A Royal Banquet in Cracow: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{data|29 March 2019}} | {{data|29 March 2019}} | ||
[[File:Restauracja Wierzynek.jpg|thumb|The sign at the entrance to the [http://wierzynek.pl/nasza-legenda/ Wierzynek restaurant] at Rynek Główny 16 (no. 16, Grand Square) in Cracow]] | [[File:Restauracja Wierzynek.jpg|thumb|The sign at the entrance to the [http://wierzynek.pl/nasza-legenda/ Wierzynek restaurant] at Rynek Główny 16 (no. 16, Grand Square) in Cracow]] | ||
Among many tourist attractions in my beautiful hometown of Cracow (or Kraków, if you will), the former seat of the kings of Poland, there are two venerable establishments which pride themselves on dating back to the reign of King Casimir the Great -- specifically, to the year 1364. One of them is Poland's oldest institution of higher learning, the one where Copernicus went to college. King Casimir obtained papal consent to open a university in Cracow in 1364 indeed. But it took him three more years to actually open the Academy of Cracow, and three years after that King Casimir died and the | Among many tourist attractions in my beautiful hometown of Cracow (or Kraków, if you will), the former seat of the kings of Poland, there are two venerable establishments which pride themselves on dating back to the reign of King Casimir the Great -- specifically, to the year 1364. One of them is Poland's oldest institution of higher learning, the one where Copernicus went to college. King Casimir obtained papal consent to open a university in Cracow in 1364 indeed. But it took him three more years to actually open the Academy of Cracow, and three years after that King Casimir died and the Academy closed for business. It was only in 1400 that King Vladislav Jagailo and Queen Hewdig founded a new university in Cracow, which is known to this day as Jagiellonian University (and not Casimirian University). "Founded in 1364" turns out to be somewhat of a stretch. | ||
Okay, but what does it have to do with culinary history? Nothing. That's why we're now going to focus on the other establishment, one which even has the year 1364 written into its logo. Here's what we can read about it in ''1,000 Places to See Before You Die'', a snobbish guidebook to the world's most overpriced hotels, restaurants and other tourist traps: | Okay, but what does it have to do with culinary history? Nothing. That's why we're now going to focus on the other establishment, one which even has the year 1364 written into its logo. Here's what we can read about it in ''1,000 Places to See Before You Die'', a snobbish guidebook to the world's most overpriced hotels, restaurants and other tourist traps: | ||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
[[File:Busta Alzbeta Pomoranska.jpg|thumb|170px|Empress Elizabeth's bust in Saint Vitus' Cathedral in Prague (ca. 1380)]] | |||
So much for Longinus. Unfortunately, historians realized long ago that much of this story is at odds with what you can read in other historical documents, especially in the Cracow cathedral chronicle, the ''Annals of the Holy Cross'' (although these contain errors too, which Longinus merely repeated) and ''The Capture of Alexandria'', an epic poem by Guillaume de Machaut (more about which later). Neither the date, nor the purpose, nor the guestlist of the event turned out to be exactly as the chronicler claimed they were. This is how these discrepancies were summed up at the end of the 19th century by prof. Stanisław Kutrzeba: | So much for Longinus. Unfortunately, historians realized long ago that much of this story is at odds with what you can read in other historical documents, especially in the Cracow cathedral chronicle, the ''Annals of the Holy Cross'' (although these contain errors too, which Longinus merely repeated) and ''The Capture of Alexandria'', an epic poem by Guillaume de Machaut (more about which later). Neither the date, nor the purpose, nor the guestlist of the event turned out to be exactly as the chronicler claimed they were. This is how these discrepancies were summed up at the end of the 19th century by prof. Stanisław Kutrzeba: | ||
{{Cytat | {{Cytat | ||
| Clear-headed historical criticism does not fully trust Longinus, who tends to combine | | Clear-headed historical criticism does not fully trust Longinus, who tends to combine distinct facts, seek relationships among them where there aren't any and embellish his account with more than just stylistic additions. No more did the beautiful story of a king's fight for his sister's honour and of his granddaughter's wedding survive the scalpel of critique. Doubts, minor at first, eventually dismantled almost entirely the structure which Longinus had skillfully pieced together. | ||
| źródło = S. Kutrzeba, ''Krakowski zjazd monarchów, czyli uczta u Wierzynka,'', p. 53, own translation | | źródło = S. Kutrzeba, ''Krakowski zjazd monarchów, czyli uczta u Wierzynka,'', p. 53, own translation | ||
| oryg = Trzeźwa krytyka historyczna nie bardzo wierzy Długoszowi, który nieraz wiąże ze sobą fakty odrębne, szuka między nimi związku, choć go nie było, wreszcie upiększa i ozdabia opowiadanie nie tylko stylistycznymi dodatkami. Tak i ten piękny obraz walki o sławę siostry i zaślubin wnuki królewskiej nie ostał się przed skalpelem krytyki. Drobne początkowo wątpliwości doprowadziły do tego, iż prawie na szczątki rozbito gmach sklejony sztucznie przez Długosza.}} | | oryg = Trzeźwa krytyka historyczna nie bardzo wierzy Długoszowi, który nieraz wiąże ze sobą fakty odrębne, szuka między nimi związku, choć go nie było, wreszcie upiększa i ozdabia opowiadanie nie tylko stylistycznymi dodatkami. Tak i ten piękny obraz walki o sławę siostry i zaślubin wnuki królewskiej nie ostał się przed skalpelem krytyki. Drobne początkowo wątpliwości doprowadziły do tego, iż prawie na szczątki rozbito gmach sklejony sztucznie przez Długosza.}} | ||
As it happens, the great Cracovian chronicler, writing a century after the actual events, combined at least three separate mettings of Central European monarchs which took place in Cracow in the years 1363–1364 into one big congress. First there was the imperial wedding in May 1363. Louis wasn't there as he hadn't yet reconciled with the emperor, nor had the kings of Denmark and Cyprus any reason to attend. The bride and groom's families were certainly there, so we can presume the presence of some people not mentioned in the sources, such as the emperor's brother John Henry, Margrave of Moravia, or Casimir of Stolp, the bride's brother and King Casimir's favourite grandson. | |||
As it happens, the great Cracovian chronicler, writing a century after the actual events, combined at least three separate mettings of Central European monarchs which took place in Cracow in the years 1363–1364 into one big congress. First there was the imperial wedding in May 1363. Louis wasn't there as he hadn't yet reconciled with the emperor, nor had the kings of Denmark and Cyprus any reason to attend. The bride and groom's families were certainly there, so we can presume the presence of some people not mentioned in the sources, such as the emperor's brother John Henry, Margrave of Moravia, or Casimir of Stolp, King Casimir's favourite grandson. | |||
In December of the same year Bolko the Small arrived in Cracow, so that he and King Casimir could finally adjudicate on the dispute between Charles and Louis. It's possible that King Valdemar IV of Denmark (not Sigismund, as Longinus writes) was in town at the same time on unrelated business. | In December of the same year Bolko the Small arrived in Cracow, so that he and King Casimir could finally adjudicate on the dispute between Charles and Louis. It's possible that King Valdemar IV of Denmark (not Sigismund, as Longinus writes) was in town at the same time on unrelated business. | ||
Finally, in September 1364, Emperor Charles and King Louis convened in Cracow to reconcile and swear friendship to each other, as mandated by Casimir and Bolko's arbitration. This was a purely political gathering, not a family event, so most likely without women. Other participants may have included | Finally, in September 1364, Emperor Charles and King Louis convened in Cracow to reconcile and swear friendship to each other, as mandated by Casimir and Bolko's arbitration. This was a purely political gathering, not a family event, so most likely without women. Other participants may have included dukes of Austria, as parties to the dispute, other aforementioned dukes and -- quite coincidentally -- King Peter of Cyprus. | ||
[[File:Nuremberg chronicles - CRACOVIA.png|thumb|left|400px|A panorama (from the 1493 Nuremberg Chronicle) of the Wawel castle, the city of Cracow and its suburbs, including the town of Kazimierz, founded and named after King Casimir the Great]] | |||
Let's take a closer look at this somewhat exotic ruler. The Kingdom of Cyprus was established after crusaders led by King Richard the Lionheart had conquered the Christian, but strategically located, island. From then on, it was ruled by Catholic kings of the French house of Lusignan. Most of the time they were warring against the equally Catholic city of Genoa, but for PR reasons they promoted the need to fight the Arabs and the Turks. And so, in 1362, King Peter set out on a tour of Europe to gather volunteers and money for a new crusade against the infidels. He travelled through Italy, France, what is now Belgium, England and Germany. He collected quite a sum of money, but the he was robbed and had to start from scratch. Eventually he got to Prague, where the emperor proposed to take him to a big get-together of monarchs in Cracow, where he was just getting ready to go and where Peter could propagandize his idea for a crusade. | |||
Years later Guillaume de Machaut would sing of King Peter's peregrination, as well as the actual crusade against Egypt, in ''The Capture of Alexandria''. According to de Machaut's account, Charles and Peter leaved Prague on horseback, entering Silesia (a region between Bohemia and Poland) after three days, then passed a number of Silesian and Polish towns (some of which couldn't possibly be on their itinerary, so it looks like the poet just listed the place names he happened to know) and finally reaching Cracow, where they were greeted by other monarchs with much rejoicing. During the congress, the monarchs politely lent their ears to Peter's pleas and then supported his crusading efforts by letting him win the main prize in a tournament. | |||
== The Bourgeois Nobleman == | |||
[[File:Mikołaj Wierzynek młodszy.jpg|thumb|upright|Mikołaj Wierzynek Junior according to an anonymous lithographer (1831)]] | |||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
As for Wierzynek, Longinus gives only his surname. A merchant family of this name, one of the city's most affluent and influential, used to live in Cracow for centuries. | |||
Co do samego Wierzynka, to Długosz niestety nie podaje jego imienia, a tylko nazwisko. W istocie żyła przez wieki w Krakowie taka rodzina kupiecka, jedna z zamożniejszych i bardziej wpływowych w mieście. Jej protoplastą był Mikołaj Wierzynek, który na początku XIV w. przyimigrował do Krakowa z Nadrenii. No i oczywiście nie nazywał się Mikołaj Wierzynek, tylko Nikolaus Wirsing; dopiero z czasem jego potomkowie spolszczyli to nazwisko. W Krakowie był radnym, później służył jako wójt Wieliczki, a wreszcie został mianowany stolnikiem sandomierskim – co nie znaczy, że nakrywał do królewskiego stołu, kiedy król bawił w Sandomierzu. Ten urząd był już wtedy czysto tytularny, a co więcej, zarezerwowany dla szlachty. W jaki sposób kupiec z Nadrenii stał się polskim szlachcicem? Tego nie wiadomo, ale możliwości były w zasadzie trzy: nadanie szlachectwa, indygenat (czyli uznanie szlachectwa cudzoziemskiego) oraz oszustwo. W każdym razie był to człowiek majętny, wysoko postawiony i cieszący się sporym zaufaniem ze strony króla – a więc idealny kandydat na organizatora wielkiej uczty, która miała olśnić cesarza i innych monarchów europejskich, rozsławiając tym samym królestwo Kazimierza Wielkiego, które właśnie debiutowało jako poważny gracz na arenie międzynarodowej. | Co do samego Wierzynka, to Długosz niestety nie podaje jego imienia, a tylko nazwisko. W istocie żyła przez wieki w Krakowie taka rodzina kupiecka, jedna z zamożniejszych i bardziej wpływowych w mieście. Jej protoplastą był Mikołaj Wierzynek, który na początku XIV w. przyimigrował do Krakowa z Nadrenii. No i oczywiście nie nazywał się Mikołaj Wierzynek, tylko Nikolaus Wirsing; dopiero z czasem jego potomkowie spolszczyli to nazwisko. W Krakowie był radnym, później służył jako wójt Wieliczki, a wreszcie został mianowany stolnikiem sandomierskim – co nie znaczy, że nakrywał do królewskiego stołu, kiedy król bawił w Sandomierzu. Ten urząd był już wtedy czysto tytularny, a co więcej, zarezerwowany dla szlachty. W jaki sposób kupiec z Nadrenii stał się polskim szlachcicem? Tego nie wiadomo, ale możliwości były w zasadzie trzy: nadanie szlachectwa, indygenat (czyli uznanie szlachectwa cudzoziemskiego) oraz oszustwo. W każdym razie był to człowiek majętny, wysoko postawiony i cieszący się sporym zaufaniem ze strony króla – a więc idealny kandydat na organizatora wielkiej uczty, która miała olśnić cesarza i innych monarchów europejskich, rozsławiając tym samym królestwo Kazimierza Wielkiego, które właśnie debiutowało jako poważny gracz na arenie międzynarodowej. | ||