Then Tell me why they are called the Vikings Center please
Because it’s a theme park for children, and that theme is Vikings.
More specifically the Viking age.
3 Likes
And im taking this seriously because im from England and this matters for us in history, you are trying to change the history with your other BS, if you conduct and do a Poll i guranteed you majority would want it called the Vikings
This forum is pointless as theres only few hundred - 200 views, whereas majority of players isnt
1 Like
I’m just saying, it’s not like viking isn’t going to be plastered all over the civ.
I really do not understand what ‘the deal’ is with The Vikings being super important to English identity, heritage, history or whatever.
If it is so important, wouldn’t having an accurate name be the priority? Because again, it’s not like anyone has ever suggested that the new civ shouldn’t get viking representation, just that the name should represent the actual civilization instead of a 200 year limited interaction with west Europe.
They weren’t called Viking in eastern Europe, the Mediterranean, or in north Africa.
They were called varangian, norman, norse, scandinavian…
So I guess what I’m getting at is, why should the Anglo-Saxon perspective trump all other perspectives?
2 Likes
Is this from England?
Because the answer has been: because that’s the term Anglo-Saxon descended people use.
Also, as I discovered last time I spent 5 seconds reading their about page, they refer to the Vikings as having been Norse, Norsemen, Northerners, or Scandinavian…. So….
1 Like
no:
Viking refers to anyone from that culture. Calling medieval farmers in what is now Norway or Sweden “Vikings” is fine.
If anything “Norsemen” isn’t a great term, because in lots of writing (both medieval and modern) Vikings are separated into “Norsemen” and “Danes”, either by origin, or by religion (ie pagan norsemen, christian danes).
ie: not all Vikings are Norsemen, not all Vikings are Danes. But all Norsemen are Vikings, all Danes are Vikings
4 Likes
That gap in history, between the end of the viking age in 1066 and the 20th century is the biggest problem.
How do the nations which formed in that 800 year period measure up to the name viking?
What you are referring to in that Wikipedia article is valid for a limited population.
For example, do you know why the Normans were called Norman?
They were northmen who settled in France after raiding it as vikings, but established themselves as a part of society and integrated a viking bloodline into the ruling class, eventually leading a campaign to fully conquer England. You can experience this story through the Norman conquest campaign.
We don’t call them vikings, even though they are descended from them. We don’t call the byzantine varangian guard vikings in game, even though everyone knows they are.
I’m sure people don’t mind being called Viking. It’s seen as being heroic, epic, legendary. An indomitable force. Of course there are people who don’t take issue with being seen as a conqueror.
But why favor ego and fantasy over history? This is one of few games that actually tries to represent people, places, and events in a way that reflects history. Viking is a term that reduces context and removes information.
The Macedonian Dynasty ‘viking’ units are actually called Varangian, and use Icelandic for their names. I’m honestly not even trying to advocate for their names because I want them to change something… they were more than likely never going to use ‘The Vikings’ as their faction name. That just isn’t how this game is designed.
I was more interested in sharing history and talking about the actual people. There is so much more to talk about than the Viking Age when it comes to Norway, Denmark, or Sweden.
2 Likes
What does that even mean? The name doesn’t refer to the nations that formed in that 800 year period that came after.
you misunderstand. we don’t call the modern Danes, Norwegians, Swedes etc “Vikings”. “Vikings” is the modern term for those medieval people(s). Just like how we call the Byzantines “Byzantines”, they didn’t call themselves that, nobody else did either at the time.
Byzantines and Vikings are modern words to describe medieval cultures.
I don’t think you’d be in favour of calling the Byzantines “Romans” or “Greeks”, because in modern English those words have different meanings, but that is what the Byzantines were called at the time. It’s similar with “Vikings”.
3 Likes
In any case:
We still don’t know any mechanics, landmarks, units, language, or even time setting of this new Viking civilization.
I think they only said it’s about Vikings (pirates) to generate hype, because in theory we already have a “Swedish” Viking civilization, the Varangians from Macedonian Dynasty.
They would still need to add Danish and Norwegian Vikings.
If they plan to call it Danes, Norse, or even Vikings, that’s something I think would make more sense to discuss when they provide more information about the civilization itself.
At least what I hope for in the name and the chosen civilization is CONSISTENCY:
Danish
1).- If they choose Danes or Danish, well, it should represent a civilization of the Danish people until they become Denmark, with at least stone structures in the Imperial Age.
- Stone landmarks or arquitecture at least at imperial age.
- The possibility of choosing Christianity in the Third Age, or if not, that it be the default religion of the civilization. Temples made of wood or stone, or wood first, evolving to stone in the Imperial Age.
- Trade bonuses, from which they obtained their technology from the HRE.
- Infantry civilization
Norse or Vikings
2).- If they choose Vikings or Norse as a name, it should represent the Viking period of Denmark and Sweden, but with all its historical limitations:
- No Landmarks, except Jarl Longhouse (like GH)
- Unique Blacksmith technologies, the same as Macedonian Dynasty, but without Tier 4-6. This is because plate armor (angled surfaces) was invented recently, around 1300.
- Full pagan Norse religion (Thor, Odin, Loki)
- No gunpowder units (no Bombard, no Handcannoners)
- No University; Imperial technology goes to Blacksmith (like Mongols)
- Weak cavalry units
- No stone walls or stone keeps, “none”. Maybe Ring-Fortress (Trelleborg type)
- Berserkers, because they weren’t banned until Christianity came.
- A promise of a future Denmark, Kalmar, or Norweign civs, with stone landmarks and normal Age-Up.
As long as it has good historical representation, I have no problem. That said, if they choose Vikings, I’ll say it again, I at least expect a Norwegian variant and a Danish one later on, perhaps with the Kalmar period in the Imperial era, haha.
2 Likes
I’m sure they won’t hold back on making any variants.
Right, so you understand.
How does Viking capture the identity of the civ it represents for the time periods past Feudal Age?
The answer: it does not.
The Viking age ends in 1066 and their descendants defined themselves through actions not associated in any way with vikings.
That is a big issue with using Viking as the name for the civ, especially when you consider every other base civ in the game has changes in language, architecture, and cultural identity as they age up.
you misunderstand. we don’t call the modern Danes, Norwegians, Swedes etc “Vikings”. “Vikings” is the modern term for those medieval people(s).
I was responding to what you said at the end:
Viking refers to anyone from that culture. Calling medieval farmers in what is now Norway or Sweden “Vikings” is fine.
If anything “Norsemen” isn’t a great term, because in lots of writing (both medieval and modern) Vikings are separated into “Norsemen” and “Danes”, either by origin, or by religion (ie pagan norsemen, christian danes).
ie: not all Vikings are Norsemen, not all Vikings are Danes. But all Norsemen are Vikings, all Danes are Vikings
This is just not true. While people refer to Norse as Vikings, not all of them were Vikings. This is a well known misconception.
Viking was a temporary job that people held to gain wealth, but would return to be farmers.
In a somewhat ironic twist, all of the material that has been linked in this thread points to the historical reality of what being a viking was, and how the colonization done during the viking age leads to the nations we know today.
The question bears repeating: how does Viking represent Norway, Denmark, or Sweden past the Viking Age?
2 Likes
While medieval English might have used the word “viking” to refer to raiders/pirates, in modern English “Viking” does refer to the entire culture, not just those actively participating in raids.
the misconception is thinking “viking” is only a job.
I agree, this is a valid reason against calling them Vikings.
1 Like
I went over twenty years ago, but appreciate the recommendation 
Isn’t this for an American Football team? 
3 Likes
That’s fair, I was misunderstanding you.
I guess I could see it as being similar to the other names we have in AoE IV, like French or Chinese, where their names are from a modern perspective or are an exonym.
1 Like
They can always set their time frame as 793-1066.
Calling them “Vikings” is basically the same as calling a Japanese civ “Samurai".
Still, I won’t be surpised if it happens just because of name recognition.
I’d prefer something like “Norse" if we’ e trying to keep it broad.
1 Like