Ada Kaleh buried by Danubian sediments

MAGYARUL

It's been more than fifty years since the island of Ada Kaleh, with its adventurous past, monuments and fort, was buried under the Danube after the construction of the Iron Gate I hydroelectrical power plant. Since then, it has been lost to sight, sleeping in its eternal slumber at a depth of about 30 metres. But a recently discovered sonar image gives us a rough idea of the decades the island has spent in the depths, and also reveals that, contrary to legend, the tower of the Turkish minaret will no longer emerge, even if the reservoir level drops.

Ada Kaleh in a watery grave (source) 

In the first days of December, Ada Kaleh's underwater sonar image was posted on several Facebook groups. However, the post, which included a source tag and information on the image, was later deleted, but by then the image had been downloaded. The image was also published in the Romanian media on 13 December, but aktual24.ro only reported the story of the island and the imaging process in a paragraph. According to this article, the image was taken with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) at an unknown time. The MBES is based on a sonar mounted on a floating structure, which emits sound waves in the direction of the seabed in the shape of a fan and calculates the distance from the reflection time. The sound waves from Ada Kaleh's deep-hidden ramparts and buildings return sooner because they are closer to the surface than the deeper forms of the Danube bed. The distance data are represented by a colour scale, where blue represents deep and red shallow. Unfortunately, the image does not provide any specific data in the form of a legend.

The sonar image shows only the western part of Ada Kaleh, lying like a wreck in the Danube. The sparsely built-up garden area to the east has been left out, probably because the survey was limited to a small area. It is worth comparing with the sketch of the island as a whole. The two-street settlement itself was located within the inner ramparts. In addition, there was an outer wall system, but the western tip of the island was also fortified with bastions with eaves in the mid-18th century. The Turkish settlement also included a mosque with a slender minaret expanding from it, which stood roughly in the middle of the island, above the eastern gate. If it is true that the fortress was demolished by the Romanian state before the flooding to build a replica of the bastions from the bricks on Simian Island, relatively minimal work was done, as the fortress walls are still sharply defined in the sonar image. Although the sketch does not show the topography, contemporary photographs or postcards show that the moat system between the outer and inner ramparts was standing water, while a small forested island grew in the southern inner curve of Ada Kaleh.

A sketch of the island before the flooding

From a hydrological point of view, the sonar image can be described as extraordinary. It contains extremely important information about the sedimentation processes that took place after the flooding. So far, the blog has published two large-scale articles on the sedimentation of the Iron Gates, one on the three towers of Trikule and the other on the Crown Chapel near Orsova, which illustrated the process of filling in the section of the river that was backwatered by the Iron Gate I power plant. The same can be done for the island of Ada Kaleh, where the sonar image gives a very detailed picture of the altered flow conditions and the associated sediment movements.

Farewell. Soon the ramparts will be swallowed by the Danube reservoir.

Let's take a look at the sonar image, especially the longitudinal positive shape extending to the right of the fortress. At first glance it looks like a long dune in the desert. Several similar forms can be observed within the fort area and in the western foreground. All of them take the same direction and are characterised by being 'lee shaded', i.e. they are formed behind a large projecting wall section or bastion. They do not follow the course of the Danube branches that surrounded the island of Ada Kaleh from two directions, but appear to run straight through the longitudinal axis of the island. It is also revealing that, apart from the ramparts and one or two houses, the settlement's street network is not visible. One reason for this is that the Romanian state has done a thorough job of systematically destroying the houses of the Turks, extracting as much building material as possible. Another is the aforementioned filling of the reservoir.

Once the island was submerged, the flow conditions changed fundamentally. The drift lines that had been bypassing the island in two directions merged just above the island, as evidenced by the direction of the sediment plumes. As Ada Kaleh remains in the centre line of the estuary, unaffected by the construction of the streamside alluvial cone, the sediment deposited in the fort moves in the direction of the Iron Gates dam in the centre line of the estuary. Where the water flow encounters an obstacle, such as along the line of the ramparts, it first deepens the bed by breaking through the obstacle and deposits the sediment washed out in quieter areas such as the western foreshore, the interior of the fort, or even the eastern extension of the island. The sonar image shows that the most significant erosion is at the base of the wall of the fort in the south-west corner of the island. This outcrop probably formed a significant depression in the riverbed before the flooding.

This suggests that the sediment conditions of the former island are not primarily determined by the sediment that is being deposited from the filling reservoir, but by the sediment that is being washed locally due to the changed flow conditions in the bed, and to a lesser extent by the trapping of transported sediment from further away. And it is the demonstration of this that gives the sonar image its importance, and we can only hope that measurements will be taken at regular intervals so that the data can be compared and possible trends in sediment accumulation and leaching can be identified, preferably for the whole island.

Three Sentences on Haynau

IN HUNGARIAN

True, it has nothing to do with that Haynau, born in Kassel, Germany, but there was an island of that name on the Austrian section of the Danube, namely west of the castle of Wallsee, roughly opposite Mitterau/Ledererhaufen, which was nominated in the 2023 Danube Island of the Year vote.

Haynau on the Danube (mapire.eu)

Now that the 150 years have passed and it is safe to write about this island, which originally belonged to Upper Austria, it is worth mentioning first that Haynau (also known as Hain Au, or, in English, a Danubian sandbank with groves) is, like many of its Austrian Au counterparts, a young landform, because, like the Gemenc region in Hungary, islands and reefs on this originally braided stretch of river were very often born, disappeared or transformed.

Haynau was formerly part of a larger river bend, Grünau, in the south, and only later became an 'independent' island, sometime in the 1870s, as it first appears on the sections of the 3rd military survey, while its present form as a tied peninsula is due to the Wallsee-Mitterkirchen hydroelectric power station, built between 1965 and 1968, which eventually connected it to the Lower Austrian riverside.

Royal Oaks of Vének

IN HUNGARIAN

The Csallóköz (Žitný ostrov) is typically referred to as the Golden Garden in the Hungarian literature. Exactly why this is so, perhaps because of the gold panning, will probably never be known, but it is certain that a piece of the "Golden Garden" can be found on the opposite side of the Danube, the Szigetköz, near the village of Vének. Twelve oaks form this Golden Garden, each are older than a hundred years.  

Royal oaks of queen consort Elisabeth

It's not a big garden, with just a dozen oak trees, plus the meadows underneath. It looks like an extension of the village built on a narrow river bank. Along the huge flood protection embankment that runs alongside it, trees have been felled, but at this point the rule seems to be broken. Less noticeable on the site, but the trees are planted in regular order, assessing from their size a long time ago. Unfortunately, one of them, judging by the withered leaves on one of its branches, has dried up this year. The information plaques under the oaks date their age to at least 125-127 years, since the saplings were planted in two phases; in 1896 and 1898, first to commemorate the Hungarian Millennium and then two years later to commemorate the death of queen consort Elizabeth (10 September 1898), Franz Josef's wife. The former group forms a hexagon, with the famous Árpád oak in the middle, underneath which the villagers hid a time capsule. The south-eastern part of this group of trees dried up this year, breaking the geometric shape. Five of the Elizabeth trees form the letter "X", west of the Millennium group. These shapes can be seen really well from above in the leafless season. The conservation value of this group of trees is that the saplings are said to have originated from the now deforested hardwood groves of the Szigetköz.

The golden garden in gray scale. (fentrol.hu) 1969. november 12.

It didn't take much for the Hungarian Water Authority to cut these oaks down for flood protection reasons. According to press reports of the time, the oak grove was saved thanks to József Pados, the last school principal in Vének, who "formed a human chain around the grove with his primary school pupils, which made the people with chainsaws and their bosses, who were marching to the storage area, back off": 

We escape the heartbreaking silence of the school. József Pados knows an interesting story about every house in Vének. We go from gate to gate, and old stories and mischiefs warm up in his memory. At the end of the village we stop in front of the Golden Garden. Beautiful oaks sway their branches in the warm wind. 

- This is the tree of the seven chiefs. They were planted at the Millennium. According to the writings that have come down to us, the names of the people of the village at the time were placed in a jar at the base of the Árpád tree, and one of each of the coins of the time was also placed at the base of the tree. 

- These were the trees you even called me to save? 

- Yes. They were going to be cut down years ago because there is a regulation that there can be nothing on the ground within sixty metres of the side of the embankment. Fortunately, they were rescued. I did a lot of research, but my efforts were not in vain. Now, not only the inhabitants of Vének, but also the people of Győr can enjoy it, because more and more small weekend houses are being built on the banks of the Danube. Kolerasziget, Tordasziget, Angliakert, Szélkert, Ficsor-dűlő, Rókadomb, Ciglés, Ökörmező - you know the history of all of them and you know the area like the back of your hand.

The trees of the Golden Garden have been saved and have been protected since 1982. The school was not so fortunate, the children from Vének are now taken to school in Kisbajcs.

Resting St John of Nepomuk

Despite the fact that one of the millennium oaks has withered, there are still a dozen trees defying water regulations, as an old black poplar tree stands on the side of the embankment north of the oaks, sheltering the statue of St John of Nepomuk, who rests beneath it. It watches the traffic of at least three dusty roads, while the Danube flows behind it, beyond the embankment.

Danubian Island of the year 2023

This is the 11th time the Donauinseln blog announces the traditional poll for the Danubian Island of the year!

You can vote for the three nominated islands between 13th October and 30st December 2023!

MAGYARUL

Last year's winner: The Prímás Island at Esztergom, Hungary

The aim of this contest is to focus attention on the often unknown islands of the Danube. Most of you probably visited the Seychelle Islands before any Danubian Island. This is the ninth poll, and we are happy we have started a tradition and more and more people will learn about these islands across the World.

The winners so far (you might noticed, this is a Hungary-based blog):

2013. Kompkötő Island, Vác

2014. Helemba Island, Esztergom

2015. Kismarosi Island, Kismaros

2016. Szalki Island, Dunaújváros

2017. Csallóköz/Žitný ostrov, Slovakia

2018. Molnár Island, Soroksár, Budapest

2019. The Great Island of Rácalmás

2020. Kerekzátony Island, Ráckeve

2021. The Island of Mohács, Hungary

2022. Prímás Island, Esztergom

This year, a long-planned change to the voting process has been introduced. For 10 years, readers could nominate two of the three islands to be joined by the blog's candidate in the final vote. As the majority of the blog's readers live along the Esztergom-Dunaújváros stretch of the river, the islands here have become over-represented, and often the same islands have been competing we've seen in the past. From this year, we present you the three candidates, representing one existing island, one disappeared island and one island beyond Hungary's borders.

We present the candidates in alphabetical order, which is also the reverse order of the river's flowing direction:

The island of Bár lies on the Hungarian stretch of the Danube between Baja and Mohács. Its speciality is its diverse fauna, which is derived from the area's wide variety of wetland types. This landscape has been created and is being destroyed by anthropogen impacts. A tributary of the island was closed by a stone dyke, that is why its side-arm is constantly being filled-up, and since the 1970s several hectares of floodplain forest have grown up on the sand banks. In the meantime, what is left of the island on the main branch is gradually dying, with erosion processes characterised by impassable banks and waterlogged trees. The area belongs to the Danube-Drava National Park.

Southern tip of the Bár Island

The Island of Bár in 1968, during low-water (fentrol.hu)

There is almost no trace of Gubacsi Island in Soroksár. Only those who know what they are looking for will find remaining traces of the island, despite the fact that the island, named after the nearby Árpád village, existed less than a century and a half ago. Its fate was sealed by the closure of the Soroksár Danube in 1871, its tributary drying up as a result of the water level descending in the northern section, which over time has been eroded by agriculture and a clay mine for brick-making. What makes it special is that it is now a veritable urban jungle in the Wild West sense of the word. 

About what is left of Gubacsi Island in Budapest

The Gubacsi Island right before its disappearence (1880. mapire.eu). 

The island of Mitterau, also known as Ledererhaufen, near Wallsee in Austria, is a pseudo-optical illusion to look for in old and present-day photographs. If you want to identify the island from an aerial photograph taken in 1930, today's best guess would be the island next to the Wallsee-Mitterkirchen hydroelectric power station. However, this island has since been extensively reshaped and is located directly opposite side of the Wallsee castle. However, the river has been creating new reefs and removing old islands on this once very braided section. Mitterau/Ledererhaufen was finally connected to the opposite left bank by river regulation, and since then nature has largely forested the sediment deposited in the closed tributary.

