GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives
Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1996-12 > 0849897813
From: ic <>
Subject: Re: Danish Kings in 8th & 9th Centuries
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 18:43:33 +0000
In-Reply-To: <585000$i9c@news.campus.mci.net>
On Thu, 5 Dec 1996, Stewart Baldwin wrote:
> ic <> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >There is one more Sigfrid mentioned, I think only in AV 883-4: he was a
> >christian Dane _nepos Heorici_ who was sent by the Franks to negotiate a
> >danegeld with the Danish army at Amiens. Another ms has _nepos Rorici_
> >which may be preferable: he might be grandson of Horic I or a nephew of
> >Roric of Frisia or vice-versa. As the AV refers to roric in 882, the
> >_nepos Rorici_ might be a better reading.
>
> I have been wanting to look at a copy of AV so I can see the exact
> wording used for this item,
MGH edition by Simson 1909: a more recent book (but using the earlier
edition by Pertz 1873? in the Scriptores series, I think) is Rheinold
Rau (ed) Quellen zur Karolingischer reichgeschicht, III, pub. 1980,
which has an antequated German translation. However there
was an English translation due to come out in the MUP series
which has already published the AB & AF as long ago as 1992. I'm not
sure why their's been the delay unless the project was cancelled. The
Annals of Xanten were supposed to appear in the same volume. Perhaps
they are winging their way to the press at this very moment.
since all I have is an ambiguous piece
> from notes taken many years ago. Does the wording of AV make it clear
> that this is a different person from the other Sigifrid, or is that
> just the usual interpretation? In the list of Danish kings which I
> recently posted, I left it unsettled whether or not the Sigifrid
> "nepos Heorici" was the same as the king of that name. My main reason
> for this is that one rescension of the Fulda annals refers to the
> baptism of Sigifrid in 882, followed by a large payment to Sigifrid
> (AB only mentions the payment). Sigifrid is then not mentioned in AF
> until after the murder of Godefrid. (AB ends in 882.) It seems that
> one possible scenario is that King Sigifrid converted temporarily to
> Christianity in 882, was the same person as the Sigifrid of AV884, and
> was friendly to the Franks until after the murder of Godefrid (when he
> again starts appearing in the annals as a hostile Viking).
Possible, though Occam's razor is against it. However there is a school
of thought that sees the various viking chiefs as much more integrated
into Frankish political scene than the annals (with their ecclesiastical
authors) would want to reveal. The church wanted the kings to fight the
Vikings, as they had to fork out most of the danegeld; the nobles
often didn't want to as they were the ones, more likely to die. Your
explanation would probably find favour here.
(Another
> possibility is that the baptism Sigifrid of AF882 is an error for
> Godefrid.)
I think this is what Reuter thought in his translation of the AF:
that is to say, 1 scribe, or copyist confused Godfrid and Sigfrid
and made Sigfrid receive baptism, and Godfrid get the danegeld.
Thus, even though there may have been more than one
> Sigifrid in this period, the evidence I have seen seems consistent
> with only one man of that name for the events of 873-887. Is there
> anything in AV which rules out this possibility?
>
The latin is (from Rau, p304):
Interim quia rex iuvenis erat, omnes principes Compendio palatio
conveniunt tractaturi, quid illis esset agendum. Initoque consilio
Sigifridum Danum Christianum regique fidelem, qui nepos fuerat
Heorici Dani, mittunt, ut cum principibus suae gentis tractaret,
ut tributum acciperent et e regno abirent.
that is (feel free to correct)
"Meanwhile, becos the king was young, all the leading men of the
franks met at the palace of Compiegne to decide what should be
done. And having taken counsel, they sent Sigfrid, a christian
Dane and a faithful man of the king, who was the nephew
of Horic the Dane, to negotiate with the leading men of his
people, so that they should accept a tribute and depart from
the kingdom."
Now in all the other mentions of King Sigfrid in the AV, that is
880, 886, 887, he is (unlike the various Fulda versions) always
called king. So it would seem that by calling this Sigfrid
"a Christian Dane", a different individual was meant. Which of
course is a pity, as it would be nice to connect King Sigfrid
873-87, with Horic's dynasty.
The text goes on to say that Sigfrid then went to Amiens met
the leaders of the Vikings and went backwards and forwards between
them and the Franks until the conditions of the tribute/danegeld
were agreed. He's not mentioned again. But I guess this is not decisive
against your argument.
> Stewart Baldwin
>
This thread: