Why did you surrender in ancient times knowing that you would be executed if you were captured?

Everyone has herd mentality and luck, even soldiers are no exception. Judging from the history of the war, in addition to the extreme army, the Japanese, Zhang Xun, Li Tingzhi and others ate people and guarded the city, resolutely refused to surrender, and the vast majority always chose to be prisoners.

For example, in the Nanjing Defence War, it was learned that the Japanese army had been killed all the way since Shanghai, and almost all the countries that did not break through chose to surrender. First, because most senior officers left them and ran away, they were leaderless, resulting in a negative psychology of broken cans and broken falls; Second, I hope the enemy can abide by the Geneva Convention and think that Nanjing is the capital, and the Japanese army will treat them leniently for the sake of the so-called international image.

Only an army that has been trained to Japanese level, is stubborn and committed suicide by caesarean section after running out of ammunition and food will give up all illusions and greet death with a broken posture. In the national army, there are also some vicious people, such as Liu Kan. After Yichuan was defeated, he blew himself up with a Grenade in order not to be captured by our army. If he doesn't succeed, he will die. As for Zhang, it is generally believed that he was killed by our platoon leader after surrendering.

Regardless of ancient and modern times, prisoners are always holding the psychology of being able to live a little longer, hiding their ears and comforting themselves. Even when his companion was killed, he felt that it was not his turn. It's sad that a team of devils actually slaughtered more than 3000 national army prisoners in batches!

There was no Geneva treaty in ancient times, so the probability of being captured and killed was higher than that in modern times, but this does not mean that surrender will definitely lead to death.

In fact, many outstanding generals and monarchs in ancient China did not advocate killing the enemy and surrendering. Because "killing people to cover up their mouths" has always been regarded as an inhuman performance, which will not only bring bad luck, but also leave a lasting stigma. For example, Xiang Yu was notorious for killing 200,000 Qin Jun prisoners after the victory in the Battle of Julu. Later, Xiang Yu failed in the war with Liu Bang for the world, to some extent because of the negative impact of surrender.

Another example is leitian. Although he was regarded as one of the four famous soldiers in the Warring States period, he was praised as "human slaughter". He was forced to commit suicide because of his excessive killing. And those who fought in troubled times, such as Zhu Can and Huang Chao, all came to no good end without exception.

In addition, in the troubled times of ancient times, the consumption of people and materials by war far exceeded the range that society could bear. For example, at the end of the Eastern Han Dynasty, after the Yellow turban insurrectionary uprising and the hegemony of the princes at the end of the Han Dynasty, the population of the Han Dynasty dropped sharply in just a few decades, which made Cao Cao leave a message in Hao Lixing that "the world has been left for a hundred years, and his thoughts are broken." Moreover, in the war of cold weapons, except for a few battles in which fewer people win more, in most cases, even the winner will inevitably "kill 10,000 enemies and lose 3,000". Therefore, the victorious countries actually attach great importance to supplementing their troops or expanding their strength by absorbing prisoners of war.

Therefore, surrender in ancient times was generally not killed. Of course, if you can surrender under the leadership of a general, your overall chances of survival will be much higher. After all, it will be easily absorbed by successful people. If it is a scattered straggler or a small group of people, the possibility of being killed and used for military service after surrender is quite high.

Because of this, soldiers who fought alone on the battlefield or scattered small groups of defeated soldiers would rather escape into the forest of Shan Ye as bandits than be caught by the enemy or even their own troops.

Faced with any life-threatening danger, people have a desire to survive. Similarly, in ancient times, although it was known that 100% was executed after being arrested, the desire to survive was prone to luck. If you don't surrender, you will die immediately, at least not immediately. If you don't die, there may be a miracle of escape and eternal life. It is said that living a few more days means living a few more days, so you naturally choose to surrender and be captured. Maybe that's what happened. My personal analysis and guess may not be correct. Please give us your advice!

In ancient times, 100% of people captured in the war would be executed, which is a complete misunderstanding.

In ancient times, there were very few executions of prisoners, mostly generals, while small soldiers were adapted into their own soldiers or transferred to the rear to be farmers or slaves. There are few large-scale executions of captured soldiers.

During the war years, all walks of life withered, people fled everywhere, the fields were deserted, no one did business, and the economy was not good. Population is very important in wartime. With population, we have everything and strength to continue the war. Captured soldiers are also a population, and of course they will not be executed at will.

In ancient wars, it was common for Party A to capture Party B's soldiers, and then Party A adapted Party B's soldiers for Party A's use, and it became Party A's army to continue to attack Party B. Why did Changping of Qin kill more than 400,000 soldiers of Zhao and Xiang Yu kill more than 200,000 soldiers for more than 2,000 years? It was still controversial, because in ancient wars, all the captured soldiers were rarely killed, and the case was very special, so it was constantly brought up for discussion.

Zhang Han surrendered in the Qin Dynasty and was reused by Xiang Yu, while Li Ling surrendered in the Han Dynasty and Xiongnu was reused. During the Three Kingdoms period, Shu Han perished and Soochow perished. Although many folk military commanders surrendered and were killed, many people survived. Until the Ming and Qing dynasties, there were still many cases in which the enemy was defeated and surrendered and was reused.

Beiyang fleet prefect Ding was surrendered by the Taiping Army and later reused by the Qing Dynasty. Beiyang fleet was also entrusted with the task of prefect. If he is caught, he will be put to death.

In ancient wars, no matter ordinary soldiers or some talented generals, unless there were some special reasons, they were generally not executed and might be entrusted with important tasks.

This statement is actually problematic.

As a matter of fact, in ancient wars, neither prisoners of war nor residents of occupied areas really had to be executed. If you surrender voluntarily, not only will you not die, but you may also have a lenient policy.

Why?

First, although war was a matter of life and death in ancient times and today, in ancient times, it was extremely immoral to kill and surrender, in other words, there was a lack of "benevolence". Once this bad reputation is formed, it will be talked about by just people every day, and over time it will become the so-called eternal infamy.

Second, in ancient times, war was a terrible thing, because many people died after a war, and the dead people were unlucky after all. Therefore, the country should make long-term preparations and considerations before launching a war, and also ask for divination. Under this concept, the generals who participated in the war did not dare to kill or slaughter a large number of cities, because they were afraid that excessive killing would bring them ominous.

Third, in ancient times, there was not much difference in weapon factors between the two sides of the war. The most crucial thing is actually population. Whoever has a large population and strong military mobilization ability on both sides of the war will become the winner. Therefore, in addition to consuming the other population, war is also consuming its own population. If we can attract a large number of prisoners of war to surrender, we can expand our army in a short time. The same is true of the occupation of cities, because in ancient agricultural society, it is useless to occupy an empty city, and population is the basis of productivity. If we can get the population of the city, even if the city is abandoned, we can consider it.

So, in ancient times, what was the usual practice of the victorious party to the conquered nation or the surrendered enemy?

Generally speaking, unless it is a city loyal to the opposition, generals will warn them by slaughtering. Those who voluntarily surrender will not only be slaughtered, but also be lenient in order to buy people's hearts and show them to other enemies who have not surrendered. Soldiers who surrender, especially those who surrender in the whole organizational system, are generally lenient and then reorganized into their own troops.

The premise is wrong, why? This kind of questioning is too poor.

At all times, killing prisoners is generally regarded as an unkind and ominous evil. "100% prisoners will be executed" is sheer nonsense.

The ancient custom in China was not to kill prisoners of war. Of course, there are exceptions. The most famous one is that the State of Qin killed 400,000 soldiers of Zhao.

Worrying about the situation is a waste of time. Never do it yourself. Qin fought against Zhao for a long time with the strength of the whole country, and its troops and food supply were on the verge of collapse. Tian Lei held out until the last five minutes before winning by luck. This is because Zhao's general was accidentally killed, and the army surrendered without a master.

However, it is unable to provide food for so many Zhao pawns. In the event of an uprising, Zhao will do his best to mobilize troops and fight, and will face despair. Because Qin faces several other countries, the situation is very dangerous. Tian Lei did it for the State of Qin. He became a wicked man and lost his reputation as a great star. I always regretted it. Later, when I was killed, I said I shouldn't have killed the prisoner.

The surrender you mentioned is an act between armies. In the era of cold weapons, in an army established by simple obedience, it is difficult for individuals to decide what to do or not to do by their own will!

Look at the book Mob, and you will have a deeper understanding of collective unconscious behavior!

As for life or death after surrender, what can be considered for the trapped individual?

Killing and surrendering has always been considered cruel and ominous, so it is generally not adopted by the army. Under normal circumstances, as long as the supply can be guaranteed, the army will not kill those who surrender!

If this army keeps killing the enemy and surrendering, then it will encounter stubborn resistance in the subsequent war! The army will also lose its moral high ground, lose people's hearts and lose morale. This is why all wars in the history of our country pay attention to making teachers famous!

For an individual, only an army that dares to inspire the enthusiasm and initiative of grassroots officers and soldiers, carry forward military democracy and explain why it is fighting will dare to sacrifice and dare to win! Will swear to death Even in modern times, there are only a handful of such troops!

Naive question. There is no logic and answer value at all, and there is no historical and military common sense. In ancient times 100% of prisoners of war were executed? Where does this argument come from? What is the basis of such horror? Thousands of years of ancient history, how many wars? There are many forms between countries, nations and religions, and no war has ever killed all prisoners of war. Logically and technically, it is impossible. And being captured on the battlefield is caused by various reasons, not just surrender.

It is an ancient rule of war not to kill or surrender, and it is an unspoken rule that the two armies engage in war without cutting. Tian Lei killed someone and surrendered, which is a long-lasting legacy. Xiang Yu killed and surrendered, which is also a timeless legacy.

In ancient times, you didn't kill prisoners 100%, because it was difficult to fight like this in the later battles, and the other side would defend desperately.