DR MAY-6

 In the middle of the ninth century, ensconced within an administrative chamber somewhere in the mountainous Jibāl region—an area now constituting part of western Iran—a man speaks with deliberate precision to a scribe whose pen scratches with deference upon parchment. The calendar reads the 840s in the Common Era, though in this remote eastern dominion of the sprawling ‘Abbāsid Caliphate, anchored politically and culturally in the illustrious city of Baghdad, dates are reckoned by the Hijri lunar calendar. The man dictating is Abu ’l-Qāsim ʿUbayd Allāh b ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Khurradādhbih, a bureaucratic functionary of significant consequence, serving simultaneously as director of posts and superintendent of police for the region. His purview is expansive, encompassing surveillance, communications, and regional intelligence.

As he fulfills his governmental responsibilities, Ibn Khurradādhbih compiles what will become a component of a broader intelligence dossier—one later to be known as Kitāb al-Masālik wa l-Mamālik, or The Book of Itineraries and Kingdoms. Ostensibly a logistical and diplomatic ledger, this manuscript records movements of persons and goods across territories, delineating points of origin and destination, as well as the motivations behind travel—an ancient equivalent of modern-day geopolitical reconnaissance. Within this context, he reports on a people identified as the Rūs: groups who traverse from the obscure fringes of the Slavic lands to the eastern Mediterranean, where they barter pelts of beaver and black fox alongside blades of steel. Upon entry into Byzantine lands, their wares are subject to a tariff of ten percent. On return, they reroute via maritime channels to Samkarsh (modern-day Taman), noted then as a Jewish city, before re-entering Slavic territories.

Yet their navigational choices are not singular. An alternate path carries them southward via the Tanais River (Volga), through Khazaria’s capital, Khamlīkh, where an identical levy is exacted. From there, they launch into the Caspian Sea, directing their voyages with uncanny geographic acumen. At times, these traders proceed overland from Jurjān, ferrying their goods on camel-back toward Baghdad. Another equally intricate terrestrial itinerary starts from Spain or France, descends to Morocco, courses through North Africa and Egypt, before weaving its way through Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, and South Asia—finally reaching al-Ṣīn, likely denoting regions within Turko-China. The coherence of these accounts, though long treated with skepticism, now reveals the extent to which a unified ethnographic narrative spans both paragraphs, all referencing the same Rus merchants.

Contrary to earlier Eurocentric historiographies that confined the Vikings—those archetypal marauders of lore—to a theater of westward expansion and coastal raiding, the last four decades of scholarship have produced a much more intricate tapestry. Beyond the flaming sword and dragon-headed ship exists the settler, the mercantile patroness, the frontier intermediary. One Scandinavian might pursue piracy during a season of bounty, while another may fall amid the caravanserais of Khwarezm, transmitting news back through surviving comrades. Even the fabled Norse voyages to Vinland included a cast of characters extending beyond ethnicity—Greenlanders, Turks, Scots. All these stories, drawn from archaeological and textual evidence, collectively redefine what we understand by the Norse diaspora.

Indeed, the network of Viking mobility was not merely one of outward expansion, but of bidirectional flow—immigration into Scandinavia accompanied exodus from it. Ibn Khurradādhbih’s account, with its sweeping geographical breadth, corroborates what modern researchers associate with the fabled Silk Roads. His designation of “Rus’” aligns with eastern nomenclature for Scandinavian traders. That the Viking world extended to Constantinople, to the vast riverine arteries of Russia and Ukraine, to the shores of Newfoundland, and possibly to the bazaars of India and China, challenges the overly restrictive narrative of the “Viking Age.”

More provocatively, contemporary scholars now question the very lexical currency of the term “Viking.” Derived from the Old Norse víkingr—likely denoting a sea-borne raider—the word was never an ethnonym but a vocational title, fluid, elective, and often short-lived. The bulk of Scandinavians, agrarian and sedentary, never bore the moniker. Today, terms like “Norse” or “Northerners” serve as linguistic stand-ins, however imperfect, for the broader demographic, while “viking” (lowercase) refers specifically to the raiders themselves. Such semantic recalibrations, though frustrating to purists, are critical to an honest retelling of a past far more pluralistic, dynamic, and interconnected than once assumed.

---

Difficult Word Meanings:

• Ensconced – Settled securely or comfortably.

• Parchment – Writing material made from animal skin.

• Purview – The scope of authority or responsibility.

• Ostensibly – Apparently or purportedly, but perhaps not actually.

• Caravanserais – Roadside inns for travelers, especially in Asia or North Africa.

• Diaspora – The dispersion of a people from their original homeland.

• Ethnonym – A name applied to a given ethnic group.

Word Count: 598
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 17

 Articles Daily+ | Just ₹55/month

Sharpen your VARC with 4 daily CAT-level articles in 1 PDF — curated from AEON Essays, The Guardian, The New York Times, Philosophy Now & more.

✔️ Paragraph-wise Main Ideas
✔️ Words to Note (with meanings)
✔️ Summary & Conclusion
✔️ Doubt-solving by 99+ %ilers

No fluff. Just focused, high-quality prep — every single day.
Join now. Stay consistent. Score higher.

DM to get your subscription today - @astiflingsoul