MISSION MISCARRIED: THE NARRATORS OF THE

NINTH-CENTURY MISSIONS TO SCANDINAVIA AND

CENTRAL EUROPE

sverrir jakobsson/reykjavík

h e ninth-century has generally been regarded as the nadir in the fortunes of those

committed to the advance of Christianity. At er some signii cant achievements by

missionaries in the seventh and eighth centuries, the countries of Christendom

found themselves on the defensive. h e century began with an increase in scale and

violence of raids by Scandinavian pirates, the Vikings, and at its end, the incursion

of the Magyars into Central Europe inaugurated a dii cult time for the kings of the

Eastern Carolingian Empire. Missionary successes were few and far-between, in con-

trast to the impressive advance of European Christianity both before and at er, most

noticeably in the late 10

th

century, when the peoples of North, Central and East Eu-

rope seemed to be joining the Christian oecumene at an exhilarating rate.

Yet, there was no dearth in missionary activity during this troubled century. In

this article, the circumstances of two such missionary enterprises will be explored,

with particular reference to how these hapless adventures were recorded for poster-

ity. h e missions that will be placed under scrutiny are those of Ansgar in Scandina-

via, and of the brothers Cyril and Methodius in Moravia. Both ultimately proved

unsuccessful, but the protagonists of these missions became the subject material of

hagiographies which of er a tantalizing insight into the activities and mindset of

ninth-century missionaries, as well as being important sources to the history of the

lands which were the setting of these particular missions.

One of the interesting parallels between the Frankish missions in the North dur-

ing the ninth century and East Roman missions in Central Europe within the same

generation is the emphasis which posterity has placed on the work of few individuals.

h is is in large part due to the nature of the main sources. h e Scandinavian mis-

sion is i rmly placed within the context of its main source, the Life of Ansgar (Vita

Anskarii) and the Byzantine mission in Moravia is equally connected with the vitae

of Cyril and Methodius. It is dii cult to avoid the trap of overrating the evidence

provided by the Lives of these saints at the expense of less comprehensive and enter-

taining sources. In the case of Cyril and Methodius there is an alternative version of

the events, the overtly hostile Conversion Bagoariorum et Carantanorum which can

be used in comparison, but in the case of Ansgar there is no such counterweight. In

spite of these important reservations, the lives and actions of these missionaries are

nevertheless central to any discussion of the progress of Christianity in Europe in the

ninth century. Both are important examples of state-sponsored missions, at least in

their initial stages, and thus of er an insight into the strength and weaknesses of the

Byzantine and Carolingian empires in their interrelations with the other peoples of

Europe.

90

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

h e aim of this article is to examine the dif erences between these parallel mis-

sionary enterprises, and explore the possible causes for those divergences.

h e Vita Anskarii
h e missionary Ansgar was born in 801 in the vicinity of the monastery at Corbie in

Picardie in northern France. He probably spoke a West Germanic language, judging

from his place of birth. When he was i ve years old he lost his mother, and his father

sent him to the monastery to receive education. From an early age Ansgar had visions

of a religious nature, more ot en than not in his dreams. One of the i rst of these was

connected with his mother but also the death of the emperor Charlemagne in 814

seems to have made a great impression on him. At the age of 25 he became involved

in the mission to the North, which henceforth was closely associated with his person.

When Ansgar died in 865, he was succeeded as Archbishop of the missionary see of

Hamburg-Bremen by a Frisian called Rimbert. It was Rimbert who composed the

Vita Anskarii, the most important source to the ninth-century mission to the North

Germanic peoples. It is written sometime between 869 and 876, and addressed to

the monastery of Corbie.

Vita Anskarii is generally considered to be one of the most erudite accounts of

the life of a medieval saint. However, one cannot escape the fact that the purpose of

a vita is very dif erent from that of a historical narrative. As it is the only source to

much of the facts and events described in it, it is troubling to i nd that when other

accounts exist, they do not always corroborate its version of events. For example, the

vita is at odds with contemporary accounts of King Harald klak’s baptism in 826 in

stating that Harald had by then been driven out of Denmark, which did not happen

until 827.

1

At times, Frisia is confused with the lands beyond the Elbe, possibly be-

cause Rimbert wanted to make Ansgar’s expedition seem more daunting. h is is, ac-

cording to Ian Wood, “one aspect of the author’s concern to isolate his hero through

the organization of his narrative”. h e account is also written with the benei t of

hindsight, in the knowledge of Ansgar’s subsequent distinguished career, as well as

Archbishop Ebbo’s fall from grace at the Carolingian court.

2

h e vita ignores aspects of Ansgar’s career, such as his composition of the Mi-

racula Willehadi and his promotion of the cult of Sixtus and Sinnitius. h e political

content of the saint’s career is not very prominent in the vita. h e 830s are portrayed

as a period of success, with not even a reference to the early Viking raids on Dores-

tad and Frisia. h e problems along the North Sea coast must have af ected Ansgar’s

1

Annales regni Francorum inde ab a. 741 usque ad a. 829 qui dicuntur Annales Laurissenses

maiores et Einhardi, MGH SS rer Germ, ed. F. Kurze. Hannover 1895, p. 163.

2

I. Wood, Christians and Pagans in ninth-century Scandinavia, in The Christianization of

Scandinavia. Report of a Symposium held at Kungälv, Sweden 4–9 August 1985, ed. by B. Saw-

yer–P. Sawyer–I. Wood, Alingsås 1987, 36–67, at p. 37. On Ebbo’s political activity see P.

R. McKeon, Archbishop Ebbo of Reims (816–835): A Study in the Carolingian Empire and

Church, Church History 43 (1974) 437–47.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

91

missionary enterprises and the author of the vita, himself a Frisian, must have been

concerend about events in Frisia.

3

In the later History of the Archbishops of Hamburg-

Bremen, composed by Adam of Bremen in the 1070s, Rimbert’s involvement in Fri-

sian af airs is discussed, but it is not mentioned in Vita Rimberti.

4

In Vita Anskarii,

Horic is referred to as the sole king of the Danes; however, the account of his death

in Annales Bertiniani refers to him being slain along with other kings.

5

h e Vita Anskarii is therefore a source which should be used with caution, as can

be seen by comparing it with other sources, to the extent that such are available. h is

is, however, ot en not the case, as Vita Anskarii is the only source to most of the facts

which can be gathered from it.

According to James T. Palmer, “[t]he dif erent functions of the Vita Anska-

rii are . . . unii ed by a single, overriding concern: the continuation of mission in the

north”.

6

h e unii cation of Hamburg-Bremen had put Rimbert in a dii cult position.

h ere was a lack of interest in the archbishopric among the kings and bishops of the

East Franks who had more pressing strategic interests in the Slavs to the east than

the Vikings in the north. Churches in Saxony lacked both benefactors and material

support for missionary activities. h us, Rimbert turned to the monks of Corbie in

the West Francia, the patrimony of Charles the Bald who had severed all ties with

the mission at er the division of the Carolingian empire at Verdun 843. However,

the kingdom had been expanding eastwards at er the death of Lothar II in 869 and

Rimbert may have hoped that the conditions were favourable for renewing the ties of

the mission with the West Franks.

7

Sources on the lives of Cyril and Methodius
h e most important sources for the life and missionary ef orts of Constantine and

Methodius in Moravia are the Vita Constantini and Vita Methodii.

8

h e former was

probably composed in Moravia sometime between 870 and 882, by someone close

to Methodius, or even the Bishop himself. h e only surviving manuscripts are in

3

Wood, Christians and Pagans, 46.

4

Adami Bremensis gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae Pontii cum, Liber I, cap. 39, Quellen des 9.

und 11. Jahrhunderts zur Geschichte des hamburgischen Kirche und des Reiches (Ausgewählte

Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters. Freiherr vom Stein-Gedächtnisausgabe,

XI), ed.W. Trillmich–R. Buchner, Berlin 1961, 210, 212.

5

K. L. Maund, “A Turmoil of Warring Princes”: Political Leadership in Ninth-century Den-

mark, h e Haskins Society Journal 6 (1994) 29–47, at p. 40.

6

J. T. Palmer, Rimbert’s Vita Anskarii and the Scandinavian Mission in the Ninth Century,

Journal of Ecclesiastical History 55/2 (2004) 235–56, at p. 240.

7

See Palmer, Rimbert’s Vita Anskarii and the Scandinavian Mission in the Ninth Century,

241–43.

8

On the life of Constantine and Methodius see Konstantin i Metode Solunjani. Izvori –

Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses. Fontes (Radovi Staroslavenskog Instituta. Knijga

4), ed. F. Grivec–F. Tomšič, Zagreb 1960.

92

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

Old Church Slavonic, none earlier than from the i t eenth century, but the existence

of a lost vita in Greek is generally assumed.

9

h e latter must have been composed

shortly at er the saint’s death and the earliest manuscripts date from the twelt h and

thirteenth centuries. h e obvious choice for author is St. Clement, one of the broth-

ers’ disciples.

10

h is may also have a Greek original. Due to the late date of surviving

manuscripts, the value of these two lives as sources to ninth century events has been

doubted, although Francis Dvornik argued persuasively for their reliability.

11

Other

sources for their lives are less important, with the exception of a work originally com-

posed around 871 as Frankish propaganda against Methodius, De conversione Ba-

goariorum et Carantanorum libellus.

12

h is short text of ers an alternative view of the

early history of the mission in this region.

Although the vitae are important sources, due to their apparent proximity in time

to the events described, they are vague on many points, as their authors had many

other considerations than providing source-material for future historians. h rough-

out Vita Constantini, much weight is laid on the intellectual aspect of Constantine’s

mission, and his disputations against iconoclasts, Arabs, Jews and trilingual heretics

are recorded verbatim. Vita Methodii places more emphasis on the hardship Metho-

dius suf ered, even if only due to the weather, and his readiness to sacrii ce himself for

the faith. While Constantine is the instructor of the Slavs, Methodius is their holy

shepherd.

Missionary politics in the Carolingian Empire
h e policies of Charlemagne and his successors dif ered from that of their Meroving-

ian predecessors in respect to their relations with their neighbours and to missionary

activity. Regarding the former, they followed an aggressive expansionary policy, aim-

ing to make the Frankish kingdom the dominant power in Western and Central Eu-

9

See P. Meyvaert–P. Devos, Trois énigmes cyrillo-méthodiennes de “Légende Italique” réso-

lues grâce à un document inédit, AnBoll 73 (1955) 375–461.

10

See Vita Clementis Bulgariæ archiepiscopi, cap. 22, PG 126, ed. J. P. Migne, Paris 1857–

1866, cols. 1227–1230. Cf. D. Petkanova, Zur Frage der Autorenschat der Vita Methodii,

in Symposium Methodianum. Beiträ ge der internationalen Tagung in Regensburg (17. bis 24.

April 1985) zum Gedenken an den 1100. Todestag des hl. Method (Selecta Slavica 13), ed. K.

Trost–E. Völkl–E. Wedel, Neuried 1988.

11

See F. Dvornik, Les Légendes de Constantin et de Méthode vues de Byzance (Byzantinoslavica.

Supplementa, I), Prague 1933. For a recent discussion of the dif erent sources see T. Nótári,

Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum – Document of an Early Medieval Show Trial, Sec-

tio Juridica et Politica, Miskolc 25/1 (2007) 95–139.

12

Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum: Das Weissbuch der Salzburger Kirche über die erfol-

greiche Mission in Karantanien und Pannonien (Böhlau Quellenbücher), ed. H. Wolfram,

Vienna 1979. Most of the sources pertaining to Cyril and Methodius are published in Кирил и

Методий, ed. A. Теодоров-Балан, 1–2, София 1920–1934, see A. P. Vlasto, h e Entry

of the Slavs into Christendom: An Introduction to the Medieval History of the Slavs, Cambridge

1970, 29–32.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

93

rope. h is culminated in the coronation of Charlemagne as Roman emperor in 800.

As to the latter, the Church was in many ways made in subservient to the interest of

the state, as will now be examined in brief.

h e gradual development of the ambition of Carolingian kings can be seen from

what they called themselves in the intitulationes.

13

From 789 onwards Charlemagne

was called defensor ecclesiae and sometimes rector populi christiani.

14

In the imperial

oath of 802 the emperor has become responsible for the conduct of all Christians

under his authority.

15

In the words of noted historian F. L. Ganshof, “L’empereur ne

commande pas seulement: il prêche.”

16

When Charlemagne became protector of the church, it was only a logical con-

sequence that the enemies of the church should also become his enemies and vice

versa. By assuming the imperial mantle the Carolingians became even more involved

in the protection of the Church. h is was not just a rhetoric to be used for decora-

tive purposes: it was systematically used by Charlemagne, when making war on his

enemies. According to it, the duty of Charlemagne was to subject nations every-

where, by means of terror, and to create stability.

17

h e main oi cial purpose of the

war against the Saxons was to make them Christians, as they were incorporated into

the Carolingian Empire. h e same rhetoric was used to justify the campain against

the Avars which began in 791.

18

h e main novelty is the way in which Charlemagne

combined military planning, political zeal and spreading the Christian faith into a

13

For a dei nition see H. Wolfram, Intitulatio I. Lateinische Königs- und Fürstentitel bis zum

Ende des 8. Jahrhunderts (Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung.

Ergänzungsband 21), Vienna–Cologne–Graz 1967, 12: „Die Intitulatio last den einzelnen,

namentlich festgelegten König und Fürsten über sich selbst aussagen, was zumeist bloss die

h eorie seiner Herrschat betrit , jedoch bis zur Rel exion über das persönliche Schicksal des

Titelträgers reichen kann.“

14

Admonitio generalis, cap. 22, MGH Capit. I, ed. A. Boretius, Hannover 1883, 53–62; Al-

cuini epistolae, MGH Epp. IV, ed. E. Dümmler. Berlin 1895, 288. See L. Wallach, Alcuin

and Charlemagne: Studies in Carolingian History and Literature (Cornell Studies in Classical

Philology 22), Ithaca, New York 1959, 147–77, 266–74; F.-C. Scheibe, Alcuin und die Ad-

monitio generalis, Deutscher Archiv 14 (1958) 221–29.

15

MGH Capit. I, 92.

16

F. L. Ganshof, La i n du règne de Charlemagne. Une decomposition, Zeitschrit für

schweizerische Geschichte 28 (1948) 433–52, at p. 441.

17

See Alcuini epistolae, MGH Epp. IV, 84, 294, 414. h is is repeated in Papal correspondance

from Stephen II (752–757) onwards.

18

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 86, 88; Annales Mettenses priores, MGH SS

rer. Germ, ed. B. de Simoson, Hannover–Leipzig 1905, 78–79. See also De Pippini regis Vic-

toria Avarica, MGH Poetae I, ed. E. Dümmler, Berlin 1881, 116–17. Josef Deér has demons-

trated how the oi cial Frankish propaganda was at pains „den Awarenkrieg als Heidenkrieg

gegn grausame Christenfeinde hinzuztellen“, see J. Deér, Karl der grosse und der Untergang

des Awarenreiches, in Karl der Grosse, Werk und Nachleben I. Persönlicheit und Geschichte, ed.

H. Beumann, Düsseldorf 1965, 719–71, at p. 758.

94

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

unitary ideology.

19

Although in contrast with the general practices of the Church, forced baptism,

mainly of Jews, did happen from the seventh century onwards. h e most notable in-

cident happened following the Persian wars of Emperor Heraclius. At the time, this

policy had the approval of Pope Honorius I.

20

Such instances were, however, an ex-

ception and in 787 the Council at Nicea ruled that forced baptism should be consid-

ered illegal.

h ere was thus a great contrast between the use of force in the conversion of the

Saxons and what the Church was actively preaching at the time. In 796 an Episco-

pal synod at the Danube unanimously rejected compulsory baptism and condemned

Charlemagne’s methods in the Saxon wars.

Why, then, did Charlemagne go against the grain of the ecclesiastical thought of

his Age? He may, in the light of his imperial pretensions, have wanted to equal Hera-

clius, who in a time of troubles could no longer tolerate other religions than that of

the emperor. He would also, perhaps, have considered himself failing in his duty to

God and his subjects, had he not endeavoured to crush paganism and to advance

Christianity.

21

As early as in 776, regulations dealing with ecclesiastical organization

had a role to play in Saxony, and in 804/805 some of the most important kernels for

the ecclesiastical assimilation of Saxony were made into bishoprics; Münster, Osna-

brück, Bremen, and Minden were made subject to the archbishopric of Cologne, but

Paderborn was made subject to the archbishop of Mainz. h is work of ecclesiastical

organization was continued by the successor of Charlemagne, Louis the Pious (814–

840), in whose reign Hildesheim, Halberstadt, Verden and Hamborg also became

bishoprics, probably all subject to the archbishop of Mainz.

22

With the annexation of

Saxony, the Empire had reached the borders of the lands of the Slavs and the North

Germans.

h e i rst Viking raids on Western Europe occurred at the end of the eighth cen-

tury, and seem to have taken contemporary chroniclers by surprise. Although no ad-

equate explanation can be of ered as to why they should have happened at this time

rather than any other, one of the causal factors might be the extension of Frankish

power during the Carolingian period. “[T]he Carolingians seem to have curbed Fri-

sian sea-power, so that when the Danes moved south they found that they were mas-

ters in Frankish waters without having to i ght for supremacy.”

23

In 782 diplomatic relations were established between Charlemagne and the Dan-

19

H. Büttner, Mission und Kirchenorganisation des Frankenreiches bis zum Tode Karls des

Grossen, in Karl der Grosse, Werk und Nachleben I, 454–87, at p. 468.

20

See R. Devreesse, La i n inedited d’une letter de saint Maxime: un baptême force de Juifs et

deSamaritans à Carthage en 632, Recherches de sciences religieuses 17 (1937) 25–35; cf. also E.

A. Thompson, h e Goths in Spain, Oxford 1969, 165–68.

21

P. D. King, Charlemagne (Lancaster Pamphlets), London 1986, 17.

22

See Büttner, Mission und Kirchenorganisation des Frankenreiches, 474–75.

23

J. M. Wallace–Hadrill, h e Barbarian West 400–1000, Oxford

4

1985, 152.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

95

ish king Sigefrid.

24

h e decades before that seem to have been a period of expansion

for the kingdom of the Danes. According to dendrochronological evidence, the se-

ries of inter-related defensive earthworks that link the Schleij ord and the Schwanse

peninsula with the valley of the river Ejder were constructed in 737. h is system,

known as Danevirke, may be connected with the building of a wall mentioned by

the Annales regni Francorum to 808, with the king Godefrid being credited for its

construction. h e trading town of Schliesthorp (Haithabu/Hedeby) was integrated

into this defence system.

h e dating of Danevirke to 808 in the Frankish Annals may rel ect the increas-

ing tension between the Empire and the Franks following upon the extension of the

Frankish realm. h e Saxons north of the Elbe had resisted their absorption into the

Empire, but the Franks put an end to this by rounding them up and transplanting

them into Francia. h eir land was given to the Emperor’s Slavic allies, the Obodri-

tians.

25

In 808 the Danes, under the leadership of Godefrid, attacked the Obodri-

tians for the i rst time, supported by Slavic allies called Wilzians (or Veleti), who had

crossed swords with Franks on numerous occasions before.

26

h e Obodritians retali-

ated, and in 810 Godefrid sent a l eet to raid Frisia.

27

At the royal court at Aachen

the problems concerning the Danish border began to receive more and more atten-

tion. Yet Charlemagne made no plans for a Nordic mission, being content with creat-

ing a no man’s land between the Empire and the Danes, or using the Obodritians as a

buf er state. Some clerics, however, rel ected upon the possibility of a mission to the

Danes. In a letter from 789, Alcuin asks: “Is there any hope for the conversion of the

Danes?”

28

h e abbot Liudger, who was made a bishop of Münster in 805, was of the

opinion that the Saxon and Frisian Churches would never be able to prosper in peace

for as long as the Northmen remained Pagan. He proposed a mission, but Charle-

magne did not allow him to leave his post, much to his chagrin.

29

h is problem even

haunted him in his dreams.

30

h e successor of Charlemagne, Louis the Pious, inherited his father’s imperial

pretensions, although he did not call himself a Roman emperor, nor indeed king

24

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 60–61.

25

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, pp. 118. On the Obodritians see L. SOBEL.

Ruler and Society in Early Medieval Western Pomerania (Institutum Historicum Polonicum

Romae). Rome 1981, pp. 43–56.

26

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 125–26.

27

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 131.

28

“Mandate mihi per litteras, . . . si spes ulla sit de Danorum conversion;” Alcuini epistolae,

MGH Epp. IV, 31.

29

Die Vitae Sancti Liudgeri, ed. W. Diekamp (Die Geschichtsquellen des Bisthums Münster 4),

Münster 1891, 36: “Fuit autem cupies anxie gratia docendi Nordmannos adire, sed rex Carolus

ad hoc nullatenus praebuit.”

30

Die Vitae Sancti Liudgeri, 32–33.

96

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

of the Franks, but simply imperator augustus.

31

h e maintenance of the Empire was

never going to be an easy task. h e fact that he alone succeeded to the throne was

more due to the premature death of his brothers and subsequent lack of heirs than

anything else. h e only surviving pretender, Louis’ nephew Bernard, was given a

kingdom in Italy, but before long Louis had out-maneouvered him politically and he

died as a result of blinding in 817. In ecclesiastical af airs Louis continued his father’s

politics.

32

Loyalty to the Church went hand in hand with loyalty to the state, as seen

from the fact that Princes from the borderlands coni rmed their submission to the

Emperor with baptism. According to the rhetoric of the Imperial church, Christians

and subjects of the Emperor were to be one and the same.

33

One of the prelates who came to prominence during the reign of Louis the Pi-

ous was Ebbo of Rheims, who grew up at Charlemagne’s court and knew his heir

from childhood. During the early reign of Louis, he became an important i gure of

the realm, a man well versed in literature and a pioneer of missionary activity in the

North.

34

A great monastery in Ebbo’s diocese, Corbie, set up a monastery in Saxony,

New Corvey, which was supposed to sow the seeds for a Danish mission. h e choice

of Ebbo as a missionary rel ects the nature of the mission as a state enterprise.

h e mission of Archbishop Ebbo in 823 was also connected with a plea from the

Danish king Heriold for help in his struggle against the sons of Godefrid for politi-

cal supremacy among the Danes. In this period, it is highly doubtful whether there

existed anything resembling a kingdom of the Danes, although external sources tend

to depict their leaders as kings. It is more likely that several leaders held power at any

one time.

35

Godefrid was killed by his own men in 810 and succeeded by his nephew

Hemming, who died in 812. His successors, Heriold and Reginfrid, were driven in

exile by the sons of Godefrid in 813, and in the following year Heriold turned to

Louis the Pious for assistance, at er the death of his brother in battle.

36

In the follow-

ing years, Louis supported Heriold in his campaign against the sons of Godefrid, and

in 819 Heriold managed to regain some of his power, alongside two of the sons of

31

H. Wolfram, Lateinische Herrschertitel im neunten und zehnten Jahrhundert, in Intitulatio

II. Lateinische Herrscher- und Fürstentitel im neunten und zehnten Jahrhundert (Mitteilungen

des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung. Ergänzungsband 24), ed. H. Wolf-

ram, Vienna–Cologne–Graz 1973, 19–178, at 96–100.

32

See f. inst. J. Fridh, Ludwig der Fromme, das Papsttum und die fränkische Kirche, in Charle-

magne’s Heir. New Perspectives on the Reign of Louis the Pious (814–840), ed. P. Goodman–R.

Collins, Oxford 1990, 231–73.

33

Epistolarium Fuldensium fragmenta, MGH Epp. V, ed. K. Hampe, Berlin 1897, 520: “Dif e-

rentia non debet esse in diversitate nationum, quia una est catholica ecclesia per totum orbem

dif usa et quique i delium i lii sunt lucis, cum sunt i lii Dei.”

34

On Ebbo and his literary interests see McKeon, Archbishop Ebbo of Reims, 438

35

See Maund, “A Turmoil of Warring Princes”, 32.

36

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 138–41.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

97

Godefrid while other two of them were treacherously driven out.

37

In 823 Heriold

again sent a plea for help to the emperor, as the sons of Godefrid were threatening

to expel him. At this time, it is stated by the Frankish annals, Archbishop Ebbo re-

turned from a year’s misson among the Danes.

38

h ere is a papal bull from this period

coni rming Ebbo as a missionary legate sent to preach in the Northern part of the

world.

39

In 826 Heriold made a peace and an alliance the sons of Godefrid at the em-

peror’s palace in Ingelsheim. At the same time he was baptized. Before he returned

as one of the rulers of the Danes, the emperor granted him land in Frisia, as a refuge

should he need it.

40

A year later, Heriold was again expelled from power by the sons

of Godefrid, and took up permanent residence in Frisia.

41

From this time onwards, Ansgar became the main i gure in the mission. He was

sent with king Heriold and his court and remained with them in Frisia for a while.

42

In contemporary sources, Heriold and his brother are depicted as pirates who terror-

ized Christians, and it is evident that the baptism at Ingelsheim was an act of political

expediency rather than a statement of personal conviction.

43

Already in 829, Ans-

gar let his court in order to engage in a new missionary enterprise, a mission to the

Swedes in Birka.

h e initiative for the mission is described as coming from the Swedes themselves,

as Swedish emissaries came to the court of Emperor Louis at Worms in August 829

claiming that many among their peoples desired to cultivate the Christian religion,

and asked the emperor to allow priests to come to them. h e emperor agreed and

selected Ansgar for this task, to explore whether the people there were ready for the

Christian faith.

44

In Sweden the missionaries were well received by King Bern and

spent a year and a half among new converts. Ansgar then returned to the emperor to

whom he could now report that the journey had been a success, and that the Dan-

ish mission, which had originated through the ef orts of Ebbo, could be extended to

37

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 152.

38

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 162–63; Annales Xantenses et Annales Veda-

stini, MGH SS rer. Germ, ed. B. de Simson, Hannover–Leipzig 1909, 6.

39

Epistolae Paschalis I. papae, MGH Epp. V, ed. K. Hampe, Berlin 1891, 68–70; see L.

Weibull, Ansgarii skrit om den påvliga legationen over Norden, Scandia 13 (1940) 151–57,

at 152–55.

40

h e main sources for this event are: Ermoldus Nigellus, Carmen in honorem Hludowici, in

Ermold le-Noir-Poème sur Louis le Pieux, ed. E. Faval, Paris 1932, ll. 1882–2513; Annales

regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 169–70; Annales Xantenses, MGH SS rer. Germ, 7;

Vita Hlodowici Imperatoris, in MGH SS II, ed. G. H. Pertz, Hannover 1829, 629.

41

Annales regni Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 173.

42

Vita Anskarii, cap. 8, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 36.

43

Annales Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, ed. G. Waitz, Hannover 1883, 26; Annales Xantenses,

MGH SS rer. Germ, 17.

44

Vita Anskarii, cap. 9–10, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 38, 40. See also Annales regni

Francorum, MGH SS rer. Germ, 177.

98

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

Sweden.

45

In the following, Louis the Pious decided on the basis of the initial success of

Ansgar’s ef orts to found an archiebiscopal see at Hamburg in 831. Ansgar was then

consecrated as Archbishop of this new diocese, and then provided with the monas-

tery of Turholt (Torhout) as a station on the mainland to sustain the mission. Con-

sequently Ansgar, accompanied by two bishops and a count, went to see the Pope

who coni rmed him as a papal delegate for the North and East.

46

A kinsman of Arch-

bishop Ebbo called Gauzbert was also selected to be a missionary legate in Sweden.

47

While it is ot en dii cult to establish the facts concerning the foundation of a

medieval bishopric, in the case of the see of Hamburg-Bremen the expected dii cul-

ties are compounded by the mass of forgeries produced by the clerics of that vener-

able institution in the eleventh century.

48

h e claim of the Vita Anskarii, that Ansgar

became an Archishop in 831 is thus dii cult to verify, and Rimbert may have had his

reasons for claiming an early foundation date for the Archbishopric. In 847, Ansgar

is listed among the bishops subject to the Archbishop of Mainz.

49

h e foundation of

the Archbishopric could, in fact, have been accomplished as late as in 864.

50

Soon upon the establishment of the Northern mission, the Frankish Empire ran

into a crisis during years of strife between Louis the Pious and his sons, and the mis-

sion was more or less let to its own devices. h e tripartite division of the Empire

was formalized in Verdun in 843. Ansgar’s mission thus lost its prime political backer

when it was yet in its formative stages.

h e Mission of Cyril and Methodius and the three languages controversy
Few details are recorded on the early life of the brothers Constantine and Metho-

dius, except that they were the sons of a rich and noble drungarios, called Leo, who

lived in h essalonike, He had seven children, the youngest of whom was Constan-

tine, “philosopher, teacher and our doctor’ (ôèëîñîôü, íàñòàâíèêü è ó÷èòåëü

45

Vita Anskarii, cap. 11, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 40, 42

46

Vita Anskarii, cap. 12 and cap. 13, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 44, 46, 48; Annales

Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, 9.

47

Vita Anskarii, cap. 14, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 48, 50.

48

See H. Holmquist, De äldsta urkunderna rörande ärkestit et Hamburg-Bremen och den

nordiska missionen, Kyrkohistorisk Årsskrit 9 (1908) 241–83.

49

MGH Cap. II, eds. A. Boretius–V. Krause, Hannover 1897, 173.

50

See f. inst. W. Seegrün, Das Erzbistum Hamburg – eine Fiktion? Zeitschrit des Vereins für

hamburgische Geschichte 60 (1974) 1–16; R. Drögereit, Erzbistum Hamburg, Hamburg-

Bremen oder Erzbistum Bremen? Studien zur Hamburg-Bremen Frühgeschichte, Arkiv für

Diplomatik 21 (1975) 136–230; W. Haas, Foris apostolus-intus monachus. Ansgar als Mönch

und “Apostel des Nordens”, Journal of Medieval History 11 (1985) 1–30, at p. 22; R. Aubert,

Hambourg II. Diocèse, in Dictionnaire d’histoire et de géographie esslésiastique 23, Paris 1990,

cols. 217–19,

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

99

íàøü

).

51

Methodius was as an imperial oi cial in a Slavic principality, according to

Vita Methodii appointed to his post by the emperor himself on account of his sagac-

ity, but resigned to become a monk on Mount Olympus, where his brother Constan-

tine later joined him.

52

More is told about the youth of Constantine who became a

man of letters and learning. Constantine’s mission to the Arabs is the most notable

achievement of his earlier career, and it is indicated that the Arabs specii cally asked

for an expert in the Christian faith to explain it to them.

53

h e missionary cooperation of the brothers began when they headed an East Ro-

man embassy sent to Khazaria, probably at the end of 860. h is mission and inci-

dents connected with it occupy i ve of the eighteen chapters of the Vita Constantini.

Constantine and Methodius spent the winter at Cherson, where Constantine pre-

pared for his mission by learning Hebrew. He also gave instant proof of his linguistic

ability, when they discovered an evangelium and a psalter written in “Russian letters”

(роськы писмєнь) and a person speaking that language, Constantine could instant-

ly read and speak this language.

54

At the kagan’s residence, Constantine engaged in

theological disputations with the Jewish rabbis who held a dominant position at the

Khazar court.

55

Although described enthusiastically by Vita Constantini, the result

was meager on the religious level, all in all around two hundred conversions and an

ambiguous declaration from the kagan of his sympathy for Christianity.

h e trip east was, however, a political success, for the alliance between the

East Roman empire and Khazaria was reai rmed, and the kagan wrote to Emper-

or Michael III, stating his readiness to be of service to the Empire whenever he was

needed. h e brothers were rewarded for this success; Methodius became an Abbot

in Polychron monastery, which had over seventy priests, whereas Constantine’s ac-

51

Vita Constantini, cap. 2, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 96 (Latin trans. p. 170).

52

Vita Methodii, cap. 2–3; Vita Constantini, cap. 7, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses,

108, 153–54 (Latin trans. pp. 182, 221–22).

53

Vita Constantini, cap. 6, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 103 (Latin trans. pp. 178–

79). h is is a fairly common motif in both Christian and Islamic texts. h is mission is dated,

probably erroneously by Vita Constantini as occurring in 851, but the date given by Tabari, in

Tarîh ar-rusul wa‘l-mulûk, is perhaps more reliable, in A.H. 241, sa‘ban and rajab (Nov.–Dec.

855).

54

Vita Constantini, cap. 8, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 109 (Latin trans. p. 184).

It is far from certain what is indicated by “Russian letters”, which might refer to a Slavic or a

North Germanic language, or even Gothic.

55

h e description of the political situation in Khazaria is anachronistic; no mention is made of

the beg (or tarxan), which was the dominant political entity in the Khazarian realm at the

time, and the kagan, who had become a nonentitu by that time is referred to as the supreme

political authority, as he was in the eighth century. See O. Pritsak, Turkological Remarks

on Constantine’s Khazarian Mission in the Vita Constantini, in Christianity Among the Slavs.

h e Heritage of Saints Cyril and Methodius. Acts of the International Congress held on the

Eleventh Centenary of the Death of St. Methodius, Rome, October 8–11, 1985, under h e

Pontii cal Oriental Institute (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 231), ed. R. F. Taft–E. G. Far-

rugia–G. K. Piovesana, Rome 1988, 295–98.

100

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

tivities are described more ambiguously.

56

It has been argued that he was probably

placed over the philosophical faculty at the Church of the Holy Apostles.

57

In 863 Prince Rastislav of Moravia sent a request to the East Roman Emperor, for

a missionary who could preach the Christian faith in the language of Rastislav him-

self and his subjects.

58

h e brothers were thus trained emissaries, as well as Methodius

having administrative experience, and seem to have been the obvious choices to head

such a mission. Moreover, they were from h essalonica “and everyone from h es-

salonica can speak pure Slavic”.

59

In the following years, Constantine and Methodius

laid the foundation of a new Slavonic Church, making use of a new literary language,

Old Church Slavonic, and a new alphabet, probably the Glagolitic alphabet.

60

According to the Vita Constantini, Constantine translated the New Testament

into Slavonic at the request of the Emperor, at er Rastislav’s request for missionaries

had reached the court.

61

It is not inconceivable that the brothers had initiated, or at

least planned, such an ef ort earlier. Later Methodius, at the end of his life, i nished

translating the Old Testament.

62

It is evident that they intended to introduce into

Great Moravia the religious order as it existed in Byzantium, with all its liturgical

arts. It must, however be taken into account, that on the arrival of the Byzantine mis-

sion Moravia had already been Christianized to a great extent and the Latin liturgy

was already in use in that country.

63

Vita Constantini refers to theological disputes

which Cyril and Methodius had with Latin and Frankish clergy, most notably con-

56

Vita Methodii, cap. 4; Vita Constantini, cap. 13, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses,

128, 154 (Latin trans. pp. 198–99, 222–23).

57

See F. Dvornik, Photius et la reorganization de l’académie patriarcale, in Mélanges Paul

Peeters II (Analecta Bollandiana 68), Bruxelles 1950, 108–25, at 121–22.

58

h e location of Ancient Moravia has been a hotly contested topic. Cf. J. Poulik, h e Origins

of Christianity in Slavonic Countries North of the Middle Danube Basin, World Archaeol-

ogy 10/2 [Archaeology and Religion] (1978), 158–171; C. R. Bowlus, Imre Boba’s Reconsid-

erations of Moravia’s Early History and Arnulf of Carinthia’s Ostpolitik (887–892), Speculum

62/3 (1987) 552–574; F. Curta, h e history and archaeology of Great Moravia: An Intro-

duction, Early Medieval Europe 17 (2009) 238–247.

59

Vita Methodii, cap. 5, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 155 (Latin trans. p. 223).

60

h e Cyrillic alphabet, which is named at er Constantine (who took the name Cyril on

becoming a monk shortly before his death), seems to be a more recent invention. Currently,

the Glagolitic alphabet is regarded as “formed by the adaptation of cursive Greek by some Slavs

during the couple of centuries preceding the 860s”. See P. Cubberley, h e Slavic Alphabets,

in h e World’s Writing Systems, eds. P. T. Daniels–W. Bright, New York 1996, 346–54, at

p. 346.

61

Vita Constantini, cap. 14, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 129–30 (Latin trans. pp.

200–1).

62

Vita Methodii, cap. 15, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 163 (Latin trans. pp. 234–

35).

63

For loanwords from German Church vocabulary in Moravia, see Vlasto, h e Entry of the

Slavs into Christendom, 58.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

101

cerning their use of the Slavonic language.

64

At er spending forty months in Moravia the brothers were able to ordain their

i rst disciples. h en they spent the i rst half of the year 867 at the court of the Pan-

nonian prince Kocel at Mosaburg, who received them enthusiastically. From thence

they went to Italy where Constantine had a dispute with Latin clerics, who surround-

ed him “like ravens against a falcon”. Constantine, however, held his ground, pointing

out among other rhings that many other nations (for instance Armenians, Persians,

Aegyptians and Syrians) observed their faith in their native language.

65

It might seem a bit odd that, during the period of the Photian schism, Greek

prelates from h essalonica should turn to the Papal see for support against Latin-

speaking Frankish clergy.

66

However, the Bishops of Rome did have notions of su-

premacy over other Bishop, and their self-acknowledged aim was to lead the Church

as a whole, not only a Western-based Latin speaking Church. h us, the ambitions of

the Popes to be leaders of Christianity did not make them Western or Latin-oriented.

In the contrary, it made them less so.

It would be far too simplistic to assume that Papal policy in such matters would

always have been to support the Franks against the Roman Empire. It is a fact that

Pope Nicholas I had been in favour of a Franco-Bulgarian alliance against Prince

Rastislav. On the whole, however, he tended to be very independent in such matters,

and he may have been reluctant to witness the Frankish clergy becoming yet power-

ful. h e Pope claimed supreme jurisdiction over Pannonia, although it had gravitated

from papal sphere of inl uence in the eighth century, when it was under the control

of the pagan Avars. Now in 868 a new pope, Hadrian II., decided that the time had

come to reclaim Pannonia. At risk was the ecclesiastical allegiance of all the Slav peo-

ples in Central Europe and the north Balkans. It is also quite possible that the h es-

salonian brothers, with their combined learning and missionary zeal, made a favour-

able impression, and they brought with them the relics of one of the earliest martyrs

of the Roman see, St Clement, which they had discovered at Cherson during their

mission to the Khazars. h e inl uence of the Greek Librarian Anastasius should also

be taken into account, as well as the fact that the Photian schism was about to be suc-

cessfully resolved.

67

Whatever the reason, the fact is that the Pope decided to adopt

the new Slavonic liturgy, and at the same time he condemned the so-called trilingual

64

Vita Constantini, cap. 15, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 131 (Latin trans. pp.

202–3).

65

Vita Constantini, cap. 15, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 134–36 (Latin trans. pp.

205–8).

66

For an overview of the Photian Schism see Histoire du Christianisme des origines à nos jours,

tome iv. Évêques, moines et empereurs (610–1054), ed. G. Dagron–P. Riché–A. Vauchez,

Paris 1993, 169–79.

67

See J. M. Hussey, h e Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire (Oxford History of the

Christian Church), Oxford 1986, 79–82.

102

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

heresy.

68

For the i rst time in history, a Slavonic mass was celebrated in Rome.

h ree of the Slavic disciples of Constantine and Methodius were consecrated as

priests and two as lectors. h e i rst Bishop was presumably intended to be Constan-

tine, but he died on 14 February, in a monastery, under his newly acquired name

of Cyril. Before his death he exhorted Methodius to continue their mission.

69

Pope

Hadrian he sent a letter addressed to all three Slav rulers of the region (Rastislav, his

nephew Svatopluk and Kocel), declaring his approval of the use of the Slavonic lit-

urgy and preparing the appointment of Methodius as bishop of the central European

Slavs.

70

h e Pope allotted to him the titular see of Sirmium, which had once been

the administrative and ecclesiastical capital of Illyricum occidentale, but which was at

around 870 to the south-east of any contemporary political centres.

71

Like Ansgar a

few years before, Methodius became an archbishop without bishops.

72

Hagiographies as sources to state-formation
h e early ninth-century trade in the North was coni ned to a handful of ports; Dores-

tad in Frisia, Hedeby, Ribe and Århus in Denmark, Kaupang in Norway and Birka

in Sweden. h ese cosmopolitan islands in a sea of rural life and paganism were very

small; the largest, Dorestad, having around 1000–2000 inhabitants. But their politi-

cal and cultural importance went beyond their size. h e Frankish mission on Scan-

dinavia was in fact coni ned to three such trading towns, Hedeby (or Schliesthorp/

Schleswig), Ribe and Birka.

h ese centres of trade were quite ot en political foundations. In Annales regni

Francorum, king Godofrid is connected with the founding of Schliesthorp. In the

cemetery there, graves from various rites can be traced from around 800. Evidence

about the religious allegiance of the inhabitants can be discerned from the orienta-

tion of the corpses. It is important to note that Christian graves appear before the

time of Ebbo of Reims or Ansgar.

73

On the other hand, the initial dii culties experi-

68

Vita Methodii, cap. 6, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 156 (Latin trans. p. 224).

69

Vita Constantini, cap. 15, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 131 (Latin trans. p.

202).

70

Hadriani II. papae epistolae, MGH Epp. VI, ed. E. Perels, Berlin 1925, 763–764. h e

authenticity of this document has been doubted.

71

Imre Boba argues that Methodius cannot have been a bishop of a titular see: “Methodius, or-

dained by Hadrian II, must have been fully intitulatus, that is, ordained to a cathedral church

from the income of which he received his subsistence and at which he had to establish his resi-

dence.” See I. Boba, h e Episcopacy of St. Methodius, Slavic Review 26/1 (1967) 85–93, at

p. 86. He maintains that Methodius was probably the bishop of diocesis Pannonica, which was

located south of the Danube, residing in Morava, a vernicular form of Sirmium.

72

h is parallel has been noted by D. Kalhous, h e signii cance of the Sirmian and apostolic

tradition in shaping Moravian episcopal organization, Early Medieval Europe 17 (2009) 268–

285, at 275–76.

73

H. Jahnkuhn, Das Missionsfeld Ansgars, Frühmittelalterliche Studien 1 (1967) 213–21;

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

103

enced by Ansgar do not indicate that there was a substantial population of Christians

in either Hedeby or Birka at any time.

When King Horic was persuaded to allow Christianity in his country and the

building of a Church in Schleswig, the Vita Anskarii claims that many residents there

were already Christians, having been baptized in Dorestad or Hamburg. h at these

must have been merchants is corroborated by the fact that the benei ts of the new

situation to both Danish and Saxon traders are elaborated upon, when the founding

of the church in Schleswig is described.

74

Horic II granted a similar location for a

Church “in alio quoque vico regni sui Ripa vocato” and gave his permission to have

priests there.

75

h e same arguments held sway when the inhabitants of Birka decided

to allow the practice of Christianity in the town, Christianity was seen as providing

protection for merchants returning to Birka from Dorestad.

76

h e main function of

the kings depicted in Vita Anskarii seems to be the protector of towns and trade. In-

deed, many of their political and military actions can be, and have been, explained as

having the purpose of diverting resources into ports under their own control.

77

h e relationship of various Danish kings with the Carolingian Empire was of

vital importance for the success of the mission, but following the establishment of

a missionary see at Hamburg, this relationship became ever more complex, as the

Empire was fragmented and the competing fractions sought allies from every cor-

ner. h ese political complexities are ignored by the Vita Anskarii. h e competition

between Louis the Pious and his son Lothar had important consequences, as He-

rioldus allied with the latter and lost his political usefulness. Instead Louis allied

himself with Horic, who permitted the activities of the missionaries.

78

Following the

death of Louis, Danish raids intensii ed. h e years 841–844 there were annual raids,

reaching a pinnacle in 845, when three separate Viking forces attacked the Empire.

79

One created havoc along the Seine and besieged Paris; another raided at Saintonge

on returning from Spain; the third one attacked Hamburg.

80

According to Annales

See also idem. Archäologische Anmerkungen zur Vita Anskarii, in Tradition als historische

Krat , ed. N. Kamp–J. Wollasch, Berlin 1982, 197–203; for a general overview of Western

trade with Scandinavia see H. Arbman, Schweden und das karolingische Reich. Studien zu

den Handelsverbindungen des 9. Jahrhunderts (Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets

Akademiens handlingar 43), Stockholm 1937.

74

Vita Anskarii, cap. 24, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 80.

75

Vita Anskarii, cap. 31, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 102.

76

Vita Anskarii, cap. 27, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 90, 92.

77

See E. Roesdahl, Viking Age Denmark, London 1982, 73, for a discussion of the political

motives behind the raids of Godofrid in 808.

78

See f. inst. C. M. Cusack, Conversion Among the Germanic Peoples, London–New York 1998,

139.

79

Annales Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, 25–32.

80

Descriptions in Annales Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, 32; Annales Xantenses, MGH SS rer.

Germ, 15–16; Translatio Sancti Germani Parisinsis, in AnBoll 2 (1903) 69–98; Ex miracula

sancti Germani in Nortmannorum adventu facti, MGH SS XV, ed. G. Waitz, Hannover

104

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

Bertiniani, Horic I was responsible for the raid on Hamburg, and in h e Miracle of

Saint German it is suggested that Reginheri, the leader of the attack on Paris, was a

prominent person at the court of Horic.

81

It is possible that this Reginheri is identical

with a vassal of Charles the Bald, the ruler of West Francia, who had been the benei -

ciary when the king coni scated the monastery of Torhout.

82

h is act placed Ansgar’s

mission in acute crisis, which was then intensii ed by the sacking of Hamburg.

In the Vita Anskarii the sacking of Hamburg is connected with Gauzbert’s sudden

expulsion from Sweden and the killing of his nephew, Nithard.

83

For the next seven

years, Sweden was without a priest, save for a brief visit by a priest named Ardgar.

84

Gauzbert went on to become bishop of Osnabrück. He never returned to Sweden.

Ansgar moved his seat to Bremen and does not seem to have returned to Hamburg

at er 845, although archaeological i nds indicate that the town was already well on its

way to being rebuilt around 850.

85

Following his procurement of the bishopric of Bremen, Ansgar went to meet

King Horic I and managed to establish renewed trust between himself and the Dan-

ish King, who, it is hinted, had Christian sympathies. In any case, Ansgar managed

to gain the support of the king for the building of a Church and freedom for priests

to proselytize among his peoples.

86

h e political background to this mission is not

made very clear, but it is possible that Ansgar was in fact acting as an intermediary

between the East Frankish and Danish kings. One royal mission to Horic is recorded

in 845, and another in 847. Ansgar may have taken part in one or both of these mis-

sions. Both were concerned with the enmity between Horic’s subjects and Christian

kingdoms, and both were on matters which could be described as pertinent to Ans-

gar. h e i rst mission was sent by King Louis alone but the second by all the Frankish

kings.

87

h e benevolence of King Horic may be exaggerated in the Vita Anskarii. Indeed,

1887, 10–16. See also J. L. Nelson, h e Annals of St Bertin, in Charles the Bald: Court and

Kingdom, ed. M. T. Gibson–J. L. Nelson, Oxford 1981, 15–36.

81

See R. W. McTurk, Ragnar liðbrók in the Irish annals, in Proceedings of the seventh Viking

Congress, Dublin, 15–21 August 1973, ed. B. Almqvist–D. Greene. Dublin 1976, 83–123.

82

See N, Lukman, Ragnar loðbrók, Sigifrid and the saint of Flanders, Mediaeval Scandinavia

9 (1976) 7–50. It is not certain to which mainland station Ansgar transferred his mission.

Wolfdieter Haas has postulated that he moved to Ramelsloh, as the tradition of Situs and

Sinnitius is very much connected to that place, see Haas, Foris apostolus-intus monachus, 19.

h en the question arises as to why Rimbert, who is generally very interested in provisions such

as these, would fail completely to mention this one.

83

Vita Anskarii, cap. 17, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 52.

84

Vita Anskarii, cap. 19, 20, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 56, 68.

85

See R. Schindler, Ausgrabungen in Alt-Hamburg, Hamburg 1957.

86

Vita Anskarii, cap. 24, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 80.

87

Annales Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, 35; Hlotharii, Hludowici et Karoli conventus apud

Marsnam primu febr. 847, MGH Kapit. II, ed. A. Boretius–V. Krause, Hannover 1897,

70.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

105

it was he who had been responsible for the raid on Hamburg in 845. It is also highly

doubtful whether he was as powerful among the Danes as the vita indicates, and his

powers were about to be diminished even further. In 850 Horic I was forced to di-

vide his kingdom with two unnamed nephews.

88

In 854, another war resulted in the

death of Horic I and it lasted until Horic II was established in power.

89

According

to Vita Anskarii, the death of Horic I severely compromised the success of the Dan-

ish mission, as the new king had councillors which the Bishop did not know from

before. h ese councillors began to argue for the closure of churches and the banning

of Christianity within the domain. However, very soon some of the previous king’s

councillors began to regain inl uence, one of whom, Burghard, is mentioned. h e

political fortune of Ansgar thus rose at the Danish court.

90

It seems that Horic II sent

some git s to Pope Nicholas I and indicated a desire to be converted.

91

However, he

may already have been dead or out of power when the Pope wrote his reply; at least

he does not seem to have outlived Ansgar by much.

92

h e support of the king and

individual notables was evidently vital for the mission, so that a missionary such as

Ansgar had the status more of a diplomatic negotiator than an itinerant preacher.

Ansgar also made an attempt to resurrect the Swedish mission, in cooperation

with the East Frankish King Louis. A nephew of the earlier missionary Gauzbert was

sent along to fuli l priestly duties. Upon arriving in Birka, Ansgar invited the new

king, Olef, to his hospice, showed him letters from King Horic and presented him

with several git s.

93

h us, as in Denmark, Ansgar turned straight to the king on both

his missions to Sweden. However, the kings there seem to have had less power than

their Danish counterparts. h e standard procedure of the king seems to have been to

consult a local assembly before allowing any missionary activity. Neither of the kings

Bern or Olef seems to have converted to Christianity himself, but much is made of

the conversion of an aristocrat called Herigar, one of the king’s councillors.

94

A comparison with the mission in Moravia reveals striking similarities. h e ini-

tiative for the Moravian mission originated with the local ruler, Prince Rastislav, and

may be regarded as a part of a larger endeavour to forge a diplomatic alliance between

Moravia and the East Roman Empire. When the missionaries arrived the Prince re-

ceived them with great honours and provided them with disciples to be educated by

88

Annales Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, 38.

89

Annales Bertiniani, MGH SS rer. Germ, 45; Annales Fuldenses, MGH SS rer. Germ, ed. F.

Kurze, Hannover 1891, 44–45; Annales Xantenses, MGH SS rer. Germ, 18.

90

Vita Anskarii, cap. 31–32; Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 100, 102.

91

Nicolai I. papae epistolae, MGH Epp. VI, 293–94. h e initiative seems to have reached the

pope through Solomon, bishop of Konstanz in the southwestern corner of the East Frankish

realm, rather than Ansgar.

92

Wood, Christians and Pagans, 45.

93

Vita Anskarii, cap. 26; Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 88.

94

Vita Anskarii, cap. 11; Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 42.

106

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

them.

95

How closely the success of the mission was related to the political fortunes

of Rastislav, can be deduced from its subsequent misfortunes following his fall from

grace. In 870 Rastislav was defeated by the East Frankish Prince Carloman who sub-

sequently occupied Moravia. h is is, however, not mentioned in Vita Methodii, al-

though Methodius internment in East Francia resulted from it.

96

Kocel had been i rmly entrenched in the Frankish camp before the arrival of

Constantine and Methodius in Pannonia. He seems nevertheless to have welcomed

them whole-heartedly and gave them i t y students to be trained and prepared for

priesthood, without doubt according to the new rite.

97

He actually requested from

the Pope that Methodius were to be sent to him, and at er the Pope made Metho-

dius Archbishop it is clear that Kocel gave him all his support. However, the defeat

and overthrow of his realm by the Germans in 874 meant the demise of the Slavonic

practice in that region.

h e position of Rastislav’s nephew and eventual successor Svatopluk was much

more ambiguous. According to Vita Methodii Rastislav had send his initial request

to Emperor Michael III at er consultation with Svatopluk. In Vita Constantini, how-

ever, he is not mentioned, but it it stated that Rastislav consulted with his princes

(кнєѕы своими) and his people.

98

h e sources thus tell a slightly dif erent story, if not

entirely disharmonious, about Svatopluk’s initial involvement in the mission. In 870

he betrayed Rastislav to Carloman, but assumed power himself in 871, nominally as

a vassal of the Franks.

According to Vita Methodii, it was the Moravians, led by Svatopluk, who asked

the Pope to restore Methodius to his see in 873.

99

But it is clear from papal corre-

spondence that Svatopluk was more than willing to support the enemies of Metho-

dius, at least from 874 onwards, when he made an alliance with the Franks. h e vita

greatly downplays Svatopluk’s role in the Methodius’ misfortunes and all blame is

placed squarely on the Franks. But it was Svatopluk and the nobles at his court who

wanted to celebrate the mass in latin, as a letter written by Pope John VIII. in June

880 makes clear.

100

h ere are references in the vita to a pagan leader of the lands of Vislans, whom

Methodius persuaded to undergo baptism, and a Hungarian king who visited him.

101

95

Vita Constantini, cap. 15, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 131 (Latin trans. p.

202).

96

Vita Methodii, cap. 9, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 159 (Latin trans. pp. 229–

30).

97

Vita Constantini, cap. 15, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 132 (Latin trans. p.

204).

98

Vita Constantini, cap. 14; Vita Methodii, cap. 5, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses,

129, 155 (Latin trans. pp. 199, 223).

99

Vita Methodii, cap. 10, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 160 (Latin trans. p. 230).

100

Registrum Iohannis VIII papae, MGH Epp. VII, ed. P. Kehr, Berlin 1928, 224.

101

Vita Methodii, cap. 10, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 161, 165 (Latin trans. pp.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

107

While the identity of both those princes is obscure, they bear witness to Methodius’

insistence on good relations with local rulers, and cooperating with them.

h e failure of the missions
At er the death of Gauzbert in 859, Ansgar seems to have been the sole bishop for

Scandinavia. Ansfrid, a priest sent by Gauzbert, returned from Sweden and his suc-

cessor, Ragenbert, was killed by Danish Vikings on the way. At the time Vita Anska-

rii was composed, a priest called Rimbert (not to be confused with the author of the

vita) was still working in Sweden.

102

At er the death of Ansgar in 865, his successors struggled to maintain actual

links with Scandinavia. In Vita Rimberti Scandinavian Christians are mentioned, and

Rimbert seems to have made an ef ort to buy the relase of Christian captives on his

travels.

103

h e lost of royal patronage made his task nigh impossible. h e Danes man-

aged to inl ict a crushing blow to the imperial government in Saxony in 880, when

the Danes killed twelve counts, among them the queen’s brother, and two bishops.

104

h e situation of the mission became dire, as it had in part been a diplomatic exercise;

a rel ection of a? rapprochement between Scandinavian kinglets and the rulers of the

Frankish empire.

A similar fate awaited the mission in Moravia, following the loss of the patron-

age of Svatopluk. In 879 Mehodius was summoned to Rome to discuss his alleged

disobedience in the use of the fi lioque clause. Although his orthodoxy was con-

i rmed, restrictions were placed on the Slavonic liturgy.

105

In the following his title

was changed to archbishop of Moravia.

106

h e loss of papal patronage is probably the

reason why the Archbishop travelled to Constantinople in 882–883, to underline

that he still enjoyed the support of the East Roman Emperor.

107

Methodius died on

Easter Sunday, 6 April 885, and his funeral service was held in Latin, Greek and Sla-

vonic, illustrating the i nely tuned balance between these three languages in Moravia

at the time.

108

Before his death, Methodius had indicated that his preferred successor was one

231, 235).

102

Vita Anskarii, cap. 33, Quellen des 9. und 11. Jahrhunderts, 102.

103

Vita Rimberti, cap. 16, MGH SS rer. Germ, ed. G. Waitz, Hannover 1884, 95.

104

Annales Fuldenses, MGH SS rer. Germ, p. 94. h is event is discussed at length by H.

Harthausen, Die Normanneneinfälle im Elb- und Wesermündungsgebiet mit besonderer

Berücksichtung der Schlacht von 880, Hildesheim 1966.

105

Registrum Iohannis VIII papae, MGH Epp. VII, 160.

106

In Fragmenta registry Iohannis VIII papae, MGH Epp. VII, 286; Methodius is called Pannonius

archiepiscopus legatione apostolicae sedis ad gentes fungens, in 879 his title is archiepiscopus

Pannoniensis ecclesiae, but in June 880 it has become archiepiscopus sanctae ecclesiae Marabensis.

Cf. Kalhous, h e signii cance of the Sirmian and apostolic tradition, 268–69.

107

Vita Methodii, cap. 13, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 163 (Latin trans. p. 233).

108

Vita Methodii, cap. 17, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 166 (Latin trans. p. 237).

108

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

of his disciples named Gorazd.

109

He did not, however, submit his candidature to

Rome.

110

Svatopluk used this opportunity to instigate a persecution against the dis-

ciples of Constantine and Methodius, although some remnants of the Slavonic tradi-

tion survived in Moravia.

111

Most of their followers went to Bulgaria which became

the centre of the Slavonic rite and language.

112

It was only with the destruction of the

Moravian Empire by the Magyars that the work of Constantine and Methodius in

Moravia was brought to a dei nitive end.

113

Conclusion
Comparisons of the two missions; the one in Denmark and Sweden, and the other

in Moravia and Pannonia, brings to light several parallels as well as dif erences. h e

i rst and the most important similarity, is the fact that both missions were ultimately

unsuccessful and, at least for the time being, did not manage to hold their ground

against the Pagan forces. Another likeness between the two ef orts is the all-powerful

emphasis given to converting the rulers of the countries in which the missionaries

were active. h us the activities of the missionaries were more ot en similar to those

of a diplomat than those of a preacher. h e Archbishops Ansgar and Methodius were

church dignitaries, and an important part of their mission was to establish the proper

titles of them and dei ne the extent of their jurisdiction. Both the missions enjoyed

Papal approval at one time or the other, although the Pope was a marginal i gure in

the North Germanic mission and the policies of successive Popes towards the Sla-

vonic mission were ambiguous and inconsistent at times.

h e dif erent fortunes of the missions are to some degree a rel ection of the for-

tunes of the Empires of which the missionaries were political and cultural agents.

h e division of the Carolingian Empire undermined the mission of Ansgar, and the

weakening of the Frankish kings was, in the end, fatal to the mission. Similarly, the

mission of Constantine and Methodius was af ected by the volatile relationship of

109

Vita Methodii, cap. 17, Constantinus et Methodius h essalonicenses, 165 (Latin trans. p. 236).

110

See f. inst. Fragmenta registri Stephani V papae, MGH Epp. VII, ed. E. Caspar, Berlin 1928,

352–53.

111

See F. Dvornik, h e Signii cance of the Missions of Cyril and Methodius, Slavic Review 23/2

(1964) 195–211, at p. 209.

112

See G. C. Soulis, h e Legacy of Cyril and Methodius to the Southern Slavs, DOP 19 (1965)

19–43

113

However, the i rst known duke of Bohemia, Borivoj, was baptised by Methodius, see Cosmae

Chronica Boemorum, MGH SS IX, ed. R. Köpke, Hannover 1851, 39, 44–45. It seems

that Borivoj, his wife Ludmila (d. 921) and his grandson, St. Václav (d. 929) were patrons of

Slavonic-speaking priests; see D. Obolensky, h e Byzantine Commonwealth. Eastern Europe

500–1453, Crestwood, New York 1971, 196. For a more cirtical view of the authenticity of the

legend cf. F. Graus, Die Entwicklung der Legenden der sogennanten Slavenpostel Konstantin

und Method in Böhmen und Mähren, Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas 19 (1971) 161–

211.

BULGARIA MEDIAEVALIS

109

the East Roman Emperors with the See of Rome. During a brief period of good-will

and co-operation between these institutions, the brothers from h essalonica man-

aged to gain a foothold in Moravia, but when the capricious political winds changed

again the position of the missionary legate eroded and the followers of the Slavonic

rite became marginal and subject to persecution. Neither mission ever came to a de-

i nitive end; they just evaporated quietly in a climate of hostility on part of its sub-

jects and of indif erence on part of its sponsors.

h us the establishment of Christian missions among North Germans in Scandi-

navia and among Slavs in Central Europe is a rel ection of the institutional and ideo-

logical strength of the European empires as well as their limitations. h eir contrast

between their eventual signii cance is also notable. Although Ansgar is celebrated as

the apostle of North, there is scant connection between his ninth-century mission,

and the eventual Christianization of the Scandinavian kingdoms in the later part of

the tenth century. In contrast, Constantine and Methodius and their disciples, estab-

lished the Slavonic rite, along with a written language, which was to be of enormous

political and cultural importance among the peoples in Eastern Europe and the Bal-

kans.