Earlier Viking Age

[Jan Olbracht]

8th century Norsemen, whose raids terrified Europe, were not that much more developed than Iron Age Germanic tribes and were not the first pirates of the North Sea-Saxons and Franks before them also raided coastal areas. What made them different from predecessors was their naval tech. Norse were not coast-huggers, they seemed to appear out of nowhere from perspective of raided people and that made them so terrifying.

So lets assume, that Norse naval tech improvements came earlier, during Roman Warm Period (say 2nd-3rd century AD). Thus there are Norse raids of Britain and Gaul, Faroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland are settled. What would be impact? Would Romans abandon Britain earlier due to Norse pressure? Roman naval tech improves too as response? And earlier settlement of Iceland and Greenland gives Norse better chance to estabilish permanent presence in New World?

 

[Atterdag]

Part of the reason Norsemen turned to raiding was because there wasn't a Roman state in which they could look for employment as mercenaries anymore. In the west anyway, they famously went in service to the Byzantine Emperor as varangians. Thus I don't think proto-Vikings half a millenia early would do as much raiding in the Roman Empire as much as they'd serve as mercenaries in the civil wars.

 

[Jan Olbracht]

Part of the reason Norsemen turned to raiding was because there wasn't a Roman state in which they could look for employment as mercenaries anymore. In the west anyway, they famously went in service to the Byzantine Emperor as varangians. Thus I don't think proto-Vikings half a millenia early would do as much raiding in the Roman Empire as much as they'd serve as mercenaries in the civil wars.

So if, say, crisis of 3rd century kills Rome earlier, they'd turn into raiding?

 

[Atterdag]

So if, say, crisis of 3rd century kills Rome earlier, they'd turn into raiding?

Possibly, probably if this lead to an overall earlier age of migration.

 

[Atterdag]

This might have interesting consequences for Christianity

Rome disappearing in the 3rd century likely means christianity won't become the hegemonic religion of Europe at all. It probably will become dominant around the mediterranean still if the eastern Empire holds, but I wouldn't count on it ever becoming dominant in northern Gaul, Germany or Britannia.

 

[Gloss]

Part of the reason Norsemen turned to raiding was because there wasn't a Roman state in which they could look for employment as mercenaries anymore. In the west anyway, they famously went in service to the Byzantine Emperor as varangians. Thus I don't think proto-Vikings half a millenia early would do as much raiding in the Roman Empire as much as they'd serve as mercenaries in the civil wars.

I don't think the fall of the Roman empire in the 5th century caused the Viking age in the 9th century...

Also the Norse did raid the Byzantines as well.

 

[Atterdag]

I don't think the fall of the Roman empire in the 5th century caused the Viking age in the 9th century...

It did lead to the age of migration, which the Viking Age was part of.

But it's less that the fall of the Roman Empire was a cause of the Viking Age, rather that it was a prequisite for it. Had there been a strong Roman state with a functioning defensive system you can bet Vikings wouldn't have been able to terrorize western Europe as freely as they did.

Also the Norse did raid the Byzantines as well.

To a much lesser degree than western Europe. A functioning Byzantine Empire meant more resistance to raids, as well as another possible source of income for norse adventurers.

 

[Gloss]

To a much lesser degree than western Europe. A functioning Byzantine Empire meant more resistance to raids, as well as another possible source of income for norse adventurers.

Only because of distance were there less raids in that region, which is why Arab pirates were still able to seize Crete and raid Byzantium
Also it's not like only "advanced states" were able to employ Norse peoples as allies and mercenaries, the Bretons did so as well.

 

[Atterdag]

Only because of distance were there less raids in that region, which is why Arab pirates were still able to seize Crete and raid Byzantium

Really, distance is the only thing that matters? Then why did Viking raids ever end at all? It’s not like England, France etc got any further away from Scandinavia, no they gradually improved their defenses so that they weren’t as vulnerable to raids, thus raiding stopped being as valuable to the Norsemen.

Also it's not like only "advanced states" were able to employ Norse peoples as allies and mercenaries, the Bretons did so as well.

Don’t know why you’re quoting something I haven’t written. You’re thinking in much to absolute terms, yes Western Europeans could hire Viking mercenaries, but on a smaller scale than an Empire like Byzantium that had more readily available cash. Yes, Vikings could raid Byzantine lands even though they were better protected, but on a much smaller scale than they could the relatively unprotected west.