Hozzie wrote:I disagree. Big does not alway win. Goliath....
Thanks hozzie, I wanted to discuss this point, as both a Southern Baptist and a fan of small and fast over big, slow, and stupid (1993 Dallas Cowboys defense over current 3-4, bandwagoner on current Barcelona over Real Madrid, etc.) However, David v Goliath and Leonidas v Theseus is apples to oranges in this case for two reasons.
1. Theolgical (I'll try to be religiously neutral): David and Goliath worshiped different gods, thus in a religious faceoff it is the God of David (and Israel and two large spinoff religions) vs Goliath who was devotee of Baal. In contrast, Leonidas and Theseus worshiped basically the same pantheon, including head god Zeus, thus it is a matter of Zeus's divine favoritism not a battle of the influence of competing gods (YHWH vs Baal). In fact, Theseus is the son of Zeus, thus if Zeus was to show favoritism anyone it would to 12 ft tall Theseus not to Leonidas, so Leonidas better be hoping to kissing up to Hera or he might be in major divine trouble.
2. Weapon Systems: David took out Goliath with a sling and stone. Daivd would have a killing range advantage against any useful weapon Goliath could have had. David negated his size disadvantage with a weapon still used against riot police and troop with machine guns today (much less effectively but still viable). Leonidas however lived and breathed in a world where projectile weapons was the ulimate sign of cowardice and Spartans rather die in battle than even think about using a sling. Leonidas was too macho to use a sling in Thermopylae, he ain't using against Zeus's kid. Actually, his hoplite toolkit of spear, shield, and short sword might not even be useful in a one on one battle even Theseus has similiar weapons. Theseus would have had a longer spear and short sword thus still a more effective killing range. Thus one dead Spartan.