Chivalry

[ariel]

The story of arms is inseparable of the stories of men who wielded them.
Throughout history, we honor soldiers. Some are legendary heroes. We assume that the age of heroism and chivalry is over. It is not.
I just finished reading a book "The Yom Kippur War".
When Syrians attacked the Golan Heights, virtually nothing stood between them and the Israeli hinterland. Their 51st Armoured Brigade with more than 100 tanks penetrated the border and advanced unimpeded . They were met by a single tank under the command of a 21 year old Leutenant Zvi (diminutive Zvika) Greengold. He identified himself to the command post as "Koah Zvika" (Force Zvika) so that the Syrians would not know that he was alone. He fought an entire tank brigade for a whole night, destroyed almost 50 Syrian tanks and kept them at bay until the reserves arrived.
This was a battle worthy of Roland or Leonidas and his 300 Spartans.
Not less awe inspiring is the magnanimity of honors bestowed by the victors on their fallen enemies.
Israelis erected a memorial to the soldiers of the Arab Legion who fell almost to a man defending the Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem during the Six-Day War in 1967.
Perhaps, the most touching is the letter Ataturk (who defeated the British forces at Gallipoli), sent to the families of the fallen ANZAC soldiers.

"Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives... You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side now here in this country of ours... you, the mothers, who sent their sons from faraway countries wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land, they have become our sons as well."

The Australians erected a memorial to Ataturk in Canberra on which these words are engraved.

Say what you want, guys, but these people are awe inspiring.

[ham]

Well observed, Ariel

Ham

[Rivkin]

I will be honest on this - in all countries in which I lived there are memorials to some great heros. Most likely, a hero like this is usually credited with meeting alone the enemy 50-200 stronger, running out of ammunition, killing 10,000 enemy soldiers and then continuing fighting with his socks, knives, shoes or something else. After doing so for 3 hours, this guy usually gets killed, but first he writes in his blood something like "for our country" or "the city will always be ours". When journalists later ask his family and covillagers about the fallen hero, they always learn that he was an exemplary son, great friend and so on (somehow fallen heroes never have bitter ex-wives and DUI convictions).

The problem is that 90% of these stories are rather obvious fakes. The moment our media started to talk about Jessica Lynch "sussumbing to her wounds after running out of ammunition", that was a clear sign that some PR officer in Pentagon have decided that we need to create another hero.

[Rick]

Alvin (Sgt.) York was no myth ; nor was Audie Murphy .

Every country has its people who go above and beyond .

These are not folk tales or myths .

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by ariel

Perhaps, the most touching is the letter Ataturk (who defeated the British forces at Gallipoli), sent to the families of the fallen ANZAC soldiers.

"Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives... You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side now here in this country of ours... you, the mothers, who sent their sons from faraway countries wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land, they have become our sons as well."

The Australians erected a memorial to Ataturk in Canberra on which these words are engraved.
.

I did not know that. Impressive.

[Andrew]

Let's try and keep this discussion in the abstract, to avoid war here.

Propaganda and War always have and always will go hand-in-hand, and Heroes make good television. However, every conflict has its Heroes. Most are never canonized by the media or history, but their heroism is not diminished by the lack of notoriety.

[VANDOO]

PROPAGANDA IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF WINNING A WAR IT CAN MAKE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WINNING OR BEING DEFEATED. THERE ARE MANY HEROIC DEEDS DONE AND NEVER NOTICED AND MANY DASTERDLY THINGS DONE IN WAR BY THE WINNERS AND THE LOSERS. GOOD PROPAGANDA INSPIRES YOUR TROOPS TO DO THEIR BEST AND CAN DISCOURAGE THE ENEMY. BAD PROPAGANDA DISCOURAGES YOUR TROOPS AND COUNTRY AND MAKES THE ENEMY MORE BOLD AND DETERMINED AS THEY WAIT FOR YOUR COUNTRYS RESOLVE TO FAIL AND FOR YOU TO TURN TAIL AND RUN.

MANY STORIES OF HEROIC FIGHTING ARE TRUE AND SOME MAY BE EMBELISHED BY THE ONES WHO SAW THE ACTION, BUT I DON'T THINK MANY ARE JUST MADE UP. THERE ARE MANY HEROS IN WAR MOST OF WHICH DIE FOR THEIR COUNTRYS TRYING TO PROTECT THEIR FELLOWS AND WIN FOR THEIR COUNTRY. THERE ARE USUALLY MORE HEROS WHO ARE KILLED THAN THOSE WHO LIVE THRU SUCH A SITUATION, OFTEN THEY BECOME A FOCUS FOR A TRADITION TO INSPIRE FUTURE TROOPS. THE FORIGN LEGION HAS SEVERAL GREAT HEROS THAT ARE PART OF THEIR TRADITION AND MOST MILITARY UNITS THE WORLD OVER HAVE THEIR HEROS AND TRADITIONS AS WELL. IT IS OFTEN SUPRIZING WHAT A DIFFERENCE ONE MAN OR A SMALL GROUP CAN MAKE IN A BATTLE IF THEY DO THEIR BEST. IF THE ENEMY THOUGHT THEY WERE FIGHTING ONE TANK AND NOT A ENTIRE UNIT THE OUTCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY DIFFERENT SO THE QUICK THINKING OF THE TANK COMANDER TO MISLEAD THEM STOPPED THE ADVANCE AND SAVED HIM AND ALLOWED HIM TO FIGHT ON.

WAR IS SOMETHING THAT ALL COUNTRYS SHOULD AVOID IF POSSIBLE BUT ONCE YOU ARE COMITTED EVERYONE MUST SUPPORT THE EFFORT IN ALL WAYS OR YOU WILL SURELY LOSE AND WORSE ALYWAYS FOLLOWS FOR THE LOSER.

[Rivkin]

To be completely honest, I don't know how to reply to this thread, without inflaming passions. I am not trying to say that there is no such things as heroism; what I am trying to say is that we learn about great heroes from newspapers and military reports. Both sources have other than truth objectives - providing subscribers with something interesting to read for the former, and motivation of masses for the latter.

Obviously, a lot of actions are described accurately. On the other hand, why Patton is a genius commander, while everytime Hitler's military record is described, it is all about his mistakes in 1943-45? Why Einstein and Hawking are super-celebrities in the world of science, while Heisenberg, Walter Kohn or Lorentz are barely known to the mass public ? What is so great about artists like Ansel Adams or Pollack ? The answer, in my opinion, is simple - some heroes are better suited for mass consumption. To some extent they got lucky, they just happened to be what masses needed - does not mean that they were not outstanding or even ingineous. But there are dozens of others who are quite capable of holding their own place in history, who are unknown.

Obviously there are many cases, when individuals or governments exploit this property of our society in order to advance their own agenda. Ariel, how about the famous recipient of Congressional Gold Medal, who held "multiple advanced degrees from Sorbonne and Humboldt" - I heard they still can't find a single one of them .

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Rivkin

To be completely honest, I don't know how to reply to this thread, without inflaming passions.

Staying away from specific examples will help.

I am not trying to say that there is no such things as heroism; what I am trying to say is that we learn about great heroes from newspapers and military reports. Both sources have other than truth objectives - providing subscribers with something interesting to read for the former, and motivation of masses for the latter.

Obviously, a lot of actions are described accurately. On the other hand, why Patton is a genius commander, while everytime Hitler's military record is described, it is all about his mistakes in 1943-45? Why Einstein and Hawking are super-celebrities in the world of science, while Heisenberg, Walter Kohn or Lorentz are barely known to the mass public ? What is so great about artists like Ansel Adams or Pollack ? The answer, in my opinion, is simple - some heroes are better suited for mass consumption. To some extent they got lucky, they just happened to be what masses needed - does not mean that they were not outstanding or even ingineous. But there are dozens of others who are quite capable of holding their own place in history, who are unknown.

Obviously there are many cases, when individuals or governments exploit this property of our society in order to advance their own agenda. Ariel, how about the famous recipient of Congressional Gold Medal, who held "multiple advanced degrees from Sorbonne and Humboldt" - I heard they still can't find a single one of them .

To a certain extent, you're mixing apples and oranges, Kiril. Military commanders are subject to the axiom "To the victor goes the spoils". Including how history remembers them. This is particularly true when the loser is guilty (or accused) of atrocities. It is a rare and exceptional military "loser" whose efforts are praised by the victor.

Pop culture icons (and I include artists, athletes, gladiators, actors, musicians and certain scientists) have and will always be created by the media. Some deserve it, some don't.

[ariel]

No doubt, some "heroic deeds" were invented.
The classic one, I think, is a story of Aryobarzan.
About 150 years after the Battle of Thermopilae (the 300 Spartans story), Alexander the Great invaded Persia. With a comparatively small force, he annihilated Persian forces time and time again.
The humiliated Persians counteracted with the story of a heroic Persian commander Aryobarzan who, with a small force, held the gigantic Greek army at bay in a mountain pass. A local shepherd betrayed him by showing the Greeks a secret pass around.
Well, this is the exact repetition of the Leonidas' story, only the sides were reversed!
I spoke with a former Professor of History in Teheran University and she just chuckled: according to her, this story was a well-known hoax invented by the humiliated Persians and passed from generation to generation. Kind of psychological compensation..... But just Google this name: hundreds of hits in Iran, from hotels to tours! Heroism, especially invented, can be commercially profitable .

