Pre firearm age toughest warriors
Toughest warriors after introduction of guns
The Mongols are the obvious candidates but missing from the list.
not sure why the Franks are their, majority of their ability came from the Alan’s (who also influenced the Huns), also the Franks relied heavily on Saxons and Germanic tribes (which of course the Franks were).
Greeks, no, Macedonians yes.
Definitely not the crusaders (all types which include Teutonic)
The Vikings had a huge impact on global history, Russia, Byzantium, trade, Normans, England, Ireland, etc.
The Roman ability to make war, combined arms was stunning,
out of all of them the winner was technology, all relied on lots of training, lots of personal skill, however the invention of the. Longbow, the crossbow and firearms, levelled the playing field.
another missing from the list are the German army, who with equal numbers could pretty much defeat anyone and usually did.
The crusaders not only killed a lot of muslims but through their own incompetence and religious preachings probably killed far more of their own than the enemy every did. So for that they've got to be a contender.
Aztecs were in the top ten, along with the Samurais (and Polynesians, I think)
It is regarded this way
Opinion
27Opinion
The best warriors were the Greeks: Macedonians specifically under Alexander the Great, and Spartans.
Spartans trained from 7 years old in military service, and in Pankration.
Despite being outnumbered 3 to 1 by the Persian army at the battle of Platea, Sparta squashed the world power at the time - Persia never came back to Greece after.
The Greek Army, under Alexander the Great, was undefeated, and crushed the Persian army at it's height - A rare feat, as most world powers throughout history, such as the Greeks when they fell to Rome, the Romans when they feel to the Germanic Kingdoms, and most other examples of a world powers collapsing, was to due to that empire being in decline, and getting weak, to the point where often an inferior, less advances civilisation took over it. Alexander's army also took over most of the known world in only about 12 years - Lightening speed.
As a long-lasting empire with warlike traditions, the Romans easily take this. In terms of utterly skunking massive armies and revolutionizing warfare for the time, thereby allowing a relatively small faction to conquer huge chunks of the world including many of its strongest armies over the course of decades, the Mongols easily win it.
The others make significant marks in history, but they're basically famous for doing the same thing that others did at the time a bit better.
The best most skilled efficient killers are the Americans. The most kills in history likely goes to the Chinese. They tend to purge themselves in colossal civil wars between dynasties and just run into the meet grinder to die quickly and brutally by the millions.
I think you’d have to control for technology and tactics. The Normans were actually Vikings who settled in France.
A lot of these were efficient and well supplied armies with the latest technology
I lean toward warriors that made these mass armies worried, like the Harii, Apache, Comanche..
Smaller units with improvised weapons, outnumbered... kicking ass.
When you have to mobilize a whole army to take them out... they were pretty deadly.
You need to read more history. The Mongols were far more deadly than most of the ones you listed. They cut across from Mongolia and reached Europe. The great Macedonian king Alexander conquered more than any European including the Romans. The others you listed were minor localized warriors who barely made it outside their back yards.
Well, depends on how you look at things.
Mongolians had huge killing sprees. But numbers are a bit unknown.
Russians killed 27 million of there own people.
China has done about the same with there civilians over longer time in history. Vast Numbers still unknown.
And the USA. We've kill 100's thousands in Afghanistan Iraq with very little lose. And we're the only country to use nukes. 400,000 dead no lose.
It's all prespective.
Sparta was by far the best in terms of combat and in 2nd place the romans, 3rd the templars but they all lack the savageness of the vikings so yea
You forgot a group. Not only did they kick the Catholic Crusaders asses, they destroyed the Teutonic Order on multiple occasions. The Polish Knights fought both off many a times when they tried to crush the Orthodox Christians.
Archers and spearmen aren't getting enaugh credit.
Very hard tools to beat, especially one on one.
This guy/crew :D
https://www.youtube.com/embed/cFdgjYoBMIg
u The Swedish Vikings and the Minnesota Vikings football team
Makes me want to watch 300 now.
Nobody as strong as the Roman's, the Teutonic knight's were bad ass though.
The mongols... but just if these I’ll go with the Vikings
No mogul option?
And the chin dynasty did rather well.
😂😂😂 strictly based off the images I know it wasn’t the normans and it wasn’t the franks
Genghis Khan was the ruthless but the best
Hey, those are all Western warriors!
Good choice.
i would of guessed the Vikings, but i never studied it. Biblical it was King David
You can also add your opinion below!
