whendoesitbecome

Trigger warning: s*icide

This is how I would’ve written Gyda’s character in Vikings:

Season 2 (age.12 and 16 in four year time jump)

Gyda falls into a deep depression after witnessing and hearing the death of her friends from the plague, missing them, attempts suicide in season 2 episode 1. She rescued either by Ragnar or Lagertha. In the battle between Rollo and Ragnar, Ragnar instead says to Rollo: “Not that you'd care, brother, but your niece, Gyda, tried to kill herself”. Gyda' goes to Hedeby where Lagertha properly trained Gyda into becoming a shield-maiden allowing Gyda to overcome her depression as he a purpose to fight for her people who remain living

Before leaving, Ragnar tries to comfort her but Gyda rejects his affection and is angry that Ragnar allowed Aslaug to sleep with him committing adultry for the sake of the prophesied sons, feeling that she is not enough as last borne and is that he betrayed her mother by having. Ragnar begins to mourn the loss of his relationship with his daughter and feels guilty for the infidelity and for how he made Gyda feel like she is not enough and being unable to provide her happiness due to her deep depression

“Gyda, I have come to say goodbye to you properly”, because in this case she’d be leaving for Hedeby with Bjorn and Lagertha, “I have been thinking about you, about when you were small. You were so lively. You could run as swiftly as the wind. You were like quicksilver. But then, before I knew it, you stopped running here and there and everywhere and you became still. At 12 years old, you have the stillness and the calm of a fine woman. I think of the children you will produce. The joy they will bring to all of us. Dear child, Gyda, you are not gone because you are always in my heart. They say that a man must love his sons more, but a man can be jealous of his sons,and his daughter can always be the light in his life. The Gods kept you here with us. I will wait here awhile, and if you want to come and talk to me, then come and talk, and I will gently stroke your long and beautiful hair once again with my peasant hands.”

I think Ragnar would still have gone to the beach and said some of the lines, some would be the same and some different under the alternative context, to himself; he would not be able to say it to Gyda as the show displays he is sensitive to children. An example of this is when he and the other Vikings ate in King Aelle’s Hall and he tried to greet a Saxon boy; the boy got scared and you could see that Ragnar felt some rejection sensitivity; he felt he could not try to get the boy to see he was not a bad man and be can safe despite situation happening, in season 1 episode 8. There is then his self-imposed exile before returning then dying in season 5; it was to an extent driven by Ragnar’s guilt after how far his failures and their consequences resulted from the Paris raids, even for his sons thus he made Aslaug a single mother for a period, he avoided and did not confront his children and apologise as soon as possible and head on. So, if Gyda had lived under this context; it is highly likely Ragnar would not have been able tell her Gyda his thoughts face to face, still leading to a solitary beach monologue, due to her mental health and behaviour towards him.

Gyda returns to Kattegat in season 2 episode 7 - but resents Ragnar after having secretly knowing that Earl Sigvard had abused her mother; what her mother went through that in order to no longer be “humiliated” and “insulted” by Ragnar and his relationship and doings with and surrounding Aslaug, Bjorn allows Ragnar’s embrace; Gyda does not

Gyda is pissed off for Ragnar overshadowing her mother Earl Ingstad in England, causing further friction in the relationship

Season 3

Gyda starts to drink heavily, sleep around to numb hedonistically, maybe to numb similar insecurities to an extent; ones that aren't so different to Rollo's, this is where Rollo and Gyda begin a close relationship, a familial uncle and niece not a romantic one, as he intervenes so his niece doesn’t follow his lifestyle especially as a coping mechanism. In season 1 episode 8 Siggy had complained of his drinking and sleeping around in Uppsala, and season 2 episode 2 he hit rock bottom due to his drinking, the snow incident with Siggy after feeling depression when he betrayed Ragnar by siding with Jarl Borg where Siggy splashed water in his face after Rollo passed in out in the snow. With Gyda he sees himself as a cautionary tale/allegory. In the original series they weren’t close; they did not have private scenes together. I think this might started there bond.

In season 3 episode 6 where Ragnar still daydreams of his life on the farm again; Ruby O’leary’s Gyda as young Gyda brings him comfort; Gyda is alive and grown and has fractured relationship with him

Season 4

Gyda is furious, in season 4, when Ragnar did not immediately punish Floki after the latter killed Athelstan whom she grew to love too. Based of their fractured relationship; this’d be a factor as to why Ragnar gets addicted to Yidu’s medicine

Ragnar still thinks of younger/little Gyda when he sees that little Saxon girl reminding him of her, in season 4 episode 12 and dies thinking Gyda stopped loving him when he remained having loved her until death

Ragnar does thinking Gyda stopped loving and hated him in season 4 episode 15

Gyda wants to join Bjorn et al avenging their father, she is accused by Bjorn by not loving but possibly hating their father due to the fractured relationship; this was cemented when Gyda accepted to the challenge to fight Ragnar in episode 10, not to kill him but to finally release the anger Gyda has felt Ragnar all these years. However, Gyda did and continued to love Ragnar as much as Bjorn but Bjorn did not believe that hence she wasn’t allowed to join him et al to avenge Ragnar’s death when she really wanted too; Bjorn forbids and used his authority - this respects the tradition of the Saga where by it was only the sons of Ragnar who avenged him against King Aelle

Season 5/6

Gyda meets to Alfred the Great, Gyda still believes in her father and mother’s dream, they begin to discuss the possibility of Dane Law; her relationship with Athelstan gave her optimism it was possible for Norse and Saxon to live with one another + she does not know she is meeting the son of Athelstan

In order to establish DaneLaw on behalf of her people to reduce conflict between her’s and Saxons, with the promise to Alfred that it would not apply to his land Wessex, Ivar and Gyda clash because of this, the final nail in the coffin comes when she doesn’t stop but allows Alfred from baptizing Gunthrum.

Gyda becomes a diplomat in Dane Law, one of many, with somewhat predominant sway on Alfred.

Tv show: Vikings

Warnings:

The no. of warnings probably are overcompensation

The following content is personal opinion

This requires an extent of knowledge about The Vampire diaries

Possible bad English and grammar and constructed sentences

I only remember so much from the show

I'll probably get details wrong

Much of what is presented aren’t even original ideas and information

I know very little about history and about the sagas too

I did very very basic research for this criticism.

And this criticism is quite long.

And I admit I am quite nervous to post this and will probably come back for future edits

Race and gender and mental health and colonialism are explored here

I am only talking about Vikings, not Vikings Valhalla

Truth be told I might delete this

This is not intended to be a personal attack or source of offense for the writers

The linked transcripts mayn't work or provide what officially aired on the show; so be wary of them, please watch the show on official sources, as of now it is available on Netflix in the UK.

I might come to disagree with what I partially or fully wrote

Ragnar solitarily had eulogised Gyda, saying this alone: “Gyda, I have come to say goodbye to you properly. I have been thinking about you, about when you were small. You were so lively, you could run as swiftly as the wind. You were like quick-silver. But then, before I knew it, you stopped running here and there and everywhere and you became still. At 12 years old, you had the stillness and the calm of a fine woman. What children you would have produced! What joy that would have brought to all of us. Dear child, Gyda, you are not gone because you are always in my heart. They say that a man must love his sons more, but a man can be jealous of his sons, and his daughter can always be the light in his life. I know very well that you are with the gods, but I will wait here awhile, and if you want to come and talk to me, then come and talk, and I will gently stroke your long and beautiful hair once again with my peasant hands.” in season 2 episode 1.

https://subslikescript.com/series/Vikings-2306299/season-2/episode-1-Brothers_War

 The eulogy reflects, an extent of, possible real world certain or specific unconscious or unintentional gender biases towards the daughter of the main character, not applicable to all the females in the show, who would all be categorised as part of a marginalised group.  

The eulogy highlighted Gyda’s link, but not being example of, the angel of the house ideal, where underlyingly, a female is seen to be only capable of being the source of happiness, peace, domestic bliss to return to for the male head of a household e.g Ragnar in this case. This is heavily reflected in the language e.g. talking of Ragnar’s grandchildren, recalling an ideal of happiness from a female bearing children and focus on unarticulated, but possibly hinted, traditional motherhood based on the traditionally carried ideals of what is deemed be the "stillness and calm fine of [women]". The idea of that a  ‘daughter can always be the light in [a man’s] life”, is another example of possible unconscious gender bias, benevolent sexism, born out well intent, the last quote is a beautiful sentiment seeing daughters as mentality good for their fathers' psyche, hence why it is benevolent.

However, it meant the writers in real life had restrictive Gyda's character into not be able to be live to manifesting traits and explore a narrative alongside her brothers that could make a father jealous of their daughter. Traits that can inspire healthy jealousy and competition for a father in the sense of bypassing, improving on, matching alikeness, in; coming near to a father’s achievements, legacy; fame and way of life, especially in world of Vikings' warship and geo-political achievements. This exposes the limited and unequal view of her character’s potential compared to her brothers. Its means the sons were given preference over the story compared Gyda when the following will shows there was no reason to do so. To continue this, this is where the sexism comes in or maybe that way too far, maybe more better an father-son-relativism writing of Ragnar's children when there was no obligation nor was their limitation too. Despite the agreement amongst Lagertha and Ragnar in season 2 episode 7 when Bjorn said his sister would have been “strong and wise” like Ragnar considered him. Hence, Gyda’s death did not being allow to live to achieve some form of geopolitical achievement and fame with her brothers in the historical fantasy. Bjorn Ironside almost became the king of Norway thus being seen as worthy for being a monarch for a proto-nation, Ivar the Boneless defeated Alfred the Great; Ubbe lead the expedition into discovering North America and interacting and navigating a first peoples contact with the Native Americans; Sigurd the Snake in Eye and Hvitserk were figureheads in avenging the death of Ragnar against King Aelle; the latter monarch part of the foundational kingdoms of England.

Edit: Even Athelstan being made the father of Alfred the Great, when a real life Athelstan was actually the grandson of Alfred the Great. Or when Rollo returned, in season 4 episode 13, we see he only has sons and one daughter (correction) by Gisla. The following comparison mayn't even be enough or the appropriate comparison model when it comes to Bonnie in TVD as there might be exposable aforementioned and/or alike possible unconscious or unintentional or biases, when it comes writing a daughter compared to son(s) in relation to that of father whom are a main character in television; the father-son relativism where sons do not die a pre-mature death and are allowed to live long enough to explore interesting storylines/or the ability to have done something with their lives compared to daughters of the main male protagonists.

In the Peaky Blinders (2013-2022), Ruby dies of TB, in a way one may argue that Ruby functions like Gyda does for Ragnar for Tom, then Tom ends finding out he had son outside wedlock.

Overall, this doesn't mean traditional feminine traits, roles and associations are being nor should be considered lesser than. Not am I arguing Gyda was seen less than as a daughter.

https://subslikescript.com/series/Vikings-2306299/season-2/episode-7-Blood_Eagle

The issue surrounding Gyda reminded of a similiar phenomenon in another tv show, whilst not the same and not as extensive, it happened to Bonnie in the Vampire Diaries aka. tvd. In the books Bonnie's character was white not black in the show, in the Sagas Gyda’s character did not exist, in tvd the show explored African American spirituality - ‘the ancestors’ - surrounding Bonnie’s lineage as she was African American, Gyda stated she knew how to use a shield compared how to Bjorn was given basic training by Ragnar in combat too in season 1 episode 1 meaning both siblings were given foundational training. All of this helped give some equality to the characters narrative by diverting from the source material, the books and sagas. But, Julia Pleck, once commented on Twitter now X: “I believe black women are going to save us all and i am so sorry to put that burden on you.”, this is an shocking example of benevolent unconscious prejudice/discrimination. It must be made clear that Vikings did not produce the same comparative level. To continue, this thinking exposed an underlying issue of the treatment of Bonnie’s character in tvd, expected to solve supernatural issues through her being a strong witch for the white characters. This is where black women seen to be a heroically socially stabilising force in the face of conflict, hence its benevolence, have their feelings treated as secondary in importance and not equal in deserving space to explore contrasted and to serve the non-marginalised group, hence the racism, to extents that can dehumanising, maybe objecting of and unfair towards black women .

What I am trying to argue is: The Vampires Diaries came out in 2009 and Vikings in 2013; it shows that even though progressives writers may want to create a more equality by making changes from the source material, in the early 21st century, carrying of certain unconscious notions towards still persisted in some form. Even when they didn’t consciously believe in the aforementioned ideals and treatment and want to produce it, and want to fight against it in the fictional sense. This is why I would argue against a good argument that Ragnar’s eulogy is 100% reflective of his 9th century thinking.

Gyda’s death is part of the dying daughter pattern of the main male characters within the show itself: Bjorn’s daughter, Floki’s daughter, are linked to, not examples of, the woman in the Refrigerator trope, where female death is used to add tragedy to male characters; and the females' lives are trapped and in the memories of them in death to help facilitate male stories. Whereas the males are less expected to function that way, and typically have agency to live a fuller life for themselves. This seen in how the sons of Ragnar written. Even Magnus, who is not the son of Ragnar, but contested to be, got more to do than Gyda. Magnus got to explore the downfall of his mother’s kingdom, quest in misdirected paternity attributed to the legend Ragnar; the delusion of thinking he was a Viking rejecting Saxon Christian. When you compare their histories to that of Gyda, the pattern highly suggests that her character was written with again certain unconscious gender bias applicable to the daughters of the main characters, not all the females.

The show does not adhere to and follow the Sagas accurately and history and took quite huge historical liberties to aid the stories of the characters. For example, Ubbe lead the discovery of the North America. This is important as his character got to claim Leif Erikson’s and then later Christopher Columbus’ discovery; which is linked to the later European colonisation of Native American land, and Ubbe’s character represent a discover with forgotten knowledge to the wider world and a leader in first contacts between people virtually alien to one another. Another is Lagertha was allowed a rich warrior career; adding to her fame as a shield-maiden. Although, in real life, Europe did not allow a substantial collective amount of female combatants, until the Russia’s Soviet Union in the Red Army during WW2, a millennium after Vikings took place; I don't think Lagertha lead a substantial collective amount of female combatants in bands in the Sagas nor history seen in Vikings. The writers allowing such liberties to happen for Lagertha allowed her to have a fame as Shieldmaiden, and being a significant figurehead in maneuvering issues in battle with Ragnar. Her character exemplied that females, not all, were given the same level of historical liberties from the sagas and history, to be able to achieve fame and geo-political success alongside the males in the show.

It would not have broken the internal logic of the show if Gyda survived the plague in season 1, and instead of depending on the sagas, that were being diverted from anyways, the writers could’ve chosen to produce television to explore the children of Ragnar Lothrok, not the sons, to give a better chance at equal treatment and the same level of historical liberties and diversions from the sagas to be given to all female of the show including Gyda. I do not know about the rest of the historical liberties and diversion from the sagas, I am aware that I have not reported the depth, I am aware there is some considerable depth. Gyda’s non-existence in the sagas and her survival of the plague in season 1 and potential storyline after would not have been inconsistent with the depth of diversion and historical liberties taken in the show.

Edit: Another thing I thought of, if Rollo and Ragnar weren’t brothers in the Sagas nor in real life. Rollo, was a significant male figure made kin to Ragnar. Nor did Rollo and Ragnar face off one in Paris; that was invented for the storyline in season 4 episode 10. They could have made a significant female figure be Ragnar’s daughter from Sagas and/or real historical record. Or, they could’ve amalgamated or taken inspiration from multiple significant female figures to be the inspiration for Ragnar’s daughter in the Tv show who existed in Sagas and/or real historical record. Thus, they’d be a way to draw from real material to have a foundational storyline to draw from for Gyda along with the sons.

Lagertha: Ragnar... Are you not happy that we're going to Uppsala?

Ragnar: Of course I'm happy. Why should I not be happy? When we reach Uppsala, we shall ask the gods why they give with one hand, but take away with the other? Why they make me Earl, yet kill my son?

Lagertha: We can have more sons.

Ragnar: Have we not tried?

Season 1 episode 8

https://tvshowtranscripts.ourboard.org/viewtopic.php?f=192&t=11748

Gyda could have shown herself as evidential support against the then culturally backed ideal of male leaders being focused on producing sons. Gyda could’ve resembled but not exactly paralleled Henry 8th’s daughter Elizabeth 1 famous being the executive led the defeat against the Spanish armada securing part of the North America for Britain; despite her mother being executed by her father being impart motivated by the inability to provide a male heir, and Ragnar whilst being very unlike Henry 8th did to an a lower extent very softly mirror him, in his disappointment in season 1 episode 8 when Lagertha suffered a miscarriage with their son and that her attempts to provide more sons failed. Though, that was not entirely motivated by his internal gender bias as it is fair for fathers to grieve miscarried children in general regardless of their gender.

