Thyra Dane

Author of Romance. Blogs about Scandinavia, Vikings and books.

Several people have asked me about what I think of the new series The Vikings (History channel). I`ve only seen two episodes but I will tell you my opinionΒ  if you`ll me yours πŸ˜‰


History channel series Vikings. Ragnar Logbrog

History channel series Vikings. Ragnar Logbrog

First what I like about the series:

  • The shieldmaiden. I truly loved her and I loved how we were told that she`d saved her husband`s life and fought side-by-side with him. I also loved how she was able to protect her family and I do like the actress portraying her.
  • The actor portraying Ragnar Lodbrog is pretty cool too. Okay, he`s hot and I may have to try and talk my husband into getting a hair cut (and some hair extensions) to copy that amazing braid.
  • The fact that they made a series about Vikings at all. My eyes can never be tired of looking at Viking clothes, houses, ships, weapons etc etc.

What I don`t like about the series:

  • They are pretending this is a portrayal of historical facts and it isn`t. They are telling us the story about Ragnar Lodbrog (a figure from the myths but one they are fairly sure has lived even if they aren`t sure about the details – he was claimed to have taken Paris, for instance) – who was Danish and yet they let him live in a country with high mountains and deep fjords. Most of us would think Norway (though it`s filmed in Ireland) and not flat-as-a-pancake Denmark when we see the topography sorrounding Ragnar`s home. The story of Ragnar would have been SO much better if they`d made him just any old Viking Ragnar and not Ragnar Lodbrog, the (probably) historical figure.
  • What is with Gabriel Byrne as a Viking earl? It rubs me the wrong way. Probably because he doesn`t look Norse at all and the accent is horrible. Was he the only famous actor they could find? I also missed more Nordic actors.
  • Which brings me to the next point: What is it with the silly accents? They are speaking freaking English – not Norse. They won`t seem any more Norse just because the English is broken. They just seem stupid. Especially since the accents are different from scene to scene. Even the names are pronounced differently from scene to scene.
  • The portrayal of the Vikings – Rollo especially. They are dirty, blood thirsty, raping killers with no sense at all when really the Vikings had a weekly washday (Saturday) and there was a death sentence for rape.
  • The use of all “knowledge” about Vikings in one great mixture. The scene in episode two where all the Vikings washed and blew their noses in the same water was so silly. This is a description used by Ibn Fadlan about the “Vikings” living in Russia/Belorus – not about the Vikings in the Nordic countries. Since this is one of the few descriptions about a people that may or may not have been similar to the Vikings, it was long considered a “fact” that Vikings washed themselves like that. But we don`t know that they did this and it seems silly to have it as a part of this series unless it was the people behind the series trying to tell us that “yes, we have read about the Vikings – truly we have.” I would have been more happy if they`d used their imagination instead.
  • And even if they try to add all the “knowledge” we have about the Vikings, they still mess up. Like making Rollo use an ax when axes were probably mainly used by poor warriors who couldn`t afford a sword. Or making Floke make a boat just my snapping his fingers. Or mixing up 300 years of Viking age – imagine if we mixed up something from 1713 in how we portrayed the present.
  • The Vikings and the Christian monks. Arrrgh, that meeting was annoying. Yes, I realize that the writers of this series probably grew up in a Christian country but do they have to be so obvious about how nice and sweet and gentle and brainy the monks were and how blood thirsty and cruel the Vikings were just because they “get” the Christians better than the Vikings? The cruelest of the Vikings – Rollo – (we just saw him rape a girl, we know he`s baaaad) was the one who destroyed the cross with Jesus on it. Oh, the shock. Really, the Vikings were curious about this new religion and they accepted Christians into their countries. They stole from the monks, of course, but the hatred against their religion portrayed in this series has no basis in what we know about the Vikings. At least not until the Christians tried to forcefully baptize the Vikings.
  • “There is no land to the West”. This is repeated on and on in the series and is really silly since the Vikings traded with the people on the other side of the North Sea way before they started raiding them. They knew they were there, they (probably) just didn`t raid them until the late 8th century (Lindisfarne being the first known raid in the west).
  • The general red thread in the series (well, the first two episodes, at least) about the Vikings being so strange and brutal and weird. I`d hoped for a series about the life of the Vikings that went behind the myths and prejudice – not one that added to them.
  • I have to watch the series on a crappy online channel provided by HBONordic. They aren`t showing it on any television channels here in Scandinavia but an online channel will never be as good as the real thing – especially not the sorry excuse for an online channel HBONordic are forcing us to pay for.

