History to become legend

[Recaferona]

Right know I am in the middle of world building stage for my fantasy novel. It set in parallel world(s), but mostly in a particular world (for know) called Charna. Till know I have two main arc that took place at different timeline but related to each other. The first one happen at the 16th centuries and the second took place before it. The problem is, I need to set the second arc as a "legend" at the first arc timeline. I planned to make it at least about 5 centuries, but I don't so sure if it still would be counted as history. How long it take for history to become legend? I would glad to hear all of your opinion and comment, thanks before ^^

NB: I have the character from the second arc to reappear as (kinds of) demigod in first arc, and I just don't think that he would fit to appear as a thousand years old sorcerer.

 

[shangrila]

Hmm. If you take modern society, it doesn't take long for a legend to spring up. Chuck Testa, for example, or the Slenderman (whose creator I feel kind of bad for, since he's probably not seeing squat for creating something that's spawned a few video games among other things at this point). Or the Double Rainbow Guy...eh, I could go on with stuff like that, though there are obviously others. Arnie is a legend, as is someone like Michael Jordan.

If you're talking about a more ancient society, though, well I'm not so sure. I don't think it would take TOO long if it's set in the region. If you have this person performing great deeds in another country though, for example, it might take a couple of generations to catch on to the wider audience and become widely known enough to be considered a legend.

 

[rbidatta]

Do either of your worlds have technology similar, or more advanced, than ours?

If not, I would guess that it wouldn't take very long for history to become legend, and that 5 centuries is more than enough time. Especially since relying on an oral history and a limited printing history (think history prior to the printing press) would be so rare and inconsistent, it would be easy enough to add embellishment to the tale. Plus the scarcity gives the tale an intangible and fantastic feel.

If your worlds do contain technology, it would be a little more difficult for history to become legend (as anyone can research and acquire the real story). However, if the tale is incredible enough to suspend belief, I feel history could turn to legend within 5 centuries. Either way, I think you are okay with your timeline.

 

[wordwalker]

Bards.

Even if you don't have technology, the more determined a good poet or storyteller is to create a legend, the faster it might catch on. Another kind of artist could do the same thing with woodcut "printed" images or in less fast-moving form (like a famous painting/sculpture in an often-seen place), and so could any kind of power broker willing to patronize artists and other ways to spread a legend.

And a lot of this depends on what message the storytellers want to create from the facts --accurate or not-- and how receptive the people might be to it. You could end up with a peacemaker king remembered as a traitor by his own people and a hero by the neighbors he tried to treat with, or any number of other contortions.

 

[GeekDavid]

If your worlds do contain technology, it would be a little more difficult for history to become legend (as anyone can research and acquire the real story). However, if the tale is incredible enough to suspend belief, I feel history could turn to legend within 5 centuries. Either way, I think you are okay with your timeline.

Personally, a quick browse of Snopes.com shows how quickly legends can take hold even in a so-called technological society.

In some ways, technology has accelerated the spread of stories, be they true or not.

 

[Tryns]

Personally, a quick browse of Snopes.com shows how quickly legends can take hold even in a so-called technological society.

In some ways, technology has accelerated the spread of stories, be they true or not.

This is an excellent point. In some ways an oral tradition may indeed be more accurate than our current speed of light communication.

 

[Sanctified]

The good thing is that legend isn't so much a matter of how much time has passed, but how good the record keeping of the time was, and whether a civilization/age's records survived at least partially intact.

For example, we know a LOT about the Romans and Greeks. Hell, we know some of their most important libraries were burned or otherwise destroyed, we know of major works that are lost to history, and we've probably forgotten more than we know now, but there was so much writing produced in those cultures that despite the losses we've still got enough to satisfy lifetimes of scholarship.

By contrast, look at the Dark Ages -- we know more about what happened in Rome 2,000 years ago than we do about what happened in certain areas of Europe 700 years ago.

Likewise, Augustus Caesar and Jesus were contemporary. We know almost every detail of Augustus' life, but historians can't account for 33 entire years of Jesus' life.

So the good news is that, if you're building the world, you get to decide what becomes legend, and it's easy to make it happen.

 

[skip.knox]

I think it depends on what you mean by a legend. We moderns tend to distinguish between legend and history, with the latter depending on written records. Some of the comments here, though, seem to equate legendary with merely being famous. A good many individuals have stories attached to them, where the individual is "historical" but legendary stories are associated with them. These stories sometimes are called apocrypha. It might be worthwhile for you to consider a bit on what you mean by the word and how you mean it to work in your world building.

I can, though, say that pre-literate memory works in particular ways. There is a divide between living memory and anything older. That divide falls roughly at the third or fourth generation--events older than that were "ancient" without too much specificity attached to them. Note that this says nothing about the relative veracity of stories, only that a story dealing with a time before grandpa's father was something remote.

At the same time, pre-literate societies were amazingly accurate and complete in their ability to preserve memory of events even across hundreds of years. So you are free to have whatever mix of fact and fancy you care to. Oh, and another thing: there was a tendency to conflate events. Something that happened to one king might get transferred and be credited to some other king, especially if it involved kingly behaviors or virtues. This happened a lot with medieval saints.

 

[Recaferona]

thanks for the answers guys, it open my mind for more possibilities (Bard, Library, it never come to my mind though lol) my world didn't involve much technologies, pretty much like medieval age.