Gripla - 20.12.2009, Page 138

GRIPLA138
and also by the material culture which shows continuity from the previous
periods. Both resulted in studies focused on the pan­regional commonali­
ties of the Nordic area that were produced in some kind of “splendid isola­
tion”.
thus, the natural geographic and linguistic definition of Scandinavia
received an additional historical-cultural dimension. This allowed the inclu­
sion of all of the insular “colonies”, which in turn resulted in the enlarge­
ment of the Nordic area over the whole of the north Atlantic. There is no
doubt that this part of the globe really did show specific traits that sustain
these historical generalizations. However, such a perspective may not be
scientifically fruitful because it overshadows obvious points of differentia­
tion across the area in question. the dominant trend of looking for the
similarities of the “common” nordic viking Age culture produced elegant
synthetic interpretations but it has made it difficult to understand local and
regional variations which eventually resulted in different political and eco­
nomic developments during the High and Late Middle Ages.
therefore, I do not like Arnold toynbee’s concept of a specific pre­
Christian “Nordic civilization” which was a conscious northern “response”
to the breakdown of the imperial Roman world and the ensuing tripartite
division into Western Christendom and Byzantium flanked to the south
and east by the Islamic world. Such a view is based on a rather simplified
contrast between the North and the post-Roman world but at the same
time, implies their historical equality in the further development of
europe.
this added an “historiosophic” dimension to the picture of the unique­
ness of the homogenous North which had already been established through
the combined efforts of Scandinavian geographers, linguists, historians and
archaeologists. The idea of an ancient unity and a common destiny is, how­
ever, undermined by yet another, equally strong historiographic tradition
which divides this huge “Nordic civilization” into original “ethnic” sub-
regions. It is generally taken for granted that the earliest history of
Scandinavia concerns the primordial Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish
peoples who were soon to be followed by the Faroese and the Icelanders.
they are all the obvious subjects of national(istic) scholarly interests. thus,
the idea of “national” continuities determined the tracks of the historical