Runboard.com
Слава Україні!
Community logo


runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2 

 
Tarry Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Posts: 42
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Norman ethnic background


Folks,

Anyone ever read anything about the percentage of Vikings actually living in Normandy? We always hear the Normans were the descendants of Vikings. But this must be a simplification. I find it unlikely that the Vikings could have ever been more that a very small minority. The bulk of the Normans must have been Franks or descendant of the Gauls. But I've never seen anything published on this. Any thoughts?



Tarry
Apr/27/2005, 9:05 pm Link to this post Send Email to Tarry   Send PM to Tarry
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Tarry:

WEll, a certain Dudo claimed that Rollo, or Rolf, or Hrolf, or whatever his name was, obtained Normandy from the King of France(who, at that time was quite weak). There seems to be some indication of Scandinavian settlement in certain place names in Normandy(I think I could look them up somewhere if you're really interested), and certain names that were fairly common, even by 1066. But the problem is, that as far as culture went, the Scandinavians, whatever their original numbers, seem to have "Gallicized" and become Christians rather quickly. At least the rulers did, more or less. So you are probably at least partially correct.
Anne G
Apr/28/2005, 3:23 am Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Tarry Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Posts: 42
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Hey Ann,


I think you are right about the speed with which the Vikings assimilated into the dominant culture. My question comes from my own personal quest to find out if my ancestors where Vikings, Gauls or Franks. Just going by numbers, I would think Gaulish would be the most likely candidate. My DNA test has shed no light on the subject since I’m of a genetic group that is common in all the concerned peoples. However, my name is a Norman version of a common Frankish name. So it could easily be that a Viking ancestor adopted a local name and over time the name changed to its Norman variety. It would be interesting to know how Viking names changed over time. Where new surnames often based on location? Has anyone ever studied the names of Normandy for ethnic background?

Tarry
Apr/28/2005, 2:17 pm Link to this post Send Email to Tarry   Send PM to Tarry
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Tarry:

I think you are right about the speed with which the Vikings assimilated into the dominant culture. My question comes from my own personal quest to find out if my ancestors where Vikings, Gauls or Franks. Just going by numbers, I would think Gaulish would be the most likely candidate. My DNA test has shed no light on the subject since I’m of a genetic group that is common in all the concerned peoples. However, my name is a Norman version of a common Frankish name. So it could easily be that a Viking ancestor adopted a local name and over time the name changed to its Norman variety. It would be interesting to know how Viking names changed over time. Where new surnames often based on location? Has anyone ever studied the names of Normandy for ethnic background?

I don't know if anybody has ever "studied the names of Normandy for ethnic background". What I do know is, that surnames were not generally adopted in England or France until sometime after 1300 or so. But then, there are some contemporary societies where people *still* don't have surnames. Their communities are small enough so they don't need them. This was pretty much the case during the earlier Middle Ages, and it was as true in France(and Normandy) as it was in England. There were only a relatively small number of personal names in use, so people with the same or similar names were often distinguished by(a), referring to them as, say, "Stephen of X", X being the place Stephen came from. Or they might be distinguished by what would now be known as a nickname, usually derived from some characteristic, e.g. "John Brown"(e.g., he was tanned or had brown hair, or something), or by occupation(e.g. Butcher, Baker, etc.). Or by good ol' patronymics. But personal names are often a matter of what's "fashionable" at any particular time, so while it's true a lot of people eventually adopted the name of some ancestor, that ancestor may have been the son of, say, Erik, who was given a better and less "Viking-sounding" name like William or Henry or Humphrey or Godfrey or whatever. And I think you can figure out what happened after that.
Anne G
Apr/28/2005, 8:47 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Tarry Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Posts: 42
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Ann,

I'm not knowledgable about the subject enough to be a good judge, but it doesn't seem to me that the Vikings held onto their ethnic names for very long. Perhaps becoming Frankish gave them more legitimacy. I know that Williams ancestors were pretty quick to support the church and were energetic church builders in Normandy. This has been explained as a Norman attempt to win the favor of the pope. Whatever the reason, most names at the time of Hastings seem to be more French than anything else. Then you have the southern branch with names like Bohemond and Tancred. Not sure what those names derived from.

