⋆°.☾⋆.ೃ࿔*:⋆

So, Stanisław. Why Stanisław? Why are we even talking about some random saint?

Majority of what is known about him has its roots in a sole chronicle. Old chronicles tend to be dramatic and biased when it comes to politics. The trials of Stanisław's past are unclear enough to have been the source of fierce historical and theological discussions for a long time now. We are only going to focus on the most popular portrayal and perception of his character.

Stanisław, currently considered one of Poland's patron saints and major martyr, was a 11th century priest based in Kraków. TL;DR the prior bishop of the city ordained him and gave him a canonry, then Stanisław got popular for his teachings, then he became the next bishop of Kraków and partook in various reforms, as well as building what is now known as the Wawel Cathedral (she's cute, look her up). He was a Big Deal, partaking not only in art and preaching, but also national politics.

And so, eventually, according to the chronicles, he got into shit for criticising the King, either threatening to excommunicate him or straight-up doing so. Either way, the King declared him a traitor and sent his people to torture and kill the Bishop, and then scatter his cut-up remains to be devoured by wild beasts. Fun. The sources are gloriously unreliable and the entire case is somewhat similar to the story of Thomas Becket, another significant cleric that had beef with the King. Either way, bitches were quick to canonise the guy, and thus he became the first native Polish saint, and the patron of Kraków, his home diocese.

BUT THAT'S NOT ALL THAT IMPORTANT. The legend itself (and there is a Legend, Vita Minor, a typical hagiography). It says that the Bishop's chopped-up body got miraculously pieced back together. The author of Vita Minor takes some... vast artistic liberties, lmao—he states that Stanisław's death brought a curse upon the Kingdom, later on leading to the severe, multiple invasions of Poland. But ☝️ the legend also insists that the country, just like the Bishop's remains, will eventually be unified...

And what other reformer-and-shit-stirrer-later-on-even-more-fiercely-venerated religious leader do we know of?? Ghurch-wise?? Terzito, of course.

NOW. NOW. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? TO ANY SANE PERSON? WELL. NOT REALLY. NOT LIKELY. IT IS A STRETCH THAT COULD IMPRESS ANY SEASONED YOGA TEACHER.

But oh, to a boy that's grown up between his own fascination of the occult and the polite, sem-religious upbringing of typical Cracovian intelligentsia. To someone who has always looked for blessings in the macabre, who has already heard of a dismembered martyr-priest-leader-politician brought back to life.

I already assumed Terzo's death would have crumbled Necropolitus' psyche, marking a shift from idealisation to blatant deification, the way it often happens when you're a part of a cult whose leader has just passed. And I wonder, once the dust settles and the coup reshapes the Church, does the Bishop think back to the saint from his hometown? Do the following political shifts and conflicts that make him step back from the centre of it all remind him of the curse that fractured a kingdom? Does he hope his beloved martyr might, too, reintegrate and return to unify the flock that has lost him?