/his/ - History

They might develop combat stress temporarily, but before gunpowder I'm not sure if PTSD would manifest in noticeable numbers. Compared to modern soldiers a warrior would rarely experience battle, and few of those would involve a sudden, traumatic event that wouldn't be seen coming for at least several minutes.

I recall a poster from here referenced a book that contained accounts of warriors with ptsd from the Bronze Age but I forgot from where (maybe Akkadian?)

>>31000

well you also have to remember combat was up close and personal, you saw peoples heads chopped off a few feet from your face and hearing the roaring screams as enemies charge could per say do as much PTSD as gunpowder shots.

>>31000

well you also have to remember combat was up close and personal, you saw peoples heads chopped off a few feet from your face and hearing the roaring screams as enemies charge could per say do as much PTSD as gunpowder shots.

>>31003

but during battles, especially ancient hoplite or pike battles, people wouldn't actually face combatants.

>>30999

>PTSD

It's been shown that most of what's called PTSD is actually caused by brain damage due to nearby explosions.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23252434

Which means ancient warriors wouldn't get anywhere near the modern PTSD levels, as their would be purely psychological.

>>30999

As far as I remember modern levels of PTSD come from continuous high stress and fear of death. Even in WW1 every second on the frontline included the possibility of a sudden violent death, especially during artillery fire. It became even worse in vietnam and later on iraq and afghanistan as the soldiers were deprived of any feeling of securtiy, wether it was at the front or in the basecamps, anytime something could happen to you. A situation like this leaves a mark on people, especially when they try to return to thier daily life the constant subconsious fear of danger and death would remain. In ancient times it was fairly more simple, except for suprise attacks and alike you could usually feel quite secure while marching or resting, ofcourse when the day of the battle came it was bloody and cruel but once it was over, it was over. Brutality may leave people deadend but it would probably not result in anything modern PTSD like.

>>31011

This is an interesting concept which would certainly explain PTSD in modern combat scenarios, but PTSD can be suffered through vehicular accidents, rape and generally experiencing something traumatic, such as human mutilation and killing of humans in a battlefield scenario.

>>30999

I can't imagine they would get PTSD on a large scale and I very much doubt they'd be treated for it. I would suspect they'd just carry on with their lives and learn to deal with it. I can imagine some would carry on fighting and few would commit suicide.

War wasn't so bad back then because the average lifespan was 45 years due to disease and shit anyway.

>>31027

Could be a case of throwing completely different cases under one single umbrella term of PTSD.

>>31029

Yeah, I agree, the term "PTSD" is quite a blanket term, I guess that study was more about "shell-shock" in combat scenarios.

>>31028

Yeah… no. War was just as gruesome if not worse. I'm quite sure the combatants were a lot younger as well. Besides, it doesn't matter if you have 10 or 30 years left to live, fear of death is still very strong.

I could imagine that pre-modern warriors had their own psychological issues related to combat and injuries, but as with many other unfortunate things that already existed in the past, there simply were no scores of psychotherapists to write papers about it.

Plus, I still would argue that modern war is more intense in that death can come at literally any moment. If some stupid archer would fire an arrow into your face, you normally would at least see him. In modern times, you can be killed by airstrikes, artillery bombardment, landmines, sniper fire, and about a dozen other ways without even realizing you're in danger. I think it is the constant state of tension this brings about that really fucks you up, though seeing your comrades and friends being mowed down by a hail of arrows or mounted knights naturally doesn't help, either.

I could imagine that pre-modern warriors had their own psychological issues related to combat and injuries, but as with many other unfortunate things that already existed in the past, there simply were no scores of psychotherapists to write papers about it.

Plus, I still would argue that modern war is more intense in that death can come at literally any moment. If some stupid archer would fire an arrow into your face, you normally would at least see him. In modern times, you can be killed by airstrikes, artillery bombardment, landmines, sniper fire, and about a dozen other ways without even realizing you're in danger. I think it is the constant state of tension this brings about that really fucks you up, though seeing your comrades and friends being mowed down by a hail of arrows or mounted knights naturally doesn't help, either.

>>31036

Has Thucydides wrote anything in his "History of the Peloponnesian" about soldiers experiencing PTSD?

>>31037

*Peloponnesian War

>>31000

>modern soldiers a warrior would rarely experience battle,

It's the complete opposite life in pre-industrial society's were short violent and brutal. Raiding, skirmishing and mass battles were the bread and butter of war for thousands of years, take into account that populations were smaller than they are now there's a high chance that most pre-modern warriors saw combat.

>>31035

PTSD or at least the modern definition of it has been talked about by writers since ancient times it appears in many cultures under a variety of names. It was something that was observed but it wasn't one of those things that was openly spoken about, before the advent of psychology talking about emotions and feeling was universally considered unmanly and unbecoming of men, and I agree with that view.

>>31068

>talking about emotions and feeling was universally considered unmanly and unbecoming of men

Care to tell us where did you hear that? The current emotional stigma for men developed in the last couple of centuries

>>31071

>The current emotional stigma for men developed in the last couple of centuries

That's not true, when you observe and study the norms of pre-industrial societies particularly the tribal ones there are social mores that are universal. For example amongst the Mongolians there are clear and defined standards for masculinity and one of those standards is that one should never speak about ones emotions openly in fact Westerners who have been to Mongolia are derided when they do so by both the men and the women, and that contributes to the Mongolian viewpoint that Westerners are soft and weak.

>>31098

But is that healthy? How is mental health and well being over there in comparison to our relatively much more male emotions accepting west?

>>31068

>PTSD or at least the modern definition of it has been talked about by writers since ancient times it appears in many cultures under a variety of names. It was something that was observed but it wasn't one of those things that was openly spoken about

You're contradicting yourself.

I've read a lot of old historical military manuals from a few hundred years ago and earlier. I have never seen anything that sounded like a description of PTSD. Old soldiers complained about their old wounds, not their triggers.

>>31011

Oh I almost forgot; NatGeo had an article on this.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/healing-soldiers/blast-force.html

>>30999

You don't really need a psychologist to deal with psychological problems, even nowadays they don't help that much.

People can cope with it in a multitude of ways, like religion, or simply focusing yourself on another type of work.

Also keep in mind that what causes PSTD isn't the killing itself.

>>31035

>>31036

Somehow i really fucking doubt modern war is more stressful than napoleonic warfare, standing in an open field, marching in strict discipline praying you don't get shot or run over by cavalry, knowing that you can be blown off by a cannonball at any minute, and seing it happen to people right next to you, are you kidding me i'd take modern warfare over this any time.

>>31160

You've got to remember, those battles would last a few hours at most, you'd be in the trenches for days on end before being relieved, under constant barrage and stress. Modern combat situations means that soldiers have threats whenever going out on a patrol also.

>>31162

But trench rotations happened very often. Fuck, do y'all get your WW1 information from fucking movies and video games or something? At most, the average soldier was in the trenches for a week. Not even the front lines, either.

>>31191

No, I don't get it from movies or videogames, I studied the First World War. while sixty percent of a soldiers time was out of the trenches, forty percent was in the trenches. Whether that's in the support trenches, communications trenches and reserve trenches, they were still being bombarded with near constant artillery; the artillery doesn't just hit the front line, you know. Also, the average soldier wasn't in the trenches for a week at most, they were in the front-line for a couple of weeks in a year. This amount of time they would be facing attacks and also attacking so those days would have been devastating to a soldiers mental state.

>>31192

Also, the French were terrible with rotaions, it's one of the reasons why the French army nearly completely mutinied in 1917.

>>31110

It's extremely difficult to make comparisons, in that you're going to be comparing apples and oranges. Different societies bring different struggles to bear, in the West depression and mental disorders are often caused by a dehumanizing social system and many cope with it through a variety of ways often through hedonism. In Mongolia the melancholy is caused by a hard life in the steppes and many Mongolian men are chronic alcoholics.

>>31117

There's no contradiction. Symptoms of PTSD was observed but not spoken about that's the point I was making. Xenophone and Plutarch made note of the transformation men went through in war, there are surviving letters from Prussian soldiers during the Seven Year War that pointed out the behavior of veterans when around loud noises, and there are medical records from the US Civil War making note of the irregular heartbeats that many veterans had.

>I've read a lot of old historical military manuals from a few hundred years ago and earlier. I have never seen anything that sounded like a description of PTSD.

Of course not because historical military manuals were written in a time where the discipline of psychology didn't exist. There was only one mental factor they took into account that was moral.

>Old soldiers complained about their old wounds, not their triggers.

Again it was shameful to speak of such things so of course they wouldn't discuss it.

>>31217

>There's no contradiction. Symptoms of PTSD was observed but not spoken about that's the point I was making.

Then how do you know it was observed despite the glaring lack of evidence?

>>31229

Read the rest of the post instead of nitpicking

>>30999

Well, the oddest story of traumatic stress I recall was the mention that during, I think it was, Hannibal's largest battle- the Romans were surrounded, then supposedly some panicked and began to bury their heads in the ground.

Not sure to what extent it was made up or that if it was genuine and just some obscure aspect of their culture.

>>31027

don't forget twitter bullys

:^)

>>31193

like it almost happened or it happened and almost everyone did it?

>>31378

Wikipedia but seems to be quoted well and is basically the same answer I would give:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Army_Mutinies

>>31342

I heard it was true, they buried them because they were facing certain death; I guess suffocation is better than being killed by Carthaginians

I guess pillaging and raping after the battle was a great stress reliever.

>>30999

post tromatic stress disorder has a lot of variables that influence some one getting it. one of the prevailing theories I've heard is that a more homogenous society where people help each other are less likely to suffer from ptsd. or something along those lines. so i think that the rates of ptsd would in general be pretty low in most cultures.

>>31112

Notice how Sweden isn't on the list

Also, it may be about how mental illnesses are more likely to get a diagnostic USA than in a country where people can barely afford a regular doctor: look how poor African countries are under represented when a lot of those countries have been teared up by war in the last decades.

>>31160

>You don't really need a psychologist to deal with psychological problems, even nowadays they don't help that much.

At least can give you medication

>>30999

Interesting question and very nice trips. I know nothing about this particular issue, but the main consideration here is that psychohistory is always a shaky affair. It retroactively imposes the modern field of psychology on past cultures that saw things differently, such as the Greek perception of epilepsy as sacred. And besides that, it looks for implications of things based on scant evidence.

Thomas Heebøll-Holm of the University of Southern Denmark has done some work on this question, though I want to note that he's only an adjunct professor. He points out Geoffroi de Charny, a 14th century French knight who wrote a few books on being chivalrous:

>In this profession one has to endure heat, hunger and hard work, to sleep little and often to keep watch. And to be exhausted and to sleep uncomfortably on the ground only to be abruptly awakened. And you will be powerless to change the situation. You will often be afraid when you see your enemies coming towards you with lowered lances to run you through and with drawn swords to cut you down. Bolts and arrows come at you and you do not know how best to protect yourself. You see people killing each other, fleeing, dying and being taken prisoner and you see the bodies of your dead friends lying before you. But your horse is not dead, and by its vigorous speed you can escape in dishonour. But if you stay, you will win eternal honour. Is he not a great martyr, who puts himself to such work?

Does any of that prove that de Charny had PTSD, or maybe knew someone who did? Holm says yes, definitely. I say there's room for doubt, all we know for sure is that he's telling the reader that war is horrible and to not give in to fear. It always comes back to the same problem: you can't properly psychoanalyze dead people who think completely differently from you. A historian has to take things on their terms, so here you could think about honor, chivalry and maybe Christianity to try to formulate some sort of answer.

>>31028

Does that account for infant mortality?

>>30999

The ancient world was a much more violent place than the modern one. Economies then were overwhelmingly agrarian and hunting was a major food source as well, so many people had been slaughtering and gutting animals for their whole lives, and if not they had at least witnessed it. You also had public executions, blood sport, sacrifice, and the like, and all of this was seen in person, not on the tv or computer screen. The ancient man would have been pretty desensitized to gore and death even in the more stable and civilized areas. You also have to account for cultural differences; in some times and places, human life just didn't carry the same value as it does in the modern, western world.

>>32570

Totally irrelevant and predictable modern bias.

who is the warrior on the right supposed to represent?

>>32705

Im guessing Persians vs Kushites? There was legend that said that the Achamenids tried to invade Nubia or something

>>32705

Read the filename. Assyrian fighting a Nubian

>>32604

Totally inane and incoherent attempt at an argument.

>>32825

We see a lot of violence through media and this desensitises the majority of us because a lot of us are able to use media. Not everybody would see violence in the ancient world and, even if they did, I don't see how desensitisation would stop people from having PTSD; a war veteran would still suffer from PTSD after a battle or war, it's all about a person's mental state and desensitisation doesn't mean shit.

I've seen some psychologists theorize that the concepts of chivalry are a sort of coping mechanism devised by knights to deal with the stresses of their profession.

I pulled out my copy of "On Killing" because I do recall a small, one-note comment about how historical civilizations he never mentioned which ones specifically if I do recall correctly had very specific, week-long recuperation ritual that had the men bond together and ease them back into society. Couldn't find it though.

The problem with Grossman in this context is that he doesn't have many ancient examples that and he seriously believes Gypsys have a healthy Sexual culture.:

One of the main differences between pre-20th century and post-20th century warfare is length of engagement with the enemy. If you were a Roman Auxillary you wouod be pretty unlucky to fight a battke that lasted longer than a day. Compare thid to your average French soldier in the battle of Verdun for example, a battle that in essence did not stop for 2 years.

What i am trying to say is that the difference between modern and pre-modern wars sre so stark that we may as well call them different things

>>33247

>>33247

Jeez,, sorry about all those typos. That will teach me to type and walk at the same time

>>33456

see >>33247 You're still kinda right though.

>>33480

>It's rare that people enjoyed life.

This is a really interesting thought, recently I've been imagining how my ancestors lived and how they loved, how they were happy, but saying that makes me realise that many of them would have hated their existence, especially the women.

>>33456

I think you're exaggerating the time a person would be fighting for, the Lord would mainly rally men for a campaign or battle and form them into a militia, once this campaign or battle has ended they could return home; at least in smaller wars and battles.

>>33479

i dont think pikemens were supposed to fight other pikemen formations, they were used mostly to gain gorund, hold ground and advance and gain more ground, here is were the fight between pikemens should happen, but it would be more a psychological battle since the atacking army would assist the advance whit artillery fire, gun fire and cavalry maneuvers (probably trying to encircle the enemy), so you try to have some advantages on the fire power that ou are using on the enemy to force their men, like pikemen formations, to break formations and retreat, this also happened on the napoleonic warfare were the loses from desertion were greater than the ones by death on the field.

>>33495

Speaking of miserable women, wasn't their a study somewhere that stated women in the U.S. to specific were getting unhappier? Is just that women are more willing to express their dissatisfaction with things? Because I admit in the past most women weren't allowed to amount to much, but the average man's life is something that isn't brought up much. Then there's children's lives as well, If your mom is having it bad, I can't help but imagine how that will affect children.

>>31027

The first part is a sort-of misconception. There's actually a difference between PTS (which rape victims would have) and PTSD (which soldiers wouldhave). This is usually marked by how long it takes for it to set in (PTSD can take years to surface and PTS is usually immediate) and some symptoms are more severe for PTSD compared to PTS. PTSD can suffer flashbacks and not the kind like in the movies. Flashbacks like a guy reimagining he was at the battle of Fallujah and screaming and posing as if he was taking down Iraqis and telling his unit to stay back. Or they can experience joylessness like a man who loved movies just doesn't find anything entertaining anymore.

PTSD never completely subsides, just a thing to get used to.

PTS subsides after some time maybe a few months at most from the event

>source- Highschool psychology class

>>30999

>I'm curious, how did ancient warrior cope with war? After the conflict was over, how did they get back into the groove of daily life?

Which warriors?

Professional/elite? They continued to train, patrol borders, patrol roads, hunt and whatnot.

Militia? They said "phew!" and got back to their business, occasionally interrupted by raiders, highwaymen and suchlike.

>>36077

Think there's a bit more to it than this, mate.

>>31003

PTSD isn't about how gruesome the actual combat is. It has a lot more to do with whether the combatant actually feels responsible for killing the enemy. Read "On Killing" for more on this.

Consider then, the typical phalanx, where only the frontline is actually killing, with the bulk of the formation basically serving as a structural reinforcement…90% of your unit isn't actually responsible for killing, and as such, no one is getting PTSD save for those 10 guys up front, all of whom are up there because they fucking enjoy that shit.

>>36121

How about considering something which isn't the phalanx; it's very easy to say what you're saying when you look at no other type of military fighting. What about the Saxons against the Normans? The Crusaders against the Fatimids?

You should check out the book Warrior Ethos by Steven Pressfield; it's very related to this topic.

>>31011

You don't have to be in combat to get PTSD. you just need to go through some form of traumatic stress. Though I could see how people who received blast-force tbi would be more likely to get PTSD than those who suffered blunt-force tbi.

>Which means ancient warriors wouldn't get anywhere near the modern PTSD levels, as their would be purely psychological.

as opposed to the modern PTSD which is physiological(tbi) and psychological?

>>33498

Well, that has little to do with what we actually know. Pikemen were specifically trained to fight other pike squares, "wrestling" included.

Pike SQUARES are not just lines of pikemen.

>>33495

I doubt your ancestors hated their existence. What they lived through may seem harsh by toady's standards, but for them it was normal, and they probably weren't all that bothered by it. I'm sure they still found happiness in their lives, even if it was only because they didn't know how good life can be.

This may not be the best example, but I know quite a few people from war-torn countries, with very little access to medical treatment, and from what they've told me, people there view life pretty much the same way we do. They just accept the things they can't change, no matter how awful they are, and move on. I guess when hardships are common to you, they don't seem as severe as they would to someone who rarely experiences them.