texts:
<mask> (died 2 February 619) was the second Archbishop of Canterbury, serving from about 604 to 619. He was a member of the Gregorian mission sent from Italy to England to Christianise the Anglo-Saxons from their native Anglo-Saxon paganism, although the date of his arrival is disputed. He was consecrated archbishop by his predecessor, Augustine of Canterbury, during Augustine's lifetime, to ensure continuity in the office. While archbishop, he attempted unsuccessfully to resolve differences with the native British bishops by corresponding with them about points of dispute. <mask> faced a crisis following the death of King Æthelberht of Kent, when the king's successor abandoned Christianity; he eventually reconverted. <mask> was revered as a saint after his death in 619. Early life
<mask> was part of the Gregorian mission originally dispatched from Rome in 595 to convert the Anglo-Saxons from their native paganism to Christianity; he landed at Thanet, Kent, with Augustine in 597, or, as some sources state, first arrived in 601 and was not a part of the first group of missionaries.He had been a monk in Rome before his travels to England, but nothing else is known of his history or background. The medieval chronicler Bede says that  Augustine sent <mask> back to Pope Gregory I to report on the success of converting King Æthelberht of Kent and to carry a letter with questions for the pope. Accompanied by Peter of Canterbury, another missionary, he set off some time after July 598, and had returned by June 601. He brought back with him Gregory's replies to Augustine's questions, a document commonly known as the Libellus responsionum, that Bede incorporated in his Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum. <mask> is probably the <mask> referred to in the letter from Gregory to Bertha, queen of Kent. In that letter, Gregory praises Bertha for her part in the conversion of her husband, details of which Gregory says he received from <mask> the priest. It is known that <mask> returned to England with Mellitus and others of the second group of missionaries  in the summer of 601, but there is no record of Peter being with them.Archbishop

<mask> succeeded Augustine to the see of Canterbury in about 604, and ruled until his death on 2 February 619. To secure the succession, Augustine had consecrated <mask> before he died, even though that was prohibited by canon law. Augustine was afraid though that if someone did not step into the office immediately, it would damage the missionary efforts in Britain. However, <mask> never received a pallium from Rome, so he may have been considered uncanonical by the papacy. Bede makes a point of comparing Augustine's action in consecrating <mask> to Saint Peter's action of consecrating Clement as Bishop of Rome during Peter's lifetime, which the theologian J. Robert Wright believes may be Bede's way of criticising the practices of the church in his day. In 610 <mask> received letters from Pope Boniface IV, addressed to him as archbishop and Augustine's successor. The correspondence was in response to <mask> having sent Mellitus to Rome earlier in 610, to solicit advice from the papacy on matters concerning the English Church.While in Rome Mellitus attended a synod, and brought the synodical decrees back with him to <mask>. In 613 <mask> consecrated the monastery church built by Augustine in Canterbury, and dedicated it to saints Peter and Paul; it was later re-consecrated as St Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury. <mask> also wrote to the bishops in the lands held by the Scots and by the Britons, urging them to hold Easter on the day that the Roman church celebrated it, instead of their traditional date, as part of the Easter controversy. The letter is also preserved in Bede's history. <mask> in 609 stated that Dagan, a native bishop, would not eat with <mask> or share a roof with the archbishop, due to the differences between the two Churches. Pagan reaction

Æthelberht died in 616, during <mask>'s tenure; his son Eadbald abandoned Christianity in favour of Anglo-Saxon paganism, forcing  many of the Gregorian missionaries to flee the pagan backlash that followed Æthelberht's death. Among them in Gaul were Mellitus, who was Bishop of London, and Justus, who was Bishop of Rochester.Remaining in Britain, <mask> succeeded in reconverting Eadbald to Christianity. Bede relates the story that <mask> had been prepared to give up when he was visited by St Peter in a dream or vision. St Peter chastised <mask> and whipped him, and the marks of the whipping remained after the vision or dream ended. <mask> then displayed them to Eadbald, and the king was converted on the spot. Bede, however, hints that it was the death of some of the leaders of the pagan party in battle that really persuaded <mask> to stay. According to Benedicta Ward, a historian of Christianity, Bede uses the story of the whipping as an example of how suffering was a reminder of Christ's suffering for humans, and how that example could lead to conversion. Wright argues that another point Bede is making is that it is because of the intercession of St Peter  himself that the mission continued.David Farmer, in the Oxford Dictionary of Saints, suggests that the whipping story may have been a blending of the Quo Vadis story with some information given by Jerome in a letter. Modern historians have seen political overtones in the pagan reaction. The historian D. P. Kirby sees Eadbald's actions as a repudiation of his father's pro-Frankish policies. Alcuin, a later medieval writer, wrote that <mask> was "censured by apostolic authority". This may have been a letter from Pope Adeodatus I, commanding <mask> to stay in Kent. Kirby goes on to argue that it was Justus, not <mask>, who converted Eadbald, and this while Justus was archbishop, sometime around 624. Not all historians agree with this argument, however.Nicholas Brooks states that the king was converted during <mask>'s archiepiscopate, within a year of him succeeding his father. The historian Barbara Yorke argues that there were two co-rulers of Kent after Æthelberht's death, Eadbald and a Æthelwald, and that Eadbald was converted by <mask> while Æthelwald was converted by Justus after his return to Rochester. Another factor in the pagan reaction was <mask>'s objection to Eadbald's marriage to his father's widow, something that Christians considered to be unlawful. All efforts to extend the church beyond Kent encountered difficulties due to the attitude of King Rædwald of East Anglia, who had become the leading king in the south after Æthelberht's death. Rædwald was converted before the death of Æthelberht, perhaps at the urging of Æthelberht, but his kingdom was not, and Rædwald seems to have converted only to the extent of placing a Christian altar in his pagan temple. It proved impossible for Mellitus to return to London as bishop, although Justus did resume his duties at Rochester. Death and legacy

<mask> died on 2 February 619, and was buried in the abbey of St Peter and Paul in Canterbury, later renamed St Augustine's; his relics, or remains, were moved, or translated, to the new church of St Augustine's in 1091.His shrine was in the axial chapel of the abbey church, flanking the shrine of Augustine, his predecessor. <mask> came to be regarded as a saint, and was given the feast day of 3 February. The ninth century Stowe Missal commemorates his feast day, along with Mellitus and Justus. A Vita (or Life) was written about the time of his translation, by Goscelin, but it is mainly based on information in Bede. His tomb was opened in 1915. Besides his feast day, the date of his translation, 13 September, was also celebrated after his death. <mask>'s tenure as archbishop is mainly remembered for his failure to secure a settlement with the Celtic church, and for his reconversion of Eadbald following Æthelbert's death.He was succeeded as archbishop by Mellitus, the Bishop of London. See also
 List of members of the Gregorian mission

Notes

Citations

References

Further reading

External links
  – listing of most contemporary and close to contemporary mentions of <mask> in the primary sources. Includes some spurious charter listings. , who travelled back to Rome, and is probably the same person

Archbishops of Canterbury
Gregorian mission
Kentish saints
619 deaths
7th-century archbishops
7th-century Christian saints
Year of birth unknown
7th-century English clergy

masks: Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence Laurence


type: original

texts:
<mask> (24 July 1930 in Antwerp – 12 February 1999 in Geneva) was a (in 1985 naturalised) Swiss economic historian of Belgian descent who specialized in urban history and historical demography. He published or co-authored more than two dozen books and 120 scholarly articles. His most important works emphasize the agricultural preconditions necessary for industrialization and controversially claim, contrary to most scholars that colonization was not beneficial to colonial empires. He argued that tariffs and growth were positively correlated in the 19th
century. Academic career

<mask> gained a bachelor's degree by correspondence, intending to become an engineer but he turned to studying economic history in 1956 at the parisian Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes. He obtained his doctorate in 1963 at the Free University of Brussels where he worked from 1965 to 1995. He was economic adviser to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) at Geneva from 1967 to 1969, professor at the Sir George Williams University (Concordia) in Montréal from 1969 to 1971 and on recommendation of Fernand Braudel became director of studies at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes from 1971 to 1972.In 1972 he was made professor of history at the University of Geneva. He retired in 1995. He was also visiting professor at Harvard and at the Collège de France (1983) and Doctor honoris causa at the ETH Zurich. From 1985, <mask> directed a number of research projects on the world economy at a Centre for International Economic History in Geneva. Research

<mask> sought through quantitative, empirical research of historical trends to question and challenge many beliefs which are nowadays generally accepted in economics (see in particular his work Economics and World History: Myths and Paradoxes), among which: the idea that free trade historically led to periods of economic growth; that moving away from free trade caused the Great Depression; and that colonial powers in the 19th and early 20th centuries became rich by exploiting the Third World. Bairoch argued that such beliefs are based on insufficient knowledge and misguided interpretations of the economic history of the United States, Europe and the Third World. He researched extensively the reasons why an industrial takeoff was prevented in the colonised countries of the Third World (see e.g.his book Révolution industrielle et sous-développement). He is particularly known for his detailed empirical research on economic problems of Third World countries, on the industrial revolution and its aftermath and on urban history. His historical estimates of Gross Product measures are still being referred to in the literature, although some are also challenged by other economic historians such as Angus Maddison. Bairoch argues that free trade contributed to deindustrialization in the Ottoman Empire. In contrast to the protectionism of China, Japan, and Spain, the Ottoman Empire had a liberal trade policy, open to foreign imports. This has origins in capitulations of the Ottoman Empire, dating back to the first commercial treaties signed with France in 1536 and taken further with capitulations in 1673 and 1740, which lowered duties to 3% for imports and exports. The liberal Ottoman policies were praised by British economists such as J. R. McCulloch in his Dictionary of Commerce (1834), but later criticized by British politicians such as Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, who cited the Ottoman Empire as "an instance of the injury done by unrestrained competition" in the 1846 Corn Laws debate:

Quotes

<mask> referred here to colonialism and to the exploitation of the third world in the 19th and early 20th century.He argued that this exploitation was not indispensable for industrialisation. This he thought is "good news" for the third world because it means that development could occur without exploitation of other regions. Books and monographs

Le mythe de la croissance économique rapide au XIXe siècle. 1962
Le processus et l'amorce de la croissance économique. [1963]
La formation des prix des fruits, légumes et produits laitiers (with Georges Thorn). Bruxelles: Université libre de Bruxelles, Institut de sociologie, 1964
La baisse des coûts des transports et le développement économique. 1965
Niveaux de développement économique de 1810 áa 1910.1965
L'économie belge et internationale (with T. Deldycke and others). Institut de sociologie, Université libre de Bruxelles, 1965.Originalités et conséquences de la révolution industrielle. 1966Le rôle de l'agriculture dans la création de la sidérurgie moderne. 1966Evolution de la population active dans le monde par branches et par régions, 1880–1960. 1968La population active et sa structure. Sous la direction de P. Bairoch par T. Deldycke, H. Gelders [et] J.-M. Limbor avec la participation de G. Lefevere, G. Thorn [et] G. Vandenabeele. [1968]Diagnostic de l'évolution économique du Tiers-monde, 1900–1968.4th edition. Paris : Gauthier-Villars, 1970De tertiaire sector; studie over de invloed der ontwikkeling op de vermindering van de omvang der economische fluctuaties (with others) Bruxelles : Institut de sociologie de l'Université libre, [1970]Le Tiers monde en l'an 2000 (with Pierre Masse). Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1971.Trend in 1960–1967 and short term prospects of the Third World economy. Dakar : United Nations, African Institute for Economic Development and Planning, 1971.Le Tiers-Monde dans l'impasse. Le démarrage économique du XVIIIe au XXe siècle. Gallimard, 1971.Le chômage urbain dans les pays en voie de développement : présentation générale du problème et éléments d'une solution. Genève : Bureau International du Travail, 1972.Révolution industrielle et sous-développement.Fourth edition, Paris: Mouton, 1974.The economic development of the Third World since 1900. 1975Urban Unemployment in Developing Countries: The Nature of the Problem and Proposals for Its Solutions International Labour Office; 2nd edition, June 1976Commerce extérieur et développement économique de l'Europe au XIX siècle. Paris : Mouton, 1976.Taille des villes, conditions de vie et développement économique. Paris : Éd. de l'École des hautes études en sociales, 1977.Disparities in Economic Development Since the Industrial Revolution (<mask> and Maurice Lévy-Leboyer, eds.) Palgrave: Macmillan, 1981. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1981.Structure par produits des exportations du Tiers-monde 1830–1937 (with Bouda Etemad) Genève : Droz, 1985.Les passages des économies traditionnelles européennes aux sociétés industrielles: quatrième rencontre franco-suisse d'histoire économique et sociale.(ed.by <mask> and Anne-Marie Piuz). Genève: Droz, 1985.Histoire économique De Jéricho à Mexico. Villes et économie dans l’histoire. Gallimard, 1985La population des villes européennes : 800–1850 : banque de données et analyse sommaire des résultats (with Jean Batou and Pierre Chèvre) Genève : Droz, 1988.Cities and Economic Development: From the Dawn of History to the Present. Translated by Christopher Braider. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988La Suisse dans l'économie mondiale (with Martin Körner). Genève: Droz, 1990.World energy production, 1800–1985 = Production mondiale d'énergie" (with Etemad Bouda & Jean Luciani ; under the direction of <mask> & Jean-Claude Toutain) Genève : Librairie Droz, 1991
Liber amicorum : Henri Vander Eycken (with Henri Vander Eycken).Brussels : VUBPress, 1991. Economics and World History: Myths and Paradoxes. University of Chicago Press, 1993
Autour de l'histoire sociale du temps. Zurich : Chronos Verlag, 1997. Victoires et déboires : histoire économique et sociale du monde du XVIe siècle à nos jours (3 Vols). Gallimard, 1997. L'agriculture des pays développés, 1800 à nos jours : production, productivité, rendements.Paris : Economica, c1999

Selected articles
<mask> and J.-M. Limbor, "Changes in the Industrial Distribution of the World Labour Force, by Region, 1880–1960," International Labour Review, 98 (1968), pp. 311–336;
"Population urbaine et taille des villes en Europe de 1600 à 1970," Revue d'histoire économique et sociale, Vol. 54, pp. 304–335
"Structure de la population active mondiale de 1700 à 1970," Annales E.S.C., 26 (1971), pp. 960–976. "Free Trade and European Economic Development in the Nineteenth Century’. IN: European Economic Review, 3, 1972."Agriculture and the industrial revolution 1700–1914", in: Carlo Cipolla (ed. ), The Industrial Revolution – Fontana Economic History of Europe, Vol. 3. London: Collins/Fontana, 1973
"Commerce international et genese de la revolution industrielle anglaise." In: Annales, 28, pp. 541–571, 1973
"European Foreign Trade in the XIX Century: The Development of the Value and Volume of Exports (Preliminary Results)", in: Journal of European Economic History, Vol. 2, no.1, 1973
"Geographical Structure and Trade Balance of European Foreign Trade from 1800 to 1970" in:  Journal of European Economic History, Vol. 3, no. 3, 1974
"European Gross National Product 1800–1975", in: Journal of European Economic History, 5, 1976. "Reply to Mr. Gunder Frank's Commentary", in: Journal of European Economic History, Vol. 5,  n. 2, 1976
"Le volume des productions et du produit national dans le Tiers monde, 1900–1977". In: Tiers-monde, 20(80) oct./dec. 1979 : 669–691
"Nature de la technologie et problematique du demarrage economique".Chronique sociale de France, cahier 6, décembre 1969, 77e année, p. 15–26
"International industrialization levels from 1750 to 1980", in: Journal of European Economic History, Vol. 11, no's 1 & 2, Fall 1982. "Employment and Large Cities: Problems and Outlook". International Labour Review, v121 n5 p519-33 Sep–Oct 1982
"Libre-echange et protectionnisme, idées reçues et réalités : les enseignements de l'histoire". In: Economie et humanisme, no 277, mai-juin 1984, p. 8–18
"Les mesures de conversion des énergies primaires. Historique des unités et présentation des coefficients", Histoire & Mesure, Vol. I – N° 3/4, 1986."Factors of urbanisation in the nineteenth century developed countries : a descriptive and econometric analysis" (with Gary Goertz)  Urban studies, Vol. 23, no. 4, Aug. 1986. "Historical Roots of Economic Underdevelopment: Myths and Realities". in: W.J. Mommsen & J. Osterhammel(ed.).Imperialism and After. Continuities and Discontinuities. Londres: Allen & Unwin, 1986. "Urbanization and the Economy in Preindustrial Societies: the Findings of Two Decades of Research", in: Journal of European Economic History vol. 18, no. 2 1989
"La Literature Periodique d'histoire economique contemporaine" (with Bouda Etemad), in: Annales E.S.C., 47, 1987
"The Impact of Crop Yields, Agricultural Productivity, and Transport Costs on Urban Growth between 1800 and 1910". In: A M van der Woude, Akira Hayami, Jan De Vries (eds.)Urbanization in history : a process of dynamic interactions. New York : Oxford University Press, 1990. "L'industrie manufacturière suisse : succès et déboires : une perspective internationale et historique (1830–1990)". In: Passé pluriel : en hommage au professeur Roland Ruffieux. Fribourg : Ed. universitaires, 1991. "The City and Technological Innovation" in Favorites of Fortune; Technology, Growth, and Economic Development since the Industrial Revolution.Edited by Patrice Higonnet, David S. Landes and Henry Rosovsky. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1991
"La Belgique dans le commerce international, 1830–1990", in: <mask> & Eddy van Cauweberge (eds. ), Entrepreneurship and the Transformation of the Economy (10th–20th Centuries). Essays in Honour of Herman van der Wee, Leuven 1994. "Globalisation myths: some historical reflections on integration, industrialisation and growth in the world economy" (with Richard Kozul-Wright). UNCTAD discussion paper UNCTAD/OSG/DP/113 March 1996
"Globalization, myths and realities: One century of external trade and foreign investment", in R. Boyer and D. Drache, (eds), States Against Markets: The Limits of Globalisation.London: Routledge, 1996. "Les exportations d’articles manufacturés de la Suisse dans le contexte international (1840–1994)". In: Martin Körner und François Walter (ed. ),  Quand la Montagneaussi a une Histoire. Festschrift für J.-F. Bergier. Bern: Verlag Paul Haupt: Bern, 1996, pp. 205–234
"New Estimates of Agricultural Productivity and Yields of Developed Countries, 1800–1990," in Amit Bhaduri and Rune Skarstein, eds., Economic Development and Agricultural Productivity, Cheltenham, U.K., Edward Elgar, 1997, pp.45–64. "The impact of globalization on employment in Europe" in: Trade and jobs in Europe : much ado about nothing?, edited by Mathias Dewatripont, André Sapir, and Khalid Sekkat. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. "The Constituent Economic Principles of Globalization in Historical Perspective." International Sociology, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp.197–214, 2000

About <mask>

Towards an international economic and social history : essays in honour of <mask>. Genève : Ed. Passé Présent, 1995. Bouda Etemad and Jean Batou, "<mask> (1930–1999)" in Revue d'histoire suisse, vol. 49, n° 3, 1999, pp. 391–394. Patrick Verley, "In Memoriam: <mask> (1930–1999)", Revue économique, Vol.51, No. 2. A. M. Piuz, "<mask>", Journal of European Economic History, vol 29, no. 1, 2000

See also
Angus Maddison
James Morris Blaut
Andre Gunder Frank

References

External links
<mask>ch Library

Economic historians
1930 births
1999 deaths
École pratique des hautes études alumni
Université libre de Bruxelles alumni
Harvard University staff
20th-century Swiss historians

masks:
Paul Bairoch
Bairoch
Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Klep
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairoch
Paul Bairo


texts:
was the 113th emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession. <mask>'s reign spanned the years from 1687 through to his abdication in 1709 corresponding to the Genroku era. The previous hundred years of peace and seclusion in Japan had created relative economic stability. The arts and theater and architecture flourished. Events of <mask>'s life

Early life
Before <mask>'s ascension to the Chrysanthemum Throne, his personal name (imina) was  or Tomohito. Tomohito was born on October 21, 1675 and was the fifth son of Emperor Reigen; his birth mother was a lady-in-waiting named Matsuki Muneko. While Prince Tomohito was the son of a secondary consort, he was adopted by empress Takatsukasa Fusako (chief consort or Chūgū).Tomohito's Imperial family lived with him in the Dairi of the Heian Palace. Events that took place before Tomohito became Crown Prince include a great flood that devastated Edo, a great famine that devastated Kyoto, and the Great Tenna Fire in Edo. The Shingon Buddhist temple Gokoku-ji was also founded in Edo where it remains today as one of the few sites in Tokyo that survived World War II. Tomohito-shinnō was proclaimed Crown prince in 1682, and given the pre-accession title of Go-no-miya (五宮). For the first time in over 300 years a ceremonial investiture was held for the occasion. A fire burned the Kyoto Imperial Palace to ashes in 1684 prompting reconstruction that took a year to complete. The effects from this fire on the Imperial family, if any, are unknown.Emperor Reigen's brother, former-Emperor Go-Sai, died on March 26, 1685 and a great comet was observed crossing the night sky. Reign
Prince Tomohito acceded to the throne on May 2, 1687 as Emperor when his father abdicated in his favor, the era's name was changed from Jōkyō to Genroku to mark this event. While he held the political title of Emperor, it was in name only as the shoguns of the Tokugawa family controlled Japan. Initially, Emperor Reigen continued to rule in Higashiyama's name as a Cloistered Emperor as had been done in the Heian period. While this move caused trouble by provoking the ruling shogunate, <mask>'s gentle character helped to improve relations with the Shōgun. This warmed relationship caused imperial property to be increased, and repairs carried out on Imperial mausoleums. Reigen meanwhile lived out his retirement in the Sentō-gosho (the palace for an ex-Emperor), and is now known for being the last "Cloistered Emperor" of Japan.On December 20, 1688 the esoteric Daijō-sai ceremony was revived because of the shogunate's insistence. This Shinto ritual had been in abeyance for over a century, and is performed only once by the emperor in the period of the enthronement ceremonies. 1688 (Genroku gannen): The Tokugawa shogunate revised the code of conduct for funerals (Fuku-kiju-ryō), which incorporated a code of conduct for mourning as well. September 16, 1689 (Genroku 2): German physician Engelbert Kaempfer arrives at Dejima for the first time. Bakufu policy in this era was designed to marginalize the influence of foreigners; and Kaempfer had to present himself as "Dutch" in dealings with the Japanese. Regardless of this minor subterfuge, an unintended and opposite consequence of sakoku was to enhance the value and significance of a very small number of thoughtful observers like Kaempfer, whose writings document what he learned or discovered first-hand. Kaempfer's published accounts and unpublished writings provided a unique and useful perspective for Orientalists and Japanologists in the 19th century; and his work continues to be rigorously examined by modern researchers today.1695 (Genroku 8, 8th month): Minting begun of Genroku coinage. The shogunate placed the Japanese character gen (元) on the obverse of copper coins, the same character used today in China for the yuan. There is no connection between those uses, however. 1695 (Genroku 8, 11th month): First kennel is established for stray dogs in Edo. In this context, Tokugawa Tsunayoshi comes to be nicknamed the . 1697 (Genroku 10): The fourth official map of Japan was made in this year, but it was considered to be inferior to the previous one—which had been ordered in 1605 (Shōhō 1) and completed in 1639 (Kan'ei 16). This Genroku map was corrected in 1719 (Kyōhō 4) by the mathematician Tatebe Katahiro (1644–1739), using high mountain peaks as points of reference, and was drawn to a scale of 1:21,600.1697 (Genroku 10): Great fire in Edo. 1697 (Genroku 11): Another great fire in Edo. A new hall is constructed inside the enclosure of the Edo temple of Kan'ei-ji (which is also known as Tōeizan Kan'ei-ji or "Hiei-san of the east" after the principal temple of the Tendai Buddhist sect—that is to say, after the temple of Enryaku-ji at Mount Hiei near to Heian-kyō). 1703 (Genroku 15, 14th day of the 12th month): when the Akō Incident took place, in which a band of Forty-seven rōnin (leaderless samurai) avenged the death of their master Asano Naganori, due to the bloodshed, Emperor Higashiyama nearly withdrew the imperial will. 1703 (Genroku 16, 5th month): First performance of Chikamatsu Monzaemon's play The Love Suicides at Sonezaki. 1703 (Genroku 16, 28th day of the 11th month): The Great Genroku earthquake shook Edo and parts of the shōguns castle collapsed. The following day,  a vast fire spread throughout the city.Parts of Honshū's coast were battered by tsunami, and 200,000 people were either killed or injured. October 28, 1707 (Hōei 4, 14th day of the 10th month): 1707 Hōei earthquake. The city of Osaka suffers tremendously because of a very violent earthquake. November 15, 1707 (Hōei 4, 22nd day of the 10th month): An eruption of Mount Fuji; cinders and ash fell like rain in Izu, Kai, Sagami, and Musashi. 1708 (Hōei 5): The shogunate introduces new copper coins into circulation; and each coin is marked with the Hōei nengō name (Hōei Tsubo). 1708 (Hōei 5, 8th day of the 3rd month): There was a great fire in Heian-kyō. 1708 (Hōei 5, 8th month):  Italian missionary Giovanni Sidotti landed in Yakushima, where he was promptly arrested.1709 (Hōei 6): Shōgun Tsunayoshi appoints commission to repair and restore Imperial mausoleums. 1709 (Hōei 6, 4th month): Tokugawa Ienobu, Tsunayoshi's nephew, becomes the 6th shōgun of the Edo bakufu. and Emperor Nakamikado accedes to the throne. July 27, 1709 (Hōei 6, 21st day of the 6th month): Emperor <mask> abdicated and the throne passed to his son. January 16, 1710 (Hōei 6, 17th day of the 12th month): <mask> died. Higashiyama is among those enshrined in the Imperial mausoleum, Tsuki no wa no misasagi, at Sennyū-ji in Higashiyama-ku, Kyoto. Also enshrined in this location are this emperor's immediate Imperial predecessors since Emperor Go-Mizunoo – Meishō, Go-Kōmyō, Go-Sai and Reigen.<mask>'s immediate Imperial successors, including Nakamikado, Sakuramachi, Momozono, Go-Sakuramachi and Go-Momozono, are enshrined here as well. Eras of reign
The years of <mask>'s reign are more specifically identified by more than one era name or nengō. Jōkyō  (1684–1688)
 Genroku       (1688–1704)
 Hōei    (1704–1711)

Genealogy
<mask>'s family included at least 11 children. Spouse

Concubines

Issue

Fictional portrayals
<mask> appears under the name of Tomohito in the novel The Samurai's Wife by author Laura Joh Rowland. In the novel, detective Sano Ichiro is sent to investigate the murder of an important official in the Imperial Court. Tomohito is labelled as a suspect, and is portrayed as a childish oaf at the start of the novel. He is later revealed to be the instigator behind a coming revolution against the Tokugawa regime, so he can seize control of Japan himself.However, his plan fails, and he is once again placed in the Imperial Palace, where he seems to have accepted his fate to never leave the palace. Ancestry

See also
 Emperor of Japan
 List of Emperors of Japan
 Imperial cult

References

Further reading
 Hammer, Joshua. (2006). Yokohama Burning: the Deadly 1923 Earthquake and Fire that Helped Forge the Path to World War II. New York: Simon & Schuster. ;
 Meyer, Eva-Maria. (1999).Japans Kaiserhof in der Edo-Zeit: unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Jahre 1846 bis 1867. Münster: LIT Verlag. ;
 Ponsonby-Fane, Richard Arthur Brabazon. (1956). Kyoto: The Old Capital of Japan, 794–1869. Kyoto: Ponsonby Memorial Society. __.(1959). The Imperial House of Japan. Kyoto: Ponsonby Memorial Society. Screech, Timon. (2006). Secret Memoirs of the Shoguns: Isaac Titsingh and Japan, 1779–1822. London: RoutledgeCurzon.;
 Smith, Robert and Richard K. Beardsley. (2004). Japanese Culture: Its Development And Characteristics. Chicago, Aldine Publishing. Titsingh, Isaac. (1834). Nihon Ōdai Ichiran; ou,  Annales des empereurs du Japon.Paris: Royal Asiatic Society, Oriental Translation Fund of Great Britain and Ireland. Traganeou, Jilly. (2004). The Tokaido Road: Traveling and Representation in Edo and Meiji Japan. New York: RoutledgeCurzon. ;
 Varley, H. Paul. (1980).Jinnō Shōtōki: A Chronicle of Gods and Sovereigns. New York: Columbia University Press. ;

Japanese emperors
1675 births
1710 deaths
Emperor Higashiyama
Emperor Higashiyama
Emperor Higashiyama
Emperor Higashiyama
Deaths from smallpox
Infectious disease deaths in Japan
17th-century Japanese monarchs
18th-century Japanese monarchs
Japanese retired emperors

masks: Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama Higashiyama


texts:
<mask>  (born 17 October 1987) is a French professional footballer who last played for League Two club Grimsby Town, as a winger. <mask> can also play as a central attacking midfielder. He previously played in France for Stade Malherbe Caen, Olympique de Marseille and a loan spell at Grenoble Foot 38, as well as in Bulgaria for CSKA Sofia. <mask> has played for France at under-21 level. Club career

Caen
<mask> began his career at his hometown club, Stade Malherbe Caen and signed his professional contract at the club. He made his debut for the first team in the 2004–05 season, making just one substitute appearance, on 28 May 2005 in a 3–2 defeat to Istres as Caen were relegated from Ligue 1 to Ligue 2. This turns out to be his only appearance of the season.In opening game of the 2005–06 season, <mask> started the season well when he scored his first goal for Caen, in a 3–2 loss against Créteil-Lusitanos. <mask> scored his second goal of the season, in a 5–0 win against Valenciennes in the first round of the Coupe de la Ligue on 22 September 2005. He once again scored against them for the second time this season, losing 2–1 on 15 September 2006. A month later on 10 February 2006, <mask> scored his third goal of the season, in a 1–0 win against FC Sète 34. The club finished fourth in Ligue 2, missing out on promotion to Ligue 1 on goal difference. With his playing time at SM Caen increased, he made a total of nineteen league appearances, scoring three goals (twenty–two appearances and scoring four times in all competitions). In the 2006–07 season, <mask> scored his first goal of the season, in a 1–0 win against Créteil-Lusitanos on 7 November 2006.He then scored his second goal of the season, in a 3–2 win against Dijon on 22 December 2006. Two weeks later on 7 January 2007, <mask> scored his third goal of the season, in a 2–1 loss against Valenciennes in the first round of the Coupe de France. As he became a first team regular at the club, <mask> was part of the Caen squad that finished as runners-up and won promotion to Ligue 1 after beating FC Libourne 2–1 in the last game of the season. At the start of the 2007–08 season, <mask> continued to be in the first team for the side despite finding his playing time, coming from the substitute bench. He then scored his first goal of the season, as well as, setting up one of the goals, in a 5–0 win against Bordeaux on 24 November 2007. <mask> also scored two more goals, coming from Coupe de la Ligue matches against Toulouse and Lyon. His performance attracted interest from Marseille.By the time he departed from Caen, <mask> made a total of 55 league appearances for the club and scoring six goals. Marseille
On 28 January 2008, midway through the 2007–08 season, <mask> joined Marseille for €400,000. However upon leaving Caen, he was criticised by manager Franck Dumas. In his first match for the club against AS Monaco in the last 16 of the Coupe de France, he made an assist for the second goal scored by Mathieu Valbuena, in a 3–1 win. <mask>'s debut for Marseille came on 9 February 2008 against Nice and started the match, playing 89 minutes before being substituted, in a 2–0 win. On 17 May 2008, the last day of the season against Strasbourg, he came on as a substitute after an injury to striker Mamadou Niang, and sent his pass set up to Nasri to score as Marseille won 4–3 and so qualified for the preliminary round of the Champions League. At the end of the 2007–08 season, <mask> made eight league appearances, most of them as a substitute.In the 2008–09 season, <mask> was in the starting line-up in the first game of the season at Stade Rennais, scoring Marseille's fourth goal in stoppage time, in a 4–4 draw. On 13 August 2008, he made his European debut in the third qualifying round of the Champions League, in a single-goal victory at Norwegian side Brann. Four days later on 17 August 2008, <mask> scored his second goal for the club, in a 4–0 win against Auxerre. In the return leg against Brann, he helped Marseille win 2–1 to advance to the next round of the UEFA Cup tournament. However, <mask> then fell out of favour into the plans of Eric Gerets and lack of playing time in Marseille. As a result, he was linked a move away from the club in the January transfer window, with clubs, such as, Grenoble, Le Havre and Strasbourg were interested in signing him. By the time <mask> departed from Marseille, he  made a further eight appearances, scoring twice.<mask> joined fellow Ligue 1 side Grenoble Foot 38 on loan for five months on 30 January 2009. He made his debut on 7 February 2009, starting the whole game, in a goalless home draw with Valenciennes. <mask> became a first team regular for the club, rotating in playing either midfield and striker positions. He made a total of eight appearances before returning to Marseille at the end of the season. Having been told by new manager Didier Deschamps of being in a new plan ahead of the new season, <mask> was linked a move away from Marseille, with Standard Liège, Sheffield Wednesday and Birmingham City interested in signing him in the summer transfer window. On 18 August 2009, it was reported by L'Équipe that he would go on trial in England with Premier League club Stoke City five days later and that Stoke had first option on the player for around €1 million. After returning to France, Marseille released <mask> from his contract on 2 September.The club later called him as one of the worst signings. CSKA Sofia
On 5 January 2010, <mask> was reportedly in negotiations with Romanian Liga I club Rapid Bucharest, and was believed to be about to sign for the club; however, on 20 January he signed an 18-month contract with Bulgarian A PFG club CSKA Sofia, after they gave him an improved offer that gave him 30% of any future sale proceeds. However, <mask> suffered a setback with an injury during the winter break and was sidelined for a month. He made his competitive debut for the club on 13 March 2010 against Sportist Svoge, scoring the opening goal and providing an assist in a 4–1 win. <mask> then scored his second goal for CSKA Sofia, in a 4–2 win against OFC Sliven on 10 April 2010. He scored two goals in two matches between 24 April 2010 and 2 May 2010 against Slavia Sofia and Lokomotiv Sofia. <mask> became a first team regular for the club, and helped CSKA Sofia finish second.Despite missing a total of three matches later in the 2009–10 season, he made a total of ten league appearances and scoring four goals. Ahead of the 2010–11 season, his performances attracted interests from clubs around Europe. But <mask> wanted to stay at CSKA Sofia, only to later to have a change of heart. He played in the opening match of the 2010–11 season, a 1–0 home defeat to local rivals Levski Sofia in the first Eternal derby of the season, on 1 August 2010. Four days later on 5 August 2010, <mask> played in a 2–1 win over Northern Irish IFA Premiership side Cliftonville at Windsor Park, Belfast, in the Third qualifying round of the 2010–11 UEFA Europa League, in what turned out to be his last appearance for the Reds. Blackpool
On 11 August 2010, <mask> signed for newly promoted Premier League club Blackpool on a two-year deal, with the option for a third year. Three days after signing for the club, he made his debut as Blackpool made their bow in the Premier League and set up a goal for Marlon Harewood, who scored twice in a 4–0 win over Wigan Athletic at the DW Stadium.Since joining the club, <mask> was involved in the first team, playing in the midfield position and spoke positively of manager Ian Holloway's personality and tactics. He then played a role in two separate matches against West Bromwich Albion on 1 November 2010 and then against Bolton Wanderers on 27 November 2010 by assisting both matches that saw Blackpool earn a draw and win respectively. However, <mask> suffered a hamstring injury during a match against Sunderland on 28 December 2010 and was substituted in the 19th minute, as the club lost 2–0. But he made his return to the starting line–up against Liverpool on 12 January 2011 and played 64 minutes before being substituted, in a 2–1 win. On 12 February 2011, <mask> scored his first goal for the club in a 1–1 home draw with Aston Villa. Shortly after, <mask> suffered a hamstring injury that saw him miss two matches. He then made his return to the starting line–up against Blackburn Rovers on 19 March 2011 and played 66 minutes before being substituted, in a 2–2 draw.However, Blackpool were relegated to the Championship after losing 4–2 against Manchester United in the last game of the season. At the end of the 2010–11 season, <mask> made twenty–four appearances and scoring once in all competitions. In the 2011–12 season, <mask> made three starts for Blackpool, as the club earned six points in the first two league matches of the season. However, he suffered an injury on his toe that kept him out for four weeks. After missing 17 games through injury, <mask> made his return to the first team against Barnsley on 26 December 2011, coming on as a 63rd-minute substitute, in a 3–1 win. Two weeks later on 14 January 2012, he scored his first goal of the season and later set up Blackpool's second goal of the game, in a 2–2 draw against Ipswich Town. In a follow–up match against Crystal Palace, <mask> scored his second goal of the season, in a 2–1 win.By the time he was loaned out to OGC Nice, <mask> went on to make seven appearances and scoring two times in all competitions. In the 2012–13 season, <mask> return to Blackpool after Nice failed to sign him on a permanent basis. Upon returning to the club, he switched number shirt to ten. <mask> made his first appearance of the season against Morecambe in the first round of the League Cup on 12 August 2012, coming on as a second half substitute, in a 2–1 loss. A month later on 18 September 2012, he won a penalty and successfully converted the penalty himself, in a 4–1 win over Middlesbrough. Shortly after, <mask> was not included for the next five matches, after scoring his first goal, and trained with the club's development squad, as manager Holloway explained his reason for leaving out the player as being a bad attitude. In response, he said his intention was wanted to leave Blackpool and expressed his love of the city.Upon his returning to the squad, <mask> scored his first second goal of the season and set up the club's second goal of the game five minutes later, in a 2–2 draw against Nottingham Forest on 22 October 2012. This was followed up by scoring his third goal of the game, in a 1–1 draw against Brighton & Hove Albion. However, the departure of Holloway led to the player's first team opportunities being reduced and appeared an unused substitute for the remainder of the matches played. At the end of the 2012–13 season, he went on to make thirteen appearances and scoring three times in all competitions. Following this,  <mask> was released by the club. Loan Spell at OGC Nice
<mask> returned to his native country by signing a season-long loan deal with OGC Nice on 28 January 2012. Upon joining the club, he said: "I have had great experiences abroad, in Bulgaria and in England, but I really wanted to come back to France.I felt like I didn't finish the job here. So when the Nice opportunity presented itself, I did everything to make it happen. It is a real challenge for me, I really want to help the club." It was later revealed that a family factor was the reason <mask> returned to his native country to resolve his problem there. <mask> made his debut for OGC Nice, starting the whole game, in a 2–1 loss against his former club, Marseille on 1 February 2012. Three days later on 4 February 2012, he made his first league appearance in three years, starting a match and playing 63 minutes before being substituted, in a 1–1 draw against Ajaccio. His involvement in the first team for the rest of the 2011–12 season saw him make thirteen appearances in all competitions.Following this, the club did not take up the option to make his move permanent and he returned to Blackpool. Crystal Palace
In August 2013, Holloway's new club Crystal Palace signed <mask> from Blackpool on a free transfer. He made his debut on 27 August, in a 2–1 defeat against Bristol City in the second round of the League Cup. In January 2014, <mask>'s contract was cancelled by mutual consent, under the management of Tony Pulis, without having made a league appearance. Blackpool (second spell)
On 6 February 2014, <mask> returned to Blackpool on a deal until the end of the 2013–14 season after leaving Crystal Palace at the end of January. Following his return, he said moving back to the club felt like home and revealed that interim manager Barry Ferguson played a role of giving him a chance. <mask> re-debuted for the club, where he came on for Ángel Martínez, in the 67th minute, as Blackpool and Nottingham Forest drew 1–1 on 8 February 2014.<mask> then scored his first goal for the club, as Blackpool lost 2–1 to Yeovil Town on 5 April 2014. However, he found his first team opportunities limited and found his playing time, coming from the substitute bench. At the end of the 2013–14 season, <mask> went on to make seven appearances and scoring once in all competitions for his second spell at the club. Following this, Blackpool opted not to offer him a new contract. Following his departure from Blackpool, he was linked with a move to Championship clubs, including a return to Blackpool. Later career
After leaving Blackpool, <mask> moved to Romania, where he joined Astra Giurgiu on 15 August 2014. <mask> Giurgiu, in a 2–0 win.However, his first team opportunities at the club was limited and found his playing time, coming from the substitute bench. This was due to his struggles in settling in the country. As a result, <mask> found himself in a dispute with Astra Giurgi over an unpaid salary and left the club. <mask> returned to England, signing for Shrewsbury Town in League One on a short-term deal until the end of the season in February 2016. He was released without making a first team appearance. After spending six months as a free agent and signing for Cypriots side Ermis Aradippou, <mask> made his debut for the club, coming on as an 85th-minute substitute, in a 2–0 win against Karmiotissa on 15 January 2017. A month later on 18 February 2017, he scored his first goal for Ermis Aradippou, having come on as an 83rd-minute substitute, in a 4–0 win.In a follow–up match against AEK Larnaca, <mask> set up two goals for the club, as they lost 3–2. He later scored two more goals for Ermis Aradippou, coming against Doxa Katokopias and Ethnikos Achna. At the end of the 2016–17 season, <mask> went on to make thirteen appearances and scoring three times in all competitions. After leaving Cyprus, <mask> returned to France with Fréjus Saint-Raphaël of the Championnat National 2 (fourth tier) on 26 January 2018. He made his debut for the club, starting the whole game, in a 1–0 win against Paulhan-Pézenas on 3 February 2018. At the end of the 2017–18 season, <mask> went on to make nine appearances in all competitions for Étoile Fréjus Saint-Raphaël. The following year, he moved to JS Saint-Pierroise of Réunion, and was part of their team on 4 January 2020 that won 2–1 away to Niort to become the second Outre-Mer club to reach the last 32 of the Coupe de France, and first since French Guianan champions ASC Le Geldar in 1989.On 31 January 2020, the last day of the 2019–20 winter transfer period, <mask> returned to England joining League Two side Grimsby Town until the end of the season to link up with former manager Ian Holloway. He made his debut for the club, coming on as a 63rd-minute substitute, in a 1–1 draw against Bradford City on 8 February 2020. <mask> made four more starts for Grimsby Town, playing in the centre–midfield position. However, the 2019–20 season came to a premature end, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the club finished fifteenth place. Having made five appearances for Grimsby Town, he was released by the club at the conclusion of the 2019–20 season. International career
In 2005, <mask> was part of the French youth squad that won the Meridian Cup in Turkey. In May 2008, he was called to the France U21 squad for the first time.<mask> was called up to the France U20 squad for the Toulon Tournament but they were eliminated in the Group Stage. In August 2008, he was called up to the France U21 squad for the first time. <mask> scored on his U21 debut for the national side, in a 2–2 draw against Slovakia U21 on 19 August 2008. He went on to make three appearances, scoring one goal for France under-21s in 2008. However, <mask> Aradippou FC players
ÉFC Fréjus Saint-Raphaël players
JS Saint-Pierroise players
Grimsby Town F.C. players
Ligue 1 players
Ligue 2 players
First Professional Football League (Bulgaria) players
Premier League players
English Football League players
Liga I players
Expatriate footballers in England
Expatriate footballers in Bulgaria
Expatriate footballers in Romania
Expatriate footballers in Cyprus
French expatriate sportspeople in Romania
France under-21 international footballers
French expatriate sportspeople in England
French expatriate sportspeople in Bulgaria
French expatriate sportspeople in Cyprus

