Zimányi V. A Rohonc Szalonaki uradalom és jobbágysága а XVI–XVII. században. Bp., 1968.
Zsilinszky M. A magyar országgyűlések vallásügyi tárgyalásai a reformációtól kezdve. 5 köt.: 1526–1687. Bp., 1881–1893.
Zsilinszky M. Az 1637/8–ki pozsonyi országgyűlés történetéhez. Bp., 1885.
Zsilinszky M. A linczi békekötés és az 1647–ki vallásügyi törvénycikkek története. Bp., 1890.
Zsoldos A. Hrvatska i Slavonia u srednjevekovnoj Ugarskoj Kraljevini // Hrvatsko-madar-ski odnosi 1102.–1918. Zvornik radova. Zagreb, 2004.
Список иллюстраций
1. Надор Миклош Эстерхази. Неизвестный художник XVI в.
2. Оршоя Дершфи, супруга М. Эстерхази. Неизвестный художник XVI в.
3. Карта Венгрии Вольфганга Лазил 1570 г.
4. Буда. Гравюра в Нюрнбергской хронике XV в.
5. Святая венгерская корона. Гравюра XVII в.
6. Герб Иштвана Вербеци.
7. Герб Реваи.
8. Герб Лёринца Ференцфи.
9. Герб Асалаев.
10. Венгерская корона сегодня. Фото.
11. Знамя Венгерского королевства с гербом в траурной процессии на похоронах Фердинанда I в 1565 г.
12. Карта Венгрии в XVI в.
13. Коронационная процессия Максимилиана II Габсбурга при въезде в Пресбург. Гравюра XVI в.
14. Коронация Леопольда I Габсбурга в Пресбурге. Гравюра середины XVII в.
15. Мученичество Венгрии. Гравюра М. Шрота. 1584 г.
16. Буда в турецкую эпоху. Гравюра XVI в.
17. Буда при штурме 1686 г.
18. Венгерский конный воин. Гравюра 2-й половины XVI в.
19. Турецкие воины при осаде Эстергома. Гравюра конца XVI в.
20. Иштван Вербеци. Гравюра 1560 г.
21. Трипартитум Иштвана Вербеци. Издание 1574 г.
22. Миклош Олах. Гравюра 1560 г.
23. Балинт Балашши. Неизвестный художник XVI в.
24. Балинт Балашши. Книжечка для врачевания больной души.
25. Миклош Иштванфи. Гравюра XVI в.
26. Миклош Эстерхази. Гравюра 1-й половины XVII в.
27. Кристина Няри, вторая жена М. Эстерхази. Неизвестный художник XVII в.
28. Ласло Ракоци. Гравюра XVII в.
29. Дёрдь II Ракоци. Гравюра XVII в.
30. Пал Эстерхази. Неизвестный художник середины XVII в.
31. Иван Китонич. Гравюра XVII в.
32. Замок Эстерхази Форхтенштейн (Фракно). Гравюра XVII в.
33. Замок Эстерхази в Лакомпаке (Лакомбах). Гравюра XVIII в.
34. Венгерский народный танец. Гравюра XVI в.
35. Аттила. Изображение на медали XIX в.
Summary
The present book is a collection of materials that analyse various aspects of the life of Hungarian nobility in the XVIth— XVIIth cc. The world of the Hungarian nobility is shown through different paths followed by a number of people who differed in their influence, views, social status and profession, and in situations where they found themselves.
The idea to look at the period through the eyes of a Hungarian nobleman and to show it using the lense of personal history has solid foundations. In the XVIth— XVIIth cc., the Hungarian nobility occupied leading positions in the administration of the realm and played leading role in the politics and economics of the country, its culture and the military. Three groups of factors defined this situation. One, and the most fundamental, was shaped by peculiarities of the historical development of medieval Hungary. The country was poorly urbanized, and urban elites were weak, dynasties often replaced each other on its throne, and the kings did not command much support; all of this made up for a powerful feudal elite capable of fighting to preserve its social privileges and authority. The second group of factors is linked to the fact that Hungary was a part of a Central European composite state created by the Austrian Habsburgs in the 1520s. Relations between its centre and composite parts was complex, and links between them were not always strong or wellconstrued. The third set of factors was created by the wars against the Ottoman Empire that at the time were mostly fought on Hungarian territories. In these circumstances, the Habsburg monarchs could not hope to control local elites as they did in Austria and, to some extent, in Bohemia. For the first century and a half the dynasty did not have enough human and material resources to both hold its ground against the Ottomans and to govern the country effectively, and to carry out its policies. The first two tasks were mostly given to the Hungarian feudal elite — its aristocracy and the majority of the gentry. The system of local noble selfadministration provided for the more or less smooth functioning of the state mechanism, even though its central organs (with the exception of the Treasury) happened to be outside of Hungary. The most important matters of state were settled at the Diet. Its meetings were controlled by magnates and noblemen who dominated over the representatives of towns and the clergy. The Hungarian aristocrats provided the substantial means for building and maintaining of fortresses in their possession, and those granted to them by the Crown. Until the second half of the XVIIth century, the core of the Hungarian military was noble militia that gathered in the counties when summoned by the King. At the times of war, the elites were fluid. Brave young men, sons who were to continue their noble lineages, died fighting the Turks. More than one noble family went extinct in the unequal battle. Others replaced them: new families rose to all strata of the elite, from aristocracy to landless gentry — «armalists». The way to social advancement led, primarily and unsurprisingly so, through military service. Civil administration, however, also provided ample opportunities, especially as the central authorities, and particular magnates needed more and more officials, educated specifically for the task This led not only to the numerical growth of nobility, but to the emergence of a new bureaucracy. To keep the Hungarians loyal and under their control, the Habsburgs interfered in the process of ennoblement, and foreigners from Bohemia, Austria, German and Italian lands, etc. — persons close to the court — found their way into the Hungarian «political nation».
The choice of personal history in this study is explained not only by the fact that its protagonists are members of nobility — the leading political and social force in early modern Hungary. There has not been enough source material studied in the relevant fields of history to make generalizations. This is true, for example, for the history of the early modern state bureaucracy in the composite monarchy of the Austrian Habsburgs. In case of the Kingdom of Hungary in the XVIth— XVIIth cc., this aspect can be studied in the context of the history of nobility. The same can be said about the relationship between the Hungarian elites and the central power, the Habsburgs as the Kings of Hungary. A study of a biography, a work of one historical person can show how more general trends of the history of the Hungarian society and state reflected these aspects in this complex and difficult period of the history of Hungary. An attempt to see what the most interesting, thinking, active and dedicated noblemen of Hungary thought, to reveal their views on the most pressing topics — about the central power and their relationship to it, about their estate and its place in the society, about the Hungarians, their history and the role of the defenders of the Christendom, etc. — makes it possible to see to what extent traditions and attitudes characteristic of the generations of the post-Mohacs Hungarian noblemen set the limits to their power in new historical circumstances.
Individual lives, however, provide more than just some material for generalizations, typologies and patterns. Personal histories, brought as close to individuals as possible, have their own value because these are safeguards against anonymity of a historical study. The analysis of certain episodes in the lives of particular people — the way I see these — are not so much biographies in traditional sense. Rather, these are moments when my «protagonists» revealed themselves and showed ability to make untrivial decisions. This makes it possible to talk about their identity, and to see personal choice in their actions. The choices made them stand out of the mass of nameless people, even though they were not outstanding people in the strict sense. This becomes possible through a combination of various aspects in the study: the everyday world, social relations, ideas and views.
Some of the protagonists of this study are shown in their everyday life and work, in their habitual circle — professional or social. Thus, it can be said that this is a microhistorical study. This approach certainly requires a good deal of attention paid to historical context. Besides, I think and work within a framework of a certain episteme and start from some accepted evaluations and assumptions. However, behavior of historical persons that I studied clearly deviated from models of social and individual behavior accepted in Europe in general and in its regions, Hungary in particular. A study of deviant behavior of a treasury official can reveal characteristics of collective, even traditional consciousness, and of corporate behavior at the very least. This is the «normal exceptional» mentioned by Edoardo Grendi and later by Carlo Ginzburg when he explained his path to microhistory. Dichotomy of such study is obvious — and this makes it attractive, valuable and promising in my eyes. This is also revealed in the fact that a study of the world of the Hungarian nobility at the time of the Ottoman wars makes one juxtapose, or rather, not to make a clear divide between, the national and the universal, the individual and the collective, the subjective and the objective; horizontal links are combined with vertical ones.