Politicizers of the Past

PublishedJanuary 7, 2015 Post authortorino

A handy example of politicization of the study of the past should be brought back up because it is so compelling. Here is a quote from an article published in 1991 when the fear of the rise of Eastern European nationalism (whatever that means) filled the pants of most academics who studied the area. It was published, we kid you not, by a German (Austrian but, let’s be honest, that’s a fake country that’s always on the brink of not being around in a few years) who decided, in his disarming naiveté, to apply the reeducational training he must have received on deconstructing German nationalism (indeed the concept of the German nation which, though barely, is still in existence) to the other European nations.

(We note here that Germans have a tendency to excel in things – unfortunately for the rest of us, 1) they also often lack the preliminary judgment as to what things they should excel in in the first place and 2) too much excelling in anything can be a bad thing).

An individual well-schooled in the art of criticizing his own people might find no trouble in criticizing other “lesser” (this time “lesser” as regards their sensitivity/multiculturalism/spirit of tolerance – whatever – as usual, with this type – lesser) peoples when called upon to do so. And so this proves true also here.

There are three brow-raising things here:

1) that this should be published by a German less than 50 years after their war;

2) that it was published in a Slavic (Polish actually) Archeological journal; but, importantly, also

3) that he comes out and says exactly what his purpose is (and, just in case you are wondering, it isn’t science or truth – it’s Momsense!)

Here you go, reintroducing the propagandist Walter Pohl:

“Traditional research has taken the meaning of the terms “people” or “tribe” for granted. In this view, a “people” is a racially and culturally [our note: the latter only if you took Kossina seriously] highly homogenous group sharing a common descendant and destiny [our note: not sure where he got the destiny part from], speaking the same language and living within one state. Peoples (and not individuals or social groups) were often seen as factors of continuity in a changing world, as the real subjects of history – almost immutable in its course [our note: huh?], indeed more a natural than a historical phenomenon [our note: here he must be referring to some of his own people’s ’33-’45 (?) Nazi writings and assuming/extrapolating]. Their fate was described using biological metaphors: birth, growth, flowering and decay [note: still awake?]. This historical conception was rooted in the national movements of the 19th and 20th century, and it had its share in encouraging all kinds of chauvinist ideologies [our note: we’re getting warmer]…. Today’s nationalist movements in many Eastern European countries have rediscovered the 19th century ideal of the homogeneous nation-state; it is sad to see that after so many tragedies it has brought about, some more seem to follow, and often in the name of history. This situation explains the crucial importance of Early Medieval studies for the conceptions and preconceptions of ethnicity… The existence of Romans, Germans or Slavs in the 5th or 7th centuries became important arguments [sic] in an endless series of national struggles, culminating in the bizarre revival of the fair and reckless Germanic hero that lured an entire people into the Nazi holocaust [not capitalized by the author because why?].”

Now, putting aside that many of the “tragedies” that he talks about were brought about not by nationalists (putting aside as well what exactly constitutes a nationalist in his mind) but by self-avowed internationalists… An ethno-nationalist state is what everyone wanted after all but it was a single ethno-nationalist state that brought about WWII (its citizenry was apparently more easily “lured” to use the author’s vaguely exculpatory language). Nor did the multi-national Austro-Hungarian Empire just sit out WWI. He also fails to understand that it is not nationalism or, for that matter, internationalism or religion that creates “tragedies” but rather extremism in pursuit of almost any idea. And that extremism is fostered by a lack of checks and balances on the ruling class which goes to the importance of institutions. Indeed, the Weimar construct that preceded the Nazis used rhetoric and postulated goals with respect to Germany’s borders, very similar to those of its successor but only its successor, unbound by any constraints, was able to set in motion what the preceding republic could not.

This gentleman tells us he is experiencing “sadness” – we can, like, totally understand, as our forefathers experienced a similar “sadness” when his ancestors brought us some wacky sadness over from his country (of course his people were “lured” into all that as he says) – his polemic, errr “article” is, of course, addressed partly at us – the first saddened, then saddled people who spent 50 years behind the Iron Curtain while he warmed his behind in “neutral” Süd Deutschland (or is it really West Slavland?) protected by cushy government-paid stipends and the might of the surrounding NATO countries (i.e., US)?

Highly-developed empathic abilities allow the Dinaric Uebermensch to experience other people’s sadness at intensity levels such lesser people could never hope to reach

He thinks Suavic nationalism could be just like his so now that his people have stopped killing us, he thinks it’s the right time to start to lecture us…

I need to learn some T A C T !!!!!!!

But let’s put that aside and look at what he actually says above:

“This situation explains the crucial importance of Early Medieval studies for the conceptions and preconceptions of ethnicity… The existence of Romans, Germans or Slavs in the 5th or 7th centuries became important arguments [sic]…”

There it is – he is saying history should be a tool of current politics and new identity formation – forget wie es eigentlich gewesen [ist/war] – that’s irrelevant to an over-eifrig armchair-warrior on a crusade to ensure the Slavs do not cause another holocaust… wait, what!? (note that he wrote holocaust and not Holocaust which may also raise some eyebrows).

So, you see, if in fact you come across claims that the Veneti are not Slavs or that something “definitely is not Slavic” or similar stuff, take them with a grain of salt – not because the opposite must be true (we should lways freely admit our doubts) – but because the person making such a claim may not be guided by truth at all or at least not as much as by certain “secondary” considerations – he may just be an ideologic propagandist who tailors his work to fit his preconceived and, here above explicitly stated, political needs.

Not with a tinge of irony we note that in the 19th century the Slavic-Veneti connection was questioned by German nationalists – now it seems the very existence of Slavs prior to some period is being questioned by German “citizens of the world”. (Someone asked whether we thought this individual was a covert German nationalist – we do not like that description as it has been too often abused and, in any event, even accepting this wording, we do not think so – we take his beliefs to be sincere – sincere lunacy though is no less problematic).

Well, as was once said, if people never did silly things, nothing intelligent would ever get done. And with that we take heart.

Polish Gods Part IV – On the Baptism of Poland by Jan Dlugosz & its After-Effects by Thietmar of Merseburg

PublishedJanuary 6, 2015 Post authortorino

We relate here what the Polish priest Jan Dlugosz says in his Chronicle of the Poles of the fateful events surrounding the “Baptism of Poland” under the heading “The year of our lord 965” [Dobrava arrived in 965, the baptism took place in 966].

We note that there may have been earlier attempts to convert portions of Polish lands – indeed Cracow may already have been Christian by 966. There is, for example, a threatening missive from Methodius to the “duke in Vislech” to accept Chrisianity willingly or have it shoved down his throat at the point of the sword (see the Chronicle of Methodius). Nonetheless, little is known of this and those portions were, apparently, not portions of Poland yet (Cracow likely belonged to the Czechs until Mieszko or Boleslaw took it).

The famous “Methodius’ Offer” painting (water colors) from the IXth century, shows Methodius listing the benefits of conversion to the “Duke in Vislech”

BTW we mention Dlugosz from the 15th century since earlier sources (Gallus Anonymous, Master Kadlubek and the Great Poland Chronicles) do not discuss these events in any detail other than to note that Mieszko was first blind but then, at seven, finally gained his sight – this aws an allegory (apparently) to the future baptism of the entire country. Now, Dlugosz wrote half a millennium after the events in question so that one might question how much of this is accurate but, having said that, this is all we have… almost since there are also reports from the Germans like Thietmar… but first to Dlugosz.

Jan Dlugosz

“A.D. 965 – Mieczyslaw, the duke of Poland marries Dobrava the daughter of the Czech duke and leaving pagan idols, accepts the christian faith with the entire nation”

“After a warning from Christian believers and friars Mieczyslaw left his seven concubines tied to him with the love of the flesh, so that the female pleasures should not hold him in the blind addiction of idolatry.”

Mieszko’s prior wives in traditional Polish red-white uniforms (picture taken at a harvest festival)

“After separating from them [the concubines, i.e., current wives] he sent his envoys to Boleslaw, the Czech duke, the brother and killer of Saint Wenceslas, asking for the hand of his daughter Dobrava which he desired to marry as the only and lawful wife. The Czech duke said that he won’t refuse such an honorable and excellent son-in-law so long as he should first give up his pagan errors and accept the order of the Christian faith; otherwise he won’t allow his daughter to marry a pagan duke and an idolater; the princess gave a similar answer from her side that it is not proper for a Christian woman to marry a pagan; but if Mieczyslaw the Polish duke should give up the disgusting idol worship and accepting baptism he should be reborn with a new life, then in that case she will not deny him her hand;”

Dobrava in a local Plzner promotion – Mieszko’s choice could not have been more difficult

“When the envoys came back to Poland with these messages, duke Mieczyslaw called all the elders and lords and in a well-attended meeting he tried to get counsel what one should do. The lords had different views so that it was decided to delay the decision till the next day.”

Mieszko got agitated at the council meeting

“But that night the foreseeing God, took mercy on the penury and blindness of the Polish nation, and during their sleep filled Mieczyslaw in his dreams as well as a majority of his advisers with a dire warning and order that they should not miss the serendipitous opportunity presented them and to know, before accepting their new faith, that their country should blossom into the future [should they accept it].”

Many of the best of the country’s citizens had an unexpected change of heart over night

“With this revelation, the Polish duke was convinced and he and the elders unanimously agreed to surrender themselves to the holy faith of Christ. And so many envoys were now sent to the Czechs and promised that in order to obtain marriage not only the Polish duke but also the entire Polish nation, after having first learned exactly the tenets of the Christina faith, will accept baptism…”

[the Czech duke Boleslaw now, of course, agrees to provide his daughter together with worthy dowry]

“… there were among the lords and elders of the kingdom many who were strongly opposed to this not allowing to accept the Christian faith. Some argued that this new Christian faith is full of superstitions and nonsense; others argued that it would be hard to keep such a faith; others that it i unworthy to give up the faith of their fathers and mothers, and freely bend their necks to a new and unknown faith. These, however, and other difficulties, the loving god, who gives good counsel to kings, took pity on the foolishness and blindness of the Poles, took away their doubts, and filled them with the spirit of agreement and drove them to accept the Christian faith so that, by rejecting it, they should not become a target of shame among the Czechs and others…”

The Czechs’ mockery – what Mieszko feared the most

“… After a few days, prince Mieczyslaw [BTW it’s always Mieszko – Mieczyslaw is Dlugosz’s invention], after having learned the rules and rites of the correct faith from monks and hermits, which with this purpose in mind, he had brought [to his country], together with lords, nobles and certain better [!] citizens gives up the darkness of prior errors and accepts the rightful faith of Christ; the first step of his conversion to the light of the faith he celebrates with the cleansing mercy by accepting his baptism here in Gniezno. And so cleansed of his sins in the holy fount of rebirth, he uses the baptismal water to cleanse mistakes and paganisms, away from the superstitious worship of idols and towards the knowledge of the true go of the pure and chaste faith…”

“… and at this time, the entire Polish nation accepted the shackle [this is in the text] of salvation of the holy Christian faith; from the mercy of the lord, and with the fervent attempts of Mieczyslaw and his wife Dobrava, Poles saw the light of the faith, when in the Peter Chair there sat Leon VIII, a born Roman who also in this year said good bye to the world and after him there sat down…”

The light of the true faith is best seen from this angle

“… and thereafter from the most severe command of the duke, and a unanimous resolution of the lords and nobles [1%? of the population?] all the idols were broken and statues of false Gods, their temples were burned and their worshippers and believers were condemned to the loss of their property and the penalty of the sword. Polish Duke Mieczyslaw not only abrogated all the feasts and rites honoring the pagan Gods, but also brought together all the magicians, augurers, sorcerers and such and forbade all festivities public and private which were previously part of idol worship.”

A Polish refusenik at a Sacred Grove

“Our God, namely, is not similar to those false gods about whom the Polish people thought that they could be roused with noises, feasts and festivities and all kinds of godlessness. A happy and god-chosen duke who first brought the Poles to the faith of salvation and allied with the holy church through the knowledge of the truth and the abandonment of the idols. And because in almost all the larger towns and villages there stood statues of Gods and Goddesses, idols and sacred groves, which the people were not altogether eager to destroy, as they were commanded by Mieczyslaw, therefore he ordered that the seventh of March be designated as the day when they shall be crushed and destroyed in all the Polish lands.”

“When this day came, all the towns and villages were forced to hit and topple the statutes of their Gods, and, once crushed, to drown them in marshes, lakes and ponds, and to cover them with stones, [a task] for which there came forth in great numbers people of both sexes and not without mournful sorrow and cries of the worshippers of these idols, especially among those, who, by reason of having performed rites to honor these [Gods] derived certain benefits [i.e., the priest class], but because of the fear of ducal officials they dared not resist the order. A reminder of this destruction and drowning of these false Gods and Goddesses idols lives on until the present day in certain Polish villages, where in the fourth Sunday of Lent [Laetare Sunday] they stick on long poles images of Dziewanna and Marzanna [Dzyexwyanye et Marzane], and then they throw them and drown them in nearby bogs. And so the continuation of this task has not yet ceased among the Poles in this ancient custom.”

And so it was that Mieszko converted his country so as to marry the woman he loved. We note that being a much more noble reason than that of Henry VIII who converted his country just to get a divorce.

Thietmar

And now this is bishop Thietmar of Merseburg reporting on the events in Poland after Mieszko’s passing during the reign of Boleslaw the Great:

Bishop Thietmar – known for his writings on cattle, mules and scrota – never saw an Abrahamic religion he didn’t get a hard on for

“In the country of her [Oda’s] husband [i.e., Boleslaw the Great’s country] there are many customs and although they are terrible, some must be applauded. His people, namely, must be watched like cattle and need a whip like a stubborn mule; also it is impossible to rule with the interest of the ruler in mind if the ruler does not apply the harshest punishments. If anyone from these people should dare to enchant someone else’s wife [remember polygamy was permitted before the year 966] or engage in lascivious acts, he is then subject to the following penalty: he is led to a market bridge and then attached to it with a nail through his scrotum. And then there is placed next to him a sharp knife and so he is given a tough choice: either he should die or to cut off that part of the body” [we have a rather difficult time picturing the exact mechanics here but, be that as it may, the whole thing sounds unpleasant].

And the same refusenik, now, after having undergone a successful conversion

“If it has been discovered that someone ate meat [during Lent], he was punished severely by having his teeth knocked out. God’s law you see, only recently introduced to this country, grows greater in strength through such duress than it would [only] through the Lent/fasting ordered by the bishops.”

[we chose not to publish the “teeth” photos as they seemed too drastic and, therefore, unsuitable for our audience]

On Bretislav II’s Revitalization of the New Faith in Bohemia

PublishedJanuary 4, 2015 Post authortorino

We have previously written that the Czech records regarding pre-Christian Gods are poor and that much is certainly, and unfortunately, true. However, Czech chroniclers did manage too smuggle a few descriptions of Czech religious practices even if, perhaps, by accident. Thus, we have Cosmas in Book III of his Chronicle of the Czechs writing about the events of the year 1092, when the new duke Bretislav II:

Bretislav II also invented the Pickelhaube

“…burning with great zeal for the Christian religion at the beginning of his rule, he expelled all the magicians, prophets and soothsayers [omnes magos, ariolosos et sortilegos] from the midst of his realm. He also eradicated and consumed with fire trees or holy groves which the base commoners worshipped in many places [in multis locis colebat vulgus ignobile]. So also the superstitious practices which the villagers, still half-pagan, observed on the third or fourth day of Pentecost, offering libations over springs, offering sacrifices, and making offerings (of flour and salt?) to demons [Item et superstitiosas instituciones, quas villani, adhuc semipagani, in Pentecosten tertia sive quarta feria observabant, offerentes libamina super fontes mactabant victimas et dæmonibus immolabant]; the burials they made in forests and fields; the huts/tents/temples [atque scenes – see, e.g., Hajek “stanky“] they built at two or three crossroads [i.e., where two or three roads meet] for the dead according to the pagan rite as if to bring calm to the souls; and the profane games, which they performed over the dead, rousing the shadows of the dead/ghosts, dancing while wearing masks on their faces, and reveling. The good duke exterminated these abominations and other sacrileges [has abhominaciones et alias sacrileges adinventiones], so they might no longer persist among the people of God. Because he always worshipped the only true God with a pure heart and possessed zeal for him, this pleased all the lovers of God.”

Crossroads “stanky” – now under new management

It certainly does not escape notice that all of this was occurring in a country which had been part of the Moravian state whose rulers were baptized in the 880s and whose first saints became saints in the 920s and 930s (admittedly the usual, painful way). Thus, 150-200 years later, pre-Christian beliefs continued to resist the New Age appeal of Christianity. It should therefore, not shock that in the much larger and more sparsely populated Poland similar practices continued into the 15th century (and indeed even till today depending on how broadly one interprets folk customs).

The forest creatures did not speak up against the abuses of Czechs under Bretislav II – when Bretislav came for them, there was no one left to speak for the forest creatures

Note also the similar references to early May, the time of the Pentecost and of the Green Week, much like here, here and here.

On the Synodal Statutes (1420?) of Andrew, the Bishop of Poznan

PublishedJanuary 3, 2015 Post authortorino

the original (or as original as we get)

Andrew (of the clan “Godziemba”) of Gosławice (pol, Andrzej Łaskarz z Gosławic herbu Godziemba) was the Bishop of Poznan (between 1414 and 1426) and a well-regarded and quite an accomplished man.

We know this, in the first instance, because he appears in the literature under names suggesting importance, relevance and being an altogether heavy-hitter. Thus, for example, he is written up as Andreas Lyaskarius de Goslawicze, nobiles (but, of course!) de domo Godziamba. He was born in 1362 as the son of Laskarz and Dorota from Goslawice (and that should also tell you that he was important since were he of peasant stock, his contemporaries may not have even known his parents’ names or dates of birth and we certainly, six centuries later, would not even dream of knowing them). His father was a castellan of Konin and his mother was, likely, related to the the later Poznan Bishop Piotr Wysz. Andrew studied in Brodnica and then, at 17, moved on to Prague where he received his bachelors degree in 1392/1393. He then moved on to the University of Padua where he received a doctorate in 1405.

However, putting all of this “silver spoon” stuff aside, he used his privileged upbringing quite well and to the service of his country (even while juggling his studies it seems). He was an emissary to the Grand Master of the Teutonic Knights Konrad von Wallenrode (who was followed by the Jungingen brothers, the second of whom ended up going to see his lord at Grunwald/Tannenberg). In 1397, Andrew became a secretary to queen Jadwiga. He participated in various church councils, he traveled to the Holy Land, he represented Poland against the Teutonic Knights at various diplomatic meetings (along with the more famous Paul Wlodkowic) and, of course, was a bishop of Poznan. He is likely to have known Lucas of Great Kozmin.

In 1415 he was at the Council of Constance as a member of the Polish delegation. That council concluded in 1418 (and is best known in history for putting the Czech church reformer Jan Hus to the torch). Upon returning from Constance, the Primate of Poland, Mikolaj Traba called for a provincial meeting of the clergy first at Wielun and then the clergymen continued their deliberations at Kalisz. The purpose presumably was to educate the locals on the new church findings/doctrines/laws and start the implementation phase (maybe gossip about Hus). We may assume that other European Constance attendees had similar “country” meetings after returning home. Those provincial Wielun/Kalisz meetings concluded on the 25th of September 1420 (as per Jan Dlugosz). Their result was a series of statutes that applied country wide to all of Poland.

After the provincial synod, the local clergy, in turn, returned to their own dioceses and called for meetings there. In the case of Andrew, he returned to Poznan and it was then at that point that he called for a meeting of the local Poznan clergy that produced the below discussed Statuta Synodalia Andreae Episcopi Posnaniensis, i.e., the statutes (or laws) for the Poznan diocese (diocese being a part of the Polish province). Presumably, they were a reflection both of what was discussed at Constance and later at Wielun/Kalisz. Again, we may assume that similar meetings were taking place at all the local church levels all over Poland (and Europe) in a kind of a trickle-down evangelism. Note for example that we already briefly (breviter) mentioned here the Statuta Breviter of Gniezno. When did the meeting in Poznan take place? Presumably after the national Wielun/Kalisz meeting so September 26th 1420 would be the earliest date – but before Andrew died in 1426.

laskarza1 These Poznan statutes (but also the Statuta Brevier which deal with similar issues in places) are of great interest as they deal with all kinds of deviations from church policy/docrine and with other excesses. While some are trivial (in their nature, if not in effect) and read a bit like a list of sins of the political class of any respectable middle or southern European country (or of a banana republica latina), others are point to folk practices, beliefs, superstitions and customs that co-existed with and in full view of Christianity – in fact, many local priests participated in these “excesses”. It is a selection of these latter ones that we present here for our readers. We note, upfront, that some of these may be or “proto-Slavic” nature (indeed some of them are also subject to scorn in Bohemia), others may have developed in Poland alongside of Christianity and others yet may have come from other countries (e.g., dyngus from Germany?). Some of these customs we would likely see today as joyful and fun, others as great if kept in moderation, others yet as clearly “excessive” and yet others as, likely, troublesome.

Statuta Synodalia Andreae Episcopi Posnaniensis

(selected items)

VII. De fonte baptismali (Of the baptismal font)

Item statuimus et sub poena trium marcarum mandamus, ut quilibet curatus fontem baptismalem, crisma et oleum sacrum, ac sacratissimum corpus domini nostri Jesu Christi sub seris et clausuris semper habeant, ut nulli alteri quam ipsis pateat accessus propter sortilegia et maleficas mulieres, et conservent in mundis et decentibus locis; caldareque aereum vel plumbeum in fonte baptismali infra hinc et festum Paschae proximum habeant comparatum propter stillicidium, quod fit fontibus ligneis.

(Furthermore, we order and command, under the penalty of [three (?) marks], that in each parish the baptismal fount, chrism/myrrh and sacred oil, the most sacred body of our Lord Jesus Christ be kept under lock and that no one have access to these except [the priests] because of sorcerers and witch women and to keep such [relics] in a clean and decent/well thought-out place; Caldar [?] [bronze/steel/lead vase for, e.g., sprinkling Holy Water] to be placed below the font [at the time/close to?] Easter… in cases of fonts made of wood [?]) (you get the gist)

XXIX. De columbationibus (On caroling/kolenda/kolyadam)*

Item prohibeatis columbationes nocturnas in festo sancti Stephani, cum illa nocte furta, homicidia et plura mala committantur.

(Also, let there be forbidden carolers (kolednicy/calenda – see too here for a Croatian version of yule-tiding mariner carolers) going about at night on the second day of Christmas (Saint Stephen’s Night) for on that night there occur therefore murders, thievery and other bad excesses)

Note this was also the Latin sterna, i.e., auguries, e.g., for the new year.

XXX. De ludis festorum (On festive games)

Item in vigilia Nativitatis Christi prohibeantur ludi et superstitiosae opiniones, quae – proh dolor! – in hac vigent patria.

(Likewise, let there be forbidden on Christmas Eve games and superstitious beliefs/doctrines which – alas! – blossom in this country)

XXXI. De incantationibus mendosis et benedictionibus (On mistaken incantations and blessings)

xxxi1

Item superstitiosae benedictiones et mendosae, quae non habent in sacris scripturis fundamentum, prohibeatis.

(Also, let there be prohibited superstitious and mistaken blessings that do not have foundations in the sacred scriptures)

xxxi2

Item omnes incantationes, quae consueverunt fieri de nocte sanctorum Philippi et Jacobi Apostolorum prohibeantur.

(Likewise, let there be prohibited the enchantments that have become commonplace during the nights/Feats of Saints Phillip and James (this was May 1st – now, since the reform of the Roman calendar in mid-20th century, May 3rd)).

XXXIII. De incantationibus et abusionibus carnis privii (Regarding incantations and other Lent [i.e., carnival] abuses)*

Item, quia multe incantationes et superstitiones consueverunt fieri in carnis privio, arceatis [articulate?] populum, verum ut a talibus desisteret, et a dissolutionibus effrenatae consuetudinis, ut viri mulierum vestibus, et mulieres virorum vestibus utantur.

(Also, because it is customary to name many enchantments and superstitions during the Lent time, tell the people to desist from such and to terminate/dissolve the carrying on of such customs, such as the dressing of men in women’s clothes and women putting on men’s clothes).

* Whether these carnival abuses then then also led to carnal ones is another matter (not for this blog; let us just say that winters are cold in Europe). Note that the etymology of carnival is that of “letting go of meat”, i.e., giving up meat on Lent before Easter (as to Easter, note the connection to Yassa/Yasse via Yasterbog/Jasterbog of the Kaszubians – see, e.g., Jastarnia – we will return with stories of the Venerable Bede & Einhard & others, later)

XXXIV. De pactatione ovorum (On trading eggs)

Item prohibeatis, ne feria secunda et tertia post festum Paschae masculi foeminas, et foeminae masculos praesumant pro ovis et aliis muneribus depactare, vulgariter dyngowacz, nec ad aquam trahere, cum tales insolentiae et strangulationes non sunt sine gravi peccato et sine divini nominis offensa, cum in die Pasche vel circa hoc tempus sunt eucharistiae sacramento procurati; igitur sint solliciti qualiter in omni devotione et disciplina morum se custodiant et observent.

(Also prohibit, on the second and third day after Easter (e.g., Lany Poniedzialek and thereafter) that men ask women and women ask men for eggs and other presents, which in the common tongue is called dyngowacz, and to run to water because such lawlessness and insolence do not take place without also them being grave sins and offenses against the divine name, when this happens around the time of Eucharist/Easter; therefore, be careful and observe whether they they will keep themselves in every lesson in moral conduct and in devotion)*

* The feast of Smigus-Dyngus (whether this comes from Germany (Schmackostern (from, yes, smacking), Stiepern – stypy?) is a topic for another post though we will note here that the only places in Germany where this was a practice seem to be only the former Slavic ones so whether this is originally of a Slavic or of a Germanic beginning is to us unclear although the dyngowacz seems to be of German origin – Dingen = things you give so as not to get smacked) was originally a kind of “trick or treat” event. Specifically, you might get whacked/smacked with a branch from a “palm” tree (remember Palm Sunday?) unless you treated your interlocutors with presents.

Alternatively, the branch was replaced with water and the presents with eggs – and, voila! here is your Easter (or, rather, the fun parts!);

Item prohibeatis comessationes et ebrictates, cum secundum apostolum tales regnum Dei non possidebunt, et praesertim in festivatibus Pentecostes Navitatis Dominin et aliis festis, sed ut divinis officiis sint intenti.

(Also prohibit eating and drunken debauchery [whoa!?] [especially during the Pentecost, Christmas and at other Holy Days, for as the Apostles tell us such persons [acting this way] shall not inherit the Kingdom of God)

XXXV. De imagine straminis in jejunio (Of [the carrying of] straw imagines during fasting [Lent])

Item prohibeatis, ne in dominica “Laetare”, alias “Biala niedziela”, superstitiosam consuetudinem observent, efferentes quamdam imaginem, quam mortem vocant, et in lutum postea projiciunt, quia non carent hujus modi facta scrupulo superstitionis.

(Also prohibit on the Laetare Sunday* (alias White Sunday), the superstitious custom of carrying around a kind of a puppet that they call “death” (i.e., Marzanna), which they then throw into the mud as they are not free from these kinds of superstitions)

Same practices were also subject to prohibitions in the Prague diocese in 1366 and again in 1384 during a local synod.

* Fourth Sunday of Lent

XL. De abusionibus circa funera (Of abuses at the time of funerals)

Item superstitiosas, consuetudines, quae consueverunt fieri circa funera, prohibeatis.

(Prohibit also the superstitious rituals that are customary at funerals)

LVIII. De choreis nocturnis festorum (Of night dances and feasts)

Item inhibeatis nocturnas choreas in diebus sabbativis et in vigiliis sanctorum Joannis Baptistae, Petri et Pauli, cum plures fornicationes, adulteria et incestus illis temporibus committuntur.

(Prohibit too the nightly dances that take place during days of the sabbath (sobotki or kupalnocki in the summer) and on the days of the Saints John the Baptist and Saints Peter and Paul, for there are fornications and adultery and incest committed in those times)

On Ragusan Yule Logs

PublishedDecember 31, 2014 Post authortorino

The town of Dubrovnik in Croatia is a renowned port city. Seeing as it is Yule-tide just about now (or whatever the Slavic version of it should be called), we bring you a light-hearted description of the events in Dubrovnik on the Eve of Christmas.

The mariners of the city, you see, would gather up and carry a yule-log of sorts to the house of the local prince (comes) and then set it on fire rejoicing greatly. The prince potentate would reward them pro Kallendis (i.e., for the end of year/yule-tide) with two perpers (local currency) as well as with something to drink (naturally).

The oldest manuscript in existence dates back to the 1340s and is in the Dubrovnik State Archives – this is a 16th century copy

All of this is described in the Liber Statutorum Civitas Ragusii (i.e., The Book of Laws/Statutes of the City of Dubrovnik, aka Dobro Venedik in Turkish (or “good Venice”)) from about the year 1272. This was a book of laws that remained in force in Dubrovnik until the end of the Ragusan Republic in 1808.

bottom portion

We will return to Dubrovnik later when discussing the White Cliffs of Dover… as a hint we are doubtful of the official derivation of the name of the city from an oak grove, i.e., a dab but that is a matter for another time.

On the Earliest Slavic Names

PublishedDecember 30, 2014 Post authortorino

We present here some of the earliest Slavic names (as the title suggests) along with their sources. Since these names appear both in the description of Slavs and in the description of the Antes we mention both groups of names under separate sections.

The Slavs

Ardagastus – (source: Theophylact Simocatta’s History) – first known “Sclavene” chieftain known to conduct raids into Byzanthine territory. He was engaged by Comentiolus at Adrianople/Ansinon and retreated with the Byzantines freeing a lot of their prisoners. Later forced to flee another Byzantine general – Priscus – on an “unsaddled mare;” then when that mare was caught by the “Romans” (i.e., Byzantines) he fled on foot; but then fell on a tree stump only to escape in the last minute across a river. Meanwhile, his Slavs were taken as captives to Byzantium in “wooden fetters”.

Feild dives into the mud after he won the Bareback event during the Calgary Stampede Rodeo in Calgary

Ardagastus after being left by his “unsaddled mare”

Musocius – (source: Theophylact Simocatta’s History) – another Sclavene leader (“rex”) who sent out a scouting party that was caught by the Byzantines by reason of a betrayal by a certain Gepid. The Gepid first helped the Byzantine Alexander to catch the scouting party then was enticed by Priscus to draw Musocius into a trap which he did claiming that he wanted to get boats to help those left from Ardagastus’ party who had been trapped on the other side of some river (Paspirius? presumably a tributary of the Danube). Musocius fell for this and sent one hundred fifty boats and thirty oarsmen came to the other side of the river. At which point the Gepid went back to Priscus and brought a force back with him led by the same Alexander. They caught the Slavs unawares (sleeping and/or drunk) took their ships and crossed the river with a much larger force. There it seems they found Musocius (actually it’s not clear whether Musocius had crossed first or just sent the ships) who was sleeping/drunk (apparently as a result of funeral festivities or commemorations for his just passed away brother).

Musocius seemed ok after a few drinks but some in the Slav camp were beginning to worry

The Romans (i.e., Byzantines) were victorious but then they started drinking and the Slavs, apparently, got back on their feet and attacked them – the Byzantines would have lost but for one Gentzon who carried the day – the next day the officers of the watch were impaled by Priscus’ command and some of the other soldiers “severely flogged”. It is unclear whether Musocius himself survived. As we’ve already noted here, Musocius’ name is reminiscent of the name Mieszko from a few hundred years later.

Peiragastus – (source: Theophylact Simocatta’s History) – leader of a Sclavene raiding party. Apparently he was letting his horses rest at a river crossing and came upon a patrol of Byzantine soldiers capturing them in the process (they were asleep as they had been riding all day and were preparing for night scouting duties – apparently with no sentries). Then his force was camouflaged at the river bank and when the main body of the Byzantines began to cross the Slavs were able from their hiding places to kill a thousand of them. When the Byzantines realized what was happening they attacked all at once and with arrows from their rafts driving the Slavs away from the river. Peiragastus himself was killed by an arrow and his troops then surrounded and partly slaughtered but the Byzantines, lacking horses, were unable to pursue.

Peiragastus – the Last Stand (seeing as sitting down was no longer an option)

(So the end tally Theophylact Simocatta is: Ardagast – escaped; Musocius – may have escaped; Peiragastus – terminated).

Dauritas/Daurentius – (source: Menander the Guardsman, The History of [the same]; this is a work that now exists only in the collections De Legationibus and De Sententiis from the 10th century) – Apparently, he had “insulted” the Avar khan Baian by refusing to become the Avar’s tributary. Specifically, Dauritas and his fellow chiefs reply to the Avars’ envoy was “What man has been born what man is warmed by the rays of the sun who shall make our might his subject? Others do not conquer our land, we conquer theirs. And so it shall always be for us, as long as there are wars and weapons.” The Avars boasted likewise and then came the usual “abuse and insults” as well as a “shouting match.” The Avar envoys miscalculated in the short run (and for those specific envoys the short run was all they had it turns out) and the Slavs “unable to restrain their rage” slew the envoys.

Slavs “unable to contain their rage” (Dauritas in the front seems particularly unable to do so)

In the long run (about the year 578) this proved to be a bit of a mistake as the ever scheming Byzantines via the emperor Tiberius II started chatting up Baian and convinced him to attack the Slavs as part of the Byzantine strategy of divide and conquer (in fairness the Slavs have been raiding the Byzantine lands and, in fact, part of the Avars desire to get at the Slavs was to get their hands on the gold that the Slavs had apparently stolen from the Byzantines). The Avar envoys requested boats from Tiberius to cross the Danube from Pannonia to Scythia Minor in order to attack the Slavs. Although Tiberius was apparently suspicious that the Avars really wanted to get at the Byzantine city of Sirmium, he ultimately did agree and ordered the governor of Illyricum, John to assist the Avars. About sixty thousand (!?) “armored horsemen” were transported into Byzantine territory (including Baian himself) who crossed Illlyricum, crossed Scythia and prepared to recross the Danube (?). Once on the other side Baian “immediately fired the villages of the Slavs and laid waste their fields, driving and carrying off everything, since none of the barbarians there dared to face him, but took refuge in the thick undergrowth of the woods.” It is not clear what happened to Daurentias and his “fellow chiefs”.

The Antes

Boz – (source: Jordanes, Getica) – the story of Boz has its own entry here.

Dabragezas – (source: Agathias of Myrina, Histories) – this was the name of an Antian officer in the service of the Byzantines – apparently in command of the Byzantine fleet in the Crimea. Another officer by the name of Leontios may have been his son (it is thought). Be that as it may, since Leontios is a Greek name, we do not separately create rubric for Leontios. This was circa 582. (note that Slavs and Antae were in the service of the Byzantines as well as fighting them – for example, in 537 most of the about 1,600 horsemen sent to relieve Belisarius’ campaign against the Ostrogoths in Italy were Slavs and Antae as per Procopius).

The famous 1594 edition of Agathias Scholasticus Myrinaeus by Buonaventura Vulcanus

Mezamer/Idariz/Kelagast – (source: Menander the Guardsman, The History of [the same]) – the Avars had been pillaging and ravaging (not necessarily in that order) the lands of the Antae (circa 582) forcing the latter to send an embassy to the Avars appointing as the main ambassador one Mezamer, the son of Idariz and brother of Kelagast so as to ransom some of the Antae who had been taken captive by the Avars.

Mezamer arrived for the negotiations so full of hope

But Mezamer was a “loudmouth braggart and when he came to the Avars he spoke arrogantly and very rashly.” There was at the Avar court a Kutrigur (apparently the Gepids and Kutrigurs have noxious effects on the Slavs and Antae respectively) who noted to the Khagan who suggested that Mezamer was the most powerful of the Antae and that, therefore, killing him would make the Antae fold with fear. The Avars did take up this helpful suggestion and thereafter were able to ravage the land of the Antae “even more than before, carrying off prisoners and plunder without respite.”

[Chilbudius] – (source: Procopius, Gothic Wars) – this one is not certain; Chilbudius was a magister in charge of Thrace who launched attacks against the barbarians north of the Danube but fell in one of his expeditions. Apparently, an Antian prisoner of the Slavs either had the same name (which might be interesting for our purposes) or pretended to have the same name (which would be less interesting) and, therefore, claimed to be the same person as the magister who was thought dead. Specifically, when the Antes bought back the man from the Slavs (yes, they were known to fight one another too), the buyers were approached by a Byzantine prisoner of theirs (i.e., of the Antes) who convinced them that they had the real deal here or at least that they ought to be able to get some cash for the pretender. In any event, at some point the Antes figured out that this was not the “true” Chilbudius and the bought back Antae (Ant?) fessed up (supposedly) but the Antes went ahead with the plan anyway and sent him to Constantinople (apparently as part of a plan to convince the Emperor Justinian to have Chilbudius govern them at Turris, a city that Justinian wanted to give to the Antae in exchange for their protecting the imperial frontier from the Huns).

The (2nd) outing of the false Chilbudius – the Byzantines saw right through him

However, the whole thing was revealed when the Chilbudius or not Chilbudius was taken prisoner by a Byzantine named Narses who saw through the ruse or whatever else this was – our head is spinning and so should yours about now. The year was [circa] 545.

The Tale of Piast and Popiel as seen in Gallus Anonymous’ Chronicle

PublishedDecember 27, 2014 Post authortorino

We thought it interesting to produce an English translation of some of the more popular stories and myths of Slavic countries without analysis, interpretation and paraphrasing (something different this time). To give you what’s there – literally – in the old chronicles. We will start with the earliest versions but, to the extent we think there is interesting stuff in subsequent iterations of the tale, we will include those as well. We will start this series with the tale of Piast (with Popiel) but have plans for other stories as well.

With regards to Polish sources, we have the Anonymous Chronicle as the most ancient source, then Master Vincent Kadlubek’s Chronicle, then Dzierzwa and then the Greater (Old) Poland Chronicles. Finally, there is Jan Dlugosz who is hardly an ancient source but whose versions are always entertaining – for that reason we will include him as well. Subsequent tales and myths of Miechow, Kromer, Bielski or Guaginin/Stryjkowski we will not include in these series as they are more modern and, we think, do not add much worthwhile material in this respect.

Gallus Anonymous Chronicle

About Duke Popiel [called Choscisko]:

There was namely in the town of Gniezno, whose meaning in Slavic is simply “nest”, a duke by the name of Popiel, who had two sons; according to pagan custom he prepared a great feast for their postrzyzyny [hair cutting ceremony wherein the boy became admitted to adulthood – aka First Communion or Pole-mitzvah], to which feast he invited a ver many of his magnates and friends. It happened, however, from God’s mysterious will, that there arrived two guests , who were not only not invited to the feast but were even in hurtful ways turned away from city gates.

Some versions of this story have three guests arriving

And they, outraged at the cityfolk’s inhumane treatment of them, went straightaway to the burbs [i.e., the area around the city walls where poorer people dwelt], where they fortuitously happened upon the little house of a ploughman of the aforementioned duke who was arranging the feast for his sons [this “who” seems to refer to the duke’s feast, rather than to the ploughman].

Piast’s house is the second bottom one from the left

This poor man full of compassion, invited the strangers to his house making it available [to them] in all of its poverty. And they, grateful to be so invited upon entering the friendly house, said unto him: “Be happy indeed that we have come and perhaps our arrival will bring unto you a wealth of all good things, and from your offspring pride and fame.”

About Piast the Son of Choscisko:

[note that this section has caused much confusion as it suggests, given the title of the preceding section, that Piast was the son of Popiel – as far as we know that is an unresolved issue and people have lived with this problem and, absent new sources, will have to continue to so live; incidentally, Choscisko seems to mean someone with out of control hair]

“Those who lived in this friendly house were one Piast, the son of Choscisko and his wife by the name Rzepka; and both of them with all their heart tried to tend to the needs of their guests, and seeing their prudence/wisdom, they got ready to run secret plan they had concocted by the guests [?]. When sitting down and according to custom they talked about various things, and the visitors asked, what is there to drink, the hospitable ploughman answered: “I have a barrel of fermented beer which I have prepared for the postrzyzyny of my only son but what does such a small barrel mean? Drink it should you will so!” The poor man decided namely at a time when his duke and master was hosting a feast for his sons – for at another time he could not do so because of his poverty – to prepare a slightly better meal for the postrzyzyny of his little one and to invite a few of his likewise poor friends to this feast but rather for a modest snack; and so he’d been fattening a pig for this occasion.

Piast’s wife Rzepka trots out the very best

Strange things will I say but who can understand the mind of the Lord? Or who would dare to question the goodness of God who in this life not once elevates the humbleness of the poor and does not hesitate to reward hospitality even among the pagans? Calmly the guests thus ask Piast to pour the beer because they well knew that the amount of beer will not be lessened by drinking it but rather will only increase. And so the there was more and more beer until all the borrowed cups were filled while those that feasted with the duke found their cups to be empty. They order then to kill the afore mentioned pig whose meat – aching unbelievable – was to fill ten vessels known in Slavic as “cebry” [singular, ceber].

The names of Piast’s other wives did not make it into the annals of history – yet their role getting that pig was equally important

Piast and Rzepka when seeing these miracles that were happening, sensed in them an important augury for their son and almost intended to invite the duke and his guests but they dared not do so without first asking the travelers. Why wait? Thus, at the guests’ counsel and with their encouragement, their lord the duke and all his revelers are invited by the peasant Piast, and the invited duke certainly did not see shame to come to his own peasant’s house.

Piast is eager to welcome Popiel to his humble house

For at that time the Polish dukedom was not so great, nor did the duke of the country have yet so much pride and did not go about so richly surrounded by a procession of vassals. So when the customary feast was organized and all the foods were aplenty, the guests cut the boy’s hair and gave him the nama Siemowit [or Siemovit] as an augury of future occurrences.”

About the duke Ziemowit, the Son of Piast:

“After all this, the young Siemowit, son of Piast Chosciskowiec [i.e., Piast son of Choscisco, with Chosciskowiec being a patronymic] grew in strength and in years and each day grew also in virtues until at last the king of kings and duke of dukes with the common agreement of all made him a duke of Poland and Popiel, together with his descendants, he [i.e., God] removed completely from the duchy. Wise men also say that this Popiel once thrown out of the kingdom was so greatly pursued by mice, that for this reason he was brought by his people to an island, where he was long defended in a wooden tower against these enraged animals who swam there, until he was finally abandoned because of the great stench that arose from the many killed [mice? men?] and died there in the most shameful way, for he died being torn/bitten apart by these monsters…

Popiel’s last stand (from the Hanna Barbera documentary)

But let us leave the histories of people, the recollection of whom has been lost in the forgetfulness of centuries and who were sullied by the errors of idolatry, and mentioning them only briefly let us move on to herald those matters which have been solidified by exact memory.

Siemowit thus, having obtained the duke’s honors, passed his youth not on pleasures and fleeting entertainments but rather, devoting himself to hard work and knightly service, his respectability became well-known and so did his worthy fame and he expanded the borders of his dukedom further than anyone before him. After his passing, his place was taken by his son Lestek who by his knightly deeds equaled his father in his respectability and courage. After Lestek’s death there came Siemomysl, his son, who multiplied threefold the memory of his ancestors both through his birth as by his honor.”

[the next story in the Chronicle is the story of Mieszko]

On the Freising Manuscripts’ Translations

PublishedDecember 26, 2014 Post authortorino

Having dealt with some things Czech, others Polish and a bit of Russian and Croatian, we decided to take a detour into the lands of Slovenia. We begin by taking a quick look at the so-called Freising Manuscripts.

The Freising Manuscripts are Slovenian manuscripts and are the oldest Slavic-language documents written in Latin, likely created before the year 1000. Perhaps they written by Bishop Abraham in Freising, perhaps not. Currently, at the Bavarian State Library, they consist of three separate texts. They are available for viewing here.

The above is the first page of the third manuscript. We note the translation of the beginning in Slovene and in English is as follows:

Slovene (this is the modern translation of these ancient words):

“Jaz se odpovem zlodeju, in vsem njegovim delom, in vsem njegovim lepotijam.”

English:

“I renounce the devil and all his works, and all his ornaments.”

What the language actually says is the following:

“Iazze zaglagolo zlodeiu. Iuzem iego delom. Iuzem iego lepocam.”

Now, the first interesting thing here is that zlodeiu is interpreted as an “evil doer” reminding us of the older meaning of this word (this is correct as the “zlodei” was to be contrasted with the “dobrodei”) which now may mean something else, e.g., “thief” in Polish.

Secondly, notwithstanding the translation, there is no devil or rather the word “devil” is not used. Just “Zlodei”. In fact, “dei” may actually be interpreted here as a god, specifically, a bad god, i.e., a zlo dei. It is curious whether there is a connection between the word deus and the indo-european verb to do – perhaps, as in maker or doer.

Thirdly, the quality of the writing is remarkable. Spacing, in particular is nice, airy and altogether generous as most words are properly and exactly separated with a nice roomy, yes, space (compare that to the incredibly annoyingly chicken scratched manuscripts of Lucas from Great Kozmin). A few words are stuck together – mostly the word “and”, i.e., “i”. Two-letter words, however are usually separated from others. The word “I” seemingly appears in the text once only (this is partly because of verb conjugation that does not exist in English): as in “Jaz” then “se” in the above text. Indeed, in modern Slovenian “I am” is “Jaz sem”. Is that what “Iazze” means?

Polish Gods Part II – On the Night on Bald Mountain

PublishedDecember 25, 2014 Post authortorino

Tranquility Itself

Merry Christmas y’all. The Łysa Góra (aka Łysiec, Święty Krzyż or in English Bald Mountain) Benedictine abbey in the Holy Cross Mountains in Poland was (and what remains is) a very famous abbey.

Of course, the monks were only able to buy their tranquility by investing in a high quality ray gun – guaranteed to stop any Polish Gods… at least if they come at you from space at a 90 degree angle

As such it deserved to have its history written and, as it deserved it, so it got its desserts. In particular, the history of the establishment was written in the so-called Powieść Rzeczy Istey (publication year 1538? (the Latin version came out in 1536)).

We will let readers take it all in at their own time and pleasure but, in general, the story starts with the existence of a castle (Łysiec or “baldy”) on Bald Mountain. In that castle there lives a Lady so arrogant that she demands to be worshipped as if she is the goddess Diana. Such sacrilege cannot go on and so the castle is torn apart by thunder such that its remaining stones can be seen to this day (and to this day too).

Money for the new monastery was there – just not enough for proper cleanup of what was there before

In that place there was (then? later?) a church to three idols (trzy balwany) named Lada, Boda and Leli where the common people would come to pray and make offerings on the first of May (recall the Green Week and the Pentacostal Postillas/Sermons).

This was seen by the Czech princess Dobrawa on her way to marry Mieszko and she being a good Christain could not tolerate such an affront and ordered that (the old church be razed and) a church (a “real” one) be built to be dedicated to the Holy Trinity.

The monk Benedict Kiddo used the Five-Point-Palm-Exploding-Wall Technique to break down the Lada/Boda/Leli church temple ramparts – effective, if messy

She also founded (and apparently funded from her dowry) a Benedictine monastery (tradition says in 1006 though she was already departed by then) and invited six monks from Bohemia to run it, i.e, to be doing whatever monks do in monasteries there. Later, at her request, her son Boleslaw Chrobry after his coronation strengthened the construction (there is talk of some masonry) and donated more funds to it.

Now, since Dobrawa died before Mieszko in 977 and Boleslaw was not crowned until 1025 (although in this version of Powieść Rzeczy Istey he was king for 25 years so since the year 1000 – suggesting BTW that the Gniezno meeting with Otto III resulted in a coronation… a topic for another time) some time must have passed between Dobrawa’s request and Chrobry’s further works on the monastery (at least 23 years if the crowning is to be in the year 1000 or 48 years otherwise if we go with the crowning in the year 1025 as is usual). In any event, Boleslaw Chrobry passes shortly after his (real) coronation in 1025 with the story noting that his passing was foretold by a large and very bright comet (“Kometa wielka i bar(d)zo Jasna).

So we are left with another list of Gods with the mystery figure here being Boda as the others are already known from Jan Dlugosz and others.

The stuff that went on on Bald Mountain was quite extraordinary

A priest of Boda on Bald Mountain?

Although Jan Dlugosz allegedly also referred to Lel and Polel (as well as Świst, Poświst, Pogoda) as being venerated on Łysa Góra, I have not been able to confirm this.

Note also that the above story about Bald Mountain was mentioned in one form or another by the Greater Poland Chronicle and by Jan Dlugosz later as well.

Here is the version from the above Powieść Rzeczy Istey. It contains parts labeled 2 and 3 above:

English

“This Boleslaw was the son of Mieszko [who was] the Polish duke [and] was the one who was first to spread the Christian faith in Poland and who at his baptism in lieu of his name Mieszko was named Mieczyslaw. His mother was a good Christian named Dabrowka a Czech duchess, [and] the granddaughter of Saint Wenceslaus the martyr. This Dabrowka desiring to spread wider the glory of the Lord in Poland, tried to find worthy places to build a church. She liked one place – Bald Mountain called after the castle Lysiec (bald) which stood on it and which was so called as it shone from afar.”

“It was in this castle that a certain lady who had lived there earlier; having grown in pride for she had defeated the great Alexander at this mountain, ordered that she be worshipped as the goddess Diana. But she right away learned God’s wrath for this blasphemy for he threw all thunder at this castle; this lady too, together with all the servants he stifled so that till this day there lie at this place a great many stones. At this same place there stood once a temple to three idols who were named Lada, Boda, Leli. It was to these that the commoners would come on the first day of May so as to pray to them and to make offerings. Therefore, the afore-said Dabrowka, having cast down their temple, ordered that a church be built there and dedicated to the veneration and praise of the reverend Holy Trinity. Having called there six monks from the order of Saint Benedict, godly men from the Czech town of Sázava [Benešov District], she built there a small monastery and gave it a portion of her property that came from her dowry; which monastery later, the great and famous King Boleslaw Chrobry, at the request of this Dabrowka, his mother, whose only son was he, in the sixth year after his coronation, endowed with a greater estate and built up robustly with masonry.”

Polish

Był ten Bolesław syn Mieyszki książęcia polskiego który napierwey w Polszcze począł szczepić wiarę Krześcijanską który też na krzcie w miasto imienia Mieyszki nazwan był Mieczysław. Matką iego była dobra krześcijanka imieniem Dąbrówka księżna Czeska wnuczka świętego Wacława męczennika. Ta to Dąbrówka chcąc chwałę bożą w Polszcze rozmnożyć, iakoby młode szczepie, szukaiąc mieysca godnego ku budowaniu kościoła. Spodobało się iey mieysce iedno, Łysa gora wezwane od zamku Łysiec, który na niey był, który też tak zwano, iż się z daleka bielał.

Na tym zamku pani iedna przedtym mieszkaiąca, podniowszy się w pychę, iż była poraziła wielkiego Alexandra pod tą gorą, kazała się za boginią Dyane chwalić. Ale natychmiast za to bluźnierstwo pomstę Bożą uznała, iż on zamek wszystek grom rostrącił onę też panią ze wszystkimi służebniki potłumił, tak iż ieszcze podziś dzień leżą na tym miescu wielkie gromady kamienia. Na tym też miescu był kościół trzech bałwanów, kthóre zwano Lada, Boda, Leli. Do których prości ludzie schadzali się pierwszego dnia Maia, modłę im czynić y ofiarować. Tedy Dąbrówka przerzeczona pokaziwszy ich bożnice kazała zbudować kościoł y poswięcić ku czci y ku chwale wielebney świętey Troyce. Tamże wezwawszy szesć mnichow zakonu S. Benedykta meżow nabożnych z Zozea miasta Czeskiego zbudowała klasztor niewielki y nadała im cześć imienia z posagu swego kthory potym klasztor wielki a sławny Krol Bolesław Chabry, na prośbę teyże Dąbrówki matki swey, ktorey był syn iedyny, roku szóstego po koronacyey więtszym imieniem nadał y dostatkiem więtszym zmurował.

On Czech Gods Part II – Neplach

PublishedDecember 23, 2014 Post authortorino

We mentioned before that the Czech sources for most of the Czech Gods are rather behind the times coming mostly (outside of the controversial Mater Verborum glosses) only starting in the 16th century. We also mentioned that that was not entirely correct and that we had some ideas for earlier sources. The time has come:

Here is Abbott Neplach of Opatovice, associated with the court of Charles IV. He was apparently “born in Hoříněves to a poor family, then was sent to the Benedictine monastery in Opatovice in 1328. In 1334 he took the vows of the Benedictine Order, and in 1340 he studied in Bologna. He became abbot of the Opatovice monastery in 1348.” [quoting after Brill]. He wrote a history of the world with a particular reference to that most important part of it, i.e., Bohemia (Summula chronicae tam Romanae quam Bohemicae). It seems that this was at the request of Charles IV and followed an earlier crappier attempt by another writer. Neplach’s effort was also rather lousy and eventually it was left to Pulkava to please the sponsor. However, Neplach does say under the year 894 the following (carryover paragraph):

“A.d. DCCCXCIV incipiunt acta ac gesta ducum et regum Boemie, quorum quidam pagani fuerunt et idcirco, quo tempore vel quibus annis domini regnaverint, non est curandum. Habebat enim quoddam ydolum, quod pro deo ipsorum colebant, nomen autem ydoli vocabatur Zelu. Sed obmissis materiis de illis virginibus, de quibus fit mencio in principio cronice Boemice, de sola Lybossa phitonissa brevissime dicendum est.”

To translate:

“There began the deeds and acts of the dukes and kings of Bohemia, some of whom were pagans and, therefore, at what time or in what years they ruled is of no importance. And they had an idol whom they worshipped as a god and the name of this idol was Zelu. But now let us focus on the matter of those maidens of whom mention was made at the beginning of this chronicle and briefly mention Lybossa [Libuse] the witch…”

Now, the interesting thing is that the German (and, apparently, only the German) translation of the Dalimil Chronicle contains a similar reference (perhaps based on this text above):

Now, Zelu seems to be the same as Zelon sive Dobropan, (interpretatio romana Mercury) from Stredovsky. In fact, perhaps Stredovsky based his Zelon on the above reference of Neplach’s…

Curiously, a similar Godname appears either in Laskowski or in the De diis Samagitarum caeterorumque Sarmatarum et falsorum Christianorumi where, in discussing Baltic Gods, the author, if I recall correctly, mentions Zelus.

Update: Other Neplach entries included by Meyer are the following (from the new compilation by Juan Álvarez-Pedrosa Núñez, with him as well as Julia Mendoza Tuñón and Sandra Romano Martín translating):

Sub Anno 1336

“In the year of our Lord 1336, Phillip, son of the king of Majorca, accompanied by twelve noblemen from the kingdom entered the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin on the eve of the Nativity of Christ; and in Bohemia, close to Kadan, along with a solider in the town of Blov, a pastor named Myslata died. And he, rising from this tomb each night, would wander all of the nearby towns, terrorizing and slitting the throats of the people, and he would speak.When pieced with a stick, he said: ‘Much damage you have done me, since you have given me a cane to defend myself from the dogs;’ and when he was exhumed to burn him, he swelled like an ox and gave a hair-raising roar. When they put him in the fire, soemone took a stck and drive it through him, and he bled without stopping, as if he were a tanakrd. In addition, when they disinterred him and put him in a cart, his legs shrunk as if he were alive, and when he was burned, all of his evil was dispelled, and before being burnt, all those whose names he spoke at night would die within eight days.”

“A.d. MCCCXXXVI Philippus, filius regis Maiorikarum, cum XII nobilibus regni ordinem fratrum Minorum in uigilia Natiuitatis Christi ingreditur et in Boemia circa Cadanum ad milliare unum in villa dicta Blow quidam pastor nomine Myslata moritur. Hic omni nocte surgens circuibat omnes villas in circuitu homines terrendo et iugulando et loquebatur. Et cum fuisset cum palo transfixus dicebat: Multum nocuerunt michi, nam dederunt michi baculum, ut me a canibus defendam; et cum cremandus effoderetur, tumebat sicut bos et terribiliter rugiebat. Et cum poneretur in ignem, quidam arripiens fustem fixit in eum et continuo erupit cruor sicut de vase. Insuper cum fuisset effossus et in currum positus, collegit pedes ad se sicut vivus, et cum fuisset crematus totum malum conquievit, et antequam cremaretur, quemcumque e nomine in nocte vocabat, infra octo dies moriebatur.”

Sub anno 1344

“Year of the Lord 1344. In Levin a woman died and she was buried. Bu then she would come out of her tomb and murder many and then she would attack anyone. And when she was pierced, the blood flowed as if she were a live animal, and she had devoured more than half of her own shroud, which, when taken out of her, was covered in blood. When they went to bur her, they could not get any type of wood to light except for the wood from the roof of the church, according to the testimony of some old women. Although they had pierced her, she continued to rise up; but, when they were able to burn her, all of the evil she had was dispelled.”

“A.d. MCCCXLIV Quedam mulier in Lewin mortua fuit et sepulta. Post sepulturam autem surgebat et multos iugulabat et post quemlibet saltabat. Et cum fuisset transfixa, fluebat sanguis sicud de animali vivo et devoraverat slogerium proprium plus quam medium, et cum extraheretur, totum fuit in sanguine. Et cum deberet cremari, non poterant ligna aliqualiter accendi nisi de tegulis ecclesie ad informacionem aliquarum vetularum. Postguam autem fuisset transfix adhuc semper surgebat; sed cum fuisset cremata, tunc totum malum conquievit.”