masks:
Elliot Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandintra
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandin
Grandinis


texts:
<mask> II ( also given in English and Latin as Premyslas or Premislaus or less properly ; 14 October 1257 – 8 February 1296) was the Duke of Poznań from 1257–1279, of Greater Poland from 1279 to 1296, of Kraków from 1290 to 1291, and Gdańsk Pomerania (Pomerelia) from 1294 to 1296, and then King of Poland from 1295 until his death. After a long period of Polish high dukes and two nominal kings, he was the first to obtain the hereditary title of king, and thus to return Poland to the rank of kingdom. A member of the Greater Poland branch of the House of Piast as the only son of Duke <mask> I and the Silesian princess Elisabeth, he was born posthumously; for this reason he was brought up at the court of his uncle Bolesław the Pious and received his own district to rule, the Duchy of Poznań in 1273. Six years later, after the death of his uncle, he also obtained the Duchy of Kalisz. In the first period of his government, <mask> II was involved only in regional affairs, first in close collaboration and then competing with the Duke of Wrocław, Henryk IV Probus. This policy caused the rebellion of the prominent Zaremba family and the temporary loss of Wieluń. Working with the Archbishop of Gniezno, Jakub Świnka, he sought the unification of the principalities of the Piast dynasty.Unexpectedly, in 1290, under the will of Henryk IV Probus, he managed to obtain the Duchy of Kraków and with this the title of High Duke of Poland; however, not having sufficient support from the local nobility (who supported another member of the Piast dynasty, Władysław I the Elbow-high) and faced with the increasing threats of King Wenceslaus II of Bohemia, <mask>yslid dynasty. In 1293, thanks to the mediation of Archbishop Jakub Świnka, he joined into a close alliance with the Kuyavian princes Władysław the Elbow-high and <mask> of Łęczyca. This alliance was anti-Bohemian, and his goal was to recover Kraków, then in the hands of King Wenceslaus II. After the death of Duke Mestwin II in 1294, and according to the Treaty of Kępno signed in 1282, <mask> II inherited Pomerelia. This strengthened his position and enabled his coronation as King of Poland. The ceremony was held on 26 June 1295 in Gniezno, and was performed by his ally Archbishop Jakub Świnka. Only nine months later, on 8 February 1296, <mask> II was murdered during a failed kidnapping attempt made by men of the Margraves of Brandenburg, with some help from the Polish noble families of Nałęcz and Zaremba.Birth and naming
<mask> II was born on 14 October 1257 in Poznań as the fifth child and only son of Duke <mask> I of Greater Poland and his wife Elisabeth, daughter of Duke <mask> the Pious of Silesia. It is known that he was born in the morning, because according to the Chronicle of Greater Poland, when Dowager Duchess Elisabeth gave birth to a son, the vicars and canons of the city were singing morning prayers. At the news of the birth, the local clergy chanted the Te Deum laudamus. Shortly after his birth, the prince was baptized by the Bishop of Poznań, Bogufał <mask>. According to the Chronicle of Greater Poland (Kronika wielkopolska), <mask> II was named after his father, who had died four months before his birth, on 4 June 1257. The form of the name in the days of his contemporaries certainly sounded like Przemysł or possibly Przemyśl. However, due to the fact that the word "Przemysł" () means production of a good or service within an economy today, it is reasonable to be considered that his name could be a valid form from Przemysław, especially as this version is undoubtedly more medieval (occurs at the beginning of the 14th century).Another name under which the Duke of Greater Poland was probably known, following the indications of the Rocznik Kołbacki, is Peter (), but Oswald Balzer considered this an obvious mistake. The only historian who recognised the name Peter as authentic was K. Górski. No sources about contemporary rulers provided information about a nickname. Only in sources related to the Teutonic Order from 1335 he is given the nickname Kynast. In current historiography he is sometimes nicknamed Posthumous (), but this has not been universally accepted. Tutelage of Bolesław the Pious (1257–1273)

Childhood
At the time of is birth, <mask> <mask> was the nominal ruler of the Duchy of Poznań. The guardianship of the Duchy, probably alongside with his mother Elisabeth, was taken by his uncle Duke Bolesław the Pious and his wife, the Hungarian princess Jolenta (Helena).In consequence the prince remained at the court in Poznań, where his mother raised him. On 16 January 1265 Dowager Duchess Elisabeth died at her estate in Modrze, and the orphaned <mask> together with his sisters were later cared for by their uncle and aunt. Very little information exists about the education given to <mask> II. Diplomatic sources have retained only the names of two of his teachers: Dragomir and Przybysław. It is assumed (although without any direct evidence) that the prince had some knowledge of at least Latin in speech and writing. Relations with Brandenburg and Neumark
The next mention of <mask> II came in 1272, when his uncle Duke Bolesław the Pious appointed him the nominal commander of an armed expedition against Brandenburg. The true commanders of the expedition were the Governor of Poznań, Przedpełk and the Castellan of Kalisz, Janko.The expedition was launched on 27 May; in addition to the specific purpose to acquire and destroy the newly built fortress in Strzelce Krajeńskie (or, in case it proved to be impossible, at least the desolation of Neumark). The young prince was to be educated in the art of war. The project, as detailed in the Chronicle of Greater Poland, was a great success. The city of Strzelce Krajeńskie after a short, but extremely fierce battle, was defeated and captured by the Greater Poland army. According to the Chronicle, while gaining command of the fortress, <mask> II ordered the slaughter of the defenders, and only a few managed to save the life of the prince from the angered citizens. Shortly after completing the expedition and with the majority of his forces in his way back, <mask> II received a confidential message that the fortress of Drezdenko was protected by only a few German knights. The young prince, despite the fact that he only had a part of his forces, decided to make a quick attack.This completely surprised the defenders and fearing the same fate of soldiers from Strzelce Krajeńskie, they decided to surrender the fortress in exchange for a full pardon. After this, <mask> II took the fortress in the name of his uncle and triumphantly returned home. In the same year, <mask> II concluded his first alliance with Duke Mestwin II of Pomerelia. At first an ally of the Margraves of Brandenburg, Mestwin II could expel his brother and uncles from Pomerania and became sole ruler in 1271, but shortly after he was defeated and even imprisoned by them; this caused him to cede the province of Gdańsk to Margrave Conrad of Brandenburg in exchange for aid against his foes. Despite Mestwin II retaining the feudal sovereignty over the territory, the Brandenburg Margraviate still occupied the main castles and fortresses of the city even after the restoration of Mestwin II in the ducal throne. With his knowledge that his forces are too weak against Brandenburg, the Pomeranian Duke decided then to make an alliance with the Greater Poland rulers, Bolesław the Pious (who probably was his first-cousin) and <mask> II. The Greater Poland-Pomerania alliance ended up in regaining the fortresses in Gdańsk and the complete expulsion of the Brandenburg forces from Pomerania.Although soon after Mestwin II decided to conclude a separate peace with the Margraviate, the alliance with Greater Poland signed in 1272 remained in force. The continuous threat of Brandenburg and the uncertainty of the alliance with Mestwin II, caused that Bolesław the Pious began to seek new allies in case of war. For this purpose, Bolesław decided to seek an agreement with Duke Barnim I of Pomerania. First marriage
As a part of the new alliance with Pomerania, marriage was arranged between <mask> II and Barnim I's granddaughter Ludgarda, daughter of Henry I the Pilgrim, Lord of Mecklenburg and Anastasia of Pomerania. Apparently, the young prince was pleased with his young bride, as stated

masks:
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysłem
Casimir II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Henry II
III
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł


texts:
 in the Chronicle of Greater Poland:

After the wedding the couple was briefly separated. <mask> II came to Greater Poland, where together with his uncle prepared the ceremonial arrival of his wife to Poznań. Finally, together with his uncle, his aunt Jolenta, Bishop Mikołaj I of Poznań and other Greater Poland dignitaries the prince went to the border frontier in Drezdenko, where he solemnly brought Ludgarda to her new home.The alliance between Greater Poland and Pomerania was directed against Brandenburg and in 1274, resulted in more than one retaliatory expedition against Greater Poland; taken by surprise, the princes watched how without major obstacles the Brandenburg army came to Poznań, and burned the main fortress of the city. Only after this, the Greater Poland knighthood was hastily organized and was able to expel the invaders. Independent Duke of Poznań (1273–1279)

Rebellion
In 1273 <mask> II became an independent Duke of Poznań. The circumstances around this event are not entirely clear. On the basis of only one known source, a document dated 1 October 1273, it appears that <mask> II began to use the title of "dux Poloniae" (Duke of [Greater] Poland). A document issued on 25 August 1289, notes that the Greater Poland ruler gave the villages of Węgielnice and Łagiewnice to the major of Gniezno, Piotr Winiarczyk, in gratitude for helping him to escape from the Gniezno fortress (however, when the incident took place wasn't mentioned in the document). In light of modern historiography, the events preceding the issue of this document could be as follows: <mask> II, unhappy with the prolonged guardianship of his uncle, and with the support of some powerful Greater Poland magnates decided, regardless of the consequences, to assert his rights over Poznań.It is unclear at this stage whether there has been any armed incidents; in any case, the demands of <mask> II became so insistent that they ended in his imprisonment in the Gniezno castle. It can be assumed that there wasn't a prison in the proper sense of the word, but under house arrest, during which <mask> II was not too rigorously guarded, since the prince was able to escape from the castle without any outside help. In a document issued to Piotr Winiarczyk, the writer used the phrase "qui de nocte consurgens", which supports the assumption that the clerk was asleep and was completely surprised by the arrival of the prince. In any case, the real cause of this grant of lands given to Winiarczyk by <mask> <mask> apparently wasn't sure, and probably only equipping him with sufficient means to escape. Alliance with Henryk Probus
After escaping from Gniezno, <mask> II probably went on Lower Silesia under the care of Henryk IV Probus, Duke of Wrocław. This help was evidenced by the conclusion of an alliance (in unknown date) directed against "any man and Polish prince" with the exception of Duke Władysław of Opole and King Ottokar <mask> of Bohemia. An alliance between <mask> <mask> and Henry IV placed Bolesław the Pious in a very uncomfortable situation, because he was a member of the Pro-Hungarian coalition of Polish princes (in addition to him, it included Bolesław V the Chaste, Leszek <mask> the Black and Konrad II of Masovia) could not remain indifferent to this close cooperation with the Duke of Wrocław, which was the leader of the Pro-bohemian coalition (where other Silesian princes also belonged).This alliance probably forced Bolesław the Pious to reconsider his treatment of his nephew and finally granted him the Duchy of Poznań in 1273. <mask> II, in exchange, not only interrupted for a time his cooperation with the Duke of Wrocław, but decided to support his uncle in the expedition against Władysław of Opole (ally of King Ottokar <mask> and Henryk IV Probus), in retaliation for the attempts of the Opole ruler to overthrow the government of Bolesław V the Chaste in Lesser Poland during the first half of 1273. Thus, with high probability, it can be concluded that by this time the conflict between <mask> II and his uncle for power has been finally resolved. Very little information exists about the rule of <mask> II over Poznań. From the period 1273–1279, are known only four documents issued by the prince, including two issued jointly with his uncle Bolesław the Pious. Conflict with Bolesław the Horned

<mask> II's foreign politics are more known during this time. His friendly relations with Henry IV Probus survived, despite the momentary interruption, even after 1273.This alliance was maintained without significant changes, and only as a result of the events that taken place on 18 February 1277 in the town of Jelcz near Wrocław, the Duke of Poznań was forced to explicitly stand at the side of the Wrocław ruler, his cousin. Henryk IV was kidnapped and imprisoned in the Legnica castle by his uncle, Duke Bolesław II the Horned. The pretext used by the Duke of Legnica to do this was the demands of the Duke of Wrocław over one-third of his domains, which, according to him, were part of his inheritance as legacy from both his father <mask> the White (died in 1266) and uncle Władysław (died in 1270). Bolesław used in his favor the political weakness of Henryk IV's guardian, King Otakar <mask> of Bohemia, who in September 1276 was forced to submit to King Rudolph I of Germany. <mask> <mask>, faithful to his previous agreements with Henry IV Probus, decided to stand at the head of the knights of Poznań, Wrocław (which generally were loyal to their ruler) and Głogów (commanded by Duke <mask>) and marched to Legnica in order to obtain the freedom of Henry IV. The Legnica army was commanded by Bolesław and his eldest son Henry V the Fat. The battle took place on 24 April 1277 in the village of Stolec near Ząbkowice Śląskie, and, according to modern historiography, was extremely bloody and lasted almost the entire day.Initially it seemed that the coalition Poznań-Głogów-Wrocław would have a complete victory. The situation became even more favorable to them when Bolesław escaped from the battlefield. However, his son Henry V decided to stay until the end, and in this desperate situation encouraged his knights to fight, and finally obtain the victory; to complete the success, even <mask> <mask> and <mask> were taken prisoners. However, according to Jan Długosz in his chronicle, for the Dukes of Legnica this was a Pyrrhic victory, since "died in this battle so countless number of people that the knights of Legnica, although the winner, they could mock the vanquished, because the bloody paid for victory". The imprisonment of the Duke of Poznań, if it occurred, was brief. The argument against this was noted in the fact that there is no record of Przemysł II having to pay for his release. Whatever the truth was, by 5 July 1277 Przemysł <mask> was in Lubin.The release of Henryk IV Probus took place some days later, on 22 July, after the surrender to Bolesław II of 1/5 of his Duchy, with the town of Środa Śląska at the head. Bolesław the Pious was against the participation of his nephew in this conflict; he not only refused to support him militarily but also invaded the borders of the Duchy of Wrocław, trying to assert financial claims. Moreover, at this point, he gave his daughter Elizabeth in marriage to Henry V the Fat. An additional reason for a quick end to this conflict among the Silesian princes was the personal intervention of King Ottokar <mask> of Bohemia, who in preparation for his final confrontation with King Rudolph I of Habsburg German needed to calm the situation in Poland. Cooperation with Bohemia
In September 1277 King Ottokar II held in the border city of Opava a meeting of Polish princes. Sources doesn't specify either the exact date or the participants. Historians speculate only that they could be: Henryk IV Probus, Bolesław V the Chaste, Leszek II the Black, Władysław of Opole with his sons, <mask> of Głogów and Przemysł II.Several political decisions were made during the meeting, most notably military actions against Germany. The decisive battle between Ottokar <mask> and Rudolph I took place on 25 August 1278 in the known Battle on the Marchfeld. As many 1/3 of the Czech army were supposed to be allied with the Polish troops. <mask> II wasn't among them, because he was then in Ląd. However this doesn't mean that, as historians speculate, he

masks:
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
II
II
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Henry III
II
Przemysł
II
Henry III
Przemysł
II
Henry III
II
II
Henry III
II
Przemysł


texts:
 didn't send troops to the Bohemian King as was planned. Reconciliation with Bolesław the Pious
The apparent difference of interests between <mask> <mask> and his uncle Bolesław the Pious in the Silesian and Czech affairs, did not disturb their good relations. Evidence of this was the common issuance of documents, such as 6 January 1278.Another proof of the close cooperation between uncle and nephew in the last years of Bolesław the Pious' life is in the events that took place in mid-1278 (probably in August): Bolesław, using the weakness of the Margraviate of Brandenburg during the fight between Ottokar <mask> and Rudolph I, in only eight days attacked Neumark and advanced until Myślibórz, where his troops defeated Margrave Otto V the Long. <mask> II didn't participate in this expedition (at least directly, according to Jan Długosz), because at that moment he was in Ląd, according to a document dated 24 August 1278. Certainly by the command of his uncle, <mask> <mask> acted as mediator in the dispute between Dukes Leszek <mask> the Black and Ziemomysł of Inowrocław and his subjects. <mask> <mask> was able to end the dispute between Leszek and Ziemomysł with their local nobility definitively. The Duke of Inowrocław had to agree to two conditions: firstly, in his court all the noble families would be well tolerated and respected, and secondly, he had put a distance from his German advisors. In addition Ziemomysł also have to accept the surrender of the towns of Kruszwica and Radziejów to Bolesław the Pious and Wyszogród to Duke Mestwin II of Pomerelia. The friendly relations between <mask> II and the Kuyavia Dukes proved to be durable and survived to the end of his reign.The expedition against Brandenburg in 1278 was the last important event in Bolesław the Pious' life. "Maximus trumphator de Teutonicis" (in: The highest winner on the Germans), died on 13 or 14 April 1279 in Kalisz. Without male heirs, shortly before his death he declared his nephew his only and legitimate heir and urged him to take care of his wife Jolenta-Helena and his two underage daughters, Hedwig and Anna. Duke of Greater Poland (1279–1290)

Acquisition of Greater Poland
The inheritance of Greater Poland by <mask> II went peacefully. The union proved to be durable, and with the exception of its borders with the Duchy of Wrocław, survived throughout his reign. However, despite the personal unification of the territory, the division between Kalisz and Gniezno persisted almost to the end of the 18th century. Later, in times of <mask> the Great, there was also a visible division between the old voivodeships of Poznań and Kalisz.Relations with nobility and neighbors
An analysis of the contemporary documents showed that in the first period of his rule over all Greater Poland, <mask> II relied on the following nobles: Jan Gerbicz, Bishop of Poznań; members of the powerful noble family of Zaremba: Andrzej, chancellor of Kalisz (since 1288 the first "cancellerius tocius Polonia") and later Bishop of Poznań; Sędziwój, chamberlain of Gniezno; Beniamin, voivode of Poznań; and Arkembold, voivode of Gniezno. Other close collaborators were Wojciech Krystanowic z Lubrzy, chamberlain of Poznań; Tomisław Nałęcz, Poznań castellan; Maciej, Kalisz castellan; Stefan, Wieluń castellan, Mikołaj Łodzia, Poznań judge; Wincenty Łodzia, chancellor of Poznań; and the brothers Tylon, Jaśko and Mikołaj, three notaries of middle-class origin. During the years 1279–1281, <mask> II had a rather friendly (or at least neutral) relationship with all of his immediate neighbors. Imprisonment
The Duke of Greater Poland felt quite safe when he was invited to a meeting organized by Henry IV Probus. The meeting took place probably on 9 February 1281 in one of the Silesian villages; however, the Duke of Wrocław had another plan – he broke all the rules of hospitality, imprisoned the three princes who were invited (<mask> <mask>, Henry V the Fat of Legnica, and <mask> of Głogów), and forced them to make political concessions. This action was made even more outrageous by the fact that only four years earlier Przemysł II and Henry III risked their lives and armies to save Henry IV Probus in the Battle of Stolec, which ended with victory of Henry V the Fat, the third guest of this meeting. Historians speculate that the reason for the Duke of Wrocław to make this radical move was probably his desire to increase his influence over the neighboring principalities as part of his own plans for a royal coronation.Finally, after brief resistance, <mask> II was forced to give the strategic Lesser Polish land of Wieluń (also known as Ruda) in order to obtain his release, because Henry IV wanted a direct connection between Wrocław and Lesser Poland. The imprisonment of <mask> II did not last too long, because on 3 March he was documented to have been in Poznań. <mask> and Henry V the Fat were both forced to grant much larger territorial concessions. In addition, the three Dukes agreed that upon the request of the Duke of Wrocław they would each give him military aid in the amount of thirty lancers. So this was, in practice, an act of homage. The rapid release of <mask> II could have been aided by the intervention of Leszek II the Black and Mestwin II of Pomerelia. The reason for the arrival of Mestwin II to Greater Poland, in addition to helping his imprisoned ally, was to settle the claims of the Teutonic Order over parts of Pomerelia and to resolve the issue of succession after his own death; from his first marriage, Mestwin II had only two daughters, Catherine and Euphemia.The situation was further complicated by the fact that Mestwin II gained the rule over all the Duchy of Pomerelia after a war against his uncles, Racibor and Sambor II, who in revenge for this willed his possessions (including Białogard and Gniew) to the Teutonic Order upon his death in 1278. Treaty of Kępno

The first talks between <mask> II and Mestwin II about the latter's succession probably occurred around 1281, on occasion of the arrival of the Duke of Pomerelia in Greater Poland to visit the Benedictine Abbey in Lubin. Although there is no direct evidence that <mask> <mask> was also in the Abbey in person, the presence of Jan I of Wysokowce, Bishop of Poznań and other Greater Poland dignitaries suggest that a compromise was then suggested. At the beginning of the next year Mestwin II again went to southern Greater Poland, in order to talk with the Papal legate Filippo di Fermo about his dispute with the Teutonic Order over the possession of the towns of Gniew and Białogard. The legate stayed in Milicz, which belonged to the Diocese of Wrocław. Due to the friendly relations of <mask> II (and thus his ally Mestwin II) with Henry IV Probus, the Duke of Pomerania decided to stop at the frontier village of Kępno (also in the Diocese of Wrocław), and waited to hear the legate's verdict. In Kępno, Mestwin II probably expected the arrival of the Duke of Greater Poland.Here, on 15 February 1282, a treaty was concluded between <mask> II and Mestwin II, which secured the future unification of Gdańsk Pomerania and Greater Poland. Witnesses in the signed document, among others, were Pomeranian Voivode Waysil, Poznań voivode Beniamin, Gniezno voivode Arkembold, Poznań judge Mikołaj, Kalisz judge Andrzej, and the Dominican friar Piotr (later Prince-Bishop of Cammin from 1296 to 1298), who was possibly responsible for writing the text. Other important dignitaries might have been present in Kępno at the time, however, they are not mentioned. There are ongoing disputes between historians about the exact nature of the Treaty of Kępno. According to some historians (for example Balzer and Wojciechowski) the treaty was a classic pact of mutual inheritance, in which the one who survives the other inherits his territory. According to others (like Kętrzyński, Baszkiewicz, Zielinska, Nowacki and Swieżawski), it was a one-sided arrangement or donation for life from Mestwin II to Przemysł II (called donatio inter vivos). Another theory was posed by Janusz Bieniak.He believed that Mestwin II simply paid homage for his lands to the ruler of Greater Poland, who became the de jure ruler of the territory. Currently, the second theory is the most accepted, mainly because it agrees entirely with the contemporary sources. Since 1282 Przemysł II

masks:
Przemysł
II
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
II
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Casimir III
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Henry III
Przemysł
Przemysł
Henry III
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł


texts:
 formally used the title of "dux Pomeranie" (Duke of Pomerania), but during Mestwin II's life he renounced his claim to the rights over Gdańsk Pomerania (Pomerelia). As was customary, the treaty would have to be approved by the nobles and knights of both lands. The meeting between the nobility of Pomerelia and Greater Poland took place between 13 and 15 September 1284 in the town of Nakło, where they confirmed the rights of <mask> II over Gdańsk Pomerania. The unification of Pomerelia and Greater Poland was not the only decision made by <mask> II and Mestwin II. The favors shown by the Duke of Pomerelia to the powerful witnesses of the agreement from Greater Poland showed that they were also keenly interested in the close integration of the two lands.Widowhood
In December 1283 in Gniezno, at the age of 22 or 23 years, Ludgarda, wife of <mask> II, died unexpectedly. Relations between the spouses for some time before her death weren't very good; perhaps there had even been a separation between them. The reason for this was the supposed infertility of Ludgarda, more apparent after ten years of marriage. The actual period of marital intercourse between the spouses given their age (both are quite young at the time of their wedding) could actually be shorter. Indeed, there is no direct proof about Ludgarda's barrenness beyond the lack of offspring; in those, the childlessness in marriage was usually considered to be the woman's fault, although in this case (due to the birth of a daughter from <mask> II's second marriage), it seems more likely. It was not a surprise when accusations began to emerge against the Duke of Greater Poland of the suspected murder of his wife. No contemporary source mentions this, a fact more surprising because <mask> II had bitter enemies who certainly would use this crime against him.Also, any reactions from church or public penance would noticed. The first suggestion about Ludgarda's mysterious death came from the 14th century Rocznik Traski:

The chronicler of the Rocznik Traski doesn't suggest an unnatural death for the Duchess, but leaves some doubts about it. The Rocznik małopolski, by the other hand, spoke clearly about Ludgarda's murder in the Szamotuły code, in which added further information about this event:

Another source that describes the death of Ludgarda is the Kronika oliwska, written in the mid-14th century by Abbot Stanisław. On the pages of his work, the author clearly showed aversion towards the Samborid dynasty, rulers of Pomerelia until the end of the 13th century. This aversion is also transferred to Przemysł II:

It is unknown why the Margraves of Brandenburg would avenge the murder of Ludgarda, since this could place them in a dangerous position, considering their alliance with Pomerelia-Greater Poland. The reports of the Kronika oliwska were repeated in Mecklenburg by chronicler Ernst von Kirchberg, a wandering bard from Thuringia, who around 1378 appears at the court of Duke <mask> of Mecklenburg (Ludgarda's nephew) on occasion to his wedding. Shortly after von Kirchberg wanted to show his thanks for the Duke's hospitality and wrote a long rhyming poem, in which he also mentions Ludgarda.The story of the chronicler was as follows: <mask> II, at the instigation of his mother Elizabeth of Wrocław (who is well known had died in 1265, a long time before the marriage of her son) asked his wife for a divorce and return her to Mecklenburg. In view of her refusal because "What God has joined, men must not divide", <mask> II decided her imprisonment in the tower, where he tried to persuade her again to accept a divorce. Finally, due to her obstinacy, <mask> II killed her with his own dagger. In this event he was helped by one of his ministers, who finished the deed by suffocating a dying Ludgarda with a towel. The last important source for the history of Ludgarda are Annals of Jan Długosz, who wrote about this events almost two centuries after (around 1480). Długosz was the first chronicler who locates Poznań as the place of Ludgarda's death. Besides, he established her date of death on 14 December, who is corroborated by contemporary sources as a date of her burial.Modern historiography generally supports the complete innocence of <mask> II in the sudden death of his wife. Based on the findings of Brygida Kürbis, it can be concluded that the 10-year marriage of <mask> II and Ludgarda wasn't successful, and over time it became more obvious to everyone that the ducal couple was unable to have children, although this couldn't be completely certain, because Ludgarda in 1283 was at most only 23 years old. Nevertheless, is assumed that Przemysł II's growing aversion to his wife because of her infertility was well known by all. So when in mid-December 1283 Ludgarda died suddenly and separated (evidenced by her death in Gniezno, away from <mask> <mask>'s court in Poznań), raised suspicion that the death of the duchess was unnatural. Nobody, however, had evidence of this. Contributing to rumors was that in the 13th-century medical knowledge was negligible, and therefore often sudden death of a young person was interpreted as unnatural. In addition, the duke's rejection of a proper mourning to his wife, who was universally liked, increased the suspicions against <mask> II.Archbishopric of Gniezno

