Sure, they weren't on the same level as Greeks or Romans (both originally Pagan btw), but they were certainly no less accomplished than their Christian contemporaries. Pic very much related. Being the first Europeans to reach America should alone should be enough to disqualify them from being considered a bunch of unwashed (ironic because they cared about personal hygiene more than Christians) barbarians.
>B-but muh raids! 1. The vast majority were traders, nor raiders 2. There's nothing in Christianity that's against raiding and robbing your neighboring kingdoms, Christians just hate it when it's done to them
And shitting on your ancestors just to make your desert cult look better is really pathetic.
Colton Martinez
>they weren't on the same level as Greeks or Romans Per capita and geography they were.
Also the Viking-era was only a small part of Norse history.
Wyatt King
>worshiping some Jewish sandeater I really don't understand
Nolan Ward
Founding Rus' and BTFOing khazar kikes is enough of achievement for me.
Jack Fisher
you seem to have a romanticized view of the vikangs, what are you trying to rationalize ? What even is the point of this thread ?
Angel Murphy
>According to the Primary Chronicle, he believed that his warriors (druzhina) would lose respect for him and mock him if he became a Christian. Based.
Hudson Phillips
>you seem to have a romanticized view of the vikangs Which part of my post makes you think that? My point is that Christians on Sup Forums shit on them unfairly just because they were Pagan, when at the same time most contemporary Christian states were no more accomplished.
Christopher Miller
Normans werent vikings ffs. In Rus they were small part of pops and assimilated in one two generations to slavs. Cryptonationalist swedish lies.
Caleb Miller
>early medieval western europe was no more accomplished thank vikangs
Wyatt Taylor
"Normans" were Norse before they mixed and integrated. "Rollo" were probably Norwegian. Nobody is saying that people in the area stayed Norse.
>In Rus they were small part of pops and assimilated in one two generations to slavs. Doesn't contradict OP
Camden Thomas
His map paints it as viking expansion which is total bullshit.
Normandy existed before a couple hundred viking men settled there at most and intermarried with French women, by the time Guillaume went and conquered england most of the Normans with vinking blood were already at least 75% French and Breton
Julian Gutierrez
>The wall of Charles V, built from 1356 to 1383 Try again.
Logan Flores
Sure. The Norsemen still left a huge mark on the area and the world. Despite being completely inferior in numbers and land.
Josiah Morgan
building of the louvres started in late 12th century but it's a pretty late exemple I agree, I could have used Carolingian architecture to illustrate my point better but I was doing something else
Anthony Foster
Mostly through rewriting of history by English people to attempt and distinguish Normans from French in the renaissance.
David Williams
Fair enough. In the field of architecture they were mostly ahead (even if it was created mostly to serve the needs of the Church). But I still believe that my Initial point stands.
Jayden Reyes
dunno man there is a pretty big rift between continental western europe + England and Scandinavian countries until the late middle ages, due to a variety of factors without doubt, but the rift was there.
Jeremiah Green
Mostly by leaving a permanent mark on the area. No matter how much history is re-written.
