Vikings Tv Series Historical Evaluation
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 вер 2024
- Vikings were Norse seafarers, mainly speaking the Old Norse language, who raided and traded from their Northern European homelands across wide areas of northern, central, eastern and western Europe, during the late 8th to late 11th centuries.
Facilitated by advanced sailing and navigational skills, and characterised by the longship, Viking activities at times also extended into the Mediterranean littoral, North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. Following extended phases of exploration, expansion and settlement, Viking (Norse) communities were established in diverse areas of north-western Europe, European Russia, the North Atlantic islands and as far as the north-eastern coast of North America.
Popular, modern conceptions of the Vikings often strongly differ from the complex picture that emerges from archaeology and historical sources.
Follow me on my social networks:
/ themetatron
/ metatron_youtube
www.facebook.c...
/ puremetatron
/ realmetatron
Royalty free music by Epidemic Sound:
intro ES_Knights Templar 1 - Johannes Bornlöf
intro 2 ES_Medieval Adventure 01 - Johannes Bornlöf
outro ES_Knights Templar 2 - Johannes Bornlöf
Check out the facebook page of the photographer who works with me, he has lots of fantastic pictures
www.facebook.c...
and his instagram
www.facebook.c...
Check out my friend Salvo's channel
/ @littlesalvo000
The reason they go with little or no clothes is because all nords have 50% frost resistance
@Rem
Why So Angry Imperial?
SKYRIM BELONGS TO THE NORDS!!!
Damm!! you stole line
Just go Breton and use Atronach Stone
Skyrim... the gratest nation of skandinavia
I laughed my head off when you mentioned how they always act surprised when they get their own women pregnant... classic truth.
Historic in some places, other than The Rights of Heir, people were just happy the both the mother and child made it through birth. If a woman live through birthing seven children it was a Sign From the Gods !
If the children made it to adult hood it was a real blessing.
In one German early medieval story a traveling "noble/warlord" was once again passing through a given village. Some of the ill temper warriors went to torment another man " warrior " that his wife cluck him and he was raising a bastard son. Which was being done in front of the visiting warlord.
In the fest hall, " tavern" the man said sitting at the table.
" I have already lost two children to the winter cough, a daughter and a son. Now I am raising a fine healthy son with two young daughter in poor health. With the Grace of God the two of them will make it through this coming winter. My fine son is becoming a good young man looking after his mother and sisters. Doing what needs to be done around the village. My lord it will be a good thing to get to know this young man that God has bless his mother with."
It seems Hollywood writes/ producers telling the creative team on how they want a give show to play out really are out of touch with world history.
" Life is Cheap, but we are the ones who have to give Life value."
Then again some shows are just really bad writing.
What is the name of the story?
Still happening today.
@@teoxd0 there is no story she made the shit up after roleplaying as a shield maden
@@tylerjarrett5979 you bet
"we'll read a history book"
Boy oh boy you'll be shocked by the sheer (horrifying) number of people who just watch TV/movies and regard them as facts.
There are people who never fought in their lives who think they can easily take out a knight in plate armour because knights of course move slower than turtles, so yes I fully agree with you.
@@MsJavaWolf And armor is something that you can cut throught with a butter knife
@@dzzuel6008 When I watched the Lord of ring, I always feel confused about why people and orcs wear armors, they are as weak as paper.
You’d be surprised the number of falsehoods in many history books as well to be honest
It's disappointing when fictionalised popular media representations gives a false impression of how our ancestors lived back in the day.
It's arguably problematic when it informs our sense of the past and how it affects the present. For example, there are many good arguments to be made for Scottish independence; however, if even one person bases their beliefs on the fantasy of the film 'Braveheart', that's one too many.
Roland has strange metabolism. He wears warm clothes in Francia but less clothes in Scandinavia.
I imagine he'd have to wear a double-layered coat in Africa.
If he has to wear a double-layered coat in Africa, then he'd have to peel of his skin in Greenland.
He'd never survive Eric the Reds voyages then.
Well, say what you will, but Clive Standen is one good looking hunk of a man. He probably would be most comfortable here in NYC.
Fewer.
Athelstan is reviewing the series
Lol
Bromance with Ragnar....😁
Underrated comment
😂
I actually know one of the people who excavated the Swedish city of Birka and who directly studied
and recreated textiles found there. My other half is also studying textile history at Uppsala university and is well learned in the field.. You are 100% correct in what you say. They generally wore very fine Linen close to their bodies and in summer this was probably common (The temperature would be as it is today and during summer here. The medium temperature might be 20, but it can reach into the 30’s like in Italy. And because of the long sunlight hours in summer it is warm around the clock, even at night.
The richer even had silk.
(people are still unsure how they got the silk and from where) But there is a strong possibility that the Norse had their own ties to the orient and silk road and were doing their own trading before even Marco Polo did. (Archaeological DNA finds of mummified corpses of caucasians found in northwestern China seem to support this theory.) And some people here in Scandinavia and Finland as
also seem to have some DNA mixed with far east asian populations.
During cold weather they wore wool, skins and furs over their linens. There is even evidence that they felted wool for clothing. And as you said. Bright colours would be common. Dyeing was very common. In particular blue, red, green, yellow and orange.
There is also the myth that they were poor. There is no evidence that they were poor. Population was quite low. But the people were probably quite rich anyway.
Now to the metals. Armor was probably more common than some people believe. The grounds here in Scandinavia is quite rich in metals. Iron, copper, gold and silver are more common here than the rest of Europe. I have myself held iron nails taken up from the ground made by a blacksmith in Birka 1400 years earlier. So people going out on viking raids. Were probably sponsored armor.
Also.. Berzerker. Is from the norse word ”bärsärk” (still used in the swedish language).. The word in itself means. ”To wear armor....” Bära = wear/carry and särk is an old word for armor (probably chain mail). Hence ”armoured warrior”. Not to lose you mind. This ties in with archeological finds that I was saying earlier. Armour was much more common than in mainland Europe. It was easier to get. Probably cheaper than on mainland Europe. And probably has something to do with that they were a lower population with more resources than other parts.. Probably even the ”farmers” had to learn to somewhat fight and defend themselves when they were younger because of sparce population.
On a side note. It is also likely that most people could read and write using the runic system which was used at the time. Meaning there was some sort of ”schooling” going on.
Pretty interesting for ”barbarians”... Don’t you think?
Have you watched the Vikings series by Neil Oliver? I learn so much from it! It has some years now, but I bought the DVD and I watch it again from time to time.
@@arelendil7 couple of years ago, I watch a short series drama on Vikings invading England.
a.) I couldn't call it Bad acting cause " No One Was Acting !"
i.) The Brits and Scots doing the film just carry on like they were at a summer camp, with others speaking Cornish and a few other dialects , some of the Sweds could not speak English very well.
ii.) The show went full Hema, with peroid armor. Honestly, I couldn't tell that they were women fighting till they took off their helms.
ii.) In one scene a woman really hit a man wearing a helm with a cast iron frying pan, the dude went flying. Everyone stop what they were doing and the other viking reenactors checked on the fallen guy, who was laughing the whole time. They remove his helm, the mail coif, and padded cap to make sure there was no bleeding or other damage.
The frying pan hit man sit up, rambles some words and him and his friends broke out laughing.
Everyone was in question as to what was said and what the joke was about.
" I have Finally Found My WIFE !! "
iii.) All of the back ground actress in their late teens and early 20's, claim their fathers put a 25lb/
12.5 kilog mail shirt on them as grade school children and they just ran around the yard all day in it. As teens they trained with shields, for them it was just another weekend with their friends. Just this time they are spending their summer in North England/ South Scotland making a movie.
iv.) Unlike Hollywood movies, alot of these people in this drama series had split lips and bloody noses, cut eye brows after their short battles.
Just so you know barbarians were considered to be anyone who isn't Christian and we don't really know what they wore. Leather and other textiles don't really last not preserved very well. History is pieced together with little evidence and guess particularly the finer details. The further we go back in history the more guess we make.
@@fecalmatter4195. There are cases of preserved textiles from this period. I know because I am friends with a person who has studied these fragments.
@@swedishmetalbear I understand there is some evidence by there are also alot of assumptions like nobody else left the textiles there the one thousand years or so . You understand?
It's still more historically accurate than that BBC documentary that had black Norman warriors and clergy.
lol whats the name
I know right. We wuz Normanz n sheyyy!!!
Liam English Nah y’all wuz Dickwashers
@Aram Mad Sasani except it is
StoneAgeWolf ! Bullshit
Im from Denmark and I approve this message, the series does damage the truth and because the world simply dont know and now they really dont know the real facts anymore.. its good that you can bring some sense to the table...
I am 40 years old. when I was 30, I realized most people prefer to go through life Willful Stupid.
Their life knowledge is contain within their social group echo chamber. Don't mess with their fantasy reality with " your " facts.
I'm from USA.
Kristoff Bjorgman theyre not ur ppl lool idgaf whether u descended from them 10,000 years ago they are in no way linked to u pussy 😂😂😂
Kristoff Bjorgman man said ethically challenged 😂😂😂😂😂 ur the one on utube comments talking like ur offended by the way ur ancestors have been portrayed in a TV SHOW 🤣🤣🤣
Not really, most people knowledge of vikings isnt gonna be affected by this show as most people are smart enough to know that this is fiction. The series doesn't claim to be historically accurate so why should other people take it as such.
@@alfiewoodley01 you have no idea what hes feeling because you're a mutt with no culture
Vikings series suprised me quite a bit.
With that ammount of time-missplaced armor and equipment i almost expected norsemen to have muskets
Plot twist, Thor's hammer was a blunderbuss
Saddest thing for me is the History Channel badge these dramas are released under. This gives viewers the false impression that any historical accuracy or due diligence is paid by researchers and producers. The falsehoods portrayed then become "fact". Essentially this is re-writing history for no good reason and turning it in to Fantasy-Sci-Fi genre.
Its really hard for me not to correct my friends and give a lecture when they talk about the show.
Craig Sinclair Agreed. It wouldn't bother me so much if it wasn't done by the "History" Channel. Sadly, too many people learn history from movies and tv shows. I would even include many documentaries into the list of inaccurate as they are often misleading and oversimplified.
I know right! It's become especially annoying in season 5, which is just complete garbage (history and drama-wise).
who the hell thinks that the history channel is education. the history channel stated that they are entertainment, not educational. since this is their stated goal, why would you be befuddled over it?
I've done research , the big Moments in ragnar's history are true , and his sons' deeds are also mostly true , it's a pretty accurate show honestly
"The gods are protecting them" sounds like plot armor to me.
I did not want to watch this show for years. Being an Anglo-Saxon history buff, I just thought it would be too full of historical problems for me to enjoy. My wife convinced me to watch it and BOOM! The characters were great, the conflict was so touching, and the acting is fantastic. One of my favorites.
Then clearly you aren't much of an anglo Saxon buff since no show has ever been more disrespectful towards them than this one
About the helmets: Lack of helmets is a problem in almost every movie set in medieval or ancient times. There are exceptions however (like Troy ). The excuse, that the audience needs to be able to recognize their hero, does not convince me, because in historical times the soldiers also needed to identify their leader. This however did not keep their leader from running across the battlefield with no helmet on. Instead we see horsetails, feathers, polished gold an silver on historical helmets, even bright coloured paint. And then there are also banners of course, which are also rarely portrayed in the way they functioned on a battlefield.
CONCLUSION: Give everybody head protection, even if its just leather or wood or a turban and give the fanciest, most flamboyant helmet to the hero. He can still take it off during dialogues.
"We don't want to put helmets on the characters so the audience can recognize them or relate to them".
Meanwhile the Mandalorian: Hold my beer, this is the way!
*Doing homework, sees Metatron upload on his dashboard* Well...it's kinda like homework, this guy's a teacher after all.
Quite literally indeed.
Lollll now get back to the homework!
As painful as that memory is...let's just say there is a very good reason I hate Eldar above all other Xenos...
Their arrogance knows no bounds, the tau know no humility, the ork know only dakka is not enough dakka.
Mr Nobody seriously? How did we get to GW?
Metatron, Shadiversity, and Skallagrim.
Killers of misinformation
I recommend Real Crusades History youtube channel as well. The guy who runs it is an absolute expert of the Crusades and does an amazing job at presenting the history in a relatively fair way, although he does have a clear bias for the Christians. I am also biased though having grown up in Catholic schools until age 14 where we idolized the Templars.
Dont forget lindybeige
@@MrGufi-nf2jz yyyyy i think not
@@huberttarnowski4980 why he did hema too
@@MrGufi-nf2jz I may be too rush to judge his content, but when i watched his video about cavalery i was strongly confused.
As a dane, who has watched vikings, i often laugh at "kattegat" Denmark doesn't have any mountains, only mere hills. And although the show indicates that Kattegat is placed in Norway, maybe Oslo? We can see Ragnar ride to Lagerthas city: Hedeby. Which is an existing city in Denmark, in southern Jutland. However, Jutland doesn't have a single mountain, and if you look to Sweden marine coast with Denmark, they don't have mountains there either.
Hi, im from southern sweden, Malmö. And ist the small sea between Sweden, Norway and Denmark called something like kattegatt?
It is, indeed.
Maybe Denmark used to have mountains, but the vikings pillaged them into flatlands! That is what I'm gonna go with.
Would the two of you agree with me that most people in Sweden, Denmark and Norway call them vikings.. Even if it makes the scholars and pedants cringe?
Oskar Frost i think it was filmed in iceland correct me if im wrong plz.
"Double katana wielding ninja orcs" 🤣😂😅😁😁🤣😂😁🤣😂😁😅😅😅
Hey thats my skyrim character
The old anglo-saxon people called foreigners for "orcs", probably giving Tolkien the name as well. He was well educated in ancient languages, also norse.
Ten thousand Immortals from 300 I'm assuming
@@EA-History he also described Orcs as appearing like Mongols in one of his letters.
had to rewatch it just to notice that. completely missed that one. lol
As I usually say, "I can recommend Vikings, it's a great show, just try not to learn too much about vikings from it".
Erik Yes! I was able to THOROUGHLY enjoy this show precisely because I kept in mind it wasn’t very historically accurate at all.
i personally coulnd´t enjoy it because of my rampant misogynism
It's dogshit, how anyone can be entertained by it is a complete mystery
It always irritated me that quite literally no one on the show, ever wore a helmet. Correct me if I am wrong... Shield walls, mighty lords etc, no helmets.
Plus, a lord/King such as Ragnar going around wearing silly clothes that did not represent his power. I mean he doesn't have incredible chain Armour, boots, rings, fancy helmet etc.
Floki actually wears a helmet once, it caught my atention 'cause it was the first time I saw someone wearing it
Ivar wear helmet , in the new trailer Viking use helmet
Battles would be a confusing mess, if both sides wore helmets. There's also the issue of helmet-hair.
I love the show its great fun and I ain't gonna cry about historical inaccuracies but when I think of Badass viking warriors I think of Bernard Cornwell's The Last Kingdom books where he wonderfully describes the warriors in all their resplendent detail!
Well, Lord of the Rings had their actors using helmets and yes, the battles were an mess (in a good sense). But man, did Peter Jackson made it look badass and actors recognazible even with the helmets (Okay, most of them were barbut style helmets).
Finally someone pointing out the Burgonet Helmets. That was a major error and a ridiculous descision by the film-makers. As you said, it's a Renaissance/early modern helmet, not even Medieval. As an example: musketeers, pikemen, arquebusiers, cuirassiers/cavalry and rodeleros, i.e Conquistadors, Landsknechts, soldiers from the 30 Years War and the English Civil War, would have been the ones using this type of helmet.
Nearly all the clothing and armor was fantasy junk. Look, even the picture with the Lady wearing a wolf fur around her shoulders was utterly silly. No one did that in Europe until...after WWI. Yes, then there was this fad that ran all this last century to have the legs and heads of fur trim. Before that, the legs and heads were always removed.
Wow. I am used inaccuracy, but that's a bad one.
Irish kerns and Gall Oglaigh fighting under Hugh O Neil wore them
The show's depiction of the Anglo-Saxons made my yarbles quiver with rage... fuaaaark
I disagree with the cinematography and Helmet arguments. Gladiator used the Helmet on Russel Crowe and it was done so well that it made him as identifiable with it as without it. They can make historically accurate and distinctive helmets for the main characters, the viewers are not dumb, after an hour or so they understand which character wears what armor and helmet. And good helmets look kooler and are more immersive to the battle than no helmets. Eg. 300, where they did use helmets and though fantastical they looked cool with the damage due to use etc.
yes, esspialy in periods and cutures where the rich would decorate their helmets, for example romans of the 3rd and 4th century were required to decorate their helmets according to rank, silver gold and jewels used, i believe the germanic peoples also did this even during the viking age, and even if they didn't we can tell main characters helms because they are more well armoured (due to being rich) and their shields are painted
sushanalone except the helmets they are wearing, burgonets would the equivalent of a knight with a glock. Vikings had some cool historically correct helmets just give them those
Ivar has a quite distinctive helmet later in the series.
The most unrealistic part is that they don't portray them with horns on their helmets.
*+Jacob Hansen* Ha! I see what you did there...
Dragonstar :P
I would argue the most ridiculous inaccuracy is that the first helmets seen in season 1 are 16th century burgonets...
At least Skyrim got that right.
Jacob Hansen must not fall to the bait
The great thing about shows like this is that it peaks someone's interest in a subject and gets them to read about the real history. That's always a good thing in my book.
But that's one over thousands, the rest will just take everything at face value.
piques interest
Mate, in 20 degrees Celsius we can easily walk around half-naked. Sincerely, people from the Northern Europe.
4 degrees Celsius is still pretty good sincerely an Alaskan.
lmao 20 degrees Celsius isn't even cold.
@@TheJPworld 15-20 degrees Celsius is my prefered temperature when going outside :D HAIL from Norway!
lol true. in germany 20°C is very mild, pleasent summer weather. of course, especially during the middle of the summer the temperature can rise significantly, sometimes even up to >30°C, but 20°C is certainly not something that i'd call cold.
20 degrees is pretty good weather to be honest
It would be amazing if there was a show that was completely historically accurate in terms of weapons, costumes, etc., but the show is very watchable nonetheless. I think it's in the same category as Game of Thrones--very entertaining for what it is. Good analysis, brother!
I'm glad you liked it mate :)
anime called maria the virgin witch
Lagartha the best looking, and also the most realistic armour, strange how realistic armour looks better than this fake leather stuff
helps that the actress is hot as hell, so anything would fit well with her. But more realistic really looks the best in this case.
Some Icelandic viking films are very historically accurate, however it's hard to distinguish people from one another because they're all so heavily bearded.
Im Norwegian and i agree, However we do say “Vikings” when we talk about the Norse. This might just be a modern thing though. Not sure about old Norwegian
Yes it is as you said and that we say Vikings maybe because they were the people doing the viking thing, like any profession a tailor do tailoring. If that made any sense lol. Thanks for the video :)
in denmark we say viking as a guy that raids during the viking age not as the people
It's much like calling Hellenes, Greek. It's not that it's true or the norm at the time, but it's what we, modern people, refer/know them as.
@@zlayd5146 vi kalder sgu da ringborge for vikingeborge eller noget derhen af.
Vi kalder det ihvertfald ikke en nørren ringborg.
yes we do say Vikings about all the people in the Viking age in Denmark, we don't just say it about those who went exploring or raiding and then when talking about the women at home doing farming call them something else like "Normannerne" we just say Vikings the only time we use the word for "Norse" is when talking about the language "old Nordisk" meaning old Nordic @@zlayd5146
I like warband, they call a faction as Nords, and next to them have bandits called sea riders(but everyone say they're vikings)
Don't you call those bastards anything else. They're damn dirty vikings.
OH, the sea riders!, so OP
TODAY THE GODS WILL DECIDE YOUR FATE!
I WILL DRINK FROM YOUR SKULL!
I love to kill a party of sea raiders alone when I start the game. Huge moneymakers and hive decent weapons and armor
I agree. The general public get their "impressions" from film and media. Even though they are aware that it may not be historically accurate , impressions do have a lasting effect. That's how a katana is able to cut through mountains, slay gods, and be the weapon of choice for the immortal MacLeods.
Viking may be a verb (go raiding), a profession (like raider or pirate), a description of someone from a vik (a inlet, or fjord) or a reference to a lifestyle (living and farming in the vik before going raiding when the last food is harvested). The norsemen was quite metaforical in their language, and my guess is that Viking means a bit of all the above. It may be a verb we have in norway still ;å vike (to retreat or give right of way) to describe maybe a bate and switch, a kiting strategy or lightning strike kind of tactic where the vikings would strike and then vik/retreat with resources (coins, weapons, gold, food, slaves, animals etc) before the enemy could muster enough forces. Having faster ships did these tactics possible.
You are so wrong Metatron...
lagertha looks good in, or out of armor :P
damn she looks best without clothes :)
I stand corrected ;)
So true!
Love the comment!
@Martin 'The Looter King' Did you have a bad day ?
I hope it getts better mate.
@@tilemacro Welcome back after 2 years.
The representation of vikings is sort of a catch 22. People think vikings were dirty and barbaric, because that's how shows depict them. Shows depict them that way, because people expect vikings to be dirty and barbaric and if they're not, they find it strange.
And it's like that with a lot of period. As far as people are concerned, history is basically: egyptians riding around on chariots and shit, followed by imperial Rome, followed by a period of about a thousand years where everything was miserable and made of sticks, mud and plague rats, which suddenly ends one day and turns into the renaissance the next, where everyone's wearing robes and building cathedrals, until they got bored and decided to put on some powdered wigs. But those got out of fashion, so they switched to fancy suits and top hats, WW2 happened (with no mention of WW1) and here we are today.
Moviemakers pretty much have to follow this stupid template, because any time they diverge and show something transitionary or just different (if more historically accurate) people go "Pft, they don't do their homework. Everyone knows people in medieval times were covered in 7 layers of mud at all times. That's how every other movie does it."
You might as well add, that everyone was poor and so only ate dirt which is probably why they where covered in mud and ofcourse never washed.
I praise you
My forefathers have lived in Iceland for over 1000 years, I have over 1000 year old pure Icelandic blood through my veins. I am so happy with this truth. Thank you very much.
I remember your videos when I watched you a lot when I was watching Spartacus and you were talking about your home country Italy and the Roman history. You were the one who got me interested in the tv show "Rome" 2006 if I remember the years right. 2006-2007. Your videos were of course not from 2006 :D However your interest in your heritage is great as I am proud of my Nordic heritage. I am literally over 1000 year old pure blooded Icelandic human being. With probably more than 1000 year older purer blooded Nordic on top of my Icelandic heritage.
I am not sure how youtube made me loose your channel! The greatest truth is of course they had armor. They were known to fight only when they knew they would win. As in, if they believed they would lose. They would not fight. So it´s true, they were not running around like some extremists calling out Allah Akbar and dying after one or two kills. They did everything to be the superior force, the force that would win the battle. Survive the battle. They never just "ran with it", trusting the Gods. They trusted themselves and their tactics. You are spot on, on so many things. Like Ragnar and Rollo living on the same timeline. So far from the truth. They were not brothers. They never even met. The mail vs leather. Helms vs skulls. Death vs life. I like how you literally got everything right!
Well done!
Scandinavia varies when it comes to nature. The famous Fjords are located in Norway, which is mostly a mountainous region. Sweden on the other hand is mainly covered with large forests and lakes. Lastly, Denmark is a flat country, with lots
of fields.
Norway is just as covered in forest as Sweden.
The whole metal stud thing has been a total mystery to me. My only guess as to why they became a thing is due to a misunderstanding of what a brigandine is. Or someone thought putting random studs on armor looked cool
Brigandine it is, or should be...
It's from dungeons and dragons. Yes, really. They wanted armor that was slightly better than regular leather, so they invented studded leather
@@chstens Yeah, but it doesn't do anything. There is a small chance a blade hits a stud, and even if it does it's gonna slip off and hit you anyway.
@@janosnagy3661 I am well aware
@@chstens since leather itself was barely used as armor it feels weird that those two ended up being the standard light armors in all RGP's. Why not just go with light/heavy gambeson (or "cloth armour" if they're afraid gambeson wouldn't be understood) or something similar if mail is only to be reserved for medium armours is beyond me
Mr. Metatron I love your show. You remind me so much of my wife. She studies period appropriate clothing and makes costumes and she's always pointing it out when the "historical dramas" we watch are replete with completely ridiculously dressed characters. She tells me that in 1000 years there will be dramas about us where cod pieces are paired with three piece suits with the sleeves cut off. Anyway, rock on man.
Lol...oh dear...that is probably true - also add pants with the bum cut out or chaps and there you have it. Thanks for the laugh.
Even with all its faults this show is fantastic and not woke which is the best part of the show, just feels good to see a groupe of norsemen without all the black washing.
@@davefekete7187 Atleast It wasn't a woke show with multicultural activities and people.
And now I can't unsee that image of us in 1000 years.....
24:57 As a lady with similar length hair (and similar texture as well) I can confirm that a plat is one of the best ways to keep your hair out of your face. It is brilliantly practical. With practice, I have found that I can plat my hair in barely anytime at all.
@@froggymusicman that joke is older than UA-cam and more dead than the vikings. 🤮
Vikings armor looks like shit compared to the real deal.
Real viking armor is dull and boring.
I think you’ll all find that all early medieval armor looks shit xD
@@Defferleffer it would be pretty hard to do worse than the biker gear they went with in the show.
When Metatron held up the matchlock, I lost it. A part of me somehow ended up imagining Jack Sparrow meandering across the Viking battlefield. A bit past matchlock era, I know, but not by *that* much - what's a century or two when you're already off by seven?
I just imagined an Anglo saxon army, maybe around 2-2.5 thousand troops. And then 500 vikings all armed with guns, maybe even a few gattlings (The kind seen in last samurai)
"They tend to prefer dual-wielding, which again makes no sense, because you would be killed off Immediately..." I laughed my ass off.
The problem with the innacuracies is that the show is being produced by the History Channel. HISTORY! I mean, c'mon!
Yeah so what? It's called historical fiction for a reason, key word historical.
@@lampad4549 Ain't advertising itself as fiction, but it sure is on the historical part. That's the problem.
What's especially infuriating is the complete lack of any ancient aliens.
"300" was an autrocity of a movie, cool fights but that's it!
Same thing, really. Historical accuracy sacrificed on the altar of entertainment. It just serves to re-write history, which is insulting to the memory and cultures of the people back then. Or would anyone from this era be remembered as something they weren't, for something they didn't do?
Why don't films contract out the Metatron?
Alexander Fetters cause he's not on anybody's rolodex, and they don't make these anymore so filmmakers keep using some dumbass they know since the 80s
Kevin GOULIN Amen.
Because the average movie goer/netflix subscriber doesn't give a rat's arse about historical accuracy, all they want to see are cool fight scenes and grim-dark vikings surrounded by fog.
Which does look pretty cool to be honest, would look better though without weird anachronisms everywhere.
Film makers do hire historical experts, but typically their advice is completely ignored. I've seen a few historical advisors on films rant about it. The companies basically hire them so they can say they had a historical advisor in the credits.
Because, the writers would get their dreams of historical-fantasy crushed...
I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!! "I don't speak any Scandinavian languages ...... yet."
Important characters always have an armor stronger than anything a God can give and it's called plot armor
With regards to -mail- you have to remember that the heaviest thing these historians lift is a pint after work ,one probably lifted a mail coat and could hardly lift it so decided that it slowed everyone down.
It's an idiotic thing to do anyway, that's like taking off all your clothes and shows, cramming into a bag then picking that up and saying "golly, these are heavy, guess I won't be wearing any cliothes today". Obviously the weight's going to disperse itself, in another video Metatron said even plate armour wouldn't have weighed more than 25kg as a full suit, spread out across your body that's nothing...
@@TheGreatGodPan Ever heard of sarcasm, my man?
@Noa Roos yes, I'm, English, have you? Not at all relevant here.
This is why experimental archaeology is so useful.
We could imagine that it would weigh a person down and reduce their mobility. Put it on and see (as Metatron - peace be upon him - has done) and find out.
I'm currently about 12 kilos above my ideal weight; that means I'm already carrying about the same as mail armour.
"Viking" - Journey
"Vikingr" - Traveller
It's a verb. Vikingr is the noun. I guess I can let it slide cause English is your 57th language :^)
He's correct in his basic point though. It's something you do, not an ethnicity, right?
@@Brocklebury yes he is correct
They went a Viking! Or they went raiding! Is about right, but like the OP stated, it is his 50th language lol
@@cowboyjohnn Yes, but most scandinavians still call the people vikings (vikinger), probably because there's no easy word for norsemen. There's the word norrøn, which refers to the culture, society, and language, but norsemen would be something like "det norrøne folk," which is way more cumbersome than just saying vikinger, at least in everyday speech and regular schooling. I wouldnt know what terms scandinavian academia uses, though. And no, northmen (nordmenn) is not an option because that's what modern norwegians are called.
@@chstens in Finnish, the word closest to "norsemen" would be "pohjoismaalaiset" which incidentally means "people of the Nordics" and hence would be very confusing to use. I usually settle for ancient/old Scandinavians since that's at least relatively easy and accurate to say
We need a ‘Historical Evaluation’ video for The Last Kingdom, which I confess I enjoyed more than Vikings.
Lindybeige made one 9f those.
@@Danko_Sekulic I'll check it out, thanks
@@LaloMartins
You're welcome.
Last kingdom has quite a bit of truth but the story is fiction... BUT.... it's quite realistic
About the whole mail argument, the first time i wore it it felt like quite a burden to move around, which is where the film people probably ended up with their argument from. However after a week, you don't even notice it.
Just a point about the word viking in scandinavia.
Here in Denmark we call them "vikinger". I don't know about the other languages in scandinavia, but we use it to refer to Danes, Norwegians, Swedes and Icelandic People from the æra we call "vikingetiden" or "The Viking age (ca. 800 - 1050 AD.) In school we learnt that this specific period of the Middle ages was called "The Viking age" and that nobody else bothered to call it that.
I think that we use the word viking about the general Norse population of that period for general understanding and because we named an age after them.
For example: In my town there is a "viking ship" museum, Vikingeskibsmuseet. Where a plaque reads something like; "Most of the vikings were farmers, not raiders at sea."
So we do technically call the norse population "vikinger" but it makes sense when you think about that they were a people in a period in time called "vikingetiden"
I love your passion, and the amount of new information you've provided. I love the vikings show, and I knew it wasn't the most accurate, but not to this extent.
In a video from Lindy Beige, I think, or someone else who deserves credit they figured out that the reason for those studs is that many movie makers see the coat of plates and want to copy that. Because they only see the studs holding the plates on the inside they don't realize that the studs themselves are not armor.
I'm pretty sure that the burgonet helmets were recycled from The Borgias TV series.
With all these epic series and movies, it could be a good business to have a company renting equipment and armor with historians, artisans, and athletes counseling “movie people” 😊... maybe at the end they will just hire actors to do their own proper movies.
Még abban a sorozatban is korai kicsit... Ugyan láttam korabeli ábrázolásokat a 15-16. század fordulójáról (itáliai háborúk kora, amikor játszódik a sorozat, első és második háború konkrétan), ahol "burgonet" típushoz hasonló sisakokat hord az (észak-itáliai) katonák egy része, de azok amolyan proto-"burgonet" sisakok, inkább "celata" (vagy ahogy mi ismerjük német névvel "schaller") típusúak még. A Borgiák-ban viszont MINDENKI a nem a proto "burgonetet", hanem a 16. század közepétől használt dizájnú, teljesen kifejlesztett típust használja, ráadásul TÖMEGESEN... Nem (vagy alig) látni "armet", zárt sisakot, vaskalapot, "celata", vagy "barbuta" típusokat, és gyakorlatilag egy teljes lemezvértet sem... A felsorolt sisakok akkoriban nagyon népszerűek és elterjedtek voltak, a lemezvértek meg a reneszánsz idején érik fejlettségük tetőpontját...
I would really like to watch a show about Vikings or maybe about Celts or the Hallstatt-culture that does not depict them as savages, but as the brilliant craftsmen, navigators (in case of the Vikings) and diplomats they were.
This is why I cannot watch Vikings or the Last Kingdom. It is painfully triggering to my historical autism...
Wednesday's Child m cool.
you coud make the colves some one would býe them
It's been harder and harder for me to watch these shows the more I watch Metatron, Skall, Matt, Lloyd, etc.
Archaeonomy nah not really. The only thing that got me triggered is the scene from Last kingdom. Where Uhtred kills Skorpa
@Archaeonomy - there, there
I will console myself with Lindibeige's "Hitler wants historical accuracy in movies" lol
Solid video. I was surprised that you gave a free pass to the shields on Vikings. I would have pointed out that most Norse shields were covered with linen or leather to add strength, offer some weather proofing, and reduce splintering when struck. Also, every shield on that show seems to be rimmed in iron (a better use for which would have been a few suits of maille). While we have evidence for iron-rimmed shields, it is believed that hide wrapped edges were likely more common. The only other thing that surprised me about this video that poopooed things like "chainmail" instead of the more accurate "maille" was your finishing the video with the 19th century cry of "Valhalla" instead of the historically correct "Valholl." Otherwise, a great video - I just subscribed and look forward to watching more from your channel.
Underrated comment here.
"He is a berzerker." So he has a bear skin, good to know.
Seriously. Berzerker (Berserker) means Person wearing a bear skin/hide.
It has nothing to do with our warriors.
Also a lord who took his thralls our on vikings, would pay for their equipment, even giving out swords, which was a status symbol (Swords was not for common folk).
So unless the raiders applied allegiance to the lord doing the raid, then they would be equipped by the lord himself.
After all, the less of his men dies, the more stature he would gain.
The Greeks built out of stone, the Nose out of wood, which last longer ?
Each Greek city state, " glorified " walled/ fortified village " town." had trade raiding ships. The Nose was no different in that regard. So as a status symbol any hamlet/ village of size will try to build their own raiding ship. Hey everyone in the boat would have been related by blood or marriage.
Also the iron/ steel to make one sword could instead be used to make three to four spear heads.
People always like to hype their drama.
I’ve heard berserker actually be a champion of a lord who may be given a bear skin to show that he was the champion
@@creepypinny8717 Not Norsemen then, since we would have a huge number of champions then. And I have personally never heard about that.
Bear and wolf skins was extremely common for people to wear here, since we lived right next to them, all over.
Lords and ladies, could have fancier made bearskin or wolfskin cloaks, with copper jewellery to showcase they were rich and of power.
We did however do have fighting tactics that revolved around certain animals, like Boar, Horse, Wolf, Bear, Deer, and a few more.
metatron there is a game called mounted and blade viking conquest and it shows one of or the most realistic depiction of england in the 9th century
I think the point "It must be entertaining so make a sacrifice on history" is complete BS. History is full of events that are way more entertaining than a lot of series. You have books taking an invented character and inserting him in history. Why would it be impossible with a movie/serie? Game of thrones is fantasy, but they opened the way for big sets with a medieval taste and a lot of finances to express a vision. Now is the time.
On the one hand, history is complex and messy and involves too many characters for a common viewer to keep track of, so some simplification and character fusion is understandable to keep the pace of the story from dragging...
BUT on the other hand, Game of Thrones is complex and messy and involves a million and one characters, and audiences loved it (or... most of it anyway...*cough*).
ALTHOUGH, creating such a complex story with such rich and subtle character interconnections did take George a literal lifetime, so perhaps the simplifications are more in the interest of keeping to a production deadline rather than keeping it entertaining.
Perhaps a bit of both.
...Still no excuse for ugly clothes and no armor though.
Glad you pointed out the out of century Anglo Saxon cavalry helmets. I had never been able to find such helmets in dark age periods but did not know they were actually 16th and 17th century! I do love the show regardless.
It's disheartening that this idiocy appears on the "History Channel." Were it pure fantasy and shown on a different channel, I'd have no problems with it. But this is on the same channel that has Ancient Aliens. Think about that for a second.
Rad Chad history channel doesn't make history shows anymore. Everybody knows that
@Bleed The Machines It's not even close to that number though. It's not even 2/3.
@Bleed The Machines hoped so but you never know in comment sections.
Well it may appear on the history channel so what? It's still a historical fiction drama first and foremost it's not a biography.
@@lampad4549 By your "argument," then the movie 300 could have been played by twenty black transgender women in wheelchairs or single scarecrow with a spear taped to its hand. "It doesn't matter. It's a historical fiction drama. What if the hobbits in the Lord of the Ring series beat Sauron or whatever by farting on him? Doesn't matter. It's fantasy. This is not an argument at all, and it's cancerous.
Historical fiction is based on history. Historical fiction must be rooted in some history. The amount of liberties taken can vary, but they are inexorably working within the confines of their medium. How good a movie would Tombstone have been were Doc Holiday, for example, played by a morbidly obese woman wielding a lightsaber instead of man resemblant of the real life character wielding firearms that were more or less period correct?
As it turns out, this is important.
This is why I have trouble watching "historical" TV shows even though I'm a huge history buff. I get to annoyed. And since most people watching these shows won't bother to look things up, they will believe that it is historically accurate and all the stereotypes just gets reinforced.
MY SENTIMENTS exactly. How I long to see history done right in movies.
kattegat scenes were filmed in Blessington Co Wicklow. I ve actually walked around there when they were filming
How does a Viking cope with pain?
He ig-NORSE it
...
CAP198462 Get out.
Best joke ever
That was fucking godly my friend CAP198462 xD
This made me laugh out loud. Love from Norway.
No, the History Channel did a lot of publicity in the lead up to the first season stating that they did a lot of research to make it historically accurate. Us Viking re-enactors were really looking forward to it. First off the steering oars are on the WRONG side of the ships! I won't bother with the rest of the rubbish they portray. As re-enactors everything we do is a million times more accurate than that show. Case in point, two Swedish re-enactors went to an open casting in Ireland, with full kit of their own and were told to go to Wardrobe to be made to look like "real Vikings". If it was produced by HBO we would understand but as its by The History channel it's set back public perception of the era back to the Victorian era. They may as well have horned helmets.
Yeah, the History Channel's selling it as a historically accurate drama is why I never bothered tuning in. This was the channel that was 1/2 Hitler & Nazis, 1/3 UFOs, and 1/4 cryptozoology. I never had faith they would do it justice.
history stopped being about accuracy and history about the time they started showing "ancient aliens".
i hate vikings. it's a fucking terrible show
Totally agree with you. What I don't understand is that they were told about the obvious error with regards to the steering oar mistake. Why didn't or have not corrected that error?
But don't you know, it was the aliens that gave the Norse that armor!.....
Vikings was such a cool show and seemed so promising. It was really cool to see their take on the culture, and how they fought the english. I really liked the side story of the priest who is slowly becoming apart of their culture as he continues to be with them.
Its a shame it turned into a total game of thrones clone with stupid political family disputes and drama that feels like its for drama’s sakes.
It is for dramas sake.
It's also a shame how they went and turned Aethelstan into a damn saint or martyr or whatever. He could've been so damn well integrated into the story and they just go ahead and do what they did to him
My only issue is the stupid tactics 🙄
Like the Saxons whom were always fighting against each other and so on. You'd think they'd pick a up a thing or two. At the very least.
Woke cheap plots putting women higher dumbly, Laguerta's later story, Rollo bringing it troops to Scandinavia. Let alone him killing his own, ergo, no norman culture. The civil war and Ivar caring to take Scandinavia, like, why even?
The whole battle for Norway when Björn ended up ruling Sweden. And I stopped watching but I doubt they would have done the invasion of England badly.
@JackSonEFla2After losing most your lands to an enemy most times fighting in numerical inferiority m Those who you many times had to ally or buy off to survive in the worst times? Those who ended conquering you and forming your current language? (Those being the half norse Normans)
The Jutts, Angles, Frisians and Saxons succeeded on defeating and obliterating the entirety of Roman Brittania but it's not as if we thought of the Romans as therefore inferior.
Concerning the hair styles, I would like to add that I highly doubt shaving part of the head was part of the old Nordic custom. What we can go on concerning such things through written accounts, depictions on rune- and gotlandic picture stones, etc, show nothing indicating that it was a thing.
Somehow "Asterix" seems more plausible.
The way I see it, Vikings is a form of historically inspired fantasy.
300 is terribly unrealistic except for that brief moment when they first use the phalanx, but it becomes more watchable and forgivable when you remember that it is Dilios' retelling of the event. He exaggerated what he saw to demonize the Persians and make the Spartans look badass. It was propaganda to hype them up before the final battle.
While this could explain away the weird fantastical elements like Goat Men and vampiric Immortals in japanese kabuki masks...
The campfire storytelling scenes, as well as the end scene at Platea are apparently the real deal (Dilios dies in that battle so it isn't another retelling by him), so it shows that the Spartans in that world did march into battle in nothing but capes, helmets, and leather speedos :\
Vito C those arent japanese kabuki masks. They looked much more like Mongol war masks.
The funniest historical inaccuracy in 300 is when Leonidas insults the soldiers from Athens by basically calling them gay. Apparently the film makers never realised that Sparta was one of the most gay-friendly cultures in history, to the point where homosexual love was seen as more pure than hetero love.
300 is based on a graphic novel, not real life. And yeah the reason it's all exaggerated is because it's him telling a story
I think of it as the second layer. Dilios telling those stories before the battle is itself part of the overarching legend of Spartans that he himself helped to build and that we, the audience, remember now. Meta!
shut up persian you got destroyed by a country half or less your army. PATHETIC.
Could we possibly get an analysis of the movie The 13th Warrior (Eaters of the Dead)? Damn entertaining movie even if it isn't completely accurate. I'd love to know your thoughts on it.
Nate M agree
Absolutely agree, excellent film 👍
Something people might find interesting is that Ivar the Boneless may actually be a mistranslation of his name. The Latin word for boneless only has one letter difference from the Latin word for despicable. So it's likely that he was actually known as Ivar the Despeciable, but the name was copied wrong and he was then forever known as the Boneless. There was actually a skeleton found in Ireland at the site of the Great Invasion of the Vikings into Ireland. The way the skeleton was buried showed that the man was incredibly important. He was a very tall man and interestingly enough, the presence of a boar tusk positioned deliberately between his legs and a cut mark to one of his thighs gives evidence that his manhood was cut off, something that would have only been done to a man who was truly hated. It's speculated that the skeleton belonged to Ivar, and showed no sign of being physically disabled in any way.
I enjoyed watching the first season. Somewhere into the second season I lost interest and haven't watched the series since.
The main reason my family watched it in the first place was to see what the makers had done to my wife's ancestor (Ragnar Lodbroke, as he's called in Swedish).
One detail I liked a lot, and which isn't mentioned here, is that it seemed (in the first season, at least) like the Britons speak something fairly close to real Anglo-Saxon!
What we found most annoying is when they go to places that are known to be historical, but the location doesn't look anywhere near correct in terms of topography and vegetation. (Uppsala being one of the prime examples.)
Some specific comments to Metatron's comments:
1) In the Nordic languages today the term "Viking" typically refer to a Norse person living in Scandinavia during the period 500-1000 AD. Back then "viking" was a verb, as you point out, but the by now about 100 years old "romantic" reference to the population prevail.
2) I agree 100% about what weapons and armour these rich persons should use, historically. Based on affordability the priority "shopping list" for a Scandinavian going to battle would be: a) Spear, b) shield(s) (those were cheap, and not expected to survive a battle!), c) helmet, d) axe, e) chain mail and f) sword.
3) The Viking shields used in the series may have the right size and shape, but they lack the main structural component: Raw hide (on front and rear side). One swing with a sword or axe will split the shield apart unless there's hide to provide structural integrity. Furthermore the hide will help stopping arrows that would otherwise go clean through. (The thin wooden disk is just thick enough to not crumble under the tension when the hides dry.)
"Viking" was a verb, but also a word used to describe a person of that profession. However, it was not specific to norse people back in those days. In the sagas, the word Viking is used on people of multiple origins, even muslim Moors of Spain. I think "pirate" is a decent translation, really.
PS. Try not to learn anything about norse society in that show. They're operating under feudalism, evident under Jarl Haraldsson's rule. And don't get me started on how stupid it is in the first place to have a norse character who is referred to by patronymic surname. ;)
yes, the 16th century helmets on Wessex army... Every time i see them i have my eyes burned!!!
I'm too particular when I watch "historical" drama. I also don't see why a producer or costumer would go Hollywood with clothing when the real clothing was better. Good points throughout
In terms of the burgeonets bit, I am almost certain they bought them on discount because Game of Thrones had used a ton for Stannis' army and didn't need that much going onward
Isn't the armour worn by the Franks supposed to be a coat of plates? It would be very anachronistic and a design that doesn't exist as far as historical examples are concerned but it would explain the studs.
Looks more like a brigandine in the screenshot. Especially when you look at the way the armor is cut in a way that is very reminiscent to the 15th/16th century. So, it's even more anachronistic actually.
In another scene in the show (scene where the franks repel a viking attack) the soldiers look like they're wearing gambesons though, so props to them on that one.
The Franks in this vid are definitely wearing Brigandines.
The studs look like failed rivets.
Also, the Islanders look to be wearing western scale or really bad (early) coat of plates, which is weird looking but not too Asian...
How can you tell the difference between a coat of plates and a brigandine from afar? Don't they look the same?
295Phoenix Brigandine is shorter.
Mind you, that is likely to be just me.
They´re closely related, but rule of thumb says Brigandine is more on the side of smaller, more numerous plates, where a coat of plates has fewer individual plates, especially in the chest and belly area. Given that the rivets are fairly evenly spread, I would tend towards brigandine here.
However, given how long these pieces of armor are and that they dont have folds, it looks like you could not sit down in these things if there were actual metal plates riveted on the inside.
I cannot say I agree with the lack of helmets for a cinematography reason. Just make the leaders helmets extremely distinctive. It is extremely believeable. We need these Vikingers to be more blinged out, man!
@Reinhard von Lohengramm Yes, exactly. We all know what a centurion looks like. Why? The helmet. It's a fact of reality, humanity has absolved this issue.
Salutations from Sweden! Love your work, Metatron. Just wanted to state that, at least in Sweden, it is common for everyday people to actually call the old Norse folk "Vikings" or "Vikingar" as we say it in Swedish. Regardless of how correct or incorrect it is to refer to the demographic in this manner, it is simply something that has become a common thing to do. Language and the use of words can vary so much between the world of Academia and the everyday life. I am however glad to have learned that Viking is in fact an action and not a demographic of people. At least during my school years we mostly learned about the old Norse mythology as well as the village life, not much focus was placed on the actual raids or the Viking act. Perhaps it is a source of historical shame? I don't know, but it is interesting to think about.
Yeah everyone calls the people back then for vikings here in scandinavia. Dont know where he got that from.
Metatron, I think the Frankish soldiers were wearing Brigandine. Seems like there were plenty of Deloreans in the Age of the Vikings
Sweden has Iron ore. We had plenty of Iron. We exported Iron during the Roman age. Good smiths existed too back then, a tool chest has been found, it had everything a smith need.
It wont suprise me if we start to see shieldmaidens wearing Full plate armor. You know, the fantasy heavy armor for woman.
The chastity armor are to much protection for shieldmaidens :P
Next thing there are skeletal legionnaires with the armour on fighting the norse invaders.
I'm still waiting for the berserks wearing fur and inmune to damage :P
I'm waiting for huns appearing outta nowhere in Kattegat wearing lamellars and using crissmessers on mounted combat while Ragnar and his troupe has trouble dealing with Skraelings in Vinland... Who are actually mohawks from the XIX century.
Now i gotta sleep.
breastplates with nipples , no doubt.
In Denmark, we do use the word Viking to address our ancestors, and sometimes even ourselves. Don't know about Norway or Mordor though
We do pretty much the same here in Mordor, of that you can be assured my dear neighbour.
Great video. My family line traces back to 950AD. Uncle Ognir always kept us straight on what viking meant. The old magic view had The Vikings on five reels should have been called The Scandinavians.
"Coitus interruptus" Sounds like a harry potter spell XD
How about Lagertha's cheerleader army? At first, I just thought it was a ploy. I expected that the real Viking army would show up to sneak attack the enemy, after they fell down laughing.
Why?
The series is clearly based upon the sagas. While the sagas can't be interpreted as 100% accurate, it's still a historical text, and what the show is based on. Had they stayed true to the sagas all the time, you could argue it would be historically correct fantasy st least.
And in the sagas we do have shield maidens, and Lagertha is named as such.
I have much more problems with them going around in biker gear, than showing women fighting. Could perhaps be more realistic in what you show women to do, but that goes for the men as well.
We even have description of a woman grabbing a sword and attacking skralingr (Indians) when the men are running away, so an army of shield maidens is far from the least accurate thing here. Give them spears if you want to be more accurate. Or start with real errors in the show first.
@@JDahl-sj5lk Sure there's some stories about women fighting but this show is indeed pushing it to the max. The show is to modern and it kind of ruin the "credibility". Fighting women is a thing done by the media mostly post 2001, and then of course a very few historical sagas and stories. I don't agree at all that vikings in biker gear is less realistic. Women in ancient times mostly fought wars when the numbers of soldiers was so low that they had to fight. Children likewise.
Pyramus K
You can of course argue the numbers and how realistic it is, but at least it is in the sagas. The credibility of the show should in any case be piss poor, as it’s very far from realistic in a lot of ways.
I think the fighting overall is pretty devoid of any tactical or martial credibility, it’s really just pure fantasy. So women fighting as they do in the show just goes to prove that point.
If however, the armor and clothing was more accurate, and the fighting overall, then some shield maidens (such as Lagertha which is named as one), with shield and spears (the spear being the one of the best weapons for a woman, and one of the main weapons used in the migration/Viking period, would be something I’d really like to see.
That they have a women army instead of a couple is not much more unrealistic than men fighting half naked (successfully) and cutting through mail.
But what one finds as more unrealistic is really up to ones choice, when they are all unrealistic.
Ps. I happen to practice fencing, and while there are certainly less women, I have seen what abilities they can muster. And while not the everyday girl, some can definitely hold their own with a sword.
@@pyramusk3264 I agree that the show is pushing it, but as has been mentioned it's fairly accurate in that regard (from what sources we have). Furthermore it is know that women in "viking" society were fairly equal when it came to rights of any sort, i say fairly because f.i. they weren't allowed at "ting". This can be seen where I am from (Faroe Islands), dating back ca. 800 years with records, not a few, but many. Granted this is some 100s of years later, but the difference historically/socially speaking wouldn't have been that large.
That said, the "cheerleader squad" you mention.. yeah, that just smells far and away like pure modern feminism :D
2017: "guns would look anachronistic"
2020: FUCKIN' HOT AIR BALLOONS
I don't see why more shows aren't historically accurate. It would be reasonably easy to make an entertaining show, while making it educational.
You didn't mention TATTOOS.
There is still to this day zero evidence that the Norse people had tattoos, whiles it is likely they knew about tattoos, we do not know if they themselves wore them or practiced the art.
the rus or vargieans were known for having full body tattoos...although that aswell the hair like commonly used by normas aswell as the tail on like cosacks are old steppetraditions mongols are famouse for their hairstyle to difference from settled...
aswell as britons used it before roman time..rember like the horse came first from tamed...but that is far another topic about people migration althought old germanic culture/relgion been pretty simulair with the one found on the steppes before
I have only found your videos today, and I am delighted by your enthusiasm for accuracy. And also by your care not to directly offend those who have made mistakes. Thank you. Please continue!
LMFAO I would never have expected you to talk about pulling out condoms, while still giving information. I had no Idea proto-condoms existed, that is hilarious
"I'm Norwegian and I support this message."
You make some great points. I like your common sense approach. Keep spreading the word Metatron!
Couple of things that bugged me about the tv-series:
Ragnars brother being called "Rollo". Rollo is a latinized name. His real name in scandinavian would've been "Hrolf" or "Rolf", and should've been pronounced as such. "Rollo" just makes me think of the toddler in the cartooned series "The Cleveland Show".
Second, in one of the episodes they visit "The Temple of Uppsala" (presumably in Uppsala, Sweden) and the show depicts this as some grand wooden temple, among the mountains and even with some dramatic waterfalls nearby.
There is just one problem... Anyone who ever went to the actual Uppsala would tell you that the entire Uppsala region is completely flat.
All you'll see in Uppsala are open plains, fields and a few patches of largely flat forests. And the only waters you'll see consists of lakes and creeks. So, some grand wooden temple in the mountains? In Uppsala it ain't! :P
"Rollo" literally means roller blind oder roller curtain in german xD
He went down in history as "Rollo". You just have to deal with that fact. Ragnar wasn't "Lothbrok"
That Uppsala thing is the only thing so far that bothers me, history wise. And the human sacrifice bullshit - that was never done in reality.
It doesn't matter. Still makes no sense why his norse fellows would refer to him as "Rollo" before they even met any other Europeans who could've latinized his name.
Also, norse pagans did sacrifice human beings, whether you like it or not.
You are pretty much correct. Rollo is the latin version which makes sense insofar as some of the records of this guy were recorded by monks who wrote in Latin.The name in Old Norse was Hrolf Gangr (no letter e in ganger). He was a real figure most likely Norwegian and not even remotely related to Ragnar L. who was Danish. There is today a statue in the capital of Normandy, Rouen, of it's Norse founder in 911. And the French have inscribed his name as "Rollo".
The show is mostly in English unless they're trying to show the differences between the languages (Norse, Saxon, Frankish) so it makes as much sense for them to say Rollo as it does for them to say "hey"
"not using a shield is suicidal in any kind of battle situation."
-Internal rEEeeeEee in Japanese :,D
Your guys used shields too, they just wore them on their shoulders like space marines.
@@jackdeily8615 not everyone. Only Samurai (with Samurai armor)
Idk bout y'all but Samurai armor have these mix between a Pauldron and Shield. You could say they're Shoulder Shields 😅 Especially true with Oyoroi
So in a way, they used shields, it's just that it is hanging on your shoulders/breastplate.
Very good description - only fault is you should offset/resize your image so it doesn't cover up the background image.
"There is always the option of coitus interruptus"
Fanciest way I've ever heard of pulling out described.
In 2020 men still don’t pull out.
Some men do, but it's really not a good method of contraception and totally ineffective against the diseases of Venus. We are fortunate to have many far better options available to us now.
When Bjorn came back from exploring and said, “I had to FIND MYSELF,” it was really annoying, SO 20th century. 😒
Not at all. Proving yourself in the wild is an ancient practise.
Just found your channel this week and wanna say well done on upgrading your vid quality. Been binging your content and this is the first early content I've watched.
the only warriors from history that didn't wear armor used shields