Goths, Celts and Vikings

TarionzCousin · Aug 23, 2010

Keith Taylor's [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Bard-III-Wild-Keith-Taylor/dp/044104915X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282537103&sr=8-3"]Bard III[/ame] has a traditional Irish Bard in the employ of a Viking warrior-maiden. I recommend it if you're interested in historical fantasy.

MortonStromgal · Aug 23, 2010

jonesy said:
Don't say never ever. There is one, just one, depiction of a viking horned helmet:

The reason for the few horned helms found is largely unknown. If the couple pieces of art are to be believed the were worn as some sorta party by an individual or two. No one knows if they wore them outside the party or if the helm meant anything at the party.

Starfox · Aug 23, 2010

We have little hard fact about the origin of the Goths. Their Swedish origin is today believed to be fanciful Swedish 15th century propaganda. Still, the shoe does not fit that badly; in many ways they are the precursors of the Vikings. Both Norsemen/vikings and Goths are germanic peoples; part of a larger culture. The Celts are also such a larger culture; comparing vikings to celts is like comparing Italians to Arabs; one is a nation, the other is a culture. My tip is to ignore the Goths and just think of them as a Norse subgroup. If you don't, you might as well invent them from scratch.

The naval issue is complicated by the fact that on Ireland, Celts and Germanic norsemen intermingled and created a nation (Dubliners) that became very good pirates and raiders. Some Irish raiders were thus descended from norsemen. But the Irish did raid long before the Norse came to their shores. Norse tales also tell how there were Irish monks on Iceland before the Norsemen settled there. Celtic naval technology might have been primitive, but they were not afraid to use it.

Vikings were a group of Norsemen who left their homes in search of adventure. They did so in larger numbers as the kings of their homeland gained more and more power. Not unexpectedly, the most chaotic and unruly Norse choose to leave when central authority became stronger, setting such places as Iceland. Scandinavia, the Norse homeland, was never really a "Viking" area: to be a viking was to go abroad. There are exceptions, such as King Knut (Canute) and Harald Hårdråda (Hardraada) and their invasions of England, who were more or less national wars made by kings who had first consolidated their power at home, but this was very late in the viking era. William the Conqueror was also Norse, the descendant of Norse who settled Normandy a century before and built a nation there. But neither of these are vikings, they are kings bent on conquest. "Proper" viking operations were on a much smaller scale, led by individuals rather than kings.

Umbran · Aug 23, 2010

MortonStromgal said:
The reason for the few horned helms found is largely unknown. If the couple pieces of art are to be believed the were worn as some sorta party by an individual or two. No one knows if they wore them outside the party or if the helm meant anything at the party.

So, you're saying wearing the horned helmet may be the Dark Ages version of drunkenly wearing a lampshade?

jonesy · Aug 23, 2010

Starfox said:
We have little hard fact about the origin of the Goths. Their Swedish origin is today believed to be fanciful Swedish 15th century propaganda. Still, the shoe does not fit that badly; in many ways they are the precursors of the Vikings.

Well yeah, one of the largest problems with these is defining the definitions. When you have people moving elsewhere, and other people moving there, and those people together "becoming" a whole other people,
at what point does a Swede end (for example), and at what point does a Goth begin? Or end?

MortonStromgal · Aug 23, 2010

Umbran said:
So, you're saying wearing the horned helmet may be the Dark Ages version of drunkenly wearing a lampshade?

Possibly, yes. We have more than one horned helm from the right era and places. We also have a couple art pieces where an individual has one on. But for all we know Burger King was using horned helms back then

kigmatzomat · Aug 24, 2010

Baron Opal said:
So, if I was going to highlight the major differences between these cultures, what would they be?

The goal is to make stylistic differences between groups of humans; different races, if you will.

Depends on when you want to use as a time-frame basis.

The Celtic tribes wandered west across most of central Europe and then down the Iberian penninsula and over to displace the Picts in Britannia.

The (Ostro/Visi)Goths started out a few centuries later in the mountains near Romania and followed the same general path as the Celts. The Goths had the disadvantage of taking the brunt of the Hunnish attacks, eventually driving them south into Italy (and rome), France, and around the Iberian coast to take Carthage in north Africa until the Romans put that down.

The vikings were Germanic Odin/Thor worshiping tribes that migrated west behind the Celts, but north of the Goths, into Scandinavia. Except for the Finns, who have their own interesting take on axe-wielding thunder gods.

The Celtic and Germanic peoples each had a rich mythology that is fairly easy to research (the 1st Ed Deities & Demigods is a quick view of them that isn't totally mangled). Many Celtic gods were incorporated into the pre-Christian Roman "pantheon". There's not a lot about the pre-christian Goths, they were probably followers of the Roman Empire's mishmash of gods, but Christian goths were one of the first documented people with institutionalized freedom of religion.

Militarily the Goths were infantry forces, partial to the heaviest armors ever used by the Roman Legions even after the Roman army moved to lighter armor to server as cavalry to counter Huns and Persians. Gothic influences on armors in western europe eventually evolved into the full plate armor of the knights, after much effort to breed ginormous horses. I think the Celts were partial to lighter armor, in part due to their limited metal production. The germanic tribes were something of barbarians that had adopted roman ways from the necessity of fighting off the Huns.

Tuft · Aug 24, 2010

I do recommend having a look at the "Terry Jones' Barbarians" documentary series for an interesting take on two of these cultures.

Barbarians - The Savage Goths
The Primitive Celts.avi

A2Z · Aug 24, 2010

nedjer said:
The Goths were short on opportunities at home so they moved to France and formed the Frankish kingdoms. The guys liked ornamental facial hair and braiding.

I think the Franks might argue that point.

jonesy · Aug 24, 2010

A2Z said:
I think the Franks might argue that point.

Which Franks? They were a group of people formed from many smaller groups of people of different ethnicities, some from the north, some from the east, including Celts from Gaul. Which really muddles up the whole issue.