, . LVII 2008) . 151-174 HISTORICAL REVIEW, Vol. LVII (2008) p. 151-174 312(497.11 ) 1776

1776. *: 1776. . . , , , , , . 1739. 1788. . Key Words: Zemun, 18th century, 1776, military communities, Habsburg Monarchy, demography, contribution.

XVIII -, . - 17161718, 1728. . - 17371739. . , . , 1743. , 1746. . *

17. . (. . 147027).

1753, - . XVIII , - (17881791), , .1 1736. 1788. . , , , . 1736. .2 (17371739), (17391745), . 1743. 1745. .3 , . 1754. 1762, .4 1773, 1776. 1787. , , , : I. Soppron, Monographie von Semlin und Umgebung, Semlin 1890; . , , 1896; . , (17171881), CXVII (1967), 1-105; . , I , 1966. - : . , (174549), 25 (1960), 49-91; . , (17451766), IV (1959), 1-31. 2 . , 1736. , 1950, 155-163. 3 . , , 67. 4 , , . 629 (1754/5); 630 (1755/56); 631 (1756/57); 632 (1757/58); 633 (1759/60); 634 (1760/61); 635 (1760/61); 636 (1761/62).1

152

1776.

.5 , 1786. , , .6 (Haussasige), . , , . . , 17541762. , (Znnsleuthe), (Zigeuner) (Juden). 60- XVIII ( 1773, 1776. 1787) , (Neue Znsleuthe) (usser der Stadt). , . 1736-1786. 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 120 0 1736. 1754. : 1761. 1773. 1776. 1786. 554 711 937 1030 1138

, , . 637 (1773); 870 (1776); 871 (1787). , , 1787. , . 6 . . , , 2003, 249-252. 80- XVIII .

5

153

, 1736. 1754. , 120 554, 1754. 1786. , 554 1.138 . 1776. 1786. 108 , 10,48% 17541761. ( 157 28,33%) 17731776. ( 93 9,92%). 70- , 1787. . , 1786. , , .7 * 1776. . , , : , , , , . , , , . , , XVIII , .87

- , 1786. : (1.490), (536), (601), (1.611), (911), (4.470), (3.172), (558) (1.865). : . . , , 243262. 8 , , . 870 (1776).

154

1776.

1776. 799 783 16 . , (871), (159), 1.030 . 3.918 , , , 4,9 , 3,8 . 8.872 5.101,4 h (51,01 2), 76,8 2.9 (2,7%), . , 16 .10 * , . , , , . : - (Freyschutze) 1.020 , (Unenrolleirte). (Enrolleirte) , . (Halb-invaliden) 90 35,8 ./2, 44,2, 35,7, 23,8, 23,1, 32. : I. Erceg, Stanje i struktura stanovnitva u Hrvatskoslavonskim upanijama godine 1782, Starine JAZU 59 (1984), 311. 10 : KAW, Kartensammlung, B IX a 906 A (1780); . , (1717-1881), 36; . . , , 249-252. : . , I , 1966; . . , , 1967.9

155

. . - (Undienstbare) 665 (Nachwuchs Tauglicher), 17 (Nachwuchs Invaliden) 44 (Ganze invaliden) . - (Eximierte) 224 (Weltliche) 10 (Geistliche) . (Summa efective) 2.070 . 60, 15 , , , . 159 (Inwohner), 121 (Handwerckgesellen), 11 (Knechte), 4 (Wirkliche Pfarrer) 134 '' (Unsessionierte). . ( ), ( ) . , . 15 34,1%,11 15 40 45% . , 80% 40 . , , , . , -

11

( 15 ) 3538% , XVIII . : A. Koroknai, Problemi zadruge u Podunavskoj i Potiskoj granici (1686-1723), Istraivanja 3 (1974), 62.

156

1776.

. , . 1: 1776. - -

10-15

15-20

20-25

25-30

30-35

35-40

40-45

45-50

50-55

55-60

60-65 35 1,9

65-70 15 0,82

5-10

187

200

199

150

165

176

197

130

125

36

87

51

42

10,3

11,0

10,9

10,8

1,9

8,2

9,1

9,7

7,1

6,9

4,8

2,8

4,1%

44,9%

16,8%

2,3

2,7% 0,9%

( ) , . , , . 1.848, 1.080 (Verheuratete und Wittwen) 768 (Ledige). 58,44%, 41,55% . 15 , 15 . 47,16%, 52,83% . , , , 1.000 890 .12 1782. 1.000 972 . 50,43% 49,57% , 50,42% 49,58%, 52,33% 47,67%, 52,13% 47,87%, 51,47 48,53%, 51,82% 48,18% . : A. Koroknai, Problemi zadruge u Podunavskoj i Poti12

157

0,88

16

70 >

0-1

1-5

* 34 (13 , 10 11 ) 130 (68 , 60 ). , 115 (11,16% ), . 19 , 16 , 31 . , . . , , , . 151 , 85 . (halbblind 16; blind 2; gehorlos 9; hat fehler in Augen 2), (hat die schwere krankheit 3; immer kranklich 8) (alt und schwach 1; altes halber 5, 67, 70 82 ). , , (krump 8; bucklet 5; estrupiert 6; hat eines leibes Schaden 8; hat leibes defect 1), (hinfallende krankheit 3) (vom Schlaag getroffen 1). , (verwihrt 3) , , . . 126 , , 78 . skoj granici, 63; I. Erceg, Stanje i struktura stanovnitva u Hrvatsko-slavonskim upanijama, 310-311.

158

1776.

, 48 . .13 * , . (im zns) . 373, 2,3 . 205 , 15 40 (54,13%). 159 , 49 15 20 . 168 , 118 50 . 54,95%, 45,04%. 10 (6,28%), 60 (37,73%) 89 (55,97%). 2: 1776. 15 58 26,82% 15-30 51 24,87% 30-40 60 29,26% 40-50 24 11,7% 50-60 10 4,87% 60-70 4 1,95%

, . , . , (26,82%). 19. , , , (P. Chaunu, Civilizacija klasine Evrope, Beograd, 1977, 542).13

159

, . , , . * , 1776. 1.633 , 406 , 30 (). , , 78,99% , 19,61% , 1,44% 0,04% . , , , . , , , , , . , .14 840 (718 122 ), 180, 10 . , , , . , 23 , .15 92 (81 11 ), , , 88 (65 23 ). 16 '' '', 39 , , , . 15 - '' '', . , , . , . , 1787. 52 (, , . 1080 - Conscription der Trken und trkischen Unterthanen mit Ende Oktobri 787).14

160

1776.

1753. , . 40- , (Slancsanin), (Vincsanin), (Borcsanin), (Dobanovcanin), (Vischnicsanin), (Belegischanin), (Guberevczanin), (Bolefcsanin), (Schernogoratz), (Umczanin), (Czervenincsanin), (Barajevaz), (Porecsanin), (Carlovsanin), (Batainizanin), (Rogaczanin), (Scharkovaz), (Pancsevcsanin), (Ropocsevacz), (Toplicsanin), (Topolovcsanin), (Golubincsanin) , Bugarin () Erdelian (). , . , , . * (Meister von Profession) '''' (Sonstige). (301 29,22% ), (203 19,70%), (84 8,15%), (77 7,47%), (79 7,57%), (28 2,71%), (fuhrmann 8 0,77%), (schopper 7 0,67%), (brandweinbrenner 4 0,38%) (6 0,58%). , . 59 , 12 , . , (50) (20), (1), (2), / (2) (materialist 2). , ( 18). 161

, , . , . 24 , , . , (2) (2) . ( 52, 7, 4, 12) 36,94%, , ( 52, 7, 3 1) 31,03% . . (2) (20), 10,83% . (5), (2), (2) (1), 4,92% . , (7), (6), (1), (1) (1) 7,88% . (7), (4), (2), (1), (1), (1), (1), 8,37%. 203 149 (73,39%), 54 (26,60%) . ( ), . , (ackersmann 79) . , (5-22 ). , (6), (schaafer), (vieh-halter). , , . , , . 63 12 162

1776.

. , . 63 (39,62% ), 13 , . - 34 (21,38%), , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . , , . 16 , , , , . . 12 , , , , , , , , . , , . * . , , () , . , , , . , , . , . / . , . , . , . 163

, (Juraj Adam Bttner) ( ), . , , . , , . , , . . (Stadt Haus) 13 1, . . 72, .16 . . 4 2 . 4 , 2 . hospital XVIII , , (als milde Stifftung frey). , () . * 799 4,9 . 1.418 , 196 , 973 , 250 1.056 . 16

1773. . : . . , 1739. 1804. , I (1739-1788), 1973, 353-355 (. . 153, / 1773). 1774. : . , , 14 (1965), 98-101.

164

1776.

, , , . , . , . , , , , . , , , . , , . 1776. 1.030 1,37 , 0,19 , 0,94 , 0,24 , , 1,02 . 3: 59 177 84 51 50 177 24 70 40 21 23 81 4 13 6 4 1 18 169 294 188 75 48 267 218 256 211 27 8 128 80 96 96 14 5 58

. 35 (59,32%), 51 (86,44%), 32 (54,23%). 169 . 48 (28,40%), 75 (44,37%), 58 (34,31%). 80 , 165

14 (17,5%), 25 (31,25%). 2,91 , 1,43 , 1,66 , 0,87 6,75 , 1,17 , 0,96 , 0,12 , 0,03 0,58 . * 6.142 , 1.177 , 294,3 , 450 , 8.014 .17 (871), 159 . 7,05 (4,05 h), 1,35 (0,77 h), 0,33 (19 ), 0,51 (29 ), 9,20 (5,29 h) . 769 (88,28% ), 535 (61,42%) 476 (54,64%). , . 45 . , (14 ), , , , , . 21 45 , 9 21 . 15 21 , 4 11 . , , .

17

3,59 2, 1.600 0,57 h. : ., , I IV, 19611974.

166

1776.

4: 1776. 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 235 76 7 17 1 2 1 215 10 2 (30,55%) (9,88%) (0,91%) (2,21%) (0,13%) (0,26%) (0,13%) (27,95%) (1,30%) (0,26%) 4 4 6 6 7 9 9 10-20 20-45 1 1 110 8 1 22 5 49 6 769 (0,13%) (0,13%) (14,03%) (1,04%) (0,13%) (2,86%) (0,65%) (6,37%) (0,78%)

535 (67,42%) 2,28 . 17 . 516 (96,16%) 5 (2,85 h). , , , , , . 5: 1776. - 1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10 10-17 : 5 (0,93%) 11 (2,05%) 221 (41,3%) 203 (37,94%) 22 (4,11%) 44 (8,22%) 25 (4,67%) 4 (0,74%) 535

. (0,14 ) 12 (6,9 h) -

167

.18 XVIII , . 4 (2,5 h) 12 (6,9 h) , , . , . 6: 1776. 1 1 1 2-3 3-4 4-5 9 12 150 (31,51%) 183 (38,44%) 61 (12,86%) 42 (8,82%) 12 (2,52%) 11 (2,31%) 10 (2,1%) 3 (0,63%) 2 (0,42%) 1 (0,21%) 1 (0,21%) 476

, 100150 (57,5 h). , , , , , , . , . * , , . , , , (7,1 ), , (1 = 1.600 = 0,57h).18

168

1776.

, , . , , . (, ) . , , . 7: 1776. 19 1 1 1 1 1 2 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 13 18 . 496

148 39 16 19 5 3 4 3 1 1 1 1 240

1 2 3 4 5 6 8 13 14

16 32 16 12 1 10 2 1 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 8

66 40 13 7 1 2 1

30 50 60 100 150 200 300 400

1 2 1 3 1 3 2 1

1 3 10 15

1 2 1 1

10 20 30 40 45 60

279

91

238

130

2240

14

32

5

23,30% . (379) 234 , 148 (61,6%) . , , . 117 41 . , , 2,78 , (zum Zucht) (zur Hauswirtschaft).19

265

169

, , , . , , . 8,83% . , . ( ), , . , 12,62% . 90 , 153 . 40 , 85 . (4-8) , , , , , . 1,35% . , . 2.240 , 160 . , , , . , 12 , , , . , , . 200 . (0,48%) 32 . , . , , . , . 265 , (0,67%). 170

1776.

, 37,8 . , , , , . * , , 20 (1,94%). 43 , 12 , , , . , . , , , , , , , . , , , , . * 1776. . (vom Gewerbe), (vom Haus), (vom Grund), (vom Habschaft) (Schutz - und Kopfgeld). 1.030 6.248 26 , 6 4 . . 8: 1776. () 1.143 18 701 25 1.872 48 440 21 2.090

6.248 26

, . (871) 171

84,56% , 309 (30%), 320 (31,06%) . , 4 9 , 48 , 2 9 1 22 . , , , , , , . , . , , . , , . 2 , 1 4 . () (, , ). , , 8 , 3 , 3 , 10 , 6 '' '', . . (, ), (11,21% ), (29,96%) (33,45%). (18,29%) (7,04%). * , , , , , 172

1776.

, . , . 18. 1776. .

Jelena ILI THE POPULATION OF ZEMUN ACCORDING TO THE 1776 CENSUS Summary Tumultuous political and legal circumstances, ending with the acquisition of the 1753 status of favorable autonomy as a military community, as well as excellent natural and geostrategic location, enabled Zemun an intensive demographic and economic development during the period of peace, between 1739 and 1788. According to the 1776 census, in the city of 958 households 799 homeowners and 159 renting there were 3918 people. Favorable circumstances stimulated young, mobile and poor population to largely settle in Zemun. Heads of households aged between 20 and 40 made up 36.86 per cent of all the heads of households, and because of their youth, families had less numerous offspring, participating with 34.1 per cent in the total male population. Overall, approximately 80 per cent of male population of Zemun was under 40. As demonstrated by the fragment about the origin of Zemun citizens based on surname, most came from some of the nearby settlements of Srem, Serbia, and Banat, mostly from the immediate vicinity of Belgrade. The great circulation of the nearby population is confirmed by the fact that the majority of population (83 per cent) were Orthodox Serbs. Some professions were in the hands of certain religious or ethnic communities. Most of the merchants were Orthodox Serbs and Tzintzars (64), except three Jews, as well as inn owners who were mostly Orthodox (22), with the exception of two Catholics. Transporters (8) and shedders (8) were Catholic, but non-German, while there were equal numbers of Catholics and Jews among the boilermakers (2 each). All the farmers, without exception, were Serbs (84), and the most numerous artisans (194) and wage workers (267) were of mixed ethnicity.

173

Family structure could be partially reconstructed based on the data on the size of the household (4.08 members), proportion of the young (around 42.6 per cent under 20), number of joined members (19 sons-in-law, 16 adopted ones, 31 stepsons, 7 protgs, 11 servants, and 129 learners), gender structure (47.16 percent female and 52.83 per cent males), number of widows (115), single men (34), and childless couples (130). With all this, the difference in the structure of the owners' and renters' households was also obvious in the average numbers of their members 4.3 versus 2.3. Counting numerous joined members and renters' households (159) within the same houses, Zemun houses were insufficiently comfortable (1 to 2 rooms, a kitchen, area for cattle, one in three had cellar, and one in four had a shop). Entire town organization was based on religious-organizational division. Civil servants the City (City Council, cops) and the State ones (contumacy, customs, post office) were mostly Catholic of German origin, and in lesser part, Serb Orthodox. There was a City Hall, two Catholic and Orthodox churches, two schools, and three hospitals. Apart from the urban core, fully settled by this time period, during the 1770s the town began to expand beyond the palisades. Even though one could also speak about separate professional class of farmers and cattle owners, the importance of the agricultural activities for town dwellers can be seen in that all the home owners at the same time had at least a minimal plot of land, and that the territory of the Zemun area was mostly used. The average holding had 6.41 acres of agricultural land, 1.22 acres of fields, 0.30 acres of vineyards, or 8.36 acres of total arable land. Majority had middle holdings within their consumer needs, and few who worked in profitable professions invested in land, as the main capital of the time. When it comes to taxes, and based on which the privileged status of the military community was justified before the military authorities, it is notable that the largest sum of money was gathered from the money with which adults and physically able men bought out their military service (33.45 per cent), then, from the basic tax on property, house, and land (41.18 per cent), and the smallest part from the town professions and real estate (25.33 per cent).

174