[Discuss] On adventurers and their "noble relatives"

[Timothy Collett]

On Nov 8, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Talita CS wrote:
> Anyway, though we cannot say for sure what did the nobles do
> individually, we can say that overall, the majority would treat
> peasants with disrespect, and even violence.

I still can't agree with this--I'm not saying that it didn't happen,  
or even that it wasn't widespread, but I simply can not believe that  
the **majority** of nobles treated their peasants this badly.

I believe that the majority of nobles treated their peasants more or  
less like a farmer treats his plough-horses: they're nothing like on  
the same level as you, but they shouldn't be beaten half to death or  
otherwise unduly distressed for no reason.  If you do that too much,  
they just won't work, and what's the good of a plough-horse (or  
peasant) who doesn't work?  Sure, you can slaughter him and replace  
him, but that only works for so long, and unless there's a good  
*reason* for it, you won't do it.

Nobles who treated peasants horribly existed; we know this is true.   
But if you really try to think as they thought--yes, peasants were  
basically animals, but most nobles didn't get their kicks torturing  
and killing animals, either.  That's called sadism, and it's hardly a  
universal thing in any age.

Timothy Collett
Anaris Family

--

"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs,  
even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor  
spirits who neither enjoy much or suffer much, because they live in  
the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
  -Theodore Roosevelt




-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss