Chapter IV: , VII (201)

"No race of the ancient or modern world have ever taken to the
sea with such heartiness as the Northmen. The great cause
which filled the waters of Western Europe with their barks was
that consolidation and centralization of the kingly power all
over Europe which followed after the days of Charlemagne, and
which put a stop to those great invasions and migrations by
land which had lasted for centuries. Before that time the
north and east of Europe, pressed from behind by other
nationalities, and growing straitened within their own bounds,
threw off from time to time bands of emigrants which gathered
force as they slowly marched along, until they appeared in the
west as a fresh wave of the barbarian flood. As soon as the
west, recruited from the very source whence the invaders came,
had gained strength enough to set them at defiance, which
happened in the time of Charlemagne, these invasions by land
ceased after a series of bloody defeats, and the north had to
look for another outlet for the force which it was unable to
support at home. Nor was the north itself slow to follow
Charlemagne's example. Harold Fairhair, no inapt disciple of
the great emperor, subdued the petty kings in Norway one after
another, and made himself supreme king. At the same time he
invaded the rights of the old freeman, and by taxes and tolls
laid on his allodial holding drove him into exile. We have
thus the old outlet cut off and a new cause for emigration
added. No doubt the Northmen even then had long been used to
struggle with the sea, and sea-roving was the calling of the
brave, but the two causes we have named gave it a great
impulse just at the beginning of the tenth century, and many a
freeman who would have joined the host of some famous leader
by land, or have lived on a little king at home, now sought
the waves as a birthright of which no king could rob him.
Either alone, or as the follower of some sea-king, whose realm
was the sea's wide wastes, he went out year after year, and
thus won fame and wealth. The name given to this pursuit was
Viking, a word which is in no way akin to king. It is derived
from 'Vik,' a bay or creek, because these sea-rovers lay
moored in bays and creeks on the look-out for merchant ships;
the 'ing' is a well known ending, meaning, in this case,
occupation or calling. Such a sea-rover was called 'Vikingr,'
and at one time or another in his life almost every man of
note in the North had taken to the sea and lived a Viking
life."

_G. W. Dasent,
Story of Burnt Njal,
volume 2, appendix._

"Western viking expeditions have hitherto been ascribed to
Danes and Norwegians exclusively. Renewed investigations
reveal, however, that Swedes shared widely in these
achievements, notably in the acquisition of England, and that,
among other famous conquerors, Rolf, the founder of the
Anglo-Norman dynasty, issued from their country. … Norwegians,
like Swedes, were, in truth, merged in the terms Northmen and
Danes, both of which were general to all Scandinavians abroad.
… The curlier conversion of the Danes to Christianity and
their more immediate contact with Germany account for the
frequent application of their name to all Scandinavians."

_W. Roos,
The Swedish Part in the Viking Expeditions
(English History Review, April, 1892)._

ALSO IN:
_S. Laing,
Preliminary Dissertation to Heimskringla._

_C. F. Keary,
The Vikings of Western Christendom,
chapter 5._

_P. B. Du Chaillu,
The Viking Age._

See, also, SCANDINAVIAN STATES.

{2367}

NORMANS: 8-9th Centuries.
The island empire of the Vikings.

We have hitherto treated the Norwegians, Swedes, and Danes
under the common appellation of Northmen; and this is in many
ways the most convenient, for it is often impossible to decide
the nationality of the individual settlement. Indeed, it would
appear probable that the devastating bands were often composed
indiscriminately of the several nationalities. Still, in
tracing the history of their conquests, we may lay it down as
a general rule that England was the exclusive prey of the
Danes; that Scotland and the islands to the north as far as
Iceland, and to the south as far as Anglesea and Ireland, fell
to the Norwegians, and Russia to the Swedes; while Gaul and
Germany were equally the spoil of the Norwegians and the
Danes. … While England had been overcome by the Danes, the
Norwegians had turned their attention chiefly to the north of
the British Isles and the islands of the West. Their
settlements naturally fell into three divisions, which tally
with their geographical position.
1. The Orkneys and Shetlands, lying to the N. E. of Scotland.
2. The isles to the west as far south as Ireland.
3. Iceland and the Faroe Isles.

The Orkneys and Shetlands: Here the Northmen first appear as
early as the end of the 8th century, and a few peaceful
settlements were made by those who were anxious to escape from
the noisy scenes which distracted their northern country. In
the reign of Harald Harfagr [the Fairhaired] they assumed new
importance, and their character is changed. Many of those
driven out by Harald sought a refuge here, and betaking
themselves to piracy periodically infested the Norwegian coast
in revenge for their defeat and expulsion. These ravages
seriously disturbing the peace of his newly acquired kingdom,
Harald fitted out an expedition and devoted a whole summer to
conquering the Vikings and extirpating the brood of pirates.
The country being gained, he offered it to his chief adviser,
Rögnwald, Jarl of Möri in Norway, father of Rollo of Normandy,
who, though refusing to go himself, held it during his life as
a family possession, and sent Sigurd, his brother, there. …
Rögnwald next sent his son Einar, and from his time [A. D.
875] we may date the final establishment of the Jarls of
Orkney, who henceforth owe a nominal allegiance to the King of
Norway. … The close of the 8th century also saw the
commencement of the incursions of the Northmen in the west of
Scotland, and the Western Isles soon became a favourite resort
of the Vikings. In the Keltic annals these unwelcome visitors
had gained the name of Fingall, 'the white strangers,' from
the fairness of their complexion; and Dugall, the black
strangers, probably from the iron coats of mail worn by their
chiefs. … By the end of the 9th century a sort of naval empire
had arisen, consisting of the Hebrides, parts of the western
coasts of Scotland, especially the modern Argyllshire, Man,
Anglesea, and the eastern shores of Ireland. This empire was
under a line of sovereigns who called themselves the Hy-Ivar
(grandsons of Ivar), and lived now in Man, now in Dublin.
Thence they often joined their kinsmen in their attacks on
England, and at times aspired to the position of Jarls of the
Danish Northumbria."

_A. H. Johnson,
The Normans in Europe,
chapter 2._

"Under the government of these Norwegian princes [the Hy Ivar]
the Isles appear to have been very flourishing. They were
crowded with people; the arts were cultivated, and
manufactures were carried to a degree of perfection which was
then thought excellence. This comparatively advanced state of
society in these remote isles may be ascribed partly to the
influence and instructions of the Irish clergy, who were
established all over the island before the arrival of the
Norwegians, and possessed as much learning as was in those
ages to be found in any part of Europe, except Constantinople
and Rome; and partly to the arrival of great numbers of the
provincial Britons flying to them as an asylum when their
country was ravaged by the Saxons, and carrying with them the
remains of the science, manufactures, and wealth introduced
among them by their Roman masters. Neither were the Norwegians
themselves in those ages destitute of a considerable portion
of learning and of skill in the useful arts, in navigation,
fisheries, and manufactures; nor were they in any respect such
barbarians as those who know them only by the declamations of
the early English writers may be apt to suppose them. The
principal source of their wealth was piracy, then esteemed an
honourable profession, in the exercise of which these
islanders laid all the maritime countries of the west part of
Europe under heavy contributions."

_D. Macpherson,
Geographical Illustrations of Scottish History
(Quoted by J. H. Burton, History of Scotland,
chapter 15, volume 2, foot-note)._

See, also,
IRELAND: 9-10TH CENTURIES.

NORMANS: A. D. 787-880.
The so-called Danish invasions and settlements in England.

"In our own English chronicles, 'Dena' or Dane is used as the
common term for all the Scandinavian invaders of Britain,
though not including the Swedes, who took no part in the
attack, while Northman generally means 'man of Norway.' Asser
however uses the words as synonymous, 'Nordmanni sive Dani.'
Across the channel 'Northman' was the general name for the
pirates, and 'Dane' would usually mean a pirate from Denmark.
The distinction however is partly a chronological one; as,
owing to the late appearance of the Danes in the middle of the
ninth century, and the prominent part they then took in the
general Wiking movement, their name tended from that time to
narrow the area of the earlier term of 'Nordmanni.'"

_J. R. Green,
The Conquest of England,
page 68, foot-note._

Prof. Freeman divides the Danish invasions of England into
three periods:
1. The period of merely plundering incursions, which
began A. D. 787.
2. The period of actual occupation and settlement, from 866 to
the Peace of Wedmore, 880.
3. The later period of conquest, within which England was
governed by Danish kings, A. D. 980-1042.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880.

ALSO IN:
_C. F. Keary,
The Vikings in Western Christendom,
chapters 6 and 12._

NORMANS: A. D. 841.
First expedition up the Seine.

In May, A. D. 841, the Seine was entered for the first time by
a fleet of Norse pirates, whose depredations in France had
been previously confined to the coasts. The expedition was
commanded by a chief named Osker, whose plans appear to have
been well laid. He led his pirates straight to the rich city
of Rouen, never suffering them to slacken oar or sail, or to
touch the tempting country through which they passed, until
the great prize was struck. "The city was fired and plundered.
Defence was wholly impracticable, and great slaughter ensued.
… Osker's three days' occupation of Rouen was remuneratingly
successful.
{2368}
Their vessels loaded with spoil and captives, gentle and
simple, clerks, merchants, citizens, soldiers, peasants, nuns,
dames, damsels, the Danes dropped down the Seine, to complete
their devastation on the shores. … The Danes then quitted the
Seine; having formed their plans for renewing the encouraging
enterprize,—another time they would do more. Normandy dates
from Osker's three days' occupation Of Rouen."

_Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapter 2 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_C. F. Keary,
The Vikings in Western Christendom,
chapter 9._

NORMANS: A. D. 845-861.
Repeated ravages in the Seine.
Paris thrice sacked.

See PARIS; A. D. 845; and 857-861.

NORMANS: A. D. 849-860.
The career of Hasting.

"About the year of Alfred's birth [849] they laid siege to
Tours, from which they were repulsed by the gallantry of the
citizens, assisted by the miraculous aid of Saint Martin. It
is at this siege that Hasting first appears as a leader. His
birth is uncertain. In some accounts he is said to have been
the son of a peasant of Troyes, the capital of Champagne, and
to have forsworn his faith, and joined the Danes in his early
youth, from an inherent lust of battle and plunder. In others
he is called the son of the jarl Atte. But, whatever his
origin, by the middle of the century he had established his
title to lead the Northern hordes in those fierce forays which
helped to shatter the Carlovingian Empire to fragments. … When
the land was bare, leaving the despoiled provinces he again
put to sea, and, sailing southwards still, pushed up the Tagus
and Guadalquiver, and ravaged the neighbourhoods of Lisbon and
Seville. But no settlement in Spain was possible at this time.
The Peninsula had lately had for Caliph Abdalrahman the
Second, called El Mouzaffer, 'The Victorious,' and the vigour
of his rule had made the Arabian kingdom in Spain the most
efficient power for defence in Europe. Hasting soon recoiled
from the Spanish coasts, and returned to his old haunts. The
leaders of the Danes in England, the Sidrocs and Hinguar and
Hubba, had, as we have seen, a special delight in the
destruction of churches and monasteries, mingling a fierce
religious fanaticism with their thirst for battle and plunder.
This exceeding bitterness of the Northmen may be fairly laid
in great measure to the account of the thirty years of
proselytising warfare, which Charlemagne had waged in Saxony,
and along all the northern frontier of his empire. … Hasting
seems to have been filled with a double portion of this
spirit, which he had indulged throughout his career in the
most inveterate hatred to priests and holy places. It was
probably this, coupled with a certain weariness—commonplace
murder and sacrilege having grown tame, and lost their
charm—which incited him to the most daring of all his
exploits, a direct attack on the head of Christendom, and the
sacred city. Hasting then, about the year 860, planned an
attack on Rome, and the proposal was well received by his
followers. Sailing again round Spain, and pillaging on their
way both on the Spanish and Moorish coasts, they entered the
Mediterranean, and, steering for Italy, landed in the bay of
Spezzia, near the town of Luna. Luna was the place where the
great quarries of the Carrara marble had been worked ever
since the times of the Cæsars. The city itself was, it is
said, in great part built of white marble, and the 'candentia
mœnia Lunæ' deceived Hasting into the belief that he was
actually before Rome; so he sat down before the town which he
had failed to surprise. The hope of taking it by assault was
soon abandoned, but Hasting obtained his end by guile. … The
priests were massacred, the gates thrown open, and the city
taken and spoiled. Luna never recovered its old prosperity
after the raid of the Northmen, and in Dante's time had fallen
into utter decay. But Hasting's career in Italy ended with the
sack of Luna; and, giving up all hope of attacking Rome, he
re-embarked with the spoil of the town, the most beautiful of
the women, and all the youths who could be used as soldiers or
rowers. His fleet was, wrecked on the south coasts of France
on its return westward, and all the spoil lost; but the devil
had work yet for Hasting and his men, who got ashore in
sufficient numbers to recompense themselves for their losses
by the plunder of Provence."

_T. Hughes,
Alfred the Great,
chapter 20._

NORMANS: A. D. 860-1100.
The discovery and settlement of Iceland.
Development of the Saga literature.

The discovery of Iceland is attributed to a famous Norse
Viking named Naddodd, and dated in 860, at the beginning of
the reign, in Norway, of Harald Haarfager, who drove out so
many adventurers, to seek fortune on the seas. He is said to
have called it Snowland; but others who came to the cold
island in 870 gave it the harsher name which it still bears.
"Within sixty years after the first settlement by the Northmen
the whole was inhabited; and, writes Uno Von Troil (p. 64),
'King Harold, who did not contribute a little towards it by
his tyrannical treatment of the petty kings and lords in
Norway, was obliged at last to issue an order, that no one
should sail to Iceland without paying four ounces of fine
silver to the Crown, in order to stop those continual
emigrations which weakened his kingdom.' … Before the tenth
century had reached its half-way period, the Norwegians had
fully peopled the island with not less, perhaps, than 50,000
souls. A census taken about A. D. 1100 numbered the franklins
who had to pay Thing-tax at 4,500, without including cotters
and proletarians."

_R. F. Burton,
Ultima Thule, introduction,
section 3 (volume 1)._

"About sixty years after the first settlement of the island, a
step was taken towards turning Iceland into a commonwealth,
and giving the whole island a legal constitution; and though
we are ignorant of the immediate cause which led to this, we
know enough of the state of things in the island to feel sure,
that it could only have been with the common consent of the
great chiefs, who, as Priests, presided over the various local
Things.

See THING.

The first, want was a man who could make a code of laws." The
man was found in one Ulfljót, who came from a Norwegian family
long famous for knowledge of the customary law, and who was
sent to the mother country to consult the wisest of his kin.
"Three years he stayed abroad; and when he returned, the
chiefs, who, no doubt, day by day felt more strongly the need
of a common centre of action as well as of a common code, lost
no time in carrying out their scheme. … The time of the annual
meeting was fixed at first for the middle of the month of June,
but in the year 999 it was agreed to meet a week later, and
the Althing then met when ten full weeks of summer had passed.
{2369}
It lasted fourteen days. … In its legal capacity it [the
Althing] was both a deliberative and executive assembly; both
Parliament and High Court of Justice in one. … With the
establishment of the Althing we have for the first time a
Commonwealth in Iceland."

_G. W. Dasent,
The Story of Burnt Njal,
introduction (volume 1)._

"The reason why Iceland, which was destitute of inhabitants at
the time of its discovery, about the middle of the 9th
century, became so rapidly settled and secured so eminent a
position in the world's history and literature, must be sought
in the events which took place in Norway at the time when
Harald Hárfragi (Fairhair), after a long and obstinate
resistance, succeeded in usurping the monarchical power. … The
people who emigrated to Iceland were for the most part the
flower of the nation. They went especially from the west coast
of Norway, where the peculiar Norse spirit had been most
perfectly developed. Men of the noblest birth in Norway set
out with their families and followers to find a home where
they might be as free and independent as their fathers had
been before them. No wonder then that they took with them the
cream of the ancient culture of the fatherland. … Toward the
end of the 11th century it is expressly stated that many of
the chiefs were so learned that they with perfect propriety
might have been ordained to the priesthood [Christianity
having been formally adopted by the Althing in the year 1000],
and in the 12th century there were, in addition to those to be
found in the cloisters, several private libraries in the
island. On the other hand, secular culture, knowledge of law
and history, and of the skaldic art, were, so to speak, common
property. And thus, when the means for committing a literature
to writing were at hand, the highly developed popular taste
for history gave the literature the direction which it
afterward maintained. The fact is, there really existed a
whole literature which was merely waiting to be put in
writing. … Many causes contributed toward making the
Icelanders preeminently a historical people. The settlers were
men of noble birth, who were proud to trace their descent from
kings and heroes of antiquity, nay, even from the gods
themselves, and we do not therefore wonder that they
assiduously preserved the memory of the deeds of their
forefathers. But in their minds was developed not only a taste
for the sagas of the past; the present also received its full
share of attention. … Nor did they interest themselves for and
remember the events that took place in Iceland only. Reports
from foreign lands also found a most hearty welcome, and the
Icelanders had abundant opportunity of satisfying their thirst
for knowledge in this direction. As vikings, as merchants, as
courtiers and especially as skalds accompanying kings and
other distinguished persons, and also as varangians in
Constantinople, many of them found splendid opportunities of
visiting foreign countries. … Such were then the conditions
and circumstances which produced that remarkable development
of the historical taste with which the people were endowed,
and made Iceland the home of the saga."

_F. W. Horn,
History of the Literature of the Scandinavian North,
part 1, chapter 1._

"The Icelanders, in their long winter, had a great habit of
writing, and were, and still are, excellent in penmanship,
says Dahlmann. It is to this fact that any little history
there is of the Norse Kings and their old tragedies, crimes,
and heroisms, is almost all due. The Icelanders, it seems, not
only made beautiful letters on their paper or parchment, but
were laudably observant and desirous of accuracy; and have
left us such a collection of narratives (Sagas, literally
'Says') as, for quantity and quality, is unexampled among rude
nations."

_T. Carlyle,
Early Kings of Norway,
Preface._

See, also,
THINGS.
THINGVALLA.

NORMANS: A. D. 876-911.
Rollo's acquisition of Normandy.

"One alone among the Scandinavian settlements in Gaul was
destined to play a real part in history. This was the
settlement of Rolf or Rollo at Rouen. [The genuine name is
Hrolfr, Rolf, in various spellings. The French form is Rou,
sometimes Rous …; the Latin is Rollo.—Foot-note.] This
settlement, the kernel of the great Norman Duchy, had, I need
hardly say, results of its own and an importance of its own,
which distinguish it from every other Danish colony in Gaul.
But it is well to bear in mind that it was only one colony
among several, and that, when the cession was made, it was
probably not expected to be more lasting or more important
than the others. But, while the others soon lost any
distinctive character, the Rouen settlement lasted, it grew,
it became a power in Europe, and in Gaul it became even a
determining power. … The lasting character of his work at once
proves that the founder of the Rouen colony was a great man,
but he is a great man who must be content to be judged in the
main by the results of his actions. The authentic history of
Rolf, Rollo, or Rou, may be summed up in a very short space.
We have no really contemporary narrative of his actions,
unless a few meagre and uncertain entries in some of the
Frankish annals may be thought to deserve that name. … I
therefore do not feel myself at all called upon to narrate in
detail the exploits which are attributed to Rolf in the time
before his final settlement. He is described as having been
engaged in the calling of a Wiking both in Gaul and in Britain
for nearly forty years before his final occupation of Rouen. …
The exploits attributed to Rolf are spread over so many years,
that we cannot help suspecting that the deeds of other
chieftains have been attributed to him, perhaps that two
leaders of the same name have been confounded. Among countless
expeditions in Gaul, England, and Germany, we find Rolf
charged with an earlier visit to Rouen [A. D. 876], with a
share in the great siege of Paris [A. D. 885], and with an
occupation or destruction of Bayeux. But it is not till we
have got some way into the reign of Charles the Simple, not
till we have passed several years of the tenth century, that
Rolf begins clearly to stand out as a personal historic
reality. He now appears in possession of Rouen, or of whatever
vestiges of the city had survived his former ravages, and from
that starting-point he assaulted Chartres. Beneath the walls
of that city he underwent a defeat [A. D. 911] at the hands of
the Dukes Rudolf of Burgundy and Robert of Paris, which was
attributed to the miraculous powers of the great local relic,
the under-garment of the Virgin.
{2370}
But this victory, like most victories over the Northmen, had
no lasting effect. Rolf was not dislodged from Rouen, nor was
his career of devastation and conquest at all seriously
checked. But, precisely as in the case of Guthrum in England,
his evident disposition to settle in the country suggested an
attempt to change him from a devastating enemy into a
peaceable neighbour. The Peace of Clair-on-Epte [A. D. 911]
was the duplicate of the Peace of Wedmore, and King Charles
and Duke Robert of Paris most likely had the Peace of Wedmore
before their eyes. A definite district was ceded to Rolf, for
which he became the King's vassal; he was admitted to baptism
and received the king's natural daughter in marriage. And,
just as in the English case, the territory ceded was not part
of the King's immediate dominions. … The grant to Rolf was
made at the cost not of the Frankish King at Laon but of the
French Duke at Paris. The district ceded to Rolf was part of
the great Neustrian March or Duchy which had been granted to
Odo [or Eudes] of Paris and which was now held by his brother
Duke Robert. … It must not be thought that the district now
ceded to Rolf took in the whole of the later Duchy of
Normandy. Rouen was the heart of the new state, which took in
lands on both sides of the Seine. From the Epte to the sea was
its undoubted extent from the south-east to the north. But the
western frontier is much less clearly defined. On the one
hand, the Normans always claimed a certain not very well
defined superiority over Britanny as part of the original
grant. On the other hand, it is quite certain that Rolf did
not obtain immediate possession of what was afterwards the
noblest portion of the heritage of his descendants. The
Bessin, the district of Bayeux, was not won till several years
later, and the Côtentin, the peninsula of Coutances, was not
won till after the death of Rolf. The district granted to Rolf
… had—sharing therein the fate of Germany and France—no
recognized geographical name. Its inhabitants were the
Northmen, the Northmen of the Seine, the Northmen of Rouen.
The land itself was, till near the end of the century, simply
the Land of the Northmen"—the Terra Northmannorum.

_E. A. Freeman,
Historical Norman Conquest of England,
chapter 4 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapters 3-5._

_A. Thierry,
Norman Conquest of England,
book 2._

See, also,
FRANCE: A. D. 877-987.

NORMANS: A. D. 876-984.
Discovery and settlement of Greenland.

"The discovery of Greenland was a natural consequence of the
settlement of Iceland, just as the discovery of America
afterward was a natural consequence of the settlement of
Greenland. Between the western part of Iceland and the eastern
part of Greenland there is a distance of only 45 geographical
miles. Hence, some of the ships that sailed to Iceland, at the
time of the settlement of this island and later, could in case
of a violent east wind, which is no rare occurrence in those
regions, scarcely avoid approaching the coast of Greenland
sufficiently to catch a glimpse of its jokuls,—nay, even to
land on its islands and promontories. Thus it is said that
Gunnbjorn, Ulf Krage's son, saw land lying in the ocean at the
west of Iceland, when, in the year 876, he was driven out to
the sea by a storm. Similar reports were heard, from time to
time, by other mariners. About a century later a certain man,
by name Erik the Red, … resolved to go in search of the land
in the west that Gunnbjorn and others had seen. He set sail in
the year 984, and found the land as he had expected, and
remained there exploring the country for two years. At the end
of this period he returned to Iceland, giving the
newly-discovered country the name of Greenland, in order, as
he said, to attract settlers, who would be favorably impressed
with so pleasing a name. The result was that many Icelanders
and Norsemen emigrated to Greenland, and a flourishing colony
was established, with Gardar for its capital city, which, in
the year 1261, became subject to the crown of Norway. The
Greenland colony maintained its connection with the mother
countries for a period of no less than 400 years: yet it
finally disappeared, and was almost forgotten. Torfæus gives a
list of seventeen bishops who ruled in Greenland."

_R. B. Anderson,
America not Discovered by Columbus,
chapter 7._

ALSO IN:
_D. Crantz,
History of Greenland,
book 4, chapter 1._

NORMANS: A. D. 885-886.
The Great Siege of Paris.

See PARIS: A. D. 885-886.

NORMANS: 9-10th Centuries.
The Danish conquests and settlements in Ireland.

See IRELAND: 9-10th CENTURIES and A. D. 1014.

NORMANS: 9-10th Centuries.
The ravages of the Vikings on the Continent.

"Take the map and colour with vermilion the provinces,
districts and shores which the Northmen visited. The colouring
will have to be repeated more than ninety times successively
before you arrive at the conclusion of the Carlovingian
dynasty. Furthermore, mark by the usual symbol of war, two
crossed swords, the localities where battles were fought by or
against the pirates: where they were defeated or triumphant,
or where they pillaged, burned or destroyed; and the valleys
and banks of Elbe, Rhine and Moselle, Scheldt, Meuse, Somme
and Seine, Loire, Garonne and Adour, the inland Allier, and
all the coasts and coast-lands between estuary and estuary and
the countries between the river-streams, will appear bristling
as with chevaux-de-frise. The strongly-fenced Roman cities,
the venerated Abbeys and their dependent bourgades, often more
flourishing and extensive than the ancient seats of
government, the opulent seaports and trading towns, were all
equally exposed to the Danish attacks, stunned by the
Northmen's approach, subjugated by their fury. … They
constitute three principal schemes of naval and military
operations, respectively governed and guided by the great
rivers and the intervening sea-shores. … The first scheme of
operations includes the territories between Rhine and Scheldt,
and Scheldt and Elbe: the furthest southern point reached by
the Northmen in this direction was somewhere between the Rhine
and the Neckar. Eastward, the Scandinavians scattered as far
as Russia; but we must not follow them there. The second
scheme of operations affected the countries between Seine and
Loire, and again from the Seine eastward towards the Somme and
Oise. These operations were connected with those of the Rhine
Northmen. The third scheme of operations was prosecuted in the
countries between Loire and Garonne, and Garonne and Adour,
frequently flashing towards Spain, and expanding inland as far
as the Allier and central France, nay, to the very centre, to
Bourges."

_Sir F. Palgrave,
History of Normandy and England,
book 1, chapter 3 (volume 1)._

{2371}

ALSO IN:
_C. F. Keary,
The Vikings in Western Christendom,
chapters 9-15._

NORMANS: A. D. 979-1016.
The Danish conquest of England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 979-1016.

NORMANS: A. D. 986-1011.
Supposed voyages to America.

See AMERICA: 10-11th CENTURIES.

NORMANS: 10-13th Centuries.
The breaking up of the Norse island empire.

"At the close of the 10th and beginning of the 11th century
the battles of Tara and Clontarf overthrew the power of these
Norsemen (or Ostmen as they were called) in Ireland, and
restored the authority of the native Irish sovereign. About
this time they [the 'Hy-Ivar,' or sovereigns of the
island-empire of the Northmen—see above: 8-9TH CENTURIES]
became Christians, and in the year 1066 we find one of their
princes joining Harald Hardrada of Norway in his invasion of
England, which ended so disastrously in the battle of Stamford
Bridge. Magnus of Norway, thirty-two years later, after
subduing the independent Jarls of Shetland and the Orkneys,
attempted to reassert his supremacy along the western coast.
But after conquering Anglesea, whence he drove out the Normans
[from England] who had just made a settlement there, he
crossed to Ireland to meet his death in battle. The
sovereignty of the Isles was then restored to its original
owners, but soon after split into two parts—the Suderies and
Norderies (whence the term Sodor and Man), north and south of
Ardnamurchan Point. The next glimpse we have of these
dominions is at the close of the 12th century, when we find
them under a chief named Somarled, who exercised authority in
the islands and Argyleshire, and from him the clans of the
Highlands and the Western Isles love to trace their ancestry.
After his death, according to the Highland traditions, the
islands and Argyleshire were divided amongst his three sons.
Thus the old Norse empire was finally broken up, and in the
13th century, after another unsuccessful attempt by Haco, King
of Norway, to re-establish the authority of the mother kingdom
over their distant possessions, an attempt which ended in his
defeat at the battle of Largs by the Scottish king, Alexander
III., they were ceded to the Scottish kings by Magnus IV., his
son, and an alliance was cemented between the two kingdoms by
the marriage of Alexander's daughter, Margaret, to Eric of
Norway." At the north of Scotland the Jarls of Orkney, in the
11th century, "conquered Caithness and Sutherland, and wrested
a recognition of their claim from Malcolm II. of Scotland.
Their influence was continually felt in the dynastic and other
quarrels of Scotland; the defeat of Duncan, in 1040, by the
Jarl of Orkney, contributing not a little to Duncan's
subsequent overthrow by Macbeth. They fostered the
independence of the north of Scotland against the southern
king, and held their kingdom until, in 1355, it passed by the
female line to the house of Sinclair. The Sinclairs now
transferred their allegiance to their natural master, the King
of Scotland; and finally the kingdom of the Orkneys was handed
over to James III. as the dowry of his bride, Margaret of
Norway."

_A. H. Johnson,
The Normans in Europe,
chapter 2._

ALSO IN:
_J. H. Burton,
History of Scotland,
chapter 15 (volume 2)._

See, also, IRELAND: A. D. 1014.

NORMANS: A. D. 1000-1063.
The Northmen in France become French.

See NORMANDY; A. D. 911-1000; and 1035-1063.

NORMANS: A. D. 1000-1194.
Conquests and settlement in Southern Italy and Sicily.

See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1000-1090;
and 1081-1194.

NORMANS: A. D. 1016-1042.
The reign of the Danish kings in England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1016-1042.

NORMANS: A. D. 1066-1071.
Conquest of England by Duke William of Normandy.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1042-1066; 1066; and 1066-1071.

NORMANS: A. D. 1081-1085.
Attempted conquest of the Byzantine Empire.

See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1081-1085.

NORMANS: A. D. 1084.
The sack and burning of Rome.

See ROME: A. D. 1081-1084.

NORMANS: A. D. 1146.
Ravages in Greece.

See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 1146.

NORMANS: A. D. 1504.
Early enterprise on the Newfoundland fishing banks.

See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.

----------NORMANS: End--------

NORTH, Lord, Administration of.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1770, to 1782-1783.

NORTH ANNA, The passage of the.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (MAY: VIRGINIA).

NORTH BRITON, Number 45, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1762-1764.

----------NORTH CAROLINA: Start--------

NORTH CAROLINA:
The aboriginal inhabitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, CHEROKEES,
IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH,
SHAWANESE, and TIMUQUANAN FAMILY.

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1524.
Discovery of the coast by Verrazano.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1523-1524.

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1585-1587.
Raleigh's attempted settlements at Roanoke.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1584-1586; and 1587-1590.

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1629.
The grant to Sir Robert Heath.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1629.

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1639-1663.
Pioneer and unorganized colonization.

"An abortive attempt at colonization was made in 1639, and a
titular governor appeared in Virginia; but this, and a number
of conflicting claims originating in this patent [to Sir
Robert Heath], and sufficiently troublesome to the
proprietaries of a later time, were the only results of the
grant of Charles I. This action on the part of the Crown, and
the official information received, did not, however, suffice
to prevent the Virginia Assembly lending itself to a scheme by
which possession might be obtained of the neighboring
territory, or at least substantial benefits realized therefrom
by their constituents. With this object, they made grants to a
trading company, which led, however, only to exploration and
traffic. Other grants of a similar nature followed for the
next ten years, at the expiration of which a company of
Virginians made their way from Nansemond to Albemarle, and
established a settlement there. The Virginian Burgesses
granted them lands, and promised further grants to all who
would extend these settlements to the southward. Emigration
from Virginia began. Settlers, singly and in companies,
crossed the border, and made scattered and solitary clearings
within the wilds of North Carolina. Many of these people were
mere adventurers; but some of them were of more substantial
stuff, and founded permanent settlements on the Chowan and
elsewhere. Other eyes, however, as watchful as those of the
Virginians, were also turned to the rich regions of the South.
{2372}
New England enterprise explored the American coast from one
end to the other, in search of lucrative trade and new
resting-places. After a long acquaintance with the North
Carolina coast, they bought land of the Indians, near the
mouth of Cape Fear River, and settled there. For some
unexplained cause—possibly on account of the wild and
dangerous character of the scattered inhabitants, who had
already drifted thither from Virginia, possibly from the
reason which they themselves gave—the New England colonists
abandoned their settlement and departed, leaving a written
opinion of the poor character of the country expressed in very
plain language and pinned to a post. Here it was found by some
wanderers from Barbadoes, who were of a different opinion from
the New Englanders as to the appearance of things; and they
accordingly repurchased the land from the Indians and began a
settlement. At this date [1663], therefore, there was in North
Carolina this infant settlement of the Barbadoes men, on the
extreme southeastern point of the present State, and in the
north-eastern corner the Virginia settlers scattered about,
with here a solitary plantation and there a little group of
farms, and always a restless van of adventurers working their
way down the coast and into the interior. … Whatever rights
the North Carolina settlers may have had in the eyes of the
Virginians, who had granted them land, or in those of the
Indians who had sold it, they had none recognized by the
English King, who claimed to own all that vast region. It may
be doubted whether anything was known of these early colonists
in England; and their existence was certainly not regarded in
the least when Charles II. lavished their territory, and much
besides, upon a band of his courtiers and ministers."

_H. C. Lodge,
Short History of the English Colonies,
chapter 5._

ALSO IN:
_J. W. Moore,
History of North Carolina,
volume 1, chapter 2._

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.
The grant to Monk, Clarendon, Shaftesbury and others.
The organized colonies.

"On the 24th March, 1663, King Charles II. granted to Edward,
Earl of Clarendon; George [Monk], Duke of Albemarle; William,
Earl of Craven; John, Lord Berkeley; Anthony, Lord Ashley
[Earl of Shaftesbury]; Sir George Carteret, Sir John Colleton,
and Sir William Berkeley, all the country between the Pacific
and Atlantic Oceans, between 31° and 36° parallels of
latitude, called Carolina, in honor of Charles. [The grant
embraced the present States of Georgia, Alabama and
Mississippi, as well as the two Carolinas.] In 1663, Sir
William Berkeley, Governor of the Colony of Virginia, visited
the province, and appointed William Drummond Governor of the
Colony of Carolina. … Drummond, at his death in 1667, was
succeeded by Stevens as governor. … The first assembly that
made laws for Carolina, assembled in the fall of 1669. … A
form of government, magnificent in design, and labored in
detail, called 'The fundamental constitutions of Carolina,'
were drawn up by the celebrated author of the Essay on the
Human Understanding, John Locke. … On the death of Governor
Stevens, who died in the colony full of years and wealth, the
assembly chose Carteret for their governor, and on his return
to England soon after, Eastchurch, who then was in Eng]and,
was appointed governor, and Miller secretary."

_J. H. Wheeler,
Historical Sketches of North Carolina,
chapter 4._

"The earliest grant made to the lords proprietors did not
include the whole of the present State of North Carolina. Its
northern line fell short of the southern boundary of Virginia
by half a degree of latitude. Notwithstanding this, an
unwarranted exhibition of authority established virtually the
proprietary dominion over this unappropriated territory. …
Colonel Byrd of Virginia, who was born not long after the
charter of 1665 was made, and who lived during the
administration of Berkeley, states, and no doubt truly, that
'Sir William Berkeley, who was one of the grantees, and at
that time governor of Virginia, finding a territory of 31
miles in breadth between the inhabited part of Virginia and
the above-mentioned boundary of Carolina [36°], advised the
Lord Clarendon of it. And his lordship had interest enough
with the king to obtain a second patent to include it, dated
June 30th, 1665.' By this patent very large powers were
granted; so large that, as Chalmers has remarked, 'no one
prerogative of the crown was preserved, except only the
sovereign dominion. … The existence of the colony from
Barbadoes, under Sir John Yeamans, that settled in the old
county of Clarendon, from its inception in 1665 to its
abandonment in 1690, forms but an episode in the proprietary
history of North Carolina. The colony, like all others
similarly situated, sought at first to make provision for the
supply of bodily wants, in securing food and shelter only; but
having done this it next proceeded to make profitable the
gifts of Heaven that were around it. Yeamans had brought with
him negro slaves from Barbadoes, and so inviting was the new
settlement deemed, that in the second year of its existence it
contained 800 inhabitants. … But with all this prosperity, the
colony on the Cape Fear was not destined to be permanent. The
action of the lords proprietors themselves caused its
abandonment. … In 1670, the lords proprietors, who seem to
have been anxious to proceed more and more to the southward,
sent out a considerable number of emigrants to form a colony
at Port Royal, now Beaufort, in the present State of South
Carolina. The individual who led the expedition was William
Sayle, 'a man of experience,' says Chalmers, 'who had been
appointed governor of that part of the coast lying
southwestward of Cape Carteret.' … Scarcely however, had Sayle
carried out his instructions and made his colonists somewhat
comfortable, before his constitution yielded to a new and
insalubrious climate, and he died. … It was not easy for the
proprietors immediately to find a fit successor; and, even had
such been at hand, some time must necessarily have elapsed
before he could safely reach the scene of his labors. But Sir
John Yeamans was near the spot: his long residence had
acclimated him, and, as the historian states, he 'had hitherto
ruled the plantation around Cape Fear with a prudence which
precluded complaint.' He therefore was directed to extend his
command from old Clarendon, on the Cape Fear, to the territory
which was southwest of Cape Carteret. This was in August,
1671. The shores with the adjacent land, and the streams
making into the sea, were by this time very well known to all
the dwellers in Carolina, for the proprietors had caused them
to be surveyed with accuracy.
{2373}
On the banks of Ashley River there was good pasturage, and
land fit for tillage. The planters of Clarendon, therefore,
turned their faces southward, while those from Port Royal
travelled northward; and so the colonists from both
settlements met on the banks of the Ashley, as on a middle
ground, and here in the same year (1671) they laid, 'on the
first high land,' the foundations of 'old Charlestown.' In
1679, it was found that 'Oyster Point,' formed by the
confluence of Ashley and Cooper rivers, was more convenient
for a town than the spot previously selected, and the people,
with the encouragement of the lords proprietors, began to
remove thither. In the next year (1680) were laid the
foundations of the present city of Charleston; thirty houses
were built, and it was declared to be the capital of the
southern part of the province, and also the port for all
commercial traffic. This gradually depopulated old Clarendon.
… We now return to trace the fortunes of the settlement on
Albemarle, under Stephens. As before stated he entered upon
his duties as governor in October, 1667. … His instructions
were very full and explicit. The Assembly was to be composed
of the governor, a council of twelve, and twelve delegates
chosen by the freeholders. Of the twelve councillors, whose
advice, by the way, the governor was required always to take
and follow, one half was to be appointed by the Assembly, the
other half by himself. To this Assembly belonged not only the
power to make laws, but a large share of the executive
authority also. … In 1669, the first legislature under this
constitution assembled. And it is worthy of remark, that at
this period, when the province may be said to have had, for
the first time, a system of regular government, there was in
it a recognition of two great principles which are now part of
the political creed of our whole country, without distinction
of party. These are, first, that the people are entitled to a
voice in the selection of their law-makers; and secondly, that
they cannot rightfully be taxed but by their own
representatives. … The people, we have reason to believe, were
contented and happy during the early part of Stephens'
administration. … But this quiet condition of affairs was not
to last. We have now reached a period in our history which
illustrates the fact, that whatever wisdom may be apparent in
the constitution given to the Albemarle colony by the
proprietors, on the accession of Stephens, was less the result
of deliberation than of a happy accident. … But the time had
now come for the proprietors to carry out their magnificent
project of founding an empire; and disregarding alike the
nature of man, the lessons of experience, and the physical
obstacles of an unsubdued wilderness (even not yet entirely
reclaimed), they resolved that all should yield to their
theories of government, and invoked the aid of philosophy to
accomplish an impossibility. Locke was employed to prepare
'the fundamental constitutions.'"

_F. L. Hawks,
History of North Carolina,
volume 2, pages 441-462._

ALSO IN:
_W. C. Bryant and S. H. Gay,
Popular History of thee United States,
volume 2, chapter 12._

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1669-1693.
The Fundamental Constitutions of John Locke,
and their failure.

The royal grant of the Carolinas to Monk, Shaftesbury,
Clarendon, and their associates invested them with "all the
rights, jurisdiction, royalties, privileges, and liberties
within the bounds of their province, to hold, use, and enjoy
the same, in as ample a manner as the bishop of Durham did in
that county-palatine in England: … Agreeably to these powers,
the proprietors proceeded to frame a system of laws for the
colony which they projected. Locke, the well-known
philosopher, was summoned to this work, and the largest
expectations were entertained in consequence of his
co-operation. Locke, though subsequently one of the
proprietors, was, at the beginning, simply the secretary of
the earl of Shaftesbury. The probability is that, in preparing
the constitution for the Carolinas, he rather carried out the
notions of that versatile nobleman than his own. … The code of
laws called the 'Fundamental Constitutions,' which was
devised, and which subsequently became unpopular in the
colony, is not certainly the work of his hands. It is ascribed
by Oldmixon, a contemporary, to the earl of Shaftesbury, one
of the proprietors. The most striking feature in this code
provided for the creation of a nobility, consisting of land
graves, cassiques, and barons. These were to be graduated by
the landed estates which were granted with the dignity; the
eldest of the proprietary lords was to be the superior, with
the title of Palatine, and the people were to be serfs." The
tenants, and the issue of the tenants, "were to be transferred
with the soil, and not at liberty to leave it, but with the
lord's permission, under hand and seal. The whole system was
rejected after a few years' experiment. It has been harshly
judged as … the crude conception of a mind conversant rather
with books than men—with the abstract rather than the
practical in government and society. And this judgment is
certainly true of the constitutions in the case in which they
were employed. They did not suit the absolute conditions of
the country, or the class of people which subsequently made
their way to it. But contemplating the institution of domestic
slavery, as the proprietors had done from the beginning—a
large villanage and a wealthy aristocracy, dominating almost
without restraint or responsibility over the whole—the scheme
was not without its plausibilities. But the feudal tenures
were everywhere dying out. The time had passed, even in
Europe, for such a system. … The great destitution of the
first settlers left them generally without the means of
procuring slaves; and the equal necessities, to which all are
subject who peril life and fortune in a savage forest and on a
foreign shore, soon made the titular distinctions of the few a
miserable mockery, or something worse."

_W. G. Simms,
History of South Carolina,
book 2, chapter 1._

"The constitutions were signed on the 21st of July, 1669;" but
subsequently revised by the interpolation of a clause, against
the wishes of Locke, establishing the Church of England. "This
revised copy of 'the model' was not signed till March, 1670.
To a colony of which the majority were likely to be
dissenters, the change was vital; it was scarcely noticed in
England, where the model became the theme of extravagant
applause. … As far as depended upon the proprietaries, the
government was immediately organized with Monk, duke of
Albemarle, as palatine." But, meantime, the colonists in the
northern part of the Carolina province had instituted a simple
form of government for themselves, with a council of twelve,
and an assembly composed of the governor, the council, and
twelve delegates from the freeholders of the incipient
settlements.
{2374}
The assembly had already met and had framed some important
laws, which remained "valid in North Carolina for more than
half a century. Hardly had these laws been established when
the new constitution was forwarded to Albemarle. Its
promulgation did but favor anarchy by invalidating the
existing system, which it could not replace. The
proprietaries, contrary to stipulations with the colonists,
superseded the existing government, and the colonists
resolutely rejected the substitute." Much the same state of
things appeared in the South Carolina settlements (not yet
separately named), and successive disorders and revolutionary
changes made up the history of the pseudo palatinate for many
years.

_G. Bancroft,
History of the United States
(Author's last revision),
part 2, chapter 7 (volume 1)._

In 1693, "to conciliate the colonists, and to get rid of the
dispute which had arisen as to the binding force of the 'Grand
Model,' the proprietors voted that, 'as the people have
declared they would rather be governed by the powers granted
by the charter, without regard to the fundamental
constitutions, it will be for their quiet, and the protection
of the well-disposed, to grant their request.' This abrogation
of the labors of Locke removed one bone of contention; but as
the 'Grand Model' had never been actually carried into effect,
the government went on much as before. Each of the
proprietaries continued to have his special delegate in the
colony, or rather two delegates, one for South Carolina, the
other for Albemarle, the eight together constituting the
council in either province, over which the governor presided
as delegate of the palatine, to whom his appointment
belonged."

_R. Hildreth,
History of the United States,
chapter 21 (volume 2)._

The text of the "fundamental constitutions" is printed in
volume 9 of the 12th edition of Locke's complete works, and in
volume 10 of several prior editions.

NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1688-1729.
Slow progress and unprosperous state of the colony.
End of the Proprietary Government.