My verdict

The series has a kick-ass shieldmaiden. I`m sold and I`ll keep watching no matter how crappy it turns out if she stays alive and fighting.

(Yes, I`m cheap :-D)

What do you think of the series?

66 thoughts on “What do you think of Vikings – the History Channel series?

  1. treewitch703 says:

    Long on visuals short on plot.
    I kept on saying to my self – what about the settlements in Scotland, and Ireland, and Iceland…..and why are they so dirty. Why was that girl learning weaving when she was old enough to be betrothed? Ack. I thought a Thing was held outside in a natural amphitheater – or was that Iceland?
    Ticking ME off.
    Do love your Sheildmaiden.

    1. thyra10 says:

      I love the visuals and I don`t mind the lack of plot but I am annoyed with all the details. Oh yes, the girl learning basic weaving. What IS that? She would have learned it years ago.
      Things were held various places but often in open spaces of some kind. They needed the space for their “kapleik” – their sports/competitions.
      Yes, the shieldmaiden is great and I hope they keep her that way. From cuts it seems as if she is going into battle later on and I`m looking forward to that (though I hope it doesn`t mean the kids have been killed or harmed in some way).

    2. Tretopper says:

      Basically, its fantasy bullschitte. The vikings lost bigtime at the battle of stamford bridge. The end.

      1. Thyra Dane says:

        True, but they did win a few battles before that πŸ™‚

  2. isismama says:

    Loved the shieldmaiden. I enjoyed the visuals, especially Ragnar’s mismatched eyes. Beautiful. However…so much of what we know about Viking culture is speculation. Most of what we’ve read about them was written by others such as Christian monks. At least that’s what I’ve seen on History Channel etc., which is where I’ve gained my non-existant Viking knowledge.
    So basically what I’m saying is that while I enjoyed watching the first two episodes(online), I can’t honestly say whether it was historically accurate, but parts of it just seemed ‘off’ to me.
    It didn’t seem necessary for Rollo to rape that poor girl unless they were trying to say rape was commonplace, which I don’t think it was. If they were just attempting to make us not like him because he’s a rapist, well there are rapists in every society and they are all dispicable. He could easily have been made into a villain without the rape scene. Was it for shock value?
    Didn’t care for the actor who played the earl, nor the character of the earl.
    Enjoyed Floke for entertainment value and watching ASkars brother, Gustav, work. They look nothing alike, though.
    Of course, I couldn’t help but compare Ragnar with our very own Viking and I must say…it’s a really close call. Ragnar is every bit as sexy as Eric, to me anyway.

    1. thyra10 says:

      Yes, that rape scene really had me wondering too. Were they trying to show how Vikings treated their slaves or was it just Rollo they wanted us to know was bad? I`m also afraid the whole scene was for shock value only πŸ™

      When I reread the SVM books I think I`ll try to picture Ragnar as Eric. It does fit, somehow πŸ™‚

    2. Dana Nash says:

      Yes, I keep thinking about “Eric” True Blood, ASkars. Nope nothing alike. The lead actor playing Ragnar, looks more like a Scarsgaard.
      Wish it had more history…..having come from Norse background, all I ever heard was how clean they were???

      1. thyra10 says:

        Hehe, no you have to look really close to see any family resemblance.
        Yes, they were cleanly and it`s a shame this series portrays the myths and not the truth in this.

  3. FBLayla11 says:

    Thanks for posting your thoughts. I was very curious to read how you felt about it

    I also love the shieldmaiden. She rocks. So far, I love the series and I agree with you about perpetuating the myth of the brutal ignorant Viking.

    Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts!

    1. thyra10 says:

      Oh, the shieldmaiden definitely rocks. I`m sort-of writing a book about a shieldmaiden and I`ve had problems visualizing her. That is definitely not a problem anymore πŸ™‚

  4. Alison Griffiths says:

    I haven’t seen the show but I couldn’t agree more with what you say about using what little knowledge they have and trying to throw it all in together. I think it’s exactly what you say, the writers wanting to prove they did some research, who cares about whether its actually about Danish Vikings huh? Well, you do for one! I hate when anyone does a period drama about ‘olde England’ and tries for all the stupid dialogue, thee’s etc, no one really knows for sure how people spoke back then, so why try and make a bad copy. Talk normally and avoid the too modern buzzwords (most of which are not as modern as we might think!)

    1. thyra10 says:

      Yes, it`s not as if we have any tapes from the 13th century so we can hear how people spoke. We only have some written material but people usually don`t speak the way they write – and that was probably even more so in “olde England”. So yes, I agree with you – avoid the modern words and focus more on making the characters *act* the time than *speak* it.

  5. Alison Griffiths says:

    And while I’m on the subject, Christianity has been the excuse for some of the larger atrocities and conflicts in the world, our way or the highway. The Vikings were explorers, hell they even traded heavily in Constantinople, I think other cultures and religions would have interested them. After all they were a very spiritual people themselves!

    1. thyra10 says:

      We don`t know much about the Vikings but there is nothing to support the idea of them hating Christianity. If anything, they thought it cowardly and weak (they called Jesus “white-Christ” and white was the color of slaves and cowards) but it seems they accepted Christians (and Muslims, for that matter) into their society.

  6. fffbone says:

    LOL, like how we all want to know what your thoughts are Thyra.

    I’m agreeing with what you wrote Thyra.

    When I first heard about this, I was great! It’s better than what’s on the history channel now. Some of The shows I can do without, plus I’m so tired of hearing about mummy’s etc.

    Anyway, first thing was why were they dirty? The impression I got was they couldn’t do or say what they wanted. I’m not sure if that’s how it was. What’s with the eye make up?
    And the rape of the girl, Rollo already gives the impression of not a nice guy. Didn’t he come on to Lagertha?
    It also doesn’t seem like Rollo and Ragnar are on equal footing after the 2nd. Episode. The Priest lived.
    I don’t like the chief and his wife.

    The actress who plays Lagertha, Katheryn Winnick Is an actual black belt at 13 and By age 21, she had started three martial arts schools. According to Wikipedia
    I was able to see the next episode. The History web site had it posted already. But it was very choppy on my laptop. I don’t want to spoil it for you.

    1. thyra10 says:

      Oh, I envy you for having seen the next episode even in a choppy version.

      Yes, what was with all the dirt, the eye make up and the rape?

      Wow, Katheryn Winnick sounds as cool and kick-ass as the character she is playing. I love that they didn`t just pick a pretty face but someone who could actually fight.

  7. Sadly, I haven’t seen this yet, and it’ll be a while before it comes to Australia. But I’m looking forward to it.

    I agree with you that it’s unfair to take what Ibn Fadlan about the Rus and the Varangians and apply that to the Vikings themselves. They were separated by a lot of distance and a lot of time. I mean, 300 years or so, and thousands of miles doesn’t mean that the descendants of the Vikings were actually a good representative of what they were like. Not to mention that Ibn Fadlan wasn’t put down on Earth as an impartial observer anyway. It’d be like taking the Romans at their word on what the Celts did. It’s a bit of an amateurish reading of history. Mr. Minty would give me such a lecture if I did that.

    I’m still looking forward to it, though. πŸ˜€

    1. thyra10 says:

      Actually we do take the Romans descriptions of the Celts as the truth. I read a book a while back called “The Barbarians” where they ran through all the inventions and ideas we credit the Romans with – because the Romans credited themselves with them – and really, they all came from one or other tribe of “barbarians”. They were more “evolved” than the Romans give them credit for but we still buy into the idea of the Romans as a refined culture and the people surrounding them as dirty brutes.

      That washing scene in episode two was completely without point – apart from telling us that the writers behind the series had read Ibn Fadlan. Including that scene made me understand that the people behind the series are not historians and I adjusted my expectations accordingly.

      It`s still a pretty series with a handsome hero (he would have made a marvelous Eric) and a shieldmaiden straight out of my dreams. I hope you manage to see it soon!

      1. Well, I suppose we do. I just know I’d get roused on for it. And I don’t think that we should assume anyone without bias. Soon I’ll be ranting about the Inquisition being demonised, per Mr. Minty. I should be more careful. πŸ˜€

        I think that’s the first thing that anyone reads about when they look for sources on Vikings. Pity Ibn Fadlan isn’t compared to Ibn Rustah, and consider that *both* guys are Muslim, and have strict views on what is considered “unclean”.

        I don’t even know which channel it’ll be on. Could be on History, could be changed to be on another. *Sigh* I can’t find out. But I’ll watch for ads. At the moment it’s a whole bunch of Australiana being released.

  8. thyra10 says:

    All our historical sources are biased. Biased by the sender (if it is a conscious sender and not, for instance, a pile of bones) and biased by the finder/interpreter of those historical sources. I had an old history teacher in high school who said that he loved history because it never changed. What he`d learned when he was young was the same as today. And that may be true on some basic facts like when a king was born and died. But it certainly isn`t true for most of what we know about history. New sources and new interpretations pop up all the time – which is great!

    One of the major sources to ancient Danish history is Saxo Gramaticus – a historian who lived from aprox. 1160 – 1220. He wrote about the old kings and gives a great interpretation of Danish history seen from the 12th century. But when he writes about things happening in the 7th century – it`s 500 years old and he didn`t have that many sources. He was also biased by the fact that he was Christian and that he was trying to make his king look good (his king descended from some of the finest Viking kings, of course).

    Same goes with the Islandic sagas. They give us a lot of information but we need to remember that they were written centuries after what they described had happened and they carry a thread of Christian moral – which was different from the pre-Christian moral of the Vikings.

    I do wish Vikings had taken the time to write more down than a few runes on a few stones but I suppose they were too busy having fun. And delivering their history orally instead of in writing.

    Here it`s on a new online channel called HBONordic. It`s a terrible channel – you have to pay a ridiculous amount of money to get a link that doesn`t work half the time. And they wonder why people download television series illegally? I mean, I don`t mind the paying – but I do mind watching a show and being thrown out half way through.

  9. fffbone says:

    Hi Thyra, I was wondering how one becomes Chief? Is it handed down through the generations?
    Someone needs to take out the Chief in this series and his second.
    Also are you able to view it ahead of time yet?

    1. thyra10 says:

      Back then it seems there were two major ways of becoming chief/jarl (earl)/king: Grab the throne by force or be appointed. In both cases it could be easier if you were the son of the former chief/earl/king but it was not a given. And not a given that the older son won. Even an older son would have to be able to prove himself.

      No, unfortunately no. I`ve been away on a business trip or been busy in the evenings. I haven`t even seen episode 3 yet πŸ™

  10. AuntieL (Lynn) says:

    I’m watching episode 4 on DirecTV on demand right now. Without posting spoilers (which is DIFFICULT), I’ll just say that as long as you’re not too fussed about historical accuracy, it’s pretty wicked!

    I think they should have used Thyra as a consultant. πŸ™‚

    1. thyra10 says:

      Oh, and I can`t see another episode until after Easter … it`s going to be SO hard to wait.

      And yes please, I would work for food and board if I got to touch the swords (and get sneak peaks at “Ragnar” πŸ˜€ )

  11. The accents thing is kind of funny. Any time there is an American show where the protagonists are either historical foreigners, like say a prince in France or something, or a villain, they cast lots of actors who are English. If they do cast native actors though it’s still going to be in English because it’s an American show and Americans are spoiled when it comes to subtitled shows.

    But good god, Ragnar is lovely. And Rollo turns out to not be so bad after all. I’m not sure what they were getting at showing him raping a slave but you might see it differently when Knut (Eric’s brother) attempts to rape a Saxon woman and then the shieldmaiden herself. (Doesn’t end well for him.) I guess in a contrasting sort of way.

    I figured the makeup was just war paint, designed to make them look more frightening. But yeah, there was a lot of destruction with the sweet monks temple. It did seem like a lot of unnecessary killing, especially if they could have brought more slaves. Also Eric kills the slaves they brought back which was really stupid. I wonder if a Chieftan could afford to be so prideful and arrogant considering how much he could have gotten for selling the slaves.

    And Floki is Skarsgard’s brother, Gustaf.

    1. thyra10 says:

      Yes, it makes you wonder what kind of relationship Americans end up having when it comes to accents. To us it`s just silly – especially when the accents are wrong. There`s a HUGE difference in how a Dane and a Swede speak English, but not according to Hollywood. We don`t really know how the Vikings spoke but it`s assumed it was close to today`s Icelandic – and that there wasn`t that big a difference between how Vikings spoke in one part of “Viking land” and another even if there were different chiefdoms/kingdoms.

      Arrgh, I can`t wait to see it and I have to wait until I get home on Tuesday.

      Yes, that sounds incredibly stupid. Like burning money.

      I know πŸ˜‰ He was the reason I learned about the series in the first place *blushes*

      1. I guess the creators are banking on the fact that most Americans wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between a Dane’s accent and a Swede. It’s not one many Americans would be really familiar with. Many Americans will confuse Australian and South African accents too and they’re native speakers. I had one person get angry at with me because I thought his accent was Scottish and it turned out he was from Northern Ireland.

        This chief has made me think of Eric’s father – Sookie’s Eric that is, since he was the son of chieftan and what that might have been like. (Idea time Thyra! :D)

        He also buried much of the treasure. He claims there is a ritual associated with it but that still seems strange.

        Lol. I didn’t realize until a few days ago. And Valdimur Kulich is the big blonde one. I saw his name in the credits and couldn’t recognize him.

  12. thyra10 says:

    It`s not really a problem in this series as there weren`t Danes and Swedes as we know them today, back then. But in general all Scandinavians sound German when portrayed by Hollywood and only the Danish accent is similar to the German. Swedish and Norwegian are way too “melodic” to have any resemblance to German.
    And I`m having a hard time keeping various English “dialects” from each other. Ooshka tried to show me the difference between the Australian and Kiwi dialects/accents and I could tell the two people spoke differently but I couldn`t tell what the difference was.
    But then I couldn`t tell the difference between Norwegian and Swedish until I moved to Norway πŸ˜‰

    Hehe, I`m getting ideas all the time, watching this show. But mainly to a series I`m trying to write. It`s non-fanfiction and set in the Viking age. About three sisters – a shieldmaiden, a vΓΈlve and a wife. Each will have her own book as soon as every week has two thursdays and I can write on one of them πŸ™‚

    They did bury their treasures so that their enemies couldn`t get to them (that and graves are the main way of finding Viking artifacts) but there might be some ritual as well that I haven`t heard of. A sacrifice to the gods, perhaps.

    Yes, I noticed good old Vladimir on the credit as well but I couldn`t remember having seen him and I haven`t been able to go back and check it out. He`ll forever make me think of Eric Northman πŸ™‚

  13. fffbone says:

    I noticed Vladimir right away, before the credits. lol

    1. thyra10 says:

      In which episode did you notice him? I wonder what he looks like today. I don`t think I`ve seen him in anything since 13th warrior.

      1. He’s in all of them up until this past week’s. So I think that’s 4 total.

    1. thyra10 says:

      Thank you” *hugs*
      I did reply to you on the Hans Christian Andersen thread but I forgot to press the reply button so I`m not sure you got a notice about it πŸ™‚

    1. thyra10 says:

      Oh, I certainly noticed him – I just never knew it was good old Vladimir. The character did stand out, though. And I can understand why the hair wasn`t real. He would have had to grow it for ages to get it that long πŸ˜€

  14. Today in the US, the History Channel is running a marathon. I was wondering about your final verdict on S1. Did you find enough to like dispite its flaws?

    1. thyra10 says:

      There was a shieldmaiden and that was more than enough for me πŸ™‚

      But really, the series just turnes worse and worse when it comes to historical facts. Apparently historians around here have been facepalming because of how the Vikings were portrayed as being poor and dirty – and, as one historian said in an article I read yesterday, the leaders were wearing too little “bling” in this series. Vikings were vain πŸ˜€

      But as long as they don`t kill the shieldmaiden and as long as she`s still one of the heroes of this series, I`ll be watching. I`m hopeless πŸ˜‰

  15. Scott Hornbuckle says:

    I’m happy that they did a series on vikings…kinda. I can say with great fortitude that the series got the vikings precisely wrong. Firstly, Earl Haraldsson’s title is very dumb. He should be given the title “Jarl”, and the first name should be addressed. Next, a nobleman doing the kind of stuff he was doing would have long been deposed. The Vikings’s chieftains and kings had to live up to their sense of honor and expectations. The punishments and the way the lawsuits at the Thing were presented were utterly stupid. The Vikings only had two punishments for being found guilty of a crime: being fined or being exiled, the latter being rare. The clothing was, like everything else portrayed in the series, foolish. The vikings had clothing that existed in a variety of colors and the style was different from that portrayed in the series. The residential buildings were very inaccurate (seriously, have these guys even heard about longhouses?!) and the living conditions were better. The idea of the vikings being poorly mannered combined with that of them never even knowing of England until 793 and all of the other inaccuracies listed is pure bullshit. (By the way, the term “shield maiden actually relates to Valkyries, not warrior women. In fact, there is very little evidence of female warriors existing.)

    1. thyra10 says:

      I`m happy they did a series on vikings as well….kinda. I`m happy because I`m basically thrilled with everything Viking but only kinda because so many things rubbed me the wrong way. Not necessarily the things you mentioned, though, because the Viking age was several hundred years (and they keep expanding it – last they think it started almost 50 years earlier. Not with LIndisfarne but with an attack on an island in the Baltic sea), the Vikings lived over a huge territory and we know very little about them since it was not a culture that wrote much down. The few things we do know because we`ve excavated them – houses and clothes, for instance – may just be examples and there might be other kinds of houses and clothes too that we just haven`t found (though, I do miss the longhouses as well). Same goes with behavior. Yes, “earl” Haraldsson`s behavior does not fit with the picture I have of how a good jarl would behave but that doesn`t mean that there couldn`t have been bad jarls who did indeed behave kind of similar to what was portrayed in the series.
      What did annoy me was how much they copied from Ibn Fadlan`s accounts because, to me, that`s just cheap. It was like they said “hey, we did this historically correct – look how they blew snot into the water they washed in. Aren`t we good?”. And I was generally annoyed with the whole Vikings = barbarians theme. It was a very anglo (as in people growing up listening to stories about Vikings as raiders seen from the side of the raided) portray.

      Historians around here are not too disappointed in the series because they acknowledge that the series needed to be watchable by modern standards as well – and, I suppose, they feared it could have been worse.

