Paying the Danegeld?

[DBear]

Found this while surfing other forums. I think it very appropriate in light of current events:

Dane-geld
(A.D. 980-1016)
Rudyard Kipling

It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation,
To call upon a neighbour and to say:—
“We invaded you last night—we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away.”

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you’ve only to pay ’em the Dane-geld
And then you’ll get rid of the Dane!

It is always a temptation to a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say:—
“Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away.”

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we’ve proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray,
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to says:—

“We never pay any one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost,
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!”

 

[Sophie 378]

Interesting poem. Does anyone from the History forum have any comments on how this mindset could have arisen, or what events the poem is about? Why is it Dane-geld? I presume it means gold for the Danes.
All I'm getting is a mental image of the CivIII leaderheads demanding money with menaces, and the options "We will give you what you want - this time/Take your empty threats elsewhere".

 

[Dr. Yoshi]

I assume Dane-geld is a reference to the Vikings who would demand a certain amount of gold to spare a town and then return later and pillage the place anyway. This actually reminds me quite a bit of our invasion of Iraq.

 

[Takhisis]

Well, the Danegeld was exacted especially in England, when the Danes conquered one half of the island and agreed not to do so with the other half in exchange of yeraly tributes, very heavy, in gold.

 

[El_Machinae]

All my civ simulations indicate that pushing opposing civilizations into paying tribute is very valuable for long-term progress.

However, I seem to invest in progress quite a bit more than the victim civilizations, so it's money well spent!

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Moderator Action: Moved to History.

 

[Verbose]

Problem with Kipling's history writing is that it somehow assumes the Anglosaxons didn't at first tell the Danes to get lost, didn't fight them and get defeated, and only then reluctantly open the wallet.

The Imperialist Kipling would of course be loathe to accept that his kingdom was at this point in history "unarmed and not so agile" and defeated for it.

But from the Danish perspective the Anglosaxon kingdom's money-making-machine, the ability to come up with hard cash like that (50 tons of pure silver over a century or so) was a spectacle so impressive it had the Scandinavians saying: "Damn! I've got to get myself one of those!"

 

[Kafka2]

You also need to view Danegeld from Alfred's perspective.

"OK. Here's some money to make you go away. And while you're gone, I'll totally overhaul the defensive network of the nation, build a Navy, and set the framework that'll see my children and grandchildren make you their *****."

 

[Kafka2]

Kipling belongs very firmly to the pro-Norman tradition, which denigrates the status of the Anglo-Saxon nation in comparison. It's an archaic viewpoint that overlooks how effective the Saxon state was.