Author: Malcolm (---.sympatico.ca)
Date: 05-28-2002 01:45
...you are an abberation that's been taken for granted. You were not a part of the second oldest profession; standing armies haven't existed since the beginning of human history but pop up when nations or empires attain a certain kind of structure.
The next closest thing are different variations of warlord. Sometimes these titles are inherited and sometimes they aren't. In these situations, you make your living with various kinds of banditry and extortion until society reaches a point where they've had enough of your bullshit and decides to hold your leaders accountable. In france and Janapn, they decide to pay you off as long as you become the King/Shogun's hostage. With that largesse in tow, you might get to actually have something to so with a standing army -- one which is usually meant to contain your own particular landed interests.
Unfortunately, once the standing army starts up, your society's controls on organized violence start to fray. The Romans forbid fights between champions and armies attack on holy days and break various truces, because a centralized leadership overwhelms the need to gather the approval of a coalition.
So, it's really a mixed bag, isn't it? This, in fact, is the kind of warfare and fighting I'd like to hear about, rather than some generalized pean to dudes with swords. Christ, it isn't as if they're going out of style or anything. Why not ask what the hell professional violence-mongers actually do, rather than give an inflated pep-talk?
|
|
