This sounds like the setup to a romcom. "Duke William had it all. He was winning battles left and right. They called him 'William the Conquerer'. But there was just one problem: he couldn't find a wife. Even his enemies had started to take notice. Everyone was asking the same question: is he 'man enough' to lead if he doesn't have a woman? This holiday season, Will's friends are on a mission. They're not looking to get him a girlfriend or even a concubine: they're looking to get him a wife."
dude was a known accomplished military commander and warrior. yet people questioned his manliness because "he ain't got no bitches bro" has to be the funniest thing i've heard today.
Two of his soldiers were probably like "i dont know, so many men in his armies yelling his name in battle and yet...no women in the evening to do the same?"
Running for his life most of his childhood, I guess he had other priorities. Especially if manliness required more than just a high body count but forming actual caring lasting relationships.
I think it`s funny until you realize it`s basically the same today and leads to things like Incels and misogyny in general because a lot of guys are big mad that they don`t have access to a certain societal status because girls and women won`t date them.
I think it`s funny until you realize it`s basically the same today and leads to a lot of misogyny. A lot of guys are big mad that they don`t have access to a certain societal status because girls and women won`t date them. That makes them adopt ideas of wanting to control women and they behave and vote accordingly.
I think as a wider audience, we tend to jump to the conclusion that Concubines subscribe to the Chinese version of such a thing Where the women are and will forever be the Man's Concubine/Property. But with the way you describe it. It sound a lot more like a modern-day concept of dating or dare i say Sugar Situation. Especially since it appears the Concubine can leave the man and still get married one day. As long as that is explicit in the story hopefully the reader will be smart enough to understand the difference.
Fun fact, this stayed a thing in Swedens law until 1734. The church tried their best to get women to stay virgins until married by making rules for how fancy the bridal crown could be (this happend in the mid 1600s) depending on if you where a virgin, had slept with your husband to be, or with completely different man but the only truly bad one (that would result in a fine) was lying about it. Until 1734 if you had a kid out of wedlock they still had a right to inherit part of their fathers estate. Now _proving_ that back then, a lot harder. But still part of the law for a long time.
@@cmm5542 This is a new word for me as well. I've read... quite a few books on medieval and ancient history already, and not come across that particular word once (that I recall). It would appear to only be helpful dependent upon which cultures you're reading about, what aspects of said cultures, and in which centuries. It's a fine word to know, but it certainly isn't one that will make or break your understanding of any other topic in your historical reading repertoire. What it does, though, at least for me, is make me want to go read "Tears of the Wolf". I'm intrigued!
@@poonyaTara Some people have lived long enough to make use of good words when they find them. Getting the pronounciation correct, much like spelling, is a different matter all together. Hearing words pronounced when you have only read or listened to them with a much different accent can make it seem like a whole new word, but really just a door to a new understanding of how people act in another part of the world, when the are not being watched......
The events leading up to William the Conqueror are even more illustrative of the role of powerful women in the Norse kingdoms, with multiple women named Aelgifu marrying, and later divorcing key rulers. Exes and step children were quite common, and made for some interesting stories :)
I’m just so glad and thrilled she considers Norman Vikings and Norse related and theme too! Many do not and it makes me sad. Norman usually get lumped with the French solely or they focus on Sicily and crusader ones. Not their pagan roots
@DillionMatt Mostly because Normans were french. William didn't speak Norse, nor had his ancestors for a couple hundred years by then, and all of them since Rollo were Christian, all of the troops William brought to England were French speaking and replaced the Anglo Saxon nobility. There is very little Norse in Normans that took over England in 1066. It's like saying that the Anglosaxons are German (not Germanic, German) for some reason.
I understand what you mean, but Viking is a profession, as in sea raider, not a people. One more thing, a Norse wife did have great power over her husband, she could request a divorce, hence destroy his reputation as a man, because he must have failed to satisfy her in bed, or failed in any other masculine task, like provide for the family.
She seems aware of this in other videos (I think shes even made that point herself), but she still uses the 'viking as stand in for Norse' for the audience
@@PraiseJ-Pope While it is not normally brought up directly in court, I think it is a frequently discussed topic. It is especially discussed in divorces where adultery was involved (regardless of gender, but maybe more frequently aimed at men). There seems to be an assumption that a man who can satisfy his wife won't get cheated on. This is a false hope that only lets people feel a delusion of control by blaming a wronged party for their misfortune, but it is commonly discussed nonetheless.
What iv learned from this random subject video is Vikings and ancient customs were just as confusing weird and hard to keep track of as modern societal systems.
Well, a thousand years ago we bullied men for being single. Now we bully men for being INvoluntary CELibates. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
One of the 'advantages' for a concubine was proof she birthed healthy children, so a lower class woman with a proven 'track record' and a healthy dowry might be just what an older high ranking man with no heir might be looking for, she gives him an heir, plays nice until he dies, and gets the run of the place until the child is old enough, and assuming a good maternal relationship, and well played politics, she's set from there
So for the Norse, could a child of a concubine inherit the positions of power? In Christian Europe, your parents normally needed to be married for you to inherit. Also, it seems strange that they would let the mother rule in the child's name rather than another male relative or advisors. She isn't a blood relative of the former ruler.
@@greywolf7577 In my example one mans former concubines' becomes the older mans wife, having proven her ability to birth healthy children she's worth more than an 'unproven' woman, her older child would not be in a position to inherit, and often would become a servant in their fathers household (since keeping concubines and providing them dowry was a rich mans game) a son with her husband would be in the line of succession, and she's unlikely to have a male relative of sufficient rank to hold title until the child comes of age. While higher class concubines existed their trajectory differed, I was pointing to a way a relative peasant could secure herself within the system. Pre-Christianization the idea of virginity/purity wasn't used the same way, it surely existed, but for certain groups it would have been much less important , an older man with no heirs will have very different priorities when selecting a wife than a young man.
@@greywolf7577 But a relative of the future one. Also it is in her best Interest that her child makes it to the Throne, an older male relative might see things differently.
What’s more ironic is how many people mistake the values of “Christian Europe” as being biblical when they were, in fact, Greco Roman. The word translated concubine in the Bible was just another form of a marriage covenant and the children of that covenant were to be given the same treatment and inheritance as the children of more formal marriages. As Europe, as per Roman tradition, didn’t permit polygamy and as the Bible in neither Greek nor Hebrew has a specific word meaning wife, the translators didn’t quite know what to do with passages referring to wives of lower social status or in polygamous marriages. Therefore they translated it through European cultural lenses and called them concubines.
@@greywolf7577 Yes a concubine was seen as a wife with lower status in the eye of the law, and the children was seen as "legitimate" but of lower status then the children of the proper wife. But they did have the right to inherit. That a concubine take power is theoretically possible, but then the wife need to be dead, and the wife's children is not old enough to assume power, and the man have not appoint a guardian/advisor to rule until a child is old enough to assume power
@@KateeAngeli saw William the fucking conqueror killing 20 men on the battlefield and ran at me i wouldn't think to myself "You gay." I would just shit myself.
Normands were very much "Viking-adjacent" with norse traditions still in place, and William was not called "the bastard" for so long without reason, his parents were not married by the christian church, Herleva was of a lower social status and was Robert's wife "more danico", a concubine in the danish way.
Thank you! I rarely see this emphasized enough. Normans usually get lumped with French, Sicily, and crusaders not their pagan roots as much. Which I find odd. It also makes William conquest of England more ironic because he is fighting Danes, Scandinavians, and Anglo Saxons who are less “French”😂
@@DillionMatt the making of France, and whatever "being french" is, has been a long process, like assembling the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle and convincing each piece, in time, that it belonged with the others. The general population of Normandy in William The Conqueror's time was probably more or less as Gallic as it had been under the Roman Empire, successive invasions only affected the ruling classes. And then, same thing in England when he conquered it. English people did not become Norse, but William was no more English than he was ever French.
@@ameliecarre4783 French being more trade and court language at the time. Norse or Scandinavians in general probably did move to England and Normandy but assimilated into the majority there. In France being Gallic. Scandinavia ain’t that populated in general. Also a harsh land in general. Most are likely traders, farmers, and a handful of nobles leading them. Acting as raiders/vikings when beneficial. You see Norse in the English language. England itself is likely a mix of Anglo-Saxons and Briton Celtic influences. Norse and Norman are more so a minority influence which you see in language graphics about modern English. Celtic influence always seems to get “snuff”. It odd. You think the Celtic influence would be bigger in England? Same with France too. Latin and Germanic culture bloc seems to be more influential.
@@ameliecarre4783 true, I just like to Nordic and Germanic folk/pagan themes. For some reason I always associate Celtic more so with Christianity especially folklore wise. Norman usually gets lump with Christian symbolism because they did play a role in the crusades and Sicily. So I find more pagan base stories more interesting
It's a similar idea in todays US Military, albeit for a different reason altogether- high ranking officers are more often than not married. it's pretty rare to find one who's single because Officers who are married are seen as reliable and being able to run a home, so in turn they should be able to run a military (i guess?) and it also plays to the Discipline theater they have going on, you dont ever hear about adulterous generals because it'd make the whole institution look amoral Source- My Fwb who was a Colonel before retiring
People need to stop to put people from a thousand years ago up to our social standards. Different times, different rules. I really appreciate that you aim for historical accuracy in your works of fiction, even though spice is not my genre.
It's similar in the modern society as well when it comes to valuing men. The fact that you had to say ''In his defense'' at 1:17 just proves my point...
@@Regina316You need kids to have a lineage that lasts longer than this TH-cam message board will. What proof is there that you lived in 1,000 years? The things you do? Almost assuredly not, very few things survive for 1,000 years. But that unimportant farmer in your past that had a completely mediocre life will have a far greater impact than the most important person in his sphere of life.
2:34 In Dune when Jessica says, "History will call us wives" to Chani seems extremely plausible to me as an anthropology major. I mean if Solomon wasn't the son of Bathsheba I'm pretty sure she would be an unnamed concubine. Which would have been unfortunate because then people wouldn't have known what a terrible person David was.
This subject matter is much deeper than the time you alotted but well done. If i could make one criticism, i see in many videos. Please stop excuse or tip toeing around the past. I know many people get triggered by certain words because they are weak and uneducated, but the past is the past and can't be changed, and augar coating it is what leads us to repeat it. I decend from Rollo that i know my ancestors were monsters by todays standards. But they shaped the world, and we owe them the respect of rememberance for giving us what we have. Well done though. You have a new follower.
Outstanding Video chat! Learned something new and whether people admit it or not, those views still exist today..... under different names perhaps, but I can see the patterns. May of been much more distinct in the ancient cultures, but no denying that when a man remains single too long, people begin questioning what his problem is or could be. Leads to all kinds of speculations.
The problem here, in understanding the facts of how the ancient Viking thought, is us, not them. We don't like to think about it, but we are all going to die someday. Those ancient people were intimately aware of death, it was something they saw on a routine basis. A man that didn't take a wife and provide for her a home and children was not doing his part to ensure the survival of his culture. This is just as true today as it ever was. We have more time, resources and technology, still we too will pass. It is easier for us today to carelessly and foolishly destroy a home and family through our irresponsible behavior. However, every one of us that does that hurts the society as a whole. A thousand years ago, when people watched their friends and neighbors dying around them, people were not so forgiving of degenerate behavior. It was like sitting in the back of a boat and not rowing.
The strictures of the Fantasy/Romance genre can be overly strict at times. If the goal is to show romantic love in all its spendor, then its complexities must be shown as well. We are not a naturally monogamous species, and that is a biological fact. But in our cultures, which are not biological, we do often aspire to monogamy, fidelity, a ilfelong partnership--and that's a fascinating contradiction in us. And like all ideals, is often more aspiration than reality. Not always. I had no one before I met my person. She had past relationships that were meaningful to her. And would tell me about them. In great detail. While I didn't always appreciate this, I did want to know all there was to know about her, and I recognized that the person I loved was the sum total of her past experiences, happy and otherwise. Also, some of the stories were really funny. Like this one time she wanted to see her ex, who had moved to California, while she remained in New York. So she got on a transcontinental train. He had, at the same time, taken a train to New York. They passed each other somewhere in mid-continent. She had a nice time exploring the West Coast (with almost no money). Later, she found out what happened. Sounds very romcom. But in fact, they never got back together. I have no problem with this ending. ;) Maybe the single part of Frank Herbert's novel Dune that most gets to me is Leto and Jessica's relationship. He knew he'd never love anyone as he did her, but aspiring to be Emperor someday, he had to be available for a politically advantageous marriage--so she remained his concubine, and their union was no less real--she was his wife in everything but name, as well as an invaluable ally, due to her knowledge and abilities. But as Leto is awaiting death, all he can feel is regret that he never gave her his name. That he held back any part of himself from her in his quest for power, when the things that made his life meaningful were the love they felt for each other and the son created by that love. Paul was his legitimate heir, which in fact was possible in many societies where concubinage was practiced. Herbert did his research. But I would not say the Dune novels are Fantasy/Romance. Science Fiction with a fantasy ethos, let's say.
Looking forward to reading this :) Not sure if you're familiar with it yet, but Viking Answer Lady has some great leads for when you're researching this sort of thing (attitudes and practical details of daily live in that culture).
One point missed is a simple one we overlook in our modern societies. Being "Single" for a leader is a huge worry to everyone as it means there are no heirs being produced. No acknowledged heirs leads to uncertainty as to the continuity of governance. That uncertainty leads to political strains (internal and external) as everyone has to be constantly prepared to carve their position out of the new power structure.
You know, their whole view of concubines could actually be a great plot for a romance book. (could be spicy or not) say, she's the sister of a friend of his/ husband died could be a lot of different things, about to be married off to an evil man, and in order to protect her, the MC claims her as his concubine. He claims no romantic affections from her, its simply a relationship of convenience for both of them. He's not interested in a wife at this time, but still needs to be seen as manly, and she needs protection from an evil would be husband. And then a potential romance can continue from there. Maybe with her eventually becoming his wife I dunno.
*grin * Just because I love huge surprises and absolutely vicious plot twists, plot twist: What we thought was the main character goes to negotiate with some neighbour or other and it goes horribly wrong. There is an attack and things are looking bleak until said "evil" warhawk of a man arrives to save the day. He doesn't do things properly, he has little honor to speak of, but he and his warriors do save a lot of people's lives that day. Cue chaos in poor heroine's head.
@Regina316 interesting, i love when the main villian actually helps the good guys. But he doesn't reform in order to help, it just suits his interest. Like Lex Luthor in the New Adventures of Superman. He helps Clark save Lois on more than one occasion cuz he's obsessed with Lois. Not cuz he's actually a good guy.
@@americandefender1861 That's one way to look at it. The other way is... a message along the lines of "If other people are being nasty and you insist on being kind even to them, sometimes that will result in you or your loved ones suffering." Kindness is likely to be exploited, like it or not, do about it what you will, or let it be if you wish... but don't be surpised.
I would like to add one very important factor in this, which many people seem not to get - marriage or formal wedding is a newer custom if we consider a human history. Calling a wedding or marriage in front of a priest or whatever is very very late . Before that , people would see man and woman together for some time and would assume that they are 'husband and wife' ( husband and wife again is loosely termed here cause its not entirely marriage) . So what would a modern society call that relationship? Concubine ? Live in partner ? Wife? partner? Now going back to the topic, the "marriage" was sometimes were done by the request of one family to another. Sometimes it was the decision of the man and woman which both family blessed. Sometimes women didn't have a say in it. Sometimes women had all the say in it. Sometimes men took woman as their "wife" by showing her how good he was in hunting. Sometimes men abducted the women . Sometimes women ran away to their loved one and start a family. Depending on the culture or the time period. It worked well because the early tribes / villages / migrating people were relatively small in numbers. With religion being institutionalized or trying to take control away from the monarchy or chieftains, the formal wedding became such big thing. ( Later religions like Abrahamic religions started this from the get go ) . Along with city or township exploding in numbers it also kind of became a necessity. You would marry in front of the GOD or church to basically let know the society that you are married. And because Abrahamic religions put so much restraint and control over people's lives and stigmatized sex it became a necessity for a common human to do that.
Tangentially one of my favourite Dune Quotes: "Think on it, Chani: that princess will have the name, yet she'll live as less than a concubine-never to know a moment of tenderness from the man to whom she's bound. While we, Chani, we who carry the name of concubine-history will call us wives."
A starting point might be simply searching 'viking ship Museum' in Google and clicking on their website. You don't have to go there to get a general overview you can use as a starting point. Also; the Viking Age is called 'vikingetiden' in danish if that helps. Some Danish websites come with an english translation built in😅 Good luck and I hope this helps.
There's always going to be some people who hate it. But if you're doing historical things with historical research, the real question is how well you explain the situation and envision it. There's also always a default problem that here can be of benefit to you, where people adopt a protagonist-centered morality when they read things. You can write the protagonist doing something awful and you want people to dislike the awful thing, but they won't because it's the protagonist, and as long as he's the one doing it, it's fine. (I'm sure you've seen similar problems where people decide characters are cute little cinnamon rolls despite massacring an entire village? Same thing. But here it plays more in people's favor as it allows them to accept the morality of the time being different than their own morality.
I'm not a romance reader, so take this for what it's worth, but I've long been annoyed by how we read modern ethics back into tales set in older time periods -- I mean not all of them, there's plenty that really couldn't fly with a sympathetic character for a modern audience, but like, the modern concept of monogamous love is not the only way to do things, and shouldn't be the only way to write characters. Choosing to honor an obligation to a person you were connected to but now aren't, that does make me feel like the character is more honorable and worthwhile. Still caring for the welfare of your children even if you're in a different marriage relationship, that sort of thing too. Making sure that your harem is well cared for and not bored. That sort of thing. And that's before getting into possibly polyamory -- that's just counting situations where the sexual relationship was socially regulated and the emotional relationship was weak or absent. Which allows the man to be open to a new emotional relationship without a background that includes either tragedy or loose ends ("Die For Our Ship").
@ Im trying to think of a Crusader Kings related phrase to throw out besides 'Deus Vult!'. Maybe 'Look out, the Aztecs are coming!' or 'Glitterhoof makes an excellent chancellor'
4 years played Swedish violin with about 25 Swedish people, mostly retired ladies & gentlemen. We had to memorize a set of 15 songs per year. Good memories. I sure wouldn't cheat on a Swedish wife!
This reminds me of Harold Godwinson and Edith "Swan neck" who were married "in the Danish Manner" and had many children including Gytha who became mother to a line of Grand Princes of Kiev. The legal informality of Harold and Edith's marriage meant that Harold was able to marry Edwin and Morcar's sister Ealdgyth (also Edith), as I understand, largely as an act of diplomacy to secure the Northern Earls' support for his gaining the throne of England
What about putting a short blurb in your books, at least the e-books, with mentions of things like this and other choices based on history? Just a few sentences per topic you are making these videos on. I really like hearing stuff like this, and think it would work well in your books in the same way that some historical books or translations have a bit of a preface about historical context.
Could we go American Girl style and put a "Peek Into the Past" at the end of each book, exploring some of these issues a little deeper, like the videos do?
This sounds like the kind of pitch I would get from one of my female students who gets frustrated I’m married. “There’s a broad variety of concubinage arrangements…”. Young women are down bad these days.
I’m so glad you consider Norman Viking adjacent😂. Many don’t and I find it annoying. They are literally Norse people who learned the French language and laws. While many historians brush off their Norse roots
Norman literally is "north man". Kinda hard to miss what that means, tbh. I remember that from like high school at the latest. Though, iirc, they did intermarry with the other peoples there, so weren't "purebred" Scandinavian/viking by the time of William.
I have been working on an alternate history story for a long while set in the late Roman Empire. The main character's father owns and trains slaves. From a modern perspective this is evil and reprehensible, but to the Romans it was fairly normal. Understanding that historical periods had wildly different morals to our modern ones is a part of historical fiction.
Marriage also brought social stability and a measured from of ambition and social cohesion... Whereas concubines were recognized as a instability. The social stability brought by marriage created a stable economic environment and a coherent cohesive ambitious ambition that moved the entire community forward. Whereas a society that lacks a harmony culture in this way rapidly becomes radically unstable and then dysfunctional.
High status individuals in history were expected to have families. Viking culture was similar to pre Charlemagne Germanic culture, where men were seen as superior for not having seggs as they were seen as more disciplined and men who indulged were seen as hedonistic and weak. Tribes like the nervii swore off alcohol for similar reasons. The Vikings had the same culture.
Hello. First, great video. Second as a historian and avid fantasy fan may I ask for the sources that you read upon the concubine and Scandinavian "Manliest" topic? I have my way to find some, but it I am interested about others list too. Thank you in advance, have a nice day and Happy Holidays to you!
Since I am precisely the sort of weird history buff to bring this up in a casual conversation, feel free to picture that one scene from Golden Girls with Dorothy and the gang in the drugstore, but Dorothy is yelling "CONCUBINES! CONCUBINES!" instead of "CONDOMS! CONDOMS!" ... Coincidentally, as a young man my fiance would have been happy labeling it an extensive network of concubines, since he was forever hankering to have his cake and eat it too. I may or may not mention it the next time he starts reminiscing about behaving badly.
This continues to this day. For over 8 years I have been able to find a woman interested in me. Shit sucks. I also refuse to just "hook up" with someone. I feel quite manly. I apparently am a "good guy"............... Humanity is bizarre.
Love history with Elizabeth Wheatley yeah cant wait to check it out also about Concubinage one of 2024s Sci-Fis biggest film had that present so I think audiences are understanding I mean it was common practice in those times.
God, it sounds like it would have been exhausting. Go to war, win in battle, but you're still not a real man because you haven't hooked up with someone? Christ, that's obnoxious. Makes me very glad to live in the here and now.
A Viking man could have multiple concubines, but only one wife. On top of that could he have multiple thralls/slaves he could share the bed with. The three types had different rights, powers and statuses. His children from the three different relationships had different rights, powers and statuses as well. Monks and other Christians that wrote about the Vikings very often didn't tell everything, wasn't always honest and truthful with their "facts" and at times even totally lied about the Vikings, so multiple sources are very often important when talking about Viking "facts". Some sources also seem to be much more reliable than others, both because of the time it was written and because of archaeological finds and evidences.
Have you come across the DNA research on chromosomes in Iceland and Faroe Islands ? Turns out that the male chromosome in those places is almost all Nordic. Female, not so much. over 60% of Icelandic female chromosome is Celtic. Same in the Faroes. Read into that what you want.
Intermarriage was very common historically, and it was even reflected in the lore about the Aesir and Vanir: Thor, Freyja, Freyr, Njiord, and most of the Gods and Goddesses had diverse heritage. Intermarriage was a common form of adoption into the society.
@@anthill1510 I mean, what you think about did happen. You know it, I know it, we all know it. But it wasn't the only thing. Think about it. Men fight, men die. Women don't fight. There is many more women left then men. Who are they going to marry?
Rollo is a direct ancestor of mine, as he is of a lot of people today. My ancestors at the time were berserkers, clan name of "Mutilators" lol. Interesting subject however! Just wanted to add, you look at lot like Christina Ricci it's crazy!
Oh, this is interesting if you think about Fair Annie in terms of concubinage - she had every reason to expect that she'd get all the privileges of a wife, including her man not just suddenly up and marrying another woman.
It's not much different today, actually. Having a gf or wife elevates your status and being single is seen and subtly marketed as being somehow inferior.
Usually concubines got something (like a dowry or something, a bit like a severance package) but if he didn't have a wife I believe the bulk of his property reverted to his Mother? (Don't quote me on that, I am basing it off the fact that things like houses, farming tools, and property stayed with the Mother's line).
they did not have concubines usually. they had very strict marital laws. Basically only someone like a King or Jarl rarely had concubines. They were very monogamous and had strict marital laws.
Concubinage - so, polygyny basically A wife's offspring would have been considered the legitimate heirs, though all the other children were expected to be provided for
I think it is not only the concept that a man is virile but more like how can you lead us a nation or a tribe if you cannot lead a home? I guess when the apostle Paul discusses deacons he does stress that they must be married and a good husband and father to be a deacon a leader to others.
Keeping subtitles hardwired into the video is one of the most distracting things you can do. It makes it hard to keep track of the story you're telling.
I never read anything about "satisfy a woman" you think they had a ranking system? Having children was considered manly though, because doh, and the absence of children a legally justified reason to demand a divorce. I don't think Vikings even thought in terms of "single". The family was your world and security, the more numerous the more powerful. It's expansion the goal of wealth gain. As for William in feudal France with it's endless infighting the absence of an heir and clear transition of power would of course be concerning to his vasalls. How great of a leader he was wouldn't matter when he was dead.
So I'm probably in a minority, but I like stories that try their hand at something more grey like concubines. Yes, it was a social system meant as another means of oppressing women (i would lightly argue that longterm girlfriends who give wife privledges to a man who won't marry them are probably the modern equivalent, but there's more personal freedom involved for the modern GF), but that was the reality of the times, and they were still just people trying to do their people thing and find some joy and not die. It's not a comfortable topic, but it IS an interesting one, to see how real humans move and think within a society that has different standards.
All good points. I like your theory about contemporary concubines. Much food for thought there, I'd say. ...Of course, that I am now seriously tempted to bring it up to my fiance the next time he starts reminiscing about behaving badly during his womanizing days is (shall we say) coincidental. 😈
It seems like concubines occupied a rather in between status. They had rights and recognition a one night stand or similar casual relationship didn’t, but a lower status than a wife but also lower expectations (the wife had social obligations, had to produce the legitimate offspring, etc.).
Why do you call William a viking? He was not. For the first, the Viking area was over, and second, viking was an occupation, not a people. What you mean is Norman.
This sounds like the setup to a romcom. "Duke William had it all. He was winning battles left and right. They called him 'William the Conquerer'. But there was just one problem: he couldn't find a wife. Even his enemies had started to take notice. Everyone was asking the same question: is he 'man enough' to lead if he doesn't have a woman? This holiday season, Will's friends are on a mission. They're not looking to get him a girlfriend or even a concubine: they're looking to get him a wife."
This sounds probable ngl
That's funny
I'd watch/read it
I can only hear this with "Walkin' on Sunshine" playing in the background
Ironically, William I probably liked the D.
dude was a known accomplished military commander and warrior. yet people questioned his manliness because "he ain't got no bitches bro" has to be the funniest thing i've heard today.
Two of his soldiers were probably like "i dont know, so many men in his armies yelling his name in battle and yet...no women in the evening to do the same?"
Running for his life most of his childhood, I guess he had other priorities. Especially if manliness required more than just a high body count but forming actual caring lasting relationships.
Relatable
I think it`s funny until you realize it`s basically the same today and leads to things like Incels and misogyny in general because a lot of guys are big mad that they don`t have access to a certain societal status because girls and women won`t date them.
I think it`s funny until you realize it`s basically the same today and leads to a lot of misogyny. A lot of guys are big mad that they don`t have access to a certain societal status because girls and women won`t date them. That makes them adopt ideas of wanting to control women and they behave and vote accordingly.
I think as a wider audience, we tend to jump to the conclusion that Concubines subscribe to the Chinese version of such a thing
Where the women are and will forever be the Man's Concubine/Property. But with the way you describe it. It sound a lot more like a modern-day concept of dating or dare i say Sugar Situation. Especially since it appears the Concubine can leave the man and still get married one day. As long as that is explicit in the story hopefully the reader will be smart enough to understand the difference.
I was actually just thinking that haha (the loose connection to modern standards). Very interesting stuff.
Concubines in China were more alike the concubines in the harems of the islamic world then the concubines in european history.
Today it would be called a 'mistress' or 'side piece'.
Fun fact, this stayed a thing in Swedens law until 1734.
The church tried their best to get women to stay virgins until married by making rules for how fancy the bridal crown could be (this happend in the mid 1600s) depending on if you where a virgin, had slept with your husband to be, or with completely different man but the only truly bad one (that would result in a fine) was lying about it.
Until 1734 if you had a kid out of wedlock they still had a right to inherit part of their fathers estate. Now _proving_ that back then, a lot harder. But still part of the law for a long time.
So being someone's Viking concubine means you have a sugar daddy?
Learned a new word today: concubinage. Not sure how often I will be using that one in my daily vocabulary 😄
It's helpful in understanding books about ancient times though, so now you can get more of those!
Some words one just absolutely needs to know only once in one's life, I guess. 😂
@@poonyaTarathat begs the question: how many words does one need never know?
@@cmm5542 This is a new word for me as well. I've read... quite a few books on medieval and ancient history already, and not come across that particular word once (that I recall). It would appear to only be helpful dependent upon which cultures you're reading about, what aspects of said cultures, and in which centuries. It's a fine word to know, but it certainly isn't one that will make or break your understanding of any other topic in your historical reading repertoire.
What it does, though, at least for me, is make me want to go read "Tears of the Wolf". I'm intrigued!
@@poonyaTara Some people have lived long enough to make use of good words when they find them.
Getting the pronounciation correct, much like spelling, is a different matter all together. Hearing words pronounced when you have only read or listened to them with a much different accent can make it seem like a whole new word, but really just a door to a new understanding of how people act in another part of the world, when the are not being watched......
The events leading up to William the Conqueror are even more illustrative of the role of powerful women in the Norse kingdoms, with multiple women named Aelgifu marrying, and later divorcing key rulers. Exes and step children were quite common, and made for some interesting stories :)
Ironically, most Swedes are practically ladybois now.
I’m just so glad and thrilled she considers Norman Vikings and Norse related and theme too! Many do not and it makes me sad. Norman usually get lumped with the French solely or they focus on Sicily and crusader ones. Not their pagan roots
William the concubine conqueror 😊
@DillionMatt Mostly because Normans were french. William didn't speak Norse, nor had his ancestors for a couple hundred years by then, and all of them since Rollo were Christian, all of the troops William brought to England were French speaking and replaced the Anglo Saxon nobility.
There is very little Norse in Normans that took over England in 1066. It's like saying that the Anglosaxons are German (not Germanic, German) for some reason.
I understand what you mean, but Viking is a profession, as in sea raider, not a people.
One more thing, a Norse wife did have great power over her husband, she could request a divorce, hence destroy his reputation as a man, because he must have failed to satisfy her in bed, or failed in any other masculine task, like provide for the family.
She seems aware of this in other videos (I think shes even made that point herself), but she still uses the 'viking as stand in for Norse' for the audience
Imagine todays divorce courts if the satisfaction thing was still allowed...
@@PraiseJ-PopeThere was something similar in the High Middle Ages as well . . .
@@PraiseJ-Pope While it is not normally brought up directly in court, I think it is a frequently discussed topic. It is especially discussed in divorces where adultery was involved (regardless of gender, but maybe more frequently aimed at men). There seems to be an assumption that a man who can satisfy his wife won't get cheated on. This is a false hope that only lets people feel a delusion of control by blaming a wronged party for their misfortune, but it is commonly discussed nonetheless.
Or he could have hit her (in some cases a reason for divorce), and it's great if they think "he's not manly, he hit his wife!'
What iv learned from this random subject video is Vikings and ancient customs were just as confusing weird and hard to keep track of as modern societal systems.
Well, a thousand years ago we bullied men for being single. Now we bully men for being INvoluntary CELibates.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The more things change, the more they stay the same it seems
One of the 'advantages' for a concubine was proof she birthed healthy children, so a lower class woman with a proven 'track record' and a healthy dowry might be just what an older high ranking man with no heir might be looking for, she gives him an heir, plays nice until he dies, and gets the run of the place until the child is old enough, and assuming a good maternal relationship, and well played politics, she's set from there
So for the Norse, could a child of a concubine inherit the positions of power? In Christian Europe, your parents normally needed to be married for you to inherit.
Also, it seems strange that they would let the mother rule in the child's name rather than another male relative or advisors. She isn't a blood relative of the former ruler.
@@greywolf7577 In my example one mans former concubines' becomes the older mans wife, having proven her ability to birth healthy children she's worth more than an 'unproven' woman, her older child would not be in a position to inherit, and often would become a servant in their fathers household (since keeping concubines and providing them dowry was a rich mans game) a son with her husband would be in the line of succession, and she's unlikely to have a male relative of sufficient rank to hold title until the child comes of age. While higher class concubines existed their trajectory differed, I was pointing to a way a relative peasant could secure herself within the system. Pre-Christianization the idea of virginity/purity wasn't used the same way, it surely existed, but for certain groups it would have been much less important , an older man with no heirs will have very different priorities when selecting a wife than a young man.
@@greywolf7577 But a relative of the future one. Also it is in her best Interest that her child makes it to the Throne, an older male relative might see things differently.
What’s more ironic is how many people mistake the values of “Christian Europe” as being biblical when they were, in fact, Greco Roman. The word translated concubine in the Bible was just another form of a marriage covenant and the children of that covenant were to be given the same treatment and inheritance as the children of more formal marriages. As Europe, as per Roman tradition, didn’t permit polygamy and as the Bible in neither Greek nor Hebrew has a specific word meaning wife, the translators didn’t quite know what to do with passages referring to wives of lower social status or in polygamous marriages. Therefore they translated it through European cultural lenses and called them concubines.
@@greywolf7577 Yes a concubine was seen as a wife with lower status in the eye of the law, and the children was seen as "legitimate" but of lower status then the children of the proper wife. But they did have the right to inherit.
That a concubine take power is theoretically possible, but then the wife need to be dead, and the wife's children is not old enough to assume power, and the man have not appoint a guardian/advisor to rule until a child is old enough to assume power
It's actually rather nice to know that the Vikings did not see only winning battles as 'manly,' but also being able to take care of a family.
She's not talking about taking care of a family though... In fact, that is almost entirely irrelevant to what she's actually saying
And they'd go raid other people's homes and destroy other people's families. Aren't they lovely!
More like they cared about man not being gay it seems. Because that is the only thing conclusively proven by having a wife or concubine
@@KateeAngelit’s not proven though, they could still be gay
@@KateeAngeli saw William the fucking conqueror killing 20 men on the battlefield and ran at me i wouldn't think to myself "You gay." I would just shit myself.
Normands were very much "Viking-adjacent" with norse traditions still in place, and William was not called "the bastard" for so long without reason, his parents were not married by the christian church, Herleva was of a lower social status and was Robert's wife "more danico", a concubine in the danish way.
Thank you! I rarely see this emphasized enough. Normans usually get lumped with French, Sicily, and crusaders not their pagan roots as much. Which I find odd. It also makes William conquest of England more ironic because he is fighting Danes, Scandinavians, and Anglo Saxons who are less “French”😂
@@DillionMatt the making of France, and whatever "being french" is, has been a long process, like assembling the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle and convincing each piece, in time, that it belonged with the others. The general population of Normandy in William The Conqueror's time was probably more or less as Gallic as it had been under the Roman Empire, successive invasions only affected the ruling classes. And then, same thing in England when he conquered it. English people did not become Norse, but William was no more English than he was ever French.
@@ameliecarre4783 French being more trade and court language at the time. Norse or Scandinavians in general probably did move to England and Normandy but assimilated into the majority there. In France being Gallic. Scandinavia ain’t that populated in general. Also a harsh land in general. Most are likely traders, farmers, and a handful of nobles leading them. Acting as raiders/vikings when beneficial. You see Norse in the English language. England itself is likely a mix of Anglo-Saxons and Briton Celtic influences. Norse and Norman are more so a minority influence which you see in language graphics about modern English. Celtic influence always seems to get “snuff”. It odd. You think the Celtic influence would be bigger in England? Same with France too. Latin and Germanic culture bloc seems to be more influential.
@DillionMatt Celtic is still very present in Brittany, Wales, Scotland, Cornwall to this day.
@@ameliecarre4783 true, I just like to Nordic and Germanic folk/pagan themes. For some reason I always associate Celtic more so with Christianity especially folklore wise. Norman usually gets lump with Christian symbolism because they did play a role in the crusades and Sicily. So I find more pagan base stories more interesting
It's a similar idea in todays US Military, albeit for a different reason altogether- high ranking officers are more often than not married. it's pretty rare to find one who's single because Officers who are married are seen as reliable and being able to run a home, so in turn they should be able to run a military (i guess?) and it also plays to the Discipline theater they have going on, you dont ever hear about adulterous generals because it'd make the whole institution look amoral
Source- My Fwb who was a Colonel before retiring
Nice to see an author take their responsibility to represent the past accurately.
The Nordic name of this is 'frilla' or 'friþla' [frithla]. This is a diminutive form of 'frid' (peace, tranquility).
Blessed with another viking video
People need to stop to put people from a thousand years ago up to our social standards.
Different times, different rules.
I really appreciate that you aim for historical accuracy in your works of fiction, even though spice is not my genre.
Please, keep sharing these story bits, I love them
It's similar in the modern society as well when it comes to valuing men. The fact that you had to say ''In his defense'' at 1:17 just proves my point...
So interesting! Also, Rowan sounds fascinating and it'd be awesome to have a spinoff book about her!
And honestly people still massively judge men for being single, and especially virginal
Yep. Made me want to write a virgin male lead for just this reason 😊
That is sadly true.
I mean, yeah. We like to think that we have some kind of "advanced society" but we still think about a lot of things based on natural instincts.
@ In the end we are the same apes in clothes, doing business at the business factory instead of hunting and gathering or farming and raiding
@@Regina316You need kids to have a lineage that lasts longer than this TH-cam message board will. What proof is there that you lived in 1,000 years? The things you do? Almost assuredly not, very few things survive for 1,000 years. But that unimportant farmer in your past that had a completely mediocre life will have a far greater impact than the most important person in his sphere of life.
2:34 In Dune when Jessica says, "History will call us wives" to Chani seems extremely plausible to me as an anthropology major. I mean if Solomon wasn't the son of Bathsheba I'm pretty sure she would be an unnamed concubine. Which would have been unfortunate because then people wouldn't have known what a terrible person David was.
He had a great start, but he couldn't finish the race. I guess power does corrupt people
This subject matter is much deeper than the time you alotted but well done. If i could make one criticism, i see in many videos. Please stop excuse or tip toeing around the past. I know many people get triggered by certain words because they are weak and uneducated, but the past is the past and can't be changed, and augar coating it is what leads us to repeat it. I decend from Rollo that i know my ancestors were monsters by todays standards. But they shaped the world, and we owe them the respect of rememberance for giving us what we have.
Well done though. You have a new follower.
I am SO EXCITED for a new book from you!!!!
Outstanding Video chat! Learned something new and whether people admit it or not, those views still exist today..... under different names perhaps, but I can see the patterns. May of been much more distinct in the ancient cultures, but no denying that when a man remains single too long, people begin questioning what his problem is or could be. Leads to all kinds of speculations.
The problem here, in understanding the facts of how the ancient Viking thought, is us, not them. We don't like to think about it, but we are all going to die someday. Those ancient people were intimately aware of death, it was something they saw on a routine basis. A man that didn't take a wife and provide for her a home and children was not doing his part to ensure the survival of his culture. This is just as true today as it ever was. We have more time, resources and technology, still we too will pass. It is easier for us today to carelessly and foolishly destroy a home and family through our irresponsible behavior. However, every one of us that does that hurts the society as a whole. A thousand years ago, when people watched their friends and neighbors dying around them, people were not so forgiving of degenerate behavior. It was like sitting in the back of a boat and not rowing.
The strictures of the Fantasy/Romance genre can be overly strict at times. If the goal is to show romantic love in all its spendor, then its complexities must be shown as well. We are not a naturally monogamous species, and that is a biological fact. But in our cultures, which are not biological, we do often aspire to monogamy, fidelity, a ilfelong partnership--and that's a fascinating contradiction in us. And like all ideals, is often more aspiration than reality. Not always. I had no one before I met my person. She had past relationships that were meaningful to her. And would tell me about them. In great detail. While I didn't always appreciate this, I did want to know all there was to know about her, and I recognized that the person I loved was the sum total of her past experiences, happy and otherwise. Also, some of the stories were really funny. Like this one time she wanted to see her ex, who had moved to California, while she remained in New York. So she got on a transcontinental train. He had, at the same time, taken a train to New York. They passed each other somewhere in mid-continent. She had a nice time exploring the West Coast (with almost no money). Later, she found out what happened. Sounds very romcom. But in fact, they never got back together. I have no problem with this ending. ;)
Maybe the single part of Frank Herbert's novel Dune that most gets to me is Leto and Jessica's relationship. He knew he'd never love anyone as he did her, but aspiring to be Emperor someday, he had to be available for a politically advantageous marriage--so she remained his concubine, and their union was no less real--she was his wife in everything but name, as well as an invaluable ally, due to her knowledge and abilities.
But as Leto is awaiting death, all he can feel is regret that he never gave her his name. That he held back any part of himself from her in his quest for power, when the things that made his life meaningful were the love they felt for each other and the son created by that love. Paul was his legitimate heir, which in fact was possible in many societies where concubinage was practiced. Herbert did his research. But I would not say the Dune novels are Fantasy/Romance. Science Fiction with a fantasy ethos, let's say.
Looking forward to reading this :)
Not sure if you're familiar with it yet, but Viking Answer Lady has some great leads for when you're researching this sort of thing (attitudes and practical details of daily live in that culture).
One point missed is a simple one we overlook in our modern societies.
Being "Single" for a leader is a huge worry to everyone as it means there are no heirs being produced. No acknowledged heirs leads to uncertainty as to the continuity of governance. That uncertainty leads to political strains (internal and external) as everyone has to be constantly prepared to carve their position out of the new power structure.
What a fascinating insight into the Vikings.
You know, their whole view of concubines could actually be a great plot for a romance book. (could be spicy or not) say, she's the sister of a friend of his/ husband died could be a lot of different things, about to be married off to an evil man, and in order to protect her, the MC claims her as his concubine. He claims no romantic affections from her, its simply a relationship of convenience for both of them. He's not interested in a wife at this time, but still needs to be seen as manly, and she needs protection from an evil would be husband. And then a potential romance can continue from there. Maybe with her eventually becoming his wife I dunno.
*grin * Just because I love huge surprises and absolutely vicious plot twists, plot twist: What we thought was the main character goes to negotiate with some neighbour or other and it goes horribly wrong. There is an attack and things are looking bleak until said "evil" warhawk of a man arrives to save the day. He doesn't do things properly, he has little honor to speak of, but he and his warriors do save a lot of people's lives that day. Cue chaos in poor heroine's head.
@Regina316 interesting, i love when the main villian actually helps the good guys. But he doesn't reform in order to help, it just suits his interest. Like Lex Luthor in the New Adventures of Superman. He helps Clark save Lois on more than one occasion cuz he's obsessed with Lois. Not cuz he's actually a good guy.
@@americandefender1861 That's one way to look at it. The other way is... a message along the lines of "If other people are being nasty and you insist on being kind even to them, sometimes that will result in you or your loved ones suffering." Kindness is likely to be exploited, like it or not, do about it what you will, or let it be if you wish... but don't be surpised.
I would like to add one very important factor in this, which many people seem not to get - marriage or formal wedding is a newer custom if we consider a human history. Calling a wedding or marriage in front of a priest or whatever is very very late . Before that , people would see man and woman together for some time and would assume that they are 'husband and wife' ( husband and wife again is loosely termed here cause its not entirely marriage) . So what would a modern society call that relationship? Concubine ? Live in partner ? Wife? partner?
Now going back to the topic, the "marriage" was sometimes were done by the request of one family to another. Sometimes it was the decision of the man and woman which both family blessed. Sometimes women didn't have a say in it. Sometimes women had all the say in it. Sometimes men took woman as their "wife" by showing her how good he was in hunting. Sometimes men abducted the women . Sometimes women ran away to their loved one and start a family. Depending on the culture or the time period. It worked well because the early tribes / villages / migrating people were relatively small in numbers.
With religion being institutionalized or trying to take control away from the monarchy or chieftains, the formal wedding became such big thing. ( Later religions like Abrahamic religions started this from the get go ) . Along with city or township exploding in numbers it also kind of became a necessity. You would marry in front of the GOD or church to basically let know the society that you are married. And because Abrahamic religions put so much restraint and control over people's lives and stigmatized sex it became a necessity for a common human to do that.
Enjoyed the video, always interesting to see how an author thinks and comes at the work.
Very interesting
Tangentially one of my favourite Dune Quotes: "Think on it, Chani: that princess will have the name, yet she'll live as less than a concubine-never to know a moment of tenderness from the man to whom she's bound. While we, Chani, we who carry the name of concubine-history will call us wives."
I wish I knew where I could learn more about Vikings and the Viking age, because I love hearing you talk about them and find very interesting
A starting point might be simply searching 'viking ship Museum' in Google and clicking on their website. You don't have to go there to get a general overview you can use as a starting point.
Also; the Viking Age is called 'vikingetiden' in danish if that helps. Some Danish websites come with an english translation built in😅
Good luck and I hope this helps.
There's always going to be some people who hate it. But if you're doing historical things with historical research, the real question is how well you explain the situation and envision it.
There's also always a default problem that here can be of benefit to you, where people adopt a protagonist-centered morality when they read things. You can write the protagonist doing something awful and you want people to dislike the awful thing, but they won't because it's the protagonist, and as long as he's the one doing it, it's fine. (I'm sure you've seen similar problems where people decide characters are cute little cinnamon rolls despite massacring an entire village? Same thing. But here it plays more in people's favor as it allows them to accept the morality of the time being different than their own morality.
I'm not a romance reader, so take this for what it's worth, but I've long been annoyed by how we read modern ethics back into tales set in older time periods -- I mean not all of them, there's plenty that really couldn't fly with a sympathetic character for a modern audience, but like, the modern concept of monogamous love is not the only way to do things, and shouldn't be the only way to write characters.
Choosing to honor an obligation to a person you were connected to but now aren't, that does make me feel like the character is more honorable and worthwhile. Still caring for the welfare of your children even if you're in a different marriage relationship, that sort of thing too. Making sure that your harem is well cared for and not bored. That sort of thing.
And that's before getting into possibly polyamory -- that's just counting situations where the sexual relationship was socially regulated and the emotional relationship was weak or absent. Which allows the man to be open to a new emotional relationship without a background that includes either tragedy or loose ends ("Die For Our Ship").
Ah so Crusader Kings coming clutch as historically accurate once again!
I've found my people😂
@ Im trying to think of a Crusader Kings related phrase to throw out besides 'Deus Vult!'.
Maybe 'Look out, the Aztecs are coming!' or 'Glitterhoof makes an excellent chancellor'
4 years played Swedish violin with about 25 Swedish people, mostly retired ladies & gentlemen. We had to memorize a set of 15 songs per year. Good memories. I sure wouldn't cheat on a Swedish wife!
Love learning new things! Any chance of a video that lists out what made a manly man Viking?
This reminds me of Harold Godwinson and Edith "Swan neck" who were married "in the Danish Manner" and had many children including Gytha who became mother to a line of Grand Princes of Kiev. The legal informality of Harold and Edith's marriage meant that Harold was able to marry Edwin and Morcar's sister Ealdgyth (also Edith), as I understand, largely as an act of diplomacy to secure the Northern Earls' support for his gaining the throne of England
What about putting a short blurb in your books, at least the e-books, with mentions of things like this and other choices based on history? Just a few sentences per topic you are making these videos on. I really like hearing stuff like this, and think it would work well in your books in the same way that some historical books or translations have a bit of a preface about historical context.
Could we go American Girl style and put a "Peek Into the Past" at the end of each book, exploring some of these issues a little deeper, like the videos do?
Concubinage strangely has nothing to do with conches, cubes, or spinach.
This sounds like the kind of pitch I would get from one of my female students who gets frustrated I’m married. “There’s a broad variety of concubinage arrangements…”. Young women are down bad these days.
Everyone forgets the Normans were Vikings. Well, northmen, Viking was a profession. But the profession was the source of the duchy.
I’m so glad you consider Norman Viking adjacent😂. Many don’t and I find it annoying. They are literally Norse people who learned the French language and laws. While many historians brush off their Norse roots
Norman literally is "north man". Kinda hard to miss what that means, tbh. I remember that from like high school at the latest. Though, iirc, they did intermarry with the other peoples there, so weren't "purebred" Scandinavian/viking by the time of William.
Why tf did this come up right when I was looking for Duke William stuff for writing? I'm not complaining, thank you T_T
I have been working on an alternate history story for a long while set in the late Roman Empire. The main character's father owns and trains slaves. From a modern perspective this is evil and reprehensible, but to the Romans it was fairly normal. Understanding that historical periods had wildly different morals to our modern ones is a part of historical fiction.
This comment is under the protection of a viking male
Marriage also brought social stability and a measured from of ambition and social cohesion...
Whereas concubines were recognized as a instability.
The social stability brought by marriage created a stable economic environment and a coherent cohesive ambitious ambition that moved the entire community forward.
Whereas a society that lacks a harmony culture in this way rapidly becomes radically unstable and then dysfunctional.
High status individuals in history were expected to have families. Viking culture was similar to pre Charlemagne Germanic culture, where men were seen as superior for not having seggs as they were seen as more disciplined and men who indulged were seen as hedonistic and weak. Tribes like the nervii swore off alcohol for similar reasons. The Vikings had the same culture.
He was the Duke of Normandy
Hello. First, great video. Second as a historian and avid fantasy fan may I ask for the sources that you read upon the concubine and Scandinavian "Manliest" topic? I have my way to find some, but it I am interested about others list too.
Thank you in advance, have a nice day and Happy Holidays to you!
Since I am precisely the sort of weird history buff to bring this up in a casual conversation, feel free to picture that one scene from Golden Girls with Dorothy and the gang in the drugstore, but Dorothy is yelling "CONCUBINES! CONCUBINES!" instead of "CONDOMS! CONDOMS!"
... Coincidentally, as a young man my fiance would have been happy labeling it an extensive network of concubines, since he was forever hankering to have his cake and eat it too. I may or may not mention it the next time he starts reminiscing about behaving badly.
This continues to this day. For over 8 years I have been able to find a woman interested in me. Shit sucks. I also refuse to just "hook up" with someone. I feel quite manly. I apparently am a "good guy"...............
Humanity is bizarre.
More of this craft-lore, please.
Viking's got a sword and a Sword yo!
When you're an accomplished warlord and military strategist, but got no maidens...
How do you deal with writers block?
Love history with Elizabeth Wheatley yeah cant wait to check it out also about Concubinage one of 2024s Sci-Fis biggest film had that present so I think audiences are understanding I mean it was common practice in those times.
what length of time counts as a long period of being single? months? years? and how quickly were young men expected to get into a relationship?
I'm glad this has stopped being a thing now a days.
So would you say that a concubine was the equivalent of a girlfriend but with more formality behind it?
God, it sounds like it would have been exhausting. Go to war, win in battle, but you're still not a real man because you haven't hooked up with someone? Christ, that's obnoxious. Makes me very glad to live in the here and now.
A Viking man could have multiple concubines, but only one wife.
On top of that could he have multiple thralls/slaves he could share the bed with.
The three types had different rights, powers and statuses.
His children from the three different relationships had different rights, powers and statuses as well.
Monks and other Christians that wrote about the Vikings very often didn't tell everything, wasn't always honest and truthful with their "facts" and at times even totally lied about the Vikings, so multiple sources are very often important when talking about Viking "facts".
Some sources also seem to be much more reliable than others, both because of the time it was written and because of archaeological finds and evidences.
super interesting
Have you come across the DNA research on chromosomes in Iceland and Faroe Islands ? Turns out that the male chromosome in those places is almost all Nordic. Female, not so much. over 60% of Icelandic female chromosome is Celtic. Same in the Faroes. Read into that what you want.
Intermarriage was very common historically, and it was even reflected in the lore about the Aesir and Vanir: Thor, Freyja, Freyr, Njiord, and most of the Gods and Goddesses had diverse heritage. Intermarriage was a common form of adoption into the society.
Inter-"marriage" 💀
"Intermarriage" Sure. That`s how that played out when the Vikings raided places.
@@anthill1510 I mean, what you think about did happen. You know it, I know it, we all know it. But it wasn't the only thing. Think about it. Men fight, men die. Women don't fight. There is many more women left then men. Who are they going to marry?
@Brafnskald You can impregnate women without marrying them. Crazy, I know.
Rollo is a direct ancestor of mine, as he is of a lot of people today. My ancestors at the time were berserkers, clan name of "Mutilators" lol.
Interesting subject however!
Just wanted to add, you look at lot like Christina Ricci it's crazy!
Oh, this is interesting if you think about Fair Annie in terms of concubinage - she had every reason to expect that she'd get all the privileges of a wife, including her man not just suddenly up and marrying another woman.
It's not much different today, actually. Having a gf or wife elevates your status and being single is seen and subtly marketed as being somehow inferior.
It wouldn't surprise me that a wife had more inheritance rights than a concubine who might have had none; after the man die.
Same with divorce.
Usually concubines got something (like a dowry or something, a bit like a severance package) but if he didn't have a wife I believe the bulk of his property reverted to his Mother? (Don't quote me on that, I am basing it off the fact that things like houses, farming tools, and property stayed with the Mother's line).
they did not have concubines usually. they had very strict marital laws. Basically only someone like a King or Jarl rarely had concubines. They were very monogamous and had strict marital laws.
Beers, battles and brides!
It was the drip.
Concubinage - so, polygyny basically
A wife's offspring would have been considered the legitimate heirs, though all the other children were expected to be provided for
I think it is not only the concept that a man is virile but more like how can you lead us a nation or a tribe if you cannot lead a home? I guess when the apostle Paul discusses deacons he does stress that they must be married and a good husband and father to be a deacon a leader to others.
Keeping subtitles hardwired into the video is one of the most distracting things you can do. It makes it hard to keep track of the story you're telling.
So basically it's easier to be a successful military commander than find yourself a good woman. Huh, I guess things haven't changed all that much.
The vikings were similar, then, to some evangelical churches in the U S today in that respect.
not a fan of romance at all, but im looking forward to your book!
Writing a book yet cannot get singular and plural useage correct? Seriously?
Where the hell are all these viking men? Cant seem to meet one that match me. Sad really.
Okay so, whatchu doing this weekend?
Isn't it sad, that you have to worry that historical accuracy would offend a reader?
I never read anything about "satisfy a woman" you think they had a ranking system? Having children was considered manly though, because doh, and the absence of children a legally justified reason to demand a divorce. I don't think Vikings even thought in terms of "single". The family was your world and security, the more numerous the more powerful. It's expansion the goal of wealth gain. As for William in feudal France with it's endless infighting the absence of an heir and clear transition of power would of course be concerning to his vasalls. How great of a leader he was wouldn't matter when he was dead.
Ya, I think that’s just natural human thought
No maidens?
Why are all the good stuff coming out 2025
bookgoblin make book?!? youtubegoblin happy!
You should take it easy on the wine a bit... It is showing up a bit too much in your eyes
I have XCIX problems, but a kvinna ain't I.
So I'm probably in a minority, but I like stories that try their hand at something more grey like concubines. Yes, it was a social system meant as another means of oppressing women (i would lightly argue that longterm girlfriends who give wife privledges to a man who won't marry them are probably the modern equivalent, but there's more personal freedom involved for the modern GF), but that was the reality of the times, and they were still just people trying to do their people thing and find some joy and not die. It's not a comfortable topic, but it IS an interesting one, to see how real humans move and think within a society that has different standards.
All good points. I like your theory about contemporary concubines. Much food for thought there, I'd say.
...Of course, that I am now seriously tempted to bring it up to my fiance the next time he starts reminiscing about behaving badly during his womanizing days is (shall we say) coincidental. 😈
It seems like concubines occupied a rather in between status. They had rights and recognition a one night stand or similar casual relationship didn’t, but a lower status than a wife but also lower expectations (the wife had social obligations, had to produce the legitimate offspring, etc.).
Because then you would have said "Viking Man"
rollo stopped being a viking when he converted
his sons wouldnt be
So basically nothing has changed, literally the exact same thing is still true in western cultures today.
Only one U.S. president was never married so the idea this is some ancient weird thing is not correct .
☦️☦️☦️ Christ is born.
so you are saying that viking femboys might be real?
Were children via concubine afforded the same status as a child by wife?
No but they had certain rights and considered legitimate offspring of the man not bastards.
Why do you call William a viking? He was not. For the first, the Viking area was over, and second, viking was an occupation, not a people. What you mean is Norman.
Honey. Jumpcuts. Holy F work on those. So jarring.
We need more real men