Hallstein Torleivsson - The connection between the deposed king of Isle of Man and the noble Skanke family i Norway, Sweden and Denmark

You sound like a wikipedia robot :)

Johan,

I'm not quite sure what prompted all that but I think it is partly a misreading of what I said.

My academic background is in history. My master's thesis, if I ever finish it, is about the invention of genealogy in medieval Europe as a way of forging political, social, and cultural identity.

I try to be very upfront about that, because when I run into problems with genealogists it's almost always because I have an academic prejudice about what constitutes proof, and because I can sometimes come across as being callous when people are mourning the loss of their favorite historical myth.

That is, I am very comfortable living with historical ambiguity ("maybe, but not proven") and I don't have the same emotional attachment about my connection to the historical figures that interest me.

My responses to Stein Aage about the Scandinavians who served in the Roman army are a response to his idea that Viking culture (say 800-1000) was the creation of people fleeing Christianity in the Roman empire in an earlier period.

Of course there were Scandinavians who served in the Byzantine army. They were later. I'm talking about the period before the collapse of the Western empire. As you must know, there are tantalizing hints from archaeology that there were Scandinavians circa 300 and 400 who served in or had some kind of relationship with the Romans. I've seen some articles about them, but as far as I know, no one has put together a coherent survey of the whole topic.

And, of course the European nobilities, not just in Scandinavia were linked in a web of regional, national, and international intermarriages. The higher their status, the wider the marriage market. None of that is an issue here.

There is no proof about Torlack's ancestry, but considering his rank you could say he was almost certainly part of a large, highly interconnected network of Norwegian, Swedish, and Scottish families. Probably also Denmark, and into Germany, Russia, and England as well. No one would argue. It would be the typical profile of a man of his rank in his time.

A Wikipedia robot?

I suppose that must be the inevitable result of trying to condense 40 years of specialized research into easy sound bites ;)

:) Glad that you can take my response in a good way. You seem to know your stuff ofcourse. And also Stein Aage. Impressive and nice to listen to.

Ya.. what i mean is that we can learn how to see things and get a hunch of where to look of things before we know the answers. (dont remember what it can be called very late in the evening here, deductive or inductive or whatever.. But rarely no one does. I think it all has to be revised.. I was looking on the Roskildehistorie map of families like Bolt etc. And if you compare with other sites the sum is that there are many different views on where they lived. And so many are so stuck with old notions of where they must have lived and where they come from..

I studied human geography and i think one can understand social structures in the end see where and when someone can come from.. if it is even possible etc. .

I dont know how to link this discussion to this discussion we have here..

But maybe as an example. You said the "people fleeing Christianity in the Roman empire in an earlier period."
Well, couldnt it have been so.. from a long time.. but not from everywhere.. (quite obvious though)

Ulf, in my opinion Torlack is Torleif, Halsteins father. The traditional school of heavy weight historians supports the evidence : the using of the Skanke name and the triskelion (speaking coat of arms) by these noble men was ment to be evidence of the connection between them, and still is.

The oral tradition in Isle of Man could have been altered or falsified and likewise with the oral tradition in Jämtland, but I do not believe that the oral tradition of these two very separate geographical places could be altered or falsified into the same story !

The chances of ending in the same story would be minimal, and I do not think that Justins schoolbooks take on this situation when stating the uncertainity of oral traditions in general. All of this was probably was well considered by professor Ahnlund and C.V.C. Young, as they confirmed these connections.

Regarding the alternative mothers, I am in a bit of confusion about the sources. I understand that Justin has placed one of them on the Genitree at a time, and is not accountable for it anymore ?

Justin, with regards to the migration to Norway in the 3rd and 4th century, the archeologists have found interesting evidence in mid Norway :

First, there is a significant change in the technique of building houses. The constructions from this period are "built to last", and some of this engineering ideas (stav-) are still in use.

Second, the engineering of boats was altered into lighter, longer and wider wessels. Until then the boats were build in heavy pine, from this period on they used spruce.

Third, the archaeologists have found that there was a significant change in expression of belief system from the culture that lived in mid-Norway until then.

I think that the steep inprovement of engineering-skills probably comes from military education or practice. Military in this period means Rome.

