Did pre-20th century armies have any sort of "killing" training?

Did pre-20th century armies have any sort of "killing" training?

By that, I don't mean the techniques of fighting and killing, but the emotional and mental hardening it takes to kill someone. Is this something pre-20th century armies worried about as well or was it just assume that soldiers wouldn't shirk their duty when the time came?

It was pretty standard for armies to have some ritual for the explicit purpose of getting everybody psyched to kill the enemy. This could be as simple as a prayer asking God for strength, or as complicated as a quick human sacrifice to woo the gods in your favor.

>"killing" training?

Man is naturally able to kill. What motivated them to do that pre 1900 was ideological fervor, hatred of the enemy, and fear that if they didn't kill them, the enemy would come in and kill their family instead. Combine that with drilling into each individual's head that he is a member of a group rather than a man and you get somebody who is an able soldier.

Most people are able to kill with minimal psychological damage, the problem is modern training that results in soldiers killing before they even think about it.

>Most people are able to kill with minimal psychological damage

sauce?

What I've understood is that the problem with american veterans is that they don't feel like they're a part of the collective anymore, so it's as if the killing and dying they did was in vain.
They don't receive the emotional support, that warriors usually have received throughout human history.
The same doesn't apply to israeli veterans, who are celebrated and appreciated in their home nation.

>What motivated them to do that pre 1900 was ideological fervor, hatred of the enemy, and fear that if they didn't kill them, the enemy would come in and kill their family instead.
None of that shit mattered in any aggressive war in history. Your average Roman soldier gave zero shit about the Britons or Dacians when they were invading them.

>Did pre-20th century armies have any sort of "killing" training?

Yeah, its called life.
Today we buy meat, instead of killing, gutting and skinning animals.
Today our relatives die sedated in hospitals, instead of choking, fighting for air, and shitting themselves in the family bed at home.
Today it is rare to lose a sibling, where before it was common.

You just grew up with more death around you, and thus were more comfortable with causing it on others, or with dying yourself for a good cause.

I don't think most men nowadays would have a problem killing an animal desu

You haven't been to university, I take it?

Nah I'm a working man. Have some friends at uni though, lot of the young lads do act like faggots with their skin tight jeans and soft faces. Hope they grow out of it desu

>grow out of sophistication

It won't happen. What they have is built on top of what you have, its an extra layer.
The only way out is an additional layer on top of it, as usually happens with these things.
A reaction to the previous reaction becoming popular, which itself was a popular reaction to a previous reaction, etc.

>sophistication
Lmao, mate it's hardly sophisticated to have no understanding of real life and be living off daddy and the state

I don't think you have the sophistication to understand that post, or even what sophistication actually means.

Arrogant student

There's a difference between the slaughtering of an animal, the witness of natural death, and the decided killing of a man.

How do we change that culture in America though so that they are celebrated? I mean I’ve always felt like Americans celebrated veterans in a circlejerk and not a serious sort of way.

I do remember reading about Roman soldiers from cannae who saw the spirits of the dead and suffered from terrible night terrors, so certain things definitely got to soldiers. I think even the Trojan war tales mention a form of PTSD?

PTSD is a modern concept

>in close combat with enemy
>life is in danger
>kill him
?

The majority of people in history didn't get to die of old age though. Half of people died as kids, and a good portion of the rest died from debilitating disease or injury.

If anything, dying quickly while having lived a relatively short but fit and healthy life would've been one of the less horrible ways to die. There was no certainty in life back then.

Growing up as dirt poormountain pastoralist with hard work and near constant clan feuds, cattle rustling and border raids is a pretty good training for pre industrial soldiers.

On that topic, violence rates whee significantly higher in medieval and early modern Europe, like 10-50 times the chance for violent death than compared to today depending on timeframe and location. So yeah, people definitely where more prone to violence.
>does that mean society is evolving???

'no'
It has a new name and a new diagnosis, it has existed since time immemorial

A friend of mine used to have a joke: you don't need a killer instinct to kill everyone you meet who needs to be killed. It's true as well.

Not fighting a perpetual war is a good start

>you don't need a killer instinct to kill everyone you meet who needs to be killed.

it's a joke