[HN Gopher] Vikings in al-Andalus and the Maghreb
___________________________________________________________________
Vikings in al-Andalus and the Maghreb
Author : Bluestein
Score : 91 points
Date : 2024-07-26 18:36 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.alandalusylahistoria.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.alandalusylahistoria.com)
| slim wrote:
| looks like it was hugged to death
| slim wrote:
| Insufficient Storage
|
| The method could not be performed on the resource because the
| server is unable to store the representation needed to
| successfully complete the request. There is insufficient free
| space left in your storage allocation.
| Bluestein wrote:
| Shame, really.-
|
| Further sad, no Internet Archive nor archive.is, which, funny,
| has snapshotted _this_ moment (facepalm):
|
| -
| https://archive.is/https://www.alandalusylahistoria.com/?p=4...
| Bluestein wrote:
| Alright. Appears back - probably recuperated somewhat :)
| neonate wrote:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20240727170644/https://www.aland...
|
| https://archive.ph/h0zD8
| kitd wrote:
| Vikings were amazingly influential in early modern history. They
| were the origins of Normans, who, quite apart from England and
| Northern France, founded successful kingdoms in the
| Mediterranean. They were also the original European Russians (the
| name "Russia" derives from "people who row", = Vikings)
| Bluestein wrote:
| Indeed. They are 'seminal', in many ways.-
| Bluestein wrote:
| PS. Apparently, someone objects to - I gather - my use of
| "seminal" here ...
|
| (By which no pun - even given ample pillaging and raping by
| the vikings - was intended ...)
|
| I just meant they are influential, even genetically.-
| ionwake wrote:
| This is a weird half apology. You used seminal and it makes
| sense with all the raping - it's a good pun tho clearly it
| is offending some. No need to pretend it wasn't a pun tho
| mate
| Bluestein wrote:
| Thanks. I actually realized _after_ the fact.-
| gumby wrote:
| Rus was settled by people who migrated from what is now Sweden.
| havelhovel wrote:
| > people who migrated from what is now Sweden
|
| a.k.a. vikings
| mantas wrote:
| Modern Sweden was only a part of origins of vikings. If it
| is known that those people are specifically Swedish
| vikings, then it makes sense to highlight that.
| fmbb wrote:
| It actually makes very little sense to "highlight" that
| in the context above.
|
| It would perhaps have been interesting to point out that
| that region of Sweden is called Roslagen today, and has
| been since those times.
| mantas wrote:
| If there are even more historical details known... The
| more precise it is, the better.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| The land was already settled by slavic and finnic tribes,
| whose experience of this is lost to us. The norse made their
| own settlements and assumed rule over the existing groups.
| Eventually the norse and finnic groups had more or less fully
| assimilated with each other and into the local slavic
| population forming the rus'.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| If you go even further back, it was people from the
| Caucasus/modern day Ukraine that wiped out the male
| population of Europe and settled Europe. The same group of
| people that also branched off and settled in Iran and India.
| The speakers of PIE. Fast forward about 2000 years and the
| Scandinavians went back and assimilated with local tribes to
| form the Rus.
| Bluestein wrote:
| > PIE
|
| Proto-Indo European if I am not mistaken.-
|
| PS. Now _that_ would have sounded interesting I bet ...
| Tagbert wrote:
| Various linguists have done reconstructions of what PIE
| might have sounded like from projecting back through the
| descendent languages. There are several examples on
| YouTube.
|
| Obviously none of them are 100% accurate but they may
| capture some of the feel of the language.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCI4Y8VneP0
| LarsDu88 wrote:
| Rus is what these people called themselves. They were folks
| lured to that part of the Mediterranean by promise of work in
| the Byzantine military as Varangian Guards.
|
| A subset of these Norsemen sailed up the Dniper to what is
| today Kiev and setup Kievan Rus. They ruled over and
| assimilated the the Slavic, Bulgar, and Turkic peoples of the
| area. In the Middle Ages, the Mongols came and destroyed
| Kiev, murdering just about everyone inside, leading to
| fragmentation into multiple polities like Moscow, the
| Novgorod Republic, and Vladimir.
|
| The Rus ethnonym lives on in the name of the Russians,
| Rusyns, Ruthenians, Belarussians, and others!
| Bluestein wrote:
| > the Mongols came and destroyed Kiev, murdering just about
| everyone
|
| I wonder to what degree - if any - these poor people served
| as a "buffer" against the Mongols, saving Europe from the
| slaughter ...
| ivanhoe wrote:
| > these poor people served as a "buffer" against the
| Mongols, saving Europe from the slaughter ...
|
| You mean saving Western Europe :)
|
| Mongols ran over (and did a lot of slaughter in) the most
| of Eastern and Central Europe, including Poland, Czechia,
| parts of todays Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, Croatia and
| Austria. There was no "buffer" that stopped them, they've
| stopped eventually because their Great Khan died. As the
| leadership broke down and fights for power arose, they've
| been forced to return back home.
| Bluestein wrote:
| > There was no "buffer" that stopped them, they've
| stopped eventually because their Great Khan died.
|
| Basically unstoppable, eh? So, basically, an "accident"
| of history they did not take over the Mediterranean ...
| dotancohen wrote:
| That's not unique to the Mongols. Another easy example
| would be Alexander of Macedon. History is filled with
| great empires, many of them expanding, which fell or
| contracted after the leader passes.
| Bluestein wrote:
| Point.-
|
| PS. I wonder what - if anything - implications that has
| for leadership or management - you know, the whole
| achievement falling apart, missing one individual ...
|
| (Or, to project management - low "bus factor", so to
| speak ...)
| jltsiren wrote:
| Mongols invaded Eastern and Central Europe several times,
| but they always turned back. There are at least two
| common explanation for that.
|
| First, European countryside was infested with castles.
| Defeating the king and sacking his capital wasn't enough
| to pacify the land. Mongols would have had to deal with
| every local warlord separately, and Europe wasn't worth
| the trouble.
|
| Second, Mongols were getting too far away from the
| steppe. Their armies could not stay in Europe in the long
| term due to the lack of large enough pastures.
| Bluestein wrote:
| > Defeating the king and sacking his capital wasn't
| enough to pacify the land
|
| So, decentralization, in a way. Nice.-
| ivanhoe wrote:
| You reversed the timeline a bit.
|
| Varangians came primarily from todays Sweden, and were
| initially going inland into the today's Estonia, Belarus
| and Russia from north, from the Gulf of Finland, using
| rivers. The group of them called Rus under the leadership
| of Rurik created Novgorod in 862. About 20 years later
| they've also conquered Kiev (some 900km more to the south).
| They were initially raiders, but over time they've
| conquered the local Slavs, established their rule and
| became very important traders, as they've created the
| trading (and also slave) routes all across the continent
| from the Baltic in the North down to the Black Sea - using
| huge rivers like Volga and Dneper - trading in south with
| Byzantin empire and Abbaside Caliphate. It was one of the
| main trading routes between West/North Europe and Arab
| world of that age.
|
| And as their presence grown stronger, the Rus started more
| frequently raiding the Byzantin Empire, sacking even the
| big Constantinople a few times. To stop these attacks, in
| 10th century the Byzantines did the same move as king
| Charles the Simple did in Francia with Normans, they gave
| Varangian leaders some titles and employed them all as a
| royal guard. Problem solved.
|
| And then, as you've said, the viking era was over, and they
| assimilated into the Slavic population (just like Bulgars
| and others did).
|
| Another interesting note, the Rus ethnonym also got into
| many Slavic languages as a word for fair blonde or reddish-
| blonde hair ("rusaia" in Russian, "rusa" in
| Serbian/Croatian, etc.). In Serbian 'rus' was historically
| used in folk language with a meaning 'red', for instance
| for skin rush, names of some herbs, etc.
| rdtsc wrote:
| > traders, as they've created the trading (and also
| slave)
|
| So much so that the word "slave" in Greek and other
| languages comes from "Slavs"?
| kleton wrote:
| It's even what suomi call Sweden - ruotsi
| INTPenis wrote:
| I am super fascinated with "norse" history, specifically the
| parts we don't talk about much. To me "viking" is only a period
| of heightened threat against christianity, but the northern
| european region had been a threat to the roman empire.
|
| The east coast of England was dotted with roman forts, defended
| by fast moving Dalmatian cavalry against raids from the north
| sea. As soon as the romans left we see an invasion of people from
| Denmark and northern Germany.
|
| So the word viking, and the period 800 to 1066, show a very
| limited view of the northern european history.
| leyth wrote:
| I am fascinated by them as well. Let me know if you know any of
| interesting documentaries out there.
| yareally wrote:
| Coincidentally, I was watching this BBC documentary on the
| dark ages tonight and the last episode is about Viking art
| and culture in the dark ages. Entire series is worth a watch
| if you can find it.
|
| https://docuwiki.net/index.php?title=The_Dark_Ages:_An_Age_o.
| ..
| INTPenis wrote:
| It's on youtube too, great show.
| louky wrote:
| Ah, presented by Waldemar Januszczak. He's produced quite a
| few great videos and series.
| bbkane wrote:
| Not a video, but I was enthralled by
| https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-
| history-69-twilig... .
| astrobe_ wrote:
| William the conqueror [1] is a direct descendant of a viking,
| Rollo, who made a deal with the king of France: territory in
| exchange for protection against the _other_ vikings. The name
| of this territory is relatively well-known for other
| historical reasons: Normandy. The conquest of England by
| William "the conqueror", duke of Normandy, is why the
| English language has a significant number of French origin.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_the_conqueror
| Quothling wrote:
| > So the word viking, and the period 800 to 1066, show a very
| limited view of the northern European history.
|
| I'm Danish and I think that it's cool that you like our
| history, but I would encourage you to be a little more
| inclusive as far as the word "Viking" goes. As I understand it
| the word has an origin in what the people around "Viken" called
| them selves in the period. This is the area around the Oslo
| fjord and Skagerrak, and it's actually a lot less "sexy" when
| you know that the word "vig/vik" means "bay". Anyway in
| Denmark, Norway and Sweden (and possibly more Scandinavian
| countries) we actually call the period vikingetiden (The Viking
| Age). I know that a lot of the popular culture (and even
| academic) focus on the age is on the BERSERKERGANG parts.
| Probably not too surprising considering ordinary life was
| really rather mundane, with around 95% of populations in
| Denmark/Norway/Sweden being regular iron age farmers. I don't
| think this should discourage you from using the word "viking",
| however, I don't know any Scandinavians who would think less of
| you at least.
|
| What we dislike is the cultural appropriation by far right
| fools. Which has gotten so bad, even here, that I sort of need
| to wear a giant rainbow hat to signal that I'm "safe" to be
| around if there is a pride or whatever going on in my town
| because I look sort of evil to some people. I'd probably
| describe me as a biker dadbod + beard and tattoos.
|
| > The east coast of England was dotted with roman forts,
| defended by fast moving Dalmatian cavalry against raids from
| the north sea. As soon as the romans left we see an invasion of
| people from Denmark and northern Germany.
|
| This part is especially interesting to me personally. Maybe not
| so much what happened in England, but the consequences of the
| Romans leaving France with France subsequently getting rather
| serious about "being good at civilization". Which meant that
| they attacked as far as into Danish Sonderjylland, pushing the
| northern germanic and scandinavian people toward expansion
| elsewhere. Which is what lead to we now know as the "viking
| routes"
|
| Anyway, don't let certain representations of "viking culture"
| (whatever they may be) discourage you from using the word
| "viking".
| poisonarena wrote:
| > What we dislike is the cultural appropriation by far right
| fools. Which has > gotten so bad, even here, that I sort of
| need to wear a giant rainbow hat to > signal that I'm "safe"
| to be around if there is a pride or whatever going on > in my
| town because I look sort of evil to some people. I'd probably
| describe > me as a biker dadbod + beard and tattoos.
|
| so a far left fool, wearing rainbow hat, gets to appropriate
| viking culture, and speaks for all danes?
|
| It works both ways no?
|
| Also, I wonder what your danish ancestors would think if you
| could speak old norse and explain them your 'inclusiveness'
| and culture appropriation to them. They would probably think
| you are crazy.
| gunnihinn wrote:
| Good for you to stick up for the _checks notes_ nazis.
| bloopernova wrote:
| It's astonishing to me that there are people defending
| nazis as "just another political ideology", or "just a
| normal reaction to leftwing people". The very ideology
| that the free world spent 5 years at total war to defeat.
| The people who defeated fascism in WW2 are literally
| called _The Greatest Generation_ but nowadays we have
| people thinking "oh I bet we can make fascism work for
| us. It's never backfired on its adherents!"
|
| I wonder if that's due to WW2 veterans dying, or just
| plain time passing. And will we see another Axis?
| Bluestein wrote:
| > And will we see another Axis
|
| Unfortunately, yes.-
| Amezarak wrote:
| > The very ideology that the free world spent 5 years at
| total war to defeat. The people who defeated fascism in
| WW2 are literally called The Greatest Generation but
| nowadays we have people thinking "oh I bet we can make
| fascism work for us. It's never backfired on its
| adherents!"
|
| This is a historical anachronism. "Nazi ideology" (by
| which we typically mean things in particular like
| eugenics, racism and antisemitism, but perhaps also
| things like "strong nationalism" or "leader-centralized
| authoritatianism") was not the reason the US or other
| Allies went into the war, nor was it the reason why
| _most_ people volunteered to fight, assuming they were
| not drafted. (Of course, there were exceptions.) The
| mythologization of the war in modern times has led to a
| much, much greater modern hatred of Nazi ideology than
| what existed in the 1940s, even in the postwar period. If
| you read newspaper articles and private letters from the
| period, it 's really quite shocking the sentiments the
| average American, Frenchman, or Englishman had.
|
| It is also of course always worth mentioning the enormous
| Soviet contribution to the war effort against Germany,
| without which Allied victory would have almost certainly
| been impossible - and the Soviet Union under Stalin was
| not exactly "the free world", to put it mildly.
| kubanczyk wrote:
| German totalitarism did not cause Britain to go to war
| but it was why Britain did not negotiate peace in 1940.
|
| German totalitarism was why they never held any serious
| legitimacy among conquered Poles and later Russians.
| Terror and more terror. It says something that, after
| long hesitation, Russians solidified around Stalin. Is it
| an anachronism as well? Did they see any hope for a
| prosperous post-war future with/under Hitler?
| Epa095 wrote:
| It's hard to know what they would think. It probably
| depends if you asked one who stayed home at the farm,
| someone who mostly raided, or someone who travelled and
| traded a lot.
|
| No viking visiting 10th century Baghdad would think 'the
| white man is clearly superior and is meant to govern the
| other races'.
|
| My impression is that viking culture mostly could not
| afford decadent beliefs like racism. They raided their
| white neighbour, and if they somehow managed to get a hold
| of a black thrall with useful skills, they would take
| advantage of those skills. Similarly to how many women had
| decent rights. Not because they were 'woke', it was just
| practical.
|
| An important source of income was the slave trade, where
| they got white slaves from Europe and sold them to the
| southern countries (Orthodox Byzantine Empire and the
| Islamic Middle Eastern Caliphate). So they were inclusive
| in the sense that they would sell their victims to slavery
| independently of the color of their skin ;-)
| Quothling wrote:
| > so a far left fool, wearing rainbow hat
|
| What about wanting to make people feel safe when they are
| around me makes me "far left"? I'd like to think that it
| makes me considerate. I'm not particularly happy that far
| right have made it so I may come off scary to some people,
| but it is what it is.
|
| > and speaks for all danes?
|
| I think I can officially tell you that I am in fact
| speaking on behalf of every non-nazi danish person when I
| tell you that we collectively hate the fact that the far
| right in so many places has adopted our cultural heritage.
|
| > Also, I wonder what your danish ancestors would think if
| you could speak old norse and explain them your
| 'inclusiveness' and culture appropriation to them
|
| They would likely be fine with them. We have both
| historical and archeological sources to show us that
| vikings weren't really very judgemental in the sense that
| traditional monotheistic religions are today. We also know
| that things like "nationality" weren't even concepts at the
| time. They'd quite simply mingle with the cultures they
| encountered and you'd even have things like homosexuality
| being rather accepted in parts of society and not in
| others. Though obviously not in a way that is comparable
| with society today as you can see in the "law texts" we
| have from the period. For men the "acting party" wouldn't
| be considered to be different from a heterosexual man,
| while the "receiving party" would be anything from poorly
| treated to considered to be breaking the law depending on
| which specific city/area they lived in. Similarly women's
| rights were a thing, with them being better than they are
| for many women today in some parts and worse in others,
| though over all rather good for any period in human
| history.
|
| It's sort of silly to compare our society with society 1200
| years ago though. A huge amount of the concepts we've build
| our civilizations upon simply didn't exist in "Norse
| culture". A lot of our modern cultural, like the
| Scandinavian work ethics and our morals are hugely inspired
| by Lutheranism as an example.
| Bluestein wrote:
| > that vikings weren't really very judgemental in the
| sense that traditional monotheistic religions are today.
|
| Interesting point. (I mean, given how widely they spread
| - and their influence on local cultures - they _had_ to
| be open minded ...
|
| > in the "law texts" we have from the period.
|
| I am curious as to what some of those (codes) might be -
| excuse my ignorance ...
| DougN7 wrote:
| Not exactly law texts, but if you're interested in
| original texts from that era, from roughly the same
| people, read the Icelandic Sagas. Really good reading.
| Bluestein wrote:
| Noted :)
| poisonarena wrote:
| > anyone who disagrees with me is a nazi and they all
| wear a thor hammer > im speaking for every dane thats not
| a nazi
|
| 99% of all danes, sure bro..
|
| > long winded paragraph about how vikings were angels
|
| absolutely reddit brained
| brnt wrote:
| Any ancestor of mine would be thoroughly disappointed if
| their descendants hadn't found ways to improve themselves
| over the generations and find me still stuck at their
| level.
| porbelm wrote:
| The appropriation of the Scandinavian norron viking lore by
| the extreme right/nazi-adjacent/nazi groups is so annoying.
| I'm from around Tonsberg (look it up) and we have a lot of
| people with a healthy, normal interest in the old medieval
| stuff. We also have a lot of people that use it for their
| nazi feelgood shit. Problem is, you can't tell 'em apart
| unless you can see their other, less visible tattoos :(
| mantas wrote:
| And the other problem is many people call anybody
| interested in native culture and its preservation a nazi.
| Which is bullshit especially since original nazis didn't
| give a damn fuck about preservation of anything, but tried
| to build a new superhuman based on their fantasies.
| TechDebtDevin wrote:
| I think nationalism/ white supremacy are more so the
| issue. While they might not be Nazis, and in fact a lot
| of them really don't like Germans, I personally
| encountered a lot of the Scandanavian White purity types.
| They often use ancient Scandinavian history as a source
| of pride and to justify that type of superiorty. In fact
| I often tell people that Sweden and Norway have the most
| closeted racist society I've been exposed to. This is
| saying a lot considering I'm American!
| mantas wrote:
| What's the problem with nationalism? Coming from Central
| Europe, here nationalism is anti-imperialist and about
| nations self governing themselves to promote native
| cultures. And as far as I know Scandinavian nationalism
| is pretty similar with no imperialist ambitions.
| TechDebtDevin wrote:
| There's nothing wrong with being patriotic (usually), the
| problem is when your national identity gets roped in with
| the color of your skin, which is certainly something I've
| seen many times over Norway and Sweden. While they have
| incredibly fair and polite societies they say some insane
| things behind closed doors.
| mantas wrote:
| Skin color is most visible proxy of a foreign color.
| Let's not pretend that those people blend in local
| cultures very well. Nor do people with white skin, to be
| fair.
|
| Scandinavians are even more against central Europe
| migrants. While racism card silences some people
| regarding other skin colors, they double down on fellow
| Europeans. And knowing folks who emigrated there... I
| can't say I blame Scandinavians for not liking them.
| TechDebtDevin wrote:
| What a small world. I was just looking for wallpapers/
| paintings of Tonsberg landscapes/seascapes yesterday. Off
| topic but didnt Edvard Munch have a summer house there and
| thus a lot of his settings are there? I'm from the States
| but I got to visit Tonsberg a few times when I worked in
| Norway Lovely little town that I hope I can visit again!
|
| More topically, I encountered a lot of the latter group in
| Southern Norway and quite a few people from Sweden that
| were obsessed with Viking culture in a way that came off as
| Masculine cope.
| INTPenis wrote:
| Don't encourage me, encourage the researchers. It's a well
| established opinion that the so called viking-age was from
| around 789 (Lindisfarne raid) to 1066 (Harald loses England).
|
| Simply because those are the written sources we have. But us
| laypeople are allowed to romanticize and consider other
| variables.
|
| Btw I'm swedish and I speak fluent danish. ;) Lived 20 years
| around the Oresund region.
| Unbefleckt wrote:
| I don't think it's appropriation if they're ethnically
| nordic, is it? Whether they have a rainbow or a swastika.
| AlecSchueler wrote:
| Why base it on ethnicity? I'm not sure the original peoples
| would have focused on that rather than, say, culture, for
| the in/out grouping. It's my understanding that the ethnic
| focus came much later with the rise of nationalism and even
| later with genetics.
|
| Consider that these seafarers would have habitually mated
| with people from Britain, Ireland and even the Maghreb as
| we see here. Do you think they would have considered the
| offspring of such pairings as less Viking?
|
| For my that culture is essentially gone and it's basically
| appropriation no matter your DNA.
| Bluestein wrote:
| (I can totally see an AI running amok post-Singularity
| being "stopped" by being "fed" an incongruous rainbow-
| swastica and having it collapse :)
| blululu wrote:
| Interesting. It is worth noting that the presence of Germanic
| tribes in Spain goes back much farther in time. and The name Al
| Andulus for instance comes from the Arabic name for the Vandals:
| a Germanic tribe who settled in Iberia.
| thom wrote:
| Yeah, it's always surprising to learn that Spain in the 400s or
| so was a battleground between at least three different Germanic
| tribes: the Visigoths, the Suebi and the Vandals.
| thom wrote:
| The article mentions Vikings in the Maghreb as well, but
| obviously the Vandals under Gaiseric have them beaten there
| too, having ruled most of the western Mediterranean as far as
| Tripoli in his time. Germanic tribes, ruling North Africa,
| building amphitheatres and writing Latin poetry no less.
| leyth wrote:
| It's interesting that they were referred to as 'majus' or fire-
| worshipers, a term Muslims typically used for Zoroastrians.
| lordgrenville wrote:
| For those interested in the topic, I highly recommend this book:
| https://www.nyrb.com/products/the-long-ships
| dr_dshiv wrote:
| Graffiti evidence of Vikings in Athens:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piraeus_Lion
| fakedang wrote:
| A very interesting character of this period was Harald Hardrada.
| Prior to becoming King of Norway, he fought for the Kievan Rus
| and was captain of the Varangian Guard. He became King of Norway
| after scheming with the King of Denmark, then immediately after
| turned his back on his former ally to claim his throne too. Then
| the brother of Harold the Saxon invited him to conquer England,
| which he did almost successfully.
|
| Almost successfully, because what happened next was the Battle of
| Stamford Bridge, and the end of the Viking era.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| I'd love to read an alt history of what would have happened if
| Harald invaded a few weeks later, and William a few weeks
| earlier, and Godwinson was able to dispatch the Normans before
| having to deal with the Vikings.
| Bluestein wrote:
| All it would have taken is slightly different weather.
| Different sailing winds delaying or speeding some ships
| along. A few weeks ahead or a few weeks behind. And history
| would have changed forever ...
| begueradj wrote:
| At no point the article provides evidence of the Vikings presence
| in North Africa. But we have archeological evidence that the
| Vandals came to and lived in North Africa.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-07-28 23:15 UTC)