top of page

1,000 Spartans vs 1,000 vikings


Spartans:

(Image courtesy of realmofhistory.com.)

Armament (Spartites–20% of the whole force): 1 10-foot-long spear (“Dory”), 1 19-inch-long sword (“Xiphos”), 1 35-inch-across bronze shield (“Aspis”), bronze plate armor


Armament (Perioeci–20% of the whole force): 1 10-foot-long spear (“Dory”), 1 19-inch-long sword (“Xiphos”), 1 35-inch-across bronze shield (“Aspis”), bronze plate armor


Armament (Helots–60% of the whole force): Unknown, but light


Tactics: Phalanx–Hoplites would line up in ranks in close order. The hoplites would lock their shields together, and the first few ranks of soldiers would project their spears out over the first rank of shields, like this:

(Image courtesy of https://sites.psu.edu/.)

The phalanx therefore presented a shield wall and a mass of spear points to the enemy, making frontal assaults against it very difficult.


Advantages: Until the plate-armoured and mounted knight, the Spartan was the deadliest (human) killing machine on the planet. They were trained from the age of seven to become unstoppable supersoldiers. Both boys and girls were brought up by the city women until the age of seven, when boys (paidia) were taken from their mothers and grouped together in "packs" (agelai) and were sent to what is almost equivalent to present-day military boot camp. This military camp was known as the Agoge. They were provided with only scant food and clothing; this also encouraged them to steal, and if they were caught, they were punished–not for stealing, but for being caught. There is a characteristic story, told by Plutarch: "The boys make such a serious matter of their stealing, that one of them, as the story goes, who was carrying concealed under his cloak a young fox which he had stolen, suffered the animal to tear out his bowels with its teeth and claws, and died rather than have his theft detected."

I admit that if the vikings trained every single day to the level that Spartans did, they would be stronger but they didn’t. At home, vikings liked knitting, cheese-tasting, and boring things like that. Spartan conditioning and strength training are legendary for a reason.

Solid plate armour is superior to mail. In this situation however, the armour is of no real consequence because each side has armour that would prove to be impenetrable to their opponent's piercing weapons. For anyone who talks about "soft bronze armour", try cutting a penny with stainless-steel scissors. Bronze is still metal.

It is commonly thought that bronze armour fell out of fashion because iron was superior. This is not true. In fact, the real reason that bronze stopped being the go-to material for armorsmiths was that there was a massive shortage of tin near the end of the bronze age.

The body of the aspis is primarily made of wood and leather with a bronze layer on the front. That relatively thick ring of bronze was a terrible weapon to face. Impacts from this shield literally shattered bones through sheer shock and impact, regardless of whether or not the opponent was wearing armour. It could hit with all the power of a whistling mace and over a much broader area. A single hit to an unarmoured head would cause immediate death. A single hit to a head with a helmet would cause immediate concussion, brain damage and internal brain hemorrhaging. However, it is not known if it was used as an active weapon.

The Norsemen have powerful bludgeoning weapons as well, like the war hammer, but the aspis has shown that it can absorb consecutive terrible impacts from the Kanabō, a massive wooden club studded with steel used by Samurai. Imagine a 4-foot-long baseball bat studded with metal and you'll more or less realize just how hard a Kanabō can hit. Nevertheless, the aspis absorbed such impacts with ease.


Disadvantages: The greatest weakness of the Spartans was that they were utterly predictable. They would form a phalanx, put their best troops on the right flank and then move towards the enemy like a steamroller–or anchor the phalanx between two obstacles like at Thermopylae.

Once engaging the enemy, a pushing match would ensue. The phalanx would put its collective weight to push back the enemy line and thus create fear and panic among its ranks.

This would succeed only if the enemy obliged to it. But if the enemy instead avoided engaging the phalanx, it would be in trouble. I would be hard pressed to think of any nation which showed less imagination on their tactics and strategies than the Spartans. Given to their degree of training, drill and practice as soldiers, they should historically have done better. But they didn’t.

The Spartans showed next to no imagination on their strategies and tactics, and since their ability to adapt was incredibly low, any enemy general who had any wits would easily win the Spartans by fighting unconventionally - such as Athenians at Sphacteria 425 BC–where they simply skirmished the Spartans into exhaustion with psiloi (!) without suffering many casualties.

The Spartans had no cavalry, no missile-armed troops, no psiloi, no bad terrain troops and their only light troops, helots, were notoriously unreliable because of the bad treatment they received. Every autumn the Spartans would declare war on the helots so they could be killed by a member of the Crypteia without fear of repercussion. The Spartans were tactically extremely rigid and inflexible.


Vikings:

Armament (peasant class–60% of the whole force): Varies; usually consists of 1 8-foot-long spear, 1 14-inch-long knife (“Seax”), 1 33-inch-across wooden shield, sometimes 1 single-bladed axe


Armament (archers–20% of the whole force): 1 6-foot-tall yew flatbow, 1 14-inch-long knife (“Seax”), sometimes 1 single-bladed axe


Armament (noble class–10% of the whole force): Usually consists of 1 33-inch-long iron sword, 1 6-foot-long throwing spear, 1 14-inch-long knife (“Seax”), 1 33-inch-across wooden shield


Armament (Berserkers–10% of the whole force): Same as peasant class, but no armor. Would charge the enemy without caring for their lives. They were usually the misfits of the viking society, considered to have been touched by Odin. It is assumed many of them suffered from schizophrenia or similar mental illnesses as they thought they could change into wolves or bears.


Tactics: Svinfylking–Old Norse for “Swine Array” or “Boar Snout”. The formation consisted of heavily armed, presumably hand-to-hand warriors and less-armored archers grouped in a triangle formation with the warriors in the front lines protecting the archers in center or rear, like this:

Skjöldborg–A wall of shields formed by soldiers standing in formation shoulder to shoulder, holding their shields so that they abut or overlap. Each soldier benefits from the protection of his neighbors' shields as well as his own, like this:

The first three ranks of the main wall would have been made up of select warriors, such as Huscarls, who carried heavier weapons and consistently wore armor. There would also have been nobles, who would have had their own armored bodyguards.


Advantages: The vikings would have missile troops. They would be most valuable as skirmishers, to slow down the advance of the phalanx and to irritate and provoke them to charges and tiring themselves.

The best chance for the vikings would simply be to outflank the Spartan phalanx. This would not even be too difficult–just skirmish and draw the phalanx off the anchoring terrain, and then double envelop it. The phalanx was extremely vulnerable on the flanks and rear.

The Vikings were about 4 inches taller than the Spartans as well, though the Spartans may have been at least as strong.


Who wins? Comment and say who you think wins and how! No ties.


34 views

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page