4 ms·

The Vikings are an example of history written by the losers. The people who lost the battles (literate Christians) wrote the history. The Vikings didn't have ne

by rmc 12y ago

The Vikings are an example of history written by the losers. The people who lost the battles (literate Christians) wrote the history. The Vikings didn't have nearly that much writing, so they came off very bad in European history.

robryan 12y ago
I would still call it history written by the winners. In the end the Christians had the cultural influence that runs all the way until today. If the Viking culture had been preserved into modern day I would expect that we would see them in a different light.
kryptiskt 12y ago
The Icelandic sagas is a far more extensive and sophisticated literature than anything produced in Europe at the same time.
- rpenm 12y ago
  Those were apparently written more than a hundred years after "the Viking Age" had ended.
  - avar 12y ago
    And furthermore they mainly concern themselves with the internal strife of Iceland after the settlement. They're really important historically, mainly because they're pretty much the only thing from that time period that records the customs and affairs of common people and not royalty, but they have almost nothing to do with vikings.
xorcist 12y ago
A lot of our written history is preserved from the mediterranean civilizations. They have a tendency to describe other civilizations as less developed, primitive fighters. That was almost never really the truth of course. Some of it lives on in words such as "barbarians", "slaves" etc. that are very pejorative to the people originally referred to. I'm sure similar words exists in other old civilizations with good written record, such as the Chinese.
Htsthbjig 12y ago
History was written by the winners, as Christians WON most of the battles. Vikings principal weapon was surprise. Their objective was not winning battles but loot and pillage as much as they could before withdrawal. Their idea was not to invade and conquer populations that were stronger than them if they had time for responding the attack. If they found resistance they simply changed their objective to some weaker population. E.g First time Vikings attacked the north coast of what now is Spain they surprised people there. They won in some cases and withdraw. Years later they tried again, but people were prepared and Vikings lost hard. The same happened on what is now UK coast, first time the surprised and won over the people living there. Next time they lost.
- arethuza 12y ago
  "Next time they lost." I don't think that's quite accurate - a few parts of what is now the UK were colonized by Vikings and their descendants for hundreds of years. Places like Orkney and Shetland are very proud of their Viking heritage - e.g. the Up Helly Aa festival in Shetland: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-25917694 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shet... Then, of course, there are that lot of Vikings who settled in what is now France and went on to do quite well for themselves...
  - vidarh 12y ago
    Most of England was conquered by vikings at one time or another before the Norman invasion. First Danelaw expanded from 865 onwards. The viking rule over parts of England continued until England was united in 954. But they only stayed away for less than 60 years. In 1013 Denmark conquered England again, lost it in 1014, and reconquered it in 1016. King Cnut (Canute) the Great then ruled over Denmark, Norway, parts of Sweden, and the vast majority of England, from 1016 to 1035, followed by his sons, and it was first the death of the second of his sons to hold the English crown that brought England, very temporarily, back under English rule in 1066. The majority of the first couple of centuries of a united England was under the rule of descendants of viking invaders.
- vidarh 12y ago

by rmc 12y ago

robryan 12y ago

I would still call it history written by the winners. In the end the Christians had the cultural influence that runs all the way until today. If the Viking culture had been preserved into modern day I would expect that we would see them in a different light.

kryptiskt 12y ago

The Icelandic sagas is a far more extensive and sophisticated literature than anything produced in Europe at the same time.

rpenm 12y ago
Those were apparently written more than a hundred years after "the Viking Age" had ended.
- avar 12y ago
  And furthermore they mainly concern themselves with the internal strife of Iceland after the settlement. They're really important historically, mainly because they're pretty much the only thing from that time period that records the customs and affairs of common people and not royalty, but they have almost nothing to do with vikings.

xorcist 12y ago

A lot of our written history is preserved from the mediterranean civilizations. They have a tendency to describe other civilizations as less developed, primitive fighters. That was almost never really the truth of course. Some of it lives on in words such as "barbarians", "slaves" etc. that are very pejorative to the people originally referred to. I'm sure similar words exists in other old civilizations with good written record, such as the Chinese.

Htsthbjig 12y ago

History was written by the winners, as Christians WON most of the battles. Vikings principal weapon was surprise. Their objective was not winning battles but loot and pillage as much as they could before withdrawal. Their idea was not to invade and conquer populations that were stronger than them if they had time for responding the attack. If they found resistance they simply changed their objective to some weaker population. E.g First time Vikings attacked the north coast of what now is Spain they surprised people there. They won in some cases and withdraw. Years later they tried again, but people were prepared and Vikings lost hard. The same happened on what is now UK coast, first time the surprised and won over the people living there. Next time they lost.

arethuza 12y ago
"Next time they lost." I don't think that's quite accurate - a few parts of what is now the UK were colonized by Vikings and their descendants for hundreds of years. Places like Orkney and Shetland are very proud of their Viking heritage - e.g. the Up Helly Aa festival in Shetland: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-25917694 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shet... Then, of course, there are that lot of Vikings who settled in what is now France and went on to do quite well for themselves...
- vidarh 12y ago
  Most of England was conquered by vikings at one time or another before the Norman invasion. First Danelaw expanded from 865 onwards. The viking rule over parts of England continued until England was united in 954. But they only stayed away for less than 60 years. In 1013 Denmark conquered England again, lost it in 1014, and reconquered it in 1016. King Cnut (Canute) the Great then ruled over Denmark, Norway, parts of Sweden, and the vast majority of England, from 1016 to 1035, followed by his sons, and it was first the death of the second of his sons to hold the English crown that brought England, very temporarily, back under English rule in 1066. The majority of the first couple of centuries of a united England was under the rule of descendants of viking invaders.
vidarh 12y ago