"Vikings died at thirty" circulates widely, and in that form it is wrong. What can be shown is less dramatic and more interesting: the cemeteries of Ribe hold adults who died at a mean age in the late thirties, the Icelandic law code Grágás obliges children to support their parents, and Egil's saga draws a blind, stiff, mocked poet said to be in his ninth decade, that is, in his eighties. This article separates what bones, legal texts and stories can each tell us, and where the sources fall silent.
How old did people get in the Viking Age? The question looks harmless and is one of the trickiest to answer. The Viking Age runs roughly from the late eighth to the eleventh century. Scandinavia then had no parish registers or tax lists recording birth and death years. Anyone who wants to know how long people lived has essentially three routes: bones from graves, legal texts that treat old age as a problem to be managed, and stories written down later. Each route yields a different kind of statement, and none is enough alone.
A common misunderstanding runs through nearly every popular account. Figures such as "life expectancy 35" sound as if life ended in the mid-thirties. They say something else, explained below. For now: a low average arises even when part of the population grows very old, as long as another part dies young.
In this article I stay with what I could actually inspect during research. That is less than a handbook would offer. Where I only saw a summary, or could not reach the source at all, the text says so, and the source list at the end separates the cases again.
Skeletons are first-hand evidence. They show wear, healed fractures, dental condition and growth disturbances, and features such as cranial sutures, pelvic joints and tooth wear allow an estimate of age at death. But that estimate has limits. The older a person was, the less precise it becomes; many older adults end up in an open category such as "over 50". That is not a flaw of one study but a known problem of skeletal ageing.
Selection matters too. A cemetery shows only those buried there. Viking Age burial in Scandinavia took many forms, including cremations, inhumations, boat graves and simple pits, and not every group in the population is equally represented. Those who stayed at sea, fell abroad or lay in graves where bone did not survive are missing. More on burial forms is in the article on Norse burial.
Finally, preservation is uneven. Children's bones are small and decay in the soil faster than adult bones. That is one reason infants and small children are under-represented in many burial grounds, a point that matters for reading averages shortly.
One of the few studies I could inspect, at the level of its abstract, comes from a team around D. D. Pedersen (with P. Tarp, M. Søvsø, H. C. Petersen, G. R. Milner and J. L. Boldsen), published in 2020 in Anthropologischer Anzeiger (volume 77, issue 1, pp. 13-25) as "A millennium of population change in pre-modern Danish Ribe". It analyses 943 adult skeletons from three urban cemeteries in Ribe, a town in Jutland. The span runs roughly from 800 to 1800 and so includes the Viking Age, the Middle Ages and the period after.
The abstract's results, reported as they stand: mean age at death in the Viking period was 38.5 years for men and 38.6 for women. In the medieval period it fell slightly, to 37.4 for men and 36.9 for women. In the post-medieval period it rose to 40.4 for men and 43.2 for women, which the authors describe as a gain of 3.0 and 6.3 years respectively.
What does this mean? First, the figure concerns adults. Children who died before adulthood are not in this mean, so "38.5" does not mean a Viking Age child died at 38 on average. Second, a mean age at death is not the same as life expectancy; the abstract uses age at death. Third, the value comes from a single town. Ribe was a trading place where people lived close together, and nothing here shows whether a farm in the countryside would give the same numbers. Fourth, the abstract gives no figure for how many of the 943 people passed 50 or 60, so the spread behind the mean is not visible in what I saw.
It is notable that the Viking Age and the Middle Ages differ so little. Pictures of a "dark" Middle Ages and a "rougher" Viking Age find no support in these numbers; the jump comes later. That too should not be over-interpreted, but it can be taken seriously.
Here lies the most common error. Suppose in a group every third newborn dies in the first year while the rest live 55 years on average. The average at birth then lies far below 40, even though no survivor was ever "old at forty". This is an arithmetic example, not a Viking figure; I use it only to show the mechanism. Life expectancy at birth is pulled down strongly by child mortality. Someone who reached fifteen or twenty in a pre-modern society could live considerably longer than the mean suggests.
How high child mortality was in the Viking Age cannot be quantified reliably for Scandinavia; I know of no robust figure and found none here. Whoever gives one usually extrapolates from later or foreign societies. That is legitimate as a comparison but not a measurement.
The second reason means mislead: they hide the spread. The Ribe mean of just under 39 does not say people died at 39. It blends people who died at 20, after childbirth, injury or infection, with others who reached 60 or 70. That such older people existed is already presupposed by the legal texts and sagas. How many there were I cannot say from my sources.
The laws show that old age was a regulated matter for people in the North. Grágás ("Grey Goose") is the fullest legal collection of medieval Iceland. The surviving manuscripts are younger than the Viking Age, and the law reflects the Icelandic Commonwealth, not all of Scandinavia. Using it as evidence for "the Vikings" generalises.
I could not read Grágás in full text. I could only inspect Frederik Pedersen's article "A Medieval Welfare State? Welfare provision in a twelfth-century Icelandic law code" (Northern Studies 34, pp. 89-111) through a retrieval tool. The following points come from that summary, not from checking the law itself. According to Pedersen:
These rules show two things. First, society expected people to grow old, fall ill and become unable to work, and to need support. Second, support was no favour but a legal duty, with penalties for refusal. Both speak against the idea that the old were simply disposed of as a burden; more on that in the myth check.
The limit of this source is obvious. A law states what should be, or what the lawgiver had to regulate because disputes arose. It does not say how often a farmer paid his tithe or how an old man fared when he changed farms every few weeks under the rotation rule. Pedersen's title, a "medieval welfare state?", is a modern label with a question mark; anyone turning it into "the Vikings already had pensions" overshoots. There was no pension in today's sense, no state that paid, no central administration. There were relatives, neighbours and the community.
Dating adds a caveat. Pedersen calls the law code a twelfth-century one, in title and text; according to his article the main manuscripts (Konungsbók, Staðarhólsbók) date from the mid-thirteenth century, and most of the poor-relief rules are dated there to 1096-1236. The Viking Age in the narrow sense ends earlier. The rules thus describe the period just after it, and it cannot be shown that they applied in the ninth or tenth century. The thing, the assembly where such rules were made and disputes heard, is explained in the article on the thing; an overview of law and compensation is given in law and the thing among the Vikings.
On Norwegian laws such as the Gulathing or Frostathing law I can say nothing documented in this article. I found no usable source on them. It would be wrong to transfer the Icelandic rules to Norway, Denmark or Sweden.
The law ties in with an order older than any law book: kinship. In Norse society the family was the main protection against hardship, lawsuits and old age. Someone with children, siblings or nephews could hope for support; someone without depended on the community and on charity. That explains why the order of those obliged is regulated so closely in the Grágás article. For an introduction to the kinship structure see the article on kin and family.
Reality also included dependence at the bottom of society. I can cite no old-age claim for the unfree; the Pedersen summary names only freed slaves among those entitled to support. How an old unfree person lived and died cannot be answered from my sources. Background on unfreedom is in the article on slavery.
Women appear in the legal source mainly as mothers and wives: the mother heads the list of those to be supported, and the law regulates the sharing of children after divorce or widowhood. How old women got on average, Ribe shows only for one town, where women's age at death in the Viking period was practically level with men's. For more on their role see the article on women in the Viking Age.
Sagas are not chronicles. The sagas of Icelanders were written down in the thirteenth century and tell of people said to have lived in the ninth to eleventh centuries. They are no source for age as numerical data, but they mirror what the audience found plausible. An overview is in the article on the sagas of Icelanders.
The most striking picture of old age comes from Egil's saga. The poet, warrior and farmer Egil Skallagrimsson appears at the end of his life in chapter 85. I inspected the English wording on voluspa.org and, in agreement, on sacred-texts.com (where the chapter is counted as XC); neither names the translator, and the wording matches the older public-domain English edition (probably W. C. Green, 1893; I have not verified this). Chapter numbering varies by edition. I give the passages in my own words. It says that in the later days of Hacon the Great Egil was in his ninth decade of life. In old age he became heavy in movement, dull in hearing and sight, and stiff in the legs. Women see him stumble and laugh. In the end he becomes quite blind; someone asks whether his feet are cold and warns him not to hold them too near the fire.
"You are now quite gone, Egil, if you fall when alone."
Egils saga Skallagrímssonar, ch. 85 (sacred-texts.com: XC), the women's mockery; English wording as on voluspa.org and sacred-texts.com, translator not named there (probably Green, 1893, unverified)
This is literarily dense and humanly sober. The famous warrior and poet ends as an old man laughed at by the women of the house and in need of the fire's warmth. The text does not idealise old age, nor does it portray it as something to be removed.
Do not skip over one thing: "ninth decade" means, according to the saga, that he was between 80 and 89. Whether the historical Egil lived that long cannot be checked. The age comes from a story composed generations later, and I know of no second source. The saga therefore shows that a very long life was conceivable and could be told, not that it was common. More on the person and work is in the article on Egill.
Other sagas also show old people, for instance Njáls saga or Laxdæla saga. I did not read them in full text for this article and therefore give no specific passages; nor do I cite anything from collections of sayings such as the Hávamál. That is a gap, not a claim that nothing is there.
The most persistent image of old age in the North is the cliff from which the old were supposedly thrown. The term "ättestupa" ("family cliff") is Swedish. It goes back to an episode in Gautreks saga, the Dalafíflaþáttr: a family so miserly that it would rather die than pay for hospitality jumps from a rock the saga calls ættarstapi or ætternisstapi. According to English-language Wikipedia the word occurs in no other Old Norse text. The episode is meant comically, not as a legal custom.
The saga became known in Sweden through the edition and Swedish translation by Olaus Verelius in 1664, as the same source reports. From the seventeenth century on, it continues, various cliffs were given the name. The article cites no archaeological evidence for the killing of the old; as support it uses ancient accounts of other peoples, such as the Heruli in Procopius. Wikipedia names as scholars who questioned the myth the linguist Adolf Noreen and Birgitta Odén (Scandia, 1996) and states that it is "now generally accepted among researchers" that such cliffs never existed as a practice. I could inspect Odén through the retrieval tool (Birgitta Odén, "Ättestupan – myt eller verklighet?", Scandia, 1990s; the volume was not given in the retrieval, and I saw only a summary). She regards the ättestupa as unverifiable and as belonging to myth; skeletons of elderly people show no fall injuries. She dates Gautreks saga to the late thirteenth century (oldest manuscript fifteenth century), classes it as a satirical fornaldarsaga and traces the form "ättestupa" to a mistranslation by Verelius. I know Noreen only through Odén and Wikipedia.
Why does the image persist? Because it fits a story of the "barbarian North" and because it sounds good. Together with the legal duties described above, the result is: neither skeleton, nor law, nor saga supports the custom.
Even when a grave holds a very old person, it is not always recognised. Wear on joints shows hard work, not necessarily great age; a bone with arthritis can belong to a forty-year-old farmer. Conversely, very old people can have unremarkable skeletons. Grave goods help little: a richly furnished grave says something about status, nothing about age at death. If you look at individual well-known finds, for example from Birka, remember that every age statement is an estimate with a margin of uncertainty; for the sites see Birka and Hedeby. I evaluated no single studies on these places for this article.
Health is a related matter. An overview of the healing arts of the time is in the article Viking medicine, and on diet in the article on food. How these factors affected age at death in concrete terms I cannot quantify.
Frankly, the source base I could inspect does not carry a large history of ageing. There is one skeletal study with solid means for one town, one legal text from Iceland and one saga. Open questions include the distribution of ages at death behind the mean, child mortality, conditions in the countryside, the situation in Norway, Sweden and the western settlements, age in the context of violence and seafaring, and the practice behind the law. There is probably more research on these points than I could use; I do not want to fill from memory where I saw no source.
Anyone wanting to go further should read the Ribe study in full, check the Grágás text in an annotated edition (for instance the translation "Laws of Early Iceland", which turned up in my search without my having inspected it), and look for studies of other sites. For thinking it through, assess each source type separately: bones speak about bodies, laws about expectations, sagas about ideas.
How old did Vikings get on average? For adults from Ribe, a 2020 study gives a mean age at death of 38.5 (men) and 38.6 years (women) in the Viking period. It is a mean for adults of one town, not life expectancy at birth, and it says nothing about how many people reached 60 or more.
Were there old Vikings? Yes, the sources presuppose them. Grágás regulates support for old people, and Egil's saga shows Egil as a very old man. How common they were cannot be quantified from the sources used here.
Who had to support old parents? According to the Icelandic Grágás, first the children, then further relatives; only then did the community (hreppr) step in. That describes Iceland, not all of Scandinavia.
Is it true that the old were thrown from cliffs? No, there is no archaeological evidence. The idea goes back to a comic episode in Gautreks saga and to later Swedish naming.
Why are life expectancy figures misleading? Because early death in childhood pulls the average down strongly. Anyone who reached adulthood could grow considerably older than the value at birth suggests.
Kin and family · Law and the thing · The thing · Egill · Sagas of Icelanders · Ideas of death · Viking medicine · Burial
Egill Skallagrímsson · Kin & Family · Viking Law & Thing · Viking medicine · Viking burials.
All History & Finds articles →
An army shouts its own name, and from the far bank the word comes back. That is how Plutarch opens the battle of Aquae …
Read more →In AD 58 a dispossessed people stood on the lower Rhine and asked Rome for a strip of pasture that the soldiers did not …
Read more →Some peoples enter world literature because somebody was trying to describe something else. The Anartes are one of …
Read more →The Angles were a Germanic people whom Tacitus names around AD 98 as the Anglii and who, in the fifth century, set out …
Read more →