I want a "Playlist of Earth". We just line up all the docuseries, starting at the earliest one in the library, allllll the way to the latest one, in chronological order....
That is a tall order. Over the centuries hundreds of event overlapped, happened at the same time. Individual volumes would indeed be wonderful but I am afraid some of those tomes might weight hundreds of pounds. I am currently studying the spread of Christianity. I assumed it started in Bethlehem and spread out from there in neat clean chronological order. Sadly for me that is not even close.
I feel like that could sort of be done- if you divided the world up by continents and made a playlist for each. Of course - a totally comprehensive playlist is impossible- but one could surely create a very interesting project with OP’s idea in mind.
@@h0rriphic That's kinda what I was thinking after @John Lowe, Photographist comment. Have a globe with a timeline slider. There's outlines for areas covered in a particular video, and color based on theme or something. Like, "Government", "Religion" etc. That way, a series on a monarchy could be seamlessly side by side with one on like farming or whatever.
'Vikings' were not a 'race', but an occupation i.e. Pirates. Their raids on Ireland, for example, preceded Christianity, with recorded encounters in the Iron Age. There are many names in the ancient Irish language for these invaders/marauders, reflecting their various places of origin and physical appearance. 'Northmen' being one that eventually became the Normans from the North West of France. Lochlanaigh was another, which gave rise to family names Loughlin/O'Loughlin/ MacLoughlin etc. Because of the swiftness and savagery of their attacks, they were also known by the term 'Cu na Mara/Hounds of the Sea/MacCunamara/MacNamara'. Distinguishing features of brown or fair hair gave rise to the place, personal and family names Dubh Gall/Dougall/MacDougall' and 'Finn Gall/Fingal/Finlay etc. The 'Vikings' most likely learned about Iceland, Greenland and North America from the explorations of Irish Monks, such as St Brendan, who set off in Leather Boats in groups of 13, imitating Jesus and the Twelve Apostles, in search of Paradise. English Historian, Tim Severin, faithfully recreated 'The Brendan Voyage', arriving in America coinciding with the 1776-1976 Bicentenary celebrations but 1,500 years after St Brendan.
Quite likely that Iceland,the Med and Spain were known in pre Christian times.Natives were even ship wrecked in Scotland.Sailors and traders may have been more wide ranging and better navigators than history gives them credit for.Who knows what was happening during the Nordic Bronze Age and what trade routes may have existed?
As a Danish Historian it's a good documentary, but there are many flaws. Most significant the premise made 5:20. In short Charlemagnes Christian Crusade against Northern Pagans made them unite against Christianity. His Conquest and brutal Christianization of Frisia and Saxony 772 - 785 a.d. IS the main background story. All Pagan sacred sites were destroyed and those who refused to convert were slaughtered numbering in the thousands. Pagan areas all over the North was interconnected (Frisians, Saxons, Angles, Jutes - Danes, Norwegians and swedes. It's too early to state Denmark was one united country under the rule of Godfred at this point in time. It could well be, but it's not proven.) and events in Frisia/Saxony (incl. Christianization on the British Isles) was by all likelihood perceived an existential threat. Evidence is the major fortifications built in the immidiate aftermath. Just North of Saxony a Fortress Wall not unlike Hadrians Wall ALL across the main land was built to fend off further expansion during 790s (Dannevirke - Mis-interpreted in the doc 22:46). At least five major Ring-fortresses was built during the following Century (Aggersborg, Fyrkat, Trelleborg etc. which indicate a united Denmark was established making preperations against potential attacks from perceived enemies). Viking raids at any and all Christian held areas across Europe (Lindisfarne 793, ireland 796 and Aquitaine 799) was a direct cause-effect result. The timeline of events cannot be ignored. Christians were viewed as legitimate targets in an all-out war for the very existence of pagan belief for decades following Charlemagnes Conquest and Christianisation of Frisia and Saxony. The Viking era had begun. As more powerful rule was established in the North and Carolingians weakened during the 9th Century the objective of Vikings opportunisticly changed to include territorial gains (Normandy/Danelaw etc.), mainly due to over-population which was the reason for organized bands of Vikings seeking their fortune elsewhere. Finally on the dramatization parts; Godfred definately didn't reside in a stone castle 19:48, but in a wooden hall with a roof of reed or straw as all the pagan rulers in the North did in the 9th century.
The vikings looked at England as we do to Florida...when it gets cold, they go south. Thank you for this segment. I knew nothing on the topic, so now I know more than when I started. 😀 I just wonder why the vikings would want to stop being vikings and assimilate. And, what do they do with their loot, what did they spend it on.
I'd love it if these had English voice over during french-speaking bits, I listen to these as I move around, not just sitting watching the screen. Pretty soon I'm just doing stuff while listening to a foreign language and not understanding anything. I just want to hear the whole thing without being pinned down to watching the screen 100% of the time. Other than that, great story telling.
I disagree that the winters for the Vikings were just miserable and many died in the camps. It was warmer in England and Frankia than a Scandinavian winter. Also, it's likely they were able to make themselves fairly comfortable by using a bit of the wealth they had plundered. Not to mention, if these winters were so harsh and many died, no one would have wanted to winter there. They would have went home. But they continued to overwinter in these locations year after year until eventually settling there. Notice the French expert says "I think that many died in those camps" meaning in her opinion.
Odd. I've never heard of the "Frankish Empire ". There was the Holy Roman Empire, which emerged out of the Germanic pagan Kingdom of the Franks, after the conversion to Catholicism of Charlemagne's grandfather ,Charles Martel, who was born in Belgium. Francia, was only the western half of the "Kingdom of the Romans", the eastern half being modern Germany. What was formerly Roman Gaul, was a separate Latin-speaking demographic before that point.
Charles Martel did not convert to Catholicism. He was born a Catholic. The Franks by Charlemagne’s time had been Christian since the conversion of Clovis, which happened around 500AD so Frankish kingdom had been Christian for nearly 300 years.
The name is pretty self explanatory Its the empire ruled by Charlemagne the Great and his Franks The name doesnt have to be contemporary to the time of Charlemagne if we understand what the name implies today The terms "Byzantine Empire" and the "Aztec Empire" are modern constructs as well...the Byzantines called themselves the Roman Empire and the Aztecs called themselves the Triple Alliance (with Tenochtitlan as the senior partner) Despite those not being their actual names we know what "Byzantine" and "Aztec" implies
I can't stand it when they don't get a translator and just use subtitles. I watch with my ears and barely ever look up at the tv so this ruins it for me. Audio listener...🤷
so basically we should have respected the Danish sphere of influence taking the Saxons and Frisians into the Frankish empire was one step to far the Danes had no other option but to plunder England after that
My mistake earlier, his reign likely began in 804, not ended. Anyway, Charlemagne was absolutely responsible for Gudfred's assassination. Killed by his own man? These Danes were exceptionally loyal to one another and most especially their Chieftain (king). This assassin was likely paid a vast amount of Frankish silver.
We don´t know that - also we don't know how loyal the Danes were compared to other Danes. Gutfred was killed 810 by one of his Housecarls, according to the written history. I mean the Housecarl could have been paid of by Charlemagne which would have been very smart from him, we just don't know., unless you have historic evidence which I didn't find.
@@bavariancarenthusiast2722 yeah his reign likely began in 804, not ended, my mistake. Anyway, how else would you explain your own bodyguard, someone you trust, has probably been with you for years, has nothing to gain from this action, all of a sudden kills you right before a major battle with a Christian kingdom that's having some serious doubts about their success in said coming battle?
@@Son-of-Tyr I respect your opinion :) historically but we cannot look at it like that. Our opinion is formed by our society and education from today - totally different to 1200 years ago, different values, religion, society totally different everything. What is obvious for us today - would not have make any sense for somebody in the 9th century. We only really can go back to written evidence from that time. Which we don't have in detail.
@@Son-of-Tyr No problem - year more or less doesn't make a big difference. Because it was one of his close people, there are many motivations we can think of why he has done it. The Housecarl betrayed and killed his Lord. The Danes were very much divided. There was a local king called Halfdan, also a famous Name, who already agreed to have an alliance with Charlemagne in 807 - 3 years before Gudfred was killed by his own people. Why? We don't know, but it can be a crime of passion, family, ambition or simply for money. I would love to know more details about it - but no real 1st hand sources I could find.
music much too loud, obscures the voiceover. so dumb. what kind of idiots think this enhances? out before one minute gone. damn shame; i was interested.
Why do you have to use subtitles instead of just dubbing in English! It DESTROYS the flow if you have to try and read the subtitles and take in what is going on.
Each to their own. I prefer subtitles, preferring to hear people speak their own language, and don't have an issue following things. Maybe it'd be nice if they offered the option like foreign DVDs did where you could choose subs or dubs.
I'm not really sure how exactly these experts have come by seemingly precise types of knowledge and what us speculation, supposition or actual evidence. Especially, from what they say illiteracy was the rule unless you were a chieftain or clergy. The jumping from languages does not help the listener even though there are translations. Too bad there just couldn't be one narrator in English.
Oh behave, every part time scholar is well aware, but its become a useful term to categorise the mostly north germanic pagan warrior bands of the 8th - 10th centuries without getting bogged down in specifics of exactly where they came from. Considering there was no modern nation states of England, Norway, Sweden, Denmark etc, but instead was split up into various small kingdoms/ chieftains untill towards the end of the viking era, having a generic layman's term to talk about these peoples is perfectly reasonable.
I want a "Playlist of Earth". We just line up all the docuseries, starting at the earliest one in the library, allllll the way to the latest one, in chronological order....
That is a tall order. Over the centuries hundreds of event overlapped, happened at the same time. Individual volumes would indeed be wonderful but I am afraid some of those tomes might weight hundreds of pounds. I am currently studying the spread of Christianity. I assumed it started in Bethlehem and spread out from there in neat clean chronological order. Sadly for me that is not even close.
I feel like that could sort of be done- if you divided the world up by continents and made a playlist for each. Of course - a totally comprehensive playlist is impossible- but one could surely create a very interesting project with OP’s idea in mind.
@@h0rriphic That's kinda what I was thinking after @John Lowe, Photographist comment. Have a globe with a timeline slider. There's outlines for areas covered in a particular video, and color based on theme or something. Like, "Government", "Religion" etc. That way, a series on a monarchy could be seamlessly side by side with one on like farming or whatever.
Hell yea!
I'd rec the Fall of Civilizations Podcast for that lineup. Richest AV series I've seen. Covers empires I had never even heard of and still ongoing.
'Vikings' were not a 'race', but an occupation i.e. Pirates. Their raids on Ireland, for example, preceded Christianity, with recorded encounters in the Iron Age. There are many names in the ancient Irish language for these invaders/marauders, reflecting their various places of origin and physical appearance. 'Northmen' being one that eventually became the Normans from the North West of France. Lochlanaigh was another, which gave rise to family names Loughlin/O'Loughlin/ MacLoughlin etc. Because of the swiftness and savagery of their attacks, they were also known by the term 'Cu na Mara/Hounds of the Sea/MacCunamara/MacNamara'. Distinguishing features of brown or fair hair gave rise to the place, personal and family names Dubh Gall/Dougall/MacDougall' and 'Finn Gall/Fingal/Finlay etc. The 'Vikings' most likely learned about Iceland, Greenland and North America from the explorations of Irish Monks, such as St Brendan, who set off in Leather Boats in groups of 13, imitating Jesus and the Twelve Apostles, in search of Paradise. English Historian, Tim Severin, faithfully recreated 'The Brendan Voyage', arriving in America coinciding with the 1776-1976 Bicentenary celebrations but 1,500 years after St Brendan.
Quite likely that Iceland,the Med and Spain were known in pre Christian times.Natives were even ship wrecked in Scotland.Sailors and traders may have been more wide ranging and better navigators than history gives them credit for.Who knows what was happening during the Nordic Bronze Age and what trade routes may have existed?
You should have a TH-cam channel and share your knowledge.
As a Danish Historian it's a good documentary, but there are many flaws. Most significant the premise made 5:20. In short Charlemagnes Christian Crusade against Northern Pagans made them unite against Christianity. His Conquest and brutal Christianization of Frisia and Saxony 772 - 785 a.d. IS the main background story. All Pagan sacred sites were destroyed and those who refused to convert were slaughtered numbering in the thousands. Pagan areas all over the North was interconnected (Frisians, Saxons, Angles, Jutes - Danes, Norwegians and swedes. It's too early to state Denmark was one united country under the rule of Godfred at this point in time. It could well be, but it's not proven.) and events in Frisia/Saxony (incl. Christianization on the British Isles) was by all likelihood perceived an existential threat. Evidence is the major fortifications built in the immidiate aftermath. Just North of Saxony a Fortress Wall not unlike Hadrians Wall ALL across the main land was built to fend off further expansion during 790s (Dannevirke - Mis-interpreted in the doc 22:46). At least five major Ring-fortresses was built during the following Century (Aggersborg, Fyrkat, Trelleborg etc. which indicate a united Denmark was established making preperations against potential attacks from perceived enemies). Viking raids at any and all Christian held areas across Europe (Lindisfarne 793, ireland 796 and Aquitaine 799) was a direct cause-effect result. The timeline of events cannot be ignored. Christians were viewed as legitimate targets in an all-out war for the very existence of pagan belief for decades following Charlemagnes Conquest and Christianisation of Frisia and Saxony. The Viking era had begun.
As more powerful rule was established in the North and Carolingians weakened during the 9th Century the objective of Vikings opportunisticly changed to include territorial gains (Normandy/Danelaw etc.), mainly due to over-population which was the reason for organized bands of Vikings seeking their fortune elsewhere.
Finally on the dramatization parts; Godfred definately didn't reside in a stone castle 19:48, but in a wooden hall with a roof of reed or straw as all the pagan rulers in the North did in the 9th century.
The vikings looked at England as we do to Florida...when it gets cold, they go south. Thank you for this segment. I knew nothing on the topic, so now I know more than when I started. 😀 I just wonder why the vikings would want to stop being vikings and assimilate. And, what do they do with their loot, what did they spend it on.
i love history
Down with the heathen!!!
*+DEVS VVLT*
DEUS VULT
Excellent.
What a trip. Charlemagne is one of my distant ancestors.
He lived over 1200 years ago. Had at least 15 children, pretty sure everyone of mostly European ancestry is a distant relative of Charlemagne.
you and everyone else in this world. 😂
he isan ancestor of some 20% of Germans Simple statistics
@@floriangeyer3454 so, I have 20% more relatives. Cool!
@@zuverzagmail well, 20% of the Germanic people at least. Just means that there is more people I am genetically related to. Hooray for more family!
I'd love it if these had English voice over during french-speaking bits, I listen to these as I move around, not just sitting watching the screen. Pretty soon I'm just doing stuff while listening to a foreign language and not understanding anything. I just want to hear the whole thing without being pinned down to watching the screen 100% of the time. Other than that, great story telling.
Sound track sounds like In the court of the Crimson King.
nice ships
I disagree that the winters for the Vikings were just miserable and many died in the camps. It was warmer in England and Frankia than a Scandinavian winter. Also, it's likely they were able to make themselves fairly comfortable by using a bit of the wealth they had plundered. Not to mention, if these winters were so harsh and many died, no one would have wanted to winter there. They would have went home. But they continued to overwinter in these locations year after year until eventually settling there. Notice the French expert says "I think that many died in those camps" meaning in her opinion.
Denmark is temperate. The winters in Northern France would not have been much warmer, but could have been muddier and less practical.
@@dudermcdudeface3674 yeah, I'll give you that.
With exposure to new viruses, molds and bacteria. They could have been wintering on the Riviera and still have lost a good percentage to illness.
@@theConquerersMama Well, yeah. That's how it usually went. Warfare tolls were mostly disease-related from being in strange places.
Good points.
Go looking for a fight in north Eastern Europe, you’re sure to find one.
Pretty much the same everywhere.
@@LeeGee especially my house! Lol
Odd. I've never heard of the "Frankish Empire ". There was the Holy Roman Empire, which emerged out of the Germanic pagan Kingdom of the Franks, after the conversion to Catholicism of Charlemagne's grandfather ,Charles Martel, who was born in Belgium. Francia, was only the western half of the "Kingdom of the Romans", the eastern half being modern Germany. What was formerly Roman Gaul, was a separate Latin-speaking demographic before that point.
Charles Martel did not convert to Catholicism. He was born a Catholic. The Franks by Charlemagne’s time had been Christian since the conversion of Clovis, which happened around 500AD so Frankish kingdom had been Christian for nearly 300 years.
The name is pretty self explanatory
Its the empire ruled by Charlemagne the Great and his Franks
The name doesnt have to be contemporary to the time of Charlemagne if we understand what the name implies today
The terms "Byzantine Empire" and the "Aztec Empire" are modern constructs as well...the Byzantines called themselves the Roman Empire and the Aztecs called themselves the Triple Alliance (with Tenochtitlan as the senior partner)
Despite those not being their actual names we know what "Byzantine" and "Aztec" implies
Scholars use several terms interchangeably including Frankish Empire.
Does anyone know who the narrator is?
wow
I can't stand it when they don't get a translator and just use subtitles. I watch with my ears and barely ever look up at the tv so this ruins it for me. Audio listener...🤷
so basically we should have respected the Danish sphere of influence
taking the Saxons and Frisians into the Frankish empire was one step to far
the Danes had no other option but to plunder England after that
My good sir, whatever could you possibly be driving at...
The danes weren't a brother group with either, and the various other Norse tribes were practically unaffected by it
Charlemagne never wore the Reichskrone.
This is an amazing document I can’t believe I have not seen this before
Lol I just realize it was released an hour ago
Me neither I love the quality I usually have watched all of them 100x docudrama
Only half of it would be true.
My mistake earlier, his reign likely began in 804, not ended. Anyway, Charlemagne was absolutely responsible for Gudfred's assassination. Killed by his own man? These Danes were exceptionally loyal to one another and most especially their Chieftain (king). This assassin was likely paid a vast amount of Frankish silver.
We don´t know that - also we don't know how loyal the Danes were compared to other Danes. Gutfred was killed 810 by one of his Housecarls, according to the written history. I mean the Housecarl could have been paid of by Charlemagne which would have been very smart from him, we just don't know., unless you have historic evidence which I didn't find.
@@bavariancarenthusiast2722 yeah his reign likely began in 804, not ended, my mistake. Anyway, how else would you explain your own bodyguard, someone you trust, has probably been with you for years, has nothing to gain from this action, all of a sudden kills you right before a major battle with a Christian kingdom that's having some serious doubts about their success in said coming battle?
@@bavariancarenthusiast2722 no I don't have proof. Just seems obvious, and very likely.
@@Son-of-Tyr I respect your opinion :) historically but we cannot look at it like that. Our opinion is formed by our society and education from today - totally different to 1200 years ago, different values, religion, society totally different everything. What is obvious for us today - would not have make any sense for somebody in the 9th century.
We only really can go back to written evidence from that time. Which we don't have in detail.
@@Son-of-Tyr No problem - year more or less doesn't make a big difference. Because it was one of his close people, there are many motivations we can think of why he has done it. The Housecarl betrayed and killed his Lord. The Danes were very much divided. There was a local king called Halfdan, also a famous Name, who already agreed to have an alliance with Charlemagne in 807 - 3 years before Gudfred was killed by his own people. Why? We don't know, but it can be a crime of passion, family, ambition or simply for money.
I would love to know more details about it - but no real 1st hand sources I could find.
music much too loud, obscures the voiceover. so dumb. what kind of idiots think this enhances? out before one minute gone. damn shame; i was interested.
That the guy from Alaskan Bush People?
there are no Vikings with out a Viking name. 4. x. 105 =
How funny, the saksens lived on the flat part of Germany, no hills.
Why do you have to use subtitles instead of just dubbing in English! It DESTROYS the flow if you have to try and read the subtitles and take in what is going on.
Each to their own. I prefer subtitles, preferring to hear people speak their own language, and don't have an issue following things.
Maybe it'd be nice if they offered the option like foreign DVDs did where you could choose subs or dubs.
A Viking man can impress women by demonstrating how he takes his longship up a canal to deliver seeds which can be planted in fertile places.
do not get the history hits thing. It is very disappointing. Just keep with youtuble.
How am I supposed to take historical information from a a guy with a "man bun" ?
Exactly!
@@dr.barrycohn5461 with a doctorate in superficiality.
@@LeeGee Gee whiz what happened to your critical thinking, oh never had it, I see Lee Gee...
I'm not really sure how exactly these experts have come by seemingly precise types of knowledge and what us speculation, supposition or actual evidence. Especially, from what they say illiteracy was the rule unless you were a chieftain or clergy.
The jumping from languages does not help the listener even though there are translations. Too bad there just couldn't be one narrator in English.
I love hearing the various languages of Europe. They're all so similar and easy to learn. Hopefully you could read the subtitles.
Clearly the Franks were causing …. Oh no… global warming !😄
Viking is a Verb - not a noun. Any show stating ‘The Vikings’ is therefore ridiculous.
😆
It was a verb, it is now a noun because languages change over time.
Oh behave, every part time scholar is well aware, but its become a useful term to categorise the mostly north germanic pagan warrior bands of the 8th - 10th centuries without getting bogged down in specifics of exactly where they came from. Considering there was no modern nation states of England, Norway, Sweden, Denmark etc, but instead was split up into various small kingdoms/ chieftains untill towards the end of the viking era, having a generic layman's term to talk about these peoples is perfectly reasonable.
The "historians" call the roman empire byzantine dude
@@westoeden no