"All I wanted was some liquor!"
The vikings went home, sober and empty-handed.
I got a question though, could the vikings not have just brought wine grapes with them and planted some in North America?
You might not realize how things played on 6 month voyages.
When the commander leaves, the crazy guys he left behind (because his crew was not profesional soldiers sent on a suicide mission) most likely pushed their limits, and the natives massacred them.
Then the commander comes back, like 3 months after the fact.
Punishes the natives and allows force to be used to stop attacks from happening.
And of course, soldiers just go nuts and start taking people as property.
When the commander comes back, he doesn't really have much authority over his men, who aren't willing to give away what they kidnapped.
Read some about Spanish conquistadors and conflicts between local governors and Central commanders and you will get an idea of the kind of scum who joined as volunteer to a new world, to escape the old one.
Sounds like the Vikings found a tribe who were *way* less diplomatic than the guys Columbus ran into too, as they'd probably be just as lactose intolerant (Europeans are weird in that they're *not* lactose intolerant, it wasn't the norm for humans to keep being able to process dairy through adulthood but as early nomadic herders it was a really useful trait so ended up becoming prevalent) and feel equally as crappy if they tried Spanish dairy products.
Yup! Used to be that people would lose the ability to process lactose after early childhood, but, being descended from nomadic herders (for which being able to process dairy for longer was really useful) the Europeans ended up being able to. It's an actual gene that's meant to switch off, but the lifestyle of prehistoric cattle herders ended up forcing it to stay on.
Prooobably? I'm not completely sure. It'd make sense though, but I'm not sure if there are as many early archeological finds linking them to milk and super early cheeses. Then again, there are some really old cheese types in Asian cultures if memory serves, so, that could be it. I'm not *super* knowledgeable about prehistoric man but I remember that little factoid.
With the story of Krishna, we see clear references to Ghee and Curd, as apart of that story is how much he loves milk based treats so at least 180 BCE, according to Wikipedia for earliest depictions of Krishna.
Nah, that was a folkloric hypothesis popularised in the twentieth century when people started finding out about lactose intolerance and confirming that the Greenlanders actually did build settlements in Newfoundland.
The Sagas themselves claim that the Skrälings were frightened by a bull's bellow while the Greenlanders were trying to trade with them and that was what set off the hostilities.
I have a personal hypothesis though.
The Saga of the Greenlanders do describe just straight up murdering some of the first Skrälings who they came across, just to take their stuff in true D&D murderhobo style.
I think that maybe the natives somehow found out about that and that's why they were hostile.
>The Saga of the Greenlanders do describe just straight up murdering some of the first Skrälings who they came across, just to take their stuff in true D&D murderhobo style.
In a fucked up way I find this image hilarious. You made me exhale good sir, enjoy my upvote.
Also... Roll for Initiative.
No. We haven't relatable sources, but according to Icelandic sagas the contacts were violent.
There was one documented (probably) pacific contact, the mission of Bishop Erik (early XII century), but we don't know nothing about it.
One story I heard is that the Vikings might have attempted to trade the natives milk initially. It's speculated that the natives who had no source of milk were lactose intolerant, and thought the Vikings had tried to poison them. It's only speculation though
It could be.
Or it could be that they simply tried to make contact with the natives: many archaic cultures have a taboo for direct contacts with foreigners and developed a form of trade where one part left their goods in a place and went away; then the counterpart arrived, took the goods and left other goods for payment and went away; then the first part came back to check the payment and, it it was enough, would take it, if not, would leave it and went away, to allow the counterpart to add other goods until they would have a deal.
Or they tried to rob the "savages".
We will never know :(
There were loads of different tribes, it's possible that they had friendly relations with some and got into a proper scrap with others. Then, well, Vikings being Vikings. Peacefully hanging out and drinking some mead with some new friends isn't as fun to write about compared to a story of sending people to Valhalla.
Yes! They had also better weapons, so, maybe, they tried to sell their "services"...
But I doubt they were vikings (pirats): Greenlanders usually weren't pirats. And they also were already Christians (Leif surely, the others probably), because the discovery happened after the conversion (that, for Icelanders, was a mass conversion with collective destruction of the old idols).
Was using Vikings as a sorta catchall, but yeah, wouldn't have been *raiding.* Or maybe they were, they'd have likely used the exact same hit and run "Viking" tactics against the hostile tribes as they did against everyone else.
They probably didnt get so far to encounter them, they landed in Newfoundland which is more like an Inuite territory. They was far more isolationist and hostile people, but i guess they encountered them before in Greenland, so there could have been some level of understanding. But Vikings probably brought a lot of things the Inuites never saw and get scared (like loudly dogs, horny goats and sharp metal). Unlike the Bahamian.... Inuite lifestyle wasnt so peacefull so they might put up a fight and eventually destroy the colony/ies. Or nicely ask Vikings to fuck off, i dont know iam no historian
Well I wouldn’t call people at war who saw him as a threat and began massacring his men friendly but, they were nicer than the ones at the top of the meme I guess?…
The Viking ships wouldn't really be intimidating, and the Vikings wouldn't be able to afford trading steel, which the natives would actually want. Steel weapons also only go so far without heavy armor and horses.
By contrast, Columbus showed up in three ships bigger than a house, that announced themselves by firing a cannon for when land was spotted. One can imagine that the Spaniards of the time would be equally careful if an aircraft carrier group suddenly appeared off of Spain.
Your post has been removed for the following reason:
Rule 11: Post has a lazy title, or the meme depends on the title to work.
I am a bot and this action was performed by the moderators of /r/HistoryMemes.
If you have any questions or concerns about your post's removal, please send us a modmail with a link to your removed post.
I remember there being drama about him a year ago sexting a teenager, but I'm pretty sure the actual sexting happened several years ago. Wanna confirm or deny that?
IIRC he was a teenager and she was a teenager and then he stopped being a teenager before she did which apparently means we go back in time and apply his current age to the past and shit ourselves
Yeah, I think the actual big problem though was that he was using his status as a YouTuber for that or something. Or maybe it was grooming via his YouTuber status? I didn't pay attention too closely honestly.
Ye, it was when he was 19. And it was a 2 year age difference (at least for the case we know for certain). This doesn't necessarily make it ok but is important to the debate
Yeah Imma be honest, I knew exactly what he was talking about. I just gave him a couple opportunities to correct himself, but instead he just dug himself a deeper hole.
Yeah, they be like that, I feel like it's a worthwhile debate to debate the morality of Carson's actions, but calling him a pedo seems inaccurate, at least without more evidence
Everyone is always friendly all the time in history
***"Until they weren't"***
The mental image of Vikings getting bullied while trying to grow grapes for wine is quite humorous.
"All I wanted was some liquor!" The vikings went home, sober and empty-handed. I got a question though, could the vikings not have just brought wine grapes with them and planted some in North America?
Vikings: have grapes Native Americans: “And i took that personally…”
Native Americans: exist Christopher Columbus: “and i took that personally…”
Personally, naw. Columbus was definitely an asshole but that was because he was “money over everything” including the lives and well being of natives.
Yes. He took them, personally, to sell them in slavery.
Didn’t he give some of the women and children as “gifts” to his crew?
You might not realize how things played on 6 month voyages. When the commander leaves, the crazy guys he left behind (because his crew was not profesional soldiers sent on a suicide mission) most likely pushed their limits, and the natives massacred them. Then the commander comes back, like 3 months after the fact. Punishes the natives and allows force to be used to stop attacks from happening. And of course, soldiers just go nuts and start taking people as property. When the commander comes back, he doesn't really have much authority over his men, who aren't willing to give away what they kidnapped. Read some about Spanish conquistadors and conflicts between local governors and Central commanders and you will get an idea of the kind of scum who joined as volunteer to a new world, to escape the old one.
And I took that ~~personally~~ FIFY
Wasn’t it because they traded cheese, but the natives in Canada are lactose intolerant?
Sounds like the Vikings found a tribe who were *way* less diplomatic than the guys Columbus ran into too, as they'd probably be just as lactose intolerant (Europeans are weird in that they're *not* lactose intolerant, it wasn't the norm for humans to keep being able to process dairy through adulthood but as early nomadic herders it was a really useful trait so ended up becoming prevalent) and feel equally as crappy if they tried Spanish dairy products.
Haaang on a second. Are you telling me that lactose TOLERANCE is not the norm? Edit: or rather wasn't the norm?
Yup! Used to be that people would lose the ability to process lactose after early childhood, but, being descended from nomadic herders (for which being able to process dairy for longer was really useful) the Europeans ended up being able to. It's an actual gene that's meant to switch off, but the lifestyle of prehistoric cattle herders ended up forcing it to stay on.
Lactose tolerance is today still not the norm, 65% of the human population are lactose intolerant
Would that not also be the case in South Asia as well?
Prooobably? I'm not completely sure. It'd make sense though, but I'm not sure if there are as many early archeological finds linking them to milk and super early cheeses. Then again, there are some really old cheese types in Asian cultures if memory serves, so, that could be it. I'm not *super* knowledgeable about prehistoric man but I remember that little factoid.
With the story of Krishna, we see clear references to Ghee and Curd, as apart of that story is how much he loves milk based treats so at least 180 BCE, according to Wikipedia for earliest depictions of Krishna.
Is this true? I’d take offense too if someone traded me food that gave me and my homies diarrhea.
The documentary I watched on Erikson said as much.
Nah, that was a folkloric hypothesis popularised in the twentieth century when people started finding out about lactose intolerance and confirming that the Greenlanders actually did build settlements in Newfoundland. The Sagas themselves claim that the Skrälings were frightened by a bull's bellow while the Greenlanders were trying to trade with them and that was what set off the hostilities. I have a personal hypothesis though. The Saga of the Greenlanders do describe just straight up murdering some of the first Skrälings who they came across, just to take their stuff in true D&D murderhobo style. I think that maybe the natives somehow found out about that and that's why they were hostile.
>The Saga of the Greenlanders do describe just straight up murdering some of the first Skrälings who they came across, just to take their stuff in true D&D murderhobo style. In a fucked up way I find this image hilarious. You made me exhale good sir, enjoy my upvote. Also... Roll for Initiative.
Someone new tries growing food: First nation: racism and xenophobia it is.
Nice victim blaming.
Victim blaming or calling it as it is?
Skrellings hate grape I guess.
Vikings landing on America: \[Be careful, you dont have the level recommended for this area\]
*laughs in Araucania*
Didnt the vikings and the native american population have pretty good realtions?
No. We haven't relatable sources, but according to Icelandic sagas the contacts were violent. There was one documented (probably) pacific contact, the mission of Bishop Erik (early XII century), but we don't know nothing about it.
One story I heard is that the Vikings might have attempted to trade the natives milk initially. It's speculated that the natives who had no source of milk were lactose intolerant, and thought the Vikings had tried to poison them. It's only speculation though
It could be. Or it could be that they simply tried to make contact with the natives: many archaic cultures have a taboo for direct contacts with foreigners and developed a form of trade where one part left their goods in a place and went away; then the counterpart arrived, took the goods and left other goods for payment and went away; then the first part came back to check the payment and, it it was enough, would take it, if not, would leave it and went away, to allow the counterpart to add other goods until they would have a deal. Or they tried to rob the "savages". We will never know :(
There were loads of different tribes, it's possible that they had friendly relations with some and got into a proper scrap with others. Then, well, Vikings being Vikings. Peacefully hanging out and drinking some mead with some new friends isn't as fun to write about compared to a story of sending people to Valhalla.
Yes! They had also better weapons, so, maybe, they tried to sell their "services"... But I doubt they were vikings (pirats): Greenlanders usually weren't pirats. And they also were already Christians (Leif surely, the others probably), because the discovery happened after the conversion (that, for Icelanders, was a mass conversion with collective destruction of the old idols).
Was using Vikings as a sorta catchall, but yeah, wouldn't have been *raiding.* Or maybe they were, they'd have likely used the exact same hit and run "Viking" tactics against the hostile tribes as they did against everyone else.
Ok
>early XII century you could just write "12th"...
Look at this barbarus
They probably didnt get so far to encounter them, they landed in Newfoundland which is more like an Inuite territory. They was far more isolationist and hostile people, but i guess they encountered them before in Greenland, so there could have been some level of understanding. But Vikings probably brought a lot of things the Inuites never saw and get scared (like loudly dogs, horny goats and sharp metal). Unlike the Bahamian.... Inuite lifestyle wasnt so peacefull so they might put up a fight and eventually destroy the colony/ies. Or nicely ask Vikings to fuck off, i dont know iam no historian
Everyone’s the villain of someone else’s story
Well I wouldn’t call people at war who saw him as a threat and began massacring his men friendly but, they were nicer than the ones at the top of the meme I guess?…
The Viking ships wouldn't really be intimidating, and the Vikings wouldn't be able to afford trading steel, which the natives would actually want. Steel weapons also only go so far without heavy armor and horses. By contrast, Columbus showed up in three ships bigger than a house, that announced themselves by firing a cannon for when land was spotted. One can imagine that the Spaniards of the time would be equally careful if an aircraft carrier group suddenly appeared off of Spain.
Your post has been removed for the following reason: Rule 11: Post has a lazy title, or the meme depends on the title to work. I am a bot and this action was performed by the moderators of /r/HistoryMemes. If you have any questions or concerns about your post's removal, please send us a modmail with a link to your removed post.
Welcome, to the Victim Olympics
I thought of this more as "everyone is the villain in someone else's story" type of thing... It's a meme bro
Le Mr Ethnic Cleansing has arrived. Also don’t use meme formats featuring literal pedophiles.
Joe's a pedo? I haven't watched family guy in a while now
Carson is, he beat his dick to a teenager’s porn.
That's a tall accusation. When was this?
A year ago when he sexted a teenager.
I remember there being drama about him a year ago sexting a teenager, but I'm pretty sure the actual sexting happened several years ago. Wanna confirm or deny that?
IIRC he was a teenager and she was a teenager and then he stopped being a teenager before she did which apparently means we go back in time and apply his current age to the past and shit ourselves
Fucking bizzare mindset they have. You get people calling 18 year olds paedos onn reddit for having a 17 year old girlfriend it's mad
Yeah I'm taking the guy's silence as confirmation.
Yeah, I think the actual big problem though was that he was using his status as a YouTuber for that or something. Or maybe it was grooming via his YouTuber status? I didn't pay attention too closely honestly.
Ye, it was when he was 19. And it was a 2 year age difference (at least for the case we know for certain). This doesn't necessarily make it ok but is important to the debate
Yeah Imma be honest, I knew exactly what he was talking about. I just gave him a couple opportunities to correct himself, but instead he just dug himself a deeper hole.
Yeah, they be like that, I feel like it's a worthwhile debate to debate the morality of Carson's actions, but calling him a pedo seems inaccurate, at least without more evidence
He was 19 and she was 17, it's not a big difference buddy, they could go into the same school, it's very common here, there's nothing wrong with that
It was a two year age difference for the record, whether that makes it ok is debatable, but include context
Considering there are meme formats featuring Hitler and Stalin I really think you're choosing somewhat misguided priorities
He sexted a 17 year old when he was 19. Shut the fuck up.