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

Justin: Ulf writes that there were no sigil from Torlack. If the name Skenck is even found in the original (Munch and others writes that the name was very dubious and hard to read), I agree that Skenck probably relates to Skank and that his sigil would probably be a Skank, but we dont know this from the Source. The mentioning of "until 1303" must be because thats when the sigil of Hallstein is from. Skanke in heraldry is used as a description for any heraldry containing a foot, and to use Skanke as surname on everyone who has a sigil described as containing a Skanke is not very usable. In heraldry a Skanke/Skank is not plural. So I would not use "Skanke" as surname for Nils or Hallstein as they where not known by that name.

Stein Aage,
"
You said, "none of the names you present here are authoritative historians with the "weight" to alter the findings of the traditional school of professors in history"

This is a very difficult argument to make, because historical research doesn't work like that.

First, what counts is the majority opinion of modern historians not the opinion of one historian.

Second, what counts as good history is the proper use of contemporary methods, not academic degrees or teaching positions.

Those are both a serious problem here. You like Munch, who was a historian but who lived when standards were different (lower). And you like Young, who doesn't have the academic degrees. You can't have it both ways.

Many towns, cities, castles, states have an official Historian. Young is the Chronicler for the Isle of Man. But that doesn't mean much. I have a ton of pamphlets written by The Local Historian. Some good, some bad. The authors are usually just a local man or woman, like Young, who has done a lot of writing and whose efforts are recognized with an "official" title.

Yes, I agree so far, I have something to add on the Sicilian part though.

Justin points out that he thinks Alexander III of Scotland 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.

Alexander III became king of Scotland in 1249, he was then 7 years old. In 1251, at the age of 9, he got married to princess Margaret of England who was then 11 years old. She was the daughter of King Henry III of England (1207-1272) and as such an elders sister of prince Edmund who was born in 1245. In 1262 Alexander bacame of age, since he was 21 years old, and he resumed his father's project of Outer Hebrides (old norse: Suðreyjar) which was cut short by his father's death 13 years earlier. Alexander laid a formal claim to king Haakon IV of Norway, who rejected the claim. Haakon invaded the Outer Hebrides after having learned that the Scottish nobles had raided the islands in 1262 and that Alexander III planned to conquer the islands. He got assistance from he chieftains of the Hebrides and Man, and ancored outside the Hebrides with 120 ships in July 1263 (12000 - 20000 men). Negotiations was started by Alexander, but he purposely prolonged them. Haakon ended the negotiations and sent parts of his fleet and the fleets of King Magnus of Man (Magnus Olafsson) and King Dougal of Suðreyjar (Dubhghall mac Ruaidhrí) up Loch Long and Loch Lomond to plunder. Then, as Alexander hoped, the storm came (stormy season in september/october) and some of Haakon's ships stranded, and then there was the clash at Largs, which none of them won, but it made Haakon and his fleet to withdraw to the Orkneys for the winter. Haakon stayed the winter in Kirkwall, Orkneys, but he fell ill and died there December 16th 1263.

Now the Islands lay open for Alexander and in 1266 at the Treaty of Perth Alexander and Haakon's son king Magnus VI Haakonson (in norwegian often called Magnus Lagabøte) agreed that Alexander should have the sovereignty over Isle of Man and the Outer Hebrides for the lump sum of 4000 marks and an annuity of 100 marks. Scotland also confirmed Norwegian sovereignty over Shetland and Orkney.

In 1254 the Sicilian crown was offered by the Pope Innocent IV to King Henry III of England. He accepted on behalf of his 9 year old son Edmund. The Pope hated the local king, king Conrad II of Sicily, as hi did his grandfather Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II. But the english king wasn't able to capture the Sicilian kingdom from king Conrad and his halfbrother king Manfred, so the Pope retired the offer in 1263. And that ended the Sicilian story of the Sicilian kingdom.

Edmund, when an Earl of Lancaster and Leicester used a very peculiar seal showing a lion tricorporate which is a lion with three bodies radiating from one head respecting. It is on his seal of 1273 with the legend "Sigillvm Edmvndi Filii". (Source: " A lion tricorporate. In: Dennys, R.: The Heraldic Imagination. London 1975 p. 138: Coll Arms ms. Vinc. 88, fol. 96 (afbeelding van het contrazegel uit 1273).)" This lion tricorporate was perhaps inspired by the Sicilian triquetra and in that case it may have been adopted to the memory of te time he was a pretender of the Sicilian crown. On the other hand it can as well be inspired by the triskeles of the King of Man which apeared in about the same time.
A modern drawing of this lion triskelion can be seen here: http://mistholme.com/dictionary/lion/ It is written "Lion tricorporate (Period)" underneath the Coat of Arms.

I have not been able to find any source sayint that Alexander III used a triskelion.

In 1265 the Pope again offerd the Sicilan throne to Charles d'Anjou and from there on the kingdom of Sicily belonged to the House of d'Anjou until the middle of the 15th century when the House of Castilia Trastamare took over, but lasted just a short time before the Habsburgs took over in 1515.

From Charles d'Anjou took over in 1265 and until the 19trh century, the Coat of Arms of Sicily hav been the Arms of the House of Barcelona where d'Anjou came from and the Arms of the House of Hohenstaufen.

In 1806 Napoleon Bonaparte made his brother Joseph Napoleon Bonaparte King of Naples and King of Sicily. Siting this page: http://www.hubert-herald.nl/ItalTrinacria.htm "Because the quarterly in saltire for Sicilia had always been a dynastic coat of arms, borne by right by the descendants of King Frederick II, it could not possibly be used as a part of the arms of the Two Sicilies of Joseph Bonaparte.

A new emblem was invented for the island, actually not in the posession of Joseph but nominally a part of the newly founded kingdom. For the Island a triskeles or triquetra was chosen as its emblem. It was inspired and based on coins and decorations from Siracusa of the 6th century BC. It was introduced by law of Joseph Napoleon of 1 December 1806 and it was blasoned: Regno di Sicilia: Trinacria d’argento in campo d’oro. That is: For the Kingdom of Sicilia and consequently they are not the royal arms of Sicily."

And that is the history of the Three Legs of Sicily. The rest can be read on these pages: http://www.hubert-herald.nl/ItalSicily.htm

I haven't checked the truthfullness of the sources on these pages, but since there are good sources mentioned and the work look in my opinion to be sound and good, I would trust these alot kore than I would trust Mr. Young's writings.

David, thanks for the clarification. I was parsing Ulf's statement: "1295: Torlack "Schenck" are mentioned, no sigil until "1303" for him". I read it to mean Ulf is claiming a 1303 seal for Torlack although that's not what he said earlier.

Also thanks for this: "In heraldry a Skanke/Skank is not plural." That was something I've been wondering about. It doesn't seem to me, based on my knowledge of heraldry, that it would need to be plural, but I don't speak Norwegian so I haven't been sure.

Remi, your account is very good. You can trust it.

The idea that the the Manx coat of arms was derived from the Sicilian coat of arms was the theory put forward by John Newton in 1885:

http://www.isle-of-man.com/manxnotebook/fulltext/newton/newton.htm

In Old norse theres two Words:
*Skankr: Meaning thigh or foot.
*Skenkr: Meaning bestower.

I think we then can rule out any link to the island and Kingdom of Sicily as an origin of the Manx triskelion.

Rule out any connection? Maybe, although I don't like to be so doctrinaire ;)

Say instead that none of us have any fondness for Mr. Newton's theory.

Sir Anthony Wagner said the earliest documentary evidence of the arms was about 1270. The three legs appear on the arms of Man in the Camden Roll of Arms, theHerald's Roll, Segar's Roll, Walford's Roll, and Wijnbergen Roll.

I can't see any specific evidence they were adopted by Alexander III, but they date from about his time.

Remi,

Very belatedly I notice the phrasing you used -- "Justin points out that he thinks Alexander III of Scotland 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."

No, no, no. That's not what I think. I've never thought that. What I said was that it's the "most common theory". I learned it a different way, and I have a personal opinion that is different from both.

John Newton's theory is fun and quirky, I think, but he also makes many historical mistakes. For example, he thinks the triskelion was the symbol of Frey, a sun god, forgetting that the Norse sun god was female.

"Say instead that none of us have any fondness for Mr. Newton's theory." Ha Ha :-) That made my day. :-)

And that made laugh even more since I thought you were talking about Isaac and the apple he made his theories from. Just shows it is bedtime for me. Good night. :-)

Skænk, or, munskänk, meaning cupbearer, or a butler, and so many of them later had a leg in their coat of arms.

Skank, or skanke, the part of a leg beneath the knee, or backside of it, then compared to skånk, with the same meaning as skänk, to give, it's not the same as you see. But because of the similarity in sound, they adopted the leg. Locally some say skånk, meaning leg, and skånk when to handle over something, some calls a restover for skånk, other call it skalk.

Anyway, the use of 3 legs in the sigill have no trace to any coat of arms that had only 1 leg, when it comes to Nils Hallsteinson sigill. With a very high degree it seems most likely that it actually came from the Isle of Man via his father whom in turn might have got the idea from either his father or more likely, his wife if she were the daughter of Olof Gudrödsson, which in itself explains the breach between the commonly repeated father to son names in that line.

I regard the mentioning of the Sicilian coat of arm as a big diversion from the sword that I mentioned earlier, containing the triskelion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_of_State_(Isle_of_Man)
and the jumble with lions as a play with word, tri ske lion.

Finally, as said in the footnote 2 in that link,
http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/regest_vise_tekst.prl?b=1...= the name Torlack Skenck could actually be miswritten, according to me and many others, it could just as well have been Torleif Skanke.

Also found this: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shank
Theres also some german families named Schinck, Schunck etc. also named after or adapted a sigil With a Skanke..

If you know any Swedish Justin, theres also this: http://g3.spraakdata.gu.se/saob/show.phtml?filenr=1/245/55.html

The Word Skank is in Norwegian grammar: Indefinite: Skank, Definite: Skanke, Plural: Skanker.

I created afather from the patronymics in this profile
Gudleik "Sneis"

Remi Trygve Pedersen
deleted it, why? I do want to report him for taking it away, as he had no right to do so. Can someone of you other curator report him to CS?

David, thanks. That Swedish link does help. I've been mentally translating to the English word "shank", which seems close enough. In my part of the world, I would normally save the word "shank" for livestock, on the hoof or on the table. I would not use it for people unless I were joking, but it's easy to understand its antiquarian meaning. For example, King Edward Longshanks of England.

Ulf, when there's no evience, there's no evidence. Start a discussion from that profile if you think Remi is wrong.

Justin Durand
What di you mean by NO EVIDENCE?
In this regest
http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/regest_vise_tekst.prl?b=1... of the signers actual was Gudleik Viljalmsson, searching for him renders up in only one match, Gudleik "Sneis" who also happened to be one of the kings men, Eric II, king of Norway

So, you say they are not the same? I at the other hand, see how it's possible for another man with an anglicized background, perhaps even also from the people who left Isle of Man, to have been in service for the Norwegian king, thus, strengthen our claims, not the opposite.

I do take his actions as subjective and hostile.

Remi,

There is some evidence the triskelion was associated with Sicily before it was adopted as the official arms in the 19th century.

The English historian William Camden, writing in 1607, says about the Manx coat of arms "just like the three legs, naked, which were formerly stamped on the coins of Sicily, to signify the three promontories."

Camden doesn't have to be right about this. His statement is interesting because it proves that someone in the 1600s associated the Manx and Sicilian, while Remi's history of the Sicilian arms suggests doubt that someone in the 13th century would make that association.

Now he has changed that profile, claiming that there's no source for the patronymic, and his ancestry are unknown... Remi, are you serious at all?

Ulf, you're off topic. It seems to me Remi thinks there is no evidence. The place to debate it is on that other profile.

Do we have any other curator on this site that could step in and help me report Remi for destroying the world tree? He needs to be either stopped or at least warned.

Ulf, you need to report Remi yourself. Send a message to misconduct@geni.com.

"The name Torlack Skenck could actually be miswritten, according to me and many others, it could just as well have been Torleif Skanke." If it even is possible to interpret this passage of the letter then sure.. But until then its just a guess, and the name Torlak and Torleif is not the same.
In 1894 the original was in the Royal Archives: https://archive.org/stream/repertoriumdiplo01ersl#page/106/

"But until then its just a guess, and the name Torlak and Torleif is not the same."

Eight pages of discussion summarized in one pithy sentence ;)

I did find the other half...
Vilhjalm Lodvinson Bonde

Yes, David W H, the name are not the same, but IF it was misread, then we would not have a certainty for "Torlack" being right at all, but the only way to see what's likely, would be to take a look at the actual origin record itself, not a transcript of it, but I do not even know if it still exist.

Ulf, I have started a new discussion about Gudleik Sneis: Gudleik "Sneis"

I have Attached the Sources that I found..

A few days ago I mentioned that there were two women who came forward to claim the Isle of Man in 1293 (after the death of King Magnus in 1265). Torlack didn't make a claim, and that's probably the strongest argument he was not a member of this family.

It's hard to imagine anyone in the middle ages giving up the chance for a kingdom, even a small one. Even if Torlack himself were a retiring, gentle soul who just wanted to stay home and be a farmer, his king should have seen the chance to rule Man with Torlack as a puppet.

So, who were the claimants? I had a vague memory but I had to do some searching.

They were (1) Aufrica de Connaught, kinswoman and heiress of the last king, Magnus. She petitioned the king of England in 1293 and had previously petitioned the king of Scotland. Her exact relationship to Magnus is unknown but she was probably his daughter. She signed over her rights to Simon de Montagu, whose grandson eventually succeeded in getting the kingship.

And (2) Mary, niece of King of Magnus and wife of John Waldboef. She presented her claim in 1293 but nothing came of it, probably because Aufrica de Connaught had a better claim as daughter of Magnus.

Stewart Baldwin has a nice summary of the genealogy of the kings of Man (and the many problems with it): http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~medieval/man.htm

David Powell wrote an article about the problems with identifying Aufrica de Connaught (did not marry Simon Montagu, was probably not daughter of Fergus, has been confused with her ancestor, etc.): http://www.montaguemillennium.com/familyresearch/tr1999_01.htm

Now, here's a fun point about the coat of arm of Man. In some of the rolls of arms from this period a later editor has attributed the Manx arms to King Magnus.

Herald's Roll, an English Roll, an English roll c1270-80: No. 23 Le Roy de Man
Also shows No. 24 Le Roy de Sesile (Sicily), the Anjou version
http://www.aspilogia.com/HE-Heralds_Roll/index.html

Wijnbergen Roll, a French roll c1270-1285: No. WN1277 Le Roi de men
http://briantimms.fr/Rolls/wijnbergen/wnrois.html

Walford's Roll, an English roll c1275: No. C19 Le Roy de Man
Annotated to say Magnus, King of Man
http://www.briantimms.fr/Rolls/walfords/walfords1.html

Camden Roll, an English roll c1280: No. D18 Le Rey de Man
Annotated to say Magnus, King of Man
Also shows D8 Le Rey de Cezile (Sicily), the Anjou version
http://www.briantimms.fr/Rolls/camden/camden1.html

Segar's Roll, an English roll c1282: No. 24 Rey de Man
http://www.aspilogia.com/G-Segars_Roll/index.html

These rolls show that the triskeion was indeed the coat of arms of Man in othe period after 1270.

Rolls of arms from this period don't give the names of kings. The fact that a later editor has attributed the arms to Magnus shows that it was probably a "tradition" of the Montagus and their successors that they had inherited these arms from him.

Thanks for the updates! Learning lots of stuff!

I'm trying to make the Wiki page show where it took the information from - that's kind of the point of it. So generally - no link, no mention. Justin, do you have a good link I can use for the story (stories?) of the women who claimed Man for themselves? I hesitate to cite Rootsweb's personal directories....

Ulf, all we know about the possible misspelling of Torlak Schenk's name is that it was corrected, so it's presumably hard to read; until someone finds an image of the name from the RN, we don't know which parts of it were hard to read.

If "Schenk" in this name was a job title and not a coat-of-arms description, he might have had a career that included being servitor to the king. But that's another speculation. I'm not putting that into the Wiki.

One fun find: I had cited "independent occurence" of the triskelion related to Guillaume of Montagu. Turns out that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_de_Montagu,_2nd_Earl_of_Salis... isn't independent of Man after all - he had the title of "King of Man" 1344-1392.