Vikings : Ragnar picked the wrong son…

He said Ivar's strength would be that people underestimate himand that he has good strategy. But for several episodes, Ivar has been extremely blatant about being "the chosen one", antagonizing his brothers at every opportunity, and far from acting meek like Claudius (I, Claudius, the BBC TV series), Ivar tells everyone what his plan is. How is THAT being "underestimated"? He's an idiot. Now with his latest unforgivable act, it proves that Ragnar picked the wrong son to lead. Ivar is like Caligula.

Ubbe seems much more clever than the rest. Then again, none of Ragnar's sons were clever enough to see Ecbert's plan, to grant them land "as king" even though he may have relinquished the throne. Perhaps Rollo, the traitor, would be smart enough to see danger in Ecbert's strategy.

The scene at the end with the hachet, OMG Ivar is now pariah.

Well, in times were the forgery of signatures were common

After all, they got the real signature and the real seal.
Who will debate that it came hours to latein these times they do not even had the means to measure time precisely.
And the archbishop who performed the transition died with Ecbert.

Aethelwulf can deny his claim, but outside of England it will be one word against the other ,whereas the sons of Ragnar can provide a genuine document with king Ecbert's seal and signature.
In the end it will be a matter of "the victor writes history".

The real service Ecbert provided for his son and people was to halt the invasion.
Ivar might opt to go on, but the rest has been satisfied with Ecberts dead and East Anglia.


Willkommen im Zeitalter des Trump!

---

but the rest has been satisfied with Ecberts dead and East Anglia.

---

But Ecbert wanted to die anyway, and most of the royal family got away.

Ubbe didn't want to go; Ragnar was a beggar and could only get Ivar, poor man's man.

Ubbe was in a natural leadership position as eldest of Aslaug's sons. Hvitserk seemed disinterested in anything other the slave but Sigurd was witty.

why do people keep on referring to them as stupid for not seeing through Eckbert, when even Ragnar got played by him? remember these men would not be intelligent, they didn't read books or know about the world, whereas Ecbert had stories of roman emperors translated, so he would even be familiar with Claudius. IOf courseIvar had the right instinct here, he wanted to blood eagle Ecbert and take England by force.

Ivar was not. They don't have the means for an invasion.


Willkommen im Zeitalter des Trump!

Ragnar was suicidal, rolling in with bums and a cripple son.

I'd say stupid people think the sons are stupid. They don't see that Bjorn got a milestone for his men (avenge Ragnar and fulfill Ragnar's vision of farmland).

We didn't see him discuss the possibility of treachery by Ecbert but it actually does not matter. That's because the Vikes risk nothing and since Ecbert gave his life, there's nothing that says the new king (Vikes don't give a 5h1t who it is) can't do his own thing.

Ivar is not likeable so the the show will lose a lot of fans if it becomes the Ivar the Horrible show. I hope they kill him off soon but I'm not optimistic.

lol Ivar became a fan favorite instantly, he's beating Lagertha that now is not as loved as she used to be. Of all the Ragnarssons Ivar is easily the most loved by fans (just take a look on any social media plataform or message board). So quite the opposite, the more they focus on him the more the show will be safer. He is the new favorite.

So go on. Kiss me. Kill me. Do something.

No, Ivar is the perfect choice, he's clearly the smartest one. And if he had taken other of his sons they would been murdered, they saw Ivar was a cripple and thought he was no threat. They will regret this

So go on. Kiss me. Kill me. Do something.