Defeated by Celts

>hurr durr cuck hurr
>writing is for fag-cuks hurr

>I'll let you keep our former most sacred land if you promise to be a good boy and fend off the rest of your invading cousins

>Normandy
>most sacred land

fucking lol it's like calling Alabama the most important state of the US

>christian monks
I thought most of it came from Snorre Sturalson

>>defeated by Celts
conquered and founded dublin, limerwick, cork, etc. also, the kingdom of the isles?
>>defeated by Saxons
conquered england 3 times if you count the danelaw
>>defeated by polabian Slavs (Konungahela sacked by Racibor)
oh wow one raid so much defeat. slavs got conquered by swedes in russia
>>defeated by Moors
sure, the raids got btfo at times. then there is the norwegian crusade
>>defeated by native burgerclaps
literally a handful of settlers with no weapons like the spaniards etc. had
>>defeated by Franks
do you even know how normandy came to be?

what's so wrong with recording history orally?

Who took sources from what christian monks wrote before. Also he wrote his sagas after viking age ended so it's safe to say a lot what we know about norse culture is actually horse shit.

>colonized russia (varangians)
>colonized england (anglo-saxons and normans)
>colonized northern france (normans norrman aka northman)
>conquered italy (goths)
>conquered southern france and iberia (goths)
>conquered northern africa (vandals)

eh, goths and vandals weren't vikings like OP asked

leftist limpwristed viking hating OP BTFO

>who took sources from christian monks before
having destoryed the library of alexandria it's safe to assume no monk would preserve any knowledge about pagans

>Also he wrote his sagas after viking age ended so it's safe to say a lot what we know about norse culture is actually horse shit.
norse culture didn't magically end with the viking age famala, besides the stories still lived on

>conquered England 3 times

bullshit
>slavs got conquered by Swedes

oh you mean when ruskies invited them? Such conquest. Also the fuck do east slavs have to do with polabian ones? Might as well say ''sure Americans were rekt in Vietnam but England had an empire!'' it's about as related

>norwegian crusade
don't forget to mention how Italian city states from 15th century represent Roman Empire

>handful of settlers

oh but when vikangz zerg rush some monastery then it's a great victory right?
>do you even know how normandy came to be?

do you?

23 APRIL 1014 BEST DAY OF MY LIFE
VIKINGSHITS BTFO

>scandinavians fighting scandinavians
>vikings BTFO

what did limpwrist mean by this

>scandinavians fighting scandinavians
What did user mean by this

>The Rurik dynasty or Rurikids (Russian: Pю́pикoвичи, Ukrainian: Pю́pикoвичi, Belarusian: Pýpыкaвiчы) was a dynasty founded by the Varangian[1] prince Rurik, who established himself in Novgorod around the year AD 862.[2] The Rurikids were the ruling dynasty of Kievan Rus' (after 862), as well as the successor principalities of Galicia-Volhynia (after 1199), Chernigov, Vladimir-Suzdal, and the Grand Duchy of Moscow, and the founders of the Tsardom of Russia. They ruled until 1610 and the Time of Troubles, following which they were succeeded by the Romanovs. They are one of Europe's oldest royal houses, with numerous existing cadet branches. As a ruling dynasty, the Rurik dynasty held its own in some part of Russia for a total of twenty-one generations in male-line succession, from Rurik (died 879) to Vasili IV of Russia (died 1612), a period of more than 700 years.

more like gaels v gaels + scandinavians
are you retarded?

>The Varangians (Old Norse: Væringjar; Greek: Βάραγγοι Varangoi, Βαριάγοι Variagoi) was the name given by Greeks and East Slavs to Vikings,[1][2][3][4] who between the 9th and 11th centuries ruled the medieval state of Kievan Rus', settled among many rivers in Russia and formed the Byzantine Varangian Guard.[5][6]

>Clontarf
>scandinavians fighting scandinavians
wat

Name some of these great battles.

What a profoundly stupid thing to say

I bet you're an american.

an american would be the one who thought it was strictly Irish vs Norse and nothing else

I'm irish, i just posted the "vikings btfo" thing to stir shit

sweyn forkbeard and cnut the great both conquered england. when sweyn died, the english tried to invite the old english king back but got defeated by cnut. the danelaw too took a huge portion of england.

and those polabian slavs had to pay tribute to denmark for a while, so i'd hardly call the vikings shitty at fighting them when they had to pay the danes tribute to fuck off.

the norwegian crusade resembled a viking raid a ton, only this time it was called a crusade instead of a raid, so i thought it would be fair to add it. the italian city-states and the roman empire were a lot more different than harald hardrada's army and sigurd the crusader's army

how can you even expect a few farmers to gain a foothold against aggressive natives, with no muskets or anything like the europeans 500 years later would have?

normandy was given to gange-hrolf and the norse influence gave rise to the name "normandy". no vikings, no normandy, simple as that

have fun with those viking settled cities

Whats with Veeky Forums and hating Americans.

Yeah but that's a much more understandable conclusion to come to considering the Leinster forces seem to have been two thirds Norse. "Scandinavians fighting Scandinavians" is much worse because it was ultimately an Irish conflict between two Irish factions, one of which depended heavily on Norse manpower.

Oral history doesn't have a "record". Is precisely why it has less value in unravelling history

>have fun with those viking settled cities

"The battle was hard-fought and bloody, with fighting lasting from dawn until dusk, until Ivar's army broke. The Dal gCais pursued the broken army beheading many foreigners along the way back to Limerick and stormed into the city, ruthlessly sacking it and massacring all of the inhabitants."

looks like they did :^)

>Implying Alabama isn't the most important part of America

and it's also the most simple ones and Americans always go for the most Simplest solutions

it's always the Catholics who stir shit here

i thank god every day for what the viking frogs did to you guys

that wasn't the viking frogs but the pope giving the viking frogs permission
the guy the irish still love and worship :^)

Thank god for /his, reminding me everyday how useless scandinavians are

>the pope giving the viking frogs permission
Most historians now think it was a forgery

aren't you supposed to thank reddit since limpwrists like you don't believe in god

I am christian, it is snowniggers like you who do not believe in god

>being catholic
>not orthodox
enjoy having your gods representative kissing nog feet while embracing the invasion of Europe

Catholic, snownigger, both pagan whatever any of them say
youtube.com/watch?v=YQCIxnkAtiI

you can't really say the pope got a history of protecting the weaker of his flock against the stronger

Vikings were opportunistic terrorists in their day; they preferred that their prey was off-guard so that it made pillaging easier.

What they should be more renown for is their wanderlust; their daring seafaring (a crystal they utilized for navigation is equivalent to a modern GPS) and their hunger for trade. They're hardy fighters, but not the meme that Nordic asspergs like to tout.

If anything, their Norman offshoots are far more deserving as the daredevil warriors of the 10th to 12th centuries. Their exploits in Spain, England, Ireland, Sicily, southern Italy, and the Holy Land are the stuff of legends. Ideally, France should've been more like the Viking-Frankish hybrid that the Normans were.

What's it like living with autism?

QFT

The Normans shit on the Vikings. Even the Moslems spoke quite highly of their feats in battle and their ability to respect refined culture.

b-but Ikea

TELL ME ABOUT HARLUS, WHY DOES HE HOLD THE FEAST?

Nords are shit
>rekt by Swadians
>rekt by Vaegirs
>rekt by anyone with any cavalry at all really
>technology two centuries behind the rest of the world
>''cities'' look like villages I felt ashamed conquering that shit
>not even native to Calradia, should build a fucking wall around them

Underrated

Because it's just poetry rather than writing something down

Does Belgium inviting a german monarch to rule over them mean Germany conquered Belgium in 1830?

>I am a German who enjoys Black Metal.
How exactly is that supposed to stregthen your argument?

I am a chinaman who enjoys gangsta rap

Krauts are autistic and Russians shouldv'e finish the job.

>knows a character from a game
>autism
What?

>noT battle of Tara
>entire Norse Dublin army removed by a few Irish fags on a hill

I think "Vikings were shit" is a bit much. More like they were often woefully unprepared for organised forces.

they managed to defeat monks and rob monasteries, such badass warriors

Nobody likes pathetic Americtards

Turko-Mongols >>> Snowniggers

>>defeated by Celts
and also won against them
>>defeated by Saxons
and also won against them
>>defeated by polabian Slavs (Konungahela sacked by Racibor)
and also won against them
>>defeated by Moors
and also won against them
>>defeated by native burgerclaps
and also won against them
>>defeated by Franks
and also won against them

if your only metric for victoryn is to NEVER be defeated EVER i guess Rome blows because a bunch of Germanics and t*rks beat them

t. flaming Anglo-Saxonaboo

>no writing
>ᛁᛗᛈᛚᛃᛜ

That map is blatantly false. Lmao at this fucking redditor. Also if your merit of ''good warrior'' is ''they won sometimes'' then I guess fucking Poles are a mighty warrior race as well.

>massacre peaceful and unarmed peasants
>rape children
>slaughter babies
>run away from (or get decimated by) real armies

we wuz viKANGZ.. muh warrior ancestors

yea, Poles have had quite a good show sometimes

I'm just saying that Vikings went all over the place, and had their share of victories as well as defeats and cannot in intellectual honesty be called bad

furthermore, what areas on the map are false? I imagine that outside of the areas at Corsica and such most of the map is right.

>Normandy makes your statement invalid

Normandy was offered to the vikings in exchange for vassalage after this battle
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Chartres_(911)

That map is a massive load of horseshit

>Normandy makes your statement invalid

>do you even know how normandy came to be

Normandy was offered to the vikings in exchange for vassalage after this battle
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Chartres_(911)

It's really time norseboos start to actually study viking hustory instead of taking their knowledge from that fanfiction-tier TV serie....

prove it bitch nigga

>implying protestants don't post anti-catholic b8 threads all the time

The fact that the Normans spoke a dialect of French is what turns off a lot of Vikingboos. The Normans were god-tier fighters but I really hate what they did to Anglo-Saxon England and later Ireland.