The economy of Bohemia, Hungary and Poland remained mainly agricultural in the period, although towns started to play a role everywhere in the twelfth century. Society in all the polities became more complex and hierarchical over the period.

POPULATION SIZE

The size of the population can only be guessed at hypothetically: rare contemporary population numbers for certain groups (which are not statistics in the modern sense), archaeological or other indicators for sizes of villages and churches, analogies with western Europe (where the calculation of medieval populations cannot be precise either) and the use of theoretical frameworks for the size of families or likely population growth combine to provide very provisional and debatable estimates.

It is extremely difficult to estimate the population of the Piast realm in the eleventh and twelfth centuries in absolute numbers. Using regression analysis applied to later data on the collection of Peter’s pence, it has been estimated that around the year 1000 Poland’s population was about 1.25 million, but this figure is rough and appears too high. Estimates of population density in particular areas based on archaeological data seem more trustworthy, and can be added up for the entire country. Keeping in mind their hypothetical character and modifications introduced to make them consistent with historical studies, scholars have pointed to the systematic growth of population density during the period in question.

THE CONCEPT OF CENTRAL EUROPE

‘It is time that some scholarly institute of ours . . . decides, in the end, which historical region we live in: Western Europe or Eastern Europe; Central Europe or Central-Eastern Europe; Carpathian Europe or the Danubian area; or elsewhere.’ This irritated outburst highlights the difficulties of determining whether Central Europe exists, and if so, where, even in modern times. Because the concept of Central Europe is a modern rather than a medieval one, it is necessary to look at its origin, meanings and implications in modern history before discussing its relevance to the Middle Ages.

Searching for a definition reveals a multitude of divergent ones. Based on claims of common identity, history or culture, ‘Central Europe’ at its narrowest can include the so-called Visegrád group (initially Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland, but since the ‘velvet divorce’, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia), but alternatively it can mean these countries and some or all of the following: Austria, Germany, Liechtenstein, Slovenia, Switzerland, Croatia, Romania, Serbia and Ukraine. The reason for such discrepancy, apart from the historically changing borders of various states, is that the criteria which determine inclusion in ‘Central Europe’ vary widely. They can be cultural, political, socio-economic, historical or a combination of these, and past- or present-oriented.

The tenth and eleventh centuries were a period of transition, a time when Christian polities emerged. Leaders increased their power at the expense of various rivals and Christianity penetrated the region, ultimately turning it into part of Latin Christendom. In all three areas, new polities formed under the leadership of a local elite, which became the basis of the medieval kingdoms. The reinforcement and extension of rulers’ power were intertwined with Christianization. Internal rivalries as well as relationships with neighbours – the East Frankish Kingdom (later the Ottonian Empire) in particular, but also other neighbouring territories where Christianization and the development of a polity had already started – had a significant impact on this process. Hungarians raided while Bohemians and Poles were sedentary. Nonetheless, all had contacts with Frankish/Ottonian society and were influenced by it. All three Ottonian emperors intervened frequently in political developments beyond their eastern frontier and, while they could pose a threat to their neighbours, they were also a powerful model of kingship for contemporary rulers. The dynasties of the three polities were frequently bound together by common political interests or by military conflicts. Their relations were dynamic and sometimes unpredictable, despite attempts to regulate them through pragmatic marriage strategies.

After the emergence of new Christian polities, the history of the three central European countries diverged in terms of their politics. Poland and Hungary were independent realms; Bohemia-Moravia became part of the Holy Roman Empire. Each polity was affected by territorial subdivision to some extent, above all Poland, which fragmented into principalities. Hungarian rulers held a royal title continuously, whereas some Bohemian and Polish rulers were styled kings, and others dukes. Yet some structures of governance, for example, the strongholds and districts organized around them, were similar in all three realms.

In the late 1970s, Dušan Třeštík and Barbara Krzemieńska developed a model describing the emergence and organization of central European states in the tenth through the twelfth centuries. They argued for striking similarities in the organization of social, political and economic life in Bohemia, Poland and Hungary. According to them, the ruler had almost absolute power based on the warrior elite, who were dependent on him and served as his bodyguard, and who until the twelfth century did not own land. The ruler retained almost exclusive control over land and the peasants who farmed it, and allocated part of the revenues to members of the elite. The territorial organization of state administration was based on the system of strongholds and their respective districts. (Chapter 5 discusses the social and economic implications of the model.) This model of the development of central European states in the eleventh and twelfth centuries informed studies on all three polities published from the 1970s through the 1990s. Today, however, it is being questioned.

Radical transformations from the end of the twelfth century meant that, in many respects, there was discontinuity between the history of the eleventh and twelfth centuries on the one hand, and of that of the thirteenth on the other. The thirteenth century was a period of great tension between rulers and the nobility, of the devastating Mongol invasion and of innovations and new beginnings. In Hungary and Poland, the power of the nobility was on the rise, leading to political fragmentation, whereas, in contrast, in Bohemia the ruler acquired the royal title. The Mongols invaded all three countries and with the exception of Bohemia defeated the local rulers in battle. The extent of the devastation they caused in each country is open to debate. Social and economic changes included the more widespread use of writing in administration and legal cases; the development of towns and monetization; and an increase in the role of immigrants.

The growing number of settlers arriving from German-speaking lands – townsmen, peasants, knights – together with the increasing attractiveness of German courtly culture for elites triggered both co-operation and conflicts between locals and newcomers. Yet the new culture that emerged from the meeting of different traditions was much more important than conflicts. Benefits for rulers were especially significant. Chartered towns with fortifications and a new organizational form (communes), and their resulting standing as communities in relation to rulers, were the visible sign of change. Castellanization, the process of building castles as residences for knights, not just for royal administration, was another such sign. In the countryside, new spatial organization was introduced by western immigrants and widely adapted by local landowners in the second half of the thirteenth century. Social, legal and economic organization also affected the system of power. Instead of orally transmitted rights, written and commonly accepted laws and privileges became the norm.

The new polities of central Europe did not develop in a vacuum. Though sources are scarce, we have some knowledge of populations and political units prior to the development of Bohemia-Moravia, Hungary and Poland. A brief description of these is in order, to understand the complex heritage of the early societies. The new dynasties in each case created origin myths, some of which were later elaborated further. In modern times, the question of origins became highly politicized; it is therefore important to discuss the historical basis of these ideas of origins.

EARLY HISTORY OF THE REGION

Carpathian basin

Various populations and power centres existed in the Carpathian basin prior to the development of the kingdom of Hungary. Human remains go back to the lower Palaeolithic period: the oldest settlement (Vértesszőlős) is thought to be about 350,000 years old. Archaeologists have found human remains, tools and settlements of hunters from the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic in a number of sites. The area became more densely inhabited in the Neolithic age, supported by a mixture of agriculture, animal raising and fishing. People had permanent settlements and made ceramics. From this period on, different archaeological cultures followed each other, sometimes linked to immigration and conquest. Modern scholars gave these populations names based on the names of towns or villages near which their remains were found (such as the Nagyrév culture in the Early Bronze Age) or based on archaeological characteristics in burial or other aspects of their culture (e.g. the Tumulus culture of the Late Bronze Age). Their ethnic identification has sometimes been attempted but remains controversial or impossible to substantiate. Metallurgy and fortified centres appeared.

While Byzantine influence played a role, especially in Bohemia and Hungary, it was the Latin Church which mainly came to define ecclesiastical life. Ecclesiastical institutions developed, albeit at varying rates, in all three polities. By the thirteenth century, adoption and adaptation from western Europe were complemented by local ecclesiastical initiatives.

CATHOLIC (LATIN) AND ORTHODOX (GREEK) CHRISTIANITY

While the newly Christianized lands became part of Latin Christendom, Byzantine influences were not negligible in Bohemia and Hungary and reached Poland in the early period, although such influences were fading at the latest by the thirteenth century.

Still open for debate is the extent to which the Great Moravian Slavonic legacy persisted within the Bohemian Church, for evidence is scarce. The first Bohemian church, founded in Levý Hradec, was dedicated to St Clement. Later, other churches in ducal strongholds shared this dedication. This indicates that Clement’s cult remained significant during the tenth and eleventh centuries; it is even claimed that his relics were once brought from the Black Sea area by St Constantine/Cyril and St Methodius. We also find evidence for the use of Slavonic script, although no proof for the use of double liturgy.