Cultural beliefs do not necessarily change like that just because someone shows evidence against it; in the 16-17th century, Elizabeth herself and Britain and America did not turn feminist just because of what she was accomplishing. The etymology of the state of Virginia did not honour Elizabeth’s right as a woman not to have children; the language represents her staying pure and untainted by being virginal - a then a patriarchal ideal - from my understanding to transmit her legacy as being the executive power to securing part of North America. Gyda’s character would have not been expected to break the cultural ideal, that supported male leaders being focused being focused on wanting and securing sons, but it might’ve shown it was not necessary. After Ragnar was disappointed when Lagertha miscarried their son, that would have been a cool point of internal conflict if Gyda has shown that the “[Gods did not necessarily take away something ]” - reference season 1 episode 8 - from Ragnar when he lost his son, nor the idea that only his sons only should be the predominant fixture in his mind to produce what he thought his sons they could only give, do and show. Gyda could have caused internal conflict or challenged Ragnar’s beliefs, for a man who is known for seeing what others do not, creating drama in the show; I do think Ragnar is written as quite a progressive. This could have been vicariously exhilarating to watch especially for certain female watchers. For the following, Ragnar before he died, could’ve seen the beginning foundations for what’d later be Dane Law which I’d explore a bit more later.

These are alternatives to how Gyda could have written:

In the show, Gyda was placed in the same building where other people had the plague too. This means, after surviving, she would have been plagued with having remembered watching and experiencing the deaths of her childhood friends die. In Kattegat, she would've remembered the faces of those who died stimulated by seeing where they use to live, hang out and play with her and miss them. For parents relatives who were unable to be with their relatives for their last moments; she would have been responsible for relaying what happened to their children, what they experienced; if they had suffered. Some relatives may have wished it was Gyda taken. All of this could’ve created deep depression and survivor’s guilt which would be I argue would be a better way to explore the harsh realities of 9th century North, especially in the realm of child mortality then, so Gyda’s death was not necessary to explore this.

Deep depression from the plague and resentment from Ragnar’s infidelity would have created enough tragedy and pathos for Travis Fimmel to deliver a performance where his character deals with guilt and heartbreak over his daughter changing the context of the scene. For example, there are scenes in season 1 depicting Gyda allowing Ragnar to be physically affectionate with her: kissing the top of head, put his arm around her, letting her sit on his shoulders whilst he walked and stood upright. Deep depression combined with potential asocial and/or antisocial towards and not talking to Ragnar from hearing of Ragnar’s infidelity from season 1 episode 9, committed against her mother Aslaug, could have meant that Gyda stopped allowing Ragnar from being physically affectionate with her. Ragnar still could’ve produced this line “but I will wait here, awhile, and if you want to come and talk me, then come and talk, and I will gently stroke your long and beautiful hair once again with my peasant handles” Ragnar would still wish this to happen whilst feeling devastated at the loss of his and Gyda’s relationship and her happiness, even both were not long-term . This shows that, from my opinion, Gyda’s character did not have to die to generate Fimmel’s great performance. At this point Gyda leaves with Bjorn to go to Hedeby with Lagertha.

I think Ragnar would still have gone to the beach and said some of the lines, some would be the same and some different under the alternative context, to himself; he would not be able to say it to Gyda as the show displays he is sensitive to children. An example of this is when he and the other Vikings ate in King Aelle’s Hall and he tried to greet a Saxon boy; the boy got scared and you could see that Ragnar felt some rejection sensitivity; he felt he could not try to get the boy to see he was not a bad man and be can safe despite situation happening, in season 1 episode 8. There is then his self-imposed exile before returning then dying in season 5; it was to an extent driven by Ragnar’s guilt after how far his failures and their consequences resulted from the Paris raids, even for his sons thus he made Aslaug a single mother for a period, he avoided and did not confront his children and apologise as soon as possible and head on. So, if Gyda had lived under this context; it is highly likely Ragnar would not have been able tell her Gyda his thoughts face to face, still leading to a solitary beach monologue, due to her mental health and behaviour towards him. I believe this issue with Gyda could have been narrative driving for Ragnar, Lagertha, and Bjorn too.

This alternative shows, I think, that her death was not needed much to create enough tragedy in the show and pathos from the audience. It is heartbreaking for parents when children are suffering from deep depression, and not accepting their love due their mistakes. It is very fair to criticise my alternatives as being bad and as not invoking the emotions needed from the original canon, that there needed to be finality, nostalgic sadness from Gyda’s life and death, the emptiness of her absence, especially for Fimmel’s performance. I’d agree with that too. But again, as this is all coming from personal opinion and nor my desire to be my intent to be favoured towards my written alternates, I’d much rather sacrifice or had another alternative than what had been given in canon to let then character die in the plague in season 1. As someone who loved watching Vikings. This is because I might, as I am still not determined on this thought, think the character shouldn’t have died then and need more of a story beyond season 1.

Edit 2: whilst I look back on this. I am rewatching the show, only some episodes. Whilst I am aware these characters have Viking stoicism towards death and have intellectualised and are under the normality of child death in their time and place, I think the characters are too happy in a sense in after Gyda’s death. Edit 3: Lagertha being okay to participate in that threesome with Aslaug and Ragnar being pleased with it after he work up in season 2 episode 1.

Bjorn, Ragnar and Lagertha and Rollo do not act like a family who are still grieving the loss of a sister, daughter and niece. Apart from references to her characters and nostalgia for examples: a following character named after Gyda, Rollo feeling a flash of guilt for not appearing to care for his niece’s death in the season 2 episode 1, Bjorn’s statement in season 2 episode 7, where Ragnar daydreamed about his life on the farm again, seeing Gyda, during Paris in season 4 episode 6, and his clear reminder of Gyda in season 4 before his death through watch a Saxon girl in a forest - season 4 episode 13. These are acknowledged and were done well. I think Ragnar still could have the latter two moments in the show even when Gyda is older; having reminders of little Gyda either through daydreaming and or other girls could still bring him comfort. To continue, the aftermath of her death only serves momentary times of grief. It makes me think that her death was not as worth it or better terms that justifiable of such an important character.

Edit: There are no scenes really depicting Ragnar and Lagertha talking about the loss of their daughter. Bjorn, I don’t think ever talked about his sister to their half-brothers; at the loss of latter having missed by not having their sister. And, I feel Rollo displayed well enough grief for the loss of Gyda compared to his Siggy. I know Gyda and him were not close; but he did show underlying care for her when he stated “I have come to swear to you my allegiance and fealty to you and your family from this day” in season 1 episode 6. There aren’t really scenes depicting further emotional consequences from her death; now I’d look back I ask: Shouldn’t there be some extent of lingering darkness over the family resulting from Gyda’s death and more development as how to Gyda’s life motivates the characters directly to acknowledge the deep tragic loss and meaning of this beloved family member instead of it always to be subtle or indirect? I respect show and don’t tell and the desire for the show to move on. Although, in my opinion you need some significant time and those non-subtle and direct moments are needed to give weight to the necessity of the character death; it would need not be overbearing in the story; it’d just give the gravity, weight, depth and to support to it.

Following lines come from online, from things these characters said:

Gyda: Do you have any family, priest? 

Athelstan: I had four brothers and a sister.They all died of a fever, like my mother and father. I was only saved because they had me placed in a monastery when I was just a child. They had too many mouths to feed. 

Gyda: So you are alone?

Athelstan: No. God is my father, so I am never alone.

Gyda: What does your god look like?

Athelstan: No one can know what God looks like.

Season 1 episode 4

https://subslikescript.com/series/Vikings-2306299/season-1/episode-4-Trial

Gyda: I told them you'd come home.

When Ragnar returned from his first voyage to the West

Season 1 episode 3

https://subslikescript.com/series/Vikings-2306299/season-1/episode-3-Dispossessed

Gyda: If you're a priest, which God do you like best?

Athelstan: There is only one God.

Season 1 episode 3

https://tvshowtranscripts.ourboard.org/viewtopic.php?f=192&t=11743

Gyda: Athelstan? He is so weak he cannot eat. Pray to the gods, please, for him.

Season 1 episode 9

https://subslikescript.com/series/Vikings-2306299/season-1/episode-9-All_Change

Floki: Hello. How are you?

Bjorn: Well. Thank you, sir. Let me see.

Floki: Ah! You [Bjorn] have your father's [Ragnar's] eyes... Unfortunately.

Ragnar: Why unfortunately?

Floki: It means he will be like you, and therefore he will want to do better than you, and you will hate him for it.

Season 1 episode 1

Read more at: https://tvshowtranscripts.ourboard.org/viewtopic.php?f=192&t=11741

When it came to Gyda’s characters due the curiosity she displayed to Athelstan asking him questions about his background in season 1 episode 4; this shows she potentially could’ve been an approachable and more trustworthy figure for Saxons to communicate with in diplomacy. When it came to Gyda, she appeared to have an optimistic attitude as she displayed hope that Ragnar would return from his first journey to the West in season 1 episode 3. Had she lived whilst people might’ve believed that it was not possible, she might think in a more positive mindset that the Norse and Saxons can live together , and it not end up in eventual ruin; she might’ve been the forerunner for Danelaw had she lived to disapprove it which I will get onto later shortly later.

Because she showed kindness towards Athelstan asking her mother to pray him when he was suffering from the plague too like herself and did not even ask Lagertha to pray for her, in season 1 episode 9, it showed despite religious conflict that people such as herself can display religious humanity and care towards Saxons even when Athelstan told her that her others Gods do not exist. A character such as hers might have helped soften but not debunk the myth carried by the Saxons, due to past conflicts, that the Norse cannot show humanity and care for their people.

Especially pertaining to Dane Law; Gyda would have gone against Floki’s prediction; her eyes aren’t blue and shaped like Ragnar’s whereas Bjorn’s eyes are, that only he would seek to do better than Ragnar. She could have done better if she'd been a foreunner to the establishment of Dane Law showing that the Norse e.g. Vikings could live with Saxon Christians in spite of their conflicts and again not have eventual ruin. This would have happened after Ragnar’s Wessex settled had failed, where he did dream of a farming relationship between the Norse and Saxon requiring the both to live together, but his foresight and departure from England could not stop King Ecbert destroying his settlement. Thus Gyda could've done better where he failed and subverted the prediction only given to Bjorn.

There was a shieldmaiden named after Gyda through Lagertha. Showing she was an Gyda was an honourable character to be named after, but it still doesn’t feel like enough to honour the character’s memory, if you want the memory of Gyda to be honourable to audience, you let the character live and have her own rich storylines and achieve something to show off it. To me, it somewhat feels there is underlying idea that Gyda could’ve accomplished more had she lived by having another sheild-maiden named after her, not the daughter of the primary protagonist, get to have a career as a warrior whereas Gyda could not because they ended her life too early. In my opinion, if you see and invest in the potential of character you don’t let them die prematurely without making something of themselves fully e.g. having Ragnar’s wound be cauterised in season 1 episode 5 and then he died in season 4. Based on Ragnar having stated “[She was] so lively, [she] could run as swiftly as the wind. [She was] like quick-silver” as a younger child, those traits could have returned, and it could fuelled her potential to be good shieldmaiden; or good warrior in general, if she was deemed too fast for her opponents; the one who slipped past them hence being like “quicksilver” in the figurative sense. That was a missed potential there too. There could have been a source of pride for Lagertha as she’d be one to invest in these traits as a mentor, trainer; teacher; Rollo in season 1 episode 1 told us, this information indirectly laid the foundation for this was possible, as he was the one who asked Gyda whether “[her mother was] teaching [her] how to use a shield” which she confirmed by stating she knew how to use one meaning Lagertha made sure of it. Thus, the audience could’ve seen one “famous shieldmaiden” creating another “famous shieldmaiden” in my opinion, a missed beautiful legacy from mother to daughter.

Edit: we also have the unexplored relationship dynamics between her and uncle Rollo, as there are no scenes showing them privately bonding, being close and spending time alone together contrasted to her and Lagertha and Bjorn and Rollo. I think this would've been interesting to watch.