So were the badass part of vikings come into play? I mean raiding

File: Norse Influence.gif (26KB, 700x543px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 700x543px

>>621827
Not a whole lot of raider/trader cultures can boast this.
>Inb4 assmad proofs Russian
Varangians were a thing. You still have slavic heritage. If you live in north/western Russia, upper Ukraine, or Belarus, you've probably also got Swedish heritage. Get over it.

>>621827

I actually think that their badassery comes from their desire to die in battle so the valkyrs could take them to Valhalla, this means that they had no fear to die.

Also its important to point out that the Varengian Guard was made of vikings due the conspiracy of Byzantinian noblemen who wanted the throne, so recruiting mercenaries and make an oath (which they took seriously) was even better than having a native guard.

They're fucking vikings. Vikings are AWESOME.

>>621916
Russians are the ones shilling vikings. They seem pretty WE WUZ VIKINGZ 'N SHIET tier in fact.

>>621925
>desire to tie in battle
then why they attacked unprotected targets?

File: ▲.png (248B, 34x16px) Image search: [Google]

248B, 34x16px

>>621941
I have never witnessed this outside of dumbass norse pagan Russians on /int/ and once on /pol/(where they also tend to deny it). On /his/ there's this fag Russian who shows up every once in a while to educate us on how Russians are pure and the Varangians and Rurikids are Western propaganda. Posting an image because without one it keeps saying 'file too large'.

>>621827
I dunno, they're weren't the ultimate badasses, but they were still pretty cool.
They're essentially pirates but with beards and more snow.

>>621944
In the sagas they only attacked unprotected targets when there was a war between factions. And pillage was somewhat important because they wouldn't go back to their homes without nothing, expeditions were an investment of resources in order to acquire money and social status

>>621827
Their sagas definitely come into play.

The fact that they may have just been raiders looking back. But if you're some monk in Britain somewhere, or a random farmer. The Vikings are more than just bandits, they're terrifying. Their reputation built by the victims who lived in fear of them.

>>621827

Tons other peoples have blood feuds too.
>Until the early modern period, feuds were considered legitimate legal instruments[1] and were regulated to some degree. For example, Montenegrin culture calls this krvna osveta, meaning "blood revenge", which had unspoken but highly valued rules.[2] In tribal societies, the blood feud, coupled with the practice of blood wealth, functioned as an effective form of social control for limiting and ending conflicts between individuals and groups who are related by kinship, as described by anthropologist Max Gluckman in his article "The Peace in the Feud"[3] in 1955.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feud

>>621970
>war between factions
as in clan wars like in Ireland?

>>621985
Fun facts, Christian pilgrims actually argued that the bible is correct by incorporating norse religion into it, claiming that Ragnarök wasn't something that was going to happen but already happen, and basically fused the aftermatch of Raknarök with Genesis.

>>621827
>conquer large parts of england
>conquer northern france
>conquer large parts of scotland and ireland
>conquer parts of ukraine
>conquer large parts of russia
>conquer sicily
>conquer parts of brittany

just raiders?

>>621995

I have no knowledge about how were the wars between clans in Ireland though an example is during the unification of Norway under the reign of Harald I, if there was a noblemen opposed to his regime their only option was to flee (discovery of Iceland) so they had to make their way to the shore and get a boat.

Drakkars were the fastest boats in their times, they adapt to the waves and could sail into rivers.

File: EarlArdent-40595-Brungilda_-_colo_-.jpg (476KB, 828x1030px) Image search: [Google]

476KB, 828x1030px

>>621827
Because fashion. Images of Pirates and Vikings are near. Smell of sea and freedom, dangerous freedom near to anarchy.

>>622025
Somewhat true, due to wagner there was a romantic image of them.

VIKINGS WERE FUCKING COWARDS WHO HARMED THE CHURCH

STOP.
FUCKING.
POSTING.
THEM.

File: poster-brian-boru-350429.jpg (71KB, 380x500px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 380x500px

>>621995
>clans
>Ireland

File: gaels vs vikings.jpg (167KB, 960x591px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 960x591px

>>621995
>clan wars
>Ireland
Are you thinking of Scotland?

>>622004
vikings never even fucking invaded england you stupid vikingboo retard

>>622041
>danes in 9th century
>not vikings

baka

>>622036
hello anglocuck

>>622047
they didn't invade. You just blindingly follow revisionist bullshit made to damage tradition

>>622036
Start shit get hit.

>>622041
England was bloody ruled by a Danish viking once upon a time.

>>622053
>>622050
>great heathen army

oh, was it the great peaceful army of danish diplomats?

>>622055
>>622062
>still posting revisionist bullshit without empirical proof

/leftypol/ everyone.

File: Aelfred the Great.jpg (93KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 768x1024px

>>622062
Alfred rekt that army tho.

>>622082
>>622067
guthrum conquered shit tonnes of england lad

File: maxresdefault.jpg (52KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1280x720px

>>622036
>CHRISTIANS WERE FUCKING COWARDS >WHO HARMED THE VIKING CHURCH
>STOP.
>FUCKING.
>POSTING.
>THEM.

>>622041
>Danelaw

>>622025
Horned Viking helms are probably my biggest trigger.

>>622062
they weren't vikings

>>622118
>"However, the raiding of England continued on and off until the 860s, when instead of raiding, the Vikings changed their tactics and sent a great army to invade England."

>not vikings

>>622127
so? they weren't vikings because they weren't viking

File: 1453844568546.jpg (494KB, 1454x969px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1454x969px

Retards on both sides ITT don't realize that Vikings=/=any Norsemen.
Vikings were traders, explorers, and raiders. Vikings did plenty, but not all Norse accomplishments were Viking, although plenty were.

>>622132
But they demonstrably were.

>>622132
>>622133
so you're mad the vikings don't have any accomplishments but when they do accomplish something they're not vikings?

got it

>>622140
What part of my post says this?
Norsemen, and their Vikings, did many cool things.

File: 103_3854.jpg (110KB, 682x1023px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 682x1023px

>>622004
>just raiders?

I too can hear my ancestors calling to me. Heil og sæl you proud son of Macedon

File: King Athelstan.jpg (30KB, 458x684px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 458x684px

>>622092
Guthrum converted to Christianity after being defeated by the English.

>>621916
Hoooo boy. Let's go through this.

>England
Saxons ran them out of there.

>Normandy
>Lose to Franks
>Forced to convert and swear fealty to Charles the fucking Simple
>Claim to be conquerors
Wow, GJ

>French population of Normandy goes on to be significant
BASICALLY DANES. WE WUZ KONKURAZ

>Rus
>One ethnically Swedish dynasty with Russian people
WE WUZ KONKURAZ

>Claim a bunch of uninhabited rocks
>Get driven off by a paleolithic civilization
WE WUZ KONKURAZ

Vikings were basically just bandits and slavers with a funny religion. They got trashed whenever they fought real armies.

File: Losers.jpg (363KB, 1532x763px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1532x763px

>>622184

>>622184
I find it funny how assrekt Vikings make you

File: GAULED.jpg (622KB, 1032x1400px) Image search: [Google]

622KB, 1032x1400px

>>622133
It's a colloquial term, for christ's sake. You could say that anglo-saxon isn't accurate because it excludes the other germanic peoples that migrated there, such as the Jutes and Frisians, or that since William's conquest anglo-norman makes more sense, but it's just pointless bitching.

>>622198
Not really, you guys are just straight retarded. Basically on the same level as people claiming ancient Africans had space magic, or Korean nationalists claiming they once had an empire that included everything out to Spain.

>>622192
Buddy,that's not how history works. You don't post a bunch of wikipedia links to cherrypicked battles to prove a point. It's retarded. I could just as easily cherrypick 20 Viking victories and line them up like that and screencap them to try and make a point. It's a pointless exercise

>>622211
Pick any five Viking victories against the Franks. I'm waiting.

File: Falstaff.jpg (147KB, 391x517px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 391x517px

>>622211
Scandinavia was Christianized lad.

>>622210
>, you guys

I'm not even a viking boo, but you are clearly very butthurt by this group of people.

> as people claiming ancient Africans had space magic, or Korean

No. They had a massive trading network that spanned from the atlantic to Russia, the biggest in northern Europe by far at the time. They discovered North America. They founded a kingdom in Russia. They founded the duchy of normandy. Stop trying to play all this down. They were quite significant from 800-1000 approximately, so much so that the era is often called the Viking age by historians. Now take your butthurt somewhere else because you're shitting up this board

File: Phenotypes 1.jpg (246KB, 1121x1708px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1121x1708px

>>622184
>>England
>Saxons ran them out of there.
They weren't run out, they were assimilated. Some parts of England have people with up to 50% norse ancestry.

>>Normandy
>>Lose to Franks
>>Forced to convert and swear fealty to Charles the fucking Simple
>>Claim to be conquerors
>Wow, GJ
Not claiming they're conquerors, but they were granted that land because the Franks recognized their capabilities and employed them to protect Francia from more viking raids.

>>French population of Normandy goes on to be significant
>BASICALLY DANES. WE WUZ KONKURAZ
Again, not saying they're conquerors. But they are of Danish ancestry and they had an undeniable impact on that region.

>>Rus
>>One ethnically Swedish dynasty with Russian people
>WE WUZ KONKURAZ
First of all, it wasn't just one Swedish dynasty, it was settlement. Second, this Swedish dynasty was one of TWO dynasties in all of Russian history. Third, if they are a foreign people ruling over vast swaths of territory, how are they not conquerors?

>>Claim a bunch of uninhabited rocks
>>Get driven off by a paleolithic civilization
>WE WUZ KONKURAZ
Not even sure what you're referencing. Ireland? Yes, a lot were driven off, and a lot were assimilated, forming the Ulster Irish which settled Scotland (assimilating or killing the native Picts in the process). Greenland/Iceland? They weren't driven away. Iceland is culturally and almost entirely genetically norse with a slight touch of Irish from a few peppered settlements. Greenland is still owned by Denmark.
Did I miss anything?

>>622216
You're moving the goalposts. They hardly ever fought pitched battles. You can't even find 5 battles where the franks beat the Vikings. There were a few sieges of Paris, but thats about it in terms of large scale engagements against the franks. The sieges were mostly stalemates and with the last one Rollo was given Normandy

>>622229
>They had a massive trading network that spanned from the atlantic to Russia
Sure, but the Muslims had a larger and more significant one. And their network was basically around to sell slaves taken in coastal raids, not conquest.

>They discovered North America
And were promptly driven out by people who didn't actually know how to use metal.

>They founded a kingdom in Russia
A less-than-significant one that is in no way related to the Duchy of Muscovy.

>They founded the duchy of normandy
Kek. They were given land in Normandy by the Franks in return for swearing fealty and converting.

>Stop trying to play all this down
>Stop shattering my myths of things that never really happened!

>They were quite significant from 800-1000 approximately
Sure, as slave-taking coastal raiders, not as conquerors

>so much so that the era is often called the Viking age by historians
Wewlad. The history channel does not consist of real historians.

>Now take your butthurt somewhere else because you're shitting up this board
>S-s-s-stop making fun of muh magic nordic warriors, we wuz konkuraz!

>>622184
Holy shit, this is hard damage control

>"xd Romans collapsed and don't have their empire anymore. They were le shit xd"

>>622242
This is photo of Caucasoid

File: BN46aV6qiSQ.jpg (32KB, 600x445px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 600x445px

>>622271
come unstuck

File: Varangian.jpg (32KB, 343x500px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 343x500px

>>621827
You should look up Harald Hardrada and the Byzantinian's Varangian Guard

>>622256
>Sure, but the Muslims had a larger and more significant one

It's funny that you literally have to bring up the largest trading network in the world in an attempt to belittle the Vikings. It only proves that the Vikings were important traders during that era

>And were promptly driven out by people who didn't actually know how to use metal

Well they didn't send a fucking invasion force. There were maybe a few hundred settlers tops. Of course they would've been driven out being so heavily outnumbered

>A less-than-significant one that is in no way related to the Duchy of Muscovy

>kievan rus
>insignificant

Wow. You're joking right? It was the first incarnation of Russia or Ukraine as we know them today. It was a very significant power in eastern Europe until the Mongol invasion.

>Kek. They were given land in Normandy by the Franks in return for swearing fealty and converting.

And? They still founded it and their descendants were Normans who ended up founding 3 kingdoms

Oh but great job spewing memes and green texts. You sure told me

File: 1452241020661.jpg (66KB, 540x760px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 540x760px

>>622283
Reminder that Harold Godwinson defeated Harold Hardrada.

Varangians were based tho.

>>622242
>They weren't run out, they were assimilated. Some parts of England have people with up to 50% norse ancestry.
/pol/ pls. The Saxons wound up in charge.

>Not claiming they're conquerors, but they were granted that land because the Franks recognized their capabilities and employed them to protect Francia from more viking raids.
Yes, so Charles the Simple could instead use his army to attempt to hold his rapidly-fracturing realm together. That's not them being great warriors, that's them being present when Frankish kings had better things to do.

>Again, not saying they're conquerors. But they are of Danish ancestry and they had an undeniable impact on that region.
Mostly culturally (Which is far more important) and ethnically French, bruv

>First of all, it wasn't just one Swedish dynasty, it was settlement. Second, this Swedish dynasty was one of TWO dynasties in all of Russian history.
That's like saying the Articles of Confederation was one of only TWO constitutions in American history and therefore just as important as the constitution.

>Third, if they are a foreign people ruling over vast swaths of territory, how are they not conquerors?
They exerted direct control of a fairly small area and had tenuous psuedo-control over a larger one. Not particularly impressive

>Not even sure what you're referencing. Ireland? Yes, a lot were driven off, and a lot were assimilated, forming the Ulster Irish which settled Scotland (assimilating or killing the native Picts in the process).
Once again, you have this weird obsession with ethnicity. the Irish and Scottish cultures and kings wound up in control. Iceland and Greenland were empty when they showed up.

>>622252
> You can't even find 5 battles where the franks beat the Vikings
Lad, there were 9 major pitched battles. The Franks won 8.

Battle of Brissarthe (866)
The Battle of Thimeon (880)
The Battle of Saucourt-en-Vimeu (881)
The Siege of Asselt (882)
The Second Siege of Paris (885)
Battle of Leuven (891)
Siege of Chartres (911)
Battle of Trans-la-Forêt (939)

The Vikings won one siege of Paris, which wasn't the capital at the time.

>There were a few sieges of Paris, but thats about it in terms of large scale engagements against the franks
There were two. The Vikings won one. That was the only battle they ever won against the Franks.

>The sieges were mostly stalemates
Funny way to spell "Frankish victory"

>last one Rollo was given Normandy
After being forced to swear fealty to Charles the Simple and convert.

>>622296
>Reminder that Harold Godwinson defeated Harold Hardrada.
through treachery!

[spoiler]I don't really care, I just thought I'd get that out of the way since some Vikingboo will say it[/spoiler]

>>622210
>Korean nationalists claiming they once had an empire that included everything out to Spain.

lol, does this really happen?

>>622296>>622283
I am suspect, axe and sword did not wear together because it was heavily.

File: ThatsNotHowYouUseThatGary.jpg (87KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 800x532px

>>622296
He was an adventurer too, until he took an arrow in the [spoiler]throat[/spoiler]

But one of his guys got to go full berzerker on some englishmen

>>622319

You can wear whatever you want in a selfie though.

>>622286
>It's funny that you literally have to bring up the largest trading network in the world in an attempt to belittle the Vikings. It only proves that the Vikings were important traders during that era
"The second most important traders who didn't really conquer very much". Wow, I guess you're right, Nordic pride!

>Well they didn't send a fucking invasion force. There were maybe a few hundred settlers tops. Of course they would've been driven out being so heavily outnumbered
Certainly happened to the Spanish, right?

>Wow. You're joking right? It was the first incarnation of Russia or Ukraine as we know them today. It was a very significant power in eastern Europe until the Mongol invasion.
Holy shit, you actually believe this. They were the land the Magyars and Easter Romans didn't even feel it was worth it to bother with.

>And? They still founded it and their descendants were Normans who ended up founding 3 kingdoms
Their mostly French partial descendants with French culture. This is literally on the same level as "Well, civilization came out of the Middle east so Greeks are basically Sumerian :)))"

>Oh but great job spewing memes and green texts. You sure told me
>Muh anscestors
Fuck off.

File: 환국.jpg (327KB, 819x394px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 819x394px

>>622318

>>622346
Yeah, but it was a myth from their proto-kingdom period, and its based off exaggerated measurements, as one would expect.

"Our lands extend 40,000 crumbalds to the West and 200,000 crumbalds to the North and South"

>>622307
It's funny because half the battles you listed weren't even Frankish victories. Also those weren't the only engagements ever fought between Vikings and franks. On top of that, there is a massive lack of written sources for that era. Many sources are incomplete or lacking

>>622346
holy shit this is real lol

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xzj4ix_ancient-korean-empire-hwanguk_people

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xzj579_korean-established-aztec-inca-civilizations_travel

http://koreabridge.net/post/korean-nationalism-when-world-was-korean-intraman

File: muhpurewaifu.jpg (223KB, 898x449px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 898x449px

>>622184
>WE WUZ
>WE WUZ
>WE WUZ
get some real arguments that aren't shitty memes you fucking retard

>>622362
I have spoken with people who believe this map is literally true

>It's funny because half the battles you listed weren't even Frankish victories. Also those weren't the only engagements ever fought between Vikings and franks. On top of that, there is a massive lack of written sources for that era. Many sources are incomplete or lacking
Those are literally all Frankish victories.

>They just forgot to write down all the times we won!
Lol, wow.

>>622367
Read the rest of the post you fucking retard.

File: 1444863176059.jpg (34KB, 350x420px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 350x420px

>>622367
>mad about memes

>>622342
>Certainly happened to the Spanish, right?

>comparing a gunpowder empire to Vikings

Are you fucking serious?

>They were the land the Magyars and Easter Romans didn't even feel it was worth it to bother with

You are a retard. Empires want any land they can get. The Byzantines fought numerous wars against the rus.

Just fuck off to /pol/. Your level of debate and reasoning is too retarded for even this shithole

>>622381
I'm sure, and there are people that still argue that the world is round

>>622364
>>622381
Part under the first line is for you, faggot.

File: BaitingBaiters.jpg (144KB, 400x506px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 400x506px

>>622392
Ah well, I tried

File: 1451145264512.png (196KB, 385x476px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 385x476px

>>622367
>posting a quote by a vikingboo

go back to amren, stormfront, march of the titans, or whatever meme site you came from

>>622389
>comparing a gunpowder empire to Vikings
>40 guns
>Mostly out of work Rodeleros with swords and shields
It's good to know you don't know anything about other periods of history either

>You are a retard. Empires want any land they can get.
Kek. That's why at least 3 empires I can think of off of the top of my head didn't bother to even try to conquer the land to the north and to the south of Mesopotamia.

>Just fuck off to /pol/. Your level of debate and reasoning is too retarded for even this shithole
If anything you're the /pol/ one here
>Muh glorious Vikings

Nice job just giving up half of the points in the argument and acting like you didn't notice them, btw.

>>622393
>I don't care about historical accuracy and sources

>>622419
Lol you're the one saying "We won battle too! Just all the ones we won no one remembered to record!"

ITT people who aren't biased to all hell are listing feats that the Norse accomplished.
Then, mongs with a mysterious hate-boner for them nitpick the shit out of the feats, usually with things that could be applied to most other people, and say they're bad for it, all while accusing the opposition for getting heritage fags with no basis.

>>622449
>getting
*being

File: Hide Snowniggers.png (115KB, 1305x893px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1305x893px

>>622449

>>622413
>Nice job just giving up half of the points in the argument and acting like you didn't notice them, btw.

There's just no point. You're clearly dead set against anything that opposes your view of Vikings.

>If anything you're the /pol/ one here

Why? Because I pointed out their achievements? Anything praising North Europeans is /pol/? You're the one who is actually /pol/ tier because you resort to memes and mimicking green texts which is just underage tier pathetic shite. You refuse or try to belittle any point I bring up because according to you the Vikings couldn't have possibly done anything noteworthy at all. You belong in /pol/ because you're not able to see any viewpoint but your own extremely biased one. Anyway have fun with your circlejerk bud

>>622449
>Look at all this land we conquered!
>Except that never happened.
>Fuck yuo Vikings are of pure warriors my view is unbiased. Now I'm going to type passive-aggressive shit after getting BTFO.

>>622454
>There's just no point. You're clearly dead set against anything that opposes your view of Vikings.
Son, you haven't provided one reasonably counter argument. Give me a Viking victory agains tthe Franks other than the 845 siege of Paris if you're so certain you're right

>Why? Because I pointed out their achievements? Anything praising North Europeans is /pol/?
Doing so irrationally, yes

>You're the one who is actually /pol/ tier because you resort to memes and mimicking green texts which is just underage tier pathetic shite. You refuse or try to belittle any point I bring up because according to you the Vikings couldn't have possibly done anything noteworthy at all. You belong in /pol/ because you're not able to see any viewpoint but your own extremely biased one.
You've made a whole bunch of broad statements with no historical backing whatsoever, then acted assmad when I point out that you're wrong. Let's not forget this started with "I can pick out 20 random viking victories"
"Pick 5"
"Uh, akshully I can't"

Maybe actually post something with content.

>>622457
I just hopped in, you've been talking with other Anons. You've basically been doing nothing but damage control against >>621916

>>622474
Sure, definitely.

>>622449
>are listing feats that the Norse accomplished.

since when is bullying defenseless monks an accomplishment?

why do vikiboos boast about a group of savages running around and killing monks for 3 pieces of gold like a jackass? That's like me punching a 2 year old in the face and pretending im the world's greatest badass because of it. Is it because nordic history is pretty dull and abo-tier when you take away their meme bandits?

File: 1452472318694.png (594KB, 842x974px) Image search: [Google]

594KB, 842x974px

>>622453
I've got danker memes pal

>>622481
>why do vikiboos boast about a group of savages running around and killing monks for 3 pieces of gold like a jackass?
Because they established multiple kingdoms and established their influence throughout Europe.

>hates Christians
>masturbates to Normas

Vikingboos are fucking retards

>>622526
>Because they established multiple kingdoms

a trading post is not a kingdom.

>established their influence throughout Europe.

and? Europe was shit tier at the time.

>>622539
Not all of it, just the parts that aren't shit tier now. And the Vikings were only influential in the poorly-defended parts of those places. And not as rulers but as raiders.

File: Phenotypes 2.png (1016KB, 1408x1138px) Image search: [Google]

1016KB, 1408x1138px

>>622271
It's unrelated because 4chin ain't letting me post without a picture for some reason.

>>622539
Well now you've revealed you're retarded.

File: Phenotypes 3.jpg (166KB, 1782x1098px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1782x1098px

>>622298
>/pol/ pls. The Saxons wound up in charge.
I didn't say they didn't. But they left their mark.

>Yes, so Charles the Simple could instead use his army to attempt to hold his rapidly-fracturing realm together. That's not them being great warriors, that's them being present when Frankish kings had better things to do.
Whatever the reason for the Franks granting the vikings Normandy, they thought them capable of defending Francia against further raiding. That counts for a lot.

>Mostly culturally (Which is far more important) and ethnically French, bruv
I get that they were mostly French, maymay master, but the Norse still had a major impact. There are lots of place names with Norse origin in Normandy. I don't think you should just dismiss them because they weren't 100% Norse.

>That's like saying the Articles of Confederation was one of only TWO constitutions in American history and therefore just as important as the constitution.
No it's not. If it weren't for them, Russia wouldn't exist. It's more like saying that just because the Bill of Rights was just one set of laws that America was founded on doesn't mean it's unimportant.

>They exerted direct control of a fairly small area and had tenuous psuedo-control over a larger one. Not particularly impressive
Rome also mostly exerted this 'pseudo-control' you're referencing. They mostly just taxed other regions and used them for levies on occasion. The Varangians were significant enough to have economic, cultural, religious, and military exchange. If they were just chumps I'm sure the Byzantines would have just conquered them.
1/2

File: Phenotypes 4.jpg (257KB, 1156x1120px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1156x1120px

>>622298
>>622594
2/2

>Once again, you have this weird obsession with ethnicity. the Irish and Scottish cultures and kings wound up in control. Iceland and Greenland were empty when they showed up.
It's not a weird obsession, I just don't think it should be forgotten. Signs of ancestry is a big sign that cultural influence took place, which it did. If not for the Norse, Ulster would have been just like the rest of Ireland. Also, Iceland and Greenland were NOT empty. There were small Irish enclaves in Iceland and a native population in Greenland that today makes up over 90% of the population.

>>621827
They used their adventurous spirit to rule the liminal period between great eras, much like the Sea Peoples, the first Islamic Arabs, and the Conquistadors. They are romanticized for that reason.

Vikings are overrated because of these three things:

>Continental clergy trying to overplay their threat and turning them into some kind of heathen-shock-troopers-from-hell Emmanuel Goldstein boogeyman
>Scandinavian / Germanic national revival in the 19th century overplaying the importance of their pagan ancestors (myths like horned helmets and attributing the word "Viking" to all Norsemen or even the Normans come from here)
>modern imagery in pulp media (everything from videogames and comics to metal album covers)

I think everyone with a brain understands these guys were no awesome superwarriors, but likewise they weren't absolute primitives living in caves either, as some people on this board would like you to believe.

File: >bagans.png (373KB, 830x974px) Image search: [Google]

373KB, 830x974px

>>622487
>posting the reddit version

>>622600

The norse didn't even live in ulster you mongoloid.

>>622894
This anon is correct, they raided, as they did many other places, but it wasn't colonized. There are traces of norse blood there because of the Ulster Plantation and the Reivers that moved there.

>>622040
same thing really

>>622004
>conquer sicily
I thought they only raided it. That's interesting.

>>621966
>pirates but with beards

so just pirates

>>623208
There were Norman kings of Sicily for quite some time

>>623232
>Norman
so not fucking vikings then

I think, like a lot of things in not only history but every subject, idiotic myths and bullshit prevail over actual historical fact.

File: le dubs guy 13.png (856KB, 1565x870px) Image search: [Google]

856KB, 1565x870px

>>623362
Not really, but it's considered part of the Norse legacy.

Side note, does anyone know what could be causing 4chan to say my file is too large with none selected?

>>622003
If thats true its a good argument.

>>622096
There was never a viking church

>>622221
as was the rest of Europe, but what on earth does that have to do with anything he wrote?