On 18 December 1283, a few days after Ludgarda's funeral, Greater Poland witnessed an extremely important event for later history of Poland: the consecration of Jakub Świnka as Archbishop of Gniezno. The event took place in the Franciscan church in Kalisz and was extremely important because after twelve years (since the death in 1271 of Archbishop Janusz Tarnowa) Poland wasn't a full-recognized prelate. Jakub Świnka received the papal nomination on 30 July 1283, however, because he was only a deacon, it was necessary to ordain him. This ceremony took place on 18 December and a day later Jakub received the episcopal consecration. The ceremony, according to sources, was assisted by five Polish bishops and <mask> <mask>, who gave the new Archbishop an expensive ring as a gift. Little is known about the origin and early years of Jakub Świnka, except for his mention in a document issued by Bolesław the Pious. As Archbishop of Gniezno, the cooperation between him and <mask> II was excellent.One example of this was the fact that he appeared as witness in 14 diplomats issued by the Duke of Greater Poland, including the confirmation of all his existing privileges and the permission to mint his own coins in Żnin and the castellany of Ląd. War against Western Pomerania
In the first half of 1284 <mask> II was involved on the side of Denmark and Brandenburg in an armed conflict against Western Pomerania and Rügen. Details about this event are limited, and the peace, which was concluded on 13 August, didn't bring any real benefits to Greater Poland. Much more positive effects would arise from <mask> II's friendly relations with Leszek II the Black, Duke of Kraków; they had a meeting in Sieradz on 20 February 1284. Details about the reason and talks of this relationship are unknown, but they would be productive, since <mask> II decided to give the Kraków voivode Żegota three villages (Nieczajno, Wierzbiczany and Lulin). This good relations were maintained for some time, since seven months later, on 6 September, the Duke of Greater Poland mediated in a dispute between Leszek II the Black and his brother <mask> of Łęczyca with the Teutonic Order. <mask> II also didn't lose sight of the Pomerelian affairs, because on 13 September he had a new meeting with Mestwin II in the city of Nakło.Betrayal of Sędziwój Zaremba
According to the Rocznik Traski (based probably in older sources now missing), on 28 September 1284, Kalisz was burned. This soon caused a series of events which threatened the power of <mask> <mask>. Now governor of Kalisz and in the city at the time of the fire, Sędziwój Zaremba, fearing the consequences, decided to take the Kalisz castle (apparently not damaged in the fire) and give it to Henry IV Probus. At the news of the events of Kalisz, <mask> II reacted instantly. No later than 6 October, as attested by a document issued in that time, <mask> <mask> was at the head of the Greater Poland knights under the city walls. In view of the refusal of submission, the duke ordered the

masks:
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Albert II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Casimir II
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
II


texts:
 siege. It is unknown how prolonged this siege was, but certainly soon due to the reluctance to fight from the rebels (knights and nobles probably feared that <mask> II, after the capture of the castle, would not spare nobody), the duke agreed to negotiate with them.Eventually, <mask> II regained his castle of Kalisz, but he had to give the newly built castle in Ołobok to Henryk IV Probus. There is no certainty that the betrayal of Sędziwój Zaremba was an isolated incident or part of a wider conspiracy from the Zaremba family. However, it can be assumed that the duke didn't believe in a familiar conspiracy because most of Sędziwój's relatives remained in their posts even after 1284. Another source supporting this is a document issued on 6 October (and thus during the period of siege) where the voivode of Poznań Beniamin Zaremba appears as a witness, and therefore had to remain in the inner circle of <mask> <mask>. <mask> <mask>'s change of attitude against Beniamin occurred in 1285. Due to little contemporary information, the cause is unknown. The Rocznik Traski only pointed that the Duke of Greater Poland imprisoned both Sędziwój and Beniamin.At the end apparently they were treated very gently, because Mestwin II of Pomerelia not only restored them their previous post but also part of the property that was confiscated them. Moreover, Beniamin appeared again in the circle of <mask> II around 1286. Second marriage
In 1285 <mask> II decided to remarry. The chosen bride was Richeza, daughter of the deposed King Valdemar of Sweden and granddaughter of King Eric IV of Denmark. Due to the lack of contacts between Greater Poland and Sweden, the negotiations were probably concluded through the mediation of the House of Ascania. The marriage by proxy took place in the Swedish city of Nyköping on 11 October 1285; in the ceremony, the Duke of Greater Poland was represented by the notary Tylon, who received from Przemysł II the village of Giecz in gratitude for his services. It is unknown when and where the formal wedding between <mask> II and Rikissa took place, or who administered the sacrament of marriage: it could be either Bishop Jan of Poznań or Jakub Świnka, Archbishop of Gniezno.Congresses of Łęczyca and Sulejów
The year 1285 brought to <mask> II other successes: in January, Archbishop Jakub of Gniezno convened a meeting in the town of Łęczyca, where the excommunication of the main opponent of the Greater Poland ruler, Henryk IV Probus was confirmed; On 15 August <mask> II had another princely meeting, this time with Władysław I the Elbow-high and Ziemomysł of Inowrocław in the town of Sulejów, where the rebellion against Leszek II the Black and his deposition in favor of Konrad II of Czersk was probably discussed. In May 1286 after the death of the Bishop of Poznań Jan Wyszkowic, his successor Jan Gerbicz was consecrated. The cooperation between the new Bishop and <mask> II was good, although some historians wonder why Bishop Gerbicz later was surnamed "traditor" (traitor). Alliance between Greater Poland, Pomerelia and Western Pomerania
According to Jan Długosz, on 14 June 1287 some Greater Poland knights and (as was suggested by the chronicler), without the knowledge of his ruler, made a surprise attack to Ołobok, won the castle and returned the district to Greater Poland. Henryk IV Probus decided to not respond with any armed conflict and accepted the loss; in unknown circumstances, around this time <mask> <mask>law IV of Pomerania.There, they entered into and agreement of mutual cooperation and help against any opponent, especially the rulers of Brandenburg and Vitslav II, Prince of Rügen. The agreement also guaranteed the inheritance of Gdańsk by Bogislaw IV or his descendants in the case of the deaths of both Mestwin II and <mask> II. In addition, this treaty contributed to a significant deterioration of the relations between Greater Poland and the House of Ascania, rulers of Brandenburg. The treaty was subsequently confirmed at a meeting in Nakło in August 1291. Coalition and fatherhood
According to the theory of historian Oswald Balzer, around 1287 and by inspiration of Archbishop Jakub of Gniezno, treaty of mutual inheritance was agreed on between Leszek II the Black, Henryk IV Probus, <mask> <mask> and <mask> of Głogów. Balzer's theory gained immense popularity among historians. This view is refuted by Władysław Karasiewicz and Jan Baszkiewicz.However, doesn't completely exclude the possibility that during this period an agreement could have been concluded between <mask> II and Henryk IV Probus, evidenced by the fact that the Duke of Wrocław voluntary returned of lands Ołobock and Wieluń to <mask> II in his will. On 14 May 1288 at the Congress of Rzepce the alliance between <mask> II and Mestwin II was further strengthened. In July, the Duke of Greater Poland visited the seriously ill Leszek II the Black in Kraków. The matters discussed in this visit are unknown. The first and only child of <mask> II was born in Poznań on 1 September 1288: a daughter, named Richeza, who later became queen of Bohemia and Poland as the wife of Wenceslaus II and after his death, of Rudolph I. The news of the birth of her daughter were also the latest information about Duchess Richeza. She certainly died after that date and before 13 April 1293, when <mask> II entered into his third and last marriage.It seems that <mask> II had deep and strong feelings for his second wife. This is evidenced not only by the fact that he give their daughter the name of the mother, but also by a document issued on 19 April 1293 where he ceded to the Bishopric of Poznań the village of Kobylniki as payment for a lamp lit eternally at his second wife's tomb. Death of Leszek the Black
On 30 September 1288 Leszek <mask> the Black, Duke of Kraków, Sandomierz, and Sieradz, died childless . His death launched the outbreak of war in Lesser Poland. The Kraków knighthood were in favor of Bolesław II of Płock, while the Sandomierz knighthood supported his brother Konrad II of Czersk; on the other hand, the middle-class citizenry favored Henryk IV Probus, Duke of Wrocław. At the beginning of 1289, Silesian troops marched under the command of the Duke of Wrocław and his allies Bolko I of Opole and Przemko of Ścinawa. They also counted on the support of Sulk the Bear (pl: Sułk z Niedźwiedzia), the castellan of Kraków, who had control over Wawel castle.In response, a coalition against them was formed by Bolesław <mask> of Płock, Casimir II of Łęczyca, and Władysław I the Elbow-high. Surprisingly, <mask> <mask> joined with them, thus ending all of his prior arrangements with the Duke of Wrocław. The Wrocław-Opole-Ścinawa army realized that they had insufficient forces to resist the coalition of Greater Poland-Kuyavia-Masovia, and decided to retreat to Silesia, where they would gather more troops. The retreating troops were quickly followed and a bloody battle took place in the town of Siewierz in Bytom on 26 February 1289, culminating in a full victory for <mask> <mask> and his allies. In this battle Przemko of Ścinawa was killed and Bolko I of Opole was captured. After the battle Władysław I the Elbow-high took Kraków, and <mask> <mask> withdrew with his troops, making a separate truce with Henryk IV Probus. However, later in 1289, Henryk IV Probus took up arms against Kraków, removing Władysław I the Elbow-high to the government of Sandomierz.This event was considered as temporary, because both Henryk IV Probus and Władysław I the Elbow-high continued to use the title of Duke of Kraków and Sandomierz. Rise to kingship (1290–1295)

Acquisition of Kraków
Henry IV Probus, Duke of Wrocław and Kraków, died on 23 June 1290, probably poisoned. Because he died childless, in his will he bequeathed the Duchy of Wrocław to <mask> of Głogów, and Kraków – with the title of high duke and thus the overlordship over Poland – to <mask> II. In addition, he returned Kłodzko to King Wenceslaus <mask> of Bohemia and also gave the Duchy of Nysa–Otmuchów to the Bishopric of Wrocław as a perpetual fief with full sovereignty. These latter dispositions were not surprising, since they were compatible with the most recent political stance of Henryk IV. However, the inheritance of Kraków and Sandomierz by <mask> II, one of his closest male relatives, caused considerable surprise

masks:
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
IIgis
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
Henry III
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
Przemysł
II
II
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
II
Przemysł
II
Henry III
Przemysł
II
Przemysł