The Viking offered the Native Americans milk as a peace offering. But they got sick because of their lactose intolerance and thought they were being poisoned and attacked them in return.
This reminds me of the movie Pathfinder. Except here there is no sympathetic Norseman that was taken in by the natives as a child, grows up to become Karl Urban, falls in love with the chief's daughter and single handedly defeats all the Viking invaders.
My money is on the Native Americans, because they have the home advantage and numbers. The Vikings might have steel swords and a fierce reputation, but the native Americans aren't slouches either, and the Vikings aren't getting any reinforcements.
I'm a direct descendant of him, only 1001 years between us lol Do they go into the incredible story of his wife Guðríður Þorbjarnardóttir or Gudrid Torbjarnardottir in that show? Does the show on into the story of Icelandic settlements and early life of the Vikings there?
@The Infographics Show i'm kinda dissapointed by the lack of historical accuracy you put in this video. Vikings did not had horned helmets nor did they had double bladed axes. Normally your videos are a little bit better when it comes to these things. Some inaccuracy hurts no one cause i get it - those are just simple graphics. But these two things are major if you're into archeology or history cause it spreads and shapes a wrong picture through mainstream.
The horn helmets and double axes were already widespread icons of Viking culture even if they didn’t actually use them people have already associated it with them for a long time now so it’s kind of way to tell the viewer what who is who
Depends on who makes it. ChatGPT(not that you can always count on it) says battle axe heads often used less iron, but you are right that there was several factor. Like axes being multi-purpose and being a big part of their mythology.
Vikings had a variety of shield formations. They had the shield wall for frontline fighting, but also Shield Castle, which was a formation in which a dome was formed out of shields, and the boars snout formation for rushing the enemy. In addition, the gambeson that would adress blunt damage, mail, and helmets the vikings had would have given them an incredible leg up. Their bows were nothing to scoff at either. Lets also reconize the vikings were not foreign to hit and run, considering their main raiding tactic is to do just that and flee with their longships before a response force arrived. The main reason vikings may have left the Finland settlements is due to how hard they were to get to and maintain. In the end, it would have been more beneficial to just cut their losses than keep fighting for a non-profitable cause.
Vikings don't have close allies or a supply line, it took America over 300 years to subdue native Americans and that was with guns and destroying the native food source, the buffalos.
@@wawa8408 Don't get me wrong, kings like Alfred the Great and Harold Godwinson stood up to their savagery. But what makes this a unique situation is that the Vikings, this time, were the ones in constant fear of being attacked and plundered.
In a video that's meant to portray accuracy, why did you include horns on the vikings' helmets? They didn't have horns on them. That feature was only a thing that became a fixture in later operas.
This video left out one important mortality factor here: diseases. Cross contamination killed more Native Americans than any weapons wielded against them.
The descendants of Vikings didn't go back to take over the continent, unless you mean way further down the line after Columbus and after the pilgrims. Not sure what history you're talking about.
@@Ackdaddy100 But that's not the Vikings directly doing the hostile settling, they were Pilgrims, definitely not the same thing. The Viking Age ended in 1066 while the Pilgrims didn't come to be until 1605, that's around 20 generation of Brits and the Viking lineage would be quite thin by then. I'm a direct descendant of the Vikings who settled in Iceland and of Leifur Eiríksson and yeah your comment triggered me more than I thought it would. I learned a lot about the Vikings especially the Vinland saga as one of my ancestral mothers Guðríður (Gudrid Þorbjarnardóttir (Thorbjarnardottir) went there with Leifur along with her husband Þorfinnur (Thorfinnur) „karlsefni“ Þórarson (Thorarson) and she had the first western child there in 1004 named Snorri. What they don't say in this video is that after Leifur and his clan left Vinland shortly after the baby was born and he learned that another viking leader heard about Vinland and wanted to go there to settle by force but Leifur took a team of Icelandic víkings after them and managed to get there just before the brutal viking (I don't remember who) and they were ready for them and slaughtered them before they could attack the natives and then they returned either to Greenland or Iceland
@@cantabilewoman yeah true. What I meant though was that the English who are mostly Germanic and Northern European descent from Saxon Jutish and Viking invaders 80 percent of English people have their DNA ended up taking over Northern America many years later. Didn’t mean to trigger anyone. I also have Viking Ancestry I have the Y chromosome M253 Haplotype my ancestors invaded southern England from what DNA research suggests is Norway then went to America and Australia I also have Native American DNA. I am glad that the English empire existed otherwise my ancestors wouldnt have met and I wouldn’t be alive.
I question how effective Beothuk archers could have put up a fight against a Viking raiding party. First of all, there is a difference between hunting bows and warbows. Being primarily hunters and fisherman, its unlikely they would have developed archery technology to eclipse anything European armies had available at the time. Not only would their stone tipped arrows bounce off the shields and chainmail the Norseman came equipped with, but its dubious whether they had access to bows with enough draw strength to cut through steel or padded armor. I for one doubt their archers could have been anything more than a minor inconvenience. Perhaps they could have put a few of the Vikings out of commission, but overall it wouldn't have made a huge difference in stopping them.
European settlers in the 1500's were equipped with gunpowder firearms, body armor and technology. These settlers didn't know where to find game or what native foods were edible. Kept cooped up behind wooden walls, the invaders died of starvation and disease. The Vikings might win battles, but Amerindians would win the war.
@@Otokichi786 This maybe true. But I seriously doubt they could have defeated the Vikings through sustained arrow-fire because of how primitive their bows and arrows were. The worse their stone and flint arrow-tips could have done is scratch the Viking's armor but not dent it. Perhaps they could get some lucky shots in by hitting them in the eyes or other exposed areas, but a solid shield-wall would have nullified any amount of volleys the natives threw at them.
Native Americans had 100 million people until about 100 years before the pilgrims arrived when 98% of them died off from multiple plagues brought over by Christopher Columbus The natives had to face multiple fevers, coronaviruses, influenzas and the chicken pox and black plague all at the same time having no immune system to any of them
See the problem is of your thinking. Even if there armor was so called unstoppable. Couple things getting hit with arrow even with body armor hurts and can even break bones Same with bullet proof armor even though it can stop bullets it can still break bones. the other thing same with the problem with European if you hit the unprotected spots of a person with body armor will do damage
You really should have consulted the NFL on this subject. In their most recent meeting, the Chiefs beat the Vikings 27-20 on October 8, 2023. *AND* the Chiefs have an all-time record of 8-5 against the Vikings. Pretty conclusive evidence I'd say.
Firstly they where peaceful cuz that's when natives in CANADA first started using iron tools cuz of the viking smelting techniques which where heavily traded so vikings hit Canada first not the usa
Hey do you think its possible to stop a fall using bed 🛌 sheets ? I tried finding a video about this but i can't so i was wondering if you can make one
You mentioned in previous videos they thought using now and arrows were cowardly, but did they not begin to use them once they were fired upon with them?? Why would they not abandon that belief?
North American Natives were still in the stone age never smelted metals. Around the Great Lakes region tribes used found copper cold hammered but even this was very rare.
Based upon all the mixedbloods I've met up in Canada who trace their ancestry waaaaaaaay back, I'm convinced that the Vikings and the Natives did more than just _fight_ with each other (hint: it's another word that begins with F). 😛
My girlfriend said if I don't stop my obsession with Viking culture she'll fight me to the death "Jokes on you" I said "if I die in battle I'll go straight to Valhalla" … I am now in Valhalla 🙄
Horned Viking helmets are a myth that was introduced to the 1876 Beyruth Festival by Carl Emile Doepler. The auspicious occasion was the first performance of "Der Ring des Nibelungen" by Wagner at this Festival 8:47
Well they did have to travel over an ocean and couldn't use the full force of their capabilities and manpower in their opponents backyards its hardly surprising it was tough for the Vikings, if it was the other way around the same if not worse result would've been upon the natives, I'd argue even worse.
@@Blackwell0102 I disagree in Viking lands in would be warmer. And the native Americans were better adapted to use the resources of the land and live off the land unlike Vikings. Who used animal husbandry as the main source of food. Native American tactics were ahead of their time.
@@redstar8226 The differences between Scandinavia and Newfoundland in climate are negligible both are far north and parts of Scandinavia reach even further into the arctic than Newfoundland does. And the natives hardly even use metals if at all in their weaponry or armours, their tech was mostly primitive in comparison. Both Civilisations were hunters too and ofc the natives are more adapted to their own land that's a given but hypothetically if the full mass of the VIkings was in Newfoundland and not Scandavia, to say they wouldn't have eventually beaten the natives and took ground is silly at least to a certain degree. I think it was location and logistics that sway this battle tbh but you're entitled to your opinion its a cool vid either way.
@@redstar8226 Scandinavians were also excellent fisherman. In fact during the early medieval period, fishing became more prominent in Viking lands and the Norse people were experts when it came to deep sea fishing, as well as fishing in rivers and lakes. They could catch cod, halibut and other types of fish that could only be found in deep, icy waters. I think they could have easily adapted to fishing in the same places as the Beothuk.
"With that small of a population, a fighting force being a fraction of that. A conquest conquest of the region would have been physically impossible" Hermann Cortes: "Am I a joke to you?"
To be Canadian, you must be a national of Canada. To be a Native American, you must have ancestry to the first humans to have established societies on the America’s (includes all of North America, Central America, and South America)
If you know anything about Military strategy the attacking party is stereotypically expected to have at least 3:1 of the defenders numbers to succeed and usually throughout history they have been the defeated side, and considering they had to travel incredible distances in a unfamiliar environment with some of the first iterations of ships, in a foreign land with slightly different climate and terrain it was never an equal battle. But in terms of which society was more developed or who'd win in a "fair fight" that is strictly continental the Vikings likely would have smashed most native tribes.
The Viking offered the Native Americans milk as a peace offering. But they got sick because of their lactose intolerance and thought they were being poisoned and attacked them in return.
*milk
Well done, you watched the video where he says this.
or possible cheese
@@beepboop204 - LIMBURGER cheese? 😲
we don't know the whole truth, if they intended to poison them, or if the milk was spoiled, maybe the natives had supplies the Vikings wanted.
This reminds me of the movie Pathfinder. Except here there is no sympathetic Norseman that was taken in by the natives as a child, grows up to become Karl Urban, falls in love with the chief's daughter and single handedly defeats all the Viking invaders.
God that movie was awful
My money is on the Native Americans, because they have the home advantage and numbers. The Vikings might have steel swords and a fierce reputation, but the native Americans aren't slouches either, and the Vikings aren't getting any reinforcements.
Vikings didn’t have horns on their helmets!!!
YES!!! Finally, an episode about vikings.!!! I love almost everything info graphics produces.
Thorfinn Karlsefni mentioned!!!! those who enjoy the anime Vinland Saga knows all about him or his animated counterpart
I'm a direct descendant of him, only 1001 years between us lol
Do they go into the incredible story of his wife Guðríður Þorbjarnardóttir or Gudrid Torbjarnardottir in that show?
Does the show on into the story of Icelandic settlements and early life of the Vikings there?
@@cantabilewomanin the manga he marries her and has a son
@The Infographics Show i'm kinda dissapointed by the lack of historical accuracy you put in this video. Vikings did not had horned helmets nor did they had double bladed axes. Normally your videos are a little bit better when it comes to these things. Some inaccuracy hurts no one cause i get it - those are just simple graphics. But these two things are major if you're into archeology or history cause it spreads and shapes a wrong picture through mainstream.
Infographics have never been known for accuracy and I would always take any of their historical or sociopolitical videos with a grain of salt
The horn helmets and double axes were already widespread icons of Viking culture even if they didn’t actually use them people have already associated it with them for a long time now so it’s kind of way to tell the viewer what who is who
Never thought I’d see an infographics of which of my ancestors would win in a fight.
you know how to fight
The sailing boats that the Beothuks are depicted sailing seem much more like the Polynesian culture's boats. Which is on the opposite coast.
Similar to your Samurai v Mongol video I love these warrior v warrior vids. Keep up the great work. Look forward to your next upload.
Axe heads are actually about as heavy as swords (which tend to be lighter than most people would think). They use about the same mass of iron.
Depends on who makes it. ChatGPT(not that you can always count on it) says battle axe heads often used less iron, but you are right that there was several factor. Like axes being multi-purpose and being a big part of their mythology.
What stories did vikings tell their children?
Norsery Rhymes.
hahaha made me snort laugh stealing this joke hello from Scotland
Thank you for the update, The Infographics Show..!! Amazing narration and animation as usual. I believe the viking invasion did occur.
Vikings had a variety of shield formations. They had the shield wall for frontline fighting, but also Shield Castle, which was a formation in which a dome was formed out of shields, and the boars snout formation for rushing the enemy. In addition, the gambeson that would adress blunt damage, mail, and helmets the vikings had would have given them an incredible leg up. Their bows were nothing to scoff at either. Lets also reconize the vikings were not foreign to hit and run, considering their main raiding tactic is to do just that and flee with their longships before a response force arrived. The main reason vikings may have left the Finland settlements is due to how hard they were to get to and maintain. In the end, it would have been more beneficial to just cut their losses than keep fighting for a non-profitable cause.
Vikings don't have close allies or a supply line, it took America over 300 years to subdue native Americans and that was with guns and destroying the native food source, the buffalos.
The Vikings had a rude awakening when they realized they couldn't pillage and bully the relentless Natives like they could with Anglo Saxons.
That’s true they thought these were the helpless monks and priests they slaughtered
Gimme a break..
William the Conqueror says hello...
@@wawa8408 Don't get me wrong, kings like Alfred the Great and Harold Godwinson stood up to their savagery. But what makes this a unique situation is that the Vikings, this time, were the ones in constant fear of being attacked and plundered.
@@wawa8408lmao, he was brutal
In a video that's meant to portray accuracy, why did you include horns on the vikings' helmets? They didn't have horns on them. That feature was only a thing that became a fixture in later operas.
Very educational video. Thank you.
Just waiting for the sticklers in the comments to say, "they didn't have horns" 😂😂
This video left out one important mortality factor here: diseases. Cross contamination killed more Native Americans than any weapons wielded against them.
Did the Vikings bring any diseases with them? There were so few that made the journey.
@@9HighFlyer9Their immunesystems had evolved seperately since humans migrated out of africa so even a simple sneeze could wipe out the entire tribe.
The Vikings decedents and similar Germanic descendants ended up returning many years later and took over the whole continent.
The descendants of Vikings didn't go back to take over the continent, unless you mean way further down the line after Columbus and after the pilgrims.
Not sure what history you're talking about.
@@cantabilewoman So your saying the British aren’t of mainly Germanic/Viking stock somewhere down the line ?
@@Ackdaddy100 But that's not the Vikings directly doing the hostile settling, they were Pilgrims, definitely not the same thing.
The Viking Age ended in 1066 while the Pilgrims didn't come to be until 1605, that's around 20 generation of Brits and the Viking lineage would be quite thin by then.
I'm a direct descendant of the Vikings who settled in Iceland and of Leifur Eiríksson and yeah your comment triggered me more than I thought it would. I learned a lot about the Vikings especially the Vinland saga as one of my ancestral mothers Guðríður (Gudrid Þorbjarnardóttir (Thorbjarnardottir) went there with Leifur along with her husband Þorfinnur (Thorfinnur) „karlsefni“ Þórarson (Thorarson) and she had the first western child there in 1004 named Snorri.
What they don't say in this video is that after Leifur and his clan left Vinland shortly after the baby was born and he learned that another viking leader heard about Vinland and wanted to go there to settle by force but Leifur took a team of Icelandic víkings after them and managed to get there just before the brutal viking (I don't remember who) and they were ready for them and slaughtered them before they could attack the natives and then they returned either to Greenland or Iceland
@@cantabilewoman yeah true. What I meant though was that the English who are mostly Germanic and Northern European descent from Saxon Jutish and Viking invaders 80 percent of English people have their DNA ended up taking over Northern America many years later. Didn’t mean to trigger anyone. I also have Viking Ancestry I have the Y chromosome M253 Haplotype my ancestors invaded southern England from what DNA research suggests is Norway then went to America and Australia I also have Native American DNA. I am glad that the English empire existed otherwise my ancestors wouldnt have met and I wouldn’t be alive.
there were no moose on the island of Newfoundland at this time they are not native to the island but were introduced much later
Awesome video!
I question how effective Beothuk archers could have put up a fight against a Viking raiding party. First of all, there is a difference between hunting bows and warbows. Being primarily hunters and fisherman, its unlikely they would have developed archery technology to eclipse anything European armies had available at the time. Not only would their stone tipped arrows bounce off the shields and chainmail the Norseman came equipped with, but its dubious whether they had access to bows with enough draw strength to cut through steel or padded armor. I for one doubt their archers could have been anything more than a minor inconvenience. Perhaps they could have put a few of the Vikings out of commission, but overall it wouldn't have made a huge difference in stopping them.
European settlers in the 1500's were equipped with gunpowder firearms, body armor and technology. These settlers didn't know where to find game or what native foods were edible. Kept cooped up behind wooden walls, the invaders died of starvation and disease. The Vikings might win battles, but Amerindians would win the war.
Facts! Thank you!
@@Otokichi786 This maybe true. But I seriously doubt they could have defeated the Vikings through sustained arrow-fire because of how primitive their bows and arrows were. The worse their stone and flint arrow-tips could have done is scratch the Viking's armor but not dent it. Perhaps they could get some lucky shots in by hitting them in the eyes or other exposed areas, but a solid shield-wall would have nullified any amount of volleys the natives threw at them.
Native Americans had 100 million people until about 100 years before the pilgrims arrived when 98% of them died off from multiple plagues brought over by Christopher Columbus
The natives had to face multiple fevers, coronaviruses, influenzas and the chicken pox and black plague all at the same time having no immune system to any of them
See the problem is of your thinking. Even if there armor was so called unstoppable. Couple things getting hit with arrow even with body armor hurts and can even break bones Same with bullet proof armor even though it can stop bullets it can still break bones. the other thing same with the problem with European if you hit the unprotected spots of a person with body armor will do damage
Imagine this as an assassin creed game
Vikings never actually wore horned helmets. Fun fact 🪓
God help any Viking military expedition that somehow managed to fight its way to the lands of the Apache, Comanche, and Sioux.
You really should have consulted the NFL on this subject. In their most recent meeting, the Chiefs beat the Vikings 27-20 on October 8, 2023. *AND* the Chiefs have an all-time record of 8-5 against the Vikings. Pretty conclusive evidence I'd say.
Lol
nice to see newfoundland in a video
I wish I had a Time Machine to see what really happened in the past ages from around the world. 😉🤷♂🌎🌍🌏
Firstly they where peaceful cuz that's when natives in CANADA first started using iron tools cuz of the viking smelting techniques which where heavily traded so vikings hit Canada first not the usa
Except that neither nation existed at the time.
While watching this, the Muppet skit of "In The Navy" came to mind.
Hey do you think its possible to stop a fall using bed 🛌 sheets ?
I tried finding a video about this but i can't so i was wondering if you can make one
hi love your vids
You mentioned in previous videos they thought using now and arrows were cowardly, but did they not begin to use them once they were fired upon with them?? Why would they not abandon that belief?
1:00 It is Lief Erikson day.
HINGA DINA DURGEN
Vikings had metal weapons…..
"what year is it?" "It's the Viking age" "well that explains the lazer raptors"...
Bottom line, it's always way harder to invade then defend
North American Natives were still in the stone age never smelted metals. Around the Great Lakes region tribes used found copper cold hammered but even this was very rare.
Sadly, the Beothuk would be absolutely wiped out after further European contact.
Kind of what the USA faced in Vietnam
The Viking Age? I see no lazer raptors
they did not let your ancestors stay so you came back with guns
HE SAID NEWFOUNDLAND WRONG
Newlyfoundlands
@@THEINFINITIVERSESAGA it's "new-fin-land" not newfinlind
@@TeamFlame_101 But not Labrador?
Come on! If you aim to inform people, cut out those stoopid horns. They are wrong!
"Back through time, we'll fight the Viking horde!"
15 hours ago to 16 hours ago 😮
Based upon all the mixedbloods I've met up in Canada who trace their ancestry waaaaaaaay back, I'm convinced that the Vikings and the Natives did more than just _fight_ with each other (hint: it's another word that begins with F). 😛
Foam bath between masculine man?
not F....more like R
its literally happening in vinland saga manga...crazy timing
this video felt very one sided in favor of the indigenous people and i don't normally get that idea from your videos
The First Nations all day any day.
100 vikings vs 100 natives and the natives would get destroyed. So obvious
Watch the movie Pathfinder its all about this 😉
Let’s go
My girlfriend said if I don't stop my obsession with Viking culture she'll fight me to the death
"Jokes on you" I said "if I die in battle I'll go straight to Valhalla"
… I am now in Valhalla 🙄
You have no gf,vikings are cowards that got whooped when they fought warriors 1on1
What's your sources? Yes we found a viking settlement in Newfoundland but there hasn't been a written record found
Horned Viking helmets are a myth that was introduced to the 1876 Beyruth Festival by Carl Emile Doepler.
The auspicious occasion was the first performance of "Der Ring des
Nibelungen" by Wagner at this Festival 8:47
Hello !
The Vikings had no horns on their helmets. Horns were placed on the helmet at brave fighters funerals.
Phil. Peace.
But the natives welcomed floki though
Native Americans beat the Vikings. Vikings are over rated
You must be Somalian
Well they did have to travel over an ocean and couldn't use the full force of their capabilities and manpower in their opponents backyards its hardly surprising it was tough for the Vikings, if it was the other way around the same if not worse result would've been upon the natives, I'd argue even worse.
@@Blackwell0102 I disagree in Viking lands in would be warmer. And the native Americans were better adapted to use the resources of the land and live off the land unlike Vikings. Who used animal husbandry as the main source of food. Native American tactics were ahead of their time.
@@redstar8226 The differences between Scandinavia and Newfoundland in climate are negligible both are far north and parts of Scandinavia reach even further into the arctic than Newfoundland does. And the natives hardly even use metals if at all in their weaponry or armours, their tech was mostly primitive in comparison. Both Civilisations were hunters too and ofc the natives are more adapted to their own land that's a given but hypothetically if the full mass of the VIkings was in Newfoundland and not Scandavia, to say they wouldn't have eventually beaten the natives and took ground is silly at least to a certain degree. I think it was location and logistics that sway this battle tbh but you're entitled to your opinion its a cool vid either way.
@@redstar8226 Scandinavians were also excellent fisherman. In fact during the early medieval period, fishing became more prominent in Viking lands and the Norse people were experts when it came to deep sea fishing, as well as fishing in rivers and lakes. They could catch cod, halibut and other types of fish that could only be found in deep, icy waters. I think they could have easily adapted to fishing in the same places as the Beothuk.
do a video on alaska and russia’s claim to it
Native Americans would totally own vikings on their own turf.
Who would win? Who DID win, you should ask.
Vinland saga
When fake history become true
"With that small of a population, a fighting force being a fraction of that. A conquest conquest of the region would have been physically impossible"
Hermann Cortes: "Am I a joke to you?"
More than 100,000 native warriors help Hernan. 😂
@@bmf1954 A fact conveniently forgotten by some Spanish enthusiasts I suspect.
@@davidanderson_surrey_bc funny, right?
Native would win because the us is there native homeland that means that they know every place and Viking dont
They buried Thorvald with standing crosses? Not very viking like if they were already christianized.
Since when did being "Christian" stop one from committing slaughter? The historical examples are too numerous to list here.
Infooo 😃
12th!!!!
Fun fact Newfoundland can't grow grain❤. Meaning before the potato Vikings couldn't sustain themselves in the long term.
saying first here
My wife is a Viking and I'm native Canadian 😂. No wonder we fight so much 😂
Wife like great great and more grandpa husband like great great and more grandpa
So basically natives were also terrible.
Oden..
Arrowhead.
Mexico.
Cartels.
Indian.
What about THA BAARBAARIAAN... HHHOOORRRDE
Except ur average Viking was 5,7 foot.Had no teeth and had a heavy lice infestation.
Native CANADIAN tribes.
To be Canadian, you must be a national of Canada. To be a Native American, you must have ancestry to the first humans to have established societies on the America’s (includes all of North America, Central America, and South America)
Better Vikings than Mongols isn't?
Where the Ukraine vids at?
Last
It sad that the Native Americans manage to survive the Viking Age, only to nearly annihilated by White American settlers centuries later.
Natives were no better.
That made no sense how could the Vikings not shoot there bows back they were better made!?
Vikings rock 😂natives only win bcuz they outnumber like 100 💯 to one 😢
❤Vikings, the first organized homosexual groups
Oh? And what was Sparta?
Contact😂
🇺🇸
Wow nice seeing u here
I’m here early I’m the 4667 view
For midgard
First!
First
first
Who DID win that encounter, is not even a question, we have proof
The vikings and native americans dont have a beef and yall spreading a fasle narrative🚮💯
This reminds me of an amazing movie 💝 " Pathfinder" 🥰🥰🥰 yeah Vikings didn't have a chance in Indigenous USA 😹😹😹😹
If you know anything about Military strategy the attacking party is stereotypically expected to have at least 3:1 of the defenders numbers to succeed and usually throughout history they have been the defeated side, and considering they had to travel incredible distances in a unfamiliar environment with some of the first iterations of ships, in a foreign land with slightly different climate and terrain it was never an equal battle. But in terms of which society was more developed or who'd win in a "fair fight" that is strictly continental the Vikings likely would have smashed most native tribes.
@Blackwell0102 you are absolutely right.
First