This census is of limited value because it doesn't include every household, and even for those households enumerated it names only the principal taxpayer.

It is important to note that most nobles were exempt from taxes, and therefore they and their manorial land was not included in this census. Likewise, most peasants did not hold taxable property and so they also were not included. That does not mean these other peasants went untaxed. They did not. In addition to their feudal obligations to their landlord, they were taxed by the county ... just not on the basis of their land. So, who is included in this census:

• Burghers: usually city-folks who were merchants, artisans, professionals such as lawyers, etc. who owned their homes and businesses.
• Non-Noble Landowners: these farmers existed in significant numbers in only a few areas but overall in Hungary they were few in number.
• Jobággy - the top-echelon of Peasants: whose significant feudal holdings made them subject to taxation. By 1828 the distinction between the jobbágy and non-noble landowners had blurred considerably.
• Tax-paying Nobles: usually the poorest of nobles who owned very little land, or in some cases none at all, who were subject to taxation as a result of recent changes in the law.
• Other People: such as the "inquilini" (cotters) and the "subinquilini" (farm laborers) on this census record, who in some cases owned taxable property, but were probably more often included out of military conscription considerations.

This census is sometimes called the Zemplen County Census since it is quite complete for that geographically very large county. Note that the Zemplen county of historic Hungary is now divided into three parts; the northeastern part is in the Ukraine, the rest of the north and the central part make up much of eastern Slovakia, and the southern end of the historic county is in present-day northeastern Hungary. There are also a very large number of films for Nyitra county, but several areas of that populous county are not included. For each county, the towns and villages are either arranged alphabetically or grouped by district on the microfilms. Here are the list of counties and towns for which this census is available from the FHL, check Place Search in the catalog for details:

• Abauj-Torna County -- 14 films.
• Bars County -- 29 films.
• Esztergom County -- 5 films.
• Komárom County -- 53 films.
• Nyitra County -- 157 films.
• Sáros County -- 64 films.
• Szepes County -- 57 films.
• Zemplen County -- 171 films.
• Györ, Györ m. -- 7 films by district.
• Hajduszoboszló, Hajdu m. -- 1 film.
• Nyiregyháza, Szabolcs m. -- 1 film.
• Szentes, Csongrád m. -- 16 films by house number.

The second large grouping is for horned cattle (szarvasmaha) which are separated into Hungarian (magyar) and Swiss (svájczi) and buffalo (bivaly). The first two of these categories are divided into bulls (bika), cows (tehen), oxen (ökör), and calves (borju) under three years. Not being a 19th century Hungarian farm-boy, I'm not sure of the difference between Hungarian and Swiss cattle -- but, I suspect Hungarian cattle are what we call long-horns (which were more common in the large ranches on the plains of southern Hungary) and Swiss are what we typically see in this country as short-horned dairy cows. Anyway, this farm had only two Swiss cows and two calves. Apparently they borrowed a bull from time-to-time.

Does the house have? (A lakás van?): a cellar (pinczében); a ground floor (földszint); a loft (félemeleten); how many upper stories (hányadik emeleten); an attic (padlácson). Note that this is a one-story house without cellar or attic.

The house is made up of how many? (A lakási képezi hány?): sleeping room (szoba); pantry (kamra); living room (elöszoba); and kitchen (konyha). Note that this is only a two-room house consisting for a living room and bedroom.

Next is a statement that the house is used only for living (lakásra) -- ie. not for business. Then there is a question concerning additional facilities and buildings used for a business (in this case farming).

Column 2 lists the names of the people. The instructions are simply a long-winded way of saying count everyone who lives at the house. Column 3 specifies the sex of each person (ferfi = male and nö = female); and column 4 specifies the birth year of each person. So, we see that there are two families of four, plus a 10-year-old male servant living in the house. Remember, I have no other information about these people other than what we find here. But, it appears the Gombita family consists of an older couple and their two youngest daughters. The Rakar family is a younger couple, also with two daughters. Mrs. Rakar may be the daughter of the Gombita's (the age is right) but we can't be certain. The boy Stefan Dunaj is from a nearby village and apparently was hired out to help on this farm by his parents. He may or may not be related.

Unfortunately, there's one problem with this nice picture ... the age of Mrs. Gombita. If she really was born in 1807, she's too old to be the mother of the two Gombita girls listed here. If, instead, she was born in 1817, the hypotheses above all make sense. While women often fib about their age, that rarely is intended to make them older. Perhaps it was just a recording error by the census taker. Obviously, other information is needed (and is probably available in church records) to correctly understand the relationship between all these people.

Column 5 gives the religion of each individual. This is a Roman Catholic household (note: the little squiggle is in effect a ditto mark). The instructions give the following choices of religion: Roman, Greek or Armenian Catholic; Greek or Armenian Orthodox; Evangelical of the Helvetic Confession (ie. Reformed) or of the Augsburg Confession (ie. Lutheran); Unitarian; other Christian denominations; Jewish; other non-Christian denominations. Column 6 is the marital status of each individual [nös = with wife; ferjes = with husband; hajadon = maiden; nötlen = bachelor are seen here; özvégy = widow/er might also be found.] Column 7 lists the office(s) held -- none by these people.

On the second page of this two-page form, column 8 identifies the type of work performed. Mr. Gombita is a telkes, a smallholder (ie. peasant farmer). Mr. Rakar is a telkes seged helper to the smallholder. Their wives are both listed as háztars, a housekeeper. The four girls are seged -- ie. help out on the farm/house. The Dunaj boy is listed as an éves szolga, a year's servant (presumably that's the duration of his being hired out to the Gombita's). If any of the children were in school, they would probably be listed as students (tanár) -- so the implication is that none of them are in school. Column 9 is birthplace -- note that only Mrs. Gombita and the four girls were born in Cernina, possibly implying that they were living on her parents' farm. Column 10 is citizenship -- all are helybeli (local) rather than idegen (foreign). Columns 11 and 12 relate to whether the persons were at home or away at the time of the census, with special instructions for those who had been away for more than a month. These did not apply to this household.

A poor peasant is not going to run out to a printshop and spend his last "dime" to have a death notice printed on the day of his mother's death. Obviously, this type of document is only likely to be used in more affluent families. But, if your family used death notices, that single page can convey a significant amount of important family history data. This is not the type of document that an immigrant would bring to America with them. But, rather, death notices were often received by mail for years or decades after an immigrant arrived here. When received, they were probably stored with other family mementos like old photographs.

They are normally black-bordered, and are often folded for mailing. In the pre-World War I period, Hungary had special low postage rates for mailing death notices. With regard to these two examples, I found one in Hungary recently, the other was mailed to my grandfather in New York at the time of his uncle's death in 1937. While every death notice is different, by convention they tend to have some common features. Therefore, this topic focuses on those common features.

These two death notices, together, I believe have considerable illustrative value. Both men were elderly widowers at their deaths, and both are related to me, but, they were unrelated to each other and their deaths were separated in time by almost forty years. Both were prominent lawyers -- though one only at a local level, the other nationally. One was Roman Catholic, one Lutheran. One had a large family, the other practically no family at all. I think that, between their death notices, you can get a good idea of what to look for in other death notices that you may find. [Please note: my ability to translate Hungarian is very limited. Therefore, these "translations" are more in the form of a paraphrase, that hopefully conveys the gist of documents.]

1937: there is no list of mourners, probably due to the small family (the only son had no children). The date and place are stated and the epitaph is a line from a poem concerning our duty to the dead (which I'm unable to translate adequately), and finally the rather curt statement, "No visitors will be received."

There are living relatives who are omitted from each of these death notices. We can only guess the reason why. From the 1899 notice, there's one possible and one definite missing person. A woman in Budapest, who died in 1920, claimed to be the daughter of József Osztróvszky. She's mentioned nowhere else in family records, and her claim may have been false. But, my grandfather is not mentioned as a grandchild of Osztróvszky. He had been orphaned as a young boy, and was raised by his aunt Vilma (one of the senders of this death notice). At the time of his grandfather's death, he was still living in Hungary and serving in the Army. After coming to the U.S. (many years later) he told his children that he was estranged from his family in Europe because of a dispute with his sister. Could this be why he's not listed? Perhaps someday we'll figure it out. Regarding the 1937 death notice, Ábel still had one living sister at the time of his death. While she is not mentioned by name, her existence is implied by the statement that he was a good brother. Probably we'll never know the reason for her not being named.

• Separate Historical Notes such as the one seen in this example.
• Beginning of Pastorate Notes. Each of the Vadosfa pastors wrote these and they are often a full-page (though not very dense). In Vadosfa, they tended to tell more about the previous pastor and his accomplishments than about the earlier life of the new pastor.
• Construction Notes. Pastor Vásonyi wrote a separate note about the completion of the congregation's second church building in 1734, and the dedication service.
• Pastoral Actions. Pastor Fabri documented his "ecclesiastical examination" of 1748 under the auspices of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Györ. This was an attempt to find fault with Fabri so he could be dismissed or the church in Vadosfa closed.
• Notes about Missing Data. Missing data is often evidenced by no rites being recorded for a longer than normal period. But, in the Vadosfa records we find specific notes written by Pastor Kutsera concerning the period of almost two years between the riot of 1751 and Pastor Fabri's formal expulsion. In one case Kutsera wrote: I found a scrap of paper with the following baptisms written on it ... and he recorded a few baptisms that were done by Fabri and not formally recorded by him.

• Notes about Teachers or Assistant Pastors coming to a congregation.
• Notes about Special Meetings. I have seen minutes and expenses for both congregational meetings, and for convocations of pastors and or teachers from a church district.
• Records of Contributions to the Congregation by Members. These are most often found in Reformed congregations which tended to make member's contributions public knowledge. Note that these only recorded cash contributions, not contributions "in kind" (ie. chickens, etc). Therefore, do not expect to find a complete list of congregational members and their giving.

ID from Rites Performed. The easiest (and often the only) way to identify clergy and teachers is by the identification associated with a rite (baptism, marriage, or burial) that was performed. Many registers identify the person performing each rite ... often with "ditto" marks (or the equivalent) when many rites are performed by the same person. These can sometimes be used to define the duration of service of an individual to a congregation. Other information may sometimes be garnered. For instance:

• Many Roman Catholic families who had a priest in the family, called upon him to baptize their children -- even if that priest was not normally assigned to the given church. So if the priest's name sounds familiar, try to find a family connection.
• In Protestant congregations, burials were normally a duty of the schoolteacher. This fact has two obvious ramifications: 1) you can sometimes trace the career of teachers from burial records; and 2) if the Pastor does the burial personally, this may indicate that the deceased is one of the wealthier or more influential members of the congregation.
• Where rites performed in several villages were recorded in a single register, the identification of the officiant can identify the place the rite was administered.

ID from Year-End Notes. Sometimes the clergyman wrote a short note at the end/beginning of each year -- often simply thanking the Lord for another good year. But, such notes identify the clergyman responsible for the congregation at that date.

ID from Beginning of Pastorate Notes. Sometimes a clergyman wrote a note in the register when he came "on-board." These are useful to identify the beginning of a pastorate, but may also give useful information about the individual ... place of birth, education, location of previous assignment, etc. On occasion, a new pastor will extol the virtues of his predecessor.

ID from Separate Historical Notes that include lists of Pastors and/or Teachers. These lists -- as shown here -- are more commonly found in Protestant, than in Roman Catholic, registers. Such lists are often added to a register long after the dates of service of many of the individuals in the list, and therefore may be prone to error.

• The first set of entries were probably made by János Nagy in 1772, when he wrote that he succeeded Lörintz Varga in that year. He also wrote most of the previous entries, probably based on the memory of living parishoners at that time. Note that he left a half a page blank, probably hoping that later research would lead to the names of the teachers who preceded those he listed.
• The names of two earlier teachers -- Csik and Körösi -- were almost certainly added later, without further information. They are definitely in another hand. I am uncertain whether the third name on the list -- Czegledi -- was written by Nagy or someone else.
• Following Nagy' departure to Csapag in 1775, there are a series of marginally legible entries that may have been written by several different people.
• On Page 321, beginning with the entry of 1815 -- Székszai -- the entries more or less run-together. I suspect that my ancestor József Szundi recorded the information from 1815 until his death in 1854.
• The last several entries seem to each be written by a different person, with the last entry being simply the year "1909" which presumably was the date of the death (or perhaps retirement) of Lajos Molnár who began teaching in Fokszabadi in 1886.
• Obviously, entries that appear to have been written contemporaneously with the events have more credibility than those that were added well after the events. Therefore the pre-1768 events and 1815-1834 events have a higher probability of containing erroneous data than the others.

• In the middle of page 321 an entry reads - “Ez Polgárdira válrosván 1836b Szondi Josef jött helyébe Kiskesziröl” with a second entry immediately following in different handwriting - “Szundi Jósef meghalván 1854det év Január 5en.” Translation: "This native of Polgárdi, Josef Szondi, came here in 1836 from Kiskeszi." and "Josef Szundi died in the year 1854 on January 5." Note: in that period, the family name was spelled either Szondi or Szundi, depending upon the writer.
• The first part of this entry (and the previous entry) were almost certainly written by József Szundi himself. So, I am fortunate enough to have a sample of my great-great-great-grandfather's handwriting.
• In his own hand we are told where he was born, and where he had taught previously. Unlike farmers, who tended to stay put for generations, professionals such as teachers and clergy, and business people such as the millers in this same branch of my family, often moved from place to place. Their whereabouts are often very hard to trace, and peripheral clues such as this teacher list can be a great help.
• The next teacher (presumably) gave the date of the death of my ancestor. This piece of information was not as critical, since I would have easily found the death record in that same Fokszabadi church register.
• I will use this opportunity to again encourage you to look over the entirety of microfilms of church registers, keeping an eye out for notes and other lists that were either inserted among register entries or on blank pages. As with this 2-page teacher list, such notes can provide very valuable information for your family history research ... if you get lucky.

• Sequence Number: 1
• Birthdate of the Converted: 19 April 1853
• Year and Day of Conversion: 11 April 1873
• Name of the Converted: John Kovács
• Names of the Parents of the Converted: Michael Kovács and Susanna Horvát living in Nemes-Szalók
• Residence of the Converted: Nemeskér
• The Previous Confession of the Converted: Roman Catholic
• Notes: Identifies the Roman Catholic parish with which the convert was associated, etc.