Abstract
The scholarly investigation of epic heroes encompasses a complex and multifaceted realm, engaging researchers in grappling with the intricate task of defining and categorising these figures, while also endeavouring to comprehend their evolutionary trajectory. Academic discourse on epic heroes has yielded two distinctive approaches. The first group, denoted as the “ubiquitous fallacy group” within this article, employs anthropological, psychoanalytical, historical, and literary perspectives to argue for the temporal and spatial ubiquity of epic heroes at their core, accentuating shared patterns and recurring themes. This article provides a thorough critique of the first group, highlighting the inherent methodological and contextual problems in their analytical frameworks, and revealing their limitations, particularly in terms of selective data and potential oversimplification of complex phenomena. The second group, while acknowledging some generic influences over time, emphasises the impossibility of ascribing a single, stable, or universal form to the concept of epic hero. Although leaning towards favouring the latter approach, this article aims to identify the problems inherent in this group as well. This approach’s categorisation of epic heroes, creating heroic models or types to differentiate heroes, is also problematic, given the fluid boundaries between these categories and the potential inadequacy of models in capturing the full complexity and diversity of epic heroism they represent. This article further delves into two distinct analytical frameworks in this group, Doris Cecilia Werner’s socio-political reading and John Steadman’s “image and ideal” hypothesis, offering potential solutions to address gaps in their theoretical approaches. Accordingly, this article, while presenting fresh criticism on the theories of the evolution of epic heroes, argues that the ever-changing nature of epic heroes defies a uniform ubiquitous definition or categorizations, and offers solutions to fill the gaps in the latest scholarly analytical frameworks.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.