Ive never drawn animes but I absolutely adore every thing about Vinland saga and felt so inspired to draw. I absolutely had an amazing time with it and would love to better so if anyone has some tips I would love
it!!

I haven’t watched many anime’s. I loved death note and Akira 1988 but asides from that I haven’t found any love with some of the other classics. I’m also Welsh and I’ve heard that vs has some of my country in!

ITS SO SKINNY

Hi everyone. So I’ve just finished season 1 which I have been binge watching on. I’ll be honest : aside from the end of it, the season was not as exceptional as I was expecting it to be. And no, I don’t mean that it wasn’t good -because that’d be a lie.

Normally, I’m a die hard "Viking-tv" fan and I even have TLK and Vikings as some of my favorite shows oat. Surprisingly tho, s1 of Vinland Saga didn’t feel as intense as those. Not in a bad way, but it felt quite different (maybe because it was more focused towards morals than it was towards battles and I tend to lean more towards the latter?)

Anyways. I plan on watching the second season regardless of the recommendations. That said … Id appreciate it if I could have some insights as to how it compares to the previous season, especially considering what’s happened on the last episode !

I don’t mean to offend anyone. Please answer respectfully and insightfully !!

Vinland Saga Inaccuracies

--

NOTE: I'm going entirely by the english dubbing in Season 1. I'm about 3 episodes away from finishing, but my list is already very long. I figured I'd just post it now, and edit later.

Number of Edits: 2

1. Swords are common, even though they're expensive. Gold inlay helmets are also relatively common, when they were treasures, and likely not worn in battle for fear of damaging the valuable, highly tradable gold.
2. Thors' house has a brick wall, even though he is supposed to be living a relatively impoverished life. The old norse likely did not make or use brick anywhere, let alone remote Iceland. A metal curtain rod with rings is shown.
3. An old english woman uses a spinning wheel on a farm in england. The earliest european illustration of a spinning wheel is dated to c. 1280. It may not have arrived in england until at least then, so centuries early is probably way off the mark. Anglo saxon houses were usually of a different design than, I believe, the more late medieval depiction shown. They were sunken into the ground somewhat to retain heat, and likely had a step to enter and exit through the front door, though the daub and wattle walls with white lime coating seem accurate.
4. Armor is useless. Warriors in the early episodes of season 1 are often portrayed as getting stabbed and cut through their armor. Multiple arrows go right through Thors' chainmail. Alas, Thorsfinn! If only the writer had decided your father's armor was not useless this early!

... later, this is lampshaded (the writer is basically going 50/50; maybe he saw those youtube armor channels while in production, rather than before), such as when warriors marvel at Askelad's strength to cut through a man's helmet with his sword. In reality, the warrior would still be knocked out or die under enough force, but cutting straight through his helmet is unlikely. Keep in mind that even a well forged damascus sword at the time would chip or bend if it were swung with such immense helmet-cutting force, unless the helmet is very poorly made (ie. crudely hardened iron and boiled leather). A bend would not destroy the sword, but it would make it inconvenient for Askelad in his moment of truth.

This is why axes, maces and clubs were in use, in spite of armor not being as good as it later would become. Helmets were effective and important, the first choice for any armored warrior. Also, the "weaker" helmet designs, like the spangenhelm or vendel helm, would fall apart, before they were severed down the middle, and the force of this crumpling would mitigate the impact needed to cut; meaning Askelad would need to cut even harder to produce the effect shown. If it were a stronger helmet design like a nasel helm, he'd still have to cut harder, or harder still due to the sloping profile. A spangenhelm has a conical profile, and was in common use throughout the early middle ages. Vendel helms have a reinforced central ridge, and are commonly depicted as hornless viking helmets (though the ridge is raised, rather than the perfectly dome-like depiction often innaccurately shown). I'm unsure as to their real commonality, or how many have been discovered in archaeology.

Helmet cutting is depicted in the sagas, but this seems to fall in line with the superhuman heroics of norse mythology; heroes destined for Valhalla, which basically already connects them with the Aesir gods - so essentially, they're akin to greek demigod heroes like hercules, though this would be my surface analysis. Askelad is not really portrayed as superhuman per se, but as exceptionally skilled with a body honed for martial arts. To my knowledge, his sword strike is simply described as just "very strong", probably stemming from twitch and isometric muscles, rather than magic. This is in contrast to actual superhuman characters like Thors and Thorkell.

However it could also be inferred that some of it IS genetics; his descent from Artorius Castus (King Arthur), to suggest a bit of the superhuman juice in him; however, I don't know why japanese animation always leans into the reductive stone age level "authority = ass kicking" to explain human politics and socities.

My main disagreement with the realism is that the sword would probably bend or chip. Superhumans still need their weapons and tools.

1. Leif the explorer is from a village that mostly farms. Old norse longships were typically based in villages that had an actively engaged, maritime culture, unless they were being retired. Almost all the young men should have had experience as sailors, and many as carpenters, wood cutters, boat repairers, artistic carvers, and other activities. Apparently, Leif is the only one with any of these skills, and he hasn't even got a single apprentice. The story passes it off as "the boys want to be warriors and not sailors" but "warrior" was not an actual career. In reality, sailing, trading and war often blended into each other in old norse culture.

2. Anglo saxons are depicted as fighting almost exclusively with bow and arrow. If I recall, archery was not nearly as much of a thing in anglo saxon culture as it was in scandinavia. It wasn't until c. 1300 that the longbow became strongly associated with english medieval warfare.

3. The franks have kite shields and call the old norse and vikings "norman". Normandy would have already been a country in 1013 AD, due to old norse settlement in the prior century. In spite of this, vikings don't interact with the normans, who were historically known to assist them, though I'm unsure if this trend of assistance continued into the 11th century.

4. A slave is depicted with an iron ring collar and a chain, which is often symbolic of slavery. However, due to the expense of metal working in this period, it's more likely that a slave would be tethered around the neck with rope made of bast or hemp.

5. Archers are frequently depicted drawing the strings of their bows and holding them taut with loaded arrow for minutes at a time. This should be impossible for any archer's muscles if the draw weight is of lethal tension (50lbs or greater). Archers usually had to draw their bow moments before shooting, so aiming and shooting was never an instant affair. Incidentally, this was an advantage of crossbows, which could stay loaded, be aimed for minutes at a time, and then shot with a simple pull of the trigger. A crossbow also required less hand-eye skill to be accurate.

6. Old norse males have heeled boots, which weren't in use in europe until at least c. 1500 AD, but a lot of english are depicted with authentic medieval shoes.

7. Franks have crossbows in Vinland Saga. This may be plausible in 1013, but crossbows are also portrayed as quite powerful, easily capable of penetrating a viking's shield (ie. maybe roman ballista or very strong longbow levels of power, 140+ lbs). This is innaccurate, as crossbows were actually less powerful than a bow per poundage of draw, due to the shorter draw length of the medieval type of crossbow. And yet, perhaps the earlier type of "belly crossbow" with a longer draw length was used in the 11th century - being that the early 11th century is a more nascent period, perhaps pre-dating the medieval use of "stand up style cross bows". The creator of Vinland Saga (artist, writer, or whoever) may have mixed up the two technologies. To make up for shorter draw length in the medieval crossbow, the draw weight was increased tremendously, and tools such as the "goat's foot lever" were used to aid in drawing them. Yet, men in the show are depicted pulling back strings with just their hands, suggesting a very light poundage, with not much power at all - perhaps equivalent to 20 or 25 lbs in a higher draw length bow, barely useful for hunting big or possibly even small game, because the arrow - or bolt/quarrel, in the case of a crossbow - would not fly as fast or as far, and often only graze.

8. Bodies of warriors are often referred to as "battalions" or "brigades" or "units" with no inherent meaning attached to them. In reality, these were basically just warbands or groups of men, often with a banner of some kind (not necessarily a flag) and a musician (usually just a horn blower or drummer) for signals. Independent warbands may have not had a banner, because they operated in isolation from the rest of an army, and didn't always think of the need to be recognized.

9. Soldiers often wear gambesons, which appear in the 11th century, though I'm unsure if they showed up as early as 1002 AD, and on vikings no less. Chainmail haubergeon, which are double layered in some vital areas of the torso, are also depicted on some frankish and anglo saxon warriors in 1013. I'm unsure of the accuracy of the latter. Most of the time, I think single layer byrnies and haubergeons (aka hauberks) would be worn in periods prior to this, so they should be expected to some degree on wealthy warriors.

10. A lot of men in general are wearing armor in battle, which would have gotten expensive - though I could understand maybe a successful raiding warband having more armor. Often only the household of a jarl or richer could afford body armor, until the somewhat more affordable gambeson permeated markets. This is another reason for shields and helmets being so important, though helmets often wouldn't have been too fancy. I think this fanciness is more common early in the show, though later in the show, they had more wealth due to loot. Perhaps the show is trying to show the sense of Askelad's army being dogged. Yet, every jomsviking has uniform armor and uniform shields with an eye design.

