7 ms·

The angle on this article is a bit strange. They talk about Icelanders as the real Vikings because they where settled by 100% Vikings. How are other Scandinavia

The angle on this article is a bit strange. They talk about Icelanders as the real Vikings because they where settled by 100% Vikings. How are other Scandinavian countries less Viking? They where also 100% settled by Vikings at the same time because that is where the Vikings came from. This whole story reads like this complete detachment of Iceland from everything else around it. But many Americans are entirely infatuated with Iceland and don’t look beyond its borders to put it in context. Almost everything said about Icelanders here would apply to my native Norway. The attitudes, values etc are very similar. Same with the connection to nature. Same with institutions. The Thing like the Icelanders had existed all over Scandinavia. It was not unique to Iceland. But Norway being much larger had multiple Thing. They still served as a sort of proto democracy. New Kings got voted in by election. Every free man and women could vote. Every offspring of the king, bastard or not was eligible to “run for office” so to speak. What is unique to Iceland is how tightly knit society they are due to how few people they are and everybody knowing everybody. And of course that they can read the original sagas but sagas also play an important role in Norway. I also learned about old Norse and read sagas in high school. It is more difficult for us of course but we can still see it is a strongly related language. I can guess a lot of the text if I read an Icelandic newspaper.

bookofjoe 6y ago
>How are other Scandinavian countries less Viking? They were also 100% settled by Vikings at the same time because that is where the Vikings came from. >‘Viking’ was a job description, not a matter of heredity, massive ancient DNA study shows https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/09/viking-was-job-description-not-matter-heredity-massive-ancient-dna-study-shows https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/09/viking-was-job-descr...
- arethuza 6y ago
  They also took Irish women as slaves to Iceland: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/dna-study-reveals-fate-of-irish-women-taken-by-vikings-as-slaves-to-iceland-1.3521206 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/dna-study-reveals-fa...
- socialdemocrat 6y ago
  Of course I know all this, I was after all raised in Norway. However I use the term as it is commonly understood by people today, not as it was used in 900 AD.
aitait 6y ago
"How are other Scandinavian countries less Viking?" They are much more diverse and have interacted much more with the outside world. You can not compare Sweden with Iceland. Sweden is a very progressive country and always have been in the modern age. Not being condescending but I perceived the people in Iceland very bold and and often interacting and dressing in a way that would be considered "low class". I also must say (downvote expected) that the Icelandic women by far do not live up to their reputation (looks). Sweden had mining, coal, the industrial revolution etc. Iceland did not have mining, did not have coal, did not have gas, did not have an industrial revolution due to lack of natural resources. They were a poor area and stayed poor until recently when they were able to harvest energy from their volcanoes. In fact, it is now a society with one of the highest energy consumption in the world. Well set for the future due to cheap energy and easy cooling of servers. It is true that the Icelandic society is much more coherent than others. In general I observed that if you look for a second passport, look in a small country. The smaller the better. (Incredibly difficult to get a passport in Liechtenstein, Andorra or Monaco). In big countries like Russia, USA, Brazil or China a citizen is mostly expendable.
- kyuudou 6y ago
  >harvest energy from their vulcans By mind-meld?! Clearly far more advanced than Swedes! As long as they controlled their powerful emotions and focused on logic! Oh, you mean volcanoes...
  - aitait 6y ago
    "For a long time, this volcanic island was one of Europe’s poorest countries, as only a small portion of the land is suitable for agricultural use and Iceland possesses virtually no natural resources. Thus, Iceland never developed into an industrial nation – the prosperity it achieved toward the end of the 20th century was due to the country’s booming services sector." https://www.erih.net/how-it-started/industrial-history-of-european-countries/iceland/ https://www.erih.net/how-it-started/industrial-history-of-eu... Do you know the thinnest books in the world? Swiss Humor Italian heroes German lovers English cuisine Icelandic industry
JetSetWilly 6y ago
It is nonsense anyway. There's been lots of studies (eg by the University of Iceland) showing that the original inhabitants were about 25%-50% Irish/Scottish [1]. Why? Because the norse who settled Iceland kidnapped and enslaved thousands of women from the coasts of Scotland and Ireland and took them to Iceland. So, Iceland is less Norse pureblood than the rest of Scandinavia, and secondly, the "Iceland has had the benefit of developing free from the guilt of having displaced native inhabitants" statement of the article is also total rubbish in the sense that there were plenty of forcibly displaced inhabitants, it is just that they were native to elsewhere. [1] https://www.irishtimes.com/news/why-people-in-iceland-look-just-like-us-1.1104676 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/why-people-in-iceland-look-j...
- arethuza 6y ago
  Does anywhere actually show much "guilt of having displaced native inhabitants"?
  - drpgq 6y ago
    There's some in Canada now.
  - ancorevard 6y ago
    Don't forget the guilt of the "native" inhabitants displacing the prior native inhabitants. It's a rabbit hole.
  - sharkjacobs 6y ago
    I don't know where you live but for the last few years, every public event or performance in Vancouver, Canada, has been preceded by a land acknowledgement statement. It happens at political events, at Hockey games, at plays and performances. It's just a brief statement along the lines of "We acknowledge that this event is taking place on the unceded territory of (list of indigenous tribes who inhabited the specific region)" There are debates about its merits as an actual tool of reconciliation, but I don't think it's possible to argue that it isn't an expression of guilt by the cultural majority.

bookofjoe 6y ago

>How are other Scandinavian countries less Viking? They were also 100% settled by Vikings at the same time because that is where the Vikings came from. >‘Viking’ was a job description, not a matter of heredity, massive ancient DNA study shows https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/09/viking-was-job-description-not-matter-heredity-massive-ancient-dna-study-shows https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/09/viking-was-job-descr...

arethuza 6y ago
They also took Irish women as slaves to Iceland: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/dna-study-reveals-fate-of-irish-women-taken-by-vikings-as-slaves-to-iceland-1.3521206 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/dna-study-reveals-fa...
socialdemocrat 6y ago
Of course I know all this, I was after all raised in Norway. However I use the term as it is commonly understood by people today, not as it was used in 900 AD.

aitait 6y ago

"How are other Scandinavian countries less Viking?" They are much more diverse and have interacted much more with the outside world. You can not compare Sweden with Iceland. Sweden is a very progressive country and always have been in the modern age. Not being condescending but I perceived the people in Iceland very bold and and often interacting and dressing in a way that would be considered "low class". I also must say (downvote expected) that the Icelandic women by far do not live up to their reputation (looks). Sweden had mining, coal, the industrial revolution etc. Iceland did not have mining, did not have coal, did not have gas, did not have an industrial revolution due to lack of natural resources. They were a poor area and stayed poor until recently when they were able to harvest energy from their volcanoes. In fact, it is now a society with one of the highest energy consumption in the world. Well set for the future due to cheap energy and easy cooling of servers. It is true that the Icelandic society is much more coherent than others. In general I observed that if you look for a second passport, look in a small country. The smaller the better. (Incredibly difficult to get a passport in Liechtenstein, Andorra or Monaco). In big countries like Russia, USA, Brazil or China a citizen is mostly expendable.

kyuudou 6y ago
>harvest energy from their vulcans By mind-meld?! Clearly far more advanced than Swedes! As long as they controlled their powerful emotions and focused on logic! Oh, you mean volcanoes...
- aitait 6y ago
  "For a long time, this volcanic island was one of Europe’s poorest countries, as only a small portion of the land is suitable for agricultural use and Iceland possesses virtually no natural resources. Thus, Iceland never developed into an industrial nation – the prosperity it achieved toward the end of the 20th century was due to the country’s booming services sector." https://www.erih.net/how-it-started/industrial-history-of-european-countries/iceland/ https://www.erih.net/how-it-started/industrial-history-of-eu... Do you know the thinnest books in the world? Swiss Humor Italian heroes German lovers English cuisine Icelandic industry

JetSetWilly 6y ago

It is nonsense anyway. There's been lots of studies (eg by the University of Iceland) showing that the original inhabitants were about 25%-50% Irish/Scottish [1]. Why? Because the norse who settled Iceland kidnapped and enslaved thousands of women from the coasts of Scotland and Ireland and took them to Iceland. So, Iceland is less Norse pureblood than the rest of Scandinavia, and secondly, the "Iceland has had the benefit of developing free from the guilt of having displaced native inhabitants" statement of the article is also total rubbish in the sense that there were plenty of forcibly displaced inhabitants, it is just that they were native to elsewhere. [1] https://www.irishtimes.com/news/why-people-in-iceland-look-just-like-us-1.1104676 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/why-people-in-iceland-look-j...

arethuza 6y ago
Does anywhere actually show much "guilt of having displaced native inhabitants"?
- drpgq 6y ago
  There's some in Canada now.
- ancorevard 6y ago
  Don't forget the guilt of the "native" inhabitants displacing the prior native inhabitants. It's a rabbit hole.
- sharkjacobs 6y ago
  I don't know where you live but for the last few years, every public event or performance in Vancouver, Canada, has been preceded by a land acknowledgement statement. It happens at political events, at Hockey games, at plays and performances. It's just a brief statement along the lines of "We acknowledge that this event is taking place on the unceded territory of (list of indigenous tribes who inhabited the specific region)" There are debates about its merits as an actual tool of reconciliation, but I don't think it's possible to argue that it isn't an expression of guilt by the cultural majority.