On Scandinavia / Vikings

[cybrxkhan]

^buff, blonde, funky helm, nice weapon... this stereotypical Viking is lacking one thing... the beard.

 

[Rusty Edge]

I fixed the link . It has a different image , but the same idea. He was supposed to be a superhero, not a hippy, so tights, but no beard.

 

[SkippyT]

I don't like the list, Danmark has to many cities in the list, and Uppsala twice? also i would move Stockholm up a spot, as it's the largest city, and the capital of the largest country in that region.

Like I said, I did the list in a hurry, I wrote down the city that came first in mind and if I think of some city that I think should be higher, I did.
But I knew that the Copenhagen-Stockholm thing would be tricky (like I said) but it's still my opinion (and my opinion can obviously be wrong) that Copenhagen was the most important city in Scandinavian history. But that's just my opinion

yes, but, A. I just brought up a very random thought. B. This means that Vikings did wear horned helms, according to the box art, and... C. They didn't put Vikings in Medieval Total War II. Ha.

But what they did was having Denmark (like in MTW I) and that's historically accurate. I remember the Viking invasion expansion, there was one scenario where you could pick the Vikings (only Norway and Denmark were on the map) and then there were other English tribes; Mercia, Northumbria, Saxons etc. I very much dislike the horned helmet thingy but I thought MTW I was fine. When you played as Denmark, you could build Viking thralls, Viking berserkers and Viking this and Viking that. And I liked it! A Danish country building Viking armies (who were the unmatched warriors of the earliest era) seemed really historically accurate to me.

 

[Onagan]

But I knew that the Copenhagen-Stockholm thing would be tricky (like I said) but it's still my opinion (and my opinion can obviously be wrong) that Copenhagen was the most important city in Scandinavian history. But that's just my opinion

Maybe I'm wrong.

But probably the "problem" is that you have your history lessons in Iceland. Those lessons are different from lessons from someone in Finland.

Island has much more to do with Danmark and Norway trough history then with Sweden. Finland on the other hand has far more influence from Sweden then from Danmark & Norway, so in their lessons are different from yours.

As I'm from the Netherlands our history doesn't mention those countries at all. Only a part about the Vikings that raid our cities. Our history tells about the three powers surrounding us, Germany in the East, France in the South and England in the West. And of course our independence war against Spain. Our colonies in the East and about Nieuw Amsterdam (ancient NY)

 

[TheLastOne36]

The only city on Gotland is Visby, which could well be included; it was an important trade centre during both the Viking Age and later on. As for Lapland, neither Kiruna and Boden (in Swedish Lapland) or Kirkenes (in Norwegian Lapland) or Rovaniemi (in Finnish Lapland) were founded until fairly late, so I wouldn't really want to have them included. Furthermore, the Lapps keep saying that they are not Scandinavians, so they would probably mot care to have cities in their area included in the city list for a Scandinavian civilization. (Even though the people in thsoe cities are not Sami, except for a small minority.)

Yah there's a situation in Norway and Sweden with the Laps, They traditionally cross the borders freely, but now the governments are not allowing this which = Alot of Sami Protests.

Or something like that, right?

 

[SkippyT]

But probably the "problem" is that you have your history lessons in Iceland. Those lessons are different from lessons from someone in Finland.

Yes, and I know that. Just like Poles are taught in school that they had the first constitution in Europe, Icelanders are taught that they had the first constitution. I was taught everything about Margaret I or Danish history, how they were involved in each and every war, but nothing what-so-ever about Gustavus Adolphus or Swedish history, all I know about him is something I've read about myself.

Saying Copenhagen is better than Stockholm or that Stockholm is better than Copenhagen will be a quarrel that will never end just like saying Sweden is better than Denmark or Denmark is better than Sweden.

 

[TheLastOne36]

and what did you learn about other countries? (non-Scandinavian)

Just curios.

and i was taught that Iceland had the first Constitution. I don't know bout other poles, I guess my school was special.

 

[Onagan]

Saying Copenhagen is better than Stockholm or that Stockholm is better than Copenhagen will be a quarrel that will never end just like saying Sweden is better than Denmark or Denmark is better than Sweden.

Of course it's never ending. Although Sweden is better at ishockey and football then Denmark.

maybe I don't like the Danes because they almost wouldn't enter their country when I was underway to Sweden from the Netherlands with a tent in the back of the car and saying we're staying in a hotel. we also answered that we didn't know how long the vacation would last. And when the Dane asked "Is this your car?" answering "No" (It was mine car)

But after all I don't like the Vikings in Civ, but wouldn't like the Scandinavians in also. I prefer a single country from the North.

 

[SkippyT]

and what did you learn about other countries? (non-Scandinavian)

Just curios.

and i was taught that Iceland had the first Constitution. I don't know bout other poles, I guess my school was special.

Quite much (of course most about Iceland and our neighbors). But when I was 14 years old I wasn't so very interested in history but now the past years my interest has grown very much.
But yes, I learned especially about the large countries: China, India and American history and we were supposed to know much about Europe even though I didn't at the time.

I learned that Leif Erickson, the Icelander, was the first to reach America of all white men. The book just forgot to mention other possibilities (Carthaginians, Scots or the Irish). Today I don't believe much of what I read; for example that all Catholics were mean to Protestants (the Icelandic state religion) and that they were massacred and killed in countries such as France and Spain. I've learned now that they were not better themselves. The Swedish protestants killed many Polish and German Catholics in the 30 year war for example.

The Icelandic schools tend to put much more into language and science than history. Our science classes are good and well done and everything is there, and the books are great, but history books are often just nationalistic ones written 1992
To show a little better how it's put up; we learn biology from 10-11 year old (I recall) and forth, English from 9-10 year old and up, Danish from 11-12 year old and up, but about history outside of Scandinavia from 14 and up. I don't look at it as a problem, since linguistic and scientific are the future but history and geography doesn't really come in handy.

 

[Traitorfish]

But after all I don't like the Vikings in Civ, but wouldn't like the Scandinavians in also. I prefer a single country from the North.

But which one? Denmark would probably be the obvious choice (it was usually the most powerful, unless I'm mistaken), but then you're ignoring the roles of Sweden and Norway in Scandinavian history. Having a broad "Scandinavian" civ is a compromise to represent all three nations. Of course, "Vikings" throws that out the window by representing a country that didn't really exist, but, of course, that's what this topic was originally about.

 

[Lacaixa]

Haven't made much progress in 21 pages have we.

 

[SkippyT]

But which one? Denmark would probably be the obvious choice (it was usually the most powerful, unless I'm mistaken), but then you're ignoring the roles of Sweden and Norway in Scandinavian history. Having a broad "Scandinavian" civ is a compromise to represent all three nations. Of course, "Vikings" throws that out the window by representing a country that didn't really exist, but, of course, that's what this topic was originally about.

That's what I think (that Denmark was more powerful) but the Swedish will certainly not agree with me.
A Scandinavian civ would be much better IMO since as a civilization, we are one. Sure Danes hate Swedes (in a good way, I think) but don't the Scots hate the English and they're the same civ, or at least that civ has leaders who controlled both countries.
And because we are one civilization, one whole, I think the only right thing (historically) is to add a Scandinavian civ!

And yeah, Lacaixa, no progress at all
ps. enjoyable signature

 

[Onagan]

I'm not sure about the Strength of the Danes, they had serious problems in the 17th century. I think both had their Golden Ages, and thus a stronger position over the other.

But as I'm not a Scandinavian by birth I can't tell. But as Dutch (I live near the border) I can tell you that the Dutch and Belgians are NOT one civilization. their cultural differences are huge. So I can not believe that Norway/Denmark/Sweden could be called ONE civilization. And calling England and Scotland one civilization is ridiculous.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Just out of interest, how many of these names are actually real? I've heard Heary Breeches, which seems plausible if a bit off for a warlord, Furry Pants, which sounds like a mistranslation of some sort, and now Snot Nose, which I can only imagine is a personal nickname for him...

Ragnar Snotnose is just my personal nickname for the Warlords leaderhead which keeps wiping the snot from off his nose in a very disgusting manner. However, the Old Norse did like to bestow nicknames, not all of them ill-natured. Sigurd Snake-eyes (one of Ragnar's sons) was actually called that because a chieftain was supposed to have piercing eyes that made other people frightened and ill at ease. His brother Björn Ironside definitely had a complimentary nickname. However, yet another brother, Ivar Boneless, was supposedly called that because he had gristle instead of bones. It didn't keep him from being a fierce warrior.

Here are some other examples of Norse nicknames: Halfdan Halftroll, Thori Dog, Thorhalla Everybody's-sister, Hildegunn Healingwoman, Sigrid Great-counsel, Gudmund the Mighty, Rafarta Irishdaughter, Thorfinn Sealrock (the reason for the nickname is unkown), Thorsteinn Hook, Eirik the Red, Leif the Lucky, Thorsteinn Sour. Thorsteinn Sour got his nickname because someone tried to kill him in a dark shed by hitting him in the back with an axe, but Thorsteinn wore a container of sour milk on his back which took the blow, so he was unharmed. And here are some more: Grim Hairycheek, Styrbjörn the Strong, Mård Fiddle, Dale-Koll, Thorsteinn Red, Aud the Deepthought (a woman), Kettil Flatnose, Ossur the White, Asgrim the Black, Little Alf, Björn Goldbearer, Onund the Fair (= Handsome), Ulf the Unwashed, Rolf Jade (as in a rather poorly horse), Erik Victoryhappy, Ingjald Evilcounsel. "Evilcounsel" meant that he thought up evil counsels: he made himself sole ruler of Sweden by inviting all the other Swedish petty kings to a banquet, barring the doors to the hall and then burning down the hall with all the others inside it. The Swedish word for Ingjald Evilcounsel is Ingjald Illråde, which, like some of the other nicknames supplied here, is less unwieldy in its Scandinavian form(s).

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Like I said, I did the list in a hurry, I wrote down the city that came first in mind and if I think of some city that I think should be higher, I did.
But I knew that the Copenhagen-Stockholm thing would be tricky (like I said) but it's still my opinion (and my opinion can obviously be wrong) that Copenhagen was the most important city in Scandinavian history. But that's just my opinion .

I'm comfortable with the present capital, Trondheim in Norway, which (unlike Copenhagen and Stockholm) actually existed during the Viking Age. The Danish capital in thos days was Jelling and the Swedish capital was Uppsala. But I think Trondheim (called Nidaros in those days) is perfectly fine as the capital of the Scandinavian civilization.

 

[TheLastOne36]

i think Uppsala should be higher up on the list.

Also does the cities in the viking city list include things like "vinland" etc?

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Yah there's a situation in Norway and Sweden with the Laps, They traditionally cross the borders freely, but now the governments are not allowing this which = Alot of Sami Protests.

Or something like that, right?

No, not quite. The Lapps always retained their right to cross the border between Sweden and Norway, and since the 1950's all Nordics have freedom of movement with in the Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Denmark).

As for the peeing contest about Denmark or Sweden being the migthiest, Denmark lost the position to Sweden in the 17th century and has never recovered it. For what it's worth; neither country has exactly been a great power for centuries now.

 

[TheLastOne36]

i remember reading something like that. But i geuss i was wrong...

 

[Rusty Edge]

No, not quite. The Lapps always retained their right to cross the border between Sweden and Norway, and since the 1950's all Nordics have freedom of movement with in the Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Denmark).

As for the peeing contest about Denmark or Sweden being the migthiest, Denmark lost the position to Sweden in the 17th century and has never recovered it. For what it's worth; neither country has exactly been a great power for centuries now.

I thought that in the beginning of the Napoleonic wars ( After some of the french ships had been destroyed, but before America grew big and fat from trading with both sides) that Denmark had the second largest fleet in the world, and Britain bombarded copenhagen to sieze control of it , rather than let Napoleon have it.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

i remember reading something like that. But i geuss i was wrong...

You may be thinking of the fact that the Danes (who controlled Norway) and the Swedes quarrelled over who had the right to tax the Sami nomads. Sometimes, I believe, the poor souls were made to pay taxes to both governments. However, that particular argument was settled long ago by all Sami officially registerting residency in one country even when they remained nomads. Of course, many Sami do not own reindeer and make a living as fishermen or hunters instead. And many have taken up agriculture over the centuries, but those who did that ceased to be Sami after a generation or two.