On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, hadji wrote:
> the state creating folk (Hungarians, Germans) were in supreme
> positions over other one. All the administration, ruling aristocracy and
> high positions were saved for the supreme nation. Could you mentioned
> some Slovakian aristocrat or high official?
The Hungarian aristocracy ceased to be Hungarian around the 13th/14th
century. At that time, the crown went to foreigners. And long before
that (during the reign of the Arpad kings) none of the Queens of Hungary
were Magyar -- all came from foreign lands, so there was a large foreign
population in the royal court. The populace joked that there was no
Hungarian blood left in the royal line by the time the Arpad line ended.
> As for Croats in Hungary they were in a little bit different position.
> Croatian Duxness were established before Hungarians came to Pannonia,
> so later Hungarian state expanding included these Duxness and they
> receive the supreme authority of Hungarian king. But it was still
> overlordship not neighbourship or peacful co-existing.
Quite the contrary. The Croats *invited* the Hungarian king to take the
Croatian crown when their own royal line ended. And many of the Hungarian
appointed men who became Ban were Croats and were given near-autonomy in
their own region.
> <<Ragusa was a mix of various cultures.>>
> ... under the supreme power of Venetian republic, by the way like as
> other points allover Mediterranian sea.
Nope. Ragusa was a rival to Venice, and was *never* ruled by them. Both
Croatia and Ragusa fought many wars against the Venetians. Ragusa was an
independent and autonomous nation until 1808, when Napoleon conquered it.
> The Eastern Empire was probably the only multiethnical state there where
> one's possitionit does not depend so much on ethnicity, but mainly on
> the social status.
It didn't depend solely on social status either. Remember that some
Emperors began life as goatherds!