Abstract
Modem historiography interprets the ninth century sources concerning Moravia as referring to a nation of “Moravians” or describing the history of a nation-state “Moravia” with characteristics of a modern sovereign country. The fact is that none of the sources contemporary papal letters, annalistic entries, or even Church Slavonic sources of late provenience — ever mentions a nation, an ethnic group known as Moravians, or a territorial or medieval nation-state under the name of Moravia. There are, however, direct references to a city of Morava and its inhabitants.1 All sources read in the light of medieval topographic concepts and analyzed with philological exactness attest only to the existence of a city by the name of Morava and of a principality of the same name. The tribal or ethnic name of the city’s inhabitants was Sclavi or Slaviene, and the same name was used for the population of the principality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Cf. Vita Naumi II: “Mefodii… otide v Panoniou, v grad Moravou,” i.e., “Methodius left for Pannonia, to the city of Morava”. Lamberti Hersfeldensis annales: “1059. Nativitatem Domini in civitate Marouwa celebravi, in confinio sita Ungariorum et Bulgarorum.” For “Morava in Pannonia” c. 1165, cf. J. Dobrovský, Cyril a Metod (ed. J. Vajs), Prague, 1948, p. 84.
Cf., e.g., Gradivo, vol. 2, Index s.v. ‘Fulransko’ and ‘Karantanija’.
Annales Fuldenses and Herimanni Augiensis chronicon. For complete text see page 34.
Cf., e.g., Charles E. Bennett, New Latin Grammar (Boston, 1953), 152 (3).
Annales Fuldenses. For text see note 16 on p. 37.
Herimanni Augiensis chronicon. For text see note 17 on p. 38.
Cf., e.g., Gradivo, vol. 2, Index s.v. ‘Oglej and ‘Karantanci’
Monumenta Poloniae Historica II, 816 and elsewhere.
The transliteration of Glagolitic and Cyrillic phrases in this study is rather unconventional. It does not follow either the phonetic or the sign-for-sign transcription. The guiding principle is simplification. For editions of Church-Slavonic texts see the Bibliography.
See note 1, page 21.
Cf. Chernorizets Khrabr, O pismenakh: “…v vremiena Mikhaila tsiesarie griechskego i Borisa kniaza bulgarskogo i Rastitsa kniaza moravska, i Kotselie kniaza blatenska.” The adjectives ‘griechskego’ and bulgarskogo’ are formed from ethnic names; the forms ‘moravska’ and ‘blatenska’ from place names. Kotsel was prince of ‘Blaten grad’ (Moosburg) or ‘Blatensko’, on the lake Balaton.
It should be noted here that the attested Church Slavonic forms have ‘Moravliene’. The ending -iene appears to be South Slavic. Furthermore, the l between Morav-and -iene is an epenthesis occurring in South Slavic dialects. Cf. Ernst Eichler, “Zur Deuting und Verbreitung der altsorbischen Bewohnernamen auf -jane”, in Slavia 31 (1962), 348–377, specially pp. 348–49. Note that the form Sloviene (p. 349) is also South Slavic. Cf. also V. Vondrak, Vergleichende Slavische Grammatik, 2nd ed., vol. 1 (Göttingen, 1924), 542.
This structure in South Slavic is influenced possibly by Greek and Latin. For a similar structure in Old Russian, but with dative case, cf. R. Aitzetmüller, “Zum sog. Richtungsdativ des Altrussischen. Typus ide Kyevu”, in Zeitschrift für slavische Philogie 31 (1963), 338–356.
Cf. also Vita Constantini 15; “chetyridesent miesents stvori v Morave,” and Vita Methodii 5; “Rostislav… s Sventopolkom poslasta iz Moravy… ”.
Vita Methodii 10.
In Slovenian ‘oblast’ still today means ‘power’. The same meaning is carried by the Croat ‘ovlast’.
Povest Vremennykh Let, ed D.S. Likhachev, vol. 1 (Moscow-Leningrad, 1950), 117.
I.I. Sreznevskii, Materialy dlia slovaria drevne-russkago iazyka 1–3 (Sanktpeterburg, 1893-1903), s.v.
Vita Methodii 8.
Cf. “Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres.”
Cf. also Vita Methodii 12; “Methodi us… into his hands were given all the Slavonic parts.”.
Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum meridionalium, vol. 7, pp. 361–362. Conversio Bagoariorum has “Sclavinia” for Carinthia and Lower Pannonia.
Codex diplomaticus regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae, vol. 1, pp. 33–35 (no. 24).
For this and numerous other illustrations see K. Jireček, Istoriia Srba, ed. J. Radonić, vol. 2 (Belgrad, 1952), 2 ff. Cf. also F. Sisic, Povijest Hrvata u vrijeme narodnich vladara (Zagreb, 1925), 614–15, 620.
Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum meridionalium, vol. 7, pp. 158–159 (no. 130).
For more persuasive arguments placing Sclavonia in a territory south of the Drava cf. F. Dvornik, Les Slaves, Byzance et Rome au I Xe siècle (Paris, 1926), 224–245 and 229. The term Sclavia or Sclavonia could and was used also for some territories north of the Bohemians. In the ninth century territories north of the Danube were considered part of Germania Einhardi vita Caroli, c. 15, (Cosmas, I, 2). Note also that today “Germany’ covers only part of the territories inhabited by Germanic people. A history of Slavonia has not yet been written. Instead, scholars have concentrated on the history of the Croats and the Serbs and have engaged in controversies whether the Bosnians were Serbs or Croats. The fact is that the Serbs, Croats and Bosnians were known in the Middle Ages under the ethno-political name of a joint Patrimonium, namely of the Slavonians. A history of Slavonia would be comparable to the history of medieval Rus, comprising the history of its component principalities, i.a. Novgorod, Smolensk, Kiev, Pskov and others.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1971 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Boba, I. (1971). Basic Premises. In: Moravia’s History Reconsidered. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2992-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2992-6_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-247-5041-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-2992-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive