The Cumans, a people that habited the Eurasian steppes in the eleventh–thir-teenth centuries and formed the Cuman-Kipchak Federation on a vast territory north of the Black Sea, came into contact with the Hungarian Kingdom first in the eleventh century. Two centuries later, through waves of forced migration, some Cuman tribal groups entered the country, and formed a minority of consider-able size, comprising c. 7–8% of the kingdom’s population according to modern calculations.1
1 Much debate has been focused on the size of the Cuman minority. The main problem is presented by the lack of reliable sources. The only figure concerning the size of the immigrant group is found in Rogerius’ account, who wrotes of 40,000 families (familias circa quadraginta milia dicebantur. Rogerius, Anonymi Bele Regis Notarii Gesta Hungarorum = The deeds of the Hungarians: Magistri Rogerii Epistola in miserabile carmen super destructione regni Hungarie per Tartaros facta = Epistle to the sorrowful lament upon the destruction of the kingdom of Hungary by the Tartars, ed. by János M. Bak, Martyn Rady and László Veszprémy, (Budapest – New York: CEU Press, 2010) p. 140.) This is, however, problematic in many ways. First of all, it is not clear if the word familia means family without servants or an extended family with all servants included. Moreover, 40,000 is a figure often used by antique authors as a synonym for ‘a great multitude’; Rogerius himself admits that this information is based only on rumors and not on a conscription (they were said to be this many). Another problem is posed by the fluctuation in the Cuman minority in the mid-13th century. The situation is further complicated by the difficulties of estimating the surviving Hungarian population in the Great Plain after the invasion, which changed from one region to the other. However, the number of the Cuman minority may be estimated by other means. On the basis of the size of lands given to them and the carrying capacity of those areas, András Pálóczi Horváth calculated the number of newcomers to 70–80,000, 50–60,000 of which remained after the 13th-century military conflicts. He calculated with a population density of 5–8 persons/km2, and 8000–8500 km2 of land at their disposal. Gábor Hatházi made similar calculations in the area of Mezőföld (a region in Transdanubia where Cumans settled), based on archaeological results, and concluded that the overall number of the Cuman minority must have been around 40–50,000. However, these are only estimations; the identifica-tion of Cuman settlements is itself a debated issue with many inherent and yet unsolved methodologi-cal questions. (András Pálóczi Horváth, Pechenegs, Cumans, Iasians. Steppe Peoples in Medieval Hungary (Budapest: Hereditas-Corvina, 1989) p. 61.; Nóra Berend, ‘Cuman Integration in Hungary’, in Nomads In The Sedentary World, ed. by Anatoly M. Khazanow and André Wink (Richmond: Curzon, 2001), 103–
127, p. 105; Nóra Berend, At the Gate of Christendom. Jews, Muslims and ‘Pagans’ in Medieval Hungary, c. 1000- c. 1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univerity Press, 2001) pp. 71–72.; Gábor Hatházi, A kunok ré-gészeti emlékei a Kelet-Dunántúlon, Opuscula Hungarica 5 (Budapest: Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, 2004) p. 170.; Szabolcs Rosta, ‘Új eredmények a kunok Duna-Tisza-közi szállásterületének kutatásában’, in
32 KYRA LYUBLYANOVICS
Cumans – at least in the years predating their entry in the kingdom – led a mobile, nomadic lifestyle on the steppe, and their cultural background, lan-guage, religion and customs differed significantly from those of the Hungarians.
Nevertheless, they had intensive contacts with Christian states after they first ap-peared on the southern borders of the Russian Principalities in the mid-eleventh century. By the end of the twelfthcentury they were more or less acquainted with Christianity, and from the early thirteenth century onwards mendicant orders showed a great interest in the Cumans and Tatars.2 Cumans were not only famil-iar with the main dogmatic religions, but they were used to form alliances and attach themselves to foreign empires whose culture and language was different from their own. The Cuman-Kipchak Confederation, a vast territory habited by Turkic-speaking tribes north of the Black Sea in the eleventh and twelfth century, was a loose alliance of ethnically diverse groups,3 which must have resulted in a linguistic and cultural assimilation between populations of different origins. In some cases, these tribes were only brought together by the slow westward move-ments fuelled by the Mongol expansion. After the battle at the Kalkha River in 1223, the Mongols regarded Cumania as their rightful possession and the Cumans as their subjects, and thus a rapid movement of the steppe population to the West began. In fact, a smaller Cuman community under the leadership of khan Bortz decided to have his people baptized and make an allegiance with the Hungarian king already in 1227, which was probably due to the need to find protection from the growing Mongol threat; Duke Béla (the rex junior, later king of Hungary by the name Bela IV) started to use the title rex Cumaniae.4 As a devastating mili-tary conflict with the Mongols seemed inevitable, another Cuman khan, Kuthen asked for asylum in Hungary in 1239, and entered the kingdom with a larger body of people. By that time the Cuman-Hungarian connections became closer, mainly
Kun-Kép. A magyarországi kunok régészeti hagyatéka. Tanulmányok Horváth Ferenc 60. születésnapjára, ed. by Szabolcs Rosta (Kiskunfélegyháza: Kiskun Múzeum, 2009), pp. 175–216.)
