Thanks for this question, Kunigunde. May we start with some definitions?Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:Why not a historical (not divine) Herakles ? It seems not impossible to me.
1. fiction: = not true;
2. legend: = hyperbole, exaggeration;
3. myth: = supernatural attribution.
By definition, Zeus, and all other Greek Gods, are "mythical", not simply legendary, not simply fictitious, but rather, capable of behaviour which is definitely not humanly possible, i.e. engaging in action contrary to the laws of physics.
When Herakles' father, Zeus, mated with a human female, the resultant zygote lacked human paternal DNA. By definition, therefore, Herakles could not have been "historical". Herakles and his demigod cousin, Jesus of Nazareth, are BOTH nonhuman, supernatural entities. Therefore, they cannot have existed in history. It makes no difference which "human" attributes are assigned to these fictitious characters. Their mythical character is specified in their paternal chromosomes, or rather, the lack thereof.
If a "human" Herakles seems possible to you, then you simply do not understand the definition of "human". Neither Jesus nor Herakles can be historical, because neither of them could have existed. There are no gods, and therefore there are no offspring from gods....Nor, should there be, for, omnipotent, supernatural deities have no need for children... Goatherders need children to watch the flock. Farmers need children. Gods have no need for helpers. All of these Greek myths have one element in common: they all convey human frailties upon the fictional, supernatural deities under discussion. Herakles died and was resurrected, ascending then to Mount Olympus, where he resides at the side of his father, Zeus.
Maybe it will be helpful, to think of a sabertooth tiger. Yes, there are no such huge animals alive today. However, they are not mythical creatures, capable of mechanical feats that defy the laws of physics. They did live in the past, and they are historical. They did have both maternal and paternal DNA. Compare them to vampires. Vampires do not exist, and never have existed, and never will exist, for they are simply mythical characters, not historical figures.
I don't know which characters you intend to label as "myths", but I would sound a note of caution: Be careful with your description Kunigunde, for many on this forum are rather sloppy, with regard to the distinction between "legend" and "myth". Legendary attribution refers to hyperbolic activity, which corresponds to an exaggerated tendency, that nevertheless remains within the realm of reality, and does not violate the laws of physics: sabertooth tigersKunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:7 out of 10 of these guys are myths. But how do we know which one of them.
Mythical beings, on the other hand, like "Babe the blue ox", can also be huge, but not genuine creatures, they are simply fictional entities, possessing supernatural qualities.
Perhaps a more reasonable claim is that 7 of 10 characters in a story are fictitious. That was the point of asking you earlier today, to comment on the characters from War and Peace. Some of those characters were genuine humans, e.g. Napolean and Catherine the Great, and Marshall Kutuzov, while most of the characters were fictional entities created by Tolstoy. It is important not to confound "myth" with fictional. Myths ALWAYS refer to supernatural phenomena. Fiction, on the other hand, can be simply imaginary, but not supernatural. Jesus is a mythical figure, not an historical person, because Jesus was a classic Greek demigod. History exists only for actual living humans, not for fictional characters.
Hope this helps you to understand why neither Herakles nor Jesus could have been historical.