Baltic Crusades

The baltic crusades were meant to kill or convert the proud Pagan people's of the baltic to Christianity. So much for a nice tolerant religion that preaches love for all mankind!

True.

As the tradition goes, Sweden conquered and christened Finland through three crusades; first one taking place in the 1150s, the second in the 1230s, and the last in the 1290s.

Sweden held Finland for 600 years after this, making the Swedish crusades the most long-term successful of them all.

Originally posted by Jagiello   Well don't look for a second ant my avatar ,but in fact the "last pagan stronghold-Lithunia" did not have any good army at all exept for some untrained and unequiped horse archers ,so it wasn't them who destroyed the Teutons.

Well since you don't have any proofs to your claims, I am not taking your comment seriously. Just few comments from my side to show that you have certainly biased look on Lithuanian medieval army. You mentioned Lithuanian horse archers which is obviously wrong as Lithuanians didn't have their own horse archer troops because of the terrain and countryside of their lands. Horse archers are for steppe. Though Lithuanians acquired horse archer mercenary corps from Tatars and southern Rus principalities.

Read something about the battle of Grunwald-it was the "stronghold of christianity" Poland that mainly(with the help of the Lithunians,russians and tatars)that destroyed the teutons,not only at the battle of Grunwald,but during the long wars with the order-more than 100 years.(and the pagan stronghold was quicly "captured" by the polish priests and become another "stronghold of christianity" thanks to my people)

You are certainly one of those nationalistics. Have seen your type here on AE and also on other sites. There are few things you all share which is claiming superiority of ones nation over other nations.

Speaking about battle of Grunwald - It was victory of Lithuanian and Polish alliance, not exclusively Polish or Lithuanian.

Originally posted by Reginmund True. As the tradition goes, Sweden conquered and christened Finland through three crusades; first one taking place in the 1150s, the second in the 1230s, and the last in the 1290s. Sweden held Finland for 600 years after this, making the Swedish crusades the most long-term successful of them all.

Im afraid that once again the true events are less exciting than the ones described in chronicles
The first crusade has been revised latley and many scholars think that it might not have hapened at all.

One might argue that the crusades to finland were really nothing like the crusades to Jerusalem.
It has been long a very popular idea that Finland was litterally conquered through crusades but it is more likely that Finland was attatched to Sweden via Chritianity. Probably there were some "sword mission" going on but probably not in a very large scale.
The third "crusade" to Carelia is most likely have taken place. The Carelians and Tawastians had long been raiding each others territories but this time the Tawastians would get help from Swedes as Novgorod had been supporting the Carelians.
The main reason for the crusades were not at all to convert the pagan finns but really political and financial. Finland has long been a battle field for the two powers of Sweden and Russia(Novgorod). In the case of the third crusade the reason was for the swedes to get a foot hold to the Hansa trading route to east.

One thing is certain though. The finns renounced their pagan beliefs during the "crusade times" (1100-1300). Though some documents can be found even from the 1600-1700s where pesants were accused of heresy

Edited by Kynsi - 13-Feb-2007 at 16:57

Originally posted by DreamWeaver The same is true for regions of Western Europe, old faihts managing to cling on in some areas or bastardised into some other form.

Edited by Cryptic - 14-Jun-2010 at 14:00

"Anyways, the dig uncovered countless offerings of chickens dating from the Middle Ages though the 1700s. The offerings all had the same format. Then, the carbon 14 dating of some offerings were from the 1950s, and not the middle ages. The modern offerings had all the characteristics of the older ones."

Could not some of us consider that the 14C tests were tainted? Or, hold your breath, "wrong?"

Seriously! Just how could "the modern offerings" have, "had all of the characteristics of the older ones?"

Was there any stratigraphy involved?

It all just smells?

DW, just accepted it when he wrote;

"Some things never really go away." Which indicates that he has no problem believing that even in the 1950's people were preparing their "chicken sacrafice" in the same manner or style, that made it indistinguishable from sacrifices made many hundreds of years earlier!

I am not sure that during the shortages that existed in Cornwall England, in the 1950's (and earlier) would have allowed the waste of a good chicken?

Perhaps it was done by the German POW's who were forced to work for English families after the war? (possible?)

I would even propose that these were "Cornish Game Hens?", or not!

Perhaps this was just a nice place to have a bar-b-que?

Edited by opuslola - 14-Jun-2010 at 12:21

Or, perhaps, they did not?

Just why was there a division of hundreds of years? Or, at least it seems that the discoveries went from "the Middle Ages" directly to the 1950's CE!

Were all of these old women in hiding?

Really?

Thanks for the explanation! For, without continutity, the site would be worthless! But were some of the sacrifices dated to the 1800's, and later?

You see, 14C testing is sometimes fooled by the material?

Originally posted by opuslola DW, just accepted it when he wrote; "Some things never really go away." Which indicates that he has no problem believing that even in the 1950's people were preparing their "chicken sacrafice" in the same manner or style, that made it indistinguishable from sacrifices made many hundreds of years earlier! I am not sure that during the shortages that existed in Cornwall England, in the 1950's (and earlier) would have allowed the waste of a good chicken? Perhaps it was done by the German POW's who were forced to work for English families after the war? (possible?)

Apologies Im bandying about axiomatic British concepts. It not a case of me accepting the dearth of chickens and the manner of their sacrifice but rather the peculiarity of the people of Cornwall, in which I find the continuance of such practices to be entirely conceivable if not in fact expected. Such  would be true for various other regions of these isles.

Also in such out of the way places old ideas and concepts hold on to the present day. A ramble through British Folk Lore would certainly enlighten such matters. That such practices with chickens should continue in parts of the country, though not neccessarily in the same manner (For such a claim would be as spurious as much of Welsh nationalsim, or indeed Cornish nationalism), rather unsurprising. Then again perhaps because Im British I come to accept such things as a norm.


Not all of them were forced, many preferred to stay, and are still here to this day.

Dr. Madden talks about the Wends who were a slavic group, who faced the brunt of the Baltic Crusades. I would have to study this more to gain a better understanding. As bad as these crusades were I gather the Wend were not exactly peaceful and that to some degree this was done in self defense. Control over land, Christian missionaries were being killed and also Christian villages were attacked.
I would need to look at a variety of sources to really gain a good understanding.

There is always two sides to a story!