Add to Neptune?
If you would like, can you add this type of notation to the article itself? I think this one probably belongs more in the Neptune article, but may also make sense in any Olympians article.
Jamie 16:08, 18 Jun 2005 (Eastern Daylight Time)
- I would tend to disagree with this. Describing specific appearances and/or references to individual gods within their own article is appropriate, but having 5800 BCE on any article other than Neptune seems inappropriate to me. It might even have been Oceanous way back then, with Neptune taking his place after the Titans lost the war with the Olympians with the humans not knowing the difference, or at least not recording it as a change. Just my opinion, just don't tell Namor that I don't quite believe him. :) Chadlupkes 19:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Ouranos (grandfather, deceased) in the relatives section gives me pause. The gods don't really "die", as evidenced by the previous existence of Valhalla on Asgard and Hades (the place, not the god) shown in a few Avengers and Thor issues. Ouranos was most likely banished to Tartarus or some other location when he was defeated by Chronos. The interactions of human myth and actual history are murky given how different writers have used the myth in various ways in the Marvel Universe. Anyway, I would remove "deceased" from this, since it's mostly meaningless. Chadlupkes 19:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Ouranus and Neptune
I agree. I butted heads with Jeff over stuff like this a lot over at the Appendix. The mythguide entry for Ouranus under the rules of the MU certainly implies he never died and the dates for the start of the worship of the Olympian gods surely contradicts the rules for the MU, but I'm not allowed to rewrite the MU to match the myths. Thor2000 18:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I agree about not rewriting the Marvel Universe to match the myths, because that has to be up to the writers at Marvel, not us. I'm just saying that death means different things to gods than mortals, even within the MU. Even Steve Rogers' soul is still around somewhere, although I'm sure if the Valkyries were still around they'd be fighting for him. Chadlupkes 21:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- You don't have to rewrite the MU to fit the myths. Just decipher it alternately. Thor2000 17:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Where the heck did THAT come from? The most original title for Zeus came from Homer who called him Zeus Thunderstriker. He also called Poseidon Earthshaker. My gods, does anyone respect mythology anymore or are they just making it up? Thor2000 16:43, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
- It's a fictional universe. Of course it's all made up.
- --GrnMarvl14 17:05, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
5800 BCE =
Quick note. Namor I#38 establishes that Neptune was worshipped as early as 5800 BCE. This may serve as the earliest reference to the Olympian deities. (Author Unknown)
I don't know if 5800BCE is the same as 5800 BC, but that predates the Minoan Empire and the founding of Greece and places them well before the Bronze Age and just after the Ice Age. It would make the Olympians older than the Ennead and the Anunnaki. Who would be around to worship them that far back? I know the Marvel writers make up a lot of stuff, but do they EVER do any research? Could this actually pertain to the Titans worshippped before the Olympians? Thor2000 17:41, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
- BCE is "before common era." It's basically a more scientific version of BC. And the Marvel Universe's history of humans is fairly extensive, with Atlantis (one of the largest, and oldest human settlements) being founded in 20,000 BC/BCE. And...of course they're making this up. That's what makes it a work of FICTION. It's only LOOSELY (and VERY loosely) based upon the history of our earth, with NUMEROUS modifications made here and there to suit the whims of the writers. It's NOT going to be the same as it is in the real world, because it ISN'T the real world. Complaining about the Olympians being worshipped before the Minoans is like complaining that Hercules and Thor are active on earth now. It's not MEANT to be accurate with what we know. It's a different world. With different rules and a different history. If it wasn't...what fun would it be?
- --GrnMarvl14 20:25, October 10, 2009 (UTC)
- You know what bothers me. When you get confused by something and can't figure it out so you post a question to figure it out and you get accused of "complaining." It's been fairly obvious to me that the MU is fictional especially since I don't see Spiderman sightings on ESPN or Josh Gates tracking the Hulk on "Destination Truth." You could have just let me know that Marvel plays loose and fast with chronology; you did not have to indulge in character assassination. Yes, for the record, I'm being sarcastic.
