The Boiari
The duke's retinue
Who were the Baioarii?
Historic map of Bavaria
The "elder" Bavarian dukedom
The "younger" Bavarian dukedom
In Carantania
Baierdorf
Selected Bibliography
  

The Boiari

The armed retinue of the duke and the social structure of early Bavaria

It was of non-Germanic origin and similar to that of Carantania

Did it originate from the ancient Vends (Veneti)?

The famous chalice of Tassilo (before 777 AD) in the Abbey of Kremsmünster (in today's Upper Austria)


Dr. Jožko Šavli (June 19, 2007)

The well-known Slovenian historian Bogo Grafenauer was aware that the knez (prince) or vojvod (duke) of Carantania had to be accompanied by a retinue of armed men, called "družiniki". That is, "members of a družina" (family), as the prince of Kiew (Ukraine, Russia) called his retinue. Some sort of princely escort very probably existed in ancient Carantania, even though there are no records to be found. Grafenauer gave the appellation "družiniki" to this group based on the assumption, that all Slav peoples originated from Russia. Consequently, at one time or another they should have been part of the "Slavic" (Russian) social structure, including "družiniki, and so on.

In the feudal era, it is true, the feudal lord was surrounded by a small community called familia (family) in Latin documents. This community did not only include an armed escort, but also many other people. It is also true, that the Slovenian translation of familia sounds like "družina". Evidently, in this way Bogo Grafenauer argued the appellate "družiniki" (members of the familia), the traces of which are otherwise not found in the Slovenian (Carantanian) social tradition. In fact, the Slovenian etymon družina refers only to the family of an individual house. In this connection, the Slovenian etymon "hiša" means both, house and family. Besides, in the Slovenian historical tradition, there are no traces of the great family (zadruga), which among the Southern Slavs has been preserved until the 20th century.
The duke's retinue   

My intention at the outset of this research was firstly to study the retinue of the duke, which evidently existed in early Carantania, although it is not mentioned in historical documents. Anyway, such an escort appeared in early Bavaria, built on a very similar, i.e., non-Germanic social structure. The question is, if at this time, the Bavarians and Carantanians still were of similar ethnic origin? And if so, on what basis?
Some time ago, I came across a book by Prof. Otto Kronsteiner (Lublana 2003), in which he rejects today's interpretation of the origin of Bavarians (p. 74 ff.). His theory lead to the conclusion that the name Bavaria (Bayern) was of non-Germanic origin, which I consider absolutely correct. However, I do not agree with Prof. Kronsteiner's interpretation, that Bavarians are descendants of the Ladins, this is, of the Romanized people, who inhabited the country since the Roman era. I am saying this, because I want to raise an issue on a number of "Slovenian" (Venetic) names, which I found all over Bavaria. I suppose, these names could only have been the legacy of the ancient inhabitants of Vindelicia, as Bavaria was called in Roman times. This territory is practically free of Ladin (Latin) names.

Furthermore, I discovered, that these Vendic names were systematically overlooked by Bavarian, German, Austrian and other scholars of nomenclature (cf. Šavli: Bavaria, and its origin… on Carantha website). This could have been done intentionally, because otherwise the interpretation that Bavarians are of German origin would fail to recognize them as such. Seen from the perspective that the people of Bavaria and Carantania originated from the ancient Veneti, a similar social structure would have existed in both duchies in their early period. The fact, that in Bavaria the duke's retinue is clearly identified and bore perhaps a Venetic (Slav, Slovenian) name - baioarii, leads us to the conclusion that a similar group of nobles existed in Carantania, too.
  
Who were the Baioarii?

The records convey a twofold meaning of the term "Bavarians". For example, I quote an event from 715 AD, when Theodo, the Bavarian duke, made a pilgrimage to Rome. In the records is quoted: "Theodo dux gentis Baioariorum" cum aliis gentis suae… (cf. Bosl 1965, 335). This is, duke Theodo (ca. 680 - 716 AD) with the "Bavarian" people and others of his people … Here, apart from others of the duke's people (aliis gentis sue), the gens Baioarium is quoted, which evidently does not refer to the Bavarians in the sense of a nation but to a group.

According to Bosl (ibid., 336), this group was formed by the noble retainers of the duke, called Baioarii (Bosl: adelige Gefolgschaften = Baioarii). It seems that the name Baioarii was gradually passed on to the people and their country. Thus, in the letter of Pope Gregory III of 739 AD has been quoted Otilo dux Baioariorum and optimates provinciae (cf. Bosl, cit., 336). Here, Odilo evidently appears as duke of the Bavarian people and of the magnates. In this connection, the word provincia means a national State, which in this case is also a church province (Bosl). The "optimates provinciae" are to be understood as the national nobility, which had the leading role in the country and were property owners.


Early medieval fighters.

We suppose that similar warriors existed in Bavaria and in Carantania.
The Bavarian (high) aristocracy, as subsequently explained, developed from the retinue of the duke, the baioarii. Surprisingly, the name corresponds to that of the bojari (from boljari = the magnates, the great). It is about a Venetic (Slav) denotation. Thus, the prince's retinue and later the aristocracy of Novgorod (Russia) were also known as the bojari. They were found in the Princedom of Moscow, which in 1478 definitely annexed Novgorod. The original name of Novgorod was Slovenia.

It was in 2004, when I came across an interesting article titled the existence of the Republic of Novgorod, originally known under the name Slovenia (cf. Šavli, The Slovieni, in Forum Veneti Part I, Carantha website). In this connection, I believe that a migration wave of the ancient Veneti (Sloveneti, Slovenci) reached the hinterland of present-day St. Petersburg and settled the area, as Tacitus reveals in his Germania 44, 1st century AD. The social and political structure of Novgorod was similar to that of Carantania. Beside the bojari, it had perhaps also an organized popular assembly, which elected the duke. At the national level, such meeting was called "vece" (pron. vetche), like the "veca" in Carantania.

Using the example of Bavaria and the linguistic similarity of appellates, I would say that the duke's retainers in Carantania also had the rank of a bojari and not of a "družiniki" (B. Grafenauer). I think, in the early period, the original Vendic social organization prevailed in Bavaria and in Carantania. The mentioning of Carantania as "provincia Sclaborum" by Paulus Diaconus in his book Historia Langobardorum of 595 AD, bears witness that the appellate provincia could only refer to a national and independent State. Like in the case of Bavaria.
  



Historic Bavaria (encircled with red boundary)
and modern Bavaria (encircled with yellow boundary).

In fact, the origin of Bavarians as well as of Carantanians goes back to the ancient Vends (Veneti)
  
The "elder" Bavarian dukedom

Some time ago, I published an article about the very origin of Bavarians (cf: J. Šavli: Bavaria, and its origin, Carantha website). Later, I was surprised to find further data, which, in my opinion, confirms that the majority of Bavarians are of Vendic origin. Let me quote some examples!

I am quoting from Paulus Diaconus, the well-known Lombard historian, which also refers to the first mentioning of Carantania (provincia Sclaborum): "His diebus Tassilo a Childeperto rege Francorum aput Baioarium rex ordinatus est…" (Historia Langobardorum IV. c. 7). Translated: In his days, the Frankish king Childebert installed Tassilo as king of Bavaria … (Bosl 1965, 331).

Rex - Thus, it was ca. 591 AD, when Childebert (575 - 595 AD) installed duke Tassilo I in Bavaria. But why is Paulus Diaconus calling him rex (king) instead of dux (duke)? Bavarian and German scholars interpret Diaconus' quotation, that the duke's office in Bavaria, too, was a "High Frankish state administration, based on royal installation" (hohes fränkisches Reichsamt, das auf königlicher Einsetzung beruhte, cf. Bosl, ibid.). Not very likely!

Considering that the Bavarians are of Vendic origin, then the appellate »rex« could only have been a literal Latin translation of the word kral, originally meaning »elected«, which still exists in Slovenian and in other Slav languages. This appellate cannot be a translation of the German König, which meant "a man from a distinguished noble family" (aus vornehmen Geschlecht stammender Mann, cf. the devices König and kiesen in Duden Etymologie 1963).

Conventus - The fact, that the Bavarian duke was called »rex« (elected), supposes the existence of an assembly (conventus). Indeed, it existed in Bavaria, too. In 716 AD, for example, Pope Gregory II (715 - 731) ordered, that his three delegates should negotiate with the dux provinciae (Bavarian duke) about the convocation of a conventus (assembly, Landtag) of the clergy, judges and universi gentis eiusdem primarii (entire people and their leading men, cf. Bosl, cit., 335). I think, with "primarii" is meant above all the village heads (mayors, in German: Schultheißen, in Slovenian: župani), who generally were also appointed as the people's judges. Thus, the conventus was equal to the people's assembly - the veca (pron. vetchah). It is evident, that a characteristic Germanic social organization did not exist in early Bavaria, but rather one"without a leading aristocratic class".

Here is a further example! In 765, a noble, Poapo by name, donated his preaedium libertatis (free estate) to the Church of Freising. The donation ceremony was attended by five counts and 10 other witnesses called boni homines (Bosl, cit., 344). In general, the boni homines were elected by the people, because they had the people's confidence. - In Carantania, the boni homines ("dobri možje") were also appointed by the people and sent as the people's representatives to the veca (national assembly). I think I am not mistaken when I believe that such a social Vendic (Venetic) organization existed. It was also present in other Vendic nations, even though some of them, like the Swedes, had already lost the primordial Vendic language.

Let us go back to the Bavarians! Considering the above facts, we have to ask ourselves if this nation, aside from speaking the Germanic language, has any Germanic attributes at all? Is the Germanic origin of Bavarians an academic construction, that originated in the period of German national patriotism (19th century), in which the prefix Ur (very ancient) was self-implied in several theses, in order to achieve a German historical dignity in the public eye? As an example for Bavaria, we quote the so-called Germanic Uradel (very ancient nobility), which evidently is an academic construction that has no historical basis.

Uradel? - From the above presentation we can deduce that in Bavaria the ancient (Vendic) structure remained preserved until the early Middle Ages. Anyway, in their romantic Germanic pathos it is the endeavour of almost all writers to present Bavaria as a very ancient Germanic (urgermanisch) country. In this regard, I found in the same miscellanea of "Wege der Forschung" (see below), a paper with the title "Germanischer Uradel im frühbaierischen Donaugau" (The very ancient German nobility in the early Bavarian Danube-Gau), written by Hans Dachs. My observations on the author's explanations are as follows:

Hans Dachs' paper is a very instructive example, in which the historical truth can be manipulated, as the love for one's native country dictates it. The author is still working with the characteristically moulded terms of pan-German ideology like Gau, Sippe, urgermanisch,… He quotes, that in the Roman era Bavaria was called Raetia. Of course, he conceals that its first name was Vindelicia (named after the Vends). Then, after a poetical introduction, he presents closer Bavaria, which is the portion of country south of the Danube (Vindelicia), and states that because of Germanic Bavarian conquest, even this area achieved a more pure German (deutschen) character. In fact, it developed a much more pure culture than any other region.

To prove his point, the author quotes several place names, which he interprets as deriving from persons with excellent Germanic properties and puts the following interrogative question: Has the primordial world of the Germandom gone to its grave with its expertise to fight, which, according to research done on these and many other names, was highly esteemed for its bravery, glory of weapons, ruling power and every other fundamental human quality, as the name-giving heroes from the first founding and settlement period bear witness. - This text was written in 1936, this is, in the time of the full pathos of the Germanic national idea. In the Addendum of 1964 we find some completions, but the original ideological contents was not corrected.

To prove his theory, the author quotes several sources originating as early as the 8/9th century AD, as well as some place names, which supposedly derive from valorous Germanic persons. Anyway, the very ancient Germanic roots (Germanischer Uradel) of Bavarians have remained unproven. Consequently, the settlement of "Germanic Bavarians" in this territory, as presented by the author with great ardour, must be treated as a pure invention.
  


Examples of early medieval armed men with helmets
The "younger" Bavarian dukedom

In the 8/9th century, the ancient Bavarian people's nobility became extinct. This event coincides with the fact, that in 788 AD, due to an actual or supposedly uprising, Charlemagne deposed of the Bavarian Duke Tassilo III and had him confined to an abbey. With that, Bavaria lost its status of duchy (State). Anyway, this issue was not approached objectively by the patriotic Bavarian historiography, because it does not recognize, that at this time, the Carolingians treated Bavaria as a Frankish county. Thereafter its leading class, the nobility, gradually divided into two classes (Bosl, cit., 343, 344).

a) Liberi, in the sense of the Bavarian people's law. They were bound for military service to duke and king. They were furnished with ducal and royal estates and endowed with ducal and royal freedom. Documents also refer to them as viri exercitales (executive men). Besides them stood the Romani tributales (Barschalken) with a similar law. At the top of the scale were a small number of comes (counts), who represented the Frankish administration and military command. - Below this class were the subjects (servi and mancipia) (Bosl, cit., 343). - Anyway, during the 10th century this noble class of landowners became extinct too. Then, the first recognised aristocracy formed, consisting of a small number of members.

b) Optimates (potentes, magni), the best class, which descended from the Baioarii (prince's retinue). They were so potent, that the comes (counts), in particular during an expeditio (a military campaign), could not exercise their power over them (Bosl, cit., 344). Moreover, an aristocracy developed from this class, which since the 8th century had been appointed to govern in the offices of count (Graf), palsgrave (Pfalzgraf), judge (Richter), bailiff (Vogt). From this class the Bavarian high aristocracy was formed. They worked together with the governor, bishops, king, margrave and duke. There were about 30 families, and this number still existed in the 11th century (Bosl, cit., 344).

It was the aristocracy, which I consider rather Bavarian - Frankish. Thus, this occurred after Duke Tassilo III was deposed of and Bavaria lost its autonomy. The ancient Bavarian social structure was undergoing a feudalization. I suppose, at that time the old people's assembly (conventus) lost its function. Feudalism was but a characteristic Frankish social order. Bavaria had no proper duke for a long time. The appellate "duke" appears in the records again at the beginning of the 10th century. In a document from 909 AD we find the quotation tempore Arnolfi ducis (Bosl, cit. 355). It is about Arnulf of Bavaria, son of the fallen margrave Luitpold. († 907), who followed his father.

The Abbey Niederalteich in 1619 on the Danube. It was founded in 731 by duke Odilo
  
In Carantania

Otherwise, as suggested in the following sentence, Carantania, in distinction to Bavaria, did not change its status and social structure, when it after 745 AD accepted Christianity in connection with the recognition of the supremacy of the Frankish king. The fact, that Bavarian, Austrian and other German historians present Carantania after its Christianization as a "Bavarian March" has no grounds to stand on. In this case, once again we come across the argument called "ex silentio". It is used to explain historical events in consequence of lacking documents, mainly led by own selfish ambitions to pursue several ideologies. In the case of Slovenian history, the purpose is always the same: the denial of historical independence of Carantania (Slovenia) as well as the linguistic and ethnical identity of Slovenians.

The same can be said about Slovenian (Yugoslav) historians. Until this very day they continue to stress the izguba samostojnosti  (Carantania lost its independence). They admit, that Carantania was independent in the early period. Anyway, with the acceptance of Christianity (after 745 AD) they should have "lost their outer independence". Later, the Carantanians (in fact the Carniolians and a part Carantanians) associated with the anti-Frankish rebellion of Duke Liudevit in Slavonia (819 - 822), who was defeated by the Franks. In retaliation for the rebellion, say historians, the Franks deposed of the Carantanian dukes and noble class, and Carantania became a "simple county" of the Frankish kingdom (B. Grafenauer 1965, 5). This should have meant the "loss of its inner independence". Once again, it is based on "ex silentio", this is, the absence of documents stating otherwise.

Frankish soldiers besiege a castle (book illumination), Psalterium Aureum, 9th century (Staatsbibliothek St. Gallen, Switzerland)

Indeed, the aforesaid rebellion of ca. 820 arose against Kadolah, the margrave of the Friulian March, a Frankish military district, which extended south of the river Drava. This district included only the lesser part of Carantania (the present-day Lower Styria) and its province Carniola. After Kadolah, a new ruler by the name of Marquise Baldericus, was installed in the Friulian March. In this connection the records show the following information: The Frankish troops, on their return from Slavonia, constrained the Carniolians… and a great part of Carantanians, who were bound to Liudevit, to collaborate with Baldericus. (cf. Fr. Kos, Gradivo II, 61). Both rulers, Kadolah and Baldericus, were of Swabian origin. In this case it is not about Slovenia, but about Slavonia (today a part of Croatia).

Thus, nothing has been said about deposing either the duke or the noble class. Consequently, there is no reason to jump to conclusions, that in Carantania the ancient Slovenian (Vendic) social structure was altered by Franks, like it was the case in Bavaria. Therefore, in Carantania the process of feudalization took a relatively slow course. Indeed, the seigniory, the typical base of the feudal system, prevailed in the Carantanian social structure as early as in the period between ca. 970 - 1070 AD (Vilfan 1980, 111). However, the base of the ancient Slovenian social structure - as defined by the indigenous law called institutio Sclavenica - continued to exist. Until this very day, it played a particular role in the autonomy of the village community under the župan, the village mayor.
  
"Baierdorf"

In ancient Carantania, the present-day Austria, we find several localities called Baierdorf or similar. It is my opinion, that in the majority of cases they do not bear witness of Bavarian settlements in the early period of Carantania. These early settlers were probably the bojari (baioarii), the original members of the duke's retinue. From this stage, I suppose, they made the transition to the leading aristocracy, to which the military defence of the country was entrusted. Therefore, the name Baierdorf appears in strategic places throughout the Carantanian territory.

One of them is to be found in the proximity of the one-time Hungarian boundary, near Weiz in eastern Styria, and another one near Graz - Gradec. There is another Beierdorf near Hollabrun in Lower Austria, at the border zone with Bohemia. In the basin of the upper Mura we find Baierdorf near Judenburg, another one near Neumarkt and a third near Feistritz. Close to St. Veit (Št. Vid), the former chief town of Carinthia, we find Baardorf (Beierdorf), and then there is Paierdorf under the mountain ridge of Koralpe (Golica) between Carinthia and Styria.

In present-day Slovenia, we come across Bavarska vas (Peierdorf), that is now called Šmarjeta. The Bavarski dvor ("Bavarian" court) is situated at the entrance of Lublana. It is not very likely, that these places have been named after "Bavarian" settlers. Thus, the settlements have been named in German language like Nemška vas (German village), which are many in Slovenia.
Baierdorf (Vischer 1672) under the strategic Sölker Pass (1788 m), which connects the upper Mura basin with the Enns (Aniža) basin. Today, the road over the pass bears the name Archduke Johann Road.

As can be seen from the above explanations, the retinue of the Duke was very much alive in Carantania, too, and is best known by the name of "bojari".

In Bavaria the primary social structure decayed after the Franks defeated the rebellion of duke Odilo (ca. 740). This occurred in particular after 788 with the deposition of duke Tassilo III. Then, Bavaria was forced to submit to the Frankish feudal structure. In Carantania, however, feudalization was a slow process, and the indigenous structure preserved until the 11th century, this is, it continued well into the period of Great Carantania and its marches.

The fact, that the Carantanian duke had an armed retinue, arises from the nature of things. Besides, the existence of two noble classes coincides with Bavaria and Carantania: a) liberi, in Carantania svobodini, in German written records Freie (as for example, Freie von Saneck), b) optimates, in Carantania boljci, in German documents Hochfreie. This social group was the basis of the later gentry and nobility. The Slovenian family name Sabadin derives from "svobodin", and from "boljec" derive family names like Boljec, Boletina, Bole, Bolc (cf. Šavli - Bor - Tomažic 1989, 337).

In Carantania, the people's assembly called veca (placitum in Latin, Taiding in German) was also preserved, whereas in Bavaria it ceased to exist. It is very characteristic that the "Carantanians" still in 1039, 1045, 1056 and 1061 refused the nominated duke at the national assembly, if he did not please them. In that case the Royal Court had to send another one. As in early Bavaria, people participated directly in the popular Carantanian assemply, or they were represented by the people's delegates called dobri možje (homines boni). Furthermore, it still has to be investigated, whether several groups typical for Carantania can also be traced in Bavaria, such as the kosezi (Edlinge, in German) and the horvati (hervard). The first group consisted of free men, but with several duties. Their social position corresponds to that of the cotsetlas in early England (Stanovnik, 1963, 1038). The second one was a group of military peasants, armed, and always on guard, prepared to stop the enemy from entering the centre of the Carantanian duchy and the important passes until the regular army arrived.

On this occasion, I would like to call attention to Slovenian titles given to the bearers of several services in Carantania, like gradnik (castellan), mocnik (sheriff), cernic (border guard), cuješ (castle guard), vitez (knight). The latter one was noble but not free. (In Friuli, the family name Vidoz descends from vitez.)
  
Selected Bibliography

•   Karl Bosl: Das "jüngere" bayerische Stammesherzogtum der Luitpoldinger, p. 329 ff., in: Zur Geschichte der Bayern (Wege der Foschung, Bd.LX), Darmstadt 1965
•   Hans Dachs: Germanischer Uradel im frühbairischen Donaugau, p. 85 ff., in: Zur Geschichte der Bayern (Wege der Forschung, Bd. LX), Darmstadt 1965
•   E. Hamm: Diss. Herzogs- und Königsgut, Gau und Grafschaft im frühmittelalterlichen Baiern (not published), Munich 1949
•   Otto Kronsteiner: Nichts als Namen. Kulturwissenschaftliche Wahrnehmungen aus Österreich und Umgebung, Lublana 2003
•   Šavli - Bor - Tomažic: Veneti, naši davni predniki, Dunaj 1989
•   Jožko Šavli: Bavaria, and its origin, Carantha website
•   Jožko Šavli: The Slovieni, Carantha website (Forum Veneti, Part I)
•   Josip Mal: Ist das Edlingerproblem wirklich unlösbar?, in: Südostforschungen, München 1963
•   Sergij Vilfan: Družbena razmerja in gibanja /Social Relations and Movements/, Zgodovina agrarnih panog /History of the Agrarian Branches/, tome II, in Gospodarska in družbena zgodovina Slovencev (tome II), Lublana 1980
•   Janez Stanovnik: Še o kosezih /Again about the Kosezi/, in: Sodobnost XI, Lublana 1963
•   Josip Mal: Die Eigenart des karantanischen Herzogtums, in: Südostforschungen, München 1961