NationStates Jolt Archive

The Prussians or the Vikings? .....back up your choice with reasons and facts

Who had the better Civilization?

Who were the better warriors?

Lets see who NS thinks was the better of these two awesome races!

Lets see who NS thinks was the better of these two awesome races!

Races?

Omg I Love Vikings

When vikings attacked it was "aahhhh!! vikings!!"
When prussians attacked it was "holy sh*t, get me out of here!"

Prussians were better warrriors because they were hired internationally. Vikings were feared internationally.

Viking civilization compared to Prussian is trash.
(Besides, since prussia=germany, germans win hands down:D )

Ok, the tough part here is the use of the word warrior. The Vikings were better warriors...but the Prussians were better *soldiers*. Anyway...for civilization? Vikings, easily, considering they were far more democratic than the Prussians. They were just as much traders and explorers as they were raiders, as well.

(Besides, since prussia=germany, germans win hands down:D )

It worked for Kaiser Wilhelm, it worked for Hitler and it'll work for you!

Being of 50% Prussian heritage (well, who knows how much part Viking is mingled in there, but anyway)

Prussia all the way. And they definitely had the better marches :D:D:D

Vikings had a better civilization because alot of them were in the Asatru religion and that religion has very good morals and values.

Vikings had better warriors because they had brute strength and the speed, both hitting and running, while carrying large weapons such as mauls, war hammer, and battle axes. They may not have had the stragetic senses that the Prussians did but they were overall better warriors.

Vikings had a better civilization because alot of them were in the Asatru religion and that religion has very good morals and values.

Vikings had better warriors because they had brute strength and the speed, both hitting and running, while carrying large weapons such as mauls, war hammer, and battle axes. They may not have had the stragetic senses that the Prussians did but they were overall better warriors.

How about this: When you lived in Prussia, you had the freedom of religion as a member of society while science and arts were major things the Prussian king sponsored.
And please don't forget that the Teutonic Knights could kick some major ass as well.

It's always hard to compare peoples from different historical epochs.

The Prussians were the most religously tolerant of their time...excluding possibly the Dutch. They were the first to really introduce standing armies. They had a love for the military and showed it well while fighting in Europe. Considering they once fought Austria, Russia, and France all at the same time and lived to tell the tale! They also united Germany and basicely ran it up until pre WWII. They were also a major European Power and a close ally of Great Britan. Also after uniting Germany...Prussia influenced the rest of the german states so it was more like Prussia expanding than all the German states coming together. And, during WWII the Prussians were the military class of germany, and opposed and even hated Hitler and his S.S., but fought for their country just because of their loyalty towards it....For instance, look at Erwin Rommel....

Being of 50% Prussian heritage (well, who knows how much part Viking is mingled in there, but anyway)

Prussia all the way. And they definitely had the better marches :D:D:D

I'm Prussian too!!!!!!!!

I'm Prussian too!!!!!!!!
High five!

*plays 'Preußens Gloria'*

Lets see who NS thinks was the better of these two awesome races!
You know what I'm thinking, my friend...

High five!

*plays 'Preußens Gloria'*

How do you type sweet looking B's like that?

You know what I'm thinking, my friend...

Lol...of course;) theres only 1..haha...cant teach an old dog new tricks can you, my german friend?:p

How do you type sweet looking B's like that?
With a German keyboard. It's the sharp double s condensed in one letter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9F

Prussians were better warrriors because they were hired internationally. Vikings were feared internationally.


*cough* Varangian Guard *cough*

My money is on the Viking. As warriors they were more physically powerful, extremely well motivated, and totally devoted to bloodshed even to the brink of death (the whole dying in battle = Valhalla shtick.) They also purposely used somewhat theatrical scare tactics as a means of psychological manipulation to craft their image into something synonymous with utter terror.

As a civilization they often get white washed as savage’s which is totally unjustified. They had decent, well organized governments, they were much less misogynistic then most ancient and medieval civilizations, they bathed regularly, and they even had such things as fine jewelry and hair combs. They also had extremely talented crafters tradesmen, world-class explorer, and merchants.

