Topic Editor: Maria Marius Topic Description: The sacking of the monastery of Lindisfarne in June of the year 793 marked the official beginning of the Viking Age. Over the next several centuries, the Vikings ranged eastward from the cities of the Rus, south to the Emperor's palace in Miklagard (Constantinople), and west to Greenland, Iceland and Vinland the Good. At various times, the Vikings established a military hegemony over portions of present day Russia, Ireland, England, Scotland, France and Italy. Yet the predecessors of the Vikings are barely mentioned by historians. What led to the tremendous explosion of trade, piracy, and conquest amongst the Vikings themselves? Message: Global Warming
Author: - Maria Marius
Date: Feb 21, 1998 13:24
In several different sources, I have seen reference to the climactic optimum which occurred around the time the Vikings burst forth on the world scene. I can see how this would lead to a larger food supply and thus contribute to a lower death rate amongst children and the eldely, the most vulnerable members of any population group. However, I don't think an excess supply of rutabagas is a sufficient explanation for the explosive energy of the Viking Age.

Message: No, many good years isn't enough by itself
Author: Always looking for trends - Berosus Etana
Date: Feb 21, 1998 20:00
Though that does explain why the Viking colonies on Iceland and Greenland succeeded (in the short run where Greenland is concerned, they had to abandon it after the cold weather returned). The other factor that I know of is that the Vikings invented a really efficient sailing ship at the same time. Its keel allowed it to make good speed without a strong tailwind, and its low, wide build made it very seaworthy. What's more, it could navigate in very shallow water--the Irish claimed it could even sail across wet grass!

You can compare the results by looking at how boldly they explored the Atlantic with their dragon-ships. Previously, the only thing Dark Age Europeans wanted to do on that stormy ocean was cross the North Sea, in commercial runs between Frisia and England.

Message: How About a Viking Jihad?
Author: - Maria Marius
Date: Feb 25, 1998 00:26
Could there have been a religious motivation for at least the initial Viking raids?

I have always approached the subject of the Vikings from a Christian perspective-that's how I was raised-that's how the brain was imprinted. However...if one assumes that at least SOME of the pagan Vikings were sincere people dedicated to the Faith of Their Fathers, at a minimum they would have had to view the incursions of the Christian missionaries on their territory with grave misgivings. Is it legitimate to consider the raids on Lindisfarne, Jarrow, etc. in the form of a pagan "holy war" to smite the Christians at their source?

Some Icelandic followers of Asatru, the modern form of the ancient Germanic/Nordic faith, certainly regard pagans executed at the behest of Christian rulers/missionaries as the equivalent of pagan martyrs to the Old Faith. I am told that June 8th is celebrated as "Lindisfarne Day" in commemoration of the attack by those hardy souls of yore who struck a blow for Odin and Thor against the servants of the White Christ.

Does anyone know if this is true?

Nota bene: In 1972, Asatru was recognized officially by the government of Iceland as a legitimate religious faith. I am aware of the fact that some people who patronize AS may deem it to be "neo-pagan" and therefore nonsensical. However, equating all of the followers of Asatru with some of the confused souls who practice a debased form of "neo-wicca" is not intellectually sound. Moreover, my point here is not to discuss the validity (or lack thereof) of the modern pagan faiths. I'm asking about Viking pagans.

Message: Vikings and all that--
Author: Horned helmet? Got it at a garage sale. Really - Marie Siduri
Date: Mar 11, 1998 02:13
Berosus--
In the Feb. 1998 issue of Scientific American, there is a detailed article about the Viking longships, including a photo of a reconstructed longship being pulled by horses over land. The caption claims that the slight keel made for easy portage. Perhaps these are what the Irish saw sailing over the grass?

Maria--
I'm not a scholar on pagan Norse ways, but I don't recall reading that the Vikings were interested promoting their religion. They were out for land, plunder and gold, as I recall. While they may have preceived a threat to their religion in the missionary activities of the Christians, my guess is that it wasn't seens as a great enough threat to launch a 1000 longships. An interesting read that deals with ideas along these lines, albeit fictionally, Stephen Lawhead's "Byzantium."

Message: The Irish saw a ship-pulling? Interesting . . .
Author: Nordic - Berosus Etana
Date: Mar 12, 1998 00:01
The Vikings did that all the time to go between the rivers of Russia, since most of the important streams begin in the Valdai hills of Belarus. I discribed the details on another Viking Forum thread ("General Discussions?"), so hike over there if you want to know more.

As for the horned helmets, most Vikings only wore them to special occasions, like religious ceremonies. The rest of the time a steel cap was good enough. Horned helmets are more common in Wagner's operas than they were in real life.

Message: Viking Horned Helmets
Author: - Maria Marius
Date: Mar 12, 1998 00:16
The hornet helmets were for use in religious ceremonies. Purportedly, the horned appearance represented the aurochs...the living symbol of prosperity.

I'm not sure when the aurochs actually became extinct. I think prior to the Viking era, however. I've often wondered if northern European men shook their heads at the younger generation & belittled them for never having killed an aurochs. I can just see all the elderly hunters gathered round...."How can young Erik claim to be a real man? He's never even killed an aurochs!"

Maybe THAT'S why the Vikings started raiding. There were no more aurochs to kill!

Message: It was all a long time ago
Author: Swearing off garage sales - Marie Siduri
Date: Mar 12, 1998 12:28
Actually, I believe I read somewhere that the aurochs survived into the 18th century in remote parts, well after the Vikings had stopped going a-viking. Berosus--The horned helmet was a joke. My understanding is that they've been found in graves dating several centuries before the common era, but were not in common use after then, except, as you mentioned, ceremonial occasions. However, because of Wagner (who didn't get the stories straight anyway) and others, the horned helmet has become bound up with the whole idea of Vikings. The Minnesota pro football team, for one, though few would argue that representation is of any historical acurracy.

Maria, forgive me for making a long posting even longer by quoting from the Orkneyinga Saga:

Olaf sailed east with five ships and didn't break his jouney until he reached Orkney. At Osmundwall he ran into into Earl Sigurd who had three ships and was setting out on a viking expedition. Olaf sent a messenger to him, asking Sigurd to come over to his ship as he wanted a word with him. "I want you and all your subjects to be baptized," he said when they met. "If you refuse, I'll have you killed on the spot, and I swear that I will ravage every island with fire and steel." The Earl could see what kind of situation he was in and surrendered himself to Olaf's hands. He was baptized and Olaf took his son, called Hvelp or Hundi, as a hostage and had him baptized under the name Hlodvir. After that, all Orkney embraced the faith.

This was written, so the introduction states, probably in the 12th century by a Christian. It is easy to see that there was a lot of acrimony in both the Chrisitan and pagan camps. So you have modern pagans saying: "This is what we were before we were oppressed by the missionaries," and Christians saying: "Yeah, but you guys were oppressing us killing us and sacking our towns and holy places." Both are true, I believe, but which one more "right" probably speaks to the the prejudices of the modern reader, who will never be faced with oppression from either missionaries or Vikings.

Message: Myth and Legend
Author: - Brighid Cormac
Date: Mar 14, 1998 07:38
The Viking period lasted somewhere between 750 to 1050,during which time a vigorous boby of myths developed, revolving around the deeds of Odin,Thor and brother-sister deities Frey ans Fraya.A ready acceptence of danger,and a profound disdain for those who could not endure hardship, characterized the Vikings and was reflected in the fatalism of thier myths.Death in battle was a joyous event,since the Valkyries took the gloriously slain to Valhalla,Odins hall.There,fallen heroes feasted by night and by day,fought mock battles in prepartion for Ragnark,the final battle which would witness total destructionon the Vigrid plain.A new earth would rise from the ashes of Ragnarok, green and fresh with fields of corn that grow unsowen.Moreover, some gods,including Balder and his blind brother Hodr,would return from the underworld and repeople the land.Both the the courge and cunning of the Vikings are reflected in the adventtures of thier gods.

Message: On origins
Author: - Sulla Didius
Date: Mar 14, 1998 11:18
I would suppose that the Vikings (or their predessors) went unnoticed prior to their famous (or infamous) expansionist phase because they were essentially outside the view of the Romans, who wrote about everything. We know alot about the Germans, but not much regarding the Germanic/Teutonic/Indo-European groups who eventually became the Vikings. Most of what we do know probably comes from archaeology. Any thoughts from our European experts?

Message: Archaeological evidence re pre-Viking days...
Author: The Viking Dormouse - Maria Marius
Date: Mar 14, 1998 12:02
I'm not a European, but...

I have read that archaeological finds indicate that Scandinavia was inhabited by humans as early as the 6th millennium BC. There are remains of ash wood canoes from around 4000 BC. (Surely they were preserved in a bog...although my source book did not say so!)

A written record exists of a Danish king, one Cochilaicus, who took part in a raid into western Europe in 515 AD. (He was killed.) Apparently this was a "dress rehearsal" of events to come.

I vaguely remember references to commercial activity on the island of Helgo near present day Stockholm...and also at a site in Jutland. But I can't remember the time frame and cannot presently locate that book. (My home library shelves are a mess...and the books have trailed all over the house. It's time to DO SOMETHING about this. Although I'll probably just look on-line....) More later.

Message: The Vikings were probably too far away for the Romans to pay much attention
Author: Indo-European - Berosus Etana
Date: Mar 14, 1998 15:17
I never even heard of them visiting Denmark, which they could have done without ships. Maybe Tacitus had something to say--I haven't read his Annals yet.

Likewise, the Romans did not bother with the Slavs, though many of them were captured by German tribes like the Goths and sold in Roman cities. In fact, so many of them ended up in Roman slave markets that the word "Slav," which meant "glorious" to them, became the root word of the English word "Slave."

Message: Romans and proto-vikings
Author: - Demetrios Xanthippos
Date: Mar 15, 1998 15:58
Some of Tacitus´ comments in his Germania shed light on a few archaeological finds in northern Germany and Denmark. (Just what those are I don´t recall right now). Peoples from the broader Scandanavian region did have an effect on the late empire; The Goths were originally from the area (Southern Sweden is still called Gotland) and Germanic legends hint that some groups like the Saxons came from the shores of the Baltic.

Message: Roman contacts
Author: sveonian - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Mar 16, 1998 17:17
There were trade and other contacts between Scandinavia and the continent during the Bronze Age. The Celtic expansion seems to have isolated the Scandinavians, with changed routes of trade. After the victories of Julius Caesar the contacts were opened again, with trade along the Roman border.

Message: Did weapons export lead to the Viking attacks?
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Mar 19, 1998 17:11
The success of the Vikings is not as unexpected as it may seem. During a long time, gaining little attention, they had developed ship building and navigation far beyond the rest of western Europe. They were used to long travel from the trade trips. During the last ages they were transporting swords from the Franks to Baghdad, in exchange for silver. Religious differences prohibited open trade, and the northern, pagan, peoples were used as middlemen. Maybe some of the traders got the idea that instead of making the long trip for a small pay, you could go directly to the source... A fact is that the Franks' own swords were often used at attacks against them!

Message: The Iron Age Came Late in the North
Author: - Maria Marius
Date: Mar 19, 1998 21:39
I keep running across generalized references to technology in Scandinavia which can best be summarized as "the iron age came later up there." Perhaps the Nordic peoples would have begun their extensive raiding sooner if they had been able to obtain mass quantities of competitive weaponry at an earlier date.

Message: Baghdad was buying swords from the Franks?
Author: - Demetrios Xanthippos
Date: Mar 20, 1998 17:04
Why, when Damascus blades were readily available and of much higher quality?

Message: Correction of weapons export
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Mar 23, 1998 15:56
I hope no citizens from Baghdad read my earlier message.... The Franks did sell swords to the Vikings but the main goods that was transported to Baghdad was cloth! It was however still too controversial to trade directly with the Moslems.

Message: Viking Expansion
Author: Astrologue - Urgos Enkidu
Date: Apr 19, 1998 01:24
The Vikings went through a long period of boat designs. It may well be that they never raided in earlier times because they couldn't get very far. At any rate the Febuary edition of Scientific American has a great feature on this topic.

Message: And the link to Scientific American for that article is..
Author: - Marie Siduri
Date: Apr 19, 1998 12:02
http://www.sciam.com

Message: Pre-viking shipping
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Apr 20, 1998 11:51
Good article! Glad to see some activity at the subject!
There is a reference of "grave stone art", or rather picture stones. One can be found here . Also some information about boats and sails. There were a belt of deep forrests in south central Sweden that made land transports very hard, separating the two main parts populated by Sveons and Goeths. This led to a great dependence of sea transports. The island of Gotland was also an important tradingplace, as were places in Norway. There were early trading between Central Sweden and the border of the Roman empire in northern Germany. So it is not really fair to say that they didn't get far before the Viking age.

Message: Honor Guard of the Emperor
Author: Skol - Urgos Enkidu
Date: Apr 20, 1998 23:01
I remeber reading that the Honor guard of the Emperor in Constantinople was made up of Viking warriors. Does anyone know of more details about this?

Message: The Varangian Guard
Author: - Maria Marius
Date: Apr 20, 1998 23:39
The Vikings called Byzantium/Constantinople "Miklagard"...and the stalwarts who guarded the Emperor were the "Varangian Guard."

Unfortunately...that's all my really pathetic Viking books have to say on the subject.

