Romans vs medievals

[Erik]

well alright, It just seems like living to fight, by todays standards, and the funeral ceremonies and just the general viking law was ridiculous and based on nothing but sadition and violence. My post was all pretty much in jest anyway...

yeah, you need to read up more... read "hávámal" and see if it was all "sadition" (huh?) and "violence"...

those morals were imo a lot healthier in general than whatever judeo-christian sludge most blindly follow today...

 

[BastardSonOfGod]

you know, i agree with you to a point, in that i'm a pretty pure-blooded swede myself and certainly consider myself a descendent, in spirit and blood, of the "viking race", but i object to calling the whole folk "vikings" because in reality, a very small percentage of norsemen 1000 years ago were actual vikings by the true definition of the word.

hahahaha, ah Ok...a NeoViking

well alright, It just seems like living to fight, by todays standards, and the funeral ceremonies and just the general viking law was ridiculous and based on nothing but sadition and violence. My post was all pretty much in jest anyway...

In their religion... If you Die in fight... you'll go to Valhalla... Vikings born to Die in war... Christians born to fuck other religions... Musulms born to commit suicide... They just did what was right (for them obviously as every religion)

 

[King Chaos]

aye, I don't disagree with that, I'd describe most of the western world as retarded too... I just think that for insatce, the funeral ceremonies... I read something once, an ancient piece of reportage... it said that for a viking's funeral they would choose a woman, sometimes like, a spouse or sister or something family related, then they would all rape her and send her out to sea with the viking on a flaming boat... but she'd still be alive. I mean, if the women are into it, then go them! But I some how doubt they actually wanted that. Maybe it was meant as a harsh motivation for the vikings, like "You die, and we are gonna fuck your girlfriend then burn her alive." I'd get brave fast.

 

[King Chaos]

They wouldn't find us sick, they'd find us weak. And they'd burn our towns, rape our women and generally fuck shit up.

Maybe sex used to be more animal, and had less emotional significance. True. Thus rape wouldn't exactly exist... it'd just be territorial pissings. Ok I agree, vikings = not retarded.

 

[BastardSonOfGod]

never heard about that, but true or not, you have to put all things in their historical perspective... there are a lot of things they would find extremely sick about our society today as well. either way i find that a lot of the basic values of our 10th century norseman are as relevant today as ever... perhaps more so.

Me too, Never heard about that, I though that if a viking die, he had to be burned in a ship with his wife... but in the Viking society if you rape a woman, then you'll be judge as a criminal, because for vikings the "viking" woman was sacred, Valkyries, warrior girls.

 

[King Chaos]

Is this an example of not always believeing what you read in the papers? yeah, maybe it was biased against vikings, but it said they took it in turns and screwed the chosen woman. Probably wasn't a warrior woman though.

 

[QRV]

Vikings were mere raiders and masters of "lightning strikes" or "commando-like strikes". They normally assaulted small and little-protected cities and monasteries. They even sacked some places which were relatively well-protected, but they did so by using carefully planned strategies which included surprise attacks and fast retreats. Like guerrilla soldiers.

They were, however, not fitted for massive-scale attacks or wars. Their legendary savagery and brutality was a myth created by incrediblty stupid monks who saw them as barbaric pagans with no respect for the sacred places they robbed.

Vikings were first and foremost concerned with commerce and trading, and only secondarily concerned with armed assaults. Their relatively frequent attacks on septentrional and mediterranean places had its influence on the fall of the Middle Ages, but it was in no way a determining factor. They actually were easily converted to Christianity, as they saw it as an opportunity to become more involved with the rest of the world. They were the ultimate pragmatists of their time.

 

[BastardSonOfGod]

Is this an example of not always believeing what you read in the papers? yeah, maybe it was biased against vikings, but it said they took it in turns and screwed the chosen woman. Probably wasn't a warrior woman though.

Well... That's true, the wife of the dead viking had to die with him... to go to valhalla too

 

[BastardSonOfGod]

They were, however, not fitted for massive-scale attacks or wars. Their legendary savagery and brutality was a myth created by incrediblty stupid monks who saw them as barbaric pagans with no respect for the sacred places they robbed.

What????, Vikings crush empires, even the Christian in that times made a pray against the vikings: ...Oh lord, protect us of the fury of the mens of the north...

Vikings made a "commercial" war in almost all europe... and to do that, first, they defeat a lot of nations, one by one

 

[QRV]

My reference is Régis Boyer's La vie quotidienne des vikings (800-1050). The guy's a reknowned especialist in viking culture, so I think he knows what he says.

edit: They actually conquered a few reigns and forced others to pay tribute, but those reigns were totally unorganized and ruled by very incompetent kings.

 

[QRV]

Vikings made a "commercial" war in almost all europe... and to do that, first, they defeat a lot of nations, one by one

But they didn't defeat a lot of nations. They actually were very cowed during Charlemagne's period. When he died and the empire divided, they just saw it as an opportunity and brought upside-down the most unorganized places.

And it wasn't a "commercial war". It was just commerce, mate.

 

[Hitori]

VTheir legendary savagery and brutality was a myth created by incrediblty stupid monks who saw them as barbaric pagans with no respect for the sacred places they robbed.

hmm as much as I'm into church-bashing, I always thought that they WERE savage and brutal. They did it to give a honorable death to their enemies- the bloodiest and most brutal it was, the higher their place (the dead enemy's place) in valhalla
so they were quite nice

I'm enjoying this thread

 

[QRV]

They did have the "berserk" warriors and suceeded in intimidating people with their looks, their language and their axes (although they never wore the horned helmets nor were dressed like prehistoric tribesmen). But yeah, they were honorable, communitary, and had a very free tongue. I like them a lot.

 

[Magrathean]

KC: Well, only warriors who died fighting went to Odin's halls (the Valhalla). Not everyone was a warrior, you know. But i'm glad you brought that up; as i mentioned before, the vikings' zeal was greater than any other i've heard of. The reason was probably that: if they died, they went to feast eternally with Odin and the valkyries (who wouldn't want that?).

BastardSonofGod: They can do that with DNA now, you know.

KC: Maybe that's bullshit. Maybe it's true and the women hated it. But maybe it's true and they loved it. I mean, the aztecs made sacrifices to their gods. You could say "i'm not sure the aztecs were too much into dying for their gods", but i'm sure it was just about the single greatest honor an aztec could have.

QRV: Well, they did attack the bretons when they thought Scandinavia was getting too packed and they wanted more territory. But, as i said before, not everyone was a warrior. And, anyway, who can resist guerillas? That's about the most damaging technique (after nuclear weapons, but they didn't have that back then).

 

[BastardSonOfGod]

BastardSonofGod: They can do that with DNA now, you know.

Which thing???? Know who is a viking???? Wow!!!! with Dna... I knew only the thing that the Germans do... That thing about the size of the bones...

Hey, The Berserk... I like that... Furious Warriors

 

[hyena]

i can't believe that all this hype exists around vikings.

 

[QRV]

QRV: Well, they did attack the bretons when they thought Scandinavia was getting too packed and they wanted more territory. But, as i said before, not everyone was a warrior. And, anyway, who can resist guerillas? That's about the most damaging technique (after nuclear weapons, but they didn't have that back then).

But they didn't attack the major kingdoms. They mostly did it on small raiding groups with particular interests, and conquered only the weaker kingdoms. Then they thought it would be better for business to embrace Christianity.

Though I understand there was a Swedish king who did ensembled a huge army.

They conquered Ireland, right?

 

[Magrathean]

BastardSonOfGod: Yea, they can trace your whole history back to prehistory with DNA. Genetics are wonderful.

hyena: We're fans of a scandinavian metal band, and many of you guys are scandinavian, and besides the vikings were the greatest civilization of all time (and had the most amazing mythology ever).

QRV: So the bretons were small and weak? Wow. :Smug:

I don't know about Ireland, but Sweden and Norway were at war all the time for a while.

 

[QRV]

The scottish were few and weak, at least. Don't know about their incursions on the rest of Britain.

 

[Magrathean]

England (or, rather, Anglesland) was powerful. In fact, it was when the legend of King Arthur was born.