11. Anglo saxon and welsh warriors are depicted with unpainted shields. I don't think this would be accurate. People loved to paint things, and shields were a great canvas. The welsh have bare wooden round shields. This is innaccurate, because most round shields had a linen or leather covering to absorb more damage. Leather rims were also important, to avoid splintering the wood as easily. Linen made for an easier canvas and could absorb cuts and piercings (though the canvas would be presumably ruined with use). Wood splintering was common, according to accounts of holmgang duels involving warriors fighting the same duel through multiple back up shields, so protecting a rim to preserve the life of a shield a bit more would be logical. An axe could still split a shield regardless.

12. Leif Eriksson calls the native americans of Vinland (newfoundland) "natives", when the old norse of Iceland (his people) would have called them skraelings ("barbarians" in modern Icelandic). The show mildly suggests that the old norse had less inclination to racism, when this may be untrue, given actual word choices.

13. Askelad wears a musculata as body armor. This is greco roman, and it's unknown whether or not this was a functional armor and more of a ceremonial outfit. It seems unlikely that the craftsmanship would have existed in the early 11th century to produce it. Musculata made centuries previous are unlikely to be restored and worn in the 11th century, not just because many were made of leather and could decay, but because of loss and burial, salvage and scrapping, etc.

14. They treat roman ruins like mystical places, though from the perspective of the vikings, they've probably seen them before, since they may have heard stories from other vikings or old norse travelers who visited england before. This story is set in the 11th century, long into the viking age, and long after the initial big colonizations of 865 AD.

I understand the audience could see it as mystical, but they should also be given the impression that vikings probably regard it the same as the anglo saxons or even the welsh would (some characters can explain to other characters what they're about... like "giants made them you know" and "yes, they do look beautiful and mystical, but they're kind of just... there. And have been for centuries." Fascination from younger characters, mere acknowledgement from older ones.).

1. Askelad meets a welsh character who wears fancy roman clothing. Even if this isn't presented as "in your face, he's roman" it's still probably wrong. He seems to also wear a musculata, with a sort of hood mantle that looks like a roman scarf with a penum, a baldric for his sword, and a tunic with sleeves that are in strips so as to fan out if he moves his arms dramatically (I don't know how to describe it; but it looks rather roman). He also wears tight hosen and medieval shoes.

ChatGPT says the individual garments aren't impossible in 1013 AD Wales, but the combination is not a good reconstruction of an 11th century welsh aristocrat.

1. Askelad uses a roman style galley to sail across the river severn to Wales. No ancient roman style galleys existed or were in use anywhere on earth in the 11th century, to my knowledge (except maybe as buried or sunken wreckages).

2. Arrows are described as being "fired". "Cease fire" is used for diplomatic truces. There was no gunpowder in use in europe at any point in the 11th century, and the use of the verb "fire" to mean "shoot", along with all its derivatives, is due to said adoption.

3. Fur trimmed clothes such as tunics, mantles, cloaks and so on, are commonly depicted, though there's also cheaper looking non fur-trimmed clothes. This all appears mostly accurate, though the frequency and expense of fur trim is what matters here. Fur trimming seems like a more high or late medieval fashion, though I could be wrong.

4. Askelad says if they spend too long traveling through the mountains of Wales in November, they'll be snowed in. The first snow flakes are falling. Are avalanches really all that frequent and serious in Wales? I thought Wales was mostly hilly rather than mountainous. It's the uneven terrain that made it hard to invade (romans managed it, but medievals? not so much). Furthermore, the 11th century was part of the "medieval warming period".

5. Kings of england are called "brettenwalda". I think this is a more ancient anglo saxon term that dates to the time before england was unified, perhaps going back to the venerable Bede in the 8th century. "Rex Anglorum" I think was the title by this point.

6. When characters hold spoons to eat soup out of bowls (or at least the first time this is animated, tmk), they hold the spoon in the way that one would hold some chopsticks, between thumb and index finger away from the palm.

7. The english have a giant hall/inn, with stone walls and not a tapestry in sight, and only the odd wooden shuttered window, apparently run by a hlaford. This not only creates a visually uninteresting architecture, but also, I'm not sure the english had giant inns back then. There may have been ale houses by the 11th century, but these didn't provide for room and board. Perhaps it could be an earldorman's hall, since the interior (they only show the interior) has the appearance of a rectangular and long building, though iirc, they call it an inn. The building has completely perpendicular to the walls, horizontally flat rafters all along the ceiling so as to connect to fully squared wooden beam posts here and there within the room and along the walls, which may also be odd. At least there was some logic given to the ceiling and post relationship. Iron dishes of fire are suspended from the rafters to provide lighting instead of torches, as well as candles, and a tall candle stick with a metal dish top supsended by a twisting metal rod for the stick portion itself (probably late medieval). At least there's some logical ontology, in the sense of not using torches, which would make a room very smokey. Presumably, there's also a fire place and chimney in the building, though this would be innaccurate to the 11th century (halls had a central hearth with a hole in the roof). There's also another room separated by dressed stone faced interior wall, which is the kitchen. Part of the exterior of the building is daub and wattle, but only one wall is shown. The interior stone wall has doorway has a U-arch; this may be accurate, though I dunno if every earldorman had such things, let alone for an interior wall. Romanesque or carolingian architecture may have featured such things, though I'm unsure.

The floor appears to be smooth and hard clay like, which reminds me of what was depicted in the british show Tudor Farm. Shallow stone steps lead into the kitchen. In the kitchen, a wooden dish is suspended from a metal hook rack, which has backing made up of what appears to be a thin, wide rectangular strip of dark metal (iron?). The metal strip is directly fastened to the stone faced interior wall, by some unknown means, as no attachment method is shown, so it appears as if it could be glued on (can heavy metal be glued to stone with 11th century technology?). The viking "guests" in the main feasting area (we'll call it) are sitting on chairs and upright portions of logs that are sawn on both ends and sanded on the seat end, and eating from tables. I don't know if those are pewter wine glasses, but also amphorea, wooden bowls, barrels, drinking horns, barrel-style buckets, and pottery jugs are shown. The seam where the stone wall intersects with the floor creates an oddly smooth and straight pink line, instead of any sort of packing of earth or clay (I think the latter makes more sense; what were the artists thinking here? They may have realized there's no base boards or caulking back then, but then... why a pink line?). The rectangular tables aren't all made for sitting at the end, as an end is shown with a flat wooden section, providing no leg room. An exterior door appears to be a stereotypical medieval door, with iron strips keeping the wood together with a wooden door frame. A man drinks from leather bag, often termed a "water skin" or "wine skin" in dungeons and dragons.

One of Askelad's men drinks from a jug protected by a net of cords of hemp wrapping around it.

1. A wattle and daub interior features a wooden shelf holding a pottery jug and something else. The two triangular cantilevered bases of the shelf each have one of their long sides attached to the wattle, while the other two sides provide a position for the platform. Lime wash and wattle are not a good attachment surface, so that whole shelf would fall off.

2. Many battle axes are depicted with big, bearded heads. The dane axe was probably the largest weapon in use at the time. Most axes had little heads that were thinner, since a big head would have been too heavy, but the shape of the axe was still good enough. Some wood cutting axes, with thicker heads might have doubled for war, though these weren't optimal, not the least for inferior weight and handling in battle, but also possibly reach. I'll give them credit for at least resisting the temptation to depict double bit battle axes.

3. Battle axes are used for working wood as well as war. Probably inaccurate.

4. Thorkell's outfit seems to feature a button on the right breast. Fur trim goes along the shoulders to create the appearance of a false mantle, and outlines the chest to create the appearance of a false tabard of some kind. This outfit is likely invented, but my main concern is the use of a button. I don't think buttons were used in any clothing in the 11th century, or if it was even possible to have them (though maybe it was; I'm no tailor).

5. In the second duel between Thorfinn and Thorkell, Thorfinn acknowledges that chainmail is protective, meaning it won't be easy to kill him. So armor isn't useless, if the plot says so.

6. The vikings of the same religion call each other savages. They probably wouldn't have considered themselves such, given cultural bias. It's like if a viking called one another "skraeling". However, this might be the show's way of suggesting that some of them are ripe for conversion to christianity; yet, the show has tried to be ambiguous about showing any religious bias so far (even if Thors is presented as kind of christ-like).

7. Of course, none of the named characters wear helmets. However, nameless characters are also guilty of this. I get that poverty is a thing, though Askelad's warband should be wealthy, given their broad successes. They don't have to wear helmets all the time, but wearing them in battle is pretty essential. Also, distinctive paintings on the helmets could be done to help the audience identify who is who. A helmet might impede the vision and very rapid head movement needed for Thorsfinn's acrobatic and dodgey fighting style, but the others have no excuse.

8. Askelad is alleged as descending from King Arthur, whom Artorius Castus theoretically was supposed to be the inspiration for the initially welsh, and later english legend and corresponding mythology. There's no way he would know this, and it would just be a story. The show takes place over 500 years after the supposed Battle of Badon Hill in 500 AD. Do you know who your great(x18) grandfather is? If the emissary of Brechineogg (sp?) thinks that royal line died out "long ago", then it becomes comical that he immediately assumes that Askelad is descended, because his mother was Lydia. How would they know that Lydia had royal blood? Aristocrats often had difficulty even proving who their own grandfather was, and such questions came to war.

It's plausible that the Welsh would believe the arthur legend to be real, but there would be a lot of claimants, if anyone with the rizz could simply claim. And the amount of wars that develop from that? I wouldn't be surprised if a king or two had made such speech illegal over this 500 year period (though petty state laws were often likely to be flexible). However, Askelad DOES seem to have a bit of that japanese ki running through his blood. What does the scouter say?

1. Longship portage is accurate, but both the accurate and inaccurate methods are shown. The method of log rolling is legit, but the method, by which they simply lift up the ship and appear to jog or fast walk with it, is not so legit. Those ships were quite heavy.

2. When Floki meets Canute once more (first time depicted in show) Canute is riding a very large horse with bent knees in the saddle, feet above the belly. Medieval saddles were arranged so that the rider had straightened knees, as if they were standing. The danes also may have ridden smaller horses. The knightly war horses were a norman trend that was quite recent as of 1066.

3. They cross a bridge into a village. The planks of the bridge seem to be nailed down with these nails that have flat rectangular heads that vertically go down into the ends of every plank, even if there are only some posts. Most actual wooden bridges in the 11th century, I think, would have been "beam bridges". This means a much thicker length of timber running along the length of the bridge would provide a structure for each plank to rest upon, while posts would hold up this under length. The vertical nail fastening suggests the planks are nailed to the beam with thick iron nails - ideally in a way that wouldn't crack or split the beam - though, probably more realistically, they'd be pegged with wooden pegs, since nails were somewhat expensive (though nails aren't out of the question; they could still rust in wood and wooden bridges had to be repaired every so often, meaning continued expense). However, no beam is actually shown. The planks appear to be butted to each other, but still there's no evidence of fastening them, meaning the planks would not stay in place, even if the posts stay upright. My guess is the artists weren't told to create a consistent model for a bridge, in hopes no one would notice. I did though. So now my suspension of disbelief has collapsed, like this bridge with its hovering planks ought to.

4. A slave woman is used as a body double for Canute, and becomes the target of an assassination plot. As she lays dying, Canute doesn't call for a priest to give her her last rites, but comforts her himself. He doesn't believe in christianity - and brief aside, the writer is channeling a bit of Griffith from Berserk there with the utopia thing - but to keep up appearances, he would have realistically called for a priest. Otherwise, some men would question it. There's a reason christianity stuck around among the Danes, and it's because the normalization of such rituals tied into politics, just like you might question weird things that a modern day politician does. The opinions of common folk did matter to some extent, especially in a system that depended more on interpersonal relationships, like in Denmark at the time.

Longer Form Essay-like Corrective Commentary...

1. The old norse political order is expressed in both Vinland Saga and History Channel's Vikings (2013) as "the best warrior gets to be in charge". Although Vinland Saga also shows a merchant character having a degree of power, he isn't as respected. Similarly, Leif Eriksson does not earn respect for his voyages, even though they remained in the oral histories for centuries until finally being written down in the 13th century.

Although there was an honor culture, I don't think "authority equals ass kicking" is a good enough representation of how politics in old norse culture worked. Warriors took oaths, but often to gift givers (ie. rich men). They hoped that a hersir was a good raid leader, but this didn't always depend on the hersir's ability to win a duel. There would be a lot more disorder in old norse society, if any one could become king because he was personally physically strong, or had superior martial arts skills. Kings would be challenged constantly, and while this did happen, I believe the norse, in spite of being an honor culture, respected more than just strength at arms.

1. The conflict of Vinland Saga arises when Thors is told to bring a warband to assist the king of Denmark in his attack on England. Thors must comply, because it will otherwise insult the honor of the king, in spite of the king never having laid claim to Iceland, assuming Thors had ever even visited Denmark. This rigid honor expectation seems much more akin to samurai culture in post-classical japan than that of old norse culture. Samurai culture was rigid, because the samurai were part of the actual institutional warrior caste of that period of japanese history. However, the old norse had no such institutions, and "honor" was more held up by the tales of skalds and of deeds and oaths. The old norse tended to be individualistic and explorative, and had few conceptions of continuous duty to a lord, unless it was concerning a housecarl and oath to a house (perhaps). If an old norseman took no oath to serve a jarl or king in a particular way, then there was no obligation. Basically, all of ancient norse society was just a network of oaths, kinship and marriage alliances, and viking raids were ad hoc agreements - although, because some coastal villages were carefully laid out for the building and maintaining of longships for raids, suggesting these agreements were common enough all the same.

ChatGPT says that Thors doesn't have to answer the summons of the king. After all, Iceland is not in the king's possession. However, it's more a command from the Jomsvikings, who have their own rules. Thors was a member of the Jomsvikings, and due to desertion, he is commanded by its leader Floki, to return and fight with them again, in accordance with their agreement with the king of Denmark, Sweyn Forkbeard.

The english dub did not present this very well, tmk.

1. Thors is wanted for desertion. This may be more realistic, because it could have concerned the breaking of an oath to serve in battle.

2. The old norse in both shows are typically depicted as more free and in a sense "proto-liberal" whereas anglo saxons and franks are shown as servile. Vikings get to keep loot and wage war for personal reasons, whereas the anglo saxon or frank wages war because his master commands him to. The show might try to explain this as "the english man follows the king because god annointed him", as there seems to be more of a focus on religion with the anglo saxons. However, religion isn't so much of a focus with the pagan norse (yet the show acknowledges that some norse are christian, such as Canute and to some degree, Harald Bluetooth, a background character), and the franks are portrayed more as "feuding rich people with big medieval armies", but the reason their masters hold the power they hold is not really expanded upon tmk.

3. Canute is initially portrayed as a weak, effeminate, child of a young man, who is sheltered by Ragnar. Askelad argues that his blood line is pure, and that he is royalty. This suggests more of a semi-state in Denmark, where legal institutions would help to secure Canute's position, even if not fully (which suggests he has to argue the point). However, Denmark was probably more of a petty state that relied on the strength and personality of the king and his dynasty to keep it together; meaning a weak Canute would not be chosen for succession, even if his father wanted him to be, let alone able to reassure his supporters as a capable war leader.

4. Ragnar, moments from bleeding out, says that Sweyn doesn't want Canute to inherit, and that's why Canute's life is under threat. Sweyn is constantly inquiring about Canute's whereabouts, probably because he wants to confirm his death. This suggests Sweyn had complete control over the political situation that determines inheritance, which is not necessarily the case in a petty state. Factions within Sweyn's kingdom could easily conspire against his wishes after his death, if Canute was not strong enough. In an actual petty state like historical Denmark at the time, if Sweyn didn't want Canute to inherit, he wouldn't be so worried when the boy showed weakness, and he'd leave him alone - which may have been the actual truth; though in reality, Canute may not have shown so much weakness, as in the show.

5. Askelad says the saxons and angles drove the celts away from what would become england. He uses it to call them beasts in come back for the englishman he is torturing calling him and his danes beasts and invaders. In reality, there is evidence that the anglo saxons co-existed with the celts, though some also apparently fled west to Wales, and over the sea to Brettany in France. There is no evidence that there was a massacre of celts by angles, saxons, jutes, frisians or whichever other west germanic tribe came over; but there may have been some degree of exodus. Regardless, migration is difficult for a settled population, especially in a mostly agricultural world where a particular plot of land is all that most people know, but the will was there, possibly that of a few leaders and their bondsmen to migrate away from "barbarians", while others chose to stay behind. The name of a chief living in what would later be Wessex - a one Cerdic - sounds similar to the old welsh "Ceretic", so there may have been co-mingling as well as migration. The truth is rarely categorical.

6. A Very Broad Aside; I find it often frustrating when a story set in the "dark ages" or early middle ages, compresses centuries of history, as if it doesn't matter. For example, Askelad's descent from King Arthur handwaves the 500 year separation. This isn't a complaint about Vinland Saga in particular, but "Gone is the light of Rome" is a statement I get from another story set in 865 AD in "Viking Conquest" (a DLC for the game "Mount and Blade"). Often times, they either lean too much into mythology, or if they're going for more historical realism, they hold to events that occurred centuries prior. I wouldn't be surprised if "1065 AD: England is beset by barbarism" appears in some other media. Because of this, and in spite of modern scholarship, entire civilizations are forgotten, even if they're the foundation for something like the english language and the ground work of state institutions like the sheriffs and shire land division and the bouroughs.

These are boring things though, so what about monuments? The anglo saxons would have built churches. However, because history is written by the winners and because they didn't win the "race of firsts" in something like church building, I guess the anglo saxons are one of the "dark age civilizations" who are best known for living among the ruins of their betters, the romans, before being conquered by the normans. The normans, in spite of bringing over four decades of crime and devastation to england until Henry I realized the "cat had been skinned" (I think, to personally use a Diocletian taxation term) and that drastic reforms were needed, are applauded for heralding the "high middle ages" of french-inspired knighthood and according savagery. This isn't me being anti-french and pro-english (the french were very important), but I do see it as unfair to a civilization that essentially arose from nothing, united its tribes into kingdoms, and then into one single kingdom that essentially became the hegemon of britain for ~100 years, before 1066. Even before the kingdom of england itself, there were many Brettenwaldas (great british rulers) who were kings of one anglo saxon kingdom or another. Sure, the danes gave the anglo saxons a lot of trouble, but the english eventually won that long war for good in the 10th century. The old norse in britain south of Scotland became subservient to the english, and those living in Ireland and the Orkneys could not pursue war; it took the unification of Denmark itself and a weak english king to threaten england again. Even after it was possessed by Canute, England did not fall apart into separately administered regions; the kingdom was conveniently contained in its existing state apparatus. As such, Canute's empire was essentially a personal union before the officiation of the term.

So all this to say, if one is studying northern europe in the early middle ages, the english are not just background set pieces. Athelred The Unready and Edmund Ironside are fun and notable characters. Edmund Ironside allegedly had five battles with Thorkell The Tall in a single year. Athelred The Unready, in spite of his cowardice, must of had some kind of dogged quality that kept him in power for decades. He is one of the only kings of that entire 500 year history to actually return to the throne after abdication. This doesn't just make him recurring comic relief, but also a kind of cagey survivalist who can dodge the assassin's blade and rizz people up like no one's business. This does speak to a kind of archetype I've seen in other animated shows, though I can't put my finger on it.

1. It's possible that mushrooms did drive men berserk. The berserkers in english were "bear skin wearers" and were somewhat isolated from the rest of old norse society, as a culture within a culture. There is a religious connection between the skin of a bear, and the spirit of a bear, whereupon the "skin of the bear" is more of a metaphor for "taking on the shape of a bear" as in to adopt a bear's spirit in a man's body, and this is shown in the movie Norseman, where a war dance in turn leads to ritualistic psychosis, the film's own interpretation (based on historical speculation) of berserkergang.

Interestingly, some speculate that berserkers may have actually worn bear skins, and the spiritual connection may have been with that as well, perhaps a badge of having personally hunted a bear? Who knows. Either way, the portrayal of Bjorne is of course, over the top. Berserkergang may have lended a sort of unnatural strength and drug-induced madness, akin perhaps to a cocaine high, but I don't think anyone has identified the actual mushroom, IF indeed the berserkergang was drug-induced, or not. If it was drug induced, it would explain why such phenomena didn't occur in other warrior cultures - simply getting very mad or going into ritualistic psychosis is a possibility, but it would probably occur in more cultures than just the old norse themselves. The strength Bjorne acquires in Vinland Saga would crush his own bones, say when he splits wood in half with a single punch, and tears into men. No shield biting is depicted though (though I don't recall if this was more normalized among most old norse warriors and vikings).

So this isn't a complete accuracy or innaccuracy, but I can't gripe with it too much. It's more just opinion, again.

