Hungaro-Polonica
Young Scholars on Medieval
Polish-Hungarian Relations
Dániel Bagi – Gábor Barabás – Zsolt Máté
(ed.)
Történészcéh Egyesület
Pécs, 2016
Publishing of this book was supported by Re-
public of Poland’s Embassy in Budapest.
Edited by: щániel Bagi – ьáborХчarabás* – Zsolt
żátéВ
* The editing of the book was supported by the Hungarian
Scientific Research Found (OTKA NN 109690).
ВХTheediting of the book was supported
byХsupportedХbyХtheХσNźі-16-2-I. New
National Excellence Program of the
Ministry of Human Capacities.
Cover: ZsófiaХżagyar
Printing: VirágmandulaХźftг
©ХцuthorsбХ2016
©ХъditorsбХ2016
ISBN: 978-963-12-7382-3
2
Contents
Abbreviations 6
Dániel Bagi 9
Preface
Studies
Adrien Quéret-Podesta 17
Poland and Hungary in the Chronicle of Adéв
mar de Chabannes
Marta Graczyńska 33
The Cathedrals – The Problem of Place and
Space: Origins and Reasons of their Existence in
Central Europe (Hungary, Bohemia and Po-
land)
Bernadett Benei 49
Contributions to the Study of the 11–12th Cen-
tury Texts of the Hungarian Chronicle
Angelika Herucová 69
Palatines in the Hungarian Kingdom, Bohe-
mian Kingdom and Polish Principalities in the
10th to 13th Century
Gábor Barabás 89
Coloman of Galicia and his Polish Relations.
The Duke of Slavonia as Protector of Widowed
Duchesses
3
Stefan Albrecht 119
Three New Manuscripts of the so Called
Chronicon hungarico-polonicum
Wojciech Kozłowski 143
International Relations before the Sovereign
Territorial State. Modern-StateХчiasХandХtheХÁrв
pádian-Piast Relations, 1240-1320
Annamária Érsek 167
The Crypto-portrait in Central Europe in the
14th Century
Andrzej Marzec 189
New King and New Elites. The Reign of Louis
the Great in Poland 1370–1382
Anna Obara-Pawłowska 225
Polish and Hungarian Economic Relations in
the Middle Ages (from the Second Half of the
13th Century to the End of the 14th Century)
János Incze 265
360 Years in Pledge. TheХ іledgingХ ofХ theХ SpišХ
Region
Tomáš Homoľa 291
Polish-Hungarian Rivalry for the Bohemian
Crown in the 1460s
4
315
István Kovács
шlementХofХTúronyгХPossibilities of a Canon of
Southern Baranya in the late Middle Ages
Paul Srodecki 327
WładysławХ ююI and the Polish-Hungarian Bul-
wark topoi against the Background of the Otto-
man Threat in the 15th Century
Inna Kubay 357
Repercussion of Hussite Reformation Ideas in
the South-Western Rus at the End of the XVth –
First Half of the XVIIth Century
Authors 379
5
Abbreviations
Abbreviations
Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon = Ademari Cabannensis
Chronicon, ed. Pascale Bourgain, Corpus Christianorum.
Continuatio Mediaevalis vol. 129 (Turnhout, 1999)
CDAC = Codex Diplomaticus Arpadianus Continuatus –
ÁrpádkoriХ újХ okmánytár. ed. Gustav Wenzel (Budapest, 1860–
1874)
CDB = Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris regni Bohemiae, ed. Gus-
tav Friedrich et al. (Praha, 1904–2013)
CDH = Codex diplomaticus Hungariae, ecclesiasticus ac civilis. ed.
ьeorgiusХыejér (Budae, 1829–1866)
CDP = Codex diplomaticus Poloniae quo continentur privilegia
regum Poloniae, magnorum ducum Litvaniae, bullae pontificum,
nec non jura a privatis data, illustrandis domesticis rebus gestis
inservitura adhuc nusquam typis exarata, ab antiquissimis inde
temporibus usque ad annum 1506, ed. Leon Ryszczewski et al.
(Varsaviae, 1847–887)
CDPH = Codex Diplomaticus Patrius Hungaricus. Hazai
okmánytárбХedгХюmreХNagy et al. (ьyрr – Budapest, 1865–1891)
CESDQ = Codex Epistolaris Saeculi Decimi Quinti, 3 vols., ed.
цugustХSokołowskiХ– яózefХSzujskiХ– Anatol Lewicki, Monumenta
Medii Aevi Historica. Res Gesta Poloniae Illustrantia vols. 2, 12 and
14 (Cracoviae, 1876–1894)
DF = MagyarХNemzetiХŻevéltárХOrszágosХŻevéltáraг żohácsХъlрttiХ
ьyűjteményг щiplomatikaiХ ыényképgyűjteményХ [HungarianХ
National Archive. Photo-Collecton of Diplomatics]
DL = Magyar NemzetiХŻevéltárХOrszágosХŻevéltáraгХżohácsХъlрttiХ
ьyűjteményгХщiplomatikaiХŻevéltárХ[Hungarian National Archive.
Collection of Diplomatics]
6
Abbreviations
щługoszХтХщługoszбХяan, Historiae Polonicae libri XII, 5 vols., ed.
Aleksander Przezdziecki, яoannisХ щługoszХ SeniorisХ шanoniciХ
Cracoviensis Opera Omnia vol. 10–14 (Cracoviae, 1873–1878)
DRMH = Decreta regni mediaevalis Hungariae. The Laws of the
żedievalХźingdomХofХHungaryХюджгХжеееБжиежбХedгХяánosХżгХчakХ–
Leslie S. Domonkos – James Ross Sweeney (Idyllwild, 1999)
źщźźХ тХ źodeksХ dyplomatycznyХ katedryХ krakowskiejХ цwгХ
WacławaХ [TheХ щiplomaticХ Codex of Wawel Cathedral of Saint
Wenceslaus] vol. 1. ed. ыranciszekХіiekosińskiХĐźrakówбХжнмйЮХ
źщżХтХźodeksХdyplomatycznyХżałopolskiХ[щiplomaticХшodexХofХ
Lesser Poland], vol. 2, ed. Franciszek PiekosińskiХetХ alгХĐźrakówбХ
1876)
KDMK = Kodeks dyplomatyczny miasta Krakowa [Diplomatic
Codex of the City of Cracow]бХedгХыranciszekХіiekosińskiХĐźrakówбХ
1879–1882)
KDW = Kodeks dyplomatyczny Wielkopolski, ed. Ignacy
Zakrzewski et al. ĐіoznańбХжнмм–1999)
żщъХ тХ żagyarХ diplomacziaiХ emlékekпХ żátyásХ királyХ korábólХ
[Hungarian Diplomatic Records: From the Era of King Matthias]
vol. юбХedгХюvánХNagyХ– цlbertХчгХNyáriХĐчudapestбХжнмкЮ
MGH = Monumenta Germaniae Historica (Hannoverae 1872–)
żźŻХтХżátyásХkirályХleveleiбХkülügyiХosztályХvolгХюХ[ŻettersХofХźingХ
Matthias, Category Diplomacy volгХ ю]Х edгХ VilmosХ ыraknóiХ Đчudaв
pest, 1893)
MPH = Monumenta Poloniae Historica, ed. August Bielowski
ĐŻwówбХжнлй–1893)
MPHSN= Monumenta Poloniae Historica. Series NovaбХĐźraków –
Warszawa, 1946–)
MVH = Monumenta Vaticana historia regnum Hungariae illus-
trantiaбХedгХVilmosХыraknóiХetХalгХĐчudapestбХжннй–)
7
Abbreviations
RA = Regesta regum stirpis Arpadianae critico-diplomatica. – Az
árpád-háziХ királyokХ okleveleinekХ kritikaiХ jegyzékeбХ ed. Imre
SzentpéteryХ– юvánХчorsaг (Budapest, 1923–1987)
RGIX тХŻesХregistresХdeХьrégoireХюX. Recueil des bulles de ce pape
publiéesХetХanalyséesХd’aprèsХlesХmanuscritsХoriginauxХduХVaticanХ
par Lucien Auvray, t. I–IV. (Paris, 1890–1955)
RPR = Regesta Pontificum Romanorum, ed. August Potthast. (Ber-
lin, 1874)
SRH = Scriptores Rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum
regumque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum" I–II. ed. Emericus
SzentpéteryХĐчudapestiniбХжоим-жоинЮХReprintпХedгХźornélХSzovákХ–
ŻászlóХVeszprémyХĐчudapestбХжоооЮ
SRS = Scriptores rerum Silesiacarum. Oder Sammlung Schlesischer
Geschichtschreiber, ed. Gustav Adolf Stenzel et al. (Breslau, 1835–
1902)
Thietmari Chronicon = Thietmari, Merseburgensis episcopi,
Chronicon, ed. żarianХZygmuntХяedlickiХĐіoznańбХжоки)
Thuróczy, шhronicaХ тХ яánosХ Thuróczy, Chronica Hungarorum. I.
TextusбХ edгХ ъrzsébetХ ьalántaiХ – ьyulaХ źristó, Bibliotheca
Scriptorum Medii Recentisque Aevorum. Series Nova vol. 7 (Bu-
dapest, 1985)
VMH = Vetera monumenta historica. Hungariam sacram
illustrantia. I–II, ed. Augustinus Theiner (Romae, 1859–1860)
ZщżХтХZbiórХdokumentówХmałopolskichХ[шollectionХofХtheХщocuв
ments from Lesser Poland], ed. StanisławХ źuraцХ – Irena
Sułkowska-źuraцХĐWrocławбХжолз–)
ZSO = Zsigmondkori oklevéltárХжинм-1425, I-XII [Cartulary of the
Sigismund period 1387–1424, I-Xю]ХedгХюvánХчorsaХ– NorbertХшгХTóthХ
– ъlemérХżályuszХetХalгХĐчudapestбХжокж–2013)
8
Dániel Bagi
University of Pécs
Preface
The present volume contains the edited version of papers de-
liveredХinХіécsХatХtheХturnХofХSeptemberХandХOctoberХзежкбХonХ
theХ occasionХ ofХ theХ “жst żeetingХ ofХ YoungХ żedievalists”Х
working on the Medieval History of Hungary and Poland.
The workshop was organized by the Institute of History of
theХUniversityХofХіécsб jointly with the Department of Medi-
evalХ HistoryХ atХ żarieХ шurieХ SkłodowskaХ UniversityХ ofХ Żuв
blin, and sponsored by the Embassy of the Republic of Po-
landХ inХ чudapestХ asХ wellХ asХ theХ “Historians’Х ьuild”Х ĐTörв
ténészcéhЮ atХtheХUniversityХofХіécs. This association, whose
membership consists of the present and former students of
history, is one of the most powerful student associations at
theХUniversityХofХіécsбХbasedХatХtheХюnstituteХofХHistoryг
The idea to organize a workshop for the upcoming gen-
eration of researchers dealing with Hungarian and Polish re-
lations in the Middle Ages, was motivated by many reasons.
I started my academic career, influenced by my teachers,
with a work on Polish-Hungarian historical relations, and in
1999 I defended my doctoral thesis written on the Polish pol-
icy of Louis I of Anjou. While preparing the dissertation and
after its defence I started thinking about further possibilities
of research on Polish-Hungarian relations in the Middle
Ages. It was clear to me, that Polish-Hungarian relations
have a huge literature, describing and analysing common
9
щánielХчagiпХіreface
historical events affecting the destiny of both countries.
However, I had to recognize and admit that this kind of re-
search activity could never grow up to establish itself as a
historiographical school, as it happened for example to the
Bohemian-Polish or German-Polish historical research on
medieval subjects. No doubt, the concept of parallelism of
Polish and Hungarian History was created not by historians
but the nobilities of these countries in the 16th and 17th centu-
ries. Poland and the aurea libertas of the Polish nobility
granted by royal privileges served as an example to follow
for the Hungarian noblemen of that age, since the Hungarian
nobility felt to be threatened both by the Ottoman Empire
and the Habsburg Monarchy; the first power occupied part
of the Kingdom of Hungary, while the latter withheld to pro-
vide that rights and privileges to the nobility which were
supposed to be necessary for noblemen, who identified
themselves with the nation itself. Therefore, the Polish, and
later the Polish-Lithuanian nobility became the ideal for their
Hungarian contemporaries which con-tributed to the crea-
tion of terms describing a similar, or indeed, a same histori-
cal development in case of Hungary and Poland. Terms like
conformitas, bona vicinitas, and first of all, the idea of the an-
termurale christianitatis influenced the thinking of many gen-
erations, and coloured not only the imagination of Hungar-
ian-Polish relations of the forthcoming centuries, but also
had a retrospective effect on the research of the medieval pe-
riod of Polish and Hungarian History. Consequently, terms
created later on, came to be used for earlier events, which
originally had nothing to do with these definitions. These
terms were to determine the priority research fields too, and
10
щánielХчagiпХіreface
thereby limited the choice of possible approaches to the topic
itself, the golden thread of which was related to my doctoral
thesis, namely the dynastic relations.
One of the possible ways to break out of this state of af-
fairs seems to be to place the issue of Hungarian-Polish his-
torical relations in a wider context and analyse them com-
paratively from a regional perspective, i.e. the East-Central-
European horizon. I must admit, this idea is not a brand new
one, and in post-war Europe it had two major schools. The
first one, created mostly by historians who were forced to
emigrate after or before World War II and represented by
many Hungarian, Polish, Czech and Slovak Historians, im-
agined East-Central-Europe on the pattern of their own his-
torical traditions such as the idea of antemurale, (strongly rep-
resented for example by Oskar Halecki), or the Great Mora-
vian Empire, and the latter tradition was inherited by the
modern Czech and Slovak Historiography. The second pat-
tern was conceived and developed primary by Marxists in
the fifties of the 20th century, who, by trying to avoid any na-
tionalХ narrativesбХ createdХ aХ specialХ termбХ “ъast-Central-Eu-
rope”бХcharacterizedХbyХso-called struc-tures, such as state-
building, structure and development of nobility etc. Despite
the Stalinist origins of this conception and the struggles of its
earliest representatives to make a sharp discontinuity in na-
tional histories, there can be no doubt that the latter ap-
proach is more useful. To analyse a historical region from
many comparable points of view may result in a new
knowledge about distinct subjects of research, as it has been
presented in the studies written in the last decades by Ger-
man, Polish, Czech, Slovak and Hungarian colleagues.
11
щánielХчagiпХіreface
So, I was very glad that beyond Hungarian and Polish
younger medievalists there were also colleagues present at
the workshop from other countries too, from Slovakia, Ger-
many or even France, working on topics placing the history
of Hungary and Poland in a wider, not just regional but even
European context, and showing new ways of approach to the
same topic, emphasizing thereby the the-matic program of
the workshop.
The papers, printed in this book, are of different in con-
tent and nature, but the scale is pretty wide: it ranges from
political history to iconography and ecclesiastical history, in-
cluding Medieval Latin philology, research on narrative
sources, history of art, and even economic history. Obvi-
ously, the texts are of different scholarly level. Some of them
are products of prospective or even defended doctoral the-
ses, others represent graduate or even undergraduate aca-
demic level, and others again have been written by research-
ers, academic colleagues with a longer professional experi-
ence. Despite all differences regarding length, the-matic va-
riety, diverse methodological approaches, all papers pre-
sented in the recent volume are supposed to be either a be-
ginning or a new step of individual research interests.
Finally, I would like to express my acknowledgment to
the co-editorsХofХtheХbookбХщrгХьáborХчarabásбХResearchХцsв
sistant at the Department of Medieval and Early Modern
HistoryбХandХZsoltХżátéбХіhщХstudentХatХtheХщepartmentХofХ
Contemporary History, who, despite their different research
interests, helped enthusiastically to find financial resources
to organize the meeting and cover edition costs. Without
their consilium and auxilium neither the workshop nor this
12
щánielХчagiпХіreface
volume could have been organized and edited. Last but not
least, I have to express my gratitude to the Faculty of Hu-
manitiesХofХtheХUniversityХofХіécsХforХhostingХtheХwork-shop
in the academic facilities.
13
Studies
Adrien Quéret-Podesta
University of Olomuc
іolandХandХHungaryХinХtheХшhronicleХofХцdéв
mar de Chabannes
Introduction
TheХ descriptionХ ofХ SaintХ цdalbertХ andХ чrunoХ ofХ їuerfurt’sХ
missions and of the events linked to them in the third book
of the Chronicle written in the eleventh century by цdémarХ
de Chabannes is one of the most problematic sources con-
cerning the oldest history of Poland and Hungary. For a long
time, this fragment was often considered as a twelfth century
interpolation and scholars gave little credit to this account;
moreover, the presence of numerous mistakes and confu-
sionsХinХцdémar's work also contributed to enhance this lack
of trust. However, we can see in the most recent history of
the scholar discussion on this text that its authenticity is now
widely recognized thanks to codilogical and paleographical
discoveries. We can also notice a significant rise of the inter-
est for this text: several scholars focussed on the episode of
theХdonationХofХшharlemagne’sХgoldenХthroneХtoХчolesławХюХ
of Poland by the emperor Otto юююХandХonХtheХ“storyХofХtheХ
lance”1 but other specialists also studied the description of
1See for instance źnutХьörichбХOttoХюююгХöffnetХdasХźarlsgrabХinХцachenгХ
ÜberlegungenХ zuХ HeiligenverehrungХ undХ TraditionsbildungбХ ьerdХ
Althoff, Ernst SchubertбХ HerrschaftsrepräsentationХ imХ ottonischenХ
SachsenбХ VorträgeХ undХ ыorschungenХ йлХ ĐSigmaringenХ жоонЮХ инж–430;
17
Hungaro-Polonica
Saint цdalbert’sХmissionгХHoweverбХцdémarХofХшhabannes’Х
presentation of Central Europe received less attention from
the historians, even though they often underlined the nu-
merous mistakes made by the chronicler.
In spite of this situation, an analysis of the information
concerning Poland and Hungary in the 31st chapter of the
thirdХ bookХ ofХ цdémarХ deХ шhabannes’Х шhronicleХ canХ bringХ
some interesting results, especially if we take into consider-
ation the origin of this author. He lived indeed very far from
the described areas, much further than Thietmar of Merse-
burg for instance; we shall then examine the influence of this
situation on his text, and his examination must be completed
by a reflexion on the nature of the sources he could have at
his disposal. In order to answer to those questions, the first
partХofХourХstudyХwillХanalyseХцdémar’sХhistoricalХandХgeoв
graphical description of Poland and Hungary at the turn of
the first and the second millennium A. D, whereas the sec-
ond part will try to determine the nature of the sources used
by the chronicler, a task which we will lead us to examine
carefullyХtheХlinkХbetweenХцdémar’sХchronicleХandХtheХnowХ
lost Liber de passione sancti Adalberti.
ŻüdgerХźörntgenбХTheХъmperorХandХhisХыriendsпХtheХOttonianХRealmХinХtheХ
Year 1000, in Europe around the Year 1000, ed. ігХUrbańczykХĐWarszawaбХ
2002) 465–йннрХ цndrzejХ іleszczyńskiбХ іolandХ asХ anХ allyХ ofХ theХ HolyХ
ottonianХ empireбХ inХ ъuropeХ aroundХ theХ YearХ жееебХ edгХ ігХ UrbańczykХ
(Warszawa, 2002) 409–426.
18
Hungaro-Polonica
I. Informations about Poland and Hungary in Adé-
mar’s Chronicle.
The fragment concerning Central Europe in the 31st chapter
ofХtheХthirdХbookХofХцdémarХdeХшhabannes’ХChronicle begins
with the presentation of the two mains protagonists: Saint
Adalbert et Bruno de Querfurt, who the author seems to con-
fuse with Bruno of Augsburg (and to a lesser extent with
чrunoХofХSaintХьallЮгХцdémar continues his parallel narration
since he describes the modest way of life of Adalbert, his con-
versation with the emperor Otto III and its decision to go the
polliana provincia; he relates also Bruno’sХ decisionХ toХ goХ toХ
mission to the province of White Hungary, which according
to our chronicler is called this way in order not to be con-
fused with Black Hungary, whose inhabitants are “of the
same dark colour as the Ethiopians”.
After that, our author focussed once more on Adalbert.
He mentions that the formerХчishopХofХіragueХĐforХцdémar:
archbishop) converted four provinces to faith: “Polliana”,
“Sclavania”, “Waredonia”, and “Cracovia”, and he also de-
scribes his martyrdom by the Pincenati. Our chronicler also
underlines the fact that his body was finally acquired by “the
king of Sclavania Botesclavus”, which must of course be iden-
tified with Boleslas the Brave, first king of Poland. Adémar
then returns to Bruno and ascribes to him the conversion of
Russia, the baptism of the king of Hungary Gouz/Stephen,
an associationХofХnameХwhichХprovesХthatХцdémar confused
SaintХStephenХofХHungaryХwithХhisХfatherХьézaгХHeХalsoХaddsХ
that in this occasion the Emperor Otto gave Stephen the
spear of Saint Maurice and a Nail of the Holy Cross. After
19
Hungaro-Polonica
thisбХ theХ chroniclerХ describesХ чruno’sХ missionХ toХ theХ Pin-
cenati, his martyrdom and the fate of his remains.
цdémar relates then the miraculous way in which Char-
lemagne’sХ tombХ wasХ foundХ byХ OttoХ theХ ThirdХ andХ reportsХ
that Otto sentХшharlemagne’sХьoldenХThroneХtoХtheХkingХBo-
tesclavus, in order to get a relic from Saint Adalbert; our
chronicler finally mentions that king Botesclavus accepted
this gift and sent him one arm of the former bishop of Pra-
gue.2
This short description of theХtextХprovesХthatХцdémar’sХ
knowledge of the territories located East of the Ottonians
Lands is quite weak. He does mention neither rivers nor
mountains from this area and presents all the political enti-
ties, be it duchy, kingdom or even lands inhabited by pagan
tribes, using the word “provintia”, which suggests a lack of
knowledge about the real nature of those territories. Moreo-
verбХhisХsentenceХaboutХчruno’sХconversionХofХRussiaХisХnotХ
clear and some researchers stated that our chronicler saw
Russia as a part of Hungary. His knowledge of the pagan
tribes is not better since he obviously confuses the Prussians
and the Petchenegs. We must finally underline that he men-
tionsХ onlyХ oneХ townбХ іragueбХ ĐinХ цdémar’sХ workпХ Pragra)
which he located “in provintia Bevehem” (Bohemia); we must
also note that Prague appears twice in that fragment, the first
time as a civitas, the second time as an urbs, which might sug-
gestХthatХцdémarХdidХnotХreallyХknowХhowХtoХdescribeХtheХ
capitalХcityХofХtheХіфemyslidХstate.
2 Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon III, 31.
20
Hungaro-Polonica
цdémar’s presentation of Hungary and Hungarian his-
tory contains some serious mistakes: he confuses Bruno of
Querfurt with two other ecclesiastics bearing the same name,
and gives to Stephen the name of his father (According to
ThietmarХofХżerseburgбХStephen’sХpagan name was Wajk).
However, his mention of the provintiae of White Hungary
and Black Hungary showsХthatХцdémarХknewХaboutХtheХexв
istence of the Black Hungarians, also mentioned in some of
чruno’sХofХїuerfurt’sХwritings3 but his attribution of a darker
colour to the Black Hungarians is not confirmed by those
sources. The existence of White Hungary is suggested main-
ly by later sources, which the chronicler could not have
knownбХandХalsoХindirectlyХbyХtheХnameХofХtheХcityХofХSzékéв
sfehérvárбХ whoseХ Latin name, Alba Regia, may have been
known to our chronicler.
цdémar’sХdescriptionХofХtheХlandsХchristianisedХbyХцdalв
bert is also fairly surprising. Indeed, the simultaneous appa-
rition of the terms “Polliana” –a deformation of “Polonia”,
which meansХ“іoland” since the beginning of the eleventh
century–, and ”Cracovia”, is quite problematic. Although we
can not formally exclude the possibility that he used the
word “Polliana” in a narrower meaning, namely “Greater Po-
land”, it seems more likely that our chronicler did not really
knew that Cracow area belonged to Polonia. The apparition
of the word “Sclavonia”, whose meaning changes frequently
in the medieval sources, is also difficult to conciliate with the
3See Epistola Brunonis ad Heinricum Regem and Vita Quinque Fratrum
Eremitarum [seu] Vita et Passio Benedicti et Johannis et sociorumque
suorumХ auctoreХ чrunoneХ їuerfurtensiХ edгХ яadwigaХ źarwasińskaбХ inпХ
MPHSN IV, part 3 (Warszawa, 1973)
21
Hungaro-Polonica
other terms, but the mention that its king was Botesclavus
suggest it refers to some area ruled by Boleslas the Brave.
However, the most enigmatic name mentioned by цdémar
in his list of the lands christianised by Adalbert is clearly the
third one, that is to say “Waredonia”: some researchers, like
the editors of the Chronicle in the MGH, suggested that it
could be distorted form of the word Wenedonia (land of the
Veneds/Vends=Western Slavs), whereas others try to link it
to the Varangians, but it is also possible that this word has
another meaning: it could indeed be linked with the river
Warta,4 which is mentioned inХThietmar’sХшhronicleХasХtheХ
limit of the territories for which Mieszko I had to pay a trib-
ute to the emperor.5
The list of lands christianised by Adalbert according to
цdémar of Chabannes remains thus a puzzle quite difficult
to solve, but we must add that geographical precision was
clearlyХnotХourХchronicler’sХpriorityХwhenХheХwroteХthisХlistгХ
As already underlined by several researchers, like for in-
stance the author of the introduction to the last edition of
цdémar’sХ шhronicleХ іascaleХ чourgain, the whole fragment
concerning Saint Adalbert and Bruno of Querfurt has a ra-
ther strong hagiographical character.6 In this context, the en-
vironment of the missionaries was by far less important that
their actions or the circumstances of their deaths. Therefore,
this enigmatic list must also be analysed from this point of
4 HypothesisХ proposedХ byХ щrХ RafałХ SimińskiХ duringХ an informal
discussionХinХхrodaХхląskaХtheХзйthХofХOctoberХзеенХafterХmyХpaperХforХtheХ
conferenceХЧTerraХcognitaЧХorganisedХbyХtheХuniversityХofХWrocławгХ
5 Thietmari Chronicon II, 19.
6 Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon, introduction LVIII.
22
Hungaro-Polonica
view; with this new angle, the most important element ap-
pears to be not the lands in themselves but their number,7
and we must keep in mind fact that our chronicler himself
clearly indicates this number (“[…] quattuor istas provincias”).
The number four has indeed a very strong symbolical mean-
ing associated with the idea of universality, and examples of
geographical description construction in four parts in order
to suggest universality are well known around the year 1000:
we can quote for instance the famous miniature of the Evan-
geliar of Reichenau, which displays an allegoric presentation
of (from left to right) Sclavinia, Germania, Gallia and Roma,8 or
the famous text of Gerbert of Aurillac containing the excla-
mation: “nostrum, nostrum est imperium Romanum!” and a list
mentioning Italia, Gallia, Germania andХ“the powerful king-
dom of the Scythes”.9 In this context the presence of four el-
ements in the list has to prove the importance of the Chris-
tianisation work of Adalbert and to present him as kind of
“Apostle of the Slavs”; however, the question of the real mean-
ing of the geographical terms was clearly far less important
for our chronicler.
7 A similar case of using numbers while giving informations of geographic
natureХ canХ beХ seenХ inХ цdémar’sХ descriptionХ ofХ юrelandпХ цdemariХ
Cabannensis Chronicon III, 55.
8 Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliotek, manuscript number 4453, folio 23 v.
This comparaison also appears in цdémarХdeХшhabannesбХшhronique, ed.
and transl. Y. Chauvin – G. Pon. (Turnhout, 2003) 237, note 305.
9 Lettres de Gerbert, ed. Julien Havet (Paris, 1889) 237.
23
Hungaro-Polonica
II. Adémar’s sources and the problem of the Liber de
passione sancti Adalberti.
Although Hungary and Poland are mainly the background
of the story of Adalbert and Bruno and the precise descrip-
tion of those areasХwasХnotХaХpriorityХforХцdémar, this fact in
itself does not explain all the confusions and inexact ele-
ments of this fragment. This situation is clearly linked with
the sources used by our chronicler, and a significant number
ofХ specialistsХ affirmХ thatХ цdémarХ wasХ informedХ orallyХ byХ
some foreign travellers: іascaleХчourgainХsuggestsХthatХцdéв
mar’sХinformatorХcouldХhaveХbeenХsomeХьermanХclerkбХwhoХ
would have also informed him about the foundation of the
bishopric of Bamberg in 1007,10 whereas Darius Baronas
states that it could have two Greek monks from the Sinai.11
However, we cannot exclude the possibility that цdémar’s
owned at least a part of this information to one participant
ofХtheХpilgrimageХofХtheХшountХofХцngoulêmeбХwhoХtravelledХ
to Holy Land via Bavaria and Hungary and whose greeting
in Hungary by the king Stephen is mentioned in one of the
lastХchaptersХofХцdémar’sХwork.12
The 31st chapterХofХtheХthirdХbookХцdemar’sХшhronicle is
also frequently mentioned as one of the works influenced by
theХsoХcalledХ“Liber de passione sancti Adalberti”Хquoted by the
chronicler Gallus Anonymus in his description of the encoun-
ter of Gniezno between Otto the Third and Boleslas the
10 Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon, introduction LVII–LVIII and LXIX.
11 Darius Baronas, The year 1009: St Bruno of Querfurt between Poland
and Rus, Journal of Mediaeval history 34 (2008) 13.
12 Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon III, 65.
24
Hungaro-Polonica
Brave.13 We can indeed find some similarities between the
textХofХцdémarХand the work of the Gallus Anonymus,14 spe-
cially concerning the exchange of gifts between the emperor
and the Central European rulers:
Ademari Cabannensis Gallus Anonymus,
Chronicon, III, 31 Chronica sive gesta ducum
et principium Polonorum,
I, 6
…regnum ei liberrime habere …Х et pro vexillo triumphali
permisit, clavum
dans ei licentiam ferre lanceam ei de cruce domini cum lancea
sacram sancti
ubique, sicut imperatori mos Mauritii dono dedit, pro
est, et quibus illi
reliquias ex clavis Domini et Bolizlauus sancti Adalberti
lanceam brachium
sancti Mauricii ei concessit in Redonavit.
propria
lancea.
[…]
Solium eius aureum imperator
Oto
direxit regi Botisclavo pro
reliquiis
13 […]Х sicut in libro de passione martiris potest propensius inveniri. – Galli
Anonymi Chronicae et Gesta ducum sive principum Polonorum, ed. K.
żaleczyńskiбХinХżіHSNХз ĐźrakówбХжокзЮ I, 6.
14 SeeХ forХ instanceХ щánielХ чagiбХ źrólowieХ węgierscyХ wХ źroniceХ ьallaХ
Anonima [Hungarian Kings in The Chronicle of the Gallus Anonymus]
ĐźrakówбХ зеенЮХ мм–нйХ ĐinХ HungarianХ щánielХ чagiбХ ьallusХ цnonymusХ ésХ
żagyarországХ[TheХьallusХцnonymusХandХHungary]ХĐчudapestбХзеекЮЮХ
25
Hungaro-Polonica
sancti Adalberti martiris. Rex
autem
Botisclavus, accepto dono,
misit
imperatori brachium de corpore
eiusdem sancti…
The comparison of those two texts shows two main analo-
gies, but also two important differences.
The first analogy is of course the fact that spear by the
Emperor is presented by both authors as the spear of Saint
Maurice and that the spear came with a nail from the Holy
cross; the second one is the mention by both texts that
Boleslas the Brave gave an arm of Adalbert to the emperor.
The first main difference is the identity of the person who
receivesХtheХspearХgivenХbyХtheХъmperorпХforХцdémarбХitХwasХ
Saint Stephen of Hungary, whereas the Gallus Anonymus
states that it was Boleslas the Brave. The second difference,
which is linked to the first, concerns the nature of the gift
given by the Emperor to Boleslas the Brave: according to
цdémarбХtheХіiastХrulerХreceivedХthe golden throne of Char-
lemagne but the Gallus Anonymus mentions that the gift
given to Boleslas was the spear of Saint Maurice.
The presence in both chronicles of the same description
of the spear and of the mention that Boleslas gave the arm of
Saint Adalbert to the Emperor helps us to determinate the
origin of those information: since they both appear only in
our two chronicles, they probably come from the only source
which seems to have been used by both authors, namely the
so-called Liber de passione sancti Adalberti, which is now lost
26
Hungaro-Polonica
butХwhoseХexistenceХandХuseХbyХцdémarХdeХшhabannesХandХ
the Gallus Anonymus are accepted by a majority of research-
ers. The work of the anonymous chronicler being more reli-
ableХthatХцdémar’sХchronicleХinХthatХmatterбХweХcanХthenХconв
clude that this in all likelihood, the lost Liber de Passione con-
tained a description of the encounter between Boleslas and
Otto the Third during which the Polish ruler gave the arm of
Adalbert to the emperor who gave him a spear, which was
probably described in this lost source as the spear of Saint
Maurice with the nail of the Holy Cross.
However, this attempt of reconstitution does not really
explainХwhyХцdémar wrote that the Emperor gave the spear
to Saint Stephen and the Golden throne of Charlemagne to
Boleslas. In his monography on the chronicle of the Gallus
Anonymus, щánielХчagiХwroteХthatХitХisХunlikelyХtheХLiber de
passione described the gift of both a Polish and a Hungarian
spear but he adds that theoretically this possibility cannot be
ruled out and he underlines that since we do not know the
text of the Liber de passione, we can only make suppositions15.
With those methodological warnings in mind, I would like
to present here a possible scenario for the explanation of the
differencesХbetweenХtheХfragmentХwrittenХbyХцdémar and its
counterpart into Gallus’s Chronicle.
As already mentioned above, in the chapter 65 of his last
bookбХцdémarХdescribesХtheХpilgrimageХofХtheХшountХofХцnв
goulêmeХinХжезлбХandХmentionsХthatХheХwasХgreetedХinХHunв
gary by the king Stephen.16 It is then possibleХthatХцdémarХ
15щánielХчagiбХźrólowieХwęgierscyбХнигХ
16“Stephanus rex Ungriae cum omni honore eum suscepit et muneribus ditavit.”Х
– Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon III, 65.
27
Hungaro-Polonica
was informed by one member of the retinue of the Count,
who stopped at Limoges (moreover, we shall also keep in
mindХ thatХ цdemarХ hasХ beenХ monkХ atХ SaintХ шybardХ d’цnв
goulêmeХandХhadХcloseХtiesХwithХtownЮ,17 that the Hungarian
king had a spear as an insigne of power, a fact that is clearly
provenХ byХ SaintХ Stephen’sХ portrayalХ onХ theХ casula of
SzékesfehérvárбХ whichХ howeverХ wasХ embroideredХ onlyХ inХ
1031,18 and by the denary bearing the inscription LANCEA
REGIS.19 OnХtheХotherХhandбХцdémar probably knew the ac-
count of the Liber de passione concerning the encounter be-
tween Otto the third and Boleslas the Brave, although it is
likely his source of knowledge came from oral transmission,
perhaps from the same person that would have informed
him about the foundation of the bishopric of Bamberg, alt-
hough it is not certain. We can then propose the hypothesis
that our chronicler saw an apparent contra-diction in those
two accounts and try to correct it by attributing the spear
given to Saint Stephen of Hungary; However this would
have let Boleslas without present and this could explain why
17 “Divertit per Lemovicam revertens […]” – Ademari Cabannensis
Chronicon III, 65.
18 ÉvaХźovácsбХ„Die Kasel von StuhlweiӥenburgХĐSzékesfehérvarЮХundХdieХ
Bamberger Paramente”, Europas Mitte um 1000, ed. A. Wieczorek – H.
Hinz, Tome 2, (Stuttgart, 2000) 640–651.
19 On this topic see ŻászlóХźovács ”Die Heilige Lanze Ungarns”, Europas
Mitte um 1000, ed. A. Wieczorek – H. Hinz, Tome 2 (Stuttgart, 2000) 902–
903; Marek Dulinicz, ”ŻanceaХ sacraгХ WędrówkaХ ideiХ iХ przedmiotów”
[ŻanceaХsacraгХTheХwanderingХofХideasХandХobjects]бХinХWędrówkiХrzeczy i
ideiХwХцredniowieczuХ[TheХwanderingsХofХthingsХandХideasХinХtheХżiddleХ
цges]бХ edгХ SгХ żoѐdziochХ ĐWrocławбХ зеей) 71–72, 74; StanisławХ
Suchodolski, ”WłoczniaХцwiętegoХStefana” [The Spear of Saint Stephen],
Kwartalnik historyczny CXII (2005) 91–107.
28
Hungaro-Polonica
цdémar ascribed him the throne of Charlemagne, an ele-
mentХwhichХappearsХonlyХinХцdémar’sХchronicleХbutХwhichХ
is obviously based on the opening of Charlemagne by Otto
the third, a fact documented by Thietmar’sХшhronicle,20 and
thatХцdémar could have heard of from one his sources.
III. Conclusion
As the present communication aimed to show, the analysis
of the information concerning Poland and Hungary given in
the 31st chapterХ ofХ theХ thirdХ bookХ ofХ цdémar’sХ Chronicle in
order to determine their sources is a very difficult task, not
only because of the numerous mistakes contained in this
fragmentбХbutХalsoХofХitsХnatureХandХofХitsХauthor’sХgoalsгХTheХ
rather marked hagiographical dimension of this chapter has
been indeed stressedХbyХsomeХspecialistsХofХцdémar’sХworksХ
and the remarks made above lead us to confirm this view.
The tone of this fragment is of course to be put in relationship
with the use of a hagiographical source such as the so-called
Liber de Passione Sancti Adalberti by our chronicler, although
he had probably only an indirect access to this text. It is also
likelyХthatХцdémar had more than one source of information
about the lands in which Saint Adalbert and Bruno of Quer-
furt led their missions around the yearХ жееерХ thisХ “doubleХ
channel” would explains some particularities of the text, like
for instance the differences betweenХцdémar‘sХversionХofХtheХ
“storyХ ofХ theХ spear” and the version of this event in the
20 Thietmari Chronicon IV, 29.
29
Hungaro-Polonica
chronicle of the Gallus Anonymus, but this seducing hypoth-
esis does not explain all the singularities of this fragment.
Bibliography
Sources
Editions and traductions of Adémar’s Chronicle
Ademari Cabannensis Chronicon, ed. Pascale Bourgain.
Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis vol. 129 (Turnhout,
1999).
цdémar de Chabannes, Chronique, ed. Yves Chauvin – Georges Pon,
(Turnhout, 2003).
Other written sources:
ъpistolaХчrunonisХadХHeinricumХRegemбХedгХяadwigaХźarwasińskaбХżonв
umenta Poloniae Historica Nova Serie, Volume IV, part 3, (Warsaw, 1973).
Galli Anonymi Chronicae et Gesta ducum sive principum Polonorum, ed.
źarolХżaleczyńskiбХMonumenta Poloniae Historica Nova Serie,, Volume
II, (Cracow, 1952).
Lettres de Gerbert, ed. Julien Havet, (Paris, 1889).
Thietmari, Merseburgensis episcopi, Chronicon, ed. Marian Zygmunt Jed-
lickiбХĐіoznańбХжокиЮ.
Vita Quinque Fratrum Eremitarum [seu] Vita et Passio Benedicti et Johan-
nis et sociorumque suorum auctore Brunone Querfurtensi, ed. Jadwiga
źarwasińskaбХżonumentaХіoloniaeХHistoricaХNovaХSerieбХVolumeХюVбХpartХ
3, (Warsaw, 1973).
30
Hungaro-Polonica
Other sources:
Denary with the inscription LANCEA REGISпХŻajosХHúszarбХMünzkatalog
Ungarn von 1000 bis heute, (Munich 1979) 31, number 2.
Miniature of the Evangeliar of Reichenau with the allegorical
representation of Sclavinia, Germania, Gallia and Roma: Munich, Bayerische
Staatsbibliotek, manuscript number 4453, folio 23 v.
Secondary literature
щánielХчagiбХźrólowieХwęgierscyХwХźroniceХьallaХцnonima [Hungarian
Kings in The Chronicle of the Gallus Anonymus], (źraków, 2008).
31
Marta Graczyńska
Jagellonian University, Cracow
The Cathedrals – The Problem of Place and
Space:
Origins and Reasons of their Existence in Cen-
tral Europe
(Hungary, Bohemia and Poland)
One of the most important and fundamental places related
to the Christian liturgy are cathedrals. Since the beginning of
Christianity, due to their function, cathedrals have played an
essential role for religious communities. Each cathedral was
reserve of a bishop – the only person who was entitled to
administer the sacraments of baptism, marriage, and confir-
mationгХчishops’ХdutiesХalsoХincludedХtheХadministrationХofХ
the priesthood sacrament and taking a care of the lower
clergy. Apart from the ecclesiastical responsibilities, a bishop
also had legislative duties – his authority extended over all
of the faithful within his diocese.1 And thus it is explained
why that the Greek term ἐӳίӶκӲӳӲӵХĐbishopЮХmeansХalsoпХaХ
1 югeгХяerzyХStrzelczykбХ“NiektóreХproblemyХchrystianizacjiХъuropyХwczes -
noцredniowiecznej”Х[Christianization of Europe. Selected Issues], in Nihil
superХ fluumХ esseгХ іraceХ zХ dziejówХ цredniowieczaХ ofiarowaneХ profгХ ягХ
źrzyђaniakowej, ed. J. Strzelczyk – ягХ щoboszХ ĐіoznańбХ зеееЮХ лж–84;
щariuszХцndrzejХSikorskiбХ„żodelХmisjiХzaХczasówХцwгХчrunona”Х[Type of
Missionary Work in St. Brouno Days], in хwiętyХчrunonгХPatron lokalny
czyХ symbolХjednoцciХ ъuropyХ iХ powszechnoцciХ źoцciołaбХ edгХ A. Kopiczko
(Olsztyn, 2009) 51–73.
33
Hungaro-Polonica
guardian, protector, supervisor. To become a bishop one had
to be at least thirty years old.2 And as mentioned above, the
place associated with a bishop was a cathedral (Greek:
κӤθέδӴӤЮг3 In a literal translation, a bishop wasХ‘sittingХonХtheХ
cathedral’Х– a term deriving from the fact that originally the
worldХ‘cathedral’ХreferredХonlyХtoХaХchairХorХaХthroneХraisedХ
above floor level. Gradually, with time, the term was trans-
ferred to the building in which the chair/throne was located.
We can suppose that during the development and growth of
Christianity, in the areas that used to belong to the Roman
Empire, bishops and the places of their governance were one
of the most important elements of the social order.
The 7th century Church organisation, in the 10th century
expanded further East - to the newly Christianised areas of
Hungary, Bohemia, and Poland. The three states had been
undergoing some rapid social, cultural, and political changes
already since the mid-9th century, due to both external and
internal impulses, pressures, and forces. One of dynamic fac-
tors was the introduction of Christianity – an element that
left a very distinctive mark on these countries. Dukes of the
ruling dynasties in these states. i.e. Arpads, Premyslids, and
Piasts, adopted Christianity and opened their countries to
transformation. The religious change required the creation
2 The exception was St Adalbert for political reasons, run by i.e. Gerard
ŻabudaбХ хwietyХ WojciechгХ Biskup - żęczennikгХ іatronХ іolskiбХ шzechХ iХ
WęgierХ[StХцdalbertгХTheХчishopХ- Martyr. Patron of Poland, Bohemia and
Hungary] ĐWrocławбХзеееЮгХ
3 żonicaХшhielliniХNariбХ“шathedra”бХinХъncyclopediaХofХtheХżiddleХцgesбХ
ed. A. Vauchez – B. Dobson – M. Lapidge (Cambridge, 2000) 257–258. And
particularly with quoted written sources Jan Frederik Niermeyer, Mediae
latinitatis lexicon minus. Abbreviariones at index fontum (Leiden – New
York – źölnбХжоомЮХжкнг
34
Hungaro-Polonica
of suitable and right conditions for conducting evangelisa-
tionХofХtheХsubjectedХtoХtheХdukes’ХpeoplesбХwhichХincludedХ
creating forХeachХareaХtheХarchbishop’sХmetropolisХandХdioв
ceses.
The creation of sovereign Church organizations in the Pi-
astsХandХцrpads’ХstatesХafterХtheХyearХжеееХsignificantlyХinfluв
enced the prestige of the rulers – and thus it also changed the
meaning of the rule itself. The changes occurred also in
places chosen as the seats of bishops; as these became centres
for the most important elements of power at that time – sec-
ular, belonging to a duke or a king; and religious, tied with
the office of a bishop.4
The described process was reflected in the architectural
forms of palatia, episcopia, and churches. Remains of bishops
andХdukes’ХpalacesХĐpalatia and episcopia) either are not pre-
served or have not been discovered yet;5 and thus, the struc-
tures available for study (archaeology-wise and by histori-
ans of art) are the churches. Importantly, often-times the
churches consisted not only of single buildings, but formed
so called cathedral groups/complexes – a baptistery and
4 Gerard Labuda, “ZakresХuprawnieńХwładczychХnadХźoцciołemХpolskimХ
nadanymХ przezХ OttonaХ юююХ księciuХ чolesławowiХ шhrobremuХ wХ rгХ жеее”бХ
[The Scope of Governmental Authority over the Polish Church
Organization given by Otto III to Duke Boleslaw the Brave in the Year
1000], Rocznik Historyczny 64 (1998) 7–12.
5 OrХwasХjustХdisoveredХasХinХіoznańХ‘щąbrówka’ХіallatiumбХrunХbyХHannaХ
źočka-źrenzбХ “іalatiaХ wczesnopiastowskie”бХ inХ хredniowiecze w
rozjaцnieniuбХ[іalatiaХinХtheХъarlyХіiastХъraХinХшlarifyХtheХżiddleХцges]ХedгХ
źгХSkupieńskiХĐWarszawaбХзежеЮХжжо–жизрХHannaХźočka-źrenzбХіoznańХinХ
theХжеthХшenturyХĐіoznańбХзежжЮг
35
Hungaro-Polonica
smaller churches concentrated around a Canonical cathe-
dral.6
The founders of the churches were in general secular rul-
ers – they were also responsible for the maintenance of these
religious buildings.7 For them the cathedrals were not only
the seats for bishopric responsibilities and authority, but also
and in fact mainly they were for the rules the places for os-
tentation and for legitimating and of their secular power.8
In the main, the churches were erected within relatively
narrow span of time after setting the metropolis. But as indi-
cated by archaeological research, the establishment of a bish-
opric was not synonymous in time with the commencement
of its church construction (i.e. of a cathedral). Such infor-
mation comes from the dating of archaeological remains (sci-
entific absolute dating, stratigraphy, and ceramic pottery da-
ting) when compared with written sources (for instance: in-
formation about a date of the consecration of a church or of
its main altar).9
It is worth pointing out here an important factor strongly
influencing the available for the study information. Analyses
of cathedrals centres history show that, due to for instance a
6 яacquesХThiébautбХ“шathedral”бХinХъncyclopediaХofХtheХżiddleХцgesбХed.
A. Vauchez – B. Dobson – M. Lapidge (Cambridge, 2000) 258–259.
7 Sible de Blaauw, Cathedral in The Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages
Vol. I, ed. R. E. Bjork (Oxford, 2010) 353.
8 How cathedrals were important for ostentation the secular power have
beenХshowХbyХexampleХofХHradХandХVyšehradХinХіragueбХrunХbyХцndrzejХ
іleszczyńskiбХ іrzestrzeńХ iХ politykaгХ StudiumХ rezydencjiХ władcyХ
wczeцniejszegoХ цredniowieczaгХ іrzykładХ czeskiegoХ WyszehraduбХ [Space
and Politics. Early Medieval Rulers Residence. Example of the Czech
Vysegrad. Case Study] (Lublin, 2000).
9 I.e. Fontes rerum Bohemicarum vol. II, ed. Josef Emler (Praha, 1874) 110–
111, 138.
36
Hungaro-Polonica
fire and wars, the religious buildings were often subjected to
considerable destructions. But their very important function
– aХvisibleХsignХofХaХruler’sХsovereignty – influenced decisions
of their sometimes repetitive reconstruction and rebuilding.
And thus appeared stratigraphical architectural complexes,
with phases of the same building erected above and on re-
mains of the previous ones. This is also one of the reasons
why archaeological excavation in cathedrals are truly diffi-
cult to conduct and frequently the research is not possible.
The negative excavation conditions naturally contribute to
sometimes uncertain and inconclusive recognition and inter-
pretation of the examined remains.
The independent province of Church organisation in the
Arpads state was created in the year 1001. Before this mo-
ment, between 997 and 1001, the bishopric in Veszprem was
created. It is assumed it have been a part of the archbishopric
of Salzburg.10
On the basis of establishing archbishopric in Esztergom
(1001) a network of subordinate bishoprics with the seats in
VeszprémбХьyрrбХъgerХwasХformedгХцfterХжееоХnextХbishopв
rics seats were created, in Kalocsa (as a titular archbishopric
till the beginning of the 1160'sЮбХ ьyрrбХ іécsбХ ъgerХ wasХ
formed.11
10 ŻászlóХ źosztaбХ ЧХ StateХ іowerХ andХ ъcclesiasticalХ SystemХ inХ ъleventhХ
Century Hungary (An Outline to the Dynamics of the Development of
Hungarian Christian Church)", in "In my spirit and thought I remained a
European of Hungarian origin". Medieval Historical Studies in Memory
of Zoltan J. Kosztolnyik, ed. I. Petrovics – SгХ ŻгХ TóthХ – E. A. Congdon,
(Szeged 2000) 67–78.
11 ŻászlóХKoszta, ъsztergomХésХźalocsaХkapcsolataХaХжж–жзгХszázadbanгХĐцzХ
egységesХ magyarХ egyháztartományХ megosztásaЮХ [TheХ Relation of
Esztergom and Kalocsa. The Division of the Uniform Hungarian
37
Hungaro-Polonica
The network structure became denser since the 1040s,
withХtheХfoundingХofХbishopricsХinХцlbaХюuliaбХчiharбХшsanádбХ
VácбХNitraбХandХbetweenХженм–1091 in Zagreb, the last bish-
opric seat was created.
The forms of cathedrals erected in theses centres are
known mainly from the results of archaeological excavation
that started at the beginning of the 19th century and some of
these still carry on till nowadays.12 The archaeological work
resulted in uncovering remains of cathedrals in Esztergom,
źalocsaбХVeszprémбХіécsбХъgerбХцlbaХюuliaбХandХVácХĐdatedХtoХ
11th century). Remains of other cathedrals – as they are
known to exist from written and from iconographic sources
– haveХnotХyetХbeenХuncoveredХĐiгeгХшsanádЮгХъvenХthough,
the archaeological excavations revealed only fragments of
the architectural complexes, we are still able to establish in
approximation the original form of the early-Arpads cathe-
drals.13 They were three-aisles basilicas, but excluding the
case of Kalocsa where the numbers of aisles are still under
discussion.14 The forms of their eastern parts can be divided
into two types. The first had all three naves ended with apses
ĐasХinХъsztergomбХъgerбХandХprobablyХalsoХinХVác15). In this
Ecclesiastical Province], in Lux Pannonie. ъsztergomХ azХ ezerХ évesХ
kulturálisХmetropolisбХedгХюгХHorváthХĐъsztergomХзеежЮХкм–63.
12 чélaХ ZsoltХ SzakácsбХ “TheХ ResearchХ onХ RomansequeХ цrchitectureХ inХ
HungaryпХцХшriticalХOverviewХofХtheХŻastХTwentyХYears”бХцrteХżedievaleХ
4 (2005) 31–44.
13 чélaХZsoltХSzakácsбХ“шathedralsХinХtheХъarly XIIIth шenturyХinХHungary”бХ
in Secolul al XIII-leaгХіeХżeleagurileХŻocuiteХdeХшătreХRomâniбХedгХцгХцгХ
Rusu (Cluj-Napoca, 2006) 179–205.
14 Current, unpublished fieldwork results by Gergely чuzásг
15 ьergelyХ чuzásбХ “іestХ megyeХ középkoriХ művészetiХ emlékei”Х [The
Medieval Art Remains of Pest County], in іestХmegyeХmonográfiájaХюдз,
ed. A. Zsoldos (Budapest, 2001) 223–254.
38
Hungaro-Polonica
caseХtheХapses’ХwallsХwere transferring each other smoothly
without any faults and distinctions in their course. Each
apse’sХdiameterХwasХequalХtoХitsХadjacentХnave’sХwidthгХюnХtheХ
central nave there was also a choir – elevated a few steps
above the level of the church; this part was probably also
separated from the flanking aisles. In the second type (build-
ingsХinХVeszprémбХźalocsaбХіécsХ– 1st Phase, and Alba Iulia)
only the main nave ended with an apse with the diameter
equalХ toХ theХ nave’sХ widthгХ TheХ sideХ navesХ probablyХ endedХ
with straight walls. Because of the considerable destruction
of the described buildings, at this stage of the archaeological
research it is not possible to establish the internal spatial out-
lines of their choirs. The bodies of the naves all of the basili-
cas were simple, without a transept or towers. The western
parts of the early-цprads’Х cathedralsХ alsoХ representedХ twoХ
main formal types.16 TheyХhadХeitherХstraightбХclosedХfaçadesХ
ĐasХinХVeszprémбХіécsбХцlbaХюuliaбХъgerЮХorХexpandedХwestв
works (as in Kalocsa, EsztergomбХandХVácЮгХTheХspatialХoutв
lineХofХtheХwestworksХhadХvariousХformsгХюnХVácХinХtheХwestв
ern part, on the axis of the main nave there was a closed hall
crypt, visible as an apse in the external walls. Due to consid-
erable destruction of the church, we cannot tell if the apse
was flanked by a pair of towers. Another architectural design
was applied in Kalocsa. But for this foundation there are cur-
rently two interpretations of the uncovered remains. Re-
searchers conclude that in this place the western part con-
sisted either of a pair of towers, or with two pairs of towers.
Due to the above mentioned destruction of the remains, it is
16югХeгХчélaХZsoltХSzakácsбХ“WesternХшomplexХofХHungarianХшhurchesХofХ
theХъarlyХъleventhХшentury”бХHortusХцrteХżedievaleХиХĐжоомЮХжйо–163.
39
Hungaro-Polonica
not yet possible to reconstruct the internal outline of the ca-
thedral at Kalocsa.17
The Bohemian (Czech) diocese had already been formed
by the end of the 10th century. But throughout the whole of
the 11th century it was not an independent province of the
Church. The seat of the bishop was located in Prague. The
erectedХbuildingХthatХwasХtoХbeХtheХbishop’sХchurchбХalsoХhadХ
the three-aisled basilica form. Both parts (western and east-
ern) of the cathedral had an expanded formal spatial outline.
The aisles ended with apses. The central nave ended with a
choir with an eastwards extending presbytery that ended
with an apse – additionally, this part of the building was el-
evated above the floor level of church by a hall crypt (located
underneath the nave). The western part of the church con-
sisted of a transept and a western choir, which ended with
anХapseХandХwasХelevatedХaboveХtheХnaves’Хlevel. Also, in this
part of the church had towers, located on the eastern side of
the transept.18
The independent province of the Church organisation in
the lands ruled by the Piast Dynasty was an outcome of the
Gniezno Meeting in the year 1000. Due to the set up agree-
ment established there, the seat of the archdiocese became
ьnieznoХwithХsubjectedХdiocesesХinХźrakówбХźołobrzegбХandХ
17 Imre Henszlmann, Die Grabungen des Erzbischofs von Kalocsa Dr.
Ludwig Haynald (Leipzig, 1873).
18 яanХ ыrolíkХ – яanaХ żaфikova-źubkováХ – ъliškaХ RůžičkováХ – цntonínХ
ZemanбХ “NejstaršíХ sakrálníХ architekturaХ іražskéhoХ hraduгХ VýpověЬХ
archeologickýchХpramenů”Х[The Oldest Religious Architecture of Prague
Castle. Termination of Archaeological Sources], Castrum Pragense 3
(2000) 203–207, 289–353.
40
Hungaro-Polonica
WrocławбХwhileХtheХbishopricХofХіoznańХwasХtemporarilyХexв
emptedХfromХьniezno’sХjurisdictionг19 Then, by the end of the
11th centuryбХaХbishopricХinХіłockХwasХcreatedгХ
The results of archaeological research at most of the
above listed places, the cathedrals were erected soon after
theХbishopsХwereХappointedгХTheХsettingХinХźołobrzegХisХstillХ
unknown, while interpretation of architectural remains un-
coveredХinХWrocławХraisesХnumerousХquestionsХandХcontroв
versies.20 Unfortunately, the centres with uncovered remains
of cathedrals have them preserved in conditions, which do
not allow for a clear reconstruction of their plans. The cathe-
dralsХinХьnieznoХandХinХźrakówХareХknownХonlyХfromХveryХ
fragmentary remains. In Gniezno the uncovered part of the
cathedral contains only an outline of a three-aisled eastern
choir – it allows us to establish only the width of the build-
ingгХюnХźrakówХtheХsurvivingХremainsХareХsoХpoorХthatХtheyХ
allow only for formulation of very hypothetical ideas about
theХcathedral’sХformг The building was supposed be a three-
19 югeгХ ьerardХ ŻabudaбХ “цspektyХ polityczneХ iХ koцcielneХ tzwгХ „zjazduХ
gnieѐnieńskiego””Х [іoliticalХ andХ ъcclesiasticalХ цspectsХ of the so called
“шongressХofХьniezno”], in Ziemie polskie w X wieku i ich znaczenie w
kształtowaniuХ sięХ nowejХ mapyХ ъuropuбХ edгХ HгХ SamsonowiczХ ĐźrakówбХ
2000) жмрХ RomanХ żichałowskiбХ ZjazdХ ьnieѐnieńskiгХ ReligijneХ przesłankiХ
powstaniaХ цrcybiskupstwaХ ьnieѐnieńskiego [Congress of Gniezno.
Religious Premises for the Creation of the Archdiocese of Gniezno]
ĐWrocławбХ зеекЮрХ Johannes Fried, Otto III. und Boleslaw Chrobry. Das
Widmungsbild des Aachener Evangeliars, der "Akt von Gnesen" und das
früheХpolnischeХundХungarischeХźönigtum (Stuttgart, 2001) 86–124.
20 іawełХRzeѐnikХ– цdamХёurekбХ“WrocławХokołoХrokuХжеее”Х[WrocławХ
around the Year 1000], in іolskaХ naХ pełomieХ юХ iХ ююХ tysiącleciaбХ edгХ SzгХ
SkibińskiХ ĐіoznańбХ зеежЮХ иик–352, 346; Dariusz Andrzej Sikorski,
WczesnopiastowskaХ architekturaХ sakralnaХ ĐjakoХ ѐródłoХ historyczneХ doХ
dziejówХźoцciołaХwХіolsceЮХ[Early Piast Sacral Architecture (as a Source
for History of the Church in PolandЮ]ХĐіoznańбХзежзЮХжен–112.
41
Hungaro-Polonica
aisled, transept basilica with the eastern choir ending with
three apses.
There is a different situation in regards to the uncovered
remainsХofХtheХcathedralХatХіoznańгХцfterХtheХlastХverificationХ
research the form of the cathedral was outlined very accu-
rately.21 It was a three-aisled basilica with an expanded for-
mal and spatial structure of both the western and eastern
parts. In the eastern part there was a low transept with an
elevated choir in the central part. The choir was above a
crypt and ended with an apse. The western structure also
had a low transept. The uncovered remains allow for recon-
struction of the spatial outline in two ways. Either the west-
work had a centrally placed tower with a gallery (empore), or
it the westwork was without any tower at all. In the central
part of the body of the nave there was the main altar of an
expanded architectural form.
The early-Piasts cathedrals were negatively impacted by
the events of the late 1030s. The weakening of the central
power and a wave of social unrest destabilised the Church
organisation. On the top of that, Bretislaus I, the Premyslid
Duke of Bohemia took advantage of the unstable situation
byХ invadingХ andХ lootingХ partsХ ofХ theХ іiasts’Х stateгХ TheХ deв
stroyed, during the events, seats of bishops in Gniezno, Poz-
nańбХandХinХWrocławХwereХrestoredХonlyХinХtheХsecondХhalfХ
of the 11th century. Even though the bishopric buildings in
źrakówХwereХnotХdamagedХduringХtheХeventsбХtheyХwereХstillХ
21Aneta Bukowska, Najstarsza katedra w Poznaniu. Problem formy i jej
genezyХwХkontekцcieХarchitekturyХokołoХrokuХжеееХ[TheХOldestХшathedralХ
in іoznańгХ The Problem of the Form and its Origin in the Context of
Architecture around the Year 1000]ХĐźrakówбХзежиЮг
42
Hungaro-Polonica
also rebuilt at that time. The newly constructed complexes
were three-aisled basilicas - and that was the only resem-
blance to the former buildings, because each of the cathe-
drals used different formal and spatial settings. The cathe-
dral in Gniezno had the plan of transleptless basilica, its east-
ern part ended with apses. The central part of the choir con-
sisted of an eastwards extending presbytery, which was
probably risen a few steps above the church floor level. In
the central part of the nave a structure of the confession of St
Adalbert (St Wojciech) was constructed. This structure was
slightly rebuilt at the end of the 11th century – its western part
of expanded into a two-towered formation. The main form
ofХtheХcathedralХinХіoznańХdidХnotХundergoХsuchХconsideraв
ble changes. Most likely, the western part was rebuilt and
expanded. Certainly this phase of the building had a tower
structure with a gallery (empore) – and thus the basilica be-
came a double-choired structure.
цsХ mentionedХ aboveбХ theХ cathedralХ inХ źrakówХ underв
went changes as well. A section of the old eastern part was
used in the new building. The central part changed, as a
choir built on a crypt was placed there. The western part was
completely remodelled. In this phase, it consisted of a choir
that was elevated on a hall-crypt and was flanked by porches
and towers. Thus, also this cathedral took the form of a dou-
ble-choired basilica. Also, from the west an atrium adhered
to the complex.
In the second half of the 11th century the cathedral in
іłock was constructed. Current information about the build-
ing does not allow for a complete reconstruction, but its out-
look can be outlined. It was probably a three-aisled, transept
43
Hungaro-Polonica
basilica. The transept arms and the nave ended with apses
with slightly narrower diameters than the width of the naves
and side aisles. In such a way both in the external and inter-
nal wall setoffs appeared. The western part of the building is
not known at all.22
As we can see from the above presented formal analysis
of the 11th century cathedrals, they presented one architec-
tural type, but with variants. All architectural foundations
were three-aisled basilicas. Most of those built in the early-
Arpads period are of simple plan. Only in Kolacsa cathedral
thereХhadХanХexpandedХtowerХstructureгХюnХVácХtheХwesternХ
part was also expanded, but the emphasis was put on the
interior of the building rather than the external outlook. The
single early-Premyslids cathedral in Prague had in its form
almost all the architectural elements known at that time – a
double-choir and an expanded westwork; both elements in-
fluenced the more open character of the internal space. In the
case of the early-Piasts cathedrals there was a variety of
forms, from a transeptless basilica to the application of quad-
ratische Grundplan.
In the spatial and formal structures of the described ca-
thedrals two important elements appear – galleries (empore)
and memoria. Both were designed to elevate and underline
the importance of individuals related to the cathedrals (i.e. a
ruler, who during the liturgy sat in the gallery; and memo-
22цnetaХ чukowskaбХ“źatedraХwХ іłockuХ – romańskaХ czyХrenesansowaф”Х
[шathedralХ inХ іłockХ – Romanesque or Renaissance?], in ёebyХ wiedzieРгХ
StudiaХ dedykowaneХ HelenieХ żałkiewiczównie, ed. W. Walanus – M.
Walczak – ягХWolańskaХĐźrakówбХзеенЮХжк–24.
44
Hungaro-Polonica
ries of the ones who were buried in the churches). Applica-
tion of a gallery (empore) can be theoretically deducted as ap-
plied in the cathedrals in Kalocsa and Prague, but their ex-
istence can be expected more certainly in the cathedrals of
іoznańХandХźrakówгХMemoria were built, accordingly to the
currentХstateХofХresearchбХinХtheХcathedralsХofХіragueбХVácХĐфЮбХ
ьnieznoбХandХіoznańгХчothХstructuresХareХhighlightedХinХtheХ
architectural space of these cathedrals.
We ought to pay attention to the distinction of some of
the mentioned elements of cathedrals. One can ask about
their purpose and who was influencing the construction pro-
cess. Can such elements as elevation of choirs above the
church’sХnaveХfloorбХincorporationХofХaХgalleryХĐempore) into
the space of a westwork, or distinguishing a burial with an
architectural structure in the cathedrals tell us something?
The examples I wanted to focus on particularly are the com-
plexesХinХіragueбХьnieznoХandХinХіécsгХюnХallХthreeХcasesбХbeв
fore the basilica type churches were erected, with the func-
tion of cathedral, the same tasks had been entrusted to al-
ready existing buildings. In Prague and in Gniezno the ear-
lier buildings were rotundas built in the 10th century, while
inХіécsuХthereХwasХprobablyХan early Christian church – so
called the Cella Septichora.23 Since the bestowal of status of
metropolisХtoХіragueХĐомиЮбХьnieznoХĐжеееЮХandХіécsХĐжееоЮбХ
until almost mid-11th century no new church buildings were
erected. Furthermore, both Prague and Gniezno, since they
begunХturningХintoХbishops’ХcentresбХtheyХwereХalreadyХtheХ
ьergelyХ чuzásбХ “цХ pécsiХ székesegyházakХ aХ románХ korban”Х [TheХ
23
Cathedral of іécsХinХtheХRomanesqueХъra]бХцrcheologiaХ– Altum Castrum
Online (2013) 1–43.
45
Hungaro-Polonica
depositaries of relics. In the Church of St Vitus in Prague re-
mains of St Wenceslaus were placed – the Premyslid Duke
of Bohemia. While in Gniezno, in the Rotunda of Virgin
Mary, the relics of the Five Martyr Brothers and then the rel-
ics of St Adalbert were deposited. After the fire in 1018, the
cathedral was rebuilt in a basilica form, but its central point
was the memoria erected in the earlier phase. The memoria did
not change its place also in further phases of the 11th century
cathedral, i.e. in phases of rebuilding that took place in the
40s, 60s, and 90s of that century.24
The cathedral in Prague got its form as a developed ba-
silica only by the end of the 11th century. Earlier on, i.e. 950–
1060, the church was a rotunda, which was expanded archi-
tecturally. Initially, the rotunda had one apse, but then three
more apses were added in the mid-11th century. Two of the
four apses contained burials of saints, and the western apse
probably contained a gallery (empore). Only the second half
of the 11th century brought considerable changes to the ca-
thedral outlook. However, it has to be pointed that the for-
mer church, i.e. the rotunda, was encompassed and incorpo-
rated into the walls of the newly constructed foundation.25
Other existing buildings on the Hrad (the Castle Hill) did not
allow for the old rotunda to be in the central part of the new
cathedral and thus it dominated the plan of the eastern part.
24 TomaszХ яaniakбХ “ZХ badańХ nadХ przestrzeniąХ liturgicznąХ romańskiejХ
katedryХwХьnieѐnie”Х[ResearchХofХtheХŻiturgicalХSpaceХofХtheХRomaesqueХ
Cathedral of Gniezno], in Architektura romańskaХ wХ іolsceгХ NoweХ
interpretacjeХiХspojђeniaбХedгХTгХяaniakХĐьnieznoбХзееоЮХжзо–174.
25 ыrolíkХ– żaфikova-źubkováХ– RůžičkováХ– ZemanбХ“NejstaršíХsakrálníХ
architektura”бХжйк–208.
46
Hungaro-Polonica
TheХ situationХ inХ іécsбХ whereХ noХ relicts were held, was
slightlyХdifferentгХTheХbasilicaХtypeХcathedralХerectedХinХіécsХ
in 1040s, contained the burial of its founder Peter Orseolo.
The cathedral was built at a distance from the older Cella Sep-
tichoria and was not linked to its form. A similar archi-tec-
tural solution was applied in the cathedral foun-dation in
іoznań, where in the already existing basilica, near the Altar
of the Holy Cross, burials of the rulers were placed. And as
shown by the recent research in Kalocsa, also in this case the
burial of its founder, bishop Astrik, was located in the central
nave, just before the altar.26 Also in all of the churches (except
forХіécsХ– as no remains are preserved to examine) erected
just after mid 11th century, the westworks containing a gal-
lery (empore) were applied. Information inferred from avail-
able plans of cathedrals, i.e. a bipolarity or emphasis on the
western part and the medio ecclesae, seems to underline the
permanent presence of the sanctified power. The power that
wasХobtainedХeitherХbyХaХmartyr’sХdeathХĐStХWenceslusХandХ
St Adalbert – in Prague and in Gniezno), or by episcopal or-
dination (St Adalbert in Gniezno and in Prague, Astrik in Ka-
locsa), or finally by the royal anointment. Of course not all
founders of cathedrals at the time had a crown, but certainly
each one was striving for one. Their ambitions were illus-
trated in the architecture of the cathedrals – the seats of bish-
ops authority, which could and did provide an adequate set-
ting for the rulers who were aspiring to be accepted into the
circle of the Christian kings.
26ьergelyХчuzásбХ“цХkalocsaiХérseksírХazonosítása”Х[юdentificationХofХtheХ
Archbishop’sХ ьraveХ ofХ źalocsa]бХ Archeologia – Altum Castrum Online
(2014) 1–7.
47
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibliography:
Secondary literature
ыrolíkбХяanХ– żaфikova-źubkováбХяanaХ– RůžičkováбХъliškaХ– Zeman, An-
tonínбХ“NejstaršíХsakrálníХarchitekturaХіražskéhoХhraduгХVýpověЬХarcheв
ologickýchХpramenů”Х[TheХOldestХReligiousХцrchitectureХofХіragueХшasв
tle. Termination of Archaeological Sources], Castrum Pragense 3 (Praha,
2000).
48
Bernadett Benei
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Contributions to the Study of the 11–12th
Century Texts of the Hungarian Chronicle
I. Historiographical introduction
In the beginning of this paper about the results of my
grammaticalХ studiesХ onХ theХ HungarianХ шhronicle’sХ жж–12th
century texts, I would like to shortly discribe the relevant
theories of the Hungarian historiography. Many
mediavelists have already treated the texts, mostly lexical
and stilistical studies have been done. Most of the historians
agreed with the so-called ancient-gesta1 which was either
written during the age of Saint Ladislas (1077–1095) or
Coloman (1095–1116), and was continued in the 12th century
during the reign of Stephen II (1116–1131) andХ theХÁlmos-
lineХkingsбХmaybeХunderХtheХreignХofХьézaХююХĐжжйж–1161).
There are medievalists who claim the possibility of
another chronicle redaction in the end of the 12th or at the
1 In connection with the formation of the ancient gesta there are different
theoriesгХяánosХHorváthХюfj. thought that it might have been written during
the reign of Andrew I. (1046–1060). цccordingХ toХ яózsefХ ьerics it might
have been created in the era of Solomon (1063–1077). чálintХ HómanХ
hypothesized that the ancient gesta is from the late Ladislas-era (ca. 1090).
ьyörgyХьyörffyХandХьyulaХźristóХthoughtХthatХitХmightХhaveХbeenХwritten
during the reign of Coloman (1095–1116). Madzsar Imre placed the
formationХofХthisХhistoricalХworkХtoХlaterХagesбХtoХtheХreignХofХьézaХtheХююХ
(1141–1162).
49
Hungaro-Polonica
beginning of the 13th century. Gyula Pauler studied lexically
the 11–12th century texts in the end of the 19th century and
declared that the author of the chronicle told different
episodes with similar phrases.2 From these he thought that
duringХtheХreignХofХчélaХюююХĐжжмз–1196) or in the beginning
of the 13th century the chronicle might have been redacted.
Other evidence for the redaction can be found in the
character of Saint Ladislas in the chronicle, who has the
attributes of the saints: has visions and does miracles. In the
Middle Ages it was highly unlikely that somebody is
discribed as a saint in his life, so this part of the chronicle
should have been written circa 1192, when Ladislas was
canonizedгХюfХit’sХtrueбХasХьáborХThorockayХalsoХthinksбХthenХ
maybe the chronicle has given the source of the Ladislas-
legends.3 KornélХSzovákХstudiedХchapterХжиоХofХtheХchronicleХ
which revealed the usage of the word tetrarche in the
following expression: duces et tetrarche Theutonicorum
cunctique barones et optimates. SinceХ thisХ isХ aboutХ Żadislas’sХ
electionбХ accordingХ toХ SzovákбХ theХ word might refer to the
form of government of the Latin Empire of Constantinople
in the 13th century.4 ŻajosХ ягХ шsókaХ derivedХ theХ firstХ
2 ьyulaХіaulerбХцХmagyarХnemzetХtörténeteХazХÁrpád-háziХkirályokХalattХ
[The History of the Hungarian Nation During the Reigns of the Arpadian-
Kings] I–II. (Budapest,1899) II. 610–611.
3 ьáborХThoroczkayбХЧŻászlóХkirályХszenttéХavatásaЧХ[TheХшanonizationХofХ
King Ladislas] (Authorial copy)
4 źornélХ SzovákбХ ЧSzentХ ŻászlóХ alakjaХ aХ koraiХ elbeszélрХ forrásokbanХ ĐцХ
Żászló-legendaХ ésХ aХ źépesХ źrónikaХ жиогХ fejezeteХ forrásproblémáiЮЧХ [TheХ
Character of Saint Ladislas in the Early Narrative Sources – The
Sourceproblems of the Ladislas-legend and the 139th Chapter of the
шhroniconХіictum]бХSzázadokХжийХĐзеееЮХжжм–145.
50
Hungaro-Polonica
Hungarian historical summary from a monk of
Pannonhalma.5
іaradoxicallyбХ weХ don’tХ knowХ muchХ aboutХ цnonymusбХ
even though his work, the Gesta Hungarorum from the 12–
13th century, is fully preserved and available for studies.
ьyulaХ źristóХ comparedХ lexicallyХ andХ stilisticallyХ theХ ьestaХ
Hungarorum with the Hungarian Chronicle and found
similarities in 10 subjects, as follows: the idea of knighthood;
xenophobia; clan-names; understanding of the Civil Law,
paying attention to juridical questions; diploma-formulas;
awareness of the Troian story; schooling, knowledge of the
university-system; usage of external works; characteriza-
tions; rarely used phrases and narrative modus. Based on
theseХresultsбХźristóХinХжоойХbuiltХupХaХtheoryХwhichХsaysХthatХ
a contemporary of Anonymus, perhaps a monk, who might
have studied at one of the western-european universities,
maybe in France, took the ancient gesta and its
continuations, and redacted the texts according to his own
conception. This means that the chronicle, as we know it
today, is the work of one author from the end of the 12th or
the beginning of the 13th century.6
5 ŻajosХ ягХ шsókaбХ цХ latinХ nyelvűХ történetiХ irodalomХ kialakulásaХ
żagyarországonХaХXю–XюVгХszázadbanХ[TheХыormationХofХŻatinХŻanguageХ
Historical Literature in Hungary in the 11–14th Century] (Budapest, 1967)
528, 559, 554, 549–551, 544, 560.
6 ьyulaХźristóбХцХtörténetiХirodalomХżagyarországonХaХkezdetektрlХжзйж-
ig [The Historical Literature in Hungary from the Beginnings to 1241]
ĐчudapestбХ жоойЮгХ яuditХ шsákóХ recentlyХ treatedХ withХ thisХ question in her
paper: "Volt-eХ krónikásaХ ююгХ цndrásnakфХ żegjegyzésekХ gestaszer-
kesztményünkХ жигХ századХ elejiХ átdolgozásánakХ problematikájáhozЧХ [щidХ
Andrew II have a Chronicler? Remarks on the Problem of the Reworking
51
Hungaro-Polonica
Nobody has examined the texts gramatically until now,
althoughХ theХ methodХ isn’tХ unknownХ toХ theХ mediavelistsХinХ
Hungary. During my Phd studies I attemp to fulfil these
examinations and affirm or contradict the theories built up
byХьyulaХźristóХandХothersбХandХtoХdoХsoбХюХwillХexamine the
different linguistic usages in the chronicle. I have began my
researches with studying the participial constructions:
accusative and nominative cum infinitivo and ablative absolutus.
II. The usage of the accusative and nominative cum
infinitivo in the Middle Ages and in Hungary
I would like to start with the description of the usage of the
accusative and the nominative cum infinitivo in the classical
Latin. A typical trait of Medieval Latin is that clauses with
conjunction can be used instead of the accusative or
nominative cum infinitivo fromХ theХ цgeХ ofХ ъmperors’Х ŻatinгХ
For example instead of video patrem venire, there stood video,
quod pater meus venisset. This fact, that in the late antiquity
the accusative and nominative cum infinitivo lost their
substantiality, is connected to the effect of the Biblical Greek
language.7 TheХ ьreekХ conjunctionХ ӲӷίХ hadХ theХ sameХ causalХ
meaning as the Latin quod or quia.8 The usage of the clause
introduced with a conjunction gradually conquered space
primarily among early Christian authors. However this
usageХ hasn’tХ squeezedХ outХ totallyХ theХ accusative and
of the Old Hungarian Gesta in the Early 13th Century]бХSzázadokХжйоХĐзежкЮХ
301–332.
7 Stotz, Handbuch 394.
8 Ibid., 403.
52
Hungaro-Polonica
nominative cum infinitivoгХ ThereХ weren’tХ strictХ grammaticalХ
rules in connection with these constructions in the Middle
Ages, the usage depended on the author and on the kind of
text he wanted to create. For example, in his sermons, Saint
Augustine used clauses introduced with conjunctions more
frequently than the accusative cum infinitivo or the nominative
cum infinitivo, because it stood much closer to the spoken
language. However, Tertullian and Ciprian have preferred
the accusative cum infinitivo and the nominative cum infinitivo
in their works, but made exception, when they citated the
Bible.9 Researches have shown that from the 9th to the 12th
centuries in the medieval Latin texts used three to seven
times more accusative cum infinitivo or nominative cum
infinitivo than clauses introduced with conjunction.10
According to Peter Stotz after the 12th century this rate has
shifted in favour of the clauses introduced with conjunction.
This can be explained with the more practical linguistic
usage of the scholasticism (dicendum quod, notandum quod).
These rates of the accusative or nominative cum infinitivo and
clauses may be an important and useful pointer to clarify the
issue of the formation of the text, and also show how an
author’sХ attitudeХ was towards the ancient language
standards. 11
Analyzing the language of the Major Legend of Saint
StephenбХTamásХźörmendiХdemonstratedбХthatХtheХauthorХofХ
the legend used the clause introduced with conjunction only
twice, in the other 31 cases he used the accusative cum
9 Ibid., 393–394.
10 Ibid., 394.
11 Ibid., 395.
53
Hungaro-Polonica
infinitivo. This proves that the author of the Major Legend
kept himself to the rules of the classic grammatical
standards, and disliked the medieval clause-drafting. There
aren’tХanyХnominative cum infinitivo in the Major Legend.12 In
connectionХ withХ theХ шhronicle’sХ жйth century continuation
during the Angevin-era, which was analyzed by Szilvia
Somogyi, it is easy to observe that its text followed the classic
grammatical standards.13
Because of the easier handling of the text I have divided
it into 5 parts according to the kings:
1. The reigns of Saint Stephen, Peter Orseolo and
Samuel Aba (c. 64–85)
2. TheХreignsХofХцndrewХюХandХчélaХюХĐcгХнл–96)
3. TheХreignsХofХSolomonбХьézaХюХandХSaintХŻadislasХĐcгХ
97–141)
4. The reigns of Coloman and Stephen II (c.142–159)
5. TheХreignsХofХtheХÁlmos-lineХkingsпХчélaХююХandХьézaХ
II (c. 160–166.)
Systematizing the accusative cum infinitivo constructions
and the clauses introduced with conjunctions, I can say that
the 11–12th centuries’ХeventsХnarrativeХpartsХofХtheХHungarianХ
Chronicle follow the classic grammatic standards and fit to
other medieval Latin texts from Hungary. However I have
12 TamásХ źörmendiбХ ЧSzentХ юstvánХ királyХ NagyobbХ legendájánakХ
nyelvezeteЧХ [TheХ ŻanguageХ ofХ SaintХ Stephen’sХ żajorХ Żegend]бХ ыonsХ же
(2003) 95, 117, 87.
13 SzilviaХ SomogyiбХ ЧцХ XюVгХ századiХ krónikakompozícióХ цnjou-kori
folytatásánakХ nyelvezeteпХ aХ budaiХ minoritaХ krónikaХ latinХ nyelveЧХ [TheХ
Language of Angevin Continuation of the 14th century Chronicle
Composition: the Latin Language of the Minor Chronicle from Buda],
Fons 18 (2011) 229–230.
54
Hungaro-Polonica
to notice that there are lot of clauses introduced with
conjunctionsХ inХ it’sХ textгХ юnХ ййХ casesХ theХ clausesХ areХ
introduced with quod, in 35 cases with ut, in two cases with
quia, and in 4 cases without a conjunction were the clauses
drafted.
We can get however somewhat more nuanced picture if
we individually group the chapters of the chronicle
according to their usage of the grammatical constructions.
Then we have 4 kinds of groups. The first one consists of
those chronicle chapters which follow the classic
grammatical standards, use correctly the accusative cum
infinitivoгХ TheХ secondХ group’sХ chaptersХ useХ insteadХ ofХ
accusative cum infinitivo just clauses introduced with
conjunction. The third group consists of those chapters
which mixed the mentioned usages, and in the fourth group
thereХ areХ thoseХ chaptersХ whichХ don’tХ haveХ accusative cum
infinitivos or clauses introduced with conjunctions. 24
chapters of the chronicle use the accusative cum infinitivo in
accordance with the grammatical rules. 18 chapters just use
clasuses introduced with conjunction, in 27 chapters can be
found both constructions, and in 27 chapters (ca. the quarter
of the hole textЮХthereХaren’tХanyХaccusative cum infinitivos or
clauses. Three of the mentioned divided parts have all types,
approximately in equal proportions. There are two
exceptions, the first part, which is about the reigns of Saint
Stephen, Peter Orseolo and Samuel Aba, which contains only
one clause introduced with conjunction. The other exception
isХtheХlastХpartбХwhichХisХaboutХtheХreignsХofХtheХÁlmos-line
kingsгХюtХhasn’tХgotХaХchapterбХwhichХusesХjustХaccusative cum
infinitivo.
55
Hungaro-Polonica
It is evident that there are consecutive chapters that form
coherent units. Any at least three successive chapters which
share the usage or non-usage of the accusative cum infinitivo
can be considered as such. Although overall can be found
more accusative cum infinitivos than clauses introduced with
conjunctionsХ inХ theХ textsбХ thereХ aren’tХ anyХ и-chapter units
which use only these constructions. There are though 4 units
which use accusative cum infinitivo, but each consist of only
two chapters. There are two sections in the analyzed part of
the chronicle which are purely medieval and which respond
to all the above criteria. Both of them feature in the part
aboutХtheХreignsХofХSolomonбХьézaХюХandХSaintХŻadislasгХĐcгХ
97–99: Solomon and the dukes make peace thank to the
mediation of bishop щesideriusХĐщezsрЮрХcгХжзз–126.: battle of
żogyoródбХvisionХofХSaintХŻadislasбХtheХcoronationХofХьézaХ
юЮгХThisХprovesбХaccordingХtoХіeterХStotz’sХstatementбХthatХtheХ
number of the clauses introduced with conjunctions has
increased in medieval Latin texts in the end of the 12th
century. So, Gyula Pauler might be right, and these chapters
were written in the end of the 12th century, after Saint
Ladislas was canonized.
Coming to the chapters 97–99, we have to state that in
chapter 98 appears bishop Desiderius, who mediated
between Solomon and the dukes. According to Lajos J.
шsókaбХthisХbishop’sХroleХisХstrikinglyХsimilarХtoХщesideriusХ
шhanadianХbishop’sХmediatorХactivityХfromХtheХжиth century,
whose name can be found in the diploma of Pannonhalma,
which dates back to 1213. The author of the chronicle might
used this 13th century bishop as a model for the role of the
56
Hungaro-Polonica
bishop of the chronicle.14 So these chapters might have been
created in the beginning of the 13th century based on the
usage of the clasuses introduced with conjunction. Although
chapterХжиоХanalyzedХbyХźornélХSzovákХisХstandingХaloneбХit’sХ
medieval constuctions allow us to presume that this chapter
is also an interlining from the mentioned period.
юt’sХaХcharacteristicХofХtheХchronicleХthatХinХthe whole text
the accusative cum infinitivos with participium imperfectum
activi can be found in the position of the verbum regens:
Aba audiens Petrum ab Hungaris derelictum et ab Herrico …
susceptum (326, 7–8);15 cesar… videns… periculis se esse
perplexum (349, 11);16 videntes agmina ducis fugere (384, 19–
20.);17 dicens regem Hungariae esse hominem suum (440, 2–3.);18
credentes ipsum esse filium regis Colomani (448, 5–6.).19 Based
on these constructions we may assume one author.
The whole text contains only 12 nominative cum infinitivos
or equivalent clauses. In 10 cases were used nominative cum
infinitivo in accordance with the classic grammatical
standards and in two cases clauses were used. Both of them
has the quod as a conjunction. In the first third of the text can
be found half of the nominative cum infinitivos. The two
clauses with the quod areХinХtheХpartХaboutХSolomonбХьézaХюХ
and Saint Ladislas: notatur, quod fides in mulieribus non sit
(369, 6.);20 videtur michi, quod tu fidelis sis duci (387, 4–5.).21
14 шsókaбХцХlatinХnyelvűбХкзнбХкййбХккйбХкйо–551, 559, 560.
15 SRH I. 326.
16 Ibid., 349.
17 SRH I. 384.
18 Ibid., 440.
19 Ibid., 448.
20 Ibid., 369.
21 Ibid., 387.
57
Hungaro-Polonica
There are also two regular constructions in this part, both of
them in chapter 121. There is one nominative cum infinitivo in
each last two parts of the chronicle. It can be stated that
except two cases the author of the chronicle has followed the
classic Latin grammatical rules. Based on these structures,
not so much can be declared in connection with the
authorshipбХ sinceХ thisХ numberХ ofХ theХ constructionsХ isn’tХ
significant. However, if we consider the distribution of the
constructions, visibly the first thirdХ ofХ theХ chronicle’sХ textХ
abounds with nominave cum infinitivo, compared to the last
two thirds. This fact does not serve as enough evidence to
declare that the chronicle is a work of more authors, rather
consider an imprint of an early drafting, which is
incorporated into the text we know today.
III. The usage of the ablative absolutus in the Middle
Ages and in Hungary
The ablative absolutus (participium absolutum) – similarly to the
accusative cum infinitivo –stood for abbreviating clauses. The
construction was used very frequently in medieval Latin.
The ablative absolutus like in ancient times, was used when
the noun in ablative case corresponded with the main-
clause’sХ subjectiveг22 Frequently occured that the noun
corresponded with the main-clause’sХobject: congregato omni
populo… interrogavit eos.23 żanyХ timesХ theХ objectХ wasn’tХ
named in the main-clause, so it had to be deduced from the
22 Stotz, Handbuch, 261–262.
23 Ibid., 262.
58
Hungaro-Polonica
ablative absolutus: destructis omnibus his locis hicque (eos/ea)
mutavit in melius.24 The phrase in ablative absolutus, frequently
with a noun or a pronoun in dative case, connected to the
mainХ caluse’sХ predicationпХ abiit Reinardus, fratre relicto nil
absens (sc.ei) misit.25 In late antiquity and in medieval Latin
the subject of the ablative absolutus was often omitted, if it was
possible to complete it depending on the meaning of the
whole sentence: respondentibus ’etiam’ ostendi sibi expostulat.26
Sometimes the participal element of the ablative absolutus is a
neutral participium perfectumбХ inХ thisХ caseХ it’sХ aХ verbХ
intransitive (valedicto recessit), or a subjunctive accusative cum
infinitivo or clause introduced with conjunction (is cum
diaconum vidisset, cognito, quod Romanus esset).27 It can be seen
from the example, that in the participal position frequently
stands the trained form of verbs, which expresses
information and perception: cognito, audito, viso.
The author of the Major Legend of Saint Stephen used the
ablative absolutus 43 times in his text, except one case these
constructions fitted with the classic grammatical standards.
The exception is irregular in form: instead of the -e ending of
the participal element of the ablative absolutus, he has used –
i: tempore sue predestinationis iam instanti. The ablative
absolutus constructions were used for abbreviating time
clauses, causal clauses and modical clauses. The author has
never abbreviated conditional or concessive subordinations,
his constuctions were conventionally formed.28 The author
24 Ibid., 262.
25 Ibid., 262.
26 Ibid., 262.
27 Ibid., 262–263.
28 źörmendiбХżajorХlegendХofбХнн–90.
59
Hungaro-Polonica
of the chronicle continution from the Angevin-era has used
the ablative absolutus according to the classical grammatical
standards.29
юnХtheХжеиХchaptersХofХtheХцrpadianХchronicle’sХanalyzedХ
part there are 181 ablative absolutus, which were
proportionally distributed in the text. These constructions
abbreviated time clauses: postmodum vero congregato exercitu
(313, 9.);30 mane igitur facto (339, 2.);31 Hungari ergo capta
civitate (373, 29.);32 modical clauses: hiis itaque taliter ordinatis
cesar (333, 16.);33 abiectis clipeis fugerunt (351, 3.),34 cervice fracta
mortuus est (432, 20–21.);35 and causal clauses: Deo sic volente
captus est (348, 7–8.);36 Bohemis ad conflictum venire non
audentibus (365, 14–15.)37 In few cases also conditional clauses
were abbreviated with the construction: non posse regnare […]
nisi fratre suo Bela extincto (353, 15.);38 si ita est, talibus militibus
repugnantibus non recuperabis regnum (399, 15.).39 The ablative
absolutus was never used for abbreviating concessive
subordinationгХThereХaren’tХanyХablative absolutus mancus in
the text, which is illustrative of the Latin language from this
era. The most common topics in connection with the usage
of these constructions can be observed, are: life and death:
29 Somogyi, Angevin Continuation, 229.
30 SRH I. 313.
31 Ibid., 339.
32 Ibid., 373.
33 Ibid., 333.
34 Ibid., 351.
35 Ibid., 432.
36 Ibid., 348.
37 Ibid., 365.
38 Ibid., 353.
39 Ibid., 399.
60
Hungaro-Polonica
vivente Sancto Stephano rege (317, 12.),40 eo mortuo (319, 26–
27.),41 eodem mox ibidem interfecto (368, 9–10.),42 diplomatic
negotiations: consilioque habito (337, 5–6.),43 roborate federe
pacis (378, 9.),44 wars: commisso igitur proelio inter utrumque
(332, 1.),45 gathering information: his auditis contristatus est rex
(359, 33.),46 illi hoc viso (340, 36.),47 and in the descriptions of
religious actions: cantatis igitur matutinis (382, 12–13.),48
celebrataque missa, omnibus rite peractis (402, 25–26.).49
The entire text of the chronicle is filled with audio and
colligo formed ablative absolutus constructions: hoc audito,
collecto exercitu. These are conventional phrases which can be
foundХinХanyХhistoricalХworksбХbecauseХofХthisХfactбХtheyХdon’tХ
prove that the today-known text could be a work of one
author.
юt’sХ veryХ interestingбХ thatХ thereХ areХ stilisticallyХ well-
formed ablative absolutus constructions in the text. The two
elements of the structure as parts of a framework round the
other adjuncts. There are more examples from the text of the
chronicle for this, each of the mentioned five parts has
stilistically well-formed constructions.
40 Ibid., 317.
41 Ibid., 319.
42 Ibid., 368.
43 Ibid., 337.
44 Ibid., 378.
45 Ibid., 332.
46 Ibid., 359.
47 Ibid., 340.
48 Ibid., 382.
49 Ibid., 402.
61
Hungaro-Polonica
1. Saint Stephen, Peter Orseolo, Samuel Aba:
Aba vero congregato Hungarorum exercitu50 (325,6–
7.)51
Petro itaque per fugam de manibus Hungarorum
elapso (325, 10–11.)52
Petro rege cum presidio suorum in Hungaria relicto
(333,17.)53
2. цndrewХюбХчélaХюпХ
regalibus itaque nuptiis iuxta fluvium Morua
celebratis (351,16–17.)54
federibus pacis firmiter roboratis (351,17–18.)55
completo regni sui anno tertio (360, 16–17.)56
3. SolomonбХьézaХюбХSaintХŻadislasпХ
Bohemis ad conflictum venire non audentibus (365,
14–15.)57
plurimis eorum ibidem in ore gladii prostratis (371, 7–
8.)58
residuis autem eorum in captivitate subactis (371, 8–
9.)59
50 Words bolded by the author.
51 Ibid., 325.
52 Ibid., 325.
53 Ibid., 333.
54 Ibid., 351.
55 Ibid., 351.
56 Ibid., 360.
57 Ibid., 365.
58 Ibid., 371.
59 Ibid., 371.
62
Hungaro-Polonica
manibus itaque regis et ducum in fidei pignus extensis
(374,11–12.)60
multis ex eis interfectis (396, 22–23.)61
nunc hiis, nunc illis fugientibus et diu sine vulnere
certantibus (398,28.)62
4. Coloman, Stephen II:
accersito Polonorum et Hungarorum consilio et
auxilio reversus est (426, 33.)63
5. Álmos-lineХkingsпХчélaХююбХьézaХююп
ascito Rutenorum Polonorumque auxilio (448, 7–8.)64
In many cases can be shown the cumulation of the ablative
absolutus in the studied texts of the Chronicle.
1. Saint Stephen, Peter Orseolo, Samuel Aba:
omnibus pompis mundane glorie calcatis et temporali
regni dyademate deposito (318, 20–21.)65
missis muneribus, data quoque fideбХquod…ХĐизнбХогЮ66
accepta a duce licentia, Béla fratre suo ibidem relicto
(336, 3–4.)67
60 Ibid., 374.
61 Ibid., 396.
62 Ibid., 398.
63 Ibid., 426.
64 Ibid., 448.
65 Ibid., 318.
66 Ibid., 328.
67 Ibid., 336.
63
Hungaro-Polonica
2. цndrewХюбХчélaХюп
relictis tentoriis et clipeis et universis supellectibus
suis abiectis (350, 27–28.)68
regalibus itaque nuptiis iuxta fluvium Morua
celebratis et federibus pacis firmiter roboratis (351,16–18.)69
omnibus Teutonicis ibidem interfectis et ducibus
eorum comprehensis (357, 5–6.)70
3. SolomonбХьézaХюбХSaintХŻadislasпХ
rex igitur et gloriosi duces fere omnibus paganis
interfectis et omnibus Christianis a captivitate liberatis
(369, 9–10.)71
plurimis eorum ibidem in ore gladii prostratis,
residuis autem eorum in captivitate subactis (371, 7–9.)72
post hec collectis exercitibus, nunciis frequenter
missis tandem rex et dux venerunt Strigonium(378, 4.)73
militibus suis interfectis et ipsis graviter vulneratis
(391, 17–18.)74
celebrataque missa, omnibus rite peractis precipit rex
(402, 25–26.)75
4. Coloman, Stephen II: -
5. Almos-lineХ kingsпХ чélaХ ююбХ ьézaХ ююп quo regnante
regina Elena habito consilio (446, 24.)76
68 Ibid., 350.
69 Ibid., 350.
70 Ibid., 357.
71 Ibid., 369.
72 Ibid., 371.
73 Ibid., 378.
74 Ibid., 391
75 Ibid., 402.
76 Ibid., 446.
64
Hungaro-Polonica
Perhaps the stylistically more valuable framed ablative ab-
solutus-structures and construction- accumulation could
prove the theory of one author, but this statement is weak.
So it can be declared that the analyzing of the ablative absolu-
tus structures has given no results in connection with the au-
thorship or with the possibly redactions. The presented re-
sult can be understood as just a partial issue, further gram-
matically and stylistically analyzises are required for a cer-
tain statement in connection with the authorship and the re-
daction of the Hungarian Chronicle.
IV. Conclusions
After the analyzing the usage of some participal
constructions: the accusative cum infinitivo, the nominative cum
infinitivo and the ablative absolutus we have got different
results. The author of the 11–12th century chronicle, similarly
to the authors of the Major Legend of Saint Stephen and the
Chronicle continuation from the Angevin-era, favored the
usage of the accusative cum infinitivo against the clauses
introduced with conjunction, considering the number of
appearance of these structures in the text. However, while
studying the dominant grammatical solutions, a more
complicated result can be observed: the whole text of the
chronicle is filled by medieval grammatical structures. There
aren’tХsharplyХseparateХpartsбХactingХpurelyХaccordingХtoХtheХ
classic grammatical rules, which can help us judge which
parts of the chronicle has written earlier. Still, there are
definite parts of the text of which can be said, that they had
been written in the end of the 12th or the beginning of the 13th
65
Hungaro-Polonica
century according to the usage of accusative cum infinitivo. If
it’sХtrueбХitХcouldХproveХtheХredactionХfromХtheХsameХperiodХ
asХ itХ hasХ beenХ declaredХ byХ ьyulaХ іaulerбХ ŻajosХ ягХ шsókaбХ
ьyulaХźristóХandХźornélХSzovákгХTheХparticipium imperfectum
activi form as a verbum regens can be the characteristic for the
author. The nominative cum infinitivo was used much less
frequently, and due to the lower number far-reaching
conclusions can not be drawn from them. The ablative
absolutus constructions of the chronicle are in accordance
with the classic grammatical standards. Although the whole
text of the chronicle is filled with hoc audito and collecto
exercitu typesХstructuresбХtheyХaren’tХableХtoХclearХtheХquestion
of the authorship. Perhaps the above presented stilistically
more valuable framed ablative absolutus-structures and
construction-accumulations could prove the theory of one
author, but these statements are weak. So it can be declared
that the analyzing of the ablative absolutus structures has
given no results in connection with the authorship or with
the possibly redactions. These presented results are just
partial issues, further gramatically and stilistically
analyzises are required for a certain statement in connection
with the authorship and the redaction of the Hungarian
Chronicle.
66
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibliography
Secondary literature
шsókaбХ ŻajosХ ягб цХ latinХ nyelvűХ történetiХ irodalomХ kialakulásaХ
żagyarországonХ aХ Xю–XюVгХ századbanХ [TheХ ыormationХ ofХ theХ ŻatinХ
Language Historical Literature in Hungary in the 11–14th Century]
(Budapest, 1967).
źörmendiбХTamásбХЧSzentХюstvánХkirályХNagyobbХlegendájánakХnyelvezete"
[TheХŻanguageХofХSaintХStephen’sХżajorХŻegend]бХыonsХже (2003), 65–118.
źristóбХьyulaбХцХtörténetiХirodalomХżagyarországonХaХkezdetektрlХжзйж-
ig [The Historical Literature in Hungary from the Beginning to 1241]
(Budapest, 1994).
Pauler, Gyula, A magyarХ nemzetХ történeteХ azХ Árpád-háziХ királyokХ alattХ
[The History of the Hungarian Nation During the Reigns of the Arpadian-
Kings] I–II. (Budapest, 1899).
SomogyiбХ SzilviaбХ ЧцХ XюVгХ századiХ krónikakompozícióХ цnjou-kori
folytatásánakХ nyelvezeteпХ aХ budaiХ minoritaХ krónikaХ latinХ nyelveЧХ [TheХ
Language of Angevin Continuation of the 14th century Chronicle
Composition: the Latin Language of the Minor Chronicle from Buda],
Fons 18 (2011) 209–268.
67
Stotz, Peter, Handbuch zur lateinischen Sprache des Mittelalters. I–V.; Vol.
юVгХыormenlehreгХSyntaxХundХStilistikХĐżünchenбХжоонЮг
SzovákбХ źornélбХ ЧSzentХ ŻászlóХ alakjaХ aХ koraiХ elbeszélрХ forrásokbanХ ĐцХ
Żászló-legendaХ ésХ aХ źépesХ źrónikaХ жиогХ fejezeteХ forrásproblémáiЮЧХ [TheХ
Character of Saint Ladislas in the Early Narrative Sources (The
Sourceproblems of the Ladislas-Legend and the 139th Chapter of the
шhroniconХіictum]бХSzázadokХжийХĐзеееЮХжжм–145.
Angelika Herucová
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Palatines in the Hungarian Kingdom, Bohe-
mian Kingdom and Polish Principalities in the
10th to 13th Century*
Comparative method of research1 is one of the popular and
useful methods used in historiography, especially in the time
periods where the knowledge as well as means to obtain it
are limited.2 When it comes to Central Europe before the year
1300 the insufficiency of sources is common in several areas.
* ThisХresearchХwasХsupportedХbyХVъьцХgrantХNoгХздежеоджйпХ„źomuni -
káciaХaХspôsobyХšíreniaХinformáciíХvХstredoveku”Х[шommunicationХandХtheХ
Modes of Spreading Information in the Middle Ages].
1 чyХ theХ „comparativeХ methodХ ofХ research“Х ю mean the comparison of
realities in different societies with similar character or in the same time
period in order to conceptualise and point out similarities and differences,
and also (in historiography of Central Europe notably in the research of
the 10th to 12th century) the custom to apply, with caution, the knowledge
from one region (or time period which is sometimes referred to as the
“retrospectiveХ method”ЮХ toХ anotherХ whereХ isХ anХ informationХ gapгХ SeeХ
Charles C. Ragin, The Comparative Method (Berkeley – Los Angeles –
London, 1987) 34–52; in Slovak literature the basic historical methods were
summarisedХinХяúliusХчartlбХσvodХdoХštúdiaХdejepisuХ[TheХюntroductionХtoХ
the Study of History] (Bratislava, 1997).
2 Julia M. H. Smith, Introduction: Regarding Medievalists: Contexts and
Approaches, in Companion to Historiography, ed. M. Bentley (London –
New York, 1997) 98–108. The concept is widely addressed in social
sciences, see e. g. Ragin, The Comparative Method; Dan Slater – Daniel
ZiblattбХ“TheХъnduringХюndispensabilityХofХtheХшontrolledХшomparison”бХ
Comparative Political Studies 46 (2013) 1301–1327; W. Laurence Neuman,
Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (New
York et al. /7th ed./, 2009).
69
Hungaro-Polonica
The comparability of Kingdom of Hungary, Duke-
dom/Kingdom of Bohemia, and Polish Principalities is al-
ready well established.3 When it comes to the research of the
office4 of palatineХinХtheХцrpadianбХіфemyslidХandХіiastХdoв
minions respectively, to utilize it is a logical step. However,
several questions need to be asked and answered before-
hand. The terminology is key when it comes to the contem-
porary discourse as well as the historical realities. Who was
a palatine, how would one define him? What is to be com-
pared – the competences of the dignitaries with the homon-
ymous title or rather the offices with similar function with-
out the emphasis on the designation? Does the character of
the main sources in the particular dominions differ, and if so,
how does it influence the results? Where is it interesting to
compare? Newfangled research of several scientist is aimed
3 See the popularХessayХbyХяenрХSzűcsбХThreeХHistoricalХRegionsХofХъuropeбХ
in Civil Society and the State, ed. J. Keane (London, 1988) 291–331; also
ыrantišekХщvorníkбХTheХżakingХofХшentralХandХъasternХъuropeХĐŻondonбХ
жойоЮрХsimilarlyХeгХgгХщušanХTфeštíkбХźosmovaХkronikaг StudieХkХpočátkůmХ
českéhoХ dějepisectvíХ aХ politickéhoХ myšleníгХ [TheХ шhronicleХ ofХ źosmasгХ
Studies to the Beginnings of Czech Historiography and Political Thinking]
ĐіrahaбХжолнЮрХюdгбХіočátkyХіфemyslovcůХ[TheХчeginningsХofХіфemyslids]Х
(Praha, 1981) and otherрХяosefХŽemličkaбХСechyХvХdoběХknížecíХжеий–1198
[Bohemia at the Time of Duchy] (Praha, 1997); Nora Berend – іrzemysławХ
UrbańczykХ– іrzemysławХWiszewskiбХшentralХъuropeХinХtheХHighХżiddleХ
Ages: Bohemia, Hungary and Poland, c.900–c.1300 (Cambridge, 2013);
щanaХ щvoфáčková-żaláХ – Jan Zelenka, Curia ducis, curia regis.
іanovníckyХ dvůrХ zaХ vládyХ іфemyslovcůХ [шuriaХ щucisбХ шuriaХ RegisгХ TheХ
RoyalХшourtХunderХtheХRuleХofХіфemyslids]ХĐіrahaбХзежжЮрХяánХSteinhübelбХ
NitrianskeХkniežactvoХ[TheХNitraХщuchy]бХĐчudmericeХ– Bratislava, 2004).
4 ыorХtheХpurposesХofХtheХpaperбХtheХwordХ“office”ХisХusedХratherХlooselyгХ
Several or all of the courtly offices fully formed and became more
institutions-like in the late medieval period. In the 10th to 13th century they
were in a process of formation, strongly depended on the particular
person holding it, the ruler as well as other circumstances
70
Hungaro-Polonica
at the courts of kings and dukes5 before 1300 in Central Eu-
rope.6 This paper is written mainly from the standpoint of
the Hungarian Kingdom, with the focus on the Bohemian
and Polish realities as a source for comparison.
In the research of royal courts in medieval Europe the
handbooks or other treatises on administrative order of the
courts are pivotal sources.7 Some estimate that these actually
existed only after the 1260s,8 but there are several documents
pre-dating it, congruent in part with the form and/or con-
tent, namely e. g. De ordine palatii (882) about the court of
Charlemagne9 or Constitutio domus regis (around 1136) in
England.10 De ordine palatii was written by Hinkmar, bishop
ofХ RheimsХ aХ lifetimeХ afterХ шharlemagne’sХ deathбХ butХ heХ
5 The historical-semanticХdefinitionХofХaХ„court“ХandХhowХitХisХtoХbeХviewedХ
(as a space, as a group of people, as an idea etc.) continues to be discussed
inХhistoriographyбХseeХщvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 12–23, 24–
35. In this paper the term is mainly used in a sense of the highest
dignitaries/offices in the dominion connected to the ruler.
6 ъгХ gгХ щvoфáčková-żaláХ – Zelenka, Curia ducisрХ TiborХ SzрcsбХ цХ nádoriХ
intézményХ koraiХ történeteХ жеее–1342 [An Early History of the Palatinal
Institution 1000–1342], Subsidia ad historiam medii aevi Hungariae
inquirendam 5 (Budapest, 2014); Agnieszka Teterycz-іuzioбХ “Wczesno-
piastowska organizacjaХ administracyjnaХ wХ XХ iХ XюХ wieku”Х [ъarlyХ іiastХ
Administrative Organisation in the 10th and 11th century]бХSłupskieХStudiaХ
Historyczne 9 (2001) 245–257.
7 юnХSlovakХĐdvorskéХporiadkyЮбХшzechХĐdvorníХфádyЮХandХіolishХĐporządekХ
dworuЮХ verbatimХ translationХ “ordersХ ofХ theХ court”рХ щvoфáčková-żaláХ –
Zelenka, Curia ducis, 17.
8 WernerХіaraviciniбХ“ъuropäischeХHofordnungХalsХьattungХundХїuelleб“Х
inХ HöfeХ undХ HofordnungenХ жзее–1600, ed. H. Kruse – W. Paravicini,
Residenzenforschung 10 (Singmaringen, 1999) 14; see Dvoфáčková-żaláХ–
Zelenka, Curia ducis, 17.
9 Hincmar von Reims, De Ordine Palatii, in Thomas Gross – Rudolf
Schieffer ed., MGH, Fontes iuris 3 (Hannover, 1980).
10 щvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 17.
71
Hungaro-Polonica
claimed he based the account on the (unpreserved) work of
Adalhar, the abbot of Corbie and an advisor to Charle-
magne.11 This document is especially interesting in the Cen-
tral European milieu when the theories are applied, that the
common structure and similar development of the courts
throughoutХъuropeХĐimplementationХofХtheХ“westernХmodel”Х
in Central Europe)12 were shaped after the Frankish Em-
pire.13 Hinkmar’sХ reportХ onХ theХ palatineХ ĐfreelyХ translatedЮХ
goes as follows: Because the king and the queen were over-
loaded with duties, they had to delegate. The matters of
church were appointed to apocrisarius or capellanus, the secu-
lar matters to comes palatii. Among other duties, he was in
11 Hincmar, De Ordine Palatii, 54–55.
12 SzűcsбХThree Historical Regions, 315–317.
13 ZoltánХягХźosztolnyikбХHungaryХunderХtheХъarlyХÁrpadsбХноеsХtoХжелибХ
East European Monographs DCV (New York, 2002) 237, 252. Generally
said, in Czech and Slovak historiography it is considered that the transmit
was made primarily though the remnants after the system implemented
in Great Moravia (Czech views are summarized by David Kalhous,
Anatomy of a Duchy: The Political and Ecclesiastical Structures of Early
іфemyslidХчohemiaбХĐŻeidenХ– Boston, 2012) 11–46; Slovak point of view
representsХSteinhübelбХNitrianskeХkniežactvoбХзже–214; or Martin Homza,
“VznikХ UhorskéhoХ kráзovstva”Х [TheХ шonstitutionХ ofХ theХ HungarianХ
Kingdom], Impulz, 9 (2013) 31–58). The Hungarian historiography leans
more towards the idea that the inspiration came through the Bavarian
courtХĐeгХgгХSzрcsбХцХnádoriХintézményбХзк–26, 300 based inter alia on the
theoriesХ ofХ ьyörgyХ ьyörffyбХ sinceХ theХ wifeХ ofХ StephenХ юХ wasХ aХ чavarianХ
princessХдseeХяánosХżгХчakбХStephanбХзгХSгХĐюstvánЮХюгХdгХHlгбХkgгХvгХUngarnбХ
in LexMa 8, (Lexikon des Mittelalters, CD-ROM-Ausgabe, J. B. Metzler
2000) 112–114 /). Polish site is to be found in the works of Alexander
ьieysztorбХ eгgгХ “UrządХ wojewodzińskiХ weХ wczesnychХ państwachХ
słowiańskichХ юX–XюХ wieku”Х [TheХ OfficeХ ofХ VoivodХ inХ ъarlyХ Slavic
Countries in 9–11th Century], Archeologia Polski 16 (1971) 319, 324 who is,
too, an advocate of the Great Moravian origin of the offices; also Andrzej
Pleszczynski, The Birth of a Stereotype : Polish Rulers and their Country
in German Writings c. 1000 A.D., (Leiden – Boston, 2011) 90–98.
72
Hungaro-Polonica
charge of legal affairs, especially judicial proceedings; in
matters not covered by law, he decided with the king. When
one wanted to get to the king, he was the one to approach.
The economic aspects of running the court were covered by
the queen and the chamberlains (camerarii).14
The idea of translatio gets complicated by crossovers be-
tween the competences and nomenclature in the process of
development of the Central European courts, as well as the
14 “Nam quamvis praefati ministri unusquisque de suo ministerio non sub alio
vel per alium, nisi per se ipsum solum regem, vel quantum ad reginam vel
gloriosam prolem regis respiciebant, caput ponerent, non tamen omnes
aequaliter de ceteris rebus vel ceterorum neccessitatibus regem adibant, sed
mensura sua quisque contentus erat et, ubi vel ubi ratio poscebat, solatium al-
terius requirebat. E quibus praecipue II, id est apocrisarius, qui vocatur apud
nos capellanus vel palatii custos, de omnibus negotiis eccleciasticis vel ministris
ecclesiae et comes palatii de omnibus saecularibus causis vel iudicis, suscipiendi
curam instanter habebant, ut nec ecclesiastici nec saeculares prius domnum
regem absque eorum consultu inquietare necesse haberent, quousque illi praev-
iderent, si necessitas esset, ut causa ante regem merito venire deberet; si vero
secreta esset causa, quam prius congrueret regi quam cuiquam alteri dicere,
eundem dicendi locum eidem ipsi praepararent, introducto prius rege, ut hoc
iuxta modum personae vel honorabiliter vel patienter vel etiam miseri-corditer
susciperet. [...] Comitis autem palatii inter cetera paene innum-erabilia in hoc
maxime sollicitudo erat, ut omnes contentiones legales, quae alibi ortae propter
aequitatis iudicium palatium aggrediebantur, iuste ac rationabiliter deter-
minaret seu perverse perverse iudicata ad aequitatis tram-item reduceret, ut et
coram Deo propter iustitiam at coram hominibus propter legum observationem
cunctis placeret. Si quid vero tale esset, quod leges mundanae hoc in suis diffi-
nitionibus statutum non haberent aut secundum gentilium consuetudinem
crudelius sanctitum esset, quam christianitatisrectitudo vel sancta auctoriras
merito non consentiret, hoc ad regis moderat-ionem perduceretur, ut ipse cum
his, qui utramque legem nossent et Dei magis quam humanarum legum statuta
metuerent, ita decerneret, ita statueret, ut ubi utrumque servari posse, utrum-
que servaretur, sin autem, lex saeculi merito comprimeretur et iustitia Dei con-
servaretur. De honestate vero palatii seu specialiter ornamento regali nec non
et de donis annuis militum, absque cibo et potu vel equis, ad reginam praecipue
et sub ipsa ad camerarium pertinebat,[...]“Х– Hincmar, De Ordine Palatii, 68–
72.
73
Hungaro-Polonica
fact, that they took on a life of their own after their initial
establishment in the Carolingian fashion in the particular
setting. In the earlier period – 10th to 12th century – there is
complete lack of sources that would be more than just cir-
cumstantial. Chronicles and sporadic mentions that allow
concluding some aspects of the character of the courtly of-
fices are interesting, but hardly substitute for any offi-
cial/royal documents or enactments as seen in the West or
in the later periods. This led some to ascertain, that for this
timeframeХ“whenХdecidingХspecificХcompetencesХ[ofХtheХdigв
nitaries of court] we are to a large extent dependent on the
designators/titles of the offices, from which at least the gen-
eral information about their field of activity is to be con-
cludedг”15 This is well fitted for those offices, which titles are
quite literal like magister agazonum (the master of stablemen)
or magister pincernarum (master of cupbearers/butlers), but
becomes increasingly problematic when the differences and
shifts in the character and competences of the namesake dig-
nitaries in Central European countries are considered.
In the case of Hungarian palatines, they emerge from the
sources in the 13th century gradually separating from the
court and establishing their judicial powers, documented by
a novelty – palatine issued charters.16 It is generally agreed
uponбХevenХforХtheХearlierХperiodбХthatХtheХpalatineХwasХ“poв
litically the highest non-dynastic secular dignity after the
king inХmedievalХHungary“б17 “mostХprominentХamongХtheХ
15 щvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 48.
16 SzрcsбХц nádoriХintézményбХкж–кирХTiborХSzрcsХĐedгЮбХRegesta palatinor-
um et vices gerentium tempore regum stirpis Arpadianae critico-
diplomatica (Budapest, 2012) 324.
17 SzрcsбХц nádoriХintézményбХиеегХ
74
Hungaro-Polonica
counts”б18 “oneХofХcountry’sХheadХofficials”ХĐtheХsecondХbeingХ
the archbishop of Esztergom)19 andХking’sХ“principalХrepreв
sentative”г20 Some state that he was originally the adminis-
trator and the head of the royal court and step by step he
becameХ theХ king’sХ deputyбХ mainlyХ inХ theХ legalХ andХ judicialХ
matters, as well as the commander of the military.21
There are few mentions of the palatine in the early legal
sources. The article III of the third book of the Laws of king
Ladislas I, from the last third of the 11th century, is titled De
palatino comiteгХюtХstatesХthatХheХwasХtheХcustodianХofХtheХ„regis
et curie sigilli“ХandХthatХheХwasХnotХsupposedХtoХtakeХitХawayХ
with him. His judicial authority is also apparent here, since
thereХ isХ aХ mentionХ ofХ thoseХ “whomХ heХ isХ permittedХ toХ
judge”г22 At the beginning of the 12th century the palatine is
18 іálХъngel, The Realm of St Stephen, A History of Medieval Hungary,
895–1526, (London – New York, 2001) 40.
19 ZoltánХягХźosztolnyikбХ“щynasticХintriguesХandХщomesticХrealitiesХduringХ
theХ ReignsХ ofХ цndrewХ юХ andХ чelaХ ю”бХ HungarianХ StudiesХ ReviewХ XXVюююХ
(2001) 93–108, 97.
20 Martyn Rady, Nobility, Land and Service in Medieval Hungary, Studies
in Russia and East Europe (Hondmill – New York, 2000) 41.
21 SeeХŻeonХSokolovskýбХіrehзadХdejínХverejnejХsprávyХnaХúzemíХSlovenskaХ
юХпХOdХpočiatkovХdoХrokuХжкзлХ[TheХOverviewХofХtheХHistoryХofХtheХStateХ
Administration on the Territory of Slovakia I : From the Beginning until
the Year 1526], (Bratislava, 1995) 23; also DRMH I/1, xlv–xlix; Ferdinand
UličnýбХщejinyХSlovenskaХvХжжгХažХжигХstoročíХ[TheХHistoryХofХSlovakiaХinХ
the 11th – 13th century], (Bratislava, 2013) 417–418; Kosztolnyik,
Hungary...890s to 1063, 251–253.
22 “III. De palatino comite. Placuit etiam, ut si aliquando palatinus comes
domum ierit, regis et curie sigillum, que in vice eius remanserit, illi dimittat,
ut sicut regis una est curia, et ita unum sigillum persistat. Domi vero comes
idem quamdiu manserit super neminem sigillum mittat, nisi super eos dumta-
xat, qui vocantur udornic et qui spontanea voluntate iverint ad eum, illi ei liceat
iudicare. Quod si aliter fecerit, LV pensas solvat. Similiter et ducis comes, qui
super suos, quam alios iudicaverit, eadem sententia corrigatur.”Х– DRMH I/1,
18. See alsoХSzрcsбХц nádoriХintézményбХий–35.
75
Hungaro-Polonica
mentioned in the article XXXVI of the first Laws of the king
Coloman, which concerns the duty of noblemen to equip the
king with horses under several circumstances. They were
supposed to claim their travel expenses that were to be reim-
bursed from the palatine.23 The next legal document that
concerned palatines was the Golden Bull of 1222, well into
the 13th century.24 However, in the Kingdom of Hungary, it
is possible to compile a list of the noblemen who held the
office25 from as early as 1055, due to the custom to include
their names as well as the title they held in the subscription
of the royal charters.
Palatine was ex usu the first secular dignitary after the
representatives of Church,26 which corresponds with seeing
him as the primus inter pares of the Barons. This allows an-
swering one of the questions opened in the introduction. In
Hungarian Kingdom it is not unreasonable to give the basic
definition of palatine based on this; to define the palatine as
a nobleman marked in a royal charter as one. That said, the
proposalХ isn’tХ toХ completelyХ excludeХ thoseХ noblemenбХ whoХ
23 “XXXVI. Quando rex vel dux in comitatum aliquem intraverit, tunc megalis
equus exercitualis prestetur, qui si quo casu mortuus fuerit, XV pense domino
equi donentur. Si vero aliquomodo, sed non usque ad mortem lesus fuerit, pre-
dicti pretii pars dimidia pro equo reddatur. Si magna fama marchiam intraverit,
comes nuntios II equis exercitualibus IIII ad regem dirigat, qui cum proprio cibo
illus pervenientes, pretium viatici sui a palatino comite exigant, et tantumdem
ad reditum suum. Si vero equi illorum mortui vel lesi fuerint, tot pense, quot
supra diximus, pro equis reddantur, sed si sani redeant, pro una via exercituali
deputetur.“Х– Ibid., 27.
24 Ibid., 32–35, 95–жежрХSeeХalsoХżartynХRadyбХ“HungaryХandХtheХьoldenХ
BullХofХжззз”бХчanaticaХзйХĐзежйЮХнм–108; and Rady, Nobility, 54–58.
25 цttilaХ ZsoldosбХ żagyarországХ világiХ archontológiájaХ жеее–1301 [The
Laical Archontology of Hungary 1000–1301], (Budapest, 2011) 13–238.
26 See the charters available on DL/DF online:
archives.hungaricana.hu/en/charters/ (3/2016); or edited in e. g. CDAC
76
Hungaro-Polonica
are labelled as palatines in other sources, but have no pre-
served charter to concur (like Samuel Aba /1038–1041/ or
Mizse /1290/),27 just that seeing him as the absence of such
confirmation should be considered.28
On the other hand, the same cannot be applied in the Bo-
hemian Dukedom/Kingdom. Setting aside the debate
whether or not there actually ever was an office of palatine,29
the customary subscriptions in Bohemian charters are differ-
ent. It is not unusual that the list of noblemen testifying to
the issuance of a charter consists only of names with no ti-
tles.30 Therefore, it would be ill-fitted to base the definition
of palatine, or most other dignitaries of the court in Bohemia,
on the subscriptions of charters. The main sources used in
the research significantly differ in character. In Czech histo-
riography, the questions regarding palatines are answered
via in-depth linguistic analysis of the terminology used in
narrative sources (for the most part in the Chronicle of
Kosmas).31 When considering the Hungarian palatines,
chronicles and other narrative sources offer some interesting
27 ZsoldosбХżagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaбХжкбХзибХзнжбХиинг
28 This correspondence with the methodology proposed by Janken
żyrdalбХ“SourceХіluralismХandХіackageХofХżethodsпХżedievalХTending of
ŻivestockХ asХ anХ ъxample”бХ inХ żethodsХ andХ theХ żedievalistпХ шurrentХ
Approaches in Medieval Studies, ed. M. Lamberg – J. Keskiaho – E.
RäsänenХ– O. Timofeeva, (Newcastle, 2008) 134–158.
29 щvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 48–56.
30 See CDB e. g. I, 80 (1080) 87 (no offices listed); 246 (1169) 217–218 (with
offices); 270 (1174) 239 (some offices listed).
31 щvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 48–56.
77
Hungaro-Polonica
insides,32 but hardly can be the bases of the research, espe-
cially for the 11th and 12th centuryгХцfterХallбХthereХisn’tХreallyХ
a preserved equivalent in Hungarian Kingdom on par with
Kosmas in the Kingdom of Bohemia and Gallus Anonymous
in Poland at that time.
Even though it is possible that there either never was a
palatine on the Bohemian court or that the title ceased to ex-
ist rather quickly,33 the Bohemian and Hungarian situations
areХstillХopenedХtoХcomparisonгХTheХ“firstХafterХking”ХinХtheХ
secular hierarchy of the royal court in the Bohemian circum-
stances was the camerarius / summus camerarius / camerarius
Boemie (chamberlain).34 The term more often used for the
equivalent office in Hungarian Kingdom was the magister
tavernicorum (master of treasury/treasurer) which conclu-
sively existed from the second third of the 12th century on-
ward.35 Interestingly enough, several palatines were the
masters of treasury before they took the office – Mika was
magister tavernicorum 1198, palatine 1199–1201,36 Dionysus,
son of Ampod guarded the treasury 1216–1224 and became
palatine 1227–1228, and again in 1231–1234,37 Dionysus To-
maj was the treasurer 1224–1231 and palatine 1235–1240,38
32 SeeХmyХpreviousХpaperпХцrpádovskíХpalatíniХvoХvybranýchХnaratívnychХ
prameňochХ[цrpadianХіalatinesХinХSelectedХNarrativeХSources]бХHistorickéХ
štúdieХйоХĐзежкЮХззм–240.
33 щvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 48–56.
34 Ibid, 75.
35 ZsoldosбХżagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaбХлжг
36 Ibid, 332.
37 Ibid, 295.
38 Ibid.
78
Hungaro-Polonica
the master of treasury between 1231 and 1235 was Nicho-
laus, who is in 1233 referred to as the son of palatine Nicho-
laus, probably the palatine in the years 1219–1222 and 1226.39
In the Polish historiography two palatines – Sethei
(Sieciech)40 and his later successor41 Scarbimirus (Skarbimir)
– gained fame through the narration of Gallus Anonymous,
where they play an important role. They are named circa
twentyХtimesХinХtheХchronicleбХbutХSieciechХhasХtheХtitleХ“palв
atine”ХattachedХonlyХonceХandХSkarbimirХtwiceбХplusХonceХheХ
is mentioned as princeps militie.42 It seems that in the Polish
environment the term comes palatinus merged and is used
synonymously with voivode (wojewoda).43 The Polish trans-
39 Ibid, 18–19, 62. It is considered that the magister tavernicorum
traditionally acted as the supreme judge of all people belonging to the
chamber, including its count with his staff and the burghers of the royal
towns. Engel, The Realm, 154.
40 For the extensive list of Polish literature on the subject of Sieciech see
яanuszХźurtykaбХ“Sieciech”бХinХ іolskiХSłownikХчiograficznyбХvolгХ XXXVI,
1995–1996, [online] www.ipsb.nina.gov.pl/index.php/a/sieciech#
(3/2016).
41 At the beginning of the 22nd chapter of his second book Gallus men -
tioned that after the revolt and removal of Sieciech, the Duke did not
appointХ newХ palatineгХ“Dux ergo Wladislavus pristinae seditionis reminis-
cens, quum Zetheum de Polonia profugavit, quamvis aetate debilis et infirmi-
tate fuerit, nullum tamen in curia sua palatinum vel palatini vicarium praefecit,
omnia namque per se ipsum vel suo consilio sagaciter ordinabat, vel cuilibet co-
miti, cuius provinciam visitabat, curiae responsionem et sollicitudinem com-
mendabat.”Х– Gallus Anonymus, Galli Chronicon, in MPH I, 443.
42 Ibid., 435, 448, 430, 476.
43 GieysztorбХ UrządХ wojewodzińskiбХ ижм–изкрХ юdгбХ WojewodaбХ SłownikХ
staroђitnooeciХ słowiańskichХ VюбХ ĐWrocławбХ жонеЮХ йнл–487; Pleszczynski,
The Birth of a Stereotype, 90–98; Teterycz-іuzioбХ “WczesnopiastowskaХ
organizacja”, 255–зклрХźurtykaбХ“Sieciech”Х– the palatine is referred to as
“palatynХĐwojewodaЮХpolskiбХnajwyђszyХdostojnikХWładysławaХHermana”рХ
similarlyбХ theХ entranceХaboutХ SkarbimirХ ĐяanuszХ чieniakбХ “Skarbimir”бХinХ
79
Hungaro-Polonica
lation of the Latin denomination of an administrative terri-
tory of e. g. Palatinatus Cracoviensis isХ “WojewództwoХ kraв
kowskie”44 (Voivodeship of Cracow), which is comparable
with the situation in the German lands, where the term Pa-
latinatus is synonymous with the administrative Pfalz and
comes palatii/palatinus with (Hof)Pfalzgraf.45 The terminologi-
cal shift in the meaning throughout the Central Europe was
already analysed in several works.46
In the Hungarian context, there is an administrative ter-
ritory in the Kingdom that was a voivodeship, and that is
Transylvania. The name of the office of the dignitary over-
іolskiХ SłownikХ чiograficznyбХ volгХ XXXVIII, 1997–1998, [online]
www.ipsb.nina.gov.pl/index.php/a/skarbimir# /3/2016/), palatine in
sourcesбХ refersХ toХ himХ asХ “wojewoda”гХ SeeХ ZbigniewХ ьóralskiбХ UrzędyХ iХ
godnoцciХ wХ dawnejХ іolsceбХ ĐWarszawaбХ жониЮХ знжрХ щvoфáčková-żaláХ –
Zelenka, Curia ducis, 52.
44 StefanХ źrzysztofХ źuczyńskiбХ іolskieХ herbyХ ziemskieгХ GenezaбХ treцciбХ
funkcje [Coat of Arms of the Polish Lands. Genesis, Content, Functions],
(Warszawa, 1993) 214.
45 Irmfried Eberl, Pfalzgraf, III. Ottonen-, Salier- und Stauferzeit; Pfalz,
Palast, in LexMA 6, 1993–1996; 2013. The specific territory of Palatinate
(formed in 12th century from the lands of the counts palatine of
Lotharingia /Lorraine/; divided into the Rhenish/Lower and the Upper
Palatinate) were the lands of the count palatine, ergo controlled by the
leading secular prince of the Holy Roman Empire. In early medieval
period, German palatines served as stewards of royal territories in the
absence of emperors. Since 1214, when Frederick II granted the lands to
Louis I, duke of Bavaria, the Wittelsbach dynasty controlled them.
“іalatinate”бХ inХ ъncyclopaedia Britannica, [online] www.britan-
nica.com/place/Palatinate (5/2016).
46 ьieysztorбХ “UrządХ wojewodziński”бХ ижм–325; Teterycz-іuzioбХ “Wczes-
nopiastowskaХorganizacja”, 245–зкмрХSeeХalsoХяózefХыгХSporsбХ“ZeХstudiówХ
nadХurzędamiХwХіolsceХwХXюХiХXююХwгХWojewoda, komornik, pod-komorzy”Х
[From Studies on Offices in Poland in 11–12th Centuries. Voivod, Bailiff,
Chamberlain], Czasopismo Prawno-Historyczne 44 (1992) 26–53.
80
Hungaro-Polonica
seeing it varies in the Latin sources, from the princeps Ultra-
silvanus,47 through dux Transsyluanus,48 to the Woiawoda.49
The originally Slavic word voi(e)vod(e) can be translated to
Latin literally as dux exercituum, with the military co-notation
connecting it back to the other term used by Gallus as a title
for Skarbimir – princeps militie.
When it comes to the military competences of Hungarian
palatines, it is a problem to distinguish what was connected
with the office and what was regular part of being a noble-
man in the inner circle of the king.50 Several palatines led mil-
itary expeditions, either with king or in his name. That does
not necessary mean that it was part of their duties as pala-
tines; several led military expeditions before or/and after
they were palatines (e. g. Dionysus de genere TürjeЮг51 Specif-
ically exercitus palatini is mentioned in Carmen Miserabile of
Rogerius de Apulia, canon and later archdean in Oradea, So-
pron and archbishop of Split, a narrative account of the Mon-
gol invasion in 1241.52 The troops led by the palatine Diony-
47 ZsoldosбХżagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaбХилг
48 CDAC II, 222 (1260) 322; this is a case where the title is part of the
titulature of the (junior) king.
49 DL 392 49. To my knowledge, he had never been referred to as the
Palatine of Transylvania, nor was the territory ever called Palatinatus.
50 See Rady, Nobility, 144–157.
51 See DL 583 82; RA no. 608.
52 Rogerius of Apulia, Carmen MiserabileбХinХTatárskyХvpádХ[TheХżongolХ
Invasion], ed. M. Marek – R. Marsina (Budmerice, 2008) 57–125; original
inХяánosХThurócziбХ Chronica Hungarorum. 1488, Theobald Feger – Erhard
RatdoltгХ цugsburgбХ іergamenгХ Országos SzéchényiХ źönyvtárбХ invгХ noгХ
1143, fol. 157v–172v; 76–ммрХfolгХжлжrпХ“Anno igitur domini evoluto Hungaria
ad regem in malivolentia existente circa nativitatem Domini fama fuit, qoud
confinia Hungarie Ruscie continua Tartari devastabant. Et, quia rex de hoc per
suos nuncios certus erat, ad custodiendum portam Ruscie, que Montana
81
Hungaro-Polonica
sus Tomaj (unnamed by Rogerius) guarded the eastern bor-
der of the Kingdom for several months before he send one of
his soldiers to tell the king that without help they will fall.53
A description of troops led by palatine on other occasion is
also present in the Chronicon Pictum.54 The title princeps militie
occurs in connection to a possible Hungarian palatine – the
already mentioned Samuel Aba is thus titled in the Hungar-
ian-Polish Chronicle.55 Samuel became the king in 1041, as
the third king of Hungaria, after the death of St Stephen I and
dicitur, per quam in Hungariam patebat aditus, misit maiorem suum comitem
cum exercitu palatinum et fecit per totam Hungariam proclamari, quod tam
nobiles, quam [...] (alii) se ad exercitum prepararent, ut essent, quando rex
mitteret, preparari”г
53 “Circa vero medium quadragesime venit ad regem cursitando unus de
militibus palatini ex parte ipsus referens, quod iam ad portam Ruscie
pervenerant et indagines destruebant, et non credebant, quod palatinus posset
eis resistere, nisi rex mittere ei auxilium festinum. [...] Et, dum in anxietate
huiusmodi permaneret, quarto die postea venit idem solus, qui nocte dieque
cursitaverat, palatinus dicens, quod duodecimo die intrante Marcio in porta
congressum habuerat cum eisdem et suis pene omnibus sagittis et gladiis
crudeliter trucidatis cum paucis evaserat [...]”Х – Ibid., 78–79; original fol.
161v.
54 The Chronicle records series of unfortunate events connected to meeting
between the Hungarian king Stephen II and Bohemian duke Vladislaus I,
thatХcontainsХpartХaboutХ“Ianus vero filius Vrosa, palatinus comes“ХcampingХ
withХhisХtroopsХseparatelyХfromХtheХkingгХ“Ianus vero filius Vrosa, palatinus
comes longe descenderant de rege. Qui cum audissent, silenter ac suaviter suos
armaverunt et impetum super Bohemos, qui castra devastabant, fecit.
‘Contrivitque Dominus’ eos ‘in ore gladii’ Hungarorum et dire morti sauciavit.
Misitque Ianus post regem nuncium et mamanifestavit illi victoriam [...]”Х –
SRH I, 436–437; Chronicon PictumбХ[TheХюlluminatedХшhronicle]ХOrszágosХ
SzéchényiХźönyvtárбХшodгХŻatгХйейбХfolгХккrг
55 “Cum quo sine mora presulem Strigonie Astriquum et principem milite Albam
nomine ad avunculum suum Meschonem ducem Polonie et Ungarie conveniret.”Х
– Martin Homza (ed.), Uhorsko-poзskáХkronikaХпХNedocenenýХprameňХkХ
dejinámХ strednejХ ъurópyХ [TheХ Hungarian-Polish Chronicle : An
UnderratedХSourceХofХtheХшentralХъurope’sХHistory]бХĐчratislavaбХзееоЮХжкег
82
Hungaro-Polonica
after (at first) successful revolt against Peter Orseolo.56 He
was married to the sister of St Stephen and is considered to
be the first palatine in Hungarian Kingdom.57 Some proclaim
that it is to be taken for granted that the office of palatine was
established by St Stephen I and that Samuel held it during
his reign.58 Some postulate that he was made palatine after
theХweddingХwithХtheХprincessбХwhichХfittedХintoХtheХking’sХ
administrative reforms, and elevated Samuel with his terri-
tory (Eger) from provinciality to the higher ranks.59 Some ex-
press their views more cagily, saying only that he was in a
“positionХofХresponsibility”ХonХStХStephen’sХcourtб60 or follow
strictlyХtheХsourcesХwhichХdateХSamuel’sХsupposedХpalatinateХ
in the years 1038–1041, into the time after death of St Stephen
and after the coronation of Peter Orseolo.61
The absence of a royal charter in which Samuel Aba
would be labelled as palatine (or just mentioned, for that
matterЮбХ doesn’tХ haveХ muchХ informationХ valueбХ sinceХ it
would be extraordinary for the first half of the 11th century,
if it existed. When it comes to other sources, in the Gesta Hun-
garorum anonymi notarii Belae regis heХisХ‘only’ХmentionedХasХ
56 Kosztolnyik, Hungary...890s to 1063, 332–337; Engel, The Realm, 29.
57 ZsoldosбХżagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaбХжкбХзнж
58 SzрcsбХц nádoriХintézményбХзл–29, 300.
59 SteinhübelбХNitrianskeХkniežactvoбХжоибХзизбХижнбХйзмбХйки–454.
60 Kosztolnyik, Hungary...890s to 1063, 333.
61 ZsoldosбХżagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaбХжкбХзнжрХRichardХżarsinaХ
et al., Dejiny Slovenska I (do roku 1526) [The History of Slovakia I (up to
theХ yearХ жкзлЮ]бХ ĐчratislavaбХ жонлЮХ жмерХ ьyulaХ źristóбХ “Nádorok”Х
[іalatines]бХandХŻászlóХSzegfűбХ“SámuelХцba”бХinХźoraiХżagyarХTörténetiХ
Lexikon (9–жйгХ századЮбХ edгХ ьyгХ źristóХ – P. Engel – F. Makk (Budapest,
1994) 474, and 592–593.
83
Hungaro-Polonica
a king.62 In most of the versions of Chronici Hungarici compo-
sitio saeculi XIV. heХisХonlyХasХ„quidam comes“г63
Samuel is titled comes pal(l)atii in the hagiographic docu-
ment De Sancto Gerhardo episcopo Morosenensi et martyre regni
Ungarie from the second half of the 13th century64 and
later in the Chronicon Budense, one of the versions of Chronici
Hungarici published in the 15th century.65 He is titled princeps
62 VincentХ żúcskaХ ĐedгЮбХ źronikaХ anonymnéhoХ notáraХ kráзaХ чelaХ пХ Gesta
Hungarorum [The Chronicle of Anonymous Notary of King Bela: Gesta
Hungarorum], (Budmerice, 20ееЮХмнБмог
63 “Anno igitur regni Petri tertio principes Hungarorum et milites consilio
episcoporum convenerunt adversus Petrum regem et sollicite querebant, si
aliquem de regali progenie in regno tunc invenire possent, qui ad gubernandum
regnum esset ydoneus et eos a tyrannide Petri liberaret. Cimque neminem talem
in regno invenire potuissent, elegerunt de semet ipsis quemdam comitem
nomine Abam, sororium sancti regis Stephani et eum super se regem
constituerunt.”Х– SRH I, 324–325; Chronicon Pictum, fol. 24rгХTheХ“quidam
comes”Х isХ ratherХ dismissiveХ towardsХ SamuelбХ andХ canХ beХ viewedХ asХ anХ
attempt to discredit him – the domestic noblemen who usurped the throne
from the king with a foreign origin might have been a touchy topic in the
period. Chronici Hungarici was composed under the rule of the Anjou
kings (See SRH I, 219–237) and even though the parts concerning the first
ÁrpadХkingsХwereХtakenХfromХolderХsourcesбХsomeХalterationsХmightХhadХ
been made, especially when taken in account the problems Charles Robert
hadХwithХsoХcalledХ‘oligarch-palatines’бХaboutХwhichХseeХSzрcsбХцХnádoriХ
intézményбХ жем–114; so the title palatine might have been omitted on
purpose.
64 “Post quem Petrus in regem coronatus est, cui cum omnes regni principes
fidelitatem sub iureiurando spopondissent, Alba comes pallacii, deiecto Petro,
regalem coronam et aulam regiam sibi usurpavit”Х– SRH II, 500; Kosztolnyik,
Hungary...890s to 1063, 281.
65 Incunable issued in June 1473. SRH I, 220. The SRH I edition actually
does not contain the mention from Chronicon Budense, which is possible to
find only in the separate edition by Podradczky (Chronicon Budense, ed. I.
іodradczkyбХ ĐчudaбХ жнинЮХмнпХ“Et Samuel Aba, S. Stephani sororis maritus,
Palatii Comes, ei sufficitur. Anno 1041.”ХцlsoХseeХChronica Hungarorum, Buda
жймибХ щigitálisХ kincstárХ - Digital treasury, (Budapest, 2006). The quoted
text is paragraph heading, in the text of the paragraph itself Samusel is still
“quemdam comitem nomine Abam.”
84
Hungaro-Polonica
milite66 in the Hungarian-Polish Chronicle, which was also
most likely composed in the 13th century, so around two hun-
dred years after his death. None of this means thatХheХwasn’tХ
a palatine, but neither that he was. The most substantiated
conclusion is that in the 13th century, it made sense to the au-
thor of De Sancto Gerhardo to connect the title of palatine to
Samuel Aba, either because he had access to some nowadays
unknown source or because the level of power Samuel Aba
achieved – overthrowing the ruling king and becoming the
ruler himself – was coherent with the position the palatines
at that time enjoyed in the Kingdom. The use of princeps mil-
itie in Hungarian-Polish Chronicle can fall into the same cat-
egory, but on a more hypothetical level. The author mixed
several historical figures and events together, so Alba in the
Chronicle is not strictly speaking just Samuel Aba. It cannot
be ruled out, that the author knew the work of Gallus Anon-
ymous – he actually mentions Sieciech with the title of pala-
tine67 – andХtheХ“princeps militie”ХmightХhaveХbeenХaХreferenceХ
to it, or at least he could have adopted the title in the
іolishдlocalХenvironmentбХandХnotХnecessarilyХ“have a West-
ernХorigin” as some say that the terminological use of the title
supportsХtheХbelieveХinХtheХWesternХoriginХofХtheХшhronicle’sХ
author.68
The comparability of the Central European models of
courts is undeniable, but in no way simple. As stated about
the court of Bohemia, neither court was just an application
66 Homza, Uhorsko-poзskáХkronikaХpгХжнбХжкег
67 Ibid., 176.
68 Ibid., 151.
85
Hungaro-Polonica
of a foreign system, nor was any of them autochthonous.69 It
is not possible to compare the three dominions with a strict
approach, either looking only on the namesake offices or
searching for equivalent dignitaries with rigorously same
competences. As for the office of palatine, barely existent in
Bohemia, and on its peak with Sieciech and Scarbimir in the
12th century in Poland, in the Kingdom of Hungary it became
“specificХandХuniqueХinstitution”70 during the 13th century.71
Bibliography
Primary sources
Gallus Anonymus, Galli Chronicon, in MPH, I, edгХцгХчielowskiбХĐŻwówбХ
1864) 390–459.
Hincmar von Reims, De Ordine Palatii, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
Fontes iuris 3, ed. Th. Gross – R. Schieffer (Hannover, 1980).
Rogerius of Apulia, Carmen MiserabileбХ inХ TatárskyХ vpádХ [TheХ żongolХ
Invasion], ed. M. Marek – R. Marsina (Budmerice, 2008) 57–125.
Uhorsko-poзskáХkronikaХпХNedocenenýХprameňХkХdejinámХstrednejХъurópyХ
[The Hungaro-Polish Chronicle: Un-appreciated Source to the History of
Central Europe], ed. M. Homza (Bratislava, 2009).
69 щvoфáčková-żaláХ– Zelenka, Curia ducis, 73.
70 SzрcsбХц nádoriХintézményбХиеег
71 ZsoldosбХżagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaбХжк–25.
86
Hungaro-Polonica
Secondary literature
щvoфáčková-żaláбХ щanaХ – Zelenka, Jan, Curia ducis, curia regis.
іanovníckyХ dvůrХ zaХ vládyХ іфemyslovcůХ [шuriaХ щucisбХ шuriaХ RegisгХ TheХ
Royal CourtХunderХtheХRuleХofХіфemyslids] (Praha, 2011)
ъngelбХіálбХTheХRealmХofХStХStephenбХц History of Medieval Hungary, 895–
1526 (London – New York, 2001).
ьieysztorбХцlexanderбХ“UrządХwojewodzińskiХweХwczesnychХpaństwachХ
słowiańskichХюX–XюХwieku”Х[TheХOffice Voivod in Early Slavic Countries
in 9–11th Century], Archeologia Polski 16 (1971) 317–325.
źosztolnyikбХZoltánХягХHungaryХunderХtheХъarlyХÁrpadsбХноеsХtoХжелибХъastХ
European Monographs DCV (New York, 2002).
Lexikon des Mittelalters, CD-ROM-Ausgabe, J. B. Metzler 2000.
Pleszczynski, Andrzej, The Birth of a Stereotype: Polish Rulers and their
Country in German Writings c. 1000 A.D. (Leiden – Boston, 2011).
Rady, Martyn, Nobility, Land and Service in Medieval Hungary, Studies
in Russia and East Europe (Hondmill – New York, 2000).
Ragin, Charles C, The Comparative Method (Berkeley – Los Angeles –
London, 1987).
SteinhübelбХ яánбХ NitrianskeХ kniežactvoХ [TheХ NitraХ щuchy] (Budmerice –
Bratislava, 2004).
SzрcsбХ TiborбХ цХ nádoriХ intézményХ koraiХ történeteХ жеее–1342 [An Early
History of the Palatinal Institution 1000–1342], Subsidia ad historiam
medii aevi Hungariae inquirendam 5 (Budapest, 2014).
SzűcsбХяenрбХ“Three Historical Regions of Europe”, in Civil Society and the
State, ed. J. Keane (London, 1988) 291–331.
Teterycz-іuzioбХ цgnieszkaбХ “WczesnopiastowskaХ organizacjaХ
administracyjnaХwХXХiХXюХwieku”Х[ъarlyХіiastХцdministrativeХOrganisationХ
in the 10th and 11th шentury]бХSłupskieХ StudiaХ HistoryczneХ оХ ĐзеежЮХзйк–
257.
ZsoldosбХ цttilaбХ żagyarországХ világiХ archontológiájaХ жеее–1301 [The
Secular Archontology of Hungary 1000–1301] (Budapest, 2011).
87
Gábor Barabás
University of Pécs
Coloman of Galicia and his Polish Relations.
The Duke of Slavonia as Protector of Widowed
Duchesses*
Rivalry in Galicia
At the beginning of the 13th century the main contact area of
Polish-Hungarian relations was Galicia, where the interests
ofХtheХÁrpádsХandХіiastsХmet that of the local elite.1 The ori-
gins of the Polish connections of Prince Coloman (1208–
1241)2 can also be found there. The Polish-Hungarian com-
petition in this area was strengthened especially after the
* Research for this paper was supported by the Hungarian Scientific
Research Found (OTKA NN 109690). I am grateful to Professor Endre
Sashalmi for the correction of the text.
1 Cf. żárta FontбХÁrpád-háziХkirályokХésХRurikidaХfejedelmekХ[цrpadianХ
Kings and The Rurikid Princes] (Szeged, 2005) 179–зжйрХ NatašaХ
іrocházkováбХ "Some Notes on the Titles of Coloman of Galicia", in
Slovakia and Croatia Vol I. Slovakia and Croatia Historical Parallels and
шonnectionsХĐuntilХжмнеЮбХedгХVгХźucharskáХ– SгХźuzmováХ– A. Mesiarkin
(Bratislava – Zagreb, 2013) 104.
2 ьézaХźanyóбХЧźálmánХherczegХжзен–жзйж”Х[шolomanбХHungrianХіrince
1208–1241], Katholikus Szemle 9 (1895) 250–267, 414–ййкрХ TiborХ цlmásiбХ
ЧźálmánгХżagyarХherceg”Х[шolomanбХHungarianХіrince]бХinХKorai magyar
történetiХ lexikonХ Đо–жйгХ századЮбХ edХ ьyгХ źristóХ – P. Engel – F. Makk
(Budapest, 1994) 316.
89
Hungaro-Polonica
death of Roman Mstislavič3 in 1205,4 although the Hungarian
endeavour concerning Galicia was already noticeable at the
timeХofХźingХчélaХюююг5 Roman was killed in the battle of Zawi-
chost, while he was fighting certain Polish dukes (Leszek the
White and Konrad of Masovia).6 His widow, Maria, had no
choice but to try to protect the interests of their sons, Daniel
and Vasilko. In this situation she turned to the Duke of Cra-
cow, Leszek the White, while seeking the support of Andrew
II as well.7 The Hungarian king arranged a personal meeting
with Maria and came to an agreement with Leszek in 1206.8
The next conflict broke out in 1213, when Andrew II
planned a campaign to support Maria and Daniel. On his
way to Galicia he learned about the assassination of his wife,
Gertrud of Merania.9 The king turned back to Hungary,
while his army, led by Vladislav źormiličič, continued
3 щariuszХ щąbrowskiбХ RodowódХ RomanowiczówХ ksiąђątХ halicko-
wołyńskichХ [TheХ ьenealogyХ ofХ theХ RomanowiczesХ ofХ theХ щuchyХ ьalica-
Żodomeria]ХĐіoznańХ– WrocławбХзеезЮХзи–44.
4 źarolХHollýб "Princess Salomea and Hungarian–Polish Relations in the
Period 1214–жзйжЧбХHistorickýХСasopisХккбХSupplement (2007) 10.
5 ыontбХÁrpád-háziХkirályokбХжмо–187.
6 HollýбХ “іrincessХ Salomea”бХ жерХ щariuszХ щąbrowskiбХ “іiastenХ undХ
RjurikidenХvomХжжгХbisХzurХżitteХdesХжигХяahrhunderts“бХinХDie piastische
Herrschaft in kontinentalen Beziehungsgeflechten vom 10. bis
zum frühenХжи. Jahrhundert, ed. D. Adamczyk – N. Kersken (Wiesbaden,
2015) 180.
7 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжег
8 żárta Font, “II.цndrás oroszХ politikájaХ ésХ hadjáratai“ [The Russian
іolicyХandХtheХшampaignsХofХźingХцndrewХюю]бХSzázadokХжзкХĐжоожЮХ119,
122–жзирХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжжг
9 ыorХ thisХ seeХ recentlyХ TamásХźörmendiбХ цХ “ьertrúdХ királynéХ elleniХ meв
rényletХ körülményei”Х [TheХ шircumstancesХ ofХ theХ цsassinationХ ofХ їueenХ
ьertrude]бХinХъgyХtörténelmiХgyilkosságХmargójáraгХжзжи–зежигХżerániaiХ
ьertrúdХemlékezeteбХedгХягХżajorossyХĐSzentendreбХзежйЮХок–124.
90
Hungaro-Polonica
marching to Galicia. After his first successes Vladislav func-
tioned as the Hungarian governor of Galicia. The widow of
Roman seemed to be unsatisfied with the turn of events, so
she contacted Leszek the White again. Daniel raised an army
with the support of the Cracowian duke and defeated
VladislavХinХtheХbattleХbyХtheХriverХчóbrkaг10 Despite this vic-
tory, Leszek and Daniel could not accomplish the much de-
sired territorial control.11
The reaction of Andrew II to these events was a campaign
against Cracow. According to certain suppositions, the Hun-
garian king planned to place his second son, Coloman as
king on the throne of Galicia as early as 1213.12 Later on he
wrote about this issue to Pope Innocent III and he described
the plan as the idea of certain boyars of Galicia, the so-called
Hungarian party.13 In this situation Leszek found himself in
a dilemma: he could either fight the Hungarian king or co-
operate with him. The Duke of Cracow chose the second op-
tion as the events of 1214 show us.14
In the fall of this year one of the most important actions
of the selected era took place, namely the meeting of SpišХ
(ScepusiaбХ Szepesség) of Andrew II and Leszek the White.
The meeting of the rulers was also a turning point in the life
of Prince Coloman, the second son of the Hungarian king. In
the so-called agreement (or treaty) of Spiš Andrew and
10 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзй–жзкрХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжжг
11 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзкрХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжжг
12 Cf. ibid. 11–12.
13 RA no. 294. See: ыontбХ “ююгХ цndrásХ orosz“бХ ж25–126; HollýбХ “Princess
Salomea”бХжж–12.
14 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзк–126; HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бжзг
91
Hungaro-Polonica
Leszek came to the decision that their alliance should be con-
firmed by the marriage of Coloman and Salomea, the daugh-
ter of Leszek.15 Concerning the effects of the agreement one
can find two contradictory opinions. On the one hand, and
this is the conventional view, the agreement is considered fa-
vourable especially for the Hungarian king, since according
to the agreement Coloman should have ruled over Galicia as
king, while Leszek only got іrzemyцlХandХŻubaczówХin re-
turn.16 On the other hand it has to be emphasised that the
daughter of the Cracowian duke was engaged to a member
ofХ theХ ÁrpádsбХ andХ this kind of event had happened only
once since 1138, so Leszek could benefit from the prestige of
this marriage.17 According to some scholars he could even
secure the coronation of Salomea in the agreement – at least,
later events can point to this conclusion.18
As a result of the agreement of Spiš Coloman was placed
in Galicia at the end of 1214, and was waiting for the corona-
tion, perhaps already in the company of his bride.19 It is in-
teresting, however that there is no mention of Salomea in the
15 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзкрХNatašaХіrocházkováбХ“źoloman HaličskýХ
naХ SpišiХ predХ rokomХ жзйж“Х [шolomanХ ofХ ьaliciaХ inХ Spiš before 1241], in
TerraХScepusiensisгХStanХbadańХnadХdziejamiХSpiszuб edгХRгХьładkiewiczХ–
M. Homza (Żevoča – WrocławбХзееиЮХзййрХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжзг
16 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзкг
17 HollýбХ “іrincessХ Salomea”бХ жзбХ жйбХ жкгХ шfгХ WojciechХ źozłowskiбХ “The
Dynastic Horizons of the Árpáds and Piasts, ca. 1150–1250“бХ Annual of
Medieval Studies at CEU 15 (2009) 85, 89–94.
18 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжзрХЭura Hardi stated that the assurance of
Marias and Daniels rule in Vladimir was also part of the agreement of Spiš.
ЭuraХHardiбХNaslednici Kijeva [The Successors of Kiev]. (Novi Sad, 2002)
134.
19 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бжкгХżártaХыontХdeniedХthisХoptionг ыontбХ“ююгХ
цndrásХorosz“бХжзмг
92
Hungaro-Polonica
letter of Andrew II, which he sent to Pope Innocent III.20 In
another royal charter from the following year we learn about
theХ papalХ grantХ ofХ шoloman’sХ coronationг21 Yet, it is also
questionable if Salomea was crowned too, at the inaugura-
tion of her husband. Gerard Labuda, for example, denied
this possibility, based on the assumed age of the duchess.
Furthermore, he assumes the participation of the Cracowian
bishopбХ VincentyХ źadłubekХ atХ theХ coronationгХ TheХ SlovakХ
historianХ źarolХ HollýбХ onХ theХ contraryбХ interpretsХ thisХ hyв
pothesisХasХanХindicatorХofХSalomea’sХattendance of the cere-
mony.22 It is also possible to suppose multiple acts: namely
that the unction and the first coronation was performed right
after the meeting of SpišХinХHungaryбХъsztergom, while the
second one with the crown sent by the pope only later.23
żártaХыontХearlierХcountedХwithХoneХcoronationХandХdatedХ
this event to the pontificate of Innocent III, so before July
1216 and she thought it was performed in Galicia.24 At the
outset of the 20th centuryХUbulХźállayХclaimedХthatХtheХcoroв
nation had happened in Hungary at the turn of 1215 and
20 RA no. 294. It can be assumed that it was composed before the meeting
of Spiš. For that see HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжкг
21 RA no. 302.
22 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжл–17; Gerard Labuda, Zaginiona kronika z
pierwszejХ połowyХ XюююХ wiekuХ wХ RocznikachХ źrólestwa Polskiego Jana
щługoszaпХpróbaХrekonstrukcjiХ[цХŻostХшhronicleХfromХtheХыirstХHalfХofХtheХ
13th шenturyХ inХ theХ цnnalesХ ofХ theХ іolishХ źingdomХ byХ яanХ щługosz]Х
ĐіoznańбХжониЮХ54–55.
23 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжмгХ
24 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзл–127. For the changes in her opinion see her
upcomingХ workХ onХ шolomanХ ĐżártaХ ыontбХ “źálmánХ ésХ SalomeaгХ цХ
koronázásХ problémái“Х [шolomanХ andХ SalomeaбХ іroblemsХ ofХ theХ
шoronation]бХinХюnХmemoriamХźosztaХŻászlóбХedгХTгХыedelesХ– Zs. Hunyadi
(Szeged, 2016) in print.
93
Hungaro-Polonica
1216.25 юnХ theХ жозеsХ іolishХ historianХ чronisławХ WłodarskiбХ
and recently the Slovak Nataša іrocházkovaХalsoХoptedХforХ
the Hungarian location, while earlier Gerard Labuda had ar-
gued for a coronation in Galicia.26
юnХ Salomea’s case it is even more difficult to come to a
conclusion about her participation, since there are even less
sources known. The date of her leave of Cracow itself is ques-
tionable, so we do not know exactly when Salomea was
brought to Galicia to Coloman. According to the traditional
view it did not happen right after the meeting of Spiš or even
after the coronation of the Hungarian prince,27 since the
daughter of the Cracowian duke was in a very young age.
Otherwise it is also assumed that Leszek did not intend to
observe the terms of the agreement, so it is not surprising
that there is no evidence of the coronation of Salomea.28 Ka-
rolХHollýХonХtheХotherХhandХemphasisedХtheХweakХpointsХofХ
this argumentation. The doubts based on the age of the duch-
ess, for instance, can be refused by many analogues. Con-
cerning the intentions of Leszek the White, he employs the
25 Ubul źállayбХ“żikorХkoronáztákХmegХźálmántХHalicsХfelkentХkirályátХaХ
pápátólХküldöttХkoronávalф“Х[WhenХandХWhereХwasХшolomanбХtheХцneledХ
źingХofХьaliciaХшrownedХwithХtheХшrownХsentХbyХtheХіopeф]бХSzázadokХимХ
(1903) 672–673.
26 NatašaХ іrocházkováбХ “іostavenieХ haličskéhoХ kráзaХ aХ slavónskehoХ
kniežaťaХ źolomanaХ zХ roduХ цrpádovcovХ vХ uhorskejХ vnútornejХ aХ
zahraničnejХ politikeХ vХ prvejХ poloviciХ жигХ storočia“Х [źingХ ofХ ьaliciaХ andХ
Duke of Slavonia. шolomanХofХtheХÁrpádianХщynastyгХюnХtheХыirstХHalfХofХ
the 13th Century], Medea зХĐчratislavaбХжоонЮХлмрХіrocházkováбХ“Koloman
Haličský“бХзйй–245; Labuda, Zaginiona kronika z, кйгХSummarisingХHollýбХ
“іrincessХSalomea”бХжмг
27 żártaХыontХdatesХitХtoХжзжогХыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзнг
28 SummarisingпХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжм–18.
94
Hungaro-Polonica
evaluation of the agreement of Spiš and states that its out-
come was favourable for the Polish duke, so he was rather
interested in preserving the deal.29 And as the most im-
portant argument he came up with the letter of Andrew II
sent to Pope Innocent III in 1215, in which we can find a pas-
sage about the accomplished marriage.30 ыurthermoreбХHollýХ
refers to the later legend of Salomea reporting on her trip to
Galicia at the age of three, right after the agreement men-
tioned several times.31 In connection with this idea he takes
it probable that the young couple was crowned together.32
We cannot decide this question though definitely, yet, the
queen status33 of SalomeaХisХthanksХtoХhisХhusbands’ХtitleХnotХ
doubtful, as her addressing in the letter of Pope Gregory IX
in 1234 proves it.34
TheХ“rule”ХofХtheХnewХkingХinХьaliciaХdidХnotХlastХlongбХ
and probably ended in 1221 or 1222 at the latest. It is ques-
tionable if Coloman and Salomea spent the whole time there,
or they were expelled in 1219 from Galicia, and got back
there later as a result of a Hungarian campaign.35 The end of
the Ruthenian episode of the life of the royal couple caused
the attack of Mstislav Udalyj, the duke of Novgorod. Peace
was restored through the engagement of Andrew, the third
son of Andrew II, and the daughter of Mstislav.36 Coloman
29 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжнг
30 RA no. 302.
31 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжн–19.
32 Ibid. 19–20.
33 Although it did not require the act of coronation.
34 RGIX noгХзжзлгХSeeХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжо–зегХżártaХыontХdidn’tХ
deny the possibility of the coronationгХыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзнг
35 шfгХыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“бХжзн–жзорХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХзз–23.
36 ыontбХ“ююгХцndrásХorosz“б жзорХыontбХÁrpád-háziХkirályokбХзжи–214.
95
Hungaro-Polonica
and Salomea had to move to Hungary in this situation: first
they settled in Spiš,37 but in 1226 Coloman followed his elder
brotherбХчélaбХasХtheХщukeХofХшroatiaХandХщalmatiaг38
Coloman and the monastery of Spiš
Coloman got in touch with Polish matters, however, already
before becoming the Duke of Slavonia,39 in Spiš. As we men-
tioned already, after his return from Galicia he spent many
years there, in the north-eastern part of Hungary, in a loca-
tion near his former Kingdom, as well as Poland.40 We do not
know about an active political role of Coloman (or Salomea)
of this time, but there is one case in which the prince and his
Polish connection could have played an important role. So,
it is very likely that Coloman was the founder of the Cister-
cian monastery of Spiš (Savnik – Spišský ŠtiavnikЮ, or at least
37 See Attila Zsoldos, “SzepesХmegyeХkialakulása“ [The Formation of Sze-
pesХшounty]бХTörténelmiХSzemleХйиХĐзеежЮХзкрХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХ
25–26.
38 ыontбХ Árpád-háziХ királyokб зжмрХ ьyulaХ źristóбХ A feudálisХ szét-
tagolódás żagyarországonХ [TheХ ыeudalХ Fragmentation in Hungary]
(Budapest, 1979) 48.
39 TheХquestionХofХшoloman’sХrole in the genesis of the so called Polish-
Hungarian Chronicle is not the subject of this paper. For this see recently
цdrienХ їuéret-Podesta, “VomХ UngarnХ derХ ÁrpádenХ zumХ іolenХ derХ
Piasten. Zur Entstehung und zum Schicksal der sogenannten Ungarisch-
polnischen Chronik“ inХżittelalterlicheХъlitenХundХźulturtransferХöstlichХ
derХ ъlbeгХ юnterdisziplinäreХ чeiträgeХ zuХ цrchäologieХ undХ ьeschichteХ imХ
mittelalterlichen Ostmitteleuropa, ed. A. Klammt – SгХ RossignolХ Đьöt-
tingen, 2009) 70–мжбХмибХмкрХяuditХшsákóбХ“цХżagyar–lengyelХźrónikaХésХaХ
hazaiХ elbeszélрХ hagyomány“Х [TheХ Hungarian-Polish Chronicle and the
Domestic Narrative Tradition], Századok 148 (2014) 305–315.
40 See Zsoldos, “SzepesХ megyeХ kialakulása“, 25; HollýбХ “Princess Sa-
lomea”бХзк–26.
96
Hungaro-Polonica
his father managed to do it with his cooperation.41 It has to
be mentioned as well that according to other views the mon-
astery was founded by Dionysius, son of Ampud, the Hun-
garian master of the treasury (magister tavernicorum rega-
lium). It also has to be considered that he was the count of
Spiš in 1216 and he later became a close trusted man of Co-
loman.42 The significance of this foundation can be found in
the circumstances of its own formation. On the basis of the
statute of the general chapter of шîteaux43 we know that the
abbotsХofХtheХіolishХmonasteriesХSulejówХandХźoprzywnica
were sent to examine the petition of Dionysius concerning a
new monastery. They must have found there suitable condi-
tions, because the right was granted to Dionysius to bring
monksХ thereХ fromХ anotherХ іolishХ monasteryбХ Wąchockг44
41 For the detailed introduction of this topic see чeátaХVidaбХ“цХciszterciХ
rendХ kezdeteinekХ vitatottХ kérdéseiХ aХ Szepességben“Х [TheХ щisputedХ
Questions about the Beginnings of the Cistercian Order in Spiš], in Fons,
skepsisбХlexгХÜnnepiХtanulmányokХaХмеХesztendрsХżakkХыerencХtiszteletéreбХ
ed. T. цlmási – ÉгХRévészХ– Gy. Szabados (Szeged, 2010) 462. Cf. Beatrix
RomhányiбХ “The Role of the Cistercians in Medieval Hungary: Political
Activity or Internal Colonization?“б Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU 1
(1994) 194; Beatrix Romhányi, KolostorokХesХtársaskáptalanokХaХközépkoriХ
żagyarországonХ [żonasteriesХ andХ шollegialХ шhaptersХ inХ theХ żedievalХ
Hungary] (шщХRomбХзеенЮХ’Savnik’
42 źristófХźeglevichбХ“цХszepesiХapátságХtörténeteХazХÁrpád- ésХцnjou-kor-
ban (1223–жинмЮХ“Х[HistoryХofХtheХцbbeyХofХSpiš inХtheХÁrpád- and Angevin
Era], Fons 14 (2007) 5–11.
43 For the catalogues about the foundations of the Cistercian monasteries
cfгХ щánielХ чácsatyaiбХ “цzХ egresiХ ciszterciХ monostorХ koraiХ történeténekХ
kérdései“Х[TheХїuestionsХofХъarlyХHistoryХofХTheХшistercian Monastery of
Egres], SzázadokХжйоХĐзежкЮХ264–267.
44 RomhányiбХ“TheХRoleХof”бХжоерХіrocházkováбХ“źolomanХHaličský“бХзйкрХ
źeglevichбХ“цХszepesiХapátság”бХкрХżárta Font (ed.), Dinasztia, Hatalom,
ъgyházгХRégiókХformálásaХъurópaХközepénХĐоее–1453) [Dynasty, Power,
Church. Formation of Regions in the Middle of Europe (900–1453)] (іécsбХ
2009) 413.
97
Hungaro-Polonica
Among the medieval Cistercian monasteries in Hungary this
one was quite a unique case considering the circumstances
mentioned, because the other foundations happened from
French or Austrian bases (the new monasteries were filiates
of Clairvaux, Pontigny or Heiligenkreutz).45 Only three other
abbeys belonged to the Morimond-group besides the mon-
astery of SpišпХ шikádorбХчorsmonostorХ andХ Zagrebг46 How-
ever, the role of the Polish monasteries can be explained by
the fact of geographical closeness,47 or internal colonization48
as well, but the presence of Coloman in Spiš by the time of
the foundation (1223)49 allows us to take his Polish contacts
into consideration as one of the reasons for the participation
of the mentioned monasteries.50 It is interesting too that there
is no other known evidence of a Polish participation in the
ecclesiastical matters of Coloman, which perhaps can be ex-
plained by the distance between Slavonia and the Polish
lands.
45 Żászló Koszta, “щieХ ьründungХ vonХ ZisterzienserklösternХ inХ UngarnХ
1142–жзме“бХUngarn–Jahrbuch 23 (1997) 66–68; Font, Dinasztia, Hatalom,
ъgyházбХйео–413.
46 Font, DinasztiaбХ HatalomбХ ъgyházбХйжзрХ Koszta, “щieХ ьründungХ von”бХ
76.
47 ыontбХщinasztiaбХHatalomбХъgyházбХйжиг
48 RomhányiбХ“TheХRoleХof”, 190.
49 źeglevichбХ“цХszepesiХapátság”б 5.
50 Martin Homza stated that the initiative of the foundation had come from
Salomea herself, although he later modified this presumption. Martin
Homza, “VzťahyХ SpišaХ aХ żalopoзskaХ odХ rokuХ жжинХ doХ rokuХ жзйж“
[Relations between Spiš and Lesser Poland from 1138 to 1241], in ZborníkХ
príspevkovХkХslovenskýmХdejinámбХedгХягХчobákХĐчratislavaбХжоо8) 106, 111.
SeeпХіrocházkováбХ“źolomanХHaličský“бХзйкрХVidaбХ“цХciszterciХrend”бХйлзг
98
Hungaro-Polonica
Papal Protections and Coloman
The next relevant topic of the Polish-Hungarian relations
concerning the life of Coloman and Salomea was the papal
protection of two Polish duchesses and their sons. On 23rd
December 1233 two charters were issued in the papal chan-
cellery, both addressed to the Duke of Slavonia.51 These let-
ters were meant to secure the protections of the Apostolic See
givenХ toХ ьrzymisławaХ ofХ Sandomierz52 and to Viola of
Opole.53 Due to their requests Pope Gregory IX took the wid-
owedХduchessesХunderХhisХandХSaintХіeter’sХdefenceбХasХweХ
51 SeeХіrocházkováбХ”іostavenieХhaličskéhoХkráзa”бХмжрХ ыontбХÁrpád-háziХ
királyokбХ 217; żárta Font, “цХ világiХ igazgatásХ intézményrendszerénekХ
kialakulásaХ azХ Árpád-korban (1000–жиежЮХ “Х [TheХ ыormationХ ofХ theХ
юnstitutionsХofХtheХŻaicalХцdministrationХinХtheХÁrpád-era (1000–1301)], in
M. Font – T. Fedeles – G. KissбХ żagyarországХ kormányzatiХ rendszereХ
(1000–1526) (іécsбХзеемЮХизрХżartinХHomzaбХ“źrólХHaliczaХźolomanХjakoХ
dux Scepusiae“Х [шolomanбХ źingХ ofХ ьaliciaХ asХ dux Scepusiae], in Historia
scepusii. Vol. I. ed. M. Homza – S. A. Sroka (Bratislava – źrakówбХзееоЮХ
148рХ HollýбХ “іrincessХ Salomea”бХ зкрХ ьáborХ чarabásбХ Das Papsttum und
UngarnХ inХ derХ erstenХ HälfteХ desХ жигХ яahrhundertsХ Đca. 1198– ca. 1241).
іäpstlicheХ ъinflussnahmeХ – Zusammenwirken – юnteressengegensätzeг
Publikationen der ungarischen Geschichtsforschung in Wien. Bd. VI.
(Wien, 2014) 226–230.
52 See чenedyktХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeХundХseineХZeitпХіolitikХundХ
GesellschaftХ imХ mittelalterlichenХ SchlesienХ ĐżünchenбХ зеез) 255, 285;
Johannes Fried, щerХ päpstlicheХ SchutzХ fürХ ŻaienfürstenгХ щieХ politischeХ
ьeschichteХdesХpäpstlichenХSchutzprivilegsХfürХŻaienХĐжж–13. Jahrhundert)
(Heidelberg, 1980) 290. For the earlier history of Sandomierz see Andrzej
чukoбХ“Sandomierz sedes regni principalis and State Formation Processes
in Little Poland“б inХыrühgeschichtlicheХZentralorteХinХżitteleuropaбХedгХягХ
żachácekХ– ŠгХUngermanХĐчonnбХзежжЮХ643–651.
53 SeeХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtige, 280–281, 289; Anna Grabowska, “The
Church in the Politics of the Duke of Opole Mieszko II. Obese (1238–1246)
in the Light of Diplomatic Sources“, in Cogito, Scribo, Spero. Auxiliary
Historical Sciences in Central Europe at the Outset of the 21st Century, ed.
99
Hungaro-Polonica
learn this from the charters sent directly to the duchesses.54
Prince Coloman was ordered as a lay conservator55 to protect
them, their children as well as their belongings and rights.56
The papal protection of laymen was not an extraordinary
phenomenon in the first half of the 13th century, as this prac-
tice was growing under the pontificate of Innocent III.57 The
significance of these cases, however, is the role of the Hun-
garian prince. Though he was not the only appointed protec-
tor, as the archbishop ofХьnieznoХandХtheХbishopХofХWrocławХ
were involved in both cases as ecclesiastical guardians con-
cerning Viola, together with the bishop of Olomuc,58 while
inХtheХcaseХofХьrzymisławaХwithХtheХbishopХofХшracowг59 Co-
loman was neither the only temporal power entrusted by the
popeгХ TheХ interestsХ ofХ ьrzymisławaХ hadХ toХ beХ guardedХ byХ
Henry the Bearded, Duke of Silesia,60 who previously had
acted many times in favour of the duchess and maintained
an especially good relationship with the papacy.61
M. Bolom-Kotari – ягХZouharХĐHradecХźrálovéбХзежзЮХ193, 198–199; Fried,
щerХpäpstlicheХSchutzбХзоег
54 RPR. no. 9337. RGIX no. 1645; RPR no. 9351, RGIX no. 1647.
55 ыriedбХщerХpäpstlicheХSchutzбХиео–310.
56 ыorХ theХ papalХ protectionХ seeХ ыriedбХ щerХ päpstlicheХ SchutzбХ andХ ьáborХ
чarabásбХ “ViolaХ opoleiХ hercegnрХ ésХ źálmánХ szlavónХ hercegгХ ъgyХ
historiográfiaiХ vitaХ margójára“Х [щuchessХ ViolaХ ofХ OpoleХ andХ шolomanбХ
Duke of Slavonia. Contribution to a Historiographical Dispute],
VilágtörténetХимХĐзежкЮХл–мрХюdгбХ“Prinz Koloman und Herzogin Viola von
OppelnгХчeitragХzuХeinemХhistoriographischenХщisput“бХUngarn–Jahrbuch
32 (2016) 2–3.
57 ыriedбХщerХpäpstlicheХSchutzбХзлй–265.
58 RPR no. 9348, RGIX no. 1646.
59 RPR no. 9350, RGIX no. 1648.
60 RGIX. no. 1650.
61 See ZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeб 285.
100
Hungaro-Polonica
The reason of the papal mandate given to the Hungarian
duke and the tasks imposed on him, although similar, were
notХtheХsameХinХtheХtwoХcasesгХTheХgroundХforХшoloman’sХasв
signment can be traced down through the analysis of the sit-
uationsХ ofХ ьrzymisławaХ andХ ViolaХ andХ theirХ connection to
the Duke of Slavonia or broadly to the Hungarian royal fam-
ily. The case of the duchess of Sandomierz seems to be
clearer than the other one, so we will examine it first.
She was the widow of Leszek the White, the mother of
Salomea, and the mother-in-law of Coloman. The Cracowian
duke was murdered at the meeting of the Polish dukes in
Gąsawa on 27th November 1227. After this event WładysławХ
III Laskonogi (Spindleshanks), ruler of Greater Poland and
Konrad of Masovia, the brother of Leszek fought for the
throne of Cracow. The widow of Leszek renounced the
rightsХofХherХsonХinХfavourХofХWładysławХinХжззнбХsoХsheХreв
ceived the territory of Sandomierz in return. After the death
of Laskonogi Henry the Bearded became the greatest sup-
porter of mother and child against Konrad of Masovia.62 The
щukeХofХSilesiaбХasХalreadyХmentionedбХhelpedХьrzymisława
contacting the Apostolic See: his contribution was inevitable,
62 ыorХtheХconflictХseeХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХзйо–284; іrzemysławХ
WiszewskiбХHenrykХююХіoboђnyгХчiografiaХіolitycznaХ[HenryХююХtheХіiousгХ
A Political Biography] (Legnica, 2011) 26–27, 229–231. Cf. Wojciech
źozłowskiб “The Marriage of чolesław of the Piasts and Kinga of the
Árpáds in 1239 in the Shadow of the Mongol Menace“б in Capitulum VI
“юn my Spirit and Thought I Remained a European of Hungarian Originг”
Medieval Historical Studies in Memory of Zoltan J. Kosztolnyik, ed. I.
Petrovics – SгХŻгХTóthХ– E. Congdon (Szeged, 2010) 84–85.
101
Hungaro-Polonica
since the widow and her son by this time were captured by
Konrad.63
Concerning the papal mandate of Coloman we can state
with relative certainty that the reason for it can be found in
his kinshipХ withХ ьrzymisławaгХ TheХ іolishХ historianбХ чeneв
dykt Zientara was of this opinion as well,64 while Karol HollýХ
the role of Salomea emphasizes.65 Unfortunately we do not
possessХanyХconcreteХdataХconcerningХшoloman’sХactivityХinХ
the interest of his mother-in-law. It is furthermore question-
able, if the Hungarian prince could do or wanted to do any-
thing at all in this situation. On the one hand the distance
between Poland and Slavonia (the latter being the south-
western part of Hungary) has to be emphasised, although we
have to take into consideration that the prince possessed the
territory of Spiš until his death,66 an area directly neighbour-
ing Lesser Poland. On the other hand it has to be underlined
that by the time of the issuing of the papal charter the duch-
ess already had been freed from her captivity, while later,
thanks to the mediation of the Polish prelates, an agreement
was made between Henry and Konrad in which the rights of
ьrzymisławaХ andХ herХ sonбХ чolesław67 were likewise se-
cured.68
63 Zientara, Heinrich der чärtigeбХжми–176, 284–286. Cf. Wiszewski, Henryk
ююХіoboђnyбХзнбХжел–110, 235.
64 ZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХзнкг
65 HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХзн–29.
66 шfгХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХзлрХHomza, “źrólХHaliczaХźoloman”, 148.
67 For the assumable role of Salomea in the later marriage of her brother,
чolesławХtheХShyХwithХtheХlatterХіolishХsaintбХźingaбХdaughterХofХźingХчélaХ
юVХseeХHollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХиж–32; źozłowskiб “The Marriage of”б
80–99. Cf. WiszewskiбХHenrykХююХіoboђnyХжкн–160, 235–236.
68 ZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХзнл–287.
102
Hungaro-Polonica
The second case is not as simple as the previous one,
since the connection of Viola to Coloman cannot be proven
easily. She was the widow of Duke Casimir of Opole, who
died in 1230, or perhaps already in 1229. After the death of
her husband Viola became the guardian of their sons,
żieszkoХandХWładysławбХandХasХaХregentХtheХleaderХofХtheХ
Duchy of Opole-Racibórzг69 This situation, however, did not
last long: in 1231 the already mentioned Silesian duke,
Henry the Bearded, as the closest male relative of the young
children, claimed the guardian status above them, and so the
69 SeeХWiszewskiбХHenrykХююХіoboђnyХзнбХжзйбХзикрХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХ
чärtigeбХзне–знжрХWładysław Dziewulski, “чułgarkaХksięђnąХopolskąф“Х[цХ
Bulgarian Duchess of Opole?], хląskiХ źwartalnikХ HistorycznyХ Sobótka,
WrocławskieХTowarzystwoХżiłoцnikówХHistoriiХĐWrocławбХжолоЮХжмж–172;
Wincenty Swoboda, “źsięђnaХkaliskaХчułgarkąфХіrzyczynekХdoХrozbioruХ
krytycznegoХ цnnaliumХ щługosza“Х [цХ чulgarianХ щuchessХ ofХ źaliszфХ
шontributionХtoХtheХшriticalХцnalysisХofХtheХцnnalesХofХщługosz], Studia i
żateriałyХdoХщziejówХWielkopolskiХiХіomorzaХиХĐжонеЮХлж–62; Kazimierz
яasińskiбХ RodowódХ іiastówХ цląskichгХ іiastowieХ wrocławscyбХ legnicko-
brzescyбХ цwidniccyбХ ziębiccyбХ głogowscyбХ ђagańscyбХ oleцniccyбХ opolscyбХ
cieszyńscyХiХoцwięcimscyХ[TheХьenealogyХofХtheХіiastsХofХSilesia]ХĐźrakówбХ
2007) 501–зекрХяerzyХHorwatбХźsięstwoХopolskieХiХjegoХpodziałyХdoХжкизХrгХ
пХ ksiąђętaбХ miastaбХ źoцciółбХ urzędyбХ własnoцРХ prywatnaХ [TheХ щuchyХ ofХ
Opole and its divisions till 1532. Dukes, of the City, Church, Offices,
PrivateХ іroperty]Х ĐRzeszówбХ зеезЮХ ии–ийрХ яerzyХ HorwatбХ źsiąђętaХ
górnoцląscyХ zХ dynastiiХ іiastówпХ UwagiХ iХ uzupeХ naХ genealogiczneХ [TheХ
Dukes of Upper Silesia from the Piast Dynasty. Notes and Extensions on
theХьenealogy]гХĐRudaХхląskaбХзеекЮХзирХцntoniХчarciakбХźsiąђętaХiХksięђneХ
ьórnegoХ хląskaХ пХ pracaХ zbiorowaХ дХ podХ redгХ Antoniego Barciaka [The
Princes and Princesses of Upper Silesia. A Collective Work Edited by
Anton Barciak] (Katowice, 1995) 70, 89; Anna іobóg-Lenartowicz, “ViolaбХ
чułgarkaбХ księђnaХ opolskąгХ іrzyczynekХ doХ migracjiХ małђeńskichХ wХ
цredniowieczu“Х [цХ чulgarianХ щuchessХ ofХ OpoleгХ цХ шontributionХ toХ theХ
Matrimonial Migration in the Middle Ages.], in Kobiety i procesy
migracyjne, ed. A. Chlebowska – K. Sierakowska (Warszawa, 2010) 13–16;
Grabowska, “The шhurchХin”, 192–193.
103
Hungaro-Polonica
rule over Opole.70 His purpose was probably to secure the
resources of the duchy for himself in the struggle for rule
over Cracow.71 Therefore, his pushing Viola into the back-
ground can be understood only indirectly as part of the con-
flict of the Piast stirpes.72
In this situation Duchess Viola turned to the Apostolic
See in 1233, trying to secure her and her sons rights against
the demands of the neighbouring Silesian duke. The already
mentioned papal charters73 show us that Pope Gregory IX
granted the request of Viola. He also decided on the mandate
of ecclesiastical and temporal protectors, but it remained
partially ineffective similarly to the proclamation of the pa-
pal protection. As we mentioned, Henry the Bearded had es-
pecially good relations with the papacy,74 so he could man-
age to solve the problem with a compromise. Due to this set-
tlement Henry remained the guardian of the underage
princes, but he acknowledged their right for Opole, while he,
in fact, did not give up the real power over the duchy. In re-
turn, Viola and her sons could take possession Kalisz and
70 WiszewskiбХHenrykХююХіoboђnyХзнбХжзйбХжкк–156, 235. For the practice of
the custody by the mothers or by closest male relatives cf. Pavol HudáčekбХ
“TheХŻegalХіositionХofХWidowsХinХżedievalХHungaryХupХtoХжзззХandХtheХ
Question of Dower”бХHistorickýХСasopisХлзгХSupplement (2014) 11.
71 ZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХзне–знжрХщziewulskiбХ“чułgarkaХksięђnąХ
opolskąф“бХжмз–173; Swoboda, “źsięђnaХkaliskaХчułgarkąф”бХммг
72 Casimir himself was not directly involved in the struggles, although he
was occasionally part of several alliances. шfгХчarciakбХźsiąђętaХiХksięђne,
мерХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХзем–239.
73 RPR no. 9349; RPR no. 9337, RGIX no. 1645; RPR no. 9348, RGIX no. 1646.
74 ZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХжми–176, 289.
104
Hungaro-Polonica
Ruda in Greater Poland, which were occupied recently by
Henry the Bearded.75
чeforeХweХgetХbackХtoХtheХquestionХofХшoloman’sХinvolveв
ment, we have to state concerning this case that we do not
know any sign of a practical activity of the Slavonian duke
in the interest of Viola. The only clue for his apostolic man-
date is the several times- mentioned papal charter.76 Due to
the lack of further information on Coloman’sХ possibleХ arв
rangements we are not able to find the cause of this papal
mandate, so we have to focus on the other party, i.e. Viola.
There is no evidence of any Hungarian-Polish interaction
form the 1220s or from the time after the death of Casimir
which could explain the participation of Coloman. Neverthe-
lessбХtheХsituationХofХьrzymisławaХpresentsХitselfХasХaХpotenв
tial parallel case, so we have to examine too, if Viola had any
direct connection to Coloman at all.
About the descent of Viola, in contrast to later chapters
of her life,77 sadly, there is only one single data known, the
noticeХ ofХ яanХ щługoszХ inХ hisХ workХ цnnalesХ RegniХ іoloniaeХ
form the 15th century. The annalist wrote the following pas-
sageХforХtheХyearХofХжзкжХconcerningХtheХdeathХofХViolaпХ”Viola
genere et natione Bulgara, Ducissa de Opol, moritur“.78 On the
75 See DziewulskiбХ“чułgarkaХksięђnąХopolskąф“бХжми–175; Zientara, Hein-
richХderХчärtigeбХзнорХьrabowska, “TheХшhurchХin”бХ192–193; Wiszewski,
HenrykХююХіoboђnyХжкк–156, 235.
76 RPR no. 9349.
77 See Swoboda, “źsięђnaХkaliskaХчułgarkąф”бХлжг
78 щługoszХюгХ327.
105
Hungaro-Polonica
basis of this information Viola in Polish historiography is tra-
ditionally considered a Bulgarian duchess.79 This theory is,
however, not the only one present, since according to other
views Viola could have a Hungarian, Ruthenian,80 and Dal-
matian or Croatian81 origin as well. In this paper we cannot
present all arguments about the various views concerning
Violas descent,82 but we have to try to answer the remaining
question: What was the reason for the papal mandate of Co-
loman?
First of all, we have to stick to the disputed descent of the
duchess. As already mentioned, on the basis of the other case
we have to assume that there could be some connection be-
tween the protected Polish widow and the Slavonian duke.
It seems to be very tempting to agree automatically with the
Hungarian version, which could easily explain the duty of
theХHungarianХking’sХsonгХюnХtheХcaseХofХшolomanХoneХhasХtoХ
79 See DziewulskiбХ “чułgarkaХ księђnąХ opolskąф“рХ чarciakбХ źsiąђętaХ iХ
księђneбХ ййбХ ло–мебХ нобХ жжйбХ жзерХ ZientaraбХ HeinrichХ derХ чärtigeбХ знерХ
яasińskiбХ RodowódХ іiastówХ цląskichбХ кеж–кезбХ келрХ żikołajХ ьładyszбХ
ZapomnianiХ krzyђowcyпХ іolskaХ wobecХ ruchuХ krucjatowegoХ wХ Xюю–XIII
wieku [The Forgotten Crusaders: Poland and the Crusader Movement in
the 12th and 13th Centuries] (Warszawa, 2004) 166–жлмрХ іobóg-
ŻenartowiczбХ “ViolaбХ чułgarkaбХ księђna”рХ ьrabowska, “TheХ шhurchХ in”,
192.
80 See Swoboda, “źsięђnaХkaliskaХчułgarkąф”рХHorwatбХźsięstwoХopolskieбХ
28–иерХюdгбХźsiąђętaХgórnoцląscyбХзй–27.
81 щariuszХ щąbrowskiбХ “SlovakХ andХ SouthernХ SlavicХ ThreadsХ inХ theХ
ьenealogyХofХtheХіiastХandХRurikidХщynastiesХinХtheХThirteenthХшentury“Х
in Slovakia and Croatia Vol I. Slovakia and Croatia Historical Parallels and
шonnectionsХĐuntilХжмнебХedгХVгХźucharskáХ – SгХźuzmováХ– A. Mesiarkin
(Bratislava – Zagreb, 2013) 113–116.
82 SeeпХщąbrowskiбХ“SlovakХandХSouthern”бХжжз–жжлрХчarabásбХ“ViolaХopoleiХ
hercegnр”бХже–жнрХюdгбХ“іrinzХźolomanХund”бХм–15.
106
Hungaro-Polonica
take into consideration that the Dalmatian, or even the Ru-
thenian origin of Viola could also be a reasonable supposi-
tion.83 The question itself is more difficult than a simple
choice between theories, since there are many details in the
various hypotheses which deserve further considerations.
For instance, a Hungarian royal charter of 124684 was
used for the identification of Viola, in which we can learn
about the participation of an unknown Polish duke at the
crusade of Andrew II in 1217–1218. The letter itself is proba-
bly not authentic,85 and it is known only from a later tran-
script.86 Yet, it is interesting, how a single passage was used
as a source for the Bulgarian origin,87 as well as for the Hun-
garian,88 or a Dalmatian one.89 It has been assumed that Cas-
imir of Opole was the Polish duke, who accompanied the
Hungarian King on his crusade90 and on his way back home
he found a Bulgarian wife from the family of the tsars.91 Even
though this assumption wastaken into consideration as
right, it still would not be enough evidence for any of the
versions concerning the descent, in our opinion. It has to be
at least mentioned that this imaginable involvement of the
83 See: щąbrowskiбХ“SlovakХandХSouthern”бХжжи–116
84 RA no. 843.
85 яánosХźarácsonyiб HamisбХhibáskeltűХésХkeltezetlenХoklevelekХjegyzékeХ
1400-ig [Catalogue of Forged, Wrong- and Undated Diplomas until 1400]
(Budapest, 1902) 18.
86 In a charter of King Ladislaus IV (1272–1290) which was issued on the
7th September 1274. DL 401 19.
87 щziewulskiбХ“чułgarkaХksięђnąХopolskąф“г
88 HorwatбХźsiąђętaХgórnoцląscyбХзк–26.
89 щąbrowskiбХ“SlovakХandХSouthern”бХжжк–116.
90 ьładyszбХZapomnianiХkrzyђowcy, 156–169.
91 щziewulskiбХ“чułgarkaХksięђnąХopolskąф“бХжлл–169.
107
Hungaro-Polonica
Opolian duke could itself be a reason behind the latter mis-
sion of Coloman, the son of Andrew II.
Regarding the origin of Viola the Ruthenian version has
to be taken into consideration as well, since the role of Co-
loman could be explained this way through a relationship
between the duchess and the duke, dated from the time
when he was the ruler of Galicia.92 It is also interesting in this
point of view that between 1214 und 1217 Casmir of Opole
had an especially good relationship with Leszek the White:
this situation could be a possibility for a Ruthenian marriage
for the duke of Opole.93 The Ruthenian origin of Grzy-
misławaХ canХ alsoХ beХ takenХ intoХ considerationХ asХ aХ clueХ reв
garding Violas assumable Eastern-Slavic heritage too,94 es-
pecially concerning the papal mandate of Coloman. This as-
sumption, however, cannot be supported by any concrete
source, so it remains only a hypothesis.
шoncerningХшoloman’sХіolishХrelationsХthereХisХanother
connection we have to take into consideration, since beside
his mother-in-law there is another relative of his, who played
an important role in the examined matters of the early thir-
ties, Henry I the Bearded. His wife Hedvig (Jadwiga) of Sile-
sia was the sister of Gertrud of Merania, mother of Coloman,
92 ыontбХÁrpád-háziХkirályokбХ204–зжйбХзжмрХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХ
285.
93 SeeХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХзем–зенбХзклрХщziewulskiбХ“чułgarkaХ
księђnąХopolskąф“бХжли–165.
94 Cf. HollýбХ“іrincessХSalomea”бХжирХщąbrowskiбХ“іiastenХundХRjurikiden”бХ
178.
108
Hungaro-Polonica
therefore the Silesian duke was a kin to him.95 We have al-
readyХmentionedХHenry’sХroleХinХbothХcasesбХsoХtheХpresumpв
tionХthatХшoloman’sХpapalХmandatingХcouldХbeХinХconnectionХ
with this kinship, is possibly not really far from the reality.
It has to be emphasized, however that Henry was the fellow
temporal protector of his nephew only in the case of
ьrzymisławaгХшoncerningХtheХpapalХprotectionХofХViolaбХtheХ
Silesian ruler was, on the contrary, even the opponent,
against whom the help of the Apostolic See was sought for
the widowed duchess. We think it is possible, but not prov-
able that the parallel involvement of the related dukes in the
firstХcaseХcouldХledХtoХtheХideaХofХшoloman’sХdualХauthorizaв
tion at the papal Curia.
If we get back to the question of the nature of the rela-
tionship between Coloman and Viola, we have to analyze the
papal charter sent to the duke. In this text there is no evi-
dence of any kinship between the protected person and the
authorized protector.96 It does not mean, however that this
state of affairs rules out the possibility altogether, since nei-
ther does the other papal diploma contain a clue to the rela-
tionship between Coloman and his mother-in-law.
RegardingХшoloman’sХtasksХweХhave to examine the pa-
pal mandates as well. The one about the protection of Viola,
unlike the other, cannot be found in the papal register97 – a
95 SeeХZientaraбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeбХжлибХжмкрХіrocházkováбХ”іostavenieХ
haličskéhoХ kráзa”бХ мерХ WiszewskiбХ HenrykХ ююХ іoboђnyбХ ло–77. Cf.
źozłowskiбХ“TheХщynasticХHorizons“бХозгХыorХtheХpossibleХeffectsХofХsuchХ
kinships onХtheХrelationsХofХtheХrelativesХinvolvedХseeХщąbrowskiбХ“іiastenХ
undХRjurikiden”бХжног
96 VMH I. no. 204, RPR no. 9352, RGIX no. 1649.
97 Cf. RGIX
109
Hungaro-Polonica
condition that can complicate the question even further. It
has to be emphasised, however that not every papal charter
can be found in the registers,98 since there was never a goal
to reach a fullness: the documents were selected on the basis
of various criteria, such as juridical relevance,99 or the peti-
tion of the recipients of the charters.100 In the case of a papal
protection the situation is further complicated by the fact
that the protected persons had their share in its proclama-
tion, as well as in the delivery of the charters to the protec-
tors.101 In the case of Viola it could have an effect on the tra-
dition of the text. Every single charter can be be found in the
register of Pope Gregory IX102 except this one, which is
known to us only thanks to an edition from the modern
era.103 The reason for this situation is (and probably will re-
main) unclear, but there is no reason to doubt the authentic-
ity of the charter, and so the authorisation of Duke Coloman.
Searching for the possible causes of the papal mandate of
the duke the hypothesis has to be mentioned as well that Co-
loman could have been chosen for the task in the papal Curia
either by mistake or due to his relations to Duchess
ьrzymisławaбХsinceХtheХdutiesХofХtheХprotectionХwereХgivenХ
to Coloman within a very short time span, and this situation
could cause the dual authorization. In the daily work of the
98 See Othmar Hageneder, “щieХRegisterХюnnozenz‘Хюююг“б in Papst Innozenz
III, Weichensteller der Geschichte Europas, ed. T. Frenz (Stuttgart, 2000)
92.
99 See Hageneder, “Die Register Innozenz III.“бХоиг
100 Hageneder, “щieХRegisterХюnnozenz‘Хюююг“бХон–99.
101 ыriedбХщerХpäpstlicheХSchutzбХиемг
102 RGIX no. 1645–1649.
103 RPR no. 9349; CDH III/2. 373.
110
Hungaro-Polonica
papal chancellery, especially by the delegated jurisdiction in
the audientia litterarum contradictarum, undeniably there can
be found many defaults,104 but in the case of a papal protec-
tion it is hard to imagine a total coincidence concerning the
selection of a secular protector. The order to protect Viola,
her sons and all their rights was given to Coloman,105 so we
do not think it is possible that the task of the duke was the
result of a misunderstanding. The authorisation of the Slavo-
nian duke probably cannot be explained by his assumed ex-
perience in matters of papal protections either, because be-
side these two cases we do know not many similar episodes
from the life of the King of Galicia, although there are some:
in October 1233, i.e. in the same year, Ninoslav, the Ban of
Bosnia was taken under the protection of the Apostolic
104 SeeХьáborХчarabásбХ“цХpápaiХkiküldöttХbíráskodásХżagyarországonХaХ
kezdetektрlХ aХ жигХ századХ közepéig“Х [щelegatedХ іapalХ яurisdictionХ inХ
Hungary from the Origins to the Middle of the 13 th шentury]бХTörténelmiХ
Szemle 55 (2013) 196–197; Othmar Hageneder, Die geistliche
Gerichtsbarkeit in Ober- undХ NiederösterreichгХ VonХ denХ цnfängenХ bisХ
zum Beginn des 15. Jahrhunderts (Linz, 1967) 59–60; James Brundage, The
Medieval Canon Law (London, 1995) 139; Peter Herde, “ZurХpäpstlichenХ
Delegationsgerichtsbarkeit im Mittelalter und in der frühenХ Neuzeit“б
Zeitschrift der Savigny-StiftungХ fürХ RechtsgeschichteгХ źanonischeХ
Abteilung 119 (2002) 23; Ludwig Falkenstein, “Appellationen an den
Papst und Delegationsgerichtsbarkeit am Beispiel Alexanders III. und
Heinrichs von Frankreich“б Zeitschrift der Kirchengeschichte 97 (1986) 55–
56.
105 “Quum igitur dilectam in Christo filiam, V. viduam, ducissam in Opal, ac
filios eius, in devotione ecclesie persistentes, cum omnibus bonis, que in
presentiarum iuste ac rationabiliter possident, sub Apostolice Sedis protectione
receperimus speciali, serenitatem tuam rogandam duximus attente, ac
hortandam, quatenus ipsos, ducissam et filium eius, terram et alia bona sua,
habeas pro divina et nostra reverentia propensius commendata, et tam a duce ac
aliis supra dictis, quam aliis etiam, qui eos contra protectionis nostre tenorem
molestare presumserint, tradita tibi potestate defendas”Х– CDH III/2. 372–373;
RPR no. 9349.
111
Hungaro-Polonica
See,106 Coloman, as the Duke of Slavonia, Croatia and Dal-
matia was also informed about the papal decision.107 The
fight against the heretics in the Balkans was the reason be-
hind the papal protection of the Hungarian prince,108 when
Gregory IX gave him a similar assurance about the safety of
his family and belongings on 17th October 1234, while he was
supposed to lead a campaign against the heretics of Bos-
nia.109
In short, it has to be stated about the examined question
thatХaccordingХtoХourХknowledgeХonХtheХgenealogyХofХtheХÁrв
páds110 there is no evidence of any person with the name Vi-
ola. Nevertheless, it cannot be excluded that the Duchess of
Opole was a Hungarian or even a member of the royal fam-
ily. Concerning this question one argument, namely the pa-
106 RPR no. 9304, RGIX no. 1521. Furthermore, it has to be mentioned that
before the named mandates about the Polish duchesses, it was only this
time that he was contacted from the papal side. See RPR no. 9305, 9349,
9352.
107 RPR no. 9305, RGIX no. 1522.
108 шfгХчarabásбХщasХіapsttumХundбХзйи–254.
109 “Hinc est, quod te affectionis paterne brachiis amplexantes, peronam tuam
cum omnibus bonis tuis, que impresentiarum rationabiliter possides, sub Beati
Petri et nostra protectione suscipimus, et presentis scripti patrocinio conforma-
mus, districtius inhibentes, ut dum pro reverentia Redemptoris contra hereticos
perstiteris debellandos, nullus super bonis eisdem te presumat indebite molestare”Х
– шщцшХ югХ иззбХ RіRХ noгХ омикбХ RьюXХ noгХ зжзигХ шfгХ ыriedбХ щerХ päpstlicheХ
Schutz, 288.
110 SeeХżórХWertnerбХцzХÁrpádokХcsaládiХtörténeteХ[TheХьenealogyХofХtheХ
Árpáds]Х ĐNagybecskerek, 1892) 421–424. About the problem of the
versionsХofХtheХnameХViolaХseeХчarabásбХ“ViolaХopoleiХhercegnр”бХжмбХзз–
23; Id., “іrinzХźolomanХund”бХжй–15, 20–21.
112
Hungaro-Polonica
pal authorisation of Duke Coloman has been almost com-
pletely disregarded until now.111 In the light of the involve-
ment of the Arpadian prince, the Hungarian origin of Viola
seems to be more plausible than previously assumed, alt-
hough the Ruthenian and even the Dalmatian possibilities
cannot be disapproved either.
Conclusion
At the end of this short summary about the Polish relations
of Duke Coloman we can underline the fact that his Polish
wife, Salomea and so his kinship with Leszek the White had
an enormous effect on the intensity of the connections men-
tioned. The matters of the reign and life of the young couple
inХ ьaliciaХ andХ theХ papalХ protectionХ ofХ ьrzymisławaбХ theХ
mother of Salomea, can confirm this statement splendidly.
Coloman had however a second Polish link as well, his aunt,
Hedvig (Jadwiga) of Silesia, who was the sister of the mur-
dered Hungarian queen, Gertrud of Merania. This way the
Silesian duke, Henry I the Bearded, the husband of Hedvig
was a kin to Coloman as well. This connection, however, was
less reflected in the life of the Duke of Slavonia. The direct
crossing of their oeuvres can be observed only regarding the
twoХ papalХ protectionsгХ юnХ theХ caseХ ofХ ьrzymisławaХ HenryХ
was the fellow laymen protector of Coloman, while concern-
ing Viola he was his opponent, who the duchess of Opole
had to be protected from. There is no evidence of any direct
interactions between the Hungarian prince and the Polish
111 WithХtheХexceptionХofХщariuszХщąbrowskiгХSeeХщąbrowskiбХ“SlovakХandХ
Southern”бХжжи–116.
113
Hungaro-Polonica
participants. The questions concerning the reason of Co-
loman’sХpapalХauthorisationХandХhisХcontactХwithХViolaХareХ
therefore unique topics, since the origin of the duchess is a
long disputed issue in the Polish historiography, to which
the papal mandate of Coloman could be a small contribution.
Bibliography
Secondary literature
чarabásбХ ьáborбХ щasХ іapsttumХ undХ UngarnХ inХ derХ erstenХHälfteХ desХ жигХ
Jahrhunderts (ca. 1198– caгХ жзйжЮХ іäpstlicheХ ъinflussnahmeХ –
Zusammenwirken – юnteressengegensätzeбХ іublikationenХ derХ Un-
garischen Geschichtsforschung in Wien Bd. VI. (Wien, 2014).
чarabásбХ ьáborбХ ЧViolaХ opoleiХ hercegnрХ ésХ źálmánХ szlavónХ hercegгХ ъgyХ
historiográfiaiХ vitaХ margójára" [Duchess Viola of Opole and Coloman,
щukeХofХSlavoniaгХшontributionХtoХaХHistoriographicalХщispute]бХVilágtörв
ténetХ37 (2015) 5–28.
чarabásбХьáborбХЧPrinz Koloman und Herzogin Viola von Oppeln. Beitrag
zu einem historiographischen Disput", Ungarn–Jahrbuch 32 (2016) 1–24.
чarciakбХцntoniбХźsiąђętaХiХksięђneХьórnegoХхląskaХпХpracaХzbiorowaХдХpodХ
red. Antoniego Barciaka [The Princes and Princesses of Upper Silesia. A
Collective Work Edited by Antoni Barciak] (Katowice, 1995).
щąbrowskiбХ щariuszбХ ЧSlovakХ andХ SouthernХ SlavicХ ThreadsХ inХ theХ
ьenealogyХofХtheХіiastХandХRurikidХщynastiesХinХtheХThirteenthХшentury”бХ
in Slovakia and Croatia Vol I. Slovakia and Croatia Historical Parallels and
шonnectionsХĐuntilХжмнеЮбХedгХVгХźucharskáХ– SгХźuzmováХ– A. Mesiarkin
(Bratislava – Zagreb, 2013) 110–119.
114
Hungaro-Polonica
щąbrowskiбХщariuszбХЧіiastenХundХRjurikidenХvomХжжгХbisХzurХżitteХdesХжигХ
яahrhunderts“бХinХDie piastische Herrschaft in kontinentalen Beziehungs-
geflechten vom 10. bis zum frühenХжи. Jahrhundert, ed. D. Adamczyk – N.
Kersken (Wiesbaden, 2015) 155–189.
Dziewulski, Władysławб ЧчułgarkaХ księђnąХ opolskąфЧХ [цХ чulgarianХ
щuchessХofХOpoleф]бХхląskiХźwartalnikХHistorycznyХSobótkaбХWrocławskieХ
TowarzystwoХżiłoцnikówХHistorii ĐWrocławбХжолоЮХжко–183.
Font, żárta, “II.цndrás oroszХpolitikájaХésХhadjáratai“ [The Russian Policy
andХtheХшampaignsХofХźingХцndrewХюю]бХSzázadokХжзкХĐжоожЮХжем–144.
Font, żártaбХÁrpád-háziХkirályokХésХRurikidaХfejedelmekХ[TheХцrpadianХ
Kings and The Rurikid Princes] (Szeged, 2005).
Font, żártaХĐedгЮб щinasztiaбХHatalomбХъgyházгХRégiókХformálásaХъurópaХ
közepénХĐоее–1453) [Dynasty, Power, Church. Formation of Regions in the
Middle of Europe (900–1453)] (іécsбХзееоЮ.
Fried, Johannes, щerХ päpstlicheХ SchutzХ fürХ ŻaienfürstenгХ щieХ politischeХ
ьeschichteХdesХpäpstlichenХSchutzprivilegs fürХŻaienХĐжж–13. Jahrhundert)
(Heidelberg, 1980).
ьładyszбХ żikołajбХ ZapomnianiХ krzyђowcyпХ іolskaХ wobecХ ruchuХ
krucjatowego w XII–XIII wieku [The Forgotten Crusaders: Poland and the
Crusader Movement in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries] (Warszawa,
2004).
Grabowska, Anna, “The Church in the Politics of the Duke of Opole
Mieszko II. Obese (1238–1246) in the Light of Diplomatic Sources“, in
Cogito, Scribo, Spero. Auxiliary Historical Sciences in Central Europe at
the Outset of the 21st Century, ed. M. Bolom-Kotari – J. Zouhar (Hradec
źrálovéбХзежзЮ.
Hageneder, Othmar, “Die Register Innozenz III.“б in Papst Innozenz III.,
Weichensteller der Geschichte Europas, ed. T. Frenz (Stuttgart, 2000) 91–
102.
HollýбХ źarolбХ "Princess Salomea and Hungarian–Polish Relations in the
Period 1214–1241", HistorickýХСasopisХккбХSupplementХĐзеемЮ.
Homza, Martin, “źrólХ HaliczaХ Koloman jako dux Scepusiae“ [Coloman,
King of Galicia as dux Scepusiae], in Historia scepusii. Vol. I. ed. M. Homza
– S. A. Sroka (Bratislava – źrakówбХзееоЮХжйнг
115
Hungaro-Polonica
HorwatбХ яerzyбХ źsięstwoХ opolskieХ iХ jegoХ podziałyХ doХ жкизХ rгХ пХ ksiąђętaбХ
miastaбХźoцciółбХurzędyбХwłasnoцРХprywatnaХ[TheХщuchyХofХOpoleХandХitsХ
divisions till 1532. Dukes, of the City, Church, Offices, Private Property]
ĐRzeszówбХзеезЮ.
HorwatбХяerzyбХźsiąђętaХgórnoцląscyХzХdynastiiХіiastówпХUwagiХiХuzupeХnaХ
genealogiczne [The Dukes of Upper Silesia from the Piast Dynasty. Notes
and Extensions on the Genealogy] ĐRudaХхląskaбХзеекЮ.
яasińskiбХ źazimierzбХ RodowódХ іiastówХ цląskichгХ іiastowieХ wrocławscyбХ
legnicko-brzescyбХ цwidniccyбХ ziębiccyбХ głogowscyбХ ђagańscyбХ oleцniccyбХ
opolscyбХcieszyńscyХiХoцwięcimscyХ[TheХьenealogy of the Piasts of Silesia]
ĐźrakówбХзеемЮ.
źeglevichбХźristófбХ“цХszepesiХapátságХtörténeteХazХÁrpád- ésХцnjou-kor-
ban (1223–жинмЮХ “Х [TheХ HistoryХ ofХ theХ цbbeyХ ofХ Spiš inХ theХ Árpád- and
Angevin Era], Fons 14 (2007) 3–58.
Koszta, Żászlóб “щieХьründungХvonХZisterzienserklöstern in Ungarn 1142–
жзме“бХUngarn–Jahrbuch 23 (1997) 65–80.
źozłowskiбХWojciechбХ“The Dynastic Horizons of the Árpáds and Piasts,
ca. 1150–1250“бХAnnual of Medieval Studies at CEU 15 (2009) 85–102.
źozłowskiбХWojciechб “The Marriage of чolesław of the Piasts and Kinga
of the Árpáds in 1239 in the Shadow of the Mongol Menace“б in Capitulum
VI. “юn my Spirit and Thought I Remained a European of Hungarian
Originг” Medieval Historical Studies in Memory of Zoltan J. Kosztolnyik,
ed. I. Petrovics – SгХŻгХTóthХ– E. Congdon (Szeged, 2010) 79–100.
ŻabudaбХ ьerardбХ ZaginionaХ kronikaХ zХ pierwszejХ połowyХ XюююХ wiekuХ wХ
RocznikachХ źrólestwaХ іolskiegoХ яanaХ щługoszaпХ próbaХ rekonstrukcji [A
Lost Chronicle from the First Half of the 13th Century in the Annales of the
іolishХźingdomХbyХяanХщługosz] ĐіoznańбХжониЮ.
іobóg-Lenartowicz, цnnaбХ“ViolaбХчułgarkaбХksięђnaХopolskąгХіrzyczynekХ
doХ migracjiХ małђeńskichХ wХ цredniowieczu“Х [цХ чulgarian Duchess of
Opole. A Contribution to the Matrimonial Migration in the Middle Ages.],
in Kobiety i procesy migracyjne, ed. A. Chlebowska – K. Sierakowska
(Warszawa, 2010) 11–17.
іrocházkováбХ NatašaбХ “іostavenieХ haličskéhoХ kráзaХ aХ slavónskehoХ
kniežaťaХ źolomanaХ zХ roduХ цrpádovcovХ vХ uhorskejХ vnútornejХ aХ
zahraničnejХ politikeХ vХ prvejХ poloviciХ жигХ storočia“Х [źingХ ofХ ьaliciaХ andХ
116
Hungaro-Polonica
щukeХofХSlavoniaгХшolomanХofХtheХÁrpádianХщynastyгХюnХtheХыirstХHalfХofХ
the 13th Century], Medea 2 (Bratislava, 1998) 64–75.
ProcházkováбХ NatašaбХ “źolomanХ HaličskýХ naХ SpišiХ predХ rokomХ жзйж“Х
[Coloman of Galicia in Spiš beforeХжзйж]бХinХTerraХScepusiensisгХStanХbadańХ
nad dziejami Spiszu., edгХRгХьładkiewiczХ– M. Homza (Żevoča – WrocławбХ
2003) 243–249.
іrocházkováбХNatašaбХ"Some Notes on the Titles of Coloman of Galicia", in
Slovakia and Croatia Vol I. Slovakia and Croatia Historical Parallels and
шonnectionsХĐuntilХжмнеЮбХedгХVгХźucharskáХ– SгХźuzmováХ– A. Mesiarkin
(Bratislava – Zagreb, 2013) 104–109.
RomhányiбХчeatrixбХ“The Role of the Cistercians in Medieval Hungary: Po-
litical Activity or Internal Colonization?“ Annual of Medieval Studies at
CEU 1 (1994) 180–204.
Swoboda, WincentyбХ“źsięђnaХkaliskaХчułgarkąфХіrzyczynekХdoХrozbioruХ
krytycznegoХ цnnaliumХ щługosza“Х [цХ чulgarianХ щuchessХ ofХ źaliszфХ
шontributionХtoХtheХшriticalХцnalysisХofХtheХцnnalesХofХщługosz]бХStudiaХiХ
żateriałyХdoХщziejówХWielkopolskiХiХіomorzaХ3 (1980) 61–78.
VidaбХчeátaбХ“цХciszterciХrendХkezdeteinekХvitatottХkérdéseiХaХSzepességв
ben“Х[TheХщisputedХїuestionsХaboutХtheХчeginningsХofХtheХшistecianХOrderХ
in Spiš]бХinХыonsбХskepsisбХlexгХÜnnepiХtanulmányokХaХмеХesztendрsХżakkХ
ыerencХtiszteletéreбХedгХTгХцlmási – ÉгХRévészХ– Gy. Szabados (Szeged, 2010)
461–467.
WiszewskiбХіrzemysławбХHenrykХююХіoboђnyгХчiografiaХіolitycznaХ[HenryХ
II the Pious. A Political Biography] (Legnica, 2011).
ZientaraбХчenedyktбХHeinrichХderХчärtigeХundХseineХZeitпХіolitikХundХьeв
sellschaft imХmittelalterlichenХSchlesienХĐżünchenбХзеез).
Zsoldos Attila, “SzepesХ megyeХ kialakulása“ [The Formation of Szepes
шounty]бХTörténelmiХSzemleХйиХĐзеежЮХжо–31.
117
Stefan Albrecht
Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz
Three New Manuscripts of the so Called
Chronicon hungarico-polonicum
The so called Chronicon Hungarico-polonicum, which has re-
cently met the increased attention of historians1, is a text
1 Ryszard Grzesik, “шhroniconХhungaricoХpolonicum”б in Encyclopedia of
Medieval Chronicle, ed. G. Dunphy (Leiden – Boston, 2010) Vol. 1, 348f;
Adrien їuéret-іodestaбХ“TheХinfluenceХofХtheХso-called Hungarian-Polish
chronicleХonХtheХSilesianХmedievalХchronicles”бХSlezskýХsborníkХжен (2010)
273–змнрХцdrienХїuéret-іodestaбХ“VomХUngarnХderХÁrpádenХzumХіolenХ
der Piasten. Zur Entstehung und zum Schicksal der sogenannten
Ungarisch-polnischenХ шhronik“бХ inХ żittelalterlicheХ ъlitenХ undХ
źulturtransferХöstlichХderХъlbeпХюnterdisziplinäreХчeiträgeХzuХцrchäologieХ
und Geschichte im mittelalterlichen Ostmitteleuropa, ed. A. Klammt
(ьöttingenбХ зеео) 69–80; ёywotХ цwгХ StefanaХ królaХ WęgierХ czyliХ źronikaХ
węgiersko-polska [The Life of St Stefan, King of Hungary, or the
Hungarian-Polish Chronicle], ed. R. Grzesik (Warszawa 2003); Ryszard
ьrzesikбХ źronikaХ węgiersko-polskaгХ ZХ dziejówХ polsko-węgierskichХ
kontaktówХ kulturalnychХ wХ цredniowieczuХ [TheХ Hungarian-Polish
Chronicle. About the History of Polish-Hungarian Cultural Contacts in
the Middle цges]Х ĐіoznańбХ жоооЮрХ żartin Homza, Mulieres suadentes.
іresviedčajúceХženy [Mulieres suadentes. Persuading Wifes] (Bratislava,
зеезЮрХ żartinХ HomzaбХ “TheХ SystemХ ofХ іroperХ іersonalХ NamesХ inХ theХ
Hungarian-іolishХшhronicle”бХinХъastХшentralХъuropeХatХtheХturn of the 1st
and 2nd millennia, edгХVгХżúcskaбХцctaХhistoricaХposoniensiaХзХĐчratislavaХ
2002) 49–лорХяuditХшsákóбХ“цХmagyar–lengyelХkrónikaХésХaХhazaiХelbeszélрХ
hagyomány”Х [TheХ Hungarian-Polish Chronicle and the Domestic
NarrativeХ Tradition]бХ SzázadokХ жйнХ (2014) 287–334; Ryszard Grzesik,
“ŻegitimierungsfunktionХ derХ ungarisch-polnischenХ шhronik”бХ inХ TheХ
Medieval Chronicle. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on
the Medieval Chronicle, Driebergen/Utrecht, 13–16 July 1996, ed. E.
Kooper (Amsterdam, 1999) 144–154. Here I would like to express my
deepest thanks to probably the best expert of the Chronicon, Prof. Dr.
119
Hungaro-Polonica
probably written between 1220 and 1235, at the court of Ko-
loman, son the Hungarian king, who had been crowned
King of Halic in 1215/16. His widow, Salomea, took the text
with her when she went to Poland. The chronicle tells the
story of the Hungarians and their king, Aquila (i. e. Attila),
from the time of leaving Eastern Hungary as far as to the rule
of King Ladislaus. There exist two versions of the chronicle,
the first and longer one being of a rather historical nature,
whereas the second and shorter one shows hagiographic fea-
tures; it is also listed under Vita s. Stephani epitomata (BHL
7922). The Chronicon is structured into three parts. The first
part, found only in the longer edition, describes the migra-
tion of the Hungarians through Europe, to Croatia and Scla-
vonia, where Attila is said to have founded a state called
Hungary (in a very reduced way this is also told at the be-
ginning of the Vita s. Stephani epitomata). This part is partly
based on the lost Gesta Ungarorum and partly on Croatian
and Hungarian sources. The second part, which is told in
both versions, although in different length, tells the story of
theХ conversionХ ofХ źingдщukeХ YessesХ ĐьézasЮХ byХ цdelheidбХ
his (apocryphal) Polish wife, and the story of the life of their
sonХStephanгХThisХpartХisХbasedХonХHartvik´sХVita s. Stephani
(BHL 7921). The two versions of the third and last part are
very different from each other. Only the longer edition tells
theХ fabulousХ storyХ ofХ Stephan´sХ sonsХ whoХ areХ saidХ toХ haveХ
fled to Poland, and then there follows the story of the Polish
Ryszard Grzesik as well as to Prof. Ernst-Dieter Hehl for their valuable
hintsгХThisХpaperХisХanХamendedХandХtranslatedХversionХofХmyХ“Zwei neue
Handschriften des sog. Chronicon hungarico-polonicum”гХ StudiaХ
яródłoznawczeХкиХĐзежкЮХжжж–121.
120
Hungaro-Polonica
intervention in Hungary and the thus following happy time
of the rule of St Ladislaus. The shorter edition instead pre-
sents a continuation of the Vita s. Stephani, once again based
on Hartvik, including some miracles. Whereas the chronicle
was not received in medieval Hungary, a number of in par-
ticular Lesser-Polish and Silesian sources draw on it, such as
the Vita maior sancti Stanislai by Vincent of Kielcza. The Sile-
sian and Lesser-Polish annals of the late 13th and the 14th-15th
centuriesХknowХtheХstoryХofХцdelheid´sХweddingХandбХlikeХalв
ready in Vincent, a story of Hungarian-Polish rivalry for the
crown donated by the Pope. However, we may suppose that
in most cases the Polish annalists did not refer to any original
manuscript of the chronicle but probably used a revised ver-
sion.2
The editio princeps of the compositio maior was edited in
1823 by Hipolit Kownacki, there were further editions by
Stephanus Ladislaus Endlicher, Stanislaw Pilat, Florian
żarianusХandХяozsefХщeér3, the editio princeps of the compositio
minor was edited in 1897 by Wojciech Ketrzynski4. The cur-
2 їuéret-іodestaбХ“VomХUngarnХderХÁrpáden“бХммгХ
3 źronikaХWęgierskaХnaХpoczątkuХwiekuХXююрХźronikaХczeskaХnaХpoczątkuХ
wieku XI, [The Hungarian Chronicle at the Beginning of the 12th Century]
ed. H. Kownacki (Warszawa 1823); Chronica hungarorum, ed. S. L.
Endlicher, Rerum hungaricarum Monumenta Arpadiana (Sangalli 1849)
60–нзрХ źronikaХ węgiersko-polska [Hungarian-Polish Chronicle], ed. S.
Pilat, MPH 1, 495–515. – Vita Sanctorum Stephani regis et Emerici ducis,
ed. M. Florianus, Historiae Hungaricae Fontes Domestici, Pars Prima:
Scriptores I (Lipsiae 1881) 70–79; Chronicon Hungarico-Polonorum, ed. J.
щeérбХSRHХзбХзоо–320.
4 Wojciech KętrzyńskiбХ “OХ kroniceХ węgiersko-polskiej”Х ĐVitaХ sanctiХ Ste -
phani, regis Ungariae, Ungarico-Polona) [About the Hungarian-Polish
Chronicle (Vita sancti Stephani, regis Ungariae, Ungarico-Polona)],
121
Hungaro-Polonica
rently valid edition is the three-columnedХeditionХbyХчélaХźaв
rácsonyiХwhichХtakesХallХknownХmanuscriptsХintoХconsideraв
tion, the middle column giving the text shared by both ver-
sions, the left one the special text of the compositio maior and
the right one that of the compositio minor. His abbreviations
will be used in the following.5 Another edition, presenting
the chronicle in the form of a mixed text, has recently been
presented as a Slovakian translation by M. Homza.6
Previously known manuscripts
Up to now, the following manuscripts of the Chronicon Hun-
garico-Polonicum have been known:
Z = Warsaw, BN, BOZ 28. The best edition of the longer
version is that of the Codex Zamoyski, a parchment from the
end of the 14th century, measuring 25.4cm x 18cm on 97 folio
pages, written in a marked gothic minuscule, which seems
to indicate a connection to an Italian school. The chronicle
starts on fol. 90r and ends on fol. 96v. Also, the manuscript
includes a description of the life of Alexander the Great, the
chronicle of Gallus Anonymus, the so called Spominki kra-
kowskie (Notes from Cracow) on the years 1439 and 1437–
1447, a 14th century revised version of the Vita et miracula
RozprawyХ wydziałuХ historyczno-filozoficznegoХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciХ
w Krakowie 34 (1897) 365–373.
5 Chronica hungaro-Polonica, pars I (Textus cum varietate lectionum), ed.
чгХ źarácsonyiг цctaХ HistoricaХ UniversitatisХ SzegedensisХ deХ цttilaХ яózsefХ
nominatae, 26 (Szeged, 1969)
6 Martin Homza, Uhorsko–poзskáХ kronikaгХ NedocenenýХ prameňХ kХ
dejinámХ strednejХ ъurópy [The Hungarian-Polish Chronicle. An Un-
appreciated Source of Central Europe History] (Bratislava, 2009).
122
Hungaro-Polonica
sancti Stanislai by Vincent of Kielcza (inc. tradunt), the Rocz-
nikХTraskiХĐTraska´sХцnnals) and a number of other texts.
C (S in Grzesik) = Cracow, Muzeum Narodowe, Zbiory
Czartoryskich, Codex Cracovienis Czartoryskianus 1310. A
Polish-made copy of the chronicle from the second half of the
15th century is found in the Codex Cracovienis Czartoryski-
anus 1310 which, on 949 pages, includes several works cop-
ied most of all from Z; the Hungarian-Polish chronicle is on
fol. 349r–359r.7
K = Lost today is the Codex Varsovianus Krasinskianus
[of the Krasinski Library in Warsaw] 83, a paper manuscript
from the 16th century which is missing since World War II.
According to the only known description, the chronicle
could be read on fol. 7r–v.
W = Wroclaw, Ossolineum, Codex Vratislaviensis Osso-
lianus I.818 Another paper manuscript from the 15th century
is the Codex Vratislaviensis Ossolinianus I.818, containing
most of all theological texts. On fol. 177v there are the first
lines of the chronicle like the older edition (Z).
O = Wroclaw, Ossolineum, Codex Vratislaviensis Ossoli-
anus II. 1944.
This is a paper manuscript of 433 folio pages bearing the
headline Passionale. The manuscript dates from the 15th cen-
tury and, as the editor believed, is probabiliter ex Polonia ori-
undus. This manuscript is a variant of the Legenda aurea, orig-
7For a detailed description see: Wojciech щrelicharzбХцnnalistykaХmało-
polska XIII–XVХ wiekuгХ źierunkiХ rozwojuХ wielkichХ rocznikówХ kom-
pilowanych [Annalistic in Lesser Poland, 13 th – 15th Century. Develop-
ment of the Greater Polish Yearbook-шompilations]ХĐźrakówбХзееиЮХйй–56.
123
Hungaro-Polonica
inating from a Polish environment, and consists of 211 leg-
ends. On fol. 371r–375r it gives the only known text of the
Vita s. Stephani regis Ungarie (BHL 7922), that is the shorter
edition of the Hungarian-Polish chronicle, which is why it
serves as the basis for the comparison to the here presented
manuscripts. Furthermore, as an appendix it includes a
number of other saints, some of them from Lesser Poland
(Stanislaus), some of them from Silesia (Hedwig), some of
them from Bohemia (Adalbert, Ludmilla, Wenzel, Prokop)
some of them from Hungary (Elizabeth, Emmerich).8
New manuscripts
Apart from the above mentioned, already known manu-
scripts, the shorter version of the Chronicon or the Vita s.
Stephani (BHL 7922) is also found in three other codices
which have been overlooked so far.
These are a manuscript from Prague (P in the following)
and a manuscript from Magdeburg (M in the following).
The Prague manuscript9, which is today kept at the Na-
tionalХ ŻibraryХ inХ іragueХ ĐNárodníХ knihovnaХ СeskéХ repubв
liky) under the signature XIV.A.7, probably originates from
8 ьrzesikбХ “шhroniconХ hungaricoХ polonicum”бХ ийнfрХ ьrzesikбХ źronikaХ
węgiersko-polska.
9 http://www.manuscriptorium.com/apps/main/mns_direct.php?docI
dтrecжзнимлжкие_ййХ [цccessпХ ззгеигзежл]бХ seeХ яosefХ TruhláфбХ шatalogusХ
codicum manu scriptorum latinorum, qui in c. r. bibliotheca publica atque
UniversitatisХ іragensisХ asservanturбХ tгХ зХ ĐіragaeХ жоелЮХ čгХ зйжобХ змл–277;
Emma UrbánkováбХRukopisyХaХvzácnéХtiskyХpražskéХUniversitníХknihovnyХ
[Manuscripts and Rare Prints of the Prague University Library] (Praha,
жокмЮХ čгХ ккбХ жорХ яosefХ źrásaбХ RukopisyХ VáclavaХ юVХ [żanuscriptsХ ofХ
Wenceslaus IV] (Praha, 1971) 252.
124
Hungaro-Polonica
Bohemia itself, from the last third of the 14th century, proba-
bly at about 1380, however not earlier than 1366 and not later
than 1400. It is a carefully made, two-columned parchment
manuscript of I+376 folio pages of the size of 38cm x 27cm
and a text area of 25cm x 17.5cm with about 40 lines per page.
This manuscript is a compilation of Vitae based on the
Legenda aurea, most of which are entered according to the
course of the liturgical year. At the end of the manuscript
only the names of the most famous saints are given, whereas
at the beginning also the names of less well known saints are
entered. Probably the manuscript was copied from a compi-
lation of a number of sources. The compilatory nature be-
comes particularly obvious from the fact that some texts exist
two times. When compiling the text, one did not care about
a standardized volume, instead some texts are rather short
martyrological notes, others are very voluminous, the long-
est ones concern Saints Gallus and Livinus. In particular, the
manuscript includes a number of Bohemian saints. For ex-
ample, we find the Legend of Ludmilla Fuit in provincia
Boemorum, the Translatio Ludmile, the Vita and Translatio of
St Wenceslaus, the Vita of St Prokop and the Vita of the Five
Holy Martyr Brothers (De quinque fratribus) according to the
version by Cosmas of Prague.
The fact that the Legenda quemadmodum or Tempore Mich-
aelis imperatoris is missing, suggests that the original compi-
lation dates from earlier than the mid-14th century.10
10 SeeХ“TemporeХżichaelisХimperatoris”, and “ŻegendaХїuemadmodum”,
in Magnae Moraviae Fontes historici II. Textus biographici, hagiographici,
liturgici (Brno, 1967) 255–257; 289–291. On the spread of these parts among
the Legenda aurea manuscripts see e. g. Barbara Fleith, Studien zur
ÜberlieferungsgeschichteХ derХ lateinischenХ ŻegendaХ aurea, Subsidia
125
Hungaro-Polonica
Apart from the Vita sancti Stephani regis Ungarie, also the
Vita Henrici regis Ungarie (BHL 2529b) indicates that the orig-
inal compilation was somehow related to Hungary; there is
evidence for relations to Silesia by a Sermo venerabilis Clem-
entis pape de canonizacione Hedwigis and the Minor legenda de
sancta Hedwigi (BHL 3767d) (253r–257r)11.
The other manuscript (Ms. Magdeb. 138) comprises the
summer part of the huge Magdeburg Legendary.12 It is a
two-columned paper manuscript from the stocks of the
Domgymnasium with IX, 443 pages of the size of 31.5cm x
21.5cm, the text area being of the size of ca. 25cm x 15cm. It
was written by several hands, among them also those in-
volved in Ms. Magdeb. 26 (giving the winter part of the Leg-
endary) which bears the date of 1459 and is also written on
the same type of paper, which is why also Ms. Magdeb. 138
may be supposed to date from the same period of time. Both
hagiographica 72 (Bruxelles, 1991); цnežka VidmanováбХ“ŻegendaХaureaХ
a Сechy“Х[ŻegendaХaureaХandХчohemia]бХinХяacobusХdeХVoragineбХŻegendaХ
aurea (Praha, 1984) 11–64.
11 SeeХ яosephХ źlapperбХ “‘HedwigisХ electa’гХ Eine Hedwigsvita aus dem
Anfang des 14. яahrhunderts“бХцrchivХfürХschlesischeХźirchengeschichte
19 (1961) 53–61. The Vita as it is presented in Ms. P cuts off in mid-text (in
the edition by Klapper 55 [L. 19], to be followed by the Vita Henrici regis
Ungarie. It certainly dates from later than 1300. Klapper believes it to
originate from the first years of the 14th century.
12 This manuscript has been decisively commented on by Ursula Winter,
whose observations shall be given here. Ursula Winter, Kurt Heydeck, Die
Manuscripta Magdeburgica der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin Preussischer
Kulturbesitz, Part 2: Ms. Magdeb. 76–168, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin.
Preussischer Kulturbesitz. Kataloge der Handschriftenabteilung, Erste
Reihe: Handschriften, Vol. 4, Die Manuscripta Magdeburgica Part 2
(Wiesbaden 2004) esp. 127–137; Ursula Winter, Das Legendarium Magde-
burgense in der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – іreußischerХ źulturbesitzХ
(Mss. Magdeb. 26 u. 138.), in Scrinium Berolinense. Tilo Brandis zum 65.
Geburtstag Vol. 1., ed. P. J. Becker (Berlin, 2000) 320–327.
126
Hungaro-Polonica
manuscripts originate either from Magdeburg itself or from
its closer environment, which is suggested by the existence
of local legends and anecdotes. Probably the Legendary was
meant for the use of the Magdeburg Cathedral Chapter. Ex-
cept the Vita of St Stephen, the manuscript also includes the
Materia Langobardorum et cronica imperatorum, a version of the
ŻatinХversionХofХtheХSächsischeХWeltchronikХwhereХweХalsoХ
find a report about a great tournament which is said to have
happened in Magdeburg in 1278, furthermore there is a letter
by a certain Simon from Constantinople, telling about the fall
of the city in 1453. The Legendary is a compilation of several
martyrologies and legendaries, it is based on the Legenda au-
rea, furthermore on the Speculum historiale by Vincent of
Beauvais, on the Liber pontificalis andХ“probablyХalsoХ[on]ХaХ
ŻegendariumХ Halberstatense”бХ furthermoreХ onХ someХ unв
known sources. Several texts might indicate a connection to
Bohemia or Prague, a fact of which U. Winter did not take
muchХnoticeгХыirstХthereХisХaХ“biographyХbasedХonХчrunoХofХ
їuerfurt´sХ VitaХ sгХ цdalberti”бХ togetherХwithХ aХ reportХ aboutХ
hisХ translationХ andХ OttoХ ююю´sХ visitХ toХ ьnesenбХ whoseХ existв
ence, however, may also be connected to the cult of Adalbert
in Magdeburg. Also there may be a Polish background. The
Legendary shows a clearer relation to Bohemia, as it includes
a legend of St Wenceslaus extended by a miracle: In 1391 the
Saint is said to have extinguished a fire in Halle, for the
promise of being venerated there. Further indications of a
Bohemian connection are the Ludmilla legend Fuit in provin-
cia Boemorum, the Translatio s. Ludmillae with a different end
(BHL 5028) and an abridged version of the Vita of the Five
127
Hungaro-Polonica
Martyrs (BHL 1148) ending with quattuor autem aliorum in
Praga cum maximo honore seruantur et recoluntur.
Furthermore the Legendary includes a Vita of St Hedwig.
The Vita of St Stephen is found on pages 144vb – 147vb.
It is written by a superficial hand – several times lines had to
be deleted, due to the scribe´sХeyesХlosingХtrackбХandХhadХtoХ
be written again at the correct place. The fact that the selec-
tion of entries is the same as that of the above mentioned Pra-
gue manuscript might indicate a certain degree of a common
tradition.
The last manuscript is dated to 1435 and comes from the
цbbeyХofХSieciechówХĐSЮгХщueХtoХwaterХdamageбХitХisХdifficultХ
to read or cannot be read at all (National Library, Warsaw
3316 – fol. 196v – 199r)13.
The relation of the manuscripts to each other
Basically, the manuscripts show the same stock of texts.
However, they are characterized by a number of variations
which make it impossible to assume that manuscripts O or
M are copies of the older one P.
In particular, M and P both show a number of differences
from O which, however, are in most cases not very signifi-
cant, such as:
13ыleithбХ StudienХ zurХ Überlieferungsgeschichte, No. 961. I express my
thanksХtoХщrгХŻászlóХVeszprémyХforХtellingХmeХaboutХthisХmanuscriptг
128
Hungaro-Polonica
O15,12 totum vero totum P M
vero
O16,16 descendit discessit P (in rasura) M
O19,23 craa traa P M
O23,21 iube te de iubeo te de sollitudine P M
sollicitudine
O28,14 nuncijs
necessarijs
O28,26 mesko mezko P M
O28,26 duci polonorum duci P M
polonorum
O29,7f mittere iam mittere P M
iam
O34,11 meszkoni mezkoni P M
O35,11 eum turbatum eum P M
turbatum
O43,34f per per avunculum P M
nepotem
O46,15f om. ingemiscere et clamare audiret P (Z);
ingemiscere clamare audiuit M
O48,12 terram totam terram P M
totam
O53,8 u. 35 Heinricus P; Hindericus M
Hemericus14
O59,8 deo domino P M (= BHL 7921)
O70,3 prestanda (=BHL 7921)
preparanda
14This version of the name is typical for Hungarian sources, whereas
Heinrichus or Hindericus indicate a (North) German author/scribe.
129
Hungaro-Polonica
O72,38f per parentes (=BHL 7921)
gentes
O73,1 viri viri suffragio conferentes (P = BHL
suffragio 7921)
confringentes
M on the other hand is different from O and P, due to many
and grave differences
O15,6 plaga dei plaga et flagellum die
O16,38–17,15 P Dehinc per- Demum pertransiuit alpes
transiuit alpes tyranice et et in terminos cruwatie et
uenit in terminos dacie et sclavonie ubi conflictum
slauonie (sclauonie P) et con- magnum 8o diebus
flictum magnum octo diebus habuerunt
O20,18 congregatis igitur congregatis cunctis
cunctisque principibus principibus
O20,24–30 Post mortem Post mortem patris uxor
autem patris sui uxor co- coloman genuit filium
loman genuit filium qui uoca- nomine Bela
tus est bela
O21,1 Inde autem mouens se post venit in terram
uenit in terram sclauoniam Sclauoniam, quam
quam attauus suus ungariam attauus suus ungariam
appellauit vocavit
O21,11 de regione polonie de regno polonie
O21,22 hec cepit uirum suum Hec cepit yesse ad
ad christum conuertere et christum convertere et
130
Hungaro-Polonica
fidem katholicam tenere et a fidem katholicam instru-
cultura ydolorum recedere ere et a cultura ydolorum
secernere
O22,19 Idem tempus celitus om. M.
depositum
OзибззХ іХ ĐubiХ іЮХ tibiХ …Х om. M
dominus
O24,7–15 Verumptamen Verumptamen virum
uirum spirituali legacione tibi spirituale legacione tibi
transmittendum honorifica- transmittendum honor-
biliter suscipito uenerabiliter ifice suscipere et apertis
habeto, exhortacionibus eius cordibus eiusque exhorta-
cordis fidelem assensum tionibus assensum
prebeto
O25,19 qui eam alloqui taliter alloquens eam dicens
cepit
O26,1 P tamen15 om. M
O26,3 P uel et M
O31,3 P sine certatione sine dilatione M (sine
cunctatione in BHL 7921)
O33,12f. romanae sedis ponti- papa M
fex
O36,29–31 siue poloni in Siue poloni in vngaros
vngaros, siue ungari in siue contrarium M
polonos
15 HereХźarácsonyiХreadХcum, Kownacki and Endlicher emended tum. In
the otherwise identical passage of Z Pilat indeed read tum. But the
abbreviation may be supposed to mean tamen, like in P.
131
Hungaro-Polonica
There are particularly voluminous differences of M com-
pared to P and O on fol. 146r:
O3823–4336 und P M146rb
Post hec autem sancte dei Post hec infra missarum
genitricis semperque uir- solempnia rex stephanus
ginis marie incipitur offi- oleo sacro inungitur
cum salue sancta parens
iuxta missam uero rex (P
rex uero) oleo sacro inungi-
tur et consecratur.
Post missam uero osculum
pacis omnibus prebet alii
uero manum sacram anu-
lum sacrum salutant et ben-
ediccionem ab eo recipiunt.
Quo finito presules cum
clero comites cum populo
Kyrieleyson cum congruis
laudibus proclamant, deum
omnipotetem et sanctos et dyademate regalis dig-
apostolos Petrum et Pau- nitatis feliciter est corona-
lum benedicunt, quod sanc- tus. Post acceptam regalis
tus deo dilectus Stephanus excellencie dignitatem tam
exunccione sacri crismatis episcopales et ecclesias
perunctus quantum alias regaliter am-
plians disposuit
Dyademate regalis dignita-
tis feiliciter est coronatus.
132
Hungaro-Polonica
Post acceptum regalis excel- cum crucibus et uasis
lencie lignum (signum?) (P aliisque suppellectibus ad
digm dignum / dignitatem?) ministerium dei pertinenti-
tam epicsopales ecclesias bus secundum quod unicu-
amplians regaliter dispo- ique opus erat sufficienter
suit decorauit
quam crucibus et uasis aliis post haec officium de sancta
supellecitilibus ad ministe- trinitate incipitur scilicet
rium dei pertinentibus benedicta etc. pro rege et
secundum quod unicuique principe mezkone et pro
opus erat sufficienter deco- cuncto populo pro for-
rauit. manda pace, qua missa
finita ad tentoria sua
Post officium sancte trini- redeunt ubi in gaudio et
tatis incipitur Benedicta sit leticia epulis et potibus ac
sancta trinitas officia uero musicis variis instrumentis
sancta pro rege et principe
mezkone et pro cuncto pop-
ulo per presulem astritum avunculus et nepos letos 8
offeruntur pace accepta et duxerunt dies omnisque
missa finita ad tentoria sua polonorum exercitus a ma-
redeunt ubique in gaudio et iore usque ad minorem
leticia epulis et potibus in muneribus replentur duci
cordis et organis et tympa- uero multa bona per avun-
nis et choris cytharis et phy- culum offeruntur.
alis
auunculus et nepos letos
octo duxerunt dies om-
nisque polonorum exercitus
133
Hungaro-Polonica
a maiore usque ad minorem
muneribus replentur duci
uero multa bona per
nepotem (P: avunculum) of-
feruntur.
Other differences separating M from O and P are found in
these passages
O (und P) M
44,17–23 in ipsa regalis in ipsa regalis sedis ciuitate
sedis ciuitate, que alba witzeborch, que alba dicitur,
nuncupatur, sub laude et sub laude et titulo marie vir-
titulo genitricis dei fa- ginis famosam ecclesiam opere
mosam et grandem ec- mirifico construere fecit
clesiam opere mirifico
construere cepit
47,12–22 Quadam igitur Quadam igitur nocte per rev-
nocte per reuelacionem elacionem quandam precepit
qua<n>dam infra diem ut omnes in rure manentes ad
et noctem ad albam munitas ciuitates quam
transsiluana<m> pre- citissime possent festinarent
cepit festinare et omnes
in rure manentes ad mu-
nitas ciuitates, quam
citissime posset congre-
gare
48,12f terram totam totam terram Transsiluanam.
devastauit
134
Hungaro-Polonica
48,14 om. albe civitate devastata
52,3 quid uidisset si quem vidisset
52,5–7 om. cui tum omnia visa retulit
52,9f constat, quod illum erat impletum, quod actis
impletum est apostolorum
52,13 in regnum etc.
caelorum
52,17–19 tribus annis in per triennium infirmitate
(in om. P = BHL 7921) continua
infirmitate continua
53,3 abortam (P obortam exortam
= so korrigierten auch
alle Herausgeber vor
Karacsonyi)
53,3 genitor pater
55,2 vix umquam vix ut numquam
кмбжзfХnonХ…гХplantaretХ om.
58,11 inunctionem unctionem
58,12 quibus ultimum quibus expletis omnes
benedicans benedicans
58,18 iesu christe om.
59,5 cantu planctu
59,10 monumento sepulcro
59,22f per angelorum per angelorum choros laudans
choros et laudantes
59,29 sanctus om.
60,5 om. et voces
70,3f germanum fratrem
135
Hungaro-Polonica
71,10 miseretur et stabat misereretur instabat (=corr.
Ketrzynski)
71,26 annuente fauente
72,13 obsessis obsessi (=BHL 7921)
72,18–знХ UndeХ …Х om.
collaudarent
72,38 accepit accepit quod et factum est
73,1 viri suffragio con- viri suffragio rogantes
fringentes (conferentes
(P))
Furthermore, M is connected to Z by readings which at the
same time make P different from O:
O and P Z and M
O17,1 dacie chrvacie (cruwatie M)
O17,10 om. conflictum magnum 8o die-
bus habuerunt M fecerunt
conflictum magnum octo die-
bus
O31,6 P cito scito MZ
O38,9 P plurimorum privilegiorum MZ
O46,10 P pro grege pro regno MZ
O58,11 P inunctionem unctionem MZ
How the manuscripts are related to each other cannot be con-
cludingly clarified. Mss. P and O are closer related to each
other – they show almost identical texts with only little dif-
ferences. However, the latter fact rules out that O might be a
136
Hungaro-Polonica
copy of P. Indeed, we may postulate a common original. The
relatedness of the two mss. is further underlined by the fact
that in each case at least the Vita of St Emmerich is found in
almost the same wording.16
It is remarkable in this context that P does not include the
Vita of St Stanislaus. Either it was already missing in the
original from which P was copied or it was added only later
or, however, it was left out later, due to lack of interest in
these Polish affairs.
How M and P are related to each other is much more dif-
ficult to say. Basically, due to its many omissions, comple-
tions and changes M is much different from P and of course
also from O; more than only a few of them might be due to
the superficiality of the scribe who is certainly North Ger-
manбХothersХagainХareХdueХtoХhisХĐorХtheХscribe´sХofХtheХorigiв
nal) ability to make reasonable (completing) comments. Fur-
16BHL 2529b: O (=D in AASS Nov. II Pars I 487B, = L in SRH Vol. 2, 449–
йлебХhereХййоЮпХ”Gloriosus rex primus Stephanus ducatum Ungarie tenuit annis
octo, regnavit autem triginta tribus annis, mensibus septem, diebus XIIII;
migravit autem ad Dominum anno incarnacionis Domini m° ccc° IIII° (sic),
decimo octavo kal. septembris, feria quinta; cuius venerabile corpus Albe
reconditum est; per huius mellifluam prudenciam novissimis, ut dicam,
temporibus tocius Panonie regnum lumine veritatis agnovit”г
іХтХ”ьloriosusХrexХprimusХStephanusХducatumХUngarieХtenuitХannisХoctoХ
regnauit autem xxxiiius annis mensibus vii diebus xiiii, migrauit autem ad
dominum Anno domini incarnationis mo xxxiiiio xviii kal. septembris feria
va cuius venerabile corpus albe recordatum est, per huius mellifluam
prudenciam nouissimis ut dicam temporibus tocius pannonie regnum
lumen veritatisХagnouit”г
OnХ theХ problemХ ofХ theХ іolishХ ъmmerichХ legendХ seeХ alsoХ SaroltaХ TóthбХ
“żagyarХ ésХ lengyelХ юmre-legendák”Х [HungarianХ andХ іolishХ ъmmerichХ
Legends], Acta Universitatis Szegediensis. Acta Historica XI (Szeged,
1962) 5 and 57–70.
137
Hungaro-Polonica
thermore, M and P in comparison to O show a few connect-
ing differences, some of which also document a closer rela-
tionship to BHL 7921. Just the same, there are some signifi-
cantly connecting differences to M and Z, namely the com-
mon use of the name cruwatia in contrast to dacia in the other
two mss.
Finally, a few words to the manuscript "S": Ms. S is almost
identical with the well-known ms. O. Nevertheless, the dif-
ferences indicate that it is based on a better original, although
here is no reason to assume that O was copied from it.
Thus, reading traa in contrast to craa O19,23 confirms the
readings of P and M. There are similar results if, for example,
in all manuscripts including S transmisit is contrasted to
transiuit in O47,3. S also confirms the reading parentes in P
and M in contrast to the obviously mistaken per gentes in
O71,38f. Whereas these differences suggest that the scribe of
S copied its original more carefully than the scribe of O, the
following differences allow for the conclusion that S may
hardly have been the immediate original of O: Thus S shows
– correctly – signum whereas O40,6 writes lignum, which was
already corrected appropriately by Ketrzynski (due to the
considerable differences in O, P and M it seems as if this pas-
sage was difficult to read already in the common original),
instead of senseless descendit in O16,16 (that may be ex-
plained by wrong solution of an abbreviation), S disim-
proved disperavit (PM: discessit), similarly S wrote predicanda
instead of the more correct preparanda O70,3. Finally it must
be remarked that S, other than O, used consequently the Ger-
manic name Henricus, for which O used Hungarian Emericus.
138
Hungaro-Polonica
Whereas previously all manuscripts came from Poland,
the two new ones P and M draw our attention to an environ-
ment connected to Bohemia and make clear that this version
of the vita or chronicle met interest also beyond the Polish
border and that it was probably much more widely spread
than previously assumed. Also, the time of its making can be
further delimited, as ms. P provides a clear terminus ante
which, after all, is the same as that of the previously known
ms. Z or even earlier.
The background of the inclusion of the Hungarian saint
into a Bohemian manuscript of the Legenda aurea cannot be
concludingly clarified. However, even given the reception of
the Hungarian-Polish chronicle at the monasteries of Ka-
menz and Heinrichau17 and due to the integration of the
Hedwig material one may assume a Silesian connection,
more exactly a connection to the Cistercians who supported
the spread of the cult of St Hedwig.18
17 Grzesik, “źronikaХ węgiersko-polska”бХ жеи–108; їuéret-іodestaбХ “TheХ
influence”бХзми–278.
18 źateфina шharvátová, Dějiny cisterckého įádu v Čechách 1142–1420.
Kláštery na hranicích a za hranicemi Čech [History of the Cistercian Order in
Bohemia 1142–1420. The Monasteries at the Border and Beyond the Borders
of Bohemia] (Praha, 2009) 134–136; яosephХ ьottschalkбХ “StгХ HedwigХ undХ
derХ Zisterzienserorden“бХ цrchivХ fürХ schlesischeХ źirchengeschichteХ зк
(1967) 38–51. On the Hedwig cult in Bohemia see the Joseph Gottschalk,
“StгХ HedwigбХ HerzoginХ vonХ Schlesien”, Forschungen und Quellen zur
Kirchen- und Kulturgeschichte Ostdeutschlands 2 (źölnХжолй) 302–304, an
early document in this context is a lectionary from 1316, coming from the
Benedictine Monastery of Opatovice [Opatowitz] which, by sending
monksХ toХ aХ prioryХ atХ WahlstattХ andХ thenХ atХ ьrüssauбХ wasХ veryХ closelyХ
connected to Hedwig and what happened in Silesia. In October, 1357,
Bohuslav, Prior of Leitmeritz, a brother of Prague Archbishop Arnestus,
шanonХ ofХ StгХ ÄgidiusХ inХ чreslauХ and Chaplain of Emperor Charles IV.,
donated an altar in honour of Sts. Hedwig and Anna, probably in
139
Hungaro-Polonica
This again would suggest that the Hungarian-Polish
chronicle was epitomised already under the rule of Wences-
laus II. (1278–1305) who made rich donations particularly to
Kamenz which was also otherwise treated preferentially.19
Bibliography:
Sources
Chronica hungaro-Polonica, pars I (Textus cum varietate lectionum), ed.
чгХ źarácsonyiгХ цctaХ HistoricaХ UniversitatisХ SzegedensisХ de цttilaХ яózsefХ
nominatae 26 (Szeged, 1969).
Chronica hungarorum, ed. S. L. Endlicher, Rerum hungaricarum Monu -
menta Arpadiana (Sangalli, 1849) 60–82.
Chronicon Hungarico-Polonorum, edгХ ягХ щeérбХ ScriptoresХ RerumХ Hun-
garicarum vol. 2 (Budapestini, 1938) 299–320.
consideration of Anna of Schweidnitz, the wife of Charles IV. See also
Halina żanikowskaбХ “ŻegendaХ цwгХ яadwigiХ – obiegХ iХ transformacja”Х
[Legend of St Hedwig-circulation and Transformation], in Kultura elitarna
aХ kulturaХ masowaХ wХ іolsceХ póѐnegoХ цredniowieczaбХ edгХ B. Geremek
(WrocławбХжомн) 155–171.
19 30th of April 1294: donation by theХшityХofХżittelwaldeХдХżiędzylesieрХ
26th ofХżarchХжзонпХdonationХofХStalsdorfХnearХыreudenthalХдХчruntálХasХaХ
replacement Trebenowice, which had illegally given away when still
being underage, that is before 1288. Regesta dipolmatica nec non
epistolaria Bohemiae et Moraviae, pars 2: annorum 1253–1310, red. Josef
ъmlerХ ĐіragaeбХ жннзЮХ мекХ №Х жлйирХ млоХ №Х жмннгХ – шharvátová, Dějiny
cisterckého įádu 134–136. – Heinrich Grüger, „Die zisterziensische Architektur
in Schlesien in den Jahren 1200–1330. Bemerkungen zu Marian Kutzner,
Cysterska architektura na İląsku w latach 1200–1330“, Archiv für schlesische
Kirchengeschichte 29 (1971) 26.
140
Hungaro-Polonica
źlapperбХяosephбХ“‘HedwigisХelecta’гХъineХHedwigsvitaХausХdemХцnfangХ
des 14. яahrhunderts“бХцrchivХfürХschlesischeХźirchengeschichteХжоХĐжолжЮХ
53–61.
źronikaХWęgierskaХnaХpoczątkuХwiekuХXююрХźronikaХczeskaХnaХpoczątkuХ
wieku XI, ed. H. Kownacki (Warszawa, 1823).
źronikaХwęgiersko-polskaбХedгХStanisławХіilatбХżіHХжбХйок–515.
Regesta dipolmatica nec non epistolaria Bohemiae et Moraviae, pars 2: an-
norum 1253–1310, red. J. Emler (Pragae, 1882).
Vita Sanctorum Stephani regis et Emerici ducis, ed. M. Florianus, Historiae
Hungaricae Fontes Domestici, Pars Prima: Scriptores I (Lipsiae, 1881) 70–
79.
ёywotХ цwгХ StefanaХ królaХ WęgierХ czyliХ źronikaХ węgiersko-polska, ed. R.
Grzesik (Warszawa 2003).
Secondary literature
шharvátováбХźateфinaбХщějinyХcisterckéhoХфáduХvХСecháchХжжйз–1420. źláв
šteryХnaХhranicíchХaХzaХhranicemiХСechХ[HistoryХofХtheХшistercianХOrderХinХ
Bohemia 1142–1420. The Monasteries at the Border and Beyond the Bor-
ders of Bohemia] (Praha, 2009).
ыleithбХ чarbaraбХ StudienХ zurХ ÜberlieferungsgeschichteХ derХ lateinischenХ
Legenda aurea, Subsidia hagiographica 72 (Bruxelles, 1991).
ьrzesikбХ RyszardбХ źronikaХ węgiersko-polskaгХ ZХ dziejówХ polsko-
węgierskichХ kontaktówХkulturalnychХ wХ цredniowieczuХ [TheХ Hungarian-
Polish chronicle. About the Historiy of Polish-Hungarian Cultural Con-
tactsХinХtheХżiddleХцges]ХĐіoznańбХжоооЮ.
ьrzesikбХRyszardХ“шhroniconХhungaricoХpolonicum”бХinХъncyclopediaХofХ
Medieval Chronicle, ed. G. Dunphy (Leiden – Boston, 2010) Vol. 1, 348f.
їuéret-іodestaбХ цdrienбХ “VomХ UngarnХ derХ цrpádenХ zumХ іolenХ derХ
Piasten. Zur Entstehung und zum Schicksal der sogenannten Ungarisch-
polnischenХшhronik“бХinХżittelalterlicheХъlitenХundХźulturtransferХöstlichХ
der Elbe: InterdisziplinäreХ чeiträgeХ zuХ цrchäologieХ undХ ьeschichteХ imХ
mittelalterlichenХOstmitteleuropaбХedгХцгХźlammtХĐьöttingenбХзееоЮХло–80.
141
Wojciech Kozłowski
The Maria Grzegorzewska University, Warsaw
International Relations before the Sovereign
Territorial State
Modern-State Bias and the Árpádian-Piast
Relations, 1240-1320
International Relations before Sovereignty
It is already a truism to state that historian approaches the
past (that is the subject of his inquiry), while remaining
deeply rooted in and entwined with social and cultural com-
plexities of his own time. On one hand, this dependence on
contemporary contexts and backgrounds seems detrimental
to the great pursuit of objectivity and scientific rigor, which
many historians consider as their professional motto. Chang-
ing societies and the transformations of their cultures (in-
cluding scientific and intellectual fashions), on the other
hand, provide consecutive generations of scholars with ever
new incentives to revisit and reconsider the findings and in-
terpretations of their predecessors. Further, new circum-
stances and experiences stimulate new questions, original
approaches, and create novel perspectives allowing illumi-
nating and inspirational vantage points. Professional histo-
rian, being alert to intricacies of his own time and remaining
sensitive to never ending yet always context-specific chal-
lenges that affect human societies, looks back into the past in
143
Hungaro-Polonica
hope to distill his modern anxieties through the lenses of the
extant source material and – as a result – to say something
meaningful about humans and their societies in the past. De-
taching oneself from the world one lives in appears not only
virtuallyХimpossibleХĐasХtheХdevelopmentХofХhistorian’sХcraftХ
evidences) but sometimes even counter-productive, because
itХmayХartificiallyХtruncateХhistorian’sХsocialХsensitivitiesХandХ
kill motivations to test new intellectual avenues.
The majority of experienced and prominent historians of
political history that I know have been born into the world
of sovereign territorial nation-states. For centuries these po-
litical units had been gradually emerging and achieved their
apex throughout the twentieth century, claiming – following
żaxХWeber’sХfamousХformulaХ– the legitimate use of coercive
power (violence) on a given, clearly demarcated and popu-
lated, territory.
In the Polish context, to which I am strongly attached by
birth and education, sovereignty (meaning: the freedom of
Poland) remained the central issue for intellectuals (and be-
yond, up and down across all social strata) for nearly two
centuries: in the nineteenth century due to the partitions and
in the twentieth century due to the short-lived interwar in-
dependent Poland (1918-1939) contrasted with the extensive
period of German devastating occupation and with subse-
quent communist oppression.
In the contemporary context sovereignty occupies im-
portant place in the Polish political discourse. This card is
used on various occasions and mostly in relation with mat-
ters of European integration and processes of globalization.
There are powerful milieus in the Polish politics and media
144
Hungaro-Polonica
hammeringХintoХpeople’sХmindsХthatХsovereigntyХisХindispenв
sable and essential for the survival of a nation. The specific
historical experience and its dominant interpretation
strongly bound the idea of state sovereignty with the much
desired notions of freedom and independence. A good ex-
ample of this mind-gripping approach is Dzieje Polski. Skąd
nasz ródř (The History of Poland. Where Do We Come
From?),1 produced by Andrzej Nowak, a distinguished his-
torian from Kraków. He presents an original and authorita-
tive account of the Polish history until the year 1202. Draw-
ing on the most recent findings of Polish scholarship, Nowak
paints a teleological picture of the gradual crystallization of
the separate Polish political community, with the concepts of
freedom and of survival from numerous external aggres-
sionsХasХtheХpicture’s core features.2
Without a doubt, today sovereignty matters and the con-
cept itself has been firmly attached to the coming of the mod-
ern state.3 There is a strong (yet very recently abating)4 con-
1 Andrzej Nowak, щziejeХіolskiгХSkądХnaszХródХĐщoХжзезЮХ[TheХHistoryХofХ
Poland. Where Do We Come From? (To 1202)] ĐźrakówбХзежйЮг
2 цndrzejХ NowakбХ“HistoriaХ іolskiХ - HistoriaХ wolnoцci”Х [TheХ HistoryХ ofХ
Poland - A History of Freedom], Gazeta Polska 26 (2014) 31.
3 цlessandroХіasserinХd’ъntrèvesбХThe Notion of the State: An Introduction
to Political Theory, (London, 1967) 95.
4 See for instance: Benno Teschke, The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics,
and the Making of Modern International Relations (London; New York,
2003); or Jeremy Larkins, From Hierarchy to Anarchy: Territory and
Politics before Westphalia (New York, 2010). TheХlatterХcommentsпХ“Ideas
of territorial-sovereignty are not universal and fixed but historical and fluid. They
are the products of particular, arbitrary, and ever-changing discursive conjun-
ctions of politics and space. Histories of territorial-sovereignty must therefore
avoid two temptations: either to write a progressive history in which sovereign-
territoriality achieves its telos in modernity, or to assume that absolute
145
Hungaro-Polonica
ventional conviction in the IR (International Relations) schol-
arship that the intertwined doctrines of sovereignty and ter-
ritoriality matured sometime in the middle of the seven-
teenth century and gave birth to the modern states-system
which endured fairly untouched to our times.5 Robert Jack-
son aptly encapsulates the vitality of sovereignty in the mod-
ern times:
“Sovereignty is an idea of authority embodied in those bordered
territorial organizations we refer to as 'states' or 'nations' and ex-
pressed in their various relations and activities, both domestic and
foreign. In the early twenty-first century there are almost two hun-
dred of those organizations around the world, each one responsible
for the territory under its jurisdiction and the people who live there.
Sovereignty is at the center of the political arrangements and legal
practices of the modern world. The idea originated in the contro-
versies and wars, religious and political, of sixteenth and seven-
teenth-century Europe. It has existed without interruption and
spread around the world since that time, and it continues to evolve.
[…]Х State sovereignty is a fundamental idea of authority of the
modern era, arguably the most fundamental. It stands in marked
contrast to ideas of authority of other eras, particularly the preced-
ing medieval period of European history, which revolved around
the theocratic and transnational idea of Latin Christendom. Sover-
eignty also stands in marked contrast to ideas of authority in other
discontinuities or ruptures exist between different modes of territorialization.
Both of these tendencies are present in the Westphalia narrative that represents
medieval international politics as other to the modern international system of
sovereign territorial states”Х– Ibid. 53.
5 Cf.: TeresaХ Łoц-Nowak, StosunkiХ międzynarodoweпХ TeorieбХ systemyбХ
uczestnicy [International Relations: Theories, Systems, Participants]
ĐWrocławбХзеелЮХий; for some more general information on this matter, see:
Jacek Czaputowicz, SuwerennoцР [Sovereignty] (Warszawa, 2013) 73–77.
146
Hungaro-Polonica
parts of the world before Western imperial states intervened and
established themselves as a global, and no longer merely a Euro-
pean or Western, system of authority. That worldwide episode was
only completed in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries”г6
Taking all this into account, it seems unsurprising that in
approachingХ “international”Х medievalХ historyХ historians
seem lured into a trap of viewing pre-modern political enti-
ties as perhaps underdeveloped but clearly predestined-to-
sovereign-reasoning states, which tend to act on the interna-
tional stage and to construct their interests in a roughly iden-
tical manner as modern states appear to do: secure survival,
form and break alliances, strive to dominate others or at least
to balance power (if attaining hegemony is out of reach).
Taking this perspective is genuinely seducing because it
compellingly and logicallyХ resonatesХ withХ historian’sХ ownХ
experiences and understandings of world politics; further,
this approach draws on a scholarly tradition established long
ago.
To be sure, historians recognize that medieval political
entities operated in a different social and cultural context,
and thus means of conducting international politics varied
from modern political arsenals, having in its center the so-
calledХ“dynasticХpolitics”ХĐwithХdynasticХmarriagesХasХitsХfunв
damental tool) and relying political authority on personal
bonds. Nevertheless, acknowledging circumstantial and
contextual discrepancies does not necessarily affect the
seemingly ahistorical logic of international politics, which
remains constant across centuries. Consequently, in many
6 Robert H. Jackson, Sovereignty: Evolution of an Idea (Cambridge –
Malden, 2007) ix.
147
Hungaro-Polonica
scholarly accountsХitХisХimplicitlyХassumedХthatХmedievalХ“inв
ternational”ХactorsХcarriedХoutХforeignХpoliticsХaccordingХtoХ
the same principles that modern states follow.7
Strikingly enough, conventional IR scholarship has been
reluctant to grapple with medieval politics, deeming it struc-
turally different to contemporary systems. In a popular IR
textbookХRobertХHгХяacksonХandХьeorgХSørensenХcontendedп
“Can we speak of ‘international relations’ in Western Europe
during the medieval era? Only with difficulty because, as already
indicated, medieval Christendom was more like an empire than a
state system. States existed, but they were not independent or sov-
ereign in the modern meaning of these words. There were no clearly
defined territories with borders. The medieval world was not a ge-
ographical patchwork of sharply differentiated colors which repre-
sented different independent countries. Instead, it was a compli-
cated and confusing intermingling of lines and colors of varying
shades and hues. Power and authority was organized on both a re-
ligious and a political basis: in Latin Christendom, the Pope and
the Emperor were the heads of two parallel and connected hierar-
chies, one religious and the other political. Kings and other rulers
were subjects of those higher authorities and their laws. They were
not fully independent. And much of the time, local rulers were not
7 See for instance: VìtalìjХ NagìrnijбХ Polityka zagranicznaХ księstwХ ziemХ
halickiejХ iХ wołyńskiejХ wХ latachХ жжонХ ĐжжооЮ –1264 [Foreign Policy of the
Duchies in the Lands of Halich and Volhynia]бХ VìtalìjХ NagìrnijбХ Polityka
zagraniczna księstw ziem halickiej i wołyńskiej w latach 1198 (1199)–1264, Prace
Komisji WschodnioeuropejskiejХ дХ іolskaХ цkademiaХ UmiejętnoцciбХ жзХ
ĐźrakówбХзежжЮХог
148
Hungaro-Polonica
fully independent either. The fact is that territorial political inde-
pendence as we know it today was not present in medieval Eu-
rope”г8
It is tempting for a historian to dismiss this opinion with
a wave of his hand, pointing to its superficiality and crude-
ness, not to mention flaws in historical data, since medieval
Europe was never equally and entirely subordinated to im-
perial and papal powers. Along these lines, Peter Halden
commented:
“Certain social sciences such as International Relations (IR)
tend to simplify the Middle Ages to a binary opposition between
emperor and pope. Conversely, within the historical disciplines the
view that there was no “international politics” in this era has long
prevailed. Both are results of identification of the state with the We-
berian definition and of inter-state politics with institutions such
as sovereignty and the “balance of power”. With this background,
two options have been left to synthetic approaches, focusing on feu-
dal relations between minor lords or concluding that Europe was
governed by unitary structure made up of the emperor and the pope
until the system differentiated into fully autonomous units at the
peace of Westphalia”г9
Here is the dilemma. Historians generally recognize the
“otherness”Х ofХ medievalХ “international”Х politicsбХ andХ thusХ
they have been willing to approach it from various angles:
facts and events (traditional political history), institutions
8 Robert H. Jackson – ьeorgХ SørensenбХ Introduction to International
Relations: Theories and Approaches (Oxford – New York, 2010) 11.
9 іeterХ HaldenбХ “ыromХ ъmpireХ toХ шommonwealthĐs): Orders in Europe
1300-жнее”бХ inХ Universal Empire. A Comparative Approach to Imperial
Culture and Representation in Eurasian History, ed. P. Fibiger Bang – D.
źołodziejczykХĐшambridgeХ– New York, 2012) 283.
149
Hungaro-Polonica
(the so-called constitutional history), and political culture
and manifestations of power (the New Political History).10
This plethora of approaches and perspectives, however,
hardly ever stimulates historians to question the validity of
the presumed universal logic (sovereignty, territoriality, bal-
ance of power) of international politics. To put it differently,
historians know and accept that medieval political world
was quite different from our own, and they provide pictur-
esque descriptions of this world; what they are less inclined
to acknowledge is that those differences (technical, concep-
tual, ideological, and cultural) affected in some way the very
structure of international system, rendering it inexplicable
by means of sheer transfer of concepts and meaning that rule
the international politics of today. The well-studiedХ“otherв
ness”Х ofХ medievalХ politicsХ appearsХ inconsequentialХ forХ theХ
ways this politics is perceived and explained in historical
works. IR scholars, on the other hand, are much less special-
ized in navigating through the intricacies of the medieval
world and rather disinterested in exploring source material
(as far as I can tell, they chiefly limit themselves to reading
historical works about the Middle Ages), but their systematic
and profound inquiry about various manifestations of inter-
national systems compelled (some of) them to doubt any
10SeeпХ іiotrХ ьóreckiбХ “TheХ ъarlyХ іiastsХ юmaginedпХ NewХ WorkХ inХ theХ
іoliticalХ HistoryХ ofХ ъarlyХ żedievalХ іoland”бХ The Mediaeval Journal 1
(2011) 81–102. Also: SusanХReynoldsбХ“TheХHistoriographyХofХtheХżedievalХ
State”бХinХCompanion to Historiography, ed. M. Bentley (London – New
York, 1997) 109–29; ReesХщaviesбХ“TheХżedievalХStateпХTheХTyrannyХofХaХ
шonceptф”бХ Journal of Historical Sociology 16 (2003) 280–300; Susan
ReynoldsбХ“ThereХ WereХ StatesХ inХ żedievalХ ъuropeпХ цХ Response to Rees
щavies”бХJournal of Historical Sociology 16 (2003) 550–555; John Watts, The
Making of Polities: Europe, 1300-1500 (Cambridge – New York, 2009).
150
Hungaro-Polonica
continuity between pre-modern forms of international sys-
tems and their modern successors. That is to say, drawing on
the body of scholarship on medieval times, they noticed and
recognizedХ theХ medievalХ “otherness”бХ whichХ onХ theХ wholeХ
led them to conclude that the pre-modern systems cannot be
interpreted through the lenses of contemporary IR theories,
since modernity follows a different rationale than the pre-
ceding age. Hence, IR scholars have refused to problematize
and theorize medieval politics,11 disbelieving their models
(developed throughout the twentieth century)12 to provide
meaningful explanations. Historians, however, perhaps less
experienced in socio-theoretical explorations (and not al-
ways fascinated by them) remained stubbornly immune to
draw conclusions, at which IR people arrived long ago.
11 WithХaХfewХexceptionsпХWojciechХźozłowskiбХ“TheorizingХŻateХżedieval
іoliticsгХReportХfromХtheХыield”бХStudiaХzХdziejówХцredniowiecza 19 (2015)
107–135.
12 The IR scholarship developed throughout the twentieth century and it
has made this twentieth-century international system its central issue. All
IR theoretical traditions, even if they reach to theorists and philosophers
of the past centuries for inspiration and solid grounding, they were in first
place devised to elucidate the behavior of the twentieth-century states.
Although the discipline did not confine itself to the contemporary matters,
the focus on the recent developments remained principal. This was
partiallyХ dueХ toХ theХ юR’sХ aspirationsХ ĐnotХ sharedХ byХ historiansЮХ toХ offerХ
meaningful predictions about the future transformations on the
international stage.
151
Hungaro-Polonica
Modern-State Bias and the “Regional Family
Network” of the Árpáds
From the early decades of the thirteenth century the relations
betweenХ іiastХ dukesХ andХ ÁrpádianХ monarchsХ inХ HungaryХ
gradually intensified and eventually laid foundations for
closeХdynasticХtiesХthatХpinnacledХinХŻouisХtheХьreat’sХascenв
sion to the Polish throne in 1370. Certainly, nothing was pre-
determined in the way the events unfolded and in the early
1200s it had been simply impossible to foresee that trans-
Carpathian political and dynastic relations would so con-
cludeгХ цnywayбХ яanХ щąbrowskiХ rightlyХ observedХ thatХ
throughout the thirteenth century the dukes of Kraków and
Sandomierz developed their politics towards establishing
greaterХtiesХwithХtheХÁrpádsг13
According to the investigation I carried out some time
ago, in the period 1150-1250 (which coincided with the dis-
integration of the duchy/kingdom of Poland into smaller en-
tities governed by members of the Piast dynasty) things were
dynamically transforming, bringing a gradual change in the
statusХ andХ perspectivesХ ofХ theХ ÁrpádsХ andХ іiastsгХ StartingХ
from the middle of the twelfth century and the divisions en-
dorsedХ byХ чolesławХ źrzywoustyбХ theХ dynasticХ horizonХ ofХ
both houses (i.e., how broad and diversified were their sets
of marital partners), initially similar in scope, began to vary
13 яanХ щąbrowskiбХ “ZХ czasówХ ŁokietkaгХ StudiaХ nadХ stosunkamiХ polsko-
węgierskimiХwХXюVХwгХшzęцРХюбďХ[ыromХtheХTimesХofХŁokietekгХ Studies on
the Polish-Hungarian Relations in the 14th Century. Part I], RцUгХWydziałХ
Hist.-Filoz. 34 (1916) 278.
152
Hungaro-Polonica
considerably. This gap continued to expand along the pass-
ing generations. Whereas theХÁrpádsХbecameХaХdynastyХwithХ
wide European relations, the Piasts submerged into more
and more short-distance dealings with a shrinking interna-
tional perspective. In addition, due to the intensifying dis-
memberment of Poland, the Piasts lost their dynastic attrac-
tivenessХtoХroyalХcourtsбХincludingХtheХÁrpádsгХThereforeбХinХ
the middle of the thirteenth century there was already a
strikingХcleavageХbetweenХtheХіiasts’ХandХtheХÁrpáds’Хdynasв
tic perspectives. чutХ alsoХ theХ latter’sХ interestХ inХ RuthenianХ
lands in the early thirteenth century opened up new oppor-
tunities in shaping inter-dynastic connections. Statistically
speakingбХtheХÁrpád-Piast marriages of the first half of the
thirteenth century: Coloman and Salomea (1214), Ku-
nigundaХ andХ чolesławХ theХ шhasteХ (1239), and Jolanta and
чolesławХtheХіiousХĐжзклЮХwereХextraordinaryХforХtheХіiastsбХ
who over last century scarcely had succeeded in marrying
into any nuclear royal family.
TheХmarriageХofХźunigundaХandХчolesławХtheХшhasteХhasХ
been interpreted in many ways but often superficially. Schol-
ars have tended to concentrate on the interests of one party
and neglect the other. Recent examinations showed that the
marriage could have been the result of negotiations between
щukeХ HenryХ theХ іiousХ ofХ SilesiaХ ĐчolesławХ the шhaste’sХ
guardianЮХandХźingХчélaХюVХofХHungaryбХinvolvingХSalomeaХ
and the nobility of Lesser Poland.14
14шfгпХWojciechХźozłowskiбХ“TheХżarriageХofХчolesławХofХtheХіiastsХandХ
źingХ ofХ theХ ÁrpádsХ inХ жзиоХ inХ theХ ShadowХ ofХ theХ żongolХ żenace”бХ inХ
шapitulumХ VюгХ “юnХ żyХ SpiritХ andХ ThoughtХ юХ RemainedХ aХ ъuropeanХ ofХ
HungarianХOriginг”ХżedievalХHistoricalХStudiesХinХżemoryХofХZoltanХягХ
153
Hungaro-Polonica
Henry the Pious aspired to receive a royal crown and to
become king of Poland. This would have equipped him with
a claim to authority over the other Piasts. To achieve this
goal, he was seeking for prominent and potent alliances. He
alreadyХ hadХ closeХ familyХ connectionsХ withХ theХ іфemyslidsХ
andбХindirectlyбХwithХtheХÁrpádsбХbutХasХtheХdominantХіolishХ
dukeХ heХ lookedХ forХ furtherХ connectionsгХ TheХ ÁrpádsХ wereХ
“popular”ХwithХъuropeanХdynastiesХbecauseХofХStХъlisabethбХ
who had been canonized in 1235 and soon became an influ-
entialХ modelХ ofХ aХ nobleХ woman’sХ saintгХ ъvenХ theХ imperialХ
house was emphasizing its proximity to her. These reasons
of prestige were undoubtedly presentХinХHenryХtheХіious’sХ
mind.
чélaХюV’sХforeignХagendaХwasХguidedХbyХcircumstancesХatХ
home. His authority was challenged by Hungarian nobles
and he sought means to solidify his royal power.15 In addi-
tion, the borders of the kingdom of Hungary were targeted
by the approaching Mongols, and he was seeking partner-
ship with a ruler, whose borders were equally menaced. At
the same time, ties with KrakówХcouldХsecureХforХчélaХюVХasв
sistanceХ inХ recoveringХ theХ ÁrpádianХ influenceХ inХ RutheniaбХ
following strategic avenues developed by King Andrew II,
his father. Thus, during the negotiations a military alliance
was at stake which was to be confirmed by a marriage.
чolesławХtheХшhaste’sХspecialХpoliticalХpotentialХinХжзиоХmadeХ
himХanХattractiveХpickХforХчélaХюVпХжЮХhe was under Henry the
Kosztolnyik, ed. I. Petrovics – SгХŻгХTóthХ– E. Congdon (Szeged, 2010) 79–
100.
15 This period is well covered by: яenрХSzűcsбХцzХutolsóХÁrpádok [The Last
Árpáds]ХĐчudapestбХжооиЮг
154
Hungaro-Polonica
іious’sХsupervisionХĐwhoseХallianceХчélaХюVХwasХhopingХforЮбХ
but 2) he was not his offspring whose degree of kinship with
źunigundaбХчélaХюV’sХdaughterбХwasХ– according to the canon
law – simply too close; 3) he was also a young duke of San-
domierz and the lawful heir of Kraków. Although in 1239 he
still had little chance of becoming an actual duke of Kraków,
Sandomierz was also in Lesser Poland, a region which the
ÁrpádsХtraditionallyХcountedХpoliticallyХsignificantг
In 1241 the Mongol invasion swept Lesser Poland and
Moravia, and considerably devastated the kingdom of Hun-
gary. Henry the Pious fell in battle and, due to the subse-
quentХpoliticalХturmoilбХinХжзйиХчolesławХtheХшhasteХemergedХ
as the duke of KrakówгХыorХчélaХюVХandХtheХelites of the king-
dom of Hungary, however, the Mongol brief-yet-cata-
strophic occupation was transformative and, seemingly, it
strongly affected their future political interests, encouraging
closer ties with the rulers of Lesser Poland and beyond.
The leading roleХinХ theХ“post-żongol”Х regionalХpoliticsХ
wasбХthereforeбХplayedХbyХчélaХюVбХwhoseХkingdomХsufferedХ
apparently the most from the invaders. There are no doubts
concerning the terrifying reality of destruction. There is,
however, some dispute about its degree. In the older schol-
arship it was claimed that almost 50% the country was de-
populated by the killings and later by disease and starvation,
which occurred because large parts of land remained un-
tilled due to the marauding Mongols. More recent studies
suggest a lower proportion of 20% for the percentage of the
155
Hungaro-Polonica
population that was killed.16 To reinforce their arguments
these scholars point to later events that show that after the
Mongols retreated to the steppes, the kingdom resumed its
military activities fairly quickly.17 It is beyond any question,
however, that the Mongol onslaught left the kingdom of
Hungary changed in many respects. Apparently, the fear of
the soon-to-comeХnextХinvasionХinstilledХinХpeople’sХhearts18
– outside all the other damages and losses they had already
suffered – significantly influenced and shaped the polices
adoptedХbyХчélaХюVбХwhoХhasХsometimesХbeen called the sec-
ondХ“state-founder”г19
One of his responses to this pending threat was to author-
ize nobles who could afford constructing stone-castles. A big
building campaign was primarily designed to strengthen the
defense potential of the kingdom, because – as the Mongol
attack revealed – there were significantly higher chances of
survival if the invaders encountered a walled location. This
constructionХboomХwasХveryХefficientХandХbyХчélaХюV’sХdeathХ
(1270), it produced a hundred new castles owned by the
royal family, wealthy nobles, and bishops.20 The rapid rise of
16 Recently about the supposed population destruction cf. Attila Zsoldos,
NagyХuralkodókХésХkiskirályokХaХжигХszázadban [Great Rulers and Petty
Kings in the 13th Century] (Budapest, 2009) 54.
17 ŻászlóХ SzendeбХ “żagyarországХ külpolitikájaХ жзйз-жзйлХ között”Х
[Hungarian Foreign Policy 1242-1246], ъlsрХSzázad 2 (2000) 299-349, 307–
311; іálХъngelбХRealm of St Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895–
1526 (London, 2001) 101–102.
18 Zsoldos, NagyХuralkodókб 54.
19 шfгХ юvánХ чertényiХ – ьáborХ ьyapayбХ żagyarországХ rövidХ története [A
Short History of Hungary] (Budapest, 1992) 90–91.
20 Engel, Realm of St Stephen, 104.
156
Hungaro-Polonica
fortified places in the kingdom certainly expanded its de-
fense potential, yet – by diversification of their ownership –
it deprived the king of an important advantage in times of
confrontation with uncooperative nobility (the number of
stone-castles reached three-hundred by the end of the thir-
teenth century,21 and at least two-thirds of them did not be-
long to the king).22 Giving away property and lands to the
elite to financially enable it to erect own castles reinforced
the kingdom in absolute terms but, at the same time, it cre-
atedХaХfavorableХfoundationХtoХreduceХtheХkingdom’sХpoliti-
cal integrity, for it undermined the will for cooperation on
the part of the elite. Plainly speaking, more powerful nobles
could demand more for their compliance.
The reconstruction of the country had to encompass sev-
eral aspects. Alongside a new immigration policy that was
aimed to repopulate deserted areas, there was a shift in the
political strategy. The experience of the Mongol warfare – so
different from the European fighting style – forcedХчélaХюVХtoХ
reconsider the organization of the royal army. A clear change
inХtheХkingdom’sХinternalХarrangementsбХhoweverбХwasХonlyХ
oneХsideХofХtheХcoinгХчélaХюVХpainfullyХrealizedХthatХhisХkingв
dom would not be safe as long as it faced the Mongols on its
own. He believed (or appeared to believe) that the best an-
swer to the eastern menace would be the unity of the Euro-
21Zsoldos, NagyХuralkodókб 55.
22ьyulaХźristóбХ“щieХżachtХderХTerritorialherrenХinХUngarnХamХцnfangХ
des 14. яahrhunderds”бХ Etudes Historiques Hongroises 1985 vol. 1 (Bu-
dapest, 1985) 605.
157
Hungaro-Polonica
pean kingdoms, confirmed and corroborated with papal au-
thority. Therefore, he turned to the Holy See23, to the German
emperor,24 and to the king of France, asking for reinforce-
ments and support against the common danger. However,
his pleas proved in vain.25 щisappointedбХ чélaХ юVХ concenв
trated on Eastern Europe as the region where his idea of a
system of security could prevail.
The aftermath of the Mongol invasion was, therefore, a
powerful stimulant for a political cooperation between the
ÁrpádsХandХtheХіiastХdukesХofХŻesserХіolandХinХtheХfollowingХ
decades. A system of security had been initiated in 1239 by
theХallianceХbetweenХчélaХюVХandХHenryХtheХіiousгХTheХtanв
gible threat of the advancing Mongols and internal turmoil
compelledХчélaХюVХtoХseekХmilitaryХandХpoliticalХsupportХinХ
the north. The system, however, did not work, owing to the
excellence of the Mongol warfare.
23 ыorХneedХandХdespairХreflectedХinХtheХlettersХofХчélaХюVХseeпХNora Berend,
цtХtheХьateХofХшhristendomпХяewsбХżuslimsбХцndХ“pagans”ХinХżedievalХ
Hungary, C. 1000-C. 1300 (Cambridge – New York, 2001) 164.
24 цnХenvoyХofХчélaХюVХarrivedХatХtheХimperialХcourtХinХжзйжХandХpromisedХ
thatХ ifХ чélaХ юVХ hadХ receivedХ aidХ fromХ theХ emperorХ againstХ żongolsбХ heХ
would have submitted himself and his country to him in fiefdom. See: Z.
J. Kosztolnyik, Hungary in the Thirteenth Century, East European
Monographs 439 (Boulder, 1996) 350–51.
25 Ibid., 180. чélaХюVХnicelyХexpressedХhisХfrustrationХwritingХtoХtheХpopeХcгХ
жзкепХ“When the Tartars fought against us in our kingdom, we put our request
over this matter before the three principal courts of Christendom, that is Yours,
which is thought and believed to be the mistress and superior of all courts by
Christians, the imperial one, to which we were ready to submit ourselves because
of this, if at the time of the said pestilence it had given us efficient aid and help;
and we had our request laid before the court of the Franks, but from all these we
received neither consolation nor help, but only words.”Х– Berend, At the Gate,
166.
158
Hungaro-Polonica
Therefore, the security structure had to be reorganized.
The death of Henry the Pious paradoxically helped in this
endeavorбХbecauseХhisХlordshipХdisintegratedХandХчolesławХ
the Chaste emerged as a claimant to the throne in Kraków
and finally won it in 1243.26 This did not happen, neverthe-
less, without a Hungarian support. The followers of
чolesław the Chaste with some Hungarian reinforcements
expelled Conrad of Mazovia from Kraków in 1242.27 чélaХюVХ
was devoted to protect his allies.28 цccordingХtoХWłodarski29
andХrecentlyХtoХёmudzkiб30 a decisive turn to Halich was a
part of the previous expansionist politics of the king of Hun-
gary. Firstly, the expansion was carried out with both mili-
taryХ andХ dynasticХ meansгХ TheХ “marital”Х offensiveХ toХ theХ
north was the opposite of the practices from before 1241 and
it clearly aimed at building a buffer zone along the northern
bordersХofХtheХkingdomХofХHungaryгХRostislavХofХСernigovбХ
who had already asked forХ aХ daughterХ ofХ чélaХ юVХ inХ жзин–
1239, eventually married one of them, Anna, in 1243. Within
ten years he became a key figure in the Balkans, controlling
theХÁrpádian interests in the south as the duke of Bosnia and
żačvaг31 NeverthelessбХinХthatХyearХчélaХюVХintendedХtoХpitchХ
26 żarekХ źazimierzХ чarańskiбХ щynastiaХ іiastówХ wХ іolsce [The Piast
Dynasty in Poland] (Warszawa, 2006) 340, 373. See also: StanisławХSzczurбХ
HistoriaХ іolskiпХ хredniowiecze [A History of Poland. The Middle Ages]
ĐźrakówбХзеезЮХзлйг
27 SzendeбХ“żagyarországХkülpolitikája”бХижобХизкг
28 іawełгХ ёmudzkiбХ StudiumХ podzielonegoХ królestwaпХ ksiąђęХ ŻeszekХ
Czarny [A Study of the Divided Kingdom: Duke Leszek the Black]
(Warszawa, 2000) 33, 36.
29 чronisławХ WłodarskiбХ іolskaХ iХ RuцпХ жжой–1340 [Poland and Ruthenia
1194–1340] (Warszawa, 1966) 123.
30 ёmudzkiбХStudiumХpodzielonegoХkrólestwa, 34.
31 Engel, Realm of St Stephen, 106.
159
Hungaro-Polonica
himХ inХ HalichХ againstХ щanielгХ żeanwhileбХ чolesławХ theХ
шhasteХ wasХ alreadyХ rulingХ inХ ŻesserХ іolandгХ TheХ jointХ Árв
pádian-Piast-Rurikid expedition against Daniel, a duke of
Halich, in 1245 proved in vain.32 цfterwardsбХ чélaХ юVХ disв
missed the idea of conquering Halich for his son-in-law.33 He
launchedХ hisХ “marital”Х offensiveХ insteadбХ andХ succeededг34
Lev, a son of Daniel, a Ruthenian duke, married Constance,
anotherХdaughterХofХчélaХюVХinХжзкжгХыinallyбХtheХіolishХdukeХ
Boleslaw the Pious of Kalisz received Jolenta, a sister of Con-
stance, as a spouse in 1256.
чélaХюVХmadeХaХsignificantХeffortХtoХsustainХtheХbestХposв
sible relations with his northern and northeastern neighbors,
namely, the Piast and Rurikid dukes of Kraków and Halich.35
Hence, the general security system meticulously set up by
чélaХюVХmayХbeХcharacterizedХasХfollowsпХчélaХюV’sХvitalХinterв
estsХwereХinХtheХwestХĐcompetitionХwithХtheХіфemyslidsХover
theХчabenbergs’ХdomainsЮХandХinХtheХeastХĐtheХżongolsЮгХTheХ
threat coming from both directions was considered as long-
32 WłodarskiбХіolskaХiХRuц, 127–28.
33 SzendeбХ“żagyarországХkülpolitikája”бХииог
34 WłodarskiбХPolska i Ruц, 132.
35 źingХчélaХюVХonХзХцprilбХжзлйбХissuedХaХcharterХforХaХżagisterХNicholausХ
with a donation as a reward for his fidelity. The text mentions many
envoys from various countries who had gathered in the court. Moreover,
the presence of all three of theХking’sХdaughtersХwithХtheirХhusbandsХwasХ
alsoХ attestedгХ ThisХ mayХ indicateХ theХ king’sХ intentionХ toХ keepХ upХ goodХ
relations with his sons-in-lawпХ “et medio tempore nuncios diversorum
regnorum recepissemus [Béla IV – WK], grecorum scilicet, bulgarorum,
boemorum et specialiter Vybar filium Beubarth, Abachy et Thamasy nuncios
tartharorum, nec non et nuncios regis Francie, sollennes et honestos; eadem eciam
hora domina Constancia ducissa Gallicie et Lodomerie, domina Kyngve ducissa
Cracovie et Sandomerie, nec non et domina Jolen ducissa de Calis, karissime filie
nostre, cum principibus earumdem ad visitandum nos convenissent.“Х– CDPH
VIII. No. 76, 96-97.
160
Hungaro-Polonica
lasting, but over the decades the western one repeatedly ap-
pears in royal donation charters. This warlike policy surely
contributed to the fact that the second half of the thirteenth
century was full of conflicts that concentrated there. The
kingdomХofХHungary’sХsouthernХborderХwasХsecuredХbyХRosв
tislav’sХtriumphsХthatХeffectivelyХsuppressedХtheХkingdomХofХ
Serbia and gained some control over the lordships in Bul-
garia. The north (and the northeast, too, to be precise) be-
came a rather peaceful region where the neighboring princi-
palitiesХwereХfriendlyХtoХчélaХюV’sХcourtг
The second half of the thirteenth century witnessed a
growing political rivalryХbetweenХtheХіфemyslidsХandХtheХÁrв
pádsгХTheХwarХoverХtheХчabenberg’sХlegacyбХwhichХeruptedХ
in 1246, occupied them for thirty years and greatly reshaped
politicsХinХшentralХъuropeгХыorХtheseХthreeХdecadesХчolesławХ
the Chaste, and his appointed successor Leszek the Black,
firmlyХsupportedХtheХÁrpádsб36 deserting them briefly only
in the late 1270s.37 But even then, they did it for only a short
time.38 I would argue that 60 years after the Mongol invasion
and still before the ascension of Charles I of Anjou to the
Hungarian throne the experience of cooperation was deeply
entrenched in the political horizons of the kings of Hungary
and of the dukes of Lesser Poland. The strategic decision of
чélaХюVХinХжзиоХtoХreachХoutХtoХtheХneighboringХіiastХdukesХ
36 WłodarskiбХіolskaХiХRuц, 145.
37 ёmudzkiбХ StudiumХ podzielonegoХ królestwa, 260. WłodarskiбХ Polska i
Ruц, 155–156. See also: чronisławХWłodarski, Polska i Czechy w drugiej
połowieХXюююХiХpoczątkachХXюVХwieku (1250–1306) [Poland and Bohemia in
the Second Half of the 13th and in the Beginning of the 14th Century (1250–
жиелЮ]ХĐŻwówбХжоижЮХнег
38 ёmudzkiбХStudiumХpodzielonegoХkrólestwa, 389.
161
Hungaro-Polonica
as to possibleХ politicalХ partnersбХ initiatedХ aХ discreteХ “newХ
opening”ХinХtheХrelationsХbetweenХdynastiesгХTheХżongolХinв
vasion, however, forced the Hungarian elites to enhance
theirХsecurityХbyХcreatingХaХ“regionalХfamilyХnetwork”бХwhichХ
was established by marrying outХчélaХюV’sХnumerousХdaughв
ters. Ideally, the network built on marriages was supposed
to last for some time.
ThirtyХyearsХafterХчélaХюV’sХdeathбХinХtheХbeginningХofХtheХ
fourteenth century, however, the dynastic circumstances be-
came significantly differentгХ TheХ ÁrpádsХ andХ soonХ enoughХ
theХіфemyslidsХwereХgoneХfromХtheХsceneгХTheХżongolХthreatХ
somewhat abated. New families emerged in the region, striv-
ing to grab the thrones of Hungary and Bohemia: the Ange-
vins and Luxemburgs (respectively). Meanwhile, the compe-
titionХ amongХ theХ іiastsХ ultimatelyХ elevatedХ WładysławХ
ŁokietekХ toХ ruleХ overХ aХ moreХ extensiveХ lordshipбХ whichХ inХ
1320 assumed the prestigious status of a kingdom. In this
contextбХ шharlesХ юХ ofХ цnjouХ andХ ъlizabethХ іiast’sХ marriageХ
(1320) emerged to be consequential in its outcomes and laid
foundations for close relations between the Angevin and Pi-
ast monarchs, which resulted in the twelve-year-long period
of the union of the kingdom of Hungary and of Poland ruled
by King Louis the Great of Hungary (1370–1382).39 Various
39About the significance of the marriage and the origins of the succession
project, see: StanisławХ SzczurбХ “WХ sprawieХ sukcesjiХ цndegaweńskiejХ wХ
Polsce”Х [шoncerningХ theХ цngevinХ SuccessionХ inХ іoland]бХ Roczniki
Historyczne 75 (2009) 1–53.
162
Hungaro-Polonica
explanations have been offered for the origins of the mar-
riage, interpreting it as a manifestation of a political alli-
ance.40
Summarizing the most recent analysis,41 it was profitable
forХŁokietekХtoХgiveХaХconsentХtoХtheХmarriageгХюtХprovidedХaХ
prominent future for his daughter and, at the same time, it
offered him a gate to the elite milieu of the early fourteenth-
century ruling houses. Besides, the Angevin-Piast marriage
functionedХasХaХformХofХrecognitionХofХŁokietek’sХnewlyХacв
quired royal dignity (at a time aptly questioned by the Lux-
emburgs of Bohemia) and established an additional and
meaningfulХ reasonХ toХ seekХ шharlesХ ю’sХ auxilium et consilium
(assistance and advice) when necessary. I argue, however,
that first and foremost the Angevin-Piast marriage was a re-
sultХ ofХ шharlesХ ю’sХ determinationХ toХ produceХ anХ heirХ toХ hisХ
lordship. He hopelessly awaited one from his previous
wives: from Mary Piast and from Beatrix of Luxemburg, and
looked forward to conceiving one through Elizabeth.42 The
alliance was, therefore, an outcome of unpredictable devel-
opments of family-centered politics. Otherwise, in 1320
шharlesХюХandХŁokietekХdidХnotХhaveХmuchХinХcommonг
40 źazimierzХ яasińskiбХ “іolitykaХ małђeńskaХ WładysławaХ Łokietka”Х
[WładysławХŁokietekďsХżarriageХіolitics]бХinХGenealogiaпХRolaХzwiązkówХ
rodzinnychХiХrodowychХwХђyciuХpublicznymХwХіolsceХцredniowiecznejХnaХ
tleХporównawczymб edгХцгХRadzimińskiХ– ягХWroniszewskiХĐToruńбХжоолЮХ
9–28.
41 WojciechХźozłowskiбХ“TheХOriginsХofХtheХжизеХцngevin-Piast Dynastic
żarriage”бХStudiaХZХщziejów хredniowiecza 20 (2016) 39–55.
42 цboutХшharlesХю’sХthreeХĐorХfourЮХmarriagesХandХtheХscholarlyХdiscussionбХ
see: ьyulaХ źristóбХ “źárolyХ RóbertХ családja”Х [TheХ ыamilyХ ofХ шharlesХ
Robert], Aetas 20 (2005) 14–28.
163
Hungaro-Polonica
Concluding Remarks
While writing the historical part of this paper, I deliberately
attempted to avoid the modern-state bias I discussed it the
beginning. The narrative indicates that the thirteenth-cen-
turyХ“international”ХworldХcanХbeХsuccessfullyХpresentedХasХ
a place for interacting lords (kings, dukes, and nobles), and
less as a system of states. True, in both variants the central
question remains the same: cooperate or fight?, but it does
notХ necessarilyХ meanбХ forХ instanceбХ thatХ чélaХ юV’sХ decisionsХ
aboutХenteringХaХstrifeХoverХtheХчabenberg’sХinheritanceХcanХ
be reported as, say, an imperial expansion of Hungary in the
region. In other words, the logic of territorial gains (modern
state) does not have to be identical to the logic of lordship-
buildingХ andХ ofХ securingХ eliteХ standingХ forХ one’sХ offspringХ
(lord). Also, a dynastic marriage (like the case of Charles I
and Elisabeth) can be effectively interpreted at the level of a
family matter (providing an heir) and may appear problem-
atic, if considered as an element of a big power-balancing
game, characteristic to behaviors of states in the nineteenth
and twentieth centuries.
This paper concludes with a suggestion. Perhaps, at-
tempts to make sense of the thirteenth-centuryХ “internaв
tional”Х politicsХ mayХ proveХ moreХ effectiveХ andХ meaningfulХ
(than the conventional application of modern-state interna-
tional logic), if – while developing some form of an explana-
tory model – aХ fewХ ofХ theХ medievalХ politics’Х essentialХ eleв
mentsХareХconsideredбпХжЮХtheХ“international”ХworldХisХpopuв
lated with persons (individuals) rather than with abstract en-
164
Hungaro-Polonica
tities (states); 2) this world lacks clear domestic-foreign dis-
tinctions; 3) it is culturally dominated by hierarchical mind-
set, emphasizing the importance of social standing; 4) it is
multipolar and highly decentralized; 5) and to secure coop-
eration it prefers personal bonds than forms of territorial al-
legiance.
Bibliography
Secondary Literature:
чarańskiбХ żarekХ źazimierzгХ щynastiaХ іiastówХ wХ іolsce [The Piast
Dynasty in Poland] (Warszawa, 2006).
Berend, Nora. цtХtheХьateХofХшhristendomпХяewsбХżuslimsбХцndХ“pagans”Х
in Medieval Hungary, C. 1000-C. 1300 (Cambridge – New York, 2001).
ъngelбХіálгХRealm of St Stephen: A History of Medieval Hungary, 895-1526
(London, 2001).
SzendeбХŻászlóгХ“żagyarországХkülpolitikájaХжзйз-жзйлХközöttЧХ[Hungarв
ian Foreign Policy 1242-1246], ъlsрХSzázad 2 (2000) 299–349.
WłodarskiбХчronisławг іolskaХiХRuцпХжжой-1340 [Poland and Ruthenia 1194-
1340] (Warszawa, 1966).
ёmudzkiбХіawełгХStudiumХpodzielonegoХkrólestwaпХksiąђęХŻeszekХшzarny
[A Study of the Divided Kingdom: Duke Leszek the Black] (Warszawa,
2000).
Zsoldos, Attila. NagyХuralkodókХésХkiskirályokХaХжигХszázadban [Great Rul-
ers and Petty Kings in the 13th Century] (Budapest, 2009).
165
Annamária Érsek
University of Paris-Sorbonne
The Crypto-portrait in Central Europe in the
14th Century
“As a genre, the
identification por-
trait, or disguised
portrait, has been
treated with a mix-
ture of incompre-
hension and amaze-
ment even in the
most recent work
on the history of
Renaissance por-
traitureг”1
Although the subject of portraiture has generally been well
studied, especially with the publications of recent years,2
some issues have yet to garner much interest. The issue of
crypto-portraits takes part of these somewhat neglected and
misunderstood subjects, as the words written by Friedrich
Polleross and cited below, accurately portray the situation
regarding the research of crypto-portraits, even today.
1 ыriedrichХчгХіollerossбХ“чetweenХTypologyХandХіsychologyб”ХArtibus et
historiae 24 (1991) 75.
2 For an overview, see żartinХ чüchselбХ “ŻeХ portraitХ au żoyenХ Âgeб”Х
іerspectiveгХцctualitéХenХhistoireХdeХl’art 2 (2012) 401–406.
167
Hungaro-Polonica
When we evoke the first known individual portrait in
medieval art history, we have an answer generally acknowl-
edged in international scholarship. There is a consensus in
the research that considers the image of John the Good as the
first individual panel portrait.3 But if we would like to define
the first crypto-portrait in the Middle Ages, we can establish
a long list based on different hypotheses in scholarship. Can
be mentioned the Shrine of Charlemagne in Aachen Cathe-
dral (ca. 1200–1215) – crypto-portrait of Frederick Barba-
rossa, the Bamberg Horseman (ca. 1230) – crypto-portrait of
emperor Frederick II, Bitonto (Apulia), on the marble ambo
created by Master Nicolaus (1229) – Frederick II as David,
Rome, San Clemente, statue of Clement I – supposed to rep-
resent the pope Boniface VIII or the Epiphany Scene in
Notre-Dame of Paris with the crypto-portrait of Philippe III
(+1285).4
What is more, this specific type of portraiture does not
have a common name and definition: with a little bit of ex-
aggeration, we could say that as many researcher as many
termХinХuseгХThat’sХwhyбХfirstХofХallбХюХwillХstartХwithХanХenuв
meration of the different terms in use referring to the crypto-
portrait in the scientific literature which cover similar, but
not exactly the same reality.5 This point is crucial for the un-
derstanding of the entire phenomenon as the first apparition
3 Even the recent book of S. Perkinson sheds new light on this qualification.
Stephen Perkinson, The Likeness of the King (Chicago, 2009).
4 ьerhartХ чurianХ ŻadnerбХ “щieХ цnfängeХ desХ źryptoporträtsб”Х inХ Von
цngesichtХ zuХ цngesichtпХ іorträtstudienрХ żichaelХ Stettler zum 70.
Geburtstag, ed. F. Deuchler, (Bern, 1983) 78–98.
5 This paper does not have the aim to present contemporary written
sources and the beginnings of the use of the term or other relevant notions,
168
Hungaro-Polonica
of the genre depends largely on the definition accepted.
What is a crypto-portrait?
If one reviews the literature on the subject, they would come
across the following terms: crypto-portrait, identification
portrait, historical portrait, disguised portrait, allegorical
portrait, incognito portrait and mythological portrait. Given
the confusion that surrounds its terminology, the first task is
to try to find a working definition, which could be used in
the course of the research.
Friedrich Polleross, author of a dissertation defended in
Austria at the end of the 1980s on the Identification portrait,6
presented the first utilisation of the terms related to the phe-
nomenon. The notion ritratto istoriato was first used in the
17th Century, while its French and German equivalents are
known from the middle of the 18th Century: portrait historié
and historiches Bildnis.
Identification portraits can be categorized in two main
groups:7 The crypto-portrait is the older form and it means an
image that was inserted to a historic or religious scene. We
can describe a crypto-portrait as a representation of a saint,
biblical, historical or mythological character, painted to look
as that of the portrait for example. On this issues, we refer to the only
academic monograph on the subject, that of F. Polleross: Friedrich B
іollerossбХщasХsakraleХюdentifikationsporträtпХeinХhöfischerХчildtypusХvomХ
13. bis zum 20. Jh. (Worms, 1988).
6 іollerossбХ“щasХsakraleХюdentifikationsporträt”г
7 іollerossбХ“щasХsakraleХюdentifikationsporträt”рХ ьerhardХSchmidtбХ“чei-
trägeХzumХьotischenХ„źryptoporträt”ХinХыrankreichХinХMalerei der Gotik,
Fixpunkte und Ausblicke, ed. M. Roland (Graz, 2005) II, 329–340.
169
Hungaro-Polonica
like a contemporary figure– often with the addition of attrib-
utesХ properХ toХ theХ portrait’sХ subjectгХ ыorХ exampleбХ theХ porв
traits in the scenes of Adoration of the Magi or the portraits
in the guise of king David can be cited. The other group of
images is that of the disguised portrait or verkleidete Bildniss.
The images were conceived originally as portraits and gave
anХallegoricalХmeaningХbyХattributesХorХ“masking”гХюtХisХimв
portant to note that the condition of such a disguised portrait
is the very existence of the autonomous portrait. In this case,
the historical or biblical scene is only a supplementary
framework, a kind of accessory. At the same time, it is con-
fusing that some authors as Claire Richter Sherman,8 author
of aХmonographХonХшharlesХVХofХыrance’sХportraitsбХusesХtheХ
notion disguised portrait to describe representations that be-
longХactuallyХtoХtheХfirstХgroupбХthat’sХtoХsayбХtoХcrypto-por-
traits.
Nevertheless, this is not the only possible classification.
A thematic distinction was also suggested: if it is represented
in a profane scene (mythological portrait) or in a sacred one
(disguised portrait). Another option consists of classifying
the images relating to the public.9 On private crypto-portraits
or reflexive images, the commissioner wanted to see himself
on the representation. These images are not addressed to a
large public and are painted in manuscripts, in little devo-
tional images or portative altars. The opposite group can be
called public crypto-portraits or demonstrative images.
Monumental art and coins can be mentioned here, given the
8 Claire Richter Sherman, The Portraits of Charles V of France (New York,
1969) 20.
9 SchmidtбХ“чeiträgeХzumХьotischen”бХизог
170
Hungaro-Polonica
large audience who has access to these images.
We can thus consider the main difficulties to identify
crypto-portraits as follows. First, it consists of identifying the
person represented in the portrait, often someone of histori-
cal importance. To accomplish this, it is essential that one
take into consideration the resemblance, but also the traits
characteristic of the subject and their position. Subsequently,
one must examine the historical context of the work, and
then establish a link with a known portrait of a historical fig-
ure, which usually includes the same codified elements. Fi-
nallyбХ oneХ mustХ ascertainХ theХ natureХ ofХ portrait’sХ commisв
sion, as well as the quality of the material used in the crypto-
portrait.10 It is very important to underline the separation be-
tween the crypto-portrait and the disguised portrait as it per-
mits us to conceive a relevant problematic. The confusion
that surrounds this term made difficult to conduct an in-
depth study, as it prevents us to focalise on one of the main
elements that, in my sense, could explain the emergence of
crypto-portraits.
From the magi to earthly kings
In the 13th–14th шenturyбХgenealogiesбХrulers’ХseriesХandХotherбХ
historicising series became particularly in fashion. The lost
cycleХonХtheХюleХdeХlaХшitéбХtheХьenealogyХofХtheХŻuxemburgХ
10ьötzХіochatбХ“ZurХ ьeneseХdesХіorträts”бХinХ Sigismundus rex et impe-
ratorгХźunstХundХźulturХzurХZeitХSigimundsХvonХŻuxemburgбХedгХюгХTakács
(Mainz am Rhein, 2006) 137.
171
Hungaro-Polonica
dynastyХorХtheХcyclesХlostХofХіragueХandХTangermündeХcasв
tles can witness it.11 At the same time, mentions as second
Charlemagne or second Alexander the Great were in use, to
designate and praise the ruler. The issue was to be able to
represent it visually and at this point; the crypto-portrait
could propose an adequate solution.
It is possible that the need for a representation in histori-
cal sequences and biblical scenes played an important role in
the emergence of the crypto-portrait and the portrait. We
cannot obviously separate it of the other factors that had a
determining role.12 In the first time, the objective may have
been to identify with a deceased model. The contemporary
ruler wanted to achieve the virtues possessed by the famous
ancestors and predecessors. The representations in the guise
of the three magi are particularly representative in this con-
text as they were kings in the tradition. The visit of the three
wise men to pay homage to the infant Jesus is related in the
Gospel of Matthew and some apocryphal gospels.13 In its
11 żarieХ чláhováбХ “Herrschergenealogie als Modell der Dauer des
бpolitischenХźörpers’ХdesХHerrschersХimХmittelalterlichenХчöhmen”ХinХDas
Sein der Dauer, ed. A. Speer – D. Wirmer (Berlin, 2008) 380–397; Evemarie
Clemens, Luxemburg-чöhmenбХWittelsbach-Bayern, Habsburg-ÖsterreichХ
und ihre genealogischen Mythen im Vergleich (Trier, 2001); Christian de
żérindolбХ “ŻesХ princesХ etХ l’usageХ deХ l’histoireХ àХ laХ finХ deХ l’époqueХ
médiévaleб”ХinХŻesХprincesХetХlďhistoireХduХXюVeХauХXVюююeХsiècleХпХactesХduХ
colloqueХ orgгХ parХ lďUniversitéХ deХ Versailles-Saint-Quentin et l'Institut
historique allemand, Paris/Versailles, 13–16 mars 1996, ed. Ch. Grell – W.
Paravicini – J. Voss (Bonn, 1998) 43–66. More in detail and for more
references on this subject, see my forthcoming PhD thesis, in preparation
at Paris-Sorbonne University.
12 Dominic Olariu, ŻaХgenèseХdeХlaХreprésentationХressemblanteХdeХl’hom-
meХReconsidérationsХduХportraitХàХpartirХduХXюююeХsiècle (Bern, 2014).
13 Matt. 2.1–16., Protoevangelium of James (chap. 21.), Gospel of Pseudo-
Matthew (chap. 16.), Gospel of Infancy (chap. 7.)
172
Hungaro-Polonica
recognition of Jesus as the King of Kings, the feast of the
Epiphany had special meaning for medieval rulers. Some au-
thors qualify the participation of earthly rulers in the Adora-
tionХsceneХasХaХ“doubleХъpiphany”п14 Christ acknowledged
the realm of the rulers by accepting their offerings and the
kings assured their loyalty with their gifts to Jesus. These
earthly kings would often assume the ceremonial roles of the
magi in the liturgy of the feast, and coronations often took
place on that day.
Richard Trexler wrote a study entitled The Journey of the
Magi15, presenting the development of the three magi to
three kings. As he insisted upon it, an important problem of
the use of the three magi iconography in a representational
context is its inability to present a unique authority.16 A so-
lution of this problem is to represent the three magi as three
members of the same dynasty. The Three kings offer the pos-
sibility to represent the biblical or historical models, the fa-
milial ancestors and the contemporary ruler in one and
unique representation. For the empire specially, the Magi
had a special relevance. Since the translation of their relics to
Cologne cathedral under Frederick Barbarossa, the Magi
were particularly significant as the patrons of the kings and
14 HugoХStehkämperбХЧźönigeХundХHeiligeХщreiХźönige”бХinХщie Heiligen
щreiХźönigeХ– Darstellung und Verehrung. Katalog zur Ausstellung des
Wallraf-Richartz-Museums in der Josef-Haubrich-Kunsthalle, ed. R.
чuddeХ ĐźölnбХ жонзЮХ иорХ Iva Rosario, Art and propaganda (Woodbridge,
2000) 33.
15 Richard C. Trexler, The journey of the Magi meanings in history of a
Christian story (Princeton (N.J.), 1997).
16 Trexler, "The journey of the Magi", 80.
173
Hungaro-Polonica
it became customary for Kings of Romans to follow their cor-
onation at Aachen with a visit to Cologne where they might
pay reverence to the relics.17
On the Reliquary of the three kings in Cologne, Otton IV
appears next to the three magi, which some scholars inter-
pretedХasХbeingХ“theХforthХking”гХцnХinscriptionХOTTOХRъXХ
identified him without doubt.18 The main difference between
the representation of the three kings and that of Otton is the
fact that the latter does not have a crown. Nevertheless, this
representation is often interpreted as a step to the inclusion
of earthly kings to the theme of the magi.19
Already Nicholas of Bari, of the court of Frederic II, made
an allusion between contemporary rulers and the magi in
1235: His ancestor <Frederick I> was a great ruler because he was
emperor of the Romans, his father <Henry VI> was also great, be-
cause emperor of the Romans and king of Sicily, himself <Frederick
II> he is the greatest because he is emperor of the Romans, king of
Jerusalem and Sicily. Certainly, these three kings are like the three
magi, who came gifts to adore the God and the Man, but this is the
youngest of the three, on whom the child Jesus had put his blessed
17 StehkämperбХ ЧźönigeХ undХ HeiligeХ щreiХ źönige”бХ иорХ TrexlerбХ ЧTheХ
яourneyХofХtheХżagi”бХмнрХHansХHofmannбХщieХheiligenХdreiХźönige (Bonn,
1975).
18 Hofmann, "щieХ heiligenХ dreiХ źönige”бХ ойр StehkämperбХ ЧźönigeХ undХ
HeiligeХщreiХźönige”бХиог
19 TrexlerбХ ЧTheХjourneyХ ofХ theХżagi”г See also Gerald Schwedler, "Ritu-
alinnovation: Zur Gestaltung politisch-liturgischer Zeremonien im
SpätmittelalterХamХчeispielХderХіariserХщreikönigsmesseХimХяahrХжимнб”ХinХ
щasХ UrsprünglicheХ undХ dasХ NeueгХ ZurХ щynamikХ rituellerХ іrozesseХ inХ
GeschichteХundХьegenwartбХedгХчгХщückerХ – G. Schwedler (Berlin, 2008)
145–206.
174
Hungaro-Polonica
hands and his sacred arms.20 The mention of Nicholas of Bari –
kings were like magi – can be considered as the first mention
of a parallel between them. We have not only a first visual
sign of the intention to include earthly rulers in the iconogra-
phy of the three kings but also some written evidence.21
From later periods, we also know some liturgical plays in
which rulers played an important role. We can evoke for ex-
ample the offerings of Charles V, king of France and the em-
peror Charles IV in 1378 in the guise of the magi at the Epiph-
any feast.2223 The text relates that Charles V prepared three
20 Cited by іollerossбХ “щasХ sakraleХ юdentifikationsporträt”, 178; F. O.
чüttnerбХImago Pietatis: Motive der Christlichen Ikonographie als Modelle
zurХVerähnlichungг (Berlin, 1983) 27. English translation is from: Doina-
ъlenaХшraciunбХ“One authority and three kings: the king as a Magus from
written sources to late-medieval art.”бХ httpпддwwwгacademiaгedu-
/8249276/One_authority_and_three_kings_the_king_as_a_Magus_from
_written_sources_to_late-medieval_art (20/02/2016)
21 ыorХmoreХdetailбХseeпХSchwedlerбХ“Ritualinnovation”г
22 “Lendemain, jour de la Tiphanie, l’Empereur volt veoir les reliques celluy jour,
et estre à la messe, et en pria le Roy, et que avec luy disnastрХ[…]ХSi fu l’offrande
du Roy telle: trois de ses chambellans tenoyent haultement trois couppes belles
dorées; en l’une y avoit or, et en l’autre encens, et en l’autre mierre;et de renc
aloyent; si offry le Roy l’or primiérement, puis l’encens, et puis le mierre; et, à
chascune foiz, baisa la main de l’arcevesque de Rains, qui chantoit la messe. »
« Lendemain, jour de la Tiphanie, l’Empereur volt veoir les reliques celluy jour,
et estre à la messe, et en pria le Roy, et que avec luy disnastрХ[…]ХSi fu l’offrande
du Roy telle: trois de ses chambellans tenoyent haultement trois couppes belles
dorées; en l’une y avoit or, et en l’autre encens, et en l’autre mierre;et de renc
aloyent; si offry le Roy l’or primiérement, puis l’encens, et puis le mierre; et, à
chascune foiz, baisa la main de l’arcevesque de Rains, qui chantoit la messeг”Х–
Christine de Pisan, żémoiresХouХlivreХdesХfaits et bonnes moeurs du sage
roi Charles V (s. l., 1785) 80–81.
23 “Le merquedy ensuyvant, Vie jour de janvier et jour de la Thiphaine,
l'Empereur fist prier au Roy qu'il li pleust celui jour monstrer les saintes reliques,
et que, celui jour, avoit devocion de les veoir et soy faire apporter, et estre à la
messe, et disner au Palais avecques le Roy […]Хvint à l'offrande, le Roy avoit fait
appareillier trois pères de offrandes, d'or, d'encens et de mirre, pour offrir pour
175
Hungaro-Polonica
pairs of offerings: gold, frankincense and myrrh to offer up,
as in common. This mention allows us to think that this kind
of offerings had been already in use in the court before
1378.24 The cited representations of the Adoration of the
Magi, can be interpreted as the visual confirmation of this
tendency. Crypto-portraits appeared thus as tools of actual-
isation of a biblical image.
Central Europe as a Centre of Production?
As already mentioned, some authors situate the first appear-
ance in the 13th century in the Saint-Empire, Italy or in
France.25 Beside these first sporadic and very hypothetical
occurrences, the real expansion of the genre seems to start in
the 14th Century, eventually based upon an earlier model.
lui et pour l'Empereur, ainsi qu'il est acoustumé. Et fist demander le Roy à
l'Empereur s'il offreroit point, lequel s'en excusa en disant qu'il ne povoit aler,
ne soy agenoiller, ne aucune chose tenir pour la goûte, et qu'il pleust au Roy offrir
et faire selon son acoustumance. Si fu l'offrande du Roy tele qui s'ensuit : trois
chevaliers, ses chambellans, tenoient hautement trois bêles coupes dorées et
esmailliées ; en l'une estoit l'or, en l'autre l'encens et en la tierce le mirre. Et
alerent tous trois par ordre, comme l'offrande doit estre bailliée devant le Roy, et
le Roy après, qui s'agenoillierent, et il (le Roi) s'agenoilla devant l'arcevesque, et
la première offrande, qui fu de l'or, lui bailla celui qui la tenoit et il l'offri et baisa
la main. La seconde, qui est de l'encens, bailla le secont chevalier qui la tenoit au
premier et il la bailla au Roy, et il l'offri en baisant la main de l'arcevesque. La
tierce, qui est du mirre, bailla le me chevalier, qui la tenoit, au 11 e et le 11 e au
premier, et le premier la bailla au Roy, et en baisant la main dudit arcevesque
tierce foiz l'offriг”Х – Les grandes chroniques de France. Chronique des
règnesХdeХяeanХююХetХdeХшharlesХVбХedг R Delachenal (Paris, 1910). 232–234.
24 ыorХdetailedХinterpretationбХseeХSchwedlerбХ“Ritualinnovation”бХжйм–154;
яanaХыantysová-żatejkováбХ“TheХHolyХRomanХъmperorХinХtheХtoilsХofХtheХ
ыrenchХprotocolб”ХImago temporis. Medium Aevum 6 (2012) 223–248.
25 See namely SchmidtбХ“чeiträgeХzumХьotischen”.
176
Hungaro-Polonica
The birth of the portrait has been situated in the new intel-
lectual climate of the 14th Century, characterised by a new
vision of the world and the human and the birth of the
crypto-portrait comes within the scope of this development.
Scholars seem to accept the court of Charles IV as the centre
of expansion of the crypto-portrait. Among his crypto-por-
traits, a great part had been painted in a scene of the Adora-
tion of the Magi.26
An Adoration of the Magi and a Dormition of the Virgin
scenes were probably originally parts of a diptych. The pan-
els known as the Morgan diptych may contain not only the
crypto-portrait of Charles IV but also that of Innocent VI in
the guise of the Saint Peter.27 The second king has Charles
юV’sХ featuresХ andХ hisХ mantleХ isХ muchХ moreХ decoratedХ thanХ
that of the other kings. His mantle is decorated with the im-
perial eagle. The double crypto-portrait may refer to the frag-
ile balance between the power of the Holy Roman Empire
and the Church.
шharlesХюV’sХfeaturesХseemХtoХhaveХbeenХimposedХonХoneХ
of the three kings in the Adoration scene in the Holy Cross
Chapel at Karlstejn castle.28 What is unusual in this image is
26 іollerossбХ“щasХsakraleХюdentifikationsporträt”бХжморХPaul H. D. Kaplan,
The Rise of the Black Magus in Western Art (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1985)., 89;
OlgaХ іujmanováбХ “іortraitsХ ofХ kingsХ depictedХ asХ żagiХ inХ чohemianХ
paintingб”ХinХThe regal image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, ed. D.
Gordon et al. (London, 1997) 247–267; Rosario, "Art and propaganda";
SchwedlerбХ“Ritualinnovationб”г
27 яaroslavХіešinaбХ“юmperiumХetХsacerdotium”бХUmění 26 (1978) 521–528.
For the recent literature, Prague: the Crown of Bohemia, 1347–1437, ed. B.
D. Boehm – J. Fajt, (New York – New Haven, 2005) cat. no. 25.
28 Rosario, "Art and propaganda”бХжорХżagisterХTheodericusгХшourtХіainter
to Emperor Charles IV. The Pictoral Decoration of the Shrines at Karlstejn
Castle. ed. J. Fajt (Prague, 1998) 178.
177
Hungaro-Polonica
the fact that Charles IV is the third king and not the middle
one, as on his other representations.
The breviary of Jean of Streda, which is also known as Li-
ber Viaticus, was painted in the fifties-sixties of the 14th Cen-
tury. Initial of the 97v folio presents a scene of the Adoration
of the Magi. First of all, as Marco Bogade has already pointed
out, the crown of the second magi was painted with a partic-
ular care. Not only this element but also his clothes may be
viewed as efforts to distinguish a particular personality in
the image. Given the close parallels existing between this im-
age and the Adoration of the Morgan diptych, it is possible
that Charles IV had his own features imposed on an image
of the Magi. (Moreover, another image in the manuscript
may contain a crypto-portrait, namely that representing Mel-
chisedek.) Not only the middle king has been identified with
a contemporary personality. The young king may be repre-
sented in the guise of Wenceslas, the son of Charles, as Olga
Pujmanova suggested.29 The young king holds a large nug-
get of gold. This iconographical specificity can allude to the
birth of Wenceslas and a generous gift made by his imperial
father. Written sources conserved that the equivalent of the
weight of the baby Wenceslas had sent to the Aachen cathe-
dral treasury to commemorate this event.
цnotherХexampleХofХtheХpossiblyХ“dynastic”ХцdorationХofХ
theХżagiХpaintingsХisХknownХbyХtheХnameХ“чucherХцdoraв
tion”ХinХtheХscholarshipг30 It is supposed that Charles IV had
his own features imposed on an image of the Magi. Both he
29 іujmanováбХ“іortraitsХofХkingsЧбХзкйг
30 „іragueбХtheХшrownХofХчohemia”бХcatгХnoгХонг
178
Hungaro-Polonica
and his two sons may even be intended here, with the kneel-
ing Charles, Wenceslas as Dauphin in the middle, and the
read-headed Sigismund.31
Not only the court of Charles IV but that of Rudolf IV of
Habsburg used the practice of the crypto-portrait. On the
Nativity Portal of St Theobald in Thann, the Journey of the
Magi conserved a crypto-portrait of the archduke.32 Situated
on the lower west-southern tympanum on the Nativity Por-
tal, the scene of the Journey is represented together with that
of the Adoration of the Magi. Sharing features of other
known portraits of Rudolf, Assaf Pinkus argues that the fig-
ure of the middle king has been portrayed with the arch-
duke’sХfeaturesбХhypothesisХwhichХisХalsoХsupportedХbyХconв
temporary political concerns.33 Often interpreted in the logic
of a certain rivalry between himself and his brother-in-law
Charles IV, the representation of Rodolf in Thann may be
part of this ambition.
For the contemporaries of Charles IV and Rudolf IV, the
kings of Hungary and Poland, Louis I and Casimir III the sit-
uation is more complicated, as no likeness of these rulers has
been conserved. Nevertheless, different hypotheses have
been published on the subject. In Padua, at the S. Felice
Chapel, S. Antonio, Altichiero eventually represented Louis
Ist of Hungary. Among other crypto-portraits on the scene
of the Council of Ramiro, Margaret Plant recognised that of
Louis Ist. Here, “…he is shown against a baldacchino emblazoned
31 іujmanováбХ“іortraitsХofХkingsЧбХзймг
32 цssafХіinkusбХ“Rudolf’sХjourneyб”Х Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch 65 (2004)
273–288.
33 іinkusбХ“Rudolf’sХjourney”г
179
Hungaro-Polonica
with the royal lilies of the house of Anjou. His helmet with ostrich
head is held by an aide-de-camp in the Battle of Clavigo, and his
horse stands nearby with its caparison emblazoned with fleurs-de-
lysг”34 Besides these plausible arguments, the author sup-
posesХthatХtheХfeaturesХofХtheХkingХwithХhisХ“distinctiveХbifurв
cated beard”ХhaveХbeenХalsoХrepresentedгХOnХthisХbasisбХtheХ
author identifies other crypto-portraits of the king in Vele-
mérХ ĐHungaryЮбХ oneХ onХ theХ sceneХ ofХ theХ цdorationХ ofХ theХ
Magi and another one in the guise of Saint Ladislas.35
Unfortunately, no Polish examples are known from the
14th Century representing the contemporary king as a Magi.
But it is supposed that the practice of crypto-portrait was
knownХinХhisХcourtХasХsomeХrepresentationsХshowХtheХking’sХ
head with horns. The horns had been probably borrowed
from the iconography of Moses in order to evoke a compari-
son between the king and the Old Testament patriarch. Ma-
rek Walczak mentions for example the coat of arms of the
Dobrzyn region form the mid-14th-century in this context.36
We can add that the practice of the crypto-portrait in the
Magi iconography has been in use in the 15thХшenturyХinХіoв
landгХ OnХ theХ soвcalledХ іolyptychХ ofХ OurХ ŻadyХ ofХ SorrowsХ
ĐшracowХшathedralбХtheХшhapelХofХtheХHolyХшrossХ–ХźaplicaХ
Świętokrzyska, 1470–1480s) the crypto-portrait of Ladislas
Jagiello was executed on a panel representing the Adoration
34 żargaretХіlantбХ“іortraitsХandХpoliticsХinХlateХtrecentoХіaduaб”ХThe Art
bulletin 63 (1981) 412.
35 іlantбХ“іortraitsХandХpoliticsЧбХйжзг
36 żarekХ WalczakбХ “шasimirХ theХ ьreat’sХ цrtisticХ ыoundationsХ andХ theХ
шourtХ цrtХ ofХ theХ Żuxembourgsб”Х inХ Kunst als Herrschaftsinstrument.
чöhmenХundХdasХHeiligeХRömischeХReich, ed. J. Fajt (Berlin, 2009) 534–549.
180
Hungaro-Polonica
of the Magi.37
It seems that the practice of the crypto-portrait was
known in all of the studied courts in Central Europe. The
concept may have been transferred from the imagery of
Charles IV toХ hisХ contemporaries’Х representationгХ цtХ thisХ
pointбХ ъrnрХ żarosi’sХ hypothesisХ canХ furnishХ anХ interestingХ
clarification.38 It is possible that the likeness of Emperor
Charles IV was used in the Hungarian court, namely in the
Chronicon Pictum (also known as Illuminated Chronicle). If
we observe two miniatures of the Chronicle, the first repre-
senting the king Peter before emperor Henri III and the sec-
ond showing the king Salomon before the emperor Henri IV,
we can recognize some familiar features. It seems that for the
figure of the emperor, the likeness of the contemporary em-
peror, so that of Charles IV, has been used. These two effigies
are unique in the Chronicle as they are painted in a three-
quarter view. For the other images, a simple profile or frontal
view can be observed, except for some battle-scenes. If
żarosi’sХhypothesisХturnsХoutХtoХbeХcorrectбХweХcouldХproveХ
the transfer of the concept from Bohemia to Hungary.
Despite some grey areas on the first occurrences, the
genre of crypto-portrait had surely been in use in the 15th
шenturyгХ юnХ жйинбХ emperorХ Sigismund’sХ courtierбХ ъberhardХ
WindeckeХdescribedХhowХtheХъmperorХwasХ‘well-spoken and
sensible […] and was painted at many places because of his fair
countenance; and you will also find him painted in place of one of
37 żateuszХьrzędaбХ“TheХчirthХofХіortraitureХinХіolandфХTheХыaceХofХźingХ
Ladislas IюХ яagielloХ onХ hisХ TombХ inХ шracow”бХ inХ Art and Architecture
around 1400: Global and Regional Perspectives, ed. M. Ciglenecki – P.
Vidmar (Maribor, 2012) 121–131., 129.
38 Erno Marosi, źépХésХhasonmásХ[Image and Likeness], (Budapest, 1995).
181
Hungaro-Polonica
the three Magi in the cloister of our lady Margaret and in place of
David in the cloister of Our Lady’s Brethren . . .’39 This record
bears a particular importance not only for the iconography
of the emperor Sigismond but also for the history of the
crypto-portrait. It proves that the practice of crypto-portrait
was well known and used in the 15th Century, namely in the
framework of the Magi iconography.
39 шitedХbyХчertalanХźéryбХźaiserХSigismundгХюkonographieбХĐżünchenХ –
Wien, 1972) 157. ъnglishХ TranslationХ fromХ SuzieХ NashбХ “шlausХ SluterďsХ
ďWellХofХżosesďХforХtheХшhartreuseХdeХшhampmolХReconsideredпХpartХюююг”бХ
The Burlington Magazine, November 2008, 740.
182
Hungaro-Polonica
Illustrations
Figure 1 Morgan diptych, Pierpont-Morgan Library,
New York, Adoration of the Magi
183
Hungaro-Polonica
Figure 2 Karlstejn castle, Holy Cross Chapel, Adora-
tion of the Magi
Figure 3 Thann, St Theobald, Nativity Portal, Journey
of the Magi
184
Hungaro-Polonica
Figure 4 VelemérбХшhurchХofХtheХHolyХTrinityбцdoraв
tion of the Magi
Figure 5 Chronicon Pictum, Budapest, Orszagos
SzechenyiХźönyvtarбХfгХйкr
185
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibliography
Secondary literature
Hofmann, Hans, щieХ heiligenХ dreiХ źönigeпХ zurХ HeiligenverehrungХ imХ
kirchlichen, gesellschaftlichen und politischen Leben des Mittelalters
(Bonn 1975).
ŻadnerбХьerhartХчurianбХЧщieХцnfängeХdesХźryptoporträtsЧбХinХVon Ange-
sichtХ zuХ цngesichtпХ іorträtstudienрХ żichael Stettler zum 70. Geburtstag,
ed. F. Deuchler (Bern 1983) 78–98.
Boehm, Barbara Drake - Fajt, Jiri (ed.), Prague: the Crown of Bohemia,
1347-1437 (New York - New Haven, 2005).
іinkusбХцssafбХЧRudolf’sХяourneyпХцrtХіatronageХandХіolitics in the St. The-
obald Minster in Thann", Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch 65 (2004) 273–288.
Plant, Margaret, "Portraits and Politics in lateХtrecentoХіaduaпХцltichiero’sХ
Frescoes in the S. Felice chapel, S. Antonio", The Art bulletin 63 (1981) 407–
494.
Friedrich B Polleross, Das sakraleХ юdentifikationsporträtпХ einХ höfischerХ
Bildtypus vom 13. bis zum 20. Jh. (Worms, 1988).
OlgaХіujmanováбХЧіortraitsХofХźings Depicted as Magi in Bohemian Paint-
ing", in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, ed. D. Gor-
don et al. (London, 1997) 247–267.
Iva Rosario, Art and Propaganda: Charles IV of Bohemia, 1346–1378
(Woodbridge, 2000).
ьerhardХ SchmidtбХ ЧчeiträgeХ zumХ ьotischenХ „źryptoporträt”Х inХ ыrankв
reich", in Malerei der Gotik, Fixpunkte und Ausblicke II., ed. M. Roland
(Graz, 2005) 329–340.
ьeraldХ SchwedlerбХ “RitualinnovationпХ ZurХ ьestaltungХ politisch-litur-
gischerХ ZeremonienХ imХ SpätmittelalterХ amХ чeispielХ derХ іariserХ щreiköв
nigsmesseХ imХ яahrХ жимн”Х inХ щasХ UrsprünglicheХ undХ dasХ NeueгХ ZurХ щyв
namikХrituellerХіrozesseХinХьeschichteХundХьegenwartбХedгХчгХщückerХ– G.
Schwedler (Berlin, 2008) 145–206.
HugoХ StehkämperбХ „źönigeХ undХ HeiligeХ щreiХ źönige”бХ inХ щieХ HeiligenХ
186
Hungaro-Polonica
Drei źönigeХ– Darstellung und Verehrung. Katalog zur Ausstellung des
Wallraf-Richartz-Museums in der Josef-Haubrich-Kunsthalle, ed. R.
чuddeХĐźölnбХжонзЮ
Richard C Trexler, The Journey of the Magi Meanings in History of a
Christian Story, (Princeton, 1997)
187
Andrzej Marzec
Jagellonian University, Cracow
New King and New Elites. The Reign of Louis
the Great in Poland 1370–1382
I
In November 1370 Louis the Great, King of Hungary and Po-
land, reigned over vast lands of Central Europe, controlling
the countries from the Adriatic up to the border of the State
of the Teutonic Order in the north. It was the peak of his
power; however, he had no male descendant to take over the
crowns of the Angevin dynasty. When in 1371 his wife Eliz-
abeth of Bosnia became pregnant, it seemed that the line
could be secured.1 The power of Angevin rule, especially in
the Kingdom of Hungary, resulted from the consistent
strengthening of the king's power over his subjects, includ-
ing the noble families who had won considerable political
influence at the time of the struggle for the Hungarian
crown. Charles Robert, Louis's father, defeated the opposi-
tion of the nobles and ensured strong economic foundation
of the throne, which, in turn, put the Hungarian kings in the
role of the strongest power players in that part of Europe.
1 StanisławХ цгХ SrokaбХ ьenealogiaХ цndegawenówХ węgierskichХ [TheХ
Genealogy of Hungarian Angevins] ĐźrakówбХзежкЮХлн–71. In July 1370, a
few months before the death of Casimir the Great, Elizabeth of Bosnia
gave birth to the oldest daughter, Catherine. A year later, in 1371, Mary
was born
189
Hungaro-Polonica
Their partners in the game were the Luxemburg dynasty
who ruled in the Czech Kingdom in the person of Charles IV
as well as the Austrian Habsburgs and Polish Piasts.2
II
Seizing the Polish throne was not just another of Louis's tri-
umphs; it also meant the necessity of facing his new subjects
2 There are numerous publications on the subject of the Central European
politics by monarchs of the 14th centuryбХseeХiгaгпХяanХщąbrowskiбХOstatnieХ
lata Ludwika Wielkiego 1370–1382 [The Last Years of Louis the Great
1370–жинз]Х ĐźrakówбХ жожнбХ reprintпХ źrakówбХ зееобХ pageХ numbersХ
according to the new edition) 12–жйнрХюdгбХ“ZХczasówХŁokietkaгХ Studium
nad stosunkami polsko-węgierskimiХ wХ XюVХ wieku”Х [ыromХ theХ щaysХ ofХ
WładysławХюХtheХъlbow-high. The Study of Polish-Hungarian Relations in
the 14th шentury]бХ RozprawyХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciбХ WydziałХ
Filozoficzno-historyczny 59 (1916) 278–излрХцbdonХźłodzińskiбХŁokietekХaХ
Habsburgowie, (ibid.) 255–зммрХяiфíХSpĕváčekбХźarelХюVгХŽivotХaХdíloХ[яohnХ
of Luxemburg. Life and Achievements] (Praha, 1979); Id., Jan
ŻucemburskýХaХjehoХdobaХжзол–1346 [John of Luxemburg and his Times
1296–жийл]Х ĐіrahaХ жоойЮрХ чlankaХ чerezovákováбХ “іolitickýХ zapasХ
цnjouovcovХ oХ uhorskúХ korunu”Х [цngevinХ politicalХ strugglesХ forХ theХ
HungarianХшrown]бХHistorickýХčasopisХиоХĐжоожЮХкме–586; Paul Knoll, Luis
the Great and Kasimir of Poland, in Luis the Great, King of Hungary and
Poland, ed. G. Goldschmidt – L. S. Domonkos (New York, 1986) 105–127;
чronisławХNowackiбХшzeskieХroszczeniaХdoХkoronyХpolskiejХ[шzechХшlaimsХ
toХtheХіolishХшrown]ХĐіoznańбХжонмЮрХщieterХVeltrupбХZwischenХъherechtХ
und Familienpolitick. Studien zu den dynastischen Heiratsprojekten Karl
IV. ĐWarendorfбХжоннЮрХыrantisekХźavkaбХVládaХźarlaХюVгХzaХjehoХcísaфstvíХ
(1355–1378). ZemĕХСeskéХkorunyХaХrodováбХфíšskaХaХevropskáХpolitykaХ[TheХ
Goverment of Charles IV. in his Empire (1355–1378). Dynastic, German
and European policy] I–ююХ ĐіrahaбХ жооиЮрХ StanisławХ цгХ SrokaбХ
“цndegaweńskaХreorganizacjaХWęgierХwХцwietleХnowszychХbadań”Х[TheХ
Angevin Reorganisation of Hungary in Light of Recent Studies],
Kwartalnik historyczny 103 (1996) 23–ийрХ StanisławХ SzczurбХ“W sprawie
sukcesjiХ andegaweńskiejХ wХ іolsce”Х [OnХ theХ цngevinХ SuccessionХ inХ
Poland], Roczniki Historyczne 75 (2009) 61–104.
190
Hungaro-Polonica
who had their own specific expectations towards their new
king. The relations of the Angevins and the Piasts began with
the marriage of Elizabeth, the sister of the Polish king Casi-
mir the Great, with Charles Robert in 1320. Since the 1350s
the mutual relations between these two dynasties had be-
come the subject of particular interest to the Polish political
elites.3
The most decisive in this context was a poorly docu-
mented all-Polish massХmeetingХthatХtookХplaceХinХSulejówХinХ
1350. Probably during that mass meeting the issue of the
Hungarian succession was put forward for the first time for
a public debate between the king, the secular and ecclesias-
tical elites and the Masovian princes.4 In the most recent lit-
3 The origin of dynastic contracts between the Piasts and Angevins was
srcutinised on a number of occasions – OswaldХчalzerбХźrólestwoХPolskie
1295–1370 [Kingdom of Poland 1295–жиме]Х tгХ иХ ĐŻwówбХ жозебХ reprintХ
źrakówбХ зеекЮХ ни–жйзрХ яanХ щąbrowskiбХ ъlђbietaХ ŁokietkównaХ жиек–1380
[Elizabeth of Poland 1305–жине]ХĐźrakówбХжожйбХreprintХźrakówбХзеемЮХмл–
ожрХюdгбХ“ZХczasówХŁokietka”бХpassimрХяerzyХWyrozumskiбХ“ьenezaХsukcesjiХ
andegaweńskiejХwХіolsce”Х[ьenesisХofХtheХцngevinХSuccessionХinХіoland]бХ
Studia historyczne 25 (1982) 185–197; Janusz Kurtyka, Odrodzone
królestwoгХ żonarchiaХ WładysławaХ ŁokietkaХ iХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoХ wХ
цwietleХnowszychХbadańХ[The Reborn of the Kingdom. The Monarchy of
WładysławХ theХ ъlbow-high and Casimir the Great in Light of Recent
Studies]ХĐźrakówбХзеежЮХйз–ймрХSzczurбХ“WХsprawieХsukcesji”бХлж–64.
4 Older subject literature based on the 15 th century Hungarian and Polish
recordsХ ĐTheХ чudaХ шhronicleХ andХ RocznikiХ щługoszaбХ шhronicaХ
Hungarorum and Annales seu cronicae incliti Regni Poloniae), supported
with some succinct comments by Ioannes de Czarnkow, argued that the
succession to the throne, following the reign of Casimir the Great, had
been discussed by the king and the dignitaries of the secular and religious
orders already in the 1330s. It was closely related to the plans of territorial
expansion to Ruthenia, which was against the Angevin will. The Angevins
also made claims to the Ruthenian Crown. Hence, the reported mass
gatheringХ inХ źrakówХ ĐcaгХ жиинджииоЮХ isХ ofХ crucialХ importanceХ inХ subjectХ
191
Hungaro-Polonica
erature on the subject it has been argued that the mass meet-
ingХinХSulejówХmarksХtheХactualХshiftХtowardsХtheХelitesХandХ
the supporting knighthood of the decisive initiative in for-
mulating the conditions on which Louis the Great could be
crowned as Polish king.5 Until November 1370 the power
was in the hands of Polish knighthood. A year after the event
inХSulejówбХшasimirХtheХьreatХsetХoutХtoХfightХŻithuaniaгХOnХ
his way to Ruthenia, in Lublin, the king fell ill and was in
danger of death.
At that point the Hungarian king and a potential succes-
sor to the throne requested from the Polish knighthood an
literature as well as the meeting between Casimir and Charles Robert. The
details concerning succession to the Polish throne and Ruthenian
expansion were defined during this meeting. However, the newest studies
argue that the intensification and re-evaluation of the Polish-Hungarian
contracts in terms of succession and claims to Ruthenian lands took place
in 1350, when Casimir the Great succeeded in Ruthenia, which, in turn,
enforced the response from the Hungarian king – SzczurбХ “WХ sprawieХ
sukcesji”бХмж–91.
5 The mass meeting has been so far treated as a gathering of the royal elites
and was associated with the escalating and complicating character of the
war in the East. Under such circumstances, the king had to obtain
acceptance for his decisions, which often led to the spending of the
subjectsďХ moneyгХ ыorХ theХ studiesХ onХ theХ topicбХ seeХ SzczurбХ “WХ sprawieХ
sukcesji”бХ ож–94. The author convincingly questioning the previous
understandingХ ofХ theХ SulejówХ colloquiumбХ reachedХ theХ conclusionХ thatХ
taking a stance on the Angevin document (1350) was the aim of the
meeting. The document presented one-sided viewpoint of Louis the Great
on the Ruthenian expansion of his predecessor Casimir the Great. The
Hungarian king yielded Ruthenia to the Polish king and, at the same time,
suggested its future in the event of the seizure of the Polish Crown; by
doing so, he made the Polish side respond to the claims. Therefore, the
SulejówХmeetingХturnedХoutХtoХbeХaХnationwideХdebateХoverХtheХsuccessionХ
to the Polish throne and the regulations concerning it – SzczurбХ “WХ
sprawieХsukcesji”бХол–102.
192
Hungaro-Polonica
oath of loyalty and a warranty of succession. The elites gath-
ered in Lublin did not consent to the request immediately
but they set their own conditions. They demanded the exclu-
sion from the Polish succession of Louis's brother Stephan
(or at least a guarantee that he would not become a viceroy
in Poland) and a warrant of payment for war expeditions
abroad.6 They also enforced Louis the Great to pledge that
he would not appoint two Germans mentioned by name
(sic!) to the office of capitaneus (castellans). Four years later
the Hungarian king and the Polish representatives reached
another agreement which resulted in the famous Privilege of
Buda. It was the first recognised written document – the
monarch's pledge to abide by the expectations of the Polish
knights.7 The powerful and almost key part the Polish polit-
ical elites played in formulating the conditions on which
Louis the Great could become Polish king is widely acknowl-
edged in subject literature.
6 цsХinХtheХcaseХofХtheХgatheringХinХSulejówбХtheХstudiesХonХtheХsubject are
scarce. The description of those events can be found in the Hungarian
Chronicle (Chronicon Dubicense) whose fragments relating the war
expeditionХ wereХ publishedХ byХ цnatolХ ŻewickiбХ źilkaХ przyczynkówХ doХ
dziejówХźazimierzaХWielkiegoХюХzХkronikiХzapomnianej [A Contribution to
the Study of Casimir the Great's History], Kwartalnik Historyczny 3,
(1889) 205–213. The Chronicle has been analysed and interpreted on many
occasions – щąbrowskiбХ OstatnieХ lataбХ жжнХ arguedХ thatХ theХ HungarianХ
king's brother – Stephan was not excluded from succession but lost the
right to the regal office of viceroy, just as the two Germans mentioned by
name. Jerzy Wyrozumski, Kazimierz Wielki [Casimir the Great]
ĐWrocławбХжонзЮХоогХclaimsХthatХtheХpointХwasХtoХexcludeХStephanХfromХtheХ
succession to the Polish throne. Chronicon will be referred to in the latter
part of the article.
7 KDKK 1, no. 201. The most important study devoted to the analysis of
the document: Kurtyka, OdrodzoneХkrólestwo, 46–47.
193
Hungaro-Polonica
III
To consider all aspects of the Polish elites of the time would
far exceed the scope of the present article. However, in the
context of the Anegevin takeover some questions are worth
discussing. The most important of them deals with the actual
potential of the elites to influence the policy of the monarch.
Two further questions arise here: the first one is about the
extent to which the king is able to act freely and the other is
a reflection on the possibility of pressurising the monarch by
the knights and particularly the noblemen (szlachta), who
constituted a large proportion of the political elites. During
his nearly forty-year rule, Casimir the Great managed to re-
inforce considerably the position of the monarch. With the
help of advisers he introduced such new measures recog-
nised at that time in Europe as: the consolidation and devel-
opment of royal lands (demesne), strong and effective re-
gional administration dependent on the office of the king's
representative (capitaneus – starosta), and last but not least,
ruthless fiscalisation of the kingdom joined with reclamation
of royal land.8 He managed to achieve the above mentioned
8The modernisation of the monarch's rights, first and foremost of the royal
demesne, which was of crucial importance to all rulers, intensified since
the union of the Kingdom. The process had been started by Wenceslaus II
andХcontinuedХbyХWładysławХtheХъlbow-high. However, it was the long
and stable reign of Casimir that enabled the consolidation of the changes
– RomanХ ьrodeckiбХ “щziałalnoцРХ gospodarczaХ źazimierzaХ Wielkiego”Х
[Casimir the Great's Economic Activity], in Polska piastowska, ed. J.
Wyrozumski, (Warszawa, 1969) 475–койрХяerzyХWyrozumskiбХіaństwowaХ
gospodarkaХsolnaХdoХschyłkuХXюVХwiekuХ[StateХъconomicsХofХSaltХюndustryХ
in Poland to the End of the 14th шentury]бХ ĐźrakówбХ жолмЮрХ яacekХ
żatuszewskiбХіrzywilejeХiХpolitykaХpodatkowaХŻudwikaХWęgierskiegoХwХ
194
Hungaro-Polonica
goals despite the difficult situation in the Kingdom of Poland
in 1333, when the military expansion in Ruthenia was begin-
ning and the knights of Greater Poland were on the verge of
rebellion. Despite all adversities, the king managed to con-
trol his subjects and, to a great extent, accomplish his objec-
tives. Until the end of his reign Casimir the Great continued
his reforms which can be proved by the implementation of
Polsce [The Privileges and Taxation Policy of Louis the Great in Poland]
ĐŁódѐбХ жониЮрХ SławomirХ ьawlasбХ OХ kształtХ zjednoczonegoХ królestwaгХ
NiemieckieХ władztwoХ terytorialneХ aХ genezaХ społecznoustrojowejХ
odrębnoцciХ іolskiХ [OnХ theХ ShapeХ ofХ theХ UnitedХ źingdomгХ German
Territorial Rulership and the Genesis of Poland's Social and Institutional
юdentity]Х ĐWarszawaбХ жоолЮрХ юdгбХ “іolskaХ źazimierzaХ Wielkiego a inne
monarchieХ ъuropyХ хrodkowejХ – moђliwoцciХ iХ graniceХ modernizacjiХ
władzy”Х [шasimirХ theХ ьreatďsХ іolandХ andХ OtherХ шentralХ ъuropeanХ
Monarchies – the Possibilities and the Boundaries of Modernisation of
іower]бХ inХ żodernizacjaХ strukturХ władzyХ wХ warunkachХ opóѐnieniaгХ
ъuropaХ хrodkowaХ iХ WschodniaХ naХ przełomieХ цredniowieczaХ iХ czasówХ
nowoђytnychбХedгХżгХщygoХ– S. Gawlas – H. Grala (Warszawa, 1999) 5–34;
юdгбХ “żonarchiaХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoХ aХ społeczeństwo”Х [шasimirХ theХ
Great's Monarchy and Society], in GenealogiaгХWładzaХiХspołeczeństwoХwХ
іolsceХ цredniowiecznejбХ edгХ цгХ RadzimińskiХ – ягХ WroniszewskiХ ĐToruńбХ
1999) 197–236; Id., “Polen – eineХStändegesellschaftХanХderХіeripherieХdesХ
lateinischenХ ъuropa”бХ inХ ъuropaХ imХ spätenХ żittelalterгХ іolitik-
Gesellschaft-Kultur, ed. R. C. Schwingen – Ch. Hesse – P. Moraw
ĐżünchenбХзеелЮХзим–злжрХыranciszekХSikoraбХ“RopczyckiХzespółХosadniczyХ
wХ цredniowieczuгХ ZХ badańХ nadХ kazimierzowskimХ modelemХ osadniczo-
urbanizacyjnym”Х[żedievalХSettlementХшomplexХinХRopczyceгХTheХStudyХ
of Kazimierz Urban-SetllementХżodel]бХTekiХźrakówskieХиХĐжоолЮХми–96;
цndrzejХ żarzecбХ „źrólewskieХ sądownictwoХ prawaХ polskiegoХ zaХ
panowaniaХ WładysławaХ ŁokietkaХ iХ źazimierzaХ Wielkiego”Х [RoyalХ
яudiciaryХ ofХ theХ іolishХ ŻawХ underХ WładysławХ юХ theХ ъlbow-high and
Casimir theХ ьreat]бХ inХ іravniХ kulturaХ stфedovĕkuХ [ŻegalХ шultureХ ofХ theХ
Middle Ages], ed. żгХNodlбХігХWęcowskiбХшolloquiaХżedievaliaХіragensiaХ
17 (Praha 2016) 81–104.
195
Hungaro-Polonica
new statues in Greater and Lesser Poland, the 1368 salt law
and the monetary reform.9
IV
Having at his disposal a detailed account of events that im-
mediately succeeded the arrival of Louis the Great in Kra-
ków in 1370, a historian does not lack the possibility to inter-
pret the events.10 The new king had to face doubts concern-
ing the testament of his deceased predecessor. Over a year
9 The following questions are discussed in numerous studies. The most
noteworthyХincludeпХStanisławХZajączkowskiбХ“іolskaХaХWittelsbachowieХ
wХpierwszejХpołowieХXюVХwieku”Х[іolandХandХtheХWittelsbachsХinХtheХыirstХ
Half of the 14th Century], in Prace historyczne w 30-lecieХ działalnoцciХ
profesorskiejХ StanisławaХ ZakrzewskiegoХ [HistoricalХ WorksХ onХ theХ ие th
цnniversaryХofХStanisławХZarzeckiďsХіrofessorship]ХĐŻwówбХжоийЮХйи–111;
StanisławХSzczurбХTraktatyХmiędzypaństwoweХіolskiХpiastowskiejХ[іiastХ
іolandХ andХ юtsХ юnternationalХ Treaties]Х ĐźrakówбХ жооеЮрХ юdгбХ “ZjazdХ
wyszehradzkiХ zХ rokuХ жиик”Х [TheХ шongressХ ofХ VisegrádХ inХ жиик]бХ StudiaХ
Historyczne 35 (1992) 3–зерХюdгбХ“OkolicznoцciХzrzeczeniaХsięХхląskaХprzezХ
źazimierzaХ WielkiegoХ wХ rokuХ жиио”Х [TheХ RelinquishmentХ ofХ шlaimsХ toХ
Silesia by Casimir the Great in 1339], Studia Historyczne, 30 (1987) 518–
киорХ юdгбХ “źrakowskiХ zjazdХ monarchówХ wХ жилйХ roku”Х [TheХ шongressХ ofХ
źrakówХinХжилй]бХRocznikiХHistoryczneХлйХĐжоонЮХик–кмрХюdгбХ“іraskiХzjazdХ
źazimierzaХWielkiegoХzХcesarzemХwХrokuХжикл”Х[TheХіragueХшongressХofХ
шasimirХ theХ ьreatХ andХ theХ ъmperorХ inХ жикл]бХ inХ іolskaХ iХ jejХ sąsiedzi w
póѐnymХцredniowieczuбХedгХźгХOђógХ – SгХSzczurХĐźrakówбХзеееЮХнж–117;
Henryk Paszkiewicz, Polityka ruska Kazimierza Wielkiego [The
RuthenianХіoliticsХofХшasimirХtheХьreat]ХĐWarszawaбХжозкбХreprintХźrakówбХ
зеезЮрХяerzyХŁojkoбХ“źonfederacjaХżaciejaХчorkowica”Х[żaciejХчorkowicďsХ
Confederation], Roczniki Historyczne 43 (1977) 29–кнрХStanisławХRomanбХ
ьenezaХ statutówХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoгХ StudiumХ ѐródłoznawczeХ [TheХ
Genesis of Casimir the Great's Statutes. The Study of Primary Sources]
ĐźrakówбХжолжЮрХягХźurtykaбХOdrodzoneХkrólestwoбХpassimг
10 Joannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon Polonorum, ed. J. Szlachtowski,
żonumentaХіoloniaeХHistoricaбХзбХĐŻwówбХжнмзЮХлил–642. Having heard
ofХшasimirďsХdemiseбХtheХfirstХoneХtoХarriveХinХźrakówХwasХVladislausХofХ
196
Hungaro-Polonica
prior to his death, Casimir the Great adopted his grandson
шasimirХofХSłupskг Until the present day the monarch's deci-
sion is not clear, but one can assume, in all likelihood, that in
the future it would lead to the coronation of the young
prince. It sounds even more plausible when one remembers
that at that time Louis was still childless (his first daughter
was born in 1370).11
Before his death, the king of Poland decided to bequeath
considerable tracts of Polish land to his grandson including:
ŁęczycaбХSieradzХandХщobrzyńХlands as well as a number of
important castles on the north-western border of the King-
domХ ĐźruszwicaбХ WielatówбХ чydgoszczХ andХ WałczЮг12 The
chronicler, though not impartial, left a fairly precise descrip-
tion of the sequence of events, if only because he and the Kra-
kówХchancellorХяanuszХSuchywilkХpresentedХtoХŻouisХtheХwillХ
of the deceased for approval.13 The king, before taking the
Opole, Count palatine of Hungary. He came to Poland in order to prepare
the arrival of Louis and make sure that there were no obstacles on Louis's
way to the throne. Casimir the Great had been buried before the arrival of
his nephew.
11 źazimierzХяasińskiбХ“ZjazdХnaХżazowszu w kwietniu 1369 roku i jego
geneza. ZeХ studiówХ nadХ itinerariumХ źazimierzaХ Wielkiego“Х [TheХ
Masovian Convention in April 1369 and Its Genesis. The Study of Casimir
the Great's Itinerary], Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici, Historia 9
(1973) 59–69 (reprintХ inпХ źazmierzХ яasińskiбХ іraceХ wybraneХ zХ naukХ
pomocniczychХ historiiбХ ĐToruńбХ жоолЮХ змм–знлЮрХ юdгбХ “żałђeństwaХ iХ
koligacjeХpolityczneХźazimierzaХWielkiego”Х[TheХżarriagesХandХіoliticalХ
шonnectionsХ ofХ шasimirХ theХ ьreat]бХ StudiaХ яródłoznawczeХ volгХ из–33
(1990) 67–76 (reprint in: Id., Prace wybrane z nauk pomocniczych historii,
ĐToruńбХжоолЮХижк–331).
12 StanisławХźętrzyńskiбХ“ZapisХźazimierzaХWielkiegoХdlaХźazimierzaХчo -
gusławowica“Х [TheХ чequestХ ofХ шasimirХ theХ ьreatХ toХ źazimierzХ
чogusławowic]бХіrzeglądХHistoryczny 14 (1912) 26–47, 164–194, 294–316.
13 Ioannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 639. On Janusz Suchywilk and Jan of
шzarnkówХseeпХяanuszХчieniakбХ“яanХĐяanekЮХzХшzarnkowaгХNiedokończonaХ
197
Hungaro-Polonica
decision, sought advice from the knights who held a mass
gatheringХledХbyХtheХarchbishopХofХьnieznoХяarosławХofХчoв
goria and the bishopХofХźrakówХыlorianХofХżokrskoг14 He ex-
pected them to resolve the issue of the problematic bequest.
According to the chronicler, none of the gathered knights
was able to decide on what was legal and illegal in Casimir's
will. Jan of Czarnkow's description, though not very precise,
allows us to notice some important issues.
It is known that only the bequests to his natural sons and
шasimirХofХSłupskХwereХaХmatterХofХseriousХdebateгХTheХfirstХ
ones had been dealt with quickly and annulled without fur-
ther discussion.15 The bequest to prince Casimir, however,
was much disputed. The legality of the most important be-
questХ ofХ theХ ŁęczycaбХ SieradzХ andХ щobrzyńХlandsХ forХ шasiв
mirďsХgrandsonХtheХprinceХofХSłupskХhadХnotХbeenХresolvedгХ
The case was tried on the day after the documents sent by
kronikaХ polskaХ zХ XюVХ wieku”Х [яanХ ofХ шzarnkowгХ An Unfinished Polish
Chronicle of the 14th century], StudiaХяródłoznawczeХймХĐзееоЮХжео–144;
цndrzejХ żarzecбХ“SapientiorХ interХ proceresХ іoloniaeгХ Kariera polityczna
яanuszaХSuchywilkaХhгХьrzymałaХĐжиил–жимйЮ”Х[SapientiorХinterХproceresХ
Poloniae. The Political Career of Janusz SuchywilkХofХьrzymałaХшoatsХofХ
Arms (1336–1340], inХіolskaХiХjejХsąsiedziХwХpóѐnymХцredniowieczuбХedгХźгХ
OђógХ– SгХSzczurХĐźrakówбХзеееЮ 9–кирХюdгбХ“SzymonХzХRuszkowaгХZХbadańХ
nadХ personelemХ kancelariiХ królewskiejХ wХ czternastowiecznejХ іolsce”Х
[SzymonХ ofХ RuszkówгХ The Study of the Personnel from the Royal
Chancellery in 14th century Poland], in Ecclesia, regnum, fontes. Studia z
dziejówХцredniowieczaбХedгХSгХьawlasХĐWarszawaбХзежйЮХззн–239.
14 “Mandavit [the king – A.M.] eadem privilegia ad dominos archiepiscopus
Gneznensem et Florianum Cracoviensem episcopum et ad nobiles regni, qui
partim aderant reportari, eorum arbitrio et definition committens.“Х– Ioannis de
Czarnkow, Chronicon, 639.
15 “Et tandem convenientes [...] donationem duobus filiis naturalibus predictis
factam annihilare volentes, privilegia per camerarios Mscijonem Sandomiriensem
et Johannem Cracoviensem precidi mandaverunt, quae tamen sic praecisa fuerunt
et sunt reservata.“Х– ibid., 640.
198
Hungaro-Polonica
Louis were brought. According to Jan of Czarnkow, the
Hungarian monarch urged the parties to resolve the case.16
WładysławХ OpolczykбХ whoХ hadХ beenХ sentХ byХ theХ kingбХ
pressed hard for the opinion suggesting even the referral to
the principle of propinquity and the necessity of securing he-
reditary rights of all relations. The gathering answered by
appointing the judge and sub-judge (subiudex) of Sandomi-
erz to deliver the verdict. The appointees ruled that the
rights of all relations must not be encroached. Louis de-
manded the confirmation of the verdict in written form with
the seals of the archbishop and other nobles. In effect the case
stalled: the knights informed the king that the appointees'
opinion concerned the rights of the landed gentry, while the
rights of the princes were in this respect unknown to them.17
As a result, Louis the Hungarian settled the dispute by exer-
cising his right of discretion. Therefore, he deprived prince
шasimirХofХtheХŁęczycaбХSieradzХandХщobrzyńХlandsбХleftХhimХ
16 Jan of Czarnkow stated clearly that along with Janusz Suchywilk, they
took Casimir the Great's testamentary bequests to archbishop, bishop of
źrakówХ andХ othersХ forХ approvalгХ HoweverбХ laterХ inХ theХ textбХ afterХ theХ
information about the annulment of the bequests to natural sons
NiemierzaХ andХ яanбХ heХ statedпХ “In crastino autem mane archiepiscopo et
episcopis ac nobilibus dignitate majoribus simul congregatis, dominus Ludovicus
rex [...] misit Wladislaum ducem Opoliae [...] ad eosdem.“Х – Joannis de
Czarnkow, Chronicon, 640. It means that having received the
testamentary bequests, no decision was made until the next day and,
hence, Louis sent Vladislaus so that he could hasten the parties.
17 Ioannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 640–642.
199
Hungaro-Polonica
the remaining properties and promised compensation in re-
turnХ forХ theХ lossesгХ źaѐkoХ ofХ SłupskХ acceptedХ theХ heritableХ
properties as a fief from the Hungarian monarch.18
V
The value of the chronicler's record lies in the presentation
of the real condition of the Polish elites. Jan of Czarnkow's
account of events clearly states that during the gathering, in
the archbishop's house, apart from the representatives of the
episcopate, mostlyХ highХ officialsХ wereХ presentгХ юnХ яózefХ
ёerbiłłoďsХtranslationбХoneХgetsХtheХimpressionХthatХtheХclerв
gymen led the mass meeting of knights; whereas the Latin
text, in a few passages, shows that the meeting took place
between the head dignitaries of the Polish Kingdom both
secular and religious.19 It can be assumed that the highest
dignitaries of the Kingdom of Poland were among Louis's
partners (unfortunately they are not mentioned by name in
18 ŻouisХ attemptedХ toХ passХ theХ щuchyХ ofХ ьniewkowoХ toХ źaѐkoХ butХ theХ
latter refused, since he knew thatХ theХ legitimateХ heirбХ WładysławХ theХ
White, was alive, Ibid., 642.
19 Kronika Jana z Czarnkowa [Jan of Czarnkow's Chronicle], trans. яózefХ
ёerbiłłoбХeditingХandХfootnotesХżгХщгХźowalskiХĐźrakówбХжоолЮХзо–30. [The
king A.M.] ordered the privileges to be taken to the archbishop of Gniezno
andХbishopХыlorianХofХźraków, as well as to the noblemen, the most of whom
were present… “mandavit [...] et ad nobiles regni, qui partim aderant
reportari.“Х– яoannisХdeХшzarnkowбХшhroniconбХлиогХThoseХ“nobilesХregni”Х
are probably not the kingdom's noblemen but dignitaries; in the latter part
of the description Ioannis de Czarnkow leaves no doubt that the
controversialХ issuesХ wereХ debatedХ byХ “nobilesХ dignitateХ maioris”гХ TheyХ
met at the archbishop's place which could only house a considerable
number of people.
200
Hungaro-Polonica
the source texts).20 Their indecisiveness and inability to make
decisions must have been a very telling sign for the Hungar-
ian monarch. This gave the new king a feeling of considera-
ble advantage and augured well for the royal control in the
Polish Kingdom.
Source literature and historical research of the last hun-
dred years offers a clear depiction of the political scene in the
14th century Polish Kingdom and particularly before
WładysławХяagiełłoХassumedХtheХthroneгХSinceХtheХжииеsХtwoХ
basic political parties dominated the scene: the pro-Hungar-
ian and the pro-Czech factions, which meant the support for
either the Angevin or the Luxemburg dynasty. The two fac-
tions were most active exactly at the time of Louis's reign
when the marriages of his daughters were in the balance
and, consequently, the election of the future king of Poland.
The elites of Lesser and Greater Poland as well as their
20On his arrival in Poland, Louis ofХHungaryХwasХwelcomedХinХSączХbyХ
proceres terre et natu maiores (Joannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 636). They
accompaniedХhimХ toХ źrakówХandХdebatedХ atХ theХarchbishopďsХ houseгХ юnХ
November 1370 those highborn noblemen must have been landed officials
and starostas (capitaneus officials), the majority of whom were from Lesser
іolandгХцmongХthemХthereХwereпХtheХcastellanХofХźrakówХяanХofХżelsztynбХ
theХ voivodeХ ofХ źrakówХ щobiesławХ źurozwęckiбХ theХ voivodeХ ofХ
Sandomierz Piotr Nieorza, the castellan of Sandomierz WilczekХofХчirkówбХ
theХcastellanХofХWiцlicaХRafałХofХTarnówбХtheХstarostas (capitaneus officials):
RuthenianХ OttoХ ofХ іilicaбХ іrzecławХ ofХ ьułtowyХ fromХ ьreaterХ іolandбХ
źuyavianХżoцcicХofХхcibórzбХяanХźmitaХofХWiцniczХfromХSieradzбХvoivodesХ
and castellans from PoznańХ andХ źaliszХ asХ wellХ asХ fromХ ŁęczycaХ andХ
Sieradz lands. There were also other noblemen, who were not officials, as,
forХexampleбХяanХofХTęczynбХtheХsonХofХźrakówХvoivodeХ – Andrzej, who
died in 1368.
201
Hungaro-Polonica
knightly followers were all divided according to their sym-
pathies for the rival dynasties.21 Such attitude and interpre-
tation of the 14th century Polish political reality is based on
the belief that not only the main dignitaries of the Kingdom
21 żoreХimportantХstudiesХincludeпХщąbrowskiбХOstatnieХlata, 148–230; Id.,
“іolitykaХandegaweńskaХźazimierzaХWielkiego”Х[TheХцngevinХіolicyХofХ
Casimir the Great], Kwartalnik Historyczny 36 (1922) 11–40; Oskar
HaleckiбХ“źazimierzХWielkiбХĐжиии–жимеЮ”Х[шasimirХtheХьreatХĐжиии–1370),
in Historia polityczna Polski жбХĐźrakówбХжозеЮХиже–йжерХюdгбХ“OХgenezieХiХ
znaczeniuХ rządówХ andegaweńskichХ wХ іolsce”Х [OnХ theХ ьenesisХ andХ
Siginificance of Angevin Reign in Poland], Kwartalnik Historyczny 35
(1921) 31–лнрХ WandaХ żoszczeńskaбХ “RolaХ rycerstwaХ wielkopolskiegoХ wХ
dobieХ bezkrólewiaХ poХ ŻudwikuХ Wielkim”Х [TheХ RoleХ ofХ ьreaterХ іolandХ
Knighthood during the Interregnum following the Death of Louis the
ьreat]бХ іrzeglądХ historycznyХ зкХ ĐжозкЮХ ии–жкорХ źętrzyńskiбХ ZapisХ
źazimierzaХ WielkiegoбХ passimрХ WłodzimierzХ щworzaczekбХ ŻeliwiciХ
Tarnowscy. ZХ dziejówХ moђnowładztwaХ małopolskiegoгХ WiekХ XюV–XV
[TheХ ŻeliwaХ ofХ TarnówгХ TheХ HistoryХ ofХ theХ ŻesserХ іolandХ Żords]Х
(Warszawa, 1971) 65–73, 85–онрХTomaszХNowakowskiбХ“іolitykaХpółnocnaХ
Polski w latach 1356–жилйбХnaХtleХjejХsytuacjiХwewnętrznej”Х[іolishХіolitics
Regarding Northern Countries 1356–1364, Set Against Its Domestic
Situation], Akademia Techniczno-Rolnicza w Bydgoszczy. Zeszyty
naukoweбХ NaukiХ społeczneХ жеХ ĐжонеЮХ мк–жеирХ юdгбХ “юnimiciХ capitalesгХ ZХ
dziejówХideologiiХpolitycznejХwХczternastowiecznej Wielkopolsce”Х[ыromХ
the History of Political Ideology in 14th Century Greater Poland], Acta
Universitatis Nicolai Copernici, Historia 17 (1981) 81–озрХ юdгбХ “UwagiХ oХ
polityceХ wewnętrznejХ iХ zagranicznejХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoбХ StudiaХ iХ
materiałyХ doХ dziejówХ WielkopolskiХ iХ іomorza”Х [SomeХ RemarksХ onХ theХ
Domestic and Foreign Policy of Casimir the Great. The Studies and
Material on the History of Greater Poland and Pomerania], 16 (1985) 141–
жкнрХ яanuszгХ źurtykaбХ “źarieraХ wojewodyХ źrakówskiegoХ цndrzejaХ zХ
TęczynaХ naХ tle rywalizacji stronnictw za panowania Kazimierza
Wielkiego”Х[TheХшareerХofХшracowХVoivodeХцndrzejХofХTęczynХagainstХtheХ
Contending Factions at the Time of Casimir the Great's Reign], in
Cracovia-Polonia-Europa, ed. źгХ чaczkowskiХ etХ alгХ ĐźrakówбХ жоокЮХ зкк–
зожрХ RobertХ чubczykбХ źarieraХ rodzinyХ źurozwęckichХ wХ XюVХ wiekuгХ
StudiumХzХdziejówХpowiązańХpolskiejХelityХpolitycznejХzХцndegawenamiХ
[TheХшareerХofХtheХźurozwęckiХыamilyХinХtheХжйth century. The Study of the
Relations of the Polish Political Elite with the Angevins] (Warszawa, 2002).
202
Hungaro-Polonica
but also the middle knighthood had precise views on what
foreign and dynastic policies the king should adopt. This pic-
ture is undoubtedly too clear; it leaves no space for phenom-
ena and events that would be too unconventional for the
knights and political elites to accept.22
VI
The change of medieval dynasty was a significant event
which found reflection in the relations between the monarch
and his subjects. When a native dynasty came to an end (in
this case the Piasts) the new monarch had to face the chal-
lenge of settling the relations with the people of the country.
The examples of the Hungarian and Czech Kingdoms at the
turn of 14th and 15th centuries prove that such process took a
long time and might take a bloody course.23 Therefore one
22 I have argued such interpretation of the political scene of the Polish
źingdomХinпХżarzecбХUrzędnicyХmałopolscyбХpassimгХOnХpagesХжжм–131 I
discuss the question and subject literature dealing with the political
parties present in Casimir the Great's kingdom.
23 In both kingdoms at the turn of the 13 th and 14th centuries, before the
growth of the Angevin and Luxemurg dynasties, there were internecine
blood feuds – щąbrowskiбХ OstatnieХ lataбХ жз–знрХ VáclavХ шhaloupeckýбХ
“юnauguračni diplomyХ králeХ яanaХ zХ rokuХ жижеХ aХ жижж”Х [TheХ юnaguralХ
цwardsХ ofХ źingХ яohnХ formХ ижеХ andХ жижж]бХ СeskýХ časopisХ historickýХ кеХ
(1947–1949) 69–жезрХяiriХSpĕváčekбХяanХŻucemburskyХaХjehoХdobaХжзол–1346
[John of Luxemburg and his Era 1296–1346] (Praha, 1994) 89–133; Robert
цntoninбХ “ыormováníХ moravskéХ zemskéХ obceХ aХ soubojХ oХ českýХ trůnХ wХ
letech 1306–жиже”Х [ыormationХ ofХ theХ żoravianХ іrovincialХ żunicipalityХ
and Fight for the Czech Throne in the Years 1306–1310], in Historik na
żoravĕгХ іrofesoruХ яíфimuХ żaliфoviбХ pфedesoviХ żaticeХ moravskéХ aХ
vedoucímuХHistorickéhoХústavuХыыХżUбХedгХHгХцmbrožováХ– TгХщvoфákХ–
чгХшhocholáčХ– L. Jan – P. Pumpr (Brno, 2009) 221–235.
203
Hungaro-Polonica
could have expected that tensions would appear at the mo-
ment of Louis's ascension in 1370.
The problems with the approval of Casimir the Great's
testament demonstrate the lack of a distinct political pro-
gramme among the elites, which could be confronted with
the new monarch's expectations. The case is interesting
since, as Jan of Czarnkow noted, the aim of the bequest to
шasimirХ ofХ SłupskХ wasХ toХ paveХ himХ theХ wayХ toХ theХ іolishХ
throne.24 However, it is difficult to find a trace suggesting
that this situation was of interest to the disputing dignitar-
ies.25 In this context it is worth bringing forward the corona-
tion passage of Louis.26 He set out on a journey across the
24 “Nam quidem magnates et quasi primi in consilio regis mortui, partii
Ungarorum multum faventes, aestimabant, ducem Kazimirum de terra
Syradiensi, Lanciciensi et Dobrinensi ac castris praenominatis in juvamine
Karoli, generi siu, Romanorum imperatoris, ac Boguslai patris sui, ducis
Stetinesis ad regni Poloniae gubernacula [...] posse pervenire“Х – Ioannes de
Czarnkow, Chronicon Polonorum, 641.
25 We cannot rule out the possibility that the whole content of the
Chronicle is distorted by Jan of Czarnkow, since he did not like the
Angevins and, what is more, he did not conceal his reluctance towards the
union of Hungary and Poland. Perhaps even the mighty secular and
religious dignitaries were looking for an excuse to annul Prince Stephan's
bequest and were acting together with the new king? However, the
chronicler's description suggests that it was the inaction and
indecisiveness on the elite's part which led to the former vice chancellor's
schadenfreude. Thus, the vice-chancellor could blame the dignitaries for
theХnegligenceХofХprinceХofХSłupskďsХbusinessбХwhoseХbequestХseemsХtoХhaveХ
been fully legitimate. Finally, Jan of Czarnkow concludes the deliberations
onХ шasimirďsХ willХ withХ aХ convincingХ remarkпХ “Sicque in eodem nagotio
sibimet, proch dolor, contrarii sunt inventi; nam primo pronunciarunt omnes
donationes per dominum regem fuisse validas; et altera die, ut praemissum est,
dixerunt, complacere cupientes, minime valvisse“Х – Joannis de Czarnkow,
Chronicon Polonorum, 641.
26 Right before the coronation, the archbishop of Gniezno, together with
the noblemen from Greater Poland, tried to influence the decision of Louis
204
Hungaro-Polonica
new country, first of all to Greater Poland having promised
to appear in the coronation apparel in the Gniezno Cathe-
dral, to sit there on the throne in front of the dignitaries and
the archbishop. This was understood as an act of recognition
of the importance of the province which was tied to the
Polish crown from the very beginning of the statehood.
However, having arrived in Gniezno, the monarch refused
to fulfil the promise, allegedly on the advice of some digni-
tariesХfromХźrakówгХцccordingХtoХthemбХtheХactХmightХturnХ
against him as ridiculous.27
The situation described above depicts another strong dis-
cord among the elites. Regardless of all advice, Louis ignored
the elites of Greater Poland, united in their expectations with
theХ veryХ archbishopХ ofХ ьnieznoХ яarosławХ ofХ чogoriaгХ TheХ
king's hasty departure from Poland, while leaving his
mother Elizabeth in Kraków as well as the loss of Ruthenia
without any noticeable resistance of the Polish elites, portray
a monarch who did not seem to notice any threats to his rule
in the Kingdom of Poland.28
soХ thatХ theХ ceremonyХ ofХ coronationХ wouldХ beХ movedХ fromХ źrakówХ toХ
Gniezno, a far more proper place for such an event. The event serves as an
important remainder of the competition between the provinces of Lesser
and Greater Poland for power in the Kingdom of Poland. It also shows
that many decades after the union of the country, the feelings were still
strong. On the kingdom's unification and the discussions surrounding it,
seeХцndrzejХżarzecбХ“żiędzyХіrzemysłemХююХaХWładysławemХŁokietkiemбХ
czyliХ kilkaХ uwagХ oХ źrólestwieХ іolskimХ naХ przełomieХ XюююХ iХ XюVХ wieku”Х
[чetweenХіrzemysłХююХandХWładysławХюХtheХъlbow-high. A Few Remarks
on the Polish Kingdom at the Turn of the 13th and 14th Centuries], Roczniki
Historyczne 78 (2012) 83–106.
27 Joannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon Polonorum, 648–649.
28 By separating Ruthenia from Poland, Louis showed that he probably no
longer feared that the Polish subjects would offer any resistance. In the
205
Hungaro-Polonica
VII
Louis quite early faced the problems that would be decisive
in keeping the Polish throne in the Angevin hands. The birth
of subsequent daughters forced him to revise the Buda ar-
rangements of 1355 according to which the succession to the
Polish throne excluded female descendants.29 As a result in
жимйХ theХ famousХ privilegeХ ofХ źošiceХ ĐźassaбХ źoszyceЮХ wasХ
signed.30 This document, along with the Buda privilege, con-
stitutes one of the most essential sources about the late me-
dieval nobility.31 However, research devoted to those two
documents, especially in the last three decades, has sug-
gested a cautious interpretation.32 Firstly, the concessions
spring of 1371, the king decided to enfeoff his entrusted palatine Duke
VladislausХofХOpoleХwithХRutheniaХĐяerzyХSperkaбХOtoczenieХWładysławaХ
Opolczyka w latach 1370–1401 [Vladislaus II of Opole's Milieu from 1370
to 1401] (Katowice, 2006) 32–34). Both Ruthenia and the Kingdom of
Poland in line with the dynastic contracts now belonged to Louis. If the
Polish Crown was subject to continued negotiations, the main topic of the
Privilege of Buda (1355), then the question of Galicia appeared only once,
in 1350, and it was initiated by the Hungarians as a response to Casimir
theХьreatďsХsuccessХinХRutheniaгХцsХStanisławХSzczurХpointsХoutбХsinceХжикеХ
Galicia had never reappeared in Polish-Hungarian dialogue (or at least
not to our knowledge). The author suggests that the issue remained
unresolved until 1370 and both parties refrained from the subject.
Ruthenia was supposed to lose its importance to Louis after the year 1350
because the crucial problem then was the arrangement with the Polish
society about the conditions of the succession – SzczurбХ “WХ sprawieХ
sukcesji”бХнм–97.
29 Sroka, ьenealogiaХцndegawenów, 68–88.
30 KDW 3, no. 1709.
31 SpołeczeństwoХpolskieХodХXХdoХXXХwiekuХ[іolishХSocietyХfromХtheХже th
to the 20th Century], ed. I. Ihnatowicz – цгХ żączakХ – B. Zientara
(Warszawa, 1979) 165.
32 There are many studies devoted to the Privileges, and especially the
Buda one; however, they are scatteredбХ seeХ iгaгпХ іawełХ SkwarczyńskiбХ Z
206
Hungaro-Polonica
granted by Louis were not extraordinary and did not
weaken drastically the position of the monarch providing, at
the same time, the noble classes with more power. Jacek
żatuszewskiХ andХ щánielХ чagiбХ inХ theirХ criticalХ studies,
demonstrate that it was the Hungarian king who had the fi-
nal word on the content of both documents.33 It is interesting
to see how the knightly demands were shaped while being
taken into consideration by the rulers in the process of mak-
ing concessions.
The first important event, unfortunately not well-docu-
mented, was the war against Lithuania waged by Casimir
badańХnadХprzywilejamiХziemskimiХbudzińskimХiХkoszyckim [The Studies
onХtheХіrivilegesХofХчudaХandХźošice]ХĐŻublinбХжоилЮрХяózefХżatuszewskiбХ
юmmunitetХ ekonomicznyХ wХ dobrachХ źoцciołaХ wХ іolsceХ doХ roku 1381
[EconomicХюmmunityХinХшhurchďsХіropertiesХtoХжинж]ХĐіoznańбХжоилЮХжмм–
жнерХщąbrowskiбХOstatnie lata, 270–314; Id., ъlђbietaХŁokietkówna, 65–75,
130–143; Peter Mikliss, Deutscher und polnischer Adel im Vergleich: Adel
und Adelsbezeichnungen in der deutschen und polnischen verfassungs-
geschichtlichen Entwicklung sowie die rechtliche Problematik polnischer
Adelsbezeichnungen nach deutschem Recht (Berlin, 1981) 78.
33 żatuszewskiбХ іrzywilejeХ iХ politykaбХ passimрХ щánielХ чagiбХ “WpływyХ iХ
znaczenieХ szlachtyХ polskiejХ iХ węgierskiejХ podХ koniecХ XюVХ wiekuгХ іróbaХ
porównaniaХprzywilejuХbudzińskiegoХzХжиккХrгХzХprzywilejemХkoszyckimХ
zХжимйХrгХwХцwietleХpotwierdzeniaХzłotejХbulliХzХrokuХжикж”Х[TheХюnfluenceХ
and the Significance of Polish and Hungarian Gentry at the End of the 14th
Century. An Attempt at a Comparative Study of Buda Privilege (1355) and
the Privilege of źošice (1374) in Light of the Confirmed Golden Bull of
жикж]бХ inХ іolskaХ iХ WęgryХ wХ kulturzeХ iХ cywilizacjiХ europejskiejбХ edгХ ягХ
WyrozumskiХĐźrakówбХжоомЮХик–46. Matuszewski demonstrated beyond
all doubt that the tax of two grosze for the noble class, which was imposed
in 1374 as a special privilege, was illegitimate. Bagi proves that both
privileges: of Buda and of źošiceХ mostly resulted from the political
situation in Poland of the time, where the initiative belonged to the
monarchs.
207
Hungaro-Polonica
the Great and Louis the Hungarian in 1351.34 The king's sud-
den and grave illness led Louis to demand of the Polish
knights the oath of allegiance and the assurance of succes-
sion. It was the time when Louis had to concede on several
points. According to the Chronicon Dubicense he excluded
from succession his brother Stephan, resigned from employ-
ing two Germans as his officers, and agreed to pay military
wages for wars waged abroad.35 In 1355 in Buda he promised
not to increase taxes above the customary level, what used
toХbeХdoneХbyХWładysławХ theХъlbow-high and Casimir the
Great in the past, and reimburse whatever losses connected
with wars waged abroad.36 The Kassa document of 1374 in-
troduced a regular tax for the landed gentry of two grosze
from each field, at the same time resigning from all extraor-
dinary taxation. Capitaneus offices (starostwa) were re-
stricted to Poles only, while landed posts were guaranteed
for the gentry of a given province. The castles mentioned in
the Privilege by name were not to be given to foreign bur-
graves, while all burgaves were responsible to Polish territo-
rial courts of justice. The last concession promised to reim-
burse losses incurred in foreign wars and released noblemen
from the duty to provide food and accommodation for the
king and his court during his travels within the kingdom.37
34 On the course of the war see Paszkiewicz, Polityka ruska, 125–130.
35 “sic tamen quod dux Stephanus, frater eiusdem regis Hungarie nihil haberet
cum eis agere, nec theutonici, specialiter Wolphardus et Corradus.“Х– Chronicon
Dubicense, ed. M. Florianus, in Historiae Hungariae fontes domestici, pars
prima, 3 (Lipsiae, 1884) 160.
36 KDKK 1, no. 201.
37 KDW 3, no. 1709.
208
Hungaro-Polonica
Taken together the three documents show that Louis did
not find the expectations of the Polish gentry particularly
burdensome. Especially in the context of the events that took
place in 1351, it can be assumed that the necessity of formu-
lating demands addressed to a potential monarch was very
surprising. Since Casimir the Great fell ill unexpectedly, it
was difficult to expect of the knights, who at the time were
preparing for the war against Lithuania, that they had pre-
pared a list of demands for Louis. The Chronicon Dubicense
in its description of the demands suggests rather their spon-
taneous and repetitive nature. The possibility of appointing
one of Louis's trusted military commanders for the position
of capitaneus (starosta) in Poland was also subject to objec-
tions. These objections undoubtedly resulted from the ongo-
ing war during which Louis's trusted men could have been
ordered to take command of the knights.38 Reimbursement
for war expeditions is another postulate reappearing at least
since the late 13th centuryХwhenбХinХtheХіrivilegeХofХŻitomyцlХ
38The issue of appointing to the capitaneus office in Poland at that time
created tensions. A year after the war expedition to Lithuania and
Casimir's illness a new capitaneus of Greater Poland was nominated. His
nameХ wasХ WierzbiętaХ ofХ іalowiceХ ofХ theХ NiesobiaХ coatХ ofХ armsХ andХ heХ
cameХfromХSilesiaгХHisХpresenceХinХіoznańХandХźaliszХlands caused strong
opposition among the knights, which resulted in the establishment of a
confederacyХledХbyХżaciejХчorkowicбХtheХvoivodeХofХіoznańХandХaХformerХ
capitaneus. The king, however, did not give in and overcame the resistance.
In effect Borkowic was sentenced to death – ŁojkoбХKonfederacja Macieja
Borkowica, passim. The knights' reluctance towards foreign officials
appointed as capitaneus, addressed to Louis in July 1351, reflected the
tensions that were present in Poland. They were related to the policy of
Casimir the Great who was then finalising his work on the unified
administrative system of the state. The strong office of capitaneus served
as the foundation of the system – Kurtyka, OdrodzoneХkrólestwo, 122–147.
209
Hungaro-Polonica
set by Wenceslaus II of Bohemia, it had already been called
an old habit.39 The restriction of eligibility for certain offices
to local knights was yet another repeated expectation.
TheХ questionХ ofХ Stephan’sХ successionХ toХ theХ throneХ isбХ
however, unclear. Yet it seems that the gist of the problem
was in not nominating him as the king's viceroy in Poland.
The most interesting fact about the homage of 1351 lies
somewhere else. In his recent article devoted to the issues of
dynastic Piast-цngevinХrelationsбХStanisławХSzczurХhypotheв
sizes that in 1350 during the mass gathering in Sulejów“ the
political elites took the floor and since then they had influ-
enced the conditions on which Louis would seize the Polish
throneХinХtheХfuture”г40 The demands put forward in the fol-
lowing year prove that there had been no precise plan as to
what concessions should be forced on the king. While the
Hungarian Chronicle offers a succinct and imprecise de-
scription of the events of 1351, the Privilege of Buda, issued
four years later by the Hungarian king, contains a precise de-
piction of the promises made to the representatives of the
Polish society. However, this document focuses solely on
two main questions, namely: the king's solemn obligation
not to impose any uncustomary taxes and the reimburse-
ment of wars waged abroad.41 This set of concessions is not
an extraordinary one, especially when we take under consid-
eration the fact that the privilege was addressed not only to
the knights but also to the townspeople and the clergy. The
39 KDKK 1 no. 94.
40 SzczurбХ“WХsprawieХsukcesji”бХомг
41 KDKK 1, no. 201. In the document Louis also emphasises the exclusive
rightХ ofХ successionХ toХ theХ źrakówХ throneХ ofХ hisХ orХ hisХ nephewďsХ maleХ
descendants.
210
Hungaro-Polonica
іrivilegeХofХźošiceХĐźassaЮХsignedХinХжимйХcontainsХaХsetХofХ
concessions that were developed further. Apart from the
substitution of any extraordinary taxes with a fixed one of
two grosze and the promise to reimburse the war expedi-
tions, new demands appeared that would ensure the Polish
knights the right to all important landed and capitaneus of-
fices as well as burgraviates. Therefore, it turned out that the
price for the right of succession to the Polish throne by his
daughters was not too high. Certainly financial expectations
of the Polish knighthood belonged to the most important
ones. Louis granted them all without really getting into ex-
penses, as Matuszewski has proved; what is more, in a sense
he stabilized the royal treasury.42
Until 1374 there was no opposition to the range of the
royal power, or, to look at it from the other perspective, there
were no demands concerning the expansion of the preroga-
tive of the knighthood estate. The most important matters to
solve after 1370 concerned property and taxes. In Kassa Priv-
ilege taxation was settled and at the same time lawsuits for
the restitution of lands sequestered by the late Casimir the
Great were under way.43
42Matuszewski, Przywileje i polityka, passim.
43źarolХіotkańskiбХ“SprawaХrestytucji”Х[TheХшaseХofХtheХRestitution]ХĐжимйХ
andХ жинжЮбХ RozprawyХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciгХ WydzгХ ыilozoficzno-
HistorycznyХиоХĐжоееЮрХюdгбХ“яeszczeХsprawaХrestytucji”Х[цgainХtheХшaseХofХ
Restauration]бХ RozprawyХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciХ 42 (1902) 42–74 (both
textsХreprintedХinХźarolХіotkańskiбХŻechiciбХіolanieбХіolskaгХWybórХpismХ
[The Lechites, the Polans, Poland. A Selection of Texts], ed. G. Labuda
(Warszawa, 1965) 568–651).
211
Hungaro-Polonica
VIII
Can we formulate a thesis that the elites of the Polish King-
dom had no conception as to how to rule the kingdom? To a
certain extent we can. It seems that the elites had two main
weaknesses. The first was the result of a relatively short pe-
riod of the union of various Piast duchies, the other was con-
nected with the internal structure of the nobility, which was
based on extended knightly families. The competition be-
tween the Lesser and Greater Poland elites did not help in
constructing a coherent vision of the kingdom, quite the op-
posite, it led to conflicts. The early 14th century integration of
the lands undoubtedly had an effect on the political influ-
ence exerted by dignitaries from particular parts of the king-
dom. The key role of the knights from Kraków and Sandom-
ierzХlandsХinХtheХsuccessХofХWładysławХtheХъlbow-high after
1305 decided about the permanent empowerment of the of-
ficials from Lesser Poland in the monarch's surroundings.44
44 The newly revived Kingdom of Poland at the turn of the 14th century for
a long period did not have any centrally administered offices. The official
hierarchies were tied to particular lands, which were the constituent parts
of the Kingdom. Those lands, in turn, are the former Piast duchies from
the period of feudal fragmentation (rozbicie dzielnicowe) and hence the
multitudeХofХvoivodesбХcastellansХandХotherХdignitariesгХUnderХWładysławХ
the Elbow-high and Casimir the Great there were not many nationwide
officials; the few were rather closely related to the king and their
nationwide functions concerned mostly the monarch's affairs. At the
beginning the positions bore a resemblance rather to courtly offices than
to the central ones. They included, first and foremost, such official titles as
the following: podkanclerzy (vicecancellarius regni Poloniae), podskarbi
ĐsubthesaurariusбХ vicethesaurariusЮбХ theХ chancellorХ ofХ źrakówХ andХ theХ
marshal of the court of the Crown – seeХ яanuszХ źurtykaбХ “іroblemХ
identycznoцciХurzędówХziemskichХźrakówskichХiХnadwornychХwХwiekachХ
XIV–XVю”Х[TheХіroblemХofХюdentityХчetweenХŻandedХandХцulicХOfficesХinХ
212
Hungaro-Polonica
The castellany of Kraków and Sandomierz voivodship be-
came the mostly desired estates. The domination of the mag-
nates from Lesser Poland was a remainder of the late medi-
eval Kingdom of Poland. The influence of the ancestral struc-
ture of the knighthood estate on its political condition is
much more complex.45 Families (irrespectively of debates on
their subject) were based on a vertical pattern of the richest
house on top and the poorer kin below. It is difficult to asses
the influence of the hierarchical structure on the sense of to-
getherness among the nobility and knights.
źrakówХыromХжйth To 16th шentury]ХinХUrzędyХdworuХmonarszegoХdawnej
RzeczypospolitejХiХpaństwХoцciennychбХedгХцгХьąsiorowskiХ– R. Skowron
ĐźrakówбХжоолЮХжи–зерХżarzecбХUrzędnicyХmałopolscyбХpassimг
45 The issues of hereditary nature of the knights and Polish nobility have
been of interest to historians for over a hundred years. The older, clashing
viewsХonХtheХsubjectХwereХsummedХupХbyХяanuszХчieniakбХ“RodyХrycerskieХ
jakoХ czynnikХ strukturyХ społecznejХ wХ іolsceХ Xююю–XV wiek (uwagi
problemoweЮ”Х [źnighthoodХ ыamiliesХ asХ anХ ъlementХ ofХ іolishХ SocialХ
Structure from the 13th to 15th Centuries (Problem Remarks)], in Polska w
okresie rozdrobnienia feudalnego. іaństwo-społeczeństwo-kultura, ed.
HгХ ŁowmiańskiХ ĐWrocławбХ жомиЮХ жлж–200 (reprint in: Janusz Bieniak,
іolskieХ rycerstwoХ цredniowieczneгХ WybórХ pismбХ ĐźrakówбХ зеезЮХ км–82).
For more recent subject literature offering some comments and research
seeпХ яanХ WroniszewskiбХ SzlachtaХ ziemiХ sandomierskiejХ wХ цredniowieczuгХ
ZagadnieniaХspołeczneХiХgospodarczeХ[TheХNobilityХofХSandomierzХinХtheХ
Middle Ages. Social and Economical Issues] (Poznań–WrocławбХзеежЮХо–
17, 187–зеорХ юdгбХ “żetodaХ genealogiczno-rodowa w badaniach historii
społecznejгХчilansХiХperspektywy”Х[TheХьenealogicalХżethodХinХtheХStudyХ
of Social History. TheХ SummaryХ andХ іrospects]бХ inХ HistoriaХ społecznaХ
póѐnegoХцredniowieczaгХNowe badania, ed. S. Gawlas (Warszawa, 2011)
107–жзерХ юdгбХ NobilesХ SandomiriensesгХ RodyХ щębnówбХ яaninówбХ
ьrzymałówбХщoliwówХiХіowałówХ[NobilesХSandomiriensesгХшlansпХщębnoбХ
яaninaбХ ьrzymałaбХ щoliwaХ andХ іowała]Х ĐźrakówбХ зежиЮХ к–11, 209–216;
TomaszХ яurekбХ “ьenezaХ szlachtyХ polskiej”Х [TheХ ьenesisХ ofХ theХ іolishХ
ьentry]бХinХŠlechtaбХmocХaХreprezentaceХveХstфedovĕkuбХedгХ M. Wihoda –
M. Nodl, Colloquia Mediaevalia Pargensia 9 (Praha, 2007) 95–107.
213
Hungaro-Polonica
On the one hand, due to the hierarchy the privileges re-
ceived by the top rank families were quickly passed to other
members; the marriages between the members of different
houses brought people together.46 On the other hand, the fact
that the families were deeply immersed in the chivalric com-
munity did not help to develop a well and clearly defined
ideology which would consolidate the nobility and thus
transform it from the vertical hierarchy into a more horizon-
tal model – based on the idea of equality.47 The feuds be-
tween noble families which broke out in the seventies and
eighties of the 14th century are proof of the social condition
46 The heraldry of the Polish knighthood operated in accordance with this
pattern since the turn of the 13th century – яanuszХ чieniakбХ “HeraldykaХ
polskaХ przedХ щługoszemгХ Uwagi problemowe”Х [іolishХ HeraldryХ beforeХ
щługoszгХ іroblemХ Remarks]бХ inХ SztukaХ iХ ideologiaХ XюVХ wiekuбХ edгХ ігХ
Skubiszewski (Warszawa, 1978) 165–зжерХ юdгбХ „іieczęcieХ dostojnikówХ
małopolskichХzХжиелХroku”Х[TheХSealsХofХŻesserХіolandХNoblemenХinХжиел]бХ
inХ OpusculaХ minoraХ inХ memoriamХ юosefoХ SporsХ ĐSłupskбХ жооиЮХ жйм–170
ĐreprintХ inпХ юdгбХ іolskieХ rycerstwoХ цredniowieczneХ [іolishХ żedievalХ
Knighthood]. SuplementХĐźraków, 2005) 49–62). Another example which
testifies to the rule was the acceptance by Casimir the Great the court
immunityХ ofХ allХ theХ membersХ ofХ theХ ToporХ andХ StaryХ źońХ familiesгХ TheХ
members of the houses referred to common (however fictitious) origin,
both families stemming from the same genealogical root – Janusz Kurtyka,
TęczyńscyгХ StudiumХ zХ dziejówХ polskiejХ elityХ moђnowładczejХ wХ цrednio-
wieczuХ [TheХ HouseХ ofХ TęczyńskiгХ The Study of the Polish Elite in the
żiddleХцges]ХĐźrakówбХжоомЮХжмнг
47 The relations between the blood relatives of particular families were of
crucial importance here: ThoseХ “ancestralХ coalitions”Х basedХ onХ mutualХ
marriages, to a certain extent, deprived the members of others families of
inheritance rights on the female line and, thus, the possibility of
enrichment [...] This process also led to the oligarchization of the local
authorities, especially jurisdiction – Wroniszewski, Nobiles Sando-
mirienses, 213.
214
Hungaro-Polonica
in Poland.48 In my opinion those factors shaped considerably
the political ideas of the knighthood estate and of its elites. It
is the very period of the Hungarian monarch's rule which
had a great impact on the political maturity of the noble
elites. The Hungarian king's reign started with an almost
nonchalant attitude towards his new subject. However, in
the end, the nobles recognised their own power and the sig-
nificance of the Kingdom of Poland.
IX
The power of Louis of Hungary started to wane considerably
early in Poland. His mother, Elizabeth the Regent, could not
cope with the growing problems, particularly in Greater Po-
land where the opposition to the political domination of Kra-
kówХ wasХ veryХ strongг49 The critical moment at which the
48 KDW 3 no. 1733 – the document ends a personal war between the houses
ofХьrzymałaХandХяaninaгХTheХьreaterХіolandХшivilХWarбХwhichХtookХplaceХ
in 1382, after the death of Louis I of Hungary, was also of similar character
– ŁojkoбХWojnaХdomowaХwХWielkopolsceХw latach 1382–1385 [Civil War in
Greater Poland 1382–жинк]бХinХьnieznoгХStudiaХiХmateriałyХhistoryczneХзбХ
ed. Z. Boras (Warszawa–іoznańХжонмЮХло–97.
49 In 1371 a conflict arose as to who should be appointed for the office of
capitaneus in Greater Poland. Elizabeth of Poland handed it over to Otto of
іilicaХofХtheХTopórХcoatХofХarmsбХwhoХwasХoriginallyХfromХŻesserХіolandгХ
SheХhadХdeposedХіrzecławХofХьułtówХofХtheХьrzymałaХcoatsХofХarmsХfromХ
Greater Poland. The nomination met with the resistance of the knights
fromХźaliszХandХіoznańХprovincesгХюtХwasХtheХbishopХofХіoznańХяanХщoliwaХ
and his clan (sua parantela Dolywa) who decided to accept the nomination
– Joannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 650–651. According to the chronicler,
the bishop's decision had been consulted with the advisers form Lesser
Poland. Otto did not manage to hold the office for a long time because he
was unable to maintain the public order. One year later he was replaced
byХSędziwójХofХSzubimХfromХьreaterХіolandг
215
Hungaro-Polonica
king realised that he should redefine his relations with sub-
jects was the turn of 1373 and 1374, when his third daughter
– Jadwiga was born.50 Less than a year later, in September
1374, the Privilege of Kassa was granted, according to which
Louis's daughters were to ascend the Kraków throne.51 In
1376, after the massacre of Hungarians in Kraków, the crisis
of authority became serious.52 Leaving apart a detailed anal-
ysis of the careers of particular dignitaries and a thorough
study of the potential political factions among the royal of-
ficers, we must, however, pay attention to some more gen-
eral tendencies.53
The most important sources used in the following article
are the privileges (treaties) binding the Hungarian king and
the representatives of the Polish knights. The Privilege of Ko-
szyce is the most thorough document when compared to the
Buda treaty and the descriptions of the accords of 1351. The
Kassa Privilege granted in September 1374 demonstrates the
changes in the perception of the elites' role in the Kingdom
50 Sroka, ьenealogiaХцndegawenów, 81–86.
51 The short period of time which passed between the birth of Louis's
daughter and the Privilege of źošice shows that Louis did not have any
serious problems in establishing the rules of succession. On the discussion
about the alleged two conventions in źošice, see Matuszewski, Przywileje
i polityka, 197–209.
52 Ioannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 675–677.
53 The political scene of the Kingdom of Poland was described among
othersХ byпХ щąbrowskiбХ OstatnieХ lataбХ жлк–229; Halecki, O genezie i
znaczeniuбХpassimрХNowakowskiбХ“іolitykaХpółnocna”бХpassimрХźurtykaбХ
TęczyńscyгХ Studium, 181–197; Bubczyk, Kariera rodziny KurozwęckichбХ
86–жкзрХ цndrzejХ żarzecбХ“ьenezaХ stronnictwaХ „panówХkrakowskich”ХwХ
póѐnoцredniowiecznejХіolsce”Х[TheХOriginХofХtheХіartyХofХ“шracowХŻords”Х
inХ ŻateХ żedievalХ іoland]бХ inХ źazimierzХ WielkiХ iХ jegoХ państwoбХ edгХ ягХ
Maciejewski – T. Nowakowski (Bydgoszcz, 2011) 127–138.
216
Hungaro-Polonica
of Poland. As I have already mentioned above, the noble rep-
resentatives of the knighthood estate (because they negoti-
ated the principles of cooperation with the king) were pri-
marily concerned with the financial aspects. I believe we
should agree on this point. The Kassa Privilege contains
some points which anticipate the changes imminent in the
very heart of the elites. The first regulation concerned the el-
igibility for landed offices (reserved for regnicole terrarum),
capitaneus offices (only for the inhabitants of the Kingdom
and Poles – nacione Polonum), what is more, the capitaneus
offices could not be passed on to princes. Another important
regulation pertained to the nominations for burgraviates in
the Kingdom of Poland. The monarch declared that not a sin-
gle castle would be given to a prince; furthermore, the
twenty-four castles would never be ceded to anyone else but
the capitaneus officials or the nobles (terrigenis).54 All the bur-
graves were to be responsible only to the capitaneus officials
and the Polish courts. Those regulations constitute the first
clearly and precisely expressed concessions made by a king
to his subjects and they relate to the system of the govern-
ance of the kingdom. Even if these restrictions were dictated
byХtheХknighthood’sХwillХtoХkeepХtheХmonopolyХforХtheХimв
portant offices, they still point to a growing consciousness of
the necessity to keep the territorial integrity of the Kingdom.
The restriction concerning the exclusion of princes on the
54KDW 3 no. 1709. There were the most important castles among the
twenty-fourХ mentionedХinХ theХ documentпХ źrakówбХ SandomierzбХ WiцlicaбХ
чieczбХ NowyХ SączбХ WojniczбХ ZawichostбХ ŻublinбХ SieciechówбХ ŁukówбХ
RadomбХ ŁęczycaбХ SieradzбХ іiotrkówбХ źruszwicaбХ чrzeцРХ źujawskiбХ
WłocławekбХ іoznańбХ źaliszбХ іyzdryбХ żiedzyrzeczбХ ZbąszyńбХ NakłoбХ
Konin.
217
Hungaro-Polonica
office of capitaneus and as potential landlords was dictated
by fears of losing control over the lands administered by
such officials or burgraves. It probably resulted from the cur-
rent events. When Louis became the king of Poland, he
passed a number of castles and surrounding lands to Vladis-
laus II of Opole; the lands bordered on the provinces of Kra-
kówбХ SieradzХ andХ Wieluńг55 Four years earlier, in 1370, the
dignitaries were unable to express their opinions on the be-
stowalХ ofХ honoursХ toХ шasimirбХ theХ princeХ ofХ SłupskбХ andХ
Vladislaus II of Opole; furthermore, they did not take a
stance on the separation of Ruthenia from the Kingdom of
Poland.56 However, Louis's actions combined with the expe-
riencesХofХtheХadventurousХpolicyХofХprinceХWładysławХtheХ
55 юoannisХdeХшzarnkowбХшhronicaХіolonorumбХpгХлйкгХTheseХwereХWieluńбХ
чolesławiecбХ чrzeѐnicaбХ źrzepiceбХ OlsztynХ andХ чoboliceХ – Sperka,
OtoczenieХ WładysławaХ OpolczykaбХ лкрХ яacekХ ŻaberschekбХ “ZasięgХ iХ
charakterystykaХrządówХWładysławaХOpolczykaХwХpółnocno-zachodniej
częцciХ ziemiХ źrakówskiejХ жиме–жиож”Х [TheХ RangeХ andХ шharacterХ ofХ
Vladislaus of Opole's Rule in the North-westernХ іartХ ofХ źrakówХ ŻandsХ
1370–1391], RocznikХ żuzeumХ OkręgowegoХ wХ шzęstochowieбХ HistoriaХ жХ
(1985) 10–12.
56 The question of Ruthenia remains unclear, especially when it comes to
the political stance of the elites. At the time of taking the Ruthenian office,
Vladislaus was accompanied by the Polish dignitaries: Otto of Pilica, Jan
źmitaбХ хwiętopełkХ ofХ юrządzбХ іaszkoХ ZłodziejХ ofХ іilchowiceбХ яanХ
іakosławicХ fromХ RzeszówгХ SimilarlyбХ thereХ wasХ alsoХ aХ groupХ ofХ іolishХ
nobles when Ruthenia was being passed to Louis in Lviv. Jerzy Sperka,
WładysławХ ksiąђęХ opolskiбХ wieluńskiбХ kujawskiбХ dobrzyńskiбХ panХ RusiбХ
palatynХWęgierХiХnamiestnikХіolskiХ[VladislausХююХofХOpoleбХtheХщukeХofХ
OpoleбХ WieluńбХ щobrzyńХ andХ źujawyбХ theХ ьovernorХ ofХ theХ źingdomХ ofХ
RutheniaбХ шountХ іalatineХ ofХ HungaryХ andХ іoland]Х ĐźrakówбХ зежзЮХ жейХ
believesХ thatХ “NoneХ ofХ theХ іolishХ dignitariesХ wouldХ everХ thinkХ thatХ
RutheniaХ wouldХ beХ separatedХ fromХ іoland”гХ ThisХ isХ justХ anХ unfoundedХ
assumption. According to a more convincing interpretation, Poles
expected to be bestowed by the new Duke of Ruthenia; and Jan Kmita
received a huge estate – źatalogХ dokumentówХ pergaminowychХ zeХ
218
Hungaro-Polonica
White, had to find their reflection in the political imagination
of the elites.57 In spite of the decreasing Angevin power in
the Kingdom of Poland, Louis had initiative until his death;
sometimes he allowed himself to disrespect the regulations
from the Koszyce treaty. In 1378, after depriving Vladislaus
of Ruthenia, Louis enfeoffed him with Polish lands of Do-
brzyńбХьniewkowoХandХaХcastleХinХчydgoszczгХTheХkingХtriedХ
to appoint Vladislaus of Opole to the position of viceroy in
1377–1378.58
According to Ioannis de Czarnkow, only some of the in-
habitants of Greater Poland accused the king of violating the
rules of the Kassa Privilege.59 The elites' stance seems very
ambiguous. Until 1382 the Polish-Hungarian king used tra-
zbiorówХ TomaszaХ NiewodniczańskiegoХ wХ чitburguХ [TheХ шatalogueХ ofХ
іarchmentХщocumentsХfromХtheХшollectionХofХTomaszХNiewodniczański]бХ
ed. J. Tomaszewicz – żгХ ZdanekХ ĐźrakówбХ зеейЮХ noгХ жжгХ юt is worth
remembering that Louis announced his personal seizure of power in
Ruthenia in 1378.
57 іrinceХWładysławХtheХWhiteХwasХtheХlastХmaleХmemberХofХtheХźuyavianХ
line of Piasts and the only heir to the Duchy of Gniewkowo. Under Louis's
rule he returned to Poland from a foreign monastery and wanted to
reclaim his goods and power and maybe even advance his claims for the
Polish crown. In the end, Louis of Hungary paid him for the withdrawal
of his claims to the Duchy of Gniewkowo – Ioannis de Czarnkow,
Chronicon, 654–ллибХлнорХяózefХхliwińskiбХWładysławХчiałyХĐжизмджиииХ –
1388). OstatniХ ksiąђęХ kujawskiгХ NajwiększyХ podróђnikХ spoцródХ іiastówХ
[WłaysławХtheХWhiteгХ The Last Duke of Kujawy. The Greatest Traveller
цmongХtheХіiasts]ХĐźrakówбХзежжЮг
58 Ioannis de CzarnkowбХ шhroniconбХ лнерХ SperkaбХ WładysławХ ksiąђęХ
opolski, 127–жижрХ юdгбХ “RządyХ namiestniczeХ WładysławaХ OpolczykaХ wХ
źrólestwieХ іolskimХ ĐжиммджимнЮ”Х [VladislausХ ююХ ofХ OpoleďsХ RuleХ inХ theХ
Kingdom of Poland (1377/1378)], in Mieszczanie, wasale, zakonnicy.
ьdańskieХ studiaХ zХdziejówХ цredniowieczaХ жебХ edгХ чгХ хliwińskiХ ĐżalborkбХ
2004) 245–265.
59 Ioannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 681.
219
Hungaro-Polonica
ditional methods in his political dealings within the King-
dom of Poland; knowing the elites' ambitions and animosi-
ties, to a great extent, he manipulated them.60 Personal wars
between the houses, the adventurous behaviour of Bartosz
Wezenborg, the strongly anarchic knighthood of Greater Po-
land and, most clearly, an inchoate vision of the kingdom –
all these elements let him maintain the political initiative al-
most until his demise.61 At the time of his death, Louis was
convinced that the Polish subjects paid homage of loyalty to
his daughter Maria, who was then engaged to Sigismund of
Luxemburg, and that her succession to the throne was rela-
tively safe.
X
Among the mightiest and wealthiest dignitaries of the Polish
Kingdom, the majority of whom came from the families of
Lesser Poland, the vision of the organisation of the Kingdom
of Poland must have been maturing for a long period of time.
The idea must have come from the observation of Louis's
60 The words of the chronicler, commenting on the political reality of
ŻouisďsХtimesбХareХveryХmeaningfulпХ“Tempore enim istius regis iste pessimus
et iuri canonico cnotrarius inolevit, quod clerus ambitiosus non solum super
beneficiis ecclesiasticis vacaturis, ad praesentationem domini regis spectantibus,
sed etiam super episcopatibus recipiebat minus dicrete litteras. Et hoc modo laici
nobiles super dignitatibus temporalium similiter litteras impetrabant, propter
quod jurgia et displicentiae tam un clero, quam inter nobiles saepius
insurgebant.”Х– Ionanis de Czarnkow, Chronicon, 711.
61 The nomination of four vicars of the kingdom can be interpreted in this
wayгХ юnХ жинжпХ щobiesławХ ofХ źurozwękбХ SędziwójХ ofХ SzubimХ andХ яanХ
Radlica and Domarat of Pierzchno, who were supervised by Zawisza of
źurozwękХ– щąbrowskiбХOstatnieХlataбХизм–328
220
Hungaro-Polonica
dealings. As subject literature has noted, numerous mighty
inhabitantsХofХŻesserХіolandХofХtheХTęczyńskiбХżelsztyńskiХ
and Tarnowski houses, did not aspire to execute the king's
political plans, leaving it to the more ardent noblemen.62 On
the other hand, the king might have not strived for their in-
volvement. However, it turned out, shortly after Louis's
death, that they – the Lesser Poland nobles, were the strong-
est party in the complex and violent strife for the Polish
throne. The Greater Poland Civil War only exposed the
weakness of the knighthood and nobility of that province in
face of the key political challenges in the whole Kingdom.63
The leading Lesser Poland dignitaries knew how to play suc-
cessfully their diplomatic part. First of all, they managed to
put an end to their greatest danger, that is, to the claim for
the Polish crown by Siemowit IV, Duke of Masovia.64 They
also managed to convince Elizabeth of Bosnia to choose
Jadwiga as Louis's successor.65 Secret negotiations with Jagi-
ello in the matter of his marriage with Jadwiga, to join her on
62 Kurtyka, TęczyńscyгХStudium, 194.
63 żoszczeńskaбХ RolaХ politycznaХ rycerstwaбХ passimрХ ŁojkoбХ WojnaХ do-
mowaбХpassimрХягХźurtykaбХTęczyńscyгХStudiumбХжоог
64 яanuszХчieniakбХ“ъpilogХzabiegówХSiemowitaХюVХoХkoronęХpolską”Х[цnХ
Epilogue to Siemovit IV's Efforts to Seize the Polish Crown], Acta
Univeristatis Nicolai Copernici. Nauki humanistyczno-społeczneХ кнбХ
HistoriaХоХĐToruńбХжомиЮХмж–86.
65 It is worth mentioning that during the talks with Elizabeth of Bosnia, the
demands were made to return Ruthenia and the lands controlled by
Vladislaus of Opole. This only proves that Louis's dealings were not
forgotten – яanХTęgowskiбХ“чezkrólewieХpoХцmierciХŻudwikaХWęgierskiegoХ
aХgenezaХuniiХіolskiХzХŻitwą”Х[TheХюnterregnumХцfterХtheХщeathХofХŻouisХюХ
of Hungary and the Genesis of Polish-Lithuanian Union], in Studia
historyczne z XIII iХXюVХwiekuбХedгХягХхliwińskiХĐOlsztynбХжонкЮХом–102.
221
Hungaro-Polonica
the Polish throne, are the proof of thorough and deep reflec-
tion of the Lesser Poland dignitaries on the future of the
Polish Kingdom.66
XI
Louis the Great's rule lasted only twelve years. On the one
hand, it was the time of the decline of the Angevin dynasty
in Central Europe, on the other, it was the time when the
Kindom of Poland rose to power. Furthermore, under Louis
the Great a new political elite was shaped. Their novelty was
not founded on spectacular personal changes on high offices
or the elimination of some dignitaries from political life. The
difference can be seen between the ways in which the elite
faced the challenges after Casimir the Great's death (1370) or
how they responded to Louis's essential political decisions
and the ways of dealing with the politics of the country after
the monarch's death. The new elite were thoroughly in-
formed when taking the matters of the country in their
hands. The Kraków lords matured to administer the whole
kingdom and, being fully aware of their power, they also
took the responsibility for its future.
66
The description of the events 1383–1384 can be found in: Kurtyka,
TęczyńscyгХStudiumбХжоо–202.
222
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibliography
Primary sources:
Chronicon Dubicense, ed. M. Florianus, in: Historiae Hungariae fontes
domestici, pars prima 3 (Lipsiae, 1884).
Joannis de Czarnkow, Chronicon Polonorum, ed. J. Szlachtowski, in:
żonumentaХіoloniaeХHistoricaХзХĐŻwówбХжнмзЮг
Secondary literature:
чubczykбХRobertбХźarieraХrodzinyХźurozwęckichХwХXюVХwiekuгХStudium z
dziejówХpowiązańХpolskiejХelityХpolitycznejХzХцndegawenamiХ[TheХшareerХ
ofХtheХźurozwęckiХыamilyХinХtheХжйth Century. The Study of the Relations
of the Polish Political Elite with the Angevins] (Warszawa, 2002).
щąbrowskiбХ яanбХ OstatnieХ lataХ ŻudwikaХ WielkiegoХ жиме–1382 [The Last
Years of Louis the Great 1370–жинз]Х ĐźrakówбХ жожнбХ reprintпХ źrakówбХ
2009).
щąbrowskiб яanбХ “ZХ czasówХ ŁokietkaгХ StudiumХ nadХ stosunkamiХ polsko-
węgierskimiХ wХ XюVХ wieku”Х [ыromХ theХ щaysХ ofХ WładysławХ юХ theХ ъlbow-
high. The Study of Polish-Hungarian Relations in the 14th Century],
RozprawyХцkademiiХUmiejętnoцciбХWydziałХыilozoficzno-historyczny 59
(1916) 278–326.
HaleckiбХ OskarбХ “OХ genezieХ iХ znaczeniuХ rządówХ andegaweńskichХ wХ
іolsce”Х[OnХtheХьenesisХand Siginificance of Angevin Reign in Poland],
Kwartalnik Historyczny 35 (1921) 31–68.
źętrzyńskiбХ StanisławбХ “ZapisХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoХ dlaХ źazimierza
чogusławowica”Х [TheХ чequestХ ofХ шasimirХ theХ ьreatХ toХ źazimierzХ
чogusławowic]бХіrzeglądХHistorycznyХжйХĐжожзЮХзл–47, 164–194, 294–316.
źurtykaбХяanuszбХOdrodzoneХkrólestwoгХżonarchiaХWładysławaХŁokietkaХ
iХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoХ wХ цwietleХ nowszychХ badańХ [TheХ Reborn of the
Kingdom. TheХżonarchyХofХWładysławХtheХъlbow-high and Casimir the
ьreatХinХŻightХofХRecentХStudies]ХĐźrakówбХзеежЮг
223
Hungaro-Polonica
ŁojkoбХ яerzyбХ “źonfederacjaХ żaciejaХ чorkowica”Х [żaciejХ чorkowicďsХ
Confederation], Roczniki Historyczne 43 (1977) 29–58.
ŁojkoбХяerzyбХ“WojnaХdomowaХwХWielkopolsceХwХlatachХжинз–жинк”Х[шivilХ
War in Greater Poland 1382–1385], in Gniezno. StudiaХ iХ materiałyХ
historyczne 2, ed. Z. Boras (Warszawa–іoznańХжонмЮХло–97.
żarzecбХ цndrzejбХ UrzędnicyХ małopolscyХ wХ otoczeniuХ WładysławaХ
ŁokietkaХ i Kazimierza Wielkiego (1305–1370) [Lesser Poland Officials in
theХ żilieuХ ofХ WładysławХ юХ theХ ъlbow-high and Casimir the Great]
ĐźrakówбХзеелЮ
Matuszewski, Jacek, Przywileje i polityka podatkowa Ludwika
WęgierskiegoХwХіolsceХ[TheХіrivilegesХandХTaxationХіolicy of Louis the
ьreatХinХіoland]ХĐŁódѐбХжониЮг
NowakowskiбХTomaszбХ“іolitykaХpółnocnaХіolskiХwХlatachХжикл–1364, na
tleХ jejХ sytuacjiХ wewnętrznej”Х [іolishХ іoliticsХ RegardingХ NorthernХ
Countries 1356–1364 Set Against Its Domestic Situation], Akademia
Techniczno-RolniczaХwХчydgoszczyгХZeszytyХnaukoweбХNaukiХspołeczneХ
10 (1980) 75–103.
Paszkiewicz, Henryk, Polityka ruska Kazimierza Wielkiego [The
RuthenianХіoliticsХofХшasimirХtheХьreat]ХĐWarszawaбХжозкбХreprintХźrakówбХ
2002).
SperkaбХ яerzyбХ WładysławХ ksiąђęХ opolskiбХ wieluńskiбХ kujawskiбХ
dobrzyńskiбХpanХRusiбХpalatynХWęgierХiХnamiestnikХіolskiХ[VladislausХююХofХ
OpoleбХtheХщukeХofХOpoleбХWieluńбХщobrzyńХandХźujawyбХtheХьovernorХofХ
the Kingdom of Ruthenia, Count Palatine of Hungary and Poland]
ĐźrakówбХзежзЮ
SperkaбХ яerzyбХ OtoczenieХ WładysławaХ OpolczykaХ wХ latachХ жиме–1401
[Vladislaus II of Opole's Milieu from 1370 to 1401] (Katowice, 2006).
SrokaбХ StanisławХ цгбХ ьenealogiaХ цndegawenówХ węgierskichХ [TheХ
Genealogy of Hungarian Angevins] ĐźrakówбХзежкЮг
SzczurбХStanisławбХ“WХsprawieХsukcesjiХandegaweńskiejХwХіolsceХ[OnХtheХ
Angevin Succession in Poland], Roczniki Historyczne 75 (2009) 61–104.
224
Anna Obara-Pawłowska
UMCS - Lublin
Polish and Hungarian Economic Relations in
the Middle Ages (from the Second Half of the
13th Century to the End of the 14th Century)
The history of relations between Poland and Hungary in the
Middle Ages has prompted the interest of historians for a
long time, the result of which were monographs and minor
academic works, the authors of which have researched polit-
ical, social or cultural dimension of these relations.1 Eco-
nomic issues have never seen a separate and independent
1Polish scholarship on this subject is very extensive. Amongst researchers
working on the relationships between Poland and Hungary in the Middle
цgesХ couldХ beХ mentionedбХ iгeгпХ яanХ щąbrowskiХ Đ“źrakówХ aХ WęgryХ wХ
wiekachХцrednich”Х[шracowХandХHungaryХinХtheХżiddleХцges]бХRocznikХ
źrakowskiХ жиХ ĐжожжЮрХ юdгбХ “ZХ czasówХ ŁokietkaгХ Studia nad stosunkami
polsko-węgierskimi w XIV wг”ХczęцРХжХ[ыromХtheХTimesХofХWładysławХtheХ
Elbow-high. Studies on Relations between Poland and Hungary in the 14th
шenturyбХ partХ ж]бХ RozprawyХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciгХ WydziałХ Histor-
yczno-ыilozoficznyХ коХ ĐжожлЮрХ юdгбХ “іolitykaХ andegaweńskaХ źazimi-erza
Wielkiego” [The Angevin Politics of Casimir the Great], Kwartalnik His-
torycznyХ илХ ĐжоззЮрХ юdгбХ “ъlђbietaХ ŁokietkównaХ жиек–жине”Х [Elizabeth of
Poland 1305–1380]бХ RozprawyХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciгХ WydziałХ Histor-
yczno-Filozoficzny 57 (1914) (reprint: KrakówбХ зеемЮрХ юdгбХ Ostatnie lata
Ludwika Wielkiego 1370–1382 [The Last Years of Louis the Great 1370–
1382], ĐźrakówбХжожнбХreprintпХźrakówбХзееоЮгХ Today one of the most re-
nowned historians speaking on the subject of various relations linking
medieval Poland andХ HungaryХ isХ StanisławХ цгХ SrokaХ ĐiгeгпХ ZХ dziejówХ
stosunkówХpolsko-węgierskichХwХpóѐnymХцredniowieczuгХSzkiceХ[HistoryХ
of Polish-HungarianХRelationsХinХtheХŻateХżiddleХцgesгХъssays]ХĐźrakówбХ
жоокЮрХюdгбХ“źontaktyХWładysławaХŁokietkaХzХWęgramiХwХцwietleХnowych
dokumentów”Х[шontactsХofХWładysławХtheХъlbow-high with Hungarians
225
Hungaro-Polonica
dissertation in Polish historiography. In the meantime, simi-
larities in the development of economy in the areas of Cen-
tral Europe in the Middle Ages (the importance of mineral
resources and developing industries associated with them or
trading of these resources) as well as the mutual complemen-
tarity in terms of the economy of countries in that region
meantХthatХ“theХrepeatedlyХundertaken in the 13th, 14th and
15th century attempts to a partial unification of the territories
discussed here had their economic foundations precisely in
theХmentionedХinterdependencies”г2 Tracing economic corre-
lations can therefore contribute to a fuller understanding of
the political dimension of relations between Poland and
Hungary.
When analysing economic issues of the Middle Ages, it
is particularly difficult to determine a precise and undisput-
able timeframe. The accepted time span, the second half of
inХtheХŻightХofХNewХщocuments]бХStudiaХHistoryczneХинХĐжоокЮрХюdгбХźsiąђęХ
WładysławХ OpolczykХ naХ WęgrzechгХ StudiumХ zХ dziejówХ stosunkówХ
polsko-węgierskichХ wХ XюVХ wiekuХ [щukeХ VladislausХ юю of Opole in
Hungary. Studies on the History of Relations between Poland and
Hungary in the 14th century]ХĐźrakówбХжоолЮрХюdгбХіolacyХnaХWęgrzechХzaХ
panowania Zygmunta Luksemburskiego 1387–1437 [The Poles in
Hungary during the Reign of Sigismund of Luxembourg 1387–1437]
ĐźrakówбХ зеежЮрХ юdгбХ WokółХ kontaktówХ dawnychХ ziemХ węgierskichХ zХ
іolskąХwХцredniowieczuгХSzkice [Around the Relations of Historical Areas
ofХHungaryХwithХіolandХinХtheХżiddleХцgesгХъssays]ХĐźrakówбХзеежЮрХюdгбХ
хredniowiecznyХ чardiówХ iХ jegoХ kontaktyХ zХ żałopolskąХ [żedievalХ
чardejovХandХitsХRelationsХwithХŻesserХіoland]ХĐźrakówбХзежеЮрХTheХsourceХ
editionпХ щokumentyХ polskieХ zХ archiwówХ dawnegoХ źrólestwaХ WęgierХ
[Polish Documents from the Archives of the Former Kingdom of
Hungary], vol. 1–5, ed. Id. ĐźrakówбХжоон–2012).
2 żarianХ żałowistбХ WschódХ aХ ZachódХ ъuropyХ wХ Xююю–XVI wieku.
źonfrontacjaХstrukturХspołeczno-gospodarczych [East and West of Europe
in the 13th–16th Century. Confronting Socio-Economic Structures], (War-
szawa, 2006) 149.
226
Hungaro-Polonica
the 13th century and the 14th century, was a period of ex-
tremely intensive economic transformations taking place in
this part of Europe. Processes of colonisation and urbanisa-
tion, trade intensification, mining development or growth in
the importance of money were a determinant for these trans-
formations. Chronological timeframes of this article corre-
spond also to the period of a successful political cooperation
between the representatives of the Piasts with the Arpads
and the Angevins, which – as can be assumed – conditioned
the intensity and scope of mutual contacts between the two
Central European monarchies in the area of economy.
One of the most tangible manifestations found in the
sources on economic relations in the Middle Ages was trade.
Trade between Poland and Hungary became attested by
written sources on a wider scale in the second half of the 13th
centuryгХцnХincreaseХ ofХHungarianХ merchants’Х interestХ canХ
be observed at that time on the routes going north- leading
toХtheХчalticХSeaХviaХSpišХandХthe dukedoms of the Piasts, and
the areas of modern-day Germany.3 The degree of intensifi-
cationХofХgoods’ХexchangeХbetweenХtheХlandsХofХtheХHungarв
ian and Polish monarchies can be attested by the network of
communication routes emerging at that time, linking the ar-
eas of northern Hungary with Lesser Poland where these
roads were branching out, leading further to Silesia, to
3яanХщąbrowskiбХ“źrakówХaХWęgry”Х[шracowХandХHungary]бХжоерХHenrykХ
RucińskiбХ Prowincja saska na Spisz do 1412 roku: (na tle przemian
społecznychХiХustrojychХwХkomitacieХspiskimХiХnaХobszarachХprzyległychЮХ
[TheХ SaxonХ іrovinceХ inХ SpišХuntilХ 1412: (Against the Backdrop of Social
andХшonstitutionalХшhangesХinХtheХшountyХofХSpišХandХцdjacentХцreasЮ]
ĐчiałystokХжониЮХзкк–256.
227
Hungaro-Polonica
Greater Poland, the areas of central Poland and to Pomera-
nia.4
The first information about the goods brought from the
Polish territory to Hungary appeared in the document of
kingХчélaХюVХdatedХtoХжзлкХforХtheХresidentsХofХtheХtownХofХ
Liptov. These goods were: salt, lead and broadcloths.5 Rock
salt exported to Hungary was being extracted from around
the mid-13th century from the mines in Bochnia and
Wieliczka. The importance of trading this resource with the
Hungarian monarchy is attested by the activities of Casimir
the Great in 1348–1368. The monarch not only allowed for
the purchase of the Lesser Poland salt by Polish and Hungar-
ian merchants at a reduced price, with the intention of ex-
portingХ itХ toХ Spišб6 but was also undertaking active efforts
4 StanisławХ źutrzebaбХ “HandelХ źrakowaХ wХ wiekachХ цrednichХ naХ tleХ
stosunkówХ handlowychХ іolski”Х [TradeХ ofХ шracowХ inХ theХ żiddleХ цgesХ
Against the Background ofХіoland’sХTradingХRelations]ХĐźrakówбХжоезЮбХ
reprintХinпХюdгбХыinanseХiХhandelХцredniowiecznegoХźrakowaХ[ыinanceХandХ
TradeХinХżedievalХшracow]ХĐźrakówбХзееоЮХжмн–жннрХStefanХWeymannбХшłaХ
i drogi handlowe w Polsce piastowskiej [Customs Duty and Trade Routes
inХ іolandХ ofХ theХ іiasts]Х ĐіoznańбХ жоинЮрХ чoђenaХ WyrozumskaбХ щrogiХ wХ
ziemiХkrakowskiejХdoХkońcaХXVюХwiekuХ[RoadsХinХшracowХŻandХuntilХtheХ
End of the 16th century]Х ĐWrocławбХ жоммЮрХ ZoltánХ ьyalókayбХ “SzlakiХ
handloweХnaХpograniczuХźrólestwaХіolskiegoХiХWęgierskiego w wiekach
XIV–XVю”Х [TradeХ RoutesХ onХ theХ чorderХ ofХ theХ źingdomsХ ofХ іolandХandХ
Hungary between the 14th and 16th century], Almanach Nowotarski 10
(2006) 114–123.
5 The act dated by the publisher (CDAC XI no. 350) to 1261. Adjustments
for 1265 were madeХ byХ historianХ żatúšХ źučeraХ Đ“іolďsko-slovenskýХ
obchodХsoХsolďouХdoХkoncaХжлХstoročia”Х[іolish-Slovak Trade of Salt until
the End of the 16th century]бХSlovenskeХŠtudieХмХĐжолкЮХжежбХnoгХ77.
6 CDP 3, no. 119; Starodawne prawa polskiego pomniki [The Old Monu-
ments of Polish Law], vol. 1, ed. A. Z. Helcel (Warszawa, 1856) 225. Salt
mine owners of Lesser Poland sold to the merchants a hundredweight of
salt allocated for the national market at a rate of 12 grosze, which was three
times more expensive than the price of the same measure of the product
228
Hungaro-Polonica
with Louis I in order to facilitate the import of this product
to the areas of northern Hungary.7 King Casimir relied on the
influx of Hungarian gold to the Kingdom of Poland since the
local merchants paid for salt exactly with this bullion.8 The
active trade policy of the last Piast resulted in the fact that
within a century from the discovery of the rock salt deposits
in Lesser Poland, the trade of this raw material has become
one of the most important sectors of commerce conducted
together with Hungary.9 The second, after rock salt, raw ma-
terial exported from the Polish land to the territories of Hun-
garian monarchy was lead.10 Deposits of lead were located
allocatedХforХexportХtoХHungaryХĐяózefХźrzyђanowskiбХ“Statut Kazimierza
WielkiegoХdlaХkrakowskichХђupХsolnych”Х[Statute of Casimir the Great for
the Salt Mines of Cracow], Rocznik Krakowski 25 (1934) 108).
7 “цktaХ odnosząceХ sięХ doХ stosunkówХ handlowychХ іolskiХ zХ WęgramiХ
głównieХzХarchiwumХkoszyckiegoХzХlatХжикй–жкек”Х[TheХцctsХRegardingХ
Trade Relations between Poland and Hungary Mainly from the Archives
ofХ źošiceХ fromХ жикй–1505], ed. S. Kutrzeba, Archiwum Komisji
Historycznej, vol. 9 (1902) no. 1.
8 Jerzy Wyrozumski, іaństwowaХgospodarkaХsolnaХwХіolsceХdoХschyłkuХ
XIV wieku [National Salt Economy in Poland towards the End of the 14 th
Century] ĐźrakówбХжолнЮ 128.
9 яózefХ іiotrowiczбХ “Problematyka genezy i najstarszych dziejówХ
górnictwaХ solnegoХ wХ іolsce” [Problem of the Origin and the Eldest
History of Salt Mining in Poland]бХ StudiaХ iХ żateriałyХ doХ щziejówХ ёupХ
Solnych w Polsce 2 (1968) 220.
10 щanutaХ żolendaбХ ъlђbietaХ чalcerzakбХ żetaleХ nieђelazneХ naХ ziemiachХ
polskich od XIV do XVIII wieku (zastosowanie i wyroby) [Non-ferrous
Metals in the Polish Territories from the 14th to the 18th century (Usage and
Products)] ĐWrocławбХ жонмЮХ жкрХ eademбХ “щziejeХ OlkuszaХ doХ жмокХ roku”
[History of Olkusz until 1795], in Dzieje Olkusza i regionu olkuskiego, t. I
[History of Olkusz and the Region of Olkusz, vol. I], ed. F. Kiryk – R.
źołodziejczykбХĐWarszawa-źrakówбХжомнЮХжйо–150; eadem, іolskiХołówХnaХ
rynkachХ ъuropyХ хrodkowejХ wХ Xююю–XVII wieku [Polish Lead in the
Markets of Central Europe in 13th–17th Century] (Warszawa, 2001) 52–54.
It is assumed that the export of this resource beyond the Carpathian
229
Hungaro-Polonica
in the area of Silesia and Lesser Poland (Olkusz- from the
mid-13th century the major place for extracting the lead ore
in this part of Europe11 – SławkówбХ шhrzanówХ andХ
Trzebinia). Exporting this metal remained very important
for proper functioning of silver and copper mining in Cen-
tral and Eastern parts of Upper Hungary.12 The commodity
transported from the Polish territories to Hungary were also
broadcloths. In the case of this product the precise designa-
tion of its place of provenance is giving rise to some difficul-
ties. Although, together with the development of urban cen-
tres and commodity-monetary economy, there was in the
Polish territories a professionalization of weaving crafts and
separating it from homemade manufacturing,13 it is never-
theless necessary to pose a question whether the production
was aimed at the export of broadcloth products outside the
bordersХofХtheХіiasts’ХprincipalitiesХorХatХmeetingХtheХneedsХ
of state markets. According to some Polish researchers, the
local production was to satisfy local markets in the first
Mountains was developed in the 14th centuryХ ĐźutrzebaбХ “HandelХ
źrakowa”ХзиоЮг
11 żałowistбХWschódХiХZachódбХжйзг
12 Lead was necessary in the process of smelting gold and silver from the
local ores, for cleaning them as well as for obtaining silver from copper
ĐżolendaбХъlђbietaХчalcerzakбХйе–йжбХнирХżolendaбХіolskiХołówбХкзЮг
13 яerzyХWyrozumskiбХ“іrzemianyХwХorganizacjiХwytwórczoцciХtekstylnejХ
doХ schyłkuХ XюююХ wieku”Х [шhangesХ inХ theХ OrganisationХ ofХ TextileХ żanu-
facturing to the End of the 13th Century], in ZarysХhistoriiХwłókiennictwaХ
naХziemiachХpolskichХdoХkońcaХXVюююХwieku [An Outline of the History of
Textile Industry in the Polish Lands to the End of the 18th Century], ed. J.
źamińskaХ– югХTurnauбХĐWrocławбХжоллЮХкйг
230
Hungaro-Polonica
place,14 which does not exclude the possibility of exporting
textiles produced there beyond the borders of the Polish
duchies.15 However, the fact that large amounts of broad-
cloths were brought from the Polish territories already in the
1260s, what has been confirmed also for a later period,16 to-
gether with a confirmed intensification of the domestic pro-
duction taking place only towards the end of the 13th and the
beginning of the 14th century, seems to suggest that com-
modities of foreign origin were being sent to Hungary.
Broadcloths were to be imported by residents of Cracow
fromХ ьdańskХ andХ onlyХ fromХ thereХ theyХ wereХ sentХ toХ theХ
southern neighbor.17 Therefore, according to the Cracow
rates from 1364, it can be stated that the fulling mill function-
ing in the city was in the first place milling the imported
14 цntoniХ żączakбХ HenrykХ SamsonowiczбХ чenedyktХ ZientaraбХ ZХ dziejówХ
rzemiosłaХ wХ іolsce [From the History of Crafts in Poland] (Warszawa,
1957) 152.
15 The production in the territory of Silesia as well as export for the markets
of south-western, central and north-eastern Europe of a simple broadcloth
(known under the name of pannus polonicalis), of inferior quality in
comparison with a taverstock broadcloth, is accepted for the period in
questionХ ĐщanutaХ іoppeбХ “Pannus polonicalis. ZХ dziejówХ sukiennictwaХ
polskiegoХ wХ цredniowieczu” [Pannus polonicalis. From the History of
Polish Broadcloth-making in the Middle Ages], Kwartalnik Historii
Kultury Materialnej 36 (1988) 617–628). At the same time the author quite
skeptically refers to the possibilityХ ofХ manufacturingХ “theХ іolishХ
broadcloth”Х inХ otherХ provincesХ ofХ іolandХ beforeХ theХ жйth century (ibid.,
628).
16 In settling the argument between the inhabitants of Cracow and the Poor
шlaresХofХSączХoverХcollectingХbyХtheХlatterХtheХexcessiveХcustoms duties in
1310, broadcloth was mentioned, before lead, as the main product
exported to Hungary (KDMK 1, no. 7).
17 яerzyХWyrozumskiбХ“źrakówХцredniowiecznyХjakoХoцrodekХprodukcjiХiХ
handluХtekstylnego” [Medieval Cracow as the Centre of Production and
Textile Trading], in Id., шracoviaХmediaevalisХĐźrakówбХзежеЮ 317–318.
231
Hungaro-Polonica
broadcloths.18 Broadcloths imported in the second half of the
14th century by the merchants of Cracow were coming from
the areas of central Italy (Florence), England, Flanders and
the Duchy of Brabant.
The list of commodities brought by inhabitants of Cra-
cow from the Hungarian monarchy was drawn up on the oc-
casionХ ofХ settlingХ byХ щukeХ WładysławХ theХ ъlbow-high the
dispute between the merchants from Cracow and the Sisters
ofХtheХіoorХшlaresХofХStaryХSączХinХщecemberХжижегХюnХtheХlightХ
of the document, the goods were as follows: copper, wine,
wax, money, horses, cattle and hogs.19
The first information confirming the import of copper
from the mines of Upper Hungary comes from the 1270s.20
This trade was, above all, of a transit nature. Copper brought
over to Poland was only in a small portion used up for the
needs of the domestic market; the majority of it was trans-
ported further north where it reached Flanders and the areas
of modern-day Germany.21 Nonetheless, the import of cop-
per entailed important repercussions also for the economic
18 Amongst textiles processed there broadcloths such as those were listed:
of Bruges, Florence, Ypres, Mechelen, Herentals, generic broadcloth of
Ypres, English, as well as locally manufactured broadcloth (KDMK 2, no.
262).
19 KDMK 1, no. 7.
20 щanutaХżolendaбХ“іoczątekХeksploatacjiХgalmanuХnaХziemiachХpolskichХ
ĐdoХ połowyХ XVююХ wгЮ”Х [Beginnings in Calamine Extraction in the Polish
Territories (until mid-17th Century)], Kwartalnik Historii Kultury
Materialnej 21 (1973) 46.
21 źutrzebaбХ“HandelХźrakowa”бХзйирХщanutaХżolendaбХ“Eksploatacja rud
miedziХiХhandelХmiedziąХwХіolsceХwХpóѐnymХцredniowieczuХiХpoczątkachХ
nowoђytnoцciХĐdoХжмокХrгЮ”Х[Extraction of Copper Ore and Copper Trade
in Poland in the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Times (until 1795)],
іrzeglądХ Historyczny 80 (1989) 810–нжжгХ цccordingХ toХ historians’Х
232
Hungaro-Polonica
development of the Polish state, contributing throughout the
14th century to the creation of a strong production centre of
metalwork in Cracow,22 since it found application, among
other things, in constructions (sheet metal roofing plates,
wires, slabs, fittings), manufacture of bells, tableware and
small utilitarian objects (candlesticks and candleholders) or
in coinage production (coins made out of copper and its al-
loys).
A commodity important for a proper functioning of min-
ing in Lesser Poland was iron, out of which mining tools and
boiling flasks were produced. In the second half of the 14th
century iron and its products for the needs of the Polish min-
ing industry were imported, amongst other places, from the
area of northern Hungary. This can be evidenced by the en-
tryХinХtheХarticlesХestablishingХшracow’sХsaltХminesХofХшasimirХ
the Great in 1368. The King specified precisely the rate (that
is cetnarka of salt), for which the salt miners of Lesser Poland
were to buy iron coming from Hungary.23 It is believed that
its transportation was at that time handled by carters from
Hungary.24 The metal was also a subject of transit trading. It
was sent from Cracow further to Prussia, but possibly it
could also reach Flanders.25
calculations there were from 8000 to 10000 hundredweights of copper
exported from the mines of modern-day eastern Slovakia, which was
transported through the Polish territory further north. (Molenda,
“ъksploatacjaХrudХmiedzi”бХнжжЮг
22 żałowistбХWschódХaХZachódбХжйог
23 Starodawne Prawa 220.
24 źučeraбХ“іolďsko-slovenskýХobchod”Х112–113.
25 źutrzebaбХ“HandelХźrakowa”Хзйи–244.
233
Hungaro-Polonica
Bringing from Hungary cattle or hogs could also result
from the weakness of Polish livestock farming as well as a
fast development of this sector of the rural economy in Hun-
gary, the effect of which was, amongst other things, a growth
in exporting oxen to western and southern Europe in the sec-
ond half of the 14th century.26 Similarly, in the 15th and 16th
century, Hungarian horses played a significant part in the
exchange of goods at the border with Poland.27 However,
these animals were probably driven to the Polish areas from
the territories of modern-day Slovakia already in the second
half of the 13th century. In the abovementioned document of
чélaХюVХtoХhisХsubjectsХinХŻiptovбХtheХmonarchХallowedХthemХ
for an unhampered sale of horses, everywhere except Ger-
many and Bohemia.28 Even though it was not unequivocally
indicated that the record referred to the export of horses to
the Polish regions, its context – previous entries about cus-
toms’Х dutiesХ forХ rawХ materialsХ andХ productsХ comingХ fromХ
Poland, authorisation for moving the settlers from there to
Żiptov’sХestatesХ– leads to a conjecture that also Polish terri-
tories could have been included in the case of trading these
animals. It also cannot be ruled out that bringing horses from
the territory of Hungarian monarchy to the Polish areas re-
mained at that time in connection with the development of
mining centres in Lesser Poland or Upper Silesia. Horses
were used in mining industry as a tractive and driving force
26 żarianХ щygoбХ “WschódХ iХ ZachódпХ gospodarkaХ ъuropyХ wХ XюV–XV
wieku”Х[ъastХandХWestпХъconomy of Europe in the 14th–15th Century], in
ZiemieХ polskieХ wobecХ ZachoduгХ StudiaХ nadХ rozwojemХ цredniowiecznejХ
Europy, ed. S. Gawlas (Warszawa, 2006) 168–170, 179–180.
27 SrokaбХхredniowiecznyХчardiówХжеог
28 CDAC XI no. 350.
234
Hungaro-Polonica
for drainage and water-supply tools. The significance of
these animals for mining industry was important for heavily
watered areas where the machines draining the water out
had to work continuously, regardless of time of the day or
night.29 In Poland such areas included lead-bearing and salt-
bearing regions of western Lesser Poland as well as regions
of Silesia rich in lead. Horses became obtained for the needs
of salt mines of Lesser Poland from the local aristocratic es-
tates and markets of nearby towns only from the mind-14th
century onwards.30 However, it is a known fact that also in a
later period, i.e. 15th–17th century, horses were brought from
the neighboring countries, including Hungarian monar-
chy,31 as well as from the remote south-eastern territories of
29 щanutaХ żolendaбХ “Zaopatrzenie polskichХ oцrodkówХgórnictwaХ krusz -
cowego w XV–XVююХwг”Х[Provisions in Polish Ore Mining Centres in the
15th–17th Century], Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej 39 (1991) 447–
450. It was confirmed in 1482 that in 8 mines of Olkusz there were 600
horses working while in 1551 the usage of three drainers in one mine
situatedХinХTarnowskieХьóryХrequiredХaХforceХofХилеХhorsesХĐibidгбХйкебХйкзЮг
30 яózefХіiotrowiczбХ“ZaopatrzenieХђupХkrakowskichХwХsurowceбХmateriałyХ
orazХ artykułyХ spoђywczeХ jakoХ czynnikХ rozwojuХ handlu lokalnego i
dalekosięђnegoХ ĐXююю–XVюХ wгЮ”Х [Provisioning Mining Companies of
Cracow with Resources, Materials and Comestibles as a Factor of the
Development of Local and Long-distance Trade (13th–16th c.)], Studia i
żateriałyХdoХщziejówХёupХSolnychХwХіolsce 18 (1994) 110. The statute of
Casimir the Great which organised salt mining in the region of Cracow
provided a requisition of horses belonging to the merchants who, after
having purchased salt intended for Hungary at preferential prices in the
mines of шracowбХsoldХitХwithinХtheХbordersХofХtheХіiast’sХmonarchyгХюtХisХ
not unlikely that these animals were delivered for the need of the mine.
31 Already in the 15th century the export of these animals from Hungary to
Poland was conducted on a mass scale (Feliks Kiryk, “StosunkiХhandloweХ
яasłaХ iХ miastХ okolicznychХ zХ miastamiХ słowackimiХ wХ XVХ wieku”Х [TradeХ
RelationsХofХяasłoХandХNeighbouringХTownsХwithХSlovakХTownsХinХtheХжкth
century], in StudiaХzХdziejówХяasłaХiХpowiatuХjasielskiegoХ[StudiesХonХtheХ
235
Hungaro-Polonica
Poland where breeding them became developed.32 It is pos-
sible that earlier, i.e. 13th to the mid-14th century, domestic
horse breeding was not able to meet the local needs, includ-
ing the developing mining industry of Lesser Poland; hence
appeared the demand for obtaining then from the territory
of a close-by foreign country.
The import of Hungarian wine to the Polish areas was
determined by the inability to fulfil all the demands of do-
mestic market by modest local production, directed at satis-
fyingХtheХneedsХofХvineyard’sХownerХandХnotХsellingб33 as well
as the proximity of Hungary itself. The latter factor was sig-
nificant in the case of problems occurring in the Middle Ages
with transporting wines, which were easily going off at
longer distances and the necessity of consuming them within
a period of few months from their fermentation.34 Hungarian
wine could appear in Cracow already in the 13th century35
while its presence in Lesser Poland was confirmed by writ-
ten sources in the following century.36 This drink was reach-
ing primarily customers in the capital of Lesser Poland, in
the first place the royal court, the local magnates or wealthier
HistoryХofХяasłoХandХtheХшountyХofХяasło], ed. ягХьarbacikХĐźrakówбХжолйЮХ
155).
32 żolendaбХ“Zaopatrzenie”бХйкз–453.
33 ZbigniewХżorawskiбХ“RozwójХiХupadekХwiniarstwaХwХіolsceХĐXюю–XVI
wiekЮ”Х [щevelopmentХ andХ щeclineХ ofХ WinemakingХ inХ іolandХ Đжз th–16th
Century)], Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej 26 (1978) 57–76.
34 ыrancisХ WгХ шarterбХ “шracowďsХ WineХ TradeХ ĐыourteenthХ toХ ъighteenthХ
шenturiesЮ”бХTheХSlavonicХandХъastХъuropeanХReviewХлкХĐжонмЮХкйжбХкйлг
35 щąbrowskiбХ“źrakówХaХWęgry”бХзззг
36 KDMK 1, no. 7; RachunkiХdworuХkrólaХWładysławaХяagiełłyХiХkrólowejХ
яadwigiХzХlatХжиннХdoХжйзеХ[TheХRoyalХшourtХцccountsХofХźingХWładysławХ
яagiełłoХ andХ їueenХ яadwigaХ fromХ жиннХ toХ жйзе]бХ edгХ ыгХ іiekosińskiбХ
ĐźrakówбХжнолЮХзжебХзжи–214.
236
Hungaro-Polonica
шracow’sХtownsmenгХWineХwasбХthereforeбХnotХaХcommodityХ
of a mass-import, which might be indicative of its small con-
sumption in medieval Poland.37 Intermediation in trading
wine was taken over by the merchants of Cracow, who trans-
portedХitХfromХчardejovХandХźošiceХtoХtheХcapitalХofХtheХźingв
dom of Poland and the surplus was sent further to the Baltic
Sea region.38
Interactions between Poland and Hungary in the field of
trade were not restricted only to the exchange of commodi-
ties. Mutual political contacts between the royal courts of
Buda and Cracow could provide patterns for conducting
trade policy. In February 1327 at the meeting of Trnava
Charles Robert and John of Bohemia reached an agreement
on eliminating Vienna from trade between Hungary and
Western Europe. According to Borys Paszkiewicz these ac-
tivities became an inspiration to and were later replicated by
Casimir the Great who, having waged trade war against
WrocławбХsoughtХtoХshiftХtheХtradeХrouteХfromХHungaryХandХ
Ruthenia to Prussia and leading through Polish territories,
37 źutrzebaбХ“HandelХźrakowa”бХзййрХюdгХ – яanХіtaцnikбХ“щziejeХ handlu i
kupiectwaХ krakowskiego”Х [HistoryХ ofХ шracow’sХ TradeХ andХ шommerce]бХ
RocznikХ źrakowskiХ жйХ ĐжожеЮХ крХ żariaХ щembińskaбХ źonsumpcjaХ
ђywnoцciowaХwХіolsceХцredniowiecznejХ[ыoodХшonsumptionХinХżedievalХ
іoland]Х ĐWrocławбХ жолиЮХ жикрХ щygoбХ WschódХ iХ ZachódбХ жлк. Scholars
explaidokumentównХtheХsmallХinterestХinХwineбХlimitedХtoХtheХelitesбХbyХtheХ
fact that at that time the main drink in the Polish territory was beer. The
intensification of export, and what consequently follows- the
dissemination of wine drinking habit, took place only at the beginning of
the 16th century.
38 шarterбХ“шracowďsХWineХTrade”, 544. At the beginning of the 15 th century
some of the merchants from Cracow had their own vineyards in the areas
of the northern Hungary from where they imported that drink (ibid., 548–
549).
237
Hungaro-Polonica
butХwithХtheХexclusionХofХWrocławг39 After signing the Peace
Treaty of Kalisz with the Teutonic Knights in July 1343, the
King of Poland made decisions which were aimed at stimu-
lating the exchange of goods with Prussia, particularly with
ToruńбХtheХmerchantsХofХwhichХplayedХaХsignificantХroleХnextХ
to inhabitants of Cracow, especially in trading Hungarian
copper.40 TheseХdecisionsХcanХbeХregardedХasХtheХmonarch’sХ
efforts to expand a fuller control over transit trade passing
through the territories subjected to him.
юnХіoland’sХterritoriesХшracowХplayedХtheХmostХimportantХ
role in the trade of goods with Hungary. The commercial sig-
nificance of this largest civic centre in the Polish territory was
conditioned by the privileges granted by the rulers as well as
a convenient location right at the intersection of international
trade routes. The problem of importance and participation of
medieval Cracow in the trade with Hungary was presented
in details in Polish historiography;41 at this point it is worth
focusing on the most important stages in granting privileges
to the local merchants. Of the utmost significance was grant-
ing the staple right to Cracow in 1306 as well as vouchsafing
exclusivity to the merchants in acquitting Hungarian cop-
per.42 The increasing commerce importance of the capital of
Lesser Poland is corroborated by the far-reaching plans of
39 чorysХіaszkiewiczбХ“żennictwoХiХpolitykaХmonetarnaХźazimierzaХWiel-
kiego”Х[шoinageХandХżonetaryХіolicyХofХшasimirХtheХьreat]бХinХźazimierzХ
Wielki. Historia i tradycjaбХedгХżгХяaglarzХĐNiepołomiceбХзежеЮХжмиг
40 ZDM 4, no. 939. and no. 937.
41 Kutrzeba – іtaцnikбХ“щziejeХhandlu”бХкрХщąbrowskiбХ“źrakówХaХWęgry”бХ
190–202; Id., Ostatnie lata, 230–зйирХ źutrzebaбХ “HandelХ źrakowa”бХ зил–
252.
42 KDMK 1, no. 4.
238
Hungaro-Polonica
Casimir the Great who was to pursue, after conquering a
part of Ruthenia with Lvov, the transformation of the capital
city into the main centre of trade between the zone along the
Baltic Sea and Hungary, as well as between Western Europe
and the Black Sea area.43 Cracow gained significant trading
privileges during the reign of Louis I who was well aware of
howХessentialХwasХaХgoodwillХofХtheХcapital’sХresidentsХtoХaХ
foreign ruler.44 Procedures regarding this matter started al-
ready during the life of Casimir the Great.45 Further indica-
tions of favouring the merchants of Cracow were directly
linkedХwithХŻouis’ХeffortsХinХsafeguardingХaХthroneХofХіolandХ
for one of his daughters.46
щuringХ Żouis’Х reignбХ theХ residentsХ ofХ шracowХ receivedХ
also a direct access to trade with the areas of the Black Sea.
They had been so far limited in their way to the East by an
absolute staple right of Lvov. Beneficial decision of the King
on that matter opened for the merchants from Cracow a
43 żałowistбХWschódХaХZachódХжнегХTheХproofХofХшasimirХtheХьreat’sХende-
avor to promote Cracow as the biggest trade center in the Kingdom of
Poland can be a document of the King from the end of 1358, in which,
while confirming the existing privileges of Cracow, he additionally guar-
anteed that the merchants from Hungary on their way to Prussia, Bohemia
and Silesia could not leave out the capital of Lesser Poland (KDMK 1, no.
32).
44 щąbrowskiбХOstatnieХlataХзил–237.
45 KDMK 1, no. 23, 38.
46 Ibid., no. 41, 43. As a side note, it should be indicated that immediately
afterХŻouis’ХsuccessionХtoХtheХthroneХofХіolandбХbothХhimХandХhisХmother-
Elizabeth, who ruled on behalf of her son, issued a number of documents
confirming or extending trading privileges of other Polish towns. These
confirmations were activities typical for the moment of taking over the
power by a new ruler. However, the privileges related to the internal trade
andХ didХ notХ referХ toХ theХ exchangeХ ofХ goodsХ withХ HungaryХ ĐщąbrowskiбХ
Ostatnie lata, 236).
239
Hungaro-Polonica
routeХ“toХtheХTatars”г47 As a result of granted trading privi-
leges, issuing of which was unquestionably motivated more
by the political than economic factors, Cracow not only
strengthen its economic position in comparison with other
Polish towns, but simultaneously became the most im-
portant centre in the Kingdom of Poland, confirming its sta-
tus as a capital.48 In the period under discussion the capital
of Lesser Poland maintained a privileged position also
against Hungarian centres. As an example, from the Hun-
garian perspective the role of an intermediary in the trade
withХіolandХwasХtakenХoverХbyХźošiceг49 Similarly to the cap-
ital of Lesser Poland, it also had a staple right for copper. In
1361 it was granted even an absolute staple right for all the
goods imported therein, which was however limited already
7 years later in the interest of newcomers from Cracow.50
47 KDMK 1, no. 54, 58.
48 The intention of Casimir the Great was that Cracow was to play not only
a role of the trade centre of its monarchy, but also to perform repress-
entativeХandХresidentialХfunctionsХĐSławomirХьawlasбХ“іolskaХźazimierzaХ
Wielkiego aХ inneХ monarchieХ ъuropyХ хrodkowej – moђliwoцciХ iХ graniceХ
modernizacjiХwładzy” [Poland of Casimir the Great and Other Monarchies
of Central Europe- Possibilities and Limitations of Power Modernisation],
in żodernizacjaХ strukturХ władzyХ wХ warunkachХ opóѐnieniaгХ Europa
хrodkowaХ iХ WschodniaХ naХ przełomieХ цredniowieczaХ iХ czasówХ nowo-
ђytnych, ed. M. Dygo – S. Gawlas – H. Gral (Warszawa, 1999) 31).
49 щąbrowskiбХ“źrakówХaХWęgry”бХжойрХźutrzebaХ– іtaцnikбХ“щziejeХhand-
lu”бХоз–93.
50 SignificanceХofХźošiceХinХtheХtransitХtradeХwithХtheХterritories of Poland
became reinforced at the very beginning of the 15 th century owing to
Sigismund of Luxembourg. This ruler sought to eliminate Venice from
cotton trade, to let Hungary take control over the revenues from this
product (pouring to this part of Europe from the Black Sea and the Middle
East via the Balkans and Greece) and having it sent further north, i.e. via
Polish territories. TheХviewХofХOгХHalagХafterпХюrenaХTurnauбХ“чawełnaХweХ
włókiennictwieХ europejskimХ odХ цredniowieczaХ doХ końcaХ XVюююХ wг”Х
240
Hungaro-Polonica
Only in 1394 both cities made an agreement concerning the
rules of the staple right by which the business partners in
both cities were bound.51 The agreement is sometimes inter-
preted as a proof of theХweakeningХofХшracow’sХpositionsбХtheХ
merchants of which had to agree to a partial limitation of the
privileges they held.52
The most advantageous period in trading relations be-
tween Cracow and Hungary ended together with the death
of Louis I. The city was indeed still receiving trade privileges
confirming its almost unlimited monopoly for trading with
HungarianХ territoriesбХ butХ theyХ wereХ issuedХ byХ WładysławХ
яagiełło53 and their implementation often enough encoun-
tered resistance from Sigismund of Luxembourg, the ruler of
Hungary. The monarch treated the trade policy in an instru-
mental manner, depending on the political situation as well
as on rather dynamically changing relations with the Lithu-
anian ruler.54 The most symptomatic example of an ex-
tremely unceremonious treatment of commercial exchange
wasХ Sigismund’sХstatementХfromХжйжегХTheХźingбХwhoХwasХ
advocating the Teutonic Knights and was ready to give them
military support, had informed his towns that in case of war
with Poland, Hungarian merchants were expected to return
[Cotton in the European Textile Industry from the Middle Ages to the 18th
Century], RocznikiХщziejówХSpołecznychХiХьospodarczychХйлХĐжонкЮХкг
51 Sroka, Dokumenty polskie, part 1 no. 26.
52 щąbrowskiбХ“іolskaХaХWęgry”бжомгХцlreadyХatХthatХtimeХtheХmerchantsХ
fromХźošiceХreachedХwithХtheirХcopperХdirectlyХtoХtheХчalticХSeaХviaХSilesiaбХ
bypassing the territories of Poland (ibid., 196).
53 KDMK 1, no. 63, 88, 90.
54 щąbrowskiбХOstatnieХlataбжо6.
241
Hungaro-Polonica
from Poland and the Polish ones to leave Hungary, which
was equivalent with breaking off the trade relations.55
Interactions between Poland and Hungary in terms of
settlement are best attested for the frontier areas in the pe-
riod of great economic transformations which followed as a
result of colonization based on German law. In the processes
of managing the new areas, newcomers from the neighbor-
ing countries were often recalled. Thus, the settlers of ham-
lets established in accordance with theХьermanХlawХinХSpišХ
Magura (situated on the left bank of the Poprad) were usu-
allyХьermansХfromХSpišбХbutХtheХentireХprocessХofХorganisingХ
the village was conducted by the local Slavic population,56 to
whom some Polish historians referred as Poles.57 More likely
is the fact that Slavic settlers mentioned in the Hungarian
documents, came from Upper Hungary, as well as from Po-
land or Ruthenia.58 Nevertheless, in the case of the settlement
of the northern outskirts of the Hungarian monarchy, we can
refer to documents directly confirming the interest of rulers
and land-owing lords in bringing colonists from the Polish
areasгХюnХжзклХźingХчélaХюVХbestowedХonХcountХяordanХofХtheХ
HouseХofХьörgeyХaХforestХonХbothХsidesХofХtheХriverХіopradХ
55 źutrzebaбХ“HandelХźrakowa”бХзймгХA similar appeal took place in 1430.
56 Anna Rutkowska-іłachcińskaбХ SądeczyznaХ wХ XюююХ iХ XюVХ wiekuгХ
іrzemianyХ gospodarczeХ iХ społeczneХ [RegionХ ofХ SączХinХ theХжиth and 14th
Century. Economic and Social Transformations] (WrocławХжолжЮХжкг
57 StanisławХ ZachorowskiбХ “WęgierskieХ iХ polskieХ osadnictwoХ SpiђuХ doХ
połowyХXюVХwieku” [HungarianХandХіolishХSettlementХofХSpišХuntilХmid-
14th шentury]бХRozprawyХцkademiiХUmiejętnoцciгХWydziałХHistoryczno-
Filozoficzny 52 (1909) 278.
58 VáclavХшhaloupeckýбХStaréХSlovenskoХ[HistoricalХSlovakia]ХĐчratislavaбХ
1932) 280–282.
242
Hungaro-Polonica
as a reward for diplomatic service (participation in embas-
sies sent to Poland and Ruthenia) as well as for bringing the
settlers from neighbouring kingdoms and surrounding
lands. From the context of the document one can assume that
the territories of, amongst other places, Poland (Lesser Po-
land) were considered.59 A few years later the same monarch
gave permission to the subjects of Liptov for an unobstructed
arrival of settlers from Poland or other territories.60
A very symptomatic example confirming the coming of
settlers from the Polish areas was indicated by Slovak histo-
rianХżilošХżarekгХHeХdrewХattentionХtoХtheХfactХthatХinХtheХ
document from 1246, which was a confirmation of the di-
ploma of King Andrew II from 1209 for the ancestors of the
SpišХandХьermanХHouseХofХŻordsХofХчrezovicaб there were
two brothers of German names Rykolf and Herman. On the
other hand, in a document from 1257, in which a division
betweenХtheХbrothersХfromХVeзkáХŻomnicaХwasХmadeбХasХwellХ
as in subsequent documents, appeared a brother of Rykolf,
referred to as Polan (Polonus). According to the historian,
Herman was so frequently staying in the Polish territories,
fromХwhereХheХwasХmostХlikelyХbringingХsettlersХtoХSpišбХthatХ
his second name was Polonus.61 This and similar examples
allowed researchers for putting forward a thesis that the
59 żiroslavХ ŠtevíkбХ “іrehзadХ vývinuХ osídleniaХ aХ verejnejХ správyХ stredo -
vekéhoХ Spiša”Х [цnХ OverviewХ ofХ theХ щevelopmentХ ofХ SettlementХ andХ
цdministrationХofХżedievalХSpiš]бХZeszytyХsądecko-spieskie 2 (2007) 13.
60 CDAC XI no. 350.
61 żilošХżarekбХ“SaxonesХnostriХdeХScepusпХźХniektorýmХotázkamХpríchoduХ
saskýchХhostíХaХichХživotaХnaХSpiši SaxonesХnostriХdeХScepus”Х[OnХшertainХ
Questions Regarding the Arrival of Saxon Guests and their Lives inХSpiš]бХ
in Terra Scepusiensis 360, no. 48.
243
Hungaro-Polonica
model of colonization developed at the Elbe, giving fast and
effective economic results (settlement under the German law
conducted by the mayor-founders), was transferred to the
northern territories of the Hungarian monarchy (Orava,
ŻiptovбХSpišбХSarisЮХdirectlyХfromХtheХareasХofХŻesserХіolandХ
and Silesia, and the representatives of various nations were
participating in colonising the new areas, including in addi-
tion to the Slavs from the neighbouring regions (Slovaks)
also the inhabitants of the Polish lands.62
Great controversies in the historiography were triggered
by a problem of an impact of the Hungarians on the devel-
opment of the Lesser Poland salt mining. The author of the
first life of Saint Kinga attributed to the duchess a driving
force of a miraculous discovery of the rock salt in Bochnia.63
The tale was later taken over and complemented with new
details by the 15th centuryХ іolishХ chroniclerХ яanХ щługoszг64
With foundations in this story and with the brevity of other
sources informing about the circumstances of the rock salt
62 RucińskiбХіrowincjaХsaskaбХзиж–зикбХйеирХцdrienneХźörmendyбХ“Osad -
nictwo na Spiszu w XII–XIV wieku. іodłoђeХwielokulturowoцciХSpisza”Х
[SettlementХofХSpišХinХtheХжзth–14th Century. Multicultural Background of
Spiš]бХ inХ SpiszХ – wielokulturoweХ dziedzictwoХ [SpišХ – Multicultural
Heritage]бХ edгХ цгХ źrohХ ĐSejnyбХ зеееЮХ жзерХ eademбХ “StrukturaХ społeczno-
gospodarczaХцredniowiecznegoХSpiszuХĐіrzeglądХproblematykiХiХdorobkuХ
historiografiiХ węgierskiej” [Socio-economic StructureХ ofХ żedievalХ SpišХ
(An Overview of Issues and Achievements of Hungarian
Historiography)], in Terra Scepusiensis 273.
63 “VitaХ etХ miraculaХ sanctaeХ źyngaeХ ducissaeХ шracoviensis”, ed. S.
źętrzyńskiбХinХMPH vol. 4, 696.
64 яanХщługoszбХ“VitaХbeataeХźunegundis”, in Opera omnia, vol. 1, ed. A.
іrzeѐdzieckiХĐźrakówбХжннмЮХзил–237.
244
Hungaro-Polonica
discovery in Bochnia near Cracow,65 some historians were
willing to accept that the Hungarian miners participated in
this find.66 яózefХіiotrowiczбХaХresearcherХofХtheХhistoryХofХsaltХ
in the Polish land, has expressed his strong objection against
such eventuality. He started from the generally known as-
sumption that Hungary was at that time rebuilding itself un-
derХ theХ patronageХ ofХ źingХ чélaХ юVХ dueХ toХ theХ devastationsХ
causedХbyХtheХTartars’ХinvasionХinХжзйжгХOneХofХtheХelementsХ
of these activities was a mining extraction of the under-
ground natural resources conducted on a large scale. This
gave rise to the demand for various types of specialists in the
field of mining, brought at that time particularly from Ger-
man states, what ruled out any possibility of sending the
miners to Poland.67 According to J. Piotrowicz, the discovery
65 “TheХшhapterХцnnalsХofХшracow” and “цnnalsХofХSędziwoj” give 1251
as the year when the rock salt was discovered there (Sal durum in Bochna
est repertum, quod nunquam ante fuit; Sal durum in Bochna repertum est)
ĐżonumentaХ іoloniaeХ HistoricaбХ volгХ зХ ĐŻwówбХ жнмзЮХ некбХ нммЮгХ OnХ theХ
otherХhandбХinХtheХ“цnnalsХofХŻesserХіoland”ХĐcodicesХofХźuropatnickiХandХ
źrólewiecЮХtwoХdifferentХdatesХwereХgivenбХthatХisХжзкзХandХжзожХ (MPH,
vol. 3, 168, 169).
66 źarolХSzajnochaбХ“хwгХźinga”Х[Saint Kinga], in Szkice historyczne [His-
torical Drafts] volгХжХĐŻwówбХжнкйЮХзорХHieronimХŁabęckiбХ“Najdawni-ejsze
dziejeХ salinХ krakowskichХ aђХ doХ ђupnictwaХ яanaХ чonera” [The Earliest
History of the Salt Mines of Cracow until Salt Mine Management of Jan
Boner], Biblioteka Warszawska 2 (1856) 278–зморХ źazimierzХ żaцlan-
kiewicz, ZХdziejówХgórnictwaХsolnegoХwХіolsceХ[ыromХtheХHistoryХofХSaltХ
Mining in Poland] ĐWarszawaбХжолкЮХожрХżarianХźaniorбХ“іostaРХbłгХKingi
wХцwietleХjejХђywotów” [Blessed Kinga in the Light of Her Lives], Studia i
żateriałyХ doХ щziejówХ ёupХ SolnychХ wХ іolsceХ жнХ ĐжоойЮХ йерХ юdгбХ “Kult
błogosławionejХźingiХnaХziemiХkrakowskiejХwХciąguХwieków” [The Cult of
Blessed Kinga in the Region of Cracow Throughout the Ages], Studia i
żateriałyХdoХщziejówХёupХSolnychХwХіolsceХзжХĐзеежЮХзйнг
67 іiotrowiczбХ“іroblematykaХgenezy”бХжож–жозрХюdгбХ“ьórnictwoХsolneХwХ
żałopolsceХ wХ czasachХ księђnejХ źingiХ – jego legendarne i rzeczywiste
245
Hungaro-Polonica
of rock salt in Bochnia took place around 1248 (according to
the cited author, the year of 1251 given by The Chapter Annals
of Cracow and Annals of Sędziwoj was the date of commencing
the rock salt extraction on a large scale) due to the involve-
ment of the French conversi from the Cistercian monastery
inХWąchockбХwhileХtheХdevelopmentХofХsaltХminingХfollowedХ
with the participation of specialists from Germany and Sile-
sia.68
юtХseemsбХhoweverбХthatХtheХreferencesХaboutХtheХduchess’Х
participation in the discovery of rock salt deposits or, more
broadly, the Hungarian influences on the development of
salt mining in Lesser Poland cannot be thoroughly refuted.
It is worth to refer here to the information regarding the
chronology of works on the abovementioned hagiographical
piece. The life of Saint Kinga started to be written down after
1317, it was finished before 1329 (but most likely in 1320) and
while describing the relations with Hungary the author of
theХworkХĐtheХanonymousХыranciscanХfromХNowyХSączЮХreв
ferred to an unknown Hungarian chronicle written in the
second half of the 13th century and to the oral Polish tradi-
tion.69 The work is a typical example of a hagiographical lit-
erature where the themes of legends and those bearing the
elements of wonders are superimposed on historical facts,
początki” [Salt Mining in Lesser Poland in the Times of Duchess Kinga –
юtsХŻegendaryХandХцctualХчeginnings]бХStudiaХiХżateriałyХdoХщziejówХёupХ
Solnych w Polsce 18 (1994) 16–19.
68 юdгбХ“ьórnictwoХsolne”Хо–15, 19.
69 “VitaХetХmiracula”, 676–лнерХźaniorбХ“іostaР”бХимг
246
Hungaro-Polonica
but nevertheless – as was demonstrated by research – the in-
formation included in this life largely corresponds with the
actual course of events.70
The latest date of crystallizing the tradition which merges
Kinga (or overall the Hungarians) with the mining works on
salt-bearing areas of Lesser Poland (not necessarily limited
to Bochnia itself) were the 1320s, so therefore a period
around 30–имХyearsХafterХźinga’sХdeathХĐsheХdiedХonХtheХзйth
of July 1292). However, much more likely is a conjecture that
this tradition had evolved much earlier, that is directly after
the death of the duchess71 and its foundations could have
been rooted in specific activities undertaken by the female
monarch. Perhaps it referred to the support given by her in
the search for salt in other regions of the Duchy of Cracow.
70 żariaХHгХWitkowskaбХ“Vita sanctae Kyngae Ducissae Cracoviensis jako
ѐródłoХ historyczne”Х [Vita sanctae Kyngae Ducissae Cracoviensis as a
Historical Source], Roczniki Humanistyczne 10 (1961) 163.
71 юtХseemsХthatХяózefХіiotowiczХunderestimatedХtheХimportanceХofХtheХtimeХ
of creating this work. Although the scholar realized that this tradition
ĐlegendЮХbecameХdevelopedХalreadyХafterХźinga’sХdeathбХmostХlikelyХinХtheХ
monasteryХinХStaryХSączХĐ“ьórnictwaoХsolne”, 25), in his speculations he
neverthelessХ preferredХ toХ referХ toХ aХ muchХ laterХ workХ byХ яanХ щługosz. It
allowed him to conclude that in the 15th century nothing certain was
known about the circumstances of commencing works on the rock salt
extractionХ inХ ŻesserХ іolandХ Đ“іroblematykaХ genezy”Х [іroblemХ ofХ theХ
Origin], 175–жмкрХ “ьórnictwoХ solne”бХ жл–17). It should be, however,
emphasised that the chronologically second of the medieval lives was to a
large extent an alteration of the first one, which can indicate its lesser
importance while investigating the biography of the duchess of Lesser
Poland (Barbara Kowalska, хwiętaХ źingaбХ rzeczywistoцРХ iХ legendaгХ
StudiumХ ѐródłoznawczeХ [SaintХ źingaбХ RealityХ andХ ŻegendгХ Source
Studies] ĐźrakówбХзеенЮХжеЮг
247
Hungaro-Polonica
One of the saliferous areas in the Middle Ages was the Re-
gionХofХSączб72 givenХtoХźingaХbyХherХhusbandбХчolesławХtheХ
Chaste. The energetic duchess, known for giving great atten-
tionХtoХincreasingХtheХeconomicХlevelХofХherХdomainХofХSączб73
could have committed herself to the search of rock salt de-
posits there, referring to the help of experts who arrived
from their Hungarian homeland. It can be also assumed that
towards the end of the 13th century, after finishing the reor-
ganization of the Hungarian mining, its specialists started
arriving in Cracow in increasingly large numbers, which the
tradition linked to some extent with the person and activities
of Kinga.74
72 цntoniХяodłowskiбХ“ZХmetodykiХbadańХarcheologicznychХnadХprodukcjąХ
soliХ naХ ziemiachХ polskichХ doХ połowyХ XюююХ wieku” [Methodology of
Archaeological Research on the Production of Salt in Polish Territories
until mid-13th Century], Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej 20 (1972)
614.
73 Rutkowska-іłachcińskaбХ SądeczyznaбХ passimрХ żarekХ чarańskiбХ
щominiumХ sądeckieпХ odХ ksiąђęcegoХ okręguХ grodowegoХ doХ majątkuХ
klasztoruХ klarysekХ sądeckichХ [щominionХ ofХ SączпХ fromХ aХ чoroughХ ofХ
щuke’sХStrongholdХtoХtheХżonasterialХъstatesХofХtheХіoorХшlaresХofХSącz]Х
(Warszawa, 1992) 96.
74 Presence of mining experts from Hungary, next to the representatives of
other nations, was confirmed for the period of the 14th century (яózefХ
іiotrowiczбХ“Okresy rozwojowe i przemiany gospodarki solnej w Polsce
odХpołowyХXюююХdoХpoczątkówХXVюююХwieku”Х[іeriodsХofХщevelopmentХandХ
Transformations of Salt Economy in Poland from the mid-13th to the
Beginning of the 18th Century], StudiaХiХżateriałyХdoХщziejówХёupХSolnychХ
w Polsce 9 (1980) 45). In the ordination on the salt mining management of
Casimir the Great from 1368, alongside former salt mine managers, salt
dealers and steigers (people responsible for technical supervision over the
mine during salt extraction), also Bernhardus- a steiger from Hungary was
mentioned (a person responsible for technical supervision over the mine
during salt extraction (Starodawne prawa, vol. 1, 218).
248
Hungaro-Polonica
It is also worth considering whether the experts from
Hungary did not accidentally have their share in the devel-
opment of the salt mining industry in the areas of Wieliczka,
which is known only through being chronologically later
than the one in Bochnia. The first information on extracting
rock salt in Wieliczka comes from the location act of this
townбХissuedХ inХ жзоеХbyХіrzemysłХ ююг75 This means that the
extraction of this mineral must have started before that date.
Exploratory works in the areas nearby Wieliczka were sup-
posed to commence shortly after the discovery made in
Bochnia.76 It is possible to once more refer here to the Annals
of Lesser Poland ĐźrólewiecХstatute-book), the author of which
placed under 1291, chronologically close the diploma of
іrzemysłХ ююбХ anХ informationХ aboutХ discoveringХ rockХ saltХ inХ
Bochnia.77 Possibly is was a mistake and one referred not to
Bochnia, but to Wieliczka, in the mines of which the extrac-
tion of salt underwent intensification in the early 1290s. Ex-
ploratory works on rock salt in the area of Wieliczka salt
mine could have ended successfully thanks to the participa-
tion of miners who arrived from the Hungarian monarchy,
which in an ordinary reception was linked to Kinga herself.
This tradition, supported and cultivated by the convent of
theХіoorХшlaresХfoundedХbyХtheХduchessХinХStaryХSączбХcouldХ
have become suitably modified. In order to further enhance
the contribution of the female monarch into the organization
of the salt mining industry in the region of Cracow, the
daughter of чélaХ юVХ becameХ attributedХ withХ participationбХ
75 KDM 2, 515.
76 іiotrowiczбХ“ьórnictwoХsolne”бХзи–24.
77 “RocznikХmałopolski”бХжлог
249
Hungaro-Polonica
bearing signs of supernatural intervention, in the discovery
which took place not in Wieliczka, but in Bochnia where rock
salt had started to be extracted earlier.
Due to the lack of undisputable sources, the suggestions
presented above remain within the circle of unverifiable hy-
potheses. The contribution of Kinga in the development of
salt mining, accentuated in the 14th century hagiographic
work, could have also had a completely different nature. Be-
tweenХ жзмиХ andХ жзмнХ чolesławХ theХ шhasteХ conductedХ aХ reв
form which granted the ruler a thorough control over the
production process and trade of salt in the areas subjected to
him (its most important postulate was to withdraw all the
privileges, owned mainly by ecclesiastical institutions,
which were diminishing the revenue of the ruler from the
salt mines), which was equivalent with the introduction of
salt regalia.78 According to J. Piotrowicz, the notion of irref-
utable and indivisible rights of the monarch to all the salt-
bearing areas was brought from Hungary, where for a long
time all such regions together with mines were a part of the
royal domain.79
Financial relations, which within the conditions of a me-
dieval state were not an isolated phenomenon but were sub-
jected to influences of external factors, were still remaining
an area of potential interactions between states.80 It became
78 źrzyђanowskiбХ StatutбХ жеи–жекрХ WyrozumskiбХ іaństwowaХ gospodarkaХ
solna, 123–124.
79 іiotrowiczбХ“ьórnictwoХsolne”бХзе–25.
80 Štefan KazimírбХ“WpływХpieniądzaХpolskiegoХnaХstosunkiХpienięђneХnaХ
WęgrzechХwХlatachХжкеж–жлжо”Х[Influence of Polish Money on Monetary
Relations with Hungary in 1501–1619], WiadomoцciХNumizmatyczneХиеХ
(1968) 163.
250
Hungaro-Polonica
evident particularly in the case of monetary reform of the
13th–14th century initiated in Western Europe, the substance
of which was to take over the thick silver coin by the succes-
sive European monarchies.81 Its occurrence in Lesser Poland
and Greater Poland was conditioned there by strong Bohe-
mian influences during the reign at the end of the 13th and
the beginning of the 14th century of the іфemyslidsг82 After
шracowХhadХbeenХcapturedХinХжиелХbyХщukeХWładysławХtheХ
Elbow-high it was decided that the emission of coins from
the times of the іфemyslids’Х reignХ wouldХ beХ continuedг83
During the reign of the Piast circulation of silver denarius
coins was limited to two areas of Lesser Poland, i.e. Cracow
Land and Sandomierz Land. After the royal coronation of
the Duke, the emission of these coins in the areas of Lesser
Poland underwent standardization in accordance with their
type. Their circulation was probably common for the entire
district of Lesser Poland, which should be regarded as the
first stage of monetary unification in the Polish monarchy.84
81 In Polish scholarly works this problem was most thoroughly analyzed
by Ryszard Kiersnowski, Wielka reforma monetarna XIII–XIV w. [Great
Monetary Reform in 13th–14th Century] (Warszawa, 1969).
82 чorysХ іaszkiewiczбХ “ReformaХ monetarnaХ królaХ WacławaХ ююХ wХ іolsce”Х
[żonetaryХ ReformХ ofХ źingХ WenceslausХ ююХ inХ іoland]бХ WiadomoцciХ
Numizmatyczne 45 (2001) 23–33.
83 чorysХ іaszkiewiczбХ „żennictwoХ WładysławaХ Łokietka”Х [шoinageХ ofХ
WładysławХtheХъlbow-high]бХWiadomoцciХNumizmatyczneХиеХĐжонлЮХнйг
84 чorysХ іaszkiewiczбХ “źrakówбХ SandomierzХ iХ mennictwoХ WładysławaХ
Łokietka”Х [шracowбХ SandomierzХ andХ theХ шoinage ofХ WładysławХ theХ
Elbow-high]бХ inХ żiastaбХ ludzieбХ instytucjeбХ znakiгХ źsięgaХ jubileuszowaХ
ofiarowanaХprofesorХчoђenieХWyrozumskiejХzХokazjiХмкгХrocznicyХurodzinХ
[Towns, People, Institutions, Signs. A Jubilee Volume Dedicated to
іrofessorХчoђenaХWyrozumskaХon the Occasion of Her 75th Birthday], ed.
ZгХіiechХĐźrakówбХзеенЮХмми–774.
251
Hungaro-Polonica
In this regard, the model of proceeding could have been de-
livered by the activities of Charles Robert, who in 1314 initi-
ated monetary reform in the areas subjected to him. Its most
important stage was the decision from 1323 on undertaking
an emission of a new, lasting (non-negotiable in terms of ex-
change) coin, which was to be in use in the entire territory
remaining under the authority of the House of Anjou.85
The second half of the 13th and the 14th century was a pe-
riod during which a significant area of the Old Continent (It-
aly, France, England, Netherlands, Germany, Bohemia and
Hungary) initiated and developed the gold coin production.
The main producer of gold in Europe at that time was Hun-
gary,86 which around 1325 became an inducement for
Charles Robert to mint gold coin.87 It was the first success-
fully completed emission of this kind in the areas beyond the
Alps88 and the sources for its inspiration should be sought in
Sicily, in the earlier activities of Frederick II. At roughly the
same time as in Hungary, golden florins (often referred to
85 źiersnowskiбХWielkaХreformaХmonetarnaбХзжирХюdгбХ“щataХiХkształtХreformХ
monetarnychХ źazimierzaХ Wielkiego”Х [щateХ andХ ScopeХ ofХ żonetaryХ
ReformsХ ofХ шasimirХ theХ ьreat]бХ WiadomoцciХ Numizmatyczne 12 (1968)
жлмрХіaszkiewiczбХ“żennictwoХiХpolitykaХmonetarna”бХжмйг
86 Peter Spufford, Money and its Use in Medieval Europe, (Cambridge,
жооиЮХзлнрХщygoбХ“WschódХiХZachód”бХжнйгХRyszardХźiersnowskiХquotedХ
with great caution calculations of historians who stated that Slovak mines
on the turn of the 13th and 14th century provided 80% of the entire
ъuropeanХgoldХextractionХĐ“WielkaХreformaХmonetarna”ХьreatХżonetaryХ
Reform, 211).
87 Information about a golden Hungarian coin appeared for the first time
in the last-will of the Bishop of Olomouc, Conrad, dated to 22 June 1326
(Codex diplomaticus et epistolaris Moraviae, volгХлбХedгХягХшhytilХĐчrünnбХ
1854) no. 314).
88 Spufford, Money, 268.
252
Hungaro-Polonica
also as ducats) struck in the local mint appeared in the King-
domХofХіolandХofХWładysławХtheХъlbow-high. Precisely de-
termining the beginning of their emission gave cause to
much controversy. Older historiography accepted that the
royal coronation of the Piast in 1320 was an opportunity for
their circulation and its foundation was of an ideological na-
ture, associated with the need of manifesting the fact of ele-
vating the ruler to the status of a king.89
Only the study by Ryszard Kiersnowski showed that the
ephemeral issuance of the (Lesser)Poland florins started at
the earliest in 1330 and was associated with the celebrated at
that time jubilee in honour of Saint Stanislaus. At the time
large amount of gold (monetary and non-monetary), from
which Polish copies of florins began to be minted, was col-
lected from the pilgrims who came from the Kingdom of Po-
land, Bohemia, Hungary, Silesia and the neighbouring coun-
tries.90
89 TeodorХWierzbowskiбХ“OХdukatachХWładysławaХŁokietkaХiХцleksandraХ
яagiellończyka”Х [OnХ theХ щucatsХ ofХ WładysławХ theХ ъlbow-high and
цlexanderХ яagiellon]бХ WiadomoцciХ Numizmatyczno-Archeologiczne 1
ĐжножЮХ зжирХ ыranciszekХ іiekosińskiбХ “SłowoХ wХ obronieХ autentycznoцciХ
dukataХWładysławaХŁokietka”Х[WordХinХщefenseХofХtheХцuthenticityХofХtheХ
щucatХofХWładysławХtheХъlbow-High], ibid., 221, 224; Marian Gumowski,
żonetaХzłotaХwХіolsceХцredniowiecznejХ[ьoldenХшoinХinХżedievalХіoland]Х
ĐźrakówбХжожзЮХннг
90 Ryszard KiersnowskiбХ„щukatyХWładysławaХŁokietka” [щucatsХofХWła-
dysławХ theХ ъlbow-high]бХ WiadomoцciХ NumizmatyczneХ нХ ĐжолйЮХ зи–41.
Description of the surrounding circumstances and celebrations of the
jubilee in 1330, which became the foundations for the hypothesis of R.
Kiersnowski, was given by the 15th centuryХіolishХchroniclerХяanХщługoszбХ
Annales seu cronicae incliti Regni Poloniae, vol. 9, ed. S. Budkowa
(Warszawa, 1978) 155.
253
Hungaro-Polonica
To undertakeХ thisХ initiativeХ byХ WładysławХ theХ ъlbow-
high meant to fit into the pan-European trend. It can be as-
sumed that the direct inspirations arrived from the neigh-
bouring countries, but it is more likely that the territory ruled
by the House of Anjou was coming into play more than the
Kingdom of Bohemia of John of Luxembourg, who he started
issuing his own florins in 1325. The first matter to pay atten-
tion to is the similarity between the golden coins from Hun-
gary and Poland. According to the Hungarian sources, the
coins which were minted in Buda in 1325 and then continu-
ously from 1332 to 1333 were, in terms of their external fea-
tures and metal standards, a faithful imitation of the florins
fromХыlorenceХĐonХtheХobverseХofХшharlesХRobert’sХcoinsХwasХ
placed a heraldic motif in a shape of a lily flower – fleur de
lis, distinctive of their counterparts from Florence as well as
the inscription KAROLV.REX while on the reverse – the fig-
ure of Saint John the Baptist, a patron saint of the Italian city,
with the inscription S.JOHANNES.B). Shortly, around 1331,
as a result of protests launched by Florence against imitating
her coins, Hungary introduced a different stamp (on the ob-
verse the king was depicted on a throne, on the reverse the
Angevin shield under a crown was placed).91
Different concept was presented by R. Kiersnowski ac-
cording to whom the occurrence of coins imitating the florins
in the regions of Hungarian monarchy took place only after
1332/1333, while earlier, from 1325, the minted coins were
91 Opinions of Hungarian historiography in favour: Kiersnowski, Wielka
reforma monetarna, 214–215. No original examples of golden coins from
before 1332/1333 were preserved. The appearance of those earlier ones
can be learnt from the 18th century copy of an original which is now lost
(ibid., 215).
254
Hungaro-Polonica
“differentХinХtermsХofХappearanceХandХperhapsХstandardsХofХ
metalХfromХtheХordinaryХflorins”г92 And it was their pattern
which could have been the subject of imitation by the Piast
rulerгХOnХtheХobverseХofХaХgoldenХіolishХcoinХofХWładysławХ
the Elbow-high is depicted the figure of the king on a throne
and a caption WLADISLAVS DI G REX,93 while on the re-
verse the figure of Saint Stanislaus and an inscription
S.STANISLAVS POLE. As can be seen, the florin of the
Polish King was presenting partial similarity (obverse) to the
atypical, in terms of appearance, issuance of the Anjou ruler.
The time convergence in their issuing appears to exclude an
ordinary coincidence and the Hungarian golden coin served
asХaХmodelХforХanХanalogousХissuanceХbyХWładysławХtheХъlв
bow-high.94 Production of florins in Poland was temporary
in nature and it soon ceased. Therefore, it did not play a sig-
nificant role in the Polish economy of that time.95
92 Kiersnowski, Wielka reforma monetarna, 216. As a proof he cites the
expressions included in the abovementioned document from 1326, which
refersХtoХaХ“goldenХHungarianХcoin”бХandХnotХ“aХflorin”бХaХnameХofХwhichХ
was already at that time in common use (ibid.).
93 цccordingХ toХ ŻesławХ żorawieckiХ theХ writingХ shouldХ beХ readХ asХ
VLADISLAVS DEI GRATIA REX, which had its analogies in one of the
denariiХ ofХ WładysławХ theХ ъlbow-highХ Đ“щukatХ WładysławaХ ŁokietkaХ –
interpretacjeХ legendy”Х [щucatХ ofХ WładysławХ theХ ъlbow-high –
InterpretationsбХŻegends]бХWiadomoцciХNumizmatyczneХзкХĐжонжЮХин–42).
94 Kiersnowski, Wielka reforma monetarna, 217.
95 żotivesХforХtheХdecisionХofХWładysławХtheХъlbow-high about issuing his
own golden coin are indicated in the necessity of meeting financial needs
of the Polish monarchy in the face of the outbreak of further fighting with
the Teutonic Order as well as in propagandistic factor. The latter was
associated with placing on the reverse of the coin the figure and
inscriptions referring to the 11th century Bishop of Cracow- Saint
StanislausбХ toХ whomбХ particularlyХ towardsХ theХ endХ ofХ WładysławХ theХ
Elbow-high’sХ reignбХ aХ roleХ ofХ aХ guardianХ ofХ theХ unitedХ іolishХ stateХ wasХ
begunХtoХbeХassignedХĐцgnieszkaХRoђnowska-Sadraei – Pater Patriae. The
255
Hungaro-Polonica
At the end of the discussion on economic relations be-
tween Poland and Hungary it is necessary to mention the
continuous contribution of Louis I to the organization of the
іolishХtreasuryгХThisХconcernsХmainlyХtheХіrivilegeХofХźošiceХ
from 1374 for the Polish nobility as well as, modelled on it,
agreement between the King and the feudal lords of the
clergy in 1381. In accordance with the provisions of the Priv-
ilegeХofХźošiceХtheХmonarchбХinХexchangeХforХtheХіolishХlords’Х
consent that one of his daughters would take the throne of
Poland in the event of a subsequent absence of male off-
spring, abolished the duty of maintaining his visits and
made some commitments and promises to his subjects of no-
ble lineage. One of the more important provisions of the
privilegeХissuedХinХźošiceХwasХtoХdeliverХtheХknights’ХestatesХ
from any existing obligations and burdens, introducing in
this place a fixed tax at a rate of two grosze from the culti-
vatedХ peasant’sХ fiefг96 The earlier Polish historiography
treated the provisionsХ ofХ theХ іrivilegeХ ofХ źošiceХ mostlyХ inХ
terms of concessions given to King Louis as a price for guar-
anteeing to his dynasty the right to the throne of Poland.97
Thoroughly different interpretation of the document issued
Cult of Saint Stanislaus and the Patronage of Polish Kings 1200–1455
(Cracow, 2008) 216–223). Manifesting such position was especially
significant due to the escalating threat from the outside as well as John of
Żuxembourg’sХconsistentХunderminingХofХіiast’sХrightХtoХtheХіolish crown,
indication of which was i.e. referringХtoХWładysławХtheХъlbow-highХasХ“theХ
kingХofХшracow”ХbyХtheХrulerХofХчohemiaХĐźщWХзбХnoгХжеомЮХasХwellХasХяohnХ
ofХŻuxembourg’sХnotoriousХentitlingХofХhimselfХasХ“theХźingХofХіoland”г
96 KDW 3, no. 1709.
97 югeгХ яanХ щąbrowskiХ summarisedХ theХ dispositionsХ included in the
monarchicalХ diplomaХ fromХ SeptemberХ жимйХ withХ theХ wordsпХ „ŻouisХ
ransomed the succession of his daughters very dearly” (Ostatnie lata, 295).
256
Hungaro-Polonica
inХźošiceХwasХprovidedХbyХяacek Matuszewski. He reached
the conclusion that the diploma was a confirmation or regu-
larisation of privileges so far held by the knights. Introduc-
ing a permanent tax in the place of the already existing emer-
gency tributes was seen as a reform of a taxation system. The
change was advantageous from the perspective of the noble
owners of estates (the extent of tax was not overly high), but
its greatest beneficiary was the monarch himself. The reve-
nues to the royal treasury became increased, but most of all
the cyclical nature of the charged levies was making the
monarch independent from the consent of his subjects when
carrying out the levy. This resulted in specific consequences
of political nature, particularly in the case when the repre-
sentatives of a new dynasty sat on the Polish throne. Due to
the implemented regulations they were becoming more in-
dependent from their subjects.98 The core of the change in-
cludedХinХtheХіrivilegeХofХźošiceХwasХinstitutingХaХnewХandХ
permanent tax, just as it was once done in 1338 by King
Żouis’ХfatherХinХHungaryг99
Considerations presented above refer to the most im-
portant sectors of medieval economy. Discussion on them
does not exhaust the problem of economic relations between
Poland and Hungary in the Middle Ages. The thorough un-
derstanding of the essence and meaning of this subject will
98 яacekХ SгХ żatuszewskiбХ “Przywileje i polityka podatkowa Ludwika
WęgierskiegoХwХіolsce”Х[іrivilegesХand Taxation Policy of Louis the Great
in Poland], Acta Univerisitatis Lodziensis (1983) passim.
99 щánielХчagiбХ“źazimierzХWielkiХiХjegoХczasy”Х[шasimirХtheХьreatХandХHisХ
ъra]бХinХźazimierzХWielkiХiХjegoХpaństwoгХWХsiedemsetnąХrocznicęХurodzinХ
ostatniego Piasta na tronie polskim, ed. J. Maciejewski – T. Nowakowski
(Bydgoszcz, 2011) 29; Gawlas, “іolskaХźazimierzaХWielkiego”гХзи–24.
257
Hungaro-Polonica
be possible after juxtaposing the works of Polish historians
of the Middle Ages with the results of research of Hungarian
or Slovak historians, as well as presenting them through a
prism of economic development of Central European coun-
tries and their closest neighbors. Nevertheless, already at
this point it is possible to draft some general observations
about the nature of these relations. First of all, the attention
must be drawn to their multidimensional character. They
came down not only to such specific phenomena in the area
of economy as, to say the least, the exchange of commodities
or participation of people from the neighbouring country in
the settlement of new territories, but also to taking over from
the neighbouring areas some inspirations or already pre-
pared patterns. In the cases such as the legal aspect of organ-
ising rock salt mining, monetary reform (introduction of a
gold coin) or taxation reform, it is possible to indicate the
one-sided, Hungarian, direction of impact. This resulted
from significant economic advancement of the southern
neighbor of Poland.100 In the second half of the 13th century,
not an insignificant role was played in that matter by the con-
sistent economic policy of чélaХюVХwhileХafterХtheХaccessionХ
to the throne of the House of Anjou, the opportunities
opened up for the Hungarians to reach out for the Sicilian
heritage of the Hohenstaufen and the latest Italian canons.101
100щygoбХ“WschódХiХZachód”бХжмл–185.
101Gawlas, “іolskaХźazimierzaХWielkiego”бХззгХTheХfactХofХtheХцngevins’Х
reign over the part of Croatian and Dalmatian coastline, the territory of
which was of vital interest to Venice, made the mutual relations between
the Kingdom of Hungary and the Republic of Saint Mark quite intense.
The latest economic solutions or inspirations could have permeated to the
territories of Central Europe also from this direction
258
Hungaro-Polonica
The territory of Hungarian monarchy was in some ways con-
stitutingХ aХ “conveyorХ belt”Х ofХ theХ westernХ ъuropeanХ ecoв
nomic solutions in the Polish lands. Diffusion of new ideas
facilitated the tradition of cooperation and alliance between
the Piasts on the one hand, and the Arpads and Anjou on the
other hand.
Another feature of the Polish-Hungarian relations was
complementing or compensating the shortcomings in raw
material, in this way providing an undisturbed operating of
the Hungarian mining sector. Such role was fulfilled partic-
ularly by Polish lead, essential for the development of gold
and silver mining in the region of Upper Hungary. It can be
assumed that similar meaning had, although on a much
smaller scale, the animals brought to Poland (horses, cattle,
and hog). The mutual complementing of the two economies
was indirectly stimulating the process of urbanizing the
country (i.e. emergence of the mining town category102) or
reorganizing rural hamlets along the trade routes, which
were running between the states.
The fact of the complementarity of Polish and Hungarian
mining sector was conditioning the regional nature of the
mutual economic ties (directly involved in them were the
neighbouring regions of southern Poland and the northern
areas of the Kingdom of Hungary) and led them to their spe-
cialisation. Another significant matter was, as a rule, a transit
nature of trade, particularly with regard to natural resources
102щanutaХ żolendaбХ “żiastaХ górniczeХ ъuropyХ цrodkowo-wschodniej w
epoceХ feudalnej”Х [żiningХ TownsХ ofХ шentralХ andХ ъasternХ ъuropeХ inХ theХ
ыeudalХ ъra]бХ inХ żiastaХ dobyХ feudalnejХ wХ ъuropieХ цrodkowo-wschodniej
[Towns in the Feudal Times in Central and Eastern Europe], ed. A.
Gieysztor – TгХRosłanowski (Warszawa, 1976) 189–216.
259
Hungaro-Polonica
from Hungary. The areas of Poland did not constitute a final
destination for Hungarian copper or lead. They were largely
intended for the Western market and were placed there
through the merchants of Cracow, who could guarantee to
themselves suitable privileges with the help of monarchs.
Bibliography
Primary sources
“цktaХ odnosząceХ sięХ doХ stosunkówХ handlowychХ іolskiХ zХ WęgramiХ
głównieХzХ archiwum koszyckiego z lat 1354–жкек”Х[TheХцctsХRegardingХ
Trade Relations between Poland and Hungary Mainly from the Archives
ofХ źošiceХ fromХ жикй–150], ed. S. Kutrzeba, Archiwum Komisji
Historycznej, vol. 9 (1902).
щługoszХ яanбХ цnnalesХ seuХ cronicaeХ incliti Regni Poloniae, vol. 9, ed. S.
Budkowa (Warszawa, 1978).
щokumentyХ polskieХ zХ archiwówХ dawnegoХ źrólestwaХ WęgierХ [іolishХ
Documents from the Archives of the Former Kingdom of Hungary], vol.
1–5, ed. S. цгХSrokaХĐźrakówбХжоон–2012).
RachunkiХdworuХkrólaХWładysławaХяagiełłyХiХkrólowejХяadwigiХzХlatХжиннХ
doХ жйзеХ [TheХ RoyalХ шourtХ цccountsХ ofХ źingХ WładysławХ яagiełłoХ andХ
Queen Jadwiga from 13ннХtoХжйзе]бХedгХыгХіiekosiński ĐźrakówбХжнолЮг
Starodawne prawa polskiego pomniki [The Old Monuments of Polish
Law], vol. 1, ed. A. Z. Helcel (Warszawa, 1856).
“VitaХ etХ miraculaХ sanctaeХ źyngaeХ ducissaeХ шracoviensis”бХ edгХ S.
źętrzyńskiбХinХżіHХvolгХйг
260
Hungaro-Polonica
Secondary literature
щąbrowskiбХ яanбХ “źrakówХ aХ WęgryХ wХ wiekachХ цrednich”Х [шracowХ andХ
Hungary in the Middle Ages], Rocznik Krakowski 13 (1911), 187–250.
щąbrowskiбХ яanбХ OstatnieХ lataХ ŻudwikaХ WielkiegoХ жиме–1382 [The Last
Years of Louis the Great 1370–жинз]Х ĐźrakówбХ жожнрХ reprintпХ źrakówбХ
2009).
шarterбХыrancisХWгбХ“шracowďsХWineХTradeХĐыourteenthХtoХъighteenthХшenв
turiesЮ”ХTheХSlavonic and East European Review 65 (1987) 537–578.
щygoбХżarianбХ“WschódХiХZachódпХgospodarkaХъuropyХwХXюV–XVХwieku”Х
[East and West: Economy of Europe in the 14th–15th century], in Ziemie
polskieХwobecХ ZachoduгХ StudiaХ nadХrozwojemХ цredniowiecznejХ ъuropyбХ
ed. S. Gawlas (Warszawa, 2006) 117–194.
ьawlasХ SławomirбХ “іolskaХ źazimierzaХ WielkiegoХ aХ inneХ monarchieХ
ъuropyХхrodkowejХ– moђliwoцciХiХgraniceХmodernizacjiХwładzy”Х[іolandХ
of Casimir the Great and Other Monarchies of Central Europe-
Possibilities and Limitations of Power Modernisation] in Modernizacja
strukturХ władzyХ wХ warunkachХ opóѐnieniaгХ ъuropaХ хrodkowaХ iХ
WschodniaХ naХ przełomieХ цredniowieczaХ iХ czasówХ nowoђytnychбХ edгХ żгХ
Dygo – idem – H. Gral (Warszawa, 1999).
źaniorбХżarianбХ“іostaРХbłгХźingiХwХцwietleХjejХђywotów”Х[чlessedХźingaХ
inХtheХŻightХofХHerХŻives]бХStudiaХiХżateriałyХdoХщziejów ёupХSolnychХwХ
Polsce 18 (1994) 31–45.
Kiersnowski, Ryszard, Wielka reforma monetarna XIII–XIV w. [Great
Monetary Reform in 13th–14th c.] (Warszawa, 1969).
źrzyђanowskiбХяózefбХ“StatutХźazimierzaХWielkiegoХdlaХkrakowskichХђupХ
solnych”Х [StatuteХ ofХ шasimirХ theХ ьreatХ forХ theХ SaltХ żinesХ ofХ шracow],
Rocznik Krakowski 25 (1934) 96–128.
źučeraбХżatúšбХ“іolďsko-slovenskýХobchodХsoХsolďouХdoХkoncaХжлХstoročia”Х
[Polish-Slovak Trade of Salt until the End of the 16th century] Slovenske
ŠtudieХмХĐжолкЮХно–122.
źutrzebaбХ StanisławбХ іtaцnikХ яanбХ “щziejeХ handluХ iХ kupiectwaХ
krakowskiego”Х [HistoryХ ofХ шracow’sХ TradeХ andХ шommerce]бХ RocznikХ
Krakowski 14 (1910), 1–183.
261
Hungaro-Polonica
źutrzebaбХ StanisławбХ “HandelХ źrakowaХ wХ wiekachХ цrednichХ naХ tleХ
stosunkówХ handlowychХ іolski”Х [TradeХ ofХ шracowХ inХ theХ żiddleХ цgesХ
цgainstХtheХчackgroundХofХіoland’sХTradingХRelations]ХĐźrakówбХжоезЮбХ
reprintХ inпХ idemбХ ыinanseХ iХ handelХ цredniowiecznegoХ źrakowaХ [ыinanceХ
and Trade in MedievalХшracow]ХĐźrakówбХзееоЮ.
żałowistбХ żarianбХ WschódХ aХ ZachódХ ъuropyХ wХ Xююю–XVI wieku. Kon-
frontacjaХstrukturХspołeczno-gospodarczych [East and West of Europe in
the 13th–16th Century. Confronting Socio-Economic Structures] (War-
szawa, 2006).
Molenda, DanutaбХчalcerzakХъlђbietaбХżetaleХnieђelazneХnaХziemiachХpolв
skich od XIV do XVIII wieku (zastosowanie i wyroby) [Non-ferrous Met-
als in the Polish Territories from the 14th to the 18th Century (Usage and
іroductsЮ]ХĐWrocławбХжонмЮ.
żolendaбХщanutaбХ“ъksploatacja rudХmiedziХiХhandelХmiedziąХwХіolsceХwХ
póѐnymХцredniowieczuХiХpoczątkachХnowoђytnoцciХĐdoХжмокХrгЮ”Х[Extrac-
tion of Copper Ore and Copper Trade in Poland in the Late Middle Ages
and Early Modern Times (until 1795)] іrzeglądХHistorycznyХнеХĐжоноЮ 801–
804.
MolendaбХ щanutaбХ “ZaopatrzenieХ polskichХ oцrodkówХ górnictwaХ
kruszcowego w XV–XVююХwг”Х[Provisions in Polish Ore Mining Centres in
the 15th–17th Century], Kwartalnik Historii Kultury Materialnej 39 (1991)
449–465.
żolendaбХщanutaбХіolskiХołówХnaХrynkachХъuropyХхrodkowejХwХXююю–XVII
wieku [Polish Lead in the Markets of Central Europe in 13th–17th Century]
(Warszawa, 2001).
іaszkiewiczбХ чorysбХ “żennictwoХ iХ politykaХ monetarnaХ źazimierzaХ
Wielkiego”Х [шoinageХ andХ żonetaryХ іolicyХ ofХ шasimirХ theХ ьreat]Х inХ
Kazimierz WielkiгХHistoriaХiХtradycjaбХedгХżгХяaglarzХĐNiepołomiceбХзежеЮ.
іiotrowiczбХяózefбХ“іroblematykaХgenezyХiХnajstarszychХdziejówХgórnictwaХ
solnegoХwХіolsce”Х[іroblemХofХtheХOriginХandХtheХъldestХHistoryХofХSaltХ
żiningХinХіoland]бХStudiaХiХżateriałyХdoХщziejów ёupХSolnychХwХіolsceХзХ
(1968) 173–234.
іiotrowiczбХ яózefбХ “ьórnictwoХ solneХ wХ żałopolsceХ wХ czasachХ księђnejХ
Kingi – jegoХ legendarneХ iХ rzeczywisteХ początki”Х [SaltХ żiningХ inХ ŻesserХ
Poland in the Times of Duchess Kinga – Its Legendary and Actual
262
Hungaro-Polonica
Beginnings] StudiaХ iХ żateriałyХ doХ щziejówХ ёupХ SolnychХ wХ іolsce”Х жнХ
(1994) 9–26.
RucińskiбХHenrykбХіrowincjaХsaskaХnaХSpiszХdoХжйжзХrokuпХĐnaХtleХprzemianХ
społecznychХiХustrojychХwХkomitacieХspiskimХiХnaХobszarachХprzyległychЮХ
[TheХ SaxonХ іrovinceХ inХ SpišХuntilХ жйжзпХ Đцgainst the Backdrop of Social
andХшonstitutionalХшhangesХinХtheХшountyХofХSpišХandХцdjacentХцreasЮ]Х
Đчiałystok, 1983)
Rutkowska-іłachcińskaбХ цnnaбХ SądeczyznaХ wХ XюююХ iХ XюVХ wiekuгХ
іrzemianyХ gospodarczeХ iХ społeczneХ [RegionХ ofХ SączХinХ theХжи th and 14th
Century. ъconomicХandХSocialХTransformations]ХĐWrocław, 1961)
Spufford, Peter, Money and its Use in Medieval Europe (Cambridge, 1993)
SrokaбХ StanisławХ цгбХ хredniowiecznyХ чardiówХ iХ jegoХ kontaktyХ zХ
żałopolskąХ [żedievalХ чardejovХ andХ юtsХ RelationsХ withХ ŻesserХ іoland]Х
ĐźrakówбХзежеЮ.
WyrozumskiбХ яerzyбХ іaństwowaХ gospodarkaХ solnaХ wХ іolsceХ doХ schyłkuХ
XIV wieku [National Salt Economy in Poland towards the End of the 14 th
шentury]ХĐźrakówбХжолнЮ.
263
János Incze
Central European University
360 Years in Pledge. The Pledging of theХSpišХ
Region*
For posterity, the name of Sigismund of Luxemburg is irrev-
ocably associated with his pledgings, including that of the
SpišХregionбХwhichХisХundoubtedlyХoneХofХtheХmostХrenownХ
transactions in medieval Hungarian history. It owes its im-
portance to a number of factors. First, that the transaction
was of countrywide importance is well illustrated by the fact
thatХregainingХtheХSpišХregionХwasХamongХtheХWladislavХю’sХ
(1440–1444) Hungarian coronation conditions.1 Secondly,
the charter itself also indicates the significance of the trans-
action: Sigismund did not pledge the region alone as Hun-
garian king but together with his barons and prelates.2 Fi-
nally, the total sum involved was unusually high: 37 000
ЯХюХwouldХlikeХtoХthankХіrofessorХюstvánХщraskóczyХandХіфemyslХчarХforХ
their valuable suggestions and remarks on the article. The present article
isХ aХ revisedХ editionХ ofХ theХ paperХ publishedХ inХ HungarianпХ “илеХ évigХ
zálogbanпХ цХ SzepességХ zálogosításaб”Х inХ żicaeХ żediaevalesХ VпХ ыiatalХ
történészekХdolgozataiХaХközépkoriХżagyarországrólХésХъurópárólбХedгХŻгХ
ыábiánХetХalгХĐчudapestбХзежлЮХож–103.
1 The Hungarian coronation conditions of the Polish ruler, Wladislav of
Varna stipulated that he would marry Queen Elisabeth, the widow of King
цlbertХHabsburgбХandХalsoХthatХheХwouldХreturnХtheХSpišХregionХwithoutХ
anyХ paymentгХ ŻajosХ юlyefalviбХ цХ ŻengyelországnakХ elzálogosítottХ XюююХ
szepesiХvárosХtörténeteХ[TheХHistoryХofХtheХThirteenХTownsХofХSpišХpledgedХ
toХіoland]ХĐżakóбХжоелЮХкз–53.
2 There are cases of Sigismund pledging a royal property ex consilio
prelatorum et baronum butХinХsuchХinstancesХtheХking’sХadvisorsХdidХnotХsealХ
265
Hungaro-Polonica
schock Prague groschen was equivalent to almost 100 000
Hungarian golden florins, a small fortune in the period.3 In
addition, the length of pledging period was exceptional: the
territory put in pledge in 1412 was recovered around 360
years later. This was possible because – contrary to some
opinions – time limit was seldom set for redeeming proper-
tiesХ inХ Sigismund’sХ pledgingsб4 the possessions were re-
the document as they did with the charter of pledging the SpišХregionгХщŻХ
9984. Some examples of pledgings ex consilio…пХщŻХминкбХминобХмнозбХйзнинг
3 The Prague groschen initially was struck at 60 to the local mark weight
of silver, later was still reckoned in sixties (or schock/sexagena) when it was
no longer minted at 60. Peter Spufford, Money and its Use in Medieval
Europe (Cambridge, 1993) 412. During the late Middle Ages it was
exchanged to different currencies. In 1380, eighteen Prague groschen was
worth one Hungarian golden florin, while in 1434 this figure increased to
twenty-eightгХ яiфíХ SejbalбХ щějinyХ penězХ naХ żoravěХ [HistoryХ ofХ żoneyХ inХ
Moravia] (Brno, 1979) 173. Historians often calculate the sum of the
pledgingХ ofХ theХ SpišХ regionХ atХ anХ exchangeХ rateХ ofХ зкХ іragueХ groschenХ
equivalent to one florin, which makesХннХнееХflorinsгХыorХexampleпХяózsefХ
щeérбХ “ZsigmondХ királyХ honvédelmiХ politikája”Х [źingХ Sigismund’sХ
щefenseХіolicy]бХHadtörténelmiХźözleményekХимХĐжоилЮХжойгХTheХbasisХofХ
thisХcalculationХisХprobablyХtheХchronicleХofХSpišskáХSobotaХandХtheХearliestХ
transcriptionХofХtheХcharterХofХtheХpledgingХĐжкозЮгХźálmánХщemkóбХedгбХцХ
szepes-szombatiХkrónikaХ[TheХшhronicleХofХSpišskáХSobota]ХĐŻрcseбХжножЮХ
31. DL 9984. ZSO I. 2897. There is no data about the exchange rate from
the year of the pledging (1412), the closest year with available data is 1409
when twenty-three Prague groschen was worth one Hungarian florin.
SejbalбХщějinyХpenězбХжмигХшalculatingХwithХthisХfigureбХимХеееХgroschenХisХ
equivalentХtoХолХкзжХflorinsгХіálХъngelХcalculatedХtheХsumХofХtheХtransaction
at a twenty-two Prague groschen exchange rate, which makes 100 000
florinsгХ іálХ ъngelбХ TheХ RealmХ ofХ StХ StephenпХ цХ HistoryХ ofХ żedievalХ
Hungary, 895–1526 (London, 2001) 228.
4 It is understandable that Sigismund did not prefer fixed-term
transactions since they jeopardized his property right over the pledged
domainгХ яánosХ юnczeбХ “TheХ іledgeХ іolicyХ ofХ źingХ SigismundХ ofХ
Luxembourg in Hungary (1387–жйимЮб”ХinХżoneyХandХыinanceХinХшentralХ
266
Hungaro-Polonica
deemedХ whenХ theХ debtХ wasХ paidХ offгХ TheХ SpišХ regionХ reв
mained unredeemed until 1772 when it was re-incorporated
into Hungary on the occasion of the first partition of Poland.5
The history of the region is discussed in abundant Hun-
garian and international literature; as early as the nineteenth
century seminal books were written about its past, and there
areХseveralХworksХonХSigismund’sХpledgingХspecifically.6 The
present article deals with the transaction itself, more pre-
cisely it focuses on issues that have not been adequately ad-
dressed to date. These concern the international background
of the pledging, the preliminary negotiations, the place of
Europe during the Later Middle Ages, ed. R. Zaoral (Basingstoke, 2016)
96.
5 There were a number of later attempts to redeem the region, but they
were all without success. Of course, even Sigismund would not have
thoughtХatХtheХtimeХofХconcludingХtheХcontractХthatХtheХSpišХregionХwouldХ
remain in pledge for so long. He also tried to get it back during the Council
of Constance but he failed, probably because heХrefusedХtoХpayХforХitгХŻászlóХ
іósánбХ“ZsigmondХésХaХNémetХŻovagrend”Х[SigismundХandХtheХTeutonicХ
Order]бХHadtörténelmiХźözleményekХжжжХĐжоонЮХлйнг
6 Just to mention some of the most important works: Ilyefalvi, A
ŻengyelországnakХ elzálogosítottрХ ыrigyesХ SvábyбХ цХ ŻengyelországnakХ
elzálogosítottХ XюююХ szepesiХ városХ történeteХ [TheХ HistoryХ ofХ theХ ThirteenХ
TownsХ ofХ SpišХ іledgedХ toХ іoland]Х ĐŻрcseбХ жнокЮгХ цntalХ NagyХ ыeketeбХ цХ
SzepességХ területiХ ésХ társadalmiХ kialakulásaХ [TheХ TerritorialХ andХ SocialХ
ыormationХ ofХ theХ SpišХ Region]бХ ĐчudapestбХ жоийЮгХ юnХ HungarianХhistorio-
graphy the history of the region does not receive as much attention as
previously. More recent contributions are written by Slovak and Polish
researchers: RyszardХьładkiewiczХandХHomzaХżartinбХTerraХScepusiensisпХ
stanХbadańХnadХdziejamiХSpiszuХ[TerraХScepusiensisпХTheХstateХofХresearchХ
onХ theХ historyХ ofХ Spiš]Х ĐŻevoča– WrocławбХ зееиЮрХ ZuzanaХ źollárováбХ
“SpišskéХmestáХvХpoзskomХzálohuХĐжйжз–жммзЮ”Х[TheХTownsХofХSpišХinХtheХ
Polish Pledge] (Ph.D. diss., Comenius University) (Bratislava, 2006);
Martin Homza – StanisławХSrokaбХHistoriaХScepusiiбХvolгХжбХщejinyХSpišaХdoХ
rokuХжкзлХ[TheХHistoryХofХSpišХuntilХжкзл]б (Bratislava, 2009).
267
Hungaro-Polonica
reaching the agreement, and the receipt and use of the
money of the pledging.
The Spiš region and international politics
The pledging of the region in 1412 was in correlation with
contemporary international political events, primarily with
the conflict between Poland-Lithuania and the Teutonic Or-
der, and indirectly with the outcome of the Battle of Grun-
wald (Tannenberg, 15 July 1410). The battle was a key event
ofХtheХ“greatХwar”ХĐmagnus conflictus 1409–1411)7 fought be-
tween the above mentioned parties, in which the united
forces of Poland-Lithuania achieved a crushing victory over
the Teutonic knights. Following the battle, the troops of the
Polish-Lithuanian union were conquering the Teutonic Or-
der’sХterritoryХstepХbyХstepбХevenХtheХorder’sХcapitalХżarienв
burg was laid under siege, and the fate of Prussia and of the
whole chivalric order depended on its defense. However, the
long siege lasting several weeks was not successful, partly
dueХ toХ HenrichХ vonХ іlauen’sХ competenceгХ WhenХ theХ
grandmaster of the order, Ulrich von Jungingen, died on the
battlefield, Plauen organized the defense of the capital suc-
cessfully – which contributed to gaining back territories later
7 About the causes of the war andХtheХeventsХleadingХupХtoХitбХseeХŻászlóХ
іósánбХ“цХNémetХŻovagrendХésХlengyel-litvánХállamХközöttiХ‘nagyХháború’Х
(1409–жйжжЮб”Х [TheХ “ьreatХ War”Х betweenХ theХ TeutonicХ OrderХ andХ theХ
Polish-Lithuanian Union (1409–жйжжЮ]бХ HadtörténelmiХ źözleményekХ жзйХ
(2011) 3–17; Sven Ekdahl, Die Schlacht bei Tannenberg 1410:
quellenkritische Untersuchungen (Berlin, 1982); Rimvydas Petrauskas,
Grischa Vercamer and Werner Paravicini, eds, Tannenberg – Grunwald –
Zalgiris 1410: Krieg und Frieden im späten Mittelalter (Wiesbaden, 2012).
268
Hungaro-Polonica
– and was elected as the new grandmaster.8 At the beginning
of the following year the First Peace of ToruńХĐThornЮХendedХ
the war and prescribed territorial and financial obligations
for the Teutonic knights. As part of their territorial obliga-
tion, the Teutonic knights had to return Samogitia
ĐŽemaitijaЮХtoХŻithuaniaХĐonlyХforХtheХlifetimeХof Wladislav II
and the Grand Duke Vytautas), and the Dobrin lands, occu-
pied during the war, to Poland. The financial prescription
consisted of the huge sum of 100 000 schock Prague groschen
(around 260 000 golden florins) indemnity, and paying ran-
som for releasing the captives and for conceding the occu-
pied castles.9 Later the fate of the Spiš region became tied to
settling the indemnity in four installments.
The Battle of Grunwald not only temporarily ended the
conflict between the Polish-Lithuanian Union and the Teu-
tonic Order but created a new international environment
which transformed the Polish-Hungarian relations. Until the
battle relations of the two countries were burdened by a
number of factors. Sigismund probably remembered both
his failure to gain the Polish throne and the Polish troops
8 іósánбХ“цХNémetХŻovagrendб”Хзи–24; William L. Urban, Tannenberg and
After: Lithuania, Poland, and the Teutonic Order in Search of Immortality
(Chicago, 1996) 160–170.
9 Urban, Tannenberg and After, 171–жмзрХіósánбХ“цХNémetХŻovagrendб”Х
26–змрХюdХ“ZsigmondХésХaХNémetХŻovagrendб”ХлйзгХThe text of the peace
treatyпХъrichХWeiseбХщieХStaatsverträgeХdesХщeutschenХOrdensХinХіreußenХ
im 15 Jahrhundert, vol. 1, 1398–1437 (Marienburg, 1970) 85–89. The Peace
ofХToruńХisХusuallyХpresentedХinХіolishХhistoriographyХasХaХcompromiseгХ
Poland benefited financially from the peace treaty – they wanted to crush
the Teutonic Order through the indemnity – but had no territorial gain.
Zenon Hubert Nowak, “юnternationaleХSchiedsprozesseХalsХeinХWerkzeugХ
derХіolitikХźönigХSigismundsХinХOstmittel- und Nordeuropa. 1411–жйзкб”Х
чlätterХfürХdeutscheХŻandesgeschichteХжжжХĐжомкЮХжмлгХ
269
Hungaro-Polonica
conquering Red Ruthenia at the beginning of his Hungarian
reign. As a result, the voivodes of Wallachia and Moldavia
renounced Hungarian suzerainty and accepted the Polish
king as their overlord. The conflict was deepened by the
death of Queen Mary in 1395, which was followed by the in-
cursion of Polish contingents in the Spiš region giving a
greaterХimpetusХtoХtheХіolishХїueenХяadviga’sХclaimХforХtheХ
Hungarian throne.10 In addition, the fact that the Luxem-
burgs traditionally had good relations with the Teutonic Or-
der, and Sigismund was no exception, was another source of
conflict. Sigismund regularly relied on the financial support
of the Teutonic knights to achieve his political goals,11 and
expectedХtheХorder’sХsupportХtoХgainХtheХtitle of the king of
the Romans. No wonder then that he sided with the knights
inХtheХ“greatХwar”, forging an alliance with them in 1409, and
as a consequence Hungarian troops led by Stibor of Stiboricz
10 There were attempts to harmonize the relationship between the two
countries, for example, a meeting of the two rulers was organized which
improved the rapport temporarily. However, it dramatically deteriorated
again following the outbreak of the war with the Teutonic knights.
NorbertХ шгХ TóthбХ “ZsigmondХ magyarХ ésХ ююгХ UlászlóХ lengyelХ királyХ
személyesХ találkozóiХ aХ lublóiХ békeХ utánХ Đжйжз–жйзйЮ”Х [TheХ іersonalХ
żeetingsХ ofХ źingsХ WladislavХ ююХ andХ SigismundХ afterХ theХ іeaceХ ofХ StaráХ
жubovňaХ Đжйжз–жйзйЮ]бХ TörténelmiХ SzemleХ клХ ĐзежйЮХ иио–ийерХ іósánбХ
“ZsigmondХésХaХNémetХŻovagrendб”Хлий–636; NorbertХшгХTóthбХ“цzХжиокгХ
éviХ lengyelХ betörésпХ aХ lengyel-magyarХ kapcsolatokХ egyХ epizódja”Х [TheХ
Polish Incursion of 1395: an Episode of Polish-Hungarian Relations], in
“HonorisХcausa”пХTanulmányokХъngelХіálХemlékéreХ[StudiesХinХtheХhonorХ
ofХіálХъngel]бХedгХTгХNeumann – ьyгХRáczХĐіiliscsaba–Budapest, 2008) 447–
485.
11 The fact that the Teutonic Order could easily overbid Poland for
Neumark, the Northern part of the Margreviate of Brandenburg, reflects
theХ extentХ ofХ theirХ financialХ resourcesгХ NowakбХ “юnternationale
Schiedsprozesseб”Х жмк–жмлрХ іósánбХ “ZsigmondХ ésХ aХ NémetХ Żovagrendб”Х
639. ZSO II. 1442, 1796–1797, 1942.
270
Hungaro-Polonica
attacked South Poland.12 Presumably, there were a number
of reasons why Sigismund was striving to normalize the re-
lations with WladislavII after the Peace of ToruńгХыirstбХwarХ
broke out with Venice and Hungarian armed forces attacked
the province of Friuli in the late autumn of 1411.13 Venice was
in alliance with Poland, and Sigismund managed to success-
fully distance Poland from Venice by improving his rapport
with Wladislav II.14 Furthermore, settling his conflict with
Poland Sigismund – elected as German king in the meantime
– could turn his attention towards such burning issues as the
fight against the Ottomans, finding a solution for the Great
12 As a response to the military campaign led by Stibor, there was a counter
expeditionХofХіolishХforcesгХTheХіolishХtroopsХattackedХStaráХжubovňaбХtheХ
sameХtownХthatХSigismundХpledgedХtoХіolandХtwoХyearsХlaterгХщvoфákováХ
щanielaбХ цХ lovagХ ésХ királyaпХ StiboriciХ StiborХ ésХ ŻuxemburgiХ ZsigmondрХ
źépekХ ésХ történetekХ egyХ középkoriХ magyarХ nemesХ életébрlХ [TheХ źnightХ
and his King: Stibor of Stiboriczi and Sigismund of Luxemburg; Moments
and Stories in the Life of a Medieval Hungarian Nobleman], (Pozsony,
2009) 286–288. According to the existing agreement between Sigismund
and the Teutonic knights, Sigismund would have had to offer military aid
only in case there had been pagan and heretical contingents in the joint
army of Poland-ŻithuaniaгХъlemérХżályuszбХźaiserХSigismund in Ungarn,
1387–1437 (Budapest, 1990) 104–жекрХ іósánбХ “ZsigmondХ ésХ aХ NémetХ
Żovagrendб”Хлйе–йжрХіósánбХ“цХNémetХŻovagrendб”Хзй–25. According to
theХinformationХofХSigismund’sХvoluntaryХchroniclerбХъberhardХWindeckeбХ
before the battle of Grunwald the order had already sent 40 000 Florins to
SigismundХforХtheХexpectedХmilitaryХhelpгХъberhardХWindeckeХemlékirataХ
ZsigmondХkirályrólХésХkorárólХ[ъberhardХWindecke’sХżemoirsХaboutХźingХ
SigismundХandХhisХцge]бХtransгХRenátaХSkorkaХĐчudapestбХзеенЮХизгХ
13 іéterХ ъг źovácsбХ “ZsigmondХ isztriaiХ hadjárata”Х [Sigismund’sХ żilitaryХ
Campaign in Istria], in цХ hadtápХ voltХ magaХ aХ fegyverпХ TanulmányokХ aХ
középkoriХhadszervezetХésХkatonaiХlogisztikaХkérdéseirрlбХedгХŻгХіósánХ– L.
VeszprémyХĐчudapestбХзежиЮХзие–231.
14 Ottokar Israel, Das Verhältnis des Hochmeisters des Deutschen Ordens
zum Reich im 15. Jahrhundert, (Marburg, 1952) 15.
271
Hungaro-Polonica
Schism, or creating the union between the Roman and the
Greek Orthodox Church.15
After the ceasefire was brokered and the negotiations be-
tween the magnates of the two countries were over, the two
rulersХ metХ inХ personХ inХ StaráХ жubovňaХ ĐŻublóЮХ whereХ theyХ
concluded the peace in March 1412. The negotiations contin-
uedХ inХ źošiceХ ĐźassaЮбХ whereбХ probablyХ uponХ Sigismund’sХ
proposal, Wladislav II invited Sigismund to be the adjudica-
tor in the dispute between him and the Teutonic Order.16
These hostilities were rekindled because the knights man-
aged to pay only half of the 100 000 schock Prague groschen
prescribed by the Peace of ToruńХandХfailedХtoХpayХtheХthirdХ
installment on time.17 Sigismund tried to prevent further es-
calation of the dispute by this intervention.
15 іósánбХ“ZsigmondХésХaХNémetХŻovagrendб”ХлйирХNowakбХ“юnternationaleХ
Schiedsprozesseб”ХжмлгХ
16 The role of the adjudicator in an international conflict was not entirely
new for Sigismund. He gave advice to his brother King Wenceslas IV on
his decision of 8 February 1410 concerning another chapter of the conflict
between the Teutonic Order and Poland-Lithuania. Adam Szweda, Polish
and Teutonic Diplomatic Activity in Europe during the Conflict of 1409–
1411, online document, accessed October 14, 2015, http://www.history-
.pth.net.pl/article,1; żályuszбХKaiser Sigismund, 106–107.
17 Dieter Zimmerling, Der Deutsche Ritterorden (Düsseldorf – New York,
1988) 262–263; ZenonХ HubertХ NowakбХ żiędzynarodoweХ procesyХ
polubowneХ jakoХ narzędzieХ politykiХ ZygmuntaХ ŻuksemburskiegoХ wХ
północnejХ iХ цrodkowowschodniejХ ъuropieбХ жйжз–жйзйХ [юnternationalХ
цrbitrationХasХaХіoliticalХToolХforХSigismundХofХŻuxemburgХinХNorthernХ
andХъastвшentralХъuropeХжйжз–жйзй]ХĐToruń, 1981) 25.
272
Hungaro-Polonica
The preliminary negotiations
Initially, the grandmaster of the order, Heinrich van Plauen,
did not want to accept the arbitration of Sigismund as he pre-
ferred Pope John XXIII (1410–1415). Since at this time there
was no universally acknowledged pope, and because there
was no assurance if John XXIII would make a decision more
favorable for the Teutonic knights than the Peace of ToruńбХ
Plauen in the end raised no objections against Sigismund.18
Once the delegates of both sides arrived, the negotiations be-
gan in Buda on July 5, 1412. In the meantime, the two rulers
took a tour around the country; King Wladislav II spent al-
most three and a half months in Hungary as a guest of Sigis-
mund.19 The Hungarian ruler joined the negotiating sides af-
ter the arrangements had started, and on 24 August he made
his decision public which was almost a reconfirmation of the
іeaceХofХToruńг20
The issue of the SpišХ regionХ wasХ probablyХ discussed
shortly after the decision was announced. On August 30 Si-
gismund made a promise to recover the promissory note of
the Teutonic Order, which in fact meant that he would take
overХtheХorder’sХdebtг21 Of course, typically for Sigismund,
18 Hartmut Boockmann, Johannes Falkenberg, der Deutsche Orden und
die polnische Politik: Untersuchungen zur politischen Theorie des
späterenХ żittelaltersХ ĐьöttingenбХ жомкЮХ ол–оорХ іósánбХ “ZsigmondХ ésХ aХ
NémetХŻovagrendб”Хлййг
19 шгХTóthбХ“ZsigmondХmagyarХésХююгХUlászlóХlengyelХkirályб”Хийи–347.
20 TheХtextХofХtheХіeaceХofХчudaпХWeiseбХщieХStaatsverträgeбХол–99.
21 Ignacy Zakrzewski and Jadwiga Karwaslinska, Lites ac res gestae inter
Polonos Ordinemque Cruciferorum, vol.2, 2nd edгХ ĐіoznańбХжнозЮХ ло–70;
Wilhelm Altmann, ed. Regesta Imperii XI. Die Urkunden Kaiser Sigmunds
273
Hungaro-Polonica
he demanded 62 000 in four installments for the 50 000
schock Prague groschen,22 in other words, he estimated the
value of his services at 12 000 schock groschen.23 Further de-
tails of this plan were not included in the charter, but it is
very likely that he intended to cover this debt by pledging
the SpišХregionгХSomeХsketchesХofХthisХplanХhaveХsurvivedХinХ
oneХ ofХ Sigismund’sХ booksХ ofХ lettersХ ĐBriefbuch). Altogether
three books of letters survive from Sigismund of Luxem-
burg’sХchancelleryбХwhichХcontainХtheХruler’sХpoliticalХcorreв
spondence between the years 1411–1417. These preliminary
letters are usually undated and in many cases the name of
the recipients are missing, however, they can be dated to
some extent on the basis of their content.24
1410–1437, vol. 1, 1410–жйзйХĐюnnsbruckбХжнолЮХĐhereafterХRюЮХиемaрХіósánбХ
“ZsigmondХésХaХNémetХŻovagrendб”Хлйй–645.
22 12 500 schock Prague groschen on 2 February 1413, the same amount on
2 April, 25 000 on 29 September, and finally the remaining 12 000 on 8
цprilХжйжйгХWeiseбХщieХStaatsverträgeбХоогХ
23 цsХstatedХbyХtheХinitialХplanХofХtheХtransactionХconcerningХtheХSpišХregionбХ
Sigismund would have taken over the debt of the Teutonic Order and
clearedХitХoffХbyХpledgingХ“ad instanciam eorundem dominorum cruciferorum”Х
(according to the request of the knights), DF 287745, image 55, 293r. If this
was really the case, it means that the Teutonic knights preferred to be
indebted for a larger sum to Sigismund rather to the Polish king. Michael
źüchmeisterбХtheХmarshalХofХtheХorderХĐOrdensmarschall) and the leader of
theХ order’sХ delegationХatХ чudaбХ canХ beХ suspectedХ toХ beХ behindХ theХ planбХ
because he was inclined to a peaceful resolution more than the
grandmaster who protested heavily even against the indemnity.
24 HermannХHeimpelбХ“цusХderХźanzleiХźaiserХSigismundsХĐÜberХdenХшodгХ
іalгХ ŻatгХ межХ derХ VatikanischenХ чibliothekЮб”Х цrchivХ fürХ Urkundenfor -
schung 12 (1932) 113–115.
274
Hungaro-Polonica
According to the documents in one of the letter-books,
during the negotiations25 a different plan existed for pledg-
ingХtheХSpišХregionХthanХtheХoneХthatХwasХputХinХpracticeгХThisХ
preliminary plan envisaged the pledging of the whole region
(24 privileged townsХtogetherХwithХtheХcastleХofХSpišЮбХsignifв
icantlyХ moreХ thanХ theХ thirteenХ townsХ plusХ іodolínecбХ
Hniezdne and the estate of StaráХжubovňaб agreed upon in
the end.26 Drawing up the plan was followed by phrasing
trilateral contract drafts. First, a contract was made in Sigis-
mund’sХnameХpledgingХtheХwholeХSpišХregionХtogetherХwithХ
the castle to Wladislav II until he, his heirs, or the Teutonic
knights redeem it. Secondly, another draft in the name of the
Polish king stipulated that the region pledged to him for set-
tling the debt of the Teutonic knights, would be given back
to Sigismund or his heirs once the debt was cleared off. Oth-
erwise, Sigismund and his heirs were authorized to take it
back with force and to loot Poland to collect the interest of
25 чasedХonХtheirХcontentХъlemérХżályuszХdatedХtheseХdraftХchartersХtoХtheХ
period between 24 August and 17 September 1412. These two dates are the
days of the proclamation of the adjudicatory decision and dispatching the
Hungarian delegation to Poland. Since Sigismund promised to recover the
promissory letter of the Order on 30 August, the dating of the documents
suggestedХbyХżályuszХseemsХentirelyХjustifiedгХZSOХюююгХзклк–2568.
26 “[…]Хpro debitis dominorum cruciferorum de Prussia, utpote pro tot milibus
florenorum auri quibus idem domini cruciferi serenissimo principi domino
Wladislao regi Poloniae fratri nostro carissimo secundum formam pactorum et
conventionum inter ipsos novissimo factarum obligari et teneri dinoscuntur,
castrum nostrum regale Sepesvar nuncupatum cum villis et tributis ad idem
castrum nostrum spectantibus, item XXIIII civitates terre nostre Scepusiensis
videlicet Lewtze, Kesmark… eidem domino Wladislao regi Polonie fratri nostro
carissimo eiusque successori sive regno Polonie... pro pignore seu titulo
pignoratitio posuimus tradidimus et assignavimus […]”Х– DF 287745, image
ккбХзоиrрХZSOХюююгХзклкрХżályuszбХźaiserХSigismundбХжемгХ
275
Hungaro-Polonica
the transaction.27 Finally, in the name of Grandmaster Hein-
rich von Plauen two documents were formulated, containing
different scenarios.28 One of these specified that Sigismund
was going to pledge the region for the 50 000 schock Prague
groschen debt of the order owed to Wladislav II and for the
5000 groschen owed to the Lithuanian grand duke. This
would have only bought time for settling the debt, because
the Teutonic knights would have remained indebted, except
this time to the Polish king and the grand duke and not to
Sigismund. Nonetheless, it stipulates that the knights were
obliged to pay the two installments of 27 500 schock Prague
groschen before the deadlines (December 25, 1412 and July
25, 1413), otherwise they would have had to give Neumark
(East Brandenburg) in pledge to Sigismund. Moreover, if
they had failed to pay anything, then Wladislav II would
have been entitled to conquer the territories of the order and
to keep them until the Teutonic knights recompensed Sigis-
mund. In the other scenario, the SpišХregionХwouldХhaveХbeenХ
pledged for an undisclosed sum,29 and the order would have
been indebted to Wladislav II (there is no mention of Duke
Vytautas) who was to receive the money in two parts by June
11, 1413. In the event of a total default, the knights would
have been obliged to pledge Pomerelia to Sigismund.
27 No concrete figures were given in either case, pro tot milibus florenorum
auri and pro tot sexagenis grossorum are written in the text, leaving the
possibility of defining the exact sum later (50 000 or 55 000 schock Prague
groschen). DF 287745, image 55–57, 293r, 293v; ZSO III. 2565–2566.
28 ZSO III 2567–2568.
29 Probably for 50 000 schock Prague groschen, the amount the order owed
to the Polish ruler. There is no mention of the debt to Grand Duke
Vytautas in this document.
276
Hungaro-Polonica
Equipped with these draft charters, the Hungarian dele-
gation and the legate representing the Teutonic Order at the
negotiations at Buda travelled to Poland together to consult
the Polish king about the transaction and the issue of the in-
demnityгХцsХ statedХinХ oneХ ofХ Sigismund’sХ unfinishedХcharв
ters, the unnamed members of the delegation were fully au-
thorized by him to reach an agreement with Wladislav II
about the details of the pledging.30 Polish chronicler яanХщłuв
gosz names only Archbishop John Kanizsai, the most prom-
inent member and presumably leader of the delegation.31
ArchbishopХźanizsaiХwasХ oneХ ofХ Sigismund’sХ mostХ trustedХ
adherent and adviser until he led a plot against him in 1401
and lost his offices as a result. However, they settled their
differences in 1407 and in 1412, during the Buda summit and
Sigismund praised him as indispensable for the success of
the negotiations.32 The other two members of the delegation
30 “[ггг]Х plenam et liberam expressam ac omnimodam facultatem cum praefato
domino Wladislao rege de et super circumstanciis et conditionibus
impignorationis et obligationis huiusmodi et earum occasione quoscumque
tractatus placita contractus et convenciones tractandi iniendi acceptandi faciendi
firmandi concludendiг”Х– DF 287745, image 14, 283r.
31 “Convencione supra fluvium Bug pro die sancti Michaelis tenta expedita
Wladislaus Polonie rex in Medikam processit. Quo illic diebus quindecim
comorante Sigismund Romanorum et Hungarie regis legati, videlicet Ioannes
Strigoniensis archiepiscopus et Michael Kochmeister Nove Marchie advocatus in
die sancte Hedvigis ad suam serenitatem perveniuntг”Х– Jan щługoszбХJoannis
Dlugossii Annales seu Cronicae incliti Regni Poloniae, liber decimus et
undecimus 1406–1412, ed. C. Baczkowski – F. Sikora – D. Turkowska,
(Warszawa, 1997) 210. щługosz’sХinformationХregardingХяohnХźanizsaiХandХ
the Hungarian legation is confirmed by charter evidence too. ZSO III.
2695, 3028.
32 Sigismund was not in the country in 1414 when another summit was
convoked to Buda to restore the peace between Poland-Lithuania and the
Teutonic knights, so the two royal vicars, Archbishop Kanizsai and
іalatineХ ьaraiбХ presidedХ overХ theХ negotiationsгХ шгХ TóthбХ “ZsigmondХ
277
Hungaro-Polonica
wereХіeterХіerényiбХformerХcountХofХtheХSzékelysбХandХsecretХ
chancellorХъmericХіerényiг33 The latter, thanks to his office,
belonged to the inner circle of Sigismund’sХentourageгХżoreв
over, having undertaken a number of diplomatic missions
for Sigismund, he had ample experience in the field of diplo-
macy.34 TheХtwoХіerényisХwereХfamiliarХwithХtheХSpišХregionбХ
Emeric held the castle of StaráХжubovňaХbetweenХжйенХandХ
1410,35 while Peter was the ispán (comes) of the County of SpišХ
(1402–1404).36
According to щługoszбХ theХ HungarianХ legationХ andХ theХ
representatives of the Teutonic knights met the Polish king
on 15 October at Medyka,37 where they finally agreed on the
żagyarХ ésХ ююгХ UlászlóХ lengyelХ királyб”Х ийлрХ іálХ ъngelбХ “ZsigmondХ báróiпХ
RövidХéletrajzok”Х[Sigismund’sХчaronsпХShortХчiographies]бХinХżűvészetХ
ZsigmondХkirályХkorábanХжинм–1437 [Art at the time of King Sigismund
1387–1437], ed. L. Beke – E. Marosi – T. Wehli (Budapest, 1987) 424–425.
33 ZSO III. 2695.
34 Presumably, he was first sent to the Turkish dukes of Asia Minor, then
toХSüleymanХÇelebiбХtheХsonХofХSultanХчayezidХюгХъngelбХ“ZsigmondХbáróiб”Х
йинрХżályuszбХKaiser Sigismund, 101–102.
35 іálХъngelбХźirályiХhatalomХésХarisztokráciaХviszonyaХaХZsigmondХkorbanХ
(1387–1437) [The Relationship of Royal Power and Aristocracy in the
Sigismund Era (1387–1437)] (Budapest, 1977) 132–133.
36 іálХъngel, żagyarországХvilágiХarchontológiájaХжиеж–1457 [The Secular
Archontology of Hungary 1301–1457], vol. 1 (Budapest, 1996) 197.
37 See footnote 31. It is, therefore, more reasonable to believe that Medyka
in Poland was the place where the Hungarian delegation reached common
termsХwithХtheХіolishХkingХconcerningХtheХSpišбХcontraryХtoХearlierХclaimsХ
ofХhistoriansХsuggestingХthatХthisХhappenedХinХStaráХжubovňaХorХNiedzicaгХ
ыorХexampleбХaccordingХtoХыrigyesХSvábyбХSigismundХconvincedХWladislavХ
II about the pledging inХStaráХжubovňaХwhereХtheyХmetХafterХtheХіolesХhadХ
alreadyХ handedХ overХ theХ moneyгХ SvábyбХ цХ ŻengyelországnakХ elzálogo -
sítottбХлкгХżichalХSuchýХwasХofХtheХsameХopinionгХżichaelХSuchýбХ“SpisskeХ
mestaХ vХ polskomХ zalohu”Х [TheХ TownsХ ofХ theХ SpišХ RegionХ inХ theХ іolish
Pledge], in Spisske mesta v stredoveku, ed. R. Marsina (źošice, 1974) 57. I
wouldХlikeХtoХthankХStanislavХчártaХforХhelpingХmeХinterpretХtheХtextг
278
Hungaro-Polonica
terms of the pledging. Once the agreement was concluded,
the delegation led by Archbishop Kanizsai, lavished with
gifts from Wladislav II, travelled back to Hungary.38 At that
time, Sigismund was preparing to participate personally in
the military campaign against Venice. The archbishop of
Esztergom and his company met Sigismund at Zagreb,39
where they informed him about the outcome of their mission
andХtheХkingХissuedХtheХcharterХofХpledgingХtheХSpišХregionХ
to Wladislav II on November 8.40
Collecting and spending the money of the pledging
There are two prevailing opinions in modern historiography
regarding the expenditure of the money received.41 The more
widely accepted speculation is that Sigismund spent the
money on the war against Venice – ultimately in vain, be-
cause the city state emerged victorious from the conflict.42
The war was expensive, therefore it is entirely justified to
38 “Ioannes itaque archiepiscopus Strigoniensis legacione sua votive perfunctus
plurimisque et notabilibus donis per Wladislaum Polonie regem honoratus in
Hungariam revertebaturг”Х– Joannis Dlugossii Annales, 211.
39 źovácsбХ“ZsigmondХisztriaiХhadjárataб”ХзизрХіálХъngelХ– NorbertХшгХTóthбХ
Itineraria regum et reginarum (1382–1438) (Budapest, 2005) 95.
40 Several barons and prelates sealed the charter of the pledging, including
theХmembersХofХtheХdelegationХsentХtoХіolandбХъmericХandХіeterХіerényiбХ
and John Kanizsai. DL 9984. The original document is preserved in
źrakówбХ żuzeumХ NarodoweбХ чibliotekaХ шzartoryskichбХ іerg. nr. 294. I
would like to thank to іфemyslХчar for this information.
41 TheХ charterХ ofХ theХ pledgingХ isХ silentХ aboutХ Sigismund’sХ plansХ forХ theХ
money. DL 9984.
42 żályuszбХKaiser SigismundбХжжлрХюvanХшhalupeckýбХ“щieХZipserХStädteХ
im 13–жлгХ яahrhundertб”Х HistoriaХ urbanaХ кХ ĐжоомЮХ нл–нмрХ źovácsб “Zsig-
mondХisztriaiХhadjárataб”ХзйкрХSuchýбХ“SpisskeХmestaб”Хкм–58.
279
Hungaro-Polonica
correlate the money raised by the pledging with covering the
costs of the war. Others suggest that the Saint Sigismund
Provostry of Buda was erected from the money raised from
the transaction. This probably lived on vividly in the
memory of later generations, for example, sixteenth-century
HungarianХ lyricistХ andХ poetХ SebestyénХ “Żantos”Х ĐżinstrelЮХ
TinódiХreferredХtoХitХinХoneХofХhisХsongs.43 The provostry was
built for years after Pope John XXIII gave his consent to Si-
gismund’sХinitiativeХtoХfoundХaХnewХchurchХinХжйжег44 In my
opinion, neither of these two explanations can be excluded
definitively.45 While there are convincing arguments for
both, I think there was a possible third project on which Si-
gismund might have spent the capital of the pledging.
In Poland the negotiating sides managed to reach an
agreement not only concerning the pledging, but they also
settled the issue of the TeutonicХOrder’sХdebtг46 This was the
reasonХ whyХ theХ order’sХ representativesХ accompaniedХ theХ
43 SebestyénХTinódiбХ“ZsigmondХkirályХésХcsászárnakХkrónikájaХĐrészletЮ”Х
[The Chronicle of King and Emperor Sigismund (fragment)], in TarХŻрrincХ
pokoljárásaпХźözépkoriХmagyarХvíziókбХedгХSгХVгХźovácsХĐчudapestбХжонкЮХ
251–252.
44 ьyörgyХSzékelyбХ“цХbudaiХSzentХZsigmondХtemplomХkutatástörténeté-
hez”Х[Remarks on the Historiography of the Saint Sigismund Church in
Buda]бХчudapestХRégiségeiХииХĐжоооЮХжкг
45 ъarlierбХ цndrásХ VéghХ proposedХ thatХ besides the war against Venice,
Sigismund could have spent part of the sum of the pledging on building
the provostry. цndrásХ VéghбХ “цdatokХ aХ budaiХ kisebbХ SzűzХ żáriaбХ másХ
névenХ SztгХ ZsigmondХ templomХ alapításánakХ történetéhez”Х [Data for the
history of the foundation of the Church of Lesser Virgin Mary a.k.a.
шhurchХofХStХSigismund]бХчudapestХRégiségeiХииХĐжоооЮХзкг
46 As stated in a letter by Sigismund from December 1412, the agreement
regarding the indemnity was one of the primary aims of the joint
delegation to Poland. ZSO III. 3028. sz.
280
Hungaro-Polonica
Hungarian legation to Wladislav II. The 50 000 schock Pra-
gue groschen debt of the Teutonic knights was raised to 69
400, probably because the order could not pay the third in-
stallment on time. From the 69 400 schock Prague groschen
39 400 had to be paid to Wladislav II, 5000 to Duke Vytautas
and 25 000 to Sigismund.47 The latter sum was given to him
by the Polish king, almost certainly in return for the pledging
of the SpišХ regionг48 TheХ deadlineХ ofХ payingХ WladislavХ юю’sХ
share was at the beginning of the following year. Failing to
clear the debt on time again would have meant the pledging
of Neumark to the Polish ruler. Probably, the possibility of
taking Neumark in pledge was the reason for not giving his
consentХtoХtakeХtheХwholeХSpišХregionХinХpledgeгХWladislavХююХ
and his councilors were so sure that the Teutonic knights
would not be able to collect so much money in such short
time that they even composed the charter about taking the
region of Neumark in pledge.49
47 ZSO III. 3007, 3038; Hartmut, Johannes Falkenberg, 100; Hans Koeppen,
Die Berichte der Generalprokuratoren des Deutschen Ordens an der
Kurie, vol. 2, Peter von Wormditt (1403–жйжоЮХĐźölnбХжолеЮХжйл–147.
48 WeiseбХ щieХ StaatsverträgeбХ оорХ ZSOХ юююгХ иезлгХ The final sum of the
pledgingХ ofХ theХ SpišХ wasХ имХ еееХ schockХ іragueХ groschenбХ thereХ isХ noХ
information about the remaining 12 000 groschen. Presumably, this figure
was paid by Wladislav II and not by the Teutonic knights. Besides the 25
000 groschen, at the beginning of the year the order promised to pay 25
000 golden florins to Sigismund, but they were not able to keep their
promise during the course of the year, therefore Sigismund demanded this
sum in addition to the 25 000 groschen. ZSO III. 1506, 3007, 3038, 3125;
ZSO IV. 89, 114. Hartmut, Johannes Falkenberg, 100. Of course, it was
previously suggested that the 37 000 groschen were conceded by
Wladislav II to Sigismund from the 100 000 groschen indemnity that the
Teutonic Order had to pay him. SuchýбХ“SpisskeХmestaб” 57.
49 Ernst Lampe, “чeiträgeХzurХьeschichteХHeinrichsХvonХіlauenХжйжжХbisХ
1413,” ZeitschriftХdesХWestpreußischenХьeschichtsvereinsХзлХĐжнноЮХил–37.
281
Hungaro-Polonica
Sigismund entrusted Florentine businessman Onofrio di
Bardo, initially in the service of Filippo Scolari, with the col-
lection of the 25 000 schock Prague groschen and sorting out
the remaining issues regarding the payment.50 The Teutonic
knights had to pay the sum in two equal installments to di
Bardo but because of their many financial obligations they
were not able to do so on schedule.51 The deadlines were Feb-
ruary 2 and April 2, 1413;52 Grandmaster Heinrich von
Plauen was expecting the Landmeister of the Holy Roman
Empire (the German country master of the order) to put up
half of the sum, but even in March 1413 he wrote to him that
this was impossible.53 Seeing how difficult it was for the or-
der to keep the first deadline, Sigismund agreed to a new
The text of the charter: ZSO III. 3028; WeiseбХщieХStaatsverträgeбХжезгХThe
charter was phrased in vain because the order managed to clear the debt
on time. ZSOХюVгХжжйрХіósánбХ“цХNémetХŻovagrendб”Хзмг
50 Onofrio di Bardo later held the position of the comes of the chambers
severalХtimesХandХheХlaidХtheХfoundationХofХhisХsons’ХĐtheХNoffryХbrothersХ
ofХчajmócпХяacobбХŻeonardбХяohnХandХчardoЮХfinancialХcareerХinХtheХcountryгХ
żártonХ ьyöngyössyбХ “żagyarХ pénztörténetХ Đжеее–жкзлЮ”Х [HungarianХ
Monetary History (1000–жкзлЮ]бХ inХ żagyarХ középkoriХ gazdaság- ésХ
pénztörténetбХedгХżгХьyöngyössyХĐчudapestбХзеелЮХзкк ; Krisztina Arany,
“ыlorentineХ ыamiliesХ inХ HungaryХ inХ theХ ыirstХ HalfХ ofХ theХ ыifteenthХ
шenturyб”ХіhгщгХdiss., Central European University, 2014, 42, 48; Zsuzsa
TekeбХ “ыirenzeiХ kereskedрtársaságokбХ kereskedрkХ żagyarországonХ
ZsigmondХ uralmánakХ megszilárdulásaХ utánХ жйей–жйим”Х [ыlorentineХ
Business Companies and Merchants in Hungary after the Consolidation
of Sigismund’sХRuleХжйей–им]бХSzázadokХжзоХĐжоокЮХзек–207.
51 A letter of the grandmaster sent to the Landmeister of Livland at the end
ofХжйжзХaptlyХreflectsХtheХtheХorder’sХsituationХatХtheХtimeгХюnХthisХheХwritesХ
that the chalices and reliquaries had already been sold or smelted down,
but even this was not enough so he asks the Landmeister to send him more
gold and silver because there was no precious metals left in his province.
ZSO III. 3125.
52 WeiseбХщieХStaatsverträgeбХоор ZSO III. 3026.
53 ZSO III. 3007; ZSO IV. 262.
282
Hungaro-Polonica
deadline and sent di Bardo to negotiate the date with them.54
As a result, the February deadline was extended to 8 March,
however, the order was able to make the first payment only
on 5 April.55 There is no data regarding the exact date of the
second payment. Sigismund was still demanding it in Sep-
tember,56 but received it only around the end of the year or
at the beginning of the following year.57 Although there is no
direct information about using the whole sum, there are
some details about what half of it was spent on.58 Namely, in
his letter addressed to Heinrich von Plauen on May 17, 1413,
Sigismund writes that he still had not received the 12.500
schock Prague groschen, which he intended to spend on his
coronation. For this reason, Sigismund had to borrow this
sum from Antonio Fronte and from that point on Heinrich
54 ZSO IV. 61, 62.
55 Similarly to the precomposed charter of pledging of Neumark, a series
of acquittances were phrased in the name of Sigismund and Wladislav II
about collecting the sums of 12 500–12 500 schock Prague groschen.
Wilhelm Altmann, ed. RI XI 382; ZSO III. 3059; ZSO IV. 113, 125, 131.
Obviously, the existence of these acquittances does not mean that these
payments really happened. Adding all the figures of these documents
would yield a sum much higher than the amount of money the order was
obliged to pay. Even though Sigismund demanded the entire sum of 25
000 groschen in February, he wrote in May that he still had not received
half of the sum. ZSO IV. 243, 601. Erich Weise also discredits these
documents. He believes that the date of the first payment was April 2,
1413. WeiseбХ щieХ StaatsverträgeбХ жеег Onforio di Bardo issued an
acquittance about 12 500 groschen on 5 April, according to which he
collectedХtheХmoneyХinХSigismund’sХnameХinХtwoХplacesбХinХWrocławХandХ
ToruńгХZSOХюVгХио3.
56 ZSO IV. 1032.
57 ZSO IV. 1478. WeiseбХщieХStaatsverträgeбХжеегХ
58 Likewise, there is no indirect data about the spending of the 12 000
schock Prague groschen either. See footnote 48.
283
Hungaro-Polonica
von Plauen owed Fronte and not him.59 Sigismund spent the
rest of 1413 in Northern Italy and was crowned as king of the
Romans in Aachen on November 8, 1414, over one year after
sending this letter.60 Sigismund must have been in great need
ofХыronte’sХloanХlentХhimХinХыriuliбХotherwiseХheХwouldХnotХ
have borrowed it under unfavorable conditions. This indi-
cates that he probably had already spent the money before
leaving Italy. All these details raise the question how the sum
contributed (or could have contributed) to his coronation
later,61 however, the available source material does not allow
us to draw further conclusions.
59 “[…]Х und unser sachen zu unser cronunge domit [12 1/2 tuasent schock
Behemischer] bestalt haben wollten […]“Х– WilhelmХцltmannбХ“UrkundlicheХ
чeiträgeХzurХьeschichteХźaiserХSigmundsб”ХżitteilungenХdesХюnstitutsХfürХ
ÖsterreichischeХьeschichtsforschungХжнХĐжномЮХкоерХZSO IV. 601. Just like
many of his compatriots, Florentine merchant Antonio Fronte arrived in
Hungary in 1406 with the help of Filippo Scolari. The son of textile
manufacturer Pietro Fronte later became a burgher of Buda, a familiaris of
the king and the creditor of Scolari and Sigismund. Teke, “Firenzei
kereskedрtársaságokб” 195–жолрХ цranyбХ“ыlorentineХ familiesб”Хлй–69, 87–
88. As creditor, he is likely to have charged heavy interest on the sums he
lent, otherwise Sigismund would not have complained in his same letter
of 17 May that the transaction with Fronte wasХconcludedХ“[ггг]Х nich mit
kleinem unserm schaden gemachet [ггг]”гХХ
60 Itineraria, 96.
61 If Sigismund really wanted to expend the money of the pledging on his
coronation, then the 12 500 schock Prague groschen would covered only a
fracture of his total expenses. The costs of his imperial coronation of 1433–
1434 were 15 000 golden florins. Eberhard Inseman, “The Holy Roman
ъmpireХinХtheХżiddleХцgesб”Хin The Rise of the Fiscal State in Europe c.
1200–1815, ed. R. Bonney (Oxford, 1999) 260–261. Obviously the
coronation in Aachen was less expensive than one in Rome, which was
among the many reasons why he did not have to travel to the Eternal City.
284
Hungaro-Polonica
Summary
The pledging of the Spiš region was part of renegotiating
Hungarian-Polish relations and it was closely related to the
indemnityХsetХoutХinХtheХыirstХіeaceХofХToruńгХюnХtheХalteredХ
political environment after the Battle of Grunwald, Sigis-
mund of Luxemburg – eager to become king of the Romans
and involved in a serious conflict with Venice – reassessed
his politics regarding Poland and sought to improve it sig-
nificantly. Therefore, first the magnates then the two rulers
met in person. At the latter meeting Sigismund invited the
Polish ruler to visit Hungary, and the Polish king invited him
to be the adjudicator in the conflict between the Polish-Lith-
uanian Union and the Teutonic Order. The order could not
payХtheХindemnityХstipulatedХinХtheХіeaceХofХToruńбХsoХtheХ
conflict was liable to flare up again any time. This debt stood
at the heart of the conflict; Sigismund hoped that through his
intervention he might get some of the money himself. There-
fore, at the Buda summit, while seeking a resolution for the
conflict, he also brought up the possibility of pledging the
Spiš region even though, according to the preliminary plan,
the whole Spiš region would have been pledged if the Hun-
garian ruler had taken over the debt of the Teutonic Order.
The two cases were both resolved in Poland where the Hun-
garianХ delegationХ andХ theХ order’sХ representativesХ hadХ aХ
chance to make an agreement with the Polish king Wladislav
II. The larger part of the funds raised by pledging the Spiš
region was paid by the order to Sigismund in the course of
the year 1413, which – besides spending it on the war with
285
Hungaro-Polonica
Venice and building the Saint Sigismund Provostry – he in-
tended to spend on the preparations of his coronation in Aa-
chen.
The pledging of the Spiš region is one of the most well-
known financial transactions in medieval Hungary and as
such it has received a great deal of attention. However, as
demonstrated by this brief overview of the transaction and
its circumstances, essential questions remain unanswered
and further research is necessary regarding a number of im-
portant issues relating to the pledging and its long afterlife.
286
Hungaro-Polonica
ыigгХжгХTheХpledgedХSpišХregionХacordingХtoХtheХinitialХplanХ
(cross-hatched): 24 privileged towns together with the cas-
tleХofХSpiš.62
62TheХmapsХhaveХbeenХcreatedХwithХtheХhelpХofХtheХcomputerХprogramпХіálХ
ъngelбХ żagyarországХ aХ középkorХ végénпХ digitálisХ térképХ ésХ adatbázisХ aХ
középkoriХżagyarХźirályságХtelepüléseirрlХ[HungaryХinХtheХŻateХżiddleХ
Ages: Digital Map and Database about the Settlements of the Hungarian
Kingdom] (Budapest, 2001. CDROM).
287
Hungaro-Polonica
ыigгХзгХTheХpledgedХSpišХregionХĐcross-hatched): the thriteen
townХofХSpišбХtheХtownsХofХіodolínecбХHniezdneХandХtheХesв
tateХofХStaráХжubovňaгХ
288
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibiliography
Primary sources
Altmann, Wilhelm, ed. Regesta Imperii XI. Die Urkunden Kaiser Sigmunds
1410–1437. Vol. 1, 1410–1424 (Innsbruck, 1896).
щługoszбХяanбХяoannis Dlugossii Annales seu Cronicae incliti Regni Poloniae,
liber decimus et undecimus 1406–1412, Edited by C. Baczkowski, F. Sikora, D.
Turkowska. (Warszawa, 1997).
ъberhardХWindeckeХemlékirataХZsigmondХkirályrólХésХkorárólХ[TheХżemoirsХ
of Eberhard Windecke about King Sigismund and his Age], Translated by
RenátaХSkorkaбХĐчudapestбХзеенЮг
Itineraria regum et reginarum (1382–1438). Edited by іálХъngel and Norbert
шгХTóthХĐчudapestбХзеекЮг
TinódiбХ SebestyénбХ “ZsigmondХ királyХ ésХ császárnakХ krónikájaХ ĐrészletЮ”Х [The
Chronicle of King and Emperor Sigismund (fragment)]. In TarХŻрrincХpokoljáв
rásaпХźözépkoriХmagyarХvíziókХ[ŻaurentiusХdeХTar’sХdescentХtoХhellпХżedievalХ
HungarianХvisions]бХedгХSгХVгХźovácsХĐчudapestбХжонкЮХзкж–52.
WeiseбХъrichбХщieХStaatsverträgeХdesХщeutschenХOrdensХinХіreußenХimХжкХяahrв
hundert. Vol. 1. (Marienburg, 1970).
Secondary literature
цranyбХźrisztinaбХ“ыlorentineХыamiliesХinХHungaryХinХtheХыirstХHalfХofХtheХыif-
teenthХшenturyб”ХĐіhгщгХщissгбХшentralХъuropeanХUniversityЮХĐчudapestбХзежйЮг
ъngelбХ іálбХ “ZsigmondХ báróiпХ RövidХ életrajzok”Х [Sigismund’sХ barons: Short
biographies]бХinХżűvészetХZsigmondХkirályХkorábanХжинм–1437, ed. L. Beke –
E. Marosi – T. Wehli (Budapest, 1987) 405–458.
źovácsбХ ъгХ іéterбХ “ZsigmondХ isztriaiХ hadjárata”Х [Sigismund’sХ żilitaryХ
шampaignХ inХ юstria]бХ inХ цХ hadtápХ voltХ magaХ aХ fegyverпХ TanulmányokХ aХ
középkoriХ hadszervezetХ ésХ katonaiХ logisztikaХ kérdéseirрlбХ edгХ ŻгХ іósánХ – L.
VeszprémyХĐчudapestбХзежиЮХззм–252.
юlyefalviбХ ŻajosбХ цХ ŻengyelországnakХ elzálogosítottХ XюююХ szepesiХ városХ tör-
téneteХ [TheХ historyХ ofХ theХ thirteenХ townsХ ofХ SpišХ pledgedХ toХ іoland]Х ĐżakóбХ
1906).
289
Hungaro-Polonica
żályuszбХъlemérбХźaiserХSigismundХinХUngarnбХжинм–1437 (Budapest, 1990).
NowakбХHubertХZenonбХ“юnternationaleХSchiedsprozesseХalsХeinХWerkzeugХderХ
іolitikХźönigХSigismundsХinХOstmittel- und Nordeuropa: 1411–жйзкб”ХчlätterХ
fürХdeutsche Landesgeschichte 111 (1975) 172–188.
іósánбХŻászlóбХ“ZsigmondХésХaХNémetХŻovagrend”Х[SigismundХandХtheХTeuв
tonicХOrder]бХHadtörténelmiХźözleményekХжжжХĐжоонЮХлие–656.
іósánбХ Żászlóб “цХ NémetХ ŻovagrendХ ésХ lengyel-litvánХ államХ közöttiХ ‘nagyХ
háború’ХĐжй09–жйжжЮб”Х[TheХ“ьreatХWar”ХbetweenХtheХTeutonicХOrderХandХtheХ
Polish-Lithuanian Union (1409–жйжжЮ]бХ Hadtörténelmi źözleményekХ жзйХ
(2011) 3–17.
SejbalбХяiфíбХщějinyХpenězХnaХżoravěХ[TheХHistoryХofХżoneyХinХżoravia]ХĐчrnoбХ
1979).
SuchýбХżichaelбХ“SpisskeХmestaХvХpolskomХzalohu”Х[TheХTownsХofХtheХSpišХinХ
іolishХ іledge]гХ inХ SpisskeХ mestaХ vХstredovekuХ [TheХ townsХ ofХ theХ SpišХ inХ theХ
Middle Ages], ed. R. Marsina (źošiceб 1974) 55–87.
SvábyбХыrigyesбХцХŻengyelországnakХelzálogosítottХXюююХszepesiХvárosХtörténeteХ
[TheХHistoryХofХtheХThirteenХTownsХofХSpišХіledgedХtoХіoland]ХĐŻevoča, 1895).
SzékelyбХ ьyörgyбХ “цХ budaiХ SzentХ ZsigmondХ templomХ kutatás-történetéhez”Х
[Remarks on the Historiography of the Saint Sigismund Church in Buda],
чudapestХRégiségeiХииХĐжоооЮХжк–17.
TekeбХ ZsuzsaбХ “ыirenzeiХ kereskedрtársaságokбХ kereskedрkХ żagyaror-szágonХ
ZsigmondХ uralmánakХ megszilárdulásaХ utánХ жйей–им”Х [ыlorentineХ чusinessХ
шompaniesбХ żerchantsХ inХ HungaryХ afterХ theХ шonsolidationХ ofХ Sigismund’sХ
Rule 1404–им]бХSzázadokХжзоХĐжоокЮбХжок–214.
TóthбХшгХNorbertбХ“ZsigmondХmagyarХésХююгХUlászlóХlengyelХkirályХszemélyesХ
találkozóiХ aХ lublóiХ békeХ utánХ Đжйжз–жйзйЮ”Х [TheХ іersonalХ żeetingsХ ofХ źingsХ
WladislavХ ююХ andХ SigismundХ afterХ theХ іeaceХ ofХ StaráХ жubovňaХ Đжйжз–1424)].
TörténelmiХSzemleХклХĐзежйЮбХиио–356.
Urban, William L, Tannenberg and After: Lithuania, Poland, and the Teutonic
Order in Search of Immortality (Chicago, 1996).
VéghбХцndrásбХ“цdatokХaХbudaiХkisebbХSzűzХżáriaбХmásХnévenХSztгХZsigmondХ
templomХalapításánakХtörténetéhez”Х[Data for the History of the Foundation
of the Church of Lesser Virgin Mary a.k.a. Church of St Sigismund], Budapest
RégiségeiХииХĐжоооЮХзк–34.
290
Tomáš Homoľa
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Polish-Hungarian Rivalry for the Bohe-
mian Crown in the 1460s*
Linkage of mutual relations of Hungarian and Polish king-
doms resulted from their location – they had joint boundary
that was created mainly by Carpathian mountain range.
Kingdom of Hungary and Kingdom of Poland were for two
short periods united into the personal union under the rule
of Angevin (1370–1382) and Jagiellonian (1440–1444) rulers.
Contacts of both countries had changeable character, they re-
sulted from different interests of kings, naturally rivalry be-
tween these two monarchies prevailed. Over the period of
rule of Hungarian king Sigismund of Luxemburg and Polish
ruler Wladislaus II Jagiello it was reflected in occasional mil-
itary clashes between these two powers.1 During the second
half of 15th century the rivalry was expressed mainly in dy-
nastic and territorial claims that affected mutual relations of
both monarchies during the rule of Matthias Corvinus
* This study was published within the project VEGA 2/0109/14: Komuni-
káciaХaХspôsobyХšíreniaХinformáciíХvХstredovekuг
1 ыorХexampleХunsuccessfulХmilitaryХexpeditionХofХSigismund´sХarmyХintoХ
Polish border territory in October 1410, which was led by the Hungarian
nobleman (of Polish origin) Stibor of Stiborice. Krzysztof Baczkowski,
щziejeХіolskiХpóѐnoцredniowiecznejХжиме–1506 [History of Poland in the
late Middle Ages (1370–жкелЮ]ХĐźrakówбХжоооЮХон–оорХщanielaХщvoфákováбХ
Rytier a jehoХ kráзХ пХ StiborХ zoХ StiborícХ a ŽigmundХ ŻuxemburskýХ [TheХ
Knight and his King : Stibor of Stiborice and Sigismund of Luxemburg]
(Budmerice, 2003) 286–288.
291
Hungaro-Polonica
(1458–1490) and Casimir IV (1447 – 1492). In this study I want
to deal with mutual relations of both mentioned kings before
they gradually escalated into the military conflict in Bohe-
mian kingdom. My objective is to focus on basis and causes
of their bilateral contention in reference to Bohemian king-
dom.
Rivalry between Matthias and Casimir resulted from cen-
tral European context of the late 1450s. In 1457 only seven-
teen years old king of Hungary and Bohemia Ladislaus IV,
called Posthumous, died. In the beginning of the following
year in both kingdoms were elected as new rulers two mag-
nates from domestic nobility (Matthias Corvinus and George
ofХіoděbradyЮг2 It happened regardless of hereditary rights
of relatives of Ladislaus the Posthumous. His blood relatives
were Saxon and Thuringian duke William, called brave,
from the House of Wettin and king of Poland Casimir IV
who had marriedХіosthumous´ХsistersХъlizabethХandХцnneХ
and therefore could have claims to the thrones. However
WilliamХdidn´tХaspireХforХHungarianХthroneбХhisХinterestХwasХ
focused mainly on acquisition of the Bohemian crown3 and
2 шzechХhistorianХяaroslavХчoubínХanalysesХjointХmarksХofХtheХaccessionsХtoХ
theХthronesХofХsoХcalledХ“nationalХkings”ХinХtheХmiddleХofХtheХжк th century
(on examples of George of іoděbradyбХ żatthiasХ шorvinusХ andХ SwedishХ
rulerХźarlХVюююХźnutssonЮгХяaroslavХчoubínбХСeskáХ„národní“ХmonarchieХпХ
źХdomácimХzdrojůmХaХevropskémuХkontextuХkrálovstvíХяiфíhoХzХіoděbradХ
[шzechХ “National”Х żonarchyХ пХ ыorХ щomesticХ SourcesХ andХ ъuropeanХ
Context of theХźingdomХofХьeorgeХofХіoděbrady]ХĐіrahaбХжоозЮХлк–83.
3 He claimed for Bohemian throne already in November 1457 and in the
following two years he tried to find the support for his candidacy.
However, in spring of 1458 at the diet in Prague George of PoděbradyХwasХ
electedХ asХ aХ newХ kingгХ VáclavХ VladivojХ TomekбХ щějepisХ městaХ іrahyХ
[History of the City Prague] vol. VI (Praha, 1906) 273–277. Later in 1459 at
council in Cheb William renounced his hereditary rights to the Bohemian
292
Hungaro-Polonica
also Casimir IV was involved in the case of Hungarian suc-
cession only in minimal way.4 Another potential successor
was Holy Roman emperor Frederick III from the House of
Habsburg who possessed crown of Saint Stephen at that
time.5 Nevertheless, also he, like other rulers from abroad,
throne in the name of his spouse and his offsprings. In this issue he signed
treatiesХ withХ ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyбХ whichХ comprisedХ alsoХ dynasticХ
weddings between both royal courts. (Marriages were realised in 1464 and
жймжЮгХ цntonínХ HaasбХ цrchivХ korunyХ českéХ volгХ VюХ пХ źatalogХ listinХ zХ let
1438–1526 [Archive of the Bohemian Crown, vol. VI : Catalogue of
Charters and Letters from Years 1438–1526] (Praha, 1958) 64–65, no. 88;
іetrХ СornejХ – żilenaХ чartlováбХ VelkéХ dějinyХ zemíХ korunyХ českéХ [ьreatХ
History of the Lands of the Bohemian crown] vol. VI. 1437–1526 (Praha –
ŻitomyšlбХзеемЮХжлн–170.
4 The effort of Jagiellon stayed only in declarative form, Polish chronicler
яohnХ щługoszХ statedХ thatХ шasimirХ юVХ hadХ sendХ hisХ envoysХ toХ bothХ
kingdoms, who expressed his claims to these thrones. яanХ щługoszбХ
RocznikiХczyliХźronikiХsławnegoХźrólestwaХіolskiegoХпХźsiegaХжзХĐжййк–
1461), ed. Krzysztof Baczkowski et al. [Annals and chronicles of famous
kingdom of Poland: Book 12 (1445–1461)] (Warszawa, 2004) 333. Polish
deputy at the election diet in Prague is mentioned in other sources.
Frederick G. Heymann, George of Bohemia : King of heretics (Princeton–
NewХ яerseyбХ жолкЮХ жкнгХ TomekбХ щějepisХ městaХ VюбХ змкгХ HoweverбХ theХ
participationХ ofХ шasimir´sХ delegateХ atХ HungarianХ electionХ councilХ isХ notХ
reflected in another texts.
5 Frederick acquired the crown in 1440 when it was put in pledge by
Hungarian queen Elisabeth, widow of Albert Habsburg and mother of
ŻadislausХ theХ іosthumousгХ чrigitteХ HallerбХ “źaiserХ ыriedrichХ undХ dieХ
Stephanskrone”бХ żitteilungenХ desХ Österreichischen Staatsarchivs 26
(1973) 100–жеирХ іeterХ źartousбХ “Habsbursko-яagelovskéХ dvojvládieХ vХ
Uhorsku v rokoch 1440–жйййХ пХ ZačiatkyХ яiskrovejХ vojenskejХ činnostiХ naХ
územíХSlovenska”Х[Habsburg-Jagiellonian Dual Rule in Hungary in 1440–
жйййХ пХ TheХ чeginningsХ ofХ яiskra´s Military Activity in the Territory of
Slovakia]бХ HistorickéХ štúdieХ зйХ ĐжонеЮХзижрХ яosefХ щeérбХ щieХheiligeХ źroneХ
Ungarns (Wien, 1966) 240.
293
Hungaro-Polonica
didn´tХmake much effort for being elected as a new Hungar-
ian or Bohemian king.6 іolishХchroniclerХяohnХщługoszХsawХ
the reason for this is that Frederick III supported aspiration
of Casimir IV of Poland,7 whose rights for throne were con-
sidered legitimate and justified, even though he participated
in the struggle for Hungarian succession only in marginal
way. He dispatched the envoys to Bohemia and Hungary in
January 1458, who had to declare Jagiellonian claims for the
thrones,8 but it was the only initiative in this issue. Activity
(or inactivity) of the king of Poland was caused mainly by
6 The most significant issues were probably problems concerning the
interior policy of emperor. After the death of king Ladislaus he had to deal
with dispute about the Austrian hereditary lands with his brother Albert
VI and cousin Sigismund of Tirol. The negotiations which were in
progress during 1458 led to conclusion of treaty, whose result was the
division of Duchy of Austria between two brothers. Border was river Enns
– Frederick gained the territory under (Lower Austria) and Albert over the
river (Upper Austria). However, the struggle between Habsburg brothers
continuedХ laterгХ цloisХ NiederstätterбХ ÖsterreichischeХ ьeschichte 1400–
1522: Das Jahrhundert der Mitte: An der Wende vom Mittelalter zur
Neuzeit (Wien, 1996) 250–251. Some historians treat the Habsburg quarrel
aboutХцustrianХlandsХasХaХmainХreasonХofХыrederick´sХpassivityХrelatingХtheХ
question of succession in kingdomХ ofХ чohemiaХ andХ HungaryгХ цndrásХ
Kubinyi, Matthias rex (Budapest, 2008) 33–34; Heymann, George of
чohemiaбХжкйгХSomeХauthorsХconsiderХasХaХmainХfactorХemperor´sХlethargyХ
and reluctancy for handling the issues concerning with aspirations for
both thronesгХ TomekбХ щějepisХ městaХ VюбХ змзрХ ыrantišekХ іalackýбХ щějinyХ
národuХčeskéhoХvolгХюVХпХźnihaХжй–15 [History of the Czech nation, vol. IV:
Book 14–15] (Praha, 1968) 301.
7 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжййк–1461) 334.
8 Emissaries stressed the demands of Casimir and his sons for both
kingdoms – asХitХisХmentionedХbyХяohnХщługoszбХcontemporaryХofХшasimirХ
юVгХ щługoszбХ RocznikiХ жзХ Đжййк–1461) 333. Polish claim, originated from
the dynastic connection of House of Habsburg and Jagiellon, is written
alsoХbyХWrocławХchronicler Peter Eschenloer. Peter Eschenloer, Geschichte
derХStadtХчreslauХvolгХюбХedгХьгХRothХĐżünsterХ – New York – żünchenХ–
Berlin, 2003) 206.
294
Hungaro-Polonica
the war between Poland and Teutonic order. However, the
importance of keeping the hereditary rights of Jagiellonian
dynasty stressed by Casimir IV, was evident in the text of
charter from 1458 addressed to newly elected king of Hun-
gary Matthias.9 In the charter Casimir considered Corvinus
as a usurper of the power in the country, Polish king re-
minded him illegitimacy of his rule and emphasized his own
hereditary rights in blood relation through Emperor Sigis-
mund and king Ladislaus.10 Polish attitude is confirmed by
wordsХofХяohnХщługoszХwhoХtreatsХżatthias´ХelectionХasХ“disв
gracefulХchoice”ХandХaddsпХ“so it is natural to wonder that Hun-
garians turned to such stupidity that they had chosen a man of un-
known origin…a prisoner and servant, whose release was not ac-
complished yetг”11 юtХisХclearХthatХіolesХapprehendedХżatthias´Х
accession to the throne as menace of their own dynastic
claims. However Casimir, unlike Emperor Frederick III,12
didn´tХ wageХ warХ againstХ шorvinusХ despiteХ ofХ appealХ fromХ
9 MDE I, 41–42, no. 29.
10 MDE I, 41. It is not clear whether Casimir meant his own brother
Wladislaus III. Jagiello (in Hungary Wladislaus I.) or Ladislaus the
Posthumous, who had been his brother-in-law.
11 щługoszХpointedХtoХtheХfactбХthatХżatthiasХwasХatХtheХtimeХofХelectionХdietХ
imprisonedХinХіragueгХщługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжййк–1461) 334.
12 WhereasХemperorХhadn´tХmade notable efforts in order to acquire Hun-
garian throne in 1458, situation changed in the following year. In February
1459 a part of Hungarian noblemen who supported Habsburg succession
in Hungary, led by palatine Ladislaus de Gara, elected Frederick III as a
newХkingХofХHungaryХinХtheХborderХcityХofХьüssingгХKarl Nehring, Matthias
Corvinus, Kaiser Friedrich III. und das Reich: Zum hunyadisch-habs-
burgischenХ ьegensatzХ inХ щonauraumХ ĐżünchenбХ жоноЮХ жкрХ źubinyiбХ
Matthias rex, 63. From that time, conflict between Matthias and Frederick
began and lasted until 1463 when peace treaty of Sopron / Wiener
Neustadt was signed.
295
Hungaro-Polonica
John Jiskra to assume the rule in Kingdom of Hungary.13 The
іolishХrulerХdidn´tХwantХtoХtakeХpartХinХthisХcaseХmainlyХbeв
cause of the war with Teutonic order that was in progress.14
юnХconnectionХwithХthisХquestionХisХinterestingХthatХщługoszХ
didn´tХ commentedХ theХ electionХ ofХ ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyХ inХ
negative way as he did in the case of Corvinus in Hungary
(In spite of ecquivalent situation in relation to the claims of
Polish royal court). Despite emphasization of Jagiellonian le-
gitimate rights for the throne, he considered George as an
influential and adequate governor of the country.15 As we
can see incompletion of dynastic ambitions of Jagiellons was
by Casimir apprehended in the case of Kingdom of Hungary
much more dramatically than in the matter of Bohemia. In-
teresting fact is that despite evident Polish disagreement
withХżatthias´ХelectionХinХHungaryбХшasimirХdidn´tХattemptХ
to reverse the course of events. It is uncertain what was the
basic reason for him – war with Teutonic order on one side
whether delaying attitude or even indecision of Polish king
in this issue.
13 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжййк–1461) 341. Jiskra later payed homage also to
the emperor as a king of Hungary (10th March 1461). Joseph Chmel,
Regesta chronologico-diplomatica Friderici III. Romanorum imperatoris
ĐregisХюVгЮХvolгХююХĐWienбХжнкоЮХинлбХnoгХинкнрХыrantišekХOslanskýбХ“TheХroleХ
ofХяohnХяiskraХinХtheХhistoryХofХSlovakia”бХHumanХцffairsХлХĐжоолЮХзн–29.
14 So called Thirteen Years' War (1453–1466). Baczkowski, Dzieje Polski,
209–222; Marian Biskup – źarolХ ьórskiбХ źazimierzХ яagiellończykпХ ZbiórХ
studiówХo іolsceХdrugiejХpołowiХXVХwiekuХ[шasimirХяagiellonпХшollectionХ
of Articles about Poland in the Second Half of the 15 th Century]
(Warszawa, 1987) 173–215.
15 HeХhadХreservationsХonlyХonХ“orthodoxy”ХofХчohemianХkingгХHoweverбХ
the tone of his speech about King George is much softer in comparison to
his harsh and disrespectful words addressed for young Hunyadi.
щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжййк–1461) 335.
296
Hungaro-Polonica
Neutral attitude of Casimir IV was a consequence of var-
ious elements, first of all country was exhausted from long-
lasting Thirteen Years' War, but also tense relations with the
Holy See led the Polish king to cautious policy.16 Further-
more, limiting factor for Casimir could be his own experi-
ence from previous effort of Jagiellons to acquire Bohemian
Kingdom. After the death of Sigismund of Luxemburg in
1438 Polish king Wladislaus III tried to enforce his younger
brother Casimir (later king Casimir IV) on Bohemian throne,
firstly by diplomatic and later also by military means on the
expense of Albert of Habsburg. However, his effort was un-
successful especially because of strong aversion of bordering
powers towards Jagiellonian candidacy (mainly German
dukes opposed).17 Exactly personal experience of the king of
Poland with strong international opposition against his own
aspiration to gain the throne could considerable contribute
to his cautious, waiting attitude and preference for gradual
diplomatic solution of situation in Bohemian kingdom. From
this point of view, it is clear that for Jagiellonians was strate-
gic objective to acquire Bohemian crown. The attempt from
16 There were controversies in the matter of occupancy of bishopric offices
inХWarmiaХandХźrakówХinХlateХжйкеsХandХbeginningХofХжйлеsгХюnХtheХendХofХ
1450s pope Calixtus III excommunicated the Polish ruler for war, which
he waged with Teutonic order. Biskup – ьórskiбХźazimierzХяagiellończykбХ
200–202 a 208–210; Janusz Smolucha, Polityka kurii Rzymskiej za
pontyfikatu Piusa II. (1458–1464) wobec Czech i krajówХ sąsiednichХ пХ
Z dziejówХdyplomacjiХpapieskiejХwХXVХwiekuХ[TheХіolicyХofХtheХHolyХSeeХ
during the Pontificate of Pius II (1458–1464). Regarding Bohemia and the
Neighbouring Countries: From History of Papal Diplomacy in the 15 th
шentury]ХĐźrakówбХзеенЮХззм–229.
17 It was a question of creating Polish-Bohemian-Hungarian personal uni-
on under the rule of JagielloniansгХСornejгХ– чartlováгХVelkéХdějinyХVюбХимбХ
52–53 (For whole course of events see pages 36–56).
297
Hungaro-Polonica
1438 was one of the demonstrations of strategy of kings of
Poland from Jagiellonian dynasty.
In 1460s the interests of Hungary and Poland met in two
stages, specifically in question of Moldavian principality18
and in the case of waging crusade against Bohemian king-
dom. DepositionХ ofХ ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyХ fromХ чohemianХ
throne became serious issue in the second half of 1460s. Con-
tention between Matthias and Casimir was gradually
demonstrated in their foreign policy, mainly in different at-
titudes in case of waging the campaign against King George
which was initiated by the Holy See.19
Besides stimulation of domestic opposition (associated in
soХcalledХіanskáХдХZelenohorskáХjednotaЮ20 against George of
іoděbradyбХtheХіopeХwasХsearchingХforХalliesХagainstХheretiв
cal ruler also among the rulers of surrounding countries. He
was thinking about suitable personality that could lead the
expedition against Bohemian kingdom. Most serious candi-
date was already during the pontificate of Pius II Polish king
Casimir IV. His claim was based on hereditary rights of his
wife Elizabeth from the House of Habsburg, daughter of
Holy Roman emperor and also Bohemian and Hungarian
18 НerbanХ іapacosteaбХ “UnХ ÉpisodeХ deХ laХ rivalitéХ polono-hongroise aux
XVeХ siècleХ пХ ŻaХ campagneХ deХ żathiasХ шorvinХ enХ żoldavieХ ĐжйлмЮбХ áХ laХ
lumièreХd´uneХsourceХinédite“бХRevueХRoumaineХd´histoireХнХĐжолоЮХолм–
979.
19 For the relations of Papal state and Bohemian kingdom at this time:
Smolucha, Polityka kurii Rzymskiej, passim. Ludwig Pastor, The history
of the popes, from the close of the Middle Ages, vol. IV (St. Louis, 1913)
119–145.
20 ыorХmoreХinformationХaboutХsoХcalledХіanskáХдХZelenohorskáХjednotaпХ
яosefХżacekбХяiфíХz іoděbradХ[ьeorgeХofХіoděbrady]ХĐіrahaбХжолмЮХжме–180.
298
Hungaro-Polonica
kingХцlbertгХцfterХsuddenХdeathХofХtheХonlyХцlbert´sХsonХŻadв
islaus the Posthumous in 1457 Elizabeth acquired legitimate
claim on vacant thrones in Bohemian and Hungarian king-
domsгХ HereditaryХ rightsХ ofХ theХ іolishХ kingХ weren´tХ quesв
tioned, on the contrary Pius II considered him as a potential
successorХofХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyХalreadyХafterХtheХabolitionХ
of the Compactata of Basel.21 In 1463 during negotiation with
envoyХofХWrocławХяohnХWeinrichХheХmentionedХtheХpossibilв
ityХofХшasimir´sХassumingХpowerХinХчohemiaг22 Weinrich de-
scribed in detail his discussion with the pope, in which Pius
II was asking for his advice in the question of potential can-
didates for assuming power in Bohemian kingdom. Pius II
addedХthatХinХtheХcaseХofХdepositionХofХьeorgeпХ“we must have
someone else, who would take the duty upon. How do you like the
king of Poland, in case he will be so strong and should rule the
countryф”23 Weinrich reminded him the activities of Jagiellon
inХіrussiaХthatХhamperХtheХsolutionХofХ“чohemianХheresy”гХ
TheХpopeХwasХawareХofХшasimir´sХproblemsХwithХwagingХwarХ
with Teutonic order (which lasted from 1453), however he
would like to see the king of Poland as the implementer of
hisХintentionsгХіius´ХaimХwasХwelcomedХmainlyХbyХtheХcityХofХ
WrocławХthatХhadХbeenХrejectingХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyХfromХ
21 цboutХ чaselХ compactsХ seeХ ыrantišekХ ŠmahelбХ “чasilejskáХ kompaktátaбХ
jejichХzpísemněníХa ratifikace“Х[The Compactata of Basel : Their Drafting
and Ratification], Studia mediaevalia Bohemica 1 (2009) 187–229.
22 Hermann Markgraf (ed.), Politische Correspondenz Breslaus im Zeit -
alter Georgs von Podiebrad, vol. II. 1463–1469. SRS IX, 6–9, no. 185.
23 Markgraf, SRS IX, 7, noгХ жнкрХ ZdeněkХ TobolkaбХ “StykyХ králeХ českéhoХ
яiфíhoХz іoděbradХs polskýmХkrálemХźazimírem”Х[TheХRelationsХofХчohe-
mianХźingХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyХwithХшasimirбХźingХofХіoland]бХСasopisХ
żaticeХmoravskéХззХĐжнонЮХжлк–166.
299
Hungaro-Polonica
the beginning of his rule and also few Polish noblemen sym-
pathizedХwithХ pope´sХ planгХ ĐeгХ gгХіolishХ envoy John of Os-
trorógЮг24
After the death of Pius II (1464) this topic became more
intensive, in 1465 Pope Paul II appealed to the Polish king
through cardinal Carvajal in order to break contacts with the
Bohemian ruler.25 In the next year he also demanded to sup-
port rebelling nobles in Bohemia and city of Pilsen.26 In con-
nection with escalation of the conflict of new pope Paul II
withХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyбХtheХpopeХrealizedХtheХimportanceХ
of ending long-lastingХwarХwithХTeutonicХorderгХThat´sХwhyХ
heХsentХpapalХenvoyХRudolfХofХRüdesheimХinХorderХtoХmediв
ate truce between both belligerent sides, which he managed
to do by conclusion the peace in Thorn in October 1466.27
Consequently Rudolf came to Casimir with offer to assume
power in the Bohemian kingdom. He underlined that the
right for the throne belonged to Jagiellons through queen
consort Elizabeth. Furthermore, pope promised help to Cas-
imir, financial support and acquisition of whole Silesia and
24 In those days representatives of WrocławХ appealedХ toХ archbishopХ ofХ
Gniezno and Polish bishops, in order to find support for them from side
ofХшasimirХюVгХяohnХofХOstrorógХassuredХenvoyХofХWrocławХыabianХHankoХ
ofХшasimir´sХfavourХinХthisХissueгХTobolkaбХ“StykyХkráleХčeského”бХжлк–166.
Polish king was frequently the target of demands from the side of
WrocławгХчiskupХ– ьórskiбХźazimierzХяagiellończykбХзелг
25 Similar appeals were addressed to another royal courts (Emperor
Fredrick, Kingdom of Hungary, Denmark etc.) Markgraf, SRS IX, 130–131,
no. 297.
26 Markgraf, SRS IX, 167–жмебХčгХизжХцбХизжХчг
27 The so called second peace of Thorn was signed on 16 th October which
ended Thirteen Years' War. Baczkowski, Dzieje Polski, 224.
300
Hungaro-Polonica
Lusatia.28 However, the king of Poland was reluctant to par-
ticipate in another military conflict after recently finished
Thirteen Years' War that economically exhausted his coun-
try.29 Furthermore, relations of Casimir with George of
іoděbradyХ inХ жйлеsХ wentХ inХ friendlyХ wayбХ fromХ жйлзХ theyХ
wereХ tiedХ withХ amicableХ treatiesХ concludedХ inХ ьłogówг30
Those are the reasons why the Polish rulerХ didn´tХ wantХ toХ
intervene against the Bohemian king at all.31
The Polish king behaved in this situation carefully and
reservedly, his attitude was basically neutral32 and de-
manded from the pope time to reconsider.33 In the beginning
of summer 1467 the pope again encouraged him to assume
theХчohemianХcrownгХшhroniclerХщługoszХwritesХaboutХunanв
imous choice of the Polish ruler or his son, also he mentions
pope´sХpromiseХofХgeneralХsupportХofХчohemianХcatholicХesв
tates (including Moravia, Silesia, Lusatia) and surrounding
powers – emperor Frederick III and also other German
28 щługoszбХ яanбХ RocznikiХ czyliХ kronikiХ sławnegoХ królestwaХ polskiegoпХ
księga 12 (1462–1480) (Warszawa, 2009) 178–180.
29 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 180; Nehring, Matthias Corvinus, 28.
30 TreatiesХofХьłogówХwereХprecededХbyХcontractsХconcludedХinХчytomХinХ
1460. Both monarchs agreed on keeping mutual friendly relations, result
ofХthisХassemblyХwasХagreementХofХfutureХdietХinХьłogówгХTobolkaбХ“StykyХ
králeХčeského”бХмй–мкрХRudolfХUrbánekбХVěkХіoděbradskýХvolгХюVпХСechyХ
zaХ panováníХ яiфíhoХ z іoděbradХ Đжйле–1464), (Praha, 1962) 356–357. For
ьlogówХagreementsХseeпХRomanХHeckгХZjazdХgłogowskiХwХжйлзХrХ[ьlogówХ
щietХinХжйлз]ХĐьłogówбХзежзЮХолгХ
31 Jӧrg Konrad Hoensch, Matthias Corvinus: Diplomat, Feldherr und
żäzenХĐьrazбХжоонЮХомг
32 Heymann, George of Bohemia, 422–423.
33 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 180.
301
Hungaro-Polonica
princes.34 However, reality was not so clear. From 1459 Bo-
hemian ruler was related with Saxon Wettins, Duke Albert
юююХ marriedХ ZdenkaбХ daughterХ ofХ ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyг35
Blood relations obliged also Ursula, first born daughter of
Albert Achilles, duke of Brandenburg, who married duke of
żünsterbergХHenryбХtheХsecondХsonХofХtheХчohemianХkingХinХ
жйлмгХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyХalsoХconcludedХallianceХwithХtheХ
House of Wittelsbach – in 1460 with Bavarian duke Louis,
called the Rich.36 Actually Louis tried to mediate a peace be-
tween Paul II and George in 1466, when he demanded from
pope to stop the process against Bohemian king and recon-
cile with him.37 Furthermore, at the diet in Nuremberg in
1467 papal legateХŻorenzoХRoverellaХalsoХdidn´tХfindХsupportХ
against Bohemian utraquists that corresponded with aims
Saxon and Brandenburg royal Houses.38 Their attitude doc-
uments content of charter of the Bohemian king in which he
thanked to Frederick II, elector of Brandenburg for his sup-
port at the diet in Nuremberg.39
34 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 199–200.
35 Alliance and wedding was concluded at the diet in Cheb in 1459.
цntonínХHaasбХцrchivХkorunyХVюбХлж–63, no. 84–нмгХіoděbradskýХsignedХatХ
the same meeting friendly treaties with the House of Hohenzollern. Ibid.,
65–66, no. 89.
36 Heymann, George of Bohemia, 220–221.
37 HoweverбХpopeХresolutelyХrejectedХthisХinitiativeгХżacekбХяiфíХz іoděbradбХ
181.
38 Nehring, Matthias Corvinus, 28.
39 Codex diplomaticus Brandenburgensis Sammlung der Urkunden,
шhronikenХ undХ sonstigenХ їuellenХ überХ dieХ ьeschichteХ der Mark
Brandenburg vol. III/1, ed. Adolph Friedrich Riedel (Berlin, 1859) 440, no.
311.
302
Hungaro-Polonica
Cohesion of mutual relations and waiting or reluctance
of single rulers was delaying the realization of military inter-
vention into Bohemian kingdom. George was deposed ruler
by the pope indeed, nevertheless maintained appeals of Paul
ююХapparentlyХweren´tХsoХstrongХforХъuropeanХmonarchsгХSitв
uation was more complicated as it had been presented by the
pope and potential military conflict with the Bohemian king
needn´tХ bringХ desirableХ benefitбХ whatХ wasХ alsoХ шasimir IV
aware of. Furthermore, George appealed to the Polish king
and through his envoy demanded from him to maintain
theirХallianceХconcludedХinХьłogówХinХжйлзХandХnotХtoХgiveХ
any kind of support to rebelling nobility and city of
Wrocławг40 Since the Polish king was requested not only by
the pope, but also from side of representatives of insurgent
aristocracyХandХcityХofХWrocławХwhoХdesiredХhisХhelpХinХtheХ
struggleХwithХtheХ“heretical”ХчohemianХkingгХHoweverбХшasв
imir assured George of maintaining mutual treaties with
condition that Bohemian ruler would also keep them.41 Re-
bellious Bohemian noblemen wanted to acquire Casimir on
their side again in summer of 1467, he reacted with sending
envoys to George. The Polish king wanted to reconcile tense
situation between the king and his opposition in his own
country and also with the pope. He required from George to
submitХ toХ іaulХ ююХ inХ theХ nameХ ofХ “шhristianХ unity”Х andХ byХ
these means to avoid planned crusade into the kingdom.42
40 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 195.
41 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 195.
42 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 204–206. Bohemian king in his answer
reprimanded baselessnessХofХtheХpapalХactivitiesХagainstХhimгХцrchivХčeskýХ
čiliХstaréХpísemnéХpamátkyХčeskéХi morawskéХ[чohemianХцrchiveХthusХOldХ
303
Hungaro-Polonica
On the other hand, some kind of support for rebellious
noblemen from Jagiellonian side is not excluded, in the letter
ofХZdeněkХŠternberkбХoneХofХtheХleadersХofХrebelsбХaddressedХ
toХяohnХofХRožmberkХauthorХmentionsХplannedХmilitaryХaidХ
from the side of the Polish king against the Bohemian mon-
arch with a manpower from thousand to four thousand
horsemen.43 In august 1467 Casimir finally rejected the offer
fromХpapalХenvoyХRudolfХofХRüdesheimХtoХleadХtheХpotentialХ
expedition. The essential argument was again exhaustion
from recently finished Thirteen Years' War in Prussia against
the Teutonic order,44 however Jagiellon behaved as an arbi-
trator between Pope Paul II and Bohemian ruler George of
іoděbradyгХцlthoughХalreadyХinХtheХwinterХofХжйлмХtriedХpaв
palХ envoyХ toХ persuadeХ theХ іolishХ kingХ forХ theХ “чohemianХ
question”ХatХtheХdietХinХWrocławбХbutХalsoХthisХattempt was
unsuccessful.45 Representatives of rebels, Polish and Bohe-
mian king took part at the diet. While deputies of Bohemian
catholic nobility confirmed themselves in searching for new
king and allies against George, objective of Polish envoys
consisted mainly in position of arbitrators of truce between
the Bohemian ruler and his domestic opposition. With this
assignment, Polish deputies Stanislaus of Ostroróg, Jacob of
щębno andХяohnХщługoszХnegotiatedХwithХtheХчohemianХkingХ
WrittenХ чohemianХ andХ żoravianХ Records]Х edгХ ыrantišekХ іalackбХ volгХ йХ
(Praha, 1846) 147–153, no. 36–37.
43 іossiblyХ ŠternberkХ exaggerates the amount of Polish support, some
auxiliary troops are not excluded from the side of Jagiellon though. Josef
źalousekХĐedгЮбХцrchivХčeskýХčiliХstaréХpísemnéХpamátkyХčeskéХi moravskéХ
[Bohemian Archive thus Old Written Bohemian and Moravian Records]
vol. 7 (Praha, 1887) 279, no. 131.
44 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 206.
45 TobolkaбХ“StykyХkráleХčeského”бХиеи–305.
304
Hungaro-Polonica
and managed to conclude a truce lasting until 28th January.46
Also this last attempt to gain support from Casimir ended
unsuccessful.
Whereas the Polish ruler rather tried to reconcile the sit-
uation in Bohemia and despite of his potential support of re-
bellious nobility his relations withХ ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyХ
went in correct way, relations of Matthias Corvinus with Bo-
hemian king gradually declined. Hungarian monarch fol-
lowed the papal line of policy, he declared to Paul II in Oc-
toberХ жйлкХ thatпХ “If against Czechs or against Turks is needed,
anyhow it is in my powers and that of my kingdom, above all they
remain and forever will remain loyal to the Holy See and your
sanctityг”47 щespiteХofХьeorge´sХeffortХtoХgetХżatthiasХinХtheХ
dispute with the pope on his side48 controversy between
these two kings were culminating. As we can see in the ra-
ther sharp correspondence between both royal courts from
46 цrchivХpražskéХmetropolitníХkapitulyХvolгХююХпХźatalogХlistinХaХlistůХz let
1420–1561 [Archive of Metropolitan Chapter of Prague, vol. II: Catalogue
of Charters and Letters from Years 1420–жклж]Х edгХ яaroslavХ ъršilХ – яiфíХ
іražákбХĐіrahaбХжонлЮХнл–87, no. 238.
47 żatthiasХ namedХ чohemiansХ asХ enemiesХ inХ thisХ letterХ “hostibus quam
Bohemi sunt“Х– żźŻХюбХжжйбХnoгХмнрХVilmosХыraknóiХĐedгЮХ“żathiae Corvini
Hungariae regis epistolae ad Romanos pontifices datae et ab eis acceptae.
żátyásХkirályХlevelezéseХaХrómaiХpápákkalХжйкн–жйое”бХżVHХюдлбХлж–62,
no. 42.
48 Negotiations in this matter took place in Trnava in September 1465, pre-
sent at the talks wereХяohnХVitézбХbishopХofХOradeaбХfromХHungarianХsideХ
and Protasius of Boskovice, bishop of Olomouc, as a bohemian deputy.
яózsefХ TelekiХ ĐedгЮбХ HunyadiakХ koraХ żagyarországonХ [TheХ цgeХ ofХ theХ
Hunyadis in Hungary] vol. XI (Pest, 1855) 153, no. 385. In 1466 Gregory of
Heimburg, German jurist in the service of the Bohemian king, wrote a
letter addressed to Corvinus, in which he formulated an apology of
ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyХ andХ pointedХ outХ theХ injusticeХ ofХ religiousХ lawsuitХ
against the Bohemian king initiated by the pope. Markgraf, SRS IX, 181–
190, no. 329.
305
Hungaro-Polonica
yearsХжйллХandХжйлмбХbasicХissueХhadХbeenХmainlyХżatthias´Х
complaintsХ aboutХ raidsХ ofХ żatthiasХ ofХ ŠternberkХ andХ otherХ
Bohemian noblemen on Hungarian land.49 Tense content of
extensive correspondence was a precursor of future military
conflict, Corvinus compared the activity and caused dam-
ages of Bohemian lords to violence committed by the Otto-
mans. Opened conflict was delayed by inner-political prob-
lems, with which Matthias struggled in 1467 – war with
bratríciХmovementбХrebellionХinХTransylvaniaбХwhichХresultedХ
in military intervention in Moldavia.50
In the end of the year 1467 after unsuccessful attempts of
Pope Paul II to persuade the Polish king and the elector of
Brandenburg to lead crusade into Bohemian kingdom51
turned Holy father his attention to Hungarian ruler Matthias
Corvinus, with whom he had counted until then mainly as a
defender against expansion of Ottoman empire.52 Also Bohe-
49 Teleki, Hunyadiak kora XI, 174–зжлбХpassimрХыraknóiбХżźŻХюбХжйй–177,
passim.
50 Rebellion in Transylvania is described by chronicler Antonio Bonfini.
цntonioХ чonfiniбХ „RerumХ UngaricarumХ decadesбХ tomusХ юVбХparsХ ю“бХ edsгХ
яózsefХыógelХ– чélaХюványiХ– ŻászlóХяuhászХĐчudapestбХжойжЮХже–15; Kubinyi,
Matthias rex, 82–84. Expedition to Moldavian principality ended
unsuccessfully, Hungarian army was defeated by the forces of Moldavian
duke Stephen the Great. Campaign also contributed to worsening Polish-
Hungarian relations, because Polish estates treated Moldavian princi-
palityХasХaХsphereХofХinfluenceХofХtheirХkingdomгХцntonínХźalousбХżatyášХ
źorvínХ Đжййи–жйоеЮХ пХ UherskýХ a českýХ králХ [żatthiasХ шorvinusХ Đжййи–
1490): HungarianХandХчohemianХźing]ХĐСeskéХчudějoviceбХзееоЮХжжм–120;
іapacosteaбХUnХÉpisodeХdeбХолм–979.
51 ъlectorХ ыrederickХ ююХ wasХ alsoХ pope´sХ candidateХ forХ a leader of the
crusade, but he rejected the offers. Codex diplomaticus Brandenburgensis
III/1, 455–458. no. 327.
52 Pastor, The history IV, 140.
306
Hungaro-Polonica
mian catholic estates had the same intention, they turned at-
tentionХtoХżatthiasХandХtheyХagreedХatХtheХdietХinХWrocławХ
in the end of 1467 that they would request the Hungarian
monarch to protect catholics in the country and to support
them in the war against George.53 In the beginning of year
1468 papal nuntius Gabriel Rangoni and bishop of Olomouc
Protasius of Boskovice were sent out with mandate from the
popeХandХ“іanskáХjednota”ХtoХOradeaХinХorderХtoХrequestХtheХ
HungarianХkingХtoХjoinХtheХbattleХwithХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyгХ
Matthias was staying there in that time after his failed expe-
dition to Moldavia.54 After previous lengthy attempts to find
a leader of the crusade, only this offer succeeded finally. It is
clear from the message of bishop Protasius addressed to pa-
pal legate RudolfХofХRüdesheimбХinХwhichХheХinformedХhimХ
about achieved result of his mission to the Hungarian ruler.55
Although apparently Matthias was not the only candidate at
that time – even in February 1468 papal envoys were offering
Bohemian crown to Frederick II, elector of Brandenburg – in
fact the Hungarian king was the only person who listened to
pope´sХappealsХtoХbeginХwarХwithХ“hereticalХчohemianХking”гХ
53 Peter Eschenloer. Geschichte der Stadt Breslau vol. ююбХedгХьгХRothХĐżün-
ster – New York – żünchenХ– Berlin, 2003) 710.
54 цntonínХźalousгХ“SlužbaХчoskovickýchХu żatyášeХźorvína”Х[TheХHouseХ
of Boskovice in Service of Matthias Corvinus], Acta Universitatis
Palackianae Olomucensis Historica 33 (2007) 88–89.
55 ыrantišekХіalackýХĐedгЮбХ“UrkundlicheХчeiträgeХzurХьeschichteХчöhmnesХ
undХ seinerХ NachbarländerХ imХ ZeitalterХ ьeorg´sХ vonХ іodiebradХ Đжйке–
жймжЮ“бХinХыontesХrerumХцustriacarum II/20 (Wien, 1860) 523, no. 440.
307
Hungaro-Polonica
Matthias reacted relatively quickly, he declared war to Vic-
torinХofХіoděbradyХinХtheХendХofХżarchХreferringХtoХallianceХ
with Emperor Frederick and mandate from Pope Paul II.56
Matthias invaded Moravia with his army and during the
year of 1468 he gradually managed to gain control of major-
ity of its territory. At this time he wanted to strengthen his
position with marriage to Hedwig Jagiellon, daughter of
Casimir IV, legitimate heiress of Hungarian and Polish
crown. Her marriage with Matthias would confirm his status
in Hungary and potentially could create basis for his aspira-
tion for Bohemian throne. Matthias sent out bishop Protasius
with assignment to propose marriage at Polish royal court in
źrakówбХ howeverХ theХ proposal was unsuccessful, because
Polish side considered the Hungarian king as an inadequate
and mainly unequal bridegroom for their royal daughter.57
ыurthermoreбХшasimirХsurelyХdidn´tХwantХtoХlegitimizeХżatв
thias´ХpositionХinХthisХwayХnotХonlyХasХaХHungarian king, but
also as a potential candidate for Bohemian crown.
56 СornejХ – чartlováбХ VelkéХ dějinyХ VюбХ зкжрХ źalousбХ żatyášХ źorvínбХ жзмгХ
Pope and emperor significantly supported Matthias in his struggle with
„чohemianХheretics“гХіaulХююХspentХforХthisХpurposeХconsiderableХamountХ
of moneyгХ ыrantišekХ чenešгХ “щepositeriaХ generaleХ dellaХ crociata”бХ
СeskoslovenskýХ časopisХ historickýХ жйХ ĐжоллЮХ мйжрХ żiriamХ HlavačkováбХ
Juraj zo Schӧnbergu : Bratislavský prepošt v službách cisára a kráзa
[George of Schönberg: Provost in the Services of the Emperor and the
King] (Bratislava, 2015) 168–169; Pastor, The history IV, 83–84. Frederick
юююХ alsoХ subsidizedХ шorvinus´Х campaignХ toХ чohemianХ kingdomгХ
HlavačkováбХяurajХzoХSchӧnbergu, 164.
57 It is a statement of contemporary chroniclers. Eschenloer, Geschichte
der Stadt II, 721. Matthias planned double wedding – his with Hedwig
and a marriage of Maximilian, son of roman emperor, with younger
шasimir´sХ daughterХ SofiaгХ щługoszбХ RocznikiХ жзХ Đжйлз–1480) 219–220.
Similar statements in literature. Nehring, Matthias Corvinus, 31.
308
Hungaro-Polonica
After successful capture of Moravia, Corvinus began new
military campaign against Bohemia itself in the beginning of
жйлоХwithХtheХobjectiveХtoХdefeatХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyгХHowв
ever, in the end of February became stand-off situation that
resulted into concludingХtheХtruceХnearХvillageХofХVilémovб58
whose goal was to sign a peace treaty later in Olomouc.
Peace negotiations took place from April to May in the same
year, the result of talks was not a peace treaty though and
instead Matthias was elected as a new king of Bohemia.
Polish representatives present at the peace diet in Olomouc
immediately protested against this course of action.59 After
his election Matthias tried to persuade again Casimir IV to
join him in the Bohemian campaign and proposed to his
daughterХHedwigХagainгХъvidenceХofХшasimir´sХreactionХisХinХ
the letter of Gregory of Heimburg from July 1469, in which
heХstatedпХ“Polish king gave King Matthias Huniad cold answer
about his daughter, also all the help rejected…”60 Attitude of Jagi-
ellonХ didn´tХ changeбХ heХ didn´tХ considerХ thisХ connectionХ
which would eventually strengthen the position of Hungar-
ian king. On the contrary he pursued the possibility of ac-
quiring Bohemian crown by means of gaining support for
claims of his own son Wladislaus from the side of George of
іoděbradyг
58 Heymann, George of Bohemia, 514–кжлрХ źalousбХ żatyášХ źorvínбХ жиж–
132.
59 Nehring, Matthias Corvinus, 37.
60 шonstantinХ HöflerгХ Das kaiserliche Buch des Markgrafen Albrecht
цchillesпХ VorkurfürstlicheХ periodeХ жййе–1470, (Bayreuth, 1850) 203–204,
no. 102. щługoszХalsoХmentionesХpotentialХmarriageХofХżatthiasХшorvinusХ
withХшasimir´sХdaughterгХщługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 248.
309
Hungaro-Polonica
SoХ likeХ inХ theХ pastбХ шasimirХ rejectedХ шorvinus´Х requestХ
again at this time, because objective of his foreign policy was
to conclude an agreement with George. He negotiated with
Bohemian king about potential succession of his son Wladis-
laus after possible death of George, who supported claims of
the Polish crown prince. The negotiations about this ques-
tion were in progress from July 1469, part of the future treaty
had to be also wedding of Wladislaus with Ludmila, daugh-
ter of the Bohemian king.61 The question of connection the
HouseХofХяagiellonХwithХtheХHouseХofХіoděbradyХresonatedХ
also in the next year, but was never realized.62
After 1470 the rivalry between Matthias Corvinus and
Casimir IV moved into the new way – military conflict. It
brought also new place of their contention, in 1471–1472
Matthias faced the invasion of Polish army in territory of
Hungary. De facto it started a new era of their mutual rela-
tions that resulted in long-lasting conflict between these two
monarchs and in state of permanent pressure between these
two Central-European powers.
Relations of the Hungarian and Polish king in 1460s were
characteristic of latent pressure that resulted primarily from
żatthias´ХelectionХasХHungarianХkingгХъvenХthoughХшasimirХ
didn´tХinvolveХin succession in Hungary, he considered Cor-
vinus´ХaccessionХasХaХdamageХofХhisХhereditaryХrightsХinХtheХ
kingdom of Hungary. Furthermore, gradual involvement of
Matthias in question of leading the crusade against George
61 щługoszбХRocznikiХжзХĐжйлз–1480) 249, 258–259.
62 For more information look at Tobolka, “StykyХkráleХčeského“бХимй–380.
310
Hungaro-Polonica
ofХ іoděbradyХ raisedХ theХ tensionХ between both rulers, be-
cause Matthias could potentially threaten eventual Jagiello-
nian succession in lands of the Bohemian crown. The acces-
sion to the throne was apparently a part of strategy of Jagiel-
lonian rulers at least from 1430s, when they militarily tried
to take over the rule in Bohemian kingdom. Casimir IV grad-
ually tried to gain Bohemian crown for his royal House by
diplomatic means, he hesitated to wage war with George of
іoděbradyХ andХ openlyХ breakХ friendlyХ treatiesХ thatХ heХ hadХ
with the Bohemian king.
Strategies of both rulers how to acquire Bohemian crown
were totally different. While Hungarian king after long-last-
ingХdiplomaticХactivityХdidn´tХhesitateХtoХgoХinХmilitaryХconв
frontationХ withХ ьeorgeХ ofХ іoděbradyбХ theХ іolishХ rulerХ
opened the door for Jagiellonian succession in Bohemia with
several diplomatic actions and treaties. Strategy of Casimir
IV finally came out as the successful one, despite of his cer-
tain indecision. After the death of king George in 1471 Casi-
mir´sХsonХWladislausХsucceededХtoХtheХчohemian throne and
actually he was elected as a new Hungarian king almost 20
years later after the death of Matthias Corvinus. At last Cas-
imir´sХforeignХpolicyХwasХsuccessfulХandХasХaХresultХitХbroughtХ
to the Jagiellonian dynasty reign over Bohemian and Hun-
garian kingdom for almost forty years.
311
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibliography
Primary sources
Codex diplomaticus Brandenburgensis Sammlung der Urkunden, Chro-
nikenХundХsonstigenХїuellenХüberХdieХьeschichteХderХżarkХчrandenburgХ
vol. III/1, ed. A. F. Riedel (Berlin, 1859).
щługoszбХ яanбХ RocznikiХ czyliХ źronikiХ sławnegoХ źrólestwaХ іolskiegoХ пХ
Ksiega 12 (1445-1461) [Annals and Chronicles of Famous Kingdom of Po-
land: Book 12 (1445-1461)], ed. K. Baczkowski et al. (Warszawa, 2004).
Eschenloer. Peter, Geschichte der Stadt Breslau vol. I–II, ed. G. Roth
Đżünster – New York – żünchenХ– Berlin, 2003).
HaasХцntonínбХцrchivХkorunyХčeskéХvolгХVI : Katalog listin z let 1438–1526
[Archive of the Bohemian Crown, vol. VI: Catalogue of Charters and Let-
ters from Years 1438–1526] (Praha, 1958).
żarkgrafбХ HermannХ ĐedгЮбХ “іolitischeХ шorrespondenzХ чreslausХ imХ Zeitв
alter Georgs von Podiebrad, vol. II 1463–жйло”бХюnХSRSХюXг
TelekiбХяózsefбХHunyadiakХkoraХżagyarországonХ[TheХцgeХofХtheХHunyaв
dis in Hungary] vol. XI (Pest, 1855).
Secondary literature
BaczkowskiбХ źrzysztofбХ щziejeХ іolskiХ póѐnoцredniowiecznejХ жиме–1506
[History of Poland in the late Middle Ages (1370–жкелЮ]ХĐźrakówбХжоооЮ.
Biskup, Marian – ьórskiб źarolбХźazimierzХяagiellończykпХZbiórХstudiówХoХ
іolsceХdrugiejХpołowiХXVХwiekuХCasimir Jagiellon: Collection of Articles
about Poland in the Second Half of the 15th Century] (Warszawa, 1987).
СornejбХіetrХ– чartlováбХżilena, VelkéХdějinyХzemíХkorunyХčeskéХvolгХVюгХ
1437–1526 [Great History of the Lands of the Bohemian crown] (Praha –
ŻitomyšlбХзеем).
Heymann, Frederick G., George of Bohemia: King of Heretics (Princeton–
New Jersey, 1965).
312
Hungaro-Polonica
HlavačkováбХ żiriamбХ яurajХ zoХ Schӧnbergu : Bratislavský prepošt v
službáchХcisáraХaХkráзaХ[ьeorgeХofХSchönbergпХіrovostХinХtheХServicesХofХ
the Emperor and the King] (Bratislava, 2015).
źalousбХцntonínбХżatyášХźorvínХĐжййи–жйоеЮХпХUherskýХaХčeskýХkrálХ[żatв
thias Corvinus (1443–жйоеЮпХ HungarianХ andХ чohemianХ źing]Х ĐСeskéХ
чudějoviceбХзееоЮ.
źubinyiбХцndrásбХżatthiasХrexХĐчudapestбХзеенЮ.
żacekбХяosefбХяiфíХzХіoděbradХ[ьeorgeХofХіoděbrady]ХĐіrahaбХжолмЮ.
Nehring, Karl, Matthias Corvinus, Kaiser Friedrich III. und das Reich:
Zum hunyadisch-habsburgischenХ ьegensatzХ inХ щonauraumХ ĐżünchenбХ
1989).
іapacosteaбХНerbanбХ„UnХÉpisodeХdeХlaХrivalitéХpolono-hongroise aux XVe
siècleХпХŻa campagneХdeХżathiasХшorvinХenХżoldavieХĐжйлмЮбХáХlaХlumièreХ
d´uneХsourceХinédite“бХRevueХRoumaineХd´histoireХнХĐжолоЮХоло–979.
Pastor, The History of the Popes, from the Close of the Middle Ages, vol.
IV (St. Louis, 1913).
Smolucha, Janusz, Polityka kurii Rzymskiej za pontyfikatu Piusa II. (1458–
жйлйЮХwobecХшzechХiХkrajówХsąsiednichХпХZХdziejówХdyplomacjiХpapieskiej
w XV wieku [The Policy of the Holy See during the Pontificate of Pius II
(1458–1464) Regarding Bohemia and the Neighbouring Countries: From
History of Papal Diplomacy in the 15th шentury]ХĐźrakówбХзеенЮ.
TobolkaбХZdeněkбХ“StykyХkráleХčeskéhoХяiфíhoХzХіoděbradХsХpolskýmХkráв
lemХźazimírem”Х[TheХRelationsХofХчohemianХźingХьeorgeХofХіoděbradyХ
withХшasimirбХźingХofХіoland]бХСasopisХżaticeХmoravskéХззХ(1898).
TomekбХVáclavХVladivojбХщějepisХměstaХіrahyХ[HistoryХofХtheХшity Prague]
vol. VI (Praha, 1906).
313
István Kovács
University of Pécs
шlementХofХTúrony.
Possibilities of a canon of southern Baranya in the
late Middle Ages*
Between 1475 and 1477 Matthias Corvinus donated both the
provostships originally founded by Premonstratensians, and
theХprovostriesХofХшsútдшsрtХandХZsámbékбХlocatedХinХщioв
ceseХofХVeszprémбХtoХtheХіaulinesХatХtheХrequestХofХtheХOrderХ
of Saint Paul.1 In 1477 and 1479 Pope Sixtus IV entrusted a
doctorХ ofХ canonХ lawбХ certainХ шlementХ ofХ TúronyбХ withХ theХ
procedure in the case of the above-mentioned bodies, prob-
ably as a judge delegate.2 The same person in 23 December
1479 sent in a petition to the Holy Father, in order to the con-
firmation ofХ hisХ dignityХ ofХ ыelsрörs’sХ provostбХ thatХ heХ hadХ
been bestowed by the King.3
I noticed the previously mentioned Clement during my
research about the provostry of Arad, and then I saw his
* ResearchХ forХ thisХ paperХ wasХ supportedХ byХ „NTі-ъыÖ-P-жк”г
Supported by theХσNźі-16-2-II. 9. New National Excellence Program of
theХ żinistryХ ofХ HumanХ шapacitiesгХ юХ amХ gratefulХ toХ TamásХ ыedelesХ andХ
ьáborХчarabásХforХtheХcorrectionХofХtheХtextг
1 чeatrixХ RomhányiбХ źolostorokбХ ésХ társaskáptalanokХ aХ középkoriХ ża -
gyarországonХ[żonasteries and Collegial Chapters in Medieval Hungary],
(Budapest, 2000).
2 VinceХчedyпХцХfelsрörsiХprépostságХtörténeteХ[HistoryХofХtheХіrovostryХofХ
ыelsрörs]бХĐVeszprémбХжоийЮХклг
3 Ibid., 56.
315
Hungaro-Polonica
nameХ inХ theХ worksХ ofХ TamásХ ыedelesб4 Vince Bedy,5 юstvánХ
Sugárб6 andХNorbertХшгХTóth.7 Recently the latter has given a
detailed presentation about the career of Michael, the son of
ŻadislausХofХTúronyбХthatХmadeХmyХinterestХdeeperХtowardsХ
the analyzed person.8 TheХcommonХfeatureХofХtheХtwoХTúroв
nys – of course despite their family connection – is that they
both had an outstanding church career compared to other
canons of their bodies (Esztergom – Arad).9 Con-sequently,
the purpose of my thesis – besides I aimed to describe the
stationsХ ofХ шlement’sХ careerХ basedХ onХ sourcesХ and earlier
technical literature – is the exploration of his career similarly
to Hungarian middle class canons who had appeared in
some sources.10
There is not much known about the origins of Clement,
even his descent is questionable; he could be both a noble-
manХfromХчaranyaХandХaХserfгХюnХmyХopinionХofХTúronyХ– as
4 NorbertХшгХTóthпХ“цzХegriХkáptalanХarchontológiájaХжинм–жкзл”Х[Archon-
tology of the Chapter of Eger 1387–1526], Turul 88 (2015) 55.
5 Ibid., 55.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 NorbertХшгХTóthбХцzХesztergomiХszékeskáptalanХaХжкгХSzázadban I. [The
Cathedral-Chapter of Esztergom in the 15th Century I.], (Budapest, 2015)
70–77.
9 ThisХ statementХ isХ lessХ likelyбХ concerningХ theХ bodyХ ofХ іécs’sХ cathedralХ
chapter, because Clement compared to the other canons of the body made
a medium- successful career; in addition the number and the significance
ofХhisХbeneficesХareХfarХfromХżichaelХofХTúrony.
10 SeeХOrbánХofХNagylucseХinпХTamásХыedelesбХ“ÖrdögiХsugallattólХvezérel -
veгХъgyХжкгХszázadiХgyilkosságХnyomában”Х[ŻedХbyХtheХщevilďsХSuggestionгХ
In the Traces of a 15th-шenturyХ żurder]бХ SzázadokХ жймХ ĐзежиЮХ йии–456;
Michael of Debrecen, Michael of KesztölcбХ SimonХ ofХ TrevisóбХ SimonХ ofХ
HanvaХ щarvasбХ sonХ ofХ ŻadislausХ ofХ TúronyбХ żichaelХ inпХ шгХ TóthбХ Az
esztergomiХszékeskáptalan, 43–86.
316
Hungaro-Polonica
I aim to confirm that later on – had been born at latest in the
second half of the 1440s.11 His birthplace was favourable
fromХseveralХperspectivesбХonХtheХoneХhandбХTúronyХalreadyХ
had a stone church in the Arpadian Era;12 in addition it is
locatedХonlyХaboutХtwentyХkilometresХfromХіécsбХtheХseatХofХ
dioceseХofХіécsбХwhichХwasХdoubtlesslyХtheХmostХprominentХ
area of the late medieval Hungarian church organization. It
is quite conceivable that that the aforesaid conditions con-
tributed to the choice of making the church his profession,
like his older relative. The aforementioned Michael, who was
almost certainly his relative, supposedly his uncle or brother
– whoХ hadХ cathedralХ chapterХ prebendХ ofХ іécsХ since 1460–
probably, supported his young relative actively, and he also
might be the generous relative, who set our future canon on
the path of church career. As a result, I think it is most likely
that Clement also with the support of Michael began his
studies – thatХ heХ pursuedХ untilХ theХ obtainmentХ ofХ doctor’sХ
degreeХinХіécsбХatХtheХcathedralХschoolХofХsouthernХіannoniaгХ
Similarly to the previously mentioned we know very lit-
tle about his young ages, but it is almost certain that he had
been obtained a doctorate in canon law before his first char-
tered mention,13 which gives us certain starting points and in
which he appeared as a provost of St Peter in the Castle of
11 I will return to this later in connection with the first mention and the
doctoral degree of Clement.
12 ьyörgyХьyörffyбХцz Árpád-koriХżagyarországХtörténetiХföldrajzaХюгХ[TheХ
Historical Geography of Hungary in the Arpadian-era], (Budapest, 1987)
397.
13 I think it is possible, because in 1475, Clement appeared as decretorum
doctor in the sources, his birth cannot be dated so much earlier than the
second half of the 1440s, because of the presumable year (1503) of his death
317
Hungaro-Polonica
Eger might be dated to 1472. Then in 1473 he appeared as a
vicar of the bishop of Eger, Gabriel of Rangon and with a de-
corum doctor degree, he carried out his commissarial duties
until 1475.14 In the year of 1477, we can see his name concern-
ing the aforementioned Bishop of Eger, he appeared as chap-
lain and envoy of Rangon, so according to my calculations,
he maintained diplomatic responsibilities in the second half
of his twenties.15 There is not so much information about
howХ шlementХ gotХ intoХ шardinalХ ьabrielХ ofХ Ragon’sХ atmosв
phere.16 іrobablyХasХtheХfamiliarХofХtheХcardinalбХofХTúronyХ
got into the court of Matthias Corvinus, from where his way
led straight to the Eternal City as a delegate of the King.17
Although it is not exactly known that how much time he
had spent in Rome, it is conceivable, that his diplomatic ser-
vice in the case of the two monasteries has terminated, and
his residence in Rome has ended when he obtained the ben-
eficeХofХprovostХinХыelsрörsбХwhichХheХmightХhaveХgotХforХhisХ
diplomatic service. In my view, it is possible that although
Clement had benefice of provostry he completed his diplo-
matic responsibilities, longer than the two cased that were
presented – because of the lack of sources, none of these
statements can be certainly claimed. However, it seems to be
14 шгХTóthбХ“цzХegriХkáptalan”бХккрХюstvánХSugárпХцzХegriХpüspökökХtörté -
neteбХ цzХ egriХ fрegyházmegyeХ schematizmusaХ жгХ [TheХ HistoryХ ofХ theХ
Bishopric of Eger], (Budapest, 1984) 180.
15 TamásХыedelesбХцХpécsiХszékeskáptalanХszemélyiХösszetételeХaХkésрХkö -
zépkorbanХ Đжикй–1526) [The Personal Composition of the Cathedral-
шhapterХofХіécs in Late Middle Ages], ĐіécsбХзеекЮХйкнг
16 SugárбХ“ъgriХpüspökök”бХжмм–182.
17 ыedelesбХ“цХpécsiХszékeskáptalan”, 458.
318
Hungaro-Polonica
sure, that during his residence in Rome he worked effec-
tively, as he acted in the case of the aforementioned monas-
teriesХofХшsútдшsűtХandХZsámbékХinХжйммгХюnХtheХsameХcaseбХ
but in the year of 1479 he appeared as a papal commissioner.
It is proving the effectiveness of his job that in 1479 the King
donatedХ himХ theХ beneficeХ ofХ ыelsрörs’sХ żaryХ żagdaleneХ
provost, which was located in the aforementioned diocese of
Veszprem. The quality of the stalls and the importance of
шlement’sХjobХwillХbecomeХmoreХaccurateХforХusбХifХweХrealizeХ
that the annual income of provostry reached 200 gold forints
at that time..18 Because of the lack of sources, in the 1480s
very little is known about the local activities of Clement, so
it is also not known that how long did he have the above-
mentioned benefice, therefore we might date it to 1479–1480.
However, it might be possible that Clement could be the
body’sХprovostХforХaХlongerХtimeбХevenХinХtheХwholeХdecadeгХ
Because of his regal services he could rarely reside on
ыelsрörsбХheХenjoyedХhisХbeneficeХasХsine cura.
His ministration was facilitated by his university degree
or doctor decretorum in connection with the above men-
tioned issues. While in the fundamental work of Endre Ver-
essбХ whichХwasХ publishedХ inХжойжбХ Túrony’sХcanonХ lawХ deв
gree was dated from 1495,19 in contrast with that, due to the
researches of TamásХыedelesХitХisХknownХthatХinХжймоХaХpapalХ
bull called him decretorum doctor.20 Based on the above his
18 The provostry has been taken from the previous beneficiary because of
the act of murder, following this Clement got the benefice.
19 EndreХ VeressбХ OlaszХ egyetemekenХ jártХ magyarországiХ tanulókХ anya -
könyveХesХirataiХжззж–1864 [The Register and other Writings of Hungarian
Students on Italian Universities 1221–1864], (Budapest, 1941) 413.
20 ыedelesбХ“цХpécsiХszékeskáptalan”б 459.
319
Hungaro-Polonica
date of birth should be dated at least to the second half of the
1440's.21 We do not have further information about his uni-
versity studies.
The first, moreХcomprehensibleХstationХofХшlement’sХcaв
reer can be found in Arad, in the local, royal-founded prov-
ost that was named after Saint Martin, our canon bore the
dignity of reader canon, in one word we can find him right
inХtheХsecondХplaceХofХchapter’sХhierarchy.22 During this pe-
riod the provost has not resisted at the seat of the body. So
theХactualХdutiesХofХtheХbody’sХmanagementХwereХcarriedХoutХ
byХtheХlectorбХinХthisХcaseХbyХшelementХofХTúronyгХTheХdutiesХ
of a lector included the management of collegiate chapter
school,23 and the control of the chancery of Loca Credibilia
(place of authentication). The issue that why did he get
canon stall at that time will arise, so we can even think of
another, yet undiscovered payment for diplomatic mission,24
as it can beХseenХinХtheХcaseХofХÖrsгХAnother possible reason
for electing Clement as a lector is that his diplomatic career
has ended and as a result of this the body believed that he
was the most competent to fill the dignity of a lector. The lat-
ter is somewhat contradictory to that, as it can be seen later,
thatХшlement’sХcareerХhasХnotХendedХinХцradгХSimilarly, to the
beneficesХofХыelsрörsХandХцradбХitХisХnotХclearбХandХprobablyХ
21 ыedelesбХ“цХpécsiХszékeskáptalan”б 458–йкорХшгХTóthбХ“цzХegriХkáptalan”бХ
55.
22 чékefiбХRemigпХцХkáptalaniХiskolákХtörténeteХżagyarországonХжкйе-ig,
[History of Chapter-schools in Hungary till 1540], (Budapest, 1910) 193.
23 Fedeles, “цХpécsiХszékeskáptalan”, 54.
24 Although he enjoyed the lectoral dignity from 1492, he got his canon
stalls earlier; supposedly he must have been obtained it in the last decade
of the reign of Matthias Corvinus.
320
Hungaro-Polonica
never will be, that for what reason has he returned or might
have been returned to the dioceseХofХіécsгХHoweverбХitХisХcerв
tain that his first chartered mention is dated to 1495 – so dur-
ing the time he was a lector in Arad – namely in the quality
ofХtheХцrchdeaconХofХцszúágгХюnХconnectionХwithХtheХbeneв
ficeХofХцszúágбХitХisХnotХexactlyХknownХthat whose interven-
tion helped Clement to get it, nevertheless we can assume
that he got it for his diplomatic services, however I must em-
phasize that there are no sources about his royal or papal ser-
vices. He visited the villages annually, listed those who
wanted to become a priest, monitored that there is no witch-
craft, concubine or some kind of deviation from the path of
true faith in his decanal district, furthermore he inspected
the subordinated deans, so probably he carried out his archi-
diaconal responsibilities outstandingly. The certain data re-
garding his archdeacon responsibilities shows that he bore
his archidiaconal office between 1495 and 1499, which means
thatХheХhasХresistedХinХtheХseatХofХtheХdioceseбХinХіécsрХandХheХ
was a member of the local Cathedral Chapter. It is not actu-
ally known what happened in the period between his last ar-
chidiaconal mention, which is dated to 1499 , and his first
mention of his lectoral duties in 1503, but as it can be seen a
cleric, called Albert became the ArchdeaconХ ofХ цszúágХ inХ
жкеибХ weХ canХ conceiveХ thatХ шlement’sХ archidiaconalХ dutiesХ
has lasted until this time.25 However it can be contradictory
or rather can be a cause for further assumptions that Albert
ofХNagyvátyХresponsibilitiesХasХaХlectorХcanХbeХdatedХforХthe
25 Fedeles, “цХpécsiХszékeskáptalan”б 312.
321
Hungaro-Polonica
period between 1487 and 1499.26 In this case, it can be as-
sumed that Clement, between the years of 1499 and 1503, left
his archidiaconal benefice in order to advance to the dignity
of a reader canon. Nevertheless, it is also conceivable, that in
this period he bore the two stalls simultaneously. In the year
ofХжкеибХшlementХofficiatedХinХіécsХasХtheХlectorХofХtheХlocalХ
cathedral chapter, furthermore he led the cathedral school
and the chancellery of Loca Credibilia (place of authentica-
tion) and his actions were represented on two occasions in
the charter.27 The fact that Clement returned to his more
humble homeland could be interesting, although at first he
appearedХinХtheХcanonХcommunityХofХіécsХasХanХarchdeaconХ
ofХцszúágбХitХcannotХbeХruledХoutХentirelyХthat he might al-
ready have been possessed a canon stall in the body.
цfterХtheХyearХofХжкеиХшlement’sХnameХdisappearedХfromХ
the sources. From these circumstances we can conclude that
in 1503 or shortly after this year he died. This is not surpris-
ing, because if my idea about the date of his birth is accepta-
ble, he must have been reach the age of sixty which was con-
sidered as a quite high age in the medieval era.
юХcollectedХtheХbeneficesХofХшlementХofХTúronyХchronologв
ically, in order to a better demonstration, in the following ta-
ble. Where it is just assumable I have indicated the uncer-
tainty.
26 Ibid., 416.
27 DL 494 74, 1503. 04. 02.: DF 280 286.
322
Hungaro-Polonica
Denomination of dignity Period
and benefices
Provost, Saint Peter provostry 1475
of Eger28
Vicar of Eger29 1475.
Provost, Mary Magdalena 1479 – 1480?
іrovostryХofХĐыelsрЮХÖrs30
Lector, Provostry of Arad31 (1492? )1493 – 1495
( 1497?)
цrchdeaconбХцszúág32 1495 – 1499 (– (1503?)
Lector, Cathedral chapter of (1499?) – 1503
іécs33
Benefices of Clement of Túrony
In my opinion, this paper would not be complete if I do
notХattemptХtoХcompareХшlement’sХlifeХtoХtheХcareerХofХotherХ
canons, who have been appeared in sources.34 Investigating
theХstationsХofХшlement’sХcareerбХaХquestionХarisesХthatХbasedХ
on these statements how could he be appeared in the late
28 SugárбХ“цzХegriХpüspökök”бХжнег
29 Ibid.
30 Bedy, “цХfelsрörsiХprépostság”бХклг
31 чékefiбХ“цХkáptalaniХiskolák”бХжоиг
32 February 08. 1499.: DF 261 970; Fedeles, “цХpécsiХszékeskáptalan”бХйкн–
459.
33 January 28. 1503.: DL 494 74; Fedeles, “цХ pécsiХ székeskáptalan”бХ йкн–
459.
34 яózsefХźöblösбХ цХbudaiбХfehérváriбХgyрriХésХpozsonyiХkáptalanХarchon-
tológiájaгХ жйкн–жкзлХ [цrchontologyХ ofХ theХ шhaptersХ ofХ чudaбХ ыehérvárбХ
ьyрrХ andХ чratislavaгХ жйкн–1526], ĐчudapestбХ жонмЮрХ ыedelesбХ “цХ pécsiХ
székeskáptalan”рХшгХTóthбХ“цzХesztergomiХszékeskáptalan”, 43–86.
323
Hungaro-Polonica
medieval religious societyХofХHungaryгХTúronyХhasХneverХgotХ
into the pontifical dignity of the hierarchy; therefore, he has
not appeared in the elite of medieval religious society. For
this reason, Clement – belonged to the middle class of the
church based on significant benefices (provost, vicar). Prob-
ably he enjoyed a prebendal benefice from the beginning of
his career; furthermore, he was also the chaplain of Cardinal
Gabriel of Rangon. The Cardinal might have pioneered
Clement in the early stages of his career. Without the support
ofХtheХшardinalХandХhisХrelativeбХżichaelХofХTúronyХheХcouldХ
have hardly reach benefice of Vicar Bishop, presumably at
this early stage of his career. It is prominently important that
he achieved canon law doctorate degree that he acquired at
an Italian university. In order to facilitate the illustration for
the readers I reveal a table, summarizing the career of Mi-
chaelбХ madeХ byХ NorbertХ шгХ TóthХ Đbenefices of Michael of
Túrony).35 It has an importance that Michael might have
studied at university; however the research about him has
not shown up a doctorate. Despite all of this, if we compare
the stations of Clement and Michael, the benefices of the lat-
ter exceeded the stalls of his younger relative both in number
and in significance.
35 Ibid., 74. table number 28.
324
Hungaro-Polonica
Denomination of the scope of Period
activities, function and bene-
Notary of Holy Seefices
/ notary 18 December
1446 – 19 Au-
gust 1448.
Canon of Esztergom 6 August 1457 –
† 30 July 1501.
цrchdeaconХ ofХ Nógrád / com- 20 April 1460 –
mendator † 30 July 1501.
Director of the altar of Saint Mar- Before 29 Septem-
garet ber 1459 – † 30 July
1501.
шanonХofХіécs 22. May 1460 –
17 July 1466.
Titled Bishop of Milkovia, suffra- 12 June 1468 –
gan of Esztergom †30 July 1501.
Vicar of Esztergom 8 May 1471 –
11 April 1483.
Provost of Esztergom- Szentgyörв 16 April – 29
gymezр November
1474.
Benefices of Michael of Túrony
325
Hungaro-Polonica
Bibliography
Secondary literature
чedyбХVinceбХцХfelsрörsiХprépostságХtörténeteХ[HistoryХofХtheХіrovostryХofХ
ыelsрörs]бХĐVeszprémбХжоийЮ.
чékefiбХ RemigбХ цХ káptalaniХ iskolákХ történeteХ żagyarországonХ жкйе-ig
[History of Chapter-schools in Hungary till 1540], (Budapest, 1910).
ыedelesбХ TamásпХ цХ pécsiХ székeskáptalanХ személyiХ összetételeХ aХ késрХ
középkorbanХ Đжикй–1526) [The Personal Composition of the Cathedral-
Chapter ofХіécsХinХŻateХżiddleХцges]бХĐіécsбХзеекЮг
SugárбХ юstvánбХ цzХ egriХ püspökökХ történeteбХ цzХ egriХ fрegyházmegyeХ
schematizmusa 1. [The History of the Bishopric of Eger], (Budapest, 1984).
шгХTóthбХNorbertбХцzХesztergomiХszékeskáptalanХaХжкгХSzázadbanХюгХ[The
Cathedral-Chapter of Esztergom in the 15th Century I], (Budapest, 2015).
шгХ TóthбХ NorbertбХ „цzХ egriХ káptalanХ archontológiájaХ жинм–жкзл”Х
[Archontology of the Chapter of Eger 1387–1526], Turul 88 (2015) 48–71.
326
Paul Srodecki
Justus-Liebig University, Giessen
WładysławХюююХandХtheХіolish-Hungarian Bul-
wark topoi against the Background of the Otto-
man Threat in the 15th Century*
Dynastic ties between Poland and Hungary in the
Middle Ages
Dynastic ties between Poland and Hungary had a long tra-
dition in the Middle Ages. Regardless of the numerous con-
flicts between the two countries, principally centred around
the Ruthenian lands which were claimed by both Poland and
Hungary, the Piasts and the Arpads, as well as the Anjous
later, were attached together in a series of various dynastic
marriages.1 The personal union of both kingdoms under
*
ThisХ paperХ wasХ writtenХ asХ partХ ofХ theХ researchХ projectХ ‘TheХ шollectiveХ
юdentitiesХ inХ theХ SocialХ NetworksХ ofХ żedievalХ ъurope’Х ĐюRіЮХ whichХ isХ
conducted by the Department of History and Centre for Research in
Medieval Society and Culture VIVARIUM, Faculty of Arts, University of
Ostrava.
1 шfгХ іiotrХ StefaniakбХ чłogosławionaХ яolentaХ HelenaХ цrpadównaХ OSшХ
księђnaХwielkopolskaгХёycieбХdziełoХiХkultХĐжзйй–1304) [Beatified Yolanda
Helena Arpad, Duchess of Greater Poland. Life, Work and Cult (1244–
жиейЮ]Х ĐьnieznoбХ зееоЮрХ idбХ “хwiętaХ źingaХ цrpadówna (1234–1291) –
mniszkaХklariańska”Х[SaintХźingaХцrpadХĐжзий–1291) – a Poor Clare Nun],
цlmanachХ SądeckiХ жкХ ĐзеелЮХ и–жерХ шecylianХ NiezgodaбХ чłogosławionaХ
Jolenta (1244?–жзонЮХwцródХцrpadówХiХіiastówХ[чeatifiedХYolandaХĐжзййф–
1298) within the Arpads and the іiasts]Х ĐźrakówбХ зеезЮрХ StanisławХ цгХ
SrokaбХ ъlђbietaХ ŁokietównaХ Đжиек–жинеЮХ ĐчydgoszczбХ ДзеееЮрХ юdгбХ
“ыenenna”бХinХіiastowieгХŻeksykonХbiograficznyХ[TheХіiastsгХцХчiograph-
327
Hungaro-Polonica
Louis the Great in the years between 1370 and 1382 can
surely be regarded as the zenith of this long Hungarian-
Polish relationship in the Middle Ages.2 Furthermore both
countries had been linked since their Christianisation in the
late 10th and early 11th centuries by their common exposed
position within Latin Christianity. Their border location, sur-
rounded by pagan, schismatic or Muslim communities, com-
monly described as infideles, quickly brought them (at the lat-
est after the Mongol invasions of the 13th century) the nimbus
of faith-defending outposts – a topos spread throughout the
rest of the Occident by the Holy See in particular. Since the
High Middle Ages and in particular since the Mongolian
raids of the 13th century both countries also shared this com-
monХpictureХofХeachХotherХasХ“shields of Christianity”г3
icalХ Żexicon]бХ edгХ źгХ OђógХ – SгХ SzczurХ ĐźrakówбХ жоооЮХ зззрХ юdгбХ “WokółХ
mariaђuХźarolaХRobertaХzХіiastównąХцląskąХżarią”Х[цroundХtheХżarriageХ
of Charles Robert with the Silesian Piast Maria], Biuletzn Polskiego
Towarzystwa Heraldycznego 11 (1994) 1–5; Edward Rudzki, Polskie
króloweгХ ёonyХ іiastówХ iХ яagiellonówХ [іolishХ їueensгХ TheХ WifesХ ofХ the
іiastsХ andХ яagiellonians]бХ volгХ жХ ĐWarszawaбХ жонкЮрХ яadwigaХ ёylińskaбХ
іiastównyХ iХ ђonyХ іiastówХ [ыemaleХ іiastsХ andХ WifesХ ofХ theХ іiasts]Х
ĐWarszawaбХ жолоЮрХ źrystynaХ іieradzkaбХ “ыenenna”бХ inХ іolskiХ SłownikХ
Biograficzny 6 (1948) 413.
2 On the Hungarian-Polish personal unions in the Late Middle Ages see
ьyörgyХSzékelyбХ“іolacyХiХWęgrzyХpodХwspólnymХberłemгХUnieХpersonal-
ne”Х[іolandХandХHungaryХunderХtheХSameХSceptreгХThe Personal Unions],
inХіolskaХiХWęgryХwХkulturzeХiХcywilizacjiХeuropejskiejбХedгХягХWyrozumski,
NaukaХ volгХ мХ ĐźrakówбХ жоомЮХ йм–ккрХ StanisławХ цгХ SrokaбХ ZХ dziejówХ
stosunkówХ polsko-węgierskichХ wХ póѐnymХ цredniowieczuпХ szkiceХ [ыromХ
the History of Polish-Hungarian Relations in the Late Middle Ages]
ĐźrakówбХжоокЮг
3 шfгХRyszardХьrzesikбХіolskaХіiastówХ iХWęgryХцrpadówХweХwzajemnejХ
opinii (do 1320 roku) [Piast Poland and Arpad Hungary in the Mutual
Opinion (untill 1320)] (Warszawa, 2003).
328
Hungaro-Polonica
The beginning of the Ottoman expansion in the 14th cen-
tury aroused political interest not only in Hungary, which
was directly affected, but also north of the Carpathians. Evi-
dence for this can be seen especially in the so-calledХ“шonв
gressХofХшracow”ХĐіolishпХ“ZjazdХkrakowski”ЮХofХSeptemberХ
1364, which the Polish king Casimir the Great – with the par-
ticipation inter alia of Emperor Charles IV, the Hungarian
king Louis the Great and king Peter I of Cyprus – primarily
dedicated to the growing Turkish threat in South-Eastern
Europe.4 In addition, geographical proximity was one of the
reasons for the lively support of Polish combatants in the
Hungarian fights against the Turks in the late 14th and most
of the 15th centuries. Polish knights in particular took part in
the various anti-Ottoman campaigns of Sigismund of Lux-
emburg, amongst other in the failed crusade of Nicopolis in
1396, in the border war in Bosnia 1406–1409 or in the siege of
the strategically important Ottoman Danube fortress Golu-
bac in June 1428, in which the legendary Polish commander
Zawisza Czarny lost his life.5
4 Roman Grodecki, Kongres krakowski w roku 1364 [The Congress of
Cracow in the Year 1364] (Warszawa, 1939; reprint KrakówбХжоокЮХлнffгХandХ
озрХ яanuszХ Smołucha, Papiestwo a Polska w latach 1484–1526. Kontakty
dyplomatyczneХnaХ tleХzagroђeniaХ tureckiegoХ [іapacyХandХ іolandХ inХ theХ
Years 1484–1526. Diplomatic Contacts against the Background of the
OttomanХThreat]ХĐźrakówбХжоооЮ 15.
5 шfгХіaulХSrodeckiбХ“шontreХlesХennemisХdeХlaХfoyХdeХщieuгХщerХźreuzzugХ
vonХNikopolisХundХdasХabendländischeХTürkenbildХumХжйее”бХinХщasХчildХ
des Feindes. Konstruktion von Antagonismen und Kulturtransfer im
ZeitalterХderХTürkenkriegeбХedгХE. Leuschner – ThгХWünschХĐчerlinбХзежиЮХ
33–йорХ Żászló Veszprémy, “źingХ SigismundХ ofХ ŻuxemburgХ atХ ьolubacХ
ĐьalambocЮ“бХinХшhurchХUnionХandХшrusadingХinХtheХżiddleХцgesгХжй th–
15th Centuries, ed. Ch. Gastgeber et al. (Cluj-Napoca, 2009) 291–308;
Smołucha, іapiestwoХ aХ іolskaбХ жкрХ StanisławХ цгХ Sroka, Polacy na
329
Hungaro-Polonica
A few years later, the bishop of Cracow Zbigniew
OleцnickiХmadeХgreatХeffortsХatХtheХшouncilХofХчaselХtoХorganв
ise both financial and military support for Hungary, and
called upon other European rulers to declare a common cru-
sade against the Ottomans, who – after overcoming of the
Ottoman Interregnum and the civil war of the years 1402–
1413 – had remarkably gained in strength in South Eastern
Europe under Mehmed I and in particular under Murad II.6
When Ottoman troops attacked the Southern borders of the
Hungarian kingdom a few months after the death of Sigis-
mund of Luxemburg, and even managed to invade deeply
into Transylvania, members of the Polish nobility offered
their support to the threatened Hungarians against the rabida
gens Turcorum fidei catholicae semper inimica.7 Even though the
Polish offer proved to be fruitless in the end, diplomatic re-
lations between Poland and Hungary in the late 1430s pro-
vided a significant foretaste, both of the coming personal un-
ion between both countries under a Jagiellonian ruler, and of
the anti-Ottoman campaigns of the years 1443 and 1444.
Władysław’s candidacy for the Hungarian throne
In 1440 the sixteen-year-oldХsonХofХWładysławХяagiełłoбХalsoХ
calledХWładysławбХ ascendedХtheХHungarianХthroneбХhavingХ
WęgrzechХzaХpanowaniaХZygmuntaХŻuksemburskiegoХжинм–1437 [Poles in
Hungary during the Rule of Sigismund of Luxemburg 1387–1437]
ĐźrakówбХ зеежЮрХ цndrzejХ ыeliksХ ьrabski, Polska w opiniach Europy
zachodniej XIV–XV w. [Poland in West-European Opinions in the 14th and
15th Centuries] (Warszawa, 1968) 382–388.
6 Smołucha, Papiestwo a Polska, 15.
7 CESDQ 1,1, no. 95, 89.
330
Hungaro-Polonica
already ascended the Polish one in 1434. The topoi of being a
defender of Christianity and that of a Christian bulwark
were linked to his person from a rarely early date. Shortly
afterХWładysław’sХbirthХinХautumnХжйзйбХшardinalХьiordanoХ
Orsini had already written a congratulatory letter to the
Polish king, claiming that an extraordinary gift had been
givenХtoХіolandХasХoneХofХtheХ“bulwarksХofХfaith”бХsinceХaХnewХ
pugil had been born, who, if he would embark the glorious
pathХofХhisХfatherбХwouldХriseХupХtoХbecomeХ“aХpropagatorХofХ
the Christian name and a second [after his father] most de-
voted son ofХьod’sХchurch”г8
WładysławХwouldХnotХdisappointХtheХhopesХthatХtheХшarв
dinal placed in him when he announced his candidacy for
the Hungarian throne sixteen years later. Just before his elec-
tion as Hungarian king the Jagiellonian legitimated his ap-
plication for the Crown of Saint Stephen through reference
to his defending the faith: Once he would take over the rule
of Hungary he would subordinate all his political actions ad
populorum regimen et tutelam, salutamque animarum et potissi-
mum fidei sancte defensionemбХasХWładysław declared in March
1440.9 A personal union between Poland and Hungary
would not only serve to benefit both countries but also the
whole of Latin Christianity and would also make a decisive
8 ”Gratulor enim ego [Giordano Orsini], ut mecum gratulari debet universa
christianitas, que in terris illis et propugnaculis fidei nowm pugilem videt sibi a
domino missum esse, ut cum ipsum eo facientes, qui docueritis ambulare per vias
eius et vos in regalibus virtutibus imitare, remaneat heres vester et propagator
nominis christiani et alter devotissimus filius ecclesie dei, velud ymago quedam
vestre regie magestatis”Х– CESDQ 2, 180. no. 142.
9 CDH 4, 171.
331
Hungaro-Polonica
contribution to defending the faith.10 Both kingdoms,
WładysławХ continued, shared their existence as frontier
states which, from their founding, had always been con-
fronted with incessant attacks by the enemies of the faith.
Thus for centuries now they have commonly been referred
toХasХtheХ“wallХandХshieldХofХtheХfaithful”Хand have always
actedХ solelyХ “for the honour of God’s name and the defence of
Catholic faith”г11
10 ”Nosque consequenter magna cum instantia summoque desiderio precati sunt,
quatenus regni illius, populorumque et dominiorum ejusdem regimen et
gubernacula susciperemus, arbitrati. quemadmodum ex ipsorum votis
collegimus, id ipsum pro bono et salute horum duorum Hungarie et Polonie
regnorum, proque ipsorum et katholice fidei defensione et incremento plurimum
expedire”Х– Ibid., 173.
11 ”Ne tamen videremur et divine voluntati contraire, et salutem populi christiani
negligere, de consilio prelatorum principum et baronum nostrorum, considerato
maxime, qualiter predicta regna, sibi confinancia, et barbaris nationibus finitima,
sunt murus et clypeus fidelium, pro honore divini nominis et defensione fidei
catholice, si quod forte omnipotens Deus ex unione horum regnorum pro
incremento ipsius fidei operari et efficere dignabitur, quod speramus, confisi de
misericordia ipsius, desideriis prefatorum dominorum annuimus, nominationi
seu electioni ipsorum predicte, de persona nostra facte, consensum prebuimus et
harum serie consentimus et annuimus”Х– Ibid., 173–174. Cf. Lajos Terbe, “Egy
európaiХszállóigeХéletraizaХĐżagyarországХaХkereszténységХvédрbástyájaЮ”Х
[The Biography of a European Winged Word (Hungary as the Bulwark of
шhristianity]бХъgyetemesХіhilológiaiХźözlönyХлеХĐжоилЮХиезрХŻajosХHopp,
цzХ„antemurale“ХésХ„conformitas“ХhumanistaХeszméjeХaХmagyar-lengyel
hagyománybanХ [HumanisticХ шonceptsХ ofХ “цntemurale”Х andХ “шonfor-
mitas”Х inХ theХ Hungarian-іolishХ Tradition]бХ HumanizmusХ ésХ ReformációХ
volгХ жоХ ĐчudapestбХ жоозЮХ жмрХ SándorХ пzeХ – Norbert Spannenberger,
“HungariaХvulgoХappelaturХpropugnaculumХшhristianitatisгХZur politisch-
enХюnstrumentalisierungХeinesХToposХinХUngarn”бХinХчerufХundХчerufungгХ
Geschichtswissenschaft und Nationsbildung in Ostmittel- undХ Südost-
europa im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, ed. M. Krzoska – H.-Ch. Maner
ĐżünsterбХзеекЮХзжг
332
Hungaro-Polonica
юnХthisХsituationХtheХbulwarkХtoposХservedХWładysławХasХ
a strong instrument of persuasion. According to the Jagiello-
nian his ambitions to become Hungarian king and to unite
the crowns of Poland and Hungary did not originate in any
desire to gain personal benefits of advantages. His only con-
cern was to strengthen Latin Christianity, especially in the
East Central European region, and to defend it against its
most dangerous enemy, i.e. the Ottomans.12 In his electoral
pledgesХWładysławХpromisedХtheХHungariansХmilitaryХassisв
tance from Poland in their long struggle against the Otto-
mans. Interestingly, he also promoted his candidacy among
the Polish elites with the assurance of an equal Hungarian
troop support in fighting the Tatars.13 юnХWładysław’sХwritв
ing an established picture is outlined of two outpost coun-
tries genuinely equalled by their role as guards of the christi-
anitas. For a very long time, both have experienced sustained
attacks by the infidelitas – here the Ottoman, there the Tatar
raidsХandХdevastationsбХsoХtheХmessageХinХtheХяagiellonian’sХ
appeal. This vivid and allegorical message can also be found
12 ”Utque cunctis innotescat, nos ad eam rem non cupiditatis ardore, nec
ambitionis amore, sed ea, quam premisimus, animi sinceritate attractos esse, pro
bono statu ejusdem regni, conditiones et modos infrascriptos, quos prenominati
oratores regni Hungarie predicti, per nos admittere et manutenere ardentius
desiderarunt; de mera nostra liberalitate, grato affectu admisimus et tenore
praesentium ipsorum integre et inviolabiliter servarae et manutenere pollicemur
et spondemus“Х– CDH VII/3, 174. no. 4.
13 ”Item promittimus atque pollicemur, quod regnum predictum Hungarie et
subditos ejusdem contra et adversus quoslibet inimicos ejusdem tam Turcos,
quam quoslibet alios, ubicunque positos et occurrentes, copiis regni Polonie
predicti et dominiorum suorum fideliter juxta posse, tuebimur, sublevabimus, et
juvabimus; et reciproco modo ipsi regno Polonie promittimus, regnum ipsum
Polonie et cives subditos cum potentiis regni Hungarie contra Tartaros et
quoslibet ipsius inimicos pari passu, modo et vicissitudine fideliter tueri et
adjuvare.“Х– Ibid., 174–175.
333
Hungaro-Polonica
in a letter written in a similar tone to the Silesian dukes in
early March 1444, where the Polish king describes Poland
and Hungary as in hoc Europe angulo murus et scutum [...] fi-
delium contra barbaras naciones.14
However, it is more than questionable and must be in-
deed doubted if the Jagiellonian candidacy for the Crown of
Saint Stephen was really solely rooted in strengthening the
defensio fidei atХ theХ щanubeгХ Władysław’sХ energeticХ runХ forХ
the Hungarian kingship reflects rather the early striving of
the Jagiellonians to broadening their power to include fur-
ther adjacent countries alongside Poland and Lithuania and
thus to establish an East Central European dominion under
Jagiellonian rule.15 This assumption is confirmed by the ac-
tions of the Bishop of Cracow Zbigniew OleцnickiХwhoбХfolв
lowing the death of Władysław яagiełłoбХwasХmainlyХresponв
sible for the foreign policy of the Polish kingdom. In the
years between 1434 and 1437 OleцnickiбХasХіolishХregentбХneв
gotiated – however unsuccessfully – with Sigismund of Lux-
emburg to arrange the marriage of the two Jagiellonians
WładysławХ andХ шasimirХ withХ theХ ъmperor’sХ grand-daugh-
ters. And in the years 1438–1439 – firstly after the death of
14Letter from March 8th 1440, CESDQ 2, 412. no. 270.
15Krzysztof Baczkowski, “юdeaХяagiellońskaХaХstosunkiХpolsko-węgierskieХ
wХ XVХ wieku”Х [TheХ яagiellonianХ шonceptХ andХ theХ іolish-Hungarian
Relations in the 15th шentury]бХinХіolskaХiХWęgryбХedгХJ. Wyrozumski, 57–
72.
334
Hungaro-Polonica
Sigismund of Luxemburg, then after the short reign of Al-
brecht II – the bishop tried to ensure the Bohemian crown for
the Jagiellonians.16
юnХ thisХ contextХ Władysław’sХ юююХ candidacyХ forХ theХ Hunв
garian throne in 1440 appears as a part of a wider Jagiello-
nian dynastic policy, and the panegyric stylization of Poland
and Hungary as forewalls of Christian faith par excellence as
pure rhetoric at the service of this policy. The young Polish
king once again affirmed his altruistic intentions in front of
an assembly of Hungarian prelates, barons and estates in
Buda at the end of June 1440. He did not come to Hungary,
assuredХWładysławбХinХorderХtoХincrease his own power, but
rather to defend the Hungarian kingdom against the Turks
and thus to protect the whole of Latin Christianity. His plans
forХtheХHungarianХcrownХareХnothingХelseХthanХaХ“concernХforХ
theХшhristianХfaith”г17
цccordingХ toХ яanХ щługoszбХ the Palatine of Hungary
ŻрrincХHéderváriХinterpretedХtheХarrivalХofХtheХяagiellonianХ
in Buda as a divine sign which should lead to the liberation
nostram et Regni nostri a Turcorum tyrannide liberationem.18 For
16 IdгбХ”щziejeХіolskiХpóѐnoцredniowiecznejХĐжиме–жкелЮ”Х[HistoryХofХŻate
Medieval Poland (1370–жкелЮ]бХ WielkaХ HistoriaХ іolskiХ volгХ иХ ĐźrakówбХ
1999) 145–150.
17 ”Non quod me ad habendum Regnum Hungariae ambitione aliqua flamma -
verim, cum habeam Regnum nativum, quod cuiuslibet ambitioni sufficiebat; sed
ut Regnum vestrum a Turcorum destructione, et catholicam fidem in his oris
multipliciter depressam et pene exsanguem, divino suffultus munere et fidelium
meorum auxilio, defensarem. […]ХVeni itaque sola compassione fidei christianae
et tum vestrorum tum Elisabeth Reginae nuntiorum, tum Praelatorum et
baronum Regni mei Poloniae precibus, persuasionibus et lacrimis victus.”Х –
щługoszХvolгХйбХлинг
18 Ibid., 639.
335
Hungaro-Polonica
WładysławХtheХHungarianХpublicХwereбХaccordingХto the Pal-
atine, magna spes, per quem respirare credimus a Turcorum in-
sultu.19 As the great and long awaited redeemer, the Hungar-
ians willingly would render him unrestricted homage.20
Playing the bulwark card was therefore quite successful. In
opposition to the maintenance of the kingship of the legiti-
mate, newly-born successor to the throne, Ladislaus the
іosthumousбХwhoХhadХbeenХcrownedХinХSzékesfehérvárХwithХ
the rightful coronation insignia at the instigation of his
mother Elisabeth on May 15th, the majority of Hungarian no-
bles anticipated gaining support in fighting the rapidly ex-
panding Ottomans as a result of a Jagiellonian king and the
personal union with Poland.21
HéderváriХ justifiedХ theХ abandonmentХ ofХ theХ HabsburgХ
queen dowager and her son on behalf of the nobility assem-
bled in Buda as an act for the benefit of Hungary as well as
theХwholeХшhristianityгХыollowingХщługoszбХinХorderХtoХpointХ
this out emphatically, the Palatine effectively combined the
bulwark formula with scenarios of doom: if the Habsburgs
were to succeed in their pretensions to the throne and a baby
were to inherit the Crown of Saint Stephen, Hungary would
inevitably have to face a quick downfall. Even before Ladis-
laus could reach a military age, the Ottomans would conquer
the whole Hungarian kingdom. However, should this ever
19 Ibid., 640.
20 ”Te omnes nostri Iobagiones suum clamant liberatorem. Tuae itaque Maiestati
colla nostra subiicimus, tibi omnem fidem, obedientiam et subiectionem
pollicemur“гХюbidг
21 Baczkowski, щziejeХіolskiХpóѐnoцredniowiecznej, 153.
336
Hungaro-Polonica
happen, the defeat of all the other Roman Catholic countries
behindХthatХ“shieldХofХшhristianity”ХwouldХalsoХbeХsealedг22
The hopes of the Hungarians were further nurtured by
the Polish elites, represented by ZbigniewХOleцnickiбХtheХinв
fluential Bishop of Cracow. The latter ensured the Polish en-
deavors for the Hungarian throne at the Holy See. As early
asХяanuaryХжййебХOleцnickiХinformedХшardinalХьiulianoХшeв
sarini in Rome about the Jagiellonian plans in Hungary and
openly linked them to the fight against the Ottomans.23
Oleцnicki’sХ argumentationХ isХ interestingХ insofarХ asХ heХ hasХ
been enumerated among the biggest sceptics of a Turkish
crusade only two years later. In times of the resurgence of
the Western schism the Bishop of Cracow, as well as large
22 ”Nullus autem mentis bonae compos succensere nobis poterit, si praefato
Alberti olim Regis nostri filio posthumo praeterito, et quasi ab haereditate paterna
excluso, tuam Serenitatem pro Domino et Rege nostro assumpsimus: provide-
bamus enim per hoc tum nostro et huius Regni nostri privato, tum totius Christi-
anitatis publico commodo. Nullus enim dubitare poterit, Regno hoc, quod
Christianitatis scutum est, aut occupato per Turcos, aut confracto, caeteras
catholici Orbis regiones eandem sortem debere experiri. Delirum quoque erat
periculo Regni attento, illum pro Rege tenere, quem continebant cunae, et totius
Regni sub tam fragili rectore pertimescere ruinam, quae prius ne accidat, quam
ipse viriles annos attingat, incertum habemus, sed et Regno nostro gravissimis
impendentibus bellis serum in expectatione infantis arbitramur auxilium”Х –
щługoszХvolгХйбХлйег
23 Letter from January 13th 1440, CESDQ 1,1, no. 110, 119–120. Cf. Jadwiga
źrzyђaniakowaбХ“іolandХasХ‘цntemuraleХшhristianitatis’гХThe Political and
юdeologicalХыoundationsХofХtheХюdea”бХіolishХWesternХцffairsХиибХзХĐжоозЮХ
3–зйбХ жнfрХ źrzysztofХ чaczkowskiбХ “ZbigniewХ OleцnickiХ wobecХ ююХ uniiХ
polsko-węgierskiejХ жййе–жййй”Х [ZbigniewХ OleцnickiХ towardsХ theХ SecondХ
Polish-Hungarian Union of 1440–жййй]бХ inХ ZbigniewХ OleцnickiгХ źsiąђęХ
koцciołaХiХmąђХstanuгХżateriałyХzХkonferencjiбХSandomierzХзе–21 maja 2005
roku, ed. F. Kiryk – ZгХNogaбХĐźrakówбХзеелЮХки–71.
337
Hungaro-Polonica
sections of the Polish clergy and nobility, supported the con-
ciliarists from Basel and thus Felix V, the last antipope in the
history of Roman-Catholic church.24
Originally, however, the plans for a crusade against the
Ottoman Empire had been an idea of Pope Eugene IV who,
in the case of a successful expedition, hoped to enforce the
union with the Eastern Church which had been decided at
the Council of Florence in July 1439.25 OleцnickiХandХtheХmaв
jority of the szlachta dissociated themselves thereafter from
any crusade projects, which was ultimately also reflected in
the low level of Polish participation in the anti-Turkish cam-
paigns of 1443 and 1444.26 Against this historical back-
groundбХOleцnicki’sХletterХtoХьiulianoХшesariniХfromХжййеХandХ
the defensio fidei argumentation in it can be regarded as sheer
rhetoric, which has pragmatically been used due to the cur-
rent circumstances to put through Polish interests. It is,
therefore, all the more remarkable that Wincenty Kot, who
owed his promotion to Cardinal to Felix V, initiated some
24 Cf. Tomasz Graff, “чiskupХkrakowskiХZbigniewХOleцnickiХwobecХschiz-
my bazylejskiej (1439–1ййоЮ”Х[TheХчishopХofХшracowХZbigniewХOleцnickiХ
towards the Schism of Basel (1439–жййоЮ]бХinХZbigniewХOleцnickiгХźsiąђęХ
koцciołaбХedгХźirykХ– Noga, 195–204.
25 Baczkowski, щziejeХ іolskiХ póѐnoцredniowiecznejбХ жккгХ шfгХ “щomenicoХ
Caccamo, Eugenio IV e la crociataХ diХ Varna”бХ цrchivioХ dellaХ SocietàХ
Romana di storia patria 79 (1956) 35–87; Giuseppe Valentini, “La crociata
daХ ъugenioХ юVХ aХ шallistoХ юююХ ĐdaiХ documentiХ d’archivioХ diХ VeneziaЮ”бХ
Archivum Historiae Pontificiae 12 (1974) 91–123; Christian Unity. The
Council of Ferrara-Florence 1438/39–1989, ed. G. Albergio, Bibliotheca
Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium vol. 97 (Leuven, 1991);
яanuszХчyliński, ыaktyХiХmityХwХdziejachХuniiХkoцcielnejХXV–XVII w. [Facts
and Myths in the History of the Church Union in the 15 th–17th Centuries],
in Fakty i mity, ed. M. Kosman, Kultura polityczna w Polsce, vol. 2
ĐіoznańбХжоооЮХжиfг
26 Baczkowski, щziejeХіolskiХpóѐnoцredniowiecznejбХжккгХ
338
Hungaro-Polonica
masses and processions in spiritual support of Władysław’sХ
first Turkish campaign three years later, and prayed for di-
vine support for the Jagiellonian, qui in presenciarum pro de-
fensione fidei et catholicorum contra infideles et crucis Christi in-
imocos Turcos exercitualiter et potencialiter in Dei dextra confisus
procedit.27
Habsburgian propaganda
Surprisingly, the arguments of the Habsburgs within the
Hungarian throne quarrel were basically the same as those
to be found in Jagiellonian propaganda.28 Habsburg diplo-
mats under Frederick III, as guardian of the underage Ladis-
laus the Posthumous, also used the bulwark topos as a per-
suasive tool in their writings to the Hungarian nobility, es-
pecially in the years 1443–1444. Notable here is the work of
Enea Silvio Piccolomini and Kaspar Schlick, who both were
responsible to a major extent for the diplomatic correspond-
27 Codex diplomaticus Maioris Poloniae vol. 10, ed. цгХьąsiorowskiХ– T.
яasińskiбХWydawnictwaХяródłoweХźomisjiХHistorycznejХvolгХзиХĐіoznaniaeХ
1993) no. 1624, 315. For Wincenty Kot as the Primate of Poland cf. Marceli
Kosman, іoczetХ prymasówХ іolskiХ [цХ ŻistХ ofХ allХ іolishХ іrimates]бХ
(Warszawa, 1997) 77–81.
28 Cf. Marian Biskup, “шzasyХWładysławaХяagiellończykaХĐWarneńczykaЮ”Х
[TheХ TimesХ ofХ WładysławХ theХ яagiellonian (of Varna)], in Historia
dyplomacjiХpolskiejгХTomХжпХpołowaХXХwг–1572, ed. id. (Warszawa, 1982)
396f; Krzysztof Baczkowski, “StosunekХleopoldyńskiejХliniiХHabsburgówХ
doХ walkiХ oХ tronХ węgierskiХ poХ цmierciХ цlbrechtaХ юю”Х [TheХ іositionХ ofХ theХ
Leopoldian Line of the Habsburgs on the Struggle for the Hungarian
ThroneХ afterХ theХ щeathХ ofХ цlbrechtХ юю]бХ inХ хwiatХ chrzeцcijańskiХ iХ TurcyХ
osmańscyХ wХ dobieХ bitwyХ podХ WarnąбХ edгХ щгХ їuirini-іopławskaбХ StudiaХ
polono-danubianaХetХbalcanicaХvolгХнХĐźrakówбХжоокЮХжк–33.
339
Hungaro-Polonica
ences of the house of Austria. Piccolomini willingly deco-
rated his propagandistic letters with the forewall motive and
stylized Hungary as murus or scutum of Western Christian-
ityгХWładysławбХhoweverбХwasХpicturedХbyХtheХlaterХpopeХasХ
an intruder and illegitimate usurper, who – keen to protect
his own interests and disregarding the rightful successor to
the throne, Ladislaus – divided the country and left a border
betweenХ theХ peopleгХ Władysław’sХ approachХ wasХ notХ onlyХ
dangerous for the Hungarian kingdom, his policy, claimed
Piccolomini, would finally cause great damage to all of
Christendom.29
Kaspar Schlick, the Chancellor of the Holy Roman Em-
pire, similarly underlined the threats that Hungary would
face, if the country were not to return to the rule of its legiti-
mate Habsburg king in his letter of May 6th 1443 to the Hun-
garianХ palatineХ HéderváriгХ ыollowingХ іiccolomini’sХ arguв
mentation, Schlick linked the welfare of all Christian coun-
tries (omnia Christianorum regna fructum) to Hungary, Christi-
anitatis clipeus et murus adversus fidei hostes.30 Only the resto-
ration of the just Habsburg kingship could regnum illud pacari
et ad pristinam taliter reduci fortunam, ut non solum resistere
Teucris, sed eos ultro lacessere queat.31 The mutual intellectual
29 Der Briefwechsel des Eneas Silvius Piccolomini. Abt. 1: Briefe aus der
Laienzeit (1431–1445), ed. R. Wolkan, Fontes Rerum Austriacarum. 2. Abt.
Diplomataria et Acta vols. 61–62 (Wien, 1909), vol. 1, no. 76, 182–187, vol.
збХnoгХзжбХиобХnoгХзйбХйкгХшfгХюgnacyХZarębskiбХStosunkiХъneaszaХSylwiuszaХzХ
іolskąХiХіolakamiХ[TheХRelationsХofХъneaХSilvioХіiccolominiХwithХіolandХ
andХtheХіoles]бХRozprawyХцkademiiХUmiejętnoцciгХWydziałХHistoryczno-
Filozoficzny, Seria II vol. 45 (źrakówбХ жоиоЮХ нffрХ ьrabski, Polska w
opiniach, 392.
30 Briefwechsel des Eneas 1,2, no. 6, 10.
31 Ibid., 11. no. 6.
340
Hungaro-Polonica
fertilisation as well as the similarities in the rhetorical stylis-
tic of Schlick and Piccolomini are best shown by two letters
toХ WładysławХ fromХ theХ endХ ofХ яulyХ жййиг32 Both diplomats
call Hungary clipeus Christianitatis – Piccolomini extended
Schlick’sХ originalХ letterХ withХ theХ epithetХ murus [...] fidei
Catholice –, which could not only withstand the Ottomans,
inimicis Christi et fidei nostre catholice emulis, but also expel
them from Europe.33
Władysław’s crusading in contemporary reports
Obviously, this was by no means the opinion of the majority
of Italian humanists who – in contrast to Piccolomini – were
not paid by the Habsburgs and who tried to encourage the
young Jagiellonian king in his crusade plans with great en-
thusiasm. Their writings from that time mirror the high ex-
pectations in the Polish-Hungarian alliance, which were also
shared by a large part of Western Christianity. Indeed, after
securing his power in the main part of Hungary, WładysławХ
led two military campaigns against the Ottoman Empire.
The so-calledХ“ŻongХшampaign”ХofХжййиджйййХbroughtХsomeХ
32 Both letters, the original one of Kasper Schlick as well as the revised one
of Enea Silvio Piccolomini, can be found in ibid., no. 27, 49–55.
33 źasparХSchlickпХ“[…]Хipsum Hungarie regnum, quod clipeus Christianitatis
existis libenter videremus pacatum atque quietum, ut Teucris, inimicis Christi et
fidei nostre catholice emulis, nedum resisti, sed ut ipsi pocius e finibus Europe
possent cogi […]”г ъneasХ SilvioХ іiccolominiпХ “[…] regnum illud Ungharie,
quod murus quidam fidei Catholice et Christianitatis est clipeus, libenter pacatum
et quietum nostris diebus conspiceremus, ut perfidi Teucri, Christiane fidei
hostes, in perniciem nostre religionis assidue crassantes non solum compesci, sed
etiam e finibus Europe possent exterminari”Х– Ibid., 50–51.
341
Hungaro-Polonica
remarkable victories against Ottoman armies for the Chris-
tian crusaders under the young Jagiellonian king and forced
Sultan Murad II to conclude a favourable treaty on June 12th
1444 in Edirne (ratified on August 1st in Szeged respectively
– accordingХtoХіálХъngelХ– on August 15th inХNagyváradЮг34
Against the Muslim dār al-ḥarb tradition, the Ottomans
herein guaranteed an unusually long ceasefire of ten years.
Furthermore, Murad also gave up his claims in Serbia, rec-
ognizingХ ЭurađХ чrankoviРХ asХ theХ SerbianХ despotХ andХ deв
clared his withdrawal from Albania. Finally, the Ottomans
were even bound to pay a contribution of 100,000 florins.
However, shortly after the ceasefire, the cardinal legate Giu-
liano Cesarini35 released the young king from the treaty and
34 шfгХіálХъngel, “яánosХHunyadiХandХthe іeaceХ„ofХSzeged“ХĐжйййЮ“бХцctaХ
orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 47 (1994) 241–258; Dariusz
źołodziejczyk, “TraktatХsegedyńskiХodnalezionyф”Х[TheХTreatyХofХSzegedХ
Recoveredф”]бХinХWarnaХжйййбХrzeczywistoцРХiХtradycjaбХedгХюгХшzamańskaбХ
чalcanicaХ іosnaniensiaХ volгХ нХ ĐіoznańбХ жоомЮХ жжо–128; Id., “Der Vertrag
von Segedin 1444. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der frühosmanischenХ
diplomatischenХчeziehungenХmitХdenХchristlichenХStaaten“бХinХTurkologieХ
heute – Tradition und Perspektive. Materialien der Dritten Deutschen
Turkologen-Konferenz, Leipzig, 4.–7. Oktober 1994, ed. N. Demir – E.
TaubeбХVeröffentlichungenХderХSocietas Uralo-Altaica vol. 48 (Wiesbaden,
1998) 175–183.
35 Giuliano Cesarini can be regarded as the mental initiator of the two Tur -
kish crusades of the years 1443 and 1444. The Italian priest became famous
as a crusading preacher during the Hussite wars. He even used to be the
leader of the fifth anti-Hussite crusade of 1431, which finally ended in a
crushingХdefeatХofХtheХcrusadersХinХtheХчattleХofХщomažliceгХюnХtheХsameХ
yearбХ іopeХ ъugeneХ юVХ expandedХ шesarini’sХ sphereХ ofХ activityХ fromХ
Germany and Bohemia to also Hungary and Poland as is noted in a bull
from April 20th жйижпХ “Pro defensione catholice fidei ac nonnullis arduis
Romanae ecclesiae negotiis ad omnes Alamaniae partes ac Ungariae, Poloniaeque
et Boemiae regna […]Хcum plena potestate legati de latere officio […] destinemus”Х
– In Archivo Segreto Vaticano, Reg. Vat. 371, fol. 23. Cf. Jan Drabina,
Papiestwo – Polska w latach 1384–1434 [Papacy – Poland in the Years
342
Hungaro-Polonica
persuadedХtheХpoliticallyХinexperiencedХWładysławХtoХleadХaХ
new crusade against the Ottomans. Beside Cesarini it was
also the Byzantine diplomats who influenced the incon-
sistent Jagiellonian with eager propaganda.36
Many of the Italian humanists, who saw a resurgence of
the high medieval crusading spirit after the success of the
winter campaign of 1443/1444, welcomed the decision of the
Polish-Hungarian king to fight once again against the
Turks.37 Representative for the humanistic interest in
Władysław’sХ TurkishХ crusadesбХ ыrancescoХ ыilelfoбХ theХ courtХ
poet of the Duke of Milan Filippo Maria Visconti, wrote an
open letter to WładysławХatХtheХbeginning of November 1444
(i. e. shortly before the battle of Varna), praising him with a
panegyric: Te regum sydus appellat, te Christianae Reipublicae
propugnaculum nominat, te Christi vocat et cultorem et lumen.38
1384–жйий]Х ĐźrakówбХ зееиЮХ жжмХ andХ жкирХ іeterХ Hilsch, “щieХ źreuzzügeХ
gegen die Hussiten. GeistlicheХ undХ weltlicheХ żachtХ inХ źonkurrenz”бХ inХ
źonfessionelleХіluralitätХalsХHerausforderungгХźoexistenzХundХźonfliktХinХ
SpätmittelalterХ undХ früherХ NeuzeitгХ WinfriedХ ъberhardХ zumХ лкгХ
Geburtstag, ed. J. Bahlcke – K. Lambrecht – H.-Ch. Maner (Leipzig, 2006)
201–215, 211f.
36 Maciej Salamon, “чizancjumХwobecХwyprawyХwarneńskiejХ[TheХчyzan -
tineХъmpireХtowardsХtheХшampaignХofХVarna]бХinХхwiatХchrzeцcijańskiбХedгХ
D. Quirini-іopławskaбХми–94.
37 Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 394ff.
38 Antoni Prochaska, Uwagi krytyczneХ oХ klęsceХ WarneńskiejХ [шriticalХ
RemarksХ onХ theХ щefeatХ ofХ Varna]бХ RozprawyХ цkademiiХ UmiejętnoцciгХ
WydziałХHistoryczno-ыilozoficznyХvolгХиоХĐźrakówбХжоееЮХкзfг Cf. Grabski,
Polska w opiniach, 402f; Wiktor Weintraub, “Renaissance Poland and
Antemurale Christianitatis”бХ HarvardХ UkrainianХ StudiesХ и–4 (1979–80)
921; Paul W. Knoll, “Poland as Antemurale Christianitatis in the Late Mid-
dleХцges”бХTheХшatholicХHistoricalХReviewХлеХĐжомйЮХинжрХźrzyђaniakowa,
“іolandХ asХ цntemurale”бХ жорХ яerzyХ ьrygiel, “Echa bitwy warneńskiejХ wХ
historiografiiХczeskiejХXVХiХXVюХwieku”Х[ъchoesХofХtheХчattleХofХVarnaХinХ
343
Hungaro-Polonica
ыilelfo’sХexaltedХpresentationХreflectedХtheХ spirit of human-
istic epideictic rhetoric: Władysław as quasi novus aliquis Al-
exander was chosen by divine providence not only to banish
the enemies of faith from Europe but even to expend the
frontiers of Christianity as far as Syria and Egypt or even be-
yond the Ganges.39
Although the crusade of 1444 ended in the disastrous de-
feat of the Christians against an Ottoman army under sultan
Murad II, the death of the young Jagiellonian king and the
dissolution of the Polish-Hungarian personal union, it im-
mensely intensified the image of the Jagiellonians as defend-
ers of Latin Christianity in the following years.40
Władysław’sХ suddenХ passingХ wasХ interpretedХ asХ aХ martyrв
dom par excellence and caused a literary excursion of the
events around the second Turkish crusade of the Jagiello-
nian. Once again, it was the Italian humanists who euphe-
mistically sang of Władysław’sХ military deeds. One of the
most important eyewitness reports on the battle of Varna
was written by the papal tithe collector Andrea de Palatio,
the Bohemian Historiagraphy of the 15th and 16th шenturies]бХ inХ хwiatХ
chrzeцcijańskiбХedгХщгХїuirini-іopławskaбХжиж–141.
39 Prochaska, Uwagi, 51.
40 Cf. Thaddeus V. Tuleja, “ъugeniusХandХtheХшrusadeХofХVarna”бХTheХшa -
tholic Historical Review 35 (1949) 257–275; Franz Babinger, “Von Amurath
zu Amurath. Vor- undХNachspielХderХSchlachtХbeiХVarnaХĐжйййЮ”бХOriensХиХ
(1950) 229–265; Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 403–444; Edward Potkowski,
Warna 1444, Historyczne Bitwy vol. 41 (Warszawa, 1990); Maciej Salamon,
юmięХiХtytułХWładysławaХюююХĐWarneńczykaЮХwХhistoriografiiХgreckiejХ[NameХ
andХ TitleХ ofХ WładysławХ юююХ ĐofХ VarnaЮХ inХ ьreekХ Historiography]бХ inХ
Cracovia – Polonia – Europa, ed. W. BukowskiХetХalгХĐźrakówбХжоокЮХкзо–
килрХ żieczysławХ чielski, WładysławХ Warneń-czykХ naХ чałkanachХ Đжййи–
1444). щwieХwyprawyХ[WładysławХofХWarnaХinХtheХчalkansХĐжййи–1444).
TwoХшampaigns]ХĐToruńбХзееоЮг
344
Hungaro-Polonica
who personally took part in the campaign against the Otto-
mans. Palatio praised the Jagiellonian king as an impeccable
divini nominis cultor et christiane religionis amator princeps. Act-
ing entirely unselfishly, WładysławХhadХsolelyХinitiatedХtheХ
crusades of 1443/1444 and 1444 pro defendenda ab impiis pa-
ganorum manibus ac amplificanda et conservanda republica chris-
tiana.41 Similar descriptions can be found in the works of
otherХ юtalianХ humanistsХ suchХ asХ NiccolòХ della Tuccia,42 Lo-
renzo Bonincontri,43 Pier Candido Decembrio44 or Leodrisio
Crivelli, who eulogized WładysławХ asХ regem praepotentem,
animi immensi iuvenenem.45
41 CESDQ 2, 460. Cf. Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 409f.
42 NiccolòХщellaХTuccia, “шronacheХdiХViterboХeХdiХaltreХcittà”бХinХшronacheХ
e statute, ed. I. Ciampi, Documenti di storia italiana vol. 5 (Firenze, 1872)
197–199.
43 Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 413. Vgl. Michele Rinaldi, “Un sodalizio
poetico-astrologico nella Napoli del Quatrocento. Lorenzo Bonincontri e
ьiovanniХіontano”бХżeneХйХĐзеейЮХззж–243.
44 Pier Candido Decembrio, Opuscula historica, ed. A. Butti – F. Fossati –
G. Petraglione, Rerum Italicarum scriptores. Nova Series vol. 20,1
(Bologna, 1925–1958) 105f.: Ladislaus Polonie rex, qui preclaro illo in prelio
contra Teucros pro fide pugnans, in Grecia perijt. For Pier Candidio
Decembrio, the diplomat and court historiograph of the dukes of Mailand,
see Manfred Lentzen, “щieХRivalitätХzwischenХżailandХundХыlorenzХin der
erstenХ HälfteХ desХ жкгХ яahrhundertsгХ ZuХ іierХ шandidoХ щecembriosХ „щeХ
laudibus Mediolanensium urbis in comparationem Florentie pane-
gyricus“”бХюtalienischeХStudienХоХĐжонлЮХк–17; Michael Komorowski, “The
Diplomatic Genre before the Italian League. Civic Panegyrics of Bruni,
іoggioХ andХ щecembrio”бХ inХ NewХ WorldsХ andХ theХ юtalianХ RenaissanceгХ
Contributions to the History of European Intellectual Culture, ed. A.
Moudarres – шhгХіurdyХżoudarresбХчrill’sХStudiesХinХюntellectualХHistoryХ
vol. 216 (Leiden – Boston, 2012) 47–73.
45 Leodrisio Crivelli, “щeХexpeditioneХіiiХpapaeХююХadversusХTurcos”бХedгХьгХ
C. Zimolo, Rerum Italicarum scriptores. Nova Series vol. 23,5 (Bologna,
1948–1950) 39.
345
Hungaro-Polonica
However, WładysławХ had to share his heroic status
within the Italian written works with the person of the car-
dinal legate Giuliano Cesarini, whereas the accentuation in
French, Burgundian or – to a lesser extent – also in some Ger-
man sources was clearly in favour of the fallen Jagiellonian.46
Jean de Wavrin, the Waloon diplomat and historiographer in
the service of the Valois dukes of Burgundy, dedicated a sig-
nificant part of his Recueil des croniques et anchiennes istories de
la Grant Bretaigne, a present nomme Engleterre47 – written be-
tween 1445 and 1471 – toХWładysław’sХTurkishХcampaignsгХ
Wavrin’sХinterestХinХtheХeventsХinХSouthХъasternХъuropeХwereХ
admittedly of a personal nature, since his nephew, Waleran
de Wavrin, led a Burgundian fleet to the Danube delta in
1444/1445, together with Geoffroy de Thoisy, originally to
secureХWładysławХandХtheХcrusaderХarmyХfromХOttomanХatв
tack on the water.48 Jean de Wavrin stylized the Jagiellonian,
46 Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 418–435.
47 Jean de Wavrin, “Recueil des croniques et anchiennes istories de la Grant
чretaigneбХaХpresentХnommeХъngleterreХvolгХк”бХedгХWгХHardyХ– E. L. C. P.
Hardy, Rerum Britannicarum Medii Aevi Scriptores vol. 39, (London,
1891) 5–119; Id., “ŻaХcampagneХdesХcroisésХsurХleХщanubeХĐжййкЮ”бХedгХN.
Iorga (Paris, 1927). Cf. Johannes Meyer-Hammer, “Geschichtsbewusstsein
imХSpätmittelalterХamХчeispielХvonХяeanХdeХWavrinsХьeschichteХъnglands”бХ
in Bilder, Wahrnehmungen, Vorstellungen. Neue Forschungen zur
HistoriographieХ desХ hohenХ undХ spätenХ żittelaltersбХ edг J. Sarnowsky,
NovaХ żediaevaliaгХ їuellenХ undХ StudienХ zumХ europäischenХ żittelalterХ
volгХиХĐьöttingenбХзеемЮХжжж–140.
48 Kenneth M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571) vol. 2,
Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society vol. 127 (Philadelphia,
1978) 77–81; Jacques Paviot, La politique navale des Bourgogne 1384–1482
(Lille, 1995) 113–123; Georges Le Brusque, “Des chevaliers bourguignons
dansХlesХpaysХduХŻevantгХŻ’expéditionХdeХWalleranХdeХWavrinХcontreХlesХ
Turcs ottomans (1444–1446) dans les AnchiennesХшroniquesХd’ъngleterreХ
deХ яeanХ deХ Wavrin”бХ ŻeХ żoyenХ ÂgeХ желХ ĐзеееЮХ зкк–276; Vladimir
Agrigoroaei, “ŻiteraryХŻeakingsХintoХWavrin’sХщanubeгХThree Strongholds
346
Hungaro-Polonica
who interestingly is named throughout the narrative solely
as roy de Hongrie, as a quintessential example of a Christian
martyr fighting and dying pour lhonneur [sic!] de Dieu. Re-
markably, the Waloon writer placed the blame on the Chris-
tianХdefeatХonХяánosХHunyadiбХwhoХinХhisХeyesХflewХfromХtheХ
battlefield in a cowardly manner, leaving the king to his
fate.49 Other French and Franco-Burgundian historiog-
raphers of the second half of the 15th century such as Gilles
Carlier, Adrien de But, Georges Chastellain or Jean Germain,
the Bishop of Chalon, linked up in their reports on the Varna
campaign with thisХheroicХimageХofХWładysławг50
In turn, in the German speaking lands, the crusade of
1444 divided the writers in two camps. Authors close to the
Habsburgs around Enea Silvio Piccolomini criticized the mil-
itary expedition as poorly prepared and defectively organ-
ised. Furthermore, the defeat at the gates of Varna was inter-
preted – following the medieval tradition – asХьod’sХpunishв
mentХforХbreakingХone’sХwordХandХ– even if with infidels –
non-compliance of agreed treaties.51 This reproach was reso-
nated by numerous contemporary reports from Bohemia
andХaХчrokenХчombard”бХStudiaХіatzinakaХиХĐзеелЮХйо–72; Klaus Oschema,
ыreundschaftХ undХ NäheХ im spätmittelalterlichenХ чurgundгХStudienХ zumХ
Spannungsfeld von Emotion und Institution, Norm und Struktur, Studien
zumХ sozialenХ WandelХ inХ żittelalterХ undХ ыrüherХ NeuzeitХ volгХ злХ ĐźölnбХ
2006) 212–214, 469ff; Robert Byron Joseph Desjardins, Writing and
Imagining the Crusade in Fifteenth-Century Burgundy. The Case of the
ъxpeditionХ NarrativeХ inХ яeanХ deХ Wavrin’sХ „цnciennesХ шhroniquesХ
d’цngleterre“ХĐъdmontonбХцlbertaбХзежеЮг
49 Wavrin, Recueil 5, 56f. Cf. Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 401, 407, 418f.
50 Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 419–423. Cf. Paviot, La politique navale.
51 Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 423–425; Janusz Tazbir, “‘źrzywoprzysięђ-
caХWładysław’ХwХopiniiХpotomnych”Х[‘TheХіerjuriousХWładysław’ХinХtheХ
Opinions of the Descendants], Kwartalnik Historyczny 92 (1985) 511–513.
347
Hungaro-Polonica
andХ HungaryбХ suchХ asХ thoseХ fromХ іavelХ ŽídekХ orХ яánosХ
Thuróczyг52
цХreverselyХmoreХpositiveХimageХofХWładysławХandХhisХ
Turkish crusades is drawn by the Erfurt-based theologian
żatthiasХ щöringХ inХ hisХ Continuatio chronici Theoderici
Engelhusii53 as well as by Nikolaus Petschacher and Michael
Beheim, who – although closely connected to the court of
Frederick III – specifically dedicated two poems (Planctus su-
per morte Bladislay regis Polonie and Von dem kung pladislau wy
der mit den türken strait) to the battle of Varna.54 Of particular
interestХ isХ hereХ іetschacher’sХ panegyricбХ forХ theХ шarniola-
born poet was known – freely according to the wishes of his
Habsburgian patrons – for his anti-Polish (or better: anti-
Jagiellonian) works such as the lyrical pamphlets Poloni
magna dampna fecerunt regno Boemie or Invectiva contra Po-
lonos.55 In later Varna-descriptions from the Roman-German
52 іavelХ Žídek, Spravovna, ed. Z. V. Tobolka (Praha, 1908) 180–181;
Thuróczy, Chronica 251–253. Cf. Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 430–435;
Tazbir, “’źrzywoprzysięђcaХ Władysław’”бХ кжйfрХ ьrygiel, “Echa bitwy
warneńskiej”г
53 żatthiasХщöring, Continuatio chronici Theoderici Engelhusii, in Scripto-
res rerum Germanicarum 3, ed. J. B. Mencken (Lipsiae, 1730) col. 1–54, col.
13.
54 Nikolaus Petschacher, “Historische Gedichte aus dem XV. Jahrhun-
dert”бХ edгХ ягХ HuemerбХ żitteilungenХ desХ юnstitutsХ fürХ Österreichische Ge-
schichtsforschung 16 (1895) 633–652, no. 15, 648–652; Michael Beheim,
ZehnХ ьedichteХ żichaelХ чeheim’sХ zurХ ьeschichteХ OesterreichsХ undХ Un -
garns, ed. Th. G. von Karajan, in Quellen und Forschungen zur
vaterländischenХ ьeschichteбХ ŻiteraturХ undХ źunstбХ ed. WгХ чraumüllerХ
(Wien, 1849) 1–65, no. 5, 35–46. Cf. Andrzej Feliks Grabski, “Wiersze o
klęsceХ warneńskiejгХ ZХ dziejówХ okolicznoцciowejХ poezjiХ politycznejХ wХ
Polsce XV w.” [Poems on the Defeat of Varna. About the History of
Political Occasional Poetry in 15th Century Poland], Prace Polonistyczne
23 (1967) 27–41.
55 Petschacher, Historische Gedichte, 641–642, no. 3–4.
348
Hungaro-Polonica
Empire, such as for example the Chronicon generale of the Pas-
sau presbyter Johann Staindel, the Cronica Bavarorum of the
Ebersberg monk Vitus or the posthumously published world
chronicleХ ofХ theХ TübingenХ theologianХ яohannesХ NauclerusбХ
heroic representations of the events of 1444, which focus on
theХmartyrdomХWładysławХpro Christi nomine, are predomi-
nant.56
Władysław III as a Polish-Hungarian lieu de mémoire
HoweverбХWładysław’sХearlyХpassingХinХtheХчattleХofХVarnaХ
led his person to become first of all an important figure of
identification for the domus Iagellonica.57 In particular, it was
the Jagiellonian court historiography underХ Władysław’sХ
younger brother Casimir IV which propagated the image of
the faith-defending martyr king and that of an unprece-
dented athleta Christi in the second half of the 15th century. In
the twelfth book of his Annales seu cronicae incliti Regni Polo-
niae ĐwrittenХbetweenХжйккХandХжйнеЮбХforХinstanceбХяanХщłuв
goszХ dedicatedХ muchХ attentionХ toХ theХ “martyrdom”Х ofХ theХ
young Jagiellonian.58 Although the chronicler did not hold
56 Johann Staindel, Chronicon generale, in Rerum Boicarum scriptores vol.
1, ed. A. F. von Oefele (Augustae Vindelicorum, 1763) 417–542; Vitus von
Ebersberg, Cronica Bavarorum, in Rerum Boicarum scriptores vol. 2, ed.
A. F. von Oefele (Augustae Vindelicorum, 1763) 733; Johannes Nauclerus,
Memorabilium omnis aetatis et omnium gentium chronici commentarii
vol. 1 (Tubingiae, 1516) fol. 281r. Cf. Grabski, Polska w opiniach, 426–428.
57 Almut Bues, Die Jagiellonen. Herrscher zwischen Ostsee und Adria,
Kohlhammer-Urban-TaschenbücherХvolгХлйлХĐStuttgartбХзежеЮХмн–80.
58 Cf. Jacek Krochmal, “WładysławХWarneńczykХwХцwietleХ„Roczników“Х
яanaХщługosza”Х[WładysławХWarneńczykХinХtheХŻightХofХtheХ“цnnals”ХofХ
яanХщługosz]бХinХWarnaХжйййбХedгХшzamańskaбХжзо–жйирХяarosławХNikodem,
349
Hungaro-Polonica
back in his criticism of the Jagiellonian dynasty, he described
WładysławХ asХ aХ fearless and virtuous king-knight and fo-
cused on his fortitudo and devotio.59 In a hopeless situation,
accordingХtoХщługoszбХWładysławХasХaХPrinceps magnanimita-
tis decided to lose his life pro fide, pro religione, pro populo
christiano as well as for fame and glory rather than to live
further in shame and disgrace.60 In contrast, the Polish histo-
riographerХdescribedХaХveryХnegativeХpictureХofХяánosХHunв
yadi, whom he accused of fleeing from the battlefield in a
cowardly manner and thus causing the defeat against the Ot-
tomans.61 However, this polarizing narrative should be un-
derstood as a result of the Jagiellonian-Hunyadian antago-
nism, which arose in particular around the fight for the Bo-
hemian crown.
The dynastic cult building was even more obvious in Fil-
ippo Buonaccorsi’sХpanegyricХopusХHistoria de rege Vladislao,
which – written between 1484 and 1487 in Cracow – signifi-
“щługoszХiХźallimachХoХkoronieХwęgierskiejХWładysławaХююю”Х[щługoszХandХ
шallimachusХ aboutХ theХ HungarianХ шrownХ ofХ WładysławsХ ююю]бХ inХ WarnaХ
1йййбХedгХшzamańskaбХжйк–166.
59 щługoszХйбХмзлг
60 “[…]Хsed militiae decus praeponens saluti et gloriosam mortem vitae opprobio
[…]”Х– ibid.
61 “Iohannes de Huniad hostium multitudine et paucitate regii exercitus
deterritus, in fugam effusus, omnem Hungarorum exercitum suo exemplo secum
traxit. […] Asserunt et nonnulli disciplinae militaris periti, qui bello huiusmodi
interfuerunt, Wladislaum Regem cladi, quae successerat, occasionem propterea,
quod in pugnae principio Turcos fugientes et devictos longius prosequebatur,
praebuisse: si enim modum in prosequendo hoste tenuisset, referre triumphum et
praesentis certaminis gloriam, et summam belli perficere, haud incertum erat;
poterat tamen pugna restitui, poterat Turcos vinci et propelli, si Iohannes de
Huniad et Hungarorum cohors exemplum suum secuta, pronior ad bonam spem
quam ad fugam fuisset”Х– ibid., 725–727.
350
Hungaro-Polonica
cantly helped in forming the legend around the fallen Jagiel-
lonian king.62 The latter book was most likely essentially
based on De euocatione Vladislai regis ad regnum Vngariae a eius
expeditionibus contra TurcosбХaХworkХwrittenХbyХчuonaccorsi’sХ
patron Grzegorz of Sanok which unfortunately no longer ex-
ists.63 In his Historia de rege Vladislao Buanoccorsi moved the
Polish-Hungarian antemurale topoi to the fore. Both countries,
Poland and Hungary, are described as long-standing de-
fenders of the faith who alone, united by one king, could stop
the Ottoman aggression in Christian lands: Ad haec solam
famam eo inter se uinculo coniunctarum uirium duarum inuicta-
rum nationum satis futuram ad Turcum Tartarumque intra fines
suos continendos.64 WładysławХasХaХvirtuousХknight-king was
predestined, so Buonaccorsi, to lead Poland and Hungary,
veluti murus ab aliis Christianis regnis Turcorum impetum sub-
mouit, against the Ottomans.6566
шontraryХtoХщługoszбХinХчuonaccorsi’sХpresentationХяánosХ
Hunyadi is portrayed as a brave, experienced and prudent
commanderбХwhoХattemptedХtoХhelpХWładysławХtoХtheХlastХatХ
62 ыilippoХчuonaccorsiбХHistoriaХdeХregeХVladislaoбХedгХюгХŻichońska, Biblio-
theca latina medii et recentioris aevi vol. 3 (Varsoviae, 1961). Cf. Juliusz
щomański, “ыilippoХчuonaccorsiХeХlaХculturaХfilosoficaХdelХ‘йееХinХіolonia”бХ
inХ шallimacoХ ъsperienteгХ іoetaХ eХ politicoХ delХ ‘йеегХ шonvegnoХ inter -
nazionale di studi (San Gimignano, 18–20 ottobre 1985), ed. G. C.
Garfagnini, Institutio Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento. Atti di
convegni vol. 16 (Firenze, 1987) 25–43.
63 Heinrich Zeissberg, “ZweiХ ьedichte”бХ ZeitschriftХ desХ VereinsХ fürХ
Geschichte und Altertum Schlesiens 10 (1870) 374.
64 Buonaccorsi, Historia de rege Vladislao, 30.
65 Ibid., 86.
66 “In eius uicem uos successistis et cum ipsius tuendae negotio Christianae
quoque reipublicae tuitionem subiistis, pedem referre neque fas est neque expedit,
quando eo peruentum est, ut cum Hungaria etiam uniuersa res Christiana aut
prodenda sit aut conseruanda”Х– ibid.
351
Hungaro-Polonica
Varna, encircled by his enemies. However, eventually he
had had to resign to the overpowering Ottomans. This de-
scription is remarkable insofar as Buonaccorsi wrote the
pamphlet Attila only a short time later, in which he used a
lot of defaming allegories in allusion to the Barbaric reign of
Matthias Corvinus in Hungary.67 The humanist even went
one step further in his poem Pro regina Beatrice ad Mathiam
Hungarie regem, where he accused Matthias of being a reck-
less egoist whose desire for expansion had led him to wage
wars against other Christian neighbours rather than fighting
against the Ottomans and defending Christianity.68
67 Filippo Buonaccorsi, Attila, ed. T. Kowalewski, Bibliotheca latina medii
et recentioris aevi volгХ жеХ ĐVarsoviaeбХ жолзЮгХ шfгХ ŻászlóХ Szörényi,
“шallimacoХъsperienteХeХlaХcorteХdiХReХżatthia”бХinХшallimacoХъsperienteбХ
ed. Garfagnini, 105–жжнрХ żagdaХ яászay, “Callimaco Esperiente e il
parallelo Mattia Corvino – цttila”бХ inХ żatthiasХ шorvinusХ andХ theХ
Humanism in Central Europe, ed. T. Klaniczay – J. Jankovics, Studia
humanitatis vol. 10 (Budapest, 1994) 151–164; Krzysztof Baczkowski,
“źallimachsХ StelleХ inХ derХ źulturgeschichteХ іolens”бХ inХ щerХ polnischeХ
HumanismusХ undХ dieХ europäischenХ SodalitätenгХ цktenХ desХ polnisch-
deutschen Symposions vom 15.–19. Mai 1996 im Collegium Maius der
UniversitätХźrakauбХedгХSгХыüsselХ– ягХіiroђyńskiбХіirckheimerХяahrbuchХfürХ
Renaissance- und Humanismusforschung vol. 12 (Wiesbaden, 1997) 84f;
ъnikрХ чékés, “іhysiognomyХ inХ theХ щescriptionХ andХ іortraitsХ ofХ źingХ
żatthiasХшorvinus”бХцctaХHistoriaeХцrtiumХйлХĐзеекЮХнйрХьáborХźlaniczay,
“TheХ żythХ ofХ ScythianХ OriginХ andХ theХ шultХ ofХ цttilaХ inХ the Nineteenth
шentury”бХ inХ żultipleХ цntiquitiesХ – Multiple Modernities. Ancient
Histories in Nineteenth Century European Cultures, ed. id. – M. Werner –
O. Gecser (Frankfurt a. M. – New York, 2011) 194.
68 Filippo Buonaccorsi, Callimachi Experientis carmina, ed. F. Sica, Riscon-
tri vol. 10 (Napoli, 1981) no. 36, 150–152. Cf. Paolo Ruzicska, Storia della
letteratura ungherese, Thesaurus litterarum. Storia delle letterature di
tutto il mondo vol. 38 (Milano, 1963) 298; Donatella Coppini, “TradizioneХ
classica e umanisticaХnellaХpoesiaХdiХшallimacoХъsperiente”бХinХшallimacoХ
Esperiente, ed. Garfagnini, 119–149, 146; Marianna D. Birnbaum, “цttila’sХ
RenaissanceХinХtheХыifteenthХandХSixteenthХшenturies”бХinХцttilaгХTheХżanХ
352
Hungaro-Polonica
яanХщługosz’ХandХыilippoХчuonaccorsi’sХnarrativesХaboutХ
the Battle of Varna served the Jagiellonians as important
points of reference in their forming of a dynastic tradition.
They also helped to rigidify the WładysławХ legendХ withinХ
courtly and aristocratic society across Poland and – to a
lesser extent – Hungary, where the Jagiellonian king was
evenХeternalizedХinХaХchildren’sХsongХcalledХLengyel László jó
királyunk Đ„TheХіoleХWładysławХisХourХgoodХking“Юг69
In Poland however, especially during the early years of
the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, even after the Jagiel-
lonians had died out, the image of the martyr king
WładysławХ remained an essential benchmark of the Polish
bulwark topoi and an important lieu de mémoire of the nation-
building processes. It was especially during the reign of the
VasaХźingХWładysławХюVбХthatХWładysławХюююХwasХequatedХasХ
theХ “іolishХ crusadingХ patron”.70 This is hardly surprising,
and his Image, ed. Id. – F. H. чäumlХ ĐчudapestбХ жооиЮХ нлрХ чékés,
“іhysiognomyХinХtheХщescription”бХнйг
69 цХmagyarХnépzeneХtáraХ[цХшollectionХofХHungarianХыolkХSongs]ХvolгХжпХ
ьyermekjátékokХ [шhild’sХ іlays]бХ edгХ ьyгХ źerényiХ – чгХ чartók, Corpus
musicae popularis Hungaricae vol. 1 (Budapest, 1951) no. 428, 801. An
orchestralХ settingХ ofХ theХ folkХ songХ wasХ madeХ byХ theХ composerХ ZoltánХ
źodályХĐжннз–жолмЮгХшfгХюlonaХшzamańska, “чitwaХpodХWarnąХwХtradycjiХ
węgierskiejХiХbałkańskiej”Х[TheХчattleХofХVarnaХinХHungarianХandХчalkanХ
Tradition], in Warna 1444, ed. id., 175–жнйрХ яánosХ żгХ чak‚Х “ьoodХ kingХ
іolishХŻadislas…‘ХHistoryХandХmemoryХofХtheХshortХreignХofХWładysławХ
WarneńczykХinХHungary”бХinХшentralХandХъasternХъuropeХinХtheХżiddleХ
цgesгХцХшulturalХHistoryбХedгХігХьórecki – N. van Deusen – P. W. Knoll,
International Library of Historical Studies vol. 51 (London – New York,
2009) 176–183.
70 Tazbir, “’źrzywoprzysięђcaХWładysław’”бХкзжгХшfгХяuliuszХцгшhroцcicki,
“чarokowaХarchitekturaХokazjonalna”Х[чaroqueХOccasionalХцrchitecture]бХ
in Wiek XVII. Kontrreformacja. Prace z historii kultury, ed. J. Pelc, Studia
Staropolskie. SeriesХNovaХvolгХзоХĐWrocławбХжомеЮХззо–254, 239f.
353
Hungaro-Polonica
sinceХWładysławХюVХhadХbeenХtoyingХwithХtheХideaХofХanХanti-
Ottoman crusade throughout his whole life. This concept
only began to change in the second half of the 17th century,
when the opinion that the Christian defeat at Varna had been
the result of the breach of an oath gained more and more in
popularityгХцlthoughХtheХmartyrdomХofХWładysławХwasХnotХ
really questioned,71 the Battle of Varna was interpreted as a
warning signal from God. This was particularly reflected in
the more and more defensive orientation of the antemurale
doctrine of the majority of the Polish szlachta, who were in-
creasingly interested in maintaining the status quo between
the Rzeczpospolita and the Ottoman Empire.72
Bibliography
Primary sources
чuonaccorsiбХ ыilippoбХ HistoriaХ deХ regeХ VladislaoбХ edгХ югХ ŻichońskaбХ
Bibliotheca latina medii et recentioris aevi vol. 3 (Varsoviae, 1961).
Der Briefwechsel des Eneas Silvius Piccolomini. Abt. 1: Briefe aus der
Laienzeit (1431–1445) 2 vols., ed. R. Wolkan, Fontes Rerum Austriacarum.
2. Abt. Diplomataria et Acta vols. 61–62 (Wien, 1909).
71 TheХcharacterХofХWładysławХcanХbeХfoundХinХvariousХliteraryХandХdrama-
ticХinterpretationsХofХtheХ“VarnaХmartyrdom”ХinХtheХжмth and 18th centuries.
Cf. чarbaraХ яudkowiakбХ “WładysławХ WarneńczykХ bohateremХ dramatuХ
polskiegoХXVююХiХXVюююХwieku”Х[WładysławХWarneńczykХasХaХHeroХofХtheХ
Polish Drama in the 17th and 18th Centuries], in Warna 1444, ed.
шzamańskaбХжнк–199.
72 Tazbir, “’źrzywoprzysięђcaХWładysław’”бХк23.
354
Hungaro-Polonica
Petschacher, Nikolaus, “Historische Gedichte aus dem XV. Jahrhundert”,
edгХ ягХ HuemerбХ żitteilungenХ desХ юnstitutsХ fürХ ÖsterreichischeХ ьe -
schichtsforschung 16. 633–652.
Wavrin, Jean de, Recueil des croniques et anchiennes istories de la Grant
Bretaigne, a present nomme Engleterre vol. 5, ed. W. Hardy – E. L. C. P.
Hardy, Rerum Britannicarum Medii Aevi Scriptores vol. 39 (London,
1891).
Secondary literature
чaczkowskiбХ źrzysztofбХ щziejeХ іolskiХ póѐnoцredniowiecznejХ Đжиме–1506)
[History of Late Medieval Poland (1370–1506)], Wielka Historia Polski vol.
иХĐźrakówбХжо99).
чékés, ъnikрбХ“іhysiognomyХinХtheХщescriptionХandХіortraitsХofХźingХżatв
thiasХшorvinus”бХцctaХHistoriaeХцrtiumХйл (2005) 51–97.
шallimacoХъsperienteгХіoetaХeХpoliticoХdelХ‘йеегХшonvegnoХinternazionaleХ
di studi (San Gimignano, 18–20 ottobre 1985), ed. G. C. Garfagnini, Insti-
tutio Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento. Atti di convegni vol. 16 (Fi-
renze, 1987).
Grabski, Andrzej Feliks, Polska w opiniach Europy zachodniej XIV–XV w.
[Poland in West-European Opinions in the 14th and 15th Centuries] (War-
szawa, 1968).
Grygiel, Jerzy, “ъchaХbitwyХwarneńskiejХwХhistoriografiiХczeskiejХXVХiХXVюХ
wieku”Х[ъchoesХofХtheХчattleХofХVarnaХinХtheХчohemianХHistoriagraphyХofХ
theХжкthХandХжлthХшenturies]бХхwiatХchrzeцcijańskiбХedгХщгХїuirini-іopławв
ska, 131–141.
źrzyђaniakowaбХ яadwigaбХ “іolandХ asХ ‘цntemuraleХ шhristianitatis’гХ TheХ
іoliticalХandХюdeologicalХыoundationsХofХtheХюdea”бХPolish Western Affairs
33,2 (1992) 3–24.
Paviot, Jacques: La politique navale des Bourgogne 1384–1482 (Lille, 1995).
іolskaХiХWęgryХwХkulturzeХiХcywilizacjiХeuropejskiejХ[іoland and Hungary
within European Culture and Civilization], ed. J. Wyrozumski, Nauka vol.
мХĐźrakówбХжоомЮг
355
Hungaro-Polonica
SmołuchaбХ яanusz, Papiestwo a Polska w latach 1484–1526. Kontakty
dyplomatyczneХnaХ tleХzagroђeniaХ tureckiegoХ [іapacyХandХ іolandХ inХ theХ
Years 1484–1526. Diplomatic Contacts against the Background of the Ot-
tomanХThreat]ХĐźrakówбХжоооЮг
хwiatХ chrzeцcijańskiХ iХ TurcyХ osmańscyХ wХ dobieХ bitwyХ podХ WarnąХ [TheХ
Christian World and the Ottoman Turks at the Time of the Battle of
Varna], ed. D. Quirini-іopławskaбХStudia polono-danubiana et balcanica
volгХнХĐźrakówбХжоокЮг
Tazbir, Janusz, “‘źrzywoprzysięђcaХ Władysław’Х wХ opiniiХ potomnych”Х
[‘TheХ іerjuriousХ Władysław’Х inХ theХ OpinionsХ ofХ theХ щescendants]бХ
Kwartalnik Historyczny 92 (1985) 511–532.
WarnaХжйййбХrzeczywistoцРХi tradycja [Varna 1444, Reality and Tradition],
edгХюгХшzamańskaбХчalcanicaХіosnaniensiaХvolгХнХĐіoznańбХжоомЮг
ZbigniewХOleцnickiгХźsiąђęХkoцciołaХiХmąђХstanuгХżateriałyХzХkonferencjiбХ
Sandomierz 20–зжХmajaХзеекХrokuХ[ZbigniewХOleцnickiгХChurch Dignitary
and Statesman. Materials from the Conference in Sandomierz, May 20 th–
21th 2005], ed. F. Kiryk – Z. Noga ĐźrakówбХзеелЮ.
356
Inna Kubay
Institute of Archeology of the Ukrainian Academy of
Sciences
Repercussion of Hussite Reformation
Ideas in the South-Western Rus at the End of
the XVth – First Half of the XVIIth Century
Hussite revolution came down in history of Western
civilization as a natural reflection of the religious and socio-
political processes taking place in Europe ofthe late XIVth –
first half ofthe XVth century. Hussite Reformation idea
received support not only among the population of the
Czech lands, but also acquired broad international
resonance. Of course, the same was to be experienced by the
lands of Rus including the part of the Kingdom of Poland
and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. It must be emphasized
that despite the proven fact of participation of the military
units from the South-Western Rus in the Hussite revolution,
domestic and global Hussitology at present do not provide
adequate estimates of eventual aforementioned episode. The
problem of the impact and probable spread of the Hussite
Reformation ideas in the South-Western Rus wasn’t the
subject of a special study. Rus has always maintained close
interdynasty and interstate relationship with the lands of the
Czech crown for centuries. Therefore fragmented and ep-
isodic development of the aforementioned range of matters
actualizes further study of this issue.
357
Hungaro-Polonica
The aim of the research is to tracethe available source
materials and historiographical researches and reveal the
issue of the reception of Hussite Reformation ideas within
the territory of the South-Western Rus, using the methods of
analysis and synthesis. To achieve this goal the following
tasks are to be resolved: 1) to summarize the concept of
Hussite Reformation idea; 2) to have a closer look at the
nature of Russ-Czech contacts; 3) to trace and analyze the
Hussite influence on the South-Western Rus.
The issue of spreading Hussite Reformation ideas has
received its interpretation, though fragmentary, in a number
of research papers. First of all a special attention should be
paid to the works of Ukrainian scientists. Of course, the
works by M. Hrushevskyi1 should besingled out. Some
aspects of the chosen research topicare investigated in the
works by O. Pischanyi,2 I. Kubay.3 Same important for our
scientific research are conclusions by A. Florovskyi,4 J.
1 Ԝ Х ԓ бХ І Х Х пХ Х кХ
[Mychaylo Grushevskyj, History of Ukrainian Literature] vol.5 (Kiev,
1995) 61–83.
2 Ԟ Хԟ , ЗХ Х - Х ’ Х Х Х
ХXVII г, Ԓ ХԚ Х гХІ :
Ԓ 32 [Oleksandr Pischanyj, From the History of Ukrainian-Czech
Relations in the First Half XVII: Book 32] (Kiev, 1990) 58–64.
3 І Ԛ ,Ԕ
ԟ -З Ԡ XV ., І -
, З , 14 [Inna
Kubay, The Hussite Military Art and his Reviews in the South-Western
Rus in the XVth Century, Historical and Political Problems of the Modern
World, Collected Scientific Articles] vol. 14 (Chernivtsi, 2006) 165–170.
4 Ԑ Х , Х Х Х ,Ԟ Х Х Х
- Х Х ĐX–XVIII), 1 [Anton Florovskyj, The
Czechs and East Slavs, Essays by history Czech-Russen relations (X–
XVIII)] vol.1 (Praha, 1935) 600.
358
Hungaro-Polonica
Hryhyel,5 J. Matsurek,6 J. Hall,7 ягХ ч dl 8 and others. E.
Medynskyy,9 J.Isayevych,10 A. Savic11 and otherscompared
origins of the formation of the Protestant and Orthodox
brethren schools and analyzed their activity in Western
Ukraine in the XVIth – early XVIIth century.
Turning to the immediate consideration of the spread of
Hussite Reformation ideas among the population of the
South-Western Rus, it should be noted that the current terms
of this issue can be classified by the following ways.
Ukrainian historians of the mid XXth century, namely M.
5 яerzyХьrygielбХёycieХiХdziałanoцРХZygmuntaХźorybutowiczaгХStudiumХzХ
dziejówХstosunkówХpolsko-czeskichХwХpierwszejХpołowieХXVХwiekuХ[TheХ
Life and Activities of Zygmunt Korybutowicz, The Materials on the
History of Polish-Czech Relations of the First Half of the XVth Century]
ĐWrocławбХжоннЮХжзег
6 яosefХżacůrekбХźХdějinamХčesko-ukrajinskýchХaХčesko-rumunskýchХvzta-
hůХзХpolгХжйХaХжгХpolгХжкХstoletiгбХSlovanskéХhistorickéХstudieХ[TheХHistoryХofХ
Czech-Ukrainian and Czech-Romanian Relations at the End of the XIVth–
of the First Half of the XVth Century] (Praha, 1960) 127–182.
7 яaroslavХьollбХїuellenХundХUntersuchungenХzurХьeschichteХderХböhmi -
scheХ чrüderХ [TheХ SourcesХ andХ юnvestigationsХ onХ theХ HistoryХ ofХ theХ
Bohemian Brothers] vol.1–2 (Praha, 1876–1882) 678.
8 яaroslavХчidloбХцktyХjednotyХчratrskéХ[TheХчohemianХчrothersХRecords]Х
vol. 1–2 (Brno, 1915–1923) 595.
9Є ХԜ ,ԑ Х Х Х Хԑ ХXVю–XVююХ г
[Evgen Medynskyj, Fraternal Schools in Ukraine and Belarus in the XVI–
XVIIth Centuries] (Kiev,1958) 210.
10 ХІ є бХ„Ԟ Х Х Х ХXVII гпХ Х ХХ
Х ” [Jaroslav Isajevich, The Educational Movement in
Ukraine XVIIth Century: Eastern Tradition and Western Influence],
Ԛ Х 1 (1995) 2–9.
11 Ԟ Хԡ бХԝ Х Х Х Х Х ХԒ Х Х
ԑ Х Х XVI – XVIII гХ [Oleksandr Savych, Essays on the History of
Cultural Movements in Ukraine and Belarus in the XVI – XVIIIth
Centuries] (Kiev, 1929) 200.
359
Hungaro-Polonica
Hrushevskyi, N. Polonska-Vasylenko12 claimed that the
Eastern Slavic environment did not remain aloof regarding
social and political events on the Czech lands in the XVth cen-
tury. A lack of direct source references is offset by the
evidences of cases and forms of communication of the
Rusthrough mediation of Poland and Lithuania with Hussite
leaders or their associations. Later mentions about the
Hussite Reformation ideas on the "Ukrainian lands" in the
XVIth – first half of XVIIth century trace the development of
public opinion and criticism, the idea of collegiality and
openness of the Church and the dissemination of national
language in writing, act andliterary materials and Western
tendencies of European Renaissance as well as Reformation
in culture.13 Within Historiography the attempt was made to
attribute to the Czech Hussite influencethe movement of the
so-called “Judaizers” which evolved in Novgorod, and Mos-
cow in the late XVth – early XVIth century.14
Czech historian A. V. Florovskyihad some other views
which suggested the possibility of influence of Czech
ecclesiological models and social and religious life on Rus.
However, the author himself states, that there is no histor-
ically accurate factology and its presence can be found only
in the sphere of literary relationship.15
"When did the name of preacher and religious reformer
Jan Hus in Rus environment first sound?" – There are no
12 ԝ Хԟ -Ԓ ,І Х ,Ԕ Х Х VІІХ
бХ Х жгХ [Natalya Polonska-Vasylenko, The History of Ukraine,
Prior to the Mid-Seventeenth Century] vol. 1 (Ԛiev, 1992) 384.
13 ԓ бХІ Х Х , 82.
14 Ibid., 92–93.
15 бХ Х Х бХйжйг
360
Hungaro-Polonica
sources where the question has direct and immediate an-
swer. Though we can say that acquaintance with the ьus’Х
workstook place in the first half of the XVth century, because
there are direct source references and evidences of the Rus-
who visited Prague, teaching of the Rus students in Prague
University, and stayof Jerome of Prague in the spring of 1413
in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Thus, according to the stat-
ute of Prague University, all its mass audience and the
members were divided into four main "nations": the Czechs,
Bavarians, the Saxons and the Poles. Taking into considera-
tion the topic of our study, the most interesting for us is
«natioХіolonorum»бХbecause the Poles, Lithuanians and the
Rus wereХ includedХ inХ theХ previouslyХ mentionedХ “na-tion”,
notwithstanding their ethnic origin.16 In particular, during
1401–1408 the Bachelor's degree at the Philosophical Faculty
in Prague got "Christophorus de Lytwania",17 "Mathias
Wylna",18 "Ioan de Lemberg"19 and so on. These students and
many others were in Prague during the out-break of
revolution, and therefore clear is the fact that later after
returning home, they talked about the religious and societal
requirements ofthe Hussites. Although the Hustynsky
chronicles do not provide notes of condolence to Jan Hus,
but his heretical views and unwillingness to repent was
condemned. The words writtenin the year of 1414 (6922)
16 Vaclav TomekбХ“O počtu studentůХw učeníХpražském”Х[About the num-
ber of students at Charles University]бХСasopis Сeského Musea 20 (1846)
216–221.
17 Monumenta historica universitatis Carolo-Ferdinande Pragensis, Vol. 1
(Praha, 1830–1832) 367.
18 Ibid, 382.
19 Ibid, 397.
361
Hungaro-Polonica
state the following: ”OnХtheХшzechХlandsХaХnewХhereticХяanХ
Hus had appeared who was convicted for his letters and
burned on fire for the lack of his repentanceг”20
The most interesting in terms of authenticity and evi-
dence of the impact of Hussite teaching on socio-cultural
diversity of Rus is a trip of Jerome of Prague to the lands,
who was Jan Hus’associate. Having arrived at the invitation
of the Lithuanian Grand Duke Vytautas, the Master of
Prague University was able to communicate with the gover-
nor, the Orthodox clergy and laity regarding reason-ability
of anabaptism and adoption of Catholicism.21 In the cities of
Vitebsk and Pskov Jerome of Prague showed remarkable
tribute to the Orthodox cult-ritual traditions. He stood on his
knees in front of their icons and relics, while no decent
attention was paid to the Catholics. Subsequently the master
took so much interest in it, that he grew his beard and hair,
and claimed that religion of "these infidel people"
(Orthodox) was perfect, and that the Rus are good Chris-
tians. Jerome’sХstayХinХtheХLithuanian-Ruthenian lands was
an opportunity to transmitthe fundamental Hussite ideas
tothe orthodox social and cultural space of that time.
The direct contacts of the Rus with Hussites look more
prominent from the point of view of penetration of Refor-
mation ideas. Well-known are the facts of their participation
in military detachments of Prince Sigismund Korybut.
With the names of the prince and Frederick Ostrog,
another odious participaint in revolution, are connected the
20 ԟ Х Х Х Х [The Complete Collection of
the Russian Chronicles] vol. 2 (St Petersburg, 1843) 353.
21 Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, ed. V. NovotnýбХvol. 8 {Praha, 1932) 289.
362
Hungaro-Polonica
episodes which allow us to trace the penetration of Hussite
ideas in the society of Galicia in the XVth century. There are
reasons to claim that Sigismund Korybut was in the Czech
lands during 1422–1423. (being Vytautas’ governor) and
1424–1427. (A self-proclaimed king who didn’tХundergoХtheХ
procedure of formal initiation).22 It is clear, that the Rus
soldiers were part of the retinue (druzhina) during the first
and second campaigns. Evidence of the popularity and
support of Hussite correctionsamong the population of Gali-
cian Rus is a charter datedby King Jagiello, 27th May 1423, in
which he rebuked the Rus, mentioning that they were too
passive with their respond to the warden of Lviv district-
Spytk Tarnowskyi who wanted to hire them for the
campaign against the Hussites, but at the same time the
majority raced theapostates to the rescue, when prince Sigis-
mund Korybut went to the Czech Republic.23 Of the similar
content was another charter by Jagiello, dated 2nd July, 1423.
Its basic meaning was the following: King of Poland asks the
bishop of the same district to take spiritual measures which
would resist the phenomenon of compassion for Czechs,
primarily showing support for heretics.24 The fear among the
Catholic aristocracy of the spread of Hussite heresy was so
strong that just in few weeks after the declaration of the
aforementionedcharters Jagiello informed Vytautas about
the plannedconvening of meeting in Lesser Poland in Rus
and other lands to organize the campaign against the "pes-
tilence" (the Hussites – author). The representatives of the
22 Documenta Mag. Joannis Hus, ed. F. Palacky (Praha, 1869) 506–507.
23 ьrygielбХёycieХiХdziałanoцРбХозг
24 UrkündlicheХчeitrageбХedгХF. Palacky, vol.1 (Praha, 1846) 303–305.
363
Hungaro-Polonica
"administration" of the land took part in the meeting, and
decided to fight against the sects and their supporters. To
sum up the aforementioned, it can be stated that the actual
penetration and spreadof the Hussite ideology took place on
the territory of the South-Western Rus.
In this context it is worth paying attention to another as-
pect of mutual contacts of the Rus with Hussites. In particu-
lar, it is the introduction of modern warfare tactics and the
best arms in a technological way. We should note that the
most important performance characteristicsof Hussite army
was cart fortification (Wagenburg), which was widely ap-
plied in Eastern Europe, where favorable landscapes and ex-
cess of cavalry among combatants con-tributed to the appli-
cation of such protection and fightcompany. This may ex-
plain the defeat of one and a half thousand Taborytska in-
fantry, headed by Sigismund Korybut who supported Prince
ŠvitrigailaХ inХ theХ battleХ byХ theХ riverХ of Svyata, close to
Vilkomyr in 1435.25 While crossing the river of Svyata carts
got broken, their defense capability was minimised. In addi-
tion, heavy rain and sticky soil brought down to a minimum
the maneuvering potential of the camp.26 Interestingly that
in a letter dated January, 1432, Kraków Cardinal and Bishop
Zbigniew Olesnitskyi wrote to Cardinal Julian Chezarini
that Prince Svydryhajlo (supported by Sigismund Korybut),
guided by the advice of schismatics, married a woman who
25 Codex epistolaris saeculi decimi quinti, ed. A. Sokolowski – J. Szujski,
vol. 1 ĐźrakówбХжнмлЮХкл–57.
26 Codex epistolarisVitoldi Magniducis Lithuaniae. 1376–1430, Tomus VI
(Cracoviae, 1882) 657–658.
364
Hungaro-Polonica
was leading her life according to their customs (schismat-
ics).27
Czech historian Frantishek Palacky noted an interesting
fact: with the change of the spatial dislocation of "brothers"
military units from the Czech Republic to Slovakia and from
there to the very border of Ukrainian lands, the number of
Rusyns did not decrease, but rather increased, and soon at
the Zadniprovskiy rifts appeareda new military brotherhood
– Cossacks.28 Of course, these connotationsare hypothetical,
despite the obvious similarity in customs and rules between
Taborites and Cossacks.
The direct evidence of the hussite influence on Ukrainian
lands is numerous loans of Czech names of weapon adopted
by Cossacks. Linguistic analysis gives reason to state that
шzechХЧpiščaliЧХandХUkrainianХЧ ", Czech "houfnice",
Ukrainian " ", Czech "tarasnice", Ukrainian
" " are related words.29
After the defeat of the Hussites fringegroupin 1434 at the
Battle of Lipany, theera of the Hussite wars was all over. The
confrontation in a religious and polemical sphere appeared
instead. However, residents of Bohemia and Moravia at the
end of the XVIth – first half of XVIIth century supported mili-
tary and political contacts with the Cossacks. It is necessary
to mention the embassy, headed by Erich Lassota before the
Cossacks, in terms of military support for Rudolph II, with
27 яerzyХ SkrzypekбХ „чitwaХ nadХ rzekąХ хwiętą”Х [чattleХ ofХ theХ HolyХ River]бХ
іrzeglądХHistoryczno-Wojskowy 10 (1938) 42–43.
28 щługoszХvolгХюVбХ563.
29 Codex epistolaris saeculi, vol. 2. 289.
365
Hungaro-Polonica
whom preliminary talks were initiated by Ostap Khlopit-
skyi,30 as well as the stay of the Cossacks, who were invited
by the Moravian nobility to fight againstrebelled Hungarian
nobility at the beginning of the XVIIth century on the territory
of Moravia, and the presence of the Cossacks, being part of
the imperial troops, fighting against the Czechs in the Battle
of White Mountain in 162031 and so on.
The rapid cultural and scientific development in Western
and Central Europe in the early XVIIth century, dis-semina-
tion of humanistic ideas, the crisis of scholasticism and secu-
larized processes caused anthropocentric turn in the spir-
itual realm and church life. As F. Dvornik32 aptly noted, piety
took on individual traits increasingly and was less associated
with participation in joint religious services, which often
lacked the necessary conditions. The invention of printing,
awakening interest in the Bible and, con-sequently, the
spread of religious literature in Latin as well as in local lan-
guages only exacerbated these trends. Still many devout
people were captivated by the wave of mysticism. However,
the theoretical calls of Christian humanists were not enough
and radical changes were in need, the latter were proposed
by Martin Luther. Luther's doctrine became acceptable for
the Czech Brotherhood.
30 ыrantishekХіalackýбХщějinyХnároduХčeskéhoХvХСechachХaХvХżoravěХ[TheХ
History of the Czech Nation in Bohemia and Moravia] vol.VI (Praha, 1906)
259.
31 Ԡ Х ,ԓ ԕ [Rudolf,
Urbanek, The Hussite Military Arts and Europe] (Praha, 1946) 18.
32 Ԓ ХԔ ,Ԛ Х Х ХXVю–XVююХ гХ[Vasyl,
Domanyckyj, The Cossack Time at the Turn of XVI–XVII Centuries], З .
ԝ г - Х гХ (1964) 49.
366
Hungaro-Polonica
After an unsuccessful rebel against Ferdinand I in 1548
Czech Brotherhood were expelled from Bohemia and found
their refuge in the Polish Kingdom.33 Here their patrons were
members of the nobility Andzhej Gurko and Jan Ostroroh. In
particular, the latter opened in 1553 in the city of Leszno a
praying house and school for Czech Brotherhood.34 Later the
most important religious Hussite centers in Poland would be
in their communities in the cities of іoznań and Leszno.
Traces of Taborites and Hussite preachers can be traced since
the middle of the XVth century on the territories of Hungary
and Moldova. However, after the increasing activity of In-
quisition on account of any heretical movements (Nicholas
of Leczyca and Jakub Hrzhymaly of Dzyerzhanova were fa-
mous for their enthusiasm in fighting against Polish Huss-
ites35) the persecutions begun, including those against com-
munities of the "Unity of the Bretheren".
The spread of Hussite Reformation ideas, particularly in
the cultural and educational spheres, on the territory of the
South-Western Rus in the XVIth – first half of XVIIth century
took place in different ways. The first, of course is the geo-
political location and interdynastyrelations. Consanguinity
between the representatives of the Polish and Rus nobles led
33 Anton Florovskyj, Ukrajina na strankach českích dejin, Pr̆ehled dĕjin
SSSR: Od nejstars̆ich dob do roke 1861 [Ukraine in Czech History, The
Review of Soviet History from the Earliest Times until 1861] vol.1 (Praha,
1965) 61–74.
34 ХԔ Хԡ ’ Х ХЄ Х Х Х ,
ԟ гХ Х гХ [Francis Dvornik. The Slavs in European History and
Civilization] (Kiev, 2005) 349.
35 Eva Maleczyńska, Vliv husitského hnutíХna Polsko, Mezínárodni ohlas
husítstvíХ[TheХюnfluenceХofХHussiteХżovementХonХіolandбХцnХюnternational
Outcry of the Hussites] (Praha, 1958) 92.
367
Hungaro-Polonica
to support new Reformation ideas by the latter. Thus, in Ga-
licia Czech Brotherhood were supported by orthodox family
of Horayskyh, who had become more Poland-oriented in the
XVth century.
Speaking about the second way of Hussite spread, it is
necessary to emphasize the direct interest of the Czech
fraternal environment in the eastern branch of Christianity
as a fundamental concept of their early activities was a
search for the true apostolic tradition, not spoiled by foreign
influences. The proof of this lies in the fact of communication
betweenthe Utraquists and Patriarchate of Constantinople in
1452,36 and Expedition consisting of 4 fraternal community
members who left Prague in spring of 1491 in search for pure
шhristianХtraditionгХOneХofХitsХrepresentativesбХżarešХźoko-
vets went to Rus.37 During the free development of "Unity of
the Bretheren" in Bohemia and Moravia the communication
between the "brothers" and population of Galician Rus was
constantly maintained. Arguing against the Catholic
Church, proving that it had distorted the true apostolic
Christianity, the Hussites opposed the credibility of the
Eastern Church.
The spread of Hussite ideas on the territories of the South-
Western Rus has also contributed to a common language and
36 цdolfХіawińskiбХяanaХOstrorogaХёywotХiХpismoХoХNaprawieХRzeczypos-
politej [Jan Ostroroga, Life and the Letter of the Remediation for the
Rzeczpospolita] (Warszawa, 1884) 22.
37 Pawel Kras, Inkwizycja papieska w walce z husytyzmem na ziemiach
polskichбХ іolskieХ echaХ husytyzmuбХ żateriałyХ zХ konferencjiХ naukowejХ
źłodzkoбХзм–28.09. 1996 [The Papal Inquisition on Fighting Hussitism in
the Polish Lands, Polish Echoes of the Hussitism. Materials from the
Conference KłodzkoбХзм–28. 09. 1996] (Warszawa, 1999) 103.
368
Hungaro-Polonica
a significant cultural impact of Czechs on the Poles and the
Rus. J. Matsurek comparing the style of Galician-Ukrainian
and Moldavian charters of the first half of the XVth–XVIth
century, came to the conclusion that there are obvious anal-
ogies and similarities with Czech charters in terms of form,
style and linguistics. The scientist explains this feature by the
fact of work of the Czech Hussite scriveners in the offices of
Rus as well as by the training of local people in writing char-
ters which were based on a Czech design.
The sources describing the activities of Czech Brother-
hood since the second half of the XVth century were found in
Galicia,38 Transcarpathia, Volyn, Podillya. Thedata of place
names, which were collected in the late nineteenth century
by Podilsk local historian Yuri Sitsynskyi, testified settling of
numerous Protestant communities on the territory of Podil-
lya.39 According to the data, at the end of the nine-teenth
century almost 30 place names of Czech origin were
localized near Kamianets-Podilsk. The author also notes that
a large community of Czech Brotherhood was settled in the
city of Smotrychin the 1490–1500s. Numerous communities
who settled on the territory of Podillya, were constantly so-
cializing, not losing communication with each other. In their
home they have retained all the features of the implemented
38 ыrantishekХŠmahelбХHusyckieХpojęcieХwzjemnoцciХsłowiańskiejХiХczesko-
polskiej // Polskie echa husytyzmu. żateriałyХ zХ konferencjiХ naukowejХ
źłodzkoбХ зм–28.09. 1996. [The Hussite Concept of Slavonic and Czech-
Polish Reciprocity, Polish Echoes of the Hussitism. Materials from the
шonferenceХźłodzkoбХзм–28. 09. 1996] (Warszawa, 1999) 11.
39 яaroslavХьollбХяednotaХbratrskáХwХXVгХStoletíбХСeskyХСasopisХHistoryckyХ
[The Brotherly Union in the XVth Century, Czech History Magazine]
(Praha, 1916) 153.
369
Hungaro-Polonica
ordinance which was introduced by Lukash long before the
reforms, especially it was about the converts "brothers" who
had to undergo a two-year trial period before the
consecration of the community.
The greater number of Protestant communities were
located in Galicia (around 30 branches), in Kholm-Belz
Pobuzhya (24 communities) and in Volyn (about 20
communities).40 Calvinism, Socianity, Lutheranism and
teachings of the Czech Brotherhood were the most popular
Reformation tendencies in Ukrainian lands. Mass migrations
of the Czech Brotherhoodfrom the Czech territory began
after 1620. This is stated in a letter from Charles of
Zherotyndated 06.07.1629, in which he wrote: "[...] many
Czechs settled in Hungary, Rus, and especially in land of
Semyhradsk [...]".41 In Galicia in the XVIth–XVIIth century lived
a lot of people with the surname Moravets. In addition to
this, it is necessary to recall the activity of Martin Moravets
(1606–1654) from Myslov on the territory of Lviv. In the year
of 1637 in Kholmshchyna by Mr. Christopher Potocki served:
"[...] honest [...] Vyantseslav Czech." For a while Jan Fiakr from
Fulnek lived in Galicia and was even a rector of the school
(from 1650)бХ heХ wasХ яanХ цmosХ шomenius’Х associateг42 The
Czech Brotherhood was functioning in Berestechko, having
Jerzy Leszczynski as a patron, and later on at the beginning
40 Macůrek, K dějinam česko-ukrajinských, 182.
41 StanislawХчarączбХRysХdziejówХzakonuХkaznodziejskiegoХwХіolsceХ[TheХ
History of the Order of Preachers in Poland] vol. (Lviv, 1861) 216–218.
42 Хԡ ,ԝ Ԛ ’ -
ԟ , . Ԝ. Ԝ [Yurij Sicinskyj,
Essays on the Historical Topography of the City Kamenetz-Podolsk and
the Surrounding Area, ed. M. Moshak] (Kamenetz-Podolsk, 1994) 45–60.
370
Hungaro-Polonica
of the XVIth centuryХTheophilusХTurnovskyi’sbrother named
Jan Turnovskyi took charge of the community.43 Theophilus
Turnovskyi being familiar with Prince Konstantin Ostrog,
made great efforts in the case of unification of the Protestants
and Orthodox in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Tur-
novskyi was one of the most influential members of Torun
(1595) and Vilna Congresses (1599).44 However, these ecu-
menic plans were rejected by higher Orthodox clergy.
It is worth mentioning the protestant branches that
existed in the Carpathian region in the XVIth century. Their
support in the region was carried out at the state (initiated
by Rákóczi princes) and church (Orthodox Church) levels.
Protestant school in the city of Sukhyi Potok became the
center of the reformation movement throughout the Trans-
carpathian region.45 In 1650 at the invitation of George
Rákóczi Jan Comenius arrived, having a purpose to re-
organize the local Lutheran school into the Calvinist Aca-
demy. Here he wrote a number of well-known pedagogical
works: The laws of a well-organized school or the Rules of
Children Behavior and so on.46 Educational activity of Czech
Brotherhood in Transcarpathia was associated with the
spread of Czech literature in Transcarpathian schools and
promotion of reformational ideas. The first translations of
43 Ԝ Хԓ ,Ԕ .З [Mychaylo
Grushevskyj, The Spiritual Ukraine. The Collection of Works] (Kiev, 1994)
52.
44 źarlХ ёerotinбХ Żistove psaníХ jazykem českým [The Folic of Writing in
Czech Language] (Brünn, 1870–1872) 62.
45 , Х Х , 290–293.
46 І Х Х Х пХ ԟ Х Х бХ Х гХ ԟ
[The History of Religion in Ukraine: Protestantism in Ukraine,
ed. Pavlo Yarocki] vol.5 (Kiev, 2002) 18.
371
Hungaro-Polonica
the Holy Scripture appeared in this region with the help of
the Czech Brotherhood who brought here copies of
"Shekeyskyi Psalter" (1550), "The Gospel" (1574), "Acts of the
Apostles" (second half of the XVIth century), also known as
"The Bible of Kralice".47
Same controversial is a problem of the origin and institu-
tional functioning of fraternal Orthodox movement in Rus,
taking into consideration the influence of Hussite Refor-
mation ideas. At the first sight, there is ideological and dog-
matic proximityof the Czech and Orthodox mass move-
ments. Proponents of this version was Professor E. Me-
dynskyi, who wrote and reinforced it with a number of com-
pelling evidences the fact, that Bohemian Brotherhood could
serve as the model (not as agenuine factor) of the formation
of Ukrainian fraternities in the XVIth – XVIIth century.48
Ukrainian researchers, such as J. Isayevych,49 A. Savych,50 K.
Kharlampovych51 focused their attention on the similarity in
the organization and content of education. Let us consider
their reasoning:
Firstly, the activity of the Protestant and Orthodox breth-
ren schools was directed against the Catholic Jesuit colleges,
where scholastic teaching methods predominated; secondly,
the similarity in the activity of brethren schools: following
47 чidloбХцktyХjednotyХчratrskéбХжмз–173.
48 Ԓ Хԛ ,І :
[The History of Protestantism in Ukraine: Lectures] (Lviv, 1995) 91.
49 І є ,Ԟ , 2–9.
50 ԡ ,ԝ , 200
51 Ԛ бХ , З
XVI XVII , [Konstantyn
Harlampovich, The Westrus Orthodox School XVI and Early XVII
Century, Their Attitude to the Alien.] (Kazan, 1898) 524.
372
Hungaro-Polonica
the principle of a consistent and systematic learning, age di-
vision and the division of subjects and borrowing the ele-
ments of Protestant learning and education; thirdly, the sim-
ilarity in cultural and educational activities: in terms of lan-
guage, Czech and Orthodox members of brotherhood con-
ducted a spelling reform; fourthly, good relations between
the Orthodox and Protestant teachers who had studied in
higher education institutions in Germany.
The aforementioned research connotations need, in our
opinion, more profound reasoning. In particular, it is neces-
sary to state that the socio-political and religious situation in
the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and spread of Refor-
mation movements on its territory contributed to the uprise
of fraternal Orthodox schools rather as a "counterparty" for
Catholic and Protestant schools in order to preserve their
own religious traditions and cultural identity. The negative
impact of Protestantism on Rus community laid in disorgan-
ization of the Orthodox clergy and alienation from their own
national culture. Brethren schools defended orthodoxy as
the basis of national identity, which was opposed to the offi-
cial Polish and Protestant religious and cultural paradigm.
373
Hungaro-Polonica
In particular, evidences of the negative attitude of the Ortho-
dox clergy to both sides is found in the writings by J. Glovat-
skiy52 and V. Lipinsky.53
Next, let us consider the question of similarity in the or-
ganizational activitiy of Czech and Rus brethren schools. As
an example, the organization of educational process in Os-
troh Academy, course of studies, teaching methods, class-
task system really show similarities with the Protestant gym-
nasiums.54 However, the lack of qualified teachers and text-
books in schools forced the headquarters of these institutions
to the educational use of the Protestant textbooks. In partic-
ular, there were widely used vokabulaswritten by J. A. Co-
menius as educational books in schools and in Kyiv Mohyla
Academy.55 We should also note that the brethren schools in
the Ukrainian lands in school should be considered in the
European context of philosophical and pedagogical thought,
which had a significant impact on their development. The
similarity of statutes of Ukrainian and Czech brethren
schools and Protestant communities can be traced in those
issues that had already become a common heritage of hu-
manist pedagogy in different European countries.
52 Хԓ ,ԝ Х Х Х Хԡ -
Х гХ ԟ Х - Х Х [YakivХ
HolovackyjбХ TheХ чeginningХ andХ цctivitiesХ ofХ ŻvivХ Stavropig yskyХ
Brotherhood. According to the Historical and Literary Point of View]
(Lviv, 1860) 5.
53 Ԓ’ Хԛ ,Ԡ [Vyaches-
lav Lypynskyj, Religion and Church in the history of Ukraine] (Lviv, 1933)
96.
54 Ԛ Х , “Ԟ Х Х ”
[Konstyantyn Harlampowych, The Ostroh Orthodox School], Ԛ
5 (1897) 205.
55 ԡ бХԝ Х Х , 152.
374
Hungaro-Polonica
Thus, the conducted research confirms the fact, that the
Hussite revolution and its ideas of the Reformation found its
reverberation in the lands of the South-Western Rus of the
late XVth – first half of the XVIIth century. This is due to the
geographical closeness, common language and culture, well-
established inter-state relations,constant migration of the
youth. The participation of the Rus in the Hussite military
events clearly demonstrated not only support for the Hussite
heresy in the Orthodox environment, but also brought nu-
merous loans pertaining to the military-strategic sphere, bor-
rowings of names of weapons from Czech.
The most significant impact of Hussite Reformation ideas
can be observed in the cultural and educational spheres.
Galician and Carpathian Rus became a place of residence
and cultural and educational activities of many immigrants,
especially Czech Brotherhoodof Bohemia and Moravia. By
the end of the XVIth century the ethnic composition of Czech
Brotherhoodhas changed so much that they were the Czechs
only by name. Cultural and educational revival in Galicia
and Precarpathian Rus was largely inspired by the Hussite
Reformation influences. In educated circles the Rus craved
for the need to develop writing, organize Ukrainian schools
and printing, create manuals and much more. The idea of
secular patronage over the church became widely popular,
which was brought into action by Orthodox Brethren.
Speaking of the religious sphere, it is necessary to state
the least impact of Hussite Reformation ideas because the
idea of Orthodox-Protestant union was unsustainable. That
was because both sides had different religious and cultural
375
Hungaro-Polonica
background and traditions. Orthodox theologians consid-
ered Evangelics, Protestants, Czech Brotherhood to be
heretics, communication whith them threatened dogmatic
foundations of the eastern branch of Christianity.
Bibliography
Primary sources
чidloбХ яaroslavбХ цktyХ jednotyХ чratrskéХ [цctsХ ofХ theХ UnityХ ofХ чrethren]
vol.1–2 (Brno, 1915–1923) 172–173.
Codex epistolaris saeculi decimi quinti, ed. Augusti Sokolowski – Josephi
SzujskiХĐźrakówбХжнмлЮг
Secondary literature
ьrygielбХ яerzyбХ ёycieХ iХ działanoцРХ ZygmuntaХ źorybutowiczaгХ StudiumХ zХ
dziejówХstosunkówХpolsko-czeskichХwХpierwszejХpołowieХXVХwiekuХ[TheХ
life and activities of Zygmunt Korybutowicz, The Materials on the history
of Polish-Czech Relations of the First Half of the XVth Century]ХĐWrocławбХ
1988).
żacůrekбХ яosefбХ źХ dějinamХ česko-ukrajinskýchХ aХ česko-rumunskýchХ
vztahůХ зХ polгХ жйХ aХ жгХ polгХ жкХ stoletiгбХ SlovanskéХ historickéХ studieХ [TheХ
history of Czech-Ukrainian and Czech-Romanian Relations at the End of
the XIVth– of the First Half of the XVth Century] (Praha, 1960) 127–182.
І є бХ бХ „Ԟ Х Х Х ХXVююХ гпХ Х ХХ
Х ” [Isajevich,Jaroslav, The Educational Movement in
Ukraine XVIIth century: Eastern Tradition and Western Influence],
Ԛ Х 1 (1995) 2–9.
ԡ бХԞ бХԝ Х Х Х Х ХԒ Х Х
ԑ Х Х XVюХ – XVюююХ гХ [SavychбХ OleksandrбХ ъssaysХ onХ theХ HistoryХ ofХ
376
Hungaro-Polonica
Cultural Movements in Ukraine and Belarus in the XVI – XVIIIth
Centuries] (Kiev, 1929)
бХԐ бХ Х Х Х бХԞ Х Х Х
- Х Х ĐX–XVюююЮбХ Х жХ [ыlorovskyjбХ цntonбХ TheХ
Czechs and East Slavs, Essays by History Czech-Russen Relations (X–
XVIII)] vol.1 (Praha, 1935)
377
Authors
Albrecht, Stefan, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmu-
seum, Mainz.
albrecht@rgzm.de
Barabás, Gábor, UniversityХofХіécs.
barab.gabor@gmail.com
Benei, Bernadett, Hungarian Academy of Sciences,
Budapest.
bernadettbenei@hotmail.com
Érsek, Annamária, University of Paris-Sorbonne.
annamaria.ersek@gmail.com
Graczyńska, Marta, Jagiellonian University/National
Muzeum inХźraków.
martagraczynska@onet.eu
Herucová, Angelika, Slovak Academy of Sciences,
Bratislava.
a.herucova@gmail.com
Homoľa, Tomáš, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Brati-
slava.
tomashml@gmail.com
Incze, János, Central European University, Budapest.
inczejanos@gmail.com
379
Kovács, IstvánбХUniversityХofХіécs.
kovacs.istvan.hok@gmail.com
Kozłowski, Wojciech, Akademia Pedagogiki
Specjalnej im. Marii Grzegorzewskiej, Warszawa.
wkozlowski@aps.edu.pl
Kubay, Inna, Chernivtsi, Institute of Archeology of the
Ukrainian Academy of Sciences.
quadrivium.cv@gmail.com
Marzec, Andrzej, яagiellonianХUniversityбХźraków.
andmarzec@tlen.pl
Obara-Pawłowska, Anna, Maria Curie-SkłodowskaХ
University in Lublin.
a.a.obara@wp.pl
Quéret-Podesta, Adrien, University of Olomuc.
adrienqueretpodesta@gmail.com
Srodecki, Paul, University of Ostrava, University of
Giessen.
p.srodecki@gmx.de
380