Secret Tunnel to Trenčín Castle
Eternal lord of Trenčín and Liptov, Stephen I. of Ileszhazi, was not only a mighty and wealthy magnate, but also one of the most significant representatives of the Lutheran faith in the Hungarian kingdom. It does not come as surprise that his relationships with the ruling Habsburg dynasty were often strained. While his behavior toward the archduke Matthias in Vienna was relatively respectful, incessant conflicts would exist between him and the court of the emperor Rudolph II. This antipathy reached its climax at the end of the 16th century.
In 1581, Stephen, through marriage with Katarine of Palfy, acquired a number of properties, including two grape-growing towns in the Záhorie region – Pezinok, and Svätý Jur, which would yield him rich annuities every year. Wealthy and self-confident magistrate office in both towns wanted to shake off the shackles of servitude and dependence, and win the towns the status of free royal cities. Therefore, the magistrate office with promised support from the Emperor, offered Ileszhazi that they would ransom themselves from servitude – this was quite understandable. Thus, Rudolph would not only limit the wealth and power of this annoying Hungarian magnate, but also receive additional income for the Emperor’s treasury. This, however, was met with a determined “no” of Stephen Ileszhazi, who most likely did not hold his peace either, whenever the Emperor’s conduct would come in question. The conflict culminated in 1601. Despite an early insipid support of the Hungarian Assembly, Stephen was not protected against indictment and charges of high treason and defaming the emperor’s Majesty – capital crimes of that time. Royal emissary Stephen Šomodi summoned Ileszhazi to appear before the Hungarian Assembly.
In March 1603, chairman of the Hungarian Assembly – Mikuláš Ištvánfy, pressed by the Prague court, issued a resolution condemning Stephen Ileszhazi to lose his throat and lands. Stephen did not wait for the sentence to be carried out and fled to Krakow palatine in Poland. He would not come with empty hands, though. Stephen took all he could carry with him. We are told that his relative – Farkasz Esterházy sent after him another 39, 000 tolars and other valuables. When emissaries from the royal chamber came to Trenčín castle to claim Stephen’s possessions, majority of the valuables had already been out of their reach. This situation infuriated the Emperor who wrote a letter to the Trenčín magistrate office, in which he strictly ordered to prevent Ileszhazi from entering the castle again.
City leaders of Trenčín were thus plunged between two millstones. While they could not resist the Emperor, they did not welcome the idea to contend with this unloved yet mighty and adamant lord of the castle either. It was an uncertain time, Boczkay revolt was impending, and the winner was not clear yet. Finally, they sent a letter to the Emperor’s chamber saying that Ileszhazi has a secret tunnel to the castle, and that they are not able to preclude him from entering it. The excuse was too evident to be ignored; however, this maneuver would give rise to the legend of a secret tunnel at Trenčín castle.
Most likely, this scenario was not totally new and it appears that these Trenčín lords may have been inspired by older myths, maybe as old as the times of Matthew Czak. Older literature mentions a secret tunnel that at that time lead from the castle to Skalka, and through which he was to escape from his besieged seat in order to avoid death in 1321. Another legend is told of the castle well. Once, they let a duck into the well that would later come out on the Váh River. Lateral dead-end tunnel that leads off the well’s hole and starts at one third of the well’s depth is most likely a result of the futile search for spring. The tunnel was at times considered the secret passage to Skalka. Finding of a subterranean tunnel in front of the Lower City Gate, during restoration works on the surroundings of the early barbican in the fifties of the 20th century, and discovering another offshoot of this tunnel about 40 years later during the construction of new facilities in this part of the town, again revived these legends.
Once again, ideas about a secret tunnel to the castle would circulate amongst the public and in local press. Reality was different, however. It was an underground line of passage that made it possible to bring supplies to the defenders of the barbican after the City Gate would close by a falling grille and barricade. This line of passage provided for safe escape should the barbican fall into the hands of the enemy. After all, what secret tunnel would open up at the most frequent place of the early city? If we could imagine what enormous effort it took to dig up the castle well in that unyielding rock alone, the scenario of a secret tunnel leading from the castle would seem absurd. Moreover, with frequently changing castle’s owners and keepers, such “secret” tunnel would definitely not remain secret for long time.
Here it would be appropriate to mention how Stephen Ileszhazi got equal with royal emissary Stephen Šomodi, whom he blamed for having played major part behind Stephen’s condemnation. After Stephen joined the revolt of Stephen Botchkay in 1604, he returned to his lands and castle of Trenčín. On the night of August 30, 1606, Stephen’s armed men dragged Šomodi out of his house in Trnava and transported him to Trenčín. There, together with a royal thirtyman Matthew Kološvári who carried out the confiscation of Stephen’s possessions, he was hanged without trial. We are told that the body stayed on the gallows for five hours as a warning sign, before taken down and given to Šomodi’s widow. No less cruel was Stephen’s revenge on the leader of hayducks, Belošič, also called White Steč, who had caused much damage to the possessions of Stephen’s friend in Bytča – Juraj Thurzo. He ordered Belošič to be beheaded without mercy.
In 1581, Stephen, through marriage with Katarine of Palfy, acquired a number of properties, including two grape-growing towns in the Záhorie region – Pezinok, and Svätý Jur, which would yield him rich annuities every year. Wealthy and self-confident magistrate office in both towns wanted to shake off the shackles of servitude and dependence, and win the towns the status of free royal cities. Therefore, the magistrate office with promised support from the Emperor, offered Ileszhazi that they would ransom themselves from servitude – this was quite understandable. Thus, Rudolph would not only limit the wealth and power of this annoying Hungarian magnate, but also receive additional income for the Emperor’s treasury. This, however, was met with a determined “no” of Stephen Ileszhazi, who most likely did not hold his peace either, whenever the Emperor’s conduct would come in question. The conflict culminated in 1601. Despite an early insipid support of the Hungarian Assembly, Stephen was not protected against indictment and charges of high treason and defaming the emperor’s Majesty – capital crimes of that time. Royal emissary Stephen Šomodi summoned Ileszhazi to appear before the Hungarian Assembly.
In March 1603, chairman of the Hungarian Assembly – Mikuláš Ištvánfy, pressed by the Prague court, issued a resolution condemning Stephen Ileszhazi to lose his throat and lands. Stephen did not wait for the sentence to be carried out and fled to Krakow palatine in Poland. He would not come with empty hands, though. Stephen took all he could carry with him. We are told that his relative – Farkasz Esterházy sent after him another 39, 000 tolars and other valuables. When emissaries from the royal chamber came to Trenčín castle to claim Stephen’s possessions, majority of the valuables had already been out of their reach. This situation infuriated the Emperor who wrote a letter to the Trenčín magistrate office, in which he strictly ordered to prevent Ileszhazi from entering the castle again.
City leaders of Trenčín were thus plunged between two millstones. While they could not resist the Emperor, they did not welcome the idea to contend with this unloved yet mighty and adamant lord of the castle either. It was an uncertain time, Boczkay revolt was impending, and the winner was not clear yet. Finally, they sent a letter to the Emperor’s chamber saying that Ileszhazi has a secret tunnel to the castle, and that they are not able to preclude him from entering it. The excuse was too evident to be ignored; however, this maneuver would give rise to the legend of a secret tunnel at Trenčín castle.
Most likely, this scenario was not totally new and it appears that these Trenčín lords may have been inspired by older myths, maybe as old as the times of Matthew Czak. Older literature mentions a secret tunnel that at that time lead from the castle to Skalka, and through which he was to escape from his besieged seat in order to avoid death in 1321. Another legend is told of the castle well. Once, they let a duck into the well that would later come out on the Váh River. Lateral dead-end tunnel that leads off the well’s hole and starts at one third of the well’s depth is most likely a result of the futile search for spring. The tunnel was at times considered the secret passage to Skalka. Finding of a subterranean tunnel in front of the Lower City Gate, during restoration works on the surroundings of the early barbican in the fifties of the 20th century, and discovering another offshoot of this tunnel about 40 years later during the construction of new facilities in this part of the town, again revived these legends.
Once again, ideas about a secret tunnel to the castle would circulate amongst the public and in local press. Reality was different, however. It was an underground line of passage that made it possible to bring supplies to the defenders of the barbican after the City Gate would close by a falling grille and barricade. This line of passage provided for safe escape should the barbican fall into the hands of the enemy. After all, what secret tunnel would open up at the most frequent place of the early city? If we could imagine what enormous effort it took to dig up the castle well in that unyielding rock alone, the scenario of a secret tunnel leading from the castle would seem absurd. Moreover, with frequently changing castle’s owners and keepers, such “secret” tunnel would definitely not remain secret for long time.
Here it would be appropriate to mention how Stephen Ileszhazi got equal with royal emissary Stephen Šomodi, whom he blamed for having played major part behind Stephen’s condemnation. After Stephen joined the revolt of Stephen Botchkay in 1604, he returned to his lands and castle of Trenčín. On the night of August 30, 1606, Stephen’s armed men dragged Šomodi out of his house in Trnava and transported him to Trenčín. There, together with a royal thirtyman Matthew Kološvári who carried out the confiscation of Stephen’s possessions, he was hanged without trial. We are told that the body stayed on the gallows for five hours as a warning sign, before taken down and given to Šomodi’s widow. No less cruel was Stephen’s revenge on the leader of hayducks, Belošič, also called White Steč, who had caused much damage to the possessions of Stephen’s friend in Bytča – Juraj Thurzo. He ordered Belošič to be beheaded without mercy.
City Map
Partners
