Click to Subscribe
▶  More from Ancient Combat The Man Cave
The Warrior Origins of the Western Age of Majority

Thank you, Shep, for the fine link below. What a story.

Civilization has an emasculation problem.

Modernity is the elevation of emasculation to godhead.

One of the main problems with civilized society is that its complexity necessitates a more mature and more morally compromised warrior. As a good boxer of 40 years who was destroyed by a slightly less competent boxer of 16-years, due to his superior vitality and size I can attest that males of such an age, if permitted, could be men, could be warriors, indeed were in most pre-civilized societies. Barbarian societies did not have gang bangers or juvenile delinquents. They had entry-level warriors who conducted lighter tasks than the fully mature men.

Generally, a normal man is not capable of dealing with men in their prime on the physical level [mass, vitality, coordination, strength] until he is 21. Thus, in ancient Greece, males were not regarded as men until age 21. Athletic competition, manhood rites, did not begin until puberty, at age 12, and was further subdivided at 16 for older youths. Part of the reasoning behind the 21 year old majority was economic. The warrior had to be able to afford an expensive kit of armor and thus need be economically viable. However, the Greeks made exceptions for exceptional individuals and not only permitted, but forced, more mature teens to fight the men. Modern systems discourage such promotion in favor of maintaining same-age herds of limited humans.

The Romans continued the 21 year majority. It made sense. Younger fellows might serve as velites just as among the Greeks youths might serve as peltasts or armor bearers. Assigning youths to throwing darts, javelins and rocks made a lot of sense as overhand throwing is a young man’s game as the thrower’s shoulder is usually compromised before a man hits 30.

In medieval Christendom, the 21 year majority was further continued for the same reasons, that the warrior had economic responsibilities, had to possess a wide range of combative skills on horse and on foot and was the base political and military unit. He wasn’t just another spear. He was the core element of an entire military unit and the holder of a basic economic unit which supported his expensive war kit.

One of the reasons why primitive tribes have routinely gotten the best of adjacent civilized societies, despite being outnumbered at least 10-1, was the use of youths in the ranks, which made a more experienced warrior once he was fully matured, not to mention the use of a higher percentage of tribal man power. Such tribal polities field more flexible units and generally dominated their civilized enemies until population pressure exceeded the 1,000 to 1 mark or advanced killing technologies were introduced.

A society serious about preserving manhood as a functional component of internal and external survival, would induct its male youth into warrior societies at puberty. Any other type of society is a slave society.

All Power Fighting
Add Comment