Artorius (King Arthur, for those of you laymans), Odysseus, or Beowulf? I'm torn between the latter two, but I'd have to go with Beowulf. Ripping Grendel's arm off and then being old and fighting that dragon. Classic man. Anymore votes?
shareBeowulf was the better fighter of the three. Artorius was a leader and Odysseus a thinker.
shareKing Arthur is known to have killed quite a few giants, monsters and witches, which isn't bad either... But I agree with mOrg16 that Odysseus should leave this contest. Achilles or Hector, maybe, but not Odysseus (even if he blinded a cyclops; he was good at tricks, not battle, and I think it takes a lot of blood n' guts to make a good epic hero).
shareIt's sad that one of the greatest posts on IMDB only has three replies. I agree; Odysseus is out. I think Achilles and Beowulf would be an interesting contest... I'd have to hand it to Beowulf.
Perhaps Gilgamesh and Beowulf would be an even match.
Post responsibly.
Then again you can't leave out Aeneas. Pure Roman power, well Trojan turned Roman.
shareGilgamesh eh? hadn't thought of him... Nice contest. So what are we looking for exactly in an epic hero, before we list our candidates and call for a vote? What makes an EPIC hero? His superhuman ability to overcome? His ability to counter the plans of God/the Gods/ to bend history and events his way? His immortality as a literary character? If that's the case, I'd have to hand the prize to Gilgamesh, no one's been around longer... But I still go with Arthur for being the most universal epic hero, through time and space...
shareI'd probably also go with Arthur for the reason stated above, but Beowulf was pretty awesome.
Do you not know death when you see it?
*beep* Gilgamesh *beep* was jacked up, and stuck up!
sharemy vote would go for achilles, although beowulf would finish in a close second
shareI like how the character of Achilles was portrayed in the movie Troy and Gilgamesh is a bad ass but was arrogant and jerk. I will say Beowulf. I really like the meaning behind the epic poem/story. He was only afraid of being forgotten.
shareI agree with your feelings about Gilgamesh. Besides, it seems to me he fits better the description of a tragic hero, in the sense we've become accustomed to under the influence of the Ancient Greeks: it's the story of someone who fails in a heroic endeavour, doomed to fail from the start.
share[deleted]
YESSS!!! Hector rocks!!! All the Trojans kick ass!!! I don't know, must be my always rooting for the underdog, but I totally agree with your appreciation of Hector vs Achilles. However, again, I think Hector falls into the tragic hero category more than epic. Maybe that's just me...
shareI'd give my vote to King Arthur, as he was not only a Knight (skilled in the old dragon-slaying), but he also had time to unite England and do some fairly nifty interior decorating at Camelot - a round dining table, who'd have thought..?
shareKing Arthur is not know as 'Artorius' in legend.........
Anyway, Beowulf is my favourite epic hero. I also like Sigurd/Seigfried, Bodvar Bjarki, Cuchulainn and Dietrich of Bern (Gothic Verona rather than Bern in Switzerland).
Regards,
The Count
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"
For English I have to write a story about Beowulf vs. Gilgamesh. I'm going to make Beowulf win. Gilgamesh may be 2/3 god, but he is also very self-centered.
shareI wish I had been given that kind of assignment when I was in school... although I think that duel is highly unlikely. I would much prefer a fight between Beowulf and Arthur. Now who would win, I wonder? Both share bear characteristics, are uncommonly fearless and strong, and accustomed to the slaying of monsters... Boy I wish someone would make a movie, or at least a video game like that! ;)
shareTake away Arthur's swords (Excalibur and his other sword) and Beowulf would win as he rips off Grendel's arm and swims with armour on!
No offence meant to his majesty.
Regards,
The Count
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"
"No offence meant to his majesty." Lol, that's fun.
But how big is Grendel supposed to be anyway? Arthur kills several giants. Not with his bare hands, true, but still, we're talking BIG guys nonetheless.
Rather large. He is big enough to carry Danes away. He has a pocket which he can fit humans in...though this may be a magical pocket.
Regards,
The Count
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"
I didn't remember the pocket thing. I have to read my classics again... *off to fish out copy of Beowulf*
However, I think you're right about the magic thing. it's hard to tell what magical beings exactly look like from the texts. We assume giants to be big and dwarfs to be small, but in Norse mythology, size obviously doesn't matter as giants, humans and dwarves can mate and have offspring of any kind of appearance. Dwarves and elves, which look so different in modern fantasy, are apparently of the same species at least originally. And King Arthur's bones are said to have been of an uncommon size, whereas no legend ever says that he had problems finding a suitable horse to ride into battle!
Yeah, something tells me that's a magical pocket.
shareI enjoy the character of Beowulf because in many ways he is the first archtype who did not succeed or fail primarly due to favor from the gods. Gilgamesh, Odyesses, Achilles were all demi-gods who succeeded because of the gods intervention. Arthur Pendragon suceeded mostly through the blessings of the one true God as well as the gifts of the old spirts. I mean he did well with these gifts like Superman choosing the heroic path of virtue. Beowulf, Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, Batman they had to make it totally on their own.
That is an interesting family of heroes, I would never have thought of it that way. Thanks!
shareI'd have to go with someone like Lancelot. He totally owned anyone he faced and was near perfect if he hadn't been tricked into sex. And plus he healed a man. Arthur had a lot of help from some great knights, while all Beowulf had was nothing more than the support of some fearful people. Yet Odysseus led a bunch of men who were destined to death at sea to safety, showing great leadership and determination. Plus he showed how bad he was when he went into his house and straight up owned everyone.
shareWell, yes and no. Light Elves are more the same species as the Vanir (and thus the Aesir). Black Elves are constantly confused with Dwarves, however, I am amongst those who believe Black Elves are more akin to Huldrafolk and the southern Danish 'Trolls'.
Norse mythology has odd elements. As you pointed out even giants can mate with humans, which should be impossible. Another interesting fact about giants is that they keep changing sizes, at time they are the same height as the Gods and at times they are taller!
Also you are correct about Arthur, I had completely forgotten that fact! Thanks. ;-)
Regards,
The Count
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"
Im sorry but King Leonidas trumps all. HE had brains, brawn and the greatest soldiers the world has ever known behind him.
------------------------
"Tell a spartans passer by,that here, by Spartan law, we lie."
Hmm, as much as I like Spartans, I would not say they were the greatest warriors the world has ever know. You are surely forgetting the Samurai, the Mongol and Hunnic hordes, the Goths, Vandals, the Saxons and the Angles. Having said that they were great warriors who made a great stand at Thermopoli.
I wouldn't say Leonidas would trump all previous heroes mentioned as he doesn't have abnormnal strength (as he is based in history rather than legend...).
Greek heroes that are likely to compete in this competition are Hercules, Achiles, Odysseus and Heros.
Other Germanic heroes I would put forward are Siegfried of Xanten, Hagen of Troneck and Dietrich of Bern.
Regards,
The Count
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"
One word. Ash.
sharemy vote also is for Leonidas
shareI suppose you mean the Leonidas of 300? If not, he falls a bit short of the others mentioned so far, who have had a wider literary and legendary career. I mean, brave as the 300 were, in the history texts of Antiquity, there's nothing superhuman about them. And I think the superhuman quality is part of what makes an epic (which, IMO, is why 300 qualifies as such: it is an epic movie; the material on which Miller based his GN isn't so much; it was too historical for that, nothing like the Illiad and Odyssey, Gilgamesh, or the Arthurian legends).
shareAs off-topic as this discussion has gotten, I just thought I'd bring this up.
There are traditionally a set of criteria that qualify an epic hero:
1. Strange circumstances surrounding the hero's birth.
2. The hero usually possess one or more superhuman attributes.
3. The Hero faces challenges and enemies as he is sent on a quest of grave importance to himself or his people
4. The Hero's enemies are of a sort that often borders and crosses into supernatural.
5. At the end of the story, the Hero must accomplish his last challenge alone.
6. Upon the completion of the final task, the hero either returns to his home, or dies.
These criteria easily fit most major heroes mentioned. My money is with Odysseus, though. Don't ever underestimate a master tactician and crafty trickster.