896-1520.
The history of Hungarian Literature is divided into four distinct
periods. The first comprises the time from the advent of the Magyars in
Hungary to the Reformation (896-1520); the second, from the Reformation
to the peace of Szathmár, or the termination and failure of Hungary’s
revolt from Austria (1520-1711); the third, from 1711 to 1772, or the
period of stagnation; and finally from 1772 to our own days, or the
period of the full development.
896-1520. The first period is exceedingly poor in written remains of
literature. In fact, the first and thus the oldest literary relic of
the Hungarian language is a short “Funeral Sermon” (_Halotti Beszéd_),
dating from the first third of the thirteenth century; and for 200 years
after that date, we meet, with the exception of a Hungarian glossary of
the year 1400, recently discovered at Schlaegl, in Upper Austria, with
no example of a Hungarian literary work of even slight extent. From the
middle of the fifteenth century we possess a fragment, called after
the town where it was discovered, by Dr. Julius Zacher in 1862, the
“_Königsberg_ (in Prussia) _Fragment_.” Thus, the number of extant, or
hitherto discovered Hungarian works of even slight literary merit is,
down to 1450 A.D., an almost negligible quantity. Mr. Szilády in his
“Collection of Ancient Hungarian Poets” (_Régi Magyar Költők Tára_) has
indeed communicated six and fifty mediæval Hungarian church-poems and
other fragments; but of that number scarcely a dozen are original poems,
the rest being mere translations of the then current church-poetry. The
philologist may no doubt find much to glean from even this scant harvest
of Hungarian Literature in the first period. For literature proper, it
is of no account whatever. Yet it would be unfair to leave this period
without even a passing mention of its oral literature, or epic and
legendary stories, of which there must have been no small quantity in
those agitated times.
The Hungarian naïve epic is lost. A glance at the habits of the Finns
will, however, suffice to satisfy the inquirer that the Hungarians, like
their cousins in Russia, must have cultivated the art of recitation and
oral handing down of the glorious deeds of their ancestors, to no small
extent. We now know that the immense epic of the Finns, the _Kalevala_,
has been transmitted from generation to generation by bards who had
treasured up in their memories the endless _runot_ recording the deeds
of Lemminkäinen, Väinämöinen, and Jlmarinen. The Hungarians, too, had
their bards, called _igrigeczek_, or _hegedősök_ (violinists); and at
the manors of the nobles or the courts of the kings, old heroic songs
were recited about Attila, King of the Huns; his brother, Bleda; the
fearful battle on the Catalaunian fields (Chalons-sur-Marne, 451 A.D.);
the building of the castle of Buda; the siege of Aquileia; and the last
fatal wedding of the terrible Hun. These Hun epics were widely known and
recited in mediæval Hungary, as witnessed by the chronicles of those
times. The people firmly believed themselves to be the successors of
Attila’s hordes, and this belief, although absolutely discountenanced by
modern historians, is still lingering in the spinning-halls of Hungarian
villages, and in lecture halls in England and America.
The circle of those oral epics comprised also the Magyar heroes proper.
There were stories about Álmos, father of Árpád, the conqueror of
Hungary; others about the “Seven Magyars” (_Hét Magyar_); the conquest
of Transylvania by doughty Tuhutum, one of Árpád’s generals; the flight
of King Zalán, defeated by Árpád; the exploits of valiant Botond, Lehel
(the Hungarian Roland), Bölscü, and other paladins of Árpád’s times, etc.
In the fragments from Priscus, the Byzantine rhetorician and historian;
in the chronicles of Ekkehard, the monk of St. Gallen; and in the
“Anonymus,” or one of the chief, but hitherto, fatherless chronicles of
Hungary, the above and some more heroic stories and epical records may be
found.
In addition to the heroic epic, the Hungarians, like all the rest of the
Christian nations of the west, had a considerable tradition of legends
and lives of saints. Fortunately for Hungary, it had become, by the end
of the tenth century of our era, both the hierarchical and political
interest of one of the most learned and most statesmanlike of the popes,
Sylvester II., to detach Hungary completely from the Eastern, or Greek
Church; and to adopt it, by sending a royal crown to Stephen, duke of the
Hungarians, into the world of Roman Catholicism. Had Hungary joined the
Eastern Church, it could never have withstood the ambition and supremacy
of the German Emperors, aided by the Popes of Rome. Having, however,
adopted the Roman, or progressive form of Christianity, Hungary was
endowed with occidental or richer seedlings of civilization. St. Mary
was made the patroness of Hungary; and all through the Middle Ages, she
was adored and glorified in legends and songs. Some of these Hungarian
legends about the Virgin Mary we still possess; likewise, the life of St.
Margit, the daughter of King Béla IV.; the famous story of Josaphat and
Barlaam, one of the most popular of mediæval Christian legends, taken
originally from Indian (Buddhistic) sources; the life of St. Catherine of
Alexandria, etc. The most characteristically Hungarian of these legends
is, as to its subject, the life of St. Margit. As to its literary merits,
it is, alas! a dry chronicle without any charm of form or diction at all.
Nor did the Hungarians, as far as we know, succeed in throwing one or
another of their crusading heroes into strong epic relief. The crusaders,
in spite of their marvellous deeds, lent themselves far more to good
chronicling than to epics. Their inherent poetic vice of being, or trying
to be, saints rather than heroes rendered them unfit for real epics.