They sacked Paris france..Didn't they take over England or some shyt?
Is there a culture more overrated than the vikings?
- Thread starter Burned Verses
- Start date
Ya' Cousin Cleon
OG COUCH CORNER HUSTLA
the thing is, Vikings were closer to pirates than any concrete civilization/culture
white people love their own history....can't fault them for that
filial_piety
Banned
TBH I've never seen them portrayed in pop culture in any other way
whenever I see anything related to viking, irish or scottish lore and history...they are shown as living in huts, and bashing each others heads in as straight savages...white people love that shyt
RARI_Godwind
St. BAWGustine - DarkSkxxxn
Western Culture in general 
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 45,062
- Reputation
- 8,010
- Daps
- 122,436
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Native American Tribal Culture.
North, Central, and South.
They were romanticized as benevolent, peaceful, civilized, etc......they were worse than Europeans for a much longer time.
North, Central, and South.
They were romanticized as benevolent, peaceful, civilized, etc......they were worse than Europeans for a much longer time.
Seriously though, when weighing the awesomeness of various warrior cultures, does it make sense to hold savageness against them? Seems like hateration to me. I got appreciation for them all. From the Apaches to the Zulus. 
Able Archer 83
Two Minutes to Midnight
They were pirates, sure, but I think they had a fairly vibrant culture especially given the time (the Early Middle Ages) and the place (Europe).
Living Bait
All Star
We can barely comprehend what it was like to live 50 years ago.. Vikings didn't care about being on Huffington Post tomorrow or being cancelled on Twitter.. They put their genitals where they wanted... They took what they wanted
They were General Butt Naked
They were General Butt Naked
Violence/Peacefulness is irrelevant to the value of a civilization. Its what they contributed to the world that matters. You need a certain amount of violence to form a civilization at all.
My issue with Vikings is that they did not build anything of consequence . You can talk all the sht you want to about ancient ghana, Peruvian Inca, rome, egypt, aztecs, hindu empires, mali etc but we cant deny the fantastic displays of their greatness still standing hundreds of years later. This ranges from monoliths (timbuktu college, colosseum, cathedrals, ,pyramids, temples,etc) to the academic achievements( geom, astronomy, architecture, etc). But this just doesnt exist for vikings. Just a whole 250years of nothingness.
i would best compare vikings to the mongols for their uselessness. But even then, at least the mongols made achievements in governance.
Last edited:
The Fade
I don’t argue with niqqas on the Internet anymore
would you say the Incas were romanticized? I've read about them being fairly "progressive" but still using the threat of violence beyond their diplomacy when going to assimilate other states within them
skokiaan
African original
Enjoyed Norsemen on Netflix 
Were they?
Violence/Peacefulness is irrelevant to the value of a civilization. Its what they contributed to the world that matters. You need a certain amount of violence to form a civilization at all.
My issue with Vikings is that they did not build anything of consequence . You can talk all the sht you want to about ancient ghana, Peruvian Inca, rome, egypt, aztecs, hindu empires, mali etc but we cant deny the fantastic displays of their greatness still standing hundreds of years later. This ranges from monoliths (timbuktu college, colosseum, cathedrals, ,pyramids, temples,etc) to the academic achievements( geom, astronomy, architecture, etc). But this just doesnt exist for vikings. Just a whole 250years of nothingness.
i would best compare vikings to the mongols for their uselessness. But even then, at last the mongols made achievements in governance.
There are 4 whole days in the week named after God's from there culture. I think they contributed
That was not a viking contribution. That was a global British one. The brittish empire, yet Another empire that actually did something of substance, were originally Saxons. And the original AngloSaxon gods were Tiw, Woden, Thunor and Frige. These themselves came from the Germanic gods because Saxons descended from the same language group. The viking gods were a derivative of those germanic ones as well, and did not originate those 4 names.There are 4 whole days in the week named after God's from there culture. I think they contributed
its like if your grandfather used to call coca-cola "pop" instead of "soda" and his two sons( your uncle and father) learned to call it "pop" also. Later on Your uncle becomes an extra in diaper commercials. But your father becomes a global Tom Cruise lvl celebrity and popularized the use of "pop" when describing coca-cola in movies. Eventually your grandfather is dead, but people all over the world are still calling coke "pop".
Was this global change a result of the 2nd gen, your uncle and father, or was it the result of the grandfather(1st gen) who taught them? Furthermore, should credit be given to your celebrity, TomCruise father or to your diaper commercial uncle for spreading the slang? The answer is clear
Was this global change a result of the 2nd gen, your uncle and father, or was it the result of the grandfather(1st gen) who taught them? Furthermore, should credit be given to your celebrity, TomCruise father or to your diaper commercial uncle for spreading the slang? The answer is clear
Thus those days of the week were actually a German achievement, not one from the viking branch of the german tree. Furthermore, the propagation of those names was a direct result of England conquering 70% of the planet; not the vikings burning city halls and building row boats in France. I still stand on my original statement that the vikings contributed nothing.
Last edited: