The Duke and the King who kept changing his mind

Richard II- ‘The King who kept changing his mind’

Many people with even a moderate interest in history will likely have heard of Richard, 3^rd Duke of York (1411-1460) and his claim to the throne which made him a rival of the Lancastrian King Henry VI (the sixth)- even if only from Shakespeare’s ‘history’ plays in which this claim is recounted at some length by Richard himself.

As Historians go, most simply take it for granted that Richard and his sons the subsequent Yorkist Kings Edward IV and Richard III had the ‘best’ and ‘strongest’ claim to the throne- or at least one that trumped that of the ‘usurping’ Lancastrians. Either way, the superiority of the Yorkist claim is generally stated as an undisputed fact by many Medievalists. This is a view that I too shared until fairly recently- and which likely a lot of other History students do- but not anymore. In this post I will be examining this subject in more detail- and try not to be too boring in the process!

The key questions that are to be addressed when looking at this claim are thus

1-      What was the nature and origin of Richard’s claim?

2-      Was is truly the strongest and best?

To address the first question it is necessary to go back to long before Richard’s birth in 1411 and to the reign of Richard II. Most know the story of how Richard was deposed by his cousin Henry Bolingbroke, who later became Henry IV (the fourth). This is where Richard’s claim comes in for it is stated that whilst Henry ‘forced’ the childless Richard to name appoint as the heir before his deposition, the true and ‘rightful’ heir of the blood was the child Edmund Mortimer. To examine the ‘rightness’ of Mortimer’s claim it is necessary to go back even further to Edward III (the third) and his family line.

Richard II was of course the Grandson of Edward by his firstborn son Edward the Black Prince who predeased him by one year. Mortimer was descendant of Edward’s second son, Lionel Duke of Clarence, though his only child Phillipa. Henry Bolingbroke however was the son of Edward’s third son, John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster. Seems pretty straightforward and clear whose the rightful claim was, right? That because Richard of York was descended from the eldest son he must have had a better claim than the house of Lancaster, and in light of King Richard’s choice of successor it seems all the clearer.

However, things are not quite so straightforward as they seem even in this regard. Historian Michael Bennett in his book ‘Richard II and the Revolution of 1399’ (Sutton, 2006) accounts for one of the main difficulties with the succession in the reign of Richard II. Richard of course had no children of his own, so his closest legitimate relatives in the royal line were his Uncles and their sons and descendants- his cousins.

Confused by all the Royal Cousins and relations? Click the family tree to make things clearer

Richard seems to have been well aware of his Cousin Henry’s ambitions where the throne was concerned- but also knew that another one of his cousins Roger Mortimer (the father of Edmund) had a claim. It appears that Richard used the succession as something of weapon or at least as a political tool which by which he could gain the upper hand. In the 1480s Roger Mortimer was nominated as his heir, it is suggested perhaps partly to ‘foil the ambition of John of Gaunt’ but later in that same decade he ‘encouraged Bolingbroke’s expectations. Gaunt’s solid support for Richard from 1389 onwards may reflect some understanding that Richard… would nominate Gaunt or Bolingbroke as his heir’. After Roger Mortimer’s death in Ireland in 1397 there seems to have been little expectation that his young son Edmund would be appointed as heir- in this same decade Richard appears to have been showing favour to Edmund of Langley Duke of York and his sons and there is even suggestion that he might have considered them as possible heirs.

It is this issue of Richard’s apparent inconstancy and even capriciousness where the succession was concerned that raises questions over the absolute nature of the Mortimer claim. Next, there is the question of the strength of Richard’s claim. As stated before, he was descended from Phillipa, the daughter of the second son of Edward III but through his mother, Anne Mortimer, the sister of Edmund. Towards the end of his long reign Edward III excluded females from the succession, but when King Richard favoured Roger Mortimer as his heir, he included Phillipa’s heirs again, and there were of course other precedents in the past for female succession, such as the Eleventh century Queen Matilda.

The matter of female succession in important to any analysis of Richard of York’s claim considering that some who wish to discredit Henry Tudor’s claim cite his descent from Edward III in the female line. Yet these often seem to ignore the fact that Richard of York’s claim was derived through not one, but two female ancestors- Phillipa the aforementioned daughter of Lionel, and his mother Anne Mortimer, the sister of Edmund who died childless in 1425. Also, in the last case succession in the female line there had been no hiers in the male line left- which was not the case in 15th century England.

As Michael Hicks has demonstrated Richard of York’s claim stood as but one amongst server in the 1440s and 50s. The Lancastrians were certainly aware of his decent, and the potential threat his rival claim posed, but it does not seem to have become prominent until the late 1440s at least. Even at this time, Henry was favouring his Beaufort relatives, and others who were direct descendants of the House of Lancaster. The Lancastrian Kings themselves also had one major advantage- their descent was in the direct and unbroken male line from Edward III and was not dependant on female (as in the case of Richard) or illegitimate ancestors (as for the Beauforts).

Alongside York as possible heirs to the throne there stood at least four other viable claims

1. John Duke of Exeter who was Nephew of Henry IV by birth and so the Cousin of Henry VI, and his son Henry.
2. John Beaufort Duke of Somerset, and his brother Edmund – also direct descendants in the male line of Edward III, but through John of Gaunt’s illegitimate Beaufort sons- the offspring of his mistress Katherine Swynford. Although there were declared legitimate in the reign of Richard II they were barred from the succession by their half-brother Henry IV.
3. Margaret Beaufort the daughter of Duke John
4. Humphrey Stafford Duke of Buckingham, the heir to the youngest legitimate son of Edward III Thomas of Woodstock but, like York in the female line.

Richard of York and John Duke of Somerset- possibly because of John’s rival claim there was more to thier rivalry then flowers

The above show that York was far from the only viable claimant to the throne, though his claim did arguably trump some of the others, the complicated rules and customs governing succession did not necessarily mean that his claim was the ‘best’. Certainly there were no rules specifically excluding heirs in the female line from the succession, and the matter of Edward III’s exclusion of these seems to have been accepted or disregarded depending on political expediency.

However, the number of claimants in the Lancastrian line, and Henry VI’s attempts to strengthen their hold on power through political marriages may have put York at a disadvantage dynastically.

In some respects, it was circumstances which caused York’s claim to become prominent. The ineffectuality of King Henry, and inability or lack of success of the government in running the country for him, the unpopularity of King Henry’s ‘wicked counsellors’, and York’s own popularity as a viable alternative to these gave his claim prominence. These circumstances, coupled with the force used by York to further his ends, and a number of unsuccessful armed risings against the King lead to York finally claiming the throne in his own right in 1460. This has been argued to be a last resort, after all hopes of reconciliation by peaceful means had been exhausted. After Richard’s death, his son Edward secured the Yorkist claim by Conquest and defeat of his enemies in battle. During the reign of the Yorkist kings is perhaps unsurprising that the legitimacy and superiority and validity of the Yorkist claim came to be an accepted as an absolute fact, in spite of its weaknesses in reality.

Bibliography

Bennett, Michael, Richard II and the Revolution of 1399 (Stroud, 2006).

Hicks, Michael, The Wars of the Roses (London, 2010).

Family Tree taken from http://richardiiicasebook.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/lancaster-and-york-family-tree.html, Accessed 20th May 2012.

“Nerds” of yesterday-”Heroes” of tomorrow?: Why being Historians?

Good morning everyone. After some rearrangements it is me the one in charge to update for this week, and unfortunately you will have to wait to see what amazing Scott has ready for you until the end of the month. Nonetheless, I hope I can entertain you at least for a bit with this very random but perhaps interesting post. I have been meaning to update with something like this for a while and finally here it is.

Some of you might know that one of the requirements for history students is to do an essay and evaluations of the importance of being a historian, studying history and all that jazz. Well, I did like many others my essay some time ago already.The ideas I argued in that paper were very similar to the following one. First of all the issue of employability; history students have a good chance to find a decent graduate job thanks to their knowledge and skills acquired during their degree, which is just as a good reason as anything else to make the degree valuable. Apart from that I also indicated that historians do have the knowledge from the past that can be used to change the present and the future. Many of the nowadays situations that our governments have to deal with and even some of the circumstances given in the majority of the societies and economies all around the world have their origins in the past. As historians we can try and learn from what happened before and take measures to make it work now. In addition, I always thought that just the learning of history should be pretty much compulsory in schools, high schools and colleges no matter what, because history also forms you as an individual. History allows you to develop your own views on different matters, it makes you do your own reading and research, very useful skills for anyone in general, and it makes you understand your place within the world. It allows you to identify yourself within a bigger context, to belong somewhere. History ties in very closely with family and community, two big parts of our everyday life. Many people, not to say everyone, wants to know who they are, where do they come from, who were there ancestors, were they interesting people? did they do something relevant? something important? Something to be proud of and aspire to achieve?

These and many other things make history so important. I could carry on rambling about this the whole day, but now I would like to proceed to put forward the reason why I have been thinking about this lately. There is a TV series, that som of you might know called Falling Skies. It started last year and the new season is about coming out very soon. The basic plot of the story is that in an alternative sci-fi future some aliens have come to some places of the earth, (well in this case america, but one can assume the situation is similar elsewhere), establish huge alien bases and fight mankind. In their struggle it seems that these aliens have also been stealing the young boys and girls on many of these people to enslave them and use them in their colonisation of the planet. Why is this relevant? Because of the main character of this story, called Tom Mason, who is a father of 3 and has lost one of his sons to the aliens, and whose rescue is one of the main subplots of the whole thing. So what is the deal with Tom and why I have the urge to share this with everyone that reads this? Well as it happens he IS AN HISTORIAN!

Have any of you ever seen a historian as the protagonist of any TV series? Everyone knows about the adventures of Professor Jones against the nazis and the russians to recover lost and mysterious artefacts, and the same applies to the National Treasure saga. But it did shocked me that it was a history teacher the one that basically has the control in this series. Apart from the whole deal with the aliens, the one bit that gets to me every single time I see this, is how Amazing Tom Mason keeps on making comments and references to historical events that could give them the answer to solve a specific problem they have to deal with. Mainly and most of the times is references about battles, outcomes, hostages and military history in general, but still It Is History applied to a counterfactual situation, and the man proves himself to be useful and most of the time quite right. He uses his understanding of mankind to attempt to understand these aliens, to defeat them and to change things. I think it is a very nice tribute to all of us that engage with history to know that we can also be the ‘heroes of the day’ even if it is in fiction, and perhaps in reality if this situation could ever occur.

So today goes for you all history lovers, and in particular, as my degree finishes soon (in deed the next time I would be updating this blog I would technically have finished I university), I would like to dedicate this post to some of my particular ‘heroes’ who happen to be historians in a way or another, like the already mentioned Tom Mason, my father without whom I would have never ended up doing history, and my university lecturers.

HISTORY CHEERS! I hope you enjoyed this relaxed update and that you will keep an eye on for the delightful stuff my team mates will be sharing with you in the following weeks.

‘The greatest mistake America made was allowing women to vote’:

Now there’s a title for my blog this month. The greatest mistake that America had ever made was allow women the right to vote, call me crazy but for those of us who actually believe in the ideals of equality, freedom, and the right to express ourselves and our opinions politically, isn’t this going a bit far. Ok so that’s an understatement as to how I felt about this article when I read it, and is actually the politest way I could think to describe the shock and anger I felt upon reading it, by the way yes I am a women and as my friends well know one with feminist tendencies and opinions so to me, this was a bit of a kick in the teeth. However I respect the right of Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson to his opinion and have provided a link to the article below for those of you who wish to read the article in full. Yet I hope that he also respectfully accepts my right to disagree with him. So this blog shall explore the complex relationship that women have with politics and voting, and asking the question why, as we come in England (6 years to go) to the centenary of women having the right to vote, do such out dated views, that we shouldn’t have the right to vote, still exist.

In the article Rev. Peterson states that women are ‘leading the United States down a path of wickedness because they have too much political power. Whilst I disagree with Rev. Peterson’s idea that the way in which women vote is bringing a form of ‘political evil’, to the United States, or at least this is how it appears to him, as a Republican. However it must be stated that perhaps his rather extremist view is as a result of the suggestion that in the last presidential election (2008), that more women voted for Obama and the Democrat party , his political and the party that is attempting to bring a considerable amount of change to America, which is described by some, particularly of a Republican persuasion, as attempts to bring a kind of socialism into America. For instance through the introduction of the idea of same sex marriages; the introduction of health care reforms. As a result the suggestion by Rev. Peterson, the ‘wickedness’ that has been brought in by women voting democrat, entail the more left leaning ideas that are changing America. Which as a Republican, a group who can be typically identified as deeply Christian and extremely conservative, he would not appreciate these changes. However there is a wider comment that can be made as a result of Rev. Peterson’s suggestions, that the attitudes to women and power (in this case political, yet there are other examples) is something that hasn’t changed. Since the beginning of time it can be argued that whenever women had some form of power they were often mocked or criticized for it. In sticking with the political element to this blog post I shall stick to women who have actively participated within politics or had an impact upon them within the 21st and 20th century. However my previous statement remains women who have power have been stereotypically seen as a bad thing or something that cannot be trusted to act rationally. Once again I must state that these suggestions are my own opinions, please feel free to disagree with me and post your own comments on this subject.

As an English woman a prime example of this statement can be found in the treatment of Britain’s first and only (so far) woman Prime Minister Margret Thatcher. Now I can hear you start your tirades of how she took away milk and destroyed the miners or how she did great in the Falkland’s whichever camp you’re in, however I ask you to put these feelings aside for a moment and consider whether the fact that she was a women contributed to peoples onions of her, in a negative manner. For instance she was known as the Iron Lady, a title given to her as a result of her determination and stubbornness with her politics and politicians, whilst this can be seen as a title of strength it can also be seen negatively as the iron lady can also conjure up images of a harsh woman, to an extent unwomanly. As it is already known Thatcher underwent voice coaching and a change of appearance before becoming leader of the conservative party, in order, it can be suggested to become more authoritative a stereotypically manly trait which is needed for any leader. However the fact that Thatcher has to adopt such traits, authoritative, stubbornness, and determination in order to succeed in British politics demonstrates how women to an extent, have to change in order to succeed in politics, and sometimes get ridiculed as unwomanly as a result. Another more recent example of the way in which women who have political power are often criticized, rightly or wrongly is the characterization of Sarah Palin as the “pitbull with lipstick” and other such stereotypes that have been attached to her. Therefore, the wider point that women who have/ gain political power is still something that is seen in an interesting manner, whilst were not burning them on the stake as witches, it can be suggested that attitudes to women being in power still haven’t changed, as women who attempt have power and attempt to create change can be criticized for it. With the negative stereotyping of women who have political power it is perhaps unsurprising that there have been comparatively less great women political figures (when compared to the amount of inspiring male counterparts) and that even today there are still very few women within the political cabinet of the U.K. that can be argued as actually having a degree of influence or the ability to change laws. Whilst I’m not suggesting that the cabinet or any political body is forced to have women with the opportunity to lead and change the status quo, I think that the relationship between women and politics remains complex and this is something that hasn’t changed since women having won the right to political suffrage. The remarks of Shirley Chisholm (a Congresswoman, for New York’s 12th Congressional District from 1969 to 1983) who said that during her New York legislative career, she had faced much more discrimination because she was a woman than because she was black perhaps remain surprisingly ore relevant today than we care to believe in our modern society.

Alternatively it must be recognized that within the last 10-20 years there has been a noticeable change in the treatment of women involved within politics, for instance in America and internationally Michelle Obama is considered a very powerful and influential, within her own right as well as a result of being the first lady. Similarly Hillary Clinton, who ran in the same election as Sarah Palin can be suggested as having less negative publicity for being a politically minded women.

Thus demonstrating that whilst the public’s relationship with women in politics is no doubt complex, it is also changing. For instance in 2009 there America had the opportunity to elect its first ever women president. With this in mind the only thing left for me is to reiterate my opinion that women having the right is far from being the worst thing that has ever happened in history. It is perhaps instead a result of the negative publicity that often surrounds female politicians and women voters that has led to that particular conclusion. Yet the times are changing and there may soon be a time when women presidents and prime ministers, become the norm as it is often the case in Scandinavian countries. Who knows?

Sophie

Sources

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2141530/Fox-News-guest-Rev-Jesse-Lee-Peterson-says-women-shouldnt-allowed-vote.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Lee_Peterson http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7709852.stm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Chisholm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

Conversion in northern Europe in the early middle ages.

When thinking about the process of conversion the circumstances which resulted in a change from one religion to another must be explored. For this case, the conversion process to Christianity in northern Europe in the early middle ages is the example that will be considered.

One of the main circumstances that allowed for a successful conversion to take place was the initial conversion of the king. The power that the king wielded allowed for resources to be harnessed to aid the spread the spread of Christianity and also meant that he could influence his retainers and fellow rulers to convert as well. This is apparent in the example of King Ethelberht of Kent, who used the bonds of loyalty present in Anglo-Saxon society to influence the baptisms of King Sigeberht of Essex and King Raedwald of East Anglia. In this period, the role of the king included that of a sacral one, which meant that he wielded influence over the religion of his kingdom. This could either be by introducing it relatively peacefully, such as in the case of Iceland, whereby, according to the Islendingbók, an agreement was reached between chieftains at the Althing – the parliament assembly – which resulted in Christianity becoming the formal religion of the country. Alternatively, it could also happen by more forceful means, such as in the case of the military conquests what were imposed by the Frankish armies in Frisia and Saxony. Here, war and conversion were intimately linked, with bishops accompanying the armies that were sent out, and then settling in communities in the areas which had been conquered and establishing monasteries there. As well as by war, the marriage of kings to already Christian princesses was another way in which kings could influence the conversion process. Ethelberht of Kent again provides a useful example of this. As part of his marriage to Bertha of Frankia, the princess was allowed to bring her chaplain Liudhard with her, which resulted in more favourable circumstances for conversion.

The king also played an important role in providing protection for the new church when it was introduced in these new areas as a new religion. In the First Saxon Capitulary in 782, provision is made for the protection of priests and missionaries. In another capitulary, further provisions for the protection of the ecclesiae are made, with people who treated priests with hostility being liable to having to pay double compensation. Furthermore, such legislation allowed for the tenets of the Christian faith to gradually be implemented further. Examples of this include moves made by King Earconbert of Kent, who introduced measures to eliminate idols in his kingdom. Financial backing and providing land also played another important role in allowing for the successful conversion of the peoples of northern Europe. This was because land was vital for allowing for the completion of monasteries, which in turn had a pivotal role in the allowing for conversion on a local by helping to integrate the new religion into the existing community. This was the case with Frankish kings such as Pippin, Carloman and Charlemagne. However, at the same time it must be remembered that the conversion of the Bretwalda did not necessarily mean that leaders on a local level could also in turn convert and encourage their populace to convert in return. This was the case with Haakon Sigurdsson, jarl of Lade, who remained a pagan despite the conversion of the Danish King, Harald Bluetooth, to the Christian faith.

Another factor important to consider in the successfulness of conversion is by the way that the power of the new Christian God over the existing pagan ones was portrayed. This often came about as part of victory in battle, with the kings promising to covert if they were given success in battle; for example, in the case of Edwin of Northumbria, who pledged to convert if he was given victory against the West Saxon army. The link between conversion and kings in battle is also apparent in the case of King Olaf ‘the holy’ Haraldson in the Battle of Stiklestad. In the case of the Norwegian king, his death in battle and subsequent sainthood had the effect of helping to unite the country and consolidate the position of Christianity. Demonstrations of power to validate the supposed superiority of Christianity were another factor that arguably influenced the successfulness of the conversion process in northern Europe. Battles between pagan figures such as the druids and the saints were a common way in which this was expressed; for example, the confrontation between St Patrick and a court druid named Lucetmael for control of the weather. Other examples of demonstration of power include came about through the medium of miracles, of which there are various examples. Types of miracles that were generally used included ones dealing with healing through the saints themselves, such as in the case of St Comgall, who healed a man’s blindness by dripping his saliva into his eyes.

The successfulness of conversion in northern Europe in the early middle ages was also arguably due to syncretic connections made between certain elements in the pagan religion and ones in the Christian one. This meant that the role performed by local gods and goddesses was replaced by the use of saints in order to meet the needs of the people that the missionaries were trying to convert. Being able to pray to the saints to intercede with God the Father on their behalf gave the indigenous pagan population of northern Europe a more personal and intimate connection with the Christian God. Moreover, pagan sites of worship were often adapted for Christian use. A good example of this can be found in the form of St Patrick claiming a previous pagan well in Corcu Theimne for the Church which had previously been a site of importance for local gods in the area. Measures such as these helped to make the conversion to Christianity and more fluid and easy process.

All of the issues that have been looked at here help to give an understanding of how successful conversion in northern Europe in the early middle ages came about. However, it must also be remembered that the process of conversion itself was often a lengthy processes, with a transitional period being apparent between the two religions. It is useful to think about the conversion processes in terms of several stages, often involving the experiences of the king. This includes the initial acceptance of the gospel, the decision to announce this publically, before baptism and the entry into the community of Christians.

The Faiths of 500,000 British Citizens – Part 4: The Baha’i Faith

As you might know already, this month has been totally dedicated to the study of religious history. So far everything that has been covered, was closely linked with the Christian traditions and belief throughout time. This made me think about the situation of religious belief in general in the UK, and so I did some research on census and polls on religious practices of the British people. It was interesting though to find out that the second largest group of the population of the Uk according to the survey results is the one corresponding to those that consider to not have a religious affiliation whatsoever. Interesting, yes, but not surprising. What did surprise me and interested my, due to my own ignorance, is that almost 500,000 people in the Isles are part of religions that most of the people have not even heard about, and yet they are quite significant and outstanding in the rest of the world, especially in the Middle East. For this reason today, I am introducing you to these four faiths: Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Jainism and the Baha’i Faith. In this brief introduction I will present you some of the basic details about their beliefs and practices, places of worship, rituals and their place in the modern world.

Baha’i Faith

This religion was created during the 19th Century in Persia, by the forerunner of the faith called Bab. The practice achieved its peak and spread thanks to another prophet known as Baha’u'llah. The message this belief intends to spread around the world is one of spiritual unity, collective evolution, peace and justice. In summary, one could say that this faith has adopted a syncretic combination of other religious practices, mainly Judaism, Christiany and Islam, as well as many others. For them, every man to this moment that has preached about God is a prophet, not someone who has the ultimate truth, nor someone who should be worshipped like a deity.

A good follower of the Baha’i faith will pursue the following objectives as part of the practice of his belief. They would search for the truth and justice, they love God and embrace severance from anything that is not him. The believe in obedience, service to the rest of the people, courtesy and reverence, no gossip, humbleness and self-realisation. The followers of the Baha’i Faith think that religious unity is possible and that human nature needs to change. In addition, they belief in equality, tolerance, universal education and auxiliary language, and that religion and science should work together. Finally, they are against radical behaviour, and they have a traditional view on sex within their doctrine. On a  final note, for them there is no evil. God is infinite and perfect. Evil does not exist, just imperfection.

There is no professional priests in the Baha’i Faith, nor monastic orders, so it could be said it is a lay religion. They count with a sacred calendar, constituted of 18 months, that compiles all their religious festivities. They celebrate the New Year or, the feast of Naw-Ruz around the 21st of march. They also commemorate the anniversaries of their prophets: their birthdays, declarations, ascensions and martyrdom. These festivities are mainly related with the Bab, Baha’u'llah and Abdu’l-baha. In what once was Persia, these feasts involve picnics and gatherings with musical performance and prayers. Nonetheless, these festivities adopt a more solemn nature when they are related to the death and martyrdom of their prophets or members of their community.Their places of worship are spread all around the world, and they are usually called house of worship. However, for daily prayers and activities most of the members of this community gather in their own houses, or in rented spaces.

What is the place of the Baha’i Faith in the Modern World?

As I have mentioned already, this religion is in fact quite modern, therefore it does not suffer as much as the old traditional religions from the changes of the new age. It is important to mention the role that the Baha’i have within modern-day politics. As it stand they are well-known for working with the United Nations, trying to improved people’s lives and to achieve their beloved equality and justice.

So, this is the end of this entry. I hope that by reading and understanding what this 500,000 people belief in the rest of the population would become more aware of the religious diversity of not necessarily the world, but just one country. I also hope this is interesting enough to make us all think about religious tolerance and the alternative faiths that exist in the world. Not everyone has to be Catholic or Protestant, not all the people from India are Hindus, neither are Islamic all of the people from the Middle East.

I hope you enjoyed reading these 4 updates. If you want to know more about the Baha’i Faith you can check the following resources:

Esslemon, J.E., An Introduction to the Baha’i Faith: Baha’u'llah and the New Era (1990 ed., Wilmette)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/bahai/-BBC website dedicated to this faith

http://www.bahai.org/- the international Baha’i website

http://www.bahai.org.uk/- the Baha’i Community in the UK

The Faiths of 500,000 British Citizens – Part 3: Jainism

As you might know already, this month has been totally dedicated to the study of religious history. So far everything that has been covered, was closely linked with the Christian traditions and belief throughout time. This made me think about the situation of religious belief in general in the UK, and so I did some research on census and polls on religious practices of the British people. It was interesting though to find out that the second largest group of the population of the Uk according to the survey results is the one corresponding to those that consider to not have a religious affiliation whatsoever. Interesting, yes, but not surprising. What did surprise me and interested my, due to my own ignorance, is that almost 500,000 people in the Isles are part of religions that most of the people have not even heard about, and yet they are quite significant and outstanding in the rest of the world, especially in the Middle East. For this reason today, I am introducing you to these four faiths: Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Jainism and the Baha’i Faith. In this brief introduction I will present you some of the basic details about their beliefs and practices, places of worship, rituals and their place in the modern world.

Jainism

This faith has traditionally been seeing as an extreme version of aesthetic behaviour, combined with a life style that follows a very restricted diet and a somehow almost pathological ideal of non-violence. But let’s try to leave the stereotypes on the side and understand the nature of this religion. It seems that Jainism emerged in the north of India during what some scholars call the Vedic period (sometime between the 1100 and 150 BC). Most of the sources suggest that the practice was consolidated by the 8th/7th century BC, being the basin of river Ganges its cradle. From a western point of view it was a man called Mahavira the founder of the religion, but for the Jains he was just another of the many teachers and preachers they have had. There are also different sects of Jainism, the most relevant being the Svetambara and Digambara, being the last one more traditional and strict.

The Jains , it is true, follow the path of amisha (non-violence). The believe that every living form, including plants and animals, have a soul (jiva), and that these souls are attached to the rules of Karma. For them , the Karma is a physical substance that affects everything. There are two types of Karma, harming and non-harming. Due to this, and as the universe works in a action-reaction system, violence against anything can only produce “bad” karma, hence their pacifist ideas. Also, the Jains belief in a set of rules that are important for their development and achievement of enlightenment. These are the Three Jewels: right knowledge, right faith and conduct. For them, faith is not blind belief but the correct disposition to view and understand things. In this way, enlightenment is achieved by the following: non-violence, truthfulness, non-stealing, celibacy, and non-materialism. Also, it is considered that those that are enlighten have achieved to get rid off harmful karma. The Jains, belief that there is even a step afterwards enlightenment which they called deliverance where not only bad karma, but good karma have expired and therefore the being exists in perfect harmony.  Finally, Jainism promoted the idea of rebirth. Nonetheless, the next life form adopted by the jiva depends strongly on the mental state and karma of the deceased creature before the soul departs from its physical form.

The Jains have, as many other faiths, a sacred calendar and places, but most of them vary depending on the different sects. nonetheless, they have some common elements. For example, all the Jains have a day devoted to silence called Maunekadasi, which falls the eleventh day of the month of Margasirsa (western november/december). They also celebrate the birthday of Mahavira (13th apr./march) which is regarded as a public expression of their  religious adherence. Also, pilgrimages are very important, especially for lay people as they allow them to become aesthetic in a sense for a period of time. Most of the sites visited during such a journey are related to places where the foremakers reached enlightenment, or sites that are linked with any other aesthetic process. For the Svetambara sect the holy places are located in Gujara and Rajasthan, as well as Maharashtra. For the Digambara, however, the most important place of pilgrimage is in Karnataka. In addition, the Jains have a tendency to practice fasting in different degrees and ways.

What is the place of Jainism in the Modern World?

As we have already seen with the previous faiths treated during the last days, Jainism has gone through some changes in the new age. It has to be considered that, despite being relatively well-known, the Jains only constitute a 0.41% of the total population of India, and there are only 3000 followers elsewhere in the world. So, in order to prevail, they need to adapt, and so different perceptions have modified the faith lately. The main issue is perhaps the development of two different lines of practice. There is an orthodox side of Jainism, which is mainly performed in its motherland, and there is a neo-orthodox path which is the one that incorporate most of the changes. For the “neo-jains” science and religion go side-by-side. Their progressive ideas still accept vegetarianism as their lifestyle, as well as non-violence, but they have given importance to other aspects of religious practice, such as meditation . Also they seem to have freed themselves from the metaphysical complications of their belief, and adopted a relativist view of life. Furthermore, they do not believe that Jainism should follow a set of rituals, nor do they promote a division in sects.

To conclude, I would like to quote Paul Dundas in here, in order to explain better why the Jains do still have an impact in the modern world and why their faith is still popular;

“It is the capacity of Jains to adapt themselves to changing circumstances while remaining true to certain principles viewed as eternally valid which is one of the clues to the tenacity of their religion and mode of life over two and a half millennia”

If you would like to know more about the Jains, you can check some of the following resources:

Dundas, P., The Jains (London and New York, 1992)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/jainism/- BBC website about the faith.

Von Glasenapp, H., Jainism: an Indian Religion of Salvation (Dehli, 1999)

AND TO KNOW ABOUT THE FOLLOWERS OF THE BAHA’I FAITH KEEP AN EYE ON THE UPDATE FOR TOMORROW!

The Faiths of 500,000 British Citizens – Part 2: Zoroastrianism

As you might know already, this month has been totally dedicated to the study of religious history. So far everything that has been covered, was closely linked with the Christian traditions and belief throughout time. This made me think about the situation of religious belief in general in the UK, and so I did some research on census and polls on religious practices of the British people. It was interesting though to find out that the second largest group of the population of the Uk according to the survey results is the one corresponding to those that consider to not have a religious affiliation whatsoever. Interesting, yes, but not surprising. What did surprise me and interested my, due to my own ignorance, is that almost 500,000 people in the Isles are part of religions that most of the people have not even heard about, and yet they are quite significant and outstanding in the rest of the world, especially in the Middle East. For this reason today, I am introducing you to these four faiths: Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Jainism and the Baha’i Faith. In this brief introduction I will present you some of the basic details about their beliefs and practices, places of worship, rituals and their place in the modern world.

Zoroastrianism

This religion is meant to be one of the oldest in the history of mankind. Presumably it was originated about 3500 years ago, during the Bronze Age in the Asian steppes. It had a huge impact in the Iranian culture, as well as in some parts of india, especially in the northern lands of the country. Also it has influenced many later faiths such as Mahayana Buddhism. In the west the religion was spread and known thanks to Greek knowledge on the founder of the religion: Zoroaster, or Zarathustra. The scripture that compiles their beliefs and practices is known as the Yasna.

Zoroaster’s religion was an adaptation of old pagan Iranian pastoral beliefs. The ancient cult was dedicated to the worship of nature gods, especially of water and fire, which were the main needs for these semi-nomadic agriculturists and farmers. They also believed in something called asha: the natural force that ensured existence. Through worship men not only benefited from the gifts nature provided them with, but they also became part of the process and connected with the divine. These ancient beliefs were incorporated into Zoroaster’s idea of one only god called Ahura Mazda, who functioned with the help of the Holy Immortals (which were spiritual attainments of god based on the old deities). In addition Zarathustra incorporated the “bad guy” of the religion, Angra Manyu, a being opposite to Mazda. In this way the faith imbued itself with a sense of dualism. There were good qualities that god portrayed and that human beings should attempt to develop, such as virtue, honesty, truth and courage. These concepts formed the ashavan, while everything of a chaotic nature was attached to the concept of druh, related to Angrra Manyu.

In the first days of the religion’s existence, and due to the nature of its worshippers, the places dedicated for praying needed to be simple and mobile. For this reason, the Iranian nomads used something called pavi: a small rectangular altar slightly elevated from the ground level, which they created from whatever they could find. Once the belief adopted its more developed form, prayers and other ceremonies started to take place in temples, usually identified as fire temples. Although there is not much known about these sites, Parsi legends tell us that there are many Zoroastrian fires still burning in their places of worship, but the most significant one is perhaps the Udvada Atash-Behram. About their ritual practices it is known that the Zoroastrians celebrate the Khordad Sal, or Zoroaster’s birthday. For this festivity they get together in their fire temples and make perform communal prayers, which is something unusual as the Zoroastrian practices and prayers are meant to be individual. They also have an initiation ritual called Navjote, and they perform weddings and funerary rites.

What is the place of Zoroastrianism in the Modern World?

In 2006 there were registered on a world scale 190,000 followers of Zoroaster’s faith. However, their beliefs had to undergo a process (or rather I should say the process to a certain degree is still undergoing) to adapt themselves to the changing new times. Since the 19th century western scholars and religious figures have been attacking the doctrine. On top of that the Zoroastrians found themselves in an uncomfortable situation, where different followers had different opinions on what Zoroaster’s actual teachings were or how they should be applied. In addition, one of the largest groups of the believers, the Parsi, introduced some changes in their actual practices, allowing a reasonable degree of syncretism and assimilation of other religious practices, mainly Christianity, Hinduism and Guru teachings.

One could consider then that Zoroastrianism is under threat. The dispersion of the Parsi community to other parts of the world, mainly overseas to the areas that used to belong to the British Empire, and great Britain itself, has not contributed to the situation and debate about how the religion should be regulated and organised is still ongoing. Nonetheless, this one is not the only practice with such a problem. Nowadays, there is not one single religious belief that is not under threat due to the changes in mankind’s way of life and sociopolitical affairs. For the population of the 21st century being religious, of any kind can become a stigma. Hopefully, through the understanding of religious practices, and the different faiths tolerance would spread and take over, and put an end to such madness.

 

In the meantime, I hope I have not confuse you too much with the Zoroastrian practices and that you have learned to appreciate the uniqueness of their ideas. To know more about the teachings of Zoroaster you can check the following resources:

Boyce, N., Zoroastrians: their Religious Beliefs and Practices (London and New york, 1979)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/zoroastrian/- BBC website on this faith

 

AND TO KNOW ABOUT THE JAINS AND FOLLOWERS OF THE BAHA’I FAITH KEEP AN EYE ON THE FOLLOWING UPDATES FOR TOMORROW AND WEDNESDAY!

 

 

 

The Faiths of 500,000 British Citizens – Part 1: The Sikh People

As you might know already, this month has been totally dedicated to the study of religious history. So far everything that has been covered, was closely linked with the Christian traditions and belief throughout time. This made me think about the situation of religious belief in general in the UK, and so I did some research on census and polls on religious practices of the British people. It was interesting though to  find out that the second largest group of the population of the Uk  according to the survey results is the one corresponding to those that consider to not have a religious affiliation whatsoever. Interesting, yes, but not surprising. What did surprise me and interested my, due to my own ignorance, is that almost 500,000 people in the Isles are part of religions that most of the people have not even heard about, and yet they are quite significant and outstanding in the rest of the world,  especially in the Middle East. For this reason today, I am introducing you to these four faiths: Sikhism, Zoroastrianism, Jainism and the Baha’i Faith. In this brief introduction I will present you some of the basic details about their beliefs and practices, places of worship, rituals and their place in the modern world.

Sikhism

This religion had its origins about 500 years ago in the Punjab region, India. Its founder is known as Guru Nanak Dev. It has influences from other religions, especially Hinduism and Islam, and it send a universal message of love and peace.

The Sikhs belief that there is only one God and that Truth is its name (Ikk oan kar sat nam), and this being has no physical form therefore, there are no representations of it. The Gurus are inspired by God and they teach the rest of the community, but they are not worshipped. Their holy scriptures are compiled in what is called the Guru Grant, which include the daily prayers. The ideal that Sikhism follows is the union of all religions, races, no matter what backgrounds these would have.

Despite of the individual factor being a very important part of the practice of this faith, the Sikh have very strong family and community values. They are hard-workers that belief in the dignity of labour, equality of all people, and the importance of service: providing for each other. The also refuse the use of any type of toxins or drugs (unless recommended by doctors), as well as the performance of any sort of ritual sacrifice. In addition, a very curios characteristic of these people is that, unlike many other Indians, they are active eaters of any kind of meat. Finally, there is a common element to all the Sikh which is their surname. For the males is Singh, meaning lion or lion-hearted, while for the females is Kaur (princess), and it is ment to resemble their courage and hard-working values. Also, it is a common practice to wear a steel bracelet, not cut your hair,  and in the case of males to wear turbans and beards.

Their preferred place of worship is called the Golden Temple, located in Amritsar (Punjab). Nonetheless, their meeting can take place in any gurudwara (anywhere were there is a Guru Grant). The five Takhts are also important as they are the seats of temporal authority. About their festivities, we know that just like in the Christian Faith, they perform initiation rituals (Amrit), marriage celebrations (Anand Karaj) and funerals. In addition, they have a religious calendar which include the following feasts. Baisakhi is their version of the New Year, which takes place some time in April and is usually celebrated as a mass congregation in the Golden Temple. They also celebrate the day in which Guru Hargobund was released from prison with a group of fifty-two Hindu princes. This event is commemorated about the same time than Christmas and it is called Bandi Chhor. In addition, they also celebrate the birthdays of their ten gurus.

What is the place of the Sikh in the Modern World?

Nowadays there are about twelve million of Sikh in the world, most of them living in India. It has to be highlighted the remarkable number of Sikh related with the military. This is likely connected with the long persecution that the Islamic population of the area launched against these people. As a result they armed themselves for self-defence. Their military tradition carried on under British government, as the Sikh fought in both the First and Second World War. Nonetheless, repression of the faith’s followers carried on during and after the British occupation of India. The massacre of 1919 after the prohibition of the celebration of the Sikh new Year serves as an example, in the same way that the violent violation of the Golden Temple in 1984 by the Indian armed forces as a result of what is known as the Operation Blue Star, ordered by Indira Gandhi who was the ruler of the state of India at the time.

As a result of the many political tensions between the Hindus, Muslims and Sikh people in the area of Punjab, many Sikh had no other choice but to leave their homeland and find refuge elsewhere, mainly in the states that where once part of the British Empire. This obviously helped to spread the faith to other parts of the world, becoming more and more popular. It is surprising how despite of being a faith very attached to its homeland and origins, it is at the same time a stable religion, and not only stable but a growing one. This might be due to the fact that, indeed, the values of the Sikh are flexible, and tolerant. Their beliefs and practices have positive views linked with many current issues such as racism, sexism and religious intolerance, which perhaps provide people with hope for a change in mankind’s attitude.

To Know more about the Sikh take a look to the following sources:

Kaur Singh, N-G., Sikhism: World Religions, (1993, New York)

http://www.sikhs.org/- website of the Sikh people and their beliefs

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/sikhism/ - BBC section on this faith.

ANDDDD TO KNOW ABOUT THE ZOROASTRIANS, JAINS AND FOLLOWERS OF THE BAHA’I FAITH KEEP AN EYE ON THE FOLLOWING UPDATES! and for a heads up here is the link about the census and polls:

http://www.humanism.org.uk/campaigns/religion-and-belief-surveys-statistics

Women and Christianity in Western Scandinavia

The Conversion of Scandinavia is like the conversion of all areas a debated and contested topic in historical writing, not only because it is so decisive for the further development of the nations which we today know as Iceland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, but also because different historians read the sources differently, and that is not even taking into account the use of archaeological evidence. But during the last decade or so have the historical research started to go interdisciplinary in the approach to this topic, yet it have seem that the scholars have forgot that the area they are concerned with is waste and contain many differences within itself. This have caused a number of theories and approaches to the topic to surface and then to disappear after some time, or as a Norwegian Bishop said it in 1930 when he attempted to make sense of the historical research about St Olaf up to that point; ‘If you go to the historians for answers you will witness a Polish parliament, were everyone will be looking after their own interests and tear apart everyone else’s ideas and meanings. The development of historical research on the topic is like a household where things are being put to the side, or stored away because it is of no use anymore, or thought unreliable, but who knows maybe some of the ideas and approaches that have been stored away might one day be packed out of the boxes again and embraced once more. ‘[1] So with this in mind we should explore the problems about the interpretations of the conversion in Scandinavia.

First of all we should all know that the idea which is taught in schools that Christianity was brought to the region with sword and blood, based on the Icelandic sagas, especially Heimskringla and the Sagas of the Norwegian Kings, is wrong.[2] I have elsewhere on this blog described the issues with the sagas as a source,[3] but I can in this instance add that for the region as a whole the sagas do not give enough information about the transition period between Paganism and Christianity, it almost seems like it all happened over night. However, we as readers of history are aware that there are other accounts to this matter, though all of them have their own issues which I will not go into detail about here, but these sources can help broaden our understanding of the late pagan world and the early Christian world in the North as well as the transition between the two of them, did this transition happen overnight in 1000 on Iceland and in 1030 in Norway and in the 10^th century in Denmark?  Or are we more likely to find that things took time and that the two religions and beliefs lived side by side for a period of years? I remember from my education in a Norwegian school that the conversion we dealt with as a clear cut change that happened almost overnight, and this was thought at a point when academic historians already had started to see the possibility that Christianity could have been present in the country long before the textbooks suggest it. [4]

More resent research have included the use of archaeology among their evidence, which have brought a whole new debate about this period,  a debate we here don’t have time nor place to give you full update on, but the main thing you need to know is that everything isn’t always what it seem. It is in this environment many new articles and books have been publishes as a contribution to the search for the “truth” about the conversion in Scandinavia. Among the recent and valuable contributions to the topic is Anne-Sofie Graeslund’s[5]  and Jørn Staecker’s[6] articles in the 2003 book ‘The Cross goes North’.  Yet both seem to apply their research and findings to the entire region even though they are only from a very small area, respectively from Birka in Sweden and parts of Denmark and these areas are both very well connected with the continent through trade and other connections. They were also the areas where German and Carolingian missionaries worked in 9^th century.[7] It has to be said, both articles were primarily concerned with the role of women in the conversion of Scandinavia, and their belonging in the new faith. Although these articles do stand fast in their conclusions and in their own right is worth reading, I believe that their generalization for all of Scandinavia based on the few sources and the little spread of evidence geographically might suggest that further research is needed, or that it need to be reevaluated. For there seem to be little if no evidence from Iceland or the western parts of Norway areas which traditionally have been associated with each other.

In a recent study the author(me) found that be looking at the evidence supplied through the Sagas and other medieval literature from Iceland and comparing this with the archaeological reminds found on Iceland and in the four western Counties in Norway; Møre og Romsdal, Sogn og Fjordane, Hordaland and Rogaland, one can see that the conclusion that Scandinavian women were attracted to Christianity at an early age, based on Graeslund and Staerker’s articles, might not fit with the situation for the western parts of Scandinavia which was closed connected to the British Iles then to the continent,[8] after all a large number of settlers to Iceland came either through Scotland Ireland and England or the Hebrides, Orkney’s, Shetland and Faeroe Islands, which at the point were among the native population Christian, at least in the name. This suggest that many settlers who came to Iceland were acquainted with Christianity, and as the sagas and Landnamabook suggest, among these were some Christians who were both baptized and had received communion, among these the majority were women, though it seems from the same sources that religion did not at this point restrict the marriage marked  for the settlers or their counterparts in the British Iles, for it is suggested that there were marriages were one was belonging to the traditional beliefs and the other were Christian, in these cases it was most likely that the Woman would be Christian and would bring her religion with her to their new home on Iceland. Although these evidence are good in themselves there is one slight problem; so far it have not been found any Christian burials, not male nor female, in Iceland that dates before 980 A.D., so therefore it have been suggested that after the first generation of Christian settlers the Christian minority on Iceland took on the costumes of the pagan majority, and adapted to the political and cultural climate on the island to survive.[9] It have been suggested that since burials are done after the deceased is passed, they might not reflect the religious views, beliefs and practices held by the deceased, but rather by their family which is left behind, this might explain why we so far have not found any Christian burials on Iceland. Yet it have to be mentioned that the majority of the burials on Iceland are not what one would expect from an Viking burial; large mounds with ships and lots of goods, they are rather more sparsely equipped, and the majority are also found by share luck due to earth erosion or construction work.[10] Some archaeologists have suggested and believe that the tradition of flat ground burials, i.e. burials underground without a mound, are influences of Christianity, and the same is said about the lack of grave goods. If these are true then we might have to reevaluate the theory about the re-conversion back to paganism due to the political and cultural climate on the Saga island before the conversion in 999/1000. Already here we can see that the once straight forward conversion story of the north might be more complex than first believed, for aren’t these evidence killing each other?

Well to make it a bit more interesting; in the western counties of Norway, one can in the 8^th and 9^th century burials which archaeologists have classified as Christian or Christian influenced, and of these the majority are female, or cannot be gender determined. In an area where the ratio between burials is five male burials for every female burial,[11] one would expect to find evidence for Christian influence also in a larger number of male burials, yet the burials we here are concerned with are those the archaeologists have found, I.e. those that either have been marked by some means or just found by accident, and most of these bear witness of belonging in the upper layers of society,[12] therefore this evidence is not just demographically corrupted due to the unevenness between the genders, but also due to the possibility that maybe 90% of the population might have been buried in unmarked graves and we cannot therefore study these persons burials to trace the religious beliefs of the time through them. Yet those burials that have been classified as Christian can primarily be found in up to late 9^th century and again in the late 10^th century with a gap of about 50-70 years where they not only decrease in number, but also totally vanish for a period.[13] In this same period we see an Increase in the use of rich and well equipped mound or boat burials of the pagan traditions. And this leaves us with the question; do we see a decline in Christianity in the period and an increase in the traditional paganism as a reaction against this acceptance of the new faith? We hear about this in the sagas, that the powerful earls of Lade among others reinstituted and supported a revival of the pre-Christian traditions, as well as attacked Christians and attempts on accommodating for the conversion.[14] Are we once again faced with the possibility of a conversion back to the pre-Christian traditions? Or is the lack of Christian burials just and evidence for that the Christians started to bury their dead in flat ground graves without markers which is why we have not found any? Or what happened? For in the late 10^th century we find in at least two locations regular standardized Christian burials in cemeteries that suggest that the religion were well established by the last two decades of the tenth century in Norway, which is the same time as we see the first archaeological evidence for Christianity on Iceland also appearing . So where Staecker and Graeslund suggest the conversion was done once and was final then, it seems like the western regions of Scandinavia follows a different pattern with a period where the Christians disappear from the sources for the majority of the 10^th century, and at the same time it looks like we find a pagan revival in the same regions. This suggest as earlier explored that the women in western Scandinavia might initially have been drawn to the new faith in the early period, through contact with the world outside for then, to go back to the traditional religion when the political and cultural climate changed to be more hostile towards Christianity in the 10^th century.

---

[1] Berggrav, E., Brytningene omkring Olav og Stiklestad: Momenter til et opgjør foran jumileet, (1930, 7)

[2] R.Kayser, Norges Historie, 1866, 4-5

[3] See article on the blogg from 14^th of February 2011.

[4] R. Danielsen, S. Dyrvik, T. Grønlie, K. Helle, E. Hovland, Grunntrekk i norsk historie, fra vikingtid til våre dager, (1991, 31).

[5] A-S Graeslund, ‘The role of Scandinavian Women in Christianisation: the Neglected evidence’, in Carver, M., (ed.), The Cross goes North, (2003).

[6] Staecker, J., ’The Cross goes North; Christian Symbols and Scandinavian Women’, in Carver, M., (ed.), The Cross goes North, (2003).

[7] K.C. Alvestad, Women and Christianity in the ninth and tenth century Western Scandinavia, (2011,Unpublished, 7).

[8] O.G. Moseng, E. Opsahl, G.I. Pettersen, E. Sandmo, Norges historie 750-1537, (2007, 81).

[9] J. Jochens, ’Late and peaceful. Iceland’s conversion through arbitration in 1000’, Spectrum, vol. 74, No. 3, (Jul.,1999),640.

[10] B.B. Birgisdottir, ’Gravskikk på Island og norskekysten i vikingtiden, et bidrag til diskusjonen islendingenes opprindelse’, in A. Christophersen, & A. Dybdahl, (ed.), Gasir- en Internasjonal handelsplass i Nord-Atlanteren, (1999, 78).

[11] E.M. Skipstad, Kvinner og Kristendom på Vestlandet; En Undersøkelse med utgangspunkt i Graver fra yngre jernalder i Sogn, (2009, 40).

[12] Ibid, 47.

[13] Ibid, 67; J. Staecker, ’The Cross goes North; Christian Symbols and Scandinavian Women’, in Carver, M., (ed.), The Cross goes North, (2003, 468-470).

[14] P. Hærnes, ’Kristen innflytelse  i Rogalandsk vikingtid’ in, H-E. Liden, (ed.), Møte mellom hedendom og kristnedom i Norge, (1995, 85)

Bibliography:

Alvestad, K.C., Women and Christianity in the ninth and tenth century Western Scandinavia, (2011,Unpublished).

Berggrav, E., Brytningene omkring Olav og Stiklestad: Momenter til et opgjør foran jumileet, (1930)

Birgisdottir, B.B., ’Gravskikk på Island og norskekysten i vikingtiden, et bidrag til diskusjonen islendingenes opprindelse’, in A. Christophersen, & A. Dybdahl, (ed.), Gasir- en Internasjonal handelsplass i Nord-Atlanteren, (1999)

Danielsen, R., Dyrvik, S., Grønlie, T., Helle K., Hovland, E., Grunntrekk i norsk historie, fra vikingtid til våre dager, (1991).

Hærnes, P., ’Kristen innflytelse  i Rogalandsk vikingtid’ in, H-E. Liden, (ed.), Møte mellom hedendom og kristnedom i Norge, (1995)

Graeslund,A-S., ‘The role of Scandinavian Women in Christianisation: the Neglected evidence’, in Carver, M., (ed.), The Cross goes North, (2003).

Jochens,J., ’Late and peaceful. Iceland’s conversion through arbitration in 1000’, Spectrum, vol. 74, No. 3, (Jul.,1999)

Kayser, R., Norges Historie, 1866

Moseng, O.G., Opsahl, E., Pettersen, G.I., Sandmo, E., Norges historie 750-1537, (2007).

Skipstad, E.M., Kvinner og Kristendom på Vestlandet; En Undersøkelse med utgangspunkt i Graver fra yngre jernalder i Sogn, (2009)

Staecker, J., ’The Cross goes North; Christian Symbols and Scandinavian Women’, in Carver, M., (ed.), The Cross goes North, (2003).

http://wuhstry.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/the-icelandic-sagas/

Easter Traditions

In order to introduce this month’s topic of religious history and as Holy Week draws to a close, I have written about Easter and it’s traditions through history. In case you don’t celebrate it or have forgotten, at the end of this week or in a few weeks’ time, many people around the world will be celebrating both the most significant event in the Christian story as well as a long-lived Pagan event of new birth.

Originally, Easter and certainly the time of year in which it is celebrated, was a Pagan festival which honoured a Goddess relating to nature and new birth, hence the association of lambs, eggs and bunnies. This Goddess was known as Eastre, ‘the Teutonic goddess of spring and dawn.’[1]

Although, after the conversion of Emperor Constantine to Christianity, it is believed, so as to ease in the transition of their Empire from Paganism to Christianity, the Romans adopted many existing Pagan dates and celebrations into the Christian calendar of festivals. As well as Easter being celebrated at the time of the Pagan Spring Equinox, Christmas also almost shares its dating with the Winter Solstice.

Indeed, although there are a fair few, not many of the Christian aspects of Easter specifically derive from the story of Jesus and the accounts of the Bible. As well as this, many of the non-religious aspects evolved much later, such as the Easter Bunny and chocolate eggs.

It can be implied, from history, that the decision to have the Christian celebration of Jesus’ death and resurrection was made partly because it coincides with the Jewish Passover festival and because Easter in the Pagan traditions is a time of new-life. Examples of this include the symbol of the egg and everything that comes with Spring-time such as the birth of baby lambs and other animals. Those who do not share or fully grasp the Christian faith may wonder how the notion of new-life relates to the Christian adoption of the originally Pagan festival of Easter. Well, as Christians believe Jesus was crucified to free us from our sins and that he rose again and consequently defeated death, Christians also believe that as humans we can share in Jesus’ resurrection and eternal life, if we choose to believe in Him and acknowledge that He paid the price for our sins. This is also seen as an opportunity for our souls to live forever in Christ’s salvation. Yet, arguably, despite Easter in England becoming very much a Christian orientated celebration; there still remain clear Pagan traditions, such as the Easter egg, representing new life.

The main Christian aspects of Easter revolve around the week leading up to Easter Sunday, the usual day on which Christians traditionally come to God in worship and thanksgiving, as well as Lent and the famous Shrove Tuesday. Although Shrove Tuesday, it seems, is just as much related to socio-historical customs as it is to Christian’s traditions. According to history, it was tradition to raid the store cupboard and use up all the indulgent supplies such as flour, sugar and eggs, usually used to bake cakes. These would be mixed together to make a feast of pancakes, in recognition of the final day of indulgence before the time of often fasting or giving something up, known in the Christian Calendar as Lent. Ash Wednesday signifies the beginning of Lent and is 46 days before Easter and ‘derives its name from the practise of placing ashes on the forehands of adherents as a sign of mourning and repentance to God.’[2]

With regards to the week before Easter, known in the Church of England as Holy Week, Christians remember Palm Sunday, when Jesus rode into Jerusalem and was allegedly welcomed by people waving palm leaves, after having Spent 40 Days, in the desert, resisting temptation from the Devil. Maundy Thursday in memory of Jesus’ Last Supper with his disciples, when he broke bread and shared wine for the last time. This was also the night on which Jesus was betrayed by Judas, in the Garden of Gethsemane. As well as Good Friday, also known as Black Friday and a few other names, when Jesus sacrificed himself on the Cross through His great love for humanity.

Easter Sunday itself is believed to be the oldest observed Christian festival[3], as it commemorates the day on which Christ fulfilled the penultimate prophecy by dying on the Cross and rising again, as well as the time when the Church community was first established, according to John 19, verses 25-27.

The name Easter in England also has a history of its own, as it is not the original Christian name, instead it was used for the Christian celebration, when the faith was brought to England, so that the transition would be a lot easier for English Pagans, in that the name Easter was associated with the Pagan Spring festival of new life.[4]

The idea of an Easter bunny and the edible egg derives from the original Pagan symbols of new life, which were originally a hare and an ordinary egg, both representing new life. Regarding, the significance of the egg, it is believed that the empty or inanimate shell is supposed to represent death, which Christians believe all humans were subjected to before Jesus’ crucifixion and the actual edible part symbolises the new life we receive through Christ’s sacrifice.[5] It has also been claimed that ‘some believe that the egg might represent the stone that was rolled away from Christ’s tomb, revealing his resurrection.’[6] It is also the case that, despite their disagreements over the specific date on which Easter is celebrated, both Eastern Orthodox Christians and Western European Christians adopted the traditionally Pagan symbols of the hare and the egg. Although, it is not completely clear why the eggs we have in the UK are chocolate, when in some European countries ordinary eggs are still used, being decorated with lots of colour and patterns and given to people as gifts. Another popular tradition in England is the Easter egg hunt, which is believed to derive from America, when German immigrants brought their egg and hare traditions, which over a number of years spread to other countries.[7] This originally featured children making nests and leaving ‘them outside for the hare to lay her eggs in them’[8], although this has now evolved into children finding chocolate eggs hidden for them.

Bibliography

http://www.celebratingeaster.com/traditions/

http://www.theholidayspot.com/easter/history/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter

http://www.religioustolerance.org/easter1.htm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/paganism/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Wednesday

http://www.originalbuzz.info/index.php/2012/02/the-easter-egg-hunt-history/

---

[1] http://www.celebratingeaster.com/traditions/history/

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Wednesday

[3] http://www.theholidayspot.com/easter/history/easter_history.htm

[4] http://www.theholidayspot.com/easter/history/easter_history.htm

[5] http://www.celebratingeaster.com/traditions/

[6] http://www.originalbuzz.info/index.php/2012/02/the-easter-egg-hunt-history/

[7] http://www.originalbuzz.info/index.php/2012/02/the-easter-egg-hunt-history/

[8] http://www.originalbuzz.info/index.php/2012/02/the-easter-egg-hunt-history/