Driving
through Denmark today, one cannot help but notice the number of churches that
dapple the countryside. Small, square,
white, and almost completely identical, they are so much a part of Danish
scenery that one might almost mistake them for a natural part of the landscape,
as if Christianity has always been a part of Denmark. This, however, is not the case.
Several hundred years ago, a pagan religion dominated the North, with a
pantheon of gods and goddesses recognized by the Vikings. When, how, and why did the transition take
place? This essay will undertake to
examine the process of Scandinavian Christianization on these three
levels. Beginning with a brief study of
the primary sources for the conversion, this essay will then address the
historical aspects of Christianization, the methods of Christianization, and
the reasons why Scandinavian countries rejected their pagan religion for
Christianity.
The sources
we have for the study of the Scandinavian conversion are few, and are usually
written recordings of what was preserved as oral history. Before accepting
their contents blindly, however, it is crucial to examine the problems which
may affect these oral and written histories.
Thanks to a
‘telephone’ experiment in class, DIS Nordic Mythology students are well aware
of the difficulties involved in tracing the original tale in any retold
story. In oral societies, the
transmission of a tale from one generations to the next rarely happens without
the occurrence of change, usually in the weaker elements of dates, unfamiliar
place names, and genealogies[1]. Kaminskij’s theory of syncretic truth also
applies to this situation; in an effort to arrive at the syncretic truth
appreciated by medieval Northern society, story-tellers would sacrifice what we
now conceptualize as historical truths[2]. By the time Snorri Sturluson and Ari the
Wise wrote of their countries’ conversions, much in the way of ‘truth’ had
changed.
Stories may
also be embellished, combined, or contaminated by the story teller in many
ways, as Antti Aarne has shown[3],
and it is therefore not surprising that an oral culture may quickly legendize
its history. In this case, a historic
event – such as a battle—will be elaborated upon in local folklore until it
incorporates elements of mythology and folktales: we have seen this occur on a
large scale in the stories of the early Dacian kings, in which historical
characters and events are partially recorded, if only partially recognizable,
in a more ‘legendized’ form.[4] Even more complicated are the many examples
when legend becomes accepted as history; if Hemmingsen and Lukman are right,
the above legendized stories of Dacian kings later came to be accepted as the
proper history of Denmark[5]. The stories of St. Sigurd’s role in Sweden’s
conversion also demonstrate these difficulties in oral histories; historical
facts and personages were combined and reconfigured several times, in several
versions, and for several different reasons[6]. Considering the many versions and
stereotyped motifs found in the Sigurd legends, it is virtually impossible to
detect whether the orally transmitted stories are, by modern standards, fact or
fiction.
It is also
crucial to examine the function of the written word within a mainly oral
society, and what role these contemporary sources played in their own
societies. Unfortunately, the picture is grim.
Little or no respect was paid to the annihilation of personal bias as we
understand it today. The written word
was not used to record facts, but more often used as a tool to convince the
reader of the author’s point of view[7]. Subsequently, facts were often altered or
avoided in order to present a picture better suited to the aim of the
author. For example, Adam of Bremen
stresses the vital importance of the archbishopric of Hamburg-Bremen in order
to strengthen his claim against the independence of the archbishopric of Lund[8],
while Saxo Grammaticus’ Gesta Danorum
serves to glorify the Danish church over that of Hamburg-Bremen and Sweden[9]. In these differing objectives, selection
proved an important part of the writing of history. Even deeds of gifts or land were subject to forgery and number
crunching[10]; kings
often had documents drawn up to ‘prove’ their rights over land, and Archbishop
Adalbero of Hamburg-Bremen, outraged at the foundation of the Danish
archbishopric of Lund, proved his right to rule the Northern churches to Pope
Calixt II with as many as twelve forged documents[11].
One
possible exception to this rule of the unreliability of the written word is Ari
the Wise of Iceland. Modern scholars
accept Ari’s words with less of a grain of salt than those of other
contemporary writers because of his adherence to what are now commonly accepted
rules in the recording of history[12]. In his Íslendingabók,
he is careful to record sources, and to record why he considers them
trustworthy or reliable (many of them were eyewitnesses to the events), and is
primarily interested in recording the exact facts in Iceland’s history. In spite this sense of the historical,
however, it has been pointed out that he was trained as a priest, worked under
the eye of two bishops[13],
and may have over-dramatized his family’s involvement in the historic Althing[14]. These possible biases aside, most scholars
hold his writings in high esteem; Aðalsteinsson even declares, “Íslendingabók is a unique source on the
acceptance of Christianity in Iceland and must form the basis of all research
into the Conversion.”[15]
Because of the discrepancies and biases in
the sources, it is impossible to know for sure what exactly happened and
when. We are, of course, only familiar
with some of the major players in the story of Scandinavia’s Christianization;
for example, the names of certain monks, bishops, and kings. But the story can
more or less be told in terms of major players and dates, according to the
variety of sources.
The first
missionary activity in Scandinavia was seen in the ninth century. In 822, archbishop Ebo of Rheims was sent
north by King Louis the Pious, son of Charlemagne, in order to convert the wild
Danes[16]. Following this[17]
in 826, Harald Klak, pretender to the Danish throne, was baptised as part
of an allegiance with the Franks in
order to support his campaigns in Denmark[18].
Unfortunately, this move proved largely unsuccessful; Ebo did not manage to
find many converts, and Harald Klak was soon after driven out of Denmark for
good. At this time, either because of a
request by a Swedish king[19]
or in association with Harald Klak[20],
a mission to Birka was then undertaken by Anskar, a young man depicted as
‘up-to-the-challenge’ of converting the wild Danes[21]. Anskar’s mission, however, was somewhat
eclipsed due to the depositions of Louis the Pious in 833 and Archbishop Ebo in
834[22],
and was threatened when King Horic burned Hamburg to the ground in 845[23].
After its
destruction, Hamburg was united with Bremen as a single archbishop’s seat by
Nicolas I in 864[24]: this was
presumably a temporary loan from the archbishopric of Köln[25]
until the North had been successfully converted[26]. Anskar was promoted as its archbishop, and
quickly began a new series of missions into Scandinavia. Because of the popularity of Christianity
among merchants – who found it convenient to accept the faith in the interest
of business relations[27]– Anskar won many converts in merchant towns,
and even built churches at Ribe, Schleswig, Århus, Haithaby, and Birka[28]. On the whole, however, not much progress was
made within Scandinavia in the 9th century; not a single king
converted[29], the five
bishops of Denmark did not actually live or travel there[30],
and those few who did convert usually did so in to foreign lands such as Anglia
or Francia[31]. Adam of
Bremen’s account aside, there is much evidence in favour of a considerable
English influence on the Christian conversion: Harald Finehair’s son Håkon was
educated in Christianity in England[32],
and King Knut appointed a bishop for Roskilde who was consecrated at Canterbury[33].
It was not
until the 10th century that Scandinavia could be considered ‘Christianized’,
due to the conversion of several major kings.
Denmark was Christian in the mid-960’s when Harald Gormsson converted,
convinced –according to sources—by the priest Poppo who, at a banquet, carried
a hot iron for the sake of the Catholic faith without being burned[34]. As a testimony to his new faith, Harald
built a large church at Jelling, and erected a stone in which he declared
himself responsible for “making the Danes Christian”[35]. He also produced coinage which depicts a
cross, and his fortresses such as Trelleborg may embody Christian symbolism as
well[36].
Sources for
the conversion of Sweden are sketchy, but according to Adam of Bremen, the
first Christian Swedish king was King Erik, whose son, Olog Skötkonung, took
over the conversion of the Swedes when his father reverted to paganism[37]. In Norway, Christian influence was evident
in the reign of Håkon, who had been raised a Christian in England but may have
maintained his paganism[38],
and later by the rule of Harald Gormsson.
It was, however, largely due to the activities of Olaf Tryggvason, king
from ca. 995-1000, that much of Norway was literally forced to accept
Christianity[39]. Converted
himself in England in 994 or 995[40],
Olaf had made it his mission to Christianize Norway and Norwegian settlements:
“Christianity was to be hammered into wicked heathen heads with the customary
violence of the viking”[41]. A later successor, Olaf Haraldsson, was made
the nation’s patron saint after his death on the battlefield in 1030: not in a
Christian war against pagans, but against the Danish king Knut, who had also
conquered England. As St. Olaf, he therefore helped to strengthen Norwegian
religious and national identity in the face of the ecclesiastical powers of
Denmark and Germany[42].
Christianity
was comfortably accepted in royal circles by the eleventh century, as evidenced
by the “aversion of eleventh century court poets for the mythological kennings
that their tenth-century predecessors favoured”[43]. From Christian inscriptions around Uppsala,
we can gather the faith had gained a secure and wide-spread enough footing that
rich landowners could openly declare their faith in monuments[44]. Further, Harald Gormsson’s extensive
building projects saw the Danish countryside practically littered with small
white churches[45]. It is clear from this evidence that
Christianity exerted a definite presence in Scandinavia by the eleventh
century. This presence was firmly
established with the appointment of an archbishopric of Lund, replacing the
responsibilities of Hamburg-Bremen over Scandinavia in 1104[46],
and the subsequent appointment of archbishoprics in Trondheim, Norway (1150’s)
and Uppsala, Sweden (1164)[47]
indicate the deep and settled roots of Christianity in Scandinavia by the
mid-twelfth century.
The story
of the Christianization of Iceland is related by Ari Þorgilsson in his Íslendingabók[48]. According to Ari, the much-glorified king
Olaf Tryggvason of Norway demanded the immediate conversion of Iceland in 1000[49].
He took captive many influential Icelandic men in Norway, threatening to kill
them and invade Iceland if Christianity was not immediately made the religion
of the island.
Olaf sent
two Icelandic chieftains back to the Icelandic Althing to relay his demands,
where the matter was heatedly debated between Christian and pagan chieftains.
The final decision was relegated to the Law-speaker, Þorgeir, who “lay down and
spread his cloak over him[self], and rested all that day and the night after,
and did not speak a word”[50]. Upon his return to the council, Þorgeir
insisted that Iceland required one law and one faith in order to keep it
unified and peaceful:
“‘And now this
seems to me the best counsel,’ [Þorgeir] said, ‘that we do not let those
prevail who are most eager to go against each other, but let us so mediate the
matter between the two sides that each may win part of his case, and let us all
have one law and one religion. For this will turn out to be true, that if we
rend asunder the laws we shall also rend the peace.’”[51]
Þorgeir then spoke the new law, declaring that all Icelanders
should be baptised and accept the Christian God. Concessions were made to the
pagans by allowing the continued consumption of horse flesh, a practice
associated with pagan sacrificial feasts, and the exposure of unwanted children
according to the previous law.[52] In addition, although public
sacrifices were banned, men were allowed to sacrifice privately and in secret[53].
Miraculously[54], the
chieftains unanimously welcomed the new law, Christianizing Iceland both peacefully
and instantaneously.
The
Christianization of Scandinavia was certainly approached from a top-down
perspective[55]: a whole
population was considered ‘Christian’ simply when the king or local ruler was
baptized[56]. However, the effects of the ruler’s
conversion were rarely instantly felt. Although some effort was expended by
more pious priests to instruct the king and his court in the new regulations
surrounding their lives as Christians[57],
little was actually known of the behavioral expectations of a Christian[58],
and most kings and noblemen did not see baptism as much more than a ceremony[59]. The influence of Christianity on the lives
of royal subjects was as varied as the fervour of the king, ranging from the
erection of a few small churches to Olaf Tryggvasson’s virtual reign of terror.
In almost all cases, however, royalty was the primary subjects of missionary
campaigns: Christianity was the problem of the nobility.
Once the
kings were convinced by missionary bishops, it remained for the priests to
bring the new religion to the lower classes. Change was extremely gradual: it
is important to note that the impact of Christianity was not felt for a
considerable time among the farmers and peasants, and traces of paganism even
remain today in rural folk-legend[60].
It is, however, interesting to observe a few of the techniques adopted in the
task of conversion. Although Rimbert
insists that “by the example of [Anskar’s] good life he incited many to embrace
the faith”[61], it is
clear that simply setting a good example was not enough to ensure the local
acceptance of Christianity.
First of
all, the missionary priest would have to convince the local ruler or nobleman
as, “in order to evangelize they needed protection, shelter and support, which
could best be provided by men who were powerful locally”[62]. This was often done through gift-giving[63]. Then, to secure the foothold of Christianity
in Scandinavia, monasteries were set up in the country. Priests found an unusual way of populating
these:
“[Anskar] began
also to buy Danish and Slav boys and to redeem some from captivity so that he
might train them for God's service. Of these he kept some with him, whilst
others he sent to be trained at the monastery of Turholt. There were also with
him here belonging to your order some of our fathers and teachers, as a result
of whose teaching and instructions the divine religion has increased amongst
us…” [64]
This practice seems to have been relatively common, and had several
benefits: aside from establishing a Christian presence in towns and villages, a
generation of preachers who had the benefit of missionizing in the native
language of the populace was extremely important in getting the Christian
message to the masses[65].
In addition
to the Christian presence offered by the monasteries, Christianity set about
replacing paganism in almost all aspects.
