The most basic communicative speaks only of coronation, or political act. There is no talk of the anointing to which Boleslaw sought, for he became an anointed. God, which means that by God's will, he has authority over the people. In another words, he gained power not from the emperor, but from God himself," emphasized historian Prof. Krzysztof Ożóg.
"The Coronation of the First King of Poland". The painting of Jan Matejko. Photo: Public domain
Professor, do you agree with the thesis that thanks to Prince Mieszk I and his son, King Bolesław I Chrobry, Poland truly has a spectacular beginning? This is not only about baptism and coronation, but besides about the strong position that the Piast state gained comparatively rapidly in Europe at the time: from a tribal, pagan body to a Christian state, of which both the emperor and the pope, or political and spiritual leader of that day, counts.
Prof. Krzysztof Ożóg: With respect to this spectacularness, there is no doubt, both as regards the creation of the state and its institutions, which were created by the act of baptism. After 2 years after the baptism of the monarch of the bishopric for all his power, or Poland, and this subject only to the Holy See, was an incredible achievement. Let us emphasize – a permanent bishopric, not just missionary, which simply preceded the canonic establishment of the former. Thanks to this permanent bishopric Mieszko gained the chance to systematically introduce fresh religion and independent Christianity. Here the case facilitated the triumph of our prince over Saxon number Wichman of September 967, a multiple rebel against Emperor Otto I. However, it should be stressed that Mieszko could usage this asset perfectly. erstwhile he entered the Christian world, he proved to be a prominent ruler, and from the beginning this neophyte, just converted, was doing well in the fresh realities.
It was besides invaluable – which I consider as proof of the Prince's religion – the act of denouncing the state to St Peter. It was an act with a spiritual dimension, for in the political sphere the Holy See could not compare with the imperial court in this part of Europe. Let us remember, however, that for the functioning of the Church in Poland at the time there was besides a request for favour and acceptance of the emperor. Mieszko I managed to gain it, and the entrustment of his power to St.Peter resulted in one, namely strong ties with Rome, which in the future was very important, besides political, but besides religious. It was from the Holy See or Italy that the clergy and all liturgical accessories for the young Church were obtained. We have evidence of this, for example, by the confirmed testimonies of the denar of St Peter, or the one-year tribute which Mieszko I and his boy Bolesław paid in the wake of the act of the denunciation, which we know under the name “Dagome judex”.
In the governments, both Lives I and Bolesław Chrobry strike this decisive focus on the connection with the rite and Latin culture – the proverbial West, while at the same time striving to preserve autonomy and sovereignty.
A very crucial aspect here is the consistency and continuity of the policy of the 2 hub rulers. After all, Mieszkowy's son, Bolesław, who, as can be said, utilized providently the martyr's death of St. Wojciech, besides gained his own ecclesiastical metropolis in a spectacular way, and consequently independence. If the power of Lives I and then Bolesław Chrobry were subject to the church's Magdeburg metropolis, then his sovereignty would be severely limited. Here the large origin and very happy for us were the reigns of the then exceptional ruler on the imperial throne – Otto III, perfectly utilized by Bolesław. After the celebrated Gniezno convention in 1000, Chrobry actually ruled like a king. Let us stress that Bolesław received royal powers from Otto III – specified as the law of investment, or the appointment of the archbishop and bishops in his country and the privilege of supporting the Christianization action of pagan peoples, which was 1 of the chief tasks of the empire. Prof. Tomasz Jasinski put it well erstwhile he wrote that Bolesław became an imperial brother and associate in this work. He thus fulfilled Emperor Otto's imagination that the Boleslavic state was this Kingdom of Sclavinia, an equivalent kingdom of Italy, Gaul and Germany.
What can be seen on the celebrated miniature in Otto III prayer book – 1 of the first visions of a united Europe.
