Gesta Ladislai regis

Last updated

The coronation of Ladislaus I of Hungary as depicted in the Illuminated Chronicle Laszlo-Coronation-ChroniconPictum.jpg
The coronation of Ladislaus I of Hungary as depicted in the Illuminated Chronicle

The Gesta Ladislai regis (lit. "The Deeds of King Ladislaus") is the historiographical name of a hypothetical Latin epic poem chronicling the life and reign of Ladislaus I of Hungary, which is believed to have been written at the turn of the 11th to the 12th-centuries. According to a scholarly theory, its text was inserted and dissolved into the corpus of various texts of the so-called 14th-century chronicle composition, most notably the Illuminated Chronicle .

Contents

Interpretations

The 140th chapter of the Illuminated Chronicle writes that "whoever delights to know how many and how great were the good works wrought for his people by the blessed Ladislaus, will find full account of his deeds" ("[...] de gestis eiusdem plenam poterit habere notitiam"). [1] It is uncertain whether the word "deeds" (gesta) refers to the Saint Ladislaus legend or to another chronicle variant. [2] According to historian László Veszprémy, the quoted sentence is typical of chroniclers to draw readers' attention to hagiographical texts. Bálint Hóman considered this gesta is identical with Urgesta , the first Hungarian chronicle, which – as Hóman claimed – was compiled under Ladislaus I. In contrast, János Győry emphasized the phrase "full account of his deeds" is identical with the Saint Ladislaus legend, and the Latin word "gesta" is not a title here. [3]

In his 1913 study, literary historian László Négyesy already outlined an epic poem inserted in the chronicle text narrating the events in 1071–1074, lasted from the siege of Belgrade (104th chapter) to the coronation of Géza I of Hungary (124th chapter). [4] Classical philologist János Horváth, Jr. discovered a separate passage within the text of the chronicle from a stylistic and phraseological point of view, which narrates the events of the second half of the 11th century, from the 91st to the 139th chapter (from the coronation of the child Solomon to the establishment of the church of Várad). According to Horváth, this was the first continuation of the original Urgesta (compiled during the reign of Andrew I of Hungary, as Horváth claimed) and this section can be identified with the Gesta Ladislai regis, compiled under Coloman. [5] Horváth claimed that its author, who wrote his work around 1109, was a descendant of knights Vecelin and Opos the Brave (Ubul Kállay and Bálint Hóman identified this person with bishop Koppány). [6] Historian József Gerics agreed that the aforementioned quote refers to the chronicle written during the reign of Coloman. [7] Historian Elemér Mályusz considered that the Urgesta was continued in the early 12th century, under the guidance of Coloman, and in the centre of that continuation is St. Ladislaus (as a result, Mályusz called this expansion as "Gesta Ladislai regis") and its tone is sharply anti-Solomon. Mályusz claimed this text utilized songs in Hungarian and oral folk traditions. The chronicler also inserted the text of the Urgesta in order to mitigate its basic anti-German perception. [8] Sharing the viewpoint of Horváth, linguist János Bollók identified the Gesta Ladislai regis (compiled under Coloman) in the chronicle text lasted from the 94th to the 141st chapters, which narrates the history of Hungary between 1060 (coronation of Béla I) and 1095 (death of Ladislaus I). This text primarily tells the struggles for the throne between Solomon and his cousins, Géza and Ladislaus. [9] János M. Bak and Ryszard Grzesik considered that the Gesta Ladislai regis covered the 102–141st chapters (from 1067 to 1095), where Ladislaus I appears as central figure of the events. [10]

Literary historian Tibor Klaniczay argued that it is questionable whether only individual heroic songs served as sources, and whether the entire story was already composed by the chronicler, or whether the Latin writer relied on an already established larger poetic composition. In the latter case, it is likely that the author of the chronicle did not translate it into Latin, but considered it a source, fragmented it, or even modified its tendency, supplementing it with his own knowledge. [11]

Content

Chapters

Depictions

The Gesta Ladislai regis – following a brief summary of the events of the previous decades – picks up the thread of the story with the characterization and glorification of the reign of Béla I, the father of Géza and Ladislaus, similarly to the Saint Ladislaus hagiography, which may have been written partly based on the gesta. Within this text, the chronicler utilized and inserted an epic heroic poem narrating the conflict of Solomon and his cousins. [5]

While medieval historians generally rationally justify, interpret, and evaluate events, always within the framework of dynastic considerations, the author of the Gesta Ladislai regis has not a rational, but a poetic motivation for the chain of events. The events surrounding the conflict between Solomon and the dukes and the Battle of Mogyoród are driven forward by human, psychological factors, [11] i.e. the author attributes the cause of the discord between Solomon and the dukes to mere differences in character. For instance, the defenders of Belgrade in 1071 surrendered not to the king, but to Duke Géza because of the latter's merciful character. The envoys of the Byzantine emperor also negotiated with Géza, instead of the king, regarding the exchange of the Greek prisoners. The king was deeply offended by this; he perceived the behavior of the prisoners and the messengers as a disrespect to his royal dignity. From this insult arose first his jealousy, then his hatred for his cousin, which his wicked advisor, Count Vid, further inflamed. Thus, the conflict developed according to the laws of poetic composition, from the characters and the relationships thus established, without any external intervention. [12]

Ernyei appears as patron of the king, who, with his favorable advice, strives to prevent the occurrence of his monarch's tragedy until the very last moment. He is the king's good spirit. In contrast, Vid stirs up tension and resembles a scheming snake. The two advisors thus represent Solomon's dual nature, of which evil ultimately prevails. This symbolism also explains the ermine portent, which appears before the decisive battle; a white ermine runs up onto Ladislaus's lance, which then sits down in the prince's lap. According to medieval symbolism, the ermine symbolizes the Virgin Mary. The author, who is on Ladislaus' side, implies that at Mogyoród himself Satan had fought against the dukes who were under the protection of Mary. This is confirmed by the oath of Géza, who swears that upon victory he will establish a church in memory of Mary in Vác. [13]

The flow of the story is constantly interrupted by parts that show the heroic deeds of Opos the Brave, despite the fact that the knight fought on Solomon's side. It is very likely that the reason for this was the author's family connection to the person aforementioned warrior. [14] [15] Opos functions as the story's Achilles. [16]

The author also tries to question the legitimacy of Solomon's reign after his fall (126th chapter). First, he makes Solomon admit that it was the will of the emperor that made him king, and thus deprives him of the opportunity to defend his kingship by referring to his coronation and anointing. Solomon declares: Hungary is the regnum of Henry IV, Holy Roman Emperor. This is even more frank speech than Peter's. Solomon is further portrayed as a taxpayer and vassal of the emperor. Géza and Ladislaus thus removed Solomon from royal power, which he had legally never enjoyed. The influence and utilization of chronicler Lambert of Hersfeld can be seen in this text. [17] The Gesta also suggested this to the reader not only by emphasizing the excellence of Géza I, Ladislaus I, and Coloman, but also by suggesting that Solomon and his younger brother, David, were left without descendants as a divine punishment. [18] Since Géza then Ladislaus deprived Solomon, who inherited the Hungarian throne, the author had to recur to the notion of idoneitas, a concept always advocated by the church, as one that would guarantee the correct choice of the ruler who would keep peace to the people and the clergy. [19]

As a result of all these contradictions, according to Klaniczay, it is questionable who the protagonist of the original epic poem could have been: Solomon, Géza or Ladislaus? After his fall, Solomon remains at the center of the narrative, while Ladislaus' reign is given a much more elaborate place in the surviving chronicle text. It is conceivable that the chronicler transformed the original pro-Solomon work in order to emphasize idoneitas. [16] Historian Gyula Kristó argued that the text includes some interpolations; the texts, where only Géza is mentioned as a duke, form a coherent story, while the 14th-century excerpted text alternates between dux and duces, magnifying the importance of Ladislaus. Based on this, historian Péter Rokay considered only those parts where Géza appears as the sole duke to be authentic. [20]

