Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1999 (3. évfolyam, 1-2. szám)
Mentalităţi
The Trial by Hot Iron Ceremony 19 and public witness. In the majority of the cases, bailiffs were charged with one case, but sometimes they appeared in the register either as the judges' permanent employees or as those of the litigants.112 113 It could happen that the accused did not recognize the judge-seat's right to deliver justice. The invoked reason was that the judge and the bailiff “was not of them”.111 In some cases, these steps of the legal procedure were not explicitly stated. The more common denomination for them was “sit in judgment”.114 115 116 117 118 7. The parties of the case had to come to Oradea because the ordeals of hot iron and water were supposed to take place only in the episcopal sees of the kingdom, in bigger provostships and at Bratislava and Nitra.11 Oradea chapter was one of them."6 Furthermore, the Oradean chapter was the burial place of saint Ladislas and became an important centre of pilgrimage. The medieval legends and chronicles about Ladislas highlighted the protective characteristics of the king: Saint Ladislas helped the innocents and the pursued. Thus, he should not permit the conviction of an innocent who bore the iron either."7 It happened that only one of the parties arrived at Oradea. It seems that there was a waiting period for the presentation for the trial. If the missing party did not come during this time, it was declared guilty."8 112 For the judge's “own” bailiff, see: “Matthias comes impetiit Benedictum de villa Chehy pro furtivo equo...Quos Forcasius, curialis comes de Bichor discutiens, per pristaldum suum, Hegud de villa Bichor, misit ad examen ferri candentis Varadinum...” Ibid., no. 265, p. 252; for the accuser's “own” bailiff, see: “...Ipolitus quidem cum praenominato pristaldo suo, Gugus, Varadini fuit, paratus candens ferrum portare.” Ibid., no. 221, p. 235; for the accuseds' “own” bailiff, see: “Ex quibus tres homines Shak, scilicet: Voda, Queren, et Andreas de villa Scerep fuerunt Varadini cum pristaldo eorum, nomine Toma.” Ibid., no. 226, p. 238. 113 “...qui [Somu de villa Gyou et servi sui] veniens in sexta feria eiusdem septimane, dixit, non stare se iudicio praefati iudicis in causa ista, eo quod alius esset iudex et pristaldus corum.” Ibid., no. 136, p. 202 cp. Jakó, Codex diplomaticus, no. 76, p. 144. 114 See, for instance the thieves’ case from 1220: “Conprouinciales de Bichor vociferati sunt contra fures coram Mica comite Bichoriensi, iudice a rege Andrea delegato, qui, misso pristaldo suo, nomine Zacheo de villa Nadudor, ... et citatis furibus, facto iudicio, misit eos Varadinum...” Karácsonyi, and Borovszky, Regestrum Varadinense, no. 235, pp. 241-42. 115 A decree of the Hungarian king Coloman Beauclerc from around 1100 explicitely stated in which places ordeals of water and fire can be held: “Judicium ferri et aque in aliqua ecclesia fieri interdicimus, nisi in sede episcopali et maioribus preposituris, necnon Posonii et Nitrie.” Závodszky, A Szent István, Szent László, 186. Bunyitay presumed that these places were chosen as trial-places because their satus as loca credibilia allowed them to keep records. Probably, in all enumerated places were written registers, but unfortunately, only the Oradean was preserved. The connection between the ordeal-registers and the records of loca credibilia was highlighted also by Karácsonyi, and Borovszky, Regestrum Varadinense, 135. 116 The importance of the Oradean register can be seen in the fact that it is the only source which informs us about other ecclesiastical institutions from Hungary, which had the right to hold this kind of ordeal. I only enumerate these places: the cathedral-chapters from Esztergom, Várad, Kalocsa, Eger, and the three “monastic-chapters” from Székesfehérvár, Óbuda, Arad. Ibid., no. 357, p. 290; no. 358, p. 291 cp. Rudolp Rauscher, “O Regestru Varadínském” (About the Oradean register), Casopis Ucené Spoleőnosti Safáríkovy 3(1929): 307-26. 117 Bunyitay, A váradipüspökség, voi. 1,74. 118 According to Kandra, an eight days waiting period was established. Kandra, A váradi regestrum, 25; “Praefatus itaque episcopus [Jacobi Vaciensis], ipso videlicet Gugus pristaldo constituto, misisset
