What did the Vikings do for us?

[The Augusta]

I am re-reading that old tome, Sarum by Edward Rutherfurd during my journey to and from work at the moment, and as I ploughed through the other day and came to the 9th century chapter concerning itself with the Battle of Edington etc. it reminded me very much that apart from my irrational antipathy for the Ancient Egyptians (whose culture has always scared me - don't ask me why), the other major culture of early history that sets my teeth on edge is the Vikings. Now, although I can see exactly how the Egyptians contributed to civilisation, I am at a loss when I consider the Viking input into our dear little Britain. I do confess to knowing very little about their history on our shores, so I would appreciate it if any experts on the old Norse invaders could enlighten me as to just what they achieved for us? I have always shied away from further study of them, although some of the old sagas are quite interesting.

 

So, what contribution did they make to the history of Britain, and are there any lasting effects of the invasion still benefiting us today? Have they deserved their historical rehabilitation over the last century or so, or were they truly just marauding pirates?

[necromaniac]

I'm just now starting to read up the Vikings myself. Very interesting people, but not the blood fanatical marauders that they are potrayed to be, or so i've been reading.

[Publius Nonius Severus]

Mi Augusta-

 

I cannot answer your question, but since I am ex patria in Iceland currently, and the Icelanders are quite proud of their sagas...you might be able to see what the Vikings though about England for clues to your answer:

 

Icelandic Saga Database

 

Follow the link and search for "England". I have only looked for hits, I haven't actually looked through the results yet. Good Luck!

[ASCLEPIADES]

So, what contribution did they make to the history of Britain, and are there any lasting effects of the invasion still benefiting us today? Have they deserved their historical rehabilitation over the last century or so, or were they truly just marauding pirates?

Salve, Lady A!

 

Here is a serious answer,

 

next comes a childish answer

 

and finally a sport answer

[Pertinax]

Augusta , thats a tough question, my reply would be "an appreciation of the strategic reach of waterborne infiltration as a tactical ploy , combined with a perceptive use of ship technology " However I stop short of any particularly positive cultural suggestion, militarily I cannot see any innovation in the swine array , the glorification of personal feats of arms or weapon technology. Longbow might be able to lift my negative take on this.

[The Augusta]

So, what contribution did they make to the history of Britain, and are there any lasting effects of the invasion still benefiting us today? Have they deserved their historical rehabilitation over the last century or so, or were they truly just marauding pirates?

Salve, Lady A!

 

Here is a serious answer,

 

next comes a childish answer

 

and finally a sport answer

 

Thanks for these, Asclepiades. Well - in the

serious answer you cite, I have gleaned that they may or may not have contributed to parliamentary democracy in Iceland, and they gave a remote part of the British Isles a language that seemed to be totally useless to the rest of the country! On the other hand, we seem to have civilised them more than they civilised us (the author refers to their taking back European and English customs to Scandinavia). I did enjoy his reference to them contributing to a united nation albeit in a negative way (by forcing disparate kingdoms and tribes to band together to drive them out!). Any technological advances? I suppose their sea-faring may have played a part - and we all know they were good with wood. But of those who stayed and settled amongst us all, did they assimilate Anglo-Saxon customs, or was it vice-versa? I'm not so sure.

 

Hehe - I've yet to be convinced. But I will read up on them a bit more. And by the way - even I know what the Blood Eagle was. Eeewww! I think that one may be a myth...

[ASCLEPIADES]

Well, seriously, probably their ship technology was one of their main contributions.

 

Once again, here it is the advance ship technology

 

and the elementary ship technology.

[sonic]

I have gleaned that they may or may not have contributed to parliamentary democracy in Iceland, and they gave a remote part of the British Isles a language that seemed to be totally useless to the rest of the country! On the other hand, we seem to have civilised them more than they civilised us (the author refers to their taking back European and English customs to Scandinavia). I did enjoy his reference to them contributing to a united nation albeit in a negative way (by forcing disparate kingdoms and tribes to band together to drive them out!).

 

Hehe - I've yet to be convinced. But I will read up on them a bit more. And by the way - even I know what the Blood Eagle was. Eeewww! I think that one may be a myth...

 

 

The Viking contribution?

 

1) They gave the world the longest surviving 'democracy' in the Tynwald of the Isle of Man.

 

2) Not content with introducing a 'totally useless' language, they contributed greatly to our present day language. For example every time you look out of a window and see a bird laying an egg, think of the Vikings. Oh, and men wear shirts and women wear skirts, but the original long, non-gendered garment was a shirt. The 'sk' sound came about with the Vikings, so the split shirt/skirt, and in placenames between, for example, Shipton (South) and Skipton (North), is a direct legacy of the Vikings.

A large part of the linguistic separation between the North and South of England is due to Viking linguistic influence.

 

3) The Vikings did not force the 'disparate' kingdoms of England to come together!! They completely wiped out the kingdoms that existed in England with the exception of Wessex. The traditionally named 'reconquest' did not happen: it was a conquest of England by the Kings of Wessex, with the aim being to eradicate the Kingdoms run by the Vikings in order to ensure their survival. As late as the reign of Harold Godwinson many of the Northumbrians were unhappy with the rule of Wessex! And don't forget that for a time we were part of a large Viking empire under Cnut, who appears to have been a great king!

 

4) They maintained their mastery of trade, and it should be remembered that the 'reconquest' simply evicted the Viking ruling elite. Many vikings remained under the rule of Wessex and contributed to the trade and industry of the North.

 

Finally, they do deserve the attempt at rehabilitation. Although they did attack England and cause widespread destruction and death, that is not the whole story. Try reading a history of the Kingdom of York and seeing the influence the kingdom had on English and Scottish politics - an influence that survived long after the demise of York as a separate political entity.

[The Augusta]

Ah - thanks for this Sonic. You have certainly done a better job at 'selling' the Vikings than the author on the website cited by Asclepiades - although to be fair, I do think that was a somewhat light-hearted piece. However, I have to say, you almost lost me again by citing the Isle of Man as some kind of shining of example of anything It remains to this day a very backward place with more than a touch of the Royston Vesey about it.

 

To be honest with you, linguistics don't really cut it with me either - I am sure Doc will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think our language owes far more to Anglo-Saxon/Germanic/Latin than it does to Norse - but I stand to be corrected.

 

But I grant you the last two, which are far more persuasive. What is also telling, is that, as you say, the Viking leadership was overcome but many of the ordinary folk stayed here quite happily and were assimilated into early England (well, the North, at least).

 

I have to say that the town where I was born owed its name to the Vikings - Dukinfield in Cheshire, which was named Dokenfeld by the Vikings - or so the local history has it, and being a born and bred, dyed-in-the-wool Northern lass myself, I guess I'm a descendant of their culture in some way or another. So let me ask you another question: Of all the cultures that have shaped England (and I'm being specific to England here), which would you say has been the most important and lasting? One might say that if the Vikings introduced superior naval power (as Pertinax said - and I can see no reason to disagree with this), that may be their most crucial contribution, as we are an island, and I suppose even to this day our Navy remains our 'Senior Service'.

 

This is turning into a fascinating discussion for me. Keep the answers coming, guys.

[docoflove1974]

To be honest with you, linguistics don't really cut it with me either - I am sure Doc will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think our language owes far more to Anglo-Saxon/Germanic/Latin than it does to Norse - but I stand to be corrected.

 

While not a scholar of the history of English, I do know that the North Germanic languages (aka Norse and its sisters) did leave a lexical mark on the Anglo-Saxon mix that was already in place in the British Isles, as well as contributed to the pronominal system--but I can't recall exactly how that happened. But as most linguists will tell you, in a situation where one culture conquers another, and the only linguistic mark left is lexical (and perhaps some phonological additions/changes in order to pronounce those words), there is true language maintenance between the cultures, or the 'conquered' language is the one that is dominant. There are plenty of examples in Western Europe of this: the Normans over the English; the Gothic tribes over the Ibero-Romance peoples; the Franks over the Gallo-Romance peoples; the Ostrogoths over the Northern Italian peoples; as well as others. It tells me that while there might have been (and probably were) cultural exchanges between the Vikings and the Anglo-Saxon-ish Brits, and therefore lexical exchanges, there was still a separation between the two groups. Otherwise, we'd be speaking a Northern Germanic, not a West Germanic language nor French!

[Julius Ratus]

The Vikings created many of the modern kingdoms of Europe. England and France were influenced by the Vikings through the Normans. Russia was founded by the Vikings, the Rus. All of the Scandanavian kingdoms were the remainders of the Vikings.

 

They 'discovered' America before Columbus, and gave the Native Americans their only lastin victory against the 'White Eyes'.

 

In addition they connected the entire Medieval world. Their trade networks streched all the way from Iceland to the Volga.

[docoflove1974]

The Vikings created many of the modern kingdoms of Europe. England and France were influenced by the Vikings through the Normans. Russia was founded by the Vikings, the Rus. All of the Scandanavian kingdoms were the remainders of the Vikings

 

Really? This doesn't make sense linguistically, but that doesn't mean as much. What sources do you have for this?

[Kosmo]

Vikings created Normandy and that had a long influence on England and other places like South Italy or Antioch.

The biggest thing for Britain was the inclusion in a trade network that was centred on the Baltic Sea. Not even french influence after Hastings changed that. This trading empire connected Groenland and Island to Byzantium and the islamic califate. York was an important place for this trade. Also they founded Dublin, Limerick and most other cities in Irland as they started the urbanization process, but I'm not sure if you will consider this a benefit for Britain.

[Julius Ratus]

The Vikings created many of the modern kingdoms of Europe. England and France were influenced by the Vikings through the Normans. Russia was founded by the Vikings, the Rus. All of the Scandanavian kingdoms were the remainders of the Vikings

 

Really? This doesn't make sense linguistically, but that doesn't mean as much. What sources do you have for this?

 

I'll leave Viking influence on England to other people (not my specialty). If you read the rest of the thread it is discussed, even linguistically by The Augusta and by sonic.

 

Linguistically, Viking influence in Scandanavia is very obvious .

 

As far as the Viking creation of Russia goes (this is one of my specialities), Russia was founded by a Sweedish tribe, Rus'. They sailed down the Russian rivers and traded with the Byzantines, the Volga Bulgars, and with the Moslems. The main source would be the Russian Primary Chronicle (Povest Vremenik Let). Linguistically, Old Norse and Russian are very different, but keep in mind that over the past thousand years or so the Russians have had many influences: Byzantine Greeks, Tatars, Turkic tribes, Poles, Lithuanians, Germans, French, so on and so forth.

 

Beside the RPC, the best source I can point you towards is The Varangians of Byzantium by Sigfus Blondal.

[sonic]

Ah - thanks for this Sonic. You have certainly done a better job at 'selling' the Vikings than the author on the website cited by Asclepiades - although to be fair, I do think that was a somewhat light-hearted piece. However, I have to say, you almost lost me again by citing the Isle of Man as some kind of shining of example of anything It remains to this day a very backward place with more than a touch of the Royston Vesey about it.

 

Don't let your dislike of the Isle of Man bias your thoughts: love it or loath it, it's still the oldest!!

 

To be honest with you, linguistics don't really cut it with me either - I am sure Doc will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think our language owes far more to Anglo-Saxon/Germanic/Latin than it does to Norse - but I stand to be corrected.

 

Don't confuse Anglo-Saxon/German as distinct languages: Anglo-Saxon was a Germanic language, as was Norse, so there are many words which people asssume were English which could easily turn out to be Norse, as they were so similar, as I showed in an earlier post. That helps to explain to the Doc why 'English' remained the norm in England. Furthermore, until the last 50-100 years the dialects of the North of England were almost unintelligible to the South. Both sides had to speak carefully in order to be understood. It is only under the vast influence of the media that accents and dialects have started to become more standard.

 

As proof, in the Nineteenth century a fishing trawler from Newcastle was blown off course and ended up in Iceland. To the amazement of both parties, they could actually hold simple conversations, due to the 'Geordie' accent being influenced by the Vikings so many years before. (The Icelanders, obviously, speaking a direct derivative of Old Norse!)

 

Of all the cultures that have shaped England (and I'm being specific to England here), which would you say has been the most important and lasting? One might say that if the Vikings introduced superior naval power (as Pertinax said - and I can see no reason to disagree with this), that may be their most crucial contribution, as we are an island, and I suppose even to this day our Navy remains our 'Senior Service'.

 

This is turning into a fascinating discussion for me. Keep the answers coming, guys.

 

It hurts me to say it, but probably the 'French' invasion from Normandy. Many words were introduced to our language by the Normans, and their eventual total conquest (by c.1072) resulted in a reorientation of English politics and ambitions away from the Viking areas of Scandinavia and Denmark towards the Low countries and France. Politically and culturally we have been very much influenced by the French, even if the influence has been a negative one (such as our refusal to eat snails!! )

 

The amount of direct conflict between Engalnd and Scandinavia is small compared to our 'permanent' war with France which lasted on and off from the reign of William I until 1815. It is easy to forget that our wars with Germany have only been fought in the last 100 years, whereas we had the Hundred Years War with France. The legacy of a King of England owning half of France is still felt today!!

 

Hope that helps!!

 

Sonic

Edited September 19, 2007 by sonic