public life, and an intensive activity of
the local authority towards the improvement of public services and social security.
The following statements are derived from my field research studying the local
community of Vásárhely, proceeded since 2005. Aiming a comprehensive examination of
micro-social processes, the methods applied are mainly qualitative – interpretation of
biographical interviews, thematic interviews and written sources, accompanied by a statistical
analysis.
 As all local societies, the dwellers of Vásárhely can be divided into two groups by
their participation in local public life. Similar to thousands of small towns, active citizens of
Vásárhely usually have a critical but basically positive attitude towards their town, associated
by a strong sense of local patriotism. The unique feature is the attitude of the passive part of
Vásárhely community. All the five persons I have interviewed from this group by now, are
basically satisfied with the events going on in town, albeit they are not really interested in
local affairs. According to my experiences, active citizens of Vásárhely face much less
distrust and resistence on the part of passive dwellers than it is usual within average
Hungarian local communities, when lobbying on behalf of their settlements (see VERCSEG
1999 about this negative attitude).
The appreciation of those who act for the community may be rooted in the structure of
the old peasant community. According to a study on Vásárhely homesteads, in the past there
used to be a rather paternalistic relationship between smallholder farmers and the thousands of
lackland people working mostly at their small homestead farms (SZENTI 2003:49). This
assumption is confirmed by one of my most interesting observations, i. e. active members of
the local community are mostly descendants of traditional smallholder homestead families, or
at least deeply influenced by their values and cultural traditions.

3. 2. Motivations of a young farmer or how market town traditions can promote development

Miss E. is one of the young farmers I interviewed in Kiskunhalas, a town where the
proportion of homestead farms are much over the regional average. The aim of my research is
to study the motivations of young farmers, being part of a general research of homesteads
between the rivers Danube and Tisza, having been done by the "Great Plain" Institute of
Centre for Regional Studies of Hungarian Academy of Sciences since 2005.3 I have chosen
the case of Miss E. to present for her story is typical of young farmers, and furthermore, some
common elements of their way of thinking are characteristically reflected by her words.
Miss E. lives with her family in a recently built house in a garden suburb of
Kiskunhalas – a town of approximately 30.000 inhabitants in the southwestern part of South
Great Plain Region (Figure 10). Seven persons live together in the large, tout and trim
household, including her widowed father, two divorced sisters and their small children.
The main income of the household is sheep-breeding practised at their homestead near
the town. In the last decades of the communist era, her 64 year old father used to be manager

3
See more at http://www.alfoldinfo.hu/tanyakutatas
of the sheep-breeding department in one of the local collective farms. Laid off from this farm
in 1990, he hired 500 sheep and a stock-yard from his former company. His farm turned
gainful after the first years' difficulties, so he could buy the sheep and build a new stock-yard
together with some auxiliary buildings at his own homestead. The sheep have had an assured
market since the beginning – they are transported by lorries directly from the farm, three
times a year – before the biggest feasts in Italy.
Miss E. has been working full-time for the farm since 5 years. The sheep are catered
by father and daughter alone, instead of clippings when some additional workers are engaged.
It is a great trouble for the family that the hard works related sheep-breeding are not really
suitable either for young Miss E. or for his father with his arms and waist crocked up.
Miss E. is 27 now, graduated agricultural engineer from the agricultural faculty of the
College of Hódmezővásárhely. After working as middle manager in a well-run company
related to horse-breeding, she changed for his father's farm voluntarily. She has many plans
for the near future, such as modernising a building at the homestead and moving to live there
permanently, keeping on farming as a private entrepreneur, and competing for the
establishment of a modern, mechanised cattle-breeding division. She intends to run cattle-
breeding by herself, engaging a permanent employee for catering the sheep after his father
retires. She wants to fulfil her plans as soon as possible, so as to become self-sufficient, no
longer falling back on the quickly changing subsidisation system.
It looks interesting why a young, educated woman gives up a well-paying job
adequate to her qualifications – just for taking up a hard and risky activity. According to her
explanation, Miss E. was encouraged to do so by her strong desire for independence and her
affiliation to homestead lifestyle: "[...] here you can't blame your colleague, you are your own
master, if you what you spoil that will spoil, what you don't spoil that will work... Freedom. It
gives me freedom." The intention of revolt is a possible reason for this attitude, caused by
discontentment of the surrounding reality. As her following sentence confirms, she does not
want to toe the line as most of her peers do: "It's exciting, and I think very few people have
such an opportunity. And I'm sure I'm right. [She is laughing.]"
This strong and independent personality is reflected as well by her opinion about the
ideal partner: "I can't imagine a partner going out there to take over control, rather he is to
carry on with his own business somewhere else... It's important for me to have different
resources of income. He could give another resource for the family."
Appreciation of her father's achivements is another important motivation for Miss E.
She is conscious of the value of the farm started from the scratch, and she does not want it to
perish when his father cannot sustain it any more: "Why I chose sheep-breeding? Because
there was a small realm set already, and I think it's a great achievement of Daddy that he
managed to build it up all, and it's really great. [She is laughing.] And I don't want to leave it
go by the board. If I could build up just so many as he has done in his life, I would be pride
and satisfied. And it gives me such a firm background, that I would regret it all my life if I
didn't try to make the best of it."
Her father initially objected her intention to work for the farm, as he did not want her
to engage in such a hard and risky job. Though he is still not convinced completely, he seems
to have put up with her daughter's decision, at the sight of her firm mind and her
achievements realised by now: "Fathers usually don't like their daughters to run about in a
homestead yard with a pitchfork. [She is laughing.] But I think he can see that I make out
well... and I can fulfil what I undertake."
She is planning to live on farming despite the fact that she has a quite pessimistic
opinion about the future of agriculture in Hungary, especially about that of small farms: "In
my opinion, this has no government encouragement nowadays. [...] This is an agricultural
country as it has ever been, and it is going to be as far as a nuclear war comes. And I think it
needs a lot more encouragement. As far as I can see, their purpose is again to encourage the
big ones. If you look at the past, it's been the same for so many decades: once we share land,
then we join them together, then we become bankrupt, then we share it again.4 And I feel I'm
in the very period when small family farms are being killed off."
The words cited above reflect an instinctive, probably unconscious attitude of
swimming up the stream, that is typical of not only Miss E. but many other young farmers of
the town. Albeit they are fully aware of the adverse political and economical environment for
small family farms, they consider them as an embarrasing condition, and instead of
complaining they are striving to survive. Moreover, while striving they are constantly looking
for gaps in the wall they are facing so as to find new ways of development – just as their
ancestors used to do it throughout the long history of market towns of the Great Plain. This
collective attitude seems to be a remainder of market town mentality still living in the local
community.

4. Conclusion

4
This remark refers to the land policies of Hungary since 1945.
 Market town communities evolved by the geographical and historical conditions of the
Great Plain. Their most important attributes are the strong tradition of self-government and an
economical and as well civic development based on local resources. An almost permanent
attitude of oppositon has been another essential feature of market towns, manifesting itself in
economy, religion, nationality and even regional development policy in the course of history.
In spite of the unfavourable socio-economical conditions of their region, market towns were
able to survive, reform their structures and start a new development several times.
Due to the above facts and the defects of Hungarian regional and local policies, the
specific way of thinking and acting I call urbanised peasant traditions, preserved by market
town communities is a potential development factor not only at local but at regional level as
well, as the regional settlement network is dominated by former market towns. Therefore
these local communities now swimming up the stream of global and national policy should be
regarded as high-priority partners for any adequate regional development policy to be
implemented in South Great Plain Region.

References

BELUSZKY, P. 2006, Historische geographie der Grossen Ungarischen Tiefebene. Passau: Schenk. 280 p.
CSATÁRI, B. et al 1994, The Great Hungarian Plain, Lowland of Central Europe and its Settlements :
Supplement to the National Report of the Republic of Hungary for the UN Conference on Human
Settlements (Habitat II.) Nagyalföld Foundation: Hódmezővásárhely. 16 p.
ENYEDI, Gy 1998, Tarnsformation in Central European Postsocialist Cities. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies
of Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS). 46 p.
FARAGÓ, L. 2005, The General Theory of Public (Spatial) Planning: The Social Technique for Creating the
Future. Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies of HAS. 85 p.
A. GERGELY, A. 1996, Kun etnoregionális kisvárosi sajátosságok? (Kuman Ethno-Regional Peculiarities in a
Small Town?) Budapest: Institute for Political Science of HAS. 24 p.
KISS, J. P. 2003, Az alföldi városok fejlődésének adottságai az 1990-es évek új feltételrendszerében. (Small
Town Development in the Great Plain at the New Conditions of 1990`s). In Timár, J. –Velkey, G. (eds.),
Várossiker alföldi nézőpontból. (Town Success - Great Plain Style). Békéscsaba: Central fo Regional
Studies of HAS – Budapest: Social Science Research Centre of HAS. pp. 39-54.
KUBINYI, A. 1990, Urbanisation in the East-Central Part of Medieval Hungary. Budapest: Akadémiai. 151 p.
MÁRKUS, I. 1991, Az „alföldi út” és elakadása. (The ’Great Plain Path’ and its Obstruction.) In Idem, Az
ismeretlen főszereplő: tanulmányok. (The Main Character Unknown: Essays.) Budapest: Szépirodalmi. pp.
305-343.
PÁLMAI, Zs. 2006, A régió fejlesztési-tervezési kérdései a Nemzeti Fejlesztési Tervben. (Development and
Planning Issues of National Development Plan.) In Hajdú, Z. (ed.), Dél-Dunántúl. (South Transdanubia.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies of HAS – Budapest: Dialóg Campus. pp. 445-461.
PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS, I. 2001, Regional Development and Governance in Hungary. Pécs: Centre for Regional
Studies of HAS. 41 p.
RECHNITZER, J. 2000, The Features of the Transition of Hungary's Regional System. Pécs: Centre for
Regional Studies of HAS. 74 p.
SZELÉNYI, I. 1983, Urban Inequalities under State Socialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 158 p.
SZENTI T. 2001, Tanyarendszerünk múltja és egyik jövőképe. (The Past and a Possible Future of our Homstead
Network.) In Hitel, Vol 14, No 8, pp. 68-79.
SZENTI T. 2003, Vásárhelyi emlékeim. (Reminiscences from Vásárhely.) Hódmezővásárhely: Mayor!s Office of
the Town of Hódmezővásárhely. 195 p.
TÓTH, J. 1988, Urbanizáció az Alföldön. (Urbanisation in The Great Plain.) Budapest: Akadémiai. 200 p.
VADÁSZ, I. 1998, Két kezdet: az öntevékeny társadalmi szervezetek településenkénti megoszlása az Alföldön a
XIX. és a XX. század végén. (Two Beginnings: Distribution of Voluntary Organisations in The Great Plain
at the End of the 19th and the 20th Centuries.) In Novák L. (ed.), Az Alföld társadalma. (The Society of The
Great Plain.) Nagykőrös: Directory of Museums of County Pest. pp. 643-656.
VERCSEG I. 1999, Kistérségi fejlesztés a Mecsekalján. (Small Region Development in Mecsekalja.) Budapest:
Hungarian Association for Community Development.
http://www.adata.hu/_Kozossegi_Adattar/dokument.nsf/0/db97b0d76b7c0b4fc12568a900764ea0?
OpenDocument (27 October, 2005)
 Figures

Figure 1: GDP per capita in the regions of Hungary, 2003 (by E. P. – based on the data of Hungarian Central
Statistical Office).

Northern Hungary

North Great Plain

South Great Plain

South Transdanubia

Middle Transdanubia

West Transdanubia

Central Hungary

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

HUF 1,000 (approx. €4)

Figure 2: Proportion of urban citizens in the regions of Hungary (with the exception of Budapest, as it includes
nearly half of Hungarian urban citizens), 2001 (by E. P. – based on the data of Hungarian Central Statistical
Office).

Northern Hungary

North Great Plain

South Great Plain

South Transdanubia

Middle Transdanubia

West Transdanubia

Central Hungary*

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

*: without Budapest % of total population

Figure 3: Great Plain landscape in the past (Halászok/Fishermen by Károly Markó, 1851)…
…and in the present (air photo by ’Great Plain’ Institute of Centre for Regional Studies of HAS, 2006).

Figure 4: A homestead (photo by ’Great Plain’ Institute of Centre for Regional Studies of HAS, 2006).
Figure 5: Market town street in the 19th century (http://www.nagy-koros.hu).
Figure 6: Part of a main square demolished architecturally in a former market town (http://www.vasarhely.us).

Figure 7: A former market town today (www.szentes.hu).

Figure 8: Location of the scenes of the case studies within South Great Plain Region (by E. P).
Figure 9: The centre of Hódmezővásárhely (http://www.viztorony.hu).
Figure 10: Suburban street in Kiskunhalas (by E. P).