The History Channel series Vikings ran for six seasons and proved to be quite popular. Now Netflix is launching a sequel series called Vikings: Valhalla, to premiere Friday. The new series is set a hundred years after Vikings ended, and centers around Leif Ericsson, his sister Freydís Eiríksdóttir, and Harald Hardrada, who is Freydis' lover and Leif's close friend. All are historical characters, but Vikings: Valhalla is heavily fictionalized. You know Leif Ericsson, but who was Harald Hardrada? He was the king of Norway, a world traveler, and died while trying to invade England. Smithsonian calls him "perhaps the most interesting Viking in history."
Before you watch Vikings: Valhalla, you might want to learn what is historical about the series. For one thing, Ericsson and Hadrada were not quite contemporaries, so their relationship is just for the show. Ericsson was more of an explorer than a warrior, but he does give us a familiar name to orient us for the series. The battles depicted in the show are mostly historical, but somewhat out of order and fought by different people. You may be surprised at the appearance of a Black character among the Vikings, but Viking settlements were more multicultural than you may have realized, although not at all egalitarian. Read an overview of the action in Vikings: Valhalla and how it measures up with the historical timeline at Smithsonian.
Newest 5 Comments
You missed this point in my comment: "Throughout the entire run I spent time researching and reading the history of the actual characters and events that were portrayed." That's where I learned actual stuff. . .
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
You might have learned a lot, but how much of it is true? You'll never know if all you've watched is the TV show.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Hmmm... I've been patiently waiting for Vikings: Valhalla and will go there eagerly. The original series had its ups and downs, but overall I loved it - especially the performances of Travis Fimmel and Linus Roache and their on screen chemistry as Ragnar and King Ecbert. And it did something few series do: Throughout the entire run I spent time researching and reading the history of the actual characters and events that were portrayed. Taking dramatic license of history is nothing new, but would it have been better if it had been more factual? Dunno. Aside from the irony of it being on the 'History Channel', it was damn good entertainment. And I still learned a lot.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I agree. That show couldn't hold my attention. Never figured out why it was so boring when there was so much potential there.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I am frustrated with the Vikings series. A lot is known about the Vikings, and it's already pretty epic. The showrunners could have made an awesome program and still been historically accurate. Instead they decided to make... that. I watched half of the first season and couldn't make myself sit through any more. I'll pass on this new series.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)