Were soldiers more likely to suffer PTSD in the Middle Ages/Antiquity

>>33847046
>look away for a second
>get crossbow bolt to the face
Probably been terrifying as fuck.

File: Towton skull 25 -front.jpg (51KB, 200x263px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 200x263px

think you'd sleep well after the sort of noises this poor bastard made while he died?

I've studied hema for years. one thing I'm 100% certain of is I never, ever want to die by the sword.

>>33847046
Soldiers back then didn't get the brain injuries caused by 72 hour mortar barrages and incessant machine gun fire. This is a large part of PTSD.

File: Honey_Im_pregnant.gif (948KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

948KB, 200x200px

>>33847046
from what I've read ptsd is kind of like conditioning you to associate one thing with another. like how soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan associate yellow palm oil containers with ieds. if you were conditioned to associate the smell of blood or the sound of an arrow hitting flesh with a traumatic battle, then a similar sound or smell could very well trigger a flashback. it's very possible to get ptsd.

>>33849801
This, and mental dissociation during traumatic events is an extremely high indicator for developing PTSD. Another good indicator for PTSD is the duration of exposure to traumatic events. I forget the exact statistic but it was something in the range of a few months of regular exposure to highly stressful/traumatic events is a very strong indicator for the development of PTSD.

Artillery, explosives, and long range combat is likely to be cause for brain injuries and dissociation (everything was fine but now your buddy is splattered across the pavement), and the very nature of modern warfare (going on patrols daily --> extended periods of high stress/trauma) is pretty much the perfect combination of circumstance and stressors to consistently develop PTSD in frontline soldiers.

If you study medieval or ancient combat, the majority of fighting occurred either in sieges or in massive but brief battles. The big indicators of PTSD, being brain injury, dissociation, and extended exposure to stress/trauma were not as likely to occur.

>>33849699
That picture shows what was most likely an extremely quick death tho

>>33847046
>Were soldiers more likely to suffer PTSD in the Middle Ages/Antiquity or in modern times?
Both suffered, it has been called many things in the past but only recently been recognised.

>>33850746
>never penetrated the skullcase
It probably took over an hour for him to actually die.

>>33847046
Probably less likely
>soldiers on average saw only a few days of combat during any one campaign
>pretty much always knew who and where the enemy was
>far less likely to receive brain injuries
>had extensive periods of decompression time where they could talk it out with fellow soldiers
>general populace was inured to warfare in general and accepting of soldiers and their roles
>what wars were fought were generally considered just or righteous

>>33850746
Define quick...cause a minute off bleeding out of your face, struggling to breath among the sights and sounds of screaming and yelling men, the ring of steel striking steel, the smell of blood, shit, piss and vomit...yeah that minute is going to last a long time.

>>33850786
>due to the feasibility of information technology

>>33847046
about the same, but pre-modern fighting had a lot of walking around with your unit. going from the warzone to home took a while, and thus you were able to process what you have seen with your battle buddies for a month or so before returning to your families

>>33850866
What do you mean it never penetrated his skull? It's almost broken in half, I can see the back of his skull. His brains got mashed for sure, and even if they didn't, that would cause such severe shock you probably wouldn't feel a thing other than being extremely cold and seeing the tunnel close in.

I mean yeah maybe he would make some involuntary noises but if you've ever seen people who have had truly fucked up injuries, they say very little because their body is in a state of such complete shock and overload

>>33851104
whoops meant braincase.

And that didn't actually touch his brain and it's a clean enough cut it probably didn't cause shock

>>33850957
No, and go fuck yourself.

>soldiers on average saw only a few days of combat during any one campaign
Yeah, no. Raiding civilians was non-stop the moment you entered enemy territory, and local forces would try to do the same to you if they weren't strong enough to engage your army directly.

Foragers would fucking slaughter each other if they blundered into each other, and scouts would actively fucking hunt them.


Protip:
If you wanted to eat, you foraged.

>pretty much always knew who and where the enemy was
They very fucking rarely knew where the enemy was. Armies were compact, and scouts had limited travel range and no method of communicating over a distance. You generally had an educated guess of where they were at best.

>far less likely to receive brain injuries
I'll give you three guesses why they all wore helmets.


>general populace was inured to warfare in general and accepting of soldiers and their roles
Soldiers were hated, and most people didn't experience war unless they got raided and watched their homes burn-or got fucking
drafted.

>what wars were fought were generally considered just or righteous
Wars were largely fought over land, money, aristocratic bickering, and pride, and EVERYONE knew it.