Were shield maidens real who fought along side the men?

Were shield maidens real who fought along side the men?

Other urls found in this thread:

blog.britishmuseum.org/2014/04/19/viking-women-warriors-and-valkyries/
youtube.com/watch?v=xp_9u-NtV4c
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

you actually think a woman would stand a chance against any male soldier?

Who gives a shit?

Kek. This is the first phase of their brainwashing. Eventually they will revise history completely

no, but they're rewriting history to fit their narrative.
so shut your whore mouth, shitlord

Lagertha is the most agonizingly frustrating blue-balls-inducing character of all time. seeing her clothed triggers my anxiety. JUST FUCKING SHOW YOUR TITS ALREADY

user do you really think any woman can match a man in combat ? you should be well aware of the physical limits of women

>There are few historic attestations that Viking Age women took part in warfare,[6] but the Byzantine historian John Skylitzes records that women fought in battle when Sviatoslav I of Kiev attacked the Byzantines in Bulgaria in 971.[6] When the Varangians (not to be confused with the Byzantine Varangian Guard) had suffered a devastating defeat in the Siege of Dorostolon, the victors were stunned at discovering armed women among the fallen warriors.[6]

it happened, but most of the stories are for the same reason as now: the idea of women fighting is sexy.

i can imagine they would be real but they would look like pic related and certainly not like lagetha pinup waifu mode

why do we tolerate these bigots from Sup Forums and /r9k/ on our board, bros? we are better than this

Doubtful. It hardly ever happened in any society, especially before firearms.

There are historical chronicles of shieldmaidens (Lagertha was a name) but they were quite scarce in numbers to point them as soldiers, chronicles suggest that they fought in their homeland and not going to war.

Maybe a few did, but if so it was rare enough to be regarded as more legendary, and probably ended like it does in the show (for everyone other than Lagertha).

The answer is "we're not sure":

blog.britishmuseum.org/2014/04/19/viking-women-warriors-and-valkyries/

haeving porblem

I'd doubt they went raiding even if there were but it's hardly impossible that women would pick up arms to defend their homes.

But Ragnar Lothbrok is sort of maybe not real anyway and all this shit is based of salad that were only written down in the 1200s or something and had been getting Chinese whispered for a few hundred years. The Ragnar saga or whatever it's called does definitely mention one of his wives being a shieldmaiden though I'm pretty sure it was Aslaug.

I've only started season 1 and was pleasantly surprised by it.

I expected it to be shit based on the fact that most of the characters look more like gluten free organic free range double hopped beer drinkers with some sort of weird leather fetish.

My only major gripe other than appearance and the fact that the Saxons seem to have forgotten what the fuck a shieldwall is, is why the fuck did Lagertha care if Knut raped a saxon woman.

please tell me theres more

Yea reality needs to be banned

It would make sense to train women to defend themselves when the men went off raiding.

mother of gawd. sauce?

> implying

> painted nails
why did they have to ruin this

I had no idea her hip and pelvis game was so amazing. I am new levels of diamonds.

>tfw Katheryn will never pour water on you

youtube.com/watch?v=xp_9u-NtV4c

It happened but for the most part its stuff based on the Valkyries who in Norse Myth didn't do much fighting in the first place

Satan trips of truth. Shield maidens were a myth.

I fucking laughed at that scene
>muh warrior women

There was probably one or two here and there. There are female warriors present all over history. Very rarely as part of any female organization or according to any tradition, mostly just rare individuals going against the grain.

Yes, but not like that. They were a backup plan, and would defend the homes and farms(hence the 'Shield' in the name) Lots of places did stuff like that, Sparta for example.

Maybe but females on the front lines has always been such a stupid idea that even in the modern feminist world it isn't done. Females who serve are in rear echelon units for very obvious reasons.

Idk lads, try fighting ronda or some othere female mma meme. They would probably fuck you up in the end.
Trained fighter vs trained fighter, not a chance.

but if you took up boxing and wrestling for 2 months you'd take them easily

>2 months
Now you are being silly. You won't even get to spar in that time.

m8 Ronda couldn't even take a punch from a female boxer without her jaw crumbling.

Yeah she'd probably beat up most pencil neck nu males but any decent inshape male with some boxing or mma training could drop her.

6months?

Just going to point out, you can be physically superior all you want but if you get hit by a propelled rock your still going to get quite badly hurt.

Slings are neither difficult to make nor use. And there are plenty of other weapons available. Humans are no where near as physically dangerous as our other animal competitors, but we win using tools we make.

Eh, maybe a modern lifelong sedentary guy but not a dude that's been working a farm or doing some other hard manual labor job his entire life like you would get in any army where people still fought wars with spears and bows, to say nothing of the professionals among them. Ronda wouldn't be totally helpless but if she actually needed to pick up a sword and defend herself, chances are pretty good something has gone horribly wrong.

Then again, you should remember that Vikings only ever drew victories from fighting monks, or women and children, in spite of how much Nordics of today exaggerate their deeds.

So it isn't that far fetched that woman would fight alongside them. Vikings men themselves were pretty feminine, and were never once victorious against Franks or Saxons (until they adopted frankish tactics, but that's a story for another day).

But truth of the matter is that spear-women remains feminist wishful thinking. Some viking women were found buried with weapons, though to modern historians it will be left dubious whether this was officiated as part of burial rites for women of note, or if it really was the weapons those women had carried to battle.

So err we don't know. Could be. Could not be.

t. /his/

damn ronda got fat after she got beat up

...

t. lying anglo

Lets see, battles in those days were decided by strength and hardiness, with large engagements being a shoving match between shield walls.

Yeah, no they were never a thing.

Somebody post it

Frenchie but eh, close enough.

Vikings are grossly overrated in today's culture, when their entire accomplishments can be summated to "good travellers, but niggers of Europe for pillaging and raping, and always avoiding true conflict".

That chart that enumerates all their failures? I should have it somewhere, so I'll be looking.

I want lagertha to beat me up!

So here it is.

Yeah, my teacher told me nordics had progressive views towards their women so it is liikely they fought alonside/agaiinst male warriors

The Vikings were really scared shitless when they heard about Charles the Fat's army. They packed their shit and left in a matter of days.

>heard about Charles the Fat's army.
To be fair, you don't fuck with the French in Medieval Europe. Nor in Renaissance Europe. Nor in Napoleonic Europe.

>Vikings only ever drew victories from fighting monks
>What is Paris
>What is Northumbria
>What is Mercia
>What is Normandy
>What is the rest of England
>What is Luni (or not!Rome, kek)
>What is southern Italy
ect

I think the only genuine female military force of worth was the Royal Guard of Dahomey. But that was only because the King wanted >muh harem over an actually effective guard. The thing is despite an inherent inferiority, they were still trained and worked like dogs so they were hardened enough to be create the imposing image of the 'Dahomey Amazons'

Sup Forums is for people aged 18 or older. Come back when your older and you don't have a overexcited 'i' key

>savages ever winning real battles
people expected this

>Normandy
Solely because Frankish monarchs understood that Paris could only be raided through the Seine, and that by bestowing Normandy (which is the mouth of the Seine) to the vikings, all raids would end because vikings wouldn't raid their own lands nor would allow other vikings to pass through the Seine. There never was really was any threat looming on France from the vikings, other than the small raids they would berate the Frankish armies with, and which only angered the French because the vikings would plague undefended villages rather than face off a true army. Hence, they operated as Medieval-times niggers.

Genius move in the end.

>Paris
The Vikings weren't even able, in all their might to raid a city whose only inhabitants were inept peasants and merchants, and had to besiege the city until Charles the Fat would have his patience fade and just pay for them to depart.

>the rest of England
They'd adopted Frankish customs and tactics by then, and it would be unfair to ever acquaint those norman """""vikings"""" with the vikings from beforehand.

>southern Italy

Winning against moors is a victory these days heh? Easiest thing on Earth.

I don't know for the others because they don't much concern my country.

history was written by butthurt british monks.
The genetic materials they left behind tells another story

>The genetic materials they left behind tells another story
Raping defenseless villagers = victory ?

Thank God that other european nations knew to fight under more virile and civilized ways, by which I mean that they'd formally engage each other, rather than prey on the undefended civilians of your enemy.

>They'd adopted Frankish customs and tactics by then, and it would be unfair to ever acquaint those norman """""vikings"""" with the vikings from beforehand.

I think he means the Danelaw, not the Norman conquest

Gahh sorry! Again, I wouldn't know that extensively about English history.

Though that bear the name "Danelaw" is a good sign. Danish vikings were those that actually accumulated some victories, while Norwegian and Swedish vikings were more navigators and rapists than anything.

Well true the Danes were most successful in England, but Norwegians did take over parts of Ireland and the Isle of Mann, but I guess the locals weren't too well civilised either.

>>Idk lads, try fighting ronda or some othere female mma meme.
As soon as they give me the same dose of steroids, sure.

So it's the Swedes that end with nothing to pride themselves with, yet are the most vehement internet-wise on how we "we wuz vikangz annd sheit"?

...

>she will never castrate you with a rusty knife
jdimsa ;_;

...

Soon they'll be making movies about WW2 with tons of women pulling some Mulan shut.

Did you see the male MMA fighters?

There is no comparing them, she would be killed if she went against them

>The vikings weren't able to raid paris
What, they sacked and occupied it. They also caught the fucking plague and the franks still couldn't drive them out. Charles had to buy them out.
Pretty sure that's a victory mate.

>muh Normans don't count
They were no true scotsmen aye.

>Winning against moors is a victory these days.
Yes. Moors weren't Christian Monks

...

redpill me on bi curious yuri viking girls

>history will be rewritten in your lifetime

You have to understand that every show is the same show now, the same stupid soap that pushes the same stupid diversity shit, it just has a different skin.

well.. you see.. they like to """explore"""

>European nations
>Formally engage with one another
>Rather than prey on the undefended civilians of your enemy
Top Kek

I'm ok with it as long as the woman is a Jewish teenager living in Holland.

>Danish Vikings were those that actually accumulated some victories.
How to defeat your own argument 101.

"some" = "Vikings were the fucking shit and they defeated all those pussy armies of the germans, french, british, byzantines like my movies tell me"

My beginning argument was that vikings mostly preyed on the weakest of any kingdom, though even I have to concede that that can be nuanced, especially with Danes that weren't that pitiful at the end of the day.

The chart someone made me post is very cherrpypicked and I can acknowledge that.

Soviet Russia had female snipers in WW2, though it might have just been the one, I can't remember.

I'm not so sure about the Norse but among their English opponents, Ethelfleda, Alfred the Great's daughter, fought and led men in battle.

Well to be fair, slavs are basically orks

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko

>strong womyn killing 309 right-wing straight white men
Sup Forums's nightmare

bullshit. women are weak as fuck.

>Moors
Were still a very weakened people when the Vikings swooped in to oust them from Sardania.

>What, they sacked and occupied it. They also caught the fucking plague and the franks still couldn't drive them out. Charles had to buy them out.

They never occupied it nor sacked it. In every depiction of that episode there's to be found, Vikings were confined to besieging the Paris walls, but they certainly never breached. And upon arriving, Charles the Fat simply negotiated that they'd be allowed to move down the Seine so long as they would leave French villages unharmed, and would only raid the villages only they delved into Burgundian territory (french enemy from the time, now they're our vassals heh, so it all worked out).

>They were no true scotsmen aye.
I don't get british idioms.

Yeah, whatever you say, cuckboi

>not russian propaganda.
>like the Stahanov case, who later claimed that he got ''some'' help in that night.

>They would probably fuck you up in the end.
I would never be this lucky

>Humans are no where near as physically dangerous as our other animal competitors, but we win using tools we make.

Also through our endurance. True, we're not as fast as, say, cheetahs, but humans can walk long distances for hours on end and little rest. The same cannot be said for, say, horses (in fact, following a horse until it tired itself out and couldn't move any more was actually a good tactic to capture one alive).

Of course, tool use also greatly helped our endurance (for example, the fact that we could carry water with us in jars and bottles lengthened the distance we could go and shortened the time we needed to rest).

Can a Sup Forums fag post that webm of Ronda throwing punches

I wanna laugh

Loving the argumention.

>le strawman argument
>Moving goalposts

>You should remember that Vikings only ever drew victories from fighting monks, or women and children.
>Only ever
Come on user, you had no chance of winning this argument anyway.

>in fact, following a horse until it tired itself out and couldn't move any more was actually a good tactic to capture one alive
>good tactic

/his/fags think they know a little about history because they frequent a chinese shitposting forum. I've read more books than you will in a lifetime, faggot. It's called the Viking age for a reason. I don't even understand how you cucks can be this butthurt about it.

Real but extremely rare.

The same Alfred that got slapped by a fishwife?

Did you read the WHOLE post, or just the beginning?

So are untrained males

It's done even today , you retard. Some niggers in Africa follow an antelope, in shifts , until it fucking collapses from being too tired.

Kinda admit that I do overstate the failures the Vikings earned in their time to rebalance how much unwarranted praise they'll be granted by reddit pr 9gag fags. Or even the screenwriters of this shows.

I can't always be right can I ":p" ?

He did other stuff too, user.

love the butthurt Sup Forumstards who cant deal with the fact that their beloved nordics are in fact, pussies

>mfw everyone of 90% of adult , healthy males can overpower anyone of the 95% of healthy adult women.