ABSTRACT
A ‘generative model’ is built for mid-eighteenth-century Hungarian parliamentary politics to identify the set of factors which, when combined, produce MPs’ actual political acts that we can observe in our parliamentary sources. A total of 411 pro-government or oppositional political positions were identified for the period 1728–1765, and 60 Hungarian MPs’ political positions can be identified in at least two instances. These suggest that their behaviour could be explained by a combination of three factors. During the complete period in question, self-interest aimed at social elevation (whether personal or rather that of the family in a longer run, becoming effective in the next generation) was one of the MPs’ motivations. However, these years did not represent a fully Namierian period during which this could solely explain political behaviour in Hungarian parliamentary politics, as at the time of the diet of 1728–1729 confessionality was still a decisive force in Hungary’s politics, and was an equally strong motivational force alongside self-interest. Later, we can see this representation of Protestant or Catholic interests being replaced by a third motivation: an attention to national interests (or public good, or the interests of the country). The appearance of this third motivation fits into the process of reinterpretation of politics as one dominated by constitutional questions, which put the estates and the ruler of Hungary into increasingly antagonistic positions. Previously, taking part in parliamentary politics as a member or even a leader of the opposition could still lead to appointments to royal office, which was the most certain sign of success in this period. In the latter part of this era, this was no longer possible: the parties of king and country were separated by a wider and wider gap, clashing over constitutional questions, that is, those of principle, and thereby leaving less and less room for compromise.
