Warrior Cultures-so individualistic they lack basic teamwork (I distract you suckerpunch him)?

[7BallZ]

Not strictly martial arts but its quite related enough that I think this section is appropriate.

Two links I found.

Individual Fighter Warrior Culture and Team Work

Do Warrior cultures that focus on individual fighting lack the basic common sense team work when fighting in the battlefield? AS in Barbarians couldn't even think of something so simple as "distract a Roman soldier while my friends behead him from behind"? • /r/Military

Now considering many arguments of how RBSD and military style instructors bashing traditional martial arts because they focused too much on "individual fighting" I am quite curious.

I mean as the posters int he link state, the Warrior VS Soldier narrative has become so common that many people literally believe warriors are too busy dueling one-on-one that films and TV show them lacking the common sense to use simple teamwork tricks like throwing stones to force Macedonians into a shieldwall while sending warriors to surround said Macedonian and hit from a blind angle unprotected by as shieldwall.

I do think whoever wrote the two links both have a point. If school kids have the common sense to hide themselves than pop out of nowhere to surround another kid they want to beat up, it puts stain to the notion Warrior cultures such as Celts (and to a lesser degree martial artists such as Shaolin monks) are too focused on "individual combat" that they can't work as a team.

If a bunch of modern-day construction workers can send a guy to pin you on the wall while the rest of the construction team are hitting you, what makes it impossible for say an 8th century knight to think of something as simple as bearhugging a Muslim warrior and calling for other knights to behead said ensnared Muslim warrior?

 

[Tez3]

 

[Drew Ahn-Kim]

I really did try to understand what you're central thesis is, but I'm utterly confused.

What is your question and/or suggestion based on these two posts?

All I can distill is this:

If a bunch of modern-day construction workers can send a guy to pin you on the wall while the rest of the construction team are hitting you, what makes it impossible for say an 8th century knight to think of something as simple as bearhugging a Muslim warrior and calling for other knights to behead said ensnared Muslim warrior?

1. Yes a larger group of men can pick up a single man, especially when he's not armed.
2. The bear-hug strategy seems both far more dangerous (you have to get much closer, and out grapple him to get the bear hug, then resist his attempts to escape, which if you've wrestled before you know is pretty damn hard without armor), and once you call over the other Knight he's going to behead an alive and struggling target that his friend is holding in his arms? Just draw a picture of that and I think you'll see how this is making things ridiculously hard. Not to mention you're leaving the soldier bear hugging the guy completely vulnerable to any other attack.

Also the tactics of the Macedonians worked due to the technology that they were up against at the time, you can't extrapolate that as evidence for all other wars and conflicts.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Warrior Cultures-so individualistic they lack basic teamwork?

No.

This has been another episode of simple answers to silly questions.

To expand on that a little bit - no "warrior culture" (however you might define that nebulous term) has ever been lacking in knowledge of basic teamwork. No one who knows anything about military history would ever suggest such a thing.

Arguments can be made that one army had superior teamwork, discipline, and group tactics compared to another army, but that's a far cry from suggesting that any culture was ever completely lacking in the use of teamwork during violent conflict.

I mean as the posters int he link state, the Warrior VS Soldier narrative has become so common that many people literally believe warriors are too busy dueling one-on-one that films and TV show them lacking the common sense to use simple teamwork tricks

Movies and TV shows portray battles (and everything else) in whatever way the director thinks will be most entertaining and tell the intended story effectively. It has nothing to do with reality and no one with any knowledge of the subject matter will confuse it with reality.

Now considering many arguments of how RBSD and military style instructors bashing traditional martial arts because they focused too much on "individual fighting"

You have completely misunderstood the argument being made by these RBSD instructors.

it puts stain to the notion Warrior cultures such as Celts (and to a lesser degree martial artists such as Shaolin monks) are too focused on "individual combat" that they can't work as a team.

There is no such notion in the head of anyone with the slightest knowledge of the subject.

If a bunch of modern-day construction workers can send a guy to pin you on the wall while the rest of the construction team are hitting you, what makes it impossible for say an 8th century knight to think of something as simple as bearhugging a Muslim warrior and calling for other knights to behead said ensnared Muslim warrior?

Not a really good example. If you are bear-hugging an opponent you really don't want your buddies swinging swords at his head - your own head will be in the path of the swing, Nevertheless, 8th century knights did employ group tactics and teamwork.

 

[Drew Ahn-Kim]

No.

This has been another episode of simple answers to silly questions.

To expand on that a little bit - no "warrior culture" (however you might define that nebulous term) has ever been lacking in knowledge of basic teamwork. No one who knows anything about military history would ever suggest such a thing.

Arguments can be made that one army had superior teamwork, discipline, and group tactics compared to another army, but that's a far cry from suggesting that any culture was ever completely lacking in the use of teamwork during violent conflict.



Movies and TV shows portray battles (and everything else) in whatever way the director thinks will be most entertaining and tell the intended story effectively. It has nothing to do with reality and no one with any knowledge of the subject matter will confuse it with reality.


You have completely misunderstood the argument being made by these RBSD instructors.

There is no such notion in the head of anyone with the slightest knowledge of the subject.


Not a really good example. If you are bear-hugging an opponent you really don't want your buddies swinging swords at his head - your own head will be in the path of the swing, Nevertheless, 8th century knights did employ group tactics and teamwork.

Thank you sir, far more eloquent than I could have stated. Hopefully I wasn't the "silly answers" in that equation. If so, chalk it up to mental face-palm.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Thank you sir, far more eloquent than I could have stated. Hopefully I wasn't the "silly answers" in that equation. If so, chalk it up to mental face-palm.

Nah, it was silly questions, simple answers. Your answer was fine.

 

[Touch Of Death]

The Greeks were known for settling disputes, with a duel between their best guys. However, that was a, friendly, alternative to, all out, war, which, they, also, knew how to do.

 

[Tez3]

The Barbarians are one of the best rugby clubs in the world, teamwork at it's best!

http://www.barbarianfc.co.uk/about/

 

[Touch Of Death]

The Barbarians are one of the best rugby clubs in the world, teamwork at it's best!

About Us - Barbarian FC

I'm not into Rugby, by my friend is a Rabbito fan; so, naturally I root for the Roosters, which I am sure are a better team, that yours. Even if, Rugby and Rugby league are different.

 

[Danny T]

Uhhh, No!

 

[hoshin1600]

can i get a triple face palm?

films and TV show them lacking the common sense to use simple teamwork tricks like throwing stones to force Macedonians into a shieldwall while sending warriors to surround said Macedonian and hit from a blind angle unprotected by as shieldwall.

it would be rather difficult to surround an army of 90 thousand men. not to mention that the Macedonians had something called Lithobolos which were the ultimate stone throwers, catapults that threw 180 pound stones.

 

[Tez3]

I mean as the posters int he link state, the Warrior VS Soldier narrative has become so common that many people literally believe warriors are too busy dueling one-on-one that films and TV show them lacking the common sense to use simple teamwork tricks like throwing stones to force Macedonians into a shieldwall while sending warriors to surround said Macedonian and hit from a blind angle unprotected by as shieldwall.

Right, this sentence makes no sense for a number of reasons, bad English being the least of them. the 'warrior v soldier narrative' for a start, it isn't common at all, most people can tell the difference between fact and fiction in films. Most people understand that films are a source of entertainment, they understand the jobs of writers, actors, stuntmen etc. You are wrong in surmising that 'most people' believe films. Please do stop using the word 'literally' until you understand what the word means. people don't 'literally' believe, they either do or they don't.

do think whoever wrote the two links both have a point. If school kids have the common sense to hide themselves than pop out of nowhere to surround another kid they want to beat up, it puts stain to the notion Warrior cultures such as Celts (and to a lesser degree martial artists such as Shaolin monks) are too focused on "individual combat" that they can't work as a team.

No idea what you are talking about here. 'Puts stain to the notion', strange phrase and there's no evidence to show that individuals can't work as a team nor is there any evidence as to why they should. it's just a random opinion.

If a bunch of modern-day construction workers can send a guy to pin you on the wall while the rest of the construction team are hitting you, what makes it impossible for say an 8th century knight to think of something as simple as bearhugging a Muslim warrior and calling for other knights to behead said ensnared Muslim warrior?

I take it you have no idea what you are talking about here. Why would a Crusader want to bear hug anyone he was fighting, what a load of nonsense. I take it you have no idea about fighting over a number of centuries, no idea of what the Crusades were and the sheer tastelessness of talking about beheadings at the moment.

 

[drop bear]

So the question sort of is can a group of guys working together beat a more physically gifted group of guys working on their own?

The better fighters vs the better team.

Yeah look I lean towards team work making the dream work in a fight. As winning fights often is a numbers game.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

So the question sort of is can a group of guys working together beat a more physically gifted group of guys working on their own?

The better fighters vs the better team.

Well, that would be an interesting question that could lead to some interesting discussion. What the OP actually asked was "were warrior cultures actually so individualistic that they didn't use any teamwork at all, even on the battlefield?" The answer to that question is, of course, no.

To Orcophile's credit, he did grasp that this would be unlikely to be the case and made some arguments to that effect. His mistake was in thinking that anyone was suggesting the answer might be yes.

 

[Tez3]

Which cultures are we talking about that are supposed to focus on individuals fighting? I'm hard put to think of one because while the knights in Europe were valued and I'm sure the Samurai were in every case they fought well as an army. I can't think of any culture that valued individual fighters over armies when fighting other countries!

 

[drop bear]

Well, that would be an interesting question that could lead to some interesting discussion. What the OP actually asked was "were warrior cultures actually so individualistic that they didn't use any teamwork at all, even on the battlefield?" The answer to that question is, of course, no.

To Orcophile's credit, he did grasp that this would be unlikely to be the case and made some arguments to that effect. His mistake was in thinking that anyone was suggesting the answer might be yes.

I am trying to look it up. The Romans vs the Saxons or Gauls or something?

Romans were smaller but better organised. With weapons that suited grip combat rather than individual combat?

 

[Flying Crane]

Where on the map can I find Barbaria?

 

[WaterGal]

I think this argument is flawed from the moment we talk about "warrior cultures" and "barbarians". Those are concepts people made up to either romanticize or denigrate other cultures or time periods.

Ancient civilizations didn't fight (successfully) by having a mob of guys running around wacking people with swords. They relied on tactical combat and disciplined troop formations.