#httyd books lore

[companion-of-the-dragonmark]

New HTTYD Article Coming Soon!

Greetings, fellow Dragonmarkers! Just wanted to let you know that I'm currently working on a new article for the HTTYD Books, focusing on the timeline of the books and the Kingdom of the Wilderwest.

Keep an eye out!

Long Live the Wilderwest!

— Companion of the Dragonmark

[deconstructthesoup]

Every so often I get hit with a deep, deep stab of sorrow and regret due to the fact that the How To Train Your Dragon movies were so well-made and instilled in pop culture that almost nobody knows about the absolute mastery that is the How To Train Your Dragon books

[dopscratch]

dropping dead space hiccup and toothless

The space vikings still have horns on their helmets, it's to discourage the dragons from biting their heads off hehe

The dragons themselves can live perfectly fine in space. Their gills now run down the sides of their body and are more like vents that they can use to control their movement. Instead of fire, they breathe superheated particles because fire doesn't play well in a vacuum.

Swords are still useful as they don't require ammo, which is very helpful for the space vikings who don't have a very reliable source of it. They also fight often enough that wasting a ton of ammo on the 15th petty dispute of the day isn't a very good option. Some fancier swords have augmentations that make them more like some of the plasma saws seen throughout the series, but the Endeavour is a simple sword because The Best Is Not Always The Most Obvious.

More info and story spoilers below the cut!

Hiccup is pretty similar to his canon counterpart. He's a nerd, likes dragon-watching, speaks four languages, and is pretty terrible at anything traditionally viking-like.

After the war breaks out, he starts seeing all of the dragons who he's killed so far as well as some others who have died in the war. They mostly fuel his paranoia and just stand there menacingly.

When Snotlout dies, Hiccup also starts getting haunted by visions of him, who try to mislead him near the final battle- especially problematic because he'd lost his memory at that time.

Toothless is a Stardragonus Giganticus Maximus hehe

[demhen]

More Quick Questions

So is snotlout really hiccups cousin in the canon in the movies?

or is that like book lore we as a fandom just decided to be real in the movies as well? And if yes, is there more, more of that lore, 5hat we just carried over?

[noctusfury]

The Story Behind the Portraits (A HTTYD/Riders of Berk Theory)

Hello, my fellow Furians! And welcome to another HTTYD article!

Today, we’ll be diving into the background and mystery behind the Portraits of the Chieftains and their Heirs!

This is a continuation, sequel, and expansion of my original post here.

We know very little about Berkian history aside from the fact that Berk has been around for 7 generations (8 if you include the Gang... maybe?) and that Berk celebrated their 400th Anniversary (more on that in my previous article here).

Other events and people in Berkian history that were mentioned were the Dragon Wars (for 300 years), the Berserker Wars (during Stoick’s father’s and grandfather’s time), the skirmishes with the Outcasts, the Rise of Alvin the Treacherous, even about the fame of Hamish the First. There are mentions of other noteworthy people that were part of Berk’s history (at least, I assume they’re part of Berkian history since Fishlegs mentions them), but to regale you of them when I haven’t watched the series in a while isn’t worth it.

However, there is one glaring absence among the row of portraits on the wall: there is no portrait of Hamish the Second and his son. Why?

Let us go through the events of the Riders of Berk episode “Portrait of Hiccup as a Buff Man” to find out, since that is where we will receive the story of Hiccup the Second.

We know that Hamish the First was a famous chieftain in Berkian history, said by Fishlegs to have been: “the most successful and wealthiest chieftain in Berk’s history, who amassed a fabulous and massive treasury.” 

However, there may be some conflict over who was actually Hamish the First, since according to the Wiki, the blonde Viking is NOT Hamish the First, but actually the first portrait on the wall, the dark-haired Viking, and that Hamish the Second was named after him.

Of course, I’m not sure if the animation error is true or not. If Hamish the First, according to the Wiki, truly was the first chieftain to take his portrait in this, then it doesn’t make sense that Hamish the Second would put the treasury spanning from the First Chieftain into a secret place several generations later. But could it be that his (the first chieftain’s) son is really Hamish the Second?

I don’t know. It’s difficult to tell. I’ll leave that to you guys, and I’ll think about it a little more. I might even write another article about this apparent discrepancy.

While it may be a stretch, it's possible that Hamish the Second switched the portraits and that the first chieftain’s portrait was actually the portrait posing as the two Hamishes (the blonds) while the true portrait of the Hamishes was put into the First Chieftain’s portrait spot.

Anyway, back to Hamish the Second’s background.

After leaving behind a literal golden and colorful legacy, Hamish the First stepped down (or died), leaving Hamish the Second to succeed him as the 5th-Generation Chieftain of Berk. After that, he hid the majority of his father’s treasure hoards and created the labyrinth and riddles for the next “hiccup” to find in the future. We don’t know the later events or accomplishments of his reign — or anything else about him, for that matter — before the succession of either Stoick’s grandfather or father.

But here’s where it’s gets even more hazy.

The Case of the Missing Portraits

If you count all of the portraits in total, there are only SIX of them, including Hiccup’s portrait! We’re missing Hamish the Second’s portrait with his son.

Where is it? What happened to it? Why is it missing?!

In the intro to the HTTYD 1 film, Hiccup stated that they have lived on Berk for “seven generations,” so whether you include his own generation as the 7th generation, or if the 7th generation is Stoick’s generation while Hiccup’s generation is the 8th is its own topic altogether.

Though you could argue that only Hamish the Second's portrait is missing, since if you HAD included that, it would've been 7 generations of portraits, including Hiccup's portrait with Stoick, and, even IF Hiccup was the 8th generation instead of the 7th, there wouldn't be an 8th portrait until the coming-of-age of Hiccup's OWN children.

We get an interesting hint by Fishlegs as they observe the line of portraits:

So according to him, Hiccup is one of the “few” who wasn’t killed by their successors  — which usually implies that regicide was somewhat commonplace. Of course, “few” could just imply more than 3-4 individuals, and it’s possible that only a few in their history were actually killed by their successor.

Another theory is that Fishlegs is talking about successors and predecessors in general throughout the Archipelago in all of Viking history.

It’s not really stated what “the elite few” is referencing, whether it’s concerning the Berkian chieftain bloodline, or is including the chieftain bloodlines of other Tribes as well.

What do you guys think?

At any rate, let’s start with Hamish the Second.

Hamish the Second

Hamish the Second is definitely a curious individual in Berkian history, shown to be a nod to Grimbeard the Ghastly's son, Hiccup the Second, in the Books. Both are friends to dragons, both were Runts, both loved their fathers despite their grievances, and both their fathers were successful pirates who collecting a massive hoard of treasures.

Since after his father's death, Hamish the Second, being a brilliant engineer and nasty trapper and riddler, used his (presumedly) secret relationship with dragons to build a massive complex to hide his father's treasure (most likely due to the infighting over the said treasure, as was seen in HTTYD Book 2) and protect it from thieves and raiders.

That was his first job and project as the 5th(?) Chieftain of Berk.

So, if Hamish II became the next Chief, what happened to him and why isn't there a portrait of himself with his own son?

Well, we simply don't know, unfortunately. There are some theories and plausibilities that could explain its disappearance.

1. Hamish, much like his Book counterpart, perished at a young age — most likely as the victim of what Fishlegs mentioned as "being one of those killed by their successor."

2. Hamish could've died as a result of an accident, disease, injuries, battle, or even a shipwreck or a storm.

3. Hamish's secret of befriending dragons could've been discovered and was either killed or exiled for "betraying Berk". (Of course, this is assuming that Berk hadn't tamed dragons back then since Hamish the First obviously had time to raid and pillage to get this massive hoard of treasure without much problems with dragon raids. And the flashback with Stoick and Hiccup in HTTYD 2 and HTTYD 3 seem to support that.)

4. Hamish could've been killed or forced to leave due to people seeking his father's treasure.

5. Hamish could've had a son but, like Thugheart from the Books, decided to overthrow Hamish II and got rid of him.

6. Hamish, not wanting to endanger his dragon friends, pulled a Valka-move and either made it look like dragons killed him, or, like what Hiccup tried to do in HTTYD 1, decided to quietly leave Berk without telling anyone.

There might be more, but those are the main ones.

Heck, perhaps even one of these two portraits IS Hamish the Second and his son, presumedly Stoick's grandfather. Who knows? 🤷‍♂️

At any rate, for any or a combination of these reasons, this resulted in a tragic early death before having an heir, or he did have an heir but died before his son came of-age, thus the portrait couldn't be made.

Considering Hamish the Second is based off of Hiccup the Second from the Books, let's just assume the chieftainship was left vacant after his disappearance, for whatever reason it may be.

Of course, if this is true, does this simply mean that the portraits got switched? If so, then we can continue with the theory that a relative of Hamish the Second, Stoick's grandfather or father, became the new Chief of Berk — assuming there wasn't an upstart before that who tried to take advantage and take the throne for himself.

This would effectively make Stoick's family a new dynasty, even if they're part of the same family. Assuming that they're not just a family of Vikings that the residents voted in and that the official line of Berk ended with Hamish the Second.

If it's TRUE that the Hamishes WERE, in fact, the FIRST and SECOND Chiefs of Berk, then that would change things a bit.

For instance, if we were to be loyal to the Books, after the deaths of Grimbeard and Hiccup the Second, and the disownment and exile of Thugheart, Chucklehead would become the new Chieftain of Berk.

Meaning that after Hamish the First's death, and Hamish the Second's early death/disappearance, Chucklehead would be the next Chieftain of Berk.

And if you look at the portraits, the one on the right looks like what Chucklehead would look like, doesn't he? 👀

Conclusion

To conclude with this rather long article, regardless of Hamish the Second's fate, or what timeline he truly hails from, he left a seat vacant, and the absence of his theoretical portrait of himself and his heir is likely due to his early death or disappearance, or, if he HAD an heir, or contenders, they might've dealt with him and got rid of the portrait.

The only reason why I didn't mention the possibility of his secret — that of his friendship with dragons — being found out, and that's what caused his downfall, is that if that had been the case, then why didn't they destroy the portrait of Hamish the First and Hamish the Second as well?

If the Hamishes were the First- and Second-Generation Chieftains, then the next chieftain would've been [insert Viking] (I'm going with "Chucklehead").

If not, and it was during Stoick's grandfather's or father's time, then it's possible that Stoick's grandfather and father were part of the continuation of the dynasty left vacant by Hamish the Second. Assuming they're not a new dynasty altogether, which is unlikely.

<><><><><>

Anyway, I hope you enjoyed this article. If you have any thoughts about this mystery, or about Berkian history, please feel free to give your thoughts.

Thank you for reading. I hope you have a good weekend.

Long Live the Night!

— Noctus Fury

[the-book-of-dragons]

The Purple Death

The Purple Death is a powerful Tidal Class Dragon that is stronger than the Red Death and Green Death, and probably even a Bewilderbeast.

Just like the Green Death it originated from the How to Train Your Dragon Book series specifically the first book. It made it's appearance in the Dragons: Rise Of Berk app game but also the comics as well. This dragon that was thought to have been extinct was so powerful it could only be taken down but putting it back to sleep through a Changewing's hypnosis.

[quiet-art-kid]

If I remember right after Hiccup I the relationship was mutually beneficial but then Grimbeard enslaved dragons and banned their language. But he's still a man, just one man making what seems like a massive choice. If dragons and humans were still friends at that point surely there would have been a huge amount of pushback. This implies that:

A : There was massive pushback, and it was swept under the rug

B : the Vikings were already receptive to the idea of enslaving dragons

[dizzybevvie]

If I die within the next week know it wasnt an accident

[raayllum]

also if i seem quieter / putting out less stuff than usual that is because i got my first publishing offer on my YA sff novel (think TDP + six of crows / atla) from a press when i really didn’t expect to (i’ve queried like maybe 20 people in total) and have been figuring out what to do with it! some slight more details will follow / DM or ask questions if you want to, for any reason - life is wild bro

[starboy-squeakers]

Again not a dungeon meshi reader/watcher but every time I hear about that laois guy I get reminded of how my system had/has a hyperfixation on dragons so intense that we got that big fancy dragonology book and we treated it like the damn dragon Bible for like years

Now, obviously, we understand that there's different interpretations on mythical creatures, and no one interpretation on a dragon is necessarily gospel, but that multiple interpretations on the classic tale of beasts of scale and fire are completely valid and to be expected!

however if you call an Eastern dragon a coatl I'm going to come to your house and slaughter your family

[elainapendragon]

Hello everyone!

I'm Elaina Pendragon (my penname), and I write fantasy young adult novels! Book one is available on Amazon in all formats, and you can learn more on my TikTok!

Below is a sneak peek (click on the images for better quality), but soon I'll be releasing a couple of chapters as well, probably chapters 1-5, including the prologue. This story is a coming of age story, one about breaking free of the past. It's for fans of fantasy, dragonriders, character growth, semi-slow burn friends-to-lovers, angst, love triangles, "I will always protect you" vs "Touch her, and I will kill you," a dark and dangerous lover vs a gallant and mysterious lover, action, viking lore, foreshadowing, and a commoner-to-hero romance.

Book one is available on Amazon in all formats and may be released on the Tiktok shop as well (link below).

[companion-of-the-dragonmark]

When Was the First Kingdom of the Wilderwest Built? (HTTYD Books)

Hello, my fellow Dragonmarkers! It's been awhile! As promised, here's the article concerning the plausible timeline of the Kingdom of the Wilderwest. This article was actually a very old one of mine that I had written during this month in 2018. Why didn't I post it on here? Because I wasn't on Tumblr until 2020. And by then, I had forgotten to post this on here. Whoops. Teehee. 😜

When did Hiccup the First end the First Human-Dragon War and built the First Kingdom of the Wilderwest?

Many fans just go with what Wodensfang says in Book 11, supporting the 1000-Year Dynasty mentioned in Book 11 rather than the 500-700-Year Dynasty suggested in Book 9. In fact, it's everywhere in the HTTYD Wiki. I guess it's because fans view Book 11 to be more accurate because it's a later book? I don't know; maybe I'm thinking too hard about this.

But I want to talk through this and thoroughly go through the pros and cons of both sides of the argument and do this right. I'd love to know what you guys think about this.

Anyway, on to the topic!  

Possible Contradiction?:

In the First Book — the Book that we're all familiar with — in Chapter 6, Page 68, says that:

"The Dragon (speaking of the Green Death) had crawled down into the depths of the ocean and had gone into a Sleep Coma. Dragons can stay in this suspended state for eternity, half-dead, half-alive, buried under fathom after fathom of icy-cold seawater. Not a muscle of this particular Dragon had moved for six or seven centuries."

Wodensfang's account of Hiccup the First in Book 9 "How to Steal a Dragon's Sword", on Chapter 12, Page 203, seems to probably confirm this when he says: "Five or six centuries ago, when I was young, it was a very dark age, and the dragons and humans were at war."

He goes on further explanation in Page 208 concerning the Green Death: "...Merciless flew to the north, and to the Open Sea. He lived so long a loner that perhaps over the centuries he forgot his youth as leader of a dragon army and became quite an ordinary killer. Rumor was that several hundred years later, he was known only as the Green Death, one of the many monsters that terrorize the Deep Sea."

So you're probably saying, "Great! There it is! There's your answer! It was 600-700 years ago! Problem solved, right?"

Wrong.

In Book 11 "How to Betray a Dragon's Hero", on Chapter 6, Page 98, Wodensfang tells the story of how the Dragonmark came to be, as well as a more detailed history of the Kingdom of the Wilderwest and the story of Grimbeard the Ghastly as a boy, and how he changed the Mark. 

He says at the beginning of the story: "Once upon a time, Hiccup, a thousand or so years ago, when I was young and about the size of a Saber-Toothed Driver Dragon, I met your ancestor, Hiccup Horrendous Haddock the First, and I gave him the Dragon Jewel and trusted him with the Jewel's Secret."

In Page 100, Wodensfang repeats this by saying: "For over a thousand years, it seemed like I had made the right decision to entrust the Secret of the Dragon Jewel to the humans."

I know right? I'm as confused as you are! Didn't he say in Book 9 that it was "five or six centuries ago"? Maybe even SEVEN centuries ago? Why the change? Did he suddenly get the Dragon equivalent of memory loss due to old age? Does he not know how to count?

Here's the confusing thing: if he was rounding, this might explain it. But the thing is that you can do it with small numbers, but as the number gets bigger, you can't round up in great jumps.

(Warning: Math Ahead!)

For example, say that the number is 8, you round it up to 10 (in certain circumstances) because 8 is closer to 10 than 5. However, if it's 6, then you have to round down to 5 because 6 is closer to 5. The only time that it doesn't is when you're rounding up in percentages (55.678594375 would be 56, for example).

You can't round up to 1000 years from 600, or even 700. That's too high of a jump. Especially when you're telling a historical account. For one thing, it's inaccurate, and for another, it's lazy. And it'll spread lots of confusion.

<><><><><><><><><><>

A Roman Piece to a Nordic Puzzle | The Hint's in the Roman Numerals: 

So then, which is it? Was the Kingdom of the Wilderwest built 600-700 years ago or 1000-odd years ago? 

First off, allow me to redirect your attention once more to the references concerning the Green Death (also known as Merciless):

The Green Death Takes His Tea by Crownflame on DeviantArt

<><><><><><>

"The Dragon (speaking of the Green Death) had crawled down into the depths of the ocean and had gone into a Sleep Coma. Dragons can stay in this suspended state for eternity, half-dead, half-alive, buried under fathom after fathom of icy-cold seawater. Not a muscle of this particular Dragon had moved for six or seven centuries." 

And this one:

  ". . .Merciless flew to the north, and to the Open Sea. He lived so long a loner that perhaps over the centuries he forgot his youth as leader of a dragon army and became quite an ordinary killer. Rumor was that several hundred years later, he was known only as the Green Death, one of the many monsters that terrorize the Deep Sea." 

According to these two quotes concerning the Dragon Merciless, it would appear that the events were about roughly 600 years ago. The problem is that the first quote says he had been in a Sleep Coma for six or seven centuries. I don't know about you, but that doesn't seem like a lot of time to me for him to have forgotten his past and about his nemesis Hiccup. It sounds like in the latter quote, Merciless lived and journeyed alone for a long time — about 100-200 years or more — before he fell into a Sleep Coma.

What might help support this is the mention of what he had eaten in Book 1, Page 129: "He was awake now, and he had coughed up the last thing he had eaten, the Eagle Standard of the Eighth Legion, with its pathetic ribbons still flying bravely."

Now, yes, the HTTYD books are exaggeratory and any historical references are "purely coincidental," and that the Roman Dragonrustlers were about during Hiccup the Third's time (but after Book 3 was said to have fled back to Rome — which is inaccurate because Hiccup's time was during the Viking Age, over 300 years after the fall of the Roman Empire. However, I have a theory that'll explain that in the future). 

But what if we DID get historical here? According to history, the only 8th Legion in Roman history was the Legio VIII Augusta, one of the oldest Roman legions in Rome's history (along with the Legio VI Feratta, Legio VII Claudia, and the (in)famous Legio IX Hispana). They were stationed in Gaul (modern France) near the modern-day Strasbourg area (called Argentoratum in Roman times). It was founded in 65 BC by Julius Caesar during the Gaul Wars. It continued service presumedly until either before or until the Fall of Rome (400-500 AD). 

Of course, since it continued service until that time period, then it's impossible for the Green Death to have eaten the Legion, right?

As Old Wrinkly used to say: "It's not im-POSSIBLE, only im-PROBABLE. The only thing that limits us are the limits to our imaginations." 

So, taking this sagely advice, let's think about this carefully.

According to Roman history, the Eighth Legion was disbanded during the first of Rome's Civil Wars (called Caesar's Civil War and the conflict was between Caesar and Scipio) soon after the Battle and Siege of Thapsus (modern-day Tunisia) in 46 BC for unknown reasons. It was reconstituted in 44 BC by Caesar's adopted son Augustus for Caesar's veterans who had loyally served him and helped him defeat Mark Antony and gain power as Rome's first Emperor.

So basically, there's a two-year gap between the disbandment and the reinstation of the Eighth Legion, which means that Merciless could've easily have eaten the Legion during that time and nobody would've been the wiser, and when Augustus reinstated the Legion two years later, he filled the ranks with other veterans who had served Caesar and Augustus.

What do you think? Plausible?

<><><><><><><><><><>

Possible Connection to Dragon-Aging and Dates in the Book of Dragons:

Now, in Book 1, in the back of the How to Train Your Dragon book that Hiccup reads (similar to the Book of Dragons in the film) in Chapter 4 on Page 53-58, it says that the last stamped due-date was on "16 May 866 AD". The first and second due-dates stamped on there before that were "10 June 789 AD" and "9 April 835 AD".

However, there's no mention of when that book was borrowed, or when it was returned, or the gap between the date and when Gobber the Belch had burgled it from the Meathead "Public" Library. The Hooligans seemed to have had the book for a while. So the current date of the time of Hiccup's first memoir could be anywhere from 866-900 AD — if not later! 

Suffering Scallops, it could even be in the 1000s AD!!! In Book 7, Hiccup writes in his epilogue that: "Now I am an old, old man, and the world that I created has no need for dragons. They have retreated from the civilization that I brought, along with the wolves, and the Berserks, and the monsters of my childhood."

In 1015 AD, Berserkers were outlawed, and the practice of "going berserk" as a profession and the rituals involving their cults were forbidden until by the turn of the 12th century, Berserkers had all but disappeared from human history. The end of the Viking Age was considered to be between 1066-1100 AD, so, scallops, Hiccup could very well have lived during this time.

(This could explain the crossbows in the TV series, as they were beginning to show up around this time, as well as Hiccup's quote in the first film: "300 years and I'm the first Viking who wouldn't kill a dragon!") 

And, in Book 12, Hiccup also explains in his epilogue that Sea-Dragons like Toothless can live for thousands of years, so maybe 1000-year period might be correct? There's no mention about the other sea dragons, apparently, so I guess they don't live nearly as long?

The problem is the period of growth in the Sea-Dragons. Wodensfang was probably of-age by the time he meets Hiccup the First, and he was "the size of a Saber-Toothed Driver Dragon" then. Then, as the decades and centuries went by and the Kingdom prospered, he grew to be "as large as a mountain". Then he says that hundreds of years ago, he began to "shrink in old age", as Sea-Dragons are small in young and old ages, but in adult stages they're colossal, until he shrunk to the "size of a large Viking hunting dog (probably a Norwegian Elkhound, which lived during this time and was used mainly as a guard and hunting dog)" during the time of Grimbeard the Ghastly. By Hiccup the Third's time a hundred years later, he shrunk to the size of Toothless.

Furious was still considered a baby during Hiccup the Second's time, but grew to be the size of a small elephant. Then 100 years later, he became the size of a mountain, when it doesn't seem that Wodensfang grew that big that quickly (though, to be fair, the Berserks had been feeding him well with human sacrifices for the past 100 years, among other foods, so he probably grew to be that big because of it.) He must've had an early growth spurt. lol 😂

That being said, the reason Furious and Wodensfang have different growing speeds may be likely due to Furious having been fed well since his hatchling days. Whereas it's hinted by Wodensfang himself that he's had a difficult life in his younger days, which is one of the reasons he joins Merciless' rebellion against the Vikings. So the struggle for food could've stunted his growth until he met Hiccup the First later on, at which point he grew faster as more food was available.

Meanwhile, there's Toothless, who's a baby, and has been the size of Wodensfang since the first book, and, according to Hiccup in his epilogue in Book 12, hasn't really grown up at all despite it being 62 years since the events of Book 12 (which if Hiccup was 10-11 when he got Toothless in Book 1, this would make Toothless 65-66 years old by Hiccup's death) and is still able to sleep on his chest. 

He must be a late bloomer. lol 😂

Then there's the Green Death — or Merciless — to consider. While he was Furious's size during Hiccup the First's time, and was considered to be a young dragon, then several centuries later, if not more, when he meets Hiccup the Third, he's still the same size! Do Sleep Comas delay aging and growth or something?

So basically we have FOUR Sea-Dragons who grow and age at various speeds! So I don't think we can glean anything from this.

So . . . 1000 years or 600-700 years? Honestly, I seem to get more confused the further I try to explain it! I hope you're having better luck keeping up than I am at the moment! lol 😂

<><><><><><><>

Time For a Little More Math! (cue the groans!):

Okay, I'm going to do a little more math. To be honest, graphs, charts, and basic math is the only math I love. If you don't like it, then skip if you'd like, though you'll miss out on the cool part. 😉🧐

I've done the calculations and I'll do my best with it. If there are any mistakes, please let me know and I'll correct them. 

I'll be using current time from 866-1100 AD and then add the date to when the Kingdom of the Wilderwest could've been established in Hiccup the First's time. 

I will be using the terms CTP (Current Time Period) and DFP (Dynasty Foundation Period) to avoid confusion.

Whew! Okay! Now that THAT'S done and over with, let's get to the average ages of the Kings of the Wilderwest to further prove (hopefully) which date it might've been. 

I've organized it into different sections. Before Hiccup the Third, there were 12 Kings of the Wilderwest. So I'll divide the number of years that the Dynasty could've lasted to the number of Kings to get the average lifespan that each of the Kings have to be in order for this to become plausible.

Now granted, some of these Kings could've died young (20s-30s), or very old, or in their middle-ages (pun not intended). This is the AVERAGE lifespan for each king -- not a literal statistic for each and every King. 

Unless, of course, if we were fanciful people, we might've theorized that there's some sort of magic spell in the Dragon Jewel that Wodensfang didn't mention that causes all of the Twelve Kings to die at the same age. 

In that case, if true, and if every King DOES INDEED die at the same age, then since Hiccup the Third dies at the age of 75/76, it would've been 900 years since the foundation of the Kingdom of the Wilderwest since every King would've died at the same age that Hiccup had died.

But we're not fanciful people . . . and that would be ridiculous. lol 😜

However, you're probably noticing that there are no 1000 Years among the statistics that I just showed above. That's because I had just remembered that the Kingdom of the Wilderwest collapsed a hundred years before Hiccup the Third's time. Meaning that if the Dynasty and Kingdom lasted for 1000 years, then only 900 years of that has passed as a kingdom.

<><><><><><><><>

Conclusion:

So . . . WHEW! That took a long time to write (5-6 hours, though the time could've been cut in half had I not done the statistics, but then where'd be the fun in that? lol 😜)

I apologize if any of this went over your head or overwhelmed you with informational overload. If it did, then I sympathize because I'm feeling this as well — and I'm WRITING THIS! 

So my conclusion is that, basically speaking, regardless of the Kingdom being anywhere from 600-1000 years old, 100 of those years need to be subtracted since the Kingdom fell apart when Grimbeard dissolved it a hundred years prior to the current events of the Second Dragon War. So, realistically, the Kingdom — and the 12 Kings (including Grimbeard) — lasted around 500-900 years, and when Wodensfang tells Hiccup the Third about the history of the Wilderwest, he includes the 100 years into the timeframe when the Kingdom of the Wilderwest was first founded.

So I guess that, in the end, the actual date and timeline will be left up to the fans to headcanon for themselves.

If you could take anything from this, what would it be?

What current timeline do you think Hiccup the Third could be living in during the Viking Age? 900s? 1000s? 1100?

And how many years do you think that the Kingdom of the Wilderwest was established (including the 100-year gap)? 1000 years? 800? 700? 600? 

Please share your thoughts! I'd LOVE to hear from you!!! ^_^ 

Thank you SO MUCH for taking the time to read this and I am looking forward to reading any theories, corrections, suggestions, discussions, answers, and/or questions you may have. 

I hope this article finds you well, and I hope you have a splendid weekend! 

Long Live the Wilderwest!

— Companion of the Dragonmark

[dopscratch]

i think movie hiccup would be the one going out recklessly and doing more of the wrangling while i feel like book hiccup has major david attenborough energy except he'd always be on site doing the narration or something

movie hiccup definitely has much more of a deathwish and might even try to intervene or eat least get the urge to intervene in predator/prey interactions as well as getting much more close and personal, especially considering his experience with large dangerous creatures is that they can all for the most part be turned into loving puppy dogs and are generally misunderstood, and he might be guilty of anthropomorphizing the animals a bit too much. he'd probably be great for tagging efforts and such, as well as promoting understanding through getting a really close look at the creature itself

meanwhile book hiccup i feel has a better grasp on respecting the power and danger inherent in some kinds of wildlife and in a controlled situation where he didn't absolutely have to, wouldn't go out of his way to interact, preferring to hang back and observe their natural behaviors in secret like he'd do dragonwatching rather than getting up close and personal to actually touch/capture/interact with the animals. like don't get me wrong book hiccup can be daring but he also has a healthy sense of self-preservation, and probably wouldn't be doing anything too risky unless something important depended on it. he'd probably be more on the side of pure education, finding beauty in the natural lives and deaths of wildlife and the whole circle of life. and then also go on a tangent describing the morphological features of some random critter in detail. and i think book hiccup would definitely include the smaller creatures like insects into the mix while movie hiccup would often focus on the larger, more impressive ones.

wow that turned out longer than i thought it'd be

I think one thing both film and book Hiccup have in common is that in a modern AU, both of them would love nothing more than to host a Steve Irwin-type show where they teach you about the local wildlife and wrangle giant reptiles. (In a modern half-brothers AU it'd probably be something a bit more like the Kratt Brothers' Be the Creature)

Who knows! In a modern AU they might even be able to!

[dopscratch]

let me introduce to you my how to train your dragon dead space au

its basically httyd but in the dead space universe, alvin and excellinor are unitologist leaders and the seadragons are spacedragons

idk why but i designed termagant first (fishlegs' mother, for those who are unfamiliar with the httyd books)

she, like most of the other space vikings, wears and uses scrapped together scaf gear.

OH ALSO i'm declaring large/muscular termagant supremacy she's the daughter of a murderous and a berserk and didn't get yeeted into the ocean you can't tell me she's skinny

spoilers and necromorphs under the cut, tread carefully! (necromorphs are a body-horror and gore-fest, for those who are unfamiliar with dead space)

Rather than dying after childbirth, Termagant runs off with Alvin. Alvin starts seeming a little suspicious to her so eventually she sends off Fishlegs with Arrogance, Innocence and Patience (he's still mostly too young to remember it but he DOES retain a little bit as opposed to canon). Soon after, Alvin pulls a Dr. Mercer and makes her into a hunter-type necromorph- accidentally. He leaves before he can see what he's created but later during the war, he a) is tormented by her in hallucinations and b) occasionally sees her physically make an appearance and can't get rid of her if he tried because she just regenerates.

[walks-the-ages]

Does the Movie/Show HTTYD fandom know that "Feral Hiccup Raised by Dragons" is part of the book lore?

[noctusfury]

Contradictory Anniversary? (RTTE)

Hello, everyone! Welcome to a new article! Today’s topic is on this perplexing issue surrounding Berk’s anniversary.

Now I’m sure many of you were as perplexed by the seemingly obvious error in the HTTYD lore. I mean, we’ve all seen the first film, and it’s only said “300 years”. But Stoick and Gobber CLEARLY SAY “400 years”.

(Race to the Edge, Season 4, Episode 3 “Midnight Scrum”)

So, which is it? Is it an error or is this actually truth disguised as misinformation? We’ll find out, right after this! *Cues 5 minutes of commercials*

Just kidding! We’re finding out NOW. Duh. XD

Anyway, so the film AND the show (not to mention the short films) clearly states by both Stoick, Hiccup, and other characters that it’s been 300 years.

However, there’s a VERY important detail in the film that the Wiki probably missed. What was it?

This!

The Wiki says, as stated in the first snip above, that it’s been 300 years since Vikings first arrived on Berk. But in the film, Hiccup adds an important detail that the Wiki didn’t have.

Hiccup: “300 years, and I’m the first Viking who has never killed a dragon!”

While this may be something unrelated at first, it seems to imply that Vikings have been fighting dragons for 300 years, not living on Berk for 300 years. (That being said, he could be talking about Vikings archipelago-wide, not just on Berk.) Which means that Berkians could’ve been living here for 400 years, but have been fighting dragons for 300 years.

However, just as I say this, Astrid says an interesting quote to Hiccup after they find the Red Death:

Astrid: “Hiccup we’ve just discovered the Dragons’ Nest! The thing we’ve been after since Vikings first sailed here! And you wanna keep it a secret?!”

So which is it, Noctus? Is it 300 years or 400 years?

Well, what the Wiki said about Vikings having arrived on Berk 300 years prior could’ve been assumed from Astrid’s quote here. Which, when you think about it, is a logical one to make.

That being said though, it’s never stated whether she, like Hiccup, was talking about the Berkian Vikings, or about Vikings in general throughout the archipelago. We also can’t be sure what “here” means, whether it implies Berk or the Archipelago.

So... how can we be sure, then?

Well, I have found that when all else fails, turn to math! ^_^

So in the film, Hiccup states in his narration at the very beginning of the film that the settlement of Berk has been here “for seven generations.”

If you look at the portraits of Berk’s line of chieftains, there’s about 7 generations of them (sans Hamish the Second’s and Stoick’s Father’s portraits for unknown reasons, which I’ll get to in another article), and Hiccup’s portrait with Stoick makes it the 8th, meaning that Hiccup and the others are the 8th generation.

A generation is factually accepted to be around 20-40 years. And since Hiccup’s generation has been around for 20 or less, I’ll add that into consideration. 

40 x 7 = 280 + 20 = 300

So seven generations would give us about 280 years, which makes sense. When we add the 8th generations 15-20 years, it gives us 295-300 years, exactly. So it all checks out.

So, at face value, it has been 300 years since the Berkian Vikings have lived on the Isle of Berk.

Since RTTE, having been produced by Netflix and not Cartoon Network like the Riders of Berk and Defenders of Berk seasons have been, it was inevitable that there’d be several errors in the lore (don’t even get me STARTED on the many plot holes and plot teasers they’ve never followed through with).

But what if the Berkians weren’t celebrating the 400-Year Anniversary of Berk as a village, but as an island? Then things would make a little more sense.

After all, what if Berk had been an island that was claimed by their ancestors well before they themselves actually settled there? Granted, it’s a pretty big stretch, until you consider the BOOKS! 

That’s right, the BOOKS.

The story of Hiccup the Third and Toothless isn’t an old one. In fact, the plot of HTTYD 1 is greatly inspired and influenced by Hiccup the First and Wodensfang’s story in the books. In it (Book 9 specifically), Wodensfang talks of Hiccup the First’s saga, where not long after his birth, the Vikings of the Mainland (later to be known as the Vikings of Berk) were driven out of their fertile lands by the Uglithugs, a Viking horde who’ll control the Mainland up to current times (aside from the period where Grimbeard the Ghastly reclaimed it from UG’s ancestor for a time until after his death). From the Mainland, they sailed to Berk and made their colony there. During this time, they were also in a bloody war with the dragons, where the King of the Dragons, Merciless (also known as the Green Death [Red Death in the film]), once he hears that a Viking named Hiccup will kill him, seeks to kill everyone on the island to prevent the prophecy from coming true. He sends Wodensfang, who, at the time, was the most dangerous dragon in Merciless’s army, to complete this task. Unfortunately, a storm hits and leaves him entangled in the tree, and grows weak from his wounds. Fortunately, Hiccup the First, a child at the time, came to his aid and healed him, and they became fast friends. Wodensfang would end up helping Hiccup steal the Dragon Jewel from Merciless, forcing the latter to capitulate before Hiccup, who has the Jewel now, forcing him to disband his forces, and be exiled from the Archipelago.

Anyway, I’m digressing, hehe.

Long-story short, the Berkians are forced from their original lands and they sail to Berk and settle there. This could’ve very well been what happened in the HTTYD film lore: the Berkians claimed Berk as a territory belonging to the Kingdom 400 years prior as an outpost for both exploration and wartime purposes, but then 100 years later, a fierce war against another Viking faction broke out, ending in their defeat, and forcing the Vikings of the Mainland (or wherever) to sail to Berk, later becoming the Vikings of Berk. And it isn’t long after they settled that they had to deal with the dragons, many of which had made their nests on the island long before. Then came the dragon raids from Dragon Island, which wouldn’t end until Hiccup the Third defeated the Red Death 300 years later.

Another option is that Berk has just purely existed for 400 years and that they’ve been fighting dragons for 300 once the Red Death came along.

So that’s my hypothesis explaining the 400-Year Anniversary despite the 300 years of settlement. Because the Berkians had the island for 400 years, but didn’t settle it until a hundred years later.

What do you think? Plausible? I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter! Do you think this could be the case, or is this another thing RTTE goofed up in lore-wise?

Thank you for reading, my fellow Furians! See you in the next article! ^_^

Long Live the Night!

— Noctus Fury