Is The Northman The Most Historically Accurate Viking Film? Well.. 

This particular horned helmet is quite historically accurate and is depicted in numerous art pieces. Along with the holding of two staves. Yes, the vikings and their ancestors really did have real horned helmets. If anything, the horns were longer/bigger/more deer-like than the short stumpy, cow kind we see in caricature. This, of course, ties into many such depictions of Cernunos/Stag King figures.

I was honestly expecting this to be a *rant* about how this show was just more Horriwood bullshit, but it's actually pretty cool to see that they got more right than *most* shows depicting the Norse do; to be honest, that's why I can enjoy How to Train Your Dragon as much as I can. It's *obvious* that they *weren't* trying to portray the Norse accurately in it, but that really helps to show just what they *did* get right without even *trying* ; the *biggest* thing they got right that comes to mind is how the other Berkians speak to Stoic and Hiccup as *piers* even though they're the chief and his son respectively, and despite his position as the chief's son, Hiccup has to *earn* the other Berkians' respect. The Norsemen *didn't* see either *theirs* , or *other* people's leaders as some higher being, just as the fellow humans they *were* , and so not only were leaders just *piers* that had to *earn* their respect, and could be *mocked* if they demanded respect *without* earning it, but if they committed some horrible crime, like *murdering* someone, their status *didn't* protect them from being made to serve as a *thrœll* (thrall), or even *killed* as punishment. It's honestly not surprising, considering that they were a *republic* while the rest of medieval Europe was feudalist, and so not only could a thrall save enough up and *buy* their freedom, but even a *karl* (commoner), who amassed enough fame and fortune could *become* a jarl (noble). I still *can't* overlook the things they got *abysmally* wrong though, like the berserkers being completely *filthy* . And as for the horned helmet, while we all know that the Norse *didn't* wear horned helmets into *battle* , there're actually bronze helmets dating back to the Nordic Bronze Age that have horns on them that're too thin to've provided any substantial protection from a blow; that suggests that during the Nordic Bronze Age, the Norse *did* have horned helmets that they *occasionally* wore for some *display* oriented purpose. Considering *that* I no longer think it a stretch that they may've *continued* that practice into the Viking Age, even though we don't know that they did for *sure* . PS: Just a fun fact, that pop culture depiction of a Viking Age Norsemen wearing a horned helmet and wielding a double-headed battle-axe would actually be more historically accurate if, instead of the Viking Age Norsemen, it was (occasionally) applied to Renaissance Era *Persian* warriors; I kid you *not* , we have *artifacts* of Persian Tabarzin made for *combat* that're double-headed, and Persian Khula-Khud helmets thick enough to protect from a blow that *do* actually have horns on them.

Ty mister Metatron! I find u very informing on history :D

@@KarlKarsnark Yes they probably had some kind of horned headdress but it seems to be tied to the cult of Wodan (Odin) rather than Cernunos, this guy was worshipped by the Gauls in the iron age, not by the Norse in the early Middle Ages.

Thank you for this assessment.

I interpreted that character as an elder priest performing a ritual. And I noticed they didn't show any of the actual fighters wearing such, so I was satisfied.

@@texasbeast239 Same.

Also most Nord stuff was made of cotton or leather or pelts or wood or parts of animals all stuff that naturally decays over time so who would know if they did or did not use certain animals parts in certain ways they were a very eco friendly people

That helmet specifically represents odinn, and is a ceremonial hedwear. It is also the ONLY horned helmet in the movie. Everythibg about it is therefore correct

@@magicman3163 probably not cotton as far as I know it was almost or completely linen and maybe some imported silk for the rich

yes! Glad someone corrected these points. I was very surprised by this video as I have a lot of respect for him, but I don't think any of the "inaccuracies" were actually inaccuracies" . Some are left to interpretation, as much as there's no proof, a negative doesn't prove a positive. Personally I was excited to see the seax. :) I always thought it was relatively common, probably more than the long sword, but we never see them in film or TV.

I didn't think it looked like a seax at all personally. The seax design I have always seen is much shorter, wider bladed, and with a very dramatically angled tip that is very unique to the seax. I've seen the blade depicted in the movie simply described as a "long-knife" and though I think it's a borderline short sword (not a shortened version of the typical viking sword however), calling it a long-knife fits pretty well in my opinion.

I can understand why he thought it was a sword, not only was the seax likely just a tool and a weapon as much as a roofing hammer is a weapon, they were rarely ever that big as well, and I don't think any findings of the big ones were actually used as anything but art pieces or possibly advertising, like to show the capabilities of the craftsman. So it doesn't really make sense for him to be using it, infact I don't know why they didn't just give him another axe or an actual sword, it would fit the sagas and would just make more sense, I mean that knife doesn't even look like a good weapon, if he needed a backup he should've just brought two axes. Anyway, I'm gonna stop ranting now.

Brilliant comment mate…those who are diving into the Germanic Heathen world regularly, would have instantly recognised the “Horned Spear Man” (likely Oðinn/Wodan) image referenced in the film. Especially referenced in the Berserker ritual, an Odinic rite. The horns are also clearly birds, either ravens or eagles. Like you mentioned. This was a great historically reference in the film

Hey there thanks for the correction about the helmet, my bad! As for the saex I have too my to say about it to fit it into a comment, so I'll make a clarification video. Thank you all for your comments!

Interesting comment!

That's obvious dude or you are close minded as fuk and not trying to understand the obvious

I loved that part about the movie! Pagan spirituality if portrayed seriously is woven into every part of ones live.

So what I’m understanding is eggers gave us a saga not a Viking historical bio film…but a saga from the perspective of what people of that time would have “imagined” based on their beliefs etc.? Like the point you make about eggers depicting what they would have believed. That is fantastic filmmaking!!

I view the movie as taking place in the mind of 10th century Scandinavian hearing the "Saga of Amleth" as it were, so the line between the natural and supernatural is very thin.

I thought he was holding a Seax

Doesnt look remotely like any example of a seax I've ever seen. Way too long and I didnt see the very distinct angled tip the seax is famous for. To me it was a very long knife or a short sword.

@@DieLuftwaffel ive spoke once with this guy whos an authority in norse swords, cos i was working designing a seax for a game and my question was precisely the size and i was told seaxes came in different sizes, form a small knife to a small sword size

@@DieLuftwaffel some seax artifacts are actually huge, actual small sword/gladius blade size: 45-50+ cm, with some handles measuring up to 20cm, that makes a total length of around 70cm or so. That's the size of a typical Roman gladius. So yeah, some seax (Frankish ones notably) are in the range of short swords length wise.

@@DieLuftwaffel 20 years of living viking history Yes long seax was a thing and could be as long as a viking Broad sword I believe the name is a Langseax The seax have three different names depending on they rough lenght aswell

Exactly.

I understand your point, then why not just use a normal cave. it works when talking about the christian hell, but since its suppose to be the viking representation of hel. It would have been a better idea to cast it with a more accurate scene.

That volcano on Iceland has been called the Gates of Hell since at least the early 12th century. There have been suggestions that pre-Christian Norse settlers also called it Gates of Hel even earlier, though I can't say I've seen anything authorative.

Hel, or Helheim, is not a realm of fire. It is the afterlife of those who died unremarkable deaths, such as from old age or sickness. It isn’t a punishment, just a separation of those who died worthy of Valhal and those who weren’t.

@@tomsawyerpiper9412 couldn't have said it better myself, it isn't considered an honorable afterlife but it also isn't consider a punishment either.

But the fact he was holding 2 spears crossed over means it was also inspired by the similar design on the Sutton Hoo helmet

@@ML-bw4yt look up horned spear dancer. There are plenty depictions of that motive in the north-west part of Europe.

There are depictions of that exact helmet on the Sutton Ho helmet

Exactly. It all happened just like in a folktale.

This is a lie. He is actual a filmmaker, and his work is pretty well respected in filmmaking circles. He is not interested in 'folktales', only turning folktales into movies. If you want to meet someone telling actual folk tales, travel deep into appalachia or the ozarks.

@@OslaTheWalrus "...turning folktales into movies." Movies are a medium - a way of telling stories. Nobody "turns" folktales into "movies." Just as nobody "turns" oral stories into written stories. They are all stories told through different filters.

Interesting, I got the exact opposite from watching this movie. I felt he was using source material he cares little for in order to have a "viking" background for his overly self indulgent directorial exploration of the space. I could feel every dragging moment of what should be the equivalent of a 20 minute short story or short film, and trying to turn it into a 2+ Hour masturbation session for the director.

@@Compton3clipsed nobody cares what you think is "interesting", you bad faith venomous snake.

Basically tooth tattoos

it certainly looks fearsome. it just seems like an odd thing to throw in there, iirc there has only been one gravesite found east of the baltic with about 20 skeletons that had these tooth filings filled with some kind of resin

It is the same kind of etching that we know about from viking king Harald Bluetooth.

​@@googlename3859there have been over a hundred Viking era graves found in Sweden where the bodies had decorative filed teeth. Surprisingly, this practice doesn't seem to be restricted to one class of people such as warriors; it has been found on many types and ages of people

@Salt Meister Yeah, and those youtubers also never time-travelled back and saw how it "really" was. It's all about narrative.

it not selling welL? hell it is a great movie in many regards, despite a relatively simple story, its very well made

@@konradvonschnitzeldorf6506 so you didn't make it to 11: 00 min in the video I see

"There's so much more things right than "wrong"" like what? the costumes? Also, pretty much every movie and video game consults historians when making something about a particular period, they, like Eggers, exercise creative liberty. But despite what people may like to think, this movie is not all as "accurate" as it's cracked up to be. Sure, the costumes look authentic but that's pretty much where things end which other films and media haven't done before. It still depicts the Norse in a way that modern people want to view and experience it. Take that knattleikr scene. WHY on earth would a bunch of Icelandic settlers, not the richest bunch, watch their priceless property kill each other for fun? Honestly, the whole underlying slavery theme just made the Vikings look more like Aztecs than Norsemen. Even the homestead is weird. Why does the guy have all his hirðmenn (meaningless position in Iceland) decked in helmet (expensive) and mail (very expensive) just guarding his property 24/7? Who's gonna come to this desolate rock? Other Icelandic settlers? I hope they are ready to be declared outlaws at the Althing (basically a death sentence unless you could sail abroad or were willing to stay in hiding). If anything, those lazy fucks should be helping the thralls sow the fields, or else they're going to starve come winter. Why did they even choose to follow him? Most of the settlers who came here from norway came with their family and formed their own homesteads before choosing a representative Goði (which was not a landed title but a legal office that could be bought and sold) Then there's the draugr scene (which was my personal favorite nevertheless). Why was there some ancient German warrior in Iceland? Sure, it was all in his head but they could have done it better and with more subtlety since these things actually happened in the sagas. Sure, maybe Eggers wants to do some deconstruction or whatever but isn't this supposed to be a fairytale anyway? Also, the ritual helmet is from the bronze age to the early iron age and we don't really know anything about the rituals that don't come from christian sources. That whole scene felt more like something from Joseph Campbell anyway... In fact, the whole movie is the hero's journey but, for me, it was very blatantly so. Also, I think most people who watched this just thought the protagonist was extremely unlikable. Aside from being one-dimensional with absolutely no arc to speak of, he also embodies a more traditionally villainous role when compared to the sagas, being a berserker and all. I mean, the guy helps set fire to a house filled to the brim with people in it. And yeah, while that stuff did happen it was also considered a very villainous act, a níðingsverk. It didn't really strike me as something the average norse would do to a bunch of people he didn't know. The one Saga I know of whose protagonist does this is Egil's Saga. But Egil does it for reasons completely alien to us and even probably those raiders. Because it would be dishonorable to simply steal (as in, his partners who were slaves) without the victim (the slavers) even knowing his name...

@@dreyri2736 First of all, I never said it was a perfect movie. It has pacing and character problems. It was his first attempt with such a big budget, he didn't had the control on all aspects as he did with his previous movies( that had just a small number of scenarios). Not to mention covid. Delays etc. On second watch was way better. Witch movies/games with consultants are even remotely right? Not sure this is the way people want to see Vikings. It's not a documentary, producer and investors want results, they make impositions. Eggers thing is folktales, he's not trying to create 100% historical realism . He want to bring as much historical content as he can. That's the problem, you're nitpicking... where did you even watched that game depiction? Don't know about what a viking would or not do with a slave. Being nice is not my first guess. It's not supposed to kill them, is entertainment. I prefer the depiction of the brutality of slavery. You really think they would not mistreat slaves? Oh no, hahaha we gonna sell it, we would never kill then, dehumanize them, or damage them.... never happened... OK. De draugr scene, what do you want? Is in the legends, is cool, if you where the director, would youtake it off ? because "no one would, supposedly, ever, never, have tried to settle on Iceland"? I think you lack imagination man hahaha movie is supposed to be on 895 AD. From what I guess it's a older Anglo saxon settler, who knows? is a movie, relax. The ritual helmet, see the interviews with the consultant, is a guess. They try to use everything they could. There,'s compromise, there's different opinions It's not perfect but jesus... look at his previous movies, what he is trying to do, is a long step in the right direction You want to go from leather viking with horns cutting through armor like butter, To uncompromised historical depiction in one sweep, ok. Put this movie in the trash with the others. I prefer to look at the good, and hope more attempts like that are made.

Well... During Ragnarök the dead will leave Hellheim and attack the Asgård, and as one of the Einherjar Amleth will be on the defending side, sooo... I guess there's a chance?

This. I don’t expect 100% accuracy & I think it’s probably naive to expect it in a movie. As long as there’s an attempt to get the majority of it correct, I’ll happily allow some artistic license for the other 10-20%.

To me historically accurate means boring. It's a movie for Christ sake not a documentary.

@@timesthree5757 "To me, historically accurate means boring." Then your definitions are shit. It's a movie? So are any movies that take place today and portray the world accurately. False dichotomies are bad, but the champions of false dichotomy (like you) are true fools.

@@timesthree5757 bruh maybe historical movies/shows aren’t your thing then.

@@michaelritter8927 bruh, maybe 'historical fiction' isn't your thing then.

Nor any gay people!

Or strong females that easily beat up on their superior male counter parts.

Not “people”, just Jarls

Honesly I loved it felt like we were taken back to a world where reality and fantasy were mixed like how the Vikings viewed the world in the 8th century

Werent there any asians in scandinavia? I think they were called the Sami?

All of the "Firey" imagery doesn't really pop up until after settling Iceland and discovering volcanoes. It's one of the easiest ways to tell if your reading Scandi vs. Icelandic version of a Saga. This "Fire and Ice" imagery then gets enhanced and played up for Surtr, Raganarok, etc...Kind of like finding tobacco and po-tay-toes in Lord of the Rings. New World plants cropping up in Old World stories.

@Zoomer Stasi Oh look it's a contrarian

Ditto .... i was thinking that sounds more Christian than Norse ..Cheers .

@@KarlKarsnark they’ve found a shit ton of evidence that Egyptians had corn and some for even possibly narcotics. It’s just wether you believe the “narrative”, or not.

“Zoomer Stasi” x)

Thank you for that. I was sure they called them berserker in the film, and did think it was more of an umbrella term.

This would depend on if we're using the modern (descriptive) term or the older (practical) term, as there are to my knowledge no sources that connect Berserkers and Ulfhednar, except possibly of Ulfhednar going berserk (bärsärkagång). As far as I know the berserkers were the champions of kings and nobles, as in, they were huskarls, permanent payed fighters in a household. The Ulfhednar were a religious order that might or might not have been/part of the retinue of the king of Norway, but who's services were limited as they were also supposed to conduct their rites, religious training and ceremonies.

It's not the same thing... That's sort of like saying Templars are just the same as any other regular knight. Yes, most Templars were also knights but they were their own thing.

@@metatronyt it's possible in the movie they are called berserker because of a lapse in translation and/or localization for a wider audience, since not many are so familiar with the term Ulfhednar and the popular term became berserker for everything. Could also be just a mistake from the part of the people responsible for the movie, although i find this less credible since they seemed to have given high attention to other details. Be well noble one! :)

It is not even 100% clear whether "berserker" really comes from bear-shirt or rather from bare-shirt.

Sax* its named sax in the north. and no the sax is normally carried behind your back so that you can grab it like it should be grabbed like a machete or a small sword.

@@vargenfenrisson1164 I don't speak any Nordic language, so I used the generic word that is used in the rest of the world for that type of knife. That's why I also used quotes. Thanks for the correction. Regarding the technique of using the knife upside down and combined with another weapon (for example an ax): see, my Kali Eskrima "punong" always said that it's a very good technique for many reasons. But it also said, "If you ever fight someone who grabs a knife like that, be very careful. They either have no idea how to fight with a knife, or they're a very, very dangerous person." I guess that's why it's used so much in movies. To give the idea that the character is very good in combat. But I assure you that while in kendo it is not normal, in other martial arts it is and it has certain advantages if you know them. It seems justified to me considering that it is like you have to take a knife if you want to climb a fence.

@@vargenfenrisson1164 the "langseax" sheath, which is the weapon carried by the protagonist in the film, used to be designed to be carried horizontally at the back waist. That is why it had a metal, wood or metal-covered wood frame, with more or less decoration. Sorry for the dow text, but I'm busy. All the best!

@@vargenfenrisson1164 well as someone who done living history for 20 years in the heart of York which also hold the biggest viking festival in Europe seax are alway worn to the front plus have a large blade like that at the front is a status symbol which is one thing viking where known for showing off there wealth

One of the profs who advised on the film said that in most burial sites, the corpses have the sax horizontally in front, so that is what they did in the film as well.

Well enough people that did it lived soooo.

There is no reference to the Scandinavians of old ever doing anything like that as far as I have found, and there's no reason to assume they would, there is never a good reason to as you lose a majority of your defensive and offensive capabilities doing it, it isn't even a shield at that point either, you have more defensive options just using it normally. Also, there is historical reference of reverse sword grip in history, but it is extremely rare and was only used in very specific circumstances, so it doesn't even matter if people have done it as technique, it has always been used sparingly even by those who did, so even when disregarding that the Scandinavian's never did it, there's just never a place for it in a historical setting. Bad form doesn't equal historical inaccuracy, but there's a difference from Hollywood shlock and bad form, and reverse grip is Hollywood shlock.

Just because depictions don't show it doesnt mean a non-standard style of combat never could happen. It's not near a far-fetched as most of the bull in viking shows like black Scandinavians. A reverse grip when done right can perform some pretty good slashing motions and is best for stabbing from above. Most Vikings fought with one blade and a shield, so it's not hard to understand that being the most common depiction that has survived to today.

@@DieLuftwaffel Consider this, why use an objectively worse system when you could just use something that has worked for thousands of years. I mean what, you can't slash and thrust with a normal grip? Those aren't even pros you're mentioning, all you can really do is slash at that point and you lose reach, so you're forced to be in a more dangerous position by restricting yourself to a reverse grip if the other person does not. So objectively speaking, it's worse. The point is, it not only has no historical value, it's also just stupid, so it has no place in something that is supposed to be historical representation.

@@yoursexualizedgrandparents6929 Because people rarely use tools to their most efficient usage. Look at all the conflicts in the third world where people seem to not know that gun sights exist. Someone using a tool wrong is more likely historically accurate than not.

exactly this

Thank you very much!

i thought skallagrim was german

He's busy handling two spears

Living Anachronism weighed in on this film as a filmgoer even earlier.

Skallagrim said he might cover it but wasn't super keen to watch it when I asked him a few streams back.

@@malinko35 more likely Norwegian, but he lives in canada

Bamboo?! I'm glad you guys were good at catching it.

@@spyrofrost9158 why would bamboo be dangerous if not sharpaned? would just hurt and give a bruise are you sensitive or something? xD

@@vargenfenrisson1164 Did you know that bamboo can break into splinters capable of cutting flesh like butter?

@@spyrofrost9158 Thanks. We were teens and safety was not at the top of our list.

I've caught foam padded spears and thrown them back before, and have played the same game as you with them for practice. You should see the look of surprise on a person's face when you catch their spear and throw it back!

Great suggestion!

I loved those comics

Thanks!

But its sort of ok, because the movie is made like i film version of a legendary saga written down in the 13th century

*Spoilers* Especially because it says “Hear me Odinn, at the fiery gates of Hel, a prince bound for Valhol” I always interpreted that as them talking about the last fight and Valhol and his final moments before being sent off by the Valkyrie

They used both bear and wolf back in the day. The main character in this flick actually used both wolf and bear skin in his costume because they wanted to use both animals.

So there could be an Úlfzerker from what your saying?

@@StalinLovsMsmZioglowfagz not sure if they would have called it anything different. I would be more interested in the name of someone choosing a duck billed platypus as his warrior spirit animal. Ferocious creatures

Eggers stated that they went for a concept of warrior societies mixed between bear warriors (berserkir, marked by an exceptional strength) and wolf warriors (ulfheðnar, with a more developped cunning trait and great agility). With a sense of mixing up these two figures in the case of Amleth, who is called Berulfr (something like that, I don't recall exactly). Berskerk could also mean "shirtless". We know that the wolf skin has a great signification in pretty much all Indo-european early Youths warrior societies, from Germans to Celts and Italians and much more... Plenty of evidences for that.

I don't think they are referred to as Berserkers in the movie. And they're wearing wolf skins, which would point to them being Ulfhednar. Although the director stated, that the main character embodies the characteristics of both a bear and a wolf.

Kieran Rus was not on the Baltic, hence the name, Rus comes from the Finnish word Roosti, which means those who row, as the swedes had to row to get around the many rivers of the area

@@owenlj6261 Taking aside the fact that Novgorod, as a Rus principality, controlled a coastal strip along the Baltic sea since at least the 1000s AD. Where did I mention the Kievan Rus? I was talking about the forms of fortifications build by the various peoples living around the baltic sea in the time of the late 9th/ early 10th Century. If you have input in regards of what forms of defensive structures the Slavs, living along the baltic sea, build in the time the movie takes place in, then please go on. I´d gladly read what you have to add in that regard.

@@danielwolfgang8234 that's where the slav village you mentioned was

@@owenlj6261 I see, well, they approached via River so it must have been further inland indeed. Do you have any knowledge on how historically accurate the depiction of the villages defenses are?

It wasn't an offensive gesture. It's a way to make absolutely sure that the draugr was dead and gone (like staking vampires). This moment was from sagas.

@@jelenajs5017 Really, could have swore in the TV show Vikings in season 1 when they Jarl finds his dead sons he explains that their heads were placed against their arses as an insult? Can it have several meanings?

Thank you my friend

Yeah, Eggers stated he wanted some kind of uniformity of hairstyles to differentiate between the Norses and the Slavs in the movie. He also said that they wanted to give some of them actual iconography evidenced haircuts like bowl cuts or rear shaved, but that those actually looked too ridiculous on actors. So they went for the standard longedhair style, which was very common at the time from multiple accounts. Still way better than those footballers hairdos that they went with in Vikings TV show or Last Kingdom. They have to stop with this stupid trend, its just complete fantasy.

@@KroM234 Long hair represented someone who is freeborn. Both slave men and women had their hair cropped in old Norse culture. The main character cuts his hair short, to show he's a slave when he stows away. The slave women should of all had short hair once they reached Iceland. Only slaves wore their hair short.

@@leonieromanes7265 That's a bold claim there. Do you have any accademic reference(s) to support it? Because I went through a lot of these and the least I can say is evidences towards Viking/Norse hairstyles are scarce. But those we have point towards shorter haircurts or partially shaved (but not in the way they portray it in recent TV shows). I have there under me the book of Régis Boyer, the French ultimate reference when it comes to Norse culture of the Viking era. There is a quote of Denis Piramus, who is a Norman writer from the 12th century, so right after the end of the proper Viking era. But his description is validated by other testimonies. He describes the appearence of the leaders of the Vikings who besieged Paris back in time, himself based on scriptures that we unfortunately lost. He says (translated from French): "A hideous race, tall and strong Which had a terrifying appearence, Ones with shaved heads, But a fringe of hair on the front, Others with shaved heads, But a fringe of hair on the back" Then we have an anonymous Old English letter where a guy tells his brother to follow the Anglo-Saxon fashion and not give in to "Danish fashion with a shaved neck and blinded eyes". "Blinded eyes obviously references to the fringe of hair going so low that the eyes are almost shaded or partially hidden. As far as I am aware, there is no regulations that we know about stating that a freeman (bondir) must have their hair longs (except for women, it was strictly forbidden for them to wear men's clothes), or slaves to have their hair cut. Eggers also refer to the bowl or bowl with half back shaved or front shaved haircuts when he speaks about the movie making. But he sticked to the long hair representation to play on popular imagery.

