6 ms·
>I don't know a lot about Vikings but as I understand they were principally raiders, which I would absolutely expect to perform worse than a Frankish aristocrat
by ReptileMan 6y ago
>I don't know a lot about Vikings but as I understand they were principally raiders, which I would absolutely expect to perform worse than a Frankish aristocrat-led army.
In a pitched battle, on a open terrain, in a nice weather with preferably not too soft soil.
Also if you want to find tough people you look them at the extremes - so high north, or up in the mountains or in the deserts.
- weff_ 6y agoThe 'living in harsh conditions makes you a crazy good fighter" is a meme though, as this historian explains: https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-part-i-war-at-the-dawn-of-civilization/ https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-...
- wyattpeak 6y agoThey'd be experienced in many different forms of combat, pitched battles were a rarity in most eras, and certainly the early middle ages. I also don't think toughness is the right metric. We're not talking about brawls, we're talking about trained, well-equipped professionals doing their jobs.
- ReptileMan 6y agoIf you look at European warfare after the collapse of the Roman empire and before the Siege of Vienna it was basically a wave of ass kickers coming from central asia and getting their ass kicked by the next wave coming from central asia.