The diploma thesis deals with the position of the Hungarian minority in Serbian Vojvodina and Romanian Transylvania using the comparative method. Hungarians in Serbia and Romania represent a very large national minority and they became an integral part of the local culture and society. The level of Hungarian minority rights in the host countries is compared in four areas: legislation, political representation and institutionalization of the minority, mother tongue education opportunities and the Hungarian minority media. Apart from a brief outline of the historical context, the work focuses exclusively on the period after the fall of communism in both states to the present. During these years, there has been the biggest shift in the area of minority rights. The concept of ethnic parallelism is applied to all researched areas. Related to this, the so-called ethnolinguistic vitality approach is used, which deals with the conditions for the preservation of minority languages in the majority society. Special attention is paid to the influence of the Hungarian government under Primer Minister Viktor Orbán on the life of Hungarians abroad, which is significantly growing.

Syftet med studien är att belysa de medel som författare av journalistisk text använder för att förmedla attityd, förhandla argumenterbarheten för sina åsikter och förhålla sig till andra(s) externa positioner och åsikter. Den teoretiska basen utgörs av appraisalteorin (Martin och White 2005) och den interpersonella metafunktionen i den systemisk funktionella grammatiken (Halliday 2014). Det analyserade materialet baserar sig på ett urval av artiklar i den ungerska regeringsvänliga veckotidskriften Figyelő publicerade under perioden november 2017 till augusti 2018, vilka samtliga tematiskt behandlar utvecklingen i Sverige med avseende på migration. Resultatet visar på en mycket rik och varierad användning av den språkliga repertoaren för att uttrycka attityd, och på en övervägande subjektiv ton i rapporteringen. En stor andel implicit uttryckt attityd liksom ironi och ett framträdande författar-jag vittnar om en medveten ambition att interpersonellt närma sig läsarna. Materialet visar även på en systematisk undanträngning av alternativa ståndpunkter (kontraherande heteroglossi), bland annat genom förstärkning av egna argument och åsikter eller genom ett förringande av andras. Resultatet gör det motiverat att ställa frågan om det finns en ”Populist Stance” som kan inordnas som en utmärkande journalistisk stil under det som appraisalteorin benämns commentator voice, utifrån det narrativ som förmedlas, och vars utmärkande drag skulle vara just rika språkliga uttryck för närhet till läsarna, omfattande förekomster av värderande uttalanden om personer/grupper, och en systematisk begränsning av utrymmet för alternativa ståndpunkter. Erfarenheterna från att använda appraisalteorin i detta arbete visar att en större, fördjupad och jämförande studie på detta område torde vara meningsfull och möjlig, utifrån en kombinerad kvantitativ/kvalitativ ansats. / Jelen tanulmány célja annak megismerése, hogy az újságírói szövegek írói milyen nyelvi eszközöket használnak fel az adott témához való hozzáállásuk kifejezésére, és hogyan érvelnek véleményük érvelhetőségét mellett, valamint hogyan kapcsolódnak más külső álláspontokhoz és véleményekhez. Az elméleti kiinduló pont az „Appraisal”-elmélet (Martin és White 2005) és az interperszonális meta-funkció a szisztémás funkcionális nyelvtanban (Halliday 2014). Az elemzett korpusz a Figyelő – egy a magyar kormányt támogató heti magazin – 2017 novembere és 2018 augusztusa között megjelent cikkeiből készített saját válogatáson alapul, ahol a cikkek témájukat tekintve a migrációval kapcsolatos svédországi fejleményekkel foglalkoznak. A tanulmány eredményei azt mutatják, hogy a szövegekben a szerzők nagyon gazdag és változatos nyelvi repertoárt használnak fel a hozzáállás kifejezésére, és hogy a szövegek túlnyomórészt szubjektív módon ábrázolják a helyzetet Svédországban. A szerzői hozzáállásnak a sok egyenesen ki nem mondott megnyilvánulása, a sok irónia, valamint a szerző személyének kiemelkedő pozíciója mind arról tanúskodik, hogy tudatos törekvés van arra, hogy interperszonálisan közeledjenek az olvasókhoz. Az anyag azt is megmutatja, hogy szisztematikusan kizárják az alternatív véleményeket (kirekesztő heteroglosszia), többek között azzal, hogy megerősítik a saját érveiket és véleményüket, vagy lekicsinyilik a többiekét. A tanulmány eredményei alapján indokoltan merül fel a kérdés, hogy létezik-e egyfajta „populista hozzáállás” (angol „populist stance”), amelyet jellegzetes újságírói stílusnak lehet tekinteni, és amely besorolható az ”Appraisal”-elmélet által ”Commentator Voice”-nak nevezett jelenség alá. Ezt igazolhatják a szövegek narratívái és megkülönböztető tulajdonságai: az olvasókhoz való közelség/közeledés gazdag nyelvi megnyilvánulásai, a sok egyénekre/csoportokra vonatkozó értékelő kijelentés és az alternatív pozíciók lehetőségeinek szisztematikus korlátozása. Az Appraisal-modell alkalmazásával kapcsolatos tapasztalatok azt mutatják, hogy lehetséges és fontos lenne egy ezen a területen végzett mélyreható, szisztematikus és összehasonlító tanulmány, egy kombinált kvalitatív és kvantitatív kutatási módszer alapján. / The aim of the study is to investigate the means by which authors of journalistic text convey attitude, negotiate the arguability of their opinions and position themselves in relation to external positions and the views of others. The theoretical basis of the study is Appraisal Theory (Martin &h White 2005) and the Interpersonal Metafunction of Systemic Functional Linguistics (Halliday 2014). The analysed material is based on a selection of articles in the Hungarian government-friendly weekly magazine Figyelő, published between November 2017 and August 2018, all of which thematically deal with developments in Sweden with regard to migration. The results of the study show a rich and varied use of the linguistic repertoire for expressing attitude, and a predominantly subjective writer voice. Frequent examples of implicitly expressed attitude and irony as well as the appearance of the author as subject in the text give witness to a conscious ambition to approach readers interpersonally. The material also shows a systematic exclusion of alternative positions (contracting heteroglossia), whereby the author strengthens his/her own arguments and opinions and/or belittles those of others. The results give cause for asking whether there is a "Populist Stance", a distinctive journalistic style under what Appraisal defines as the Commentator Voice, based on the narrative conveyed, and whose distinctive features would be rich linguistic expressions of closeness to readers, extensive occurrences of evaluative statements about individuals/groups, and a systematic limitation of the space for alternative positions. Experience from applying the Appraisal model in the study shows that a larger in-depth, systematic and comparative analysis of this type of material would be meaningful and possible, based on a combined quantitative/qualitative approach.

Die Arbeit zeichnet die Entwicklung der Europadiskurse in Ungarn vom Ausgang des 18. Jahrhundert bis zum Ende des Kommunismus nach. Sie zeigt die Vielfalt und Wandelbarkeit der Vorstellungen von und Bezugnahmen auf "Europa" durch Schriftsteller, Künstler, Politiker und Intellektuelle. Geprägt war der Diskurs vor allem durch ein beinahe permanent anzutreffendes Rückständigkeitsnarrativ. "Europa", das bedeutete meist Westeuropa, England, Frankreich, aber auch Deutschland. Zwar zählte man sich seit der Krönung des ersten ungarischen Königs Istvan I. im Jahre 1000 mit einer vom Papst gesandten Krone zu einem festen Bestandteil (West-)Europas, die Zugehörigkeit wurde aber durch die fehlende beziehungsweise verzögerte wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Modernisierung häufig in Frage gestellt. Zudem sah man sich mit einer gewissen Ignoranz des Westens konfrontiert, der nur allzu oft sich selbst als eigentliches Europa darstelle und die Leistungen der Ungarn für den Schutz Europas, beispielsweise durch die Abwehr der Türken, nicht würdige. Dieses Isolationsmotiv zieht sich gleichsam wie ein roter Faden durch den Diskurs und wird vielfältig, aber ambivalent eingesetzt. Einerseits werden die niedergeschlagenen Aufstände 1848 und 1956, in denen "Europa" tatenlos zusah wie Ungarns Freiheitskampf von außen erstickt wurde, für eine Anklage des Westens und symbolische Überhöhung Ungarns als verlassener Vorkämpfer der Zivilisation instrumentalisiert, andererseits führt dieser Isolationsdiskurs häufig zu geradezu anti-europäischen Diskursbeiträgen, in denen Ungarn als ein Land des Ostens charakterisiert wird und westliche Wertvorstellungen und Errungenschaften negiert werden. Die verbreitetste diskursive Verortung Ungarns aber ist die, dass es die "Mitte" Europas" sei, ein Ort des Ausgleichs westlicher Moderne und östlicher Rückständigkeit, Bewahrer der ureigenen europäischen Werte. Diese Figur findet sich sowohl im national-liberalen Diskurs des 19. Jahrhunderts, als auch im Dissidentendiskurs der 1980er Jahre. Der ungarische Europadiskurs pendelte also, wie gezeigt wurde tatsächlich von West nach Ost, aber die Mitte war in der Perspektive der betrachteten 200 Jahre ein tradierter Rückzugs- und Bestimmungspunkt der ungarischen Identität in Europa und als Ausgleich der Extreme auch die Identität Europas selbst.:1. Einleitung.......................................................................................................................................3 1.1. Thematische Vorbemerkungen...................................................................................................3 1.2 Methodische Vorbemerkungen...................................................................................................7 2. Liberalismus und Nationalismus als Modelle der „Europäisierung“ – 1780-1848..............10 2.1 Sprachnationalismus vs. Staatspatriotismus...............................................................................12 2.2 Der Europadiskurs in Literatur und Historiographie...............................................................15 2.3 Der Europadiskurs im Vormärz-Ungarn...................................................................................19 2.3.1 „Fährenland“ nach Europa – István Graf Széchenyi...............................................................19 2.3.2 Wider den Osten – Miklós Wesselényi.......................................................................................22 2.3.4 Die westliche Mitte – Lajos Kossuth.........................................................................................25 3. Revolution und Neoabsolutismus – 1848-1867........................................................................30 3.1 Die Revolution in Ungarn im europäischen Kontext..............................................................30 3.1.1 Vorstoß..........................................................................................................................................31 3.1.2 Rückschlag.....................................................................................................................................34 3.2 Ungarn im Neoabsolutismus – Europa im Exil........................................................................37 3.2.1 Nicht ohne Österreich – Zsigmond Kemény...........................................................................39 3.2.2 Die herrschenden Ideen in Europa – József Eötvös..............................................................39 3.2.3 Zerfall Österreichs und neuer Bund für Europa – Mihály Táncsics......................................43 3.2.4 Mahnung aus dem Exil – Kossuths „Donaubund“.................................................................45 3.2.5 Nationalstaat statt Föderation – Der Königsweg für Europa?...............................................48 4. K.u.K. in Europa – 1867-1918....................................................................................................50 4.1 Die „Europäizität Ungarns“ im Dualismus ..............................................................................50 4.1.1 Das Nationalitätengesetz als Beitrag zur „Europäisierung“....................................................51 4.1.2 Wirtschaftlicher Anschluss an Europa? ....................................................................................54 4.1.3 Die Innen- und Außenpolitik der „Tisza-Ära“.........................................................................56 4.1.4 Historiographie zwischen „kuruz“ und „labanc“.....................................................................57 4.2 „Fährenland“ zwischen Ost und West – 1890-1918.................................................................59 4.2.1 Marschrichtung Osten – Von Großungarn zum Turanischen Reich.....................................61 4.2.2 Marschrichtung Westen – Die bürgerlichen Radikalen und der erneuerte Föderationsgedanke......................................................................................................................65 4.2.3 Ungarn in „Mitteleuropa“............................................................................................................69 5. Zwischen Isolation und Europaeuphorie – 1918-1945...........................................................72 5.1 Das Ende der Monarchie und die Phase der Experimente – 1918-1920..............................72 5.1.1 Europas Zusammenbruch und Zukunft – Oszkár Jászi........................................................73 5.1.2 Neues Europa durch neue Staaten – József Pásztor................................................................76 5.1.3 Die Räterepublik und Europa......................................................................................................80 5.2 Revision und Föderation – Der Europadiskurs der zwanziger und dreißiger Jahre............82 5.2.1 Die Friedensverhandlungen in Trianon......................................................................................83 5.2.2 Der Revisionismus als dominanter Denkstil der Zwischenkriegszeit....................................84 5.2.3 Die „Östliche Schweiz“ – Oszkár Jászi......................................................................................87 5.2.4 Das neue „Hungaria“ in Europa – Lászlo Ottlik......................................................................90 5.2.5 Die Pan-Europa Bewegung in Ungarn.......................................................................................92 