Posted by Grallon on March 6, 2000 at 15:35:00:
In Reply to: Re: In response to Graham's and Arcane's pissing match below. posted by Amblemourne on March 6, 2000 at 15:18:29:
>
> umm...Sauron, Morgoth (LoTR), Dragonsbane (Hambly)(very dishonorable). But and however, let us consider folks like Thor and Siegfried and such...each held a weapon specific to their enemies. The destruction of the Lord of the Nazgul by a woman, and so on. Consider each had either an item that fulfilled its purpose or was the fulfiller of a specific destiny. A hero with a slaying-specific sword/weapon is no more than a beast of burden to that item and is not alone in that battle
Ok, how about these from LotR.
Isildur, Stood up to Sauron and hacked off his finger, sure he had a sword, but that was not what did it.
Boromir, took out piles of orcs, even with arrows in him, long enough to sound his horn and set the 3 companions on the chase.
Hurin, Who lasted hours alone on a hill slaying mountains of orcs, until sunset and legions of orcs finally overtook him, but he kept them long enough to allow the last of the Light to retreat.
As to the fact that you do not wish to discuss whether the Holocaust/inquisition/crusades/jihad were good or not, I agree, but I was saying that they all had one thing in common, the people thought they were doing the right thing.
And as to the Knights acts perhaps being anti-hero, Yes I agree. There were times when Saladin overcame whole cities and armies with a small band of loyal followers.
to the Eurocentric point of view, he was a demon, to the Muslim, he was the Vengeance of Allah.