Viktor Karády, Zsidóság és társadalmi egyenlötlenségek (1867-1945) [Judaism and Social Inequalities]. Replika Kör, Budapest, 2000. Pp. 309.

The historical sociological studies published in Judaism and Social Inequalities (1867-1945) by Viktor Karády reveals, on the one hand, the role of the Jewry of Central Europe in the modernization in a specific environment, while on the other hand, the changes in the general social groups and the role of Jewry in a changing society are also presented. In the analysis, as suggested by the title, the author focuses on Jewry, but the phrase "social inequalities " indicates that Jewry is viewed from a wider aspect and the social conditions of the Central European countries are also studied in that specific period (1867-1945).

The book is divided into two parts: In the first part the author gives a theoretical definition of modernization and the related phenomena and the role attributed to Jewry in that process. The second part analyses the roots of social inequalities and changes (topics of several essays) by concentrating on two major topics: assimilation, which is restricted to the area of Hungary, and education, which is discussed in the wider European context.

By studying the role of Jewry in modernization, Viktor Karády has brought the topic to the forefront of research again. I say again because Jacob Katz already studied the relationship of traditional European Jewry and the challenge of modernization in the modern era, while Joszef Ben-David and Michael K. Silber investigated the struggles of Hungarian Jewry in the age of modernization. The novelty of Karády's study is the follow-up on the role of Jewry until 1945 and its thorough, complex analysis.

According to Karády, modernization (that is, bourgeois transition, page 20), though initiated by the liberal elite of the Hungarian noble class, was implemented by the assimilating Jewry. The "assimilating" attribute is of special emphasis, since in the author's opinion "the relationship between Jewry and modern capitalism is far from obligate" (page 12). However, the Jews moving again into the country found protection at the noble elite in the eighteenth-century and the "assimilation social contract" (page 16) as an exterior stimulus urges Jewry to participate in modernization. In addition to that, interior characteristics of the group, that is, readiness for mobility, rational economic behaviour, talent for innovation, performance-orientation, respect of knowledge and expertise have also facilitated the participation of Jewry in modernization. Meanwhile, the special Hungarian bourgeois development, different from that of Western Europe, had a new manifestation via the "double structure" , which determined the possibilities and judgment of Jewry. In this system, the members of the Christian middle class were employed in the state sector and considered themselves as victims of modernization even if they benefited from this process. The western type of modernization was characteristic to the Jewry, they were regarded first as a model for other social groups, but later were blamed to cause the demolition of the old world's system of values via their innovations.

The modernization model of the author raises a couple of key questions: To what degree did the conditions of modernization and the consequences of the predetermined fate of Jewry coincide? How can the contradiction in the study be explained that Jewry as a collective noun missing with its specific group characteristics became capable of fulfilling the tasks of economic and cultural modernization while the orthodox Jewry, which, according to the author, did not show any signs of achieving a middle class status, had the same ratio as the neolog Jewry even at the beginning of the 20th century?

In the second part of the study, the author sought the roots of social inequalities . The first scene of this is assimilation. Assimilation has already been studied in Hungarian historiography (cf. the writings of Péter Hanák, István Szabó, László Katus, Gábor Gyáni). Providing an in-depth analysis of Jewry as a whole, its subgroups and the individuals, Karády aims to delineate the peculiar, ambiguous nature of the Hungarian Jewry's assimilation. Assimilation provides a tool for Jewry to cease its "inequality " and to become an equal member of the bourgeois society. However, in the author's view, assimilation is not a one-way process, since Jewry becomes a sort of sample and mediates values toward the non-Jewish society (schooling, lifestyle). The success of assimilation is ensured by the social contract, which defines the place of Jewry in the economic and intellectual spheres, while nobility has the political sphere (until the Horthy era). By studying the assimilation acts (mixed marriage, conversion, change of language), Karády came to the conclusion that in spite of the coercive conditions, Jewry performed assimilation at its free will, showing a kind of overcompensation (higher schooling, excellence). However, the long-term consequences of this did not cease social inequalities but rather created new ones.

The second subsection continues this train of thought and focuses on the characteristics of the educational system and the relationships of social inequalities . The novelty is the complex method of analysing the system of connections, since the educational habits, facilities and characteristics of the Hungarian denominations are analysed based on rich statistical sources. Karády regards education as an institution providing social advantages (page 178). The final conclusion of his analysis is that Jewry is overeducated among the denominations. Meaning that the education of children is more characteristic to Jewry than other denominations and the study performance of the Jewish students is also better. In addition, differences can be detected among the denominations in the preference of the different school types. The social inequalities arise from that. However, the evaluation of the author raises other questions in the reader: if we study only specific layers of society, will we come to the same conclusions for the different denominations? How does the orthodox Jewry fit into this picture?

In conclusion, we can state that Viktor Karády's study aims to give a comprehensive analysis concerning the evaluation of the role of Hungarian Jewry in the modernization of the modern era by spreading the scope of the study to other groups of society. A highly valuable part of his work is the publication of the statistical sources. The system of notions and definitions set out by the author raises several questions, which would be of major importance for future research.

Erzsébet Mislovics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

© 2005 by Religion and Society in Central and Eastern Europe. All rights reserved. ISSN 1553-9962

Contents | Main Page