, . 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. ,
, , 1

: 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).

152

 1776.

.5 ,
1786.
, , .6

(Haussasige), . , , . .
, 17541762. ,
(Znnsleuthe), (Zigeuner) (Juden). 60-
XVIII ( 1773, 1776. 1787) , (Neue Znsleuthe) (usser der Stadt). , .
1736-1786.

1200
1000

1030

1138

937

800
711

600
554

400
200
120
0
1736.

1754.

:
1761.

1773.

1776.

1786.

, , . 637 (1773); 870 (1776); 871 (1787). , , 1787. , .

6
. . , , 2003,
249-252. 80- XVIII .

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
,
.8
7

-
, 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
9

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.

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.

. , .

70 >
16

65-70
15
0,82

0,88

60-65
35
1,9

16,8%

55-60
42
2,3

50-55
51
2,8

45-50
87
4,8

40-45
125
6,9

44,9%

35-40
130
7,1

30-35
197
10,8

25-30
176
9,7

20-25
165
9,1

15-20
150
8,2

10-15
199
10,9

4,1%

5-10
200
11,0

1-5
187
10,3

0-1
36
1,9

- -

1: 1776.

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
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 Poti-

157

*

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%).
13

19.
, , , (P. Chaunu, Civilizacija klasine Evrope,
Beograd, 1977, 542).

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 ). 14

16 '' '', 39 , , , .
15
- ''
'', . , , . , . , 1787. 52 (, , . 1080 - Conscription
der Trken und trkischen Unterthanen mit Ende Oktobri 787).

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

4
13
6
4
1
18

169
294
188
75
48
267

24
70
40
21
23
81

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

4
4
6
6
7
9
9
10-20
20-45

1
1
110
8
1
22
5
49
6
769

(30,55%)
(9,88%)
(0,91%)
(2,21%)
(0,13%)
(0,26%)
(0,13%)
(27,95%)
(1,30%)
(0,26%)

(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). ,
, ,
, , , .
, .
*
, , . , , , 18

(7,1 ),
, (1 = 1.600 =
0,57h).

168

 1776.

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

91

1
2
1
3
1
3
2
1

238

130

2240

14

1
3
10
15

1
2
1
1

32

30
50
60
100
150
200
300
400

66
40
13
7
1
2
1

279

1
2
3
4
5
6
8

240

16
32
16
12
1
10
2
1
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
8
13
14

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

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

10
20
30
40
45
60

1
1
1
1
1
2

265

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

(zum Zucht)
(zur Hauswirtschaft).

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