[LostTribe]

>chiefly bent on settlement, not plunder, unlike the vikings a few hundred years later.

Oh, tut tut! You've been reading too many histories based on Roman rumour. That is really OLD and OUTDATED stuff.

Read more recent research which shows that most Vikings were farmers in search of additional land for their families as the weather warmed and the Scandinavian population grew but the arable land did not increase. Look how they civilized Ireland, well, at least compared to what it was. And, they were tremendous explorers and adventurers.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

You've been reading too many histories based on Roman rumour

It seems to me that you have a big chronology problem in many of your references. The Viking invasions of England and Gaul started around 900 BC, the western Roman Empire had ceased to exist nearly 500 years prior to this. If you mean Roman Catholic (which itself would be anachronistic), say so. If you mean 'Romania' (in the general sense, that is, all areas which had been part of the Empire), say so.

[LN2Campy]

You're right, the later waves of vikings were looking for land to settle (Which is why the Icelanders speak a variety of Old Norse). But they were initially just looking for easy quick riches and slave girls.

[yarddog]

I have long noticed the striking similarity of facial features and build between highland Scots and Norwegians.

They seem to be much closer than Scots and Irish, and the highland Scots came from Ireland.