- by the way, "one of the largest, and oldest human settlements?" does that mean there were others? Thor2000 15:33, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
- If I offended you, then I apologize. Was merely pointing out that you can't expect everything to line up perfectly.
- And, yes, there were other settlements (can't remember if it was Kull or Conan who was around at that time, and visited several other civilizations), and many of the post-Cataclysm Atlanteans scattered to those other towns after Atlantis' destruction.
- --GrnMarvl14 19:17, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
- That bothers me a lot. I know Marvel has pushed backward several dates such as the sinking of Atlantis (historically about 1470 BC) in order to squeeze in a time where Conan could have existed, but they really didn't have to. The actual ancient record worked just fine to accomodate all these characters; with all these events pushed back, they've got ENORMOUS gaps in the chronology where nothing is happening. I mean, I've done the research and realistically, Kull could easily have existed after the real world Ice Age, Conan on the cusp of the Bronze age and the Sumerian civilization at the start of written records with worship of the Greek Gods at the start of the Mycenean Empire where it always started. Marvel has dug themselves a major problem, and it centers chiefly on Plato's incorrect dating of when Atlantis was destroyed. The more correcting dating can be found in the records of Solon which predates Plato. Thor2000 15:20, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
- But that's the thing. Many dates (such as the sinking of Atlantis) are based on written works that may, themselves, be (or are) fiction. Why can't Marvel play around with that? You mention how they've gotten themselves into a problem. Why? Why can't their world work the way they want it to? Why does everything have to be accounted for? There are gaps in human history, why not gaps in Marvel's history? We don't know where every group on our Earth was at every period in time. We have theories, sure. But nothing more. Why can't Marvel do the same? And who's to say those gaps won't be filled in at later points in time? Atlantis first appeared in Marvel Comics #1. How many years later was it that we finally for its entire (or close enough) history? These things take time. Can't expect all the answers to be readily available. Look at Wolverine's history for an idea of how these things take time to play out. Give it time. I'm sure all will be made clear eventually.
- --GrnMarvl14 23:15, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
- I guess I'm just a purist. It doesn't matter to me for someone to play wild and fast with fictional creations, but I expect history and myth to be accurate. I'm the same way with horror movies and haunted houses. I can't stand haunted house attractions because they have nothing to do with what real haunted houses are all about, but then I guess its next to impossible for attractions to mechanically create the sort of things that ghosts really do. Thor2000 14:37, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
- "things that ghosts really do"? I can't believe someone wrote that. Ghosts don't really do anything because they don't really exist. Of course, I can't believe you're taking Plato's hearsay account of Atlantis as historical fact either. I mean, treating it as mythology is one thing, but to say Plato got the date wrong implies there's an actual correct date - as Atlantis never actually existed, there is no correct date!
- In a world where Eternals were fighting Deviants more than 20k years ago, its hard to try to force mythology to conform to expectations based on real-world treatments. What really confuses me is that we have at least 2 groups that are supposed to have inspired the Marvel idea of Greek Gods (Eternals, Greek Gods) - how does that actually work again?
- --Squirrelloid 11:35, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
- Greek gods were the ones worshiped. Eternals were mistaken for them. They made a pact wherein the Eternals would continue to be mistaken for them in order to draw in worshipers to the Greek gods, and the Greek gods would let them do whatever they wanted to. More or less. Part of that pact involved Zuras' daughter Azura becoming Thena (after Athena, daughter of Zeus, of course).
- --GrnMarvl14 15:30, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
I find it funny that Zeus beating Hulk is used as a measure of strength when the Hulk was not fighting back or mad at all. Obviously, if he uses his plethora of magical powers and also use them to increase his strength, he can beat Hulk. After all he is the King of Olympians. But when he used his lightning to attack hulk, used his magic to empower his strength, weakening hulk with his magic, after hulk fighting and beating the rest of the pantheon while taking their hits, and moreover this being the merged hulk, he wasn't mad, didn't fight back and wanted to sacrifice himself for his family is, taken as a measure of physical combat. Also he used his lightning against Galactus. So I changed it to simply combat.Undominanthybrid (talk) 11:33, October 15, 2013 (UTC)
- The point is, the Hulk literally is no match for anybody magic based. He is typically written as having the strength to overcome anyone, which is stupid, and ridiculous. He suffers from Superman syndrome (a: only way to beat him is be MORE super, b: he's the strongest, everyone else be damned). Martian Manhunter can single-handedly take out the JLA, superman included, but this is rarely noted as Superman is the champion and mascot of DC. Neither Hulk nor Superman are unbeatable. Hulk can't beat Thor, plain and simple. I don't care about what stories were written, they're all PIS. Thor was CREATED by stan lee as 'who could beat Hulk? I know, a god! but rather than hercules lets go with someone obscure...thor!' (paraphrasing). The point is, a fight against Zeus doesn't need any explanation, Hulks anger is irrelevant. Hulk's power is science based (gamma-powered strength), and until they change his origin to having magically-enhanced beginnings by Loki or something to cause chaos, he is currently in a Pre-crisis Superman mode of needing to be reeled in and toned down. I don't know if that is too grand a concept to grasp.
- The Avengers movie did a great job, Hulk is strong, but has limits. He can one-shot a beast of a monster, possibly, but in no way can take on Thanos by himself, no matter how angry W. Wilson 13:47, December 2, 2013 (UTC)
Did you know, that I am Naruto fan? Quoting the Copy Ninja Kakashi "It takes a lot for me to get worked up, but now I'm going to go on a rampage"
I am usually polite, but people like you tick me off like a bomb. You are nothing but a plain old Hulk hater and Thor fanboy. People like you are the ruin of us fans. Avengers movie did a great job, yeah, in a bit too much blown up proportions too, but still good. Forgive me if I'm mistaked, but do you really think I'm some movie Hulk fanboy who knows nothing about the comics? Kiddo, grow up. And I have a feeling that you are a Hulk hater who hasn't read his comics Superman syndrome eh? I think you took this a bit into the DC verse itself. Superman is vulnerable to magic, but Hulk's nothing like that. For example, in the marvel verse, if a normal superhero guy X will get hurt if N amt. of force is put on him, it doesn't matter whether it's from a magical or non-magical, unless the guy is protected by the highest magic, then mostly only magic can hurt him. Hulk has had both defeats and victories against magic wielders, some powerful and some not that powerful. Did you see what happened to Chernobog the Russian God/Demon, or that spirit called Pariah who went up against Hulk? Hulk has resisted magic before, you blind hater. And the stronger he is, the stronger the resistance towards anything, even magic. He is science powered, so his power is vulnerable to magic? Dude, he's not Iron Man. And Hulk has some mysticicsm around him too. If he was so vulnerable to magic , why didn't the Jugggernaut own him in all of their fights, and why do their fights always go back and forth? Jugs is empowered by magic, not to mention by the magic of cytorak, one of the most powerful mystics in the universe. Their fights have always have ended in draw and orHulk BFRing him. The only time Jugs beat him, Ol' Greenskin repayed the favor the same afternoon. Both defeats occured due to the losing party underestimating each other. Also Hulk had been tricked by the Juggernaut who knocked Hulk out when he came to help Jugs, and Hulk's attack had taken Jugs completely by surprise, as he had him under mind control. Note that this was the Merged/Professor Hulk, who had limitd anger amping. This was before the WWH arc, which you haters say was full of PIS. Tallking about the World War Hulk arc, in it Dr.Strange took a part of the essence of Zom, a very powerful demon, one of the most powerful