Czech chronicle

The Chronicle consists of three books. In the original lists, the titles and numbering of the chapters are absent, however, the numbering of the chapters in Arabic numerals was introduced in the Brethholz publication ^[1] .

The first book covers the history of the Czech Republic, from ancient times to 1038. The book contains 2 preface and 42 chapters. Kozma dedicated it to the canon of the Prague chapter Hervasia . The description of the pagan period in this book is based on ancient traditions, which during the life of Kozma were still preserved in the people's memory. Many of this information is legendary , but some of it is based on historical facts. Only when describing the beginning of the spread of Christianity does the author begin to use written sources, some of which are indicated, and some remain unknown ^{[2] [3] [4]} .

The book begins with the Flood ^[6] . Further, Kozma cites the legend that the name of the Czech Republic is associated with the name of the legendary forefather of Czech ^[7] . He then describes the legendary history of the Czech Republic . Moreover, the Chronicle does not contain any information about the former inhabitants of the Czech Republic, as well as information about the former habitats of the Czechs ^[8] . Although there is some kind of historical basis in these legends, there are very few reliable historical facts in this part ^[9] . According to researchers, a number of events and names were invented by the author himself ^{[4] [10]} . Only beginning with the 14th chapter (the baptism of Prince Borzhivoy I ) does the narrative rely on written sources. The book ends with the death of Prince Jaromir (November 4, 1038) ^[11] .

The second book covers the period from 1039 to 1092 and describes the rule of the Czech princes, starting with Bregetislav I. It ends with the death of Vratislav II . The book consists of a preface and 51 chapters and is dedicated to Clement, the abbot of the Břevnov Monastery. The second book is based on eyewitness accounts, as well as on personal observations of Kozma, which he reports in the foreword. Moreover, this book contains a number of chronological and factual errors, as well as some defaults ^{[2] [3]} .

The most reliable and detailed is the third book, covering the period from 1093 to 1125. It consists of a preface and 62 chapters. The author is an eyewitness to the events described, however, in presenting the facts, he expresses his political position, and also tries to avoid criticism of the rulers of the principality ^{[2] [3]} . The book begins with a description of the reign of Prince Bregetislav II and ends with the first year of the reign of Prince Sobeslav I - 1125. This year Kozma died, about which the last record was made at the end of the chronicle ^[12] .

The Chronicle, like most other European chronicles of the time, was written in Latin. The author himself called his language “rural” ^[13] , however, according to later scholars, the language by which the chronicle was written was at the same level as most works of that time were written ^[14] . At the same time, Kozma uses both Latin words and expressions of the classical period, and the terms of medieval Latin. In addition, there are Greek words ^[15] .

Like many other chroniclers of that time, Kozma in his work preserved the traditions of ancient authors. In his own words, he treated the Chronicle as a heroic epic ^[16] . Often, the author uses mythological and biblical subjects, as well as ancient poetry. Sometimes he indicates cited authors, but more often quotes are given without mentioning the names. Screen shots are used to depict battles. In a number of places, Kozma imitates Homer , and one also feels a strong influence on the author of the works of Guy Sallust Crisp , Titus Livius and Boethius . At the same time, the influence of the traditions of medieval chroniclers, primarily Regino Prumsky, is also strong ^[15] .

The language used to write the Chronicle is lively and expressive, despite some rhetoric ^[3] . In the text of the chronicle there is both a prosaic text and a rhyming one, for which different poetic forms are used (most often a hexameter ). One of Kozma’s rhetorical devices of the Chronicle is the use of direct speech ^[15] .

At the time of the creation of the Czech Chronicle, there were other works on the history of the Czech Republic. However, the work of Kozma of Prague was the first sequential and comparatively complete exposition of it ^[17] .

In the preface to the first book, Kozma mentions that the Chronicle was written during the reign of Emperor Henry V (1105–1125), Pope Calixtus II (1119–1124) and Prince Vladislav I (1110–1125) ^[18] . Based on this, it was initially believed that the Chronicle was created between 1119 and 1125 . However, in modern historiography it is believed that the “Czech Chronicle” is the result of many years of work by the author, and an indication of the time of the reign reflects only the period of work on the final edition, which was interrupted only by the death of the author in 1125 ^[2] .

Since Kozma Prazhsky received a good education, he was familiar with classical literature, Western European chronicles, Czech and Polish annals . For the events of the X-XI centuries, the main sources were the lives of various saints , as well as the Prague and Krakow annals . In addition, he used various documents from the archives of the Prague Bishopric , as he held a rather high position in the Prague Church and had access to them. These documents included papal bulls , imperial letters, lists of bishops, as well as obituaries containing the dates of death of the princes and their families. Some of these documents have now been lost ^{[2] [3]} .

Among the sources mentioned by Kozma himself, the following can be noted ^[19] :

• privileges of the Moravian Church: according to researcher V. Regel, this refers to the letter of the Moravian Archbishop dated 880 ^[20] ;
• epilogue of Moravia and the Czech Republic: it is not established which source is meant ^[21] ;
• “The Life of St. Wenceslas”: according to researchers, this refers to the “Crescente fide”, which was published in Fontes rerum Bohemicarum, TI Praha, 1873, str. 183-190 ^[22] .

Other sources include the not preserved ancient Prague Annals, the “List of Bishops of the Prague Church” and the obituaries of the Cathedral of St. Vita. Kozma also used the news from the Chronicle of Regino Prumsky , although this source is not mentioned anywhere. At the same time, some researchers, following I. Lozert, accused Kozma of plagiarism from Regino’s work, but after the research of Dusan Trzeshtik ^{[23], the} opinion of plagiarism was disproved ^[17] .

Most scholars of the Chronicle noted that Kozma Prazhsky was a conscientious chronicler. In this he differs from some later chroniclers. When writing the Chronicle, Kozma saw as his goal the recreation of the glorious past of the Czech people. To do this, he tried to select the most reliable facts. Moreover, in most cases, he always indicated where he used folk traditions, and where - historical sources (to which he periodically refers) or “stories of witnesses worthy of trust” ^[24] . In addition, the author strictly shares the history of the Czech Republic - before and after the introduction of Christianity. For pre-Christian Bohemia, Kozma Prazhsky did not date events, dates appear only starting from the reign of Prince Borzhivoy I ^[25] .

For all its merits, the Chronicle in some places contains errors and inaccuracies. Describing some events (for the most part when covering the "mythological period"), the author deviates from his principles. According to later researchers, some legends were invented by Kozma himself. In addition, there are sometimes errors in the chronology in presenting the events of the historical period, and the dates of the Chronicle sometimes differ from the dates of the annals that were used by Kozma himself. First of all, this concerns the history of the Prague Bishopric, which was founded by Prince Boleslav I the Terrible . Kozma himself mentions that Pope John XIII granted a letter of founding a bishopric during the reign of Boleslav ^[26] . However, Kozma does not hide his negative attitude towards Boleslav I, who was the murderer of his brother, Saint Wenceslas ^[27] . And, since the wrong year of the death of Boleslav I (967, not 972) was indicated in the annals used by Kozma, the author of the Czech Chronicle attributed the foundation of the bishopric to the period of the reign of Boleslav II the Pious , the son of Boleslav I, arbitrarily indicating 967 as the date of the choice of the first the bishop. In fact, the first bishop of Detmar was approved in 973 (according to another version in 975) ^[28] . There are other inaccuracies in the chronology ^{[3] [4]} .

In addition, in a number of cases, Kozma Prague was not impartial. So, in the “Chronicle” there is no mention of the Sazavsky monastery , in which Slavic liturgies were held. Kozma, who was an ardent Catholic, reacted negatively to “schismatics.” Also in the "Chronicle" there is no mention of the Polish prince Boleslav I the Brave . The images of many Czech rulers are distorted. In addition to Boleslav the Terrible mentioned above, the chronicler’s hostility to Prince Vratislav II is strongly felt. Also in the Chronicle, the military successes of the prince in 1074-1081 are omitted and his death is not reported. This hostility has several reasons. Kozma was a supporter of the Prague Bishop Jaromir , who was seriously at enmity with Vratislav. In addition, Kozma considered Vratislav a supporter of the Sasavian schismatics. Another reason was that the Vysehrad chapter, founded by Vratislav, was a serious competitor to the Svyatovitsky chapter, to which Kozma himself belonged. To substantiate his views, Kozma cites a fake papal letter prohibiting the Slavic worship ^{[3] [4]} .

In many respects, all the inaccuracies and errors of the Czech Chronicle are related to the fact that Kozma acted as a defender of the interests of the Prague capital ^[4] . At the same time, he was an advocate of strong princely power and a supporter of the independence of the Czechs. This position is reflected in the chronicle, when the author opposes feudal feuds. In addition, the text shows that Kozma is most sympathetic to those rulers who strengthened Christianity and engaged in the fight against paganism. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that the author was afraid to tell the truth about the rulers of the Czech Republic, as reported directly ^[29] . The subjectivity of the author is especially pronounced in the third book ^[24] .

However, in general, the Chronicle is a valuable historical source, not only in the history of the Czech Republic, but also in the history of a number of neighboring states (Germany, Poland, Hungary). However, many of her information is unique. The “Chronicle” of Kozma of Prague, along with the “ Tale of Bygone Years ” by Nestor and the “ Chronicle and the Acts of Princes or Rulers of Poland ” by Gall Anonymous , is fundamental to Slavic culture and is one of the most important sources on the history of the Czech Republic and its neighboring states ^[15] .

Czech Chronicle Handwritten Lists

The original “Czech Chronicle” was not preserved. In 1923, B. Bretholtz compiled a classification of the lists on the basis of a comparative study of 15 lists and divided them into three groups: A, B and C ^[30] . Subsequently, some passages and fragments were discovered that were not taken into account in this classification. Subsequently, the accuracy of the division into three groups was criticized by Maria Wojciechowska ^[31] , however, a complete replacement was not proposed ^[30] . After the Second World War, the Leipzig and Dresden lists were considered lost for a long time ^[32] , now both lists have been found, although the Dresden list is critically damaged by fire ^[30] . The Strasbourg list was completely lost as a result of the fire in 1870 ^[33] . The Stockholm and Budishinsky lists in digital form are publicly available ^{[33] [34]} .

Research History

In the XII-XIII centuries, information from the "Chronicle" of Kozma of Prague was often borrowed by other chroniclers. Starting from the XIV century, chroniclers tried to supplement and interpret the information of the Chronicle in accordance with their political views. However, at the same time, throughout the Middle Ages, the “Chronicle” of Kozma was considered the main source for the ancient history of the Czech Republic, and information from it was used without any criticism ^[38] .

The situation changed at the end of the XVIII century, in connection with the identification of numerous falsifications in the Chronicle of Vaclav Gaek . Since one of the sources for the work of Gadget was the “Chronicle” of Kozma of Prague, she was subjected to critical analysis. The first author of the critical analysis of the Chronicle was Gelasiy Dobner , who noted the rational historical core of the work ^[39] . Later, J. Pubicka ^[40] , Frantisek Peltzel and Josef Dobrovsky , prominent Czech researchers of the late 18th – early 19th centuries, systematized information about Kozma Prague, and also created a single edition of the Chronicle based on various lists, published by F. Peltzel and I. Dobrovsky. In the 19th century, the Chronicle was studied in detail by F. Palacki ^[41] and V. Tomek ^{[42] [43]} . Palacki was the first to indicate that later interpolations are present in the Chronicle. In addition, he praised the work of Kozma, showing his role as the founder of Czech annals. Palacki also noted that the Chronicle is important in order to recreate the early history of the Czech Republic ^[44] .

In the works of a number of German researchers of the late XIX - early XX centuries, a nihilistic tendency was traced. So, A. Dumler ^[45] and V. Watenbach ^[46] considered the Chronicle not a very reliable source. The extreme position here was the work of the historian I. Losert, who denied the historical significance of the “Chronicle” of Kozma and accused him of falsifying history and plagiarism ^[47] . However, this position was criticized by another German researcher, Bertold Bretholtz ^[48] , who came to the conclusion that the borrowings of Kozma reflect the author’s great erudition and are widely used among chroniclers of that time ^[44] .

In the XX century, the research of the Chronicle was carried out by the Czech historian V. Novotny, who in his work The Czech History ^[49] examined in detail the Chronicle of Kozma Prague, trying to link its material with the main points of the development of the Czech state in the early Middle Ages. He also cited an extensive bibliography of works related to the study of both the Chronicle and its author ^[44] . Later, the studies of the Chronicle were carried out by Czech historians F. Graus ^{[50] [51]} , 3. Needly ^[52] and Dusan Třeštik ^{[53] [54]} , as well as Polish historians B. Kshemenskaya ^{[55] [56] [57] [58]} and M. Wojciechowska ^[59] . Of the works of Russian pre-revolutionary historiography, the work of Vasily Regel ^{[60] is of} great importance ^{[32 ]} .

Latin Chronicle Editions and Translations

The first edition of the Chronicle in Latin was undertaken in 1602 in Hanover by the historian Marquard Freyer , who, on the basis of the Strasbourg list, published the first book of the work of Kozma of Prague ^[61] . In 1607, Freyer released the second edition of the chronicle ^[62] . It was based on the Stockholm list. In addition, it already included all three books, however, there were errors in this publication, as well as proper names. In 1620, Freer’s second edition of the Chronicle was reprinted ^[63] , differing from it only in the title page ^[64] .

The next edition of the Chronicle was undertaken in 1728 by Johann Burchard Menke , professor at the University of Leipzig, who included it in the Scriptores rerum Germanicarum ^[65] . The second edition of Freyer was taken as a basis, in addition, the comments of Professor C. Schwartz were added ^[64] .

In 1783, Czech researchers Frantisek Martin Peltzel and Josef Dobrovsky released a new edition of The Chronicles ^[66] . In this edition, on the basis of six lists known at that time, a single edition of the Chronicle was created. The basis was the Capitulary List. For its time, the publication was considered exemplary ^[64] .

The next edition in the mid-19th century was undertaken by Rudolf Köpke , who included the Chronicle in the Monumenta Germaniae Historica ^[67] . In this edition 13 lists of the Chronicles have already been used, and the Budish list was used as the basis. In addition, the publication had extensive notes, as well as an introductory article on Kozma Prague and its work.

In 1854, the French abbot Jacques Paul Minh included the Chronicle in the first part of the Latin Pathology ( lat. Patrologia Latina ) - Patrologiae cursus completus ^[68] . This publication was a reprint of the Köpke publication, and textological errors were made ^[64] .

In 1854, a new publication was undertaken by the Czech historian Josef Emler ^[69] . The publication was based on Köpke, but Emler used six more new lists (Kapitulny, Brzhevnovsky, Roudnitsky, Furstsbergsky, Brpensky, Karlovsky). In addition, the publication contained extensive notes and an introductory article describing all the lists used, as well as an attempt to interpret the various events and dates of the Chronicle on the biography of Kozma Prazhsky. Moreover, the publication for the first time contained a translation of the Chronicle into Czech, made by K. Tomek ^[64] .

In 1923, a new edition of The Chronicles as part of Monumenta Germaniae Historica was undertaken by Bertold Bretholtz ^[70] . It was based on the Budis list. Compared to previous editions, the Brno List was also used. The peculiarity of this publication was that Bretholz in the introductory article gave a complete description of all handwritten lists. He also covered in sufficient detail the biography of Kozma of Prague and gave a description of the literary features of the Chronicle. In addition, the publication contains extensive textual comments that present various opinions on the reliability of dates and different points of the Chronicle. This publication has long been considered the best edition of the Chronicle, but in 1957, the Polish researcher M. Wojciechowska made a new comparison of the surviving Chronicle lists and subjected Brethholz to serious criticism ^{[64] [71]} . In 1995, this edition of The Chronicles was republished as Monumenta Germaniae Historica.

In addition to the Chronicle editions in Latin, there are translations of it in German, Czech, English, Polish and Russian. In Czech, the first translation was made by K. Tomek for the publication of the chronicle by Emler. There are several more translations into Czech. For editions of 1929 and 1947, the translation was made by K. Grdin. The 1947 translation was repeatedly reprinted, the editors were Maria Blagova and Magdalena Moravova. The latest edition came out in 2011.

The chronicle was first translated into Russian in 1962 at the publishing house of the USSR Academy of Sciences . The basis was taken by the Brethholz edition. The translation was done by Heinrich Sanchuk .

Chronicle Publications

In Latin

• Cosmae Pragensis ecclesiae clecani Chronica Bohemorum // Rerum Bohemicarum antiqui scriptores / M. Freher. - Hanoviae, 1602.
• Cosmae Pragensis ecclesiae decani Chronicae Bohemorum libri III / M. Freher. - Hanoviae, 1607.
• Cosmae Pragensis esslesiae decani Chronicae Bohemorum III. Altera editio / M. Freher. - Hanoviae, 1620.
• Cosmae Pragensis ecclesiae decani Chronica Bohemorum // Scriptores rerum Germanicarum, B. I / JB Mencken. - Lipsiae, 1728.
• Cosmae ecclesiae Pragensis decani Chronicon Bohemorum // Scriptores rerum Bohemicarum. T. I / F. Perlcel, J. Dobrovsk. - Pragae, 1783.
• Cosmae Chronica Boemorum. // Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores T. IX / R. Koepke. - Hannoverae, 1851.
• Cosmae Pragensis Chronica // Patrologiae cursus completus. Series latina. T. 166 / JP Migne. - Cosmae Pragensis Chronica.— “Patrologiae cursus completus. Series latina. " T. 166, 1854.
• Cosmae Chronicon Boemorum // Fontes rerum Bohemicarum. T. II / J. Emler. - Praha, 1874. ^[72]
• Die Chronik der Böhmen des Cosmos von Prag // Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores rerum Germanicarum. Nova series. T. II / B. Bretholz (Hrsg.). - Berlin, 1923.

In Czech

• Kosmova kronika česká / Hrdina K. - Praha: Melantrich, 1929 .-- S. 203.
• Kosmova kronika česká / Hrdina K. - Praha: Melantrich, 1947 .-- S. 203.
• Kosmas Kronika česká / Hrdina K., Bláhová M. - Praha: Svoboda, 1972 .-- S. 261.
• Kosmova kronika česká / Hrdina K., Bláhová M. - Praha: Svoboda, 1975 .-- S. 260.
• Kosmas - Kronika Čechů / Hrdina K., Bláhová M, Moravová M. - Prague: Argo, 2011 .-- 285 p. - ISBN 978-80-257-0465-3 .

In Polish

• Kronika czeska / Kownaski A. - Warszawa, 1823.
• Kosmasa Kronika Czechów / wyd. Maria Wojciechowska. - Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1968 .-- 459 p.
• Kosmasa Kronika Czechów / wyd. Maria Wojciechowska. - Wrocław, 2006. - 459 p.

German

• Des Decans Comas Chronik von Bohmen / Grandauer G. - Leipzig, 1885.

In English

• Cosmas of Prague. The chronicle of the Czechs / Lisa Wolverton. - Catholic University of America Press, 2009 .-- ISBN 9780813215709 .

In Russian

• Kozma Prague. Czech Chronicle / Transl. G. E. Sanchuk. - M .: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1962. - 296 p. - (Monuments of the medieval history of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe). - 1,500 copies
• Cosmas Prague. The Czech Chronicle // Kozma Prague, Gall Anonymous. Czech chronicle. Chronicle and acts of princes, or rulers, Polish. - Ryazan: Alexandria, 2009. - S. 9-248 . - ISBN 978-5-94460-082-0 .

The Chronicle, completed in 1125 , became widely known in the Czech Republic. She corresponded more than once, and some chroniclers continued it. So, the Prague canon Hervasius , a friend and comrade-in-arms of Kozma, supplemented the Chronicle with inserts from the Prague, Krakow and Metz annals . In addition, he did the literary editing of the Chronicle. The chronicle was supplemented in various monasteries. The supplemented chronicles of the Sazavsky monastery are known (brought up to 1162, in addition, since 932 additions were made from the history of the Sazavsky and Břevnovsky monasteries on the basis of obituaries, annals and acts of these monasteries), as well as the Vysehrad monastery (brought up to 1142). These authors are known in historiography as “the first successors of Kozma” ^{[3] [73]} .

There are also sequels that bring Czech history to 1283 . The most comprehensive were the additions made by the Prague canon Vincentius (brought to 1167) and the abbot of the Milevsky monastery Gerlach (Yarloh) (brought to 1198, but only partially preserved) ^[3] . In addition, there is a series of chronicles written by anonymous authors, which have the appearance of annals, and also contain detailed descriptions of the plots. These works are scattered and do not constitute a single whole, however, they feel a strong influence of the work of Kozma of Prague. This cycle of chronicles , the authors of which, apparently, were representatives of the Prague clergy, is called in historiography “The Second Continuers of Kozma” ^[73] .

In addition to the sequels, there were chronicles written in imitation of the “Chronicle” of Kozma of Prague. They used information from the writings of Kozma and his successors. One of these chronicles was the Zbraslav Chronicle "Written at the beginning of the 14th century. Her style largely repeats the style of the “Chronicle” of Kozma Prague. Also on the “Chronicle” of Kozma of Prague is based the rhymed “ Dalimilova Chronicle ” (brought up to 1310), created at the beginning of the 14th century — the first historical narrative that was written in Czech ^[3] . In the middle of the 15th century, the Chronicle of Frantisek of Prague was created (covers the period from the beginning of the reign of Vaclav I to 1316), the first chapters of which were based on The Second Continuers of Kozma. Also, the "Chronicle" of Kozma of Prague until 1125 was used in the "Chronicle" of Pribik Pulkava from Radenina covering events "from the beginning of the Czech land" until the reign of King Jan Blind . At the same time, Prishibik Pulkava corrected some of Kozma’s mistakes. The influence of Kozma of Prague is also felt in two other chronicles of the 14th century: the “Czech Chronicle” by the Florentine Giovanni Mariñola , who lived for some time at the court of Emperor Charles IV (brought up to 1283), and the “Chronicle” of Neplach , an abbot of the Benedictine monastery in Opatovice nad Laba ^[38] .

In the XV century, the popularity of the "Chronicle" of Kozma Prague decreased. This was largely due to the Hussite Wars - Kozma was a Catholic priest, and the information communicated to him was unacceptable to those who supported the transformation of the church. However, some chroniclers borrowed information from the Kozma Chronicle directly or through borrowings of the Pulkava Chronicle (an example is the Chronicle on the Founding of Czech Land and Its First Inhabitants by Martin Kuten from Sprinsberk ). Also, some information from the “Chronicle” of Kozma was borrowed by Vaclav Gajek from Libočany in his “Czech Chronicle”, but in his work there were many falsifications of history that were exposed in the 18th century. At the same time, some information was also revised from the Chronicle of Kozma of Prague ^[38] .

• Vysehrad Continuation of the Czech Chronicle of Kozma Prague
• Sazavskoy Continuation of the Czech Chronicle of Kozma Prague
• Continuation of the Czech Chronicle of Kozma of the Prague Prague canons