PDA

View Full Version : Greatest warrior of all time?



Bill
11 Mar 05,, 14:36
Vote away boys.

Since the thread was my idea, i get the obvious first choice:

Achilles, son of Pelius(bad ass).

Blademaster
11 Mar 05,, 15:04
Vote away boys.

Since the thread was my idea, i get the obvious first choice:

Achilles, son of Pelius(bad ass).

Arjuna or Bhisma. Hey if you want to use mythological figures, I might as well as use Hindu mythological figures.

Prosto ILya
11 Mar 05,, 16:00
A little of slavic mythology...

Илья Муромец - Ilya Muromez

Богатырь (bogatir) and just a nice fellow.

Praxus
11 Mar 05,, 21:15
Horatius of Rome. According to Roman Legend he single handedly defended Rome against an entire Etruscan Army trying to cross a bridge to enter Rome. Not only did he stand a lone to repel them once, he did it twice.

Achilles has nothing on this man;)

Bill
11 Mar 05,, 22:18
Achilles was the greatest greek warrior ever born(which says a lot when you are talking about the nation that produced the 300 Spartans of Thermopalye). In the Illiad he kills about a thousand men during the siege of Troy. He also is said to have captured 23 Trojan towns single handedly.

And it's disputed whether or not he was 'mythological' or real.

It used to be claimed Troy was mythological...until the archaeologists found it right where Homer said it was. And it had been destroyed right when Homer had said it was as well.

That's close enough for me.

Praxus
11 Mar 05,, 22:28
Achilles was the greatest greek warrior ever born(which says a lot when you are talking about the nation that produced the 300 Spartans of Thermopalye). In the Illiad he kills about a thousand men during the siege of Troy. He also is said to have captured 23 Trojan towns single handedly.

And it's disputed whether or not he was 'mythological' or real.

It used to be claimed Troy was mythological...until the archaeologists found it right where Homer said it was. And it had been destroyed right when Homer had said it was as well.

That's close enough for me.

Achilles may have been real but in all likelyhood his exploits were slightly exagerated;)

Jonathan Locke
11 Mar 05,, 22:33
Achilles may have been real but in all likelyhood his exploits were slightly exagerated;)


while single-handedly driving back an entire army (twice) is not?????????? :confused:

Jonathan Locke
11 Mar 05,, 22:35
i would have to go with Sun Tzu on this one, even thought he was more general than soldier. :biggrin:

Praxus
11 Mar 05,, 23:18
while single-handedly driving back an entire army (twice) is not?????????? :confused:

Look up the word legend and come back to me. :rolleyes:

Commando
11 Mar 05,, 23:56
During the time of King Arthur and his men. Their was a warrior called Cimino. Historians have showed his first name to be Frank. He fought for the Barbarians and was known to take down up to 50 men at once. Also it was reported but dunno if it was myth he took down 10 armed soldiers with his bare hands.
Many people compared him to King Arthur and his knights.

Jonathan Locke
12 Mar 05,, 02:58
Look up the word legend and come back to me. :rolleyes:



well my friend, i was aware that your chosen warrior was of Roman Legend/Mythology, but i believe that so was Achilles (of Greek Mythlogy/Legend), until proven otherwise. Therefore y would you state that Achilles' deeds were exaggerated, while so were Horatius', and they both fall under the same category like i've said before???????????? It would just be contradicting yourself

Commando
12 Mar 05,, 03:37
What do you guys think of the achievements of Cimino.

Jonathan Locke
12 Mar 05,, 03:38
good choice commando, i hadne't thought of him :)

Bill
12 Mar 05,, 06:44
Praxus, i'm sure his exploits were exagerated.

But i'm sure Horatius were too.

Bill
12 Mar 05,, 06:48
Google has never heard of Cimino, and neither have i. ;)

Commando
12 Mar 05,, 12:09
Yeh i have only found storys of him in very old books at the ancient library Sydney.
Not a lot of information of him at all but these storys are superb to read. There is 3 pages on him in a 15 pg book with the old paper from the 18 hundreds or older :biggrin:

Jonathan Locke
12 Mar 05,, 17:29
i dont have any idea who he is either, i was just trying to be supportive :redface:

Praxus
12 Mar 05,, 19:43
Praxus, i'm sure his exploits were exagerated.

But i'm sure Horatius were too.

Of course, never denyed it:)

But at least what Horatius did was within the realm of possibility. If the bridge was narrow enough, he could have blocked it to allow only one person at a time through and then just use his pike to stab them until they stop coming(keep in mind they are stilling using Greek Phalanx at this time) :)

Jonathan Locke
12 Mar 05,, 20:10
But at least what Horatius did was within the realm of possibility. :)


isnt everything in the realm of possibility?

I mean, Achilles could have killed thousand of men in the Trojan War, he could have just shot them with aros from a fortified hill, or he could have surprised medium-sized groups one by one. And he could have captured many towns, who is to say, that these twon were not minute ones,a nd that had barely any guards if any at all.

Bill
12 Mar 05,, 21:52
Achilles legend was such that the mere appearance of his armored form was rumored to send hardened warriors into panic and retreat.

Afterall, who wants to fight 'the son of a God'?

lol, not me. ;)

Praxus
12 Mar 05,, 22:13
isnt everything in the realm of possibility?

I mean, Achilles could have killed thousand of men in the Trojan War, he could have just shot them with aros from a fortified hill, or he could have surprised medium-sized groups one by one. And he could have captured many towns, who is to say, that these twon were not minute ones,a nd that had barely any guards if any at all.

Achilles is part of Greek mythology, it was not meant to be true (but he may have been based off of a real person). The person I mentioned is a person in early Roman Republican history.

Bill
12 Mar 05,, 22:30
Achilles was almost certainly a real man, his exploits were documented by numerous historians of the day, Homer is just the most famous of the lot to write about him.

Praxus
12 Mar 05,, 22:48
Achilles was almost certainly a real man, his exploits were documented by numerous historians of the day, Homer is just the most famous of the lot to write about him.

Herodotus doesn't mention him, neither does Thucyidides. Which historians are you refering to?

Homer wasn't a historian he was a poet who included some truth into his poetry.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 01:41
Praxus, if you do not mind my interruption, i do not know much about Ancient Roman History, could you tell me which "historians of the day" mentioned Horatius?

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 01:50
There are several historians who wrote about it, most notable is Titus Livy. I read it in a book called "The Early History of Rome" which is the first five books of Livy's history of Rome. You can find the passage on the internet: Book 2, Section 10.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0026&layout=&loc=2.10

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 02:53
Well Praxus, if you had been reading your own link, you have oticed, that he did not fight all of them, all he did was distract them for a while, while his two companions and other civilians were destroying the bridge, so the army couldnt get in. He just got lucky, and could escape to safety by swimming the river back to Rome.


Here is another link proving so:

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575945/Horatius_Cocles.html

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 02:58
Here is another one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatius_Cocles

youll also see in this link that there is a debtae between historians as to wether he died while swimming back (wich seems pretty pathetic after driving back an army :rolleyes: ) or if he survived.

It also says that Horatius was part of Roman Mythology (hmmmmmmmmm............sounds like your statement on Achilles' credibility).

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 03:00
Heros survive on luck...

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:01
It takes more than just luck

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:01
Well Praxus, if you had been reading your own link, you have oticed, that he did not fight all of them, all he did was distract them for a while, while his two companions and other civilians were destroying the bridge, so the army couldnt get in. He just got lucky, and could escape to safety by swimming the river back to Rome.


Here is another link proving so:

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761575945/Horatius_Cocles.html

I never said he fought all of them :rolleyes:.

Please do the following: Stop ********ing me and learn how to spell!


It also says that Horatius was part of Roman Mythology (hmmmmmmmmm............sounds like your statement on Achilles' credibility).

Yes and I said it is part of Roman legend. Reread my posts please. Also learn to spell.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:04
I never said he fought all of them :rolleyes:.


well then, you're "lucky" hero is seeming pretty pathetic, if he relied on his good fortune to drive back an army. Actually, i dont know why he is called a hero, almost anyone could have done that, at least someone with some exp. in fighting and at least some wits.

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:06
well then, you're "lucky" hero is seeming pretty pathetic, if he relied on his good fortune to drive back an army. Actually, i dont know why he is called a hero, almost anyone could have done that, at least someone with some exp. in fighting and at least some wits.

So it's not heoric to stand against an Army alone when all of your men are fleeing?

He was willing to hold his position on the bridge despite being bombarded with javelins and about to be attacked by the Etruscans.

Grow up, you have no idea what your talking about. You sound like a child.

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 03:06
It takes more than just luck
For a hero to survive? Not really, the nature of heroism requires luck to survive. What hero didn't have luck on his side? Nope, can't be a hero and be unlucky, you would never have done anything heroic without it, and certainly wouldn't survive...

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:09
So it's not heoric to stand against an Army alone?

Grow up, you have no idea what your talking about.

ohh no, its definetly heroic, im merely saying that it could have happenede to any soldier or guard. Yet, achilles' deeds were to much to have been to done by just any footman.



BTW, im think im older than you ;)

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:10
For a hero to survive? Not really, the nature of heroism requires luck to survive. What hero didn't have luck on his side? Nope, can't be a hero and be unlucky, you would never have done anything heroic without it, and certainly wouldn't survive...


you've misnderstood me Confed, luck definetly plays a big deal on a hero's deeds, a was saying that they can't just rely on luck, they need at least some kind of expertise related to what they r doing (Ex. Horatius was a guard, so he was able to fight some of the other soldiers)

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:11
Then why can't you spell?

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 03:12
you've misnderstood me Confed, luck definetly plays a big deal on a hero's deeds, a was saying that they can't just rely on luck, they need at least some kind of expertise related to what they r doing (Ex. Horatius was a guard, so he was able to fight some of the other soldiers)
You've misunderstood me, I said "Heros survive on luck...", nothing more. Either way, as luck would have it, he was the one there, not anyone else.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:13
Then why can't you spell?


i doubt that my keyboarding efficiency has anything to do with this argument :biggrin:

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:15
Either way, as luck would have it, he was the one there, not anyone else.



Actually, there were two other guards along with him, but he dismissed them so he could fight the army himslef.
(Its in the links i posted)

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:15
What argument? We both agree he's a hero.

Also you made it seem as if he did not engage in hand to hand combat, it seems that he did...

"Amongst the fugitives, whose backs alone were visible to the enemy, he was conspicuous as he fronted them armed for fight at close quarters. The enemy were astounded at his preternatural courage. Two men were kept by a sense of shame from deserting him--Sp. Lartius and T. Herminius--both of them men of high birth and renowned courage. With them he sustained the first tempestuous shock and wild confused onset, for a brief interval. Then, whilst only a small portion of the bridge remained and those who were cutting it down called upon them to retire, he insisted upon these, too, retreating."

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:17
What argument? We both agree he's a hero.

Well it all started when we were comparing the credibility of the sories of Achilles and Horatius. Were you said that Achilles was merely Mythology, then i pulled out a link that said that Horatius was also Mythology...........



And no, i didnt make it seem like he did nto fight, since i said that he did not fight the whole army, not that he didnt fight any of them. :biggrin:

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:21
Well it all started when we were comparing the credibility of the sories of Achilles and Horatius. Were you said that Achilles was merely Mythology, then i pulled out a link that said that Horatius was also Mythology...........

Read my first post against...

"Horatius of Rome. According to Roman Legend he single handedly defended Rome against an entire Etruscan Army trying to cross a bridge to enter Rome. Not only did he stand a lone to repel them once, he did it twice."

Wow your a smart one.

Let's take a look at your profile.

"I am a professor, in Maryland, i like History and some sports"

I'm sorry but a professor does not write like this. The sentence structure looks more like that of a 10 year old then a college level professor.

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 03:22
Actually, there were two other guards along with him, but he dismissed them so he could fight the army himslef.
(Its in the links i posted)
Sounds pretty heroic to me, but I still never said anything about the case in particular...

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:28
Read my first post against...

"Horatius of Rome. According to Roman Legend he single handedly defended Rome against an entire Etruscan Army trying to cross a bridge to enter Rome. Not only did he stand a lone to repel them once, he did it twice."

Wow your a smart one.

Let's take a look at your profile.

"I am a professor, in Maryland, i like History and some sports"

I'm sorry but a professor does not write like this. The sentence structure looks more like that of a 10 year old then a college level professor.



Well if you agree that they were both Mythology and Legend, then y were you opposing the deeds that Homer described as Achilles', saying that they were "exaggerated", well, arent Mythology and Legend most of the times exaggerated???????????????????



Oh, and im sorry about the whole sentence structure thing, i didnt realize that i couldnt talk like a normal person after-hours.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:29
Sounds pretty heroic to me, but I still never said anything about the case in particular...


okay then, i aprove of Horatius as a hero :biggrin: lol

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:33
Well if you agree that they were both Mythology and Legend, then y were you opposing the deeds that Homer described as Achilles', saying that they were "exaggerated", well, arent Mythology and Legend most of the times exaggerated???????????????????

Yes I don't see your point.

I was differentiating them because Achilles was a mythical hero and the person I mentioned was based on official Roman records.


Oh, and im sorry about the whole sentence structure thing, i didnt realize that i couldnt talk like a normal person after-hours.

Wow that says something about our society.

Oh and please stop pretending to be a professor.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:36
Yes I don't see your point.

I was differentiating them because Achilles was a mythical hero and the person I mentioned was based on official Roman records.


Official records, which have two different, and conflicting sides about the same story. They migth be offcial, but if they r not telling the same events, they dont count for much more than Homer's Illiad where he talks about Achilles

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 03:37
Official records, which have two different, and conflicting sides about the same story. They migth be offcial, but if they r not telling the same events, they dont count for much more than Homer's Illiad where he talks about Achilles

Hence the fact it's a historical legend and not historical fact.

It's not to hard to connect the dots.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:41
Hence the fact it's a historical legend and not historical fact.

It's not to hard to connect the dots.


Okay, then, those official records of which you spoke are basically stories, which might have some truth to them. (Much like the Illiad dont you think............I guess that Achilles' credibility and exaggeration are not as far away from Horatius as you put them to be)



Must you end every post with a stupid remark.

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 03:45
Does anyone even argue the Iliad/Odyssey were real events? Not that the characters were any less heroic real or not.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 03:47
Does anyone even argue the Iliad/Odyssey were real events? Not that the characters were any less heroic real or not.

i think that Snipe states that the Iliad's stories about Achilles' were real in one of his frist posts in this thread, but im not sure, go check it out.

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 04:02
Okay, then, those official records of which you spoke are basically stories, which might have some truth to them. (Much like the Illiad dont you think............I guess that Achilles' credibility and exaggeration are not as far away from Horatius as you put them to be)



Must you end every post with a stupid remark.

Horatius is reported by numerous reliable historians. Achilles is mentioned an epic poem intended as a myth.

That is the difference.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 04:04
Horatius is reported by numerous reliable historians. Achilles is mentioned an epic poem intended as a myth.

That is the difference.


Do you mean historians of that time, or of this time?

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 04:08
Do you mean historians of that time, or of this time?

I'm refering to Livy.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 04:09
I'm refering to Livy.


Yes well, you said historians and if im not mistaking Livy is only one person

Bill
13 Mar 05,, 04:55
"Nope, can't be a hero and be unlucky"

Tell that to Oddyssius.

And i wouldn't exactly call Achilles lucky either, as afterall, in the end, he was killed by a most unlucky arrow strike.

Homer was most certainly a historian as well as a poet, as it was the role of the Greek poets to record history(they had no historians), but there are some others that recorded the exploits of Achilles, the Ancient Greeks, and the Trojans.

Ovid, in the writings of metamorphases,
Statius, a poet of Rome, Hesiod the great Greek poet, Sophocles of Athens, and of course, Homer himself.

There are others as well, but i'd have to look those up.

So as i said, it is highly likely that Achilles was a real man. Certainly the trojan war was real, and certainly the Greeks have always remembered the names of their Heroes.

Why should this be any different than Thermopalye?

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 05:03
Tell that to Oddyssius.

And i wouldn't exactly call Achilles lucky either, as afterall, in the end, he was killed by a most unlucky arrow strike.
They had alot of luck until then. One cannot be lucky all the time. I have to figure luck in, as I do not believe in the magical explanation.

So as i said, it is highly likely that Achilles was a real man
Real or fiction, they are no less heroic.

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 05:04
Ovid, in the writings of metamorphases,
Statius, a poet of Rome, Hesiod the great Greek poet, Sophocles of Athens, and of course, Homer himself.

None of which are historians:)


So as i said, it is highly likely that Achilles was a real man. Certainly the trojan war was real, and certainly the Greeks have always remembered the names of their Heroes.

Why should this be any different than Thermopalye?

There are real sources that go back to Thermopalyae (5th Century BC). By the way I never objected to your claim that Achilles probably exsisted;)


Yes well, you said historians and if im not mistaking Livy is only one person

Livy got it from other Historians before him.

Bill
13 Mar 05,, 05:06
The ancient Greek poet philosophers were the ONLY historians of their day silly boy.

Praxus
13 Mar 05,, 05:11
The ancient Greek poet philosophers were the ONLY historians of their day silly boy.

Herodotus was alive during the same time as Sophocles. :biggrin:

Herodotus and Polybiys were both dead for 400 and 200 years respectivly by the time Statius comes along. Statius was also a live during the same time as Livy(roughly).

You got me on Hesoid and Homer though;)

Bill
13 Mar 05,, 17:19
Well, here's a man that is as real as they get, and one hell of a warrior in his own right.

The description below is truly the stuff of legend.

Congressional Medal of Honor Citation, DONLON, ROGER HUGH C.

Rank and organization: Captain, U.S. Army. Place and date: Near Nam Dong, Republic of Vietnam, 6 July 1964. Entered service at: Fort Chaffee, Ark. Born: 30 January 1934, Saugerties, N.Y. G.O. No.: 41, 17 December 1964. Citation: For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while defending a U.S. military installation against a fierce attack by hostile forces.

Capt. Donlon was serving as the commanding officer of the U.S. Army Special Forces Detachment A-726 at Camp Nam Dong when a reinforced Viet Cong battalion suddenly launched a full-scale, predawn attack on the camp. During the violent battle that ensued, lasting 5 hours and resulting in heavy casualties on both sides, Capt. Donlon directed the defense operations in the midst of an enemy barrage of mortar shells, falling grenades, and extremely heavy gunfire. Upon the initial onslaught, he swiftly marshaled his forces and ordered the removal of the needed ammunition from a blazing building. He then dashed through a hail of small arms and exploding hand grenades to abort a breach of the main gate. En route to this position he detected an enemy demolition team of 3 in the proximity of the main gate and quickly annihilated them. Although exposed to the intense grenade attack, he then succeeded in reaching a 60mm mortar position despite sustaining a severe stomach wound as he was within 5 yards of the gun pit. When he discovered that most of the men in this gunpit were also wounded, he completely disregarded his own injury, directed their withdrawal to a location 30 meters away, and again risked his life by remaining behind and covering the movement with the utmost effectiveness. Noticing that his team sergeant was unable to evacuate the gun pit he crawled toward him and, while dragging the fallen soldier out of the gunpit, an enemy mortar exploded and inflicted a wound in Capt. Donlon's left shoulder. Although suffering from multiple wounds, he carried the abandoned 60mm mortar weapon to a new location 30 meters away where he found 3 wounded defenders. After administering first aid and encouragement to these men, he left the weapon with them, headed toward another position, and retrieved a 57mm recoilless rifle. Then with great courage and coolness under fire, he returned to the abandoned gun pit, evacuated ammunition for the 2 weapons, and while crawling and dragging the urgently needed ammunition, received a third wound on his leg by an enemy hand grenade. Despite his critical physical condition, he again crawled 175 meters to an 81mm mortar position and directed firing operations which protected the seriously threatened east sector of the camp. He then moved to an eastern 60mm mortar position and upon determining that the vicious enemy assault had weakened, crawled back to the gun pit with the 60mm mortar, set it up for defensive operations, and turned it over to 2 defenders with minor wounds. Without hesitation, he left this sheltered position, and moved from position to position around the beleaguered perimeter while hurling hand grenades at the enemy and inspiring his men to superhuman effort. As he bravely continued to move around the perimeter, a mortar shell exploded, wounding him in the face and body. As the long awaited daylight brought defeat to the enemy forces and their retreat back to the jungle leaving behind 54 of their dead, many weapons, and grenades, Capt. Donlon immediately reorganized his defenses and administered first aid to the wounded. His dynamic leadership, fortitude, and valiant efforts inspired not only the American personnel but the friendly Vietnamese defenders as well and resulted in the successful defense of the camp. Capt. Donlon's extraordinary heroism, at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty are in the highest traditions of the U.S. Army and reflect great credit upon himself and the Armed Forces of his country.

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 17:56
I am wondering, can they give the Congressional of Honor Citation to a dead person?

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 19:27
Well, here's a man that is as real as they get, and one hell of a warrior in his own right.

The description below is truly the stuff of legend.

Congressional Medal of Honor Citation, DONLON, ROGER HUGH C.
Good choice...

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 19:27
I am wondering, can they give the Congressional of Honor Citation to a dead person?
Most are...

Jonathan Locke
13 Mar 05,, 19:28
I mean can they give it to someone that died on battle??????????

Confed999
13 Mar 05,, 19:58
I mean can they give it to someone that died on battle??????????
Yes, most Congressional Medals of Honor are given posthumously, or after death.
Congressional Medal of Honor Society (http://www.cmohs.org/)

Veni Vidi Vici
13 Mar 05,, 20:09
I mean can they give it to someone that died on battle??????????


The bravest ones are the ones who sacrificed their life to save another. Of course they can.

FlyingCaddy
13 Mar 05,, 22:53
Although DONLON, ROGER HUGH C. showed a great degree of toughness remaining heroic in the face of fire and extreme pain from worunds he is only another in a line of American heroes I think the man below is perhaps the greatest warrior of all time:

MURPHY, AUDIE L.

Rank and organization: Second Lieutenant, U.S. Army, Company B 1 5th Infantry, 3d Infantry Division. Place and date: Near Holtzwihr France, 26 January 1945. Entered service at: Dallas, Tex. Birth: Hunt County, near Kingston, Tex. G.O. No.. 65, 9 August 1945. Citation 2d Lt. Murphy commanded Company B, which was attacked by 6 tanks and waves of infantry. 2d Lt. Murphy ordered his men to withdraw to prepared positions in a woods, while he remained forward at his command post and continued to give fire directions to the artillery by telephone. Behind him, to his right, 1 of our tank destroyers received a direct hit and began to burn. Its crew withdrew to the woods. 2d Lt. Murphy continued to direct artillery fire which killed large numbers of the advancing enemy infantry. With the enemy tanks abreast of his position, 2d Lt. Murphy climbed on the burning tank destroyer, which was in danger of blowing up at any moment, and employed its .50 caliber machinegun against the enemy. He was alone and exposed to German fire from 3 sides, but his deadly fire killed dozens of Germans and caused their infantry attack to waver. The enemy tanks, losing infantry support, began to fall back. For an hour the Germans tried every available weapon to eliminate 2d Lt. Murphy, but he continued to hold his position and wiped out a squad which was trying to creep up unnoticed on his right flank. Germans reached as close as 10 yards, only to be mowed down by his fire. He received a leg wound, but ignored it and continued the single-handed fight until his ammunition was exhausted. He then made his way to his company, refused medical attention, and organized the company in a counterattack which forced the Germans to withdraw. His directing of artillery fire wiped out many of the enemy; he killed or wounded about 50. 2d Lt. Murphy's indomitable courage and his refusal to give an inch of ground saved his company from possible encirclement and destruction, and enabled it to hold the woods which had been the enemy's objective.

Parihaka
13 Mar 05,, 23:17
Charles Upham
VICTORIA CROSS AND BAR


Acknowledged widely as the outstanding soldier of the Second World War, Captain Charles Upham is the only combatant soldier to receive the Victoria Cross and Bar (awarded to members of the armed forces of the Commonwealth for exceptional bravery). In Crete in May 1941 and the Western Desert in July 1942 Upham distinguished himself with displays of ‘nerveless competence’.
Born in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 1908 Upham was educated at Christ’s College and Canterbury Agricultural College at Lincoln. Prior to the war he was a farm manager and then farm valuer before enlisting in the Second New Zealand Expeditionary Force (aged 30) in 1939, quietly citing his reason as a desire to fight for justice.

Courage and Resource
He was renowned for combining controlled courage with quick-thinking resourcefulness. While most medals for bravery are awarded for a single act, Upham’s first citation was for nine days of skill, leadership and evident heroism. In March 1941, he was a Second Lieutenant in the 20th NZ Battalion in Crete. His display of courage included destroying numerous enemy posts, rescuing a wounded man under fire and penetrating deep behind German lines, killing twenty-two German soldiers on the way to leading out an isolated platoon – all after being blown over by a mortar shell, painfully wounded in the shoulder by shrapnel and with a bullet in his foot.

The incident that typified Upham’s deeds was when two German soldiers trapped him alone on the fringes of an olive grove. Upham (on his way to warning other troops that they were being cut off) was watched by his platoon, a helpless distance away on the other side of the clearing, as he was fired on by the German soldiers. With any movement potentially fatal, he feigned dead and with calculated coolness waited for the enemy soldiers to approach. With one arm lame in a sling, he used the crook of a tree to support his rifle and shoot the first assailant, reload with one hand, and shoot the second who was so close as to fall against the barrel of Upham’s rifle.

Gallantry and Determination
Captain Upham's second citation was for his part in the July 1942 attack on Ruweisat Ridge, Egypt, where the New Zealand Division was stranded when promised armoured support never came through. As the Allied forces struggled to hold the line, Upham led his company on what was described as a savage attack on German and Italian strongpoints. Upham himself was responsible for destroying a German tank and several guns and vehicles with hand grenades and, though he was shot through the elbow with a machine gun bullet and had his arm shattered, he went on again to a forward position and brought back some of his men who had become isolated.
He was removed to the regimental aid post, but immediately after his wounds had been dressed he returned to his men. He consolidated and held his position and despite exhaustion, loss of blood and further injuries (as a result of artillery and mortar fire that decimated most of his company) he stayed with the only six remaining members until, now unable to move, he was eventually overrun by the superior weight of the enemy forces and captured.


Typifying his character and nickname ‘Pug’, he attempted to escape numerous times before being branded "dangerous" by the Germans and incarcerated in the infamous prison fortress Colditz.


On May 11 1945 King George VI pinned an official Victoria Cross onto Charles Upham's uniform. He returned to New Zealand in September 1945 and ceased expeditionary service in November 1945. In April 1946 he was an official member of the New Zealand Victory Contingent.
Modest Hero
Epitomising a certain strain of Kiwi modesty, Charles Upham was embarrassed by the accolades he received and attempted to avoid international media attention. When the people of Canterbury collected and offered him 10,000 pounds to purchase a farm in recognition of his gallantry, Upham refused and instead insisted the money be put towards an educational scholarship for children of returned soldiers.


At the conclusion of the war he returned to New Zealand to resume life as a sheep farmer in Hundalee, an isolated area north of Christchurch. It was rumoured that Charlie Upham never allowed a German-made car or machine onto the farm. He died in 1994.
When King George VI enquired to Major-General Kippenberger whether Upham deserved a Bar to the Cross, Kippenberger replied, "In my respectful opinion, sir, Upham has won the VC several times over." The Complete Australian and New Zealand Victoria Cross Reference affirms that "without doubt Upham remains one of the most courageous leaders of any modern conflict". Charles Upham was unassumingly a true edge warrior.

Parihaka
13 Mar 05,, 23:51
I'm quoting from memory here but here's another couple of 'incidents' not mentioned above.

As the NZEF was consolidating a position Uphams company was coming under fire from fixed German positions. Determining that the fire was innacurate, Upham drove a truck in front of the NZ lines and stood on top of the cab with some binoculars, calling in fire on the German positions as they shot at him. He continued this for 20 odd minutes until all the German fire had stopped.

Whilst reconnoitering in a landrover with an intelligence officer the landrover got bogged down in the sand. When they were trying to dig it out an Italian patrol advanced toward them. Upham, in poor German, ordered the patrol to push the landrover out, told them off for looking sloppy and returned to Allied lines.

On another solo recon. he took over 100 armed Italian soldiers prisoner, marching them into camp to the supprise of his men.

jasonglh
14 Mar 05,, 00:35
Miyamoto Musashi

Beaugeste93
14 Mar 05,, 06:27
I think we can safely look at any Medal of Honor, Navy Cross, DFC, AF Cross, VC, etc citation and find a worthy mention.

To my shame I cannot remember the name or the book, but one of Keith W. Nolan's excellent histories of Vietnam battles has one I cannot forget. A USMC battalion was in a hell of a fight with several NVA regiments in northern I Corps. They were heavily engaged with many NVA machinegun positions around them. A company commander (at the time) was describing the actions of one of his squad leaders. This marine went forward many times with grenades, silencing machinegun positions under heavy fire by getting close and lobbing frags. The company First Sergeant went with him, covering him with a .45. (yes a .45!) no doubt cussing him the whole time. After eliminating several positions, the marine was shot in the head and killed. The company CO relating this story put him in for the Medal of Honor, but as he said: "men far away from combat who did not see what I saw him do downgraded it to a posthumous Navy Cross."

Friggin REMFs.

Bill
14 Mar 05,, 08:57
The last two CMoH's awarded were awarded Posthumously.

lemontree
14 Mar 05,, 09:30
About choice for Greatest warrior, I'll stick to someone closer home, who I know existed.
- Shivaji - broke the hold of the Mugal empire and spread the Maratha influence upto Afghanistan.
- Ranjit Singh - broke the hold in the north of the Mugal empire.
These two effectively caused the down fall of the Mugal empire in India.
Modern warfare has so many true warriors that mentioning all is difficult.

tsering
15 Mar 05,, 08:44
About choice for Greatest warrior, I'll stick to someone closer home, who I know existed.
- Shivaji - broke the hold of the Mugal empire and spread the Maratha influence upto Afghanistan.
- Ranjit Singh - broke the hold in the north of the Mugal empire.
These two effectively caused the down fall of the Mugal empire in India.
Modern warfare has so many true warriors that mentioning all is difficult.


how about Vikram batra of tiger hill.he knew he was gonna get killed yet he did what he had to do.a true hero.
below is his last letter to home....

lemontree
15 Mar 05,, 08:57
tsering,
That is Capt. Vijayant Thapar VrC, last letter to his parents and not Capt Vikram Batra PVC. My coursemate Maj. P "Archie" Acharya MVC, was killed in that battle before Capt. Thapar made his sacrifice. Both were from 2 Rajputana Rifles.
Archie's first child was born 3 months after he died. Archie never saw his baby, but left a legacy to be proud of.
As quoted by me earlier:-

Modern warfare has so many true warriors that mentioning all is difficult.

Jonathan Locke
15 Mar 05,, 20:56
I agree wtih you on that quote

TexasOutlaw
16 Mar 05,, 03:47
Lemme throw my 2cents in on this one...

My first choice was Audie Murphy...
but my second choice would be Col. Hal Moore..for obvious reasons

I'd also throw in the 2 snipers who were killed in Mogadishu defending the Black Hawk and it's 2 remaining crew members.


Ironically enough..from what I have been told...Audie Murphy was killed in a plane crash in Southeastern Oklahoma. He was surveying his newly purchased land, and making plans for the acreage to be turned into a game preserve. Even more strange is that part of the land that I grew up on was purchased by him.

Jonathan Locke
16 Mar 05,, 22:00
. Even more strange is that part of the land that I grew up on was purchased by him.



cool

Ziska
17 Mar 05,, 02:11
"Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded"

:)

I'd like to nominate Ziska, Lt. Jacka VC, and Simpson (& his donkey) for these awards.

The Chap
17 Mar 05,, 08:31
Miyamoto Musashi
Esoteric good call! Iya'asu as well?

The Chap
17 Mar 05,, 08:38
Nelson
Vlad Dracul
Saladin
Paddy Maine
Hannibal
Gurderian
and I must have missed Alexander amidst the greek issue.
Benedict Arnold was rather good too ... :tongue: :biggrin:

baked_dog
17 Apr 05,, 11:49
The fighting was fierce throughout 7 July 1944 on the northern end of the island of Saipan. Desperate, cornered Japanese soldiers hurled themselves at American positions. On the hills overlooking the coastal plain and the village of Tanapag, soldiers of the 27th Infantry Division repelled several banzai attacks. Their position was strong, and gradually as the day wore on the Japanese assaults weakened. The story was different on the beach below. Occasionally looking down, they saw that their fellow soldiers in the 1st and 2d Battalions of the 105th Infantry Regiment were in a much more precarious position. The initial enemy attacks coming out of the night had struck full force at the battalions' initial positions next to the ocean. Despite furious resistance, the survivors were eventually pushed back to the village of Tanapag where they continued to fight. The soldiers on the hills above readily recognized the bravery of their comrades below, but they could not foresee that out of this action would come a Distinguished Unit Citation, two Medals of Honor, and a fifty-seven year struggle for another Medal of Honor for an Army dentist. In combat, the courage and fearlessness shown by some soldiers is frequently astounding and inexplicable. Such a fighter was Captain Ben Salomon, the Army dentist killed in battle defending his aid station on 7 July 1944. Almost as amazing as Ben Salomon's exploits is the story of how his heroism was finally recognized by the award of the nation's highest medal for valor.

Born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on 1 September 1914, Ben Salomon grew up in the city, graduated from Shorewood High School, and attended Marquette University before moving to Los Angeles, California, to finish his undergraduate education at the University of Southern California. He then went on to graduate from the University of Southern California Dental College in 1937, and began practicing dentistry. As with most young men in the United States on the eve of World War II, Ben's civilian plans quickly took second place to the military needs of the country. He was smart, good-looking, and popular, with a bright future in front of him. Soon after the National Selective Service Act became effective in the fall of 1940, Ben's draft board ordered him to report for induction into the Army. Dr. Ben Salomon became an infantry private.

After basic training Ben joined the 102d Infantry Regiment and quickly proved to be a natural soldier and leader. He won awards as an expert rifle and pistol marksman, and his commanding officer stated that he was "the best all-around soldier" in the regiment. Within a year he had risen to the rank of sergeant and was in charge of a machine gun section. In 1942 Salomon received notification that he was to become an officer in the Dental Corps. At first Ben attempted to remain in the infantry, and his commanding officer requested that he be commissioned a second lieutenant of infantry. The request was denied, and Salomon reported to Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, where he was commissioned a first lieutenant on 14 August 1942. After several months of work in a hospital, Lieutenant Salomon was assigned in May 1943 as the regimental dental officer of the 105th Infantry Regiment, part of the 27th Infantry Division.

Characteristically, Ben jumped into his new duties with enthusiasm and skill. Despite not having practiced dentistry for two years, Lieutenant Salomon was quickly recognized as an excellent dentist by his patients and his fellow dentists. He developed a routine of handling dental appointments in the morning and joining his regiment in the field for training in the afternoon. Ben was not just a staff observer, but also an active participant in all activities from hot, dusty hikes and range firing to crawling through the mud of the obstacle courses. He won all of the regimental competitions. Later, his regimental commander described the uniqueness of his dental officer:

Ben Salomon was the best instructor in infantry tactics we ever had. He gave everybody who ever met him a real lift. He had a way of inspiring people to do things that they might not have done otherwise. I think it was because he himself was the most vital man most of us ever met.

In June 1944, newly promoted Captain Salomon went ashore on Saipan with the 105th Infantry Regiment for his first taste of battle. In active combat operations there was little work for the regimental dentist, so Ben immediately volunteered to replace the 2nd Battalion's surgeon who had been wounded in a mortar attack on 22 June. The day before, the unbloodied 2d Battalion had been thrown into a fight to clear the Nafutan peninsula in the southeast corner of the island while the remainder of the 27th Division and the 4th Marine Division pushed north. The 2d Battalion struggled and eventually at great expense, through trial and error, began to learn the techniques of properly executed combined arms attacks. There was plenty of work to keep acting surgeon Salomon busy as the effective strength of his battalion dropped to about fifty percent of its authorized strength. On 27 June the 2d Battalion finally secured the Nafutan peninsula, but the cost had been high, not only in personnel losses, but also in its reputation. The Marine commander on Saipan, Lt. Gen. Holland Smith, complained about the poorly performing unit, which he claimed had been stopped by a handful of disorganized enemy soldiers. General Smith's doubts about the leadership of the 2d Battalion, and indeed of most Army units on Saipan, contributed to his relief of Army Maj. Gen. Ralph Smith, commander of the 27th Infantry Division. As the 2d Battalion, 105th Infantry Regiment moved north to rejoin the rest of the 27th Division, there might have been a cloud over its head in the eyes of the Marines, but the battalion itself was a much wiser and combat hardened unit.

The final drive to the north to clear the remainder of Saipan moved forward rapidly with the 27th Infantry Division on the left and the 4th Marine Division on the right. On 4 July the 2d Battalion, 105th Infantry Regiment was inserted into the far left of the line on the coastal plain next to the ocean near the village of Tanapag. Although the 2nd Battalion advanced almost 800 yards on the 5th, it bogged down the next day against increasingly desperate Japanese resistance. Late on 6 July the regimental reserve, the 1st Battalion, 105th Infantry, was committed on the right of the 2d Battalion thus allowing the two battalions to drive forward 600 yards along the coast before dark. With reports of a planned Japanese night counterattack circulating, the 1st and 2d Battalions established a tight perimeter defense of foxholes well supported by infantry heavy weapons and artillery.

The reports were correct. Of the original thirty thousand Japanese soldiers, only a few thousand remained, and those were disorganized and short of food and weapons. General Saito, the Japanese army commander, ordered all remaining Japanese soldiers, sailors, and civilians, possibly as many as five or six thousand men, to gather about a mile in front of the 1st and 2nd Battalion positions the evening of 6 July. Saito addressed his men and issued the following order: "We will advance to attack the American forces and will all die an honorable death. Each man will kill ten Americans." Then Saito committed suicide along with the naval commander on Saipan, Admiral Chichi Nagumi. Saito's men followed his orders and moved resolutely forward against the 1st and 2d Battalions despite heavy American artillery fire.

The Americans were vigilant and quickly detected the Japanese advance. Flares added to the natural illumination of a bright moon, but the Japanese approach was somewhat concealed by heavy brush which began about 400 yards from the American position. About 0500 hours the tidal wave of the Japanese banzai attack burst out of the brush and rolled forward in waves. The Americans opened fire inflicting heavy casualties on the enemy, but still the Japanese advanced and soon were inside the foxhole perimeter.

Ben Salomon had set up his aid station in a small tent about fifty yards behind the forward foxholes and thirty yards from the shoreline. Within ten minutes of the beginning of the attack, his aid station was overwhelmed with over thirty wounded. Salomon was working steadily on the most serious cases inside the tent when Japanese soldiers began to enter. Ben shot the first one who had bayoneted a wounded American lying on a stretcher. Two more charged through the tent entrance. Ben clubbed them both with a rifle, then shot one and bayoneted the other. Four more began to crawl under the sides of the tent. He shot one, bayoneted one, stabbed another with a knife, and head butted the fourth. Ben ran out of the tent to get help to defend the aid station. He quickly saw that the situation was hopeless. The Japanese suicide masses had overwhelmed the two under strength American battalions. Pockets of resistance fought on inside the perimeter, but the bulk of the survivors were being pushed back toward Tanapag village. Salomon returned to the tent and ordered his aid men to evacuate the wounded while he stayed behind to hold off the enemy and cover their withdrawal. Salomon then grabbed a rifle and fought on with the few Americans still resisting inside the perimeter. Eventually he manned a machine gun after its gunner was killed. That was the last time anyone saw Ben Salomon alive.

The fighting continued throughout 7 July as the Japanese attacked other American units. As the day wore on, it was obvious that the assaulting force had spent itself. Late on the 7th, the Americans counterattacked, and on 9 July the island was secured as most of the remaining Japanese committed suicide. Early on 8 July the positions of the 1st and 2d Battalions, 105th Infantry Regiment had been regained. These units had withstood the worst of the assault. At the beginning of the banzai attack, the two battalions had 1,108 men present for duty; at the end 919 were either dead or seriously wounded, an 83 percent casualty rate.

The 27th Division historian, Capt. Edmund G. Love, accompanied the team that went back to the overrun battalions' position. Love later described what they found:

We had been walking through piles of dead men when the general gave a sudden start, and then stepped over to the figure of a man who was bent over the barrel of a heavy machine gun. Very quickly, almost before I saw what he was doing, the general took out a knife and cut the Red Cross brassard from Ben Salomon's arm. Then he straightened up and looked around. There were ninety-eight Japanese bodies piled up in front of that gun position. Salomon had killed so many men that he had been forced to move the gun four different times in order to get a clear field of fire. There was something else that we noted, too. There were seventy-six bullet holes in Salomon's body. When we called a doctor over to examine him, we were told that twenty-four of the wounds had been suffered before Salomon died. There were no witnesses, but it wasn't hard to put the story together. One could easily visualize Ben Salomon, wounded and bleeding, trying to drag that gun a few more feet so that he would have a new field of fire. The blood was on the ground, and the marks plainly indicated how hard it must have been for him, especially in that last move.

Bill
17 Apr 05,, 16:43
"Horatius is reported by numerous reliable historians. Achilles is mentioned an epic poem intended as a myth.

That is the difference."

The Invasion of Troy was thought to be a myth for centuries, but Archeologists found the actual cite of the city, and it had been destroyed right at the time that Illiad had supposedly occured.

Now most historians believe that the Illiad was based on real events. Certainly Homer never indicates in the work that it is one of fiction. Indeed he describes it as if it was a historical occurence.

Praxus
17 Apr 05,, 16:51
"Horatius is reported by numerous reliable historians. Achilles is mentioned an epic poem intended as a myth.

That is the difference."

The Invasion of Troy was thought to be a myth for centuries, but Archeologists found the actual cite of the city, and it had been destroyed right at the time that Illiad had supposedly occured.

Now most historians believe that the Illiad was based on real events. Certainly Homer never indicates in the work that it is one of fiction. Indeed he describes it as if it was a historical occurence.

I agree, Im talking about Achilles though, not the Invasion of Troy as such.

Bill
17 Apr 05,, 17:08
There is no archaeological record of his existance, i'll grant you that much.

hammer
17 Apr 05,, 18:55
how about Vikram batra of tiger hill.he knew he was gonna get killed yet he did what he had to do.a true hero.
below is his last letter to home....

Vikram Batra is still a hero to me. I agree , a lot of heroes died for this country in kargil .But for me Vikram Batra is special , coz i saw him on NDTV explaining how they captured the Pak anti-aircraft gun so enthusiastically. and for some reason i remembered his face and his name . within a week or so i was shocked to hear the news that he was killed defending a peak.and his famous quote "Yeh Dil mange more"(roughly it translates 'gimme more') is very popular .It took me sometime to understand the realities of war.

He is in the extreme left in the last pic posing behind the captured anti-aircraft gun.

The Chap
19 Apr 05,, 01:52
"Horatius is reported by numerous reliable historians. Achilles is mentioned an epic poem intended as a myth.

That is the difference."

The Invasion of Troy was thought to be a myth for centuries, but Archeologists found the actual cite of the city, and it had been destroyed right at the time that Illiad had supposedly occured.

Now most historians believe that the Illiad was based on real events. Certainly Homer never indicates in the work that it is one of fiction. Indeed he describes it as if it was a historical occurence.

I'm with Sniper. I've been to the kraut excavation. It is indeed much as described.

Still, it is all speculative when the question of pseudo-historical heroness comes into play. :)

Bill
19 Apr 05,, 03:13
"Still, it is all speculative when the question of pseudo-historical heroness comes into play."

Since the Greeks burnt their warriors, barring the discovery of new ancient texts, it is likely that definitive proof will never be found.

However, one does not normally attempt to portray a real battle and then just make up the names of warriors who fought it.

Therefore, i believe there is a good chance that Achilles, son of Pelius, and Homer, tamer of horses actually lived. Agamemnon certainly did.

The Chap
19 Apr 05,, 03:34
Again, on y'side. The only caveat is that in documented Greek lit. tradition there is a tendancy to confabulate. The Fagles translations are the best for academe. :)
Once, back at university, there was a converstsionie (big bloody groop chat ;) )
in which I asked a visiting scholar from Oxford whether he enjoyed the Illiad or the Oddessey more?

Needless to say, enjoying them had never occured to him. Fluent in ancient Greek
and simultaneously ignorant of it. ****. :biggrin:

He (Acch) was real. And the others. Oral history. That (Troy) is not a fiction. Nor - although embellished - the others Fagels bothered to translate. :)

Amled
24 Jun 05,, 00:41
As I was absent during the time this thread was running, I have taken the liberty of resurecting it to add one name that curiously enought was absent:

Spartacus

He and seventy other escaped gladiators were able to; within a space of two years; muster an army of 120,000 men. Defeat 2 roman legions. Shook Rome to its foundation, and were preparing to march on the city when they were finally defeated by Crassus.
Not too bad for an escaped Thracian slave!


quotation from Erich Gruen, The Last Generation of the Roman Republic (University of California Press, 1974) 20-21:

It was not the governing class alone that would react in horror to the prospect of a slave insurrection. Whatever the grievances of men disenfranchised and dispossessed by Sulla, they would have found unthinkable any common enterprise with Thracian or Gallic slaves. It causes no surprise that Marxist historians and writers have idealized Spartacus as a champion of the masses and leader of the one genuine social revolution in Roman history. That, however, is excessive. Spartacus and his companions sought to break the bonds of their own grievous oppression. There is no sign that they were motivated by ideological considerations to overturn the social structure. The sources make clear that Spartacus endeavored to bring his forces out of Italy toward freedom rather than to reform or reverse Roman society. The achievements of Spartacus are no less formidable for that. The courage, tenacity, and ability of the Thracian gladiator who held Roman forces at bay for some two years and built a handful of followers into an assemblage of over 120,000 men can only inspire admiration.

Bill
24 Jun 05,, 04:39
Sparticus definitely belongs somewhere on the list.

tsering
24 Jun 05,, 05:58
How about king Songsten Gonpo?he united all the tribes in tibet and laid the foundation of buddhism in around 650 AD.He founded the Tubo empire which lasted for more than two centuries and was direct challenger to great Tang dynasty. :cool:

Hawg166
25 Jun 05,, 02:11
Yo Chap I cant believe you put Nelson at the top of your list. I couldnt agree more or with as much seriousness. The brilliance of Nelson was that he didnt conquer anyone. he kept , by himself and "his few his band of brothers" , Napolean at bey untill the he so valliantly gave his life at Trafalgar on October 21, 1805.

Kontakt Era
27 Jun 05,, 05:09
Hey how bout Hannibal Barca of Carthage? That man is a great warrior and tactician.

Kontakt Era
27 Jun 05,, 05:10
Plus he actually existed......unlke Achilles.... Well actually he might have existed but he was not a demi god or anything.

The Chap
30 Jun 05,, 05:49
Yo Chap I cant believe you put Nelson at the top of your list. I couldnt agree more or with as much seriousness. The brilliance of Nelson was that he didnt conquer anyone. he kept , by himself and "his few his band of brothers" , Napolean at bey untill the he so valliantly gave his life at Trafalgar on October 21, 1805.

A letter in the Telegraph may then ammuse you:

A French freind of the author had told him that he would never comprehend the French until he was informed that French school-children are taught that Traf. was an inconclusive battle in which the British Admiral was killed. :rolleyes: :biggrin:

SlavicWarrior
13 Aug 05,, 14:10
I would have to say; Ilya Muromets for physical strength and spirit and dedication to Russia, Alyosha Popovich for bravery, Dobrynya Nikitich for courage. :biggrin: Or even, Bus Beloyar.

Equilibrium
13 Aug 05,, 18:12
Hernan Cortes and Francisco Pizzaro.

These two Spanish Conquistadors arrived in Mexico and Peru respectively and with only 150-500 mercenaries used intrepidity and single mindedness of purpose combined with brutality and the manipulation of indigienous resentment to defeat armies of hundereds of thousands and subjugate civilizations of millions.

I think these men are the linear creators of the raison 'd entre of Special Forces and the concepts of nation building today; priority on creating alliances with indigenious personnel and economizing on force to strike decisive blows by concentrating the more proficient and techologically advanced foriegn forces as the core of domestic opposition. They also knew the significance of symbolism what attempting to undermine societies and thier governments.

I think these empirical examples are more relevant to the rubric sent by the title of the thread than the more abstract mythological heroes such as Achilles.

Hawk_eye
14 Aug 05,, 09:54
My vote goes to Heracles and his Labors:

Labor One: The Nemean Lion
As his first Labor, Heracles was challenged to kill the Nemean lion. This was no easy feat, for the beast's parentage was supernatural and it was more of a monster than an ordinary lion. Its skin could not be penetrated by spears or arrows. Heracles blocked off the entrances to the lion's cave, crawled into the close confines where it would have to fight face to face and throttled it to death with his bare hands. Ever afterwards he wore the lion's skin as a cloak and its gaping jaws as a helmet.

Labor Two: The Hydra
King Eurystheus was so afraid of his heroic cousin that when he saw him coming with the Nemean lion on his shoulder, he hid in a storage jar. From this shelter he issued the order for the next Labor. Heracles was to seek out and destroy the monstrous and many-headed Hydra. The mythmakers agree that the Hydra lived in the swamps of Lerna, but they seem to have had trouble counting its heads. Some said that the Hydra had eight or nine, while others claimed as many as ten thousand. All agreed, however, that as soon as one head was beaten down or chopped off, two more grew in its place.

To make matters worse, the Hydra's very breath was lethal. Even smelling its footprints was enough to kill an ordinary mortal. Fortunately, Heracles was no ordinary mortal. He sought out the monster in its lair and brought it out into the open with flaming arrows. But now the fight went in the Hydra's favor. It twined its many heads around the hero and tried to trip him up. It called on an ally, a huge crab that also lived in the swamp. The crab bit Heracles in the heel and further impeded his attack. Heracles was on the verge of failure when he remembered his nephew, Iolaus, the son of his twin brother Iphicles.

Iolaus, who had driven Heracles to Lerna in a chariot, looked on in anxiety as his uncle became entangled in the Hydra's snaky heads. Finally he could bear it no longer. In response to his uncle's shouts, he grabbed a burning torch and dashed into the fray. Now, as soon as Heracles cut off one of the Hydra's heads, Iolaus was there to sear the wounded neck with flame. This kept further heads from sprouting. Heracles cut off the heads one by one, with Iolaus cauterizing the wounds. Finally Heracles lopped off the one head that was supposedly immortal and buried it deep beneath a rock.

Labor Three: the Cerynitian Hind
The third Labor was the capture of the Cerynitian hind. Though a female deer, this fleet-footed beast had golden horns. It was sacred to Artemis, goddess of the hunt, so Heracles dared not wound it. He hunted it for an entire year before running it down on the banks of the River Ladon in Arcadia. Taking careful aim with his bow, he fired an arrow between the tendons and bones of the two forelegs, pinning it down without drawing blood. All the same, Artemis was displeased, but Heracles dodged her wrath by blaming his taskmaster Eurystheus.


Labor Four: the Erymanthian Boar
The fourth Labor took Heracles back to Arcadia in quest of an enormous boar, which he was challenged to bring back alive. While tracking it down he stopped to visit the centaur Pholus. This creature -- half-horse, half-man -- was examining one of the hero's arrows when he accidentally dropped it on his foot. Because it had been soaked in poisonous Hydra venom, Pholus succumbed immediately. Heracles finally located the boar on Mount Erymanthus and managed to drive it into a snowbank, immobilizing it. Flinging it up onto his shoulder, he carried it back to Eurystheus, who cowered as usual in his storage jar.

Labor Five: The Augean Stables
Eurystheus was very pleased with himself for dreaming up the next Labor, which he was sure would humiliate his heroic cousin. Heracles was to clean out the stables of King Augeas in a single day. Augeas possessed vast herds of cattle which had deposited their manure in such quantity over the years that a thick aroma hung over the entire Peloponnesus. Instead of employing a shovel and a basket as Eurystheus imagined, Heracles diverted two rivers through the stableyard and got the job done without getting dirty. But because he had demanded payment of Augeas, Eurytheus refused to count this as a Labor.

Labor Six: The Stymphalian Birds
The sixth Labor pitted Heracles against the Stymphalian birds, who inhabited a marsh near Lake Stymphalus in Arcadia. The sources differ as to whether these birds feasted on human flesh, killed men by shooting them with feathers of brass or merely constituted a nuisance because of their number. Heracles could not approach the birds to fight them - the ground was too swampy to bear his weight and too mucky to wade through. Finally he resorted to some castanets given to him by the goddess Athena. By making a racket with these, he caused the birds to take wing. And once they were in the air, he brought them down by the dozens with his arrows.

Labor Seven: the Cretan Bull
Queen Pasiphae of Crete had been inspired by a vengeful god to fall in love with a bull, with the result that the Minotaur was born -- a monster half-man and half-bull that haunted the Labyrinth of King Minos. Pasiphae's husband was understandably eager to be rid of the bull, which was also ravaging the Cretan countryside, so Hercules was assigned the task as his seventh Labor. Although the beast belched flames, the hero overpowered it and shipped it back to the mainland. It ended up near Athens, where it became the duty of another hero, Theseus, to deal with it once more.

Labor Eight: the Mares of Diomedes
Next Heracles was instructed to bring Eurystheus the mares of Diomedes. These horses dined on the flesh of travelers who made the mistake of accepting Diomedes' hospitality. In one version of the myth, Heracles pacified the beasts by feeding them their own master. In another, they satisfied their appetites on the hero's squire, a young man named Abderus. In any case, Heracles soon rounded them up and herded them down to sea, where he embarked them for Tiryns. Once he had shown them to Eurystheus, he released them. They were eventually eaten by wild animals on Mount Olympus.

Labor Nine: Hippolyte's Belt
The ninth Labor took Heracles to the land of the Amazons, to retrieve the belt of their queen for Eurystheus' daughter. The Amazons were a race of warrior women, great archers who had invented the art of fighting from horseback. Heracles recruited a number of heroes to accompany him on this expedition, among them Theseus. As it turned out, the Amazon queen, Hippolyte, willingly gave Hercules her belt, but Hera was not about to let the hero get off so easily. The goddess stirred up the Amazons with a rumor that the Greeks had captured their queen, and a great battle ensued. Heracles made off with the belt, and Theseus kidnapped an Amazon princess.

Labor Ten: the Cattle of Geryon
In creating monsters and formidable foes, the Greek mythmakers used a simple technique of multiplication. Thus Geryon, the owner of some famous cattle that Heracles was now instructed to steal, had three heads and/or three separate bodies from the waist down. His watchdog, Orthrus, had only two heads. This Labor took place somewhere in the country we know as Spain. The hound Orthrus rushed at Heracles as he was making off with the cattle, and the hero killed him with a single blow from the wooden club which he customarily carried. Geryon was dispatched as well, and Heracles drove the herd back to Greece, taking a wrong turn along the way and passing through Italy.

Labor Eleven: the Apples of the Hesperides
The Hesperides were nymphs entrusted by the goddess Hera with certain apples which she had received as a wedding present. These were kept in a grove surrounded by a high wall and guarded by Ladon, a many-headed dragon. The grove was located in the far-western mountains named for Atlas, one of the Titans or first generation of gods. Atlas had sided with one of his brothers in a war against Zeus. In punishment, he was compelled to support the weight of the heavens by means of a pillar on his shoulders. Heracles, in quest of the apples, had been told that he would never get the them without the aid of Atlas.

The Titan was only too happy to oblige. He told the hero to hold the pillar while he went to retrieve the fruit. But first Heracles had to kill the dragon by means of an arrow over the garden wall. Atlas soon returned with the apples but now realized how nice it was not to have to strain for eternity keeping heaven and earth apart. Heracles wondered if Atlas would mind taking back the pillar just long enough for him to fetch a cushion for his shoulder. The Titan obliged and Heracles strolled off, neglecting to return.

Labor Twelve: the Capture of Cerberus
As his final Labor, Heracles was instructed to bring the hellhound Cerberus up from Hades, the kingdom of the dead. The first barrier to the soul's journey beyond the grave was the most famous river of the Underworld, the Styx. Here the newly dead congregated as insubstantial shades, mere wraiths of their former selves, awaiting passage in the ferryboat of Charon the Boatman. Charon wouldn't take anyone across unless they met two conditions. Firstly, they had to pay a bribe in the form of a coin under the corpse's tongue. And secondly, they had to be dead. Heracles met neither condition, a circumstance which aggravated Charon's natural grouchiness.

But Heracles simply glowered so fiercely that Charon meekly conveyed him across the Styx. The greater challenge was Cerberus, who had razor teeth, three (or maybe fifty) heads, a venomous snake for a tail and another swarm of snakes growing out of his back. These lashed at Heracles while Cerberus lunged for a purchase on his throat. Fortunately, the hero was wearing his trusty lion's skin, which was impenetrable by anything short of a thunderbolt from Zeus. Heracles eventually choked Cerberus into submission and dragged him to Tiryns, where he received due credit for this final Labor.

And Finally Death:
Heracles had a great many other adventures, in after years as well as in between his Labors. It was poisonous Hydra venom that eventually brought about his demise. He had allowed a centaur to ferry his wife Deianara across a river, and the centaur had attacked her on the other side. Heracles killed him with an arrow, but before he died the he told Deinara to keep some of his blood for a love potion. Deinara used some on Heracles' tunic to keep him faithful, little realizing that it had been poisoned with Hydra venom from the arrow. Heracles donned the tunic and died in agony.

sparten
14 Aug 05,, 09:59
Hercules did not exist.

My choice, Hector (sorry Snipe) and any one of the Tuetonic Knights.

Praxus
14 Aug 05,, 20:11
Achilles is definately a better warrior then Hector. Hector, however had great virtues that extended beyond the battlefield; Achilles did not.

Speaking of which I just started reading the Robert Fagles translation of "The Illiad" (I'm on Book 4 right now)

sparten
15 Aug 05,, 04:19
You mean you are reading Illaid for fun :eek:

I never read it unless it was at school.

Praxus
15 Aug 05,, 04:34
It is excellent thus far.

sparten
15 Aug 05,, 05:58
How about answering this question,

"With reference to the context, how does the author seem to portray Hector in a sympathetic light? How are his (the authors) prejudices exposed. What effect do they have on the overall impact of the story?" :rolleyes:

Praxus
15 Aug 05,, 06:48
How about answering this question,

"With reference to the context, how does the author seem to portray Hector in a sympathetic light?

I'm only half way done now, but I 'll do the best I can. Homer portrays Hector as a man of virtue, as an almost ideal to which others should strive to acheive. He is wise, strong, and corageous; the very epitomy of what the ancient world called manly virtue.

This is based on what I know atm, so don't quote me on it :)


How are his (the authors) prejudices exposed. What effect do they have on the overall impact of the story?" :rolleyes:

How can he prejudge a character of his own creation. The extent of a characters atributes is determined by the author, since he would know all of them, how could he judge him prior to gaining the full knowledge of his character? Or am I missing something?

Why must modern scholars assume the worst in ancient authors.

Hawk_eye
15 Aug 05,, 08:37
Hercules did not exist.

My choice, Hector (sorry Snipe) and any one of the Tuetonic Knights.

Umm.. The only reason i added his name into the list was because he was undoubtly the most popular of Greek heroes, Hercules (sometimes called "Herakles") was celebrated in stories, sculptures, paintings, and even in the geography of the ancient world.

My Two other Choices:

Saladin (Salahu d-Din Yussuf)

Saladin managed to revitalize the economy of Egypt, he reorganized the military forces and with the advice of his father, he stayed away from any conflicts with Nureddin, his formal lord, after he had become the real ruler over Egypt. Instead he waited until Nureddin's death, before he started serious military actions first against smaller Muslim states, before directing it against the Crusaders.
Saladin is one of very few personages of the time of the Crusades that has managed to be positively described in both Western and Eastern sources. With his high position among his Western opponents, he has become a figure that have fascinated Western writers.

He conquered Egypt, Damascus, the important north-Syrian city of Aleppo, Mosul in northern Iraq, and of course he conquers Jerusalem in a matter of months.

He loses control of Jerusalem to the crusaders but then regains control of it... he signs a treaty with Richard I of England which brought an end to the third crusade.. he brought peace in Jerusalem for half a century and he allowed Christians to own claim lands off the coast of the mediterrean while Jerusalem was under Muslim control and of course, he safely allowed Christians rights to pilgrammages to Jerusalem..


Joan of Arc- Need i mention in detail her exploits... More B***S then most men....

sparten
15 Aug 05,, 15:05
I made the mistake of taking classics for a semester. That question is lifted directly from my coursebook.

Authors prejudices; he is Greek. Actually the answer is the exact opposite, the Trojans are treated quite fairly and sympathetically.

Praxus
15 Aug 05,, 17:59
I made the mistake of taking classics for a semester. That question is lifted directly from my coursebook.

Authors prejudices; he is Greek. Actually the answer is the exact opposite, the Trojans are treated quite fairly and sympathetically.

Well the classics are latin and greek on top of the history of Greece and Rome (as you obviously must know). That's a lot of hard work. If your into just the history part you should have taken classical history.

The Trojans were believed to be Greek (culturally if not ethnicly as well).

Praxus
16 Aug 05,, 04:53
My new choice: Diomedes. He took on Ares himself and stuck him in the belly with his bronze tipped spear.

:-D

leib10
16 Aug 05,, 05:20
Hercules did not exist.

My choice, Hector (sorry Snipe) and any one of the Tuetonic Knights.

I'd like to know more about the Teutonic Knights.

Bill
16 Aug 05,, 05:20
"You mean you are reading Illaid for fun"

I did.

It's a very entertaining story.

Bill
16 Aug 05,, 05:22
"Hercules did not exist."

Heracles and Hercules are not the same guy. Hawkeye was talking about Heracles.

sparten
16 Aug 05,, 06:05
I'd like to know more about the Teutonic Knights.

The Tuetonic Knioghts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Knights

They were defeated by a combined Polish-Russian army at Tannenberg in 1410. 504 years later the Germans won another victory at that place in 1914, and dedicated it to the Tuetonic Knights.

The Col could probably help you more with this.

sparten
16 Aug 05,, 06:14
I'd like to know more about the Teutonic Knights.

The Tuetonic Knioghts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Knights

They were defeated by a combined Polish-Russian army at Tannenberg in 1410. 504 years later the Germans won another victory at that place in 1914, and dedicated it to the Tuetonic Knights.

The Col could probably help you more with this.

sparten
16 Aug 05,, 12:25
Well the classics are latin and greek on top of the history of Greece and Rome (as you obviously must know). That's a lot of hard work. If your into just the history part you should have taken classical history.

The Trojans were believed to be Greek (culturally if not ethnicly as well).

In Pakistan 'Classics' mean not only Greek and Rome, but Indian, Arab and Chinese (later is optional) literature. I took only one of a possible six semeters, which was basically an intriductory course. Next semester they studied Mahabarata (in original Sansikrit!)

Praxus
16 Aug 05,, 19:33
In Pakistan 'Classics' mean not only Greek and Rome, but Indian, Arab and Chinese (later is optional) literature. I took only one of a possible six semeters, which was basically an intriductory course. Next semester they studied Mahabarata (in original Sansikrit!)

What a waste, IMHO. The only good parts of Arab culture were taken from the greeks:-p

Praxus
16 Aug 05,, 19:53
"Hercules did not exist."

Heracles and Hercules are not the same guy. Hawkeye was talking about Heracles.

Actually, yes they are. Hercules is the latin variant of Heracles (which is Greek).

Hawk_eye
16 Aug 05,, 19:53
"Hercules did not exist."

Heracles and Hercules are not the same guy. Hawkeye was talking about Heracles.

Thank you, i needed someone a bit more informed to point that out.. :)

Praxus
16 Aug 05,, 20:12
Look at all the posts, please, in particular, my last one above yours.

sparten
17 Aug 05,, 06:01
What a waste, IMHO. The only good parts of Arab culture were taken from the greeks:-p

You are confusing Arabic and Indian, as many Westerners do. No Arabic Culture really exists per se, I mean anyone who speaks the language is counted as one. Arabic in this case means Islamic, in which case you have Rumi, you also have Omer Khayyum.

As for India, it is mostly it seems Hindu texts and storys.

Praxus
17 Aug 05,, 06:22
You are confusing Arabic and Indian, as many Westerners do. No Arabic Culture really exists per se, I mean anyone who speaks the language is counted as one. Arabic in this case means Islamic, in which case you have Rumi, you also have Omer Khayyum.

As for India, it is mostly it seems Hindu texts and storys.

I was speaking of the Islamic Empire of the European dark ages.

However I do like this quote made by a Muslim: All who reject Aristotles first principle should be whipped and burned until they realize that it is not the same thing to be whipped and not whipped and burned and not burned.

shakari
20 Aug 05,, 09:22
I don't even see the reason of debate or the point of the question. Well it's just too obvious it's Ghenges Khan.
He was one with war itself. Struggle, strength, courage, will, farsight and perceverance. Never lost a battle.
Sold as a slave in childhood.....ruled the world in the last days. Restless warrior of the perpitual war. Best of the soldiers and best of the generals.....the undisputed Khan of the Khans.

Alamgir
20 Aug 05,, 14:50
You are confusing Arabic and Indian, as many Westerners do. No Arabic Culture really exists per se, I mean anyone who speaks the language is counted as one. Arabic in this case means Islamic, in which case you have Rumi, you also have Omer Khayyum.

As for India, it is mostly it seems Hindu texts and storys.

Rumi was not an Arab he was a Persian and Arabic is not the same as Islamic. You havent heard of Arab Christians? Lebanon civil war maybe??

Praxus
20 Aug 05,, 18:49
I don't even see the reason of debate or the point of the question. Well it's just too obvious it's Ghenges Khan.
He was one with war itself. Struggle, strength, courage, will, farsight and perceverance. Never lost a battle.
Sold as a slave in childhood.....ruled the world in the last days. Restless warrior of the perpitual war. Best of the soldiers and best of the generals.....the undisputed Khan of the Khans.

What world is that? A bunch of Nomadic and Islamic tribes? Who cares?

By the way, just because he was a good general does not make him the best warrior.

sparten
21 Aug 05,, 06:44
Rumi was not an Arab he was a Persian and Arabic is not the same as Islamic. You havent heard of Arab Christians? Lebanon civil war maybe??

I know that perfectly well. In essence Arabic ment Islamic in my classics course, for some inexplicable reason.

shakari
21 Aug 05,, 07:06
Do you mean to say dear! that the judgment of the qualities of a warrior should consider who he fought for and who he fought against or where and when he fought?
As for his generalship, don't you think that the term "warrior" itself implies some wisdom and better understanding than a soldier? It's not fighter or soldier but warrior. Fighters and soldiers fight battles and warriors fight WAR which by it's very nature and complicacy requires far more understanding than the combat skills and bravery.
Once I was reading about "Eriech Hartman"(sp) who shot down almost as many planes as the days in an year. There was this line "As a warrior he knew it well when to engage and when NOT to engage". Are you getting that? The understanding of the situation for NOT engaging the enemy is also part of the skills of a warrior but that is so for soldier.
And yes his combat skills were superb as well for he began with a band of 20-30 people and is known for "leading from the front". In fact the campaigns were began when he was already of the age of 40+. So how do you think he had fought till that age? As I said he began from the ground and he was accepted the khan because of his combat skills and courage.
Ghenges Khan was not a muslim though he had slain many.
And does it matter what people one rules?
The one warrior you reffered who saved rome from etruscans had saved what. A poor uncultured village in the woods. For thats what rome had been in early days. Even the founder of the rome married by treathrously killing the nobles around and raping their daughters.
But since you've mentioned it.
What he ruled?
He ruled Siberia, most of the china, Sumerkand and most of the cetral asia when he died. And his sons took ENTIRE central asia and entire CHINA.
And on yet another side note these two were richest parts of the world of that time. The muslim empire that christian crusaders of ENTIRE europe during their efforts of centuries could not compromise was annihilated in the matter of months by The Great Khan.
And if you know the battle in Poland when a numerically inferior mongol army under the generalship of Batu Khan and Subodai that is accepted by the historians as mere RIF(reconniasance in force) of the mongols WIPED OUT the combined polish hungarian army with their allies-the teutonic knight- in the matter of hours.
Alexader Nevsky prince of Novgorod who destroyed the might of teutonic knights at the battle of the frozen lake was a mere tributory of the mongols.
The fact Dear! is that the europe of that time was poor and semi barbaric. And the most cultured and prosperous lands were under mongol hegemony.
But there is apparently a tedency in weterners to stick with the old Greco-Roman history and seeing every action of significance or consequence only there as if the assyrians, the egyptians, the hittiets, the chinese etc. had always been in the side stream of civilisation. It's apparent from even this thread. But even if no one acknowledges the fact the fact remains a fact, right!
But "the world is full of mirror images where only opposite and extremes are permissible". The proof.....................the thread.

Proud Indian
21 Aug 05,, 07:41
Gangez Khan No way
He was a conqueror for sure but was cruel

a better choice is Alaxander The Great was indeed great

and indian King Akbar
and
indian Ashoka( he wa very cruel at first but he later regreted and spread bhuddism)..................................bhuddhi sm in china japan korea srilanka is only because of Asoka

Praxus
21 Aug 05,, 19:00
As for his generalship, don't you think that the term "warrior" itself implies some wisdom and better understanding than a soldier?

A soldier has a job in a unit, a warrior just runs around killing people.

agent6
08 Sep 05,, 04:44
Ok he is not my favorite, but he is up there somewhere.

William Wallas :biggrin:

Chino
13 Sep 05,, 19:14
General Vo Nguyen Giap, the Vietnamese general whom had no formal training as a soldeir or tactician, defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu. He was also later instrumental in helping defeat the Americans though he was eventually replaced as some of his offensives led to near disaster.

Though not the greatest, certainly one of the greats as he fought against overwhelming odds.

thesaint
13 Sep 05,, 21:28
Lots of names come to my mind: Giap, Chuykov, Spartacus, Alexander, J.C., G.K., Napoleon....

I have to go with Hannibal, though. He crossed the Alps with 90 thousand men. In those times it was hard to cross them on foot, yet Hannibal brought elephants with him. Hannibal defeated the Romans; he stayed in Italy for 15 or 20 years. That's why today many Italians have dark hair and skin. During WW2 a few African-American soldiers filled Europe with black children. What do you believe could possibly do, during 20 years of military rule, an army of Africans in Southern Italy ?

ps yes, Hercules is the Roman name of Heracles

The Chap
17 Sep 05,, 02:51
Lots of names come to my mind: Giap, Chuykov, Spartacus, Alexander, J.C., G.K., Napoleon....

I have to go with Hannibal, though. He crossed the Alps with 90 thousand men. In those times it was hard to cross them on foot, yet Hannibal brought elephants with him. Hannibal defeated the Romans; he stayed in Italy for 15 or 20 years. That's why today many Italians have dark hair and skin. During WW2 a few African-American soldiers filled Europe with black children. What do you believe could possibly do, during 20 years of military rule, an army of Africans in Southern Italy ?

ps yes, Hercules is the Roman name of Heracles

'load of *******s. Go and read something of weight. Or at the very least pay for the "Discovery" channel on cable or sat. :mad:

Praxus
17 Sep 05,, 19:49
I have to go with Hannibal, though.

I don't know if you know your history or not, but the feats of Hannibal are by far outweighed by Scipio Africanus. Scipio marched to New Carthage, took it, and went on to remove Carthage from Spain. Hannibal invaded Italy, destroyed a bunch of armies and accomplished nothing. Scipio furthermore went to North Africa and brought Carthage to it's knee's.

Don't get me wrong, Hannibal perhaps was one of the best


He crossed the Alps with 90 thousand men.

Only 40,000 survived to fight the Romans.


In those times it was hard to cross them on foot, yet Hannibal brought elephants with him. Hannibal defeated the Romans; he stayed in Italy for 15 or 20 years. That's why today many Italians have dark hair and skin. During WW2 a few African-American soldiers filled Europe with black children. What do you believe could possibly do, during 20 years of military rule, an army of Africans in Southern Italy

Romans according to legend are a mixture of Trojan (who were decended from Greeks) and Latin tribes.

thesaint
19 Sep 05,, 22:16
I don't know if you know your history or not, but the feats of Hannibal are by far outweighed by Scipio Africanus. Scipio marched to New Carthage, took it, and went on to remove Carthage from Spain. Hannibal invaded Italy, destroyed a bunch of armies and accomplished nothing. Scipio furthermore went to North Africa and brought Carthage to it's knee's.

Don't get me wrong, Hannibal perhaps was one of the best



Only 40,000 survived to fight the Romans.



Romans according to legend are a mixture of Trojan (who were decended from Greeks) and Latin tribes.

"according to legend" meaning that it is a legend i.e. not true. The story about Trojans refugees settling near what would have become Rome was commissioned by Emperor Augustus around A.D. 0. He paid this famous poet Virgil for writing a Roman version of the classics Odissey and Iliad, where the Roman imperial family appeared to trace their ancestry back to Aeneas.
btw Trojans didn't descend at all from Greeks. They were a population from today's Turkey.

I think the thread title is "Greatest Warrior", not "Greatest Politician". Hannibal defeated far superior Roman forces in 3 separate instances, displaying great tactical skill. His logistic skills allowed him to transfer on land a wast army from Spain to Southern Italy. At that time there were no roads and soldiers moved on foot, living off the land. The Chartaginians then stayed near Naples for 15 years, without Rome being able to raise a new army capable of defeating them. They were recalled to Chartage for political reasons and left Italy undefeated.

thesaint
19 Sep 05,, 22:17
'load of *******s. Go and read something of weight. Or at the very least pay for the "Discovery" channel on cable or sat. :mad:

I'm well read. What about you ?

Parihaka
20 Sep 05,, 00:10
That's why today many Italians have dark hair and skin

I'm well read. What about you ?
Then you should have heard of the Saracens

Praxus
20 Sep 05,, 03:12
"according to legend" meaning that it is a legend i.e. not true. The story about Trojans refugees settling near what would have become Rome was commissioned by Emperor Augustus around A.D. 0. He paid this famous poet Virgil for writing a Roman version of the classics Odissey and Iliad, where the Roman imperial family appeared to trace their ancestry back to Aeneas.

Yes, I have read it. That isn't my point.


btw Trojans didn't descend at all from Greeks. They were a population from today's Turkey.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus traces Troy back the Greeks. Your missing my point entirely. The point about Italians being dark because of the Carthaginian invasion is non-sense, and that was my point.


I think the thread title is "Greatest Warrior", not "Greatest Politician". Hannibal defeated far superior Roman forces in 3 separate instances, displaying great tactical skill.

Four, if you want to get picky. I am not denying his tactical genius, so I fail to see your point.


His logistic skills allowed him to transfer on land a wast army from Spain to Southern Italy.

Scipio and his logistic brilliance raised an army from his own pocket, threw together an Army in a relatively short period of time, and then with NO PRE-ESTABLISHED base in Africa (unlike Carthage who had Nove Cathago in Spain) brought the fight to Carthaginian soil.


At that time there were no roads and soldiers moved on foot, living off the land.

Wrong, the Romans had roads by this time.


The Chartaginians then stayed near Naples for 15 years, without Rome being able to raise a new army capable of defeating them.

Marcellus. Look him up. Hannibal was defeated in Italy. Scipio was never defeated, ever.


They were recalled to Chartage for political reasons and left Italy undefeated.

What are you talking about? They recalled him because the only Carthaginian army (Numidian to be precise) between Scipio and Carthage was annihilated at Utica! Not only was Hannibal recalled, but so was Hasdrubal.


I'm well read. What about you ?

What have you read about the 2nd Punic War? Any sources close to the time period? (Polybius in particular)

The Chap
23 Sep 05,, 02:30
I'm well read. What about you ?

I look forward to the justufied erudition displayed above in further informative posts. I shall avoid holding my breath meantime. :)

Bluesman
23 Sep 05,, 07:09
As far as aerial warriors:

Manfred von Richthofen
Frank Luke
Raoul Lufbery
Oswald Boelke
Erich Hartmann
Hans Joachim Marseilles
Adolf Galland
Greg 'Pappy' Boyington
Benjamin O. Davis
'Butch' O'Hare
Johnnie Johnson
Douglas Bader
Joseph McConnell
James Jabara
Robin Olds
Steve Ritchie

Bluesman
23 Sep 05,, 07:14
...but my vote for the greatest aerial warrior ever was John Boyd. You've probably never heard of him...but he made his mark on history.

The Chap
30 Sep 05,, 02:09
...but my vote for the greatest aerial warrior ever was John Boyd. You've probably never heard of him...but he made his mark on history.

Interesting Mr. Bond. :biggrin:
How about "Bomber" Harris?

Bluesman
01 Oct 05,, 23:31
Interesting Mr. Bond. :biggrin:
How about "Bomber" Harris?

I think he was a fine leader, organizer, administrator...but he was never known as the consummate aerial warrior.

But he shook the world in his role, though. Certainly, the Germans will never forget him. :cool:

Bulgaroctonus
10 Oct 05,, 03:09
I'll say Cuchullin from Irish folklore. The guy held off a whole army of a rival Irish clan.

As a warrior culture, I'd say either the Spartans (Thermopylae is their winning mark) or the Samurai. The Shaolin monks also deserve mention, if for no other reason than inspiring the Wu Tang Clan.

The Chap
21 Oct 05,, 03:13
Submariners on shore leave. :biggrin:

Feydakin
19 Aug 06,, 18:49
Without a doubt Bruce Lee disciple,physic,brain and most important heart he would be valuable in any war 1on1 you hope your trgger finger is fast the whole guys body is a weapon definitely elite warrior class ,He would be the closes to a modern day Achilles he doesn't need any weapons
Also Samauri society would be elite warrior caste if taken on 1on1 :cool: :cool: :cool:

Rifleman
19 Aug 06,, 19:40
King David.

Sam Woodfill gets my vote for second place. His exploits are strikingly similar to Alvin York's, but Woodfill didn't get the same press. He was a rifleman's rifleman and he deserves to be better known.

http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/woodfill.htm

sappersgt
19 Aug 06,, 20:08
King David.

Sam Woodfill gets my vote for second place. His exploits are strikingly similar to Alvin York's, but Woodfill didn't get the same press. He was a rifleman's rifleman and he deserves to be better known.

http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/woodfill.htm

I like King David because made peace with yet did not forgive his enemies. Vengence he left for his son.

LongshotSNN
19 Aug 06,, 21:54
Chao Yun from the Kingdom of Shu Han.

Dogukan
20 Aug 06,, 17:08
greatest warrior? no doubt it is Attila the Hun.

leib10
20 Aug 06,, 18:43
And let me guess, he was from Turkey huh? :rolleyes:

cris29
20 Aug 06,, 19:31
I would say Achilles, but didnt like the fact he only cared about himself and his
cousin.

So, i would have too say HECTOR, fought for his men, his family and his Nation.

leib10
20 Aug 06,, 19:39
...but my vote for the greatest aerial warrior ever was John Boyd. You've probably never heard of him...but he made his mark on history.

Can't forget Erich Hartmann, whose exploits while imprisoned are just as impressive as his feats in the air. :cool:

spittle8
21 Aug 06,, 00:34
Audie Murphy.

When he joined, he was all of 5'5/110. He grew two inches, and put on 30 pounds during his day, IIRC.

"Medal of Honor citation
Below is the official U.S. Army citation for Audie Murphy's Medal of Honor:

Rank and organization:' Second Lieutenant, U.S. Army, Company B 15th Infantry, 3rd Infantry Division.

Place and date: Near Holtzwihr France, 26 January, 1945.

Entered service at: Dallas, Texas. Birth: Hunt County, near Kingston, Texas, G.O. No. 65, 9 August 1944.

Citation: Second Lt. Murphy commanded Company B, which was attacked by six tanks and waves of infantry. Lt. Murphy ordered his men to withdraw to prepared positions in a woods, while he remained forward at his command post and continued to give fire directions to the artillery by telephone. Behind him, to his right, one of our tank destroyers received a direct hit and began to burn. Its crew withdrew to the woods. Lt. Murphy continued to direct artillery fire, which killed large numbers of the advancing enemy infantry. With the enemy tanks abreast of his position, Lt. Murphy climbed on the burning tank destroyer, which was in danger of blowing up at any moment, and employed its .50 caliber machine gun against the enemy. He was alone and exposed to German fire from three sides, but his deadly fire killed dozens of Germans and caused their infantry attack to waver. The enemy tanks, losing infantry support, began to fall back. For an hour the Germans tried every available weapon to eliminate Lt. Murphy, but he continued to hold his position and wiped out a squad which was trying to creep up unnoticed on his right flank. Germans reached as close as 10 yards, only to be mowed down by his fire. He received a leg wound, but ignored it and continued his single-handed fight until his ammunition was exhausted. He then made his way back to his company, refused medical attention, and organized the company in a counterattack which forced the Germans to withdraw. His directing of artillery fire wiped out many of the enemy; he killed or wounded about 50. Lt. Murphy's indomitable courage and his refusal to give an inch of ground saved his company from possible encirclement and destruction, and enabled it to hold the woods which had been the enemy's objective."

There may have been more incredible tales, but HOT DAMN is that not incredible? Plus, it was REAL.

Archer
22 Aug 06,, 12:18
Arjuna or Bhisma. Hey if you want to use mythological figures, I might as well as use Hindu mythological figures.

Karna. The greatest warrior in the Mahabharata, bar of course, Krishna- and perhaps, Balaram both of whom dont fight in the epic either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karna

Archer
22 Aug 06,, 12:21
About choice for Greatest warrior, I'll stick to someone closer home, who I know existed.
- Shivaji - broke the hold of the Mugal empire and spread the Maratha influence upto Afghanistan.
- Ranjit Singh - broke the hold in the north of the Mugal empire.
These two effectively caused the down fall of the Mugal empire in India.
Modern warfare has so many true warriors that mentioning all is difficult.

I agree with both choices.

AlpErTunga
16 Sep 06,, 10:12
In my opinion;Saka King Alp Er Tunga or "Efrasiyab" in Farsi sources is the greatest warrior of all time.

Tronic
16 Sep 06,, 14:23
About choice for Greatest warrior, I'll stick to someone closer home, who I know existed.
- Shivaji - broke the hold of the Mugal empire and spread the Maratha influence upto Afghanistan.
- Ranjit Singh - broke the hold in the north of the Mugal empire.
These two effectively caused the down fall of the Mugal empire in India.
Modern warfare has so many true warriors that mentioning all is difficult.
Yes, I also go with both...

Trajan
19 Sep 06,, 00:14
The only man who has a recorded 60 victories in one-on-one sword duels and started at the age of 13, dedicated his life to perfecting the art of killing his enemies, a man who was given the rank of kensai (sword-saint) for his mastery of swordsmanship, and set down the principles behind true victory in combat duels: Miyamoto Musashi.

smilingassassin
19 Sep 06,, 08:30
Genghis Khan and Manfred Von Richthofen!!

YellowFever
19 Sep 06,, 23:42
Ummm.....As to Naval heroes, how about Yi SunSin of Korea?

23 times engaged the Japanese in Naval warfare and won 23 times (I think..)

A man ahead of his time as far as warships are concerned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Sun-sin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtle_ship

FOG3
20 Sep 06,, 00:06
General George S Patton, Jr.

This guy not only competed in the "military event" of the Olympics and didn't make gold only because they weren't sure where one of his bullets went (from what I've heard there was a good chance it basically went through one of the other holes), led in combat on his own in WW1 after being injured, but turns around and becomes the best general the Allies had in WW2. This is a guy who not only got dubbed Swordmaster, but turns around and designs the 1913 Cavalry Saber and writes the doctrine in its use. This is a guy who recognized the potential of the tank, and "blitzkrieg" on his own.

Big Bob
29 Oct 06,, 01:36
Do gods count? If so, then I guess Thor. He does kill the Midgard Serpent, although he also dies in the battle because of the venom. If gods aren't allowed then I guess Beowulf would be no. 1. He had the grip of thirty men, and for fun he would swim across an entire ocean for days in a storm while armoured and killing whales with a sword. He was like Hercules but much more violent. If mythology is not allowed, then I'm not sure. But I hear that at the Battle of Stamford Bridge, there was one really tough Viking who was single-handedly stopping the entire Anglo-Saxon army from crossing the bridge and the only way they were able to kill him was by getting him from behind or from under the bridge or something. So I guess that guy would be no. 1.

Rifleman
29 Oct 06,, 02:31
Do gods count? If so, then I guess Thor.

Read Revelation 19: 11-21.

Big Bob
29 Oct 06,, 02:34
Read Revelation 19: 11-21.


I'm an atheist. So, no, I won't be doing that. I prefer yes/no answers.

Labud_NS
30 Oct 06,, 18:34
Maybe I'm subjectiv, but I'll like to claim Milos Obilic for one of the best wariors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miloš_Obilić

ColonalStriker
06 Nov 06,, 22:10
Patton doesnt count he was just a general. I vote Caesar.

ColonalStriker
06 Nov 06,, 22:22
Sorry I ment Ceaser

brokensickle
06 Nov 06,, 22:44
My vote is King david of Israel.:cool:

Rifleman
07 Nov 06,, 03:49
My vote is King david of Israel.:cool:

Good pick, he was my first choice too.

Gideon didn't do too bad either.

brokensickle
18 Nov 06,, 10:17
Good pick, he was my first choice too.

Gideon didn't do too bad either.

Rifleman,

I liked it when David crept into King Saul's camp at night and stuck his spear and flask by his head. He could have easily taken him out but shown respect and courage in sparing his life. THAT WAS CLASS.:cool:

Would you happen to be a believer?

~~~~Ivan~~~><//>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Rifleman
18 Nov 06,, 17:46
Would you happen to be a believer?

I am a Bible believer, also commonly known as evangelical, born again, etc; as in, I'm a believer because I came to a point in my life when I made the personal, conscious decision to believe.

I'm guessing that's what you meant but "believer" could mean different things these days.

brokensickle
19 Nov 06,, 06:26
I am a Bible believer, also commonly known as evangelical, born again, etc; as in, I'm a believer because I came to a point in my life when I made the personal, conscious decision to believe.

I'm guessing that's what you meant but "believer" could mean different things these days.

Rifleman,

It's good to know there are other Christians on this board.


~~~~Ivan~~~><//>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

sappersgt
19 Nov 06,, 07:52
My vote is King david of Israel.:cool:

I like King David because in order to unite the tribes of Israel he made peace with his enemies. He didn't forgive them but he made peace with them. Vengeance on those enemies he left for his son Solomon.:cool:

ArmchairGeneral
19 Nov 06,, 20:14
I like King David because in order to unite the tribes of Israel he made peace with his enemies. He didn't forgive them but he made peace with them. Vengeance on those enemies he left for his son Solomon.:cool:

Which enemies are you referring to? 'Cause he did forgive Saul's faction, and he certainly didn't make peace with the Philistines.

sappersgt
19 Nov 06,, 21:47
Which enemies are you referring to? 'Cause he did forgive Saul's faction, and he certainly didn't make peace with the Philistines.


I was referring to the other tribes whom he united. Although he was ruthless to those who rebelled.

LongshotSNN
19 Nov 06,, 21:52
Quote:Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral
Which enemies are you referring to? 'Cause he did forgive Saul's faction, and he certainly didn't make peace with the Philistines.



I was referring to the other tribes whom he united. Although he was ruthless to those who rebelled.

Joab and Abiathar for instance. He did tell Solomon not to let those two (particularly Joab) die peacefully.

However, he was merciful (or tried to be) towards Absolom when the prince rebelled. But then again Absolom was one of his favourites.

Asim Aquil
19 Nov 06,, 23:37
Alexander The Great!

One of the reasons I was suggesting Parihaka to name his son Alexander!

Alex, Lex: nicknames :D

Anyway, that guy had balls and his battles were excellently planned.

Dunno, him as a warrior. Since most of their on battle skills are exaggeratedly. I\'d call him a General.

As a General Mehmet II was pretty brilliant as well. When many failed to break Byzantines, he managed to conquer Constantinople. Subsequently that gave Muslims the breathing space to spread Islam, without the threat of an enemy.

As a General Prophet Mohammad conducted his battles very well too. The strategies used in battle are exemplary. Even the one the Muslims lost and the Prophet almost died were when his orders weren\'t followed. The Prophet was an expert at utilizing the terrain to his advantage. Something the people of those times didn\'t give much thought to.

sathe
19 Mar 08,, 04:15
Chuck Norris.

end of thread./

citanon
19 Mar 08,, 04:47
I don't know if he's the greatest but I'll add a name to the discussion:

General Yuan Chonghuan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuan_Chonghuan)

The last great Ming dynasty general and renowned user of artillery. He repeated repelled Manchu forces while he was vastly outnumbered. Mortally wounded Nurhaci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nurhaci) near the Liao River with a cannon shot. When the paranoid Ming emperor executed him on suspicion of treason, the Ming dynasty's doom was sealed.

Greek Gods
16 Jul 08,, 18:16
JUST HAVE CURIOSITY, WHERE DOES SAMSUNG COME IN?:confused:

Shipwreck
16 Jul 08,, 22:12
Greatest Warrior = The Unknown Soldier.

Knaur Amarsh
17 Jul 08,, 10:21
Greatest Warrior = The Unknown Soldier.

Completely agree

American Empire
21 Jul 08,, 06:41
- William Wallace
- Miyamoto Musashi
- Geronimo
- Alvin York
- Audie Murphy
- Hans Ulrich Rudel
- David Hackworth

Just to name a small number of men.

ANGLICOone
02 Mar 09,, 20:01
King Leonidas, the Spartan who led 400 brave warriors at Thermopolae pass to hold off the entire Persian army, until a traitor showed the Persians how to flank the Spartans.

But in recent times, the man who showed us that true leaders lead by example from the front, in my book that's Lewis Burwell "Chesty" Puller, USMC, from Nicaragua to the Pacific to Korea, a leader that any Marine would follow right into the gates of Hell.

sealion
20 Mar 09,, 08:27
Greatest warrior for me is the warrior that fights for his rights and believing with everything he has no matter the results or statistics till his last breath comes out. What his name is or will be or what his nation is doesn’t matter. What matters is the way he shows to the others to follow

coach123
16 May 09,, 21:50
BRUCE LEE. No one would have ever wanted to fight him including Achilles. Too quick and simply understood how to fight against any style. He would kick Achilles or anyone else's tail.

If we are talking about soldier's then it would be Maximus.

tankie
17 May 09,, 10:45
JUST HAVE CURIOSITY, WHERE DOES SAMSUNG COME IN?:confused:

2nd to Nokia ;)

tankie
17 May 09,, 10:52
BRUCE LEE. No one would have ever wanted to fight him including Achilles. Too quick and simply understood how to fight against any style. He would kick Achilles or anyone else's tail.

If we are talking about soldier's then it would be Maximus.



Was it not a pain killer which killed Lee.

Just did a google on him and he was some guy alright .

crazy_bandit
20 May 09,, 01:42
Attila the Hun

svs
21 May 09,, 01:10
"Who is the greatest warrior? He who turns an enemy into a friend." From the Talmud.

Kernow
21 May 09,, 01:47
Sergeant Fred 'Buck' Kite. 3 RTR.

Green Flash - Buck Kite MM (http://www.greenflash.org.uk/bravery/kite.html)

Optimus
22 May 09,, 10:39
John Wayne. America wouldnt have been safe without him, a true soilder from the Alamo to Viet Nam:biggrin:

tankie
22 May 09,, 12:09
Sergeant Fred 'Buck' Kite. 3 RTR.

Green Flash - Buck Kite MM (http://www.greenflash.org.uk/bravery/kite.html)

Amen , brilliant and look at his reg badge woo hoo ;)

sealion
22 May 09,, 15:54
greater warrior is the one that wins with the smallest lost
greater warrior is the one who fight for his motherland
greater warrior is the one who never forget
greater warrior is the one who know when to make his move
greater warrior is the one who knows to wait the proper time
greater warrior is everyone who fights for his rights
greater warrior is the mother fighting for her child
greater warrior is the son fighting for his parrents
greater warrior is the fother fighting for his family
GREATER WARRIOR IS EVERYDAY SINGLE CITIZEN FAT OR SLIM TALL OR SHORT , WITH THE FLAME OF HIS RIGHTS

Rifleman
31 May 09,, 06:57
Greatest warrior for me is the warrior that fights for his rights and believing with everything he has no matter the results or statistics till his last breath comes out. What his name is or will be or what his nation is doesn’t matter. What matters is the way he shows to the others to follow

Hence, King David.

Rifleman
31 May 09,, 06:58
greater warrior is the one that wins with the smallest lost
greater warrior is the one who fight for his motherland
greater warrior is the one who never forget
greater warrior is the one who know when to make his move
greater warrior is the one who knows to wait the proper time
greater warrior is everyone who fights for his rights
greater warrior is the mother fighting for her child
greater warrior is the son fighting for his parrents
greater warrior is the fother fighting for his family
GREATER WARRIOR IS EVERYDAY SINGLE CITIZEN FAT OR SLIM TALL OR SHORT , WITH THE FLAME OF HIS RIGHTS

Again (other than the mother example) King David.

bucephalus
01 Jun 09,, 18:11
Obviously, with a name like Bucephalus, I am a bit biased toward Alexander. Not only a great commander of others and brilliant tactician, but a great warrior who was not afraid to mix it up in the thick of battle.

Michigan_Guy
02 Jun 09,, 04:26
Patton :biggrin:

dundonrl
02 Jun 09,, 04:30
JUST HAVE CURIOSITY, WHERE DOES SAMSUNG COME IN?:confused:

Well, in English, his name is Samson.. according to Wikipedia..

Samson, Shimshon (Hebrew: שמשון, Standard Šimšon Tiberian Šimšôn; meaning "of the sun" – perhaps proclaiming he was radiant and mighty, or "[One who] Serves [God]") or Shamshoun شمشون (Arabic) is the third to last of the Judges of the ancient Children of Israel mentioned in the Tanakh (the Hebrew bible), and the Talmud. He is described in the Book of Judges chapters 13 to 16.

The exploits of Samson also appear in Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews, written in the last decade of the 1st Century AD, as well as in works by Pseudo-Philo, written slightly earlier.

Samson is a Herculean figure, who is granted tremendous strength by God to combat his enemies and perform heroic feats unachievable by ordinary humans: wrestling a lion, slaying an entire army with nothing more than the jawbone of an ass, and destroying a temple.

He is believed to be buried in Tel Tzora in Israel overlooking the Sorek valley. There reside two large gravestones of Samson and his father Manoah. Nearby stands Manoach’s altar (Judges 13:19-24).[9] It is located between the cities of Zorah and Eshtaol.[10]

DragoonGuard
02 Jul 09,, 15:42
Chuck Norris.

DragoonGuard
02 Jul 09,, 17:32
Seriously though, - How old was Alexander the Great when he died? In his twenties or something?

Some kid.