This miniature from the year 1000 virtually reflects the Ottoman concept, and at the same time confirms the place of our Bolesław Chrobry. It can be said that Bolesław took over his main ideas from Otto III. Of course, it did not prevent him from fighting a war with Otto III's successor, Emperor Henry II, but the concept of his power and his exercise of power in his country continued to coincide with what the Gniezno convention had begun, and it had, let us stress it again, the royal character. Moreover, Bolesław himself confirms this by ordering the killing of royal denarii – Rex Bolizlavus. And it was not just 1 occasional issue, these issue of "royal" coins was several, and it was for a period of respective years after the year 1005, erstwhile it came to waiting for an chance to prepare for the anointing and coronation of the King of Poland – for which he was recognized by Otto III in the year 1000.
Mr. Professor, we are celebrating Bolesław Chrobry's round, thousandth anniversary. It seems that this is simply a communicative well known to us: the baptism of Poland, the Gniezno convention and the symbolic appointment by Emperor Otto III as ruler of Bolesław Chrobre over a relic with the remains of St. Wojciech and the culmination of this road – the coronation of Bolesław Chrobre in Easter on 18 April 1025. However, the date of the coronation itself and its place are powerfully discussed. If you inactive read the comments of German chroniclers at the time, they treat this act – to put it mildly – unfavorably, stressing that Boleslaw Chrobry has done “suddenness” and “selfless” utilizing the Emperor's weakness...
This thinness of messages and memorabilia following Bolesław Chrobry's royal coronation is primarily the consequence of the destructive invasion of the Czech Prince Brestislav in 1038 or 1039. Then during the robbery of Gniezno, what would give us a greater view of Bolesław’s coronation ceremony was destroyed. And 1 more thing: there was no longer a chief chronicler who made us learn about the times of the first Piasts – Bishop Thietmar. The clergyman died in 1018, and if he had lived longer, we would surely have an extended relation with the coronation.
Especially since Bishop Thietmar, to put it mildly, was not very favorable to our ruler.
Paradoxically, it makes him more reliable. But we are not in specified a hopeless situation as it may seem. We have mainly Kwedlinburg Yearbooks conducted in Kwedlinburg by Benedictines. Sisters associated with the imperial court were unfavorable, but at the same time had very good and confirmed information. First, in 1025 it was recorded that Bolesław was anointed and crowned. These 2 facts are fundamental. Of course, this was considered usurpation, the usage of the weakness of the German king and since 1026 Emperor Konrad II. Under the same date of 1025 we have a evidence of Bolesław Chrobry's death shortly after the coronation, which according to Benedictine women was a punishment of God for this "usurpation" of anointing and coronation. From another sources we know the day of the King's death – June 17. We don't know the date of the day's coronation, but we can hypothetically deduce it. In my opinion, the coronation took place on the first day of the year 1025, counted according to the kind of Nativitate, or since the birth of the Lord, i.e. on Christmas 1024, according to our calendar. Christmas was the usual period of coronation. For example, Bolesław Szczodry was crowned. I'm little inclined to date the coronation on Easter April 18. If we were to hold on to this period, Easter is more fit for baptism Lives I, due to the fact that baptisms were indeed held on Passover Eve, and so it is to this day. And if we were to insist on the spring date, more for the coronation day is the April 23rd – St. Wojciech's celebration.
As far as the coronation site is concerned, I believe it was Gniezno, not Poznań, despite the evidence of the fire of the Gniezno Cathedral. Again, let us mention to the past of the invasion of Brestislav, during which St. Wojciech's confession was robbed, including 3 gold plates brought to Gniezno in 1000 by Otto III. Hence, the fire did not melt them, so the fire was limited in range. Let us remind, in what circumstances and where Władysław Łokietek was crowned – similarly, in the burnt Kraków Cathedral, and destroyed by a much more serious fire than the 1 that touched the Gniezno temple.
We besides know the name of Archbishop of Metropolitan of 1025 – Hippolyta. So for the early mediate Ages, we have quite a few information. Furthermore, we know that at the time in Europe there was a widespread "Roman-German pontificate" which was created in Mainz in the monastery of St Alban in the mediate of the 10th century. In it we have a written ordo coronandi, or coronation order, composed of the rite of anointing and coronation of the ruler. Assuming this pontificate was widespread in Europe at the time, we can learn about the coronation of Bolesław Chrobry in Gniezno.
Thus we can trace all stages of the coronation: symbolic awakening by the bishops of the monarch lying on his bed; bringing him into the procession of the cathedral before which the metropolitan awaits, he introduces the ruler into the cathedral; in the choir of the cathedral – not to be confused with the choir of music – the ruler takes off his coat and surrenders his arms to the bishops; then he is led, I believe, before the confession of St. Wojciech, where the cross is laid, then he besides embroiders “Litania to all the saints” and after its completion Bolesław gets up; the archbishop asks the ruler the following questions: does he want to keep Christian faith, will he defend the Church and care for the clergy and will he regulation the people subject to him fairly? and on each of these questions the ruler owes, according to the pontary, answer volol – I want. Then the metropolitan asks the gathered: Do you want to obey and obey specified a ruler? and the people respond to the fiat, the fiat amen – let it happen; after this act Bolesław receives the anointing of the cross – precisely the head, arms, hands, back and chest; after the anointing the sword is handed over to him, followed by another insignia: the scepter, the crown – which the metropolitan puts on his head – and undoubtedly the spear of St. Mauryce, then the ruler sits on the throne; the song is performed by Te Deum laudamus and at the end the Archbishop celebrates
A solemn service of humility.
What is the symbolism of this rich ceremony, and what was the real importance of it for the country?
This most basic communicative speaks only of coronation, or political act. There is no talk of the anointing to which Boleslaw sought, for he became an anointed. God, that is, that by God's will he exercises authority over the people whom God entrusted to him – that was very crucial in those days. In another words, Boleslaw gained power not from the emperor, but from God himself. This includes the monarchial responsibilities of guarding the faith, caring for his people and, most importantly, leading him to salvation. During that time, anointing was vital – making God’s anointed ruler. The monarch, being anointed, rules in Christ's name the people entrusted to himself.
Let us stress again, in common communicative the essence of this act is absent. The coronation itself, which confirms the sovereignty of the ruler and his state, is besides very important, but not alone. Of course, in the ideological order of the planet of that time the imperial power is the most important, but to the king it did not translate into a tribunal dependence.
The acceptance of Latin culture by our first rulers besides active the acceptance of knightly culture. So can we live in I and Bolesław I be regarded as those who started a knightly tradition, cultivated for centuries in the Polish Army?
Undoubtedly, Mieszko I and even more Bolesław Chrobry took the first step in this regard. After 1000 years we have a very profound transformation in the sphere of alleged knightly culture. In the 11th and 12th centuries, erstwhile the crusade began, the violent warrior was fed into a knight, for whom it is crucial not only to kill and be able to usage weapons, but besides to defend the weak, defend orphans, widows or poor. From now on, the warrior knight is to fight not only his enemies, but besides his own weaknesses through the grace of God. She and her sword make him a real knight. Of course, St. Bernard of Clairvaux, who initiated and preached the thought of Christ's knight, had an inadequacy. Thanks to the accession of our rulers to the Latin culture planet and this knightly branch of ours has become part of our tradition.
Krzysztof Józef Oźóg – Media historian, prof. of humanities, active associate of the Polish Academy of Skills. He specializes in medieval past of Poland and Europe. He conducts investigation on intellectual environments in Poland and medieval Europe, his works, the past of the Polish Church and the monarchy of Piasts, Andegawens and Jagillons. He besides deals with spiritual history, regional past and the editing of medieval sources. erstwhile manager of the Archives of the Jagiellonian University and Head of the Department of Medieval past of the Jagiellonian University Institute of History. He published, among others, "966th Baptism of Poland" (2015), "Corona and Cross: The Time of the Piasts and the Jagiellons" (2012), "Poland's Place in Intellectual improvement of Europe in the 14th–10th Century" (2006), "Students in the Jadwiga Andegawenska Monarchy and Władysław Jagiełła (1384–1434)" (2004) and "Intellectualists in the Service of the Polish Kingdom from 1306–1382" (1995).
