10 BIGGEST Historical Inaccuracies in Vikings
advertisement
VOICE OVER: Patrick Mealey
WRITTEN BY: Garrett Alden
So, what about those horned helmets? Welcome to WatchMojo, and today we're counting down our picks for the events, details, and facts that the pseudo-historical series “Vikings” gets incorrect. Our countdown includes questionable siblings, timeline issues, battle styles and more!
Welcome to WatchMojo, and today we’re counting down our picks for the events, details, and facts that the pseudo-historical series “Vikings” gets incorrect. Is there something wrong with “Vikings” that we got wrong ourselves or that we forgot? Speak up in the comments!
A major plot point of “Vikings” involves the Norse people raiding and invading the lands currently known as England. However, there’s a big problem - the characters actually refer to the land as England. The kingdoms that existed during the 8th and 9th centuries, when the show primarily takes place, did not unite into the Kingdom of England until the 10th century. While it’s possible that the term may have been in use, since it’s derived from the term Angle-land, after the Angles, from whom some of the inhabitants were descended, we have no historical confirmation of it. We get that it’s a convenience for modern audiences, but the show is still inconsistent since they use older terms for other countries, like Frankia for France.
“Vikings” takes plenty of liberties with Norse explorations. And while the way the show mis-attributes the discovery of Greenland to Ubbe, perhaps more egregious is the way the discovery of North America is handled. Ubbe is shown sailing and landing in what is likely modern-day Canada. He and his crew even discover they’ve been beaten there by Floki, the famed boatbuilder. According to what we know of history though, Leif Erikson was the first European to set foot in North America. Still, given that Leif is a character in “Vikings: Valhalla,” who knows how the franchise will end up depicting that event!
In season 2, Athelstan the Christian monk friend of Ragnar is captured when on a raid with the Vikings in Wessex. The villagers recognize him as a former Christian and sentence him to be crucified as an apostate. However, given that their savior was crucified himself, early Christians were very much against the practice of crucifixion. The first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine the Great, outlawed the practice in the Roman Empire, and it’s likely that taboo would have spread throughout Europe’s Christian communities. While it’s technically possible for a group of Christians to crucify someone, it does seem rather unlikely, since historically it’s been far more common for non-Christians to do it.
Oleg is the prince of the Kievan Rus’, a state whose inhabitants have some Norse ancestry, whom Ivar befriends. In the show, Oleg and Ivar devise a plan to attack Ivar’s brothers in Norway with a massive Rus army. They are ultimately repelled though. Still, while such a massive undertaking seems like it would be somewhere in the history books - it isn’t. Oleg does invade a powerful state much closer to Kiev - Constantinople. Oleg even mentions this attack several times during the show, so it did happen within the series. However, it’s still odd that the show devised a fake invasion for a ruler when his real attack was much closer to home.
A major appeal of “Vikings” over other medieval-set series is that many of the female characters participate in the action alongside the men. Norse women who participated in battles were known as shield-maidens. However, despite how common they are on “Vikings,” shield-maidens were not that frequent historically. Although some accounts suggest communities of shield-maidens, as is depicted in the show, it’s difficult to corroborate their existence archaeologically. While some Norse women were buried with weapons, whether they used them is harder to determine. The consensus academically seems to be that female Vikings were the exception, rather than showing up in nearly every battle, as shown in the series.
While many of the events in “Vikings” did happen in history, or in legends, the timeline of events is often compressed or moved around for the sake of the story. For instance, in the show, there are 2 sieges of Paris, which are set roughly a few years apart from each other. However, historically, these events were much further apart - and happened decades after the time period of the show. Other events are out of order, or happened to someone else or in another place. Showrunner Michael Hirst did a lot of condensing to tell the story of the Viking Age with relatively few people, making it much more manageable.
Despite “Vikings” featuring many historical events and figures, its lead character for much of the series might not have existed. Ragnar Lodbrok is most often regarded by scholars as being mythical or only semi-historical. Although his sons are confirmed to be historical figures, his own exploits are cast in some doubt. Some of his deeds were potentially done by other people, a tradition the show continues in a way, such as Ragnar faking his death to infiltrate Paris, which the historical Bjorn did to get into an Italian city. In some ways, Ragnar Lodbrok is the Viking equivalent of King Arthur - someone who may have existed, but we can’t definitively prove did. Either way, his deeds in the show are figuratively, and potentially literally, legendary.
#10: Calling It “England”
A major plot point of “Vikings” involves the Norse people raiding and invading the lands currently known as England. However, there’s a big problem - the characters actually refer to the land as England. The kingdoms that existed during the 8th and 9th centuries, when the show primarily takes place, did not unite into the Kingdom of England until the 10th century. While it’s possible that the term may have been in use, since it’s derived from the term Angle-land, after the Angles, from whom some of the inhabitants were descended, we have no historical confirmation of it. We get that it’s a convenience for modern audiences, but the show is still inconsistent since they use older terms for other countries, like Frankia for France.
#9: Discovery of North America
“Vikings” takes plenty of liberties with Norse explorations. And while the way the show mis-attributes the discovery of Greenland to Ubbe, perhaps more egregious is the way the discovery of North America is handled. Ubbe is shown sailing and landing in what is likely modern-day Canada. He and his crew even discover they’ve been beaten there by Floki, the famed boatbuilder. According to what we know of history though, Leif Erikson was the first European to set foot in North America. Still, given that Leif is a character in “Vikings: Valhalla,” who knows how the franchise will end up depicting that event!
#8: Christian Crucifixion
In season 2, Athelstan the Christian monk friend of Ragnar is captured when on a raid with the Vikings in Wessex. The villagers recognize him as a former Christian and sentence him to be crucified as an apostate. However, given that their savior was crucified himself, early Christians were very much against the practice of crucifixion. The first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine the Great, outlawed the practice in the Roman Empire, and it’s likely that taboo would have spread throughout Europe’s Christian communities. While it’s technically possible for a group of Christians to crucify someone, it does seem rather unlikely, since historically it’s been far more common for non-Christians to do it.
#7: Oleg’s Invasion
Oleg is the prince of the Kievan Rus’, a state whose inhabitants have some Norse ancestry, whom Ivar befriends. In the show, Oleg and Ivar devise a plan to attack Ivar’s brothers in Norway with a massive Rus army. They are ultimately repelled though. Still, while such a massive undertaking seems like it would be somewhere in the history books - it isn’t. Oleg does invade a powerful state much closer to Kiev - Constantinople. Oleg even mentions this attack several times during the show, so it did happen within the series. However, it’s still odd that the show devised a fake invasion for a ruler when his real attack was much closer to home.
#6: Viking Battle Styles
In “Vikings,” the eponymous warriors are often seen in huge, pitched battles - shield against shield, or even huge fields of combatants fighting smaller individual battles. Except this just wasn’t how Vikings did things. Quick, violent raids were kind of their whole deal! Hit-and-run tactics were highly effective for them historically, though we get that it doesn’t always make for great television. The show does keep a few things authentic, with several raiding scenes and by illustrating Vikings’ willingness to attack Christian holy sites. But the whole shield wall thing is probably a myth, according to many scholars.#5: Shield-maidens Were Rare
A major appeal of “Vikings” over other medieval-set series is that many of the female characters participate in the action alongside the men. Norse women who participated in battles were known as shield-maidens. However, despite how common they are on “Vikings,” shield-maidens were not that frequent historically. Although some accounts suggest communities of shield-maidens, as is depicted in the show, it’s difficult to corroborate their existence archaeologically. While some Norse women were buried with weapons, whether they used them is harder to determine. The consensus academically seems to be that female Vikings were the exception, rather than showing up in nearly every battle, as shown in the series.
#4: The Timeline
While many of the events in “Vikings” did happen in history, or in legends, the timeline of events is often compressed or moved around for the sake of the story. For instance, in the show, there are 2 sieges of Paris, which are set roughly a few years apart from each other. However, historically, these events were much further apart - and happened decades after the time period of the show. Other events are out of order, or happened to someone else or in another place. Showrunner Michael Hirst did a lot of condensing to tell the story of the Viking Age with relatively few people, making it much more manageable.
#3: Characters’ Fates
To be fair, the show does get some of its characters’ destinies correct. Ragnar famously dies in a pit of serpents. Rollo was a ruler in Frankia. But later seasons play faster and looser with how characters die. Although some characters’ cause of death is unrecorded in history, such as Aethelwulf’s (hence the random bee sting), others have theirs completely changed. Historical Bjorn founded a line of Swedish kings. Ivar ruled a kingdom in Ireland. Olaf was a saint, and died in battle, not by getting burned alive. We could go on. Bottom line - “Vikings” changed character endings to suit its narrative, rather than adhering strictly to history or legends.#2: Ragnar & Rollo Weren’t Brothers
A major feature of the first part of “Vikings” is the relationship between Ragnar and Rollo. The brothers have a contentious rivalry that explodes several times throughout the series, with Rollo betraying Ragnar several times. The final time occurs when he joins Frankia in exchange for a wife, power, and the chance to escape his brother’s shadow. It’s a great story - but it’s entirely an invention of the show. Rollo was not only not Ragnar’s brother, he also wasn’t even born during the time period the show is set! But there’s another big obstacle to the two being brothers, as you'll see in the next entry#1: Ragnar May Not Have Been Real
Despite “Vikings” featuring many historical events and figures, its lead character for much of the series might not have existed. Ragnar Lodbrok is most often regarded by scholars as being mythical or only semi-historical. Although his sons are confirmed to be historical figures, his own exploits are cast in some doubt. Some of his deeds were potentially done by other people, a tradition the show continues in a way, such as Ragnar faking his death to infiltrate Paris, which the historical Bjorn did to get into an Italian city. In some ways, Ragnar Lodbrok is the Viking equivalent of King Arthur - someone who may have existed, but we can’t definitively prove did. Either way, his deeds in the show are figuratively, and potentially literally, legendary.
