Search

In most antique and medieval geographical and historical works Scythia is described as an extensive land with altering borders. The present study examines Scythia as a gradually forming geographical concept. My starting point was the description of Scythia and the Hungarian Kingdom by the Italian humanist and historian, Antonio Bonfini (1427–1503). The introduction of Bonfi ni’s monumental book (Rerum Ungaricarum decades) is a very important passage, because the author intended to synthesize the geographical knowledge of antique authors and of his contemporaries about Scythia. Until now, this introduction has hardly been examined; it was mainly regarded as a meaningless mass of data, and thus ignored by many Hungarian scholars (Zoltán Gombocz, Péter Kulcsár). In order to defi ne Scythia geographically, we need to collect and compare data from the sources which were used by Bonfini. Three traditional defi nitions can be differentiated. Aeschylus, Herodotus, Pseudo-Scylax and Scymnus put Scythia in Europe; according to them, it was bordered by the Thanais and Phasis rivers. Pomponius Mela, Pliny the Elder and Strabo distinguished between European and Asian Scythia. The third type of description defined only Asian Scythia (Ptolemy, Pappus of Alexandria, Orosius) and introduced the concept of European and Asian Sarmatia. Medieval authors usually adopted the second type of description, the ‘double’ Scythia (Iordanes, Isidorus Hispalensis, Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomineus and Johannes de Thurocz). Thus, it was not an easy task for Bonfini to combine the description of the ‘double’ Scythia and Sarmatia with the traditional approach of the Hungarian chronicles which presented European Scythia (Iustinus, Exordia, Regino, Simon Kézai, 14th century Chronicle Composition). The complexity of the ‘double Scythia’ concept can be examined only by considering all these factors.