Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
law also recognized the existence of some groups of the "conditional nobles" (conditionarius) whose privileges were limited; e.g., the "nobles of the Church" (nobilis ecclesi) were burdened with defined services to be provided to
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary certain prelates. In some cases, not individuals but a group of people was granted a legal status similar to that of the nobility; e.g., the Hajd people enjoyed the privileges of the nobility not as individuals but as a community. Beginning in the 14th century, Hungarian nobility was based on a Patent of Nobility with a coat of arms issued by the monarch and constituted a legal and social class. Privileges of nobilitye.g. no taxation but obligatory military service at war at own costwere abolished 1848, titles of nobility were abolished in 1947, and the abolishment of titles of nobility were again confirmed in 1990. Similarly to other countries in Central Europe, the proportion of the nobility in the population of the Kingdom of Hungary was significantly higher than in the Western countries: by the 18th century, about 5% of its population qualified a member of the nobility. The "cardinal liberties" of the nobility were clearly summarized in the Tripartitum (a law book collecting the body of common laws of the Kingdom of Hungary) in 1514. According to the Tripartitum, the nobles enjoyed personal freedom, they were submitted exclusively to the authority of the king and they were exempted of taxation but were required to serve in war at own cost; until 1681, they were also entitled to resist any actions of the monarchs that would jeopardize their liberties. The core privileges of the nobility were abolished or expanded to other citizens by the "April laws" in 1848, but the members of the upper nobility could reserve their special political rights (they were hereditary members of the Upper House of the Parliament) and the usage of names of the nobles also distinguished them from the commoners. All the distinctive features of nobility, including titles, were abolished in 1947 following the declaration of the Republic of Hungary. The abolition of titles of nobility was confirmed by parliamentary legislation in 1990. The Latin term Natio Hungarica ("Hungarian nation") during the medieval period covered those groups with the right to representation in the Hungarian Diet: the nobility, the Roman Catholic clergy, and a few enfranchised burghers.[1][2][3] Natio Hungarica thus came in the eighteenth century to refer to just the privileged group which had corporate political rights of parliamentary representation, the prelates, the magnates, and the nobles.
Origins (prehistory)
In the 9th century, the nomadic Magyar society was composed mostly of freemen who were engaged in regular raids against the neighboring (mainly Slavic) peoples.[4] Muslim geographers mentioned that the Magyars exercise dominion over all of the Saqlab [i.e. the Slavs] who are adjacent to them, and they put upon them heavy burdens, and they are in their hands in the position of captives. Ahmad ibn Rustah[5] The freemen were organized into seven (later, after the Kabars had joined their tribal federation, eight) tribes (Hungarian: trzs, Greek: phyle), and each tribe was made of clans (Hungarian: nemzetsg, Greek: genea).[6] Although, the Magyars lived in a stratified society, but the legal position of the freemen was still equal.[4] Around 896, the Magyars invaded the Carpathian Basin and occupied its whole territory by 902.[7] The occupied territory had been inhabited by mainly Slavs, Avars and Germans who became subject to the dominion of the Magyars;[8] on the other hand, the name of Slavic origin of certain leaders of the Magyar armies suggest that some notabilities of the local population may have integrated themselves into the nomadic society. In the 13th century, Simon of Kza described in his chronicle that It came about that when the Magyars took possession of Pannonia they took prisoners of war, both Christian and non-Christian. Some of these were put to death when they continued to offer resistance, according to the custom of nations; the more warlike of the remainder they took with them to fight on the battlefield, and gave them a portion of the spoils; others in turn became their property and were kept around their tents to perform various servile duties. Gesta Hunnorum et Hungarorum
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary Following the conquest, the Magyars made several raids to the territories of present-day Italy, Germany, France and Spain and also to the lands of the Byzantine Empire.[9][10] On one hand, the regular raids contributed to the differentiation of their society because the leaders of the military actions were entitled to reserve a higher share of the booty for themselves, but on the other hand, these actions could also ensure that their commoner participants kept their independent status.[11] These military actions also contributed to the formation of the retinues of the heads of the tribes and the clans.[12] The regular military actions continued westwards until the Battle of Lechfeld in 955; while the raids against the Byzantine Empire finished only in 970.[13] After (or even before) the close of the period of the military raids, the Magyar society underwent a gradual transformation, and several freemen was obliged to give up their nomadic lifestyle and settle down, because the Carpathian Basin did not provide vast pastures that could have sustained a numerous nomadic population.[14] The christianization of the Magyars commenced during the reign of Gza, Grand Prince of the Magyars (before 972-997) who also invited western knights to settle down in his court and granted estates to them.[15]
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary The legal differentiation of certain groups of the "freemen" commenced during King Stephens rule and his decrees contained different rules applicable to the "heads of counties", the "warriors" and the "common freemen"; on the other hand, the size of the weregild payable by their murderer was still the same according to his decrees which suggests that in theory, the "freemens" legal status was still equal. The "heads of counties" (Hungarian: ispn, Latin: comes) lead the administration of the basic administrative units (Hungarian: vrmegye, Latin: comitatus) of the kingdom; they were appointed and dismissed by the king and thus their office was not hereditary - in contrast to the practise the western countries had already been following by that time.[22][23] The "warriors" (Hungarian: vitz, Latin: miles) owned lands and they provided military service to the kings or to the "counts" and King Stephen's decrees expressively urged them to join to the ispns' retinue. The foreign knights who were not appointed to higher offices also increased their number.[24] The size of the weregeld payable by them suggest that the "warriors'" financial conditions must have been close to that of the "common freemen". The "common freemen" (Hungarian: kzrend, Latin: vulgaris) still enjoyed their liberties (e.g., the right to free movement) and they were invited to occasional assemblies convoked by the kings, but the number of "common freemen" who were obliged to settle down on the estates of wealthier landowners was increasing during the period.[25]
5 A new group of soldiers also appeared in the royal documents; they were the "castle warriors" (Hungarian: vrjobbgyok, Latin: iobagio castri) who did not enjoy all the liberties of the "freemen" and were personally bound to a royal castle, but they had a share in both the royal estates attached to the castle and the tax paid by the people who were obliged to provide services to the royal fortress.[28]
Before 1104, King Coloman introduced a new principle when regulating the inheritance of real estates and he differentiated the lands granted by King Stephen I on one hand, and the possessions granted by his successors on the other hand: the former were inherited by all the male descendants of the person who received the grant, while the latter could only be inherited by the owner's sons or (in the lack of sons) by his brothers or their sons.[29] If a possession was granted by King Saint Stephen, it shall be inherited by all the descendants following the order of succession. Other kings' grants shall pass from father to son, and if there is no son, the brother shall come next; but after his death, his sons shall not be excluded from the inheritance. However, in the lack of such brothers, the possession shall pass to the king. Section 20 of the 1st Decree of King Coloman Development in the 12th century In the course of the 12th century, the "freemen" who owned real estate and thus earned enough revenue to serve in the kings' army strengthened their position; even their number started to increase when the kings began to grant freedom to castle warriors and serfs.[30] The first example of this practise was documented by a grant made by King Gza II (11411162) to a serf named Botus who had been serving in a prelate's household before, but who became absolved from his former duties and received a smaller portion of land from the monarch. During the period, the "notabilities" who descended from the same ancestor usually owned jointly their inherited possessions, but several examples could already be found when the members of the family divided their inheritance among themselves.
King Coloman the Book-lover (1095-1116)
King Bla III (11721196) was the first monarch who alienated a whole "county" (Modrus in Croatia) when transferred the ownership of all the royal estates in the "county" to Bartolomej who became the ancestor of the Frankopan (Hungarian: Frangepn) family.[31]
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary The development of the lesser nobility A deed issued, in 1232, by the "royal servants" living in Zala county indicated a new step towards the formation of institutes of their self-government: in the deed, they passed a judgment in a case, which proved that the "counties", that had been the basic units of the royal administration, commenced to turn into an administrative unit governed by the developing nobility.[44] From the 1230s, the terminology used in the royal charters when they referred to "royal servants" began to change and finally, the Decree of 1267 issued by King Bla IV (12351270) identified them with the nobles.[45] Thenceforward, the former "royal servants" could enjoy all the privileges of the nobles and if the kings wanted to advance commoners they rewarded them with noble status in a charter issued for this specific purpose.[46] In the second half of the 13th century, the kings ennobled several castle warriors and thus they got rid of the burden to provide services to the castle holders.[47] Castle warriors whose estate was not charged by specific services to be provided to the castle-holders could reach the status of nobility even without royal grant, provided that the nobles of the "county" where their estates were situated received them into their community.
The emerging power of the barons Following the Mongol invasion of the kingdom in 1241-42, King Bla IV endeavoured the landowners to build strongholds in their domains and therefore, he often granted lands to his partisans with the obligation that they should build a fortress there.[48] The wealthier members of the landed nobility endeavored to strengthen their position and they often rebelled against the kings.[49] They began to employ the members of the lesser nobility in their households and thus the latter (mentioned as familiaris in the deeds) became subordinate The ruins of Csejte Castle (today achtice in Slovakia) - a fortress built in the to them.[50] On the other hand, a familiaris middle of the 13th century kept the ownership of his former estates and in this regard, he still reserved his liberties and fell under the jurisdiction of the royal courts of justice.[51]
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary The last member of the rpd dynasty, King Andrew III (12901301) tried to restore the royal power and thus he strengthened the position of the lesser nobility against the "barons of the realm": he prescribed the involvement of "noble judges" (Hungarian: szolgabr, Latin: iudex nobilium) in judicial proceedings in assize courts (Hungarian: vrmegyei trvnyszk, Latin: sedes iudiciaria) and he also encouraged the nobles to take part in the law-making process by convoking assemblies for this purpose.[52] (...) the heads of the counties shall not dare to decide the verdict or pass a judgement without the four elected nobles." (...) once in each year, all the barons and nobles of our kingdom shall come to the assembly in Szkesfehrvr in order to discuss the state of affairs in the kingdom and examine the barons' actions (...) Articles 5 and 25 of the Decree of 1291 King Andrew III, however, could not hinder the strengthening of the most powerful barons who commenced to govern their domains de facto independently of the monarch and they usurped the royal prerogatives on their territories.[53] Following the king's death, the largest part of the kingdom became subject to the de facto rule of oligarchs like Matthew III Csk, Amade Aba and Ladislaus Kn.[54]
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary tax they had been obliged to pay, which contributed to the unification of the nobility of the whole realm.[64] On the other hand, during his reign, the holders of the 20 highest offices in the public administration and the Royal Households obtained the honorific magnificus vir that distinguished them from other nobles.[65] In 1332, King Charles I declared in one of his charters issued to Margaret de genere Ndasd, whose male relatives had been murdered in 1316 during the internal struggles, that she was entitled to inherit her father's possessions.[66] Although this privilege contradicted the customs of the kingdom that prescribed that daughters can only inherit one-fourth of their father's estates, it set a precedent for future cases and thenceforward "putting her into a son's place" (Hungarian: fiusts, Latin: prfectio) became a royal prerogative and both King Charles I and his successors exercised it occasionally in spite of the sharp opposition of the nobility.[67] The Act of 1351 Following the unsuccessful campaigns against the Kingdom of Naples (13471350) and the ravages of the Black Death (13471349) in the kingdom, King Louis I (13421382) convoked the assembly of the "barons, notabilities and nobles" in 1351 and at their request, he reissued the Golden Bull of 1222 with one modification.[68] The Act also declared the principle of "one and the same liberty" of the nobility when prescribed that (...) all the true nobles who live within the borders of our realm, even including those who live in the duke's provinces within the borders of our realm, shall enjoy the same liberties. Article 11 of the Act of 1351 The modification of the Golden Bull introduced the entail system (Hungarian: sisg, Latin: aviticitas) when regulating the inheritance of the nobles' estates; according to the new system, the nobles' real property could not be devised by will, but it passed by operation of law to the owner's heirs upon his death. The Act of 1351 introduced a new tax called "ninth" (Hungarian: kilenced, King Louis I the Great (1342-1382) Latin: nona) that was payable by all the villeins to their lords; and the Act also prescribed, in order to prevent the wealthier land-owners from enticing the villeins working on the smaller nobles' estate, that all the land-owners were obliged to assess the nex tax otherwise it was payable to the king.[69] On the other hand, King Louis I abolished the taxes the nobles living in Slavonia had been obliged to pay thus ensuring that thenceforward they enjoyed all the liberties of the nobility of the kingdom. Groups of "conditional nobles" Although the Act of 1351 declared the principle of a uniform nobility, but in reality, the legal status of some other groups of people in the kingdom was close to that of the "real nobles of the realm", but they were burdened with defined services linked to their estates and thus their liberties were limited.[70] The "nobles of the Church" (Hungarian: egyhzi nemesek, predilis nemesek; Latin: nobilis ecclesi, prdiales) possessed estates on some wealthier prelates' domains and served as horsemen in their lord's retinue.[71][72] In contrast to the "real nobles of the realm", they fell under the jurisdiction of the prelates, but they also set up their own organization of self-government called "seat" (Hungarian: szk; Latin: sedes).[73][74] The special legal status of the "nobles of the Church" disappeared only in 1853.[75] The "nobles with ten lances" (Hungarian: tzlndzssok; Latin: nobiles sub decem lanceis constituti) lived in Szepes county (today Spi in Slovakia).[76] They were exempted from the jurisdiction of the head of the county
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary and they were organized into an autonomous "seat".[77] At the beginning, each of them were liable to military service, but from 1243, they had to arm only ten lance-bearers for the kings' army. The "nobles with ten lances" could reserve their autonomy until 1804 when their "seat" was merged into Szepes county.[78] The "noble cnezes and voivodes" (Hungarian: nemes kenz, nemes vajda; Latin: nobilis kenezius, nobilis voivoda) were the leaders of the Romanians and Ruthenians who immigrated into the kingdom and settled down there in the course of the 13-15th centuries.[79][80][81] The kings rewarded some voivodes and cnezes for their military service with noble status, but, initially, that status was circumscribed: they remained obligated to pay taxes in kind for their estates, and to provide precisely-defined military services. In the 14th century, judicial affairs in the Htszeg (today Haeg in Romania) district were dealt by the cnez "seats", chaired by the Htszeg castellan. The bishops of Vrad (today Oradea in Romania) and Transylvania rewarded Romanian voivodes who served in their military escorts with the "nobility of the Church". The bishops' semi-noble voivodes remained in this state of dependence until the early modern period, when the Reformation did away with church estates. In contrast, the crown's semi-noble voivodes and cnezes soon rose to the ranks of "true nobles of the realm". After the cnezes were ennobled, their "seat" in the Htszeg district merged with the nobiliary court of Hunyad (today Hunedoara in Romania) county. The rule of the barons' leagues Following the death of King Louis I, his daughter Queen Mary I (13821385, 13861395) acceded to the throne, but the majority of the nobles opposed her rule. In 1385, the young queen had to abdicate in favor of his distant cousin, King Charles II (13851386), but her partisans murdered the new king soon and thus she could ascend the throne again.[82] However, the followers of her murdered opponent's son, King Ladislaus of Naples rose up in open rebellion and captured her; thus the realm stayed without a monarch.[83] In 1386, when the young Queen Mary I (13821385, 13861395) had been captured by rebellious nobles, the prelates and the "barons of the realm" set up a council and they commenced to issue decrees in the name of the "prelates, barons, notabilities and all nobles of the realm".[84] Shortly afterwards, the members of the council entered into a contract with Queen Mary's fianc and elected him king; in the contract, King Sigismund (13871437) accepted that his
King Sigismund (1387-1437)
10
counsillors shall be the prelates, the barons, their offsprings and heirs, of those who used to be the
counsillors of the kings of Hungary[85] The contract also recorded that the king and his counsillors would form a league and the king could not dismiss his counsillors without the consent of the other members of the Royal Council.[86] In 1401, King Sigismund who had been imprisoned by the discontent members of the Royal Council, concluded a new agreement with some members of the upper nobility who set him free. The public law of the kingdom also started to differentiate the descendants of the "barons of the realm", even if they did not held any higher offices, from other nobles: the Act of 1397 referred to them as the "barons' sons" (Hungarian: brfi, Latin: filii baronum) while later documents called them "magnates" (Hungarian: mgns, Latin: magnates).
11
The Castle of Vajdahunyad (today Castelul Huniazilor in Romania) - built in the 15th century and became the centre of the Hunyadi domains
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary clans of the 13th century who did not hold higher offices.[93] They were rich enough not to enter into the service of the magnates; therefore, they preferred to retire to their manors. The "nobles of the counties" (about 3,000-5,000 families) owned about 20-200 villein's parcels; the size of their estates ranged from 500 to 5,000 hectares (from 5 to 50km2 respectively) They were employed by the "magnates" and held the highest offices in their households. Several of them held offices in the "counties'" administration and thus became the leaders of the local "lesser nobility". It is important to note that the boundary between this group and the "nobles with one parcel" was constantly in flux, which created the particular dynamic of Hungarian lesser nobility. The "nobles with one parcel" (about 12,000-16,000 families) formed the most numerous group within the nobility; the size of their estate typically did not exceed the 3 hectares (0,3km2) and their parcels were often cultivated by themselves without the assistance of villeins. They were often employed as mercenaries but they also preferred the legal career; however, plenty of them worked as tailor, blacksmith, butcher or carried out similar profession.[94] In fact, they were peasants or craftsmen who enjoyed all the liberties of the nobility.[95] The majority of the "nobles with one parcel" lived in separate "noble villages", although some of them lived together with villeins in the same settlements. According to the customary law, brothers each were entitled to an equal share in their father's inheritance; therefore, the number of the "nobles with one parcel" were increasing during the period because even larger estates may have been divided among their owner's descendants from generation to generation. The "nobles' in-laws" (Hungarian: agilis, nnemes; Latin: agilis) formed also a specific group within the nobility; they were commoners who married a noble woman or descended from the marriage of a noble woman and a commoner.[96] According to the customary law, the daughters of nobles inherited one-quarter of their father's estates but their inheritance was to be delivered in cash; however, a noble's daughter was entitled to receive her inheritance in-kind, if she married to a commoner.[97] In this case, she and her husband became the owners of one or more noble estates and under the customary law, her husband and their children were regarded nobles.[98] From the 16th century, a noble woman's commoner husband was not counted among the nobles and only their children could reach the status of nobility provided that they inherited landed property from their mother. The triumph of the Estates When King Albert I (14371439) was proclaimed king, he had to take a solemn oath that he would exercise his prerogative powers only with the consent of the Royal Council.[99] The Diet convoked in 1439 enacted that even the nobles who did not have villeins be exempted from the payment of the tithe. (...) as their ancient liberties have required, nobles do not have to pay tithe whether they have villeins or not. Article 28 of the Act of 1439 Following King Albert's death, a civil war broke out between the followers of his posthumous son, King Ladislaus V (14401457) and the partisans of his opponent, King Vladislaus I (14401444).[100] Although the infant king was crowned by the Holy Crown, but the assembly of the Estates declared his coronation void[101] and the Diet formulated the principle that (...) the monarchs' coronation always depends on the will of the people of the realm, and the efficacy and the powers of the crown originate from their consent.[102]
12
13 Between 1440 and 1458, the Diet was convoked in each year (with the exception of 1443 and 1449), and its functions changed radically: previously, the assemblies of the Estates functioned mainly as a consultative body and the monarch passed his decrees in the Royal Council, but thenceforward, the Diet was involved in the legislative process of law-making and the bills were to be passed by the Diet before receiving the Royal Assent.[103]</ref> The monarch (or the regent) sent a personal invitation to the prelates, "barons of the realm" and "magnates" when he convoked a Diet and they attended in person at the assembly; other nobles were represented by their deputies elected at their assemblies held in each county. Occasionally (e.g., in 1441, 1446, 1456), all the nobles were invited to attend in person at the Diet.[104] The constitution of the Diets ensured the predominance of the nobility, because the "magnates" and the "counties'" deputies had an overwhelming majority over the prelates and the towns' representatives.[105]
In 1446, the assembly of the Estates proclaimed John Hunyadi to Regent and he was to govern the realm in cooperation with the Estates until 1453 when King Ladislaus V returned to the kingdom.[106] John Hunyadi was the first "magnate" who received a hereditary title from a king of Hungary.[107] King Matthias I (14431490) rewarded his partisans with hereditary titles and appointed them[108] </ref> hereditary heads of "counties" and he also entitled them to use the red sealing wax.[109][110] During his reign, all the members of the wealthier families descending from the "barons of the realm" received the honorific magnificus which was a next step towards their separation from other nobles.[111] In 1487, a new expression appeared in a deed of armistice signed by King Matthias: 18 families were mentioned as "natural barons of Hungary" (Hungarian: Magyarorszg termszetes bri, Latin: barones natureles in Hungaria) in contrast to the "barons of the realm" who were still the holders of the highest offices in the public administration and the Royal Households.[112]
14
During the reign of King Vladislaus II (14901516), the Diet unambiguosly expressed[113] that certain noble families were in a distinguished position and mentioned them as barons irrespectively of the office they held which prove that by that time, public law had acknowledged their special legal status and their privilege to use distinctive titles.
