###

# II. FROM DACIA TO ERDŐELVE: TRANSYLVANIA IN THE PERIOD OF THE GREAT MIGRATIONS (271-896)

Contents

- 'Forest People': The Goths in Transylvania
- The Huns. The Kingdom of the Gepids
- The Period of Avar Rule
- The Slavs. Southern Transylvania under Bulgar Rule
- Transylvania in the Period of the Hungarian Conquest and foundation of a State

The most important written sources include Auxentius, Ammianus Marcellinus, Jordanes, Corippus, Paulus Diaconus, the Annales Regni Francorum, the Annales Fuldenses, the Gesta Ungarorum, P. Magister, Vita S. Gerhardi ep., and the founding document of Garamszentbenedek. I have consulted the original texts, and quoted, where necessary, from the original. In his work Die Goten und Skandinaven (Berlin, 197O), R. HACHMANN attempts to distinguish the sources used by Jordanes. For Constantinus Porphyrogenetos, I have used Gyula MORAVCSIK's classic edition and translation, Bíborbanszületett Konstantin, A birodalom kormányzása (Budapest, 1950). For Procopios, I used Otto VEH's edition and German trnslation, Prokop, Gotenkriege (Munich, 1966). For the Byzantine sources of early Avar history (Protector Menander, Euagrius, Theophylactos Simocatta, Theophanes), the compilations and translations by Samu SZÁDECZKY-KARDOSS were of great help: 'Hitvalló Theophanes az avarokról' (AT 17: 1970), and 'Az avar történelem forrásai I-VIII' (Arch. Ért. 105: 1978, 1984). Some of the quotes from the legend of St. Gellert are based on Flóris SZABÓ's translation in Árpád-kori legendák és intelmek (Budapest, 1983).

The following selections from archaeological literature include a few of the shorter overviews, works that survey particular cultures, 'horizons', or regions, compilations of important documets, on individual cultures or field of research, and significant interpretive studies.

{1-778.} The archaeological syntheses of Kurt HOREDT have the value of source works, for they present reasoned groupings of finds ('find-horizons'). The first in this vein was 'Völkerwanderungszeitliche Funde aus Siebenbürgen' (Germania 25: 1941). His excellent monograph, Untersuchungen zur Frühgeschichte Siebenbürgens (Bucharest, 1958) includes information on Roman provincial burial places in Transylvania, on late Roman and 10th-12th century cemeteries at Gyulafehérvár/ Karlsburg, on Gepid finds (including the first register of these), and on the Old-Bulgar finds at Maroskarna as well as questions related to Bulgar rule (another first); the work also offers a list - 'metal finds from the 10th-11th centuries' - of cemeteries and grave finds in Transylvania dating from the period of the Conquest and the early Árpádian epoch. Published concurrently, his Contribuţii la Istoria Transilvaniei, Sec. IV-XIII (Bucharest, 1958) contains a good catalogue of Avar sites in Transylvania and much new data on finds; however, his analysis of the circulation of Roman currency after 270 is methodologically flawed and unconvincing, and the same applies to his elaboration of the 'stages' of Hungarian feudalism in Transylvania, which cannot be reconciled with finds and documentary sources. Another work, one of great utility, is his survey of 7th-12th century pottery, focusing on grave finds of intact vessels and earthenware cauldrons ('Ceramica slăva din Transilvania' [SCIV 2/2: 1951]).

There are problems with the analysis in a collective work, Relations between the Autochthonous Population and the Migratory Population (Bucharest, 1975), for most of the authors seem dedicated to demonstrating the validity of the title's premise. The book does contain very useful hard data presented, notably in Mircea RUSU's essays 'Avars, Slavs, Romanic population in the 6th-8th centuries' and 'The Autochthonous Population and the Hungarians on the Territory of Transylvania in the 9th-11th centuries', which include maps and notes. Rusu compiled the later 4th and 5th century finds in 'Cercetări arheologice' (MNI 7: 1984). Several of his publications deal with the population and history of Transylvania in later periods, the most recent one being 'Frühformen der Staatsentstehung in Rumänien' (Zeitschrift für Archäologie 18: 1984). Rusu's works are marked by thoroughness but suffer from a major flaw: ignoring much of the critical reassessment, published during the past century, of documentary sources, he treats both Anonymus's fictionalized chronicle from the early 1200s, and Simon Kézai's late-13th century chronicle as solid history, to the point that he adapts data from the 9th-10th centuries to fit this mold. R. HEITEL uses the same sources and consistent 'filius {1-779.} ante patrem' dating in 'Unele consideraţii privind civilizaţia din Bazinul Carpatic în cursul celei de-a doua jumătăţi a secolului al IX-lea în lumina izvoarelor arheologice' (SCIVA 38: 1983).

Early Medieval settlement in Krassó-Severin and Temes counties are surveyed in L. MĂRGHITAN, Banatul în lumina arheologiei 3. Secolele VII-XII. e.n. (Timişoara, 1985). Mărghitan selects his sites and claims that most of them harbour (undocumented) earthen hovels dating from the '8th-10th', '9th-11th', or '10th-12th centuries'. Considering that an earthen hovel was not habitable for as much as 30 - let alone 300 - years, his conclusions are of little value.

I drew heavily on József HAMPEL's classic syntheses, although I always checked his data with the original publications, which remain the basic source. His works include 'A honfoglalási kor hazai emlékei', in A magyar honfoglalás kútfői (Budapest, 1900); Alterthümer des frühen Mittelalters in Ungarn I-III (Braunschweig, 1905); and Újabb tanulmányok a honfoglalási kor emlékeiről (Budapest, 1907).