And the Historical and Linguistic Border Between Livonians and Estonians
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
/ LINGUISTICA URALICA XLV 2009 4 doi:10.3176 lu.2009.4.02 URMAS SUTROP KARL PAJUSALU (Tallinn—Tartu), (Tartu) MEDIEVAL LIVONIAN COUNTY METSEPOLE AND THE HISTORICAL AND LINGUISTIC BORDER BETWEEN LIVONIANS AND ESTONIANS The article focuses on the issue of the northern border of Metsepole iAnbtshteraCct h. ronicle of Henry of Livonia and in two earlier treaties from the 13th century. The paper analyzes the treatment of the medieval status of the Coastal Southern Pärnumaa in historical tradition. Linguistic evidence of the contacts of Salaca Livonian with the neighbouring Pärnumaa dialects is studied. It is shown that the common features may either be the result of the common origin of the Estonian Pärnumaa dialects and the Livonian language in prehistoric times, or they are brought to light by language contacts and reveal adstratum phenomena. The Livonian substratum in the coastal dialect of southern Pärnu- maa is a matter of debate in the case of some morphosyntactic similarities. Livonian, Estonian, language contacts, history, Metsepole. Keywords: 1. Introduction Fifteen years ago, Enn Tarvel, a famous Estonian historian wrote that there was still an urgent need to study the Livonian settlement history even if ”The borders of ethnic territories of the Livonian tribes in the 13th century are indeed very well defined on the basis of the Chronicle of Henry of Livonia, and the documents and records from the 13th to 15th centuries”. The results of the [former] research are summarized in the fundamental work by A. Bielenstein (1892). According to Tarvel, nothing new has been written on the settlement history during the past hundred years (1995 : 58). Most linguists and historians in Estonia and in Latvia agree with Tarvel on that the borders of ancient Livonians are well documented and the border between Estonians and (Metsepole) Livonians coincides approximately with the modern state border between Estonia and Latvia. What is unclear is the Livonian settlement history in Courland. Encouraged by Tarvel’s claim that there is still an urgent need to study the Livonian settlement history, the authors of this paper will try to show that the question of the medieval border between Estonians and Livonians is not yet resolved. Most problems arise while carefully reading the Chronicle of Henry of Livonia (CLH). Surprisingly, one can find modern maps in the literature where the territory of Livonians reached as far as 253 Urmas Sutrop , Karl Pajusalu the River Pärnu in Estonia in the 13th century (e.g. Minahan 2000 : 424; Christiansen [1980] 1997 : XXII). Literature offers different interpretations as to the northern and north-eastern border of Metsepole. The territory of Livonians under discussion covers the southern region of modern Pärnumaa — the Coastal Southern Pärnumaa with Häädemeeste, Tahkuranna, Surju, Paikuse and partially Saarde districts. To the west, Metsepole bordered on the east coast of the Gulf of Riga, to the east on the northern Baltic Latgalian county Tālava, to the south- east on the Livonian Idumea County, and to the south on the Livonian Turaida County with Gauja Livonians. The centre of Metsepole was the Turaida Castle. The question of the Estonian-Livonian tribal border is at the same time the question of borders between medieval Estonian counties and districts. We have different questions to answer: first, was this part of Pärnumaa really Livonian and did it belong to Metsepole and second, if not, did it belong instead to the Sackala County or even to the Soontagana district of the Maritima County? In the following we will first shortly treat the question of the northern border of the Metsepole County in the CLH and in early treaties in the 13th century. Second, we will examine the historical traditions to see how the question of the medieval status of the coastal region of Southern Pärnumaa is resolved. Third, we will offer some linguistic evidence to show that the Pärnumaa dialects have many common and archaic features — in pronunciation, lexicon and grammar — with the Livonian language. Finally, different linguistic interpretations will be discussed. 2. The north border of Metsepole in the Chronicle of Henry of Livonia and in two treaties from the 13th century The Chronicle of Henry of Livonia or the Livonian Chronicle is the primary source of the early medieval history of Estonia and Latvia (Heinrichs 1955; Henricus Lettus 2003). 