Lithuania’s Millennium

Lithuania’s Millennium

Prof. Dr. Alfredas Bumblauskas

The Millennium of the name only?

Lithuania has finally approached the Millennium of its virst mention. The Quedlinburg Annals (a German written source of the 11th C) have the following passage dated 1009: “St. Bruno, an archbishop and monk, who was called Boniface, was struck in the head by Pagans during the 11th year of this conversion at the Rus and Lithuanian border, and Alon with 18 of his followers, entered heaven on March 9th.” The passage contains the first mention of the name of Lithuania.

The Quedlinburg Annals most likely made it to the history of Lithuania through Scriptores rerum Prusicarum sourcebook of the 19th C; Volume I of the said sourcebook featured only fragments of the Quedlinburg Annals, including the pasage on the said event of 1009. The brevity of the pasage determined that this fact has not been more thoroughly discussed in relation to the Lithuanian history; the more especially as all other sources (including historiography) discussing St. Bruno’s mission allocated it to Prussia. Thus, the mention of Lithuania was considered to be accidental. It seemed that Lithuania itself had nothing to do with it, and that 1009 was not the turning-point in the history of Lithuania. After all, the Quedlinburg Annals discussed neither the baptism of the ruler nor the state; it just mentioned a crime committed at the border. Apparently we could not believe that Lithuania and the name of Lithuania were so recently dated. Being taught by the patriarchs of the national rebirth of the 19th C. Simonas Daukantas and Jonas Basanavičius to identify the Aestii (Balts) with the Lithuanians, we hoped to trace them to some perished

“Baltic Atlantis”; therefore, the passage in the Quedlinburg Annals seemed to be fragmentary and accidental. Even though the historical culture considers the first mention of a phenomenon to be its birth (e.g. the first mention of Vilnius is considered to be the foundation of Vilnius), it was not attributed to the mention of Lithuania, kind of hoping to find other documents witnessing greater past of Lithuania.

However, until such documents are found, it was thought to be well worth giving prominence to the emergence of the name of Lithuania from the silence of sources. Knowing the fate of this name as well as numerous schemes to debete it from maps and from the memory, the modest formula - “the celebration of the Millennium of the first mention of Lithuania’s name” - seems rather significant. However, the achievements of the historical science allow us to state that such formula is too modest and clearly narrows the possible significance and importance of the phenomenon.

St. Bruno did actually discover Lithuania in 1009

The date of 1009 started a new era in 1983 when Prof. Edvardas Gudavičius supplemented the Lithuanian history with other sources describing the mission and the death of St. Bruno. The Quedlinburg Annals that mention Lithuania while describing the death of St Bruno are not the only source describing this event. There are several such sources; however, they all allocated St. Bruno’s mission of 1009 to Prussia.

However, following the example of Polish historian Janusz Bieniak, Edvardas Gudavičius concluded that the Quedlinburg Annals were the most accurate, while other versions were only direct or indirect interpretations of this version. After all, as late as in the 13th C., i.e. more than two centuries after the said events, even Poland, which is geographically so close to Lithuania, still called the Balts as Prussians and Mindaugas - as the King of Prussia who invaded Poland jointly with the Lithuanians (!). Having considered all that, an opportunity emerged to make use of relatively more comprehensive descriptions of St. Bruno’s mission and to turn 1009 into an actual fact of the Lithuanian history.

True, there are still doubts whether “king Netimer” found “at the Rus and Lithuanian border” can be associated with Lithuania. But then another question may arise: what other Baltic tribe should we talk about then? The line of thoughts of our archaeologists is simpler: in this expanse they only see the barrow culture taking its shape in the 5th-6th C.C. and covering a vast area, which they atribute to the Lithuanian tribe. This archaeological culture is directly associated with the land of Lithuania as seen in the sources of the 13th C., which became the nucleus of the emerging Lithuanian state.

Let us thus draw our first conclusion. Lithuania was mentioned that year not by any accident - Bruno of Querfurt (c. 970-1009), a son of a Saxonian duke and the first one to spread Christianity, arrived to Lithuania in 1009 and was beheaded here. One can say that Columbus discovered America, while St. Bruno discovered Lithuania. In this respect the Millennium of Lithuania is no less significant than the Millennium of Hungary celebrated in 1896 and marking the agreed date of the invasion of Pannonia by the Madjars, and maybe even more significant that the Millennium of Austria celebrated in 1996 and marking just a rather accidental mention of the name of Austria as the Emperor’s domain.

Baptism of Netimer, a “king” of Lithuania

The baptism of “king” Netimer was the most important event in comprehensive descriptions of St. Bruno’s Mission featured in writings of Wipert and Peter Damian. St. Bruno’s mission, thus, started far more successfully than the mission of Saint Adalbert of Prague in Prussia, which ended tragically in 997; Netimer seemed to understand the significance of Christianity and could even discuss on theological issues. Netimer and his tribesmen were converted and baptised; Netimer even considered leaving his throne to his son and joining St. Bruno’s mission. However, the successful mission of St. Bruno came to a tragic end: the estranged brother of Netimer beheaded the missionary and murdered almost all his entourage. Thus, the baptism of Netimer in 1009 was the first baptism in Lithuania. However, this baptism was not followed on.

Therefore, in this respect the baptism of Netimer can neither be compared to the baptism of Clovis I, the founder of the Frankish state, the 1500th anniversary of which was celebrated in 1996, nor to the baptism of king Mieszko I of Poland in 966. Nevertheless, the baptism of Netimer sroves that the year of 1009 is not only the name-day of Lithuania. It is the first accurate date of the Lithuanian history, and the first actual story in the history of Lithuania.

Lithuanian society in 1009

If we accept the traditional historical version that the events of 1009 took place in the Prussian or Yotvingian land, we could await for the analysis of sources describing St. Bruno’s mission and the description of the tribal sočiety of that time. However, it has not been done. Only recently an interest was taken in Netimer’s society. The first Mission arrived to Lithuania in 1009. St. Bruno headed for Lithuania most probably because the neighbours knew that Lithuania had a ruler called Netimer. By today’s standards, Netimer was neither a king nor a duke, as he only ruled one of the Lithuanian tribes. He had 300 soldiers, which was too little for a state, yet clearly too many for a tribe. Other things also indicate that it is no longer a tribe that Netimer rules: Netimer’s power can be inherited, he considers the tribal territory to be his patrimony (patria) - it is clearly defined and protected. This should indicate the start of the formation of the property right of the tribal chief to the land, i.e. the allodial title. This process actually starte only recently: one brother of Netimer separated and was living and ruling separately (thus, the family could divide the tribal territory), while another brother of Netimer was still living together. Netimer’s headquarters were called a palace, and he had his cult-figures. Apparently there was a pantheon of gods and a temple controlled by the tribal chief. Thus, Netimer should not be considered as the king of the state, as the Lithuanian state will be established only by Mindaugas in the middle of the 13th C., while the baptism will become the Christianisation only in 1387. Historians hold that even under the most favourable circumstances Netimer’s Lithuania would have become a state only after a hundred years approximately. On this ground the Millennium of Lithuania cannot be compared to the anniversaries of the great states or empires, such as the 200th Anniversary of the U.S. celebrated in 1973, the 800th Anniversary of the Mongol Empire celebrated in 2006, or the 1200th Anniversary of the Empire of Charlemagne celebrated in 2000, to name just a few. However, the year of 1009 could be compared to the events that took place at the turn of

the 10th-11th C.C., i.e. the start of the Christianisation of the Nordic countries: Olav’s campaign in Norway in 995, the baptism of Iceland in 1000 and events that took place in Sweden in 1008; also, to the coronation of St. Stephen, the King of Hungary. Finally, 1009 in Lithuania can be compared to the events of 966 that gave rise to the Millennium of Poland. All these events took place in the same époque, viz. at the end of the first Millennium of Christianity.

Also, let us remember: in 1009 Lithuania was on the road from being a tribal community to becoming a state (modern science calls such state as chiefdom). Thus, Lithuania was not only discovered, but it was emerging itself. Consequently, 2009 should be the celebration not only of the Millennium of Lithuania’s name but also of the Millennium of Lithuania.

Fate of 1009

Yaroslav the Wise, the ruler of Kievan Rus, invaded Lithuania in 1040 (or in 1044, or maybe there were two invasions), conquered the country and forced it to pay tribute. Thus, the fate of Lithuania was as if coded in the story of 1009: we rose and fell, and rose again. Two centuries have passed, and Lithuania was creating its state - the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - anew, which briefly became a kingdom in 1253 upon the coronation of its first ruler, Mindaugas. Even though it has backslidden from Christianity, it has been the only East Baltic nation to withstand the Crusades. After it adopted Christianity in 1387, Lithuania, ruled by Vytautas (1392-1430), finally terminated the aggression from the West in the battle of Tannenberg in 1410, and became a part of Central Eastern  Europe and Latin civilization of the West. It remained as such until 1795 when it was usurped by Russia. However, in the 20th C. Lithuania rose twice (in 1918 and 1990) to establish a modern state, viz. the Republic of Lithuania.

Idea of the Millennium and present times

The idea of the Millennium provides an excellent opportunity to ponder on these twists in the fate of Lithuania, to see the rišęs and falls, the glory and the disgrace, heroes and traitors, what was created and what was left behind. As it was mentioned before, the idea of the Millennium emerged in Christian Europe during the époque of St. Bruno Boniface, when the time came to rejoice about what was done and to ponder on what was not done, while waiting for Christ. Millennium was the threshold where one waited to be called for the Great Account. Later European history secularised this idea, yet the most important part of it remained: we ponder not only on the past but also on the present and the future. Lithuania has to do it because at the turn of the 20th-21st C.C., i.e. the époque of its Millennium, it restored its Independence, became part of Europe once again and joined the Euro-Atlantic community. New opportunities and new challenges - that is what the Millennium of Lithuania makes one think about. To think about how we shall live for the centuries to come.