The Hidden World Of The Fearsome Viking Weaponry | The Vikings | Timeline 

Fantastic!

Yes, it is thanks to a German: Richard Wagner. When the Ring of the Nibelungen was performed for the first time in 1876, they made costumes based on a free artistic expression without much hold in reality. So they put horns and feathers on the helmets because it looked nice on stage.

Det rygte om at vikingerne havde horn i hjelmene stammer fra 1800 tallet

I like HTTYD film Vikings too but yeah historical Vikings are more appealing

number 1 is to have a viking name. 3000 names in the Icelandic name book the only country that use original vikings names.

when u died.. may valhala accept u ^^

Exactly what I was thinking when I saw that thumbnail

Well said 😂 👍

How? They uploaded it and hit the publish button. Nothing here is "historically accurate" anyway. It's always propaganda to serve agendas.

The King of the Danes took over part of England of course the Danes were Vikings

@@alanaadams7440 He was a King of the Danes and would have referred to himself as such. And when referring to Scandinavian warriors as a whole, he would have called them Ostmen, Noresmen, Norse or Danes. They didn't call themselves Vikings. A "Víkingr" was someone who went on sea expeditions, not necessarily someone who raided and pillaged.

@@fspg3207 what do you mean what’s my problem . I think that is pretty amazing .

What is your problem??

Truly impressive. Also as impressive is a Viking barn, still standing today, that is built without nails or binding. Just wood. Amazing also.

you can't fight them, you join them? and TOGETHER they went to Siberia to conquer?

I took a graduate level class in Russian history. Most Russian historians deny the claim that the Rus people invited Vikings to rule over them, while most Scandinavian historians assume that historical claim to be true. As such, the matter is controversial.

@@davea6314 And confusing as Rus means "men who rows". And the "men who rows" were the Swedish warrior merchants who travelled Eastern European river-roads. So the name of the country and population stem from the Vikings anyway :)

@@whitlaw1395 Most Russian historians would tell you that you are completely wrong with that etymological assumption.

@@davea6314 ? Russian "historians" are told what story to tell ever since the revolution, -if not longer. Whatever it is based on facts or not: their changing dictators have the say. Official Russian historians are marionettes.

Thanks for the breakdown Tammy AI!

They probably didn't plunder North America :) Probably many more used their boats as traders and colonialists. According to the Icelandic sagas, they settled and had contact with First Nations, who unfortunately were lactose resistant. So they were not too fond of the dairy products offered by that the Vikings. Note, the looting stories are recorded by those who had been attacked. Whereas the more peaceful activities of the traveling Vikings are less recorded. But genetically, there is evidence that many simply integrated with populations elsewhere.

I'm guessing you have a helmet with a horn on.

Hmmmmmmm...... This is a wild guess, but I'm gonna with....SCANDINAVIA?

@@chraffishmmmm… I’m going to take a wild leap & say I agree. I did an American minor in Scandinavian studies, but would have had it as a 3rd major if I’d taken the language requirement. If I were focused on contemporary history or literature, it would have been necessary. There’s still a lot that isn’t accessible to English speakers. But, I was on an archaeology track so linguistics were less important, though I still hit a few moments of wishing I spoke Norwegian or Swedish, just to confer with other experts. I think there’s an American assumption that everyone in Europe learns English as a second language. It’s kind of understandable. English is the international language for air traffic control & nearly as essential in business (But it’s not standardized in academics). It’s predominant in media. A lot of non-English music or movies are made but not even Bollywood keeps up with English language production. And, unlike the United States, Europeans DO encourage learning a second language from a young age, so some just assume they would choose English. A Swede is just as likely to have French or Dutch or Swahili or Spanish as English. Of course, like everyone else, if they don’t keep up with a language after school, they’ll lose it. So plenty of Norwegians might have a smattering of Swedish or no proficiency in a second language. A lot of Europeans DO speak English, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be their choice when speaking on Scandinavian history. It really doesn’t even make sense. If an American speaks Italian as a second language and is asked to discuss American history, WHY would they do the interview in Italian ? Or the op is just American arrogance & assumption that our way should be copied by everyone else, even if they have successful cultures much older than ours. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Why? Do you think all the world should speak english? If you learn viking History it make sense that you understand norse or a scandinavian language...not english.