I mean no offense. I'm one, too, just not of the following era.
The shows Vikings and The Last Kingdom:
Vikings started in what... 793? The Last Kingdom starts in 866? There appears to be a lot of overlap in the names (I've only just started episode 1 of TLK, but have watched all of Vikings so far).
So can someone help me sort out exactly what overlap there is? Which one (or both?) of these stories is playing fast and loose with the timeline? Is it (as far as the Saxons are concerned judging from what I've seen so far) the same story as Vikings?
In the immortal words of Timon: "WHAT'S GOING ON HERE!??!!?"
Thanks
0 ·
Comments
The Vikings originally raided Lindisfarne in 793 and gradually took over most of the country. TLK is set in the time when only Wessex was left as an independent Anglo-sSaxon kingdom until Alfred defeated the Vikings and agreed a different division of the country whereby Wessex controlled broadly south and west while the Vikings controilled north and east.
If Alfred appears in the Vikings show it's focussing on the later period.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts - for support rather than illumination." (Andrew Lang)
|Takeda| Yokota Takatoshi
Forum Terms and Conditions: - https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest
"We wunt be druv".
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeIn Vikings there is an Alfred as well, but as a child. What's confusing me is that in TLK unless it's entirely coincidence there appears to be Ragnar and several of his sons. But by the VIkings timeline Ragnar would be like in his 70s by this time. I guess it's possible that they just have the same names?
I dunno. It was probably a bad idea to watch these two shows back to back. Maybe I should go hit up Musketeers or Black Sails or something inbetween, lol.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agreethis exists, it's all in a fever, except for you guys, who really do
exist, only you're not really here, you're really on some space ship in
the future. Hell, if that's got to make sense I don't want to be
sober!
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeBy contrast vikings is based on semi historical characters and events and much of what happens in the series is linked to Ragnar and other characters that happened over about 100-200 years span from various figures in history. There's no chance that Ragnar Lothbrok was involved in the raid on Lindisfarne, no chance he discovered cross sea navigation and he wasn't the brother of Rollo of Normandy (they weren't even from the same country).
Now Ragnar Lothbrok's sons absolutely did invade England as seen in both series's but the rest is difficult to prove and in this respect TLK plays closer to the historical timelines.
Also in regards to the subject of "ragnar" in TLK the series explains it but the books do it more clearly but it is stated that they're not the same ragnars given Lothbrok is long dead by the time of TLK. The naming pool in dark ages scandinavia wasn't very large and I remember seeing a suggestion they had a little over 2 dozen names for men which is part of what makes Ragnar Lothbrok semi historical since there are a plethora of other Ragnar's who had histories of their own to muddle up the process of saying who did what.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree