The Slovaks have a
peculiar relationship with their nobility; at once they despise them
for being Hungarian overlords, and then they become ecstatic when
they discover that much of this nobility was of Slovak origin.
King Svatopluk of the Moravians
The fact is that, since
colloquial (non-Latin) records began from around the 16th
century, Upper Hungarian (that is, the territory that is now
Slovakia) noblemen evidently knew, corresponded, and wrote in Slovak.
For the true Hungarian
patriot, of course, this proves nothing. As much of Wikipedia (it
being practically a battlefield of 19th century ideas) can
testify, the argument used by true Hungarian patriots is that these
nobles merely learnt the Slovak tongue of their environment, to
better understand their meaner co-habitants.
And so the next step, as
soon as Slovak nationhood cottoned on to the significance of the
matter, was to try to prove beyond doubt that much of the Upper
Hungarian nobility was Slovak since the middle ages; nay, since the
time of the Great Moravian empire, and that certain of these families
are in fact the descendants of Moravian Slav magnates.
In the opinion of these
Slovak scholars (and there are many about now), the old Hungarian
chronicles are of no use, because in their attempt to glorify the
tribes of Gog and Magog they created an empty Pannonia which received
the Hetumoger with open arms. So the Slovak scholars have begun a
careful study of names and landed possessions of some of the ancient
magnate families. The most celebrated have become those of Hont and
Poznan. The dissection of family names have, to my mind, itself
proved beyond doubt the Slavic origin of this family – no Swabian
(or Magyar, for that matter) would call himself Bukven
– which to this day means 'beechmast' in Slovak. Many Upper
Hungarian noble families descend from the genus Hont-Poznan.
Hont, one of the ancestors of the Hont-Poznans
However,
I think that the Slovak scholars are being unfairly harsh towards the
old chroniclers. Upon a careful reading of the two most significant,
the Gestas of Anonymous and of Simon of Keza, it appears that really
quite revolutionary possibilities emerge. I list them:
- That 'Pannonia' did not mean the entire historical area of Hungary, but the great flat plain encircled by the Carpathians (this is not revolutionary at all, but it is a first step towards the below);
- That the area where Nitra and Hlohovec stand (and where the country first begins to ripple with hills, and where begins ethnic Slovakia proper – this discounts the flat areas to the south and south-west Slovakia, which were ethnically Magyar) were already at the borders of the early medieval state of Hungary;
- That in this northern region (Slovakia proper) Bohemians and Slavs of Nitra lived, and that these terms of ethnicity were interchangeable;
- That they were defeated in arms or at least intimidated;
- That the nobles of this people had their lands reinstated by the Magyar conquerors, and were grateful for their returned estates.
These
possibilities are truly fascinating, because they do so much to prove
the existence of Greater Moravian aristocracy turned Hungarian
aristocracy, from sources which traditionally are seen to do the very
opposite. Instead of denying ancient Slovak nobility, upon a correct
reading they in fact support it.
The
Gesta Hungarorum by Anonymous
The
Gesta has long been discredited from the point of view of actual
historical accuracy of 9th
century events – its continued value however lies in giving us a
glimpse of some circumstances of the time when the Gesta was
originally written, in the 12th
century (that is, well within a century of the fundation of the
Hungarian Kingdom in A.D. 1000).
The seven captains (Hetumoger)
In
par. 33 of the Gesta, Duke Arpad sent “many warriors to conquer the
people of castles Gemer and Novohrad and, if fortune would grant, to
continue as far as the boundaries of Bohemia at castle Nitra”
(misit
multos milites in expedicionem, qui subiugarent sibi populum de
castro Gumur et Nougrad. Et si fortuna faveret, tunc ascenderet
versus fines Boemorum usque as castrum Nitra).
This
first, and exceedingly important, quote, implies that even in 12th
century Hungary, the feeling of a borderland was felt in the area
where the historical ethnic Slovak borders begin. Even more
significantly, it was felt that this region was populated by
“Bohemians”. No actual Bohemians lived around Nitra (the seat of
the ancient Moravian empire) – this apellation meant the same thing
as 'Slav' to the Hungarians, for whom the tongue was almost
identical. It must be admitted that even Renaissance Slovak texts are
almost identical to Czech. In the same way, then, that Germans
equated the Huns with the Magyars in the 10th
century, the Magyars equated the Slavs who lived around Nitra in the
12th
century and before with 'Bohemians'. This conflation is important
because many ancient noble families who are recorded in Upper Hungary
(and the descendants of whom claimed to be Slovak) are described in
medieval chronicles as having their origin in 'Bohemian' knights.
Par.
33 of the Gesta continues: “Then all the inhabitants of that land,
Slavs, who were originally subject to Duke Salan, were afraid and
freely subjected themselves, and none of them lifted a hand...The
nobles from this land, who gave to [Zuard, Cadusa and Huba] their
sons as ransom, were given various gifts and with sweet words were
encouraged to subject themselves without fighting under Arpad's
lordship. And then they were taken on expeditions, while theirs sons,
who were ransom, came to Duke Arpad with various gifts. The duke and
his nobles were very happy at this and gave the good messengers many
gifts.”
(Tunc
omnes Sclavi habitatores terre, qui primo eran Salani ducis, propter
timorem eorum se sua libera sponte subiugaverunt eis, nullo manum
sublevante...Et melioribus habitatoribus terre, qui filios suos in
obsides dederant, diversa dona presentaverunt et blandis verbis sub
dominium ducis Arpad sine bello subiugaverunt et ipsos secum in
expedicionem duxerunt, filios vero eorum in obsides accipientes, ad
ducem Arpad cum diversis muneribus remiserunt. Unde dux et sui
nobiles leciores facti sunt solito, nuntiis gaudia ferentibus multa
dederunt dona.)
The
above quote disproves the classic interpretation of the Gesta that it
does not mention ancient Moravian aristocracy. Here Anonymous
substitutes 'Bohemians' for 'Slavs' for the same region – but he
makes a sharp distinction between the populus and the Moravian
nobility; the former do not fight because they are afraid; but the
latter are persuaded
not to fight, and as a result they are rewarded with gifts and social
station. The Moravian nobles go with the Magyars on their
expeditions, and begin their service for the nascent Hungarian state.
The ransomed sons, and the feasts and joy, and rich gifts, all recall
the typical early medieval romantic notions of high chivalric
adventure. This contemporary feel makes it even more clear that
Anonymous was aware that the area around Nitra is inhabited by Slavs
with a nobility of their own, a nobility who have accepted the
lordship of Hungarian kings and have as a result been confirmed in
their privileges.
Par.
34 then moves on to the locality of Zvolen: “Then the four lords,
on the basis of counsel and pleading by the population of that land
loyal to them, a third of the army together with that land's people
went to the Zvolen forest where, at the very edge of the kingdom,
they were to build strong stone and wood fortifications, lest the
Bohemians and Poles would one day attack their dominion”.
(Tunc
IIIIor domini inito inter se consilio per peticionem incolarum sibi
fidelium constituerunt, ut tercia pars de exercitu cum incolis terre
irent in silvam Zovolon, qui facerent in confinio regni municiones
fortes tam de lapidibus quam etiam de lignis, ut ne aliquando Boemy
vel Polony possent intrare causa furti et rapine in regnum eorum.)
Zvolen,
which later became a royal castle and under the Anjous was splendidly
appointed, is basically on the same latitude as Nitra. Anonymous,
therefore, is consistent in asserting that beyond those boundaries
lived Slavs, 'Bohemians' as he often (but not always) liked to call
them. He also mentions the 'loyal' parts of the indigenous Slav
population, hinting at the complex process of assimilation and
acceptance that the Magyars must have encountered during the
formation of the kingdom, and to some time (until the 12th
century at least) after.
