|
|
Eighth-century
Scandinavia saw the development of a number a factors that lead
to one of the most brutal yet dynamic periods in European
history. The Vikings, as the Norse are commonly of this
period are commonly called, came to the British Isles around the
790s, initially as raiders but increasingly as settlers and
traders as well. As Viking activity increased in
North Britain, they found it useful to establish a number of
power bases such as Orkney or Dublin from which they could expand
their operations and control the flow of goods. Strategically
located off the northern coast of Scotland, Orkney provided an
easily defended, fertile power base, conveniently located at the
centre of the new North Sea world, where the local population
could be pushed aside with ease. The growth of the Earldom
of Orkney from the ninth century to the eleventh century was the
result of its newfound position at the centre of the North Sea
world that provided an effective base for Viking raiders and
merchants on the route between Norway and the British Isles.
Furthermore, this position between the kings of the Scots and of
Norway prevented the expanding earldom from coming completely
under the jurisdiction of either and allowed the growth of the
earldom as a semi-independent political power in the North Sea
world of medieval Scotland.
Although few written sources survived the ages from this period,
the history of Orkney has been well preserved by saga literature
such as The Orkneyinga Saga. Composed in Iceland
near the turn of the thirteenth century, The Orkneyinga Saga
provides an excellent political history of the earldom of Orkney
from its creation in the ninth century onwards. It must be
stressed, however, that it was composed some three hundred years
later and is the product of oral tradition and a certain degree
of artistic license. Additionally it fails to illuminate
the nature and extent of the Norse conquest of Orkney. For
this scholars must turn to archaeological evidence such as
graves, houses and silver hoards. Not only does the
archaeologist’s work serve to fill in the gaps where the
sagas leave off, but it should also serve as a cross reference to
the sagas themselves. The job of the Orkney historian must
therefore be to create a synthesis of both types sources, giving
the most probable account of the early medieval earldom.
The Norse likely arrived in any sort of significant numbers
around the turn of the ninth century. The first recorded
attack in Britain was at Lindesfarne in 793, followed by the
Hebrides in 794 and Iona in 795. At the centre of the sea
route between these islands, Orkney was probably raided at this
time as well. Although some scholars think Scandinavian
settlement in Orkney began as early as the sixth century, there
is little evidence that would point to this being the case.[1] In fact, there are
no graves preceding 850 that are identifiably Norse.[2] Other evidence,
however, points toward a Norse presence on Orkney as early as the
790s. A spearhead was found a Skaill in the eighth-century
Scandinavian fashion[3], and ‘stadir’
place names are believed to predated 850.[4]
Apart from the date
of Viking penetration, there is also a debate over the nature of
the Norse conquest. Was it a mostly non-violent one in
which Norse traders and farmers settled among the native Pictish
population or a primarily violent conquest in which the Picts
were either slaughtered or driven south? Some scholars such
as Brøgger claim monastic accounts of Viking terror have been
greatly over exaggerated.[5] They point to such
evidence as a farm mound at Pool, Sanday in which a “clearly
identifiable” overlap between Pictish and Viking periods is
present.[6] The Norse also kept
the same patterns of land ownership and administration, dwelling
in the same structures and often constructing their rectangular
buildings over the old wheel-shaped houses.[7] Does this however lead conclusively to a
mingling of Norse and Picts on Orkney? First of all,
evidence such as the farm mound layers can easily be misleading.
It also seems that the Norse would have inhabited the same sites
whether or not the conquest was violent.
What seems to be
the most likely scenario is that the Viking period began with a
series of violent raids in the 790s, much like in other areas of
Britain, which depopulated the islands, either through murder or
emigration, to such an extent that by the end of the eighth
century Orkney was an entirely Norse island. Many scholars
write of a mass migration of Norse at this time,
“overwhelm[ing] the earlier inhabitants politically,
socially, culturally and linguistically.”[8] Had it been a migration solely of the
military elite, Orkney would have become a cultural mixture like
the Hebrides; yet Orkney became a Norse island, implying that the
lower classes were also principally Norse. Weinreich
discusses the tendency for conquerors to adopt the old place
names, such as Pictish names under the leadership of the Scots.
Orkney, however, saw almost no continuity in place names, as many
as ninety-nine percent of its names coming from Norse origins.
One may thus assume that the Viking settlement of Orkney followed
a period of violence that depopulated the islands to an extent
which allowed a migration of Norsemen to the fertile islands of
Orkney great enough to provide a predominantly Norse population
by the time of the establishment of the earldom later in the
ninth century. This is significant to the development of
Orkney in early medieval Scotland because it provided an
essentially Norse island in which Norse lords could hold local
power with relative ease while expanding south into mainland
Scotland with little threat from a local native population.
The traditional
account of the conquest of Orkney and foundation of the earldom,
found in the Orkneyinga Saga, states that King Harald
Finehair of Norway conquered Orkney in the 870s along with
Shetland, the Hebrides and the Isle of Man in response to raids
on his lands from Vikings of that area. He is said to have
granted Orkney to Rognvald of Møre, his vassal, as compensation
for his son Ivar’s death during the expedition. If
this account is true, then the earldom of Orkney was established
under the direct authority of the king of Norway and all
subsequent earls owed him their allegiance. This account,
however, is not without its flaws. For one thing, Harald
Finehair had many problems at home, attempting to unify Norway
under his control, and such an expedition is unlikely for a man
as preoccupied as Harald. Furthermore, there is no mention
of Harald’s involvment in the taking of Orkney found in
either the Historia Norvegiae or any of the contemporary
Irish sources.[9] Was Harald really
involved in the establishment of the earldom? It
is perhaps more probable, given the evidence against his
involvement, that his contribution to the creation of the earldom
was the fabrication of later scribes at a time when the kings of
Norway were trying to bring Orkney under their jurisdiction, thus
providing historical precedent for their rule.
Some historians,
such as Smyth, take a different approach to the conquest of
Orkney. Smyth believes that Olaf of Vestfold, a king in
southern Norway, lead an expedition to clear the islands of
Danish Vikings. He writes that the Icelandic Book of
Settlement states that Olaf the White, who Smyth believes to
be Olaf of Vestfold, ruled Dublin from 853, was a Vestfold in
origin, and lead expeditions into Scotland.[10] Is there, however, any reason to
believe that Olaf established the earldom of Orkney, giving it to
the Møre family? Although there is no evidence in the
sagas to suggest that Orkney came as a feudal grant from Olaf,
the Orkneyinga Saga does recount the close cooperation of
Sigurd I, first earl of Orkney, with Thorstein the Red, a son of
Olaf. This close cooperation between the Vestfolds and the
Møres might point to the earldom’s establishment by Olaf,
but it is unlikely. Rather than the conquests in northern
Scotland being the product of a lord-vassal expedition, it seems
more likely that the earldom of Orkney may be the product of a
conquest by Rognvald of Møre.
Rognvald of Møre,
according to later Scottish Norse tradition, took the northern
isles by himself, giving them to Sigurd, his brother.[11] The Historia
Norvegiae does not refer to Orkney as a royal grant,
suggesting the earldom was the result of independent action on
the part of the Møres.[12] There
exists indirect evidence of this in the Orkneyinga Saga.
When King Olaf of Norway claimed Orkney as a fief and demanded
Thorfinn swear an oath of allegiance to him, the saga reports
that “he [did not] care to be forced…to swear oaths
granting those lands to men with no birthright to them.”[13] This
establishment scenario would best account for the later strife
between the earls and the kings of Norway as any attempt to gain
overlordship over Orkney. It would also make the account
contained in the Orkneyinga Saga primarily a work of - or
better still the result of –later Norse royal propaganda.
Although this may most likely be the situation, there is simply
not enough evidence to out way the counterevidence for any of
these three scenarios. What is certain, however, is that
the kings of Norway or Dublin, if they possessed any rights over
Orkney de jure, could apply little if any power de
facto.
The first
significant expansion of the earldom came during the reign of
Sigurd I, later known as ‘the Mighty,’ first earl of
Orkney. As a testament to the strength of Norse rule and
the ability of the earls from the very beginning to assemble
large military forces, Sigurd I is said to have taken Caithness
and much of Argyll, Moray and Ross with Thorstein the Red.[14] Sigurd
constructed a stronghold in Morray to maintain his control of the
area, killing Earl Mælbrigte of the Scots but dying himself
shortly afterwards. Following a brief period under Rognvald
of Møre’s son Hallad, who was unable to fend of Danish
raiders, Einar I took control.[15] Einar fought off and killed Halfdan
Long-Leg, son of Herald Finehair, securing his control over
Orkney. Why, though, would Einar being fighting with the
son of his overlord? Was this battle merely the result of a
breakdown of relations between the Møres and the Norwegian royal
house, or is it instead Halfdan’s attempt to gain new
territory for himself and his family? What is certain is
that Harald came to Orkney to revenge the death of his son but
was unable to defeat Einar decisively, settling instead for a
fine of sixty gold marks. Although this incident was
certainly later viewed as Einar’s submission of his lands
and rights to Harald, there is no compelling reason to believe
that those involved viewed it as any more than a fine or bribe to
placate Harald’s desire for retribution and get him to halt
the assault on Orkney. Thus by the beginning of the tenth
century the earls of Orkney had succeeded both in carving out
large holdings ranging from Orkney down to Argyll and in fending
off an attack by the Norse royalty aimed at dispossessing them.
The earldom had already proved itself a force to be reckoned
with.
Einar was succeeded
by Thorfinn Skull-Splitter, a “strong ruler and
warrior” who consolidated control of the earldom but did
little to expand it.[16] His
sons, Ljot and Skuli, fought for control of the earldom but each
died fighting one another or the Scots in Caithness. Skuli,
it must be said, is a significant character in that he went to
the king of the Scots for aid and was granted title of earl from
him. Although this may be only in reference to Caithness,
it still demonstrates that the king of Scots claimed some sort of
authority over the earl’s possessions in northern Scotland.
The next earl, a nephew of Ljot and Skuli named Sigurd II, did
not initially share the support of the Scottish monarch. According
to the Njals Saga, he defended his mainland possessions,
extending the earldom into “Ross and Moray, Sutherland and
the Dales” and possibly even the Hebrides.[17] In what was probably the result of a
treaty recognizing Sigurd II’s power in Scotland, he took
the daughter of the Scottish king Malcolm[18] as his bride. In this manner holding
his own in Scotland, Sigurd paid homage to King Olaf Tryggvason
of Norway and was also converted to Christianity by him. The
famous account of this has Olaf threatening to ravage the islands
unless Sigurd converts, thus it may be assumed that Olaf posed
quite a military threat to the earldom. Once Olaf left and
Sigurd’s son, taken hostage by Olaf, had died, Sigurd felt
himself capable of refusing to pay homage to Olaf any longer.
Sigurd II’s reign saw initial expansion on the Scottish
mainland followed by alliance with the king of Scots, a peace and
support that undoubtedly gave him the confidence to stand up
against the Norwegian king once his large military presence had
departed.
Sigurd II’s
death left the earldom divided between his sons, although the
eventual victor was his youngest, Thorfinn II. Given the
earldom of Caithness and Sutherland by his grandfather, Malcolm
II of Scotland, Thorfinn used his lands and support to take a
portion of Orkney as well, appearing before Olaf of Norway as a
feudal overlord of Orkney and agreeing to split it with his
brother, Brusi. It should be stressed, however, that
although Thorfinn accepted Olaf’s authority at this time,
the saga states that he saw it unjust and without precedent and
he did not intend to keep his word.[19] Thorfinn did expand south into Scotland
as well. Attacked by an earl named Karl Hundason who
demanded tribute for Caithness, Thorfinn fended off the threat
and expanded his realm, according to the sagas, as far south as
Fife.[20] Once
Bursi died, Thorfinn split Orkney once again with his son,
Rognvald. The two fought together to expand into the
Hebrides, but had a falling out after which Rognvald was killed.
As an act of penance for his murder, Thorfinn sailed to Rome and
then to Jerusalem, promising the pope to give up raiding. Upon
his return, Thorfinn established the first bishopric at Birsay on
Orkney. With no more military threats to his power,
Thorfinn is said to have “turned his mind to the government
of his land and people, and to the making of laws.”[21] The earldom of
Orkney is said to have reached its climax during the rule of
Thorfinn II because he expanded it to its greatest extent, dealt
skilfully with both the Norwegian and Scottish crowns and
established means of organisation and administration such as a
bishopric and laws.
The Norse settled
Orkney because it was a rich, fertile land that provided an
excellent base for further expansion in the middle of the North
Sea world. The earls were able to keep and extend their
power largely because of their skilful dealing with the kings of
Scotland and Norway, submitting to their authority when the kings
support was needed or when the kings displayed their power and
willingness to subjugate the earls and refuting the kings claims,
either false or legitimate, when able to hold their own. Laing
is correct to point out that the earls were “virtually
independent rulers, owing little but nominal allegiance to the
kings of Norway or Scotland.”[22] For the only time in history, Orkney
had become a powerful political force in what was to become the
kingdom of Scotland.
Bibliography
Crawford, Barbara. “Norse Earls
and Scottish Bishops in Caithness.” The Viking Age
in
Caithness,
Orkney and the North Atlantic. Ed. Colleen E. Batley. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh
University Press, 1993.
Crawford, Barbara. “Einar
I,” “Thorfinn II” and “Sigurd II.” New
entries in the
DNB. Not
yet published.
Crawford, Iain A. “War or Peace-
Viking Colonisation in the Northern and Western Isles
Of Scotland reviewed.” Proceedings of the Eighth
Viking Congress August, 1977.
ed. Hans
Bekker-Nielsen: Odense University Press, 1981, pp. 259-270.
Haywood, John. The Penguin
Historical Atlas of the Vikings. London:
Penguin Books
Ltd., 1995.
Laing, Lloyd. Orkney and Shetland:
An Archaeological Guide. North Pomfret,
Vermont: David and
Charles Inc., 1974.
Lamb, Raymond G. “Carolingian
Orkney and its Transformation.” The Viking Age in
Caithness,
Orkney and the North Atlantic. Ed. Colleen E. Batley. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh
University Press, 1993.
Owen, Olwyn. The Sea Road: A Viking
Voyage Through Scotland. Edinburgh:
Canongate Books
Ltd., 1999.
Pálsson, Hermann and Paul Edwards, trans.
Orkneyinga Saga: The History of the Earls
of Orkney.
London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1978.
Ritchie, Anna. Viking Scotland.
Great Britian: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1993.
Smyth, Alfred P. Warlords and Holy
Men: Scotland AD 80-1000. Trowbridge,
Wiltshire:
Edinburgh University Press, 1998.
Thomson, William P.L. History of
Orkney. Edinburgh: The Mercat Press, 1989.
[1] Crawford, Ian A.
“War or Peace- Viking Colonisation in the Northern and
Western Isles Of Scotland reviewed.” p. 262.
[2]
Owen, Olwyn. The Sea Road: A Viking Voyage Through
Scotland, p. 14. As he later admits on page 36, graves
preceding 850 may just be poor Norse buried with no belongings or
Christianized Norse.
[3]
Laing, Lloyd. Orkney and Shetland: An Archaeological
Guide. p. 167.
[4]
Smyth, Alfred P. Warlords and Holy Men: Scotland AD
80-1000. 149.
[5]
Crawford, Ian, p. 262.
[6]
Owen, p. 21.
[7]
Ritchie, Anna. Viking Scotland. p. 25.
[8]
Crawford, Ian. Quoting Wainwright, p. 268.
[9]
Ritchie, p. 15.
[10] Smyth, p. 153.
[11] Ritchie, p. 15.
[12] Crawford, “Einar I,” p. 1.
[13] Orkneyinga Saga, p. 47.
[14] Ibid, p. 27.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid, p. 33.
[17] Crawford, “Sigurd II,” pp. 1-2.
[18] The Malcolm in question is most likely
Malcolm II, who ruled during the correct period. (Crawford,
“Sigurd II”, p. 2.)
[19] Orkneyinga Saga, p. 47.
[20] Crawford, “Thorfinn II,” p. 3.
[21] Crawford, “Norse Earls and Scottish
Bishops in Caithness.” p. 131.
[22] Laing, p. 189.