F-ck Hollywood in the Eye!
I am incredibly upset with the creators of Pathfinder. Their view of the Norse (not Vikings, see below), fantastical as it may be, paints them as cheerless, sinister, and completely incorrect. Vikings were large, but did not carry such massive arms and armor. Nor did they have horns on their helmets that could easily be struck by the blades of enemies. Having horn struck in this fashion would at least disorient you, or worse, you could fnd your helmet shit or neck broken.
A viking is a concept, not a name. To go 'a viking' was to raid. Most Norse people did not in fact go 'a viking'.
Finally, at the website they talk about blood-eagle, a Norse practice, suggesting that they performed it upon all captives. This is non-sense. The amount of nerve required to perform this ensured that only those strong of stomach and long on vengeance.
The rune they have used for "no mercy" is fehu. Fehu, is a rune of wealth, portable wealth specifically. The rune they use on the site linked to fighting arts is Gifu or 'gift'. Oh and it says they targeted the throat and head. This is trivial. The object of combat is to stop the enemy from impeding or harming you. Often you do this (gasp) by killing your opponent. They movie is just trying to justify the brutal decapitations it will no doubt have in spades.
I do appreciate that hollywood is not simply re-writing old tropes. See, it used to be that the evil, brutal, white europeans came to this beautiful eden and destroyed it and now it's evil, brutal, whiter europeans coming to this beautiful eden and destroying it earlier.
To the Norse, "Skraelings" were just people. They weren't the enemy any more than any other culture were. The Norse that came to America were primarily explorers, not conquerors in the sense the movie makes them to be. After all, there was only land available here. If they wanted to conquer land, pillage treasure, and subjugate people, they could travel south into Europe. You see, as a politeness the Christians had placed all there gold and silver in one place, guarded by priests who were loathe to fight. How very kind of them.
Anyway, I will rent Pathfinder as I will rent 300. It's simply not accurate enough in representing the culture. It is more interested in relying on the lazy interpretation of the facts.
A viking is a concept, not a name. To go 'a viking' was to raid. Most Norse people did not in fact go 'a viking'.
Finally, at the website they talk about blood-eagle, a Norse practice, suggesting that they performed it upon all captives. This is non-sense. The amount of nerve required to perform this ensured that only those strong of stomach and long on vengeance.
The rune they have used for "no mercy" is fehu. Fehu, is a rune of wealth, portable wealth specifically. The rune they use on the site linked to fighting arts is Gifu or 'gift'. Oh and it says they targeted the throat and head. This is trivial. The object of combat is to stop the enemy from impeding or harming you. Often you do this (gasp) by killing your opponent. They movie is just trying to justify the brutal decapitations it will no doubt have in spades.
I do appreciate that hollywood is not simply re-writing old tropes. See, it used to be that the evil, brutal, white europeans came to this beautiful eden and destroyed it and now it's evil, brutal, whiter europeans coming to this beautiful eden and destroying it earlier.
To the Norse, "Skraelings" were just people. They weren't the enemy any more than any other culture were. The Norse that came to America were primarily explorers, not conquerors in the sense the movie makes them to be. After all, there was only land available here. If they wanted to conquer land, pillage treasure, and subjugate people, they could travel south into Europe. You see, as a politeness the Christians had placed all there gold and silver in one place, guarded by priests who were loathe to fight. How very kind of them.
Anyway, I will rent Pathfinder as I will rent 300. It's simply not accurate enough in representing the culture. It is more interested in relying on the lazy interpretation of the facts.