Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 62 (1984): Our Past

Articles

The mystery of the second metropolis in Poland during the times of Bolesław the Brave

  • Gerard Labuda
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52204/np.1984.62.7-25  [Google Scholar]
Published: 1984-12-30

Abstract

The information given in passing by the oldest Polish chronicler, Anonymus Gallus (lib. I cap. 11), that during the reign of Bolesław the Brave (992-1025) there were two metropolises in Poland with their own suffragans, gave rise to many assumptions and interpretations among later historians. Apart from numerous nuances, two views can be distinguished. Some researchers understand the statement of the anonymous author to mean that the Archbishopric of Gniezno, founded in 1000, covered only the western lands of Poland with the bishoprics of Kraków, Wrocław, Poznań and Kołobrzeg, while the eastern lands, i.e. Masovia and Kujawy, were covered by the Archbishopric of Gniezno. Masovia with Kujawy and the northern districts of Lesser Poland with the later bishoprics of Włocławek (Leslau) and Płock and the archdeaconry of Sandomierz were under the jurisdiction of another archbishop. In this context, missionary Archbishop Brun von Querfurt was mentioned as a putative metropolitan with a putative seat in Sandomierz; with his martyrdom in 1009 on the border of Prussia and Lithuania, this archbishopric disappeared. However, this hypothesis is difficult to maintain because it is not credible that the Archbishopric of Gniezno, founded in 1000, did not cover the north-eastern areas of Poland; furthermore, the claim that Brun of Querfurt was a missionary archbishop is contradicted by the sources, since they only mention him as a missionary bishop endowed with a pallium. Other researchers - dissatisfied with the existence of another Romanesque-Latin metropolis in Poland around the year 1000 - want to see the second archbishopric as an archbishopric of the Slavic rite based in Krakow and associate it with the missionary activities of the Archbishop of Moravia Methodius (+ 885). This hypothesis also has no source justification and is therefore difficult to seriously analyze. The discussion about the second archbishopric was, it seems, steered in the right direction by the distinguished Polish Church historian Władysław Abraham, who in his article on the relationship between the archbishoprics of Gniezno and Magdeburg (+ 920), entitled Magdeburg (+ 920), attributes the idea of ​​founding the second archbishopric in Poland to Bishop Unger of Poznań. This assumption is made by the author of the above article and developed in the sense that the previous missionary bishop of Poland, Unger, who was entrusted with the newly established diocese of Poznań in 1000, did not recognize the authority of the new Archbishop of Gniezno, Gaudenty-Radzim, and then in 1005 he subordinated himself and his diocese to the Archbishop of Magdeburg as suffragan. This connection between Magdeburg and the Poznań diocese lasted until the death of Bishop Unger (+ 1012). During this period, i.e. in the years 1004-1012, two archbishops exercised their metropolitan rights in the territory of then Poland. The fact that only one archbishopric, Gniezno, is documented in a later period proves that it was a transitional state.

References

  1. Abraham W., Gniezno i Magdeburg, Kraków 1921. [Google Scholar]
  2. Abraham W., Organizacja Kościoła w Polsce do połowy wieku XII, wyd. 3, Poznań 1962. [Google Scholar]
  3. Kehr P., Das Erzbistum Magdeburg und die erste Organisation der christlichen Kirche in Polen, Berlin 1920. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kętrzyński S., Kilka uwag o opacie Astryku-Anastazym: Dodatek — O dwu metropoliach w Polsce za Bolesława Chrobrego PHis 1 (1905), s. 178—183. [Google Scholar]
  5. Kętrzyński S., O zaginionej metropolii czasów Bolesława Chrobrego, Warszawa 1947. [Google Scholar]
  6. Kozłowska-Budkowa Z., Repertorium polskich dokumentów doby piastowskiej, z. 1. Kraków 1937. [Google Scholar]
  7. Lanckorońska K., Studies on the RomanSlavonie Ritte in Poland, w: OCA, vol. 161, Roma 1961. [Google Scholar]
  8. Łowmiański H., Początki Polski, t. IV, Warszawa 1970. [Google Scholar]
  9. Najdawniejsze roczniki krakowskie i Kalendarz, wyd. Zofia Kozłowska-Budkowa, MPHn t. V, Warszawa 1978. [Google Scholar]
  10. Plezia M., Anonim tzw. Gall, Kronika polska, przekład R. Gródecki, Wrocław 1965. [Google Scholar]
  11. Silnicki T., Początki organizacji Kościoła w Polsce za Mieszka I i Bolesława Chrobrego, w: PPP t. 1 s. 357. [Google Scholar]
  12. Umiński J., Powstanie biskupstwa poznańskiego i zależnego odeń archidiakonatu czerskiego, „Wiadomości kościelne”, Wrocław 1952, nr 1—2, s. 35—64. [Google Scholar]
  13. Wattenbach W., Holtzmann R., Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter, t. III, Weimar 1971. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zakrzewski S., Bolesław Chrobry Wielki, Lwów 1925. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.