Talk:Scandinavian connections to Mieszko I
|
|
According to most of historians: civitas Schinesghe/Schinesne means the State of Gniezno, which is the same as Gnezdun Civitas on the coins from this period of time.
According to prof. Henryk Lowmianski, the second, Christian name of Mieszko was Dagobert, the name of a early Frankish king and a saint.
- Lowmianski is not the only historian :) OPther hypthesis are Ego Mesco Dux... mingled into Dagome iudex szopen
I'm uncertain how to understand some of the arguments for and against.
- In one early written documents, Mieszko I is called "Dagome", which could be a Norman name, derived from Dagon.
I'm not familiar with a name "Dagon" from any period of Norse. If it is Norman, as in from Normandy, then I can't see how you make the connection; if it is supposed to be Norse, then I would be curious to know the original form.
- This is definite proof that Vikings were merely mercenaries or invaders. What's more, the findings relating to them are few, especially compared to Russia and other countries.
What does this at the beginning of the paragraph refer to?
- In fact, some (like Awdańcy) had signs which can be interpreted as runes, ...
I suspect this refers to item 4 on the previous list, but you have to read it at least twice to see that (or perhaps, I am dense). Cheers Io 15:30, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I belive that there is no written source, what so ever, mentioning that Vikings were responsible for founding the state of the Rus. This is an error. Dan Koehl
I arrived at this page through 'Random page'. It's a mess, and gives me absolutely no clue as to what it's really about. Richard W.M. Jones 23:50, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)