For example, priests took over the ceremonies required for everyday life[66];
now, marriages, birth ceremonies, funerals and other important occasions had to
be performed by churchmen. Because
tithes were not yet in place, priests often charged for these services[67].
Pagan places of worship underwent the same Christianizing treatment; there is
evidence that under the decree of Pope Gregory the Great, pagan temples,
groves, and other places of worship were not destroyed by missionary priests,
but were simply consecrated as Christian ground[68]
so that the god figure worshipped there would be the ‘true God’[69]. Similarly, the functions of local gods and
goddesses were simply replaced by saints[70].
It seems
also that preaching exerted a special power in the conversion process[71].
In particular, the figure of Christ as portrayed by the missionary-priests had
a great influence on the spread of Christianity in all parts of Scandinavia;
not as a meek and loving God of suffering children and sinners, but as a
powerful deity. Christ was also presented “as a hero, brave, strong and just –
in a guise suitable for a heroic age, that is – but also … faultless and pure…
a source of success and strength...”[72].
He was an omnipotent God who could be invoked in every situation, instead of
having to refer to individual gods with small, packaged responsibilities. Cast
in this light, he completely eclipsed the pagan gods of Scandinavia.
Christ’s
power was constantly stressed by the missionaries in stories set in familiar
locales; these related ‘true’ situations in which Christ, physically put to the
test, always demonstrated his superior power:
On one occasion
[Herigar] was sitting in an assembly of people… In the course of a general
discussion some praised their own gods, by whose favour they had secured great
prosperity, whilst others heaped reproaches upon him because he alone, by
accepting a worthless creed, had separated himself from them all. He then,
being fervent in spirit, is said to have replied, " If there be so great
uncertainty in regard to the divine majesty, which nevertheless ought not to be
called in doubt by anyone, let us prove by miracles who is the more powerful,
the many beings whom ye call your gods or my one Almighty Lord Jesus Christ.
See, rain is at hand , " a shower was then imminent " call upon
the names of your gods and ask that no rain fall upon you, and I will ask my
Lord Jesus Christ that not a drop of rain may touch me, and he who on this
occasion has regard to those who call upon him let him be God." This was
mutually agreed, and as all the rest sat on one side, he and one small boy sat
on the other side, and each of them began to invoke his own god, whilst he
invoked the Lord Christ. Thereupon a great stream of rain descended, and they
were so completely soaked that it seemed as though they and their garments had
been thrown into a river. Even the foliage from the branches with which their
meeting place had been constructed, fell upon them and thereby proved to them
that it was by divine power that they were overcome. On himself and the boy who
was with him, not a single drop fell. When this happened they were confused and
astonished. " Ye see," said Herigar, "who is God. Do not,
unhappy men, try to draw me away from His worship, but rather be confounded
and, renouncing your errors, learn the way of truth." [73]
These stories were supplemented by those which demonstrated the
punishment of pagans by the Christian God. In these cases, the pagan gods,
although they may have been satisfied with their worshippers, were powerless to
defend them against the wrath of Christ:
The long
suffering mercy of God did not allow [the burning and looting of the Hamburg
church] to go unavenged, but almost all who were present were soon afterwards
punished … In that country there was a certain influential man whose son had
joined with the others in this conspiracy, and who had collected in his
father's house the booty which he had captured at that place. Thereafter his
possessions began to decrease and he began to lose his flocks and his household
possessions. The son himself was stricken by divine vengeance and died … his
wife, his son and his daughter also died. When the father saw that he had
become bereft of all that he had possessed with the exception of one little
son, he began, in his misery, to fear the anger of the gods and to imagine that
he was suffering all these calamities because he had offended some god.
Thereupon… he consulted a soothsayer and asked him to find out by, the casting
of lots which god lie had offended and to explain how lie might appease him.
After performing all the customary ceremonies, the soothsayer said that all
their gods were well disposed towards him, but that the God of the Christians
was much incensed against him. " Christ," he said, " has ruined
you. It is because there is something hidden in your house which had been
consecrated to Him that all the evils that you have suffered have come upon you
; nor can you be freed from them as long as this remains in your house."
…he remembered that his son had brought to his house as part of the
aforementioned booty a certain book… he feared greatly to retain it in his own
house, and he fastened it up carefully and tied it to a fence with a notice
attached stating that whoever wished might take it. For the offence that he had
committed he promised also to make voluntary amends to the Lord Jesus
Christ…Later on he showed such faith and devotion that when with us he learned
to say the Psalms without reading them. In like manner were the rest punished,
either by death or plague, or by the loss of their property, and it was made
manifest to all that they had received due punishment from our Lord Jesus
Christ because they had presumed to outrage and plunder God's holy bishop and
his companions.” [74]
Stories such as these greatly aided in convincing the pagan
Scandinavians of the superiority of Christ[75]. Thus mass conversion to Christianity was
eased by the telling of ‘truthful’ tales which demeaned local gods and
goddesses, while simultaneously glorifying the awesome power of Christ.
Although
some individuals probably did embrace Jesus Christ in sincere faith, this was
hardly the general rule. As whole
countries were considered Christianized by the baptism of the king, the
definition of Christianity in Scandinavia was extremely political as opposed to
personal. Scandinavian rulers were often impressed with the glory associated
with Christian kings[76]
and the sheer political power an association with Christendom would bring. As a ‘member’ of Christendom, Scandinavian
kings had at their disposal a vast array of new allies to the south, including
prestigious kings and powerful clergy.
Such allies were important in times of war or disputations; we have
already seen how Harald Klak attempted to use this power of association in his
attempt at legitimizing his rule in Denmark.
By becoming a member of Christendom, further, the Viking kings
eliminated the risk of crusades from the south[77],
a popular notion of the time. The political strength and security that baptism
afforded made Christianity an attractive option for many kings.
There is
also an indication that Christianity was perceived by the rulers as beneficial
for trade. Becoming Christian was
almost like joining the European Union of the time, such was the unifying power
of the symbol of ‘Christendom’[78].
As a ‘Christian country’, the Scandinavian countries would seem less like the
edge of the world, inhabited by strange barbarians, and more like a part of
Europe, cultured and Christian[79]. This would, in turn, make foreign merchants
more comfortable with the idea of trade and travel in the North. The perceived
protection and fostering of Christian communities surely promoted the ideal
among foreign traders that Birka was a safe place for Christians, encouraging
the flow of goods northwards[80];
Rimbert records the rejoicing of the merchants of Schleswig when a church was
built there, enabling them to practice their religion[81],
as well as a Swede who declared the protection of Christ under which the
journey from Dorestad to Birka is made[82].
Thus the establishment of churches in merchant cities such as Birka or Ribe can
be seen as improvements to the ‘image’ of the wild northerners in order to
strengthen economic ties to the south.
Another
economic advantage of Christianity was that offered by sainthood. Strömbäck,
for one, notes that the appointment of Norway’s St. Olaf as Iceland’s patron
saint “would have helped gifts to churches and monasteries to flow in the right
direction”[83]: i.e.,
tribute from Iceland to Norway. We do
not have enough information as to actual ritual practices common in pagan
Scandinavia to know if gift and money giving were as common or encouraged in
pagan times, but it is certain that the money provided by pilgrims and the
pious to places --or people -- of
worship would have been beneficial to the country’s treasury.
Because the
acceptance of Christianity also meant the acceptance of the authority of the
pope and his clergymen, it may seem strange that so many kings, interested in
preserving or consolidating their own power, would accept the new religion. However, encouraging the spread of
Christianity offered a king an advantageous opportunity, according to Birgit
Sawyer:
“The emphasis
put on the role of rulers in the introduction of Christianity and establishment
of the Church also served to strengthen royal claims to influence over, even
control of, the Church. This could be a useful argument in the conflict between
kings and the universal Church; the first Christian kings served as symbols of
the ‘national’ Church.” [84]
Many of these kings were eventually canonized, following a successful
custom in England[85];
although this honour was conferred posthumously, it not only generated revenue
for the royal coffers, but also greatly strengthened the power claims of their
descendants.
Dag
Strömbäck has put forward some interesting arguments regarding the conversion
of Iceland. As he puts it, the seemingly impossible task of a mass and
assenting conversion of a Scandinavian people without bloodshed whatsoever must
be seen in the context of three important factors: the legal, the political,
and the religious.
The law in
Iceland was not written down until 1117-8[86],
and until then it was the intellectual property of the lçgsçgumaðr,
or Law-speaker. This man was not only
required to know the entire code of law by heart, but was also the chairman of
the legislative court[87]. Strömbäck likens his position to that of the
“regent of the Commonwealth”, and the power of this individual was such that
the Icelandic historian Ari gives the names and dates of nineteen Lawspeakers[88],
much in the same way that an American can recite his presidents in
chronological order. The authority of this personage, was therefore
considerable, as his word was literally the law. This may explain why Þorgeir’s simple declaration of Christianity
was not questioned or met with bloody retaliation.