The Mitterau/Ledererhaufen in the year 1930. (National Library of Austria)

Wallsee and its surroundings in 2023. (googleearth)

Voting closes at noon on 30 December 2023. Results will be announced in the first post of 2024!

online polls

The Danube in Lorraine

IN HUNGARIAN

The Danube is a 4.5-kilometre-long river in Lorraine, France, which flows through the Rhine into the North Sea. There are no major European capitals on its banks, the largest settlement at its mouth has only 314 inhabitants.

"Le Danube" the river of Verdenal

I would never have found this hydrographic curiosity on my own, but luckily Eric Baude, the French author of the Danube Culture website, brought it to my attention over a beer in Zebegény. Most of the pictures are from him, as he had written about "Le Danube" before. This post is inspired by his writing, but it is not a literal translation. 

From the outset, it is important to note that the most important question can not be answered: where did this stream-like river get its name? Did the French envy their German neighbour's big river? Was it named in memory of the inhabitants who had migrated east on the "real" Danube? Or was it the Romans again...?

The valley of Verdenal in 1744. (mapire.eu)

150 kilometres northwest of the source of the Danube, on the other side of the Rhine, is the Danube river, or "Le Danube". It is called in French exactly the same as its big brother to the east. It's source is in the bucolic hilly landscape of Lorraine between Autrepierre and Verdenal, and flows straight southwards through its valley. At Domèvre Le Danube joins the Vezouze River (see top photo) which comes from the western slopes of the Vosges mountains.

The Vezouze then flows into the River Meurthe near Lunéville. It is from the latter river that the modern-day département of Meurthe-et-Moselle takes its name. Where is the former Principality of Lorraine...?

Lorraine landscape near the village of Autrepierre, near the source of 'Le Danube'.

The name of the French département is revealing of the rest of the hydrography. The Meurthe flows through Nancy, the former seat of the Duchy of Lorraine, where the late descendant of the Dukes of Lorraine, the Royal Hungarian Prince Otto of Habsburg-Lorraine, held his wedding in 1951. A few kilometres below the city, the Meurthe flows into the Moselle, which then flows northwards through the city of Metz, crossing the Franco-German language border and then the Franco-German border. The Moselle finally flows into the Rhine at Coblence.

Dammed section north of Verdenal.

Bridge over the 'Le Danube' in Verdenal.

The same bridge on a German postcard from the First World War.

Few people know, but after the expulsion of the Turks, not only Germans (Swabians, as they are commonly called in Hzngary) from Austrian territory arrived in Hungary, but also French people. Lorraine was not yet part of France in the mid-18th century, and the dukes here had very close links with the Austrian Empire. Frenchmen from Lorraine were also involved in the expulsion of the Turks, one of whom, Claudius Florimund de Mercy, later became governor of Banat, Southern Hungary. He played a major role in bringing the Swabians and the French from Lorraine downstream the Danube to Hungary, especially to Banat. Is it possible that this connection with Hungary is the reason for the name of the river's name in Verdenal? 

Image source: Eric Baude (http://www.danube-culture.org/un-danube-lorrain/)

The Chronology of the Danube's Destruction

"What does a country mean to one who loves it? It means, for instance, the treasured scenes imbedded in our memories. And few parts are imbedded there so deeply as the Danube Bend and the Visegrád district. The sublime surface of the water peacefully turning, and alive with the play of light, comes almost up to our feet. We gaze and imbibe its stillness and motion, distance and proximity, and the floating hum of rare sounds of civilization that only deepen the silence.

A few years ago, a tongue of land started out towards the middle of the water, into the midst of the scene above Visegrád and Nagymaros. It makes a depressing sight. This is not the art of landscape at work, but preparations for unmistakably dismal industrial monuments of 20th century man: a concrete barrage, a concrete bridge, a concrete rim, a concrate bank and a concrete power plant. As the barrage worms its way towards the middle of the Danube, turning the hitherto unbroken surface into a muddy pool and robbing its nature of a scene of national value, a great many things have happened in Hungarian society. The developments have benn watched with aching hearts by tens of thousands of people... We must absorb a blow—the symbolic blow with which the barrage being built scars the surface of the Danube at Nagymaros.

Water, since time out mind, has symbolized the rich, ceaseless course of life, and when water dries up, it has always signified the ebbing of life. Water has played many tricks on bungling mankind during the course of history, and it will play more tricks today when a vast ecosystem is destroyed. For we have not yet closed within us the file on the barrage issue. It is not immaterial what kind of symbol Nagymaros comes to represent in our history."

Foreword by Gyula Kodolányi, April 1988.

IN HUNGARIAN

Dunacsún 1992. X. 24. (EPA)

The title of the booklet published in two editions and in 12 languages by the Office of the Government Spokesman in 1993 is borrowed from the famous poem by Attila József. The aim of the booklet "By the Danube" was to draw the world's attention to the disadvantages and the negative environmental impacts of the Bős-Nagymaros barrage project. From this point of view, we are dealing with a propaganda publication, but propaganda can be carried out not only for bad but also for good purposes. The volumes contain only a small amount of text, and the authors have placed more emphasis on the visual material. After a foreword by the Hungarian author Gyula Kodolányi, the booklet presents the history of the power plant project and the main events of the civil resistance organised against in chronological order. They have not bothered much with presenting the parameters of the power plant, comparing the water level of the canal with the surrounding villages and landscape is the only such figure. 

A rich collection of 90 selected photos from the late 1980s and early 1990s is divided into three sections, the first of which shows the natural landscape. The focus is on the Danube bend, the landscape and scenery, islands, animals and plants, but there are also images of the Ipoly Valley and the Szigetköz. The second part shows the construction works (mainly earthworks) of the Nagymaros dam. It is likely to stir something in even the hardest-hearted pro-power plant engineers, or at least make them more understanding towards those who protest against the plant. The destroyed, industrious landscape alone is frightening enough, although the damage caused by the dam, the submerged islands, flooded archaeological sites, demolished holiday homes, planned flood protection dykes and sluices are, of course, not even visible. 

In the third part, pictures with a separate black frame show the Czechoslovakian construction site in Bős (Gabčíkovo)  and Dunacsún (Čunovo), where, in addition to earthworks, the power station was already being concreted and the Danube diverted. For the first image, I chose the photo that stayed with me as a small child, watching the huge reinforced concrete blocks fall into the river on TV with my grandfather. We cheered in vain for the river to destroy the dam being built, taking the blocks with it, but eventually the water began to run out, and in the end it barely seeped between the concrete and the crop stone. Then the water dried up in the Szigetköz branch system, leaving vast meanders filled with dead fish.

Although Nagymaros and the Danube bend were partially saved, the struggle is continuous. The plans of the Nagymaros (+Adony +Fajsz) power plants are constantly smouldering under the ash and flare up from time to time during periods of low water. Some things are constant, economic interests in the Danube bend currently override landscape and nature conservation interests. Whether it's new hotel investments or the huge gravel quarry planned for Pilismarót, where work was started in the past precisely because of the power plant investment in Nagymaros, in order to 'save' the gravel deposit from flooding. That is why these photos are important, so that we know what we have gained by not building the power plant in Nagymaros.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

October 1950

Professor Emil Mosonyi puts a proposal at a meeting of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to draw up a programme, to be realized jointly with Czechoslovakia, consisting of two hydroelectric power stations-Gabčíkovo and Nagymaros-for the purposes of energy production, navigation and flood protection.

April 18, 1953

A group chaired by Hungarian Deputy Prime Minister Ernő Gerő reviews the preparatory operations. In Gerő's view, all the aims of the construction project could also be accomplished more cheaply without the power station.

July 30, 1958

The National Chief Directorate for Water Management submits a secret proposal to the Political Committee of the Hungarian Socialist Worker's Party on joint Hungarian-Czechoslovakian utilization of hydroelectric power on the Danube Bend. 

August 5, 1958

The Hungarian Socialist Worker's Party Political Committee passes a resolution on the construction of the Nagymaros hydroelectric power station.

February 27, 1962

The National Planning Office and the Chief Directorate for Water Management inform the Hungarian Socialist Worker's Party Political Committee that the feasibility studies for the Nagymaros barrage project have been completed with Soviet assistance.

April 1963

Economic committees representing the two governments agree to the construction of the hydro system. Deadline 1975.

January-February 1974

The two governments endorse the definitive version of the programme for the construction.

September 15, 1977

János Kádár and Gustáv Husák, general secretaries of the two countries' communist parties, announce the decision to build the scheme.

September 16, 1977

Prime ministers Lubomír Strougal and György Lázár sign the international treaty on the construction. Deadline for completion: 1986-1990.

May 12-14, 1980

Three years after the conclusion of the inter-state treaty, members of Hungary's technical and scientific community have their first chance to criticize and express opposition to the project at a conference in Tatabánya.

September 22, 1980

The barrage system is discussed by 400 engineers meeting at the House of Technology in Budapest. Engineers György Hábel and István Molnár criticize the plan and vote against a draft recommendation to the government supporting the project.

December 31, 1980

The Hungarian government suspends work on the project.

November 1981

The periodical Valóság publishes János Vargha's article "Further and Further from Good" (Egyre távolabb a jótól - Dokumentumok a Gabčíkovo— Nagymarosi Vízlépcső-rendszer történetéből), criticising the investment.

October 10, 1983

Prime Ministers Strougal and Lázár reconfirm the original treaty and set a new deadline for completion: 1995.

December 20, 1983

The Presidium of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences comes out in support of suspending construction, but classifies its report top secret until an investigation has been made into the likely environmental damage.

January-February 1984

Public platform debates on the project begin. The Social Committee for the Danube draws up a petition calling for the suspension of construction work until a comprehensive study of its ecological effects has been made, and begins collecting signatures.

Spring-Summer 1984

The Danube Conservation Society is refused a permit to form. Numerous professional associations and university groups and the Hungarian Writers' Association are all dealing with the damaging effects of the hydro scheme.

September 1984

The Danube Circle forms, and decides to issue newsletters without a permit.

November 1984

The Danube Circle, having gathered some 10,000 signatures to copies of a petition, submits it to Parliament and the government. No response is recieved.

December 1984

Apart from the Austrian environmentalists, the Czechoslovak government also protests officially against a projected Danube hydro station at Hainburg. The Austrian government later abandons the scheme. 

May 1985

In general elections for the Hungarian Parliament, the public are permitted to put forward nominations for the first time. The problem of the hydro project features during the run-up to the elections.

June 21, 1985

The Hungarian Academy of Sciences holds a working meeting behind closed doors to discuss a proposal to halt the project made by nine independent experts: Mrs József Bozzay, Mihály Erdélyi, György Hábel, Sándor Jakab, Gyula Marót, István Molnár, Zalán Petneházy, Károly Perczel and János Tóth.

Autumn 1985

The European Parliament intervenes against the environmentally damaging project and anti-democratic harassment of the protesters against it.

December 1985

The Danube Circle receives the Right Livelihood Award, the so-called alternative Nobel Prize, in Stockholm, for its campaigning against the hydro scheme.

January 30, 1986

The group demanding a referendum on the Nagymaros project because of its environmental and economic damage reinforce their demand with 6,500 signatures and submit the petition to the Hungarian Presidential Council. The secretary of the Council politely refuses to accept it.

February 6, 1986

The Danube Circle is forced to abandon an "ecological walk" it has announced, because of threats from the police.

April 16, 1986

A political advertisement paid for by 30 Hungarian environmentalists appears in the Vienna paper Die Presse, protesting at the way Austrian firms are exploiting the lack of democracy in Hungary by providing credit and their services as technical contractors for the scheme in exchange for electric power.

May 1986

A Hungarian-Austrian credit agreement is concluded to finance the construction of the Nagymaros power station.

August 1987

The Czechoslovak and Hungarian governments represented by Prime Ministers Lubomír Strougal and Károly Grósz urge the scheme in a joint statement.

