' , i l 1 i l | l l o , l l l

REVISTA DE ISTORIE

rlnstitutul Romände Studii Strategice

E n e r g y I l o l t l r r r r ; I l o r r r . r r r r , rEd i tu ra Po l i ro r r r , l , r ' , , r

S .A. Mo ldomobi la I lo r r r , r r r r , r

Copyright @ Mihai-Räzvan Ungureanu

ISSN:1453-5378

Inst i tutul Romän de Studi i Strategice ( IRSS)

Facultatea de lstor ie.

Univorsi tatea , ,Al . l . Cuza", lagi

I )r i l r lor l i r r I ionrrr l r i r r

SOCIALAlv-vll

1999-2002

lagi2004

Alexandru Madgearu

Were the Zupans Really Rulers of Some

Romanian EarlY Medieval Polities ?

Various works published during the last four decades sustain that a kind of early medieval

polities narned jupe or iupanate existed on the territory of present Romania, in the same

iime wittr otnei incipient'forms of social and political organization (the so-called cnezate

äd ,ofrrodole)r . Tiis idea came into being because sevetal jupani (iupans) who were

supposed to be rulers of such polities are indeed attested in Banat (Boila and Butaul) and

in Dobrudja (Dimiter and Geärge). These sources were seen as proofs for the existence

of a RomÄian political institution with close analogies in some of the Slavic societies'

where the lupaewere ter r i to r ia lun i tspeop ledbyacer ta in t r ibe .But th ingsarenotsosimple as they seem to be at a first glance. Do these sources prove that some Romanians

were organiz ed in iupe during the 8*-10* centuries too ? This point should be analyzed

in order to clarify u, -u"h-u, possible the early history of the Romanian political

institutions and forms of social organization'The first Romanian historian who expressed the idea that the Slavic institution of the

iupanswas took on by the Romanians during the Early Middle Ages was silviu Dragomir'

He supposed that the placenames from Banat derived from the word iupa preserved the

r.roiy of an archaic iorm of social and political organization' received by the Romanians

from the Slavs during their cohabitation. Dragomir also stressed that the title of "jupan"

bore by the Wallachiän boyars during the l4d'-16th centuries inherited the old Slavic form

of orgänization and he supposed certain relations between the Wallachian and the Croatian

court ranks. He tbllowed ihe studies of Constantin Jirecek on the Serbian and Croatian

iipe, Dragomir's theory was recently resumed by Viorel Achim, who considers that the

Rä-..ri"n i4* c"ntury districts from Banat were organized upon ancient structures set on

the river valleys, which are the same with the so-called iupe ot iupanate3.

1.|.' i '""'.- s. Pascu, in Istoria Romöniei, vo|.II, BucureSti, |962, p.45; M. Com$a,

Romanen-Walachen-Rumönen,inWeltderSlawen.Geschichte,Gesellschafi,Kultur(hrsg'J'Herrmann), München, 1986, p. 140; A. Bejan, Banatul ln secolele.IV-XII (continuitatea

daco-romana, ,rnogrnrro roÄAneascö gi tnceputurile feudalismului tn sud-vestul Dqciei

Traiane),TimiSoara,1995,pp.95,147-148;I 'Barnea'Jupan' inEnctclopediaarheologieisi istorie:i vechi a Romöniei, uör. u, Bucure$ti, 1996, p. 291 ; $t. olteanu, societatea carpato'

danubiano-ponticö ln secolele IV-XI. Structuri demo-economice gi social-politice, Bucuregtt,

Lggl , pp. i.ll_zl+ and the map from p.271 ; Idem, in Istoria Romänilor, vol.III, BucureStt'

2001, pp. 99-100 (he same text as in 1997)'2. S. Dragomir, "cäteva urme ale organiza(iei de stat slavo-romäne," inDacoromania' l' L92l'

p.141 (ldem, Studii de istorie midievald, S' $ipog (ed')' Cluj-Napoca' 1998' pp' 142-143)'

3 .V .Ach im ,Bana tu l t nevu lmed iu ,S tud i i ,Ed i t u raA lba t ros ,Bucu reg t i , 2000 'p .64 .

Revista de Istorie Socialä, IV-VII' 1999-2002' pp' 15-25'

1 6 ALEXANDRU MADGEARU

The placenames mentioned by Dragomir are Jupa, Jupafalva, Jupani, Jupalnic andJupäneSti. The first one (located near Caransebeg) was recorded in deeds since 1369(with the name Suppa). The village Jupafalva (attested in 1389 as Supafalva near Ezerig)disappeared after the 15ü century, as like as another Jupa (Suppa), placed near Remetea(recorded in 1369-1377). Jupani (near Fäget, first record in 1446) was the center of theRomanian district Suppan (Jupani), attested in 1453 . JupäneSti and Jupalnic were attestedmuch more later (1514 and l7l7)4. As a matter of fact, only the placenames Jupa,Jupafalva and Jupani are significant, because Jupalnic and JupäneStl are derived fromJupa and Jupani; they are showing population movements from these villages, occurredafter the 15ü century5. There are no similar placenames in other Romanian provinces,except two villages named JupäneSti in Gorj and Argeg counties. The root of the latterplacenames is the noun jupän (which can be translated as "master" or "housemaster").

Therefore, the words jzpa andjupan became placenames only within a small area fromBanat (around the middle basin of the Timig river). The map clearly shows that theseplacenames design an enclave.

Iupän obviously comes from jupan, through a degradation of its meaning. Severallinguists expressed the opinion that the word jupän belongs to the first stage of the Slavicinfluence in the Romanian language, as like as other words like stöpän, stärtä, smäntänd,which display the same phonetical evolution from -an to -äno . However, the form iupan(with a) was currently used until the 16m century (as the Wallachian documents areshowing), which means that the evolution ftom jupan to jupän could happen much more.later than the 9ü century and that this word does not belong to the earliest group of Slavicwords in Romanian. The use of the form with -an in the Romanian language until the lateMiddle Ages is testified by the placenames quoted above. This means that the word jupanwas received in Romanian just in this form. In what circumstances ?

The existence of the Zupans in the early medieval Banat seems to be proven by theinscription of the vessel nr. 2L from the treasure found at Sännicolaul Mare (TimigCounty) in 1799 (Hungarian name : Nagy-Szentmikl6s). The inscription used the Greekalphabet, but is written in a Turkic language:

T BOYAA ZOAIIAN TEKH AY|ETOI|H BOYT AOYAZOAIIAN TATPOfH HTZI|H TAIKH.

S. Dragomir did not discussed this inscription in his study, although the treasure wasalready known before his work (the first monograph was published by Joseph Hampel inI 885) .

We can not present here the intricated problems involved by this famous treasure whichwas ascribed one after another to the Avars, the Bulgarians, the Hungarians and thePechenegsT . One major interpretation sustains that the treasure consisted of 8ü century

4. C. Suciu, Dictrionar istoric al localitäqilor din Transilvania, Editura Academiei, Bucuregti,1967-1968, vol. I, p. 320; vol. II, p. 405.

5. V. Ionilä, Nume de locuri din Banat, Timigoara, 1982, pp. 41, 232.6. E. Petrovici, "Le latin oriental poss6dairil des öldments slaves?," Revue Roumaine de

Linguistique,l l , 1966, 4, pp.313-321 ; Gh. Mihäilä, impntmuturi vechi sud-slave in l imbaromänö, Bucuregti, 1960, pp. 132-133; A. Rosetti, Istoria l imbii romäne, Bucuregti, 1986,pp . 309 -310 , 638 -639 . 751 .772 .

7. The bibliography is huge. Some of the most important works are: J. Hampel, Der Goldfundvon Nagy-Sz.ent-Miklös, sogenannter "Schatz des Attila, " Budapest, 1885; G. Ndmeth, Dle

WERE THE ZUPANS REALLY RULERS OF SOME ROMANIAN EARLY MEDIEVAL POLITIES? I7

Byzantine gifts for some Avar chieftains8 . Another one supports the Bulgarian origin anda date in the second half of the 9ü centurye. Both points of view do not exclude a finalhiding at the beginning of the 1lü century, during the war between the duke Achtum andthe Hungarian king Stephen I. For our study, the debate between the Avar and theBulgarian theories is not so important, because the zoapans were military chiefs in bothAvar and Bulgarian hierarchies. A Bulgarian greatzoapan named Slvin is recorded by themiddle of the 8ü century by an inscription on a silver cup found at Preslavr0 . The Tirrkicword zoapan was borrowed by the steppe nomads from the Persians (it seems that itsultimate origin is Chinese)rr.

From the Avars, the word zoapan was afterwards took by the Serbs and the Croats,where the Lupani became the rulers of small territories called Lupatz. In most cases, theCroatian and Serbian iupe preserved their autonomy after the restoration of the Byzantinedomination at the beginning of the l1n cenfury, becoming local structures of the Byzantineadministrationr3 . In the literary sources, the word was first time recorded as Jopan inthe

Inschrirten der Schatzes von Nagy-Szent-Miklös, Budapest-Leipzig, 1932; N. Mavrodinov,"Le trösor protobulgare de Nagyszentmiklls," (Archaeologia Hungarica,29), Budapest, 1943 ;H.W. Haussig, Die Runen des Schatzes von Nagy-Szent Miklös in ihrer Bedeutung fiir dieRunenschrifien Osteuropas, in K. Röhrborn, W. Veenker (eds.), Runen, Tamgas und Grffitiaus Asien und Osteuropa, Wiesbaden, 1985, pp. 17-52; R. Göbl, A. R6na-Tas, "Die Inschriftendes Schatzes von Nagy-Szentmiklds. Eine paläographische Dokumentation" (ÖsterreichischeAkndemie derWssenschajten. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Denl<schriften,240), Wien, 1995.

8. M. Rusu, "Tezaurul de la Sännicolaul Mare. Noi puncte de vedere," Anuarul Institutului deIstoie Si Arheologie, Cluj-Napoca, 27, 1985-1986, pp. 3l-66 ; K. Horedt, "Zur Zeitstellung desSchatzfundes von Sännicolaul Mare (Nagyszentmiklis)," Archöologisches Korrespondenzblatt,Mainz, 13, 1983, 4, pp. 503-505.

9. G. V6kony, "Zur Lesung der griechischen Inschriften des Schatzes von Nagyszentmtkläs," ActaArchaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae , 25, 1973, 3-4, pp. 293-306 ; St. Michailov,"The Interpretation of "ETX'BEX'TH> and the Year of the Conversion of the Bulgarians into theChristian Faith," Bulgarian Historical Review, 5, 1977, 3, pp. 68-70 ; Idem, "Neue Angabenüber den Goldschatz von Nagyszentmiklös," Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 32,1982, 5 (XVII Internationalen Byzantinistenkongress. Akten, II/5), pp. 143-148.

10. V. Beshevliev, "Protobulgarische Inschrift auf einer Silberschale," Byzantion,35, 1965, I,pp. l-9; A. Madgearu, Continuitate Si discontinuitate culturalö la Dunörea de Jos tn secoleleVII-WU , Bucuregti, 1997 , pp. I 86- 187.

1l . Forthehistoryof thiswordseeespeciallyN. P6trin, "PhilologicalNotesfortheEarlyHistory

ofthe Hungarians and the Slavs," Eurasian Studies Yearbook. International Journal of NorthernEurasia,72, 2000, pp. 69-70

12. T. Wasilewski, "Les Zupy et les Zupanie des Slaves m6ridionaux et leur place dans I'organisationdes 6tats m6di6vaux," it f' Congrös international d'arch4ologie slave,3, Warsaw, 1970,pp.217-224; D. Dragojlovi(, "Laiupa chez les Slaves balkaniques au Moyen Age ," Balcanica.Annuaire de I'Institut des Etudes Balkaniques, Beograd, 2, 1971, pp. 85-115 ; L.E. Havlik,"The Character of the Early Rudal Society of Slavic States," in Rapports du III" CongräsInternational dArchöologie Slave,2, Bratislava, 1980, pp. 133-148.

13. J. Ferluga, 'Archon. Ein Beitrag zur Untersuchung der südslawischen Herrschertitel im 9. und10. Jh. in Lichte der byzantinischen Quellen," in N. Kamp, J. Wollasch (hrsg.), Tradition alshistorische Krafr. Interdisziplintire Forschungen zur Geschichte des frühen Mittelalters, Berlin--New York, 1982, pp. 254-266; P. Stephenson, Byzantium's Balkan Frontier: A PoliticalStudy of the Northern Balkans, 900-1204, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 117-130.

18 ALEXANDRU MADGEARU

d e e d o f f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e A b b e y o f K r e m s ( 7 7 7 ) , a t t h e w e s t e r n b o r d e r o f t h e A v a rkhanarera . The Slavic *ird Zupai also entered in Hungarian language as ispän (with the

meaning of "local ruler;;. Iir..*, that the Hungarians inherited this word together with

the local structures from the conquered Pannonian Slavsl5 '

The theory of the g;nuine Slavic origin of the word iupan is wrong. This theory

sustained that Zupan "ätu"O fromLupa and that Lupa derives from an Indo-European

root gheu-with the meanings of "region" and "sunken dwelling", like gr' yrinrl or germ'

Gau. Infact, the suffix -an"includes the word iupan into a set of Turkic words llke khan'

turkhan, ban, kauchan. All of them concern the military and the administrative

organization of the steppe peoples. On the other hand, the evolution fromiupa to Zupan

is not suitable because in Bulgaria are known iupans, but not also iupetu ' The most

probable solution is that the fuitic (in fact, Avar) word zoapanlöupan was mixed with an

Old-Slavic word iuPa'' .

The inscription on the vessel 21 was translated in many ways' The first attempt was

made by V. Thomsen: ..The ZoapanBoila has finished the cup, this drinking cup which

was adjusted for hanging by ttre zoapan Boutaul."rs The orientalist Gyula N6meth

understood rhe text lriu äim"t.nt way: "The cup of Boila Chaban' it was made at his

order. Boutaul chaban made the ear. It is trls orinting cup."re Another proposed

interpretation is : "It is Buyla Zoapanwho carries the bowl' Drinking bowl' made by But

ilZ;;;".;2d A specialisi in Proio-Bulgarian inscriptions prop.osed the version : "Bgila

Zopanhas given you the cup aS a sign of the sacred oath.''zl In his recent book, an

outstanding specialist in Turkic languages concludes that we can not decide in what

language iuas writte., this inscription and thar all the proposed decipherings are

|4.w. P"h|' Dl, A,*,n. Ein Steppenvolk in Mitteleuropa, 567-822 n. Chr', Munich, 1988, p. 305 ;

A.Röna-Tas,Hungar iansandEuropeintheEar lyMiddleAges.Anlnt roduct iontoEar lyHungarian History, Budapest, 1999, pp' 58' 115'

rs. n. i?tt, *über das verhäitnis von slavisch und ungarisch zupan - shpan - ispän im Lichte der

Wortgeographie," Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher. Iniernationale Zeitschrift fnr Nord-Eurasien'

ql, igli,pp.207-216; A. R6na-Tas, op' cit ' ' pp' 115' 353'

16. ph. Malingoudis, ..Die Institution des Zupans iis Problem der frühslawischen Geschichte'

Einige Bemerkungen," Cyritlomethodianum, 2' 1972-1973' pp' 6l-76'

17.H. Ditten, "Bemerkungen zu den ersten Ansätzen zur Staatsbildung bei Kroaten und Serben

im 7. Jh.,,, in Beitnigti zur byzantinische Geschichte im 9.-ll . Jh., Ed. v. Vavrinek, Praga,

lg7g, p. 44g; W. ro'tt,-op 'cit.,

p.305; z. GoLab, The origins of the slavs. A Linguist's

vjeill, columbus, lggi, pp. +oo-qn ,40g. A similar viewpoint was expressed by c. cihodaru'..Originea unor r.r*.ni ieferitori la värfurile societätii feudale din (ara noasträ"' Memoria

Antiquitatis,Piatra Neam1, 2, |970,pp. 389.400 (an old Slavic word related with germ. Stppe

was influenced by the Turkic word iupan)'

lg.V. Thomser, une inscription de la trouvailte d'or de Nagy-szent-Miklös (Hongrie),

Copenhagen' 1917'19. Gy. N6meth, "Les inscriptions du tresor de Nagyszentmikl6s," Revue des Etudes Hongroises'

Budapest-Paris' 11' 1933, pp' 5-38'

20. M. Erdal, "The Turkic Naiy-Szent-tvtiklös Inscription in Greek Letters"' Acta Orientalia

AcademtaeScienttarumHungaricae,42,lgss'2-3'pp'221-234'21. p. Dobrev, universum protobulgaricum, I. Inschrifiii und Alphabet der urbulgarer, Sofia,

1995. Abridged on-line English version'. Inscriptions and Alphabet of the Proto-Bulgarians

(http : //members.tripod'com/-Groznijat/pb-lang/pbl-1-3'html)'

wERE THE ZUpeNS REALLY RULERS OF SOME ROMANIAN EARLY MEDIEVAL POLITIES? 19

doubtfu122 , although into a previous study he proposed the translation : ,,the fort of PuilaZupan will.be built here; I, Butaul Zupan, I will begin to built the internal fott"Z3

In any case, the inscription does not prove that these zo_apans were local Romanian

rulers. as claimed authors like V. Fizegan2a or $t. Olteanu2s. Because the vessels were

very precious gifts, they could belong only to a Byzantine ally with significant military

po*ei. On the other hand, the use of a Tirrkic language clearly speaks about the ethnicity

äf the o*ner, even if the name Boila seems at a first glance to be of Romanian origin.

Indeed, Boild is an ancient Romanian name, and the suffix -ilö was often used in the

medieval Romanian person names. However, the same name Boilas is also a Byzantine

one. Mircea Rusu supposed that Boila received the gifts together with title of patrikios

because the emperor Constantine V (741-775) established an alliance with the Avars during

the wars against Bulgaria. According to Rusu, the zoapan Boila could be the same with

Boilas, the father of patrikios Constantine, an official of the empress Irene (797'802)26.

This could be a mere coincidence. It is known that the word boila was a generic name for

an aristocratic rank in the 9ü century Bulgaria. In the Bulgarian inscriptions, the rank of

boila was associated with the names of the functions fulfilled by the aristocrats (for

instance, boila kauchanos)z1 .Therefore, Boila and Butaul were either two high chieftains of the Avar khanate or

two Bulgarian military commanders. In both cases, they have no relation with a kind of

some incipient small Romanian polities callediupe.A turning point in the discussions about the /upans was the discovery of an old

Bulgarian inscription that remembers a lupan named Dimiter. The inscription was found

by the Romanian archaeologist Eugen Comga in 1950 at Mircea Vodä (Constanla County),

during the works at the Danube-Black Sea Channel. The limestone block with the

inscription was not discovered in situ, but near the precinct of the camp nr. VIII (XX) of

the so-called "stone wall," which is extended between Cernavoda and Constanta. It is

obvious that the block was once in the wall, but its exact position is unknown. On theother hand, it is sure that the stone was taken from another construction, because mortarremains were observed on it (the wall was not built with mortar). The fragmentary

Slavonic Cyrillic inscription was translated: "...against the Greeks/ in the year 64511

during Dimiter/ Zupan..."28

22. A. Röna-Ths, op. cit., pp. l3l-132.23.ldem, "Die Inschrift des Nadelbehälters von Szarvas (Ungarn)," Ural-Altaische Jahrbücher.

Internationale Zeitschrifi fiir umlische und altaische Forschung, Neue Folge, 9, 1990, p. 27 .

24. V. Fize5an, "Inscripliile runice de pe vasele tezaurului de la Sännicolaul Mare, document de

culturä popularä proto-romänä ? ," Mitropolia Banatului, 30' 1980' 7-9, pp. 535-550.

25. $t. Olteanu, Societatea..., p. 273.26. M. Rusu, op. cit., pP. 45-46.27. V. Beshevliev, Die protobulgarischen Inschrifien, Berlin, 1963, pp. 4l-42.28. l. Barnea, $t. $tefänescu, Din istoria Dobrogei, vol. III, BucureSti, 1971, pp. 64, 69. The

inscription was first published with some archaeological details in E. Comga, "Cercetäri gi

observalii in legäturä cu ralurile din Dobrogea," Studii Ei Ceercetöi de Istorie Veche,2, L951,2,pp. 233-238. The authenticity of this inscription was denied by Gr. Nadrig, 'A Spurious

Slavonic Inscription from the Danube Canal," The Slavonic and East European Review,38,

1960, 91, pp. 530-534, because he pointed that the language presents old Russian features and

not Bulgarian. The problem should be carefully researched by the Slavists.

ALEXANDRU MADGEARU20

According to D.P. Bogdan, on the stone are two inscriptions, carved in different

moments. The first one inCludes two rows from the end of an inscription which mentions

the year 6451(g43), while the last two rows are differently carved (more rudely), which

means that this part was added at a later moment (between 943 and the Byzantine

conquest of 1001i2e. This interpretation changes the previous conclusions, because the

.u"nt in which Zupan Dimiter was involved cannot any more be dated in 943. The block

was taken from an inscription erected in the memory of a battle (such Bulgarian

inscriptions are already known)30 , and then it was reused for rebuilding the wall' The

reconstruction might oöcur when Bulgaria used the big stone wall as a shield against the

Byzantine northern territory, in986-1000 (it is not sure if the wall was built then or is

ancient)3l . Because the woids "Zupan Dimiter" were added later, it is possible that this

change may have been done when the block was already inserted in the wall, i'e' after

986. However, a date between 943-986 is also suitable'

The event occurred in 943 seems to be related with the Pecheneg inroad against

Bulgaria and the Byzantine Empire, recorded by a Byzantine source3z . It is possible that

the inscription may concern the crossing of the Pechenegs through Bulgllia, "against the

Greeks;" with this occasion a battle could happen in the neighborhood33 ' Bulgaria was

in peaceful relations with the Byzantine Empire in 943 and it was itself affected by that

inroad. We do not agree that the Byzantine Empire was in that moment the master of the

northern part of Dobrudja, as considers P. Diaconu, who supposed that those Greeks were

the inhabitants of the northern Dobrudja3a . According to Constantine Porphyrogenitus

(around 953), Dobrudja up to the Danube's mouths belonged to Bulgaria35 . Jupan Dimiter

had no relations with the events of 943. He lived during a later period, sometime in the

second half of the 10th century (before the final Byzantine conquest of Dobrudja in 1001)'

Because it is sure that the Bulgarian Zoapans or iupans were military commanders

and not independent rulers, the single right conclusion is that Dimiter was a commander

29.D.P.Bogdan,Paleograf iaromöno-s lavö.Tratats ia lbum,Bucutest i ,1978,p. l5 l .30. Examples in V. Beshevli ev, Die protobulgarischen' ' ' ' pp ' 124-116 '

31 . The cirronology of the wall is still disputed. According to P. Diaconu, the wall was built by the

Bulgarians, beiween 986-1000 ("zur Frage der Datierung des Steinwalles in der Dobrudscha

undler Lokalisierung der im Berichte des griechischen Toparchen geschilderten Ereignisse"'

Dacia, NS,6, 1962, pp. 317.335). More recent studies are supporting the Roman origin:

G. papuc, *Despre uaturiie transdobrogene ," Pontica,25,1992,pp,323-329; I. Bogdan-Cätäniciu'.I Valli di Traiano nella Dobrugia. Considerazioni sulle fotografie aeree"' in Omaggio a Dinu

AdameSteanu,Cluj, 1996, pp.iOt-ZZe; A. Barnea, "VoiesdecommunicationauBas-Danube

aux IVi-VI" s. ap. J.C.," Ifndes Byzantines et Post-Byzantines, III, Bucuregti, 1997' p' 38'

The idea that the reconstruction of the wall can be dated after 986 according with the Mircea

Vodä inscription was expressed by R.$t. Ciobanu, R. Florescu' "Problema stäpänirii bizantine

in nordul Dobrogei in sec. IX-XI," Pontica, S,1972, pp' 388-389'

32. Mihail Glykas, Annales, Bonn, 1886, p. 5S4 (FHDR, III, pp' 166'167)'

33 . I. BoZilov, " L inscrrption du Jupan Dimitre de l;an 943 (theories et faits), " Etudes Historiques,

Sofia, 6, 1973, PP- ll-28.34. P. Diaconu, "La Dobroudja et Byzance ä l'6poque de la genöse du peuple roumain (VII'-X"

siöcles)," pontica, 14, 1981, p. it1. See also E. Stänescu, Byzance et les Pays Roumains aux

IX,-XV siicles, rn Acites au *V Congris International des Etudes Byzantines, l, Bucarest,

1914, p. 396.35.De Administando Imperio, g (FHDR, II, pp' 660-661)'

WERE THE ZUPANS REALLY RULERS OF SOME ROMANIAN EARLY MEDIEVAL POLITIES? 21

charged with the defence of the border area of Bulgaria, near the great stone wall (aregion similar to the Frankish marks)36 . He was a representative of the central power.Even so, some Romanian historians still claim that Dimiter was the ruler of an incipientstate, presumable Romanian3T . Closer to reality is the definition "local military chief, "38

if this concerns stricto-sensa a feudal from the Bulgarian state. The existence of theso-called "jupanat" in Dobrudja is not supported by a second testimony, as someresearchers believed3e. Indeed, the inscription found in the church nr. 84 from themonastic center Murfatlar-Basarabi was transcripted as ZHUPAN I IMAET GEORGEONC TEBE ESTEK KRAIN I REZHETE, which means "the zhupan and guardianGeorge promises you eighty pieces of gold and so must it be ! "40 However, it is not surethat the inscription contains the word iupan, because another researcher remarked thatthe word can be read Tupai (the name of a man who built a church consecrated to SaintGeorge)ar

The analysis of the inscription found at Mircea Vodä clearly shows that ZupanDimiter cannot be considered ruler of a Romanian incipient state. Therefore, botharguments put forward for the existence of some Romanianjrzpe are wrong (the inscriptionfrom Sännicolaul Mare is also without significance in this respect).

If there is no positive information about the existence of the so-called Romanian jupe

during the 8fr-10ü centuries, we have to explain how and when the placename Jupa andthe noun jupanbegan to be used by the Romanians.

From the medieval documents it results that the word jupan was much more used inWallachia than in Moldavia, although the title appears for the first time in the sameperiod. The jupani were recorded in the documents issued in Wallachia since 1388 andin Moldavia since 1392. The Wallachian and Moldavian jrpani had no specific territorialjurisdiction. They were great boyars, members of the princely council (some of themheld certain functions, but their status of members of the council was not determined bysuch functions;42. In Moldavia, the title usually given to the members of the council waspan, of Polish origin. However, some of the boyars were entitled jupani also in Moldavia.

36. F. Curta, "The Cave and the Dyke : a rock Monastery on the tenth-century Frontier ofBulgaria," Studia Monastica, Barcelona, 41, 1999, I, pp. 145, 148.

37.For instance : C.C. and D.C. Giurescu,Istoria romönilor, vol. I, Editura Albatros, Bucuregti,1975, p. 160; A. Ghialä, Formations politiques au Bas-Danube et d la Mer Noire (fin dunf -XV s.), RESEE, 24, 1986, l, p. 37; M.D. Matei, "Probleme fundamentale ale genezeivielii urbane medievale in Jara Romäneascä a Munteniei gi Jara Romäneascä a Moldovei,"Revista de istorie, 40, 1987,3, p. 226.

38. I. Barnea, $t. $tefänescu, op. cit., p. 69.39. I . Barnea, $t . $ tefänescu, op. c i t . , pp. 114, 212; $t . Ol teanu, op. c i t . ,p .273.40. P. Dobrev, op. cit, (http://members.tripod.coml-Groznijatlpb lang/suppl2.html).4l . K. Popkonstantinov, "Les inscriptions du monastöre rupestre prös du village Murfatlar (Basarabi).

Etat, th6ories et faits," inDobrudia. Etudes ethno-culturelles, Sofia, 1987, pp. 128-132;P. Diaconu, "Sur l 'histoire de la Dobroudja au Moyen Age," Dacia, NS, 32, 1988, p. 186.

42. See the documents published in Documenta Romaniae Historica, A, vol. I, Editura Academiei,BucureEti, 1966 and B, vol. I, Editura Academiei, Bucuregti, 1975. For jupani and their placein the council, see D.C. Giurescu, lara Romäneascö in secolele XIV Si XV, Bucuregti, 1973,pp. 218-219,237,272; Institulii feudale din förile RomAne. Diclionar, Editura Academiei,Bucuregti, 1988, p. 260.

22 ALEXANDRU MADGEARU

D. Onciul remarked that this title was given for the voivode's kinsmena3 ' For instance'

jupan Bogdan, the brother of the voivode Alexander I, is mentioned in several documents

lssueO between 1400 and 140744 .In fact, jupan was a title of esteem like the English Lord. This clearly results from

some instances, when the title iupan was given by Romanians from Wallachia to the

Saxon Bürgermeisters from Sibiu and Bragov. For instance, fhe jupani Stan and Cräciun

wrote a -örr"g. to iupan Melher, the Bürgermeister of Sibiua5 ' Even the famous letter

of Neac$u from Cämpulung (1521), the first text written in Romanian, has a Slavonic

salutation that concerns "Jupan Hanäg Begner ot Bra9ov"46 '

Unlike Serbia or Croatia, the Romanian l4ü century principalities were not composed

from iupae. The territorial units were called judele (in wallachia) and linuturi (in

Moldavia). The word jude! comes from iude, which is an institution of Roman origin

whose function is quite similar to that of the Slavic lupan' If the states were not

organized in iupe, how can be explained the use of the title of jupan in both principalities,

but especially in Wallachia ?We suppose that the title of iupan was received in Wallachia from Serbia, under the

reign of Irriir"." I (1386-i418), when it was recorded for the first time' The Serbian

infiuence over rhe political and religious institutions of Wallachia was exerted especially

in the last third of the 14ü century. The wallachian monasteries voditra and Tismana were

founded by Saint Nicodem, a monk who came from Serbia; the same Serbian influence

can be observed at the monastery of Cozia built by Mircea I. The links between Wallachia

and Serbia were strengthened by the marriages of Radu I with Kalinikia and of Dan I with

Maria, the two daughters of Lazat HrebeljanovicaT. Finally, the deeds written down

during the reign of Mircea I contain some typical expressions borrowed from the Serbian

chancellery (as a matter of fact, even the name of the voivode is Serbian)a8 ' Under these

circumstances of the increasing Serbian influence the title of jupan was perhaps received

as a distinction for the great Wallachian boyars'In conclusion, there is no relation between the Wallachian and Moldavian 14ü century

jupani and the zoapans and iupans from the 8ü-10ü centuries. Only for the placenames-in

Banat could be supposed the inheritance of the Avar word zoapan, because this region

was under the Avar domination for more than two centuries. However, the Avars exerted

their domination over a territory much larger than the small area where these placenames

are attested. One could ask why such names are not known in Crigana or in the central

Transylvania, where the archaeological researches are showing concentrations of Avar

43. D. Onciul , Scrieri istorice,II, Bucuregti, 1968 ' p' 180'

44.Documenta Romaniae Historica' A, vol. I ' docs' 10, 11, 12' 13,22'

45.Documenta Romanrae Historica, D, vol. I, Editura Academiei' Bucuregti, 1977, doc' 324

(years 1454-1456).46.Ä. Cazact, Sur la date de la lettre de NeacSu de Cömpulung (1521), RESEE, 6,1968' 4,

pp. 525'528.+2.ä. ttreodorescu, Bizanl, Balcani, Occident la inceputurile culturii medievale romöneSti

(secolele X-XN), BucurÄqti, 1974, p' 160 ; D' Barbu, Byzance, Rome et les Roumains' Esscis

sur la production politique de ta foi au Moyen lge, Bucureqti, 1998' pp' 123-132'

4g. Tr. Ionescu-Niqcov, "Contacts enire la diplomatique serbe et la chancellerie princiöre de la

Valachie pendant les XIV" et XV" siöcles," Association Internationale d'Etudes du Sud-Est

Europöen. Bulletin, 10, 19'72,2, pp.215-288.

wERE THE ZUPNNS REALLY RULERS OF SOME ROMANIAN EARLY MEDIEVAL POLITIES? 23

finds. As a matter of fact, the Avar objects and cemeteries are missing in the area of the

placenames derived ftom juPa'

A group of population oi south-Danubian origin moved in the south of Banat by the

endof"theiZ* *ntury, being prosecuted for religious reasons by the Serbian state (they

were Bogomils). The ,.*rrcii"r from Caransebeg, Cuptoare, Gornea, Ilidia, Sviniga,

gopotu fechi, all of them dated in the 12ü-13ft centuries, display specific features for the

medieval Serbian cemeteriesae. This cluster of finds (see the map on p. 24) belong to the

first wave of Serbian population in Banat, which is also attested by a concentration of

Serbian placenames in the same area. Linguistic researches have shown that this strong

Serbian lnfluence in Banat, Haleg and in the western Oltenia could be dated in the

12ü-13ü centuriess0. The Serbs came perhaps under the rulership of several iupans'

Under these circumstances, the word iupanbecame familiar to the Romanian inhabitants

of the region. We consider that the words iupa andi.upan entered the Romanian toponymy

throughlhis Serbian immigration, in the 12ü-13ü centuries' In the same way can be

explai*ned the use of the titie iupan among the Romanian cnezi (small noblemen) fromgateg, atrested for instance in the memorial inscriptio n for iupan chendreg ( 1408) at the

Romanian church Streisängeorgiu".The early medieval Romanianilpe did not exist at all. The mistake of S' Dragomir

had a long li-te in the Romanian historiography because this supposed form of organization

filled a blank in the so-called Romanian Dark Age. Even in the last decades, when the

archaeological researches became able to provide trustworthy data about this period,

some historians continued to maintain without a proper demonstration that the Romanians

were acquainted with the organization in iupe. ln fact, the Romanian iupanate were

nothing more than a historiographic legend.

Au fost jupanii conducätori ai unor formafiuni prestataleromäne$ti in Evul Mediu timPuriu ?

Rezumat

pornind de la un studiu din 7921 al lui Silviu Dragomir qi de la interpretarea unor

inscriplii de la sännicolaul Mare, Mircea vodä 9i Murfatlar, mai mulgi istorici romäni au

sustinut existenfa unor formaliuni prestatale romäneqti conduse de jupani, denumite

convenlional jupanate, atestate de mai multe toponime din Banat (care nu au analogii in

alte prövinciirämäneSti). in realitate, inscriplia de pe vasul nr 21 din tezaurul de la

Sännicolaul Mare se rÄferä la doi conducätori de origine fie avarä, fie bulgarä. Termenul

4ryl.t."J'N*t"pole medievale (sec. X-XN) din sudul Banatului," Banatica, 12, 1993, l,

pp. 229-212; S. Ota, "Mormintele bogomile din sudul Banatului (secolele XII-XV)'"

Arheologia medievalö,2, 1998, pp. 113-123'

50. G. Iväneicu, Istorialimbii romöne,Junimea, Iagi, 1980, p.372; V. Achim, op. cit ' ,pp' 175-L16'

5 l .G.Mihäi lä , "Celemaivechi inscr ip l i icunoscutealeromäni lord inTransi lvania(1313- l314Si

140g, Streisängeorgiu - Oragul Cälan, judelul Hunedoara)," Revista Muzeelor Si Monumentelor -

seria monumente istorice Si de artd,47,1978, 1, pp' 37-38'

1A ALEXANDRU MADGEARU

turcic iupanlZoapan,care desemna o func;ie militarä atät la avari, cät Si la bulgari' a fost

preluat de särbi gi croali, iar apoi de cätre unguri. La slavi a fost contaminat cu termenul

lupa, caredesemna o uniru,"i"titorialä. Oegi nu existä o descifrare unanim acceptatä'

este cert cä inscriplia .-iort ,"Ou"tutä intr-o limbä turcicä, fapt care exclude alte atribuiri

etnice in afara avarilor, evenrual bulgarilor. Degi numele unuia dintre jupanii tn"n!i9-131r

Boila, pare la prrma vedere romänÄc, ffebuie remarcat cä boila en in secolele VIII-X

denumirea genericä a onui ,"ng in aristocralia bulgarä. La rändul ei, inscriplia chirilicä

de la Mircea Vodä datatä in 943 amintegte pe un anumt jlPun.Dimitrie' care era

comandantul unei regiuni de frontierä a Bulgarlei, dar nu in943, ci mai tärziu, cändva

in a doua jumätate a secolului al X-lea (s-a arätat cä numele lui Dimitrie 1 rgst {iyeftintr-un moment ulterior pe o inscriptrie care comemora o luptä cu pecenegii din 943)' In

pri"intu .rfuilalt jupan däbrogean, bieorghe, inscriplia respectivä de la Murfatlar nu are

o transcriere certä.Degi nu existä dovezi ale existen[ei unor jupani romäni in secolele VIII-X, cuväntul

jupan"este atestat in limba romänä. Din documentele din secolele XIV-XV reiese cä

termenul era mult mai frecvent in Muntenia decät in Moldova (unde este adesea inlocuit

cu echivalentul polonez p an). Jupan era un titlu de respect acordat marilor boieri' Nu era

asociat cu o functrie unu-, 9'l nic'i n, era legat de administrarea unor formaliuni teritoriale

denumite jape (inexistentein lara Romäneascä gi Moldova, spre. deosebire de Serbia 9i

croatia). Deoarece statele mädievale romänegti nu erau otganizate in jupe' se poate

pr.rupun, cä titlul de jupan a fost preluat din serbia, in perioada de accentuatä influentä

iarUe-Oin ultima treime a secolului al XIV-lea'

%* = Sännicolaul Mare

+ = Cemeteries of Serbian origin

WERE THE ZUpeNS REALLY RULERS OF SOME ROMANIAN EARLY MEDIEVAL POLITIES? 25

Doar toponimele din Banat ar putea fi eventual o mo$tenire din epoca avarä, dar sepoate observa cä ele se grupeazä intr-o arie restränsä, deosebitä de cea unde se concentreazävestigiile avare, dar legatä de cea a cimitirelor din secolele XII-Xil care pun in evidenträo migralie sud-dunäreanä. Tot acolo existä o concentrare a toponimelor särbegti timpurii.Prin urmare, toponimele Jupa, Jupafalva, Jupani, Jupalnic si JupäneSti au fost create pebaza influenlei särbegti (imigranlii särbi au venit, probabil, in Banat sub conducereaunor jupani).

in concluzie, romänii din Evul Mediu timpuriu nu au cunoscut jupele si jupanii.

Eroarea lui S. Dragomir a avut o viatä lungä in istoriografia romäneascä, deoareceumplea un gol in ,,mileniul infunecat". De fapt, jupanatele romänegti nu sunt altcevadecät o legendä istoriograficä.