Re: Why only crap in this NG? (was Wolter claims ...)


"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
news:gpll91t2rmi6uu58m6p8j1chjmqeds0vdt@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Mon, 30 May 2005 07:09:11 GMT, "IEJ" <Iejohansson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> skrev i meddelandet
> >news:o13l91de6bmmblvglsfserj9al7fpp46m9@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> On Mon, 30 May 2005 02:27:24 GMT, Philip Deitiker
> >> <Donevenask@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> says in
> >> >news:cpqk919grm7rpgsshetksmghvqlan08ogu@xxxxxxx:
> >> >
> >> >>>There are people and there are times. She is arguing Norwegian
> >> >>>and Swede after 1350, not Norse during the 11th century.
> >> >>
> >> >> You seem to be equating Norse with Viking. They are not the same
> >> >> thing.
> >> >
> >> >The Viking period ended at the end of the 10th century. The
> >> >greenlanders were christianized thereafter and would have been Norse.
> >> >The swedish state with recognized borders did not begin until 1323,
> >> >however a partial definition was in place by the 12th century. Prior
> >> >to that people would have been informally called Swedes if they were
> >> >from eastern trading portion of the viking world, prior to 1323 there
> >> >was a contested claim over finland, so at that time the Swedish state
> >> >would have been Swedo-finnic.
> >>
> >> All of which is correct.
> >
> >Not at all correct. Sweden's borders were recognised in a tract between
> >Sweden, Denmark and Norway in early 11th century. Officially the
consensus
> >refer to the 12th century meeting in Kongahälla 1101, but there are
> >fragments left of the earlier meeting which was held in Olof Skötkongungs
> >days. Sweden as a country is documented long before that. Unfortunatly
for
> >the Icelandic Sagas which tried/tries to make believe that it started in
Old
> >Uppsala there are documents older than the mythical Bråvallaslaget which
> >confirms that there was a type of union between the Goths living in
> >Wisigothia and Ostrogothia on one hand and the group living around
> >Aros(Västerås, Västmanland) in Migration Age whenever enemies were
> >attacking. The oldest mentioning of Sweden as a country goes back before
> >migration age and stipulates that it starts on the eastern shore of
Wigotha
> >Elf.....
> >
> > They all come under the umbrella term
> >> 'norse'. See http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Norse
> >
> >Not in Medieval Age. That's a later fabricated word which assumes that
the
> >Roman Historians meant the same with the Latin words they used for
'Nordmen'
> >and people living in the Nordic countries.
>
> You will have to argue with the dictionary. It says " Of or relating
> to medieval Scandinavia or its peoples, languages, or cultures."

English Dictionary I presume, not Scandinavian ones. There is a distinct
difference from Migration Age up between the different Scandinavian groups
and countries.
> >
> >In Medieval Age up to 1390's there were a clear distinction between the
> >three Nordic countries: Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Finland belonged to
> >Sweden as it done most of the time since Hermaneric's days.(Roman and
East
> >European sources up to 1115 AD) What's also forgotten is that the real
Kvens
> >up to around same period were in majority north of a line from Gävle to
> >Bergen.
>
> But what are Nordic countries if not Norse?

Norse is your way of placing four eggs that used to be three eggs under one
and the same hat. But we aren't in a hat. There are and have always been
very strong borders between our different groups. Skane has belonged to
Sweden since mid 1600's but many Skåningar as well as many here doesn't look
upon them as Swedes.

Inger E


.

Relevant Pages