2 The first missionaries sent to the Cumans were Dominicans; it is uncertain in which year they start-ed their missionary work but it was most probably 1221. Their work was extensively supportstart-ed by the Hungarian king for obvious political reasons. The friars were very active among the Cumans in the 1220s and by 1228 the first Cuman bishopric was established, probably in Milkov, Moldavia. (The sources pre-dating the Mongol Invasion do not mention the name of this town; it first appears in 1279.) (Ioan Ferenţ, A kunok és püsökségük (Budapest: Szent István Társulat, 1981) pp. 123–138; László Makkai, A milkói (kún) püspökség és népei (Debrecen: Pannonia, 1936), pp. 10–18, 26 footnote 32.) Later, when the Cuman migra-tion was finished, their Christianizamigra-tion was continued by the Franciscan order that was acive also among Hungarian Cumans from the late 13th century onwards, following the order of the pope. (István Gyárfás, A jász-kunok története, 4 vols (Kecskemét, 1870–1885), II, p. 432).
3 Victor Spinei, The Great Migrations in the East and South East of Europe from the Ninth to the Thirteenth Century (Cluj-Napoca: Romanian Cultural Institute, Center for Transylvanian Studies, 2003) pp. 234–236.
4 Gyárfás, A jász-kunok története, II, p. 257; Pálóczi Horváth, Pechenegs, Cumans, Iasians, p. 48.
33
SPIES OF THE ENEMY, PAGAN HERDERS AND VASSALS MOST WELCOME
due to missionary activities and the establishment of the Cuman bishopric in Milkov under the jurisdiction of the Hungarian Church.
The manifold relationship between Cumans and Hungarians in the first pe-riod after their migration has principally been discussed from the point of view of integration. The clashes – reported mostly by Rogerius – were diverse in nature, and at least four aspects can be named. The political aspect involved the impact Cumans had on the struggle between the royal power and the aristocracy. The religious aspect, the problematic conversion of the newcomers, as well as the
‘ethnic’ aspect – the language, the attire and pagan customs the Cumans followed – must have played an important role in their perception as uninvited strangers.5 A fourth, economic aspect, the damage the Cumans’ herds made in the crops, and their custom of taking Christians as prisoners and force them to labour on their fields also contributed to the escalation of the conflicts.6 Although they were never expelled by legal means, the clashes resulted in waves of Cuman emigration during the thirteenth century.
At the time of the first Cuman migration wave in 1239–1240, the Hungarian king Bela IV desperately needed military allies against the approaching Mongol armies, and saw an opportunity in using the Cumans as auxiliary military forces.
Their armies had only cavalry troops but these were superior to European armies in terms of agility and the knowledge on steppe warfare.7 In fact, relying on no-madic military forces was a frequent and accepted form of nomad-sedentary inter-action in the period,8 and thus Bela IV’s decision seemed self-evident. However, after their defeat at the Kalkha River in 1223, the Mongols viewed the Cumans as their subjects and Cumania as their own territory, and so receiving them and granting them asylum could be interpreted as an act of war – as khan Batu himself
5 Interestingly, the so-called Cuman laws issued in 1279, that regulated the Cuman-Hungarian coex-istence, originally said nothing on attire, hairstyle or other factors usually connected with ethnicity.
These are only mentioned in the ‘Second Cuman Law’, which was for a long time taken as a final ver-sion of these laws, until Nóra Berend proved that it is an 18th century forgery. (Berend, At the Gate of Christendom, pp. 89–92; Nóra Berend, ‘Az 1279-i “kun törvények” szövege és keletkezés körülményei’, in A Jászkunság kutatása 2000. Tudományos konferencia a Kiskun Múzeumban, ed. by Erzsébet Bánkiné Molnár, Edit Hortiné Bathó, and Erika Kiss (Jászberény-Kiskunfélegyháza: Kiskun Múzeum, 2002), 147–154, pp. 147–151.) A letter of pope Nicholaus III from 1279 reveals that Cumans were not willing to dismiss their traditional hairstyle, and finally the papal legate (with whose assistance the Cuman laws were issued) dropped the question. (Augustino Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Historica Hungariam Sacram Illustrantia, 2 vols (Rome, 1859–1860), I, p. 342.)
6 Acquiring labor force by taking slaves during military campaigns was a widespread custom in the Cuman-Kipchak Federation, also reported by Russian chronicles. (Spinei, The Great Migrations, pp. 228–230.)
