Underrated Cultures

[Ankari]

Just once I would like to see a portrayal of the vikings that breaks away from the stereotypes and tries to show them as what they seem to have actually been. Trouble is, if you do that odds are people actually won't recognise them as vikings.

I am having a little trouble merging the two images you describe. On one hand they are described as very clean and friendly to outsiders with a great reputation as merchants while on the other hand they were violent raiders. What were their motives for all the raiding and how did people accept them as merchants knowing that they next day they show up it could be as raiders?

 

[Devor]

Just once I would like to see a portrayal of the vikings that breaks away from the stereotypes and tries to show them as what they seem to have actually been. Trouble is, if you do that odds are people actually won't recognise them as vikings.

I remember seeing a quote that described the disgust that someone, I think a Muslim, felt at seeing the Vikings wash up from the same basin, followed by a commentary which said, actually, it was very impressive for the time period that they washed up at all. I think the image of the Viking invader was sort of blended with the Celtic and Germanic barbarians - sort of an "all our enemies look alike" kind of thing - which I think helped the Norsemen to succeed once they established their settlements. Hey, we don't look like your enemies.

I also suspect their hygiene was a big part in explaining their fierceness as warriors. They were tougher, in part, because they took better care of themselves.

What were their motives for all the raiding and how did people accept them as merchants knowing that they next day they show up it could be as raiders?

Motives? Too many theories to count. But Viking history is a little more complex than the hit-and-run image which people have. They often hit-and-ran, but they also settled extensively and traded with the people around their settlements. At one point they controlled most of England, and the French liked them so much that they gave them citizenship and the province of Normandy.

 

[Anders Ämting]

I am having a little trouble merging the two images you describe. On one hand they are described as very clean and friendly to outsiders with a great reputation as merchants while on the other hand they were violent raiders. What were their motives for all the raiding and how did people accept them as merchants knowing that they next day they show up it could be as raiders?

Well, going viking (iow, raiding) was basically just another way of making a living to them - the literal vikings were disorganized pirate bands for the most part. If you were lucky and skilled it was a quick way of earning fame and fortune, but it was just one way of getting by: vikings could be merchants or mercenaries or farmers and the people who did the raiding weren't necessarily the same people that did the trading. As for why people would still trade with them... *shrug* I'd say probably the same reason people were willing to trade with any other type of pirate: they had stuff to sell and money spend. It was business, not something personal. And the vikings were probably savvy enough to not try to hit major trading ports. (On account of needing places to sell stuff and spend money.)

Besides, it was a different time and people back then had different ideas of what was acceptable behavior. People who were enemies one day could be allies the next. A good example is the viking leader Rollo who besieged Paris and basically bullied the French king into giving him Normandy in exchange for homage and fealty and a promise to please stop raiding the capital.

Then there's various other factors - wether they traveled the western or eastern routes, wether they were settlers or just travellers, or which specific regions they came from. You have to keep in mind that the vikings weren't a unified people - there wasn't a centralized viking society. They didn't just viking other cultures, they vikinged each other a lot as well. You can't really hold a grudge to, say, the Danish for raiding your region when you were yourself raiding in Denmark last summer. It was just a thing they did.

I remember seeing a quote that described the disgust that someone, I think a Muslim, felt at seeing the Vikings wash up from the same basin, followed by a commentary which said, actually, it was very impressive for the time period that they washed up at all.

That would be ibn Fadlan. Though, to be fair, the Muslims had very high standards of cleanlyness for that time.

It could also be as simple as the particular vikings Fadlan encountered happened to take their grooming less seriously, or where just short on water at the time or something like that. *shrug* Who knows.

 

[grahamguitarman]

Saying all Vikings were raiders is a bit like saying all Caribbean sailors were pirates. Yes there were Viking pirates, but there were also Viking settlers, Viking farmers and Viking Traders ect. Many Vikings never even left their own shores, preferring to live as peaceful villagers in Scandinavia.

So the description of Viking traders as sociable and friendly people isn't really contradictory, if you accept that they were probably not the same Vikings as those doing the raiding.

Most people get their image of the Vikings from the writings of monks and nobles in England, who were rightfully complaining about Viking Raiders. These people never talked about the peaceful Vikings who just wanted a civilised interaction with the world (within the limitations of a world that was filled with violence anyway)

Its kind of ironic that we see the Vikings as vicious barbarians, yet the Romans are considered as being highly civilised. In the colliseum the Romans didn't just have chariot races and gladiator fights, people were hideously tortured for public entertainment. For example Christians were forced to sit on red hot iron chairs to be slowly cooked alive - in front of large audiences who would cheer the torturers on! So who were more civilised - the Romans or the Vikings?

as for underused culture - what about the aborigines of australia, any tale told from an aboriginal POV is going to be filled with magic and mysticism. The aboriginal dreamtime sounds very inspirational to me

 

[grahamguitarman]

They didn't just viking other cultures, they vikinged each other a lot as well. You can't really hold a grudge to, say, the Danish for raiding your region when you were yourself raiding in Denmark last summer. It was just a thing they did.
.

Agreed, before the british people were unified into a single kingdom, the smaller tribes and kingdoms were constantly raiding each other. Read up about Dark age culture and you find a world where the summer was spent raiding and fighting against other tribes, while the winters were spent in the great halls boasting about the summers conquests. So to most native British the Vikings were doing nothing they didn't do themselves. It was mostly the Monks who demonised the Vikings for their lifestyles (not least of all because they were prime targets). Unfortunately it was the monks who wrote early British history, not the native peoples - who would have perhaps shown the Vikings in a different light.

 

[Mindfire]

While not exactly underrated, I find that the vikings tend to be... misunderstood, I suppose.

They're usually depicted as these barbarian dudes wearing bearskins and leather and chainmail, kinda grey and brown all over. But historical accounts seem to indicate they were actually a pretty colorful and sorta vain bunch: They were apparently fond of strong, bright colors and would pick up fashion statements from the various places they visited and they also seem to have liked jewelry and kept themselves reasonably clean. Ahmad ibn Rustah reports that: "they carry clean clothes and the men adorn themselves with bracelets and gold. They treat their slaves well and also they carry exquisite clothes, because they put great effort in trade." They were also rather concerned with personal hygiene and hair care, at least going by the sheer amount of grooming tools they left behind - razors, tweezers, ear spoons and a crazy amount of combs. Ahmad ibn Fadlan also claimed that the rus vikings were "tattooed from fingernails to neck" with dark blue or dark green patters that resembled trees.

Like, are you picturing these guys? Have you ever seen vikings portrayed like that?

They are also made out as these grim, brutal warrior people who were obsessed with battle. And sure, they could be pretty violent, especially when they were out raiding, but then again it was a very violent period in general. And as ibn Rustah points out above, the vikings were first and formost expert merchants, which you can't be if you're not very good at getting along with people. Rustah actually goes on to point out that they were very friendly towards outsiders. Additionally, the norse sagas seem to portray them as a very no-nonsense people who valued common sense and cunning, and who tended to have a very dry, sarcastic sense of humour.

Just once I would like to see a portrayal of the vikings that breaks away from the stereotypes and tries to show them as what they seem to have actually been. Trouble is, if you do that odds are people actually won't recognise them as vikings.

But didn't they also, you know, murder innocent women and children in the name of honor and glory?

 

[Anders Ämting]

But didn't they also, you know, murder innocent women and children in the name of honor and glory?

Eh. I suppose the occasional woman and child might have gotten killed during a viking raid, but I've definitely never heard of them doing such things habitually, because they thought killing women and chilren was cool or whatever. I mean, why would they? If anything, they'd be far more likely to capture any non-combatants. Worst case scenario, you'd get sacrificed to the gods for good fortune and favorable weather, but more likely you'd just get sold as a thrall. That way they'd make an actual profit. Like I said, they seem to have been very practical-minded people.

As for the innocents who did end up dead, well, the vikings basically had a way of looking at things that sometimes seems kinda alien to our moderns sensitivities. Morals aren't universal, after all.

I heard a story somewhere, not sure about the historical validity but it still kinda illustrates what I mean: There was a viking band that started running low on provisions, so they anchored near a farm in the dead of night. Their plan was to sneak into the farm, steal what they needed and then hightail out of there. But then one of the vikings objected: they were vikings, not cowardly thieves, and he was uncomfortable about stealing since it was dishonorable. The other vikings agreed and after some discussion they revised the plan somewhat: They would sneak in, kill everyone in their sleep, and then make off with the loot. That technically made it a legitimate viking raid, which was not at all dishonorable. Everyone agreed this was a much better plan.

 

[grahamguitarman]

But didn't they also, you know, murder innocent women and children in the name of honor and glory?

No, women and children were more likely to have been enslaved, not killed. And by all accounts their slaves were fairly well treated. Honour and Glory could only be gained in combat against worthy opponents, ie other warriors. A Viking warrior killing an unarmed and weak innocent for no reason would have been accused of cowardice.

 

[Devor]

Saying all Vikings were raiders is a bit like saying all Caribbean sailors were pirates.

Saying all Vikings were raiders is more like saying all Pirates are Pirates. Can we try Norsemen?

 

[Telcontar]

I was wondering about that. So the term viking does only apply to the seaborne raider types? Not to any civilian population?

 

[Devor]

I was wondering about that. So the term viking does only apply to the seaborne raider types? Not to any civilian population?

I guess it depends a little on who you ask, but typically nowadays that distinction is made. The word "viking" comes from the people they attacked and is loaded with stereotypes.

No, women and children were more likely to have been enslaved, not killed. And by all accounts their slaves were fairly well treated. Honour and Glory could only be gained in combat against worthy opponents, ie other warriors. A Viking warrior killing an unarmed and weak innocent for no reason would have been accused of cowardice.

What accounts are you referring to? Almost everything we know is under one of two filters - that of the victims who wanted them to be horrible, or that of the post-Viking-age monks who wanted stories that stressed then-modern morality. We really don't know as much for sure as we'd like to think. Just a few of their written laws.

But to get back on topic, a good forgotten culture would be - drumroll please -

. . . . I can't remember.

Oh! How about Cold War Baltics? That's definitely a cultural attitude that could be richly transcribed into a Fantasy setting.

 

[Ivan]

"The term Viking (from Old Norse víkingr) is customarily used to refer to the Norse explorers, warriors, merchants, and pirates who raided, traded, explored and settled in wide areas of Europe, Asia and the North Atlantic islands from the late 8th to the mid-11th century." -Wikipedia, Viking

So apparently those who stayed on the farm were not Vikings.

At any rate, getting back to the topic, ancient Korea has quite a strong culture and history of its own.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

But didn't they also, you know, murder innocent women and children in the name of honor and glory?

That could be describing any number of historical cultures.

 

[Shockley]

All vikings are vikings, not all Norsemen are vikings. That said, there seems to be a broader application to the term 'viking' in traditional Nordic culture. For example, the Jomsvikings were a land-based holy order/mercenary hybrid, and the term was still applied.

Also, the Anglo-Saxons (Hengest himself would have been a viking, eerily) differentiated between the viking raids and the invasion of the Great Heathen Army, so there's that.

 

[Mindfire]

At any rate, getting back to the topic, ancient Korea has quite a strong culture and history of its own.

Their neighbors, particularly China and Japan, seem to view Korean culture as derivative.

 

[Jabrosky]

Their neighbors, particularly China and Japan, seem to view Korean culture as derivative.

Most cultures are susceptible to influence by their neighbors to one degree or another, especially if said neighbors are very powerful. I know jack shit about the Koreans but I would actually be surprised if they didn't have local traditions differentiating them from China and Japan.

I know I already cited African cultures as underrated earlier in this thread, but one African people I've thought more about recently are the ancient Nubians (or Kushites) who lived in what is now Sudan. Most people know them as the "Black Pharaohs" who mimicked their Egyptian rivals and neighbors, but what isn't as widely known is that not only did the Nubians have sophisticated cultures even before the Egyptians conquered them (A-Group and Kerma being the best examples), they also exerted their own influences onto Egypt. In fact the institution of sacral kingship that lay at the heart of Egyptian culture may have been borrowed from the Nubians. It additionally appears that the Egyptians' ancestors learned how to make pottery and raise cattle from the Nubians. I definitely want to write a fantasy story with a Nubian inspiration sometime in the future.

 

[Mindfire]

Most cultures are susceptible to influence by their neighbors to one degree or another, especially if said neighbors are very powerful. I know jack shit about the Koreans but I would actually be surprised if they didn't have local traditions differentiating them from China and Japan.

I know I already cited African cultures as underrated earlier in this thread, but one African people I've thought more about recently are the ancient Nubians (or Kushites) who lived in what is now Sudan. Most people know them as the "Black Pharaohs" who mimicked their Egyptian rivals and neighbors, but what isn't as widely known is that not only did the Nubians have sophisticated cultures even before the Egyptians conquered them (A-Group and Kerma being the best examples), they also exerted their own influences onto Egypt. In fact the institution of sacral kingship that lay at the heart of Egyptian culture may have been borrowed from the Nubians. It additionally appears that the Egyptians' ancestors learned how to make pottery and raise cattle from the Nubians. I definitely want to write a fantasy story with a Nubian inspiration sometime in the future.

Spoiler: Non sequitur off topic mini-rant

Very true. In fact, there is a direct link between the Egyptians and the Nubians. They were closely related. I don't know why people differentiate between Egyptians and Africans. Egyptians were Africans. Many physical anthropological studies on ancient Egyptian remains, especially those from Egypt's predynastic period have found an affinity with tropical Africans. The only reason they've ever been depicted as white is ignorance. Sorry for the off-topic, but the "white Egyptians" thing is a pet peeve of mine. The only "white" Egyptians were during the Ptolemaic period. And one could argue that they weren't really Egyptians anyway, just Greeks playing dress-up.

Has anyone said Native Americans yet? I don't think they have been represented in fantasy much. Unless you count the Water Tribe from Avatar, who were based on the Inuit.

 

[Telcontar]

One could also argue that even Greeks aren't "white" in most senses of the word. I agree, thinking of Egyptians as somehow Western (white) is ridiculous.

Also, and again, thanks everybody. This thread has made for some entertaining and informative reading.

 

[Jabrosky]

One could also argue that even Greeks aren't "white" in most senses of the word.

For my part, I consider all native Europeans to be White, but yeah, the Greeks probably were never perfectly "Nordic".

 

[Ivan]

Their neighbors, particularly China and Japan, seem to view Korean culture as derivative.

Well, of course they would say that. People being what they are, everyone wants to say "they got that idea from us because we are so smart and clever and awesome." It's a form of self-flattery.

There was inevitably a good amount of Chinese influence, and on the surface there are similarities. However, Korea has a lot of completely unique art and culture all its own.