I agree that the history of Vikings is way more fascinating and complicated than what's typically paraded about.
Shoutouts to Tore Hund!
> The men came with shields and sticks. She was given a cup of intoxicating drink; she sang at taking it and drank. The interpreter told me that she in this fashion bade farewell to all her girl companions. Then she was given another cup; she took it and sang for a long time while the old woman incited her to drink up and go into the pavillion where her master lay. I saw that she was distracted; she wanted to enter the pavillion but put her head between it and the boat. Then the old woman siezed her head and made her enter the pavillion and entered with her. Thereupon the men began to strike with the sticks on the shields so that her cries could not be heard and the other slave girls would not seek to escape death with their masters. Then six men went into the pavillion and each had intercourse with the girl. Then they laid her at the side of her master; two held her feet and two her hands; the old woman known as the Angel of Death re-entered and looped a cord around her neck and gave the crossed ends to the two men for them to pull. Then she approached her with a broad-bladed dagger, which she plunged between her ribs repeatedly, and the men strangled her with the cord until she was dead.
Even without the Norman invasion, the British Royal family would be descendent from Norsemen through Godwinson's mother, daughter of Sweyn Forkbeard, grandchild of Harold Bluetooth (King of Denmark/Norway and inventor of frustrating wireless protocols).
After 1066, England was pretty awful for the Anglo-Saxon warriors/noblemen, a good number of them also fecked off to Byzantium and joined the Varangian guard like Vikings before them. They also created settlements in what is now Ukraine.
And the story of what happened to his heart is pretty interesting as well:
In the sources they show up just as often fighting in battles where the emperor was there and when he was not.
The did protect him on campaign, but that might just be because the were the primary infantry arm.
Some people think of them like the Praetorian guard, but that isn't really accurate.
Can you name something googlable or wikipediable so I can read more about this?
Free, high-quality history content, can't recommend highly enough: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLh9mgdi4rNewfxO7LhBoz...
[1] https://murtonpark.co.uk/for-schools/at-murton-park/viking/
The deal was also conditioned on religious conversion and allegiance to the King of France, and he also married the King's daughter.
Win-win.
This is not so simple. Titles and their significance change over time. During the Anglo-Saxon period in Britain, an "ealdorman" was the ruler of one or (later) more shires; during the end of the period the title was shortend into "earl". The title lost later more and more of its importance. "Duke" was originally a French title (from French "Duc") and started to be used in England from the middle of the 14th century -- long after the Viking Period. Therefore it would be very anachronistic to translate "jarl" with "duke". If you were looking for the highest official of a shire in todays England you may prefer the translation "High Sheriff" (a title created in the early 1970s), but which is more or less only ceremonial. So no, a "jarl" is best to be left an "earl".
Do you have a source for this, please?
The OED says that "Ealdorman" is cognate with "Alderman", while "Jarl" is cognate with "Earl". The titles were used interchangeably, but one did not come from the other. The distinction being that earls held power under Danelaw. Earl replaced ealdorman as the title of distinction in the mid-11th century due to the extension of the power of earls outside of Danelaw.
Instead of writing:
"during the end of the period the title was shortend into 'earl'"
I should have written:
"during the end of the period 'ealdorman' was replaced by the etymologically unrelated, but phonetically close and shorter 'eorl', that later turned into 'earl'."
What I wanted to say is that "earl", though somewhat anachronistic, can still be an exceptable translation of "jarl". When the emphasis is on contemporary jargon, it might perhaps best be left untranslated. Another alternative would be to translate it with "count", because contemporary Latin sources sometimes use the word "comes" to refer to a jarl; but this translation has its own difficulties because "count" entered the English language also late via the French "comte". The only criteria in favour of "duke" is the fact that this title was later often used in Scandinavia instead of "jarl" for functionally similar offices. Another option is to translate "jarl" with "chief", which corresponds to a more general early usage of "jarl"; however, this would indicate too low a status for most of the Anglo-Saxon period.
My personal preference for the Anglo-Saxon period is to leave it untranslated. If someone insists on a translation, "earl" would still be the best fit in my opinion.
Apparently the Anglo-Saxon chronicle refers to Ealdormen as "Duces", plural of Dux, same Latin root as Duc and then Duke. It just means leader. As far as actual meaning then "second highest noble rank to a King" would mean that Jarls and Dukes are equivalent noble titles.
The spanner in the works is after 1066, Earls became equivalent to Counts, below the rank of Dukes. I wonder if this is due to King William still being a Duke in fealty to the King of France? Maybe the Shires were smaller/less-powerful than Duchies like Aquitaine, Normandy etc.?
So it sounds like it went: Ealdormen==Duke then after Cnut, Ealdormen==Jarl==Earl==Duke and then after 1066, (Earl==Count)!=Duke.
Anything that covers that would be great,
The reason the French King gave them the region as a duchy, is because the Seine river, which passes in the middle of Paris, ends its course in present day Honfleur, Normandie. So Vikings would move their drakkars ships upstream from there and sack the city. Having Rollo installed as Duke put an end to the raiding.
It is said that when Rollo was made to kneel before Charles the Simple, to swear allegiance, he grabbed onto the king’s feet and threw him in the air. I don’t know if this is a true story, but it’s always amused me!
If you drive around Normandie today, you’ll see plenty of cars with drakkar stickers on their bumpers. A sign that many still identify with this heritage.
It's worth mentioning that Russia is only one population that branched from the Rus', and it did not claim the name Russia until the ~1700s when the Duchy of Moscow entered an expansionist period... Rus' = Russia is an oversimplification that implies Russian dominance of Belarus and Ukraine.
Roslagen comes from skeppslag, skepp as in ships, administrative regions which were required to each contribute one fully manned and equipped ship along with supplies.
A similar levy was taxed inland, called hundare (hundreds). There are three still remaining, the Chiltern Hundreds in Buckinghamshire.
“The name Rus', like the Proto-Finnic name for Sweden (*Ruotsi), supposed to be descended from an Old Norse term for "the men who row" (rods-) as rowing was the main method of navigating the rivers of Eastern Europe […]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_Rusʹ,_Russia_and_Ruth...
hǫfn is "old norse" for harbour or port. Now going to wiktionary and following the etymology:
hǫfn: From Proto-Germanic *habanō, *habnō (“harbour, haven”).
habanō: From Proto-Indo-European *kh₂póneh₂ or *kh₂pnéh₂, from the root *keh₂p- (“to take, seize, grasp”).
Other germanic words (like german "Hafen") for harbour/port also have a very similar lineage and derive from this "to take, seize, grasp".
So basically the harbour is the place you go to, when you are going "to take, seize, grasp", like when you invade other countries by sea.*
I'd say this is almost an understatement[0], its rather shocking how many very average, day-to-day intellectual items are Norse in origin. Almost as if English is some sort of creole when you add the massive simplification of Old English on the way to Middle English; the Norman host was a tiny fraction of the population of speakers in England.
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Old_N...
The works of Icelandic historian/poet Snorre Sturlason, he is most famous for what in English would be called 'Snorre's sagas of kings', which is widely regarded to be one of the most important books for Norway.
The Danelaw is also pretty interesting, but what I personally find even more interesting is the colonization and settlements in Ireland by vikings. Dublin, Cork, the Isle of Man and much more was settled by vikings. The Danelaw and settlements caused words from Old Norse to become fairly influential on English.
Someone else has mentioned Ibn Fadlan, who met vikings which came from the river Dnipro, which runs through modern day Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. Vikings traveled from Sweden towards Russia, giving the country it's name. The name Rus was first used about the Scandinavians in Eastern Europe, but later referred to the Kievan Rus.
The region of Normandie in France has it's name from the vikings, as Rollo the Walker was made ruler of the region by the king of France. This was allegedly after the vikings had tried to sack Paris for the n-th time. This deal was made on the premise that the people of Normandie would defend the rest of France from vikings and other raiders. Rollo the Walker is a direct ancestor of William the Conqueror, and by extension the British royal family.
The title jarl is often translated into English as earl, but the correct translation would be duke. Jarl is simply just etymologically related to earl.
Hope this random list wasn't too confusing, if anyone is interested in this I would gladly help with finding good English language sources!