How skilled were Spartan warriors really? Could they have fucked up medieval knights from like 1700 years later?

How skilled were Spartan warriors really? Could they have fucked up medieval knights from like 1700 years later?

Of course, the fact that the greeks were able to discover gunpowder so early in history made the spartans able to create the very first version of the M4, the M4 fallós.
What I would do to be born just in time to mow down persians with my spartan bros.

According to the documentary 300 yes

is that a famas?

Isnt 300 based on a comic though?

It's an illustrated history book

The Spartans got their ass kicked by the Thebans.

No, the FAMAS actually stands for Feces And Manure And Shit. Contrary to popular belief, it was actually the Ottomans that created the FAMAS, they did this so they could make France look more powerful to prevent an Ethiopian invasion of Constantinople.

Probably, heavy infantry beats heavy cavalry. Light cavalry or archers would wreck them, though.

A group of knights would more than likely have fucked up a group of hoplites. Knights were specifically Chads. Hoplites were basically greek citizens that trained as soldiers.

Sure they could, spear infantry beats cavalry, but sword or axe infantry beats spear infantry

No feasible way they could beat heavily armored knights head on at least. They maybe could choose an extremely good defensive point with a swamp and hills and wait until the knights are extremely tired and then engage them.

their weapons, armor, and strategy would all be outdated. plus in a real battle spartan citizens would make a up a small elite portion of their troops

Yes, but if you ignore the stuff that is blatantly false (rhino cavalry, fire grenades), there is a surprising amount of truth to it.

>their weapons, armor, and strategy would all be outdated
Did anything noteworthy really change in technology or human thought prior to industrialization? It was all basically the same retarded caveman tech before then.

I think you mean "homosexual altar boys"

Medieval knights would win but only because of their better armor. Given comparable equipment a Spartan warrior could probably defeat any other warrior in history, and I don't say that as a Spartaboo or Deadliest Warrior neckbeard--the kind of training and lifestyle they had, and their style of combat, made them pretty much incomparable.

Different types of metal in their spears and swords? Better designs, more stable weapons? Better forge methods? Lots of stuff changed.

What about an English bowman?

armor yes, weapons maybe, and "strategy" (i think you mean tactics) hell no. The spartan phalanx is a more well oiled version of what medieval armies mostly did, form shield walls. One of the primary weapons used against heavy infantry (read: knights) in the middle ages was the use of pike formations (often mercenaries).

if the spartans focused a little more on fucking, they would have been a gigantic empire of super soldiers. they only died out because they didn't even marry until their 30s and shit.

Kek

They were not macedonian phalangites with utterly ridiculous sarissas, spartans were, at their peak, still equipped and formed like average greeks. Medieval knights with lances could crash into their formation and stab right through wooden hoplons and bronze armor.

Not to mention medieval horses were bigger than any horse Greeks would ever see and were trained to trample and kill and were armored too, that the knights would be wearing vastly more advanced and strong armor making them protected from cuts and stabs from soft bronze weapons, lighter and better weapons like longswords, be taller, and be trained with tactics centuries ahead of simple formation pushing.