Slovak takeover of Hungarian nobility, in 1500s-1600s
M Sjostrom
the aristocracy and corps of magnates of the Hungarian realm.
when genealogies of the 1700s-1800s magnate families are scrutinized, they
seem so much to be descended from this and that noble family and their
circle, who lived in the late 1500s in Slovakia.
And many of those ancestral families show distinctive Slavic onomastics,
including origins of many surnames.
So, the ottoman conquest overrode a good part of indigeneous Magyar
nobility, either destroying them or too much impoverishing them. So, not so
many of them in ancestral roots of those who were wealthy and aristocracy in
the say 1700s.
M Sjostrom
nationalists, to some racists, etc.
It must be a blow when, after building up delusions about 'pure' magyar
heritage, and investing energy so much to concocted myths about non-slavic
origins, still the contemporary evidence from old names, documents,
archaeology, and population settlements, points out to many slavic
heritages.
I have also understood that some racists want to deny that slavic people
were resident in the today territory of Slovakia, or that they were its old
residents. There are concoctions claiming that all came from Poland,
Moravia, Ukraine.... and those concoctors comfortably forget that it was
Magyars who in the about 900s, came and spread to Pannonian lands, where a
lot of Slavic people resided before Magyars.
There are racists who want to propagate that the today Slovakia (= land of
carpathian slavs, 'pannonian' slavs) was Magyar land, not slavic....
----
It must be remembered that the 'natio hungarorum' (and its variants) was a
different thing than the Magyar ethnicity.
One of the clearest differences was that ethnically or linguistically Magyar
serfs (and other commoners who were ethnically or linguistically Magyar),
did NOT belong to the 'Hungarian nation', natio hungarorum.
So, magyar was not the same as 'hungarian'.
What 'Hungarian' then was?
It was an epithet the noble class of the multi-ethnic hungarian realm had
given themselves.
It seems to have come from an illusion or myth that nobles were descended or
were successors of the Huns. At least, there are some literary material from
such centuries which draws connection between Huns and hungary...
The *language* of the hungarian nation in those centuries, is a curious
matter. Namely, the language was Latin. Official language. Not the magyar
language, as such.
The adoption of latin as language of the nation, appears as a signal that
the magyar language was not the common language between nobles of the realm
of Hungary.
Another difference is that any noble of the realm of Hungary, whatever that
noble's antecedents, got to belong to the hungarian nation, the 'tribe' of
nobles.
There are a bunch of persons whose antecedents were uncontestably Slavic,
and still as nobles they and their families were counted as 'members of the
hungarian nation'.
I mention only a few: Zrinski, Gorjanski, Jakusic. There were lots more.
Also, it is intriguing how almost any noble lineage had its own legend of
origin which verty usually referred to the earliest forefather having come
from some other country than the Magyar country. It was like a disease:
almost like a requirement to be a noble, would been an *agnatic* origin in
some foreign country. There were families which claimed a forefather come
from Italy or being Roman. Families which claimed an early forefather having
come from Germany. So, assuming there was at least some real behind such
claims, these claims and their number, do NOT inspire trust that Hungarian
nobility was of originally Magyar stock.... Hungarian nobility (the
Hungarian Nation) seems to come from all sorts of other origins than Magyar.
I find it extremely funny that someone wants to deny that a lineage called
'Horvath' would not have had slavic origins or some slavic identity.....
Namely, horvath simply means a croat. A 'tribe' of southern slavs.
Already the name used of them, is a testimony about their some sort of
south-slavic identity, however suppressed that identity may have become.
I regard it a delusion to claim that 'ennoblement' would have caused those
persons to lose their ethnicity, if it was slavic.
There surely was some Hungarian (not magyar) nobility whose origins were
slavic. Slavic from Slovak land.
Slavic spellings are not 'just spellings' - they are pretty good testimony
of languages spoken in those areas at the time when the names formed.
the statement 'there was no Slovakia before 1918' is, sadly, just an
irrelevant quip. To dismiss the slavs = slovaks who of course populated
certain lands already long before 1918. A quip which nationalists are prone
to make, mostly to deny any other nationality in the area.
I gather the word 'slovak' is already from late middle ages, and that Slovak
language had already diverged from other slavic languages in middle ages.
As I understand it, the slavic term 'slovensc' (and its variants) mean
'Slavic', and is translated to english varyingly but also with the word
'slovak'. which after all, is just a variant of slavic.
-----
Slovakia is a name for a land which roughly was that called (colloquially)
also upper Hungary in some earlier centuries. It does not need any quipping
from any nationalists, because that land and its population existed,
throughout the millennium, whatever some want to deny.
And, it is easier to use the name 'Slovakia' or 'slovak land' to describe
that area throughout centuries (particularly as it was continuously
populated by -ia and mostly- slavs), when a descriptor is needed for the
area.
North Hungary surely is not an adequate descriptor for that purpose, because
it means at least two different territories, depending on context: one of
alternatives is the northern part of the today Hungary, and it is totally
different (though neighboring) the today Slovakia. But, I do not mean here
the northern part of the today Hungary, and therefore I do not regard the
term 'North Hungary' as proper descriptor to what I mean.
2010/3/15 Mézes de Debreczen et Rettegh <von...@gmail.com>
> There were no Slovakia before 1918., the "Slavic" spelling names are just
> spellings, Terstyánszky,Andreanszky etc. are all Hungarian noble with
> different origin (for example Andreánszky family first ancestor is Hauk
> Polku,but his descendants are the Andreánszky, Detrich, Horánszky, Luby,
> Pongrácz, Szent-Iványi, Szmrecsányi, Andaházy, Kiszely, Baán and the
> grizáni Horváth families). There were no Hungarian or Slavic nation,there
> were Noble nation with Hungarian language and Noble culture. All the nobles
> spoke Hungarian and called themselfes "from the Hungarian Noble nation".
> After the Ottoman invasion most of the nobles emigrated to the Felvidék
> (North-Hungary),to Transylvania,and to West-Hungary. Yes, there were a lot
> of family with Slavic ancestry, but they were not Slavic after they
> ennobled,they became the part of the Hungarian Noble Nation (peasants were
> not part of the Nation, they were just peasants).
>
> Slovak takeover?
> No,because there were no Slavic nobility in Hungary and there were no
> Slovaks in Hungary before the 17th century. There were just Slavic people
> from Moravia,Poland,Ukraine, who lived in North-Hungary from the ancient
> times. From their mixture became the Slovaks after the 17-18th century.
>
> Adam
>
> 2010/3/15 M Sjostrom <mqs...@gmail.com>
>> -------------------------------
>>
>>
M Sjostrom
choices of baptismal names, speak for slavic context
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00457538&tree=LEO
I also read that the first count Turzo was a particular developer of Slovak
culture....
some other families from Slovak country:
Forgac
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00457228&tree=LEO
Druget ze Humenne
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00515908&tree=LEO
Nadasdi
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00289463&tree=LEO
Pereni
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00366663&tree=LEO
Sereni
http://genealogics.org/descend.php?personID=I00539030&tree=LEO