Barbarism? I gotta challenge disliking the Norse and Vikings on that. Look at us. We conquered our lands in the USA (Yes, I know, attacks were mutual). The north people could not farm well, they had to do something. The Norman conquest (OK, many of those had Norse ancestors). Just....war...why are Vikings always supposed to be the most brutal?
Barbarism? I gotta challenge disliking the Norse and Vikings on that. Look at us. We conquered our lands in the USA (Yes, I know, attacks were mutual). The north people could not farm well, they had to do something. The Norman conquest (OK, many of those had Norse ancestors). Just....war...why are Vikings always supposed to be the most brutal?
Sorry. Just the facts, ma'am. I was interested to hear that the escaped cocks had made it all the way down to 96th St. But then they used to hang out in Riverside Park.
<<"Yet it seems that the ritualized violence of the Vikings, their slave-taking, and all the rest is not contrary to their religious beliefs at all, no more than Aztec slaving and human sacrifice was a violation of theirs">>
OK, but speaking of these things a bit, having read Sullivan's book, spent a lot of time among Mexicans and in Mexico, and having had weeks in Norse countries, I think the Aztecs were far more brutal that the Vikings, from what I know.
Contemporary to the Norse were the Magyars who were also pretty awful back then. while the Vikings raided by sea, the Magyars raided by land until Otto the Great put a firm stop to that at Lechfield-- and also required the Magyars convert to Christianity.
Barbarism? I gotta challenge disliking the Norse and Vikings on that. Look at us. We conquered our lands in the USA (Yes, I know, attacks were mutual). The north people could not farm well, they had to do something. The Norman conquest (OK, many of those had Norse ancestors). Just....war...why are Vikings always supposed to be the most brutal?
I'm not getting into this. But I know barbarism when I see it.
OK, thank - you probably spared me. The chicken fight description was hard for me yesterday.
Sorry. Just the facts, ma'am. I was interested to hear that the escaped cocks had made it all the way down to 96th St. But then they used to hang out in Riverside Park.
<<"Yet it seems that the ritualized violence of the Vikings, their slave-taking, and all the rest is not contrary to their religious beliefs at all, no more than Aztec slaving and human sacrifice was a violation of theirs">>
OK, but speaking of these things a bit, having read Sullivan's book, spent a lot of time among Mexicans and in Mexico, and having had weeks in Norse countries, I think the Aztecs were far more brutal that the Vikings, from what I know.
Yes.
100% by an order of magnitude.
Contemporary to the Norse were the Magyars who were also pretty awful back then. while the Vikings raided by sea, the Magyars raided by land until Otto the Great put a firm stop to that at Lechfield-- and also required the Magyars convert to Christianity.
I remember reading about some part of France that within about 10 years was ravaged by the Vikings, the Arabs, and the Magyars.