--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...> wrote:
>
>Attested personal names from France include <Prince> 1269,
><Regina> ~1085, <Reyne> 1319, <Comitissa> 1129, <Contasse>
>1320, and <Marchisius> and <Marchisia> in the second half of
>the 12th century. In Anglo-Norman England the name <Roi> is
>found in 1188. <Jarl> and <Cesare> also come to mind.
By the way, an onomastic "tidbit": Anonymous, the king's notary,
who wrote around 1199 the oldest preserved Hungarian cronicle
(maybe an archbishop Paulus who indeed was one king Bela's
notary and had French education), the one who give us details
on the lineage of the Gyulas, saying the first Gyula was the
nephew of Tuhutum (atta Turkic name, isn't it!) who had conquered
the central region of Transylvania, defeating Gelou, one "dux
blachorum", well this chronicler always says that Tuhutum was
the father of someone called Horca. But most historians have
concluded that this was a confusion. Because we know from other
sources, incl. Constantin, Masudi, Gardezi etc., that one of the
high ranks, seemingly the highest one, within the proto-Hungarian
nobility after proto-Hungarians moved from Ukraine to Pannonia,
was the harka (also spelled karka). So, it rather has to be read
Tuhutum the harka. And it fits the circumstances: Tuhutum was
a very important personality under Arpad (acording to the chronicles)
and the Transylvania possession almost always was sort of an
extra-territory within the frame of the Hungarian state (sort of a
state in state). Besides, after the desaster of the 16th century,
when Hungary ceased to exist, it was Transylvania and the adjacent
Banate (countries where a substantial Romanian populace also
lived) that preserved the Hungarian nation and culture, and it
managed to maintain an autonomy tantamount to independence,
only having to pay tributes to the Ottoman Empire. While the
central part of Hungary became for about 160 years direct provinces
of the Turkish Empire (and western and northern (Slovak) ones
were included in Austria).
So, this is another example of a title perceived as a person's name.
The chronicler, although an educated person, didn't know any
longer that harka was a title, not a person's name -- only about 3-4
centuries after the events he described (based on documents he
had access to as a high-ranked insider at the court of his king).
George