Stolenbjorn, thank you for your comments on using the Sagas of Icelanders as a source for studying and understanding Viking-age combat. I agree that the sagas can not be considered 100% accurate. Without a doubt, there are fantasy elements in the sagas. And the sagas aren't even self-consistent - consider the two Vínland sagas which differ in important details. I believe I have taken a skeptical and critical view of the sagas as I've done my research. That research suggests to me that the sagas represent our best source of information about Viking-age fighting moves, not only as used in Iceland, but throughout the northern European lands. The sagas are most valuable where these moves can be confirmed by other Viking-age sources (for example, forensic evidence). The sources I have used, the reasoning I have followed, and the conclusions I have drawn are laid out in the web articles and books I referenced in my earlier posting. I hope someone with an interest in Viking-age fighting will take a look and consider the information presented there. Additionally, if you are ever in our neighborhood, I invite you to join us in our regular Viking combat research sessions or in our Viking practice sessions at the Higgins Armory Museum. Best regards, William Short
Thanks for the invitation! If I'm not mistaking, you're on the oposite side of the atlantic, so the risk of me suddenly taking up on the invitation is unfortunately not very big As for our little debate, I don't think we disagree much, I'd only downplay the Viking-part, as I feel that the medieval-part is more interresting than Viking-age -at least from my point of wiew. But as long as people are as clear about what is fact and what is speculation as you seem to be, I can live with the Viking-hype Vikings in Norway are allso a big thing, because norwegian nationalists that wanted independence from Sweeden picked up the Viking archetype as a national rally-point in the building of the consept of "Norwegian". In my oppinion, it's strange that they picked a time-period known for mass migration from Norway and social unrest, rather than the Roman iron age, when we fought as mercenaries for orther Germanic tribes, and perhaps even the Romans (see the illerup find in denemark: http://illerup.dk/deepweb.php?top=30&language=0 ) -or the period after the Viking age. Norway was at it's biggest around 1260, when we owned Greenland, Iceland, big parts of present day sweeden + some holdings in the Hebrids, the Orkny-islands and the faroe islands. The reason why the viking age is such a big thing is perhaps more catching internationally, as the viking raids like that on Lindesfarne is regarded as more relevant for an international audience, perhaps. So for me, as a Norwegian, things like "Kongsspeglen" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konungs_skuggsjá or "Heimskringla" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimskringla -are far more interresting than the viking age, telling the exciting story about how Norway came to be, the long feud with the Danish dynasty and the civil war in 12th century. If you're interrested in Viking sources, I can mention that dendrocronology on Norwegian Oak have been complemented back into the Viking age, so theese days, we do test all the viking-ships in scandinavia, and we're able to find out when and where they were built. Very interrestingly, the Oseberg ship, burried in eastern norway, was built with oak from southweastern norway, not far away from Avaldsnes, the area regarded as the seat of King Harald Hårfagre the one who alledgedly gathered Norway under one crown for the first time. -Allthough we don't really know that, as this very well could be a myth created to establish that dynasty's birthright to the crown. Such constructed history is common in scandinavian medieval times. One excample is a myth regarding a girl from southern norway beeing very witty when meeting a Danish king, and it ends with marriage. The myth is though to be a story installed in the region by the Danes in order to establish a history of ownership to that region.
We have had guests join us for practice from Iceland, England, Germany, and Denmark. Perhaps a Norwegian guest will visit us some day. Best regards, William Short
I don't think it's strange at all. Viking raiders, the time period, and their culture are highly romanticized. There are movies, memorabilia, D&D characters/modules, heck here in the States we even have football teams named in honor thereof. One of my favorite movies is "Eric the Viking." You haven't seen any movie named, "Eric the Iron Age Norwegian" have you? Anything that's romanticized gets people to rally behind it. Here in the U.S. many "native Indian tribes" have been, and are still, highly romanticized as "the Noble Savage" despite the fact that many of their practices were exactly that: savage. And let's not forget the Spartans. Eugenics, euthanasia, over-lord class, murder, obscene child cruelty, and the list just goes on and on. But we still have sports teams named "Spartans" and all the other trappings. Peace favor your sword, Kirk
