Why were vikings such terrible fighters?

It's smart.

Only three ethnic groups existed during the low Middle Ages

Vikings, Normans, and Kebab

Does that include Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland and eastern Europe, Egypt, Japan, China and Mexico?

>Spain
Kebab
>Greece
Viking and Norman mercenaries
>Italy
Normans in the South, Normans in the North
>Ireland
Normans
>Eastern Europe
Vikings
>Egypt, Japan, China and Mexico
Off topic. This board's only for discussion of Early Medieval history in Europe.

>the same ones who rekt them?
>rekt them?

um... user that's not what happened

They still got rekt in France.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Paris_(845)

Whole one instance of them winning how impressive.

read the whole page it talks about them attacking other cities like hamburg and the danish vikings taking advantage of the Frankish civil wars

>He wrote in English.

>attacking a country during civil war

so impressive

>other cities

undefended cities

An English that is closer to Norwegian than its West-Germanic brethren

pagef30.com/2008/08/why-norwegian-is-easiest-language-for.html

Called English nevertheless.

Why does Veeky Forums so readily accept the meme that Vikings were bad fighters?

Because its full of Christards and Leftists who hate white paganism.

Because there is no proof they were good fighters.

Wasn't that only for 40 years and also organized by a Danish king?

But imagine the sick finishing moves they could pull on some one off peasant.

"Vikings" as in soldiers or raiders from north weren't bad fighters on an individual basis but they lacked the organisation and tactics of a sophisticated military thus would fail against a real army.

Daily reminder Vikings were defeated by French but still given Normandy so they could defend France against their brethren. They settled and by 3 generations they were completely French in culture and traditions.

>would fail against a real army.
read my earlier post

>Because its full of Christards and Leftists who hate white paganism.

Again with the meme that Christians hate Pagans.
look, when the pagans left their containment pens they got ruffed up a bit, Christians didn't hate them personally they just didn't like walking around like they had some watermelon nuts.
If Pagans are going to act all hard then why do they always cry over being outfought?
God is so hard he got Mary pregnant without even touching her, Odin literally sucks dickChrist is the OG from the eastside, you Pagans better step the fuck up or get lost.
They didn't hate them, they were just better than them.
By the way, is it churches or sacred groves that now dominate Europe?
Quick empirical test, infallible, and easy to conduct.

>one instance in long history of conflict between raiders and armies where majority of raiders lost almost every single time
>completely proves they are as good as a regular or levied army because they managed it once against detached force

Nice logic

>is it churches or sacred groves that now dominate Europe?
we call them mosques now user

You do realize the Vikings outnumbered the Franks significantly and the Franks had little more than the local levy at their disposal?
Not to take away from the Viking victory, but 7,000 veteran raiders against 4,000 Levy isn't much of a fight, the fact the Frankish men were even able to put up a fight is a testament to their bravery.

ouch.....
>filename
kek, Christianity's autistic little brother wins.

"The earliest form of English is called Old English or Anglo-Saxon (c. 550–1066 CE). Old English developed from a set of North Sea Germanic dialects originally spoken along the coasts of Frisia, Lower Saxony, Jutland, and Southern Sweden by Germanic tribes known as the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. In the fifth century"

English comes from the same areas as the vikings came from

Indeed which demonstrates that it was academic scholarship introduced through Christianity which allowed Anglo-Saxon culture to stand head and shoulders above their barbarian cousins.

younger brother of europe snydrome, always receiving the handmedowns