Historically, how were members of the military viewed. Did they glorify them as heroes...

>There was no such thing as thinking men sitting cozzy back home while the army was out fighting
Wrong. Both in India/China, the intellectuals/priests were the highest class in the society, below the emperor and above the soldiers.

Not every able men were soldiers either. The soldiers distinguished itself from the merchants, the workers, the slaves, the intellectuals, and the priests.

In the future don't make wide generalizations. Limit your scope to the countries you know of.

Insurgency is not a new invention
The idea of creating a free nation and split off from a power is not new

This whole subject is so collosal there's no simple answer it varied massively between cultures. Sometimes warriors were the lowest most expendable young men. Sometimes they were a pampered warrior class. Sometimes liked. Sometimes loathed. It's all based on context.

Your point is accurate enough especially compared to modern precepts of soldiers but even when conscription and civic duty where at their most widely enforced there was still full time professional warriors... in that kind of culture that could have meant either they were the best in a similar vain to musicians or sportsman today; they were so good they got paid for it or the other extreme they were obsessive about it or otherwise useless so just dedicated themselves to it full time rather than find a trade.

I think throughout history however by and large it was just as described in Rudyard Kiplings poem Tommy.

>For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Chuck him out, the brute!’
>But it’s ‘Saviour of ’is country’ when the guns begin to shoot.

This attitude seems to be certainly in Europe right up since the early modern period at least. In Germany for instance soldiers weren't allowed to carry swords (essentially a basic right in most cities) and there was other brawling and weapons laws that were especially harsh on soldiers simply because they were the most likely people to instigate lethal duels.

Funny enough sword wearing was essentially the preserve of Artists and craftsmen in some cities by the 16th century because of this line of thinking.

Anyway that's an aside. Soldiers were shit on day to day and held high as heroes once they'd retired or died. That seems to be the most common theme.

Soldiers today are probably more venerated than any before them. Especially in the US with their bizarre (justified or not) serviceman worship.

Depends wildly on time and place. Not to mention that it's often very hard to reconstruct how the lower classes viewed anything.

Pretty much, you could hold the Lord.

There's a reason why recruitment sergeants looked so polished "imagine how good you'll look all dressed up soldiers"

>India
someone summarize indian history for me
hardmode: no poo in loo jokes

When I tried to join the Navy, the chief at the recruiting center was a sloppy dude with subway sandwich crumbs on his shirt.

>tried

What happened?

well that user is nearly completely wrong, but no one on this board knows or cares about indian history, so there is no point bothering.

Indus valley civilization, dried off literally in a century or so of drought.

Followed by multiple migrations of aryans from middle east/central asia. Which led to rising dynasties. Then long stagnation took place, 500-600BCE, great revolution was taking place all around the world. From Greeks to Indians to Chinese. The great thinkers were born.

Nanda empire was a very large empire that came close to fighting the Greeks/Alexander. Mauryan, who overthrew the Nanda, however did fight the Greeks and retook large portions of the Greek eastern front that Alexander had conquered before. These periods introduced Buddhism to the Greeks-Roman/Asia. Mauryan lasted from 3rd century BCE to 1st century BCE.

After Mauryan declined, various regional dynasties popped up. Then the Kushans took over a huge chunk of India/Afghan/Pakistan area during 1st century CE. The Kushans lasted a while then they died to the Sassanids to the west and the Gupta in India. Guptas reigned a bit from 3-5th century, however internal politics + Huns incursion destroyed them. After that, various minor dynasties once again ruled. Muslim incursion started around that time.

Various other dynasties lasted until the Muslim sultanate was established around 13th century and lasted till 16th century. They were replaced by another Muslim ruler, the Mughals. Mughals were defeated by the Marathas. Marathas were then played by the British and tookover India.

terrible.

Poo went into the loo

Then Poo didn't.

Now people want Poo in the Loo again.

Rejected due to autism

Soldiers were respected throughout history. It's only in the 20th century after WW1 that soldiers are vilified.

This question is so damn broad it could be answered 1000 different ways.

>Imperial Russia: Every town was expected to give a certain percentage of their male children over to the military. The child (upon reaching the age of adulthood) was then expected to serve for the next 20 - 30 years. Those who were picked were mourned by their communities as though they were already dead.

>Ancient Japan: Soldiers (known as Samurai) had their own social caste and were the only people even allowed to touch weapons. Peasants were expected to stay out of their fucking way.

>be peasant
>group of armed guys ride in, take half your meagre wealth as tax for the local warlord, do a bit of raping and pillaging
>only useful function is to fight off other groups of soldiers who'd treat you in exactly the same way

Sure sounds like they'd be well-respected.

>EVERYONE WUZ SOLDIERS
>Except the peons
Protip: The peons made up the vast majority of the population. There were professional mercenaries/soldiers everywhere. Random civilians were not trained and ready to fight in most places. They were frequently drafted to serve as meat shields for the professionals though.

>Meat shields.
Nope, at least I can't remember them in a fight if it wasn't a revolt or defending a city/siege. Serf/peons didn't fight because they were a lot more valuable for growing crops. When they were drafted they mostly were used in non combat roles, like carrying things etc.

case in point.

Are you so ignorant that you dont even know the meaning of the world "soldier"?
In italian it's "soldato", and dates back to roman times, when it literally meant "he who recieves [fights for] soldo", which is latin for money, pay.

What a shitty question. Where in the world are you asking about? Obviously the answer varies from place to place.

>Are you so ignorant that you dont even know the meaning of the world "soldier"?

Read a book. Levies are part of what made feudalism possible.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudal_levy#Medieval_levies

Fucking nerd

Then and now they are generally viewed as the lowest scum of society

>Soldiers were respected throughout history.
No they were not.

You are retarded, and need to do more research before you opine on something.

Nice rebuttal. Thank you for contributing to the discussion by saying "You're wrong" and nothing else. We need more people like you on this board.

Not at all, especially not before Napoleonic era. You think a peasant during 30 years war respected soldiers?

The brave and honourable soldier of the nation that deserves respect is a concept that spawned with nationalism, especially during 1800s. Before that an officer might be respected similarly to how we respect someone who works in an esteemed occupation but common rabble weren't, mercenaries sure as hell weren't , they were feared by peasants seen as pieces on the board by rulers.