QA：中世纪的哪些战争真的像电影中表现的那样野蛮?（一）
Which battles in the Middle Ages were really that barbaric as shown in movies?
译文简介
只有那些既没有开过一枪，也没有听到伤者的尖叫和呻吟的人才会为流血、复仇和荒凉而大声疾呼。战争是地狱。
正文翻译
一
J. Peper
Hollywood always gets battles wrong, particularly ancient and medi battles.
A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.
But yes, trying to kill a bunch of unfriendly strangers by sticking them with long pointy things before they do the same to you is inherently barbaric. So is blowing them up, shooting them, gassing them, or all the other ways we’ve made warfare more “civilized”.
好莱坞总是把战争拍错，尤其是古代和中世纪的战争。
战争不是两个暴徒互相攻击，然后分解成一堆1对1的打斗。战争是以相当有秩序、纪律严明的阵型进行的，这样你可以保护和配合你两边的人。
但是，是的，在一群不友好的陌生人对你做同样的事情之前，试图用长而尖的东西杀死他们，这本质上是野蛮的。炸死他们，射杀他们，用毒气毒死他们，或者其他所有我们使战争更加“文明”的方式也是如此。
Hollywood always gets battles wrong, particularly ancient and medi battles.
A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.
But yes, trying to kill a bunch of unfriendly strangers by sticking them with long pointy things before they do the same to you is inherently barbaric. So is blowing them up, shooting them, gassing them, or all the other ways we’ve made warfare more “civilized”.
好莱坞总是把战争拍错，尤其是古代和中世纪的战争。
战争不是两个暴徒互相攻击，然后分解成一堆1对1的打斗。战争是以相当有秩序、纪律严明的阵型进行的，这样你可以保护和配合你两边的人。
但是，是的，在一群不友好的陌生人对你做同样的事情之前，试图用长而尖的东西杀死他们，这本质上是野蛮的。炸死他们，射杀他们，用毒气毒死他们，或者其他所有我们使战争更加“文明”的方式也是如此。
One of the most studied battles of the Middle Ages is the Battle of Visby, fought on 27 July 1361. A force of 2000–2500 Danish knights and German mercenaries invaded Gotland and massacred the defending yeoman (middle class) 2000 man militia. The Danes lost 300 men and the Gutes lost 1700, who were mostly buried in their armor because the unseasonably warm weather caused the bodies to start decomposing before they could be stripped of valuables. This makes it one of the best-preserved medi battlefields.
Looking at the skeletons of the defeated yeoman, the wounds are pretty horrific. This guy took an axe to the face:
中世纪被研究最多的战役之一是1361年7月27日的维斯比战役。一支由2000 - 2500名丹麦骑士和德国雇佣军组成的部队入侵哥特兰岛（瑞典岛名），屠杀了保卫自耕农(中产阶级)的2000名民兵。丹麦人损失了300人，古特人损失了1700人，他们大多被埋在盔甲里，因为不合时宜的温暖天气导致尸体在被抢走贵重物品之前就开始腐烂。这使其成为保存最完好的中世纪战场之一。
看着战败自耕农的骸骨，伤口相当可怕。这未被斧头砍脸:
Looking at the skeletons of the defeated yeoman, the wounds are pretty horrific. This guy took an axe to the face:
中世纪被研究最多的战役之一是1361年7月27日的维斯比战役。一支由2000 - 2500名丹麦骑士和德国雇佣军组成的部队入侵哥特兰岛（瑞典岛名），屠杀了保卫自耕农(中产阶级)的2000名民兵。丹麦人损失了300人，古特人损失了1700人，他们大多被埋在盔甲里，因为不合时宜的温暖天气导致尸体在被抢走贵重物品之前就开始腐烂。这使其成为保存最完好的中世纪战场之一。
看着战败自耕农的骸骨，伤口相当可怕。这未被斧头砍脸:
Some other skulls from Visby
维斯比的其他头骨：
This is a diagram of all the injuries one victim received:
这是一名受害者受伤程度的图解:
Not the same battle, but this is the skull of a 1st century Roman legionnaire who was buried with the spear that killed him still in place:
As bad as these wounds are, our ability to inflict trauma on other people has only increased over time. As the old saying goes, war is hell.
不是同一场战斗，但这是一名1世纪罗马军团士兵的头骨，他被埋葬时，杀死他的长矛仍然在原地:
尽管这些伤口很严重，但随着时间的推移，我们给别人造成创伤的能力只会越来越强。俗话说，战争是地狱。
评论翻译
很赞 ( 1 )
收藏
Additionally, prior to modern warfare, the majority of casualties were inflicted after battle lines broke, which is why we see heavily disproportionate casualties between the winning and losing sides.
此外，在现代战争之前，大多数伤亡都是在战线断裂后造成的，这就是为什么我们看到胜利和失败双方之间严重不成比例的伤亡。
Prior to modern warfare, the majority of casualties were inflicted by hunger, disease, and exposure to the elements.
在现代战争之前，大部分的伤亡都是由饥饿、疾病和雨淋日晒造成的。
Yes of course. However I, and the original question, was talking about battles specifically.
是的，没错。然而我，和最初的问题是专门讨论战斗的。
In many cases more casualties were after the battle ended. The sack and destruction of Jerusalem for example.
在许多情况下，战斗结束后伤亡人数更多。比如耶路撒冷的洗劫和毁灭。
And a lot more died weeks later from infections from minor wounds sustained in battle than who died on the battlefield from massive trauma.
几周后死于战斗中轻微伤口感染的人比死于战场上严重创伤的人多得多。
As late as the American Civil War, disease is commonly estimated to have killed twice as many soldiers as were killed directly by battle injury.
据估计，直到美国内战，通常估计死于疾病的士兵是直接死于战斗损伤的士兵的两倍。
I remember reading or hearing somewhere that World War II was the first war in which enemy action was the leading cause of death.
我记得在哪里读到或听到过，第二次世界大战是第一次敌人行动成为死亡的主要原因的战争。
Penicillin & sulfa were a big help in WW2, not just for battle wounds, but for syphilis & gonorrhea.
Even today when I read about it, the narratives are very benign “Despite education, venereal disease spread among the troops.” As if it….just happened. Like a cold or a kidney infection…it just happened.”
青霉素和磺胺在二战中起了很大的作用，不仅治疗战伤，还治疗梅毒和淋病。
直到今天，当我读到它的时候，叙述都是非常善意的“尽管受过教育，性病还是在部队中传播。”就好像它……就这么发生了。就像感冒或肾脏感染……就这么发生了。”
man’s inhumanity to his fellow men knows no bounds, and never had.
人类对同类的不人道是无止境的，从未停止过。
Absolutely right, Kosta Do you teach history in any way? Because that fact doesn’t seem to surprise you…
完全正确，Kosta你教历史吗?因为这个事实似乎并不令你惊讶……
Dan Hedman
Another reason they were buried mostly with their armor and everything was that the fear of the plague was still fresh. That combined with hot weather made them just throw them in a hole and bury them without really plunder them
另一个原因是他们的盔甲和其他东西都被埋葬了，因为人们对瘟疫的恐惧仍然挥之不去。再加上炎热的天气，他们就把尸体扔进一个洞里埋了，并未真正劫掠战利品。
Because the winners realized that they needed to have more semblance of hygiene and sanitation after the Black Death.
因为战胜者意识到，在黑死病之后，他们需要更多的卫生外表和环境卫生。
Ummm…no, Michael. In those days, disease was thought to be from “bad air”. It wasn’t until around 1865 that the British Surgeon, Joseph Lister became the first to use antiseptics in medical practice, applying Louis Pasteur's advances in microbiology.
嗯……不对，迈克尔。在那个年代，人们认为疾病是由“糟糕的空气”引起的。直到1865年左右，英国外科医生约瑟夫·利斯特才应用路易斯·巴斯德在微生物学方面的进步，第一个在医疗实践中使用防腐剂。
But people still knew that rotting flesh could make you sick. That’s just instinct.
但人们仍然知道腐肉会让人生病。这是本能。
they did bathe in vinegar in hopes to stop the plague
他们确实用醋洗澡，希望能阻止瘟疫
battles was fought during hot summer days other times to and even in hotter climate. and bodies was still plundered. So i don’t think that is the main reason. But the battle was 1361. And the black plague had its peak between 1347 and 1352 in Europe. So that was very fresh in memory so i do think that had a bigger impact. People was terrified of the plague still
战斗是在炎热的夏天进行的，有时甚至在更热的气候中进行，而尸体仍在被劫掠。所以我不认为这是主要原因。但这场战役发生在1361年。黑死病在1347年到1352年间在欧洲达到高峰。那是非常新鲜的记忆，所以我认为那有更大的影响。人们仍然害怕瘟疫。
Possible… in fact probable, that that played a part… But so did the townsfolk not being on-site until the next day, when the corpses were getting REALLY ripe. You want to plunder a body, you do it before it bloats up and the maggots open it up… Not as enthusiastically after. That’s one reason a lot of the armor and weapons were not looted. Try getting a mail shirt of a bloated, slimy, blackfaced corpse with maggots all over it.
有可能，事实上很有可能，这也是原因之一，但是镇上的人直到第二天尸体都气味刺鼻了才到现场。你想劫掠一具尸体，就在它膨胀起来，被蛆虫打开之前下手……之后就没那么热情了。这也是很多盔甲和武器没有被劫掠的原因之一。去拿一具臃肿、黏糊糊、满脸污垢、爬满蛆虫的尸体上的锁子甲试试看。
Even in the hottest weather a corpse does not rot over a day. It wont be full of maggots the day after the battle.
The Stages Of Human Decomposition | Aftermath Services
From Flesh to Bone: The Role of Weather in Body Decomposition | The Weather Channel
And even in hotter climates and hotter weather bodies was plundered days after battles. It is not the only battle fought in hot weather. And in most other the bodies was still plundered.
So even if the hot weather did play a part i still argue that the fear of the black plague played a much bigger role. It was only a maximum of 10 years since it was at its peak in the area.
I am sure the hot weather did play its part. But if it had not been for the fear of the recent plague i am fairly sure they had been plundered a lot more
即使在最热的天气，尸体也不会在一天内腐烂。不会在战斗结束后的第二天就满是蛆虫：（引用资料）
《人体分解的阶段|善后服务》
《从肉到骨:天气在尸体分解中的作用|天气频道》
即使是在更炎热的天气里尸体也会在战斗后几天被劫掠。这并不是唯一一场在炎热天气进行的战斗。在大多数其他地方，尸体仍然会被劫掠。因此，即使炎热的天气确实起了作用，我仍然认为对黑死病的恐惧起了更大的作用。这距离该地区的（黑死病爆发的）高峰只有最多10年的时间。
我相信炎热的天气确实是原因之一。但如果不是因为害怕最近的瘟疫，我敢肯定，他们被劫掠的东西要多得多。
How exactly do you know where the townspeople were on a particular day approximately 700 years ago?
你怎么知道大约700年前的某一天镇上的人在哪里?
They were inside Visby watching as they had refused to open the gate to let their own volunteers in. It is possible the Danes and Germans did not think the antiquated and repurposed armour of these ill equipped defenders was worth taking.m Note the diagram above - how many wounds were to the mans knees and shins - few of them seem to have had leg armour but this poor devil was hacked all over. A lot were shot by crossbowmen as they bunched in a huddle .
在他们拒绝打开大门让自己的义勇兵进入时，他们就在维斯比里面看着。有可能丹麦人和德国人看不上这些装备不良的守军的陈旧和改头换面的盔甲。注意上面的图解——这个人的膝盖和小腿上有多少伤口——似乎很少有人有腿部护甲，但这个可怜的家伙全身都被砍伤了。当他们挤成一团时，许多人被弩手击中。
Shgdrn Mjh
The skeleton diagram looks like the man was felled by leg wounds, continued to suffer defensive wounds to his limbs, then received a coup d'grace in his right shoulder.
Those wounds to his hips may have been blade wounds delivered to a mounted man. Those are the kind of wounds (an axe?) that would have made a cavalryman fall off of his horse.
从骨架图上看，这名男子腿部受伤，四肢继续遭受防御伤，然后右肩遭到致命一击。
他臀部的伤口可能是被骑马的人砍伤的。这种伤(斧头?)会让一个骑兵从马上摔下来。
He was a poorly trained militiaman who fought on foot. In all probability, an opponent made an attack on his head, tricking him into raising his shield high to deflect the blow, then another followed with a quick slash to the front leg, felling the guy to the ground. The German mercenaries seem to have employed this tactic repeatedly to massacre the yeomen at Visby, as more than half of uncovered skeletons show severe leg injuries.
他是一个缺乏训练的民兵，徒步作战。很有可能，一个对手向他的头部发起了攻击，骗他把盾牌举得很高，以转移打击，然后另一个人迅速一刀砍向他的前腿，将他击倒在地。德国雇佣军似乎反复使用这种策略来屠杀维斯比的自耕农，因为超过一半的未被掩埋的骨架显示出严重的腿部受伤。
I saw an interesting show some years back on the subject. Apparently the defenders of Visby had old/inferior armour which lacked lower leg protection, making such attacks all the more incapacitating.
几年前，我看过一个关于这个主题的有趣节目。显然维斯比的守军装备的是旧的/劣质的盔甲，缺乏小腿保护，使得这种攻击的效果更佳。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
No offense, but that's a naïve assumption. We don't know in how much if a difficult position he was, how long he lasted and how successful he was in eliminating the enemy. In fact, he may have been well-trained.
无意冒犯，但这是一个天真的假设。我们不知道他的处境有多艰难，他坚持了多久，他杀敌上多么成功。事实上，他可能受过良好的训练。
It’s not a naive assumption, it’s a well-educated supposition.
We know for a fact that the defenders at Visby were yeoman militia and that the attackers were seasoned veterans - full-time professional soldiers. There is no assumption involved in stating that full time professional soldiers are better trained and than militiamen who have day jobs. The difference in training and experience is reflected in the fact that the defenders were massacred at very low cost to the attackers.
We know for a fact that the professional soldiers of the period used cooperative tactics to take down their opponents. A battle between two 1000 man armies isn’t 1000 single combats. Warfare is a team sport. You’re not trying to kill the man in front of you - you’re trying to distract him and create an opening for one of your buddies to kill him, and watching for the openings your buddies create. That’s a skill you can only develop through constant training together as a group.
这不是一个天真的假设，这是一个有根据的假设。
我们知道维斯比的守军是自耕农民兵，而攻击者是经验丰富的老兵——全职的职业军人。全职的职业军人比有日常工作的民兵训练得更好，这并不是假设。训练和经验的差别反映在这样一个事实上，即进攻者以极低的代价屠杀了防御者。
我们知道这个时期的职业士兵使用合作战术来打倒他们的对手。两支1000人的军队之间的战斗不是1000场单人战斗。战争是一项团队运动。你并不是想要杀死你面前的人——你只是想要分散他的注意力，为你的一个伙伴创造一个杀死他的机会，然后观察你的伙伴创造的机会。这是一种只有在团队中不断训练才能培养出来的技能。
Sure. He might have even been an innocent alien observer or a stranded time traveler, for all I know. I wasn’t there.
当然。据我所知，他甚至可能是一个无辜的外星观察者，或者是一个被困的时间旅行者。我不在场。
Again, sarcasm aside, if you were in his position, you would likely make worse decisions than him.
再说一次，讽刺的是，如果你处在他的位置，你可能会做出比他更糟糕的决定。
Kamran Khan
Now whenever something’s stuck in my head, I can be grateful that at least it’s not an axe.
现在，每当有什么东西卡在我的脑海里，我会心存感激，至少它不是一把斧头。
Face axe guy had pretty good teeth.
脸被斧子砍的伙计牙齿很不错。
In the words of Benjamin Franklin Pierce, war is worse than hell. There are no innocent bystanders in hell.
用本杰明·富兰克林·皮尔斯的话来说，战争比地狱还糟糕。地狱里没有无辜遭殃者。
“A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.”
This needs to be said more often. A great example is Lord of the Rings, where every major battle immediately devolved into thousands of duels. The more I learn about media warfare, the more I hate movies which do that.
“战争不是两个暴徒互相攻击，然后分解成一堆1对1的打斗。战争是以相当有秩序、纪律严明的阵型进行的，这样你可以保护和配合你两边的人。”
这一点需要更经常地说。《指环王》就是一个很好的例子，每一场主要的战斗都会立即演变成成千上万场决斗。我对中世纪战争了解得越多，就越讨厌这样的电影。
I thought the lord of the rings did a better job than most.
我觉得《指环王》演得比大多数电影都好。
They were alright in many ways, but they still used The Hollywood Moshpit in several battles, so just for that alone I have to take three stars off.
他们在很多方面都很好，但他们仍然在几场战斗中使用了“好莱坞Moshpit”（？），所以仅凭这一点，我就得扣三颗星。
Saul Martino
Not a great advertisement for recruiting soldiers of the era.
Join the army - travel the world and get an axe to the face. Then get buried in a bog.
Hmm no thanks.
在那个时代，这不是一个很好的征兵广告。
加入军队——环游世界，用斧头砍脸。然后被埋在沼泽里。
嗯，不用了，谢谢。
But think of all the friends you'll make along the way!
但是想想你在这条路上会交到的朋友吧!
And note— these are just the wounds that left a mark on the bone beneath. Flesh wounds could be horrific, too.
注意，这些只是在骨头上留下痕迹的伤口。皮肉受伤也会很可怕。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Not to mention the real chance of infection and sepsis. A wound that doesn’t drag clothing into the wound( as in a Minnie Ball in the civil war) has less , but still a very real chance of infection
更不用说感染和败血症的可能性了。一个未把衣服拖进伤口的伤口，感染的几率更小，但仍然非常大。
Analysis of the Visby skeletons shows many of them were hacked to death, probably by several people, after they fell to the ground. Not very chivalric or Hollywood.
As for the armour, the old pieces worn by the Gotland farmers (not the burghers, they stayed out of the fight) were probably not worth salvaging. The farmers seem to have done better in a few earlier guerrilla encounters, but in the final pitched battle they were totally overmatched.
对维斯比骸骨的分析显示，他们中的许多人在倒地后被砍死，可能是被几个人砍死的。不是骑士风度，也不是好莱坞式的。
至于盔甲，哥特兰的农民(不是市民，他们不参与战斗)穿的旧盔甲可能不值得回收利用。在早期的几次游击战中，农民们似乎表现得更好，但在最后的激战中，他们完全被击败了。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
I was watching the show Last Kingdom and mid way through/the end of the first season they have a battle tjat starts out quite realistic. The armies are sticking to formation and working as a unit. I thought “pretty good.”
Then the hero breaks his line to flip over the enemy line and a mess of single fights ensues.
我在看《末代王国》，在第一季的中间/结尾，他们有一场战斗，一开始很逼真。军队保持队形，作为一个整体作战。我觉得“还不错。”
然后英雄就会打破自己的防线，翻越敌人的防线，然后就会出现一堆混乱的单挑。
Peter Rabb
What happened to the teeth of the last skull? They look… fused. Or was it a toothless old man?
Also why was that man hit so many times? I’d think a broken arm would take out a combatant for good. Was he brutalized after he fell?
最后一个头骨的牙齿怎么了?他们看起来…融合了。还是一个没有牙齿的老人?还有为什么那人被击打了那么多次?我还以为断了胳膊就能让战士永远死去呢。他摔倒后受到虐待了吗?
“A battle was not two mobs charging at one another and then breaking up into a bunch of 1 on 1 fights. Battles were fought in fairly orderly, disciplined formations so you could protect and cooperate with the people on either side of you.” What did you think of the final battle scene from the film Kingdom of Heaven? I feel like it’s depicted a bit more accurately but you seem to have more insight.
“战争不是两个暴徒互相攻击，然后分解成一堆1对1的打斗。战争是以相当有秩序、纪律严明的阵型进行的，这样你可以保护和配合你两边的人。”
你觉得电影《天国王朝》最后的战斗场景怎么样?我觉得该片中对这样的战斗场景描绘得更准确一些，但你似乎更有洞察力。
Rome won most of its battles because they used soldiers, and they did NOT break up into 1 on 1 battles, while their ‘warrior’ opponents did. Most of their defeats happened when they somehow managed to forget their training (or were led by idiots). The opening battle in ‘Gladiator’ is cool, but they left out the cloud of Pila (heavy javelins) that would have greeted the charging Germans, and they in true Hollywood fashion quickly degenerated into individual duels.
The Greeks, when fighting Rome used a phalanx. They also did not break ranks, they were also fairly inflexible and Rome just went around the sides and cut them down from behind before they could turn around. If the Greeks had good flank defence they could and did defeat the Romans, but ultimately lost the war. )Rome really hated fighting in forests as they couldn’t maintain their lines.)
罗马赢得了大部分战争，因为他们对士兵的使用没有陷入一对一的战斗，而他们的“勇士”对手却这样做。他们大多数的失败都发生在他们不知道怎么忘记了自身的训练(或被白痴领导)的时候。电影《角斗士》的开场战很酷，但他们却忽略了那些迎接日耳曼人冲锋的重型标枪，他们以真正的好莱坞风格迅速退化为个人决斗。
希腊人在与罗马作战时使用方阵。他们也没有破坏队列，他们也相当不灵活，罗马人只要绕到两翼，在他们转身之前从后面砍倒他们。如果希腊人有很好的侧翼防御，他们就能打败罗马人，但最终输掉了战争。罗马人非常讨厌在森林里作战，因为他们无法维持自己的防线。
如前所述，大多数伤亡发生在败方部队顶不住了，惊慌失措开始逃跑时，大约80%的伤亡发生在逃跑时。骑兵主要用来追杀逃亡的敌军。以布迪卡女王为例，她攻击了三个罗马军团——她的“勇士”约有1万人，总数约25万人。罗马人坚守住了防线，向前推进，“勇士”们溃散了，逃回了他们的马车队，他们在恐慌中被困住了，罗马人杀死了8万多人，包括他们在马车里的家人。罗马大约损失了400人。布迪卡用打了就跑的游击战术击败了一些军团，但她认为自己拥有压倒性的力量，当她攻击苏维托尼乌斯准备好的阵地时，森林保护了他的侧翼和一个开阔的下坡。
（译注：布狄卡，是英格兰东英吉利亚地区古代爱西尼部落的王后和女王，她领导了不列颠诸部落反抗罗马帝国占领军统治的起义，公元61年左右兵败自杀。）
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Yes. For example see TV Rome episode 1. Shows Romans fighting in formation (no doubt confusing casual viewers).
是的。例如，请看电视剧《罗马》第一集。展示了罗马人列队作战(毫无疑问会让普通观众感到困惑)。
Their opponents did? Citation please. Germanic and Celtic tribes fought in shield walls in big battles. Masses of men in spear and shield formations has been the standard method of battle for any large army in Europe.
The Greeks are also known for their tight pike phalanxes, and the Parthians fought from horseback relying on horse archers and heavy cavalry.
It is true that Celtic and Germanic tribes could resort to guerrilla warfare but that is not the same thing as fighting individually spread out. Guerrilla it worked really well and over time the Germanic tribes learned from their Roman advisaries and became tougher to deal with.
No question the Romans were effective but they were not invincible and it actually is not unheard of for them to lose battles here and there. Germanic and Celtic people’s were also not stupid and figured out that massed spears and shields works.
他们的对手呢?请引用。日耳曼和凯尔特部落在大型战役中用盾墙作战。在欧洲，大批人排成长矛和盾牌编队一直是任何大型军队的标准战法。
希腊人也以其紧凑的长矛方阵而闻名，帕提亚人则依靠骑兵弓箭手和重骑兵在马背上作战。
确实，凯尔特和日耳曼部落可以诉诸游击战，但这与单打独斗是两码事。游击作战确实很有效，随着时间的推移，日耳曼部落从他们的罗马顾问那里学习，变得更加难以对付。
毫无疑问，罗马人方阵很有威力，但他们并不是不可战胜的，他们在这里或那里输掉战斗的情况也不是闻所未闻。日耳曼人和凯尔特人也不愚蠢，他们发现了聚集长矛和盾牌的作用。
Javier Garcia-Julve
That war is hell is one of those conclusions so evident that many may have reached it in history, but I think it’s generally attributed to general W. T. Sherman: “It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.”
“战争是地狱”这一结论是历史上许多人都得出过的结论之一，但我认为这句话通常认为是W·T·谢尔曼将军说的:“只有那些既没有开过一枪，也没有听到伤者的尖叫和呻吟的人才会为流血、复仇和荒凉而大声疾呼。战争是地狱。”
Those veterans that saw war are some of the calmest and most respectful people I have met. Most machos I met hadn’t even had a decent fight.
那些参加过战争的老兵是我见过的最冷静、最尊重人的人。我遇到的大多数男人都没像样地打过架。
General Sherman is one of those who made warfare that much worse. He was a war criminal.
谢尔曼将军是那些让战争变得更糟的人之一。他是个战犯。
So? It doesn’t make what he said less true. A drunkard may say the right things about drunkenness. I honestly think we need to avoid associating the truthfulness of propositions with the proposing person.
所以呢?但这并不影响他所说的真实性。一个醉汉可能会说一些关于醉酒方面的正确之事。老实说，我认为我们需要避免因人废言。
Fair enough. But he’s no hero.
有道理。但他不是什么英雄。