great summary :) hadn't thought about the Charlemagne connection before - do we have any sources identifying the attackers as 'Danes' or 'Norse' specifically? (aware those terms were used somewhat loosely at the time) or any other clues as to a regional identity?
An interesting thought, but tenuous. Norway was far from Charlemagne's influence that did not reach present-day Denmark. The monastery at Lindisfarne was simply treasure waiting to be taken. The pagan Norwegians would have had the same regard for Christian monks as Charlemagne had for the pagans at Paderborn.
I do think the world was a lot more connected than people realise as groups of people traveled great distances, but I agree that the traditional theory does carry weight.
That is where you are wrong. Widukind who was mistreated by charlemagne took refuge in Denmark and married a Dane. Charlemagnes influence literally changed Germany from a neutral friendly country into a christian threat against pagan Denmark.
Think of the Scandinavians, Sea People, Northmen,Anglo-Saxons (Basically everything excluded from Roman Empire, and later Charlemagne..) as Being Indigenous Peoples. Experiencing an early Colonialism. It will make you re-think the whole situation.
I'd not agree with the indigenous comment as that's a very modern way of thinking, but it's interesting. Groups were a lot more mobile and violent back then.
Most sources I find talk about them in a negative light, or written afterward. Are there many sources from the raiders/families of. Or a Christian at the time who was as objective as we can be today? That could be a pipe dream, I'm more curious as to whether those things play a role in what we know or we piece it up from the afore mentioned sources.
I think we discussed this together years ago. Good work, keep it up.
Aye it made me think of Domino effect of history
I think he has hit the nail on the head! Good work!
Thank you!!
great summary :)
hadn't thought about the Charlemagne connection before - do we have any sources identifying the attackers as 'Danes' or 'Norse' specifically? (aware those terms were used somewhat loosely at the time) or any other clues as to a regional identity?
I'm afraid not, I believe the term Heathen was used to describe them.
An interesting thought, but tenuous. Norway was far from Charlemagne's influence that did not reach present-day Denmark. The monastery at Lindisfarne was simply treasure waiting to be taken. The pagan Norwegians would have had the same regard for Christian monks as Charlemagne had for the pagans at Paderborn.
I do think the world was a lot more connected than people realise as groups of people traveled great distances, but I agree that the traditional theory does carry weight.
That is where you are wrong. Widukind who was mistreated by charlemagne took refuge in Denmark and married a Dane. Charlemagnes influence literally changed Germany from a neutral friendly country into a christian threat against pagan Denmark.
Think of the Scandinavians, Sea People, Northmen,Anglo-Saxons (Basically everything excluded from Roman Empire, and later Charlemagne..) as Being Indigenous Peoples. Experiencing an early Colonialism. It will make you re-think the whole situation.
I'd not agree with the indigenous comment as that's a very modern way of thinking, but it's interesting. Groups were a lot more mobile and violent back then.
Most sources I find talk about them in a negative light, or written afterward. Are there many sources from the raiders/families of. Or a Christian at the time who was as objective as we can be today?
That could be a pipe dream, I'm more curious as to whether those things play a role in what we know or we piece it up from the afore mentioned sources.
I would say that we are not objective today but the sources are all biased towards the intended audience and the writer on both sides of the fence!
Good work but the pronunciation of two words needs some work.
Irminsul = Ear min sool
Widukind = Vi doo kind
Thank you, never heard them aloud - only read them in books!