PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page i

THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD AND ITS AFTERMATH, AUGUST 955 PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page ii

Heavy cavalry attacking mounted archers Reproduced with permission by Württembergische Landesbibliothek, Stuttgart, Germany PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page iii

The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

The End of the Age of Migrations in the Latin West

CHARLES R. BOWLUS University of Arkansas at Little Rock, USA PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page iv

First published 2006 by Ashgate Publishing

Published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Franc is Group, an informa business

Copyright © 2006 Charles R. Bowlus

Charles R. Bowlus has asserted his moral right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage orretrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Bowlus, Charles R. The Battle of Lechfeld and its aftermath, August 955: the end of the age of migrations in the Latin West 1. Lechfeld, Battle of, Germany, 955 I. Title 943'.022

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Bowlus, Charles R. The battle of Lechfeld and its aftermath, August 955 : the end of the age of migrations in the Latin west / Charles R. Bowlus. p. cm. ISBN 0-7546-5470-2 (alk. paper) 1. Lechfeld, Battle of, Germany, 955. 2. Germany--History, Military. 3. Hungary--History, Military. 4. Military history, Medieval. I. Title. DD102.5.B69 2006 943'.022--dc22 2005020532

ISBN 9780754654704 (hbk)

Typeset by Bournemouth Colour Press, Parkstone, Poole. PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page v

To Barbara Cordelia and Jazz Christopher and Carrie This page intentionally left blank PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page vii

Contents

List of figures ix Preface xi Acknowledgments xv Maps xvii 1Introduction 1 2Hungarian warfare 19 3 The reforms of Henry I in Saxony 45 4Hungarians and the Latin West 73 5 The way to the Lechfeld 97 6 The way from the Lechfeld 131 Conclusion: Hungarian Defeat – Ottonian Victory 163 Appendix I Sources concerning the battle 175 Appendix II Two battles according to Liudprand of Cremona 181 Appendix III The military reforms of Henry I 183 Bibliography 191 Index 215

vii This page intentionally left blank PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page ix

List of Figures

Frontispiece Heavy cavalry attacking mounted archers ii 1St Ulrich with the Holy Lance supporting Henry II 3 2Ottonian horsemen maneuvering 124 3St Ulrich crossing the Wertach 137

ix This page intentionally left blank PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xi

Preface

This book has had a long period of gestation. In 1968 A. R. Lewis first raised the question in my mind: why was the Latin West virtually free from the incursions of Inner Asian nomads during the High Middle Ages, an era when other ‘advanced’ Afro-Eurasian societies were struggling to keep raiders from the steppes and deserts at bay? Although this volume does not answer this broader question, it does attempt to explain why predatory nomadic societies were relatively unsuccessful on the eastern frontier of the Latin West by taking a close look at the Hungarians, who, discounting brief incursions by the Mongols, were the last interlopers from the steppes into medieval Europe. These mounted archers followed in the hoofprints of Huns and Avars to settle in about 900 in the Carpathian Basin, which, I thought at that time, should have been an ideal ecology for a confederation of warriors who had already honed their predatory skills on the steppe lands adjacent to the Black Sea. Yet the Hungarian incursions into the Latin West ended abruptly on 10 August 955. I asked myself why. At the time when I began thinking about this problem, some scholars were already challenging conventional notions concerning the impact of the Hungarians on the West. Foremost among these were Szabolcs de Vajay, Thomas von Bogyay and Gina Fasoli, who demonstrated convincingly that incursions into Europe on the part of predatory nomads were not as serious as had been believed and that their activities must be understood in the context of the military and political situation in Europe at the end of the ninth and beginning of the tenth centuries. Meanwhile Denis Sinor and, slightly later, Rudi Paul Lindner were developing the thesis that the eco- system of the Carpathian Basin was really too small to support a nomadic ‘superpower’ such as the Mongols put together on the much larger steppes of Inner Asia. Moreover, they maintained that Hungarians, like Huns and Avars before them, had to change their style of warfare almost immediately after settling on the fringes of the Latin West. At about the same time, from the European vantage point, Karl Leyser published two path-breaking articles in which he argued the heavily armed and armored warriors of the West were not really inferior to the mounted archers who seemed so formidable in the narratives of the tenth century.

xi PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xii

xii The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

By the mid-1970s at the latest I had come to the conclusion that one of the questions that Lewis had raised could be easily answered: the Latin West did not live under the permanent threat of incursions of predatory nomads during the High Middle Ages because the Carpathian Basin was an inadequate base from which to operate. Moreover, to compete successfully with western armies the Magyars had to change their style of warfare completely, and in the process their entire way of life was ineluctably transformed from one of nomadic predators to a society that practiced a mix of agriculture and husbandry. While I continued to think about questions involving the settlement of nomads on the fringes of Latin Christendom and tried to keep abreast of the scholarly literature on this topic, this theme did not develop into a major interest of mine until 1993 when I began to focus on the so-called battle of Lechfeld in 955 as a means of illustrating why I thought that Hungarian mounted archers were ill equipped to deal with the army that King Otto I had hastily cobbled together against them. The occasion was a German–American historical symposium at Notre Dame University. I was asked to comment on a paper presented by Johannes Fried, who argued that Otto was an incompetent commander. The king only managed to win this encounter because the fortunes of the battlefield (Schlachtenglück) were with him on that day. Fried asserted that Otto committed a potentially fatal error when he allowed a Magyar contingent to slip behind his marching column, to encirle it and to attack his forces from the rear. I disagreed, pointing out that some recent scholars had made the case that it was Magyar commanders (not Otto) who were incompetent in their conduct of this expedition. I cited contemporary evidence (noted by Bogyay) that the Magyar attempt to envelop the German army failed because the attackers stopped to pillage the baggage train rather than rolling up the column as their ancestors (according to the Byzantine emperor Leo VI) would have done. Furthermore I referred to Leyser’s argument that it was the Hungarians who made the fatal command decision that determined the outcome of the contest when they elected to stand their ground and fight in close quarters against Ottonian heavy cavalry rather than feigning retreat and drawing their less agile opponents into traps and ambushes. Finally I insisted that if there was luck involved in Otto’s triumph, it came in the form of heavy, late summer rains which caused massive flooding, cutting the Magyars off from the safety of the Carpathian Basin and making them vulnerable to assaults by armed men operating from numerous fortresses in their rear. Of course I also pointed out that while the heavy rains may have been a lucky coincidence, the positioning of armed men in forts guarding river crossings was not the work of the goddess Fortuna. I argued that a defense-in-depth military organization had been developed in Germany by Ottonian rulers and that this system demonstrated the basic competence of the Ottonians in dealing with steppe warriors. PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xiii

Preface xiii

Thus a thesis was born. In 1994 I told Stefan Weinfurter, who invited me to lecture on this topic at the University of Mainz, that my ideas on this subject were already so clear and developed in my mind that I could have a book ready for publication in a matter of months. He was skeptical – and rightly so. For more than a decade I have written articles, delivered papers at conferences and given guest lectures in Europe and North America but no book came forth until now. I have greatly modified some of the ideas that I expressed at the conference at Notre Dame in 1993 and completely rejected some others. Even now I am going to press with some reluctance, very much aware that the present study could still be fine-tuned and improved. I have been given very good advice by many friends and colleagues along the way. They are too numerous to mention. My family has supported me in many ways, although they are probably not aware how much that support has meant. My son Christopher and his wife Carrie understand horses and their nutritional requirements. Over the years I have tapped this well of information. Their willingness to share their knowledge with a historian has been a great help. My daughter Cordelia, whose geographic curiosity has taken her back and forth across Eurasia and North America, is always willing to discuss her truly catholic interests from history and politics to plants, animals and the human cultures that interact with them. Her knowledge, keen observations and enthusiasm continue to be an inspiration to me. Her husband, Michael Jasinski, who was an inspector and interpreter at Soviet ballistic missile sites after the end of the cold war, has given me much instruction on the behavior of matter in motion. Arrows propelled by composite bows are also ballistic missiles. Without his help the sections on archery in this book would have been impossible for me to write. Barbara, my wife, has been supportive as always. She cycled with me through Transdanubia in 1991 and a decade later we drove together across the broad steppes of Transylvania at the base of the Carpathian Mountains. Without her able assistance I could not have written this book. She is a severe but loving critic who has helped me a great deal in the production of numerous publications, including this one. I owe her much. It goes without saying that any errors in this book are mine alone.

Charles R. Bowlus Munich, December 2005 This page intentionally left blank PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xv

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the following libraries for permission to use photographs from their manuscripts: the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich from the Regensburger Sakramentar, and the Württembergische Landesbibliothek in Stuttgart from the Stuttgarter Psalter and the Wertachwunder des hl. Ulrich. In addition I am grateful for permission from the Univsiteitsbibliotheek in Leiden to display a battle scene from the Makkabäer Handschrift. Most of the research for this book was done in the Library of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica and the Staatsbibliothek in Munich. I appreciate all of the assistance that I received over the years from their very able staff. Especially I would like to thank Professor Dr Rudolf Schieffer, President of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, for allowing me access to the marvelous facilities in his institute. I owe a special debt of gratitude to my son-in-law Michael Jasinski who prepared the maps for this volume.

xv This page intentionally left blank PRELIMS THEBATTLEOFLECHFELD5/4/0610:35amPagexvii

Hungarian camp Hungarian advance Land laid waste Ottonian advance between the Iller and the Lech Map 1 The Hungarian invasion of 955 PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xviii

Map 2 The march to Augsburg PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xix

N

R. Danube

R. Morava

Kis Alföld

R. Tisza R. Raba Nyirseg Balaton Nagy Alföld Mezöföld

R. Drava R. Körös

R. Maros

R. Sava

R. Danube

Predominantly sandy soils

Concentrated Hampel Group A Graves

Scattered Hampel Group A Graves

Map 3 The Carpathian Basin PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xx

Map 4 The Hungarian invasion of 933 PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xxi

Steppe-like vegetation

Swamps

Map 5 The location of Steppenheide PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xxii

Bohemians

Hungarian retreat

Concentrated Ebersberg possessions

Major fortresses

Map 6 The flight of the Hungarians PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xxiii

Episcopal cities

Major fortresses

Map 7 Bavarian fortifications at river crossings PRELIMS THE BATTLE OF LECHFELD 5/4/06 10:35 am Page xxiv

Map 8 St Lawrence churches in Bavaria CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 1

Chapter 1 Introduction

THE TEARS OF ST LAWRENCE

On 10 August 955 planet Earth passed through the tail of the Swift–Tuttle comet and a shower of cosmic debris streamed through the atmosphere for several days thereafter. Since this celestial event had been occurring every year in mid-August for millennia, ecclesiastics, well versed in such matters, surely expected it. Because meteor showers from the Swift-Tuttle comet seem to come from the constellation Perseus, the ancients called the meteorites ‘perseids.’ Christians renamed these cosmic droplets the ‘tears of St Lawrence,’ for on 10 August AD 258 Lawrence, an archdeacon in the Roman Church, was roasted alive on the orders of the imperial prefect Valerian. Subsequently the legend developed that the saint’s tears fell from the sky every year in mid- August to remind believers of Lawrence’s passion.1 In the latter half of the tenth century 10 August became the focus for the veneration of this saint because on the anniversary of his martyrdom in 955 a series of violent skirmishes began which continued over several days. Historians generally treat these martial events as a single battle, in which an army of heavy cavalry under Otto I (the Great), the ruler of the East Frankish kingdom (now Germany), completely annihilated a putatively huge invasion force of Hungarians (also called Magyars).2 The interlopers were fierce steppe warriors (mounted archers) who, a half-century earlier, had settled on the steppes of the Carpathian Basin whence, it is asserted, they terrorized much of Europe: Germany, France, the Low Countries, Italy, and even Islamic Spain. In German-speaking countries the encounters associated with St Lawrence’s Day 955 are still regarded as a single event that took place on a broad plain (the Lechfeld) in the vicinity of the fortified episcopal city of Augsburg, then on the border of the duchies of Swabia and Bavaria. However, a careful reading of the sources makes it clear that the virtual destruction of

1 For the life and martyrdom of St Lawrence, see J. de Voragine, Golden Legend, 63–74. 2 Hungarian scholars debate among themselves concerning whether their ancestors should be designated Hungarians or Magyars in the tenth century. Cf. G. Györffy, ‘Landnahme,’ 67ff. Since this question has not been resolved, as an English-speaking historian, I feel free to use both designations for stylistic reasons.

1 CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 2

2 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

the Hungarian army occurred not on 10 August 955, but rather on the days that followed, as the tears of St Lawrence were still coursing through the atmosphere. When King Otto entered Augsburg at dusk on St Lawrence’s Day and was greeted by Bishop Ulrich, the prelate of the city, the struggle with the Hungarians was still far from over. If King Otto looked up that night to see meteorites streaking across the firmament, no extant source reports it. Perhaps he could not have seen the perseids because storm clouds, which eventually produced heavy rains and severe flooding, were probably already gathering over Augsburg. Yet Otto was certainly aware that it was St Lawrence’s Day, for he had ordered his soldiers to perform vigils in memory of the saint on the eve of the encounter; immediately following the battle, Lawrence came to occupy a special place in the Ottonian pantheon of Christian martyrs.3 Not incidentally, Bishop Ulrich, who led the defense of his see when it was under siege, was canonized before the turn of the millennium and his putative sanctity figured prominently in the iconography of Henry II, the last ruler of the Saxon line.4 When Otto passed through the gates of Augsburg to meet the bishop, he could not yet have comprehended fully the magnitude of the events that were still unfolding. On that evening he knew only that his men had just fought and won two bloody skirmishes against the Hungarians, allowing him to raise the siege of this wealthy episcopal center that straddled some of the most important communication routes in Europe. Otto, however, had restrained his forces from pursuing the vanquished foe too vigorously on to a broad steppe-like plain – the Lechfeld – sprawling along the Lech River on three sides of Augsburg. A battle on this plain or the wide-open spaces of the Bavarian plateau (beyond it to the east) would have favored the enemy since the Hungarians, like other steppe warriors, knew how to use their maneuverability to lure their adversaries into traps and ambushes. Such a disaster had in fact befallen East Frankish forces forty-five years earlier – also in the vicinity of Augsburg. An army under King Louis (the Child) fell for a notorious feigned retreat and paid a terrible price for the mistake. Late on a summer day in the year 910 an army of Franconians and Swabians, believing that they had won the day, chased Magyars on to the Lechfeld only to be ambushed when their horses tired.5 ‘The apparent victors,’ wrote Bishop Liudprand of Cremona, ‘were turned into the vanquished.’ In contrast, Otto exercised caution on St Lawrence’s Day 955. His army crossed the Lech,

3 Until then saints Vitus and Maurice had been the objects of Ottonian special veneration. See H. Beumann, ‘Laurentius und Mauritius.’ D. Warner, ‘Cult of St Maurice.’ 4 See Fig. 1, the coronation representation of the last Ottonian emperor, Henry II (1002–24), in the so-called Regensburg Sacramentary, Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, clm 4456, fol. 11r, which shows Bishop Ulrich holding the Holy Lance upright next to the enthroned ruler. 5 Liudprand, Antapodosis, Bk II, ch. 4, pp. 38–9. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 3

Introduction 3

Figure 1 St Ulrich with the Holy Lance supporting Henry II Reproduced with permission by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, Germany CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 4

4 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

captured the Hungarian camp on the right bank of the river and released captives. Yet his pursuit of the fleeing enemy was restrained, and, as the tears of St Lawrence entered the atmosphere that evening, a multitude of Magyar mounted archers remained at large in the Bavarian countryside east of the Lech. Despite his apparent success, Otto’s mind must have been troubled when the bishop received him. The carnage had been great. Duke Conrad (the Red), the king’s son-in-law, who had played a crucial role in the fighting, was among the fallen, and Bishop Ulrich mourned his brother, Count Dietpald, as well as other relatives and members of his military following. Both men realized that a decisive victory over the Hungarians was still uncertain. On the other hand, the ruler was aware that forces friendly to his cause lurked along Magyar lines of retreat, for he dispatched swift couriers warning that the Hungarian warriors were retiring eastward and urging his supporters to block their flight, especially at river crossings.6 As king and bishop surveyed the events at dusk on that St Lawrence’s Day, they must have considered the possibility of trapping Magyar forces in eastern Bavaria, which could transform an ordinary victory into a resounding triumph.

THE BATTLE AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE

The final victory, which took place on the days that followed, was regarded by contemporaries as the greatest achievement of Otto’s long reign (936–73), and it eventually led to his imperial coronation in 962. But his triumph in 955 had not been easy. It came after two very trying years. Beginning in 953, Otto faced a major revolt led by none other than his own son Liudolf, Duke of Swabia, and his son-in-law, Duke Conrad of Lotharingia. A powerful Bavarian clan, the Liutpoldings, also joined the rebellion under the leadership of Arnulf, the count palatine of Regensburg, and Archbishop Herold of Salzburg. Restlessness even spread into Saxony, Otto’s power base, and spilled across the Elbe River, where Slavic tributaries, allied with dissident margraves, rose in revolt against Ottonian overlordship. At the height of the insurrections in 954, the Magyars seized their opportunity and invaded the East Frankish kingdom. Their expedition of 954 appears on maps as an impressive sweeping incursion through Bavaria and Swabia into the Rhine-Main region and, thence, clear to Lower Lotharingia, before veering south, entering the West Frankish kingdom and Burgundy, and finally crossing the Alps, to return via northern Italy to their camps in the Carpathian Basin.7

6 Gerhard von Augsburg, Vita Sancti Uodalrici. I am using the recent edition (Latin text with German translation) by W. Berschin. See Appendix I for my translation. 7 For a map of this and other Hungarian incursions see N. Hooper and M. Bennett, Cambridge Atlas. Warfare, 31. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 5

Introduction 5

Otto eventually prevailed against the rebels, humiliating Liudolf and Conrad and removing them from their ducal offices. In the spring of 955 the king besieged and took Regensburg, an encounter in which the count palatine perished, and, in a spearate action, the archbishop was captured, blinded and banished to the alpine bishopric of Brixen, where he languished until his death seven years later. Then, moving north to pacify Saxony, Otto was in the process of dealing with Transelban Slavs when he got word that the Hungarians had launched yet another invasion of southern Germany. Only after defeating the Magyars did the king turn his attention once again to the Slavs across the Elbe, bringing them to heel. Restoring order throughout his realm, he staked his claim to the title of Roman emperor. Otto’s victory in 955 came to be seen as a decisive event in his lifetime. Widukind, a monk at the Saxon monastery of Corvey, wrote that the army immediately recognized the significance of the king’s triumph, proclaiming Otto father of the fatherland and imperator as soon as the destruction of the Hungarian forces became apparent.8 Although Otto was not actually crowned in Rome until 962, for Widukind the defining moment came in August 955. ‘For no king before him had experienced such a victory in two hundred years,’ he added, referring to Charles Martel’s victory over the Spanish Muslims at the battle of Tours in 732, a victory that ended Islamic expansion into Europe. Presumably Bishop Ulrich benefited posthumously from his participation in the encounter with the Hungarians because his role in the struggle figured prominently in his canonization, which occurred within forty years of the battle.9 Throughout the Middle Ages the ‘battle of Lechfeld,’ as it came to be called later, was recognized as epoch-making by Central Europeans, and its reputation as a decisive encounter has never waned in that part of the world.10 To the English-speaking public, on the other hand, these events are largely unknown, and the battle of Lechfeld rarely appears on conventional lists of the most decisive battles in history.11 This fact is unfortunate, for the

8 Widukind, See Bibliography, Part A, hereafter cited as Res gestae Saxonicae, Bk III, chs 44–9, pp. 123–30. Occasionally I shall refer to two bilingual (Latin-German) editions, see Bibliography, Part B: the first is Quellen zur Geschichte der sächsischen Kaiserzeit, ed. and trans. A. Bauer and R. Rau; the second is Sachsengeschichte, ed. and trans. E. Rotter and B. Schneidmüller. As I write there is no complete English translation of Widukind. 9 For a short account of Ulrich’s life and canonization, see W. Goez, Lebensbilder, 28–40. 10 L. Weinrich, ‘Tradition und Individualität,’ 291. 11 For example J. F. C. Fuller in his influential The Decisive Battles of the Western World gave the battle of Lechfeld only a single sentence and Ottonian warfare one paragraph. Oman, Art of War, 123–6, discussed the battle on the Lechfeld briefly, but inadequately. In contrast H. Delbrück, a German military historian, treated it very thoroughly in his Kriegskunst, which is now available in English translation, History of the Art of War, 131ff. His version of the battle, however, can no longer be taken seriously. As I write, the only credible attempt to deal with this encounter in English is K. Leyser, ‘Battle,’ a study with which I generally disagree. N. Hooper CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 6

6 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

geopolitical implications of the encounters in the summer of 955 are enormous. From the fourth century AD until about 1500, mounted archers from the steppes and deserts of Afro-Eurasia posed recurring threats to most of the settled societies of the eastern hemisphere. For more than a millennium highly mobile armies of horse archers dominated the battlefields of the world’s largest landmass. Latin Christendom, however, was an exception. After 955 Western Europe was largely spared the depredations of these warriors. Indeed, A. R. Lewis has argued that the later global dominance of the West was in no small measure due to the fact that this civilization was immune from invasions from the Afro-Eurasian steppes and deserts during the High Middle Ages (c. 1000–1350).12 The image of nomads storming out of the East to threaten Latin Christendom is of course a powerful one in popular histories and even in some scholarly works. Surveys of the impact of steppe peoples on western civilization, however, do not support myths of that magnitude.13 Huns and Avars had troubled Europe in Late Antiquity, but not for very long. The Hungarians, who pillaged Europe for roughly a half-century, represent the last sustained threat to the West by steppe peoples. Following their defeat in 955, the Magyars settled down, converted to Christianity and became fully integrated into western Christendom. In fact, their kingdom in the Carpathian Basin became a buffer against the westward movements of latter- day predators further to the east. Although the Mongols launched an invasion of Central Europe in the early 1240s, their armies quickly retired to Inner Asia, never to trouble that part of Europe again. By the time the Ottoman Turks entered the Carpathian Basin around 1500, they had long ceased to be a steppe power. Thus when the Hungarian raids came to an abrupt halt in August 955, a turning point in world history had been reached. While other societies struggled to keep steppe peoples at bay during the High Middle Ages, Western Europeans took advantage of chaotic conditions that predatory warriors were creating in the rest of Afro-Eurasia to embark on expansionist movements in the name of crusades against infidels, pagans and heretical Christians. Free from the necessity of maintaining elaborate defensive infrastructures against ‘steppe barbarians’ after 955, Latin Christendom experienced three centuries of uninterrupted economic growth and

and M. Bennett, Cambridge Atlas. Warfare, 32, have mapped Leyser’s version of the battle. In a recent book, E. Hildinger, Warriors, 88f., offers a brief account that is entirely based on Delbrück’s dated analysis. Writing in German, M. Springer, ‘955 als Zeitenwende,’ has recently attempted to rehabilitate Delbrück (unsuccessfully in my view). 12 A. R. Lewis, Nomads and Crusaders. 13 See, for example, R. P. Lindner, ‘Nomadism, Horses and Huns.’ D. Sinor, ‘Horses and Pastures,’ A. Avenarius, ‘Strukturen.’ S. de Vajay, Eintritt. For a more comprehensive statement of my views, see C. R. Bowlus, ‘Reitervölker.’ For the evolution of western myths concerning the Huns, see the essays in F. H. Bäuml and M. Birnbaum, eds, Attila. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 7

Introduction 7

geographic expansion. A close look at the ultimate reasons for the Magyar’s catastrophic defeat in August 955 provides an explanation for Europe’s immunity from the incursions of steppe peoples that proved so disruptive elsewhere.

CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTS

Attempts to reconstruct the battle of Lechfeld have focused primarily (but not exclusively) on two sources. The first is authored by Gerhard, a native of Augsburg, who had become provost of the cathedral when he composed his account in about 985. He wrote a biography of Bishop Ulrich, which contains a long chapter on the battle. If Gerhard did not personally witness the events of August 955, he certainly knew many who had. We shall assume that his highly visual account was indeed written by a witness. A Saxon monk named Widukind wrote the other major narrative. He resided in the wealthy monastery of Corvey on the Weser River, in a house that had been well endowed by Otto’s ancestors. Although some modern historians have questioned the reliability of these authors, their testimonies (composed independently of one another) must be seriously considered.14 Despite the fact that these authors had ulterior motives, historians must recognize that Gerhard and Widukind were contemporaries who knew many people directly involved in the action. Gerhard’s Vita Uodalrici (The Life of St Ulrich) celebrates the achievements and the sanctity of Bishop Ulrich. Among his other deeds the bishop’s tenacious resistance to the Hungarian siege of Augsburg bought time, allowing Otto’s army to come to the relief of the city. Since Gerhard was writing a biography of a prelate who was under consideration for sainthood, he played down the bishop’s role in the violence.

14 Weinrich, ‘Tradition und Individualität,’ has argued successfully that Ottonian authors, especially Widukind, relied heavily upon biblical passages to describe important moments in the lives of Ottonian kings, saints and heroes. This view is in sharp contrast with the traditional interpretation which assumed that Widukind derived much of his material from classical authors, especially Sallust. Cf. Beumann, Widukind. Under the influence of Weinrich’s article some recent scholars have come to the conclusion that Widukind is unreliable. The most prominent current critic of Widukind’s utility as a source is J. Fried, Der Weg, 113ff. and 551ff. The Saxon monk has, however, been vigorously defended by G. Althoff, ‘Kronzeuge,’ and H. Keller, ‘Machabaeorum pugnae.’ A recent well-balanced historiographical article is J. Laudage, ‘Widukind von Corvey.’ A close reading of Weinrich reveals that Widukind’s biblical citations, largely derived from the Book of Maccabees, were employed to justify Ottonian kingship and have nothing to do with his description of the military events of August 955. Therefore Widukind’s Res gestae Saxonicae as a source for the battle on the Lechfeld must not be brushed aside simply because of these irrelevant passages. Indeed, throughout this book I shall argue that Widukind’s testimony can be reconciled with the conditions under which the battle was fought, the geography in the vicinity of Augsburg, and with the account found in Gerhard’s Vita Uodalrici. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 8

8 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Nevertheless, important details about the defense of the city and the final annihilation of the Hungarian army can be gleaned from his account. Widukind’s motives were more complex and have been interpreted in various ways by modern historians. It is enough to say at this point that his Res gestae Saxonicae (The Deeds of the Saxons) chronicles the achievements of the Saxons and especially the rise of their royal dynasty generally known as the Ottonians. Gerhard was geographically close to the events of the summer of 955. He probably stood on the ramparts of Augsburg during the siege, from where he could have observed those portions of the contest that took place within his view. His account is certainly a highly visual one. However, Gerhard did not commit this Vita to parchment until approximately thirty years after Otto’s victory, when the pressure for Ulrich’s canonization was building and when few other eyewitnesses remained to contradict the provost of Augsburg.15 On the other hand, Widukind’s Gestae, composed in its final form in around 967 after having gone through two previous redactions, is temporally much nearer to the events. Yet the Saxon monk was several hundred kilometers removed from the action, and some historians maintain that contradictions in his rendition can be explained by the fact that he lacked an intimate geographical knowledge of Augsburg and its environs.16 Cloistered in distant Corvey, he did not witness the battle personally. Although he had informants who had participated in this confrontation, some historians have argued that time had clouded their memories, making Widukind virtually worthless as a source for events that unfolded on that day. Nevertheless it must be emphasized that he wrote his final version of the Gestae within twelve years of the clashes near Augsburg while major figures, including Otto and Ulrich, still lived.17 Much of his work certainly does have an unmistakable odor of Ottonian dynastic propaganda; yet, as we shall see, the Saxon monk’s narrative includes plausible details demonstrating that he was well informed. Although Widukind gives us an approximate temporal reference for the beginning of the Hungarian invasion, late June or early July, he ignores the early stages of the campaign. Gerhard’s Vita Uodalrici in contrast yields a vivid account of the events leading up to the siege of Augsburg. Plundering through the Bavarian duchy south of the Danube and north of the coniferous forests on the slopes of the Alps, the Magyars swept westward across the Lech River into Swabia until they reached the Iller, a river that joins the upper Danube at Ulm (Map 1). Then, devastating the territory between the Iller and the Lech, they pulled back to invest Augsburg, where the fortifications of the city,

15 For further references to Gerhard see K. Schnith’s entry, ‘Gerhard von Augsburg,’ in Lexikon des Mittelalters, vol. 4, p. 1315 with the literature cited. 16 Cf. notes 19 and 23 below. 17 J. K. Kundert, ‘Der Kaiser auf dem Lechfeld,’ 87–9, has plausibly supported earlier arguments that Widukind’s account of the battle was written within three years of the event. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 9

Introduction 9

severely damaged during the serious rebellion against Otto in the previous year, were inadequate to withstand a prolonged siege. Bishop Ulrich, who had a large number of trained professionals in his entourage, organized the defense of the city. The immediate reaction of these warriors, who were obviously capable of operating in the field, was to make a sortie against the Hungarians surrounding the fortress. The bishop, however, restrained his men and commanded them to assist with the reinforcement of the main (south) gate, which provided the easiest point of entry. When the Magyars unexpectedly attempted to seize the east gate, which led from the citadel down an embankment to the Lech, Ulrich, recognizing the danger, led his milites out of the fortress to engage the enemy in hand-to-hand combat. Perched on his war-horse, but bearing no weapons and wearing only a stola for protection against the missiles that were flying all around him, Bishop Ulrich directed the fierce fighting that ensued in front of the gate. Finally the leader of this Hungarian band fell mortally wounded, causing his followers to disengage and to return to their camp. The immediate danger had passed. During the remainder of the day and throughout the night the prelate supervised his men, who worked feverishly to shore up the walls and gates, as well as constructing blockhouses to provide additional protection from enemy missiles. When dawn came, the Hungarians prepared themselves to take the city by bringing up siege engines. It is worth noting at this point that the Magyar army consisted not only of mounted archers, but also of a large number of reluctant foot soldiers, whom their leaders forced forward with whips to attack the city. As the besiegers were approaching the walls, news came that Otto with a relief force was advancing in the direction of Augsburg. The bearer of these tidings was Berthold, an ally of the Hungarians and a member of the Bavarian Liutpolding clan, rivals of the Saxon Ottonians. As mentioned earlier, the Liutpoldings had been among the ringleaders of the rebellion of 954. Gerhard tells us that Berthold came from Reisensburg, roughly 50 kilometers west of Augsburg on the Roman road from Ulm. The Hungarians promptly broke off the siege and returned to their camp for a war council. The Hungarian king, boasting that it would be easy to take Augsburg and ‘the entire realm’ once he had defeated Otto in a pitched battle, led his army to meet the relief column. At this point the Magyars disappeared from the purview of Augsburg’s defenders, some of whom used this opportunity to escape the city to join Otto’s advancing army. On the following day an armed encounter took place somewhere beyond the view of those standing on the ramparts. Gerhard does not describe this action, which he did not see. He relates only its aftermath when Magyar horsemen cantered in well-ordered formations towards Augsburg. The defenders, ‘who witnessed them coming back, did not believe that they were CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 10

10 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

returning defeated from the battle.’ At that point it was impossible for the defenders of Augsburg to determine which army had been victorious. At first they feared that the Hungarians had won the day and were returning to resume the siege of the city; then, to the surprise of those gathered on the walls, the mounted archers rode past the fortifications to cross the Lech. Only as Magyar formations were traversing the river did the defenders realize that their king had been the victor. Otto’s forces pursued the enemy, killing all they captured. At dusk the king returned to the city, where Bishop Ulrich, who had remained in Augsburg, received him. On the following day, after dispatching swift couriers (festini legati) with orders for those who guarded river crossings to block the Hungarians’ retreat, Otto resumed his pursuit of the fleeing Magyars into Bavaria. Control of the fords was ultimately strategically significant, for Gerhard makes the point that Hungarian warriors drowned in rivers while trying to escape. Some ‘were pitched into the water by those manning the ships.’ The few who reached ‘the opposite bank were slaughtered by those who watched the shores.’ Above all Gerhard stresses that they found no way out and no place to hide, ‘no road, nor pathless wilderness, nor locality that allowed them to escape the wrath of the Lord.’ Their kings and princes were captured and taken to Regensburg, where they were hanged ‘with many of their countrymen.’ The Augsburg cleric then breaks off his narrative of the military action to describe Ulrich, who did not participate in the pursuit and destruction of the Magyar army, picking through the carnage of the battlefield near Augsburg for fallen relatives, including his brother, Count Dietpald. Widukind, in contrast, gives us no detailed information concerning the early stages of the campaign or the siege of Augsburg. He wrote his account entirely from the perspective of the relief column, thus from the experiences of participants in encounters that took place outside of the range of Gerhard’s vision. According to the Saxon monk, Otto was in Saxony when he received Magyar legates who ostensibly had come to make peace, but who really were there to assess Otto’s situation in the wake of the bitter rebellions that the king had just managed to suppress. He allowed the ambassadors ‘to leave in peace with a few small gifts.’ Shortly thereafter couriers from his brother Henry, the duke of Bavaria, arrived in Saxony to inform Otto that the Hungarians had broken their pledges not to invade his realm. The messengers reported to the king that the aggressors were determined ‘to enter into battle with you.’ Upon receiving this news, Otto departed immediately from Magdeburg, ‘taking only a few Saxons with him because most were urgently needed in a war against the Slavs.’ Otto, joined by Bavarians, Swabians and Franconians, concentrated his forces ‘near the frontiers of Augsburg’s territory.’ Widukind does not give a precise location. The king’s son-in-law, Conrad, notwithstanding his loss of the duchy of Lotharingia a year earlier due of his involvement in the rebellion, CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 11

Introduction 11

appeared at the site ‘with a strong contingent of cavalry.’ Conrad’s arrival encouraged Otto’s forces to advance on Augsburg. At some point during the march, scouts reported that the hostile armies were nearing one another. That night in camp the king ordered his men to fast and to prepare themselves for battle. On the following day he assembled his marching column as follows. In the van were three units (legiones) of Bavarians under the leadership of an unnamed commander appointed by Duke Henry, who lay mortally ill in Regensburg. They were followed by Franconians under Conrad’s command, forming the fourth unit. Then came the royal legion (legio regia), led by the king himself and consisting ‘of courageous youths, selected from among the many thousands.’ This fifth unit was the strongest. Immediately behind the legio regia in the column were two legiones of Swabians, commanded by Duke Burchard, who had replaced Liudolf as duke of Swabia. In the rear was a single Bohemian legion, consisting of ‘one thousand crack troops, better schooled in arms than in good fortune.’ They guarded the baggage. Widukind also remarks that Otto led his army ‘through rough and difficult terrain that gave the enemy no opportunity to harass the marching column, which was protected by woods, with arrows that they knew how to use so effectively.’18 In order to engage the relief column, Widukind informs us, the Magyars ‘crossed the Lech, encircled the army, and began to attack the Bohemian legion with arrows.’ This stealthy maneuver was an initial success. The Hungarians routed the rear guard and severely mauled the two Swabian units at the extremity of Otto’s column. The assault miscarried, however, when Conrad, the commander of the fourth legion, led a vigorous counterattack, scattering the Hungarians who were plundering the baggage train. This action made heroes of Conrad and his men, mostly inexperienced youths. Waving captured enemy banners, Conrad returned in triumph. Although his account seems straightforward, Widukind’s report raises several questions. There is some ambiguity in his Latin syntax concerning the ‘rough and difficult’ terrain through which the Ottonian army marched, and this passage has been translated in significantly different ways.19 Moreover, his statement that the Hungarians ‘crossed the Lech’ to attack the baggage train at the rear of the column has puzzled some historians, giving rise to a multitude of scenarios concerning the direction of Otto’s line of march and the subsequent course of the battle. If, for example, the Hungarians were encamped on the Augsburg (west) side of the Lech and they crossed this river to engage the enemy, then Otto’s forces must have been marching on

18 The precise Latin text is Res gestae Saxonicae 124: Ducitur exercitus per aspera et difficilia loca, ne daretur hostibus copis turbandi sagittis agmina, quibus utuntur acerrime, arbustis ea protegentibus. As we shall see, there are variant translations of this passage. 19 Cf. the controversy between D. Schäfer, ‘Ungarnschlacht’ and H. Breßlau, ‘Schlacht auf dem Lechfelde.’ CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 12

12 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Augsburg from the east or northeast. This possibility, however, is contradicted by Gerhard’s testimony that Berthold brought the news of Otto’s advance from Reisensburg, west of Augsburg. Even more disconcerting is the fact that Widukind breaks off his narrative following Conrad’s decisive counterattack to insert a description of events taking place simultaneously in his Saxon homeland, where the forces whom Otto had left behind were having great difficulty coping with Transelban Slavs. First he recounts a disastrous attempt to take a Slavic fortification, an encounter in which fifty Saxons died and the rest were forced to flee ignominiously. Then he adds a second chapter relating that strange portents (portenta insusitata) terrified the Saxons. A powerful storm (tempesta valida) passed over the land, releasing bolts of lightning that struck priests and nuns. ‘Many other horrible events,’ he writes, ‘occurred at this time.’ These cosmic events caused great concern among the Saxons about the fate of the king and his army. Following this diversion, Widukind, without bothering to open a new chapter, returns to the action that was taking place near Augsburg several hundred kilometers to the south. The Hungarians who attacked the rear of the column were mounted archers, detached from the main army which had taken up positions to block the king’s line of march on Augsburg. Conrad’s counter-stroke prevented an encirclement and allowed Otto to steady his forces for an attack on Magyar contingents deployed directly in front of him. At this point Widukind puts into Otto’s mouth a rousing speech partially culled from the Book of Maccabees. The speech is notable because the king closes it by emphasizing that despite the numerical superiority of the enemy his men had ‘better arms,’ a statement that K. Leyser regarded as having great significance.20 Rallying his troops and brandishing a precious relic, the Holy Lance that (he believed) had pierced Jesus’s side on the cross, Otto personally led his forces into what has generally been construed as the ‘main battle.’ In the ensuing struggle Otto was victorious, but Widukind does not tell us precisely how. Since the monk’s informants actually participated in this encounter, Widukind’s failure to fill in the details has frustrated historians. More than a century ago Ernst Dümmler complained, ‘Concerning the course of the main battle, Widukind leaves us completely in the dark.’21 The Saxon monk did, however, describe in gruesome detail fierce fighting as the Hungarians fled. Some hid out in buildings that were torched, and were thus cremated. Other Magyars tried to swim across an unnamed river (the Lech?), but were swept away when the torrent caused the opposite bank to collapse as they tried to scramble up. Otto’s forces captured the enemy’s camp, retaking booty and freeing prisoners. The remnants of this once-mighty Hungarian army were,

20 Leyser, ‘Battle,’ 65. 21 R. Köpke and E. Dümmler, Kaiser Otto, note 3, p. 258. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 13

Introduction 13

according to Widukind, destroyed ‘on the second and third days’ by Ottonian forces operating from fortifications (urbes) along their lines of retreat, ‘so that none or only a few survived.’ There are obvious similarities, but also substantial differences, between the accounts of Gerhard and Widukind. The monk of Corvey, like the provost of Augsburg, stresses that Otto’s victory was a costly one for both sides. Bishop Ulrich lost his brother and other close relatives in the encounter. Conrad the Red also fell, catching an arrow in his throat as he loosened the straps on his armor in the sweltering heat of that day. Widukind mentions that Conrad, whose timely counterattack had made him the hero of the engagement, was laid to rest with great pomp in the cathedral of Worms. Gerhard, however, completely passes over Conrad’s contribution to the victory as well as his demise and burial. His concern is for Bishop Ulrich’s brother Count Dietpald, whom Widukind fails to note. In fact, the Saxon monk completely ignores the bishop of Augsburg and his obviously significant role in the outcome. The really substantial difference between the two accounts, however, involves Otto’s line of march and the precise locations of the encounters that occurred beyond the vision of the men on Augsburg’s walls. Widukind reports that a Magyar force ‘crossed the Lech, encircled the army, and began to attack the legion in the rear with arrows,’ which could indicate that the relief column was advancing east of the river. Since the Hungarians were besieging Augsburg (west of the Lech), the encircling force, some historians have argued, traversed the river from west to east to attack the rear guard. Otto’s relief column, therefore, must have been east of the city and the Lech.22 However, the provost of Augsburg, who was thoroughly familiar with the geography of the region, tells a different story. According to him, Berthold, coming from Reisensburg (west of the city), informed the Magyar leadership of Otto’s advance.23 Thus the king must have been marching from west to east (Map 2). Moreover, Gerhard reports that after the encounter which occurred outside of the range of his vision, the Hungarians appeared on the horizon, riding in the direction of the city in such good order that those on its bulwarks only realized that the mounted archers had been defeated after they swept by the citadel to cross the Lech. Since the Hungarians were fleeing back to their homeland, they must have crossed the river from west to east. Otto’s forces, therefore, were pursuing them in the same direction. Gerhard continues to relate that at the end of the day, Otto spent the night in Augsburg. Then he returned to Bavaria (regionem

22 Delbrück, Kriegskunst. K. Hadank, ‘Einige Bemerkungen,’ 95–114. B. Scherff, Heer der Ottonen; M. Springer, ‘955 als Zeitwende,’ 205. 23 Schäfer, ‘Ungarnschlacht’ and Leyser, ‘Battle,’ believed that Otto advanced from the northwest, whereas Breßlau, ‘Schlacht auf dem Lechfelde,’ and B. Eberl, Ungarnschlacht, were convinced that Otto marched directly east from Reisensburg through the Rauherforst, a position recently supported by M. G. Kellner, Ungarneinfälle, see his map, app. 7.1, p. 182. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 14

14 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

baioariorum revisit) to resume the chase. Widukind, in contrast, reports heavy fighting and the Magyars fleeing in disarray after their formations had been broken. According to him, fleeing Hungarians experienced a disastrous river crossing, while Gerhard writes that they easily traversed the Lech. However, the differences in these reports are not as significant as they appear at first glance. Widukind tells us about Magyars perishing at an ‘unnamed’ river crossing while desperately trying to escape. Since Gerhard reports no difficulties for their crossing of the Lech, an event that he very likely witnessed from the ramparts of the city, the river in Widukind’s Gestae could not have been the Lech. On the other hand, Gerhard states unequivocally that river crossings eventually constituted a major problem for the fleeing enemy. The provost reports that Otto dispatched messengers to the men guarding the ferries and fords along the Magyar line of retreat, ordering them to prevent the passage of their forces, a task that they performed successfully. Widukind indicates that warriors operating from forts at the Hungarians’ rear annihilated the remnants of their army on the ‘second and third day.’ The point to keep in mind from these two sources is that both narratives, despite their apparent differences, agree that difficulties with river crossings were a major factor in the final outcome, the annihilation of the Hungarian army. Both Widukind and Gerhard are unequivocal about the fact that the total destruction of the Magyars occurred not in a battle that presumably took place 10 August on the Lechfeld, but rather during the Hungarian retreat during the days that followed the initial encounter. It is noteworthy that neither Widukind nor Gerhard mentions the date or the precise location of the clash between Otto’s relief column and the Hungarians. Nevertheless there can be no doubt that some martial encounters did occur near the Lech on 10 August 955, for both authors mention this river in different contexts. Although Widukind’s reference to the Lech is confusing, Gerhard’s is not. Since the provost of Augsburg knew the geography of the region intimately, historians must accept his version of the geographic details. After an encounter the Magyars fled across the Lech, the boundary between Bavaria and Swabia, and Otto pursued them. It is clear that Otto chased the Hungarians into Bavaria, for at the end of the day he retraced his steps to Augsburg (in Swabia), spent the night with Bishop Ulrich and ‘returning to Bavaria on the next day he began (again) his pursuit of the fleeing barbarian swarms.’ The king sent messages to forces manning the fords and ferries to deny the Hungarians crossings. These fords and ferries, then, were clearly in Bavaria. In addition to Widukind and Gerhard, Adalbert of Weißenburg, the continuator of the Chronicle of Regino of Prüm, makes a vague reference to the Lech River (apud Lichum).24 The Annals of Salzburg report, ‘A large Hungarian

24 Adalberti continuatio Reginonis, a. 955, p. 168. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 15

Introduction 15

army was cut to pieces in Bavaria near the Lech River,’ confirming that Magyar forces were annihilated somewhere east of the Lech.25 At that time the frontier between Bavaria and Swabia was the Lech. Only the author of Annales Sangallenses (The Annals of St Gall ), the most contemporary source, establishes the date of Otto’s first encounter with the Hungarians. ‘On the feast of St Lawrence,’ an anonymous annalist wrote, ‘King Otto did battle with the Hungarians.’26 Barthel Eberl has pointed out, however, that this source contains a supplementary notation composed in the hand of a second annalist:27 ‘Another encounter with them [the Hungarians] was initiated by Bohemians, in which the [Hungarian] king named Lele, whose army was totally destroyed, was captured.’28 Thus there must have been at least two battles, one that occurred on St Lawrence’s Day and a second that took place on some later (unspecified) date, a clash involving Bohemians. Eberl reasoned that these forces could not have been members of that unfortunate Bohemian legion whose task it had been to guard the baggage.29 This unit had been encircled and destroyed by the Hungarians. There must, therefore, have been two Bohemian units operating in the larger campaign theater in August 955. Flodoard, a canon of Reims, who is considered a reliable source, confirms independently that Bohemian forces under the command of Duke Boleslav played a prominent role in the defeat of the Hungarians.30 Since Widukind does not mention Boleslav’s presence in the first encounter, Eberl concluded that the duke led a second Bohemian legion that was operating somewhere behind the retreating Hungarians. All in all, a careful reading of the sources leads to the firm conclusion that the really decisive action took place during the Hungarians’ retreat to their homeland several days following the initial encounters near Augsburg. There are several other points of agreement in all of the sources. They are unanimous in stressing the size of the Magyar army. The first of the two annalists in St Gall writes that the Hungarians ‘numbered 100,000,’ an obvious exaggeration, which simply means that the invasion force was very large. Flodoard recounts that they entered Bavaria ‘with immense forces and a vast multitude.’ Adalbert asserts that this multitude was so great that it could only be defeated ‘should the earth swallow them up or should the sky fall.’ Gerhard also reports a multitude of Hungarians, ‘such as no living person can remember having seen in any one region before, invaded the realm of the Bavarians which they devastated and occupied simultaneously from the

25 In ‘Salzburger Geschichtsquelle,’ ed. E. Klebel, 139. 26 Annales Sangallenses maiores, a. 955, pp. 288–9. 27 Eberl, Ungarnschlacht, 8. 28 Annales Sangallenses maiores, a. 955, p. 289. 29 Eberl, Ungarnschlacht, 40. 30 Flodoard, Annales, a. 955, 381. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 16

16 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Danube to the dark forest on the rim of the mountains.’ Widukind is somewhat more restrained, yet he is unambiguous about the fact that the Hungarian forces far exceeded Otto’s. There is a consensus in the sources that Otto triumphed despite overwhelming odds. The Annals of Quedlinburg state that Otto gained his victory ‘with great peril to himself and his men.’31 According to Gerhard the Hungarians surrounded Augsburg ‘with an indescribably overwhelming advantage.’ Widukind indicates that Otto, who had marched south from Saxony, ‘taking only a few Saxons with him,’ was unable to gather sufficient forces to risk a march in relief of Augsburg until ‘Duke Conrad appeared at the camp with a strong contingent of cavalry.’ Gerhard reports, ‘When the king saw the huge Hungarian army, he concluded that it could not possibly be conquered by ordinary mortals.’ According to Widukind, Otto tried to rally his troops by telling them ‘I realize that they exceed us in number, but not in bravery nor in weapons.’ However, Otto’s success in the encounter near Augsburg did not significantly diminish their forces, for Gerhard writes that even after the Hungarians had begun to flee, ‘a multitude of them remained.’ Despite the odds against Otto, the sources insist that his final victory was overwhelming – though losses were heavy on both sides. Gerhard writes of ‘mutual butchery.’ Pursuing the Magyars across the Lech with his men, the king killed all he could catch. Widukind reports that some Magyars sought refuge in houses in nearby villages, but Otto’s men torched these buildings, cremating the Hungarians alive. The Salzburg annalist hints at the perspective of the Bavarian peasantry. The ‘Hungarian army was cut to pieces,’ but then, under the next year, he added, ‘there was peace and a great famine.’32 Although this huge army had been destroyed in the end, it had fed itself during the summer months from Bavarian resources, slaughtering domestic animals, while trampling pastures, meadows and ripening cereals to the ground. Thus little surplus remained for suffering peasants to get them through the winter. Most importantly, all of the sources agree that the Hungarian army was annihilated. Ottonian forces gave the Magyars no quarter. The annalist in St Gall writes that a Hungarian leader (king), named Pulsi (presumably the Hungarian leader Horka Bulksú) was ‘hanged on the gallows.’ The second scribe tells us that a king called Lele was captured. Although his fate is unknown, his army was extinguished (extincto exercitu eius). Widukind writes, ‘Three leaders of the Hungarian people were hanged,’ then, he gloats, ‘suffering a shameful death that they richly deserved.’ Gerhard also delights in the hanging of the Hungarian leaders (reges et principes) ‘to the ignominy of their race.’ He adds, moreover, ‘many of their countrymen (comprovinciales) were hanged’ as well. That the Magyars did indeed suffer an overwhelming

31 Annales Quedlinburgenses, a. 955, 58. 32 E. Klebel, ‘Salzburger Geschichtsquelle,’ 139: Pax fuit et fames valida. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 17

Introduction 17

defeat is confirmed by the fact that after 955 they launched no more invasions of Otto’s realms, although several rebellions after 958 would have given the Hungarians excellent opportunities to resume their depredations.33 As might be expected, the sources, which were composed by clerics, attribute Otto’s victory to divine intervention. The first annalist of St Gall claims that the king defeated an army of 100,000 ‘with God’s help.’ Adalbert did not bother to estimate the size of the Hungarian army, but he too was convinced that Otto had only won the day ‘with God’s help.’ Bishop Ulrich encouraged his men during the siege by reciting psalms, thus ensuring that they, the righteous, need fear no evil for God was with them. Hungarian foot soldiers, on the other hand, were reluctant to approach the walls of Augsburg because they were ‘experiencing the fear of God.’ Later, when the Magyar army went out to do battle with the relief column, Gerhard writes that Otto had already concluded that he could not possibly win ‘unless Almighty God deigned to strike them down.’ Nevertheless, ‘trusting in His assistance’ Otto led the charge against them which resulted in ‘a glorious victory [that was] granted by God, for whom nothing is impossible.’ According to Widukind, although Otto recognized that his men had better weapons, the king also encouraged his men by assuring them ‘our greatest comfort is that we enjoy God’s help.’ Finally, Gerhard writes that it was ‘the wrath of the Lord’ which prevented the Magyars from escaping back to the Carpathian Basin. For contemporaries Otto’s triumph came not as a result of his military prowess, but rather because of divine intervention, which might today be interpreted as due to events beyond the control of any human agency. Modern scholars should not rely on the miraculous to explain the past, yet it is conceivable that the catastrophic defeat that the Hungarians suffered in 955 occurred at least partly because of the forces of nature rather than the superior weapons of Otto’s men, as Leyser would have had it. Could it be that the climate and ecology of Western Europe were ill suited in the long run for the type of warfare that was practiced by steppe peoples? The tactics of horse archers, which seemed so formidable throughout most of Afro-Eurasia, were perhaps less tenable within the boundaries of western Christendom than in other parts of the eastern hemisphere. In discussing Otto’s victory, Carlrichard Brühl wrote, ‘The bloody defeat on the Lechfeld resulted in the Hungarians giving up their expeditions into southern and western Europe.’34 Then he added in a footnote, ‘There really are battles of world historical importance, whether or not such a notion conforms to the preconceptions of certain historians.’ In Brühl’s view this battle was decisive because the Hungarian army was annihilated and because the end of Magyar incursions marked the last crisis in Otto’s reign, allowing

33 Kundert, ‘Der Kaiser auf dem Lechfeld,’ 82–5. 34 C. Brühl, Deutschland – Frankreich, 501 and note 303. CHAPTER 1 THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:25 am Page 18

18 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

him to create a relatively stable political order in Central Europe. I agree that the military action that took place in August of 955 was decisive and of world- historical importance. Nevertheless one searches through the pages of Brühl’s book in vain for an explanation of exactly how such an overwhelming triumph was achieved. The magnitude of this disaster for the Hungarians requires an explanation, for in the annals of warfare it is uncommon for one army to annihilate another completely.35 The Magyars, one would think, should have been able to use their mobility to escape annihilation. In this regard Brühl did not really offer an explanation any deeper than those tenth- century narrators who attribute Otto’s victory to divine providence. It is, however, the obligation of the historian to go beyond the limitations of his sources. I hope the following pages will explain why the Hungarians suffered a defeat of this magnitude. As for the world-historical importance of the so- called battle of Lechfeld, it achieved much more than simply giving Otto I the opportunity to create a new political order in Germany and Italy. After 955 all of Europe began to abandon the defensive posture that it had assumed when the Carolingian imperium collapsed in the ninth century. In the period that followed, the Latin West expanded at the expense of neighboring societies on all its frontiers.

35 Brühl, ibid., acknowledged that Hungarian historians deny that their ancestors were annihilated in August 955. He cites Györffy, König Stephan, 44, who writes that ‘only one half to two-thirds’ of the Magyar army was annihilated. ‘Das dürfte genügen’ (‘That should have been enough’) Brühl retorted. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 191

Bibliography

PRIMARY SOURCES

From Monumenta Germaniae Historica

Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum

Adalberti continuatio Reginonis (1890), ed. F. Kurze, 50. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Annales Fuldenses sive Annales regni Francorum orientalis cum continuationibus Ratisbonensi et Altahensibus (1891), ed. F. Kurze, 7. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Hrotsvithae Opera (1892), ed. P. von Winterfeld, 34. Berlin: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Liudprandi episcopi Cremonensis Antapodosis (1915), ed. J. Becker, 41. Hannover, Leipzig: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Nithardi Historiarium Libri IIII (1907), ed. E. Müller, 44. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Reginonis abbatis Prumiensis chronicon cum continuatione Treverensis (1890), ed. F. Kurze, 50. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Ruotgeri vita Brunonis archiepiscopi Coloniensis (1958), ed. I. Ott, 10 (nova series). Cologne: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Thietmari Merseburgensis episcopi Chronicon (1935), ed. R. Holtzmann, 9 (nova series). Berlin: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Vita Mathildis reginae (1994), ed. B. Schütte, 66. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Widukindi monachi Corbeiensis rerum gestarum Saxonicarum libri tres (1935), eds P. Hirsch and H.-E. Lohmann, 60. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.

Scriptores

Annales Lobienses (1881), ed. G. Pertz, 13. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 224–35. Annales Quedlinburgenses (1839), ed. G. Pertz, 3. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 22–90. Annales Ratisponenses (1861), ed. W. Wattenbach, 17. Hannover: Hahnsche Bundhandlung, 577–90. Annales Sangallenses maiores (1826), ed. G. Pertz, 1. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 75–85. Annales Weingartenses (1826), ed. G. Pertz, 1. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 64–7. Chronicon Ebersbergense (1868), ed. W. Arndt, 20. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 9–16. Ex Simonis de Keza gestis Hungarorum (1866), ed. L. von Heinemann, 19. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 523–46. Flodoardi annales a. 919-966 (1839), ed. G. Pertz, 3. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 363–407. Flodoardi historia Remensiis ecclesiae (1881), ed. G. Waitz, 13. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 405–599. Folcuini gesta abbatum Lobiensium (1851), ed. G. Pertz, 4. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 52–74.

191 BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 192

192 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Gerhardo Praeposito Annales Stederburgenses (1859), ed. G. Pertz, 16. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 190–203. Gesta Episcoporum Cameracensium (1846), ed. L. Bethmann, 7. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 393–525. Gesta Abbatum Lobiensium (1851), ed. G. Pertz, 4. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 67. Richer von Saint-Remi, Historiae (2000), ed. H. Hoffmann, 38. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 35–315. Thegani Vita Hludowici imperatoris (1878), ed. G. Pertz, 2. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 585–635. Vita Johannis Gorziensis (1851), ed. G. Pertz, 4. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 350–58.

Diplomata

Monumenta Germaniae Historica Diplomata regum Germanie ex stirpe Karolinorum, 3. Die Urkunden Arnolfs (1940), ed. P. Kehr. Berlin: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Monumenta Germaniae Historica Diplomata regum Germanie ex stirpe Karolinorum, 4. Die Urkunden Zwentibolds und Ludwigs des Kindes (1960), ed. T. Schieffer. Berlin: Hahnsche Buchhandlung. Monumenta Germaniae Historica Diplomata regum et imperatorum Germaniae, 1. Die Urkunden Konrads I. Heinrichs I. und Ottos, (1879–84), ed. T. Sickel. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.

Necrologia Germanae

Necrologia Germaniae, Dioceses Brixinensis, Frisingensis, Ratisbonensis, (1903), ed. F. L. Raumann, 3. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.

Epistolae

Monumenta Germaniae Historica Epistolae Carolini aevi 5 (1898–99), ed. E. Dümmler. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.

German Translations of Latin Sources

Gerardus (Augustanus), Gerhard von Augsburg (1993), Vita Sancti Uodalrici: die älteste Lebensbeschreibung des heilignen Ulrich mit der Kanonisationsurkunde von 993. Latin text with German trans. Eds W. Berschin et al. Heidelberg: Winter. Quellen zur Geschichte der sächsischen Kaiserzeit (1971). Latin text with German trans. A. Bauer and R. Rau. 1: Widukinds Sachsengeschichte; 2: Adalberts Fortsetzung der Chronik Reginos; 3: Liudprands Werke. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Widukind von Corvey, Sachsengeschichte (1981). Latin text with German trans. K. Rotter and B. Schneidmüller. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam. Der Mongolensturm: Berichte von Augenzeugen und Zeitgenossen (1985). German trans. H. Göckenjan and J. Sweeney. Graz, Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau.

English and German Translations of Greek and Russian Sources

Johannes Skylitzes (1983), Byzanz wieder ein Weltreich: Das Zeitalter der Makedonischen Dynastie, 1: Ende des Bilderstreites und Makedonische Renaissance. German trans. H. Thurn. Graz, Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 193

Bibliography 193

Procopius (1966), Gotenkrieg. Trans. O. Veh. Munich: Heimeran. The Russian Primary Chronicle (1953). Trans. S. H. Cross and O. Sherbowitz-Wetzor. Cambridge, MA: Mediaeval Academy of America. Jakobus de Voragine (1995), The Golden Legend. Readings on the Saints. Trans. W. G. Ryan. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 68–74.

Military Handbooks

Chaliand, G. ed. (1994), The Art of War in World History: from antiquity to the nuclear age. Leo VI’s, Tactica. A partial English trans. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press. Dennis, G. T. ed. (1981), Strategikon des Maurikios (1981). German trans. E. Gamillscheg. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. ––––––––. ed. (1984), Maurice’s Strategikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. ––––––––. ed. (1984), Three Military Treatises. 1: The Anonymous Byzantine Treatise on Strategy; 2: Skirmishing; 3: Organization and Tactics. Washington DC: Dumbarton Oaks. Dümmler, E. ed. (1897), Rhabanus Maurus, De Procinctu romanae Miliciae. Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum, 15, 413–51. Vegetius Flavius Renatus (1885), Epitoma rei militaris. Ed. C. Lang. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner. ––––––––. (2004), Epitoma rei militaris. Ed. M. D. Reeve, Oxford: Clarendon Press. ––––––––. (1993), The Epitome of Military Science. English trans. with commentary N. P. Milner. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.

Other Sources

Acht, P. ed. (1958), Die Traditionen des Klosters Tegernsee. Munich: Quellen und Erörterungen zur bayerischen Geschichte, Neue Folge 14. Bitterauf, T. (1905), Die Traditionen des Hochstiftes Freising 1. Munich: Rieger’sche Universitätsbuchhandlung. Böhmer, J. F. (1893), Regesta imperii. Vol. 2 Die Regesten des Kaiserreichs unter den Herrschern aus dem saechsischen Hause, 919–1024. Innsbruck: Wagner. Boos, H. ed. (1893), Wormser Mauerbauordnung, in Monumenta Wormatiensia, 3. Berlin: Weidmann, 223–32. Ebor, D. et al. eds (1961), The New English Bible with the Apocrypha. Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press. Hauthaler, W. ed. (1916), Salzburger Urkundenbuch 1. Salzburg: Gesellschaft für Salzburger Landeskunde. Hundt, F. H. Graf von ed. (1879), Cartular des Klosters Ebersberg. Munich: Abhandlungen der königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 14. Klebel, E. ed. (1957), ‘Eine neuaufgefundene Salzburger Geschichtsquelle’ in E. Klebel, Probleme der bayerischen Verfassungsgeschichte. Gesammelte Aufsätze. Munich: C. H. Beck, 123–89. Lauer, P. (1905), Les Annales de Flodoard. Paris: Picard. Moravcsik, G. ed. (1967), Constantine Porphyrogenitus de administrando imperio. English trans. R. Jenkins. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks. Reindel, K. ed. (1953), Die bayerischen Liutpoldinger, 893–989. Sammlung und Erläuterung der Quellen. Munich: C. H. Beck. Schmale-Ott, I. ed. (1979), Translatio sancti Viti Martyris. Übertragung des heiligen Märtyrers Vitus, Münster: Veröffentlichungen der historischen Kommission für Westfalen, 41. Fontes minores (1). Zoepft, F. and Volkert. W. (1955), Regesten der Bischöfe und des Domkapitels Augsburg. Augsburg: Winifried-Werk. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 194

194 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

HISTORICAL LITERATURE

Adriányi, G. (2001), ‘Die Rolle Salzburgs, Passaus und Regensburgs bei der Christianisierung Ungarns.’ Bayern – Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet, 55–64. Alföldi, A. (1924), Der Untergang der Römerherrschaft in Pannonien. Berlin, Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter. Althoff, G. (1993), ‘Widukind von Corvey: Kronzeuge und Herausforderung.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 27, 253–72. ––––––––. (1982), ‘Zur Frage der Organisation sächsischer Coniurationes in der Ottonenzeit.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 16, 129–42. ––––––––. (2003), Inszenierte Herrschaft. Geschichtsschreibung und politisches Handeln im Mittelalter. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. ––––––––. and H. Keller (1985), Heinrich I. und Otto der Große. Neubeginn auf karolingischem Erbe. Göttingen, Zürich: Musterschmidt. Antonopoulos, P. T. (1993), ‘Byzantium, the Magyar Raids and their Consequences.’ Byzantinoslavica, 54, 254–67. Appelt, H. (1955), ‘Die Schlacht auf dem Lechfeld.’ Blätter für Heimatkunde, 29, 9–47. Arbagi, M. (1979), ‘Byzantium, Germany, the Regnum Italicum and the Magyars.’ Byzantine Studies – Études Byzantines, 6, 44–7. Arnold, B. (1989), ‘German Bishops and their Military Retinues in the Medieval Empire.’ German History, 7, 264–83. Artler, G. (1913), ‘Die Zusammensetzung der deutschen Streitkräfte in den Kämpfen mit den Slaven von Heinrich I. bis auf Friedrich I.’ Zeitschrift des Vereins für Thüringische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, Neue Folge 21, 1–40. Auer, L. (1971), ‘Kriegsdienst des Klerus unter den sächsischen Kaisern,’ Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung, 79 (1), 316–407. Ibid. (1972), 80 (2), 48–70. ______. (1976), ‘Die Baierischen Pfalzen in ottonisch-frühsalischer Zeit.’ Francia, 4, 177–91. ______. (1982), ‘Mittelalterliche Kriegsgeschichte als Forschungsproblem.’ Francia, 10, 449–63. ______. (1991), ‘Formen des Krieges im abendländischen Mittelalter.’ In Formen des Krieges. Vom Mittelalter zum ‘Low-Intensity-Conflict.’ Eds M. Rauchensteiner and E. A. Schmidl. Graz, Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau, 17–43. Avenarius, A. (1988), ‘Struktur und Organisation der Europäischen Steppenvölker.’ Popoli delle Steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 35 (1), 125–50. Baaken, G. (1961), ‘Königtum, Burgen und Königsfreie.’ Vorträge und Forschungen, 6, 9–95. Bachrach, B. S. (1970), ‘Charles Martel, Mounted Shock Combat, the Stirrup, and Feudalism,’ Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History 7, 49–75. ––––––––. (1973), A History of the Alans in the West. From their First Appearance in the Sources of Classical Antiquity through the Early Middle Ages. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ______. (1983): ‘Charlemagne’s Cavalry: Myth and Reality.’ Military Affairs, 57, 181–7. ––––––––. (1985), ‘Animals and Warfare in Early Medieval Europe.’ L’uomo di fronte al mondo animale nell’alto medioevo. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 31 (1), 707–64. ––––––––. (1986), ‘A Picture of Avar–Frankish Warfare from a Carolingian Psalter of the Early Ninth Century in Light of the Strategicon.’ Archivum Asiae Medii Aevi, 4, 5–27. ––––––––. (1988) ‘Caballus et Caballarius in Medieval Warfare,’ The Study of Chivalry: Resources and Approaches. Eds H. Chickering and H. Seiler. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 173–211. ––––––––. (1993), ‘Logistics in Pre-Crusading Europe.’ Feeding Mars: Logistics in Western Warfare from the Middle Ages to the Present. Ed. J. A. Lynn. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 57–87. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 195

Bibliography 195

––––––––. (1999), ‘Early Medieval Military Demography: Some Observations on the Methods of Hans Delbrück.’ The Circle of War in the Middle Ages. Essays on Medieval Military and Naval History. Eds D. Kagay and L. Villalon. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell and Brewer, 3–20. ––––––––. (2000), ‘Magyar–Ottonian Warfare. Apropos a New Minimalist Interpretation.’ Francia, 27, 211–30. ––––––––. (2001), Early Carlingian Warfare. Prelude to Empire. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. –––––––– and Bowlus, C. R. (2000), ‘Heerverfassung – Heerwesen. § 2. Strategie, § 3. Taktik, § 4. Heeresstärken.’ Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, 14. Eds H. Beck, D. Geuenich, H. Steuer. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 122–36. Bálint, C. (1989), ‘Die Archäologie der Steppe.’ Steppenvölker zwischen Volga und Donau vom 6. bis zum 10. Jahrhundert. Ed. F. Daim. Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau. ––––––––. (1991), Südungarn im 10. Jahrhundert. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. Barfield, T. G. (1989), The Perilous Frontier. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Barraclough, G. (1988), The Origins of Modern Germany. 2nd rev. edn. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Barth, R. (1990), Der Herzog in Lotharingien im 10. Jahrhundert. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke. Bartha, A. (1975), Hungarian Society in the 9th and 10th Centuries. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. ––––––––. (1988), ‘The typology of Nomadic Empires.’ Popoli delle Steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 35 (1), 151–74. Bauerreiß, R. (1931), ‘Das Chronicon Ebersbergense posterius.’ Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zweige, 49, 392–5. Bäuml, F. H. and Birnbaum, M. D. eds (1993), Attila. The Man and His Image. Budapest: Central European University Press. Becher, M. (1999), Rex, Dux und Gens. Untersuchungen zur Entstehung des sächsischen Herzogtums im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert. Husum: Matthiesen Verlag. ––––––––. (1997), ‘Vitus von Corvey und Mauritius von Magdeburg: Zwei sächsische Heilige in Konkurrenz.’ Westfälische Zeitschrift, 147, 235–49. Beeler, J. (1971), Warfare in Feudal Europe 730–1200. Ithaca, NY, London: Cornell University Press. Benkö, L. (1988), ‘Le sedi degli Ungari nel secolo nono.’ Popoli delle Steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 35 (1), 283–306. Bergman, C. A., McEwen, E. and Miller, R. (1988): ‘Experimental Archery: Projectile Velocities and Comparison of Bow Performance.’ Antiquity, 62, 101–7. Bernheim, E. (1912), ‘Die augustinische Geschichtsanschauung in Ruotgers Biographie des Erzbischofs Bruno von Köln.’ Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte, 299–335. Berschin, W. (1999), ‘Die Vita Ulrichs von Augsburg und die Ungarn,’ Die Ungarn und die Abtei Sankt Gallen. St Gall and Budapest: Ungarisch Historischer Verein Zürich and Stiftsarchiv Sankt Gallen, 58–61. Beumann, H. (1950), Widukind von Korvei. Untersuchungen zur Geschichtsschreibung und Ideengeschichte des 10. Jahrhunderts. Weimar: Böhlau. ––––––––. (1952), ‘Einhard und die karolingische Tradition im ottonischen Corvey,’ Westfalen, 30, 150–74. ––––––––. (1953), ‘Kreuzzugsgedanke und Ostpolitik im Hohen Mittelalter.’ Historisches Jahrbuch, 72, 112–32. ––––––––. (1962), ‘Kaisertum Ottos des Großen. Ein Rückblick nach 1000 Jahren.’ Historische Zeitschrift, 195, 529–73. ––––––––. (1970), ‘Historiographische Konzeption und politische Ziele Widukinds von Corvey.’ La storiografia alto medievale. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 17 (1), 857–94. ––––––––. (1982), ‘Imperator Romanorum, rex gentium. Zu Widukind III 76.’ Tradition als historische Kraft. Ed. N. Kamp. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 214–30. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 196

196 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

––––––––. (1987), ‘Laurentius und Mauritius. Zu den missionspolitischen Folgen des Ungarnsieges Ottos des Großen.’ Ausgewählte Aufsätze aus den Jahren 1966–1986. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 139–76. ––––––––. (1994), Die Ottonen. Stuttgart, Berlin, Cologne: Kohlhammer. Bischoff, B. (1981), Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, 3. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann. Boba, I. (1967), Nomads, Northmen and Slavs. Eastern Europe in the Ninth Century. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. ––––––––. (1971), Moravia’s History Reconsidered. A reinterpretation of Medieval Sources. The Hague: Nijhoff. ––––––––. (1989), ‘Braslavespurch: Bratislava or Braslav’s Burg: Zalavár?’ Ungarn Jahrbuch 17, 9–23. Bogyay, T. von (1955), Lechfeld. Ende und Anfang. Geschichtliche Hintergründe, ideeler Inhalt und Folgen der Ungarnzüge. Ein Ungarischer Beitrag zur Tausendjahrfeier des Sieges am Lechfeld. Munich: Karpathia. ––––––––. (1988), ‘Ungarnzüge gegen und für Byzanz: Bemerkungen zu neueren Forschungen.’ Ural–Altaische Jahrbücher: Ural–Altaic Yearbook, 60, 27–38. Bököny, S. (1968), ‘Mecklenburg Collection, pt.1: Data on Iron Age Horses of Central and Eastern Europe.’ Bulletin of the American School of Prehistoric Research (Peabody Museum, Boston), 25, 14–48. ––––––––. (1974), History of Domestic Mammals in Central and Eastern Europe. Budapest: Corvinus. ––––––––. (1995), The Development of Stockbreeding and Herding in Medieval Europe.’ Agriculture in the Middle Ages. Technology, Practice, and Representation. Ed. D. Sweeney. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 41–61. Bóna, I. (2002), Les Huns. Le grand empire barbare d’Europe (IVe–Ve siècles). Trans. K. Escher. Paris: Errance. Boshof, E. (1987), ‘Die Reorganisation des Bistums Passau nach den Ungarnstürmen.’ Christentum im bairischen Raum von den Anfängen bis ins11. Jahrhundert. Ed. E. Boshof. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 41–64. ––––––––. (1995), ‘Schreiben der bayerischen Bischöfe an einen Papst Johannes: Eine Fälschung Pilgrims?’ Papstsgeschichte und Landesgeschichte. Festschrift Hermann Jakobs. Ed. J. Dahlhaus. Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau, 37–67. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Ungarn und Reich in der Zeit der Salier.’ Bayern–Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet, 99–112. Bosl, K. (1969), Die wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Entwicklung des Augsburger Bürgertums vom 10. bis zum 12. Jahrhundert. Sitzungsbrichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse. Munich. ––––––––. (1978), ‘Historische Probleme einer europäischen Stadt: Augsburg.’ Francia, 6, 1–19. ––––––––. (1981), Handbuch der historischen Stätten. Bayern. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner Verlag. ––––––––. (1993), ‘Vorstufen der deutschen Königsdienstmannschaft.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 6, 59–101. Bowlus, C. R. (1984), ‘Two Carolingian Campaigns Reconsidered,’ Military Affairs, 48, 120–25. ––––––––. (1995), Franks, Moravians, and Magyars. The Struggle for the Middle Danube (788–907). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvannia Press. ––––––––. (1995), ‘Reitervölker des frühen Mittelalters im Osten des Abendlandes. Ökologische und militärische Gründe für ihr Versagen.’ Ungarn–Jahrbuch, 22, 1–25. ––––––––. (1996) ‘Mounted archers on the eve of the first crusade: their strategic and tactical weaknesses,’ Autour de la première croisade. Ed. Michel Balard. Actes du Colloque de la Society for the Study of the Crusades and the Latin East. Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 159–67. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 197

Bibliography 197

––––––––. (2001), ‘Der Weg vom Lechfeld. Die Kriegsführung der Magyaren: Überlegungen zur Vernichtung der Ungarn im August 955 anhand ihrer Kriegführung.’ Bayern–Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet, 77–90. ––––––––. (2002), ‘Italia–Bavaria–Avaria.’ Journal of Medieval Military History, 1, 43–60. Boyle, J. A. (1977), ‘The Mongols in Europe.’ Reprinted in J. A. Boyle, The Mongol World Empire 1206–1307 (Variorum Reprints). London: Ashgate. Bracher, A. (1990), ‘Der Reflexbogen als Beispiel gentiler Bewaffnung.’ Typen der Ethnogenese unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Bayern, 1. Eds H. Wolfram and W. Pohl. Vienna: Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Frühmittelalterforschung, 12, 137–47. Brachmann, H.-J. (1983), ‘Der mittelalterliche Befestigungsbau. Untersuchungen zu Stellung und Funktion der Wehrbauten im Geneseprozeß der mittelalterlichen Feudalgesellschaft.’ Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Humboldt Universität, Berlin. Bradbury, J. (1985), The Medieval Archer. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. ––––––––. (1992), The Medieval Siege. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. Brandi, K. (1940), ‘Werla, Königspfalz, Volksburgen und Städte.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 3, 53–75. Breßlau, H. (1906), ‘Die Schlacht auf dem Lechfelde.’ Historische Zeitschrift, 97, 137–51. ––––––––. (1907), ‘Erwiderung.’ Historische Zeitschrift, 98, 471–2. Brühl, C. (1968), Fodrum, Gistum, Servitium Regis. Studien zu den wirtschaftlichen Grundlagen des Königtums im Frankenreich und in den fränkischen Nachfolgestaaten Deutschland, Frankreich und Italien vom 6. bis zur Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts. Cologne, Graz: Böhlau. ––––––––. (1990), Palatium und Civitas. Studien zur Profantopographie spätantiker Civitates vom 3. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert. 2: Germanien. Cologne, Vienna: Böhlau. ––––––––. (1995), Deutschland–Frankreich. Die Geburt zweier Völker. 2nd edn. Cologne, Vienna: Böhlau. Brundage, J. A. (1960), ‘Widukind of Corvey and the “Non Roman” Imperial Idea.’ Medieval Studies, 22, 15–26. Buc, P. (2001), The dangers of ritual: between early medieval text and social scientific theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Bumke, J. (1976), Studien zum Ritterbegriff im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert. 2nd edn with appendix ‘Zum Stand der Ritterforschung.’ Heidelberg: Winter. Bündig-Naujoks, M. (1963), ‘Das Imperium Romanum und die deutschen Ostkriege vom zehnten bis zum zwölften Jahrhundert.’ Heidenmission und Kreuzzugsgedanke in der deutschen Ostpolitik des Mittelalters. Ed. H. Beumann. Wege der Forschung, 7, 65–120. Burgess, E. M. (1953), ‘The Mailmakers Technique.’ The Antiquaries Journal, 33, 48–55. ––––––––. (1953), ‘Further Research into the Construction of Mail Garments.’ The Antiquaries Journal, 33, 193–203. Büttner, H. (1956), ‘Die Ungarn, das Reich und Europa bis zur Lechfeldschlacht des Jahres 955.’ Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte, 19, 433–58. ––––––––. (1956) ‘Zur Burgbauordung Heinrichs I.’ Blätter für deutsche Landesgeschichte, 92, 1–17. Carlo, G. (1899), ‘Der Ungarntribut unter Heinrich I.’ Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichschichte Geschichtsforschung, 20, 276–82. Cave, C. di (1995), L’Arrivo degli Ungheresi in Europa e la conquista della patria: Fonti e letteratura critica. Spoleto: Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo. Collins, R. (1996), ‘The Carolingians and the Ottonians in an Anglophone World.’ Journal of Medieval History, 22, 97–114. Contamine, P. (1980), La guerre au Moyen Age. 3rd edn. Paris: Presse université de France. Coulston, J. C. (1985), ‘Roman Archery Equipment.’ The Production and Distribution of Roman Military Equipment. Ed. M. C. Bishop. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 275. ––––––––. (1986), ‘Roman, Parthian, and Sassanid Tactical Development.’ The Defense of the BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 198

198 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Byzantine East, 1. Eds P. Freedman and D. Kennedy. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 297 (1). Cronon, W. (2003), Changes in the Land. Indians, Colonists, and the Ecology of New England. New York: Wang and Hill. Czeglédy, K. (1983), ‘From East to West: The Age of Nomadic Migrations in Eurasia.’ Trans. P. Golden, in Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi, 3, 25–125. Dachs, H. (1962), ‘Römerkastelle und frühmittelalterliches Herzog- und Königsgut an der Donau.’ Aus Bayerns Frühzeit. Friedrich Wagner zum 75. Geburtstag. Ed. J. Werner. Munich: C. H. Beck, 293–320. Dannenbauer, H. (1958), ‘Die Freien im karolingischen Heer.’ Grundlagen der mittelalterlichen Welt. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 240–56. ––––––––. (1958), ‘Königsfreie und Ministeriale.’ Grundlagen der mittelalterlichen Welt. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 329–53. Davis, R. H. C. (1989), The Medieval Warhorse. Origins, Development and Redevelopment. London: Thames and Hudson. Delbrück, H. (1923), Geschichte der Krigeskunst im Rahmen der politischen Geschichte, 1. Berlin: Verlag von Georg Stilke. Dennis, G. T. (1997), ‘The Byzantines in Battle,’ Byzantium at War. Ed. N. Oikonomides. Athens: Institute for Byzantine Studies, 166–78. D’Haenes, A. (1961), ‘Les incursions hongroises dans l’espace belge (954–955).’ Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale, 4, 423–40. Dienes, I. (1972), Die Ungarn um die Zeit der Landnahme. Trans. M. Meran. Budapest: Corvina. Diepolder, G. (1962), ‘Altbayerische Laurentiuspatrozinien,’ Aus Bayerns Frühzeit. Friedrich Wagner zum 75. Geburtstag. Ed. J. Werner. Munich: C. H. Beck, 371–96. Dopsch A. (1923), Wirtschaftliche und soziale Grundlagen der europäischen Kulturentwicklung aus der Zeit von Caesar bis auf Karl den Großen. 2nd expanded edn. Wien: Seidel. Duby, G. (1973), ‘Les origines de la Chevalrie.’ Hommes et structures du moyen age. Recueil d’articles. Paris: Mouton, 325–41. Duft, J. (1957), Die Ungarn in Sankt Gallen. Zürich: Belser Verlag. ––––––––. (1991), ‘Bischof Ulrich und St. Gallen.’ In J. Duft, Die Abtei St. Gallen, 2: Beiträge zur Kenntnis ihrer Persönlichkeiten. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 189–200. Dunbabin, J.(1985), ‘The Maccabees as Exemplars in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries.’ The Bible in the Medieval World. Essays in Memory of Beryl Smalley. Eds K. Walsh and D. Wood. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 31–41. Dutton, P. E. (1995), ‘Thunder and Hail over the Carolingian Countryside.’ Agriculture in the Middle Ages. Technology, Practice, and Representation. Ed. D. Sweeney. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 111–37. Eagleman, J. R. (1980), Meteorology: The Atmosphere in Action. New York: Van Nostrand Press. ––––––––. (1983), Severe and Unusual Weather. New York: Van Nostrand Press. Eberhard, W. (1978), ‘Der Prozess der Staatbildung bei mittelasiatischen Nomadenvölkern: China und seine westlichen Nachbarn.’ Beiträge zur mittelalterlichen und neueren Geschichte Zentralasiens. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 270–390. Eberl, B. (1955), Die Ungarnschlacht auf dem Lechfeld (Gunzele) im Jahre 955. Augsburg: Verlag Die Brigg. Ebner, H. (1977), ‘Die Burg in historographischen Werken des Mittelalters.’ Festschrift für Friedrich Hausmann. Ed. H. Ebner. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 119–51. Eckdahl, S. (1992), ‘Die Armbrust im Deutschordensland Preussen zu Beginn des 15. Jahrhunderts.’ Fasciculi Archaeologiae Historica, 5, 17–48. Eggers, M. (1995), ‘Das Großmährische Reich’ – Realität oder Fiktion? Eine Neuinterpretation der Quellen zur Geschichte des mittleren Donauraumes im 9.Jhdt. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann. ––––––––. (1998), ‘Die Slawenmissionen Passaus, Bischof Pilgrim und die Lorcher Fälschung.’ Südost-Forschungen, 57, 13–36. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 199

Bibliography 199

––––––––. (1998–2001), ‘Beiträge zur Stammesbildung und Landnahme der Ungarn.’ Pt. 1: ‘Die ungarische Stammesbildung.’ Ungarn Jahrbuch, 23, 1–63. Pt. 2; ‘Die Landnahme.’ Ungarn Jahrbuch, 26, 1–34. ––––––––. (1999), ‘“Der Bairische Geograph” und die Völkerschaften des Ostens.’ Eurasian Studies Yearbook, 71, 159–95. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Baiern, Pannonien und die Magyaren.’ Bayern–Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet, 65–76. Eggert, W. and Pätzold, B. (1984), Wir-Gefühl und Regnum Saxonum bei frühmittelalterlichen Geschichtsschreibern. Beiheft zum Archiv für Kulturgeschichte. Weimar: Böhlau. Ehlers, C. (2000/01), ‘Wahl des Ortes – Wahl des Königs. Überlegungen zu Forchheim als Pfalzort im Mittelalter.’ An Regnitz, Aisch und Wiesent. Heimatkundliche Zeitschrift für Stadt und Landkreis Forchheim. Supplement 1: Ludwig das Kind 900–911, 43–59. Ehlers, J. (2001), ‘Sachsen, Raumbewußtsein und Raumerfahrung in einer neuen Zentrallandschaft des Reiches.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 37–58. Einsle, H. (1979), Die Ungarnschlacht im Jahre 955: Ursachen und Wirkungen. Augsburg: Verlag Die Brigg. Elze, R. (1980), ‘Über die Leistungsfähigkeit von Gesandtschaften und Boten im 11. Jahrhundert. Aus der Vorgeschichte von Canossa 1075–1077.’ Histoire comparée de l’administration (IVe-XVIIIe Siècles). Eds W. Paravincini and K. F. Werner. Francia, Supplement 9, 3–10. Emmerich, W. (1957), ‘Landesburgen in ottonischer Zeit.’ Archiv für Geschichte von Oberfranken, 37, 50–97. Engel, P. (1998), The Realm of Stephen. A History of Medieval Hungary. Trans. T. Pálosfalvi. London: Tauris. English, J. A. (1994), On Infantry. Rev. edn. New York: Praeger. Erben, W. (1929), Kriegsgeschichte des Mittelalters. Historische Zeitschrift, supplement 16. Erdmann, C. (1938), ‘Der ungesalbte König.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 2, 311–40. ––––––––. (1942), ‘Das ottonische Reich als Imperium Romanum.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 5, 412–41. ––––––––. (1943), ‘Die Burgenordnung Heinrichs I.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 6, 59–101. ––––––––. (1963), ‘Der Heidenkrieg in der Liturgie und die Kaiserkrönung Ottos I.’ Ed. H. Beumann. Heidenmission und Kreuzugsgedanke in der deutschen Ostpolitik des Mittelalters. Wege der Forschung 7, 47–64. Erkens, F.-R. (1982), ‘Fürstliche Opposition in ottonisch–salischer Zeit. Überlegungen zum Problem der Krise des frühmittelalterlichen deutschen Reiches.’ Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, 64, 307–70. ––––––––. (1994), ‘Militia und Ritterschaft: Reflexionen über die Entstehung des Rittertums.’ Historische Zeitschrift, 258, 623–59. Fábián, G. (1970), ‘The Hungarian Composite.’ Journal of the Society of Archer Antiquaries, 13, 12–15. Faris, N. A. and Elmer, R. P. (1945), Arab Archery, an Arabic Manuscript of about 1500. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Fasoli, G. (1945), Le incursione Ungare in Europa nel secolo X. Florence: Sansoni. ––––––––. (1959), ‘Points de vue sur les incursions hongroises en Europe au Xe siècle.’ Cahiers de Civilisation médiévale, 2, 17–35. ––––––––. (1988), ‘Unni, Avari et Ungari nelle fonti e nella storia dei paesi d’occidente.’ Popoli delle Steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 35 (1), 13–44. Faussner, H. C. (1973), ‘Die Verfügungsgewalt des deutschen Königs über weltliches Reichsgut im Hochmittelalter.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 29, 347–55. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 200

200 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

––––––––. (1984), Königliches Designationsrecht und herzogliches Geblütsrecht. Zum Königtum und Herzogtum in Bayern im Hochmittelalter. Sitzungsbericht 429, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophische-Historische Klasse. Vienna. ––––––––. (1984), Zum Regnum Bavariae Herzog Arnulfs (907–938). Sitzungsbericht 426, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophische-Historische Klasse. Vienna. Fehring, G. P. (1974/75), ‘Frühmittelalterliche Wehranlagen in Süddeutschland.’ Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte, 4, 183–200. Ferdinandy, M. de (1956), ‘Die nordeurasiatischen Reitervölker und der Westen bis zum Mongolensturm.’ Historia Mundi. Ein Handbuch der Weltgeschichte in Zehn Bänden. Ed. F. Kern. 5: Frühmittelalter. Bern: Franke Verlag, 175–223. Fleckenstein, J. (1989), ‘Adel und Kriegertum und ihre Wandlung im Karolingerreich.’ In J. Fleckenstein, Ordnungen und formende Kräfte des Mittelalters. Ausgewählte Beiträge. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 287–306. ––––––––. (1989), ‘Zur Frage der Abgrenzung von Bauer und Ritter.’ In J. Fleckenstein, Ordnungen und formende Kräfte des Mittelalters. Ausgewählte Beiträge. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 307–14. ––––––––. (1989), ‘Zum Problem der agrarii milites bei Widukind von Corvey.’ In J. Fleckenstein, Ordnungen und formende Kräfte des Mittelalters. Ausgewählte Beiträge. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 333–56. ––––––––. (1989), ‘Die Entstehung des niederen Adels und das Rittertum.’ In J. Fleckenstein, Ordnungen und formende Kräfte des Mittelalters. Ausgewählte Beiträge. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 305–14. Flohn, H. (1950), ‘Klimaschwankungen im Mittelalter und ihre historisch-geographische Bedeutung.’ In Berichte zur Deutschen Landeskunde, 7, 347–57. Flohrschütz, G. (1967), ‘Die Freisinger Dienstmannschaft im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert.’ Beiträge zur altbayerischen Kirchengeschichte, 25, 9–79. ––––––––. (1989), Der Adel des Ebersberger Raumes im Hochmittelalter. Munich: C. H. Beck. Fodor, I. (1968), In Search of a New Homeland: The Prehistory of the Hungarian People and the Conquest. Budapest: Corvina. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Ungarnbild aus der Sicht der Archäologie.’ Bayern–Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet, 11–18. France, J. (1994), Victory in the East. A Military History of the First Crusade. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ––––––––. (1999), Western Warfare in the Age of the Crusades. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Frauenholz, E. von (1935), Entwicklungsgeschichte des deutschen Heerwesens, 1: Das Heerwesen der germanischen Frühzeit des Frankenreiches und des ritterlichen Zeitalters. Munich: C. H. Beck. Freed, J. (1976), ‘The Origins of the European Nobility: The problem of the Ministerials.’ Viator, 7, 211–41. ––––––––. (1978), ‘The Formation of the Salzburg Ministerialage in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries: An Example of Upward Social Mobility in the Early Middle Ages.’ Viator, 9, 67–102. Fried, J. (1989), Otto III und Boleslaw Chrobry. Widmungsbild des Aachener Evangeliars, der ‘Akt von Gnesen’ und das frühe polnische und ungarische Königtum. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. ––––––––. (1993), ‘Die Kunst der Aktualisierung in der oralen Gesellschaft,’ Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, 44, 422. ––––––––. (1994), Der Weg in die Geschichte. Die Ursprünge Deutschlands bis 1024. Berlin: Propyläen Verlag. Fried, P. (1996), ‘Rasso,’ Lexikon des Mittelalters, 6. Munich, Zürich: Artemis & Winkler, 449. Fügedi, E. (1986), Castle and Society in Medieval Hungary (1000–1437). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 201

Bibliography 201

Fuller, J. F. C. (1954), The Decisive Battles of the Western World and their Influence upon History, 1. Reprint (1993). Stevenage: Spa Books. Gamber, O. (1968), ‘Kataphrakten, Clibanarier, Normannenreiter.’ Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlung Wien, 64, 7–26. Giesebrecht, W. (1881), Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit, 1. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. Giesler, J. (1997), Der Ostalpenraum vom 8.–11. Jahrhundert. Studien zu archäologischen und schriftlichen Zeugnissen. 2: Historische Interpretation. Rahden, Westfalia: Verlag Marie Leidorf. Gillmor, C. (1992), ‘Practical Chivalry: The Training of Horses for Tournaments and Warfare.’ Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, 13, 5–30. Glaser, R. (2001), Klimageschichte Mitteleuropas. 1000 Jahre Wetter, Klima, Katastrophen. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Göckenjan, H. (1972), Hilfsvölker und Grenzwächter im mittelalterlichen Ungarn. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. ––––––––. (1977), ‘Zur Stammesstruktur und Heeresorganisation altaischer Völker. Das Dezimalsystem.’ Festschrift für Herbert Ludat zum 70. Geburtstag. Eds K.-D. Grothusen and K. Zernack. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 41–86. ––––––––. (1993), ‘Die Landnahme der Awaren aus historischen Sicht.’ Ausgewählte Probleme europäischer Landnahmen des Früh- und Hochmittelalters. Eds M. Müller-Wille and R. Schneider. Vorträge und Forschungen, 41(1), 275–302. Goetz, H. W. (1993), ‘Dux’ und ‘Ducatus.’ Begriffs- und verfassungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Entstehung des sogenannten ‘jüngeren’ Stammesherzogtums an der Wende vom neunten zum zehnten Jahrhundert. Bochum: Dissertation, Ruhr University Bochum. Goez, W. (1983), Lebensbilder aus dem Mittelalter. Die Zeit der Ottonen, Salier und Staufer. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Goffart, W. (1977), ‘The Date and Purpose of Vegetius’ De Re Militari.’ Traditio, 33, 65–100. Goldberg, E. J. (1995), ‘Popular Revolt, Dynastic Politics, and Aristocratic Factionalism in the Early Middle Ages: The Saxon Stellinga Reconsidered.’ Speculum, 70, 467–501. Grossman, D. (1995), On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. Boston, New York, London: Little, Brown and Company. Grothusen, K.-D. and Zernack, K. eds (1980), Europa Slavica – Europa Orientalis. Festschrift für Herbert Ludat zum 70. Geburtstag. Berlin: Duncker und Humblot. Grousset, R. (1939), L’empire des steppe. Attila, Gengis-Khan, Tamberlan. Paris: Payot. Györffy, G. (1983), Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft der Ungarn um die Jahrtausendwende. Vienna, Cologne, Graz: Böhlau. ––––––––. (1985), ‘Landnahme, Ansiedlung und Streifzüge der Ungarn.’ Acta Historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 31, 231–70. ––––––––. (1988), ‘Nomades et semi-nomades. La naissance de l’état Hongrois.’ Popoli delle Steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 35 (1), 621–35. ––––––––. (1994), ‘Die Landnahme der Ungarn aus historischer Sicht.’ Vorträge und Forschungen, 41 (2), 67–80. Hadank, K. (1908), ‘Einige Bemerkungen über die Ungarnschlacht im Jahre 955.’ Festschrift für Professor Hans Delbrück zu seinem sechzigsten Geburtstag. Berlin: Verlag von Georg Stilke, 95–114. Hägele, G. and Schneider, A. (1993), Vita Sancti Udalrici. Erlesene Handschriften und wertvolle Drucke aus zehn Jahrhunderten. Ed. R. Frankenberger. Katalog zur Ausstellung der Universitätsbibliothek Augsburg anläßlich der 1000-Jahr-Feier der Kanonisation des Hl. Ulrich. Augsburg: Universitätsbibliothek Augsburg. Hägermann, D. (2001), Karl der Große. Herrscher des Abendlandes. Berlin, Munich: Propyläen. Haldon, J. F. (2001), The Byzantine Wars. Battles and Campaigns of the Byzantine Era. Stroud: Tempus. Hammer, C. I. (2002), A Large-Scale Slave Society of the Early Middle Ages. Slaves and their families in early medieval Bavaria. Aldershot: Ashgate. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 202

202 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Handbuch der Historischen Stätten Deutschlands: Bayern (1961). Ed. K. Bosl. 3rd edn. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner. Hannig, J. (1984), ‘Zur Funktion der karolingischen “missi dominici” in Bayern und in den südlichen Grenzgebieten.’ Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte, Germanische Abteilung 101, 256–300. Harmuth, E. (1980), ‘Die Armbrust.’ Lexikon des Mittelalters, 1. Munich, Zürich: Artemis, 965–9. ––––––––. (1981–83), ‘Bogen.’ Lexikon des Mittelalters, 2. Munich, Zürich: Artemis, 318–22. Hatto, A. T, (1940), ‘Archery and Chivalry: A Noble Prejudice.’ The Modern Language Review, 35, 40–54. Hauck, K. (1974), ‘Erzbischof Adalbert von Magdeburg als Geschichtsschreiber. Mit Mitteilung der mikrochemischen Analyse der Heiligen Lanze in Wien.’ Festschrift für Walter Schlesinger. Ed. H. Beumann. Cologne, Vienna: Böhlau, 276–353. Heather, P. J. (1992), Goths and Romans. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 332–489. ––––––––. (1995), ‘Huns, Horses, and Nomadism.’ Abstracts of Papers,Twenty-First Annual Byzantine Studies. Session III: Byzantium and the Steppes. New York: New York University and the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 9. ––––––––. (1996), The Goths. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Hiestand, R. (1964), Byzanz und das Regnum Italicum im 10. Jahrhundert. Zürich: Fretz und Wasmuth. ––––––––. (1994), ‘Pressburg 907. Eine Wende in der Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reiches?’ Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte, 57, 1–20. Hildinger, E. (1997), Warriors of the Steppe: A Military History of Central Asia, 500 B. C. to 1700 A. D. New York: DaCapo. Hill, B. Jr (1969), The Rise of the First Reich. Germany in the Tenth Century. New York: Wiley. Hlawitschka, E. (1986), Vom Frankenreich zur Formierung der europäischen Staaten- und Völkergemeinschaften, 840–1046. Ein Studienbuch zur Zeit der späten Karolinger, der Ottonen und der frühen Salier in der Geschichte Mitteleuropas. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Hofbauer, J. (1960), ‘Südost-Bayern und die Ungarn am Anfang des zehnten Jahrhunderts. Die Schlacht an der Rott.’ Ostbaierische Grenzmarken, 4, 145–54. Hoffmann, H. (1957), ‘Politik und Kultur im ottonischen Reichskirchensytem. Zur Interpretation der Vita Brunonis des Ruotger.’ Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter, 22, 31–55. ––––––––. (1986), Buchkunst und Königtum im ottonischen und frühsalischen Reich. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann. Holzfurtner, L. (1985), ‘Destructio monasteriorum. Untersuchungen zum Niedergang der bayerischen Klöster im zehnten Jahrhundert.’ Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktiner Ordens und seiner Zweige, 96, 65–86. ––––––––. (1985), Das Klostergericht Tegernsee. In Historischer Atlas von Bayern, Teil Altbayern, 54. Munich: Kommission für bayerische Landesgeschichte. ––––––––. (2003), Gloriosus Dux. Studien zu Arnulf von Bayern (907–937). Munich: C. H. Beck. Holzmann, R. (1955), Geschichte der sächsischen Kaiserzeit (900–1024). Munich: Georg D. W. Calley. Hooper, N. and Bennett, M. (1996), Cambridge Illustrated Atlas. Warfare: The Middle Ages, 768–1487. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hübner, W. (1958), ‘Zum römischen und frühmittelalterlichen Augsburg.’ Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 5, 154–238. ––––––––. (1984), ‘Siedlungskontinuität und Bedeutungswandel zwischen Spätantike und Mittelalter im Augsburger Raum.’ Jahrbuch des Vereins für Augsburger Bistumsgeschichte, 18, 162–98. Hundt, F. H. G. von (1879), ‘Über das Fundationsbuch des Klosters Ebersberg.’ Archivalische Zeitschrift, 4, 282–92. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 203

Bibliography 203

Hyland, A. (1990), Equus. The Horse in the Roman World. London, New Haven: Yale University Press. ––––––––. (1994), The Medieval Warhorse from Byzantium to the Crusades. Stroud: Alan Sutton. Illyés, E. (1988), Ethnic Continuity in the Carpatho-Danubian Area. East European Monographs. New York: Columbia University Press. Innes, M. (2000), State and Society in the Early Middle Ages. The Middle Rhine Valley 400–1000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jahn, J. (1984), Augsburg Land. In Historischer Atlas von Bayern, Teil Schwaben, 11. Munich: Kommission für Bayerische Landesgeschichte. ––––––––. (1985), ‘Topographie, Verfassung und Gesellschaft der mittelalterlichen Stadt – das Beispiel Augsburg.’ Missellanea Suevica Augustana. Der Stadt Augsburg dargebracht zur 2000 Jahrfeier. Ed. P. Fried. Augsburger Beiträge zur Landesgeschichte Bayerisch-Schwabens, 3, 9–41. James, S. (1988), ‘The Fabricae: State Arms Factories of the Later Roman Empire.’ Military Equipment and the Identity of Roman Soldiers. Ed. J. C. Coulston. British Archeological Reports, International Series 394. Jankovich, M. (1971), They Rode into Europe. London: Harrap Press. Jankuhn, H. (1969), ‘“Heinrichsburgen” und Königspfalzen.’ Deutschlands Königspfalzen, 2, 61–9. Jäschke, K.-U. (1975), Burgenbau und Landesverteidigung um 900. Überlegungen zu Beispielen aus Deutschland, Frankreich und England. Vorträge und Forschungen, supplement 16. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke. Jettmar, K. (1966), ‘Die Entstehung der Reiternomaden.’ Saeculum, 17, 1–11. Johrendt, J. (1971), ‘“Milites” und “Militia” im 11. Jahrhundert. Untersuchungen zur Frühgeschichte des Rittertums in Frankreich und Deutschland.’ Dissertation Erlangen- Nürnberg. A summary is available in Das Rittertum im Mittelalter, ed. A. Borst. Wege der Forschung, 349. Junkelmann, M. (1990–93), Die Reiter Roms. 1: Reise, Jagd, Triumph und Circusrennen. 2: Der militärische Einsatz. 3: Zubehör, Reitweise, Bewaffnung. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Kaegi, W. E. Jr (1964), ‘The Contribution of Archery to the Turkish Conquest of Anatolia.’ Speculum, 39, 96–108. ––––––––. (1981), ‘The Crisis in Military Historiography.’ Armed Forces and Society, 7, 299–316. Kahsnitz, R. (2001), ‘Frühottonische Buchmalerei.’ In Otto der Große, 1. Ed. M. Puhle. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 225–50. Kallen, G. (1924), ‘Der Säkularisationsgedanke in seiner Auswirkung auf die Entwicklung der mittelalterlichen Kirchenverfassung.’ Historisches Jahrbuch, 44, 197–210. Kaminsky, H. H. (1972), Studien zur Reichsabtei Corvey in der Salierzeit. Cologne, Graz: Böhlau. Karpf, E. (1985), Herrscherlegitimation und Reichsbegriff in der ottonischen Geschichtsschreibung des 10. Jahrhunderts. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Kasparek, M. U. (1958), ‘Stand der Forschung über den Hufbeschlag des Pferdes.’ Zeitschrift für Agrargeschichte und Agrarsoziologie, 6, 38–43. Kasten, B. (1998), ‘“Beneficium” zwischen Landleihe und Lehen. Eine alte Frage, neugestellt.’ Mönchtum, Kirche, Herrschaft. Ed. D. R. Bauer. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke. Keeley, L. (1996), War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Keller, H. (1976), ‘Das Kaisertum Ottos des Großen im Verständnis seiner Zeit.’ Otto der Grosse. Wege der Forschung, 450, 218–95. ––––––––. (1982), ‘Militia,Vasallität und frühes Rittertum im Spiegel oberitalienischer Miles- Belege des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts.’ Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, 62, 59–117. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 204

204 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

––––––––. (1982), ‘Reichsstruktur und Herrschaftsauffassung in ottonisch-frühsalischer Zeit.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 16, 74–128. ––––––––. (1994), ‘Machabaeorum pugnae. Zum Stellenwert eines biblischen Vorbilds in Widukinds Deutung der ottonischen Königsherrschaft.’ Iconologia sacra. Mythos, Bildkunst und Dichtung in Religions- und Sozialgeschichte Alteuropas. Festschrift für Karl Hauck zum 75. Geburtstag. Ed. D.-N. Staubach. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 417–37. ––––––––. (1995), ‘Widukinds Bericht über die Aachener Wahl und Krönung Ottos I.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 29, 390–453. ––––––––. (1999), ‘Entscheidungssituationen und Lernprozesse in den “Anfängen der deutschen Geschichte.” Die Italien- und Kaiserpolitik Ottos des Großen.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 33, 20–48. ––––––––. (2000), ‘Die Ottonen und Karl der Große.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 34, 112–31. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Das neue Bild des Herrschers. Zum Wandel der “Herrschaftspräsentation” unter Otto dem Großen.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 189–213. Kellner, M. G. (1997), Die Ungarneinfälle im Bild der Quellen bis 1150. Von der ‘Gens detestanda’ zur ‘Gens ad fidem Christi conversa’ . Munich: Verlag Ungarisches Institut. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Das Ungarnbild in den frühen mittelalterlichen Textquellen.’ Bayern–Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet, 35–42. Kirmeier, J., Schneidmüller, B. and Weinfurter, S. (2002), Kaiser Heinrich II. 1002–1024. Katalog zur Bayerischen Landesausstellung. Augsburg: Haus der Bayerischen Geschichte. Klebel, E. (1957), ‘Diplomatische Beiträge zur bairischen Gerichtsverfassung.’ In Probleme der Bayerischen Verfassungsgeschichte. Munich: C. H. Beck, 144–83. Klopsteg, P. (1987), Turkish Archery and the Composite Bow. Manchester: The Simon Archery Foundation. Koder, J. (2001), ‘Byzanz als Mythos und Erfahrung im Zeitalter Otttos I.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern Verlag, 237–50. Köhler, O. (1935), Das Bild des geistlichen Fürsten in den Viten des 10., 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts. Berlin: Verlag für Staatswissenschaften und Geschichte. ––––––––. (1968), ‘Das ottonische Reichskirchensystem. Ein Forschungsbericht.’ Adel und Kirche. Festschrift für Gerd Tellenbach. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder Verlag, 141–204. Kolias, T. (1988), Byzantinische Waffen: Ein Beitrag zur byzantinischen Waffenkunde von den Anfängen bis zur lateinischen Eroberung. Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Koller, H. (1991), ‘Quellenlage und Stand der Forschung zur Landnahme der Ungarn aus der Sicht des Abendlandes.’ Baiern, Ungarn und Slawen im Donauraum. Ed. W. Katzinger. Linz: Österreichischer Arbeitskreis für Stadtgeschichtsforschung, 77–91. Köpke, R. (1867), Widukind von Korvei. Ein Beitrag zur Kritik der Geschichtsschreiber des zehnten Jahrhunderts. Berlin: Mittler Verlag. –––––––– and Dümmler, E. (1876), Kaiser Otto der Große (936–973). Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot. Kovàcs, L. (1989), Münzen aus der ungarischen Landnahmezeit: archäologische Untersuchung der arabischen, byzantinischen, westeuropäischen und römischen Münzen aus dem Karpatenbecken des 10. Jahrhunderts. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. Kovrig, I. (1980), ‘Reitervölker: Die Awaren im Karpathenbecken.’ In Handbuch der europäischen Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte, 2. Ed. J. A. Houtte. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta Verlag, 617–23. Krah, A. (1993), ‘Die fränkisch-karolingische Vasallität seit der Eingliederung Bayerns in das Karolingerreich. Überlegungen zur Ausformung der Vassalität in karolingischer Zeit im Anschluß an die Darstellung bei Walter Kienast.’ Zeitschrift für Bayerische Landesgeschichte, 56, 613–33. Kralovansk, A. (1991), ‘Neuere siedlungs- und baugeschichtliche Daten aus dem 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 205

Bibliography 205

Jahrhundert in Ungarn.’ Baiern, Ungarn und Slawen im Donauraum. Ed. W. Katzinger. Linz: Österreichischer Arbeitskreis für Geschichtsforschung, 173–94. Krause, H. (1970), ‘Die liberi der lex Baiuvariorum.’ Festschrift für Max Spindler zum 75. Geburtstag. Munich: C. H. Beck, 41–74. Kreuzer, G. (1979), ‘Die Hoftage der Könige in Augsburg im Früh- und Hochmittelalter.’ Bayerische-schwäbische Landesgeschichte an der Universität Augsburg 1975-77. Vorträge, Aufsätze, Berichte. Ed. P. Fried, Augsburger Beiträge zur Landesgeschichte Bayrisch- Schwabens, 1. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 83–120. ––––––––. (1993), ‘Die “Vita sancti Oudalrici episcopi Augustani” des Augsburger Dompropstes Gerhard – Eine literarkritische Untersuchung.’ In Bischof Ulrich von Augsburg (890–973). Ed. M. Weitlauff. Weißenhorn, Bavaria: Anton H. Konrad Verlag, 169–78. Kristó, G. (1996), Hungarian History in the Ninth Century. Szeged: Szegedi Középkor ász Mühely. Kuchenbuch, L. (1978), Bäuerliche Gesellschaft und Klosterherrschaft im 9. Jahrhundert. Studien zur Sozialstruktur der familia der Abtei Prüm. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. Kühn, H.-J. (1991), Die byzantinische Armee im 10. Jahrhundert: Studien zur Organisation der Tagmata. Byzantinische Geschichtsschreiber, supplement 2. Ed. J. Koder. Vienna: Österreichische Akadmie der Wissenschaften. Kundert, J. K. (1998), ‘Der Kaiser auf dem Lechfeld,’ Concilium medii aevi, 1, 77–97. Lamb, H. H. (1977), Climate: Present, Past, and Future, 2: Climatic History and the Future. London: Methuen. Laudage, J. (1992), ‘Hausrecht und Thronfolge. Überlegungen zur Königserhebung Ottos des Großen und zu den Aufständen Thankmars, Heinrichs und Luidolfs.’ Historisches Jahrbuch, 112, 23–71. ––––––––. (1993), ‘“Luidolfingisches Hausbewußtsein.” Zu den Hintergründen eines Kölner Hoftages von 965.’ In Köln Stadt und Bistum in Kirche und Reich des Mittelalters. Festschrift für Odilo Engels zum 65.Geburtstag. Eds H. Vollrath and S. Weinfurter. Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau, 23–59. ––––––––. (2001), Otto der Große. Eine Biographie. Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet. ––––––––. (2003), ‘Widukind von Corvey und die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft.’ Von Fakten und Fiktionen. Mittelalterliche Geschichtsvorstellungen und ihre kritische Aufarbeitung. Ed. J. Laudage. Vienna, Cologne: Böhlau, 193–224. Last, M. (1972), ‘Die Bewaffnung der Karolingerzeit,’ Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, 41, 77–93. Leonhard, R. (1991), The Art of Maneuver: Maneuver-Warfare Theory and Air-Land Battle. Novato, CA: Presidio Press. Lewis, A. R. (1988), Nomads and Crusaders. London, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Lexikon des Mittelalters (1977–99). Munich, Zurich: Artemis. Leyser, K. (1982), ‘Henry I and the Beginnings of the Saxon Empire’ and ‘The Battle at the Lech, 955.’ In K. Leyser, Medieval Germany and Its Neighbors 900–1250. London: Hambledon, 11–68. ––––––––. (1994), Communication and Power in Medieval Europe. 1: The Carolingian and Ottonian Centuries, 2: The Gregorian Revolution and Beyond. Ed. T. Reuter. London: Hambledon. Lindner, R. P. (1981), ‘Nomadism, Horses and Huns.’ Past and Present, 92, 3–19. Linzel, M. (1961), ‘Die politische Haltung Widukinds von Korvei.’ In M. Linzel, Ausgewählte Schriften, 2. Berlin: Akadamie Verlag, 316–46. ––––––––. (1961), ‘Die Schlacht von Riade und die Anfänge des deutschen Staates.’ M. Linzel, Ausgewählte Schriften, 2. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 92–125. Lot, F. (1946), L’art militaire et les armées au Moyen Age en Europe et dans le Proche Orient, 2 vols. Paris: Payot. Lotter, F. (1958), Die Vita Brunonis des Ruotger, ihre historiographische und ideengeschichtliche Stellung. Bonn: Röhrscheid Verlag. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 206

206 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Lübke, C. (2001), ‘Die Erweiterung des östlichen Horizonts: Der Eintritt der Slaven in die europäische Geschichte im 10. Jahrhundert.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 113–26. Lüdtke, F. (1936), König Heinrich I. Berlin: Verlag von Georg Stilke. Ludwig, F. (1897), Untersuchungen über Reise- und Marschgeschwindigkeit im XII. und XIII. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Mittler Verlag. Lüttich, R. (1910), Ungarnzüge in Europa im 10. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Ebering Verlag. Luttwak, E. N. (1976), The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A. D. to the Third. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Lutz, F. (1952), ‘Die Isarübergänge nördlich Münchens.’ Oberbayerisches Archiv, 77, 113–40. Macartney, C. A. (1930), The Magyars of the IXth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Maenchen-Helfen, O. (1978), Die Welt der Hunnen. Eine Analyse ihrer historischen Dimension. Vienna, Cologne, Graz: Böhlau. Malich, B. (1985), ‘Byzanz und der Balkan in der ersten Hälfte des 10. Jahrhunderts.’ Jahrbuch für Geschichte der sozialistischen Länder Europas, 29, 99–216. Marquardt, J. (1961), Osteuropäische und ostasiatische Streifzüge. 2nd edn. Hildesheim: Hirzel Verlag. Maurer, H. (1978), Der Herzog von Schwaben. Grundlagen, Wirkungen und Wesen seiner Herrschaft in ottonischer, salischer und staufischer Zeit. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke. Mayr, G. (1989), Ebersberg: Gericht Schwaben. Historischer Atlas von Bayern, Teil Altbayern, 48. Munich: Kommission für bayerische Landesgeschichte. McEwen, E. (1974), ‘Persian archery texts: chapter eleven of Fakhir-I Mudabirs Adab al-Harb (early thirteenth century).’ Islamic Quarterly, 18, 76–99. McKitterick, R. (1980), ‘Charles the Bald (823–877) and his Library: The Patronage of Learning.’ English Historical Review, 95, 28–47. ––––––––. (1989), The Carolingians and the Written Word. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Merisowsky, M. (1996), ‘Regierungspraxis und Schriftlichkeit im Karolingerreich: Fallbeispiel der Mandate und Briefe.’ Schriftkultur und Reichsverwaltung unter den Karolingern. Ed. R. Schieffer. Nordrhein-Westfälische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 97. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 109–66. Mesterházy, K. (1994), ‘Die Landnahme der Ungarn aus archäologischer Sicht.’ Vorträge und Forschungen, 41 (2), 23–66. Mitterauer, M. (1963), Karolingische Markgrafen im Südosten: Fränkische Reichsaristokratie und bayerischer Stammesadel im österreichischen Raum. Vienna: Böhlaus Nachfolge. Moravcsik, G. (1946), ‘Byzantine Christianity and the Magyars in the Period of their Migration.’ American Slavic and East European Review, 14, 29–45. ––––––––. (1947), ‘The Role of the Byzantine Church in Medieval Hungary.’ American Slavic and East European Review, 18/19, 134–51. ––––––––. (1970), Byzantium and the Magyars. Amsterdam: Adolf A. Hakkert. Morillo, S. (1990), ‘Hastings, an unusal battle.’ The Haskins Society Journal, 2, 95–104. Müller, R. (1991), ‘Ethnische Verhältnisse in der Umgebung von Keszthely und Zalavar im 9.–10. Jahrhundert.’ Baiern, Ungarn und Slawen im Donauraum. Ed. W. Katzinger. Linz: Österreichischer Arbeitskreis für Stadtgeschichtsforschung, 163–72. Müller-Mertens, E. (1963), Karl der Große, Ludwig der Fromme und die Freien. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. ––––––––. (1972), ‘Der Stellingaaufstand: Seine Träger und die Frage der politischen Macht.’ Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, 20, 818–42. ––––––––. (1980), Die Reichsstruktur im Spiegel der Herrschaftspraxis Ottos des Großen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Mütherich, F. (1972), ‘Die verschiedenen Bedeutungsschichten in den frühmittelalterlichen Psalterillustrationen.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 6, 232–44. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 207

Bibliography 207

Naumann, H. (1976), ‘Rätsel des letzten Aufstandes gegen Otto I. (953–954).’ Otto der Grosse. Ed. H. Zimmermann. Wege der Forschung, 450, 70–136. Nekuda, V. (1991), ‘Magyaren und Mähren um die Wende des 9. und 10. Jahrhunderts im Lichte archäologischer Funde und Forschungen.’ Baiern, Ungarn und Slawen im Donauraum. Ed. W. Katzinger. Linz: Österreichischer Arbeitskreis für Stadtgeschichtsforschung, 121–38. Nickel, H. (1983), ‘Bow and Arrow/Crossbow.’ Dictionary of the Middle Ages, 2. Ed. J. R. Strayer. New York: Scribner, 350–54. Nobis, G. (1955), ‘Beiträge zur Abstammung und Domestikation des Hauspferdes nach Studien an ur- und frühgeschichtlichen Funden Nordwest- und Mitteldeutschlands.’ Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Zuchtbiologie, 64, 201–46. Nolte, E. (1969-70), ‘Die Raubzüge der Ungarn und ihre Auswirkungen auf die Saargegend.’ Zeitschrift für die Geschichte der Saargegend, 17/18, 364–71. Nonn, U. (1970), ‘Das Bild Karl Martells in den lateinischen Quellen vornehmlich des 8. und 9. Jahrhunderts.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 4, 70–137. Oman, C. (1924), A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages, 1: A.D. 378–1278. 2nd edn revised and enlarged, London. Reprint (1959), New York: Burt Franklin Press. Ostrogorsky, G. (1959), ‘The Byzantine Empire in the World of the Seventh Century.’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 13, 1–21. Palágyi, S. (1989), ‘Rekonstruktionsmöglichkeiten der Pferdegeschirre aus Pannonien.’ In Roman Military Equipment. Ed. C. von Driel Murray. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 476. Paterson, W. F. (1966), ‘The Archers of Islam.’ Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient, 9, 69–87. ––––––––. (1967), ‘The Fustat Ring.’ Journal of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries, 10, 29–32. Patzl, W. (1973), ‘Die Anfänge der Ulrichsverehrung im Bistum Augsburg und im Reich.’ Jahrbuch des Vereins für Augsburger Bischofsgeschichte, 7, 65–74. Payne-Gallwey, R. (1903), The crossbow, mediaeval and modern, military and sporting. Its construction, history and management. With a treatise on the ballista and catapult of the ancients and an appendix on the catapult, ballista and the Turkish bow. London: The Royal Society. Pohl, W. (1988), Die Awaren. Ein Steppenvolk in Mitteleuropa, 567-822 n. Chr. Munich: C. H. Beck. Poschl, A. (1925), ‘Kirchengutveräußerungen und kirchliches Veräußerungsverbot im frühen Mittelalter.’ Archiv für katholisches Kirchengut, 105, 3–96. Powell, T. G. E. (1971), ‘The Introduction of Horseriding to Temperate Europe: A Contributory Note.’ Proceedings of the Praehistoric Society, 37 (2). Prinz, F. (1971), Klerus und Krieg im Frühen Mittelalter. Untersuchungen zur Rolle der Kirche beim Aufbau der Königsherrschaft. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann. Puhle M. ed. (2001), Otto der Große. Magdeburg und Europa, 1: Essays. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Rausing, G. (1967), The bow. Some notes on its origin and development. Lunds: Acta archaeologica Lundensia. Reeve, M. D. (2000), ‘The transmission of Vegetius’s Epitoma rei militaris.’ Aevum, 74, 243–355. Reindel, K. (1953), Die bayerischen Liutpoldinger 893–989. Munich: C. H. Beck. ––––––––. (1954), ‘Herzog Arnulf und das Regnum Bavariae.’ Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte, 17, 187–288. ––––––––. (1956), ‘Besprechung: Eberl, Barthel, Die Ungarnschlacht auf dem Lechfeld (Gunzele) im Jahre 955.’ In Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte, 19, 173–4. ––––––––. (1971). ‘Königtum und Kaisertum der Liudolfinger und frühen Salier in Deutschland und Italien: 919–1056.’ Handbuch der europäischen Geschichte. Ed. T. Schieffer. Stuttgart: Union Verlag. ––––––––. (1973) Bayern im Mittelalter. Munich: C. H. Beck. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 208

208 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Rentschler, M. (1981), Luidprand von Cremona. Eine Studie zum ostwestlichen Kulturgefälle. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann Verlag. Reuter, T. (1982), ‘“The Imperial Church System” of the Ottonian and Salian Rulers: A Reconsideration.’ Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 33, 347–74. ––––––––. (1985), ‘Plunder and Tribute in the Carolingian Empire.’ Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 35, 75–94. ––––––––. (1990), ‘The end of Carolingian military expansion.’ Charlemagne’s Heir. New perspectives on the reign of Louis the Pious. Eds P. Goodmann and R. Collins. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 391–405. ––––––––. (1991), Germany in the Early Middle Ages c. 800–1056. Harlow, New York: Longman. ––––––––. (2001), ‘König, Adelige, Andere: “Basis” und “Überbau” in ottonischer Zeit.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. 127–50. Reynolds, S. (1994), Fiefs and Vassals. The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Révész, L. (1992), ‘Die Bereitschafts-Bogenbehälter (Groythos) in den Gräbern der ungarischen Landnahmezeit.’ Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 44, 345–69. ––––––––. (1995), The Ancient Hungarians. Budapest: Corvinus. Ringel, H. (1997), ‘Kontinuität und Wandel. Die Bündner Pässe Julier und Septimer von der Antike bis ins Mittelalter,’ Auf Römerstraßen im Mittelalter. Eds F. Burgard and A. Haverkamp. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 211–94. Ripoche, J. P. (1977), ‘Constantin VII. Porphyrogenete et sa politique hongroise au milieu du Xe siècle.’ Südostforschungen, 36, 1–12. Rogers, G. S. (1996), ‘An Examination of Historical Explanations for the Mongol Withdrawal from East Central Europe.’ East European Quarterly, 30, 3–26. Róna-Tas, A. (1985), ‘Ethnogenese und Staatsgründung. Die türkische Komponente in der Ethnogenese des Ungarntums.’ Studien zur Ethnogenese. Abhandlungen der Rheinisch- Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 72, 107–42. ––––––––. (1996), Hungarians and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Budapest: Central European University Press. Rosenwein, B. (1996), ‘The Family Politics of Berengar I, King of Italy (888–924).’ Speculum, 71, 247–89. Rummel, P. (1992), Ulrich von Augsburg. Bischof, Reichsfürst, Heiliger. 2nd edn. Augsburg: Sankt Ulrich Verlag. Sage, W. (1980), ‘Zur archäologischen Erforschung mittelalterlicher Burgen in Südbayern.’ Wittelsbach und Bayern, 1 (1): Die Zeit der frühen Herzöge. Ed. H. Glaser. Munich: C. H. Beck, 126–32. ––––––––. (1980), ‘Ausgrabungen in hochmittelalterlichen Burganlagen Südbayerns.’ In Die Wittelsbacher im Aiacher Land. Gedenkschrift der Stadt Aichach und des Landkreises Aichach- Friedberg zur 800 Jahrfeier des Hauses Wittelsbach. Ed. T. Grad. Aichach: Mayer Verlag, 48–55. ––––––––. (1990), Auswirkung der Ungarnkriege in Altbayern und ihr archäologischer Nachweis. Publikationen der Aventinum Stiftung für Altbayern, 8. Abensberg, Bavaria. Sander, E. (1939), ‘Die Heeresorganisation Heinrich I.’ Historisches Jahrbuch, 59, 1–26. Sawyer, P. (1971), The Age of the Vikings. London: Penguin. Schäfer, D. (1905), ‘Die agrarii milites des Widukind.’ Sitzungsberichte der königlichen preussischen Akademie Berlin. Berlin, 569–77. ––––––––. (1905), ‘Die Ungarnschlacht von 955.’ Sitzungsberichte der königlichen preussischen Akademie Berlin. Berlin, 552–68. ––––––––. (1906), ‘Die Ungarnschlacht von 955.’ Historische Zeitschrift, 97, 538–51. Schaller, H. M. (1974), ‘Der heilige Tag als Termin mittelalterlicher Staatsakte.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 30, 1–24. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 209

Bibliography 209

Scherff, B. (1985), Studien zum Heer der Ottonen und der ersten Salier (919–1056). Dissertation Bonn. Bonn: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn. Schieffer, R. (2001), ‘Der Platz Ottos des Großen in der Geschichte.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 17–36. Schmid, A. (1972), Das Bild des Bayernherzogs Arnulf (907–937) in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung von seinen Zeitgenossen bis zu Wilhelm Giesebrecht. Kallmünz, Oberpfalz: Lassleben Verlag. Schmid, H. F. (1962), ‘Otto I. und der Osten.’ Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichschichte Geschichtsforschung, supplement 20 (1). Festschrift zur Jahrtausendfeier der Kaiserkrönung Ottos des Großen. Graz, Cologne: Böhlau, 70–106. Schmid, K. (1964), ‘Die Thronfolge Ottos des Großen.’ Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschichte, Germanische Abteilung, 80, 80–163. Schmid, P. (1977), Regensburg. Stadt der Könige und Herzöge im Mittelalter. Regensburger Historische Forschungen, 6. Kallmünz, Oberpfalz: Lassleben Verlag. Schmitt, J. (1977), Unterschungen zu den Liberi Homines der Karolingerzeit. Bern: Lang Verlag. Schmitt, U. (1974), Villa Regalis Ulm und Kloster Reichenau. Untersuchung zur Pfalzfunktion des Reichsklostergutes in Alemannien (9.–12. Jahrhundert). Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck- Instituts für Geschichte, 43. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Schmuki, K. (1995), Die St. Galler Klostergeschichte Ekkeharts IV. Führer durch die Ausstellung in der Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen (29. November 1994–4. November 1995). St Gallen: Verlag am Klosterhof. Schneider, W. (1989), Die südwestdeutschen Ungarnwälle. Arbeiten zur alamannischen Frühgeschichte, 16, Tübingen. Schneidmüller, B. (2001), ‘Am Ende der Anfänge. Schlußgedanken über ottonische Erfolge in Geschichte und Wissenschaft.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 345–74. –––––––– and Weinfurter, S. eds (2001), Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern. Schnith, K. (1989), ‘Gerhard v. Augsburg.’ Lexikon des Mittelalters. 4. Artemis: Munich, Zürich, 1315. Schoenfeld, E. G. (1999), ‘Freedom and Military Reform in Tenth-Century Saxony.’ The Circle of War in the Middle Ages. Essays on Medieval Military and Naval History. Eds D. Kagay and L. Villalon. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell and Brewer, 59–71. Schrader, C. R. (1976), The Ownership and Distributution of Manuscripts of the De re militari of Flavius Vegetius Renatus. New York: Scribner. ––––––––. (1979), ‘A Handlist of Extant Manuscripts Containing the De re militari of Flavius Vegetius Renatus.’ Scriptorium, 33, 280–305. ––––––––. (1981), ‘The Influence of Vegetius’ De re militari.’ Military Affairs, 5, 167–72. Schröder, D. (1975), Stadt Augsburg. Historischer Atlas von Bayern, Teil Schwaben, 10. Munich: Kommission für Bayerische Landesgeschichte. Schulze, H. K. (1974), ‘Rodungsfreiheit und Königsfreiheit: zur Genese und Kritik neuerer verfassungsrechtlicher Theorien.’ Historische Zeitschrift, 219, 529–50. Schulze-Dörrlamm, M. (1984), ‘Das ungarische Kriegergrab von Aspreslés-Corps. Untersuchungen zu den Ungarneinfällen nach Mittel-, West- und Südeuropa (899–955 n. Chr.) mit einem Exkurs zur Münzchronologie altungarischer Gräber.’ Jahrbuch des römisch- germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 9, 473–514. ––––––––. (1988), ‘Untersuchungen zur Herkunft der Ungarn und zum Beginn ihrer Landnahme im Karpatenbecken.’ Jahrbuch des römisch-germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 35, 373–478. Schünemann, K. (1938), ‘Deutsche Kriegsführung im Osten während des Mittelalters.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 2, 54–84. Schwarz, K. (1971), ‘Die Birg bei Hohenschäftlarn – eine Burganlage der karolingisch- ottonischen Zeit.’ Führer zu vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Denkmälern, 18, 222–37. ––––––––. (1989), Archäologisch-topographische Studien zur Geschichte frühmittelalterlicher Fernwege zwischen Isar, Inn und Chiemsee. Kallmünz, Oberpfalz: Lassleben Verlag. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 210

210 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Semmler, J. (1990), ‘Francia Saxoniaque oder Die ostfränkische Reichsteilung von 865/76 und die Folgen.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 46, 337–74. Settia, A. (1984), ‘Gli Ungari in Italia e i mutamenti territoriali fra VIII–X secolo.’ In I barbari in Italia. Eds M. B. Arcamone et al. Milan: Libri Scheiwiller. Shepard, J. (1985), ‘Information and Disinformation and Delay in Byzantine Diplomacy.’ Byzantinische Forschung, 10, 233–93. ––––––––. (1999), ‘Byzantium and the Steppe Nomads: The Hungarian dimension.’ Byzanz und Ostmitteleuropa. Eds G. Prinzing et al. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 55–83. Sherwood, F. H. (1980), Studies in Medieval Uses of Vegetius’ Epitoma rei militaris. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of Califiornia Press. Silagi, G. (1988), ‘Die Ungarnstürme in der ungarischen Geschichtsschreibung – Anonymus und Simon von Keza.’ Popoli delle steppe: Unni, Avari, Ungari. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 35 (1), 245–69. Sinor, D. (1972), ‘Horse and Pasture in Inner Asian History.’ Oriens extremus, 19, 171–84. ––––––––. (1978), ‘The Greed of the Northern Barbarians.’ Aspects of Altaic Civilization II. Eds L. V. Clark and P. A. Draghi. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 171–82. ––––––––. (1981), ‘The Inner Asian Warriors.’ Journal of the American Oriental Society, 101, 133–44. ––––––––. (1982), ‘Interpreters of Medieval Inner Asia.’ Asian and African Studies: Journal of the Israel Oriental Society, 16, 293–320. ––––––––. (1990), ‘The Hun period.’ The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. Ed. D. Sinor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 177–205. ––––––––. (1993), ‘The Historical Attila.’ Attila. The Man and His Image. Eds F. H. Bäuml and M. D. Birnbaum. Budapest: Central European University Press, 3–15. Smail, R. C. (1956), Crusading Warfare (1097–1193). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smith, A. D. (1981), ‘War and Ethnicity: The Role of Warfare in the Formation, Self-Images and Cohesion of Ethnic Communities.’ Ethnic and Racial Studies, 4, 375–95. Springer, M. (1979), ‘Vegetius im Mittelalter.’ Philologus, 123, 85–90. ––––––––. (1985), ‘Vergleichende Untersuchungen zur Militärgeschichte, vornehmlich des früheren Mittelalters.’ Ph. D. Dissertation, Universität Magdeburg. ––––––––. (1994), ‘Agrarii milites.’ Niedersächsisches Jahrbuch für Landesgeschichte, Neue Folge 66, 129–66. ––––––––. (2001), ‘955 als Zeitwende – Otto I. und die Lechfeldschlacht.’ Otto der Große. Magdeburg und Europa, 1: Essays. Ed. M. Puhle. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 199–208. Staab, F. (1980), ‘A Reconsideration of the Ancestry of Modern Political Liberty: The Problem of the So-Called “King’s Freemen,” (Königsfreie).’ Viator, 11, 51–69. Steger, H. (1961), David rex et propheta. König David als vorbildliche Verkörperung des Herrschers und Dichters im Mittelalter nach Bilddarstellungen des achten bis zwölften Jahrhunderts. Nüremberg: Carl Verlag. Stein, W. (1922), Handels- und Verkehrsgeschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit. Berlin. Reprint (1967), Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Stengel, E. E. (1926), ‘Über den Ursprung der Ministerialität.’ Papsttum und Kaisertum, Festschrift für Paul Kehr, 168–84. Munich: Verlag der Münchner Drucke. ––––––––. (1941), ‘Die Entstehungszeit der “Res Gestae Saxonicae” und der Kaisergedanke Widukinds von Korvei.’ In E. E. Stengel, Corona Quernea, Festgabe Karl Strecker zum 80. Geburtstage. Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 136–58. Stephenson, P. (2000), Byzantium’s Balkan Frontier. A Political Study of the Northern Balkans, 900–1204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Review Article: Early Medieval Hungary in English.’ Early Medieval Europe, 10, 95–112. Störmer, W. (1972), Adelsgruppen im Früh- und Hochmittelalterlichen Bayern. Munich: Kommission für bayerische Landesgeschichte. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 211

Bibliography 211

––––––––. (1973) Früher Adel: Studien zur politischen Führungsschicht im fränkische-deutschen Reich von 8. bis 11. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart: Hiersemann. ––––––––. (1977) ‘Adel und Ministerialität im Spiegel der bayerischen Namengebung (bis zum 13. Jahrhundert). Ein Beitrag zum Selbstverständnis der Führungsschichten.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 33, 84–152. ––––––––. (1988), ‘Zum Wandel der Herrschaftsverhältnisse und inneren Strukturen Bayerns im 10. Jahrhundert.’ Festschrift für Karl Bosl zum 80. Geburtstag, 2. Ed. F. Seibt. Munich: Collegium Carolinum, 267–85. ––––––––. (1991), ‘Bayern und der bayerische Herzog im 11. Jahrhundert. Fragen der Herzogsgewalt und der königlichen Interessenpolitik.’ Die Salier und das Reich, 1. Ed. S. Weinfurter. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 503–47. ––––––––. (1991), ‘Ostfränkische Herrschaftskrise und Herausforderung durch die Ungarn. Zur Ausformung des sogen. jüngeren bayerischen Stammesherzogstums und zum Wandel der Herrschaftsverhältnisse in Bayern.’ Baiern, Ungarn und Slawen im Donauraum. Ed. W. Katzinger, Linz: Österreichischer Arbeitskreis für Stadtgeschichtsforschung, 55–77. ––––––––. (1995), ‘Karolingische Pfalzen in Franken.’ Regensburg, Bayern und Europa. Festschrift für Kurt Reindel zum 70. Geburtstag. Eds L. Kolmer and P. Segl. Regensburg: Universitätsverlag, 161–73. ––––––––. (1997/98), ‘Graf Rasso von Grafrath in der westbayerischen Adelsgesellschaft des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts.’ Fürstenfeldbruck: Jahresbericht des Graf-Rasso-Gymnasiums. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Alpenübergänge von Bayern nach Italien. Transitprobleme zwischen Spätantike und Hochmittelalter.’ Bayern und Italien. Politik, Kultur, Kommunikation (8.–15 Jahrhundert). Festschrift für Kurt Reindel zum 75. Geburtstag. Eds H. Dopsch, S. Freund and A. Schmid. Munich: C. H. Beck, 37–54. Streich, G. (1984), Burg und Kirche während des deutschen Mittelalters. Untersuchungen zur Sakraltopographie von Pfalzen, Burgen und Herrensitzen, 2 vols. Vorträge und Forschungen, supplement 29 (1): Pfalz und Burgkapellen bis zur staufischen Zeit. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke. Szabo, T. (1984), ‘Antikes Erbe und karolingisch-ottonische Verkehrspolitik.’ Institutionen Kultur und Gesellschaft im Mittelalter. Festschrift für Josef Fleckenstein zu seinem 65. Geburtstag. Eds L. Fenske, W. Rösener and T. Zotz. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 125–45. Szádeczky-Kardoss, S. (1990), ‘The Avars.’ The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. Ed. D. Sinor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thompson, J. W. (1926), Feudal Germany. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Toth, S. L. (1999), ‘The territories of the Hungarian tribal federation around 950 (some observations on Constantine VII’s “Tourkia”).’ Byzanz und Ostmitteleuropa. Eds G. Prinzing et al. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 23–33. Toynbee, A. (1973), Constantine Porphyrogenitus and his World. London, New York, Toronto: Alfred Knopf. Treadgold, W. (1995), Byzantium and Its Army 284–1081. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. ––––––––. (1989), ‘On the Value of Inexact Numbers.’ Byzantinoslavica, 50, 57–61. Tyroller, F. (1953/54), ‘Zu den Säkularisationen des Herzogs Arnulf.’ Studien und Mitteilungen zur Geschichte des Benediktinerordens und seiner Zweige, 65, 303–12. Uhlirz, M. (1963), ‘Der Adriaraum in der Südostpolitik der ottonischen Kaiser (962–1002).’ Südost-Forschungen, 22, 118–25. Uslar, R. von (1964), Studien zu frühgeschichtlichen Befestigungen zwischen Nordsee und Alpen. Graz, Cologne: Böhlau. Vajay, S. de (1968), Der Eintritt des ungarischen Stämmebundes in die Europäische Geschichte (862–933). Mainz: v. Hase & Koehler. ––––––––. (1970), ‘Über die Wirtschaftsverhältnisse der landnehmenden Ungarnstämme.’ Ungarn-Jahrbuch, 2, 9–19. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 212

212 The Battle of Lechfeld and its Aftermath, August 955

Varady, L. (1989), ‘Revision des Ungarn-Image von Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos. Textanalysen und Reinterpretation zu den Aussagen des Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos über die Politikgeschichte der Ungarn.’ Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 82, 22–58. Verbruggen, J. F. (1965), ‘L’armée et la stratégie de Charlemagne.’ Karl der Große, 1: Persönlichkeit und Geschichte. Ed. H. Beumann. Düsseldorf: Schwann Verlag, 420–36. ––––––––. (1997), The Art of Warfare in Western Europe during the Middle Ages from the Eighth Century to 1340. 2nd edn revised and enlarged. Trans. S. Willard and S. C. M. Southern. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell and Brewer. Vinski, Z. (1983), ‘Zu karolingischen Schwertfunden aus Jugoslawien.’ Jahrbuch des römisch- germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 30, 465–501. Waitz, G. (1885), Jahrbücher des Deutschen Reiches unter König Heinrich I. (919–936). Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot. Wallace-Hadrill, J. M. (1975), Early Medieval History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wallmenich, K. von (1909), ‘Zur Ungarnschlacht von 955.’ Oberbayerisches Archiv, 54, 283–6. Warner, D. A. (1989), ‘The Cult of Saint Maurice. Ritual Politics and Political Symbolism in Ottonian Germany.’ Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles. Wehli, T. (2001), ‘Das Ungarnbild in der europäischen Klosterkultur vom 11. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert.’ Bayern–Ungarn: Tausend Jahre. Eds H. W. Wurster, M. Treml and R. Loibl. Passau, Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet, 43–54. Weinfurter, S. (1991), Herrschaft und Reich der Salier. Grundlinien einer Umbruchzeit. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke. ––––––––. (1999), The Salian Century. Main Currents in an Age of Transition. Trans. B. M. Bowlus. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. ––––––––. (1999), ‘Kaiserin Adelheid und das ottonische Kaisertum.’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 33, 1–19. ––––––––. (1999), Heinrich II (1002–1024). Herrscher am Ende der Zeiten. Regensburg: Verlag Friedrich Pustet. ––––––––. (2001), ‘Ottonische “Neuanfänge” und ihre Perspektiven.’ Ottonische Neuanfänge. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1–16. Weinrich, L. (1971), ‘Tradition und Individualität in den Quellen zur Lechfeldschlacht 955.’ Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, 27, 291–313. ––––––––. (1972), ‘Laurentius-Verehrung in ottonischer Zeit.’ Jahrbuch für die Geschichte Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands, 21, 45–66. Weithmann, M. W. (1992), ‘Die “Ungarn-Fliehburgen” des 10. Jahrhunderts: Beispiele aus dem südbayerischen Raum.’ Ungarn-Jahrbuch, 20, 1–26. ––––––––. (1995), Inventar der Burgen Oberbayerns. 3rd rev. and expanded edition. Munich: Fachberatung Heimatpflege. Weitlauff, M. ed. (1993), Bischof Ulrich von Augsburg (890–973). Seine Zeit – sein Leben – seine Verehrung. Festschrift aus Anlaß des tausendjährigen Jubiläums seiner Kanonisation. Weißenhorn, Bavaria: Anton H. Konrad Verlag. Werner, K. F. (1968), ‘Heeresorganisation und Kriegsführung im deutschen Königreich des 10. und 11. Jahrhunderts.’ Ordinamente militari in Occidente nell’alto Medievo. Settimane di studio del centro italiano di studi sull’alto medievo, 15 (2), 813–75. White, L. (1965), Medieval Technology and Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wolf, G. (1976), ‘Über die Hintergründe der Erhebung Liudolfs von Schwaben.’ Otto der Grosse. Ed. H. Zimmermann. Wege der Forschung, 450, 56–69. ––––––––. (1983), ‘Das sogenannte “Gegenkönigtum” Arnulfs von Bayern 919.’ Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung, 91, 375–400. Wolfram, H. (1987), Die Geburt Mitteleuropas, Geschichte Österreichs vor seiner Entstehung 378–907. Berlin: Siedler. ––––––––. (1993), ‘The Huns and the Germanic Peoples.’ Attila. The Man and His Image. Eds F. H. Bäuml and M. D. Birnbaum. Budapest: Central European University Press, 16–26. BIBLIOGRAPHY THE BATTLE 5/4/06 10:24 am Page 213

Bibliography 213

Wurster, W. H. (1994), Das Bistum Passau und seine Geschichte. Von den Anfängen bis zur Jahrtausendwende, 1. Strasbourg: Edition du Signe, 37. ––––––––, Treml, L. and Loibl, R. eds (2001), Bayern–Ungarn. Tausend Jahre. Regensburg: Verlag Friederich Pustet. Zatschek, S. H. (1939), ‘Bayern und Böhmen im Mittelalter,’ Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte, 12, 1–36. Zimmermann, H. (1962), Ottonische Studien. Festschrift zur Jahrtausendfeier der Kaiserkrönung Ottos des Großen. Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung, supplement 21. Cologne, Graz: Böhlau. ––––––––. (1977), ‘Zu Flodoards Historiographie und Regestentechnik.’ Festschrift für Helmut Beumann zum 65.Geburtstag. Eds K.-U. Jäschke und R. Wenskus. Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke, 204–27. This page intentionally left blank