Historical similarities (and differences) between The Last Kingdom and Vikings

How are Vikings and The Last Kingdom alike? How are they different? What characters do they share? Which one is more historically accurate? GO!

Vikings on History and The Last Kingdom on Netflix cover a lot of the same ground: they’re both set roughly during the same time period (the ninth century), deal with basically the same subject matter (the Viking invasions of England long after the collapse of the Roman Empire, when England was split into many petty kingdoms) and even share a few of the same characters.

But what exactly are the similarities? What are the differences, and which series is more historically accurate? Let’s take a closer look.

Characters in Common

Let’s start with some of the obvious stuff. Both shows have at least two important characters in common. On the Saxon side, there’s King Alfred the Great, a real-life English king who successfully defended against several Viking attacks. On The Last Kingdom, he’s played by David Dawson. On Vikings, he’s been played by several actors, but is currently played by Ferdia Walsh-Peelo.

Then there’s the Viking warlord Ubba, played by Rune Temte on The Last Kingdom and Jordan Patrick Smith on Vikings. This real-life figure was among the commanders who led the Great Heathen Army in an invasion of England in the 860s. (If you’re Scandanavian, you’re more likely to call it the Great Danish Army or the Viking Great Army.)

But the shows use these characters very differently. Take Ubba, who on The Last Kingdom is a brutal raider. On Vikings, his name is changed slightly to “Ubbe” and he’s depicted as a thoughtful hero. That’s probably because The Last Kingdom focuses on the Saxon side of this story while Vikings focuses on…well, it’s probably pretty obvious. (Side note: At this point in history, Scandinavian raiders wouldn’t have been known as “Vikings.” At the time, it was still a verb. One would “go viking,” but wasn’t “a Viking.”)

King Alfred presents yet more complications. When we meet him on The Last Kingdom, he’s a full-grown man, but he’s spent most of his time on Vikings as a boy, and is only recently become a young man. That’s because of another quirk of these shows:

The timelines are pretty different

Both Vikings and The Last Kingdom kick off with the historic Viking raid on the holy island of Lindisfarne. On Vikings, lead character Ragnar Lothbrok (Travis Fimmel) leads the raid with a party from Kattegat. It gives his reputation a big boost and he eventually becomes Norway’s most famous king.

Meanwhile, on The Last Kingdom, the raid leads to the kidnapping of the young Saxon Uhtred of Bebbanburg (played as an adult by Alexander Dreymon), who will be raised as a Viking by Jarl Ragnar (not to be confused with Ragnar Lothbrok; Ragnar was just a super-common name among Vikings at the time).

Right off the bat, there’s something weird here: the raid on Lindisfarne happened in 793, but King Alfred wouldn’t even be borne until 848 or 849. Most likely the raid is used as a starting point for both series because of its historical importance; it’s considered the beginning of “the Viking Age,” which is what both shows are about.

But that’s not the end of timeline slipperiness. After Uhtred is captured on The Last Kingdom, the show skips forward a lot of years and picks up with him begrudgingly swearing fealty to King Alfred. The first season ends with the Battle of Edington, an important Saxon victory over the Viking invaders.

Pretty much all of Vikings happens in that time jump: Ragnar rises to prominence, sires his sons, and eventually dies in King Aelle’s snakepit. That makes sense: Ragnar, if he was real (more on that in a minute) was important to Viking history but not so much to Saxon history, so Vikings would focus on him while The Last Kingdom would glide over his story.

Generally speaking, Vikings plays faster and looser with history than The Last Kingdom. For instance, when the Vikings on Vikings invade England in season 4, Alfred is just a kid, although according to historical record he should have been a grown man in charge of Mercia at that time. It’s possible Vikings will catch up to history when it airs the second half of its sixth and final season, and that the show will end with the Battle of Edington and the triumph of the Saxons over the Vikings.

The Last Kingdom, which is based on a series of books by Bernard Cornwell, has already gone well beyond that. The final book in Cornwell’s series, War Lord, ends with the Battle of Brunanburh in 937, which marks the formation of a united England under Alfred’s grandson Aethelstan I.

Uhtred vs Ragnar

Here’s another thing Vikings and The Last Kingdom have in common: the main characters aren’t real…mostly.

Uhtred of Bebbanburg is easier to explain. There was really a nobleman named Uhtred who ruled Bamburgh Castle at one point, and he may have had a few personality traits in common with the Uhtred we know from The Last Kingdom. But he lived over 100 years after the timeframe when the show is set. Basically, Cornwell borrowed the name and made up the rest.

Ragnar, on the other hand, may have been real, a little, but also maybe not. He’s a legendary character who appears in several Scandinavian sagas, but it’s pretty much impossible to tell if these stories are based on a real guy, if he’s an amalgam of several ninth century figures, or if he’s wholly invented. Generally, Scandinavian sources from this time period are spottier than English ones, which may partially account for The Last Kingdom hewing a little closer to real-world history than Vikings.

To stay up to date on everything fantasy, science fiction, and WiC, follow our all-encompassing Facebook page and sign up for our exclusive newsletter.

Get HBO, Starz, Showtime and MORE for FREE with a no-risk, 7-day free trial of Amazon Channels

h/t Looper