# Humanities & Anthropology > History & Civilisations >  Are Vikings overrated?

## Barantes

Let me begin with this, I don't mean to offend anyone this is just a question I am curious about. There are many who feel that the Viking age has been over-romanticized and they are in fact not as fierce of warriors as many would make them out to be. I am just curious about your opinions on the matter, you can state whether you feel they are or they aren't. Giving reasons to back your answers would also be appreciated.

----------


## LeBrok

I have to give them a credit for finding niche where they could benefit the most. By nature they were robbers of unsuspected populations using quick attacks and seizing the wealth. I'm not sure why this side of Vikings got romanticized. As skilfull and expansionist as they were they never amounted to building an empire. Probably because they came from north and north never had enough food to produce big population to create big army.
On plus side they were also hard working farmers, very good sailors and traders with trading posts around Europe. They are also credited of organizing populations around Kiev giving start to the Russ, also known as Russia.

----------


## hope

:

No, I don`t feel the Vikings [Norse] were overrated. To an extent I feel they are probably underrated.

In regards to their abilities as warriors, I think you need only look at the lands they settled and held, none of which was done by saying "please"..from Dublin, York, Normandy etc..we all know these things so no need to list them all.
They acted as personal bodyguards to the Byzantine emperors and fought in their armies [ Varangian Guard] obviously because they were seen as able fighters. I know a little politics was also at play, they were seen more trustworthy because they did not have a personal claim in the land, but this alone would not be the reason they were chosen.
They took part in the Byzantine naval expedition 902 and 949 to Crete and fought in Syria as part of the army 955.
Here in Ireland you recall the famous elite mercenaries, the Gallowglass. They were highly prized by the Irish chiefs [who themselves were pretty good fighters!]. These Gallowglass were made up of Norse-Gaels from Scotland. The Irish chiefs employed them also as bodyguards and personal aides
To be used in this manner, must surely be evidence of their fighting skills.

On a final note, remember the Beserkers. They fought to the death and worked themselves into such a frenzy that even after battle their own companions could sometimes not approach them until they had cooled off [ probably drug related]..

----------


## Balder

I think its supposed over-romantization today is due to the impact left by some nationalist English historians of Victorian era when they rediscovered the Icelandic sagas and (which idolized them as 'supernatural- warriors' in literature)..
But why do you, a Portuguese, care about it, a thing too distant for you? Such one worshipping sounds harmless to me.

----------


## hope

> I think its over-romantization is due to the Victorian era



That`s a good point. I know the "Noble Celts" got very much this treatment in the Victorian era.

Actually when you think about it, did the vikings really get romanticised in the same way? Have they not always been recalled as those horrible "heathen" savages ?

----------


## LeBrok

> That`s a good point. I know the "Noble Celts" got very much this treatment in the Victorian era.
> 
> Actually when you think about it, did the vikings really get romanticised in the same way? *Have they not always been recalled as those horrible "heathen" savages ?*


You are right. From polish schools I knew them only as scary robbers/bandits in boats. I think we can thank Hollywood for making heroes out of them.

----------


## ElHorsto

In medieval times, Vikings got an extremely bad press from the anglo-saxon and frankish church for their paganism and raids. This was exaggerated, actually only a minority of Vikings were raiders, most were traders. In later times (19th century) when national movements became popular, the Vikings, among others, were idealized by some as symbols of independence from roman/greek and christian influence.

----------


## Barantes

> I think its supposed over-romantization today is due to the impact left by some nationalist English historians of Victorian era when they rediscovered the Icelandic sagas and (which idolized them as 'supernatural- warriors' in literature)..
> But why do you, a Portuguese, care about it, a thing too distant for you? Such one worshipping sounds harmless to me.


I`m curious on people`s opinions on the subject, can I not be curious or something? To talk about history or views on it, it doesn't necessarily have to be your own.. I almost thought that this forum was about History but clearly I can't discuss other history other than my own.

----------


## Barantes

> That`s a good point. I know the "Noble Celts" got very much this treatment in the Victorian era.
> 
> Actually when you think about it, did the vikings really get romanticised in the same way? Have they not always been recalled as those horrible "heathen" savages ?


Maybe they did, I'm honestly not too sure how the Celts were potrayed in the Victorian era.

I feel the media have made people view it as a good thing in a way, their savagery is what makes people so fascinated by them, most people I talk to seem to be absolutely fascinated by them.

----------


## LeBrok

> I`m curious on people`s opinions on the subject, can I not be curious or something? To talk about history or views on it, it doesn't necessarily have to be your own.. I almost thought that this forum was about History but clearly I can't discuss other history other than my own.


Sometimes from posts, short written sentences, it is hard to figure out if people are serious, joking, sarcastic, or whatever they feel.
Try growing a thicker skin to feel better in this international community. Like Vikings did. :)
Welcome to Eupedia.

----------


## Barantes

Thanks, and I'm not offended or anything I just don't see what's the point of pointing out that I'm Portuguese has to do with me asking the question. Maybe if I descended from a Viking I would be fit to ask the question or something haha

----------


## kamani

I don't know about their intelligence or morals, but Vikings always fought their own battles, so I respect that.

----------


## Boss

NO.

The opposite is true IMO. 

The Vikings didn't really ever write their own history. Our sources are mainly Christian monks who ofc despised the pagan Vikings. The image these monks managed to pass on to the later generations is of uncivilised, unwashed savages whose only interests lie in stealing and murdering. 

It is not true of course as the Vikings were great craftsmen (longships were very technologically advanced for example) and, as someone already mentioned, the majority of them (like the majority of most people) would've been peaceful farmers, hunters, fishermen, etc - not murderers or thieves or adventurers.

I've found however that many Scandinavians love to think of the Vikings as brutal savages.. Men, in particular. They love to talk about how well they fought and aren't interested in finding out what they really were like.

----------


## Barantes

That's what I'm getting at, they're being remembered for something that a minority did rather than what the majority actually were, I think they're being remembered a glorified for the wrong reasons. Mainly because, like you said, the Christian monks gave them a bad image and discounted many of their accomplishments and passed them off as murderous, plundering savages etc... you know the story. It's a twisted view of what they were really like

----------


## hope

> I think we can thank Hollywood for making heroes out of them.


 And thet new series running "Vikings" lol. [Actually a bit of a disappointment that one IMO.] ..[except for the theme music which is rather good]

----------


## hope

> . It's a twisted view of what they were really like


Not really Barantes, they were pretty brutal. Yet that`s not all they were.

----------


## Barantes

> And thet new series running "Vikings" lol. [Actually a bit of a disappointment that one IMO.] ..[except for the theme music which is rather good]


I like it, it keeps me entertained for an hour after game of thrones ends

----------


## Barantes

> Not really Barantes, they were pretty brutal. Yet that`s not all they were.


Like most people in that time, you look through history and people don't really conquer lands through not being brutal. I don't really see Viking brutality as different from other people's.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> And thet new series running "Vikings" lol. [Actually a bit of a disappointment that one IMO.] ..[except for the theme music which is rather good]


I pretty much agree with all of your comments on this thread Hope, except for one. I think the main musical theme of "Vikings" should have been a part of Mari Boine's song which I'm having problems linking to on this site. It has 160,000+ views and the particular piece I'm referring to runs over eight minutes. Give it a few minutes of listening time and you'll see what I'm talking about. EDIT-- Eagle Brother is the title of the song.

Close your eyes and picture yourself a member of an opposing tribe while you're listening to this music, a tribe that the Vikings are going to invade next. 

It's a cold, misty evening. Like most of the evenings you've experienced in your life. The sun is setting. The same peoples playing this song are coming for you. Their boats are faster than your boats. They are bigger than you. They are stronger than you. They are meaner than you. Death does not scare them... they are all looking forward to dying... in battle. They want only to take part in the great hunt in the next world.

Instead of guitars, picture those guys in the video carrying battle axes. The Grizzly Adams look-a-like isn't banging on his drums, he's now paddling his boat. And don't get me started on the Viking women... they are part of this impending invasion.

They mean harm. And they are looking forward to it.

End scene.

----------


## nordicwarrior

**EDIT**

Eagle Brother... Oslo Opera House 2009 Mari Boine

Goaskin... can't spell it.

----------


## Nobody1

I also do not consider the Norsemen [Vikings/Varangians] as "overrated" or over-romanticized;

Bold adventurers and warriors that created a settlement and trade-network from Greenland - Nowgorod; 
All connected with a great culture which is everlasting manifested in the Norse Mythology and Sagas;


Sure, the Norseman also suffered great defeats, like the *Siege of Dorostolon*; 
But their reputation in bravery and loyalty (also cruelty) was so greatly appreciated that they were largely employed as mercenaries and guards by other foreign Kingdoms and Rulers; 
Their christianised descendants the Normans, were masters of the pitched battle; (tragically) defeating the Varangian Guard (Byzantine) in the* Battle of Dyrracheum*; [_Varangians were the only ones fighting, the Byzantines largely fled the field_]

The Norsemen did get a good press in the medieval times from *Ahmad ibn Fadlan*; 
very interesting chronicle and account;

Also to note (trade) the settlement of *Haithabu* (Queen of the Baltic);

Famous *Piraeus Lion* - inscriptions from Norse mercenaries [_in Byzantine service_]

----------


## hope

> I pretty much agree with all of your comments on this thread Hope, except for one. I think the main musical theme of "Vikings" should have been a part of Mari Boine's song which I'm having problems linking to on this site. It has 160,000+ views and the particular piece I'm referring to runs over eight minutes. Give it a few minutes of listening time and you'll see what I'm talking about. EDIT-- Eagle Brother.
> 
> Close your eyes and picture yourself a member of an opposing tribe while listening to this song, one that Vikings are going to invade next. 
> 
> It's a cold, misty evening. Like most of the evenings you've experienced in your life. The sun is setting. The people playing this music are coming for you. Their boats are faster than your boats. They are bigger than you. They are stronger than you. They are meaner than you. Death does not scare them... they are all looking forward to dying... in battle. They want only to take part in the great hunt in the next world.
> 
> Instead of guitars, picture those guys in the video carrying battle axes. Grizzly Adams isn't banging on drums, he's paddling the boat. And don't get me started on the Viking women...
> 
> They mean harm. And they are looking forward to it.
> ...




Yes, I will check that piece out  :Good Job:

----------


## LeBrok

> And thet new series running "Vikings" lol. [Actually a bit of a disappointment that one IMO.] ..[except for the theme music which is rather good]


I have same feelings about this series. Maybe my expectations were too high. :)

----------


## LeBrok

> Also to note (trade) the settlement of *Haithabu* (Queen of the Baltic);
> 
> [_in Byzantine service_]


Did you ever find any references of Vikings in Island of Volin (Wolin), between current Poland and Germany.

----------


## LeBrok

> Their christianised descendants the Normans, were masters of the pitched battle; (tragically) defeating the Varangian Guard (Byzantine) in the* Battle of Dyrracheum*; [_Varangians were the only ones fighting, the Byzantines largely fled the field_]


It is a great argument to the discussion who is more social and who's more individualistic. Bunch of brothers sticking together til death.

----------


## Nobody1

> Did you ever find any references of Vikings in Island of Volin (Wolin), between current Poland and Germany.


Yes of course Jomsburg, _Joms-Wikinger_

*J B Burry* - Cambridge Medival History
_According to Iomsvikinga-saga, in the vicinity of the Slav sea and commercial town Volin (Slav), Winetha (Saxon), Iulin or Iumin (Danish), mentioned by Ibrahim and the German chroniclers, the Iomsburg, a sea fort, was built by Danish pirates about 970, and according to Orderic Vitalis (b. 1075) the German gods Wodan, Thor, and Frigg were worshipped in a district of the Lyutitzi at the mouth of the Oder._ 

I have to check it up, but remember that the Joms-Vikings were saved? by a Polish King (pos. Boleslaw Chrobry) and part of the Joms nobility was Slavic; But Jomsburg is still very Mysterious;

----------


## nordicwarrior

It's interesting that we are all watching the same television series, almost as soon as it was released. U.S., Canada, and Ireland by the looks of it. Maybe many other countries also?

----------


## Barantes

I don't think their braveness is up for discussion, they were clearly pretty badass. What some people seem to be bothered by is that their have been many tough people in history eg. Celts, Germanic peoples, Slavic tribes. I'm just wondering is there something about them that made them stand out so much more than the others (Just trying to keep the discussion going).

----------


## nordicwarrior

Combination of strength, intelligence, speed, classic "look".

Some of the same reasons why the 1968 Ford Mustang is the ultimate muscle car. Some things rise to the top. Difficult to explain at times.

----------


## toyomotor

I don't think that the Vikings are overrated, quite the contrary. Their seamanship and international trade alone makes them one of the most influential groups in early medieval times. There is no doubt that Vikings were the first Europeans to reach North America, and if they can be believed, there are stories of them possibly reaching north eastern Australia, and looking at maps of the time, that is a possibility waiting to be proven.

----------


## Barantes

> I don't think that the Vikings are overrated, quite the contrary. Their seamanship and international trade alone makes them one of the most influential groups in early medieval times. There is no doubt that Vikings were the first Europeans to reach North America, and if they can be believed, there are stories of them possibly reaching north eastern Australia, and looking at maps of the time, that is a possibility waiting to be proven.


This is true and there's no question to your claim, but some people seem to be more fascinated at the warrior aspect with the "horned helmets" (they didn't use those) and battle axe (often not used either), but why were they given these stereotypes, there must be a reason why it was them and not another group of people don't you think?

----------


## Barantes

If they were seen as great sea farers and tradesmen. Or that they made very good ships and craftsmen and discovered many new settlements, then that would be fine and the fact that they were awesome warriors was a bonus. But there seems to be so much fixation on them as warriors that gets me that I feel other people throughout history acted similar but don't get the same recognition.

----------


## Barantes

Possibly, if you're referencing Vikings, which is a Canadian show I believe filmed in Ireland, so it would make sense to be released there. America gets most shows, and GoT plays anywhere with HBO. Depends on the relevance of the genre to the area. Vikings in the British Isles I'm sure they're interested by it.

----------


## LeBrok

> Yes of course Jomsburg, _Joms-Wikinger_
> 
> *J B Burry* - Cambridge Medival History
> _According to Iomsvikinga-saga, in the vicinity of the Slav sea and commercial town Volin (Slav), Winetha (Saxon), Iulin or Iumin (Danish), mentioned by Ibrahim and the German chroniclers, the Iomsburg, a sea fort, was built by Danish pirates about 970, and according to Orderic Vitalis (b. 1075) the German gods Wodan, Thor, and Frigg were worshipped in a district of the Lyutitzi at the mouth of the Oder._ 
> 
> I have to check it up, but remember that the Joms-Vikings were saved? by a Polish King (pos. Boleslaw Chrobry) and part of the Joms nobility was Slavic; But Jomsburg is still very Mysterious;


Not much about this in polish history, just picked up on it recently. I think it was a particular combination of Slavs and Vikings in this area. 
They also found this dated 10th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolin
It looks more like Swiatowit, the Slavic deity than Thor or Wodan. Perhaps is from pre Viking era.
Nevertheless very interesting twist in history, at least for me.

----------


## Barantes

Viking migrations were surprisingly extensive into Eastern Europe. Just on he top of Poland it seems and pretty well all the way down if you go more east 793px-Viking_Expansion.svg.jpg

----------


## MOESAN

> I think its supposed over-romantization today is due to the impact left by some nationalist English historians of Victorian era when they rediscovered the Icelandic sagas and (which idolized them as 'supernatural- warriors' in literature)..
> But why do you, a Portuguese, care about it, a thing too distant for you? Such one worshipping sounds harmless to me.


_curious remark of you, no?
why a stranger would not have some interest in other ethnic groups or in other countries history? everybody would have only right to question his own origins and nothing else?
no offense, of course..._
concerning Vikings, I think they showed a very good sense of trade, political strength rapports and organization sense too, without speaking about their physical courage...

----------


## Templar

> I'm just wondering is there something about them that made them stand out so much more than the others (Just trying to keep the discussion going).


Perhaps their higher percentage of paleolithic European blood gave them higher testosterone, a larger frame, bigger bones, larger muscles, etc.

----------


## Jackson

Overrated...probably not...over-popularized...definitely.

----------


## Wilhelm

Overrated yes defintaley, but that started by 19th century nordic romanticists.

----------


## edao

Viking overrated?!?!? Try one Mr Christopher Columbus  :Annoyed: 

Viking in America

----------


## MOESAN

I was looking for a thread to put my "egg":
maybe this post could be transferred to a genetic one? but it concerns history too and the place made to Vikings in Britain
this is a Britain DNA map (up to date I think, and through their methods - the post I received was not too precise (commercial approach) but I think the results are based upon autosomals (what discrimination criteria? I don't know) because the Y-HGs distribution are different in Scotland where Hebrides Islands had more Viking male than female when Orkney Shetland had a more equilibrated "package")

just for information (if it is valuable)

----------


## MOESAN

Shetland 29,2%
Orkney 25,2%
N Highlands Caithness 17,5%
NW Hebrides Skye Lewis 11,3%
E Hebrides NW Highlands 9,9%
W Highlands Argyle 5,8%
NE Grampians 4,9%
C + CE Scotland Aberdeen 2,2%
SW Scotland Ayr Galloway... 3,2%
SE Scotland Edinburgh 2,7%


N + NW England 4,0%
Yorks 5,6%
East Anglia 3,6%
C CW England 2,6%
W + SW England + Cornwall 1,6%
SE England 1,9%


Wales 1,0%


Uslter 1,4%
Connaught 1,2%
Munster 1,3%
Leinster 1,0%

Caithness, Zetland and Orkney are considered as equilibrated concerning males and female Vikings
Hebrides are considered as having known almost only male Vikings
as a whole these estimations seem sensible
skaal!!!

----------


## mihaitzateo

I think in some places they are overrated.

----------


## Aberdeen

The R1b Vikings were definitely over-rated, IMO. However, the proper I1 Vikings were, if anything, under-rated.

Seriously though, I doubt it's possible to over-rate the Vikings. They founded the Russian monarchy, served as soldiers in Byzantium and conquered large parts of Europe. They ruled England briefly, under King Canute, and held the Danegeld for centuries. And they conquered Ireland and ruled it for a time until the Celts defeated them at Clontarf. People in large parts of western Europe used to regularly pray "From the fury of the Northmen, oh Lord, deliver us!"

As for the modern over-popularization, with the fake horned helmets, I think that came about because much of western Europe had been fascinated with Vikings for centuries. When the Victorians discovered those old tales about the ferocious Vikings, the last wave of Pagan warriors to be unleashed on the farming population of Europe, it made for a good story, one that would have been undercut if the story tellers had presented a more balanced version of events that discussed the skill of the Northmen as traders and settlers. So 19th century Europe, especially the English, romanticized the more brutal aspect of Viking culture, and those stories were just sitting there waiting for Hollywood to exploit. I once watched a very bad American "Viking" movie that featured Eric the Red being played by someone with a thick Texan accent. Hilarious.

----------


## Aberdeen

I notice that the poll actually asked whether Vikings are over-romanticized. I voted yes to that, but it doesn't mean I think Vikings are over-rated, which is what is asked in the title of the thread.

----------


## GloomyGonzales

> They founded the Russian monarchy, served as soldiers in Byzantium...


Where the hell did you get this BS? For a while all tested memebers of Rurik clan have only clades typical for Eastern Europe and Southern Baltic. Y-dna clades typical for Scandinavia are very very scarce in Russia and other Eastern European countries and in opposite we have a lot of Y-dna haplos typical for Eastern Europe in Scandinavia.

----------


## Aberdeen

> Where the hell did you get this BS? For a while all tested memebers of Rurik clan have only clades typical for Eastern Europe and Southern Baltic. Y-dna clades typical for Scandinavia are very very scarce in Russia and other Eastern European countries and in opposite we have a lot of Y-dna haplos typical for Eastern Europe in Scandinavia.


Here are a few excerpts from a Wikipedia entry about the origins of Russia. Yah, I know, Wikipedia. But it matches what I've read in actual history books.

The *Rus'* (Slavic: Русь; Greek: Ῥῶς) — ancient people who gave their name to the lands of Russia and Belarus. Their origin and identity are much in dispute. Russian scholars, along with some Westerners, consider the Rus to be a southeastern Slavic tribe that founded a tribal league - the Kievan state. Ibn Khordadbeh, a Persian geographer of the 9th century also believed the Rus people are Slavic. Traditional Western scholars believe them to be a group of Varangians — diverse groups of Norsemen.[1][2][3][4] According to the Primary Chronicle of Rus', compiled in about 1113 AD, the Rus' had relocated "from over sea", first to northeastern Europe, creating an early polity that finally came under the leadership of Rurik. Later, Rurik's relative Oleg captured Kiev, founding Kievan Rus'.[5][6] The descendants of Rurik were the ruling dynasty of Rus' (after 862), and of principalities created in the area formerly occupied by Kievan Rus', Galicia-Volhynia (after 1199), Chernigov, Vladimir-Suzdal, Grand Duchy of Moscow, and the founders of the Tsardom of Russia.[7]


According to the most prevalent theory, the name _Rus_', like the Finnish name for Sweden (_Ruotsi_), is derived from an Old Norse term for "the men who row" (_rods-_) as rowing was the main method of navigating the rivers of Eastern Europe, and that it could be linked to the Swedish coastal area of Roslagen (_Rus-law_) or _Roden_, as it was known in earlier times.[1][8][9] The name _Rus'_ would then have the same origin as the Finnish and Estonian names for Sweden: _Ruotsi_ and _Rootsi_.[1]


Having settled Aldeigja (Ladoga) in the 750s, Scandinavian colonists played an important role in the early ethnogenesis of the Rus' people and in the formation of the Rus' Khaganate. The Varangians (_Varyags_, in Old East Slavic) are first mentioned by the Primary Chronicle as having exacted tribute from the Slavic and Finnic tribes in 859. It was the time of rapid expansion of the Vikings in Northern Europe; England began to pay Danegeld in 859, and the Curonians of Grobin faced an invasion by the Swedes at about the same date.
Due largely to geographic considerations, it is often argued that most of the Varangians who traveled and settled in the eastern Baltic, Russia and lands to the south came from the area of modern Sweden .[16]
The Varangians left a number of rune stones in their native Sweden that tell of their journeys to what is today Russia, Ukraine, Greece, and Belarus. Most of these rune stones can be seen today, and are a telling piece of historical evidence. The Varangian runestones tell of many notable Varangian expeditions, and even account for the fates of individual warriors and travelers.
The Vikings allegedly had some enduring influence in Rus, as testified by loan words _(these ones persist from_ _Glagolitic__ script at Adriatic_ prior and out _of any Vikings)_, such as _yabeda_ "complaining person" (from _æmbætti_, _embætti_ "office"), _skot_ [17] "cattle" (? from _skattr_ "tax") and knout (from _knútr_, "a knotty wood").[_citation needed_] Moreover three Nordic names of the first Varangian rulers also became popular among the later Rurikids and then among the East Slavic people in general: Oleg (Helgi), Olga (Helga) and Igor (Ingvar).

