Luscombe D., Riley-Smith J. The New Cambridge Medieval History, Vol. 4: c. 1024-c. 1198, Part 2

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Kievan Rus



, the Bulgars and the southern Slavs, c. 1020–c. 1200 271

he and Sava founded a Serbian monastic community which was to become the

leading centre of Serbian culture and spirituality in the middle ages. Nemanja

died on 13 February 1199 and was canonized soon after.

In summary, we have seen that after 1018 Duklja asserted itself over the

Serbian territories but failed to win independence from Byzantium. Ra

ska

replaced Duklja in importance at the beginning of the twelfth century. During

the second half of the century, Stephen Nemanja won Ra

ska’s independence

and founded a new dynasty which would rule the Serbian lands until 1371.

The Croats (1018 – c. 1200)

At the beginning of the eleventh century the Croats lived in two more or

less clearly deﬁned regions. Pannonian Croatia constituted the interior region

between Hungary in the north, Bosnia centred on the valley of the River

Bosna in the east, and the Dalmatian littoral in the south. Dalmatian Croatia

constituted most of the Dalmatian coast including such towns as Nin (Nona),

Biograd and Sebenico (

Sibenik). Within this region, however, Byzantium also

controlled a number of towns, including Zadar (Zara), Trau (Trogir), Split

(Spalato) and Ragusa (Dubrovnik). These formed the Byzantine theme of

Dalmatia. Croats, along with Serbs, also lived in Bosnia which at times came

under the control of Croatian kings.

There is little information concerning the history of either Pannonian

Croatia or Dalmatian Croatia before the Byzantine conquest. In 1000, King

Svetoslav of the Trpimir dynasty was deposed by his brothers, Kre

simir III

(1000–30) and Gojislav (1000 – c. 1020). He therefore arranged for his son

Stjepan to marry the daughter of the doge of Venice whom Byzantium had

recently recognized as the imperial agent in Dalmatia. Stjepan’s alliance posed

a serious threat to his two uncles as the Venetians gradually imposed their con-

trol over the Croatian littoral. However, in 1019 the emperor Basil II reasserted

Byzantine rule over Dalmatia after he defeated Samuel of Bulgaria.

Kre

simir III (Gojislav is no longer mentioned by the sources) acknowledged

Byzantium’s overlordship and Basil allowed him to rule Croatia as an imperial

client. In 1025, after the emperor’s death, Byzantine suzerainty became tenuous

as the civil bureaucracy which assumed the leading role in Constantinople

became less concerned with Dalmatia. Kre

simir III declared independence but

had to cede territory to his nephew Stjepan. In 1024, the latter had ﬂed strife-

torn Venice and sought sanctuary at the court of King Stephen I in Hungary.

The king seized Slavonia, as the Croatian territory between the Rivers Drava

and Sava was known, and gave it to Stjepan as an appanage.

Kre

simir III’s son and successor Stjepan I (1030–58) expanded Croatian

territories to the north-west and scored military successes against the Venetians

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

272 martin dimnik

and the Greeks. His son Peter Kre

simir IV (1058–74)reestablished cordial

relations with Byzantium. As it was threatened by the Seljuqs from Asia Minor,

the Normans from Italy and Venice on the Adriatic the empire was unable to

maintain control over its Dalmatian theme. In 1069,itceded control over

its coastal towns (except Ragusa) to Kre

simir IV but retained its nominal

overlordship. He respected the autonomous status of the Byzantine towns and

made Biograd, a Croatian town, his capital.

There is little information for the ecclesiastical history of Pannonian Croatia

where the church was Latin. More is known about the church in Dalmatian

Croatia. Despite Byzantium’s political control over the coastal towns, the

churches there remained under the jurisdiction of the pope. The most powerful

prelate was the archbishop of Split but it is not known how much authority

he wielded over the Croats living on the coast. From the beginning of the

ninth century the patriarch of Aquileia, an agent of the Franks, had conducted

missionary activity among Slavs living in northern and central Dalmatia. The

centre of his activity was Nin, the princely residence north of Zadar where,

around 850, the pope had established a bishopric for the Dalmatian Croats.

The bishop of Nin championed the use of Slavonic as a liturgical language

unlike the archbishop of Split who advocated Latin.

During Kre

simir’s reign the Slavonic liturgy, written in the Glagolitic script,

became an issue of controversy. It was especially popular in northern Dalmatia

on the islands in the Gulf of Kvarner. At the time when the papacy was imple-

menting general reforms in the church, many prelates of the Byzantine towns

attempted to prohibit the use of the Slavonic liturgy and to standardize church

practices. In 1060 a synod held in Split and attended by all the Dalmatian

bishops and a papal legate prohibited clergy from wearing long hair and beards

as was customary in the Byzantine church; it also announced that Slavs aspir-

ing to the priesthood had to learn Latin. Three years later Pope Alexander II

conﬁrmed the decisions of the synod, but the decrees were most unpopular

with the lower classes of Croats who looked upon them as measures designed

to suppress the Slavonic liturgy. In 1064 arebellion broke out on the island

of Krk where proponents of the Slavonic liturgy unsuccessfully attempted to

establish their own bishopric. Some three years later another synod divided the

Dalmatian coast into two archbishoprics: that of Split extended northwards

from the River Cetina (located south of Split), and that of Duklja extended

southwards from the river Cetina to Durazzo (where Ragusa and Bar vied for

ecclesiastical jurisdiction). In 1075 a synod held in Split conﬁrmed this reorga-

nization; it also reiterated the edicts of 1060 against Glagolitic and reafﬁrmed

the use of Latin. But the synodal decrees proved to be ineffective. The Slavonic

liturgy was retained in many Croatian communities which either preferred the

Slavonic language or could not ﬁnd priests who knew Latin.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

Kievan Rus



, the Bulgars and the southern Slavs, c. 1020–c. 1200 273

During Kre

simir’s reign Croatia was made up of three banates: Slavonia,

Bosnia and a coastal banate which existed from 1060 to 1069 under the rule

of a certain Goj

co. Little is known about the latter two, but Slavonia was

governed by the autonomous ban Zvonimir, son-in-law of King B

ela I of

Hungary. In the late 1060sZvonimir and Kresimir reached an agreement. The

former accepted Kre

simir’s overlordship as a result of which Slavonia, while

retaining its autonomy, became part of the kingdom of Croatia. Kre

simir, for

his part, designated Zvonimir his successor should he die heirless.

Kre

simir IV died around 1075 and Zvonimir was crowned king near Split.

The ceremony was performed by the legate of Pope Gregory VII to whom

Zvonimir pledged fealty. This was a signiﬁcant step in Croatia’s orientation

towards the west. Thereafter the king’s loyalty to the pope and his success

at taking politically independent action reduced Byzantine suzerainty over

Croatia to a mere formality. Zvonimir died around 1089 and was succeeded by

his son who died soon after. He was evidently the last of the Trpimir dynasty;

his death initiated a civil war during which many of the hereditary nobles

whose autonomy Zvonimir had curtailed reasserted their traditional rights.

King Ladislas I of Hungary, claiming the succession through his sister Helen,

Zvonimir’s widow, occupied much of Pannonian Croatia. In 1091 he created

a special Croatian banate (banovina) between the river Drava and the Gvozd

Mountain south of Zagreb and placed it under the command of his nephew

Almos. Three years later he also removed the churches in the banate from

the jurisdiction of the archbishop of Split and placed them under the newly

created bishopric of Zagreb (Agram). The latter was made subordinate to the

archbishop of Esztergom (Gran) in Hungary.

A certain Peter (1093–7), evidently from the region of Knin, assumed the

title of king and occupied Dalmatian Croatia and those areas of Pannonian

Croatia which

Almos did not control. In 1095 he also attempted to expel

Almos

from his banate. King Coloman (K

alm

an) came to

Almos’s assistance and Peter,

the last independent Croatian king, was killed in the ensuing conﬂict. After

recapturing Pannonian Croatia Coloman marched into Dalmatia and occupied

Biograd. In 1102 he renewed his annexation of Croatian territories but, on

reaching the River Drava, was allegedly met by local nobles who negotiated

a settlement known as the Pacta Conventa. The terms of the settlement are

unclear. Allegedly, the nobles elected Coloman king of Pannonian Croatia

and Dalmatian Croatia. Henceforth, Croatia and Hungary shared a common

king but remained distinct realms. The king of Hungary had to be crowned a

second time as the king of Croatia. Coloman promised to defend Croatia but

demanded military service from its nobles. However, he granted them local

autonomy and exempted them from taxes; he also permitted them to retain

their lands and their administrative privileges. This was important because

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

274 martin dimnik

kings like Zvonimir had attempted to curtail these rights. In this way the

kingdom of Croatia continued to exist, albeit under a Hungarian dynasty.

Except for a brief interlude in the second half of the twelfth century, Croatia

never again fell under Byzantine control.

The Croatian lands were now divided into three districts: Croatia, which

was bounded by the Adriatic from the Gulf of Kvarner in the west to the River

Neretva in the south, the River Vrbas in the east, and the Rivers Sava and Kupa

in the north; Slavonia, situated more or less between the Rivers Sava and the

Drava; and Bosnia, located to the east of the River Vrbas encompassing, in the

main, the valley of the River Bosna.

Hungary’s control of Dalmatia was frequently challenged by Venice and

Byzantium. Following Coloman’s death in 1116 Venice, with Byzantium’s back-

ing, occupied Zadar, Split, Trogir, Biograd and the surrounding territories.

In 1117 and 1124 the Hungarians failed to regain control of the littoral and

it was not until 1158 that King G

eza II recaptured Zadar for a few years. In

1167 the emperor Manuel I took advantage of internal unrest in Hungary to

assert imperial control over the former Byzantine towns once again, but for

the last time. In 1181, the year following the emperor’s death, King B

ela III re-

gained possession of the coastal towns to the dismay of the Venetians. Hungary

remained in control of the littoral until the Fourth Crusade.

For most of the twelfth century after 1102, Croatia and Slavonia were ruled by

the king’s viceroy (ban). During the reign of King Emeric (Imre) his younger

brother Andrew demanded Croatia as his appanage. The king agreed and,

in 1198, Andrew became duke of Croatia and Slavonia. Although Andrew

remained the king’s vassal and had to supply him with troops, he governed the

domains as an independent ruler. As duke he had the right to coin money, to

appoint bishops, to allocate land and to arbitrate between his nobles. He had

residences in Zagreb, Knin and Zadar.

Croatia and Slavonia were subdivided into many

zupanijas.InCroatia the

zupans were local nobles, but in Slavonia they were usually of Hungarian ori-

gin and Slavonia’s political structure reﬂected that of the Hungarians more

than that of the Croats. Furthermore, the church in Slavonia was placed un-

der the archbishop of Kalocsa in Hungary whereas the church in Croatia

remained under Split’s jurisdiction. During Hungary’s overlordship Croatia

experienced much political unrest as some

zupans attempted to secede while

others living near Bosnia attempted to transfer their allegiance to rulers in that

district.

After Coloman annexed Croatia in 1102 he also asserted his rule over Bosnia,

but little is known about its history for the next sixty years. In 1167, when

the Hungarians were defeated by Manuel I, Bosnia also fell under imperial

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

Kievan Rus



, the Bulgars and the southern Slavs, c. 1020–c. 1200 275

control. After the emperor’s death in 1180 B

ela III reclaimed it for Hungary,

but his control over much of it was nominal at best, and the central regions

of Bosnia, for all practical purposes, remained independent. In the 1180s and

1190sacertain ban Kulin arose as the most powerful ruler in Bosnia. Although

Hungary evidently exerted no control over his banate, it is doubtful that Kulin

himself had any signiﬁcant sway over the

zupanijas surrounding his domain.

The mountainous terrain of Bosnia fostered localism and the

zupans opposed

any centralizing authority. In 1189 Kulin successfully concluded a treaty with

the merchants of Ragusa who established their commercial enterprises and

opened silver mines in his banate. Kulin also granted sanctuary to Bogomils

who had ﬂed from Serbia and the Dalmatian towns (notably Split and Trau)

where they were persecuted.

During the eleventh and twelfth centuries the inhabitants of Bosnia es-

poused different Christian traditions. The Orthodox faith was predominant

in the eastern districts near Serbia and the River Drina; Latin rite Christianity

was prevalent in the west, the north and in central Bosnia. In the late twelfth

century the Latin Christians, including those in Kulin’s banate, fell under

the jurisdiction of the archbishop of Ragusa. They had one bishop, known

as the bishop of Bosnia, who was selected locally and sent to Ragusa to be

consecrated. Although the Latin Christians were afﬁliated to Rome they con-

tinued to celebrate the liturgy in the Slavonic language even after its use had

been condemned by the synod in Split in 1060.Moreover, in 1192 when B

ela

III persuaded the pope to place the Latin Christians of Bosnia under Split’s

jurisdiction, they ignored the pope’s directive and retained their ecclesiasti-

cal association with Ragusa. In 1199 Vukan of Zeta denounced Kulin to the

pope as a heretic. He also claimed that Kulin was harbouring Bogomils from

Dalmatia and that some 10,000 Bosnians professed the heretical faith. Vukan’s

accusations were reiterated by the archbishop of Split and the king of Hungary.

Believing the accusations to be true, the pope called upon Hungary to lead a

crusade against the alleged Bosnian heretic. Kulin, professing to be a faithful

Christian, countered the threat of war with Hungary by summoning a church

council. In 1203 the Bosnians renounced a series of errors in practice, promised

to reform their church and reafﬁrmed their loyalty to the pope. The pledges,

plus the presence of an ofﬁcial church representative, even though he was from

Ragusa rather than from Split, assuaged the pope’s concerns. By giving lip-

service to his allegiance to Hungary, Kulin also defused the threat of war. What

is more, he secured his church’s continued afﬁliation with Ragusa and contin-

ued Bosnian commercial relations with Ragusan merchants. He evidently died

in the following year, but despite his assurances to the pope, the alleged heresy

ﬂourished after his death.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

276 martin dimnik

In summary, we have seen that during the eleventh and twelfth centuries the

Croats were never uniﬁed under a strong central government. They lived in

different areas – Pannonian Croatia, Dalmatian Croatia, Bosnia – which were

at times ruled by indigenous kings but more frequently controlled by agents

of Byzantium, Venice and Hungary. Even during periods of relatively strong

centralized government, local lords frequently enjoyed an almost autonomous

status.

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

chapter 10

POLAND IN THE ELEV ENTH AND

TW ELFTH CENTURIES

JerzyWyrozumski

by the eleventh century the formation of a strong monarchy on the compact

territory of the Odra and the Vistula river-basins, extending south as far as

the Sudetes and the Carpathian Mountains, and north as far as the Baltic

Sea, had been completed; the process of Christianization was well advanced,

and Poland could already boast her own saint in the person of Bishop Wojciech

(Adalbert) of Prague, who had been exiled from Bohemia; the Polish rulers had

established good relations with the western empire and had developed contacts

with distinguished personages of the time. In the year 1000 the emperor Otto

III arrived in Poland to elevate Gniezno (Gnesen) to the level of archbishopric,

thus creating the ﬁrst Polish ecclesiastical province, to which the apostolic see

had given its consent earlier. The ruler of Poland, Prince Boleslaw Chrobry

(Boleslaw the Brave) of the Piast dynasty, managed to win Otto’s trust by

supporting his project of the ‘revival of the Roman empire’ and was called ‘an

aide’ (cooperator)of the empire, in which, it seems, he stood a good chance

of representing one of its four basic territorial parts (Roma, Galia, Germania,

Sclavinia). But the death of Otto III in 1002 and the changes in German

policy under Henry II on the one hand and Boleslaw’s expansive plans towards

Milsko (Milzi),

–

Lu˙zyce (Lusatia) and Bohemia on the other led to a long Polish–

German war, which was fought in three stages (1003–5, 1007–13, 1015–17) and

ended with a peace treaty in Budziszyn (Bautzen) in 1018.

Apart from seizing the Bohemian throne for a short time in the years 1003–4,

Boleslaw the Brave aimed at a partial subordination of Kiev Ruthenia. First he

wanted to secure his own inﬂuence in the region; then he helped his son-in-law

Prince Svatopolk to remain in power against the prince’s brother, Jaroslav the

Wise. His two expeditions to Ruthenia (1013 and 1018) and a secret diplomatic

mission of Bishop Reinbern of Pomerania brought only the reoccupation of

the castle-towns of Czerwien, which had been lost to Ruthenia in 981. The

ﬁnal success of his reign, however, was his coronation in 1025.In the same

year he died, leaving three sons: Bezprym, Mieszko and Otto. He designated

277

Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008

100 200 km

100 miles

150

Cracow

Sandomierz

Plock

Poznan

Gdansk

Rügen

(Rugia)

POMERANIA

Naklo

SAXONY

Mainz

Rhine

Magdeburg

Quedlinburg

Saale

Bamberg

Regensburg

BOHEMIA

Prague

Racibórz

Odra

Gniezno

(Gnesen)

Wyszogrod

Strzelno

Leczyca

Sieradz

(Breslau)

Kozle

Bautzen

Czerwien

Glogow

Kamien

Pomorski

MALOPOLSKA

(LITTLE POLAND)

LUBUSZ

(LEBUS)

Wislica

Kamieniec

Milsko

(Milzi)

Kolobrzeg

Opole

LUZYCE

Krzyszkowo

Wloclawek

Wroclaw

MORA VIA

Wolin

(Wollin)

WIELKOPOLSKA

(GREATER POLAND)

KUJAWY

(KUYAVIA)

Tyniec

(LUSA TIA)

Map 7

Poland

279 Poland in the eleventh and twelfth centuries

Mieszko, who was to become the second Piast ruler of the name, to be his

heir. Mieszko had been educated and introduced in the affairs of the state

under his father’s supervision. Married to Richeza, niece of Otto III, he tried

to continue Boleslaw’s work. At the same time entangled in his wife’s political

and family connections, however, Mieszko II became engaged in the dispute

over the German throne between Conrad II of the Salian dynasty and his

nephew Conrad the Younger. He supported the latter, as is testiﬁed by a letter

from Mathilda, mother of Conrad the Younger, sent to Mieszko together with

a gift of the book Ordo Romanus.Mieszko’s two expeditions to Germany aimed

towards the Saale (1028 and 1031) may have been intended as diversionary raids

in aid of Conrad the Younger, while an expedition of Conrad II against Poland

did not succeed.

The newly formed Piast state was racked by a political disaster in 1031.

This was due to the simultaneous incursions by Conrad II in the west and by

Jaroslav the Wise in the east, to the claims of Mieszko’s brothers to the Polish

throne and to the fact that his wife left him taking both his and her royal

crowns to Germany. Mieszko sought refuge with the unfriendly Bohemian

ruler Udalric. According to unreliable tradition, he was supposedly castrated

by the Czechs. In the course of these events Poland lost Milsko and

–

Lu˙zyce to

Germany, Czerwien to Ruthenia, and Moravia to Bohemia. Pomerania was the

last province to win independence from the Piast state. Bezprym, Mieszko’s

brother, took over the throne, but was soon assassinated, and on his return

to Poland, Mieszko had to accept the emperor’s suzerainty; Conrad II divided

Poland among Mieszko, Otto, his younger brother and Dytryk, their relative.

Soon afterwards Otto was also assassinated. Mieszko succeeded in reuniting

the state for a short time. In 1034 he was murdered as well and the state fell into

chaos caused by a popular rebellion against oppression and heathen uprising.

At this time Mieclaw, a lord who did not belong to the dynasty, may have

usurped ducal power over Mazovia.

The course of events after Mieszko’s death and their chronology remain so

obscure that they could not be properly identiﬁed by medieval chroniclers and

annalists. It is a matter of controversy whether Mieszko had one son, the well-

documented Kazimierz (Casimir), or whether he had another son Boleslaw,

either older or younger.

Among all these obscurities it seems most likely that Kazimierz took over the

power immediately after his father’s death but a rebellion of the nobles forced

him to ﬂee the country. He went to Hungary, and then to Germany, where he

was not only granted a ﬁef but also won knightly fame. Meanwhile Bretislav I,

duke of Bohemia, raided the country torn by internal conﬂicts (1038 or 1039).

He carried off from Gniezno the relics of St Wojciech (Adalbert), of Radzim-

Gaudenty, his brother and the ﬁrst archbishop of Poland, and of the Five Martyr

280 jerzy wyrozumski

Brothers together with many valuables. He seized prisoners, pillaged and looted

the country and annexed Silesia to Bohemia. Soon afterwards Kazimierz,

supported by a party of German knights, returned to a devastated country.

Basing himself on Cracow, which had apparently been least affected by the re-

cent events, he undertook the reconstruction of the state. This was already ac-

knowledged by his contemporaries, who called him the Restorer (Odnowiciel).

The territory of the Polish state, the ecclesiastical organization and the mil-

itary power-base needed reconstruction. His marriage to Dobronega, sister of

Jaroslav the Wise of Rus



, secured Kazimierz Ruthenia’s help in the struggle

for Mazovia, which lasted for several years. He ultimately defeated Mieclaw

in 1047.He may have restored Polish suzerainty over Pomerania, although

that did not last. In 1050 he annexed Silesia, which Henry III had already

recognized as a Bohemian province. In 1054 at a meeting in Quedlinburg,

Kazimierz had to accept the conditions of imperial overlordship over Silesia

and to pledge to pay a considerable tribute to Bohemia. He reconstructed the

ecclesiastical organization thanks to the substantial aid of the Benedictines,

one of whom named Aaron, who had most likely been consecrated bishop

in Cologne (Koln), acquired metropolitan power in Poland as an archbishop

with his see in Cracow. The Benedictines based, as it seems, ﬁrst in Cracow,

after Kazimierz’s death found their lasting home in Tyniec near Cracow. In

rebuilding the military basis of the state, Kazimierz probably abandoned the

outdated idea of druzyna,or the princely ‘bodyguard’, and systematically cre-

ated a warrior class holding land in return for service. The ﬁnancial system

did not undergo any essential changes; it consisted of the system of autarchical

princely estates, where ancillary settlements fulﬁlled numerous productive and

service functions, often with a high degree of specialization.

There is no indication that Kazimierz Odnowiciel tried to obtain a royal

crown. He died in 1058, leaving three sons: Boleslaw, Wladyslaw Herman and

Mieszko. The eldest, Boleslaw called the Muniﬁcent or the Bold (Szczodry),

took over the power after his father’s death, although he may, at least originally,

have shared it with his brothers. Mieszko died in 1065; Wladyslaw Herman’s

strong links with Mazovia seem to indicate that this province was his domain,

though certainly under his elder brother’s suzerainty.

Boleslaw Szczodry’s reign lasted for twenty-four years. It was marked by very

active Polish policy against the empire and its vassal Bohemia, in spite of the

fact that Boleslaw’s sister was married to the Czech Prince Vratislav. Boleslaw

took a bold step of ceasing to pay tribute for Silesia. In 1068 this led to an open

military conﬂict with Bohemia, which lasted for several years.

In the great political dispute which divided the Latin world at the time

into the supporters of Pope Gregory VII and King Henry IV of Germany,

Boleslaw Szczodry joined the Gregorian party and played a considerable role