A True Viking Saga

Post by **de officiis** » Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:52 pm

A skeleton found at the bottom of an abandoned well in Trondheim, Norway, seems to confirm a tale of defeat and destruction told in an ancient Norse saga. In 1197, a faction of the Norwegian aristocracy known as the Baglers attacked Sverresborg, the castle stronghold of the Viking king Sverre. The story of the siege—including the “killing” of the castle’s well by throwing the dead body of one of the king’s men into it—is well known, but its veracity has been questioned. “Sverre’s saga has very detailed descriptions of the battles between the king and his main enemy, and it’s also rich in references to places and people,” says lead archaeologist Anna Petersén of the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research. “The human remains in the well indicate that the saga is trustworthy. The proven relationship to events described in Norwegian history makes this discovery unique, and a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.”

Post by **TheReal_ND** » Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:55 pm

the Baglers

Heh

Post by **Hwen Hoshino** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:57 am

What was the most prestige warrior class at that time? Knights or axe wielding footsoldiers?

Post by **GloryofGreece** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:15 am

de officiis wrote:A True Viking Saga

A skeleton found at the bottom of an abandoned well in Trondheim, Norway, seems to confirm a tale of defeat and destruction told in an ancient Norse saga. In 1197, a faction of the Norwegian aristocracy known as the Baglers attacked Sverresborg, the castle stronghold of the Viking king Sverre. The story of the siege—including the “killing” of the castle’s well by throwing the dead body of one of the king’s men into it—is well known, but its veracity has been questioned. “Sverre’s saga has very detailed descriptions of the battles between the king and his main enemy, and it’s also rich in references to places and people,” says lead archaeologist Anna Petersén of the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research. “The human remains in the well indicate that the saga is trustworthy. The proven relationship to events described in Norwegian history makes this discovery unique, and a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.”

Love it when folklore or myths turnout true. Especially Troy comes to mind. It would be really cool if it turned out that Romans came from the destruction of Troy for another example.

Post by **de officiis** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:19 am

Hwen Hoshino wrote:What was the most prestige warrior class at that time? Knights or axe wielding footsoldiers?

I would defer to Hastur.

Post by **Hastur** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 8:10 am

de officiis wrote:
Hwen Hoshino wrote:What was the most prestige warrior class at that time? Knights or axe wielding footsoldiers?
I would defer to Hastur.

The Vikings didn't have Knights. That was more or less an invention of their heirs, the Normans, who paired the Norse warrior tradition with the feudal doctrines of France.

Vikings preferred to fight on foot but could ride to the battle. Viking horses were small and sturdy like the Icelandic horses of today.

They fought with axes, swords and spears. They mixed the weapons in their fighting formations since they had different functions. The axe was better at penetrating armor and shields but the awkward balance could make the wielder vulnerable so he might fight by the side of a swordsman or spearman that could help cover him with his shield.

Warrior prestige was determined by reputation standing and wealth. Someone who was fighting for a big chieftain and could afford good gear was above someone more provincial but from the sagas we can learn that reputation and prestige was extremely important.

The goal of the Viking warrior was to become famous and die well so that he would go to Valhalla and feast with Odin till Ragnarök.

Post by **Hwen Hoshino** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:34 pm

Hastur wrote:
de officiis wrote:
Hwen Hoshino wrote:What was the most prestige warrior class at that time? Knights or axe wielding footsoldiers?
I would defer to Hastur.
The Vikings didn't have Knights.

Not even around 1200?

Post by **TheReal_ND** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:43 pm

Normans weren't exactly Vikings anymore by that point. More like landed nobility in Normandy. I really like this podcast btw
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/nor ... 42230?mt=2

"Norman Centuries"

Post by **Hastur** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:35 am

Hwen Hoshino wrote:
Hastur wrote:
de officiis wrote:
I would defer to Hastur.
The Vikings didn't have Knights.
Not even around 1200?

No Vikings in 1200. The Viking age is said to have ended in 1303. The article in the OP is wrong. King Sverre was not a Viking king. He was a feudal king and his nickname translates Sverre the Priest. He was one of the Birkebeiners.

There was a movie released about them last year. See if you recognize anyone in this trailer.

Post by **Hwen Hoshino** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 4:21 am

Hastur wrote:
Hwen Hoshino wrote:
Hastur wrote: The Vikings didn't have Knights.
Not even around 1200?
No Vikings in 1200. The Viking age is said to have ended in 1303. The article in the OP is wrong. King Sverre was not a Viking king. He was a feudal king and his nickname translates Sverre the Priest. He was one of the Birkebeiners.

There was a movie released about them last year. See if you recognize anyone in this trailer.

Yep, i missed that movie because nobody on the train station knew which train was supposed to be going...

A True Viking Saga

A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga

Re: A True Viking Saga