vikings are the most overrated warriors in history
samurais come in at a close second
Why
They were great navigators and (slave) merchants, but yeah, they're militarily overrated. They basically just attacked defenseless monasteries and primitive Slavic tribes.
>>400900
Lump in ninjas with samurai and Varangians with vikings
Then:
Wehrmacht 1939-1941
US marines
Spartan hoplites
Underrated:
Polish winged hussars
Generally greek hoplites
Ghurkas
WW2 ANZAC
Napoleonic French Army
>>400938
>Ghurkas
>WW2 ANZAC
How are either of these underrated Ghurkas have a great reputation and the ANZACS could probably fit into the overrated category. Not to say that they were bad though.
>>400960
Ghurkas are underrated in America
>>400960
What honestly makes an ANZAC soldier than say a Canadian or Brit? They all seem so intertwined to me
>>400935
>and primitive Slavic tribes.
Dude, Slavs casually plundered Scandinavian shores.
>>400975
Shit, forgot about the Canucks. Yeah, people really have no idea just how based soldiers from these 3 countries were.
>>400986
Never heard of that. But we did plunder everything else.
>>400996
>>400999
Just an example from the top of my head.
>In the 1120s Pomeranian ships from Szczecin (in present-day Poland), from the southern coast of the Baltic Sea attacked the Danish coast. On 10 August 1135 Duke Ratibor assaulted the Norwegian towns. Konghelle, was captured and burnt to the ground by the forces of prince Ratibor, assisted by a fleet of 550 ships with cavalry on board (each carrying forty-four men and two horses). They laid the town to ruins, killed a large part of the population, and abducted most of the survivors as thralls to Szczecin. Snorri Sturluson, writing a century later, said that Konghelle never completely recovered
>>401106
That's long after the Viking age. Anyway, it was mostly the eastern Slavs who the Vikings raided, not the more developed western ones.
>>400900
I will agree that the whole "viking combat" thing is overrated as fuck, but you can't say with a straight face that their naval and trade power wasn't great.
>>401112
Saxo Grammaticus describes a massive Slavic (Obodrite and Pomeranian) raid on Denmark in early 900s. His record is of a great importance because he describes in details weapons and armor used by the Slavs.
>>401123
Again though, that's really the western Slavs, who were a lot more developed than the eastern Slavs that the Vikings raided for slaves.
>>400968
No, they're not. Every soldier I ever knew spoke highly of them. One of my old coworkers was in the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan and said the Gurkhas were scary as shit.
>>400938
Ninjas didn't really exist, I guess that makes them the most overrated
Also the Ghurkas are being glorified left and right. Definetly not underrated.
Here is a article from an ex US green beret tagging along with modern Gurkha's on a training exercise. It give quite a good insight into their professionalism and military culture. There are three parts, this is the first
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/gurkha.htm
>>400900
Vikings were peasants and unprofessional part-time raiders. And they served well for the purpose, showing up unexpected and looting villages. Meanwhile, Norse armies were pretty similar to any other early medieval army and had decent successes.
Certain African militaries like chad and Ethiopia are underated, as are the Canadians in ww1
It's important to remember that overrated doesn't mean shitty.
Spartans are overrated, they're rated as the best warriors to have existed. The reality is that they were very good very tough hoplites with high morale but they could still be beaten.
>>400900
How do you guys rate the Kerns and Fianna? Overrated or Underrated?
>>400935
>they're militarily overrated. They basically just attacked defenseless monasteries and primitive Slavic tribes.
Nice memes
>>401141
>who were a lot more developed than the eastern Slavs that the Vikings raided for slaves
Source?
>>400997
>ANZAC
>A N Z A C
>AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND ARMY CORPS
WHERE IS CANADA? YOU KEK!!!
>>401112
>not the more developed western ones.
the only slavs that were developed in that time were the southern ones, where slavic literacy (cyrillic and church-slavonic) as well as slavic orthodox christianity was created.
>>403712
This. The successes were more than just decent though.
>>400900
Nazis, Prussians and Germans in general.
>>403766
They aren't really rated at all.
In Irish Ceitherneach means like a rogue or outlaw and fian just means a group of warriors. The Fianna from mythology are obviously mythological, and kerns from history were just light soldiers, not a specific type.
>>400938
I think the Persian "Imortals" need to be on that list too.
>>403884
>it's a leaf
>>400938
Holy shit this fucking meme list
>Napoleonic French Army
>Polish winged hussars
>Generally greek hoplites
>Underrated
>UNDERRATED
Like it was your first day on the internet or something.
>WW2 ANZAC
Not at fucking all, I have to deal with hearing about their irrelevant bullshit, I feel sorry for the men who died fighting for absolutely no good reason, whether for the relatively relevant cause of SEA, or the completely irrelevant, humiliating naval action off of WA, but the ANZACs are as 'rated' as they should be online, and glorified so fucking hard in ANZAC countries.
Wehrmacht 1939-1941 is in no way overrated either, you absolute retard. Overcoming France and Russia at that pace is an incredible feat, especially considering the breadth of their respective armies and what they were fielding, the Wehrmacht 39-41 is at the peak of their success. Of course there are other factors, but for fuck's sake you would be better off listing Wehrmacht/SS 42-45 as overrated rather than Wehrmacht 39-41. Their existence in military history is of huge importance whether you like it or not.
And U.S. Marines and Navy Seals are only 'overrated' because of America's relevance today and the strenuous training all naval-ground troops go through. Their popularity is a testament to the elite air of their style of soldier, and it just so happens America's military has been the most active in the last half century.
Yes I mad, your list is dumb as fuck.
>>400938
>Polish winged hussars
>Generally greek hoplites
>WW2 ANZAC
>Napoleonic French Army
probably the most overrated armies in their respective countries. Winged hussars were badasses, but Poles and their
>muh hussars
is getting really tiresome.
>>403890
Daily reminder first Slavic literacy and alphabet was were created for and by Western Slavs.
>>400938
Varangians aren't over-rated. And I'd say add in Persian Cataphracts as being underrated too by what mainstream normies know about history.
>>400900
>light raiding parties can't beat armies
Oh wow
>Norsemen form armies
>Cnut
>Normans
>Danelaw
>Varangian Guard
T-these things didn't h-happen
>>404986
>Cnut
He was essentially English.
>Normans
They were French.
>Danelaw
Wasn't made by Vikings.
>Varangian Guard
Norsemen only in name.
>>405006
Yah, and Byzantine wasn't Greek, Goths weren't Germanic, and Magyars aren't steppe.
>>405006
>If someone lived in modern day France they must have been French
>>405006
>He was essentially English.
You're joking right? Care to explain?
>>405069
>butthurt christfags
>explaining anything, ever
>>405084
You're fucking stupid too, Cnut was Christian.
Go tip elsewhere.
>>405006
>all this revisionism
>>405177
Why have you quoted all these people, and what are you trying to say?
>>404142
>ut Poles and their
>>muh hussars
>is getting really tiresome.
Those "Poles" are just kids who spread memes.
>>403801
>>403890
Western Slavs were forming their own states in the period, while eastern Slavs only formed a state under Rus rule. A slave trade existed in both areas, but in the east it involved Vikings raiding Slavs, while in the west in involved Slavs raiding other Slavs.
Longbowman
>>405262
I guess that's true.
Also the Wehrmacht, grorious pre-firearms Nippon armies, the Roman and Spartan armies (both based, both overrated)
>>405329
>whermacht
How?
I don't think Vikings are overrated or underrated.
The norse culture was a martial culture with strong emphasis on combat and individual prowess. But it was not a unified culture by any means and vikings were just as likely to fight other vikings than they were to fight others.
They weren't super soldiers. They were bloodthirsty germanic tribesmen with axes, spears and shields who would sieze oppertunity when they saw it. They were at least proficient enough in combat so that the byzantine emperor saw merit in employing them as bodyguards. I'm assuming he had others to choose from. Again, this isn't suggesting that they were exeptionally bad ass (after all, keeping a germanic retinue in the court was sort of a roman tradition) but they weren't crap by any means.
Vikings trained in wrestling, swordplay and using your surroundings as weapons. There's tales of unarmed norsemen using rocks to fight off enemies when caught off guard and they kept their skills at edge via Holmgang (Essentially just a duel but with a minimum of three rounds).
They were a warrior culture and like most other warrior culture's they would beat the shit out of non-warriors. That's what warrior cultures do.
What made them come out of style?
They did not have a mounted fighting tradition. Moving into the middle ages, they had practically no chance but to give up their old ways of fighting.
>>405329
>Roman army
The Romans\ army actually deserved the praise that they have. Well, the roman army at its zenith at least.
>>405655
>They were a warrior culture and like most other warrior culture's they would beat the shit out of non-warriors. That's what warrior cultures do.
they beat non-warrior christian monks alright. They did not necessarily beat other warrior cultures in any convincing way which is why they are overrated.
>>406509
Their purpose was rarely to "beat" others but to pillage. They weren't really conquerors. Also they were succesful on a number of occasions. While they did not take Paris, they made enough of an impression to be granted the land of Normandy as protection against other pirates.
The Danes ruled over much of the British Isles for a few years.
Normans later on went to conquer Sicily and England too.
>>404112
>>403890
>the only slavs that were developed in that time were the southern ones
Great Moravia, Bohemian kingdom, ring a bell retard?
>>401141
You said "Slavs" and now you're moving the goalposts saying you only meant the eastern ones.
>>403738
they aren't rated as best warriors by anyone older than 14 because there is no such thing as the best warrior to begin with
>>405655
it's a shame they met Saxons and Celts who were warrior cultures and pushed their shit in real good. Vikings were trash compared to other warriors at the time deal with it and stop this Vinland Saga tier meme spewing.
if vikings were compared to pirates (and that's who they were) instead of proper warriors like Spartans, Romans, Mongols, Celts and many others who actually fought in fucking battles instead of going 10v1 pregnant woman there wouldn't be an issue
>>406639
>underestimating a pregnant womans strength
I bet she could 11v1 those franks with just her lefty.
>>406673
This desu you don't fuck with parental instincts,
