pic related has there even been a more brutal combat than this?

>>1873824
This kind of fighting was brief and ritualised. It doesnt even compare to the brutality of modern wars

>>1873824
Source?

>>1873824
>would you die on your first day on the battlefield if you fought in ancient times?
Are you asking if we personally would or are you asking if this is what happened? If it's the latter then obviously not, otherwise how would veterans exist?

>>1873843
'Prologue' by Richard Williams

>>1873842
This

Honestly, nowadays you can get blown to pieces in so many different ways, combat is the easiest it ever has been to die today. At least with Ancient or pre gunpowder warfare you can face your opponent and actually (maybe) have a 50/50 ratio.

>>1873949
Dunno; modern wars are also fought mostly remotely by professionals in advanced safety gear.

Battles only very rarely come down to two screaming blokes running at each other with sharp sticks.

The vague threat of just being popped out of existence by some floating trigger finger lurking behind a distant cedar is a totally different sort of fear; highly potent and psychological, but significantly less visceral than wading ankle deep in human blood, fighting off armoured foreign-speaking devil-worshippers who you're pretty sure will bum or eat you if you lose as arrows, spears, sling-bullets and bits of other people (and sometimes you) fly about.

The two experiences are almost incomparable.

jesus christ that ending

>>1873949
This is patently false, we have the lowest casualty rates of almost any time in history. most of deaths in those times were disease or infection related, obviously, but you are just less likely to die in combat today.

>>1873842
Just because some of it was doesn't mean all of it was.
By the geneva definition modern war is still ritualized, but not everyone pays attention to the conventions, no?
In fact it seems to be the norm to ignore them unless you're one of the bigger superpowers

>overhead spear grip
Other than that nice webm