Plus they had Berserkers who got wasted on Fly Agaric mushrooms (which from what I gather makes Angel Dust look like a sugar high) and butchered indiscriminately regardless of injury... that certainly weighs in on the warrior competition.

I'll take your Varangian Guard and raise you with the Teutonic Knights and the Potsdam Giants.

Just check out the Marienburg, if you will. That's a castle!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Knights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Giants

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Playmobil.jpg
These two guys actually "guard" my bookshelf, in harmonical unison with a Roman Centurio, a Roman Legionary, and a Confederate Soldier

Viking blood runs through my veins. Which probably explains why my mother is such a battleaxe. I'd be a traitor if I voted for anybody but the Vikings.

I'll take your Varangian Guard and raise you with the Teutonic Knights and the Potsdam Giants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Giants


The Potsdam Giants cannot really be considered since:

a) They never actually thought. They were more the toy of the Kaiser than actual soldiers.
b) Not all of them were Prussian.

My history of the Teutonic Knights isn't fantastic, but IIRC they were a Germanic order of knights (with recruits from surrounding areas), rather then a specifically Prussian order. Also if we are doing it simply on military prowess of the state (so nationality becomes irrelevent), the Teutonic Knights weren't under control of the Prussian state (to the best of my knowledge).

With a German keyboard. It's the sharp double s condensed in one letter.

Curses! I have to use the character map to type that ß...

They were more the toy of the Kaiser than actual soldiers.
King - not Kaiser.

King - not Kaiser.

That's correct. I don't think there was a Kaiser until the German Empire was declared in 1871, although I might be mistaken.

I choose the Prussians. They made innovations in military logistics, strategy (von Clausewitz was Prussian) and weapons technology, and were able to become the 3rd greatest industrial power in the world in only a few decades. Plus, they made massive innovations in science and technology.

The Potsdam Giants cannot really be considered since:

a) They never actually thought. They were more the toy of the Kaiser than actual soldiers.
b) Not all of them were Prussian.

My history of the Teutonic Knights isn't fantastic, but IIRC they were a Germanic order of knights (with recruits from surrounding areas), rather then a specifically Prussian order. Also if we are doing it simply on military prowess of the state (so nationality becomes irrelevent), the Teutonic Knights weren't under control of the Prussian state (to the best of my knowledge).
a) That's not their job, they just have to obey orders ;) And Prussia didn't have an emperor, "only" a king.
b) As soon as they became part of the Long Guys, they were. And while they might not have been involved in much fighting, they surely were an impressive sight.

Actually, that order founded what was to become Prussia later on. We're talking couple of hundred years timespan here...

Anyway, as much as I like and respect the Vikings, just can't go for them here...

(...)I don't think there was a Kaiser until the German Empire was declared in 1871, although I might be mistaken.
You're not.

I choose the Prussians. They made innovations in military logistics, strategy (von Clausewitz was Prussian) and weapons technology, and were able to become the 3rd greatest industrial power in the world in only a few decades. Plus, they made massive innovations in science and technology.
Good for you. How come I forgot von Clausewitz? (That's always my name when playing Risk on the compi...)

...and were able to become the 3rd greatest industrial power in the world in only a few decades...
Second I reckon...
http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/history10/activity/unit4/u4act1sis.html

Second I reckon...
http://www.sasked.gov.sk.ca/docs/history10/activity/unit4/u4act1sis.html

That's amazing. I didn't know they were able to increase it at that rate, and especially the rate at which they built up their military. All the more reason to say Prussia has an edge over the Vikings.

a) That's not their job, they just have to obey orders ;) And Prussia didn't have an emperor, "only" a king.

You know what I meant ;)

"fought."

Bah, it's late here so little mistakes are ...


Actually, that order founded what was to become Prussia later on. We're talking couple of hundred years timespan here...

Well, it's not a period I am well versed on. Meh.

Anyway, as much as I like and respect the Vikings, just can't go for them here...

But, they are Vikings :confused:

My hometown's rival football team is the vikings....

