and their followers?
A failed upstart
As we have seen, both Boleslaw and Vladimir had a vested interest in Bruno of Querfurt s last
mission; but however far-sighted they may have been, no-one could have known beforehand what its
ultimate outcome would be. We may reasonably assume that the decision to journey eastwards was
taken in advance, possibly while Bruno was still in Poland. After failing to receive the martyr s palm
at the hands of the Prussians Bruno was forced to move on, and he did so in the direction of Rus .
Bruno may well have had a hand in the marriage of Boleslaw s daughter to Vladimir s son
Sviatopolk,138 which has been dated to sometime between 1008 and 1013.139 Although it is
unclear what role Bruno played in mediating between the courts of Poland and Rus , he may
well have been heading towards Sviatopolk s domains when he encountered the rex russorum,
Nethimer. Barefoot and ill-dressed, Bruno did not make a favourable impression on Nethimer
and his pagan followers; but this soon changed when he donned his episcopal garments and in-
signia.140 This was typical behaviour for a missionary bishop who wanted to impress the pagans
135
Franklin and Shepard, Emergence of Rus, 152.
136
See also A. V. Soloviev, Reges et Regnum Russiae au moyen âge , Byzantion, 36:1 (1966), 145e7.
137
Hermanni de Wartberge Chronicon Livoniae, ed. E. Strehlke (Scriptores Rerum Prussicarum 2, Leipzig, 1863), 76.
138
Rhode, Die Ostgrenze Polens, 59.
139
Korpela, Beiträge, 213.
140
Petri Damian VBR, 58e9.
Downloaded by [Uniwersytet Warszawski] at 05:09 22 January 2014
20 D. Baronas / Journal of Medieval History 34 (2008) 1e22
he was about to address.141 Nethimer was clever enough to recognise how extraordinary this vis-
itor was: his initial joke at the expense of the ragged Bruno, and his subsequent readiness to
convert, would imply some previous acquaintance with the Christian world on Nethimer s part.
Bruno s miraculous success in his trial by fire helped Nethimer encourage his men to convert
to the new faith.142 Some of the hagiographical elements in Damian s account need not concern
us now: Nethimer s flowery statement about Bruno s ignorance of veritas; the baptismal lake
which evokes the river Jordan; Nethimer s readiness to follow St Bruno.143 The message of the
story is quite clear: it was an attempt on Nethimer s part to legitimise his rule. In turn, Bruno could
have no objection to the baptism of the newly converted pagan(s). Nethimer s conversion seems to
have been sincere, in that he even killed one of his brothers who refused to adopt the new faith.
However, he failed to provide adequately for Bruno s safety. Bruno fell into a trap set by another
of Nethimer s unconverted brother, who swiftly had the missionary put to death.144
We can only speculate as to what might have happened if Bruno had lived longer, but there
was too little time and conditions were too harsh for Nethimer to succeed in consolidating his
rule with Bruno as his people s pastor. Although Wibert and Damian report that a church or
monastery was built over Bruno s grave145 d andthis is echoedalsobyAdemar of Chabannes146
d we simply do not know what happened to Nethimer, and the impact of Bruno s last mission
was as fleeting as were his attempts to convert the Pechenegs or the Swedes. He had, literally,
gone too far: to a region beyond the effective control of the emerging powers of Poland or Rus .
Their rulers may well have been eager to reach out to the far eastern or western fringes of their
respective realms, but they lacked both the resources and the desire to make good their claims.
Bruno also went too far in his benevolence towards the newly-emerging ruler Nethimer. Even if
this rex russorum represented an abortive attempt to establish a more tangible structure between
Poland and Rus d as would be the case with Lithuania two centuries later d his efforts would
hardly have been looked on favourably by the ruling elites of Poland or Rus .
Gerard Labuda s explanation for why we have no Life of St Bruno is therefore not altogether con-
vincing: according to Labuda, thewars between Henry II and Boleslaw made it impossible for the latter
to promote the cult of Bruno, as he had St Adalbert s.147 Nor is it likely that there was simply no-one
capable of writing Bruno s Life.148 These circumstances did not prevent Boleslaw from venerating the
Five Brothers, begging the question whether Boleslaw was actually interested in promoting the cult of
St Bruno. The difference in the stimuli for papal and royal missions has already led us to question
Boleslaw s political interest in promoting Bruno s cult. But the main reason for the Polish ruler s lack
of enthusiasm is to be found in the chasm between what Boleslaw wanted, and what Bruno did.149
The latter s missionary vision was not easy to be made to fit in with Boleslaw s concept of missionary
activities.
However, we are now better placed to understand the message contained in Thietmar and the
Annales Quedlinburgenses. Both sources depict Bruno as virtually a carbon-copy of Adalbert,
141
R. Fletcher, The barbarian conversion: from paganism to Christianity (New York, 1998), 457.
142
Petri Damiani VBR, 59.
143
See also Ma zeika, Probleme der ersten urkundlichen Erwähnung Litauens , 96.
144
Petri Damiani VBR, 60.
145
MPH, t. 1, 230. Petri Damian VBR, 60.
146
Ademari Cabannensis chronicon, 153.
147
Labuda, Inspiracje misyjne , 47.
148
Labuda, Inspiracje misyjne , 41.
149
See also Gudavi cius, Brunonas Kverfurtieties ir Lietuva , 48.
Downloaded by [Uniwersytet Warszawski] at 05:09 22 January 2014
D. Baronas / Journal of Medieval History 34 (2008) 1e22 21
and although some similarity in the course of events is undeniable, they would also have us [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]