----------


## mihaitzateo

> The R1b Vikings were definitely over-rated, IMO. However, the proper I1 Vikings were, if anything, under-rated.
> 
> Seriously though, I doubt it's possible to over-rate the Vikings. They founded the Russian monarchy, served as soldiers in Byzantium and conquered large parts of Europe. They ruled England briefly, under King Canute, and held the Danegeld for centuries. And they conquered Ireland and ruled it for a time until the Celts defeated them at Clontarf. People in large parts of western Europe used to regularly pray "From the fury of the Northmen, oh Lord, deliver us!"
> 
> As for the modern over-popularization, with the fake horned helmets, I think that came about because much of western Europe had been fascinated with Vikings for centuries. When the Victorians discovered those old tales about the ferocious Vikings, the last wave of Pagan warriors to be unleashed on the farming population of Europe, it made for a good story, one that would have been undercut if the story tellers had presented a more balanced version of events that discussed the skill of the Northmen as traders and settlers. So 19th century Europe, especially the English, romanticized the more brutal aspect of Viking culture, and those stories were just sitting there waiting for Hollywood to exploit. I once watched a very bad American "Viking" movie that featured Eric the Red being played by someone with a thick Texan accent. Hilarious.


Well according to genetic testing those people who founded Russia were rather Scandinavians - non -viking people.
You can see that is plenty of Scandinavian admixture in average Russian,but paternal lines from Russia,compared to Scandinavia,are not that closed,instead,the paternal lines from Russia are closed to Baltic countries.
I do not think all Scandinavians who were good fighters were vikings,I think rather the people from the Western Coast of Scandinavia were Vikings.

----------


## Nobody1

> Well according to genetic testing those people who founded Russia were rather Scandinavians - non -viking people.
> You can see that is plenty of Scandinavian admixture in average Russian,but paternal lines from Russia,compared to Scandinavia,are not that closed,instead,the paternal lines from Russia are closed to Baltic countries.
> I do not think all Scandinavians who were good fighters were vikings,I think rather the people from the Western Coast of Scandinavia were Vikings.


But arent those genetic testings based on two Russian brothers (of nobility) that simply claim direct descent/lineage from Rurik? The way i understood it is that their Y-DNA Hg is thus taken as representative for Rurik and the Varangians/Rus'; Now i seriously have my doubts whether these brothers are actual (let alone direct) descendants of Rurik to begin with; Data from actual Varangians/Rus' need to be obtained for a proper picture;

----------


## Aberdeen

> Well according to genetic testing those people who founded Russia were rather Scandinavians - non -viking people.
> You can see that is plenty of Scandinavian admixture in average Russian,but paternal lines from Russia,compared to Scandinavia,are not that closed,instead,the paternal lines from Russia are closed to Baltic countries.
> I do not think all Scandinavians who were good fighters were vikings,I think rather the people from the Western Coast of Scandinavia were Vikings.


I'm going to once more commit the cardinal sin of using Wikipedia as a reference, simply because the passage I'm going to quote accords with what I've read on the subject and I can't be bothered to comb through my own library or go to the university library to look for a suitable quote from a more credible source. But, basically, the Swedes who travelled afar to trade and raid were vikings.

"The Swedish Viking Age lasted roughly between the 8th and 11th centuries. It is believed that Swedish Vikings and Gutar mainly travelled east and south, going to Finland, the Baltic countries, Russia, Belarus,Ukraine, the Black Sea and further as far as Baghdad. Their routes passed through the Dnieper south to Constantinople, on which they carried out numerous raids. The Byzantine Emperor Theophilos noticed their great skills in war, and invited them to serve as his personal bodyguard, known as the Varangian Guard. The Swedish Vikings, called Rus are believed to be the founding fathers of Kievan Rus'. The Arab traveller Ibn Fadlan described these Vikings as follows:I have seen the Rus as they came on their merchant journeys and encamped by the Itil. I have never seen more perfect physical specimens, tall as date palms, blond and ruddy; they wear neither tunics nor caftans, but the men wear a garment which covers one side of the body and leaves a hand free. Each man has an axe, a sword, and a knife, and keeps each by him at all times. The swords are broad and grooved, of Frankish sort.[25]The adventures of these Swedish Vikings are commemorated on many runestones in Sweden, such as the Greece Runestones and the Varangian Runestones. There was also considerable participation in expeditions westwards, which are commemorated on stones such as the England Runestones. The last major Swedish Viking expedition appears to have been the ill-fated expedition of Ingvar the Far-Travelledto Serkland, the region south-east of the Caspian Sea. Its members are commemorated on the Ingvar Runestones, none of which mentions any survivor. What happened to the crew is unknown, but it is believed that they died of sickness.

----------


## mihaitzateo

> But arent those genetic testings based on two Russian brothers (of nobility) that simply claim direct descent/lineage from Rurik? The way i understood it is that their Y-DNA Hg is thus taken as representative for Rurik and the Varangians/Rus'; Now i seriously have my doubts whether these brothers are actual (let alone direct) descendants of Rurik to begin with; Data from actual Varangians/Rus' need to be obtained for a proper picture;


According to some historical writings,some Rurik descendant was having hundreds of lovers,spread in Russia.
So they say Rurik was some branch of N1,Scandinavian branch.
If he was having so many lovers,how come this Scandinavian branch is not more often found in Russia paternal lines?
I suppose most of the Rus Scandinavians were having many women,so I think their paternal lines should be quite present,in today Russians.
I have seen some K36 results of a Russian and he was having about 20% FenoScandian admixture.
Maybe is not only from Rus Scandinavians is also from mixing of Slavs with Feno-Ugrian people.
Anyway,I think that the influence of Vikings in UK is largely over-rated,from how most UK people are looking,they do not have strong Viking 
genetics. Normans are said to have been mostly Vikings,but who knows if they were not mostly French people?
If Vikings were such great warriors,how come they could not conquer Ireland and Scotland?
The paternal lines in Ireland are showing few Viking paternal lines,maybe maximum 10% of these are of Viking ancestry.

----------


## GloomyGonzales

> I'm going to once more commit the cardinal sin of using Wikipedia as a reference, simply because the passage I'm going to quote accords with what I've read on the subject and I can't be bothered to comb through my own library or go to the university library to look for a suitable quote from a more credible source. But, basically, the Swedes who travelled afar to trade and raid were vikings.
> 
> "The Swedish Viking Age lasted roughly between the 8th and 11th centuries. It is believed that Swedish Vikings and Gutar mainly travelled east and south, going to Finland, the Baltic countries, Russia, Belarus,Ukraine, the Black Sea and further as far as Baghdad. Their routes passed through the Dnieper south to Constantinople, on which they carried out numerous raids. The Byzantine Emperor Theophilos noticed their great skills in war, and invited them to serve as his personal bodyguard, known as the Varangian Guard. The Swedish Vikings, called Rus are believed to be the founding fathers of Kievan Rus'. The Arab traveller Ibn Fadlan described these Vikings as follows:I have seen the Rus as they came on their merchant journeys and encamped by the Itil. I have never seen more perfect physical specimens, tall as date palms, blond and ruddy; they wear neither tunics nor caftans, but the men wear a garment which covers one side of the body and leaves a hand free. Each man has an axe, a sword, and a knife, and keeps each by him at all times. The swords are broad and grooved, of Frankish sort.[25]The adventures of these Swedish Vikings are commemorated on many runestones in Sweden, such as the Greece Runestones and the Varangian Runestones. There was also considerable participation in expeditions westwards, which are commemorated on stones such as the England Runestones. The last major Swedish Viking expedition appears to have been the ill-fated expedition of Ingvar the Far-Travelledto Serkland, the region south-east of the Caspian Sea. Its members are commemorated on the Ingvar Runestones, none of which mentions any survivor. What happened to the crew is unknown, but it is believed that they died of sickness.


All this is no more than BS. No one Scandinavian drakkar was ever found in Russia. From genetic point of view the stories about Sweden Vikings travelling by Russian rivers and establishing the first Russian state look absolutely unconvincing since typical Scandinavian clades of Y-dna practically absent in Russia. 
Furthermore, the viking was not exclusive Scandinavian lifestyle it was all Baltic phenomenon. Vikings from Southern Baltic for example raided Sweden and Finland. So when we talk about vikings we should take into account that they could originate from any part of Baltic sea shore.

----------


## mihaitzateo

> All this is no more than BS. No one Scandinavian drakkar was ever found in Russia. From genetic point of view the stories about Sweden Vikings travelling by Russian rivers and establishing the first Russian state look absolutely unconvincing since typical Scandinavian clades of Y-dna practically absent in Russia. 
> Furthermore, the viking was not exclusive Scandinavian lifestyle it was all Baltic phenomenon. Vikings from Southern Baltic for example raided Sweden and Finland. So when we talk about vikings we should take into account that they could originate from any part of Baltic sea shore.


There are archeological discoveries related to Scandinavians in Russia.

----------


## GloomyGonzales

> There are archeological discoveries related to Scandinavians in Russia.


And what? There was extensive trade between Northern Russian regions and Scandinavia so no wonder that some Scandinavian stuff was found in Northern Russia as well as typical Slavic stuff was found in Finland and Sweden.

----------


## mihaitzateo

> And what? There was extensive trade between Northern Russian regions and Scandinavia so no wonder that some Scandinavian stuff was found in Northern Russia as well as typical Slavic stuff was found in Finland and Sweden.


There is significant,if not lots of FenoScandian admixture in average Russian.
On k36 results,average Russian scores as much FenoScandian admixture,as average South Swede.
How can you explain that?

----------


## Aberdeen

> All this is no more than BS. No one Scandinavian drakkar was ever found in Russia. From genetic point of view the stories about Sweden Vikings travelling by Russian rivers and establishing the first Russian state look absolutely unconvincing since typical Scandinavian clades of Y-dna practically absent in Russia. 
> Furthermore, the viking was not exclusive Scandinavian lifestyle it was all Baltic phenomenon. Vikings from Southern Baltic for example raided Sweden and Finland. So when we talk about vikings we should take into account that they could originate from any part of Baltic sea shore.


No. The word "viking" specifically refers to Scandinavians, regardless of what the Balts were doing. And there's a lot of evidence of the role Scandinavians played in helping to shape early Russian history. But if you want to write your own version of history, I can't be bothered arguing with you.

----------


## MOESAN

Britains DNA (autosomals mad?) estimation


Orkney Shetland 29% / W-Caithness InnerHebrides 10% / Hebrides (isles) 11% / E-Caithness 18% / N-E(Grampians) 5% / Argyle W-Highlands 6% / Central Scotland 2% SWScotland+Borders 3% SE Scotland+Borders 3% / Man 12% / North England+ Lancashire 4% / Yorkshire 6% / West England Midlands 3% /Lincoln-E-Anglia 4% / SE England 2% / SW England 2% (Cornwall drownin it) / Wales 1% / Munster 1% / Leinster 1% / Connaught 1% / Ulster1%


surprise with Ireland!

----------


## Dalmat

Vikings ravaged trough Western Europeans like hot knife trough butter.


I think they are bit overated tho, because they were actually not legendary warriors as described in various modern legends, but raiders and pirates, who picked easy targets

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Let me begin with this, I don't mean to offend anyone this is just a question I am curious about. There are many who feel that the Viking age has been over-romanticized and they are in fact not as fierce of warriors as many would make them out to be. I am just curious about your opinions on the matter, you can state whether you feel they are or they aren't. Giving reasons to back your answers would also be appreciated.


Good question.

----------


## MOESAN

Vikings


Overrated ? Not sure –over-romanticized ? Sure !
Some points to consider : thefirst Northmen (Vikings) are not to be confused with the laterNorman(d)s – three-four centuries separate them, with the followingresults : intermarriages with natives, noble people or not –incorporation in the feudal system, far enough from the firstscandinavian model which was more egalitarian and clanic in the sametime – less hazard, more calculations in prospections - 
to come back to the first Vikings, theyprofited at first of the surprise effect, it is sure – but evenlater when Europeans « states » were aware of theirdangerousness, they remained fearce warriors and took the strong sideupon well trained armies – surely their mobility gave them someadvantage over the heavy armies of the time but...
they colonized Iceland, the Greenland,the Feroe's, they raided and submitted the Ireland and Britaincoasts, they (at least the Danes ones) obliged the Anglo-Saxonskingdoms to pay them the 'danegeld' and in the 9° century theyobliged too the Frank king and the Breton duke Nominoe to pay this'danegeld' more than a time, they pushed the Breton gentry and clergyto flee off two times during the 10° century, even if finally theywere swept off two times too by these Bretons, these ones sometimeshelped by Saxon troops (before that some Viking traitors had alreadyhelped Breton chiefs) - their internal political problems inScandinavia also played a part here – during the 9° century, notonly they raided the Western Isles and the Atlantic regions, but theyimposed themselves all over the North Sea shores, in the Netherlands,in Germany, in Belgium, without speak about the South baltic coasts –if Brittany and England escaped the definitive shame, France kingdomleft them the territory of Normandy in the beginning of the 10°century -
we cannot desprise the Vikings weightin battles nor their militar worth : they could sometimes preset500 ships (one of their chiefs, Weland, payed by Charles le Chauvein 860, could gather 200 ships under his orders) – but it isnot their number only which gave them power : they obtained'danegeld' sometimes even against more numerous armies –more than a time they were defeated by Europeans helped by otherViking mercenaries or defeated by famine and plague – atthese times, if they would have been completely united, they wouldhave been harder enemies yet... they were not afraid by raids intomainland, far from the seeshores : they raided Burgundy too !
Soo, do not under-estimate the Vikingfactor in Europe destiny at these times - 
the later 'Norman(d)s' were partlyassimilited people, crossed as genetically as culturally – theWilliam the Bastard troops of 1066 (England conquest) were full orBretons little noblemen (1/3! one of them, Alan, ancestor of theStuart family) and Pickards and Flemings ! For a long time yetFrance Normands and Bretons had some inequal relations the ones with the others – after his conquest, William had done a stage back inNormandy (Barfleur?), having send a man to collect songs from a 'redlady', a breton female singer (« bardess »?) - 


concerning genetic traces :
three aspects : Y HGs, mt HGs andautosomals : I gave you the Britain DNA results (autosomals)which make sense for me as a whole, the only surprise being the verylow level (1%) among all the irish regions(even supposed Viking names as Doyle (Dougall) are born by Y-R1b-L21males if I remind well) – in Scotland and England and Wales theresults seem very sensible – 
possibleexplanation : it is sometimes very difficult to weight therespective importance of purely « scandinavian » genes infront of the « north-germanic » genes and even some« celtic » ones ! But in Ireland the germanic geneswere surely very very scarce – what seems more evident is that inIreland, the Norwegian Vikings did not send many scandinavian femalesand took the celt ones – in Scotland we see big discrepancyaccording to subregions : Orkney-Shetland and Caithness areconsidered as equilibrated males-females Vikings colonizations whenHebrides and N-W Highlands, and Iceland too in a less marked way, areconsidered as dominantly male biased colonizations – Caithness andOrkney seem less « viking » than the Hebrides concerningmales markers, but for autosomals Orkney is more « viking »,and Caithness is almost the same as the Hebrides, spite the « male »differences - 
anddo'nt forget some Gaels took the Viking way of life aftersometimes – the clans of NWScotland were very often founded by Scandinavians males ;whatever the gaelic form of the most of their names: MacDonald(McDonell), MacDougall (McDowell), MacLeod, MacQueen(McSwan/McSweyn), Macaulay (McCauley) (Ollason in Orkney/Shetland),Gunn, Lamont (Lamond/Lamondson), MacLachlan, Sutherland (linked toancestors of Murray's) – all the way all these male Vikingsdescendants took the gaelic language in place of their germanic(norse) one, confirming the female celtic weight, except theOrkney-Shetland ones - 


concerningEngland I red _(againand again and... boring)_that English people cannot have Viking blood because they seem toofar from the nordic model : here again we confuse Anglo-Saxonsof the old time with « Brits » citizens of today, weforget that Anglo-Saxons and Frisians were physically close toancient Scandinavians, and we forget that not long agothe far North and very Eastern English people were very more'nordic'like than today : only 50 years ago, the fishers andpeasants of these old germanic lands of England were taller, blonder,and spite variated, more on the model of Dutch or Scandinavian peoplethan were big towns English people, these last ones a mix of all thepre- and historic populations of the isles (I don't speak here ofCornwall or Wales which are farther yet from the model!) -
Iknow a bit about this stuff ! I saw the growing of the « celt »physical influence upon English people in the industrial regions ofBritain : Irish people born numerous families, the density ofscottish, irish, welsh names (these ones not always easilyrecognizable it is true: Jones, Williams, Davies, Thomas and Co)grew in % during these 50 last years – I don't speak about the morerecent immigrations from everywhere, even if we discard Pakistaneseor other dark skinned people
_timepasses by and populations change : but we have to respecthistory – the very light impact of scandinavian genes (even malemarkers) among Russian of Today doesn't disprove the part of swedeVarangians in old times – and as I'm speaking about « scandinavianphysical model » (an ancient stable and peculiar mix) I cantell you the today Malmö inhabitants are no more the same mixture asin recent past andso some gifted and auto-inspired spirits could say today that Vikingswere not Vikings and why not, never existed !Too much people are rewriting History, everyday ! Do let that topoliticians, please ! We can improve History veracity, OK, it 'snot making new fairy tales after being crashed the wholework done before -_ 




Balticor Slavic Vikings : what weight and where did they « worked » ?What sources, too ?

----------


## Yetos

VIKINGS

3 thinks for all to reconsider, and 2 are written here,

1rst, When a warrior died, they 'force' women to follow him,

2nd When Byzantines and West Europeans follow or hide in Abbeys and monasteries, hoping to a peacefull life in the 'hug' of church, and afraid 'hell' more than death, vikings were Free, of all these,
they did not fear death and hell, their death destiny was Wallhala, think of that, at battle of Majikert estimated that orthodox monasteries were overcrowded, hundrends thousands went to avoid join the army, which was a life time (from 15-16 to 45-50).

3rd Gold and women, being out of christian rules, they could easily raid and fight so to buy wine and women back home.

----------


## Vedun

"There are archeological discoveries related to Scandinavians in Russia."

Not at all... There was not found 1 single "Viking" grave in Russia. Even more, Swedish language contains at least 300 Slavic words that i've counted so far which aren't of "germanic origin". 

Vikings were Swedish Jarls and have nothing to do with Slavic Russian Variags or Vagrians. Vagrians were a Slavic tribe which originated from current Poland and Germany. Their capital city was called Stargard (according to Adam von Bremen) or Stargrad ("Old city"). Gard was old name for Grad ("city") . After their unification with Russians they've moved their capital city to Novgorod, which means "New city". And yes the Vikings are overrated.

----------


## FrankN

> "There are archeological discoveries related to Scandinavians in Russia."
> 
> Not at all... There was not found 1 single "Viking" grave in Russia. Even more, Swedish language contains at least 300 Slavic words that i've counted so far which aren't of "germanic origin". 
> 
> Vikings were Swedish Jarls and have nothing to do with Slavic Russian Variags or Vagrians. Vagrians were a Slavic tribe which originated from current Poland and Germany. Their capital city was called Stargard (according to Adam von Bremen) or Stargrad. Gard was old name for Grad ("city") . After their unification with Russians they've moved their capital city to Novgorod, which means "New city". And yes the Vikings are overrated.


Stargard is today's Oldenburg / Holstein (=old castle, same name, one time the Slavic, the other time the Low German version). There is a nice museum about the excavations, maybe you should visit it. The oldest city wall dates to the early 7th century, when Slavs had not yet arrived in the area (guess why they called it "old"). It was neither Viking nor Varangian, but a typical West Baltic trading town with a mixed Slavic-Saxon-Danish-Swedish population, similar to Liubice (Old Lübeck), Reric (near Wismar) or Wolin. There are dozens of Stargard / Stargrads along the Baltic coast and its hinterland, none of them is related to Novgorod. That "new town" replaced the nearby Varangian settlement of Old Ladoga. 

