Was there ever such a thing as honor or glory on the field of battle?

Yeah sure why not.

ALTERNATE POST:

>honor
>glory
>stirner.jpg

File: monster_brant.jpg (32KB, 263x360px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 263x360px

>>1340251

Yes. In ritual battles and war. Also some glory in raiding. As soon as combat was switched from ritual warfare to massed engagements, most of the honor was lost. With the advent modern (total) warfare, there-s little glory to be gained either.

File: Battlecrow.jpg (29KB, 412x430px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 412x430px

>>1340295

Also, ww2 sniper duels were among (if not THE) the last forms of semi-ritual warfare left.

>>1340251
>Honor and glory
>Pic of Thirty Years' War

DOES NOT COMPUTE

Yes, when wars didn't mean total wars and when we didn't have so many advanced weapons and information systems.

>>1340251
Most European wars prior to WWI were seen as "glorious". At least by elites.

>>1340307
I've never heard of those before. Where should I start reading?

>>1340492
>fought nowhere near the messed up HRE

You sir are fucking stupid

>>1340295
>total
>warfare
>modern

No senpai

>>1340550
Ya plenty of pre modern war was basically fucking genocide, or at very best slaughter of populations

File: 1024px-Kazakh_SVD.jpg (132KB, 1024x684px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1024x684px

>>1340537

Well they're not that well documented, but I recommend starting from anything you can find about snipers as battlefield specialists, as well as looking up counter-snipers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-sniper_tactics

File: 1460246119400.jpg (47KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x532px

>>1340550
>>1340556

I meant the advent of both total AND modern warfare.

Raids were the main anti-civilian method before modern war.

The term total war (as well as the actual tactic) was first used in the Indian wars in the XIXth century.

It implied complete, utter destruction of a people, their livelyhood and their culture as a PRIMARY tactic in a war. (as opposed to a punitive or intimidation tactic)

File: CNAf0331bSubjugati.jpg (132KB, 576x720px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 576x720px

>>1340251
Well there was honor, or at least throwing your honor away to survive. During the early Roman wars, armies would basically be able to walk away to a man if they all walked under a yoke, which was considered the ultimate disrespect. So I guess to most people at the time, preserving your honor was important, and taking away the honor of your opponents was good too.

File: Civil War - Picketts Charge.jpg (530KB, 2048x1511px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 2048x1511px

Never have more brave and honorable men been manipulated into fighting for a worse cause.

Cotton planters should have been hung for treason.

Wherever good and honorable men go there will be a portion of them that will act honorably even in the worst circumstances. Fighting in defence of what you believe or in defence of those you love is honorable. Glory might be harder to find unless you just mean recognition.

Honour and glory only goes to the rich and powerful. Kings, emperors, knights, samurai, comissioned officers etc. Everyone else is just meat for the grinder.

>>1340251
Yes and yes. Not often shown or visible but it exists.