Most accurate film ever? Erm…

@@therightarmofthefreeworld4703 In a Norse setting yes it is, most definitely.

why would he be talking to a Slavic godess in a Viking film?

The Rus were swedish vikings. You are russian. It's different.

Like you are delusional if you think that the rus vikings were actually Russians lol. Sorry but nope..

​@@n0namesowhatblerp362 I am Ukrainian, calling me russian insults me. in the second act film states "land of the Rus" where Olga was captured. her dialect is slavic, as slavic as it possible for Hollywood actress, consultant did his best though. There was no such thing as russia up untill XVII century. I might have mistaken Mara for some random seeres (or have I?). it just made sense for me as Mara is goddes of afterlife, so after a slaughter of HER people (her slavic people), she would come to Amleth for a dialog and to remind him of his quest. "get the fck out of here mate, you have more important things to do". Why would slavic goddes reveal herself to a Northman. in the ending when Olga is speaking to wind I suppose, few words can be translated (i will use Ukrainian): "несіть меня ... сіверського вітру, несітя (несіть/ несите) меня на землі предков моїх, там зрожу (народжу) я вам ...." can`t translate last part. English: "bring me... north wind (word сіверський/ siverkyi can be transtated as north, also here in Ukraine we have river сіверський донець/ siverkyi donets). Bring me on the land of my ancestors. there i will give birth..." If my translate is right, they went back to Rus. where she would give birth to a girl, also named Olga, the princess (or Knyahynya Olga) Olga, that same Olga You can find few videos about here on youtube. Her son was Svyatoslav Rurikid/ Rurikovich. Rurik`s grandson. So i thought Mara builds a plot for a princess to be born. YOu know as gods do from time to time. Film leaves a lot of empty space for an interpretation. That what the Art does. She could`ve been a random seeres. She could`ve been a Mara or even both.

Very interesting points, now I need to go look up Zalmoxis.

Well the Thracians were from Indo-European origins same as the Scandinavians.

it's nice to see people Who are aware of what little we do know of dacian Culture and religion, you need to read more on the Indo Europeans. the Nordic people and peoples of Thracia are more or less cousins culturally, and religiously as opposed to one Borrowing From the other. the identity of Both are the product of the indo-Europeans bringing their own culture and beliefs and Conquering/intermingling with the local populations of those areas and incorporating the local beliefs and cultures into their own.

both die fighting, both goes to Valhal... This whole cnceptualization of afterlife places as revards or punishments was probably very alien to pre-conversion scandinavians... and when you find it in the prose Edda its likely Snorris addition

Are you familiar with the director?

@@darekbaird yeah seen all his work, why?

Thank you I’ glad your enjoyed it

@@dustinakadustin oh I just realized I misinterpreted your words. I thought you were saying Tron should review stuff that tries to be historically accurate and that this film wasn't (I dunno due to the fantasy elements?) I was going to bring up that historical accuracy is a passion of the director

@@darekbaird oh I gotcha! No worries! Yeah Robert Eggers' stuff is really a cut above what others do when it comes to authenticity.

*you're

Where does he mention it??? Everyone keeps pointing out his comment about the ritual helmet but I can't find it. Did he edited out??

@@michaeltheophilus5260 thank you Michael... No one ever did make this mistake in haste and it is very important to allways point it out when it happens... :D

@@giggityskull8986 Haven't rewatched it. I have pin point it, so he must have edited some

Link, please.

