Why did the two countries go to war in ancient times and not kill them?

The two wars are in confrontation, and they don't cut them down, which is like our current couriers, messengers, just to convey the news, and killing such people shows that they are incompetent, and people in ancient times were very righteous and attached importance to such things.

During the war years, the envoy was just a messenger who ran errands, an insignificant person, you were a general of a country, why did you have a small belly and chicken intestines to an envoy sent by a murderer.

Although the two sides are at war, although it is said to be hostile, everyone also knows that what is said above is not necessarily, and they may only be temporarily hostile.

At this time, the envoy is just here to tell you some things that the other party wants to talk to you, and whether you killed someone is too small.

There is also a need to communicate when you are still fighting, otherwise you won't have the main general when you play, you will say hello to the other party's main general, and it's good to start fighting directly, isn't it?

This shows that there is still a need for communication between the main general and the main general, and then it is necessary to convey the message, if you do not accept the other party's message at all, both sides will be particularly tired, and both sides will be ** miserable.

Of course, there are some more barbaric people, they will behead the envoy, telling the other party that no matter what conditions the other party gives, they will not listen, the purpose of coming is to occupy their territory, and they are here to fight them, at this time, they may not want to communicate with the other party at all, and they feel that it doesn't matter if they kill the envoy, and the mission will not be guaranteed in the space at this time.

There is really such a saying, in ancient times, there was indeed a rule for the two armies to fight. Because in many wars in history, communication is required, so it is a norm not to kill. If one party kills the envoy who came to communicate, it will definitely cause criticism from other countries.

This regulation was formed during the Western Zhou Dynasty and was accepted by all people during the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period. The main reason why there are such regulations is because of the nature of war, because when fighting a war, it is necessary to be cautious, and the two sides must agree on the time in advance, fight according to the agreement, and finish the fight within the specified time. There will also be a need to stop the war for various reasons, and the two sides will need to communicate well.

In ancient times, was there really a saying that two countries were at war without killing each other?

In fact, in ancient times, there was such a saying, mainly because the two countries had to communicate at war. The reason why there is such a provision is because of the nature of war, and fighting a war is actually mainly for profit. Therefore, it is necessary to make an appointment in advance before going to war.

But in the process of fighting, the return liquid will also need to stop fighting for various reasons, and the two sides also need to communicate in detail at this time. Therefore, there is a saying that the two countries will not kill each other at war.

Was there really a saying in ancient times that you don't cut it?

In ancient times, there was such a saying, and this was also a rule of warfare in ancient times. In ancient times, it was necessary for both sides to communicate with each other, and to determine the time for the war to be completed within the specified time. The war needs to be agreed on by both sides, otherwise there is no way to attack, and in the process of fighting, it is very likely that the two countries will need to stop for various reasons.

At this time, it is also necessary to communicate in detail, so there will be such an agreement.

Tips

There is really such a saying, because in ancient times the two sides of the war needed to communicate in detail. It is necessary to determine the time for the battle so that the battle can begin, and it must be completed within the specified time. In the process of fighting, a certain country may not be able to continue fighting for various reasons, so it is also necessary to communicate in detail.

In this case, such a provision arises.

This is a good tradition in ancient warfare, after all, in both countries, envoys are only words, but also means of communication, but exaggeration also connects communication, and if the conflict between the two countries is about to start the 100th war, in this regard time is to unilaterally kill another envoy, if not, it is undoubtedly provocative, perhaps there is a shift on both sides of the conflict. However, this is only a gentleman's agreement, because just one agreement will lead to a breakthrough in due course. In the battle of Qinqin, in addition to not killing the envoy, there is another kind of person who does not kill people, and that is surrender, if the other side still surrenders and does not let the others surrender, isn't it cruel?

If we now know that the two countries are in conflict, then we have a relatively simple way to deal with the expression of each other's opinions by citizens of the two countries via the Internet, or directly at the top by ** or** and exchange of ideas, of course, here are representatives of the older generation of envoys, but now the role of the actor does not matter. In ancient times, due to the lack of advanced means of communication, no mobile phones, no **, the two countries were in conflict, the war was about to require or there was a certain degree of condition, usually you would choose to send an envoy to another country to express intentions, in fact, to go to another country, the envoy of life and death was harmless, after all, there was no harm to the same, and there was no help, who would kill the means of communication without knowing it?

At that time, the national anthem sent an envoy to Zhou Yunhua's military camp and then sent a message, and in the end, the purpose of the agreement between the warring parties was to reach an agreement, and China took Zhou Yunhua as a hostage, and later, people were doing it when the rules of engagement between the two armies were that both sides would not cut the envoys.

The reason for this is that in the spring and autumn there is a great deal of importance to etiquette, which respects etiquette and observes the rules, but also encourages this rule of engagement, and does not cut off the envoy's contact if he is killed. There are very few envoys, both morally and prestigiously, who are unjustifiably lacking. What's more, even killing this prophet can reap benefits that are more harmful than good.

In ancient times, there was really such a preoccupation rule, because in the next life, there were some people who were both civil and military, and they were all polite and respectable people, so they didn't dare to behead them in the chaotic times.

In ancient times, there was indeed such a customary provision, which was an agreement to protect the interests of both parties.

There is a saying that "when two countries fight each other, they don't cut them off", which is a norm that both sides of the war abide by most of the time, so how did such a norm come about? What if the envoy is killed?

The essence of war is actually a struggle for interests, and in this kind of war based on interests, the two countries generally do not talk about fighting each other, and there is generally a process of escalating friction. Moreover, the ancients also said that soldiers are a major matter of the country, and the saints have to use them as a last resort. No one dares to say that the war will be won, and it is also possible to kill a thousand enemies and lose eight hundred, so if you can get the benefits you want through communication and negotiation, then it is naturally the best, whether it is to issue a war letter, put forward conditions, issue threats or show weakness in peace talks, all give the envoy a place to use.

Therefore, even if it is a warring party, there is actually a need for communication and communication.

War is also a contest between the national strength of the two sides and the combat effectiveness of the army, and the winner of the war can be determined by a strong army, excellent generals, and profound national strength, but it will definitely not be a messenger. Killing the emissary will not actually change the balance of power between the two sides, and it will bring any essential blow to the other side, but it may anger the other side, thus interrupting the communication channels between the two sides, which is really more than worth the loss.

What happens if you kill an emissary in war? Killing an emissary generally has only two purposes, one is to humiliate the enemy, to show that the enemy is not an equal force to oneself, that is, the other party is not worthy of negotiating with one's side, so as to provoke the enemy. The second is to express determination, and the messenger who killed the enemy showed that there was nothing to talk about with the enemy, that is, he completely cut off the channels of communication, and the purpose was to cut off the hearts of his soldiers to seek peace, and to unite the morale of the army and fight to the death with the enemy.

No matter what the purpose is, both the enemy and the enemy can actually understand one thing, that is, the channel for negotiation is blocked, so the next most likely thing is not to repair.

The two countries do not fight each other, so that this situation generally only exists in the two equal forces, and in the case of the two forces are not equal, the security of the envoy is actually not ***. Or one of them does not regard the envoy as the messenger. For example, the rebellious army on one side, and the army of the imperial court on the other side, in the eyes of the imperial army, the rebellious army is not a "country" equal to the imperial court at all.

This is an ancient regulation, everyone can abide by it, in the process of war, generally will not break this provision, if the cut after the destruction of the regulations, it will affect the contradictions between countries, will lead to serious **.

Because we are a ceremonial country, we are very focused on the culture of war. It may make the contradictions between the two countries more intense, the battle between the two countries will be longer, and the country that is killed will have no reputation, not much morality, and will provoke more people to resist.

This is an ancient system, generally countries and countries will abide by, once such a situation occurs, it is very immoral, which may lead to the contradiction between the two countries becoming more and more serious, resulting in serious **.

They represent the face of the two countries, and they may completely tear the faces of the two countries, and the consequences are very serious, they will be condemned, and they will also mean that these two countries will not die.

This is a tradition, this means that everything is negotiable, and there will be such a saying, after the beheading, it means that there is no end to death, there is no room for negotiation, and it will strengthen the morale of the other party.

The reason why the two armies fought each other in ancient times:

The ancients paid attention to etiquette, from the Spring and Autumn period under the lobbying of Confucianism, large countries began to use Confucianism as a governing doctrine, the courtesy in the Analects can explain the etiquette believed in by the big vassal states at that time, even if it is a war with a small country, out of etiquette, the monarch of a large country still needs to send a ceremonial department or even personally receive the other party's envoys, China is a country of etiquette, whether it is war or peace, the Chinese pay attention to etiquette; The envoys of both sides of the war often play an important role, and the two sides play a key role in the war and the envoys, so they often do not cut the envoys; In addition to not beheading the envoys, there are also no prisoners, no medical soldiers, no women, children, the elderly, and people who have no ability to resist, etc., reflecting the civilized and humane side of modern society, and at the same time, it is also the image of breaking the enemy's resistance and establishing a righteous division.

In ancient times, the two armies fought each other for the following five main reasons:

First, the main thing is to inherit the war culture.

China's war culture began to take shape in the Western Zhou Dynasty, when there was a lot of emphasis on waging war, and it was necessary to stand up to morality. King Wu of Zhou attacked the Emperor because of his "loss of way", so King Wu of Zhou was justified in uniting the surrounding princes to defeat the King of Zhou. The Zhou Dynasty also formulated a complete set of human etiquette order, which is the first slip to dismantle the Zhou etiquette, which also includes the norms of war.

2. Show spirit.

In ancient times, the emphasis was on heroism, and if you kill it, you will appear cowardly before you fight, and if you don't have the courage on the battlefield, you don't have to fight this battle. However, it is not absolute, and sometimes it can be cut to show spirit. For example, the Mongol attack on Diaoyu City was to send an envoy to persuade him to surrender, but the Song army directly beheaded the envoy and said that he would never surrender.

Third, the envoy is also defenseless.

The role of the messenger is to send letters, which is not aggressive, and the messenger at this time is similar to the old and weak, jujube women and children. And killing an unarmed emissary will make people look down on them.

Fourth, it is used as a tactic for suspecting soldiers.

The role of the envoy also has the meaning of spying on the military situation, fighting wits and courage on the battlefield, and often releasing some true and false news to fool the envoy, the most famous is probably the "Jiang Gan stolen books" during the Battle of Chibi.

Fifth, to achieve the will at the lowest cost.

In battle, the emissaries come for only two purposes: to surrender or to surrender. Whether it is surrender or surrender, the original intention is the same, that is, to minimize ** and achieve the will at the lowest cost.

Such a rule is actually an unwritten rule, because in the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, etiquette was the most important at that time, so in order to express mutual politeness and respect between the two dust stool countries, no matter how deep the hatred is, they will restrain their anger, and at most drive the messenger away, so there is a saying that they will not be killed.

Friends who know the history of ascension know that in the ancient Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, because of the influence of Confucianism that Confucius has always admired, Confucianism occupied the main ideological position at that time, and etiquette was very important to the quarrels of the vassal states, so whether it was a war or other disputes, it was necessary to issue a war letter in advance to agree on the time and place, and the real person was in such a role, so in order to express politeness and respect for the other country, the envoy would not be killed. <>

1. Such regulations have a deep relationship with historical background and culture.

From the entire history books including to the present, no matter what kind of conflict occurs between the two countries, the expulsion of the envoy is the most tense diplomatic means, very few countries will kill the envoy, in order to show respect for the other country, maintain a kind of Wood, coupled with the deep cultural influence of the time, such an unwritten rule has gradually formed, and the role of the envoy is indispensable in the process of war, so the importance of the envoy is obvious. <>

Second, the origin of this system comes from?

If you dig deeper, when did such a regulation begin? It can be traced back to the Zhou Dynasty, when the Zhou Dynasty had a very complete set of etiquette system, that is, we often called the Zhou Rite in the dynasty at that time, the ** of the entire dynasty and the people will restrain themselves according to the Zhou Rite, and anyone will fully abide by this rule, it is out of protective status, no one will kill the envoy to touch the dignity of the other party's country. <>

3. What is my personal opinion?

I think that such a system seems to be an unwritten etiquette, even if the two sides have a deep enmity like the sea, but in order to restrain their own manners and manners, although they are not respectful, they cannot be killed, and in the hearts of all people are always bound by reason, and everyone silently observes this habit, which has become a matter of common recognition for everyone.