Printable View
The mushroom thing aint true...a program on the history channel proved that a side effect of the mushrooms (the ones that produce the factor "Beserkerness") have a nasty side effect involving Diarroeah, vomiting and other nasty stuff, not something that is prized in warriors ~:cheers:Quote:
Originally Posted by skeletor
yeah , tests proved that they worked themselves up psychologically.Quote:
Originally Posted by ian_of_smeg16
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserk...erker_behavior
A UK television programme in 2004 tested the possible use of fly agaric and alcohol by training a healthy volunteer in the use of Viking weapons, then evaluating his performance under the influence of fly agaric or alcohol compared to no influence. It was obvious that use of fly agaric or alcohol severely reduced his fighting ability, and the tentative conclusion drawn was that berserk state was achieved psychologically; otherwise berserkers would have been too easy to kill.
has anyone here ever gone berserk?
nice site
sounds almost like pms..Quote:
Going berserk — berserksgangr or berserkergang — could also happen in the middle of daily work. It began with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and a chill in the body. The face swelled and changed its color. Next came great rage, howling, and indiscriminate brawling. When the rage quelled, the berserker was exhausted and dull of mind for up to several days. According to sagas, many enemies of berserkers exploited this stage to get rid of them.
one time i was playing mario cart against this guy in my dorm. i was leading the whole time, talking trash like no tomorrow! i was clearly the better racer, but it started getting tight on the last lap. at the last second, my opponent fired a random shell from about 5 seconds behind me. the thing ricocheted and clipped me as i was literally about a tenth of second from the finish line. i recovered and limped towards the line and the dirty bastard raced right past, beating me by a hair.Quote:
Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking
i can't tell you how angry i was, i threw the controller down and sprung up from the couch screaming "NO!! NO!! NO!!" as loud as i could. there were about 6 or 7 other people in the room and they were all going crazy. i raged over to a bed that was in the back of the room and grabbed the foot of the mattress and threw it straight up. the thing smacked the ceiling (more than 10-ft up) and crashed down right back onto the frame. everyone in the room scattered. i mean people were literally fleeing like i had a gun or something. it was hilarious. one girl, upon creeping back into the room, said, "you are an intense man", with a hint of fear and awe in her voice.
a few days later i tried to do the same thing, in a normal state of mind. i could touch the opposite end of the mattress to the ceiling, but i was nowhere near smacking the whole thing flush into the ceiling like i did before. it didn't even feel like it weighed anything when i raged on it.
Yes, one day during a summer vacation from school my dad woke me up 11am and told me he had some work for me to do....when i went upstairs i saw a rather large dump truck dumping 2 tons of dirt into our front yard. my dad said i had to move it to the back yard and fill in the new garden. i looked at the wheelbarrow and told my dad the tire was flat how can i possibly do this?, he told me to put air into it. i did and halfway into the backyard the tire would go flat again because the weight of the dirt pused air through the hole in the tire at a very fast rate. so after about 1.5 hours of back breaking work of pushing a wheelbarrow with a flat wheel and getting more and more angry after every load. i spilled the dirt all over the yard grabbed the spade and snapped it in 2 parts. the spade had a wooden handle about 5 centimeters in diameter i then proceded to go on a rampage kicking and throwing stuff. i fractured my foot in two placesQuote:
Originally Posted by the_handsome_viking
i was very very angry
Berserker states are fairly well attested in numerous cultures. The Irish rastriagh would pray for hours and put themselves into a kind of trance where they would begin to babble incoherently; the whole time their body would toss and shake violently (both pagan and Christian Irish believed they were being possessed by spirits that protected Ireland), ending with the person speaking very loud and very clearly, but everything they said was gibberish. They would eventually get so swift to put themself into a trance (which is an actual state of mind; it's essentially what the brain goes through while asleep, but in this state one can keep themself awake and moving, though certain nerve reactions are slowed down, though, often, one can confine those slowed reactions, once experienced, to things like pain, allowing one to ignore pain briefly; however, one would still probably lack a bit of control) they could do it right before a fight, and would fight in a trance-like state. It was called a 'calm rage' because of the seeming absolute calm of the individual coupled with their intensity in a fight (they would do things like rip people's fingers off, tear out eyes, pull out/crush throats, etc., without having drawn their weapons first; they got pretty sadistic). King Brian Boru's brother Wolf was a rastriagh (Wolf also was the one who killed Brian Boru's killer). The problem with it was that a really experienced rastriagh, if he wasn't careful, could accidentally slip into this state, and essentially freak out; rarely would he hurt anyone, except himself, though. It was scary, but it was a psychological state.
That's one kind of 'berserker'. The Irish used to say vikings did something similar, but not quite the same. Much more movement, and very loud. Lots of shouting. It was probably the same basic method; given that it's said they could slip into a berserk at any time, it seems likely it was purely a pyschological state, somewhat akin to a self-induced madness. The mind can only be subjected to certain rigors so many times before it snaps.
i would be more afraid of a calm beserker than a loud one. i mean before you know it he is holding your throat in your hand
scary as hell
Have you guys by chance changed the graphic for Hellenistic Pikemen to use BOTH hands to hold the Sarissa?
Fear not, we have an animation that will allow two handed pikes/xystons/kontus where aplicable.
you guys never cease to amaze me....
Warriors who rip you limb-from-limb without any visible emotion would be quite scary... Seriously. :sweatdrop:
bah, ill take Greek or Roman disipline over the shock tactics and mind tricks
There was plenty of discipline and tactics to be found; this wasn't every soldier, it was (in the Irish case) a small group of religious fanatics. But there were shield and spearwalls, ordered 'break' tactics, 'shell' formations (akin to testudo), sapping, very ingenious defenses involving man-made terrain (large things; not just moats, but huge man-made hills and the like). Berserkers being present in an army isn't a sign of a lack of tactics, and it's poor form to imagine that it is.
Irish Case? they had no major impact on anything untill maybe a few hundred years ago. And even then they only had an impact on British intrests.
Only true to someone who has no knowledge of ancient ireland, of course. Please refine your absolute statements to be, well, true, rather than absolutely false.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marinakis
What I'm saying is you're judging tactics based on 'an army uses berserkers, so they don't use any tactics'. Also, that was rather glib, and ignorant of history. During the dark ages, it was Irish monks who kept the books of Europe from being burned by invaders; if it wasn't saved by the eastern Roman empire, it was saved by the Irish (the period in Ireland is called the 'Gaelic Golden Age' for a reason). It also neglects the wide proliferation of Irish mercenaries (which widely changed the course of numerous events, and their use during the crusades as translators was important to numerous events), the conquest of Pictland, their effect on trade (The Irish weren't some 'backwoods' civilization in the dark ages; since they were unaffected by the dark ages negatively, they were a comparatively advanced collection of kingdoms who traded with every major kingdom and empire in Europe) and the defeat of the vikings. After Clontarf, pressure on expanding into Saxon lands was higher due to the lack of Irish holdings, and invariably altered the course of history in northern Europe. Looking further back, what about the abandonment of Britain by the Romans? That wasn't just Picts; Gaels had set up slaving colonies along the coast and were raiding with impunity, destroying mines and the like. The Irish helped make Britain so unprofitable for Romans, they couldn't deal with it with the rest of the empire's problems, and they left it. Such ignorance of the history of the region is irritating.
As to the point at hand; the Irish used berserkers. However, they also fought in dense shieldwall formations, used pikes, made elaborate armor (layers of scale, chain, and padding in some cases; actually dumbed down from earlier armor used by iron age Irish invaders), and used multi-stage charges (such as axe/cudgel followed by spears to defeat a dense formation). The presense of 'berserkers' does not mean an army doesn't use tactics, and it's stupid to think it does. The vikings used very impressive tactics, and they had berserkers. How does this denote a lack of discipline and tactics as a whole? Such an attidue of throwing the baby out with the bathwater implies you have little knowledge of actual study or reasoning, and would rather make kneejerk assesments.
And what of other armies? Carthage certainly had disciplined soldiers and tactics. Carthage also employed Celts, who had 'berserkers'. They employed rather disciplined Celts sometimes, at that, such as the Brihentin, Gallic knights, who were grouped with Iberian heavy cavalry. Celtic Soldurii were disciplined; arguably more disciplined than any regular Roman soldier would be, and for good reason (religious devotion to one another); in fact, they so impressed the Romans that Julius Caesar applied the title to his men to encourage them. It's statements like yours that are the reason EB exists. Why do you think Romans used Celtic soldiers when they could? Or anyone else for that matter? Galatians were in high demand as mercenaries for a reason.
Yeah right. Greeks and Romans were as skilled as many others, in many cases less so. Even Roman training can't replace riding nearly from birth, or Celtic tactics in many cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marinakis
I could say all the Greeks do are have two mindless hoplite groups who push at each other. But that would be a simplification.
Many peoples were far better at Greeks and Romans at warfare, both when it came to warriors and tactics.
Yeah, that 'Irish being unimportant' struck a nerve here too. I'm amazed at the patience of ye EB fellows. I'd have packed it in years ago under the assault of the Philistines.
I've made this point before and I'll make it again, all of the standard Roman equipment that we think of a Roman soldier of the 4th to early 1st centuries wearing was originally Celtic, excepting the pilum. Chain-mail was almost certainly invented by the Celts, the scutum was a Celtic shield, the gladius hispaniensis was Celtiberian/Iberian in origin, even the most popular helmet types of the Roman soldier were Celtic designs (e.g. Montefortino). The Romans might have fancied themselves the successors of the Mediterranean world but in reality their methods of warfare were highly influenced by the Celts. Additionally, in Italy the Classical phalanx was quickly replaced by more Celtic methods of warfare when the Romans first came into contact with them. I know this might be a tad unrelated, but I just wanted a chip at the "big table". ~;)
EDIT: Maybe the reason the Romans were so succesful in the first place is because, unlike the Greeks, they adopted Celtic methods of warfare!
Just rambling, sorry. :embarassed:
i never said that the equipment wasnt celtic in origin, im part French so im sure i have a little Gallic/celtic blood in me. Surly when talking about a peoples impact on the western world you dont look at just warfare?
Lets look ar Egypt, Greece, Phoenicia, and Greco-Roman culture, any one of those peoples surly had a far more profound and significant legacy then celtic influences.
I know america is 99% Irish so im sure im gonna get a huge backlash from patriotic members...
Perplexed. im perplexed at the comment " Maybe the reason the Romans were so succesful in the first place is because, unlike the Greeks, they adopted Celtic methods of warfare!"
Thats a silly comment the Greeks are if not the most succesful people one of the most. Lest look at some things the greeks contributed.
Democracy
Philosophy
The Marathon
Alexander the Great
The Olympic Games
Comedy
Geometry
Public Jury
The Hippocratic Oath
Hellenistic Architecture
History
Tragedy
i could go on if you wish
I would be happy to compare and contrast
So far you have
Chain mail
Gladius
And the most common roman used helmet
Egyptian? Sure the culture was interesting, but I think Celts had a far more lasting influence on at least European culture.
Have you ever seen their gold works and art? Far pretty than Roman stuff, and Greek stuff (well, not prettier than the Greek artisans working for the Scythians). Heck, the Greeks even respected the Celts a lot, and they were not the most tolerant of not Greeks.
And without Celtic warfare, mabye the Romans wouldn't have lasted, so that's at least profound. ~;)
P.S. You're irrelevant coment on the ethnicity of America doesn't really make much sense.
about my america comment im just saying that a huge number of people that live in america (as i do) have roots leading back to the Irish. There is nothing wrong with that. Just that im saying alot of people are going to attack me cause they think im insulting the irish, which im not.
~:handball:Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
Ok Matt, I may have taken my rhetoric a bit far... ~;)
I should have said some, not many. ~;)
Now wait a second, Steppe you honestly thing all the greeks did was hoplite warfare? For the most part I would agree with you reguarding southern most greece. however, Syracuse, Macedon, Epirus, thessally and all the Kingdoms following Alexander used very mixed and talented armies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Urnamma
It wouldnt be fair for me to say that all Celts did was just rush people naked screaming and hollering would it? Just cause some did doesnt mean they all did.
the southern greeks used mostly hoplite warfare for a reason. The land was so mountainous that they couldnt get good land to raise horses. thats why north from thebes, and all the way over in Syracuse you see greek peoples using horses.
I agree 100%. The Northern Greeks figured out how to ride horses, like the Thessallians. Then Alexander introduced more Eastern elements which helped in his armies.
But if you read what I wrote, I did not say "Greeks just used hoplite warfare".
I said "I could say all the Greeks do are have two mindless hoplite groups who push at each other. But that would be a simplification.".
Just as it is a simplification to say that Celts just charged.
I'm Irish. From Ireland. Ranika mentioned the work of Irish scholars in preserving the great works of the Greeks and Romans in the 'Dark Ages.' Thus, I suppose, one is left to reflect on the advancements made in warfare by such actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
Im sorry i dissagree, its not that the northern greeks "figured it out" its just that the terrain did not allow them to raise horses south of thessally and epirus.
To raise a horse, and enough for alot of calvary, you need ALOT of land for pasture. southern greece is extreamly rocky and mountainous which made it nearly impossable to raise good bloodlines
I would give the vast majority of credit to the Arabs for perserving and carrying on the Greeks legacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymous_joe
Well, it's their fault for living in bad horse country. ~;)
Seriously, I am aware of the limitations of geography on horses. You can't have a steppe army in most places on earth. However, if the Greeks had wanted to, they could have hired more mercanaries from good horse nations (Scythians, Persians, Thracians even fellow Greeks like the Thessalians). And that is what Alexander and his successors did.