How did guys march into battle knowing that death is a near certainty? I'm talking about the frontline guys in medieval times. Surely survival instinct kicks in at some point and you turn and run the other way? What was in their minds to hold the line?
>>75563463
jews
>>75563463
It wasnt really possible to have a choice. Youd feel the morale of all the soldiers around you and your leader behind you. Most wars the first wave never makes it out.
Men were seriously hard bastards back then and before then, we can't hold a candle to them now.
>>75563463
Discipline and honour.
If you have to ask, this world is already doomed.
>>75563463
Warriors back then were much more certain in the righteousness of their cause no matter what, and much more certain in afterlife of some sort. Military forces today have lost most of their discipline and structure. Allowing fags and womyn to fight int he front lines is just the straw breaking the camel's back.
>>75563463
The profits to be had
Someone would push you from behind and then you'd push the person in front of you and that'd go on until the whole army's moving
Dude it was like a mosh pit with fucking swords.
Your ass wasn't going anywhere. Good thing you probably had no doubt of going to heaven because atheism had not corrupted the West yet.
>>75564218
is this real or just a meme?
sounds like hell. i really hope my ancestors didnt have to experience that
>>75563463
Deserters got killed anyways.
>>75564400
Sure there were patriots but yeah generally that's how it went down
If any individual person tried to run away they'd be killed by their own army
Mostly people would just march on and whichever army would pussy out first would lose, they'd try to run away and the opposing army would finish off any one they'd be able to catch
Most medieval wars didn't have as many casualties as you'd expect them to be and they weren't Narnia-tier wars either, just small skirmishes
>>75563463
Losing means the women and children you love back home will be raped and killed then your property will be burned.
>People acting like a bunch of conscripted serfs were the height of manhood
You know what would happen if a guy decided he didn't want to stand there and fight? He gets killed for desertion
>>75564400
>Believing an India
>using meme to describe something you've heard once
1. Money.
2. Weapons back then were far less deadly. The main killer was disease. Only like 5% of an army would die in action.
>>75564908
This is what I've been saying, it wasn't just the money they were getting but also the risk of being killed
>be a deserter, get killed 100%
>don't pussy out and maybe you might live
>>75565035
why wouldn't he want to believe his former colony that revolted against him :^) ?
>>75565097
Well it was more like you die of an infection from a wound then the actual wound, since they knew fuck all about treatment back then
I mean you'd be pretty pumped after marching for 3 months you finally get to see some actions. We were definitely a lot tougher in those days.
>>75563463
Front line soldiers were paid double. Besides, getting to see foreign lands and stabbing some fuckface who didn't speak your language and quite possibly looked different than you and your bros was quite enjoyable compared to that of picking vegetables and getting your head smashed in by some drunk local knight.
Because doing so meant the survival and prosperity of their kin.
If they won, then they got land and gold and women.
If they lost, they died in fending their land, and women, and children.
Today, western countries are not one unified people fighting for their own kind. That is why war seems like a waste of your own life. You have nothing to gain by fighting and you aren't fighting for your tribe.
>>75565585
>we
>>75563463
>marching with a fear of dying
>not marching with heads up wanting to beat the shit out of enemies that threatens your glorious country and family
disgusting
>>75563463
There wasn't really else much to do in those days
>>75563463
its called not being a puissy faggot, something your countrymen lack as of late hence your current state of affairs
faggot.
>>75566073
That picture reminds me, why does everyone rag on France losing in WW2 when they actually beat the shit out of Italy
>turn and run the other way
Right into friendly spearing
>>75566386
Because that honestly isn't anything special
>>75566386
Because everyone kicks Italy's ass in WW2. I think they lost against 4 guys once
>>75566386
The Wikipedia article about Italy's involvement in WW2 is just a huge list of failures
>>75566784
Meant to include >>75566386
Not me whoopsie
>>75563463
It was less hard that what we can expect, few dead in battle the battle end with the moral of the troups so it was rarely a carnage but still for common people like us it's a way too much, ancient men were a way more tough and brave than us or modern soldier
>>75567125
>Not a lot of people actually died
>But they were way tougher and more brave then soldier today
So all those guys in WW1 were a bunch of cowards then
I have seen a lot of good answers here like like the quest for loot which is very true, it is likely if you were about to go to war you would loot some enemy or differing religious village on the way
However I think the biggest thing at least in the medieval era was these soldiers believed in an after life that there commanders likely promised them if they went to war, take away the fear of death and men will fight like death does not exist.
>>75564303
Bullshit. Atheism has always existed in some form or another (both Testaments speak of atheism). People can also think for themselves and form their own opinions, even if they don't voice it.
>>75563463
Medieval battles weren't very lethal. Being sent into the trenches or Stalingrad would have been far more dangerous than going into a Medieval battle.
>>75563710
How accurate is that anons post in pic relevant?
Spanish soldiers are death's boyfriends.