magical beings in the multiverse itself, and to quote one my fellow Hulk fans, pratically set Hulk on fireworks with the power, and why the hell was Hulk alive after that? Talking about superman syndrome, I know characters who have suffered from it more than Hulk, for example Spiderman. He's beaten firelord, who's a former herald of Galactus, therby one who has cosmic power, with incredible energy manipulative powers, and those who touch him are burned, and then taking energy blasts from and beating Carnage Cosmic, i.e., Surfer with the Carnage sybiote, and holding up the daily bugle building for quiet some time, and then another smaller 7-storeyed building effortlessly, and the maximum he has reached up to 20 tons, which is far below the weight of these objects. Atleast the time Spidey beat Firelord he had his venom suit(which would be completely irrelevant against such an opponent). When he beat Carnage cosmic or did the other feats he was just you normal friendly neigbourhood spiderman. And then Black Panther restraining Silver Surfer with an armbar. Surfer can demolish planets with his punches. And juice those punches with his comic power, solar systems and possibly galaxies go along with it. Surfer can pulverize Black Panther with his pinky, and also he can transmute anything and shrink and enlarge himslef and others and can be intangible, and in the non-existant case that Panther was stronger than him, he has this whole set of powers to break free. And then Squirell Girl defeating all these super villains from Doom to Thanos. For example, the first one she defeated, Dr. Doom. She used her control over squirells to defeat hum. They can chew through wires, yeah, but how can they take down Doom? One pulse from his armor and these "accursed rodents" would be dead. Unless he was going easy on them, its completely ridiculous. You don't see these ridiculous cases of CIS and PIS, victory due to simple character popularity, and if Hulk was the victim in them, you'd cheer for it and try to prove with it that Hulk's weak, like you do when Hulk broke his leg from a blast by Ultron when he has no-selled blasts from literal planet eaters like Galactus and Galaxy Master, or when he was knocked out by a few blows from Cap and Spidey while he has tanked blows from the Destroyer armor, something that was built to fight the Celestials, and then when he was being suffocated by an ordinary python while super heavyweights of Marvel like Hercules couldn't. And you dummy, he doesn't have the strength to overcome anyone and anything, he can access it at times for cryin' out loud. You people who hate him for his unlimited strength are plain dumb, 'cause, as I already told you, HULK DOESN'T POSSESS UNLIMTED STRENGTH, HE CAN JUST ACCESS IT. Why can't it get through through your thick skulls, or is it because its so thin that everything just passes through it? And no one said that Hulk's unbeatable. And there are people like you who say that he'd lose to everybody. And he has been beaten many times. No one's unbeatable. I've never said that, and neither did the guy above, he even said that Zeus could beat Hulk. And he can stop a big monster huh? That's child's play for the comic Hulk. Every time Hulk does an amazing feat, its PIS for you cheap a** haters. Hulk can't beat Thor? Been there, done that. Hulk's not unbeatable, and neither is Thor. Just because fanboys like you say that its PIS, it won't become PIS. Hulk is stronger than Thor, in the matter of PURE PHYSICAL STRENGTH. There is no second opinion. Thor's no weaklink, but neither is the Incredible Hulk. And for the record, Thor was not created by Stan Lee to beat Hulk, he was he created to be more powerful. More powerful does not mean that to be beaten by them. And when up against the Hulk, power is a fluctuating ratio, as the madder the Hulk gets, the stronger the Hulk gets. In one viewpoint, there are a lot guys stronger than Hulk, i.e., when he's calm, and in another viewpoint, no one is, 'cause he has the potential to match them. Hulk's anger is irrelevant huh? Then why is everyone talking about it, even you? 