SWEDISH VIKINGS

Tell me about them pol, why are they so superior to everyone else on the planet?

Other urls found in this thread:

africaresource.com/rasta/articles/the-ancient-celts-and-vikings-were-black-people-by-dr-clyde-winters/
youtube.com/watch?v=UjCdB5p2v0Y
youtube.com/watch?v=gYbRT1nmOw8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

The vikings left for Normandy and left behind a bunch of lanky fags.
>t. Norman

tolerance and diversity

The vikings stopped being vikings a 1000 years ago. All thanks to Christianity

It's not about superiority even. Surely there are plenty of trashy "Whites" that must be sterilized. It's about our people being our people. one life of low iq Irish drunk worth all of Asia

There is no such thing as swedish vikings

And now that Christianity is dead in Sweden it's time to revive our Viking spirit, because at least we still have our genetics. :^)

i think russians had them too
they where called 'bogatir' or something

Im sure you're more arab than norseman, sven ibn abdullah.

Ahmed, aren't you late for smelling the anus prayers?

viking genetics? he? has no chin

A lot of people "Had" Vikings

Normans were primarily Danes. Danes saw success before their settlement in Normandy with Danelaw, raids in the Mediterranean, and settlements in Iberia/Italy.
Norwegians were sucky vikings that "raided" bishops and monks.
Swedes were never vikings.

Tell me, which Scandinavians are the best?

Who lived in Scandinavia before the eight century?

It says that because that was when the viking age began, and those were the places we owned.

France disagrees

...

You just don't understand modern art. They were just ahead of their time.

I already mentioned Normans.
Rollo was said to be a northmen/viking. Is there historical evidence as to whether or not he came from Norway?
The majority of the people that settled in Normandy were from what is now Denmark. It is only natural, then, to consider Rollo himself a Dane.

That is from the Bronze age, more than a thousand years before the Viking age

I hope you kept the receipt...

>SWEDISH VIKINGS

Like these?

africaresource.com/rasta/articles/the-ancient-celts-and-vikings-were-black-people-by-dr-clyde-winters/

...

Who knows, most of the information we have about the vikings were written by the people that were raided by them.

Like these

Sure this Sven Al Mohammed

Vikings?
youtube.com/watch?v=UjCdB5p2v0Y
>"///ourguys///"

>still have our genetics

Kek, nice one

>superior
The island of Great Britain is chock full of viking mass graves. Every time they made a mistake of not limiting themselves to pushing around women, children, elderly and the lame in remote fishing villages, vikings got their sorry proto-swecuck asses handed to them.

...

Swedish Vikings, the ones going west were Norwegians and Danes.

Whoever made that picture screwed up. 'N-word Killer Death Squad' would be much funnier

Kek

>There are about 3,000 runestones in Scandinavia (out of a total of about 6,000 runic inscriptions).

>The runestones are unevenly distributed in Scandinavia: The majority is found in Sweden, estimated at between 1,700 and 2,500 (depending on definition). Denmark has 250 runestones, and Norway has 50.

Ah, those. True, true. We know today that vikings would sometimes bring along swedish 'men' a.k.a. the shieldmaidens but it wasn't nearly as common as Xena warrior princess fanboys would like it to be.

>Norwegians and Danes
You mean the only vikings that ever did anything?
Danelaw, Normandy, Sicily, Rurik. All Danish. What did Swedes do? Kick some Finnish ass after it converted to Christianity and sat on it's butt for hundreds of years?
You're only assisting my point. Swedish "vikings" sat and did nothing while Danes were out actually shaping history.

The current situation and development of Europe will force the northern countries to unite under Scandinavia again. Shit like norsemen raiding doesn't simply go away with time. It is dormant within our blood. There only needs to be a trigger to set it off.

Pic related will happen again.

post more gustav

>Muh runestones

We discovered Iceland, Greenland & North America bitch.

>Danelaw, Normandy, Sicily, Rurik. All Danish.
Are these like really significant somehow?

>It is in our blood
>has no go zones filled with mudshits in major cities

Yeah, no, your bloodline is weak, and you have proven it. Now Denmark, that is a whole different story, at least they have balls unlike you.

>We
You aren't a viking.
You sound completely ignorant of history. The house of Normandy isn't significant? The Kievan Rus' state isn't significant either?

Swedes weren't Vikings though

>The Kievan Rus'
Literally never heard of it

You literally worship a jew. 98% of Christians today are nonwhite subhumans.

Latvia, atheist nation. State funded NatSoc parade. Beat and kill nonwhite tourists for fun. How can christian subhumans even compete?
youtube.com/watch?v=gYbRT1nmOw8

Fuck Jesus, Heil Hitler!

Whatever faggot we were in all the places you've talked about so far i don't understand where you get this idea it was only Danish

>swedish vikings

Nortard confirmed

>Getting this triggered by a flag

Whoa there lad, you sure got me.

Vikings isn't our best fighting force

Viking managed to get into Russia and beyond, those muppets died near Finland, how can they even compete?

I almost thought he was throwing a peace sign. Kek

Where's your evidence this was only Danes anyway?

>Sweden
>Vikings

Normans were Danish and Norwegian.

Is this degenerate ?

Sorry, Danes and Norwegians. Sweden does not even fall into the same category.

I hate your religion and your pathetic kind. Extermination of Christians is something even anti-soviet Russians truly do like

Being one of the biggest empires in Europe with only 4 million population and constantly winning battles when we were deeply outnumbered.

...

I agree, the Swedish Empire is the best example of what Sweden should wish to become now.
This viking delusion will gets you nowhere. How strange that Swedish people can forget more recent history in favor for a fantasy.
>those muppets died near Finland
Ironic considering that Medieval Christian Sweden took hundreds of years to defeat unorganized Finnish Pagans.
I never said ONLY Danes, but all historical sources point towards them being majority Danish. The thought of a "northmen" came from the Danes, and most Norwegian vikings were just Danish people that continued migrating north.
Really, it's nothing against your people or state today.

>but all historical sources point towards them being majority Danish. The thought of a "northmen" came from the Danes, and most Norwegian vikings were just Danish people that continued migrating north.

link pls

Germany got a high kill count too, but never managed to penetrate it like the Vikings did.

>I never said ONLY Danes, but all historical sources point towards them being majority Danish. The thought of a "northmen" came from the Danes
lel no, if anything the Norwegians were the Northmen and Swedes/Danes were Swedes/Danes.

Look up "annals" of medieval countries. They were written by monks and priests and kept record of events that took place that year.

The Royal Frankish Annals were written in Latin and often described Danish aggression against Charlemagne's empire.
Many Irish annals speak about viking raiders as well.

Of course we have many chronicles of Anglo-Saxons that go into great detail of Danelaw, which was more than just raiding.
Look into history yourself, you will find quite a lot. I'm just giving you a few stepping stones.
Great argument, you sure did prove me wrong.

>Great argument, you sure did prove me wrong.

He means we call them Northmen in our own language

the scenarios and context is so much diffrent you can't really compare the two.

I don't understand where you get this idea from though. Most of Viking history is a cesspool of tribes fucking each other over, and conquest from each other.

Like Norwegians did conquests in Denmark & the war that started Danelaw was led by a Norwegian. And it's just tons of back and forth conquest & rivalry over England, France & Scandinavia.

He had annihilated the petty kings of the South, subdued the aristocracy, asserted his suzerainty in the Orkney Islands, and conducted a successful raid on Denmark. He made peace with King Olof Skötkonung of Sweden through Þorgnýr the Lawspeaker, and was for some time engaged to Olof's daughter, Princess Ingegerd, though without Olof's approval.

In 1019 Olaf married Astrid Olofsdotter, Olof's illegitimate daughter and the half-sister of his former fiancée. The union only produced a daughter, Wulfhild, who married Ordulf, Duke of Saxony in 1042. Numerous royal, grand ducal and ducal lines are descended from Ordulf and Wulfhild, including the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Maud of Wales, daughter of King Edward VII of the United Kingdom, was the mother of King Olav V of Norway, so Olav and his son Harald V, the present King of Norway, are thus descended from Olaf.


Olav den Helliges dod
Peter Nicolai Arbo (1859)
But Olaf's success was short-lived. In 1026 he lost the Battle of the Helgeå, and in 1029 the Norwegian nobles, seething with discontent, supported the invasion of King Canute the Great of Denmark. Olaf was driven into exile in Kievan Rus.[6] He stayed for some time in Sweden in the province of Nerike where, according to local legend, he baptised many locals. In 1029, Canute's Norwegian regent, Jarl Håkon Eiriksson, was lost at sea. Olaf seized the opportunity to win back the kingdom, but he fell in 1030 at the Battle of Stiklestad, where some of his own subjects from central Norway took arms against him.

Canute, though distracted by the task of governing England, managed to rule Norway for five years after Stiklestad, with his son Svein and Svein's mother Ælfgifu (known as Álfífa in Old Norse sources) as regents. However, their regency was unpopular, and when Olaf's illegitimate son Magnus (dubbed 'the Good') laid claim to the Norwegian throne, Svein and Ælfgifu were forced to flee.

It's just tons of shit like this man

I told you what viking history actually contributed, and then you told me you don't know half of the things I said. Why would I care what you say now?
You're asking me questions, I tell you to research yourself, and now you instantly act like you know the entire hundreds of years worth of history of vikings.

And what the fug?
>Danelaw was led by a Norwegian
What kind of retarded talk is this? Is this what they teach you in school? Is this why all Scandinavians hate teach other?
There is nothing to suggest Ivar came from Norway. The Great Heathen Army specifically came from Denmark. Yes, I'm sure there were warriors that came from Norway and Sweden as well, but it was primarily Danish. As such, they were referred to as Danes. Thus, Danelaw. They weren't Norwegian.

Separate time period. Viking Age was already finished by then, the original vikings had already settled and became Normans. Scandinavia was converting to Christianity by then as well. Olaf was one of the kings that made the most progress in that.
But that is good, you are researching yourself.

Yeah the Danes were pretty much the only ones who had diplomatic ties to other countries in Europe(especially in the early viking age), which is why all the treaties and documents mostly talks about them.

Doesn't mean the Danes were muh real northmen and you've yet to give source on the idea that Norwegian norsemen were just migrating Danes from the south.

>Danelaw was led by a Norwegian
>What kind of retarded talk is this?

A grandson of Harald Fairhair, the first king to unite Norway, Olaf was born around 968 and is thought to have been raised in Russia following the death of his father. In 991, Olaf led a Viking invasion of England, which resulted in a victory at the Battle of Maldon. Afterward, the English paid off the Vikings in an effort to prevent future attacks, at least temporarily. This type of payment became known as Danegeld. In 994, Olaf and his ally Svein Forkbeard, king of Denmark, launched another raid on England and netted themselves more Danegeld. The following year, Olaf used his loot to invade Norway and was made king after its ruler, Hakon the Great, was murdered.

> and then you told me you don't know half of the things I said.

Most of what you mentioned are not really important or significant stuff in the viking sagas.

>Danes were muh real northmen
Never meant to imply this. Historical documents refer to "Danes" as northmen, thus, all northmen are Danes according to historical documents.

The migration period saw barbarians from Germania migrating north to Denmark. It is only natural that some would continue to migrate north for more land. There is certainly a reason why all people from the north were referred to as Danes. They were all the same at the time. There was no difference between someone from what is now Norway or Denmark. That is what I am trying to explain.

It's very different now, and it clearly triggers Scandinavians, but this is because of more recent history. The Kalmar Union, Swedish Empire, etc.
You're referring to Olaf, which was the first king of Norway as you mentioned. He basically created the idea of "Norway" and "Norwegian".
I'm talking about Danelaw. The first invasion of the Great Heathen Army was carried out by Ivar. He was Danish. This was long before Olaf.
>Most of what you mentioned are not really important or significant stuff in the viking sagas.
What you just posted referred directly to the Kievan Rus', something you claimed to not even know about. That is clearly significant history of the Viking Age.

>You're referring to Olaf, which was the first king of Norway as you mentioned.

Try reading it again and see if you understands what's wrong with that sentence.

>Kievan Rus
There's pretty much no sagas about adventures in Kievan Rus, no

>Never meant to imply this. Historical documents refer to "Danes" as northmen, thus, all northmen are Danes according to historical documents.
Are you saying all documents about Northmen are refering to Danes?
>The migration period saw barbarians from Germania migrating north to Denmark. It is only natural that some would continue to migrate north for more land.
Are you implying that is when Norway was first populated by Germanics?
>There is certainly a reason why all people from the north were referred to as Danes.
??????????????????? Now they're all referred to as Danes and not Northmen?

Yes, I did read that incorrectly, sorry. It was Harald that unified Norway. Completely unrelated to Danelaw still. What are you trying to prove?
The Kievan Rus' was started by vikings. You already said you didn't know what it is. Thanks for backing that claim up.
You're confusing what I'm saying.
>Are you saying all documents about Northmen are refering to Danes?
All documents referring to Danes are referring to northmen. "Dane" is a generalization. I specified that.
>Now they're all referred to as Danes and not Northmen?
Historical documents use both "Dane" and "northmen" interchangeably.

Kievan Ros is very insignificant & viking sagas pretty much doesn't even mention it.


919 − Norwegian Vikings under King Ragnvald Sygtryggsson of Dublin take York.

920 − Edward is accepted as father and lord by the King of the Scots, by Rægnold, the sons of Eadulf, the English, Norwegians, Danes and others all of whom dwell in Northumbria and the King and people of the Strathclyde Welsh.

954 − King Eric is driven out of Northumbria, his death marking the end of the prospect of a Northern Viking Kingdom stretching from York to Dublin and the Isles.

1066 − Harald Hardrada lands with an army, hoping to take control of York and the English crown. He is defeated and killed at the Battle of Stamford Bridge. This event is often cited as the end of the Viking era. The same year, William the Conqueror, himself a descendant of Norwegian Vikings, successfully took the English throne and became the first Norman king of England.

William was also a son of a Duke of Normandie which you claim was "All Danish".

>Kievan Ros is very insignificant & viking sagas pretty much doesn't even mention it.
Perhaps Norwegian viking sagas don't mention it, since Norwegian vikings didn't form the Kievan Rus'. Although that's clearly incorrect, as you just cited something that clearly mentioned king Olaf being raised in the Kievan Rus'.

>919
This was after the Great Heathen Army invaded. Danelaw had already existed. Of course other vikings would follow the initial success. They were all vikings after all, no?
>William the Conqueror, himself a descendant of Norwegian Vikings
Great, an unsourced Wikipedia claim. I had previously talked about Rollo in this thread, nothing specifies him as being from Denmark or Norway. Complete garbage.

>which you claim was "All Danish".
This is something that I have never claimed. Rollo and his vikings were clearly referred to as Danes. Franks continuously referred to those from Denmark as Danes and northmen due to continued skirmishes and raids. I mentioned this earlier.

I just don't understand what you are trying to prove.

>Franks continuously referred to those from Denmark as Danes and northmen due to continued skirmishes and raids. I mentioned this earlier.

Source your shit then

I ALREADY DID.
Royal Frankish Annals referred to Danes many times due to having a direct border with them after the defeat of Saxony. Look them up and read them.

Meanwhile you source Wikipedia. I have no quarrel with you, seriously, but why are you going on about this? What are you trying to convince me?

I originally posted to counter the complete retardation of the OP. He's not posting anymore. No point in going on about this, is there?

>I just don't understand what you are trying to prove.

I'm trying to prove you're talking out of your ass.

That's like me saying "Oh read the bible" as a source. Can you be a little more vague please?

>>Norwegians were sucky vikings that "raided" bishops and monks.
>>Swedes were never vikings.
>why are you trying to argue against me
because you're retarded

Oh hi are you still here :)

...

Everything the Norwegian poster has posted was after Norway became a unified kingdom. Shortly after, it converted to Christianity. All successful exploits conducted are completely separate to any "viking raids" which were continuously unsuccessful no matter if it was a Dane or Norwegian conducting them.

The northmen referred to as "Danes" actually created states out of their military endeavors. I've already explained that.

My whole point is that the "vikings" who were epic and badass and "raided" defenseless people were pretty lame. The real vikings created successful feudal states. Again, my original response was to OP.

>>>Swedes were never vikings.
And this is still true.

The archbishop of Habburg and Bremen Rimbert (801-888) tells the story of invasions made by Swedes and Danes in Courland. First Danish raiders assembled large army of ships and landed on the shores of Courland. The Curonians gathered a large resistance force and defeated the Danish invaders. They took half of the Danish fleet, gold, silver and other bounties. The Swedish king Ulaf decided to take advantage of Danish failure and sent an army of his own to outmatch Danes. They managed to land unnoticed and attacked the fortress of Zeburg (Ezerpils), they razed it down and pillaged. Overjoyed by their victory they left their ships and gone deeper into Curonian territory. They besieged the fortress of Apulia (Apole) but met heavy resistance. After eight days of bitter fighting the Vikings were desperate and scared by the inability to take the fortress. They looked for god’s that may help them by making a sacred lottery. When it turned out that none of their gods wants to help them, they wanted to flee. But their ships were too far away and they risked to be completely annihilated in the bitter chase by the Curonians. In this moment of despair some merchants who were Christians told the Christ may be the only hope. Again they took the lottery and find out that indeed Christ is willing to help them. The Vikings again attacked the fortress and the defenders were looking for peace talks. While the most eager fighters wanted to destroy the fortress completely, their king decided to negotiate. The Vikings took 30 hostages and gold and silver.

WTF DUDE GOD FUCKING DAMNIT

Yes I know your point but you're wrong. All you're saying is the sources you've read are referring to Danes or Northmen(which according to you ALWAYS means Danes, source on that?)

You're just projecting your shitty conclusions.
>The real vikings created successful feudal states.
that is quite the opinion you got there
>Swedes were never vikings.
false

>Sweden
WE WUZ VI-KANGZ 'N SHIEEET

>Unorganized vikings raiding unorganized pagans in the baltics
Great.
>ALWAYS means Danes
Again, I've never said that. All I say is that it referred to people living in what is now Denmark. For example, the Great Heathen Army was composed of people from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. They were all northmen. They were all referred to as "Danes". It was a generalization.
My point is those referred to as Danes were the real vikings. They actually saw success.

>>The real vikings created successful feudal states.
>that is quite the opinion you got there
>England
>Rus
>Sicily

>>Swedes were never vikings
>false
Of course what I'm saying is hyperbole. The Swedish "vikings" were major fails that never did anything worthy of note compared to the Danes.

>Unorganized
Obviously not

>Again, I've never said that. All I say is that it referred to people living in what is now Denmark.
Yeah, Danes.

>The real vikings created successful feudal states.
>Rus
>Swedes were never vikings
hmm really made me think

Anyway I realize it's cool to have one of these whacky badass theories such as yours. Spartans were also shit fighters and Hitler shouldn't have attacked Russia.

Did they create a successful state in the baltics that lasted hundreds of years? I don't think so.

>Yeah, Danes.
That's what they were referred to. They looked the same, they talked the same. Why would Franks refer to them differently? You still look the same and talk the same.

Was Rus' not a successful feudal state? What in the fuck are you even implying? That Rurik was a Swede?

That image doesn't even specify what settlement was created by which vikings. There is barely a difference between Norwegian viking, Danish viking, or Swedish viking, so there's a reason why they wouldn't specify.
That source the Swede posts refers to Swedish raids in the baltics. That image shows their success pretty well.

>t. triggered Christian

That was not their intent if you actually read.

i think basshunter is pretty cool

What was their original intent? Loot, plunder, rape? Wow, that sure is contributing to society, isn't it?
We should totally revive the Viking Age guys!

The entire post sounds reads like a fanfic anyway.

>That's what they were referred to. They looked the same, they talked the same. Why would Franks refer to them differently? You still look the same and talk the same.
So your argument is that Europeans used different words to describe the different Norsemen. Okay, thanks.
>That Rurik was a Swede?
>Varangians were not Swedes
you really keep making me think

Yes European used different words to describe the various Norsemen tribes such as Northmen, Norsemen, Danes, Swedes, Goths, Varangians etc Thanks my man.

way to argue about absolutely nothing

>Wow, that sure is contributing to society, isn't it?
Haha yeah it is. That was probably very contributing to their society.

Keksimus