I probably could beat a person who wasn't defending himself to death, but that doesn't mean that I have the guts to do it, Leonidas did it just to get the other kids food.
The fight with the giant wolf was a showcase of all of his strengths, wits, courage, tactics, brawns and will power. Achilles would have lost against the wolf. Leonidas could use Achilles rage to aid him in a fight. Leonidas could out muscle him or he could out smart him, if Achilles is mad enough.
If Leonidas can pit his wits and will against natures fury, than he can certainly pit his wits and will against Achilles' fury.
Leonidas was ridiculously strong as well as smart.
Leonidas was moving to fit his fighting style just as Achilles was.
Last edited by King_Cold on Aug 9th, 2007 at 09:13 PM
Well if you are talking actual ages, Leonidas was around 60 at Thermoplaye (born circa 540BC died 480BC) which further defeats your argument...
You can't see Achilles killing a wolf with a stick or beating another child?
You do know who Achilles is right?
He was raised by Chiron, who fed him on the innards of lions and wild swine, and the marrows of bears.
He killed Cycnus, king of Colonae son of Posiedon who was invulnerable to attack by sword and spear by crushing and suffocating him.
He was the only mortal to experience consumate rage, which is why he was so dangerous in battle.
He delt Telephus son of Heracles (Hercules) a wound that would not heal.
Other than Thermoplyae not much is known about Leonidas prior to that so really your experience theory is moot, seeing as even in the film 300 we never see any flash backs of him fighting in wars.
Achilles relies on his speed to dodge attacks so again, you are basing your theory of Leonidas being faster on what exactley?
Throughout the entire film I saw Leonidas take damage in melee, I only saw Achilles take one hit and all that did was scratch his armour.
Spartans fought in close order, the Phalanx, each man supporting the other, Achilles fights alone and is mobile, completly different fighting styles, again no gauge of physical strength.
I respect your opinion but your evidence is getting weaker by the post for Leonidas being Achilles physical superior.
Achille's fury didn't impede his battle savy, this is why he was the greatest warrior the Achean's had.
How do you know Achilles would have lost against the wolf, where is your evidence or proof to support your claims?
Leonidas could out muscle him? again where is your proof, also why would Achilles engage him in a test of strength, when he is consistantly shown going for the instant kill and outmanuerving his opponents?
Leonidas fighting style was much more of a brawler than Achilles the fact that his body showed scars and Achille's did not, says who had the superior fighting style imo.
You repeat the same arguments, the wolf and the child and state Achilles could not do the same, with nothing as evidence for your theory.
Bottom line Leonidas claimed to be a descendent of a mythologic character, Achilles IS a mythologic character...
Last edited by Hercules on Aug 9th, 2007 at 09:31 PM
Actually I do I have studied military history. Big scary looking weapons does not make a powerful army. If you want I could quote the battle of Agincourt, world War One and the Vietnam war. My point is you cannot directly compare whether Persia had a more powerful army than Troy. You are obviously easily impressed by the gunpowder (not dynamite) and the big elephants, but you have no idea if these would be as effective as the Trojan army. This as I said yesterday is an unprovable point.
It is also irrelevant becasue we are talking about a one on one between leonidas and Achilles.
Historically/Mythologically? It'd be Achilles. Son of a goddess and all that. The Spartans are great warriors, but Achilles also was immortal, except for that heal of his, which Leonidas would not know about.
Movie wise? I'm not sure, but I don't like that aspect as the movie Troy ruined Achilles character. Great movie, don't get me wrong, but they took out most of the story by taking out the gods and goddesses.
This was the weakest version of Achilles we have seen but he was still able to beat the second greatest warrior(Hector) with ease. If they did not tone him down, he could of took Troy on his own.
also, if i remember correctly, menaleos (not sure about the spelling), the guy who fought paris, is the king of sparta. Helen was his wife. so, since menaleos was the king of sparta at that time, it would probably mean that he was also the best fighter from sparta and he was owned by hector.....quite easilly too.
so yeah, if menaleos is an indication of how spartan's fought 1 on 1 then yeah...achilles wins ths
abilities are variable. The Trojan War happened some seven hundred years prior to Leonidas. Perhaps, the Spartans became better fighters since then. In any event...Troy was largely based on myth...while 300 was largely based on historical fact. So, you can't really compare Menelaous with Leonidas.
i cant? but why?? well, actualy, u do have a point. just to point out, troy isnt based laregly on myth coz the illiad is a myth. and 300 is based on historical facts though very decorated to spicen it up.
Well, I meant that Troy was based largely on myth...because there very well could've been a historical Trojan War...it just didn't happen the way Homer illustrated it in the Iliad...lol.
Im gonna base my points on the movie versions of the characters, since that's what we're supposed to be considering right?
So, based on the movies:
1. there was no footage seen in troy showing achilles' childhood, therefore you have no proof to back up your opinion of achilles not being able to punch out another 11 yr old kid. just because achilles didn't get the benefit of flashbacks like leonidas, doesn't mean that he couldn't have punched someone to death.
Hell, i can punch someone to death with the right amount of anger and a good mount position. So to say that achilles can't punch someone to death is PURELY YOUR OPINION. to claim it as a fact would make me question your age.
2. about the wolf, impressive feat for leonidas. but then again, how can you claim that achilles never had a similar feat? you don't know his childhood, it wasn't shown in the movie. so therefore, you cannot conclude on something that you don't know. to say that achilles cannot accomplish the same feat is again PURELY YOUR OPINION. there is no proof to suggest otherwise.
3. Just because someone is older, doesn't give him an edge in experience. Leonidas was a king, requiring that he handle matters of the state, politics, farming for his city, etc.
The movie version of achilles was seen as someone actively fighting in a campaign. My point? leonidas probably didn't spend as much time fighting coz he had other matters to consider. achilles looked as if he was fighting every day of his life, helping agamemnon in his campaign. but this is my opinion. no proof can be said about who is more experienced. so stop claiming leonidas is more experienced, your wishes alone does not make it a fact.
4. achilles was not a hothead, he was taciturn and arrogant, always willing to fight. the only time he got pissed off was when brisias was taken from him and when his cousin was killed. otherwise, he was a cold calculating killer. but even when his emotions got the better of him, he was still nigh invulnerable in battle.
5. if there was something that we could compare from the movies, it would be the spearthrows. achilles threw his spear at what looked like impossible spead and strength over a distance to hit his target accurately. when leonidas threw his spear over a distance, it seemed wobbly and only glanced xerxes. im not sure what was the longer shot, but to base it on how it looked, achilles was a lot more impressive in this feat.
when leonidas threw his spear strong enough to blow back his enemies, it was at close range.
6. to base one's skills on physical appearance is stupid. i know a lot of great fighters who don't have six packs. but just for the record, i actually liked brad pitt's physique more than gerard butler's. leonidas had that chiseled but cumbersome body-builder's look (altho i would'nt mind havin a body like that). brad had a lean, lithe, zero-fat, panther looking body that seemed more suitable to a warrior. just my opinion though.
KMC Community Forums
Aug 9th, 2007 09:05 PM
