Contact or goods exchange does not mean multiculturalism, that is the frequent online reaction to articles like this, but it is incorrect. When we talk about An

Contact or goods exchange does not mean multiculturalism, that is the frequent online reaction to articles like this, but it is incorrect. When we talk about Anglo-Saxon objects found in Viking graves, we would not automatically equate that with a multicultural society, it could be as a result of pillaging, or trade, or some more intimate cultural connection, or a combination of all three, and might also include third parties. The idea presented in the original article was that a Viking was buried with a piece of fabric carrying an Islamic design, which had been incorrectly copied by a third party. They in fact said a Muslim Viking "could not absolutely be ruled out" but was unlikely. How you go from this to "Viking-Islamic multiculturalism projected into the past" is beyond me. Edit: Just googled around and did find a Guardian article with the subheading "University researchers’ ‘staggering’ claim appears to contradict theories that Islamic objects in Viking graves are result of plunder", although that wasn't replicated in the BBC article which was posted to HN.