"Scandinavia didn't have any good warr-"

>saxons

>>1919889
it had many Anglo-Saxons after 1066, but Varangian Rus made up most of it for a long time

>>1919875

They had the vikings.

>>1920220
I'm going to halt this shit before it starts.

to go Viking was literally just to travel overseas in search of wealth and fame.
this could mean to trade, to explore, or to conquer and raid. They were not a dedicated soldiers and were barely warriors.
they met with mixed results, they could establish vassalships, make Danelaw, be the lordship of the Rus, and establish petty kingdoms and settle new areas.

so no, they could not be compared to an actual warrior, but the Housecarl could.

>>1920240
Beserker then

>>1920979
Shroms and screams. Go read some more you peasant.

>>1921028
ive read tons of the sagas and books on the Vikings, beserkers were pretty badass. Also the shrooms thing is a meme, pretty much all the vikings ate them but not before battle

>>1919875
Varangians were a ceremonial unit after cavalry gained dominance

>>1921036
Cavalry was a ceremonial unit after tanks and shit gained dominance

>>1920979
Closer. They were used in Norse armies as shock troops, but they weren't really a group of warriors proper. They're semi-mythic, having connections to Odin and the like, but they weren't exactly a thing, just a phenomenon that may or may not have happened often. Sometimes Norsemen would characterize themselves as Berserkers as a self-aggrandizing statement on their battle prowess, rather than actually BEING a Berserker®.

>>1919875
>Saxons & Germans.

>>1921081
Already addressed. Kill yourself.

>>1921036
No they weren't. Cavalry was dominant in the imperial army before they even existed.

The Varangians were literally NEVER ceremonial.

Who said that? Swedes had the best army in Europe in 17th and early 18th century.

>>1921292
There's basically a "shit-on-vikings-and-norse-pagans" thread every day