Vikinzi

'Clint'

Iskusan
Poruka
5.908
Serijal sa History kanala u 6 sezona mi je bio interesantan po mnogo cemu, bilo je tu nekih istorijski tacnih cinjenica ali i nelogicnosti koje su ocigledno htele da razmisljanje 21. veka smeste u 9.
Npr Da li su zaista postojale zene ratnice (shield maiden) koje su zajedno s muskarcima isle u bitke? Vrhunac je cetvrta sezona gde lezbejka Lagerta komanduje muskarcima i dosta feministickih gluposti. Zatim Nordijci i Saksonci ne mogu da se sporazumu uopste a po nekoj logici i Saksonci su Germani kao i Vikinzi pa bi trebalo bar da mogu donekle da razumu jedni druge. Takodje za glavnog lika Ragnara Lotbruka zvanicna istoriografija tvrdi da nije postojao i da je samo mitski junak , ali njegovi sinovi jesu istorijske licnosti. Shvatam da nije ovo dokumentarac koji mora da se drzi istorijskih cinjenica ali me zanima koje su tacne s koje nisu, pogotovo "nerazumljivost" anglosaksonskog i nordijskog jezika.
 
kako ti je nejasno da englez ne razume švedski?
Žene su bile ravnopravne. Deca od 12 godina su bili ravnopravni ako su mogli da nose sekiru i da ratuju.
 
kako ti je nejasno da englez ne razume švedski?
Žene su bile ravnopravne. Deca od 12 godina su bili ravnopravni ako su mogli da nose sekiru i da ratuju.
Saksonski nije isti ko moderni Engleski isto kao sto ni moderni Skandinavski jezici nisu isti ko onaj kojim su govorili Vikinzi. Saksonsci su stigli na ostrvo nekih 300, 400 godina ranije. Valjda su i slovenski jezici bili razumljiviji medjusobno pre 1000 i vise godina.
 
koliko sam ja čitao, u Engleskoj si u to doba mogao da nadješ dva sela jedno do drugoga gde ljudi nisu mogli uopšte da se sporazumeju
Kelti i Anglosaksonci sigurno nisu mogli.. elem interesantno je da svi slovenski jezici i dan danas mozemo donekle da se sporazumemo, Germanski bas i ne u tolikoj meri ko mi medjusobno. Mislio sam na to da u devetom veku i medju Germanima nisu bile toliko drasticne razlike ko danas. Otprilike da su oni onda mogli da razumu jedni druge koliko mi Ruse ili Poljake sada.
 
Серија Vikings је апсолутно одлична серија, једна од најбољих филмских серија која обрађује историјске теме, и (по мени) једна од најбољих филмских серија икад. Све је у серији врхунски одрађено, свака сцена, секвенца, дијалози, глума, драматуршки врхунско одрађено.
Е сад, за разлику од историчара, режисер може да "тумачи" историју, да произвољно прикаже личности и догађаје, чак су и нетачности дозвољене, некад и пожељне, ако је то са сврхом и ако се тиме не скрнави историја, што узгред Амери у филмовима и серијама када обрађују старију историју, средњи вијек, воле радити.

У серији има произвољног приказа личности и догађаја, има и нетачности, подоста, но оне су са сврхом, а сврха је реафирмација приче о Викинзима, да се код људи побуди интересовање, у чему се успјело. Те да се дочара начин живота, морална начела којима робују, религиозне скрупуле, обичаји, поимање,често сукоби људи који припадају различитим културама, да се гледаоцима приближи то вријеме, са свом својом суровошћу, некад и мрачном страном. У чему се по мени такође успјело. То вријеме је вјеродостојно приказано уз одређене нетачности.


Серија се не може гледати као разбибрига за докон народ, тражи и одређену "припрему", у сваком случају за истинске филмофиле који су уз то заљубљени у историју, серија је истински ужитак.
Начину живота ивјеровању Викинга се поклонила велика пажња, читава осма епизода прве сезоне је посвећено религиозном обреду, скрупулама којима робују и како то доживљавају и проживљавају главни јунаци.

Нетачности? Има их, и оне су смишљене. Највећа је што се "елегантно" прескочио временски прихватљив калуп, у серији су обухваћени личности и догађаји који припадају различитим временима, но управо је сврха да се кроз судбине главних јунака обухвате познати догађаји и епизоде које су забиљежени у хроникама и списима из тог времена.
Радња почиње око 793.године, Рагнар је већ у зрелим годинама, пратећи све догађаје он би морао поживити 100+ година. Роло, његов брат припада другом времену, иначе у питању је шести предак Вилијама освајача.
Бјорн који 793-е има 12 година би требао у шестој сезони када се радња дешава око 880.године ,морао имати округло сро година, дјелује у серији превише младолико за стогодишњака. Но како нашисах циљ је кроз серију обухватити што више догађаја и познатих епизода из европске историје, зарад тога овакви временски скокови.
Има јоп грешака, једна од тих је да (у шестој сезони) приказују Кијев у IX вијеку како је он изгледао много касније, у XII вијеку, по мени је и то смишљено, о томе ћу у неком од наредних постова.

Сам Рагнар Лодброк (енглеска википедија
овдје)
Artists-depiction-of-a-Viking-King.jpg

Ragnar Lodbrok



Lothbrocus and his sons Ivar and Ubba. 15th-century miniature in Harley MS 2278, folio 39r.

Ragnar Lodbrok or Lothbrok (Old Norse: Ragnarr Loðbrók, "Ragnar shaggy breeches", Modern Icelandic: Ragnar Loðbrók) is a historically dubious[1] legendary[2] Viking hero, as well as, according to the Gesta Danorum, a legendary Danish and Swedish king.[3] He is known from Old Norse poetry of the Viking Age, Icelandic sagas, and near-contemporary chronicles. According to the traditional literature, Ragnar Lodbrok distinguished himself by many raids against the British Isles and the Holy Roman Empire during the 9th century. According to the sagas Ragnarssona þáttr and Sögubrot af nokkrum fornkonungum, Ragnar Lodbrok's father was the legendary king of the Swedes, Sigurd Ring.[4][5]

Accounts
The Icelandic Sagas
According to the Saga of Ragnar Lodbrok, Tale of Ragnar's sons, Heimskringla, Hervarar Saga, Sögubrot, and many other Icelandic sources, Ragnar was the son of the Swedish king Sigurd Ring. Nearly all of the sagas agree that the Danish king Randver was Sigurd's father, with the Hervarar saga citing his wife as Åsa, the daughter of King Harald of the Red Moustache from Norway. The accounts further tell that Randver was a grandson of the legendary Scandinavian king Ivar Vidfamne by his daughter Aud (whom the Hervarar saga calls Alfhild).[6] After the death of king Ivar Vidfamne, Aud's eldest son by the Danish king Hrœrekr Ringslinger, Harald, conquered all of his grandfather's territory and became known as Harald Wartooth. Harald's nephew Sigurd Ring became the chief king of Sweden after Randver's death (Denmark according to Hervarar saga), presumably as the subking of Harald. Sigurd and Harald fought the Battle of the Brávellir (Bråvalla) on the plains of Östergötland, where Harald and many of his men died. Sigurd then ruled Sweden and Denmark (being sometimes identified with a Danish king Sigfred who ruled from about 770 until his death prior to 804). He sired a son with the Norwegian princess Alfhild of the semi-mythical Álfar people, Ragnar Lodbrok, who succeeded him.[7] Eysteinn Beli, who according to the Hervarar Saga was Harald Wartooth's son, ruled Sweden sometime after Sigurd until he was slain by the sons of Ragnar and Aslaug.[8]

In their accounts of his reign, the Sagas of Icelandic Prehistory, known as fornaldarsaga[9][10] tell more about Ragnar's marriages than about feats of warfare. According to the Sögubrot, "he was the biggest and fairest of men that human eyes have seen, and he was like his mother in appearance and took after her kin".[11] He first killed a giant snake that guarded the abode of the East Geatic jarl's daughter Thora Borgarhjort, thereby winning her as his wife. The unusual protective clothes that Ragnar wore, when attacking the serpent, earned him the nickname Lodbrok ("shaggy breeches"). His sons with Thora were Erik and Agnar. After Thora died, he discovered Kráka, a woman of outstanding beauty and wisdom living with a poor peasant couple in Norway, and married her. This marriage resulted in the sons Ivar the Boneless, Björn Ironside, Hvitserk, Ragnvald and Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye.[12] Kráka was later revealed to actually be Aslaug, a secret daughter of the renowned hero Sigurd Fafnesbane. As the sons grew up to become renowned warriors, Ragnar, not wishing to be outdone, resolved to conquer England with merely two ships. He was however defeated by superior English forces and was thrown into a snake pit to die in agony.[13] The Saga of Ragnar Lodbrok, Tale of Ragnar's Sons, and Heimskringla all tell of the Great Heathen Army that invaded England at around 866, led by the sons of Ragnar Lodbrok to wreak revenge against King Ælla of Northumbria who is told to have captured and executed Ragnar.

Danish sources
The Chronicon Roskildense (c. 1138) mentions Lodbrok (Lothpardus) as father to the utterly cruel Norse King Ywar (rex crudelissimus Normannorum Ywar) and his brothers, Inguar (a double of Ywar), Ubbi, Byorn and Ulf, who rule the northern peoples. They call on the various Danish petty kings to help them ruin the realm of the Franks. Ywar successfully attacks the kingdoms of Britain, though not as an act of revenge as in the Icelandic sagas.[14] The chronicle of Sven Aggesen (c. 1190) is the first Danish text that mentions the full name, Regnerus Lothbrogh. His son Sigurd invades Denmark and kills its king, whose daughter he marries as he takes over the throne. Their son in turn is Knut, ancestor of the later Danish kings.[15]

Neither of these sources mentions Ragnar Lodbrok as a Danish ruler. The first to do so is Saxo Grammaticus in his work Gesta Danorum (c. 1200). This work mixes Norse legend with data about Danish history derived from the chronicle of Adam of Bremen (c. 1075).[16] Here Ragnar's father Sigurd Ring is a Norwegian prince married to a Danish princess, and different from the victor of Brávellir (who had flourished about thirteen generations earlier). Sigurd Ring and his cousin and rival Ring (that is, Sigfred and Anulo of recorded history, d. 812) are both killed in battle, whereupon Ragnar is elevated to the Danish kingship (identified by Saxo with Ragnfred, d. 814[17]).[18] His first deed is the defeat of the Swedish king Frö, who has killed Ragnar's grandfather. Ragnar is assisted in this by the ferocious shield-maiden Ladgerda, whom he forces to marry him. In this marriage he sires the son Fridleif and two daughters.[19] He later repudiates the unreliable Ladgerda and instead wins the daughter of the Swedish king Herrauðr, Thora, after killing two venomous giant snakes that guard her residence. His sons with Thora are Radbard, Dunvat, Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye, Björn Ironside, Agnar and Ivar the Boneless. From a non-marital affair with the daughter of one Esbjørn, Ragnar begets Ubbe, while his last marriage with Svanlaug produces another three sons, Ragnvald, Eric Weatherhat and Hvitserk.[20]

The sons were installed as sub-kings in various conquered territories. Ragnar led a Viking expedition to England and slew its king Hama, proceeding to kill the earls of Scotland and install Sigurd Snake-in-the Eye and Radbard as governors. Norway was also subjugated, and Fridleif was made ruler there and in Orkney. Later on, Ragnar with three sons invaded Sweden where a new king called Sörle had appeared and withheld the heritage of Thora's sons. Sörle and his army were massacred and Björn Ironside was installed on the throne.[21] Some time later Björn was put in charge of Norway, while Ragnar appointed another son, Eric Weatherhat, as ruler in Sweden; he was subsequently killed by a certain Eysteinn. One of the sons, Ubbe, revolted against his father at the instigation of his maternal grandfather Esbjørn, and could only be defeated and captured with utmost effort.[22] Saxo moreover tells of repeated expeditions to the British Isles, one of which cost the lives of Dunvat and Radbard. Ælla, son of Hama, expelled Ragnar's sub-ruler Ivar the Boneless from England with the help of the Galli (Gaill, Hiberno-Norse?[23]) and remained a persistent enemy.[24] Finally, the Scythians were forced to accept Hvitserk as their ruler. In the end Hvitserk was treacherously captured by the Hellespontian prince Daxon and burnt alive with his own admission. Hearing this, Ragnar led an expedition to Kievan Rus' and captured Daxon who was curiously spared and exiled.[25]

Unlike the Icelandic sources, Saxo's account of Ragnar Lodbrok's reign is largely a catalog of successful Viking invasions over an enormous geographical area. Among the seaborne expeditions was one against the Bjarmians and Finns (Saami) in the Arctic north. The Bjarmian use of magic spells caused foul weather and the sudden death of many Danish invaders, and the Finnish archers on skis turned out to be a formidable foe. Eventually these two tribes were put to flight and the Bjarmian king was slain.[26] The historical king Harald Klak is by Saxo (based on a passage in Adam's chronicle) made into another persistent enemy of Ragnar, who several times incited the Jutes and Scanians to rebel, but was regularly defeated. After the last victory over Harald, Ragnar learned that King Ælla had massacred Ragnar's men on Ireland. Incensed, he attacked the English king with his fleet but was captured and thrown into the snake pit, similar to the Icelandic sagas. In spite of all his praise for Ragnar Lodbrok, Saxo also considers his fate as God's rightful vengeance for the contempt he had shown the Christian religion.[27]

Poetic and epigraphic sources
While the narrative Norse sources date from the 12th and 13th centuries, there are also many older poems that mention him and his kin. The Ragnarsdrápa, ostensibly composed by Bragi Boddason in the 9th century, praises a Ragnar, son of Sigurd, for a richly decorated shield that the poet has received. The shield depicts the assault on Jörmunrek, the Hjaðningavíg tale, the ploughing of Gefjon, and Thor's struggle with the Midgard Serpent. Recent scholarship has suggested that the poem is in fact from c. 1000 and celebrates the Norse reconquest of England. The four tales depicted on the shield would then symbolize four aspects of the Lodbrok saga (the initial defeat of the sons of Lodbrok in England due to recklessness, Ivar the Boneless's deceitful approach to King Ælla, Ivar's cunning snatching of land from Ælla, Ragnar's struggle against the giant serpent in order to win Thora).[28] The Knutsdrapa of Sigvat Thordarson (c. 1038) mentions the death of Ælla at the hands of Ivar in York, who "carved the eagle on Ælla's back".[29] From this the story of the atrocious revenge of Lodbrok's sons already seems to be present. The reference to a "blood eagle" punishment has however been much debated by modern scholars.[30] Another lay, Krakumal, put in the mouth of the dying Ragnar in the snake pit, recounts the exploits of Ragnar and mentions battles over a wide geographical area, several relating to the British isles. The poem's name, "Kráka's lay", alludes to Ragnar's wife's Kráka,[31] though modern philologists commonly date it to the 12th century in its present form.[32]

There is one runic inscription mentioning Lodbrok, carved on the prehistorical tumulus of Maeshowe on Orkney in the early 12th century. It reads: "This howe was built a long time before Lodbrok's. Her sons, they were bold; scarcely ever were there such tall men of their hands".[33] The expression "her sons" has given rise to the theory that Lodbrok was originally thought of as a woman,[34] mother of the historically known sons.[35]

Frankish accounts of a 9th-century Viking leader named Ragnar
The Siege of Paris and the Sack of Paris of 845 was the culmination of a Viking invasion of the kingdom of the West Franks. The Viking forces were led by a Norse chieftain named "Reginherus", or Ragnar.[36] This Ragnar has often been tentatively identified with the legendary saga figure Ragnar Lodbrok,[37] but the accuracy of this is disputed by historians.[38][39] Ragnar Lodbrok is also sometimes identified with a Ragnar who was awarded land in Torhout, Flanders, by Charles the Bald in about 841 but eventually lost the land as well as the favour of the King.[40] Ragnar's Vikings raided Rouen on their way up the Seine in 845 and in response to the invasion, determined not to let the royal Abbey of Saint-Denis (near Paris) be destroyed, Charles assembled an army which he divided into two parts, one for each side of the river.[41][38] Ragnar attacked and defeated one of the divisions of the smaller Frankish army, took 111 of their men as prisoners and hanged them on an island on the Seine to honour the Norse god Odin, as well as to incite terror in the remaining Frankish forces.[36][38] Ragnar's fleet made it back to his overlord, the Danish King Horik I, but Ragnar soon died from a violent illness that also spread in Denmark.[42]

Later continental accounts
Among the oldest texts to mention the name Lodbrok is the Norman history of William of Jumièges from c. 1070. According to William, the Danish kings of old had the custom to expel the younger sons from the kingdom to have them out of the way. At a time it happened that King Lodbrok succeeded his unnamed father on the Danish throne. After gaining power he honoured the said custom and ordered his junior son Björn Ironside to leave his realm. Björn thus left Denmark with a considerable fleet and started to ravage in West Francia and later the Mediterranean.[43] Roughly contemporary with William is Adam of Bremen whose history of the Archbishopric of Hamburg-Bremen contains many traditions about Viking Age Scandinavia. In a passage referring to the Viking raids of the late 9th century, he mentions the Danish or Norse pirates Horich, Orwig, Gotafrid, Rudolf and Inguar (Ivar). This Ivar is in particular seen as a cruel persecutor of Christians, and a son of Lodbrok (Inguar, filius Lodparchi).[44]

Anglo-Saxon and Irish accounts of the father of Ivar and Halfdan
According to the contemporary Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and Asser's Life of Alfred, in 878 the "brother of Hingwar and Healfden", with a naval fleet, a contingent of the Great Heathen Army invaded Devon in England and fought the Battle of Cynwit. There the Vikings lost, their king slain and many dead, with few escaping to their ships. After the battle the Saxons took great plunder, and among other things the banner called "Raven".[45] The early 12th century Annals of St Neots further state that "they say that the three sisters of Hingwar and Hubba, daughters of Lodebroch (Lodbrok), wove that flag and got it ready in one day. They say, moreover, that in every battle, wherever the flag went before them, if they were to gain the victory a live crow would appear flying on the middle of the flag; but if they were doomed to be defeated it would hang down motionless, and this was often proved to be so."[46] This is among the earlier references to the legendary hero Ragnar Lodbrok.

The Irish Cogad Gáedel re Gallaib from the 12th century, with information deriving from earlier annals, mentions king Halfdan (d. 877) under the name "mac Ragnaill".[47] The form Ragnall may refer to either Ragnvald or Ragnar, and the entry is a strong indication that the name of Ivar's and Halfdan's father was really Ragnar or a similar name.[48] The early 11th century Three Fragments contains a passage that gives a semi-legendary background to the capture of York by the Vikings in 866. The two younger sons of Halfdan, King of Lochlann, expelled the eldest son Ragnall who sailed to the Orkney islands with his three sons and settled there. Two of the sons later raided the English and Franks, proceeding to plunder in the Mediterranean. One of them learnt from a vision that Ragnall had fought a battle where the third son had been slain and in which he himself had most likely perished. The two Viking sons then returned home with a lot of dark-skinned captives.[49] It has been hypothesized that this is an Irish version of Ragnar Lodbrok's saga, the Mediterranean expedition being a historical event taking place in 859-61.[50]

Ragnar's sons


The saga as published by Norstedts in a large-size illustrated version (1880).

The Great Heathen Army is said to have been led by the sons of Ragnar Lodbrok, to wreak revenge against King Ælla of Northumbria who had previously executed Ragnar by casting him into a pit full of venomous snakes.[51] Among the organizers were at least some of the brothers Ivar the Boneless, Ubba, Halfdan, Björn Ironside, Hvitserk, and Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye, all of which are known as historical figures, save the slightly more dubious Hvitserk.[52] Ivar the Boneless was the leader of the Great Heathen Army from 865 to 870, but he disappears from English historical accounts after 870.[53] The Anglo-Saxon chronicler Æthelweard records Ivar's death as 870.[54] Halfdan Ragnarsson became the leader of the Great Heathen Army in about 870 and he led it in an invasion of Wessex.[55] A great number of Viking warriors arrived from Scandinavia, as part of the Great Summer Army, led by King Bagsecg of Denmark, bolstering the ranks of Halfdan's army.[56]

According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the Danes battled the West Saxons nine times, including the Battle of Ashdown on 8 January 871, where Bagsecg was killed.[57] Halfdan accepted a truce from the future Alfred the Great, newly crowned king of Wessex.[58] After Bagsecg's death Halfdan was the only remaining king of the invading host. He may also have been a King of part of Denmark (Jutland?), since a co-ruler Halfdan is mentioned in Frankish sources in 873.[59] According to late sagas Björn Ironside became King of Sweden and Uppsala, although this presents chronological inconsistencies.[60] Björn had two sons, Erik and Refil Björnsson. His son Erik became the next king of Sweden, and was succeeded in turn by Erik Refilsson, the son of Refil.[61] Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye is perhaps the same person as Sigfred, brother of Halfdan, who was king in Denmark together with Halfdan in 873.[62] According to the sagas Sigurd became King of Zealand, Skåne and the lesser Danish Isles.[63] Sigfred-Sigurd possibly succeeded his brother Halfdan as King of entire Denmark in about 877, and may be the Viking king Sigfred who was killed in West Francia in 887.[64]

Sources and historical accuracy


Ragnar receives Kráka (Aslaug), as imagined by August Malmström.



19th-century artist's impression of Ælla of Northumbria's execution of Ragnar Lodbrok

Whereas Ragnar's sons Ivar the Boneless, Halfdan Ragnarsson, Björn Ironside, Ubbe and Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye are historical figures, opinion regarding their father is divided. Modern academia regards most of the stories about him to be fiction. According to Hilda Ellis Davidson, writing in 1979,

Certain scholars in recent years have come to accept at least part of Ragnar's story as based on historical fact.[65]
A generation later, however, Katherine Holman wrote in 2003:
Although his sons are historical figures, there is no evidence that Ragnar himself ever lived and he seems to be an amalgam of historical figures and literary invention.[66]
The most significant medieval sources that mention Ragnar include:

Book IX of the Gesta Danorum, a 12th-century work by the Christian Danish chronicler Saxo Grammaticus
In her commentary on Saxo's Gesta Danorum, Davidson notes that Saxo's coverage of Ragnar's legend in book IX of the Gesta appears to be an attempt to consolidate many of the confusing and contradictory events and stories known to the chronicler into the reign of one king, Ragnar. That is why many acts ascribed to Ragnar in the Gesta can be associated, through other sources, with various figures, some of whom are more historically tenable.[67]

The candidates scholars like to associate with the "historical Ragnar" include:


  • the Reginherus or Ragnar who besieged Paris in 845
  • the Danish King Horik I (d. 854)
  • King Reginfrid (d. 814), a king who ruled part of Denmark in tandem with his brother Harald Klak, but was expelled by Horik I and his brothers and later fell in a battle against them
  • possibly the Ragnall (Ragnvald or Ragnar) of the Irish Annals[68]

Attempts to reliably associate the legendary Ragnar with one or several of those men have failed because of the difficulty in reconciling the various accounts and their chronology. But the tradition of a Viking hero named Ragnar (or similar) who wreaked havoc in mid-9th-century Europe and who fathered many famous sons is remarkably persistent, and some aspects of it are strengthened by relatively reliable sources, such as Irish historical tradition and, indirectly, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.[69]
заиста јесте личност чије постојање се темељи кроз бројне легенде, и гдје са сигурношћу не можемо исконструисати његов живот. Но то никако није у рангу са легендом о краљу Артуру гдје се осим могуће личности која би могла послужити као инспирација за краља Артура, ништа не уклапа са историјским чињеницама, хроникама. У случају Рагнара, све се уклапа, имамо те инвазије Викинга и на Енглеску и опсаду Париза (око 845-е), тако да су догађаји у серији у великој мјери засновани на историјским списима и хроникама.

Што се тиче језика којим су говорили древни народи, то је увијек проблем, како тај јаз међу људима који припадаку различитој културној сфери, колико се и како разумију, то приказати.
Англи, Саксонци и Јути јесу извршили инвазију на острво четири вијека прије инвазија Викинга управо са простора данашње Данске, одакле ће и ићи главнина нових инвазија "сјеверњака"
800px-Anglo-Saxon_Homelands_and_Settlements.svg.png

Англи и Саксонци су убрзо остварили пуну доминацију на острву. Да ли су код мијешaња култура и језика, романизована келтска племена дала већи или мањи допринос? Мислим да баш и не велики.
Колико су ти језици, Саксонаца и нових дошњаиа, у IX вијеку били слични или су водили приличном неразумијевању како је у серији приказано, тешко је рећи. Серија је добро осмишљена, без обзира на смишљене нетачности, тражили су се савјети историчара, а то је видљиво код приказа догађаја, начина борбе, скрупула које владају, и вјерујем да је то у серији вјеродостојно приказано.
 
Poslednja izmena:
Ako nisi ucio Ruski,a pogotovo Poljski,neces razumeti apsoluno nista.Mozda samo mimiku donekle,mada su i gestovi malo drugaciji od nasih.
Taman su se toliko i oni razumeli.Jedna od 100 reci.
Nisam ucio ali eto poznajem neke Poljake i kad pricaju medjusobno mogu da pohvatam neke reci, isto kao i Ruse... kad bi pricali sporije i razgovernije verovatno bih mogao i vise.. Ali ko sto je Khal Drogo napisao i Angli i Saksonci su dosli nekih 400 godina iz susednog podrucja, ne mislim da su mogli komotno da vode razgovor ali neke osnovne stvari bi razumeli. I ruski i poljski pa i slovacki su recimo mnogo razumljiviji kad ih citas nego li kad se izgovaraju.... a ovo je mnogo manji vremenski period za tako drasticne razlike ko danasnji.
 
Nisam ucio ali eto poznajem neke Poljake i kad pricaju medjusobno mogu da pohvatam neke reci, isto kao i Ruse...
Kad sam prvi put dosao u Rusiju,iako sam u skoli ucio jezik,jedva sam hvatao smisao kad govore.Kad pocnu u slengu nista nisam lovio...
Poljaci govore nekim svojim jezikom,toliko razlicit da apsolutno nista ne razumem,iskreno,takodje i Ukrajinci.Svaka tebi cast ako si Poljake razumeo o cemu pricaju a da nisi uopste bio upucen u temu razgovora...
 
Ako nisi ucio Ruski,a pogotovo Poljski,neces razumeti apsoluno nista.Mozda samo mimiku donekle,mada su i gestovi malo drugaciji od nasih.
Taman su se toliko i oni razumeli.Jedna od 100 reci.
как ты, как твой день? Jedna osnovna recenica za pozdrav koju eto razumemo i danas.. Ne tvrdim da germanski jezici imaju tolike slicnosti ko slovenski ali evo najprostiji primer gde ces sigurno razumeti.. cak i kad izgovori. A od njih smo se lingvisticki odvojili pre 1500 godina... kod ovih razlika nekih 400.
 
Kad sam prvi put dosao u Rusiju,iako sam u skoli ucio jezik,jedva sam hvatao smisao kad govore.Kad pocnu u slengu nista nisam lovio...
Poljaci govore nekim svojim jezikom,toliko razlicit da apsolutno nista ne razumem,iskreno,takodje i Ukrajinci.Svaka tebi cast ako si Poljake razumeo o cemu pricaju a da nisi uopste bio upucen u temu razgovora...
Ok bio sam upucen u temu nije bas da nisam ... Ukrajinski mi je slicniji nego Ruski i za nijansu razumljiviji.
 
Samo sto RUsi uopste ne koriste tu frazu...Ты как,как твои дела je ustaljena.
Problem je kad ti rus kaze закрути стойку, a ti gledas sta da ukrutis (zavrni podupirac ili amortizer,zavisi od situacije.)
Pozdravi su jedno,razgovor o svakodnevnim stvarima totalno drugaciji.
 
Samo sto RUsi uopste ne koriste tu frazu...Ты как,как твои дела je ustaljena.
Problem je kad ti rus kaze закрути стойку, a ti gledas sta da ukrutis (zavrni podupirac ili amortizer,zavisi od situacije.)
Pozdravi su jedno,razgovor o svakodnevnim stvarima totalno drugaciji.
Na pozdrave sam i mislio i one uobicajene stvari, ne na neki zamrseniji razgovor. Isto tako i ovi Saksonci i Vikinzi su za toliko mogli da razumu jedni druge a u seriji je prikazano da bukvalno nisu nista razumeli cak ni onaj najosnovniji pozdrav.
 
Фантастична серија, добро гађа историјске чињенице. Наравно има унутрашњу радњу као и свака серија али се историјских делова држи. Нејлепши део ми је кад Роло заврши са принцезом Гила (ваљда нисам промашио њено име). И имају децу. Напокон и он да добије заслужено.
 
Vikinzi su zestoko izvikani. Uglavnom su gubili bitke kada su nadju naspram organizovanih vojski osim po danasnjoj engleskoj ali ti anglo-sanksonci su mogli samo da su izivljavaju nad nesrecnim ircima i velsanima sto je pokazao i Vilijam Osvajac i svi pokusaju kasnije engleza da nesto rade na evropskom kontinentu su isto to pokazali. U kasnijim fazama su se naucili modernim vojnim strategijama i vojnoj taktici pa su dosli do Sicilije i Napulja ali su na Balkanu opet pukli od Vizantije. A i uspeh Vikinga po anglo-saksonskim kraljevinama u danasnjoj Engleskoj je posledica razjedinjenosti i sukoba izmedju samih anglo-saksonskih drzava.

Pisacu kako su zapadni Sloveni, Vendi, medju kojima su i nasi daleki preci Luzicki Srbi, unistavali velika vikinska naselja i trgovacke centre po Danskoj, invazije Danske od strane Venda, napadi na vikinske konvoje na Baltickom moru, zasto Vikinzi nisu zalazili dublje na teritorije Venda i zapadnih Slovena uopste itd.

Vikinzi su bili lopovi koji iznenandno napadnu i sa plenom uteknu.
 
Poslednja izmena:
Vikinzi su zestoko izvikani. Uglavnom su gubili bitke kada su nadju naspram organizovanih vojski osim po danasnjoj engleskoj ali ti anglo-sanksonci su mogli samo da su izivljavaju nad nesrecnim ircima i velsanima sto je pokazao i Vilijam Osvajac

Ne moramo baš toliko da potcenjujemo ni Vikinge ni Saksonce. Jedni su izveli opsadu Pariza i Konstantinopolja, a što se drugih tiče, Vilijam ih je pokorio 19 dana nakon odlučujuće bitke na Stamford Bridžu za prestanak vikinškog prisustva na Ostrvu. Da nije bilo te bitke i posledičnog gubitka ljudstva, ogromno je pitanje da li bi Vilijamova kampanja otišla dalje od iskrcavanja na južnu obalu Engleske.
 
Pa je l su tim velikim ratnicima uspele te opsade? Mora da je neka uspela i oni osvojili neku veliku zemlju?
Koju su veliku i znacajnu zemlju Vikinzi osvojili?

Hocemo da pricamo sta se desilo sa vikinzima, kao placenicima Vizantije, protiv Seldzuka u Anadoliji?
 
Pa je l su tim velikim ratnicima uspele te opsade? Mora da je neka uspela i oni osvojili neku veliku zemlju?
Koju su veliku i znacajnu zemlju Vikinzi osvojili?

Hocemo da pricamo sta se desilo sa vikinzima, kao placenicima Vizantije, protiv Seldzuka u Anadoliji?

Buraz, ti pričaš o nečemu, a istovremeno pričaš o zapadnim Slovenima kojima takvi poduhvati nikad nisu na pamet pali. Na primer, te njihove akcije su bile iste kao vikinške, prepadi i potom povlačenje nazad, ne procenjuje se tako bilo čija snaga jer su za takve akcije sposobni svi. A ako tražimo primer moćne države koju su osnovali Vikinzi, zašto se ne orijentišemo na Ruse? I oni su u početku bili Vikinzi...
 
Ko je tvrdio da su Vendi bili veliki osvajaci? Ja ti samo kazem da su postojali Vendi koji su radili isto sto i Vikinzi i to bas Vikinzima.
Ne mozemo da se orjentisemo na Rusiju jer je oni nisu osnovali a nisu je ni osvojili. Oni su pozvani da budu neutralci u ratu istocnih slovena i ugro-finski plemena pri cemu su prihvatili slovensku kulturu i jezik, dakle nisu bili uopste u pocetku vikinzi bili su istocni sloveni ciju kulturu i jezik oni prihvatili. Ako uopste prihvatimo da su to bili Vikinzi jer poslednja genetska istrazivanja vise govore da su Rjuriki bili neko ugro-finsko pleme.
 
Ko je tvrdio da su Vendi bili veliki osvajaci? Ja ti samo kazem da su postojali Vendi koji su radili isto sto i Vikinzi i to bas Vikinzima.
Ne mozemo da se orjentisemo na Rusiju jer je oni nisu osnovali a nisu je ni osvojili. Oni su pozvani da budu neutralci u ratu istocnih slovena i ugro-finski plemena pri cemu su prihvatili slovensku kulturu i jezik, dakle nisu bili uopste u pocetku vikinzi bili su istocni sloveni ciju kulturu i jezik oni prihvatili. Ako uopste prihvatimo da su to bili Vikinzi jer poslednja genetska istrazivanja vise govore da su Rjuriki bili neko ugro-finsko pleme.

Ko kaže da je nisu osnovali? Pre njihovog dolaska nije postojala nikakva država na tom prostoru, a nakon toga se taj prostor razvio u imperiju. Što znači da je početak ipak vikinški, jer je njihova elita vladala nad tim plemenima, a tek kasnije je došlo do potpunog stapanja. Rurik nikad ne može biti ugro - finskog porekla, posebno zato što postoje i druge poznate vikinške vođe sa istim imenom, a daleko od ruskih teritorija.
 
Zanimljivo je to da nije se tako zvao narod nego samo ratnici koji odlaze u te pohode da pljačkaju...To je bilo,nešto kao zanimanje,a ne ime naroda....
 
Репутација Викинга, тих срчаних и неустрашивих ратника, којима је мало ко у борби могао парирати, је више него оправдана. Имали су сијасет забиљежених битака, бјеше и пораза, који су били посљедица ипак више њихове малобројности, како су извори хронике њихових непријатеља, нема разлога сумњати у ту репутацију.

Са друге стране, простор одакле долазе Викинзи, Скандинавија, а то је археологија и потврдила, бјеше кроз читаву историју простор одакле су народи одсељавали ка југу, бројним европским народима је прапостојбина управо Скандинавија, или су у етногенези тих народа учествовали народи који вуку поријекло са тог простора. И тај простор, и због сурових услова живота и због константних одсељавања, а и међусобних завада, никад није био насељен бројном популацијом, чијом миграцијом би преплавили неке друге просторе.

Но то не значи да нису имали успјешних похода, који су увијек испрва били пљачкашки а касније и освајачки, и да нису своју власт успоставили на освојеном територију, напротив оснивали су и своје државе.
Кроз читав IX-XI вијек имали су походе по англосаксонским земљама, формирали своје државице, повремено имали власт, углавном дански викинзи над већим дијелом касније Енглеске, Викинзи из земље фјордова (Норвешке) су такође вршили походе, до 1066-е када су доживјели одлучујући пораз.
И на простору Франачке, основали су своје војводство, које је по њима добило име Нормандија. Оно што је важно, Нормани на освојеним територијама никад нису били већинска популација, већ мањинска ратничка елита која је владала већином.
На простору данашње Аланије и Тесалије су такође крајем XI и почетком XII вијека успоставили власт и државу која није потрајала из разлога што то бјеше ратничка елита али и изразита мањина.
Најпознатији примјер су норманска освајања по Сицилији и јужној Италији (овдје) у периоду IX-XI вијека
Norman conquest of southern Italy


Multicolored map of 12th-century Italy
The Kingdom of Sicily (in green) in 1154, representing the extent of the Norman conquest in southern Italy over several decades of activity by independent adventurers

The Norman conquest of southern Italy lasted from 999 to 1139, involving many battles and independent conquerors. In 1130, the territories in southern Italy united as the Kingdom of Sicily, which included the island of Sicily, the southern third of the Italian Peninsula (except Benevento, which was briefly held twice), the archipelago of Malta, and parts of North Africa.

Itinerant Norman forces arrived in the Mezzogiorno as mercenaries in the service of Lombard and Byzantine factions, communicating news swiftly back home about opportunities in the Mediterranean. These groups gathered in several places, establishing fiefdoms and states of their own, uniting and elevating their status to de facto independence within fifty years of their arrival.

Unlike the Norman conquest of England (1066), which took a few years after one decisive battle, the conquest of southern Italy was the product of decades and a number of battles, few decisive. Many territories were conquered independently, and only later were unified into a single state. Compared to the conquest of England, it was unplanned and disorganised, but equally complete.

Pre-Norman Viking activity in Italy
There is little evidence for Viking activity in Italy as a precursor to the arrival of the Normans in 999, but some raiding is recorded. Ermentarius of Noirmoutier and the Annales Bertiniani provide contemporary evidence for Vikings based in Frankia proceeding to Iberia and thence to Italy around 860.[1]

Some modern scholars have connected this event with a much later account by the infamously unreliable Dudo of Saint-Quentin, who has a Viking fleet led by one Alstingus land at the Ligurian port of Luni and sacking the city. The Vikings then move another 60 miles (97 kilometres) down the Tuscan coast to the mouth of the Arno, sacking Pisa and then, following the river upstream, also attack the hill-town of Fiesole above Florence and win other victories around the Mediterranean (including in Sicily and North Africa).[2] Building modern speculation on medieval invention, some scholarship has identified the leaders of this expedition as Björn Ironside and Hastein. Dudo's account, however, probably adds no historically reliable information to the brief contemporary annals.[3]

Other contact between Italy and the Viking world occurred via Eastern Scandinavians coming to Italy via the Austrvegr (the river routes from the Baltic to the Black Sea) and working as Varangian mercenaries fighting for Byzantium. In particular, three or four eleventh-century Swedish Runestones mention Italy, memorialising warriors who died in 'Langbarðaland', the Old Norse name for southern Italy (Langobardia Minor).[4] Varangians may first have been deployed as mercenaries in Italy against the Arabs as early as 936.[5]

Arrival of the Normans in Italy, 999–1017
Multi-coloured map of Italy in 1000 AD
Map of Italy at the arrival of the Normans, who eventually conquered Sicily and all the territory on the mainland south of the Holy Roman Empire (the bold line), southern regions of the Papal States and the Duchy of Spoleto

The earliest reported date of the arrival of Norman knights in southern Italy is 999, although it may be assumed that they had visited before then. In that year, according to some traditional sources of uncertain origin, Norman pilgrims returning from the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem via Apulia stayed with Prince Guaimar III in Salerno. The city and its environs were attacked by Saracens from Africa demanding payment of an overdue annual tribute. While Guaimar began to collect the tribute, the Normans ridiculed him and his Lombard subjects for cowardice, and they assaulted their besiegers. The Saracens fled, booty was confiscated and a grateful Guaimar asked the Normans to stay. They refused, but promised to bring his rich gifts to their compatriots in Normandy and tell them about possibly lucrative military service in Salerno. Some sources have Guaimar sending emissaries to Normandy to bring back knights, and this account of the arrival of the Normans is sometimes known as the "Salerno (or Salernitan) tradition".[6][7]

The Salerno tradition was first recorded by Amatus of Montecassino in his Ystoire de li Normant between 1071 and 1086.[7] Much of this information was borrowed from Amatus by Peter the Deacon for his continuation of the Chronicon Monasterii Casinensis of Leo of Ostia, written during the early 12th century. Beginning with the Annales Ecclesiastici of Baronius in the 17th century, the Salernitan story became the accepted history.[8] Although its factual accuracy was questioned periodically during the following centuries, it has been accepted (with some modifications) by most scholars since.[9]

Another historical account of the arrival of the first Normans in Italy, the "Gargano tradition", appears in primary chronicles without reference to any previous Norman presence.[6] According to this account Norman pilgrims at the shrine to Michael the Archangel at Monte Gargano in 1016 met the Lombard Melus of Bari, who persuaded them to join him in an attack on the Byzantine government of Apulia.

As with the Salerno tradition, there are two primary sources for the Gargano story: the Gesta Roberti Wiscardi of William of Apulia (dated 1088–1110) and the Chronica monasterii S. Bartholomaei de Carpineto of a monk named Alexander, written about a century later and based on William's work.[10] Some scholars have combined the Salerno and Gargano tales, and John Julius Norwich suggested that the meeting between Melus and the Normans had been arranged by Guaimar.[11] Melus had been in Salerno just before his visit to Monte Gargano.

Another story involves the exile of a group of brothers from the Drengot family. One of the brothers, Osmund (according to Orderic Vitalis) or Gilbert (according to Amatus and Peter the Deacon), murdered William Repostel (Repostellus) in the presence of Robert I, Duke of Normandy after Repostel allegedly boasted about dishonouring his murderer's daughter. Threatened with death, the Drengot brother fled with his siblings to Rome and one of the brothers had an audience with the pope before joining Melus (Melo) of Bari. Amatus dates the story to after 1027, and does not mention the pope. According to him, Gilbert's brothers were Osmund, Ranulf, Asclettin and Ludolf (Rudolf, according to Peter).[12] Between 1016 and 1024, in a fragmented political context, the County of Ariano was founded by the group of Norman knights headed by Gilbert and hired by Melus. The County, which replaced the pre-existing chamberlainship, is considered to be the first political body established by the Normans in the South of Italy.[13]

Repostel's murder is dated by all the chronicles to the reign of Robert the Magnificent and after 1027, although some scholars believe "Robert" was a scribal error for "Richard" (Richard II of Normandy, who was duke in 1017).[14] The earlier date is necessary if the emigration of the first Normans was connected to the Drengots and the murder of William Repostel. In the Histories of Ralph Glaber, "Rodulfus" leaves Normandy after displeasing Count Richard (Richard II).[15] The sources disagree about which brother was the leader on the southern trip. Orderic and William of Jumièges, in the latter's Gesta Normannorum Ducum, name Osmund; Glaber names Rudolph, and Leo, Amatus and Adhemar of Chabannes name Gilbert. According to most southern-Italian sources, the leader of the Norman contingent at the Battle of Cannae in 1018 was Gilbert.[16] If Rudolf is identified with the Rudolf of Amatus' history as a Drengot brother, he may have been the leader at Cannae.[17]

A modern hypothesis concerning the Norman arrival in the Mezzogiorno concerns the chronicles of Glaber, Adhemar and Leo (not Peter's continuation). All three chronicles indicate that Normans (either a group of 40 or a much-larger force of around 250) under "Rodulfus" (Rudolf), fleeing Richard II, came to Pope Benedict VIII of Rome. The pope sent them to Salerno (or Capua) to seek mercenary employment against the Byzantines because of the latter's invasion of papal Beneventan territory.[18] There, they met the Beneventan primates (leading men): Landulf V of Benevento, Pandulf IV of Capua, (possibly) Guaimar III of Salerno and Melus of Bari. According to Leo's chronicle, "Rudolf" was Ralph of Tosni.[12][19] If the first confirmed Norman military actions in the south involved Melus' mercenaries against the Byzantines in May 1017, the Normans probably left Normandy between January and April.[20]

Lombard revolt, 1009–1022
Painting of people entering a building
The imprisonment of Pandulf of Capua, after Emperor Henry II's 1022 campaign

On 9 May 1009, an insurrection erupted in Bari against the Catapanate of Italy, the regional Byzantine authority based there. Led by Melus, a local Lombard, the revolt quickly spread to other cities. Late that year (or early in 1010) the katepano, John Curcuas, was killed in battle. In March 1010 his successor, Basil Mesardonites, disembarked with reinforcements and besieged the rebels in the city. The Byzantine citizens negotiated with Basil and forced the Lombard leaders, Melus and his brother-in-law Dattus, to flee. Basil entered the city on 11 June 1011, reestablishing Byzantine authority. He did not follow his victory with severe sanctions, only sending Melus' family (including his son, Argyrus) to Constantinople. Basil died in 1016, after years of peace in southern Italy.

Leo Tornikios Kontoleon arrived as Basil's successor in May of that year. After Basil's death, Melus revolted again; this time, he used a newly arrived band of Normans sent by Pope Benedict or who met him (with or without Guaimar's aid) at Monte Gargano. Tornikios sent an army, led by Leo Passianos, against the Lombard-Norman coalition. Passianos and Melus met on the Fortore at Arenula; the battle was either indecisive (William of Apulia) or a victory for Melus (Leo of Ostia and Amatus). Tornikios then took command, leading his forces into a second encounter near Civita.[21] This second battle was a victory for Melus, although Lupus Protospatharius and the anonymous chronicler of Bari recorded a defeat.[21] A third battle (a decisive victory for Melus) took place at Vaccaricia;[21] the region from the Fortore to Trani was in his hands, and in September Tornikios was replaced by Basil Boiannes (who arrived in December). According to Amatus, there were five consecutive Lombard and Norman victories by October 1018.[21]

At Boioannes' request, a detachment of the elite Varangian Guard was sent to Italy to fight the Normans. The armies met at the Ofanto near Cannae, the site of Hannibal's victory over the Romans in 216 BC, and the Battle of Cannae was a decisive Byzantine victory;[21] Amatus wrote that only ten Normans survived from a contingent of 250.[21] After the battle, Ranulf Drengot (one of the Norman survivors) was elected leader of their company.[21] Boioannes protected his gains by building a fortress at the Apennine pass, guarding the entrance to the Apulian plain. In 1019 Troia (as the fortress was known) was garrisoned by Boioannes' Norman troops, an indication of Norman willingness to fight on either side. With Norman mercenaries on both sides, they would obtain good terms for the release of their brethren from their captors regardless of outcome.[21]

Alarmed by the shift in momentum in the south, Pope Benedict (who may have initiated Norman involvement in the war) went north in 1020 to Bamberg to confer with Holy Roman Emperor Henry II. Although the emperor took no immediate action, events the following year persuaded him to intervene. Boioannes (allied with Pandulf of Capua) marched on Dattus, who was garrisoning a tower in the territory of the Duchy of Gaeta with papal troops. Dattus was captured and, on 15 June 1021, received the traditional Roman poena cullei: he was tied up in a sack with a monkey, a rooster and a snake and thrown into the sea. In 1022, a large imperial army marched south in three detachments under Henry II, Pilgrim of Cologne and Poppo of Aquileia to attack Troia. Although Troia did not fall, the Lombard princes were allied with the Empire and Pandulf removed to a German prison; this ended the Lombard revolt.

Mercenary service, 1022–1046
In 1024, Norman mercenaries under Ranulf Drengot were in the service of Guaimar III when he and Pandulf IV besieged Pandulf V in Capua. In 1026, after an 18-month siege, Capua surrendered and Pandulf IV was reinstated as prince. During the next few years Ranulf would attach himself to Pandulf, but in 1029 he joined Sergius IV of Naples (whom Pandulf expelled from Naples in 1027, probably with Ranulf's assistance).

In 1029, Ranulf and Sergius recaptured Naples. In early 1030 Sergius gave Ranulf the County of Aversa as a fief, the first Norman lordship in southern Italy.[21] Sergius also gave his sister, the widow of the duke of Gaeta, in marriage to Ranulf.[21] In 1034, however, Sergius' sister died and Ranulf returned to Pandulf. According to Amatus:

For the Normans never desired any of the Lombards to win a decisive victory, in case this should be to their disadvantage. But now supporting the one and then aiding the other, they prevented anyone being completely ruined.

Norman reinforcements and local miscreants, who found a welcome in Ranulf's camp with no questions asked, swelled Ranulf's numbers.[21] There, Amatus observed that the Norman language and customs welded a disparate group into the semblance of a nation. In 1035, the same year William the Conqueror would become Duke of Normandy, Tancred of Hauteville's three eldest sons (William "Iron Arm", Drogo and Humphrey) arrived in Aversa from Normandy.[22]

In 1037, or the summer of 1038[21] (sources differ), Norman influence was further solidified when Emperor Conrad II deposed Pandulf and invested Ranulf as Count of Aversa. In 1038 Ranulf invaded Capua, expanding his polity into one of the largest in southern Italy.[21]

In 1038 Byzantine Emperor Michael IV launched a military campaign into Muslim Sicily, with General George Maniaches leading the Christian army against the Saracens. The future king of Norway, Harald Hardrada, commanded the Varangian Guard in the expedition and Michael called on Guaimar IV of Salerno and other Lombard lords to provide additional troops for the campaign. Guiamar sent 300 Norman knights from Aversa, including the three Hauteville brothers (who would achieve renown for their prowess in battle). William of Hauteville became known as William Bras-de-Fer ("William Iron Arm") for single-handedly killing the emir of Syracuse during that city's siege. The Norman contingent would leave before the campaign's end due to the inadequate distribution of Saracen loot.[22]

After the assassination of Catapan Nikephoros Dokeianos at Ascoli in 1040 the Normans elected Atenulf, brother of Pandulf III of Benevento, their leader. On 16 March 1041, near Venosa on the Olivento, the Norman army tried to negotiate with Catapan Michael Dokeianos; although they failed, they still defeated the Byzantine army in the Battle of Olivento. On 4 May 1041 the Norman army, led by William Iron Arm, defeated the Byzantines again in the Battle of Montemaggiore near Cannae (avenging the Norman defeat in the 1018 Battle of Cannae.[22] Although the catapan summoned a large Varangian force from Bari, the battle was a rout; many of Michael's soldiers drowned in the Ofanto while retreating.[23]

On 3 September 1041 at the Battle of Montepeloso, the Normans (nominally under Arduin and Atenulf) defeated Byzantine catepan Exaugustus Boioannes and brought him to Benevento. Around that time, Guaimar IV of Salerno began to attract the Normans. In February 1042, Atenulf negotiated the ransom of Exaugustus and then fled with the ransom money to Byzantine territory. He was replaced by Argyrus, who was bribed to defect to the Byzantines after a few early victories.

The revolt, originally Lombard, had become Norman in character and leadership. In September 1042, the three principal Norman groups held a council in Melfi which included Ranulf Drengot, Guaimar IV and William Iron Arm. William and the other leaders petitioned Guaimar to recognize their conquests, and William was acknowledged as the Norman leader in Apula (which included Melfi and the Norman garrison at Troia). He received the title of Count of Apulia from Guiamar, and (like Ranulf) was his vassal. Guaimar proclaimed himself Duke of Apulia and Calabria, although he was never formally invested as such by the Holy Roman Emperor. William was married to Guida (daughter of Guy, Duke of Sorrento and Guaimar's niece), strengthening the alliance between the Normans and Guaimar.[24]

At Melfi in 1043, Guaimar divided the region (except for Melfi itself, which was to be governed on a republican model) into twelve baronies for the Norman leaders. William received Ascoli, Asclettin Drengot received Acerenza, Tristan received Montepeloso, Hugh Tubœuf received Monopoli, Peter received Trani, Drogo of Hauteville received Venosa and Ranulf Drengot (now the independent Duke of Gaeta) received Siponto and Monte Gargano.[24]

During their reign William and Guaimar began the conquest of Calabria in 1044, and built the castle of Stridula (near Squillace). William was less successful in Apulia, where he was defeated in 1045 near Taranto by Argyrus (although his brother, Drogo, conquered Bovino). At William's death, the period of Norman mercenary service ended with the rise of two Norman principalities owing nominal allegiance to the Holy Roman Empire: the County of Aversa (later the Principality of Capua) and the County of Apulia (later the Duchy of Apulia).

County of Melfi, 1046–1059
Castle against sky, with sloping grass in front

The stone castle at Melfi was constructed by the Normans where no fortress had previously stood. The present castle includes additions to a simple, rectangular Norman keep.

In 1046 Drogo entered Apulia and defeated the catepan, Eustathios Palatinos, near Taranto while his brother Humphrey forced Bari to conclude a treaty with the Normans. Also that year, Richard Drengot arrived with 40 knights from Normandy and Robert "Guiscard" Hauteville arrived with other Norman immigrants.[25]

In 1047 Guaimar (who had supported Drogo's succession and the establishment of a Norman dynasty in the south) gave him his daughter, Gaitelgrima, in marriage. Emperor Henry III confirmed the county of Aversa in its fidelity to him and made Drogo his vassal, granting him the title dux et magister Italiae comesque Normannorum totius Apuliae et Calabriae (duke and master of Italy and count of the Normans of all Apulia and Calabria, the first legitimate title for the Normans of Melfi).[25] Henry did not confirm the other titles given during the 1042 council; he demoted Guiamar to "prince of Salerno", and Capua was bestowed upon Pandulf IV for the third (and final) time.[25] Henry, whose wife Agnes had been mistreated by the Beneventans, authorised Drogo to conquer Benevento for the imperial crown; he did so in 1053.

In 1048 Drogo commanded an expedition into Calabria via the valley of Crati, near Cosenza. He distributed the conquered territories in Calabria and gave his brother, Robert Guiscard, a castle at Scribla to guard the entrance to the recently conquered territory; Guiscard would later abandon it for a castle at San Marco Argentano.[25] Shortly thereafter he married the daughter of another Norman lord, who gave him 200 knights (furthering his military campaign in Calabria).[26] In 1051 Drogo was assassinated by Byzantine conspirators[26] and was succeeded by his brother, Humphrey.[27] Humphrey's first challenge was to deal with papal opposition to the Normans.[27] The Norman knights' treatment of the Lombards during Drogo's reign triggered more revolts.[27] During the unrest, the Italo-Norman John, Abbot of Fécamp was accosted on his return trip from Rome;[27] he wrote to Pope Leo IX:


The hatred of the Italians for the Normans has now reached such a pitch that it is almost impossible for any Norman, albeit a pilgrim, to journey in the towns of Italy, without being assailed, abducted, robbed, beaten, thrown in irons, even if fortunate enough not to die in a prison.[28]

The pope and his supporters, including the future Gregory VII, called for an army to oust the Normans from Italy.[27]


Simple military map
Battle plan of Civitate: Normans in red, papal coalition in blue

On 18 June 1053, Humphrey led the Norman armies against the combined forces of the pope and the Holy Roman Empire. At the Battle of Civitate the Normans destroyed the papal army and captured Leo IX, imprisoning him in Benevento (which had surrendered). Humphrey conquered Oria, Nardò, and Lecce by the end of 1055. In 1054 Peter II, who succeeded Peter I in the region of Trani, captured the city from the Byzantines. Humphrey died in 1057; he was succeeded by Guiscard, who ended his loyalty to the Empire and made himself a papal vassal in return for the title of duke.[27]

County of Aversa, 1049–1098
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
During the 1050s and 1060s, there were two centres of Norman power in southern Italy: one at Melfi (under the Hautevilles) and another at Aversa (under the Drengots). Richard Drengot became ruler of the County of Aversa in 1049, beginning a policy of territorial aggrandisement to compete with his Hauteville rivals. At first he warred with his Lombard neighbours, who included Pandulf VI of Capua, Atenulf I of Gaeta and Gisulf II of Salerno. Richard pushed back the borders of Salerno until there was little left of the once-great principality but the city of Salerno itself. Although he tried to extend his influence peacefully by betrothing his daughter to the oldest son of Atenulf of Gaeta, when the boy died before the marriage he still demanded the Lombard dower from the boy's parents. When the duke refused, Richard seized Aquino (one of Gaeta's few remaining fiefs) in 1058. However, the chronology of his conquest of Gaeta is confusing. Documents from 1058 and 1060 refer to Jordan (Richard's oldest son) as Duke of Gaeta, but these have been disputed as forgeries (since Atenulf was still duke when he died in 1062).[29] After Atenulf's death, Richard and Jordan took over the rule of the duchy and allowed Atenulf's heir—Atenulf II—to rule as their subject until 1064 (when Gaeta was fully incorporated into the Drengot principality). Richard and Jordan appointed puppet, usually Norman, dukes.[30]

When the prince of Capua died in 1057, Richard immediately besieged the comune. This chronology is also unclear. Pandulf was succeeded at Capua by his brother, Landulf VIII, who is recorded as prince until 12 May 1062. Richard and Jordan took the princely title in 1058, but apparently allowed Landulf to continue ruling beneath them for at least four years more. In 1059 Pope Nicholas II convened a synod at Melfi confirming Richard as Count of Aversa and Prince of Capua, and Richard swore allegiance to the papacy for his holdings. The Drengots then made Capua their headquarters for ruling Aversa and Gaeta.

Richard and Jordan expanded their new Gaetan and Capuan territories northwards toward Latium, into the Papal States. In 1066 Richard marched on Rome, but was easily repelled. Jordan's tenure as Richard's successor marked an alliance with the papacy (which Richard had attempted), and the conquests of Capua ceased. When Jordan died in 1090, his young son Richard II and his regents were unable to hold Capua. They were forced to flee the city by a Lombard, Lando, who ruled it with popular support until he was forced out by the combined Hauteville forces in the siege of Capua in 1098; this ended Lombard rule in Italy.

Conquest of the Abruzzo, 1053–1105
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
In 1077 the last Lombard prince of Benevento died, and in 1078 the pope appointed Robert Guiscard to succeed him. In 1081, however, Guiscard relinquished Benevento. By then, the principality comprised little more than Benevento and its environs; it had been reduced in size by Norman conquests during the previous decades, especially after the Battle of Civitate and after 1078. At Ceprano in June 1080 the pope again gave Guiscard control of Benevento, an attempt to halt Norman incursions into it and associated territory in the Abruzzi (which Guiscard's relatives had been appropriating).

After the Battle of Civitate, the Normans began the conquest of the Adriatic coast of Benevento. Geoffrey of Hauteville, a brother of the Hauteville counts of Melfi, conquered the Lombard county of Larino and stormed the castle Morrone in the region of Samnium-Guillamatum. Geoffrey's son, Robert, united these conquests into a county, Loritello, in 1061 and continued his expansion into Lombard Abruzzo. He conquered the Lombard county of Teate (modern Chieti) and besieged Ortona, which became the goal of Norman efforts in that region. Loritello soon reached as far north as the Pescara and the Papal States. In 1078 Robert allied with Jordan of Capua to ravage the Papal Abruzzo, but after a 1080 treaty with Pope Gregory VII they were obligated to respect papal territory. In 1100 Robert of Loritello extended his principality across the Fortore, taking Bovino and Dragonara.

The conquest of the Molise is poorly documented. Boiano (the principal town) may have been conquered the year before the Battle of Civitate by Robert Guiscard, who had encircled the Matese massif. The county of Boiano was bestowed on Rudolf of Moulins. His grandson, Hugh, expanded it eastward (occupying Toro and San Giovanni in Galdo) and westward (annexing the Capuan counties of Venafro, Pietrabbondante and Trivento in 1105).

Conquest of Sicily, 1061–1091
See also: Emirate of Sicily, County of Sicily, and Norman invasion of Malta
This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Painting of mounted battle
Roger I of Sicily at the 1063 battle of Cerami, victorious over 35,000 Saracens according to Goffredo Malaterra.

After 250 years of Arab control, Sicily was inhabited by a mix of Christians, Arab Muslims, and Muslim converts at the time of its conquest by the Normans. Arab Sicily had a thriving trade network with the Mediterranean world, and was known in the Arab world as a luxurious and decadent place. It had originally been under the rule of the Aghlabids and then the Fatimids, but in 948 the Kalbids wrested control of the island and held it until 1053. During the 1010s and 1020s, a series of succession crises paved the way for interference by the Zirids of Ifriqiya. Sicily was racked by turmoil as petty fiefdoms battled each other for supremacy. Into this, the Normans under Robert Guiscard and his younger brother Roger Bosso came intending to conquer; the pope had conferred on Robert the title of "Duke of Sicily", encouraging him to seize Sicily from the Saracens.

Robert and Roger first invaded Sicily in May 1061, crossing from Reggio di Calabria and besieging Messina for control of the strategically vital Strait of Messina. Roger crossed the strait first, landing unseen overnight and surprising the Saracen army in the morning. When Robert's troops landed later that day, they found themselves unopposed and Messina abandoned. Robert immediately fortified the city and allied himself with the emir, Ibn at-Timnah, against his rival Ibn al-Hawas. Robert, Roger, and at-Timnah then marched into the centre of the island by way of Rometta, which had remained loyal to at-Timnah. They passed through Frazzanò and the Pianura di Maniace (Plain of Maniakes), encountering resistance to their assault of Centuripe. Paternò fell quickly, and Robert brought his army to Castrogiovanni (modern Enna, the strongest fortress in central Sicily). Although the garrison was defeated the citadel did not fall, and with winter approaching Robert returned to Apulia. Before leaving, he built a fortress at San Marco d'Alunzio (the first Norman castle in Sicily). Roger returned in late 1061 and captured Troina. In June 1063 he defeated a Muslim army at the Battle of Cerami, securing the Norman foothold on the island.

Seated man with sword receiving objects on a tray
Roger I receiving the keys of Palermo in 1071

Robert returned in 1064, bypassing Castrogiovanni on his way to Palermo; this campaign was eventually called off. In August 1071, the Normans began a second and successful siege of Palermo. The city of Palermo was entered by the Normans on 7 January 1072 and three days later the defenders of the inner-city surrendered.[31] Meanwhile, in 1066, William the Conqueror had become the first Norman King of England. Robert invested Roger as Count of Sicily under the suzerainty of the Duke of Apulia. In a partition of the island with his brother Robert retained Palermo, half of Messina, and the largely Christian Val Demone (leaving the rest, including what was not yet conquered, to Roger).

In 1077 Roger besieged Trapani, one of the two remaining Saracen strongholds in the west of the island. His son, Jordan, led a sortie which surprised guards of the garrison's livestock. With its food supply cut off, the city soon surrendered. In 1079 Taormina was besieged, and in 1081 Jordan, Robert de Sourval and Elias Cartomi conquered Catania (a holding of the emir of Syracuse) in another surprise attack.

Roger left Sicily in the summer of 1083 to assist his brother on the mainland; Jordan (whom he had left in charge) revolted, forcing him to return to Sicily and subjugate his son. In 1085, he was finally able to undertake a systematic campaign. On 22 May Roger approached Syracuse by sea, while Jordan led a small cavalry detachment 15 miles (24 km) north of the city. On 25 May, the navies of the count and the emir engaged in the harbour—where the latter was killed—while Jordan's forces besieged the city. The siege lasted throughout the summer, but when the city capitulated in March 1086 only Noto was still under Saracen dominion. In February 1091 Noto yielded as well, and the conquest of Sicily was complete.


Old four-story stone building
The Palazzo dei Normanni was a 9th-century Arab palace in Sicily, converted by the Normans into their governing castle.

In 1091, Roger invaded Malta and subdued the walled city of Mdina. He imposed taxes on the islands, but allowed the Arab governors to continue their rule. In 1127 Roger II abolished the Muslim government, replacing it with Norman officials. Under Norman rule, the Arabic spoken by the Greek Christian islanders for centuries of Muslim domination became Maltese.

Conquest of Amalfi and Salerno, 1073–1077
The fall of Amalfi and Salerno to Robert Guiscard were influenced by his wife, Sichelgaita. Amalfi probably surrendered as a result of her negotiations,[32] and Salerno fell when she stopped petitioning her husband on behalf of her brother (the prince of Salerno). The Amalfitans unsuccessfully subjected themselves to Prince Gisulf to avoid Norman suzerainty, but the states (whose histories had been joined since the 9th century) ultimately came under Norman control.

By summer 1076, through piracy and raids Gisulf II of Salerno incited the Normans to destroy him; that season, under Richard of Capua and Robert Guiscard the Normans united to besiege Salerno. Although Gisulf ordered his citizens to store two years' worth of food, he confiscated enough of it to starve his subjects. On 13 December 1076, the city submitted; the prince and his retainers retreated to the citadel, which fell in May 1077. Although Gisulf's lands and relics were confiscated, he remained at liberty. The Principality of Salerno had already been reduced to little more than the capital city and its environs by previous wars with William of the Principate, Roger of Sicily and Robert Guiscard. However, the city was the most important in southern Italy and its capture was essential to the creation of a kingdom fifty years later.

In 1073 Sergius III of Amalfi died, leaving the infant John III as his successor. Desiring protection in unstable times, the Amalfitans exiled the young duke and summoned Robert Guiscard that year.[33] Amalfi, however, remained restless under Norman control. Robert's successor, Roger Borsa, took control of Amalfi in 1089 after expelling Gisulf (the deposed Prince of Salerno, whom the citizens had installed with papal aid). From 1092 to 1097 Amalfi did not recognise its Norman suzerain, apparently seeking Byzantine help;[32] Marinus Sebaste was installed as ruler in 1096.

Robert's son Bohemond and his brother Roger of Sicily attacked Amalfi in 1097, but were repulsed. During this siege, the Normans began to be drawn by the First Crusade. Marinus was defeated after Amalfitan noblemen defected to the Norman side and betrayed him in 1101. Amalfi revolted again in 1130, when Roger II of Sicily demanded its loyalty. It was finally subdued in 1131 when Admiral John marched on it by land and George of Antioch blockaded it by sea, establishing a base on Capri.

Byzantine–Norman wars, 1059–1085
Main article: Byzantine–Norman wars

While most of Apulia (except the far south and Bari) had capitulated to the Normans in campaigns by the fraternal counts William, Drogo and Humphrey, much of Calabria remained in Byzantine hands at Robert Guiscard's 1057 succession. Calabria was first breached by William and Guaimar during the early 1040s, and Drogo installed Guiscard there during the early 1050s. However, Robert's early career in Calabria was spent in feudal infighting and robber baronage rather than organised subjugation of the Greek population.

He began his tenure with a Calabrian campaign. Briefly interrupted for the Council of Melfi on 23 August 1059 (where he was invested as duke), he returned to Calabria—and his army's siege of Cariati—later that year. The town capitulated at the duke's arrival, and Rossano and Gerace also fell before the end of the season. Of the peninsula's significant cities, only Reggio remained in Byzantine hands when Robert returned to Apulia that winter. In Apulia, he temporarily removed the Byzantine garrison from Taranto and Brindisi. The duke returned to Calabria in 1060, primarily to launch a Sicilian expedition. Although the conquest of Reggio required an arduous siege, Robert's brother Roger had siege engines prepared.

After the fall of Reggio the Byzantine garrison fled to Reggio's island citadel of Scilla, where they were easily defeated. Roger's minor assault on Messina (across the strait) was repulsed, and Robert was called away by a large Byzantine force in Apulia sent by Constantine X late in 1060. Under the catapan Miriarch, the Byzantines retook Taranto, Brindisi, Oria, and Otranto; in January 1061, the Norman capital of Melfi was under siege. By May, however, the two brothers had expelled the Byzantines and calmed Apulia.


Multicoloured map of Italian peninsula, showing smaller states
Norman progress in Sicily during Robert's expeditions to the Balkans: Capua, Apulia, Calabria, and the County of Sicily are Norman. The Emirate of Sicily, the Duchy of Naples and lands in the Abruzzo (in the southern Duchy of Spoleto) are not yet conquered.

Geoffrey, son of Peter I of Trani, conquered Otranto in 1063 and Taranto (which he made his county seat) in 1064. In 1066 he organised an army for a marine attack on "Romania" (the Byzantine Balkans), but was halted near Bari by a recently landed army of Varangian auxiliaries under the catapan Mabrica. Mabrica briefly retook Brindisi and Taranto, establishing a garrison at the former under Nikephoros Karantenos (an experienced Byzantine soldier from the Bulgar wars). Although the catapan was successful against the Normans in Italy, it was the last significant Byzantine threat. Bari, the capital of the Byzantine catapanate, was besieged by the Normans beginning in August 1068; in April 1071 the city, the last Byzantine outpost in western Europe, fell.

After expelling the Byzantines from Apulia and Calabria (their theme of Langobardia), Robert Guiscard planned an attack on Byzantine possessions in Greece. The Byzantines had supported Robert's nephews, Abelard and Herman (the dispossessed son of Count Humphrey), in their insurrection against Robert; they had also supported Henry, Count of Monte Sant'Angelo, who recognised Byzantine suzerainty in his county, against him.

In 1073-75 Robert's vassal, Peter II of Trani, led a Balkan expedition against the Kingdom of Croatia's Dalmatian lands. Peter's cousin Amico (son of Walter of Giovinazzo) attacked the islands of Rab and Cres, taking Croatian king Petar Krešimir IV captive. Although Petar was ransomed by the Bishop of Cres, he died shortly afterwards and was buried in the church of Saint Stephen in the Fortress of Klis.

Robert undertook his first Balkan expedition in May 1081, leaving Brindisi with about 16,000 troops. By February 1082 he captured Corfu and Durazzo, defeating the Emperor Alexius I at the Battle of Dyrrhachium the previous October. Robert's son Mark Bohemond temporarily controlled Thessaly, unsuccessfully trying to retain the 1081–82 conquests in Robert's absence. The duke returned in 1084 to restore them, occupying Corfu and Kephalonia before his death from a fever on 15 July 1085. The village of Fiskardo on Cephalonia is named after Robert. Bohemond did not continue pursuing Greek conquests, returning to Italy to dispute Robert's succession with his half-brother Roger Borsa.

Conquest of Naples, 1077–1139
The Duchy of Naples, nominally a Byzantine possession, was one of the last southern Italian states to be attacked by the Normans. Since Sergius IV asked for Ranulf Drengot's help during the 1020s, with brief exceptions the dukes of Naples were allied with the Normans of Aversa and Capua. Beginning in 1077, the incorporation of Naples into the Hauteville state took sixty years to complete.

In summer 1074, hostilities flared up between Richard of Capua and Robert Guiscard. Sergius V of Naples allied with the latter, making his city a supply centre for Guiscard's troops. This pitted him against Richard, who was supported by Gregory VII. In June Richard briefly besieged Naples; Richard, Robert and Sergius soon began negotiations with Gregory, mediated by Desiderius of Montecassino.

In 1077 Naples was again besieged by Richard of Capua, with a naval blockade by Robert Guiscard. Richard died during the siege in 1078, after the deathbed lifting of his excommunication. The siege was ended by his successor, Jordan, to insinuate himself with the papacy (which had made peace with Duke Sergius).

In 1130, the Antipope Anacletus II crowned Roger II of Sicily king and declared the fief of Naples part of his kingdom.[34] In 1131, Roger demanded from the citizens of Amalfi the defences of their city and the keys to their castle. When they refused, Sergius VII of Naples initially prepared to aid them with a fleet; George of Antioch blockaded Naples' port with a large armada and Sergius, cowed by the suppression of the Amalfitans, submitted to Roger. According to the chronicler Alexander of Telese, Naples "which, since Roman times, had hardly ever been conquered by the sword now submitted to Roger on the strength of a mere report (i.e. Amalfi's fall)."

In 1134 Sergius supported the rebellion of Robert II of Capua and Ranulf II of Alife, but avoided direct confrontation with Roger and paid homage to the king after the fall of Capua. On 24 April 1135 a Pisan fleet with 8,000 reinforcements, captained by Robert of Capua, anchored in Naples and the duchy was the centre of the revolt against Roger II for the next two years. Sergius, Robert and Ranulf were besieged in Naples until the spring of 1136, by which time starvation was widespread. According to historian (and rebel sympathiser) Falco of Benevento Sergius and the Neapolitans did not relent, "preferring to die of hunger than to bare their necks to the power of an evil king." The naval blockade's failure to prevent Sergius and Robert from twice bringing supplies from Pisa exemplified Roger's inadequacy. When a relief army commanded by Emperor Lothair II marched to Naples, the siege was lifted. Although the emperor left the following year, in return for a pardon Sergius re-submitted to Roger in Norman feudal homage. On 30 October 1137, the last Duke of Naples died in the king's service at the Battle of Rignano.

The defeat at Rignano enabled the Norman conquest of Naples, since Sergius died without heir and the Neapolitan nobility could not reach a succession agreement. However, it was two years between Sergius' death and Naples' incorporation by Sicily. The nobility apparently ruled during the interim, which may have been the final period of Neapolitan independence from Norman rule.[34] During this period Norman landowners first appear in Naples, although the Pisans (enemies of Roger II) retained their alliance with the duchy and Pisa may have sustained its independence until 1139. That year, Roger absorbed Naples into his kingdom; Pope Innocent II and the Neapolitan nobility acknowledged Roger's young son, Alfonso of Hauteville, as duke.

Kingdom of Sicily, 1130–1198
Main article: Kingdom of Sicily

Although the conquest of Sicily was primarily military, Robert and Roger also signed treaties with the Muslims to obtain land. Hindered by Sicily's hilly terrain and a relatively small army, the brothers sought influential, worn-down Muslim leaders to sign the treaties (offering peace and protection for land and titles). Because Sicily was conquered by a unified command, Roger's authority was not challenged by other conquerors and he maintained power over his Greek, Arab, Lombard and Norman subjects. Latin Christianity was introduced to the island, and its ecclesiastical organisation was overseen by Roger with papal approval. Sees were established at Palermo (with metropolitan authority), Syracuse and Agrigento. After its elevation to a Kingdom of Sicily in 1130, Sicily became the centre of Norman power with Palermo as capital. The Kingdom was created on Christmas Day, 1130, by Roger II of Sicily, with the agreement of Pope Innocent II, who united the lands Roger had inherited from his father Roger I of Sicily.[35]


Woodcut illustration of Constance of Sicily, her husband Emperor Henry VI and her son Frederick II

These areas included the Maltese Archipelago, which was conquered from the Arabs of the Emirates of Sicily; the Duchy of Apulia and the County of Sicily, which had belonged to his cousin William II, Duke of Apulia, until William's death in 1127; and the other Norman vassals.[36]

With the invasion of Henry VI, Holy Roman Emperor on behalf of his wife, Constance, the daughter of Roger II, eventually prevailed and the kingdom fell in 1194 to the House of Hohenstaufen. Through Constance, the Hauteville blood was passed to Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor and king of Sicily in 1198.

Encastellation
See also: Norman-Arab-Byzantine culture

Large, square stone building in a town
Early Norman castle at Adrano

The Norman conquest of southern Italy began an infusion of Romanesque (specifically Norman) architecture. Some castles were expanded on existing Lombard, Byzantine and Arab structures, while others were original constructions. The castles drew on local craftsmanship, and retained distinctive elements of their non-Norman origins. Latin cathedrals were built in lands recently converted from Byzantine Christianity or Islam, in a Romanesque style influenced by Byzantine and Islamic designs.

Norman administration was centralised, complex and bureaucratic compared with other contemporary western European systems. Public buildings, such as palaces, were common in larger cities (notably Palermo); these structures, in particular, demonstrate the influence of Siculo-Arab culture.

The Normans rapidly began the construction, expansion and renovation of castles in southern Italy. Most were original or based on pre-existing Lombard structures, although some were built on Byzantine or (in Sicily) Arab foundations. By the end of the Norman period, most wooden castles were converted to stone.

After the Lombard castle at Melfi, which was conquered by the Normans early and augmented with a surviving, rectangular donjon late in the 11th century, Calabria was the first province affected by Norman encastellation. In 1046 William Iron Arm began construction of Stridula (a large castle near Squillace), and by 1055 Robert Guiscard built three castles: at Rossano, on the site of a Byzantine fortress; at Scribla, the seat of his fief guarding the pass of the Val di Crati, and at San Marco Argentano (donjon built in 1051) near Cosenza.[37] In 1058, Scalea was built on a seaside cliff.

Guiscard was a major castle-builder after his accession to the Apulian countship, building a castle at Gargano with pentagonal towers known as the Towers of Giants. Later, Henry, Count of Monte Sant'Angelo built a castle at nearby Castelpagano. In the Molise the Normans built many fortresses into the naturally defensible terrain, such as Santa Croce and Ferrante. The region of a line running from Terracina to Termoli has the greatest density of Norman castles in Italy.[38] Many sites were originally Samnite strongholds reused by the Romans and their successors; the Normans called such a fortress a castellum vetus (old castle). Many Molisian castles have walls integrated into the mountains and ridges, and much of the quickly erected masonry demonstrates that the Normans introduced the opus gallicum into the Molise.[39]

The encastellation of Sicily was begun at the behest of the native Greek inhabitants.[40] In 1060, they asked Guiscard to construct a castle at Aluntium. The first Norman building on Sicily, San Marco d'Alunzio (named after Guiscard's first castle at Argentano in Calabria), was erected; its ruins survive. Petralia Soprana was then built near Cefalù, followed by a castle at Troina in 1071; in 1073 a castle was built at Mazara (extant ruins) and another at Paternò (restored ruins).[40] At Adrano (or Aderno) the Normans built a plain, rectangular tower whose floor plan illustrates 11th-century Norman design. An outside stairway leads to the first-storey entrance, and the interior is divided lengthwise down the middle into a great hall on one side and two rooms (a chapel and chamber) on the other.[41] Other fortifications in Sicily were appropriated from the Arabs, and the palatial and cathedral architecture of cities such as Palermo has obvious Arab features. Arab artistic influence in Sicily mirrors the Lombard influence in the Mezzogiorno.
Гдје су водили борбе за доминацијом са другим освајачима са југа, Арапима, и гдје су уконалници однијели побједу
1024px-Roger_I_de_Sicilia_en_la_batalla_de_Cerami,_por_Prosper_Lafaye.jpg

Показали су приликом владања доста политичке мудрости, дипломатске вјештине, више него ли је од припадника прије свега ратничког народа било очекивати.
Врхунац на простору Сицилије и јужне Италије су достигли у XII вијеку када су успоставили респектабилну државу.
800px-Kingdom_of_Sicily_1154.svg.png

Како год, Нормани (Викинзи) јесу формирали државе на разним подручјима, такође дали су допринос и у етногенези бројних европских народа.
 
Ko kaže da je nisu osnovali? Pre njihovog dolaska nije postojala nikakva država na tom prostoru, a nakon toga se taj prostor razvio u imperiju. Što znači da je početak ipak vikinški, jer je njihova elita vladala nad tim plemenima, a tek kasnije je došlo do potpunog stapanja. Rurik nikad ne može biti ugro - finskog porekla, posebno zato što postoje i druge poznate vikinške vođe sa istim imenom, a daleko od ruskih teritorija.

Ima li slovenska imena i koristili slovenski jezik. Toliko o toj eliti. Oni to nisu osvojili vec su pozvani da bi se zaustavio rat.
Ja samo znam da su nasli da Rjurik ima N haplogrupu sto nije vikinska haplogrupa vec finskih naroda.
 

Back
Top