It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Myth of ancient Greece's 'heroes' blown away

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 12:48 PM

04 Oct 09

Spartans! Prepare for, well, embarrassment. It seems that far from being elite, noble warriors, each worth 1,000 of any rival soldiers, King Leonidas' crack troops were a bunch of bullying thugs. And Alexander the Great? A mummy's boy: in fact, his mum was a better fighter by a long chalk and died a soldier's death on the battlefield.

They and other figures from antiquity are to have their reputations shattered by a new British study which reveals the "truth" behind long-established legends. Michael Scott, a classicist at Cambridge University, points to evidence that could change the way we think about our classical heroes.

It is interesting how recent research and findings are changing our paradigms.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 4/10/2009 by Mirthful Me]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 12:57 PM
Nothing "blown away" here.

He is just speculating. It is not like he found a "magic book" of alternate history and I am sure he didn't receive any "eyewitness" testimony so he is speculating and creating his own "story". It isn't like we can prove anything in history other than the oral or written "traditions" of the historical characters and of course those stories are based on the same biases (pro or con) of the writer or storyteller.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 12:57 PM
that sounds uninteresting, and i oculd care less if the legends were true or not. they're inspirational stories.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:03 PM
reply to post by Aquarius1

So... where did this Dr Scott, get his time machine to do these studies? It sounds to me more like a relatively no name archeologist just wants a name for himself and a few dollar on the side by scandalizing the commonly accepted history of Greece...

What did he base his findings on?

Alcoholic induced communion with Zeus?

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:09 PM
Agreed, these so called scholars and researchers have opinions they cannot back up, I prefer to embrace information gleaned from ancient texts that have been found in recent years, the Gnostic's and John Lash's work come to mind.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Aquarius1]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:16 PM
This is just another assualt on culture. "Studies" such as this serve to tear down our conceptions of heroes, our ideas of valor. Goes along with the femenization of modern men. I know it sounds crazy, but I believe, whether or not its a concerted effort, that there is an ever increasing movement to strip away masculinity from society. Make the population a little easier to control...

Don't really care what this scientist (and I use the term loosely) says. The stories of valiant warriors are inspirational.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:21 PM
I would love to get my hands on his time machine to see if he is right. We can't even be positively sure that some of these greek heroes even existed, and this "scientist" is trying to destroy their image rather than concentrate on finding more evidence to prove not all of them are myth.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:22 PM
*smirk* Well, this is the sort of reaction one would expect against someone bucking the establishment. Seems tht anyone who has an idea that isn't already approved is immediately accused of being a drunk, a lier, or out to make a buck.

I'll admit, there isn't much to go on from the article. Who knows what sources he has, and Paul Bignell does not help with the colorful sarcasm in the article. Still, after reading the whole of the article, it actually sounds more realistic than the glorious legends of old.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by rogerstigers

It is not that Dr.Scott is presenting some New Alternative Theories about Greece that is so upsetting but rather his assertions that everything we thought we knew from all the old texts are lies. That the Spartans were thugs that liked to beat up everyone and Alexander was a wus who was so wuss that his mum was more of a man than him and Isocrates was a hypocrite and the City of Athens was a not a major city but a small time town that imploded under its own economic troubles....

Those are alot of BOLD and inflammatory claims based on ...what exactly? Has Dr.Scott found a new wealth of historical documents to support his claims? Or is the man just trying to sell a book to pay a mortgage and survive his own "economic implosion"?

I don't think folks here are having close minded Knew Jerk reactions..... I think we are simply wanting to know the basis for the VARIETY of counter claims made by the "Dr" Scott...

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:28 PM
reply to post by titorite

I understand, but I can't tell from the article that those are his assertions or the colorful language of the journalist who wrote the article. I am leaning towards the latter.

In addition, in my studies of history, I have learned that *everything* we think we know about history is wrong. Just as MSM slants and spins stories today, they did it back then in their form of the time. What really happened is usually not quite what got recorded. The idea that the Spartans were brutal warmongers sounds more realistic to me than a glories nobel race of protectors. And if you speak poorly of a brutal warmonger, you are likely going to be silenced and purged.

[edit on 10-4-2009 by rogerstigers]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 02:54 PM
Bullocks I say. This guy just want's a name for himself.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:01 PM
reply to post by Aquarius1

Well we may have pulled back the vale a bit but...

That Mommy's boy still conquered all of the known world. King Leonidas and his band of merry men still fought the Persians tooth and nail...

[edit on 4-10-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:14 PM
Don't you people see the irony here? This is a board dedicated to exposing propaganda and challenging commonly accepted political and social views.

There was no one to do that back then, so what was discussed and what was recorded in history was merely no different then campaigns being run now about a war, a person, etc.

I imagine it was even worse back then because no one could refute any evidence with live action picture like we can do today.

Think if people only had access to main stream news for their information. What would be your opinion of our leaders and of the countries actions.

I for one agree with this guy, and base it wholly on common sense. I can't argue the Alex the Great stance but I can tell you, you don't breed good warriors without destroying all humanity inside them. That's just a fact of human existence. What warrior is good if he would hesitate killing something or if he isn't constantly fighting. You need to keep them in current conflict to keep them apt. Think UFC fighting if you can't wrap your head around it.

So yeah, you guys are blaming someone that is doing basically the same thing as this board, just that he is challenging things from hundreds of years ago.

It's amazing how people thing history is so concrete, almost as if there has been no corruption during the time of its recording or anytime since then as well.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:30 PM

Originally posted by threekings
It's amazing how people thing history is so concrete, almost as if there has been no corruption during the time of its recording or anytime since then as well.

All this did was expose more of their human frailties. It doesn't change their deeds. Sparta at the time was not known for their grace. There were very real reasons for their reputation. It didn't come from picking daisies. The Persians found this out the hard way.

Who cares if Alexander had a softer side? Corruption? Well that goes without saying.

All this reveals is more about their character and personalities.

It changes nothing about their historical accomplishments. IMO.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by SLAYER69]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:32 PM
Oh wow, I have finally seen the light.

I think this person writing the original article (not the original ATS poster) knows little to nothing of warfare whatsoever, nor of history and how it was to fight a battle

That Leonidas was nothing more than a bully is a fallacy, if nothing more than a lie.

Leonidas, took three-hundred volunteers, to step into the void that was left because his own politicians and countrymen were bickering and squabbling amongst themselves, which is the Greek nature, as well as the nature of mankind itself, and when he figured out the people who should be stopping Xerxes through unification against the might of Persia were bought off, either through gold, promises of leadership when none was given prior and should not, or whether it was the promise of serving the right hand of the God-King, King of Kings, Xerxes
he took it upon himself to bypass the regular rule of law by making himself a free man and all three-hundred men were as well, volunteers, to bridge that gap left in the wake of the political corruption.

Through both physical as well as metaphorical symbolism, Leonidas knew the goat path, a symbol of the division and small wedge Xerxes had driven amongst his fellow countrymen, he led these men, willingly I might add, to a suicidal confrontation.

There were 11,700 Greeks, 300 Spartans, 7,000 other assorted Greeks, and 4,000 Helot slaves there upon the hot gates of Thermopylae, and Leonidas knew that there would come a slaughter, he wanted himself as well as his men to have done their duty, through action, valor, and the ultimate sacrifice of death.

He was the victor that day, not Xerxes, because his death, both physical as well as metaphorical, re-united all of Greece who was stirred up like a hornets nest against each other and when Xerxes wended his Persian's, with Greek slaves into the bowels of this once dissected nation, he found out that the hornets nest was now stirred against his honeyed lies.

As for Alexander the Great, our issues, as humans, make us into the very men and women who will either fight, or fly in the face of danger, it is called fight or flight mentality and if this simple writer of this particular post has learned anything in my lifetime, it is that we are all unique individuals, either destined to become slaves to the system, to our own wanton lusts, or to a service against our will, but, there are the few unique individuals like Alexander, who will in fact reach their destiny to lead the rule of the world.

Leonidas and Alexander, two individuals, who the rest of humanity could learn a lesson or two from, to be better than the system, to be better than their fellow man or woman, and lead both by example as well as by deed, King's both, and some say bullies, but I say before they conquered the world's of their divination, they had to conquer both fear and themselves.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 03:39 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Aquarius1

That Mommy's boy still conquered the known world.

Well yeah - even if he sent a letter home to mum every night before hitting the hay he still managed to do this...

Conquests of Alexander

Granted Philip built the Macedonian army and did do great things. But it can't be denied that after Philip he took the army into Asia, destroyed the Persian Empire and conquered lands as far as India. Its not really a small feat - even if he did like to write home to mum.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Frogs]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 05:10 PM
Greek Heroes were nothing like our modern definition of the term "hero" is. They were savage, brutal, and fought tooth and nail. I'm sure they were at time thugs, rapists, and pillagers. Just read Homer's Iliad, they measured their victory not only in deeds but bounty, with the mightiest of them being called Heroes. You could also describe them our modern word "infamous" and I don't mean that in a derogatory way.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 05:18 PM
There's nothing mind blowing or new in this information.

Try learning history through study instead of through films and perhaps you would already have a better understanding of what our race has been through.

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 05:19 PM
Oopsie...double post.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by shamhat]

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 05:22 PM

Originally posted by Frogs
Granted Philip built the Macedonian army and did do great things. But it can't be denied that after Philip he took the army into Asia, destroyed the Persian Empire and conquered lands as far as India. Its not really a small feat - even if he did like to write home to mum.

Well his Mum did (allegedly) plot to kill his Dad in order to make it all possible, a little gratitude is to be expected.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in