Századok – 2015
2015 / 2. szám - Csákó Judit: Volt-e krónikása II. Andrásnak? Megjegyzések gestaszerkesztményünk 13. század eleji átdolgozásának problematikájához
331 nek rajza sem kifejezetten II. András-kori átszerkesztésre utal azonban, hanem csupán egy, a Gertrúd-merénylet után keletkezett redakcióra (ez az átdolgozás lehetne akár IV Béla-kori is). Hogy a krónikakompozíció ezen caputját mégis II. András alatt dolgozhatták át, azt valószínűsítheti — amennyiben nem a szóbeliségben kialakult, hanem írásban kiformálódott tradícióval számolunk — az Albericus Trium Fontium történeti munkájában (1251 előtt), valamint a Magyar-lengyel Krónikában (1220-as-1230-as évek fordulója) jelentkező királynéportré. Egy III. Béla-kori és egy II. András-kori átdolgozást sejtve Kristó kései hipotézisétől (1994, 2002) mindössze haloványan térek el: a 12. század végén - a 13. század első felében ugyancsak két redakciót gyanítok, ám ezeket a szegedi történésznél valamelyest korábbra — 1210 helyett III. Béla idejére, illetve 1235/ 1240 helyett 1213 és 1235 közé — helyezem. VOLT-E KRÓNIKÁSA II. ANDRÁSNAK? DID ANDREW II HAVE A CHRONICLER? Remarks on the Problem of the Reworking of the Old Hungarian Gesta in the Early 13th Century by Csákó Judit (Summary) The present study examines the possibility of the existence, as once supposed by Gyula Kristó, in thirteenth-century Hungary of a chronicler, who would have continued the narrative of the earlier court gesta by more or less reworking it in the process. The question it seeks to answer is whether there may have been anyone to take up the thread of the main chronicle in the court of Andrew II, alongside the Anonymous notary, who cast Hungarian prehistory in the form of a fabulous story. At first, I have gone through the opinions which Kristó himself had consequently formulated with regard to the problem of different chronicle redactions; for the eminent medievalist from Szeged put forward divergent views in his various works. While he initially counted with but one single redaction, put to writing in the first decades of the 13th century, which he alternatively dated to the beginning and the end of Andrew II’s reign, later in his life he also conjectured two reworkings of the chronicle within the same period. Whereas the first of these, referred to in the wake of the Riccardus-report as the gesta of the Christian Hungarians, he imagined to have been the work of an early-thirteenth-century author, the latter he placed either to the end of Andrew El’s reign or to the beginning of Béla IV’s. In his view, it must have been then that, under the influence of the assassination of queen Gertrude, the chronicler drew the very unfavourable picture of the consort of Saint Stephen, projecting the vices of the Meranian queen back onto Gisela, likewise of German stock. In my analysis, I at first examined those arguments which were supposed by Kristó to attest the existence of a chronicle-continuation, the redaction referred to by Kristó as the gesta of the Christian Hungarians, written in the early 13th century. I have come to the conclusion that no argument whatsoever proves beyond doubt the existence of a gesto-redaction whose compilation could be dated to the beginning of Andrew II’s reign. Then, I pondered the arguments which may support the existence of a redaction made somewhat later - after the assassination of Gertrude. At this point I involved into the analysis considerations which were not raised by Kristó. While the chronicle research in general does not reckon with any other thirteenth-century redaction prior to the gesta from the age of Stephen V some scholars alongside Kristó - before all Gyula Pauler, Lajos Csóka J. and Kornél Szovák - did hold the opinion, based either on a close inspection of the text of the chronicle composition itself, or on the evidence provided by other texts, that a continuation of the chronicle may indeed have been prepared during the reign of Andrew II. As for the supposed proofs put forward in the philological literature, however, I am of the view that they in fact only veiy vaguely hint at the existence of the redaction in question: the most founded among them is probably the darkly coloured picture of