[M.carter]

Originally Posted by ariel

No doubt, some "heroic deeds" were invented.
The classic one, I think, is a story of Aryobarzan.
About 150 years after the Battle of Thermopilae (the 300 Spartans story), Alexander the Great invaded Persia. With a comparatively small force, he annihilated Persian forces time and time again.
The humiliated Persians counteracted with the story of a heroic Persian commander Aryobarzan who, with a small force, held the gigantic Greek army at bay in a mountain pass. A local shepherd betrayed him by showing the Greeks a secret pass around.
Well, this is the exact repetition of the Leonidas' story, only the sides were reversed!
I spoke with a former Professor of History in Teheran University and she just chuckled: according to her, this story was a well-known hoax invented by the humiliated Persians and passed from generation to generation. Kind of psychological compensation..... But just Google this name: hundreds of hits in Iran, from hotels to tours! Heroism, especially invented, can be commercially profitable .

Absolutely, just like nessie!

[M.carter]

One thing Ariel, Lt.Zvika was also recognised by the Syrians, and that he acted alone all during that battle, ive read that in many reports of Syrian military commanders of that time. He's surely a hero.

I also recount the story of Abdulrahman, the young ummayad prince who refounded his dynasty in Iberia, after his clan was massacred by the Abbasids after the battle of the Zab. After countless personal and military feats, he was recognised by his arch-enemy, the Abbasid Caliph in the east, in his court, and in front of all his advisors and viziers, as the "hawk of quraish".

When one is recognised by his enemy as a hero, like Lieutenant Zvi, and Abdulrahman, then he is doubtlessly a hero.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by M.carter

One thing Ariel, Lt.Zvika was also recognised by the Syrians, and that he acted alone all during that battle, ive read that in many reports of Syrian military commanders of that time. He's surely a hero.

I also recount the story of Abdulrahman, the young ummayad prince who refounded his dynasty in Iberia, after his clan was massacred by the Abbasids after the battle of the Zab. After countless personal and military feats, he was recognised by his arch-enemy, the Abbasid Caliph in the east, in his court, and in front of all his advisors and viziers, as the "hawk of quraish".

When one is recognised by his enemy as a hero, like Lieutenant Zvi, and Abdulrahman, then he is doubtlessly a hero.

As I said, the nobility belongs to both sides.

[Ian]

Ariel:

April 25 is just a few days away -- ANZAC Day in my home country of Australia. We celebrate this day with great reverence and pride. No Australian is allowed to reach the age of six (first year in grade school) without knowing about the incredible bravery of the Australian, New Zealand and British forces who gave their lives gallantly in a noble but hopeless fight, and of the Turks who suffered huge casualties as well. We regard this date as commemorating the birth of our nation, just as July 4th is remembered here.

How many nations celebrate a military catastrophe as their crowning national moment? It is all about unselfish sacrifice and serving one's country -- in short, nationalism. Even though the last surviving ANZAC soldier died a few years ago, no Australian would allow themselves to forget the spirit of the ANZAC soldier, or would harbor any animosity to the noble enemy who inflicted the death and destruction and suffered so much death and destruction too.

Ian.

P.S. If you want some stories of heroism, look up the list of those who received posthumous awards of the Victoria Cross at Gallipoli. The tale of Private Simpson and his donkey is particularly informative.

Originally Posted by ariel

Perhaps, the most touching is the letter Ataturk (who defeated the British forces at Gallipoli), sent to the families of the fallen ANZAC soldiers.

"Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives... You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side now here in this country of ours... you, the mothers, who sent their sons from faraway countries wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land, they have become our sons as well."

The Australians erected a memorial to Ataturk in Canberra on which these words are engraved.

Say what you want, guys, but these people are awe inspiring.

[ariel]

October 25, 1854 witnessed a quick succession of 3 heroic military operations by the British Army at Balaclava, but how different they were!
The Charge of the Heavy Brigade under William Simpson and, especially, the Thin Red Line under Colin Campbell were deeds worthy of legends. The Charge of the Light Brigade was an unmitigated slaughter, a narcissistic fantasy of Cardigan who needlessly killed more than 500 of his men just to share the laurels with Simpson and Campbell.
But no matter what, the bravery of the Brits on that day was unsurpassable.

Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.

[micas]

The bravery of the Brits on that day is surpassable because such military blunders have been repeated. Correct me if I'm wrong but cowardice in the British Army in those days would get you shot?

While you're at it, you might as well praise the Persians' unsurpassable bravery for being forced to charge at well-positioned, heavily armored Greeks at the narrow pass of Thermopylae.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by micas

The bravery of the Brits on that day is surpassable because such military blunders have been repeated. Correct me if I'm wrong but cowardice in the British Army in those days would get you shot?

While you're at it, you might as well praise the Persians' unsurpassable bravery for being forced to charge at well-positioned, heavily armored Greeks at the narrow pass of Thermopylae.

Micas , I'm surprised at your somewhat vehement reaction to this thread .

In most armies cowards in battle were executed were they not ?

When it boils down to the bottom of the pot you're fighting for the guy on either side of you ; your comrad in arms .
Soldiers generally go where they're told and do what they're ordered to do and they do it because they don't want to let down the guy next to them .

[ariel]

Originally Posted by micas

The bravery of the Brits on that day is surpassable because such military blunders have been repeated. Correct me if I'm wrong but cowardice in the British Army in those days would get you shot?

While you're at it, you might as well praise the Persians' unsurpassable bravery for being forced to charge at well-positioned, heavily armored Greeks at the narrow pass of Thermopylae.

Yes, with a meager force of ~300,000 to charge all 300 of them! Bravery, indeed....
Especially disgraceful was the behavior of the Persians after they found the body of Leonidas: Xerxes ordered to cut off his head and to crucify his body. Compare with Ataturk.

[micas]

Didn't know I was being vehement but I'm guessing it might be construed that way.

The point I was making is that "real" bravery would be someone making a decision to risk their lives, personal security without being forced into it and without an audience to shame them into bravery or the promise of fame.

Just recently I watched a documentary by Werner Herzog titled "Grizzly Man". It was about some guy who wanted to be "one with the grizzlies" and in the end was eaten by them along with his girlfriend (who feared the bears). The last moments were captured on audio and it shows how the girlfriend, despite her obvious fear, tried to drive the bear away from her boyfriend who had been mauled. The boyfriend was pleading for her to run away but she tried to save him and subsequently killed as well in an isolated part of Alaska.

These acts of personal bravery are worth more than the courage of following orders to attack a fortified position. I value that woman more for her decency as a human being.

[Rick]

Micas , in my opinion they were both idiots . Grizzlies are not sentient beings ; if you're smaller than them then you are potentially a meal ; it's just that simple in my view . I commend the man's female friend for trying to save him ; still to put oneself in the position of being a snack for a large bear shows an extreme lack of common sense .

One of my ancestors showed up for the battle of Bunker (Breed's) Hill ; he was a teenaged boy and manned the trenches with his older neighbors trying to repel the British troops threatening Boston . Young Eleazor French lost his arm to a cannonball during that battle ; he carried the severed limb back to his home in Dunstable after the fight because he was damned if he would leave anything for the redcoats to gloat over .
Was he a hero or a damnfool kid ?
I really don't know ; maybe he showed up to defend his country or maybe just for the thrill of the fight ; either way he showed up and became a part of history .

[micas]

What the woman did was brave regardless of their idiot action being there in the first place which was not the point I was making. If you want to go there we can go into the whole idiocy of war. But I've had that conversation before and it's something I'd prefer to avoid along with talks about politics and religion

[Rick]

Originally Posted by micas

What the woman did was brave regardless of their idiot action being there in the first place which was not the point I was making. If you want to go there we can go into the whole idiocy of war. But I've had that conversation before and it's something I'd prefer to avoid along with talks about politics and religion

That's fine Micas , but I'm afraid like it or not war is an essential part of the human condition ; now we can pretend that the elephant is not standing in the middle of the living room but in reality it is .

Yes , the woman was brave and devoted to her partner .
I praise her for that .

[MABAGANI]

Besides bravery when i hear the word "chivalry" as it relates to knighthood, the aspects i think of are gallantry towards women and courtly love...

A good book i'm reading again is called "With the Bravest", untold history about the Sulu guerilla forces during WWII, outnumbered and outgunned they effectively held their ground with guns, kris and barung...one of their unknown claims to fame was spotting the enemy fleet and relaying the info to command, changing the outcome of the naval campaigns...

[Rivkin]

a

[Tim Simmons]

lets not get too misty eyed about the old chivalry. In those days the knights were often rough blackmailers holding each other for ransom, changing allegiance when suiting, dispensers of casual and cruel justice on thier peasants living in conditions below that of thier masters beasts. I think it is also true that they did indeed have the rights to your women first if living on his estate.

[ariel]

Let's not shortchange the significance of heroism and chivalry.
Yes, wars are 99% marching, eating bad food, living in subhuman conditions and being just a very small cog in a very large machine.
But there are some of us who transcend the drudge and perform deeds that are, in effect, guideposts to human behavior. Few, if any, fantasize about being a garden variety soldier in some major encounter. Few, if any, fail to admire the courage and the nobility of Horatius on the Bridge. "Generals" sending soldiers to battle rarely enter the lore of heroism. It is the individual soldier who does. Heroism is a supremely individual achievement. A person who volunteers to risk life for his country and his comrades is a better man. A person who is magnanimous toward his vanquished enemies is a better man. A person who refuses to obey an inhuman order is a better man. And when we remember them, there is a small, still voice within our conscience: If they could do it, why can't I? This is the meaning of heroic inspiration: striving to be a better man.

To every man upon this earth
Death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

lets not get too misty eyed about the old chivalry. In those days the knights were often rough blackmailers holding each other for ransom, changing allegiance when suiting, dispensers of casual and cruel justice on thier peasants living in conditions below that of thier masters beasts. I think it is also true that they did indeed have the rights to your women first if living on his estate.

I don't think this thread is necessarily about knightly chivalry so much as martial valor, Tim.

[Tim Simmons]

Yes I did realise that, just adding background colour .

There are records of wonderful acts of valour. To me the common soldiery of all nations in the trench life and battles of Verdun, Somme, Ypres, and so on are all heroes. Not known as Lions led by Donkeys for nothing. I just do not understand why the UK government, now it is nearly 100 years ago, cannot pardon all those shot for suppose cowardice, many brave men having been heroes in previous action just needed a rest. I think this is so sad. I know things and times were different and the summery justice issued by weary officers was often forced by the environment. A centenary pardon would go a long way to right a long forgoten wrong.

[Mark]

Since we are really speaking of the concept, not just listing examples, let me give my favorite example from literature -- Frodo Baggins!

I only recently realized that a large part of what entranced me as a youngster about the Lord of the Rings was the heroism of the most unlikely heros of the story - the hobbits. Sitting among great and powerful heros while they argued about the danger and impossibility of destroying the One Ring, Frodo gets up and says simply, "I will take the Ring to Mordor, but I do not know the way" (mercifully, one of the great lines in the book that Jackson left intact in the movie). He eventually even left behind his companions, because he did not want to endanger them - he did not hope to succeed, but still would try. By the end he was literally crawling toward his goal.

Little Frodo was not powerful, he was not wise, he was not especially brave. He did not even know where he was going. Still, there was an even greater hero in the story - his servant Sam. Sam followed out of devotion to Frodo. But in the end, Frodo failed (for those who don't know the story, he refused to destroy the Ring in the end). Sam never gave up. At one point, when he thought his master was dead, he carried on alone (though he knew even less about what to do than did Frodo). When Frodo crawled, Sam carried him. He kept the last food, the last water, for Frodo, and went without.

Frodo and Sam are characters whom Tolkein wrote to represent Everyman. Tolkein's stories were of great "heroics" by mightly warriors and wizards, fighting overwhelming odds, etc., but in his greatest work he chose to show the greatest heroism by taking the most extreme un-heroic type of person (sheltered, un-magical, complacent little guys only about a meter tall, armed with big daggers that they didn't know how to use), and placed them in the most dangerous and horrifying circumstances imaginable. Circumstances were thrust upon them, but they did what they had to do not for themselves, but for something else (Frodo had a somewhat wider understanding of saving the world from evil, but Sam did it only because of his love for Frodo).

Heroism is doing something because you have to, not literally in the physical sense, but morally or compassionately. Doing it because it was the right thing to do (not that one has time to think it all out, but I venture to say that is the motivation, even when instinctual). Generally people praised as heroes deny "having done anything," and not unfrequently confess to having been, deep down, frightened the whole time. Often it would seem that you have no choice, but in fact you always do - you can do nothing, you can give up, you can run away, you can submit to death. I think Tolkein did a wonderful job of capturing the idea of heroism in these characters.

[M.carter]

I think if we were to regard the Lord of the Rings, I would say all of the fellowship were heroes, except Boromir. Although in my opinion, Faramir is the greatest hero in my eyes.