I have backgrounds in both but I wan't to see who has the best reputation for being warriors. Thanks!
2007-03-11 11:14:24 · 2 answers · asked by Desert Punk 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
What your asking is difficult to provide a definative answer. Both were warrior cultures when fighting was bloody and unforgiving. It was win or die.
During those years (say from about 500 BCE to 1100 CE) there were many cultures which produced such warriors. To fight with edged weapons is almost the definition of being ruthless. To some extent it would depend on which battle and who the leader was at the time. Of course I must admit, the "blood eagle" which some of the norse applied to some captured enemies does make the blood run cold.
2007-03-11 11:34:45 · answer #1 · answered by Randy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well the Viking were ruthless warriors and it would be safe to say some people in todays Scotland have Viking blood in them, because the Viking had many settlements in Scotland in the 830s. the north and west of Scotland were heavily colonised by Vikings, so in theory at lot of the Scottish warrior were of Viking decent,
hope this helps
2007-03-11 18:36:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