 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Isn't it Træll in Norwegian atleast? Not Thræl.
It is spelled Träl in Swedish, Træl in Norwegian and Danish.
- Hmm. And what's most common term in English? Pavel Vozenilek 15:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- It can also be spelled trell in Norway, depending on which Norwegian language you speak. The most common term in English would be thrall (obviously). I guess you can also say 'slave', however it would not be accurate. TheIncredibleNix ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I have read and studied many sources (sorry can't remember exact references, but the current article cites none) that attest that the norse thralls actually had many rights, including the right to wages, and to purchase their freedom. While they were considered a lower class, it was still considered wrong to physically abuse a thrall. This makes them very distinct from slaves, as the definition of a slave is a person without rights, and who is wholly legally owned as property. Considering, even, that thralls were a social class in the norse world, shows that they were considered as people, not property. They were more akin to indentured servants than slaves. I believe that thjis is a very important distinction. -Angatyr
I have found a suitable refence with appropriate information. Below are two books I have studied, and a webpage that describes informatiopn in a good overview.
Nicholson, Andrew. "Viking Social Organization". 1991. Regia Anglorum.
Simpson, Jacqueline. "The Viking World". 1980. New York: St. Martin's Press
http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~clit387/Norse.html
-Angatyr
- Angatyr, I see where you are coming from. But on the other hand, they could still be sold to other lords. Doesn't that make them property? TheIncredibleNix ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
THe information on this page is contradicted on the "Slavery in the middle ages" page. There it is stated that the mother's freedom, not the fathers is the determining factor as to whether you are born a thrall. Which is correct?
Scandinavian customs often differed from those of the rest of Europe. Just write the seeming discrepency off as cultural differences.
The contradiction is in the part specifically refering to Scandanavian slavery within the "Slavery in the middle ages" page though so surely both should be the same and not just ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.173.67 ( talk) 23:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
What does (Old Norse þræll; þír, f.) mean? Is þræll a male and þír a female thrall? Is the word itself feminine in Old Norse regardless of the gender of the person? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.44.64.59 ( talk) 23:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- According to other wiki articles, Thræl was the (illegimate?) son of Ríg (Heimdall) and Edda. Thræl married Thír, and their children became the race of serfs (thralls). If someone would like to check up on it to include in the article, it should be covered in the poem from Snorre Sturlassons edda,
Rígsthula. I believe the word for a female thrall is either thír or ambátt. However, the word træll might be femininum, but only in linguistic sense.
TheIncredibleNix (
talk) 12:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- In the Icelandic sagas that have usually been updated into modern Icelandic, female slaves, or thralls are usually called, as you said: ambátt (ambáttir, plural). In these modernised sagas I have never come across the word thír, or þír, though you may well be correct :O - MrGulli ( talk) 19:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
The article says "The thralls were kept as livestock and their master had the power of their life and death.". I think this is very confusing. Livestock refers to domesticated animals, that are bread to produce food - for example a pig that you keep to butcher. The Norsemen were not cannibals. I strongly feel the word livestock should be changed. TheIncredibleNix ( talk) 12:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
The wiki page on Livestock says the term is not exclusively used for animals bred for food - it can include e.g. beasts of burden - so it's technically correct here, if a somewhat chilling way to be referring to humans (which I guess is appropriate). What do you suggest as an alternative? Dichohecho ( talk) 14:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Are not thralls just the lower class workers of the scandinavian area? The sources do not say that thralls were bound in chains but that they were tied to the land like serfs. Were not thralls free to move out of the country? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.99.132.30 ( talk) 16:51, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- There were certainly chains. Written sources tell about slaves in shackles. Iron collars have been excavated from important Viking era market towns like Hedeby, Birka and Dublin. When thralls were freed, the iron collars were removed and they became frihals, which means "free neck". The word frihals later developed into frelse, with the meaning saved, in the religious sense.
- -- 195.0.221.197 ( talk) 05:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
The sv:Träl article contains much that could be added to this. — Robert Greer ( talk) 18:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
"Early Germanic Law" says...
While the death of a freeman was compensated by means of a weregild, usually calculated at 200 solidi (shillings) for a freeman, the death of a slave was treated as loss of property to his owner and compensated depending on the value of the worker.
but "Society" says...
While thralls and freedmen did not have much economic or political power in Scandinavia, they were still given a wergeld, or a man's price, which is to say, there was a monetary penalty for unlawfully killing a slave.
So, were they wergeld worthy or not?--
23.119.204.117 (
talk) 14:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Some recent activities of one trigger-happy user seem a bit random and illogical. I have invited her/him to provide a brief rationale for the unexplained spate of rollbacks to the articles Danish slave trade, Thrall, Slavery in Sweden, and Slavery in Denmark. I'm not sure that the user actually read these articles.