Szirácsik Éva (szerk.): Neograd 2012 - A Dornyay Béla Múzeum Évkönyve 36. (Salgótarján, 2013)
Történelemtudomány - Komjáti Zoltán Igor: Félesélyes jóvátétel? A füleki végvári katonák által a civil lakosságtól erőszakkal megszerzett javak visszaadásának problémája Koháry István főkapitányságának idején (1667–1682)
NEOGRAD 2012 • A DORNYAY BÉLA J X ^MÚZEUM ÉVKÖNYVE XXXVI. A half chance for retrieval? The problems of the returns of the civil inhabitants’ values acquired with violence by the border soldiers of Fülek in the time of István Koháry Captain-General (1667—1682) by Zoltán Igor Komjáti The disagreements between the military and the civil inhabitants was not a peculiarity in Hungary, but it become a general phenomenon of age in the 17th century in all European countries. Nevertheless, the situation in the Hungarian Kingdom was graver so far as that the border soldiers more frequently made a dash at the civil inhabitants, their requisitioning of supply were fully extended to the serfs’ fodder stocks, as the central military storehouse system had not been established yet in that era. This study undertakes to give a deeper view into that process which lasted from the committing the sin to the indemnification. All this is shown on the examples of the events concerned Fülek in the time of General-Captain István Koháry (1667-1682). The events were originated from unique, and hitherto non-worked up and analysed archive sources. It can be seen that the atrocities were announced. The position and the rank filled in by the injured person in the social hierarchy determined the authority for appealing. Only the noblemen, the county magistrates and the privileged ethnic groups would complain directly to the higher authorities: to the leaders of the Border Defence Line of the Mining Towns (Pál Esterházy General and Miklós Bercsényi senior, Deputy-General), to the Hungarian and the Scepusian Chambers, to the Court War Council, or to the Sovereign, Leopold, the First. The tone of the complaints written to István Koháry was also depended on the writer’s social position: dignates, middle-typed noblemen (bene possessionati) and high priests brought up their good relations and having influences on the state and military organizations, but the serfs, widows and smaller noblemen stroke a humbler chord, and did not never ask more as simple retrieval and never kept frightening him with denouncing at his superiors. These superiors and organizations not only instructed Koháry to arrange the retrievals and arrest the sinner soldiers, but also issued orders that the recovering of the tax debts by helping of the border soldiers for the request of the noblemen was strictly forbidden, because these actions might give occasion for atrocity and later might caused legal debates being a drawback to the cohabitation and good relationship between the border soldiers and the civil inhabitants. The study also points out that the letters of protection did not assure total guarentee for protecting the inhabitants. If the soldiers pillaging the settlement did not belong to the subordinates of the issuing person, the document was not taken into consideration at all. 171
