Friar Riccardus. “The Matter of Magna Hungaria” (c. 1236)

Introduction

The text translated here is the first of two connected short reports from the second half of the 1230s related to Dominican Hungarian missions deep into Eurasia to make contact with the population of the original Hungarian homeland – so-called Magna Hungaria. This earlier text was written by a certain Friar Riccardus about a Dominican friar, Julian, and it seems to have been very likely composed in early 1236 after Julian returned to Hungary and then to the Papal Curia in Rome.

It would be followed by a second letter, written by Friar Julian himself after his return in 1238 from a subsequent mission to the East ordered by Pope Gregory IX (r. 1227-1241. Both documents combine to provide a haunting and personal glimpse of the Hungarian Dominican Order’s exploration and missionary work in the region to the far east of the Kingdom of Hungary. There were four Dominican missions made in this short timeframe in the 1230s, and Friar Julian was the prime actor in them; he was directly involved in the second, third, and fourth of the missions. The first two missions were dedicated to finding the original Asiatic homeland of the Hungarians from which they had migrated to Europe in the ninth century, and a description of these initial two missions forms the material of Friar Riccardus’ text.

According to Friar Riccardus’ report, the first Dominican mission lasted for years and was unsuccessful in actually making contact with Magna Hungaria. One of the participants named Otto however spoke to a local pagan in Hungarian and got directions to the Hungarian homeland in Asia. Thus, a second mission was attempted. While two friars turned back and another succumbed to illness, Friar Julian persevered. He claimed to have found the Hungarian original homeland east of the Volga River and stayed with the local people during the second mission. Before Julian’s discovery of their Urheimat, the Hungarians of thirteenth-century Europe were widely aware that they descended from a group that left that original homeland in the region of the Volga River, but any information about where the homeland precisely was had long since been forgotten. The expansive and powerful Hungarian Kingdom, despite constant internal conflicts, was extending its power and influence eastward and southward of the Carpathian Basin in the first few decades of the thirteenth century. This established a background context in which Hungarians could begin an active effort with royal support to discover their ancestral homeland and the people from whom they originated.

The emergence of the Mendicant movement coincided with Hungary’s expansive period in the first decades of the 1200s; the Franciscan Order was founded by Francis of Assisi (1181-1226) and the Dominican Order was founded by Dominic de Guzmán (1170-1221). The Dominican chapters in Hungary, following their founder’s exhortation to bravely preach the Gospel to heathens, no matter what the dangers, soon received royal backing in their attempts to spread Christianity eastward and southward beyond the protective barrier of the Carpathian Mountains. This meant efforts to preach to the Cumans (Cuman-Qipchaqs/Polovtsy) along the Dnieper River. Eventually in the late 1220s and 1230s, there were some successes with converting Cuman leaders and their followers in the region of “Cumania” (Wallachia and Moldavia in modern Romania) and among those who were recently arriving in Hungary as refugees fleeing from the Mongol conquests. In the 1230s, Dominicans who read of the ancestral land of the Hungarians, east of the Dnieper, expressed the ambitious plan to find the original Hungarians in their homeland of “Magna Hungaria” (Great Hungary, viz. Older Hungary) and convert its people to Christianity. This received royal support from both King Andrew II (r. 1205-1235) and his successor Béla IV (r. 1235-1270). In fact, the latter actively supported the Dominican exploratory and missionary work already in the role of crown prince when his father was still on the throne. Afterwards, as king, he became even more closely involved in the Dominican work that likely had to do with one of the Dominicans, Friar Julian, bringing back news of the “Tartars” (Mongols) who were amassing east of the Volga River under Batu Khan (r. 1227-1254/55) with the purpose of launching a major war of conquest – one that was being directed westward toward Hungary.

Faced with the new knowledge of the threat posed by Batu’s campaign, the Dominican missions evolved from evangelization to gathering facts on the coming Mongol onslaught which indeed did reach Hungary some years later, culminating in Batu’s highly destructive invasion and occupation of the kingdom in 1241-42. As such, there is an element of pathos in these two brief documents composed a few years before that invasion by friars; they were effectively warnings which foreshadowed both the Mongol high command’s larger intentions and their military plans for conquest during the so-called Great Western Campaign (1236-1242). The foreboding danger which loomed and the information about a Mongol plan for world conquest which Friar Julian brought back to Latin Christendom were not ignored. Yet, reactions and strategies to deal with the warnings were not put in place in Hungary until it was far too late.

Turning to the specifics of the document and its author, this first report is called The Matter of Great Hungary, written by Friar Riccardus in the time of Pope Gregory IX [De facto Ungarie magne, a fratre Riccardo invento tempore domini Gregorii pape noni].[1] Though it is mostly centered on the testimony and activities of Friar Julian of his partners, it was written by a certain Friar Riccardus, probably in 1236. We know next to nothing about Friar Riccardus, even if was a member of the Dominican Order like Friar Julian, but that would make the most sense considering how familiar the former was with the latter’s recent adventures in the East.

The report of Friar Riccardus provides details about the first Dominican voyage to find Magna Hungaria at the start of the 1230s. In this case, and in the three later missions, the friars would travel in small groups of four. According to Friar Riccardus, the initial mission lasted for more than three years and was unsuccessful in establishing contact, but as mentioned, one of its members, Otto, managed to get detailed instructions on the location of Magna Hungaria. Sick and worn out, he returned to Hungary and share these instructions before passing away. The second Dominican mission in 1234-35 is the primary focus of Friar Riccardus’ tale.[2] In this case, two friars gave up and returned to Hungary, one of them died of illness on the journey, but Friar Julian persevered and managed to reach Magna Hungaria. There, he rejoiced to be able to communicate with the local people in the Hungarian tongue. According to Julian, they rejoiced to meet him and claimed to be familiar with a tradition that a group of Magyars had departed far to the West in past centuries. However, the celebratory mood was ruined by the “envoy of the Tartars,” a polyglot in the service of Batu’s gathering army, who showed up and informed Julian that a great Tartar army was coming to destroy Hungary, Germany, and apparently even “Rome and beyond Rome.” At that point, the friar knew that further evangelization in Magna Hungaria would have to wait, and in June 1235, he returned to Europe to warn the Papal Curia, and undoubtedly the Hungarian monarch, of the Mongol danger. That is where Friar Riccardus’ narrative ends.

The Text: Manuscripts and Editions

Friar Riccardus: The Matter of Great Hungary, written by Friar Riccardus in the time of Pope Gregory IX

The present translation is based on Heinrich Dörrie’s critical edition (1956) that was based on four available manuscripts, at least one of which – that kept in the Liber Censuum of the Riccardiana Library of Florence – is a copy from the thirteenth century.[3] Heinrich Dörrie’s critical edition has been the standard text used by Hans Göckenjan for his German translation (1985),[4] for instance, and by Roman Hautala (2015) in his Russian annotated translation.[5] It was likewise used by Kornél Szovák and László Veszprémy (1999) in their standard version of the text used in Hungarian scholarship.[6]

Controversies: The Trustworthiness and Chronology of the Two Dominican Reports

Not wanting to be seen exhibiting the same credulity as medieval audiences, some twentieth-century scholars have perhaps been overzealous in their doubts about Friar Riccardus’ and Julian’s subsequent claims regarding Magna Hungaria. Denis Sinor insisted until the very end of his lengthy career that the report of Friar Riccardus was a mere “romanticized scholarly fabrication.”[7] Yet, linguistic data would support an Inner Asian origin of the Magyar language. There is increasing amounts of published genetic findings that suggests the populace of the Carpathian Basin has some ancestry from the Inner Asian region, particularly evident in the DNA studies of earlier Árpád rulers like László I.[8] Moreover, it is a strange premise for a friar to undertake multiple lengthy and dangerous voyages in pursuit of keeping alive a misconception that there existed a distant people that spoke a mutually intelligible language. What would Friar Julian’s motivations be to waste royal and papal resources, luring more teams of Dominican friars thousands of kilometers from Europe into the Volga region to meet up with a group of people that he had merely dreamt up? Entertaining such a scenario almost requires more credulity than simply believing there existed a people in the thirteenth century speaking an Ugric language in the broad area where such languages previously flourished and still exist in pockets today.

Moreover, the long-held suggestions of Denis Sinor, first made in the 1950s, that there were two rather than four Dominican voyages, and that Friar Julian only took part in a single voyage, seem doubtful.[9] He did not accept that Friar Julian took part in both the traditionally numbered second and fourth voyages (voyages II and IV). Furthermore, Sinor suggested that the first voyage (voyage I during which Otto found out where Magna Hungaria was but did not reach it) had been conflated with the third voyage (voyage III – a group sent in 1236-37 on a journey in which Julian did not participate). This argument is quite impossible owing to details in the textual descriptions of each voyage standing in relation to the well-known timeline of Batu’s conquests unfolding over the second half of the 1230s. Indeed, since the events in each voyage are tied to chronological stages of Batu’s conquests during the Western Campaign for which our broader set of sources provide reliable dates, it is hard to argue such a point of view.[10] Julian’s epistle notes that the friars on that journey (voyage III) encountered Hungarians fleeing as refugees to the Kingdom of Hungary and promising to convert to Christianity while they reached it. This only make sense if Journey III took place in the conditions that Magna Hungaria had been conquered by the Mongols, which suits a date range from late 1236 to the first half of 1237. It cannot be tied to any earlier context from before the time that Julian stayed in Magna Hungaria and encountered the Mongol Empire’s envoy who demanded Magna Hungaria’s surrender, saying the Mongols were waiting for reinforcing armies to arrive in their camp. That timeframe, described with voyage II, would be suitable with 1235. The meeting must have been long before autumn 1236 when Batu’s major conquests, first directed at Volga Bulgar and nearby Magna Hungaria, commenced. Thus, voyage I must have taken place before 1234 which was in fact the year that voyage II commenced.

There has been much criticism of some of the absurd claims about the Mongols made in this very early European description of them, coming from second-hand information. However, the descriptions of the Mongol modus operandi in war are quite accurate. Friar Julian’s remarks about the Mongol conquerors’ usage of group and individual psychological tendencies to drive the Mongol Empire’s continued advances stand out among contemporary sources as unusually perceptive. From details in the text, it seems clear that Julian’s insights were the result of frank discussions with experienced informants in Rus’, Magna Hungaria, Volga Bulgar, and even Alania. Julian’s details about Chinggis Khan’s rise to power do not tend to agree with our other sources composed by authors across Eurasia who worked in the Mongol administration and had a closer knowledge of affairs in Mongolia. Julian’s misconceptions and errors in this regard might reflect difficulties in communication with those already directly affected by Batu’s campaigns in the 1230s, or even the limitations of his informants’ own knowledge about the Mongols.

Overall, there remains an overarching sense of verisimilitude in both reports. The Mongol khan’s formal ultimatum to the king of Hungary, recorded in translation (or paraphrase) in Julian’s epistle, certainly comes across as authentic when viewed alongside other recorded ultimatums from Mongol khans. In fact, much of its tenor is identical to the message from Güyük Khan which John of Plano Carpini brought back from Mongolia to the papal curia in 1247. Since that letter – in its original Persian translation, signed with the Mongol court’s official seals – still exists in the Vatican, we cannot call it a phantasmagoria of the medieval West’s imagination. Moreover, since Julian’s earlier citation of a Mongol imperial ultimatum to surrender is so similar to the one composed and sent to the papal curia a decade later, we must conclude that Julian really did transmit the great khan’s message accurately in the 1230s, allowing that he did not possess uncanny powers to guess Mongol intentions and foresee the future. Julian, after all, forewarned the Mongol invasion of Hungary – a remarkable feat if he were a mere spinner of fables. If he never met an envoy of the Mongols in Magna Hungaria, and indeed never went there, then it is indeed impressive how he nevertheless correctly conveyed the Mongol Chinggisid dynasty’s view of their mandate for world rulership before Latin Europe had direct contact with the Mongols.

Another point where these two documents can be partly corroborated is in their insistence that four friars being sent on a mission seems to be the standard number of participants in such Dominican missionary and diplomatic missions. We see the same number of friars being sent on Ascelin’s Dominican mission to Baiju Noyan in Armenia in 1247 (Simon of Saint-Quentin’s report is likewise available on this website). Certain precise details in contemporary records, such as French Cistercian chronicler Alberic of Trois-Fontaines’ claim that it took the friars a hundred days to travel from Europe to Magna Hungaria, do not support the viewpoint that the Dominican voyages and peoples described by Friar Riccardus and Friar Julian were some sort of later fiction.[11]

Translation 1:
The Matter of Great Hungary, written by Friar Riccardus in the time of Pope Gregory IX, 1236
De facto Ungarie magne, a fratre Riccardo invento tempore domini Gregorii pape noni

1, 1 It was found in the Deeds of the Christian Hungarians that there is another, larger Hungary from which the seven chieftains went forth with their people to seek a place to settle because their own land could not sustain the multitude of inhabitants.[12] 2 When they had passed through and conquered many kingdoms, they at last came into the land that now is called Hungary, but then was called the Pasture of the Romans. 3 They chose this land as more suitable to inhabit than other lands, subjugating to themselves the peoples who lived there. 4 There, eventually, they were converted to the Catholic faith by Saint Stephen, their first king. The original Hungarians, from which these ones had descended, persisted in unbelief, so that they are still pagans today.

1, 1 Inventum fuit in Gestis Ungarorum Christianorum, quod esset alia Ungaria maior, de qua septem duces cum populis suis egressi fuerant, ut habitandi quaererent sibi locum, eo quod terra ipsorum multitudinem inhabitantium sustinere non posset. 2 Qui cum multa regna pertransissent et destruxissent, tandem venerunt in terram, que nunc Ungaria dicitur, tunc vero dicebatur Pascua Romanorum. 3 Quam ad inhabitandum pre terris ceteris elegerunt subiectis sibi populis, qui tunc habitabant ibidem. 4 Ubi tandem per sanctum Stephanum primum ipsorum regem ad fidem catholicam sunt reversi, prioribus Ungaris, a quibus isti descenderant, in infidelitate permanentibus, sicut et hodie sunt pagani.

5 Therefore, the Dominicans – having found these things in the Deeds of the Hungarians and feeling pity for the [original] Hungarians from whom they knew they descend, and that still were remaining in the error unbelief – sent four of the brothers to seek them, so that they could find them with God’s help, wherever they might be. 6 For they were aware from writings of the ancients that the pagan Hungarians would be in the East; but where, precisely, they would be, the Dominicans had no idea.

5 Fratres igitur predicatores, his in gestis Ungarorum inventis, compassi Ungaris, a quibus se descendisse noverunt, quod adhuc in errore infidelitatis manerent, miserunt quatuor de fratribus ad illos quaerendum, ubicumque eos possent iuvante Domino invenire. 6 Sciebant enim per scripta antiquorum, quod ad orientem essent; ubi essent, penitus ignorabant.

7 The aforementioned brothers who were sent, exposing themselves to many troubles, sought the pagan Hungarians by land and sea for more than three years; 8 yet because of the many dangers along the way, they could not find them, except one priest, named Otto, who could only proceed in the guise of a merchant. 9 He found in a certain kingdom of the pagans some people of that tongue [Hungarian] from whom it was precisely determined where they live. However, he did not go to their territory. 10 Indeed, he went back to Hungary to get more brothers, who could return with him to preach the Catholic faith to them. 11 But, having been broken by his many labors, he migrated to Christ on the eighth day from his return, after he had told the routes to find them [the pagan Hungarians].

7 Predicti vero fratres, qui missi fuerant, multis se exponentes laboribus per mare per terras eos usque post annum tercium quesiverunt; 8 nec tamen propter multa viarum pericula poterant inuenire, uno ipsorum excepto sacerdote, nomine Otto, qui tantum sub mercatoris nominee processit. 9 Qui in quodam regno paganorum quosdam de lingua illa invenit per quos certus efficiebatur, ad quas partes manerent; set illorum provintiam non intravit. 10 Immo in Ungariam est reversus pro fratribus pluribus assumendis, qui cum ipso redeuntes fidem illis catholicam predicarent. 11 Set multis fractus laboribus post octavum reditus sui diem, cum omnem viam illos querendi exposuisset, migravit ad Christum.

2, 1 The Dominicans, desiring the conversion of infidels, sent four brothers a second time to find the aforementioned people. 2 Having accepted the blessing of their brothers, exchanged their habit for secular clothing, and grown their beard and hair in the style of pagans, they journeyed through Bulgaria of the Asens and through Romania to Constantinople under the escort of, and paid for by, Lord Béla – who now is king of Hungary.[13]

2, 1 Fratres vero predicatores infidelium conversionem desiderantes, quatuor fratres ad querendam gentem predictam iterato miserunt. 2 Qui accepta fratrum suorum benedictione, habitu regulari in secularem mutato, barbis et capillis ad modum paganorum nutritis, per Bulgariam Assani et per Romaniam cum ducatu et expensis domini Bele nunc Regis Ungarie usque Constantinopolim pervenerunt.

3 Going forth from there by sea for thirty-three days, they came to a land which is called Sychia, and to a city which is called Matrica,[14] whose ruler and people call themselves Christians, having Greek letters [writing] and priests. 4 The ruler is said to have a hundred wives. 5 All the men completely shave their head but grow their beards luxuriously, except for the nobles who leave a little hair above their left ear as a sign of their nobility, but the rest of the head is completely shaved. 6 There, out of the hope for company [on the road], which they kept expecting, the brothers delayed for fifty days. 7 But God gave them mercy in the form of the lady-ruler, who was preeminent over the hundred wives, so that she showed them favor marvellously, and kept providing for them everything they needed.

3 Ibi intrantes in mare per triginta et tres dies venerunt in terram, quae vocatur Sychia in civitate que Matrica nuncupatur, quorum dux et populi se christianos dicunt, habentes literas et sacerdotes Graecos. 4 Princeps centum dicitur habere uxores. 5 Omnes viri caput omnino radunt et barbas nutrient delicate, nobilibus exceptis, qui in signum nobilitatis super auriculam sinistram paucos relinquunt capillos, cetera parte capitis tota rasa. 6 Ubi propter societatis spem, quam expectabant, quinquaginta diebus moram fecerunt. 7 Deus autem dedit ipsis graciam in conspectus domine, quae super centum uxores regis maior erat, ita ut mirabile eos amplexaretur affectu, in omnibus eis necessariis providebat.

8 Progressing hence by the wisdom and help of the said woman ruler, the brothers passed through a desert, where they found neither houses nor people, for thirteen days. 9 There they came to a land called Alania,[15] where Christians and pagans live mixed together. 10 There are as many chieftains as villages, of whom none has respect to submit to another. 11 There is perpetual war there, chieftain against chieftain, and village against village. 12 At the time of ploughing all the men of one village come together to the field armed; they all harvest likewise. 13 In this way, they cultivate the entire border area of the land, and if they have anything outside of the villages to do, whether to acquire wood or do other work, they all go together and armed. 14 Nor are they able to leave their villages in small groups for any reason without danger to their persons, except only Sunday from early morning to evening. 15 It is held in in such reverence among them, that anyone, however great the evil he did or how many enemies he had, can be secure either unarmed or armed, even among those whose parents he killed or to those he did some other evil.

8 Inde progressi consilio et adiutorio predicte domini per desertum, ubi nec domos nec homines invenerunt, diebus tredecim transiverunt.  9 Ibique venerunt in terram que Alania dicitur, ubi Christiani et pagani mixtim manent.  10 Quot sunt ville, tot sunt duces, quorum nullus ad alium habet subiectionis respectum. 11 Ibi continua est guerra ducis contra ducem, ville contra villam.  12 Tempore arandi omnes unius ville homines armati simul ad campum vadunt, simul omnes metunt.  13 Et contiguo terre spatio hec exercent, et quicquid extra villas sive in lignis acquirendis sive in aliis operis habent, vadunt omnes pariter et armati.  14 Nec possunt ullo modo pauci per totam septimanam de villis suis quacumque de causa egredi absque periculo personarum, excepta sola die dominica a mane usque ad vesperam, 15 que in tanta devotione aput illos habetur, quod tunc quilibet, quantumcumque mali fecerit vel quotcumque habeat adversarios, secures potest sive nudus sive armatus, etiam inter illos quorum parentes occidit vel quibus alia mala intulit, ambulare.

16 Those who call themselves Christians there observe this – that they do not drink or eat from that vessel which a dead mouse touches or from which a dog eats, unless it is first blessed by their priest; 17 and whoever does otherwise is expelled from the Christian community. 18 Also, if one of them for any reason kills a man, he receives neither punishment nor praise. 19 Indeed, homicide is considered as nothing among them. 20 They hold the cross in such reverence that poor people, whether native or foreign, who are unable to have a large escort with them, can move about securely all the time if they place a cross of any kind onto a spear like a standard and carry it, raised high – just as securely among Christians as among pagans.[16]

16 Illi qui Christiano ibi censentur nomine, hoc observant, quod de vase illo nec bibunt nec comedunt, in quo murem mori contingit vel de quo canis comedit, nisi prius a suo presbytero fuerit benedictum; 17 et qui aliter facit, a christianitate efficitur alienus. 18 Et si quis eorum quocumque casu hominem occidit, pro eo nec penitentiam nec benedictionem accipit; 19 immo aput eos homicidium pro nichilo reputatur. 20 Crucem in tanta habent reverentia, quod pauperes sive indigene sive advene, qui multitudinem secum habere non possunt, si crucem qualemcumque super hastam cum vexillo posuerint et elevatam portaverint, tam inter Christianos quam inter paganos omni tempore secure incedunt.

21 The brothers were unable to find [travelling] company to proceed from that place because of fear of the Tartars, who were said to be nearby.[17] 22 Because of that, two of them turned back, while the remaining two stayed stubbornly in that land. They abided for six months in the greatest deprivation in which they had neither bread nor anything besides water to drink. 23 But one brother, a priest, made spoons and some other things, for which they sometimes received a little millet with which they could barely sustain themselves except by being extremely sparing. 24 Therefore, they decided to sell two of themselves, from the earnings of which the others could complete the undertaken journey. 25 But they did not find buyers because they did not know how to plough or mill. 26 Thus, forced by necessity, two of them left those parts and headed back to Hungary, but the others remained in the same place, not wanting to give up on the journey they had begun.

21 De loco illo fratres societatem habere non poterant procedendi propter timorem Tartarorum, qui dicebantur esse vicini. 22 Propter quod duobus ex ipsis revertentibus, reliquis duobus perseverantibus in eadem terra, in penuria maxima sex mensibus sunt morati, infra quos nec panem nec potum preter aquam habebant. 23 Set unus frater sacerdos coclearia et quedam alia preparavit, pro quibus aliquando parum de milio receperunt, de quo non, nisi tenuerit nimis, poterant sustentari. 24 Unde decreverunt duos ex se vendere, quorum pretio alii ceptum iter perficerent; 25 set non invenerunt emptores, quia arare vel molere nesciverunt. 26 Unde necessitate coacti duo ex eis de illis partibus versus Ungariam redierunt, alii vero remanserunt ibidem, nolentes desistere ab itinere inchoato.

3, 1 Finally, having found the company of some pagans, they set forth on their journal through a desert waste for thirty-seven days continuously. 2 Between them, they had twenty-two loaves of bread baked in ash, so small that in five days they could have eaten them and still not have been completely sated.[18] 3 From there the brother who was healthy in fact but without strength, with the greatest of exertion and hardship nevertheless led [the other one] with vigor out of the desert. 4 But the sick brother, pitying the healthy one more than himself, kept saying repeatedly that he should abandon him in the desert as a dead and useless trunk, lest because of caring for him, the healthy one should neglect the work of God. 5 The healthy one in no way consented to this but took care of his fellow traveller until his death. 6 The pagans, their travelling companions, believing they had money, nearly killed them searching for it.

3, 1 Tandem ipsi habita quorundam paganorum societate, iter arripientes per deserti solitudinem triginta septem diebus continuo iverunt; 2 infra quos viginti duobus panibus subcinericiis usi sunt adeo parvis, quod in quinque diebus potuissent et non ad satietatem totaliter comedisse. 3 Unde frater qui sanus quidem set sine viribus fuit, cum maximo labore et dolore, libenter tamen de deserto eduxit. 4 Infirmus autem frater plus sano quam sibi compatiens illi frequenter dicebat, quod ipsum in deserto relinqueret tamquam mortuum et truncum inutilem, ne propter occupationem ipsius negligeret opus Dei. 5 Qui nequaquam consensit, set usque ad mortem ipsius secum in itinere laboravit. 6 Pagani, comites vie ipsorum, credentes ipsos habere pecuniam, fere eos occiderant perquirendo.

7 Having crossed the desert without any roads or pathways for thirty-seven days, they came to a land of the Saracens which is called Veda, and to the city of Bundaz.[19] 8 There, they could by no means receive lodging from anyone, but rather had to stay in the open field in rain and cold. 9 But for days the brother who was healthy begged for alms in the city for himself and the sick brother. 10 Thus, he could find drink as well as other necessaries, particularly from the ruler of the city who, hearing that he was a Christian, gave him alms more freely. 11 This is because the prince, as well as his people of that land, openly declare that soon they must become Christian and submit to the Roman Church. 12 From there they proceeded to another city where the aforementioned sick brother, a priest by the name of Gerard, slept in the Lord [died] in the house of a Saracen who took them in because of God – and he was buried there.

7 Transito autem deserto sine omni via et semita tricesimo septimo die venerunt in terram Sarracenorum que vocatur Veda in civitatem Bundaz. 8 Ubi nullo modo apud aliquem poterant hospitium obtinere, sed in campo manere oportuit in pluvia et firigore. 9 Diebus vero frater qui sanus fuit sibi et infirmo fratri helemosynam per civitatem querebat; 10 et tam in potu quam in aliis potuit invenire, precipue a principe civitatis; 11 qui eum christianum esse intelligens libenter ei helemosynas porrigebat, quia tam princeps quam populus illius regionis publice dicunt, quod cito fieri debebant christiane et ecclesie Romane subesse. 12 Inde ad aliam civitatem processerunt, ubi predictus frater infirmus, Gerardus nominee sacerdos, in domo Sarraceni, qui eos propter Deum recepit, in Domino obdormivit et est sepultus ibidem.

13 Afterwards, Brother Julian who alone remained, uncertain of how he could proceed, became the slave of a Saracen priest and his wife. The priest was about to go to Great Bulgaria and they arrived there together. 14 Indeed, Great Bulgaria is a large and powerful kingdom, possessing wealthy cities, but they are all pagans. 15 In that kingdom it is rumored publicly that they soon must become Christian and submit to the Roman Church; 16 but they assert to not know the day. For that’s what they heard from their sages.[20]

13 Postmodum frater Iulianus qui solus remanserat, nesciens qualiter posset habere processum, factus est serviens unius Sarraceni sacerdotis et uxoris ipsius, qui fuit in magnam Bulgariam profecturus, quo et pariter pervenerunt. 14 Est vero magna Bulgaria regnum magnam et potens opulentas habens civitates; set omnes sunt pagani. 15 In regno illo publicus est sermo, quod cito debeant fieri christiani et Romane ecclesie subiugari; 16 set diem asserunt se nescire; sic enim a suis sapientibus audiverunt.

17 In a large city of their territory from which it is said that 50,000 warriors go forth,[21] the brother encountered a Hungarian woman that had been sent from the country, which he was seeking, to those parts [Great Bulgaria] for marriage. 18 She told the brother the roads by which he should go, assuring him that in two days he could find, without doubt, the Hungarians he was seeking. And that is what happened.

17 In una magna eiusdem provincie civitate de qua dicuntur egredi quinquaginta milia pugnatorum, frater unam Ungaricam mulierem invenit, que de terra, quam querebat, ad partes illas tradita fuit viro. 18 Illa docuit fratrem vias, per quas esset iturus, asserens quod ad duas dietas ipsos posset Ungaros quos querebat procul dubio invenire; quod et factum est.

4, 1 For he found them near the great river, Ethyl.[22] 2 Having seen him and discovered that he was a Christian Hungarian, they rejoiced not a little at his arrival, leading him around through their houses and villages, and inquiring most sincerely about the king and kingdom of the Christian Hungarians, their brothers. 3 Whatever he wanted to make known to them about the faith and other things, they listened most diligently because they have a completely Hungarian language; and they understood him and he them.

4, 1 Invenit enim eos iuxta flumen magnum Ethyl. 2 Qui eo viso et quod esset Ungarus christianus intellecto, in adventu ipsius non modicum sunt gavisi circumducentes eum per domos et villas et de rege et regno Ungarorum christianorum fratrum ipsorum fideliter perquirentes; 3 et quecumque volebat tam de fide quam de aliis eis proponere, diligentissime audiebant, quia omnino habent Ungaricum ydioma; et intelligebant eum et ipse eos.

4 They are pagans, having no knowledge of God, but neither do they worship idols. Rather they live as beasts. 5 They do not cultivate the fields, and eat the flesh of horses, wolves, and that sort of thing. They drink the milk and blood of horses. 6 They abound in horses and weapons and are most vigorous in war. 7 Indeed, they know from stories of the ancients that those [Christian, Carpathian-dwelling] Hungarians descend from them; but the pagan Hungarians did not know where they are.[23]

4 Pagani sunt, nullam Dei habentes notitiam, set nec ydola venerantur, set sicut bestie vivunt: 5 Terras non colunt, carnes equinas lupinas et huius modi comedunt; lac equinum et sanguinem bibunt. 6 In equis et armis habundant et strenuissimi sunt in bellis. 7 Sciunt enim per relationes antiquorum, quod isti Ungari ab ipsis descenderant; set ubi essent ignorabant.

8 The nation of the Tartars is their neighbor, but the same Tartars, engaging with them, could not defeat them in war. What is more, in the first battle the Tartars were defeated by them. 9 Thus [the Tartars] have chosen them as friends and allies so that in cooperation they have destroyed fifteen kingdoms entirely.[24] 10 In that land of the Hungarians, the said brother came across Tartars and the emissary of the ruler of the Tartars who understood Hungarian, Rus’, Cuman, German, Saracenic, and Tartar. 11 He said that the army of the Tartars, which at that time was only five days away, intended to march against Germany – 12 but they were waiting for another army which they [previously] had sent to destroy the Persians.[25] 13 He also said this: that beyond the land of the Tartars there is an exceedingly numerous people,[26] taller and larger than all men, with such large heads that they do not seem to suit their bodies. 14 And this same people proposed to leave their land to fight against all who will resist them and to devastate every kingdom which they prove able to subjugate.[27]

8 Gens Tartarorum vicina est illis, set hiidem Thartari committentes cum eis, non poterunt eos in bello devincere; immo in primo prelio devicti sunt per eos. 9 Unde ipsos sibi amicos et socios elegerunt, ita quod simul iuncti quindecim regna vastaverunt omnino. 10 In hac Ungarorum terra, dictus frater invenit Thartaros et nuntium ducis Thartarorum, qui sciebat Ungaricum Ruthenicum Cumanicum Theotonicum Sarracenicum et Thartaricum. 11 Qui dixit, quod exercitus Thatarorum, qui tunc ibidem ad quinque dietas vicinus erat, contra Alemaniam vellet ire; 12 set alium exercitum, quem ad destructionem Persarum miserant, expectabant. 13 Dixit etiam idem, quod ultra terram Thartarorum esset gens multa nimis omnibus hominibus altior et maior, cum capitibus adeo magnis, quod nullo modo videntur suis corporibus convenire, 14 et quod eadem gens de terra sua exire proponit, pugnaturi cum omnibus, qui eis resistere voluerint, et vastaturi omnia regna quecumque poterunt subiugare.

5, 1 Having understood all these things, the brother, though he was being invited by the Hungarians, decided not to remain for two reasons: 2 first, because if the pagan kingdoms and the country of the Rus’, which are between the Christian Hungarians and those ones, heard that the latter were invited into the Catholic faith, they would worry and perhaps henceforth guard all the roads, fearing that if those [pagan Hungarians] joined them [the Carpathian Hungarians] in Christianity, they would subjugate all the kingdoms in between them.[28] 3 The other reason was because he was thinking that if he were struck by an early death or sickness, his work would be thwarted because then neither had he made progress in his tasks, nor could his Hungarian brothers know where that people is located. 4 Therefore, when he was intending to go back, those same Hungarians taught him of another road by which he could more quickly return. 5 The brother began to go back three days before the feast of the Birth of John the Baptist.[29] Resting for a few days on the way, and travelling by water as by land, he entered the Hungarian Gates two days after Christmas; 6 and still he came by horse through Russia[30] and Poland.[31]

5, 1 Frater hiis omnibus intellectis, licet ab Ungaris invitaretur, ut maneret non decrevit duplici ratione: 2 una, quia si regna paganorum et terra Ruthenorum, que sunt media inter Ungaros christianos et illos, audirent, quod illi ad fidem catholicam invitarentur, dolerent et vias omnes forsitan de cetero observarent timentes, quod si illos istis contingeret Christianitate coniungi, omnia regna intermedia subiugarent; 3 alia ratione, quoniam cogitabat, quod si eum in brevi mori aut infirmari contingeret, frustratus esset labor suus, eo quod nec ipse profecisset in illis, nec fratres Ungarie ubi esset gens eadem scire possent. 4 Cum igitur vellet reverti, docuerunt eum hiidem Ungari viam aliam, per quam posset citius pervenire. 5 Incepit autem frater redire tribus diebus ante festum nativitatis beati Iohannis Baptiste, et paucis diebus in via quiescens, tam per aquas quam per terras, secundo die post nativitatem Domini Ungarie portas intravit; 6 et tamen per Ruciam et per Poloniam eques venit.

7 In returning from the aforesaid Hungary, he passed on a river for fifteen days through the kingdom of the Mordvins. They are pagans and extremely cruel men because that man who has not killed many people is considered as nothing. 8 When someone travels along the road, the heads of all the men he killed are openly displayed before him, 9 and the more heads carried before one, the better one is considered. 10 Indeed, they make drinking cups from the skulls of men, and enthusiastically drink from them. 11 Nobody is permitted to take a wife who has not killed a man. 12 Hearing from their prophets that they must become Christian, they sent to the duke of Great Vladimir, which is a land of the Rus’ neighboring them, that he should send them a priest who could baptize them. 13 He responded, “This is not for me to do, but rather the Roman pope. For the time is near that we all must take on the faith of the Roman Church and submit to it obediently.”[32]

7 In redeundo de predicta Ungaria transivit in fluvio regnum Morduanorum quindecem diebus, qui sunt pagani et adeo homines crudeles, quia pro nichilo reputatur homo ille, qui multos homines non occidit; 8 et cum aliquis in via procedit, omnium hominum capita quos occidit coram ipso portantur, 9 et quanto plura coram uno quoque portantur capita, tanto melior reputatur; 10 de capitibus vero hominum skyphos faciunt et libentius inde bibunt. 11 Uxorem ducere non permittitur, qui hominem non occidit. 12 Isti a prophetis suis accipientes quod esse debeant christiane, miserunt ad ducem magne Laudamerie que est terra Ruthenorum illis vicina, quod eis mitteret sacerdotem, qui ipsis baptismum conferret. 13 Qui respondit: “Non meum hoc est facere, sed pape romani: prope enim est tempus quod omnes fidem ecclesie romane debemus suscipere et eius obedientie subiugari”.

Footnotes
[1]

This was probably just a title added by a later scribe to one of the manuscripts rather the title of the original letter. See the forthcoming Central European Medieval Text volume (CEU Press, forthcoming in 2024).

[2]

Heinrich Dörrie (ed.), Drei Texte zur Geschichte der Ungarn und Mongolen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1956), 137-139. Dörrie, whose editions of both texts were used for this website’s English translations, dated the second journey (Friar Julian’s initial expedition) to 1234-35. However, other experts who have looked at the topic have argued that it took place in 1235-36. For that viewpoint, see: László Bendefy, Az ismeretlen Juliánusz: A legelső magyar ázsiakutató életrajza és kritikai méltatása (Budapest: Stephaneum, 1936), 65-72; Mary Dienes, “Eastern Missions of the Hungarian Dominicans in the First Half of the Thirteenth Century,” Isis 27:2 (1937): 227.

[3]

Heinrich Dörrie (ed.), Drei Texte zur Geschichte der Ungarn und Mongolen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1956). On the dating of the Friar Riccardus manuscript copy to 1254-79, see: László Bendefy, Magna Hungaria és a Liber Censuum (Budapest: 1943), 66.

[4]

Hansgerd Göckenjan and James R. Sweeney, Der Mongolensturm: Berichte von Augenzeugen und Zeitgenossen 1235-1250 (Graz: Verlag Styria, 1985).

[5]

Roman Hautala, От Давида, царя Индий до ненавистного плебса Сатаны. Антология ранних латинских сведений о татаро-монголах [From David, King of the Indies to Detestable Plebs of Satan: An Anthology of Early Latin Information about the Tatar-Mongols] (Kazan: Sh. Marjani Institute of History of Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, 2015), 356-375.

[6]

Kornél Szovák and László Veszprémy (ed.). “Relatio fratris Ricardi (De facto Ungarie Magne a fratre Ricardo invento tempore Domini Gregori Pape noni)” in Imré Szentpétery (ed.), Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum requmque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum, 2 vols. (Budapest, 1937–1938). Reprint. Budapest 1999, 531-542.

[7]

Denis Sinor, “Le rapport du Dominicain Julien écrit en 1238 sur le péril mongol," Comptes rendus desséances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 146:2 (2002): 1161.

[8]

Gergely Varga et al. “The archaeogenomic validation of Saint Ladislaus' relic provides insights into the Árpád dynasty's genealogy,” Journal of Genetics and Genomics 50:1 (2023):58-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.jgg.2022.06.008

[9]

Denis Sinor, “Un voyageur du treizième siècle,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 14 (1952): 589–602.

[10]

For an excellent argument for the traditional view of four voyages, and a detailed rebuttal of Denis Sinor’s theory, see: Aron Rimanyi, “Closing the Steppe Highway: A new perspective on the travels of Friar Julian of Hungary,” Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU, vol. 24 (Budapest, Central European University, 2018), 101-112.

[11]

MGHS XXIII, 942.

[12]

This could be the Deeds of Hungarians or some other earlier, no longer extant document. The Deeds of the Hungarians (c. 1200) almost certainly predates the Dominican missions to Magna Hungaria which started in or close to 1230. Moreover, it refers to a late ninth-century migration of the Magyars from their ancestral homeland, “the Scythian land” east of the Volga River to the Carpathian Basin. See: János Bak, Martyn Rady, and László Veszprémy, Anonymus and Master Roger: The Deeds of the Hungarians & Epistle to the Sorrowful Lament upon the Destruction of the Kingdom of Hungary by the Tatars (Budapest: CEU Press, 2010), 20-21.

[13]

The meaning of this statement, “Lord Béla – now the king of Hungary,” is that Béla was not yet king when he provided the Dominican friars their military escort through the Balkans – the Second Bulgarian Empire and the Latin Empire of Constantinople. This means that these events certainly took place before Béla succeeded his father, Andrew II, who died on 21 of September 1235. This statement also proves that the report of Friar Riccardus was certainly completed after Béla had succeeded his father and been crowned in October 1235. Viewing 1236 as the likely year for the report’s composition makes the most sense.

[14]

The city is Tmutarakan (Tamatarcha) on the Taman Peninsula in modern Krasnodar Krai, Russia. Regarding Sychia, it likely refers to “Zichia,” meaning the surrounding land of the Circassians. The city of Tamatarcha is mentioned by the Byzantine emperor, Constantine VII (r. 913-959). See: Gyula Moravcsik and R.J.H. Jenkins, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Adminstrando Imperio (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1967), 187, 285. The twelfth-century traveller, Rabbi Petachia of Regensburg, also refers to it. See: A. Benisch, Travels of Rabbi Petachia of Ratisbon (London: Trubner & Co., 1856), 6-7. The Primary Chronicle mentions a Rus’ prince receiving tribute from the Greek populace there in 1066. See: Samuel Hazzard Cross and Olgerd P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor, The Russian Primary Chronicle: Laurentian Text (Cambridge: Medieval Academy of America, 1953), 145.

[15]

The Alans were called Asut by the Mongols – related to the present-day term Ossetian. Carpini mentioned that some Alans were resisting the Mongols still in the mid-1240s. See: Dawson, The Mongol Mission, 42. Their warlike character described here by Julian was well known and reflected in the fact that many Alans rose to great military roles through the 1200s. Later they were documented as being present in Yuan Dynasty armies in China. Julian’s description of the Alans living just beyond Zichia supports John Latham-Sprinkle’s identification of the Alan capital, Magas being in that area. For Latham-Sprinkle’s argument that Magas must have been the hillfort site of Il’ichevsk, see: John Latham-Sprinkle (2022). “The Alan capital *Magas: A preliminary identification of its location,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 85(1), 1-20. doi:10.1017/S0041977X22000453

[16]

This passage might explain why the Mongols in the 1220s were widely said by Georgian Queen Rusudan and many others to advance with crosses as standards in front of their army. It may have lowered the guard of local Christian peoples like the Alans and Georgians, giving the Mongols a strategic advantage. While such depictions of “the army of King David” are often dismissed as wishful thinking by Christian authors, they might represent a very cynical “psy-op” used by the Mongols as they pushed into Western Asia.

[17]

The very first mention of “Tartars” in two letters connected with Friar Julian comes across as understated, but it shows how the whole region that would come under Mongol attacks and conquests was profoundly threatened by them in 1235. That year, Subutai already may have been active in the Volga region according to a comment in the biography of the Mongol general. See: Pow and Liao, “Subutai,” 62.

[18]

Miserable rations seemed to be a feature of travel across the larger regions of Inner Asia. See Carpini and Rubruck’s accounts of hunger during their journeys with Mongols as ambassadors in: Dawson, The Mongol Mission, 66, 133.

[19]

The similarity of the names to the Vidini and Budini of Herodotus is likely coincidentally. Veda is probably Vyada. The city of Bundaz is very possibly the Bedezh referenced in Rus chronicles to 1346. See: Donald Ostrowski, “City Names of the Western Steppe at the Time of the Mongol Invasion,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 61 (1998), 465-475., 474. For primary source references to Bedezh, see PSRL, 4: 57; 7: 210; 10: 217; 15.1: 57; 18: 95; 25: 175; 28: 71, 232; 39: 109. The reference reads: “of severe epidemics in the eastern land: in Ornachi, Astrakhan', Sarai, and Bezdezh, and in other cities in those lands...” Based on that description and its mention of other known locations, it seems that Bundaz/Bedezh would have been on or very close to the Volga.

[20]

Rather than this claim being mere wishful thinking by Dominican missionaries, it was probably the case that various peoples like Cumans, Rus’, Magna Hungarians, and even Volga Bulgarians were flirting with the promise of conversion in the hope of receiving Latin Europe’s military support by the mid-1230s out of pure desperation.

[21]

Julian’s 1238 epistle repeats this figure which suggests it is possibly reliable or something he personally observed.

[22]

The Volga River. Turkic and Mongol populations generally called it some form of Ethyl.

[23]

It is fascinating to consider that just as Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin remembered this separation centuries after the fact, it appears those in the original homeland still preserved some lore about it.

[24]

This divide-and-conquer strategem was often used by the Mongols. A very clear example of it appears in Friar Julian’s 1238 epistle where the Mongol khan tells the Hungarians not to harbour Cuman refugees because they were his “slaves.”

[25]

The claim of a planned attack on Germany is surprising, but Alberic of Trois-Fontaine records a khan’s ultimatum to Emperor Frederick II (1194-1250) demanding his submission in 1237. See: MGHS XXIII, 943. The captive churchman, Rogerius, had likewise heard as a captive that the Mongols were going to invade Germany in early 1242. Bak and Rady, Master Roger’s Epistle, 218. The relevant sections read “fuerunt subito revocati” and “Auditis itaque rumoribus, quod Tartari aspernabantur Theutoniam expugnare…” The Persian reinforcements could refer to troops being sent after the final defeat of Jalal al-Din in 1233.

[26]

The emissary was employing intimidation tactics – he might have been referring to Jin China which fell in 1234. The Mongols seriously discussed sending Chinese levies en masse to fight in the west invasion but Yelu Chucai advised against it. See: Yuan Shi (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1976), 3460.

[27]

A “world conquest ideology” is already being described by Julian, considerably before Carpini’s report confirmed its existence (and since the letter from Güyük Khan that describes this ideology in detail still exists in its original form in the Vatican, with imperial seals, it is hard to deny such an ideology existed at latest by the mid-1240s.

[28]

The Kingdom of Hungary was engaged in aggressive expansionism for several decades before Mongol invasion.

[29]

This feast is on June 24, so Julian would have begun his return from Magna Hungaria on June 21. He arrived on the borders of Hungary on December 23. The return journey took six months even along the shortcut which he was shown by the local people.

[30]

“Ruscia” refers to the geo-political space of Kievan Rus’. For a discussion of the terminology, see the introductory essay to Friar Julian. “Letter on the Life of Tartars” on this website.

[31]

It is possible that Julian took a road from Kiev or Brest to Lublin in Lesser Poland (Małopolska) and he would have then turned southward via the trade route via Košice to Hungary. Besides geographical justifications, this route may have been more viable than travelling via a direct route vulnerable to depredations in the steppes and mountains.

[32]

The last few paragraphs of Riccardus’ epistle testify to several peoples expressing a willingness to convert to Christianity. The Magna Hungarians are happy and rejoice that Julian is a Christian, etc. This can often be seen as a pious fiction to modern observers – reflecting Dominican wishful thinking to foment support for future missionary activity. It seems much more believable if we consider the fear and duress these peoples were under from the Mongol threat and what did happen with Kuten and his Cumans who arrived in Hungary and converted en masse. Likewise, consider the arrival of pagan Permians in Norway. See: Stephen Pow, “The Mongol Empire’s Northern Border: Re-evaluating the Surface Area of the Mongol Empire,” in Genius loci – Laszlovszky 60, eds. Dóra Mérai et al. (Budapest: Archaeolingua, 2018), 10-11. There were many other surprising acts of conversion by Cumans that commenced rapidly in the 1230s (see the forthcoming CEMT volume in 2024). Danil of Galicia-Volhynia indicated to Carpini his willingness to convert after his own territory fell under Mongol control. See: Dawson, The Mongol Mission, 51. Conversion was typically seen as a prerequisite to receiving military aid.

References
  1. Allsen, Thomas T. “Prelude to the Western Campaigns: Mongol Military Operations in the Volga– Ural Region, 1217–1237.” Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 3 (1983): 5–24.
  2. Baird, Joseph L., Giuseppe Baglivi, and John Robert Kane (trans.). The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam. Binghampton: Medieval & Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1986.
  3. Bak, János, Martyn Rady, and László Veszprémy. Anonymus and Master Roger: The Deeds of the Hungarians & Epistle to the Sorrowful Lament upon the Destruction of the Kingdom of Hungary by the Tatars. Budapest: CEU Press, 2010.
  4. Bak, János and László Veszprémy. The Illuminated Chronicle: Chronicle of the Deeds of the Hungarians from the Fourteenth Century Illuminated Codex. Budapest: CEU Press, 2018.
  5. Bedrosian, Robert. Kirakos Gandzakets’i. History of the Armenians. New York: Sources of the Armenian Tradition, 1986.
  6. Bendefy, László. Az ismeretlen Juliánusz: A legelső magyar ázsiakutató életrajza és kritikai méltatása. Budapest: Stephaneum, 1936.
  7. Bendefy, László. “Fr. Julianus utazásának kéziratos kútfői = Fontes authentici itinera Fr. Iuliani illustrantes.” Archivum Europae Centro-Orientalis 3, pp. 1-52. Budapest: Főbizományos Stemmer Ödön Könyvkereskedés és Antiquarium, 1937.
  8. Bendefy, László. Kéziratos kútfők Fr. Julianus utazásáról: Richardus beszámolója és Julianus levelei. Budapest, Szalay nyomda (A magyar őstörténet kútfői II), 1943.
  9. Bendefy, László. Magna Hungaria és a Liber Censuum. Budapest: Szalay Sándor, 1943.
  10. Benisch, A. Travels of Rabbi Petachia of Ratisbon. London: Trubner & Co., 1856.
  11. Boyle, J.A. Genghis Khan: The History of the World Conqueror by ‘Ala-ad-din ‘Ata-Malik Juvaini. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1958.
  12. Boyle, J.A. The Successors of Genghis Khan. New York: Columbia University Press, 1971.
  13. Cross, Samuel Hazzard and Olgerd P. Sherbowitz-Wetzor. The Russian Primary Chronicle: Laurentian Text. Cambridge: Medieval Academy of America, 1953.
  14. Dawson, Christopher (ed.). The Mongol Mission: Narratives and Letters of the Franciscan Missionaries in Mongolia and China in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1955.
  15. Diens, Mary. “Eastern Missions of the Hungarian Dominicans in the First Half of the Thirteenth Century.” Isis 27 (1937): 225-241.
  16. Dörrie, Heinrich (ed.). Drei Texte zur Geschichte der Ungarn und Mongolen: Die Missionsreisen des fr. Julianus O.P. ins Uralgebiet (1234/5) und nach Russland (1237): und der Bericht des Erzbischofs Peter über die Tartaren. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1956.
  17. Georgi, Johann Gottlieb. Russia: Or, A Compleat Historical Account of All the Nations which compose that empire. Vol. 1. London, 1780.
  18. Göckenjan, Hansgerd and James Ross Sweeney. Der Mongolensturm: Berichte von Augenzeugen und Zeitgenossen, 1235–1250. Graz: Verlag Styria, 1985.
  19. Golden, Peter. An Introduction to the History of the Turkic Peoples. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1992.
  20. Györffy, György. Julianus barát és a napkelet fölfedezése. Válogatta, a bevezető tanulmányt és a jegyzeteket írta Györffy György. Fordította Györffy György és Gy. Ruitz Izabella [Friar Julian and the discovery of the East. Selection, introductory study and notes by György Györffy. Translated by György Györffy and Izabella Gy. Ruitz]. Budapest, Szépirodalmi Könyvkiadó, 1986.
  21. Hautala, Roman. От Давида, царя Индий до ненавистного плебса Сатаны. Антология ранних латинских сведений о татаро-монголах [From “David, King of the Indies” to “Detestable Plebs of Satan”: An Anthology of Early Latin Information about the Tatar-Mongols]. Kazan: Sh.Marjani Institute of History of Tatarstan Academy of Sciences, 2015.
  22. Hautala, Roman. “Early Hungarian Information on the Beginning of the Western Campaign of Batu (1235-1242).” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung. 69:2 (2016): 183–199.
  23. Hormayr, Joseph. Die goldene Chronik von Hohenschwangau. Munich: G. Franz, 1842.
  24. Jackson, Peter. The Mongols and the West. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2005.
  25. Jackson, Peter. “The Testimony of the Russian ‘Archbishop’ Peter Concerning the Mongols (1244/5): Precious Intelligence or Timely Disinformation?” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 26:1/2 (2016): 65-77.
  26. Latham-Sprinkle, John. (2022). “The Alan capital *Magas: A preliminary identification of its location.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 85(1), 1-20. doi:10.1017/S0041977X22000453
  27. Lech, Klaus (trans.). Das mongolische Weltreich, Al-'Umari's Darstellung der mongolischen Reiche. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1968.
  28. Ledyard, Gari. “Two Mongol Documents from the Koryŏ sa.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 83 (1963): 225-239.
  29. Luard, Henry Richards (ed.). Annales monastici, vol 1. London : Longman Publishing, 1864.
  30. Luard, Henry Richards (ed.). Matthaei Parisiensis, monachi Sancti Albani, Chronica majora. 7 vols. London: Longman Publishing, 1872-1883, vol. 4, 1877.
  31. Maiorov, A. V. “The Dragon Turns its Gaze to the West: The Mongol Empire’s Global Diplomacy in the Mirror of English, Russian, and Persian Chronicles.” English Historical Review. 2022. Vol. 137
  32. Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores [abbreviated as MGHS]. Pertz, G. H. et al. (ed.). Hannover: Hahn, 1826-1892.
  33. Moravcsik, Gyula and R.J.H. Jenkins. Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Adminstrando Imperio. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1967.
  34. Nagy, Balázs. Tatárjárás: Nemzet és emlékezet [Mongol Invasion: Nation and Memory]. Budapest: Osiris, 2003.
  35. Nègre, Arlette (trans.), Kitāb duwal al-Islām (Les dynasties de l'Islam). Damascus: Institut Français de Damas, 1979.
  36. Olbricht, Peter and Elisabeth Pinks. Meng-ta pei-lu und Hei-ta shih-lüeh: Chinesische Gesandtenberichte über die Frühen Mongolen 1221 und 1237. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1980.
  37. Ostrowski, Donald. “City Names of the Western Steppe at the Time of the Mongol Invasion,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 61:3 (1998): 465-475.
  38. Painter, George (trans.). “The Tartar Relation.” In: The Vinland Map and the Tartar Relation. R.A. Skelton et al. (eds.). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.
  39. Perfecky, George A. (trans.). “Galician-Volynian Chronicle,” in The Hypatian Codex, Part II: The Galician-Volynian Chronicle, Harvard Series in Ukrainian Studies 16:2. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1973.
  40. Pow, Stephen. “A Proposal for the Identity of the Inner Asian City of Ornas (Hornach) Mentioned in Thirteenth-Century Latin Sources,” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 77 (2024): [forthcoming].
  41. Pow, Stephen. “Nationes que se Tartaros appellant: An Exploration of the Historical Problem of the Usage of the Ethnonyms Tatar and Mongol in Medieval Sources.” Golden Horde Review 7:3 (2019): 545-567.
  42. Pow, Stephen. “The Last Campaign and Death of Jebe Noyan.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 27:1 (2017): 31-51.
  43. Pow, Stephen. “The Mongol Empire’s Northern Border: Re-evaluating the Surface Area of the Mongol Empire,” in Genius loci – Laszlovszky 60, eds. Dóra Mérai et al. Budapest: Archaeolingua, 2018.
  44. Pow, Stephen and Jingjing Liao. “Subutai: Sorting Fact from Fiction Surrounding the Mongol Empire’s Greatest General (With Translations of Subutai’s Two Biographies in the Yuan Shi).” Journal of Chinese Military History 7:1 (2018): 37-76.
  45. Rady, Martyn and László Veszprémy (trans.). The Deeds of the Hungarians. Budapest: CEU Press, 2010.
  46. Richard, Jean. Simon of Saint-Quentin: Histoire des Tartares. Paris: Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1965.
  47. Richards, D.S. (trans.). The Chronicle of Ibn al-Athir for the Crusading Period from al-Kamil fi’l-ta’rikh. Part 3: The Years 589-629/1193-1231: The Ayyubids after Saladin and the Mongol Menace. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008.
  48. Rimanyi, Aron. “Closing the Steppe Highway: A new perspective on the travels of Friar Julian of Hungary.” In Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU, Vol. 24, pp. 99-112. Eds. Gerhard Jaritz, Kyra Lyublyanovics, Judith Rasson, Zsuzsa Reed. Budapest: CEU Press, 2018.
  49. Sinor, Denis. Inner Asia and Its Contacts with Medieval Europe. London: Variorum Reprints, 1977.
  50. Sinor, Denis. “Le rapport du Dominicain Julien écrit en 1238 sur le péril mongol.” Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres (Paris: Académie des inscriptions & belles-lettres) 146:4 (2002): 1153–1168.
  51. Sinor, Denis. “Un voyageur du treizième siècle,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 14 (1952): 589–602.
  52. Szovák, Kornél and László Veszprémy (eds.). “Relatio fratris Ricardi. ("De facto Ungarie Magne a fratre Ricardo invento tempore Domini Gregori Pape noni").” In Imré Szentpétery (ed.), Scriptores rerum Hungaricarum tempore ducum requmque stirpis Arpadianae gestarum. 2 vols, pp. 531-542. Budapest: 1937–1938. Reprint. Budapest 1999.
  53. Van den Wyngaert, Anastasius (ed.). Sinica Franciscana. vol. 1. Quaracchi-Florence: Collegium S. Bonaventurae, 1929.
  54. Varga, Gergely et al. “The archaeogenomic validation of Saint Ladislaus' relic provides insights into the Árpád dynasty's genealogy,” Journal of Genetics and Genomics 50:1 (2023): 58-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2022.06.008
  55. Yuan Shi. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1976.
  56. Zimonyi, István. “A mongolok nyugati hadjáratai [The western campaigns of the Mongols].” In: Zimonyi, István (ed.), Középkori nomádok – korai magyarok [Mediaeval nomads – early Hungarians], pp. 167–189. Budapest: Balassi Kiadó (Magyar Őstörténeti Könyvtár 27), 2008.
  57. Zimonyi, István. “The Mongol Campaigns against Eastern Europe.” In: Zimonyi, I. – Spinei, V. (eds): Medieval Nomads in Eastern Europe. Collected Studies, pp. 325–352. Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române–Muzeul Brăilei Editure Istros (Florilegium magistrorum historiae archaeologiaeque Antiquitatis et Medii Aevi 16), 2014.