Timeline for Had there been a significant physiological difference between the Vikings and the Europeans (around the 11th century)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2018 at 8:49 | comment | added | Ynneadwraith | @MAGolding Agreed. It's a widely held misconception that language spoken=ethinicity/nationality (even before nationality was a thing). Partially due to contemporary European politics, and also because often with ancient cultures their language is one of the few things that survives so we tend to group them into 'this group spoke Akkaddian' etc. | |
| Mar 2, 2017 at 23:32 | comment | added | MAGolding | T.E.D. Language is not the only definition of ethnicity. How many modern ethnic groups speak Spanish or Arabic, for example? Thus it is uncertain what proportion of Scandinavians thought they were ethnic Norse and hat proportion thought they were ethnic Danes, Norwegians, or Swedes. And maybe a lot thought that they were ethnic members of a small region in one ofthe modern countries. | |
| Jan 9, 2017 at 20:46 | comment | added | T.E.D.♦ | Problem I have with the 1st pargraph is that from the 9th to 13th centuries all scandanvians spoke the same language: Old Norse. So while "Viking" may well have been a job, not an ethnicity, "Norse" was in fact an ethnicity at the time, and using the modern country names in any but a geographic sense is probably anachronistic. | |
| Jan 7, 2017 at 4:45 | history | answered | MAGolding | CC BY-SA 3.0 |