War and man’s past
13
WAR AND MAN’S PAST • A PERSPECTIVE ON THE INSTRUMENTALI TY OF WAR TO MAN’S CIVILIZATION
-
Upload
nadine-guevarra -
Category
News & Politics
-
view
197 -
download
2
Transcript of War and man’s past
WAR AND MAN’S PAST
• A PERSPECTIVE ON THE INSTRUMENTALITY OF WAR TO MAN’S CIVILIZATION
WAR
An abberant activity which distorts and disrupts the proper rhythm of man’s life( and is seen to more likely not run well in the hands of people with or without proper training)
MILITARY HISTORY
• Study of uniforms, buttons, and badges; the reenactment of historic battles, and collection of antique firearms
• A study not of war but of institutions, administrators or ideas of armies, conscriptions, strategy
• Relationships of competing institutions or with society at large;
• Examination of what fighting is like, what it is for, and why it generates the institutions it foes.
WHY WAR?
I. PRIMITIVE WARFARE: high military participation, low level of lethality and lack of results (based on civilized standards)
- chieftainshipresulted to separate warrior class
- Raid- the very concept of war as revenge for wife-stealing or material wrong; involved minimal killing since even a single death was enough to satisfy honor which leads to truce
• Basic results: territorial redistribution; alliances as a result of narrow boundaries on intensively agricultural areas; pauses for diplomacy and peace-making
• Military authority had a religious status rather than anything else because his authority was reinforced by belief of his relationship with life-giving elements( ex. Egyptian Amun Re(sun God)Result:military leadership suffered due to the necessary shift to worship and building of temples rather than warfare and the inadventent passing of commands to trusted subordinates who may not necessarily be fit for the position.
II. BARBARIC WARFARE: formal incursions to agricultural lands
- Start of the consolidation of military class- Introduction of equality and solidarity of men
who were better fighting than other men and united by common military prowess.Result: aristocracy of chariot riding military and distinct polity
- Antipathy of cavalry and agriculture large army required large amount of food which only the most developed agricultural cultures can provide.Result:appearance of warrior class who worked in agricultural processes(Greeks and the Celts)
III.FORTIFICATION WARFARE: war in the pretext of protection of cultivated lands and perpetuation of agricultural rhythmn and constancy.
- Necessitated a highly mobile and easily assembled force to ensure casualty on enemies enough to prevent them from returning for the rest of the season
- Required great wealth and firm authority( Rome and China)
IV. TECHNICAL WARFARE: war in the pretext of improvement of utilization of metals to augment human skills.
- Appearance of selectively-bred horses- Introduction of armor which became the shock
force irresistible in the battlefield. Result:European economic revival as warrior invaders were effectively held back thus providing practical environment for prosperity. Counter result:contracting of mercenaries rather than supporting military with agriculture
V. SEA WARFARE: 16th til the 19th centuries; war in the pretext of subjection and overthrow of less militant societies at the end of every sea-route Result:European colonization and hegemony(Spain and Portugal)
The Paradox of War
• First the need to make warrior the victor against intruders
• Then the desire to make him subject to his sovereign(ruler, leader, commander, king) by armoring him
• Then the armor’s art ended thereby empowering sovereigns the means to obliterate each other’s population.
