These replicas are great to see. This boat had 30 rowers. Would be nice to see Viking boat races using trained rowers. Rowing is a great way to build overall strength. Vikings were in great physical shape I'm sure. Finding 30 skilled rowers in this day is not easy. I should think someone kept time using a drum.
Really? Wearing ship ? I wonder…can this thing beat, can it tack? That would call for wearing ship, the yard would need to pivot from starboard to port . They only changed course, from a run to something of a beat. Sailing as close to the wind as possible on one tack, falling off and looping around downwind and coming up to pointing as close to the wind as possible to the next leg of the tack, yard having been passed around to the other side of the mast. The wind first on the one beam and then onto the next. That is wearing ship.
one of the reasons the vikings were so successful were there ships ,by the underwater profile I would say that alone was high in advance off there time .ive always felt the sail were very efficiant and could point to windward far than we give them credit for, haddone a lot of sailing with lug sail a bit more modern variant where the sail is attached to the stem and creates a lifting sail ,capable off 45 % to windward ,cornish luggers ,were still in use up to ww2 though many had been fitted with engines by then. be interested to know how far to windward these Nordic longships could do
Coastal cruising no doubt but certainly not an open-ocean vessel. Not enough freeboard. I would be afraid to take that to sea. Still the prettiest sailboat ever built.
I think it's the first time I ever saw a "Viking ship" come about. Very surprised at how close to the wind a rig like that can sail. Expert teamwork certainly contributed to the performance. Thanks for an excellent video.
This is how these boats were equipped traditionally by the fishermen. These boats are amazing in rough seas, hardly any waves get inside. But should one of them capsize, the stones were supposed to roll out and the wooden hull would float and function as a primitive life raft for the crew.
Mannen med det sakrale stadnamnet Agdestein omtalar sakrale stadnamn på den sakrale kultusøya Njardarlog, Med Vevatn og Helgastein og Godøy rundt 'Todneset - eller burde det eigentleg skrivast 'Todnneset? Veldig fin video. Eg er ein fortidsivrig Eidfjording som har budd på Tysnes, 8akkurat på den tida du la ut denne filmen, faktisk) Øya er jo eit fantastisk Noreg i miniatyr, med kyst, flell og dalstrok i ulike variantar (og tre dialektar: Stordprega, Bergensprega og Opprinneleg Tysnesing, så langt eg kunne høyra. Men - i Eidfjord brukar me ordet'todna' om å tine/tø , og me har ein plass som heiter Todnhaugen. Eg undrast om her er ein samanheng? A propos Agdestein: kva er forskjellen på havguden Agde og havguden Njord? Er dei same guden? Agdestein ligg jo rett over Langenuen frå Tysnes. Kan du belysa desse tinga eg har gått og lurt på i eit par - tre år? Ingen eg spurte på Tysnes forstod kva namnet Todneset kom frå - men der sola treff fyrst vil det jo òg tine fyrst - altså vender livet attende til verda etter vinterfråveret Sakrale greier, m.a.o. ;)
Forslaget ditt om Todneset er interessant, Erling Garatun. Eg visste ikkje om det verbet du nemner frå Eidfjord. Utgangspunktet må vera gammalnorsk þiðna, ‘tine’, og så er vel vokalen endra under påverknad av adjektivet tåen, ‘(ufrosen og) berr for snø’, kanskje òg verbet todna, av þorna, ‘tørke, bli tørr’. Så vidt eg kan forstå, gjev det god meining om Todneset skil seg ut med å ha lite snø, eller at snøen fer tidleg der, fordi det har meir sol enn bygda sør for vågen, og fordi det stikk ut i sjøen. Men når vi ikkje har gamle skriftformer, kan dette neppe bli sikkert. Eit problem er det òg dersom verbet todna ikkje er kjent frå Tysnes eller Sunnhordland elles. Eg finn det ikkje hos Vidsteen: Ordbog over Bygdemaalene i Søndhordland. Namnet Agdestein trur eg vi må rekne som uforklart. Rygh seier det «synes at hænge sammen med ags. egeðe, oht. egede, en Harv, idet fremspringende Punkter af Landet kunne være blevne sammenlignede med Tinder i en Harv». Det er mogeleg, men det er ikkje innlysande kva punkt i landskapet som er «fremspringende» ved Agdestein. «havguden Agde» - du meiner Æge (<Ægir)?
@@eldarheide2500 Ja, eg sikta til Ægir, tenkjer eg. Båe forklaringane dine for todna verkar mogelege. Om det kan hjelpa uttalar me tåen som 'taoen', her inne, og inntrykkjet mitt er at me plar bruka taoen om 'isfri' og todna om 'tint', etter gammalt. Tusen takk for snarleg respons. Eg fann eiit par filmar av deg i går og ser du har fleire eg kan kosa meg med innimellom. Men er det noko som tilseier at Ægir og Njord er same guden - eller ulike gudar?
@@erlinggaratun6726 Ja, det er sant, det blir taoen der inne. Då må vi nok heller rekne med påverknad frå þorna, ‘tørke, bli tørr’, når vi skal forklare at þiðna er vorte todna. Om Æge / Ægir veit vi ikkje så mykje, men han skal vera jotun, medan Njord er ein av gudane. Æge er knytt til havet, og namnet er av same rota som aqua på latin. Men kva funksjon han har, veit vi lite om. Njord høyrer til gudeflokken vanene, som fremjar grøderikdom og den slags. I mytane er Æge knytt til kysten, og han bur i Noatun, der Noa- er eit gammalt ord for båt. Opplysande er Njord-stadnamn langs kysten; særleg har vi ein del øyar som heiter Nærøya, av Njarðey. Det er alltid veldig gode hamner, gjerne gjennomseglingshamner, og/eller naturlege samlingsstader i øyrike. Dette seier at Njord var viktig for sjøfarten. Artig at du likar filmane mine!
@@eldarheide2500 Filmane dine er informative, samt konsise. Eg veit ikkje om du har omsett alle til engelsk, men eg trur du vil kunna få mange fleire interesserte om du gjer det. Framlegga dine om norrøn soge er òg interessante. Eg likar å sovne til akademiske utlegningar om noko interessant, og så høyre det eg gjekk glipp av neste dag ;)
SEE HSIUOTRY PROVES, they went to engalnd and they were jsut decapited by population cthey were just thieves, rappers and , children kidnapers, they did it to ask for money... and blackmail. just thieves and terrorists, and coward poeple , they attacked and runned away... should be ashamed of their hsiotry the nordic poeple.
Hi Eldar. I must say I really love all the stuff you're doing and I'm really glad you choose to upload some glimpses of it on your channel instead of locking it up in the ivory tower that often is academia. I recently read (and used) your article 'Spinning Seiðr' for a small paper I wrote about traces of pre-Christian ritual practice in the Icelandic sagas and I just wanted to give you a pat on the back for all the amazing work you've done and continue to do. Hopefully my small paper will get published as a small 'popular science' article and if it does I really hope more people, whether scholars or laypersons, will get a peaked interest for your valuable contributions. I hope I can get around to reading your 'Gand, Seid og Åndevind' soon! Happy new year to your and your most beloved.
I forgot my question. Do you think the tradition with putting a star on top of our christmas trees has anything to do with the notion of the nail/polar star on top of the world pillar?
Very interesting and rich presentation, Elder! Do you happen to know whether the Danish word ‘genfærd’ (spirit, ghost, apparition) has anything to do with ‘ganfar/ganfer’?
Thank you! Genfærd: It seems not, because the form of the word does not point to an Old Norse *gandferð, and we know no older form that does. The word gen- is cognate with English "again", so originally, "genfærd" literally meant "moving again".
@@eldarheide2500 Kunne det tenkes at det norrøne ordet "gann"/"gand" kan ha elementer av forståelse innenfor en definisjon som inkluderer betydningen "å komme igjen"?
@@tuneviking7800 Tja. Det er eit ord som har utvikla seg og forgreina seg veldig i mange retningar. Det kan sjå ut som utgangspunktet er ei tyding '(spiss) stav' eller noko i den retninga. I mellomalderkjeldene er det 'hug, sjel', 'ham (til å sende i veg)' og slike ting. Det er ganske uoversiktleg.
Thank you very much for putting a few of your lectures/presentations up on RU-vid for free access, Eldar! I got familiar with your work through your article "Spinning seiðr" and I've read almost everything of yours ever since. I was surprised to see your work on the hörgr complex of ideas but I'm glad to see that you're dealing with it, since most of the literature I've read on it never really got me anywhere. I'm curious to pick your brain in regards to the archaeological excavations at Ranheim a few years back. Do you believe that part of the religious complex was indeed a hörgr?
Thank you for the kind words, Glenn! I am afraid the interpretation of the Ranheim site as a hǫrgr was based upon the theory that a hǫrgr in Old Norse culture was a heap of stones (a røys in Norwegian) - which seems to be unfounded, when the material is examined more closely (as I did in my 2015 article, "Hǫrgr in Norwegian names of mountains and other natural features"). In place names, the word hǫrgr is connected to landscape barriers, which fits with a lesser known, but early, etymology suggestion, and there are a couple of early Iron Age examples where the word hǫrgr seems connected to circular, man-made cultic barriers with passageways in them.
English subtitles? It's awesome you went to the location and recorded the story directly from him. I'm just curious to know what he's saying about the huldre and their great view.
wonderfull!!!!, Some years ago I read that in the 80´s , many attemps to sail replicas failed and then , many started to think that the original ship was built only for burial purposes, maybe some other viewers can confirm this
wonderfull, Some years ago I read that in the 80´s , many attemps to sail replicas failed and then , many started to think that the original ship was built only for burial purposes, maybe some other viewers can confirm this
The original was damaged in the burial site and was rebuilt with some truncation of the beam forward at thwart height and distortion of the forward keel. This meant that the first replica, built from the existing display artefact "Dronnigen" was not adequately stable nor buoyant forward and on setting sail reached around 10 kts, shipped water and went down at around 10 degrees angle in a matter of seconds. Rumours around the design intent of the Oseberg being for show only obviously followed, but these are not supported by the current archaeology. The Roskilde Viking ship museum was active in re-measuring and interpreting the fragmentary forward structure, and following from this research, new lines were developed, used for the construction of Saga Oseberg, which exhibits none of the poor stability and seakeeping of the first attempt. www.vikingeskibsmuseet.dk/en/professions/boatyard/building-projects/the-oseberg-ship/ The report downloadable from that page is quite interesting, even if you cannot read the text (has some nice waterline and strake edge plans, some hydrodynamic data (and the text is amenable to automatic machine translation with little difficulty).
I find it easiest to understand in reverse order: 3. modern Icelandic, 2. Northern Norwegian and 1. Eastern Norwegian. I find the #3 and #2 nearly identical. #1 is slightly off somehow.
@@TTaiiLsthis is interesting because I found both Norwegian pronunciations to be very close to the reconstructed old norse pronunciation I'm used to. The modern Icelandic one seemed different to me.