7 Spinei, The Great Migrations, p. 227.
8 Berend, ‘Cuman Integration in Hungary’, p. 110.
34 KYRA LYUBLYANOVICS
warned Bela IV.9 However, as already mentioned, the Hungarian king had used the title rex Cumaniae for a couple of years, and so his protective acts towards the Cumans could be justified. Moreover, Bela IV needed supporters not only against the Mongols, but also in his struggle against influential Hungarian bar-ons, as he wanted to stabilize his own position as a political leader. He had been crowned only 4 years earlier, and he had serious conflicts with the Hungarian nobility as he tried to consolidate royal power.10 (It is telling that according to the French chronicler Vincent de Beauvais the Mongols had a long discussion concerning whether they should attack Hungary, and then decided to do so when they heard about the conflicts within the Hungarian élite.11) Bela IV was eager to create bonds with the Cuman nobility and turn them into reliable vassals. Thus, Cumans played an ambiguous political role right from the beginning, and the Hungarian aristocracy – whose rights the young king had curtailed– looked at the new vassals with suspicion. After they were mass-baptized and the king acted as their godfather, Cumans had a collective legal status which was highly depend-ent on the king: as hospites, they had no protector but the royal authority whose expectations they had to meet.12
Our most important written source on the first conflicts, the Epistola in miserabile carmen by Rogerius of Apulia, discusses the relationship between the Cumans and Bela IV extensively, emphasizes the privileges granted to them and the king’s ardent desire to win their trust. Rogerius interprets all conflicts between the newcomers and the Hungarians as a direct consequence of the king’s attitude that overlooked all assaults committed by Cumans and favoured them in all his decisions. The Cumans, on the other hand, are mostly represented through stereo-types. In fact, it is uncertain how much information Rogerius had on the Cuman
9 The text of the letter is preserved in the report of the Hungarian Dominican monk, Brother Julian. The khan mentions the Cumans specifically: ‘Intellexi insuper, quod Cumanos servos nostros sub tua protectione suscepisti; unde mando tibi, quod eos de cetero apud te non teneas, et me adversarium non habeas propter ipsos. Facilius enim est Cumanis evadere, quam tibi, quia illi sine domibus cum tentoriis ambulantes possunt forsitan evadere; tu autem in domibus habitans, habes castra et civitates, quomodo effugies manus meas?’
(Gusztáv Wenzel, Codex Diplomaticus Arpadianus Continuatus (Pest: 1860–1874) 22 vols, VII, p. 553.) 10 The accumulation of large feudal domains in the hands of the aristocracy as well as the appearance of a production-centered money economy required a change in the official structures of power. After that Endre II’s first reform attempts rather weakened than strengthened the king’s position, Bela IV targeted a new consolidation of royal power and a return to a pre-1200 status quo. The catastrophic defeat of the Hungarian military was partly due to Bela IV’s failure to recognize the military potential of the rising new Hungarian élite. (Jenő Szűcs, Az utolsó Árpádok, História Könyvtár Monográfiák 1. (Budapest: História – MTA Történettudományi Intézete, 1993), pp. 7–11.)
11 Felicitas Schmieder, ‘Der Einfall der Mongolen nach Polen und Schlesien – Schreckensmeldungen, Hilferufe und die Reaktionen des Westens’, in Wahlstatt 1241. Beiträge zur Mongolenschlacht bei Liegnitz und zu ihren Nachwirkungen. ed. by Ulrich Schmilewski (Würzburg: Bergstadtverlag Korn, 1991), 77–86, p. 86.
12 Berend, At the Gate of Christendom, p. 87.
35
SPIES OF THE ENEMY, PAGAN HERDERS AND VASSALS MOST WELCOME
commoners, but he definitely had strong connections to the court and so the ties to the Cuman aristocracy must have been well known to him. He lists the ‘reasons for the enmity between King Béla and the Hungarians’, among which he names the attitude towards the Cumans several times (although he argues that receiv-ing them was necessary in order to gain new allies against the country’s enemies and to save their souls through the Christian faith). He even reports that Cuman noblemen were allowed to meet the king face to face, while Hungarian nobles were allowed to communicate only through intermediaries13 – a strong symbolic sign of the bond Bela IV tried to forge with leaders of the new – and, he hoped, useful – minority of his land. Rogerius adds that the king tried to put an end to the conflicts between commoners by calling both the Hungarian and Cuman nobles together and making an agreement to disperse the Cumans throughout the country so that there would be smaller communities which would have been easier to handle than one big Cuman block.14 It is important to note here, that even though Cumans were used to form alliances with various political and mili-tary forces on the steppe, they never formed a state15 and were now facing a feudal kingdom as a host community much bigger than their own. Thus, conflicts were probably unavoidable.
