to the Viking period. This is not to say that they did not do it, but rather that it is not described by any one who would have actually seen it happen. Thus, I lean on the side of caution here ... and the monastic annalists would have had a vested interest in making the Vikings appear blood-thirsty. But on the other hand, the later Viking sagas, that were written by their descendents, are also pretty gruesome ... so who knows. The chaps coming back from Constantinople didn't travel via the Mediterranean and Atlantic coast, but rather a corridor of rivers (eg. Dneiper) from the Baltic through Novgorod and Kiev to the Black Sea and thence to Constantinople (and the reverse for the return trip). This was not easy going in places, and raiding on the way was not as safe nor necessarily profitable as mercenary work at the destination. What if...? Okay, so they didn't take the Atlantic coast line to Miklagaard, but rather the scenic route over Russia. I bet that there had to have been at least someone that did a "Columbus" before they came up with the dragging of boats between rivers in Russia, and sailed the coast lines of France, Spain and the British Isles, though. And if the raiding parties were out on the seas during farming season, wouldn't that suggest that it could very well have been boredom that sparked it? If the seasonal vikings were at home farming, the ones that didn't