cobalt Wrote:Really? lol I think he got that.....even I got that.
FWIW, :censored:
Major K
"He guards the sleep of his pauper master as if he were a Prince." George Graham Vest
"We are alone, absolutely alone on this chance planet: and, amid all the forms of life that surround us, not one, excepting the dog, has made an alliance with us." - Maurice Maeterlinck
I watched the first three episodes last night. Not sure how I feel about this really. While it visually stunning and for an action/adventures series it is entertaining, however there are some things I don't necessarily like.
Now granted I don't know the history of the main character's RL, but this really seems to glorify the violence and evil deeds the Vikings committed. They weren't at war, all they did was "raid" lands and murder and pillage. The first raid at the temple in England showed the brutality of the Vikings, but we are supposed to thing Ragnar and his band of merry Vikings are somehow good guys? The raping of the servant/slave girl seemed more like it was just showing how these men were versus the evilness of their acts. Should these men be glorified because they defied their evil Lord? As the saying goes, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Also, how accurate is it that the wife was out there fighting? I'm getting really tired of the PC crowd having to have this kind of stuff in the media. How long would a petite 115lb woman last against strong, burly, warrior men over half her size? Not long in real life, but lets have a badass chick in the show to boost ratings.
Overall, I'll finish the episodes I watched and treat it as it is...just more mainstream entertainment to please vast audiences. There's a reason the Vikings did not become the dominant force in the world at that time.
Now granted I don't know the history of the main character's RL, but this really seems to glorify the violence and evil deeds the Vikings committed. They weren't at war, all they did was "raid" lands and murder and pillage. The first raid at the temple in England showed the brutality of the Vikings, but we are supposed to thing Ragnar and his band of merry Vikings are somehow good guys? The raping of the servant/slave girl seemed more like it was just showing how these men were versus the evilness of their acts. Should these men be glorified because they defied their evil Lord? As the saying goes, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Also, how accurate is it that the wife was out there fighting? I'm getting really tired of the PC crowd having to have this kind of stuff in the media. How long would a petite 115lb woman last against strong, burly, warrior men over half her size? Not long in real life, but lets have a badass chick in the show to boost ratings.
Overall, I'll finish the episodes I watched and treat it as it is...just more mainstream entertainment to please vast audiences. There's a reason the Vikings did not become the dominant force in the world at that time.
This post was last modified: 05-11-2013, 09:30 AM by Sigokat.
Major K
"He guards the sleep of his pauper master as if he were a Prince." George Graham Vest
"We are alone, absolutely alone on this chance planet: and, amid all the forms of life that surround us, not one, excepting the dog, has made an alliance with us." - Maurice Maeterlinck
Sigokat Wrote:I watched the first three episodes last night. Not sure how I feel about this really. While it visually stunning and for an action/adventures series it is entertaining, however there are some things I don't necessarily like.
Now granted I don't know the history of the main character's RL, but this really seems to glorify the violence and evil deeds the Vikings committed. They weren't at war, all they did was "raid" lands and murder and pillage. The first raid at the temple in England showed the brutality of the Vikings, but we are supposed to thing Ragnar and his band of merry Vikings are somehow good guys? The raping of the servant/slave girl seemed more like it was just showing how these men were versus the evilness of their acts. Should these men be glorified because they defied their evil Lord? As the saying goes, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
Also, how accurate is it that the wife was out there fighting? I'm getting really tired of the PC crowd having to have this kind of stuff in the media. How long would a petite 115lb woman last against strong, burly, warrior men over half her size? Not long in real life, but lets have a badass chick in the show to boost ratings.
Overall, I'll finish the episodes I watched and treat it as it is...just more mainstream entertainment to please vast audiences. There's a reason the Vikings did not become the dominant force in the world at that time.
The historical Ragnar's first wife was a shield maiden, according to tradition. No idea what her actual size was.
As I understand it, the Norsemen were divided into two groups: the Viking Raiders (who attacked even fellow Norse) and the Norsemen, who were farmers, and traded and explored (but while being able to wage war at the drop of a hat) were more civilized and were documented as being peaceful (unless provoked) in even their contact in Italy, North Africa and Constantinople. This was from several documentaries I saw on cable. I wonder if the series will touch on this?
It's not that women couldn't last with men as women were known to ride and fight with the men among groups as the Scythians and Sarmatians, and were feared by powerful nations that clashed with them. Even when ignoring the leaders who presumably led through political power and/or charisma (such as Boudicca, Joan of Arc, etc) and left the heavy fighting to men, those who acted as spies and guerrillas (and thus not a contest of strength), and also mere legends or after guns & technology help level the battlefield, there were still women like Jeanee Hachette.
So the reason I have doubts about a Viking bringing his wife (granted, there are always anomalies) is because of tradition, superstition, one woman on a shipload of men is begging for trouble (especially if say her husband died), women typically had children to care for, and the fact that women have much better sense than men. Ok, to be fair, men have always been encouraged to hunt & provide, and I can see how easily that evolved into raiding, whereas women were more domestic and centered around children which in turn discouraged raiding and going on offensives, though I prefer to think of it as women having more sense (at least in this regard), especially in the ancient world...and I do wonder how many left also to get away from their women who were said to have an attitude, expert schemers, and mistreating a woman (including a wife) could get her kin after you quick.
Nevertheless, women were sometimes feared more than men in battle (one of the Roman historians said there was mixed feelings when defeat of barbarians was at hand so that the women joined the battle because that meant victory was almost assured but the women fought even more vicious which drove their menfolk to fight more viciously in turn). Heck, Blenda organized women in massacring a bunch of idiotic Vikings that attacked their village while their own menfolk were away fighting someone else. (As for Scythians & Sarmations, they were semi-nomadic with horses an important component of their society so the home moved with the raiding parties sometimes and that's why I think their women sometimes joined in offensives with their men as well as even more likely to join in defensive action, though I bet it was the women that encouraged archery, including the use, so it was plausibly said, of poisoned arrows. One of the accounts of King Darius seeking to fight one of those groups also described their women as avid hunters on horseback as well.)
But overall I am curious about the odd account of someone bringing his wife as it sounds most strange...but people do strange things all the time so I'm willing to entertain the notion, even if it is the History channel saying it (they don't have the best reputation with me).
So the reason I have doubts about a Viking bringing his wife (granted, there are always anomalies) is because of tradition, superstition, one woman on a shipload of men is begging for trouble (especially if say her husband died), women typically had children to care for, and the fact that women have much better sense than men. Ok, to be fair, men have always been encouraged to hunt & provide, and I can see how easily that evolved into raiding, whereas women were more domestic and centered around children which in turn discouraged raiding and going on offensives, though I prefer to think of it as women having more sense (at least in this regard), especially in the ancient world...and I do wonder how many left also to get away from their women who were said to have an attitude, expert schemers, and mistreating a woman (including a wife) could get her kin after you quick.
Nevertheless, women were sometimes feared more than men in battle (one of the Roman historians said there was mixed feelings when defeat of barbarians was at hand so that the women joined the battle because that meant victory was almost assured but the women fought even more vicious which drove their menfolk to fight more viciously in turn). Heck, Blenda organized women in massacring a bunch of idiotic Vikings that attacked their village while their own menfolk were away fighting someone else. (As for Scythians & Sarmations, they were semi-nomadic with horses an important component of their society so the home moved with the raiding parties sometimes and that's why I think their women sometimes joined in offensives with their men as well as even more likely to join in defensive action, though I bet it was the women that encouraged archery, including the use, so it was plausibly said, of poisoned arrows. One of the accounts of King Darius seeking to fight one of those groups also described their women as avid hunters on horseback as well.)
But overall I am curious about the odd account of someone bringing his wife as it sounds most strange...but people do strange things all the time so I'm willing to entertain the notion, even if it is the History channel saying it (they don't have the best reputation with me).
While I don't like most of the violence portrayed in Vikings.....I do appreciate the historical attempt at setting a series like this one. I'm sure the History channel is embelishing to make the story more interesting. Whether women fought as Ragnar's wife did....doesn't matter....it just adds to the story for me.
EWMAN