Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Normans?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 11>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Attila2 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 154 		  Quote Attila2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Normans?
    Posted: 10-Jul-2006 at 21:06

what language were they speaking? French or Nordic? were they more french or more Nordic in culture and tradition?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jul-2006 at 22:11
They were speaking Norman French (spoken example available http://www.essentialnormanconquest.com/).  It's considered a Romance language, a Langue d'ol.  I believe they had lived in a feudal system.
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 03:03
Originally posted by Attila2

what language were they speaking? French or Nordic? were they more french or more Nordic in culture and tradition?

 
The normans, my ancestors, were overwhelmingly Gallic (celts) racially and culturally. Scandinavian input in Normandy was quite negligible, it is estimated that not more than 30,000 scandinavians, male mostly, settled in normandy. By 1066, there were little trace of them, all assimilated.
 
The Normans spoke French, langue d'oil (the french spoken mostly in Northern French; Langue d'oc was the dialect spoken in the south) with the usual regional variation. The only impact the scandinavian had on the the language was the introduction of a few words about navigation and the sea. The terms were adopted not only in normandy but mostly in northern France
 
The Normans racially speaking, by 1066, were more Gallic than say the Francilians (Parisian), who had enormous Frankish input.
 
On the tapestry of Bayeux, the Normans, only referred to Normandy as a region, collectively, they were known as Franci (Frank or French as everyone in Northern France was referred to in those days). They were clearly conscious that French was their race and culture.  At no time the Normans thought they were scandinavian, in fact, the French factions that invaded England regarded the anglo-saxons, vikings and britons with contempt. There was a system of Apartheid (I've already posted an article on the subject).
 
From the tapestry (ordered by Odo of Bayeux, Harold's brother)
 
FRATRES HAROLDI REGIS. HIC CECIDERUNT SIMUL ANGLI ET FRANCI IN PRELIO
.
"brothers of King Harold.Here fell the English and the French simultaneously in the battle."

 

HIC ODO EPISCOPUS BACULUM TENENS CONFORTAT PUEROS. HIC EST WILLELM DUX.
"Here Bishop Odo with a staff in his hand encourages his Squires. Here is Duke William."

EUSTASIUS. HIC FRANCI PUGNANT.
"Eustace. Here the French do battle."
 
ET CECIDERUNT QUI ERANT CUM HAROLDO. HIC HAROLD REX INTERFECTUS EST.
"And those who were with Harold fell. Here King Harold was killed."
 
 
The small group of viking that settled in northern France were quickly assimilated by the Gallic majority. After a generation or two, the Normans had adopted the French culture and language and were indistinguishable from their French neighbours. By 1066, the Norman had nothing in common with the scandinavians, who many misleadingly believe were the ancestors of the Normans. In truth, the scandinavian input to the people of Normandy was quite negligible. Most Normans were of Gallic decent, the Scandinavian merely gave the region its name.

 
 


Edited by Quetzalcoatl - 11-Jul-2006 at 03:14
Back to Top
Northman View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 30-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4262 		  Quote Northman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 03:51

I'm sure you're right about the quick assimilation Quetzalcoatl - but your statement... "they had nothing in common with the scandinavians, who many misleadingly believe were the ancestors of the Normans" could be misleading itself.
We should not forget that Rollo was the first Duke of Normandy, and also ancestor to the following long line of Dukes in Normandy, William the C. included.
I believe this is one of the reasons why we call them Normans - because their leaders were of norman lineage.

 
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387 		  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 04:51
The Normans were very much aware of their Northman descent. They did not consider themselves Franks, but a different people. This becomes very clear when you read Dudo of St. Quentins History of the Normans. They maintained different values than the Franks, especially in battle ethics.
 
It is true however that the Norse language disappeared quite fast. In fact, the third Duke of Normandy, Richard I, was already unable to speak it. This can be explained easily: The settlers were mainly men, who married with the local women. As women where in chareg of children in early age, the first language of the second and third generations would be the mothers tongue.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952 		  Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 06:42
The Norman spoke a French dialect which according to medieval English accounts was looked down upon by the French as a country bumpkin dialect.
 
When early Norman kings of England met the kings of France they spoke through translators though tecnically they were both speaking French.
 
Very quickly after the Norman conquest the Normans abandoned it and would raise their children to speak French. It was considered useless, being unable to speak to either the English or the French and somewhat of an embarrassment to be heard speaking amongst well spoken French.
 
However the language still lives on as there are a few thousand Norman words in Engish.
 
 


Edited by Paul - 11-Jul-2006 at 06:45
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 07:46
Originally posted by Northman

I'm sure you're right about the quick assimilation Quetzalcoatl - but your statement... "they had nothing in common with the scandinavians, who many misleadingly believe were the ancestors of the Normans" could be misleading itself.
We should not forget that Rollo was the first Duke of Normandy, and also ancestor to the following long line of Dukes in Normandy, William the C. included.
I believe this is one of the reasons why we call them Normans - because their leaders were of norman lineage.

 
 
You also forgot the immigrants married within the population, and by 1066, after several generations, racially most of their ancestors would be Gallic.
 
Guillaume (William the Conquerer) would be mostly of Gallic lineage.From my POV Rollo was a norman but a scandinavian.
 
 


Edited by Quetzalcoatl - 11-Jul-2006 at 07:54
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 07:53
Originally posted by Paul

The Norman spoke a French dialect which according to medieval English accounts was looked down upon by the French as a country bumpkin dialect.
 
When early Norman kings of England met the kings of France they spoke through translators though tecnically they were both speaking French.
 
Very quickly after the Norman conquest the Normans abandoned it and would raise their children to speak French. It was considered useless, being unable to speak to either the English or the French and somewhat of an embarrassment to be heard speaking amongst well spoken French.
 
However the language still lives on as there are a few thousand Norman words in Engish.
 
 
 
That's nonsense, Norman French was the most refine of French. All Langue d'oil are smooth. There was no need for  translator between regional variants of Langue d'oil (Langue d'oil differs from langue d'oc in softness mostly)
 
A Norman king of England who had ben isolated on the island would certainly not speak French as it is on the continent. The language do evolve.
 
How do you explain the Angevins (Plategenet mostly, and most Gallic of all French) find no problem in communication with the Normans of England when they inherited the throne of England?
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 07:55
Originally posted by Aelfgifu

The Normans were very much aware of their Northman descent. would be the mothers tongue.
 
Yea, tell a Norman in 1066 he was viking and he would have strangle you. On the tapestry, the best source of the time, the clearly called themselves, French.
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387 		  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 08:46

I was not referring to just 1066. In history you can not just take one moment and judge all of history on it. For a very long time, Normans cherished their Scandinavian ancestors heritage, as is very clear from the sources.

And they did, like I said before, differ from the franks in battle ethics. The Normans considered themselves better fighters than the Franks, and also had a different view on killing in battle. Whereas for the Franks, at least in theory, killing was always bad, and even killing in battle had to be atoned for by confession and purification, the Normans had no such qualms. They took pride in being ruthless to their enemies, unlike the Franks who considered mercy to their enemies the highest goal.
 
That genetically, they would be more Frankish than Scandinavian does really not matter, as culture, unlike language, tends to be passed down through the male line. They were defenately not Gallic, as the Gauls were a celtic people who were overrun by the Franks in the Migration period, some 500 years previous.
 
As for the Angevins: they where Angevins, c.e. counts of Anjou, and therefore not Normans.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 13:53
The idea that feudal lords, especially of count/earl and upward, can be considered as representative of their peoples linguistically is somewhat optimistic.
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728 		  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 14:36
That genetically, they would be more Frankish than Scandinavian does really not matter, as culture, unlike language, tends to be passed down through the male line. They were defenately not Gallic, as the Gauls were a celtic people who were overrun by the Franks in the Migration period, some 500 years previous.
From what I understand, and I'm not to big on this subject keep in mind, when the Normans arrived they arrived to a large Gallic/Romano population. So they would have differed from the Germanic Franks that took over.
 
Also, from what I understand in Genetics, which I actually want to start another thread on, doesn't the father only carry the Y gene? That would mean that while the mother passes on the X gene to her son, the son still and will always get the Norman Y gene. So that wouldn't disappear, and if they kept their culture, then by all means in every aspect they'd be Norman, except lanuage. 
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387 		  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 14:50
Acually, what I meant was that culture, in this case being ethical rules of behaviour and conduct, are in a feudal society passed on from father to son, as the father will educate the boy on this, and not the (indigenous) mother.
As far as actual genetics go, I doubt the Franks, Saxons and Scandinavians differed enough genetically to make an actual difference. Apparently, blood type A is more common in Scandinavia than in England and France, but that would not really make a difference to their behavior, would it? Smile


Edited by Aelfgifu - 11-Jul-2006 at 14:51

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728 		  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 16:30

I brought up the ethnic part because in one of Quetzalcoatl's posts he made it sound as though the Normans weren't racially Scandinavian anymore and totally Gallic, which also means no Germanic blood like you said about the Saxons, Franks, etc.. But I think their bloood line could have stayed in intact, though I'm no expert.
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387 		  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 16:56

If you are interested in peoples and nationalistic feelings through history you should read this:

Patrick Geary, The Myth of Nations, the Medieval Origins of Europe (Princeton, 2002).
 
It is one of my favorites. Very clearly written. It shows the theory of ethnogenesis, the coming into exitance of peoples. It is really good, and Geary is the current expert on the subject.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952 		  Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 17:41
Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl

 
That's nonsense, Norman French was the most refine of French. All Langue d'oil are smooth. There was no need for  translator between regional variants of Langue d'oil (Langue d'oil differs from langue d'oc in softness mostly)
 
A Norman king of England who had ben isolated on the island would certainly not speak French as it is on the continent. The language do evolve.
 
How do you explain the Angevins (Plategenet mostly, and most Gallic of all French) find no problem in communication with the Normans of England when they inherited the throne of England?
 
 
 
In Chaucer English born French speaking characters speak a dialect that can't be understood by French people, is considered low class by them and is mockingly ugly and gutteral.
 
 
 


Edited by Paul - 11-Jul-2006 at 17:42
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 19:33

I was not referring to just 1066. In history you can not just take one moment and judge all of history on it. For a very long time, Normans cherished their Scandinavian ancestors heritage, as is very clear from the sources.

 
If the Norman did indeed cherish their scandinavian heritage, they would be speaking an scandinavian language and retain their culture just like the Breton. Their impact on regional French is minimal, as compare to say the Franks, who by mingling Frankish and Romance created French.
 
 
 
And they did, like I said before, differ from the franks in battle ethics. The Normans considered themselves better fighters than the Franks, and also had a different view on killing in battle. Whereas for the Franks, at least in theory, killing was always bad, and even killing in battle had to be atoned for by confession and purification, the Normans had no such qualms. They took pride in being ruthless to their enemies, unlike the Franks who considered mercy to their enemies the highest goal.
 
LOL, the Normans way of war was exactly similar to the Franks. The Franks were ruthless and were known to have committed many excesses. The vikings while being brigands never usually slaughtered whole cities like the Franks usually did. Even Toulouse suffered slaughter during the crusade.
 
The Angevins were even more ruthless and warlike, since they managed to conquer maine, a part of Normandy.
 
That genetically, they would be more Frankish than Scandinavian does really not matter, as culture, unlike language, tends to be passed down through the male line. They were defenately not Gallic, as the Gauls were a celtic people who were overrun by the Franks in the Migration period, some 500 years previous.
 
No they weren't genetically Frankish but Gallic, the Francilians were the the one with massive Germanic input not the Normandy; Frankish immigration into Normandy was minimal and the Norman were mostly of Gallic stock, descended from the Bellovaci and Belgae.
 


Edited by Quetzalcoatl - 11-Jul-2006 at 19:49
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 19:49
 
Also, from what I understand in Genetics, which I actually want to start another thread on, doesn't the father only carry the Y gene? That would mean that while the mother passes on the X gene to her son, the son still and will always get the Norman Y gene. So that wouldn't disappear, and if they kept their culture, then by all means in every aspect they'd be Norman, except lanuage. 
 
This is because you have a poor understanding of genetics. To start with the human genome consists 46 Chromosomes ( the Y chromosome, is almost vestigial, it's genetic contribution less than any other chromosomes and used to determine the sex only, but for 95% of the traits are not determine by the Y chromosomes.)
 
But one thing you are not considering, there was powerful Franco-Gallic landlords in Normandy. These landlords formed an alliance with the scandinavians, whose daughters usually married the Franco-Gallic sons. Therefore erradicating the Scandinavian Y-chromosomes down the line.
 
Although I'm not denying that there was a small genetic contribution from the scandinavian, this contribution was negligible when you look at the whole Normandy.
 
You check the Norman royal take for instance: Adela was the daughter of William the Conqueror who married stephen of Blois (who was from Blois not Normandy and became king of England). THe resulting heir carried the Stephen Y chromosome. The Normans constantly married their daughter with neighrbouring Royals, whose heirs usually inherited dukedom or important position in Normandy. Destroying the nonsense that the Y chromosomes were from the scandinavians lines only.
Back to Top
Quetzalcoatl View Drop Down
General
General

Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 984 		  Quote Quetzalcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jul-2006 at 19:52
Originally posted by Paul

Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl

 
That's nonsense, Norman French was the most refine of French. All Langue d'oil are smooth. There was no need for  translator between regional variants of Langue d'oil (Langue d'oil differs from langue d'oc in softness mostly)
 
A Norman king of England who had ben isolated on the island would certainly not speak French as it is on the continent. The language do evolve.
 
How do you explain the Angevins (Plategenet mostly, and most Gallic of all French) find no problem in communication with the Normans of England when they inherited the throne of England?
 
 
 
In Chaucer English born French speaking characters speak a dialect that can't be understood by French people, is considered low class by them and is mockingly ugly and gutteral.
 
 
 
 
That's probably because they were mostly likely of Breton-decent like the people of Quebec. Only one third of the conquerors of England came from Normandy. I repeat Norman French was/is very refine .
Back to Top
Aelfgifu View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387 		  Quote Aelfgifu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jul-2006 at 05:04
"LOL, the Normans way of war was exactly similar to the Franks. The Franks were ruthless and were known to have committed many excesses. The vikings while being brigands never usually slaughtered whole cities like the Franks usually did."
 
I have been studying the Vikingsettlers in England and Normandy for three years, and I have read all the main sources, books and articles on it. I can guarantee you, your opinions are completely contrary to those of the international scholarly society. I really put more faith in their well reseached thoughts than in your mindless ramblings. Your ideas on genetics are particularly nineteenth century and outdated.
Perhaps you should be a little more polite to the opinions of others, and not pretend you are allknowing.

Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 11>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.