      When it comes to the shieldmaidens it`s just not true that the word only refers to mythology. At least not as the word is used here. It`s been quite a few years since they acknowledged that Vikings did have female warriors and there are also a few referred to in the sagas (though they were written in Christian times and may have underplayed this). They have found that quite a few of the “male graves” (male because they were buried with swords) were indeed female graves and historians think that women played a significant role in defending their villages/homes and quite probably also in going abroad on Viking.

      1. Scott Hornbuckle says:

        Interesting. I’ve never known about the female warriors buried with weapons. And yeah, I kinda don’t like the way they put in customs from Ibn Fadlan’s accounts (they were actually Rus customs). But hey, the show was kinda good and it might interest people to learn more about Vikings.

  16. wizzosis says:

    Perhaps they speak English in the series because nobody these days speak old Norse. Just a thought.

    1. thyra10 says:

      Oh, absolutely. We’ve long ago accepted that all our heroes speak English. What I hated was that the Vikings speak English with a strange accent and only the munk speaks “proper” English. If English is supposed to be their pretend-mothtertongue then they wouldn’t speak it with an accent.
      It’s just another thing to make them seem like savages and ignorant wild people and I really hate that.

  17. Travis says:

    They used a felling axe with a “poll” or a “butt” end used mostly for balance. They weren’t invented for like a thousand years after this took place.

    1. thyra10 says:

      I think it’s safe to say that historical correctness wasn’t very important when they made this series in spite of the fact that this is a series in History Channel. I mean, it can never be 100% correct since we don’t know everything but they could at least have tried in the areas where we do have facts….

      1. You could always write a strongly worded letter. πŸ˜›

      2. thyra10 says:

        Or just sit in my house and frown. Angrily πŸ˜‰

      3. A proper Nordic reply. Just brood angrily about it. Haha.

  18. fffbone says:


  19. fffbone says:

    I meant to say LMAO

    1. thyra10 says:

      LOL (which is LOL spelled backwards πŸ˜€ )

  20. fffbone says:

    Thyra I thought you might find this interesting. I saw it on twitter & sent it to you. If it’s not working here check twitter.

    @Thyra10 You might find this interesting. Clive Standen @CliveStanden 19h A million Vikings still live among us

    1. thyra10 says:

      That was really interesting. I’ve seen articles about “Viking DNA” in Brits but never with numbers. Thank you!

      I really should be on Twitter more…

  21. Martin says:

    In general I like the Viking Series, I have been missing films/series on that subject. However the first impression was I wondered about the accents. It doesn’t even seem Nordic (Im Danish) but has a funny kind of eastern europe accents or something.
    I like that many historic details are right but I can’t help mentioning some which are not. What happened to Hedeby, Hedeby was the largest Viking city in the area (appro. 20-3000 inhabitants) and was located in northern Germany/Jutland on the peninsula Angeln which is flat as a pancake. Though you see a tiny village surrounded by Moutains with snow on top in the background.
    And “Kattegat” is described as an area of the Earl (Jarl), but it’s a sea between Denmark, Norway and Sweden… Ragnar was Danish.
    Anyway, great entertainment, just had to mention above.

  22. Daren says:

    I love the show, but accents are a complete failure. They are from the same village, but somehow it sounds like a United Nations meeting. And Donal Logue. What a miscast. He’s a good actor, but I don’t buy what he’s selling in his role as a Viking King! ? Finally, it’s a Canadian-Irish production, not an American one as many seem to think.

