The Vikings: A History

I can not recommend this book for its intended audience, general readers, because the book is so one-sided. The author clearly despises the people whose history he tells, calling them not just killers, but "overkillers", whose cruelty was in a class of its own. When a "good" Viking shows up (Ohthere), the author seems to have trouble accepting that this Norwegian merchant and farmer doesn't want to stop on his voyage for some casual plundering.

Part of the problem may be that the author heavily depends on Anglo-Saxon, Irish, and continental sources: material written by the victims of the Vikings. Some scholars now deprecate the atrocities described in these texts. Use of sources from Viking lands and by Viking people might have show more suggested to the author that perhaps more than a few of the Viking people were like Ohthere.

When the author does choose to use Scandinavian and Icelandic source materials, he seems not to understand them. Just one example: the author writes that saga hero Grettir Ásmundarson was a coal-biter, a lazy idler who lounged at home with his head near the fire (p. 45). In fact, the saga author writes the opposite, commenting that Grettir was not an idler (Grettis saga, ch. 14).

Some of the author's statements and suppositions are just plain wrong. For example, he says that heathen Vikings had a loose conception of the calendar (p. 357) and that little is known of how heathens measured time and kept the date (p. 265). Clearly, keeping an accurate calendar was important to the Norse people. Heathen Icelanders instituted a calendar reform (Íslendingabók ch. 4) to keep the calendar in sync with astronomical observations. The Icelandic law codes (Grágás) are filled with examples that date from the heathen era which require certain actions to be completed by a certain date of the year, or result in penalties. These examples suggest a very strong interest in the calendar.

Last, the references cited in the endnotes are disappointing and include popular magazines and hobbyist websites.

One needn't apologize for Viking activities, but one ought to recognize the positive contributions made by the Norse people during the Viking era. The author has chosen to focus on the atrocities and ignore the rest. General readers interested in the Viking age should choose a more balanced narrative of Viking history. show less

I was hoping for better from Robert Ferguson's The Vikings: A History. A picture of how Vikings lived, the motivation for their exploration and raiding, a description of what they believed about the universe and life and death would have made this an outstanding book. Unfortunately, what I got was mostly lists of battles and a very medieval Christian, Western European view of the Vikings. In the end, there's just not that much known about the Vikings outside writings by their victims and enemies - with all the problems that come from trying to understand a culture through unfriendly eyes. So I suppose it's not Ferguson's fault that the book is dull as dishwater. Still, I hoped for better.

Wow…that was a slog. I wanted to love this book, as I’m way into Viking culture right now, but man, I couldn’t. Unfortunately it was more about who was king, when, and where they ruled and who they tried to attack. I was hoping it would delve more into the mythology and daily life stuff, but that never really happened. I also found fault in the chronology, it was all over the place jumping between years. It felt like it started to try to take it on a linear path, but that was soon dissolved. I know writing this book must have been an undertaking as there was so much lost to history, but a when a book tells you that something might have happened one way, but it could have happened a completely different way, and we will never show more really know, it is hard to think it credible. The other issue I had was the similarity of names, Olaf and Olav, and Hakon and Hakon and Hakon. They all had surnames, or defining characteristics, if the names are that close, stick with Hakon the Good every time you mention that Hakon. If he is just called Hakon, the reader has a hard time divining if the Hakon referred to there is Hakon the Good, Hakon the Bad, or even Hakon the Ugly…sorry bad joke there…

Again, I understand so much has been lost to history and most of it will we never know, and that makes writing a book about it so difficult. But it didn’t also need to be so difficult to read… show less

It didn't wean me off my old Gwyn Jones (A History of the Vikings). Still, I liked that he uses Heathen and Heathendom -- in capitals -- to give conceptual equality with Christianity. Also I thought the specific chapter on 'The culture of Northern Heathendom' was great. The next chapter, 'The causes of the Viking age' was even better: he argues that Charlemagne's religious persecution of the Saxons, and his destruction of their most holy world-tree, directly triggered the first attack on Lindisfarne, as retaliation. In short he interprets the Vikings' attacks on churches as a conscious religious war and an answer to Christian pressures & Christian slaughters. This aspect of the book is important and I say bravo.

When he's on general show more history, though, I yawn (never did in Gwyn Jones), and he has that journalistic habit of yattering about how things were discovered... a priest in the 18th century had trouble with a loose daughter and so dug up a Viking ship... it's meant to 'entertain', but he only has 400 pages -- tell me about the 10th century. show less

I found the reviews of this a bit surprising- I guess it is a bit hard to read at times, with all those names flying around, but given that Ferguson was trying to be a responsible historian, there's not much else he could have done. Viking history has to be seen from the outside, because outsiders were the ones who recorded that history for us. Stranger still are the complaints about his use of the word 'heathen,' a product, I can only assume, of peoples' bizarre inability to understand that when you're writing about the way something is perceived, you have to use the language of the perceivers. As for the goodreads reviewer who said Ferguson is 'obviously a Christian' who somehow has it in for the Vikings... uh... huh?

The central show more oddity of this book is Ferguson's insistence that 'The Viking Age' of marauding and rapine was a kind of clash of civilizations between Christian and Heathen, in which Charlemagne's violent imposition of the former religion provoked the Scandanavians (who are taken to be not 'primitives', but just as civilized as the nations to their south, east and west) to burn churches and murder priests. It's timely, I guess, but the best evidence he can martial suggests just as much that the Vikes attacked churches because that's where the money was, and murdered priests and nuns to spread terror, which is a pretty sound military strategy. These civilized gentlemen pretty quickly converted to Christianity and assimilated wherever they settled. But note that Ferguson's presentation is perfectly objective; his reading of the archaeological, literary, and dendrochronological evidence, as well as all sorts of other stuff) never overwhelms his presentation of that evidence. show less

Robert Fergurson has packed the 300 or so years of Viking history into 450 pages (including notes and index). Jumping between various locations in a more or less chronological order he focuses mainly on the motives for their bloodthirsty reputation, especially in relation to their attacks on monasteries and other Christian sites; their impact on other lands, including settlement of Iceland and Greenland; and the efforts to introduce Christianity to the Scandinavian countries.

There is a lot in this book and it is not the easiest of "popular history" reads but the subject is fascinating to me and Fergurson does enough, for me, in trying to explain the people and their lifestyles.

Very interesting book but a rather difficult read. Early Middle Ages were very dynamic times where rulers and local warlords rose and fell in a matter of months. As a result you end up with multitude of characters and it takes pretty good concentration and focus to discern who is who at what time.

I read few reviews of this book and they said that book was sensationalistic in terms that it would bombard readers with pretty bizarre descriptions of torture. I agree that these are not things you would usually ind in historical texts but again these are all things that were common for the period. Brutal, yes they are [especially in our times] but they were common at the time.

Interesting book, highly recommended to anyone interested in Early show more Middle Ages or Vikings themselves. show less