Vikings #4, On to Season 3

[Oberyn2cool4Westeros]

I hope the next season will be as intense as season 2, without repeating any scenarios.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Aside from the pretty stupid and childish battle scenes, this is definitely a much better made fantasy series than GOT, even though the budget is lower. It really is too bad they have to kill off all the cool characters and leave Daario Lothbrok and his lame friends alive. But, King Aelle/Robert Baratheon will deliver eventually I guess.

[Florina Laufeyson]

lets face it Horik does not have one.

Horsecrap. Dont you remember Horik's introduction to the series? He basically pranks a bunch of heathen priests and it was awesome.

this is definitely a much better made fantasy series than GOT

Apart from the occasional supernatural drop (which is rare in this series), where's the fantasy? Its historical fiction.

If you die in battle, you'll either end up in Valhalla or Fólkvangr (the latter ruled by Freyja), but Horrik, as a oath-breaker, would end up in Náströnd, the worst part of Hel.

I really like you. Yeap. Ragnar also made sure of that with the Headbutt of Fury. Nidhoggr is getting a Horik shaped snack.

Next season should be pretty gr9. King Aella stuff and stuff! Hoo hoo hoo!

[Zorral]

Ragnar is an historical personage. He was created as a composite legendary hero, Ragnar Lothbrook in sagas and eddas and so on, by poets. Not the same thing as historical.

His sons were historical personages, who felt it politic to invoke a legend for their father ... perhaps. Or at least their cheerleaders / court poets, etc. felt it was politic to invoke such a legendary hero as an ancestor for them in the interest of receiving the gifts of a kingly gift-giver. :)

[jarl the climber]

Horsecrap. Dont you remember Horik's introduction to the series? He basically pranks a bunch of heathen priests and it was awesome.

No, I don't, so it couldn't have been that funny. He should have stuck with that sort of thing, maybe if he acted like a clown his betrayal would have caught Ragnar off guard.

[Corvinus85]

No, I don't, so it couldn't have been that funny. He should have stuck with that sort of thing, maybe if he acted like a clown his betrayal would have caught Ragnar off guard.

What you don't remember him throwing the chicken (or rooster) on the sleeping priests? And that almost backfired on him, too

[Florina Laufeyson]

Ragnar is an historical personage. He was created as a composite legendary hero, Ragnar Lothbrook in sagas and eddas and so on, by poets. Not the same thing as historical.

His sons were historical personages, who felt it politic to invoke a legend for their father ... perhaps. Or at least their cheerleaders / court poets, etc. felt it was politic to invoke such a legendary hero as an ancestor for them in the interest of receiving the gifts of a kingly gift-giver. :)

Still not exactly what i would call a fantasy. The sagas are admittingly, straddling the line, but theres a lot of historical shit going on there. Yeah. /Shrug Hmph. The names of these guys are embedded in history. Calling it outright fantasy like LotR and shit isnt entirely fair. The show is indeed fiction, but not exactly of the fantasy sort.

What you don't remember him throwing the chicken (or rooster) on the sleeping priests? And that almost backfired on him, too

lel yeah and it was hilarious.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Apart from the occasional supernatural drop (which is rare in this series), where's the fantasy? Its historical fiction.

I didn't really mean the supernatural drops, which I like since it portrays their religion as something people actually believed in rather than being just a source of new curse words.

It's more that they just haven't bothered enough with the historical stuff to get to call it historical fiction instead of just fiction, or low fantasy in this case. So much of what happens in the show is just wrong, often to the point of being really funny. My personal favorite is their depiction of Denmark, possibly the flattest country in the entire world, like this http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140215125912/vikingstv/images/6/64/Kattegat_3.jpg . :drunk:

Also when you have watched twenty episodes of a series about Dark Age warlords and have seen both the bondage inspired leather armour (standard fantasy trope) and the 16th century Spanish Conquistador helmets (worn by the Northumbrian Fyrd), but have yet to see a single piece of mail. Then that's a bad sign. Really though there are too many inaccuracies and weird things to list, these are just the best ones. It's obvious the producers haven't cared much.

But they should get credit for actually making an effort with the religion and languages, both the dialects and when they have characters actually speaking the old ones (though they do it wrong since Old English and Old Norse were close enough that you didn't need interpreters) but they just do too weird other things to call it historical. It also seems only very loosely inspired by the real Saga of Ragnar Lodbrok, in fact the entire premise of the plot in the first season is really bizarre. He "discovers" England, and is then regarded as the Viking Columbus by the North? LOL

It is an entertaining show though, don't get me wrong. Well written characters and cool looking settings overall and so on. It's too bad about Jarl Borg. He was a true Northman.

Still not exactly what i would call a fantasy. The sagas are admittingly, straddling the line, but theres a lot of historical shit going on there. Yeah. /Shrug Hmph. The names of these guys are embedded in history. Calling it outright fantasy like LotR and shit isnt entirely fair. The show is indeed fiction, but not exactly of the fantasy sort.

lel yeah and it was hilarious.

Well Lord of the Rings is supposedly set in prehistoric Europe, so...

[Corvinus85]

I didn't really mean the supernatural drops, which I like since it portrays their religion as something people actually believed in rather than being just a source of new curse words.

It's more that they just haven't bothered enough with the historical stuff to get to call it historical fiction instead of just fiction, or low fantasy in this case. So much of what happens in the show is just wrong, often to the point of being really funny. My personal favorite is their depiction of Denmark, possibly the flattest country in the entire world, like this http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140215125912/vikingstv/images/6/64/Kattegat_3.jpg . :drunk:

Also when you have watched twenty episodes of a series about Dark Age warlords and have seen both the bondage inspired leather armour (standard fantasy trope) and the 16th century Spanish Conquistador helmets (worn by the Northumbrian Fyrd), but have yet to see a single piece of mail. Then that's a bad sign. Really though there are too many inaccuracies and weird things to list, these are just the best ones. It's obvious the producers haven't cared much.

But they should get credit for actually making an effort with the religion and languages, both the dialects and when they have characters actually speaking the old ones (though they do it wrong since Old English and Old Norse were close enough that you didn't need interpreters) but they just do too weird other things to call it historical. It also seems only very loosely inspired by the real Saga of Ragnar Lodbrok, in fact the entire premise of the plot in the first season is really bizarre. He "discovers" England, and is then regarded as the Viking Columbus by the North? LOL

It is an entertaining show though, don't get me wrong. Well written characters and cool looking settings overall and so on. It's too bad about Jarl Borg. He was a true Northman.

Well Lord of the Rings is supposedly set in prehistoric Europe, so...

I can't explain the use of Renaissance helmets used by the Saxon cavalry, but the lack of armor and especially helms in the viking ranks can be explained by the fact that at the time there weren't that many blacksmiths in Europe. Even the Franks made due with what they had. And I would think the Vikings would choose weapons over armor when given the choice.

As to how Denmark is shown, it says on the Vikings Wiki that Ragnar's home may not necessarily be in Denmark proper, but in a region of Norway which was vassal to Denmark. It would also explain how Horik and Borg had a dispute over a land they shared a border with (supposedly) considering that Borg was in Gotaland (sorry for the spelling)

[Zorral]

Still not exactly what i would call a fantasy. The sagas are admittingly, straddling the line, but theres a lot of historical shit going on there. Yeah. /Shrug Hmph. The names of these guys are embedded in history. Calling it outright fantasy like LotR and shit isnt entirely fair. The show is indeed fiction, but not exactly of the fantasy sort.

lel yeah and it was hilarious.

I don't call it a fantasy either. It belongs to that long-time established category we call historical fiction in publishing and I think television calls period drama, like the Poldark series was for BBC and PBS back in the day. Historical events, fictional characters, mixed with historical personages.

However, I'd still call Reign fantasy, even though there was a real Mary Queen of Scots. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the history of the time at all! :)

Whereas Boardwalk Empire is definitely historical fiction - period drama, most definitely not fantasy.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

I can't explain the use of Renaissance helmets used by the Saxon cavalry, but the lack of armor and especially helms in the viking ranks can be explained by the fact that at the time there weren't that many blacksmiths in Europe. Even the Franks made due with what they had. And I would think the Vikings would choose weapons over armor when given the choice.

As to how Denmark is shown, it says on the Vikings Wiki that Ragnar's home may not necessarily be in Denmark proper, but in a region of Norway which was vassal to Denmark. It would also explain how Horik and Borg had a dispute over a land they shared a border with (supposedly) considering that Borg was in Gotaland (sorry for the spelling)

If you look at rune stones depicting Norse warriors you'll see that they are all always wearing helmets. As for mail it would have been expensive, but since we are mainly following the personal warrior retinues of various Jarls, that is their hirds, and not random farmers, it should still be very common. Going into battle only wearing anachronistic everyday clothes is stupid, and it looks like shit. Also, not enough spears.

That wiki argument doesn't hold up. Ragnar is Jarl of Kattegat in the series, which is a small sea between southwestern Sweden and Denmark, it has nothing to do with Norway. http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fil:Map_Skagerak-Kattegat.PNG

The dispute between Jarl Borg (and his capital of Whiterun from The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim) and King Horik doesn't need to be explained by that either, since southern Sweden at this time was Danish anyway, meaning that there would be a land border with Götaland. Really they just haven't bothered with research. They have taken random names from a map and then designed the places after Rule of Cool, which is why Denmark looks like the Misty Mountains from Middle Earth instead of the pancake land that it is. While it looks good it really makes it impossible to take the series seriously if you know how those places are supposed to look, it'd be like if they had shot the Tudors series in Morocco.

[Aithne]

I don't think Floki intend to betray Ragnar at all. I think it was all a plan to see what Horik was upto, it's why I think some of the Floki-Ragnar scenes in previous episodes were somewhat off/forced.

I so very much agree!

I spent a lot of the series telling myself "NO, Floki would never betray Ragnar" however, I was worried for a while :unsure:

[BormonReborn]

If you look at rune stones depicting Norse warriors you'll see that they are all always wearing helmets. As for mail it would have been expensive, but since we are mainly following the personal warrior retinues of various Jarls, that is their hirds, and not random farmers, it should still be very common. Going into battle only wearing anachronistic everyday clothes is stupid, and it looks like shit. Also, not enough spears.

That wiki argument doesn't hold up. Ragnar is Jarl of Kattegat in the series, which is a small sea between southwestern Sweden and Denmark, it has nothing to do with Norway. http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fil:Map_Skagerak-Kattegat.PNG

The dispute between Jarl Borg (and his capital of Whiterun from The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim) and King Horik doesn't need to be explained by that either, since southern Sweden at this time was Danish anyway, meaning that there would be a land border with Götaland. Really they just haven't bothered with research. They have taken random names from a map and then designed the places after Rule of Cool, which is why Denmark looks like the Misty Mountains from Middle Earth instead of the pancake land that it is. While it looks good it really makes it impossible to take the series seriously if you know how those places are supposed to look, it'd be like if they had shot the Tudors series in Morocco.

Ragnar is not a Jarl, but an Earl. If I am correct, Jarl is like a Swedish prince,,, which would explain why he was at odds with the King.

As for the land.... I am a little disappointed in the History channel. I did some Google earth of the area they are supposed to be in,.... kinda reminds me of New Jersey.

[GallowKnight]

Ragnar is not a Jarl, but an Earl. If I am correct, Jarl is like a Swedish prince,,, which would explain why he was at odds with the King.

As for the land.... I am a little disappointed in the History channel. I did some Google earth of the area they are supposed to be in,.... kinda reminds me of New Jersey.

A Jarl is the exact same thing as an Earl.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Ragnar is not a Jarl, but an Earl. If I am correct, Jarl is like a Swedish prince,,, which would explain why he was at odds with the King.

As for the land.... I am a little disappointed in the History channel. I did some Google earth of the area they are supposed to be in,.... kinda reminds me of New Jersey.

As said above they are the same thing, though if I remember correctly Earl is actually an Anglo Saxon term rather than Norse. Those cultures were pretty similar anyway. Not only in language but also in how the societies worked. The Anglo Saxons also practiced slavery for example, which is at odds with how it is portrayed in the show were Athelstan finds the Norse bizarre for doing so. They had also been Christians for a few centuries, before that they practiced a religion that was essentially the same as the Norse one, only the names of the gods were pronounced differently (Woden instead of Odin, etc).

And yes, they really dropped it with the landscapes, though they are very pretty, (as are most other things they have designed outside of the battles and what they wear in them). Norway does actually look like that, but not Denmark. It's also not grey and cold all the time, the summers are warm and there are great beaches and everything.

[Florina Laufeyson]

Actually, the funniest one was Uppsala in season 1. That. Was. Hilarious.

[Black Wolf Smith]

Earl, and Jarl are close to the same thing. The biggest different is that earlier forms of Jarl, was sometimes used a title for a Prince, in Scandinavia, and early form in the British Isles was a Duke.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl

[Old Man Aegon]

Correct me if Im wrong, but Jarl at Ragnars time was similiar to Earl but if we look at Jarl at the time before and during the life of Birger Jarl, it was more like Hand of the King?

[The Iceman of the North]

Actually, the funniest one was Uppsala in season 1. That. Was. Hilarious.

I'd say that Kattegatt is further from the reality than Uppsala, even if neither are particularly close.

Correct me if Im wrong, but Jarl at Ragnars time was similiar to Earl but if we look at Jarl at the time before and during the life of Birger Jarl, it was more like Hand of the King?

Not sure what you mean by 'the time before' as that's prehistoric times, so we really don't know anything about it. Earl and Jarl is the same word, so no sense in talking out 'similarities'. In Sweden alone, there were a special use of Jarl where members of the royal family would use it, later it was limited to a single person. I'm not familiar enough with the history of these puny people to tell whether the title signified 'designated heir' or 'most trusted councillor'.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

I'd say that Kattegatt is further from the reality than Uppsala, even if neither are particularly close.

Not sure what you mean by 'the time before' as that's prehistoric times, so we really don't know anything about it. Earl and Jarl is the same word, so no sense in talking out 'similarities'. In Sweden alone, there were a special use of Jarl where members of the royal family would use it, later it was limited to a single person. I'm not familiar enough with the history of these puny people to tell whether the title signified 'designated heir' or 'most trusted councillor'.

But now we at least know where Pyat Pree and his friends ended up after the Qarth chapters.

It ended up being more "trusted councillor" towards the later Middle Ages, so somewhat similar to Hand of the King, yeah. But if we are puny, what does that say about our past vassal peoples? ;)