What is it about vikings that captures our imagination so much?Like, if you look at what they used to do in a purely logical way, they were raiders and unwelcomed guests - no better than what niggers and muslims are today.But there's just something about them that invokes a sense of awe and wonder. Is it just the aesthetics?
>>15097672They went places
Vikings, together with the Greeks and the Romans, stand in stark contrast to the meek and submissive Christianity that came after European polytheism.It shows that there's still a need in Europe for its polytheistic roits, and that Europe will never be fully Christian. At best, Europe will be a balance between polytheistic efficiency and ruthlessness, and Christian morality and pacification of needless conflicts
>>15097706Furtherhttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/100315-headless-vikings-england-execution-pit>Aside from their injuries, the headless Vikings "look like a healthy, robust, very strong, very masculine group of young males," he added. "It's your classic sort of warrior.">A major benefit of the Viking diet was the fact that every level of society, from kings to common sailors, ate meat every day. Often this would have been pork, as hogs were easy to raise and quick to mature, but Vikings also ate beef, mutton and goats. Horses were also raised for food, a practice that led to later clashes with Christian leaders, as horsemeat was a forbidden food under church doctrine. Vikings were avid hunters, and would capture reindeer, elk and even bear to bring back to the hearth fires. And of course, since Vikings spent so much time on the water, fish formed a major part of their diet. Herrings were abundant, and prepared in a plethora of ways: dried, salted, smoked, pickled and even preserved in whey.https://www.history.com/news/the-surprisingly-sufficient-viking-diet
They were the antithesis of the domesticated modern "man," and perhaps too far in the other direction. To leave the office 9-5 and just going a-viking with the bros to pillage distant lands for gold and pussy sounds, if nothing else, like an adventure. To break it down to the simplest terms, they *did* things, as oppose to doing basically nothing which is how most people today and throughout history existed.
Also, the way they raided was also relatively uniqueBoats that manned 32 men each, setting to the sea and the great unknownIncredibly aesthetic, solemn It's also more personal than pontificus sending the legion of 10 gorrilion to totally overpower the opposition of disperate tribes, it's safe to assume the vikings had some level of underdog statusIt's like asking why do people care about pirates, they were unique in an interesting time in historyFind an African or Muslim conflict that had the same intrigue
>>15097672They are an important part of Anglo history and Anglosphere media dominates the world. That's why you see and hear a lot about them. They also have the same homeland as the Anglo-Saxons and shared many traits and cultural similarities.
They are part of British history.Many Americans are descendents of British and Sacndis.Therefore they promote Vikings a lot in mass media.Had it been slavs making their way to the US and you would see many slavic stories and folklore in pop culture.
They were also the first Europeans to discover America
>>15097672Raiders are always fascinating. Who doesn't love pirates and vikings?
>>15097672They epitomized the Faustian spirit and drive towards infinity
>>15097672>- no better than what niggers and muslims are todayWell those are very different groups and if you mean thirdie migrants, they are being invited by WEF types for economic stimulation. So it's nothing like Vikangz in that respect. Vikings were usually not being invited in most cases (I think the Slavs are an exception there may be others). The Norse developed a unique sea faring culture off their own back, then in some cases became a part of the aristocracy in many different lands. But people admire them for the same reason we admire mobsters and pirates and other such types, inset the Chad meme. But in truth it was more like Europe had become apostate by becoming Christian and they just wanted to continue their longstanding ways, they wanted to reopen trade and become rich again like the stories of their ancestors from ages past. That's what all this business is about raiding and aggression, etc, it was simply IE culture which was kind of predicated on raiding for cattle and wealth from the earliest beginning as Western Steppe Herders. Rome was founded by such types of men. The Vikings before becoming truly Christian found a way to make this part of their culture powerful and outward looking out on the seas. Various reforms like with Zoroastrianism in Persia were set in place to stop such raiding culture and make the values more urban and peaceful among various tribes and nations, much like Christianity in the west but this was more to consolidate military power and transform it into something higher than being mere warriors (see Charlemagne, Rollo, many others)
When Muslims created dynasties in Europe, like al-Andalus, they also became the subjects of enduring fascination. If any African states had got so far north I'm sure people would be intrigued as well, look at the reactions to the archaeogenetic discoveries of individual Africans in Europe, or the popularity of Afrocentrist LARPs.It's just so different from normal European countries of the period, so it stands out.
>>15098569They're just like me.
>>15098569The clothes and ship look spot on but the wigs and hair look like wigs and bad hair mostly. I also didn't like how they tried to make some of them look like powerlifting gym bros, I would expect a much leaner physique. Most don't look like guys who have rowed, sailed and trained for war since youth. You get that problem in US civil war movies too as of the last 30 years, the guys playing soldiers look stocky even kinda fat sometimes and it just wasn't the case in reality for 99% of men even officers. Modernoids need to take the otterpill in life and in fiction as it helps everything become both more beautiful and authentic simultaneously.
>>15098721Their bodies look realistic
>>15098569>>15098721>>15098746Vikings had short hair
>>15098773Most of them had long hair. Not biker haircuts like in Vikings but long and well kept hair.
>>15098746Man that bear skin guy with the axe is literally me.
>>15098784No they had short hair. Long haired vikings are a meme.
>>15098794No. We know from sources that long hair was common but short haircuts existed too.
>>15098805Source?
>Oseberg, long hair>Ælfric’s Letter to Brother Edward, short hair in the back long in the front>Bayeux Tapestry, mostly long hair but some individuals clearly had short hair too>Icelandic written sources, mostly long hair
>>15098785The main character is literally me if I were a marauding murderous psychopath
>>15098794This was more common among Normans.
>>15097672Native warriors are cooler and look it
>>15097765Soulful image desu
>>15097672I guess it's like with pirates and Gauls; people love that they are essentially counter-culture and didn't give a fuck... Ignoring the fact they're scum bags stealing a living; kinda like niggers
Vikings were Nordic
>>15097672>What is it about vikings that captures our imagination so much?Speak for yourself. I don't find vikings very interesting at all
>>15099091Here we go again.
>>15099155How is that even contestable?
>>15097672It's fucking astroturfed by Hollywood. That's LITERALLY the reason, it's not organic.>>15097714>>15097745>>15097765>>15097768>>15097881>>15098312>>15098447These are all pseudo-intellectual asspulls and conjecture. What really happened is Hollywood jews have the desire to portray white men as "primitive barbarisn savages". >>15098193>>15098207And yet there are almost no movies about actual ANGLO SAXONS but a cuntload about Vikings. Almost like Anglos don't actually run the entertainment industry. >>15099091So were the Gothic tribes who sacked Rome which is a LOT more impressive than raiding some shitty villages. So were the Franks who created western Europe. When's the last time you saw a movie about Charlemagne? Alaric? Arminius? Harold Godwinson? Roland? Any famous Germanic figure who isn't a fucking Viking or "le evil nazi"?
>>15099192Counterpoint: White people have thought that the Vikings were cool as hell since the Vikings were a thing, and no matter how much you suck Jew dick and squee about being a peasant that fact won't change.
>>15099192You understate the impact of Vikings on history but truth be told it's more the fact that we have so much from their oral traditions written down, the Eddas present the Germanic cosmology and the sagas can sometimes be an extraordinarily honest look at their pre-Christian beliefs and culture, see like the Saga of the Volsungs. Some of that is actually related to Goths and Franks. And while we know Goths and Franks were branches of the same tree, and that they were practicing rituals to the same gods in some cases long after conversion, we don't have such detailed stories and most of their written works are like the Gothic Bible, Carolingian minuscule and things of this sort. It all leans so much on Roman and Christian influences. Norse culture particularly through the Icelanders made a vital contribution to the Indo-European studies, especially for English and other Germanic language speakers.
>>15099192>What really happened is Hollywood jews have the desire to portray white men as "primitive barbarisn savages".Pretty sure they prefer to portray us a goofy, incapable, ignorant, unambitious faggots. Pic related is the icon of the 21st century media white male. Masculine movies like 300 were attacked for being fascist white supremacy blah blah blah.
>>15097881>Find an African or Muslim conflict that had the same intrigueTell us you know nothing about anything at all, without telling us that you don't.Why do you feel the intrinsic need to elevate some culture you have a perceived (but not real) connection to IN DETRIMENT of some other culture or group of people which you consider an inferior other (which they are not)?Could you not have flattered the Vikings WITHOUT having disparaged africans or arabs?Could you, with certainty, claim that nothing - no event, no great adventure , no homeric saga - south or east of the Mediterranean ever transpired, which had not been at least as thrilling as the viking stories that you, rightly so, find fascinating?You need to do some soul-searching, my friend.The wonder and awe Viking tales inspire are not the least bit diminished by other peoples having equally interesting stories and histories.You can find yours interesting, while also respecting the legacies of others - being respectful will not diminish yours in turn.
Hollywood Vikings are completely overrated but it lets sad cunts think they could have been berserkers in the past
>>15097672I can picture Persian invaders, Mongol hoards, Egyptian slavers, etc. All have unique aesthetics and interesting stories, but they’re not white, and the actions they took did not affect western civilization as directly. The stories that stick are of raiders that took and ran, hitting spots all over their territory, spreading their influence. Notice that pirates get the same treatment, despite being dirty bums and muggers. High seas helps in this regard, as it’s always been a symbol of vastness and adventure. Also helps that Hollywood and games got to take those stories and turn them into the modern equivalent of sea dwarves. Best way to put it is we need white enemies for our white stories, otherwise it’s a racial thing, and Vikings work well for it.
>>15097672They're the Pre-Christian Germanic culture that remained Pagan the longest, and has the most culture preserved. There's a reason most people call Germanic Religion "Norse Paganism: even though Anglos, and all Continental Germans once worshiped the same Gods.
>>15098901They look a lil goofy
>>15097672Probably because almost everyone can find something they like about them. Libs think pagans were feminist or something and like the idea of churches getting burned down and looted, chuds also like the idea of being pagan over being christian and probably see vikings as a symbol of white masculinity, while others probably appreciate their adventurous spirit, nice metalworking, seamanship skills, etc.
> Vikings are jocks> Christian monks are nerds and eggheadsI wonder why one is seen as cool and the other is meh.
>>15100645Christians just don't have an appealing masculine figure in their repertoire of archetypes. Knights are the closest thing but it's a pretty hard sell for most men nowadays to fanatically worship a crucified jew and to m'lady women just because they are women.
When the Anglo-Saxons encountered vikangs it was like meeting their ancestors. They still had the same religion and way of life as the Anglos had when they invaded Britain. The Anglos know where they came from with Beowulf being written by an Anglo and all.
>>15097714even tho Romans became based Christians
>>15100808What
>>15100913even tho Romans became based Christians
>>15100961What
>>15098721>clothes look spot onNo, way too drab. Vikings loved riches and impressive clothing. The camera is also filtered into grimness.>physiquesFair enough, but sometimes you need to adapt to your audience. If vikings were supposed to be way taller and beefier than the average continental, then your point will come across much better if you get a bunch of hench 190 cm guys vs normal builds, rather than wiry 175 cm guys vs malnourished 160 cm peasants. Same with exaggerating the size of certain castles and cities, rome just looks more like the worlds greatest city if it's not immediatly mogged by like, oslo, you have to exaggerate a bit.
>>15100658Nah, crusaders are cool enough. Holy warrior is a rpg archetype for a reason.
>>15101237Crusaders are icky according to the overwhelming majority of people because they did a le heckin islamophobia and there's still the problem of them worshipping a crucified jew and being simps for women.
>>15101228Those are supposed to be a band of poor viking raiders I think
>>15098312Yeah true. We northerners don’t have anything erudite and classical like the Greeks and Romans have to choose from so we larp as these thieves and vandals.
>>15101298>hello fellow northeners
>>15101237That's why I used to play a paladin in WoW
>>15101246Maybe listen to normal people instead of the twitter elite
>>15099192>It's fucking astroturfed by Hollywood. That's LITERALLY the reason, it's not organic.Oh piss off. The love for viking shit is way older than Hollywood, it all started during the Romantic era.
>>15097672The biggest castrated wusses on Earth once being feral assholes is very interesting
>>15097672you can prevent blacks from looting simply by shutting down the busses and trains, and you could starve them all to death in 6 weeks by cutting off their welfare. There is a bit different degree of romance to it, than the vikings sailing across the atlantic ocean without a compass.
>>15098822>>15098773I've already done you on fit so fuck off now balding schizo
>>15099429your cultures are only cool in the same orcs are cool
>>15101532What did early Christian Scandis think about vikangs?
>>15097706Huh! I never knew they made it to Spain and Italy.
>>15097745High iq conquerors ? Brother you were literal apeniggers living in literal mud-huts while Muslims had transcontinental world empires. Same thing goes to blacks. As for the Normans, they were mostly Franks. The only Scandinavian thing about them was just their ethnonym.
>>15101903>mud hutsNordics lived in longhouses since before the bronze age thoughever. Quit saying literal so much you sound like a woman.
>>15097672>What is it about vikings that captures our imagination so much?American culture dominanceVikings are relevant to Anglo history, and Americans see England as the "America before America existed".As a result, English history and all things pertaining to it get massively overrated and overrepresented in mass media.
>>15099192>So were the Gothic tribes who sacked Rome which is a LOT more impressive than raiding some shitty villages. So were the Franks who created western Europe. When's the last time you saw a movie about Charlemagne? Alaric? Arminius? Harold Godwinson? Roland?Did any of these guys invade England?Nope, therefore Americans (the guys who make all the movies, video games, tv shows...etc) don't care.
>>15099192>look mom, I replied to half of the thread!>>15100658>Knights are the closest thing but it's a pretty hard sell for most men nowadays to fanatically worship a crucified jew and to m'lady women just because they are women.I thought Game of Thrones did a pretty good job. Fictional world though.
6000 Vikuck rapists slaughtered at Clontarf in 1014. Utterly annihilated and proven to be incapable of fighting a standing army rather than raiding monasteries and then running away before a response could be made. Their blood dyeing the Irish Sea pink, they would never rear their memeworthy heads in Gaeldom again.
>>15100709Some Anglos even defected to the Vikingshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Assandun>During the battle, Eadric Streona, the ealdorman of Mercia, left the battle allowing the Scandinavians to break through the English lines and win a decisive victory. Eadric Streona had previously defected to Cnut when he landed in England but after Cnut's defeat at the Battle of Otford he came back to the English. However, this was a trick, as he again betrayed the English at Assandun.[5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_York_(867)best battle
>>15102031The Vikings who raided France and became Normans objectively had a bigger historical impact than Alaric. Alaric actually did nothing wrong, and the Goths were not the real cause of the fall of Rome irl and their kingdom in Italy didn't carry the same weight that Norman Britain did. It changed the language we're communicating with right now, one of if not the most important language of the industrial revolution. People liked Vikings before American tv shows, stop blindly repeating meme shit.
>>15102232Best Viking name? For me, it's Ubba.
>>15102284I like Sigurd
>>15099429The op equates us to niggersAlso you didn't list 1
>>15099168The irony
>>15097672Why do you call them Vikings when Viking is a thing you do? It's 2023 and you repeat the same bullshit calling a people by a verb.
>>15102529Academics use Vikings to refer to Norse medieval pillagers, pirates and raiders. Everyone knows what you mean if you say Viking, so why use another term?>Vikings is the modern name given to seafaring people originally from Scandinavia (present-day Denmark, Norway and Sweden),[2][3][4][5] who from the late 8th to the late 11th centuries raided, pirated, traded and settled throughout parts of Europe.[6][7][8]
>>15102541Because nearly every historian today points out that it's a misnomer
>>15102267>The Vikings who raided France and became Normans objectively had a bigger historical impact than Alaric.I have yet to see a single movie/show/game that depicts the 911 siege of Chartres, in which Rollo was defeated by the French and subsequently obtained Normandy after submitting to the French king
>>15102548Why would it be? Most historians are perfectly fine with using that term. Viking Age is also an undisputedly valid term in the field of archaeology.
>>15102560The Vikings tv show did that. They made him Ragnar Lodbrock's brother to put a family dynamic in the early Normans fighting the Vikings. The Franks made other Viking commanders dukes over other regions as well. It's an interesting mesh of cultures and I wish there was more fiction about it.
>>15102603Pure kino
>>15102593They retconned it into Rollo obtaining Normandy after betraying the vikangz during the siege of Paris.The real way he obtained his duchy was just too pathetic to be depicted in a show supposed to paint vikings as badass invincible warriors
>>15102624Heroic depictions of people often show them without limitations. That show was kind of a soap opera formula on top of that like most tv, GoT, all shows like that not something worth seething over as you are. They weren't aiming for historical accuracy. If they made.historical accuracy a point it would mainly focus on real people, not semi-legendary figures like Ragnar and wouldn't want to be a fucking farmer in England to shoehorn in gay middle class values.
>15102634This post is completely unreadable. Retype that shit again after you've seen a doctor about that stroke you just had.
>>15099192Vikings have been consistently popular since the 1800s and the Romantic period. I will never understand why TradCaths think that Vikings are only popular thanks to modern media. Sure the show helped but it's like think Pirates of the Caribbean popularize is pirates, they've been popular for hundreds of years.
>>15100709
>>15102830>I will never understand why TradCaths think that Vikings are only popular thanks to modern media.They like to imagine that the 1800s were this mythical time where everyone was hyper Christian and rejected everything that doesn't have to do with Jebus,
>>15103124P-p-poggers
>>15097672Christian Vikings were based.>Normans>Varangian Guard>St. Olaf>Leif Erikson>Harald Hardrada>Rollo>Harald Bluetooth>Sweyn Forkbeard>Cnut the Great>Sigurd the Crusader>Olaf Tryggvason>Magnus Barefoot>Haakon the Good>Snorri Sturlusonetc.
>>15103604All of them were secretly pagan according to Varg
>>15103869There may have been some truth to that. Who knows how many campfire stories they still had. Wouldn't surprise me if they projected their gods onto Christianity, as well.
>>15097672You probably don't deserve this based on what you said. However here's a book from an Arab Muslim scholar and explorer that went to the upper Volga region in 922AD who made an extensive ethnographic study of the Rus, Vikings of Swedish origin who inhabited the region at the time. It offers a unique and precious insight into the customs, attire, etiquette, religion, and intimate aspects of Viking life, featuring the only recorded firsthand description of a Viking ship cremation.Here's a snippet of his account:>I have seen the Rus as they came on their merchant journeys and encamped by the Itil. I have never seen more perfect physical specimens, tall as date palms, blond and ruddy; they wear neither tunics nor kaftans, but the men wear a garment which covers one side of the body and leaves a hand free. Each man has an axe, a sword, and a knife, and keeps each by him at all times. Each woman wears on either breast a box of iron, silver, copper, or gold; the value of the box indicates the wealth of the husband. Each box has a ring from which depends a knife. The women wear neck-rings of gold and silver. Their most prized ornaments are green glass beads. They string them as necklaces for their women.
>>15103604>Varangian GuardWeren't they mostly pagan?
>>15103604>NormansWeren't they mostly Celtic?
>>15104579Yes, as were most of the men he listed by his own account, either because like Rollo, Cnut, Sweyn, Haakon, and the Varangians they worshiped Thor, or because they actively resisted Byzantium imperialism and rejected Greek Orthodox Christianity.
>>15099192>And yet there are almost no movies about actual ANGLO SAXONSKing Arthur (2004)
>>15104606what
>>15103604>Harald BluetoothFirst man to exchange data using wireless technology
>>15103869>>15103968>>15104579>>15104606>>15104655Delusional and in full denial kek. The vikings who did anything of worth were Christians.
>>15100645>who are the templars
>>15102284Bjorn
>>15104813made me chuckle
>>15097672>they were raiders and unwelcomed guests - no better than what niggers and muslims are todayActually it would be the same as (imaginary) white americans invading europe to kill all the niggers and muslims and liberate europeans. Christians were the foreign rapefugees and vikings were the neo-nazis expelling the foreigners with violence.
>>15103604lol>>15103869>secretlyopenly
>>15104828
>>15104828Are Catholics Christian?
>>15105041No, of course not, you have to submit to the will of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch and the one holy apostolic mother church of Constantinople to be Christian.
>>15105044So then by your own definition, as >>15104655 already said, none of the men that we're talking about are Christian no matter which religion they actually practiced. And, as that same anon already said, a number of them were only "Christian" in as much as the Pope was paying them to kill off Byzantine clergymen who had setup shop in Scandinavia. Did you even bother reading the thread before you did the le ebin mass reply?
>>15097672Sexy men and women from nude beach country and playboy mate central getting into a boat to /travel/ #findmyself explicitly to get moneyy and have SEXOIf they get into a fight they can let their inner beast out with BERSERKER and defeat ANYONE!1!1!1!! The solution to this contrived and hylified view is total boomer removal. It’s that simple. Remove all boomers. Burn their yachts, freeze their banks, destroy the pension system, and we embrace Protectionism and reject jews.
>>15097672They only managed to plunder England, in Spain they were hung from palm trees or buried alive, and in the Mediterranean they were defeated by the Byzantine army.
>>15105378>Byzantine armyByzantine NAVY
>>15097672They bullied the Anglo so like the Zulus they’ve been wanked as these gigachad warriors
Its just retarded white wewuzism, (we wuz warriors!). This snow niggers built nothing, invented nothing and yet are revered like awesome people. They even did human sacrifice but unlike the aztecs they get a pass because theyre white. Hypocrisy.
>>15105671It's ideologically consistent to praise vikings if you are anti-industrialism, which many whites are. Liberals who praise them because they hate Christ are huge faggots thoughever.
>>15105671>human beings are only good if they make muh progress>no progress = subhuman>the arc of history is reducible to a line graphpeople like you really ought to move to china and be with your fucking fellow insectoids
>>15105671>Asian subhuman joins the party
>>15101875the mafia structure was a direct result of normans (and viking descendants) banding together to avoid getting erased by muslims, greeks and jews.
>>15104791Poppa>Her parentage is uncertain and may have been invented after the fact to legitimize her sons lineage, as many of the fantastic genealogical claims made by Dudo were. Based on her separate more Danico status that differentiates her from Rollo's Christian wife Gisela of France, Poppa's family was unlikely to have been powerful Christian nobility who would have insisted by force if necessary-on a legal and monogamous Christian marriage for their daughter. From Wikipedia>So that from internal as well as external evidence the whole story of Popa falls to the ground, and we are left to the conclusion that the mother of William Longsword was a Norse woman and no victim of the sack of Bayeux. Archaeologia, Or, Miscellaneous Tracts Relating to Antiquity, Volume 45, Part 2 p. 242Sprota>Sprota was an early 10th century woman of obscure origin who became wife in the Viking fashion (more danico) of William I, Duke of Normandy>The first mention of Sprota is by her contemporary, Flodoard of Reims. Although he does not name her, he identifies her under the year [943] as the mother of "William' s son [Richard] born of a Breton concubine".[6] >The name Sprota seems to contain the same root as the anthroponym Sprot found in the Domesday Book and in various place-names both in England such as Sprotbrough (Sproteburg 1086) and in Normandy like the Eprevilles, such as Epreville (Sprovilla 1025), [11] which is at the same time Anglo-Saxon as Sprota, [12] Anglo-Scandinavian and Scandinavian (see Sproti [13]).From WikipediaEither Breton, or just as likely, Norse.Gunnor/Gunnora (Old Norse: Gunnvọr)>The first part is Old Norse gunnr ("battle"), from Proto-Germanic *gunþiz. The second part is vor Probably derived from the Old Norse adjective varr ("careful, wise, loyal")From Wiktionary>according to Dudo of Saint-Quentin she was of noble Danish ancestry.From Wikipedia
>>15104791>>15106396Judith of BrittanyBreton/FrankishFrom WikipediaHerleva>Herleve (sometimes written Herlève in modern French), it is an old Norman given name of Scandinavian origin.>Herleve (Latin Herleva) presumably represents a romanized form of the Old Danish female personal name Herlef itself from the Old Norse female personal name Hærlæif>This reinforces the idea of a Norman origin of Arlette, especially since she is not the first Herleve attested at this time in the duchy, for example,the wife of Robert le Danois , brother of Duke Richard II, is also called Herlève and is probably the daughter of Turstin le Riche with the unmistakably Scandinavian name Þorsteinn.From French Wikipedia
>>15104791>>15106396Why do you fags obsess over the genetics of a man who has been dead for 900+ yearsIt's not like you are going to get any of the shine through osmosis.
>>15097714Based.
>>15104791>>15106396Rollo was of islander norse origin,- which means western norway, isle of man, hebrides, icelandic, etc.Most normans and frisians were predominantly danish or south-eastern norse speakers, but Rollo himself stems from the Seakings of norway. This is a settled matter among scholars.
>>15106428I'm not disputing that. My post concerns the wives of the Norman dukes.
>>15103604or, you know...Alfheimr = ElohimNiflgardr = NephilimMuspellheim = Laacher See/the fall of the nephilimAsk = Adam (the red blushing tree)Loki = LucipherAesir = OsiriansOdin = Thoththe list goes on, and checks out.But most importantly,- Gerda whom married Yngvie-Freyr was Mary Magdalene's daughter or granddaughter from Isle of Man - where we know for a fact her and 2 disciples were travelling.Vikings ARE the people of Magdalene.(Even Disney reveals quite clearly that this is their canon,- with their focus on anglo-norman royalty and Mandalorians)of course the jews tries to subvert the story slightly, but deep down they know for a fact we are their parental tribe. they even larp using germanic names.the peoples of Loki and Odin have always been biblical, but the authors haven't always been.
>>15104933based
I had a good run in Crusader Kings with NorwayKing of NorwayBrother ran Iceland for meIntermarried with multiple SwedesDanish got into it with the Holy Roman Empire so they had no time or resources to fuck with me Ireland was my piggy bank for raidingDecided to take ScotlandTook a pretty good chunkEnglish start pushing back Holy Roman Empire decide to crusade against the pagan NorthmenHave to head back home and fight off the HRE for multiple generationsGradually lose Scotland and IcelandBeing a Norse king ain’t all gravy
>>15106795Are you supposed to bum rush England before Slick Willy takes it all?
>>15106396>Rollo's Christian wife Gisela of FranceA literal myth that never happened>Gunnor/Gunnora>according to Dudo of Saint-Quentin she was of noble Danish ancestry.Which fits the picOf Danish ancestry =/= DanishShe was a third generation Norman, just like her husband.
>>15106396>So that from internal as well as external evidence the whole story of Popa falls to the ground, and we are left to the conclusion that the mother of William Longsword was a Norse woman and no victim of the sack of Bayeux. Sure thing broThen how did this happen>William succeeded Rollo (who would continue to live for about another 5 years) in 927[17] and, early in his reign, faced a rebellion from Normans who felt he had become too Gallicised.Gisela never existed and Poppa was a Frankish woman of minor nobility who raised her son as a frog, much to the anger of Rollo's vikangz
>>15106396>The name Sprota seems to contain the same root as the anthroponym Sprot found in the Domesday Book and in various place-names both in England such as Sprotbrough (Sproteburg 1086) and in Normandy like the Eprevilles, such as Epreville (Sprovilla 1025), [11] which is at the same time Anglo-Saxon as Sprota, [12] Anglo-Scandinavian and Scandinavian (see Sproti [13]).The article literally says that this name was randomly given to her by some faggot 150 years laterShe was in reality a Breton woman of an unknown name
>>15106857>A literal myth that never happenedWho cares, she didn't bear Rollo's children anyway.>She was a third generation Norman, just like her husband.Parents unknown, but often pretended to be a fictitious Herbastus de Crepon. See Todd A. Farmerie,Robert de Torigny and the family of Gunnor, Duchess of Normandy(Dec. 1996).She had a Norse name and according to the contemporary Dudo, was of noble Danish ancestry. Case closed.
>>15107055>Who cares, she didn't bear Rollo's children anyway.The entire bullshit reasoning for Poppa not being Frankish nobility is based on Rollo's previous marriage with Gisela>Parents unknown, but often pretended to be a fictitious Herbastus de CreponDe Crepon, not Von Copenhagen.She was the daughter of a dude who was born in France and probably had a French mother and maybe even grandmother.Being of noble Danish ancestry doesn't mean shit. Even Henry V of England was "of noble Danish ancestry" as he was descended from Rollo 500 years earlier.
>>15106992>The article literally says that this name was randomly given to her by some faggot 150 years laterHow fitting that her name is so closely associated with Anglo-Scandinavians, and present in Normandy where the Norse settled.>She was in reality a Breton woman of an unknown nameGiven that Vikings controlled Brittanyvat this point, it is just as likely se was a Norse woman.
>>15107092>The entire bullshit reasoning for Poppa not being Frankish nobility is based on Rollo's previous marriage with GiselaNo. Gisela was supposedly his later Frankish wife. William Longsword, Rollo's son was born overseas, meaning not in Normandy, long before the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte.>De Crepon, not Von Copenhagen.?>She was the daughter of a dude who was born in France and probably had a French mother and maybe even grandmother.See >>15107055>Being of noble Danish ancestry doesn't mean shitIt does when it is so recent, and still have Norse names.
The fact vikangz lovers have to claim the achievements of a bunch of French speaking christians (who neither behaved nor looked like vikings) just because some of them had one viking ancestor 200 years prior is just sad.I think it comes from the fact vikangz never achieved anything of note. They even managed to get humiliated by fucking Anglo-Saxons, whom the Normans subjugated with a single battle.
>>15107178>William Longsword, Rollo's son was born overseas, meaning not in Normandy, long before the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte.Longsword was born in England in the 890s.Rollo had been in France since the 870s, but after his many failures he went to England for some time (with his French wife Poppa) before eventually coming back to France and finally obtaining land after another defeat.>and still have Norse names.Name can't be trusted.Helerva for exemple wasn't called like that, and beside the English (for coping reason) and Scandinavian versions, most wiki articles in other languages call her Arlette.No one really know what was Gunnora's real name.
>>15107254it could have been stemming from Herloptr ("ruler of loki", or "ember tamer") as a reference name to her familys religion, or just simply a proto-christian way of damning Loki/evil.It is basically just a female norse version of "Chad Thundercock"
>>15097672>no better than what niggers and muslims are today.Maybe if niggers and muslims were daring pioneers who discovered the world travelling where no one else ever has. But obviously that is not the case. Vikings were extremely clever but also barbaric, that's the appeal
>>15097672Revisionism
>>15107254>obtaining land after another defeat.Kek>Name can't be trustedNames, as opposed to pedigree and legend is much more reliable (assuming the name is recorded correctly) as there is nothing to gain by inventing it.>Helerva for exemple wasn't called like that, and beside the English (for coping reason) and Scandinavian versions, most wiki articles in other languages call her Arlette.Herleva is a Latinisation of the Old Norse name Herlef/Hærlæif. French Wikipedia admit this.>No one really know what was Gunnora's real nameBruh
>mfw autists itt arguing over whether the black-haired, french/latin speaking, dead jew worshipping William le Conqueror had 5% or 25% of Nordic blood in his veinsWhy don't you guys try to post actual vikings achievements instead?
>>15107545The Norman elite had close ties to Scandinavia and would let Norse ships anchor in their harbors. Even Norman literature in the 11th century was heavily influenced by Scandinavia.
>>15107556and it would have continued on if it hadn't been for the black plague decimating the norwegian shipping supremacy, leaving normandy stranded and doomed to become just as faggy as the inland french. they deserved the antiroyalist french bane for turning into massive inbred faggots.
>>15107556>The Norman elite had close ties to Scandinavia and would let Norse ships anchor in their harbors.By the 11th century, all ties had been severedThere are accounts about how in the late 10th century, the older Normans were sad about no one speaking Old Norse anymore among younger generations.>Even Norman literature in the 11th century was heavily influenced by Scandinavia.Pic related
>>15107605>Haraldr-ACK (takes arrow to throat)
>>15097672Because they were a living link to a more ancient past. They thought Jesus Christ was no match for Odin or Thor.
>>15107605>The fusion between Rollo's pirates, and the already dense population of the rich province called after them Normany, had long been accomplished. It was less a fusion than an absorption, for the natives were much more numerous than the settlers.Many, many such cases when Germanics settled in new places
>>15105378>>15105385That was Rus not Vikings akshually.
>>15102748English isnt my first language but I'm trying to get better.
Normans were just a bunch of bootleg Franks at the end of the day
>>15098193this
vikings are cringe normie pop culture
>>15107545William the Conqueror's hair color is not known, but his son William II Rufus had yellow hair while his other son Henry I did indeed have black hair according to William of Malmesbury.
Here's an interesting read from some coping British historian trying to conciliate his view that Normans weren't French, with the annoying fact that they called themselves French in every official document they produced and the fact that Anglo-Saxons called them French too.
>>15107605>all ties had been severedI mean in the Bayeux Tapestry we can see some Norse influence remain, so why claim a falsehood?
>>15108837>I mean in the Bayeux Tapestry we can see some Norse influence remainWhere exactly do you see it?Their French helmets? Their French hauberks? Their French cavalry?I bet you're one of these brainlets who think the ships depicted are vikangz longships even tho they're just the typical 11th century ships used all over Western Europe at the time.Fun fact: pic related is a depiction of Anglo-Saxon ships, not Normans ones. They look excatly like Norman ones on the tapestry because that's how all ships looked in Western Europe at the time.
At this point some people are just grasping at straws to try and tie Normans to vikings.Like that one time some cretin tried to claim kite shields were of viking origin just because 11th century Normans used them, even tho it's well known they're of Byzantine origin and were later used by the Franks (which resulted in 11th century Normans using them as they were, well, French).
>>15107605completely unrelated but I find the fact that a guy in the song of Roland has a name that might be Latin in origin a very interesting factoid.
anglo-saxons wuz vikingz and shieeetlook at 'em ships bro, they really wuz!!!
>>15108889They are flying a very blatant Norse banner, anon. So, as far as the topic goes, it's over, I'm just asking why do you claim otherwise?
>>15103124nice
>>15108954>Norse bannerWhat is that even supposed to mean?Show pic of your "Norse banner" in the tapestry
>>15097714you read too many fantasy novels
>>15108997How come it's so hard to get you to answer a simple question?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven_banner
>>15109026All these straws that are grasped at to try and link 1066 Normans to vikings are just sad
>>15105671medshit fuming as always
>>15109098why do medshits cope so much about normans being vikings? they even wear the same style helmet you dumb brown fag
>>15108936they were directly related to vikings and any amateur observation of archeology would reveal this. you reveal yourself as another brown subhuman who opened a history textbook a day or two ago. if even that, probably watched a youtube video
>>15108889yeah, because all western european cultures came from the germanic tribes you dumb lying faggot. you will never be white, brown medshit
>>15109135>all western european cultures came from the germanic tribesRetarded statement. All of central and western europe spoke Celtic at one point.
>>15109130Your pic is pure cope and looks nothing like viking raven (on the top on pic related)Your shit looks more like the usual German/French marltet heradlry (provided this thing is even a bird at all, hard to tell)
>>15109132Everyone in Western Europe, from England to Italy, used that kind of ships in the 11th century.They might have been of viking origin at the beginning, but using them in 1066 didn't prove shit about one's vikingness.Anglos used them, Normans used them, other French used them, Spaniards used them, Italians used them, Germans used them...
>>15109170>Anglos used them, Normans used them, other French used them, Spaniards used them, Italians used them, Germans used them...No
>>15109174Yessee >>15108889>>15108915>>15108936
>real vikings are so boring the discussion shifted to normanssad
>>15108889>even tho they're just the typical 11th century ships used all over Western Europe at the time.English and Norman ships were built in the Scandinavian tradition during this time, shocking, I know.>>15108915>At this point some people are just grasping at straws to try and tie Normans to vikings.What? Tying the Normans to vikings isn't difficult. This is uncontroversial. https://youtube.com/watch?v=tDVyhCJxeQk
>>15109234Better videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvaZuKryQPQHe explains how they stayed close and were aware of their kinship
>>15097672Test
>>15098746Kino
>>15107545>Why don't you guys try to post actual vikings achievements instead?Ok. See >>15103604
>>15109234>English and Norman ships were built in the Scandinavian tradition during this time, shocking, I know.All of Western Europe used Norse-type ships in the 11th century.Pic related, it was the typical ship of the era.>What? Tying the Normans to vikings isn't difficult.Yeah, for braindead normies who watched that Netflix TV show and Youtube videos who keep waking over badass vikings warriors, it isn't hard as they know jack shit and can just ignore facts.Meanwhile for actual scholars who need to explain why these supposed "vikings" spoke French, wore French helmets and armor, fought like the French and called themselves French, it becomes much harder, as shown by this British historian >>15108811 who needs to go great lengths to try and deny the Frenchness of 1066 Normans.
>>15109378>Normans>Varangian GuardNeither of these were vikings. Great way to start a post about vikings achievements.
>>15109247Probably yet another dishonest video that consists in grasping at straws ("bro they used longships", "did you know that about 7% of words in Norman French dialect are of Norse origin", "wow this dude bears a banner with a bird on it!!!") while ignoring the elephant in the room (their language, their military gear, their military tactics, their family names, the way they called themselves in official documents, their architecture...etc).
Normans weren't VikingsFranks weren't FrenchAncient Germanics weren't GermanRomans weren't ItaliansAncient Egyptians weren't ArabsIt's about time /his/ finally accept these realities.
>>15109247I watched it and it says jack shit about 11th century Normans having Norse culture.The video only covers Rollo's life and states that, even though Rollo retained pagan ways all his life, his half-Frankish son William Longsword was already adopting French culture.
>>15109413>All of Western Europe used Norse-type ships in the 11th century.That is not what your source states. It doesn't even mention Western Europe.>as shown by this British historian>>15108811#who needs to go great lengths to try and deny the Frenchness of 1066 Normans.And here you are, denying the Nordicness of these same Normans. The Normans were neither French nor Scandinavians. They were a blend of both. This is why we call them Normans as opposed to just Franks or Vikings. Also, there were no unifying French identity in 1066. They were French to the degree that they spoke Old Norman, a form of Old French.
>>15097672Secret resentment against Christians and love of Nords.
>>15109625>Also, there were no unifying French identity in 1066. They were French to the degree that they spoke Old Norman, a form of Old French.There definitely was a French identity and common culture at the time, despite various regional sub-identities existing within it.Normans were part of this larger French cultural identity, as shown by them singing the Song of Roland at Hastings or by the fact they called themselves "French" when they were in England surrounded by Anglos.It's kinda like these guys who insist they are Scottish when they are in Britain, but who become proudly British when abroad.
>>15109433>their languageThey adopted the native language to be able to rule. Speaking French =/= being French.>military gear, their military tacticsThe Normans adopted Frankish military gear and tactics to suit their own needs. This is what made them so successful. They also retained some viking practices like hit-and-run and naval tactics.>their family namesNormans used patronymics like their Scandinavian ancestors, just in a different language (Fitz). Many also had norse names like Osmond, Osbern, Turstin, Rainulf, Asclettin, etc.>the way they called themselves in official documentsNormandy was a distinct political entity separate from the Frankish kingdom though part of the Frankish cultural realm. They may have called themselves "Franci", but they did not however see themselves as "French".>their architectureNorman architecture has characteristics that differ from other French styles. There's a whole Wikipedia article on it if you're interested.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_architecture
>>15109841>They adopted the native language to be able to rule.Curious how the first post-1066 English king to speak English natively rather than French started reigning in 1399. How did his predecessor manage to rule? >Speaking French =/= being French.But speaking French while being born in France and living in French = being French>The Normans adopted Frankish military gear and tactics to suit their own needs.They adopted Frankish military gear and tactics because they lived in France among French people. Same reason why they adopted French dressing style, legal system, literary tradition...etc>They also retained some viking practices like hit-and-run and naval tactics.Normans aren't famous for hit-and-run tactics, nor for naval tactics.They sailed and invaded places yeah, just like non-Norman French nobles from various regions did during the First Crusade in the same era as the Norman chimp outs in the Mediterrean. Hardly a Noric specificity.>Normans used patronymics like their Scandinavian ancestors, just in a different language (Fitz).It was the exception rather than the rule. Most had French sounding names, either toponymic or relating to an activity (Hauteville, Taillefer, Neville, Mortimer, Devereux...etc>Many also had norse names like Osmond, Osbern, Turstin, Rainulf, Asclettin, etc.Mainy 11th century Franks also bore Germanic given names, hardly an argument>Normandy was a distinct political entity separate from the Frankish kingdomNormandy was a duchy within the Kingdom of France. Like all the other French duchies, they had some autonomy, but also feudal duties toward the king.
>though part of the Frankish cultural realm. Exactly. They had some kind of local regional identity (as did the people from Aquitaine, Anjou, Poitou, Picardy, Burgundy...etc), but they were also part of a wider French cultural identity.Kinda like English, Scottish and Welsh are their own thing but are also British.>They may have called themselves "Franci", but they did not however see themselves as "French".Sounds like cope.They did see themselves as French when among non-French (such as Anglos), while they emphasized on their regional culture when among fellow French.>Norman architecture has characteristics that differ from other French styles. There's a whole Wikipedia article on it if you're interested.>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_architectureMore Anglo grasping at straw bullshit.Norman archicture is just a subcategory of French Romanesque architecture.It's barely different from the Romanesque architecture of the regions around Normandy, and it's vastly (and that's an understatement) different from Scandinavian architecture.Norman architecture was indeed French and not Nordic.
From the link about Norman architecture>Norman barons built timber castles on earthen mounds, beginning the development of motte-and-bailey castles, and great stone churches in the Romanesque style of the Franks. By 950, they were building stone keeps. By 950 they had already abandoned the traditional viking mudhuts and were now building with stone like the civilized Franks.And that's 100 years before 1066.
>>15108997>>15109026>>15109098>>15109130>>15109157Vikingsbros....I don't feel so goodOur epic raven banner of the Bayeux Tapestry is actual a christcuck dove...
>>15109130>they even wear the same style helmet you dumb brown fagThey don't faggot.1066 Normans wore the typically Western European nasal helmet, that they adopted from Franks.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasal_helmet
>>15098794That's norman knight, moron. Not a viking.Normans adopted this weird haircut because of the (french) helmets they wore.
>>15109170Idk about Italy, the Atlantic coasts of north Spain, and the rest of the places you named I can buy it. But Italy is smack dab in the mediterranean sea, and at that point, there are more prominent sea powers there.
>>15109232They're not even all that boring, the Vikings in the Caucasus and the middle east are pretty interesting.>>15107605>>15107611>>15108643>>15108811>>15110058>The only guy other than meso-anon to cite books in this board only does so to prove some random point about the ethnicity of the NormansBtw, what's the name of the books? They look pretty comprehensive.>>15109946>Mainy 11th century Franks also bore Germanic given names, hardly an argumentBasically everyone worth naming had a germanic or hebrew name at the time.Excepting the rare CASSIVS AGUVSTVUS VULTIMVS ROMANRVM that hits you like a trick whenever you see him named.That type of people did hang around un until the eleventh century.
>>15109768>by the fact they called themselves "French" when they were in England surrounded by AnglosThey pretty consistently called themselves Normans, as distinct from both Englishmen and Frenchmen. Sometimes they referred to themselves as English, but clearly saw themselves as separate from the bulk of England's people. Sometimes they called themselves French, but clearly saw themselves as separate from the bulk of France's people.Wace, the sole source for the claim that the Song of Roland was sung at Hastings, wrote in the mid-12th century. In his writings he mostly refers to himself as Norman, but also as French and English. Interestingly, at around the same time, Henry of Huntingdon was making record of the speech made at Hastings by William>Did not Rollo my ancestor, founder of our nation, with our fathers conquer at Paris the King of the Franks in the heart of his kingdom, nor had the King of the Franks any hope of safety until he humbly offered his daughter and possession of the country, which, after you, is called Normandy>Ah! let any one of the English whom our predecessors, both Danes and Norwegians, have defeated in a hundred battles, come forth and show that the race of Rollo ever suffered a defeat from his time until now, and I will submit and retreat
>>15108811>coping British historianlol he's not British XD
>>15108811>>15110439If you fags named the books you cite.
>>15097672>Like, if you look at what they used to do in a purely logical way, they were raiders and unwelcomed guestsVikings were the quintessential adventurers. For every raider, there was a trader or a mercenary or an explorer.
>>15110597Maybe for England. WHich spawned the U.S. which spawned Hollywood.Maybe in 800 years, we will see a glut of conquistador-themed media coming from Latin america.
>>15099192>there are almost no movies about actual ANGLO SAXONStbf even the English's national epic takes place in Scandinavia, Anglos are just not that interesting.
>>15110548If you see a screenshot from a book all you need to do is>grab a sentence/string of words that isn't generic>put " " around the sentence/string>Google itIt'll either turn up in Google Books or if its from a journal JSTOR, and from there there's a 95% chance it's on Libgen
>national epic
Basically they are pirates, people think pirates are fun.Interestingly everyone in that part of the world from Anglo-saxons to Norse was referred to as a pirate.>>15110651Thats because Anglos are from Scandinavia you fucking idiot>>15099192Americans think everything Norse is viking. Paradoxically they don't seem to recognise anything not viking as norse.
>>15110777>Thats because Anglos are from Scandinavia you fucking idiotLiterally from lower Denmark. Basically Germany. The jutes were bonafide though.
>>15110785>Literally from lower DenmarkAnd if you go back further than that they came from the rest of Denmark. All West Germanics did. I have the mounds 10 minutes walk from my house.
>>15103164Which is funny because if you actually read authors from the 1800s/1900s the viking fans tend to be the more traditional sort and all the religious people are going on about mystical mumbo jumbo like seance mysticism with the dead.Just yesterday while going through some complete delphi author collections I came across a british woman author & poet from the 1850s who went on about how no one in her upper-middle class could take christianity seriously for the last 50 years and how the vedanta and her swami teacher had brought back faith in her life.
>>15110758>Beowulf bad even tho it's the national epic of the great Anglo race
>>15111123>>15103164This was only Britain though. In the U.S everyone was uber Christian.
test
>>15108889Those are typical Nordic ships and in fact non nordic europeans mostly did not have boats.
>>15108915Wow some 19th centurt drawings based on the bateux tapestry to prove the ships in the Bayeux tapestry were 100% french no VikingNow that’s a next level unaware circular argumentNever go full retard, Louis
>>15111248Nah even among the settler communities there were entire homesteads that were only made up of so-called "spiritualists" in Kansas and other places.
>>15109170Citation needed. Italians mostly used galleys and other Greek like ships, or the old onerary ships
>>15109946>Curious how the first post-1066 English king to speak English natively rather than French started reigning in 1399. How did his predecessor manage to rule?The Normans introduced a much more sophisticated form of rule after Invading England with 10,000 men. This is very different from a few hundred vikings being granted territory within a kingdom.>But speaking French while being born in France and living in French = being FrenchYou won't say the same about Africans.>They adopted Frankish military gear and tactics because they lived in France among French people.*Franks>Same reason why they adopted French dressing style, legal system, literary tradition...etcClothes don't define people, and dressing styles develop over time. Not a good argument. As for their legal system (Norman law), this, as well as was their literary tradition, was unique.>Normans aren't famous for hit-and-run tactics, nor for naval tactics.That is not what I claimed. I just stated that not all of their fighting tactics were derived from Frankish traditions. Also, equating how people fight to being French is just silly.>They sailed and invaded places yeah, just like non-Norman French nobles from various regions did during the First Crusade in the same era as the Norman chimp outs in the Mediterrean. Hardly a Noric specificity.Only the Normans were doing this long before the first crusade, and of their own initiative.>It was the exception rather than the rule.Fair, but is was still different from the froms de, des, du, lu, used elsewhere in Frence.>Most had French sounding names, either toponymic or relating to an activity (Hauteville, Taillefer, Neville, Mortimer, Devereux...etcI don't disagree, but many also had Norse names.
>>15110785the Angles are from Geatland, they were the Wulfings "Wolf Clan"
>>15111352The tribe was from southern Denmark. The ruling Wuffingas dynasty may have been related to the Wulflings in Sweden.
>>15111357Angles didn't start in southern denmark, they migrated clockwise down from Scandinavia just like the Danes themselves and other tribes.The Danes were originally East of Jutland same with the Angles. The Angles were from an island and Denmark isn't one.
>>15109946>Mainy 11th century Franks also bore Germanic given names, hardly an argumentI'm not arguing havig Norse names makes one Nordic. Norse names only spread where the vikings did, so it's a good indicator for Norse heritage. Many vikings also adopted Frankish names but this does not make them Franks.>Normandy was a duchy within the Kingdom of France. Like all the other French duchies, they had some autonomy, but also feudal duties toward the king.I'm aware. The Normans existed as a distinct people from ca. 900-1200 in Normandy, and later also in England and Sicily. They were originally Norsemen who gradually mixed and integrated with the locals, forming a unique identity in Normandy lasting until Normandy's integration into the Frankish kingdom.
>>15111360>they migrated clockwise down from Scandinavia just like the Danes themselves and other tribesMaybe if you go back to the bronze age but I think by the early iron age West Germanics were everywhere in Denmark. East Germanics were in southern and south eastern Sweden, North Germanics in central Sweden and Norway. Thoughts?
>>15111370Fuck off you denialist faggot, the bronze age? The Angles are blatantly the same as Geats, Danes Swedes etc.You are that schizophrenic fucker that tries to deny Angles are Scandinavian
>>15111370The Anglosaxons literally migrated to Britain a few centuries before the Viking invaions, not in the Bronze age, you ignoramus -.-''
>>15111384Whaat? Denying what you weirdo? They are not the same, just very similar. Angles spoke West Germanic. Danes and Swedes are North Gerrmanic. Geats may have been East Germanics that started speaking North Germanic. >Angles are ScandinavianDenmark is Scandinavian, Angles mostly came from Denmark. I just told you the Wuffingas dynasty may have been from Sweden, we don't know.
>>15111405the fact you are so ass blasted by the idea Angles are Nordic origin you have to say the "bronze age"The Angles spoke Norse. They had lineage that can be traced back to Scandinavia.
>>15111415>the fact you are so ass blasted by the idea Angles are Nordic origin you have to say the "bronze age"I never denied that they have a Nordic origin you retard. They were a West Germanic tribe and for that reason shared their origin with North and East Germanic tribes in the Nordic bronze age. >The Angles spoke NorseNo they didn't. That's a North Germanic language. They spoke West Germanic. Old English. >They had lineage that can be traced back to Scandinavia.Never denied that and Denmark is also Scandinavia.
>>15111422>bronze agestop doubling down. The connection between Angles and Scandinavians can be traced to after the common era.Do you have any idea how old the bronze age is.
>>15111422you have been doing this for weeks you are an idiothttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTqI6P6iwbE&pp=ygUVb2xkIG5vcnNlIG9sZCBlbmdsaXNo
>>15111455Are you illiterate? Try reading my post again you nigger donkey. I won't reply again until you give it a try.
>>15111457This is literally the first time I discuss this. Old English is NOT the same as Old Norse. They are closely related languages but not the same like that idiot said. Look here >>15109144
>>15111466stop doubling down you mentally ill moron>>15111466
>>15111472Read again until you understand >>15111422Which one of these statements do you disagree with?
>>15111471Old English was mutually intelligible with Old Norse.You have first hand accounts of Norse saying the English spoke their language.They were practically the same language
>>15111478stopdoubling downretard
>>15111479And? In what world does that make Old ENGLISH into Old Norse? Totally different branches of the Germanic language tree. >You have first hand accounts of Norse saying the English spoke their language.Like what? Give a few examples>practically the sameBut not the same like you said. Two different languages.
>>15111498because the languages are so similar the Angles obviously SPOKE Norse before they moved to Britain. They even used runes.
>>15111508So you can't give any examples? >the Angles obviously SPOKE Norse before they moved to BritainNo, they spoke Old English which is similar to but not the same as Old Norse
>>15111513Old English is so similar to Old Norse they could speak with each other, they even say they speak the same language.This is proof that they originally were the same language.Stop doubling down you lying dipshit
>>15107112Based
>>15097672The only thing that would capture me when thinking about vikings is when I read about their defeats. Fucking plunderers, an arrow to their eyes for every single one of them.
>>15101246>This guy simps for worshipping a tree cult headed by glorified lesbians
>>15110435>They pretty consistently called themselves Normans, as distinct from both Englishmen and Frenchmen.11th century Normans called themselves French in all their documents (Bayeux Tapestry, Domesday Book, charters...etc)>>15110435>Sometimes they referred to themselves as English, but clearly saw themselves as separate from the bulk of England's people.They literally never called themselves EnglishAre we still talking about 11th century Norman? Or have you suddenly switched to late 13th century "Norman" nobility in England?>Wace, the sole source for the claim that the Song of Roland was sung at Hastings, wrote in the mid-12th century.The earlier written version of Song of Roland was procuded in Norman England during the 11th century. It's quite obvious that they were familiar with it whether or not it was sung at Hastings.>Interestingly, at around the same time, Henry of Huntingdon was making record of the speech made at Hastings by WilliamYeah this apocryphal speech written a century after the battle tells a lot about the political rivalry that now existed between the England-owning duchy of Normandy and the French king.
>>15110435>Did not Rollo my ancestor, founder of our nation, with our fathers conquer at Paris the King of the Franks in the heart of his kingdom, nor had the King of the Franks any hope of safety until he humbly offered his daughter and possession of the country, which, after you, is called Normandy>Ah! let any one of the English whom our predecessors, both Danes and Norwegians, have defeated in a hundred battles, come forth and show that the race of Rollo ever suffered a defeat from his time until now, and I will submit and retreatIt sounds like William still identified as a Viking
>>15111457>>15111479>>15111508>>15111513>>15111525Pic related, 11th century Scandinavians even remarked how Anglo-Saxon England and Scandinavia spoke virtually the same language before 1066
>>15111681This speech is literally fiction thoughIt was written a century after the battle by a dude who wasn't even born at the time
>>15111711the very last part, Old English was still used up until the end of the Norman dynasty. French was introduced in the middles ages after the Normans
>>15111716So was the account about the Song of Roland being sung to be fair.At the end of the day, the only thing that we really have from the era of 1066 Normans to know if they felt French or Viking is what is written on the Bayeux Tapestry: "Hic Franci Pugnant"
>>15111674Domesday's landholdings are split into three groups:1. Normans2. Englishmen3. Frenchmen & BretonsPicards, Welshmen and Flemings are occasionally distinguished too.>They literally never called themselves EnglishApart from when they do. That's why terms such as 'novus Anglus' and 'nos Anglos' appear. Not sure why you mention the 13th century btw when you keep quoting from the 12th? I thought the Battle of Hastings was in 1066?Do you get all your history from /his/ posts? You should try reading original texts sometime :^D>Song of Roland was procuded in Norman England during the 11th century. It's quite obvious that they were familiar with it whether or not it was sung at HastingsWalter of Aquitaine was a major literary figure throughout the Germanic world. There are poems about him in English, Latin, German, and so onNobody questions that there were many Frenchmen at Hastings. They were mercenaries recruited by William (much to the displeasure of Philip I)>apocryphal speechYes, written by a Norman monk for a Norman patron and dealing with the history of the Normans
>>15111345>You won't say the same about Africans.If /pol/'s race-mixing meme was actually true and Africans interbred with the locals (like Normans did) instead of spawning 10 pure-blooded African kids with each other, then we'd say the same about them.Like, no one denies that Alexandre Dumas was French just because he happened to have 25% of African blood.
>>15111785>Domesday's landholdings are split into three groups:>1. Normans>2. Englishmen>3. Frenchmen & BretonsThat's literally false and you know it.Pic related, from scholars who actually consulted it.The Domesday Book notoriously refered to Normans as French, something that annoys greatly the defenders of the "Normans didn't feel French" theory among scholars.
As someone who has no horse in this race, I find this whole debate hilarous.Like, I don't doubt that Normans felt like they were their own thing (every regional identity in most European countries pretty much felt like some special snowflake before the birth of nationalism in the 19th century), but still, the fact they called themselves fucking "French" (or "Frankish", whatever) in the Bayeux tapestry and the other stuff they produced should be a clue that they also felt French.From an outsider point of view, that whole attempt to argue that they didn't feel French at all despite all the material evidences showing otherwise just looks like a ridiculous cope on par of British people.I know you guys hate the French and all (and righfully so), but the Frenchified vikings who conquered you in 1066 felt French to some extend, there's just no denying it.
>>15112018>Like, I don't doubt that Normans felt like they were their own thing
Bloody frogs are trying to appropriate Normans again
>>15112018>every regional identity in most European countries pretty much felt like some special snowflake before the birth of nationalism in the 19th centuryThe southern half of France didn't even speak French until the French Revolution btw, while Normandy already did in 1000 ADBasically, the average dude living in Marseille or another southern French city in 1700 was less French than the average 1066 Norman dude
>>15103604Based. Norsemen peaked as Christians
>>15104945Cope>Initially a pagan culture, detailed information about the turn to the Christian religion to the islands of Scotland during the Norse-era is elusive.[60] The Orkneyinga Saga suggests the islands were Christianised by Olaf Tryggvasson in 995 when he stopped at South Walls on his way from Ireland to Norway. The King summoned the jarl Sigurd the Stout[Notes 7] and said, "I order you and all your subjects to be baptised. If you refuse, I'll have you killed on the spot and I swear I will ravage every island with fire and steel." Unsurprisingly, Sigurd agreed and the islands became Christian at a stroke,[59] receiving their own bishop in the early 11th century.
>>15104945>his arms and armor are indentical to vikingsPure bullshit11th century Normans wore Frankish nasal helmets and Frankish hauberk
>>15106467what the fuckholy schizopost.
>>15103869>according to Varg
>>15106360lol
>>15098746>>15113386This movie has to be the cringiest depiction of vikings to dateI miss the late 20th century when vikings were depicted like actual human beings instead of like Conan the Barbarian superhuman caricature bullshit
>>15113449What's bad about it? It's the only historically accurate portrayal of viking society ever done in hollywood
>>15113513Vikangz weren't muscular superhumans who fought naked20th century depictions were better
>>15113530Everyone in the movie wears armor except the berserkers though. Which is accurate.
>>15110114Norman helmets descend from viking helmets
>>15113530They were muscularhttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/100315-headless-vikings-england-execution-pit>Aside from their injuries, the headless Vikings "look like a healthy, robust, very strong, very masculine group of young males," he added. "It's your classic sort of warrior.">A major benefit of the Viking diet was the fact that every level of society, from kings to common sailors, ate meat every day. Often this would have been pork, as hogs were easy to raise and quick to mature, but Vikings also ate beef, mutton and goats. Horses were also raised for food, a practice that led to later clashes with Christian leaders, as horsemeat was a forbidden food under church doctrine. Vikings were avid hunters, and would capture reindeer, elk and even bear to bring back to the hearth fires. And of course, since Vikings spent so much time on the water, fish formed a major part of their diet. Herrings were abundant, and prepared in a plethora of ways: dried, salted, smoked, pickled and even preserved in whey.https://www.history.com/news/the-surprisingly-sufficient-viking-diet
>>15098794God this is such an awful and retarded-looking haircut.
>>15113558That's absolutely false, faggotNormans wore nasal helmets, which were of Western European (aka French and German) originhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasal_helmet
>>15107203>just because some of them had one viking ancestor 200 years prior is just sad.You know, one of William the Conqueror’s proven companions was a fellow named Turstin, which essentially the name Torsten/Thorstein/etc. You can’t say there was barely any influence — there was a clearly distinct identity which had formed, and this was far from the only identifiable Viking name found in/from Normandy which would not be found elsewhere in France at that time. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turstin_FitzRolf
>>15097672>What is it about vikings that captures our imagination so much?They don't. To me they are merely an expression of the desperation of Nordics to have culture and history prior to the 17th century
>>15113596They developed from northern ridge helmets >>15103124
>>15098794>>15110114>>15113558It had nothing to do with helmets, it was an old Frankish hairstyle that resulted from only the king having the right to have long hair.It's called "Norman haircut" in English because it's them who introduced it to England, but like most things that are dubbed "Norman" in English, it was really Frankish.
>>15113603Ridge helmets are of Roman originVikings took them from Western Europeans, who had taken them from Romans, who had apparently taken them from Celtshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Roman_ridge_helmet
>>15113664Yeah but they developed a separate style
>>15099192>It's fucking astroturfed by Hollywood. That's LITERALLY the reason, it's not organicThis. Jews are quite fond of vikings because they weren't Christian in the beginning and they were in cahoots with the jews in the slavery of Europeans. Vikings took people from the east and sold them to jews who castrated men and boys and shipped them for sale to Muslims in Spain and North Africa. The people who fought and defeated vikings are the real heros of the age.
>>15113703>The Jews loved Vikings because the Vikings didn't follow a Jewish religion....or something
>>15113641>only the king having the right to have long haircan't make this shit up
>>15113667And?The type of ridge helmet used by the Normans in 1066 was the Western European nasal helmet linked there >>15113596 and not the viking ridge helmet linked there >>15103124.Both were a variation of the original Roman ridge helmet, but Normans used the Western European variation that the Franks used, and not the viking variation.
>>15113766The Normans used it to protect their Viking heads
Seems we're all in agreement the Normans were in fact Vikings and not French then, lads
As a canadian I always found it pretty cringe when one of my fellow men larp as a viking when he has obviously no scandinavian blood but after watching the anime vinland saga I kinda get it, viking can be pretty cool.But I really have to double down on white north american larping as viking are cringe as fuck bro and dont get me started on the space wolves
The answer to the question of whether normans were vikings or french essentially boil down to what date we're talking aboutIf we're talking about the early 10th century (Rollo's generation and his son's), then they were 100% vikings and not french in the slightiestIf we're talking about the late 10th century, then they were probably a mix of bothIf we're talking about the mid 11th century however, well then they were fucking frogs
>>15113844well if you have English ancestry you probably have viking ancestryCertainly Anglo-saxon, they are pretty much Vikings no matter what people say.Certainly culturally you do, our language had more Norse added to it after the vikings.>dont get me started on the space wolvesSee this is interesting go me because Anglo-saxons have so many references to "Wulf" names. Highly likely they were the original "Wolf clan"
>>15112018So what? the Normans weren't that influential and they hardly conquered anyone they won due to a technicality.I have no idea why Americans are fixated on the normansShortlived dynasty of less than 100 years that ended up getting beaten by a woman.Too scared to actually live in England because the Anglo-saxon majority were irrepressible and constantly trying to rebel.Culture impact was insignificant, since they just continued all the Anglo-saxon law, bureaucracy, coinage and culture because they didnt have their own and Anglo-saxon was the best.Didnt even impact the language, English had french introduced after the Normans in the middle ages. So the Anglo-saxon majority was still speaking Old English practically Old Norse the entire time.Its more like the Normans bit off more than they could chew.
>>15113752SOUL
>>15113641Embarrassing
Norse kings were Finnic in originViking ships were likely Finnic in originSimilar culture in baltic nationsFinland has second most sword finds despite having ground that corrodes and eats everythingFinns and balts were last to become christians after norse had been subjugated under abrahamic desert cult
>>15103604>Harald HardradaHe should be added to the unmoggables list with Caesar, Alcibiades and others imo.
>>15114451>weFinns were so primitive they had their first stone building really late in history.
>>15114451You akshually got the ships, swords, genes and etc via Nordics.
>>15114390>1000 years later>Saxons still copingIncredible.
>>15114471>saxonsIt's Anglo-saxons. Full stop.
>>15114471https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_MatildaBeat the last Norman king, the most unpopular King in history.Put him in stocks and made him raise her Angle descended son as the new king.
>>15114459>NorseJust build campfire in middle of the house>FinnicStack few rocks to make more efficient heating elementGermanics would't have been able to invent simple log house without finnic peoples
>>15097672Nobody cares about actual medieval Norse culture.People fawn over a fictional representation of "vikings" as angry faggots completely isolated from Europe who listened to throat singing and death metal and worshipped death because they were super duper edgy.
>>15114484She was also a Norman descendant
>>15114502Scandinavia had wood long houses and structures since before Indo-Europeans ever even came there thoughbeit. Some date back to funnelbeaker. Saunas are really nice however, you lads did a great thing by creating those.
>>15114507and she had Angle descendants directly to Edmund Ironside.So it dispels the lie by Anglophobes that the Angle lineage was broken.You Anglophobes are insufferable.
>>15114527I'm not an anglophobe, just find it funny you're still seething over Normans lol
>>15114507she wasn't part of the Norman dynasty no. Stephen was the last. She was a German Empress
>>15112663few can bare the shame of failing to see the obvious
>>15114537You are. Classic Anglophobic revisionist trying to downplay Anglo-saxon history and upsell Norman influence.Imagine being this mad at Anglo-saxons. Still.
>>15114549You are desperate now. This makes me sad honestly. Tell me to dilate or something, stand up for yourself AngloBVLL.
>>15114567I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but your opinions come from Anglophobic rhetoric. Even the articles i linked to you, i found examples of Anglophobic rhetoric. Trying to downplay "Anglocentric" history. So you are either oying or ignorant.
>>15114602lying*
>>15101532how do you know the romantic era wasn't created and controlled by jews tho
