Yeah, they're making it harder to root for Ragnar. They're a bunch of murderer's. but Vikings! Then they're rapists and cheaters and suicidal and while all of that is less than the rampaging murder, it's just the straw that broke the camels back. Still a good show, just the Priest is the only good guy left standing and he'll probably fall sooner or later.
Well, that was weird. Some dudes were speaking Finnish in the background for the latest episode towards the end. I guess it'd be possible, since some people got picked up from the coasts back then, but they probably just put some Nordic background speech. I was more surprised by it having apparently correct meaning for the situation.
I heard that too and wondered. What was more odd about it was that it sounded more modern finnish than what you would have expected for that period. It might have been estonian though, it sounds very similar.
It was Finnish. I'm a native. Then again, the language is one of the older languages in Europe, so depending on the words in question, certain things can be between 100-6000 years old.
I'm pretty sure what they did say was "Nyt se tulee", and "Eikö se tuu?" or "Eikö se tule?". The second phrase was unclear due to the general noise around them. "Now it's coming" and "Isn't it coming?" for meaning.
All of those words are fairly old, however, so an argument could be made that there would not be a significant difference in their usage. I highly doubt that anyone would bother going that far for what's essentially a soundbyte or two. Estonian sounds different, I guess it's the cadence or the way they stress the words.
Native Finn also. I didn't make out the what they were saying as well you did, but it seems like my interpetation of it sounding like the modern finnish was correct. Not that the dialect they decided to go with is anyway as meaningful as the fact that any finnish was spoken at all. While Finland is part of Scandinavia, it's not part of the Norse culture/religion. Though neither is Estonia, for that matter, so that was grasping at straws.
PS. sorry about the time delay. I was avoiding this thread until I had watched the most recent episode.
Cynicism is a great help when trying to be sarcastic.
Well, that was weird. Some dudes were speaking Finnish in the background for the latest episode towards the end. I guess it'd be possible, since some people got picked up from the coasts back then, but they probably just put some Nordic background speech. I was more surprised by it having apparently correct meaning for the situation.
I heard that too and wondered. What was more odd about it was that it sounded more modern finnish than what you would have expected for that period. It might have been estonian though, it sounds very similar.
It was Finnish. I'm a native. Then again, the language is one of the older languages in Europe, so depending on the words in question, certain things can be between 100-6000 years old.
I'm pretty sure what they did say was "Nyt se tulee", and "Eikö se tuu?" or "Eikö se tule?". The second phrase was unclear due to the general noise around them. "Now it's coming" and "Isn't it coming?" for meaning.
All of those words are fairly old, however, so an argument could be made that there would not be a significant difference in their usage. I highly doubt that anyone would bother going that far for what's essentially a soundbyte or two. Estonian sounds different, I guess it's the cadence or the way they stress the words.
Native Finn also. I didn't make out the what they were saying as well you did, but it seems like my interpetation of it sounding like the modern finnish was correct. Not that the dialect they decided to go with is anyway as meaningful as the fact that any finnish was spoken at all. While Finland is part of Scandinavia, it's not part of the Norse culture/religion. Though neither is Estonia, for that matter, so that was grasping at straws.
PS. sorry about the time delay. I was avoiding this thread until I had watched the most recent episode.
Well... If I had to hypothesize, they did previously raid a lot along the various Baltic shores, and at the time this show is set in, large part of the area was populated by the Livonians, Estonians and other Finnic tribes. The norse people also frequently traded on the coasts of Finland, Estonia and Livonia, and picked up extra crew to replace those lost at sea, in battles, or to disease etc. This was more prevalent especially with crews going down the Russian rivers to Constantinople, and various parts of Russia. So I guess there could be some reason for it, but personally I think it's stretching my imagination a bit. They probably just picked some random nordic language bytes to add some background din to the situation.
I mean, the story reason is there, maybe a couple of dudes in crew are from the lands these vikings have previously raided/traded with, and they went for Finnish as the closest approximation of Livonian or whatever. Normally you wouldn't have seen any crewmen from the Baltic countries or Finland (both of which were a small minority to begin with) west of Denmark, as they would've ended up going down the rivers towards Miklagard with the varangians.
As an aside, the varangians/varyags are something that should definitely have more presence in various media. There's all sorts of cool stuff from essentially vikings going through Russia to Constantinople, ending up as mercenaries for the Emperor and reaping massive fame. Kievan Rus is another historical entity that's very interesting, yet it's practically unknown. They had terrible luck though, from various famines, diseases, uppity princes/whathaveyou to finally getting shivved in the back by the Mongols.
Well, that was weird. Some dudes were speaking Finnish in the background for the latest episode towards the end. I guess it'd be possible, since some people got picked up from the coasts back then, but they probably just put some Nordic background speech. I was more surprised by it having apparently correct meaning for the situation.
I heard that too and wondered. What was more odd about it was that it sounded more modern finnish than what you would have expected for that period. It might have been estonian though, it sounds very similar.
It was Finnish. I'm a native. Then again, the language is one of the older languages in Europe, so depending on the words in question, certain things can be between 100-6000 years old.
I'm pretty sure what they did say was "Nyt se tulee", and "Eikö se tuu?" or "Eikö se tule?". The second phrase was unclear due to the general noise around them. "Now it's coming" and "Isn't it coming?" for meaning.
All of those words are fairly old, however, so an argument could be made that there would not be a significant difference in their usage. I highly doubt that anyone would bother going that far for what's essentially a soundbyte or two. Estonian sounds different, I guess it's the cadence or the way they stress the words.
Native Finn also. I didn't make out the what they were saying as well you did, but it seems like my interpetation of it sounding like the modern finnish was correct. Not that the dialect they decided to go with is anyway as meaningful as the fact that any finnish was spoken at all. While Finland is part of Scandinavia, it's not part of the Norse culture/religion. Though neither is Estonia, for that matter, so that was grasping at straws.
PS. sorry about the time delay. I was avoiding this thread until I had watched the most recent episode.
Well... If I had to hypothesize, they did previously raid a lot along the various Baltic shores, and at the time this show is set in, large part of the area was populated by the Livonians, Estonians and other Finnic tribes. The norse people also frequently traded on the coasts of Finland, Estonia and Livonia, and picked up extra crew to replace those lost at sea, in battles, or to disease etc. This was more prevalent especially with crews going down the Russian rivers to Constantinople, and various parts of Russia. So I guess there could be some reason for it, but personally I think it's stretching my imagination a bit. They probably just picked some random nordic language bytes to add some background din to the situation.
I mean, the story reason is there, maybe a couple of dudes in crew are from the lands these vikings have previously raided/traded with, and they went for Finnish as the closest approximation of Livonian or whatever. Normally you wouldn't have seen any crewmen from the Baltic countries or Finland (both of which were a small minority to begin with) west of Denmark, as they would've ended up going down the rivers towards Miklagard with the varangians.
As an aside, the varangians/varyags are something that should definitely have more presence in various media. There's all sorts of cool stuff from essentially vikings going through Russia to Constantinople, ending up as mercenaries for the Emperor and reaping massive fame. Kievan Rus is another historical entity that's very interesting, yet it's practically unknown. They had terrible luck though, from various famines, diseases, uppity princes/whathaveyou to finally getting shivved in the back by the Mongols.
Yup, this series seems to take liberties with geography with the same manner as the vikings did with women in the sacked cities.
Besides that, it's pretty awesome. I await the next episode with pretty much the same enthusiasm as the next Game of Thrones episode.
Cynicism is a great help when trying to be sarcastic.
Well, that was weird. Some dudes were speaking Finnish in the background for the latest episode towards the end. I guess it'd be possible, since some people got picked up from the coasts back then, but they probably just put some Nordic background speech. I was more surprised by it having apparently correct meaning for the situation.
I heard that too and wondered. What was more odd about it was that it sounded more modern finnish than what you would have expected for that period. It might have been estonian though, it sounds very similar.
It was Finnish. I'm a native. Then again, the language is one of the older languages in Europe, so depending on the words in question, certain things can be between 100-6000 years old.
I'm pretty sure what they did say was "Nyt se tulee", and "Eikö se tuu?" or "Eikö se tule?". The second phrase was unclear due to the general noise around them. "Now it's coming" and "Isn't it coming?" for meaning.
All of those words are fairly old, however, so an argument could be made that there would not be a significant difference in their usage. I highly doubt that anyone would bother going that far for what's essentially a soundbyte or two. Estonian sounds different, I guess it's the cadence or the way they stress the words.
Native Finn also. I didn't make out the what they were saying as well you did, but it seems like my interpetation of it sounding like the modern finnish was correct. Not that the dialect they decided to go with is anyway as meaningful as the fact that any finnish was spoken at all. While Finland is part of Scandinavia, it's not part of the Norse culture/religion. Though neither is Estonia, for that matter, so that was grasping at straws.
PS. sorry about the time delay. I was avoiding this thread until I had watched the most recent episode.
Well... If I had to hypothesize, they did previously raid a lot along the various Baltic shores, and at the time this show is set in, large part of the area was populated by the Livonians, Estonians and other Finnic tribes. The norse people also frequently traded on the coasts of Finland, Estonia and Livonia, and picked up extra crew to replace those lost at sea, in battles, or to disease etc. This was more prevalent especially with crews going down the Russian rivers to Constantinople, and various parts of Russia. So I guess there could be some reason for it, but personally I think it's stretching my imagination a bit. They probably just picked some random nordic language bytes to add some background din to the situation.
I mean, the story reason is there, maybe a couple of dudes in crew are from the lands these vikings have previously raided/traded with, and they went for Finnish as the closest approximation of Livonian or whatever. Normally you wouldn't have seen any crewmen from the Baltic countries or Finland (both of which were a small minority to begin with) west of Denmark, as they would've ended up going down the rivers towards Miklagard with the varangians.
As an aside, the varangians/varyags are something that should definitely have more presence in various media. There's all sorts of cool stuff from essentially vikings going through Russia to Constantinople, ending up as mercenaries for the Emperor and reaping massive fame. Kievan Rus is another historical entity that's very interesting, yet it's practically unknown. They had terrible luck though, from various famines, diseases, uppity princes/whathaveyou to finally getting shivved in the back by the Mongols.
Yup, this series seems to take liberties with geography with the same manner as the vikings did with women in the sacked cities.
Besides that, it's pretty awesome. I await the next episode with pretty much the same enthusiasm as the next Game of Thrones episode.
Gotta love that short hike to Uppsala, that doesn't correspond even remotely with the real world equivalent in geography or population. Methinks they're mostly just namedropping at this point, as far as locations go.
So instead of going through episode to episode trying to find something I hadn't pointed out, I decided to focus on one thing:
Funeral rites and religion.
This applies most to the most recent episode of this time of writing Episode 8: Sacrifice. And Episode 6: Burial of the dead. I shall first look at episode 6.
Burial of the dead:
First things, first. The pale lady, the sacrifical slave and the sexing of the sacrifice, is all based around Ibn Fadlan's account. Of course, Vikings version (even with the sex and the straight of throat slit) is much more viewer friendly then the account given by Ibn Fadlan. One thing that wasn't shown was the part of the woman being lifted above the doorframe, thus peering into world beyond. This act has been refrenced in other historical works so it could be argued for being a common thing. Logic being that the normal way for mortals to enter was through the doorframe, looking above it was to peer into the world of gods of myths.
The thing that most stands against common evidence is the burial at sea. Being a great jarl and possesing some wealth, it is very unlikely that he would be buried at sea. Rather he would have been burned on the ship on land, then buried with earth creating a burial mound. The ship itself could be made by either wood or stone. Burial mounds are often found throughout scandinavia, but as time wears on more and more burial mounds are ruined either by farmland equipment or new settlement. This has been a problem ever since people forgot where the burial mounds were, but still from time to time are found. The most famous viking ship Oseberg shp was found in such a mound.
Still, noone can be 100 % sure. As most history, this is a work of interpreting and reinterpreting whatever evidence can be found. As one historian told my class: "Without interpretion, we would be stuck without jobs!" So nothing is set in stone.
Yeah, I've already posted why the geography is frustrating at best. (How can a danish person (Ragnar Lothbrok was danish) live in such high mountains?!) The highest point in danmark is 171 m, not the heights shown).
But this is tv and history channel, they are as the thread title stated before: Valuing drama before history.
A little embellishment is alright for artistic and dramatic purposes, in my opinion. Fjords certainly make for a better backdrop than the utterly boring southern swedish or danish landscapes.
Also, I'd be wary of taking Ibn Fadlan's account without a heaping tablespoon of salt. Most explorers tended to embellish things, and exaggerate attributes they found barbaric, so while the general descriptions might be accurate, the overall views presented should not be taken as gospel.
Yeah, they're making it harder to root for Ragnar. They're a bunch of murderer's. but Vikings! Then they're rapists and cheaters and suicidal and while all of that is less than the rampaging murder, it's just the straw that broke the camels back. Still a good show, just the Priest is the only good guy left standing and he'll probably fall sooner or later.
I'm still rooting for Ragnar as an individual, but he's standing in as a representative of a culture with values that are becoming increasingly alien. It was super easy to root for him when he was an iconoclast within that culture; I was all for the upstart who wanted to embrace knowledge to find wealth and glory within a community where the Jarl perverted the system of justice to convict someone of homicide so he could steal the convict's land. Now he's some other petty warlord's errand boy in an effort to resolve a similar land dispute. I'm all about stories where the hero survives long enough to become the villain, I just like them better when they star Batman.
It's to the point now were I don't care if Rollo fucks over Ragnar. They're all a bunch of assholes, let them kill each other. Ragnar's wife gets screwed over and the Priest, but nothing to be done about it.
It be kind of awesome if it was the opposite. Rollo would be like "Ragnar does all the work, I get to bust heads and get women, works for me!" and was all loyal. Then he assassinates all these people trying to turn him against Ragnar. If either of them were decent guys, anyway. It's kind of moot as is.
It be kind of awesome if it was the opposite. Rollo would be like "Ragnar does all the work, I get to bust heads and get women, works for me!" and was all loyal. Then he assassinates all these people trying to turn him against Ragnar. If either of them were decent guys, anyway. It's kind of moot as is.
Rollo's loyalty has definately been one of the biggest advantages Ragnar has and until this episode Rollo has seemed very content with his role in life. Not sure would it make me more dissappointed if it turns out that Rollo agreeing to betray Ragnar is just something they planned he would do. It'd be pretty cheap as a cliffhanger, but I rather like the relationship between the brothers as it is. The world of Vikings has so many more interesting challenges for Ragnar, than just to have the whole thing turn to a feud between those two.
Cynicism is a great help when trying to be sarcastic.
Boggle. Rollo has been a jealous asshat since episode 1. Where did you get the idea he was the opposite? He didn't outright betray Ragnar, but not because he was loyal. He just didn't see profit in it.
I'll grant that Rollo hasn't been the perfect "yes-man" and sometimes he would have liked to get a little more attention or recognision than Ragnar has given him. And yes, he's been shown on different occasions in situations where we usually see plots going towards betrayal, but so far the only move he has made against Ragnar was at the end of this episode.
Plus the whole demeanor of Ragnar in this episode was totally different than before. He wasn't the noble conquering warrior but rather the little weasel you find behind the trash pile. Even his posture was that hunched one of Floki's when he was negotiating. Unless this was just serious overacting in the part of the actor, I believe he was really trying to make it look like his brother is the real viking warrior and he's just the brains.
Cynicism is a great help when trying to be sarcastic.
Eh, Rollo is a bastard, he was just bidding his time. But Ragnar is a fuck up too, so it's too bad Rollo is doomed to fail right off. Ragnar may have been just trying to not get himself killed out of hand, he wouldn't make it out if the Earl decided to kill him.
And the show is pulling an AMC and taking a year off? It's dead. That's so stupid. It'll come back, the ratings will be crap in the first 2 episodes, they'll kill it.
The first season is over and the wait between most shows is about one year between seasons no?
Anyway, this season was hit and miss for me. It really needed more of a central plot for the season. At first it seemed like it was the "sailing to the west and opposing the Jarl" but then it happened and the show kind of just meandered onwards and got stuck showcasing cultural happenings instead of really progressing a cool story or narrative for the characters
The visuals are there and the cast is amazing though so I'm still looking forward to S2
On stupid Cable shows it's like 8 months to a year, yeah. Network TV is more like 4 months. Edit: Whoops, was looking at Canada numbers. It just lost halfish from the opener, which is kinda normal, but a huge break isn't going to help.
On stupid Cable shows it's like 8 months to a year, yeah. Network TV is more like 4 months. Vikings wasn't breaking a million viewers, much less whatever the demo was. A huge break isn't going to help.
I dunno about the whole season but the premiere apparently had 6 million viewers.
According to Nielsen, the unveiling of “Vikings” Sunday at 10 p.m. averaged around 6 million viewers, and topped all broadcast networks among 18-to-49 year olds who are the currency of most commercial TV.
Yeah, premiere's always open super big and season openers open big. Numbers drop off during the season. As I edited in (was looking at the wrong numbers) it ended up at about half that. And I just don't like waiting. :P
My wife and I recorded the entire season of this, since we were vacationing a lot when it was airing. We just finished watching the finale the other night, and I stumbled upon the thread.
Um. This show is awesome. I really hope they renew it and we get three or four seasons out of it so they can develop some stuff. With the exception of Rolo (Ragnar's brother, not sure on the spelling), I really like all the characters. The writing and acting is quite solid. Hell, I even grew to like Siggy, and I hated that actress.
The Vikings premier and the following three or four episodes had the benefit of following The Bible miniseries. While it's good to have that boost, I hope reasonable numbers can be maintained for at least a few more lengthy seasons.
The Ragnar vs Rollo issue could be one that not only helps the narrative (drama and all that), but would very likely be an situation in the viking culture. Rollo knowing that even if Ragnar is great, is still jealous. Rollo will never be the name kings and jarls are spoken about. Rollo is still infatuated by Lagertha, he gets all the credit even when Rollo is honestly the more sane one.
There are numerous sagas of brothers turning against eachother for power, greed and love.
Spoiler for latest episode
The fact that Ragnar has "betrayed" Lagertha with Thora so that he can have more children was a well forshadowed one, and makes sense. Prophecies always are foreshadowing in ficton today, so my guess is that Rollo will get Lagertha with child in the next season. Thus sparking another rift between them.
In fact, knowing what I do of viking culture and logic: The actions of the characters do in fact make a whole lot of sense. I don't even feel quite like this is an alien culture as it's still firmly connected to what humans and their internal struggles. Some might want some more action, but as all tv viewers know: Action costs money, drama costs less.
Oh, sure they make sense if you're a murdering asshole. Which Vikings probably all were. It was the thing to be. It just kind of got old halfway through, so I hope they get back to the murdering to cover up the assholing. But as you said, action costs, so we'll see.
The norse were mostly farmers/hunters/fishermen/craftsmen/traders. Vikings, or the raiders were really not a majority. A lot of people went on a viking once or twice, with some people making a career out of it, but it was never the central pillar of the culture unless you include every overseas expedition to it(exploration, trading, etc.).
The Ragnar vs Rollo issue could be one that not only helps the narrative (drama and all that), but would very likely be an situation in the viking culture. Rollo knowing that even if Ragnar is great, is still jealous. Rollo will never be the name kings and jarls are spoken about. Rollo is still infatuated by Lagertha, he gets all the credit even when Rollo is honestly the more sane one.
There are numerous sagas of brothers turning against eachother for power, greed and love.
Spoiler for latest episode
The fact that Ragnar has "betrayed" Lagertha with Thora so that he can have more children was a well forshadowed one, and makes sense. Prophecies always are foreshadowing in ficton today, so my guess is that Rollo will get Lagertha with child in the next season. Thus sparking another rift between them.
In fact, knowing what I do of viking culture and logic: The actions of the characters do in fact make a whole lot of sense. I don't even feel quite like this is an alien culture as it's still firmly connected to what humans and their internal struggles. Some might want some more action, but as all tv viewers know: Action costs money, drama costs less.
One of the main reasons I wish Rollo is not going to betray Ragnar after all is the fact that it's so much a cliche in practically every TV show there is. Sure you can have partnership in TV shows where the sidekick stays loyal, but if they are brothers it becomes pretty much an obligation to have the less successful brother betray the more successful brother.
Cynicism is a great help when trying to be sarcastic.
I'm amazed no one has commented on this yet. I just watched the season 2 premiere, I thought it was pretty fantastic. I kind of wish I would have either rewatched season 1 first, or at least read a synopsis to remind myself what happened and where things left off though.
I might have to fire up a new game of CK2 and play one of Ragnar's sons to commemorate the show coming back on.
Just caught the episode and god am I glad this show is back on. I think it's the best looking show on TV, with possibly one of my favorite opening credit sequences.
Eh, Ragnar is an idiot (Rolo) and an asshole (wife). This leaves no one to root for, even leaving aside all the normal viking stuff you have to ignore to start with. Maybe his wife will come back and start killing people soon as Ms. Princess has the kid. That be awesome.
Vikings is a rad show for sure. Enjoyed the whole of season 1 and the premier of this season immensely.
Except for one thing: Ragnar's son. Difficult to tell of it's just the acting or the character itself, but I find him very distracting and just too unnatural when he is on screen. I really wish they had recast him for the new season as his abilities haven't improved in the least. Or maybe my eye for talented acting is broken? I know child acting is very hit or miss, but when an otherwise perfect cast has this one glaring problem, I really wish they would have at least attempted to try someone new.
Finished up season one last night, haven't started two yet.
Not sure how eager I am. Tension to move plots is required, but I prefer when the tension is the natural result of character flaws that have been well documented, not character flaws that are mostly created entirely in the last two episodes.
I don't really mind it when a character is consistently a shithead from start to finish. Floki is a great example, he's been the spaz that he is from day 1. I feel like toward the last 2-3 episodes of season 1, though, they turned up the "Dickhead" control on several characters way higher than it'd ever been before.
Eh, Vikings just off whoever whenever for fun and games (and treasure!). Last episode is a good example. Giving the numbers involved it was a horribly stupid thing to do, but even assuming that was TV restraints and that they'll gloss over the losses it took and instead they could have rolled right over everyone what's the real gain there? Not much. So they're dickheads and stupid. But that's what makes them Vikings in the first place, so what can you do!
Vikings is a rad show for sure. Enjoyed the whole of season 1 and the premier of this season immensely.
Except for one thing: Ragnar's son. Difficult to tell of it's just the acting or the character itself, but I find him very distracting and just too unnatural when he is on screen. I really wish they had recast him for the new season as his abilities haven't improved in the least. Or maybe my eye for talented acting is broken? I know child acting is very hit or miss, but when an otherwise perfect cast has this one glaring problem, I really wish they would have at least attempted to try someone new.
Anyhow, go Team Shield Maiden!
So, about my bolded part there.
Thank jeebus they advanced the story for a new actor. I'm convinced he is better. Not great or anything but tolerable.
Posts
I'm pretty sure at least those two were represented.
Native Finn also. I didn't make out the what they were saying as well you did, but it seems like my interpetation of it sounding like the modern finnish was correct. Not that the dialect they decided to go with is anyway as meaningful as the fact that any finnish was spoken at all. While Finland is part of Scandinavia, it's not part of the Norse culture/religion. Though neither is Estonia, for that matter, so that was grasping at straws.
PS. sorry about the time delay. I was avoiding this thread until I had watched the most recent episode.
Well... If I had to hypothesize, they did previously raid a lot along the various Baltic shores, and at the time this show is set in, large part of the area was populated by the Livonians, Estonians and other Finnic tribes. The norse people also frequently traded on the coasts of Finland, Estonia and Livonia, and picked up extra crew to replace those lost at sea, in battles, or to disease etc. This was more prevalent especially with crews going down the Russian rivers to Constantinople, and various parts of Russia. So I guess there could be some reason for it, but personally I think it's stretching my imagination a bit. They probably just picked some random nordic language bytes to add some background din to the situation.
I mean, the story reason is there, maybe a couple of dudes in crew are from the lands these vikings have previously raided/traded with, and they went for Finnish as the closest approximation of Livonian or whatever. Normally you wouldn't have seen any crewmen from the Baltic countries or Finland (both of which were a small minority to begin with) west of Denmark, as they would've ended up going down the rivers towards Miklagard with the varangians.
As an aside, the varangians/varyags are something that should definitely have more presence in various media. There's all sorts of cool stuff from essentially vikings going through Russia to Constantinople, ending up as mercenaries for the Emperor and reaping massive fame. Kievan Rus is another historical entity that's very interesting, yet it's practically unknown. They had terrible luck though, from various famines, diseases, uppity princes/whathaveyou to finally getting shivved in the back by the Mongols.
Yup, this series seems to take liberties with geography with the same manner as the vikings did with women in the sacked cities.
Besides that, it's pretty awesome. I await the next episode with pretty much the same enthusiasm as the next Game of Thrones episode.
Gotta love that short hike to Uppsala, that doesn't correspond even remotely with the real world equivalent in geography or population. Methinks they're mostly just namedropping at this point, as far as locations go.
Funeral rites and religion.
This applies most to the most recent episode of this time of writing Episode 8: Sacrifice. And Episode 6: Burial of the dead. I shall first look at episode 6.
Burial of the dead:
The thing that most stands against common evidence is the burial at sea. Being a great jarl and possesing some wealth, it is very unlikely that he would be buried at sea. Rather he would have been burned on the ship on land, then buried with earth creating a burial mound. The ship itself could be made by either wood or stone. Burial mounds are often found throughout scandinavia, but as time wears on more and more burial mounds are ruined either by farmland equipment or new settlement. This has been a problem ever since people forgot where the burial mounds were, but still from time to time are found. The most famous viking ship Oseberg shp was found in such a mound.
And yes, drinking horns were common in useage. This is due to rams and sheeps being easier to herd then farming. Most are ruined due to time/useage but some are still found in mounds
Sacrifice:
The 9 aspect is a common mythology construct (with 3, 7 and 21 as other common in stories and myths). The suspected reason for the 9 is shown in the poem Havamal, in the words of king vikar:
I know that I hung on the windy beam
for night of nine, gored by the spear and given to Odin, myself to myself, upon that beam which no one knows where the roots of it run.
Havamal, st.138
Still, noone can be 100 % sure. As most history, this is a work of interpreting and reinterpreting whatever evidence can be found. As one historian told my class: "Without interpretion, we would be stuck without jobs!" So nothing is set in stone.
Yeah, I've already posted why the geography is frustrating at best. (How can a danish person (Ragnar Lothbrok was danish) live in such high mountains?!) The highest point in danmark is 171 m, not the heights shown).
But this is tv and history channel, they are as the thread title stated before: Valuing drama before history.
Also, I'd be wary of taking Ibn Fadlan's account without a heaping tablespoon of salt. Most explorers tended to embellish things, and exaggerate attributes they found barbaric, so while the general descriptions might be accurate, the overall views presented should not be taken as gospel.
I'm still rooting for Ragnar as an individual, but he's standing in as a representative of a culture with values that are becoming increasingly alien. It was super easy to root for him when he was an iconoclast within that culture; I was all for the upstart who wanted to embrace knowledge to find wealth and glory within a community where the Jarl perverted the system of justice to convict someone of homicide so he could steal the convict's land. Now he's some other petty warlord's errand boy in an effort to resolve a similar land dispute. I'm all about stories where the hero survives long enough to become the villain, I just like them better when they star Batman.
Why does every single person he meets immediately try to turn him against his brother
Edit: I want this series to get back to raiding Europe, it's much more entertaining than when it tries to be Rome and cover Viking squabbles
Rollo's loyalty has definately been one of the biggest advantages Ragnar has and until this episode Rollo has seemed very content with his role in life. Not sure would it make me more dissappointed if it turns out that Rollo agreeing to betray Ragnar is just something they planned he would do. It'd be pretty cheap as a cliffhanger, but I rather like the relationship between the brothers as it is. The world of Vikings has so many more interesting challenges for Ragnar, than just to have the whole thing turn to a feud between those two.
Plus the whole demeanor of Ragnar in this episode was totally different than before. He wasn't the noble conquering warrior but rather the little weasel you find behind the trash pile. Even his posture was that hunched one of Floki's when he was negotiating. Unless this was just serious overacting in the part of the actor, I believe he was really trying to make it look like his brother is the real viking warrior and he's just the brains.
And the show is pulling an AMC and taking a year off? It's dead. That's so stupid. It'll come back, the ratings will be crap in the first 2 episodes, they'll kill it.
Anyway, this season was hit and miss for me. It really needed more of a central plot for the season. At first it seemed like it was the "sailing to the west and opposing the Jarl" but then it happened and the show kind of just meandered onwards and got stuck showcasing cultural happenings instead of really progressing a cool story or narrative for the characters
The visuals are there and the cast is amazing though so I'm still looking forward to S2
Um. This show is awesome. I really hope they renew it and we get three or four seasons out of it so they can develop some stuff. With the exception of Rolo (Ragnar's brother, not sure on the spelling), I really like all the characters. The writing and acting is quite solid. Hell, I even grew to like Siggy, and I hated that actress.
There are numerous sagas of brothers turning against eachother for power, greed and love.
Spoiler for latest episode
In fact, knowing what I do of viking culture and logic: The actions of the characters do in fact make a whole lot of sense. I don't even feel quite like this is an alien culture as it's still firmly connected to what humans and their internal struggles. Some might want some more action, but as all tv viewers know: Action costs money, drama costs less.
One of the main reasons I wish Rollo is not going to betray Ragnar after all is the fact that it's so much a cliche in practically every TV show there is. Sure you can have partnership in TV shows where the sidekick stays loyal, but if they are brothers it becomes pretty much an obligation to have the less successful brother betray the more successful brother.
I might have to fire up a new game of CK2 and play one of Ragnar's sons to commemorate the show coming back on.
3DS: 0963-0539-4405
Except for one thing: Ragnar's son. Difficult to tell of it's just the acting or the character itself, but I find him very distracting and just too unnatural when he is on screen. I really wish they had recast him for the new season as his abilities haven't improved in the least. Or maybe my eye for talented acting is broken? I know child acting is very hit or miss, but when an otherwise perfect cast has this one glaring problem, I really wish they would have at least attempted to try someone new.
Anyhow, go Team Shield Maiden!
Not sure how eager I am. Tension to move plots is required, but I prefer when the tension is the natural result of character flaws that have been well documented, not character flaws that are mostly created entirely in the last two episodes.
It's great.
Especially Floki.
So, about my bolded part there.
Hahahahahahahahah
ahahahaha.