 |
May 5th, 2012, 12:12 PM
|
#1 | | Historian
Joined: Oct 2011 From: Lago Maggiore, Italy Posts: 5,351 | King Arthur VS Achilles
I know the force of the myth, let's try and imagine a duel between the mythological versions of these figures.
It would be a matter like this ...
Would Excalibur give to Arthur the possibility to defeat Achilles?
Would the eternal Greek hero be able to dominate the Pendragon?
But ... out of mythology?
If we think to a formation of Roman Britain chivalry facing a Greek phalanx made by Myrmidons: which would be the result?
So this poll is double.
1. According to the myth.
2. According to the most credible historical context.
| | |
| |
May 5th, 2012, 12:15 PM
|
#2 | | Man in the Box ¤ Blog of the Year ¤
Joined: Oct 2009 From: Baltimorean-in-exile Posts: 16,669 |
1. In mythology, Achilles would likely win because he can only be fatally wounded in one place; to my knowledge, Arthur is not supposed to have any such trait.
2. In real life, A sub-Roman British warband would have had increased flexibility and the improvement of nearly 2000 years of weapon and armor technology on their side against Bronze Age warriors.
| | |
| |
May 5th, 2012, 12:26 PM
|
#3 | | ...
Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 24,112 |
I think that technology gives the edge to Arthur, both historically and mythically. In the Iliad, Achilles is not indestructible, this was added later. In this later addition, he is invulnerable to human weapons due to having been dipped in the river Styx. Unfortunatley for Achilles, Caledfwlch is not a human weapon.
For a real confrontation, I think that Salah nails it in the second point of his post.
| | |
| |
May 5th, 2012, 12:34 PM
|
#4 | | This title is too lo
Joined: Apr 2010 From: T'Republic of Yorkshire Posts: 16,055 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Salah 1. In mythology, Achilles would likely win because he can only be fatally wounded in one place; to my knowledge, Arthur is not supposed to have any such trait. | Unless Arthur is carrying Excalibur's scabbard, which prevents him from sustaining any open wounds. Quote: |
2. In real life, A sub-Roman British warband would have had increased flexibility and the improvement of nearly 2000 years of weapon and armor technology on their side against Bronze Age warriors.
| Agreed.
| | |
| |
May 5th, 2012, 12:53 PM
|
#5 | | Historian
Joined: Oct 2011 From: Lago Maggiore, Italy Posts: 5,351 | Quote:
Originally Posted by Salah 1. In mythology, Achilles would likely win because he can only be fatally wounded in one place; to my knowledge, Arthur is not supposed to have any such trait.
2. In real life, A sub-Roman British warband would have had increased flexibility and the improvement of nearly 2000 years of weapon and armor technology on their side against Bronze Age warriors. | Thinking well, yes, Myrmidons would suffer the mobility of the Roman Britain units and also the better metal protections and weapons of the second ones would make the fight unbalanced.
Regarding mythology, mmh ... the capabilities of Excalibur against magics are all to be considered.
Achilles, the invulnerable man [a part a particular zone of the body], facing Excalibur, the invincible sword.
A quick note regarding the development of the mythology of the Greek hero: according to later authors who added something to Iliad, Achilles [after defeating Hector] had his troubles in facing Penthesilea [and someone even wrote that she defeated him in a first duel and that it was Achille's mother praying Zeus to change the destiny].
| | |
| |
May 6th, 2012, 06:29 PM
|
#6 | | ...
Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 24,112 |
Suprised we didn't get a little more action on this one.
| | |
| |
May 6th, 2012, 11:44 PM
|
#7 | | Historian
Joined: Oct 2011 From: Lago Maggiore, Italy Posts: 5,351 |
Yes, I expected more participation too.
May be it's a "difficult" confrontation to image: two positive heroes with a great literal, cultural and traditional legacy.
I can add a more proper context:
not a fight among myrmidons and Roman Britain cavalrymen with the two heroes leading their faithful warriors.
But a duel, a challenge between two champions.
P.s. King Arthur is dismounted.
| |
Last edited by AlpinLuke; May 6th, 2012 at 11:52 PM.
|
| |
May 7th, 2012, 08:02 AM
|
#8 | | ...
Joined: Jun 2009 Posts: 24,112 | Quote:
Originally Posted by AlpinLuke Yes, I expected more participation too.
May be it's a "difficult" confrontation to image: two positive heroes with a great literal, cultural and traditional legacy.
I can add a more proper context:
not a fight among myrmidons and Roman Britain cavalrymen with the two heroes leading their faithful warriors.
But a duel, a challenge between two champions.
P.s. King Arthur is dismounted. | Still....Arthur. | | |
| |
May 7th, 2012, 08:27 AM
|
#9 | | Scholar
Joined: Mar 2012 From: New York Posts: 597 |
But the different magics are in mythology form different gods. SO would the magics affect eachother? would the invincible sword be able to kill a man that was invincible through a different magic?
| | |
| |
May 7th, 2012, 08:30 AM
|
#10 | | Rabbit of Wormhole
Joined: Mar 2012 From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt Posts: 7,877 |
Besides its more exciting if its Russia vs. US, or Achilles vs. Shaka, lol.
Seriously, I think the Spartans vs. Roman Legion have it all.
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |