When discussing the road from the Varangians to the Greeks we have to take into consideration that there are three major problems in connection with Scandinavian history writing on Christianisation, state building and Viking-Age history in general:
1. It has been written from a West European point of view.
2. It has been written from a "Germanist" point of view.
3. It has been written from a nationalistic point of view.
In the following I will line out some of the steps leading up to the present situation and I will also try to suggest some critical points in the picture where there might be a way ahead.
The West European perspective
The West European perspective was built into Scandinavian historiography from its very beginning. The foundation was laid already in "Vita Ansgarii", written around 870 AD, by saint Ansgar's successor, Archbishop Rimbert of Bremen. Two hundred years later the construction was completed by another member of Ansgar's church, Adam, master of the cathedral school of Bremen, who in his history of the archbishops of Bremen, "Gesta Hammaburgensis ecclesiae pontificium", brought the Frankish/German version of the Viking-Age up till the early 1070s.
According to this Frankish/German version of the story, the population of the north had lived in profound barbaric paganism until St Ansgar arrived there in the first half of the ninth century. Through St Ansgar the Gospel was finally introduced also in the far North, and thanks to him even a couple of churches were established, one among the sueones in Birka and one among the dani in Slesvig1.
For the time after Ansgar's death in 865, where his vita ends, a severe lack of sources left the after world very much in the hands of Adam of Bremen. According to Adam, the population of the North relapsed into paganism again after Ansgar's death. Once again it was only by the instigation of the church of Bremen that Scandinavia from the middle of the tenth century could finally be brought under the yoke of Christendom. Beginning with the Christianisation of Harold "Bluetooth" and the Danish kingdom in the 960s, followed by the conversion of Norway from the turn of the millennium to the 1020s, the picture was almost completed with the Christianisation of Sweden under Olof Eriksson "Skötkonung" – the father-in-law of Yaroslav "the wise" – in the first decades of the eleventh century, but here a tremendous obstacle still remained when Adam was writing in the middle of the 1070s – the temple Uppsala which Adam called "the capital of barbaric superstition"2.
Through Adam's work the Frankish/German perspective became an integrated part of the early Scandinavian history writing. It was for example fundamental for what the author of the "Roskilde chronicle" in the late 1130s could say about Danish history in the Viking Age and, likewise to Saxo Grammaticus' monumental "Gesta Danorum" from the decades around 1200. Furthermore, it was an important precondition for the first Icelandic history writing in the early twelfth century. Already in the first preserved Icelandic text, Ari froði's "Íslendingabók", a distinct influence from Adam's work can be found3. Later in the twelfth century, Adam's "Gesta" indirectly or even directly influenced the first chronicles on Norwegian history, and also the more extensive compilations of Kings' sagas written in the early thirteenth century4.
To put it short, the Frankish/German perspective on Scandinavian history of the Viking Age had a great impact on the first attempts to reconstruct the past of the North in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Sweden is, however, in this early phase an exception, because here there was no effort made to write the history of the Viking Age5. The historical literature of thirteenth century Sweden was instead dominated by another genre, the saints' lives. This legendary literature, written mainly for liturgical use, seems to a very large extent to have been independent from, and even in opposition to, the Frankish/German perspective that Adam of Bremen represented. But this, however, did not mean that the saints' lives displayed a less narrow-minded West European point of view. The only difference was that in these texts it was England, not Bremen and Germany, that brought the bright light of the gospel to the barbaric pagan darkness of eleventh century Sweden.
This English church influence played a significant part also in Old Norse literature, but as the English bishops in question primarily belonged to the eleventh century the stories about them did not really contribute to any insights into the Viking Age period. On the contrary, almost by definition, the legends connected to the Christianization-theme were only concerned with the end of what we call the Viking Age6.
A profound West European perspective dominated the medieval history writing of Scandinavia, and when the work finally began in the fifteenth century to give the kingdom of Sweden a pagan history this was built around Adam of Bremen's illustrious description of the temple of Uppsala. Soon also "Vita Ansgarii" became a vital source for early Scandinavian church history, and still today the picture given in these two sources to a very large extent forms the understanding of the Viking Age and the Christianisation of Scandinavia. Consequently, the Scandinavian Viking Age still today includes a strong West European bias7.