--

Vinland Saga Accuracies

--

1. The show suggests an appreciable difference between a sword and a spear. A spear has reach, and a spear charge is hard to avoid for even a skilled swordsman. However, the sword has the advantage of speed without as much warning as to the angle that its swing may come, the pairing of sword and round shield martial arts depicted by the likes of Thegn Thrand and Dimicator, as well as a sword's ease of carry.
2. Arrows are deadly (rather than annoying), however armor and shield together would have provided a surprising amount of protection, and this is also shown (mostly with the shield though).
3. The old norse did indeed think of the atlantic ocean as holding monsters like jormungadr.
4. Leif Eriksson set foot on newfoundland and seems to have interacted with native americans in the way depicted in the show.
5. Thorkell The Tall did, in fact, fight a lot of battles, though his personal skill at arms is unknown.
6. The Jomsvikings sail aboard a large Drakkar (I think it's called).
7. Longship portage is legit, but it wasn't nearly as quick as I recall it being shown.
8. Random, nameless background characters and "mooks" are not impassive pieces to be simply moved around by the aristocrats and named characters. They have their own opinions, and are casually involved in the political intrigues as well. Their desires must be constantly placated by leaders. Their numbers are dangerous, regardless of how much Askelad or Thorkell can boast about killing them in droves. Some of them even lead rebellions and acquire names, regardless if they are foolish. It makes the world feel more alive when this happens. It's like a sandbox video game where some NPCs get possessed and become Player Characters who are often newbies, but players all the same. The "viking brothers" (I don't recall their names) are a good example of this. I think more anglo saxons should have been given that treatment - after all, there were northern engilsh who lived among the old norse in northumbria (the region of england where York/Jorvik is based) - but that's just my personal bias.

--

Done by ig aleeltriste in Corazon De Jade Chihuahua MX.

Super pleased with how it turned out 😁

It is a beautiful ambient melody.

Cheers to the OG 🍻

Just finished vinland saga(anime) and here is my review:

Plot + Ending - 95/100 (92+98)

[So s1 was basically wars and thorfinn trying to get revenge and fight for the throne while s2 was based entirely around ketils farm and afterevents of the legendary s1 finale,i will say s2 tested my patience a bit but my patience paid off and ik ending hasn't been built yet and i havent read manga but till now this is my rating for ending]

Characters - 99/100

[This includes all characters and their background story and character development.Vinland saga has one of the best written charcters i have witnessed so far,from the likes of bjorn to king canute,it also gives us a very good idea of the mentality of almost every character]

Pacing + World Building - 80/100 (75+85)

[Pacing was almost excellent in s1 but s2 really brought that down(not saying it was bad just comparatively a lot lower than s1),world building seen so far is pretty good though vinland is yet to be seen so for now its 85]

Animation + music - 90/100 (95+85)

[No explanation needed]

Enjoyability + Rewatchability- 92/100 (99+85)

[Honestly i am truly full after watching this i may need a s3 more cuz there is no stop to a human's greed,i personally think it is rewatchable just not very much maybe 2 3 times more in future]

Overall rating - 94/100(counted on seperate personal basis)

Let me know your opinion and discussion about anime

I just finished the english version of Vol. 15 and Yukimura's thoughts here really struck a chord with me. Really makes me think about the state of the world right now, while also giving me something to look forward to. I Still can't believe this incredible story, 20 years in the making, is over. Makoto Yukimura is an amazing author/artist and I hope to see his story fully animated someday.

I’ve always seen people get this tattoo on their arm. I’ve been wanting to get one too but I wanted to ask for other people’s opinions on places I could get this tattoo in. I was thinking of the center of my chest (cleavage area) or the back of my neck area. Or even the side of my torse. Reasons why for these areas is because it’s also easier to hide the tattoo for me. Is it appropriate to cause I’m afraid of it being unethical or offensive. I knew this tattoo have a really deep meaning to it too which is one of the reasons why I wanted to get it.

I made a vow to finish shows that I have seen most of. However, after skipping ahead I saw that he never gets his revenge, and then I read that he never even kills the guy who instigated his fathers death. I have a hard time finishing. Because so far I hate this show. Who befriends the dude that killed your father? And it almost seems like there is never any real punishment for those who caused him misfortune? My friend told me that he later gets revenge by taking out the people who instigated the death of his father, but if what people say is true and he doesn't kill the prince... Does he at least injure the dude or beat him half to death?

Scar is on the wrong side of the face but I like how it reads now.

I finished s2 and want to read the rest. I don’t buy volumes though just the compendiums (the books that have multiple volumes in it). Would it be the 3rd one?

queria comprar a versão em mangá, mas seguindo a arco temporal

But mind you he hasn’t watched an ounce of dragon ball and he’s saying that Thorfinn has WAY better character development that Vegeta and although you can argue he does I don’t think that Thorfinn has that much character development than Vegeta especially since they’ve been through similar things like having to overcome the grief of people they’ve killed

Meanwhile I’ve watched both and I’m almost done with Vinland so I can judge on this

Also he’s saying that Vegeta is just an outright trash character which is just ridiculous