>Terrorize people just wanting to farm in peace.
>Kill traders and loot trading ships, impovrishing the Baltic and North Sea coasts
>Burn monasteries destroying carefully preserved texts from classical antiquity, destroying knowledge of European history forever
>Hamper the development of civilization along the North Sea because they keep killing raping and plundering.
W-we wuz Vikangz an sheit...
Why do people idolize these assholes? They did way more harm to Europe than good.
Liberals idolize Pirates even though most Pirates hated blacks.
Because they were white.
ofcourse they were the white niggers of europe, retard
only reason theyre praised in the modern world is the belief that they were excelent fighters and pillagers, everyone was afraid of them. they were tough fuckers
> everyone was afraid of them
They were basically medieval dindus. Longship rains were like an early form of drive-by shooting.
They're shit tier and their descendants and faggots and failures. Anglo Saxons are superior.
Because they fought easy battles against monasteries and defenseless costal towns. The reason they are imagined with horns on their helmets is because the monks(who they brutally killed and stole from) thought they were like devils. They couldn't fight in actual battles against established countries
>be retarded britshit
>store undefended valuables on the coast
>Discovered North-America
>Settled Iceland and Greenland
>Master traders
Oh look, it's more nuanced than that. Who would've thought?
>Longship rains were like an early form of drive-by shooting
They are redeeming themselves today.
>excellent fighters
>btfo every time they faced a real army
bards sang about killing people. raping women and gold
>niggers of the day
...
Without those kangs baltics trade would have been set back 100 years and the slavic tribes would never unite
>They couldn't fight in actual battles against established countries
Where does this retarded meme come from? /his/ christcucks?
>Vikings only attacked farmers and peasants!!
Hmm.. strange they had all gold. Did serfs hoard hundreds of pounds in gold and silver items from their Kings?
Everyone in history hated blacks up until 50 or something years ago
Viking was something you did, not something you were.
There were no vikings, there were people that went viking.
You can't say
WE WUZ VIKANGZ
You have to say
WE WENT VIKANGZ
I thought you were describing muslims.
Everyone still hates niggers except white people. Go to Taiwan or something. There fucking shops there with "no black allowed" signs
They struggled to fight against actual armies
If they did win them it was usually due to numbers but if the numbers are balanced it would be a loss for vikings
I dont think you realize that one peasent having a couple of coins adds up when a village has several hundred peasents
Dont forget the nobles loved there also each village would have a noble with very few guards makinng them easy prey
Vikings were like little babies compared to the Mongols. Mongolia actually killed millions and defeated multiple empires. Vikings raided coastal villages.
This
Dont forget vikings also raided monasteries.
How progressive!
norse-mythology.org
WE
Another one brainwashed by Christian bullshittery. The Vikings fought Christianity because of bastards like Charlemagne
The vikings were never a warrior people and never will be, they were traders and farmers
Powerful warriors and killing machines, always makes for a good story and an early national identity. Discovered the new world long before filthy dago jew Columbus.
Should be noted they lived in a fairly democratic system with equality for women (divorce, land ownership, property, etc.)
BERSERKERGANG!
>everyone was afraid of them
Vikings couldn't even beat the Irish mate.
Like they even really tried
Ah, thank you for the clarification, although you have to admit the verb has become the noun in modern english vernacular.
Yeah they didn't seem too interested in expanding an empire like the Romans or Macedonians, more concerned with raiding and hoarding, then trading later.
6 of Ireland's cities started out as Viking fortified camps. Where they tried to set up shop and establish a foothold in the island. They ended up getting BTFO by a fucking 70 year old man.
Was that a joint viking effort or was there just a couple men there? I wonder
>citation needed
Ever hear about the battle of Stamford bridge?
It's estimated that about 10,000 men died in the battle I'm referring to, so it was sizeable. It's often defined as the battle that broke the Viking hold in Ireland.
To be fair, those were Hiberno-Norse, so not just Vikings but also local Irish.
Dublin was a Viking settlement, also.
They were largely Viking armies, because the cunt that hired them couldn't get anyone else to join him because he was a massive fucking cunt. The whole Mac Murchada clan were a bunch of cunts constantly bringing foreigners to Ireland to take over provinces. They got absolute fucked by the entirely Irish army of Brian Boru.
Dublin being a Viking settlement is only further testament to how badly the vikings got their shit pushed in, considering it almost immediately become a Gaelic city after the Vikings got fucked at Clontarf.
That battle where the vikings were shit on by the English? Why'd you go with that one to prove the vikings could beat actual armies? Did you mean Hastings?
>development of civilization
>good
The Norse influence had already been in Ireland for hundreds of years before that, though. The entire Dublin area was a Hiberno-Norse settlement. Much of the Irish attacking the Vikings (if they can even be called Vikings at that point) were probably Hiberno-Norse themselves.
They weren't "shit on", they lost the battle but they were outnumbered 9000 to 15,000, both sides lost 5,000 men. Legend has it that one Viking berserker killed hundreds of men on the bridge until one of the Englishmen went under the bridge and stabbed him in the balls from below. That's a legend, but it just shows how valorous the English believed the Vikings were.
Case in point, not saying that you're doing this, but belittling the Viking battle prowess also belittles those that defeated them, saying they were defeating enemies that just were pushovers.
choose exactly one.
>N-No they weren't REALLY vikings anymore so it d-d-doesn't count
Lad. Take a good fucking look at yourself.
>A Norse legend proves how brave the English thought the Norse were
Are you disabled?
>Lad. Take a good fucking look at yourself.
I didn't say it doesn't count. You're just not taking into consideration the influence and the extent of colonization of the Norse in Ireland. The Vikings colonized Ireland for 400 years, all the while colonizing the Hebrides/Western Scotland and setting up a very extensive trade route between the two.
That's also an English legend and even a part of Yorkshire folklore.
>you're not taking into account the extent of colonisation of the Norse in Ireland
>Shows evidence that they barely "colonised" anything at all in Ireland
You're outright disabled.
>Are you disabled?
It's literally from the Anglo-Saxon chronicle. Are you ignorant?
>barely
>7.5-4.5% DNA
That's not barely, that's a significant chunk from a short period of time, genetically speaking.
Killing is not wrong when we do it. You'd knew it if you were White, mr. 1/16 First Nations
it was a different time. being the baddest warrior was = being the best. we were the baddest wariors, therefore we = the best of that era.
>everyone was afraid of them.
The Vikings were afraid of the moors.
>7.5%
Ah, it seems the particular disability you have is colour blindness.
Sort yourself out.
OP is right. Killing unarmed monks is not something a good man does, and a real man fights those who are stronger than himself, not weaker. Fuck the Vikings. Only good thing from their lands are their Sagas.