My dictionary states: Pagan ~ Acknowledging neither Jehova, Christ, not Allah. Non-christian. or [Latin] ~ a person from a rural district.
Well the Viking raids did not come until roughly 350 years after the Romans left the British Isles, so there is no direct comparison. Besides, the vikings were not so much intolerant as they were exceedingly rapacious and unapolagetically so, at lest in their capacity as raiders. In terms of "historical" paganism, there was no such thing, as such. Until the latter half of the twentith century paganism was merely the condition of being neither Christian, Muslim, nor Jewish. Whomever said it is correct in that today's paganism is largely a modern animal. There are of course certain connections to various pre-Christian European beliefs, but the surviving historical data suggests that they are tenuos at best.
I beleive I said that. Rome saw itself as the be all end all of mankind, and it rolled across Europe destroying most everything in it's path. Yet to learn of this you must read the writings of the Greeks. What Rome called advancement was, as you yourself stated, CONQUEST. The first Reich used selective and revisionist history just as efficiently as the second and third.
The Pagans I have meet have been really friendly. A friend just got into the club as a prospect. Another friend won't join the club because he is already a member of a fraternity, but he went for a funeral ride with the pittsburgh chapter this weekend (someone died last sunday). I see them down at the bars and they are loud crazy partiers just like a lot of my friends have been through the years. Really nice people.