Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Was Scandinavia of the Viking Age really united culturally and / or ethnically?
An interesting article about this issue by Przemysław Urbańczyk ( https://iaepan.academia.edu/PrzemyslawUrbanczyk ):
https://www.academia.edu/6437408/Deconstructing_the_Nordic_Civilization_
For example this excerpt:
In all of Europe distinct burial traditions and material cultures are usually interpreted by archaeologists & historians as signs of ethnic diversification. Apparently an exception is Scandinavia, for which a concept of a kind of "isolation" and "lack of immigration" exists, despite evidence showing the opposite:
So perhaps von Zernichow ("from Chernihov") is a typical Norwegian surname, and von Trier ("from Treves") a typical Danish surname?
===============================
All evidence provided by archaeology, modern 21st century genetics and unbiased interpretation of written sources stand in high contrast with old chauvinistic interpretation of Scandinavian demographic history. And what was that old chauvinistic interpretation of Scandinavian demographic history? Well, it is described for example by a 2000 essay "Where Are We Going? Attitudes Towards Migrations in Archaeological Thought", by Kerstin Cassel:
An interesting article about this issue by Przemysław Urbańczyk ( https://iaepan.academia.edu/PrzemyslawUrbanczyk ):
https://www.academia.edu/6437408/Deconstructing_the_Nordic_Civilization_
For example this excerpt:
Scandinavian archaeologists traditionally interpreted the visible unevenness of cultural manifestations as merely local variations of one unified cultural tradition. this deeply rooted assumption may be checked by studying collective death rituals that were important for both the external differentiation of particular communities and their internal integration. Fredrik Svanberg’s (2003a and 2003b) analyses of south-east scandinavia during the period 800–1000 aD, indicate that there were eleven quite distinct burial traditions (Svanberg 2003b, Fig. 61). this undermines the popular concept of some homogenous “viking age culture” because territorial variability of grave types indicating differentiation in burial customs and death rituals, may be interpreted in terms of religious differentiation. this, in turn, undermines the concept of common pan-scandinavian religious symbolism and eschatological beliefs because “…it is hard to see how a number of different traditions may all simply be reflections of one and the same coherent mythology or religion” (Svanberg 2003a, 142).
In all of Europe distinct burial traditions and material cultures are usually interpreted by archaeologists & historians as signs of ethnic diversification. Apparently an exception is Scandinavia, for which a concept of a kind of "isolation" and "lack of immigration" exists, despite evidence showing the opposite:
This added an “historiosophic” dimension to the picture of the uniqueness of the homogenous north which had already been established through the combined efforts of scandinavian geographers, linguists, historians and archaeologists. the idea of an ancient unity and a common destiny is, however, undermined by yet another, equally strong historiographic tradition which divides this huge “nordic civilization” into original “ethnic” subregions. It is generally taken for granted that the earliest history of Scandinavia concerns the primordial Danish, norwegian, and swedish peoples who were soon to be followed by the Faroese and the icelanders. They are all the obvious subjects of national(istic) scholarly interests. thus, the idea of “national” continuities determined the tracks of the historical narratives that refer to the nordic early middle ages. even in Iceland, the desire for a deeply-rooted ethno-political continuity is so strong that it is necessary to be reminded that “…those who first settled in iceland were not Icelanders, but immigrants” (Orri Vésteinsson 2006, 85).
So perhaps von Zernichow ("from Chernihov") is a typical Norwegian surname, and von Trier ("from Treves") a typical Danish surname?
===============================
All evidence provided by archaeology, modern 21st century genetics and unbiased interpretation of written sources stand in high contrast with old chauvinistic interpretation of Scandinavian demographic history. And what was that old chauvinistic interpretation of Scandinavian demographic history? Well, it is described for example by a 2000 essay "Where Are We Going? Attitudes Towards Migrations in Archaeological Thought", by Kerstin Cassel:
