Characterizing the dynamic mechanical properties of spinal cord tissue is deemed important for developing a comprehensive knowledge of the mechanisms underlying spinal cord injury. However, complex viscoelastic properties are vastly underexplored due to the spinal cord shows heterogeneous properties. To investigate regional differences in the biomechanical properties of spinal cord, we provide a mechanical characterization method (i.e., dynamic mechanical analysis) that facilitates robust measurement of spinal cord ex vivo, at small deformations, in the dynamic regimes. Load-unload cycles were applied to the tissue surface at sinusoidal frequencies of 0.05, 0.10, 0.50 and 1.00 Hz ex vivo within 2 h post mortem. We report the main response features (e.g., nonlinearities, rate dependencies, hysteresis and conditioning) of spinal cord tissue dependent on anatomical origin, and quantify the viscoelastic properties through the measurement of peak force, moduli, and hysteresis and energy loss. For all three anatomical areas (cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal cord tissues), the compound, storage, and loss moduli responded similarly to increasing strain rates. Notably, the complex modulus values of ex vivo spinal cord tissue rose nonlinearly with rising test frequency. Additionally, at every strain rate, it was shown that the tissue in the thoracic spinal cord was significantly more rigid than the tissue in the cervical or lumbar spinal cord, with compound modulus values roughly 1.5-times that of the lumbar region. At strain rates between 0.05 and 0.50 Hz, tan delta values for thoracic (that is, 0.26, 0.25, 0.06, respectively) and lumbar (that is, 0.27, 0.25, 0.07, respectively) spinal cord regions were similar, respectively, which were higher than cervical (that is, 0.21, 0.21, 0.04, respectively) region. The conditioning effects tend to be greater at relative higher deformation rates. Interestingly, no marked difference of conditioning ratios is observed among all three anatomical regions, regardless of loading rate. These findings lay a foundation for further comparison between healthy and diseased spinal cord to the future development of spinal cord scaffold and helps to advance our knowledge of neuroscience.