On the political scene, Strömbäck points out that Olaf Tryggvason’s motives in his demands on Iceland were more than religiously inspired. At this point in history, Iceland was essentially governed in a republican manner, ruled by chieftains who met at a governing assembly. There is evidence that missionaries such as Thangbrand had already been to Iceland, and that a small party of Christian chieftains, although a minority at the Althing, had most likely been formed[89]. This “split in the ranks of the Icelandic leaders could always be used to the king’s advantage – as it was in the thirteenth century, when the Icelandic commonwealth came to an end and the country accepted the overlordship of the Norwegian king.”[90] Olaf Tryggvason thus intensified the situation when he held “the sons and kinsmen of prominent men”[91] hostage in Norway, and threatened an invasion and forceful subjugation of Iceland if his demands were not met. Norway essentially had everything to gain in forcing Christianity on Iceland: the issue would either paralyze the Icelandic council or else force the Christianization of Iceland, both results being in favour of Norway’s eventual appropriation of Iceland. Iceland, however, found itself backed into a corner.
The baptism
of the entire council held massive implications for religious life in Iceland.
In other parts of Scandinavia, as we have seen, the baptism of the king
declared a country as Christian, and probably required the baptism of lords and
earls, but did not instantly change the everyday religious life of his
subjects. Iceland’s aristocratic order, however, was closely linked to the
religious through the goði, a
powerful system of cult-priests who also wielded the legal and political authority
of a chieftain[92]. Strömbäck sees in this network, along with
the religious duties of the regular chieftains, “the outlines of a religious
and legal organisation from which [pagan Iceland]’s constitutional system
developed”[93]. If this is the case, the instantaneous
conversion of the goði and the
undermining of their former priestly function would fundamentally alter the
social and religious structure of Iceland, and threaten the commonwealth
structure of Iceland. This indeed seems
to have happened, as the goði were
all but eliminated in Iceland by the time Iceland submitted to Norway.
The
situation in Iceland, therefore, was unique in Scandinavia. Because of its distinctive social and
governmental structure as well as its tenuous position in relation to Norway,
Iceland’s conversion was attained instantaneously and without bloodshed, but
with unfortunate results for the pagan society.
The study
of Scandinavia’s conversion is an extremely interesting one, in spite of the
incredibility of most of our sources.
Piecing together historical legend, contemporary records, and
archaeological evidence, a picture is formed of a gradual and top-down conversion, beginning in the ninth century
and firmly established by the twelfth.
Christianity was not, however, initially accepted because of its
religious message, but mainly because of the power, glory, and prestige it
brought to the kings of the North; the religion was even forced on communities
such as Iceland, where the complete conversion of the island may be entirely
due to a political power struggle with Norway.
Whole peoples were considered Christian upon the conversion of the
ruler, and within these newly Christianized countries, change was minimized
through the transferal of pagan rituals and temples to Christian ones. When the message of Christ was preached to
the people, it was one of indomitable strength, of a God by far superior to
those accepted by the pagans. The
conversion, clearly, was not a natural process in any way; it was instead pushed
along by the forces of politics,
economics, and royal feuds, fueled with careful missionary tactics, and
recorded by biased bishops. Therefore,
in spite of their picturesque qualities, the white churches scattered over
Danish countryside today do not stand testimony to the natural place of
Christianity in Denmark. Instead, they
serve as a reminder of the foreign religion which swept Scandinavia in the
early middle ages, and as a monument to the players and their political agendas
in this orchestrated process of change.
Aðalsteinsson, Jón Hnefill. Under the Cloak. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1978.
Andersson, Theodore M. “The Conversion of Norway according to Oddr Snorrason and Snorri Sturlusun”. Mediaeval Scandinavia. Vol. 10.Odense: Odense University Press, 1977.
Hemmingsen, Lars. By Word of Mouth: The origins of Danish Legendary History. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen, 1995.
Robinson, Charles H. Anskar, The Apostle of the North, 801-865, translated from the Vita Anskarii by Bishop Rimbert his fellow missionary and successor. London: SPCK, 1921. Online at the Internet Medieval Sourcebook. Paul Halsall, 1998.
Sawyer, Birgit & Peter. Medieval Scandinavia: From Conversion to Reformation, circa 800-1500. The Nordic Series Vol. 17. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993.
Sawyer, Birgit. “Scandinavian Conversion Histories”. In: The Christianization of Scandinavia. Sawyer, Birgit & Peter, Ian Wood eds. Alingsås: Viktoria Bokförlag, 1987.
Sawyer, P.H. Kings and Vikings: Scandinavia and Europe AD 700-1100. New York: Methuen & co., 1982.
Sawyer, Peter. “The process of Scandinavian Christianization in the tenth and eleventh centuries”. In: The Christianization of Scandinavia. Sawyer, Birgit & Peter, Ian Wood eds.Alingsås: Viktoria Bokförlag, 1987.
Steblin-Kamenskij, M.I. “What is Truth?” In: The Saga Mind. Odense, 1973.
Strömbäck, Dag. The Conversion of Iceland: A survey. Bristol: Western Printing Services Ltd, 1975.
The Christianization of Scandinavia. Sawyer, Birgit & Peter, Ian Wood eds. Alingsås: Viktoria Bokförlag, 1987.
Wood, Ian. “Christians and pagans in ninth-century Scandinavia”. In: The Christianization of Scandinavia. Sawyer, Birgit & Peter, Ian Wood eds. Alingsås: Viktoria Bokförlag, 1987.
1. [1] Hodne, in Hemmingsen 89-90 8; Lecture notes, inclass 4-26-99.
2. [1] Steblin-Kamenskij.
3. [1] Aarne, in Hemmingsen, 78.
4. [1] Although this example is complicated by the fact that they have been accepted as Danish history, Lars Hemmingsen has attempted to show that these stories are in fact legends based on historical facts, then reinterpreted as history. (Hemmingsen, 1995)
5. [1] Hemmingsen, 1995.
6. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 100-103.
7. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories; Lecture notes, inclass 4-29-99.
8. [1] Sawyer Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 94.
9. [1] Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 96-99.
10. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 4-29-99.
11. [1] Hemminsen, 202.
12. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 4-29-99.
13. [1] Aðalsteinsson, 57.
14. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 72.
15. [1] Aðalsteinsson, 57.
16. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 134.
17. [1] According to Vita Anskarii. Wood 36.
18. [1] Wood, 43.
19. [1] P. Sawyer after Vita Anskarii IX, Kings and Vikings, 135; Hemmingsen 183.
20. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
21. [1] Vita Anskarii, IX.
22. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 135.
23. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 135.
24. [1] Wood, 49.
25. [1] Hemmingsen, 183.
26. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
27. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
28. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 136; Hemmingsen, 183; Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
29. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 136.
30.
[1] Lecture notes,
inclass 5-3-99; also in Vita Anskarii.
31. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 137; Wood, 50.
32. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 138.
33. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 91.
34. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings 138; The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 69.
35. [1] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings 138; The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 69.
36. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
37. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 76.
38. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 70-71.
39. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 74.
40. [1] Strömbäck, 33.
41. [1] Strömbäck, 33.
42. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 82.
43. [1] Roberta Frank (1978), in The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 73.
44. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 75.
45. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
46. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 95.
47. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 95.
48. [1] For an account of Ari’s reliability as a historian, see section 2.2.
49. [1] Dr. Ólafía Einarsdóttir has argued for the year 999 instead (Strömbäck, 4)
50. [1] Ari, I.15, in Aðalsteinsson, 81.
51. [1] Ari, I.15, in Aðalsteinsson, 81.
52. [1] Strömbäck, 16.
53. [1] Strömbäck, 17.
54. [1] Aðalsteinsson, 132-3.
55. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
56. [1] Knut Schäferdiek, in: The Christianization of Scandinavia, 24
57. [1] Vita Anskarii.
58. [1] Wood 52.
59. [1] Wood, 50
60. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
61. [1] Vita Anskarii XV.
62. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 107.
63. [1] Wood, 59.
64. [1] Vita Anskarii, XV.
65. [1] Wood, 60.
66. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
67. [1] P.Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization 83.
68. [1] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization 86.
69. [1] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99; Strömbäck, 59-60.
70. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
71.
[1] Knut Schäferdiek,
in: The Christianization of Scandinavia,
24-5; also evidence in Vita Anskarii.
72. [1] Strömbäck, 53.
73. [1] Vita Anskarii, XIX.
74. [1] Vita Anskarii, XVIII.
75. [1] Wood, 57.
76. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
77. [1] Hemmingsen, 184.
78. [1] See Hemmingsen, 184.
79. [1] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-6-99.
80. [1] The Christianization of Scandinavia, 7.
81. [1] Vita Anskarii, XXIV.
82. [1] Vita Anskarii, XXIV & XXVII.
83. [1] Strömbäck 22
84. [1] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 109.
85. [1] Hemmingsen, 188.
86. [1] Strömbäck, 27.
87. [1] Strömbäck, 27.
88. [1] Strömbäck, 27.
89. [1] Strömbäck, 35-36.
90. [1] Strömbäck, 37.
91. [1] Strömbäck, 36.
92. [1] Strömbäck, 38-40.
93. [1] Strömbäck, 44.
[1] Hodne, in Hemmingsen 89-90 8; Lecture notes, inclass 4-26-99.
[2] Steblin-Kamenskij.
[3] Aarne, in Hemmingsen, 78.
[4] Although this example is complicated by the fact that they have been accepted as Danish history, Lars Hemmingsen has attempted to show that these stories are in fact legends based on historical facts, then reinterpreted as history. (Hemmingsen, 1995)
[5] Hemmingsen, 1995.
[6] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 100-103.
[7] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories; Lecture notes, inclass 4-29-99.
[8] Sawyer Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 94.
[9] Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 96-99.
[10] Lecture notes, inclass 4-29-99.
[11] Hemminsen, 202.
[12] Lecture notes, inclass 4-29-99.
[13] Aðalsteinsson, 57.
[14] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 72.
[15] Aðalsteinsson, 57.
[16] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 134.
[17] According to Vita Anskarii. Wood 36.
[18] Wood, 43.
[19] P. Sawyer after Vita Anskarii IX, Kings and Vikings, 135; Hemmingsen 183.
[20] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
[21] Vita Anskarii, IX.
[22] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 135.
[23] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 135.
[24] Wood, 49.
[25] Hemmingsen, 183.
[26] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
[27] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
[28] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 136; Hemmingsen, 183; Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
[29] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 136.
[30] Lecture
notes, inclass 5-3-99; also in Vita
Anskarii.
[31] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 137; Wood, 50.
[32] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings, 138.
[33] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 91.
[34] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings 138; The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 69.
[35] P. Sawyer, Kings and Vikings 138; The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 69.
[36] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99.
[37] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 76.
[38] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 70-71.
[39] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 74.
[40] Strömbäck, 33.
[41] Strömbäck, 33.
[42] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 82.
[43] Roberta Frank (1978), in The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 73.
[44] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization, 75.
[45] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
[46] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 95.
[47] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 95.
[48] For an account of Ari’s reliability as a historian, see section 2.2.
[49] Dr. Ólafía Einarsdóttir has argued for the year 999 instead (Strömbäck, 4)
[50] Ari, I.15, in Aðalsteinsson, 81.
[51] Ari, I.15, in Aðalsteinsson, 81.
[52] Strömbäck, 16.
[53] Strömbäck, 17.
[54] Aðalsteinsson, 132-3.
[55] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
[56] Knut Schäferdiek, in: The Christianization of Scandinavia, 24
[57] Vita Anskarii.
[58] Wood 52.
[59] Wood, 50
[60] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
[61] Vita Anskarii XV.
[62] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 107.
[63] Wood, 59.
[64] Vita Anskarii, XV.
[65] Wood, 60.
[66] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
[67] P.Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization 83.
[68] P. Sawyer, The Process of Scandinavian Christianization 86.
[69] Lecture notes, inclass 5-3-99; Strömbäck, 59-60.
[70] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
[71] Knut Schäferdiek,
in: The Christianization of Scandinavia,
24-5; also evidence in Vita Anskarii.
[72] Strömbäck, 53.
[73] Vita Anskarii, XIX.
[74] Vita Anskarii, XVIII.
[75] Wood, 57.
[76] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-3-99.
[77] Hemmingsen, 184.
[78] See Hemmingsen, 184.
[79] Lecture notes, inclass, 5-6-99.
[80] The Christianization of Scandinavia, 7.
[81] Vita Anskarii, XXIV.
[82] Vita Anskarii, XXIV & XXVII.
[83] Strömbäck 22
[84] B. Sawyer, Scandinavian Conversion Histories, 109.
[85] Hemmingsen, 188.
[86] Strömbäck, 27.
[87] Strömbäck, 27.
[88] Strömbäck, 27.
[89] Strömbäck, 35-36.
[90] Strömbäck, 37.
[91] Strömbäck, 36.
[92] Strömbäck, 38-40.
[93] Strömbäck, 44.