MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward. 
Author Message
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.
Unexpected impact of MS 991.
As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met in 991
AD at the time the tracta between Anluf/Olav and the English King was
signed. King Olav was baptised and short there after Sigfrid as we in Sweden
calls him met with King Olof Sk?tkonung. Around 1000 AD(not 1008 AD which
some tries to make believe) King Olof was baptised in Husaby V?sterg?tland.
It might be because he had betrotten his oldest daughter Ingegerd to the
Norwegian King Olav Haraldsson but changed his mind that the King's daughter
out-of-wedlock was married to King Olav instead.

King Olof Sk?tkonung was half-brother to Canute the Great and to Ester. All
three of them were children of Gunhild sister to the King of Poland. If it
hadn't been for King Olof changing his mind and given Ingegerd to Jaroslav
of Novgorod we might not have known so much about the trade goods sent from
Greenland to eastern Europe and to Asia. But it all started with the 991 AD
tract which lead up to the Norwegian and the Swedish Kings being baptised
into the Catholic Church

In the time following King Olav's death in Svolder, up to 1060's there were
a unstabil situation in Norway.
At the same time the trade from Greenland did flowerish and the
merchandisers felt strong and earned a lot. Due to the situation in England
and the good contacts the Norse Vikings had with the Swedish court eastward
down to Bysans, the trade reached far longer than what's been told by most
writing about this.

As al-Biruni, the 11th century Arabian Historian noted:
" ..... "Walrus ivory is "the tooth of a fish, one cubit long, which the
Volga Bulgars [a Turkic people] bring from the northern seas ... [and from
there it is sent] to Mecca ... and to Egypt" to be made into knife and sword
handles for nobles and rulers." ..... "Gyrfalcons from Iceland and Greenland
were sent to the royal mews in Norway and later to Denmark and used by
rulers as gifts of state."

One unexpected impact is that the contacts from early Viking Age between
Scandinavia and Byzantine Empire got tighter when Gunhild's granddaughter
Ingegerd who converted into the Orthodox faith together with her Jaroslav
had the Scandinavian Kings and Princes living by them when on way to or from
Byzans where Scandinavian Nobility use to serve in the Emperor's Guard.
Ingegerd let her youth-beloved's son stay behind in Novgorod when Olof later
called the Holy had to return in a haste to withhold his position in Norway
where there was an uproar against him.

It's no surprise when we today learn that many of the early maps of
Greenland and the Arctic westward origin from Arabian or Byzantine
Cartographers. Nor that so many artifacts from Greenland have been found
here and there over Asia.

Inger E



Sat, 06 Jan 2007 17:26:51 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.
Quote:

>As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met in

991

Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear up
the implications of those first few words.

a) King Olav.
Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not, because
it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
Baltic.

c) bishop of Orkney
I don't think the Orcadians would admit to having a bishop of their own in
991, or for a couple of generations after

David B.



Sat, 06 Jan 2007 21:36:40 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.

Quote:

> >As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met in
> 991

> Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear up
> the implications of those first few words.

> a) King Olav.
> Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

> b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
> Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not,
because
> it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
> Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
> Baltic.

He led a double life, like many people in Scandinavia. With tax rates being
so high he needed two incomes. He also had the idea of sending Leif
Eiriksson to find new lands across the ocean so that new tithes could be
collected.

--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden



Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:51:45 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.



Quote:

> >As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met in
> 991

> Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear up
> the implications of those first few words.

> a) King Olav. didn't say he was since he then was called Anluf.
> Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

> b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
> Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not,
because
> it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
> Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
> Baltic.

No David B,
you haven't done your homework - if Sigfrid, which was the name Sigheric (of
Orkney) was given by the Swedes during the time he converted and baptised
many here, was sent by king Ethelred on a mission to the Baltic, that was
after he had baptised King Olof Sk?tkonung. That's one reason why the old
documents saying 1000 or 1001 for that baptised are more likely to be
correct, I don't intend to go into details here about that.
As for Sigheric of Canterbury he was one of the two bishops with the name
Sigheric at the meeting at which the tracta was written.

Quote:

> c) bishop of Orkney
> I don't think the Orcadians would admit to having a bishop of their own in
> 991, or for a couple of generations after

There was a bishop assigned to Orkney and the islands. Your thought doesn't
help you nor is your thought an valid argument. while the Jarl of Orkney
didn't convert until 4 (four years later)
[you missed to read the url I sent so hear it is once again
http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/timeline.htm]
there was a bishop elected for Orkney and the other islands before 990 AD.

Inger E
who wonder how someone who say he done the homework missed the line for 995
AD - believing that to have happened a generation or so later.... four years
a generation???????????

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> David B.



Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:53:31 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.


Quote:




> > >As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met
in
> > 991

> > Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear
up
> > the implications of those first few words.

> > a) King Olav. didn't say he was since he then was called Anluf.

> > Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

> > b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
> > Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not,
> because
> > it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
> > Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
> > Baltic.

> No David B,
> you haven't done your homework - if Sigfrid, which was the name Sigheric
(of
> Orkney) was given by the Swedes during the time he converted and baptised
> many here, was sent by king Ethelred on a mission to the Baltic, that was
> after he had baptised King Olof Sk?tkonung. That's one reason why the old
> documents saying 1000 or 1001 for that baptised are more likely to be
> correct, I don't intend to go into details here about that.
> As for Sigheric of Canterbury he was one of the two bishops with the name
> Sigheric at the meeting at which the tracta was written.

Where in the text of the treaty (not trakta)
http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/diplom_vise_tekst.prl?b=159...
does it say that a second bishop Sigeric was present? I can find only an
*arch*bishop with that name. Is this an example of your creative
"textanalyse"?

--
Alan Crozier
Lund
Sweden



Sat, 06 Jan 2007 23:00:38 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.

Quote:

> > c) bishop of Orkney
> > I don't think the Orcadians would admit to having a bishop of their own in
> > 991, or for a couple of generations after

> There was a bishop assigned to Orkney and the islands. Your thought doesn't
> help you nor is your thought an valid argument. while the Jarl of Orkney
> didn't convert until 4 (four years later)
> [you missed to read the url I sent so hear it is once again
> http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/timeline.htm]
> there was a bishop elected for Orkney and the other islands before 990 AD.

> Inger E
> who wonder how someone who say he done the homework missed the line for 995
> AD - believing that to have happened a generation or so later.... four years
> a generation???????????

Wow, what a load this is.  First, if 995 is the forced
conversion of Sigurd, it does not follow, nor does this source
say, that Olaf left in charge a bishop of Orkney, rather than
assuming that Orkney both politically and religiously were under
his and therefore his archbishop's control--this latter is
typical of Germanic conversions from the fifth through the 12th
centuries.  But even if you disagree with that, as I'm sure you
will, the source to which you point only states a) that there
was a conversion, it says nothing about a bishop of Orkney and
b) clicking on the provided link at that site, their text
postulates that Sigurd didn't really convert, but rather went on
with the show, but stayed true to his pagan beliefs and
practices.  So it seems to me that your source does not prove
your conclusion.  

Further, this source says nothing about the election of a bishop
for Orkney before 990 unless you want to try and argue for a
bishopric in existance from Cormac in the late 6th century all
the way through without interruption to the late tenth century.
In either case, let's see the evidence.  The source you point to
certainly doesn't provide the evidence for a Orkney based
bishopric before 990.

ljs



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 01:17:47 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.

Quote:

>He [Sigheric/Sigfrid] led a double life, like many people in Scandinavia.
>With tax rates being so high he needed two incomes. He also had the idea
>of sending Leif Eiriksson to find new lands across the ocean so that new
>tithes could be collected.

That spelling intrigues me.  It might be a typo, I suppose, but it
should not be rejected because if genuine it confirms the theory
that Vinland (like most things and places) was discovered by an
Eirishman.

Slainte na Gael!  (or words to that effect)

--
Richard N (Dick) Wisan
No wit in this SIG (as ordered by DSH)
To reply to me, disHONOR my address



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 00:54:08 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.

Quote:



>> >As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met
in
>> >991

>> Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear
up
>> the implications of those first few words.

>> a) King Olav.

>didn't say he was since he then was called Anluf.

I was quoting from your earlier line above!

Quote:
>> Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

>> b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
>> Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not,
>> because
>> it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
>> Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
>> Baltic.

>No David B,
>you haven't done your homework - if Sigfrid, which was the name Sigheric
(of
>Orkney) was given by the Swedes

More news for the Orcadians, and for quite a few others in V?xj?, York,
Glastonbury etc. We all know a very different version of St. Sigfrid's life
before his trip to Sweden.

Quote:
>As for Sigheric of Canterbury he was one of the two bishops with the name
>Sigheric at the meeting at which the tracta was written.

See Alan's message.

Quote:
>> c) bishop of Orkney
>> I don't think the Orcadians would admit to having a bishop of their own
in
>> 991, or for a couple of generations after

> http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/timeline.htm ]
>there was a bishop elected for Orkney and the other islands before 990 AD.

See Larry's message.

David B.



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 02:30:45 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.


Quote:

>>As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met in
>991

>Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear up
>the implications of those first few words.

>a) King Olav.
>Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

>b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
>Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not, because
>it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
>Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
>Baltic.

>c) bishop of Orkney
>I don't think the Orcadians would admit to having a bishop of their own in
>991, or for a couple of generations after

http://www.aberdeen.anglican.org/aboutus.htm

  "The Diocese of Orkney was founded in 1073 and
    the first bishop was Ralph".

Eric Stevens



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 04:37:03 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.


Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.
Eric,
the first dioceses in Orkney was founded before 8th century.
a work dealing with this question is among others Jane Glover in 'The Story
of Scotland'
but what's you probably don't know and most other who aren't familiar with
the History of Scotland, Orkney and the other Scottish Islands is that
Orkney saw three waves of Christianity and thus had dioceses organised in
Orkney more than once.

The first one to baptised the people of Orkney was St Columba. You can read
about him and his work in Adamnan's book about St Colomba,(contemporary
source), which was translated into English and edited in 1961 under the
title: 'Adomnan's Life of St. Columba'
a very interesting book which I recommend for those who haven't read it.
Origin's title: Vita Sancti Columb?. written in late 6th century.

url to be read:
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Orkney

as you can see in following url St Columba actually reintroduced
Christianity, and that's correct. The real first wave of Christianity passed
the Orkney islands in 2nd century AD but it faded away in 5th century.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Saint_Columba

Papa Stonsay had a monestry in 8th century, some say it was Pictish but that
can be discussed it's definitely linked to St. Columba's missions.

So the problem which are involved in reading the line you quoted Eric is
that what you refer to is the first Bishop belonging to the Anglo-Saxon
Church and not to having it's roots in Iona monestry. There were more than
one Bishop of Orkney before the one in 11th century,
but that's an other story.

Inger E



Quote:



> >>As shown before King Olav and Sigheric/Sigfrid, bishop of Orkney, met in
> >991

> >Before we begin to consider the rest of the message, can we just clear up
> >the implications of those first few words.

> >a) King Olav.
> >Fair enough I suppose, though he wasn't much of a king in 991.

> >b) Sigheric/Sigfrid.
> >Is this supposed to be one person with alternate names? I hope not,
because
> >it sounds a lot like two separate people- Sigheric, newly-appointed
> >Archbishop of Canterbury, and Sigfrid, King Ethelred's missionary to the
> >Baltic.

> >c) bishop of Orkney
> >I don't think the Orcadians would admit to having a bishop of their own
in
> >991, or for a couple of generations after

> http://www.aberdeen.anglican.org/aboutus.htm

>   "The Diocese of Orkney was founded in 1073 and
>     the first bishop was Ralph".

> Eric Stevens



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 05:12:17 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.


Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.



Quote:

> >He [Sigheric/Sigfrid] led a double life, like many people in Scandinavia.
> >With tax rates being so high he needed two incomes. He also had the idea
> >of sending Leif Eiriksson to find new lands across the ocean so that new
> >tithes could be collected.

> That spelling intrigues me.  It might be a typo, I suppose, but it
> should not be rejected because if genuine it confirms the theory
> that Vinland (like most things and places) was discovered by an
> Eirishman.

> Slainte na Gael!  (or words to that effect)

In one of the three(!) versions of the Vinland discovery there were at least
one Irishman living there. Then I haven't included the Hvitmannaland whichs
is mentioned in many written sources and also exists south of Vinland in
some early maps.

Inger E

Quote:

> --
> Richard N (Dick) Wisan
> No wit in this SIG (as ordered by DSH)
> To reply to me, disHONOR my address



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 05:14:15 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.


Fri, 19 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT
 MS 991 unexpected impact in contacts eastward.

Quote:

> Eric,
> the first dioceses in Orkney was founded before 8th century.
> a work dealing with this question is among others Jane Glover in 'The Story
> of Scotland'
> but what's you probably don't know and most other who aren't familiar with
> the History of Scotland, Orkney and the other Scottish Islands is that
> Orkney saw three waves of Christianity and thus had dioceses organised in
> Orkney more than once.

I fear that you are confusing terms.  That missionaries before
995 appeared on Orkney is not the question, the question is
whether it was formed into a diocese with its own bishop; you
claimed that the Orkney's had their own bishop before the last
years of the tenth century.  What is your evidence that the
islands ever had a bishop?

Quote:
> The first one to baptised the people of Orkney was St Columba. You can read
> about him and his work in Adamnan's book about St Colomba,(contemporary
> source), which was translated into English and edited in 1961 under the
> title: 'Adomnan's Life of St. Columba'
> a very interesting book which I recommend for those who haven't read it.
> Origin's title: Vita Sancti Columb?. written in late 6th century.

First, this is not quite correct.  There is no evidence that
Columba ever set foot on the islands.  That some of his
companions sailed from Iona in app. 565 for the Orkneys and that
Columba had preached to the Orkney chieftain who was visiting in
sourthern Scotland informing said chieftain that Columba's men
were coming and he'd best receive them with open arms is true.
Cormac and company arrived and preached.   But Adomnan says
nothing about Cormac being a bishop (and the Celtic church had a
much different view of bishops and "diocese" than the Roman
communion had) or about any subsequent bishops of the Orkney's.
BTW, Richard Sharpe has redone an edition of Admonan's Vita, in
English translation for Penguin published in 1995  In addition
is Anderson's excellent edition of the Latin text published in
1991.  It was written by the way in the late 7th century, not in
the late 6th.

Quote:

> url to be read:
> http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Orkney

> as you can see in following url St Columba actually reintroduced
> Christianity, and that's correct. The real first wave of Christianity passed
> the Orkney islands in 2nd century AD but it faded away in 5th century.
> http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Saint_Columba

> Papa Stonsay had a monestry in 8th century, some say it was Pictish but that
> can be discussed it's definitely linked to St. Columba's missions.

Possibly, that is still up for debate.  Immaterial as to whether
it was Pictish or was linked to Columba's mission (which can
only be demonstrated if the puportedly 8th century chapel there
shows that it sits on or is part of a sixth century building
that had continuous habitation.  Otherwise the connection to
Columba is tenuous at best.  Perhaps you mean to say that it
MIGHT be connected to eighth century Iona and other missionary
efforts of the period into the north.  

By the way, you contradict yourself.  If as you say above
"Columba" was first, how can the first be in the Roman period?
What evidence do you have of Roman Christianity in the Orkney
Islands in the second century, particularly since even the story
of Albanus in Bede occurs during the reign of Diocletian, late
third or very early fourth century, from which period most of
the certainly Christian artefacts and finds have come too.  So
I'm curious about this second century claim of Christianity not
only in Britain generally but specifically in the Orkney
Islands...and even if such evidence exists, it still doesn't
demonstrate the presence of a bishop in the islands, more likely
that the islands were under the jurisdiction of a bishop on the
mainland.

Quote:
> So the problem which are involved in reading the line you quoted Eric is
> that what you refer to is the first Bishop belonging to the Anglo-Saxon
> Church and not to having it's roots in Iona monestry. There were more than
> one Bishop of Orkney before the one in 11th century,
> but that's an other story.

But you have conflated the presence of Christianity as meaning
that the Orkney's had their own bishop.  That simply doesn't
wash.

ljs



Sun, 07 Jan 2007 07:50:29 GMT
 
 [ 214 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]

 Relevant Pages 

1. MS 991's impact on Leif Eriksson

2. An important Diploma from 991

3. An important Diploma from 991

4. Scandian Spread Eastward.

5. Personal Computer (Mac or MS-Dos) Heiroglyphs?

6. Getting Bob Forrest's MS

7. Where is Ms.Piggy ??

8. Ping Ms Inger Johansson

9. Announcing Scientist Friendly MS-Windows Internet Kit

10. Impact Hypothesis Loses Its Sparkle: Shock-Synthesized Diamonds Said to Prove Catastrophic Impact Killed Off N. American Megafauna Can't Be Found

11. Need information-Impact Crater and the Dinosaurs


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software