April 24, 1988

Hungarian environmentalists hold a protest march from Visegrád to Esztergom.

May 27, 1988

A demonstration is held outside the Austrian Embassy to protest against Austrian involvement in the hydro project.

July 21, 1988

Thirteen Danube conservation groups form the Nagymaros Committee to oppose construction of the barrage scheme.

September 4, 1988

The World Wildlife Fund and the Danube Circle hold a joint conference on the ecological effects of the project.

September 12, 1988

A demonstration by tens of thousands of people outside Parliament calls for a halt to the construction of Nagymaros.

October 3, 1988

Hungarian environmentalists form a human chain across the Budapest bridges, demanding a halt to construction.

October 6-7, 1988

The Hungarian Parliament holds a debate on the barrage scheme for the first time. The decision, with 19 votes against, is to continue construction but impose strict environmental-protection conditions.

October 30, 1988

A torchlight protest is held in Budapest, from Margaret Island to Parliament.

February 6, 1989

The deputy prime ministers of the two countries, Péter Medgyessy and Pavel Hrivnak, sign a protocol accelerating  the construction of the project.

February 27, 1989

The Nagymaros Committee submits to Parliament about 140,000 signatures calling for a referendum on the issue.

April 3, 1989

A demonstration by 15,000 people takes place at the Nagymaros construction site.

May 13, 1989

The Hungarian government declares a two-month moratorium on construction of the Nagymaros barrage, which is already 30% complete.

July 20, 1989

The moratorium is extended until October 31. The Hungarian government refuses to agree to further work on the Dunakiliti headwater reservoir and diversion of the Danube for the Gabčíkovo station.

August 18, 1989

The Czechoslovak Foreign Ministry, in a letter of protest, demands compensation of USD 2 billion for the delay to the scheme.

August 31, 1989

Czechoslovak Prime Minister Ladislav Adamec raises the prospect of unilateral diversion of the Danube. This is the first appearance of Variant C.

September 1, 1989

The Hungarian government's reply refers to the suspension of construction, warning that unilateral continuation of the project would bring a deterioration in relations.

October 31, 1989

The Hungarian Parliament passes a resolution on omitting the construction of the Nagymaros station and on seeking to renegotiate the 1977 treaty, with consideration for the ecological aspects, the reliable scientific findings and the national interest. (Some 95% of Hungary's surface water stocks enter from abroad).

February 3, 1990

Slovak, Austrian and Hungarian environmentalists hold a joint protest, forming a human chain between Bratislava and Gabčíkovo.

May 20, 1990

The new Hungarian government formed after the free elections presents its political programme, in which it declares on the basis of expert opinions that the project is faulty, and announces its intention of beginning negotiations with the new Czechoslovak government on rehabilitation of the sites and division of the costs of the damage caused.

July 23, 1991

The Slovak government decides that if the Hungarian side refuses its cooperation, it is possible temporarily to complete the barrage and power station exclusively on Czechoslovak soil (Variant C).

May 18, 1992

After two years of abortive negotiations, the Hungarian government abrogates the 1977 treaty.

October 17, 1992

Environmentalists make a symbolic start to demolishing the part of the Nagymaros barrage that was built.

October 23, 1992

Unilateral diversion of the Danube on Slovak territory into the artificial headwater channel above Gabčíkovo begins.

October 23, 1992

The Hungarian government appeals to the International Court in Hague for legal redress against the arbitrary alteration of the course of the Danube, which forms the frontier between the two countries, and against ecological aggression.

The nothern tip of the Szentendrei Island, 1986. (Ráfáel Csaba)

The citadel of Visegrádi, 1985. (Balaton József)

The Helembai Islands 1988. (Weress Kálmán)

Constructions at Nagymaros, 1989. (Asztalos Zoltán)

Visegrád, 1988. (Weress Kálmán)

Visegrád, 1988. (Weress Kálmán)

The Nagymaros desert 1989. (Weress Kálmán)

Nagymaros and Visegrád, 1992. (Weress Kálmán)

Bős, 1986 (Kisbenedek Attila)

Bős, 1986. (Balaton József)

Vajka, 1991 (Cseke Csilla)