"Powerful storms on the Orkney Islands in the far north of Scotland recently exposed ancient human bones in a Pictish and Viking cemetery dating to almost 1,500 years ago. Volunteers are piling sandbags and clay to protect the remains and limit the damage to the ancient Newark Bay cemetery on Orkney's largest island." Source: Live Science.
"The cemetery traces its origins to the middle of the sixth century, when the Orkney Islands were inhabited by native Pictish people, akin to the Picts who inhabited most of what is now Scotland."
"Stone ships were a burial form used in the bronze- and –iron ages and during the Viking period. They were shaped like acute oval stone circles, and might frame a grave established within the sides of the ship, but they could also function as memorials for the deceased. It is not really known why rich Vikings were buried in this way, but it is believed that the stone ship symbolizes a boat which was to carry the deceased to the kingdom of the dead." Source: Fortidens Jelling.
"Such a stone circle has existed in Jelling [Denmark], a gigantic stone ship 354 metres long. The stone ship is the oldest of the memorials in Jelling from the Viking Age." Next video shows the remains of stone ship burials in Sweden.
"Stone ships were an early burial custom, characteristically Scandinavian but also found in Northern Germany and the Baltic states. The grave or cremation burial was surrounded by tightly or loosely fit slabs or stones in the outline of a ship. They are often found in grave fields, but are sometimes far from any other archaeological remains." (Wikipedia)
Closed-captions useful. Section on stone ships starts around 3:21.
Vikings were sometimes buried in actual boats. For instance, Ancient Origins reported back in 2019 that two of these unusual burials were found in Sweden:
"A boat burial or boat grave involved dead individuals of high standing being interred in a full-sized ship. They were typically buried with a great many valuable grave goods. Anton Seiler, part of the team who found the graves, stated that 'It is a small group of people who were buried in this way,' according to Newsweek. This means that ship burials are very rare and only ten have been found in the history of the country, although more have been found in neighboring Norway, the most recent being found near Oslo."
Outside of Scandinavia, Viking boat burials have been discovered in Britain as well as northern and eastern Europe.
Note: "Uppland ... is a historical province or landskap on the eastern coast of Sweden, just north of Stockholm, the capital." (Wikipedia) I'm not sure where this grave field is located exactly.
Broborg, the fort, is "a hillfort located around 10 km east of Knivsta [south-central Uppland]. It overlooks an ancient major waterway ... leading to the interior of Uppland, as well as a road. The location thus suggests that, in prehistoric times (and before too much elevation of the land), Broborg could have controlled access for trade as well as any military activities." Source: The Mystery Of The Vitrified Hillfort. (PDF)
Broborg was a vitrified fort, i.e., its stones were apparently cemented together by a kind of glass formed by subjecting stones to extreme heat. The article quoted above mentions that the vitrification process used at Broborg is being studied by modern scientists for its possible application in nuclear-waste disposal. The idea is to seal the waste inside a vitrified matrix to prevent it from escaping into the environment.
According to the description for the first video above, there is a legend about Grimsa, "a Viking queen who was burned alive in the fort," but I haven't been able to find any further information about her.
"The blood eagle is a ritualized method of execution, detailed in late skaldic poetry. According to the two instances mentioned in the Sagas, the victim (in both cases a member of a royal family) was placed prone, the ribs severed from the spine with a sharp tool and the lungs pulled through the opening to create a pair of 'wings'. There is a continuing debate about whether the ritual was a literary invention, a mistranslation of the original texts or an authentic historical practice." Source: Wikipedia.
The Blood Eagle was a particularly nasty form of sacrificial execution, but did the Vikings actually put people to death this way? As far as I can tell, the only primary documentary evidence for the practice comes from sources such as the Orkneyinga Saga, the Heimskringla, the Tale of Ragnar's Sons, and a handful of references in other texts.
Note: The Tale of Ragnar's Sons describes (among other things) the execution of King Aella of Northumbria, a scene also depicted in Vikings.
Jarl Borg in Vikings is an entirely fictional character, I believe. Aella, on the other hand, was apparently a real king, though the sources for his life are limited and very little is known about his reign. According to some accounts, he was executed by the Vikings after they invaded Northumbria following the king's execution of the legendary Ragnar Lodbrok, another figure who may or may not have actually existed. How Aella died is a matter of conjecture, though, because the sources contradict each other:
"While Norse sources claim that Ragnar's sons tortured Ælla to death with a blood eagle, Anglo-Saxon accounts maintain that he died in battle, at York, on 21 March 867." (Wikipedia)
"Well into the last century, most historians of the Vikings accepted that the blood eagle was deeply unpleasant but very real. According to the eminent medievalist J.M. Wallace-Hadrill, its possible victims were not only Ælla of Northumbria but also Halfdán, the son of Harald Finehair (or Fairhair), king of Norway, and the Irish King Maelgualai [Mael Gualae] of Munster; in some interpretations, it is supposed that even Edmund the Martyr may have suffered the same fate."
One possibility is that the Blood Eagle was a real execution method sensationalized by later writers. For instance, the Welsh scholar and translator, Gwyn Jones, argues in A History of the Vikings (1968) that this "inhuman rite" was "unhappily no fiction ... but owes its eminence in pseudo-lore almost entirely to fiction ..." (footnote pp 119-220, 1968 edition)
It's also possible that the Blood Eagle is entirely fictitious. This seems to be the current consensus, but there's a lot of disagreement. Revisionist historians have challenged the idea that the Vikings were just a mob of cruel barbarians wearing horned helmets, but their depictions of "cuddly" Vikings went too far in the other direction. One of the main problems with our picture of the Vikings is that much of what we know about them was written by their enemies.
If the Blood Eagle is a literary invention, there's a good chance that this grisly method of execution was dreamed up by Christian writers trying to demonize the pagan Vikings. According to Wikipedia, "[t]here is debate about whether the blood eagle was historically practiced, or whether it was a literary device invented by the authors who transcribed the sagas. No contemporary accounts of the ritual exist, and the scant references in the sagas are several hundred years after the Christianization of Scandinavia." Considering the Christians' history of inventing martyr stories set in the Roman Empire, I wouldn't be surprised if they concocted similar atrocity stories about the Vikings.
Video from 2010.
When I first started to research this subject, I assumed there was a high probability that the Blood Eagle was a real thing because the Vikings are thought to have conducted human sacrifices and the Blood Eagle is, in a way, just another form of ritual sacrifice. As it turns out, though, the question of whether the Vikings actually killed people for religious purposes isn't all that straightforward.
There is some archaeological evidence that the Vikings may have sacrificed humans. For instance, "[a]t Trelleborg [Sweden] a sacrificial site was found from the time before the Viking fortress was erected in 980-81. In five c. 3 metre-deep wells human and animal skeletons were found, together with jewellery and tools. Of the total of five human sacrifices, four were young children aged between 4 and 7. " Source: National Museum of Denmark.
Blood sacrifice, including human sacrifice, was an intrinsic part of pagan religions. The historical sources for Viking human sacrifice are questionable, though, because they all seem to come, once again, from Christian accounts:
According to the National Museum of Denmark, "[t]here are several horrifying accounts of human sacrifices from the Viking period. The German bishop, Thietmar of Merseburg, describes how the Vikings met every nine years at Lejre on Zealand [Denmark] in January 'and offer to their gods 99 people and just as many horses, dogs and hens or hawks, for these should serve them in the kingdom of the dead and atone for their evil deeds.'"
A similar ritual (at a different location) is also depicted in Vikings.
"The German monk Adam of Bremen wrote a similar account in 1072 about the sacrificial tradition at [Gamla Uppsala] in Sweden, where the temple was devoted to Thor, Odin and Frey. Here the Vikings also met every 9 years to ensure the goodwill of the gods. 9 males of all kinds of living creatures were sacrificed in a holy grove nearby. According to Adam of Bremen dogs, horses and humans hung from the trees. The number 9 was apparently of magical significance to the Vikings and was involved in a number of rituals." (National Museum of Denmark)
"There has been extensive debate over whether these accounts were real or simply Christian propaganda."
I wouldn't be shocked to learn that the Vikings actually executed royal prisoners using the Blood Eagle. Even if the descriptions in the sagas were written for entertainment, they may have had some basis in fact. At this point, however, it looks like this particular form of execution was a literary invention derived from the skaldic poems and embellished by later Christian writers in yet another attempt to make the pagans look like cruel and bloodthirsty savages:
"One of the features of a skaldic poem is that it’s incredibly convoluted, like a cryptic crossword puzzle. If you have a reference to what appears to be the Blood Eagle in a skaldic verse, it’s quite likely this is a poetic conceit. Roberta Frank, at Yale, argues that the Blood Eagle is just the idea of a carrion bird scratching at the back of the dead. If you create lots of corpses, you are a very good warrior. That’s what is being referred to. But when later writers made prose stories around these skaldic verses, they seem to have interpreted it literally. So it’s quite likely that there was no such thing as this horrible form of torture, but it grew in the telling." Source: National Geographic (2017).
"The remains of a Viking ship have been discovered on a farm near a medieval church at Edøy, on the island of Smøla, in Norway." Source: Live Science.
"The ship, which is 52 to 56 feet (16 to 17 meters) long, appears to be part of a burial mound, suggesting that it was used to bury someone important, said its discoverers, archaeologists Manuel Gabler and Dag-Øyvind Engtrø Solem, both with the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU).
"They don't know if there is a skeleton or multiple skeletons inside the boat."
"When archaeologists excavated an unusual Viking grave site in Norway, they dug up two bodies … along with the remnants of two massive boats." Source: Live Science.
"After hundreds of years underground, only remnants of the wooden vessels remained, but the excavation team could tell the two boats had been stacked atop each other. Viking burial sites often feature boats, with some even boasting two buried near each other; but boats buried inside each other are 'essentially an unknown phenomenon,' Raymond Sauvage, an archaeologist at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology University Museum, said in a statement."
"The Odendisa Runestone ... sometimes called the Hassmyra Runestone, is a Viking Age runestone erected at Hassmyra, Västmanland, Sweden, that is a memorial to a woman." Source: Wikipedia. This area also contains Viking stone ship burials of women.
"The runic text carved on the serpent of the Odendisa Runestone contains a poem in fornyrðislag and is one of few runestones raised for a woman, and the only one in Sweden with a verse commemorating a woman ... The theophoric name Odendisa .., which means 'Goddess of Odin,' is a unique name and is not known from any other source."
"Stone ships were an early burial custom, characteristically Scandinavian but also found in Northern Germany and the Baltic states. The grave or cremation burial was surrounded by tightly or loosely fit slabs or stones in the outline of a ship. They are often found in grave fields, but are sometimes far from any other archaeological remains. " (Wikipedia)
"At first glance, Hnefatafl (prounounced 'nef-ah-tah-fel') might just look like a knock-off version of chess with Norse helms and impressive beards, but the game is at least 600 years older—already well-known by 400 A.D.—and is perhaps a lot more relevant to the conflicts of the 21st century." Source: Medium.com.
"Tafl games (also known as hnefatafl games) are a family of ancient Nordic and Celtic strategy board games played on a checkered or latticed gameboard with two armies of uneven numbers. Most probably they are based upon the Roman game Ludus latrunculorum [next video]. Names of different variants of Tafl include Hnefatafl, Tablut, Tawlbwrdd, Brandubh, Ard Rí, and Alea Evangelii. Games in the tafl family were played in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Britain, Ireland and Lapland. Tafl gaming was eventually supplanted by chess in the 12th Century, but the tafl variant of the Sami people, tablut, was in play until at least the 1700s." (Wikipedia)
"The Dane axe is an early type of battle axe, primarily used during the transition between the European Viking Age and early Middle Ages. Other names for the weapon include English long axe, Danish axe, and hafted axe." Source: Wikipedia.
These long axes look like they would be awkward and heavy, requiring a lot of strength to use, but "[i]n reality, battle axes in the Viking age were light, fast, and well balanced, and were good for speedy, deadly attacks, as well as for a variety of nasty, clever moves," according to Hurstwic.
Axes have several advantages over swords. They're cheaper, for instance, and most Viking farmers would probably have owned at least one short axe for chopping wood and so on:
"In a period when almost everything was constructed of wood, it is unsurprising that a large number of different axes existed. These were mostly used as tools for the construction of ships, houses and carts, as well as other objects, so many different sizes and types of axes were required. The axe was also put to very effective use on the battlefield. Sometimes it is difficult to tell whether an axe was used as a weapon or a tool. Perhaps the Vikings used their ordinary woodworking axes as weapons if the situation demanded it?" Source: National Museum of Denmark.
These were effective weapons. As seen in the video above, the long haft of the Dane axe could be used as a pole for parrying, striking and to maintain distance. Short-handled axes have one obvious disadvantage in that you have to get closer to your target for them to be effective, but there are all sorts of trade-offs when comparing these particular weapons.
The longer reach of the Dane axe made it particularly effective for fighting in shield walls:
"When in the shield wall, most attacks against your opponent are made overhead. The overhead attack is an attempt to hit over the top of the enemy’s shield while aiming at their head and trying to bash or split them in the head, neck, or shoulders. Most thrusts while in a shield wall formation would go against the enemy’s shield and open yourself up to similar attacks as you must open a small gap in the wall to allow you to thrust." Source: Spagenhelm.
"... the dane ax could be used to reach over the shield wall and be swung down upon the enemy’s heads and shoulders behind their shields. Their shields would also be shattered and split from the powerful overhead hacks by a dane ax armed viking warrior."
Maintaining distance and extending your reach were critical in these tightly packed shield wall battles. The Dane axe had its problems, but in general it was an excellent weapon, not only for swinging down over the shields, but for smashing through the shields themselves and for swinging at the legs of opponents. And the Dane axe could deliver devastating injuries. The next video shows a series of tests done on a pig carcass with various Viking weapons. The axe tests begin at around 10:23. Note: Even if a Dane axe couldn't penetrate mail armor, the impact alone could have been extremely damaging.
These axes had different types of blades, apparently. The next video demonstrates a Dane axe with a hook-shaped head that looks like it would have been useful against cavalry, among other things. A warrior could have reached up with an axe like this and hooked a rider off his horse, assuming he could get close enough in the first place.
Inevitably, new developments made this style of axe obsolete. According to Wikipedia, "[w]hile the use of the Dane axe continued into the 14th. century, axes with an armour piercing back-spike and spear-like spike on the fore-end of the haft became more common, eventually evolving into the Pollaxe in the 15th century [see next video]. The simple Danish axe continued to be used in the West of Scotland and in Ireland into the 16th century. In Ireland, it was particularly associated with Galloglas mercenaries."
"The ruined church and monastic buildings that still stand on the island today are not Anglo-Saxon; they are the remains of the new priory built on the island in the late 11th century by the monks of Durham. So where is the original monastery? And what happened to it after the attack?" Source: DigVentures.
"All that is known to survive are some carved stone monuments of Anglo-Saxon date, which were found by archaeologists clearing away some of the collapsed rubble from the priory ruins in the late 19th and early 20th century."
Note: "... a major ... geophysical survey funded by National Geographic was carried out by Durham University in September 2012. This has shown that there is limited archaeological evidence for the monastic boundary that had previously been postulated, but an alternative boundary has been identified, which is associated with an area of possible industrial activity. It also identified a probably infirmary cloister associated with the later priory and a possible structure aligned on the two standing churches." Source: Durham University.