Prince Almos, with the sign of the Turul
In
par. 35 of the Gesta, the Arpadian warlords approach the city of
Nitra in an effort to appraise its defences: “[they rode to where]
the Tormos rivulet descends into the river Nitra, and they saw that
the inhabitants of those lands, Slavs and Bohemians, would defend
themselves under the leadership of a Bohemian duke, because after the
death of Attila the region between the Vah and Hron rivers, and
between the Danube until the Morava, was unified into one
principality by a Bohemian duke. And at that time, by grace of the
duke of Bohemia, the duke of Nitra was Zubur.”
(...ab
rivulum Turmas, abi descendit in rivulum Nytre, viderunt habitatores
ilius provincie Sclavos at Bohemos eis obsistere cum adiutorio ducis
Boemorum, quia mortuo Athila rege terram, que iacet inter Wag et Gron
a Danubio usque ad fluvium Morova dux Boemorum sibi preoccupavera et
in unum ducatum fecerat. Et tunc tempore per gratiam ducis Boemorum
dux Nitriensis factus erat Zubur.)
The
above paragraph only strengthens the idea that, for Anonymous, and
thus for Magyar Hungarians, Upper Hungary was inhabited by Slavs.
Again, the word 'Bohemian' is interchangeable with Slav, even though
erroneously: true Bohemians were separated from Upper Hungary by the
Moravian mark. Nevertheless, for all practical purposes of
identification the Slavs of Upper Hungary were 'Bohemians'.
More
importantly, this paragraph introduces the concept of the 'duke of
Nitra', and Nitra as the seat of a principality. This is combined
with an astonishingly precise (for modern readers) boundaries of the
modern ethnic Slovakia, as well as corresponding closely to where the
boundaries of the Nitra principality are believed to have been. This
demonstrates that the ethnic region of the Slovaks remained unchanged
since the 12th century, the era of Anonymous.
Par.
36 of the Gesta repeats the phrase “Slavs and Bohemians” in
reference to the defenders of Nitra (Sclavos et Boemos, Sclavi et
Boemi), thus elevating it into a topos, the habitual
reference for those people. This means that the terms were
interchangeable and that the 'Bohemians' of Anonymous were simply the
Slavs of Upper Hungary, and not some lost Bohemian warband.
Par.
37 of the Gesta speaks the tale of the great battle between Arpad's
three warlords Zuard, Cadusa and Huba and the Slavs of Nitra. Zubur
is called the 'duke of Nitra' (dux Nitriensis), while the
local inhabitants are again called the 'Bohemians and Slavs' (Boemis
et Sclavis) and even 'Bohemians and Slavs of Nitra' (Boemi et
omnes Nytrienses Sclavi).
The
interesting point of this paragraph comes when the battle is over
(won, of course, by the Magyars), the castles of the region are taken
over, and when the Magyar victors return to Arpad with hostages given
to them by the local nobles (et omnes nobiles filios suos eis in
obsides dederunt): “And Prince Arpad, heeding the counsel of
his nobles, accepted oaths of loyalty from the unfaithful and gave
them – the aforementioned unfaithful inhabitants from the region of
Nitra – lands in various parts of the kingdom, in order that, when
they returned home, they would not be able to become unfaithful again
in Nitra”.
(Dux
Arpad consilio et peticione suorum nobilium donavit accepto iuramento
infidelium terras in diversis locis predictis infidelibus de partibus
Nytrie ductis, ut ne aliquando infideliores facti repatriando
nocerent sibi fidelibus in confinio Nitrie habitantibus).
The
above quote offers a tantalising possibility that the old Moravian
nobility were in fact re-instated to their rank, accepted into the
hierarchy of the nascent Hungarian kingdom. Apart from the romantic
stories concocted in his fertile imagination, Anonymous actually
quite faithfully reflected the realities of the 12th
century Hungarian kingdom: one of those realities were Slavic noble
families in Upper Hungary. Their existence and legitimate status had
to be explained in some way, and so Anonymous created the story
whereby the Moravian aristocracy were defeated in battle and
submitted to Arpad, who in return reinstated them to their positions.
This
has deep implications for medieval genealogy in Upper Hungary, where
so many noble families bore demonstrably Slavic names and were
descended from kindreds who, in medieval chronicles, were said to
have been of 'Bohemian' origin. These kindreds were 'Bohemian' in the
sense that Anonymous gives it – the old nobility of Nitra and
Greater Moravia.
Anonymous
was not the only Hungarian chronicler who thought in this way. So did
Simon of Keza, who wrote his famous Gesta Hungarorum about a
hundred years later that Anonymous, in the late 13th
century. In Simon of Keza the myth of the Hunnish origins of the
Magyars is developed further, though perhaps in a more analytical and
less imaginative manner. Nevertheless, Simon retains the idea that
the territory of Slovakia was inhabited by Slavs and 'Bohemians'.
In
par. 32 of his Gesta, Simon continues in his recounting of the seven
hosts of Arpad: “Lel was the commander of the sixth host. It is
stated in many accounts that Lel first dwelt near Hlohovec and
afterwards settled in the region around Nitra once the Moravians and
Bohemians were eliminated.”
(Lel
ergo exercitus sexti ductor fuerat. Iste circa Golgocha primitus
habitans, exinde Messianis et Boemis exstirpatis, tandem in partibus
Nitriae saepius fertur habitasse.)
Simon
here, just as Anonymous, makes the Nitra Moravians identical with the
'Bohemians'. In Simon also, then, we can be relatively sure that when
referring to 'Bohemians' in Upper Hungary, he may well mean the
indigenous Slavs living there. Simon's statement that the Slavs of
Nitra were “extirpated”, in other words utterly destroyed, is
harsh but it cannot reflect reality. The existence of so many noble
families in the region who bore purely Slavic names, as well as the
great efforts Anonymous goes to explain the Slav presence there,
oppose this.
This
conflation of Nitra Slav and Bohemian has, of course, great
implication as to the origin of some of the noble kindreds. Simon of
Keza himself writes that “the Bogat-Radvany originate in Bohemia”
(Sed illi, quod Rodoan et Bagath nominantur, eorum generatio de
Boemia ortum habet). The lands of this kindred were large but
mostly to the Northeast of Hungary, far away from actual Bohemia;
while the names of their member and the ethnicity of the later
descendants is demonstrably Slovak.
Another
kindred were the Ludany, whom Simon also identifies as Bohemian. The
Ludany kindred had lands in the region of Nitra itself, and again the
research into family names and land possessions strongly suggest that
this kindred was indigenous and had roots in ancient Nitra nobility.
Incidentally, the Ludany are believed to be the kindred of the
Elefanthy family, who were probably the ancestors of the Klebercz
family referred to in my blog.
It is
of course difficult to attempt to piece together a reliable analysis
from medieval Hungarian chronicles – they are serious pitfalls even
for the expert. However, it goes without saying that they remain
invaluable resources – and each generation of historians seems to
pick what suits them best. Perhaps this short contribution is also
slightly biased – the very existence of the Slovak political entity
seems to predispose historians to try to trace it into the past. I
myself, however, was in the past sceptical of the Slovak origin of
Upper Hungarian families. However, modern sustained research does
suggest that this may have been the case, at the very least for a
part of the nobility. It is still rather sad that, for instance,
Wikipedia refuses the valid and unquestionably serious work of Slovak
historians. I hope that my contribution here might elucidate the
matter further, in light of the very sources which Slovaks seem to
shun and Hungarians seem to adore.
Sources:
Anonymous:
Gesta Hungarorum, in: Vincent Mucska (Banska Bystrica, 2000)
Chronicon Pictum
(Chronica de Gestis Hungarorum):
in: Dezso Dercsenyi (Weimar, 1968)
Macartney,
C. A.: The Medieval Hungarian Historians
(Cambridge, 1953)
Simonis
de Keza: Gesta Hungarorum, in: Frank Schaer, Laszlo Veszpremy
(eds.) (Budapest, 1999)