5.2.6 Das neue Mitteleuropa – Elemér Hantos..................................................................................94 5.2.7 Ungarn in Osteuropa – Tivadar Raith und Dezső Szabó........................................................97 5.3 Das „rechte“ Europa.....................................................................................................................100 6. Ungarn im „Osten“ – Der Europa-Diskurs in der Volksrepublik – 1945-1990..................107 6.1 Ungarn zwischen „Ost“ und „West“..........................................................................................107 6.1.1 Der Ausgang des Krieges und die Etablierung des Stalinismus.............................................107 6.1.2 Die Misere Osteuropas – István Bibó........................................................................................109 6.2 Aspekte einer eigenständigen außenpolitischen Konzeption – 1956 als Versuch der Rückkehr nach Europa.................................................................................................................113 6.2.1 Neutralität in Europa – Imre Nagy.............................................................................................113 6.2.2 1956 – Eine Revolution für Europa............................................................................................116 6.3 Die Historiographie und der Mitteleuropadiskurs der 1980er Jahre......................................119 6.3.1 Ungarn als östliches Zerrbild des Westens – Jenő Szűcs.........................................................121 6.3.2 Die unvollständige Modernisierung – Iván T. Berend.............................................................123 6.3.3 Ungarn in Mitteleuropa – György Konrád................................................................................125 7. Resumee.........................................................................................................................................128 8. Quellen und Literaturverzeichnis 8.1 Quellen 8.1.1 Internet-Quellen 8.1.2 gedruckte Quellen 8.2 Sekundärliteratur 8.2.1 selbstständige Beiträge 8.2.2 unselbstständige Beiträge / The article starts with the notion of a remarkable research deficit (within the wider field of historically oriented European studies) regarding the thinking and discourses on “Europe” in East Central Europe, especially in Hungary. This desiderate could be explained by the partition of the continent through the Iron Curtain lasting for fourty years, what seemed to exclude these countries from Europe in several respects. Nevertheless there was and is a reconstructable, various if plural discourse on the place of Hungary in Europe. It was tightly linked with the discourses on the nation-state and on modernization in the 19th century, while the country was part of the Austrian monarchy of Habsburg. Thus it received main impulses from Western Europe, whose development was taken as an ideal to follow. The East, particularly Russia, was in contrast considered as the non-european “other”, the enemy of liberty and progress. Despite this notion, there were remarkable attempts to frame Hungary in an Eastern context, espeacially through the idea of “Turan”, that claimed a tribal community between Hungarians, Turks and Iranians, which should unite in a common empire. However catching up to the West remained the dominant goal, but was complicated by the structural, economic and cultural differences that lasted on feudal and agrarian Hungary until the beginning of the 20th century. Yet “Europe” was not only a model, it was also a, rather metaphysic and symbolic, institution to which the country appealed for support during the revolutions 1848 and 1956. Both upheavels against an imperial enemy, Habsburg and the Soviet Union, failed and Hungarians felt abandoned by the West, that is Europe. As a consequence of these gaps and failures the idea of Hungary as a part of Central Europe, a special region of small states between the Great powers in the East and the West with a specific identity was conceived. This concept also included the vision of a joint federation to facilitate the negotiations of the everlasting national and ethnic conflicts of the region. It can be found within the texts of 19th century liberal politicians like István Széchenyi, who shaped the metaphor of Hungary as a “ferry-land”, and Lajos Kossuth, who presented the first plan for Danubian Federation, Interwar-politicians like Oszkár Jászi and anti-soviet dissidents like György Konrád in the 1980ies. According to these and other protagonists of the discourse, the “centre” can be classified as the ultimate place of Hungary in Europe throughout the centuries, sharing and preserving the European Heritage.:1. Einleitung.......................................................................................................................................3 