你认为现代士兵和古代士兵谁的处境更艰难？

Do you think modern soldiers or ancient soldiers have it worse?

你认为现代士兵和古代士兵谁的处境更艰难？

Carl Hamilton M.S.
In Geography & History, Roskilde University (Graduated 2021) Upvoted by Kyle Schveiger, Master's Degree Military History and Wars, Norwich University (2011) upxed Aug 3

卡尔·汉密尔顿 罗斯基勒 
大学地理与历史硕士（2021年毕业） 获诺维奇大学军事历史与战争学硕士凯尔·施韦格（2011年毕业）点赞 更新于8月3日 

Modern soldiers absolutely。Photo is from the movie “Die Brücke” (English: The Bridge), a 1959 West German anti-war filmAnd I don’t think its much of a contest. At least not if we disregard aspects of life in general, and focus on how bad it was to be at war exclusively.If you look at ancient soldiers, they spend most of their time camping and moving around. Actually very little amount of their time had violence in it. A battle with the enemy could last several hours, sometimes even a couple of days. But that would usually be some hours or days out of an entire campaign season.

无疑是现代士兵。配图出自1959年西德反战电影《桥》。在我看来，这根本算不上什么有悬念的比较。至少如果我们抛开日常生活的方方面面，只聚焦于战场上的苦难程度的话，答案是显而易见的。古代士兵的大部分时间都耗在扎营驻留与行军转移上，真正陷入厮杀的时刻少之又少。一场与敌军的战役可能会持续数小时，有时甚至是一两天，但这样的战斗时长，在整个作战季里也只占寥寥数天。

Compare this to combat tours in the world wars. People fighting in trenches where there are artillery bombardments every single day, sometimes for weeks at a time. Medical examiners estimated that 90 days was the maximum a soldier could stand in combat conditions in WW1 before having a mental break down.

反观世界大战时期的战场轮值，士兵们蜷缩在战壕中，每天都要承受炮火的轮番轰炸，有时轰炸会持续数周之久。法医曾估算，在一战的战场环境下，士兵最多只能坚持90天就会精神崩溃。

Modern soldiers are in combat all the time, you are never safe, you can never switch off. Drones, artillery, special forces lurking at night. Ancient soldiers were basically in off mode more than 90% of the time, while modern soldiers are in combat alx mode 100% of the time they are on the front.

现代士兵始终身处战斗状态，没有一刻是安全的，神经也永远无法放松。无人机盘旋、炮火肆虐、特种部队在夜色中潜伏，这些威胁无处不在。古代士兵90%以上的时间都处于“休整待命”的状态，而现代士兵只要身在前线，就必须100%保持战斗警戒。

Your average soldier in a modern war, spends more adrenaline fueled time in combat in a week at the front, than ancient soldiers were likely to experience in their entire life as a professional warrior.Not only that, but the physical effects and realities of modern war are horrific. Every step you take could be the last, walking around is a danger, land mines and snipers sit around every corner, you can never take a walk in safety. When sitting in your trench, you are just waiting for artillery, and when it finally comes, even those shells that miss, throws dirt and splinters at you, it damages your hearing and shakes your brain in your skull, sometimes for months. No ancient soldier ever knew what a shockwave felt like on your brain.

一名普通的现代士兵，在前线待上一周，经历的高度紧张的战斗时长，可能就超过了古代职业军人一辈子的战斗时间。不仅如此，现代战争带来的生理伤害和残酷现实更是骇人听闻。每走一步都可能是生命的终点，四处走动充满了危险，地雷和狙击手遍布每个角落，你永远无法安心地漫步片刻。躲在战壕里，你唯一能做的就是等待炮火的降临。当炮弹真的袭来时，即便是没有直接命中的哑弹，也会溅起泥土和弹片，震伤你的耳膜，震荡你的脑颅，这种损伤有时会持续数月之久。古代士兵从未体验过冲击波对大脑造成的剧烈冲击。

Yes, punishment was cruel in the past, and medical procedures were unsafe and poor, but also not that necessary. Ancient soldiers fought very little and didn’t have the insane mental stress of the physical reality of modern combat.There are very few things which are almost guaranteed to drive literally anyone insane, continuous modern combat being one of the few things.

诚然，古代的刑罚十分残酷，医疗手段也落后简陋，但这些医疗手段的必要性其实并不高。古代士兵很少参与战斗，也就不会承受现代战场那种由残酷现实带来的极端精神压力。世界上能让任何人都精神失常的事情寥寥无几，而持续不断的现代战场厮杀，就是其中之一。

Andy Duffell   Ex-air force armourer

安迪·达费尔  前空军军械师

Ancient soldiers, absolutely.A lot of these guys aren’t dead, yet. They will die, but it’ll take days.There were an awful lot of wounds you could get back then which were not just lethal, but took a long time to kill you. Any wound to the abdomen basically meant you were dead. These days that’s very survivable. Even a hundred years ago it mean a long, painful lingering death. Dying from wounds after an ancient or medi battle is about the worst possible way to go. Battlefields were a horrific place in the ancient world, full of wounded men dying slowly and painfully over several days after the battle. They were usually left where they fell because nothing could be done for them. If they were lucky the looters who descended on the battlefield after the armies moved on would kill them, so they wouldn’t have to suffer. If they were unlucky the looters might not bother, but might still do things like cut your fingers off to get the rings.

无疑是古代士兵。 很多士兵当时并没有立刻死去，他们的生命会慢慢流逝，死亡的过程要持续好几天。在那个年代，士兵们受的很多伤不仅致命，还会让人在漫长的痛苦中死去。腹部一旦受伤，基本就等于宣判了死刑，而在如今，这种伤势的存活率已经很高了。哪怕是在一百年前，腹部受伤也意味着要经历漫长又痛苦的濒死过程。在古代或中世纪的战役中，因伤重而亡是最痛苦的死法。彼时的战场是人间炼狱，战役结束后，满地都是重伤的士兵，他们在战场上缓慢又痛苦地挣扎数日才会咽气。这些人通常会被遗弃在倒下的地方，因为没人能为他们做什么。如果运气好，军队撤离后蜂拥而至的劫掠者会给他们一个痛快，让他们免受折磨；如果运气不好，劫掠者不会费心结束他们的生命，却可能会为了抢夺戒指而砍掉他们的手指。

Even outside of battle life for ancient soldiers was harsh. Discipline in ancient armies was extremely brutal. Troops would often be beaten or flogged, and executed for relatively minor things. The Romans used to make soldiers beat their own comrades to death as a form of collective punishment. The word “decimate” comes from the Latin word for “ten” and refers to the practice of executing 10% of a unit, chosen randomly, as a punishment. So you could be killed even if you personally did nothing wrong, but your unit had attracted the displeasure of some leader.

即便是在非战斗时期，古代士兵的生活也同样艰难。古代军队的军纪极其严苛残酷，士兵们常常会因为一些鸡毛蒜皮的小事而遭到殴打、鞭笞甚至处决。古罗马人曾将让士兵殴打自己战友致死的方式，作为一种集体惩罚手段。英语中的“decimate”（意为“大批杀死、严重摧毁”）一词，源自拉丁语中表示“十”的单词，它指的是古罗马军队中一种残酷的惩罚手段——随机挑选一个部队中10%的士兵处决。也就是说，哪怕你个人没有犯任何过错，只要你的部队惹得某位将领不满，你也可能会被处死。

Troops back then weren’t really looked after by their leaders. It wasn’t just medical care that was limited or non-existent, many armies didn’t even feed their troops and expected them to scrounge what they needed from the local countryside. Armies were often hungry or actually starving, walking long distances in terrible footwear and if you didn’t stay in line while marching your leaders would beat the hell out of you.

那时候的将领并不会真正体恤手下的士兵。军队不仅医疗资源匮乏，甚至完全没有医疗保障，很多军队甚至不给士兵提供口粮，而是让他们去乡间劫掠，自给自足。士兵们常年食不果腹，甚至忍饥挨饿，脚上穿着破烂不堪的鞋子，还要长途跋涉。行军途中如果队伍不整齐，将领就会把他们狠狠毒打一顿。

So, modern soldiers have it way, way, way better. They’d fed, given weapons, equipment and training and they have medics to look after them if they get wounded. Most armies don’t execute their own troops any more, even for the most severe crimes.

所以说，现代士兵的处境要好得多得多。他们有充足的食物，配备了精良的武器、装备，也接受了专业训练，受伤后还有医护兵提供救治。如今，大多数军队都不会处决自己的士兵，哪怕是犯下重罪的人也不会。

Roland BartetzkoLogistics in Ukraine (2022–present)  

罗兰·巴尔特茨科，乌克兰后勤部门（2022年至今）  

Nothing equals the horror a WWI infantryman must have felt when he got the order to climb out of his trench and storm the enemy’s position.With the mass introduction of the machine gun to the modern battlefield, WWI marked the beginning of industrial-scale killing. With 714,000 casualties on both sides, the Battle of Verdun became the longest and costliest battle in human history.

没有什么场景，能比得上一战步兵接到命令、爬出战壕冲向敌军阵地时内心的恐惧。随着机关枪被大规模投入现代战场，一战开启了工业化大规模杀戮的先河。凡尔登战役双方伤亡人数高达71.4万，成为人类历史上持续时间最长、伤亡代价最惨重的战役。

WWII was even more brutal: the Battle of Stalingrad alone saw 3,000,000 casualties. Compare this to one of the last pre–machine gun era wars, the American Civil War, which had around 1,000,000 total deaths. At that time, more soldiers died from wound infections and diseases than were killed directly on the battlefield.

二战的残酷程度更是有过之而无不及：仅斯大林格勒战役的伤亡人数就达到了300万。反观机枪时代来临前的最后几场战争之一——美国南北战争，其总死亡人数约为100万。在那个年代，死于伤口感染和疾病的士兵数量，远超直接阵亡于战场的人数。

This changed with the invention of penicillin, but perversely, many of the men this miracle medicine could save were simply thrown back into the meatgrinder. You survived, only to be given the chance to be killed again.The combustion engine, tanks, airplanes, and radios were other modern inventions that didn’t make wars more bearable, but merely served to kill the enemy more efficiently.

青霉素的问世改变了这一局面，但讽刺的是，许多被这种神奇药物救活的士兵，随即又被重新投入了战争的绞肉机。你侥幸活了下来，却只是为了迎来再一次被死神盯上的机会。内燃机、坦克、飞机和无线电等一系列现代发明，非但没有让战争变得更易忍受，反而只是为了更高效地屠戮敌人。

And let’s not forget the suffering of the civilian population. This question only asks about the fate of soldiers, but how might someone in the trenches feel, knowing that their loved ones at home are almost as much at risk as they are?

我们同样不该忘记平民所承受的苦难。这个问题只关注士兵的命运，但试想战壕里的士兵得知家乡的亲人正面临着和自己相差无几的危险时，内心该是何等煎熬？

Vovchansk, Ukraine, during a Russian aerial bombardment last year. The city doesn’t exist anymore. (Picture: Armed Forces of Ukraine)。

这是去年俄罗斯空袭期间的乌克兰沃尔昌斯克市。如今，这座城市已不复存在。（图片来源：乌克兰武装部队）。

The introduction of drones on the battlefields of Ukraine has made war even more deadly and horrifying. Nowadays, you can’t even step out of the bunker for a quick smoke, even when you’re kilometers away from the frontline. Drones see everything and hunt everything.

无人机在乌克兰战场的投入使用，让战争变得愈发致命和恐怖。如今，即便身处距离前线数公里的地方，你也不敢走出掩体抽支烟。无人机无处不在，它能看清一切目标，猎杀一切活物。

When a drone spots you in an open field, you have zero chance of surviving. And even when you’re in a forest or a city, your chances of getting out unharmed are no better than 30%.Add to this the never-ending artillery fire, the 3.5-ton Russian KAB gliding bombs, and Iskander ballistic missiles.War has always been terrible, but what we see in Ukraine can only be compared to the horrors of WWI and WWII.It’s hell on earth.

一旦你在开阔地带被无人机盯上，便绝无生还可能。就算躲进森林或城市里，你能毫发无伤逃脱的概率也不会超过30%。再加上无休止的炮火轰击、重达3.5吨的俄罗斯KAB滑翔炸弹，以及“伊斯坎德尔”弹道导弹的威胁。战争向来残酷，但乌克兰战场上的惨烈景象，只能与一战、二战时期的人间炼狱相提并论。这里就是人间地狱。

Julian Pereira Lived in Canada (1967–2023)    

朱利安·佩雷拉 定居加拿大（1967-2023年）

It depends on what you mean by modern.The most logical definition of modern, is the first war where more men died from actual combat rather than disease. This was WWI, however Spanish Flu which killed millions happened right at the end of WWI.

答案取决于你对“现代”的定义。对“现代战争”最合理的定义，应该是第一场“阵亡于实战的士兵人数超过死于疾病人数”的战争。一战便符合这一标准，但讽刺的是，夺走数百万人生命的西班牙流感，恰恰爆发在一战末期。

So using WW II as the start of modern warfare, before WWII it was horrid beyond belief to be a soldier.For one thing, you were not necessarily a soldier. You might even have considered yourself as little more than a slave. Indeed, for a significant part of history slaves were soldiers, and in some cases even eunuch soldiers. You could be killed in any number of ways as a soldier. Shot, stabbed, trampled burned basically the same as a modern day soldier.

因此，若以二战作为现代战争的起点，那么在二战之前，当兵的处境简直糟糕到令人难以想象。首先，你未必是自愿参军的士兵，甚至可能觉得自己和奴隶没什么两样。事实上，在历史很长一段时期里，奴隶会被强征入伍，有些时候甚至会出现阉人士兵。作为士兵，你可能以各种方式丧命：中弹、被刺、遭踩踏、被火烧——死法和现代士兵基本无异。

Conscxtion you did not have to worry about, just being hit over the head in an ally and winding up in the navy for a few years. Leave? Another thing you don't have to worry about. There wasn’t any. Getting back home again to see your family? One of the reasons that Alexander's conquests ended is believed to be the fact that his men finally understood that they would never go home. They spent half their lifer on the march. It would take another half of their lives just to make it back. And the slave thing? You don't become one if you win. If you lose, its ano
ther story.

你不用操心征兵制度的约束，因为可能某天在小巷里被人打昏，醒来就被迫加入海军服役数年。休假？这更是想都别想的事，根本不存在。想回家见家人？据说亚历山大大帝的征服之路之所以终结，就是因为他的士兵终于意识到，自己再也回不了家了。他们半辈子都在行军途中奔波，即便要返程，也得再耗上半辈子的时间。而关于“奴隶”的身份问题——打赢了，你或许还能摆脱奴隶的命运；可一旦战败，结局就截然不同了。

Also you had the very real threat of disease. Medications for fever were essentially zero. Dysentery and the dehydration it caused could kill you really fast. And those wonderful local diseases. Well since you were not a local, you were susceptible to all of them. And don't forget everyone's favourite venereal diseases. Sleeping under the open skies in a tent with a nice sleeping bag is a nice idea for a camping trip a week or two maybe. Try doing it for a year, with no real tent and just some coarse dirty blankets. Your disease resistance might be a little compromised.

此外，士兵还要直面疾病的致命威胁。当时几乎没有治疗发烧的药物，痢疾及其引发的脱水症状，能很快夺走人的性命。还有那些当地特有的疾病——由于你不是本地人，对这些疾病毫无抵抗力。更别忘了人人避之不及的性病。在野外搭帐篷、睡睡袋露营一两周，或许是件惬意的事；但如果连续一年都只能蜷缩在破旧的帐篷里，裹着粗糙肮脏的毯子露宿，你的抗病能力恐怕会大打折扣。

So as you are out on the march fighting with the enemy, you could die from a bunch of this stuff, or worse you could be wounded. Worse because if you were wounded you would of course be subjected to the medical science of the time. And since medical science did not actually exist at the time, you were not going to do so well. Leeches are not a great treatment. Neither is bloodletting. Or any of a number of treatments which would now be called quackery. If your wounds got infected, which of course they likely would, you get the limb sawn off. That would prevent the gangrene from killing you. However there was no anaesthetic, so hopefully you would be unconscious if it came to that. If of course your wounds did not get infected, or your disease did not get you then you got to eat your army's food.

所以，当你行军作战时，可能会因为上述种种原因丧命，更糟的情况则是身负重伤。说它更糟，是因为一旦受伤，你只能接受当时的“医疗技术”治疗——可那个年代根本没有真正的医学可言，你的下场可想而知。水蛭吸血算不上什么有效的疗法，放血疗法同样如此，还有许多如今会被归为江湖骗术的治疗手段。伤口大概率会感染，一旦感染，医生就会锯掉你的肢体，以此阻止坏疽扩散、保住你的性命。但当时根本没有麻醉剂，所以真到了截肢的地步，只能祈祷你已经失去了意识。就算你侥幸没被伤口感染或疾病夺走性命，接下来还得忍受军队的伙食。

No preservatives. No clean water. Most armies preferred wine and beer to water, because wine and beer tended to not have nasty stuff in it that would make you sick. This is true in most poor countries. Most locals if given the chance prefer it, since they know the unclean water will make you sick if you drink it. However you need to cook your food somehow. The water is dirty. Interesting choices.

食物里没有防腐剂，饮用水也不干净。大多数军队宁愿让士兵喝葡萄酒和啤酒，也不提供生水，因为酒水不容易滋生导致人生病的有害细菌——这一点在如今的许多贫困国家依然如此，只要有选择，当地人也更愿意喝酒水，因为他们知道喝生水会生病。可问题是，士兵总得煮东西吃，而能用的水全是脏的。这真是个两难的抉择。

Then of course finally, you are a soldier, you are in the army. And what's an army without a little discipline. Except in the old days discipline was not like today. Whippings were common. Men were sometimes whipped to death. Even if they weren’t, see the bit about gangrene above. Gangrene in your back caused by a whipping was basically death. Beatings also occurred, along with some practices which were basically torture. Hangings were not uncommon. And justice? Well it was pretty swift. The British called it drum head justice. I suspect that it was not overly just. Executions happened. Decimation was a particularly horrible form of unit discipline the Romans used.

最后，身为一名士兵，总要遵守军纪。可过去的军纪和现在截然不同。鞭刑是家常便饭，有时士兵甚至会被活活打死。就算没被打死，背部鞭伤引发的坏疽，也基本等同于死刑。除了鞭打，士兵还会遭受毒打，甚至一些近乎酷刑的虐待。绞刑处决也屡见不鲜。至于所谓的“审判”？往往来得又快又草率。英国人称之为“战地军法审判”，但我猜这种审判根本毫无公正可言。处决是常有的事，而古罗马人实行的“十一抽杀律”，更是一种极其残忍的部队惩戒手段。

So in relative terms, modern soldiers have it easy. In the old days it was pretty tough. Generals are way better at not getting their soldiers killed by the old nasty stuff. They might be better at killing other soldiers more efficiently these days.But I don't think I would want to be a Roman, a Mamluk, a Briton, a Gaul, a Confederate or a member of the old RN. It's just too horrible to be believed.

因此，相对而言，现代士兵的处境已经算轻松的了。在过去，当兵的日子实在太过艰难。如今的将领们虽然可能更擅长高效地歼灭敌军，但至少在避免士兵死于那些古老的致命威胁方面，已经做得好太多了。但我绝不会想成为一名古罗马士兵、马穆鲁克士兵、不列颠士兵、高卢士兵、南方邦联士兵，或是旧时英国皇家海军的一员——那种日子的恐怖程度，实在令人难以想象。

Robert Hansen
Freelance Writer, Amateur Chess Enthusiast 

罗伯特·汉森 
自由撰稿人、业余国际象棋爱好者。  

Ancient soldiers might have it worse if you consider campaign sickness and the likelihood of a slow, torturous death.But you would be at risk for much of that same agony if you took an unusually large camping trip. If you want to focus on combat, or uate how much worse someone’s life becomes by being a soldier, the modern soldier has it absolutely worse.
Five major battles in almost 20 years of campaigning。

如果把行军途中的疾病，以及缓慢又痛苦的死亡概率考虑在内，古代士兵的处境或许更为艰难。但如果你参加一次规模特别大的露营活动，也有可能遭遇类似的痛苦折磨。如果我们只聚焦于战斗本身，或者评估“当兵”这件事会让生活恶化到何种程度，那么现代士兵的处境无疑要糟糕得多。近20年征战生涯中仅历经五次大型战役。

To take one case study of Ancient Rome, people would willingly become soldiers seeking social status and even personal wealth from an era where campaigns were expected to partly finance themselves.A single soldier would probably see a few hours of combat throughout their entire career; even as recently as the 18th century, it was not unusual for a year of campaigning not to culminate in a pitched battle.

以古罗马为，在那个行军作战所需经费部分需要士兵自筹的年代，人们会主动参军，以此谋求社会地位，甚至积累个人财富。一名士兵在其整个军旅生涯中，经历的战斗时长可能仅有数小时；即便到了距今不算久远的18世纪，一整年的行军作战最终没有爆发一场正面会战，也是很常见的事。

By the Middle Ages, military service had already transitioned from being an opportunity to being an obligation of the nobility in exchange for their wealth and standing, and it then became the obligation of the working classes in exchange for getting to live in their countries.

到了中世纪，服兵役的性质已经发生转变：它不再是一种机遇，而是贵族阶层为换取财富与地位而需履行的义务；后来，它又变成了工人阶级为获得在本国生存的权利而必须承担的责任。

What happened, exactly?All of the things that make war possible — technologically, economically, and sociopolitically, besides the actual science of war itself — have become unfathomably efficient.Combat operations in modern warfare are not quite non-stop as Hollywood movies tend to portray them. But in comparison to warfare even 150 years ago, they might as well carry on constantly, and operations themselves are much more lethal. The ancient soldier could not even imagine the amount of time the modern soldier spends actively in fear of an immediate and violent death, or how impersonally and random violence may arrive in the form of an artillery shell or drone. The machine can consume far more bodies, and must be fed continuously to stay running.

究竟发生了什么变化？除了战争战术本身之外，所有支撑战争得以进行的要素——无论是技术、经济还是社会政治层面——都变得高效到令人难以想象。现代战争中的作战行动，并不像好莱坞电影所描绘的那样无休止地进行。但与150年前的战争相比，这些作战行动几乎可以说是持续不断，而且其致命性也大幅提升。古代士兵根本无法想象，现代士兵要花多少时间在恐惧中度日，时刻担心自己会突然惨死；他们也无法想象，炮火或无人机带来的袭击，竟会如此冷酷无情、防不胜防。战争这台“机器”能够吞噬的生命数量远超从前，而且必须持续不断地“投喂”生命，才能维持运转。

Rodra Hascaryo
Studied Aerospace and Aeronautical Engineering at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 。

罗德拉·哈斯卡里约 
毕业于伊利诺伊大学厄巴纳-香槟分校航空航天工程专业  

Between ancient and modern people, no contest: Ancients have it worse.True, the weapons they used weren’t as devastating. But then again, nobody really knew proper medicine until around the 19th century. If you read history from those days, you’d realize that the majority of casualties weren’t from battles but rather sickness or starvation. Getting a wound that is easily treatable today could be a death sentence.

对比古代士兵和现代士兵，答案毫无悬念：古代士兵的处境更惨。诚然，古代士兵使用的武器杀伤力没那么大。但反过来讲，直到19世纪前后，人类才真正掌握了规范的医学知识。如果你去研读那个年代的历史就会发现，当时大部分伤亡并非源于战场厮杀，而是由疾病或饥饿造成的。在今天看来很容易治愈的小伤口，在当时都可能是一纸死刑判决。

For many of them, it wouldn’t be a quick death; it’d be an agonizing one.Modern soldiers also enjoy a far higher standard of living than the ancients (unless, maybe, if you’re North Korean). The food you eat is more nutritious and varied, you’re in far less danger of starvation, the water is relatively clean (and we know how to purify water properly today), you actually have more fundamental rights, your housing is a lot more comfortable, you have more options for entertainment, for most people your pay comes regularly, and so on. Back then, even the basic stuff weren’t guaranteed.For the standards of the ancient times, anyone who can live decently today is living in luxury.

对于很多古代士兵来说，死亡不会来得很痛快，而是伴随着极度的痛苦。现代士兵的生活水平也远比古代士兵高得多（或许朝鲜士兵是个例外）。他们吃的食物更有营养、种类也更多样，遭遇饥饿的风险大幅降低，饮用水相对洁净（而且如今我们掌握了完善的净水技术）；他们还拥有更多基本权利，住宿条件舒适得多，娱乐方式也更为丰富，对大多数人来说，军饷也是按时发放的。而在古代，就连这些最基础的保障都无法兑现。以古代的标准来衡量，如今任何一个能过上体面生活的人，都算得上是身处奢华之中了。

M Robin 
Project Manager at MR-Consulting (1998–present) upxed Oct 23。

埃姆·罗宾 
MR咨询公司项目经理（1998年至今）  更新于10月23日 。   

 What is meant by “worst”, the odds of death or maiming in each engagement, the length and intensity of exposure, the up-close, visceral brutality of the killing, the psychological injury it leaves (including moral injury), and the chance of medical rescue and survival afterward…Many of the answers that I read were opinions of soldiers, most of them of course thought it was harder for modern soldiers, naturally they would think so having lived it first hand, feeling it in your flesh cannot be compared to any tale or stories. War must be such a horrendous and terrifying experience that it would be impossible not to think that whatever you went through is the worst any humans can be subject to. I have been through a terrible accident and burnt and broke many bones in my body and I do not think anyone can understand how this feels physically or emotionally.

 我们所说的“更艰难”，究竟指的是什么？是每次参战的阵亡或致残概率？是置身战火的时长与强度？是近距离厮杀带来的直观残忍冲击？是战争留下的心理创伤（包括道德创伤）？还是受伤后获得医疗救助与存活的可能性？我读过的许多回答，都出自士兵的亲身观点。他们中的大多数人理所当然地认为，现代士兵的处境更艰难。这是人之常情——亲身经历过的切肤之痛，远非任何道听途说的故事所能比拟。战争一定是种极端恐怖的经历，以至于亲历者必然会觉得，自己所承受的苦难，已是人类所能忍受的极限。我曾遭遇一场严重的意外，全身多处烧伤、骨折，那种身心俱痛的感受，我认为旁人根本无法体会。

I cannot and will not argue their point, which is in great part the length of the intensity in the combat. for example in WWI the amount of days spent in trenches being bombarded and having to regularly run into the killing fields, for days, weeks months. I do not think any human can sustain this for such an amount of time and I agree the duration of the extreme stress is a major factor.I would just like to make a point for the ancient soldiers who did not get too many votes and are not here to write their stories.

我不会、也无法反驳他们的观点——毕竟他们强调的核心论据，是现代战争中高强度作战的持续时长。比如在一战时期，士兵们日复一日、周复一周、月复一月地蜷缩在战壕里，忍受炮火轰击，还得频繁冲向那片夺命战场。我认为没有任何人能承受这般长时间的煎熬，也认同这种极端压力的持续时间，是决定士兵处境艰难程度的关键因素。但我想为那些支持率不高、也无法亲自诉说经历的古代士兵说几句话。

First is proximity, in order to kill the enemy with a sword, a lance or any other short range weapons, well, you need to get up close and personal, you will see into the eyes of the person you are killing, you will feel their blood on your hands, your arms, maybe splash in your face, in your eyes until you start wondering if this some of it is your own blood. When a human body is traversed by a sharp obxt and dying the bowels also stop responding and on top of the blood everywhere now came the smell, feel, and sometimes taste of the excrements all around you, you will be stepping into, slipping touching the dying human bodies all around, everywhere.

首先是**近距离厮杀**这一点。古代士兵要用剑、长矛或其他近战武器杀敌，就必须与敌人近身肉搏。你会直视着你要杀死的人的眼睛，会感受到对方的鲜血溅落在你的双手、手臂上，甚至可能喷到你的脸上、眼里，直到你开始分不清这些血里有没有你自己的。当人体被利器刺穿、濒临死亡时，肠道会失控失禁。于是，在遍地鲜血之上，又弥漫开排泄物的气味，你甚至能在触觉乃至味觉上感受到它的存在。你脚下踩着、打滑撞上的，全是周围濒死之人的躯体。

You will also have nowhere to run, when you are that close to your enemy retreat is a difficult manoeuvre and only rarely successful and always by very disciplined armies very well lead, usually retreating before complete chaos, most of the time a rout was a massacre. Walking for miles seeing your enemy approach, then closing in until you are at missile distance then rushing toward them must have been a singularly powerful test of human resolve and the stress during the closing in and the close combat a real predicament.

这种情况下，你根本无处可逃。
与敌人距离如此之近，撤退是种极其艰难的战术行动，只有军纪严明、指挥得当的军队，才能在彻底陷入混乱前勉强成功撤退；大多数时候，溃逃只会演变成一场单方面的屠杀。徒步跋涉数英里，眼看着敌军步步逼近，双方逐渐进入投掷武器的射程，随即冲向彼此——这对人的意志无疑是种巨大的考验，而在逼近敌军与近身搏斗的过程中，士兵承受的压力更是难以言喻的绝境。

Which takes me to my second point, the fatality rate. In ancient times the fatality rate of battles was between 10 and 30% (30% being the more common rate), the loosing side suffering dramatically more looses than the winning side. Most death were the result of the loosing army breaking ranks and fleeing, if the winners had a good cavalry the massacre could go on for miles and be devastating. This number could be increase to close to 100% in some cases, see Battles of Alesia in Gaul, Marathon, the battle of Syracuse 

这就引出了我的第二个观点——**阵亡率**。在古代，战役的阵亡率通常在10%到30%之间（30%是更常见的比例），战败方的伤亡人数远比战胜方惨重。大多数阵亡都发生在败军溃散逃亡之际，如果获胜方拥有精锐骑兵，这场屠杀就能追出数英里，造成毁灭性的后果。在某些战役中，阵亡率甚至能逼近100%，比如高卢的阿莱西亚战役、马拉松战役、叙拉古战役，而且要知道，伤员的数量通常至少是阵亡人数的7倍。这些数字是相当触目惊心的。

and keep in mind that the number of wounded was usually at least 7 times more. These are some seriously large numbers. Also remember that more often than not the vanquished still alive were taken as slaves usually for the rest of their lives. So surviving on the loosing side was not always a good grace. Modern warfare as an average of 5 to 10%, of course the numbers of combatant are much higher giving larger numbers of fatalities. If we keep it in percentage of total population and total number of soldiers it is much lower than ancient warfare.

此外还要记住，战败方幸存的士兵，往往会被掳为奴隶，余生都将在奴役中度过。所以对败军士兵而言，活下来有时并非幸事。现代战争的平均阵亡率在5%到10%之间，当然，由于参战人数大幅增加，阵亡的绝对人数会更多；但如果按照总人口和士兵总数的比例来计算，现代战争的阵亡率要远低于古代战争。

That is also another point for ancient battles, field hospitals when they existed, did not have the same results as we would today, a simple infection, a large bleeding which today would mostly be dealt with was often deadly, limbs were readily amputated. Keeping in mind that illness usually caused as many casualties and often more than combat itself, again the lack of medication and medical knowledge was a factor that did not make the ancient soldier very confident, specially when cut of from his lines of communication, under fed, cold, dirty, full of flees….

这是古代战争的另一个残酷之处——**医疗条件**。即便当时存在战地医院，其救治效果也远不能与如今相提并论。一个简单的伤口感染、一场在今天基本能控制的大出血，在当时往往都是致命的，肢体被轻易截肢更是家常便饭。要知道，疾病造成的伤亡人数，通常与战斗伤亡相当，甚至更多。匮乏的药物与落后的医疗知识，让古代士兵根本无法对生存抱有信心，尤其是当他们与后方失联、忍饥挨饿、饱受严寒、浑身肮脏不堪且布满跳蚤时……

Lastly the frequency, battles, raids in the ancient times were common. The pax Romana, when the temple of Mars closed it’s doors to indicate the Romans were no longer at war, was a very rare thing indeed, in fact it was recorded in the anal as a rare and very prosperous time. It never was a full peace, and never lasted long, the Romans who were the super power of it’s age still struggled to keep the peace not only on it’s borders but often from rebellions within as well. Being in the army in these days meant you would probably see combat and death.

最后一点是**战争的频繁程度**。在古代，战役与突袭是家常便饭。所谓的“罗马和平时期”——也就是玛尔斯神庙闭门以示罗马已无战事的年代，实则是极其罕见的。事实上，史册中都将这段时期记载为少有的繁荣和平岁月。但即便是这段时期，也从未实现过真正意义上的全面和平，而且和平持续的时间十分短暂。即便是身处那个时代霸主地位的罗马，也仍要竭力维持和平——不仅要平定边境的战乱，还要频繁镇压内部的叛乱。在那个年代参军，就意味着你大概率会亲历战火与死亡。

I do not wish for myself or anyone to be subject to something so cruel as war, usually decided by people who will not fight themselves for goals that will not benefit the ones fighting. I am sure being a soldier today in any war scenario must be difficult in the extreme, but if I had to choose I would prefer not to hear the last breath and blood of my enemy.

我不希望自己，也不希望任何人，承受战争这般残酷的苦难。战争的发起者往往是那些不会亲自上战场的人，他们为了自身的目标挑起战火，而这些目标却从不会惠及冲锋陷阵的士兵。我确信，如今无论在何种战争局势下当兵，都必然是极度艰难的。但如果非要我选，我宁愿不用亲耳听见敌人的最后一口气，不用亲手沾染敌人的鲜血。