Tarry
Apr/28/2005, 9:14 pm Link to this post Send Email to Tarry   Send PM to Tarry
 
thewilliam theredforum2002 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2004
Posts: 484
Karma: -5 (+2/-7)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Tarry
Normandy became part of The Kingdom of The Franks.The Vikings were led by Hrolf Gangar and came from Norway.There were no doubt some Romano-Celts(ie Germanic)there from what was originally called Neustria but the historical identity of the Normans is Frank-Viking.In my view,ethnicity derived from names,surnames,place names etc is the only reliable way linked firmly to maximum study of the history of The Kingdom of The Franks in general and Normandy in particular.Best of luck in your search.
S.Walsh (personal capacity)
Apr/28/2005, 9:57 pm Link to this post Send Email to thewilliam theredforum2002   Send PM to thewilliam theredforum2002
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Tarry:


I'm not knowledgable about the subject enough to be a good judge, but it doesn't seem to me that the Vikings held onto their ethnic names for very long. Perhaps becoming Frankish gave them more legitimacy. I know that Williams ancestors were pretty quick to support the church and were energetic church builders in Normandy. This has been explained as a Norman attempt to win the favor of the pope. Whatever the reason, most names at the time of Hastings seem to be more French than anything else. Then you have the southern branch with names like Bohemond and Tancred. Not sure what those names derived from.

There were actually some Scandinavian-sounding names by 1066 that were still fairly common among Normans, e.g. Turold(Thorold), Gundrada, etc. If you know what to look for, you can sort of spot them. Of course, people in some parts of England had similar names, but by that time, they weren't particularly identified as "Viking era". "Frankish" names probably became more common because you are probably right that the Scandinavians who settled in Normandy were never a terribly large group, and that probably made it "easier" for them to shed their original customs.
Anne G

Apr/29/2005, 3:47 am Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Tarry Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Posts: 42
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Definitely, the Normans are a product of Frankish/Viking culture. But I think the emphasis is on the Frankish culure rather than the Norse. But if you consider the genetic make up of the Norman population, a very large part of it would have to come from people whose ancestors were Gaulish.

The Gauls stop being Celtic soon after Caesar conquered Gaul in the 50s BC. Other than their genetic makeup there was probably nothing left of the Celtic culture to contribute to the new Frankish culture, certainly even more true with the later Normans. The only possible except are the Britains who settled in Brittany.

I have seen maps of Norse place names along the coastline of Normandy. Certainly this is proof of Norse populations. However, when taken in context with all other placenames, I suspect Norse names are a distinct minority. Just as an aside, William’s favorite town, Caen, is an ancient Celtic name.

Careful calling the Romano-Celts “Germanic”, they are two different groups.

Tarry
Apr/29/2005, 1:33 pm Link to this post Send Email to Tarry   Send PM to Tarry
 
mousteriana Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 936
Karma: 6 (+6/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Tarry:

I didn't call the Romano-Celtic people "Germanic". What I was referring to(implicitly, I guess)were the "Franks" who invaded/immigrated/whatever after the Roman Empire broke up. These were definitely "Germanic" people. The problem here is, I think these people and the Romano-Celtic groups rather thoroughly mixed after that, and that's one reason why you may be having problems finding any distinctive genetic material. And later, because the Norse were something of a minority in Normandy, probably not a whole lot is left of their genetic legacy. OTOH, maybe it's still there in places. Place names give a clue that they were there, but you can't read too much into the fact that a place like Caen has a non Scandinavian name. Because maybe people liked "Caen" better than something like "Eyvindburh" or the French equivalent.
Anne G
Apr/29/2005, 6:38 pm Link to this post Send Email to mousteriana   Send PM to mousteriana
 
Tarry Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Posts: 42
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Norman ethnic background


Ann,

I was referring to the comments of thewilliamtheredforum when I mentioned Romano-Celtic and Germanic. There must have been a whole lot of mixing between the Gallo-Romans and the Franks, then between the "Franks" and the "Normans".

Some mistake cultural for ethnicity. Even before the Franks mixed with the Gallo-Romans they were a confederation of various tribes. When you add up all these different ethnic groups that went into making the Normans, it's much more complicated than just calling them Vikings. I think this is one of those things that most historians gloss over, opting for the overly simplistic explanation.

As far as the DNA is concerned, the y-chromossome doesn't get mixed up in the genetic recombining that occurs with each generation. That's why it is so valuable for ancestral research. The y-chromosome of a man today is, for the most part, an exact copy of his male ancestors 100s of years ago. In some cases that lack of change can go back tens of thousands of years. I'm pretty certain at some point differences will be seen in the y-chromosomes of different groups. But until that happens research is confined to intelligent guesswork.



Tarry
Apr/29/2005, 7:02 pm Link to this post Send Email to Tarry   Send PM to Tarry
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2 





You are not logged in (login)