Queen Margrethe II & Prince Henrik, Current Events Part 4: Jan. 2013 - November 2015

[Muhler]

VIDEO Dronning Margrethe begejstret for kæmpe vikingeskib | Nyheder | DR

And here is an excerpt from an interview to DR1, where QMII is talking about the exhibition and about the Viking age and let me make it absolutely clear: this is QMII on her homeground! She knows exactly what she is talking about.

The only thing that annoys her slightly is the continuous and popular depiction of Vikings with horned helmets, but that's because she's a bit of a nerd she admits.
(Vikings never wore horns on their helmets, that's a Keltic and partly Germannic costum. The Vikings wore state of the art conical helmets which are much better at deflecting a sword blow. Horns would be a downright danger in that respect).

I should love to hear her give a lecture about Svend Tveskæg = Swein Forkbeard, who is indeed her direct ancestor and the third (official) King of Denmark. His father was Harald Bluetooth, who is claimed (for political reasons) to have Christened the Danes. His son, Svend, took a somewhat different view.

Let's have a look at Vikings as they actually looked at the time of Svend Tveskæg/Swein Forkbeard.

https://app.box.com/s/vkk5i1oor0vea5bec4ry
First we have a group of Viking Raiders. As you can see they are well suited for their role, which is basically highly mobile marine infantry.
Well equipped and very well armed, combined with a culture where combat and dying in combat was something you sought as that determined your status in Valhalla and also determined your memory in this world, local millitias were rarely a match for the raiders. Especially as Viking warriors lived and was hardened in a world of constant small scale warfare. Being free men who lived on a good diet they were also generally physically bigger than their Western European adversaries who often came from peasant stock in a feudal society where only the wealthy ate protein rich meat on a regular basis.
As you can see they were also very vain. Every self respecting Viking was most careful about his appearance, especially the beard and the hair. But also clothes.
It is said that English women found Vikings attractive because they, in contrast to English men, took a bath every week. On Saturdays in fact. A thing that was common up until less than a hundred years ago.

https://app.box.com/s/q8ylnjyow5s25j62xq5l
This is life!
Plunder, honor, a good good drink and comeraderie - and a good bargain.
In fact as QMII also points out Vikings were eminent at adapting to the local conditions. If it was more profitable to trade, they did so. Was it better to raid the next town, they did so.
England, Ireland, Iceland and so on (I'll leave the East for another time, but that's equally fascinating) were lands of opportunity. A place you could settle as a free man, whack the locals on their heads if they didn't behave and make a fortune for yourself. Often as merchants or slavetraders or mercenaries.
It didn't take long before they got fully assimillated into the local area and indeed present day English and not least the eastern dialects of full of Scandinavian words and ways of speech. And that went both ways.

But the Vikings also settled in Normandie, intially as a buffer colony. It takes a Viking to beat a Viking was the logic. They very soon adopted a French dialect, adopted the feudal way of life and developed the most formidable heavy cavalry in Europe of the period. And they kept their opportunistic lifestyle.
As you know the Normans conquered England and changed the course of history.
Had that not taken place who knows what would have happened? An American historian has suggested in an alternative version that backed by a North European empire the Viking expeditions to America could have been larger and better organised and perhaps, just perhaps, we would have seen Viking longboats on the Great Lakes, manned by a mix of Vikings and Iroquis. Perhaps we might have seen Aztec ambassadors in Constantinople as well.
Because there would not have been a European conquest of the Americas, the technological edge wasn't big enough.

https://app.box.com/s/pwlr6c0ht2ktyoii4t51
Viking women.
Being the wives of men who were away for months at a time each year, often twice a year and often not knowing if their husband ever returned, they had to be independent and resourceful. And also capable to pick up the sword if need be, because raids in Scandinavia were common.
The woman to the left, is the mistress of the farm. You can tell from her tools and keys hanging visibly from her belt, a symbol of her status. As a married woman she wear a head scarf.
The young woman in the middle is unmarried, signified by keeping her haid uncovered. You will notice that they wear short sleeves. Bare forearms were sexy.
The third elderly woman to the right is also a member of the family, probably a widow. And pretty well of. Their men have been good providers in regards to plunder and/or trade.
And the women were just as vain as the men.
A Viking farm consisted of an extended family. A few adult males (old men were rare, they were expected to and indeed wished to die before growing old), a number of adult women. Perhaps ten adults alltogether and a similar number of children and young teenagers. And a handfull of slaves as well.
The slaves, thralls, were not free and they had few rights, but they were generally not mistreated for the simple reason that within such a small community everybody relied on everybody else. And often they became an accepted part of the family.
When the husband was away the whole thing, including security, rested on the shoulders on the mistress of the farm. Even when the husband was at home, he rarely intervened in the daily running of the household, that was the sole responsibillity of the mistress or alternatively a widow appointed as mistress, what would in later centuries become a matron.

Finally. The Vikings were not a people but a class of free warriors, mechants, adventures and mercenaries. To go out on such an adventure was to go "Viking". The rest of the population, slaves, minor farmers, laboures, specialists, priests and so on mainly stayed at home.

[polyesco]

thank you so much for the background info Muhler
always appreciate it.

You can tell the Queen is in her element

[gerry]

Mange tak Muhler! I had read about this exhibit and am delighted that HM Queen Margrethe came to open it with a speech that I do hope will be broadcast and posted somewhere on youtube! Wonderful publicity for Denmark; I am reminded of John Donaldson's wedding speech to his daughter where he specifically mentions the Vikings and their marauding tactics; no doubt an extra reason for Queen Margrethe's smile

[Penny Royalty]

Your reminder of pirates eating good food and growing in leisure make me want to do one of the many things that one can do by joining the guard or armed forces where you can be infantry and be amongst the elements in the world's vast environmental landings. I've read of various adventures through reading such as Jack London's travails in the Klondike and other author's ventures into the unchartered and parasitic like Treasure Island or Gulliver's Travels or Robinson Curusoe or even in adventure in Bram Stoker's Dracula. But nothing can beat possibly joining the adventurous armed forces of one's country or origin and training in different terrain. Your meant to be unstoppable as a cadet or soldier and it feels they go over and beyond expectations and cultural norms. I recommend it to anyone. You may never regret it. Peace George. Nice read Muhler.

[cepe]

This is from the Court Circular - I was wondering if a member of BRF was present


6th March, 2014
The Duke of Gloucester, Royal Patron, the British Museum, and The Duchess of Gloucester this evening attended the opening of an Exhibition entitled “Vikings - Life and Legend”, followed by a Dinner at the British Museum, Great Russell Street, London WC1.

[FasterB]

Originally Posted by Muhler

To go out on such an adventure was to go "Viking".

I think you can also call it "go beserk"

[Muhler]

You are welcome Polyesco & gerry

Originally Posted by Penny Royalty

Your reminder of pirates eating good food and growing in leisure make me want to do one of the many things that one can do by joining the guard or armed forces where you can be infantry and be amongst the elements in the world's vast environmental landings. I've read of various adventures through reading such as Jack London's travails in the Klondike and other author's ventures into the unchartered and parasitic like Treasure Island or Gulliver's Travels or Robinson Curusoe or even in adventure in Bram Stoker's Dracula. But nothing can beat possibly joining the adventurous armed forces of one's country or origin and training in different terrain. Your meant to be unstoppable as a cadet or soldier and it feels they go over and beyond expectations and cultural norms. I recommend it to anyone. You may never regret it. Peace George. Nice read Muhler.

I'll look it up, Penny Royalty.

The food and living conditions of soldiers (and Vikings), was especially evident during WWI, where it was time and time again noticed how Australian and American soldiers were in general taller and bigger than their European counterparts, who had more often than not grown up in industrial slum in heavily polluted areas or lived an existance in poverty as farmhands or tenants.
While the Australians and Americans had a more protein rich diet than Europeans, they also often had a rural background as well, which meant they were fit. But more crucially because they lived on farms owned by themselves and on much bigger lands, the surplus generated went to themselves, which meant they could afford to slaughter more animals for food and they had better opportunities for fishing and hunting as a supplement to their diet.

Around 1850 general conscription was introduced in DK and from then on statistics regarding the height of potential recruits have been kept. In 1850 the average recruit was around 1.64 cm = 5'5'' and the vast majority had a rural background, was fit and had had a reasonable good diet.
Nowadays the average (male) recruit is around 181 cm = 5'11'' and it has remained so for the past 20 years.
The average height for a Viking warrior was some 173 cm = 5'8''.
People from the hunter-gather-fishing societies in the Stoneage appeared to even taller than the Vikings, but there is too little material for statistics.

[Penny Royalty]

Interesting appraisal or assessment Muhler. It's particularly apparent if one is sociated with physical affinity of the not so distant hereditary traits of a populace of the past where humans were masters of their domain and contributed to living fitted as if they were kings of their terrain and kind. There are many examples of courage filled men in historic times where the different nations or kingdoms battled, fought or pursued different eventual endings to ascertain a result from conflict, and trouble to enbetter the sake of all's well being. The respect the ancestor's continue to relay upon study or investing of one in historical documentation is where I hope we don't get it wrong, for then we are to follow what was or may not have been actual. It's a dear crime to fathom a misrepresentation of actual placing of one's revealing reguard for who we are or may eventually be. It's good to be just in knowing what is true in judgement for fairedness in the way mankind may play. Nice writing to you Muhler. It's interesting who you relay. Soldiers and even Vikings or pirates are another world from another day. Let's hope they don't get torpedoed by aliens that can time travel battleships from our nowadays. Cheers, good bye.

[Dman]

I love watching the show "Vikings" on the History channel. The stuff just fascinates me.

[Muhler]

Indeed, Penny Royalty, indeed.

Originally Posted by Dman

I love watching the show "Vikings" on the History channel. The stuff just fascinates me.

Yes, no wonder QMII was absolutely electric.

I've seen the first, how many were there? Four or six episodes? Of that series as well. It's surprisingly good and pretty accurate in regards to costums, clothing, women's roles and tactics.
There are a couple of mistakes however. Local kings/chieftains at that time (late 700's) were elected and did not wield that much power and it certainly wasn't a semi-feudal society. The feudal society didn't come to DK until well into the 1100's. Only national kings were able to excersize that power (and only when they were strong enough) and they were constantly on the move.
There is no way a free man like Regnar Lodbrog would consider the local king a "lord". He might become a follower, to death and beyond, but he would not be subserviant.

The ship-burial and the communal daily-grooming is historically accurate and faithfully depicted in every detail.
There were human sacrifices in DK at that time. Usually thralls (slaves) being hanged. But the gathering at the Swedish holy site and having free men sacrificed is new to me, perhaps a mainly Swedish costum?

The legend of Kraka having to come naked yet dressed, fasting but not with a full stomach, alone nor on her own, is very wellknown here. But in the legend Kraka and Regnar got married on the spot.

Originally Posted by FasterB

I think you can also call it "go beserk"

You've awakened the nerd, FasterB.

That's a common misconception.

Berserkers were a specific group of warriors often in bands, who were considered to be particularly ferouscious. They appear to have worked themselves into a psycotic state, either through religion or drugs. Some actually considered them quite mad!
In that state they were practically unstoppable. They had also worked themselves up so much that they were in a frenzy and pumped with adrenalin they went beyond the normal physical boundaries for human beings.
Basically they kept on killing or just slashing away at poor innocent trees until they burned themselves out or got killed (and with difficulty! The Black Knight in Monty Python would have been a chicken in comparison).
They also tended to dress in animal skin, simply to enhance the psycological effect, because they were genuinely feared. Hence the name berserker.
The state they were in, when they were high, was called "going berserk".
Normal hardworking people who sailed out to raid, loot, kill and burn were "going viking".

Mind you it may also have had something to do with their upbringing. There is a story about such a berserker, who at the age of five, got slightly agitated and killed an adult thrall. His mother beamed with pride it was noticed! Now, that's a good son.
Of course because berserkers were, to put it mildly, irrational, they tended to die young, so there may have been a limit to how much trouble they caused in the daily lives of ordinary people.
But the berserkers were by no means unique. Such mad cults were common among warrior-peoples all over the world.

[iceflower]

.

This morning, March 9, Queen Margrethe was present at the commemoration service on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Simeon's Church in Copenhagen.



** BB: Dronningen til festgudstjeneste på Nørrebro ** translation **

[Muhler]

Dronning Margrethe bliver fejret i Aarhus | Billed Bladet

QMII will celebrate her birthday in Aarhus at Marselisborg Manor this year.
Her B-day is just prior to Easter and the Regent Couple usually go to Aarhus during Easter.
So it will be interesting to see whether M&F will be there. But I believe they will. They'll simply make a pit-stop celebrating farmor before going on to trend.

As for Joachim and our Marie. Schackenborg is some 2½-3 hours away, even with two but-I-have-to-go-now children in the car.

Thanks, Iceflower.

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't QMII worn that outfit before?

[Roskilde]

Thanks Muhler,

Lovely with Margrethe being celebrated in Aarhus this year

Originally Posted by Muhler

So it will be interesting to see whether M&F will be there. But I believe they will. They'll simply make a pit-stop celebrating farmor before going on to trend.

I may remember wrong, but haven't M+F and children celebrated Easter with Margrethe+Henrik the last many years (except for 2011 with the twins being newborn). I can't remember how Joachim and family's Easter traditions are.

[polyesco]

I do hope we get a large gathering for the Queen's birthday

Some pictures have been added from her visit to London last week
Åbning af udstillingen "Vikings: Life and Legend" i London - Kongehuset

[polyesco]

The Queen attends the parade at The Royal Guard and handing over the 'Queen's clock' to the Guardsman, of a Guard has been selected as the service, best Guards, the Life Guards barracks, Gothersgade, Copenhagen, at. 14.00.

article and video
Dronning Margrethe uddelte ur til ung garder | Billed Bladet

[iceflower]

Here are some more pics of the parade:



** ppe gallery **

Originally Posted by Muhler

Thanks, Iceflower.

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't QMII worn that outfit before?

Often enough - with enough being the operative word..

[Muhler]

The court confirms that the Regent Couple will go on a statvisit to China for six days, 23-28. April.
They will not stay longer this time as private tourists, as Benedikte turns 70 on 29. April and the will be celebrated in Berleburg.

Normally a statevisit only takes place once in every reign and the Regent Couple went to China in 1979, if not the first royals to do so after the revolution, then certainly among the very first.
But they have been invited by the Chinese President - and more importantly, both DK and China are interested in cementing the trade relations. - So they are smiling broadly at the Foreign Ministry, The Ministry for Commerce and the Ministry for Finance.

[polyesco]

Nice.
I think Frederik and Mary went recently to China...late 2012 or 2013?
So maybe their trip gave "fruit" to a State Visit

[Muhler]

And another upcoming event.

QMII will take part in the D-Day commemorations in Normandy this year.

It is actually the first time, because this year, 70 years on, DK has been acknowledged as one of the Allied nations. Predominantly due to the effort of Danish sailors during D-Day and otherwise during the war.
There have been cosiderable doubt as to whether DK during WWI was an ally or a vassal state of Nazi-Germany, or just as country trying to survive.

If I am to be brutally honest, the doubt is very much justified, at least until the summer of 1943, where the Parliament resigned and the policy of co-operation with Germany ended. The attempted deportation of the jews was also the final straw for the population as a whole.
So you can say that from 1943 DK became a member of the Allied club, but not before, not in my eyes.

We have been through it before here on TRF, so very briefly:
The DK policy was to lie low and hope the war would bypass us as it did, during WWI. It almost succeeded. DK was occupied almost as an afterthought and at the express order of Hitler.
It was cynically decided that a token resistance should be put up, before surrendering. It was impossible to resist the might of the German military machine anyway. That policy cost the lives of sixteen Danish soldiers and a couple of costums officers and a number of German soldiers.
With that it was shown, foreign politically speaking, that DK was protesting the occupation.
During the first years of the war, the Parliament actively promoted co-operation with Nazi-germany, actively promoted Danes to join the fight on the Eastern Front in Waffen SS.
DK also joined the anti-comintern Pact aimed at the Soviet Union.
In return DK enjoyed autonomy - and profited quite well on the occupation, thank you very much! Export to Germany boomed, not least agricultural products and quite a number volunteered to work in Germany and were paid very well - some were forced though, including a great uncle of mine, who came home with a nervous breakdown due to the allied bombings. But that happened later on in the war.
The resistance became active, very active indeed. But that was predominantly after 1943, until then must Danes, more less grudgingly, lived a live and let live existance with the German occupiers.
Was it cynical? You bet!
Was it wise? Well, if you look at the result. I.e. minimizing suffering and carnage in DK, then the answer must be yes.
Was it honorable? Absolutely not!

As a Dane, now in 2014, looking back my left half of my brain can understand the mindset and the reasoning. The more emotional right half of my brain is deeply ashamed.
The only and perhaps best consolation, is that practically all other occupied countries have a similar ambivalent story. But few have been willing to talk too much about it.
The fact is that it would have been impossible for Germany and partly Italy to occupy most of Europe and at the same time fight on two fronts without a very active co-operation by many in the occupied countries. In some cases a very willing co-operation! Waffen SS had little problems finding volunteers willing to fight the Communists even among Britons. Britischer Freikorps was very small and insignificant but it might be an indication of what would have happened had the Germans managed to cross the Channel.
And in other countries partisan movements were more busy fighting each other than fighting the occupiers. In countries like Jugoslavia, Greece and Northern Italy it was more akin to civil war than resistance.
It wasn't black and white. That came later on. Partly helped by a kind of collective amnesia.

Anyway, so this year it has been decided that DK - "well, okay, you were an ally too".

[polyesco]

thank you Muhler, for that bit of history

I will be nice seeing the Queen there