7 ms·
My understanding is that medieval warfare, among the noble class, had similarities to this: specifically, nobles didn't necessarily fight to the death. Capture
by mariodiana 5y ago
My understanding is that medieval warfare, among the noble class, had similarities to this: specifically, nobles didn't necessarily fight to the death. Capture and ransom was a big thing. The term "parole" comes from the idea of giving one's word, after capture, that you would not return to fighting if you were released. The nobles of Europe, too, had an extended network of kin, some of whom might be on the "other side."
I don't recall learning about switching sides with fluidity (as in Afghanistan), but I do recall learning that this little game got broken up once the common people were enlisted.
- int_19h 5y agoYou might be interested in this: https://acoup.blog/2020/04/16/collections-a-trip-through-bertran-de-born-martial-values-in-the-12th-century-occitan-nobility/ https://acoup.blog/2020/04/16/collections-a-trip-through-ber... "... what seems to be the case is that, for people like Bertran, the chance of dying in all of that war remained relatively low. In the first case, the style of warfare of the 12th century, oriented around raids and sieges, with relatively few large set-battles and relatively smaller armies – tended towards lower casualties in comparison to the warfare of other eras." But do keep in mind that this is a particular period of medieval warfare; it's not universal.
- pradn 5y agoWar rules are fascinating. They play a large role in the Mahabharata, which has an incredibly long battle sequence at the end, where the events of each day are detailed minutely. Part of the moral complexity of the epic comes from both sides breaking the rules, all of which are broken at some point and lead to pivotal shifts in the battle. These rule violations muddy the moral waters: what's usually seen as a "good guy"/"bad guy" story turns into a vicious tale of deception, violence, and senseless death. This martial epic contains within it both the call to duty, and, therefore, violence, but also a searing critique of where it leads to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma-yuddha#In_the_Mahabharata https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma-yuddha#In_the_Mahabhara...
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y agoThat sounds fascinating and it reminds me I haven't read the Mahabharata (then again I have quite a bit of backlog going all the way back to the epic of Gilgamesh...) Is there a good English translation? Or a French one maybe?
- pradn 5y agoPerhaps start with the RK Narayan version, which gives you the most important parts of the story? He's a lovely writer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mahabharata_(Narayan_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mahabharata_(Narayan_book) I'm not quite sure which translation is the best for the whole work as a verse epic. The fragments I've read were so dry it wasn't fun to read.
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y agoThanks! I'll give the RK Narayan version a try :)
- amelius 5y agoWith so many rules, why didn't they change the entire concept of war into something entirely intellectual, like a chess competition?
- pradn 5y agoIt's funny that you mention this because one of my fav fight scenes in any movie is at the beginning of Hero, the 2002 movie with Jet Li. When Jet Li and Donnie Yen's characters face off at the beginning of the movie, they imagine the fight in their heads, with a shift to black&white noting the shift to an imagined fight. Their "simulation" leads to both sides recognizing that Jet Li would win, and Jet Li finishes his opponent off with one swift movement. The scene actually takes place at a chess courtyard, with an old man playing music as they "fight". Video of the scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeeoEpmyb2Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeeoEpmyb2Y
- 5y ago