ВЛАДАРСКА ТИТУЛА КРАЉА ДРАГУТИНА У ДАНИЛОВОМ ЗБОРНИКУ
THE REGNAL TITLE OF KING DRAGUTIN IN DANILO’S COLLECTION OF LIVES

Summary/Abstract: Archbishop Danilo II’s note in his Collection of Lives (Danilov zbornik) that Dragutin was the “sovereign king of the entire Serbian and Littoral, Danubian and Syrmian land”, i.e. the developed titulature, in terms of territorial components, ascribed to him at the time when he assumed the Serbian throne in 1276, has most often been explained in Serbian historiography as a mistake made by learned Archbishop Danilo II. It was claimed that during his rule from 1276 to 1282 he was merely the king of “the Serbian and Littoral land”, taking power of the Syrmian and Danubian land only after 1284, i.e. 1291/1292. It is also held in historiography that archbishop Danilo II brings again unreliable news when he states that Dragutin, after suffering an injury and letting the throne to his brother Milutin, went to “the area of his state, the land called Mačva, granted to him by his father-in-law, the Hungarian king, certainly Stephen V (1270‒1272). Thus, another piece of information is discarded with the explanation that his father-in-law could not have ceded Mačva to him as he died in 1272. Writing about Dragutin’s taking over of Mačva in 1284, after vain Queen Elizabeth ceded it to him, Archbishop Danilo II states that the former Serbian king “received anew the rule over the Syrmian land”. Although Archbishop Danilo II precisely states that Dragutin “received anew the rule”, i.e. began to rule Mačva again, this statement is also considered in Serbian historiography as being another of Danilo’s errors – it is suggested that it is unclear why Danilo uses the term “anew”. The fact that the archbishop is obviously not contradictory and brings in different places the news that can be placed in a logical sequence made us re-examine the credibility of his account. After giving an overview of the history of the Lordship of Mačva (Syrmia Ulterior), we have put forward the hypothesis that the Hungarian side as well, during the conclusion of the marriage, certainly before 1271, between Dragutin and Katalina, undertook “the obligation” to cede a part of the territory, i.e. Mačva to its son-in-law Dragutin as Archbishop Danilo II clearly indicates “the obligation” of the Serbian side after the marriage conclusion, i.e. that Dragutin would inherit the Serbian throne. Such decision could certainly influence the relationship between king Stephen V and the then duke of Mačva Béla Rostislavić. However, the death of both king Stephen V and duke Béla in 1272, in a span of only a few months, and the arrival of the regency that grappled with numerous challenges of the dissatisfied nobility seem to have further blurred the time of Dragutin’s adventus in Mačva. In the period from November 1272 to September 1273, the preserved diplomatic records mention the bans of Mačva, and after several years of the absence of bans, in 1279 Ugrin Csák, who was the ban of both Mačva and Bosnia (the documents from 30 January and June‒August 1279), is mentioned. It is possible that by establishing the banate, the regency in fact aimed to prevent the fulfilment of “the obligation” of late king Stephen V and thus to preclude that Mačva left Hungary. However, following the above news of Archbishop Danilo and the news from diplomatic records, we assumed that the September 22th 1273, when we find on that position ban Egidius, is at the same time the terminus ante quem non for Dragutin’s adventus in Mačva, which he would keep until 1279 not incidentally. After the Great Church Council in Buda, or again under the influence of tighter reorganisation of the southern provinces, Mačva again came under the direct Hungarian rule. It is after this year that queen mother Elizabeth appeared in the role of the lord of Mačva and Bosnia, ruling this area, as it is known, until 11 June 1284. In our opinion, this is, at the same time, the terminus ante quem non when Dragutin “received anew the rule over the Syrmian land”, as noted by Archbishop Danilo II. However, in addition to “the entire Serbian and Littoral” and “Syrmian land”, in Dragutin’s royal titulature archbishop Danilo II states that he was also the king of “the Danubian land”. Similarly to the case of Mačva, after the death of king Stephen V, the ban (Gregorius) began to lead the newly formed Braničevo-Kučevo banate, which also survived for one year only (1272/1273). We find again, but only in the Kučevo area, the mention of ban Stephen, in December 1279. It is at this time that the activity of Bulgarian noblemen of Cuman origin Darman and Kudelin began, for whom Danilo II writes that they “took root in the state of the Braničevo land, in the place called Ždrelo”. The archbishop notes this news about their longer presence in Braničevo simultaneously with informing us that king Stephen “received anew” the rule over the Syrmian land, i.e. in 1284. They certainly assumed power in Braničevo, while there are no data for Kučevo. As the bans of Braničevo and Kučevo are not mentioned in the period from 1273 to 1279, while only the ban of Kučevo is mentioned for the last stated year, while archbishop Danilo II specifies that Dragutin also ruled “the Danubian land”, we put forward the thesis that Dragutin ruled Kučevo, and that the Cumans took hold of Braničevo. This is also corroborated by the data that Dragutin, as the former king, mustered “all the forces of his state” and went to their area, but as the land of Braničevo was “strongly fortified” and “he could not do any malice to them”, he returned to his state. This soon provoked a backlash from the Cumans, which is why the Syrmian king asked his brother Milutin to help. In 1291/1292, with joint military forces the two of them managed to banish “those foes from ’dostoànià svoègo’”. Based on all the above, it may be concluded that, in light of the analysis of indirect news from diplomatic records, the information provided by Archbishop Danilo II that king Dragutin ruled the Serbian and Littoral, Danubian and Syrmian land in the 1276–1282 period, and in case of Braničevo and Kučevo and Syrmia Ulterior (Mačva) until 1279, may be credible. After withdrawing from the throne in 1282, he kept parts of central Serbia, i.e. the area of Rudnik, Arilje and the area around the Lim river. In 1284, he received “anew” Mačva together with Belgrade, Usora and Soli from the Hungarian king, his wife’s brother Ladislaus IV, after they were ceded to him by Hungarian queen mother Elizabeth after 11 June 1284 and before 5 August. Finally, in 1291/1292, with the help of his brother king Milutin, Dragutin added to his estates the territory of Braničevo, held in the meantime by Darman and Kudelin.

• Details
• Contents