Were the Normans Danish, Norwegian or Frankish?

[Kauz R. Waldher]

They were certainly partly descendants of Norwegian and/or Danish settlers, the question is how many of the Normans, say in 1066, were of Scandinavian ancestry and how many were of other (Frankish) ancestry.

One could look at culture here, most Normans had (usually) latinized Frankish names, such as Henry, William, Richard, Robert etc. In other areas where the Norse settled, they would often use their own names for centuries to come, even if the form changed somewhat over time. However this may not reflect the actual number of Norse that settled, it can have more to do how 'strong' the local culture was. In areas with fairly low populations like parts of Britain, it was easier for the Norse to dominate the local culture than the other way around (even though they would be assimilated even in those parts in the end). France must surely have been different, being very close to Paris, and having a more developed and centralized society, with close ties to the Pope and so on. They were in the middle of the 'elite' culture of the Western world. Also, thhe Norse in France were not their wholly on their own conditions, since they hade signed a treaty with the French king, so they probably felt some urge to adapt to his ways.

We know for sure, that Normans with notable Norse ancestry, like the son of Rollo, had Frankish and not Norse first names, and thus we can see that the names of the people did necessarily not reflect their ancestry.

So the conclusion of all this, is that it would be difficult to know the ratio of Norse ancestry in the Normans later on, and their names and culture won't give us alot of clues. Maybe some modern DNA tests could give us some clues.

Well, last year they were supposed to take dna from one of Rollo's ancestors in England. That was last year. And I think Norway was helping to fund it. So, after all this time, and no info. being released makes me believe that the Norwegians didn't get the results they wanted? I'm just assuming, I could be wrong, but why the huge delay on the results?

[Granraude]

It's said that "Rollo" is actually Gange-Rolv, who is said to be related to William.

Rolv got kicked out of Norway by Hårfagre, and traveled to Valland in France.

Both Icelandic and Norwegian texts confirm this.

And the results taking so long could be from the fact that they are doing the tests on relatives of Rolv, which can diffuse the results a bit?

[Kauz R. Waldher]

"It's said that "Rollo" is actually Gange-Rolv, who is said to be related to William."

It is said, yes. But only an educated guess. More of an assumption based on some similarities between saga/myth and reality. I kind of hope he ends up being Norwegian, that would really shake things up and history would have to be edited again.

"As Rollo's death drew near, he went mad and had a hundred Christian prisoners beheaded in front of him in honour of the gods whom he had worshipped, and in the end distributed a hundred pounds of gold around the churches in honour of the true God in whose name he had accepted baptism.' Even though Rollo had converted to Christianity, some of his prior religious roots surfaced at the end."

[Méldmir]

I don't see why you in the thread are confused about Rollo? It is a fact that he was a Heathen Norseman (unknown if he was from Denmark or Norway, but one of those). It is also a fact that he was the great-great-great-grandfather of William the Conqueror. There are other sources on this than just the Sagas, for example you have Anglo-Norman historians.

Edit: I see now that the confusion was if Rollo was Gangner-Rolf. But Rollo's story after coming to Normandy is clear, just not if the two people were the same earlier.

[Kauz R. Waldher]

I don't see why you in the thread are confused about Rollo? It is a fact that he was a Heathen Norseman (unknown if he was from Denmark or Norway, but one of those). It is also a fact that he was the great-great-great-grandfather of William the Conqueror. There are other sources on this than just the Sagas, for example you have Anglo-Norman historians.

Edit: I see now that the confusion was if Rollo was Gangner-Rolf. But Rollo's story after coming to Normandy is clear, just not if the two people were the same earlier.

I know it's clear. The big ol' question is whether the Normans were originally Danish or Norwegian. I was always under the assumption that they were descendents of Danish vikings. This is actually important to me. It could change alot about my ancestry. I might end up having some Norwegian blood as opposed to Danish as I originally suspected. I have at least 10 names in my family tree that supposedly came from Normandy.

[Méldmir]

I know it's clear. The big ol' question is whether the Normans were originally Danish or Norwegian. I was always under the assumption that they were descendents of Danish vikings. This is actually important to me. It could change alot about my ancestry. I might end up having some Norwegian blood as opposed to Danish as I originally suspected. I have at least 10 names in my family tree that supposedly came from Normandy.

I read somewhere that Normandy was settled by both Norwegians and Danes. Even if Rollo was Norwegian, it doesn't hinder that he may have recruited Danes to come with him. I would think the Normans were a mix of the three tribes mentioned in the headline, Norwegians, Danes, and Franks

[Kauz R. Waldher]

I read somewhere that Normandy was settled by both Norwegians and Danes. Even if Rollo was Norwegian, it doesn't hinder that he may have recruited Danes to come with him. I would think the Normans were a mix of the three tribes mentioned in the headline, Norwegians, Danes, and Franks

Yeah, i've heard that too. And i'm not doubting that at all. But i'm more or less speaking in terms of large majority. I've read about the Normans so much that i've heard it all. But the recurring theme is that they were mostly Danes. I always assumed that was common knowledge. Until 2010 that is. I'm really eager to know. There hasn't been any updates or anything. Maybe i'll write and ask "The Viking Lady" if she's heard anything about the testing If I find anything out at all ... i'll be sure to share it.

[Granraude]

Well, the Franks called the Norwegians Northmanni, so it would make sence to think of the Normans as Norwegians.

Northmanni - Normandy - Norman.
Also, modern Norwegian for a Norwegian person is Nordmann =P

[ohrdruf]

In his book El Rey Vikingo del Paraguay which has featured elsewhere in this forum, author Jacques de Mahieu drew attention to inscriptions in caves (alongside runic material) which he thought had a Norman origin. The Vikings of Paraguay (1000-1300) were Danes mainly from the Schleswig region.

[Rodskarl Dubhgall]

The Penguin Historical Atlas of the Vikings (my most loved book) shows Upper Normandy as Danish and Lower Normandy (e.g. Cotentin) as Norwegian, which makes sense due to the directions of Danes sailing across the North Sea onward through the Channel past Friesland and Flanders, with Norwegians sailing across the Norwegian Sea onward through the Celtic Sea past Ireland and Brittany. This is no different than Danes on the east coast and Norwegians on the west coast of England.

The heart of Upper Normandy is Rouen, which is where Hrolf was Count before becoming Duke of the whole province. He as Viking on the Seine was client ruler of the Roman Empire succeeding Weland who preceded him on the Somme and Flanders, following Danish kings Harald Klak and Roric with Friesland as their fief. This establishes a formal relationship between the Kingdom of Denmark and the Roman Empire during the reigns of Louis the Pious, Lothar and Charles the Bald, culminating in the Duchy of Normandy.

In this case, Normandy appears to correlate with Men of the North Sea and I take this to mean that Frisians were radicalised to Viking life because it meant casting off the Roman Emperors who enslaved them. In this manner of seeing Frisian heritage to Normandy, with its Saxon Shore antecedent on the Bessin, I find common ground with the fact that the Belgæ who ruled Britain before and after Rome had provided the Arthurian establishment behind colonisation of Brittany earlier. It's the missing link demonstrating how Winchester went from Belgian to Saxon, from Arthur to Alfred.

Author John Heywood makes an arbitrary distinction between Vikings and Normans that I don't, in describing their occupation of Nantes, save for that they were more than likely Norwegians instead of Danes. Their exile of Alan Wrybeard to the court of Wessex prefigured Harold Godwinson in Normandy later.

Franks were sited in Maine, which was where the Frankish province of Neustria was based, on the frontier of Breton, Visigoth, Saxon, Danish and Norwegian settlements of Gaul. It was also the basis of Capet and Plantagenet rules in France which I'd say was the network leading to the kingdoms of Sicily, Naples and Jerusalem, on the trail of the Gauls to Galatia before them and leading to the Empire of Constantinople.

In his book El Rey Vikingo del Paraguay which has featured elsewhere in this forum, author Jacques de Mahieu drew attention to inscriptions in caves (alongside runic material) which he thought had a Norman origin. The Vikings of Paraguay (1000-1300) were Danes mainly from the Schleswig region.

That's absolute crap.