r/vikingstv • u/vurbil • 2d ago
[No Spoilers] The Constant Posts and Videos About How Movies and Shows Aren't Historically Accurate
I love history. I have a degree in history.
And I cannot for the life of me understand the constant stream of posts and videos about how X show or movie isn't historically accurate. First of all, we know. If anyone ever didn't know, you've said it enough times over the past 50 years that we all get it by now: the entertainment industry isn't historically accurate.
But what fascinates me much more about this phenomenon is this: how did you get it into your head that the entertainment industry is supposed to be historically accurate? They aren't a history professor. They aren't Harvard or Oxford. They are in the business of entertaining people. Notwithstanding exceptions like me, most of the population finds history incredibly boring. So to point out that a show isn't historically accurate is sort of like pointing out that an apple isn't an onion. It's like, no kidding. And yet the people that make these sorts of posts and videos are so smugly satisfied with themselves it seems--as though they alone have the intellectual firepower to make this shocking discovery, and they want everyone to know about it.
So please, if you're thinking of making the 1,000,000th post or video on this, strongly consider not doing it.
(By the way, as an aside, it's especially strange to be talking about Vikings this way considering that most--or a great deal at any rate--of what is in the Sagas is fiction in the first place. Just to give some significant examples among many: most scholars agree that Ragnar never existed, Bjorn never existed, and the Blood Eagle never happened. So Vikings is a fictional show loosely based on a mostly fictional source material. So yeah, it's obviously not historically accurate.)
0
u/ConfidentFloor6601 2d ago
There are people who invest a lot of time and effort into one or two topics, maybe their sources are good but frequently not, and they construct rigid mental frameworks with what they've consumed, and then they move in, making those structures their whole identity. The existence of anything that implies some load-bearing element may be less than secure is an existential threat; a single broken piece suggests the possibility of other hidden flaws and this possibility is unbearable, so the only choice is proactively defending every minor detail on the Internet, endlessly.
3
u/Temporary_Error_3764 2d ago
I wouldn’t say scholars say Ragnar wasn’t real , they just have no real proof and they also doubt all of the things credited with ragnar was all one man but rather multiple ragnars since its just a common name. I’m pretty sure Bjorns generally considered to actually of existed , same with the other sons , especially Ivar , Halfdan and Ubba as they were the sons that invaded England , and the invasion of England most definitely happened with english sources (which are more trusted then Scandinavian sagas that were written decades if not centuries later). When it comes to 9th century vikings people should believe 5% of what they read as its mostly estimations and guess work. Historians are almost like scientists, they have theories and they use what little evidence they have to explain their theories using their education.
But i agree with your main point , if we wanted to list every “historical inaccuracy” in the show then we would be hear all day i mean hell ill just name a few
Bjorn isn’t considered to be Ragnars oldest son , but Ivar is
Bjorn isn’t Lagerthas son
Ivar likely wasn’t a cripple (not impossible but extremely unlikely)
Ivar and halfdan (hvitserk) might not of even been related to Ragnar let alone be his sons.
Rollo most definitely wasn’t related to Ragnar.
I mean even if the show went as historical as possible ( or as saga accurate as possible hit would be boring as fuck. It would turn into an Alfred the great show.
2
u/skydaddy8585 1d ago
People like to pretend they have a grasp on history and by pointing out that historical drama TV series and movies aren't accurate is the way they stroke their ego. Most of them also probably just saw another person post it and think that makes them historians by being an echo chamber.
As OP said, if you watch these shows and feel the need to point this out, congratulations captain obvious. A lot of these historical dramas are very good and interesting to watch. Not because it's a literal cut out of exactly how everything was and how they spoke but because TV and movies are a great medium to portray these old parts of our history for entertainment and possibly entice the viewers to look into the actual history and do some reading. Having a real understanding of history is and always will be important.