The Cuman leadership was presumably unaware that they now played a role in a bitter political struggle, and were victimized partly due to their inability to com-ply with the situation. Shortly after their arrival and baptism, news reached the court that there were Cumans in the Mongol army (in fact, these were Cumans previously captured, made slaves and forced to fight, as it is reported by John of Plano Carpini16 and Thomas of Split17). The spreading news caused a panic that the Cumans were actually Mongol spies in disguise. Although the Cumans had already been called to arms against the Mongols and their troops were getting ready to join Bela’s army, Kuthen and his family were suddenly placed under guard in Buda. In a spontaneous assault, probably led by Hungarian nobles, the khan and his retinue were massacred. This set off a catastrophic series of events.
Interestingly, according to Rogerius’ report, it was not the Cumans themselves who turned against the Hungarian population when they heard about the death
13 Rogerius, Anonymi Bele Regis Notarii Gesta Hungarorum, p. 147.
14 Rogerius, Anonymi Bele Regis Notarii Gesta Hungarorum, pp. 148–149.
15 Berend, At the Gate of Christendom, p. 118
16 He also reports that he was provided with two Cumans, who counted as Tatars. (Plano Carpini, Mission to Asia, ed. by Christopher Dawson, Medieval Academy Reprints for Teaching 8. (Toronto – Buffalo – London: University of Toronto Press, 1980) p. 58, 69.)
17 Habent autem ex diversi nationibus, quas bellis edomuerunt, multitudinem maximam pugnatorum et precipue Cumanorum, quos ad pugnandum subigunt violenter. Si quem vero ex his paululum trepidare conspiciunt nec in mortem sese tota mentis insania precipitare ansque ulla cunctatione eius amputant caput.
(Thomas of Split, History of the bishops of Salona and Split, ed. by Damir Karbić, Mirjana Matijević Sokol, and James Ross Sweeney (Budapest: CEU Press, 2006), p. 285.)
36 KYRA LYUBLYANOVICS
of their khan, but the Hungarian peasants who started to organize a pogrom against the Cuman minority.18 Thus, although no legal means were used to expel them, most Cumans left the country, and went to Bulgaria, where there was a considerably large Cuman minority. This also meant that the Hungarian king lost his military ally on the eve of the Mongol attack.
In fact, not much is known about this spontaneous clash. Rogerius makes only minor comments, and explains the animosity towards Cumans as general hatred.
This, nevertheless, needs some further explanation. The Hungarian aristocracy clearly had a reason to dislike the Cuman nobles as they must have viewed them as dangerous royal allies potentially used as a military force in case of a further dep-rivation of aristocratic privileges and political power. The peasants, however, who mostly had contact with the Cuman commoners, had no such agenda. Rogerius mentions the damage the Cumans’ animals caused to crops, and their custom to take Christians as prisoners and force them to labour in their fields. However, it is uncertain if these were isolated incidents or widely practiced. As mentioned above, the king tried to eliminate the tension between the two populations by dispersing the Cuman minority throughout the country (although nothing is known of the pattern of this dispersal).19 The lowest stratum of the Cuman com-munity was certainly poor, and many of them became servants at Hungarian households.20 This first, short period of coexistence was not enough to create a framework for a long-lasting cooperation, but the Hungarian population’s experi-ence with Cumans was probably not exclusively negative. In fact, there had been other populations of steppe origin who migrated to the Hungarian Kingdom, served as military allies and were later assimilated, and so a model of integrating steppe peoples was known.21 Moreover, in this period the general view of nomads in the Latin speaking world changed profoundly, and changed from the perception
18 Cum autem rumor de morte eiusdem increbuisset, Hungari villani odiodi eis ubique contra eos insurgere coeperunt spoliando, interficiendo eosdem sine aliqua pietate. Qui, cum taliter inspicerent se peremi, insimul congregati non solum se deffendere inceperunt, sed villas comburrere et rusticos viriliter expugnare. Rogerius, Anonymi Bele Regis Notarii Gesta Hungarorum, p. 175.
19 Although there is a detailed description of lands donated to the Cumans in the so-called ‘Second Cuman Law’, it proved to be an 18th-century forgery made necessary by the Cumans’ early modern strug-gle for the ownership of the lands they inhabited. (Berend, At the Gate of Christendom, pp. 89–92; Berend,
‘Az 1279-i “kun törvények” szövege, pp. 147–151.) The areas where Cumans lived in the 13th century can mainly be reconstructed by means of linguistic analysis of placenames and the Cumans’ appearance in donation charters.
20 György Györffy, ‘A kunok feudalizálódása’, in Tanulmányok a parasztság történetéhez Magyarországon a 14. században, ed. by György Székely (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1953), 248–275, p. 251.
20 György Györffy, ‘A kunok feudalizálódása’, in Tanulmányok a parasztság történetéhez Magyarországon a 14. században, ed. by György Székely (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1953), 248–275, p. 251.