Twice ToldMaster Vincentius (Kadłubek) on the olophagus and the founding of Cracovia (Przezdziecki's edition, 1862, pp. 9 to 12)
- Language
- Latin
- Reading
- transcribed from the page image
- Translation
- ours
- Retrieved
- 18 October 2026
The passage comes from the first book of Kadłubek’s Chronica Polonorum, which the edition prints from the Vienna manuscript and sets out as an exchange whose turns are marked with the initials J. and M. The edition spells in the manuscript’s medieval way (e for ae, “Rengni”, “dingnissimam”, “sengnicies”). The first paragraph and the founding sentences are given in full; the short moral reflection that fills the middle of p. 11 is marked […].
Igitur polonia florentissimis per graccum aucta successibus, statuit eius prolem rengni successione dingnissimam, nisi alter filiorum eius fratricidii fedasset piaculum. Erat enim in cuiusdam scopuli amfractibus monstrum atrocitatis immanissime quod quidam olophagum dici putant. Huius voracitati singulis eptadiebus, secundum dierum subputacionem, certus armentorum numerus debebatur, que nisi accole quasi quasdam victimas obtulissent, humanis totidem capitibus a monstro plecterentur. Quam graccus non ferens perniciem, ut erat clemencior filius erga patriam quam pater erga filios, clam filiis accitis digerit propositum pandit consilium. Inimica, inquit, sunt ingnavia virtuti, caniciei deliramentum, iuventuti sengnicies. Non enim est virtus que ingnava est, non canicies que delira, non iuventus que sengnis. Immo fingenda est, eciam ubi nulla est exercende animositatis occasio. Porro se ingerentem gloriam quis umquam declinaverit nisi prorsus inglorius; at vero deffensa vel conservata civium salus eternales transcendit triumphos. Nec enim proprie indulgendum est saluti quociens de comuni agitur discrimine; vos itaque vos, o mea precordia, quorum utrumque nostris educavimus virtutibus, vos in monstri necem armari convenit, vos in eius congressum preponi addecet non exponi, ut pote nostre vite dimidium quibus huius Rengni debetur successio. Ad hec illi: Immo privingnali, pater, odio videmur toxicati, si tante nobis munus glorie invidisses, penes te sit iubendi auctoritas, in nobis est obsequendi necessitas; sepe igitur apertam virorum audaciam, sepius nudos nec quicquam experti virium conatus, industrie tandem niti coguntur suffragio. Coria enim armentorum occenso plena sulfore, loco solito pro armentis collocantur; que dum avidissime glutit olophagus, exalantibus intro flammis suffocatur. Moxque minor tam victorie quam rengni non quasi consortem set emulum fratrem occupat ac trucidat; cuius funus crocodillinis prosequitur lacrimis: a monstro mentitur occisum, a patre tamen gratulanter quasi victor excipitur. Sepe namque meror funeris gaudio vincitur victorie. Sic iunior graccus paterno succedit imperio heres nepharius, set diucius fratricidio fuit sordidus quam imperio insingnis. Nam paulo post dolo deprehenso piaculi deputatur supplicio, exilii perpetuitate dampnatus. J.[ohannes.]
[…]
Immo in scopulo olophagi fundata est urbs insingnis a nomine gracci dicta Cracovia, ut eterna graccus viveret memoria. Nec prius ab exequialibus cessatum est obsequiis, quam urbis consummacione clauderentur. Quam quidam a crocitacione corvorum, qui eo ad cadaver confluxerant, craccoviam dixerunt.
Translation
Poland, grown very prosperous under Graccus, would have judged his offspring most worthy of succeeding to the kingdom, had one of his sons not stained himself with the guilt of fratricide. For in the hollows of a certain crag there was a monster of the most terrible cruelty, which some believe is called an “olophagus”. By the count of days, a fixed number of cattle was owed to its hunger every seven days, and unless the people living nearby offered them as if they were victims, the monster would punish them with the same number of human heads. Graccus could not bear this plague, being a gentler son to his country than a father to his sons. He called his sons to him in secret and set out his plan. “Idleness is the enemy of virtue,” he said, “and raving is the enemy of old age, sloth of youth. Virtue that is idle is no virtue, grey hair that raves is no true grey hair, youth that is slack is no true youth. An occasion for courage has to be invented even where there is none. And who ever turned away from glory when it came to him, unless he was wholly without glory? The safety of the citizens, defended or preserved, outdoes eternal triumphs. We must not put our own safety first when the common danger is at stake. So it is you, my heart’s blood, whom we raised in our own virtues, who ought to arm yourselves for the monster’s death; it is right that you be put at the head of the fight and not exposed to it, as the half of our life, to whom the succession of this kingdom is owed.” To this they answered: “We would seem poisoned by the hatred that stepchildren suffer, father, if you grudged us so great a gift of glory. The right to command is yours; the duty to obey is ours.” So, having often tried open courage, and more often mere efforts of strength that achieved nothing, they were forced in the end to rely on cunning. The hides of cattle, filled with burning sulphur, were put out in the usual place in place of the cattle, and while the olophagus swallowed them most greedily, it was suffocated by the flames breathing out inside it. Soon the younger of them, who saw his brother not as a partner but as a rival for the victory and the kingdom, seized him and killed him. He followed the funeral with crocodile tears and lied that the monster had killed him, and his father welcomed him gladly as a victor, for grief at a funeral is often overcome by joy at a victory. So the younger Graccus succeeded to his father’s rule, a wicked heir, but he was stained by the fratricide for longer than he was distinguished by power. For soon after, the trick was discovered, he was sentenced to the penalty for his crime, and condemned to exile for ever. (John.)
[…]
“On the contrary, on the crag of the olophagus a famous city was founded, called Cracovia from the name of Graccus, so that Graccus would live in eternal memory. The funeral rites did not stop until they were closed by the completion of the city. Some called it Cracovia from the croaking of the ravens that had flocked there to the corpse.”
Notes
The speaker’s initial “J.” after “dampnatus” marks the end of one turn; the initial “M.” appears after the reflection on ambition that fills the middle of p. 11, and the founding sentence that follows is the next turn. We did not work out from the edition alone who speaks which part and say nothing more about it.
The word “olophagum” is introduced with “quidam … dici putant” (some believe it is called), so Kadłubek presents the name as one some people use. In the first sentence we read “alter” as the subject and “piaculum” as the object of “fedasset”; a second reader would read it the other way round, and the sense of the clause is the same. Przezdziecki’s edition prints “scopuli” for the crag and “in scopulo olophagi” for the founding; Banaszkiewicz (2025, p. 2033, note 31) reports that Plezia’s critical edition emends the first to “speculi”, and that the Vienna manuscript has “scopuli”. We saw “scopuli” on the page.
The grammar of “sepe igitur apertam virorum audaciam … niti coguntur suffragio” is loose, and we took it as the narrator’s report of what the sons were forced to do, not as part of their speech; “privingnali odio videmur toxicati” is rendered as “poisoned by the hatred that stepchildren suffer”, and could also mean the hatred of a stepchild. In the sentence “vos in eius congressum preponi addecet non exponi” the verbs “preponi” and “exponi” can mean to be put at the head of the fight or to be put forward and exposed; our translation keeps both senses. “Quociens de comuni agitur discrimine” is read as “whenever it is a matter of the common danger”. In “Moxque minor tam victorie quam rengni non quasi consortem set emulum” we read “tam victorie quam rengni” as going with “emulum”: a rival for the victory and for the kingdom.
“Qui eo ad cadaver confluxerant” does not say whose corpse. Banaszkiewicz (p. 2038) reads it as the corpse of the dragon. The founding passage is the only place in this text where Kraków is named; the text names no Wawel and no river.
Przezdziecki’s footnotes give variant readings from two other witnesses, cited as “edit. Dobr.” (the printed edition of Dobromil) and “cod. Kurop.” (a codex); none of them touches the words quoted here, except that the Dobromil edition lacks “decusatur” on p. 9.