I've never written a review before, and this isn't really a typical review. What I have to say applies to both the original History Channel Vikings series and the 2022 Netflix series Vikings: Valhalla, so I'll be posting this on both series.
I understand that writers of historical dramas have license to play fast and loose with the facts, but I feel compelled say that both Vikings and Vikings: Valhalla would been much improved if the role of Rollo the Walker had been more accurately portrayed. Rollo was most likely of Danish nobility, possibly a king, and it was his treaty with King Charles the Simple, conversion to Christianity, and marriage to Princess Gisla that led to his rule over what became Normandy, the end of Viking raids against France, and strong support of the church and monasteries. It was Rollo's great-great-great-grandson (I hope I've counted the generations correctly!), William the Conqueror who defeated the Anglo-Saxons at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, becoming the first King of England from whom all British monarchs trace their their lineage to this day. King Charles III is the 25th great-grandson of William the Conqueror.
The decision by those making the the History Channel's Viking series to portray Rollo so inaccurately was a lost opportunity to focus on a much more important historical figure than some of those focused on in later seasons, and the importance of religion in Vikings: Valhalla and what's to come in future episodes with descendants of Rollo would have been improved had Rollo been shown accurately in the original series.
But let's wait and see what the writers do with all this. A lot can be done with flashbacks.