DEATH TO ALL VIKINGS!!!!!BULLDOGS RULE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

but seriously....prussians had a way better army and civilization

Better civilization? Prussians, definitely; Prussian society was and (in the form of Germany) is very neat and organized. Prussia treated its workers well for the time and, compared to some of its neighbors, ruled with a fairly light hand. Too bad Wilhelm II screwed everything up. By contrast, the Vikings ruled by 'might makes right', pillaging half of Europe to keep the nobles at home from rebelling.

Better military? Prussians, again. They were able to take on France, Russia, and Austria at the same time during the Seven Years' war with minimum help from Britain, and win. They were also able to soundly defeat France, one of the most powerful nations in the world, march on Paris, and finally unify Germany. The Vikings were good, but the most they managed was a whole lot of savage raids on the European mainland.

Before we go any further I should probably be pedantic and point out that 'Viking' or 'Creekman' actually means 'pirate' so if we're asking who had the better civilization then just about *anybody* who had a claim to functioning cities had a better civilization then anybody who was just a pirate no matter what the culture they came from was like. If we're using Viking as a generic term for "Scandinavians from the period of 800-1000 AD" then fair enough but I would like to know whether your definition is this narrow or whether you're going to be like that one biographer I've just finished a day ago and count the Normans as Vikings too. @_@

"Prussian" is even fuzzier. Are you limiting yourself to the 18th and 19th Centuries? Because before then they weren't too much to write home about military wise. And are you using Prussia for the kingdom of that name or are you going to include anything German? o_O

Final question would have to be - what do you mean by "better"? Better in objective terms when compared to one another, (In that case Prussia would seem to get the nod regardless of merits because the 18th Century had a higher tech level than did the 9th), or better in comparison to their neighbors (I.E. the Danes and Norse ability to fight their neighbors vs. the Prussian ability to fight *their* neighbors)?

Without some common terms and some common measures this discussion will just be a comparison of apples and oranges! ^_~

Before we go any further I should probably be pedantic and point out that 'Viking' or 'Creekman' actually means 'pirate' so if we're asking who had the better civilization then just about *anybody* who had a claim to functioning cities had a better civilization then anybody who was just a pirate no matter what the culture they came from was like. If we're using Viking as a generic term for "Scandinavians from the period of 800-1000 AD" then fair enough but I would like to know whether your definition is this narrow or whether you're going to be like that one biographer I've just finished a day ago and count the Normans as Vikings too. @_@

"Prussian" is even fuzzier. Are you limiting yourself to the 18th and 19th Centuries? Because before then they weren't too much to write home about military wise. And are you using Prussia for the kingdom of that name or are you going to include anything German? o_O

Final question would have to be - what do you mean by "better"? Better in objective terms when compared to one another, (In that case Prussia would seem to get the nod regardless of merits because the 18th Century had a higher tech level than did the 9th), or better in comparison to their neighbors (I.E. the Danes and Norse ability to fight their neighbors vs. the Prussian ability to fight *their* neighbors)?

Without some common terms and some common measures this discussion will just be a comparison of apples and oranges! ^_~

1. I'm talking about the Viking (Scandanavians) of the 800-1000ish era.

2. I'm talking about the German Prussian state of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries.

3. Better is however you wish to define it...which is why people post their opinions of why they think each is better and why it is better.

I'd say, individually, the vikings were better warriors. But the Prussians were far more disciplined and well trained - they were soilders, not warriors, and therefore their strength was when they fought together. A Viking may be able to beat a Prussian one on one, but a Viking army had no chance versus a Prussian one.

You know what I meant ;)
'Course I did. Just funny, that typo.
You know, it's one of those little prejudices (and lame excuses post WWII) that Prussian (German) soldiers didn't think but just followed orders :p
There's a reason why "slavish obedience" is translated with cadaver-obedience (Kadavergehorsam) in German.

But, they are Vikings :confused:
And I'm half Prussian and fully German. How could I root for them?

I mean, I'm not saying that they didn't have a great craftmanship, knew how to build very tough boats and were excellent warriors. That's just not enough to turn from my conviction ;)