Master P. and Dares the Phrygian: Is Prince Álmos The Hungarian Equivalent of Aeneas?

The Gesta Hungarorum and the Troy-Romances in the Light of an Analysis of Some Textual Paralells

Abstract

This study examines Master P.’s use of two Latin Troy-romances: the “De Excidio Troiae Historia” attributed to the fictious Dares the Phrygian, and the so-called “Excidium Troiae”. Our purpose is to understand better the Notary’s attitude towards the Troy-romances. We make our observations via an analysis of certain quotations from these romances. We begin our paper with an introduction, which describes the context of these two romances, in the contemporary historical literature, and discusses their place and role, among the known written sources of the Anonymous Notary. Then, in the first chapter, we examine two citations in the Notary’s Prologus, which are adopted from the Prologus of the work of “Dares”. Their role is primarily to emphasize the Notary’s definition of the place of his work in the context of historiography of his age, but they also increase the credibility of his Gesta, as they call upon the authority of the prestigious Dares. In our second chapter, we analyse two textual borrowings from the Excidium Troiae. The first one takes place in the description of the election of Prince (“dux”) Álmos. The Notary quotes verbatim the text of the proclamation of Aeneas as a leader (“dux”), to describe the proclamation of Álmos. The use of this citation clearly alludes to the similarity of the two elections. Moreover, it supposes a parallel between the foundation of the Hungarian and Roman polities. It alludes also to the ancient Hungarians’ equality to the Trojans, and to the contemporary Hungarians’ equality to the Latin Christian peoples (for example the Franks), who had prestigious Trojan ancestry. The second borrowing from the Excidium Troiae is an allusion, in which little textual analogy can be observed. It draws parallel between the siege of the castle of Bihar [Bihor, RO], which concludes the Hungarians’ conquest of Pannonia, and the siege of Laurentina, which concludes Aeneas’ conquest of Latium. Its role is clearly to draw parallel between the conquests of the Hungarians and that of the Trojans. It supposes the same allusions as the quotation in the story of Álmos’ election. We make remarks on the fact, that Master P. uses allusions to, and quotations from the Excidium Troiae only up to a certain limit. We suppose that its cause is his deliberation to preserve the autonomy of his story, and emphasize the Hungarians’ own, independent values. Our main conclusion, is, that the Notary’s aim may have been to create a Hungarian prehistory, appropriate to the standards of “national” prehistories of his time. The use of the allusions to the Trojans and to Troy-romances was part of his efforts to reach this purpose. However, he wanted to create a history of the ancient Hungarians, who had had their own values in his eyes. So, he did not allow his story to become a Troy-romance of Hungarian subject.