The sensation went unnoticed. But how she was needed! I have no doubt that soon it will move into all textbooks in the form of a dogma, a postulate that is not subject to doubt. Let's take a sensible look at the "sensational discovery". First, we look:
How did Estonian scientists determine the ship's ownership? What is the difference between a Viking boat and a Rus boat?
Pomeranian boat.
And what about the Novgorod and Pleskava (Pskov) plows that did not please them?
Novgorod plow.
Who and when was able to convince everyone that the Vikings buried the dead right along with the ships? Does anyone think of burying a tanker with a tank now? Maybe the ancient Estonians had combat drakkars at the price of a pine coffin? How many more ships have been dug out “LIKE” in the direction of the Milky Way? And I have no doubt that the error is plus minus 10 -20 degrees, but is it really important for a sensation? Wouldn't find a reason to tie it to the Milky Way, tied it to the direction of seasonal migration of ducks and geese, or something else.
Forty dead in one boat can mean anything, including a towed vehicle with a load of 200 that sank in a storm, ran aground, or crashed on coastal reefs.
Promotional video:
And the main thing … Why exactly "Vikings"? Why not FSB officers? After all, what does the word "viking" mean? Let's write in Latin, we get "VIKING".
And if you read it carefully, what happens? Exactly!
"King VI" (vi - king). those. the same Charles the sixth, the Gallic prince, nicknamed the Mad, who lived and worked already in the fourteenth century.
Charles VI.
In addition to the fact that he looks like the current chairman of Russia, the sixth king became famous for being very strong (he broke a horse shoe with his hands) and was very militant in disposition. I walked around the neighborhood with my fellow brigadiers, and then I did not touch anyone there, then I didn’t touch anyone there. So the legend of the bloody and fierce detachment remained in the memory of the folk. Just like the "VI-KING" SS division.
We will never know who was the first translator from the Viking language into the modern one, but if Erik Rudy (Erich the red-haired) would have resurrected now, he would have been greatly amazed that he was recorded in the Vikings. This is how historical myths come about.
What kind of a great archaeologist do you need to be in order to calculate the route of the expedition, the purpose of visiting the island, and even its result using the remains of rusty nails? I would have such abilities. A millionaire would already be. One cannot help but recall an old anecdote about French, English and German archaeologists.
The task is to determine the age of the skull from the excavation. French: - "from three hundred to five hundred years!.. Englishman: -" 350-400 years. Former Gestapo: - "357 years, four months and six days. He confessed himself."
Well, there are no words at all. They sailed to ask for water, otherwise I want to eat so much that there is nowhere to spend the night, and at the same time the ships dragged 300 meters from the water. No, what do these archaeologists think? Maybe they themselves will try to drag the ships three hundred meters away, so that they can be made into a kind of fortress, and all for the sake of replenishing food supplies. Yes, while they are pulling these colossals, they themselves will become a stew for the hospitable inhabitants of Saaremaa.
Did it ever occur to anyone that the island simply did not exist at that time? About five hundred years ago, Saaremaa was an archipelago of several small rocky uninhabited islands. There could be no food there, except for the eggs of seabirds. Therefore, most likely, the boat trivially broke away from the towing cable and crashed against the stones. And what a wild fantasy about a thousand people! Another would describe the tattoos on their terrible faces of the attacking ancient Estonians, it would be just like in a crappy "Hulllywood" action movie.
Who did they say this for? Hunting falcons? Where? In the sea? Did the Viking marines play falconry at their leisure?
Maybe I missed something in school in history lessons, but try to convince me that this is possible. I cannot find any intelligible arguments. Well, it does not fit into my head the fact that in a military campaign on a fragile boat, where every gram of cargo can be registered hunting falcons. You are either a warrior who will be fed by a peasant or a hunter. Combining this is very much unrealistic in a sea voyage on a boat that is not able to survive even a two-point storm.
Long ship on the rough.
The people were armed to the teeth, which means they were not fishermen or idle tourists from the oligarchs. The falcons were either a trophy or ended up in the boat later, but not because there were five cool cones there, who allowed themselves the luxury of falconry during a military campaign.
What made them (the archaeologists) so convinced that the boat was sailing? Direction of nails buried in the ground? But what were the signs that could determine this? Are traces of the mast found? But there is not a word about this, and since there are no material arguments, then it is high time to include the "correct" ones necessary for traditional history, even if they run counter to common sense. It turns out to be an absurd situation in which the very fact of using sails on plows, boats, drakkars, knorrs, "Kazanka", whatever you call them for the sake of political ambitions, has not been proven so far, but the statements that sails were used for 50 years before the established date is declared a sensation. Where is science then?
And you know, after all, not a single drakkar has survived to this day. Don't believe me? Say that several pieces have already been excavated, and there is even a museum in Oslo. So, at such a pace, the found nails will soon be exhibited in Tallinn, which will already be a whole ship with a dragon's head, the inscription “EESTI OODIIN”, and onlookers will believe. that in front of them is a Viking ship, and as usual, no one will pay attention to the word "RECONSTRUCTION" as usual.
So it turns out that everything that historians know about the Vikings is idle fictions based on populism and the desire to prove the existence of something that does not exist.
“Ah, in Pskov they dug up a buckle with the image of a bearded and mustachioed man! Like the Vikings came to trade with them!
What do you want? Before the widespread introduction of razors in the 19th century, all normal men had beards. That is why it is absurd to talk about ancient Greek sculpture, where the men are all clean-shaven. There were no razors then, and they could not be shaved in the "minus eyelids", this is an obvious fact, why is it not taken into account? But now, if a mustachioed bearded, then a Viking.
In fact, all the Pomor tribes from Novaya Zemlya to the British Isles led a similar lifestyle, had common features in culture and approximately the same level of technology. And the sails on the northern seas appeared at about the same time. At the time when the production of linen and hemp fabrics was put on an industrial machine tool basis. Agree, to weave 450 m2 by hand on one sail is a very, very troublesome and expensive business, which means that there can be practically no talk of a massive sailing fleet in the eighth century. And the practicality of using such sails is a big question, because flax, like hemp, is not the lightest fabric, especially if it gets wet. The weight of one sail of a standard size for a boat 15-17 meters long will be almost half a ton, if the fabric is absolutely dry. How to seat forty healthy men in armor in such a boat,supply of water, provisions and hunting falcons, the question is still.
There was one daredevil who risked sailing a little across the Baltic during the "reconstruction". His name was Magnus Andersen with like-minded people. It has been experimentally proven that a drakkar with a crew of 35 is practically unable to go on oars. Only maneuver. They spent the entire expedition under sail (modern, of course), and were convinced of the complete unsuitability of this type of vessel for sea voyages. The reason is the vicious circle of the ratio of the weight of the structure, its stability and driving performance.
To increase the speed of the vessel, a larger sail is needed, a larger sail results in a decrease in payload and vessel stability. An increase in carrying capacity is fraught with an increase in the size and weight of the vessel, etc. until there is a qualitative leap in development, such as, for example, the invention of the internal combustion engine. It appears that boats such as a boat or a plow were common among the Pomors as coastal transport, mainly small in size, designed to transport a small number of people and goods under sail and over short distances. In other words, an ordinary fishing boat, only slightly larger.
Those boats that were "buried together with the king and his retinue" could in fact be the last refuge of the dead. But only as a hearse, not a battleship. For example: went to a neighboring village, chopped down a little there, what to do with the dead? Dig a hole? No really! Dismiss… let the descendants with excavators dig graves in the Norwegian rocks, but a normal Viking could have come up with a simpler and more logical solution in this case. To whip up a raft, load heroes on it, you can even with your favorite hunting falcons and let the wind and waves go free. Wherever it takes - it will take it there, but in the village there will be no smell of carrion and disease will not happen. Several of these burial ships were accidentally mothballed by crumbling soil. The raft nailed to the island, the shore collapsedand 500 years later, archaeologists unearthed it. And here is a ready-made sensation. By the nails from the raft, the route of the vessel is determined … ohoho …
But that's okay. There is still a lot of jokes in the "historical science", but about that not today.
Author: kadykchanskiy