 | | European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia |
November 5th, 2012, 07:03 AM
|
#1 | | Citizen
Joined: Nov 2012 Posts: 22 | Fall of the Vikings
I just want to get more up to date on my Scandinavian and Viking history, so, why did the Vikings fall?
| | |
| |
November 5th, 2012, 07:06 AM
|
#2 | | Misanthropologist
Joined: Aug 2010 From: Wales Posts: 8,535 |
Times changed and they changed with them. Its noticeable in elements of thier literature, various Sagas. While the warrior ethos is still seen as relatively noble, by the 12-14th Centuries it comes off as a bit anachronistic and limited. Commerce has its rewards.
| | |
| |
November 5th, 2012, 07:33 AM
|
#3 | | Historian
Joined: May 2012 From: Denmark Posts: 1,682 |
The patchwork of smaller kingdoms and chiefdoms of Scandinavia became more centralised kingdoms, and the resources usually applied locally for smaller viking raids was incoorporated into the army of the monarchs for more conventional military purposes (although looting of course still was the main form of soldiers salary until early modern times).
| | |
| |
November 5th, 2012, 09:36 AM
|
#4 | | Historian
Joined: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,428 |
They went modern — i.e. accepted Christianity and made proper Medieval kingdoms.
| | |
| |
November 5th, 2012, 08:01 PM
|
#5 | | Lecturer
Joined: Jul 2012 Posts: 474 |
Perhaps we're applying our own standards of 'success' too heavily upon them. I don't believe they were truly defeated as much as they were gradually incorporated into the surrounding culture. We're all about 'finding our true selves' and being self-actualized that we may forget that simply living pleasantly is success enough. Perhaps that is a defeat of a sort, but to a people who merely wanted to thrive and expand their success seems to continue on until today.
| | |
| |
November 5th, 2012, 10:55 PM
|
#6 | | Scholar
Joined: Mar 2012 From: New York City Posts: 541 |
The settlements they were attacking were also building better fortifications and defenses to counteract their plundering. Make it harder and harder to conduct the whole business of it.
| | |
| |
November 5th, 2012, 11:47 PM
|
#7 | | αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
Joined: Jan 2010 From: Lower Saxony Posts: 10,635 |
Look at the medieval history after the Viking period, they are still there, just without being called Vikings. Look at the de Clares, de Burgh, Kerr, Bruce, d'Aubigny, Beaumont, de Warenne, de longchamps, de Gailly, de Corbeil, Marshall, de Montfort, Bigod.... ah, simply so many of the British and French nobility.
| |
Last edited by beorna; November 6th, 2012 at 01:23 AM.
|
| |
November 6th, 2012, 12:04 AM
|
#8 | | Cynical Optimist
Joined: Jul 2011 From: Australia Posts: 2,389 |
The Danes, Norse and Sveir did not 'fall'. they simply changed with the times from raiders (vikings) to settlers and builders.
| | |
| |
November 6th, 2012, 12:34 AM
|
#9 | | Archivist
Joined: Oct 2012 Posts: 133 |
Yes time change everything!!
| | |
| |
November 6th, 2012, 09:41 AM
|
#10 | | Archivist
Joined: Feb 2012 From: South Carolina, USA Posts: 165 |
Are you talking about the Norwegian vikings or the Rus? They are as different as night and day. The Rus never fell or failed in anything they did. They dominated the peoples they came into contact with. In the end they were overwhelmed by the far greater numbers of other peoples around them and eventually merged with them. New information coming out suggests that many returned to Sweden or were planning to. This is proven by the huge number of Persian silver coin caches that have been discovered. Most of them close to the Baltic sea. The latest find is one found on the east coast of Sweden in 2006. 260,000 silver coins in one cache. A smaller # in another cache.
From Empires and Barbarians by Peter Heath, 2012.
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |