Vikings Rule

Just so you know.

I love Deadliest Warrior on Spike TV. Yes, really. Right now they’ve got a marathon going, and I’ve got to get back to that, but I’ve just got to put it out there that the Viking vs. Samurai episode was completely wrong. No way could a Samurai take on a Viking at close range and survive.

Just had to get that off my chest. Gotta go, they’re examining who would come out on top in a terrorist showdown: IRA vs. Taliban.

Advertisements

2 comments on “Vikings Rule

  1. Douglas says:

    You are absolutely correct.

    Vikings were excess, young males who had to prove their manhood, and in the process created a great deal of what we believe to be “natural” western institutions.

    The Samurai, were leaders, who ruled through terror, forcing peasents before them in war’s against their own people.

    The Vikings, were individuals, in fact “viking” isn’t a noun, it’s an adverb. The young men, to prove their value went “viking.”

    And the vikings, who ruled through raid, conquest, and pillage, created things like the rule of law as we understand it, the court of equals, the servant sovereign, (like a captain of a vessel being the voice of a nation) numerous of the penalties we now no longer practice, but are a part of the common vernacular, like “pay through the nose” is a viking thing.

    If you are a debtor who refuses to pay, and are conficted, one nostrel is cut.

    The Samurai, had no such civilizing aspect, in that they created an equal judgement (even a norse would pay through the nose if found guilty by a jury of 12) The samurai were representations of an absolute sovereign with absolute authority.

    And there is no way, a samurai force, could stand against a norse based/viking force, because they couldn’t stand against the first norse based/viking force they ever faced. . . . . Brittain.

  2. Prudie says:

    Thanks Douglas. The problem with the show was that they relied too much on the technology of the warriors. True, technology is a large part of warfare, but there’s more to it. They didn’t consider the historical aspects you pointed out.

Comments are closed.