The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

Another Perspective

History Channel Gets Vikings Precisely Wrong

By on 3.12.13 @ 6:07AM

Kirk Douglas would have taken greater care.

It’s been more than fifty years since Kirk Douglas and his production company produced what most people still consider the best Viking movie ever made, The Vikings. Within the limits of the information available at the time, they made a good faith effort to do the thing relatively authentically. We’ve learned much in the years since, especially due to advances in archaeology, and many reenactors around the world (of whom I am among the least) work hard to re-create authentic Viking Age life. Dozens of accurate replicas of Viking ships have been built and put to sea, to the wonder and delight of many. The time would seem to be ripe for a depiction of the Viking Age that would surpass Kirk Douglas’s film in portraying of one of the most exciting and colorful eras in human history.

The History Channel’s new series, Vikings, is not it.

I could say a lot about the technical faults of this series — the nonsensical idea that 8th or 9th century Scandinavians had never heard of the British Isles, the placement of the “steering board” (starboard) on the port side of the ship — but I want to discuss here what I see — on the basis of viewing the first episode — as the philosophical and political underpinnings of the thing. And no, I’m not joking. There’s ideology being flogged here, and it’s more significant to our history than you probably think.

The villain of the series thus far is the chieftain who rules over the hero Ragnar Lodbrok (Travis Fimmel), a man called Jarl (Earl) Haraldson (Gabriel Byrne). This title formulation, by the way, is a dumb one, equivalent to calling the queen of England “Queen Windsor.” Jarl Haraldson rules like a feudal lord, dominating the governing assembly (the “Thing”), bullying and threatening everyone. Ragnar has a dream of sailing west to raid the British Isles, but the jarl insists there is no such place. He threatens Ragnar with the confiscation of his property if he doesn’t get in line.

This is not in any way an accurate depiction of the political system of the Vikings. Rather, it’s an expression of the tropes to which lazy contemporary scriptwriters are prone. Every story has to be about some dynamic young person (who wants freedom) in conflict with a hidebound old conservative, who lives by oppression.

The problem — and this is serious in a series coming from a network that calls itself the History Channel — is that this is precisely the opposite of the political dynamic that was actually playing out in the Viking Age.

In the Viking Age, there was indeed an old tradition — but it was a tradition of freedom and democracy. And there were fresh new ideas about — but they were ideas of centralization and autocracy.

As it happens I’m currently in the process of translating a Norwegian book whose title means Norway in the Viking Age (though we’re planning to jazz that up for the American market). The author is Prof. Torgrim Titlestad of the University of Stavanger. His thesis is that Viking society (which had roots in earlier Germanic tribalism of the sort described by Tacitus) was essentially democratic, centered in local, district, and regional Things, with authority vested in twelve-man courts and  Lawspeakers, whose duty it was to recite one-third of the law each year. These were not egalitarian assemblies — the chieftains and magnates certainly had power and exercised it — but they were essentially democratic, and every free man had a voice. When pushed by the chieftain, they were more than willing to push back.

As pictured in the Vikings series, the Thing is held in the jarl’s house and is totally under his control. The jarl of this story acts in ways the real Vikings of that time would never have tolerated. Indeed, one of the old Norwegian Thing laws (unfortunately impossible to date) makes it a civil duty to rebel against a chieftain who arrogates too much power to himself. Things were held in the open air, in a central, neutral location offering no special advantage to the chieftain.

Now it’s true that the Viking Age was an age of change in Scandinavia. This Thing system came under attack from “new thinkers” who fancied they had a better way. These new thinkers were primarily Christians (an awkward fact for me, as a Christian, to swallow, but there it is — and in fact there were Christians on both sides) who had picked up fashionable new ideas in continental Europe. These new ideas argued that everything would work much better if all the power was placed in the hands of a king, who would centrally manage the realm. The old democratic Things, in this view, were outmoded relics of a barbaric and heathen past, due to be stamped out.

In other words, the liberals were autocratic and freedom-hating, and the conservatives were democratic and freedom-loving.

Very much like our own time.

Which probably explains why the people at the History Channel got it so wrong. Telling it right would be Hollywood blasphemy.

About the Author

Lars Walker is the author of several published fantasy novels, the latest of which is an e-book, Hailstone Mountain.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (52) |

Arnie| 3.12.13 @ 7:14AM

The History channel is not really a channel about history.

It basically boils down to American navel gazing about WW2, alien speculation present and past, and irrelevant interviews with media personalities on topics the have no business talking about...i.e. Sheryl Crow.

Out of the more than 10 thousand years of human history, this is the best this horrible excuse for a channel can come up with.

KyMouse| 3.13.13 @ 4:53PM

The Vikings were pretty hard on a lot of people whose shores they visited, but they brought a form of land management and government with them. The Isle of Man is a good example of this. Each year, its government meets for Tynwald, an open-air ceremony whose name comes from the Viking "Thingvollr." New laws are read (in Manx Gaelic and in English) and people can petition on the spot for redress of certain wrongs, I believe.
The Manx parliamentary system is the oldest continuing one in the world, and its roots are very Viking.

The island also has a number of wonderful stone crosses carved by Christianized Vikings and other folks about 1,000 years ago.

Arnie| 3.12.13 @ 7:25AM

"In other words, the liberals were autocratic and freedom-hating, and the conservatives were democratic and freedom-loving."

(Face slap)

What a bunch of crap. Only an American idiot would attempt to compare the political inclinations of modern Americans to that of Scandinavian Vikings during the Dark Ages.
And two, who the hell on the left has argued that the President needs more power and take away the vote from people?

I remember Dick Cheney and Bush arguing they had absolute power (in the executive and legislative branch) to torture and invade whatever country they wanted. And the current crop of Republicans have been trying to deny millions of American the vote.

I think this article can be summed up as "projection."

OP4| 3.12.13 @ 7:28AM

You just Drone on.

markenoff| 3.12.13 @ 9:34AM

"...who the hell on the left has argued that the President needs more power..."

Barack Hussein Obama.

"On climate change, gun control, gay rights, and even immigration, the White House has signaled a willingness to circumvent lawmakers through the use of presidential power. Already, plans are being laid to unleash new executive orders, regulations, signing statements and memorandums designed to push Obama’s programs forward and cement his legacy, according to administration aides and allies. "

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/.....genda.html

markenoff| 3.12.13 @ 9:59AM

"Using EPA
After efforts to pass climate legislation to curb greenhouse gases failed in the first term, administration officials have indicated that they aim to use the Environmental Protection Agency to limit emissions from new power plants and tackle existing plants in the second, according to an environmental activist and a congressional aide.

“The opportunity is in what the president can do under the laws Congress has already passed,” said David Doniger, policy director of the climate program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a New York-based environmental group. “It’s the tools the president already has laying around at home he can use now.”

The Pentagon is poised to extend some military benefits to the same-sex partners of service members, according to a U.S. official, including access to day-care facilities and visiting privileges at military hospitals. Topping the wish lists of gay- rights advocates in the second term is an executive order that would bar workplace discrimination by federal contractors based on sexual orientation."

Arnie| 3.12.13 @ 10:18AM

“It’s the tools the president already has laying around at home he can use now.”

The exercise of these powers is not an expansion of powers. That being said, if you think the presidency has too much power, I'm in agreement with you Markenoff. That includes the presidency's of W, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, and Kennedy.
You get my point.

Anyway, the article was painting all liberals in America as being autocratic. You need to bring up a lot more examples than a center-right Obama.

SUBVET| 3.12.13 @ 11:17AM

Arnie/dip$hit...........want history ??????

Try the book of life........in the famous words of Mr. Mark.....your a DRONE.

Occam's Tool| 3.15.13 @ 7:57PM

NC Governor Purdue talked about Suspending Elections in America, for one.

Obama specifically singled out Fox News as an "enemy," for two. (Bill O'Reilly bent OVER to be far to the scumbag).

But Purdue SPECIFICALLY argued suspending elections, and she is on the Left. Google it, Arnie. Then apologize.

Occam's Tool| 3.15.13 @ 7:59PM

"fair to that scumbag."

markenoff| 3.12.13 @ 11:17AM

The White House assertiveness has sparked complaints from Republicans. Obama’s gun proposals, released on Jan. 16, drew a sharp response from one lawmaker mentioned as a possible 2016 presidential contender.

“President Obama is again abusing his power by imposing his policies via executive fiat instead of allowing them to be debated in Congress,” said Florida Senator Marco Rubio, in a statement released after Obama’s announcement. “President Obama’s frustration with our republic and the way it works doesn’t give him license to ignore the Constitution.”

It’s not just Republicans who have objected to Obama’s efforts to wield executive power. The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington ruled on Jan. 25 that the president violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate last year to appoint three members to the National Labor Relations Board.

Bill8472| 3.12.13 @ 1:19PM

Yeah, but I don't they thought they could blow up Americans in the U.S.A. with drone strikes.

They did have that going for them.

djn1313| 3.12.13 @ 1:51PM

Arnie: You are so full of cr_p with your progressive/liberal rants. When have the GOP denied millions the right to vote? You need to brush up on "real" history instead of the trash fed idiots like you by the demoRATS. The demoRATS and their KKK wing did more to deny the rights of people.

lost| 3.12.13 @ 3:47PM

"And two, who the hell on the left has argued that the President needs more power and take away the vote from people?"
That would be Barack Obama and North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue. Just to name 2

Brad| 3.12.13 @ 9:26PM

Not to mention virtually every a-hole at MessNBC, and that limey prick Piers "Americans need the nanny state" Morgan at CNN, and virtually every horses a** in Hollyweird, and...

OP4| 3.12.13 @ 7:31AM

I assumed a television series would be inaccurate. I would be more interested in the historical accuracy of Bernard Cornwell's Saxon Chronicles series.

donserge| 3.12.13 @ 7:35AM

"...coming from a network that calls itself the History channel."

They can call themselves whatever they like but it has been obvious for several years that they are all about rewriting much of of history with a liberal slant. Trouble is, the 'ignorant masses' believe all they say.

JimH| 3.12.13 @ 7:53AM

Regarding Viking movies, Ernest Borgnine was great as the king in The Vikings. Tony Curtis brought as much credibility to his part as he did in the Black Shield of Falmouth (yonda lies the castle of my faddah). My favorite however was the 13th Warrior with Antonio Bandaras playing an Arab.

Alan| 3.12.13 @ 8:15AM

History channel? All one needs to do when watching a so-called history movie or drama in the pre-gunpowder era is look at whether or not the central charactors are wearing their swords on their belts or on their backs hollywood style. If the latter, turn it off or watch something else.

Miles Glorious| 3.12.13 @ 9:06AM

"Who sails with me"

Riff Raff| 3.12.13 @ 9:30AM

I occaisionally watch the History Channel for a specific program, generally an older one. But other than that I have long given up on this cable staple. What the History Channel has done for "Vikings" they also do for the Bible and a host of other historical subjects. The HC is oh so politically correct, a product of Hollywood Leftists and its programming shows it. Aside from its glossy, PC History, the HC spends way too much time with various "pawn" and "pickers" shows, highlighting obnoxious people who buy, sell, and "pick" other people's junk, not to mention "swamp people," extreme fishing, UFO's, Bounty Hunters, and many other shows that really have little to do with History.

Arnie| 3.12.13 @ 10:22AM

I think it's a product of the wonderful American trait to confuse religious and national myth with historical fact. Also, the complete American obsession with only seeing history through American eyes (this article being a prime example), and also, the lack of an attention span to discuss all the nuances and details of history.

It has essentially become so dumbed down for the average American viewer, it's hardly better than a tabloid....celebrities and aliens...wtf.

markenoff| 3.12.13 @ 11:18AM

You spelled "average Obama voter" wrong.

Arnie| 3.12.13 @ 12:20PM

Ok. I'll be more clear markenoff.

The average American, as defined by Sarah Palin, is that war ("so what if Middle Eastern children die") and bomb loving, bible thumping, white, gun nut, overweight, corporate brand praising cows that likes to watch films about the Bible and call it history....that love to vote for Republicans and against their own economic interests....because they're stupid and think Republicans and the corporate elite are Christians and wouldn't dare try to screw them.

There, I fixed it.

C. Vernon Crisler | 3.12.13 @ 3:53PM

Where did Sarah say that Arnie? I googled it and I only came up with your own post here. Are you another one of those who just makes up things about Sarah because you hate her that much?

BTW, the average American voted for Obama, and for that reason I would agree with you that the average American is a moron.

The Only Good Democrat| 3.12.13 @ 7:36PM

Are these some of the overweight people you are talking about?

http://cnsnews.com/news/articl.....ns-are-fat

When you were talking about the death of Middle Eastern Children, were you referring to the collateral damage from Obama drone attacks.

When you were referring to the corporate elite, did you mean Jon Corzine, you know the MF that Biden said was on the job to solve all our economic problems.

When you talked about economic interests were you referring to trillion dollar deficits as far as we can see. Maybe it was about poisoning any reform of our unsustainable entitlements. Maybe it was transfers of wealth from indebted college students to the education class for some worthless degree. Maybe it was transfers of wealth to green energy scams. Oh yeah that is my economic interest. You are quite a thinker. I hope our tax dollars can get to the bottom of why lesbians are so fat.

Lets face it if they could work anal sex or abortion into any program, you are on board so to speak.

The Only Good Democrat| 3.12.13 @ 7:44PM

Oh by the way Arnie, when you were talking about white people, is this what you had in mind?

http://cdn.rollcall.com/news/c.....gination=1

You are projecting buddy. The signs of your mental illness are obvious. Get help.

Egil| 3.12.13 @ 10:46AM

The History Channel really needs to change its name. It used to do a decent job years ago, when Edward Herrmann and Roger Mudd were hosts. Many of the programs back then might have looked a little clunky, but at least they were mostly about history, rather than UFO's, ice truckers or PC pseudo-history.

On another note, one older movie which, at least for Hollywood, did a decent job of portraying the Middle Ages was "The War Lord," with Charlton Heston and Richard Boone. It showed the power of religion, feudalism and local customs of the time, and it did a nice job with the armour of the Norman warrior characters. And the music and scenery are good.

Who Knows?| 3.12.13 @ 11:59AM

You watch the His Story Channel?

What's YOUR story?

cicero| 3.12.13 @ 12:06PM

The raiders were Norsemen, and what they did was go viking. Viking was the word for raidding, raping, and pillaging. The author is trying to do with the Norse of the 9th and 10th centuries, whatour liberal professors have tried to do with the Iroquois. They were not the first Jeffersonian democrats, and the U.S. Constitution was not built on their base. The main botty of the raiders were slaves. Prior to and after overrunning the British Isles, their maid fieldds of viking were the Balkans. They sold the slaves to the countries controlled by Islam, primarily.

Cornwell's novels are fun, and he always explains at the end what is fact, and what is fiction. He is accurate enough not to have women in the shield walls, and not to make the raiders into dispensers of charity andd purveyors of high culture.

History can be enlightening, and can give us insights into how we got here from there. But, it has to be accurate,otherwise we end up in Hollywood. But I speak the obvious.

Infantryman| 3.12.13 @ 12:10PM

Turn off the TV and read "The Long Ships" by Frans G. Bengtsson

Bill8472| 3.12.13 @ 1:20PM

Or just turn off the TV. That would be an auspicious start.

effinayright| 3.12.13 @ 12:47PM

Arnie, by quoting Palin for something she never said, you once again reveal yourself to be a flake and a troll.

You should open up a 12 oz. can of STFU and chill.

djn1313| 3.12.13 @ 1:43PM

Most of the trash the progressive/liberal History Channel spews out is propaganda for the Left. It has no historical value.

7-08| 3.12.13 @ 2:50PM

I watched a bit of the "documentary" but it took less than ten minutes to realize the portrayal of these voyagers, diplomats, culture shaping people was no more accurate and certainly less entertaining than the "Eaters of the Dead" by Crichton.

Derek Leaberry| 3.12.13 @ 3:38PM

"The Vikings" was comic-book history yet Kirk Kirk Douglas swung a deal that got the much better film, Stanley Kubrick's "Paths of Glory", to production in quid-pro-quo fashion with United Artists. The quid-pro-quo did not end with that. Kubrick directed "Spartacus", starring Douglas, partly as repayment for "Paths of Glory". Part of Douglas' qui-pro-quo for filming "Spartacus" was that he got to do the movie he really wanted to do called "Lonely are the Brave" based on Edward Abbey's novel "Brave Cowboy." "The Vikings" is an average movie and "Spartacus" is better. "Paths of Glory" and "Lonely Are the Brave" are great films, superior to the other two.

darcy| 3.13.13 @ 2:41AM

You probably won't see this reply, but based on your recommendation I rented and watched Paths of Glory tonight. I'm glad I did. Thank you.

Derek Leaberry| 3.13.13 @ 10:55AM

You're most welcome. "Paths of Glory" is an outstanding film. The young lady singing at the film's finish, Suzanne Christian, became Mrs. Stanley Kubrick after the filming was complete and she would be his widow. By the way, Humphrey Cobb wrote "Paths of Glory" and it is a very good read, written in the Hemingway style popular in the 1930s.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 3.12.13 @ 6:13PM

I saw one of the most inane posts above, so I made some efforts to correct the record:

The average American Obama voter, as defined demonstrated by Sarah Palin Arnie, is that war Stalin ("so what if Middle Eastern children die In order to make an omelet, you’ve got to break a few eggs") and bomb Occupy Wall Street loving, bible thumping, guilty white, gun nut phobic, overweight, corporate brand praising cows sheep that likes to watch films about the Bible JFK assassination by Oliver Stone and call it history....that love to vote for Republicans Democrats and against their own nation’s economic interests....because they're stupid and think Republicans Obama, Democrats, the Left and the corporate self-proclaimed elite are Christians going to give them free stuff and wouldn't dare try to screw enslave them.

Brad| 3.12.13 @ 9:31PM

Your fix has one flaw that I'd like to correct: thake the cross-line out of "own"and a "and their" so that the corrected line reads:

"...that love to vote for Democrats against their own and their nation's economic interests..."

Thanks.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 3.13.13 @ 4:02PM

A point well made, sir.

mike 3/505| 3.14.13 @ 4:41PM

Big Al,

You are showing off again! :-)

Regards,

Mike

Tafuna| 3.12.13 @ 7:07PM

The History Channel has as little to do with history as the SyFy (formerly SciFi) channel has to do with science fiction what with its fake wrestling shows.

Frekki| 3.12.13 @ 9:40PM

As a Viking, and a son of Vikings. (sen), let me enlighten you.
We are not christian, although I am.
We are not interested in the history of the English, although they are mostly Viking.
We care about these things;
A strong family, a strong state, a strong ethos before God.
Isn't it curious that your society is coming apart, and ours isn't.
More later;
Come and get them.

gray man| 3.14.13 @ 3:16AM

Norway, Sweden, Denmark all have about 70% lutheran population. I would say you are Christians.

gray man| 3.14.13 @ 3:17AM

and while we are at it, there is plenty of evidence the vikings helped the arab/islamic slave trade.

Stevemmn| 3.12.13 @ 10:21PM

How about left wing columnist Tom Friedman, who has been pining for China-style dictatorship for some time.

Cpm| 3.14.13 @ 2:21PM

Just today Bill Gates said he wished our system was more like Britain's so Obama would have more power.
The Learning Channel relieved themselves of having to teach anything worthwhile by changing their name to TLC, allowing them to inflict shows like Honey BooBoo and Hoarding on viewers.

dufasduck| 3.14.13 @ 4:59PM

From what I have read, the movie "The Thirteenth Warrior" is a little more accurate than "The Vikings"...

PaulConservative| 3.26.13 @ 12:34AM

This review and the discussion following is off base. The Vikings is historical fiction, nothing more. It's not a documentary and never claimed to be. Michael Hirst created The Tudors, and likewise it is loosely based on history, with a lot of artistic license. You could write a book about all the details that are wrong.

Like the Tudors the details may be wrong but the big picture has a lot right going for it. When was the last time an American TV series took religion seriously? A lead character is a monk - is that a typical liberal Hollywood value? Warriors are warriors - no apologies about it - is that typical liberal Hollywood?

What about the psychological truth - does the series give you a sense of their values and how their lives were? What motivated them?

Isn't the series far more creative than most of the crap that's on network TV? How much cheaper and easier it is to create one more police procedural, just follow the formula.

I like Cornwell's books too, I liked Paths of Glory and Spartacus - this series is in that tradition and it is well acted and the production values are high. Realistically though if absolute fidelity to the historical record conflicts with dramatic necessity of course the drama wins. That's show business.

I sometimes despair of conservatives who can't just enjoy a (ripping) yarn as it is written and have to view everything through a political lens.

Naidlery| 4.8.13 @ 3:58PM

I stumbled upon this article while looking for a description of the historicity of History Channel's Vikings. I must say, the comments accusing the author of politicizing history or viewing it through the lens of the United States made me chuckle. It's ironic to say that about someone who is pointing out that the faults in a semi-historical TV show may be based in a liberal American creator's political bias. Let's not forget the difference between TV and real history!

Also, those comments represented an ignorance of cultural and historical study. Cultures always have two contrary forces at work within it on a scale from conservative to liberal. The definition of "conservative" and "liberal" varies according to the specifics in the culture, as Mr. Walker mentions in his article. In terms of the historical Viking culture, democracy was the conservative stance while a central authority was liberal. This would be reversed in countries like Iran or the U.S. at the time of the American Revolution (with obvious variations).

History and culture are highly cyclical, so even an analysis of the macrocosm of historical trends based on the American microcosm wouldn't be entirely misplaced any more than Darwin's extrapolation of macroevolution from the observed phenomenon of microevolution.

Keith Schumacher| 4.28.13 @ 7:02PM

It looks like part of your article was plagiarized... some of it word-for-word.
http://breathecast.christianpo.....cies-6919/

More Articles by Lars Walker

More Articles From Another Perspective

The United States of El Norte

May 24, 2013 | Larry Thornberry

What Are the Risks of Syria Involvement?

May 23, 2013 | Christopher Orlet

The Other Gosnells

May 22, 2013 | Jordan Gonzalez

Stifle This, Mr. President

May 16, 2013 | Ray V. Hartwell, III

The Scheme to Make America Fat

May 10, 2013 | Marta H. Mossburg

http://spectator.org/archives/2013/03/12/history-channel-gets-vikings-p

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|27 comments

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|80 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|45 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|60 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|94 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|35 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|2 comments

The Spectacle Blog

The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case

Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13

Jimmy Wray, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 5.25.13

The Spectator’s Spectacular: May 18-May 25

Patrick Ryan | 5.25.13

Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Felonious Attorney General?

Kaylin Bugos | 5.24.13

Did the Boy Scouts Cave to Pressure?

Claire Healey | 5.24.13

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 5.24.13

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.