By identifying their lifestories and history, Renaissance military memoirs were making a radical political claim. First, they claimed that history and politics revolved, and should revolve, around themselves and their deeds. Secondly, they claimed that they were historical-political forces in their own right – or in the right of their own deeds and honor – independent of any other factor, including the royal state. Both claims alike rested on forging a close tie between history, honor, violence and political independence.

The ties between history and violence go back to the very beginning of historiography, and it may well be argued that, at least until very recent times, they were the very essence of history. Despite all the changes history underwent through the ages – in methods, style and subject matter – violence and, above all, war were always the prime example and focus of history. The oldest histories are all about war, and the founding texts of Western historiography deal with three wars – the Trojan, Persian and Peloponnesian. Even subsequently history dealt with war more than with any other subject and, at least with regard to popular history, this is still true today. Hence, in human thought, if there is one thing that undoubtedly belongs to history, if there is one thing that is history par excellence – it is war. More accurately, it is not war in its entirety, but only the actual use of violence that is always seen as the focal point of history. The historical event par excellence is the battle. The historical protagonist par excellence is the warrior.