¹ Herewith I wish to express my thanks to Dom Polycarp Radó, Hungarian medievalist and former Rector of the Central Seminary in Budapest, for his providing me with otherwise unobtainable research material during my short working visits to Hungary in 1964. I also thank Porhansl, Anton Dr., Executive Secretary of the Vienna Fulbright Commission, for his permission to go to Hungary while I held a Fulbright grant to Austria.Google Scholar

² On Gerard, see his late-fourteenth-century biography, Vita maior s. Gerardi (ed. Madzsar, E., in Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum, ed. Szentpétery, E. (2 vols., Budapest 1937–38, cited hereafter SSH) II 480–506; text also by St. Endlicher, L., Rerum Hungaricarum monumenta Arpadiana (2 vols.; Sangallen 1849) I 205–34; de Batthyány, I., Sancti Gerardi episcopi Chanadiensis acta et scripta hactenus inedita (Alba-Carolinae 1790) 301–59; Gombos, A. F. (ed.), Catalogus fontium historiae Hungaricae (3 vols. [Budapest 1937–38]) III n. 4985, although Gombos' text is not a critical edition. See further Madzsar's introduction, SSH II 461–70; idem, ‘Die Legende des hl. Gerhard,’ Ungarische Rundschau 3 (1914) 288–98; also, Bibliotheca hagiographica latina antiquae et mediae aetatis (ed. Bollandiani, Socii 2 vols. Brussels 1898–99, reprinted 1949) I 510–11 n. 3424–28; Marczali, H., Ungarns Geschichtsquellen im Zeitalter der Árpáden (Berlin 1882) 24–32; Kaindl, R. F., ‘Studien zu den ungarischen Geschichtsquellen,’ Archiv für österreichische Geschichte 91 (1902) 26; Macartney, C. A., ‘Studies on the Earliest Hungarian Sources,’ Archivum Europae centro-orientalis 4 (1938) 456; idem, The Medieval Hungarian Historians (Cambridge 1953) 154; Horváth, J., Arpádkori latinnyelvü irodalmunk stilusproblémái (Stylistic Problems of the Latin Literature of the Arpádian Age) (Budapest 1954) 158; Horváth, J. Jr., ‘A Gellért legendák forrásértéke (The Source-value of the Gerard Legends),’ Magyar Tudományos Akadéma Közleményei (Publications of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) Phil. and Lit. Class 13 (1958) 21. On Gerard's life and deeds, see Karácsonyi, J., Szent Gellért csanádi püspök élete és munkái (The Life and Works of Saint Gerard, Bishop of Csanád) (Budapest 1887); Zoltvány, I., ‘A magyarországi bencés irodalom a tatárjárás elött (Benedictine Literature in Hungary Prior to the Mongolian Invasion),’ A Pannonhalmi Szent Benedek-Rend története (History of the Benedictines of Pannonhalma) 12 vols. (ed. Erdélyi, L., Budapest 1902–07) I 337–80; Manitius, M., Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters 3 vols. (Munich 1911–31) II 74–84; Dawson, Ch., ‘The Hungarian Middle Ages,’ Hungarian Quarterly 5 (1939) 585–94.Google Scholar

³ Deliberatio supra hymnum trium puerorum, Batthyány, , op. cit. 1–297. Horváth, , op. cit. 110; idem, A magyar irodalmi müveltség kezdetei (The Beginnings of Hungarian Literary Culture) (2nd ed. Budapest, 1944) 21; Ivánka, E., ‘Szent Gellért Deliberatiója (St. Gerard's Deliberatio),’ Századok 76 (1942) 497–500.Google Scholar

⁴ Libellus de institutione morum, SSH II 619–27, or Monumenta Arpadiana II 299–310, or PL 151.1235–44, or A Szent István Szent László és Kálmán korabeli törvények és zsinati határozatok forrásai (Laws and Synodical Acts Dating back to the Times of Saint Stephen, Saint Ladislas and Coloman the Learned) (ed. Závodszky, L.; Budapest 1904) 131–41; Gombos, , Catalogus III n. 4686. Also, Deér, J., ‘A szentistváni Intelmek kérdéséhez (Essay on the Admonitions of Saint Stephen),’ Századok 77 (1943) 415; Balogh, J., ‘Nemzet és nemzetköziség Szent István Intelmeiben (The Concepts “Nation” and “Internationalism” in the Admonitions of Saint Stephen),’ Irodalomtörténeti Közlemények 37 (1927) 1–10; idem, ‘The Political Testament of St. Stephen, King of Hungary,’ Hungarian Quarterly 4 (1938) 389; Horváth, , Stilusproblémák 116.Google Scholar

⁵ I consider him in some such role for two reasons. One, Gerard, as the intellectual coworker of King Stephen: the king's ‘egghead’ was largely responsible for the formation of Stephen's policy in the 1030s — for instance, through his participation in the royal council; cf. articles III and VII of the Libellus, loc. cit.; Gerard's Vita maior cc. 2–4; Hartvic's Vita Stephani regis Hungariae (ed. Bartoniek, E., SSH II 401–40) c. 14. Gerard also committed to writing the legal enactments of Stephen; the bishop is the sole ‘literator’ mentioned by the record who fits into the role. ‘Quando enim homo Dei de loco ad locum proficiscebatur, non quolibet iumento, sed modico utebatur vehiculo, in quo sedens libros quos ex Spiritus Sancti gratia composuerat, relegebat’ — SSH II 474. The reader may also compare the legal statutes of Stephen with the unfinished major work of Gerard: the legal code of Stephen presents as confused a picture as the bishop's theological treatise. On the Leges , cf. Závodszky, , op. cit. 13, or Monumenta Arpadiana, II 310–24; the AS Sept I 563 version was merely reprinted in PL 151.1243–53. The second reason why Gerard must be considered important is that after Stephen's death he alone continued Stephen's policy; cf. de Kalta, Mark, Gesta Ungarorum (ed. Domanovsky, A., SSH I 239–505) c. 81, or Gerard's Vita maior, cc. 14 etc. Endlicher, St. L., Die Gesetze des hl. Stefan: ein Beitrag zur ungarischen Rechtsgeschichte (Vienna 1849); Horváth, , Stilusproblémák 104.Google Scholar

⁶ Cf. Stephen's Vita minor (ed. Bartoniek, E., SSH II 393–400); Hartvic ibid. II 401–40; text in Monumenta Arpadiana I 154–62, 163–92; text also in MGH SS XI 226–38; Hartvic only in AS Sept I 562–75 as reprinted in PL 151.1207–34. I disagree with Marczali, op. cit., 13, who called Hartvic ‘ein arger Plagiator’; Wattenbach, W., Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter 2 vols (6th ed. Berlin 1893–94) II 210–11, expressed a similar opinion. Hartvic, as member of the royal household of Coloman the Learned (1096–1116), was bound to be in a position to gain confidential information on the lives of the ruling dynasty (SSH II 402); thus he was in no need of copying down earlier material. On the other hand, he did have to rely on early sources; yet, he changed the information he received, if it became necessary, or added to the text. Cf. Macartney, , op. cit., 165–71; idem, ‘The Hungarian National Chronicle,’ Medievalia et humanistica 16 (1964) 3, where he contradicted some of the earlier observations of Hóman, B., A Szent László-kori Gesta Ungarorum és annak XII – XIII századi leszámazói (The Hungarian National Chronicle during the Reign of Ladislas the Saint and its Continuators in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries) (Budapest 1925) 60–70; idem, Geschichte des ungarischen Mittelalters 2 vols (Berlin 1940–43) I 297–99.Google Scholar