Message: What? the Varangian Guard?
Author: Akolouthos Varangoi - Trajanus Ulpius
Date: Apr 20, 1998 23:52
The Varangians, were mercenary scandinavians employed by the Russ in (where else?) Russia. The Byzantines are recorded as empoying 700 of them by 911AD. The first mention of them as the Varangian Guard dates from 1034AD. The Byzantines refer to them usually as "the axe-bearing barbarians" or the "axe-bearing Guard" , in reference to their prinicipal weapon, the Axe. Harald Hardrada was a Varangian officer.

There may have been as many as 3,000 by mid 11th century AD.

Message: More about the Varangians
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Apr 21, 1998 11:02
The early contacts with Miklagard (Byzans/Constantinople) was not as mercenaries, but attackers. The city was partly plundered in 860, but with a ransom of gold they were stopped. In 980 the Russian tzar Vladimir gave emperor Basil II a "gift" of 6000 varangians (varjages). They formed the most well-paid guard of the army and fought all around the Eastern Mediterranean. The name means "oath-sworn". Same origin as "warrior".

Message: "gift"? I bet...
Author: Strategios - Trajanus Ulpius
Date: Apr 22, 1998 09:03
That the tsar fobbed them off on the Emperor to get rid of them. Mercenaries can be troublesome, they want to get paid and regularly.

Message: Risky gift?
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Apr 26, 1998 08:17
I don't know the reason of the gift, but you are right that they did not feel all comfortable about it. The Varangians were only allowed into the city in limited groups, without weapons and with escort. Besides looting and regular pay they had an interesting kind of "bonus". When an emperor died they were allowed to rush through the palaces of the city and grab all valuables they could carry!

Message: here is the truth about the Varangians
Author: the Celt with a little Varangian blood - Slaine MacRoth
Date: Apr 27, 1998 18:31
The Varangian Guard were founded by emperor Basil II in 988, with 6000 Russian viking warriors sent by Varangian Tsar Vladimir of Russia. Their name comes from old Norse relating to sarers of an oath. Vikings had been seving in the Byzantine army and navy for some time allready, but Basil formed them into a distinct regiment to act as his Imperial bodyguard. They were known as the axe-bearing guard, from the enormous two-handed axes they carried. They served at the forefront of many of the Empire's battles, fighting Turks, Bulgars, Crusaders, Normans, and many other enemies. They also performed garrison duty in the Empire's cities. The Varangian Guard were the best paid of all the empire's troops. So well paid, in fact that membership had to be purchased. It wa quite common for Norsemen to go to Byzantium from all over Scandinavia and Russia , spend time in the Varangian guard, and return home rich. One such was the future king of Norway, Harald Sigurdson, (known as the Ruthless, or Inn Hardradi)who was to die in battle of Stanford Bridge in England, 1066. The guard was renowned for their loyalty to the emperors, an unusual thing in a society as ridded with intrigue as Byzantium. They stayed in Imperial service for over three centuries, seeing the greatness and decline of the Byzantium Empire. I think this tells all about the Varangians. I am a member of a liveroleplaying group "the Havkhersar" from the Netherlands. I play a Commander of the Varangian Guards there. We are a viking only group . For my character i studied the viking history.

Message: Varangians/Praetorians
Author: - Demetrios Xanthippos
Date: Apr 27, 1998 19:26
Clearly the de jure function of the Varangian Guard was similar to that of the Praetorians in the West. Did they engage in any kingmaking? Byzantine history has always left me confused (When half the important men in your history are named John, it´s hard to keep track) but I know that there were several dynastic changes and disputed successions. What role did the Varangians play in this? I´d think that the temptation would be great to set up a new emperor while they were out ransacking the town.

Message: Russia and the Vikings
Author: Questioner - Urgos Enkidu
Date: Apr 27, 1998 22:59
I know the Vikings made their way down the Dnieper and that the name Rus was a Viking word for the people of Russia. The Vikings also founded one of the major Russian cities, Kiev I believe. What I would like to know is whether some Vikings stayed in Russia, settled down, and became a part of the population much like the Normans in northern France.

Message: In a word, Yes.
Author: Answereing - Trajanus Ulpius
Date: Apr 28, 1998 00:58

Message: On Viking assimilation and mobility
Author: Nordic - Berosus Etana
Date: Apr 29, 1998 09:05
Yes, it only took four generations for the Russians to assimilate their Varangian rulers. The first three--Rurik, Oleg and Igor--had names which can be traced to Scandinavia, while the fourth was named Sviatoslav, and you can't miss the Slavic origin of that name. That is probably why modern Swedish and Russian historians argue over who first used the name "Rus."

I think we have agreed that the Vikings were better fighters than anyone they met, but they also had an advantage in speed. A dragon-ship carried between 15 and 100 warriors, with 50 as the average, and a typical raiding party in the early ninth century had twelve ships in it. Only a larger army with cavalry could defeat these raiders, and in those days only Byzantium could afford much of an army in peacetime. As a result, the Vikings had plenty of time to make their hits and move on, before their victims could mobilize a force to catch them. After 850, the Viking forces got even larger, when they decided to conquer and settle the places they were looting.

Along that line, I think it was logistics, rather than unfriendly "Skraelings," that forced the Vikings to abandon Vineland in 1006. There were only 30,000 colonists in Iceland, and 3,000 in Greenland; not enough to maintain a colony across the Atlantic. Had there been enough Vikings in America to allow a one-on-one match with the Skraelings, I think early American history might have been drastically different.

Message: A Viking Campaign in Azerbaijan
Author: Saga-teller - Berosus Etana
Date: Apr 29, 1998 09:25
Here's a Viking story that impressed me, which I don't think many of you have heard. In 954 twelve hundred Varangians sailed down the Volga River to the Caspian Sea. They followed the west coast of the Caspian to Azerbaijan, went two hundred miles up the Kura River, and came to Barda'a, a Moslem town with about 10,000 inhabitants. The local Moslem commander had cavalry and a force four times as large as the invaders, so he should have been able to throw them back into the sea. Instead the Vikings used heavy shields to protect themselves from Arab arrows, until they could close in for hand-to-hand combat; once the melee began, the berserk fury of the Norsemen carried all before them. They captured Barda'a, and held it for a year. The Arabs tried to recapture Barda'a, but the Vikings beat them back repeatedly, inflicting a ghastly number of casualties every time. They finally chose to leave when an enemy they could not fight, disease, became a problem, and about four hundred of them slipped out under cover of darkness, returning home with all the booty and slaves they could handle. This whole episode was a big embarrassment to the Caliphate, to say the least.

Message: The Last Viking
Author: Astrologue - Urgos Enkidu
Date: Jun 13, 1998 23:01
I don't know if calling Charles XII of Sweden the last Viking is appropriate but he sure acted like one. He took on the Russians and the Saxons over who should be king in Poland. After winning there he was seen roaming around Turkey where he was exiled to for a time. Not having had enough he talked the Turks into attacking the Russians. However after losing a decisive battle during a blizzard in Finland, Russia become the dominant power in the area and all Viking people have been living in peace ever since (O.K Norway had some problems in WWII but who didn't)

P.S I remember reading a great account of that battle in Finland, I think the books focus was Peter the Great if anyone has any ideas on what the title might be leave me a message.)

Message: Interesting. I never thought of Charles XII that way before.
Author: intrigued - Berosus Etana
Date: Jun 14, 1998 08:21
Would that make Gustavus Adolphus and his swashbuckling daughter Christina the next to the last Vikings?

Message: On Christina
Author: Viking - Urgos Enkidu
Date: Jun 14, 1998 23:12
Since I'm here I'll post what I know of here. A quick aside first: Calling Charles XII a Viking seems appropriate considering his origins and the way he acted. I suppose most people end the Viking age with the end of paganism in the north sometime in the 13th century but religion aside the Norsemen were still a potent force till the end of Charles XII reign. Now to Christina. She was an only child and raised as a prince by her father since she was destined to rule the country. Her father even looted libraries in Germany to help educate his daughter. He was killed during the 30 years war when she was only six and a regent reigned for her until she turned 18. Her upbringing had made Christina into a fairly masculine ruler by the time she took over the country. She hunted, wore men's clothes, and refused to wear jewelry. After 10 years on the throne she grew sick of ruling and Protestantism and traveled to Inssbruck in cognito. She converted to Catholocism(sp?) and spent the rest of her days entertaining many prominent guests; she liked parties but never married because she didn't want to loose her freedoms. She is also known as a great patroness of the arts supporting philosophy, music and theater. That's the synopsis I remember, if Berosus has some interesting tales of her swashbuckling I'm sure he'll post them here soon.

Message: Charles XII and Gustavus Adolphus
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Jun 15, 1998 05:20
I am not sure if it is correct to call Charles XII a Viking. He had not much of a choice, as he was attacked. In a way Gustavus Adolphus and his followers were more in that style, as they went on a voluntary campaign. But aristocrats looting during the defence of the right faith can not be compared to raiding heathens, or...

Charles XII assumed power at the age of 15. Three of the major powers of the area: Denmark, Poland and Russia saw their chance and declared war on Sweden. At the age of 18 he left Sweden to fight his enemies, returning to Sweden 18 years later! He was a great warrior, but a poor diplomat. After dealing with Denmark and Poland he turned against Russia. Like his later successors in attacking Russia, Napoleon and Hitler, he won initial victories but were weakened by the terrible winters, the vast distances and poor roads and the lack of supplies (burnt fields). After a decisive loss at the Russian village of Poltava he fled to the Turks, and tried to persuade them to attack Russia. He died during a campaign against Norway (part of Denmark).

There were later wars against Russia around 1790 and 1809, when Finland was captured from Sweden.

Message: Chrles XII the last Viking? I think not.
Author: Optimus Princeps - Trajanus Ulpius
Date: Jun 15, 1998 07:25
The first battle in question was Narva, November 30,1701. Charles was attempting to relieve the siege of Narva by Peter the great. He attacked the Russians in their siege trenches in the middle of a snowstorm. Something like 8,000 Swedes against 40,000 Russians. The Russians panicked and routed. Charles thought that was that, and went and attacked the Poles and Saxons next.
Later, Peter began a war of detachments against the Swedes, showing up and destroying any small garrison with much larger forces. At Poltava in 1709, Charles again tried to storm entrenchments, but this time it did not work. His army was destroyed, he ended up fleeing to Turkey, (it was closer), tried to set the Turks on the Russians, (they werent having any of it) and eventually made his way back to Sweden. His death in 1718 at the siege of Fredrickshald, was actually greeted with relief by a lot of Swedes. (His war had drained the country of men) The Swedes made peace and pretty much have been peaceful eversince. (a couple of short wars with Russia notwithstanding).

The last Viking is usually considered Harald Hardrada who got whacked at Stamford Bridge by Harold of England in 1066. Harold's victory was so complete, that only 20-24 ships were needed to carry home the survivors. (that out of an orginal invasion force estimated at 245-500 ships. A pile of bones still marked the site in 1130.

Message: For Capernica's benefit
Author: - Berosus Etana
Date: Jun 15, 1998 08:27
I only know a little about Christina, besides what was mentioned already. When she converted to Catholicism, the Swedes would not allow her to remain queen, so she abdicated (in 1654?) and moved to Italy. There she used the martial skills she had learned previously to live out the rest of her life as an adventurer, much like the Three Musketeers and Cyrano de Bergerac. I understand she enjoyed it a lot, too.

Message: Christina in Rome
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Jun 17, 1998 16:08
Christina was the daughter of the worst enemy of the catholics, the Swedish king Gustavus Adolphus (Gustav II Adolf). Her decision to convert to the catholic faith forced her to resign from the throne in 1654. The year after she went to Rome. She founded an academy that became a cultural and political centre. The academy was a prestigious organization made up of the high nobility in Rome, where the leading artists, musicians and scholars came to "show off" their new work or idea. Christina still had political ambitions. She supported the French cardinal Mazarin's plans of a coup d'etat in Naples, where Christina was intended to become queen. This failed when the plans were disclosed by her servant, who was killed on her orders. She also made attempts to be elected to queen of Poland. Christina died in 1689, and was the first woman to be buried in the church of S:t Peter in Rome.

Message: ahem...hi all, newly accepted into the alliance...
Author: the vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 1, 1998 06:42
*entering, sitting down and takes out a number of leather bound vellum books, and blows dust off them*

This'll be the first of many posts...
I'm sorry but i figured the best way to be answering and asking on single, or few subjects at a time...

If I go over things already answered, missing a post...I apologize...

*opens first volume*

first, thank you for starting the thread Mari.

A point of semantics secondly...Although it is common and well understood to call the general promiscuous period of Norse development "Viking", Viking is a norse word describing an activity, and not a people.

Viking - to enter, anchor or stay in a bay, a Vik.

Viking is something almost all Norse men, and some women would do at least once. During the Viking Era, at least. Viking is generally meant when one went on raiding parties. Sometimes intended trading trips turned Viking, when temptation and/or trading difficulties became too great.

Thus an understandable uneasyness amongst other European peoples, as well as other Norse. Cross raiding between what today is Sweden, Denmark and Norway was common.

