Similar to other sheets of our ethnic map series this publication is purposed to present the transformation of the ethnic patterns over the past five hundred years and its current state, on ethnic maps, tables and diagrams, this time in the area of Transcarpathia actually forming part of Ukraine. At present Transcarpathia (area: 12,800 sq. km, population: 1,287,000) is one of the 24 oblast' (regions or provinces) of Ukraine and the western bridgehead of the country situated beyond the Carpathians (as to the perspective from Kiev). One of the characteristic features of the area is a high level stability of state administration prior to 1919 (it was part of the historical Hungary uninterruptedly and exclusively) and an extreme instability since then: occupation by Czechs (1919.01.12.) and Rumanians (1919.04.10.), cessation to Czechoslovakia (1920.06.04.), proclamation of the independent Carpatho-Ukraine (1939.03.15.), return to Hungary (1939.03.14-03.17.), Soviet occupation and return to Czechoslovakia (1944.10.05.-11.23.), cessation to the Soviet Union (1945.06.29.), part of the independent Ukraine (since 1991.08.23.).

On the front page the ethnic maps (1941, 1999) of the present-day territory of Transcarpathia and the changes in the ethnic-lingual pattern of the two largest cities (Ungvár-Uzhhorod, Munkács-Mukachevo) between 1880 and 1999 are shown using pie-charts and stripe diagrams. On both maps circle diagrams show the spatial distribution of population according to native tongue: Ruthenians-Ukrainians, Hungarians, Russians, Rumanians, Germans, Slovaks, Gypsies and Jews (Yiddish and Hebrew native speakers) by the actual administrative divisions (state border, boundary of counties, districts, towns, villages). In the inscriptions of settlements in the first place the contemporary official name figures (for 1999 the Ukrainian, whereas for 1941 the Hungarian). For the towns below that Hungarian name stands for 1999, and the (also official) Ruthenian one for 1941. For the rest of settlements with a mixed ethnic structure the locally important (Hungarian, Ruthenian, Rumanian, German, Slovakian) name figures. The source of official names is indicated in the chapter 'References, remarks' (1). Beside the official Hungarian settlement names of 1941, in Ruthenian ethnic areas the earlier (until 1919 valid) versions of the Hungarian official names were also indicated (in parenthesis): e.g. Sztrabicsó (Mezőterebes), Zsdenyova (Szarvasháza).

Regretfully, the ethnic map of 1999 is not based on census data (the census has been postponed several time in Ukraine) but on the population data set published by the Statistical Office of the Transcarpathian Oblast’ as to January 1, 1999 and on probability calculations of the author. The starting point for the representation of the ethnic pattern of 1999 have been data on the native speakers (i.e. not those on ethnicity!) of the census of 1989 and of the previous ones taken between 1880-1979, and on the data base of the Hungarian Cultural Association of Transcarpathia (KMKSZ, Uzhhorod-Ungvár) using surveys of the local councils and on other kind of estimations and information (2).

Also on the front page there is a map of native tongue and administration as to January 31, 1941. A comparison with the above presented (main) map might be instructive on the anti-Jewish, anti-Hungarian and anti-German measures taken in the mid-20th century and the related demographic, migratory and ethnic processes during the past several decades. Naturally, we are aware of the fact that in a lack of a thorough knowledge of the situation, ethnic data of the 1941 Hungarian census might be debated heavily, however, after analysing data on the native tongue, ethnicity and especially those on command of language in the region in concern we came to a conclusion that the results of this census are not less “reliable” than those of the Czechoslovak and Soviet censuses which had been stately “planned”, manipulated and included citizens only.

Seven insert maps on the reverse are intended to show the lingual-ethnic spatial pattern on the territory of the present-day Transcarpathia referring to 1495, 1796, 1999 (estimations), 1880, 1910, 1930, 1941 (census data), while two tables demonstrate changes in the absolute number and proportion of the main ethnic-lingual groups between 1495 and 1989. Various sources considered more or less reliable as to the ethnic and lingual origin of population are nevertheless very heterogeneous and ambiguous between 1495 and 1850, due to a lack of comprehensive censuses of population also collecting data on ethnicity. Concerning the ethnic structure (absolute or relative majority) of the population having lived in the inhabited areas of the studied region at the moment of the tax inventory of 1495 in the Kingdom of Hungary, direct “ethnicity-related” references could be found in the sources e.g. in terms of the names of taxpayers (in most cases based on the investigations of V. Bélay, D. Csánki, P. Engel, T. Lehoczky, I. Szabó) (3). Naturally we are aware of the dubiousities of information on ethnic and lingual origin dated at the end of the European Middle Ages but the “ethnic” map of 1495 compiled using the sources of present-day availability ? despite its greater or smaller shortcomings ? should be regarded adequate to the “contemporary reality”. The map referring to the end of the 18th century shows ethnic majorities of the settlements according to the information derived from “Lexicon locorum…” (1773), A. Vályi (1796-99) and J.M. Korabinszky (1804). In 1880, 1910 and 1941 data on native tongue of the Hungarian censuses were used, while for 1930 the corresponding Czechoslovak census data on ethnicity and for 1999 our estimation outlined above formed the basis for map compilation. Because of the limited opportunities stemming from the large scale a simple areal method of representation showing the absolute or relative ethnic majority was applied which made it impossible to show ethnic mixture of population within the individual settlements. This series of maps presents ethnic majorities only on the inhabited parts of the region for each time. Other areas (uninhabited or without permanent settlement) are shown as blank spots. For a better orientation on the insert maps the most important settlements (mainly towns, district seats) were written on the contemporary (official) language (Hungarian: 1495, 1796, 1880, 1910, 1941, Czech: 1930, Ukrainian: 1999).

According to the Hungarian taxation census of 1495, carried out also on the territory of the historical Northeast-Hungarian counties Ung, Bereg, Ugocsa and Máramaros (almost constituting present-day Transcarpathia), 75,685 people (4) are assumed to have lived in 21 towns and 504 villages (5), out of which the towns and 257 villages may have had a Hungarian ethnic majority (6). If we postulate that in this area there was almost a 6.2-fold difference in Ung and Bereg, 7.2-fold in Ugocsa and 13.5-fold difference in Máramaros between the population in towns and in villages (7), 66% of the population were Hungarians, 21.3% of them were Ruthenians, 7.3% Rumanians and 5.4% Slovaks (Table 1.). The proportion of Hungarians reached 59.2% in Ung County, 75.1% in Bereg County and 86.8% in Ugocsa. Hungarians represented a relative majority (46.4%) in Máramaros as opposed to Rumanians (31.3%) and Ruthenians (22.3%). Projecting contemporary data onto the present territory of Transcarpathia a population of 44,500 is assumed in 1495 that lived in 13 towns with Hungarian ethnic majority and in villages of which 165 had Hungarian, 134 Ruthenian and 8 Rumanian majorities. It is quite probable that at that time proportions of the largest ethnic groups were the following: 65% Hungarians, 32.9% Ruthenians and 2.1% Rumanians. By the end of the 15th century, on the present-day territory of Transcarpathia, the area of ethnic Hungarian settlement extended up to the foothills of the mountains along the former defence strip line of Hungary (Hung. "gyepű") which was abandoned in the 13th century. This Hungarian ethnic boundary linked Ungvár / Uzhhorod - Szerednye / Seredne - Munkács / Mukachevo - Nagyszőlős / Vynohradiv between the Ung-Uzh and Tisza-Tisa rivers (Map 1.). The Hungarian ethnic area was also extensive in the eastern part of Ugocsa and in Máramaros (almost uninhabited until the flourishing of salt mining), where the most important Hungarian settlements were: the towns of Huszt-Khust, Visk, Técső-Tiachiv and (now a part of Rumania) Hosszúmező-Câmpulung and Máramarossziget-Sighetu Marmaţiei. Most of the descendants of German and Flemish miners, artisans and wine-growers settled during the 13th and 14th centuries and assimilated with the Hungarians by the end of the 15th century (8). A sizeable population with German names could be found only in Visk, Szászfalu-Sasovo and Beregszász-Berehovo.

The Ruthenians (9) (nearly 15,000 persons) formed the majority population in 134 villages at the end of the 15th century. The overwhelming number of these villages were to be found in the neighbourhood of the Hungarian ethnic area, i.e. on the south-western slopes of the mountains and in the upper, mountainous reaches of the rivers Ung-Uzh, Latorca-Latorytsia, Borzsa-Borzhava, Nagyág-Rika, Talabor-Tereblia and Tarac-Teresva. This was an uninhabited borderland area until the 13th century, when Ruthenians pursuing a pastoral way of life, began to penetrate this zone from Galicia, Volhynia and Podolia, led by their “magistrates” (Hung. kenézes) (10, 11). Later they gradually populated higher areas in the borderland zone. At the end of the 15th century, however, most of the mountainous regions of Máramaros, Bereg and Ung counties were still uninhabited woodland and alpine pastures.

Although the area in question had never fallen under Ottoman (Turkish) rule, being situated between the Principality of Transylvania (which symbolised this time the Hungarian independence) and the rest of Hungary under Hapsburg administration (12), it was often destroyed, being an area of military operations during the 16th and 17th centuries. Of these disasters the gravest were those caused by the Tartar invasions of 1565, 1594, 1661 and 1717, the Polish incursion of 1657, the campaign of the imperial Hapsburg troops between 1684 and 1688 (the siege to the Munkács-Mukachevo fortress) and the ravages of the Transylvanian and Hapsburg armies crossing the region. These wars and the epidemics accompanying them struck almost exclusively at the Hungarian ethnic territory, i.e. the surroundings of the castles, fortresses and towns, the zones along transport routes and the valley of the Tisza River. As a result of the decimation of the predominantly Hungarian population, the population number of Ung, Bereg, Ugocsa and Máramaros counties dropped from 102 thousand to 73 thousand between 1598 and 1640 (13). In Ugocsa County (still with a 95% Hungarian population in the mid-16th century (14), most seriously hit by warfare, the number of the portas (15) paying tax was 1,775 in 1565/74, 829 in 1638, and 491 in 1663 (16). Parallel to the decline in the Hungarian population there was massive immigration and resettlement of the Ruthenians (17) from beyond the Carpathians, from the Regions of Galicia which then belonged to then to the Kingdom of Poland. They settled in predominantly mountainous areas in the counties of Máramaros, Bereg and Ung which had remained unaffected by the wars. In the 17th century Ruthenians appeared not only in wooded mountainous areas but in ever -increasing numbers in the devastated villages on the fringes of the Hungarian settlement area, and even in some towns (Ungvár-Uzhhorod, Munkács-Mukachevo, Huszt-Khust (18). The destruction of the Hungarian settlements in the Tisza Valley and a gradual inflow of Ruthenians, had led to a situation in which Hungarians gradually were losing their relative majority in Máramaros County during the 17th century: in 1495 46.4% Hungarians, 22.3% Ruthenians, in 1542 40.7% Hungarians, 30.7% Ruthenians, in 1600 37.8% Hungarians, 31.1% Ruthenians, in 1720 19.0% Hungarians, 51.5% Ruthenians (19).

Following the failure of the Hungarian war of independence (1703-1711) led by Prince F. Rákóczi II, the census of 1715 found 6,402, of the 1720 found 8,651 taxpayers (heads of households) on the present territory of Transcarpathia. This time 38% of them had Hungarian, and 49.7% Slavic (Ruthenian) names (20) (Table 1.). Between the two censuses the invasion of the Tartars of Crimea (1717, August) decimated mainly Ugocsa, Bereg counties and the towns Beregszász-Berehovo, Visk, Munkács-Mukachevo. At this time, the Hungarian ethnic border stretched northwest and northeast of Munkács-Mukachevo, and along the foothills of the Polyana-Siniak and Borlo mountains. The area inhabited by Hungarians included the western third of the present Ilosva-Irshava district, the whole of Ugocsa County and the Tisza valley up to Técső-Tiachiv. The most populous communities of Transcarpathia and the Hungarian ethnic area in 1720 were (according to the number of tax-payer households) Visk (106), Beregszász-Berehovo (92), Ungvár-Uzhhorod (82) and Vári-Vary (77). However, Hungarian serfs from these areas of mountain foreland (primarily from the Tisza valley and the vicinity of Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv and Munkács-Mukachevo) who had survived the ravages of war, began to move in increasing numbers to the central regions of the Great Hungarian Plain. This area had extremely rich soil, and had become depopulated during the Ottoman-Turkish rule and the wars of liberation (e.g. 1683-1699, 1703-1711). At the same time, in the villages of Ugocsa, West Máramaros and Central Bereg counties which were abandoned by the Hungarians, Ruthenians moved down from the mountain areas and started to appear while colonisation was also organised by landlords. The immigration of Ruthenians from Galicia and Bukovina to the uninhabited area of Máramaros began to accelerate as salt mining and timber felling in the Upper Tisza region developed (e.g. Rahó-Rakhiv, Bogdány-Bohdan and Kőrösmező-Iasynia). These new Ruthenian immigrants formed an ethnographic group between the 17th and 19th centuries: the Hutzuls (21).

By the mid-18th century, as a result of large-scale migration, the Hungarian-Ruthenian ethnic boundary had retreated an average of 10-20 km to the Great Plain. Villages of Ugocsa County located at the Tisza gate (where the river enters the plain from the Ruthenian part of Máramaros County) became very mixed (Hungarian-Ruthenian) in ethnic structure and many Greek Catholic Ruthenian ethnic pocket developed in the Hungarian ethnic area of the Great Plain (22)(e.g. Khomok, Choma, Kvasovo, Karachin, Bratovo, Zatisivka, Trosnik). Nevertheless, the more important settlements of the Transcarpathian region (Ungvár-Uzhhorod, Munkács-Mukachevo, Beregszász-Berehovo, Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv, Huszt-Khust, Visk and Técső-Tiachiv) still preserved a majority Hungarian population at the end of the 18th century (23).

In the 18th century into the uninhabited or destroyed Hungarian areas not only Ruthenians moved, but also German colonists: peasants, vine growers and artisans. After the unsuccessful Hungarian War of Independence (1703-1711) led by Prince F. Rákóczi II, some of his vast estates were granted to L. F. Schönborn (archbishop of Mainz, Germany), who encouraged the massive immigration of Germans from the vicinity of Bamberg and Würzburg. As a result of this colonisation several German villages appeared in the environs of Munkács-Mukachevo (e.g. Verkhnyi Koropets, Shenborn, Pavshine, Kuchava, Lalovo, Berezinka) between 1730 and 1750. In the 1770s and 1780s the Imperial Treasury (Vienna) initiated the resettlement of lumbermen from Upper-Austrian Salzkammergut (Gmunden, Bad Ischl) to Máramaros County, who founded the settlements of Ust Chorna-Königsfeld and Nemetska Mokra-Deutsch Mokra. This time German workers were settled to Gyertyánliget-Kobyletska Poliana (iron works), Aknaszlatina-Solotvina and Kerekhegy-Okruhla (salt mines). By the time of the first census on the territory of Hungary (1784-87) the population number in the north-eastern counties had risen to 234,377 (24). A most dynamic increase was experienced by the Ruthenian settlements of Máramaros, of which 11 villages had more than 1000 inhabitants. On the present territory of Transcarpathia the largest settlement (excluding Ungvár-Uzhhorod) was Huszt-Khust (2,187) still with Hungarian majority, population followed by the Ruthenian Kőrösmező-Iasinia (2,137) and Iska (1,934). Of the Hungarian settlements Visk (1,743) and Técső-Tiachiv (1,329) were sizeable as well. The population number of Beregszász-Berehovo (considered a large settlement in the early 18th century) was 587 in 1784, less then that of the nearby another district seat Mezőkaszony-Koson (656). At the moment of the census in the study area there were 490 settlements opposed to 317 three hundred years before. Of them 379 had Ruthenian, 101 Hungarian, 5 German and 5 Romanian ethnic majorities (Map 2.).

According to the population conscription of 1804 (25) and the conscription of the parishes of the Greek Catholic Episcopate of Munkács-Mukachevo of 1806 (26) the number (and ratio) of Ruthenians reached 180,950 persons (62.8%), of the Greek Catholics (Uniates) 229,869 persons (79.8%) on the territory of the studied Northeast-Hungarian counties.

The ethnic structure formed until the end of the 18th century had not changed significantly by the 1880 census. During this period the ethnic-religious structure of the present territory of Transcarpathia was primarily modified by the ever growing influx of Jews (persons of Israelite religious affiliation and of mostly Yiddish native tongue) from the Russian Empire (27) and Galicia (28). The proportion of the Israelite population was 4.5% in 1840 and increased to 13% by 1880 (29). According to the figures published by L. Nagy and E. Fényes (30) the largest Jewish communities lived in the most populous urban settlements with intense commercial relations (the first number in brackets refers to the Jewish population in 1828 and the second one to that in 1840) e.g. Ungvár-Uzhhorod (646 and 762) (31), Munkács-Mukachevo (273 and 651), Szerednye-Seredne (254 and 256), Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv (197 and 150), Beregszász-Berehovo (58 and 200). In some Hungarian market towns their number remained below 20 (e.g. in Visk, Técső-Tiachiv, Nagybereg-Veliki Bereg, Tiszaújlak-Vylok in 1840). During the 19th century, the period before 1867 the dominant process was a continuous, massive and accelerated immigration of Jews. Resettlement of German and Slovak forestry and industrial workers from Upper Hungary, Bohemia and Austria to the vast entailed estate (1,350 km2) of Munkács-Szentmiklós / Mukachevo-Chinadyiovo by Count Schönborn was of secondary importance. As a result several German and Slovakian ethnic islets had been formed in the woodland around Munkács-Mukachevo and Szolyva-Svaliava (in brackets the year of foundation of the settlements): Sofyia-Sophiendorf (1804), Frideshovo-Friedrichsdorf (1807), Drachini-Dorndorf, Klenovets (1827), Sinjak (1836), Suskove Nove Selo-Erwinsdorf (1856), Dubi (1861).

During the census of the Austrian Empire taken right after the defeat of the War of Independence of 1848-1849 (1850) (32) 480,537 inhabitants were found in Ung, Bereg, Ugocsa and Máramaros counties where 45.1% of them were registered as Ruthenians, 27% Hungarians, 10,7% Rumanians, 8.5% Jews, 4.9% Slovaks and 2.3% Germans (Table 1.).

In a changed situation after the Austrian-Hungarian Compromise (1867) during an economic boom Jews as a rule were assimilating to the state-forming Hungarians in an increasing number on the territory of the Hungarian Kingdom. In the Subcarpathian region Magyarisation of the penetrating and spreading Jews arriving from Ukrainian, Russian and Polish environment (mainly from Galicia) was restricted to the urban settlements of the Hungarian settlement area (e.g. Ungvár-Uzhhorod, Beregszász-Berehovo, Munkács-Mukachevo, Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv) while the majority living in rural areas dominated by Ruthenians had retained their Yiddish and Hebrew native tongue (in the statistical surveys recorded as German). Their large-scale immigration was capable to counterbalance the heavy toll in human lives due to the cholera epidemic in 1872-74 in Máramaros and Verkhovina (Bereg County). The epidemic caused a 12% loss in the Beregszász-Berehovo Region with predominantly Hungarian population and a 6-8% decrease in the Hungarian and Ruthenian villages in the surroundings of Munkács-Mukachevo between 1869-1880. On the territory of present-day Transcarpathia more than 408 thousand people were registered by the census of 1880. 59.8% of them declared themselves to be Ruthenian, 25.7% Hungarian, 7.8% German, 4,1% Romanian native speakers. The distribution of 502 towns and villages of the area according to the majority population was the following: 374 Ruthenian, 106 Hungarian, 14 German, 4 Romanian and 4 Slovakian. Compared to the state in late 18th century the essential difference had been an increasing number of the above mentioned German and Slovakian colonies and Magyarisation of some, formerly Ruthenian lowland settlements (e.g. Khomok, Choma, Bratovo). During the same period in the Upper Tisza Valley Aknaszlatina-Solotvino (famed for its salt mining) became of Hungarian majority owing to the settlement of Hungarians and Magyarisation of the local miners and industrial workers of German origin. A similar process had taken place in Kerekhegy-Okruhla near Técső-Tiachiv and in Gyertyánliget-Kobiletska Poliana known for its ironworks (Map 3.).

As a result of socio-economic processes favourable for the Hungarians (e.g. natural lingual Magyarisation) the number (and proportion) of those declaring themselves Hungarian native speakers had risen between 1880-1910 from 105 thousand i.e. 25.7% to 184 thousand (30.8%) over the present-day area of Transcarpathia (Table 1.). Such a considerable growth of Hungarians was due to the 36 thousand Jews who declared themselves to be Hungarian native speakers, and to the prevalence of Hungarian sympathy among Greek Catholics with ambiguous ethnic identity, i.e. a bilingual population (speaking both Ruthenian and Hungarian) living mainly in Ugocsa (e.g. Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv, Királyháza-Korolevo, Tekeháza-Tekovo, Szőlősvégardó-Pidvynohradiv, Máytfalva-Matyiovo, Karácsfalva-Karachin and Tiszasásvár-Trosnik) as well as town dwellers of the region (Map 4.). In the two biggest towns of contemporary Transcarpathia (Ungvár-Uzhhorod and Munkács-Mukachevo) with a 31-44% Jewish population, the share of those declaring themselves to be Hungarian reached 80% in Ungvár-Uzhhorod and 73% in Munkács-Mukachevo, while in the present-day urban settlements of Beregszász-Berehovo, Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv, Csap-Chop and Técső-Tiachiv it exceeded 75%. For these reasons the proportion of Hungarians within the urban population had reached 58.7% by 1910. The number of Jewish population declaring themselves overwhelmingly either German or Hungarian native speakers in 1910 was over 86 thousand in the area in concern. In the districts of Ungvár-Uzhhorod, Munkács-Mukachevo, Ilosva-Irshava, Alsóverecke-Nizhni Vorota, Ökörmező-Mizhhyria, Huszt-Khust, Técső-Tiachiv and Taracköz-Teresva one fifth to one sixth of inhabitants declared Israelite religious affiliation at that time.

Between 1880 and 1910 the population growth of the Hungarian native speakers was 75%, of the Jews 65% and of the Ruthenians — otherwise with a high natural increase — a mere 35%. This was due to their massive and accelerating overseas emigration. Most of the Ruthenians lived in mountainous environment, in extremely reduced circumstances. The reasons for the pauperisation of Ruthenians having been prosperous until the end of the 17th century (i.e. up to the warfare between 1684 and 1711, the beginning of the Austrian supremacy) even in a comparison with Hungarians of the Great Plain (33) according to the analyses of contemporaneous experts (34) were the followings: the overwhelming large estates in Subcarpathia, an inadequate structure of land tenure, and an incorrect execution of letters patent on socage of 1853 (35) with dispossession of Ruthenians, a low level of industrialisation, an underdeveloped commerce, bad sanitary conditions. To all this had contributed the exploitation by the Jews coming from Galicia in massive waves and possessing exclusive spirits license (taverns) and related monopolies and contracting in terms with high rates of usurious interest. The flight (emigration) of Ruthenians had been curbed successfully through the measures of the “highland action” carried out by the Hungarian government between 1897-1919 (e.g. farming lease, provision of pedigree stock at reasonable prices, development of craftsmanship, establishment of stately owned shops and inns).

After the First World War the initial step of ousting Hungarian statehood from Subcarpathia was the occupation of Ungvár-Uzhhorod by the Czech troops on January 12 1919. It became completed on April 28, 1919 when Czech and Rumanian armies met between Munkács-Mukachevo and Csap-Chop. The Trianon Peace Treaty (1920) annexed the territory of present-day Transcarpathia to the Republic of Czechoslovakia (36) (together with the Hungarian ethnic area along the Csap / Chop - Beregszász / Berehovo - Királyháza / Korolevo - Nevetlenfalu / Diakovo - Halmi / Halmeu railway line, which provided transport links between the allied Czechoslovakia and Rumania, and in the lowlands where it provided cereals for the mountain regions). Owing to this separation and the fact that the Hungarians became an oppressed national minority, the number of those registered as Hungarians fell from 184 thousand (1910) to 111 thousand (1921) and then to 115 thousand (1930). The reasons for this considerable drop (apart from approx. 18,600 Hungarians who escaped between 1918 and 1924 (37) was the fact that the Czechoslovakian authorities did not allow those who had voluntarily become Magyarised, Jews and Greek Catholics, to declare themselves to be Hungarian. They were instead registered as ethnic Jews (sometimes “Czechoslovaks”) and Ruthenians. At the same time during the 1930 census 15,839 (2.2%), predominantly Hungarian persons (who had not been granted Czechoslovakian citizenship) were recorded as “foreigners” so they did not figure in the ethnic statistics. Owing to this, 11-21% of people in several Hungarian villages (e.g. Popovo-Csonkapapi, Koson-Mezőkaszony, Choma-Tiszacsoma, Diakovo-Nevetlenfalu and Klinove-Akli) did not have Czechoslovakian citizenship (!), while this figure did not reach 1% in Ruthenian villages. Naturally, the fall in the number of Hungarians can be attributed to the changed ethnic declaration of polyglot, mainly urban population mentioned above and people of the Ugoca region of uncertain ethnic identity. As a result the official proportion of ethnic Hungarians dropped between 1910 and 1930 in the territory of Transcarpathia from 30.8% to 15.9% (the corresponding change was 80.3 - 16.9% for Uzhhorod-Ungvár, 73.4 - 21.3 % for Mukachevo-Munkács and 96.1 - 48.3% for Berehovo-Beregszász). Over the same period the number of settlements with a Hungarian majority population, according to present-day administrative divisions, diminished from 129 to 100. The shrinking Hungarian ethnic area lost the towns along the ethnic border (Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Mukachevo-Munkács and Vynohradiv-Nagyszőlős), and by 1930 only Visk, Tiachiv-Técső and Solotvino-Aknaszlatina retained their Hungarian majority in the Upper-Tisza valley (Map 5.). An uniform ethnic Hungarian belt of 20-30 km width along the border posed a possible Hungarian irredentist danger, so Czechoslovak agrarian reform (38) made an attempt to break it by means of Czech, Slovak and Ruthenian colonisation, mainly along the new state border and the Chop / Csap - Korolevo / Királyháza railway which was strategically important, and where new colonies were founded in the neighbourhood of Hungarian villages (Solomonovo-Strazh, Malyi Heyivtsi-Iastrebskyi (Ruski Heyivtsi), Esen-Chervone, Batradj-Novi Batradj, Shom-Kashtanovo, Ardov-Zatishne, Dertsen-Nizhnyi Koropets, Muzhievo-Velika Bakta, Choma-Hedzepusta, Machola-Huniadi, Verbovets-Pushkino, Klinove-Nove Klinove etc.). The most prominent group of settlements established for Czech colonists consisted of Svoboda, Svobodka (Bakosh) and Dvorce (Novo Batovo), established on the former administrative areas of Nagylónya and Kislónya, which had remained in Hungary after annexation (39). In the artificial change of ethnic pattern the effects of agrarian colonisation were outnumbered by a resettlement of civil servants and members of defence forces to the largest towns of the region after 1919. The estimated numbers of Czechs arriving at that time were: Uzhhorod-Ungvár (6,500), Mukachevo-Munkács (2,500), Berehovo-Beregszász (2,000), Khust-Huszt (1,400). Due to this intense Czech colonisation the provincial centre Uzhhorod-Ungvár (a town since its foundation of Hungarian character) had been transformed an urban settlement with “Czechslovak” relative majority (30.1%) by the time of the Czechoslovakian census of 1930 (with 23.5% Ruthenians, 22.1% Jews, 16.9% Hungarians). As a total, in the present-day Transcarpathia 34.032 “Czechoslovakians” (ca 27 thousand Czechs and 7 thousand Slovaks) were recorded. The combined number of Ruthenians and “white” Russian emigrants from Soviet Russia (of Orhtodox affiliation) heartily welcomed by the Czech authorities exceeded 447 thousand (60.9%) (40) (Table 1.). Owing to the lingual assimilation, the resettlement of rural Ruthenians and Russian refugees Khust-Huszt, Mukachevo-Munkács and Uzhhorod-Ungvár each had more than 6,000 Ruthenian (Russian) inhabitants. As a result of their high natural increase the number of those of Israelite religious affiliation (41) had risen from 86 thousand to 103 thousand between 1910 and 1930; 88.9% of them, i.e. 91,839 persons (under certain pressure) declared themselves to be of Jewish nationality. Their most populous communities were Mukachevo-Munkács (8,869), Uzhhorod-Ungvár (5,897), Khust-Huszt (4,497) and Berehovo-Beregszász (3,759) whereas in three settlements (Mukachevo / Munkács, Handal-Bushtino / Handalbustyaháza and Solotvino Selo / Faluszlatina) Jews formed a relative majority of population.

In the last hours of the first Republic of Czechoslovakia, after the four-power pact of Munich (1938.09.29., annexation of Sudethenland to Germany) with a twenty years of delay, on October 5, 1938 Transcarpathia (beside Slovakia) obtained autonomy already granted by the Hungarian government on December 23, 1918 (“Ruska Krayna”). After the fruitless Hungarian-Czechoslovakian negotiations (Komárno-Komárom, October 9-13., 1938) following the first Vienna Award (Vienna, Palais Belvedere, November 2, 1938) and under pressure of Germany and Italy, Czechoslovakia returned 1,636 km2 of land of the present-day Transcarpathia occupied in 1919 to Hungary with 192,116 inhabitants (15.12.1938). Of them 85.2% declared themselves to be Hungarian, 9.9% Ruthenian, 2% German native speakers (42). An area of 11,085 km2 extension without the ceded (Hungarians-dominated) part had a 552,124 population (74.9% Ruthenians, 11.9 Jews, 4.7% Hungarians, 3.2% Czechoslovakians, 1.5% Germans) (43) and was administered by the government of the autonomous Subcarpathia and after October 26, 1938 by the president Avgustin Voloshin who (in accordance with his pro-Ukrainian policy enjoying support of the nazi Germany) had changed the official name of the territorial unit (Podkarpatska Rus) to “Karpatska Ukraina”. Encouraged by Germany, Slovakia and Carpathian Ukraine proclaimed independence on March 14, 1939, and on the following day German troops occupied the rest of Czech lands (Bohemia and Moravia) thus finishing the agony of the artificial Czechoslovakian state of nearly 1000 km length. Making use of the favourable historical moment, on behalf of the Ruthenian population and taking into account the strategic interests of Hungary, between March 15 and 17. 1939 Hungarian military forces liberated the Subcarpathian region occupied by the Czech troops in 1919 (44). On the regained territories with Ruthenian majority of population special, of the Hungarian county system independent “administrative branch offices (regions)” (Hung. “közigazgatási kirendeltség”) were established, where the Ruthenian language obtained an official status equal to the Hungarian one (order No. 6200/1939. of the premier minister, June 22, 1939) (45). Thus Ruthenian territorial autonomy was realised and worked up to October 1944, until the end of the Hungarian regime.

At the 1941 census after the change of regime and with Hungarians in Transcarpathia becoming a state-forming nation again, from a total population of 854,772 27.3% (i.e. 233 thousand persons) declared themselves to be native Hungarian speakers (46) (Table 1.). At the same time 330,771 persons, i.e. 38.8% of population declared about their command of Hungarian language. The number of Ruthenians amounted to 575,049 (67.5%) while that of people speaking both Hungarian and Ruthenian, exceeded 56 thousand. The ratio of this bi-lingual population was especially high in Ruthenian villages of the Hungarian language area and in settlements along the Hungarian-Ruthenian lingual border (30-90%) (47). In Ungvár-Uzhhorod, Munkács-Mukacheve, Nagyberezna-Velkyi Bereznyi, Szolyva-Svaliava, Huszt-Khust and Aknaszlatina-Solotvino, both languages were spoken by 20-25% of the population, by local Jews predominantly. This doubling of the number and proportion of Hungarians can be attributed to the immigration of civil servants and military personnel from the “Trianon territory” of Hungary, and also to 34% of Jews and 9% of Greek Catholics identifying with Hungarians along with the majority of the Hungarian-Ruthenian population who were of uncertain ethnic affiliation. This was reflected by the distribution of religious affiliation declaring Hungarian native tongue. Of the ca 233 thousand Hungarian native speakers 91 thousand belonged to the Reformed Church, and there were 60 thousand Roman Catholics, 39 thousand Greek Catholics and 37 thousand Israelites. For the above reasons and due to the moving out of Czech colonists and civil servants, 111 settlements had regained their Hungarian majority by 1941 (Map 6.). Of the towns “sensitive” to the change in power the proportion of Hungarian native speakers "suddenly" increased and was as follows: Ungvár-Uzhhorod: 77.7%, Munkács-Mukachevo: 63.9%, Beregszász-Berehovo: 92.5%, Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv: 55.3% and Técső-Tiachiv: 53.9%. As a consequence of the immigration of civil servants and military personnel and the presence of local Jews, a considerable number (20-40%) of the population in the centres of the Ruthenian ethnic area (Szolyva-Svaliava, Perecseny-Perechin, Nagyberezna-Velkyi Bereznyi, Huszt-Khust, Rahó-Rakhiv and Kőrösmező-Iasynia) declared Hungarian to be their native tongue.

A former ethnic area of Ruthenians numbering over half a million people had shrunk to some extent only in Ugocsa until 1941. Ruthenian colonists having moved to Hungarian settlement area in the 1920 and 1930’s years ? contrary to the Czechs ? were not forced (or they did not want) to abandon their villages where they retained majority (e.g. Kashtanovo, Chervona, Ruski Heyivtsi, Zatishne, Huniadi, Pushkino). Their most populous communities were found at Huszt-Khust, Nagylucska-Veliki Luchki, Bilke-Bilki, Nagybocskó-Velikyi Bichkiv, Ilonca-Ilnitsya and Rahó-Rakhiv.

This favourable ethnic-demographic-politic situation for the Hungarians lasted till the occupation of the country by the German Nazi army (March 19, 1944). To meet German demands, the Hungarian internal affairs administration soon started to organise the gathering of the Jewish population (in Subcarpathia according to the 1941 census data on religious affiliation: 115,908 persons) and were deported to German concentration camps. This meant a serious (16%) loss for the population of Hungarian native speakers, since 37 thousand Jews were Hungarian - native speakers with a Hungarian identity. The largest annihilated Jewish communities were residents of Munkács-Mukachevo (13.488, 44.4%), Ungvár-Uzhhorod (9,576, 27.2%), Huszt-Khust (6,023, 28.5%), Beregszász-Berehovo (5,856, 30.2%) and Nagyszőlős-Vynohradiv (4,264, 32%). At the same time this “war loss”, demographic vacuum created the conditions for the easy settlement of Russians and Ukrainians following the passage of the front.

Following the Soviet occupation of the territory of Transcarpathia in October 1944 Hungarian and German males liable to military service (aged between 18 and 50 years) were gathered in a concentration camp (Svaliava-Szolyva) and then deported to forced labour camps in the Ukraine and Russia. By December 17, 1944 14,990 Hungarians were deported, but according to a survey carried out on those liable to military service between July 1-7, 1945 about 30 thousand men in the Hungarian settlements were in unknown locations (48). This source estimates that 4,953 Hungarians died in the forced labour camps. In parallel with the vengeance taken upon Hungarians who were regarded as enemies, Transcarpathia became a part of the Soviet Union in accordance with an agreement between Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union of June 29, 1945. Prior to the change of power, along with the retreating Hungarian and German troops, a massive escape of Hungarians began into the territory of Trianon Hungary. According to the documents prepared by the Central Statistical Office (Budapest) for the Paris peace talks (1946) the number of these refugees amounted to 5,104. Russians and Ukranians almost immediately occupied those places previously inhabited by the deported Jews and the Hungarians and Germans who had escaped or been deported, especially in the strategically important towns of Uzhhorod-Ungvár and Mukachevo-Munkács. Within the framework of land reform new Ruthenians moved from the mountains to settlements among the villages of the Hungarian ethnic block between 1944-1947.

According to the first Soviet census after World War II (1959) out of the total Transcarpathian population of 920,000, 686,464 were Ukrainians, 146,247 Hungarians, 29,599 Russians and 12,169 Jews (Table 1.). The reason for a drop of nearly 100 thousand Hungarians compared with 1941 (besides the above mentioned causes) was that the Hungarian Greek Catholics were regarded by the authorities as ethnic Ukrainians and of Orthodox religious affiliation (49). Meanwhile, some Hungarians (about 10 thousand), intimidated by the 1944-45 wave of vengeance, declared themselves to be Slovaks (50) and "became" Ukrainians in the Hungarian-Ruthenian population of ambiguous ethnic roots. It should be mentioned, that among Hungarians there was some natural assimilation, especially in urban settlements due to ethnically mixed marriages and the feelings of remorse and an inferiority complex (51) which were created by the authorities. The Soviet authorities laid stress on liquidation of the Greek Catholic Church and on wasting of the Reformed (Calvinist) and Roman Catholic Churches which were the main supporters of local Hungarian ethnic identity. At the same time, owing to income disparity and ethnic discrimination regarding employment, there was massive emigration of skilled Hungarians from the relatively backward border zone to Lviv, Kiev and the industrial Donets Basin. The number of Hungarians leaving Transcarpathia and settling within the borders of the Ukraine rose from 2,982 to 7,400 between 1959 and 1989, while the number of those scattered in the USSR outside the Ukraine increased from 5,509 to 8,309. Besides the natural assimilation already mentioned, and the internal Ukrainian-Soviet migration, accelerating emigration to Hungary, which had begun during the Soviet period, also contributed to a reduced growth rate in the number of Hungarians (1959: 146,247; 1989: 155 711) in spite of an 11.8‰ annual average birthrate ( a total of 51,800) (52).

According to the last Soviet census (1989), the number those declaring themselves to be native Hungarian speakers exceeded the number of ethnic Hungarians by 10,989, reaching 166,700. This is due to the fact that, for various reasons, out of the Hungarian native speakers 7,973 persons declared themselves to be Gypsies (79.5% of all Transcarpathian Gypsies) and 1,890 people as ethnic Slovaks (Table 1.). At present, among the 598 settlements of Transcarpathia, there are officially only 78 with an ethnic Hungarian majority (in 1941 there were 103). This is due to the fact that both Greek Catholic, and many Roman Catholic Hungarian villages (e.g. Rafainovo-Rafajnaújfalu, Velika Byihan-Nagybégány, Mala Byihan-Kisbégány and Hut-Kétgút) were registered as settlements with a Ukrainian majority in 1989.

Since the Soviet census of 1989 the population number of Transcarpathia belonging to the western periphery of Ukraine having gained independence and suffering from a severe unemployment (53) ? in spite of a traditionally highest natural growth in the country (Transcarpathia 1998: +1,1‰, Ukraine 1998: -4.0‰) ? increased from 1,246,000 only to 1,287,000 by 1999. This should be attributed to the fact, that natural increase (52,300) during the period 1989-1998 was lessened by a migration loss of 17,200 (annual average: -1.34‰) (54). The negative migratory balance (-0.7‰ in 1993) rose to -2,3‰ in 1995 mainly owing to the emigration of Hungarians, Russians, Germans and Jews. As a result of these unfavourable demographic processes population increase of the Transcarpathian area slowed down dramatically by 1995 and there has been a population loss since 1997; the index of ageing (55) increased from 47.9 in 1989 to 65.4 by 1999. During this period the Berehovo-Beregszász district with a Hungarian ethnic majority was hit by a natural decrease of 200 people and a migration loss of 1,800.

The Statistical Office of the Transcarpathian Region (Oblast’) reported 1.287.400 resident population on 1st January 1999 (56). Of them 77.8% (1 million persons) could be Ruthenians-Ukrainians, 13.5% (174 thousand) Hungarians, 4.9% Russians and 2.4% Rumanians (these esteemed figures are based on data of the 1989 census and those of the local councils on the native tongue) (Table 1.).

The ca. one million Ruthenian-Ukrainian native speakers represent majority population in 12 districts out of the 13 total, in 8 of the 10 towns and in 17 of the 20 “settlements of urban type” (57) (i.e. “market town”) and in 481 of the 579 villages (Map 7., front page map). Their ratio in the mountainous regions is between 95-99 %. Their most populous communities live in Uzhhorod-Ungvár /85,000/, Mukachevo-Munkács /60,000/, Khust-Huszt /28,000/, Vynohradiv-Nagyszőlős /22,000/, Svaliava-Szolyva /17,000/ and Rakhiv-Rahó /15,000/. In the two largest towns of oblast’ (county) rank (Uzhhorod-Ungvár and Mukachevo-Munkács) Ruthenian-Ukrainian native speakers make up 67-68% of the population. While the fertility of the Ruthenians-Ukrainians is highest in Máramaros, especially in the districts of Rakhiv-Rahó and Tiachiv-Técső, in the more developed areas in western part of Transcarpathia (in the vicinity of Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Velikyi Berezny-Nagyberezna, Perechin-Perecseny and Mukachevo-Munkács) the number of deaths has recently exceeds that of live births.

Concerning geographical pattern of population “Dolyshnians” (Lowlanders) living in the earlier (from the 13th century) settled foothill and lowland areas and “Horniaks” (Highlanders) of the mountain regions (of later settlement, between the 15-18th centuries) might be distinguished. The Hungarian lingual and cultural influence is particularly striking among Dolyshnians in Bereg, Ugocsa and Uzh-Ung (former counties) due to more than seven hundred years’ of co-existence and ethnic mixing. Ethnographically Horniaks can be subdivided into several groups: Lemaks (Lemkians or Lemkos) living along the upper stretches of Uzh-Ung river and also in present-day Slovakia and Poland, and Boikos or Boikians (calling themselves Verkhovynets) having settled between the river-heads of Uzh-Ung and Tereblia-Talabor (roughly the present-day districts of Volovets-Volóc and Mizhhiria-Ökörmező) and the most temperamental “Hutsuls” settled in Máramaros at the river-head of Tisza and making their living mainly by timbering (58).

Following the annexation of Transcarpathia to the Soviet Union in 1945 the majority Slavic and Greek Catholic after the elimination of the Uniate (Greek Catholic) Church in 1949 — Orthodox believers. Since then the local Ruthenians increasingly mixed with the mass of Ukrainians having moved to the oblast' from beyond the Carpathians and largely assimilated in urban settlements are officially registered as an ethnographic group within the Ukrainians. Since 1990 Ruthenians living abroad (e.g. in Yugoslavia, Hungary, Slovakia, Rumania) having existed as an independent nationality. Simultaneously a movement of national revival started (59), closely related with the claim of autonomy for Transcarpathia. The question about the real existence and weight of the Greek Catholic Church reorganised after 1990 and of the Ruthenians (Rusyns) perhaps will be answered by the forthcoming census in Ukraine.

The other populous ethnic group of the area are Hungarians who became a minority in the late 17th century second to Ruthenians on the present territory of Transcarpathia (1495: 64.6% Hungarians, 33.6% Ruthenians; 1715: 41.1% Hungarians, 52.8% Ruthenians). Hungarian native speakers (174 thousand persons) form the majority of population only in Berehovo-Beregszász district, in two towns (Berehovo-Beregszász, Chop-Csap), in three "settlements of urban type" (Batovo-Bátyu, Vylok-Tiszaújlak, Visk) and in 80 villages (Map 7., front page map).

These Hungarian settlements can be found mostly in the Hungarian-Ukrainian border zone of 20 km width (the only exception is Visk between the Avash Mountains and the Tisza River). This ethnic block, where 59.3% of the Hungarian population were living in 1999, primarily included the districts of Berehovo-Beregszász, Uzhhorod-Ungvár and Mukachevo-Munkács (35.3%, 16% and 8%, respectively). A further 31.5% of Hungarians were urban-dwellers in an ethnically very mixed area along the ethnic boundary (Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Mukachevo-Munkács, Vynohradiv-Nagyszőlős) and lived in the historical region of Ugocsa, while 9.2 % were scattered in mountain areas. As a consequence of socialist urbanisation which took place in the past few decades there was a massive influx of Ruthenians, Ukrainians and Russians into Uzhhorod-Ungvár and Mukachevo-Munkács, which have doubled their populations, while the proportion of Hungarians has dropped to 10-11% (according to native tongue). Among towns and "urban type settlements"[i] this was the period when Vynohradiv-Nagyszőlős, Tiachiv-Técső and Solotvino-Aknaszlatina lost their Hungarian majority. As a result of this massive internal migration between villages and towns, which affected several hundred thousand Ruthenians and Ukrainians, the number of Hungarians in present-day towns dropped from 51.9% (1941) to 13.5% (1999), while that of Ruthenians and Ukrainians rose from 29.7% to 72%. The local Hungarian population is more "rural" (62.3% of them live in villages), than the Ukrainians (61.6%), the Russians (12.8%), or the Gypsies (37.8%). Half of Hungarian native speakers live in settlements with 1,000-2,000 inhabitants (24.1%) and 2,000-5,000 (23.8%). At the same time, only 27.7% of Hungarians lived in settlements with more than 10 thousand inhabitants and 7.3% in towns over 100 thousand. This adherence of the Hungarians to the rural environment, as reflected in the statistics, might be partly attributed to their restricted migration into towns, or partly to a gradual assimilation of the people having moved there. As a result, in 1999 68.8% of Hungarians lived in settlements where they formed an absolute majority. To maintain their ethnic awareness this may be positive, similar to the situation of Hungarians in Slovakia, where 53.4% of them live in settlements where they constitute over 75% of the population and only one fifth of them live in places where the Hungarian population makes up less than 20%. As a consequence of history and the process of urbanisation, during the past decades the most populous Hungarian communities have become the towns of Berehovo-Beregszász (16,300), Uzhhorod-Ungvár (12,800) and Mukachevo-Munkács (9,800) and the largest Hungarian village of Velika Dobron-Nagydobrony (5,473) (60).

Owing to the steady (provisional or permanent) resettlement of young Hungarians in active age to Hungary, on the territory of the Berehovo-Beregszász district of Hungarian character vital statistics (1998: natality 10,4‰, mortality 13,5‰, natural loss - 3,1‰) show much less favourable values than those in Transcarpathia as a whole as well as in the neighbouring Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County (Hungary) (61).

The third most populous ethnic minority of Transcarpathia are the Russians (about 64 thousand in 1999 according to native tongue). There was a massive wave of refugees of the “white Russians” already during the 1920's, still this ethnic block has become a large one as a result of immigrations and resettlements after 1944. In this period governmental and party officials, soldiers and their families moved to Transcarpathia, overwhelmingly (91%) to urban settlements, where their largest communities are found: Uzhhorod-Ungvár (25,000), Mukachevo-Munkács (17,000), Berehovo-Beregszász (2,800), Khust-Huszt (2,400), Vynohradiv-Nagyszőlős (2,100) and Chop-Csap (1,800) (Map 7., front page map).

Rumanians living here since the 13th century and at present numbering ca 30 thousand are rather concentrated spatially along the boundary of the Rakhiv-Rahó and Tiachiv-Técső districts in Solotvino-Aknaszlatina famous for its salt mining (specifically in its part called Solotvina Selo) and their 83 % in the surrounding villages (pl. Dibrova, Seredne Vodiane, Bila Tserkva, Khlibokyi Potik) (Map 7., front page map).

The number of German native speakers have reduced to one quarter of that in 1941 owing to losses during the war, deportations and emigration (1999: ca 3,500 persons). Descendants of those resettled from Germany and Austria to Subcarpathia in the 18-19th centuries, i.e. a community of a couple of hundred people live in Mukachevo-Munkács (mainly in the quarters called Palanok and Podhorod), and in the surrounding villages probably forming an ethnic majority in Shenborn-Unter Schönborn, Pavshine-Pausching, Kuchava-Deutsch Kutschawa and Sofyia-Sophiendorf. A sizeable German population is also found in Komsomolsk-Deutsch Mokra, Ust Chorna-Königsfeld in Tiachiv-Técső district (Map 7., front page map).

According to native tongue the number of Slovaks dropped from 6,853 in 1941 to the present-day 2,800 (0,2% of the total population) because of the natural assimilation and emigration after 1944. According to the last census there were 7,845 Slovaks among the nationalities but one third of them declared themselves Ukrainian and one fourth of them Hungarian native speakers. Their main settlement area is found along the western borderland: Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Storozhnitsia-Őrdarma, Huta, Velikyi Bereznyi-Nagyberezna and Turyi Remeti-Turjaremete (Map 7., front page map).

An overwhelming majority of Gypsies in Transcarpathia (69.6% in 1979 and 65.8% in 1989) declared themselves Hungarian native speakers. Accordingly, our map shows Gypsy native speakers (20.5% of those declaring Gypsy ethnicity in 1989) whose most populous communities are found in Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Korolevo-Királyháza and Khust-Huszt. The number of people of Gypsy nationality can be estimated about 40 thousand as a maximum (62); 94% of them lived in the lowland region, in a traditionally Hungarian environment in 1989 (e.g. Berehovo-Beregszász, Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Mukachevo-Munkács, Vynohradiv-Nagyszőlős districts and cities of Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Mukachevo-Munkács).

There has been a drastic reduction in the number of Jews i.e. 78,727 Yiddish and Hebrew native speakers in 1941 whose number had dropped to 663 by 1989, 115,908 persons of Israelite denomination in 1941 decreased to 2,639 by 1989 owing to the Nazi genocide during Second World War and the emigration of the survivors to the State of Israel. The majority of present-day Jewry of Transcarpathia live in Uzhhorod-Ungvár, Mukachevo-Munkács and Khust-Huszt.