The Henzell’s in Bohemia
In about 1996 I was attending the St.Andrew’s Hospital Heart rehabilitation exercise centre. This is about 10 years after my heart attack and bypass surgery.
I was talking to a very interesting gentleman, George Pavlu. He enquired about the origins of the Henzell family in Australia. I gave him some of the history and the references to being an ancient Noble family from Bohemia. He commented that “Henzell” was not of Czech origin.
He kindly provided the following information. Although he could not find any direct reference to the de Hennezel family, the following explanation makes for interesting reading.
I would like comments from anyone who would like to comment on this explanation.
Barry Henzell
Brisbane,
26 December 2001
According to records the Henzell’s emigrated from Bohemia, it is said, at the beginning of the fourteenth century.
In my opinion “Henzell” (or “Hennezel”) is not a Czech name but is more likely to be of Germanic (German or possibly Dutch or Scandinavian) origin.
The history of the Czech lands during the thirteenth century suggests that the Henzell’s lived in Bohemia for only about two to three generations.
In the XIIIth century Bohemia had been settled by the Czechs for some 400 years. The Czech language (quite different from German) is the western-most of the Slavic languages which are a branch of the indo-european family of languages.
Czech was spoken exclusively in the Czech lands of (i.e. Bohemia and Moravia) with Latin used only by the Church and in important civil documents.
Throughout the XIIIth century the Czech Kings were members of the Přemyslid dynasty whose most illustrious King was Přemysl Otakar II who rule from 1253 to 1278.
Of major importance to subsequent developments in Europe (albeit possibly of marginal significance to the Henzell’s) was the defeat of the Mongols of Moravia in 1241 by a coalition of Czech, Polish, Hungarian and Austrian Knights. This was the furthest the Mongols ventured into Europe and was the beginning of their gradual return east into Asia.
The other important event which almost certainly would have affected the Henzell’s directly and personally was the reign of King Přemysl Otakar II. Prior to his reign the Czechs were organised in a feudal system, even though feudalism in the Czech lands was not as fully developed as in Germany.
From about 1250 onwards the boundaries between squires and peasants and between gentry and commoners began to form, but were still not firmly established. In most cases the criterion was the extent of the land owned or the rank in the civil service or the Church.
The Czech nobility of Knights (Knights in armour if the occasion demanded) who owed feudal allegiance to the King. The status of burgher did not exist in Bohemia in the first half of the XIIIth century and came into being only after the creation of Free Towns by the King.
Family names or surnames which were in wide use in Western Europe since the XIth and XIIth century started to come into wider use in Bohemia only from about the mid XIIIth century.
The Reign of King Přemysl Otakar II
King Přemysl Otakar II was King of Bohemia for about 25 years (1253-1278) during which time he expanded the lands under his rule to the north and south so that he eventually ruled over an area extending from the Baltic to the Adriatic.
Of direct relevance to the Henzell’s, however, are his quite extraordinary modern internal policies.
He was aware that Czech lands at the beginning of his reign were not as advanced as Western Europe in respect to commerce, crafts, trades, mining, smelting and agriculture. He instituted therefore large-scale schemes to invite immigrants possessing various skills to the Czech lands. The immigrants came mainly from, but not exclusively, from North-West Germany and from The Netherlands.
To attract suitable immigrants they were given special privileges such as rent-free Crown land and tax exemption, which were not available to native-born Czechs.
The incentives offered to immigrants were so substantial so that eventually many more foreigners, mainly Germans, settled in the Czech lands than were needed to satisfy the demand for West-European skills and knowledge. Both these matters, i.e. the granting of special privileges and the consequent influx of unduly large numbers of foreigners (mainly Germans) were recognised at the time as a possible cause for future trouble between the Czechs and the new arrivals became evident even before the end of the XIIIth century (and in fact is in evidence to this day).
It is well documented that these “frictions” became, from time to time, quite murderous persecutions of the hated and privileged foreigners and it is quite possible that this could have lead to the Henzell’s decision to leave Bohemia for France.
The King also granted to members of the Jewish community in Prague, for the first time, full citizenship rights, presumably for economic reasons rather than humanitarian reasons. The social structure of the Czech lands was also fundamentally affected by the King’s policy of creating towns. In contemporaneous Western Europe (and also in England) many incorporated towns existed which fulfilled certain functions, were granted certain rights and privileges and had also certain obligations imposed on them.
Such towns, called boroughs in England, did not exist in Bohemia until King Přemysl Oatkar created them as a matter of policy, and also politics, by the issue of Royal Patents to some existing large villages and market places, but also to new purpose-built settlements. The King had several motives for the creation of these towns, which were given the status of “Free Town” by Royal Charter.
Of interest to the Henzell’s would have been that these new towns enabled artisans, tradespeople and merchants to establish themselves under the privileges granted to the towns by the King and protected by the walls surrounding the town. In return for the privileges granted to the towns by the King the burgers were obliged to build walls and fortifications and were responsible for their upkeep and for the defence of the town.
Another purely political motive was that the King used the towns as a counterweight to balance the power of the Nobles.
It is reasonable to assume that the Henzell’s (if indeed they were making glass at the time) would have settled in a town, which was close to at least some of the bulk materials needed for glassmaking, i.e.
It seemed that process involved in making ordinary soda-lime silica glass was not widely known in XIIIth century Bohemia, but was not particularly secret either. On the other hand, the making of coloured glass, as used in stained glass windows and for other special purposes, required knowledge of various metal oxides used as colouring agents and also the use of different fluxes.
Desbois “Dictionary of the Nobles of France” (1774) states that the Henzell’s were “Original Nobility of the Kingdom of Bohemia” and later that Jean De Hennezel was named in the charter of glassmakers in 1448 and is “believed” to be the first of his family to practice glassmaking. The (presumably verbal) tradition that the Henzell’s were glassmakers in Bohemia in the XIIIth century and Dubois statement that Jean De Hennezel, who flourished some 200 years later, was believed to be the first of the family practising glassmaking, are not necessarily incompatible, if only for the axiom that absence of proof (or record) is not proof of absence.
Moreover it is unbelievable that Jean De Hennezel, “believed” to be the first of his family to practice glassmaking, would have been already a member of the Chartered guild of glassmakers in 1448. Medieval guilds were far too selective, secretive and monopolistic to admit a mere beginner as a member. In many guilds men were admitted only if their fathers were already members, and then only after formal apprenticeship and fellowship leading to the rank of Master.
It is therefore almost certain that Henzell’s practiced glassmaking well before 1448 and the belief that Jean was the first glassmaking Henzell should be dismissed.
Assuming therefore that the Henzell’s immigrated to Bohemia attracted by the Kings generous conditions, they would have had good reasons to leave again for France around AD 1300, particularly seeing that glassmaking was so richly regarded there.
On the other hand if Desbois’ statement that the Henzell’s were “Original Nobility of the Kingdom of Bohemia” were taken literal, then a real discrepancy would appear. As stated before the Nobles of Bohemia of the time were feudal Knights or else high functionaries of the Court, and certainly none of these would have been engaged in glassmaking or belong to a class of immigrants described before (although foreign Knights served the King, mostly as mercenaries).
Nobles are known to have fallen out of favour with the King during he many civil and foreign wars of the period, with penalties ranging from dispossession, exile or execution and one can easily imagine the Henzell’s, if indeed they were “Nobles” in the Bohemian usage of the time, to leave the country as exiles or fugitives.
The most likely but otherwise unsupported explanation is that Desbois use, in 1774, of the term “Nobility” in reference to the De Hennezel’s of the XIVth century (1392) is inaccurate. In Desbois time nobility was a well, established, well defined social class, whereas in the XIIIth century Bohemia wealth or position at Court could lead to a rank, which, whilst not aristocratic, would yet be transferred from generation to generation.
The “De” used in Desbois in “De Hennezel” appears in many Czech documents of the period, eg. Fredericus de Chomutov or Witke de Gradec, to just quote two taken from random from a very large number. In all cases I looked at, the first element is the name of the person, the “de’ meaning “from” and the second element is the name of the seat of the family.
It does not seem likely to me that “Jean De Hennezel” would have ever meant “Jean from Hennezel”. The explanation could be that the “De” as used by Desbois is an honorific title, equivalent to the German “von” which has no relation to any locality and is simply inserted between given name(s) and surname, and is hereditary.
I cannot quote any authority for the following possible derivations.
Prior to the firm establishment of family names people were generally known by their given names, sometimes qualified by the trade of the bearer (eg. Paul the carpenter) or by origin (Peter the Scot) or by a patronymic (eg. Paul Johnson, i.e. Paul son of John).
A patronymic could also take the form of a diminutive of the father’s name. Eg. Littlejohn would be the son of John.
In German the given name “Hans”, a variation of Johan, is very widely used and its diminutive would have been “Hansl” or ‘Hänsel” i.e. “little Hans” and by association “son of Hans” (Note that in the German the diminutive sometimes converts a simple vowel into an umlaut, eg Hans – Hänsel- Hänschen). It doesn’t seem too far-fetched to think of Henzell having its origin in Hansel, both being pronounced almost identically.
Another possible but less likely derivation would be the word “hausel” which is a spelling variation of the more correct “Handsel” meaning a good-luck gift or (in Old Norse) a promise sealed with a handshake.
Usti nad Labem
Beroun
Budĕjovice
Časlav
Domažlice
Chovdim
Kavaǔ
Kouřim
Keatouvy
Kodin
Hradec Králové
Kutná Hora
Litomĕřice
Měluĭk
Most
Vysoké Myto
Nymburk
Plzen
Policka
Praha
Žatec
N.B. it is more than likely that the Henzell’s s glassmakers would have settled in one of these towns.
The list could be shortened by studying geological maps and a search of any records for any history of glassmaking.
My principal references:
“Dĕjiny Národu Českého” (History of the Czech Nation) by Franhešk Palcký (1848, revised 1861)
Despite its age this work is still used as a standard text as it contains in its 18 books, condensed into six volumes in my edition, an unparallel wealth of detail.
Other references used are:
George Pavlu
Chartered Professional Engineer
M.I.E. Aust.