Posted on 03/05/2007 7:44:25 PM PST by neverdem
The Vikings, and later the Brits, never really had much control "beyond the pale." Thus it's the Dubs with the most Viking blood.
Yes, I accept that, that's why I said 'more or less', what I can't figure is why they are claiming a majority of the make-up of the people of these islands are people who have had no influence in the histories of these islands? I know there were pre-Celtic inhabitants, but it's hard to believe they weren't completely surpassed racially by the Celts? They were culturally surpassed by them!
ping
SUPREMACY
- but is it about genes?
VIKING "BLOOD"
Around 1500 years ago, when The Roman Empire was in fast decline and the Arabs were advancing their position, Viking culture existed in an embryonal form. It was noted, not at least by the Romans, that the Vikings were extremely good shipbuilders - like an omen of what to come.
During the Viking era itself, the 8th to the 11th century roughly, Vikings on the rampage indeed raided, raped, looted and were, in consequence hereof, feared by many while they ALSO built up a gigantic trade network and promoted the spread of technology and culture. Many experts in the field are convinced they, among other things, also discovered America.
For a long time the Christian world viewed the Vikings as heathens and barbarians, failing to recognize their enormous - positive - contribution to cultural exchange, trade and technology advancement.
During the dark age of what I would label as "xenophobic" European nationalism (in contrast to true patriotism like the American one that is NOT basicallly racist), around 1830-1945, Vikings were regarded as model warriors and patriots in many nations. Especially in Scandinavia, Great Britain and Germany, Vikings were almost worshipped as Arian semi-gods. In fact, Germany and Great Britain more or less competed in picturing themselves respectively as the closest heirs to the Vikings, beside the Scandinavians themselves, naturally.
Today, many experts are wishing to "correct" traditional and popularized notions of the Vikings. In our own age, lots of educated people around the globe are aware that the Vikings were progressive minded traders and explorers, even though they, at the same time, indeed were magnificent warriors.
The future image of the Vikings?
Personally, I hope that this, seemingly ever changing image one day will develop into an awareness of the Viking culture as being a highly important factor in the great achivements of the Western Civilization, as I have reached the conclusion that this is actually the case, which brings me on to the second thing I wish to draw attention to.
THE CONTRIBUTION OF "VIKING" SCANDINAVIA TO WORLD HISTORY AND THE PROGRESS OF MANKIND
I'd like to put forth some questions regarding the Vikings that, admittedly, are daring and I'm sure most scholars, politicians and journalists of today never would wish to deal with. However, this is Free Republic and not a politically correct TVprogram produced by BBC.
- Is there any connection between Viking culture (not to be confused with Viking genes) and Scandinavia being the richest part of the world today (measured in nominal GDP per capita)?
- Is there any connection between the fact that almost EVERY great Western power since the Roman one - save Spain perhaps - was built on populations with a large degree of Viking influence? Look at Northern France, Britain, the US and Russia/Soviet. Why did Poland, any Balkan nation or any country south of the US NOT rise to a position like these nations in world history?
Is there a cental dynamic element in Viking culture that promotes and encourages fearful progressiveness?
It would be difficult to prove. But it sure can be argued for.
Anyone who has been brought up in Scandinavia or have close ties to this part of the world knows that Scandinavians have an intense love affair with groundbreaking technology, competetion and exploration - things you do not associate with, for instance, the traditional culture of China or India, even if they deserve admiration and respect from several other angles.
There are unbalanced myths regarding all nations and most of us like to view our own countries as glorious, honored and praiseworthy. Nothing is wrong with that per se, but often it can lead us wrong.
Still, I think several facts like the above ones can't be easily explained away as a expression of excessive Scandinavian chauvinism.
Why, for instance, has my own country, Sweden, produced more inventions and world leading capitalist corporations per capita than any other nation?
Why has the region of Stockholm - Helsinki - Tampere/Tammerfors developed more revolutionary information technology than ANY other part of the world of that size with the possible exception of some part of California? Just think of Ericsson and Nokia.
I don't think it is about genes. But it IS about culture - Which, among other things, would explain why many immigrants to Scandinavia have managed to adopt our values and have been very productive citizens and law abiding ones as well. I know there are several exceptions and these individuals there is no reason to make excuses for. Send them back. The positive thing is that culture can be TAUGHT while genes can not.
The Vikings developed a special mental preparedness consisting in continously keeping track of what went on in the world around them ("know thy enemy") and a strive to continously improve their TECHNOLOGY as a CONCEPT OF SURVIVAL. Other cultures did these things too, but were not centred around these factors to the same extent. The Roman Empire, Ancient Egypt or the Chinese were not that focused on exploration and pioneering technology.
Today, the world is more technology aware than ever before and that suits us just fine!
WHAT COULD BE GAINED FROM IMPROVED INSIGHTS OF VIKING CULTURE?
The Scandinavians could of course learn something important about themselves through realizing what special aspects of their cultural and historical background they should be particularly careful to nurture, cherish and preserve.
But there is something about knowledge of Viking traditions that goes beyond Scandinavia and countries with strong ties to Scandinavia like the UK and the US. That certain something is an awareness of how trade, capitalism, science and investment in new technology can create a better future for all of mankind!!
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
The Indo-europeans came later -- I would guess from the Kuban region.
The Hittites went south-west, the Indo-Iranis south-east, the Greeks south-west, the Latins and Celts and Germanics to the north and west and the Balto-Slavs remained there for a long time while the Tocharians headed east
The prevalence of red hair does not have to indicate Celtic genes -- after all Udmurts who are a finno-ugric people (and not even Aryanic) have the highest prevalence of red hair
Not gigantic and culturally they had a weak culture, hence when they settled in France they became French, in Sicily, Italian etc. etc.
Nope, because the Vikings migrated to Spain, England etc.
Also Scandanavia is not the richest part of the world -- that's held by Luxembourg, Leichtenstein etc.
No connection. The Vikings in Britain were culturally absorbed by the Saxon-Norman culture, in France by the French culture and by the third generation the Varangians in Russia were thoroughly Slavicized
If we take Sweden with it's encouraging of moslem immigrants to come and take advantage of their women, then no thankgs
Maybe because it sold to both sides during the world wars?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.