Thus also a practice of detacheable prow heads, the famed dragon heads. If trade, peacfully, was intended, the head/s would be taken down. If war, then the full fierceness of the dragon was displayed. I haven't yet found examples of the subterfugal use of this to gain peaceful entrance and then strike.*

It would be a logical choice for a poor Jarl, needing booty, I'd think. However Norse have had a long history of straightforward behaviour as well as sneaky.

A way to break down the Norse ages are;

The Roman Iron Age:
ca 0, give or take - 400 CE, due to the prevalence of archaeological finds during this period, showing the great trade with Rome. Chiefly through the middle men of the Marcomanni(a bohemia located tribe). Also, the lack of other sources during this period.

The Era of Migration:
400-800 CE, more or less. during this period, few written accounts of Scaninavia exist. The increasing prevalence of gold and silver hoards, show an accumulation of wealth. Together with fertile climate, more so than today, we have an increase in population and innovation. Mostly Scandinavia got wealthier and busied themselves with internal strife.

The Viking Age:
793 - late 900s. This is where the interest of the Norse become the fierce and violent raiding over the world. As well as a lot of exploration and settling. Lots of sources. Lots of victims.

The Coming of Christianity:
Late 900s - Middle age. The attempts of missionaries were many and, partially succesfull much earlier than this. However, the actual, permanent conversion of any large section, or Country didn't occur til now. Also, the process was slow and arduous.

*any info on this would be greatly appreciated.

*closes volume, binds it*
whew! A lot to start right off with...However any corrections, or embellishments are greatly appreciated.

My source for this post is largely Edgar Polemé, whom was a teacher and mentor for me a period.

Message: If you can find it,
Author: - Apiladey ApilSin
Date: Jul 1, 1998 07:13
I posted some info on Celtic ships on the OLD 'Actual History and Culture of the Celts' string (the one that's still under the Tara Board). Somebody disagreed with a comment about viking longships and I defended my statement with a reference to an article in a Scientific American which had a great deal of data about the evolution of the longship. You will be able to get the exact issue from the defending post I made.
On a completely diferent subject, wire was a viking, er, sorry, Norse invention from about 700 AD.

Message: Opening another volume...
Author: the Vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 1, 1998 07:29
Sorry about previously, Marie. Stumbling spelling...

On the warm climate, Jihad etc. Basically the reasons for the Viking Era...

*looks in beginning of book*

Well, the favourable climate does have a lot to do with it, actually. The over 400 years of very fertile climate and increasingly favourable trade, and next to no outside threats, on account of being outside the reach of things, in general. These things caused a steady population increase, and an increased refinement of technology. The Longships got better functioning sails, and increased in size. The weaponry became better made, we find examples of pattern welding(Damascus) in swords and composite welding in axes.

Because of legal inheritance law of the Norse, a search of lebensraum was inevitable.

A firstborn son, in a pinch a daughter, would inherit the yard and landholdings, cattle etc. Most Vikings were some form of farmer or other, and legal rights were tied to the land.

In a fertile period, you get generation upon generation of ablebodied 2nd, 3rd, 4th and more sons, who have nothing to look forward to except working for their eldest brother, or go elsewhere.

No wonder the chance of joining a Jarl on Viking and come home with enough gold to buy ones own place was attractive...

Viking happened after sod was laid and before the harvest needed gathering, a fairly long period of the year, when sailing on open sea was favourable too. The Viking raids happening during winter and late fall, early spring, usually were out of desperation. Either that, or greed, or delaying during a raid, too far from home, or into too strong lands, leading to over-wintring in Viking.

Also, several Viking bands managed to secure themselves a new country. Not a bad booty... Normandy - Land of Northmen, England (chiefly North and East), Ireland, parts of and periodically, the Hebrides, Large sections of Russia, esp. Cities. Iceland and Greenland and Vineland can also be counted. Although they weren't all completely successful, or permanent.

Jihad?
In a word, no.
Why? Well, the pagan religion spanned the Scandinavian region easily, and mythology, credo etc. were common amongst all. The individual worship and adherence, was just that, though. Individual. Each Norse would be pagan according to what he found to work best... Some never thought a second of the gods, only listened to when the Go*i(Priests) said it was cool to sow and harvest, or when a Viking was good. They went to the holiday parties for the parties and so on. Others would build huge temples, where effectively services would be held for the community under said Jarl and/or Go*i. Anything and all between those existed, and exist today, albeit in modern forms.

The commonest occurance would be for a landowneer to at least have a shrine of and to the God/dess/s/es, that he was closest to, based on profession, status and affinity.

The most important part is that it's an individual religion and a free one. The Norse were more than happy to peacefully sit down and talk religion with missionaries. Rarely did they get converted, or stay so though. That is until weapons were used on large scale by, you guessed it; other Norsemen.

*closes book*

Well, that can do on that, for now, I guess.
Any questions, comments, corrections etc. are as always welcome.

My source was chiefly, David Wilson "The Vikings"

Message: Since I'm sitting here...
Author: the Vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 1, 1998 07:41
...And find it funny, I'll read a passage that ends David Wilsons book;

"The Church landed pen in hand, as the North became part of the literate European Christian community, its vitality was strangely sapped and the Viking Age came to an end. The tenth and eleventh centuries saw the Scandinavian countries at the peak of their international importance; never again were they to make the same impression on European life. Achievements of latter-day Scandinavian heroes of the stamp of Gustavus Adolphus and Charles XII pale into insignificance beside the conquests and explorations of the Vikings. The vital civilization whichthe classical authors at the beginning of the millenium had only dimly percieved in the Pythean mists had risen like a star to its zenith - an object of wonder and fear to the world of the succeeding millennium"

(David Wilson, "the Vikings")

Message: hrmm...my own answer to David...
Author: the Vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 1, 1998 07:47
*lol* Well, big and beautiful words, to be sure, but someone might agree with me; It is a little unfair to compare two men's work to a civilisation which spanned 4-500 years at its height. Especially since they accomplished more, conquest wise, than any one, or two Norsemen previously.

ex. It took from Harald Fairhair, to his grandson Olaf Tryggvason, to unite all of Norway...

Remember; Always check and mistrust your sources.

*taking a break* As I'm sure all are glad that I do...*smiles, and hoists a tankard of dry mead*

Message: Along the line of what Meriadoc said . . .
Author: Got another fun URL - Berosus Etana
Date: Jul 1, 1998 08:38
A few months ago I found a website for a group of re-enactors in England called "Regia Anglorum." Among other things they posted a funny page on what a conversation between a pagan Viking and a Catholic priest could have been like. Hope you all like it.

http://www.ftech.net/~regia/convert1.htm

Message: Back to a completely different subject again..
Author: Ferrarius - Trajanus Ulpius, Patron
Date: Jul 3, 1998 07:41
Wire, er, sorry, was probably invented by a whole bunch of different blacksmiths through out the known world during the bronze age.

Chainmail, is of course, made from wire, And the Celts of Gaul and the Po valley were making that by 300BC. (The Romans are thought to have copied it from them).

Smaller diameter lengths of wire were used to fasten lamellar corselets together, (examples found at Carnuntum, Ham Hill, Kempten, Longthorpe, and Chincester...and thats just England), and in the production of jewerly and other household items.

See "Roman Military Equipment" M.C. Bishop and J.C.N. Coulston "Greek and Roman Technology: a Sourcebook", annotated and translated by John W. Humphrey, John P. Oleson, and Andtew N. Sherwood. "Herculaneum, Italy's Buried Treasure" by Joseph Jay Deiss.

Message: *lol* Yeah, that sounds about right...
Author: the vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 3, 1998 08:18
...on that note, a summation, or paraphrazing of Bishop hatto's attempt to convert some vikings...(historical)

Hatto: (getting to what happens if you don't become baptized and christian)...and those who remain pagan will go to Hell, and be tormented for all eternity...

Vikings: Tormented? how?

Hatto: By being amongst the burning fires, and boiling lakes etc. in Hell, always stoked bt Satan and his minions...

Vikings: so it's fire and hot?

Hatto: Yes

Vikings: All year round?

Hatto: Yes...

Vikings: Even in winter?

Hatto: Ahhh...ehh..

Vikings: well...hmm...sounds good, better'n Hel's ever cold place...yes...just remain pagan, eh...good...wonder what the deal is, with people who convert...

Hatto: (desperate) No! No, no it's bad to go to hell, ah, 'coz...ah, the fires, sure...but they aren't warm fires such as you know fire...No, they are fire that burn like the coldest north wind burn the skin in winter, and like ice burn the skin, so it sticks and falls off...

Vikings: mumble...well...ok, yeah we see, ok...

Hatto: Good. So you agree, you will become Christian?

Vikings: Hmmm, just one more question...

Hatto: Yes?

Vikings: Do we get to see our ancestors and friends that died previously, in Heaven?

Hatto: But of course not, they are in Hell, 'coz they were pagan.

Vikings: Oh, well...We'd rather take hell then. At least we know people...

Paraphrased from memory...but essentially that is what happened.

Hell, btw, comes from the norse; Hel.

Hel is the, to say the least, nasty daughter of Loki...She is a deathgoddes and gets all nidhhingar(unworthy basically), and assorted scum.

Her queendom is Helhvite - "All white".

Helhvite refers to the state of her queendom...All covered in ice and snow, nothing grows there. Always is half day and the wind bite the skin like carrion birds.

Her castle is no picnic either...in Hel's halls sit Hunger and Thirst, served is Pestilence and Disease...

Hel's appearance is that of half her body being that of a young, beautiful maiden, with pale skin, red lips and raven hair and eye. The other half is shriveled, covered in sores and pustules, the hair is falling out, and the eye is milky and runny, the hand a crooked claw.

I've heard somewhere that Helvetica - Switzerland, is also from Helhvite...makes sense.

However, in Scandinavia today, Hell, is known as Helvete, or Helvitte, which is from Old Norse; Helhvite.

*Takes another swig of the mead*..."At least we know people..." *lol*...too true...

Message: Trajanus, wire work and chain...
Author: the vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 3, 1998 09:17
...I agree on the parallell development...
Let's not forget the Scythians though, fast becoming a pet people of mine...

Funnily enough, Trajanus, there is a depiction of a sedentary scyth, on Trajan's column in Rome. The result of Sarmathians assimilating the Scyths of the Ukraine. He is astride a horse, and said horse has chainmail...I believe the scyhts had rudimentary skills with chainmail already, but they had way superior horse breeding and training skills. Whereas the Sarmathians had a long tradition of good chainmail...

some books;
E.H. MINIS : Scythians and Greeks. A Survey of Ancient History and Archaelogy of the North Coast of the Euxine from the Danube to the Caucasus (Gordon Press, New York NY, 1976)
M. ROSTOVTZEFF : Iranians and Greeks in South Russia (Oxford 1922)
T. SULIMIRSKI : The Sarmatians (New York NY 1970)
T. TALBOT RICE : The Scythians (2° ed. Londres 1958)
A.M. TALLGREN : Caucasian Monuments (in "Eurasia septentrionalis antiqua" 5/1930)

Message: Of Hel and Hell
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Jul 3, 1998 09:50
There is a parallell discussion of Viking concepts of afterlife in "General discussion/The Vikings", starting with "Another explanation". It seems that if you did not die in battle, you should at least die at sea. There are stories of people throwing themselves off cliffs when they felt they were getting close to dying of old age. You would have a chance of avoiding Helheim (home of Hel) as long as you did not die in bed. I have got a little different information about Hel. "Helvete" (Hell) is supposed to mean "a confined place for punishment". Some sources also say she had the upper body of a beautiful woman and the legs of a decomposing corpse. Such differences are not unusual as the religion was not centralized. By the way she was also half-sister of the Midgard serpent and the Fenris wolf! About Helvetia: LOL, I wonder if any Swiss people are reading this? Are you sure that is the origin?

Message: No, i'm not sure on Swiss...
Author: the vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Jul 3, 1998 10:42
...as I said, but it's compellingly similar...I'd enjoy it to be true... Loki spawned Midgardserpent, Fenris, the wolf and Hel from his union with the giantess Angurboda(anguishforeboding). These are the bad children of Loki's. In the guise of a mare, he Mothered Sleipner, Oden's eight legged horse. he also had two sons from a more normal marriage...at the time of the betrayal, they caught Loki finally and the entrails of his sons were used as the fetters to tie him to the rock, underground. there's a serpent dripping venom upon him constantly. his wife, ever faithful, collects the venom in a bowl.

When she goes to empty the full bowl, inevitably some drops will hit Loki...His agony is so great that he shakes the very earth. One type of earthquake originates this way.

Another comes from the Midgard serpent anchoring itself around the earth when Thor tries to pull it out of the ocean.

This on mythology of me and my ancestors...For now enough.

*gets another tankard*

Message: Hell...Hel and Helvetia...
Author: - Maria Marius, Patron
Date: Jul 3, 1998 16:30
Webster seems to think that the words "hell," "hel" and "Hel" all derive from the Anglo Saxon term helan "to cover or conceal"... no discussion as to the Old Norse... but the Middle English word was helle...

As to "Helvetia" and the "Helvetii"...these terms stem from an entirely different root word & derivation than do the permutations of "hell."

Helvetia and the Helvetii pertain to Celtic people living (at the time of Caesar) in the area of modern day Switzerland. Haven't a clue what the root might mean...but it stems from the "Keltic" branch of Indo-European languages as opposed to the "Germanic" stirp.

Message: Second thoughts on "Helvetia"...
Author: - Maria Marius, Patron
Date: Jul 3, 1998 16:33
The term could derive from the Italic or Hellenic stirpes of Indo-European...if it was coined by a Roman or Greek tourist to refer to the quaint mountain natives.

Anybody have any thoughts on this? Anybody want to do any actual research....gods forbid that I would do any actual work....

Message: From the home of Hel to a Hell
Author: warning the sensitive, - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Jul 5, 1998 18:58
The name Hel means "concealed" (not confined as I wrote!), and vite means "punishment". At least Compton's dictionary says that the word "hell" comes from Hel.

The view of Hel and her realm went through drastic changes. At first it was seen as a cold and gloomy but still peaceful place, where she met the dead with courtesy. Towards the later Viking age, probably through Christian influence, it turned to be a place of tormention, ruled by an evil goddess that fed on the brains and marrow of the dead! A description of the later version of the realm of Hel:

"... Your eternal fate is decided by what kind of life you have led. The innocents go into a state of negative bliss or oblivion. Those not innocent are banished to walk along Nastrond, a strand of rotting corpses, out into the water. At the end, they must keep going. They must wade through streams of ice cold snake venom. [Snakes were hated culturally . The imagery of the cold venom is similar to a very hot jalapeno from the freezer -- ice cold but fiery hot.] They they make their way through a long cave crawling with poisonous snakes. They reach the end of the cave and water gushes through and washes the corpse/spirit down to Hvergelmir (a spring of boiling water). All the flesh is boiled off the bones. Nidhug stops gnawing the roots of the World Tree to gnaw the bones."

(http://members.aol.com/mmqchome2/mythnotes.htm#scandgods)

Message: Hell
Author: Astrologue - Urgos Enkidu
Date: Jul 5, 1998 23:19
Just an aside: In German hell means bright.

Message: Aherrm, sorry, got lost in the mead casket a while...
Author: The Vitki - Meriadoc Niall
Date: Aug 7, 1998 06:34
*sits down, putting the mug aside and opening a volume*

Egil's saga...and scientific correlation/evidence.

Egil the son of Skalla-Grim, born in early 10th century, written about by Snorri Sturlusson. A man of ethics and remarkable poetry, although showing his ill temper early on...

In a passage it's described how as a boy he is bested at a game, and he gets so angry he drives an axe into the head of the offending boy. His mom is naturally positive about his prospective abilities as a Viking, but his father is "annoyed".

He is successful as a raider and gains great friends and great enemies, finally to die in his 80s...very ripe old age. One interesting thing about him is his features; He is described as having a hideous appearance. A large and thick brow, immensely broad chin, broad stumpy nose, long, broad lips and thick eyebrows...almost as if his huge head had overflowed. When old he suffered deafness, loss of balance, went blind, had chronically cold feet and had constant headaches...

This suggests that Egil suffered from quickening of the bone replacement; Paget's disease. This similarity to real medical observation lends a lot of credibility to the sagas, even when written 250 yrs after the events.

A descendant of Egil; Skapti, exhumed his bones and tried to see how thick the immense skull was. He struck it as hard as he could with his axe's hammer end, but the skull didn't dent, nor crack.

Suggested from this section in the saga has been that it's an exaggeration of a Viking hero. However, with Paget's disease, it's possible. The skull is described as having a scalloped and corrugated surface. This is consistent with description of Paget's disease. Also, if an exaggeration, why then when Egil is old does he describe his malady and physical features thus;

The Horse of the necklace sways,
My bald head bangs when I fall;
My piece's soft and clammy
And I can't hear when they call.

If indication of exaggerating a story of an ancestor/hero in the account of his exhumation, why remember such a dire and painful description? The Horse of the necklace is the neck, and is hanging under a great weight, the head.

Paget's disease is most prevalent in Britain, according to a study in 1982, which was settled heavily by the Norse in the north east. This study excluded Scandinavia, though, on the assumption from earlier and less accurate records that the disease is nonextant in Scandinavia. According to Byock, however, there were at least 11 patients in Iceland alone being treated for Paget's disease in 1991.

I find this encouraging for the credibility of Ehil's saga. Does it make other sagas more credible? Yes, not by transposing the evidence from one inappropriately to the other, but if Egil's is true to such an extent, then the likely hood for other sagas being true is higher than if Egil's was untrue.

my source in this has been Jesse L. Byock's article in the Scientific American, 1995.

I'd much appreciate any views, corrections, questions and most of all; other examples of evidence for other sagas' credibility.

*closes volume, and takes a drink off the tankard, stretches and takes a little walk outside*

Message: Comment to the story of Egil
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Aug 7, 1998 07:47
Interesting story. Might also be a connection with berserks and their looks.

In the sagas, berserks are often described as being fantastically ugly, often being mistaken for trolls, as were Skallagrím and his kinsmen in Egil's saga Skallagrímsonar. Egil himself is described as being "black-haired and as ugly as his father", and at a feast in the court of the English king Æþelstan, Egil is said to have made such terrible faces that Æþelstan was forced to give him a gold ring to make him stop:

His eyes were black and his eyebrows joined in the middle. He refused to touch a drink even though people were serving him, and did nothing but pull his eyebrows up and down, now this one, now the other..

He could also have inherited or being influenced by his father. During the berserkergang, the berserk seemed to lose all human reason, a condition in which he could not distinguish between friend and enemy. This lack of awareness of berserks is clearly seen in Egil's saga, when the berserkergang came upon Egil's father, Skallagrím, as he played a ball game with his son and another young boy:

Skallagrím grew so powerful that he picked Thord up bodily and dashed him down so hard that every bone in his body was broken and he died on the spot. Then Skallagrím grabbed Egil. Egil was saved by a servant woman, who was slain herself before Skallagrím came out of his fit, but had she not intervened, Skallagrím would certainly have killed his own son.

Message: The berserk - warrior, werewolf, villain
Author: - Bacchus Ulpius
Date: Aug 9, 1998 06:22
The name is disputed but may mean "bare of shirt" (fighting without armour) or "bear shirt" (dressing in animal skins, mostly from bear or wolf).

The main characteristics were:

(1) association with animals, including shape-shifting abilities;
(2) terrifying appearance;
(3) immunity to weapons via spells or the wearing of (magically) protective animal skins;
(4) berserker rage, including turning purple in the face, loss of human reason, acquisition of enormous strength and animal behavior (killing and howling), followed by profound bodily weakness and disability;
(5) rejection by the community due to excesses of violence.

Berserkers had much in common with those thought to be werewolves. Egil's saga speaks of a berserker, with a reputation as shape-changer, called Kveld-Ulfr ("Evening Wolf").

"Men saw that a great bear went before King Hrolf's men, keeping always near the king. He slew more men with his forepaws than any five of the king's champions. Blades and weapons glanced off him, and he brought down both men and horses in King Hjorvard's forces." (Hrolfs Saga)

This was connected with a hamingja ("spirit" or "soul") or fylgja ("spirit form") of the berserker, which could appear in animal form in dreams or in visions, as well as in reality.

The berserk often seemed to have an immunity to weapons, or performed spells to induce it, or even had special powers to blunt weapons by his gaze. Many tales say of their berserkers, "no weapon could bite them" or "iron could not bite into him."

Modern scholars connect some examples of berserker rage with the consumption of drugs such as the hallucinogenic mushroom fly agaric (Amanita muscaria) or massive quantities of alcohol, perhaps as part of a ritual. Other explanations include self-induced hysteria, epilepsy, mental illness or genetic flaws.

This fury, which was called berserkergang, occurred not only in the heat of battle, but also during laborious work. Men who were thus seized performed things which otherwise seemed impossible for human power. This condition is said to have begun with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and chill in the body, and then the face swelled and changed its color. With this was connected a great hot-headedness, which at last gave over into a great rage, under which they howled as wild animals, bit the edge of their shields, and cut down everything they met without discriminating between friend or foe. When this condition ceased, a great dulling of the mind and feeble- ness followed, which could last for one or several days.

The primary role of the berserk was as a warrior attached to a king's army. Both King Harald and King Halfdan had berserker troops. They were used as suicidally fierce shock-troops, and to reinforce weak parts of the combat lines. They also served as a last defence for the leader of the battle and the standard. The berserker's ties to the god Odin would also have been welcome in a royal army, since Odin also had a particular association with rulership.

Outside of this role, however, the berserker became the stock villain of the sagas, typified as murderous, stupid brutes. The excesses of the berserkers eventually led to their demise. In 1015 King Erik outlawed berserks, along with holmganga or duels. It had become a common practice for a berserker to challenge men of property to holmgang, and upon slaying the unfortunate victim, to take possession of his goods, wealth, and women. This was a difficult tactic to counter, since a man so challenged had to appear, have a champion fight for him, or else be named a coward. In 1123, the Icelandic Christian Law stated, "If someone goes berserk, he is punished with lesser outlawry (three years banishment from the country) and the men who are present are also banished if they do not bind him."

(main source: http://www.realtime.net/~gunnora/berserke.htm)

Message: Icelandic gene studies
Author: - Marie Siduri, Patron
Date: Nov 20, 1998 12:09
In the December 1998 issue of Discover, there is an article titled, "Blood of the Vikings" about gene studies being done using the people of Iceland. Not only do the people have a tradition of keeping track of family histories many generations back, they also have a "pure" gene pool, most of them having been descended from a single wave of migration, mostly from Norway, in the late 9th and early 10th centuries.

What those conducting the study hope to find are genetic causes and cures for various diseases. Steps have been taken to protect the privacy of the citizens, but there are questions of exploitation. I'm wondering what anyone else who has read the article, or simliar ones, may think.

While this may be a bit off topic, it's the history of the land and the people that has given rise to such a unique opportunity.

The blurb from Discover'swebsite is:
Blood of the Vikings
By Robert Kunzig

There’s gold in Iceland: one of the purest gene pools in the world, perfect for gene hunting. And an Icelander come home from Harvard has staked his claim to it.

Message: Re: Viking Jihad
Author: An Asatruar - Wodening Parisii
Date: May 15, 1999 13:23
Many scholars now beleive the raids wre first started in reaction to Denmark's problems with Charlemange as well as Charlemange's slaughter of the Saxons. The theory goes that many Saxon refugees fled north. Being hardened veterans, they quickly won their place in Danish and Norse war bands. Having hard feelings against Christianity, they chose the most obvious target, the monastaries tot ake revenge on. The Anglo-Saxons like the Celts before them had taken up the missionary zeal to convert all the Germanic tribes. Since Charlemange waged war on the Saxons, Frisians, and Danes in the name of Christiainty, it made sense to destroy the true source of that drive to convert folks. Destroy the monastaries, destroy the missionaries. I'll check around and see if I cn post some sources.

Message: On Berserking
Author: - Whiteowl Ordovices
Date: May 23, 1999 14:26
The same sort of other-mindedness is attested in the Irish sagas of CuChulainn. Of course, there are some who suggest that the Celts and the Germanic tribes were related before their presence was noted in Classical writings...

I don't know about habitual berserking, but I do know that there have been times where I have become so angry (or frightened? maybe sometimes, but I think more angry) that I've had superior strength, a clouding of judgement, and so on. While like this, I've felt as though my hardest hit was like water, yet it was really very powerful. And afterwards, after the adrenalin rush, I've been really tired afterwards. Not often, not in a long time, though.

I've also heard about another stimulus in the same vein~ tales of mothers who suddenly acquired superior strength to save their children. The story I'm thinking of involved a mother who was able to pick up a car when her child was trapped under it.

Message: the Viking Jihad
Author: - Wodening Parisii
Date: Jun 14, 1999 13:35
Well, there really is not much more to tell about the beginnings. Charlmange waged war on the Saxons in his drive to convert them to Christianity. The Saxon fortress Eresburg was destroyed in 772 AD and later the Irminsul... a pillar the Saxons held sacred. In 782, as the war continued Charlemange massacred 4500 Saxon prisoners as retaliation for the Saxon resisitance. This pretty much ended the war.

However, the Saxon homelands bordered Denmark and Charlemange had been at war with the Danes off and on. The Danes still being Heathen took in many Saxon refugees, and in 790s the first raids began on the Frankish coasts. Most of these raids were retalitory in nature. In 793, the first major raid was made on a monastary, Lindisfarne in the British Isles. Lindisfarne was a major center for Christianity, and had been home to such historical figures as Bede. It was also the place that monks were sent from to convert the Germanic pagans. After this raid, several monastaries were hit. They were, easy prey with plenty of gold. However, more could be made by hitting small trading centers nearly as easily. What the monastaries were that the trade centers were not is the source of the missionaries that would seek out kings and convert them. Once converted a newly Christian king would seek to exterminate any pagan resistors. Therefore, the ideal soulution was to eliminate the missionaries. This had been done before. Radbod, ruler of the Frisians in 716 had conquered all of Frisia and threw out the missionaries... burining churches and restoring pagan sites.

The Vikings hit Lindisfarne in 793, Jarrow in 794, Iona, and Morganwg in 795, and the Isle of Man in 797. While the raids started as a war between Christian and heathen, they quickly turned to raids for profit and then conquest.

Message: A good reference link
Author: - Marduk Hammurabi, Patron
Date: Dec 31, 2000 04:30

Vikings Arne Emil Christensen

http://odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/om_odin/p10000971/032005-990460/index-dok000-b-n-a.html