Skip to comments.
Viking Burial Site Found in England
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS via NY Times ^
| September 7, 2004
| THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Posted on 09/07/2004 7:53:26 AM PDT by 68skylark
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-128 next last
To: TomB
Vikings (singing) Spam, spam, spam, spam, spam ... spam, spam, spam, spam ... lovely spam, wonderful spam ...
Waitress Shut up. Shut up! Shut up! You can't have egg, bacon, spam and sausage without the spam.
21
posted on
09/07/2004 8:10:26 AM PDT
by
xJones
To: 68skylark
I'm not familiar with what happened in 1013 -- does anyone have a little backgroung information to share? Just off the top of my head, I believe any "conquest" of "England" by the Norse took place over several centuries, culminating in Danish rule over the greater part of what is now England in the early 11th century. By the time of the Norman conquest, Anglo-Saxon rule had been re-established, although the Danes were still contesting for the kingdom right up until the very eve of the Conquest.
22
posted on
09/07/2004 8:11:26 AM PDT
by
Mr Ramsbotham
("This house is sho' gone crazy!")
To: Tax-chick
King Swein of Denmark (with his son Cnut) sailed up the rivers Humber and Trent to be accepted as king in the Danelaw. Thanks for the background. From what you describe, none of these rules claimed to be on a secret mission to sail up rivers they never entered, or claimed to take friendly fire from drunken revelers during some pagan festival. Such things were never seared into their memories. That was back when candidates had some class.
To: SunkenCiv
24
posted on
09/07/2004 8:16:04 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(The Notorious North Carolina Niceness Nazi ... Beware the Molasses Miasma!)
To: 68skylark
LOL - just ordinary invaders, taking what they could get without apology. Scandinavia was overpopulated, odd as that seems nowadays.
25
posted on
09/07/2004 8:17:06 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(The Notorious North Carolina Niceness Nazi ... Beware the Molasses Miasma!)
To: 68skylark
You know how they knew they were Vikings? None of them had Super Bowl rings.
26
posted on
09/07/2004 8:21:07 AM PDT
by
ekyjim
To: 68skylark
The interesting thing about Svein Forkbeard... he built the invasion force (it wasn't as casual and la-dee-dah as just sailing up a couple of rivers) over a period of twenty years, with barracks, drills, the fleet, etc. Then he up and died. The Vikings were a scourge, but they weren't just a bunch of berserkers. :')
In 1066, at Stamford Bridge, Harold II (the King of England, successor to Edward the Confessor) rode up to parley with Tostig and the Norwegian King Harald Hardrada (one of the various spellings), who is probably high on the list of anyone's Quintessential Vikings. As he rode off, Harald asked who that was. "Harold of England". The Viking was impressed, not least because all he'd been offered was "six feet of English ground, or whatever additional is required for his height" (part of Harald's fame was his great size) by some guy on a horse.
The battle that ensued ended the lives of Tostig and Hardrada, and ended the period of large scale invasion by Viking armies -- with the exception of William the Conqueror (Usurper), whose ancestry was Scandinavian (Norman / Norseman / Northmen), and who would lead the forces which killed Harold II and ended the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms less that three weeks later.
27
posted on
09/07/2004 8:22:13 AM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
To: Tax-chick
"They're still using "England" in an anachronistic usage, to some extent ... Ethelraed's kingdom wasn't exactly a united polity, as was demonstrated in the runup to 1066."
In fact, arguably, the 9th-century viking immigration/invasion of what became the danelaw, and the subsequent expulsion of danelaw rule from those areas by alfred and his descendents, in fact contributed greatly to earlier consolidation of the nominal rule of the major kingdoms that would have otherwise been the case.
To: Tax-chick
...just ordinary invaders, taking what they could get without apology.Ah, the good old days. Things were so much simpler then.
To: meandog
And, the greatest long-snapper in the history of the game, Mike Morris, # 68...
To: 68skylark
Yeah, death is always simple ...
31
posted on
09/07/2004 8:29:59 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(Antibiotics, anesthesia, air conditioning ... requirements for civilized life.)
To: 68skylark
well actually the Vikings invaded a lot earlier -- they started around the 8th century and set up Danelaw in northern England right up to London. They were also based in Ireland around what is now Dublin. By the 10th century the British Isles were part of King CAnute's Empire which covered most of Scandanavia as well as other parts of north western europe.
32
posted on
09/07/2004 8:30:48 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(W2K4)
To: WoofDog123
33
posted on
09/07/2004 8:31:18 AM PDT
by
Tax-chick
(Antibiotics, anesthesia, air conditioning ... requirements for civilized life.)
To: 68skylark
Did they find John Kerry's service records?
34
posted on
09/07/2004 8:31:32 AM PDT
by
KeyLargo
To: 68skylark
Viking Burial Site Found in EnglandIt was an extremely large mound with Nodic inscription on it which translated to "Metrodome."
35
posted on
09/07/2004 8:32:21 AM PDT
by
N. Theknow
(Kerry Kool-Aid: Changes flavors with every sip.)
To: N. Theknow
Argh!
Nodic = Nordic.
Or maybe not.
36
posted on
09/07/2004 8:34:03 AM PDT
by
N. Theknow
(Kerry Kool-Aid: Changes flavors with every sip.)
To: Darkchylde
37
posted on
09/07/2004 8:35:07 AM PDT
by
DJ MacWoW
(Save a Democrat! Vote Republican!)
To: Tax-chick
Nor did the Vikings "conquer England" at any point, since there was no "England" to conquer, only a group of warring kingdoms of various ethnic backgrounds.
England is merely the land of the Angles (though, naturally I prefer Pope Gregory's pun), history generally considers King Egbert to be the first 'King of All England' following his defeat of Beornwulf of Mercia in 825, he was proclaimed Bretwalda (ruler of Britain) in 829. He was the grandfather of King Alfred the Great, who did bring a large element of unity to the country.
Obviously England was not as united then as it is now, but we were certainly way down the line in the creation of a single state. Remember that the Greece of antiquity was a set of warring city-states.
38
posted on
09/07/2004 8:35:51 AM PDT
by
tjwmason
(Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
To: TomB
Spam, Eggs, Spam and Spam.
(sausage indeed!)
39
posted on
09/07/2004 8:37:30 AM PDT
by
norton
To: Tax-chick
Hey Tax-chick, it was good to see you and the Tax-chickadees at Matthews this weekend...spreading conservative Christian homeschool entropy in your wake. :)
Look at Scandinavia a thousand years after the heyday of the Vikings. Now they're the quintessential modern European socialist weenie countries...crushing taxation, cradle-to-grave welfare socialism, liberal sexual mores causing the breakdown of the family, and lax immigration policies that are leading them toward their own little Muslim intifadas. Where's the heirs to the Vikings when you really need them?
}:-)4
40
posted on
09/07/2004 8:42:26 AM PDT
by
Moose4
(I'm a compassionate conservative. I feel lots of pity for liberals.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-128 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson