Thread replies: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: vikingplyndring.jpg (53KB, 525x300px) Image search:
[Google]
53KB, 525x300px
What does /his/ think about the theory that violent expansion and force conversion from the Frankia was one of the main factors starting the viking age?
Not saying it was the only factor, but it do make sense considering Charlemagne's recent and violent conquest of Saxony, the many refugees into pagan lands it created as well since the first confirmed viking raid taking place after the forced conversions in Saxony in which case it targeted a monastery.
The vikings had no way of directly confronting the Frankish empire's military might, so they targeted its religion wherever they could.
>>
>>1974511
It didn't even reach them, those cucks.
>>
>>1974511
What evidence is there? Like the Norse themselves saying they did it for this reason in particular?
It does seem like a logical explanation, but do expect this discussion to be memed and shitposted to death by Crusader fanboys
>>
>>1974530
May you define not reached them?
They saw their southern kin get forcefully converted and have their way of governing destroyed, the Danes seeing it fit to build one of Northern Europe's biggest fortifications ((DanneVirke)) to ward of the Frankish threat.
>>1974530
I am afraid I don't got any quotes from them right now, but as I get it the Christians wouldn't call them Barbarians but heathens giving this conflict a religious dimension. Aside from that the only thing I can think of right now is that the Viking contact with the Christians had been peaceful up to the Saxon wars, the Viking attack on lindisfarne occurring relatively recently after said wars.
Thread posts: 5
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1