The Vikings were mythicized by early medieval Frankish scholars, who built them up as "evil pagans" to justify war against Saxons and, later on, Danes and West Slavs. During the last years, a major excavation was carried out in downtown Hamburg, at the supposed place of the first settlement. They especially looked for evidence of the 845 Viking raid. Guess what they found - a lot of settlement traces going back at least to the early 8th century, but no signs of violent destruction (no ash horizon etc.) during the 9th century. The same holds true for Cologne (also a reported target of Viking raids during the 9th century) - and believe me, there is hardly a city in Germany that has been as diligently screened by archaeologists as Cologne. I don't know about the situation in Paris, which according to Frankish chronicles was raided as well - maybe there is some truth in it (after all, the Vikings settled in Normandy to develop into Normans), but for Germany, most of what medieval sources tell about the Vikings doesn't match the archaeological record.

----------


## Yetos

> "There are archeological discoveries related to Scandinavians in Russia."
> 
> Not at all... There was not found 1 single "Viking" grave in Russia. Even more, Swedish language contains at least 300 Slavic words that i've counted so far which aren't of "germanic origin". 
> 
> Vikings were Swedish Jarls and have nothing to do with Slavic Russian Variags or Vagrians. Vagrians were a Slavic tribe which originated from current Poland and Germany. Their capital city was called Stargard (according to Adam von Bremen) or Stargrad. Gard was old name for Grad ("city") . After their unification with Russians they've moved their capital city to Novgorod, which means "New city". And yes the Vikings are overrated.


in early 20th century in Crimea some still spoke Gothic, that means that either Getae and Goths are the same, either Guts habbited Crimea.

----------


## Vedun

So? There were Turks who lived in Greece and Cyprus even in 1. century AD and before and spoke Turkish language. The world was much more diverse than you think...

----------


## Yetos

> So? There were Turks who lived in Greece and Cyprus even in 1. century AD and before and spoke Turkish language. The world was much more diverse than you think...


although this is not an answer, yet Yes there could be turks, if we find linguistic or archaiology's evidence.

----------


## MOESAN

Vedun: 
could you, please, give us a list of these 300 slavic words in scandinavian languages without link with continental germanic? It would be very interested


NFrank:
I appreciate your love of precision anddocumentation-
just some points :
« mythicized « ?Perhaps... But not only Frankish scholars but Breton monks toodescribed the fear the Vikings spred in western Europe... theprotection against these pirates was part of the prayers at that time- For Normandy, it is a very good « leg » to pirates madeby a powerful king so... all the way Vikings norse gave usplacenames in Normandy and people surnames too, even in farnorth-eastern Brittany – it's history, not myth- concerningCologne/Köln I don't know and trust your lectures, all the way,Cologne (a celtic name, I think) is far from the northern shores ofGermany-
for physical anthropology, the 19th Cymaritime or rural population of Schlesvig-Holstein showed yetstatistical differences between the most maritime compared to mostinland ones, the first ones being more dolichocephalic and higherstatured, in short more 'nordiclike' (whatever the sense we put itit) – some « old » scholars attributed that to a Vikinginfluence : I have no archeology nor history record on thispossibility – it could have other (ancient and modern reasons), itis true so...

----------


## FrankN

> Vedun: 
> could you, please, give us a list of these 300 slavic words in scandinavian languages without link with continental germanic? It would be very interested
> 
> 
> NFrank:
> I appreciate your love of precision anddocumentation-
> just some points :
> « mythicized « ?Perhaps... But not only Frankish scholars but Breton monks toodescribed the fear the Vikings spred in western Europe... theprotection against these pirates was part of the prayers at that time- For Normandy, it is a very good « leg » to pirates madeby a powerful king so... all the way Vikings norse gave usplacenames in Normandy and people surnames too, even in farnorth-eastern Brittany – it's history, not myth- concerningCologne/Köln I don't know and trust your lectures, all the way,Cologne (a celtic name, I think) is far from the northern shores ofGermany-
> for physical anthropology, the 19th Cymaritime or rural population of Schlesvig-Holstein showed yetstatistical differences between the most maritime compared to mostinland ones, the first ones being more dolichocephalic and higherstatured, in short more 'nordiclike' (whatever the sense we put itit) – some « old » scholars attributed that to a Vikinginfluence : I have no archeology nor history record on thispossibility – it could have other (ancient and modern reasons), itis true so...


I don't doubt that Normans settled in the Normandy, and Danes of course also collected the Danegeld in England. But the latter, I believe, wasn't extraordinary - collecting tribute was quite common practice since antiquity. 
The interesting thing is that Viking expansions into the North Sea, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean correspond to periods when there was shortage of supply of Arab silver to the Baltic Sea region. The economic base of the Vikings / Varangians was trade via Novgorod and the Kiev Rus (along the Volga and Dnieper rivers) with the Eastern Mediterranean, the Arab Caliphates, also the western end points of the Silk Road (and the Hanseatic League, after several wars with Denmark, later stepped into that business). Occasionally, you had some Tartars, Magyars etc. temporarily cutting of that trade link, and in those periods the Vikings turned westwards. When the Golden Horde finally closed the eastern trade route, the Normans re-oriented towards the Mediterranean and conquered Sicily as their new hub for trade with the orient.
Of course, when the first Viking pioneers started to look for alternative routes, they made the experience that their merchandise (amber, fur, honey, blonde hair etc.) wasn't nearly as popular along the Atlantic as in the Middle East. Seafaring makes hungry, and the wife at home expects some gold and silver, so what do you do? Robbing and looting. Not the nicest behaviour, but also not really extraordinary (->Crusaders, Arab & Barbary pirates, Venice, Sir Francis Drake, etc.)

As to Cologne, you really disappoint me. *Colonia Claudia Ara Augusta Aggripinensium* is of course a Roman name. Empress Agrippina honoured her home town and in 50 AD had it elevated to the provincial capital of Germania Inferior. Before, it was known as _oppidum ubiorum_. The Ubii, federates of Caesar, had been resettled by him from the right to the left bank of the Rhine to protect them from incursions by the Chatti (Hessians), and to repopulate the former terrain of the Celtic Eburones after their failed revolt in 54 BC. While Caesar lists the Ubii as Germanic, they had a number of Celtic cultural features, including minting own coins according to Gallo-Celtic standards (photo below). The former capital of the Eburones, Bonn (bona), however, has a Celtic name, as has Vindobona (Vienna). 
Cologne isn't further away from the coast than Paris, and it isn't that difficult to get there by boat up the Rhine. 


Along the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein, you primarily find Frisians. The North Frisians are believed to have immigrated from the Ems area around the 8th century. Further south, and along the banks of the Lower Elbe, the lands are quite flood prone and were hardly settled during the early medieval. Well, whom do you call in when it comes to building dykes and draining wetlands? Of course, the Dutch (or better- the coastal Dutch, i.e. the West Frisians) - they colonised the area during the High Medieval. Place names like Hollern, Hollenstedt, or "Altes Land" (<Hol-land) still testify that colonisation. Further inland was traditional Angles (Schleswig) and Saxon (Holstein) land, and East Holstein was Slavic until the 12th century, and then colonised by Saxons, Westphalians and Flemish.
The Frisians (West, East and North) were legendary pirates during the middle ages, and sailed to all parts of the world from the 16th century on, so we may have some kind of shared Viking-Frisian tradition here. There is surely also genetic linkage (yDNA I, etc.) but I suppose that linkage is much more ancient, and can't be attributed to the Vikings.

----------


## Vinnie

Vikings were pretty badass and taught the Celts a lesson, they would never forget.

----------


## Aberdeen

> Vikings were pretty badass and taught the Celts a lesson, they would never forget.


Are you referring to what happened at the Battle of Clontarf?

----------


## Vinnie

> Are you referring to what happened at the Battle of Clontarf?


No I'm not talking about alliances with Kelts.

----------


## Aberdeen

> No I'm not talking about alliances with Kelts.


I don't understand your comment. The Battle of Clontarf was not about an alliance between Vikings and Celts. It was a battle in which the Irish kicked the crap out of the Vikings and ended their influence in Ireland. I was just asking whether that was an example of what you said previously about the Vikings being "badass" and teaching the Celts a lesson they'd never forget. The actual historical events weren't quite as one sided as you seem to imagine.

----------


## Vinnie

> I don't understand your comment. The Battle of Clontarf was not about an alliance between Vikings and Celts. It was a battle in which the Irish kicked the crap out of the Vikings and ended their influence in Ireland. I was just asking whether that was an example of what you said previously about the Vikings being "badass" and teaching the Celts a lesson they'd never forget. The actual historical events weren't quite as one sided as you seem to imagine.


The *Battle of Clontarf* (Irish: _Cath Chluain Tarbh_) was a battle that took place on 23 April 1014 at Clontarf, near Dublin, on the east coast of Ireland. It pitted the forces of Brian Boru, high king of Ireland, against a* Viking-Irish alliance*.

----------


## Aberdeen

> The *Battle of Clontarf* (Irish: _Cath Chluain Tarbh_) was a battle that took place on 23 April 1014 at Clontarf, near Dublin, on the east coast of Ireland. It pitted the forces of Brian Boru, high king of Ireland, against a* Viking-Irish alliance*.


So it seems you're admitting that, even with the help of some renegade Irishmen, the Vikings were no match for the Celts.

----------


## Vinnie

If that was the case the Vikings did't not rule Dublin and parts of Ireland for an extended period..

_The Vikings conducted extensive raids in Ireland at first they founded Limerick in 812, then established a settlement near Waterford in 853, invaded Dublin and maintained control until 1169._

----------


## Vinnie

And obviously this explains the minor but still evident R1a1 in Northern Ireland ans Scotland.

----------


## MOESAN

[QUOTE=FrankN;435540] 



*Nfrank* _Moesan: his answer in oblique letters_ I don't doubt that Normans settled in the Normandy, and	Danes of course and also collected the Danegeld in England. But the	latter, I believe, wasn't extraordinary - collecting tribute was	quite common practice since antiquity.  _The danegeld was not a small tribute collected on the	cost of monks or peasants but on the cost of states – it makes	some difference_ The interesting thing is that Viking expansions into the	North Sea, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean correspond to periods	when there was shortage of supply of Arab silver to the Baltic Sea	region. The economic base of the Vikings / Varangians was trade via	Novgorod and the Kiev Rus (along the Volga and Dnieper rivers) with	the Eastern Mediterranean, the Arab Caliphates, also the western end	points of the Silk Road (and the Hanseatic League, after several	wars with Denmark, later stepped into that business). Occasionally,	you had some Tartars, Magyars etc. temporarily cutting of that trade	link, and in those periods the Vikings turned westwards. When the	Golden Horde finally closed the eastern trade route, the Normans	re-oriented towards the Mediterranean and conquered Sicily as their	new hub for trade with the orient.
Of course, when the first	Viking pioneers started to look for alternative routes, they made	the experience that their merchandise (amber, fur, honey, blonde	hair etc.) wasn't nearly as popular along the Atlantic as in the	Middle East. Seafaring makes hungry, and the wife at home expects	some gold and silver, so what do you do? Robbing and looting. Not	the nicest behaviour, but also not really extraordinary (→	Crusaders, Arab & Barbary pirates, Venice, Sir Francis Drake,	etc.)
_You seem having some historical sources I have not ;	but are you so sure the western activity of Vikings is so timingly	based (in details) upon periods of lost of commercial activities in	East ? The first bases chosen by them in Northwestern Europe	(their first appearance as Vikings about the 700/800's because the	eastern activities seem later, around the 1000(s I believe) are not	the more pleasant places and their activities there seem to me more	based upon hazard and some friends informations than upon a well	planned organization – organization came later – my old lectures	tell me (as you say) some commercial purposes came in the game but	it appears that Scandinavia was very populated at these times and	that the heritage system gave all the lands to the elder son putting	his brothers in a worst condition – it could be that Northern	Europe was yet well populated at these times and the Northern coasts	around the eastern part of the North Sea were not the best choice to	do – more pleasant coasts were in Northwestern and Western	Europe?__I think the period knew more than a cause to viking	raids PLUS emigration, not always in the same time__ (emigration and raids are not the same thing : Norvegians send	back home very few of their robberies and a majority of their	Vikings (not the whole population) stayed in some of their new	countries without return) – and Vikings in East_ _colonized	__some places and created markets about the 1000's without	ask permission of the previous populations : good trade or bad	trade the same – their most important markets were in North	Russia, no surprise here, and I'm not amazed that other places more	southern and timber built were destroyed and hardly found at all -	by the way, and it is for Vedun and other here active forumers, the	old name of Novgorod would have been_ _Holmgar__đ__r__ (14m depth of black deposit of human occupation !) - the Arabs	chronicler of the time seem having observed the weakness in	organization of the Slavic people of their epoch and, even if wrong,	I dont argue here, their « legend » concerning the Swede	rulers of Russia shows at least the strength of the Varengians and	other_ _'fellagar' (fellows!)__ commerce and	settlements – I cannot imagine all the historic texts about them	in different part of Russia would be only « old wives	chatter » (always for Vedun?here)_ _the late Normans colonizations in Southern Italy	about the 1040 are the fact of people who were no more Vikinged and	whose relations with the « Homeland é of Scandinavia	were cut, for I think - they were Norman(d)s mercenaries of the	Normandy low gentry , speaking a kind of french, of feudal	background -_   As to Cologne, you really disappoint me. *Colonia	Claudia Ara Augusta Aggripinensium* is of course a Roman name.	Empress Agrippina honoured her home town and in 50 AD had it	elevated to the provincial capital of Germania Inferior. Before, it	was known as _oppidum ubiorum_.  _I'm sorry for Cologne : I red I think it was at	first a celtic place or near to it – its current name is not	celtic, as you say !_ _I was not too affirmative as you	can see in my proper words__, I think I was influenced by	__Bologne/Bologna__ supposed to be a former_ _Bononia__ which name would have been celtic (fortified place) spite it finally	was reconquired by the Romans – excuse my poor old « first	generation » brain ! I could have verified before to	write..._ 
Cologne isn't further away from the coast than	Paris, and it isn't that difficult to get there by boat up the	Rhine.  _I agree – but according to more or less courage and	strength of the local defenders, places so far from sea are not the	best places for sea raiders : but no present trace don't	disprove a past battle somewhere – but colonization is an other	thing – and Paris owners did not give Paris to Normans, only the	more northern Normandy, more uneasy to defend..._   _my disgression about physical types in Schlesvig	contained my own doubts about these Viking theory – as you say,	people of the same old stock (like Frisians) held these places long	before and were not so weak to leave the ground – and other events	can have occurred long after the Vikings time -_   _&: thanks for your first work of analysing some	truly or so called slavic-scandinavic names without germanic	cognates or loans... As you write, a lot of them can be found in	other germanic languages or, even, more largely are I-Ean cognates_

----------


## FrankN

First of a series of answers - more to come:




> [I]The danegeld was not a small tribute collected on the cost of monks or peasants but on the cost of states – it makes some difference


Yes, it makes a difference, because collecting tribute was common practice. East Rome had paid off the Huns, the Avars, and probably also already the Goths before. The first record on the collection of Danegeld is by Bishop Ansgar of Hamburg-Bremen, who visited the Swedish capital of Birka in 829-31 and several times thereafter. In 840 a Danish army arrived at Birka and caught everybody by surprise. As the King with the Swedish army was elsewhere, the city commander paid off the Danes with 700 pounds silver, collected from the citizens, and they left. Further payments of Danegeld are reported for 845 (7,000 pounds) by the Frankish king to end the Danish siege of Paris, and several times thereafter. Contributions as part of a peace deal have been common until today; Germany last year finished paying its contribution as per the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. 

Vikings weren't unified. In fact, there have been at least three kingdoms, namely Sweden (Varangians), Danes, and Norwegians. They regularly also were at war with each other, for conquest, or in order to destroy competing trade ports. In 808, e.g. Danish Vikings destroyed the Obotrite trading place of Rerik (near Wismar), and resettled merchants from there to the Danish trade port of Haithabu (Schleswig). In 900, the Swedes took Haithabu, in 934 it was conquered by the Franks, retaken by the Danes in 983, conquered by Norwegians in 1050, and ultimately destroyed in 1066 by the Rani as a late revenge for the destruction of Rerik (note the year - the Danes had just been defeated in England). 
Around 940, the Danes founded Vineta/ Wolin as trading colony on the southern Balitc Sea. This lead to regular conflict with the neighbouring Slavic Rani (Rugani), who started to raid the Danish isles. The Rani also in 1100 unsuccessfully laid siege to Liubice (Lübeck), a major port of the Obotrites, who were allied with the Danes. In 1147, the Danes joined German and Saxon nobility in the Wendish crusade that broke the power of the Rani, and in 1168 conquered the Rani strongholds on the island of Rugen.

Essentially, what I want to say here is that most of the Vikings' actions were common practice of the time, not different from what Franks, Saxons and Slavs did (and Goths had done before). The main actor in the North Sea (including the settlement of Normandy) were the Danes, and their motives were control of trade flows, tribute collection, and empire building. Reducing population pressure may have been a welcome side effect, but clearly not the main issue. From 900 onwards, Denmark even appears to have lacked the population base to maintain the (politically desired) expansion. Otherwise, Normandy and England would speak Danish today.

The case is a bit different for the Norwegians, where population pressure is likely. They, however, first went for sparsely or uninhabited areas (Orkneys around 800, Hebrides around 850, Iceland 870, Greenland 892), and only afterwards started incursion into Ireland (895).

----------


## FrankN

The Viking (Baltic) economy didn't use coins. Instead, payment was made in silver, more precisely _hacksilver_, i.e. silver hacked into pieces according to the weight required. Traces of this system are still found in currency units such as the Pound Sterling, the oere (ore), and the Ruble (from _rubit_ - to chop). Consequently, many silver hoards found around the Baltic Sea consist of chopped coins, or other silver articles (see Photo below of the Anklam hoard):


For such a system to work, standardised weights are required. The first of these weights were imported from Arab countries from the mid-9th century onwards, and confirm to the official Islamic weight standard, the mitqāl, of c 4.23g, though they came in different sizes up to 150g. Later on, Scandinavians set up their own weight standard with trapezoid bronze or lead weights. These were much smaller, only up to 4 grams, whereby dots on the top marked their weight as multiples of 0,7 grams. This means a 6-dot cubic weight would equalise a mitqāl, so both weights could be used together. 

]

In fact, however, the small weights only became common in the area under Swedish and Danish influence. Norwegian and Scottish-Irish Vikings continued to use the old Arab weights, or developed specific local ones. Thus, the map below, which displays finds of trapezoid Danish/ Swedish weights, helps to identify their influence sphere. [_Normans, of course, had switched to using Frankish coins._]


Note that the use of hacksilver as currency has several important implications:
Silver objects are as good as money - actually, they are money. And they tend to be especially present in monasteries for liturgical purposes.There is no possibility to control or manipulate the money supply. Coins can be altered in weight or composition in order to expand monetary supply. But when your prices are in grams of silver, thinning coins doesn't work. Reduced silver supply immediately leads to deflation and economic downturn, especially in the absence of paper money (letters of credit etc.).The state (king) can't finance itself from minting profit, but requires other funding sources. This provides strong political incentive to aim at controlling long-distance trade (customs duties), Raising revenue abroad is politically much less risky than taxing domestic citizens.

Some background & more maps: 
http://vikingmetalwork.blogspot.de/s...&max-results=4
https://floasche.wordpress.com/categ...ipline/page/3/

----------


## MOESAN

> First of a series of answers - more to come:
> 
> 
> Yes, it makes a difference, because collecting tribute was common practice. East Rome had paid off the Huns, the Avars, and probably also already the Goths before. The first record on the collection of Danegeld is by Bishop Ansgar of Hamburg-Bremen, who visited the Swedish capital of Birka in 829-31 and several times thereafter. In 840 a Danish army arrived at Birka and caught everybody by surprise. As the King with the Swedish army was elsewhere, the city commander paid off the Danes with 700 pounds silver, collected from the citizens, and they left. Further payments of Danegeld are reported for 845 (7,000 pounds) by the Frankish king to end the Danish siege of Paris, and several times thereafter. Contributions as part of a peace deal have been common until today; Germany last year finished paying its contribution as per the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. 
> 
> Vikings weren't unified. In fact, there have been at least three kingdoms, namely Sweden (Varangians), Danes, and Norwegians. They regularly also were at war with each other, for conquest, or in order to destroy competing trade ports. In 808, e.g. Danish Vikings destroyed the Obotrite trading place of Rerik (near Wismar), and resettled merchants from there to the Danish trade port of Haithabu (Schleswig). In 900, the Swedes took Haithabu, in 934 it was conquered by the Franks, retaken by the Danes in 983, conquered by Norwegians in 1050, and ultimately destroyed in 1066 by the Rani as a late revenge for the destruction of Rerik (note the year - the Danes had just been defeated in England). 
> Around 940, the Danes founded Vineta/ Wolin as trading colony on the southern Balitc Sea. This lead to regular conflict with the neighbouring Slavic Rani (Rugani), who started to raid the Danish isles. The Rani also in 1100 unsuccessfully laid siege to Liubice (Lübeck), a major port of the Obotrites, who were allied with the Danes. In 1147, the Danes joined German and Saxon nobility in the Wendish crusade that broke the power of the Rani, and in 1168 conquered the Rani strongholds on the island of Rugen.
> 
> Essentially, what I want to say here is that most of the Vikings' actions were common practice of the time, not different from what Franks, Saxons and Slavs did (and Goths had done before). The main actor in the North Sea (including the settlement of Normandy) were the Danes, and their motives were control of trade flows, tribute collection, and empire building. Reducing population pressure may have been a welcome side effect, but clearly not the main issue. From 900 onwards, Denmark even appears to have lacked the population base to maintain the (politically desired) expansion. Otherwise, Normandy and England would speak Danish today.
> ...


good stuff, thanks - but for me the perforance is they were as a rule (I think) less numerous than Goths or Huns or Avars...

----------


## Yetos

> I also do not consider the Norsemen [Vikings/Varangians] as "overrated" or over-romanticized;
> 
> Bold adventurers and warriors that created a settlement and trade-network from Greenland - Nowgorod; 
> All connected with a great culture which is everlasting manifested in the Norse Mythology and Sagas;
> 
> 
> Sure, the Norseman also suffered great defeats, like the *Siege of Dorostolon*; 
> But their reputation in bravery and loyalty (also cruelty) was so greatly appreciated that they were largely employed as mercenaries and guards by other foreign Kingdoms and Rulers; 
> Their christianised descendants the Normans, were masters of the pitched battle; (tragically) defeating the Varangian Guard (Byzantine) in the* Battle of Dyrracheum*; [_Varangians were the only ones fighting, the Byzantines largely fled the field_]
> ...


Battle of Dyrrachium, Noormands vs Varaggians, Vikings vs Vikings

----------


## Vedun

Wends in Scandinavia...
(i've already wrote few articles about Slovensko-Svenska (Slovene-Swedish) words similarities), here is another article with more words which were discovered by other researchers...

*The "triglav" (three head) stonehead found at Glejbjerg (ancient Wendic Glav-Breg("head-hill") of Tri-glav? - "3 head"; transmutation of Glava or Golova into Holova or Hova (Head) or Hoved) near Esbjerg ("ice-hill" or perhaps from As(god)-hill; Holm (in western Slovene dialects) - Hill of Gods?)


*

http://www.globalwends.com/uploads/1...candinavia.pdf


The most interesting word i've found in this list is a word "gou*t*a" which sounds identical to our Prekmurian word guch... "language"; Gučat; "to speak"; in official (literal Slovene) it would be "govorit"; "rek" is a "saying"; the pseudo-transliteration into a verb would be "reka*t*"; note I've market the letter "t" because it ends the verbs in Slavic and Sanskrit languages in general... This is a clear evidence that Swedish language did not derive from Gothic ("germanic") languages only... but was clearly part of the "Satem" linguistic diaspora also... 

"yta paa sveitum" (iti po svejti / iti po svetu) (lol)

Svet as "word" in Slavic. Svet-loba (probably shares similarity with "ilumina"; Svet-loba, svet*ilo*; "ilumina") as a "light"...




*"Wends" (linguistic relatives of Hyperboreans, Slavs) in Japan...*

The mysterious ancient Japan word of the Ainu people...




Ainu Couple 1936: A photograph of one of the last pure-blooded Ainu. They have died out in the latter half of the 20th century. Recently, Japanese government offered funding to have Ainu culture revived!


*very ancient Japanese sword* is called* meich* in Japanese. Surprisingly, *meich* or *mech* has the same meaning also in* Slavic*.How did Wends reach Japan, and when? The question is at which point in time in the past Wendish speakers could have had contact with Japanese islands.

"
You may wonder how I came to search for traces of Wendish as far afield as Japan. It happened quite accidentally. I became curious about whether there was a linguistic connection between ancient Japanese and Wendish in the mid-1980s, when reading a biography of an American who had grown up in Japan. He mentions that a *very ancient Japanese sword* is called* meich* in Japanese. Surprisingly, *meich* or *mech* has the same meaning also in *Wendish*.How did Wends reach Japan, and when? I decided to find out first if this particular word, meich, really exists in Japanese. And, if it does, at which point in time in the past Wendish speakers could have had contact with Japanese islands.

I describe in more detail, mentioning my tentative conclusions with regard to the origins of Wendish in Japanese, and its relation to the Ainu language, in the 5th installment of my article,_The Extraordinary History of a Unique People,_ published in the _Glasilo_ magazine, Toronto, Canada. Anyone interested will find all the already published installments of this article, including the 5th installment, on my still not quite organized website, www.GlobalWends.com. In the next, winter issue of _Glasilo_, i.e., in the 6th installment of my article, I will report my discoveries and conclusions with regard to the origins of Wendish in the Ainu language, the language of the aboriginal white population of Japan.

I started my search for the word meich by buying Kenkyusha's _New School Japanese-English Dictionary._ Unfortunately,I had acquired a dictionary meant for ordinary students and meich is not mentioned in it. Obviously, I should have bought a dictionary of Old Japanese instead, in which ancient terms are mentioned. Nevertheless, to my amazement,I foundin Kenkyusha's concise dictionary, instead of meich, many other Wendish words and cognates, which I am quoting below in my _List_.

I found it intriguing that the present form of words in Japanese, with clearly Wendish roots, show that Chinese and Korean immigrants to the islands were trying to learn Wendish, not _vice versa_. This indicates that the original population of Japan was Caucasian and that the influx of the Asian population was, at least at first, gradual. Today, after over 3000 years of Chinese and Korean immigrations, about half of the Japanese vocabulary is based on Chinese.

There is another puzzle to be solved. Logically, one would expect the language of the white aboriginies of Japan, the Ainu - also deeply influenced by Wendish - to have been the origin of Wendish in modern Japanese. Yet, considering the set up of the Wendish vocabulary occurring in Japanese, Ainu does not seem to have played any part in the formation of modern Japanese, or only a negligible one. Wendish vocabulary in Japanese points to a different source. It seems to have been the result of a second, perhaps even a third Wendish migration wave into the Islands, at a much later date. Ainu seem to have arrived already in the Ice Age, when present Japan was still a part of the Asian continent. They have remained hunters and gatherers until their final demise in the mid-20th century. They retained their Ice Age religion, which regarded everything in the universe and on earth as a spiritual entity, to be respected and venerated - including rocks and stars. Wendish words in Japanese, however, mirror an evolved megalithic agricultural culture and a sun-venerating religion.

A list of all Wendish cognates I have discovered in the Kenkyusha's dictionary is on my website, under the heading of a _List of Wendish in Japanese_. It is by no means a complete list. My Japanese is very limited, based solely on Kenkyusha's dictionary and some introductory lessons to the Japanese culture, history, language, literature and legends, by a Japanese friend of mine, with an authentic Wendish name Hiroko, pronounced in the Tokyo dialect, as in Wendish,*shiroko*, _wide, all-encompassing_. Besides, although I have a university level knowledge of Wendish, I do not possess the extensive Wendish vocabulary necessary to discover most of Wendish words which may have changed somewhat their meaning with thousands of passing years, complicated by the arrival of a new population whose language had nothing in common with Wendish.

Future, more thorough and patient researchers - whose mother-tongue is Wendish but who also have a thorough knowledge of Japanese - will, no doubt, find a vastly larger number of Wendish cognates in Japanese than I did."

http://www.globalwends.com/introduction.html

List of Wendish (the author is Slovene, he concentrated the transliterations of the Ainu words through the Slovene; which is *also* very close to ancient Rig Vedic Sanskrit, among Lithuanian)...
The following list (attached at bottom of page as a PDF file) was compiled on the basis of an admittedly rather superficial reading of J. Batchelor's Ainu-English-Japanese English Dictionary and Grammar, 4th Edition, published by Iwanami in 1938.

http://www.globalwends.com/uploads/1..._ainu_list.pdf






A portrait of The Minamoto no Yoritomo (May 9, 1147 – February 9, 1199), the founder and the first shogun of the Kamakura Shogunate of Japan, a feudal system which lasted for 700 years and undermined Emperor's centralized power in Kyoto. Minamoto ruled from 1192 until 1199. He united Japan with the rising of the Samurai class, whose privileged status was ended only in the late 19th century. He is shown in his portrait as a young man of 32, with reddish hair, green eyes, blond eyebrows, a blond moustache and a blond beard. This indicates that some Wendish characteristics were still to be found among the 12th century Japanese population - after some 3,000 years of mixing with Chinese and Korean immigrants.

A Partial List of Wendish Words in Modern Japanese

http://www.globalwends.com/uploads/1...n_japanese.pdf

expansion of the Y haplogroup R1a1a into China... 

Chinese mummies with partimonial Y haplogroup R1a1a, which is most common among current Russian, Ukrainian, Slovaks, Polish, Slovene men...

The dynasty of Di(n) (derives from Don (River); named after goddess Dana or Danica or Zorya or Zorica (Dawn); this term is identical to Irish Danu goddess (Tuatha de Danu) and Vedic Saraswati (her simbol was a white swan; also in the mythology about Danu and Zorya (Danica)...

----------


## Sile

@vedun

there are 2 theories on Goth origin
1 - they came from scandinavia
2 - they came from pomerania 

I always supported number 2 

Their "cousins" are the gepids south of them in pomerania..........they do not have "cousins" in the geats or the gutes of sweden and gotland. The goths conquered these lands

----------


## Theodorik

If you bothered to read any standard of account of Russian history, you would learn about the Rus, who came from Roslagen in Sweden. They were invited by merchants in Novgorod to be mercenaries. When they weren't paid, they took over Russia. For the first two hundred years, they spoke Swedish and intermarried with Viikings in Sweden. They gradually became the nobility of Russia.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...mary-Chronicle

Gard was the Swedish word for fort, which became grad in Russian. 

Valdemar became Vladimir. Helga became Olga. 

Rurik, the founder of Kievan Rus, was named Hroerekr.

We don't have to just rely on archaeology because we have historical sources, but Viking artifacts are all over Kievan Rus.
On the 1,000th anniversary of Rurik's conquest, Russia erected a monument to the Swedish Vikings who founded the country
http://www.aztux.com/travel/page/Russia


http://www.aztux.com/travel/page/Russia
You don't know anything about either Swedish or Russian. Many Russian words were borrowed from Swedish, including kniga (book) from knigge, and stol (table) from stol (chair) in Russian

----------


## Vedun

"
Rurik, the founder of Kievan Rus, was named Hroerekr."

Rurik was never the founder of "*Kiev*an Rus". The term Kiev itself derives from prince *Kiy*, who was a ruler before ruler Rurik or Riurik. 
His brothers were Shchek (=current "Czech") and Khoryv and his sister was Lybid (or Labod or Labud or "Swan" = Lada goddess...also a river around the city of Kiyev or Kiev...
Kiev simply means "Kiy's" and not "Riurikov". 

"You don't know anything about either Swedish or Russian."

Why are you saying that? The words, you've described above are the same as in my language... They' are not Russian only. 

"Many Russian words were borrowed from Swedish, including kniga (book) from knigge"

I've already wrote a post about the this root of KN; it means "fast" and something which has to do with a Ruler (like Kniaz or Knez or Konyaz (Kon; also a Horse or Kunec (a rabbit - fast running animals; young (fast) man,..)) or Russian КОН (Kon) which means "a game" or Time (cycle); Kniaz (Konyaz; "Konig"("king") / "Khan") was a "Time lord"(a dynasty)...

And the guys you are describing, weren't Swedish Vikings (Jarls), but Vagrians(from current location of Poland (and Germany) or Variags who became "rulers" over Rusi (and Rusalke weren't Swedish women...but dark "vilas" (fairies) from the 7th world..("7th day" celebration of the Rusalka days..). And the capital city of Variags (described by Adam von Bremen) or Vagrians was called Stargard or Stargrad (in Russian as Drevny Gorod or Grad) or "Old city"... With their 'unification', they've moved the capital city to Novgorod or New city.

----------


## LeBrok

> If you bothered to read any standard of account of Russian history, you would learn about the Rus, who came from Roslagen in Sweden. They were invited by merchants in Novgorod to be mercenaries. When they weren't paid, they took over Russia. For the first two hundred years, they spoke Swedish and intermarried with Viikings in Sweden. They gradually became the nobility of Russia.
> http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...mary-Chronicle
> 
> Gard was the Swedish word for fort, which became grad in Russian. 
> 
> Valdemar became Vladimir. Helga became Olga. 
> 
> Rurik, the founder of Kievan Rus, was named Hroerekr.
> 
> ...


Obviously there was Viking influence over beginning of Kiev Rus. However this:*Gard was the Swedish word for fort, which became grad in Russian.* might be too far fetched. Grod, Gorod is also used by all the other Slavs. It is hard to explain borrowing from Vikings if it came from them around 9th century. Mind you that all Slavs split around 5th century, therefore their common vocabulary should come from before this time.

----------


## Vedun

"Mind you that all Slavs split around 5th century, therefore their common vocabulary should come from before this time."

Jordanes described 3 kins, tribes of Slavs: Sklaveni (from this term derives Sloveni as an artificial name for all Slavs), who were living around the city of Novietunum and from the so called Mursian Lake to the River Dnjeper and up to River Visla to the north.' In these words we can best see the description of all Western Slavs, from Slovenians to Slovinians along the Baltic. Novietum can only be Neviodunum, today’s Drnovo near Krško, at that time an important Roman centre and a port on the river Sava. Marsian lake can only be Blatno jezero (Boloton Lake) named Mursian because of the nearby river Mura. Jordanes wrote in the year 551 referring to year 490. This was some one hundred years before the Slavs were supposed to have settled in present day Slovenia in the region of the Eastern Alps. 
Left from the mountains in Dacia lived population of another Slavic tribe of Veneti. The territories of Antes (current Ukrainians, Russians, Belorussians, partially also Bulgarians) extends between rivers Dniester and Dnieper.
Jordanes is setting Venetes above Skloveni (Slovenes) and Antes and saying that both came from the Venetic origin...- both shared the same linguistic family... 

"common vocabulary". If you already understand the language of Freising manuscripts(which predate 8th-9th century), we are not dealing with "common Slavic language" called "Church Slavic language", but Slovene, which was in a way much different the Old Novogorod dialect and Church Slavic (artificial christian language).

----------


## Vedun

*KYI, SHCHEK, KHORYV and Lybid, founders of Kiev...*





Note the ship, is "Korabel" in modern Ukrainian (Korabl' in Russian)... the old word was Ladya (remained in literal Slovene) which was also a term for a city Ladoga... The word contains the goddess Lada (Lady; "lads"(young people); (v)*Lada (government, harmony)*, which was always described as a white Swan (Labod (Lybid, sister of prince Kiy); look bellow... Lada was mother of goddess Zorya(dawn) or Danica; this is Irish Danu and Vedic Saraswati(=Zarja(Danica; Danu) Sveta)

----------


## Vedun



----------


## Tomenable

> The Norsemen did get a good press in the medieval times from *Ahmad ibn Fadlan*; 
> very interesting chronicle and account;


Good press?  :Petrified:  Are you sure?  :Rolleyes:  Depends in which aspect, I guess.

Below is an excerpt from "Journey of Ahmad Ibn-Fadlan to the Itil River and Adoption of Islam in Bulgaria". This book describes the journey of Ahmad Ibn-Fadlan, Chief of the Embassy of the Baghdad Caliph Al-Muktadir to the Volga River, to the realm of Volga Bulgars (now in central Russia), in years 921-922 CE, in regard to their adoption of Islam. An excerpt describes hygiene of people whom Ibn-Fadlan calls the Rusiyyah:

*"(...) The Rusiyyah are the filthiest of Allah's creatures: t**hey do not purify themselves after excreting or urinating, nor do they wash themselves when in a state of impurity after coitus and do not even wash their hands after food. Indeed they are like wild asses that roam in the fields. They arrive from their land and moor their boats by the Itil, which is a great river, building on its banks large wooden houses. They gather in each house in their tens and twenties, sometimes more, or less. Each of them has a couch on which he sits. They are accompanied by beautiful slave girls for trading. One man will have intercourse with his slave-girl while his companions look on. Sometimes a group of them comes together to do this, each in front of the other. Sometimes indeed a merchant will come in to buy a slave-girl from one of them and he will chance upon him having intercourse with her, but a Rus will not leave her alone until he has satisfied his urge. They cannot, of course, avoid washing their faces and their heads each day, which they do with the filthiest and most polluted water imaginable. I shall explain. Every day a slave-girl arrives in the morning with a large basin with water, which she hands to her owner. He washes his hands, then his face and his hair in the water, then he dips his comb in the water and brushes his hair, blows his nose and spits in the basin. There is no filthy impurity which he will not do in this water. When he no longer requires it, the slave-girl takes the basin to the man beside him and he goes through the same routine as his friend. She continues to carry it from one man to the next until she has gone round everyone in the house, with each of them blowing his nose and spitting into the basin, then washing his face and hair in the basin. (...)"

*If this is a GOOD press, then I really don't know what would a bad press look like...  :Grin:   :Laughing: 

=============================

And the next part of Ibn-Fadlan's account about the Rusiyyah (just for the sake of it):
*
"(...) As soon as their boats arrive at this port [the city of Bulgar], each of them disembarks (...) and prostrates himself before a great idol, saying to it: 'Oh my lord, I have come from a far country and I have with me such and such a number of young beautiful slave girls, and such and such a number of sable skins (...) I would like you to do the favour of sending me a merchant who has large quantities of dinars and dirhams and who will buy everything that I want and not argue with me over my price. (...)"*

----------


## MOESAN

[QUOTE=Vedun;438307]Wends in Scandinavia...
(i've already wrote few articles about Slovensko-Svenska (Slovene-Swedish) words similarities), here is another article with more words which were discovered by other researchers...

*The "triglav" (three head) stonehead found at Glejbjerg (ancient Wendic Glav-Breg("head-hill") of Tri-glav? - "3 head"; transmutation of Glava or Golova into Holova or Hova (Head) or Hoved) near Esbjerg ("ice-hill" or perhaps from As(god)-hill; Holm (in western Slovene dialects) - Hill of Gods?)

*Vedun, just for the fun (I know you like wild etymologies)
*hoved* has nothing in common with *golova/glova/hlova*; Swedish has the oldest form huvud, dutch *hoofd*, German *haupt* apparently cognates with latine *cap-ut

*

----------


## jamt

To go back to the original question for a second.

I think the Vikings are over-romanticised, yes. On top of that I find it odd that they are seen more like a fictional group wherein you can celebrate their exploits without getting 'unethical'. In other words, we have Viking Metal where it is common to find allusions to slaughtering priests, robbing, general pillage, destruction and enslavement, but it's not really common to find mainstream glorification of what would otherwise be considered 'crimes against humanity', such as transatlantic slavery of Africans, glorified from the British point of view for example.

People can celebrate their Viking heritage by harking back to the slaughter of innocents, people can't really celebrate their British heritage by harking back to the same thing done in colonial times. You generally wouldn't find people rooting for the British soldier striking down the "savage" Native American and raping their women.

----------


## Twilight

Nope, my G.....Granny is not over rated. Considering that in my local library, I'm 110th in line to check out a copy of Viking Season 3.

Some ways yes I think that Viking are over rated and some under rated; a consequence of Victors(Christian Jesus) domination the losers (Odinism Thor). The Vikings may have attacked the monasteries in such terror but ultimately the Vikings converted to Christianity after the sacred oak tree was cut down.

----------


## Potentia

Honestly, sometimes the Vikings are overrated. However, they have had a huge impact on European History. The Normans are descended from Vikings, as are a lot of people around the continent.

----------


## halfalp

I think it depends what you understand with " warrior ", Celts were a natural warrior civilisation, but they fail and die against the roman discipline of war and diplomaty, Goths defeats romans and kills the emperor Valens but for what ? A lot of Goths soldiers die at Andrinople. The thing is that Vikings were also an honor and mythological warriorish civilisation. That gives them a lot of power between fatalist and scared christians people. If an centralised kingdom or empire were in western europe at this time, Vikings would only be here for figuration. When you've got an civilisation who trust on the point that all men have to die in fight and in the other side, people who prey, ass straight to heaven in tears, not so surprising that vikings had that ferocity and warriorship reputation. So, i don't think they were overrated, i think western europe at this time, dide not have the ability to fail them. They where determinated when christians where fatalist.

----------


## Angela

Imho, all of these ancient "warrior" groups are over-rated. Wanton destruction, rape and pillage, and engaging in the slave trade are not admirable activities. 

It's one thing to be like Cincinnatus and honorably defend your homeland. It's another thing to invade, kill and enslave millions of people, and destroy everything in sight in Gaul for glory and money and power, as Julius Caesar did. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius...us_Cincinnatus

----------


## zanipolo

Norsemen where underrated , always portrayed as dirty, unkept and ignorant
http://theconversation.com/what-does...lly-mean-75647
the word viking means to go on a raid in old norse language

----------


## davef

All they did was rape and destroy, nothing innovative or beneficial at all

----------


## mwauthy

I think Vikings and Caribbean Pirates had certain character traits that are romanticized such as independence and courage and other psychopathic traits that are vilified such as theft, murder, and rape. 
People respect courage and it definitely took courage to go on adventures and to explore unknown vast bodies of water in a boat. People also value independence especially in hierarchical societies. In societies where so much of one’s life is governed by a multitude of various rules and obligations there is something enviable and refreshing about abandoning that to chart your own course.
The flip side though is that many of these people had psychopathic tendencies and were not people you’d want to associate with. Most normal well adjusted people can agree that it’s not morally okay to steal, rape, and murder. The Golden Rule is logically consistent and people that sway away from it have a warped hypocritical version of reality that should not be romanticized in my opinion.

The Viking stories I enjoy the most involve the explorations of Iceland, Greenland, and North America.

----------


## OkTex

In my opinion, it's easy to romanticize The Viking era when relics closely associated with them include broadswords, helmets, loot and long-boats!

----------


## VanishedNova

Over rated? I would say no, but heavily misunderstood? I would say yes.

----------

