• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)_

Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Dorian Thompson said:
I got the sense that Siggy knew that Ragnar was watching her through the latice. She seemed to look right at him. For a moment I was wondering if she was being a double agent for Ragnar. I'll have to watch the scene again. Perhaps I misinterpreted.

Yes, Athelstan is the wildcard. To the hundredth power he is. Also, I'm assuming the fourth son Aslaug is carrying is Ivar the Boneless. Some historians suggest that Ivar was actually deformed in some way; all suggest that he was vicious. We shall see. Bjorn is almost too good to be true. He seems more Lagertha's son than Ragnar's. I think the actor is adorable, but almost too good to be true as a character, you know?
Click to expand...
Bjorn does seem too good, but I expect he'll toughen up. I wonder if he will come across Athelstan in England?

I am interested to see how they use this business with Athelwulf, Ecbert's son. Historically, Judith is his second wife, and was a Frankish princess and granddaughter of Charlemnge. 12 to boot... so they're making this up as they go. Alfred the Great was the son of Athelwulf and his first wife, Osburh and neither woman had anything to do with Aella. Who knows how they'll play the English angle beyond the broadest brushstrokes of history.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Just found out that the actor playing Floki is Alexander Skarsgard's younger brother...
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

When Ragnar said last week that he was going to blood-eagle Borg, I think I muttered "oh dear" out loud. My wife asked, and I described the blood eagle to her. She said "oh dear."

Man has such creative ways of killing each other. But I'm wondering if a blood eagle is any worse than crucifixion. I guess it's more brutal, but the victim isn't any happier either way.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

12 to boot...
Click to expand...

12 was considered marriageable age amongst the royals. From what I understand, the man was expected to wait to consummate the marriage for a few years. Margaret Beaufort's husband (he was 26, she was 12) didn't wait, that pig. That's why she was only 13 years older than her son, Henry VII. She was so damaged that she never bore another child. That marriage was arranged by Henry VI. Edmund Tudor was a half brother, I believe, since Henry V's widow, Catherine of Valois, broke royal protocol and had an affair with one Owen Tudor a few years after the king's death.

I'm thinking Michael Hirst chose wisely in not portraying a 12 year old bride but still....why not portray Ethelwulf's first wife? Hmmmmm....shades of making Margaret Tudor nonexistant on The Tudors and thus eliminating the bloodline of Mary Queen of Scots.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Dorian Thompson said:
12 to boot...
Click to expand...
12 was considered marriageable age amongst the royals. From what I understand, the man was expected to wait to consummate the marriage for a few years. Margaret Beaufort's husband (he was 26, she was 12) didn't wait, that pig. That's why she was only 13 years older than her son, Henry VII. She was so damaged that she never bore another child. That marriage was arranged by Henry VI. Edmund Tudor was a half brother, I believe, since Henry V's widow, Catherine of Valois, broke royal protocol and had an affair with one Owen Tudor a few years after the king's death.

I'm thinking Michael Hirst chose wisely in not portraying a 12 year old bride but still....why not portray Ethelwulf's first wife? Hmmmmm....shades of making Margaret Tudor nonexistant on The Tudors and thus eliminating the bloodline of Mary Queen of Scots.
Click to expand...
Agreed, as for the name, that may just have been for the greater familiarity of the name Judith over Osburh. I wonder if Hirst will acknowledge that first wife, or just have Alfred born of this marriage?
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Gov Kodos said:
Dorian Thompson said:
12 to boot...
Click to expand...
12 was considered marriageable age amongst the royals. From what I understand, the man was expected to wait to consummate the marriage for a few years. Margaret Beaufort's husband (he was 26, she was 12) didn't wait, that pig. That's why she was only 13 years older than her son, Henry VII. She was so damaged that she never bore another child. That marriage was arranged by Henry VI. Edmund Tudor was a half brother, I believe, since Henry V's widow, Catherine of Valois, broke royal protocol and had an affair with one Owen Tudor a few years after the king's death.

I'm thinking Michael Hirst chose wisely in not portraying a 12 year old bride but still....why not portray Ethelwulf's first wife? Hmmmmm....shades of making Margaret Tudor nonexistant on The Tudors and thus eliminating the bloodline of Mary Queen of Scots.
Click to expand...
Agreed, as for the name, that may just have been for the greater familiarity of the name Judith over Osburh. I wonder if Hirst will acknowledge that first wife, or just have Alfred born of this marriage?
Click to expand...
The History Channel website has "Inside Episode ..." videos, and judging by the last one, Alfred will be a result of this marriage. Historically, he was born in 849.

The whole timeline of this show is screwed anyway. King Aella, Ragnar, Ragnar's sons, Horik are all about a generation or two too early, Ecbert became a king few years later than in the show, Athelwulf was supposed to be about 4-5 years old when the second season takes place etc etc etc. Just as with The Tudors, the emphasis in "historical fiction" here is much more on fiction.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Still not as off as Xena's "history"! :lol:
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Psst. It's more mythology than history. You know, like the bible, or most of the stories told around hearth fires of old.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Shurik said:
Gov Kodos said:
Dorian Thompson said:
12 was considered marriageable age amongst the royals. From what I understand, the man was expected to wait to consummate the marriage for a few years. Margaret Beaufort's husband (he was 26, she was 12) didn't wait, that pig. That's why she was only 13 years older than her son, Henry VII. She was so damaged that she never bore another child. That marriage was arranged by Henry VI. Edmund Tudor was a half brother, I believe, since Henry V's widow, Catherine of Valois, broke royal protocol and had an affair with one Owen Tudor a few years after the king's death.

I'm thinking Michael Hirst chose wisely in not portraying a 12 year old bride but still....why not portray Ethelwulf's first wife? Hmmmmm....shades of making Margaret Tudor nonexistant on The Tudors and thus eliminating the bloodline of Mary Queen of Scots.
Click to expand...
Agreed, as for the name, that may just have been for the greater familiarity of the name Judith over Osburh. I wonder if Hirst will acknowledge that first wife, or just have Alfred born of this marriage?
Click to expand...
The History Channel website has "Inside Episode ..." videos, and judging by the last one, Alfred will be a result of this marriage. Historically, he was born in 849.

The whole timeline of this show is screwed anyway. King Aella, Ragnar, Ragnar's sons, Horik are all about a generation or two too early, Ecbert became a king few years later than in the show, Athelwulf was supposed to be about 4-5 years old when the second season takes place etc etc etc. Just as with The Tudors, the emphasis in "historical fiction" here is much more on fiction.
Click to expand...
It's taking broad and liberal strokes with history, legend, and conventional fictional forms for sure, but it is a fun story none the less. I'd have loved Athelstan asking Athelwulf sotto voce where the hell this England place was and him shrugging it off and saying just go with it.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

It's taking broad and liberal strokes with history, legend, and conventional fictional forms for sure, but it is a fun story none the less.
Click to expand...
It most definitely is. I love this show.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

The inaccurate history doesn't bother me so much because I've watched a lot of Japanese, Korean and Chinese historical dramas/movies where many liberties were taken with the story. Particularly in terms of offspring for the King/Emperor usually involved in the story since most often have soccer team sized rosters of children from multiple wives/concubines.

I do think there is a little disconnect that this is on the HISTORY channel and not really being very historically accurate though.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Well, considering the History Channel also has a buttload of UFO and cryptozoology shows, this may be one of its more accurate presentations. :D
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Gov Kodos said:
Yeah, Aella should never be happy. The blood eagle was pretty serious, too. It should be interesting to see how this vengeance on Jarl Borg plays out. Sure, expected by Horrik given the attack on his family. But was Horrik serious about helping him escape or did Ragnar and Rollo act faster. Also, it seemed Borg could have been turned into a considerable ally. Could Horrik have changed his mind when Lagertha showed up? Is a chance to get Floki building ships for him a better alternative? Who gets Borg's lands now that the old Jarl is off to Valhalla? Man, there's a lot of territory to cover in the next few episodes with a lot of folks looking at who's on whose side.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, it seems there was a small bit of dialogue that was filmed but not used in the final episode. Someone who knew about Horik's proposition asked him why he didn't actually help save Borg, and the reply was that the king would never have helped him escape. He wanted to make Jarl suffer more by offering him false hope. It seems that while Horik may have been honest about the need for Borg's ships and warriors, he still considered him more of a potential threat than Ragnar is becoming.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Introducing Ivar the Boneless and Princess Slutbunny....
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Remember how the Seer said to Ragnar that one of his sons will marry a daughter of a king?

Bjorn + Princess Slutbunny, mark my words.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

I enjoyed Lagertha's cat. Remembering how the dead hubby compared her breasts to Freja's breasts (she being reknowned for her beauty) Freja was also known for her cats. They were important animals to her and pulled her chariot. Freja was also a goddess of war and had claim to half the dead of the battlefield and Odin the other half. Lagertha makes a great complement to Ragnar in that sense of Freja as Ragnar sees himself a descendant of Odin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freyja
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Shurik said:
Remember how the Seer said to Ragnar that one of his sons will marry a daughter of a king?

Bjorn + Princess Slutbunny, mark my words.
Click to expand...

But first we're bound to get Athelstan and Princess Slutbunny.
 
Re: Vikings season 2 episodes discussions (spoilers inside, of course)

Athelstan sure is a chick magnet....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top