'cause its his strength, it makes him stronger. You're practically contadicting yourself. And that reminds me of an argument you Hulk haters always make. Hulk doesn't have unlimited strength because he does not have unlimited anger power, there is limit to how angry one can get, he would blow up with a heart attack, blah, blah, blah. Tell you something, its been described many times that Hulk's rage is infinite. And setting that aside, HULK'S STRENGTH IS NOT DEPENDANT SOLELY ON HIS RAGE. His strength can increase with excitement, fear, and stress, physical or mental., and that's why Hulk has beaten Thor who's strength is higher than his base strength. Hulk has unlimited strength. Deal wiht it, or go and die. And that reminds me of something else you haters and Thor fanboys say. Thor always holds back. I don't see how an Asgardian in Warrior's Madness holds back. And for the record, its been proven that Hulk too hold's back. Most of you will still say its PIS, 'cause HATER'S LIKE YOU HATE. Hulk even has haters in the comic office itself. You will say every one of Hulk's feats are PIS and CIS and Hulk's won due to his popularity, 'cause they prove that Hulk is not inferior to, and has the potential to match, and even best your favorite character/cannot be defeated by your favorite character, which you don't like or want to accept. As far as I can see, YOU joined the community not to contribute to it, but just profeess your hate for Hulk. "Hulk smash haters." I've had people say, Thor can't beat Hulk because he just brawls. And why can't he beat Hulk with brawling? 'cause Hulk's stronger. And if he uses all of his highly varied list of abilities, he may beat Hulk. Coming to that I've heard some guys say, Thor could beat Hulk if he blasted Hulk from the other end of the solar system. Right, as if Hulk would just stand there and let himself be hit and there also arises the questiom can the blast can defeat him if it connects, and that's another story. Then another one. If Thor teleports his brain into black hole,then he can defeat Hulk. Just bullshit. Every time I've seen Thor teleporting, its through portals and vortexes. And teleporting a guy's brain out. Whether you teleport it to a black hole or to the city's sewer system, the end result is the same. And talking about if he teleports Hulk's brain out. Hulk has ripped off half his head(and thereby obviously half of his brain) and healed back. We are talking about a guy who can come back from being atomized, and he can't heal back is brain? Get a life. And another group says they can throw him into the sun. Gladiator tried to do that and see what happened to him. (I like that series 'cause Hulk used his powers to the max utility.) And another reason Thor can't win because of the same reason I dislike him for, as he's a boisterous and arrogant prat who gives annoying "I am a god" speech every time and thinks that he beat anyone anyway he wants to and ergo, HIS EGO prevents him form using his other powers granted to him by the mjolnir. And some say they hate the Hulk 'cause he's just a brick who punches stuff. If he was just that, he would've been written out a long time ago. And I've heard some say that he's not so popular. Then why on earth was he the first one to crossover to both the Fant.4 comic and cartoon, and one of the 1st marvel characters to get movies? Some say that he's only got his anger to deal with and that makes it boring, and so gamma muatates like Abomination, supergenius villains like leader and modok, cosmic level threats such as galactus and beyonder, extra dimensional threats like nightmare and ng'arai demons are just dealing with anger for you guys? Some say he's overrated. I'd say he underrated a lot more, inside marvel universe and outside. Iniders get a beating, but outsiders like you get away. And some say they dislike hulk because they've seen versions of Hulk that they didn't like, like the Ultimate Hulk. I can forgive them for hating Hulk if the first Hulk they saw was Ultimate Hulk, but still. I've heard some say they hate Hulk because of what his fanboys say. That's just dipshit. I know many characters with lot of fanboys, but I don't hate those. And I should be with that logic, 'cause I've had you haters say Aunt May(or just any character for that case) could beat Hulk. W*F? But if you hate those fanboys that is reasonable. Though I have not actually seenthe refeered post, one has told me that he saw a post that if Hulk was erased from reality he would punch his way back out. Now you can hate those guys saying such bullshit. In the completely impossible event that what they say occurs, wouldn't it be completely ridiculous? Hulk probably can't take on cosmic entities. But talking about that, they are not protesting when Iceman froze the cosmic entity oblivion while he couldn't keep hulk in his ice. And the Thor fanboys like you can be hated as well. Everyone will ahev problems if Hulk took down a cosmic entity, but if a mutant or these so-called gods did, they have no problem. You haters hate him so much that you act as if Hulk has no powers and can only beat sleepin' palsied grannies while anyone else can beat him.
You guys are blabbering about Thor being beaten by Thor's hammer being used on Thor himself by those who aren't worthy. That's completely acceptable to me, which I attribute to Thor's arrogance. Why the hell wasn't he using his mystical link on his hammer to stop it then? If you guys hated Rulk using Zero-G to overcome the worthiness to smash Thor with it, calling it Loeb force, why didn't you say anything when Iron Man carried the hammer in space? Its just because Thor was beater you guys make all the fuss Not to mention the retuned Thor almost killed Rulk. Talking about Rulk, have you people ever heard of the mutant called Rogue and her powers? Rulk has a toned down version of that power over which he has complete control. He can absorb energy to enhance his own powers and, depending on who's energy he's absorbing, suppplement himself with additonal powers. Did you know what the writer said? He said that Rulk was able to goe toe to toe with Thor 'cause he was absorbing the Odinforce from Thor. If you know what the Odinforce can do, I think that would settle it. What I hate about them is how stupid they make Thor look. Thor can't be not that much of an idiot to do nothing else but brawling in such a situation. Also, something that comes up in discussions-Hulk vs Thor was a very very bad portrayal of Thor. The writer said that Thor lost because he didn't like the character? That's just bullshit. Thor has gone up against Mindless Hulk in the comics and had equalled him. But if you say all of Hulk's feats are simply bad writing, the same can be said of Thor's. The term gods means very different in the Marvel verse. They are gods compared to normal humans, but not just above everyone else. Many of these so called gods have been owned by "non-divine" superhumans. Hah, Thor has been owned by Mantis, who does it more through training than powers. And the Hulk fanboys those who hate Thor for being able to match Hulk and having the power to defeat him, are plain stupid as well. And those who say Thor always needs his hammer and is nothing without it doesn't know his true potential. It has been shown that Thor can do well even without his hammer. And as a guy said in a forum, taking away the hammer takes away from Thor is taking away an integral part of the character.
As a side note, I'd like to say that Hulk and Thor, along with a guy you wouldn't expect to be in the list, Galactus, have become punching bags for new characters to prove their strength.
P. S. I know I sound a little harsh and rude with all that cussing, but I was in a bad mood and seeing a misinformed Hulk hater on the wiki set me off. I apologize for that. But I stand by my views and that's final!Lightning Blast (talk) 18:10, December 3, 2013 (UTC)
- Wow you are a chatty little ranter aren't you? I see your wall of text, and all I see is "blah blah unlimited anger blah blah". Avengers movie isn't proof of anything, just an example.
- Magic defies science, so something 'unbreakable' by physical means like Adamantium can be broken or de-atomized by magic or a molecular manipulator. Plain and simple, it makes absolutely no sense that his strength/resistance to damage can resist magic. It only has done so in comics to suit the will of writers. If I enchanted a dumbbell with "Hulk cannot lift" spell you would say he could. My spell isn't dependent on amount of force, Hulk overriding the spell to lift it is reliant on his force potential. Think of my magic spell as infinite gravity; Hulk can't beat infinite. Magic is for all intents and purposes infinite as it is not measured on the same scale as a physical force. Magic to Magic has comparative strengths (magic shield vs. magic blast, or magical-telekinetic lifting)
- Citing fights isn't proof, just examples, as examples can be good or bad, depending on Plot-Induced Stupidity or writer. Your defense of Hulk is weak because, as you admitted, his appearances have been inconsistent. I am being an arbitrator saying what I said. Also you are extremely biased, where I am impartial. You sound like you are personally offended by what I said about the Hulk.
- Hulk v. Jugs proves nothing except that writers avoid having a clear victor. The inherent aspects of the characters transcend any match ups they have. At that point, it's just entertainment, like story-driven wrestling. Yes, I'm disregarding the canon in favor of the established fundamentals of the characters. Just like if I said Spider-man had Hulk-fueled webbing that the harder you pulled the stronger it got: it's still physical properties and can be bypassed by magic. You make a lot of ad hominem arguments, which I will refrain from noting what that signifies for your intelligence.
- I agree your Spider-man feats were beyond suspension of belief. I agree about Black Panther restraining Silver Surfer. But I think DCs Captain Marvel should be able to armbar Superman.
- Squirrel-Girl is a joke, writers know this. Would it make you happier if they didn't show you exactly what transpired in their defeat, left it a mystery? I imagine her like the girl from Kick-Ass, or better yet, Arale from DB. W. Wilson 01:55, December 4, 2013 (UTC)
With Zeus, how much are the myths considered true? We know from Thor and Hercules that not all of the myths are accurate. We can only really say they are true when confirmed in story. As for the charges:
Rape-The Greeks had no direct English translation for rape. That is why in some retellings other words like "abduction" or "seduction" are used. Given the radical different Greek culture it is sometimes hard to tell when they mean "rape" in the modern sense. For Marvel Zeus, all of his relationships have been depicted as consensual. In his handbooks bios, the only thing I remember is it stating he has had numerous relationships. Since we know not all of the myths are true or accurate in Marvel I don't see how we can hold this against him.
Torture - Zeus was the god of law and justice as well as the god of storms. Many of his acts were punishments against evildoers meant to enforce order. If you condemn him on the basis of torture alone you would have to condemn pretty much every ancient society and everyone in it as evil.
Tyrant - Zeus was not a tyrant. At least not in the modern sense of the word. He won his position through drawing of lots as established in Incredible Hercules. Monarchy is not the same as tyranny. Otherwise, once again you have to condemn virtually all of the major rulers of human history. If you go with myths, Zeus often attempted to solve disputes through compromise which never pleased either party. Hardly the act of a tyrant. Zeus can be heavy-handed at times, but the Olympians come off as incredibly powerful, petty-children. Being heavy-handed comes off as sometimes the only way to deal with them.
Silver Age - The Silver Age is perhaps his most controversial act. Impiety was a major issue in ancient Greece. Socrates was executed for impiety and corrupting the youth of Athens. Other information on the Silver age is they were incredibly foolish and violent. In Marvel at least, Zeus has stated he considers one of his duties to move history forward even if he has to commit horrible acts and as king of the gods it would be both his right and duty to pass judgement on mankind. I know there are many who would disagree with this, but in the myth the act itself is not portrayed as one of malice, but divine judgement.
Overall in Marvel Zeus does not come across as really good or bad. He lacks the sheer malevolence found in most villains. Hid godhood and living in a different culture place a great distance between him and the modern world. Zeus has been an antagonist at times like in the Avengers' story "Olympus Under Siege," but in each story when it finally gets through to him that he has been in the wrong he repents. I don't see that as something a tyrannical god would do. He has sometimes been a forced for good. Frequently, he has acted on a check against the more malicious Olympians like Pluto, Hera, and Ares. If it means anything, Dungeons and Dragons labels Zeus as chaotic good.
But at the same time I would not label Zeus as good. While he may have good intentions too often others suffer due to his flaws before it gets through to him he is wrong. Zeus tends to think of Zeus first. So to me in the end he is neutral. Seekquaze1 (talk) 01:07, June 22, 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand this reference and why everyone thinks its important: "It seems unclear if the Olympian gods themselves existed during the Hyborian Age. Once, the descendants of time-traveling Greeks, who had come to the Hyborian Age from the time of Alexander the Great, encountered a native temporal inhabitant of the Hyborian Age. This native temporal inhabitant of the Hyborian Age, upon hearing these people invoke Zeus, stated "I never heard of a god or demon named Zoos." It's a time-travel reference; all it means to me is that some time-displaced Greeks from Ancient Greece stranded during the Hyborian Age were likely worshipping Zeus before the Titans came to power or before Zeus was even born. Or has Marvel creatively slid back the reign of the Olympian gods further back and erased the Titans from even existing in the Marvel timeline. Thor2000 (talk) 17:17, June 22, 2014 (UTC)
- Zeus' bio in one of the handbook states the Titanomachy occurred over 20,000 years ago so if that counts as a source Zeus definitely existed during the Hyborian Age. The Titans still exist, but they ruled the Earth at an earlier point in time. We know humanity or different types of humanity have been created by different groups of gods at different points in time along with human civilization rising and falling at least several times. The modern Marvel Age is merely the latest civilization of humanity. I would think of it as Kronos ruled over The Golden Race of Mortals on Earth. Zeus overthrew him, cut off contact with Earth and knowledge of Olympus was lost during the Hyborian Age as other gods filled the void. Once the civilizations of the Hyborian Age collapsed and the current civilization began Zeus reestablished contact with Earth making the Olympians known again. Seekquaze1 (talk) 21:55, June 22, 2014 (UTC)
- The mention of it being over 20,000 years ago is from Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe from A to Z vol. 14. The exact sentence is about the three brothers drawing lots "well over 20,000 years ago." The rest of conjecture on my part. We know several stories have dealt with human civilization rising and falling in the past. Given how all of the creation stories are so far regarded as in someway true and that the gods measure time in geological ages with 5,000 years being "young" to them it isn't that implausible to think that they interacted with Earth at different periods of time. Seekquaze1 (talk) 22:26, June 23, 2014 (UTC)
- I'm obviously not as big a geek as a lot of you. I enjoy comic books, but I'm more of a mythological purist; I can tell you the real myths on these characters and I'm often beleaguered by the fact that these characters and their real histories and real time periods are getting further and further distorted from reality. The truth is: the real stuff is a LOT more cooler. I used to applaud Marvel for being more faithful to the original material, but in the last ten years or so, it seems as if the quality of writing has gone down hill and their faithfulness to their own continuity is starting to reflect DC Comics. I apologize if that offends anyone, but that's how I feel. Thor2000 (talk) 23:37, June 23, 2014 (UTC)
- I enjoy the original myths as well, but I try and separate adaptations to make both of them enjoyable. Otherwise, I would tear my hair out at how different everything is. Marvel has generally made the gods (all of them )weaker, kind of stupid, but more heroic with the weaker and stupid part only being the last decade or so. The general personalities of many of the Greek deities I think that got more or less correct since the myths themselves give some latitude for interpretation. To some degree I can imagine how the gods would adapt or change over time. Pluto becoming evil after millennia of mistreatment makes sense. Ares updating his arsenal to include machine guns and rocket launchers makes sense. And there are limits to how far I am willing to bend. I cannot stand the movie Troy or the remake of Clash of the Titans for the wide liberties it takes with the source material. The fact they are horrible movies on their own only makes it worse. Same with a book series called the Iron Druid Chronicles that makes Thor into a murderous psychopath and Zeus into one track mind sex fiend despite the original myths shaping the gods and their personalities. I also find it aggravating how some people view the ancient gods through the lens of monotheism where everything has to be black and white with humans being the greatest thing ever and anything that does not think so is evil. (Another reason I did not like the Clash remake). If you haven't, you might want to check out a series called "The Olympians" by George O'Coonor. It is a retelling of the Greek myths in comic book form, but not limited to having to conform to a shared universe or a scientific worldview. Each book is dedicated to a different god and the myths around them. One of the best aspects are the artistic choices the O'Connor makes The Titans such giants that clouds act as their hair. The scythe of Cronos is the crescent moon which he uses to cut the actual sky. Hestia, the most underdeveloped of the Olympians, is only vaguely humanoid to symbolize her lack of personification. The Titanomachy literally destroys mountains. Perhaps best, the Olympians themselves are presented more like real people than the flanderizations you often find in modern day interpretations. Seekquaze1 (talk) 21:48, June 24, 2014 (UTC)
You know, reading these conversations here and elsewhere reminds me of those conversations by the characters on "The Big Bang Theory" where they obsess over the most trivial matters, imagine elaborate scenarios to force events to make sense and in the end, no one is really satisfied with the results so they try re-working them again. Maybe DC Comics has the right idea by NOT trying to define their universe. I mean, Marvel Comics has writers who don't talk to each other, don't refer to the handbooks and ignore continuity to create storylines for an imagined continuity that doesn't really exist and will continue to contradict, and yet, we still try to place them in a sequence of events that become even more distorted and more preposterous the more we try. Why the hell do we bother? No matter what we try to imagine, it's never going to make sense. Thor2000 (talk) 14:34, June 23, 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's why we're nerds and that is part of the fun at times. I think it only gotten really bad in the last decade or so. During the eighties Shooter became famous (infamous?) for enforcing a stricter continuity. Some writers like Peter David tried to go along with it as well. Before the eighties I don't think it was a huge problem since titles were a bit more self-contained or at least the writers paid a bit more attention. Nowadays, the writers are given a much looser reign and all the crossovers force characters who have nothing to do with them to take part. Neither of which is good for a shared universe. Seekquaze1 (talk) 22:26, June 23, 2014 (UTC)