Battle of Hastings marks the beginning of the Medieval era? Failed by 600 years, the end of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century (deposition of the last western roman emperor Romulus Augustus in 476) is generally considered the beginning of the middle ages.
The High Middle Ages begin in the 11th century, but the Battle of Hastings is not the particular beginning either.

Spaniards blaming half frozen people.... This was around the time Spaniards were sieging Holland and tried several times to invade England after England had already been occupied by Italy, and Spain via France played large parts in Scotland and Ireland, and then invading North and South America. But go ahead blame frozen people for starting fights.

I can add alot more to about how Africa and Asia has been treated and slavery and alot more. But dont believe me, look it up.



No one could read or write hardly until after the Renaissance. Knowledge was more closely guarded back then and Rome didnt share to easily for a large part of history including reading and writing. Anyone teaching history before it could be have possibly been recorded properly has to remember that.

Those that were taught properly in the past had to go to Rome to learn. This is shown many times.

Its good history was recorded in some way but there is ZERO doubt its rarely been recorded fairly so have to look at the facts and everything to see properly.

A prime example is when Spain claimed a ship raiding and shutting down their slave colonies in South America in response to an entirely different wrong, was a bad guy. Look it up. The Spanish and the ship both recorded the same events that happened at the same slave colonies.

I hope this comment doesntt go unnoticed and anyone can look any of it up.

No offence to anyone and i do know what i am talking about and show proper respect where it is deserved.



Video games teaching history should expect a little history in return. :)

Go ahead learn history. :) But the future is important to and worth some thought as well.

Ok no one says anything thats ok. I got a question then.

CB how come your history lesson written by Spaniards and Italians talks about German, French, English, and Nordic Kings fighting in England but no Italian names or Spanish names are mentioned?

Its like Italy that were in fact slavers at the time had never occupied the place for a long time during and after the Roman Empire or that Spain also slavers had no interests there at all.

Again no offence to modern day times but its a valid question on an English forum.

I mean Spain was the last secure trade stop before going to England with the Italians. I dont get why no Italian or Spanish names mentioned in the fighting.

Go ahead CB whats your answer?



Thats ok to. Can CB the video game historians name any battle that the Italians and Spanish lost before they were kicked out of England?

Their Empire did occupy England, name any of the battles that ended their rule.

Dont forget to include the Italian and Spanish expansion attempts into Sweden and Norway while your at it.

Because the announcement was for the anniversary of the viking attack on Lindisfarne in 793, which marks the beginning of the viking age (but not the medieval era).

引用自 GodKilla-：

Because the announcement was for the anniversary of the viking attack on Lindisfarne in 793, which marks the beginning of the viking age (but not the medieval era).

I have read alot of history and this is the first i have heard of it.

I dont see who wrote this history either.

I would like to know by whos definition this started the so called Viking age. I dont get why its called the Viking age when Spain was invading everyone on the mainland and Italy was fighting in England.

Im serious where did this history come from, that CB states as fact.

Also the Normans never spoke Swedish or Danish or Norwegian they are French and spoke French.

I see they mention a German King as well, and that isnt surprising a German king would go to fight what was left of the Roman Empire in England.

I see no mention of any Spanish or Italians anywhere in all of this.

No doubt Italian and Spanish slave ships raiding pissed the Swedish, Norwegian and Danish off provoking their attacks.

I see no mention of any of this.



FYI French Kings were the first to get their freedom from the Roman Empire, and Germany never was part of the Roman Empire. Alot of history there because the Eastern Roman Empire didnt fall until after gunpowder and cannons.

This entire narrative of this topic ignores the all out expansion and slave trading of Spain mostly, and they went into South America, England, France, North America, Africa and without a doubt into Nordic waters as well.

But out of all of that this topic is what CB says is history?

Dont believe me. Look it up they captured and used slaves everywhere and no doubt thats what got the Vikings upset. No doubt about it. To bad this topic claims the Vikings were after defenceless monks or what ever.

引用自 Flippy：

引用自 GodKilla-：

Because the announcement was for the anniversary of the viking attack on Lindisfarne in 793, which marks the beginning of the viking age (but not the medieval era).

I have read alot of history and this is the first i have heard of it.

I dont see who wrote this history either.

I would like to know by whos definition this started the so called Viking age. I dont get why its called the Viking age when Spain was invading everyone on the mainland and Italy was fighting in England.

Im serious where did this history come from, that CB states as fact.

Well that only qualifies your knowledge of occidental history as deficient, it is common knowledge, Lindisfarne is famous for exactly that and for the Book of Lindisfarne.

It is called the Viking Age to mark the time viking invasions plagued Europe, to coin a common term for it, it doesn't mean there were no other even more imporant events during the time or that it was more imporant than what happened in Italy and Spain at the time. In fact what happened with the Roman Empire is most fundamental to all of Europes history, but their presence on the British Isles ended ~400 AD. "Spain" (the name is derived from latin Hispania) was part of the Roman Empire; the Western Roman Empire ultimately ended in 476, Iberia was then occupied by Goths and then by the islamic Moors (until the Reconquista).
At the time of the Lindisfarne attack neither "Spain" nor "Italy" were present on the British Isles, nor did either of them even exist, the viking raids however were an enormous impact for the people of Britain and north-western Europe at the time.

引用自 GodKilla-：

引用自 Flippy：

I have read alot of history and this is the first i have heard of it.

I dont see who wrote this history either.

I would like to know by whos definition this started the so called Viking age. I dont get why its called the Viking age when Spain was invading everyone on the mainland and Italy was fighting in England.

Im serious where did this history come from, that CB states as fact.

Well that only qualifies your knowledge of occidental history as deficient, it is common knowledge, Lindisfarne is famous for exactly that and for the Book of Lindisfarne.

It is called the Viking Age to mark the time viking invasions plagued Europe, to coin a common term for it, it doesn't mean there were no other even more imporant events during the time or that it was more imporant than what happened in Italy and Spain at the time. In fact what happened with the Roman Empire is most fundamental to all of Europes history, but their presence on the British Isles ended ~400 AD. "Spain" (the name is derived from latin Hispania) was part of the Roman Empire; the Western Roman Empire ultimately ended in 476, Iberia was then occupied by Goths and then by the islamic Moors (until the Reconquista).
At the time of the Lindisfarne attack neither "Spain" nor "Italy" were present on the British Isles, nor did either of them even exist, the viking raids however were an enormous impact for the people of Britain and north-western Europe at the time.

The entire concept is ridiculous. They didnt have the man power or technology to do what they were blamed for.

So i will go back to my first statement and say it sounds like YET ANOTHER Spaniard raid and blamed on the Vikings.

Dont say the Viking claimed they did this because unless someone convinved them through the years in history there is no way they could have made record of it.

I really dont want to get started but there is literally thousands of years of raiding to look at and a VERY FEW half frozen Vikings in row boats had next to nothing to do with any of it.

Even this very topic is raiding a defenceless people that could not have kept records at the time.

引用自 Flippy：

The entire concept is ridiculous. They didnt have the man power or technology to do what they were blamed for.

So i will go back to my first statement and say it sounds like YET ANOTHER Spaniard raid and blamed on the Vikings.

Dont say the Viking claimed they did this because unless someone convinved them through the years in history there is no way they could have made record of it.

Historians are certain because scribes accross all of north-western Europe document about the invasions.
Your theory doesn't make sense to me, but you'd also have to be more precise, "Spaniards" between ~800~1100 (Vikings Age) is a very far streched term. The Reconquista had begun, Asturia, Léon, Castillia, ... emerged/vanished.
None of those realms had the capacity to launch raids across all of Europe over the course of 3 centuries and I don't think the British or people of Europe were not able to tell the difference between a scandinavian and a spaniard.
The Vikings were also called Danes because in Danemark they used to land every season to launch their raids, they had a large trading and landing seaport there.

And the scandinavian people did make records, the Sagas and runestones. 'Vikingr' may mean 'west-sailing' which every viking had to do once in his life. Those who sailed to the east/southeast (Russia) are called Varangians or Varyags.

引用自 GodKilla-：

引用自 Flippy：

The entire concept is ridiculous. They didnt have the man power or technology to do what they were blamed for.

So i will go back to my first statement and say it sounds like YET ANOTHER Spaniard raid and blamed on the Vikings.

Dont say the Viking claimed they did this because unless someone convinved them through the years in history there is no way they could have made record of it.

Historians are certain because scribes accross all of north-western Europe document about the invasions.
Your theory doesn't make sense to me, but you'd also have to be more precise, "Spaniards" between ~800~1100 (Vikings Age) is a very far streched term. The Reconquista had begun, Asturia, Léon, Castillia, ... emerged/vanished.
None of those realms had the capacity to launch raids across all of Europe over the course of 3 centuries and I don't think the British or people of Europe were not able to tell the difference between a scandinavian and a spaniard.
The Vikings were also called Danes because in Danemark they used to land every season to launch their raids, they had a large trading and landing seaport there.

And the scandinavian people did make records, the Sagas and runestones. 'Vikingr' may mean 'west-sailing' which every viking had to do once in his life. Those who sailed to the east/southeast (Russia) are called Varangians or Varyags.

Thank you for bringing the Reconquista up.



Again no offence to modern day, and a reminder that even in South and North America and especially England and France things were very complicated and have to know history and look into these things to know not everyone in any group was bad and some tried to help the natives and fought and died beside them and history is long and complicated.

Roman legions fought beside the last Pharaoh of Egypt after the the Emperor was assassinated. History really is long and complicated.