Here is the link sir, hoping the youtube algorithm wont remove it xd survivethejive.blogspot.com/2022/04/the-northman-pagan-themes-explained.html?m=1

Is he a historian? What has he published?

@@mycaleb8 survive the jive is not a mainstream historian, he tells the truth which makes it difficult for people like him to get books published as they go against today's politically motivated academic agenda, he's based

@@che71che And there it is.

My very pleasure!

The depictions are pretty good believe it or not for such a goofy show, what is more funny is it is combined with modern day social awkwardness any Scandinavian would recognize easily. Most of the costumes are garbage though, but surprisingly good for a comedy low budget show

@@INSANESUICIDE LOL, I love the show, I really hope they make more seasons.

@@QarthCEO the same, not sure if I like it in english or Norwegian the best, that english accent is just too good tbh

@@INSANESUICIDE As a Norwegian it's best in Norwegian by far.. The Norweglish pains me to hear 😅 And the awkwardness is shown better in Norwegian I think.

@@spuddlingbob8724 the norwenglish is horribly good it is so on point for stereotype bad Norwegian english, but yeah that awkwardness definitely comes through better in Norwegian. Hilsen fra vestlandet

It’s hard to make a movie that’s accurate to how people behave even if you’re setting it in 2022 and filming it in 2022. Movies exaggerate actions and how people talk all the time. It should be expected in the medium. If a movie is exactly accurate to real life it’s not a movie it’s a filmed reenactment.

if your interested in berserker history check out the koryos, seems likely being a berserker was like a warriors initiation rite going back to the bronze age. its also likely there were "berserkers" who used boar totems, and possibly other animals ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zEXXA0naXkk.html video on koryos by dan davis if you're interested

Grazie mille!

Permafrost?

@@disprogreavette8545 😂 no, just scandinavian were not in Iceland before Xth century.

They weren't that great, really. Some were better than others.

Thank you for watching

My pleasure!

Thank you for your comment

Yeah. There are a lot of things that I have seen some people complain about that I really don’t care (climbing the fortress without being stabbed in the face because it was fantastical, or having the berserkers wear leather thongs - it’s just a movie ffs). But this one - just why? Why do all this excellent historical work just to put in a bullshit clichéd “cool” sword look from the 90s?

Does it though? It makes somewhat sense in English, but I'm modern Norwegian it's quite the way from "bjørneskjorte" to "berserk". It could of course be different in old Norse, but if modern Norwegian it's anything to go from, it's nowhere close.

there's not set answer towards the meaning of the word. And there is also iconographic depictions involving animal skins.

@@LEEgner From the Online Etymological Dictionary, berserker is derived from the Old Norse *ber* (bear) + *serkr* (shirt)--thus, *berserkr.* Later on, Old Norse *Serkr* became Old English *serc* (shirt, chemise), which then reverted to Middle Eng. *sark.* Supposedly, the Swedish *skjorta* has a different root in the Old Norse *skyrta* (short garment, skirt).

@@LEEgner Well, I'd trust my Old Norse professor. Well, I just took the Norse history course from him, but he also taught the Old Norse language course, which I didn't have time to take, sadly.

Thank you very much!

Yes! Precisely this! Thank you!!

I caught a beer bottle thrown at me by a drunk while bartending in college, It was mostly luck. I'm glad javelins weren't on the pub's menu.

You get a lot more confident after the magic mushrooms lol

Returning a javelin is considered somewhat of a feat, done by the skilled.

In combat though without holding back? I highly doubt that could ever happen, why would you even try it? Just let it hit the ground and then pick it up? Lol nobody is catching a flying spear coming at them during a battle.

@@robertkofron47 That's not the point. The point is that it's possible, but highly unlikely to happen. That's probably why it was included in the Saga. Hero shit.

I loved the original Conan movie, but I recognise that The Northman was pretentious twaddle about as entertaining as watching paint dry 😂

@@jananilcolonoscopu4034 well I agreed with everything they said on this channel but just know IT'S ONLY A LITTLE BORING!!!!!! It's really not that boring it is just a little bit in the middle. Overall it was just a fantastic movie and if you love Conan you're going to love this movie