User talk:Dan Koehl/2007

Norse history and culture wikiproject
WikiProject Vikings and WikiProject History of Scandinavia both appear to be defunct at this point. I would like to set up a new Wikiproject to oversee articles on ancient and medieval Scandinavian and Nordic history that would cover what these inactive projects used to. There are literally hundreds of great articles on obscure sagas, historical figures and the like (largely through the efforts of such users as User:Berig and User:Wiglaf). Since you have edited many Norse-themed articles in the past, I would be interested in your thoughts on how best to proceed. --Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 21:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Norse history and culture
Thought you might be interested in contributing... Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Norse project
Hallo Brian, I did become interested to join the project until I read the first page containing:

Category:Battles involving the Vikings Category:Viking enemies and allies Category:Norse hundreds Category:Image stones Category:Viking Age monarchs Category:Viking exploration of North America Category:Viking Age people Category:Viking practices

As well as "did you know" section claiming that wikings made the pirues lion.

You know, I do not share the opinion that its wise, logical, correct or scientific, to use the term viking, for anything than vikings. You will get trapped in the same trap as the page vikings where norse people are described, where very few vikings are described, and where documented NOT vikings are described as vikings. And in my experience, for people who apply the term viking as it has been used between 1903 and almost today, there is less ambition to waken up, and study the prime sources, its more fun to play around with the mythology. Still, I see you have very positive ambitions, and this project COULD, be the ice breaker that finally starts to clean up around the different myths.

I guess you are fully aware of that we dont know the profession of the guys who wrote on the pireus lion. But upto a certain degree, we can guess they were Varingians. Now, only in lexicons from 1903, and in peoples imaginations varingians were vikings. No written prime source (of course) confirms that those both terms had the same meaning. (and WHY should 2 different terms have?)


 * 1) Category:Battles involving the Vikings. Among the very few battles were vikings are named, they fought against the norwegian king, when he cleaned out the shores from vikings. But that was not vikings fighting vikings, that was a norwegian king, using his fleet, against vikings. Vikings ws among his most important enemies for some time, and made several outlows, and was not satisfied until they were killed or driven to Iceland.
 * 2) Category:Viking exploration of North America: Reg the ships that went to america, sorry, no evidence what so ever that this was a viking raid. Some of the peoples may have been adventorous farmers, some of them was if I recall correct german and french. No vikings there...but most of them probably scandinavian, a word which for some very pecualir reason is not used between 800-1066 for svandinavians, only before and after.
 * 3) Category:Norse hundreds: The hundreds was a way to aministrate the Ledung fleet, which was among other functions used as defence, against among others, vikings. One runestone in sweden even names a man who was a "viking watcher". (the only time the word viking was used on a runestone in sweden, except for some four known occasions when it was used as a persons name, and another where it was told about men who went ON VIKING. Now, those guys didnt went on that every day thorughout their lifes. Why the stone tells this, is because they were involved, for a certain period of time, in viking activities. before, and after, they were probably just farmers.) This guy, most probably the son of a jarl, the honorable vikingwatcher, was not moving around in the village, looking on nice girls and handsome guys, he had a honorable duty as guard against vikings who could treat the village, he was watching for enemies in ships that could threten his village.

Category:Viking practices. As for their practicies, we know very little. Adam of Bremen, one of the few who gives a description and definition, stated there was a group of men living at the danish coast, he called them pirats, and noted that the local people called them vikings, while Adams own people called them askomans. He also and noted that they actually pay tax to the danish king. Until the icandic sagas, thats about all we know about REAL vikings (and not the late misinterpretation of the word).

On the other hand we know more about norse people. Among other things, their defence against vikings.

Now, when you already, in the beginning of this project call all norse people vikings, you will run into big troubl, describing the norse peoples most important enemies: the vikings! How will you describe the well documented norse defendce against vikings, if you call norse people vikings. The real vikngs Adam met may even have been foreigners. What if they were from england? or northern germany? Pirats may have been from various etnic people?

In order to tell the history about norse people, its important to realize that docuemts only gives evidence for altogether some 2-3 norse people from present sweden that were vikings. The others were just norse.

The page viking does not clearly tell people about vikings, and who they were, since most people wants to belive that all scandinavians died in the year 800, grow beards and became vikings for 200 years, and then became scnadinavian again. Which is not true. The term has been misunderstood and misused.

Its my srongest belief, that you will soon run into logical problems describing norse people if you falsely give them the lable viking between 800 and 1066. Because they were not, they were as much against vikings as people in France, Germany and Britain.

To be clear, we associate Australia with sheep and shepherds. Now if we staumble on a story, telling about an australian man, its still wrong to lable him as shepherd. He may be an wool allergic priest, a fisherman who never saw a sheep, or a carpenter. So, if he is refered to as australian, thats perfecty enough, theres no use to invent his profession out of phantasy?

The same goes for norse people. Please, just cll them norse. Or scandinavian. Do not call christian priests, carpenters, farmers, fishermen, soldiers, vikingwatchers, rune carvers etc for vikings, unless they were described as such: Othervise the whole misunderstanding will just be repeated. let the project deal with norse people, not using other labels, if theres no evidence that the terms really are identical.

Ill wit to join the project, giving you some time to consider what I mean, and evaluating how crazy it sounds. But I can never participate in project where its is actually written "the pirates organized their defence against the pirates in a very effective way, namley..." it will just become un unlogical porridge again, like the page about vikings.

I do hope you may see my logical objection here, and that at least it may we worty to think about it just for 2 seconds. I mean no harm, does not want to argue with you, if you disagree, then its fine for me. I just hope that finally, at least one project risa above the old myths, and tries to give a more scientific insight in the norse culture. Which was for sure, maybe upto 99%, not a viking activity at all. It was more or less similair to more southern nations cultures. And theres need to start to see the norse people and cultures as for what they were, even if its less exciting than the imaginal myths that was developed during the nationanalromancy period from 1903 and onwards, when the word viking started to be used for people who were not vikings.

Vikings were vikings. Sometimes norse, sometimes not.

Norse were norse. very seldom vikings, according to the prime sources.

same goes for tradesmen. Not one single written prime source says that vikings were tradesmen.

Contrary, Snorri Sturlason writes in Egils Skallagrims saga: Björn var farmaður mikill, var stundum í víking, en stundum í kaupferðum; Björn var hinn gervilegasti maður.

english: Björn was a great traveller; sometimes as viking, sometimes as tradesman.

It is not logical to say that the terms are same, if Snorri says there were different. Its not logical to apply a term on people, who were the opposite of the term. Regardless if thousands of peoples believe it was the same. Most people believe Napoleon was short man also, although he had avarege height for french men. Its actually just a misunderstanding, shared by hundreds of thousands of peoples, thats all.

Sorry for putting those thoughts on your page. I mean no harm, just hope youll see the point.

Dan Koehl 00:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Dan: Obviously I did not name those categories, they were pre-existing. Your points are all well taken, and most of them I had already thought of myself- note that it's "Norse history and culture" and not "Viking history and culture". Why not join the project and help us sort out this mess? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 02:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Really? very well, then of course Im happily participating!

Dan Koehl 02:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * May I post this conversation to the project talk page? Maybe others will have a better idea than I how to fix the problem. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Dan, one thing you should keep in mind, though, is that "Viking Age" is the standard English term for the relevant time period, even though it is understood that not everyone was a viking. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes of course, theres a big difference between viking and Viking Age. Still, it seems many people have a problem of separating them. Dan Koehl 06:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject_Norse_history_and_culture
Take a look at this new section and see if one of the articles interests you, or if you prefer, add a new one to the list. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

MfD nomination of WikiProject History of Sweden
I've nominated WikiProject History of Sweden, a page you created, for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject History of Sweden and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of WikiProject History of Sweden during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. FPT 19:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)