Search results

1

“…It is impossible to endure the above mentioned serious matters and grievous injuries…” Misunderstandings between István II. Koháry, General-Captain of Fiľakovo and the Nobility (1667–1682)

100%

Komjáti Z. I.

Acta historica Neosoliensia Vedecký časopis pre historické vedy

|

2022

|

vol. 25

|

issue 1

33-66

EN

In the 17th century Fiľakovo was not only the base for the royal garrison, but at the same time the fort was the seat of three counties: Novohrad, Pest-Pilis-Solt and Heves and Külső-Szolnok earlier fleeing before the Ottomans. By the common sense and the practical reason, we could believe that the dependency on each other, the mutual national interest and the patriotic solidarity would bring about cooperation between the border soldiers and the nobility. The stark reality was, however, that they could not agree: mutual accusations, disagreements, atrocities, severe debates — occasionally with the intention to kill — characterised the relationship of the Fiľakovo troops and the nobility residing or temporarily staying in the border castle. The main problem was the lack of supplies for the army. As the border soldiers did not receive their dues, they procured food and goods needed for their living and clothing from the nearby settlements in the county, which was ever so often violent. The county nobility was deeply harmed by the attacks of the soldiers that not only hindered their living, but they saw it as the derogation of their ancient noble rights and their sanctity, which they could not tolerate. As a result the nobility had to limit the privileges of the Fiľakovo border soldiers that the other party could not stand, either. The war between the two social strata both regarding themselves privileged precipitated in legal debates: who is to accuse and punish the guilty and captured border soldiers? who has the right to call to account and punish the guilty captured soldiers? whose jurisdiction is stronger and in what case? Heves and Külső-Szolnok County sent their representatives either together with other counties or on its own to Pál Esterházy, Ferenc Nádasdy, then from 1670 to Ádám Forgách, Chief Judge of Hungary, but they could have even presented their grievances to the Emperor. The other frontline of the confrontation between the two parties manifested in the use of violence. People were treated roughly by the soldiers due to the mutual conflict, but the village inhabitants instigated by the County Magistrate did not hold themselves back when capturing a soldier. This way, there were often human casualties. When a person of noble origin committed an atrocity, no matter how significant it was he was treated carefully and judgement was very slow. This is shown in the study through the case of Menyhért Ebeczky, the Deputy-Lord-Lieutenant of Novohrad County and Noble Judge of Heves and Külső-Szolnok County from 1678.

2

The Problems of the Military Provisions and Payouts and Their Consequences during the Upper Hungary Campaign of 1664

100%

Komjáti Z. I.

Acta historica Neosoliensia Vedecký časopis pre historické vedy

|

2021

|

vol. 24

|

issue 1

70-95

EN

This study concentrates on the financial and alimentative problems of the Anti-Turkish Campaign of Upper Hungary in 1664, and on the military abuses derived from the shortage of the adequate supplying. Due to the often happening contemporary logistic shortages and the exiguousness of the Hungarian resources, the Imperial War Council supplied with difficulty the German–Hungarian Army led by General Louis de Souches and Stephen I. Koháry, General-Captain of Fiľakovo (who was commissioned twice to Commander of the Hungarian Troops during the campaign). The obtaining of the payout was always on the agenda in the agreements with the county magistrates, and by order of Palatine Francis Wesselényi, the magnates and the prelates were also obliged to surrender grain crops and other foods. In spite of the very often shortage of supplying, the commanders managed to solve the problems, and the Christian Army successfully re-captured Nitra and Levice, and were also victorious on the battlefield of Žarnovica and Hronský Beňadik. But the encamped soldiers were encouraged by the unsystematic paying and food supplying to pillage the inhabitants of the surrounding settlements. The campaign also gave an opportunity for the looting of the vagrant soldiers who often could not be called to account for their crimes, because they did not serve under the banners. To avoid the pillages and atrocities, the only solution was that trusted and disciplinable soldiers were recruited in the camp, and by means of issuing strict orders, the commerce of the stolen livestock were forbidden in all of free and royal towns. The magistrates of certain settlements and other owners asked for safe-conduct or safeguard garrison from the commanders trying to assure the protection for the inhabitants and their belongings.

3

The County and State Taxing of the Koháry Demesnes in Hont County in the 1710’s and 1720’s

100%

Komjáti Z. I.

Acta historica Neosoliensia Vedecký časopis pre historické vedy

|

2020

|

vol. 23

|

issue 2

29-52

EN

The campaigns against the Ottoman Empire and the War of Independence named after Francis Rákóczi lasting almost 30 years thoroughly ruined the economy of the Hungarian Kingdom by the beginning of the 1710’s. The Sovereign (Charles the Third) and the governmental organizations tried to issue decrees for the constant development, but they almost all the time left out of consideration the difficult cost-of-living condition of the county inhabitants. The taxes imposed after “porta number” on the counties (gratuitous labour, winter quarters, billeting and conveyance for the transient army and doing wagon-traffic in the time of the Campaign of Báčka) were exactly supposed to fulfill by the county, so the Magistrate distributed to each settlements. The Koháry Family had two demesnes in the territory of Hont County: Čabraď and Sitno, and the state and the county taxation applied to them in the same way as the other settlements. But Stephen (István) Koháry (directing Hont County as Lord-Lieutenant since 1711) always got an opportunity for acquiring the exemption of the demesnes from the gratuitous labour. Primarily, he had applied to Sovereign Charles the Third for issuing a diploma of exemption, then he introduced it with both the Hungarian Royal Locumtenens Council and Hont County Magistrate. Thus, the two demesnes of Koháry were always exempted from the gratuitous labour, imposed and varied several times annually, and fulfilled either at Buda or Esztergom Fortresses. Last but not least, it can be observed that tendency that the existence of a diploma of exemption might not guarantee the automatic acceptance, in fact, it would be yearly applied for it, would be make it accepted on each occasion, and the acceptance of the exemption was the permanent item on the agenda of a county delegate negotiating with the higher authorities. The paper offers a deeper view into the the practice of the county taxation, and it sized up the economic life of Hont County in the first third of the 18th century.

Refine search results

3 Acta historica Neosoliensia Vedecký časopis pre historické vedy

3 Komjáti Z. I.

1 2022

1 2021

1 2020

“…It is impossible to endure the above mentioned serious matters and grievous injuries…” Misunderstandings between István II. Koháry, General-Captain of Fiľakovo and the Nobility (1667–1682)

The Problems of the Military Provisions and Payouts and Their Consequences during the Upper Hungary Campaign of 1664

The County and State Taxing of the Koháry Demesnes in Hont County in the 1710’s and 1720’s