Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 5th, 2017, 09:20 AM   #11

Slavon's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jan 2014
From: Rus
Posts: 747

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny Wong View Post
It was more likely that Danes were making pre-emptive raids? Walls for defense? That Widukind had gone there to bring the message of christian expansion under Charlemagne?
Difficult questions. It is clear only that walls were for defense.

Another difficult question is the name of Denmark. Word "mark" meant frontier parts of Frankish state.
Slavon is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 5th, 2017, 05:00 PM   #12

notgivenaway's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2015
From: UK
Posts: 4,719

Because they didn't have the resources and the time to do so.

they didn't know fully how to replicate the longboats, even though many made navies to counter the Norse threat. This succeeded somewhat, with both the Franks, Anglo-Saxons and even Al-Andalus in Spain.
notgivenaway is offline  
Old January 7th, 2017, 01:19 AM   #13
Scholar
 
Joined: May 2016
From: Vatican occupied America
Posts: 586

In addition to logistical considerations there were political ones for not attacking, Denmark was the first domino to fall to Christianity and was on and off again both Christian and a Frankish ally. Attacking it would have pushed to the Pagan side and made it unlikely that those who would make it an ally would gain or keep power. Danes were also often good Vikings like Rollo in the Vikings of the history channel - they were the good Vikings the Franks could tolerate giving land to because the constantly raided land was nearly worthless and having Viking vassals holding it kept the bad Vikings from sailing Paris deep into France or wherever they pleased in Neustria.
Disciple of Sophia is offline  
Old January 7th, 2017, 05:06 AM   #14
Citizen
 
Joined: May 2016
From: Ragnarok
Posts: 11

In the interval 802 to 804, the tribe Obotrites were transferred a part of the Saxon landscapes north of the Elbe and near to the border of the Vikings. On that occasion the army of Charlemagne showed up north of the Elbe and he encamped south of the river near Hollenstedt (Holdunsteti).

This challenge became the Danish king Gudfred (Godofridus) to assemble a fleet and the entire cavalry (latin: equitatus) of the kingdom in a place called Sliesthorp (Schleswig), the borderline between his kingdom and Saxony. Originally, a meeting with Karl south of Hollenstedt was agreed upon, but Gudfred, with caution, sent only envoys or diplomats. Charlemagne demanded the Saxon refugees extradited - which king Gudfred refused.

Answer: the Franks did not dare.

Source: Annales Regni Francorum.
Historicus is offline  
Old January 9th, 2017, 02:46 PM   #15
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,947

Quote:
Originally Posted by ztmyy View Post
We know the Vikings raided West Frank in paris/france, itaily, etc in arround 900AC. These Vikings were from Danmark or German beach villiage.
If we look at the Europe map, Danmark is not far from France. It would only take a few days to ride a horse to go to Danmark from Paris. So why the West Frank sent troop to Danmark to destory Vikings home villiage which were not well protected.

From the the map, we dont see barriers like high mountain or wild forrest between France and Danmark. How can these Frankia and Vikings isolated to each other so largely?

Vikings raided Francia because it had rich pickings. It wasn't worth raiding in the opposite direction. However Charlemagne waged a war of some 37 years against the pagan Saxons before they submitted to Christianity and the Danes fortified Jutland by the Danewerk a barrier which was still in use in 1864. The Saxons between the Elbe and Eider were a sort of buffer zone but came under the control of the bishops of Bremen and Hamburg who sought to convert the Danes by peaceful means. They also acted as allies against the Slavic tribes to the east, protected by the Limes Saxoniae or Sachsen Wall. You can see the lines of both below:

Click the image to open in full size.



It was much higher in its day and had a manned pallisade

Click the image to open in full size.
authun is offline  
Old January 9th, 2017, 02:59 PM   #16
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,947

This map should act as a timeline for Frankish operations in the north. The saxon wars were prceded by the frankish-frisian war.

Click the image to open in full size.
authun is offline  
Old January 9th, 2017, 03:01 PM   #17

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,291

At the time of this, Denmark was in the area of influence of East Frankia, and West Frankia experienced an almost total collapse of central authority in the 9-10-11th centuries. It wasn't possible for the West Frankd, because of political and logistical issues, just to march to Jutland. Neither they had naval resources to do that. At some point around 900, they were so weak, that western Frankish kings couldn't even defend their south Pyrenees direct possesions.
Frank81 is offline  
Old January 9th, 2017, 03:13 PM   #18

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,291

Another issue is East Frankia.

In 974, Harald I Bluetooth attacked German territories around the Elba. Otto the Great assembled a very big army and attacked the Danevirke, defeated Danes and Norwegians defended it, and entered Denmark. Harald had to make a peace, and the Germans stablished their own fortified tows south of the border.
Frank81 is offline  
Old January 9th, 2017, 06:37 PM   #19
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Chalfont, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,599

The East Frankish kings did eventually force the kings of Denmark to become their vassals in the 10th century. Presumably the Danish kings ordered their Danish subjects to stop or decrease raiding Germany and maybe some other Christian lands, though the Danish Kings actually conquered and ruled England early in the 11th century. But by then it was one Christian king conquering another Christian Kingdom.

So eventually when Germany became strong enough it not only stopped the raids of the "horse vikings" - the Magyars - but it did everything that the suggested plan could do to stop Viking raids, by greatly decreasing Danish but nor Norwegian or Swedish raids on Germany and any other lands the German kings chose to protect by including in agreements with the Danish kings.
MAGolding is offline  
Old January 9th, 2017, 11:32 PM   #20

johnincornwall's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Cornwall
Posts: 5,824

'Horse Vikings'? Germany?

Starting to lose me there my friend.
johnincornwall is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
attack, beach, danmark, frankia, german, vikings, village, west



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why didn't Napoleon attack St. Petersburg(the capital of Russian Empire)? Mrbsct War and Military History 4 April 15th, 2015 08:19 AM
Why didn't Germany attack Switzerland? Watson War and Military History 27 May 15th, 2013 04:55 PM
Why didn't some of the european powers attack the 13 colonies right after the AR? randomdude123 American History 33 March 12th, 2013 03:36 AM
Why didn't West Germany have a army? ND4 European History 3 August 13th, 2011 10:53 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.