The only mention in actual history of the blood Eagle is when Ivar does it to the man who kills his father...will be interesting to see if they follow through with that. DD
Ahhhhhhhh... Can't wait. But I hope they hold off on killing Ragnar as long as possible. As great an actor as Ivar is, The Ragnar and Ivar scenes together are just too good.
I know it would suck if he dies - Here is how he dies - if you are interested. Spoiler He is dropped into a pit of Vipers DD
That is not actual history, that is more Norse mythology. Anglo-Saxon history has Aella dying in battle. In any event, the show is completely messed up with historical accuracies, timelines, etc. some things it is having as earlier than actual history, others are later. People, events, etc. It started out seeming to attempt some historical nods but is straight mythology at this point.
I don't except that I wish it knew what it wanted to be from the beginning. As for my post, you were talking about what happened in history and I was pointing out that you were quoting mythology.
In general you can't really trust the Ragnar Lodbrok sagas because they are filled with magic and mysticism. It is a little bit like King Arthur legends. There might be some historical basis but Ragnar Lodbrok could be a composite of a bunch of Ragnars (there were a lot) or some wholly made up. But the same chronicles that call Iva's mother a powerful sorceress should be taken with a grain of salt when compared with Anglo-Saxon histories (which can still be problematic in their own right). Keep in mind Scandanavians were a mostly non-literate culture at the time so any "history" was word of mouth storytelling. What is most likely is that there were a few Ragnars but none seemed to be an ultimate leader kind of figure. For the time, Ivar the Boneless seems to be the biggest fear for the Anglo-Saxons (and he was a military leader and not a cripple).
It absolutely did know what it wanted to be from the beginning, historical fiction. Easy enough right?
Historical fiction doesn't usually have magic in it. The magic has increased over the seasons. That is all I meant. Not a big deal but I prefer for shows to be more obvious when fantasy so people don't think anyone of it is accurate.
Mysticism and magic is a huge part of all kinds of historical fiction. The Bible is a huge example. Polytheistic religions are just as rich. I don't really see the problem.
Spoiler Wow - killing the main actor, has any series EVER survived that? Will this series? I mean there are powerful characters, Bjorn, Ivar, Lagatha, Floki, but will the series be able to hold it's audience without Ragnar? I mean for the short term people will want to see the revenge for him, but as time goes by, he fades, and will the audience stay? Unreal. DD
Yeah, you should spoil that. I am not sure why you are shocked. It was pretty obvious he was going to die...maybe not this early on in the season. Ragnar has become uninteresting. He had to go. I suspect we will see another season and then the show will be done.
Definitely should have spoilered those comments DD. Spoiler His death gives the last 5 episodes momentum and the revenge angle should be interesting. IMO, Ivar is savvy enough to accept Lagertha's help in avenging Ragnar but he will kill her immediately afterwards while in Wessex (maybe he kills Ecbert and Lagertha in the same room consecutively). I think Lagertha knows her death is coming. A major new character very important for next season will be introduced shortly. I doubt the show can survive past next season. Regardless, that was an epic sendoff!
