Timeline for Why are Vikings singled out for raids in Britain and Ireland when records may indicate most raids were by local rulers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
May 27, 2019 at 7:35 | history | edited | Evargalo |
edited tags
|
|
Oct 5, 2017 at 5:40 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackHistory/status/915813843099688960 | ||
Oct 5, 2017 at 0:30 | vote | accept | Lars Bosteen | ||
Oct 5, 2017 at 0:07 | answer | added | sempaiscuba | timeline score: 13 | |
Oct 4, 2017 at 22:38 | history | edited | Lars Bosteen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added text, rearranged text
|
Oct 4, 2017 at 22:01 | comment | added | Lars Bosteen | @ sempaiscuba. My impression is also that the Irish situation was rather unique, That's why I'm wondering if anyone has come up with numbers for attacks in England to see if M&H. Whittock's assertion can be backed up by statistics. I certainly wouldn't be surprised if monasteries were targeted by local rulers / raiders for (as you noted) they were rich and easy to attack. | |
Oct 4, 2017 at 18:03 | comment | added | sempaiscuba | Mind you, the passage about Aldhelm on page 61 of Wessex in the Early Middle Ages by Barbara Yorke seems to suggest that the wording chosen by M & H Whittock is rather misleading in context. | |
Oct 4, 2017 at 17:43 | comment | added | sempaiscuba | The situation in Ireland was rather unique (as I explained in another answer. I'm on a phone, so can't post a half-decent answer with sources right now. I think Aldhelm was an exception because of the location of his monastery on the border between 2 warring kingdoms. Viking raiders targeted monasteries (starting with Lindisfarne in 793) because they were rich, isolated, and largely unguarded ("easy pickings"). The chroniclers were mostly monks - the ones being targeted by the Vikings. | |
Oct 4, 2017 at 15:34 | answer | added | Tom Au | timeline score: 1 | |
Oct 4, 2017 at 14:18 | history | asked | Lars Bosteen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |