A truly great film, cast,story,score & screenplay, and in my all time top 5 However....I would think this film is set in 800/900's, but Aella's castle is stone built complete with moat & baillie. Which make it Norman 12th Century at least. Also Aella's soldiers are dressed,equiped ala 12th/13th century. Just a minor point I know, which doesn't detract from a truly great film.
sharePicky yes, but then again they were concentrating on getting the Norsemen details as accurate as possible they probably totally forgot to research what the Brits would be wearing at the time. OH Well time for a remake.
UPDATE: Oh yes it is on the Goofs page Anachronisms: A Norman-style stone castle is featured in England, though the film is set before the Norman Conquest of 1066.
I need a better sig
Why would Tony Curtis's helm come off when they attack the castle. That type of helm has a chin strap I believe and they certainly would have buckled it on pretty securely. It makes for a great scene anyways. As he rolls the helm comes off and you can see its Tony Curtis lying against the wall. Same with Kirk Douglas. With all those weapons flung at him, he'd have his helmet on as well. But again he's got a great head of hair for this.
Doug
Toronto
<b>What really gets me is thats in colour - everyone knows they did not have colour films back in those days!!!</b>
Just kidding guys.
Valid points all round.
Love the film.
Browner.
Actually just researching the Viking's costumes and culture would have been able to give you an idea of what an Angle (Northumbria was an Angle kingdom) would look like clothing-wise and to a lesser extent how he acted. As costumes were almost the same, though Angles had less armour..etc..generally as they were not as rich, due to them giving up raiding (as they used to raid Britain much like later 'Vikings') when they settled in England...and the culture was similar to the Scandinavian culture of the time (as the Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Frisians were West Germanic peoples (rather than North Germanic liek the Norse) from Jutland and the Frisian coast) except for the religion and a few features of the culture (they were closer in relationship to Frisians (who speak an Anglo-Frisian language), Dutch and Germans.
This film although not accurate was fun.
If you're interested in this period, I'd recommend Bernard Cornwall's Viking series which even begins with Aelle's war with the invading Danes.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
[deleted]
No buckles found with Viking-Age helmets, Doug. Not even any provisions for a lining or strap can be found (in the form of rivets or holes) in such helmets as the Gjermundbu find or the Coppergate helmet. Most likely they had an inner liner, which was seperate, and the whole was a friction fit, allowing for the helmet to be used as a cookpot.
Is that accurate enough for you?
That's interesting and hard to believe. I've tried many replica medieval helmets and wore them while walking a few miles in parades. They must be buckled on, unless it's an armet or close helm. How else is it going to be comfortable?
It just doesn't make sense. Unless they were that heavy that they would stay securely on your head, or they were meant to come off easily. I believe the Roman helmets had straps under the chin. The Vikings were pretty smart. Doesn't make sense not to have straps. Have you ever worn any medieval helmet? I don't see how a Norman helmet could be worn securely without a chin strap. Not that it would be buckled up all the time. Are the helmets you mention ceremonial or operational? Is that all the evidence available and is it statistically valid?
Doug
Toronto
The Coppergate look like it could stay on without chin straps if there was chain mail attached.
Here's some stuff from a site.
Some form of chin fastening is required. Without it, the helmet simply falls off in a fight. Unfortunately, there's little evidence for chin straps. There's no convincing archaeological evidence and little pictorial evidence (although the rider from the Bayeux tapestry shown to the left might arguably have a chin strap). On the other hand, we know that helmets both before and after the Viking age routinely used chin straps. From Grágás, the medieval Icelandic lawbook, we know that some hats had chin straps. But the most convincing evidence for me is that without one, a reproduction helmet is quite useless in a fight; it simply falls off. Some reproductions use a simple leather thong that ties under an the chin. But, speaking as someone with a full beard, I don't find that approach viable. The leather thong is constantly pulling on my beard. The reproduction helmet shown in the photos has a simple chin strap. When properly adjusted, it holds the helmet securely without tugging on my beard all the time.
You sure know your Vikings, sherlock-37.
And wouldn't the Vikings wear chins straps? Beards or no, it's only common sense, especially with the helmet getting bashed from the sides all the time.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
I've been wearing Anglo-Saxon and Viking helms for about 30 years.
There's a painstakingly detailed book on the Coppergate helmet published by the York Archaeological Trust (YAT). It's on my bookshelf; unfortunately it's currently out of print:
http://www.iadb.co.uk/pubs/pubs.php?Action=Details&PID=58
Some other sources:
http://www.regia.org/helmet.htm
"I've been wearing Anglo-Saxon and Viking helms for about 30 years."
Well, I hope you've taken them off every now and again if only to go to the shower or go to bed or stuff like that.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
Old post, but what the hey.
No buckles found with Viking-Age helmets, Doug. Not even any provisions for a lining or strap can be found (in the form of rivets or holes) in such helmets as the Gjermundbu find or the Coppergate helmet.
Truly great yes, and a great job on the building of the viking ships, they were totally accurate, they were based on the gokstad ship which was found by archaeologists. The history may be wrong but names are true, there was a king called Aella, and their were several cheiftans called Ragnar no doubt, I think it was a Ragnar that killed King Edmund in East Anglia. But having said that there is another viking movie which while being more of a comedy, and historically incorrect has some other historically correct famous vikings, that movie being of course Erik the Viking fromthe Monty Python team. Even if the characters are inaccuratly portrayed, as in The Vikings itself. But both are good movies and I could watch them over and over again.
shareStop nitpicking and just enjoy the movie is my policy! Unless it is a ridiculous anachronism, like someonewearing a wristwatch or a car in the background, who cares?
I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every moment of it.
............I generally would give high marks to any Viking movie where they're not wearing horned helmets.
True genius is a beautiful thing, but ignorance is ugly to the bone.
.I would think this film is set in 800/900's, but Aella's castle is stone built complete with moat & baillie. Which make it Norman 12th Century at least.
The film is quite historically correct, considering. Ragnar Lodbrok was killed by king Aella, but not by being thrown into a wolf's pit, but rather into a snake pit. According to legend, he then uttered: "Well might the pigs grunt, if they only knew how the old boar suffers." His two sons later had their revenge on Aella, quite a bloody one.
share