A person who fights against destiny or against gods for a cause that they believe to be just is considered a tragic hero. I believe that in most cases Esfandyar would be considered a tragic hero, but I can also see how some people would argue that. Other people might believe that he did not fight for what he thought was just. Those people believe that he fought only because his father was telling him to. But I believe that he was indeed fighting for a cause that he believed to be just. He was fighting because he wanted his father's throne and every ime that he won the battle that his father sent him on, his father would not give him the throne and just send him on more battles. This is what Esfandyar was fighting for.
             I do not believe that if Esfandyar had acted differently he would have been a more successful hero. If he had acted differently and not choose to fight in the battles that his father sent him on, he would not have received the glory and honor of winning the battles. And had he not gone to the Brass Fortress, he would not have rescued his siblings. He knew that he should not fight Rostam, but he did it anyway because if he had not he would have been considered unhonorable. It was wrong to disobey your father, especially the King of Persia. These actions which he choose to do are what makes me consider him a hero.
             I do not believe that Esfandyar is considered an anti-hero as depicted by Ovid because he did not use his powers in the way that Ovid explains anti-heroes to do so. All Esfandyar did was follow what his father told him to do and fought in battles. He never used his powers to harm innocent people.
             In my opinion, I do not believe Esfandyar to be an unsuccessful hero. Although he did not make it to the throne of Persia, he did accomplish many hard tasks which I find to be very challenging tasks which should make him proud. It seems to me that the people who read and believe this myth, would more than like...