The Germanist perspective
This West European perspective provides the Christianisation of Scandinavia with vital ingredients such as chronology and historical personalities, but there is another set of ideas that form our understanding of paganism, and Viking Age society on a deeper level.
Already in the Middle Ages Jordanes' "Getica" had a great influence on Scandinavian history writing, because he had established a close relation between Scandinavia and the Goths that had conquered Roman territory in the Migration period. According to Jordanes, these famous Goths had descended from Scandza8, and this was invaluable information for Northern, and especially Swedish, historians, because it brought these obscure parts of Europe in connection with the central themes of world history. Jordanes made it possible to argue that it was brave warriors from Scandinavia that had finally crushed the West Roman Empire.
These ideas culminated in Sweden in the late seventeenth century, when the great professor of medicine in Uppsala, Olof Rudbeck senior, published his voluminous work "Atlantica", where Uppsala was presented as the ancient capital of the Goths. Uppsala and Sweden were in fact, according to Rudbeck, the source of all higher culture in Europe, and he even found it beyond doubts that the central tower of the old cathedral church in Old Uppsala had once been the temple of Poseidon in the Atlantis described by Plato9.
However, most of Rudbeck's high-flying theories perished just as quickly as Sweden's position as a superpower in Europe, but two important features survived the Age of Enlightenment and continued to play a significant, if not unchallenged, role until the present day: the connection between Scandinavia and the Goths that conquered Rome, and the formidable position of the Uppsala temple. But the world around these features now came under the influence of new currents. Had Jordanes' "Getica" given rise to the "Gothicism" of Scandinavia, Tacitus' "Germania" encouraged German Scholars to develop "Germanism".
In 1806 the Napoleon wars put an end to the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation. A crisis of identity was now triggered off within what was later to become Germany, and a force of political resistance was blown into the Romantic Movement. The German spirit was raised in opposition to the Roman spirit of the French. The confrontation between the French and the Germans became a parallel to the barbarian "Germanic" invasions of the Roman Empire in the Migration Period. It was argued that the Roman-French people was by nature disposed to bow their necks under the authority of a state, but this was quite unnatural for the Germans because they were shaped to live unbound of a strong state authority. The true constitution of the Germans was anarchy, claimed Friedrich Schlegel. German individuality did not accept any restrictions. An important consequence of this was that while the French became French as citizens of the state of France, the Germans, or what would become Germans, had to find their identity in a common heritage not in a political structure but within an organic Volk10.
Initially the common identity of such a Volk was constructed mainly through its ancient language, law and religious mythology, but as the nineteenth century past the common heritage increasingly became a matter of blood. In this development Swedish scholars of medicine and archaeology played a significant part, but it is a German scholar, Gustaf Kossinna, who has come to be seen as the founder of the so called Siedlungsarchäologie, the culture-historical school of archaeology. This "school" was characterised by interpreting names of groups in written sources – such as in Tacitus' "Germania" – as strictly defined ethnic units that could be identified in the archaeological material and then traced back and forth in history through archaeological remains11.
It is a bit unfair to blame Kossinna alone for making this theory fashionable in archaeological scholarship, even if his work indeed came to play an important role for the Nazis. The cultural-historical tendencies within archaeology seem however to have been a much broader phenomenon around 1900. Bernard Salin's "Germanische Thierornamentik", from 1904, is only one example, but an important one since it provided means to identify "the Germanic peoples" in Europe, and distinguish them from other peoples such as for example the "Celts" and "Slavs"12. In any case, the result is clear. Iron Age Europe was by this time filled with the idea of well-defined ethnic cultures, distinguished not only by language, law, and mythology, but also by blood. These organic, or now even biological units had, according to the theory, bumped around like billiard-balls and pushed each other in different directions, without mixing, as for example when the Huns forced the Goths to enter into the Roman Empire. It is certainly no surprise to find a racist political movement born in these years that strove for a widened Lebensraum for the German Volk.
Since language was the leading principle for the early Germanist movement Scandinavia was already from the very beginning integrated into the sphere of interest. However, it was not only because of the language. In Scandinavia, with Iceland, there existed sources of a kind totally unknown to the continent. The two "Eddas", for example, preserved in manuscripts from thirteenth and fourteenth century Iceland, but perceived as ancient pre-Christian Germanic lore, were totally indispensable for the reconstruction of pre-Christian Germanic mythology and religion, and since Scandinavia was seen as a relict area for the older stages of Germanic culture, the provincial laws of Sweden were taken as very old-fashioned and close to the Germanic Urrecht, in spite of the fact that they were among the youngest medieval law-codes in Germanic language.
Along these lines Scandinavia was so to say built into the romantic Germanic past. Initially however, Scandinavian scholars were quite sceptical to this wave of pan-Germanist brotherhood, but as the idealisation of the Scandinavian society, and the praising of the unpolluted Northern race, reached new heights in the second half of the nineteenth century, the resistance weakened. It was far from any acceptance of Jacob Grimm's idea to integrate parts of Scandinavia in the new Germany13, but at the end of the century Scandinavia on the level of historical identity had been firmly integrated in the Germanic billiard-ball – with the small exception of course that the Lapps and the Finns and any other minority were left out to other billiard-balls.
The nationalist perspective
Consequently, in the early twentieth century Viking Age Scandinavia was reconstructed from a West European and a Germanist perspective. Christianity came from the West, and the paganism before was Germanic. But there was also another component of great importance at work – nationalism. In fact, the real power of the billiard-ball theory did not become evident before it merged with the political structure of Europe. In some areas, as for example the Balkans, its effects are all too visible still today, but in Scandinavia the implementation of the theory was much less complicated because the political structures here were already well adapted to the idea of the nation and the folk. The only more important minority was the Lapps, but they were too peripheral to make any difference.
Norway, Denmark and Sweden therefore soon became their own billiard-balls, and the only real problem left to explain was how these three Germanic folk, whose original constitution was the Germanic freedom, had come to be gathered under the authority of kingdom and a state. There were different ways to answer this question, but in Sweden there was one especially important theory that, in the first decades of the twentieth century, was able to give an explanation by combining the new social-Darwinist theories with the extraordinary position of the Uppsala temple, without coming into conflict with the fundamental ideas about Germanic personal freedom.
Let me first mention, however, that the famous professor of literary history in Uppsala, Henrik Schück, in 1914 proposed that Denmark had got its name from a group of Swedish immigrants coming from the parish Danmark not far from Uppsala14. A few years later he got support from the influential archaeologist Birger Nerman, who wanted to prove this absurd and today forgotten idea with Snorri Sturluson's "Heimskringla" from the 1220s15.
Consequently, it came as no surprise when Jöran Sahlgren, "the father of Swedish place name studies", in 1930 argued that the whole of Sweden had been conquered from the very small village Svia in Tiundaland, the district in the province Uppland where Uppsala is located. The reason why it was exactly the people from Svia that had subjugated the rest of Sweden was, as Sahlgren puts it, "first and foremost" that "they belonged to hardened and strong race". Uppsala – still perceived as the ancient centre of the kingdom – had of course been founded by these extraordinary able people and became a centre early on in this process16.
This strange idea found no support by Swedish historians, but some way or another it came to be a widely spread common sense that Sweden had been brought together to one kingdom by an unusually fit bunch of Germanic warrior-peasants from the vicinity of Uppsala and Stockholm. A reason for the success of this theory might possibly have been that it well suited Stockholm's developing position as sole power centre of Sweden during these years when the fast growing capital of Sweden more and more appeared like a colonial centre within its own realm17.
The Rus from Roslagen
I have brought you this far into Swedish historiography to be able to illustrate how extremely well the "Normanist" ideas about the origin of Rus fitted into the worldview of Swedish archaeologists and philologists in the 1930s. There was no end to the importance leading scholars of these disciplines, especially in the Uppsala University, were prepared to ascribe to the province Uppland around Uppsala north of lake Mälaren.
The name Rus was now not only taken as steaming from a Germanic word related to rowing, a designation preserved in the name Roslagen, which is the coastal areas of Uppland. No, just as Denmark had got its name from a group of immigrants from the Upplandic parish Danmark, and just as Sweden had got its name from the vigorous population in the little Upplandic village Svia not far from Uppsala, so had naturally also Russia got its name from the inhabitants of the Upplandic Roslagen. In 1959 the archaeologist Eric Oxenstierna could proudly state that: "All philologists derive the word [Rus] from Roslagen, and see a connection with its old subdivision into ship-teams [skeppslag]. ... Maybe these mobilised warships constituted the backbone in the organisation of the king of the Swedes already when the colonies on the other side of the Baltic Sea were founded"18.
Had it not been for the profound West European perspective, and the by now fully completed integration in the rock solid Germanic billiard-ball, and had it not been for the fact that the Swedish people as a part of this Germanic family was now held as a biologic entity and as an unquestionable prerequisite of history, had it not been for this, then maybe the effects of the cold war would not necessarily have had to make the stupidity worse.
But since this in fact was the Stand der Forschung in Scandinavian archaeology, and since Stalin in 1937 against all Marxist logics had redirected research on the origin of the Slavs within the Soviet Union from the socio-economic perspective back into the billiard-ball theory of organic ethnicity19, the culture-historical school of Kossinna and others continued to dominate the scene until the end of the twentieth century, yes perhaps even to some extent until the present day. The cold war cemented the Germanic-Slavic opposition and confirmed their mutual otherness.
The time for change has come
I am happy to be able to underline that Swedish historians of the twentieth century, at least outside Uppsala, ignored and even actively opposed the development within archaeology and philology described above20. As to church history, a leading historian like Lauritz Weibull in Lund attacked the image of St Ansgar as a pious monk only interested in the expansion of Christianity, and argued that he first and foremost had been an instrument of Frankish imperial politics in the North21.
In the 1930s his disciple Toni Schmid furthermore brought some attention to the conflict between the Frankish/German and the English perspectives on the Swedish Christianisation, but more important was that she opened up for a possible Eastern Church influence on the early Scandinavian Christianity22. In the 1950s she got support by another Swedish historian, Sven Ulrik Palme, who in a popular book on the Christianisation of Sweden briefly tried to use archaeological material in Sweden to illustrate contacts with the Eastern Christianity23, and in spite of the fact that such ideas were quite effectively pushed back during the cold war era, the Eastern aspect of Viking Age Scandinavia seems in recent years to move into the sphere of more intense scholarly interest24. The perspective on the Scandinavian Viking Age is slowly beginning to become less limited, and less simplified West European.
Another important feature is the growing criticism of the culture-historical approach in archaeology, which I have called here the billiard-ball theory. An important revision of this theory within Germanic studies has been ascribed to Reinhard Wenskus and his extremely influential work "Stammesbildung und Verfassung" from 1961. Here Wenskus argued from the point of view that the different "peoples" of the Migration period were quite polyethnic groups, only bound together by a leading aristocracy who carried a core of tradition, a Traditionskern, which provided the group with a mythic narrative as material for a common identity. Through this theory the billiard-balls of Germanic peoples indeed could be seen as less homogenous from an ethnic point of view, but recently it has been pointed out that this approach actually offers little new. The billiard-balls were possibly made a bit less biologically homogenous, but the central features that held them together, language, law and especially the mythology, still pointed back to a Germanic Urheimat and this is still reconstructed with the same "Eddas" and sagas as two hundred years ago25.
The Canadian scholar Walter Goffart, who is one of the critics, has offered another a way ahead. He argues that sources like Jordanes "Getica" and Paul the Deacon's "Historia Langobardorum" have little to offer when we ask for "true" information about remote origins and ancient history of their different objects. But works like these are formidable sources to the contexts in which they are shaped. Contextualisation of such narrative sources brings to light the purpose of their authors and opens up the real social world of the texts, in contrast to the ethnogenesis-theory of Wenskus and others that picks out isolated elements of the texts and uses them to follow the traces back to the imagined ancient context of the Traditionskern, the Germanic Urheimat26.
Following this line of argument, the billiard-balls did not even have an inner core of proper Germanic tradition. In fact there were no billiard-balls. What we are left with are the texts as artefacts from a specific moment in a constantly changing social context where ethnic identities, as any other aspect of identity, are produced in a complex manner of ways answering to the often rapidly shifting conditions in society.
Such an approach to the sources of the Germanic society forces the whole concept "Germanic" back into nineteenth century romanticism, where it got its modern connotations. The main features of the so called Germanic religion, based as they are on the "Eddas", are diminishing back into the flaming lights of Snorri Sturlususon's farm Reykholt in the 1220s where it still waits for contextualisation. Indeed, even the Uppsala temple disappears from Viking Age Uppland, and ends up in the cathedral school of Bremen, where it in fact has been contextualised with astonishing results27.
Accordingly, it is not only the West European perspective on Scandinavian Christianisation that is slowly beginning to lose ground. The Germanic nature of the society prior to Christianisation stands, as far as I understand, in a very near future before a thorough revaluation. As to the third component I have discussed here, nationalism, it is slowly beginning to get less biological, and in the lack of Germanic support it will probably in the end be a bit hard to keep up its billiard-ball shape. Consequently, everything points to that a new overall interpretation of Scandinavian Viking Age will most certainly have to evolve within the next decade or so. And I am rather convinced that this new picture will contain some quite new aspects on the road from the Varangians to the Greeks.
The Christianisation of Scandinavia and the end of Scythia
I suppose that you are all by now a little puzzled over the title of this paper. But I do have one more point to make from what now has been said. In 935 Archbishop Unni of Bremen died in Birka in central Sweden. An almost contemporary monk in the Saxon monastery Corvey noted this, but instead of Birka he referred to the place of death as in Scithiam28. At first this might not appear very sensational, but on a second thought it does indeed seem worthwhile taking into some consideration.
Scythia is one of the oldest geographical concepts of Europe. It was already well established when Herodotus was writing in the fifth century ВС, and it was probably very old already by then. Since Romanticism, Nationalism and the billiard-ball theory that concurred Europe in the nineteenth century, it has not been a very popular category. Instead attention has been drawn from the geographical name to a people called the "Scythians". Hereby is referred to what is believed to be a well discernible culture within language and ethnicity, which dominated the regions north of the Black Sea from the eighth century ВС until around the birth of Christ. They are recognised from their archaeological remains29.
The Scythians are thus an excellent example of the kind of culture-historical archaeology in the spirit of Kossinna that has received such devastating critique in recent years. Material culture, blood and language do not necessarily coincide. Instead of making this group the proper Scythians who have given name to Scythia, it seems fair to suggest that it was the territorial name Scythia that gave name to its inhabitants30. We know that this frequently was the case later, and in the sixth century AD Procopius actually states that the Goths had previously been called Scythians, because all groups who lived in that area were regularly called Scythians31.
Be as it may with this, but it is an indisputable fact that Scythia was the name of a firmly established geographical territory between the Danube and the Don already when Herodotus was writing, and so it still was when Jordanes wrote his "Getica" 1000 years later. Jordanes treats Scythia as a political entity over which Ermanarik had ruled (imperavit) and over which Attila had been regnator. He treats Germania and Scythia as two equal entities separated by a border in Weichsel. Ermanaric "ruled over all nations in Scythia and Germania"32. Several centuries later Germania's eastern border still went in Weichsel33.
Both Scythia and Germania seem accordingly to have been territories with an extremely stable position in the European geography well into the Early Middle Ages. Scandinavia's position in this connection was not as stable however. In 98 AD Tacitus counted major parts of Scandinavia and the Baltics into his "Germania", but in the Early Middle Ages the perspective on Scandinavia's affiliations seems to have changed. Around 700 AD the anonymous geographer of Ravenna identified the island Scandza, mentioned by Jordanes as the origin of the Goths, as the "Old Scythia" (Scythia antiqua)34. The Patriarch Photius I of Constantinople referred to the "Rus" that attacked Constantinople in 860, called by purely Scandinavian names, as "Scythians"35. To the year 907 AD the "Primary Chronicle" mentions the Varangians first among the peoples that the Greeks counted to "Great Scythia", and still in the middle of the eleventh century Greek sources could refer to the Scandinavia population as Scythians36. These few examples from the written sources indicate more eastern connections for Scandinavia by this time, and this is a fact that is well supported by the archaeological material, which indicates strong eastern connections for Scandinavia until the end of the tenth century37. When a monk in Corvey therefore, in the middle of the tenth century, referred to Birka in Malaren as a place located "in Scithiam" there is reason to believe that Scythia here was something more than merely a learned allusion to classical literature. In Saxony by the middle of the tenth century the term Scythia into which Scandinavia was counted, referred to a vast cultural sphere beyond the horizon of the German empire, beginning in Scandinavia. Still in the 1070s Adam of Bremen could write that after the Danish isles "another world" (alter mundus) is opening that is almost unknown to our part of the world38. A traveller here entered into what he called the Scythian Sea. Here began the Scythian world.
A few years later this was not an alter mundus to Western Europe anymore. By the beginning of the twelfth century Scandinavia had been integrated into the western Church with its Latin Liturgy. Adam of Bremen and other members of this western Church now laid the foundations for Viking Age history and the history of the Christianisation of the North. In a few generations almost everything was forgotten about the alter mundus. Scandinavia was locked up in a West European, Germanist and nationalist perspective.
A similar development took place on the other side of the Baltic Sea. The "Primary Chronicle" and later chronicles here played a role corresponding to Adam of Bremen and the early Scandinavian history writing creating an East European perspective in which later Slavist and nationalist ideas found a good ground to grow.
For centuries these two developments, both taking off around 1100 AD, managed to obscure the fact that at least in the later Iron Age there had been intimate relations between "Scythian" Scandinavia and other parts of the Scythian world – partly along the road to the Greeks.
1. Rimbert. Vita Ansgarii / G. Waitz // MGH SRG. Hannover, 1884.
2. Adam. II. 58.
3. Christensen A.E. Om kronologien i Aris Íslendingabók og dens laan fra Adam af Bremen // Nordiske studier. Festskrift til Chr. Westergård-Nielsen. København, 1975. S. 23-34.
4. Weibull L. Kritiska undersokningar i Nordens historia omkring år 1000. Lund, 1911. S. 40 ff.; Bolin S. Muhammed, Karl den store och Rurik // Scandia. 1939. B. 12. S. 94 ff, 105 f.; Ólavía Einarsdóttir. Studier i kronologisk metode i tidlig islandsk historieskrivning // Bibliotheka historica Lundensis. Lund, 1964. Vol. 13. S. 23.
5. A trivial attempt from the middle of the thirteenth century to create a list of the Christian Kings of Sweden back to Olof Skötkonung in the beginning of the eleventh century, is found in the Older law code of Västergötland, but concerning the Viking Age kings this text also proves itself to be remotely dependent on Adam of Bremen.
6. In fact Adam of Bremen also mentioned the English influence. He found it tolerable and even reluctantly had to admit that it could be a good thing as long as the English bishops accepted to subjugate themselves under the Archbishop of Bremen. Otherwise, however, they and even those who received their ordination by the pope, violated the sacred rights of the Archbishop of Bremen, became criminals, and had to answer to the Archbishop and do penance (Adam. IV. 34).
7. Cf. for example: Bartlett R. The Making of Europe. Conquest, Colonization, and Cultural Change, 950-1350. L., Princeton, 1993; Hallencreutz C. F. När Sverige blev europeiskt. Till frågan om Sveriges kristnande. Stockholm, 1993.
8. Jordanes. IV. P. 60. Cf. Søby Christensen A. Cassiodorus Jordanes and the History of the Goths. Studies in a Migration Myth. Köpenhamn, 2002.
9. Rudbeck O. Atlantica Svenska orginaltexten / A. Nelson. Uppsala & Stockholm, 1937-1950.
10. Janson H. The organism within. On the construction of a non-Christian Germanic nature // Old Norse religion in long-term perspectives. Origins, changes and interactions / A. Andren et al. Lund, 2006.
11. Brather S. Ethnische Identitäten als Konstrukte der frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie // Germania. 2000. Bd. 78. S. 139-177.
12. Salin B. Die Altgermanische Thierornamentik. Stockholm, 1904.
13. Wiwjorra I. Der Germanenmythos. Konstruktion einer Weltanschaung des 19. Jahrhunderts. Darmstadt, 2006. S. 73.
14. Schück H. Svenska folkets historia. Lund, 1914. В. 1:1. S. 104 ff.
15. Nerman B. Härstamma danerna ifrån Svealand? // Fornvännen. 1922. B. 17. S. 129-140.
16. Sahlgren J. Sveaväldets uppkomst // Namn och Bygd. 1931. В. 19. S. 131-143.
17. Cf. Janson H. Till frågan om Svearikets vagga. Vara, 1999.
18. Oxenstierna E. Så levde vikingarna. Stockholm, 1959. S. 78.
19. Curta F. From Kossinna to Bromley. Ethnogenesis in Slavic Archaeology // On Barbarian Identity. Critical approaches to Ethnicity in the Early Middle Ages / A. Gilette. Turnhout, 2002. P. 207ff.
20. Janson H. Till frågan om Svearikets vagga. S. 70ff.
21. Weibull L. Ansgarius// Scandia. 1941. В. XIV. S. 186-199.
22. Schmid T. Sveriges kristnande från verklighget till dikt. Stockholm, 1934. S. 49.
23. Palme S. U. Kristendomens genombrott i Sverige. Stockholm, 1959.
24. Cf., for example: Från Bysans till Norden. Östliga kyrkoinfluenser under vikingatid och tidig medeltid / H. Janson. Skellefteå, 2005.
25. See, for example: Brather S. Ethnische Identitäten; On Barbarian identity.
26. Goffart W. Does Distant Past Impinge on the Invation Age Germans? // On Barbarian Identity. P. 21-37; Idem. The Narrators of Barbarian history (AD 550-800). Jordanes, Gregory of Tours, Bede, and Paul the Deacon. Princeton, 1988; Idem. Two Notes on Germanic Antiquity Today // Traditio. 1995. Vol. 50. P. 9-30.
27. Janson H. Templum nobilissimum. Adam av Bremen, Uppsalatemplet och konfliktlinjerna i Europa kring år 1075 // Avhandlingar från Historiska Institutionen i Göteborg. Göteborg, 1998. В. 21.
28. Die Grösseren Annalen von Corvey / J. Prinz, F.-J. Schmale // Abhandlungen zur Corveyer Geschichtsschreibung 8, Veröffentlichungen der Historischen Kommission für Westfalen 10. Münster, 1982. ad. a. 936.
29. Cf. Jacobson E. The Art of the Scythians. Interpenetration of Cultures at the Edge of the Hellenic World // Handbuch der Orientalistik. Leiden, etc., 1995. В. 8:2. P. 29-51; Grakow B. N. Die Skythen. В., 1978; Minns E. H. Scythians and Greeks. A survey of ancient history and archaeology on the north coast of the Euxine from the Danube to the Caucasus. N.Y., 1971 (1913).
30. This has been thoroughly argued in: Janson H. Nordens kristnande och Skytiens undergang // Från Bysans till Norden. S. 178-203.
31. Procopius Caesariensis. Gotenkriege / О. Veh. Werke 2. München, 1966. IV. 5f.
32. Jordanes. § 120: ...omnibus Scythiae et Germaniae nationibus ...imperavit.
33. Janson H. Nordens kristnande. S. 186.
34. Ravennatis anonym i cosmographia et Guidonis geographia / J. Schnetz // Itineraria Romana 2. Leipzig, 1940.1. 12.
35. Photius. The Homilies of Photius Patriarch of Constantinople / English Translation, Introduction and Commentary by C. Mango // Dumbarton Oaks Studies. Cambridge, Mass., 1958. Vol. 3. P. 89 (Hom. III. 3).
36. Johannes Scylitzes. Synopsis historiarum /1. Thum // Corpus fontium historiae Byzantinae 5. В., 1973. P. 430f. Cf. Janson H. Nordens kristnande. S. 200 with notes 134 and 135.
37. Arne T. J. La Suede et l'Orient : études archéologiques sur les relations de la Suede et de l'Orient pendant l'âge des vikings // Archives d'etudes orientales. Uppsala, 1914. B. 8; Bolin S. Muhammed, Karl den store och Rurik; Jansson I. Situationen i Norden och Östeuropa för 1000 år sedan – en arkeologs synpunkter på frågan om östkristna inflytanden under missionstiden // Från Bysans till Norden. S. 37-95.
38. Adam. IV. 21.