Category talk:English heroic legends

message: This is intended for Germanic legendary material that is preserved in English sources and for heroic tales developed by the English (or by those of Danish descent in Yorkshire who had become English) such as Havelok the Dane, the Guy of Warwick romance, and the Robin Hood material along with other early ballad material. There is overlap with Category:Norse mythology and a probable Category:German heroic legend to be created. This is intentional.
Normally Arthurian material should not be included, as in origin Arthurian material is British, not English, and was later mostly developed in French. An exception is Arthurian material that contains a significant mention of at least one personage also prominent in native English tradition, for example Hengest or Vortigern. 
Jallan 14:19, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I dispute the usefulness of this type of categorization. Who is to determine what qualifies as an "English heroic legend"? The Arthurian Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is very clearly an English work emphasizing English mores, culture, and language.--Cúchullain t/c 15:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Sir Gawain was just an example of how the Arthurian legend is used in an English context, clearly the poem itself doesn't belong in the category as a literary work rather than a legend. But what about the Arthurian legend itself? English literature and folklore involving the Arthurian legend abounds, regardless of where the legend originated. The category already contains a number of articles for legends set in countries far more "foreign" than Sir Gawain's Logres simply because they are given an English context (the best example is Beowulf.) I also disagree that the criteria is clear, I think it's actually very vague. To clarify it a bit you've added specifications that define "English" as simply "Germanic", but in my opinion this definition is contrived and puts too fine a line around it. There were also a number of issues in the specification (the links and phrasing, largely) but I've correct that. And the fact that no one had registered a complaint isn't an issue; :Category:Arthurian legend had been placed in the category for six months until you removed it.--Cúchullain t/c 13:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

text: That level of acrimony is not appropriate or productive. What I claimed above was that the category is too vague to be useful - I made no comment about my authority or population genetics (!) The issue of what qualifies as an "English heroic legend" is palpable. Obviously it doesn't mean individuals from England, or most of these characters would be out. Clearly legends of the English are intended, regardless of where the characters originate. But if we are defining English as "Anglo-Saxon", as you suggest, then why are Robin Hood characters and literary figures like Guy of Warwick included? And if we add your even more artificial pre-Norman timeframe, that discounts yet more articles, such as Hereward the Wake, Fulk FitzWarin, and Drake's Drum. If, however, we define "English heroic legend" as legendary figures who were treated by the English in heroic poetry, prose, and other material, then Arthur is clearly appropriate, as his story was widely regarded to be true and he featured very widely in English literature and folklore (if you don't believe this, you clearly know little about the subject.) Fact is, the category is problematic, and that won't be helped by you attacking me on various talk pages.--Cúchullain t/c 13:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: