Vlastimir

Vlastimir (Serbian Cyrillic: Властимир, Greek: Βλαστίμηρος[a]; c. 805 – 851) was the Serbian prince from c. 830 until c. 851. Little is known of his reign. He held Serbia during the growing threat posed by the neighbouring, hitherto peaceful, First Bulgarian Empire, which had expanded significantly toward Serbia.

This article is about the Serbian prince. For the given name, see Vlastimir (name).
Vlastimir
archon (ἄρχων) [c]
Prince of Serbia
Reignc. 830 – 850 [b]
PredecessorProsigoj
SuccessorMutimir
Bornbefore 805
Diedc. 851
IssueMutimir, Strojimir, and Gojnik
DynastyVlastimirović
FatherProsigoj
ReligionSlavic pagan

At the time, the Bulgarian Empire and the Byzantine Empire were at peace by treaty, and although the Byzantine Emperor was overlord of the Serb lands, he was unable to aid the Serbs in a potential war. Presian I of Bulgaria eventually invaded Serbia, resulting in a three-year-war, in which the Bulgarian army was devastated and driven out. Vlastimir then turned to the west, expanding well into the hinterland of Dalmatia. He is the eponymous founder of the Vlastimirović dynasty, the first Serbian dynasty.

Background

Serbian realm and family history
Vlastimirović dynasty
further information: Serbia in the early Middle Ages
Slavic principalities in ca. 814 AD.

The prince (archon) that led the Serbs to the Balkans and received the protection of Heraclius (r. 610–641), known conventionally as the Unknown Archont, was an ancestor of Vlastimir.[1] The Serbs at that time were organized into župe, a confederation of village communities (roughly the equivalent of a county),[2] headed by a local župan (a magistrate or governor).[3] According to Fine, the governorship was hereditary, and the župan reported to the Serbian prince, whom they were obliged to aid in war.[4] Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (r. 913–959) mentions that the Serbian throne is inherited by the son, i.e., the first-born,[1] though on one occasion there is a triumvirate in his enumeration of monarchs.[5][6] The DAI's account about the Serbian ethnic settlement and establishment of several future principalities by the 10th century is considered as highly disputable: Serbia (roughly the later province of Rascia, including Bosnia; part of Zagorje - "hinterlands"); and Pagania, Zachlumia, Travunia (including Kanalitai) and Dioclea (part of Pomorje - "maritime").[7][8][9][10][11][12]

Višeslav, the great-grandfather of Vlastimir and first Serbian monarch known by name, was a contemporary with Charlemagne (fl. 768–814). He directly held the hereditary lands of Neretva, Tara, Piva and Lim.[13][14] Constantine VI conquered the Sclaviniae (slavdom - "slav area") of Macedonia, situated to the south, in 785.[15] Radoslav, then Prosigoj, succeeded Višeslav, and they ruled during the revolt of Ljudevit Posavski against the Franks (819–822). According to the Royal Frankish Annals, written in 822, Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisak to the Serbs, who controlled a great part of Dalmatia.[16][17]

Rise of Bulgarian power
further information: Bulgar territorial expansion under khans Krum and Omurtag
Bulgarian expansion by 814.

In the east, the Bulgarian Empire grew strong. In 805, khan Krum conquered the Braničevci, Timočani and Obotrites, to the east of Serbia, banished their tribal chiefs, and replaced them with administrators appointed by the central government.[18] In 815, the Bulgarians and Byzantines signed a 30-year peace treaty.[19] In 818 during the rule of Omurtag (814–831), the Braničevci and Timočani together with other tribes of the frontiers, revolted and seceded from Bulgaria because of an administrative reform that had deprived them much of their local authority.[20] The Timočani left the societas (association, alliance[21]) of the Bulgarian Empire, and sought, together with the Danubian Obotrites and Guduscani, protection from Holy Roman Emperor Louis the Pious (r. 813–840), and met him at his court at Herstal.[21] The Timočani migrated into Frankish territory, somewhere in Lower Pannonia, and were last mentioned in 819, when they were persuaded by Ljudevit to join him in fighting the Franks.[21] The Danubian Obotrites stayed in Banat, and resisted the Bulgarians until 824, when nothing more is heard of them.[22] The khan sent envoys to the Franks and requested that the precise boundary be demarcated between them, and negotiations lasted until 826, when the Franks neglected him.[22] The Bulgarians answered by attacking the Slavs that lived in Pannonia, and subjugated them, then sent ships up the Drava river, and, in 828, devastated Upper Pannonia, north of the Drava.[22] There was more fighting in 829 as well, and by this time, the Bulgarians had conquered all of their former Slavic allies.[22][23]

The Bulgarian state had a general policy of expansion in which they would first impose the payment of tribute on a neighboring people and the obligation of supplying military assistance in the form of an alliance (societas), leaving them internal self-government and local rulers, and when the need for this kind of relationship expired, they would terminate the self-government arrangement and impose direct and absolute power, integrating their neighbor fully into the Bulgarian political and cultural system.[24]

Life and reign

Vlastimir succeeded his father, Prosigoj, as the archon of Serbia.[1] According to Živković, the date of Vlastimir's accession was around 830.[19] He united the Serbian tribes in the vicinity.[6][25] The Serbs most likely consolidated due to alarm at the advance of Bulgaria towards their borders—a rapid conquest of neighbouring Slavs[26][27]—in self-defence,[26][28] and possibly sought to cut off the Bulgarian expansion to the south (Macedonia).[25] Emperor Theophilos (r. 829–842) was recognized as the nominal suzerain (overlord) of the Serbs,[26] and most likely encouraged them to thwart the Bulgarians.[25] The thirty-year-peace treaty between the Byzantines and Bulgarians, signed in 815, was still in effect.[19]

War with the Bulgarian Empire
Further information: Bulgar-Serb War (839–42)
Emperor Theophilos, who was the overlord of the Serbs, was prohibited to aid Vlastimir in a potential war with the Bulgarians as a peace treaty was in effect. Some historians maintain that he had an important part in the Bulgar-Serb war.

According to Constantine VII, the Serbs and Bulgaria had lived peacefully as neighbours until the invasion in 839 (in the last years of Theophilos).[26] It is not known what exactly prompted the war,[25] as Porphyrogenitus gives no clear answer; whether it was a result of Serbian-Bulgarian relations, i.e., the Bulgar conquest to the southeast, or a result of the Byzantine-Bulgarian rivalry, in which Serbia was an Imperial ally.[19] It was not unlikely that the Emperor had a part in it; as he was at war with the Arabs, he may have pushed the Serbs to drive the Bulgaria from western Macedonia, which would benefit them both.[26] According to J. Bury, this alliance would explain Malamir's action.[26] Zlatarski supposes that the Emperor offered the Serbs complete independence in return.[26][29]

According to Porphyrogenitus, the Bulgarians wanted to continue their conquest to the west and force the Serbs into subjugation. Presian I (r. 836–852) launched an invasion into Serbian territory in 839, which led to a war that lasted for three years, in which the Serbs were victorious; the defeated Presian lost a large number of his men, made no territorial gains, and was driven out by Vlastimir's army.[25][29][30] The Serbs held out in their easily defensible forests and gorges, and knew how to fight in the hills.[25][28] The war ended with the death of Theophilos in 842, which released Vlastimir from his obligations to the Empire.[31]

According to Živković, it is possible that the Bulgarian attack came after the failed invasion of Struma and Nestos in 846 (see next section): Presian may have collected his army and headed for Serbia, and Vlastimir may have participated in the Byzantine–Bulgarian Wars, which would mean that Presian responded to a direct Serbian involvement.[32]

The defeat of the Bulgarians, who had become one of the greater powers in the 9th century, shows that Serbia was an organized entity, fully capable of defending its borders, and possessing military and administrative organization. It is not known whether Serbia at the time of Vlastimir had a fortification system or developed military structures in which the župan had clearly defined roles.[33]

Expansion
Supposed political map of the Western Balkans, 9th century.

After the victory Vlastimir's status rose.[28] He went on to expand to the west, taking Bosnia, and Herzegovina (Hum).[31][34] Vlastimir married off his daughter to Krajina, the son of a local župan of Trebinje, Beloje, in ca. 847/848.[35] With this marriage, Vlastimir elevated Krajina's title to archon.[35] The Belojević family was entitled to the rule of Travunia. Krajina had a son with Vlastimir's daughter, named Hvalimir, who would later on succeed as župan of Travunia.[36]

Vlastimir's intent to connect to the ruling house of Travunia shows, in context, that his reputation among the neighbouring Serbian archontes and župani was on the rise, as well as the political importance and military strength of Serbia.[35] It is possible that, prior to Vlastimir's reign, the Travunian župan sought to free himself from Serbia's influence, but that Vlastimir found the solution in the political marriage of his daughter to Krajina.[37] The elevation of Krajina's title (which meant the practical independence of Travunia) strongly suggests that Vlastimir was a Christian ruler who understood very well the monarchal ideology that developed in the early Middle Ages.[37] There is a possibility that the marriage took place before the conflict with Bulgaria, which makes another theory likely: that Bulgaria reacted to Vlastimir's rising political position, particularly given that he had the right to confirm rulers in the neighbouring Serbian principalities with Byzantine sanction.[33] Although Vlastimir's elevations of titles were merely symbolic, rather than a reflection of administrative-political relations, it does show that he had the right to act this way, which undoubtedly puts him at the head of all Serbian archontes—viz., the leading ruler among the Serbian principalities.[33]

Soon after 846, with the end of the thirty-year-truce, Malamir (or Presian) invaded the regions of the Struma and the Nestos, and Empress-Regent Theodora (r. 842–855, the wife of Theophilos) answered by attacking Northern Thrace.[25] A brief peace was concluded, then Malamir proceeded to invade Macedonia.[25][26][29] Bulgaria also imposed rule on the Morava region, a frontier region with the Serbians; in 844, an anonymous Bavarian geographer mentions the Merehani as the people that bordered the Franks furthest away.[38] They lived in the valleys of the present-day Morava river basin, and were still unconquered by the Bulgarians.[38] However, after 845, Bulgaria added these Slavs to their societas; they are last mentioned in 853.[39]

The Byzantines were also active in the hinterland of Dalmatia, to the west of Serbia; the strategos of the cities of Dalmatia came into conflict with a Frankish vassal, Duke Trpimir I of Croatia, in 846/848, who defeated the strategos.[37]

Vlastimir was succeeded by his three sons about 851.

Family
Seal of prince Strojimir of Serbia, from the late 9th century

Vlastimir had three sons and one daughter:[40]

Aftermath

Vlastimir's three sons successfully fought off an onslaught by Boris I of Bulgaria in 853 or 854 (shortly after the death of Vlastimir[40]), when they captured 12 great boyars and the commander himself, Vladimir, the son of Boris. The Bulgarians had sought to avenge the previous defeat of Presian in 842.[41] The two sides made peace, and possibly an alliance.[6] The two younger brothers later revolted against Mutimir for undisclosed reasons. Mutimir sent them as prisoners, a guarantee of peace, to the court of Boris I at Pliska.[6][40] After Mutimir requested that Emperor Basil I (867–886) baptize his lands, Constantinopolitan priests were sent and a Serbian bishopric was founded. The Christianization is evident in the tradition of theophoric names found in the next generation of Serbian monarchs (e.g., Petar Gojniković, Pavle Branović).[42] The three branches of Vlastimir's sons continued a succession war over the decades.[6]

The Bulgars under Boris I were persuaded by Moravian Prince Rastislav to attack Louis the German of East Francia. The Bulgar-Slav campaign ended in disaster, and a peace was signed in 855. The following year, the Byzantine army, led by Michael III and caesar Bardas, recaptured Philippopolis (Plovdiv), the region of Zagora and the ports around the Gulf of Burgas on the Black Sea. In 863, the Byzantines invaded the Khanate once again, during a period of famine and natural disasters. Boris I was forced to sign a peace and to convert to Christianity, in return for which he was gifted Zagora. The cradle of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church was founded about 870 in Pliska.

On July 11, 2006, A golden seal of Strojimir, dated to 855-896, was acquired by the Republic of Serbia at auction in Munich, Germany, for 20,000 €, beating a Bulgarian bid of 15,000 €. The seller was an unknown Russian. The seal is of Byzantine handcraft (from Athens, Thessaloniki or Constantinople), weighs 15.64 g, and has a patriarchal cross and a Greek inscription that reads: "Strojimir" and "God, Help Serbia".[43]

A street in Novi Sad is named after Vlastimir (Ulica Kneza Vlastimira).

See also

Annotations
  1. ^
    Name: The first attestation of his name is the Greek Vlastimiros (Βλαστίμηρος).[1] In Latin, his name is spelled Blastemirus,[44] in Serbian Vlastimir, although some identify his name as a misprint of the name Vladimir.[41] His grandfather, and most distant ancestor known by name, was Višeslav, his father was Prosigoj, hence, according to naming culture, his name was Vlastimir Prosigojev(ić) Višeslavić. The root of his name, vlastiti, means "to rule".
  2. ^
    Reign: According to Živković, he began his rule in ca. 830, and as his sons succeeded him during the rule of Presian, he ended his rule in 851, at latest.[45] Živković puts the year of his death at 851, a year before the death of Presian, with whom he failed to reach peace.[5] According to Runciman, his reign ended between 845-850.[41]
  3. ^
    Title: Constantine VII refers to the monarchal title as archon (ἄρχων), of Serbia (Σερβία /Σερβλίας) in De Administrando Imperio,[46] and mentions "archon of the Serbs" (ἄρχων Σερβλίας) in his protocol of De Ceremoniis,[47] and the title is used interchangeably, as if to denote a ruler of a nation. Archon was usually used when describing a Prince.[48] Vlastimir's title in Serbian is knez,[6] which is used for early monarchs, though later referring to dukes. In some secondary sources, his title has been given as Grand Župan (or Grand Prince), signifying leadership over other, lesser, župans. In minor cases he has been called King.
  4. ^
    Religion: Although Porphyrogenitus says that Heraclius sent "priests of Rome" (during the Byzantine Papacy) to baptize the Serbs, he later says Basil I sent Constantinopolitan priests, and possibly a bishop, on the request of Mutimir, after the war with the Saracens in 869. At this time, the Eparchy of Ras and Braničevo were founded, alongside other Slavic bishoprics, confirmed by the Eighth Ecumenical Council (879-880).[49] The Slavic names of Vlastimir and his sons does not necessarily mean that Serbia was pagan, though the tradition of theophoric names in the next generation point to this. Most historians account Serbia as Christian as of 870.[42] According to Živković, he was most likely Christian.[37]

References
  1. Živković 2006, p. 11
  2. Fine 1991, p. 304
  3. Evans 2007, p. xxi
  4. Fine 1991, p. 225
  5. Živković 2006, p. 21
  6. Fine 1991, p. 141
  7. Fine 1991, pp. 53, 225
  8. Dvornik 1962a, p. 139, 142: C.’s general claim that the Zachlumians were Serbs is, therefore, inaccurate; and indeed his later statements that the Terbouniotes (34/4—5), and even the Narentans (36/5-7), were Serbs and came with the Serbs, seem to conflict with what he has said earlier (32/18-20) on the Serb migration, which reached the new Serbia from the direction of Belgrade. He probably saw that in his time all these tribes were in the Serb sphere of influence, and therefore called them Serbs, thus ante-dating by three centuries the state of affairs in his own day ... For C.’s statement that the Pagani are ‘descended from the unbaptized Serbs’ (36/5-6), see on 33/18-19. It is obvious that the small retinue of the Serbian prince could not have populated Serbia, Zachlumia, Terbounia and Narenta.
  9. Curta 2006, p. 210: According to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, the Slavs of the Dalmatian zhupanias of Pagania, Zahumlje, Travounia, and Konavli all "descended from the unbaptized Serbs."51 This has been rightly interpreted as an indication that in the mid-tenth century the coastal zhupanias were under the control of the Serbian zhupan Časlav, who ruled over the regions in the interior and extended his power westwards across the mountains to the coast.
  10. Živković 2006, pp. 60–61: Data on the family origin of Mihailo Višević indicate that his family did not belong to a Serbian or Croatian tribe, but to another Slavic tribe who lived along the Vistula River and who joined the Serbs during the migration during the reign of Emperor Heraclius. The introduction of Mihajlo Višević and his family by Porphyrogenitus suggests that the rulers of Zahumlje until his time belonged to this ruling family, so that, both in Serbia and Croatia, and in Zahumlje, there would be a very early established principle of inheriting power by members of one family. Constantine Porphyrogenitus explicitly calls the inhabitants of Zahumlje Serbs who have settled there since the time of Emperor Heraclius, but we cannot be certain that the Travunians, Zachlumians and Narentines in the migration period to the Balkans really were Serbs or Croats or Slavic tribes which in alliance with Serbs or Croats arrived in the Balkans. The emperor-writer says that all these principalities are inhabited by Serbs, but this is a view from his time, when the process of ethnogenesis had already reached such a stage that the Serbian name became widespread and generally accepted throughout the land due to Serbia's political domination. Therefore, it could be concluded that in the middle of the 10th century the process of ethnogenesis in Zahumlje, Travunija and Paganija was probably completed, because the emperor's informant collected data from his surroundings and transferred to Constantinople the tribal sense of belonging of the inhabitants of these archons ... The Byzantine writings on the De Ceremoniis, which were also written under the patronage of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, listed the imperial orders to the surrounding peoples. The writings cite orders from the archons of Croats, Serbs, Zahumljani, Kanalites, Travunians, Duklja and Moravia. The above-mentioned orders may have originated at the earliest during the reign of Emperor Theophilus (829 - 842) and represent the earliest evidence of the political fragmentation of the South Slavic principalities, that is, they confirm their very early formation. It is not known when Zahumlje was formed as a separate principality. All the news that Constantine Porphyrogenitus provides about this area agrees that it has always been so - that is, since the seventh-century settlement in the time of Emperor Heraclius. It is most probable that the prefects in the coastal principalities recognized the supreme authority of the Serbian ruler from the very beginning, but that they aspired to become independent, which took place according to the list of orders preserved in the book De Ceremoniis, no later than the first half of the 9th century. A falsified and highly controversial papal charter from 743 also mentions Zahumlje and Travunija as separate areas. If the basic information about these countries were correct, it would mean that they formed as very early principalities that were practically independent of the archon of Serbia.
  11. Živković, Tibor (2012b). "Неретљани – пример разматрања идентитета у раном средњем веку" [Arentani - an Example of Identity Examination in the Early Middle Ages]. Istorijski časopis. 61: 12–13. The geographical position of the Neretvans, ie Paganians, often imposed the opinion in science that they were Croats, which was especially used to deny their affiliation with the Serbian tribe - which is explicitly stated by Constantine Porphyrogenitus.7 In this case, there can be no question of the existence of any Serbian or Croatian identity outside the political framework of their principalities. In fact, the ethnic moment is completely subordinated to the political one, so the formation of the tribal states of the South Slavs is a consequence of political development, not some independent development of ethnic / tribal consciousness.8 In other words, when discussing the principality of Neretva, its territory, and the tribal affiliation of its inhabitants, one should first of all examine how the formation of these principalities as political beings came about.9
  12. Bilogrivić, Goran (2015). "Bosnia i Hum/Hercegovina" [Bosnia and Hum/Herzegovina]. In Zrinka Nikolić Jakus (ed.). Nova zraka u europskom svjetlu: Hrvatske zemlje u ranome srednjem vijeku (oko 550 − oko 1150) [Croatian lands in the Early Middle Ages (o. 550. – o. 1150.)] (in Croatian). Zagreb: Matica hrvatska. p. 486. ISBN 978-953-150-942-8. Porfirogenet piše kako stanovnici svih triju sklavinija vuku podrijetlo od Srba, no vjerojatnije je tumačenje toga navoda u smislu njihove podložnosti Srbiji, pod čiju su vlast potpali najvjerojatnije tijekom prve polovice 10. stoljeća, u vrijeme srpskoga kneza Petra ili pak Časlava. U prilog odvojenoj etničkoj pripadnosti govori i podatak prema kojemu bi Travunjani bili Srbi samo od vremena bizantskoga cara Heraklija do srpskoga kneza Vlastimira, kada su stekli određenu neovisnost pod županom Krajinom, kao i navođenje jasne i odvojene lokalne tradicije vladajućeg roda Zahumljana o podrijetlu njihovih predaka s područja Visle.
  13. Mijatovic 2007, p. 3
  14. Cuddon 1986, p. 454
  15. Carter 1977, p. 298
  16. Einhard, year 822
  17. Ćorović 2001, ch. 2, II
  18. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences 1966, p. 66
  19. Živković 2006, p. 13
  20. Slijepčević 1958, pp. 35, 41, 52
  21. Komatina 2010, p. 4
  22. Komatina 2010, p. 19
  23. Einhard, year 827
  24. Komatina 2010, p. 24
  25. Runciman 1930, ch. 2, n. 88
  26. Bury 1912, p. 372
  27. Fine 1991, pp. 109–110
  28. Ćorović 2001, ch. 2, III
  29. Zlatarski 1918, f. 17
  30. Fine 1991, pp. 108, 110
  31. Houtsma 1993, p. 199
  32. Živković 2006, pp. 14–15
  33. Živković 2006, p. 19
  34. Fine 1991, p. 110
  35. Živković 2006, p. 17
  36. DAI, p. 161
  37. Živković 2006, p. 18
  38. Komatina 2010, p. 21
  39. Komatina 2010, p. 22
  40. DAI, pp. 154—5
  41. Runciman 1930, p. 93; DAI, pp. 154
  42. Vlasto 1970, p. 208
  43. Glas Javnosti, 2006/07/27, Archive
  44. J. B. Colbert, Historia Byzantina, p. 271
  45. Živković 2006, pp. 12–13
  46. Stephenson 2000, p. 41
  47. Stephenson 2000, p. 47
  48. Fine 1991, p. 102
  49. Vlasto 1970, p. 209

Sources
Primary sources
Secondary sources
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.