Shieldmaidens in Viking Sagas and Graves
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- A look at the Norse idea of the women warrior or shieldmaiden (skjaldmær) in the sagas, and the recent discovery that a Viking-Age burial containing weapons also contained the bones of a woman. See links below for more:
Original article announcing the discovery: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10...
Important cautionary thoughts from Dr. Judith Jesch at the University of Nottingham: norseandviking.blogspot.co.uk/...
Dr. Jackson Crawford is Instructor of Nordic Studies and Nordic Program Coordinator at the University of Colorado Boulder (formerly UC Berkeley and UCLA). He is a historical linguist and an experienced teacher of Old Norse, Modern Icelandic, and Norwegian. FAQs: • Video
Jackson Crawford’s translation of The Poetic Edda is available now: www.amazon.com/gp/product/162... and his translation of The Saga of the Volsungs with The Saga of Ragnar Lothbrok is forthcoming in September 2017: www.amazon.com/gp/product/162...
Jackson Crawford's Patreon page: / norsebysw
![mgk - I Think I’m OKAY (with YUNGBLUD) (Sad Version) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7AC1uqQLIg4/mqdefault.jpg)
A very helpful discussion on shield maidens. One point I would add is that these women were viewed honorably and as atypical. Most Scandinavian woman were not running around taking male names, seeking adventure, and fighting in the shield walls. In fact it was a rather exceptional woman who did so, and she was regarded as unique, desirable, and brave for participating in traditionally male adventures and warfare.
And who was that pray tell lmao
There are a number of shieldmaidens that you can point to in the sagas. Freydís Eiríksdóttir was a Norse shieldmaiden who fought Native Americans barebreasted and pregnant in Vinland and was praised for her zeal. Hervǫr Angantýrsdóttir, a Goth shieldmaiden, wielded the sword Tyrfingr against the Huns and bravely fell in battle with a great troop surrounding her. The Danish shieldmaidens Webiorg, Wisna, and Heiðr (Heid) fought in the Battle of Brávellir and led 300 other shieldmaidens in the fight. Webiorg slew the Swedish champion Soti and wounded Starkaðr (Starkad) before being slain by Þorkell (Thorkell), while Wisna, who held the Danish banner, had her arm cut off by Starkaðr. Princess Heiðr was the daughter of King Haraldr hilditǫnn (Harald Wartooth) of Denmark. Hlaðgerðr (Lagertha) was a Norse shieldmaiden who fought with "the courage of a man" and she tactically flanked the Danes with her warriors attacking their rear and encampment. Probably the most famous shieldmaiden, Brynhildr (Brunhild), is likely a composite character representing the Goth princess Brunhilda of Austrasia and the Frankish noblewoman Fredegund. Brynhildr was praised for her skills as a warrior. The courage of shieldmaidens is exemplified in the mythic valkyrja (valkyrie) and war godesses Þorgerðr Hölgabrúðr (Thorgerdr Holgabrudr), Jarpr (Irpa), and Freyja.
@@jonathanowen9917 can you name any sources that are commonly excepted as fact not fable? There is only three that are refered to that can be verified and all three they either died quickly or were moved away from the battle before it started.
A comment on another RUclips video mentioned that in the 1200's, Iceland made a law stating that it was against the law for women to practice with weapons. Since they felt that they needed to pass such a law, it most likely means that there were women practicing with and using weapons in that culture.
David Briggs Precisely. That would've been after christianization, wherein women (gradually?) went from being able to own property, to de facto becoming property. (Not to say pagan culture wasn't a patriachy, just a different, and maybe less binary, brand)
I'm not well read in Icelandic history, but i would draw the same conclusion, regarding the origins of any such legislation.
Mikael af Petersens i would agree. pagan culture is not uniform.
however pagan culture is not uniform. (nittpick)
Which law? I would be curious to know the name of the text as I am currently studying Icelandic medieval laws and would like to know. (EDIT) I think I know what you are talking about. The Grágás, a collection of laws probably dating to the first half of the 12th century, forbids women to exact vengeance in their own name. In order to legally kill for revenge, women needed to appoint men from their kin. The same applied to legal procedures, where women couldn't summon a criminal to any court. I'm not 100% sure if we see the same thing in the later codes, the Járnsíða and Jónsbók, but I think the latter contains a very similar law.
so does men being forbidden from wearing woman's clothing suggest that there was a budding drag queen scene in Iceland?
In the Faroe isl. we have the story about Sigmund Brestison and his wife Turid. She takes up arms against their antagonist Tróndur í Gøtu, when he and his mates make landfall in Skúoy
"Turid húsfrúan tekur eisini vápn og er mans maki" - Føroyingasøga 1962
I don't know if your reply is a statement or a question. yea, in battle she was a mans equal. She lived to rais up their children in Skúoy. Sigmund and his Brother got killed in Sandvík.
Anbjorn hovik hauge
"Turið, the mistress of the house, also takes up arms and is the mans equal."
There's also the story of the great female warrior Aud the Deep Minded, daughter of Ivar Vidfamne, who led the war that resulted in the fall of the Scanian empire, and its replacement by the Kingdom of the Swedes and the Western Goths, and the Kingdom of the Danes and the Eastern Goths.
In the north west of England there is a Town called Skelmersdale, supposedly named after a viking Skjaldmarr .
The news about the Birka grave is interesting and is going to open up some new discussion of Early Medieval Scandinavia. The grave was excavated by Hjalmar Stolpe in 1889. Ol’ Hjalmar noted the warrior trappings and assumed the body was male. Fairly logical for the time, I guess. He found a sword, an axe, a spear, battle-arrows, a seax, shields, and two horses- fairly butch grave goods. However., it has long been suspected that he was a she. The skeleton was rather gracile and it appeared that its owner stood about 5'6".
The main issue is probably going to be a reassessment of the known grave excavations. How many have been misinterpreted based on the expectations of the archaeologist? It may not necessarily upset the understanding of gender roles in Early Medieval Scandinavia. Several centuries and lots of different communities involved there-not easy to make accurate generalities. Whoever she was, she was someone special. My best guess, is she was fairly high ranking in her society-even without the warrior goods. Add that to the military aspect, she was apparently highly regarded. That was one expensive grave.
David H The only reason they had thought she was a "strategist" was due to a chess-like game found among her belongings. Furthermore, there was zero evidence of the skeleton and the body it belonged to having gone through the stress and wear from Viking Age warfare. She had no broken bones, severed limbs, etc etc. I do agree that this will not change gender norms, though. But with female warriors being such a small minority throughout history, it is not that surprising. You might enjoy this article.
norseandviking.blogspot.dk/2017/09/lets-debate-female-viking-warriors-yet.html?m=1
And the weapons... "Furthermore" you say, only to present facts that would further support the idea that she was a strategist, not directly involved in battle.
Why do you people try to apply semi-modern ideas about women as weaker to a society that did not have such ideas?
Fheed Pexx it is not a modern idea. It is an observation, one that anyone throughout the history could make. Why assume early medieval people were so much different from us?
What some folks are missing is that the Scandinavian warrior elite were larger people than many other contemporaneous tribes. The Birka warrior at 5'6" would have been larger than most continental European men of her time. It makes perfect sense that the Norse might have had women participate in battle, particularly when fighting tribes that outnumbered them, but whose men were smaller than Scandinavian women.
As a Swede I always wondered why Drengr (courageous man) has become the word Dräng which means a male farmhand. Could it be that farmhands would mockingly or encouragingly be called courageous?
Women of many cultures were expected to take up arms to either protect their homes or loved ones .Japaneses women trainied in the Naginata , spear and bow . And as you said although the excavation may not have been perfect ,due to the science at the time . When we see cultural , artistic , verbal and archaeological evidence lining up it tends to support the theory . I would also point out legal rights of women during the Nordic age and how they were able to own property and had legal standing . As well as the later German fighting manuals .
I think it wasn't the usual thing to do for women to be a warrior/fighter, but I also think that women who had it in them could be accepted in taking their place amongst the men.
Thank you Mr. Crawford. Very insightful
Very interesting Doctor Crawford, thank you for bringing your subject to a wide audience.
Vikings coming to England and intent of attacking Mercia in the early 900s would surely have encountered Æthelflæd, the warrior queen of the Mercians, a daughter of Alfred, who defeated three Viking armies at the head of her fighters, and won Derby, Leicester, and York from the Danelaw. So I suspect that it wasn't a radical concept for either side when circumstances permitted it.
Do you do any seminars about these subjects around the US?
If i am curious about the historical social structure/daily lives/ethnography of average Joes (not raiders or explorers) in pagan Scandinavia, which sources will you recommend?
Fascinating, thank you! 🌞
Consider this comment from a Roman historian named Marcus Borealus: "The women of the Celtic tribes are bigger and stronger than our Roman women. This is most likely due to their natures as well as their peculiar fondness for all things martial and robust. The flaxen haired maidens of the north are trained in sports and war while our gentle ladies are content to do their womanly duties and thus are less powerful than most young girls from Gaul and the hinterlands."
We have many comments like this from Roman soldiers about the Celtic tribes. Why should their northern counterparts be any different? In a culture where warlike, aggressive tendencies are desirable why wouldn't this be prevalent in women as well?
i agree completely.
squirrel435 Although history is filled with examples of female warriors, it still isnt as common as people fantasize it being. The woman found in this case has not given any indication that she was actually in battle (No broken bones, severed limbs, etc etc)
Anytime we make assumptions about things that occurred hundreds or thousands of years ago it can never be more than speculation. We'll never know for sure and I think most the time what we assume about the past says more about ourselves and our beliefs now than it does about what may have happened back then.
squirrel435 Well, there are assumptions and there is the scientific process. As I said, I have no doubt that were female warriors. I just doubt that it was as common as everyone makes it out to be. But yes, in this age of female empowerment, it is understandable that it would be blown out of proportion or at the very least, embellished.
Hostis Humani Generis to me its simply a matter of the amount of accepted female masculinity in a culture, as a counter point to all of the hysteria: "the norse may have loved a good badass but they had no stomach for a sissy." the martial art wing chun was invented by a woman in ancient china - this does not mean that wemen of the period were all crazy kungfu killers, the men certainly all weren't, it simply means that they were "allowed" to be. and thats at the route of all of this hysteria today, what is and is not "allowed" in society. and given what our own society was like in the 1800's, and through that the advent of christianity through the mid and early parts of the last millennium or so, most people definitely weren't "allowed" to be allot things.
This is great. I need to show this video to everyone who still doubts that Assassin’s Creed Valhalla’s female Viking protagonist is actually quite feasible because of the culture of the society in which she lives.
Dr Crawford have you considered writing novels. I really hope so. There are people writing on the subject that have minimun understanding on norse tradition.
There was a discussion about Oleg of Kiev and Orvar Oddr (I can't find the video now) and there's one thing that suddenly struck me so I just want to share this insane thought before I forget:
I was just curious what was real name and patronymic of Olga of Kiev (Helga ????dottir) but couldn't find any info about her father.
If we take that Viking age Norse people had tradition of naming their children after recently deceased relatives, can we at least assume what her father's name could be and maybe try to match it with some known figure.
"Sviatoslav"/"Saint+glory|fame", for instance, could be just a translation of combination of names Helgi/Oleg/"Saint" and Hrorik/Rurik/"Famed ruler", but could it be that it was taken from another Helgi than that who was a ruler of Rus'?
Maybe Helga's father's name was also Helgi? So could she be Helga Helgisdottir ?
Or maybe she was Helga Helgisdottir as precisely the daughter of *that* Helgi?
Of course it's just an insane amount of speculation, but it's also what it makes it insanely interesting to me :(
Great video- very enjoyable. I learned a new term- Drengar
I believe that the female Viking warrior you talked about is Signe. Swedish t.v had a documentary about her.
Around 7:30, you mentioned that the man who divorced his wife, and was attacked by her told his companion that the aattack was justified. This seems to be a contradictory reaction to a physical attack, if the man in question was 'drengiligr,' which got me wondering, is the man in that saga shown to be just kind of a putz., or is there more to that?
The main thrust of the question would be, is the guy just hapless, or would it have been considered un-drengiligr to attack a woman in response to an attack which she committed?
You so have to do a video on hnefatafl!!!!
Going off topic: Your left Lapel--Infantry?
Mr Crawford, can you tell me what makes "other sagas" "less realistic"?
i apologize if youve answered this in other videos.
It seems like many of the women I have encountered casually who take on this sort of 'drengr' role have been unmarried, divorced, or widowed - and often are depicted as having a different social role, when married. I'm curious if this is just a matter of skewed perspective. You mentioned one wife fighting her husband's enemies alongside him, in an ambush. What other examples of wifely women are there doing this? Is my suspicion this may be a matter of marital status unfounded, looking at a a broader array of materials?
well, consider also the Oslo ship was the property of 2 women. If 1 woman had significant grave goods, and the other 2 had a ship then it does show that this particular society allowed for a great deal more equality than places like the Mediterranean at the same time.
Are there any accounts of female warriors from sources other than the usual Norse ones?
I am Danish. Why would my forefathers have a word for these women - if they did not, somehow, exist...
Exactly.i am born and raised in norway but my ancestors came mainly from norway, denmark and sweden so i see no point in explaining to people that are not Scandinavian by blood how we and our ancestors lived if they are not open for that we where different from rest of the world
Have you heard about the massive grave finds in Eura, Finland? There was also a grave of a possible woman leader, she is called in finnish "Euran emäntä" - mistress of Eura. Could a women have been the highest leader of a viking age civilization? It would be interesting...
The sagas indicate that about the 7th century Aud the Deep Minded, the great grandmother of Ragnar Lodbrok. She has been called "the Hatshepsut of the Vikings", given that she was the one woman the sagas indicate as the most significant leader of her generation.
Finnish aren’t descendent of Vikings. Completely different blood.
As always, love it! Great job, you have proved me right. I knew their were Norse women that fought.
Yeah but it was not the norm and instead under irregular circumstances. It was more about being cornered in a situation, even then a child will take up arms.
There have always been women that fight throughout time and in the whole world. But they were almost exclusively exceptions. The role of warrior being "afforded" to men is a pretty straightforward consequence of biology, not societal norms. In fact, a woman taking up arms may be brave, but usually just as foolish.
It could be interesting to have a general video on the position of Norse women in society. Could a woman demand divorce? Did women inherit when their parents died? Did women run the farm while their men were abroad? etc.
To me the question becomes Freya? Wasn't she a war goddess? So it makes sense that there would be a few female warriors, also same with the Valkyries
And then someone like Lindybeige comes along and says it's impossible for her to have been a warrior and it's stupid for anybody to think she was because clearly it's just the grave of the people of a location and since women die there's obviously going to be some women in the graves. All of the weapons and high quality warrior items? No mention of them. I'm glad I saw your video today, Dr. Crawford. This isn't "proof" that it happened, and even if it did happen this doesn't mean it was incredibly common, but I do appreciate you discussing the actual discovery and the supporting evidence found both on site and in the eddas rather than dismissing it out of hand because it doesn't fit the classic image of Big Tough Viking Men(tm).
No one has neglected to mention the weapons in those graves. Quite the contrary, in fact. Weapons and armour are status items, and certainly any ruler would be buried with them - whether he or she ever fought or not. Weapons symbolize power and might, even up to modern times. Elizabeth I wore a cuirass and helmet at Tilbury, where she gave her famous speech - even though she was never going to fight herself. The presence of arms and armour in graves does not say "warrior", it says "status". Not all warriors got a warrior's burial, and being given a warrior's burial does not mean you ever fought.
@@Gilmaris That's really context dependent though. If they frequently find graves of women with other types of wealth and symbols of authority, such as jewelry, fine clothes, and keys, it's more likely that a woman buried with weapons actually was involved in fighting in some way. That may have involved fighting, or it may have involved a nonviolent leadership role. Either way, I think that it's just as erroneous to claim (with no direct evidence) that she was definitely not involved in fighting or warfare as it is to assume that she was definitely a soldier.
@@alexanderflack566 Jewelry and fine clothes are symbols of status, but not authority. Keys mark them as the housewife of the household, and thus an important status symbol, but does not symbolise authority beyond that. Case in point: keys are only ever found in women's graves. And the household key is part of the traditional female attire (bunad) even today. It's the key to the food stores. The man's outfit has a knife instead.
I had an unrelated question
How would you say Shield Maiden in modern Norwegian?
Skjoldmøy
You point out that warrior women were not looked upon disapprovingly by the Norse, and this is certainly true - but then again, I cannot think of a single example of stories relating to warrior women from _any_ culture which looked upon them disapprovingly. On the contrary, their prowess tends to be exaggerated. Take Joan of Arc, for instance - the French aren't ashamed of her, are they? Quite the opposite, they are most proud of her, and Joan of Arc is often praised as a warrior woman - even though by her own proud confession, she herself never fought, as she did not wish to jeopardise her soul.
The common denominator is that _individual_ women who fought as men were universally lauded and respected, regardless of culture, but the societies they came from nevertheless didn't think fighting was a woman's business, and looked down on women as a whole when considering fighting prowess. A case in point is Hervor: Why must she disguise herself as a man?
Women taking up arms isn't unusual. In medieval Britain and France is was part of a noble ladies job to take up arms if her husband was around. The War of the Roses, with the exception of Richard III, was fought between women.
There is one thing I think you missed here that is very important in this context and that is the upbringing of the children.
While it was for the most part the mother's role to "run the house" and also raising the children, both boys and girls went hunting, they fought and they played and trained with the common weapons that their father and mother used and they were familiar with.
so up to a certain point in their upbringing boys and girls did the same things, they played togheter and not seperate as in many cultures, and this in turn gave girls and later women at least the most basic of skills with common weapons.
If we then compare to other cultures at the time, we saw that boys and girls werre given very seperate and isolated ubringings from a very early age, and with these cultural differences in mind.
A christian soldier facing a norse woman dressed in leather and wielding an axe....to him it is a warrior, she even shows some skill, maybe quite a bit of skill.......but to herself and to her fellow norsemen she is nothing more than a "simple" house wife and mother.......
in the christian mind she was a warrior, when the christians later dictate history the mother who knew somewhat how to fight something wastly different than most christian women these woman in lack of a better trem became warriors.
However as said, a woman wo stuck to the traditional roles was not in any looked down upon and she had quite a bit of social "power", a woman choosing to do roles mostly considered male roles was also not looked down upn, in fact often the opposite.
so again, I think it is important that you distiguish between the woman who fights and knows how to and the woman soldier, both existed, but the latter in far less numbers
That's very interesting. It seems reasonable that in a subsistence culture, women might learn some of the martial arts by hunting game (archery) ax-throwing perhaps, or spear fishing, etc. Every once in a while individual is born with an unusual percentage of fast-twitch muscle fibers. For some unknown reason I've always had an unusual amount of upper body strength even though I trained as a ballet dancer. When I was young the girls had to participate in a general physical fitness test in certain grades. One of the tests was the "flexed arm hang" which was similar to a pull-up except somebody helped you up and you just stayed up there as long as possible. I was up there for about 63 seconds. The average was 2 or 3 seconds and the next closest competitor was 11 seconds. When I was an adult, I was at my sister-in-law's house and was playing fetch with the family german shepard. I would throw a semi-inflated football and the dog would bring it back. I finally turned to my husband and gave him the ball and said, "You throw it. I can't throw it any further than that." He said, "I can't throw it any further than that either." I said, "Oh, come on now." and laughed a bit. Then I turned to my brother-in-law and was getting ready to give the football to him, and he said. "I can't throw it any further than that either." I was very surprised to say the least.
this is still true to the modern world to a certain extent where its generally more acceptable for women to become more masculine or androgynous in the way they look or act on the other hand men being feminine is usually much more frowned upon by society
Funny how "dräng" in modern Swedish came to mean a male farmhand...
It makes perfect sense both for the time and place. When the men went off raiding who was left to protect the village? Old men, children old enough to fight even if they stood no match against a man, and women. The Celtic women were well known for their martial abilities, similarly the Sarmatians of Eastern Europe and then we get to the Nordic peoples.
But leaving all that aside, just go out into the rural parts of America or my old home Australia and you often found women on farms and ranches who can do all the tasks a man can do simply because a man could be away from home for days on end, so who's going to take care of the farm? The strict separation of men's and women's roles was encouraged by the church in the Middle Ages and romanticised from then on, hence the wilting Guinevere who ultimately gives into the desires of the flesh. While she was most likely a fictional figure, the point was being made that women should not fight. These stories served up a rather staid diet of pliant, weak women and strong men. It's only with the retreat of the church and the rise of humanism and scientific discovery that we're perhaps coming around full circle to an earlier time when men and women were equal.
Interesting video though, I have subscribed so I'll come back and watch some more once I get back from Copenhagen.
In japan, women of upper class households were expected to know how to fight. And the smaller frame and weaker(slightly) build of a woman was balanced out by the weapon known as a naginata.
B
Infantry officer eh?
There are towns in Normandy with female viking names ("Audr land", "Asfridr land"..), wich was usually the name of the viking earl whom owned this place.
I cannot say the exact %, and while it's nowhere near the 50%, i'd say around 10% of them. I will try to get a more accurate evaluation on the specific area of the pays de caux, by the sea by the seine.
So that would mean that around 10% of the viking earls at war were female. We cant really say about the % among the simple warriors.
But when it comes to vikings, that is to say specifically the warriors, Normandy archelogy may become usefull, as the norse people populating that land were all warriors.
it was probably a lot less than 10%, might 0.1-1.0 at top. We have only found about 2 graves with female ''warriors'' in and there are not 100% true they were warriors. It can be the father, husband or brothers. If you think rational, why would the Norsemen let their families fight in raids, when they had a kid to look after or to protect their homes. No man at that time would have wanted the mother of there child or sister to die in battle. But females did learn to fight, they were the last defender, but there were probably so a small % that went rading with the men. And if there were about 10% of the army surely the franks, English, Scottish and Irish would have written that down. That they had an army of females.
@@galenbjorn443 a female leader may also be more likely to lend their name to a place. If it is rare people will remember the name and it will become the place name because it is remarkable.
If you'd like to refute research you don't like, it's best to do it with facts and evidence, not your feelings. Here's some useful examples.
Interview w/the first author: www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/09/once-viking-warrior-was-revealed-be-woman-some-began-question-her-battle-bona-fides
Skeleton ignites debate over whether women were Viking warriors: www.sciencenews.org/article/skeleton-ignites-debate-over-whether-women-were-viking-warriors
New evidence of Viking warrior women might not be what it seems: arstechnica.com/science/2017/09/have-we-finally-found-hard-evidence-for-viking-warrior-women/
not a bad looker. i'd follow her anywhere. haha. thank yew
There already exists a mythological warrior race of women....the valkyries. So given how prominent shieldmaidens are throughout Nordic texts, it surely isn't that far fetched to believe they really existed? Otherwise, why would they just not be labelled as valkyries?
Couldn't it just have been a female Jarl (if that was a thing) or just a highly decorated women maybe even royalty?
I suspect that there were three patterns of gender roles that existed in ancient Proto-Indo-European tribes. Some were matriarchal, with women taking on protective warrior roles and men concentrating on productive work. (The Greek myth of the Amazons indicates that this was the oldest type, which has some archaeological support.) Secondly, there were patriarchal tribes who gender-reversed that to what has been considered normative in more recent times. The third group that might logically have arisen were tribes where both males and females were warriors, and conquered people were employed to perform productive labor. It seems to me that at least some groups among the Norse culture represented a vestige of the third pattern.
It seems that it was dishonorable for a man to assault a woman or a child; and would go out of his way to avoid assaulting them. This is unlike the show "Vikings" where males regularly engage female warriors in combat. I don't doubt female "Shield Maidens" existed, but like a "hand maiden" she was an assistant. I imagine she helped the warriors as a squire would, taking the risks of death on the battlefield just as a squire, powder monkey or drummer boy. If an injured combatant was caught handout by a "Shield Maiden" he could expect an inglourous death at her hands.
Battle is different than just beating your wife. This was never the case when it came to the raids as many women were slain as well.. if a woman is swinging an ace or sword at you in battle a man would swing back. Obviously the gender role for women changed after Christianity took place.
@Berserking Bishop not for women.. women had way more rights before Christianity came in.
It`s important to remember that statistic gender dimorphism does not mean you can`t have individual outliers which why you can easily find tall solidly built women and men who are rather short. Physiologically at least there is no reason why there could`nt have been minority of elite Norse women who were warriors.
The Amazons were real. The Greeks misinterpreted their societies and social rules. They weren't matriarchal but they were matrilineal, this was misinterpreted as killing male children by the Greeks. Women as a matter of pragmatic survival were trained to use both bow and sword. The Greeks misinterpreted women being able to defend themselves as women ruling men as harshly as the Greeks ruled their women.
I just found out that I share DNA with her! How cool is that? Thank you for sharing this information. Now, I am on a quest to find out more about my ancestor.
Then we are related.i got haplogroup T2b too
Yes, I am as well! She created my maternal line
Celtic female Warriors existed
Norse women Warriors
no doubt did too
i'm sure other cultures also...
common sense says it was
exceptional ..related
to Chiefly High Status by choice
or High Bravery or
Need of the Family or Tribe
Dreng in Danish means boy ... nowadays x
"Dräng" in Swedish is a young man working on a farm. For reasons of the non-mechanized agricultural society no longer being in existence, I assume that the word is rarely used today -- but a very common word and activity just a century ago or so. By the way, his boss would be the "husbonde" (the male farmer) . That's the same word as "husband". It literally means "house farmer", or historically more properly "house male farmer", borrowed into Old English a millenium ago or so from Old Norse "husbondi". Source for etymology of "husband": The American Heritage Dictionary
Yep, I was thinking the same which also makes me doubt this whole women being warriors. To be a 'Drengr' to me is then pretty clearly tied to the male sex or not? I could be wrong, but 'Dreng' sure is close to 'Drengr'
While this is indeed a testament to a more expanded access to upward social mobility for women, this is still indicative of a very unequal valuing of the two gender roles in Nordic societies at the time. The female role is inherently "lower" than the male role, as demonstrated by the fact that the "lower" female can adopt the "higher" male role, but not the other way around.
So, while we can and should appreciate the degree to which women could be valued for rising to parity with their male peers, we shouldn't make the mistake of viewing the Old Nordic peoples as being "feminist," at least in any way that resembles 20th and 21st century feminism.
Jackson, like I often say, your channel is red with gold. I've learned so much, and when I can afford to become a patron for any internet creators, you'll be in my top 5, no doubt about it.
There is a lot in this I found very doubtful. First I am little surprised that Slavic and Germanic languages are bundles. They are quite far. English is way closer then any Slavic is.
But to go to the topic.
The problem with this find is to me not at all the gender of the skeleton. As far as I know here in Sweden there's been a consensus that this is a woman since mid 70ties. The problem with this, and why I am surprised a peer view accepted it, is the link between the skeleton and the grave. The skeleton is from one of roughly 4500 graves in the Birka area. Loads of them was dug up in the 1880 with methods none should accept today. The roof was blown of the grave with dynamite and then paid diggers dug up normally 2 graves a day. Sometimes the archaeologist was there. Sometimes not. How the diggers cared of the stuff we don't know. Even the archaeologist notes are often gone or never existed. And in they 1880ties skeletons was just bones without any possibility to tell us stuff so their handling was so so. At best. Later in museum there was miasplacingw so parts got lost. I have no doubt that any court would say no no to this as evidence because of the problems of the link between the grave and the skeleton tested. If this was a normal skeleton I couldn't care less, in the same way I don't care of somebody cheats the last 500 meters in climbing Mount Everest. But this I supposed to be unique and then it has to be solid. To me this is much of a fundraise rather then good science. A student of the same professor who was head of this in a text by one of her students agrees that of the children skeletons we can with roughly 25% not even say if they where buried inside or outside the city wall. But with this extraordinary skeleton the link between the grave and skeleton is conveniently not mentioned.
In the Swedish debate both in general and among scholars I have seen zero doubt of female warriors. They question has always been how rare, not if they existed.
Also the attention to the game surprises me. It's a simple and crude artwork. I can not see that this should be either an elite item or designed for a elite. As far as I found out, the game seems to had been quite commonly played and was spread even to the British island by vikings. Rules got lost but a very similar or the same game was preserved by the Sami population of Sweden and was documented in the 1700hundreds.
So yes. It is an interesting grave and finds. But it has loads of problems surrounding any extraordinarily conclusions because of horrible handling of the findings. Link below is to the catalogue of the items. Be ware that the drawing of the grave is way younger then the opening of the grave. K
mis.historiska.se/mis/sok/kontext.asp?kid=786
My little sister owns a gun and a chess bored. So clearly she must be an army ranger and a high ranking general
If you're a female planet....Venus... you can do what you want...
I find it almost funny how many well respected scientists and archeologists seem to argue against the evidence, both in regards to the female warrior found but also to other aspects of viking/scandinavian history. For example the Goths and Visigoths that are refered to as germanic tribes where records show that romans clearly documented that they where from southern scandinavia they just discard that completly. I mean come on, we have “Gotland” with the city Visby for example, and areas such as götaland and östra götaland (ostrogoths) in Sweden. In many more cases it seems like the evidence is staring them straight in the face and they just blatantly ignores it. I think there was other mentions of like scandia as an island when in fact it’s what southern sweden is called. Many of these things are not directly connected to vikings because it happened a few hundred years before the so called ”viking age” but to me just going through wikipedia it seems pretty absurd what conclusions these guys draws from the available findings.
Celtic female Warriors existed
Norse women Warriors
no doubt did too
i'm sure other cultures also...
common sense says it was
an exceptional thing related
to Chiefly connections by choice
or High Bravery or
Need of the Family or Tribe
Birka is my DNA ancestor.
Yes, Dr. Jesch has posted detracting the findings. Lauren Southern discusses that here: ruclips.net/video/DLUMINLTNLE/видео.html
Maybe the woman was not an actual warrior, but the weapons are merely an indication of high status for said woman.
Yes, this has been theorized, problem was that high status women would normally only carry one inherited male item with them into the grave, e.g. a dagger. This one had a full armour set and several different weapons.
It's interesting that Jackson is unfamiliar with modern thoughts on the Amazons--the discovery of female warrior graves goes back 20 years I think--I guess that's the problem with being a specialist, you get so zeroed in on your own subject you lose touch with everything else..
In 1997, Princes Diana and Mother Teresa were each given a state funeral. The coffins of both women were carried on gun carriages, though that reflected no part of their lives. During the ceremony for Mother Teresa, the Indian Government was at pains to point out that the gun carriage being used was the same one used to carry the body of Mahatma Gandi, a man of peace. State funerals were designed for politicians and generals and did not accurately reflect the lives of women or men who advocate peace. If a woman had risen to lead her community the dictates of a high status funeral may have called for sword, axe ect., even if she had never been in battle. If we still have such inconsistencies today, why not the Vikings?
Yes, but Princes Diana and Mother Teresa weren't buried with guns or cannons as grave goods. People in the viking age were buried with their personal belongings and stuff they may need or want in the afterlife. That could even include ships, farm animals and slaves. Generally you would bury them with the things they used an liked in life.
If only there were a link to the study, but that's really kool shield maidens look more legit historically.
Kevin Smith it's really trashy science. Also, you can totally look up whatever you want?
Like Judith Jesch, that's a place to start.
The study is linked to in the video description, click Show More:
Original article announcing the discovery: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.23308/full
Regardless of the veracity of their findings. The Thor-aboo neckbeards losing it over the mere IDEA of a m'lady holding a sword has been hilarious
Cody Carter Well, it clearly wasnt the norm and far from it. So, why would anyone be upset? With the exception of you, of course.
Asgeir _, lol even the vikings would have thought your ideas were outdated and weird.
Holy cringe, dude
Fheed Pexx Sorry, but it is the truth. Women, just like today, are a small minority on the battlefield. In this context and even with this find, there is no evidence that points to this being a norm.
I guess it depends on what one means by "norm." If 10% of Norse women were trained as warriors, that's not a huge amount, but it would be a norm in the society. Or 2%, or 25%. Seems to me that finding out that the skeleton is female just adds credence to the sagas. No one is saying all of a sudden that every Norse woman was a Viking.
The bones show 0 sign of battle. They could have also been a merchant. Or inherited the goods. Could have just been very wealthy.
If someone can find 100%, irrefutable proof, fantastic. But until then, it's guessing and assuming. Sorry to rain on the parade, but looking at grave good and the sex of a person isn't the end all argument.
Like I said, find irrefutable proof, and I'm all for it. Until then...
How very appropriate this video right after the Drengskapr (Viking Manliness) video. I'm entertained by modern dudes justifying and distorting strict gender roles when evidence, such as the Birka grave, shows otherwise.
Shin Kansen
You mean most modern dudes in the Middle East and in China? Basically just the East. Also, it's important to note that Western societies are very much founded on Eastern ones. This especially includes Christianity, Judaism and Islam when it comes to gender roles.
Shin Kansen Except for the fact that the woman they found had no indication she was actually in battle. No one is debating that there have been and are female warriors, but it is far from the norm so it really debunks nothing as far as your "Gender Studies" goes.
Shin Kansen norseandviking.blogspot.dk/2017/09/lets-debate-female-viking-warriors-yet.html?m=1
'Modern dudes', you seem like a very pretentious person. Gross.
Women were not warriors.
Except when they were.
Gaius Baltar But most were not. The gender norms havent changed just because a a woman's grave was found with weapons.
Hostis Humani Generis Has anyone claimed MOST women were warriors? No. So you don't have to invent claims to argue against.
A woman buried with expensive things does not prove she was a warrior. Women were not warriors, basic human biology will tell you that. Shieldmaidens did not actively fight in the battles. They were SHIELDMAIDENS, they were supporting the actual fighting men.
Spjutfisk 123 The experts on the subject say it does. I'm going to take their word over your half-baked ideas about human biology. You're neither an anthropologist nor an archeologist, so your opinions on the matter carry absolutely zero credibility.
There is a lot in this I found very doubtful. First I am little surprised that Slavic and Germanic languages are bundles. They are quite far. English is way closer then any Slavic is.
But to go to the topic.
The problem with this find is to me not at all the gender of the skeleton. As far as I know here in Sweden there's been a consensus that this is a woman since mid 70ties. The problem with this, and why I am surprised a peer view accepted it, is the link between the skeleton and the grave. The skeleton is from one of roughly 4500 graves in the Birka area. Loads of them was dug up in the 1880 with methods none should accept today. The roof was blown of the grave with dynamite and then paid diggers dug up normally 2 graves a day. Sometimes the archaeologist was there. Sometimes not. How the diggers cared of the stuff we don't know. Even the archaeologist notes are often gone or never existed. And in they 1880ties skeletons was just bones without any possibility to tell us stuff so their handling was so so. At best. Later in museum there was miasplacingw so parts got lost. I have no doubt that any court would say no no to this as evidence because of the problems of the link between the grave and the skeleton tested. If this was a normal skeleton I couldn't care less, in the same way I don't care of somebody cheats the last 500 meters in climbing Mount Everest. But this I supposed to be unique and then it has to be solid. To me this is much of a fundraise rather then good science. A student of the same professor who was head of this in a text by one of her students agrees that of the children skeletons we can with roughly 25% not even say if they where buried inside or outside the city wall. But with this extraordinary skeleton the link between the grave and skeleton is conveniently not mentioned.
In the Swedish debate both in general and among scholars I have seen zero doubt of female warriors. They question has always been how rare, not if they existed.
Also the attention to the game surprises me. It's a simple and crude artwork. I can not see that this should be either an elite item or designed for a elite. As far as I found out, the game seems to had been quite commonly played and was spread even to the British island by vikings. Rules got lost but a very similar or the same game was preserved by the Sami population of Sweden and was documented in the 1700hundreds.
So yes. It is an interesting grave and finds. But it has loads of problems surrounding any extraordinarily conclusions because of horrible handling of the findings. Link below is to the catalogue of the items. Be ware that the drawing of the grave is way younger then the opening of the grave. K
mis.historiska.se/mis/sok/kontext.asp?kid=786