  23. I agree about the language totally. I speak few languages (including some Scandinavian ones) myself. The accent mess in the series is just annoying and it keeps confusing me all the time. I find it hard to believe they’re really speaking Old Norse (about the Anglo-Saxon I don’t know), as they say. Actually I’m pretty sure, in one episode, Rollo said “it’s a trap” in supposed Norse and he used word “trappos”. What is that, a Viking who speaks Italian or something? And the Scandinavian names (people and places) for God’s sake.. The cast should choose either to pronounce everything in proper English or very correct Scandinavian accent, otherwise nobody knows what they’re saying. We do have very good Scandinavian actors who can speak good English (or with the real accent) and say the Scandinavian words right…

  24. Steven holloway says:

    Why are the english so bad at fighting. They were one of the most brutal empires ever to have existed.

  25. julie says:

    Getting baptized and selling out to the Christians……..Don’t think I’ll be watching anymore.

    1. thyra10 says:

      The Vikings were a pracmatic people. They did convert – and many still kept their old gods. I have a replica of a Thor’s hammer that can be turned around and function as a Christian cross. They were very common. They didn’t discriminate – they just incorporated this new god with their old ones.
      Better safe than sorry, right? You never know what’s on the other side and why not cover all bases and pray to the new one as well as the old ones.
      I stopped following The Vikings a long time ago so I’m not entirely sure how they did it in the series. It may have been portrayed in a completely ridiculous way. Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was πŸ™

  26. Bridget Muniak says:

    At First when I saw the previews, for the first time, I though why or how could anyone be so cruel. Today, knowing what trully is coming I now realize that we have to be strong like the Vikings did and our forefathers. My family is Polish and Slovak. I see that Ragnar was very intelligent, Gustof/Floki has a special gift and I love that women were warriors also and that Katheryn Winnick portrays this. That women were not treated like Backwoods Hillbillies to not work, stay home cook, clean, have babies. She proved that we were equals and should be treated as such. She dhows that women can do all! Unlike Rollo who only knows how to think with his DICK!

  27. Sakura says:

    Konnichiwa. πŸ™‚
    Just read your review of the show.
    Thank you. I was just wondering if I should give it a try and enjoy the show.

    I have just got myself interested in the Vikings history quite recently maybe it’s because I have one Norwegian grandfather living in Norge.

    Um…one question.
    Has anyone in the Scandinavian countries ever made any Vikings movies or TV shows in which all the characters speak their own languages ?

    If there’s a good one, I would like to watch ‘that’ one. πŸ™‚

    Sakura from Japan

    1. thyra10 says:

      Konnichiwa. My son is learning Japanese and we visited Japan last Summer. What a wonderful country!
      There have been some television shows about Vikings but no movies. Not to my knowledge, anyway. This TV show is the most recent but it’s a humor show πŸ™‚

      Ha det bra!
      From Norway

      1. Sakura says:

        Tusen takk ! πŸ™‚
        The humorous one was not what I had in mind, but…no complaints there if this is a good one. πŸ˜‰

        So…I peeked a look inside the linked page. Um, it’s got the details of the show but has no videos, yes ?

        Actually, I’m still a beginner learning Norsk…so I wouldn’t understand much of what’s mentioned at the linked page, I’m afraid. ^_^;

        Wow, you and your son came to Japan just last year !? πŸ˜€
        Me ? No…I’ve never been to Norge *blushes* although my bestefar Thor lives in Trondheim hoping to see me ASAP. :’)

        I am hoping to move to Norge within 2 years and that’s part of the reason why I’ve been trying SO hard to learn to speak Norsk. πŸ™‚

        Hilsen Sakura
        PS. If you and your son ever had any questions about Japanese and/or Japan, please don’t hesitate to contact me on Facebook. πŸ™‚

  28. Dasvin says:

    The show is dumb. Totally not believable. Made for tv for sure. Knight fall follows suit. The storylines are reaching way out there and border atupidity….sorry.

    1. thyra10 says:

      The sad thing is that people believe that these are historically correct πŸ™

  29. Bethany Foster says:

    His name is spelled ragnar lothbrok not lodbrog

    1. thyra10 says:

      In Danish he’s named Lodbrog. The name refers to his pants. Brog means pants and lod (or lodden) means fussy

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: