he name Dracula conjures up a myriad of dark images in our mind; late
night
horror movies of vampires and vampire hunters, dark forests in Romania,
and
tyranical leaders capable of all sorts of evil acts. Here is some
background
information on the Dracula from which Bram Stoker -- and Jeanne
Kalogridis
-- were inspired: Prince Vlad Tepes, born 1431, died 1476, ruler of the
lands now known as Romania.
This section owes much to Dracula researchers Radu Florescu and Raymond
McNally, whose wonderful books IN SEARCH OF DRACULA and DRACULA: PRINCE
OF
MANY FACES were primary resources in the creation of the FAMILY DRACUL
novels.
Vlad Tepes (which Kalogridis spells phonetically in English as Tsepesh)
was
born in the town of Sighisoara in Transylvania (now known as northern
Romania) in 1431 and later came to rule that area of southern Romania
known
as Wallachia. The word "tepes" in Romanian means "impaler" -- and Vlad
was
so-named because of his penchant for impalement as a means of punishing
his
enemies. Impalement was a particularly gruesome form of execution,
wherein
the victim was impaled between the legs -- to put it politely -- upon a
large, sharpened stake the width of a burly man's arm. Vlad especially
enjoyed mass executions, where several victims were impaled at once,
and
their stakes hoisted upright. As they hung suspended above the ground,
the
weight of their bodies would slowly drag them downwards, causing the
sharpened end of the stake to pierce their internal organs. In order to
better enjoy these mass spectacles, Vlad routinely ordered a banquet
table
set up in front of his victims, and would enjoy a leisurely supper amid
the
pitiful sights and sounds of the dying.
In addition to his title of "Impaler," Vlad was also known as
"Dracula,"
which means "son of the Dragon." Originally, this title came about
because
his father (also named Vlad) belonged to the Order of the Dragon, an
order
formed by the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund for the purpose of defeating
the
Turks. The elder Vlad used the dragon symbol on his coins and went by
the
name "Dracul" ("dragon" or "devil"). Hence the diminutive "-a" on his
son's
name, Dracula. As the younger Vlad's talent for torture became known,
however, the name Dracula came to be interpreted more and more as the
sinister "son of the devil."
At the same time that Vlad became notorious for his sadism, he was also
respected by his subjects because of his fierce campaigns against the
Turks.
He was a respected as a warrior and stern ruler (no kidding!) who
tolerated
no crime against his people, and during his reign erected several
monasteries. However, despite Vlad's political ambition, the turbulent
political atmosphere of the times took its toll on his reign. He was
overthrown twice (he ruled for a brief period in 1448, again from
1456-1462,
and for only a matter of weeks in the year of his death, 1476.)
Ultimately,
Dracula died violently (according to rumor, at the hands of one of his
men
who was actually a Turkish spy). He was buried at one of the
monasteries he
patronized, on the island at Snagov.
Contrary to popular belief, Dracula's castle does not exist in
Transylvania;
the crumbling ruins still stand in the northern Wallachian town of
Tirgoviste.
The Dracul family tree as given by Jeanne Kalogridis in her novels
Dracula's empty tomb
Fortress of Belgrade Cronstad
Transylvania - The Roots of Ethnic Conflict
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART ONE: The Dawn of National Consciousness
The roots of ethnic conflict in Transylvania go back at least as far as
the
collapse of the feudal kingdom of Hungary on the blood-soaked plains of
Moh�cs. This battle against the Ottoman Turks in 1526 resulted in the
division and depopulation of the once powerful and prosperous kingdom
of
Matthias Rex (1458--90). The Hungary that had provided stability for
Eastern
Europe for over 500 years was now subjected to depredations from both
East
and West. Transylvania, which had been an integral part of this
kingdom,
henceforth faced an uncertain future as the Habsburgs and the Ottomans
attempted to consolidate their hold over northwestern and central
Hungary
respectively.
The defeat at Moh�cs opened an age of constant conflict. The Hungarian
population was dramatically and drastically reduced in the ceaseless
military struggles. Many sections of the former kingdom were totally
depopulated. It was during these critical years of the Turkish wars
that
Transylvania gained added significance for the peoples of Eastern
Europe.
The Hungarian princes who governed it from 1541 until the end of the
seventeenth century provided continuity to the quest for Hungarian
independence. At the same time, Transylvania became a haven for the
Rumanian
populations of Wallachia and Moldavia.
The study by L. S. Domonkos provides an ethnic profile of the medieval
kingdom of Hungary on the eve of the Battle of Moh�cs. It sketches the
ethnic composition and the prevailing state order of which Transylvania
was
an integral part. Domonkos also shows that the relations between these
diverse groups were not confrontational along ethnic lines.
The study by Louis J. Elteto focuses on the beginnings of the
disintegration, which in the long run produced some of the nationality
conflicts of the future. Elteto's analysis reflects on the period that
follows the Battle of Moh�cs, its main concern being to outline the
impact
of the Reformation on the national consciousness of the Hungarians,
Saxons,
and Rumanians of Transylvania. This period represents for all the
peoples of
Transylvania an important phase in the differentiation of their
respective
self-definitions.
B�la K. Kir�ly's study is concerned with the role of Transylvania in
the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in fostering or hindering
the concept of independence for the kingdom of Hungary. As noted above,
the
Battle of Moh�cs signalled the end of independence for Hungarian
statehood.
Its division into Habsburg and Ottoman-occupied parts meant that the
remainder, i.e., Transylvania, was now the only hope for the
preservation of
Hungarian liberty and the only political entity that could work toward
the
reestablishment of the kingdom of Hungary.
Together these three studies provide the broad background for the
developments that led to the emergence of modern nationalism in
Transylvania.
1. The Multiethnic Character of the Hungarian
Kingdom in the Later Middle Ages
by L. S. DOMONKOS
THE NATIO HUNGARICA
The Hungarian kingdom in the late Middle Ages was not a national state
in
the modern sense of the word, but a multiethnic political unit in which
the
Magyar nobility held the dominant position. In this respect Hungary is
not
unique, for the medieval period does not offer examples of national
states.
Hungary had within its borders a large number of non-Magyar inhabitants
in
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries who were nevertheless members of
the
"Natio Hungarica" or "Natio Hungarorum," irrespective of the ethnic
background. The terms of "Natio Hungarica" or "Natio Hungarorum" should
be
viewed basically as indicators of geographic and not ethnic origin. An
individual belonged to the "Hungarian Nation" if he or she resided
under the
authority of the king of Hungary, i.e., in the lands of the Hungarian
crown.[1] Probably the clearest illustration of this point can be drawn
from
late medieval university practices. A large number of students from the
Hungarian kingdom attended the University of Vienna in the fifteenth
century, where the scholars were divided into four "nations," following
the
model of the great University of Paris. These nations were the
Austrian,
which also included Italy; the Rhenish, comprising the Rhineland and
Western
Europe; the Hungarian, with the Slavic areas added; and the Saxon, to
which
belonged students from northern and eastern Germany, Scandinavia, and
England.[2] If, for example, a student from one of the Transylvanian
Saxon
towns enrolled at the University of Vienna, as Thomas Altenberg of
Szeben
(Hermannstadt, Sibiu) did in 1453, he was inscribed into the registers
of
the Hungarian Nation[3] and not the Saxon Nation, for the simple reason
that
he came from a territory of the Hungarian crown. The fact that Thomas
Altenberg spoke German and might have felt more at home in the
Austrian,
Rhenish, or Saxon nations at the University does not enter the picture
at
all. He was, because of the geographic location of his home, a member
of the
Natio Hungarica.[4]
The Hungarian kingdom in the fifteenth century comprised a geographic
entity
bounded by the Carpathian Mountain range in the north, east, and
southeast,
and by the Danube and Sz�va (Sava) rivers in the south and southwest.
The
western border with Austria did not follow any major geographical
barrier or
line. The area of the kingdom was about 300,000 square kilometers (or
124,000 square miles) and included the regions of Hungary proper,
Croatia-Slavonia, and for a time the coast of Dalmatia. The population
of
fifteenth-century Hungary (including Transylvania but excluding
Croatia-Slavonia), has been estimated to have been between 3.4 and 4
million
inhabitants. The more conservative figure given by Erik Moln�r,[5] who
based
his calculations on a family unit of four members, is probably more
nearly
correct than the estimates of Istv�n Szab�, who took a five-member
peasant
family as the norm.[6] It is interesting to note that in 1720, almost
200
years after the Battle of Moh�cs, the population of the same area is
still
3.5 to 4 million.[7] This gives some indication of the devastation
caused by
the Turkish wars. Under the authority of the Hungarian crown, the areas
of
Transylvania and Croatia-Slavonia enjoyed a degree of autonomy in their
political and administrative life but were parts of the regnum
Hungariae.
The kingdom was subdivided into counties, of which fifty-seven were in
Hungary proper, seven in Transylvania, and seven in the Slavonian area.
South of the Sz�va River frontier were a number of military districts
(b�ns�gok), which were buffer areas against Turkish expansion and
scenes of
a number of campaigns against the Ottomans during the early period of
the
reign of Matthias Corvinus.
In the early sixteenth century, Mikl�s Ol�h (1493--1568), humanist
scholar,
friend of Erasmus, and later archbishop of Esztergom --- and as his
name
indicates, of Rumanian origin --- composed an important geographic
treatise
entitled "Hungaria,"[8] in which he gave an invaluable description of
the
kingdom as it was before the Turkish devastation. Ol�h's work has been
studied with care by art historians, but it is also important to us
because
in Chapter XIX of "Hungaria," Ol�h enumerated the various inhabitants
found
in Hungary during his own lifetime. He describes these as follows: "The
territory of the Hungarian kingdom contains in our time diverse
nations,
[namely] Hungarians, Germans, Bohemians, Slavs, Croatians, Saxons,
Sz�kelys,
Vlachs, Serbs, Cumans, Jaziges, Ruthenians, and most recently
Turks."[9]
Ol�h mentions twelve "nations" who resided under the sovereignty of the
Hungarian crown. These same twelve groups were present during the 200
years
prior to the Battle of Moh�cs, which is the period on which we plan to
focus. It is well known that Moh�cs brought about the destruction of
the
medieval Hungarian monarchy and ushered in great
changes that also effected the subsequent ethnic composition of the
state,
to the detriment of the once dominant Magyar element. Following roughly
the
outline presented by Ol�h, let us examine the twelve "nations" and
their
major characteristics during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
THE MAGYAR ELEMENT AND THE SZ�KELYS
The first mentioned "nation" were the Magyars, who were the dominant
ethnic
group in the Hungarian kingdom in the late Middle Ages. Not only were
the
Magyars the politically significant element, but they also constituted
the
vast majority of the population. By the end of the fifteenth century,
the
kingdom was more thoroughly Hungarian than it ever was until the
post-Trianon era of the twentieth century.[10]
Our most reliable, although unfortunately incomplete, sources of
information
concerning the wealth, size, population density, etc. of the late
medieval
Hungarian state are the taxation records of 1494--95. These were
prepared
during the tenure of Zsigmond Ernuszt, bishop of P�cs and treasurer
(thesaurarius) of the realm, who in 1496 was accused of having stolen a
sizeable sum from the treasury. In order to clear himself, Ernuszt
prepared
elaborate accounts for the period 1494--95, which are an invaluable
source
for the study of the social and economic conditions of the period.[11]
Elem�r M�lyusz, one of the most renowned Hungarian medievalists,
estimated
on the basis of taxation documents that 77.25 percent of those employed
in
agricultural pursuits in the fifteenth century were Magyars. This is
based
on the analysis of the names of the taxpayers. M�lyusz also found that
about
17 percent of the names were such that it is impossible to determine
the
ethnic group to which the individual belonged. Some of these were
undoubtedly also Hungarians, which would push the percentage up
further, to
about 80 percent.[12]
The Magyar population was concentrated in the lower-lying regions of
the
Carpathian Basin, in the plateau areas, and in the river valleys. Since
there was, for a long period, an ample land reserve, the less desirable
areas were left to others or remained unoccupied. Particularly strong
were
the settlements in the counties of Baranya, Tolna, B�cs, and Bodrog.
Towns
and villages in the valleys of the K�r�s, Szamos, and Maros in eastern
Hungary were inhabited predominantly by Hungarians. The same is true of
the
lower valley of the V�g and Nyitra rivers in northwestern Hungary. The
evidence presented by surviving charters and other documents from the
fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries is overwhelming: the place names are predominantly Hungarian,
indicating that the majority of the population was in fact Magyar.[13]
If one were to draw a map showing ethnic distribution in Hungary, the
more
mountainous regions would show the presence of Slovak, Rumanian, or
Ruthenian inhabitants in large areas. This, however, should be viewed
with a
certain amount of caution because of the great differences in the
density of
the population between the counties on the plain and in the Carpathian
or
Transylvanian regions. Mountains and forests can give livelihood to
much
smaller numbers of people; consequently, settlements were of more
modest
proportions in these regions. Furthermore, since many of these mountain
settlements were of more recent foundation, they were also less
populous.[14] To illustrate density of population, we must again turn
to the
tax lists of 1495, which measure the number of porta (tax-paying units)
per
county. There were 15,000 portas in Baranya, 11,000 in Somogy, and
10,000 in
Tolna County. At the same time there were 300 portas in �rva County,
790 in
Lipt�, and 1,420 in Z�lyom[15] all located in the mountainous areas of
northern Hungary. It is clear that the population of the
Magyar-inhabited
plains counties was several times the number of inhabitants that could
be
found in the border counties, which were generally more sparsely
inhabited
and where the Hungarian population was a smaller proportion of the
total.
Of the fifty-seven counties that made up Hungary proper, twenty-two
counties
formed a coherent block of Magyar-inhabited areas. Around this core
were
twenty-six counties where other "national" or ethnic groups were
present in
larger or smaller numbers. And, finally, there was a number of counties
in
which the Magyar element was probably less than 20 percent. Seven of
these
were in the northernmost part of the kingdom: Trencs�n, �rva, Tur�c,
Lipt�,
Z�lyom, Szepes, and S�ros. Two, M�ramaros County in the east and
Pozsega in
the southwest, had few Hungarian inhabitants, although even there the
nobility was predominantly Magyar.[16]
In general, we can say that the weight of the Hungarian population was
to be
found in the south, in those regions that fell under Turkish domination
first and remained subjugated for the longest. It is there that the
tragedy
of Hungarian history can be found. While the southern counties would be
depopulated, the northern would be able to grow relatively unimpeded.
In
1495, there were 2.75 portas per square kilometer in Tolna County and
.80
porta per square kilometer in Trencs�n County. Yet, in 1870, Trencs�n
County
had 258,000 inhabitants, Tolna 222,000.[17]
Two areas under the Hungarian crown but with some degree of autonomy
were
the Croatian-Slavonian region and Transylvania. The number of
Hungarians in
Slavonia was small. Except for a few members of the nobility, the
percentage
of Magyars in this region was insignificant.
In Transylvania, the situation was quite different. There were three
administrative units in Transylvania: the Saxon region (Sz�szf�ld), the
Sz�kely region (Sz�kelyf�ld), and the Seven Counties (Bels�szolnok,
Doboka,
Kolozs, Torda, K�k�ll�, Feh�r and Hunyad). The Saxon region was
obviously
German; the Sz�kelys were Magyars; and in the seven counties the total
population was about two-thirds Magyar, and one-third Rumanian (Vlachs,
Wallachians).[18] In some areas, the number of Vlachs (Wallachians) was
probably higher.
We have until now been concerned mainly with the peasantry, which,
after
all, was the bulk of the population. Let us now examine briefly the
other
segments of the Magyars, namely the nobility and the urban dwellers.
