• DragonTypeWyvern
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Yeah, that was the point, that the Britons having their own problems is irrelevant to the specific criticism of Vikings and how they traumatized all of their neighbors for a thousand years, just as the English being evil colonizers doesn’t stop the Portuguese and Spanish from also being evil colonizers.

    And I didn’t compare you to fascists. I said they’re not the only ones guilty of revisionist history.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It’s part of the inaccuracies yes, that is exactly the point.

      You act like the britons weren’t slave trading in Dublin and raiding their neighbors and oh yeah the thousand years of slave trading that followed.

      The Viking aren’t uniquely violent in their area nor are they unique in their violence when compared to global civilizations at the time. You imply the britons weren’t raiding, pillaging, raping and slave trading each other which they absolutely were.

      Similarly let’s remember there’s a huge debate about if all Norse were Viking or Vikings happened to be largely Norse given that recovered raids turn up English and Arab dudes dressed like Vikings.

      • DragonTypeWyvern
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The general consensus from what I’m aware of is that Viking is as good a term as any for a relatively well understood historical culture group because Germanics is too broad, Norse too specific, and Scandinavian either includes or excludes Sami and Finns unfairly depending on how you look at it.