Who would win in a battle, Spartans or Vikings?

Question

I know there is a question of 300 spartans vs. 300 vikings, but if possible, do some research in the tactics, average numbers fought in a battle, equipment, and what not.

Answer 1

Vikings and spartans are basically in two different leauges.

A viking, by definition, is a raider. (This is what the word means. It has no link to location. Norse saga writers would call moorish pirates "heathen vikings") A more propper term would be "dark age scandinavians."

The spartans where a warrior state, with a dedicated class of professional soldiers. Everyone else where slaves. (A fact not mentioned in 300, BTW). As such, they had a much higher level of training and dedication than just about everybody else.

Equipment wise, the main battlefield loadout of both parties are large round shields, onehanded spears, and swords for backup.
Armour, in the form of bronze cursaises, greaves and helmets, would be pretty much standard issue for the spartans, while the norse would have little armour.
The ones that do carry armour would have mail shirts, which had better coverage than a breastplate.

The norse fight in a tight shield wall formation, the spartans in a more orderly and looser phalanx.

Most likely, the vikings would atempt a vedge charge, hoping to break the phalanx. This might or might not work, depending on circumstances.
If the enemy formation breaks, individual fighters will seldom attack a formed up foe. The spartans might try, which might or might not work, depending on circumstances.
At this point the battle might (or might not) disolve into a melee, at which point who wins is more or less random.

As you can see, practical combat has so many Might or Might Nots that predicting a outcome is hard.
However, my money would be on the spartans.

Neither the spartans or the vikings where in any sense "supermen" as portrayed in fiction. Yes, they where good fighters, but once a fight breaks out, they die like everyone else.

Answer 2

Spartans are over rated, Epamiondas of Thebes and his outnumbered army 6000 vs 11,000 Spartan led troops. Spartans were crushed. The Spartan Citizen Hoplites never numbered over 8,000 (Max strength with 60 year olds). The Spartans also used freemen of equal numbers to bolster their numbers, along with Helots of varying numbers. An entire mora of 600 Sartans was once captured by Athenian missile troops, as they just pelted them into surrender. 300 Theban Cavalry even defeated over 1,500 Spartans in a tight space, before they had a chance to form up.

Remeber Rome conquered phalanx armies with ease even defeated Macedonia because phalanx is useless on uneven ground and cant turn easily in mid battle as an army using small units such as Maniples.

The Vikings were probably stronger and more mobile. It takes greater arm strength to hold a heavy Viking sword than a spartan spear. As one Greek historian put it the Spartans were equal to any Greek, it was onl in formation that they were considered superior.

Answer 3

According to Wikipedia’s page on the Spartan army the most common tactic used by the Spartans was the phalanx formation, for the Vikings it was a shield wall which is superior. A phalanx formation only works when it is difficult for the opposing forces to attack the army’s flanks, which Spartan’s flanks were protected by the mountainous region of Greece. The Viking shield wall is much more adaptable. Now, if a battle did take place between these two forces, it would have to take place in a setting where neither force has an advantage due to the location. Therefore, the location would not be in a setting suitable for the use of the phalanx formation. Additionally, the phalanx formation takes a bit of time to become organized, giving time to the opposing force to flank the phalanx. The Viking’s shield wall tactic wins.
While both Vikings and Spartans practiced eugenics to produce the best people physically, the Spartan’s more formal training triumphs over the Viking’s more casual training. “The Spartan Military” informs that a Spartan boy’s training began at the early age of seven where they were sent to a military boarding school. This schooling glorified the physical skill of the strongest or fastest boys, making the other boys envy that position as the fastest or the strongest. A young Viking’s training usually began at age ten, and was fulfilled by a friend of the parents. While he was still taught how to wield a sword, aim a spear, and such, it was not in a competitive atmosphere as a Spartan’s training was. The competitive atmosphere mixed with a Spartan’s honor was a perfect environment to get everyone performing at their absolute best, thus the training of a Spartan exceeds the quality of training that a young Viking would receive.
A Viking’s weaponry trumps a spartan’s weaponry, mainly due to the fact that the Vikings followed the Germanic Iron Age. Now, let’s clarify what weapons we are comparing. For the Viking, chainmail armor, a Dane Axe, and a bow and arrows. For a Spartan, a bronze cuirass, a Dory, and a javelin. Chainmail armor has a definite weakness against the pro-stabbing offense of the Spartan with their Dory, however a bronze cuirass restricts mobility and could not stand a blow from the Dane Axe. Thus it is a tie for armor/short range weaponry. “The spartan Military” reminds that the, “the Spartans considered [the bow] cowardly.” A Spartan would not want to use a weapon that they deemed cowardly in a fight of pride between Spartans and Vikings. The Vikings did not consider the bow and arrow cowardly, as this was part of their main arsenal. While a single bow and arrow may not necessarily do a lot of damage to a Spartan, an army of Vikings all with bows could deal major damage to an opposing army, via volleys of iron tipped arrows. Furthermore, the Spartan’s javelin was very inaccurate when compared to the Viking’s bow. After a tie, the Viking’s win the weaponry comparison.

Answer 4

This is a little late answer but who cares
If it was 300 Spartans vs 300 Vikings both in formation fighting each other head on I say the Spartans would win because of there training and weapons. The main part of a Spartan army is the phalanx it's what makes them who they are. Also the weapons a Spartan has a spear, short sword and shield. In close quarters the sword would be better against a Viking sword or axe whit h would be longer than a Spartan sword so the Spartan would have more flexibility. If the fight was not in formation the Vikings would have more of a chance. Since the Vikings are more used to 1 on 1 style fighting where a Spartan is more used to the phalanx they are both extremely physically fit but it would be a hell of a fight.

Answer 5

I saw people writting about Romans that feared Vikings , please Romans would take down Vikings in any battle , Romans were masters of open field battle ! And Vikings came up after 700 a.D. not at 100 b.C. to 200 A.D where Romans were at their Prime ! The Eastern Roman Empire ( Byzantines ) and the Western Romans and later ( Holy Roman Empire ) were something else

Spartans , don't go through the movie , they were much more badasses ( sorry for the word ) The red cloak was to hide blood ( just for info ) . Their arsenal was not all bronze , Shield was , Helmet was . Shield was bronze to slice a bit and take the force of impact . Like a bulletproof vest . Anyway , Spartans are the dream of every modern army . Even their raiders were twice more effecient than Vikings . They just didn't have cavalary . But their tactics , their devotion to the cause , fighting to death because that was their belief . Those parts made spartans the best SOLDIERS the world has ever known . And a battle is won by soldiers , not raiders ! They would crash on bronze wall just like Persians did .

Answer 6

The spartan had alot more coverage most likely the vikings weapons would just bounce off his armour his only chance would be thrusting. While only the more higher ranking vikings would carry chainmail and a sword the standard viking would carry a axe, wooden shield and leather armour while the standard spartan carried a long 7 foot spear, short sword, full bronze armour, a large bronze/wood shield. All weapons would most likley peirce the vikings chainmail while the viking would have trouble getting past the shield and his armour. Not to mention the spartan has a lifetime of battle training while the vikings were mostly raiders who traveled to raid villages and trade because they had such scarce supplies. All the spartan lived for is to kill and fight training ever since the age of 8 and only those who survived the training became spartans. The spartans had only two options fight or die and to never retreat.

Answer 7

This is tough. Because The only thing separating the Vikings and Spartans is discipline. They are both very great and power full warriors. However lets take this into account. Vikings were one of the German tribes the Romans feared. Vikings were the first peoples to conquer Constantinople after the Romans ((Byzantines)) took it over. The Viking weapons were more advanced then the shield and sword of the Spartans. You have to rember it took armies of Knights to fight off a viking horde. So needless to say it all depended on if the viking horde could cause the phalanx to break or not. Because a hotplate man on man with a viking warrior is a unfair fight. at least for the spartan.

Answer 8

Vikings weapons were made of steel, the spartans of bronze, a blow from a viking axe could crush a spartan shield or at least wound the man behind it.
The spartans lost many battles, they were not so invincible as many seem to beleive.
I would say many facts in this thread is incorrect.

Answer 9

Vikings Shield Wall

Answer 10

That depends on several factors.
Notably, who's on the offensive.
And, whether it was a raiding party or an army.

The Vikings had an excellent shield wall/spears combination, along with two fully developed martial arts. Modern terminology has named them as Stav and Systema (Systema was introduced by the Rus tribe of Swedes into Russia, and has been refined for the past 1000+ years).

I would say the Vikings.
Not to take anything away from the Spartans, of course, because they were quite the warrior culture. But... I mean... come on... The Vikings.