VIKINGS'S TREATMENT OF CAPTURED PRISONERS
Barry Fletcher
Hello Folks:
In an episode of T.N.T. Robin Hood, the Viking of Robin Hood time
were shown, raiding and capturing people for sacrifice to the god of
Thunder.
Was this a common practice by the Norse clans around this time or
before? I thought the common practice with prisoners where to ransom
ransom them back to their lords or vessels for money? Especially, if one
of them is Prince John of England?
I also thought the point of Viking raids was to get slaves or
captives to repopulated the lost love one of the clan? Is this statement
true or not?
Sign:
Barry Fletcher
Luke Braly
Barry Fletcher <e410...@mail.wsu.edu> wrote:
>In an episode of T.N.T. Robin Hood, the Viking of Robin Hood time
>were shown, raiding and capturing people for sacrifice to the god of
>Thunder.
>
>Was this a common practice by the Norse clans around this time or
>before?
There was a "blood eagle" human sacrifice ritual performed by the
Vikings wherein the victims lungs were carved out while he was still
alive and layed out in a form supposedly resembling a bloody eagle.
I cannot remember the Norse diety involved. The ritual was performed
by the Danes on English captives.
Jeff Peck
Barry Fletcher wrote:
>
> Hello Folks:
>
> In an episode of T.N.T. Robin Hood, the Viking of Robin Hood time
> were shown, raiding and capturing people for sacrifice to the god of
> Thunder.
>
> Was this a common practice by the Norse clans around this time or
> ransom them back to their lords or vessels for money? Especially, if one
> of them is Prince John of England?
> I also thought the point of Viking raids was to get slaves or
> captives to repopulated the lost love one of the clan? Is this statement
> true or not?
>
> Sign:
> Barry Fletcher
Barry,
I sugest that rather than asking the same questions over and over
in different newsgroups and mailing lists that you read some of the
books that were recommended to you rather than expecting others to do
your research for you.
Cartoon shows as a general rule are NOT the best place to
start your research (nor are live action shows like the new Robin Hood ,
Xena or Hercules).
Jeff Peck (or , in the SCA , Lyulf MacFlandry)
--
anj...@gte.net | By a knight of ghosts and shadows,
| I summoned am to tourney,
| Ten leagues beyond the wide world's edge,
| Methinks 'tis no great journey.<TRAD.>
Janne Nilsson
Even if I havent seen the episode you are reffering to I had it described
in another article in this newsgroup. The whole plot is utterly nonsence.
The few times humans were sacrificed they were sacrificed to Oden, almighty
father of the gods of Asgård. They were hanged in a old tree an "Asp" to
represent the tree that holds the world "Yggdrasil". Also were animals
sacrifed. Seven humans, seven dogs, seven horses etc were left for the
ravens. Oden had two ravens Hugin and Munin who travelled Midgård to keep
him informed of what was happening there. These sacrifices were also held
at certain times as midsummer and midvwinter and theyre called "Blot". The
greatest reason for viking raiding were the same as the crusades. Only the
oldest son could inherit the farm and land of the father the other ones had
to seek employment otherwere as mercenarys "Hirdmen". Or to raid to get
treasure to buy his own peace of land. Sadly never mentioned in history
which like to portray the vikings as savage heathens they actually made
more money in trading than raiding. Also had they the most democratic
society of the time except for having serfs and a few slaves. By the time
of which Robin hood lived the whole scandinavia were considered to have
been christnede but for long many people worshipped both the white christ
and the gods of Asgård. Still today only a few people thinks of themselfs
as religios.
Barry Fletcher <e410...@mail.wsu.edu> skrev i inlägg
<Pine.OSF.3.95.970314...@cheetah.it.wsu.edu>...
Peter Pettersson
On Sun, 16 Mar 1997, Luke Braly wrote:
>Barry Fletcher <e410...@mail.wsu.edu> wrote:
>>In an episode of T.N.T. Robin Hood, the Viking of Robin Hood time
>>were shown, raiding and capturing people for sacrifice to the god of
>>Thunder.
>>
>>Was this a common practice by the Norse clans around this time or
>>before?
>
>
>There was a "blood eagle" human sacrifice ritual performed by the
>Vikings wherein the victims lungs were carved out while he was still
>alive and layed out in a form supposedly resembling a bloody eagle.
>I cannot remember the Norse diety involved. The ritual was performed
>by the Danes on English captives.
I don't think this was a sacrificial ritual of any kind, but only a way of
killing your enemy as slowly and painful as possible.
- Peter
Sharon Fisher
Peter Pettersson <as6p...@ling.gu.se> writes:
There's also a movie called The Viking Saga that describes a procedure
known as "the walk," where one's belly is slit and one's intestine is
nailed to a post, and then one walks around the post, winding one's
intestine around it, until one dies.
Thomas W. Ireland
Sharon Fisher (s...@netcom.com) wrote::
: >>There was a "blood eagle" human sacrifice ritual performed by the
: >>Vikings wherein the victims lungs were carved out while he was still
: >>alive and layed out in a form supposedly resembling a bloody eagle.
: >>I cannot remember the Norse diety involved. The ritual was performed
: >>by the Danes on English captives.
:
: >I don't think this was a sacrificial ritual of any kind, but only a way of
: >killing your enemy as slowly and painful as possible.
:
: There's also a movie called The Viking Saga that describes a procedure
: known as "the walk," where one's belly is slit and one's intestine is
: nailed to a post, and then one walks around the post, winding one's
: intestine around it, until one dies.
Lovely concept, also used by the Iroquois in the Boyd-Parker Massacre near
(what today is) Geneseo, NY, in the mid-1770's (?).
I'm not certain that either of these tortures have been authenticated as
having been used by the Vik. They certainly are popular fictional tools,
though. Harry Harrison, in _The Hammer and the Cross_ has an English (?)
captive put to death by the "Eagle".
Tom Delfs
Lars Arnestam
Thomas W. Ireland wrote:
>
>long cut..
>
> I'm not certain that either of these tortures have been authenticated as
> having been used by the Vik. They certainly are popular fictional tools,
> though.
cut...
>
> Tom Delfs
I also doubt that these methods are authentic. I know that both these
methods are mentioned in old Norse litterature (the Blood Eagle in
"Heimskringla" by Snorre Sturlasson, the part with the intestines in
"Nial's Saga"), but both these sources were written down 200 years after
the end of the viking age and should definitely not be taken litterally
when it comes to details. They may very well be tainted by medieval
Christian notions about what the vikings were like.
"The walk", where the intestines are wound up on a pole, is also
described in a lesser known "apocryptical" story (I don't remember which
one, possibly Hanlax saga), but in that story it's a troll (!) who kills
one of the heroes with that method!
By this I don't want to say that the vikings would not be cruel to
prisoners, only that they were probably far less imaginative than what
those examples above may make you think.
Lars Arnestam
Steven Sohn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In article <3332A8...@al.etx.ericsson.se>,
lars.a...@al.etx.ericsson.se says...
> Thomas W. Ireland wrote:
> >
> >long cut..
> >
> > I'm not certain that either of these tortures have been
authenticated as
> > having been used by the Vik. They certainly are popular fictional
tools,
> > though.
>
> cut...
> >
> > Tom Delfs
>
>
> I also doubt that these methods are authentic. I know that both
these
> methods are mentioned in old Norse litterature
SNIP
SNIP
> By this I don't want to say that the vikings would not be cruel to
> prisoners, only that they were probably far less imaginative than
what
> those examples above may make you think.
>
> Lars Arnestam
>
I have to wonder, and wish somebody with more expertise might respond,
how much pain a person can take and still manage to walk around a
pole, "winding one's intestines onto it." When I flew combat missions
over Laos, we were advised to save a bullet for ourselves, due to the
Pathet Lao's torture techniques, and none sounded as grotesque as that
which is offered here.
I rather think one would either pass out from pain and not be able to
walk around a pole with intestine nailed to it; or, not really give
much of a damn about walking around a pole, even if being encouraged
to do so by pain delivery such as flogging, etc. After all, who gives
much of a damn about stopping a beating or whatever if your abdomin is
open and intestines being drawn out.
This seems a lot of nonsense to me, and would like somebody with
knowledge of physiology to respond here.
sohn
- --
Good company and good discourse are the very sinews of virtue.
Izaak Walton, "The Compleat Angler" (1653)
voice: 718.421.4598 + http://www.webcom.com/sasohn + fax: 718.421.4098
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5
Comment: Classification OWC Only - Burn Before Reading
iQCVAgUBMzMN4ZsE3EZsdmbFAQECxwP+JYMjXj/FadQqDw+39QuU8ZqdOj1XyiEZ
LfJlaH6Ew03ch5XSS3AvYeaxNGSBioDuqg1X1C1rZxB5FkoX0ydVPevce+ivZHDQ
xbHLv34ljpOFcoUpdc3c0KyA/pav5MwUSIQlqaM+9Wc2ICVJiOVebB9ChCHMQHHX
MQhI+9EbtLc=
=iLw3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Carl Edlund Anderson
The bottom line is that while such things as "blood eagles" may have
occured, they may also be no more than literary fictions.
Obviously, treatment of prisioners by medieval Scandinavians would have
varied as much as treatment of prisoners can today or at any other period.
Holding prisoners for ransom or for sale as slaves were almost certainly
the fates in store for the bulk of prisoners. Sagas suggest things ranging
from vengeful execution for enemies (i.e. _Jomsvikinga saga_) to the rather
flashier stuff like the ever-popular "blood eagle", or evangelizing kings
bent on ramming snakes down the throats of heathens. By the way, it's not
known exactly what a "blood eagle" was meant to be, whether or not it is a
literary fiction.
Torture, death, slavery--it all depended on _who_ captured you and the
circumstances surrounding it of course.
Cheers,
Carl
*************************************************************************
Carl Edlund Anderson "Hefi ek ok aldri
ce...@cus.cam.ac.uk sva reitt vapn at manni
http://wjh-www.harvard.edu/~canders/hem.html at hafi vid kommit."
Dept. of Anglo-Saxon, Norse & Celtic, Cambridge --Skarphedinn Njalsson
*************************************************************************
Pete Scathe
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.970318150309.10858A-
100...@hjelmslev.ling.gu.se>, Peter Pettersson <as6p...@ling.gu.se>
writes
>
>
>On Sun, 16 Mar 1997, Luke Braly wrote:
>
>>There was a "blood eagle" human sacrifice ritual performed by the
>>Vikings wherein the victims lungs were carved out while he was still
>>alive and layed out in a form supposedly resembling a bloody eagle.
>>I cannot remember the Norse diety involved. The ritual was performed
>>by the Danes on English captives.
>
>I don't think this was a sacrificial ritual of any kind, but only a way of
>killing your enemy as slowly and painful as possible.
>
The key text for all the allegations of blood-eagling is the original
scaldic verse for the killing of the (possibly only legendary) King
Aella at York in 867. When it was first conceived, this was intended to
say only that the victim was killed and left as metaphorical food for
eagles (and it could just as easily have been crows, ravens or vultures,
which were equally favoured by poets). Such literary images were utterly
commonplace at the time, and there is no real reason to believe that
anything unusual had happened apart from the simple fact that Aella had
been killed, in circumstances that we cannot today even begin to know.
Indeed, one of the main normal devices of the scaldic verses was
precisely the use of clever metaphors and images (called Jennings') that
were designed to make elaborate metaphors and riddles which deliberately
complicated and concealed very simple events or things. The subsequent
saga writers knew all about this process, but it did not stop them
misunderstanding the poetic image of King Aella as carrion, and leaping
to the false assumption that it was incontrovertible evidence that he
had had the shape of an eagle either carved on his skin or sculpted out
of his intestines, and that then, maybe, salt had been rubbed in before
the victim finally died. It is this story which has grown and grown ever
since, so that all the saga writers soon began to believe that execution
by the blood eagle was indeed a very common practice among the Vikings.
A whole mythology exactly as in the case of St Edmund's martyrdom
soon began to accrete around it.
When viewed in the cold light of day, there actually seems to be no
contemporary evidence whatsoever for the blood eagle, regardless of
whether it implied the carving of an eagle on the victim's back, or his
artistic evisceration. It turns out to have been entirely a much later
literary conceit, based on a mistranslation, in just the same way that
the alleged Viking habit of drinking out of human skulls turns out to
have been simply a mistranslation for their actual habit of drinking out
of animal horns.
The whole blood eagle phenomenon was entirely invented in the Iceland of
the 1100s, and its only link with poets vaguely contemporary with the
actual event is every bit as unsubstantiated as the technical details of
just how the execution itself may have been carried out.
Adapted from "The Viking Art of War" by Paddy Griffith, based on an
article by Roberta Frank in The English Historical Review.
--
Pete Salmond
Tim Donovan
> Torture, death, slavery--it all depended on _who_ captured you and the
> circumstances surrounding it of course.
>
> Cheers,
> Carl
Precisely what I have read while studying Early Medieval Irish history. The
Norse Kingdom of Dublin had two main functions, a massive slave market and
a base for operations against the Kingdom of York.
As for the base for slavery, the fact that the majority of raids on
ecclesiastical establishments was during religious holidays or festivals
suggests they were hoping for the biggest haul of prisoners for trade into
slavery. While I was living in Iceland the common concensus was that 20%
of their gene pool is "Celtic" and was contributed by the large number of
slaves and "stolen" women. The Vestmanney Islands (sp?) are named for the
"West Men" as a number of Irish slaves killed their masters and fled to
these Islands offshore, when caught this second time I do not doubt their
punishment was not pleasent.
As the base for operations against the Kingdom of York, the constant
battles between the Danes and Norse seem much more viscious and the
beheadings and "blood eagles" seem reservrd for these bloody confrontations
or revenge in Saga's while battles against the Irish usually had
commercial overtones and the captured were probably the most valuable
commodity once the gold from the monastic sites had long been plundered.
Tim
--
Timothy D Donovan OD
home email: tdon...@conch.net
Lars Arnestam
Tim Donovan wrote:
>
long cut..
battles against the Irish usually had
> commercial overtones and the captured were probably the most valuable
> commodity once the gold from the monastic sites had long been plundered.
>
> Tim
>
> --
> Timothy D Donovan OD
> home email: tdon...@conch.net
There is no doubt that slaves was one ot the most important trading
commodities of the Vikings. This is very apparent also in the Arabian
descriptions of Viking traders in Russia in the 10th century. These
traders (who usually were of Swedish decent) no doubt "stocked up" on
slaves from those Slav settlements which they passed on their way down
to the trading towns on the Black or Caspian Sea, where there would be
wealthy Arabian customers.
Lars Arnestam
Todd A. Farmerie
Pete Scathe wrote:
>
> The key text for all the allegations of blood-eagling is the original
> scaldic verse for the killing of the (possibly only legendary) King
> Aella at York in 867.
While I agree with Frank's interpretation of the blood eagle, I question
the assignment of Aella to legend. He is specifically named in the
ASC. He is described as having been of common birth, but to have taken
over the thrown at York. When the vikings overran York, both kings
(presumably he and the ruler he displaced) were killed. Are you aware
of any particular reason to doubt the existance of Aella?
FWIW, I just read a curious article on the capture and killing of
Archbishop Aelfheah in 1011. It suggests that he fell victim of the
rowdy viking after-dinner behavior of throwing bones at each other or at
a particular scapegoat, with the allusion to stoning having developed
later in immitation of St.Stephen's martyrdom. This is in direct
analogy to St.Edward's martyrdom mirroring that of St.Sebastian.
taf
Tom Cain
lbr...@sprintmail.com (Luke Braly) wrote:
>Barry Fletcher <e410...@mail.wsu.edu> wrote:
>>In an episode of T.N.T. Robin Hood, the Viking of Robin Hood time
>>were shown, raiding and capturing people for sacrifice to the god of
>>Thunder.
>>
>>Was this a common practice by the Norse clans around this time or
>>before?
Barry,
I can not imagine that you will get any different answers to this
question than those you got from Ansaxnet, Mediev-l or Oldnorsenet. Go
away and think up a new game!
To those who do not know Mr.Fletcher, he has been ejected from at
least one list (Mediev-l) for disruptive and abusive behaviour. The
three questions he has posted here (along with a variety of others,
becoming increasingly intolerent and full of invective) are part of a
game of disruption and dissention that he likes to play on people he
regards as academics (both professionals and amateurs alike come in
for his scorn). He likes to feel superior by stirring up arguements.
He has a inferiority problem with PhD's of any kind, but particularly
those in university administration, whom he regards as special objects
of scorn and ridicule.
Do not be fooled by his writing style. Mr.Fletcher is a student at WSU
(even on the university History society committee) - where I hope he
is not as disruptive as he has proven himself to be to the outside
community! However, his 'aping' the written 'style' and mannerisms of
what he regards as the poor, set-upon under-class I find particularly
distasteful as it is offensive to those with learning disabilities and
those (like myself) who have taught them. Mr. Fletcher is *not*
learning dysfunctioned in any way. Indeed, dispite his deliberate bad
grammar, he is as well educated as many of his current status.
If true to form, his next move will be to ridicule me either in public
or by private e-mail. His usual line of attack is to assume some sort
of racial or social-class stance, or demanding respect because of his
father's military exploits! I do not know whether he is 'a person of
colour', or from a poor, down-trodden background. But I seriously
doubt it! Whether he is or is not has little bearing on either my
responses to his e-mails or his postings.
I have not been accustomed to 'parading by political credentials'
before an audience for some years, but to head off any flamming from
other than Mr. Fletcher - I am a British socialist from a lower-middle
class family of Scottish descent. Both parents come from working-class
Glasgow steel-yard/ Scottish mining background of the 20's and 30's.
As a student I was active in the Anti-Nazi League in London in the
late 70's/early 80's (who were and are particularly opposed to racist
organisations such as the National Front). As a teacher of secondary
age students (11-18 year olds) I have always taught in inner-city
London schools where student populations are overwhelmingly 'of
colour' and I have always taught people who are learning dysfunctioned
with the same care and consideration that I do those who are not.
Mr.Fletcher is indeed like his epithet - remember the 'combat happy
joes of easy company' were the followers of a paticularly jingoistic
and distasteful 60's cartoon and comic character called Sgt.Storm.
Like them Mr.Fletcher is two-dimensional, mono-chromic and dull! Like
many comics of the period, Mr.Fletcher is wearing thin. Please, do not
respond to him or play his game in any way. Ignore him and he will go
away and play somewhere else.
Thnax,
Tom 8-\
Michael Jung
sas...@worldnet.att.net (Steven Sohn) writes:
[...]
> I have to wonder, and wish somebody with more expertise might respond,
> how much pain a person can take and still manage to walk around a
> pole, "winding one's intestines onto it."
The above punishment was used during the middle ages in some german
districts for peeling bark of trees still alive. (Altenhaslauer
Markordnung und Wendhagener Bauernrecht; Grimm - Rechtsaltertuemer 520
- II 39)
> This seems a lot of nonsense to me, and would like somebody with
> knowledge of physiology to respond here.
There are combat reports of soldiers fatally wounded by a gaping hole
in the abdominal area pushing their intestines back into the hole in a
futil attempt to stay "together". I do not know, wether they were
standing, but other people tell of amazing movement stunts from people
mortally wounded (you might want to ask in a *.gun.* newsgroup). The
bizarre treatment is not physiologically impossible as it may sound.
Michael
Ben Mandus
Michael Jung wrote:
> Steven Sohn writes:
> > This seems a lot of nonsense to me, and would like somebody with
> > knowledge of physiology to respond here.
>
> There are combat reports of soldiers fatally wounded by a gaping hole
> in the abdominal area pushing their intestines back into the hole in a
> futil attempt to stay "together". I do not know, wether they were
> standing, but other people tell of amazing movement stunts from people
> mortally wounded (you might want to ask in a *.gun.* newsgroup). The
> bizarre treatment is not physiologically impossible as it may sound.
>
Endorphins, chemicals naturally produced in the human body
(morphine-like) at times of super stress, like jolts of
adrenaline (sp? sorry, haven't had my coffee, yet).
I have very vivid memories from my childhood of my father,
thoughtful man, telling us all kinds of gory war stories
at the dinner table, things like guys getting their jaws
blown off in mortar fire and simply retreiving the lower
mandible for the medics to reinstall. I'm sure that some
military medical records somewhere have accounts of such
occurences.
Cheryl Mandus
Glyn Jones
In message <01bc37a3$0f9a5220$92f298cd@tdonovan>
"Tim Donovan" <tdon...@conch.net> writes:
> > Torture, death, slavery--it all depended on _who_ captured you and the
> > circumstances surrounding it of course.
The
> Norse Kingdom of Dublin had two main functions, a massive slave market and
> a base for operations against the Kingdom of York.
> As the base for operations against the Kingdom of York, the constant
> battles between the Danes and Norse seem much more viscious and the
> beheadings and "blood eagles" seem reservrd for these bloody confrontations
> or revenge in Saga's while battles against the Irish usually had
> commercial overtones and the captured were probably the most valuable
> commodity once the gold from the monastic sites had long been plundered.
Surely if Olafr Cuaran went to Dublin after being beaten at York by
Bloodaxe, there couldn't have been much enmity between York and
Dublin at that point? Could you explain?
Glyn
--
Glyn Jones FRPS
Join the Royal Photographic Society
Join Creative Monochrome
Markus Nybom BKF
Paul J. Gans (ga...@scholar.nyu.edu) wrote:
: Michael Jung (mj...@poincare.math.tu-berlin.de) wrote:
: : sas...@worldnet.att.net (Steven Sohn) write
: : > This seems a lot of nonsense to me, and would like somebody with
: : > knowledge of physiology to respond here.
: :
: : There are combat reports of soldiers fatally wounded by a gaping hole
: : in the abdominal area pushing their intestines back into the hole in a
: : futil attempt to stay "together". I do not know, wether they were
: : standing, but other people tell of amazing movement stunts from people
: : mortally wounded (you might want to ask in a *.gun.* newsgroup). The
: : bizarre treatment is not physiologically impossible as it may sound.
: I agree. BUT, in those cases the wounded were trying to save
: themselves. The point raised was essentially: why would
: someone with an opened belly go to the trouble to help his
: torturers and hurt himself. What were they going to do to
: him if he did not help? Kill him? So it is an interesting
: question.
I'm not certain I quite understand what you mean, but in case
it is why someone would actually WALK around the tree, I suppose that's just
a way of saying it. The person in question was probably dragged around it
with his intestines tied to it. It may also be of relevance that pain can
be felt in various ways: crushing, piercing and burning pain. (I'm going
from memory here, so correct me if I left some form out.) I suppose having
a spear or torch about his back would make the victim walk another meter
or so despite the other form of pain caused by the twirling of the intestines.
There is also one thing that may have some influence on this. Pain is the bodys
way of telling the brain that something is seriously wrong. Therefore we have
most of our sensory nerves in the skin. Inside the body there are far less
of these and that is why visceral pain is often felt at strange places.
(The pain from hearttroubles may well be felt in the back, for instance.)
The reason we have less sensory nerves under the skin is that it serves little
purpose, generally there would be very little the person in question could do
about the pain inside the body.
What I'm trying to come to is that the actual pain felt by the twirling
of the intestines could have been somewhat less intense than what we'd expect.
OTOH, the horror of seeing your own intestines winding up around a tree would
be undescribable. Ok, before I'm flamed away, plase note that all of the
above is PURE & COMPLETE speculation. Perhaps a physician could correct the
worst factual faults in the above text, this was just a humble attempt to
put what I could recall from a physiology & anatomy textbook I read some years
ago to use.
Regards,
Markus
Mike Haines
I think that the thing to remember here is that the type of weapon used
then
was far removed from the modern concept of warfare, most injuries would
have
been sustained by using blunt cutting or stabbing instruments with some
crush injuries. I have seen some tests done with these weapons on joints of
meat
as demonstration.
I believe that being able to walk around a tree in such a condition would
be
impossible, shock would get you if nothing else. I also believe that much
damage
was sustained by having dirty clothing or armor being driven into a wound
leading
to poisoning later on.
I cannot believe that anybody would do this although I respectfully would
be interested to know if there are records of such deeds occurring.
Markus Nybom BKF <man...@news.abo.fi> wrote in article
<5hj3nv$m...@josie.abo.fi>...
Paul J. Gans
Michael Jung (mj...@poincare.math.tu-berlin.de) wrote:
: sas...@worldnet.att.net (Steven Sohn) writes:
: [...]
: > I have to wonder, and wish somebody with more expertise might respond,
: > how much pain a person can take and still manage to walk around a
: > pole, "winding one's intestines onto it."
:
: The above punishment was used during the middle ages in some german
: districts for peeling bark of trees still alive. (Altenhaslauer
: Markordnung und Wendhagener Bauernrecht; Grimm - Rechtsaltertuemer 520
: - II 39)
: > This seems a lot of nonsense to me, and would like somebody with
: > knowledge of physiology to respond here.
:
: There are combat reports of soldiers fatally wounded by a gaping hole
: in the abdominal area pushing their intestines back into the hole in a
: futil attempt to stay "together". I do not know, wether they were
: standing, but other people tell of amazing movement stunts from people
: mortally wounded (you might want to ask in a *.gun.* newsgroup). The
: bizarre treatment is not physiologically impossible as it may sound.
I agree. BUT, in those cases the wounded were trying to save
themselves. The point raised was essentially: why would
someone with an opened belly go to the trouble to help his
torturers and hurt himself. What were they going to do to
him if he did not help? Kill him? So it is an interesting
question.
----- Paul J. Gans [ga...@scholar.chem.nyu.edu]
Markus Nybom BKF
Mike Haines (mai...@cincom.com) wrote:
: I think that the thing to remember here is that the type of weapon used
: then
: was far removed from the modern concept of warfare, most injuries would
: have
: been sustained by using blunt cutting or stabbing instruments with some
: crush injuries. I have seen some tests done with these weapons on joints of
: meat
: as demonstration.
: I believe that being able to walk around a tree in such a condition would
: be
: impossible, shock would get you if nothing else. I also believe that much
: damage
: was sustained by having dirty clothing or armor being driven into a wound
: leading
: to poisoning later on.
I probably quoted the wrong passages, as I think you are talking
of battle wounds. The original question of twirling intestines around a tree
was regarding a punishment, that is a way of execution. The executor
without doubt used a sharp instrument of some form to cut open the belly.
(I believe there even was an instrument designed for this monstrous purpose
alone, though I have no idea of what nomination it went by.)
