The collapse of Communism in 1989 gave a massive impetus to the relatively new field of transition studies: the transformation of authoritarian dictatorships into democratic, capitalist societies. The future of Central and Eastern Europe was a key concern. Would democracy take hold and would the former Communist states become integrated into Europe, or would they follow the example of Vladimir Meciar's Slovakia into autocracy or Yugoslavia's route into war? The importance of the question explains the sheer mass of publications in this highly popular new field and its swift integration into university curricula. The relative lack of contemporary sources and limited chronological horizon in the past made many such works overly theoretical and speculative in nature. These weaknesses do not plague Andreas Schmidt-Schweizer's Politische Geschichte Ungarns. Though embedded in the theory of transition studies through an introductory chapter, this is a highly empirical, blow-by-blow account of Hungarian politics from the mid-1980s to the year 2002.

Well over a third of the book is dedicated to Communist reform under and after party leader János Kádár, and his successors, the reformist prime ministers Károly Grósz (1987–1988) and Miklós Németh (1988–1990). Schmidt-Schweizer argues that “system change” in Hungary was not a “negotiated revolution,” but was mainly brought about by reformist Communists within the ruling Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party (MSzMP), without significant pressure from a disorganized and fragmented opposition—a conclusion that is likely to be controversial in Hungary. This lays the groundwork for the rest of the book, dealing with the first democratically elected Hungarian governments of József Antall and Péter Boross (1990–1994), Gyula Horn (1994–1998), and Viktor Orbán (1998–2002). This analysis is concluded by a chapter on the rule of Péter Medgyessy's MSzP in 2002. Schmidt-Schweizer covers all the most important political developments, crises, financial, legal, and economic reforms after 1990. He examines the rise and fall of anti-Communist container parties. such as the Democratic Forum (MDF) and Smallholder's Party (FKGP), and the gradual coagulation of political forces in the country into two ideological blocks—one surrounding the former Communist Hungarian Socialist Party (MSzP) and left liberal SzDSz, and the other around Viktor Orbán's national-conservative Fidesz-Hungarian Citizen's Party (Fidesz-MPP).

All this is based on an impressive range of Hungarian secondary literature and Hungarian primary sources. For the chapters on the collapse of Communism, Schmidt-Schweizer also uses some archival sources and interviews with important political actors. Oddly though, he refrains from using this latter rather obvious source for the period following 1990.

In his introduction, Schmidt-Schweizer proposes to write a Rankean history wie es eigentlich gewesen ist (11), and that is exactly what he has produced: a classical history of elites, politicians, and significant events. On the plus side, this means his Politische Geschichte Ungarns is a solidly empirical account. On the down side, this makes this book, like Hungarian cuisine, difficult to digest. The long lists of newly promulgated laws, technocratic changes, and names of long-forgotten back-benchers at times distract from the general argument. Schmidt-Schweizer has little interest for the human side or the high drama of politics. This makes politicians appear as purely rational actors without ideological, emotional, or personal motives. It also makes this a very dry book.

A more significant critique is the lack of interest for the Hungarian voter. Here, the Hungarian population only appears as an actor in opinion polls. This need not be problematic, save for Schmidt-Schweizer's conclusion that the collapse of Communism took place “without direct pressure from the masses” (422). Though it is true Hungary had no Solidarność (Solidarity) in the 1980s, the general lack of popular legitimacy of Communist rule after 1956 does form a major underlying cause in the downfall of Hungarian Communism. It also calls into question Schmidt-Schweizer's conclusion that transition has been a “success” (426). This does not do justice to the highly emotional nature of political polarization in Hungary that ruins friendships and divides families to this day. One wonders to what extent transition has really become consolidated after the riots and mass demonstrations of 2006. These followed a now infamous leaked speech by Socialist prime minister Ferenc Gyurcsány in which he stated that the Socialists had “lied in the morning, lied in the evening” during their years in government.

Although such underlying developments tend to remain hidden from view, this does not distract from Andreas Schmidt-Schweizer's achievement, which is the production of a highly detailed, factual, and comprehensive overview of Hungary's most recent political history. Even in Hungarian it will be hard to find an equally extensive account. For this reason the Politische Geschichte Ungarns will prove invaluable to historians of modern Hungary, an excellent starting point for scholars dealing with transition politics in Hungary and the region in general from the 1980s onward.