Heretics in Sixteenth-Century England

Welcome to Minorities Month on our blog! Today I’m going to discuss the term ‘heretics’ as a minority in Tudor England. After Henry VII’s victory at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, the sixteenth century became dominated by a new and eventually infamous dynasty known as The Tudors. The severing of the Church with Rome in 1534 confused the definition of ‘heretic’ and left people in a state of ambiguity regarding which faith was ‘legal’ under Henry VIII and his heirs that would follow. This is not the story of ‘Catholics’ or ‘Protestants’ as such, since both of these groups would become heretics or traitors under Tudor rule at some point in the sixteenth century, but rather an insight into how suddenly a group or person could be declared a criminal when so previously praised for their ‘true’ faith. In this article, the status and treatment of ‘heretics’ under the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth I will briefly be examined.

Up until 1534, England was part of the unified Catholic Church under Papal authority in Rome. Anybody who did not accept Catholic doctrine or recognize the Pope as Head of the Catholic Church was immediately labelled a heretic and, if unrepentant, put to death by burning at the stake. The first heretical threat to England under Henry VIII was Protestantism, a new and radical movement that gained influence in the 1520s rooting from Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Thesis in Germany. Luther promoted personal faith and Bible-reading, attacked idolatry, the Pope, transubstantiation and many other aspects of Catholic doctrine. Thomas More, a deeply religious Catholic who took the post of Chancellor after Wolsey’s fall, began to crack down on heresy, viewing it as a spreading disease. He saw it as his duty to exterminate Protestants to protect the ‘true’ faith, and burnt a total of six people during his short rule of power, who were charged for accusations such as distributing banned books.

Yet in a drawn-out, England-altering battle with the Pope to divorce Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Boleyn, Henry VIII decided to split with Rome in 1534 and create his own Church of England, allowing him as Supreme Head to do as he pleased within it. The Oath of Supremacy enforced his subjects to recognize him, and not the Pope, as Head of the English Church – and to deny it was treason, punishable by death. The tables had now turned for Thomas More, who would not sign the Oath and acknowledge Henry as Head of the Church instead of the Pope due to his ‘conscience’. Despite his long-term friendship with the King, Henry had him executed in July 1535 in the Tower.

As Henry became more radical and introduced pro-Protestant doctrine, influenced by Anne Boleyn as some would argue, the Catholics that had experienced one faith their entire lives were seen as a threat to Henry’s authority and for the first time in England it was them, and not the Protestants who had been previously persecuted, that were now seen as the heretics and traitors.

Yet the situation would change again. With unstable foreign policy and an ageing Henry yearning Spanish support whilst tackling France, he introduced The Act of Six Articles which consisted of mostly Catholic doctrine in the hopes of pleasing Catholic Spain (and perhaps the rebels following the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536). The Protestants that had gained influence from the split with Rome were now expected to revert to a more conservative and traditional faith, even to the point of accepting Transubstantiation. At this point the confusion and insecurity of the religious people in England can be understood. It was not as easy to unofficially change the state’s religion now, however. The Protestant movement had finally been given the chance to grow and build communities in England and it was not going to back down without a fight. Anne Askew is the only woman in English history to have been tortured at the Tower of London on the rack before being burnt at the stake. According to Henry, when informed of the woman’s interrogation (which was against the law),  he replied “from the word of God, we know that the Devil takes many forms.” Askew’s links within Protestantism were strong, though. Support for her and the movement she promoted can perhaps be seen by an anonymous person placing gunpowder around her neck before the flames were lit, resulting in a quicker and easier death.

Henry VIII’s death in 1547 paved the way for the Protestant factions surrounding his son and heir, Edward VI, to reinstate the Protestant doctrine and continue to dissolve the monasteries for financial gain. As Edward was a minor, however, no Catholics were tried or executed during this point except those involved the Western Rebellion of 1549.

The situation reversed in 1553 after Mary I (or ‘Bloody Mary’) took her rightful place on the throne from Lady Jane Grey, the Nine Day’s Queen. A staunch Catholic who resented the Reformation under her father, viewed as the cause of her and her mother’s suffering, Mary intended to restore the true faith to England in the counter-Reformation and finally put an end to heresy (or Protestantism). Infamously known for her burnings, Mary executed approximately 287 men and women during her short reign, a colossal figure even for the gory time period. Although she had achieved in reuniting England with Rome, she was resented by Protestants and even some Catholics for her brutality, exposing the majority of London the stench of burning flesh.

Elizabeth I, following Mary’s sudden death, immediately reinstated the Act of Supremacy and became Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Her ‘Protestant’ regime aimed to please both Catholics and Protestants alike, and at the beginning, there were no persecutions of either faith since Elizabeth showed little interest for personal religion. This all changed, however, when Mary Queen of Scot’s sparked the Catholic threat in England, and the Northern Rebellion began in 1569. When excommunicated by the Pope, Elizabeth cracked down on Catholics (or rather ‘traitors’) to secure her political position. Most were beheaded or hanged rather than burnt, including Mary, Queen of Scot’s herself. This would be the only safe point to say, however, that Catholics were truly a minority in Tudor England. The Reformation that introduced Protestantism in Henry VIII’s reign had now planted a deep root in the English Church and as the older generation died out, few disgruntled Catholics remained. Elizabeth’s paranoia regarding a Catholic conspiracy leading up to the Spanish Armada, however, blew the threat of remaining Catholics out of realistic proportion.

If we had lived in the sixteenth century, we must have been very religiously-versatile in order to survive. And because of the unbreakable integration of religion and politics, this was never really possible. With each monarch, or new political situation, came different laws on what was heretical and what was not. A heretic under Henry VIII in 1520 would be praised from 1534 (H VIII – Act of Supremacy), burnt from 1539 (H VIII – Act of Six Articles), secure from 1547 (Edward VI), one of Bloody Mary’s victims from 1553, and favoured from 1558 (Eliz. I). As explored, Catholics were not always safer than Protestants, either. It appears it was safest to remain loyal to the King/Queen before the Church in such a temperamental religious climate in sixteenth-century Tudor England.

The Odd one out: The princess in the mountain

For those of you who have read a few of my updates on this blog, know that I’ve got a thing about Scandinavia, and the Viking age. This update is no exception to that. Though you might find that this is more a brief review rather than an independent research piece, you might learn something new about Scandinavia and its many quirks.

It is a long time ago now, that my mother bought a cd by the Norwegian artist Hanne Krogh.  On which there were a song about Selje and Sunniva,[1] and I have to admit that I’ve since then been fascinated by these names, for who was Sunniva, and what does Selje mean? And are they relevant for us today? Or are they just another example that the past is a foreign country?

Partly can the answer for this be found on the west front of Nidaros cathedral in Norway, where a single woman is depicted among a group of men on the left hand side of the wall, she is standing there lonely and holding a cliff in her hands, almost like the odd one out! Why is it so? Well the statue is depicting Sunniva of Selje, the only native female saint to Norway.[2]  But Sunniva’s story is more than just a hagiographic fairy tale, it is the story if ocean currents, local and national politics in both Norway and Ireland, religion and two religious changes and the importance of faith, some would even claim it’s a story about archaeology, but I am not so convinced about that to be honest.

The Sunniva we know from the past was a Irish princess who instead of marrying a Viking king who were occupying her homeland, fled with her people out on the ocean with only her faith as a compass. Of the three boats that set out from Ireland only two ended up at Selje, an island just south of Stad-landet in Norway. The destiny of the last ship is unknown, though suggestions have been made that they either shipwrecked or ended up further north in Norway where local legends suggest that Irish monks lived for a time at the end of the 10th century. These legends help us date the events we are here concerned with, Sunniva much have lived, if she ever existed, sometime in the 10th century, while Vikings lords controlled parts of Ireland, and it must have been before 995 as this is the first tangible year in the Sunniva cult, when Olaf Tryggvason came to the island just as he arrived in Norway to claim his crown. Or this is what Snorri suggest, but as we have talked about before in an earlier blog post, Snorri and the saga’s are not really reliable. One can almost start wondering if Snorri is back dating the cult of Sunniva, as this is the first and only record of her, in this period. Snorri tells the legend of Sunniva’s life and sainthood, and let Olaf and his company find her body undamaged in a collapsed cave.[3] Due to Selje’s position of being the resting place of Sunniva and her people, known as the Sjelumen(the men of Selje), Selje became the home of Norway’s first stead bound bishopric in the beginning of the 12th century. [4]

Some have claimed that the legend of Sunniva is a continuation of the pre-Christian traditions of spiritual connections with Selje, and that the bones that were claimed to belong to the Seljumen, really were the remains of Stone Age settlements on the island.[5] It have also been suggested that the entire myth was invented to be a tool in the battle against the Norse religion in Norway, and to be a focal point of the newly arrived Christianity. Yet what at least is certain is that the cult did start to develop during the 11th century, especially after 1024, when the country accepted king Olaf Haraldsson’s law of religion and society.[6]

However, during the 12th and 13th century did both the popularity of Sunniva, and the Norwegian society grow and develop. Therefore is it not surprising that Sunniva’s shrine and the bishopric of Selje were moved to Bergen when that city became the most prominent trading post on the Western Norwegian coast. Yet in 1537 Norway passed through a Lutheran reformation where the shrine of Sunniva were melted down and destroyed. Thus Sunniva passed into world of legends and fairy tales. However, with the increasing interest in Norwegian history during the 19th century, Sunniva like so many other medieval Norwegians took the step out of the shadows and came to life again. But as earlier mentioned, what does Sunniva mean to us today? Well, personally I’m a Lutheran, and as the Lutheran Church don’t believe in the powers of saints, only in their position as role models for other Christians, then her cult have not resurrected itself to be the same as it used to 500 years ago.  Based on the evidence from the last 50 years or so, is Sunniva’s revival due to three things. One: tourism which basically is this due to the notion that the past sells, and that people want to experience the past, as well as see the places that history took place. Therefore have Selje now become a tourist attraction with its ruins and tower from the middle ages. Two: a religious and spiritual revival in Northern Europe. This spiritually revival is not bound by the notion of the spirituality of both persons and the world is not confined to churches and institutional religion, but also in the landscape as well as in traditional beliefs in saints and the holiness of persons. Thirdly: the Lutheran acceptance of its catholic past. Were the church have started incorporate the old tradition into the new religion to bridge the gap between popular and institutional Christianity.

But what does this tells us? This suggest that as Norway have moved forward and become one of the best countries in the world to live in, its people have sought back into the past to find spiritual and religious identity markers. History is many things; although the public rememberance of the past might not be ‘historically correct’ it is still worth keeping an eye on. This reflects therefore the popular understanding of our discipline: History!


[3] K. Helle, (Ed.), Aschehougs Norges Historie; 800-1130[Norwegian History 800-1130], (2005,150).

[4] Ibid, 282.

[5] O. Hoftun, Norrøn tro og kult[Norse beliefs and cult], (2001, 303).

[6]Helle, Op. Cit.,267.

La Regina, the woman in St Peter’s

In 1689 an old lady passed away in Rome, her life were not that of an ordinary woman leaving this world in Rome. Yet considering who she was, her life was not as special, as it could have been.  She is one of the few women buried in St Peter’s, and millions visit that church every year, but who was she??

I have to admit, I have never been to St Peter’s, nor do I know if the tourists are told about her while visiting it. But what I do know is that her place in history is much deserved, unfortunately is not very well-known among the general public today. That is why I am writing this week’s update about her. As you might know, this month we are doing monarchs which are not well-known, and this week is about a woman who reigned for a relatively short time, although she left an impressive mark upon history. Some of our readers might know her name, her origin or some of her deeds, but do you know it all? Well, to tell the truth I do not know her life that well, but I will attempt to give you an introduction to the women whose conversion lead to her exile, and yet she still kept a firm presence in political life both in her land of origins and her new home.

In 1626 Christina Wasa was born, a woman who according to my sources did not think a woman could ever be fit to rule a kingdom. Although she was born in an age of turmoil and violence, and as the daughter of one of the 17th century’s strongest protestant princes, she would not be known for her wars, nor for her religious intolerance, but rather for being the last Wasa to rule Sweden, and for her conversion to Catholicism. Christina was the only living child of Gustavus II Adolphus of Sweden and Maria Eleonora of Brandenburg,[1] and thus the hair to the Swedish crown, as the closest male hair to the crown was the, from a Swedish perspective, the hated Polish king.

When Gustavus II Adolphus of Sweden fell at the battle of Lutzen in 1632 Christina became Queen of the Swedish kingdom, yet she what only 8, so her father’s most notable noble allies in Sweden became the real rulers during her minority, an agreement that was based on the king’s letter to Axel Oxenstierna in 1630, where he was appointed her guardian in case the king died. Christina’s early reign was dominated by the council that governed the crown in her place until she took power herself in 1644 at the age of 18. In equality to, and as a continuation of her father politics, the council of her guardians continued Gustavus Adolphus’s politics towards the nobility, by giving them land for their war efforts and to continue the thirty year war, both things which Christina did not have to deal with in the 10 years she reigned alone. This evident in the doubling of noble families in Sweden from 300 to 600 during the 10 years she reigned from 1644 to 1654, as her father had divided out the crown land for good service; she was now forced to reward her servants with noble titles for their service instead. Additionally for her work for the peace treaty in Westphalia in 1648, where she went against the wishes of Axel Oxenstierna, who for the record wanted more war in Europe, and sent Johan Adler Salvius to negotiate the peace on her behalf.[2]

But it is not her reign that makes Christina so notable, for she could have been like all the other Swedish ruling queens if it has not been for her abdication and the reasons for it, for as I wrote above, her life was not so extra ordinary as it could have been if we compare to her other relatives who ruled Sweden, both her father, cousin and his heir’s left a much more intriguing legacy after their time on the throne of Sweden. So it is in fact her life after the abdication that is the most intriguing.

During Christina’s reign the famous French philosopher Descartes visited Sweden, and talked to the young queen, with the resulted that she sought to learn more about the religion that her ancestors had left behind over 100 years earlier; Catholicism. So in 1654 she abdicated, and left the crown to her cousin Charles X of Sweden and his heir’s. All due to her choice of religion, as Catholicism were outlawed in Sweden in 1607.  Yet officially she did not convert until she was out of Sweden. Her life afterwards lead her to Rome and to take part in a political dance with Mazarin, Louis XIV and several of the popes.  In Rome she filled her life with art, theater and music. It is said that it is due to her abdication and life in Rome, many paintings which were taken from Prague by Gustavus II Adolphus when he sacked the city, as many of the paintings kept in the royal palace in Sweden were lost in the fire in 1697. Her collections of books, paintings and art were the reason for her roman home to be seen as a scientific and cultural gathering point in Rome. In 1686 she wrote a declaration in which she stated that all Jews in Rome as the time were under her protection, and should not be prosecuted. Although she abdicated her Swedish throne many years before she still signed the declaration as; La Regina, (the queen). She attempted several times after her abdication to return to Sweden, but as a catholic she was not welcomed, so she always returned to Rome.

The woman who was born to become a queen and heir to one of the greatest kings in Swedish history ended her life in 1689 in Rome as a catholic Swede, and as a recognition of her importance she was given a burial in St Peter’s, like only 2 other women, after all she was the queen who abdicated to be able to stay true to her faith.

If you find Christina interesting, for example how could such a woman believe that no woman should ever rule? or want to know more about her life, her origins, legacy or destiny then there are some good books written about the topic, the latest one is from 2004, so why don’t you pick up a book and read about her, or other monarchs you don’t know a lot about? However, I do hope you will find time to visite our blog later this month as well, as we are encountering more monarchs that are not always remembered or often talked about.

——————————————————————————–

[1] http://snl.no/Kristina_Augusta

[2] http://snl.no/Johan_Adler_Salvius

The Power of the Saints

For my dissertation, in my final year at Winchester University, I will be writing about a specific aspect of female saints in the later middle ages. Although it has not yet been properly defined, my reading for this ten-thousand-word assignment has directed me to study the Church and Christian faith in the medieval period. It has also led me to consider, therefore, the place of the saints in medieval society (particularly England). So for this week’s post, I will be considering the role and criteria of saints during the medieval period and the influence the Church had upon this.

Although during the early years of the Church, saints were seen as those who died for their faith, known as martyrs – both the definition and the criteria of who is considered to be a saint later became altered and scrutinised by the (medieval) Church leaders. For example, local saints honoured by the Anglo-Saxons were shunned by the Church after the Norman Conquest and these lay cults were often deemed as a threat to ecclesiastical order within England[1]. Although, looking at the evidence, it can be concluded that the Normans merely could not pronounce the names of the English saints and so looked down on them.

Furthermore, it has been argued that after ‘the twelfth century, the requirements of a universal church had demanded a still tighter control of the holy in all its forms: a more centralised monitoring of sainthood…’[2], namely Rome wished to dictate such decisions. Indeed, approval, whatever the circumstances of the proposed saint’s life or death, was adamant even for the Church to recognise lay veneration of a saint.[3] The process for such an approval reflects the Church’s preoccupation with authority and order, as well as being able to predict who will go to Heaven or is already in Heaven, based upon their actions.

What is more, not only were saints during the middle ages seen as an example of good moral Christian living, but were also given their own powers within the Church, such as intercessory prayer, whereby people would ask the saints (in prayer) to plead with God on their behalf.[4] As well as this, even after their death, saints were also seen as miracle makers, capable of the kind of healing Jesus is believed to have given, as recorded in the Gospels. Indeed, hagiographers were justified in writing of the deceased as saints if miracles had frequently been recorded at the tomb of the person concerned.

The medieval Catholic idea of patron saints can be seen as being worshipped in a similar way to Pagan Gods and Goddesses, in that they almost became idols in themselves, due to their alleged power in matters of divine judgement. This meant that in a situation someone could pray to a saint whom had experienced something similar in their lifetime, such as Saint Matthew having once been a tax collector (although there are better examples). Saints were also patrons of the place in which they were born or had been practising their faith.[5] However, unlike Pagan idol worship, the honouring of saints was seen, in the middle ages, as a means of worshipping God (as well as increasing one’s chances of getting to heaven).

This power from the virtuous deceased could be obtained, it was believed, from coming into contact with the holy relics of the saints. These relics were often bodily remains of the saints or objects which they themselves had come into contact with such as pieces of the cross which Jesus Christ was crucified on. This incredible power associated with medieval saints can be linked to the notion of ‘friends of God’[6] and ‘soldiers of God’[7] which was attributed to the saints by the medieval Cult of Saints.

However, due to the apparent competition amongst the abbeys of Europe, the writings of hired hagiographers are likely to be rather inaccurate and in some cases corrupt descriptions of the lives of deceased abbots. Indeed, it has been pointed out that ‘an abbey with a saint among its former membership could hope for pilgrims to come and visit the ‘shrine’.’[8] This, in turn would mean increased income for the abbey.

The general expectation of miracles, which, with the help of God, ‘Christians thought saints were regularly capable of performing’[9], throughout the Middle Ages could also help explain why so many miracles were reported and so many people worshipped as saints. However, many still exhibited genuine Christian virtues and therefore earned their place as examples of Christian lives. Some examples were St Paul, who repenting from his old ways of persecuting Christians, followed God’s Will and spent the rest of his life preaching the word and building churches[10], St Stephen who was killed for speaking God’s truth and St Francis of Assisi who cared for the poor and lepers and rejected material wealth in his quest to carry out God’s calling.(11)

Therefore, it can be seen that the saints held a significant position within medieval society and that this was largely shaped by the Church, although one historian has shown that the lay people still held sway: ‘Lay people at all social levels appropriated cults to suit both pious and social needs. Even in so closely a governed country as England, secular and ecclesiastical authorities at the highest levels had only limited control over the appearance and interpretation of the holy.’[12]


Sources:

Brown, Andrew, Church and Society in England, 1000-1500 (Basingstoke, 2003), pp 61-84

Evans, G. R., Faith in the Medieval World (Oxford, 2002), pp 110-127

Farmer, David, Oxford Dictionary of Saints (Oxford, 2004), ppvii-xxi, 414-415

http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/religion/hagiography/cult.htm

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

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

http://www.allaboutprayer.org/intercessory-prayer.htm

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


[1] Brown, Andrew, Church and Society in England, 1000-1500 (Basingstoke, 2003), 63?

[2] Ibid., 62

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonization

[4] http://www.allaboutprayer.org/intercessory-prayer.htm

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patron_saint

[6] http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/religion/hagiography/cult.htm

[7] Ibid.

[8] G.R. Evans, Faith in the Medieval World (Oxford, 2002), 123

[9] http://www.the-orb.net/encyclop/religion/hagiography/cult.htm

[10] David Farmer, Oxford Dictionary of Saints (Oxford, 2004), 414-415

(11) Ibid., 203

[12] Brown, Op. Cit., 84

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 people 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 who 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.

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 10th 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 9th 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 8th and 9th 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 9th century and again in the late 10th 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 10th 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 10th 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 10th 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 14th 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/

The Beliefs of the Land of Yellow and Corn

I believe it is to everyone’s knowledge that according to the Maya calendar the world should end this year in December. Many have the fear this might be true, others use and abuse the subject to make money out of it. Others think it is just non-sense or even a conspiracy created by, you know, “Them”, to makes us all panic and so, control us at their will. So I decided that while everyone else seems to end this year with the fear towards this amazing civilization, I would start 2012 with a tribute to them, and their interesting believes. However, before I start I would like to inform these people led by paranoia and terror about a couple of things about the Mayan calendar.

First of all, you should know that their calendar had two different circles that combined formed their astronomical way of “counting days”. This cycle was called Tzolkin, it contained numbers and names that formed a ritual cycle of 260 days, and something calles haab that was the everyday use cycle of 365 days. These two elements formed their almanac. Also, the first one was mainly used to determine the life of an individual within the community. The two cycles formed together a longer one of 18980 days (52 haabs of 365/73 tzolkin of 260). To even make the situation more complicated, they also brung to consideration the lunar cycle. In addition, some experts have also explain that the Maya might have worked as well the cycles of some start, especially Venus, that would have affected all this astronomical year-like-system. The importance of Venus is remarkable as it was associated with war, and war was one fo their engines of gaining power, land and resources. So…If someone knowing this has the courage to do the calculations of these 4 cycles and even so conclude 2012 is the year the world ends…Well, I will grant this person an applause, and then get impressed by the surrealism of how 4 different calendars combined together, at the end of all of their cycles doom us all…Anyway, that was just a note, and I shall get now to my actual business.

The case with sources about the Maya civilization is the same that in many other European ones: original documents got lost, but there was a later re-write of those. Our example here would be the Popol Vuh, which was written around 1550 but refers to ancient tradition creation myths, deities and believes. According to these myths there were several attempts to create mankind according to the Maya. First the gods made people out of mud, but they collapsed easily. Then they made people out of wood, but as these had no souls, they were not people per se, and so they got left out to be animals. Finally, the gods made people out of corn and corn meal, and as these pleased them, the corn people became the ancestors of the Maya. (Interesting note in here, corn was one of the most basic resources for food in the lands of the Maya, hence the importance of this plant as a vital element). Also, we know they believe in an Earth creation myth that consisted on the gods yelling the word Earth, and this one would have materialised out of darkness and water.

The Maya cosmology counted with a world tree. Pretty much in the same way the Vikings had Yggdrasil, they counted with Ceiba, which was the centre of the world and connected it with the 13 layers of heaven and 9 areas of the underworld. For them , the world was in the centre of the universe and it was blue and green. Then the universe expanded following the directions of a compass. Each direction had a symbolic colour; north=white, east=red, south=yellow, west=black. About the two mystical spheres of their universe, we know that the heavens were the home for the gods, supervising Earth from above. Down in the underworld 12 demons known as the lords of Xibalba controlled the fate of the dead people. It was believed that with death, one would go to the underworld and suffer though six magical houses full of traps at least for a while before getting into heaven. Nonetheless, some people had direct access to the land of the gods: people who committed suicide, victims of sacrifices and women who died in childbirth.(This is very interesting as many other believes did not reserve any sort of salvation for these deviants…Perhaps the influence of Christianity in the East produces such an effect…Or maybe the Maya had a different consideration and understanding of these members of society)

About the deities of the Maya, there are many parallelisms that can be found. There were three main ones, and they were related with the natural elements of earth, water and air. These were Chaac, Huracán and Itzamná. The were all configured pretty much in the old fashion of powerful, superior and to an extent frightening beings. Chaac was in charge of agriculture, rain and fertility. Huracán was conceived as the god of wind, fire and lightning. His role was so important for them that it is because of him that we have words like hurricane, or huracán in Spanish, which are directly associated with his role of storm creator. Itzamná was the god that lived up on the skies, and he was considered to be the deity for priests and medicines. He also gave the Maya the cacao trees that became a key element for their diet, trade and medicine.

So, as it usually happens with these cultures, one can easily see that their believes were closely related to their lifestyle; one mainly based on agriculture. Even their very elaborated calendar seems to fit well with the rhythm and needs of the society. It is interesting to notice that there are many similarities between the Mayas and other cultures from overseas in what concerns religion. Perhaps this justifies the idea that a religious believe is developed to fulfil a specific function in society which is always the same; to provide shelter, explanations and salvation. Perhaps it might be all a massive coincidence that all these cultures thought in similar trends because of almighty gods that wanted so. Either way, I suggest we move our focus to the understanding of this civilizations rather than to the somehow ridiculous superstitions that emanate from them.

I hope I manage to make some of you interesting in a wonderful civilization that is the Maya, and not in the supposed end of the world this year. And for those that are still going on about the same topic…Perhaps you should consider that to understand the end of something, whatever it is, you need first to know the origins of such a thing. Either way introducing yourselves to a bit of Mayan knowledge will do you no harm.

And there goes my tribute not to end, but origin, believes, and therefore hope.

Killing In the Name Of…

As the sun is setting, four horsemen, cloaked and somber, are approaching the Canterbury Cathedral. They move in silence, standing in the shadows, with sword and armor hidden between their robes. They have a dark purpose when they entered the great church, but their purpose is not theirs alone, but the reflection of a tense political situation which was bound to explode violently. A fight is having place in the middle of England’s Government: the King and his former Lord Chancellor, now at the head of the Church of England were not happy with each other. Henry II was seeking control over the church, so for him the appointment of Becket, at the time Lord Chancellor and a man who had served him well, even against the church if needed, was an obvious solution. Trouble was that, in fact, Becket was a God’s man, and installed again within the Church where he had some responsibilities before, he decided to defend it against royal pretensions.

Thomas Becket, as a man of the Church, was not willing to abide to the King’s wishes. As he was getting ready for the Vespers he was probably thinking on it, now that he was back after years of exile in France. All that pressure put upon him, the damned (please God forgive me) Constitutions of Clarendon, that stupid scheme to undermine his authority bestowing other Bishops, more lenient, to play His Majesty’s game crowning the Young Henry, which was his prerogative. Trouble, fighting, an endless war to keep hold of the Church or gain its control. “I’m so tired of all this” he probably thought “yet it is my mission to establish and defend our Lord’s Church independence from the King”. He may have looked through the void and silent cathedral, thankful for a moment of peace before joining the community for the Vespers.

Then, something creeks. A door. There is someone in the shadows. Four figures move close and closer. They are cloaked. They are at your side. They want you to go to Winchester and pledged guilty and accept your King’s will. And it has to be now. That is what the King wants to forgive you and settled your dispute. They do not sound very convincing though, there is something in their voices that makes you feel cold. But it will not be now or never, you are simply not yielding, Thomas, and that make the four ghosts furious. They are mad at you and before you can understand what is going on, you are beaten once, twice…and everything turns black.

And there he lies, bleeding to death, in his own see, the Archbishop of Canterbury, his blood dripping in sacred soil, his “brains scattered about the pavements” in the words of Edward Grim, an eyewitness. Thomas Beckett had been murdered, embracing martyrdom. Surrounding him, four knights: Reginald FitzUrse, Hugh de Morville, William de Tracy and Richard le Breton. They had come to Canterbury allegedly to convey the Archbishop to Winchester, but in the end, to kill him with extreme violence in his own church, handing their swords and armor against a Prince of the church. It was the Vespers hour, 29 December 1170.

But why four knights of the realm had committed so terrible a crime against their own religious leader, thus against the Holy Church and against God? The story says that guilt must be put in a sentence uttered by the King of England in a moment of fury. That sentence, which could well be apocryphal, was seemingly “will no one rid me of this turbulent priest” though scholars like Simon Schama have shown their disagreement with this particular formulation. Anyway it seems quite clear that King Henry was no particularly happy with Becket attitude and deeds and he was fuming his malcontent in public. Thence, some of his knights thought probably that it would be a good idea and a nice way of clearing their way through the Court just if they satisfied their King’s wishes. So they went to Canterbury and entered in the History of murder as the assassins of a would-be-saint.

It is ironic their bad timing, killing a priest in the Christmas season. Their bad judgment on the King’s wishes, or their good judgment but brutal and excessive implementation could also be a matter of discussion. They didn’t get any helpful advice from their King and, in the end, were banned to fight in the Holy Land for fourteen years. Poor reward for such a service. Becket’s was much better apart from the fact that he was dead: he was promoted to sanctity. In the end, there is something cruelly humorous about the whole scene: it gives another meaning to Christmas as a time to reconciliation as the knights reconcile Becket with His Father. But their ways were surely not welcome in Heaven.

When Christmas Is not a Time for Peace.

Well, I think spending your Christmas time in a quiet and secluded place with a very close community inspired by the religious feeling which, allegedly, fuels the celebration (or that way it was, once), people whom with to share a praying moment and a pious enjoyment of thy Glory could be considered, at least by a great number of people, the best possible Christmas to live.

Otherwise, it could happen that your quiet and secluded place would be under constant bombardment, with a fierce enemy at the gates, food running low, and without an army to rescue you. That would not be peaceful merriment, for sure. And it could be even worse: the army at the gates could be a rabble of heretics (that, from your point of view) and you could be a simple monk, and the keeper of your nation’s most sacred relic. Then you’re dreaming of a white Christmas would turn a complete nightmare…

I was forgetting something: there are good and bad news. The good news is that you live in a monastery that, in fact is a fortress. Enter the bad news: the enemy’s strength is ten times yours; they are a hired army of German Lutherans, hardened mercenaries, ungodly veterans; the Polish Commonwealth (your country, by the way) is losing the war, the king has exiled in Silesia, And you are, more or less, the last strong point defending the Commonwealth banner. Well, it is not as bad as it looks: your Prior, Augustyn Kordecki, a farsighted man, has let in some recruits from the local nobility and, above all, has bought muskets and ammo. But, I know you are asking yourself would all this be enough? Ah, my friend, your faith is lacking. Trust in God, Whose ways are mysterious.

So here we are: Advent came and is leaving, negotiations ended with no result. You did great at first, a successful sally brought down two cannons, Swedes and Germans got nervous, your cannon was superior and your aim more accurate. Then they brought in heavy siege artillery, 24-pounders, and seriously damaged the northern walls and a bastion. But your sorties still bore fruit and on December 14 you destroyed a 24-pounder and got some relief. Only to enrage the enemy, who doubled its efforts and resume bombardment and started digging a tunnel to undermine the old building. By this time, though, you were masters of sortie and again defeated the Swedish army on the 20, with the leadership of Stefan Zamoyski one of the noblemen helping the Commonwealth in its hour of need. This time, the result was devastating for the besiegers: two cannon destroyed and almost every miner dead. Now, all the hardships, the fear, the self-questioning is being let aside. God is among you, saving you now that the time Thy son was born is about again, helping you, giving you courage and luck, even, for sure, was God’s own hand who made another 24-pounder exploded while barraging mercilessly your tired walls. You are winning, my friend.

I can only imagine what is now crossing General Burchard Müller von der Luhnen’s mind. He is out there, beholding the walls. In silence, thinking, questioning himself too. Why? They are just some dozens of monks and a few soldiers. Why? We should have been inside for weeks now. Why am I here, at the gates, in the snow, waiting for a clue to overcome the Polish. Why are they fighting like that? He must be thinking of Divine intervention, but, no, that cannot be. He is a professional soldier. There is no space for superstition in a battlefield, or it is? It seems there is nothing more he can do now. Christmas Eve is here and still nothing gained. Soldiers are unsettled and morale is ebbing. Well, maybe a handsome ransom could be mustered, just for all the trouble. And, after all, the war is almost over, and this is just a monastery…
So a ransom was asked for. And denied. As Prior Kordecki put it, “I would have paid before the fighting began, now the monastery needs the money for repairs”. Ah, there is a leader of men if you need one, the new warrior-monk, a true Templar´s heir. And, finally, at dawning the 27th December 1655, the Swedish army started to withdraw with a last bitter look to the high walls that, with God’s help, had defeated them.

That’s how History goes. A little religious community was preparing for Christmas when war called at the door. Through the smell of powder and the sound of thunder, the hunger and the cold, they resisted a professional army and allegedly, started and gave impulse to the resistance. From then on, the Polish would gain momentum till the final defeat of the invaders. Probably the siege of Jasna Gora was not the only reason, but surely it was a sign that helped to restore national pride and, maybe, as it showed that the Swedish were in fact vulnerable gave the small guerrillas still operating and the beaten rests of the polish army a new hope of victory. And, in a longer span, the siege, and the intervention, if ever there was, of the Black Madonna of Czestochowa, contributed to the Polish national spirit and is still nowadays a strong reference for all the Polish people. The Madonna was still there when Poland was quartered, and under the communist rule, and today keeps on moving every soul when on visit.