Female Viking Warriors in History: Legendary Valkyries Shield Maidens

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

Do you think that Viking women primarily stayed at home? Or do you think that female Viking warriors were more common than we have been led to believe? Let us know what you think!

[@sallypettet8929]

Of course,there were FEMALE viking warriors!!!....male misconceptions try to blot them out!Thank you for correcting this. p.s. I've read Nancy Marie Brown's book "The Real Valkyries"

[@shannonericksen1291]

The females were bad ass! My husband’s ancestor is Leif Erikson. His grandfather being the first to move to America. Even the women who stayed home had to be strong fighters

[@danlutt3635]

Great video! I don’t often comment but I love history, and especially Norse/Celtic history and ancient stuff, a rubbing theme in those instances at least is always a strong female role in society, culture, worship, all kinds of things. Ancient Egyptians had many depictions of the uterus and even female pharaohs, I think people forget that we truly have put women into an unsubstantial position in relation to their ability. It’s a case by case basis, sure, but the same can be said about men or any group of people. I love stories about incredible historical women, and shield maidens by far have to be the coolest account haha

[@veronicajensen7690]

it's not about thinking because we know for sure women primarily stayed at home unless the whole family were settling in another country, the question is were they any female warriors at all? there are only 1 source from the Viking age who write about women in modern Sweden were wearing men's clothing and being trained for battle, but no woman who have been in battle have been found at all, the few females buried with weapons have not actually been in a battle, they may just have been buried with weapons to show status, we simply don't know all we know is that the skeletons show no signs of battle or of often using weapons

[@DocSanders]

PLEASE!!! Viking women were no different than any other branch of Celtic Ancestry. True their main jobs were their Kids and keeping a place where the Kids would be safe, and of Guarding and preparing food and maintaining a safe and secure place to have kids and to raise then. But, like every OTHER Branch of Celt, when battle was necessary, they always fought with distinction. Read about Boudica. Because that, my friends, is what happens when the Guy goes off to fight the Roman invaders, in Boudica's case, and does not return!?! PS-There is NO written record that says Vikings of either sex had either the time or the Money-NOT to mention, the opportunity to waist time getting Tats. (tattooing was invented in China for God sake and never got to the West until the Brits started importing Opium in the 17th and 18th centuries). ALL that BS is a VARY recent inventionby a few money-minded, and not-so-bright, people who think it makes them look cool or tough. Look in the eyes of a Viking-Berserker (there are still a few around) and tell me he needs a Tat to scare you out of your wits? Or, as one Irish Monk wrote around 600 AD, “Lord, deliver us from the rath of the Northmen.”

[@PatienceWithAnimals-be6uc]

I think that everyone back in that time, having to survive in such harsh conditions, and especially the Viking culture, they were tougher in every possible aspect. Also more connected to the natural world. It ticks me off reading the comments that scoff about female Vikings being involved in anything other than producing children and taking care of the home. Lol. It is ridiculous. I cannot even imagine how tough people in general had to be back then in every possible way in order to survive. I really enjoyed your video and am subscribing for more content! Thank you :)

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

We agree! They were very different times and people had to adapt to their environment. Thanks for watching! 🙂

[@DocSanders]

Actually there is a reason to scoff. Women on the battle field were exceptionally rare. Because either, a.) All her children were dead, or b.) Her children were themselves on the Battle field. In which case you'd want to be on another battle field in some other country. Moreover, in the case of infants and the Very Old it was the grand or great grandmother who was responsible for EVERYTHING "back home." With the added responsibility of being there when and if the fighters got home. one more REASON so many women died at an early age. NOTE. Until the 20th century child bearing was the MOST dangerous thing a woman could do. Fighting would have been ONLY for the suvivors.

[@acokedupmonkey3762]

Glad I found this page. Excellent video!

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

Welcome, Jared, and thank you!

[@stevenbrown9275]

Another excellent video. Thanks for posting.

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

Our pleasure!

[@BLuddenify]

What makes you think that only the woman who went a viking fought, the house and property slaves and children had to be defended while he was off a viking. It's not like raiding in the home land would suddenly stop just because the man was off a viking. With DNA tech they have discovered several viking warriors tombs that hold females, and were misidentified because of social biased, believing Viking women had the same stupid limitations the rest of European women did. Some Anthropologists/ historians think it posable that as much as 10% of their fighting force may have been female. Not a lot but far more than the rest of Europe.

[@DocSanders]

A little garbled but true. That's why Samurai women learned to fight with Naginata and use "sweeping strokes."

[@JamesBroadwater]

Thanks so much for this wonderful information! God bless you!

[@kaushiksheshnagraj7176]

Wow I like your content. Editing and narrating make your channel my favorite. Your work should be admired . You are deserve more subscriber I hope you must gain 1 Million subscriber by the end of this year. Please keep continue this type of amazing work. Your admirable hard work and deep research make you the best channel on KZbin. I get much knowledge than school from your videos. The content of your video is fantastic. But can you please make a video on skanderbeg please.

[@monalisapatra5324]

Again marvellous 👍👍👍

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@philcrawford7760]

Keep up the good work 🙂

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

Thanks for watching!

[@scottish785]

Point of error. He had a son Fridleif and 2 daughters with Lagertha From the book The nine books of the Danish history of Saxo Grammaticus page 543 of the English translation dated 1905.

[@DocSanders]

Do you mean ptinted 1905 from a much older text, i.e., c. 1150 - c. 1220...

[@stellank450]

Thank you for this video. I dedicate some time to famous women, genesis consequences like witchhunt etc. on my site. You gave me more knowledge!

[@NordicSami]

Lagertha was of barbarian descent, and I do believe there were a lot more female warriors than believed, simply due to necessity.

[@DocSanders]

That may be true. One thing for sure; unless she were Japanese and had armor made for her she would look like a young man in Armor on the Battle field. Note: there is a very famous story where a Samurai woman lead her entire Female household, Mounted, into Battle... Why sit and wait for an organized attack on YOUR house. And, mounted they were a.) extremely mobile and had a incredible 20' reach with their Naginata, and b.) NO foot soldier would want to be in the path of a mounted and well armed adversary. It must have been a slaughter.

[@michelegrimaud7307]

comment écouter en français ???

[@PerfectAlibi1]

I still believe women were mostly in a supportive role in the battle. Like bring a fresh shield to warriors that lost theirs, hence they were called SHIELD-maidens. Now they may occasionally have picked up sword when seeing a loved one go down in a fit of rage. Even the Valkeries weren't strictly warriors but a more supportive role.

[@Nattens767]

I am Norwegian (born and bred), well vested in my people's history and mythology, am personally acquainted with archeologists, some of whom live here in Bergen, and to this very day, there hasn't been ANY archeological evidence whatsoever to confirm that female warriors of us Norse folk existed. Yes, it IS highly likely that many capable women were taught/learned to fight because they were the primary caretakers of the farmlands and children, and being it was an age of barbarism, there was a constant daily potential or real threat from neighbouring tribes and villagers all caught in a time where the climate wasn't exactly favourable for crops. That's actually one of the reasons why the men went "a Viking", to find habitable lands where they could grow crops and have livestock in better suited climates. This also explains why there have been graves found with female skeletons buried with weapons. Shield maidens? They were simply just that, women who were there on standby to give men training in combat extra shields if one was destroyed. Women in Norse culture were highly valued for reproduction, you know, to keep the bloodline and population efficient and present. It's true they were equal to men in terms of traditions and laws in Norse culture, and had as much as say in the way their village was operated. However, when it came to boarding ships to sail beyond their lands, it was strictly forbidden for women to be included for reasons already explained. That and the fact that most of them wouldn't have been able to fight as well as the men did, and that there isn't some chauvinistic view, but rather a fact of biology and natural law. I am aware that due to the success of the TV series "Vikings", a lot of assumptions have been made, especially by modern feminists, but it's all wishful thinking, nothing more.

[@tazzahmed511]

Hatts off to you!! Absolutely nailed it!🙏👏 How much more REAL can "they" ask for?! When we've got living proof as your self. Who's well versed in your ancestral land of history!! It's as if these "modern feminists" trying to change the laws of physics, and core fundamental principles of the universe. Like you said: Wishful thinking!! 🤪👈

[@Nattens767]

@@tazzahmed511 Thanks and it's quite easy to put it in perspective. You simply consider the battles these people got into back then, big men with axes, shields, swords and knives, the average warrior being around 160 to well over 200 lbs. plus the weight from their armour, there is NO way a woman of any size back then could have held her own against just ONE of them. They'd have been slaughtered. It sounds sexist to some, but we're talking biology here, and most men for all intents and purposes are far stronger and more adept for fighting than women. This has actually been proven time and again with re enactments, and even in martial arts. I'm a fit 46 year old Norwegian man who's 6'4" and 231 lbs. with 41 years martial arts training (jeet kune do, Muay Thai, and Arnis), and most women I know including my longtime girlfriend ain't gonna be putting me on my ass anytime soon. That's not machismo; that's fact. And so you think of how most Norsemen back then were either my size or a bit shorter but still well trained in combat, even the small guys would outmatch most women. It's a law of nature that most species besides our own where the males are the ones who are the fighters. Hunter gatherers, and this obviously applies to several cultures besides my own. Hell, I train my country's military in hand to hand combat three times a year, and while it is true there's women in our military who are quite good in self defense, so far, none of them have been able to best our male soldiers in up close personal combat. I have seen it firsthand, and so I can confirm. And we both know where this lunacy is coming from: modern feminism which has indoctrinated a lot of women into believing they can do anything a man can do when this is absolutely false. Just like there's things women are more adept to than most men, and the problem with said indoctrination is it has them acting on emotion instead of thought. It's got them believing in things which are untrue, easily refuted, and outright absurd. And people who point these things out, male of female, they get called sexist by some people all because they can't handle facts. The laws of nature do not adhere to feminist thought or not even misogynistic thought. Each of us is equipped differently, and both genders need each other in terms of survival. I obviously do not hate women at all, but I'm more than willing to call out things which are clearly unfounded and even laughable for BOTH genders. In this case, this fanciful notion that there were women standing side by side with Viking men on the battlefield. It looks good and works well in fantasy, but it's not a possibility in reality - then or now.

[@tazzahmed511]

@@Nattens767 Amen brother!!!🙏

[@candicefrost4561]

Many women were actually far more physically strong back then than what we expect as the default today. Were half of all women warriors? Certainly not; the evidence found was only from one small group. But just because it was less common does not mean it never happened- just like how people who were transgender, gay, etc existed even if it’s not as common. If it was celebrated in the culture and there were warriors’ burials given to literal females…is it really crazy to think this might have been a few of them? Really? Is it that hard for you to believe or do you just hate “modern feminism” because it messes with your little Viking masculine power fantasy 😂 Also, women were not just “valued for reproduction”, but for their invaluable creative labor in textiles (which is especially important when you need to stay warm), doing math and household planning (funny how there are “smart guys” who say math is inherently something the “logical” male is good at), and keeping the family together.

[@Nattens767]

@@candicefrost4561 It took only reading the first sentence before deciding to not go any further given it's obvious you're another fantasy chaser looking for what never happened. You lot just can't let it sink in that what you wish was or is wasn't or isn't - and vise versa. I didn't bother with whatever it is you had to say, so take your wishful thinking elsewhere.

[@valeriesoto8738]

Samurai expected their wives to have similar warrior skills because they needed to defend the house while the men were away and also oversee the children’s martial arts education. So I’ve read anyway 🙏🏼

[@philcrawford7760]

I believe they were real.

[@omarmaxwell2319]

I think they were fighters

[@martthesling]

keep telling yourself that.

[@KellieEverts-h5o]

Ofcourse im ambitious!

[@parmesanzero7678]

> shook the world in 2017 No. We already knew about the women who were Norse warriors.

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

Not everybody did. 😉 Thanks for watching!

[@DocSanders]

OK I give up!! What the F*** is Ol'' Spice!!

[@michaelcohn2585]

I thought their existence was up for debate. There are no historical accounts only myths. Most of the other warriors have real versions of the fictional person. Shield maiden are similar to the gods of that age. A wish but not a reality

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

There will always be some debate, but archaeological evidence does prove that they did exist. How many there were or how widespread they were is another question. Thanks for watching!

[@tazzahmed511]

Don't misinterpret fairy tales into actual history! 🤣🤣🤪👈

[@orbitalgordo1568]

Absolutely ridiculous, Stop spreading a false Narrative

[@warlockshenandoah3658]

There were no shield maidens for the same reason women and men don’t compete in sports. No amount of revisionist history will change this.

[@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia]

It's not revisionist history. Evidence has shown that women were buried wearing warrior clothing and with weapons.

[@thebelfastvikingmartinbrow3603]

So one or two women got weapons there's more men without so does that mean men was not warriors. But it really just means that for the 1000s of male warriors you get maybe 1 female who might have carried a weapon. But boys from a young age learned to use weapons girls didn't. So yes a few But not really a thing if the home or village was attacked without doubt they would have had to fight in defence of the family.

[@Regurgitator85]

​@@WorldHistoryEncyclopediacoulda have a been a slave forced to earn her freedom. They were no units of female fighters lol. Stop being delusional.

[@heathercronemiller406]

You backtracked quickly 😂

[@warlockshenandoah3658]

@@WorldHistoryEncyclopedia Maybe they were queens like Elizabeth I or a Joan of Arc type but no army of women is going to take on men any more than they would be successful as an NFL team. Common sense goes a long ways here. Otherwise the Roman Empire would have trembled in fear at the approach of some feminist legion. The car that you are driving, the road that you are driving on, the bridge you are driving across, the cityscape you see, the police, firefighters, armed forces are the hated patriarchy. Or just reality. It has always been. It’s not payriarchy it’s just reality. Are cities going to be built by women? Civilization itself was by men. Writing was by men. Permanent structures, government, military, economies. Did women build your house? Come visit with reality. We need both men and women. But men and women cannot compete in war, sports or many things. They would never win in sports or watr or building anything. About 96% of all inventions and discoveries are by men. Think about it. Don’t go into a yoga pose and astro-travel but deal with reality and turn off that air conditioner and get outside and build something or try to compete with men. This is why you won’t have the Olympics going to eliminate men’s and women’s sports. And that’s why the shield maidens were a myth built around the Vikings hearing vaguely about Amazons that are more myth than reality like the centaurs. A Viking would break a woman like celery.

[@veronicajensen7690]

the women found in Viking graves with weapons don't have any signs of ever have been in a fight or even used weapons, such thing is shown in the bones because as muscles are being build the bones change we don't know if the Shield Maidens are a myth as the Sagas are written hundreds of years after the Viking age by Christians, there are another source from the Viking age describing women in Sweden being trained in battle but as mentioned no remains of a woman who actually have been in battle was found, in general women made clothes and other things to use, wear or sell and they were keeping the farm, they did however come along on the ships when they were going to settle in other countries, until we find a female skeleton who have been in battle we really don't know for sure, I personally think it female warriors were a thing we would have more sources from the time as English Monks and Islamic sources certainly would have written about it, because they were quite critical of Vikings and women warriors would be something they would be critical of, and with the many hundreds of graves and very fem females none with signs of battle there really is no proof