"Was settled by" is generally taken to mean "founded". I agree that "settled in" presents a more accurate picture. If that is what you were indicating.
One suggests that there was no one living in A, so B set up there, while the other would imply that B set up there, but there may have been other people already there.
The Vikings were the first humans in Iceland, as I recall. All the other places they went to were inhabited already (Newfoundland, UK, Normandy, Sicily...).
Quite a few were settled even in the last 2 thousand years (meaning absence of proof of earlier settlement of course): https://www.jetpunk.com/quizzes/most-recently-settled-countries
I believe that both Madeira and the Azores were absent any people at the time of Portuguese colonization. There are other examples, but most are remote or semi-remote islands.
It's strange that they did not settle at all in Finland. The Black Sea spot probably overlaps the modern frontier, both Bulgaria and Turkey would be correct answers.
The castles you mention were built during the Swedish administration well after the Viking age was over. As for why they didn't settle in the area of modern day Finland - it's probably because there wasn't much reason for them to do so.
Ouch. Doesn't say a whole lot for Finland. The Vikings would make perilous transoceanic voyages into terra incognito, sail thousands miles down inland rivers into hostile lands, but wasn't really interested in Finland just around the corner.
I'm pretty sure that's Turkey, not Bulgaria. Eastern Belarus is definitely orange. I can also say that a bit of orange is on the Belgian coast. Compare the map given with a political map of Europe and you'll see what I mean.
Having stared at the map for awhile, it's difficult to say. It's probable that the yellow area includes parts of both countries. I simply combined the two answers.
2 - Not completely acurate as I'm portuguese and we had two diferent clans of vikings ruling over us. The wiped the romans and kept there for 300years give or take
Greenland isn't on the list because it is a territory of Denmark. While Portugal was subjected to frequent Viking raids, they never actually settled there. The Portuguese were ruled over by two Germanic barbarian tribes, not Vikings, after the fall of the Romans and then the Moors after them.
For whatever reason Germany didn't work when I typed it in (I know I spelled it right), so I missed one. Took the quiz again and it worked fine. I have no idea what happened.
So just who are we defining as Vikings? Vikings are those Scandinavians that travelled WESTWARDS from (mainly) Denmark and Norway. Varangians are those Scandinavians who travelled mostly EASTWARDS AND SOUTHWARDS from (mostly) Sweden. I am not certain that the term Viking or Varangian has any basis in historical nomenclature. I did however get most of the answers - although not Malta
The Northmen who settled in Byzantium were definitely Varangians and not Vikings cf Varangian Guard.
Viking is not a nationality. It's a lifestyle of going from bay to bay, inlet to inlet ... in other words from vik to vik a.k.a. viking. ;)
Based on DNA, the Nordics are the homelands of the Vikings. If you go by the common haplotype, West Finland has the most of it, today, right behind being Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Close behind the Baltic states. A noticeable amount elsewhere in Europe esp. West/more Northern parts. Then again, there are many traces of Vikings picking up spouses from wherever (e.g. see Iceland where there are many genetic markers from Scotland and Ireland), settling here and there, mixing with locals, even continuing all the way to Georgia to settle, Canada to attempt and many other places incl. in Islamic Levant, North Africa... and then many Vikings simply disappearing from history due to who knows what reason, maybe just settling in wherever you might find blue eyes these days.
So, in the lack of full evidence: you define who is a Viking.
Strange that they went to Denmark, Germany and Norway, but overlooked the Netherlands and Belgium. Also, didn't realize that they ventured as far south as Malta and Turkey.
wow I had no idea about italy, malta, turkey/bulgaria. I tried netherlands, belgium, ireland and usa. They seemed to make the most sense, coastal, northern and neighbours of countries allready on the list.
I tried Morocco and Algeria first. I knew they were somewhere in North Africa because of the TV series Vikings. But since they did not settle Spain or Portugal they probably went through France or Italy.
Looking closely at the map and cross-checking with Google Maps, I'm fairly sure Algeria should be included. The western point of the yellow area appears to be the small peninsula where the Cap Rosa lighthouse is, which is within Algeria.
2 - Not completely acurate as I'm portuguese and we had two diferent clans of vikings ruling over us. The wiped the romans and kept there for 300years give or take
"Some sort of invented name" is spot on. :-)
I've never seen the Vikings at the school.
Malta for the win!
So just who are we defining as Vikings? Vikings are those Scandinavians that travelled WESTWARDS from (mainly) Denmark and Norway. Varangians are those Scandinavians who travelled mostly EASTWARDS AND SOUTHWARDS from (mostly) Sweden. I am not certain that the term Viking or Varangian has any basis in historical nomenclature. I did however get most of the answers - although not Malta
The Northmen who settled in Byzantium were definitely Varangians and not Vikings cf Varangian Guard.
Still an interesting one
Based on DNA, the Nordics are the homelands of the Vikings. If you go by the common haplotype, West Finland has the most of it, today, right behind being Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Close behind the Baltic states. A noticeable amount elsewhere in Europe esp. West/more Northern parts. Then again, there are many traces of Vikings picking up spouses from wherever (e.g. see Iceland where there are many genetic markers from Scotland and Ireland), settling here and there, mixing with locals, even continuing all the way to Georgia to settle, Canada to attempt and many other places incl. in Islamic Levant, North Africa... and then many Vikings simply disappearing from history due to who knows what reason, maybe just settling in wherever you might find blue eyes these days.
So, in the lack of full evidence: you define who is a Viking.
WHY!!!!!!!!!