1 It is mainly from this chLroivnliäcn le - dthisacthweeChharvoeniknowledge on the ancient Estonian and Livonian tribes, their social organisation, customs, religion, and territories. There are at least four - teen passages in the chronicle where the border between Metsepole Livo - nians and Estonians is mentioned in the beginning of the 13th century. Here, under the term border we mean not a line on a map, but a situation where somebody moves from one known point to another known point mentioned in the chronicle; the border lies between them. The first references to the border are made in XIV, 10: ”To take vengeance on the nations of Estonians the whole army followed Russin, Caupo, and others, who went ahead of the Rigans and pilgrims into Metsepole. They marched to the sea and, following day and night the direct route along the sea, they came to the first province, which is called Soontagana.” Here 1 The format of the citations from the chronicle is to the chapter (Roman number) and paragraph (Arabic number) according to the critical edition by Leonid Arbusow and Albert Bauer (Heinrichs 1955) and the translation of the passages follows the EnglishLtrivalnäsnladtiisocnhebyChJaromneisk A. Brundage’s (Henricus Lettus 2003). The chronicle is not divided into chapters and paragraphs in the same way in these issues of the chronicle. 254 Medieval Livonian County Metsepole... it is quite interesting that Soontagana is called the first Estonian province, which means that from the direction of Riga, Estonia started beyond the River Pärnu. Soontagana is called the first province of Estonia also in XIX, 8. Most passages with reference to the border do not give us enough infor - mation to decide on the location of the border, e.g. in the same passage (XIV, 10): ”the Estonians who had first escaped came hurriedly from Soon - tagana and the other near-lying provinces with a great army to Metsepole”. In our context one of the most important places in the chronicle is (XV, 7): ”They [Brothers, Livonians, Wenden, and Letts] assembled a great army in Metse - pole, marched to the sea, and went for a three-day journey beside the sea. They turned, after this, toward the province of the Sackalians and journeyed for three days through forests and swamps by a very bad road. [ ––– ] At length, on the seventh day, they came to the villages. [ ––– ] They [ ––– ] returned by another road, dividing all the loot equally among themselves. With joy they returned to Livonia.” Here the army started its journey somewhere in the heart of Metse - pole, marched a three-day journey beside the sea. It means that they reached near the mouth of the River Pärnu, but before Soontagana turned towards the direction of Sackala and continued their journey for three more days before they reached the Sackalian villages. The other road probably went from Sackala directly to Lake Burtnieki. From this passage it is possible to infer that the coastal region of Pärnumaa did not belong to Sackala at that time. The chronicle mentions several times how the Teutonic army marched from Sallaca (Metsepole) directly to the Soontagana or Maritime provinces, e.g. XVIII, 5; XIX, 3; XXI, 5; XXII, 9. Two border treaties are also known from the second part of the 13th century. In 1259 Livonians from Metsepole and Estonians from Soontagana concluded a border treaty (see Berkholz 1886 : 44—46; Perlbach 1886 : 20— 23). Both sides agreed that in 1259 Livonians inhabited the territories north of the River Salaca to the River Orwaguge [Orajõe], and the Cape of Ladde- keriste [Laigaste nina] would remain the northern border of Metsepole . The next border contract from 1276, now between the archiepiscopacy and the Livonian Order agreed that the new border was along the rivers Coddeyogge [German Koddiak , Rozēni at the River Salaca] and Hainejecke [Ainaži] (see Berkholz 1886 : 45; Hildebrand 1880 : 376—277) . Half a century earlier, the data from the CLH and the treaties are only prima facie contradictory. It is possible that Soontagana skillfully took control over the territory in question using the chaos resulting from the Livonian Crusade. Passages from the chronicle clearly show that Soontagana was located beyond the River Pärnu, since it took several days and nights to march from Salaca to Soontagana. 3. Whom did Coastal Southern Pärnumaa belong to? According to mainstream historians, Coastal Southern Pärnumaa belonged to Estonians (see e.g. Strods 1963 : map on p. 7; Jaanits, Laul, Lõugas, Tõnisson 1982 : 408; Eesti aastal 1200 : maps on pp. 10 and 12; Latvijas vēstures atlants 2005 : map on p. 12; Kriiska, Tvauri, Selart, Kibal, Andersen, Pajur 2006 : map on p. 44). The mainstream tradition is based on the influ - ential book ”Grenzen des lettischen Volksstammes” by Dr. August Bielen - stein (1826—1907) , a famous Latvian theologist, linguist, folklorist, and histo - 255 Urmas Sutrop , Karl Pajusalu rian who placed the border between Soontagana and Metsepole on the River Orajõgi (Bielenstein 1892 : map II). He comments that the north border of Metsepole was beyond the River Salaca, approximately at the border between Estonians and Latvians at the end of the 19th century (Bielenstein 1892 : 59). Bielenstein did not find any evidence from the CLH, because on the one hand he was enthusiastic about the 1259 and 1276 border contracts (see above), and on the other hand he relied on a comment by Hermann Hildebrand on the CLH ”north of the River Salaca is Soontagana and in south Metsepole ” ( Hildebrand 1865 : 65) .