Хрватски владари

Béla IV (1206 – 3 May 1270) was King of Hungary and Croatia between 1235 and 1270, and Duke of Styria from 1254 to 1258. As the oldest son of King Andrew II, he was crowned upon the initiative of a group of influential noblemen in his father's lifetime in 1214. His father, who strongly opposed Béla's coronation, refused to give him a province to rule until 1220. In this year, Béla was appointed Duke of Slavonia, also with jurisdiction in Croatia and Dalmatia. Around the same time, Béla married Maria, a daughter of Theodore I Laskaris, Emperor of Nicaea. From 1226, he governed Transylvania with the title Duke. He supported Christian missions among the pagan Cumans who dwelled in the plains to the east of his province. Some Cuman chieftains acknowledged his suzerainty and he adopted the title of King of Cumania in 1233. King Andrew died on 21 September 1235 and Béla succeeded him. He attempted to restore royal authority, which had diminished under his father. For this purpose, he revised his predecessors' land grants and reclaimed former royal estates, causing discontent among the noblemen and the prelates.

The Mongols invaded Hungary and annihilated Béla's army in the Battle of Mohi on 11 April 1241. He escaped from the battlefield, but a Mongol detachment chased him from town to town as far as Trogir on the coast of the Adriatic Sea. Although he survived the invasion, the Mongols devastated the country before their unexpected withdrawal in March 1242. Béla introduced radical reforms in order to prepare his kingdom for a second Mongol invasion. He allowed the barons and the prelates to erect stone fortresses and to set up their private armed forces. He promoted the development of fortified towns. During his reign, thousands of colonists arrived from the Holy Roman Empire, Poland and other neighboring regions to settle in the depopulated lands. Béla's efforts to rebuild his devastated country won him the epithet of "second founder of the state" (Hungarian: második honalapító).

He set up a defensive alliance against the Mongols, which included Daniil Romanovich, Prince of Halych, Boleslaw the Chaste, Duke of Cracow and other Ruthenian and Polish princes. His allies supported him in occupying the Duchy of Styria in 1254, but it was lost to King Ottokar II of Bohemia six years later. During Béla's reign, a wide buffer zone—which included Bosnia, Barancs (Braničevo, Serbia) and other newly conquered regions—was established along the southern frontier of Hungary in the 1250s.

Béla's relationship with his oldest son and heir, Stephen, became tense in the early 1260s, because the elderly king favored his daughter Anna and his youngest child, Béla, Duke of Slavonia. He was forced to cede the territories of the Kingdom of Hungary east of the river Danube to Stephen, which caused a civil war lasting until 1266. Nevertheless, Béla's family was famed for his piety: he died as a Franciscan tertiary, and the veneration of his three saintly daughters—Kunigunda, Yolanda, and Margaret—was confirmed by the Holy See.
 
Andrew II (Hungarian: II. András, Croatian: Andrija II., Slovak: Ondrej II., Ukrainian: Андрій II; c. 1177 – 21 September 1235), also known as Andrew of Jerusalem, was King of Hungary and Croatia between 1205 and 1235. He ruled the Principality of Halych from 1188 until 1189/1190, and again between 1208/1209 and 1210. He was the younger son of Béla III of Hungary, who entrusted him with the administration of the newly conquered Principality of Halych in 1188. Andrew's rule was unpopular, and the boyars (or noblemen) expelled him. Béla III willed property and money to Andrew, obliging him to lead a crusade to the Holy Land. Instead, Andrew forced his elder brother, King Emeric of Hungary, to cede Croatia and Dalmatia as an appanage to him in 1197. The following year, Andrew occupied Hum.

Despite the fact that Andrew did not stop conspiring against Emeric, the dying king made Andrew guardian of his son, Ladislaus III, in 1204. After the premature death of Ladislaus, Andrew ascended the throne in 1205. According to historian László Kontler, "t was amidst the socio-political turmoil during [Andrew's] reign that the relations, arrangements, institutional framework and social categories that arose under Stephen I, started to disintegrate in the higher echelons of society" in Hungary.[1] Andrew introduced a new grants policy, the so-called "new institutions", giving away money and royal estates to his partisans despite the loss of royal revenues. He was the first Hungarian monarch to adopt the title of "King of Halych and Lodomeria". He waged at least a dozen wars to seize the two Rus' principalities, but the local boyars and neighboring princes prevented him from conquering the principalities. He participated in the Fifth Crusade to the Holy Land in 1217–1218, but the crusade was a failure.

When the servientes regis, or "royal servants", rose up, Andrew was forced to issue the Golden Bull of 1222, confirming their privileges. This led to the rise of the nobility in the Kingdom of Hungary. His Diploma Andreanum of 1224 listed the liberties of the Transylvanian Saxon community. The employment of Jews and Muslims to administer the royal revenues led him into conflict with the Holy See and the Hungarian prelates. Andrew pledged to respect the privileges of the clergymen and to dismiss his non-Christian officials in 1233, but he never fulfilled the latter promise.

Andrew's first wife, Gertrude of Merania, was murdered in 1213 because her blatant favoritism towards her German kinsmen and courtiers stirred up discontent among the native lords. The veneration of their daughter, Elizabeth of Hungary, was confirmed by the Holy See during Andrew's lifetime. After Andrew's death, his sons, Béla and Coloman, accused his third wife, Beatrice d'Este, of adultery and never considered her son, Stephen, to be a legitimate son of Andrew.
 
Stephen V (Hungarian: V. István, Croatian: Stjepan V., Slovak: Štefan V; before 18 October 1239 – 6 August 1272, Csepel Island) was King of Hungary and Croatia between 1270 and 1272, and Duke of Styria from 1258 to 1260. He was the oldest son of King Béla IV and Maria Laskarina. King Béla had his son crowned king at the age of six and appointed him Duke of Slavonia. Still a child, Stephen married Elizabeth, a daughter of a chieftain of the Cumans whom his father settled in the Great Hungarian Plain.

King Béla appointed Stephen Duke of Transylvania in 1257 and Duke of Styria in 1258. The local noblemen in Styria, which had been annexed four years before, opposed his rule. Assisted by King Ottokar II of Bohemia, they rebelled and expelled Stephen's troops from most parts of Styria. After Ottokar II routed the united army of Stephen and his father in the Battle of Kressenbrunn on 12 July 1260, Stephen left Styria and returned to Transylvania.

Stephen forced his father to cede all the lands of the Kingdom of Hungary to the east of the Danube to him and adopted the title of junior king in 1262. In two years, a civil war broke out between father and son, because Stephen accused Béla of planning to disinherit him. They concluded a peace treaty in 1266, but confidence was never restored between them. Stephen succeeded his father, who died on 3 May 1270, without difficulties, but his sister Anna and his father's closest advisors fled to the Kingdom of Bohemia. Ottokar II invaded Hungary in the spring of 1271, but Stephen routed him. In next summer, a rebellious lord captured and imprisoned Stephen's son, Ladislaus. Shortly thereafter, Stephen unexpectedly fell ill and died.
 
Ajmo dalje Branimir croatorum (Lol).
Opet se ispostavlja da se radi o falsifikatu.
Po ko zna koji put, pa zar vas nije sramota. Ne zna se ko je luđi, naša ,,naša" elita koja u to veruje ili ovi besramnici što falsifikuju šta god im padne šaka.
Logično pitanje se nameće koliko čovek mora biti idiot,maliciozan, ili imati agendu da veruje posle svega tim istim Hrvatima?! E, vidiš Slavene to ti je isto ko i moj primer kada bi Kale džedaj napisao knjigu, ti svojevrsnim ,,džedajima" veruješ i presipaš iz šupljeg u prazno, al nisi jedini, ima dosta sličnih kojima je to sve u redu, i ništa nije čudno. Valjda čekate da na HRT1 neko izađe i kaže ,, lijepo vas prosim oprostite mi smo falsifikatori". Bože ti pomozi.

Ukupno 6 epigrafičkih spomenika, 2 pisma pape Jovana VIII, Čedadski jevanđelistar, Hronika Ivana Đakona i Hronika Tome Arhiđakona Splitskog koji pominju Branimira.

Ali ne, to što se neki čovek 11 puta pominje u istorijskim izvorima sigurno znači da imamo 11 falsifikata. :lol: Da li treba dokazati da su sve to listom falsifikati (i to su samo pisani izvori koji spominju ime izravno, ne računajući druge koji donose posredne komplementarne podatke, ali Branimira ne pominu izrekom)? Ne; dokazima se bave samo maliciozni idioti. :hahaha:
 
Poslednja izmena:
Reci mi ono što ne znam.
Онда је наслов теме сасвим прикладан и сасвим сигурн се не односи на Белу, Андреја или Стефана угарске краљеве.
Proveri još jednom. Deveto što sam postavio je Branimirov natpis.
Где ти је онда 7.:)
 
Која је сврха што нам форумаш Мркаљ методом copy/paste преноси три текста из енглеске википедије? Мало се зајебава или под*ебава?
Узгред, у мађарској википедији за Андраша II (овдје) не пише да је краљ Мађарске и Хрватске већ само
II. András – más alakváltozatban Endre – (1176 körül – 1235. szeptember 21.), Magyarország királya 1205 és 1235 között.
да бјеше мађарски краљ, Хрвате не помињу.
И за Белу IV (овдје) исти клинац, пишу само да бјеше
IV. Béla (1206. november 29. – 1270. május 3.) Magyarország királya 1235-től haláláig. II. András magyar király és első felesége,
мађарски краљ, не помињу некакве Хрвате.
За Иштвана V (овдје) исти клинац
V. István (1239 – 1272. augusztus 6.) Magyarország királya 1270 és 1272 között, IV. Béla király
опет заборавили написати да је хрватски краљ већ само мађарски. Биће да мрзе Хрвате, или се једноставно подразумијевало да је простор данашње Хрватске био у саставу мађарске државе.
Истина, мађарска википедија није међу изворима које користимо на овом птф, али ако се бавимо мађарском историјом, А краљеви Бела IV, Иштван V и Андраш II јесу део мађарске историје, логично је да "помоћ потражимо" у мађарским изворима и мађарској википедији.
Оно што можемо примијетити јесте, како тај период приказују у хрватској интерпретацији историје, пардон повијести, и како то приказују у мађарској историографији (а како год окренули то бјеше мађарско краљевство, приликом титулисања би ту набрајали и разне области којима влада мађарски краљ, али то бјеше мађарско краљевство) поприлично се разликује и неко ту "искривљује" историју.
 
Која је сврха што нам форумаш Мркаљ методом copy/paste преноси три текста из енглеске википедије? Мало се зајебава или под*ебава?

Ovo je autorska tema Oriona ST o seriji Hrvatski kraljevi, a Lekizan ju je nakon 9 godina postojanja u tom kontekstu preinačio promenom naziva.

PS. Jako je čudno da neko na ovaj način menja istoriju na forumu koji se zove "Istorija."
 
Аха видиш то сам превидео некако не знам како, у праву си.Хвала.

Možda si prvobitno video pogrešni redosled, pa ti se urezalo u glavu. Jedan broj sam napisao dva puta; odmah čim sam primetio poslao sam moblu moderaciji da ispravi. Pretpostavljam da je to bio Cronnin. :)
 
Ukupno 6 epigrafičkih spomenika, 2 pisma pape Jovana VIII, Čedadski jevanđelistar, Hronika Ivana Đakona i Hronika Tome Arhiđakona Splitskog koji pominju Branimira.

Ali ne, to što se neki čovek 11 puta pominje u istorijskim izvorima sigurno znači da imamo 11 falsifikata. :lol: Da li treba dokazati da su sve to listom falsifikati (i to su samo pisani izvori koji spominju ime izravno, ne računajući druge koji donose posredne komplementarne podatke, ali Branimira ne pominu izrekom)? Ne; dokazima se bave samo maliciozni idioti. :hahaha:
Branimira pominju kao Kralja Hrvata?! To te ja sada pitam?! Kratko i jasno!
 
Proveri još jednom. Deveto što sam postavio je Branimirov natpis.






Istorijski izvori koji pominju Trpimira su:
* Natpis iz Rižinice kod Solina
* Čedadski evanđelistar
* Gotšalkov traktat
* Porfirogenitov Spis o narodima
* Trpimirova darovnica

Ako već želiš o nečemu pričati, barem se o tome najosnovnije informiši. Ovako jedino što ispada jeste da tvoj stav dolazi kao proizvod neznanja.
Gde se on navodi kao KRALJ HRVATA?
A, da nije prva verzija za koju se ispostavilo da je podmetačina. Koliko ja znam originalno piše vladar Slovena?
 
Poslednja izmena:
Kakve gluposti

Trpimirova darovnica, Trpimir je živeo oko 840, a darovnica i svi podatci o njemu su prvi put objavljeni u 16 veku? Do tada niko nije čuo za Trpimira.

Za Branimira slična priča prvo je objavljeno da se radi o Hrvatu, međutim ispostaviće se da je opet laž, obzirom da je pisalo dux sclavorum ( vladar slovena).

,,Charter, dated to 4 March 852, is not preserved in its original form but in five subsequent transcripts out of which the oldest is from year 1568."
 
Poslednja izmena:
Gde se on navodi kao KRALJ HRVATA?
A, da nije prva verzija za koju se ispostavilo da je podmetačina. Koliko ja znam originalno piše vladar Slovena?

U takvoj sintagmi, nigde. Titulu rex za Trpimira navodi Gotšalk, tako da bismo na osnovu toga mogli nazivati Trpimira kraljem, ali važno je naglasiti da Gotšalk taj pojam koristi iz prezira, opisujući varvarske kraljevine, a ne u svrsi nekakvog međunarodnog priznanja. Mogli bismo Trpimira nazvati kraljem u istom kontekstu kako kraljevskom titulom nazivamo druge poglavare plemena (odnosno plemenskih saveza), mada treba jasno razdvojiti to od pozno srednjovekovne percepcije regalne titule u latinskom svetu.

Što se tiče hrvatskog etnonima, osim u već više puta pominjanoj darovnici, Trpimira među hrvatskim vladarima spominje i Porfirogenit:

εν ταίς ημέραις Τερπημέρη του άρχοντος

Trpoje.JPG


Nemamo indicije da je postojalo nekakvo hrvatsko pleme koje je ojačalo i preuzelo celu teritoriju onog što će se prozvati Hrvatskom, a potom prisvojilo pređašnje vladare kao svoje, što bi stvorilo da Trpimira od X stoleća smatramo hrvatskim vladaocem iako on to nije nužno isprva bio.
 
U takvoj sintagmi, nigde. Titulu rex za Trpimira navodi Gotšalk, tako da bismo na osnovu toga mogli nazivati Trpimira kraljem, ali važno je naglasiti da Gotšalk taj pojam koristi iz prezira, opisujući varvarske kraljevine. Što se tiče hrvatskog etnonima, osim u već više puta pominjanoj darovnici, Trpimira među hrvatskim vladarima spominje i Porfirogenit:

εν ταίς ημέραις Τερπημέρη του άρχοντος

Pogledajte prilog 701455

I to je dokazano tačno kako?
Ovakve stvari kada se dovedu u pitanje kada su posredi izvori koji blate Srbe, uglavnom osoba biva izopštena iz svih mogućih naučnih sfera .
 
Kakve gluposti

Trpimirova darovnica, Trpimir je živeo oko 840, a darovnica i svi podatci o njemu su prvi put objavljeni u 16 veku? Do tada niko nije čuo za Trpimira.

Za Branimira slična priča prvo je objavljeno da se radi o Hrvatu, međutim ispostaviće se da je opet laž, obzirom da je pisalo dux sclavorum ( vladar slovena).

,,Charter, dated to 4 March 852, is not preserved in its original form but in five subsequent transcripts out of which the oldest is from year 1568."
Ne piši gluposti, od nastanka te darovnice postoji spor kroz srednji vek između splitske nadbiskupije i Ninske biskupije oko neke zemlje i gde se obe strane pozivaju na potvrde Trpimira i oca mu Mislava i koje daju kasnije potvrđivati od kraljeva, hrvatskih do mađarskih.
Kakvi 16. vek da se prvi put čuje za Trpimira, a crkva bukvalno drži zemljišne posede pomoću tih darovnica.
Zato su i prepisivane i potvrđivane da se sačuvaju. U jednom prepisivanju, verovatno u 16.veku, je nadodan deo koji daje pravo na nešta šta im darovnicom ne pripada.
To dokument čini falsifikatom, ali samo u delu za koji se zna da ga nije bilo u originalu.
 

Back
Top