I mean today war is a very impersonal thing. Most of the time the enemy is several hundred yards away when he is killed of course there are the occasional close combat. But what I’m wondering is why do we have so many people with PSTD today but it seems to be non existent during times were warfare was really a brutal and bloody affair?
Back in the day people killed each other with swords, maces and axes and they weren’t really the quickest methods of killing someone and most of the time the guy died a horrible and painful death while begging for his life. I mean that’s bound to mess up your head.
So why is it that we haven’t heard of some type of PSTD till modern warfare?
I only noticed is being reported around WW2 when they still called it “War weariness”
But before that is seems to not have existed at all. Why is that? Was it because people in olden times had no problem killing?
- kurtsea on Scarlet’s Mid-Winter Festival 2009 Saturday 2
- ScarletFest on Scarlet’s Mid-Winter Festival 2009 Saturday 2
- littlebitgidget on Scarlet’s Mid-Winter Festival 2009 Saturday 3
- PinkSugarfarie on Scarlet’s Mid-Winter Festival 2009 Saturday 3
- omgitshikaru on Scarlet’s Mid-Winter Festival 2009 Saturday 3
Maybe because they know that the current war is unjustified. Most of the people American soldiers are fighting and killing had nothing to do with 9/11, and were never a threat to the USA.
Maybe because there was no knowledge of diagnosing mental disorders in the medieval period, I bet they didn’t have anybody with autism or post natal depression either.
PTSD is not new, it is just finally being recognized.
‘those who pay no attention to history are doomed to repeat it’…. and thankfully we are learning from our mistakes in the past and actually paying attention to veterans returning home changed.
talk to a Vietnam Veteran… most still have problems to this day with things like night-terrors, anger, alcoholism, anxiety, and depression…. and that is because they werent given the needed counseling to help cope with PTSD….
now, Veterans have more available to them in terms of counseling and treatment for any psychological problems associated with war.
It isnt that things like PTSD didnt exist before WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, or Iraq….. its just that there wasnt a name for it.
They didn’t have an understanding of psychological back then.
Maybe it is because people were less civilized, or maybe it existed and you just don’t hear about it because that was the normal way of doing things so everyone is like that. Maybe it only affects us today because we are supposed to be more “civilized” today than we were in Medieval times. Thats my guess, but its your call.
One sane blended in with a group of crazies would look to them like the crazy guy, No?
I’m sure that they had it back then but it was unnoticable. Not even the troops nowadays don’t know they have PTSD. No one knew of its condition until WWII. Many Civil War vets had it, if you read any of the biographies of the civil war soldiers, they lived an isolated live or struggled with the visions they’ve seen. Nobody kept extensive records back in the ancient history days, so no one can say that they did or did not suffer from PTSD, but I believe that they did.
Considering how violent and insane that time period was, how would we know whether there was PTSD or not back then?
If it happened less often, it probably because battle was less personable ironically. Remember, the first term for PTSD was shell shock. Getting barraged by shells from afar which you have no protection from is in alot of ways more scary then getting run through with a sword. At least in the middle ages, you could partly rely on your own skill to protect yourself. You can’t protect yourself from modern warfare nearly as effectively.
I’m sure people did get PTSD back then, but skill also played a more important part in battle as well, and the more you can rely on your own training to save yourself, the less the chance you’ll come down with PTSD.
People didn’t live very long on average back then and people in the military probably had shorter lives. Any fighting was local and because the two sides hated each other’s guts that built up from months or years. There was no dropping people off and saying, “Go fight these people over there.”
In ancient times for the Lords or Royalty, the peasants fought the bulk of the wars back then. After the wars no care what happen to them. Then there are the Spartans and Romans who were raise to kill and endure, and weakness was not tolerated.
The Civil War produced many cases of PTSD, but it wasn’t called that. Jesse James and his ilk, “Wild Bill Hitchcock, John Wesley Hardin, The Earps, Doc Haliday and many other well known killers came out of that Civil war. Why do you think they were so quick to use a gun, and why the west was referred to as “Wild West”.
I was in combat in Viet Nam, and 22 hours later I was home in the USA, and thrust into civilian life, with new laws, and unarmed.
Audie Murphy, the most “valor” decorated soldier in WW2 . kill at least 270 German Soldiers, and suffered from Battle Fatique (PTSD).
The veteran that suffers, will resort to drink or drugs to keep these problems in check, and memories buried. But it won’t work. Many veterans that survive the war, feel extreme guilt for surviving where his buddies didn’t.
If a Viet Nam Combat veteran has PTSD from just one tour, can you imagine the IRAQ/Afganistan veteran who is forced to do 2-3 tours, and the degree of PTSD he/she has?
But Uncle Sam has begun to pull a fast one to save money. They now are discharging soldiers, and using “personality disorder” for an excuse, and therefore not giving VA Hospital benefits to the Veteran. Ask any combat Vet, there isn’t a day he/she doesn’t think about the combat they experienced.
Between 1914 and 1918, the British Army had a ’shell shock’ rate of 2% in a war with heavy losses, intense bombardments and terrible living conditions. In some days, 20 000 British soldiers were killed,
The figure for PSTD is 20% of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans in a far less stressful war. You don’t have to go back too far to see a vast difference in rates.
Two things I feel need to be clarified.
1) Just because there are no terrible death tolls like there was in WW1 & WW2, Korea, Vietnam and The Civil War does not mean that the visual affects of war are still there. Of the 4124 soldiers marines airmen and sailors that have been killed in Iraq, there have been HUGE casualties on the part of the anti Iraqi Forces some say as high as 120 thousand.
2) War is never “a very impersonal thing”. You know damn good and well that when you split the silhouette of the bad guy down range you are about to take his life. That’s an EXTREMELY Personal issue.
Not all wounds bleed. And I am certain that the ones who felt the “battle fatigue” in the past are ranked right up there with todays finest military. The knowledge and understanding of what warfare does to a persons mind wasnt something that was high on the list of things to care about, as sad as that may be, and thats why today there are droves of Psychiatrists out there who are willing to see it for what it is and deal with it accordingly.
You almost answered your own question. More people DIED from any wound because we did not have any knowledge of antiseptics or clean water then. Soldiers injured were often left behind to die…especially if they were “paid” soldiers. Living past 40 was for the lucky anyway. If the war did not kill you – the water or the cook would.
PTSD is guilt pure and simple. back then society dictated that there was nothing to feel guilty about as long as you did it for your king. And bravery and serving honorably really paid off. Now society has everything ambiguos. It’s your fault for not being a better shot and your not supposed to hate your enemy, ect,ect. Bravery also gets you a $5 medal nothing else. Basically society say’s your supposed to feel guilty and be screwed up so more people are.