[HISTORICAL ISSUE] - Medieval Serbian Political Structure

[Son of Fire]

Ok, I have been trying to figure out medieval Serbian political structure and that recent web documentary I posted seems to have shed some light on it.
I may jump around a bit, but it is just so I can get all the information out as I have it and understand it.

Now from what I gather, the Serb states tended to have a strong central authority, with little to no subinfeudation… with most of the nobility reporting directly to the lord, be it a King (Kralj) or Duke (Ban or Knez?) for the smaller states.

From the documentary, it seems that there was some minor subinfeudation, with 4 Zupans under a “Duke” and 7 Satniks (sp?) under each Zupan, both of which were appointed from the local nobility and represented the court authority.
Though I wonder about the set numbers… as to why they had to be specific?
I do know that not zupas had Zupans, and not even all Zupans had zupas, and yet others had parts of different ones.
So it was not as clear and linear as earlier times.
As for Satniks… I have no clue about them at all, who they are, what they did, or what equivalent rank in Western Europe they might even remotely equate to.

Now I know the collective nobility was called Vlastela, and they were made up of various Bashtiniks (hereditary freeholds), and Pronijar (directly appointed nonhereditary holdings).
But all the fiefs varied considerably, and the number, size, and strength of the fiefs determines whether the noble is Veliki Vlastela (Greater noble) or Vlastelinicic (Lesser noble) or even Vojnik (soldier), as well as the nobles power and influence. Though I assume that Velmoze is only the absolute top tier nobility in the sense of power an influence.

Now from what I understand, depending on the power and wealth of the noble in question, they may also have their own household troops of varying types as well. Though I am not sure if that would constitute Druzina or not. But considering that there seemed to be minimal subinfeudation, chances are that the nobles in question would support the troops, and supply them with the gear needed, and that tends to sound similar to how Druzina were portrayed in other Slavic cultures.

Now is any of this correct?
Or I am I way off the mark?

[NikeBG]

As for Satniks… I have no clue about them at all, who they are, what they did, or what equivalent rank in Western Europe they might even remotely equate to.

Sadnik means judge (at least in archaic Bulgarian, I presume it's close enough in Serbian as well).

[Son of Fire]

Judge eh?
So maybe something equivalent to a Justicar?

[Aru]

"A kneževima, to jest županima, zapovijedio je da svaki ima pod sobom jednog satnika, koji bi s njim jednako pravedno sudio narodu"

"And to Dukes (Princes), or Župans, he ordered to each have Satnik under him, who would with equal justice judge the people. "

"Svugdje, pak, u pokrajinama odredio je bana, to jest vojvodu, od svoje braće po krvi, i župane, to jest kneževe, i satnike, to jest, centurione, od plemenitijih ljudi iz istih pokrajina. "

"Everywhere in provinces he (king) set a Ban, that is Vojvoda, of his brothers by blood, and Župans, that is Knez, and satniks, that is, centurions, of noble folk from those provinces"

-Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja (my translation).

Maybe you can compare it with bailiff

Per Wikipedia:
"The term was first applied in England to the king's officers generally, such as sheriffs, mayors, etc., and more particularly to the chief officer of a hundred. "

Satnik is equaled with stotnik - the one who commands the hundred - or centurion in Latin.

So basically Satnik is officer in service of the Duke who oversees the law, acts as a judge and representative of the Duke in certain province of area.

Satniks are also mentioned right from the start of Statute (law codex) of Vinodol among people called to help write the statute. (1288) among elders and priests.

Modern translation of satnik is captain (satnik=captain in modern military ranks, excluding navy).
But it is also translated as captain even when dealing with medieval texts. You just have to imagine it in civilian terms.

[Son of Fire]

Thanks...

Though it does kind of sound like a justicar...

And I think Duke = Knez... at least in this case...

[Hrobatos]

title knez is not just duke...
for instance Croatia in 900 year
knez was ruler of state but also high nobility, they all had title "knez"

it basicly represents high nobleman, ruler of state as well as other high nobility

i haf theory about this knez title but later about it

also ruler of Rascia early was called "veliki župan" (grand zhupan)

[slavic_crusader]

more sounds like "jupan" in english

[Son of Fire]

Well it is kind of like the term "Prince"... yes it can mean the eldest son and heir of the king, but it also means the ruler of a realm...
Which Machiavelli wrote his famous book, he used the term Prince to denote the various rulers, be them kings, dukes, or what have you...
Basically, it just means the single ruler of a state....

I was just looking for a medieval definition that seemed to be the most common during the various periods, as well as similar structure for a basis of comparison... So I kind of think of it like Prince / duke... tends to fit... as one can have a Duke under a king (Kralj) or independently... and the Prince / Duke tends to fit that...

[Hrobatos]

look...
ruler of state can be knez
ruler od city, fortress or something in state is also knez

so Croatia in 840 had manny people with title knez while one of them ruled state

i think it originates from modern Russia
if nations were created by tribe aliances every knez ruled a tribe
one tribe was above others and gave name to the nation,and their ruler-knez was ruler of all
but didnt had any specific title

its like with germanic tribes where each tribe had from 1 to 5 kings
king represented war-leader
same with knez

[Son of Fire]

@Hrobatos...
Which is effectively the same thing as a Prince / Duke... which is what I stated...
I know there will be no exact correlation, so I was looking for something similar...

Though I thought, at least in the tribal early periods, there were just Zupans, and a Veliki Zupan...

[Aru]

Though I thought, at least in the tribal early periods, there were just Zupans, and a Veliki Zupan...

The word Knez derives from proto-Germanic Kuningaz (which evolved into modern König, King), that means it was borrowed centuries before Slavic migrations.

The Priest of Duklja gave rather detailed account on organization of his imaginary South Slavic state (Imaginary because the state and ruler names that he described are inconsistent with all other historical sources).
He said that Kingdom (which stretched from Istria to mid Albania) was divided into Zagorje (Up-Hill) and Primorje (By the Sea), and Zagorje was divided into Rascia and Bosnia while Primorje to Red and White Croatia. To rule the provinces King named Knezs (what the hell is plural of knez, knezs just doesn't sound right!!) or Bans who were his cousins and Župans or Vojvoda's of local nobility of those provinces provinces.
Each Ban (Knez) had 7 satniks (centurions) to judge and collect taxes, and each Župan(Vojvoda) had 1 satnik. Ban had to give 1/2 of taxes to King while Župan had to give 2/3 to King. He notes that Župans answered directly to King and not to any Ban.

Few decades and kings later he says that land was without the king for a while and Bans vassalized Župan's.
Some more time later land was again without a king and one noble who ruled Rascia didn't dare to claim neither title of King nor Ban, but called himself Veliki Župan because he ruled other Župans.

[Son of Fire]

I have also heard that it may also in turn come from a proto Indo-European...
But either way, it seems to be an early Slav word found in many different Slavic peoples...

The last part about the Bans and Satniks is pretty much what I stated in my first post...
Though I thought Vojvodas meant "war chief" or "war lord"... in which case wouldn't that be more of a military title?
As for Ban and Knez... which would it be? Or would it just be interchangeable?

[Aru]

Vojvoda means soldier-leader. Originally military title, later administrative and noble title.

Band and Knez are interchangable, as well as Vojvoda and Župan.
At least according to Priest of Duklja, and at his time.

I know you wrote the same, the Chronicle is basically the only place where this (bans, župans and satniks, numbers and organization) is ever written, at least as far as I know. And as I wrote, it is work of fantasy, so don't take it for granted.

[Son of Fire]

But at what time period did it become a title?

I saw something about that online... something like there are things that are correct and verifiable, and other things that are just way off...
I just looked at the documentary I posted to get my info... though it seems to have drawn on that as well...
Meh, who knows... either way, it least it is something in regards to the political structure...

Though I wonder why the Satniks had set numbers...
From what I recall, some Zupans, or Knez's (I know it sounds odd, but hey, my Serbian sucks)... had varying amounts of land, be it freehold, alod, or pronia...
Now granted alods would not have had taxation in the typical feudalism sense since it is own wholly by its own, so all that income would go directly to him, which is probably why they were smaller, and rarer... though freeholds, and of course pronia's would all need to be taxed...
The point is, that depending how much land, and how many people are on it... one may not need 7 Satnick's... or may need more...