15
a noble could not be arrested without having been summonsed to appear before a court of justize and judged guilty; a noble was subordinate only to the power of the monarch legally crowned; a noble was exempt from any taxes and obligatory services with the exemption of military service in case of an attack on the realm; nobles were entitled to resist any act of the monarchs that could jeopardize their liberties.[121]
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary Suleiman invaded the kingdom and occupied its central parts. However, by the Sultan's grace, the infant King John II Sigismund (15401570) could reserve the government in the eastern parts of the kingdom which led to the formation of a semi-independent polity on those territories.[124] Thenceforward, the medieval Kingdom of Hungary became divided into three parts: the western and northern territories of the kingdom were ruled by kings from the Habsburg dynasty (Royal Hungary); the central territories of the kingdom became parts of the Ottoman Empire (Ottoman Hungary); Transylvania and other eastern territories of the kingdom turned into a semi-independent principality under Ottoman suzerainty (Eastern Hungarian Kingdom, Principality of Transylvania).[125]
16
17
Notes
[1] John M. Merriman, J. M. Winter, Europe 1789 to 1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire; Charles Scribner's Sons, 2006; page 140; ISBN 978-0-684-31359-7. [2] Nakazawa 2007, p.158. [3] Katerina Zacharia, Hellenisms: Culture, Identity, and Ethnicity from Antiquity to Modernity; Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2008; page 237; ISBN 978-0-7546-6525-0. [4] Krist 1998, p.47. [5] Lszl 1996, p.195. [6] Tth 1998, pp.7889. [7] Tth 1998, p.189. [8] Krist 1998, p.28. [9] Krist 1998, pp.6768. [10] Bna 1998, pp.2965. [11] Krist 1998, p.67. [12] Krist 1998, p.66. [13] Bna 1998, pp.6265. [14] Krist 1998, p.70.
18
[37] Krist 1998, pp.210211. [38] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.102. [39] Krist 1998, pp.212213. [40] Bn 1989a, p.34. [41] Bn 1989b, p.53. [42] Krist 1994, p.55. [43] Krist 1994, p.56. [44] Krist 1998, p.221. [45] Krist 1998, p.256. [46] Krist 1994, pp.377, 484. [47] Krist 1994, p.377. [48] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.123. [49] Krist 1998, pp.263269. [50] Fgedi 1986, pp.132133. [51] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.133. [52] Krist 1998, pp.269271. [53] Krist 1998, pp.273276. [54] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.4145. [55] Tgil & Gerner 1999. [56] Fgedi & Karbi 1998, p. 2 (http:/ / books. google. com/ books?id=6pXe-vrY5rsC& pg=PA2). [57] Tgil & Gerner 1999, p.130. [58] Klein & Reban 1981, p.131. [59] Csaba Lvai, Vasile Vese, Tolerance and intolerance in historical perspective (http:/ / books. google. co. uk/ books?ei=kyBdTv3DKMGp8AOKpLSlAw& ct=result& id=IsDZAAAAMAAJ& dq="natio+ hungarica"+ 15th+ century& q=synonymous+ #search_anchor), PLUS, 2003, ISBN 978-88-8492-139-0 [60] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.4155. [61] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.5657. [62] Fgedi 1986, p.220. [63] Fgedi 1986, pp.192193. [64] Corpus Juris Hungarici, mek.oszk.hu (http:/ / mek. oszk. hu/ 03400/ 03407/ html/ 78. html) [65] Fgedi 1986, p.188. [66] Fgedi 1986, p.250. [67] Fgedi 1986, p.251. [68] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.101102. [69] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.102103. [70] Krist 1994, p.556. [71] Krist 1994, p.181.
19
[94] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.173, 315. [95] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.315. [96] Bn 1989a, p.15. [97] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.313. [98] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.314. [99] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.198. [100] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.199202. [101] Benda 1981, p.260. [102] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.199. [103] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.195. [104] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, pp.195196. [105] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.196. [106] Benda 1981. [107] Benda 1981, p.270. [108] John Vitovec (1463: Zagorje county); Emeric Szapolyai (1465: Szepes county); Nicholas Csupor de Monoszl (1467: Verce county); John Ernuszt (1467: Turc county); Nicholas Bnffy de Alslendva (1485); Peter and Matthias Gerb (1487)<ref name="FOOTNOTEFgedi1986381-382">Fgedi 1986, pp.381-382. [109] Fgedi 1986, p.381. [110] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.227. [111] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.226. [112] Fgedi 1986, p.382. [113] Article 22 of the Act of 1498. [114] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.356. [115] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.358. [116] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.363. [117] Article 16 of the Act of 1514 [118] Engel, Krist & Kubinyi 1998, p.364. [119] Article 25 of the Act of 1514 [120] Benda 1981, p.337. [121] Bn 1989b, p.121. [122] Benda 1981, p.350. [123] Benda 1982, p.361. [124] Benda 1982, pp.372374. [125] Benda 1982, p.374. [126] Bn 1989b, p.36. [127] Bn 1989b, p.190. [128] Articles 5 and 6 of the Act of 1595
20
References Sources
Bn, Pter, ed. (1989a). Magyar trtnelmi fogalomtr - I. ktet (A-K) [Dictionary of the Terminology of the Hungarian History - Volume I /A-K/]. Budapest: Gondolat. ISBN963-282-203-X. Bn, Pter, ed. (1989b). Magyar trtnelmi fogalomtr - II. ktet (L-Zs) [Dictionary of the Terminology of the Hungarian History - Volume II /L-Zs/]. Budapest: Gondolat. ISBN963-282-204-8. Benda, Klmn, ed. (1981). Magyarorszg trtneti kronolgija I /A kezdetektl 1526-ig/ [The Chronology of the History of Hungary - From the beginnings until 1526]. Budapest: Akadmiai Kiad. ISBN963-05-2661-1. Benda, Klmn, ed. (1982). Magyarorszg trtneti kronolgija II /1526-1848/ [The Chronology of the History of Hungary - 1526-1848]. Budapest: Akadmiai Kiad. ISBN963-05-2662-X. Bna, Istvn (2000). A magyarok s Eurpa a 9-10. szzadban [The Magyars and Europe during the 9-10th centuries]. Budapest: Histria - MTA Trtnettudomnyi Intzete. ISBN963-8312-67-X. Bnis, Gyrgy (2003). Hbrisg s rendisg a kzpkori magyar jogban [Vassalage and Feudality in the Medieval Hungarian Law]. Budapest: Osiris Kiad. ISBN963-389-426-3. Engel, Pl; Krist, Gyula; Kubinyi, Andrs (1998). Magyarorszg trtnete - 1301-1526 [The History of Hungary - 1301-1526]. Budapest: Osiris Kiad. ISBN963-379-171-5. Fgedi, Erik (1986). Ispnok, brk, kiskirlyok [Counts, Barons and Petty Kings]. Budapest: Magvet Knyvkiad. ISBN963-14-0582-6. Fgedi, Erik; Karbi, Damir (1998). The Elefnthy. Central European University Press. ISBN978-1-122-05842-1. Karcsony, Jnos (1985). Magyarorszg egyhztrtnete fbb vonsaiban 970-tl 1900-ig [The Major Features of the Church History of Hungary from 970 until 1900]. Budapest: Knyvrtkest Vllalat. ISBN963-02-3434-3. Klein, George; Reban, Milan Jan (1981). The Politics of ethnicity in Eastern Europe (http://books.google.com/ books?id=HutoAAAAMAAJ). East European Monographs. ISBN978-0-914710-87-5. Krist, Gyula, ed. (1994). Korai Magyar Trtneti Lexikon - 9-14. szzad [Encyclopedia of the Early Hungarian History - 9-14th centuries]. Budapest: Akadmiai Kiad. ISBN963-05-6722-9. Krist, Gyula (1998). Magyarorszg trtnete - 895-1301 [The History of Hungary - 895-1301]. Budapest: Osiris Kiad. ISBN963-379-442-0. Lszl, Gyula (1996). The Magyars - Their Life and Civilisation. Corvina. ISBN963-13-4226-3 Tgil, Sven; Gerner, Kristian (1999). Regions in Central Europe: the legacy of history (http://books.google.co. uk/books?id=3PF8uGVHGLsC&pg=PA130&dq=NAtio+Hungarica+Magyar+warrior+tribes+that+ founded&hl=en&ei=FlZXTtLMDMGy8gPPzqyuDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1& ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=NAtio Hungarica Magyar warrior tribes that founded&f=false). Purdue University Press. Tth, Sndor Lszl (1998). Leveditl a Krpt-medencig [From Levedia to the Carpathian Basin]. Szeged: Szegedi Kzpkorsz Mhely. ISBN963-482-175-8.
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary Nakazawa, Tatsuya (2007). "Slovak Nation as a Corporate Body: The Process of the Conceptual Transformation of a Nation without History into a Constitutional Subject during the Revolutions of 1848/49". In Hayashi, Tadayuki; Fukuda, Hiroshi. Regions in Central and Eastern Europe: Past and Present. Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University. pp. 155-181 (http://src-h.slav.hokudai.ac.jp/coe21/publish/no15_ses/09_nakazawa. pdf). ISBN978-4-938637-43-9.
21
Further reading
Select Sources of Historical Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary Alapi, Gyula. Komromvrmegye nemes csaldai. Komrom, 1911. ldsy, Antal. A magyar Nemzeti Mzeum knyvtrnak cmjegyzke. Cmereslevelek. Budapest, 1937. Andretzky, Jzsef. Baranya vrmegye nemesei. Pcs, 1909. Balogh, Gyula. Vasvrmegye nemes csaldjai. Szombathely: Bertalanffy, 1894. Balogh, Gyula, & Mrton Szluha. Vasvrmegye nemes csaldjai. Budapest: Heraldika, 1999. Barcsay-Amant, Zoltn, ed. Nemesi vknyv. Luzern: Kziratknt kezelend, 1935-1980. Baross, Kroly. Magyarorszg fldbirtokosai. Az sszes 100 holdnl tbbet br magyar birtokosok nvsora a tulajdonukban lev fldterletek mvelsi gak szerinti feltntetsvel. Budapest: Hungaria, 1893.
Borovszky Samu, ed. Magyarorszg vrmegyi s vrosai. Magyarorszg monogrfija. Buda-pest: Apoll, 1896-1913. Borovszky, Samu. Nv- s trgymutat a Turul 18831892. vfolyamhoz. Budapest, 1893. Darczy, Zoltn. Nemesi vknyv Budapest: May, 1923-1934. Duds, Gyula. A bcskai nemes csaldok. Zombor, 1893. Dukovits, Istvn. "Nemesi kihirdetsek Veszprm vrmegyben". Kzlemnyek Dunntl trtnethez (1911). Fejrpataky, Lszl, ed. Magyar Nemzetisgi Zsebknyv. Frang csaldok. Budapest, 1888. Fekete Nagy, Antal, ed. Nv- s trgymutat a Turul 18931936. vfolyamaihoz. Budapest, 19011902. Fnyes, Elek. Magyarorszg geogrphiai sztra. Pest: Kozma Vazul, 1851. Rpt. Budapest: MKKE, 1984. Frster, Jen. "Szepes vrmegye nemes csaldainak sszersa 1591-1595-1754/55-1835 vekbl". Kzlemnyek Szemes megye mltjbl (1909). Frhlichsthal, Georg Freiherr von. Der Adel der Habsburgermonarchie im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Insingen bei Rotherburg ob der Tauber: Bauer & Raspe, 2008. Ger, Jzsef. A kirlyi knyvek. Az I. Ferenc Jzsef s IV. Kroly kirly ltal 1867-tl 1918-ig adomnyozott nemessgek, fnemessgek, elnevek s cmerek jegyzke. Budapest, 1940. Ger, Jzsef. A Magyar Kir. Belgymin. ltal igazolt nemesek. Budapest, 1940. Gudenus, Jnos Jzsef. A magyarorszgi fnemessg XX. szzadi genealgija. Budapest: Heraldika, 1990-1999. 5 vols. Gudenus, Jnos Jzsef. "A magyar fnemessg genealgija" (http://www.pim.hu/). Budapest: Petfi Irodalmi Mzeum. Gudenus, Jnos Jzsef. "Magyar csaldtrtneti adattr" (http://www.pim.hu/). Budapest: Petfi Irodalmi Mzeum. Gudenus, Jnos Jzsef. rmny eredet magyar nemesi csaldok genealgija. Budapest: Erdlyi rmny Gykerek Kulturlis Egyeslet, 2000. Gyalkay, Jen. Bihar vrmegye s az tls nemesi insurrectio. Nagyvrad, 1902. Hornszky, Pl. Lipt vrmegye az 1790-1843. vek kztt kiadott nemessgigazol s egyb-bizonytvnyok jegyzke. Budapest, 1940. Horvth, Sndor. A M.Kir. Orszgos Levltrnak az 1886-1907. vekben bemutatott czmeres nemeslevelek jegyzke. Budapest, 1908. Illsy, Jnos, & Bla Pettk. A Kirlyi Knyvek. Jegyzke a bennk foglalt nemessg, czm, czmer, elnv s honossg adomnyozsoknak 1527-1867. Budapest: Magyar Orszgos Levltr, 1895.
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary Illsy, Jnos, & Bla Pettk. Az 1754-55. vi orszgos nemesi sszers. Budapest, 1902. Ivnyi, Bla. "Fogaras vidki nemessg sszersa 1637-bl". Turul 32 (1927): 88-89. Jger Sunstenau, Hanns. General Index zu dem Siebmacher'schen Wappenbchern 16051961. Graz, 1964. Kempelen, Bla. Csaldknyv I. Nemes csaldok. Budapest, 1940. Kempelen, Bla. Magyar frang csaldok. Budapest, 1931. Kempelen, Bla. Magyar nemesi almanach. Az 18671909. magyar nemessgre, bri, grfi s herczegi mltsgra emelt csaldok. Budapest, 1910. Kempelen, Bla. Magyar nemesi csaldknyv. Budapest, 1927. Kempelen, Bla. Magyar nemes csaldok. Budapest: Grill, 1911-1932. 11 vols. Kempelen, Bla. Magyar nemes csaldok cmerei. Budapest, 1914. Kempelen, Bla. Magyar zsid s zsideredet csaldok. Budapest, 1937-1939. 3 Vols. Kiss, R. Istvn. Az utols nemesi felkels. Budapest, 1911. Kszeghi, Sndor. Nemes csaldok Pestvrmegyben. Budapest: Hungria, 1899. Kvri, Lszl. Erdly nevezetesebb csaldai. Kolozsvr, 1854. Lendvai, Mikls. Temes vrmegye nemes csaldjai. Budapest, 1905. 3 vols. Lengyel, Alfrd. Gyr vrmegye nemessgvizsglatai s az 1725. vi invesztigacio. Mo-sonmagyarvr, 1942. Lengyel, Alfrd. Moson megye 1754-ben igazolt nemes csaldjai. Mosonmagyarvr, 1943. Nagy, Ivn. Csaldtrtneti rtest czmerekkel s leszrmazsi tblkkal. Budapest, 1899-1901. Nagy, Ivn. Magyarorszg csaldai czmerekkel s nemzedkrendi tblkkal. Pest: Rth Mr, 1857-1868. 12 vols. Pettk, Bla, & Ede Reiszig. Magyar Nemzetsgi Zsebknyv. Nemes csaldok. Budapest, 1905. Rdei, Ferencz, & Emil Elek. A Magyar fldbirtok 1903. Magyarorszg 100 holdon felli fldbirto-kosainak s haszonbrlinek czmtra a mezgazdasgi ingatlan becsrtknek s a munksviszonyok ismertetsvel. Budapest: Ptria, 1903. Romhnyi, Vilmos. "Nyitra vrmegye 1754-55. vi nemesi igazolsa. Levltri Kzlemnyek (1914). Sndor, Imre, & Jzsef Sebestyn, ed. Genealgiai fzetek. Csaldtrtneti folyirat czmerekkel s leszrmazsi tblkkal. Kolozsvr, 19081914. Scheftsik, Gyrgy. Jsz-Nagykun-Szolnok vrmegye nemes csaldjai. Szolnok, 1935. Schneider, Mikls, Vas vrmegye 1835. vi nemesi sszersa. Szombathely, 1939. Schneider, Mikls. Fejr megye 1843 vi nemesi sszersa. Szkesfehrvr, 1936. Schneider, Mikls. Fejr megye nemesi sszersa (1754, 1809, 1818-21, 1828). Szkesfe-hrvr, 1934. Schneider, Mikls. Fejr megyei nemessgvizsglatok. Szkesfehrvr, 1947. Schneider, Mikls. Fejrmegyei nemes csaldok. Szkesfehrvr: Csitry G. Jen, 1935. Schneider, Mikls. Trencsn megye 1725-32. vi nemessgvizsglata. Szombathely, 1938. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye 1558. vi nemesi sszersa. Szombathely, 1943. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye 1696. vi nemesi sszersa. Szombathely, 1943. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye 1717. vi nemessgvizsglata. Szombathely, 1939. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye 1726/27. vi nemessgvizsglata. Szombathely, 1940. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye 1754. vi nemesi sszersa. Szombathely, 1939. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye ktsgtelen nemesei 1733-ban. Szombathely, 1940. Schneider, Mikls. Vas vrmegye nemesi sszersai 1781. Szombathely, 1941. Schnherr, Gyula. "Czmeres nemes levelek a mrmarosi levltrban". Csaldtrtneti rtest 2 (1900): 175-79, 231. Segner, Felix Ladislaus von. Der ungarische Adel. Grafenau: By the author, 1969. Siebmacher. Der Adel von Ungarn samt den Nebenlndern der St. Stephanskrone. Ed. Ivn Nagy & Gza Cserghe. Nrnberg, 1885-1893. rpt. Neustadt an der Aisch: Bauer & Raspe, 1982.
22
Szluha, Mrton. Bcs-Bodrog, Csand, Lipt, Nyitra, Udvarhely s Vas vrmegyk nemes csaldjai. CD-ROM. Budapest: Arcanum, 2004.
Nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary Tagnyi, Kroly. Jegyzke a Magyar Orszgos Levltrban a magyar s erdlyi udvari kancellria fllltsig tallhat herczegi, grfi, bri, honossgi s nemessgi okleveleknek. Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Levltr, 1886. Tagnyi, Kroly, & Bla Pettk. Ptlk Tagnyi Kroly nemesi jegyzkhez. Budapest, 1888. Vajay, Szabolcs. A Johannita Rend lovagjai, 1854-1987. Mnchen: By the author, 1987. Vajay, Szabolcs. A mltai lovagrend magyar lovagjai 1530-2000. Budapest: Magyar Mltai Lovagok Szvetsge, 2002. Source (open-access academic journal, copyright Purdue University Press: released to Steven Ttsy de Zepetnek): Nobilitashungariae: List of Historical Surnames of the Hungarian Nobility / A magyar trtnelmi nemessg csald neveinek listja. Ed. Steven Ttsy de Zepetnek. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture (Library): West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2010. (http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/clcweblibrary/nobilitashungariae. ) Ttsy de Zepetnek, Steven. Records of the Ttsy de Zepetnek Family / A Zepetneki Ttsy csald adattra. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture (Library): West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2010. (http:/ / docs.lib.purdue.edu/clcweblibrary/totosyrecords)
23
External links
hungarianheraldry.org (http://hungarianheraldry.org/) College of the Hereditary Nobility of Hungary and Transylvania docs.lib.purdue.edu (http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/clcweblibrary/nobilitashungariae), nobilitashungariae: List of Historical Surnames of the Hungarian Nobility. Ed. Steven Ttsy de Zepetnek.
24
License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 //creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/