Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-kwdml Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T22:19:24.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bilingualism in Medieval Europe: Germans and Slavs in Helmold of Bosau's Chronicle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2014

Sébastien Rossignol
Sébastien Rossignol*
Affiliation:
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Having described the countries of the “numerous peoples of the Slavs,” the late twelfth-century chronicler Helmold of Bosau added, “If you consider Hungary as a part of Slavania, as some would suggest, because it does not differ by customs or by language, the area of the Slavic language extends so far that a proper estimate is quite lacking.” These few words indicate how clearly local the chronicler's horizon was—the farther away from Wagria, the fuzzier his information. At the same time, though, Helmold made plain that the Slavic language was for him an essential element of what Slavania was. As a parish priest at the forefront of missionary and settlement activities, Helmold wrote a chronicle that is a unique source of information for intercultural interactions between Germans and Slavs during the high medieval colonization period.

Information

Type
Other Articles
Information
Central European History , Volume 47 , Issue 3 , September 2014, pp. 523 - 543
Copyright
Copyright © Central European History Society of the American Historical Association 2014 

Having described the countries of the “numerous peoples of the Slavs,” the late twelfth-century chronicler Helmold of Bosau added, “If you consider Hungary as a part of Slavania, as some would suggest, because it does not differ by customs or by language, the area of the Slavic language extends so far that a proper estimate is quite lacking.”Footnote 1 These few words indicate how clearly local the chronicler's horizon was—the farther away from Wagria, the fuzzier his information. At the same time, though, Helmold made plain that the Slavic language was for him an essential element of what Slavania was. As a parish priest at the forefront of missionary and settlement activities, Helmold wrote a chronicle that is a unique source of information for intercultural interactions between Germans and Slavs during the high medieval colonization period.

The interactions between Germans and Slavs in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have attracted considerable attention by scholars, but the ethnic and linguistic mosaic was far more complex than the dichotomy Germans-Slavs might suggest.Footnote 2 Among the settlers who moved eastward, linguistic and dialectic differences were important. They came from the Rhineland, Flanders, and even from Romance-speaking regions of northern France.Footnote 3 Differences were also important in Slavic societies, in which the elites were usually cosmopolitan and integrated into interregional aristocratic networks, whereas peasants were mostly connected with other members of their local community—with a broad range in between.

In such an intricate setting, communication challenges among speakers of the linguistic communities were bound to arise. Among the languages that were used in these border regions, two language groups—German and Slavic—became predominant, and the constant interaction between the two fostered a growing sensibility for language differences. Curiously, however, historical scholarship has not yet focused on the modes of communication among members of language groups except when conflicts arose over the use of languages by clerics in thirteenth-century Poland, even though studies on the interrelations between foreign settlers and local societies fill entire libraries.Footnote 4 Concerning the areas between the Elbe and Oder rivers, research has focused more on the roles of the different groups than on actual instances of linguistic interference. Certainly, the lack of explicit sources available to investigate such problems stands in the way. Even though the source material is generally laconic, it may be helpful at least to look more systematically at what is available and what can be deduced from it. In this essay, instances of interactions between Slavs and Germans, as well as indications on language skills found in Helmold of Bosau's Chronicle of the Slavs, will be presented and discussed, taking into account Helmold's background and the historical context.

Assimilation and Conflict

Processes of linguistic assimilation in medieval East Central Europe have long been a topic of heated scholarly debate. Charles Higounet discussed the long-term development that led to the spread of the German language in regions touched by the settlement movement.Footnote 5 He did not touch, however, on the problem of day-to-day communication. Jan M. Piskorski also focused on the process of linguistic assimilation, insisting on the fact that, although in many regions Slavic speakers gradually adopted German, in others it was German speakers who adopted Slavic, such as in Upper Silesia and Eastern Pomerania.Footnote 6 Comparing developments in different regions of East Central Europe, Piskorski observed that the number of settlers was not the only decisive element for the gradual predominance of one or the other language. The attitude and composition of lay and ecclesiastic elites have also been of paramount importance: Germanization progressed faster where local knights were few and the clergy were predominantly German; Slavic or Polish linguistic resistance was stronger where there were an established local clergy and influential aristocratic families.Footnote 7

The existence of differing cultural and linguistic communities led, as has often been noted, not only to peaceful coexistence and adaptation, but also to tensions.Footnote 8 Benedykt Zientara investigated situations that involved conflict between Germans and Slavs, with special attention given to situations in which the ethnic difference marked the dividing line. Such occurrences took place, for instance, when German settlers received better lands than Slavs did in some areas between the Elbe and Oder rivers. But, as Zientara demonstrated, these occurrences remained occasional and there is little trace of there having been a situation where there was permanent conflict between peasants of the two language groups. Josef Joachim Menzel supported this interpretation, indicating that, in most places, measures were consciously taken to avoid direct conflicts over resources between the two groups.Footnote 9 In the towns, however, access to burghers’ status has indeed sometimes been restricted with arguments related to ethnic belonging—with the so-called Wendenparagraph.Footnote 10 As Zientara insisted, however, this restriction appeared only in the fourteenth century—well after the colonization period itself—and was mostly the result of a general deterioration of the urban economy.Footnote 11 Zientara also underlined that belonging to a language group did not necessarily lead to a sense of national identity in medieval Europe, since there were several cases of German speakers who identified primarily with the predominantly Slavic principalities in which they were living (e.g., Bohemia, Western Pomerania, and Poland), while several Slavic princes are known to have learned German or even composed poetry in German.Footnote 12 Ethnic, linguistic, and political belonging could obviously be seen as different things, at least in some cases. Finally, Zientara indicated that even though conflicts around ethnic identity occurred, medieval ethnic consciousness concerned mostly the upper classes: clergy, knights, and townspeople. Ethnic differences sometimes intensified conflicts that had started for other reasons (access to resources, economic or social status, religion), but they do not appear to have been the cause of the conflicts themselves.Footnote 13 According to Zientara, historians have traditionally focused more on exceptional appearances of tensions and conflicts than on “everyday cooperation, exchange of experiences, mutual acceptance of one another's customs and culture,” which generally seem to have been more common.Footnote 14

Historical and archaeological scholarship has also focused on the respective roles of Germans and Slavs in the high medieval transformation period, insisting inter alia on the fact that many of the active promoters of change were Slavic princes, and that in many places colonization was performed not only by the newcomers, but also by the local population. In scholarship on the Slavs living between the Elbe and Oder rivers, this interest has led, as Petra Weigel underlined, to the neglect of the study of contemporary medieval perceptions of the processes that were taking place.Footnote 15 It might be added, though, that research on German and Polish stereotypes and mutual perceptions in medieval sources has been especially fruitful in the works of Polish historians in recent decades.Footnote 16 Only recently have processes of identity formation in border areas been analyzed, or a stronger emphasis been put on the concrete consequences of the encounters between culturally diverse groups.Footnote 17 Modes of linguistic interaction have hardly attracted attention, however, apart from a few punctual examples, such as Duke Przemysł II of Greater Poland (died 1296), who is said to have spoken Latin with German ecclesiastics, and from conflicts over the usage of Polish and German by ecclesiastics in the thirteenth century.Footnote 18

Helmold of Bosau

This essay will not deal with the problem of the predominance of situations of conflict or cooperation, but with the modalities of linguistic interaction. The exchange of ideas and experiences that has obviously been the result of the encounters between foreign settlers and local communities had to cross the barrier of different languages. The following arguments will not linger on the long-term processes of assimilation, but rather on the face-to-face situations and on the reactions of the protagonists as portrayed by a twelfth-century chronicler who was at the forefront of this intercultural phenomenon.

Helmold of Bosau, who spent most of his life in the border area of Wagria (in the eastern parts of today's Schleswig-Holstein)—which had recently been settled by German newcomers who arrived in a country populated by Slavs—presents with his chronicle an exceptional source to investigate such questions. Helmold was born around 1120 and received his education in the monastic school of the Augustinian Canons at Segeberg, which had been founded by Vicelin, who later became bishop of Starigard (German: Oldenburg).Footnote 19 Around 1138, Helmold had to flee with the other clerics to the monastery of Faldera (later known as Neumünster) following a conflict between the Abodrite Prince Pribislav and the German Count Henry of Badwide. Helmold later pursued his schooling in Brunswick with Gerold, who subsequently became the bishop of Lübeck, and then came back to Segeberg. He was in Segeberg in 1154 when Bishop Vicelin passed away and was succeeded by Gerold. Helmold became a close partner of the new bishop and accompanied him on his visitation journey through the diocese in 1156. Helmold took part in different activities connected with the mission of the Slavs and finally obtained the position of parish priest in Bosau, near the Great Plön Lake, in 1156. Bosau was the only stable and functioning parish in Wagria and was even used as a temporary residence for the bishop, since the situation in Starigard, located in a purely Slavic environment, was less secure. Helmold died in Bosau after 1177.Footnote 20

It is during his time in Bosau that he wrote his chronicle: the first book between 1163 and 1168, and the shorter second book in 1171–1172. The Chronicle of the Slavs (the title found in later manuscripts cannot be attributed to the author) described mostly the evolution of the mission among the Slavs in Wagria, the military conflicts between Germans and Slavs, the failures and successes that occurred during the pacification of the area, as well as the colonization through German—mostly Saxon—settlers.Footnote 21 Helmold began to write his work just after the death of Bishop Gerold in 1163 and addressed it to the cathedral canons, probably to remind them of the achievements of Vicelin and Gerold in a time of insecurity for the new bishopric.Footnote 22

How reliable are Helmold's descriptions of interactions between Germans and Slavs? Medieval historians’ objectives were primarily of a moral nature. Historia, contrarily to fabula, had to follow the truth, but historians were often more interested in moral truths and in providing examples than in the minutiae of the material details of the scenes they were depicting.Footnote 23 As far as they could, though, medieval historians were faithful to the model of ancient Roman and Greek authors, whose approach to history had been passed on to them by Isidore of Seville, and they relied on their own experiences when they had witnessed the events they recounted.Footnote 24 Helmold had not witnessed the military and political actions described in his chronicle and had limited access to the leading lay aristocrats of his time. But he had, as his biography makes clear, close contacts with the higher levels of the German clerical circles of his area and knew the regions of northern Saxony and Wagria very well.Footnote 25 It can be confidently assumed that, when Helmold described interactions between German clerics and the Slavic population, it was based on his own hands-on experience of missionary activities in Wagria and of what he knew about the bishops and clerics involved in the process, all of whom he knew personally. When it comes to scenes with aristocrats, however, Helmold's knowledge must have been primarily secondhand. It is likely that he had not witnessed encounters between German and Slavic aristocrats himself, but Bishops Vicelin and Gerold, from whom the chronicler obtained much information, must have been familiar with the circles of the German lay elites. In addition, it should be kept in mind that Helmold's narrative was written in view of his presumably mostly German audience and that it had to appear plausible and realistic to his readers.Footnote 26

Slavic Aristocrats

Helmold's Chronicle presented several instances in which a Slav spoke with a German and there did not appear to be any communication problems between the protagonists. While describing such scenes, however, the chronicler never indicated what language the speakers were using or if an interpreter was mediating. For instance, Helmold recounted that Wago, the tenth-century bishop of Starigard, had lived among the Slavs.Footnote 27 Wago had given his sister in marriage to Billug, ruler of the Abodrites. A daughter, Hodica, had been born of this union; she had received a literate education and had become the abbess of a convent located in the fortress of Mecklenburg.Footnote 28 The chronicler described how Wago paid a visit to Billug in Mecklenburg.Footnote 29 As soon as Wago met Billug and his retinue, the Abodrite ruler “addressed publicly” (palam alloquitur) the bishop with a long speech. He offered to give the tribute he owed the bishop instead to his daughter Hodica, Wago's niece. In exchange, Billug would give the bishop some possessions and revenues in his realm. Wago readily accepted this proposal. The chronicler then added that Wago decided to allot the properties he had just received to some settlers (coloni).Footnote 30 While describing this scene, Helmold did not mention the language Billug spoke to Wago. Billug was married to a German woman and had a close relationship with German aristocrats and clerics, so it is reasonable to assume that he could have acquired, in some way, knowledge of the German language. But since Helmold was writing almost two centuries later, he could hardly have done more than depict the scene as it seemed reasonable to him in his own time.

Quoting Adam of Bremen, Helmold retold that the eleventh-century Abodrite ruler Gottschalk (died 1066) explained in the Slavic language what German priests had been preaching to the Slavic population.Footnote 31 Gottschalk, a Slavic prince who had spent his youth as a hostage and grew up in Lüneburg, obviously mastered both German and Slavic and was able to mediate between the two language communities. Adam's formulation, which Helmold took up, can imply, however, either that the German priests did not speak Slavic at all, or that their grip on the language was too shaky for them to be understood properly. One way or another, it is apparent that German priests in the mid-eleventh century, even though devoted to missionary activities in newly Christianized societies, did not possess sufficient language skills to be understood by the Slavic population without problems.

The successors of Gottschalk were his son Henry (died 1127) and Cruto (died ca. 1093); the latter belonged to a pagan party responsible for Gottschalk's murder.Footnote 32 Henry and Cruto engaged in a dire conflict after Gottschalk's death. Henry, who was born of a Danish mother, had to escape and fled to Denmark.Footnote 33 It was at that time, around 1072, that the Saxon Duke Ordulph died and was succeeded by Magnus, the son of a daughter of the Danish king. Helmold recounted that Henry's brother Butue, who had fled Cruto, arrived in Lüneburg, where Magnus was staying. According to the chronicler's description, Butue addressed Magnus directly (allocutus est eum) with a request for support. Having heard his words, Magnus replied by addressing him directly as well (his auditis dux respondit).Footnote 34 Helmold did not mention any mediation by interpreters, but also did not indicate in which language—German, Danish, or Slavic—the conversation was held. He could hardly have known anyway, but what is interesting is that he portrayed the scene as if it were only natural for the two protagonists to discuss and understand one another. It was unlikely for Magnus to have learned the Slavic language, but it seems possible that Butue, the Christian son of the bilingual Gottschalk, had learned some German or even Danish, since Gottschalk's wife had been a Danish princess.Footnote 35

As for Butue, we read that he penetrated into Cruto's territory in Wagria and attacked the fortress of Plön. When he entered the fortifications, he found no army but encountered a German woman who spoke to him (locuta est ad eum) to warn him of the treachery of the Slavs. According to the chronicler's depiction, Butue apparently did not have any problem understanding what the German woman said to him, even though Helmold specifically underlined the fact that she was German.Footnote 36

In a later episode about events in the early twelfth century, Helmold told of the Abodrite Prince Henry, who was residing in his fortress of Old Lübeck when he was attacked by the pagan tribe of the Rani. Henry escaped during the night with two companions and fled to the Holzatians, whom he warned of the approach of the Rani. A group of Holzatian warriors then agreed to return with him to Old Lübeck to combat their enemies. During these encounters, Henry apparently communicated with the Holzatian Saxons without any problem.Footnote 37

Helmold then recounted how Saxon warriors from Holzatia and Sturmaria had joined Prince Henry in his expedition to the land of the Rani. Henry was already in the land of the Rani when the Saxons journeyed to reach him. When the Saxons arrived in Wolgast, where Henry was, the Slavic prince brought the Saxons together and addressed them directly (populum in concionem allocutus est) by giving a speech to thank them for their help. The Saxons replied, addressing him directly (responderunt) as well.Footnote 38 The chronicler did not give the impression they had difficulty understanding one another or needed help from interpreters; on the contrary, he insisted that Henry spoke in front of the Saxons who had gathered before him to hear what he had to tell.

Helmold also recounted that the sons of Henry, Zventepolch and Cnut, had had a conflict over their father's succession after his death in 1127. The chronicler described how Zventepolch besieged the fortress of Plön with the support of Holzatian warriors. Cnut climbed on the fortress walls and addressed the besieging army (allocutus est omnem exercitum), trying to convince them to give up the fight.Footnote 39 According to Helmold's rendering of the scene, it seems that the Saxon warriors who accompanied Zventepolch understood Cnut perfectly. In addition, Helmold indicated that it was specifically the Holzatians whom Cnut addressed.

When Helmold introduced Count Adolph II of Holzatia (died 1164), he immediately specified that Adolph had received a literate education. Adolph had been apparently expected to pursue an ecclesiastical career, whereas his older brother Harthung was to succeed his father in the position of count. But because Harthung unexpectedly died, it was Adolph who was next in line to become count. Helmold underlined that Adolph not only knew Latin and German, but was also “no less fluent in the Slavic language.”Footnote 40 Helmold also described a conversation that had taken place between Adolph and a Slav called Vratislav, son of the Abodrite ruler Niclot. Adolph besieged Vratislav in the fortress of Werla, and Vratislav came out to negotiate a truce.Footnote 41 Helmold did not indicate whether they spoke German or Slavic.

As for the Abodrite ruler Niclot (died 1160), Helmold recounted how he came to Duchess Clementia, wife of Duke Henry the Lion (died 1195), who was residing in Lüneburg. Niclot was seeking help against the tribes of the Kicini and Circipani. When he arrived in the presence of Clementia and of the followers of the duke, Niclot “complained in her presence and that of the friends of the duke” (conquestus est in facie eius et amicorum ducis) about the situation and requested support. Count Adolph was then ordered to come to Niclot's help with his Holzatian warriors.Footnote 42 Based on the way Helmold portrayed the scene, Niclot appears to have been speaking directly to the duchess. There was no mention of someone else mediating. According to the chronicler, the only other persons present were the “friends of the duke,” who appeared to have been listening.

Helmold also told of the siege of the fortress of Mecklenburg by the Abodrite ruler Pribislav (died 1178), son of Niclot. The fortress's defense had been entrusted to the prefectus castri Henry of Scathen, who happened to be away at the time Pribislav arrived, and to a group of Flemish warriors. Pribislav then directly addressed the Flemish warriors (ait ad viros qui erant in municione), in Helmold's depiction, and tried to convince them to abandon the fortress and to give it to him because it had earlier belonged to the Abodrites. The Flemish refused and were subsequently massacred by the Slavs.Footnote 43 After this episode, Pribislav went on to attack the fortress of Ilow, which was defended by Guncelin, prefectus of the country of the Abodrites, and by a garrison of German and Slavic warriors. Guncelin's German warriors feared that if they left the fortress to fight Pribislav's army, their Slavic companions would betray them and give Ilow to Pribislav. Guncelin then assembled his German warriors and told them, “in the presence of the Slavs in the fortress” (in audientia Slavorum, qui fuerant in urbe), that they should exterminate the Slavs at the first sign of treason. The Slavic warriors, “having heard” Guncelin's speech (his auditis), refrained from their treacherous plans. Pribislav had to leave without taking Ilow.Footnote 44 Apparently, these Slavic warriors—or at least some of them, allies of Guncelin—were supposed to have had no problem understanding a speech given by a German to his fellow Germans.

As noted earlier, Helmold could not possibly have witnessed these scenes. Most of them took place in earlier times, many of them during the period for which the chronicler's information is known to have been less reliable.Footnote 45 The other ones mostly concerned military expeditions. Are we dealing here with literary and highly idealized renderings? Can these scenes be taken as a realistic depiction of twelfth-century realities? After all, the use of interpreters could have been so normal that Helmold did not bother to mention them.

First, it is striking that several common features emerge, presenting a fairly coherent picture of linguistic communication between German and Slavic elites. The chronicler often specified that these speeches were held in public or in front of other people. The Slavs depicted in these scenes as conversing without any problem with Germans all belonged to the upper classes; no interpreter was ever mentioned, even though, as discussed later, interpreters appeared in other instances in the chronicle. Second, it should be asked whether German could have been the usual language of interaction between upper-class Germans and Slavs. Members of the ruling Slavic dynasties in Wagria often had had close relatives in German families for decades, if not centuries. As such, it is obvious that they must have had opportunities to learn the German language either in their own families or through frequent contact with German aristocrats. In view of this, it seems reasonable to postulate that, in Helmold's conception and according to what he knew of German-Slav interactions in the twelfth century, it could have been expected that conversations between German and Slavic aristocrats were held in German and that this was so natural that it did not need to be specified.

Too much cannot be made of an argumentum e silentio, though. This hypothesis is nevertheless reinforced by the fact that when a German aristocrat did learn to speak Slavic, this was enough of a singularity that Helmold deemed it worth underlining, such as when he introduced Count Adolph II. In short, Helmold did not mention that Slavic aristocrats spoke German, arguably because it was usual—but he made a point of underlining it when it was the other way around, this case being presumably more exceptional. Such a situation would not necessarily have been unique in medieval Europe. It has been demonstrated, for instance, that Gerald of Wales used a similar approach regarding the use of French and English in late twelfth-century England; he did not indicate it when aristocrats were speaking French—because he assumed French to be the default language—but highlighted it when they spoke English.Footnote 46

German and Slavic Warriors

Even though, in all the cases discussed earlier, German and Slavic aristocrats appear to have been able to communicate easily with one another, and although Helmold did not feel the need to underline this as something exceptional, such straightforward intercultural communication did not necessarily always take place. Indeed, there is an instance in which the chronicler clearly indicated that interpreters were sometimes needed. When Butue was besieged by an army of Slavs in the fortress of Plön around 1075, Saxon warriors from Holzatia, Sturmaria, and Thetmarchia heard about it and decided to help Butue. When they arrived in the vicinity of Plön, they sent a man “versed in the Slavic language” (gnarus Slavicae linguae) to inquire why the Slavic warriors were besieging Plön. The interpreter turned out to be a traitor: after a conversation with Cruto, who bribed him with a large sum, the interpreter helped him take the fortress by convincing Butue that he would receive no help from the Saxons.Footnote 47

Apparently Slavic aristocrats might have been expected to learn German, but this was not the case for common Slavic warriors; thus, the scene in Ilow presented earlier—in which some Slavic warriors allied with Germans understood a speech held in German—was not necessarily representative. But even the Ilow scene does not imply that Slavic warriors were all expected to understand German; it only suggests that some of them were able to understand a conversation they had overheard. The Plön episode indicates that it would have been expected that an interpreter would be needed to communicate, and German warriors made sure they had a man with such linguistic skills accompanying them. Again, a pattern can be recognized: in Helmold's view, it was not exceptional that some Slavic warriors understood German, but it was expected that German warriors would rely on an interpreter.

German Missionaries and Priests

It is surprising that Helmold did not give any indication that Vicelin, missionary bishop in the country of the Slavs in the first half of the twelfth century and hero of his chronicle, had acquired knowledge of the Slavic language. This time we enter firmer ground, given that the chronicler had known Vicelin personally. Vicelin had, according to Helmold, heard that the Abodrite ruler Henry was favorably disposed toward Christianity. Vicelin then asked Archbishop Adalbero of Bremen for permission to contact Henry; Adalbero accepted and sent him to preach to the Slavs and to extirpate their idolatry. Accordingly, Vicelin penetrated into Slavic territory with two German priests and went directly to Old Lübeck, Henry's main residence. Vicelin and his companions requested permission to preach, and Henry readily accepted and even allowed them to erect a church. Shortly after this first success, however, Vicelin and his companions went back to Saxony to organize further the future mission. A pivotal event happened, though, when Henry died in 1127 and his sons Zventepolch and Cnut began to fight one another.Footnote 48 Vicelin and his priests were not able go back to Old Lübeck. Adalbero then heard that the inhabitants of Faldera, a locality situated in the border area between Saxony and the Slavic lands, lacked a priest and had expressed a wish to obtain one. Adalbero sent them Vicelin: from there he would be able to go easily in and out of the Slavic lands. The inhabitants of the region were, according to Helmold, Christians in name only and prone to superstitions; as Stanisław Rosik underlined, they did not seem to have been much different in that regard from the neighboring Slavs.Footnote 49 Vicelin spent his time in the region preaching to the population and destroying cult places. Vicelin and the priests who had joined him also prayed for the conversion of the Slavs.Footnote 50

Vicelin was named Bishop of Starigard in 1149. Helmold recounted that Vicelin went to visit Starigard after the bishopric had been moved to the new city of Lübeck. At that time, according to the chronicler, there were only pagans living there with a pagan priest called Mike, who represented the community. Vicelin had no great success preaching the basics of the Christian doctrine to the inhabitants, but nonetheless managed to have a church erected on the marketplace near the wall of the stronghold.Footnote 51

Vicelin later founded a church in Bosau, where he preached to the local population. Helmold added that new settlers had recently arrived in the surrounding settlements and that their situation was insecure because of constant attacks by pillagers. The chronicler portrayed Vicelin praying to God to request the conversion of the Slavs. Vicelin also presaged to the “men of the migration” (homines transmigracionis) that the Christian cult would soon become stronger in the Slavic lands. After this time spent in Bosau, Vicelin returned to Faldera.Footnote 52

Vicelin's successor was Bishop Gerold, who began a tour of his diocese after his appointment and was accompanied by Helmold himself, who later described his experience in his chronicle. Gerold, Helmold, and their companions arrived in Starigard, which was almost deserted, but the chapel that Vicelin had erected was still standing. Gerold celebrated the mass, but the only Slavs who attended were Prince Pribislav and some of his followers. After the mass, Pribislav invited Gerold and his companions to his residence. They then went to the grove of the god Prove and destroyed it.Footnote 53 Following this action, Gerold went to the new city of Lübeck and “spoke to the people” (perorasset ad plebem) assembled on the marketplace, trying to convince them to stop worshipping idols.Footnote 54 After that, he had a conversation with Pribislav and negotiated the conditions of the Slavic ruler's conversion.Footnote 55 Gerold later discussed similar topics with other Slavic rulers—among them Niclot—who met at an assembly organized by Duke Henry the Lion.

According to Helmold's account, Gerold then continued with the founding of churches in Wagria and the further destruction of groves. Helmold added that Gerold had convinced Count Adolph II to found a colony of Saxon settlers in Starigard, a project that was soon realized. The reason given by the chronicler was that “the priest might have the solace of a people whose language and customs he knew.”Footnote 56 In another episode with a teleological framework, Helmold again underlined the correlation between the arrival of Saxon settlers and the surge in Christianity.Footnote 57 He indicated that the Slavic country, which had been very dangerous because of robbers and pillagers, was made more secure; this, in turn, favored the installation of more Saxon settlers. The chronicler added at this point that “cities and villages grew up there and churches were built and the number of the ministers of Christ multiplied.”Footnote 58 Helmold also indicated that Vicelin had sent two priests to the new city of Lübeck, where the Abodrite ruler Henry favored their installation. The priests were “kindly received by the merchants of whom no small colony had gathered there.”Footnote 59 In other words, important Christians in Lübeck were apparently Western merchants. Consequently, the priests did not have to learn the Slavic language to be able to communicate with their brethren.

The picture that emerges from all this is clear. Vicelin, Gerold, and their followers—all close acquaintances of the chronicler—did not really try to learn the Slavic language. When they entered Slavic territory, they went directly to the court of a Slavic ruler who, like those of his class, was expected to be able to communicate in German. When the missionaries and priests settled somewhere more permanently, it was either in a border area such as Faldera or a place where a population of Western settlers was thriving, such as Bosau and the new city of Lübeck. In the few cases where German missionaries and priests dared to go to places populated mainly by Slavs, they either preached only to the small circle of Slavic elites who had fostered contacts with their German counterparts, or undertook actions—such as the destruction of pagan groves—that were symbolic and practical at the same time, but for which no linguistic skills were needed.

There are nevertheless a few mentions in Helmold's chronicle of German priests who did learn the Slavic language. Helmold himself possibly acquired a rudimentary knowledge of Slavic: for example, he was able to explain that the name of the Slavic god Zcerneboch meant “black god.”Footnote 60 Helmold told of a priest called Bruno, put in place in Old Lübeck by Vicelin in 1136, who was called by Gerold in the 1150s to support him in Starigard.Footnote 61 Bruno used “sermons written in Slavic words” and “declaimed them properly to the people.”Footnote 62 Nothing more is known of Bruno's linguistic skills; in view of the specific mention of a written version, he might have had the sermons translated so that he could read the transcription aloud.Footnote 63 Even though he had been attracted to Starigard by Gerold as a specialist with much experience, Bruno's use of a written script might indicate that the priest was not yet completely fluent in the Slavic language.

As time passed, it eventually dawned on the German priests active in areas peopled partly, if not mostly, by Slavs, that it would make sense to learn the Slavic language. This had not been seen as a priority or even a necessity by the first wave of missionaries and settlers. They had been mostly preoccupied with preaching to Slavic princes and aristocrats and with carrying out symbolic actions such as the destruction of groves. The linguistic skills of the German priests were the result of specific needs in a constantly evolving situation. It might seem surprising that Vicelin and Gerold, praised by Helmold for their missionary activities in Wagria, did not consider preaching in Slavic a central priority. Again, the example of Gerald of Wales indicates that such an attitude was not necessarily unique in medieval Europe. When he was preaching the Crusades in Wales, Gerald used the languages he had mastered best, French and Latin; although he sometimes relied on interpreters to communicate with monoglot speakers of Welsh, he does not seem to have cared very much about being understood by his audience.Footnote 64

Language, Communication, and Pragmatism

Even though Helmold seldom gave precise and detailed information about who was learning which language and under what circumstances, and although the reliability of the episodes he recounted varies, the general picture is in itself coherent. It is probably not too far-fetched to use his chronicle to make deductions about the problems of daily communication between Germans and Slavs in the border areas at the high point of twelfth-century colonization in the areas between the Elbe and Oder rivers.

The first to acquire the other's language was arguably the Slavic aristocrats, which is hardly surprising. Many of them clearly wanted to be integrated into the higher circles of European aristocracy—something they demonstrated by their openness to Christianity and their intention to convert, as well as by their imitation of Western ideals and ways of life. Many of them were also intimately connected with western aristocratic families through marriage alliances and the practice of holding children as hostages. These people thus not only had the interest, but often also the opportunity to learn German. It is likely that the German language was, however, not necessarily seen at first so much as a marker of a cultural identity, but as a means of communication in situations advantageous to them.Footnote 65 That the German language came to be seen, at least in later periods, as prestigious and as a symbol of European court culture can be seen in a scene described in a thirteenth-century Polish chronicle, according to which the Silesian Duke Boleslas the Bald was laughed at because of his insufficient command of German.Footnote 66 As Jan M. Piskorski pointed out, the situation was different in Wagria, Pomerania, and Silesia than in regions such as Greater Poland, where a Germanization process never occurred in a broad fashion. In Greater Poland, local Christian aristocratic and clerical elites had been in place for centuries and had built entrenched positions for themselves and were sometimes suspicious of foreigners who threatened to take their place. In twelfth-century Wagria, by contrast, Christian priests had only recently appeared and all come from abroad, and the princely circles had had strong connections to their German counterparts for centuries. The situation in Wagria was thus comparable to that of Pomerania and Silesia, and these factors were more likely to favor the assimilation of the Slavic higher classes.Footnote 67

Apparently, German aristocrats seldom deemed it necessary to learn Slavic. This does not necessarily mean that they considered the Slavs an inferior people and their language unworthy of learning. To put it simply, they likely did not really have to learn it.Footnote 68 The Slavs with whom they were dealing and who belonged, like they did, to aristocratic circles, had presumably already had learned some German or were willing to do so. When German aristocrats needed to communicate with lower-rank Slavic warriors, it seemed to them sufficient to rely on interpreters—even though, as Helmold demonstrated, this reliance on a few individuals could cause problems. The only German aristocrat whom Helmold portrayed as having learned Slavic was Count Adolph II who, as the chronicler explained, had been expected in the twelfth century to become a cleric. Adolph probably belonged to a generation of German clerics for whom it appeared to make sense to learn Slavic in order to communicate better with a broader range of the Slavic population.

As surprising as this might seem at first, learning Slavic had not initially been a priority for the German priests and missionaries sent into Slavic lands. It became more important as the situation stabilized and it became necessary to preach to and communicate with not only the Slavic elites, but also broader groups of the Slavic population. Yet, even at the time of Helmold, Bruno's example suggests that the preachers’ knowledge of the Slavic language was likely still very basic.

By the end of the medieval period, the inhabitants of Wagria had become predominantly German speaking.Footnote 69 The process had been very gradual, of course, as has often been underlined or at least suspected. It had not been a straightforward evolution, however, a fact that has thus far not been discussed by scholars using specific examples. A first wave of Slavic aristocrats likely learned German through their international connections before a second generation of German missionaries began to learn Slavic to communicate with the local population. On both sides of the linguistic divide, people learned the other's language out of pragmatic needs and opportunities.

Relations between Germans and Slavs in twelfth-century Wagria were not always free of prejudices and haughtiness. But Helmold never indicated that in tense situations language itself was seen as an identity marker by either group. He did give at least one example of a German margrave who despised the Slavs (it is hard to tell if this attitude was widespread, but Helmold himself clearly did not share it), but such prejudices seem to have been linked to the ethnic background lato sensu, not necessarily to the language.Footnote 70 Helmold described tensions over rights and land properties between settlers and the local population, and put in the mouth of Prince Pribislav words of resentment toward Duke Henry the Lion, who had taken away the Slavs’ rightful properties and settled in their lands: “strangers, namely Flemings, Hollanders, Saxons, and Westphalians, as well as diverse nations.”Footnote 71 Even in this context, however, the Bosau priest did not make any explicit connection to the fact that Slavs and settlers belonged to different language groups. On the contrary, Pribislav is depicted as addressing the Germans and the Slavs in turn, without any trace of linguistic difficulty.

Language learning seems to have proceeded in twelfth-century Wagria more out of pragmatism than out of ideological motivation. Attitudes toward linguistic and ethnic differences nonetheless varied greatly. The authors of written sources that have come down to us all belonged, as Jerzy Strzelczyk underlined, to the circles of elites—aristocrats or clerics, be they Germans or Slavs—who profited the most from the economic improvements resulting from the arrival of foreign settlers. It does not have to be assumed that their general open-mindedness toward cultural, if not religious, differences was necessarily shared by the local population, which might have noticed how the newcomers were often favored and privileged by the princes.Footnote 72

Helmold's attitude toward the Slavs was ambivalent. He was generally less interested in ethnic and linguistic differences than in the religious divide and the progress of the mission, which was at the core of his chronicle and of his personal experience.Footnote 73 He did describe the Slavs as an inherently cruel and untrustworthy people, though, and strongly criticized their stubbornness in remaining pagans.Footnote 74 Nonetheless, as Armin Reese pointed out, he displayed some respect for some aspects of their religious habits (for their deference toward their sanctuaries and their pagan priests, for instance), likely hoping that his fellow Germans would do the same in a Christian context.Footnote 75 Helmold held the Christians responsible, through their sins and greed, for the failure of the mission among the Slavs.Footnote 76 Although he criticized the pagan Slavs for their religious behavior, he did not fail to strike a laudatory tone when speaking of Slavs who had become Christians.Footnote 77 Helmold's main interest was the mission, and he consequently criticized anyone who prevented the progress of Christianization and praised everyone who contributed to it.Footnote 78 Helmold's views and open-mindedness toward the Slavs, as a cleric engaged in missionary activities, were not necessarily shared by everyone or necessarily representative of opinions and attitudes among the German aristocracy. His stories of a German count who despised the Slavs and of a Slavic prince who resented the Germans might indicate a climate of latent tension. But Helmold did not provide any indication that such frictions resulted in a refusal to use the other's language.

Conclusion

Processes of assimilation and acculturation are complex phenomena. Scholarship on the East Central European migration and colonization of the high Middle Ages has demonstrated how the interaction among different linguistic communities could lead to various consequences, according to local factors and specific regional, political, and social settings. Little attention had been given, however, to concrete situations and the gradual steps involved in these developments.

The chronicler Helmold of Bosau, who lived at the forefront of the religious, social, and cultural transformations of twelfth-century Wagria, provided an exceptional testimony of these events. Language learning in border areas apparently followed mostly pragmatic incentives; cultural identity was connected more with social positions and networks than with language. Linguistic assimilation was not a straightforward process and the pressure on the protagonists to learn the other's language varied according to time and circumstances.

No matter its worth, the Bosau priest's chronicle only presents, however, a small vignette of large-scale processes that took place over centuries and over vast areas of the European continent. A study of other medieval sources might provide contrasting results in other times and places, allowing for a better understanding of the linguistic developments that shaped the cultural diversity of Europe for so many centuries.

Footnotes

1 Quod si adieceris Ungariam in partem Slavaniae, ut quidam volunt, quia nec habitu nec lingua discrepant, eo usque latitude Slavicae linguae succrescit, ut pene careat estimatione. Helmold of Bosau, Cronica Slavorum 1.1, ed. Lappenberg, Johannes M. and Schmeidler, Bernhard, Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi 32 (Hanover: Hahn, 1937), 5.

2 Recent overviews include Lübke, Christian, “Ostkolonisation, Ostsiedlung, Landesausbau im Mittelalter. Der ethnische und strukturelle Wandel östlich von Elbe und Saale im Blick der Neuzeit,” in Ostsiedlung und Landesausbau in Sachsen. Die Kührener Urkunde von 1154 und ihr historisches Umfeld, ed. Bünz, Enno, Schriften zur sächsischen Geschichte und Volkskunde, vol. 23 (Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag, 2008), 467–84; Lübke, Christian, “Ethnic Diversity in East Central Europe and the Beginnings of the Economic Change in the High Middle Ages,” in XXXIV Semana de Estudios Medievales, Estella, 16 a 20 de julio de 2007. Movimentos migratorios, asentamientos y expansión (siglos VIII–XI). En el centenario del professor José María Lacarra (1907–2007) (Pamplona: Fondo de Publicaciones del Gobierno de Navarra, 2008), 289–304; Idem, “Proces wkraczania Niemców na ziemie słowiańskie i początek niemieckiej kolonizacji na wschód od Łaby i Soławy,” in Wędrówka i etnogeneza w starożytności i średniowieczu, ed. Salamon, Maciej and Strzelczyk, Jerzy (Cracow: Towarzystwo Wydawniczne “Historia Iagiellonica,” 2004), 305–12; Piskorski, Jan M., “Medieval Colonization in East Central Europe,” in The Germans and the East, ed. Ingrao, Charles and Szabo, Franz A. J. (West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 2008), 27–36; Idem, “The Medieval Colonization of Central Europe as a Problem of World History and Historiography,” German History 22, no. 3 (2004): 323–43.

3 Grabarek, Józef, “Die Ostkolonisation im westslawischen und baltischen Sprachraum bis 1350,” in Werte und Wertungen. Sprach-, literatur- und kulturwissenschaftliche Skizzen und Stellungnahmen. Festschrift für Eugeniusz Tomiczek zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Bartoszewicz, Iwona, Hałub, Marek, and Jurasz, Alina (Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza ATUT, 2004), 504–12.

4 For other regions of medieval Europe, see, for instance, Wright, Roger, “Early Medieval Pan-Romance Comprehension,” in Word, Image, Number: Communication in the Middle Ages, ed. Contreni, John J. and Casciani, Santa (Florence: Sismel, 2002), 25–42; Townend, Matthew, Language and History in Viking Age England: Linguistic Relations between Speakers of Old Norse and Old English (Turnhout: Brepols, 2002); Schiller, Christiane, “Sprachgrenzen—Sprachen im Grenzraum. Sprachverhältnisse im Großfürstentum Litauen,” in Grenzräume und Grenzüberschreitungen im Vergleich. Der Osten und der Westen des mittelalterlichen Lateineuropa, ed. Herbers, Klaus and Jaspert, Nikolas (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2007), 279–89; Communicare e significare nell'alto Medioevo, Settimane di studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull'alto Medioevo, vol. 52 (Spoleto: Presso la Sede del Centro, 2005); Boglioni, Pietro, “Les Problèmes de langue dans les missions du Haut Moyen Age d'après les sources hagiographiques,” Hagiographica 17 (2010): 39–71; Kleinhenz, Christopher and Busby, Keith, eds., Medieval Multilingualism: The Francophone World and Its Neighbours (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010); Gieysztor, Aleksander, “Gens polonica: Aux origines d'une conscience nationale,” in Études de civilisation médiévale, IXe–XIIe siècle. Mélanges offerts à Edmond René Labande à l'occasion de son départ à la retraite et du XXe anniversaire du C.E.S.C.M. par ses amis, ses collègues, ses élèves (Poitiers: C.E.S.C.M., 1974), 351–62; Josef Joachim Menzel, “Die Akzeptanz des Fremden in der mittelalterlichen deutschen Ostsiedlung,” in Toleranz im Mittelalter, ed. Patschovsky, Alexander and Zimmermann, Harald (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1998), 207–19; Strzelczyk, Jerzy, “Die Wahrnehmung des Fremden im mittelalterlichen Polen,” in Die Begegnung des Westens mit dem Osten. Kongreßakten des 4. Symposions des Mediävistenverbandes in Köln 1991 aus Anlaß des 1000. Todesjahres der Kaiserin Theophanu, ed. Engels, Odilo and Schreiner, Peter (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1993), 203–20; Biermann, Felix, “Konfrontation zwischen Einheimischen und Zuwanderern bei der deutschen Ostsiedlung des Mittelalters,” in Bereit zum Konflikt. Strategien und Medien der Konflikterzeugung und Konfliktbewältigung im europäischen Mittelalter, ed. Auge, Oliver, Biermann, Felix, Müller, Matthias, and Schultze, Dirk (Ostfildern: Thorbecke, 2008), 160; Graus, František, Die Nationenbildung der Westslawen im Mittelalter (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1980), 121–22; Zientara, Benedykt, “Die deutschen Einwanderer in Polen vom 12. bis zum 14. Jahrhundert,” in Die deutsche Ostsiedlung des Mittelalters als Problem der europäischen Geschichte. Reichenau-Vorträge 1970–1972, ed. Schlesinger, Walter (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1975), 346–47. For overviews of historiography, see Piskorski, Jan M., ed., Historiographical Approaches to Medieval Colonization of East Central Europe: A Comparative Analysis Against the Background of Other European Inter-ethnic Colonization Processes in the Middle Ages (Boulder, CO, and New York: Columbia University Press, 2002); and Piskorski, Jan M. in cooperation with Hackmann, Jörg and Jaworski, Rudolf, eds., Deutsche Ostforschung und polnische Westforschung im Spannungsfeld von Wissenschaft und Politik. Disziplinen im Vergleich (Osnabrück and Poznań: Fibre and Poznańskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Nauk, 2002). Two of the most important monographs of the last decades on medieval colonization in East Central Europe do not touch on the topic of language at all: Erlen, Peter, Europäischer Landesausbau und mittelalterliche deutsche Ostsiedlung. Ein struktureller Vergleich zwischen Südwestfrankreich, den Niederlanden und dem Ordensland Preußen (Marburg am Lahn: J.-G. Herder-Institut, 1992); Körmendy, Adrienne, Melioratio terrae. Vergleichende Untersuchungen über die Siedlungsbewegung im östlichen Mitteleuropa im 13.-14. Jahrhundert (Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskiego Towarzystwa Przyjaciół Nauk, 1995).

5 Higounet, Charles, Les Allemands en Europe centrale et orientale au Moyen Age (Paris: Aubier, 1989), 337–44.

6 Piskorski, “The Medieval Colonization of Central Europe as a Problem,” 338. This had already been hinted at by Benedykt Zientara in Zientara, “Die deutschen Einwanderer,” 340–42.

7 Piskorski, Jan M., Kolonizacja wiejska Pomorza Zachodniego w XIII i w początkach XIV wieku na tle procesów osadniczych w średniowiecznej Europie (Poznań: Poznańskie Towarzystwo Przyjaciół Nauk, 2005 [first published in 1990–1991]), 215–16.

8 Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 131–34.

9 Menzel, “Die Akzeptanz,” 210, 215. In some areas between the Elbe and Oder rivers, however, land that belonged to Slavic peasants was apparently given to German settlers. See Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 136–37.

10 Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 163; Schich, Winfried, “Zum Ausschluß der Wenden aus den Zünften nord- und ostdeutscher Städte im späten Mittelalter,” in Mit Fremden leben. Eine Kulturgeschichte von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, ed. Demandt, Alexander (Munich: Beck, 1995), 122–36.

11 Zientara, Benedykt, “Nationality Conflicts in the German-Slavic Borderland in the 13th-14th Centuries and Their Social Role,” Acta Poloniae Historica 22 (1970): 214–16.

12 Footnote Ibid., 217, 221; Zientara, “Die deutschen Einwanderer,” 337, 341.

13 Zientara, “Nationality Conflicts,” 224; Menzel, “Die Akzeptanz,” 215; Górecki, Piotr, “Assimilation, Resistance, and Ethnic Group Formation in Medieval Poland: A European Paradigm?,” in Das Reich und Polen. Parallelen, Interaktionen und Formen der Akkulturation im hohen und späten Mittelalter, ed. Wünsch, Thomas (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 2003), 472–73.

14 Zientara, “Nationality Conflicts,” 225.

15 Weigel, Petra, “Slawen und Deutsche. Ethnische Wahrnehmungen und Deutungsmuster in der hoch- und spätmittelalterlichen Germania Slavica,” in Ostsiedlung, ed. Bünz, 58–60.

16 Strzelczyk, “Die Wahrnehmung”; Gawlas, Sławomir, “Marność świata i narodowe stereotypy. Uwagi o wielokulturowości na Śląsku w XV wieku,” in Korzenie wielokulturowości Śląska ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem Śląska Górnego, ed. Barciak, Antoni (Katowice-Zabrze: Polskie Towarzystwo Historyczne Oddział w Katowicach, 2009), 29–53; Wrzesiński, Wojciech, ed., Wokół stereotypów Niemców i Polaków (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, 1993); Pleszcziński, Andrzej, The Birth of a Stereotype: Polish Rulers and Their Country in German Writings, c. 1000 A.D. (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2011).

17 Scior, Volker, Das Eigene und das Fremde. Identität und Fremdheit in den Chroniken Adams von Bremen, Helmolds von Bosau und Arnolds von Lübeck (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2002); Fraesdorff, David, Der barbarische Norden. Vorstellungen und Fremdheitskategorien bei Rimbert, Thietmar von Merseburg, Adam von Bremen und Helmold von Bosau (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2005). For a broader perspective, see Hoffmann, Richard C., “Outsiders by Birth and Blood: Racist Ideologies and Realities around the Periphery of Medieval European Culture,” Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History VI (XVI) (1983): 3–34, especially 7–8. Górecki, “Assimilation,” 449–52.

18 According to Piotr Górecki, Przemysł likely spoke Latin because he was proud of his learning —not because he was unable to communicate in another language with German clerics, as has often been assumed. See Stenzel, Gustav Adolph, ed., Liber fundationis claustri sanctae Mariae virginis in Heinrichow, oder Gründungsbuch des Klosters Heinrichau (Breslau: Josef Max & Komp., 1854), 63. See Górecki, “Assimilation,” 459–60; Gieysztor, “Gens,” 360–61; Menzel, “Die Akzeptanz,” 210; Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 160; Graus, Die Nationenbildung, 121–22.

19 Known as Oldenburg in German and Starigard in Slavic. Helmold provided both versions of the name of the fortress: Aldenburg, ea quae Slavica lingua Starigard, hoc est antiqua civitas, dicitur. Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.12, 23.

20 Berg, Dieter, “Helmold von Bosau,” in Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters. Verfasserlexikon, vol. 3 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1981), 976; Stoob, Heinz, “Einleitung,” in Helmold von Bosau, Slawenchronik, trans. Stoob, Heinz (Berlin: Rütten & Loening, 1963), 1–6; Scior, Das Eigene, 138–39.

21 About Helmold's historiographical conceptions, see Kaljundi, Linda, “Waiting for the Barbarians: Reconstruction of Otherness in the Saxon Missionary and Crusading Chronicles, 11th-13th Centuries,” in The Medieval Chronicle V, ed. Kooper, Erik (Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi, 2008), 113–27; Kaljundi, Linda, “Medieval Conceptualisations of the Baltic Sea Region: Performing the Frontier in Helmold of Bosau's ‘Chronicle of the Slavs,’” in The “Baltic Frontier” Revisited: Power Structures and Cross-cultural Interactions in the Baltic Sea Region. Proceedings of the International Symposium in Florence, February 29th and March 1st, 2008, ed. Sooman, Imbi and Donecker, Stefan (Vienna: University of Vienna, 2009), 25–40.

22 Berg, “Helmold,” 976–79; Stoob, “Einleitung,” 6–18; Scior, Das Eigene, 139–44.

23 Isidore of Seville, Etymologiarum sive originum libri xx 1.40–44, ed. Lindsay, W. M. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1911). See Green, D. H., Medieval Listening and Reading: The Primary Reception of German Literature 800–1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 237, 247; Guenée, Bernard, Histoire et culture historique dans l'Occident médiéval (Paris: Aubier, 1980), 18–19, 350–54; Goetz, Hans-Werner, Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsbewußtsein im hohen Mittelalter (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1999), 98; Ray, Roger D., “Medieval Historiography through the Twelfth Century: Problems and Progress of Research,” Viator 5 (1974): 43–44; Schoebe, Gerhard, “Was gilt im frühen Mittelalter als geschichtliche Wirklichkeit? Ein Versuch zur ‘Kirchengeschichte’ des Baeda Venerabilis,” in Festschrift Hermann Aubin zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. Brunner, Otto et al. . (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1965), vol. 2, 625–51; Morse, Ruth, Truth and Convention in the Middle Ages: Rhetoric, Representation, and Reality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 1–13.

24 Guenée, Histoire, 18–19, 27–35; Goetz, Geschichtsschreibung, 147; Lacroix, Benoît, L'Historien au Moyen Age (Montréal: Publications de l'Institut d’Études médiévales de Montréal, 1971), 34–35, 45–49; Bachrach, David S., “The Rhetoric of Historical Writing: Documentary Sources in Histories of Worms, c. 1300,” Journal of the History of Ideas 68, no. 2 (2007): 187–88; Spiegel, Gabrielle M., The Past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography (Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997), 88–89.

25 Berg, “Helmold,” 977–78; Stoob, “Einleitung,” 4–11.

26 On the necessity of plausibility in historical writing, see Bachrach, “Rhetoric,” 189–90.

27 Beumann, Helmut, “Die Gründung des Bistums Oldenburg und die Missionspolitik Ottos des Großen,” in Helmut Beumann, Ausgewählte Aufsätze aus den Jahren 1966–1986. Festgabe zu seinem 75. Geburtstag, ed. Petersohn, Jürgen and Schmidt, Roderich (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1987 [the article was originally published in 1972]), 177–92.

28 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.13, 26.

29 Little is known about the legendary figures of Wago and Billug. See Lübke, Christian, Regesten zur Geschichte der Slaven an Elbe und Oder (vom Jahr 900 an). Teil II. Regesten 900–983 (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1985), Reg. 143, 197–198; Reg. 169a, 240–41.

30 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.14, 27–28.

31 Footnote Ibid., 1.20, 42. See Scior, Das Eigene, 210; Johannes Nowak, Untersuchungen zum Gebrauch der Begriffe populus, gens und natio bei Adam von Bremen und Helmold von Bosau (Ph.D. diss., University of Münster, 1971), 104.

32 For an overview of the history of the Abodrites, see Fritze, Wolfgang H., “Probleme der abodritischen Stammes- und Reichsverfassung und ihrer Entwicklung vom Stammesstaat zum Herrschaftsstaat,” in Siedlung und Verfassung der Slawen zwischen Elbe, Saale und Oder, ed. Ludat, Herbert (Gießen: W. Schmitz, 1960), 141–219.

33 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.24, 46.

34 Footnote Ibid., 1.25, 48–49.

35 Butue was born of another woman, however. Ibid., 1.24, 46.

36 Footnote Ibid., 1.25, 49–50.

37 Footnote Ibid., 1.36, 70–71.

38 Footnote Ibid., 1.38, 74–75.

39 Footnote Ibid., 1.48, 94–95.

40 Preter facundiam enim Latinae et Teutonicae linguae Slavicae nichilominus linguae gnarus erat. Ibid., 1.49, 98.

41 Footnote Ibid., 1.93, 183.

42 Footnote Ibid., 1.71, 136.

43 Footnote Ibid., 2.98, 191–92.

44 Footnote Ibid., 2.98, 192–94.

45 That is, the period ranging from the late eleventh century (Helmold had relied on the work of Adam of Bremen and other written sources for earlier times) to the mid-twelfth century. He had more reliable information for the later, contemporary decades. See Berg, “Helmold,” 977–78.

46 Putter, Ad, “Multilingualism in England and Wales, c. 1200: The Testimony of Gerald of Wales,” in Medieval Multilingualism, ed. Kleinhenz and Busby, 97–98.

47 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.25, 50–52.

48 Footnote Ibid., 1.46, 90–92.

49 Rosik, Stanisław, Interpretacja chrześcijańska religii pogańskich Słowian w świetle kronik niemieckich XI-XII wieku (Thietmar, Adam z Bremy, Helmold) (Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniersytetu Wrocławskiego, 2000), 260–62.

50 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.47, 92–94.

51 Footnote Ibid., 1.69, 130–134. See also Rosik, Interpretacja, 278–79.

52 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.75, 143–44.

53 Footnote Ibid., 1.84, 159–160. Concerning Prove, see Rosik, Interpretacja, 281–88.

54 Lübeck was the favored center of the politics of Henry the Lion, whom Gerold supported. Gerold likely realized that Lübeck was promised a greater future than Starigard. See Stoob, “Einleitung,” 5–6.

55 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.84, 160–62.

56 Et quia castrum et civitas, quae olim ecclesia et sedes cathedralis fuerat, deserta erat, obtinuit apud comitem, ut fieret illic Saxonum colonia et esset solacium sacerdoti de populo, cuius nosset linguam et consuetudinem. Ibid., 1.84, 164. See Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 153–54.

57 According to Linda Kaljundi, Helmold implied a comparison between the arrival of Saxon settlers in the land of the Slavs and that of the Old Testament Israelites in the promised land. See Kaljundi, “Medieval Conceptualisations.”

58 Omnis enim Slavorum regio (. . .) olim insidiis horrida et pene deserta, nunc dante Deo tota redacta est veluti in unam Saxonum coloniam, et instruuntur illic civitates et oppida, et multiplicantur ecclesiae et numerus ministrorum Christi. Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 2.110, 218.

59 Footnote Ibid., 1.48, 95.

60 Footnote Ibid., 1.52, 103. See Rosik, Interpretacja, 266–73.

61 Helmold, of Bosau, Cronica 1.54, 105.

62 Quibus et sacerdos Dei Bruno iuxta creditam sibi legacionem sufficienter amministravit verbum Dei, habens sermones conscriptos Slavicis verbis, quos populo pronuntiaret oportune. Ibid., Cronica 1.84, 164.

63 Scior, Das Eigene, 210; Lotter, Friedrich, “Bemerkungen zur Christianisierung der Abodriten,” in Festschrift für Walter Schlesinger, vol. II, ed. Beumann, Helmut (Cologne and Vienna: Böhlau, 1974), 425.

64 Putter, “Multilingualism,” 86–87.

65 Accordingly, the linguistic divide between Germans and Slavs should not be overestimated. The linguistic divide was mostly between multilingual elites and people of lower social rank, who had less need and fewer opportunities to learn another language. See Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 158–59; Lübke, Christian, Fremde im östlichen Europa. Von Gesellschaften ohne Staat zu verstaatlichen Gesellschaften (9.–11. Jahrhundert) (Cologne, Weimar, and Vienna: Böhlau 2001), 72–74.

66 Theotonicum proferens, sic verba corrupit, ut in pluribus audientibus ridiculum redderetur. Węclewski, Zygmunt, ed., Chronica principum Poloniae, 23, in Monumenta Poloniae Historica/Pomniki dziejowe Polski, vol. III (Lwów: Zakład Nar. im. Ossolińskich, 1878), 497; see Zientara, “Die deutschen Einwanderer,” 346.

67 Piskorski, Kolonizacja, 215–16.

68 Zientara, “Die deutschen Einwanderer,” 345–46.

69 Higounet, Les Allemands, 343.

70 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.16, 34. For such stereotypes, see Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 162; Graus, Die Nationenbildung, 77; Opelt, Ilona, “Slavenbeschimpfungen in Helmolds Chronik,” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 19 (1984): 168; Görlich, Paul, Zur Frage des Nationalbewußtseins in ostdeutschen Quellen des 12. bis 14. Jahrhunderts (Marburg and Lahn: J.-G. Herder, 1964), 166–71.

71 Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 1.63, 119–120. See Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 138–39. “Notum est omnibus vobis, quanta calamitates et pressurae apprehenderint gentem nostrum propter violentam ducis potentiam, quam exercuit in nos, et tulit nobis hereditatem partum nostrorum et collocavit in omnibus terminis eius advenas, scilicet Flamingos et Hollandros, Saxones et Westfalos atque nationes diversas.” Helmold of Bosau, Cronica 2.98, 193.

72 Strzelczyk, “Die Wahrnehmung,” 106.

73 Stoob, “Einleitung,” 2; Scior, Das Eigene, 204–05, 214; Nowak, Untersuchungen, 106–07.

74 Görlich, Zur Frage, 102–05, 194–96, 200–03.

75 Reese, Armin, “Das Gute im Bösen. Einige Bemerkumgen zu Helmolds Slawenchronik,” in Flores considerationum amicorum. Festschrift für Carl August Lückerath zum 70. Geburtstag am 13. Dezember 2006, ed. Hasberg, Wolfgang and Schröder, Josef (Gleichen and Munich: Muster-Schmidt, 2006), 332–33, 336–39; Nowak, Untersuchungen, 130–31.

76 Opelt, “Slawenbeschimpfungen,” 167; Reese, “Das Gute,” 329; Scior, Das Eigene, 214–15; Görlich, Zur Frage, 122–25; Biermann, “Konfrontation,” 151–52.

77 Gläser, Manfred, “Die Slawenmission in den schriftlichen Quellen,” in Heiden und Christen. Slawenmission im Mittelalter, ed. Gläser, Manfred, Hahn, Hans-Joachim, and Weibezahn, Ingrid (Lübeck: Schidt-Römhild, 2002), 75–77; Nowak, Untersuchungen, 104–06, 129–130; Görlich, Zur Frage, 146.

78 Reese, “Das Gute,” 329–31; Görlich, Zur Frage, 213–15.

Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid
Ibid