Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Bishops, Churches, and Slovak History

Expand Messages
  • Ron
    It is interesting to see how much they say the church owned in 1818-1819. My understanding is that one of the major changes Napoleon made in the countries he
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 10, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      It is interesting to see how much they say the church owned in 1818-1819. My understanding is that one of the major changes Napoleon made in the countries he defeated was to take away the church property and pass it out to civilians, likely his supporters. To think that the church re-assembled its 'property' after his defeat in 1812 is surprising.

      Also it is worth remembering that not just forest and farm land belonged to the church, but the villages and our ancestors obligations to the church as a feudal lord as well as the religious leaders. Depending upon the bishop or priest, some conditions under their thumb were not good for the peasant!

      Ron



      --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com, "nilo3rak" <piekielnik@...> wrote:
      >
      > from THE HUNGARIANS A THOUSAND YEARS OF VICTORY IN DEFEAT
      >
      > Between 1867 and 1914 over one-third of the country was still in the hands of ecclesiastical and lay landowners. According to Count Mihaly Karolyi . . . in 1818-19, 324 landowners owned 20 per cent of the arable land with an average of 20,000 to 25,000 hectares each. The Catholic Church owned about one million hectares and the Achbishops of Esztergom and Kalocsa and the Bishop of Nagyvarad had over 10,000 day-labourers at their disposal.
      >
      >
      > ...peasant landholdings in 1914 did not even amount to half of the country's total area. A third of the peasants were semi-proletarians with mini-holdings of less than three hectares. In 1910 there were 3 million poor peasants . . . with the addition of the semi-proletarians, this rose to almost 4 million. The majority of these were seasonal and day labourers. Destitution....impoverishment
      >
      > OFF TOPIC
      > Let me add, read chapter Chapter 27, The "Golden Age" of the Millenium, to get an appreciation of the colossal arrogance, stupidity, and laziness of the Hungarian aristocracy, and the horrible cost of their medieval practices.
      > Carolyn
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > > Curt, in looking for more information, I ran across a really excellent book
      > > on Slovak history, i.e., Illustrated Slovak History: A Struggle for
      > > Sovereignty In Central Europe, by Spiesz, Caplovic, and Bolchazy, published
      > > in 2004 (over 400 pages). Much, but unfortunately not all, of the book is
      > > available on line. It is not cheap to purchase-the best prices I found were
      > > in the low $40s for the paperback edition. It is highly readable, more up to
      > > date, and appears to be less politically biased than many Slovak histories I
      > > have seen. It also addresses questions that have arisen elsewhere, such as
      > > whether the nobility in Slovakia was Slovak or Magyar. (Answer--depends on
      > > location. In some counties the nobles were clearly Slovak.)
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Relevant quotations from the book follow:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > "[In the 12th century], the major landowners in Slovakia were the king, the
      > > upper nobility, and the church (the Archbishop of Esztergom, the Bishopric
      > > of Nitra, monastic chapters and monasteries). . . . A major power-broker and
      > > cultural arbiter in these times was the medieval church. It is true, a
      > > diocesan see (Nitra) existed in Slovakia from very early on, but even so, a
      > > majority of Slovak villages and towns belonged to the Archdiocese of
      > > Esztergom, while the villages of eastern Slovakia fell under the
      > > jurisdiction of the bishop of Eger..
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > In the mid-14th century [the king] owned approximately 25 to 30 percent of
      > > all land magnates owned somewhat less than that, while the church owned 10
      > > to 15 percent..
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > In Slovakia, approximately one-third of all land was heavily forested and
      > > belonged to old established families of the upper nobility. . . . The royal
      > > family also owned a lot of forested land, as did the church, and the cities
      > > of Kosice, Levoca, Brezna and Kremenica."
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > It is not clear what time period this last comment refers to, but I would
      > > guess that it was true up through the 19th century at least.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Christine has suggested that perhaps it was another church official rather
      > > than a bishop who went hunting in the forest with her great-grandfather. Who
      > > knows? But I would assume in any case that the forest would have been church
      > > property-perhaps the monastery. When the Church owned lands, it operated
      > > basically the same way as other major landowners. It hired agricultural
      > > workers (and sometimes housed, clothed, and fed landless peasants who worked
      > > the fields) and controlled forestry and pasturages.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Interesting topic, one that brings life to genealogy-more than names and
      > > dates. Imagining one's great-grandfather hunting with a church official,
      > > probably for deer or boar, makes history come alive.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Janet
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > _____
      > >
      > > From: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > Behalf Of CurtB
      > > Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 9:52 AM
      > > To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: Re: [S-R] Bishops
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Janet,
      > > I am not sure, but I think that the monasteries in upper Hungary were the
      > > exception, and did in fact, own considerable land. Just not the bishops and
      > > parish churches.
      > >
      > > Curt B.
      > >
      > > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com, "Janet Kozlay" <kozlay@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Thank you, Curt, for the history lesson. I had not heard that the Church
      > > was
      > > > not as well represented among the landowners in Upper Hungary. I did find
      > > a
      > > > Franciscan monastery in Nizna Sebastova, just north of Presov and within
      > > 15
      > > > miles of Raznany, but whether the monastery owned that village is not
      > > > mentioned.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Janet
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > _____
      > > >
      > > > From: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com [mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@
      > > <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > Behalf Of CurtB
      > > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 10:53 PM
      > > > To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com
      > > > Subject: Re: [S-R] Bishops
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Janet,
      > > >
      > > > Up until recent times there were few bishops in Slovak territories. As you
      > > > can tell by looking at parish records of 19th century confirmations, the
      > > > bishop might visit a village parish once every 15 to 20 years. Slovak
      > > > territory was ruled by two Archbishops, Archbishop of Esztergom, with a
      > > > local bishop in Nitra and another in Banska Bystrica. The other was the
      > > > archbishop of Eger with four bishops in Spisska Kapitula, Rozhava, Kosice,
      > > > and Satu-Mare. There were later Greek Catholic Bishops in Presov,
      > > Uzhhorod,
      > > > and Mukachevo. There was no change from the time of Maria Theresa until
      > > the
      > > > formation of Czecho-Slovakia. The church owned little land in Slovak
      > > > territory. Bishops and clergy were paid directly by government. I think
      > > that
      > > > is still customaruy in Slovakia today.
      > > >
      > > > Most of the historical sources for all this are in German.
      > > >
      > > > Curt B.
      > > >
      > > > --- In SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > yahoogroups.com, "Janet Kozlay" <kozlay@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Christine, I would bet that the Roman Catholic Church was a major
      > > > landowner
      > > > > in the village and probably owned the forest. If it was the seat of the
      > > > > bishop, it would explain his hunting in the forest with your
      > > > > great-grandfather.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Although much of the land in historic Hungary was owned by the Church, I
      > > > > haven't been able to find any references in English that showed where
      > > > those
      > > > > lands were, or even the location of the bishoprics. Too bad. We do what
      > > we
      > > > > can with what we've got.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Janet
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > _____
      > > > >
      > > > > From: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > yahoogroups.com [mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@
      > > > <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > > Behalf Of christine mackara
      > > > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 3:46 PM
      > > > > To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com
      > > > > Subject: Re: [S-R] help with OCCUPATION
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Thank you, Janet,
      > > > >
      > > > > Your explanation and guess makes sense to me. I sort of expected
      > > something
      > > > > like that. Finding that, was a big surprise and fits in with the family
      > > > > talk, that great-grandfather, a carpenter(asciarius) went hunting with
      > > his
      > > > > friend, the local bishop. Up to now we thought , that seems to be a tall
      > > > > tale. But if his brother was the keeper of the woods, it makes it just a
      > > > > little bit more plausible.
      > > > > I know that in Germany for instance, these forrest keepers also keep an
      > > > eye
      > > > > on the animals, to be sure, to have a good hunt for the owner, in the
      > > > > season, and the growth of the timber etc.
      > > > >
      > > > > Christine
      > > > >
      > > > > Message -----
      > > > > From: Janet Kozlay
      > > > > To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com
      > > > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 4:06 PM
      > > > > Subject: RE: [S-R] help with OCCUPATION
      > > > >
      > > > > When reading Latin entries it helps to bear in mind that most of them
      > > were
      > > > > written in "kitchen Latin," which does not necessarily follow proper
      > > Latin
      > > > > grammar. I am not a Latin scholar, but I would guess that the occupation
      > > > > meant "lord of the woods," or forest manager, one who patrolled the
      > > forest
      > > > > and kept the peasants from taking wood without permission of the
      > > landlord.
      > > > > But that is only a guess.
      > > > >
      > > > > Janet
      > > > >
      > > > > _____
      > > > >
      > > > > From: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > yahoogroups.com
      > > > > [mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > > Behalf Of christine mackara
      > > > > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:13 AM
      > > > > To: SLOVAK-ROOTS@ <mailto:SLOVAK-ROOTS%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com
      > > > > Subject: [S-R] help with OCCUPATION
      > > > >
      > > > > Hi,
      > > > >
      > > > > .This I found in a birth entry online : In Nyars/Raznany in 1860
      > > > >
      > > > > Georgius Makara SILVANUS DOMINAL.
      > > > >
      > > > > What could he have been ? . I know, that "silva" means "woods or
      > > forrest".
      > > > >
      > > > > Christine
      > > > >
      > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > >
      > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > >
      > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.