Style

The literary style of the Gesta Ladislai regis exhibits numerous features that make the work as a whole unique in all of medieval Hungarian literature, as literary historian László Négyesy outlined already in his work Árpádkori compositio in 1913. Besides its poetic perspective, the other striking characteristic of the Gesta Ladislai regis is its compositional depth and unity, whose style contrasts sharply with the rest of the 14th-century chronicle composition, [21] for which it also earned the recognition of the 19th-century Hungarian poet János Arany, who first referred to this text as a lost epic poem and suspected a vernacular epic in its background. He compared the description of the Siege of Belgrade with Homer's Iliad centered around the Trojan War. [16] Négyesy argued the whole gesta may have been based on an epic song originally in Hungarian, with its excellent exposition, interesting complication, characters endowed with distinctive qualities and epically prepared and magnificent final battle surrounded by miracles. [21] József Deér rejected these approaches in 1931. [22] János Horváth, Jr. emphasized that the artistic self-conscious composition is not supported by the sequence of these chapters, despite the fact that no other place in the chronicle text abounds in details of such poetic beauty as this section. [23]

János Horváth, Jr. presented the influences of the folk heroic epic in the text, considering the most striking to be the "stereotyped repetition and constant return of epic turns". Although he did not discover a unified poetic composition in the text, in his opinion, numerous stylistic elements indicate the influence of ancient songs and legends. He considered such evidence to include, among others, the speech similes believed to be of archaic origin. [24] [25]

János Bollók determined its genre as heroic verse, and to prove this, he outlined four characteristics of the work:

  1. frequently use of epitheton ornans; for instance, Vid appears with the attributive "detestabilis" ("evil" or "malicious") three times, while another royal advisor, Ernyei, who seek reconciliation Solomon and his cousins, is styled as "pacis amateur" ("lover of peace") twice. Regarding the knightly hero Opos the Brave, not only the adjective "gloriosus" recur several times, but the repetition of certain phrases such as "singulari certamine", or "in modo fulguris", can also be observed. [26] Ernyei's epithet reflects the impact of Jordanes. [24] [13]
  2. symmetry in the structure of the narrative; for instance, the armed clash takes place in two parts: in the Battle of Kemej, Salamon is victorious, and Géza flees; in contrast, Géza is victorious in the Battle of Mogyoród, and Salamon is forced to flee. On the eve of the latter battle, counts Vid and Ernyei consider their prospects in Solomon's camp; dukes Géza and Ladislaus do the same thing in their respective camp. The repetition of the same phrases and the symmetrical structure appear simultaneously in the scenes of the mutual sending of envoys during the early stage of conflict. The author has asserted the principle of symmetry to such an extent that he also sought to maintain balance in the persons of the envoys: the "evil" Vid and the "gentle" Ernyei as Solomon's envoys, or the "deceitful" Vata and the "capable" bishop of Várad as Géza's envoys. Both the king and the duke imprisoned and guarded the enemy's emissaries. [24] [26]
  3. repeated phrases in battle descriptions; for instance collecto exercitu, ordinatis agminibus and missis nuntiis. [24] [27]
  4. proverb-like comparisons which appear almost only here in the entire chronicle text; e.g. "With the strokes of their swords they severed the freshly shaven heads of the Cumans like unripe gourds" and "Across the way, the soldiers of Géza pour out the cups of dire death to them. The Teutons [Germans] yield, the Latins fight on, they find no place to flee, and they fall before the Hungarians, like oxen in a slaughterhouse". [24] [27]

The Gesta Ladislai regis narrates the Battle of Mogyoród, which is the most artistically and carefully crafted section, in 32 four-syllable bars, which combine to form 16 consecutive eight-syllable verses with a caesura in the middle. According to János Bollók, it is a type of prosimetrum whose basic rhythmic units were formed by the four-syllable or three-syllable bars, which probably reflect the meter of Hungarian heroic poetry. [28] János Horváth, Jr. argued that the use of rhymed prose, in addition to the witty puns, distinguishes the lines of the Gesta Ladislai regis from the rest of the text of the chronicle. [29]

Classical antiquity phrases

ChapterPhrase/DescriptionClassical analogy
107Siege of Belgrade (1071) Trojan War [30]
121 Battle of Mogyoród dextrarius ("war horse", Pharsalia by Lucan); praestolor (e.g. Ammianus Marcellinus, Sidonius Apollinaris); arduus equus ("hard horse", Georgica by Virgil); pocula dire mortis eisdem propinarunt ("they [Géza's army] poured out to them [Solomon's army] the cups of dire death", proverb originally referring to the forced suicide of Socrates by poisoning, also used by e.g. Lucan, Cicero, Historia Langobardorum by Paul the Deacon, writings of Augustine of Hippo, hagiography of Cuthbert by Bede, Annales Quedlinburgenses ) [27] [31]
122 Battle of Mogyoród various motives from the works of Herodotos (Solomon = Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes; "intriguer" Count Vid = Democedes, Atossa, Mardonius; "peace-loving" Count Ernyei = Croesus, Artabanus, Demaratus); Ladislaus' vision before the battle, desecration of Vid's corpse (medieval literary analogies through Justin and Petrus Comestor) [31] [32]
123Solomon and his mother after the battleThe queen mother foretells the downfall of his son ( Persai by Aeschylus, Ab urbe condita by Livy, Gesta Francorum ) [33]

Biblical phrases

Some narratives was written using well-known biblical stories. The description of the Battle of Kerlés in 1068 (102th chapter) is full of biblical proverbs, for instance, "swords drunk by the blood" – unlike Horváth's claim, who regarded it a folk simile – is a quote from Is 34:5. [34] According to Péter B. Kovács, the Siege of Belgrade in 1071 (105th chapter) is depicted as similar to the story David and Goliath in its motif set and lexicography. [35] Regarding the incitement of Count Vid (110th chapter), who says to Solomon that "two sharp swords cannot be kept in the same scabbard" is a reference to the doctrine of the two swords (Luke 22:38). [36] The description of the Battle of Mogyoród (121st chapter), in addition to the aforementioned classical antique impacts, also contains biblical elements; "cloud of thick darkness" and "ermine of purest white". [37]

References

  1. ↑ The Hungarian Illuminated Chronicle (ch. 140), pp. 262–265.
  2. ↑ Gerics & Ladányi 1996, p. 277.
  3. ↑ Veszprémy 2019, p. 59.
  4. ↑ Négyesy 1913, p. 199.
  5. 1 2 Horváth, Jr. 1954, p. 331.
  6. ↑ Horváth, Jr. 1954, p. 339.
  7. ↑ Gerics & Ladányi 1996, p. 281.
  8. ↑ Mályusz 1967, pp. 36–38.
  9. ↑ Bollók 1998, p. 223.
  10. ↑ Bak & Grzesik 2018, p. 10.
  11. 1 2 Klaniczay 1964, p. 30.
  12. ↑ Bollók 1998, p. 224.
  13. 1 2 Bollók 1998, p. 228.
  14. ↑ Horváth, Jr. 1954, pp. 321, 334.
  15. ↑ Mályusz 1967, p. 37.
  16. 1 2 3 Klaniczay 1964, p. 31.
  17. ↑ Gerics & Ladányi 1996, p. 276.
  18. ↑ Mályusz 1967, p. 36.
  19. ↑ Bak & Grzesik 2018, p. 11.
  20. ↑ Szőcs 2007, pp. 64–65.
  21. 1 2 Négyesy 1913, pp. 200–201.
  22. ↑ B. Kovács 2020, p. 1085.
  23. ↑ Horváth, Jr. 1954, p. 316.
  24. 1 2 3 4 5 Horváth, Jr. 1954, pp. 321–323.
  25. ↑ Klaniczay 1964, p. 32.
  26. 1 2 Bollók 1998, p. 225.
  27. 1 2 3 Bollók 1998, p. 226.
  28. ↑ Bollók 1998, p. 227.
  29. ↑ Horváth, Jr. 1954, pp. 326–329.
  30. ↑ Veszprémy 2019, p. 114.
  31. 1 2 Veszprémy 2019, pp. 106, 110.
  32. ↑ B. Kovács 2020, pp. 1101–1103.
  33. ↑ Veszprémy 2019, p. 57.
  34. ↑ B. Kovács 2020, pp. 1090–1091.
  35. ↑ B. Kovács 2020, pp. 1093–1096.
  36. ↑ B. Kovács 2020, pp. 1097–1098.
  37. ↑ B. Kovács 2020, pp. 1098–1099.

Sources

Primary sources

  • Bak, János M.; Veszprémy, László; Kersken, Norbert (2018). Chronica de gestis Hungarorum e codice picto saec. XIV[The Illuminated Chronicle: Chronicle of the deeds of the Hungarians from the fourteenth-century illuminated codex]. Budapest: Central European University Press. ISBN   978-9-6338-6264-3.

Secondary studies

  • B. Kovács, Péter (2020). "A Gesta Ladislai regis néhány bibliai eredetű hasonlatáról [Biblical Metaphors in the Gesta Ladislai regis]". Századok (in Hungarian). 154 (5). Magyar Történelmi Társulat: 1083–1104. ISSN   0039-8098.
  • Bak, János M.; Grzesik, Ryszard (2018). "The Text of the Illuminated Chronicle". In Bak, János M.; Veszprémy, László (eds.). Studies on the Illuminated Chronicle. CEU Press. pp. 5–23. ISBN   978-963-386-261-2.
  • Bollók, János (1998). "Die Gesta regis Ladislai [The Deeds of King Ladislaus]". Acta Universitatis de Attila József Nominatae: Acta antiqua et archaeologica (in German). 27. Szeged, Hungary: University of Szeged: 223–229. ISSN   0567-7246.
  • Gerics, József; Ladányi, Erzsébet (1996). "Gesta és legenda a krónikában: gesta Ladislai regis [Gesta and Legend in the Chronicle: Gesta Ladislai regis]". Magyar Könyvszemle (in Hungarian). 112 (3): 273–282. ISSN   0025-0171.
  • Horváth, Jr., János (1954). Árpád-kori latinnyelvű irodalmunk stílusproblémái[Stylistic Problems of the Árpád-Era Latin Literature] (in Hungarian). Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
  • Klaniczay, Tibor (1964). "Egy 11. századi joculator-eposz? [An 11th-Century Joculator Epic Poem?]". In Klaniczay, Tibor (ed.). A magyar irodalom története I. kötet: A magyar irodalom története 1600-ig (in Hungarian). Hungarian Academy of Sciences. pp. 30–32. ISBN   963-05-2302-7.{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  • Mályusz, Elemér (1967). A Thuróczy-krónika és forrásai[The Thuróczy Chronicle and its Sources] (in Hungarian). Budapest: Tudománytörténeti tanulmányok 5, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
  • Négyesy, László (1913). "Árpádkori compositio [Composition from the Era of Árpáds]". Budapesti Szemle (in Hungarian). 41 (154): 188–201.
  • Szőcs, Tibor (2007). "A 14. századi krónikaszerkesztmény interpolációi és 11. századi okleveleink [Interpolations of the 14th-Century Chronicle Compilation and the 11th-Century Charters]". Fons. 14 (1). Szentpétery Imre Történettudományi Alapítvány: 59–96. ISSN   1217-8020.
  • Veszprémy, László (2019). Történetírás és történetírók az Árpád-kori Magyarországon (XI–XIII. század közepe) [History Writing and Historians in Hungary during the Reign of the Árpád Dynasty (Eleventh–Mid Thirteenth Century] (in Hungarian). Line Design. ISBN   978-963-480-004-0.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.