History Channel Gets Vikings Precisely Wrong

[Cincinnatus]

Anyone other than me watch this? A writer at the "American Spectator" says the series is wrong in its depiction of the Norse raiders known as Vikings.

"It’s been more than fifty years since Kirk Douglas and his production company produced what most people still consider the best Viking movie ever made, The Vikings. Within the limits of the information available at the time, they made a good faith effort to do the thing relatively authentically. We’ve learned much in the years since, especially due to advances in archaeology, and many reenactors around the world (of whom I am among the least) work hard to re-create authentic Viking Age life. Dozens of accurate replicas of Viking ships have been built and put to sea, to the wonder and delight of many. The time would seem to be ripe for a depiction of the Viking Age that would surpass Kirk Douglas’s film in portraying of one of the most exciting and colorful eras in human history.
 
The History Channel’s new series, Vikings, is not it."

His reasons:

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/03/12/history-channel-gets-vikings-p

[truth_seeker]

The Vikings were powerful and influential. Some of the philosophical underpinning of the "Magna Carta" (and the previous "Charter of Liberties") certainly would have come from Norse thinking. The Normans were French speaking Vikings, having invaded and taken northern France previously.

William the Conqueror was William of Normandy. In 1066 he took the crown of England. Battle of Hastings.

The Vikings had been present in Britain since at least 793, when they raided Lindesfarne, on the northeast coast of England, near the Scottish border. That year, 792, is taken as the start of the Viking Age.

The eventual result was English Common Law, and the political philosophies, leading to modern British and then American politics.

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

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

The totality of Viking influence and power goes geographically in the opposite direction, east, whereby the Swedes ventured down Russia's big rivers, and actually named the people themselves. The term "Russia" comes from the name "Rus" given to the people by the Swedish Vikings of the time.

[PzLdr]

Ragnar Lothbrok [" Hairy Breeks"] is a semi-legendary Viking, portrayed, in broad terms by Ernest Borgnine in Douglas' movie.   The general story is that he was captured by Aeilla, and thrown into a flooded tower with skates, rays, and God knows what, where he died [Borgnine jumped, once properly armed with his passport to Valhalla, into a wolf pit].

Where it gets interesting is the next part. Supposedly, three of Ragnar's sons swear vengeance, invade Northumbria [and subsequently more of England], and kill Aeilla. One of Ragnar's sons was supposedly Ivar the Boneless-who IS a histoical figure. So maybe, Ragnar's story is true.

Historically, there's no evidence a Viking named Ragnar led the raid on Lindisfarne. Vikings generally wore chain mail when they fought, and their shields were a bit souter. They also used the common infantry formation of the time- the shield wall.

But you gotta love the Vikings! What a great heaven. Fight all day, drink all night 'til Ragnarok. And all the waitresses look like St. Pauli Girls! ODIN!  ^-^ ^-^

[Lipstick on a Hillary]

The totality of Viking influence and power goes geographically in the opposite direction, east, whereby the Swedes ventured down Russia's big rivers, and actually named the people themselves. The term "Russia" comes from the name "Rus" given to the people by the Swedish Vikings of the time.

Was it you who posted a European DNA map once?  That was interesting.

[SouthTexas]

It's gotten to the point where you cannot believe what is presented as "history" any more, even on the History channel.  That said, Vikings as entertainment, is far better than anything else on TV

[truth_seeker]

Was it you who posted a European DNA map once?  That was interesting.

The first article about the "Rus people" ties them genetically to Sweden.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rus%27_people

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

[Lipstick on a Hillary]

As I recall, Scandanavian DNA pops up in northeastern England on that map, although I could be wrong.  Anyway, I remember my first thought was vikings.

[PzLdr]

As I recall, Scandanavian DNA pops up in northeastern England on that map, although I could be wrong.  Anyway, I remember my first thought was vikings.

As I recall, the Swedes went east, the Norwegians went into Ireland and some of the islands [Faroes, etc], and the Danes took England and damn near anything else that wasn't nailed down.