⁷ Known also as Passio sancti Gerardi (ed. Madzsar, E., SSH II 471–79; named Vita minor of Gerard by Endlicher, , Monumenta Arpadiana I 202–04). The first printed version of this text appeared in Legendae sanctorum regni Hungariae in Lombardica historia non contentae (Strassburg 1484 [or 1487]), a work mentioned by Hain, L., Repertorium bibliographicum 2 vols in 4 (Stuttgart-Tübingen 1826–38, reprinted Milan 1948) n. 9996, printed in seven columns. The second oldest printed version of this text is the Vita beati Ladislai of Poland (Cracow 1511); text also in AS Sept VI 722–25; excerpts of the text were printed by Batthyány, op. cit. 350–61, and starting on page 362, Batthyány printed a sermon by Pelbartus of Temesvár, O.F.M. (1430–1504) on Gerard. On friar Pelbartus, see my article, ‘Pelbartus of Temesvár: a Franciscan Preacher and Writer of the Late Middle Ages of Hungary,’ Vivarium 5 (1967) 100–10. I wish to point out also that both A. Potthast, Bibliotheca historica medii aevi 2 vols. (2nd ed. Berlin 1896) II 1335, and Gombos, , Catalogus, III n. 4985, confused the previous printed editions of Gerard's Vita minor with those of the Vita maior. Pásztor, E., ‘Problemi di datazione della Legenda Maior s. Gerardi,’ Bollettino dell' Istituto Storico per il Medio Evo e Archivio Muratoriano 73 (1961) 113; Macartney, , op. cit. 152–54; Zimmermann, A. M., Kalendarium Benedictinum 4 vols. (Vienna 1933–38) III 96. Bánfi, F., ‘Vita di s. Gerardo da Venezia nel codice 1622 della Biblioteca Universitaria di Padova,’ Benedictina 2 (1948) 262; edited text ibid., 288–330.Google Scholar

The essay by Juhász, C., ‘Die Beziehungen der Vita Gerardi maior zur Vita minor,’ Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktiner-Ordens 47 (1929) 129, is weak in this respect. Horváth, , Stilusproblémák 181, made the remark that the Vita minor was originally a sermon prepared sometime in the thirteenth century, because the term ‘microcosmus’ in its fifth chapter was not in use prior to that date. The fact is that the earliest available manuscript of the Vita dates back to the late twelfth century and this manuscript is only a copy ! This is the major trouble with all the medieval Hungarian sources. Thus Horváth's controversy cannot be decisive as, presumably, the late-twelfth-century scribe working on the manuscript simply applied the then fashionable term to the opus. The letter of Fulbert of Chartres to Bonipert, the first bishop of Pécs in Hungary in the time of Gerard (PL 141.189–90), proves established cultural relations between Hungary and the West at such an early date, and I have found no reason to doubt the possibility that the scribe of the late-twelfth-century manuscript that carries the Vita minor of Gerard knew, through cultural exchange, of the work of Bernard Silvestris De universitate mundi; the second book of which is entitled Microcosmus: in secundo libro qui Microcosmus dicitur, id est minor mundus … (Bernardi Silvestris De Mundi universitate libri duo sive Megacosmus et Microcosmus. edd. Barach, C. S. et Wrobel, J. [Innsbruck 1876] 6.34–35).Google Scholar

⁸ Vita minor, c. 1, SSH II 471.Google Scholar

⁹ Gerard himself made a statement on his earlier life: ‘Multa legi, multa cucurri. In Spania fui doctus, in Britannia eruditus, in Scotia detritus, in Hybernia studui; omnes liberales disciplinas commendavi memoriae, ideo nil lectionis me effugere potest,’ in Batthyány, , op. cit. 256. Endres, J. A., ‘Studien zur Geschichte der Frühscholastik: Gerard von Csanád,’ Philosophisches Jahrbuch 26 (1913) 349, brought forth the argument that Gerard in his early days might have belonged to the religious community of St. Romuald. The rustic way of living of this group (cf. PL 144.953) would hardly have made any appeal to Gerard's literary mind; see also, Mikkers, E., ‘Eremitical Life in Western Europe during the xi and xii Centuries,’ Citeaux: Commentarii Cistercienses 14 (1963) 44–54.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Vita minor, c. 2, SSH II 472, and Hartvic, c. 14 ibid., II 487–88.Google Scholar

¹¹ The barons, alias nobles, are the Magyars, while the non-Magyar element is the conquered social stratum of the population, as is evident from the Leges of King Stephen: ‘ut gens nostra monarchiae hujus ab omni incursu et accusatione servorum et ancillarum remota et quieta maneat…’ art. I:20 (art. XIX in the PL version); or, ‘volumus ut firma pax, et unanimitas sit inter majores et minores, secundum apostolum: Omnes unanimes estote…’ art. I:35 (art. XXXIII in PL). The scriptural quotation is 1 Peter 3:8, or Phil. 2:2; incidentally, this accurate Biblical quotation is another proof of the authorship of Gerard as compiler of the Leges because the bishop was notorious for his correct citations. See below, n. 24. As further proof of the twofold nature of Hungarian society in the days of Stephen, I cite two other legal acts, II:9 and II:16 (art. XLIII and L in PL), because it is evident from their text that the king had to protect his low-born officials from the wrath of the barons. ‘Si quis militum judicium a suo comite recte judicatum spernens, ad regem apellaverit, cupiens comitem suum reddere injustum, sit debitor decem pensarum auri suo comiti’; ‘si quis servorum curiae regali vel comitis praeficitur, ejus testimonium inter comites recipiatur….’ Had the royal officials been Magyars, members of the baronial class, they would not have needed extra legal protection. Furthermore, Gerard himself distinguished between Magyars and non-Magyars; as a matter of record, the Csanád bishop held a rather low opinion of the unlearned barons — see Batthyány, , op. cit. 153. It is furthermore clear from the record that the ‘opposition’ consisted of the nobles and not only the members of the royal family: Hartvic, c. 6, reports: ‘… plebs gentilis Christianae fidei iugo colla submittere renuens, cum principibus suis a dominio ipsius se subtrahere moliebatur,’ SSH II 408. After all, the barons did enjoy unlimited liberty between 907, the death of Árpád the Conqueror, and 972, when Duke Geysa came to power. See the report of the Hungarian Carthusian, Anonymus, cc. 47 etc. (ed. Jakubovich, Ae., SSH I 33–117), or even Simon de Keza's Gesta Hungarorum (ed. Domanovszky, A., SSH I 141–94), c. 43. Geysa remained in power only because he made a compromise with the barons; he agreed not to enforce the Christianization of Hungary. In turn, however, Geysa suffered heavy censure from his non-Magyar contemporaries, as, for instance, from Bruno of Querfurt, Vita Adalberti Pragensis, c. 23, MGH SS IV 607, or from Thietmar of Merseburg, Chronicon, ibid., III 826. Also, Hóman, , Ungarisches Mittelalter, I 185–88.Google Scholar

¹² The Vita Emerici ducis (ed. Bartoniek, E., SSH II 449–60; text also in Monumenta Arpadiana I 193–201; AS Nov. II/I 487–90; Gombos, , Catalogus, III n. 4975) has no historical value at all — see Macartney, , op. cit. 170. His death was recorded in the Annales Hildesheimenses, a. 1031 MGH SS III 98; also, Hartvic, c. 16; Stephen's decision to withdraw from the government of public affairs was reported by Kalta, c. 69, SSH I 319.Google Scholar

¹³ The entry in the Annales Hildesheimenses, a. 1030, ‘Counradus imperator cum exercitu fuit in Hungaria,’ MGH SS III 97, is meaningless as the sentence stands all by itself in the text. On the other hand, the additional remark in the Annales Altahenses, a. 1030, explaining that the emperor spent a night at the abbey, might indicate detailed preparations for the attack and render the reason for the thorough German defeat: ‘rediit autem de Hungaria sine militia et in nullo proficiens, ideo quod exercitus fame periclitabatur, et Vienni ab Ungaris capiebatur.’ MGH SS XX 791. That the term ‘Vienni’ actually meant Vienna, Wien, was noted procul dubio by W. v. Giesebrecht, , ibid., XX 791, n. 23. The statements of the Annals are supported by Wipo's Life of Conrad II, c. 26, ibid., XI 268, and Wipo also explained the reasons for the emperor's hostility toward the Hungarians in c. 22. Also, the almost total silence of the German chroniclers on Hungarian affairs in the 1030s, their sudden lack of interest in Hungary as long as the old king was alive, is worth noting. Had there been detailed planning, the German court would not have given up its plans so easily. Cf. ibid., III 98; also, Schnith, K., ‘Recht und Friede: zum Königsgedanken im Umkreise Heinrichs III.,’ Historisches Jahrbuch 81 (1962) 22–34. The article by Gombos, F. A., ‘Szent István háborúja II Konrád császárral (King Stephen's War with the Emperor Conrad II),’ Emlékkönyv Szent István halálának kilencszázadik évfordulóján (Memorial Volumes to the 900th Anniversary of the Death of King Stephen), ed. Serédi, J., 3 vols. (Budapest 1938; cited hereafter SIE) II 107–34, contributed little to the solution of the problem. The interpretation of Hóman, Ungarisches Mittelalter I 247–48, is more convincing.Google Scholar

¹⁴ J. Stilting in AS Sept VI 713–22; SSH II 487 reported on Gerard's acting as a tutor to the prince; however, I have found no reference to such tutorial activity in the Vita minor. Rónay, Gy., ‘Szent Gellért,’ Vigilia, Budapest, Dec. 1946, 47–50, also doubted whether Gerard had tutored the prince. F. Kühár, ‘Szent Gellért Bakonybélben (The Whereabouts of Gerard at Bakonybél),’ Pannonhalmi Szemle 2 (1927) 305, presents no convincing argument.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Cf. Hartvic, c. 13, SSH II 419–20, on Stephen's foreign policy; Balogh, A., ‘Szent István Csehországgal, Németországgal, stb., való kapcsolatai (The Relations of Stephen with Germany, Bohemia, etc.,),’ SIE I 430–61, esp. p. 459, n. 1, stressed the importance of Stephen's correspondence with Abbot Odilo of Cluny, who visited Hungary. Cf. Iotsald's Life of Odilo, I:6, MGH SS XV/2. 813. Among the more distinguished western visitors at Stephen's court one may find Richard, abbot of St. Vannes, whose sojourn in Hungary may have coincided with the arrival of Gerard in 1025. Cf. Ademar Cabannensis Chronicon, c. 65 MGH SS IV 145–46; Sackur, E., Richard Abt von St. Vannes (Breslau 1886) 44–45. Gerard made use of the occasion, and presented the visiting abbot with a writing of his: ‘Libellus de divino patrimonio’; cf. Batthyány, , op. cit., 296; or, Southern, R. W., The Making of the Middle Ages (London 1953) 52–53. 164 on Gerard and Odilo and conditions in Hungary at the time. Gerard's political missions on behalf of his royal master fell between 1025 and 1030, when he became the ordinarius of Csanád; cf. Annales Posonienses, a. 1030, SSH I 125, and his Vita minor, c. 2. Further, Hamilton, B., ‘The Monastic Revival in Tenth Century Rome,’ Studia monastica 4 (1962) 35; Haas, A. M., ‘Mittelalterliches Mönchtum,’ Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Aug. 14, 1965, 11.Google Scholar

¹⁶ SSH II 474.497–98.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Text in Závodszky, , op. cit. 141–60; Endlicher, , op. cit. 52; Monumenta Arpadiana, II 310–24; PL 151.1243–54; Gombos, , Catalogus, III 4688. On Stephen's legislation, see his Vita minor, c. 4, and Hartvic, c. 10. Also, Nagy Tasnádi, A., ‘A Thousand Years of Hungarian Constitution,’ Hungarian Quarterly 5 (1939) 9–17.Google Scholar

¹⁸ SSH II 472; Strommer, V. (ed.), Szent Benedek Emlékkönyv (Memorial Volume to St. Benedict of Nursia) (Pannonhalma 1929) 58; Zoltány, , loc. cit. Google Scholar

¹⁹ Hartvic, c. 14; ‘secundum vite meritum episcopos et sacerdotes prefecit, ut auctoritate apostolice traditionis erudirentur,’ Vita minor, SSH II 396.Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid. I 125.Google Scholar

²¹ Cf. the ‘Csanád narrative’ in Gerard's Vita maior, c. 8; Macartney, , op. cit. 157–58; Juhász, C., ‘Gerhard der Heilige, Bischof von Marosburg,’ Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktiner-Ordens 48 (1930) 1.Google Scholar

²² SSH II 492.Google Scholar

²⁸ Cf. Karácsonyi, , op. cit. 125; v. Ivánka, E., ‘Szent Gellért görög müveltségének problémaja (Whether Gérard knew Greek),’ Értékezések a nyelvtudományok köréböl 26 (1942) no 3.Google Scholar

²⁴ Bodor, A., ‘Szent Gellért Deliberátiójának forrásai (The Sources of Gerard's Deliberatio),’ Századok 77 (1943) 173–83; v. Ivánka, E., ‘Das “Corpus areopagiticum” bei Gerhard von Csanád,’ Traditio 15 (1959) 205–22.Google Scholar

²⁵ SSH II 492–95.Google Scholar

²⁶ Horváth, , Irodalmi müveltség, 21–25. Pintér, J., Magyar irodalomtörténet (History of Hungarian Literature) 8 vols. (Budapest 1930–41) I 152–57.Google Scholar

²⁷ Batthyány, , op. cit. 297; SSH II 475–76.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid. II 476. Compare with the report by Keza, cc. 45 ff. Also Gerard noted the decline of general conditions in Hungary after 1038; cf. Batthyány, , op. cit. 36; 216.Google Scholar

²⁹ SSH II 477–78, and compare with Kalta's account, cc. 81 etc. Here I also wish to call attention to the double date: 1046 or 1047 given as that of Gerard's martyrdom. The sole reason I have found would be the difference in time-reckoning of the times. Gerard lived and died in a region where Byzantine influence, consequently Byzantine time-reckoning prevailed; according to Byzantine time-reckoning, the year began on September 1 (of the ‘previous’ year); cf. Grotefend, H., Zeitrechnung des deutschen Mittelalters und der Neuzeit 2 vols. (Hannover 1891–92) I 17. Grotefend, too, placed Gerard's death in 1047, ibid., II 107, and so did the author of the Annales Posonienses SSH I 125. On the other hand, at the Hungarian royal court the year began with Christmas day — ‘Weihnachtsstil,’ see Grotefend, , op. cit., I 205–06, and by this method of reckoning, Gerard died 24 September 1046; see also, v. Brandt, A., Werkzeug des Historikers (2nd ed. Stuttgart 1960) 36–39.Google Scholar

³⁰ Batthyány, , op. cit., 65 and 75; he complained also of the lack of time for systematic study, ibid. 229.Google Scholar

³¹ Cf. Ibrányi, F., ‘Szent Gellért teológiája (The Religious Doctrine of Gerard of Csanád),’ SIE I 495–556.Google Scholar

³² Ibid. Also, Manitius, , op. cit. 77–78.Google Scholar

³³ Ivánka in Traditio (n. 24 above); Hajdú, T., ‘Szent Gellért Deliberatio cimü müvének méltatása (Essay on Gérard's Deliberatio),’ Pannonhalmi Rendtörténet I 381.Google Scholar

³⁴ Batthyány, , op. cit. 1–297. The work itself is preserved in the late-eleventh-century MS 6211 of the Munich Staatsbibliothek. Cf. Karácsonyi, J., ‘Szent Gellért püspök müncheni kódexe (The Munich Codex of Bishop Gerard's Work),’ Magyar Könyvszemle n. s. 2 (1894) 10; Morin, D. G., ‘Un théologien ignoré du xi^e siècle: l'évêque martyr Gérard de Csanád, O.S.B.,’ Revue Bénédictine 27 (1910) 516.Google Scholar

³⁵ Batthyány, , op. cit. 98–99; compare with SSH II 499.Google Scholar

³⁶ Batthyány, , op. cit. 153; 122; 126.Google Scholar

³⁷ Ibid. 265.Google Scholar

³⁸ Csóka, L. J., ‘Szent István Intelmeinek és törvényeinek szerzösége (Essay on the Authorship of King Stephen's Admonitions and Legal Acts),’ Vigilia 29 (1964) 453; Kosztolnyik, Z. J., ‘The Development of the Hungarian Constitution under the Árpáds, 997–1301,’ unpublished master's thesis, Fordham University Library (1961) c. 3.Google Scholar

³⁹ Batthyány, , op. cit. 36–37, 73, 55, 84, 212. Further, Békefi, R., ‘Szent István Intelmei (The Admonitions of King Stephen),’ Századok, 35 (1901) 922; Balogh, J., ‘Szent István Intelmeinek forrásai (The Sources of the Admonitions of King Stephen),’ SIE II 237.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Gerard did as did Jonas of Orléans, who summarized the articles of the Synod of Paris, 829; cf. PL 106.285; also, v. Váczy, P., Die erste Epoche des ungarischen Königtums (Pécs 1935) 35; idem, ‘A királyság központi szervezete Szent István korában (The Centralized Authority of the Hungarian Court at the Time of King Stephen),’ SIE II 33.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Horváth, Stilusproblémák, 104.Google Scholar

⁴² SSH II 500; Batthyány, , op. cit. 99.Google Scholar