QA：中世紀(jì)的哪些戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)真的像電影中表現(xiàn)的那樣野蠻?（一）
Which battles in the Middle Ages were really that barbaric as shown in movies?
譯文簡(jiǎn)介
只有那些既沒有開過一槍，也沒有聽到傷者的尖叫和呻吟的人才會(huì)為流血、復(fù)仇和荒涼而大聲疾呼。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是地獄。
正文翻譯
一
J. Peper
Hollywood always gets battles wrong, particularly ancient and medi battles.
A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.
But yes, trying to kill a bunch of unfriendly strangers by sticking them with long pointy things before they do the same to you is inherently barbaric. So is blowing them up, shooting them, gassing them, or all the other ways we’ve made warfare more “civilized”.
好萊塢總是把戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)拍錯(cuò)，尤其是古代和中世紀(jì)的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。
戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)不是兩個(gè)暴徒互相攻擊，然后分解成一堆1對(duì)1的打斗。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是以相當(dāng)有秩序、紀(jì)律嚴(yán)明的陣型進(jìn)行的，這樣你可以保護(hù)和配合你兩邊的人。
但是，是的，在一群不友好的陌生人對(duì)你做同樣的事情之前，試圖用長(zhǎng)而尖的東西殺死他們，這本質(zhì)上是野蠻的。炸死他們，射殺他們，用毒氣毒死他們，或者其他所有我們使戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)更加“文明”的方式也是如此。
Hollywood always gets battles wrong, particularly ancient and medi battles.
A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.
But yes, trying to kill a bunch of unfriendly strangers by sticking them with long pointy things before they do the same to you is inherently barbaric. So is blowing them up, shooting them, gassing them, or all the other ways we’ve made warfare more “civilized”.
好萊塢總是把戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)拍錯(cuò)，尤其是古代和中世紀(jì)的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。
戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)不是兩個(gè)暴徒互相攻擊，然后分解成一堆1對(duì)1的打斗。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是以相當(dāng)有秩序、紀(jì)律嚴(yán)明的陣型進(jìn)行的，這樣你可以保護(hù)和配合你兩邊的人。
但是，是的，在一群不友好的陌生人對(duì)你做同樣的事情之前，試圖用長(zhǎng)而尖的東西殺死他們，這本質(zhì)上是野蠻的。炸死他們，射殺他們，用毒氣毒死他們，或者其他所有我們使戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)更加“文明”的方式也是如此。
One of the most studied battles of the Middle Ages is the Battle of Visby, fought on 27 July 1361. A force of 2000–2500 Danish knights and German mercenaries invaded Gotland and massacred the defending yeoman (middle class) 2000 man militia. The Danes lost 300 men and the Gutes lost 1700, who were mostly buried in their armor because the unseasonably warm weather caused the bodies to start decomposing before they could be stripped of valuables. This makes it one of the best-preserved medi battlefields.
Looking at the skeletons of the defeated yeoman, the wounds are pretty horrific. This guy took an axe to the face:
中世紀(jì)被研究最多的戰(zhàn)役之一是1361年7月27日的維斯比戰(zhàn)役。一支由2000 - 2500名丹麥騎士和德國(guó)雇傭軍組成的部隊(duì)入侵哥特蘭島（瑞典島名），屠殺了保衛(wèi)自耕農(nóng)(中產(chǎn)階級(jí))的2000名民兵。丹麥人損失了300人，古特人損失了1700人，他們大多被埋在盔甲里，因?yàn)椴缓蠒r(shí)宜的溫暖天氣導(dǎo)致尸體在被搶走貴重物品之前就開始腐爛。這使其成為保存最完好的中世紀(jì)戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)之一。
看著戰(zhàn)敗自耕農(nóng)的骸骨，傷口相當(dāng)可怕。這未被斧頭砍臉:
Looking at the skeletons of the defeated yeoman, the wounds are pretty horrific. This guy took an axe to the face:
中世紀(jì)被研究最多的戰(zhàn)役之一是1361年7月27日的維斯比戰(zhàn)役。一支由2000 - 2500名丹麥騎士和德國(guó)雇傭軍組成的部隊(duì)入侵哥特蘭島（瑞典島名），屠殺了保衛(wèi)自耕農(nóng)(中產(chǎn)階級(jí))的2000名民兵。丹麥人損失了300人，古特人損失了1700人，他們大多被埋在盔甲里，因?yàn)椴缓蠒r(shí)宜的溫暖天氣導(dǎo)致尸體在被搶走貴重物品之前就開始腐爛。這使其成為保存最完好的中世紀(jì)戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)之一。
看著戰(zhàn)敗自耕農(nóng)的骸骨，傷口相當(dāng)可怕。這未被斧頭砍臉:
Some other skulls from Visby
維斯比的其他頭骨：
This is a diagram of all the injuries one victim received:
這是一名受害者受傷程度的圖解:
Not the same battle, but this is the skull of a 1st century Roman legionnaire who was buried with the spear that killed him still in place:
As bad as these wounds are, our ability to inflict trauma on other people has only increased over time. As the old saying goes, war is hell.
不是同一場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)斗，但這是一名1世紀(jì)羅馬軍團(tuán)士兵的頭骨，他被埋葬時(shí)，殺死他的長(zhǎng)矛仍然在原地:
盡管這些傷口很嚴(yán)重，但隨著時(shí)間的推移，我們給別人造成創(chuàng)傷的能力只會(huì)越來越強(qiáng)。俗話說，戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是地獄。
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 1 )
收藏
Additionally, prior to modern warfare, the majority of casualties were inflicted after battle lines broke, which is why we see heavily disproportionate casualties between the winning and losing sides.
此外，在現(xiàn)代戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)之前，大多數(shù)傷亡都是在戰(zhàn)線斷裂后造成的，這就是為什么我們看到勝利和失敗雙方之間嚴(yán)重不成比例的傷亡。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Prior to modern warfare, the majority of casualties were inflicted by hunger, disease, and exposure to the elements.
在現(xiàn)代戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)之前，大部分的傷亡都是由饑餓、疾病和雨淋日曬造成的。
Yes of course. However I, and the original question, was talking about battles specifically.
是的，沒錯(cuò)。然而我，和最初的問題是專門討論戰(zhàn)斗的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
In many cases more casualties were after the battle ended. The sack and destruction of Jerusalem for example.
在許多情況下，戰(zhàn)斗結(jié)束后傷亡人數(shù)更多。比如耶路撒冷的洗劫和毀滅。
And a lot more died weeks later from infections from minor wounds sustained in battle than who died on the battlefield from massive trauma.
幾周后死于戰(zhàn)斗中輕微傷口感染的人比死于戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)上嚴(yán)重創(chuàng)傷的人多得多。
As late as the American Civil War, disease is commonly estimated to have killed twice as many soldiers as were killed directly by battle injury.
據(jù)估計(jì)，直到美國(guó)內(nèi)戰(zhàn)，通常估計(jì)死于疾病的士兵是直接死于戰(zhàn)斗損傷的士兵的兩倍。
I remember reading or hearing somewhere that World War II was the first war in which enemy action was the leading cause of death.
我記得在哪里讀到或聽到過，第二次世界大戰(zhàn)是第一次敵人行動(dòng)成為死亡的主要原因的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。
Penicillin & sulfa were a big help in WW2, not just for battle wounds, but for syphilis & gonorrhea.
Even today when I read about it, the narratives are very benign “Despite education, venereal disease spread among the troops.” As if it….just happened. Like a cold or a kidney infection…it just happened.”
青霉素和磺胺在二戰(zhàn)中起了很大的作用，不僅治療戰(zhàn)傷，還治療梅毒和淋病。
直到今天，當(dāng)我讀到它的時(shí)候，敘述都是非常善意的“盡管受過教育，性病還是在部隊(duì)中傳播?！本秃孟袼瓦@么發(fā)生了。就像感冒或腎臟感染……就這么發(fā)生了?！?/b>
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
man’s inhumanity to his fellow men knows no bounds, and never had.
人類對(duì)同類的不人道是無(wú)止境的，從未停止過。
Absolutely right, Kosta Do you teach history in any way? Because that fact doesn’t seem to surprise you…
完全正確，Kosta你教歷史嗎?因?yàn)檫@個(gè)事實(shí)似乎并不令你驚訝……
Dan Hedman
Another reason they were buried mostly with their armor and everything was that the fear of the plague was still fresh. That combined with hot weather made them just throw them in a hole and bury them without really plunder them
另一個(gè)原因是他們的盔甲和其他東西都被埋葬了，因?yàn)槿藗儗?duì)瘟疫的恐懼仍然揮之不去。再加上炎熱的天氣，他們就把尸體扔進(jìn)一個(gè)洞里埋了，并未真正劫掠戰(zhàn)利品。
Because the winners realized that they needed to have more semblance of hygiene and sanitation after the Black Death.
因?yàn)閼?zhàn)勝者意識(shí)到，在黑死病之后，他們需要更多的衛(wèi)生外表和環(huán)境衛(wèi)生。
Ummm…no, Michael. In those days, disease was thought to be from “bad air”. It wasn’t until around 1865 that the British Surgeon, Joseph Lister became the first to use antiseptics in medical practice, applying Louis Pasteur's advances in microbiology.
嗯……不對(duì)，邁克爾。在那個(gè)年代，人們認(rèn)為疾病是由“糟糕的空氣”引起的。直到1865年左右，英國(guó)外科醫(yī)生約瑟夫·利斯特才應(yīng)用路易斯·巴斯德在微生物學(xué)方面的進(jìn)步，第一個(gè)在醫(yī)療實(shí)踐中使用防腐劑。
But people still knew that rotting flesh could make you sick. That’s just instinct.
但人們?nèi)匀恢栏鈺?huì)讓人生病。這是本能。
they did bathe in vinegar in hopes to stop the plague
他們確實(shí)用醋洗澡，希望能阻止瘟疫
battles was fought during hot summer days other times to and even in hotter climate. and bodies was still plundered. So i don’t think that is the main reason. But the battle was 1361. And the black plague had its peak between 1347 and 1352 in Europe. So that was very fresh in memory so i do think that had a bigger impact. People was terrified of the plague still
戰(zhàn)斗是在炎熱的夏天進(jìn)行的，有時(shí)甚至在更熱的氣候中進(jìn)行，而尸體仍在被劫掠。所以我不認(rèn)為這是主要原因。但這場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)役發(fā)生在1361年。黑死病在1347年到1352年間在歐洲達(dá)到高峰。那是非常新鮮的記憶，所以我認(rèn)為那有更大的影響。人們?nèi)匀缓ε挛烈摺?/b>
Possible… in fact probable, that that played a part… But so did the townsfolk not being on-site until the next day, when the corpses were getting REALLY ripe. You want to plunder a body, you do it before it bloats up and the maggots open it up… Not as enthusiastically after. That’s one reason a lot of the armor and weapons were not looted. Try getting a mail shirt of a bloated, slimy, blackfaced corpse with maggots all over it.
有可能，事實(shí)上很有可能，這也是原因之一，但是鎮(zhèn)上的人直到第二天尸體都?xì)馕洞瘫橇瞬诺浆F(xiàn)場(chǎng)。你想劫掠一具尸體，就在它膨脹起來，被蛆蟲打開之前下手……之后就沒那么熱情了。這也是很多盔甲和武器沒有被劫掠的原因之一。去拿一具臃腫、黏糊糊、滿臉污垢、爬滿蛆蟲的尸體上的鎖子甲試試看。
Even in the hottest weather a corpse does not rot over a day. It wont be full of maggots the day after the battle.
The Stages Of Human Decomposition | Aftermath Services
From Flesh to Bone: The Role of Weather in Body Decomposition | The Weather Channel
And even in hotter climates and hotter weather bodies was plundered days after battles. It is not the only battle fought in hot weather. And in most other the bodies was still plundered.
So even if the hot weather did play a part i still argue that the fear of the black plague played a much bigger role. It was only a maximum of 10 years since it was at its peak in the area.
I am sure the hot weather did play its part. But if it had not been for the fear of the recent plague i am fairly sure they had been plundered a lot more
即使在最熱的天氣，尸體也不會(huì)在一天內(nèi)腐爛。不會(huì)在戰(zhàn)斗結(jié)束后的第二天就滿是蛆蟲：（引用資料）
《人體分解的階段|善后服務(wù)》
《從肉到骨:天氣在尸體分解中的作用|天氣頻道》
即使是在更炎熱的天氣里尸體也會(huì)在戰(zhàn)斗后幾天被劫掠。這并不是唯一一場(chǎng)在炎熱天氣進(jìn)行的戰(zhàn)斗。在大多數(shù)其他地方，尸體仍然會(huì)被劫掠。因此，即使炎熱的天氣確實(shí)起了作用，我仍然認(rèn)為對(duì)黑死病的恐懼起了更大的作用。這距離該地區(qū)的（黑死病爆發(fā)的）高峰只有最多10年的時(shí)間。
我相信炎熱的天氣確實(shí)是原因之一。但如果不是因?yàn)楹ε伦罱奈烈撸腋铱隙?，他們被劫掠的東西要多得多。
How exactly do you know where the townspeople were on a particular day approximately 700 years ago?
你怎么知道大約700年前的某一天鎮(zhèn)上的人在哪里?
They were inside Visby watching as they had refused to open the gate to let their own volunteers in. It is possible the Danes and Germans did not think the antiquated and repurposed armour of these ill equipped defenders was worth taking.m Note the diagram above - how many wounds were to the mans knees and shins - few of them seem to have had leg armour but this poor devil was hacked all over. A lot were shot by crossbowmen as they bunched in a huddle .
在他們拒絕打開大門讓自己的義勇兵進(jìn)入時(shí)，他們就在維斯比里面看著。有可能丹麥人和德國(guó)人看不上這些裝備不良的守軍的陳舊和改頭換面的盔甲。注意上面的圖解——這個(gè)人的膝蓋和小腿上有多少傷口——似乎很少有人有腿部護(hù)甲，但這個(gè)可憐的家伙全身都被砍傷了。當(dāng)他們擠成一團(tuán)時(shí)，許多人被弩手擊中。
Shgdrn Mjh
The skeleton diagram looks like the man was felled by leg wounds, continued to suffer defensive wounds to his limbs, then received a coup d'grace in his right shoulder.
Those wounds to his hips may have been blade wounds delivered to a mounted man. Those are the kind of wounds (an axe?) that would have made a cavalryman fall off of his horse.
從骨架圖上看，這名男子腿部受傷，四肢繼續(xù)遭受防御傷，然后右肩遭到致命一擊。
他臀部的傷口可能是被騎馬的人砍傷的。這種傷(斧頭?)會(huì)讓一個(gè)騎兵從馬上摔下來。
He was a poorly trained militiaman who fought on foot. In all probability, an opponent made an attack on his head, tricking him into raising his shield high to deflect the blow, then another followed with a quick slash to the front leg, felling the guy to the ground. The German mercenaries seem to have employed this tactic repeatedly to massacre the yeomen at Visby, as more than half of uncovered skeletons show severe leg injuries.
他是一個(gè)缺乏訓(xùn)練的民兵，徒步作戰(zhàn)。很有可能，一個(gè)對(duì)手向他的頭部發(fā)起了攻擊，騙他把盾牌舉得很高，以轉(zhuǎn)移打擊，然后另一個(gè)人迅速一刀砍向他的前腿，將他擊倒在地。德國(guó)雇傭軍似乎反復(fù)使用這種策略來屠殺維斯比的自耕農(nóng)，因?yàn)槌^一半的未被掩埋的骨架顯示出嚴(yán)重的腿部受傷。
I saw an interesting show some years back on the subject. Apparently the defenders of Visby had old/inferior armour which lacked lower leg protection, making such attacks all the more incapacitating.
幾年前，我看過一個(gè)關(guān)于這個(gè)主題的有趣節(jié)目。顯然維斯比的守軍裝備的是舊的/劣質(zhì)的盔甲，缺乏小腿保護(hù)，使得這種攻擊的效果更佳。
No offense, but that's a na?ve assumption. We don't know in how much if a difficult position he was, how long he lasted and how successful he was in eliminating the enemy. In fact, he may have been well-trained.
無(wú)意冒犯，但這是一個(gè)天真的假設(shè)。我們不知道他的處境有多艱難，他堅(jiān)持了多久，他殺敵上多么成功。事實(shí)上，他可能受過良好的訓(xùn)練。
It’s not a naive assumption, it’s a well-educated supposition.
We know for a fact that the defenders at Visby were yeoman militia and that the attackers were seasoned veterans - full-time professional soldiers. There is no assumption involved in stating that full time professional soldiers are better trained and than militiamen who have day jobs. The difference in training and experience is reflected in the fact that the defenders were massacred at very low cost to the attackers.
We know for a fact that the professional soldiers of the period used cooperative tactics to take down their opponents. A battle between two 1000 man armies isn’t 1000 single combats. Warfare is a team sport. You’re not trying to kill the man in front of you - you’re trying to distract him and create an opening for one of your buddies to kill him, and watching for the openings your buddies create. That’s a skill you can only develop through constant training together as a group.
這不是一個(gè)天真的假設(shè)，這是一個(gè)有根據(jù)的假設(shè)。
我們知道維斯比的守軍是自耕農(nóng)民兵，而攻擊者是經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的老兵——全職的職業(yè)軍人。全職的職業(yè)軍人比有日常工作的民兵訓(xùn)練得更好，這并不是假設(shè)。訓(xùn)練和經(jīng)驗(yàn)的差別反映在這樣一個(gè)事實(shí)上，即進(jìn)攻者以極低的代價(jià)屠殺了防御者。
我們知道這個(gè)時(shí)期的職業(yè)士兵使用合作戰(zhàn)術(shù)來打倒他們的對(duì)手。兩支1000人的軍隊(duì)之間的戰(zhàn)斗不是1000場(chǎng)單人戰(zhàn)斗。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是一項(xiàng)團(tuán)隊(duì)運(yùn)動(dòng)。你并不是想要?dú)⑺滥忝媲暗娜恕阒皇窍胍稚⑺淖⒁饬?，為你的一個(gè)伙伴創(chuàng)造一個(gè)殺死他的機(jī)會(huì)，然后觀察你的伙伴創(chuàng)造的機(jī)會(huì)。這是一種只有在團(tuán)隊(duì)中不斷訓(xùn)練才能培養(yǎng)出來的技能。
Sure. He might have even been an innocent alien observer or a stranded time traveler, for all I know. I wasn’t there.
當(dāng)然。據(jù)我所知，他甚至可能是一個(gè)無(wú)辜的外星觀察者，或者是一個(gè)被困的時(shí)間旅行者。我不在場(chǎng)。
Again, sarcasm aside, if you were in his position, you would likely make worse decisions than him.
再說一次，諷刺的是，如果你處在他的位置，你可能會(huì)做出比他更糟糕的決定。
Kamran Khan
Now whenever something’s stuck in my head, I can be grateful that at least it’s not an axe.
現(xiàn)在，每當(dāng)有什么東西卡在我的腦海里，我會(huì)心存感激，至少它不是一把斧頭。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Face axe guy had pretty good teeth.
臉被斧子砍的伙計(jì)牙齒很不錯(cuò)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
In the words of Benjamin Franklin Pierce, war is worse than hell. There are no innocent bystanders in hell.
用本杰明·富蘭克林·皮爾斯的話來說，戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)比地獄還糟糕。地獄里沒有無(wú)辜遭殃者。
“A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.”
This needs to be said more often. A great example is Lord of the Rings, where every major battle immediately devolved into thousands of duels. The more I learn about media warfare, the more I hate movies which do that.
“戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)不是兩個(gè)暴徒互相攻擊，然后分解成一堆1對(duì)1的打斗。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是以相當(dāng)有秩序、紀(jì)律嚴(yán)明的陣型進(jìn)行的，這樣你可以保護(hù)和配合你兩邊的人?！?br /> 這一點(diǎn)需要更經(jīng)常地說?！吨腑h(huán)王》就是一個(gè)很好的例子，每一場(chǎng)主要的戰(zhàn)斗都會(huì)立即演變成成千上萬(wàn)場(chǎng)決斗。我對(duì)中世紀(jì)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)了解得越多，就越討厭這樣的電影。
I thought the lord of the rings did a better job than most.
我覺得《指環(huán)王》演得比大多數(shù)電影都好。
They were alright in many ways, but they still used The Hollywood Moshpit in several battles, so just for that alone I have to take three stars off.
他們?cè)诤芏喾矫娑己芎?，但他們?nèi)匀辉趲讏?chǎng)戰(zhàn)斗中使用了“好萊塢Moshpit”（？），所以僅憑這一點(diǎn)，我就得扣三顆星。
Saul Martino
Not a great advertisement for recruiting soldiers of the era.
Join the army - travel the world and get an axe to the face. Then get buried in a bog.
Hmm no thanks.
在那個(gè)時(shí)代，這不是一個(gè)很好的征兵廣告。
加入軍隊(duì)——環(huán)游世界，用斧頭砍臉。然后被埋在沼澤里。
嗯，不用了，謝謝。
But think of all the friends you'll make along the way!
但是想想你在這條路上會(huì)交到的朋友吧!
And note— these are just the wounds that left a mark on the bone beneath. Flesh wounds could be horrific, too.
注意，這些只是在骨頭上留下痕跡的傷口。皮肉受傷也會(huì)很可怕。
Not to mention the real chance of infection and sepsis. A wound that doesn’t drag clothing into the wound( as in a Minnie Ball in the civil war) has less , but still a very real chance of infection
更不用說感染和敗血癥的可能性了。一個(gè)未把衣服拖進(jìn)傷口的傷口，感染的幾率更小，但仍然非常大。
Analysis of the Visby skeletons shows many of them were hacked to death, probably by several people, after they fell to the ground. Not very chivalric or Hollywood.
As for the armour, the old pieces worn by the Gotland farmers (not the burghers, they stayed out of the fight) were probably not worth salvaging. The farmers seem to have done better in a few earlier guerrilla encounters, but in the final pitched battle they were totally overmatched.
對(duì)維斯比骸骨的分析顯示，他們中的許多人在倒地后被砍死，可能是被幾個(gè)人砍死的。不是騎士風(fēng)度，也不是好萊塢式的。
至于盔甲，哥特蘭的農(nóng)民(不是市民，他們不參與戰(zhàn)斗)穿的舊盔甲可能不值得回收利用。在早期的幾次游擊戰(zhàn)中，農(nóng)民們似乎表現(xiàn)得更好，但在最后的激戰(zhàn)中，他們完全被擊敗了。
I was watching the show Last Kingdom and mid way through/the end of the first season they have a battle tjat starts out quite realistic. The armies are sticking to formation and working as a unit. I thought “pretty good.”
Then the hero breaks his line to flip over the enemy line and a mess of single fights ensues.
我在看《末代王國(guó)》，在第一季的中間/結(jié)尾，他們有一場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)斗，一開始很逼真。軍隊(duì)保持隊(duì)形，作為一個(gè)整體作戰(zhàn)。我覺得“還不錯(cuò)?！?br /> 然后英雄就會(huì)打破自己的防線，翻越敵人的防線，然后就會(huì)出現(xiàn)一堆混亂的單挑。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Peter Rabb
What happened to the teeth of the last skull? They look… fused. Or was it a toothless old man?
Also why was that man hit so many times? I’d think a broken arm would take out a combatant for good. Was he brutalized after he fell?
最后一個(gè)頭骨的牙齒怎么了?他們看起來…融合了。還是一個(gè)沒有牙齒的老人?還有為什么那人被擊打了那么多次?我還以為斷了胳膊就能讓戰(zhàn)士永遠(yuǎn)死去呢。他摔倒后受到虐待了嗎?
“A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.” What did you think of the final battle scene from the film Kingdom of Heaven? I feel like it’s depicted a bit more accurately but you seem to have more insight.
“戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)不是兩個(gè)暴徒互相攻擊，然后分解成一堆1對(duì)1的打斗。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是以相當(dāng)有秩序、紀(jì)律嚴(yán)明的陣型進(jìn)行的，這樣你可以保護(hù)和配合你兩邊的人。”
你覺得電影《天國(guó)王朝》最后的戰(zhàn)斗場(chǎng)景怎么樣?我覺得該片中對(duì)這樣的戰(zhàn)斗場(chǎng)景描繪得更準(zhǔn)確一些，但你似乎更有洞察力。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Rome won most of its battles because they used soldiers, and they did NOT break up into 1 on 1 battles, while their ‘warrior’ opponents did. Most of their defeats happened when they somehow managed to forget their training (or were led by idiots). The opening battle in ‘Gladiator’ is cool, but they left out the cloud of Pila (heavy javelins) that would have greeted the charging Germans, and they in true Hollywood fashion quickly degenerated into individual duels.
The Greeks, when fighting Rome used a phalanx. They also did not break ranks, they were also fairly inflexible and Rome just went around the sides and cut them down from behind before they could turn around. If the Greeks had good flank defence they could and did defeat the Romans, but ultimately lost the war. )Rome really hated fighting in forests as they couldn’t maintain their lines.)
羅馬贏得了大部分戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，因?yàn)樗麄儗?duì)士兵的使用沒有陷入一對(duì)一的戰(zhàn)斗，而他們的“勇士”對(duì)手卻這樣做。他們大多數(shù)的失敗都發(fā)生在他們不知道怎么忘記了自身的訓(xùn)練(或被白癡領(lǐng)導(dǎo))的時(shí)候。電影《角斗士》的開場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)很酷，但他們卻忽略了那些迎接日耳曼人沖鋒的重型標(biāo)槍，他們以真正的好萊塢風(fēng)格迅速退化為個(gè)人決斗。
希臘人在與羅馬作戰(zhàn)時(shí)使用方陣。他們也沒有破壞隊(duì)列，他們也相當(dāng)不靈活，羅馬人只要繞到兩翼，在他們轉(zhuǎn)身之前從后面砍倒他們。如果希臘人有很好的側(cè)翼防御，他們就能打敗羅馬人，但最終輸?shù)袅藨?zhàn)爭(zhēng)。羅馬人非常討厭在森林里作戰(zhàn)，因?yàn)樗麄儫o(wú)法維持自己的防線。
如前所述，大多數(shù)傷亡發(fā)生在敗方部隊(duì)頂不住了，驚慌失措開始逃跑時(shí)，大約80%的傷亡發(fā)生在逃跑時(shí)。騎兵主要用來追殺逃亡的敵軍。以布迪卡女王為例，她攻擊了三個(gè)羅馬軍團(tuán)——她的“勇士”約有1萬(wàn)人，總數(shù)約25萬(wàn)人。羅馬人堅(jiān)守住了防線，向前推進(jìn)，“勇士”們潰散了，逃回了他們的馬車隊(duì)，他們?cè)诳只胖斜焕ё×?，羅馬人殺死了8萬(wàn)多人，包括他們?cè)隈R車?yán)锏募胰?。羅馬大約損失了400人。布迪卡用打了就跑的游擊戰(zhàn)術(shù)擊敗了一些軍團(tuán)，但她認(rèn)為自己擁有壓倒性的力量，當(dāng)她攻擊蘇維托尼烏斯準(zhǔn)備好的陣地時(shí)，森林保護(hù)了他的側(cè)翼和一個(gè)開闊的下坡。
（譯注：布狄卡，是英格蘭東英吉利亞地區(qū)古代愛西尼部落的王后和女王，她領(lǐng)導(dǎo)了不列顛諸部落反抗羅馬帝國(guó)占領(lǐng)軍統(tǒng)治的起義，公元61年左右兵敗自殺。）
Yes. For example see TV Rome episode 1. Shows Romans fighting in formation (no doubt confusing casual viewers).
是的。例如，請(qǐng)看電視劇《羅馬》第一集。展示了羅馬人列隊(duì)作戰(zhàn)(毫無(wú)疑問會(huì)讓普通觀眾感到困惑)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Their opponents did? Citation please. Germanic and Celtic tribes fought in shield walls in big battles. Masses of men in spear and shield formations has been the standard method of battle for any large army in Europe.
The Greeks are also known for their tight pike phalanxes, and the Parthians fought from horseback relying on horse archers and heavy cavalry.
It is true that Celtic and Germanic tribes could resort to guerrilla warfare but that is not the same thing as fighting individually spread out. Guerrilla it worked really well and over time the Germanic tribes learned from their Roman advisaries and became tougher to deal with.
No question the Romans were effective but they were not invincible and it actually is not unheard of for them to lose battles here and there. Germanic and Celtic people’s were also not stupid and figured out that massed spears and shields works.
他們的對(duì)手呢?請(qǐng)引用。日耳曼和凱爾特部落在大型戰(zhàn)役中用盾墻作戰(zhàn)。在歐洲，大批人排成長(zhǎng)矛和盾牌編隊(duì)一直是任何大型軍隊(duì)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)戰(zhàn)法。
希臘人也以其緊湊的長(zhǎng)矛方陣而聞名，帕提亞人則依靠騎兵弓箭手和重騎兵在馬背上作戰(zhàn)。
確實(shí)，凱爾特和日耳曼部落可以訴諸游擊戰(zhàn)，但這與單打獨(dú)斗是兩碼事。游擊作戰(zhàn)確實(shí)很有效，隨著時(shí)間的推移，日耳曼部落從他們的羅馬顧問那里學(xué)習(xí)，變得更加難以對(duì)付。
毫無(wú)疑問，羅馬人方陣很有威力，但他們并不是不可戰(zhàn)勝的，他們?cè)谶@里或那里輸?shù)魬?zhàn)斗的情況也不是聞所未聞。日耳曼人和凱爾特人也不愚蠢，他們發(fā)現(xiàn)了聚集長(zhǎng)矛和盾牌的作用。
Javier Garcia-Julve
That war is hell is one of those conclusions so evident that many may have reached it in history, but I think it’s generally attributed to general W. T. Sherman: “It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.”
“戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是地獄”這一結(jié)論是歷史上許多人都得出過的結(jié)論之一，但我認(rèn)為這句話通常認(rèn)為是W·T·謝爾曼將軍說的:“只有那些既沒有開過一槍，也沒有聽到傷者的尖叫和呻吟的人才會(huì)為流血、復(fù)仇和荒涼而大聲疾呼。戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是地獄?！?/b>
Those veterans that saw war are some of the calmest and most respectful people I have met. Most machos I met hadn’t even had a decent fight.
那些參加過戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的老兵是我見過的最冷靜、最尊重人的人。我遇到的大多數(shù)男人都沒像樣地打過架。
General Sherman is one of those who made warfare that much worse. He was a war criminal.
謝爾曼將軍是那些讓戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)變得更糟的人之一。他是個(gè)戰(zhàn)犯。
So? It doesn’t make what he said less true. A drunkard may say the right things about drunkenness. I honestly think we need to avoid associating the truthfulness of propositions with the proposing person.
所以呢?但這并不影響他所說的真實(shí)性。一個(gè)醉漢可能會(huì)說一些關(guān)于醉酒方面的正確之事。老實(shí)說，我認(rèn)為我們需要避免因人廢言。
Fair enough. But he’s no hero.
有道理。但他不是什么英雄。