The
"political nation" was made up of the nobility, secular and
ecclesiastic,
which constituted about 5 percent of the total population. The vast
majority
of these belonged to the petty or lesser nobility, which was almost
exclusively Magyar. Among the barons and prelates, however, there were
many
who rose to prominence although of non-Hungarian ancestry. Random
examples
of this can be seen in the case of the Cillei (Cilli) family, the
powerful
competitors of the Hunyadis. The Croatian-Slavonian Frangep�n and
Vitrovec
families were also considered barons of the Hungarian kingdom.[19]
Although
some Hungarian historians have tried to disprove that the Hunyadi
family was
of Vlach (Wallachian) origin, the overwhelming evidence supports the
view
that they indeed were not Magyars, but rose in the service of the
Hungarian
king, received nobility, intermarried with Magyar noble families, and
thus
rose to prominence.[20] A large number of others were also able to make
this
transition, among them the famous Dr�gffy, Majl�th, and N�dasdi
families.[21] Similarly, leaders of the Slovak, Ruthenian, and Saxon
communities made their way into the ranks of Hungarian nobles. There
are,
however, instances where the reverse situation was also evident. Magyar
nobles living in predominantly Slovak-inhabited areas became
linguistically
assimilated to their subjects, as is evident from their correspondence
by
the sixteenth century.[22] Generally, it was advantageous for any
person,
regardless of ethnic background, to join the ruling class rather than
to be
part of the exploited segment of society.
Among the prelates there was also a number of important men who rose to
prominence in the Hungarian state, although they were
ethnically not Magyars. Excellent examples of this are provided by the
careers of Archbishop J�nos Vit�z of Esztergom and of his nephew, the
great
humanist-poet Janus Pannonius, bishop of P�cs (F�nfkirchen). The Vit�z
family was of Slavonian origin and had intermarried with Magyar
nobility.[23] Vit�z was one of the most loyal supporters of Hunyadi,
and
under Matthias was eventually rewarded with the offices of chancellor
and
primate of Hungary. Janus Pannonius was a member of the Royal Council
and
privy chancellor. It was obviously ability that determined the rise of
these
men and not the question of whether they were Magyar or Slavonian.
Other
examples abound: the successor of Janus as bishop of P�cs was Zsigmond
Ernuszt, whose family originated from Austria and who was probably
partially
Jewish. Gy�rgy Szathm�ri, bishop of V�rad (Oradea, Grosswardein) and
later
of P�cs, was born of German parents in Kassa (Kosice, Kaschau) while
Johann
Filipecz, bishop of V�rad, was a Moravian. L�szl� Ving�rdi Ger�b,
bishop of
Transylvania, was a member of a Saxon family that made the transition
to the
Magyar nobility in the course of the fifteenth century. All these men
served
the Hungarian kingdom without being of Magyar ancestry and had a strong
attachment to the "Natio Hungarica," of which they were an integral
part.
When we examine the backgrounds of the heads of the "political nation,"
namely the kings, we find that the Hungarian kingdom was ruled by men
who
were, for the most part, non-Magyars. The list of rulers for the
fifteenth
century presents a curious picture. Sigismund (1378--1437) was of the
House
of Luxembourg. Although a stranger in Hungary at first, by the end of
his
reign he often wore Magyar dress, swore in Hungarian, and was buried
next to
his hero, Saint L�szl�, at V�rad. Albert (1437--39) was a Habsburg,
Wladislaw I (1440--44) a Pole. J�nos Hunyadi, regent (1446--52), was of
Rumanian ancestry; L�szl� V (1444--57) lived most of his life abroad
and
probably knew little if any Hungarian. The only "true Magyar" king was
Matthias (1458--90), succeeded by the Polish Wladislaw II (1490--1516).
The
ethnically predominantly Magyar kingdom of Hungary was ruled by
non-Hungarian kings through most of the fifteenth century.
Turning our attention away from nobles, prelates, and kings, we find
that
the population of the urban centers was predominantly non-Magyar.
Hungary
was slow to develop cities. The growth of towns before the Tatar
invasion
was minimal, and even in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the
number of
true cities was very small.[24] The Decree of 1514 enumerated those
cities
(civitas) that by virtue of their privileges could be counted as
genuine
urban centers. Altogether there were only twenty-four in the whole
kingdom,
the most important of
which were the free royal cities of Buda (Ofen), Pest, Kassa, Pozsony
(Bratislava, Pressburg), Nagyszombat, B�rtfa, Eperjes, and Sopron
(�denburg).[25] By 1500, however, there were about 750 market towns
(oppidum, mez�v�ros) throughout the land.[26] It is an interesting
Hungarian
phenomenon that from the second half of the fifteenth century onward
the
growth of the civitas stagnated, while the number of oppida increased
considerably.[27] The population of the market towns was often made up
of
German settlers (hospites, guests) in the early fourteenth century.
During
the course of the next 100 years, however, large numbers of Magyar and
Slavic settlers took up their residence in the market towns. In the
areas
inhabited predominantly by Hungarians, the oppida became mainly Magyar,
while in areas where the Slavic population was the majority, their
movement
to the market towns made those particular settlements Slavic.[28] Our
information about the development of oppida in the Transylvanian area
is
fragmentary. The almost complete monopoly of the Germans as urban
settlers
was eventually broken down by the movement of both Magyar and Slavic
populations into the cities and towns.
This urbanization trend was a general European phenomenon and is not
peculiar to the Hungarian kingdom. Two obvious results of this
population
movement were the abandonment of villages in many formerly inhabited
areas[29] and the increase of Magyar and Slavic elements in the urban
centers. The fact that many towns had increasingly mixed populations
made it
possible to weaken the ethnic identity of the non-Magyars, especially
of the
Germans. This led in some instances to the "Magyarization" of some
individuals, just as others lost their German identity and became part
of
their Slovak environment. In Buda, for example, the Ohnwein family
became
Bornemissza during the course of the fifteenth century.[30] In Eperjes,
the
entry of Magyars into town life and their growing influence has been
demonstrated by the study of B�la Iv�nyi.[31] Towns such as
Sz�kesfeh�rv�r
and Esztergom were almost completely Magyar by 1500, although they had
had
large French, Flemish, and Italian populations in the previous
centuries.
Szeged and �buda were always Magyar. Pest was changing from a
predominantly
German to predominantly Hungarian town. In Buda, the German-speaking
population was still very strong. Only in the fifteenth century were
the
Hungarians able to force the Germans to agree to the rotation of the
judgeship (judocus) so that one year the incumbent was German, the next
Hungarian.[32] The German preponderance at Buda can best be seen in the
organization of the parishes on Castle Hill. The Hungarian parish was
the
Church of Saint Mary Magdalena, a simpler, smaller structure. The
German
parish church, named after Our Lady (today
Matthias or Coronation Church), was a far more imposing and larger
structure
than the parish of the Magyars. The laws of the capital city of Hungary
were
written in German and are known as the Ofner Stadtrecht.[33] Buda
became a
Hungarian city only in the twentieth century.
Before leaving the subject of the Hungarian element, let us turn
briefly to
the examination of the Sz�kelys (Siculi, Seklers). In origin and
language,
they were Magyars and lived as a compact block in the eastern part of
Transylvania called the Sz�kelyf�ld. All the Sz�kelys were considered
noble
and as such owed military service but paid no taxes to the king.[34]
The
royal representative in the region was called the isp�n (comes
sicolorum),
whose primary function was to lead the Sz�kely military units in case
of
war. Their social organization still reflected the vestiges of the
clans
that made up the "Sz�kely nation." Originally, there were seven
territorial
units based upon these clans, each of which was called a sz�k. From
these,
several subunits (fi�sz�k) were formed in the course of time. At the
head of
each sz�k there was an elected captain (hadnagy, later kapit�ny) and a
judge.[35] Together, all the Sz�kelys formed the Universitas Sicolorum,
one
of the three administrative units of Transylvania. The population was
originally divided into two major classes based upon the type of
military
service that they performed; i.e., those who fought on foot were called
darabant and those who fought on horseback, l�f�. In 1473, Matthias
Corvinus
reorganized them militarily and created three classes, namely the
primor,
who led a troop of Sz�kelys into battle; the primipilatus, composed of
the
l�f�, who constituted the cavalry; and the pixidarius, made up of those
who
fought on foot.[36]
This autonomous block of Magyar-speaking inhabitants in Transylvania
was
able to retain its language, customs and institutions throughout the
late
Middle Ages and for centuries thereafter