1.1. Thematische Vorbemerkungen...................................................................................................3 1.2 Methodische Vorbemerkungen...................................................................................................7 2. Liberalismus und Nationalismus als Modelle der „Europäisierung“ – 1780-1848..............10 2.1 Sprachnationalismus vs. Staatspatriotismus...............................................................................12 2.2 Der Europadiskurs in Literatur und Historiographie...............................................................15 2.3 Der Europadiskurs im Vormärz-Ungarn...................................................................................19 2.3.1 „Fährenland“ nach Europa – István Graf Széchenyi...............................................................19 2.3.2 Wider den Osten – Miklós Wesselényi.......................................................................................22 2.3.4 Die westliche Mitte – Lajos Kossuth.........................................................................................25 3. Revolution und Neoabsolutismus – 1848-1867........................................................................30 3.1 Die Revolution in Ungarn im europäischen Kontext..............................................................30 3.1.1 Vorstoß..........................................................................................................................................31 3.1.2 Rückschlag.....................................................................................................................................34 3.2 Ungarn im Neoabsolutismus – Europa im Exil........................................................................37 3.2.1 Nicht ohne Österreich – Zsigmond Kemény...........................................................................39 3.2.2 Die herrschenden Ideen in Europa – József Eötvös..............................................................39 3.2.3 Zerfall Österreichs und neuer Bund für Europa – Mihály Táncsics......................................43 3.2.4 Mahnung aus dem Exil – Kossuths „Donaubund“.................................................................45 3.2.5 Nationalstaat statt Föderation – Der Königsweg für Europa?...............................................48 4. K.u.K. in Europa – 1867-1918....................................................................................................50 4.1 Die „Europäizität Ungarns“ im Dualismus ..............................................................................50 4.1.1 Das Nationalitätengesetz als Beitrag zur „Europäisierung“....................................................51 4.1.2 Wirtschaftlicher Anschluss an Europa? ....................................................................................54 4.1.3 Die Innen- und Außenpolitik der „Tisza-Ära“.........................................................................56 4.1.4 Historiographie zwischen „kuruz“ und „labanc“.....................................................................57 4.2 „Fährenland“ zwischen Ost und West – 1890-1918.................................................................59 4.2.1 Marschrichtung Osten – Von Großungarn zum Turanischen Reich.....................................61 4.2.2 Marschrichtung Westen – Die bürgerlichen Radikalen und der erneuerte Föderationsgedanke......................................................................................................................65 4.2.3 Ungarn in „Mitteleuropa“............................................................................................................69 5. Zwischen Isolation und Europaeuphorie – 1918-1945...........................................................72 5.1 Das Ende der Monarchie und die Phase der Experimente – 1918-1920..............................72 5.1.1 Europas Zusammenbruch und Zukunft – Oszkár Jászi........................................................73 5.1.2 Neues Europa durch neue Staaten – József Pásztor................................................................76 5.1.3 Die Räterepublik und Europa......................................................................................................80 5.2 Revision und Föderation – Der Europadiskurs der zwanziger und dreißiger Jahre............82 5.2.1 Die Friedensverhandlungen in Trianon......................................................................................83 5.2.2 Der Revisionismus als dominanter Denkstil der Zwischenkriegszeit....................................84 5.2.3 Die „Östliche Schweiz“ – Oszkár Jászi......................................................................................87 5.2.4 Das neue „Hungaria“ in Europa – Lászlo Ottlik......................................................................90 5.2.5 Die Pan-Europa Bewegung in Ungarn.......................................................................................92 5.2.6 Das neue Mitteleuropa – Elemér Hantos..................................................................................94 5.2.7 Ungarn in Osteuropa – Tivadar Raith und Dezső Szabó........................................................97 5.3 Das „rechte“ Europa.....................................................................................................................100 6. Ungarn im „Osten“ – Der Europa-Diskurs in der Volksrepublik – 1945-1990..................107 6.1 Ungarn zwischen „Ost“ und „West“..........................................................................................107 6.1.1 Der Ausgang des Krieges und die Etablierung des Stalinismus.............................................107 6.1.2 Die Misere Osteuropas – István Bibó........................................................................................109 6.2 Aspekte einer eigenständigen außenpolitischen Konzeption – 1956 als Versuch der Rückkehr nach Europa.................................................................................................................113 6.2.1 Neutralität in Europa – Imre Nagy.............................................................................................113 6.2.2 1956 – Eine Revolution für Europa............................................................................................116 6.3 Die Historiographie und der Mitteleuropadiskurs der 1980er Jahre......................................119 6.3.1 Ungarn als östliches Zerrbild des Westens – Jenő Szűcs.........................................................121 6.3.2 Die unvollständige Modernisierung – Iván T. Berend.............................................................123 6.3.3 Ungarn in Mitteleuropa – György Konrád................................................................................125 7. Resumee.........................................................................................................................................128 8. Quellen und Literaturverzeichnis 8.1 Quellen 8.1.1 Internet-Quellen 8.1.2 gedruckte Quellen 8.2 Sekundärliteratur 8.2.1 selbstständige Beiträge 8.2.2 unselbstständige Beiträge

Sexuality-driven political participation refers to the political engagement of people of sexual minorities. While progress has been made in understanding the motivation behind their political participation, this study seeks to address the limitations of the existing literature which are designed explicitly to work in democratic contexts where engagement can bear fruit and for mostly quantitative inquiries which imply homogeneity and fail to map out the heterogeneity in the meanings of sexual minorities’ political participation. To fill these gaps, this thesis aims to answer the following question: how do sexual minorities make sense of their political participation in an increasingly undemocratic context? To explore the plurality of meanings that sexual minorities attach to their political participation in a context where democracy is under threat and homophobia is persistent, I conducted in-depth individual interviews and focus groups with 16 politically active LGBT+ citizens in Hungary. Through qualitative meaning-centred content analysis and with the help of deductively developed analytical lenses, I found that while existing theories can explain to a great degree the meanings that sexual minorities attached to their political participation in increasingly undemocratic contexts, this thesis also sheds light on the multifaceted drivers of political engagement. This includes not solely social identity and discrimination but also a broader pursuit of justice, civil liberties, democracy, and empathy. Overall, the paper makes an important contribution to a more in-depth understanding of the political participation of LGBT+ citizens, highlighting the complex and multifaceted motivations behind their engagement.

The master thesis focuses on similarities and disparities in the politics of memory related to the 'forgotten' Romani Holocaust in Slovakia and Hungary after 1989. It scrutinizes based on particular topic areas to what extent is the Romani Holocaust marginalized, excluded or integrated into the historical narratives of nation-states and whether it can be classified as a competitive or multidirectional form of memory. The reference point for the comparative discursive analysis represents the Jewish Holocaust. By employing the discourse-historical approach, the thesis attempts to identify various current or long-term strategies of instrumentalizing the Romani Holocaust in specific politics of memory. Moreover, it endeavours to find out which role can the Romani Holocaust play in forming the national identity in these states or its potential endangering.

The diploma thesis Czech Nobility in the First Third of the 20th Century analyses the significance of the nobility living in Bohemia after the establishment of Czechoslovakia in 1918. The focus is put on five of the noble families, specifically Auersperg, Buquoy, Czernin, Metternich-Winneburg and Schaumburg-Lippe, their lives, and their strategies in the newly formed republic. The aim of the thesis is to analyse their reactions to the change of the establishment, the ongoing land reform, the abolition of the aristocratic titles and their use leading to the end of their privileged social status as well as the joint of the individual and collective aspects of the nobility. From the methodological point of view, the thesis is based on the concepts of Pierre Bourdieu and Fernand Braudel, specifically the concept of habitus, capital, social fields, longue durée and the so-called new nobility. The introductory parts of the thesis, the historical context, sources, and the methodological approaches, aim to demonstrate the suitability of the use of these concepts for the study of nobility. The following part, empirical part of the thesis, beginning by the fifth chapter, studies the individual fields of nobility, with the first area being the political field. The accent is put on the attitude of the studied...

Through the conception of the EU as a normative power, scholars envisage moving beyond the traditional notion of power in international relations. Scholars have argued that this “new kind of political ethics” entails an expectation on political discourse to avoid antagonistic othering and for consistency between the internal and external dimensions of identity construction. By exploring the previously overlooked internal dimension of Normative Power Europe (NPE), in light of Hungary challenging the upholding of the EU’s founding values, this thesis investigates how EU representatives discursively manage differences “at home”. The discourse analysis identified a dominant pattern of antagonistic othering towards the Hungarian government, suggesting a dilemma in upholding EU values while complying with the expectation that being a “new kind of power” entails. The results further suggest that the internal dilemma has implications on the credibility of the EU as an actor in foreign policy. In studying the managing of internal differences, this thesis adds to previous NPE scholarship on how the EU, in addressing internal fallacies, could work as a “laboratory” and project credible normative power in international relations.

The thesis studies the most recent debate on the issue of democratic backsliding in Hungary, and more specifically, if a rhetoric of inaction was dominant in the plenary debate of the European Parliament. Democratic backsliding is a crucial topic to research in the context of the European Parliament’s recent attempts to take a more active role in defending the European  Union’s fundamental values. The different type of rhetoric used by the European Parliament’s eight party groups makes the political clash over Hungary even more interesting. In this thesis, the type of rhetoric and empirical basis used by the party groups will be described. The study finds that the majority of party groups in the European Parliament use a rhetoric of action towards the democratic backsliding in Hungary despite prior research arguing against such a pattern. Moreover, the most common empirical basis being used, is democracy and rule-oflaw. These results are intriguing because they address an important research gap in the literature on EU institutions and action on Hungary.

Fieldwork in the Zemplen Mountain area of north-eastern Hungary showed that there are at least eight geological sources of obsidian here, five of which have obsidian of a workable quality. There are a further three sources in the Slovak Zemplen, all of which provide workable obsidian. Sources in Central Slovakia are highly devitrified and not useable, and reported sources in Rumania had been discounted earlier (Nandris, 1975). Forty-six samples of obsidian from the Zemplen sources, and 293 pieces from 87 archaeological sites in Central and Eastern Europe, were analysed by neutron activation analysis for 15 trace and two major elements. The trace elements used included those which are geochemically likely to show the greatest variation between different obsidian sources, and which are not badly affected by devitrification and hydration of the obsidian, for example the rare earth elements. The analytical data was processed using Cluster Analysis. 242 of the archaeological samples came from Slovak sources, 22 from Hungarian sources, 9 from Lipari and 5 from Melos. In addition, 6 samples were tentatively assigned to Carpathian sources, and 9 could not be assigned to any source. Obsidian from the Zemplen Mountains was distributed up to a distance of approximately 480 km from the sources; it was used extensively in Slovakia and Hungary and reached southern Poland, Austria, Moravia, central Yugoslavia, north-east Italy and central Rumania. Obsidian use in central and eastern Europe began in the Mousterian period. The earliest pieces analysed were Aurignacian and came from Hungarian sources. Later, in the Gravettian, Slovakian sources began to be exploited and remained predominant until obsidian use declined sharply in the Later Neolithic, and Copper and Bronze Ages. The Carpathian obsidian distribution overlaps with the Liparian distribution at one site in north-east Italy. There is no evidence for an overlap with Aegean or Near Eastern sources. The rate of fall off of obsidian away from the sources suggests a down-the-line trading mechanism.

No description available.