Shock would probably get the victim anyway, but according to the texts I've
read about methods of torture, it seems man can take an incredible amount
of physical punishment without passing out or dying.
: I cannot believe that anybody would do this although I respectfully would
: be interested to know if there are records of such deeds occurring.
Well, I'm damned sure no would do this of their own free will. ;-)
Regards,
Markus
wvanh...@aol.com
>
>I agree. BUT, in those cases the wounded were trying to save
>themselves. The point raised was essentially: why would
>someone with an opened belly go to the trouble to help his
>torturers and hurt himself. What were they going to do to
>him if he did not help? Kill him? So it is an interesting
>question.
>
>
I remember reading about an incident that took place in Ohio (I think)
after a group of settlers had killed a group of "Friendly" Indians. The
relatives of the victims managed to capture one of the guilty settlers.
They slit his abdomen, tied his intestines to a tree, and led him around
the tree untill his stomach was pulled through the hole. Later another was
cought and impaled on a sharpened sappling just high enough to keep
his body sitting upright next to a campfire. Since death would not be
immediate, but certain, if you don't have time to hang around to
watch --------------
W F VAN HOUTEN
NO CLAIM TO FAME
Tim Donovan
> > > Torture, death, slavery--it all depended on _who_ captured you and
the
> > > circumstances surrounding it of course.
> The
> > Norse Kingdom of Dublin had two main functions, a massive slave market
and
> > a base for operations against the Kingdom of York.
>
>
> > As the base for operations against the Kingdom of York, the constant
> > battles between the Danes and Norse seem much more viscious and the
> > beheadings and "blood eagles" seem reservrd for these bloody
confrontations
> > or revenge in Saga's while battles against the Irish usually had
> > commercial overtones and the captured were probably the most valuable
> > commodity once the gold from the monastic sites had long been
plundered.
>
> Surely if Olafr Cuaran went to Dublin after being beaten at York by
> Bloodaxe, there couldn't have been much enmity between York and
> Dublin at that point? Could you explain?
>
> Glyn
Dublin changed hands between Danish and Norse Vikings on numerous occasions
during this era. The Irish actually are one of the few that make a
distinction between Norse and Dane as Finn Gaill and Dubh Gaill in their
chronicles. P H Sawyer states that it was more a struggle between two
dynasties, one Norse the other Danish. A unified Dublin-York kingdom was
very desireable as slaves taken from ravages of the North Britons, Picts,
and Saxons could be shipped to Dublin, "the hub of the intercontinental"
slave trade. However sometimes a truce based on marriages were arranged as
the Irish themselves would take advantage of these disputes to assert
themselves and managed to sack Dublin more than once.
Thus if in Danish hands Dublin would be very important in the slave trade,
however when in Norse hands the Kings of Dublin would look covetously
towards York as an excellent center for slaving raids against the Northern
British, Picts and Saxons as they were more numerous than the sparsely
settled and politically fragmented lands of Ireland.
In refernce to the original posting while looking for concrete evidence for
the above I did stumble across
the following in Michael Richters, "Medieval Ireland the Enduring
Tradition"...
"Through the Vikings, slavery had also become widespread in Ireland.
Slaves, often prisoners taken battle, were traded, imported and
exported..."
If you would like sources write back and I will search some more.....
Tim
--
Timothy D Donovan OD
LT MSC USNR
Naval Branch Medical Clinic Key West
home email: tdon...@conch.net
Chris Anderson
In article <5hlo2d$c...@josie.abo.fi>, man...@news.abo.fi (Markus Nybom BKF) wrote:
>: I cannot believe that anybody would do this although I respectfully would
>: be interested to know if there are records of such deeds occurring.
>
> Well, I'm damned sure no would do this of their own free will. ;-)
True enough :-)
However, keep in mind that the concept of dying bravely was around at that
time.
Chris
Michael Jung
> : There are combat reports of soldiers fatally wounded by a gaping hole
> : in the abdominal area pushing their intestines back into the hole in a
> : futil attempt to stay "together". I do not know, wether they were
> : standing, but other people tell of amazing movement stunts from people
> : mortally wounded (you might want to ask in a *.gun.* newsgroup). The
> : bizarre treatment is not physiologically impossible as it may sound.
> themselves.
(Not in all cases.)
> The point raised was essentially: why would someone with an opened
> belly go to the trouble to help his torturers and hurt himself.
> What were they going to do to him if he did not help? Kill him? So
> it is an interesting question.
Someone already pointed out the higher density of nerves sensitive to
pain on the skin in contrast to inner organs, so poking at the back
might do the trick. It is moreover not a situation in which rational
behaviour can be expected from the victim; maybe a basic flight
response can be provoked: run away! All the officials need to do is to
set the course.
Michael
Mike Cleven
In article <01bc37a3$0f9a5220$92f298cd@tdonovan>, "Tim Donovan"
<tdon...@conch.net> wrote:
The Vestmanney Islands (sp?) are named for the
> "West Men" as a number of Irish slaves killed their masters and fled to
> these Islands offshore, when caught this second time I do not doubt their
> punishment was not pleasent.
Vestmanneyjar - literally "West Man Islands", eyjar being the plural for
ey, or island.
Mike Cleven
Reading through this thread, or as much of it as I have encountered (11
messages, I think), I'm amazed that no one has considered the ethical
standards of Viking warriors (which, yes, they did have). Torture would
have been considered quite unmanly when used against an enemy, and against
slaves it was pointless and would reduce their resale or work value.
"Death-by-viking" was more likely to be a thorough skewering by the blade
of a longsword or battle-axe, with death almost immediate and this big
blond guy staring you in the eyes while he watches your spirit leave
them. This isn't meant to sound romantic or idealistic towards the
"vikings" (vaerynga, to use the correct term although I don't think I've
got the plural right). Humiliating a battle enemy with torture would be a
disgrace, inflicting upon another warrior something that you wouldn't want
yourself - death in battle or not at all! The tale of Ajax/Aias comes to
mind, but in a more specific context the Eddic accounts of the tortures
inflicted upon Gunnar and Hogni by Attila/Atli conjured up loathing
towards the ignoble forms of death offered these heroes, both of whom
defied the Hunnic lord by making something heroic of these deaths. The
murder of Sigurd in his marriage-bed by Gunnar and Hogni is by comparison
relatively heroic, involving a straightforward (if cowardly) slaying.
Nowhere in the Eddic accounts can I recall a single incident of torture,
with the notable exception of what was done to Loki after the death of
Balder. While the Edda's tales describe a long-vanished age, the values
ascribed to by their protagonists/antagonists held sway over the "viking
hordes" who I believe would not have countenanced torture as a means of
war or revenge; torture does not seem to have become common in the North
until after Christianity came along. Torture, if used at all, would not
have a place on the battlefield or in its aftermath: captives were either
directly killed or enslaved. Self-torture, on the other hand, was a
defining practice of the Cult of Odin, applied as a form of asceticism in
pursuit of wisdom and power - self-asphyxia by hanging, carving out of
your own eyeball, drinking near-fatal levels of poison, etc.
In light of this, I would tend to agree with those post-ers who have
suggested that Viking torture is a Christian gloss or fiction.....
john...@aol.com
Sharon Fisher
ga...@scholar.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans) writes:
>I agree. BUT, in those cases the wounded were trying to save
>themselves. The point raised was essentially: why would
>someone with an opened belly go to the trouble to help his
>torturers and hurt himself. What were they going to do to
>him if he did not help? Kill him? So it is an interesting
>question.
In the movie "The Viking Saga," the guy who did this did it to
distract his captors from the fact that his son was escaping.
In the book "Fanny," by Erica Jong, which depicts it happening to a
pirate caught for some crime (stealing, I think), he was forced around
the pole at the point of a knife.
Pete Scathe
In article <3336B6...@po.cwru.edu>, "Todd A. Farmerie"
<ta...@po.cwru.edu> writes
>Pete Scathe wrote:
>>
>> The key text for all the allegations of blood-eagling is the original
>> scaldic verse for the killing of the (possibly only legendary) King
>> Aella at York in 867.
>
>While I agree with Frank's interpretation of the blood eagle, I question
>the assignment of Aella to legend. He is specifically named in the
>ASC. He is described as having been of common birth, but to have taken
>over the thrown at York. When the vikings overran York, both kings
>(presumably he and the ruler he displaced) were killed. Are you aware
>of any particular reason to doubt the existance of Aella?
>
Frank's reasons for thinking otherwise.
>FWIW, I just read a curious article on the capture and killing of
>Archbishop Aelfheah in 1011. It suggests that he fell victim of the
>rowdy viking after-dinner behavior of throwing bones at each other or at
>a particular scapegoat, with the allusion to stoning having developed
>later in immitation of St.Stephen's martyrdom. This is in direct
>analogy to St.Edward's martyrdom mirroring that of St.Sebastian.
Yes, I'd heard about him being "boned" to death...
--
Pete Salmond