The Greatest Warrior...

[The Saucepan Man]

The fact that Turin takes on and defeats Morgoth in the final battle rather suggests to me that, in the scheme of things, he is the greatest warrior.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

The fact that Turin takes on and defeats Morgoth in the final battle rather suggests to me that, in the scheme of things, he is the greatest warrior.

But how relevant is that? How much of his power would Melkor had recovered? And in what state of power would Melkor be after he fought Earendil / Fionwe / Tulkas, depending on the version? Does the power of Turin take all the credit?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

The fact that Turin takes on and defeats Morgoth in the final battle rather suggests to me that, in the scheme of things, he is the greatest warrior.

Well, I thought of that same when I wrote my first post, but I didn't want to post it since I thought it's not that "canonical", and then I forgot it. Yes, taken from this point of view, I would say so as well (cf. my first post).

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Raynor

But how relevant is that?

I would have thought it not just relevant but entirely compelling. Taking down the ultimate source of evil is surely the 'greatest' feat that a warrior can perform.

Or are we just talking most powerful warrior ...?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I would have thought it not just relevant but entirely compelling. Taking down the ultimate source of evil is surely the 'greatest' feat that a warrior can perform.

Or are we just talking most powerful warrior ...?

In my opinion, we don't have sufficient information to conclude anything about Turin's power based on the result of that contest. If he is sufficiently weakened by the other opponent(s) I mentioned, then it would not take the greatest fighter ever to bring him down.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Raynor

In my opinion, we don't have sufficient information to conclude anything about Turin's power based on the result of that contest. If he is sufficiently weakened by the other opponent(s) I mentioned, then it would not take the greatest fighter ever to bring him down.

You misunderstand me. I am not talking about whether Turin was most powerful, skilful etc warrior. But he was the warrior who achieved the ultimate greatness, and so, surely, the greatest warrior of Arda.

[Hammerhand]

Aye, but didn't Turin return from the Halls of the Dead to vanquish Melko? It confuses me the amount of endings!

So we are in a majority of Fongolfin being in the top... as with Turin.

Are there any backers for Fingon? Hurin? or Ecthelion? or any others you feel we need to discuss?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

You misunderstand me. I am not talking about whether Turin was most powerful, skilful etc warrior. But he was the warrior who achieved the ultimate greatness, and so, surely, the greatest warrior of Arda.

I disagree with this logic. If the bulk of the merit for defeating Melkor would go either Fionwe, Tulkas or Earendil, then giving the greatest title to the guy that gives the last punch does not seem appropriate to me. That last blow might be something purely "formal", and we don't know either way. Then again, we might have to agree to disagree.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Raynor

If the bulk of the merit for defeating Melkor would go either Fionwe, Tulkas or Earendil, then giving the greatest title to the guy that gives the last punch does not seem appropriate to me.

But who got the credit for it?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

The fact that Turin takes on and defeats Morgoth in the final battle rather suggests to me that, in the scheme of things, he is the greatest warrior.

Since Legate qualified the terms on which I based my earlier suggestion of Eowyn, I must ask for yet more clarifications.

Are stupid, stubborn and prideful required characteristics for this macho competition or are they simply assumed qualifications?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Since Legate qualified the terms on which I based my earlier suggestion of Eowyn, I must ask for yet more clarifications.

Are stupid, stubborn and prideful required characteristics for this macho competition or are they simply assumed qualifications?

'Stupid, stubborn & prideful' does seem to fit Eowyn pretty well too......

[MatthewM]

I am not familiar with all of the characters from the earlier ages that most of you are speaking of, so I am going to answer with my obvious choice. A Man who was definitely not "stupid", although perhaps stubborn and prideful-

Boromir of the Nine Walkers, of the Third Age.

The most renowned warrior of his time, and the greatest Gondor had seen in many years. Defending Gondor on countless occassions from the growing might of Sauron, in specific his defense of Osgiliath, Boromir proved vital to Gondor's survival during the last years of the Third Age.

In addition to being the Captain of the White Tower, Boromir's death was a truly heroic one...one of a true warrior. Sacrificing himself and fighting on against ridiculous odds, only falling when numerous arrows reigned on him, shot by cowardly orcs who would not dare face him sword to sword.

I know most here will not agree, but in my opinion as far as my knowledge streches at this time, Boromir was Middle-earth's greatest warrior.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

'Stupid, stubborn & prideful' does seem to fit Eowyn pretty well too......

Eowyn learns from experience, and so I would not call her stupid. She is driven to extreme measures out of her frustration and despair, but she does change.

Turin by and large does not learn from his mistakes.

However, the comparisons being made here are among characters in very different texts, with very different styles. Eowyn differs from most of Tolkien's characters in that her characterisation appears closer to those in 'realist' fiction, with some degree of psychological motivation, while many of Tolkien's other characters operate in a very different style of characterisation. Turin, for example, would not be so tragic if he learned from his mistakes.

Boromir on the other hand does learn, but he learns too late. Maybe he's Turin 'upgraded' ('downsized'?) for a different literary style.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Eowyn learns from experience, and so I would not call her stupid. She is driven to extreme measures out of her frustration and despair, but she does change.

Turin by and large does not learn from his mistakes.

He does learn - he just learns the wrong things. And this brings up the larger question of the curse. To what extent can Turin 'learn' the right thing? Eowyn is not under Sauron's curse. Turin is driven by a belief that he can free himself from the curse he is under. He is seeking always to be free of his doom.

Turin is 'unlucky'. The choices he makes are all meant to bring about the Good. He isn't stupid at all. He is very smart, very cunning & a master strategist. He becomes a real threat to Morgoth's plans & in the end destroys his most powerful weapon. His strategy is, basically, 'the best defence is a good offence'. If Eowyn is driven by frustration & despair so is Turin most of the time.

Turin, for example, would not be so tragic if he learned from his mistakes.

As i said, he does learn from his mistakes - its the fact that he learns the wrong things from them that makes him a tragic hero - if he really learnt nothing at all from his mistakes he wouldn't be a tragic figure, he'd be an idiot & we wouldn't care about him.

And I think Turin & Eowyn are a lot closer than you imply - what if Niniel hadn't turned out to be Turin's sister - & what if Eowyn had been married before she rode to war &, after killing the Witch King it had turned out her husband was really her long lost brother?

Eowyn is 'lucky', & has a chance to learn from her mistakes, & find a new, meaningful life. Turin is 'unlucky' & doesn't. 'Call no man (or woman) lucky until he is dead' & all that.

If we're talking about greatest hero here we can't limit it either to being a nice guy, or to being lucky, or always winning. Turin is a great hero because he never gives in, always fights on, against insurmountable odds (even when he knows they are insurmountable. Being a hero doesn't mean being a nice guy who always wins. It means doing heroic things, facing the Dragon & standing your ground & not running.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by davem

If we're talking about greatest hero here we can't limit it either to being a nice guy, or to being lucky, or always winning. Turin is a great hero because he never gives in, always fights on, against insurmountable odds (even when he knows they are insurmountable. Being a hero doesn't mean being a nice guy who always wins. It means doing heroic things, facing the Dragon & standing your ground & not running.

Based on your criteria, I would place Hurin before Turin as the greatest mortal warrior. Hurin was far more selfless in his actions (particularly in the Nirnaeith Arnoediad), and defied Morgoth to his face (which was dauntless beyond measure). As someone stated previously, Tolkien refers to him as the "mightiest of the warriors of mortal men", and that's good enough for me. In addition, I was never really pleased at how Turin slew Glaurung (stabbing him while hidden underneath). It lacks the heroic stature of Azaghal standing bravely against Glaurung, Ecthelion versus Gothmog, or Hurin defiantly slaying 70 trolls without recourse to aid or escape. In that sense, I think Tolkien missed the boat and lessened the impact of Turin's deed.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

I know most here will not agree, but in my opinion as far as my knowledge streches at this time, Boromir was Middle-earth's greatest warrior.

I believe that it is clear that there are better warriors even among other Men of his time. Aragorn and Boromir's younger brother for instance. Faramir may not be seen as the warrior, but he most certainly is.

"He is bold, more bold than many deem; for in these days men are slow to believe that a captain can be wise and learned in the scrolls of lore and song, as he is, and yet a man of hardihood and swift judgement in the field. But SUCH IS Faramir. Less reckless and eager than Boromir, but not less resolute." [RotK, p. 42]

I suppose it's the same when it comes to how people see Feanor as not being a warrior because he got killed and because his greatest feats were based on his sub-creative abilites which surpassed any of Elf-kind.

With Faramir he does speak of how the High Men became more like Middle Men and valued the warrior more than Men of other crafts when before warriors had more skills, as he himself does. This change is why he said Boromir, "was accounted the best man in Gondor" [TTT, p. 339] since they looked upon warriors as better than Men of other crafts. Faramir, being like the old Numenoreans was not only a warrior but a scholar and people seeing him the scholar did not account him as good a warrior as Boromir. Well most did not. Some, as in my quote above knew he was every bit the warrior Boromir was. Also take into account Eowen's perception of Faramir, she "knew, for she was bred among men of war, that here was one whom no Rider of the Mark would outmatch in battle." [RotK, p 265]