This is an archive of past discussions about Conan the Barbarian. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

←

Archive 2005

Archive 2006

Archive 2007

Archive 2008

Archive 2009

The Character

Robert E. Howard never referred to Conan as "the Barbarian." The official title should be "Conan the Cimmerian." The movie title has clouded this fact. Since this is an article about the literary character, shouldn't it reflect the author's work? --Fallshirmjager 00:25, 11 January 2006

I fear that while Howard indeed never called him "Conan the Barbarian", he described him as such (no, I can't quote any specific instances, and currently have too much stuff on my reading list to go through Conan again), and that descriptor clung to him, even before the movie... probably at least from the Marvel comics days, or the first carter and de camp pastiches published in the 60s. So, while it can't be proved that the appellation "Conan the Barbarian" would get the REH stamp of approval, it can't be denied that the name is how most people designate REH's most famous creation (yes, even your purist servant does so on occasion).

To boot, if we start going on a purist streak, we might transport all discussion of the canon, Howard material to a "Conan of Cimmeria" page, and all the rest to "Conan derivative products and related dreck" page. When I see what some authors have done with Howard's creations and to his univeres and continuity, I want to play Vlad III of Wallachia and have them play the boyars, Saxons and Turks. --Svartalf 16:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

"I have no royal blood," ground Conan. "I am a barbarian and the son of a blacksmith." - http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Hour_of_the_Dragon_-_Chapter_3

"here was the barbarian - the natural killer" -http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Phoenix_on_the_Sword

"He was a barbarian.."

“I am Conan, a Cimmerian,” answered the barbarian briefly. - http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Red_Nails

-- Beardo 22:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I would like to add that "Conan the Barbarian" (while discomforting to some) is likely a more appropriate page name for users doing a search for Conan. It becomes more easily recognizable for them than Conan the Cimmerian.
--Brian Kurtz 18:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Fallshirmjager that this article should be properly re-titled Conan the Cimmerian. As for worries about users doing a search for Conan the Barbarian and not finding anything, we can easily create a redirect. -- Flask

What about the disambiguous page for Conan... "Conan the Cimmerian" with an AKA?

Duggy 1138 09:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I think this should be put to a vote. I think it should be either 'Conan' or ' Conan the Cimmerian'. At least "Conan the barbarian" lower-case b in barbarian.--71.97.135.183 02:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't think just 'Conan' works. Just check out the number of entries on the disambig page for that name. 'Conan the Barbarian' is the recognisable name, so at the very least it needs a redirect here. 'Conan the Cimmerian' may become more popular with the upcoming comic, but it won't match the name recognition of the story collection, Marvel comic or film that bore that name.

Duggy 1138 03:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The Tall Barbarian

I am interested in the source of the estimate of Conan's height as 6'6". In the Howard stories I believe there is only one objective description of Conan's height ands weight. He is said to have been 6'0" and 180 lbs at the time of the raid on Venarium. He was only 15 years old at the time so it is reasonable to assume he grew taller with are but I have never seen this quantified. The source for this statement should be cited.

I think the weight given for Conan at being 200lbs is probably too low. Surely somebody has a better source for this.

I found the earlier version statement of "about 2 metres, 90 kg" quite amusing as well. something for comparison. Good to see it's not there anymore. --Anshelm '77 20:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Conan is a Cimmerian, a barbarian of the far north. In ancient times, Cimmerians didn't live as far in the north, as Germans did. See this map http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/europa1000bcsm.gif Bogdan | Talk 11:07, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

That's history, this is fiction. Howard's Cimmerians lived in the far north. The only tribes more northern were the Aesir and Vanir.

We only have one of Howard's letters, in which he remarks in passing that at age 15, Conan stood six feet and weighed 180 pounds.

How about we make a compromise. It is inconsequential what actual size Conan was. How about we settle on describing him as being large, and the fact he is muscular and well built. It seems like there will be no consensus on actual heighth, since REH never actually specified it. --L.A.F.

I don't believe that Howard ever stated what his height and weight were, as an adult, in any of these stories. In fact, I don't think that it's really even been brought up in the near countless novel adaptations of the character that have been done for decades. As far as I know, the only possible mention of Conan's height and weight might be when he was a licensed property of Marvel Comics. However, whether or not it might be accepted as canon by the most hardcore fans of the character is all up in the air. Marvel Comics used the character and the Hyborian Era itself as an important time in the history of Earth, at least in their version of Earth. Now, don't hold me to this but I believe that Conan was listed at about 6'6" and in the 275-300 pound range. Since Conan is no longer a licensed property of Marvel Comics, there's debate as to whether or not anything about the character is accepted as canon as far as the comics went. To look at the drawings of the character, from Howard's own illustrations, to the comics, to the various novels he's obviously a man of tremendous muscular size and development. However, as is common with many comic book or fantasy characters, Conan could merely have been drawn with an artistic license to exaggerate his proportions. For example, Superman is listed at about 6'3" and 225 pounds or so but his proportions are drawn to make him appear to me considerably larger. The same could simply have been done with Conan all this time. In Howard's stories, he might have been not much larger than he was as an adult than at age 15. Then again, he size might have been more along the lines of the comic book appearances. It's all open to speculation and interpretation. Maybe 15,000 years or so ago, 6'0" and 200 pounds could be considered gigantic, since Conan's great physical stature is mentioned in every story or novel I've read about him. But personally, I feel the character is between 6'3"-6'6" and 250-275 pounds. I just have trouble overlooking the bodybuilder-ish build that he's always drawn at having. Odin's Beard

Howard gives no estimate of his weight. He does state, however, that he already topped 6 feet at the age of 15, when he participated in the Venarium sack... so giving him 4 or 6 inches extra growth may not be abusive. As to the weight... He ius described as being at once lithe and pantherish, yet enormously strong. I let specialists evaluate what kind of body build and muscle mass might let one achieve both at once. --Svartalf 21:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

REH had another character named Cormac FitzGeoffrey, who was an Irish/Norman knight in the 12th century. Howard gave his stats as 6'2" and 215 pounds, and said that he was the spitting image of Conan.

In Hawks of Outremer, REH gives Cormac being just over 6' with a weight of 200lbs: "Cormac FitzGeoffrey was a fraction of an inch above six feet, but with his mighty shoulders and two hundred pounds of iron muscle, he seemed shorter." 203.173.54.220 14:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

Stories in the Public Domain?

Please consider denoting which Conan stories are in the public domain and request their text to be added to wikisource.

Complicated. If anyone wants to explore the idea, there's an article about the issue here: The copyright and ownership status of the works of Robert E. Howard. --Tearlach 00:47, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

newer version (posted Jan 1 2007): http://www.robert-e-howard.org/AnotherThought4revised.html, and an article by the same author (Paul Herman)regarding Conan VS He-Man: http://www.robert-e-howard.org/AnotherThought2.html. Don't expect Conan Properties or Paragon to agree, however.

24.176.20.60 23:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I have corrected the Copyright information to more accurately reflect the situation complete with a reference to Corell University.--BruceGrubb 12:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Other

Deceased ?

Someone added Category:Deceased Fictional Characters and someone else removed it. I guess since Conan lived thousands of years ago, the presemption is that he is dead, despite his death not having been written. Or should we allow for immortality or time travel ? -- Beardo 04:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

It seems some well meaning, or silly, people have been adding all manners of weird categories to this article. I certainly agree that "deceased characters" is dodgy as his death, while self evident given the time when he supposedly lived, was never depicted in any canon writing, if ever at all. Of course, I define canon to the writings of Howard alone, to the exception of all pastiches and collaboration, including the carter-de camp stuff, even the good things. --Svartalf 08:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

FYI, this category has been deleted once before, and I have just relisted it at WP:CFD. Applying the label deceased to any fictional character is problematic. ×Meegs 12:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Wait, didn't Howard have a poem entitled "The Death-Song of Conan"? Wouldn't such a thing count as Canon evidence of Conan's demise?

"Death-Song of Conan" was a Lin Carter poem, not a REH poem (I won't cite sources, but it's so...), and therefore suspect. I personally would reserve the category 'Deceased characters' for those whose deaths have been prtrayed in the media, like the movie Zorro, or Superman (haha, never mind, he got better...). There's still a lot of debate open even within those terms.

24.176.20.60 23:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Ownership edits

See Talk:Bran Mak Morn#Ownership edits. 69.182.106.50 19:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Edited comics

I'm not sure where to put this, pehaps in one of the comic articles linked to this one. One of the remastered and colourized comics from Dark Horse has been edited: http://www.schnittberichte.com/schnittbericht.php?ID=2834

Here is another article on the front cover of a comic however, http://www.schnittberichte.com/schnittbericht.php?ID=3196 I'm sure this one was during production and was never released. AGuy6342 19:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Cutting "In popular culture" section?

The "In popular culture" section is the most frequently altered part of this article and yet is merely an ever-fluctuating list of unsourced trivia ranging from volleyball to Triple H's dress style to radioresistant bacteria. In my opinion, this list is superfluous and should be cut from the article. As it stands, there isn't enough there to necessitate a spin-off/separate article. Does anyone agree? Disagree? Thoughts? Comments? -- Flask 06:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I pretty much agree. Of course there's the belief that all pop culture sections are little more than trivia collections and I don't always agree, but, in this case, it truely is mostly useless trivia.

Duggy 1138 01:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

All right. As over two weeks have passed, I will remove the section today. If someone wishes to discuss the change, I will direct them to this discussion. -- Flask 03:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)