Justin, the earliest evidence of the Skanke name and coat of arms besides that of the regests is Ønd (Øivind) Pederssons tombstone in display at Frøsø kyrka. The inscription on the stone states that it is made in 1397 in memoria of the noble person that have past away. On the tombstone there is engraved a man holding a shield. On the shield there is engraved a shank.

Private , "Ulf, in my opinion Torlack is Torleif, Halsteins father."

Chronological, I could accept that he was the grandfather instead.

Torlack Haraldsson

Wife 1 Maud? Óláfsdóttir
Children: Sæmund Torleivsson; Lodin Torleifsson; Kolbjörn Torleifsson; Botolf Torleifsson

Wife 2 Magnhild Gudrödsdotter
Children: , Hallstein Torleivsson, his child, Torleif Hallsteinsson

Ulf, Torlack was active with high ranks in 1295, Hallstein was active with high ranks in 1302-1303. There is a possibility of a generation between them, but not likely ?

Stein Aage,

Where did you get the silly idea that I added a profile to Geni but am not accountable for it??

The profile we are talking about is Wife of Óttarr Snaekollson. It has been added by 68 people, and merged into one profile. I wasn't the first person to add it. I'm just one of those 68 managers.

Please explain your logic.

Stein Aage.

You didn't answer my question about the earliest documentary evidence. Instead, you dodged it.

The 1397 stone, as you describe it, is a memorial to a man with a shank on his coat of arms. Not even a triskelion? No mention of his illustrious descent from the kings of Man??

I think you are misunderstanding that evidence must be cumulative. No one is contesting the idea that there is a prominent Norwegian family with the name Skanke, that they have a leg or legs in their coat of arms, or that early members of the family are probably related in some way even if the relationship can't be proven.

What I'm asking about is the earliest written source that says clearly and explicitly this family is descended from Harald II.

You mentioned an oral tradition in the Isle of Man, but I don't see any evidence of that tradition. I've done a lot of reading over the years in this area of history. I don't recall any Scottish historian even mentioning Torlack's supposed claim.

Also, I have shown you the criteria David Sellar used in 2006 to dismiss the MacLeod tradition. The same criteria would dismiss the Skanke tradition.

Stein Aage,

When it comes to the archaeological evidence, you and I are talking about the same thing. You are taking a stand in favor of the idea these changes were introduced by men from the Roman empire. I generally prefer the cultural diffusion theory.

This is an old, familiar debate among historians when it comes to just about every example of something coming in new to an area. Some people think the innovations were brought by actual immigrants, while others think the innovations were brought by exchanges along a cultural frontier.

A famous example of this is something our friend Johan probably knows more about than I do. The short version is that agriculture reached Scandinavia about 4000 BCE. For two generations now scholars have been arguing about whether it came to Scandinavia through immigration or through cultural diffusion.

The debate was settled in 2013, at least for now, when there was a paper that showed the correlation between the spread of agriculture and the spread of DNA haplogroups G and J2. These haplogroups originated in the Middle East. They are now relatively rare in Europe, but DNA shows men with these haplogroups spread through Europe, arriving at each place at the same time as agriculture. So, the immigration folks won this one.

Justin, in this tread you participated in a discussion of interpretation of the name Skanke, wich means shanks, plural. This evidence was as a surprise to the "experts". The name points back to multiple legs on the familys coat of arms, even though the coat of arms from Ønd on is with one leg. There you are, I will not repeat it again because of allegations of personal attacks ?

Again, the noble mans name Torlack Scenck points towards the contemporary triskelion as coat of arms used at the Isle of Man. I thought this was basic knowledge ?

The Macleod clans tradition does not correspond to that of the Skankes. The Skankes claim was made through the rebellion in 1275, and was probably not supported by the norwegian king. My theory is that the norwegian nobles were supported by the king of England. You will find the oral tradition at the Isle of Man described in C.V.C. (Barney) Youngs books.

With regards to the multiple wives, the only information I have comes from this tread. You curators should make an attempt to use the same standard towards any profile. By not doing that, you are not acting as proffesionals.

Stein Aage,

I'm surprised you continue to argue about facts that are settled but don't address the actual problems.

Skanke means shanks. Sure. Multiple legs on a coat of arms? Maybe, but I wouldn't say it's certain. Probably at least one. The same as the contemporary Manx coat of arms? Controversial. We've been through that at length. It's not as certain as you think. It's not enough to simply make the claim over and over in the face of the problems.

I'll look at CVC Barney Young. I have some medical stuff this week, so there might be a delay.

Justin, I am pretty confident on this, and I think the worst that geneaologists can do is to eradicate an important line of historical persons without evidence !
The theory of the speaking coat of arms is not contradicted.
Maybe a language expert could be helpful ? Else, I wish you good luck.

The genealogical sin is to create a line without sufficient evidence ;)

I have already said I see no problem with the coat of arms. I've said so since the beginning. I'm at a loss to understand why to insist on trying to create an argument about it. What you call "speaking coat of arms" in English is called "canting arms". They are so extraordinarily common as to be hardly worth debating. Many Scandinavian families took their surnames from canting arms. Will I need type it in all caps to get the point across that there is no argument on that point?

The argument is about the date of the Manx coat of arms. The earliest definite evidence of the triskelion as the Manx coat of arms is about 1270. There is a theory that they were adopted by Alexander III of Scotland about 1255.

It's your theory that in 1275 the claimant to the Manx throne gave up his family's coat of arms and adopted the new coat of arms from his enemies but did not make any claim to the throne himself even though it would have been to the advantage of the Norwegian king if he had made a claim. That makes no sense to me.

I'm losing track of sources cited, links posted and names repeated. I've started a collection here:

https://wiki.geni.com/index.php/Skancke_and_the_Isle_of_Man

I'll try to get through our 7 pages of argument and distil them onto this page. It will at least help me keep track.

The Wiki is open for editing by anyone with an account.

The book you are talking about seems to be The Three Legs Go to Scandinavia: A Monograph on the Manx Royal Family and Their Scandinavian Descendants by George Vaughan Chichester Young (Mansk-Svenska Publishing Company, 1981). In other words, a pamphlet self-published by an attorney who was also a respectable, non-professional local historian who had wide-ranging interests and was writing for a popular audience.

I don't dismiss his theory because of his lack professional training in history, but I'm inclined to be cautious.

I'm not able to view a copy of this book online. I'll have to order it through the local university, which will take some time.

In the meantime, I found this quote from his work in Wikipedia:

"The rebellion {of 1275} was, however, abortive and resulted in some members of the royal family emigrating to Norway, where their descendants are still to be found in the Norwegian family of Skankes, the Swedish family of Skunck(e)s and the Danish family of Barfods. The emigrants took with them as their Arms "the three legs", which had been the Royal Arms of the Sudreyan Kings since about the middle of the 13th century. These Arms (a modification of the ancient Indo-Germanic sun symbol) were simplified in Norway and Sweden to one leg and in Denmark to three bare feet, and later to one bare foot.:
— Young, G.V.C.: A Brief History of the Isle of Man, The Mansk-Svenska Publishing Co. Ltd., Peel, Isle of Man, 2001: p. 12

That quote makes me even more cautious. He is right about the dating but quite wrong about these being the arms of the Sudreyan (Southern Isles) kings. At this time, those "kings" were the MacDonald Lords of the Isles, and they used the old ship arms, not the new triskelion arms.

Moreover, he equates the triskelion to the "ancient Indo-Germanic sun symbol" (that is, to the swastika). Maybe so, but this sort of thing is typical of gossipy popular histories. It's almost always a tip-off to an author who is widely read but not very rigorous in his thinking.

I'll give it a fair reading when I get a copy but my first impression is that this is not someone I would put up against a historian like David Sellar.

Harald,

You might consider adding both English and Norwegian Wikipedia.

English Wikipedia says

"According to the Skanke Family Association in Norway, the family can trace its roots to Jemtland in the 14th century with a high degree of certainty, and with less certainty to the Isle of Man before that. The association's shield depicts a blue-armored leg (or shank), spurred in gold, on a field of white.

"The family's use of a leg motif in its heraldry has been compared with the Manx triskelion, and Manx historian George Vaughan Chichester Young, O.B.E., supposed from the similarity that the family descends from Manx monarchs (who lost their kingdom as a result of the Treaty of Perth and the 1275 loss of the Battle of Ronaldsway)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanke_(noble_family)

Norwegian Wikipedia says:

"En kjent slekt stammer fra sognepresten Jon Mogenssøn Skanke (død 1618), Innvik. Han har etterkommere i både manns- og kvinnelinjer som bruker litt forskjellige skrivemåter for navnet. . . .

"Det er skrevet bøker og mange artikler om slekter med varianter av navnet Skanke. Det er antatt at en stamfar for en av slektene kom på 1500-tallet fra Jemtland. En teori er lansert om at en slekt Skanke skal være etterkommer av kongeslekten på øya Man, fordi Man har tre rustningskledte ben i triskelion som våpenmerke fra middelalderen. Heraldisk sett er denne teorien diskutabel fordi det er mange steder, personer og slekter som bruker rustningskledt ben (ett eller flere) i våpenskjold. I Norge ble triskelion brukt i segl av Hallstein Thorleifsson i 1303 og Nikulas Hallsteinsson i 1345 (avbildet i Huitfeldt-Kaas 1899-1950).

https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanke

Justin, I see now that you are willing to make an effort. You should be investigating without a political view, and I am sure that you will find that the late Youngs work is of good quality.

No one is contradicting the fact that the coat of arms of the Norwegian vice king up until about 1250 was a ship. This is described in the regests of the Isle of Man.

But the interesting fact is the use of the triskelion on the Isle of Man since then. Where did it originate ? To my knowledge, the earliest known use of the shank(s) is in Torlacks name, he is a Norwegian noble man.

If you should come up with any other evidence of the use of shanks as coat of arms or the use of the equivalent to the name Skanke as a surname in the same geographical area at the same time, it will be no problem for me to accept that the connection is of weaker evidence.

Until then, I am quite satisfied with what the wikipedia rules out, both in English and in Norwegian. You must also take into consideration that this is the official opinion in these countries.

Stein, I'll defer my comments on "official opinion" for another day. For now, I'll just say that official history is not real history at all.

The most common theory about the triskelion is that it was adopted as the coat of arms of Man when the English prince Edmund was promised the throne of Sicily, which also has a triskelion coat of arms.

The way I learned it, the triskelion was the symbol of the god Manannán mac Lir, who lived on the Isle of Man. He transformed himself into three legs one time when he rolled down a hill to fight some invaders.

The usual theory is that Alexander III adopted the triskelion as the Manx arms because he was in England when the English prince Edmund was offered the throne of Sicily, which has a triskelion in its arms.

I've also read somewhere that the triskelion, a reference to the Trinity, was adopted in a tribute to the Pope, who was England's feudal overlord after King John.

My own theory, which has absolutely no basis except poetic fancy, is it refers to the idea that in the days of the druids Man was the sacred center of the British Isles. The three legs point to England, Scotland, and Ireland, which is a way of saying that the Isle of Man will "stand" on whichever kingdom controls it.

I have also read some of this earlier, but I quote this on theories, no evidence at all.

I understand that you will be busy taking on other tasks in the coming days, if you like some enterainment : here is a link to digitalized work done by C.V.C. (Barney) Young and his successor, Johanna Wilhelmina Young-Tammel.

https://www.academia.edu/4386441/Isle_of_Man_under_the_Norse

As I see it this is what we know according to primary Sources:

1. Torlack Skenck, mentioned in 1295 (RN b.II, no. 790), theres no mention who he was or where he lived. Theres nothing that can prove who his father was and theres no mentioning of a seal in the regesta. (According to the regesta and Munch the reading Skenck is also dubious).

2. Hallstein Thorleifsson (1303: DN b.III, no.53, 56, 1326: DN b.IV, no.168), He is the first in the supposed lineage to use the The three legged triskellion. But we dont know who his father was, his name was Thorleif, it has been guessed that this could be the same as or a relative of Torlack Skenck.

3. Nikulas/Nils Hallsteinsson (1348: DN b.III, no.254, 1345: b. x, no. 50, 51), He was probably son of Halstein who used almost the same seal as him the Three-legged triskellion.

4. Peder, he is only known through his sons Joan, Karl and Önd. His father is thought to be Nikulas/Nils, but since he is not found in any contemporary Sources, we dont know for sure.

More litterature: http://www.genealogi.no/mediawiki/index.php/Skanke_(slekt)

I would never recommend P. A. Munch as a Source for middle-age genealogy or history today. His works is not regarded as very reliable and the way history and especially genealogy is studied today has changed a lot since 1859.

Not many historians have enough Insight in Norwegian society of the middle-ages to interpret Sources for the sake of genealogy. Those that has had the most impact and are the leading genealogists on middle-age genealogy today in Norway, are among others: Lars Løberg, Jo Rune Ugulen, Geirr Leistad, Are S. Gustavsen, Per Reidar Christiansen, Bjørn Jonson Dale, Johan Marius Setsaas. and of course Tore H. Vigerust (d. 2010).

David Widerberg Howden, none of the names you present here are authorative historians with the "weight" to alter the findings of the traditional school of professors in history. This will stand until someone takes up the glove and put as much work into the topic as they have done.

Everyone, you and me too, could always be contradictive in our own opinion or even make allegations of fairytales in the historybooks, but the latter would just give us the image of ignorants and nonprofessionals.

I believe a true scientist should close into uncertanity with caution. The hard core political statements is seldom of any value in social sciences.

We should join forces instead, give the UiO incentives for digitalizing the regesta sodorensa that seem to not have been cared for at all. There could be enlightenment there ?

OK, I think I have most of the references cited here so far on the page: https://wiki.geni.com/index.php/Skancke_and_the_Isle_of_Man#Timelin... (special thanks to David Widerberg Howden for the DN references!)

What I can't find out from the discussion is which sources the triskelion sigils were in fact attached to - I saw one mention saying that it was *not* attached to the mention of Torlack Schenk. UiO's transcriptions didn't include images, unfortunately.

It also seems clear (I've read all the entries in DN that are cited, as far as I was able to get through the language) that the name Schenk / Schanke was *not* used in the original sources for Hallstein Torleifsson and Nils Hallsteinson. Are we agreed on this?

I could add many more medieval historians/genealogists on the list.
But since you clearly dont know who any of these are I Guess you wont even consider any medieval genealogist/historian trustworthy. P.A. Munch was among those that established todays Norwegian historival science, but he died in 1869, and the way an historian worked back then has changed a lot. Todays Medieval historical genealogy in Norway was established among others by Henning Sollied and Tore H. Vigerust, who has published many of their articles in Norwegian Genealogical Journal. Who is the only Scientific/academic journal of Norwegian Genealogy. In this journal you will find the Skanke Connection mentioned a number of times..

Reference to the triskellion:
Hallstein Thorleifsson (DN b.III, No. 56) Nikulas Hallsteinsson (DN b. X, No. 51). http://urn.nb.no/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2009052603006

*Munch died 1863

"Are we agreed on this?"
No
1295: Torlack "Schenck" are mentioned, no sigil until "1303" for him.
Then it reappears 1345 in Nils Hallsteinson sigill, that would indirectly reveal the epithet skanke.
http://www.espell.se/saga/Nicolaus%20Hallstensson.png

It's a mistake to think that noble names "must" have been used by themselves, people have categorized many off them pretty much in after hand. We have many examples of families who never used the names we later have address them as, so the lack of any name in any sources from those days don't disprove a relationship.

Noble names in Norway are very often tied to the heraldry, and as you mention not always a name that they used themselves. And I have not said that the fact that Skanke wasnt use as surname disproves that they where Skanke. Theres just nothing in the Sources that clearly proves that Nils/Nikolaus was the grandfather of Joan, Karl and Önd. Or that Hallsteis father Thorleif was the same as Torlack Skenck and nothing written that proves Torlack Skenck was son of Harald of Man.

Harald,

If I understand your question correctly, my understanding from the discussion is that there is no surviving seal for Torlack Schenck, although Ulf now says a seal survives for him from 1303. I wonder about that because his Geni profile says he died after about 1295. The way I understood it, the coat of arms is imputed to him because of his name.

Then, my understanding was that the earliest surviving seal for any of these people is the one for Hallstein Torleifsson in 1303, pictured on his profile, and that the name Skanke is imputed to him because of that seal.

Then the same seal for Nils Hallsteinsson in 1345, and again the name Schanke imputed to him. The name appears on his Geni profile but not on his seal.