B. Gál Edit – Veres Gábor szerk.: Agria 47. (Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve - Annales Musei Agriensis, 2011)

Komjáti Zoltán Igor: Szigor vagy közös érdek? - A polgári és katonai igazságszolgáltatás jellegzetességei Füleken Koháry István főkapitányságának idején (1667-1682) Heves és Külső-Szolnok vármegye példáján

PÁLFFY Géza 1995 A katonai igazságszolgáltatás a királyi Magyarországon a XVI-XVII. században, Győr SZAKÁLY Ferenc 1991 Nemesi vármegyeszervezet és a Török Hódoltság (A „menekült vármegye" fogalmáról és szervezetéről), in: Történelmi Szemle 1991. évi 3-4. szám (XXXIII. évfolyam), 139-184. oldal Zoltán Igor Komjáti Rigour or mutual interest? The characteristics of civil and military jurisdiction in Fülek (now Fil'akovo, Slovakia) during the captaincy of István Koháry (1667-1682) on the example of Heves and Külső-Szolnok county As it could be seen, Heves and Külső-Szolnok county always tried to monopolise the adjudicative power over Fülek soldiers, having legal rights on the basis of the acts 15 and 16 of 1659. As a result serious disagreements evolved between the authorities of the border castle and the county, and very often national authorities had to reconcile them. The Heves and Külső-Szolnok County Authority forthright condemned to death any soldiers caught red-handed in burglary. However, cohabitation and the interests of the border castle spurred the County Magistrate to mitigate death sentence to fine, imprisonment or caning. Cohabitation created a special situation, as military adjudication in Fülek was intertwined with civil jurisdiction: the time of army court coincided with the time of county assemblies, and the officials of the Magistrate could become a member of its judges. (Only a few succession trials were exception to that.) When civilians caused damage to the soldiers, the Commander turned to the deputy bailiff of the county for adjudication. At the same time István Koháry always tried to take into account the privileges of the nobility and only arrested noblemen, who committed deeds that were serious and violating the interests of the country or the border castle. The Commander was willing to set aside the adjudication over the offending civilians due to the intervention of high-ranking clergymen, and accept bloodwit instead. 160