NationStates Jolt Archive

Im not sure if i spelt Antiquity well or not...

So who do you think is the greatest Hero of the Old days i.e Rome,Gothic,Greek,Persian maybe you think it is one from the Classical Books.

I will accept those from the Illiad or of Myth.-As some claim they are.

I say Hector
Hector was like the perfect Soldier.

Your thoughts..

Zhang Liao.

(I'm a jackass)

Greatest hero...?

Prometheus.

According to the myth, took fire down from Olympus, gave it to the humans, and on top of that, taught them to swindle the gods.

...although, if I'm allowed to go back in time in a fictional story, the two main characters in Good Omens are my heros.

Zhang Liao.

(I'm a jackass)
Your just lucky i didnt get it! :p

Your just lucky i didnt get it! :p

Google 'im? He is certainly a hero, he's from roughly that time period, but he's from China. Thus expanding your post to include major heroes from less-often talked about nations.

Probably Odysseus. Why? Because he was supposedly a strong and capable warrior. But he always relied as much, if not more on his wits than his muscles.

Publius.

Aeneas. Or maybe King Arthur.

Define antiquity..

If European probably the head of the Spartans when they held off the Persian army, but I forget his name.

What about Guan Yue, does Ghengis Khan or Julius Cesar count?

Gilgamesh.

Gilgamesh, no contest.

Define antiquity..

If European probably the head of the Spartans when they held off the Persian army, but I forget his name.



that would be....Leonidas. And, he was more Asia-Minoran than European.

Lemme see........ I would pick Grendel. Or Grendel's mom.

Cyrus the Great, the world's first Emancipator! :p

that would be....Leonidas. And, he was more Asia-Minoran than European.

Lemme see........ I would pick Grendel. Or Grendel's mom.

Leonidas was Greek, that's European. How about Alexander as an offering?

I see no problem with the Chinese examples, but then I assumed the original poster meant e.g. and not i.e.

Ralphie, the not so fresh.

Paul the amoeba, without whom none of you would be alive: the ancestor of all life on the planet Earth today. :p [/generation A worldview]


Martin Luther King, Jr.

Oh wait, that wasn't antiquity...that was the 1950s-60s. :headbang: [/generation Y worldview]

Cush the Great.

Saladin

Sure, Leonidas was Greek, but Greece had closer ties to Asia Minor in the ancient world (and arguably the modern one) than it did to Europe. That is why they are more asian-minoran.

Alexander the Great, absolutely no contest

Also have to give props to Hannibal Barca. While he did lose to the Romans under Publius Scipio, he returned to Carthage and was elected suffete. During his time in office, he brought about democratic and financial reforms that allowed Carthage to prosper immensley. So much so that it terrified the Romans, who went to war with them again and only by nearly wiping out the entirety of Carthaginian people, culture, art, and literature were they able to finally build their Empire.

Aeneas, I say. An intergral part of the narrative of Roman history which motivated a conquest of the "entire world".

Gilgamesh kicked ass.

I also greatly enjoyed the Anabase, by Xenophon. This is the first known work in "embedded journalism". :rolleyes:

Greatest Hero of Antiquity
Lovejoy!

Oh wait... that's antiques. Nevermind.

hercules?

achilles?

hector is a good choice. a great hero fighting for a good cause.

I as well wish that antiquities was defined better. It seems most people think it is interchangable with mythical which it certainly is not.

For western civilization I would say Alexander the Great, followed closely by Julius Ceasar. Without the former western civilization would not exist as we know it as he united Greece and captured much of Asia making it the ancient world power promping a golden age of several centuries of progress in technology and literature (even if the territory in Asia was not held long). The later for the Romans would capture much of Europe, again which resulted in several hundred years of mostly peaceful civilization advancements for the known world.

I am not an expert on the east so I will leave that for others to provide examples.

Socrates. He died for encouraging philosophical enquiry rather than accepting existing explanations, which I think counts for something.

Zhang Liao.

(I'm a jackass)

Kongming had it all over Zhang Liao.

Socrates. He died for encouraging philosophical enquiry rather than accepting existing explanations, which I think counts for something.

But Archemides had actual superpowers. He could lift warshipt right out of the water and drop them on the rocks. Ok, he used the cranes he invented to do it, but some of the superheroes have superpowers that aretechnology-based.

Define antiquity..

If European probably the head of the Spartans when they held off the Persian army, but I forget his name.

What about Guan Yue, does Ghengis Khan or Julius Cesar count?
Leonidas.
Although if you want the Spartan leader who was unperturbed by descriptions of the size of the persian force ("So numerous that their arrows blocked out the sun." "Good, we can battle in the shade.") Dienekes.

Zhang Liao's a nice pick, a nice pick. But he's not Dian Wei. He killed people with other people's bodies! That was absolutely amazing! Granted he didn't really accomplish that much because of how quickly he died, but he was incredibly impressive for a brief time. Zhang Liao is a solid second from Wei though, no matter how much I love Xiahou Dun.

Kaiser Bill... (am I the only one who thinks the late 19th- early 20th centuries were a really really long time ago?)

more seriously... Lenoidas, someone mentioned him, the leader of the Spartan army at Thermopolayae (sp?)... utter bravery... stupid Persians.. err.. lol

Nestor. He was pretty awesome in his time.

Im not sure if i spelt Antiquity well or not...

So who do you think is the greatest Hero of the Old days i.e Rome,Gothic,Greek,Persian maybe you think it is one from the Classical Books.

I will accept those from the Illiad or of Myth.-As some claim they are.

I say Hector
Hector was like the perfect Soldier.

Your thoughts..

No doubt based on watching that trollope film Troy?

Nobody has named PERICLES yet.
A brilliant general, a good politician, a friend of the arts, always humble, living by the law.

Zhang Liao's a nice pick, a nice pick. But he's not Dian Wei. He killed people with other people's bodies! That was absolutely amazing! Granted he didn't really accomplish that much because of how quickly he died, but he was incredibly impressive for a brief time. Zhang Liao is a solid second from Wei though, no matter how much I love Xiahou Dun.

Did you ever read the book? I only ask becuase your using the trademarked names for KOEIs PS2 interpretation of the book.

Nobody has named PERICLES yet.
A brilliant general, a good politician, a friend of the arts, always humble, living by the law.

Are we thinking of the Pericles that stole the money from the Delian League's defense fund to build monuments in Athens? Whom the rest of the Greeks rose up against?

Are we thinking of the Pericles that stole the money from the Delian League's defense fund to build monuments in Athens? Whom the rest of the Greeks rose up against?
No, I am thinking of the Pericles who opened Athenian democracy to the ordinary citizen and expanded Athenian power.
But I guess it's the same man. It's juste a question of point of view.

No doubt based on watching that trollope film Troy?
He was awesome in the original poem anyway.

Dienikes was a pimp. Have you read "Gates of Fire"?

I'd say there was no single greatest hero of antiquity. There were many great men and women from different time periods who shaped the modern civilization so much that no one person can be picked out and touted as "the greatest". (Except for Mohammed Ali!)

That said, I'd say my personal hero from past time periods would be Leonardo da Vinci or Johannes Guttenberg, da Vinci because he was just so far ahead of his time in thinking, and Guttenberg because he offered the masses the chance at empowerment.

Kongming had it all over Zhang Liao.

Only in the book. Ever read the footnotes or the histories? Kongming was a BRILLIANT civilian admin...but had no real head for tactics.

But Zhang Liao's court history and book persona agree; he kicked massive amounts of tail. He's right up there with Zhao Yun.

I think it comes down to this; who in that time period were frontline generals, often fighting against impossible odds, are credited with brilliant upset victories, and died of old age in a time of unimaginable chaos and intrigue.

Did you ever read the book? I only ask becuase your using the trademarked names for KOEIs PS2 interpretation of the book.

I'm using the spellings from the Moss Roberts translation printed by Foreign Languages Press in Beijing, first printing: 1995, sixth edtion: 2004. Do you have the Brewitt-Taylor translation? Because that uses the Yale name system instead of the Pinyin that Roberts used. I'm also pretty sure Koei can't trademark the names because it's just an alternate spelling of (mostly) historical characters.

No, I am thinking of the Pericles who opened Athenian democracy to the ordinary citizen and expanded Athenian power.
But I guess it's the same man. It's juste a question of point of view.

In all fairness, while he did do alot of good, he went looney later on.

In all fairness, while he did do alot of good, he went looney later on.
Yup! He had a great start, and it soured at the end. But most politicians don't know when it's time to step down.

Anyway most politicians, leaders, kings and emperors did nothing good to their country, (and this includes, like, 90% of these silly Byzantine emperors) so it's always good to remember those who left a positive legacy.

I'm using the spellings from the Moss Roberts translation printed by Foreign Languages Press in Beijing, first printing: 1995, sixth edtion: 2004. Do you have the Brewitt-Taylor translation? Because that uses the Yale name system instead of the Pinyin that Roberts used. I'm also pretty sure Koei can't trademark the names because it's just an alternate spelling of (mostly) historical characters.

Well, like Zhao Yun in Dynasty Warriors is written as Zhao Zilong in the Moss Roberts book, I'll say Zhao Yun because more people will understand who I'm talking about.

I use the Koei names mostly because its simply easier write pinyin and more people have played/heard of the game than read the book. Certain things are easier if you just bend with the times, like "Cao Cao" with a hard 'c' sound. That drove me INSANE for about 3 years. Then I just shrugged and gave up, "Ts'ao Ts'ao = Cao Cao = Kao Kao"

Hannibal Barca. He pushed the early Roman republic to breaking point, and they couldn't face him in the field with chance of victory until they stolen his key advantage, his cavalry, and specifically the Numidians. He made one mistake in his career, and that was confronting Scipio at Zama, instead of creating favourable conditions. His battlefield victories are virtually without reproach, and varied, showing his understanding of the art of war. All of this despite the contempt the Barcids tended to have in the Carthaginian senate, though not by the people. He also managed to crush the Romans with a mixed army, and got the best out of them when it really counted, showing he must have had a strong personality. And despite all of this, Antiochus the third could only make him an ADMIRAL of the Seleucid navy.

Zhao Yun is referred to as Zhao Yun when he is first introduced in the book, however because it's his given name. I believe Roberts (or did Guanzhong write it like this?) makes the intentional decision to refer to him with his style name, like Liu Bei styled Xuande. From my understanding of it this is supposed to show respect for the person being referred to, which is why the ones who consistently have their style names used are people like Liu Bei/Xuande, Zhao Yun/Zilong and Zhuge Liang/Kongming, the novel is very pro-Shu. This is also the reason why quite a few achivements by the Sun family and their followers, historically, are given to Liu Bei and his companions. For example, historically Sun Jian killed Hua Xiong at the Si River, while in the novel it's Guan Yu who kills him. Dynasty Warriors mainly avoids style names to prevent confusion in the American audience. I think in 4 Yue Ying does refer to Zhuge Liang as Kongming at one point which is the only time I can remember one being used in the series. I also believe the style names are used much more extensively in the Japanese version, from what I've heard.

Zhao Yun is referred to as Zhao Yun when he is first introduced in the book, however because it's his given name. I believe Roberts (or did Guanzhong write it like this?) makes the intentional decision to refer to him with his style name, like Liu Bei styled Xuande. From my understanding of it this is supposed to show respect for the person being referred to, which is why the ones who consistently have their style names used are people like Liu Bei/Xuande, Zhao Yun/Zilong and Zhuge Liang/Kongming, the novel is very pro-Shu. This is also the reason why quite a few achivements by the Sun family and their followers, historically, are given to Liu Bei and his companions. For example, historically Sun Jian killed Hua Xiong at the Si River, while in the novel it's Guan Yu who kills him. Dynasty Warriors mainly avoids style names to prevent confusion in the American audience. I think in 4 Yue Ying does refer to Zhuge Liang as Kongming at one point which is the only time I can remember one being used in the series. I also believe the style names are used much more extensively in the Japanese version, from what I've heard.

**claps his hands and laughs** Oh, what a joy to find someone who has read the book, knows its inner workings AND has played the games! You are officially amazingly cool in my book :)

Yes, Zhuge does call himself Kongming at various times in DW 4 and 5. Even in the English translation. From what I head in the Japanese score in 3 and 4:Empires, the style names are used only occasionally, where appropriate. It IS hard to tell, because the Japanese "equivilents" of style and proper names for Chinese people are sometimes very unusual and opaque.

Oh, how I wish DW5 had kept their Japanese track. **sigh**

Hannibal Barca. He pushed the early Roman republic to breaking point, and they couldn't face him in the field with chance of victory until they stolen his key advantage, his cavalry, and specifically the Numidians. He made one mistake in his career, and that was confronting Scipio at Zama, instead of creating favourable conditions.

Perhaps, but in judging history it is results and impacts that count and he could not succeed and was eventually defeated by the Romans by them refusing pitched battle after the first losses and engaging in constant harrassment to slow his progress through Italy until they could finally face him before he got to Rome.

I seem to recall he committed suicide (or was forced to), no? I have a book on him but its been years.

Arminius the Cheruscan.

Cincinnatus of Rome. Not only was he a very capable general, but after he won a great victory and returned to a Rome that begged to make him emperor, he turned them down and maintained the control of the Senate.

Would that Caesar were such a noble man.

Beowulf

Gilgamesh

http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/sharemed/targets/images/pho/t309/T309931A.jpg

George Washington

Julius Caesar. I mean, honestly... the guy gets voted dictator for life (dictator perpetuus). Anyone who can legally seize complete power from a government, not end up with a massive genocide on his hands, AND get Billy Shakespeare to write a play about him more than a millenium and a half later gets my vote hands down. Not to mention that pirate story of his... any historians who've studied the obscure parts of Caesar's life and who happen to have a sick sense of humor have to agree: Caesar gets the job done, and looks good doing it.

And, come on! Even Dante backs him up by sticking Cassius and Brutus in the mouth of Satan alongside Judas!

Perhaps, but in judging history it is results and impacts that count and he could not succeed and was eventually defeated by the Romans by them refusing pitched battle after the first losses and engaging in constant harrassment to slow his progress through Italy until they could finally face him before he got to Rome.

I seem to recall he committed suicide (or was forced to), no? I have a book on him but its been years.

They never faced him and won when he was approaching Rome. Cannae virtually annihilated the Romans. It was only Zama, in Africa, that defeated Hannibal. Not a Roman army in Italy.

Besides, Hannibals impact on Rome was immeasurable. It provided their impetus to greater holdings. Hannibal may have been able to snuff them out, there and then, but didn't, for reasons they probably did not understand. Remember the utter warrior culture of Rome, the lack of distinctions between politician and soldier, and would not understand his reasoning not to attack Rome, especially since he had just killed 50,000 of their soldiers a day before. Without Hannibal, Carthage would have been just another "friend" of Rome, a subserviant city-state in perpetuity. Rome would have lacked an adversary. It is likely they would not have approached the Greek city states, not leading to a confrontation with Macedonia, expanding their eventual influence in hellene by the taking of Macedon, and the severe reduction of Seleucian power in the area. Without Hannibal, Rome may never have became the eternal city.

Why did i forget about this. :confused:

You cant beat an enemy if he will not fight!
So long as he is garuanteed supplies.

Thats why Hannibal didnt win The Romans didnt want to play after Cannae.

Why did i forget about this. :confused:

You cant beat an enemy if he will not fight!
So long as he is garuanteed supplies.

Thats why Hannibal didnt win The Romans didnt want to play after Cannae.

Cheaters, eh? The plan nearly backfired on them. Had they been less pro-active in their not fighting, they would have ran out of allies. Hannibal had all but secured the south of Italy by the time Rome had finished rebuilding its armies, and the Appenines are a very powerful defensive tool. The Romans could force Hannibal into areas that he would not choose to go to, and wear down his armies since it was now tasked with defending the south of the peninsula. Though Hannibal was undefeatable in Italia... his lieutenents were. Hannibals armies were worn down through division. it is unfortunate that the support he received from the senate at home was so minimal, he could have easily turned that to a Carthaginian victory with more men.

Is Odin a contender, or are gods disqualified?

Well, like Zhao Yun in Dynasty Warriors is written as Zhao Zilong in the Moss Roberts book, I'll say Zhao Yun because more people will understand who I'm talking about.

I use the Koei names mostly because its simply easier write pinyin and more people have played/heard of the game than read the book. Certain things are easier if you just bend with the times, like "Cao Cao" with a hard 'c' sound. That drove me INSANE for about 3 years. Then I just shrugged and gave up, "Ts'ao Ts'ao = Cao Cao = Kao Kao"

I know how you feel. I don't know why, upon learning of Wade-Giles' transliteration scheme, the Oxford faculty didn't strangle them both with their own tounges. If they ever make a historical movie about it I want John Cleese to play their boss. How in the world did anyone ever think it was a good idea to spell D with a T and T with a T'

Eternal proof that a class based society can't work.

Miyamoto Musashi. From the Japanese Sengoku Jidai (Warring States) period, he was a truly powerful warrior who still wept for his fallen enemies. He also wrote poetry and several works of philosophy and strategy, not the least of which, The Book Of Five Rings.

I would like to know what the definition of Antiquity is. Is it simply the past or is it a certain era of the past? i for one think Napoleon's conquest of Europe was fairly impressive.

Bah, there's so many possibilities, so I'll just list a few from different time periods.

Cyrus the Great - Founded the first all-out-conquering empire. His strategies, both in war and in peace, were then used by first Alexander and then the Romans.

Rameses II - set up the first inter-empire treaty, ending hundreds of years of war with the Hittites. Also reigned for an incredibly long time, and managed to get nearly 150 children. You've got to recognise that. Yes, okay, he may have had a bit of trouble with the Israelites, but you can't win them all.

And since others have mentioned people from the middle ages, I'll add Charlemagne and Suleyman the Magnificent. Charlemagne set up the feudal system (effectively creating the social system of Europe for the next 500 years), prevented the Moors from crossing the Pyrenees, and united enough of Europe to be made Holy Roman Emperor. Suleyman was one of the greatest administrators of the Ottoman Empire, ruling at its height, reaching from the gates of Vienna to Mecca, from Algiers to the borders of Persia.

Antiquity should be around 300AD and back
Dont ask me why i say 300AD it just seems right. that or the fall of the Western Empire...

Thisbe, such a noble pursuit

David

Probably Odysseus. Why? Because he was supposedly a strong and capable warrior. But he always relied as much, if not more on his wits than his muscles.
Yes and he didnt want to go and fight so he sowed his crops with salt and pretended to be insane until they placed his son in front of the plough.

Good Sense, because it obviously died a long time ago

Good Sense, because it obviously died a long time ago
:confused:
HE wasnt a Hero but a fool!

Alexander or Caesar! All the way!

I would like to know what the definition of Antiquity is. Is it simply the past or is it a certain era of the past? i for one think Napoleon's conquest of Europe was fairly impressive.

Antiquity is considered the "classical" period which includes starts from around the ancient Greek period/Mesopotamia and ended with the fall of Rome.

Military tactics and weaponry changed. The dominance of infantry on the battlefield during antiquity was replaced by cavalry during the medieval period. Armor became heavier and heavy cavalry would dominate for 1,500 years.

I would say either Hannibal Barca or Alexander the Great. They were real people who accomplished much so IMHO they beat out any fictional character.

Sure, Alexander had a big empire, the Pope turned back Atilla the Hun, 300 A.D. hmmm, Ramses II ( The Damned) would work, when was Boudaccia queen of the Mycenae of England? Cyrus the Assyrian sure, How about Nebuchadnezzar, who established the first real Empire, and Law code, and the hanging gardens, which are still a mystery as to how they were devised. Shutruk Nuhunte? heh heh, Of Course Gaius Julius Caesar had a more lasting influence than all of the previous. In fact I doubt even the Shogun Tokugawa, or Ch'in, or Master Sun could top Caesar's lasting cotribution, and memory.

"To think Horatio, that Imperious Caesar, might stop a hole, to keep the wind away."

Hamlet, III:I?

I would say either Hannibal Barca or Alexander the Great. They were real people who accomplished much so IMHO they beat out any fictional character.

They were amazing generals, sure. But what did they DO? Heroes are more than just good generals, right?

Hannibal won the battles and lost the war. Alexander won the war but lost the peace. How great are their legacies? Alexander left Chaos and destruction in his wake, and after his death it simply got worse. Hannibal couldn't save his homeland, all he managed to do was kill a whole lotta Romans.

This doesn't take away from their skill and greatness on the battlefield, but the "Greatest Hero of Antiquity" should probably earn that title for more than simply killing a lot of people and then dying.

Thus I proposed Zhang Liao, half in jest because I knew they meant European antiquity. But Zhang Liao managed to stabilize a border, safegaurd his lord, and helped a Kingdom survive many of the most dangerous threats to it exsistance throughout his life. He was a paragon of honor, and fought like a demon on the battlefield. But moreover his acomplishments helped Wei survive its most difficult times.

This combination of merit and acomplishment surely is what is meant by "greatest" someone who not only COULD do great things, but DID them and succeeded where others might so easily have failed.

Miyamoto Musashi. From the Japanese Sengoku Jidai (Warring States) period, he was a truly powerful warrior who still wept for his fallen enemies. He also wrote poetry and several works of philosophy and strategy, not the least of which, The Book Of Five Rings.

Even if you take the 1600's as Antiquity, Musashi had very little chance to prove himself in times of war; he was Sixteen when the Sengoku Jidai period ended remember, and he fought for the losing side in that conflict. His only other two military expiditions were fought with him as a staff officer, not a frontline general.

That said, he WAS an amazing duelist, and his life captured the imagination of generations of Japanese. He is certainly a hero of an age...but probably not antiquity.

:confused:
HE wasnt a Hero but a fool!

Good Sense most certainly is a hero and I won't have you besmirching his good name.

They were amazing generals, sure. But what did they DO? Heroes are more than just good generals, right?

Hannibal was tactically brilliant and for that he ranks high in my book. Alexander had a much greater influence than you give him credit for. He is responsible for the Hellenistic period where the cultures of Greece and Persia, and to an extent Egypt, were merged. His actions shaped the history of that region for the next 300 years. Had he not died of illness (at the age of 33) who knows how different the world would be today.

Cthulhu

why are you choosing Gilgamesh? Enkidi seems like the real hero of the story. Then again he DID die before the more 'mythic' parts started.

Oh, btw, "God is my favorite fictional character"

Cthulhu

Myrth :)

Good Sense most certainly is a hero and I won't have you besmirching his good name.
I wil besmirch what i damn well please!

I don't think it's really proper to deify Good Sense. We should appreciate Good Sense for it's teachings while it was alive, as well as mourn it's tragic death. Once we start seeing Good Sense as some sort of supernatural being, it can be (and has been) used to advocate all manner of horrors it would never have approved of.