"History is written by the victors" is an oft-cited quote in discussions about history and how our perception of historical realities can be shaped by who recorded those events and what their motives, biases and allegiances were. While this reasoning can have shortcomings in the face of archaeological discoveries and comparative analysis, to say that literary records are often best treated with a degree of skepticism is generally a solid way of thinking. This also includes mistranslations or questionable translations of primary sources which have been proliferated over time and eventually treated as concrete fact. Even in the field of archaeology, the cultural biases of those writing archaeological reports and interpreting finds can and has resulted in distorted views of history which are progressively being identified and corrected.
What is often not given as great attention, though, is the effect of current popular trends upon the wider view of historical periods and peoples, especially when it comes to subjects which enter popular culture and which don't have a wealth of their own material to counter those distortions. An easy example of this, and one which I can more easily speak to from points of both research and personal experience, is Early Medieval Scandinavia; I would say that it's even more specifically the "Viking Period", but even the Vendel & Merovingian Periods get roped in with this, particularly when it comes to weapons and armor which get mistakenly labeled as “viking”. While there are historical written records about Early Medieval Scandinavia and the people who lived there, much of it is a mix of mythological poetry & prose as well as legendary and family sagas, many of which were written in the centuries following that period.
Along with these are contemporary accounts from outsiders who either travelled there from other places in Europe or Central and Western Asia or encountered Scandinavians abroad, and these encounters were filtered through different cultural and religious backgrounds and their resulting biases. Over time, archaeological discoveries in and beyond Scandinavia have helped to create a much more scientifically grounded view of that time and place, but even these interpretations often rely on limited physical material along with comparative analysis of finds elsewhere.
What this, along with the popularity and romanticism of Early Medieval Scandinavia, has created is a sort of blank canvas onto which people in the modern day can project their own realities and ideals under the guise of history. A classic example of this with heavy artistic license is Wagner's Ring Cycle, which famously popularized the look of vikings with horned helmets and clothing almost resembling Classical Greece or perhaps the Nordic Bronze Age more than what we know of historical "vikings". Similar and much more tragic is the use of this historical romanticism to fuel the German Völkisch and later Nazi movements, using the idea of a racially pure Germanic people who dominated Northern and Central Europe and whose domains would be taken back from the inferior forces who had stolen them.
Even these examples are at least nearly a century old, though, despite their persistence, and there have been plenty more since. From the "Vikings" TV series to popular neo-folk and metal music to Ren Faire culture, a lot of imagery has been put onto Early Medieval Scandinavia which is borne of modernity more than history. This is to the point where educating people about that history can also require breaking down fully formed ideas of it that they have in their minds and which can have a lot of value to them and their own identities. Often this involves a heritage connection to the idea of a heroic cultural past. Though it's not on the same level, it can have similar elements to trying to convince someone that their political ideology is flawed, no matter how well-meaning and objective the arguments are.
.jpg)
How this presents itself in the context of living history takes different forms. Internally, it often manifests with someone who wants to get into the hobby, but they want to do so in the image of the black leather-clad, constantly screaming warrior with heavy facepaint, pelts slung over their shoulders, (elder futhark) runes all over them and a drinking horn and everything else under the sun dangling off of their ten inch-wide "warrior belt". Maybe it's not always that intense, but you get the idea. Less Early Medieval Scandinavia, more Sons of Anarchy meets Elder Scrolls. Look, I get it. I did and still do enjoy metal music, and my earliest "viking" kit definitely showed it. Conversely, one can encounter viking kits that are so eclectic in place and even time that one can be reasonably unsure whether a single item is based on Early Medieval Scandinavian material. Getting ahead of any fun-police accusations, these types of things are no issue at all in a cosplay or otherwise fantasy setting. Rather, it’s when presented as legitimately historical that they become problematic.
Of course on a totally rational level these inaccuracies can be corrected. The common problem is when rather than using the scientific approach of looking at evidence, using that evidence to form conclusions and rejecting what doesn't stand up to scrutiny, a person looks for evidence to support the conclusion that they've already made and rejects what doesn't support it. The more invested they are in that image, especially financially, the more likely they are to choose the latter and lose interest when an organization stands by that more scientific approach and standards. Sometimes that's even expressed through some choice name-calling such as "stitch-counter", "authenticity nazi" and "gatekeeper".
Externally, this manifests in the public being more excited about this pop-culture "viking" aesthetic than the actual history, and event organizers catering to that interest, thereby helping to reinforce it by presenting it as history. It may include the people who are dead set on the idea the "viking music" is somewhere between metal, Siberian shamanism and Mongolian throat-singing, and when they see a group of people playing some modal melodies on lyres and flutes with perhaps some clean, ornamented singing over it that doesn’t sound nearly as melancholy or epic as it “should”, their immediate reaction is "What the hell is this? Where’s the viking music?" Event organizers may even get ahead of the public by just assuming that the pop-culture aesthetic is what people will want to see and creating their event around it with little to no emphasis on real history. Sometimes it's even museums and cultural organizations doing this!
Organizations such as my own, the Northwest Viking Alliance, have sought to avoid this by progressively creating our own public events in which we set the standards and build around it. Even in this region where living history is not nearly as widely popular as in Europe, we have been encouraged to find a solid amount of people who, whether as participants or attendees, want to be a part of that and experience real living history.
.jpg)
We still have to have the occasional debate with someone who is not willing to work with us, but overall it has been encouraging to see this enthusiasm. While it's an uphill battle, especially where the history is not as ingrained in the culture as in other places, there are people who care about real history and that makes the whole struggle worthwhile. History may be what we make of it, so-to-speak, but that “we” also includes those of us who do this research and pursue this hobby.
Til árs ok friðar,
William
Comments
Post a Comment