Talk:Notow

Notow as a Kontor

I made an edit referring to the claim of a "Kontor" at Notow as unreferenced and anachronistic. This might have been a bit rash of me, so let me explain further: Notow is a very interesting place, but there is no evidence to suggest that there was ever anything that could be called a "Kontor" there. I used the word "anachronistic" because the term "Kontor" only started appearing at the end of the 15th century - it is first used about Bergen in 1484 - and by that time, the Hanseatic organization had existed in Bergen had existed for at least 130 years. It is, however, common in the historic litterature to refer to the Hanseatic organization and settlement in Bergen, London, Novgorod and Bruges as "Kontors" also when referring the time before the 1480s. The term is used to refer to the organization of Hanseatic merchants, permanently settled, governed by aldermen and equipped with trading privileges and internal statutes. This can be demonstrated in Bergen since the 1350s. There are no sources in existence which show the existence of a Hanseatic organization, aldermen, privileges, statutes or anything that could justify the use of the term "Kontor" at Notow, at any time. There was no "Kontor" there. You will not find any historical work which says there was.

"Den norske so"/"De nornsche saw"/"The Norwegian sow" is indeed a remarkable book. It is very interesting, in places entertaining and often bizarre, and probably reflects oral traditions in Bergen from the late 16th century. But it is not a reliable source for the history of the earlier Middle ages.

So, I am happy with the inclusion of a paragraph saying that "the sow" claims there was a Kontor at Notow before Bergen, but it should also be made clear that this is an isolated claim with no evidence backing it up, and not generally accepted.

Finally, thank you to the creator of this article - it is an interesting place and well worth mentioning.--Barend (talk) 14:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that. I came to a kind of hasty conclusion regarding that particular part you mention. -TheG (talk) 19:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]