CotW Silm ch 1 Of the Beginning of Days
Christopher Kreuzer
'The Silmarillion' by J.R.R. Tolkien. To read previous Chapter of the
Week discussions, or to sign up to introduce a future chapter, please go
to:
Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
Quenta Silmarillion (QS)
Chapter 1 - Of the Beginning of Days
After the Ainulindale (The Music of the Ainur) and the Valaquenta
(Account of the Valar and Maiar), the creation myth and the account of
the angelic gods respectively, we come to the core story of 'The
Silmarillion': the Quenta Silmarillion (The History of the Silmarils).
In the Foreword to 'The Silmarillion', Christopher Tolkien describes the
Quenta Silmarillion as "the Silmarillion proper", and it is this story
of the Silmarils that makes up most of the published Silmarillion, and
gives that book its name. [1]
This is a good place to point out that all the chapters in Quenta
Silmarillion start with the word 'Of'. Each chapter is 'hung' on a
certain subject matter, a 'peg' so to speak, and is often a loose
collection of tales and histories centred to a greater or lesser extent
on that subject. This also means that there is no definite plot, or
storyline, running through Quenta Silmarillion, but we are instead
dipping into a history of the major events and characters, before and
during the First Age, and we are eventually being shown the overarching
history of the Silmarils, and the Men and Elves that were caught up in
that history. [2]
But we start, as always, at the beginning, with chapter 1: Of the
Beginning of Days. [3] This chapter has three distinct parts.
1) The first part of this chapter takes up the story that was started in
the closing paragraphs of the Ainulindale, of the battles of the Valar
with Melkor, and of the ordering of the Earth. Whereas the Ainulindale
uses broad brushstrokes to describe the scenes, this account goes into
detail and continues the tale. We read about the Lamps of the Valar,
about the lands of Almaren and Aman, and of the Two Trees of Valinor, up
to "...and thus began also the Count of Time".
2) The second part of this chapter repeats or recasts much of the
material from the Valaquenta, and also presents some new material,
describing the Valar and their powers and responsibilities, from "But as
the ages drew on..." to "...and the lands were filled with shadows and
deceits". Unlike the more complete and ordered account of the
Valaquenta, this account is intended to show the relationship and
attitude of the Valar to Middle-earth, the Outer Lands lying in the
darkness of Melkor and the twilight beneath the stars. But the story of
the later labours and battles of the Valar is left for the following
chapters.
3) The third part of this chapter, from "Now all is said concerning the
manner of the Earth and its rulers in the beginning of days..." to the
end of the chapter, is a kind of philosophical treatise about Elves and
Men, the Children of Iluvatar. This account especially concerns
Iluvatar's gift of freedom and death to Men.
Summary points as reminders of the chapter structure for the detailed
discussion points:
[First War with Melkor; arrival of Tulkas]
[Lamps of the Valar; Almaren; Spring of Arda]
[Melkor returns; Spring marred; Lamps overthrown]
[Valar remove to Aman; Pelori; Valinor]
[Two Trees of Valinor; Count of Time begins]
[Valar; Middle-earth in dark and twilight]
[Ainur, Elves and Men; Gift of Men; Time]
Detailed discussion points:
- "for long Melkor had the upper hand" - reminding us that Melkor is
indeed "he who arises in might" (Valaquenta) and "mighty are the Ainur,
and mightiest among them is Melkor" (Ainulindale).
- "hearing in the far heaven that there was battle in the Little
Kingdom" - what is the 'far heaven' and the 'Little Kingdom' here, the
places from whence and to where Tulkas comes?
- "Melkor brooded in the outer darkness" - what is this 'outer
darkness'?
- The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other creation
myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier objects than the
Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in fact greater creations.
Do the names of the Lamps, Illuin and Ormal mean anything? Can the
process of their creation (and the Valar who work to create them - Aule,
Varda, Manwe) be compared to the later creation of the Two Trees (by
Yavanna, with the aid of Nienna)?
- The first seeds and creatures of Yavanna - mosses, grasses, great
ferns, tall trees, beasts on land and sea, but no flowers or birds. Is
this a nod to the real evolutionary history of our Earth, where
flowering plants and birds appear late in the story, and mosses and
ferns appear earlier? [Supposing of course that the grasses and great
trees are non-flowering ones].
- The lights of the Lamps - the blending of the light of the lamps seems
to be a foreshadowing of the blending of the light of the Two Trees. But
the light of the Lamps is steady and unchanging, with no waxing and
waning. As well as not giving rise to the Count of Time we see with the
Two Trees, does a steady and unchanging light make any sense
biologically? The Valar would have had to have changed things anyway (or
would they?), so maybe Melkor did them a favour by destroying the Lamps?
- "new-made green was yet a marvel in the eyes of the makers" - this
reminds me of a passage from 'The Lord of the Rings' where Frodo is in
the fair land of Lothlorien, and has arrived at Cerin Amroth: "It seemed
to him that he had stepped through a high window that looked on a
vanished world. A light was upon it for which his language had no name.
[...] He saw no colour but those he knew, gold and white and blue and
green, but they were fresh and poignant, as if he had at that moment
first perceived them and made for them names new and wonderful."
(Lothlorien). Is it possible that in Lothlorien Frodo is experiencing
something of what Galadriel experienced in Aman, and that this is some
faint echo of what the Valar achieved in the Spring of Arda? [Tolkien
also talks about this in his essay: 'On Fairy-stories].
- "Melkor knew of all that was done [...] he gathered to himself spirits
out of the halls of Ea..." - Does this suggest that the earlier
reference to 'outer darkness' was to an area that is within Ea?
- "the Spring of Arda was marred" - the marring of Arda is an important
theme in Tolkien's writings in Middle-earth. What significance does this
marring have here?
- The destruction of the Lamps - great piece of writing! You really get
the impression of massive destruction here, especially when the Valar
are described as having to restrain the tumults of the Earth.
- "though fear fell upon him" - we see here the first descriptions of
Melkor's fear. This will be an important theme later on. What exactly
does Melkor fear here?
- "who were yet to come in a time that was hidden from the Valar" - we
see here that the Valar do not know when the Children (Elves and Men)
will awake. In the Ainulindale, we were told that when Iluvatar showed
the Ainur a vision of their Music: "they saw with amazement the coming
of the Children of Iluvatar", but it seems that they were not aware of,
or shown, the details.
- The retreat to Aman - the Valar raised the Pelori to defend
themselves, much as Melkor raised the Hithaeglir to oppose the riding of
Orome in Middle-earth. Raising mountains as defences is an incredible
concept, but rather suitable for Powers such as these.
- Valinor - this is described as being "more beautiful even than
Middle-earth in the Spring of Arda". This seems to contradict the more
common model of things declining over time in Arda and Middle-earth, of
things never being quite as good as before. Is this completely true? Do
you think some aspects of the Spring of Arda were more beautiful and
gone beyond recall?
- The creation of the Two Trees - an absolutely beautiful creation myth
here, and one that involves song from Yavanna, music being of great
power in Ea. The importance of the event is shown by two phrases in
particular: "silence was over all the world in that hour" and "Of all
things which Yavanna made they have most renown, and about their fate
all the tales of the Elder Days are woven."
- Silver and Gold - I'd like to quote a passage from 'The Lord of the
Rings' here, from the bit where Frodo is before the Black Gate of
Mordor, lamenting his evil fate: "But he had taken it on himself in his
own sitting-room in the far-off spring of another year, so remote now
that it was like a chapter in a story of the world's youth, when the
Trees of Silver and Gold were still in bloom." (The Black Gate is
Closed); and also a comment by Gandalf to Pippin as they ride to Minas
Tirith: "Even now my heart desires [...] to look across the wide seas of
water and of time [...] and perceive the unimaginable hand and mind of
Feanor at their work, while both the White Tree and the Golden were in
flower!" (The Palantir). Just two examples to show the enduring
influence of the Two Trees on the history and legends of Middle-earth.
- The Two Trees - These are Telperion and Laurelin (and they are given
many other names beside). Telperion, the elder tree, gives forth a dew
of silver light, and is described as male. Laurelin gives forth warmth
and a great light, and is described as female. This distinct character
of each tree contrasts with the Two Lamps, which were not distinguished
other than in name. Are there any other creation myths that are similar
to this one involving trees sung into being and flower?
- The Count of Time - just as beautiful as the account of the creation
of the Two Trees, is the description of how the waxing and waning lights
begin the Count of Time: "the white glimmer of a silver dawn"; "the
Opening Hour"; the mingling of the lights; the "Days of the Bliss of
Valinor". Capitals being strewn around to show how important these
concepts are.
- "wells of water and of light" - the dews of Telperion seem to
correspond to the water, and the rain of Laurelin to the light, but it
seems that the 'water' from Telperion is in fact light, but whether it
can really be described as 'light' is not clear: "the light that was
spilled from the trees endured long, ere it was taken up into the airs
or sank down into the earth". It seems that this is a very mythical kind
of light, maybe even a metaphor of some kind. Do these metaphors of
water and of light have anything to do with, maybe, the starlight of
Varda and the waters of Ulmo, or the tears of Nienna? Remember that it
is Varda who is said to hoard the light of the Trees, and it is she who
later makes stars from the dews of Telperion.
- "in the darkness Melkor dwelt, and still often walked abroad, in many
shapes of power and fear" - this is a stark contrast to the beautiful
land of the Valar.
- "the fairest of all gems were the Silmarils, and they are lost" - I
have a theory that sometimes a story can be _more_ interesting if you
know what happened. You have an idea of where the story is going, and it
becomes easier to follow the story. Maybe that is why Tolkien inserts
these little "what happened bits", or maybe it is just to remind you
that this is a tale of long ago, and the ending is known to all. Though
to be fair, this bit actually ratchets up the tension. You want to read
on and find out _how_ the Silmarils were lost, or even to find out
_what_ the Silmarils are!
- "Spirits in the shapes of hawks and eagles" - what are these spirits
that help Manwe see what is going on? Are there normal hawks and eagles
as well?
- ""where Melkor sat in his dark thought impenetrable shadows lay" -
what a lovely turn of phrase: 'sat in his dark thought'! This phrase is
used again later on, as is the idea of impenetrable darkness.
- Noldor and Teleri - both are mentioned here before we know properly
who they are. Is this an editorial oversight?
- Ulmo's music - we are told here again of the strong connection between
Ulmo and music and the waters of the world: "in the deep places he gives
thought to music great and terrible".
- "flowering meads of Valinor" - obviously the Valar have got around to
making flowers now.
- "their elders and their chieftains" - the Valar (and other Ainur) are
described as such in relation to the Children of Iluvatar (Elves and
Men), and _not_ their masters. The obvious comparison is with Melkor,
who seeks to be master of everything.
- Ainur, Elves and Men - "Iluvatar made [Elves] more like in nature to
the Ainur, though less in might and stature; whereas to Men he gave
strange gifts." Much of the themes of Tolkien's writings seem to spring
from these differences. Death and Mortality, Immortality, Time, and so
on, but, in the closing words of this chapter, Tolkien tries to
communicate several complex philosophical points. Does he succeed?
- Iluvatar's thoughts - "for an age Iluvatar sat alone in thought" -
What does the mind of God look like? What does God think about? We are
told of Iluvatar's words. Who is telling us these words? Is this
something revealed by the Valar to the Elves by Manwe, who "knows most
of the mind of Iluvatar"?
- Tolkien introduces the words 'Quendi' (Elves) and 'Atani' (Men) here
for the first time in 'The Silmarillion', though the terms are also used
in the Appendices of 'The Lord of the Rings'.
- Fate and the Gift - Iluvatar says that he will give a new gift to Men:
"he willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and
should find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to shape
their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music
of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their
operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the
world fulfilled unto the last and smallest." - Now, I think I understand
this up until the "as fate to all things else" bit, but the bit after
that I can never understand. What is Tolkien saying here?
- Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the Valar
had departed?
- Death and envious Valar - "Death is their fate, the gift of Iluvatar,
which as Time wears even the Powers shall envy." - Does this tell us
more about Men, or about Elves and Ainur? A relevant quote here seems to
be Legolas's comment on the Great River after the Fellowship leave
Lothlorien in 'The Lord of the Rings': "The passing seasons are but
ripples ever repeated in the long long stream. Yet beneath the Sun all
things must wear to an end at last." (The Great River). Will even the
Valar wear to an end at last, becoming ever more remote and distant as
the ages pass?
- Second Music of the Ainur - the final passage of this chapter seems to
contradict an earlier passage in the Ainulindale. The passage here is:
"Yet of old the Valar declared to the Elves in Valinor that Men shall
join in the Second Music of the Ainur; whereas Iluvatar has not revealed
what he purposes for the Elves after the World's end". The passage from
the Ainulindale is: "it has been said that a greater [Music] still shall
be made before Iluvatar by the choirs of the Ainur and the Children of
Iluvatar after the end of days." - Does this indicate that the Elves,
and maybe even the Ainur, do not really know what will happen after the
world ends? Are they all groping in the dark?
- Finally, regardless of the philosophical complexities of the closing
passages of this chapter, I'd like to say that I think the writing is
really quite wonderful. It has a rhythm and power all of its own, and
builds and progresses to its climax. It creates a powerful impression,
even if you aren't quite sure if you've understood it.
- Any other thoughts and comments?
Footnotes:
[1] Given that Christopher Tolkien says that the Ainulindale and
Valaquenta are "closely associated with 'The Silmarillion'", and given
the difficulty some people have in encountering the Ainulindale and
Valaquenta at the beginning when they first read 'The Silmarillion',
should people be advised to start reading 'The Silmarillion' at some
later point, and return to the Ainulindale and Valaquenta later, or not?
Or to put it another way, would it be good advice to tell people to
start reading 'The Silmarillion' from, say, 'Of the Beginning of Days',
or even from a later chapter in Quenta Silmarillion?
[2] How confusing is this structure of Quenta Silmarillion, and indeed
the whole of 'The Silmarillion' as a collection of stories and tales?
Was it difficult when first reading this book to understand what was
going on? Would something like a timeline help when reading it, or is
part of the charm and power the way the whole history crystallises out
of the stories?
[3] The recent discussion of the Ainulindale included comments about how
Christopher Tolkien's editing removed part of the Ainulindale texts (the
ones that he was using to form 'The Silmarillion' Ainulindale text) to
this chapter, and how the second chapter (Of Aule and Yavanna) was also
affected. Does anyone have any details of what happened here in
editorial terms?
[4] Writing style: "It is told..."; "In that time..."; "Now it came to
pass..."; "Thus ended..."; "But as the ages drew on..."; "And in that
time..."; "Now all is said..."; "For it is said..."; "Yet of old the
Valar declared...". This 'historical' tone and style runs through the
whole of 'The Silmarillion', but is very noticable here. Why is Tolkien
writing this way? Is this an easy style to write in? Is it an easy style
to read and understand? What do you think of the way Tolkien used this
style?
[5] Archaic and obscure words and phrases: forsook; more lofty far;
burgeon; deemed; espoused; naught; tumult; anew; dappled; well nigh all;
thither; thence; coursed; meads; whereat; redounds; whither; whence;
wherefore; confounded; whereas - Are these words easily understood when
encountered in the correct context? I am reminded of a quote from
Tolkien's Letters: "an honest word is an honest word, and its
acquaintance can only be made by meeting it in a right context. A good
vocabulary is not acquired by reading books written according to some
notion of the vocabulary of one's age group. It comes from reading books
above one." (draft letter to Walter Allen, April 1959). Admittedly, some
of these words are so archaic that they would be rarely encountered or
used, but if you here met words like 'tumult' or 'burgeon' or 'redounds'
for the first time, I think you would be helped by encountering them in
a correct context, as provided by Tolkien.
Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Chris Kern
<spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> posted the following:
>[3] The recent discussion of the Ainulindale included comments about how
>Christopher Tolkien's editing removed part of the Ainulindale texts (the
>ones that he was using to form 'The Silmarillion' Ainulindale text) to
>this chapter, and how the second chapter (Of Aule and Yavanna) was also
>affected. Does anyone have any details of what happened here in
>editorial terms?
This chapter is a fusion of mainly three texts by Tolkien -- The
Ainulindale, the Annals of Aman, and Quenta Silmarillion Chapter 2
("Of Valinor and the Two Trees"). There is a lot of (relatively
minor) editorial alteration to merge the sources, and to get rid of
the explicit narrator (Pengolod) in the Ainulindale (for instance, "It
is told among the wise that the First War began before Arda was
full-shaped" was written by JRRT in the Ainulindale as "This tale I
have heard also among the loremasters of the Noldor in ages past. For
they tell us that the war began before Arda was full-shaped...")
I don't have the time or inclination to work out the exact sentences
that were drawn from each source, but I would say on casual
observation that it is at least 50-60% Ainulindale, perhaps another
20-30% Annals of Aman, and only a bit of QS.
As I said before, the only authority at all that HoME gives us for the
creation of this chapter is that on the Ainulindale C* (written before
the final version D), Tolkien questioned whether to move some of the
final material into the QS. CT may have been working off other
unpublished notes, or perhaps he had strong stylistic or form reasons
for doing this.
-Chris
Tar-Elenion
spam...@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> This post is part of the series of "Chapter of the Week" discussions on
> 'The Silmarillion' by J.R.R. Tolkien. To read previous Chapter of the
> Week discussions, or to sign up to introduce a future chapter, please go
> to:
>
> http://parasha.maoltuile.org
>
> Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
>
> Quenta Silmarillion (QS)
> Chapter 1 - Of the Beginning of Days
>
> Summary points as reminders of the chapter structure for the detailed
> discussion points:
>
> [First War with Melkor; arrival of Tulkas]
> [Lamps of the Valar; Almaren; Spring of Arda]
> [Melkor returns; Spring marred; Lamps overthrown]
> [Valar remove to Aman; Pelori; Valinor]
> [Two Trees of Valinor; Count of Time begins]
> [Valar; Middle-earth in dark and twilight]
> [Ainur, Elves and Men; Gift of Men; Time]
>
> Detailed discussion points:
>
> - "for long Melkor had the upper hand" - reminding us that Melkor is
> indeed "he who arises in might" (Valaquenta) and "mighty are the Ainur,
> and mightiest among them is Melkor" (Ainulindale).
>
> - "hearing in the far heaven that there was battle in the Little
> Kingdom" - what is the 'far heaven' and the 'Little Kingdom' here, the
> places from whence and to where Tulkas comes?
Far heaven, the regions of Ea distant from the Little Kingdom.
Little Kingdom, Arda.
>
> - "Melkor brooded in the outer darkness" - what is this 'outer
> darkness'?
The Void, interstellar space (or the region of Ea beyond the Walls of
Night).
>
> - "Melkor knew of all that was done [...] he gathered to himself spirits
> out of the halls of Ea..." - Does this suggest that the earlier
> reference to 'outer darkness' was to an area that is within Ea?
Yes.
<snip>
--
Tar-Elenion
He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
Stan Brown
<spam...@blueyonder.co.uk>:
> - "hearing in the far heaven that there was battle in the Little
> Kingdom" - what is the 'far heaven' and the 'Little Kingdom' here, the
> places from whence and to where Tulkas comes?
I think the far heaven us the Timeless Halls, where all the Ainur
lived with Iluvatar and where the ones who didn't descend into Eä
live still.
The Little Kingdom, from context, has to be Arda. Compare the line in
"Ainulindalė", "And this habitation might seem a little thing to
those who consider only the majesty of the Ainur."
> - "Melkor brooded in the outer darkness" - what is this 'outer
> darkness'?
At first I wrote:
It's either the same dark regions where he wandered before the Music,
or else it's Arda before lights were created. From the context it
sounds like this is happening before Melkor came down to Arda, but
that doesn't make sense to me because I thought he entered Arda at
the same time sa the (other) Valar, so that he could start getting up
to no good.
But I think you yourself gave a better answer later: this is
somewhere in Eä outside of Arda, in this passage (moved here out of
order):
> - "Melkor knew of all that was done [...] he gathered to himself spirits
> out of the halls of Ea..." - Does this suggest that the earlier
> reference to 'outer darkness' was to an area that is within Ea?
> - The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other creation
> myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier objects than the
> Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in fact greater creations.
> Do the names of the Lamps, Illuin and Ormal mean anything? Can the
> process of their creation (and the Valar who work to create them - Aule,
> Varda, Manwe) be compared to the later creation of the Two Trees (by
> Yavanna, with the aid of Nienna)?
I think the distinction is between Technology and Living Things. The
Lamps were essentially static; the Trees were living things that
waxed and waned.
> - "though fear fell upon him" - we see here the first descriptions of
> Melkor's fear. This will be an important theme later on. What exactly
> does Melkor fear here?
"though fear fell upon him; for above the roaring of the seas he
heard the voice of Manwė as a mighty wind, and the earth trembled
beneath the feet of Tulkas. But he came to Utumno ere Tulkas could
overtake him; and there he lay hid."
I think he feared retribution: capture and punishment.
> "Even now my heart desires [...] to look across the wide seas of
> water and of time [...] and perceive the unimaginable hand and mind of
> Feanor at their work, while both the White Tree and the Golden were in
> flower!" (The Palantir). Just two examples to show the enduring
> influence of the Two Trees on the history and legends of Middle-earth.
If I recall correctly, didn't Gandalf speak those words? He was there
when the Trees were in flower. Presumably in his native form he would
remember them clearly, but in his Istar guise his memories of Valinor
were imperfect.
> - The Two Trees - These are Telperion and Laurelin (and they are given
> many other names beside). Telperion, the elder tree, gives forth a dew
> of silver light, and is described as male. Laurelin gives forth warmth
> and a great light, and is described as female. This distinct character
> of each tree contrasts with the Two Lamps, which were not distinguished
> other than in name. Are there any other creation myths that are similar
> to this one involving trees sung into being and flower?
Do you count /The Magician's Nephew of C.S. Lewis? :-)
> - "wells of water and of light" - the dews of Telperion seem to
> correspond to the water, and the rain of Laurelin to the light, but it
> seems that the 'water' from Telperion is in fact light, but whether it
> can really be described as 'light' is not clear: "the light that was
> spilled from the trees endured long, ere it was taken up into the airs
> or sank down into the earth". It seems that this is a very mythical kind
> of light, maybe even a metaphor of some kind.
Somewhere -- I can't remember where; "Myths Transformed", maybe? --
CRT talks about the Trees as being pure light, unmarred. He said this
was an important element of Tolkien's mythology, the ide of pure and
original light, before the Marring. In this scheme the Sun and Moon,
which came later after the Trees had absorbed the poison of
Ungoliant, were imperfect.
This is (one reason) why the Silmarils were so important: they were
the last of the pure primeval light.
Wat don't get, about that, is why the stars didn't also count as
pure and perfect light, since they also were made before Melkor
marred all the raw materials.
> - Fate and the Gift - Iluvatar says that he will give a new gift to Men:
> "he willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and
> should find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to shape
> their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music
> of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their
> operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the
> world fulfilled unto the last and smallest." - Now, I think I understand
> this up until the "as fate to all things else" bit, but the bit after
> that I can never understand. What is Tolkien saying here?
Sorry, no idea ether. It's beautiful language, but like you I'm not
sure what it _means_.
> - Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the Valar
> had departed?
We had a discussion not long ago about the appearance of time in the
Timeless Halls, of a First Theme and Second Theme requiring time
(else how could first come first?), but I don't think we ever
resolved it (or could).
The relevance here is that I'm not sure we are justified in
concluding that Iluvatar decided the fate of men at the point where
the narrator tells us about it. It may well have been part of his
eternal plan.
> [1] would it be good advice to tell people to
> start reading 'The Silmarillion' from, say, 'Of the Beginning of Days',
> or even from a later chapter in Quenta Silmarillion?
I'm minded of Julia Child teaching people to make quiche. She shows
how to make a pie crust from scratch, nd then says something to the
effect that if making teh crust is a stumbling block, just use a
tore-bought crust and you'll still have most of the goodness.
I wouldn't counsel anyone to skip Ainulindalė and Valaquenta
automatically. But if they're having trouble getting through those
sections, then I'd say "better to read the QS and come back later to
A and V, than to let the harder opening sections turn you off to the
entire book."
> [2] How confusing is this structure of Quenta Silmarillion, and indeed
> the whole of 'The Silmarillion' as a collection of stories and tales?
> Was it difficult when first reading this book to understand what was
> going on? Would something like a timeline help when reading it, or is
> part of the charm and power the way the whole history crystallises out
> of the stories?
A timeline would have been of great help to me. When reading LotR
after the first time -- i.e. when I knew of the existence of teh Tale
of Years in App B -- I referred frequently to it, to keep track of
what was happening simultaneously "off stage".
But with that excetion, I didn't find the structure of the QS
troublesome. To me the chapters never seemed all that disconnected
from each other: the work seemed like a great tapestry. IIRC, in the
Turin chapter there were some near-encounters with folks we had met
in earlier chapters, and I remember picking up on those references
with delight.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
Stan Brown
> Kingdom" - what is the 'far heaven' and the 'Little Kingdom' here, the
> places from whence and to where Tulkas comes?
I think the far heaven us the Timeless Halls, where all the Ainur
lived with Iluvatar and where the ones who didn't descend into Eä
live still.
The Little Kingdom, from context, has to be Arda. Compare the line in
"Ainulindalė", "And this habitation might seem a little thing to
those who consider only the majesty of the Ainur."
> - "Melkor brooded in the outer darkness" - what is this 'outer
> darkness'?
At first I wrote:
It's either the same dark regions where he wandered before the Music,
or else it's Arda before lights were created. From the context it
sounds like this is happening before Melkor came down to Arda, but
that doesn't make sense to me because I thought he entered Arda at
the same time as the (other) Valar, so that he could start getting up
to no good.
But I think you yourself gave a better answer later: this is
somewhere in Eä outside of Arda, in this passage (moved here out of
order):
> - "Melkor knew of all that was done [...] he gathered to himself spirits
> out of the halls of Ea..." - Does this suggest that the earlier
> reference to 'outer darkness' was to an area that is within Ea?
> - The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other creation
> myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier objects than the
> Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in fact greater creations.
> Do the names of the Lamps, Illuin and Ormal mean anything? Can the
> process of their creation (and the Valar who work to create them - Aule,
> Varda, Manwe) be compared to the later creation of the Two Trees (by
> Yavanna, with the aid of Nienna)?
I think the distinction is between Technology and Living Things. The
Lamps were essentially static; the Trees were living things that
waxed and waned.
> - "though fear fell upon him" - we see here the first descriptions of
> Melkor's fear. This will be an important theme later on. What exactly
> does Melkor fear here?
"though fear fell upon him; for above the roaring of the seas he
heard the voice of Manwė as a mighty wind, and the earth trembled
beneath the feet of Tulkas. But he came to Utumno ere Tulkas could
overtake him; and there he lay hid."
I think he feared retribution: capture and punishment.
> "Even now my heart desires [...] to look across the wide seas of
> water and of time [...] and perceive the unimaginable hand and mind of
> Feanor at their work, while both the White Tree and the Golden were in
> flower!" (The Palantir). Just two examples to show the enduring
> influence of the Two Trees on the history and legends of Middle-earth.
If I recall correctly, didn't Gandalf speak those words? He was there
when the Trees were in flower. Presumably in his native form he would
remember them clearly, but in his Istar guise his memories of Valinor
were imperfect.
> - The Two Trees - These are Telperion and Laurelin (and they are given
> many other names beside). Telperion, the elder tree, gives forth a dew
> of silver light, and is described as male. Laurelin gives forth warmth
> and a great light, and is described as female. This distinct character
> of each tree contrasts with the Two Lamps, which were not distinguished
> other than in name. Are there any other creation myths that are similar
> to this one involving trees sung into being and flower?
Do you count /The Magician's Nephew of C.S. Lewis? :-)
> - "wells of water and of light" - the dews of Telperion seem to
> correspond to the water, and the rain of Laurelin to the light, but it
> seems that the 'water' from Telperion is in fact light, but whether it
> can really be described as 'light' is not clear: "the light that was
> spilled from the trees endured long, ere it was taken up into the airs
> or sank down into the earth". It seems that this is a very mythical kind
> of light, maybe even a metaphor of some kind.
Somewhere -- I can't remember where; "Myths Transformed", maybe? --
CRT talks about the Trees as being pure light, unmarred. He said this
was an important element of Tolkien's mythology, the idea of pure and
original light, before the Marring. In this scheme the Sun and Moon,
which came later after the Trees had absorbed the poison of
Ungoliant, were imperfect.
This is (one reason) why the Silmarils were so important: they were
the last of the pure primeval light.
Wat don't get, about that, is why the stars didn't also count as
pure and perfect light, since they also were made before Melkor
marred all the raw materials.
> - Fate and the Gift - Iluvatar says that he will give a new gift to Men:
> "he willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and
> should find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to shape
> their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music
> of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their
> operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the
> world fulfilled unto the last and smallest." - Now, I think I understand
> this up until the "as fate to all things else" bit, but the bit after
> that I can never understand. What is Tolkien saying here?
Sorry, no idea ether. It's beautiful language, but like you I'm not
sure what it _means_.
> - Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the Valar
> had departed?
We had a discussion not long ago about the appearance of time in the
Timeless Halls, of a First Theme and Second Theme requiring time
(else how could first come first?), but I don't think we ever
resolved it (or could).
The relevance here is that I'm not sure we are justified in
concluding that Iluvatar decided the fate of men at the point where
the narrator tells us about it. It may well have been part of his
eternal plan.
> [1] would it be good advice to tell people to
> start reading 'The Silmarillion' from, say, 'Of the Beginning of Days',
> or even from a later chapter in Quenta Silmarillion?
I'm minded of Julia Child teaching people to make quiche. She shows
how to make a pie crust from scratch, nd then says something to the
effect that if making the crust is a stumbling block, just use a
store-bought crust and you'll still have a good quiche.
I wouldn't counsel anyone to skip Ainulindalė and Valaquenta
automatically. But if they're having trouble getting through those
sections, then I'd say "better to read the QS and come back later to
A and V, than to let the harder opening sections turn you off to the
entire book."
> [2] How confusing is this structure of Quenta Silmarillion, and indeed
> the whole of 'The Silmarillion' as a collection of stories and tales?
> Was it difficult when first reading this book to understand what was
> going on? Would something like a timeline help when reading it, or is
> part of the charm and power the way the whole history crystallises out
> of the stories?
A timeline would have been of great help to me. When reading LotR
after the first time -- i.e. when I knew of the existence of the Tale
of Years in App B -- I referred frequently to it, to keep track of
what was happening simultaneously "off stage".
But with that exception, I didn't find the structure of the QS
Chris Kern
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> posted the following:
>Tue, 08 Nov 2005 21:07:42 GMT from Christopher Kreuzer
><spam...@blueyonder.co.uk>:
>> - "wells of water and of light" - the dews of Telperion seem to
>> correspond to the water, and the rain of Laurelin to the light, but it
>> seems that the 'water' from Telperion is in fact light, but whether it
>> can really be described as 'light' is not clear: "the light that was
>> spilled from the trees endured long, ere it was taken up into the airs
>> or sank down into the earth". It seems that this is a very mythical kind
>> of light, maybe even a metaphor of some kind.
>
>Somewhere -- I can't remember where; "Myths Transformed", maybe? --
>CRT talks about the Trees as being pure light, unmarred. He said this
>was an important element of Tolkien's mythology, the ide of pure and
>original light, before the Marring. In this scheme the Sun and Moon,
>which came later after the Trees had absorbed the poison of
>Ungoliant, were imperfect.
Perhaps you are thinking of JRRT's projections for the revision of the
Silmarillion which would put the creation of the Sun and the Moon
before Arda. In these projections, Melkor tainted the Sun, but before
that happened, the pure light was preserved in the Two Trees.
>> - Fate and the Gift - Iluvatar says that he will give a new gift to Men:
>> "he willed that the hearts of Men should seek beyond the world and
>> should find no rest therein; but they should have a virtue to shape
>> their life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music
>> of the Ainur, which is as fate to all things else; and of their
>> operation everything should be, in form and deed, completed, and the
>> world fulfilled unto the last and smallest." - Now, I think I understand
>> this up until the "as fate to all things else" bit, but the bit after
>> that I can never understand. What is Tolkien saying here?
>
>Sorry, no idea ether. It's beautiful language, but like you I'm not
>sure what it _means_.
My interpretation would be that this is a declaration that humans are
central to Iluvatar's theme, and that by their works the Music will be
brought to its ultimate conclusion and fulfillment.
-Chris
Stan Brown
Paul Ciszek
In article <ys8cf.3653$Lw5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
Christopher Kreuzer <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>- The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other creation
>myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier objects than the
>Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in fact greater creations.
>Do the names of the Lamps, Illuin and Ormal mean anything?
I assumed that Tolkien was making a pun: "Is this the face that launched
a thousand ships, and burnt the topless towers of Illium?"
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
Christopher Kreuzer
> In article <ys8cf.3653$Lw5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
> Christopher Kreuzer <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> - The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other
>> creation myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier
>> objects than the Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in
>> fact greater creations. Do the names of the Lamps, Illuin and Ormal
>> mean anything?
>
> I assumed that Tolkien was making a pun: "Is this the face that
> launched a thousand ships, and burnt the topless towers of Illium?"
Ilium is spelt with one 'l'. And Ilium and Illuin are spelt totally
differently, and it looks like they sound totally different as well
(which is probably more important). I did wonder briefly if you could
split it into Il-luin, using the Il- part of Iluvatar, and the -luin
thing that means blue in Ered Luin - hoping that it would come out as
'Blue Light' or something. But we aren't told what language was used to
name the lamps, whether we are reading some Valarin names told to the
Elves by the Valar, or Quenyarized forms of such names.
And in any case, I have analysed the word 'Iluvatar' wrongly. The index
and Appendix to /The Silmarillion/ say that Illuvatar means 'Father of
All', and the first fragment of Iluvatar comes from 'iluve' - 'the
whole, the all', and the second part - 'atar' - is 'father'.
Which brings us no closer to what, if anything, Illuin and Ormal mean. I
have drawn a complete blank here, though the Appendix says 'mal-' is
'gold', so it is tempting to speculate that one was blue and the other
gold, silly as that sounds. It makes more sense, given the "unchanging
day" description, that they both produced a yellow/white light. And it
would make more sense for their names, if they mean anything, to refer
to their locations in the north and the south.
Does anyone have _any_ idea what Ormal and Illuin mean? Do they, for
example, appear in earlier writings that might have a sentence
explaining what the words mean, or some further clues as to the nature
of the light they produced?
Prai Jei
message <Lqjdf.6281$Lw5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>:
> Which brings us no closer to what, if anything, Illuin and Ormal mean. I
> have drawn a complete blank here, though the Appendix says 'mal-' is
> 'gold',
Attached to "or" which is French (and heraldic) for gold. The complete name
is close to a syllabic reversal of "mallorn" - could it mean the same
thing?
One possible pun is for Tolkien to have seen the initial N of 'normal' as a
negative prefix, and by removing this N he has created 'Ormal' as a
positive form, to indicate that the lamp is anything but normal -
"supranormal" perhaps, borrowing a word from the mathematicians.
It's an illuin that blows nobody any good? Or is there a hint of
'illumination' in the name?
--
Pelagiarism: passing off somebody else's heresy as your own
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
Stan Brown
<nos...@nospam.com>:
> In article <ys8cf.3653$Lw5....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
> Christopher Kreuzer <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >- The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other creation
> >myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier objects than the
> >Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in fact greater creations.
> >Do the names of the Lamps, Illuin and Ormal mean anything?
>
> I assumed that Tolkien was making a pun: "Is this the face that launched
> a thousand ships, and burnt the topless towers of Illium?"
I can't positively say he didn't, but I think it would be very much
out of character for him.
He created so many names of places and persons that there are bound
to be a few with similar sounds to real-world place names, but as far
as we know that's just coincidence. He addressed this point in Letter
324, responding to a query whether Gondar (in Egypt) had anything to
do with Gondor.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Does anyone have _any_ idea what Ormal and Illuin mean?
High Gold and Sky Blue
Conrad Dunkerson
> I don't have the time or inclination to work out the exact sentences
> that were drawn from each source, but I would say on casual
> observation that it is at least 50-60% Ainulindale, perhaps another
> 20-30% Annals of Aman, and only a bit of QS.
Seem like reasonable estimates. The 'Ainulindale' pieces are easy to
spot, but the rest of it is very chopped up.
> As I said before, the only authority at all that HoME gives us for the
> creation of this chapter is that on the Ainulindale C* (written before
> the final version D), Tolkien questioned whether to move some of the
> final material into the QS. CT may have been working off other
> unpublished notes, or perhaps he had strong stylistic or form reasons
> for doing this.
The published Silm text cuts off where the drafts have;
"And when he had ended the Ainulindale, such as Rumil had made it,
Pengolod the Sage paused a while..."
MR, Ainulindale - C (pg 17)
Within the chapter JRRT labeled 'Ainulindale' there was a story of that
name set down by Rumil AND then some information from Pengolod about
subsequent events. This is why I think CT decided to treat the
Ainulindale myth as a chapter by itself and then the material following
that (wherein Pengolod tells Aelfwine of the early history of Arda) as
part of the QS history. If the brief discussion is cut out then Silm's
'Ainulindale' and 'Beginning of Days' can be seen to separate at
precisely that point quoted above.
Christopher Kreuzer
Hey! It looks like Gold and Blue was the right idea after all! Did you
get this from the Etymologies or something?
High Gold and Sky Blue would correspond nicely with a yellow sun in a
blue sky. Makes a lot of sense now. Illuin was in the north, and Ormal
was in the south. In the northern hemisphere, you would see a distant
yellow light (Ormal) in a blue sky (the light from Illuin). And
obviously, if you journeyed far enough to the south (in the Spring of
Arda), you would see a distant blue light (Illuin) in a yellow sky
(because you would be surrounded by the light of Ormal). Blue light in a
yellow sky!!
Did Tolkien ever try to go directly from the Lamps of the Valar to the
Sun and Moon? It wouldn't be a great leap of the imagination to go from
a blue light to a silver light.
As for the language. Well, 'mal' is gold, and 'luin' is blue. I did
consider whether the 'ilm' stem given in the Appendix to /The
Silmarillion/ was what is found in the word 'Illuin'. The stem 'ilm' is
found in the words 'Ilmen' [the region above the air where the stars
are]; and also in 'Ilmarin' ['mansion of the high airs']; and in
'Ilmare' [the handmaid of Varda - something to do with starlight]. But
doesn't the presence of that 'm' at the end of 'ilm' mess things up?
Shouldn't it be something like: 'Ilmluin'? Or is it acceptable to morph
that to form 'Illuin'? I guess it must be acceptable!
And does this imply that the Lamps of the Valar were tall enough to
reach up into Ilmen? Into the regions of the stars?
As for 'Or' in 'Ormal' meaning 'High', that makes a lot of sense as
well. You would see this in 'Orod' - mountain, and the 'orn' for tree
also speaks to the height of trees. But the 'or' in Orome is a red
herring, it seems.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Hey! It looks like Gold and Blue was the right idea after all! Did you
> get this from the Etymologies or something?
I just remembered having seen those translations. Now that I look into
it they seem to be interpretations rather than attested forms.
Ardalambion has 'Ormal = High Gold' as a suggested translation in the
Quenya wordlist. They also note the 'luin' portion of Illuin.
A Google search shows the two I gave as the most common interpretations
but also;
Illuin = [High] Pale-blue light
Ormal = Lofty Gold
One site has 'Blue Star' for Illuin, but I think that unlikely.
I'd break it down thus;
oro - mal = 'high' - 'gold'
ilu - luin = 'high airs' - 'blue / pale'
> Did Tolkien ever try to go directly from the Lamps of the Valar to the
> Sun and Moon? It wouldn't be a great leap of the imagination to go from
> a blue light to a silver light.
Well, the lights of the trees were patterned after the lights of the
lamps in some texts... so not a 'direct' link, but there is definitely a
connection between Sun and Moon and the lamps.
> As for 'Or' in 'Ormal' meaning 'High', that makes a lot of sense as
> well. You would see this in 'Orod' - mountain, and the 'orn' for tree
> also speaks to the height of trees. But the 'or' in Orome is a red
> herring, it seems.
'Orome' is apparently 'Eldarinized' from Valarin 'Aromez'.
Christopher Kreuzer
> Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
>
>> Hey! It looks like Gold and Blue was the right idea after all! Did
>> you get this from the Etymologies or something?
>
> I just remembered having seen those translations. Now that I look into
> it they seem to be interpretations rather than attested forms.
Ah. So only interpretations. But pretty convincing ones.
> Ardalambion has 'Ormal = High Gold' as a suggested translation in the
> Quenya wordlist. They also note the 'luin' portion of Illuin.
>
> A Google search shows the two I gave as the most common
> interpretations but also;
>
> Illuin = [High] Pale-blue light
Why 'light' here and not in 'Ormal'? Maybe they were thinking of the
stem 'sil' seen in Silmaril? I would suggest that 'light' is incorect
here, and that 'high' might be a better interpretation of 'Il-'. My
reasoning is that (within the history of Arda) the words Illuin and
Ormal may predate the coining of the words that came to signify 'high
airs' (Ilm-) and to signify 'mountain' (Or- in Orod). Though I may have
this the wrong way round. I think I am trying to work out whether the
Elves, safely in Valinor and being told tales by the Valar of the Day
before Days (though strictly that phrase applies to the some of the Two
Trees, it could just as well be used of the time of the Two Lamps),
whether these Elves already had words for mountain (what later became
the Sindarin 'Orod') and for Ilmarin, and then applied those words to
what they were told about the Two Lamps?
I was hoping to be able to argue that 'Il' and 'Or' are proto-words that
both, in different ways, came to be applied to 'high' objects (Orod,
Ilmarin), maybe even originating from their use for the Two Lamps. But I
don't think the argument works.
> Ormal = Lofty Gold
>
> One site has 'Blue Star' for Illuin, but I think that unlikely.
They might have been thinking of Ilmare, and her association with stars.
> I'd break it down thus;
>
> oro - mal = 'high' - 'gold'
> ilu - luin = 'high airs' - 'blue / pale'
But the Appendix in /The Silmarillion/ says specifically that it is
'ilm', not 'ilu' that is found in 'Ilmarin', where the meaning 'high
airs' seems to be most clearly attested. Unless there are other
attestations you are thinking of.
And can any linguist confirm whether 'Ilm' + 'luin' can end up as
'Illuin'?
>> Did Tolkien ever try to go directly from the Lamps of the Valar to
>> the Sun and Moon? It wouldn't be a great leap of the imagination to
>> go from a blue light to a silver light.
>
> Well, the lights of the trees were patterned after the lights of the
> lamps in some texts...
Interesting. Can you remember which texts? It seems that no trace of
this survives into the published Silmarillion. The only connection
between the Lamps and the Trees (in the published Silmarillion) seems to
be that they emitted light, and in both cases there were two of them.
> so not a 'direct' link, but there is
> definitely a connection between Sun and Moon and the lamps.
To my mind, the Lamps seem closer in conception to the Sun and Moon (in
the sense of being lofty and distant lights), than to the conception of
the Two Trees (stuck in the ground in one part of the world).
Oh. There is one more similarity between Lamps and Trees that I forgot.
That they are both 'rooted' in the ground. In contrast, the Sun and Moon
are mobile and free.
Maybe a table can be constructed (first line is column headings):
Property Lamps Trees Sun and Moon
Number 2 2 2
Light Y Y Y
Lofty Y N Y
Fixed Y Y N
Colour Y Y Y
Variable N Y *
Marred N N Y
Destroyed Y Y N
I don't get the impression that the Trees were that tall, though maybe
they were taller than it seems. And the colour of the Lamps comes only
from the interpretations of their names, I don't know where this light
is directly described as other than "unchanging day".
* - The variability of the Sun and Moon comes not from an intrinsic
variation in the light (as it did for the Two Trees), but rather from
their movement. I can't find the explanation, within the mythology, for
the waxing and waning of the Moon, which does seem to recall the waxing
and waning of the Trees.
>> As for 'Or' in 'Ormal' meaning 'High', that makes a lot of sense as
>> well. You would see this in 'Orod' - mountain, and the 'orn' for tree
>> also speaks to the height of trees. But the 'or' in Orome is a red
>> herring, it seems.
>
> 'Orome' is apparently 'Eldarinized' from Valarin 'Aromez'.
This Valarin is strange! :-)
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad Dunkerson <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>Illuin = [High] Pale-blue light
> Why 'light' here and not in 'Ormal'? Maybe they were thinking of the
> stem 'sil' seen in Silmaril? I would suggest that 'light' is incorect
> here, and that 'high' might be a better interpretation of 'Il-'.
I agree, but most likely they are taking it from the root GIL- and
related 'ilm' as you note below.
> My reasoning is that (within the history of Arda) the words Illuin and
> Ormal may predate the coining of the words that came to signify 'high
> airs' (Ilm-) and to signify 'mountain' (Or- in Orod). Though I may have
> this the wrong way round. I think I am trying to work out whether the
> Elves, safely in Valinor and being told tales by the Valar of the Day
> before Days (though strictly that phrase applies to the some of the Two
> Trees, it could just as well be used of the time of the Two Lamps),
> whether these Elves already had words for mountain (what later became
> the Sindarin 'Orod') and for Ilmarin, and then applied those words to
> what they were told about the Two Lamps?
The Eldar had crossed the Misty Mountains on their way to the West, so
it seems likely that they would have a word for 'mountains'. The root
for 'tall tree' (ORNI-) was also related. Tolkien also said the root RO-
was a form of ORO-... this meant "rise", but also somehow came to be the
source of various terms for 'East'; romen, rona, rhufen, rhun. 'ro -
men' would be 'place of rising' or somesuch and likely explains the
origin of the term... the place where the Elves awoke was in the East.
This connection puts the root very far back in the history of elven
linguistics.
All that being said, Tolkien first came up with the name 'Ormal' and
'Illuin' around 1951. Before that the pillars rather than the lamps
themselves were named. The late date for the creation of these names
means that Tolkien had a more developed form of the languages to work from.
>>I'd break it down thus;
>>oro - mal = 'high' - 'gold'
>>ilu - luin = 'high airs' - 'blue / pale'
> But the Appendix in /The Silmarillion/ says specifically that it is
> 'ilm', not 'ilu' that is found in 'Ilmarin', where the meaning 'high
> airs' seems to be most clearly attested. Unless there are other
> attestations you are thinking of.
The form 'ilu' is found in the older 'Quenya Lexicon'.
The original meaning of 'Iluvatar' was 'Sky Father' based on this root.
The 'ilu' = 'all' and ilu > ilm shift came in later, but were definitely
present by the time of the Etymologies circa 1937.
Which, of course, is contradictory to what I just said above about
'Illuin' being coigned circa 1951. Still, it is possible that JRRT used
the older form in this instance.
> Interesting. Can you remember which texts? It seems that no trace of
> this survives into the published Silmarillion. The only connection
> between the Lamps and the Trees (in the published Silmarillion) seems to
> be that they emitted light, and in both cases there were two of them.
BoLT I, Coming of the Valar - pages 70-73. The light of the lamps is
described as 'liquid light' which was gathered up into pools and used to
create the Trees. These pools and the liquid light sap of the trees
survive into the published Silmarillion though their origin is not
mentioned.
> I don't get the impression that the Trees were that tall, though maybe
> they were taller than it seems.
I've always had the impression that they were very tall. They are
described in Silm as "tall" and Ungoliant's shadow is said to come up to
their roots during the attack on them.
> And the colour of the Lamps comes only
> from the interpretations of their names, I don't know where this light
> is directly described as other than "unchanging day".
BoLT describes the lamp colors - same as the trees.
Christopher Kreuzer
<snip>
Thanks for the etymology comments.
> The Eldar had crossed the Misty Mountains on their way to the West, so
> it seems likely that they would have a word for 'mountains'. The root
> for 'tall tree' (ORNI-) was also related. Tolkien also said the root
> RO- was a form of ORO-... this meant "rise", but also somehow came to
> be the source of various terms for 'East'; romen, rona, rhufen, rhun.
> 'ro - men' would be 'place of rising' or somesuch and likely explains
the
> origin of the term... the place where the Elves awoke was in the East.
> This connection puts the root very far back in the history of elven
> linguistics.
Staying on this topic, I looked up the annotations to Treebeard's song
(where he names lots of places) in 'Reader's Companion to LotR', and
Hammond and Scull quote from the "unfinished index of place-names"
composed by JRRT, and confirm that 'East End' is the name of Fangorn in
the Elder Days, and that 'Ambarona' ("And I walk in Ambarona, in
Tauremorna, in Aldalome./
In my own land, in the country of Fangorn...") is:
"[...] 'the ancient name of a region' It means 'uprising, sunrise,
orient', from Quenya /amba/ 'up(wards)' + /rone/ 'east'. An unpublished
gloss of the name in Tolkien's linguistic notes gives 'Eastern (land)'
with the annotation 'dawn = /ambarone/'."
<snip>
>> Interesting. Can you remember which texts? It seems that no trace of
>> this survives into the published Silmarillion. The only connection
>> between the Lamps and the Trees (in the published Silmarillion)
>> seems to be that they emitted light, and in both cases there were
>> two of them.
>
> BoLT I, Coming of the Valar - pages 70-73. The light of the lamps is
> described as 'liquid light' which was gathered up into pools and used
> to create the Trees.
Interesting. I wonder why this idea didn't survive. We do get the bit
about "when the lamps were spilled destroying flame was poured out over
the Earth" (*). This seems to imply that there were stores of liquid
fire inside the lamps (kind of like oil lamps instead of electric
lights). Maybe another property can be added to the table comparing
Lamps, Trees, and Sun and Moon: whether the light was 'liquid'. It seems
that the Lamps and Trees had liquid light (though only the Trees, it
seems, actually 'dripped' this liquid light), but I get the impression
that the Sun and Moon just emitted light, like the stars (and like
electric lights).
> These pools
Though in the published Silmarillion they were pools of light from the
Trees, never pools of light from the lamps.
> and the liquid light sap of the trees
> survive into the published Silmarillion though their origin is not
> mentioned.
The light of the Trees seems to be intrinsic. A new thing that comes
from the Trees. No connection with the lamps is made.
The origin of the pools of light _is_ made clear in the published
Silmarillion: "the dews of Telperion and the rain that fell from
Laurelin Varda hoarded in great vats like shining lakes, that were to
all the land of the Valar as wells of water and of light." (Of the
Beginning of Days)
>> I don't get the impression that the Trees were that tall, though
>> maybe they were taller than it seems.
>
> I've always had the impression that they were very tall. They are
> described in Silm as "tall" and Ungoliant's shadow is said to come up
> to their roots during the attack on them.
I'd never noticed that before! They must be fairly tall then.
>> And the colour of the Lamps comes only
>> from the interpretations of their names, I don't know where this
>> light is directly described as other than "unchanging day".
>
> BoLT describes the lamp colors - same as the trees.
Thanks.
Christopher Kreuzer
<snip>
I've added five more rows to my table comparing the properties of the
Lamps of the Valar, the Two Trees of Valinor, and the Sun and Moon.
First line is column headings, see also notes following table:
Property Lamps Trees Sun and Moon
Number 2 2 2
Light Y Y Y
Lofty Y ^ Y
Fixed Y Y N
Colour Y Y Y
Variable N Y *
Marred N N Y
Destroyed Y Y N
Liquid Light Y Y N
Male/Female N Y Y
Technology Y N #
Living beings N Y &
One made first ~ Y Y
* - The variability of the Sun and Moon comes not from an intrinsic
variation in the light (as it did for the Two Trees), but rather from
their movement. I can't find the explanation, within the mythology, for
the waxing and waning of the Moon, which does seem to recall the waxing
and waning of the Trees.
^ - The Two Trees are said to be 'tall', but it seems that the Lamps
were loftier, and that the Sun and Moon were higher still. While the Sun
and Moon journeyed in Ilmen, there is a suggestion from the name Illuin,
that the Lamps may have been tall enough to be fixed objects within
Ilmen.
# - While the Two Trees were organically grown, and the Lamps of the
Valar seems to have been technologically constructed (and are also, as
far as I can tell, gender neutral), the Sun and Moon seem to be a
combination of organic origin (fruits of trees) and of technological
origin. The fruits were sung into being by Yavanna, but hallowed by
Manwe and put in vessels made by Aule - the results being given to Varda
to put in the heavens. We can compare the Valar said to contribute to
the making of the Lamps and Trees - and we can then note that all the
Valar thus named are combining to make the Sun and Moon: Aule, Varda and
Manwe made the Lamps; Yavanna and Nienna combined to make the Two Trees;
Yavanna and Nienna brought forth the final fruits from the Two Trees,
and Manwe, Varda and Aule work together to produce the Sun and Moon from
these fruits. We really see technology and nature working together here.
& - The Lamps of the Valar, again going back to the technology/nature
distinction, are not living beings. However, the Two Trees are living
beings that have grown organically from the Earth. In a sense they are
technology as well, but not in the normal sense of the word. The Sun and
the Moon, as discussed in the technology/nature comment, combine
technology and nature, but are also unique in the sense that they have
living beings (Tilion and Arien) to guide them - and this preserves the
gender distinction we saw with the Two Trees.
~ I don't know of any definite statement that Illuin was specifically
built, or the pillar on which it rested was raised, first, but this
seems to be what is suggested in 'Of the Beginning of Days', where
Illuin is described first, and then Ormal. More definitely, Telperion is
said to be the elder of the Two Trees, and this aspect is maintained
with the Sun and Moon, where the Moon rises first.
- The colour of Illuin-Telperion-Isil if we can draw a line connecting
these three objects, seems to change from pale blue, to silver (and the
tree is sometimes described as 'White' as well). The colour of
Ormal-Laurelin-Anar is always yellow/gold.
- Also, the Sun is depicted as being more powerful than the Moon. This
distinction is not clearly drawn, if at all, between the Two Trees or
the Two Lamps. Though Laurelin produces heat and Telperion does not, we
probably don't know enough about the Lamps to say whether or not there
was any difference there.
Raven
news:ChEdf.6863$Lw5...@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> And can any linguist confirm whether 'Ilm' + 'luin' can end up as
> 'Illuin'?
I'm no linguist, but it looks quite probable. Take the Latin compounds
"ad" + "lative" -> "allative" and "in" + "lative" -> "illative". And for
that matter, to Norwegian phonology -lml- is quite wrong, so to me it would
seem natural to combine "ilm" + "luin" to either "illuin" or "ilmeluin".
What does your English phonological gut-feeling tell you?
Corvus.
Christopher Kreuzer
> "Christopher Kreuzer" <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> skrev i en
> meddelelse news:ChEdf.6863$Lw5...@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>> And can any linguist confirm whether 'Ilm' + 'luin' can end up as
>> 'Illuin'?
>
> I'm no linguist, but it looks quite probable. Take the Latin
> compounds "ad" + "lative" -> "allative" and "in" + "lative" ->
> "illative".
Hey, thanks! That does settle it, in my mind at least.
> And for that matter, to Norwegian phonology -lml- is
> quite wrong, so to me it would seem natural to combine "ilm" + "luin"
> to either "illuin" or "ilmeluin". What does your English phonological
> gut-feeling tell you?
I'm hungry? :-)
I don't think I have a gut feeling for English phonology. But I would
agree that 'lml' does sound wrong, so you need to throw in some vowels,
or glissade (I think that's the right word) across the 'm' (making it
effectively silent). So I'd say pretty much what you said.
Conrad Dunkerson
> I don't have the time or inclination to work out the exact sentences
> that were drawn from each source, but I would say on casual
> observation that it is at least 50-60% Ainulindale, perhaps another
> 20-30% Annals of Aman, and only a bit of QS.
To expand upon this a bit, the start and end of the Silm chapter are
taken from Ainulindale and portions in the middle (notably the creation
of the Trees) were constructed from Annals of Aman and Later Quenta
Silmarillion.
1919 1928 1930 1936 1951 1958
+MotA-0d --------------> MotA-D -------------------------------
\
+LT-CV > S > AV1 > AV2 > +AAm-0 > +AAm-1 > AAm > AAm* > AAm:t > Silm
\ /
-------------------------------------------------> LQ2 ---
See the Ainulindale and Valaquenta chapter of the week discussions for
textual antecedents of 'Music of the Ainur D' (MotA-D above), 'Later
Quenta 2' (LQ2 above), 'Sketch of the Mythology' (S above), and BoLT
'Coming of the Valar' (+LT-CV above).
Most abbreviations are CT's usage from HoME, but those marked with a '+'
are my own inventions to fill out the list of source texts. The listed
dates above are very approximate and intended only to show which texts
were roughly contemporary to each other.
The new texts listed here are;
Abbrev Title Start End Location
AV1 Annals of Valinor 1930 1930 SoME VI: 263-272
AV2 Later Annals of Valinor 1930~ 1937.11.15 LROW 2.I: 110-120
+AAm-0 Draft over AV2 text 1951+ 1958 MR 2: 56-58
+AAm-1 Draft of first page 1951+ 1958 MR 2: 48
AAm Annals of Aman 1951+ 1958 MR 2: 48-134
AAm* Author's typescript 1951+ 1958 MR 2: 64-80
AAm:t Amanuensis typescript 1958 ? MR 2: 68-138
The 'start' and 'end' dates are estimated dates between which the text
was written - based on CT's analysis. Most of the titles are per JRRT or
CT, but a few have been made up when no specific title is given.
All of these 'Annals' extend from pre-history up through the start of
the Years of the Sun. The portion relevant to 'Of the Beginning of
Days' is shortly after the start of each.
Conrad Dunkerson
> 1919 1928 1930 1936 1951 1958
> +MotA-0d --------------> MotA-D -------------------------------
> \
> +LT-CV > S > AV1 > AV2 > +AAm-0 > +AAm-1 > AAm > AAm* > AAm:t > Silm
> \ /
> -------------------------------------------------> LQ2 ---
Whupps, the LQ2 branch should split off from Sketch (S) rather than
Coming of the Valar (+LT-CV)... though the chapter in question is
specifically derived from that portion of Sketch related to +LT-CV.
Snis Pilbor
Christopher Kreuzer wrote:
> This post is part of the series of "Chapter of the Week" discussions on
> 'The Silmarillion' by J.R.R. Tolkien. To read previous Chapter of the
> Week discussions, or to sign up to introduce a future chapter, please go
> to:
>
> http://parasha.maoltuile.org
>
> Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
> [Ainur, Elves and Men; Gift of Men; Time]
>
Hi,
Sorry I am a latecomer to the Silm COTW. I just noticed you guys
had started one for Silmarillion. I never participated in the LoTR
COTW's because I am more of a "first age kinda guy". Anyway, you can
consider me a newbie...
I noticed there isn't a lot of discussion on the "Gift of Men"
aspect of chapter 1, that there is a general lack of understanding what
it means. This is one of my favorite parts of this chapter so I'll
talk about how I read it.
There are three parts to the gift of men: death, wanderlust, and
power over fate.
The gift of death is discussed a lot in the Akallabeth. It's made
pretty explicit throughout silm, although from other forums I've seen
it's a common point of confusion for new readers. The bulk of evidence
suggests death is a very priceless gift. One which "even the powers
shall envy as time wears". It is rest and escape for sure, but it has
many critics among the Numenoreans because it is also the great
unknown.
By the gift of "wanderlust" I mean the heart's yearning beyond
the confines of the world, mentioned by Iluvatar. The is the most
obscure gift because we don't really have any explicit examples of it.
Personally I interpret this in much the same way as the discontentness
theme in Pascal's Pensees: while in Arda humans are never truly
satisfied and are always looking to accomplish more, do more. I
believe this is part of what allows men, despite their short lifespans,
to compete with immortal elves. The best textual illustration of this
wanderlust gift is the words of Huor and Hurin when they are requesting
permission to leave Gondolin.
The gift of power over fate manifests itself again and again.
Beren subdues fate and teaches it who's master over and over. In the
UT story of Tuor's sojourn, several very explicit mentions are made
about Tuor narrowly avoiding an unforgiving fate. It is probably this
gift which causes Melkor to fear men so much, "even those that serve
him".
On another subject, in the same paragraph we read that the world
is to be a "mansion" for the men and elves. I think the importance of
this cannot be overstated. Compare it with Manwe's later vision where
it is revealed that the hand of Iluvatar upholds everything. The
moral? Even among the bitterest anguish and sorrow, Iluvatar is at
work and he knows what he's doing, and the wise should always be glad
even among torment, and glory in the beauty of the world.
I'm glad to see some Silm discussion going on and hopefully I'll
have time amidst swamps of homework to read and contribute!!
Snis Pilbor
Chris Kern
posted the following:
> Sorry I am a latecomer to the Silm COTW. I just noticed you guys
>had started one for Silmarillion. I never participated in the LoTR
>COTW's because I am more of a "first age kinda guy".
Same here.
> The gift of death is discussed a lot in the Akallabeth. It's made
>pretty explicit throughout silm, although from other forums I've seen
>it's a common point of confusion for new readers. The bulk of evidence
>suggests death is a very priceless gift. One which "even the powers
>shall envy as time wears". It is rest and escape for sure, but it has
>many critics among the Numenoreans because it is also the great
>unknown.
This is unusual for Tolkien because it is very different from the
concept of death in Catholicism. Catholic doctrine (and most of
Christianity) sees death as a punishment for sin -- if humanity had
never sinned, they would be immortal.
I like Tolkien's concept, though, that death was originally intended
as a gift and only became something to fear after the influence of
Melkor and the evil of Men.
> By the gift of "wanderlust" I mean the heart's yearning beyond
>the confines of the world, mentioned by Iluvatar. The is the most
>obscure gift because we don't really have any explicit examples of it.
Perhaps this manifests itself in Aragorn's conduct near the end of his
life, when he seems to desire death (not in the "evil" manner of a
suicide*, but as a natural course of events).
-Chris
* I specifically put evil in quotes because I am not saying people who
commit suicide are evil -- I'm treating it within the confines of the
religious doctrine Tolkien was influenced by (although Catholicism has
significantly revised its outlook on suicide in the past 50 years or
so).
Torkel Franzen
> * I specifically put evil in quotes because I am not saying people who
> commit suicide are evil -- I'm treating it within the confines of the
> religious doctrine Tolkien was influenced by (although Catholicism has
> significantly revised its outlook on suicide in the past 50 years or
> so).
Having slipped into this newsgroup by way of the off-topic topic of
Godel's incompleteness theorem, I'm impressed by its standard of
Tolkien scholarship (I'm just a reader of his two great tales myself).
What is the significant revision of the Catholic outlook on suicide
in the past 50 years?
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>What is the significant revision of the Catholic outlook on suicide
>in the past 50 years?
Well, the current Catechism states that while suicide is still a sin
(and a grave one at that), committing suicide does not automatically
mean you go to Hell.
Now, I can't say for certain that official Catholic doctrine ever
stated that you did go to Hell for committing suicide even before
Vatican II and the new Catechism -- it may have been just been a
popular misconception that was finally stamped out with the new
Catechism (that tends to be how Catholicism works -- they don't
formally define their doctrine until challenged).
-Chris
John W. Kennedy
> * I specifically put evil in quotes because I am not saying people who
> commit suicide are evil -- I'm treating it within the confines of the
> religious doctrine Tolkien was influenced by (although Catholicism has
> significantly revised its outlook on suicide in the past 50 years or
> so).
Note that Dante has only Christians in the Wood of the Suicides.
--
John W. Kennedy
"But now is a new thing which is very old--
that the rich make themselves richer and not poorer,
which is the true Gospel, for the poor's sake."
-- Charles Williams. "Judgement at Chelmsford"
Torkel Franzen
> Well, the current Catechism states that while suicide is still a sin
> (and a grave one at that), committing suicide does not automatically
> mean you go to Hell.
Checking in on the Vatican website, I find that it does indeed state
that
We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have
taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the
opportunity for salutary repentance. the Church prays for persons who
have taken their own lives.
A Catholic priest on the Catholic Online Forum states:
The Catholic Church has always taught that suicide violates God’s law,
because God himself has revealed that it violates his law. But the
Catholic Church never taught that all who commit suicide are in
hell.
So maybe the popular idea about Catholic suicides going straight to
hell has little or no foundation.
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>So maybe the popular idea about Catholic suicides going straight to
>hell has little or no foundation.
That may well be true. Some people mistake "a lot of Catholics
believe X" for "the Catholic Church teaches X", which isn't always
accurate (unfortunately). I'm actually not aware of any denomination,
from liberal to fundamentalist, protestant or catholic, that believes
suicide is an automatic ticket to Hell no matter what.
-Chris
Morgil
I think the logic behind it is that murder always sends you to hell
unless you repent and have your sins forgiven by a priest or such.
But if you kill yourself, you won't have a chance to repent and be
forgiven, so hell you go. The loophole of course in this case would
be to take slowly effecting but incurable poison, and arrange the
forgiveness ceremony before the poison has an effect :)
Morgil
Chris Kern
posted the following:
>I think the logic behind it is that murder always sends you to hell
>unless you repent and have your sins forgiven by a priest or such.
>But if you kill yourself, you won't have a chance to repent and be
>forgiven, so hell you go.
Right; this would be what people are thinking. This logic starts from
a false premise, however -- it misunderstands the difference between a
"grave sin" and a "mortal sin".
-Chris
Leo Talbot
The Catholic Church teaches that if you die while in a state of mortal
sin (you have not confessed the sin in Confession), then you will go to
hell. Suicide is one such grave sin, but the loop-hole alluded to in the
Catechism relates to informed consent. In order for a grave matter
to be interpreted as a mortal sin, some conditions need to be met:
"Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes
knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's
law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal
choise. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but
rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin." (Taken from the
Catechism of the Church).
So, someone who was not fully in their right mind who committed suicide
may not die in a state of mortal sin. And given that we would not know
the mental state of someone who commits suicide, we cannot be sure that
they are not saved.
Leo
--
"But free debate is a war of ideas. It's a place where we should
be able to hurt each other" - Theo van Gogh
PGP: 0xD4225B61 fp=141B83BE A6F44EEF 8E379887 F6338DE7 D4225B61
Matthew T Curtis
<spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>This post is part of the series of "Chapter of the Week" discussions on
>'The Silmarillion' by J.R.R. Tolkien. To read previous Chapter of the
>Week discussions, or to sign up to introduce a future chapter, please go
>to:
>
>http://parasha.maoltuile.org
>
>Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
>
>Quenta Silmarillion (QS)
>Chapter 1 - Of the Beginning of Days
>
<snip>
There is one loose end left dangling in this chapter, one from an
earlier iteration of the legendarium: Salmar, who 'made the horns of
Ulmo', is presumably a Maia of Ulmo, but this is his solitary
appearance.
In the Lost Tales he was a Vala, subordinate to Ulmo (like Osse), also
called Noldorin; then he was a shadowy, ill-drawn figure (unlike Osse,
who always had more of a personality), brother of Omar-Amillo (another
lost Vala), concerned with music and friendly to the Noldor. CT
himself points out that this is his only mention apart from what was
published in the Silmarillion.
Did anybody else notice this solitary reference when they first read
the Silmarillion? Did you take it as a hint of greater depths to the
story (like Queen Beruthiel), or just as sloppy editing?
--
Matthew T Curtis mtcurtis[at]dsl.pipex.com
HIV+ for 25 glorious years!
There was a roar as the shout of a camel that finished seeing
two bricks. - Terry Pratchett, translated into Spanish and back
Christopher Kreuzer
<snip>
> ~ I don't know of any definite statement that Illuin was specifically
> built, or the pillar on which it rested was raised, first, but this
> seems to be what is suggested in 'Of the Beginning of Days', where
> Illuin is described first, and then Ormal. More definitely, Telperion
> is said to be the elder of the Two Trees, and this aspect is
> maintained with the Sun and Moon, where the Moon rises first.
It has been mentioned before, but I forgot to add it to this post: the
motif of the silver Moon/Tree being the elder of the pair, is seen also
in the naming of Isildur and Anarion, with the elder son named after
Isil (the Moon) and the younger son after Anar (the Sun), and the Moon
being identified with the Quendi (Elves - the elder race of the Children
of Iluvatar) and the Sun with the Atani (Men - the younger race of the
Children of Iluvatar). Minas Anor and Minas Ithil (the cities of
Isildur and Anarion) are definitely named after Sun and Moon. Can anyone
confirm the etymology of the names Isildur and Anarion?
Christopher Kreuzer
<snip>
> * - The variability of the Sun and Moon comes not from an intrinsic
> variation in the light (as it did for the Two Trees), but rather from
> their movement. I can't find the explanation, within the mythology,
> for the waxing and waning of the Moon, which does seem to recall the
> waxing and waning of the Trees.
I've just realised that the Moon was said to come from a flower, and the
Sun from a fruit. The flower-thing might help explain waxing and waning,
such that the Moon waxes and wanes as a flower opens and closes. Still
can't find anything in the text, but I rather like this speculative
explanation! :-)
JimboCat
>* - The variability of the Sun and Moon comes not from an intrinsic
>variation in the light (as it did for the Two Trees), but rather from
>their movement. I can't find the explanation, within the mythology, for
>the waxing and waning of the Moon, which does seem to recall the waxing
>and waning of the Trees.
IDHTBIFOM, but I clearly recall the explanation. Tilion is enamoured of
Arien (or maybe of her light) and keeps trying to get closer, but this
burns and darkens him. Sometimes he gets so close that he blocks her
light entirely (a solar eclipse). Eventually he backs off and regains
his glow.
I think this is from Silm, but might be in UT.
Jim Deutch
--
"The meek shall inherit the Earth. The rest of us are going to the
stars." - Peter Diamandis
Yuk Tang
news:1133899469....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
> IDHTBIFOM
Shouldn't this be IDNHTBIFOM?
--
Cheers, ymt.
Raven
news:Xns9724E25DC518j...@130.133.1.4...
> "JimboCat" <10313...@compuserve.com> wrote in
> news:1133899469....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
> > IDHTBIFOM
> Shouldn't this be IDNHTBIFOM?
Or alternatively IAGTBIFOM.
Marghvran.
Christopher Kreuzer
> Christopher wrote:
>
>> * - The variability of the Sun and Moon comes not from an intrinsic
>> variation in the light (as it did for the Two Trees), but rather from
>> their movement. I can't find the explanation, within the mythology,
>> for the waxing and waning of the Moon, which does seem to recall the
>> waxing and waning of the Trees.
>
> IDHTBIFOM, but I clearly recall the explanation. Tilion is enamoured
> of Arien (or maybe of her light) and keeps trying to get closer, but
> this burns and darkens him. Sometimes he gets so close that he
> blocks her light entirely (a solar eclipse). Eventually he backs off
> and regains his glow.
>
> I think this is from Silm, but might be in UT.
That is in Silm. I thought that explained why certain areas of the Moon
are darker than others. See also Gimli's song in Moria, where the Moon
is described has not yet having any stain. But I like the idea that this
might refer to the phases of the Moon. It could in fact refer to both.
The initial approach of Tilion towards Arien is said to both "scorch"
and "darken" the Moon. And afterwards, it is said that Tilion "was still
drawn towards Arien", so you could still explain the waning phase of the
Moon as the Moon darkening as he draws nearer to the Sun. This chimes
neatly with the real scientific explanation, where a Full Moon is seen
when the Earth is on the side of the Earth opposite the Sun (which is
why you can never have a solar eclipse at Full Moon), and the New Moon
is seen when the Moon is on the other side of the Earth, and nearest the
Sun!
There is something else as well. Tilion is said to tarry under the Earth
and return late. This might refer to the Moon seemingly being absent
when there is a new Moon, but this could also refer to the way the Moon
doesn't follow the same path in the sky as the Sun, and moves in the sky
at a different speed (from day to day - rather than the movement
"caused" by the Earth's rotation).
Christopher Kreuzer
ID'NHTBIFOM?
Christopher Kreuzer
> Raven <jonlennar...@damn.get2net.that.dk.spam> wrote:
>> "Yuk Tang" <jim.l...@yahoo.com> skrev i en meddelelse
>> news:Xns9724E25DC518j...@130.133.1.4...
>>
>>> "JimboCat" <10313...@compuserve.com> wrote in
>>> news:1133899469....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>> IDHTBIFOM
I do have the books in front of me.
I don't have the books in front of me.
>>> Shouldn't this be IDNHTBIFOM?
I do not have the books in front of me.
>> Or alternatively IAGTBIFOM.
I 'ave got the books in front of me.
I 'aven't got the books in front of me.
I ain't got the books in front of me.
> ID'NHTBIFOM?
This is complete rubbish. I'm not even going to bother explaining why I
tried to put an apostrophe in the abbreviation.
Speaking of which, the other big apostrophe hoohah was about another
film title. Something about the "Dos and Don'ts" of something or other,
which was rendered in the film title as "Do's and Don'ts".
The problem being that some people read dos as DOS, and does isn't
possible because doe is another word. The same problem arises with "to
read" and "to have read", though rewriting the sentence should escape
most problems. It is only having read the sentence that you realise it
may not read right.
And I've lost count of the number of times I've seen people say that
they took the lead and lead [sic] the way...
Yuk Tang
news:N4Ilf.4521$iz3....@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
>> Raven <jonlennar...@damn.get2net.that.dk.spam> wrote:
>>> "Yuk Tang" <jim.l...@yahoo.com> skrev i en meddelelse
>>> news:Xns9724E25DC518j...@130.133.1.4...
>>>> "JimboCat" <10313...@compuserve.com> wrote in
>>>> news:1133899469....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>>> IDHTBIFOM
>
> I do have the books in front of me.
> I don't have the books in front of me.
>
>>>> Shouldn't this be IDNHTBIFOM?
>
> I do not have the books in front of me.
I used it to distinguish DN from D, using the same convention that
abbreviates database to db, not d. Ie. the abbreviation contains all
the necessary information that defines it from similar terms in the
same subject.
>>> Or alternatively IAGTBIFOM.
>
> I 'ave got the books in front of me.
> I 'aven't got the books in front of me.
> I ain't got the books in front of me.
I took a more positive reading from it, that Raven was getting the
book in front of him, unlike the lazy so-sos that the rest of us are.
>> ID'NHTBIFOM?
>
> This is complete rubbish. I'm not even going to bother explaining
> why I tried to put an apostrophe in the abbreviation.
>
> Speaking of which, the other big apostrophe hoohah was about
> another film title. Something about the "Dos and Don'ts" of
> something or other, which was rendered in the film title as "Do's
> and Don'ts".
>
> The problem being that some people read dos as DOS, and does isn't
> possible because doe is another word. The same problem arises with
> "to read" and "to have read", though rewriting the sentence should
> escape most problems. It is only having read the sentence that you
> realise it may not read right.
Actually, the film may have been talking about avoiding dog muck on
the pavement, in which case the apostrophe would be entirely correct.
Alternatively, the film may have been pushing unix, in which case the
title should have been "DOS and don'ts". I believe the gamekeeping
community produced a film during the reign of William I, warning
against the poaching of game in the royal forests, titled "Does and
don'ts".
> And I've lost count of the number of times I've seen people say
> that they took the lead and lead [sic] the way...
And the history groups have grown ups (much older than myself) who
discuss how countries 'loose' wars.
--
Cheers, ymt.
Christopher Kreuzer
<snip>
>> Speaking of which, the other big apostrophe hoohah was about
>> another film title. Something about the "Dos and Don'ts" of
>> something or other, which was rendered in the film title as "Do's
>> and Don'ts".
>>
>> The problem being that some people read dos as DOS, and does isn't
>> possible because doe is another word. The same problem arises with
>> "to read" and "to have read", though rewriting the sentence should
>> escape most problems. It is only having read the sentence that you
>> realise it may not read right.
>
> Actually, the film may have been talking about avoiding dog muck on
> the pavement, in which case the apostrophe would be entirely correct.
Really? Do explain...
> Alternatively, the film may have been pushing unix, in which case the
> title should have been "DOS and don'ts". I believe the gamekeeping
> community produced a film during the reign of William I, warning
> against the poaching of game in the royal forests, titled "Does and
> don'ts".
Is that 'does' (female deer) or 'does' (one does this)?
>> And I've lost count of the number of times I've seen people say
>> that they took the lead and lead [sic] the way...
>
> And the history groups have grown ups (much older than myself) who
> discuss how countries 'loose' wars.
I still get confused over choose/chose/chosed.
Just saw another episode of 'Rome' tonight. The one with a raft of, um,
dead men, and Vorenus being very noble about Pompey. The way the action
was divided between Rome and Greece was a bit confusing though. And did
they really have that silly bloke announcing the news in the town square
all the time? I suppose I'm too used to newspapers, TV and radio, in our
media-saturated world.
Yuk Tang
>> "Christopher Kreuzer" <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Speaking of which, the other big apostrophe hoohah was about
>>> another film title. Something about the "Dos and Don'ts" of
>>> something or other, which was rendered in the film title as
>>> "Do's and Don'ts".
>>>
>>> The problem being that some people read dos as DOS, and does
>>> isn't possible because doe is another word. The same problem
>>> arises with "to read" and "to have read", though rewriting the
>>> sentence should escape most problems. It is only having read the
>>> sentence that you realise it may not read right.
>>
>> Actually, the film may have been talking about avoiding dog muck
>> on the pavement, in which case the apostrophe would be entirely
>> correct.
>
> Really? Do explain...
"Doos and don'ts".
>> Alternatively, the film may have been pushing unix, in which case
>> the title should have been "DOS and don'ts". I believe the
>> gamekeeping community produced a film during the reign of William
>> I, warning against the poaching of game in the royal forests,
>> titled "Does and don'ts".
>
> Is that 'does' (female deer) or 'does' (one does this)?
Doe, a deer, a female deer... Jokes that were hardly ribticklers to
begin with get even less funny when one has to explain them.
>>> And I've lost count of the number of times I've seen people say
>>> that they took the lead and lead [sic] the way...
>>
>> And the history groups have grown ups (much older than myself)
>> who discuss how countries 'loose' wars.
>
> I still get confused over choose/chose/chosed.
I've never seen "chosed".
Subjective present: choose, eg. I choose.
Subjective past: chose, eg. I chose.
Objective: chosen, eg. I am chosen, I was chosen.
> Just saw another episode of 'Rome' tonight. The one with a raft
> of, um, dead men, and Vorenus being very noble about Pompey. The
> way the action was divided between Rome and Greece was a bit
> confusing though.
The only way they could show the unpredictability of the situation, I
guess. Caesar pursued a bizarre strategy of trying to blockade
Pompey while the latter had command of the sea, and nearly came a
cropper at Dyrrachium when his troops routed and barely got back to
their camp. The cat and mouse game was reversed for a while, as
related in Ep5, until constant nagging from the senators pushed
Pompey into forcing battle at Pharsalus.
Incidentally IRL, Cato raised another few legions after Pharsalus and
Ponpey's escape. With Pompey absent, the command would have fallen
to the next most senior senator present, which was Cicero. Except
that 1. Cicero thought his military ability was a joke, 2. Cicero was
tired of the whole thing and only wanted to go home and face the
music.
> And did they really have that silly bloke
> announcing the news in the town square all the time? I suppose I'm
> too used to newspapers, TV and radio, in our media-saturated
> world.
Ancient historians don't mention that kind of thing, but I loved his
adverts for the Brotherhood of Millers, providing true Roman bread
for true Romans. If you've recorded it, note how little feeling he
puts into them.
--
Cheers, ymt.
JimboCat
You bring up a point I'd never considered: it seems that "no stain yet
on the moon was seen", which had puzzled me, refers to a definite,
identifiable (and pretty short!) historical period. We know the moon
first rose (and was a full moon) when Fingolfin's host arrived back in
ME. This was before the sun existed. THAT's when it was still
unstained! Presumably, it was also *always* full before the sun first
rose, since there was no Arien to "darken" it. Hmm, it's still a
puzzlement, though: I thought Durin first awoke long before that.
Wouldn't Gimli's song more appropriately have referred to the stars,
and no moon at all? I thought Durin woke long, long ages before the
Eldar returned to ME...
Do we know how long a time elapsed between the first rising of the moon
and that of the sun?
> There is something else as well. Tilion is said to tarry under the Earth
> and return late. This might refer to the Moon seemingly being absent
> when there is a new Moon, but this could also refer to the way the Moon
> doesn't follow the same path in the sky as the Sun, and moves in the sky
> at a different speed (from day to day - rather than the movement
> "caused" by the Earth's rotation).
So, between the first rising of the moon and the first rising of the
sun, "days" (reckoned as the period between moonrises) were probably
more than 24 modern hours. Could, in fact, have been practically
*anything*! Nowadays the moon rises about every 25 hours, and does so
on a very strict schedule, so it's hard to call it "late"....
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
I'd rather be here now.
Tar-Elenion
10313...@compuserve.com says...
LotR, which is where the verse is from, has (like most of the post LotR
writings) a sun and moon that existed long before the Noldor returned to
Middle-earth. 'Historically', rather than 'mythologically' the Dwarves
awoke shortkly after Men (who awoke, IIRC, while the Eldar were on their
great journey to Aman)
> Do we know how long a time elapsed between the first rising of the moon
> and that of the sun.
In the Silmarillion "Tilion had traversed the heaven seven times" before
the sun rose, so about a week.
<snip>
--
Tar-Elenion
He is a warrior, and a spirit of wrath. In every
stroke that he deals he sees the Enemy who long
ago did thee this hurt.
Christopher Kreuzer
<ahem> Of course I meant when the MOON is on the side of the Earth
opposite the Sun...
>> (which is why you can never have a
>> solar eclipse at Full Moon), and the New Moon is seen when the Moon
>> is on the other side of the Earth, and nearest the Sun!
>
> You bring up a point I'd never considered: it seems that "no stain yet
> on the moon was seen", which had puzzled me, refers to a definite,
> identifiable (and pretty short!) historical period.
Sorry to put the dampers on this. I too got quite excited when I
realised that the phrase "no stain yet on the moon was seen" might allow
precise dating of the time when Durin saw the Moon, only to be brought
back down to earth with Tar-Elenion explaining how the Sun and Moon are
different in LotR and in 'The Silmarillion' (as he has also done in
response to your post). This difference is mainly because of the way
Tolkien's thoughts on this changed over the years.
This is also seen in 'The Hobbit', where, after a passage describing the
passage of the other Elves to "Faerie in the West", we read that:
"In the Wide World the Wood-elves lingered in the twilight of our Sun
and Moon..." (Flies and Spiders)
This passage would be suitable to bring up in the discussion of chapter
3 of 'The Silmarillion'. I'll add something there.
> We know the moon first rose (and was a full moon) when Fingolfin's
> host arrived back in ME. This was before the sun existed. THAT's
> when it was still unstained! Presumably, it was also *always* full
> before the sun first rose, since there was no Arien to "darken" it.
Hadn't thought about the Moon always being full in those first seven
days. That's something to remember!
Not to get ahead of ourselves, but did you find the way the Moon and Sun
first moved in the heavens to be rather confusing and difficult to
visualize?
> Hmm, it's still a puzzlement, though: I thought Durin first awoke long
> before that. Wouldn't Gimli's song more appropriately have referred to
> the stars, and no moon at all? I thought Durin woke long, long ages
> before the Eldar returned to ME...
Presumably at some point after the Elves awoke (if you don't count the
initial waking of the dwarves when Aule created them), but before we
hear of the Sindar encountering dwarves in Beleriand and the dwarves
helping Thingol build his halls. I would also (for no particular reason)
presume that the dwarves were not around when the Elven hosts passed
west from Cuivienen over Middle-earth.
> Do we know how long a time elapsed between the first rising of the
> moon and that of the sun?
>
>> There is something else as well. Tilion is said to tarry under the
>> Earth and return late. This might refer to the Moon seemingly being
>> absent when there is a new Moon, but this could also refer to the
>> way the Moon doesn't follow the same path in the sky as the Sun, and
>> moves in the sky at a different speed (from day to day - rather than
>> the movement "caused" by the Earth's rotation).
>
> So, between the first rising of the moon and the first rising of the
> sun, "days" (reckoned as the period between moonrises) were probably
> more than 24 modern hours. Could, in fact, have been practically
> *anything*!
My impression is that the period of the Moon was the same as that of the
Sun, and that was similar to the period we observe today. I don't think
it was seven months, that's for certain. The Moon rises as Fingolfin
arrives in Middle-earth from the Helcaraxe, and the Sun rises as he
marches into Mithrim. We aren't told how far that is, but I get the
impression that a week would be about right, and we are also told that
the world still lay "in wonder" at the coming of the Moon, so that
implies it wasn't a long period of time.
> Nowadays the moon rises about every 25 hours, and does so
> on a very strict schedule, so it's hard to call it "late"....
What I mean, is that when it is new, it is difficult to see, so you
might think it is a few days late before you spot it again. Though I
don't actually have any experience looking for a New Moon. Is it easy to
find in the night sky?
JimboCat
>In article <1134148785.0...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>10313...@compuserve.com says...
>
>> You bring up a point I'd never considered: it seems that "no stain yet
>> on the moon was seen", which had puzzled me, refers to a definite,
>> identifiable (and pretty short!) historical period. We know the moon
>> first rose (and was a full moon) when Fingolfin's host arrived back in
>> ME. This was before the sun existed. THAT's when it was still
>> unstained! Presumably, it was also *always* full before the sun first
>> rose, since there was no Arien to "darken" it. Hmm, it's still a
>> puzzlement, though: I thought Durin first awoke long before that.
>> Wouldn't Gimli's song more appropriately have referred to the stars,
>> and no moon at all? I thought Durin woke long, long ages before the
>> Eldar returned to ME...
>
>LotR, which is where the verse is from, has (like most of the post LotR
>writings) a sun and moon that existed long before the Noldor returned to
>Middle-earth.
Do you have evidence from the text for that (other than Gimli's verse
about Durin, that is)? Certianly there's no evidence in LOTR I can
recall that the sun and the moon arose within any historical memory,
but none to the contrary that I know of, either...
>'Historically', rather than 'mythologically' the Dwarves
>awoke shortkly after Men (who awoke, IIRC, while the Eldar were on their
>great journey to Aman)
That's what I thought, which is why the verse is a puzzlement. It
implies the story of a new-made moon, pure and unstained, yet places it
in the wrong era entirely, far too long in the past to be reconciled
with other writings.
Your "solution" -- that the sun and moon were, in "fact", created far
earlier in the LOTR scenario than that of Silm is unconvincing to me. I
think it's a mere translation error <g>.
>> Do we know how long a time elapsed between the first rising of the moon
>> and that of the sun.
>
>In the Silmarillion "Tilion had traversed the heaven seven times" before
>the sun rose, so about a week.
One week the moon remained "unstained". After the sun rose, the moon
approached it and went through what we now know of as "phases". After
that first close pass of Arien and Tilion, the moon was darkened and
sooty, even when full.
That's a short period of time on which to base a poetic image in a song
referring to a time (by Gimli's time) thousands of years ago!
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"People treat nature the way an illiterate might treat a library: as a
great source of neatly stacked firewood" - Dan Janzen
JimboCat
>JimboCat <10313...@compuserve.com> wrote:
[snippage]
>> You bring up a point I'd never considered: it seems that "no stain yet
>> on the moon was seen", which had puzzled me, refers to a definite,
>> identifiable (and pretty short!) historical period.
>
>Sorry to put the dampers on this. I too got quite excited when I
>realised that the phrase "no stain yet on the moon was seen" might allow
>precise dating of the time when Durin saw the Moon, only to be brought
>back down to earth with Tar-Elenion explaining how the Sun and Moon are
>different in LotR and in 'The Silmarillion' (as he has also done in
>response to your post). This difference is mainly because of the way
>Tolkien's thoughts on this changed over the years.
>
>This is also seen in 'The Hobbit', where, after a passage describing the
>passage of the other Elves to "Faerie in the West", we read that:
>
>"In the Wide World the Wood-elves lingered in the twilight of our Sun
>and Moon..." (Flies and Spiders)
Oh, no dampers on me <g>. I do agree that there is a consistency gap,
here, but I don't see sufficient evidence (unless Tar-Elenion can trot
out some more) for there being a clear conception in LOTR of the
chronology of Sun and Moon in contradiction of that in the Silm. That
quote from TH is unconvincing: it only alludes, IMHO, to the usual JRRT
concept of "the good old days", of which the "now" of TH and LOTR is
just a pale and degraded echo. The Sun and the Moon just ain't what
they used to be, you know...
>> Nowadays the moon rises about every 25 hours, and does so
>> on a very strict schedule, so it's hard to call it "late"....
>What I mean, is that when it is new, it is difficult to see, so you
>might think it is a few days late before you spot it again. Though I
>don't actually have any experience looking for a New Moon. Is it easy to
>find in the night sky?
First sight of the new moon is important to Muslims, since their
calendar is *deliberately* non-deterministic [1]. The month starts, for
them, when the new moon is actually sighted, not when it's predicted.
Under good conditions a moon that is only hours past "new" can be
visible. Unexperienced observers won't be likely to see a moon less
than about 24 hours "old", however: it is still a pretty slim crescent
at that point, and sets well before the sky is completely dark.
[1] this prevents the correspondence -- which we have in the
western/christian calendar -- between Christian holidays (e.g
Christmas) and old pagan ones (e.g. the winter solstice). The month of
Ramadan, for instance, slowly cycles through the seasons: over time, it
can occur at any date of the western calendar whatever. (I hope I have
this all right: I'm not an expert by any means.)
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"The King James Bible was good enough for Moses,
and it's good enough for me." - anon
Tar-Elenion
10313...@compuserve.com says...
> Tar-Elenion wrote:
>
> >In article <1134148785.0...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> >10313...@compuserve.com says...
> >
> >> You bring up a point I'd never considered: it seems that "no stain yet
> >> on the moon was seen", which had puzzled me, refers to a definite,
> >> identifiable (and pretty short!) historical period. We know the moon
> >> first rose (and was a full moon) when Fingolfin's host arrived back in
> >> ME. This was before the sun existed. THAT's when it was still
> >> unstained! Presumably, it was also *always* full before the sun first
> >> rose, since there was no Arien to "darken" it. Hmm, it's still a
> >> puzzlement, though: I thought Durin first awoke long before that.
> >> Wouldn't Gimli's song more appropriately have referred to the stars,
> >> and no moon at all? I thought Durin woke long, long ages before the
> >> Eldar returned to ME...
> >
> >LotR, which is where the verse is from, has (like most of the post LotR
> >writings) a sun and moon that existed long before the Noldor returned to
> >Middle-earth.
>
> Do you have evidence from the text for that (other than Gimli's verse
> about Durin, that is)? Certianly there's no evidence in LOTR I can
> recall that the sun and the moon arose within any historical memory,
Essentially correct. Taking LotR alone (or LotR and the Hobbit
together), with no knowledge of the Silmarillion etc., one would not
come to the conclusion that the Sun and Moon are 'recent' creations,
only appearing when the Noldor returned to Middle-earth.
> but none to the contrary that I know of, either...
"Then they all gazed at Gandalf with still greater wonder. Some glanced
darkly at the wood, and passed their hands over their brows, as if they
thought their eyes saw otherwise than his.
Gandalf laughed long and merrily. 'The trees?' he said. 'Nay, I see the
wood as plainly as do you. But that is no deed of mine. It is a thing
beyond the counsel of the wise. Better than my design, and better even
than my hope the event has proved.'
'Then if not yours, whose is the wizardry?' said Theoden. 'Not
Saruman's, that is plain. Is there some mightier sage, of whom we have
yet to learn?'
'It is not wizardry, but a power far older,' said Gandalf: 'a power that
walked the earth, ere elf sang or hammer rang.
Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
When young was mountain under moon;
Ere ring was made, or wrought was woe,
It walked the forests long ago.'
'And what may be the answer to your riddle?' said Théoden.
'If you would learn that, you should come with me to Isengard ' answered
Gandalf."
TT, Road to Isengard
>
> >'Historically', rather than 'mythologically' the Dwarves
> >awoke shortkly after Men (who awoke, IIRC, while the Eldar were on their
> >great journey to Aman)
>
> That's what I thought, which is why the verse is a puzzlement. It
> implies the story of a new-made moon, pure and unstained, yet places it
> in the wrong era entirely, far too long in the past to be reconciled
> with other writings.
Huh? It is reconcilible with virtually all post LotR writings.
Sun and Moon are inexistence when the Elves awake, Men awake when the
Elves are on the Great Journey to Aman, Dwarves awke shortly after Men.
It might not be reconcilible with the Silmarillion if the myth in the
Silmarillion is take as 'fact', but as CT notes in the Forward to the
Silmarillion:
"A complete consistency (either within the compass of The Silmarillion
itself or between The Silmarillion and other published writings of my
father's) is not to be looked for, and could only be achieved, if at all
at heavy and needless cost."
>
> Your "solution" -- that the sun and moon were, in "fact", created far
> earlier in the LOTR scenario than that of Silm is unconvincing to me. I
> think it's a mere translation error <g>.
It is not my solution, it is JRRT's. See the Myths Transformed section
of Morgoth's Ring (HoME 10):
"It is now clear to me that in any case the Mythology must actually be a
'Mannish' affair. (Men are really only interested in Men and in Men's
ideas and visions.) The High Eldar living and being tutored by the
demiurgic beings must have known, or at least their writers and
loremasters must have known, the 'truth' (according to their measure of
understanding). What we have in the Silmarillion etc. are traditions
(especially personalized, and centred upon actors, such as Fëanor)
handed on by Men in Numenor and later in Middle-earth (Arnor and
Gondor); but already far back - from the first association of the
Dunedain and Elf-friends with the Eldar in Beleriand - blended and
confused with their own Mannish myths and cosmic ideas.
At that point (in reconsideration of the early cosmogonic parts) I was
inclined to adhere to the Flat Earth and the astronomically absurd
business of the making of the Sun and Moon. But you can make up stories
of that kind when you live among people who have the same general
background of imagination, when the Sun 'really' rises in the East and
goes down in the West, etc. When however (no matter how little most
people know or think about astronomy) it is the general belief that we
live upon a 'spherical' island in 'Space' you cannot do this any more."
or, for example:
"This general idea lies behind the events of The Lord of the Rings and
the Silmarillion, but it is not put forward as geologically or
astronomically 'true'; except that some special physical catastrophe is
supposed to lie behind the legends and marked the first stage in the
succession of Men to dominion of the world. But the legends are mainly
of 'Mannish' origin blended with those of the Sindar (Gray-elves) and
others who had never left Middle-earth."
See Letter 325 for full context.
>
> >> Do we know how long a time elapsed between the first rising of the moon
> >> and that of the sun.
> >
> >In the Silmarillion "Tilion had traversed the heaven seven times" before
> >the sun rose, so about a week.
>
> One week the moon remained "unstained". After the sun rose, the moon
> approached it and went through what we now know of as "phases". After
> that first close pass of Arien and Tilion, the moon was darkened and
> sooty, even when full.
>
> That's a short period of time on which to base a poetic image in a song
> referring to a time (by Gimli's time) thousands of years ago!
>
Tar-Elenion
10313...@compuserve.com says...
The quote from the Hobbit was specifically changed by JRRT from one
which adhered to the myth that the Sun and Moon were made very late in
the First Age (it was "In the Wide World the Wood-elves lingered in the
twilight /before the raising of the/ Sun and Moon", see the Annotated
Hobbit).
The Wood-elves dwelt in a world with a Sun and Moon, while the Vanyar,
Noldor and Teleri were dwelling in Aman, before the return of the
Noldor.
<snip>
Yuk Tang
news:MPG.1e075fa73...@newsgroups.comcast.net:
> The quote from the Hobbit was specifically changed by JRRT from
> one which adhered to the myth that the Sun and Moon were made very
> late in the First Age (it was "In the Wide World the Wood-elves
> lingered in the twilight /before the raising of the/ Sun and
> Moon", see the Annotated Hobbit).
> The Wood-elves dwelt in a world with a Sun and Moon, while the
> Vanyar, Noldor and Teleri were dwelling in Aman, before the return
> of the Noldor.
Was the original yet another of the untruths perpetuated by a Ring-
influenced Bilbo? Did the Ring also cause Bilbo to magnify the
exploits of hobbitry by inventing a character called 'Trotter', which
later chroniclers identified with King Elessar?
--
Cheers, ymt.
Tar-Elenion
Troels Forchhammer
"Christopher Kreuzer" <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> enriched us with:
> Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
>
> Quenta Silmarillion (QS)
I've been down for a few days with the flu, but that has given me a
chance to work on catching up with the CotW -- still got a good way to
go, but at least I'm making a start of it ;-)
<snip>
> This chapter has three distinct parts.
I hadn't really noticed that before you pointed it out, but it does.
It doesn't, from what Conrad notes elsewhere[1] seem to be particularly
related to the division of the sources, but it might nevertheless still
be a result of the choice of how to 'split' the material about the pre-
Cuivienen events and ordering.
We ended up having the Creation Myth in Ainulindalë, some mixed things
(both history and listing) in the Valaquenta and finally this chapters
covers many of the same things and events. Should it have been divided
differently to make more sense? Perhaps keeping all the history-stuff
(everything happening after the creation of Eä) in one chapter and the
rest -- listing the Valar and their various areas, the philosophical
stuff etc. -- in another chapter (thus retaining the Ainulindalë as
is).
<snip>
> - "for long Melkor had the upper hand" - reminding us that Melkor
> is indeed "he who arises in might" (Valaquenta) and "mighty are
> the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor" (Ainulindale).
I do find it of passing interest how Melkor's /original/ strength seems
to vary in various passages. In some passages he seems the equal of
Manwë (not sure how far that equality extends), elsewhere he is
defeated by Tulkas (also when Tulkas first arrived in Arda), but we
also see him as the mightiest of all the Valar: nearly as strong as all
the rest together.
> - "hearing in the far heaven that there was battle in the Little
> Kingdom" - what is the 'far heaven' and the 'Little Kingdom' here,
> the places from whence and to where Tulkas comes?
>
> - "Melkor brooded in the outer darkness" - what is this 'outer
> darkness'?
Adding my voice to those of others, I think that both 'Little Kingdom'
(Arda) and 'outer darkness' (Eä outside Arda) are fairly certain, but I
am less sure about the 'far heavens'. There are a few indications that
there were communications of a more general kind from the Timeless
Halls to Arda after the first wave of Ainur entered into Eä (e.g. the
story of Eru brooding for an age after they left), and Tulkas might
have learned about the battle both in the far places of Eä and in the
Timeless Halls.
<snip>
> - "who were yet to come in a time that was hidden from the Valar"
> - we see here that the Valar do not know when the Children (Elves
> and Men) will awake. In the Ainulindale, we were told that when
> Iluvatar showed the Ainur a vision of their Music: "they saw with
> amazement the coming of the Children of Iluvatar", but it seems
> that they were not aware of, or shown, the details.
That is a corner of an investigation that I find very interesting, and
which I touched on also in the introduction to Ainulindalë: that of the
amount of foreknowledge by the Valar.
Their foreknowledge comes from being part of the Music, in which the
world was imagined, though they didn't know what they were doing, from
the Vision that Eru showed them, from His words (that accompanied the
Vision), and possibly also from their general knowledge of both Eru and
of each other. It is, IMO, described quite well in ch. 3 'Of the Coming
of the Elves and the Captivity of Melkor':
Thus it was that the Valar found at last, as it were by
chance, those whom they had so long awaited. And Oromë
looking upon the Elves was filled with wonder, as though
they were beings sudden and marvellous and unforeseen;
for so it shall ever be with the Valar. From without the
World, though all things may be forethought in music or
foreshown in vision from afar, to those who enter verily
into Eä each in its time shall be met at unawares as
something new and unforetold.
It's like watching the weather forecast the night before -- you know
the rain is coming, but you can still be surprised when you're suddenly
caught outside without your umbrella ;-)
In addition to this 'fuzziness' in the timing, there is also a number
of uncertainties involved. Eru adds in each age some events that were
not in the music (and hence, I think, not in the vision either -- the
vision was, according to what Eru said, a visualisation of the Music),
and that will introduce some deviations, as will the Gift of Men; the
freedom of their Fate from the Music.
The whole foreknowledge issue creates some problems regarding the
motivation and reasoning behind some of the actions of the Valar. If
they knew what the result of their actions (e.g. summoning the Quendi
to live in Valinor) were to be, why then did they still go through with
it -- why try at any point to force the Children of Ilúvatar, if they
knew it would go wrong) ('and if ever in their dealings with Elves and
Men the Ainur have endeavoured to force them when they would not be
guided, seldom has this turned to good, howsoever good the intent.')
Basically there can be two possibilities -- either they do know what is
coming and is still forced to go through it, or they don't know the
outcome of their actions. The former would be a limitation of their
Free Will, while the other would be a limitation of their foreknowledge
(knowing that X will happen, but not seeing that doing Y will only make
it happen would come under the latter description). Tolkien resolved
the problem by limiting the foreknowledge of the Valar, so that they
could remain good-intentioned and free-willed agents and ambassadors of
God on Earth.
The manner of the limitation of their foreknowledge is, however,
interesting. First of all it appears that their foreknowledge has the
form of broad strokes rather than details, and in particular they must
be unaware of the effect of their own interventions in the history of
Arda -- they need to be unaware of whether their specific actions will
lead to the desired goal or not.
Ultimately that still leaves us guessing about the precise extent of
the foreknowledge of the Ainur, and of the Valar in particular. Which
events, for instance, of the Quenta Silmarillion did they know of when
they summoned the Quendi to Valinor?
<snip>
> - Valinor - this is described as being "more beautiful even than
> Middle-earth in the Spring of Arda". This seems to contradict the
> more common model of things declining over time in Arda and
> Middle-earth, of things never being quite as good as before.
Entropy ;-)
You might decrease it locally (Aman), but the overall entropy (marring)
must increase . . .
I don't think it's a problem that the Valar, in Valinor, achieves what
they didn't get in the Spring of Arda -- that they get their little
unmarred corner perfect only, IMO, sets off the darkness that is the
greater part of Arda; that part which they leave to the dominion of
Melkor, for him to mar as he please, for several ages.
Sometimes a touch of perfection only makes the imperfection that
surrounds it seem all the more overwhelming.
> Is this completely true? Do you think some aspects of the Spring
> of Arda were more beautiful and gone beyond recall?
Perhaps as someone said about the beauty of Melian, Lúthien and Arwen
-- the Spring of Arda was the most beautiful while it was, but later
Valinor surpassed it (though with flowers not being part of the Spring
of Arda, I would imagine that might make a difference).
> - The creation of the Two Trees - an absolutely beautiful creation
> myth here, and one that involves song from Yavanna, music being of
> great power in Ea.
Song and Trees together for Tolkien -- what did you expect ;-)
Everything about the Two Trees reminds me of Tolkien's deep love for
trees in general, and his relation to music in general is well
described in letter #260 ('Music gives me great pleasure and sometimes
inspiration').
The power of song permeates his writings from the Ainulindalë and
Lúthien's spell-songs (in letter #260 he states that he 'married a
musician' -- another reference to Edith in Lúthien?) to the power of
the Elven-songs in LotR.
Combining his love of trees and his -- whatever the right word might be
-- for song in the creation of the Two Trees would call for a very
powerful description, and he certainly achieved that.
<snip>
> - ""where Melkor sat in his dark thought impenetrable shadows lay"
> - what a lovely turn of phrase: 'sat in his dark thought'! This
> phrase is used again later on, as is the idea of impenetrable
> darkness.
It is lovely, indeed. And I get the feeling that it is intended very
nearly literately -- that the darkness is also physical, and that
Melkor, the most powerful (in some versions) of the Valar, when he
broods like this, will give some semi-reality to the darkness that is
his thoughts. He is actually sitting in his dark though.
> - Noldor and Teleri - both are mentioned here before we know
> properly who they are. Is this an editorial oversight?
You said it yourself above, 'this is a tale of long ago, and the ending
is known to all.' This part comes directly from the Ainulindalë from
MR, which is Pengoloð's descriptions to Ælfwine, but Ælfwine would, I
think, already know about the Noldor and the Teleri when Pengoloð told
him the Ainulindalë.
Think of most of the myths of the real world -- except in some few
cases, where one song, poem, tale or whatever has a list of all (or,
more likely, 'a number of') the gods, heros, dwarves, giants etc. that
occur in the mythology in general, nearly all the stories presuppose
that the listener / reader is already familiar with the gallery of
characters and groups that appear in the myth.
<snip>
> - Ainur, Elves and Men - "Iluvatar made [Elves] more like in
> nature to the Ainur, though less in might and stature; whereas to
> Men he gave strange gifts." Much of the themes of Tolkien's
> writings seem to spring from these differences. Death and
> Mortality, Immortality, Time, and so on, but, in the closing words
> of this chapter, Tolkien tries to communicate several complex
> philosophical points. Does he succeed?
I have to ask, 'at what?'
I think he succeeds in communicating a number of philosophical
questions regarding death, fate and immortality vs. mortality, and I
also think that he succeeds in communicating the basics of these in his
sub-creation, but that does not amount to a full treatment of the
subject. For that you've got to read all of LotR, Silm, UT and letter
(and then there are still questions left unanswered).
This passage appears in all versions of the Ainulindalë, as far as I
can determine. It is present already in BoLT, and in all the later
versions.
[...]. Therefore he devised that Men should have a free
virtue whereby within the limits of the powers and
substances and chances of the world they might fashion
and design their life beyond even the original Music of
the Ainur that is as fate to all things else.
[BoLT1 - 'The Music of the Ainur']
This theme of mortality seems very fundamental to Tolkien.
<snip>
> - Fate and the Gift - Iluvatar says that he will give a new gift
> to Men:
<snip quotation>
> Now, I think I understand this up until the "as fate to all
> things else" bit, but the bit after that I can never understand.
> What is Tolkien saying here?
I'm not going to say that I know what Tolkien intended, but merely how
I read it ;-)
[...] and of their operation everything should be, in
form and deed, completed,
I think that 'their' must refer to Men, and thus I interpret this to
mean that it is through the actions of Men that 'everything' will be
completed. We know already that Arda in the beginning should belong to
the Quendi, but that later would come the rule of the Atani, and that
might be part of this -- the story, even the Music (from which the
Atani are exempt at that) cannot be completed unless through the
actions of Men -- and thus even the fate of the Quendi and the Ainur
who descended into Eä depends on the Atani.
and the world fulfilled unto the last and smallest.
which would make sense if 'the world fulfilled' is interpreted as
having an invisible preceding 'the fate of' ;-)
I think this is related to the statement that Men are supposed to join
in at the second Music (of the Ainur and Eruhíni).
At the philosophical level, I think Tolkien suggests that the Gift of
Men, and in particular that they should be restless in Arda and seek
beyond it, are necessary in order to develop Arda and have the world
fulfill it's purpose and fate -- exactly because of this freedom, the
Choice of Men will ultimately be important.
I begin to ramble, I know, but I don't seem to be able to pick the
words that would express it exactly -- I think that somehow it is
important that there is a relation between the fate of Man-kind and the
fate of the Creation; and it seems to me to suggest some kind of Final
Choice for Men in which the Free Will (and, in Tolkien's sub-creation,
their freedom of fate) to make this Final Choice will be all-important.
I don't know if there is anything in Christian thought to parallel any
of that . . .
> - Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the
> Valar had departed?
That would be the obvious reading, IMO. This obviously suggests some
kind of communication from the Timeless Halls to Eä after the first
departure of Ainur -- either by Eru himself (as he is known to have
done to Aulë and Manwë -- perhaps he imparted some extra knowledge
somewhere) or by some agent entering Eä later (Tulkas?).
<snip>
> - Any other thoughts and comments?
When re-reading this chapter, I was struck by something in the
description of Aulë.
[...]. Of him comes the lore and knowledge of the Earth
and of an things that it contains: whether the lore of
those that make not, but seek only for the understanding
of what is, or the lore of an craftsmen: [...]
In particular 'seek only for the understanding of what is' invoked for
me the memory of Tolkien's description of Tom Bombadil in letter #153,
'the spirit that desires knowledge of other things, their history and
nature, /because they are "other"/ and wholly independent of the
enquiring mind,' relates strongly to this description of Aulë. This is
not to create yet another Tom is X thread -- Tom is definitely not
Aulë, for Aulë is more than this (Aulë also shapes the world), but it
does create a connection between the two, which might be more than just
philosophical: Tom as somehow one of the spirits associated with Aulë?
<snip>
[1] Message-ID: <dzRdf.4905$Pa4.67@trndny01>
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the
world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
- Aragorn, /The Lord of the Rings/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
Christopher Kreuzer
> In article <Xns972AC4D08DF1B...@130.133.1.4>,
> jim.l...@yahoo.com says...
>> Tar-Elenion <tar_e...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:MPG.1e075fa73...@newsgroups.comcast.net:
>>>
>>> The quote from the Hobbit was specifically changed by JRRT from
>>> one which adhered to the myth that the Sun and Moon were made very
>>> late in the First Age (it was "In the Wide World the Wood-elves
>>> lingered in the twilight /before the raising of the/ Sun and
>>> Moon", see the Annotated Hobbit).
>>> The Wood-elves dwelt in a world with a Sun and Moon, while the
>>> Vanyar, Noldor and Teleri were dwelling in Aman, before the return
>>> of the Noldor.
>>
>> Was the original yet another of the untruths perpetuated by a Ring-
>> influenced Bilbo? Did the Ring also cause Bilbo to magnify the
>> exploits of hobbitry by inventing a character called 'Trotter', which
>> later chroniclers identified with King Elessar?
>
> What?
Well caught! Throw that back into left-field... :-)
Troels Forchhammer
Tar-Elenion <tar_e...@hotmail.com> enriched us with:
> In article
> <1134407108.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> 10313...@compuserve.com says...
>>
>> Tar-Elenion wrote:
>>>
<snip>
>>> LotR, which is where the verse is from, has (like most of the
>>> post LotR writings) a sun and moon that existed long before the
>>> Noldor returned to Middle-earth.
I came to speculate -- I don't recall anything that explains the
stains on the Moon in the later conception, where the burn-scars
would be wholly inappropriate.
I am, of course, going again by the 'No stain yet on the Moon was
seen' and wondering how that can be justifiable -- how long did the
Noldor stay in Valinor before returning? The time accounted for since
their return to Middle-earth was, IIRC, not to change significantly,
and that is wholly inadequate to explain the stains on the Moon, so
they must, especially in the historically / cosmologically more
correct version.
>> Do you have evidence from the text for that (other than Gimli's
>> verse about Durin, that is)? Certianly there's no evidence in
>> LOTR I can recall that the sun and the moon arose within any
>> historical memory,
>
> Essentially correct. Taking LotR alone (or LotR and the Hobbit
> together), with no knowledge of the Silmarillion etc., one would
> not come to the conclusion that the Sun and Moon are 'recent'
> creations, only appearing when the Noldor returned to
> Middle-earth.
>
>> but none to the contrary that I know of, either...
<snip parts of quotation>
> 'It is not wizardry, but a power far older,' said Gandalf: 'a
> power that walked the earth, ere elf sang or hammer rang.
>
> Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
> When young was mountain under moon;
I.e. mountain and moon were in existence before 'elf sang' and all
the rest.
It is also interesting that this contradicts the chronology suggested
in 'Of Aulė and Yavanna', according to which the Ents would not
awaken until /after/ the awakening of the Elves.
This is also a very good point, that I hadn't considered.
Without that, I would have taken the position that Tolkien was
deliberately removing any reference to this aspect, as he was at the
time unsure as can be seen in the Ainulindalė versions B (1930s), X
(1946), C* (~1947) C (~1949) and D (~1950) (dates are all with some
uncertainty, but the sequence should be certain).
The point is that he was definitely 'playing around' with the Round
World version when he was writing LotR, but that he went back to the
Flat World version before the final edit of LotR.
I'm inclined to think that Tolkien might have been weeding out
definite references to the Round vs. Flat World versioning from LotR
and The Hobbit, and that he may have overlooked the above -- but
without the relevant HoMe volumes, I it has to remain a question. Are
there any passages where Tolkien went from more ambiguity to less in
LotR / TH or are all examples of the the same kind as the one
mentioned from TH that went from unambiguously Flat World version to
ambiguously either?
>>> 'Historically', rather than 'mythologically' the Dwarves awoke
>>> shortkly after Men (who awoke, IIRC, while the Eldar were on
>>> their great journey to Aman)
Are there other sources to this later view than 'Myths Transformed'
in MR? My impression from reading that section was that the ideas
were rather more fluid -- that Tolkien was determined to have a more
cosmologically correct mythology where the Sun and the Moon were
coėval with a round Earth, but that he was working with several
models for how this could be achieved and how it would affect the
later stories (in particular, of course, the stories preceding the
rising of the Sun and Moon).
<snip>
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>
The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement.
But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another
profound truth.
- Niels Bohr
Tar-Elenion
Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid says...
> In message <news:MPG.1e075d799...@newsgroups.comcast.net>
> Tar-Elenion <tar_e...@hotmail.com> enriched us with:
> >
> > In article
> > <1134407108.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
> > 10313...@compuserve.com says...
> >>
> >> Tar-Elenion wrote:
> >>>
>
> <snip>
>
> >>> LotR, which is where the verse is from, has (like most of the
> >>> post LotR writings) a sun and moon that existed long before the
> >>> Noldor returned to Middle-earth.
>
> I came to speculate -- I don't recall anything that explains the
> stains on the Moon in the later conception, where the burn-scars
> would be wholly inappropriate.
>
> I am, of course, going again by the 'No stain yet on the Moon was
> seen' and wondering how that can be justifiable -- how long did the
> Noldor stay in Valinor before returning? The time accounted for since
> their return to Middle-earth was, IIRC, not to change significantly,
> and that is wholly inadequate to explain the stains on the Moon, so
> they must, especially in the historically / cosmologically more
> correct version.
By the Annals of Aman the Noldor were in Valinor for about 3500 Sun
Years.
>
> >> Do you have evidence from the text for that (other than Gimli's
> >> verse about Durin, that is)? Certianly there's no evidence in
> >> LOTR I can recall that the sun and the moon arose within any
> >> historical memory,
> >
> > Essentially correct. Taking LotR alone (or LotR and the Hobbit
> > together), with no knowledge of the Silmarillion etc., one would
> > not come to the conclusion that the Sun and Moon are 'recent'
> > creations, only appearing when the Noldor returned to
> > Middle-earth.
> >
> >> but none to the contrary that I know of, either...
>
> <snip parts of quotation>
>
> > 'It is not wizardry, but a power far older,' said Gandalf: 'a
> > power that walked the earth, ere elf sang or hammer rang.
> >
> > Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
> > When young was mountain under moon;
>
> I.e. mountain and moon were in existence before 'elf sang' and all
> the rest.
>
> It is also interesting that this contradicts the chronology suggested
> in 'Of Aulė and Yavanna', according to which the Ents would not
> awaken until /after/ the awakening of the Elves.
It is possible the Ents were not fully 'sentient' until after the Elves
awoke, and taught them to speak, thus awakening them. Treebeard's Lore
of the Living Creatures notes Elves as the eldest (though saying Ents
are old as mountains). Just as a note the Ent related passages in Aule
and Yavanna are added from 'Ents and Eagles' in WotJ.
>
> This is also a very good point, that I hadn't considered.
>
> Without that, I would have taken the position that Tolkien was
> deliberately removing any reference to this aspect, as he was at the
> time unsure as can be seen in the Ainulindalė versions B (1930s), X
> (1946), C* (~1947) C (~1949) and D (~1950) (dates are all with some
> uncertainty, but the sequence should be certain).
>
> The point is that he was definitely 'playing around' with the Round
> World version when he was writing LotR, but that he went back to the
> Flat World version before the final edit of LotR.
The Akallabeth proper, and some of its versions (DA) are also 'Round
World' (Sauron is a source of the 'Flat World' 'deceit' in DA).
>
> I'm inclined to think that Tolkien might have been weeding out
> definite references to the Round vs. Flat World versioning from LotR
> and The Hobbit, and that he may have overlooked the above -- but
> without the relevant HoMe volumes, I it has to remain a question. Are
> there any passages where Tolkien went from more ambiguity to less in
> LotR / TH or are all examples of the the same kind as the one
> mentioned from TH that went from unambiguously Flat World version to
> ambiguously either?
The various passages in LotR that have an extent Sun/Moon were not
changed. I don't see the passge in the Hobbit as 'ambiguous'.
>
> >>> 'Historically', rather than 'mythologically' the Dwarves awoke
> >>> shortkly after Men (who awoke, IIRC, while the Eldar were on
> >>> their great journey to Aman)
>
> Are there other sources to this later view than 'Myths Transformed'
> in MR? My impression from reading that section was that the ideas
> were rather more fluid -- that Tolkien was determined to have a more
> cosmologically correct mythology where the Sun and the Moon were
> coėval with a round Earth, but that he was working with several
> models for how this could be achieved and how it would affect the
> later stories (in particular, of course, the stories preceding the
> rising of the Sun and Moon).
>
The 'Last Writings' section of PoME about Glorfindel. Maybe 'Dwarves and
Men' as well but I am not recalling specifically.
Troels Forchhammer
> Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid says...
>>
<snip>
> By the Annals of Aman the Noldor were in Valinor for about 3500
> Sun Years.
Rather insufficient to put any significant stains on the moon, I'd
say ;-)
The problem with invoking poetic license on this is that it would
work either way, and render the passage useless for all our purposes
(both dating the awakening of the Dwarves and discussing Round vs.
Flat world).
<snip>
>> The point is that he was definitely 'playing around' with the
>> Round World version when he was writing LotR, but that he went
>> back to the Flat World version before the final edit of LotR.
>
> The Akallabeth proper, and some of its versions (DA) are also
> 'Round World' (Sauron is a source of the 'Flat World' 'deceit' in
> DA).
Unfortunately I don't have Sauron Defeated to look at the Drowning; I
wondered if you could outline the part that corresponds to the
rounding of the world in the Akallabêth (as published in Silm)?
CT does note in PoMe that 'something like three-fifths of the precise
wording in of the second text of /The Drowning of Anadûnë/ [...]
survived in the /Akallabêth/.' So, with DA written from a explicit
Round World perspective, that perspective would obviously survive
into much of the Akallabêth, even if the explicit references were
removed.
In looking at the account of the Akallabêth published in appendix A
of LotR, I find it is interesting that there appears to be no
explicit references to either version -- everything can be
interpreted as consistent with either.
>> Are there any passages where Tolkien went from more ambiguity
>> to less in LotR / TH or are all examples of the the same kind
>> as the one mentioned from TH that went from unambiguously
>> Flat World version to ambiguously either?
>
> The various passages in LotR that have an extent Sun/Moon were not
> changed.
Apart from the dubious passages already mentioned (Durin and the
Ents)[*], are there any passages in LotR that unambiguously refer to
the Round World version?
[*] 'Dubious' because there are other chronology problems if we
accept these passages at face value.
> I don't see the passge in the Hobbit as 'ambiguous'.
The passage does not, IMO, in the revised version, necessarily mean
that the Wood-elves were 'lingering in the twilight of our Sun and
Moon' prior to the time when the Noldor returned from Aman -- it can
be read as being in agreement with the Flat World version, according
to which the Noldor didn't find any lingering Wood-elves until
/after/ the Moon and the Sun had risen.
So that is what I meant by 'ambiguous' -- that it does not
necessarily contradict either version.
<snip>
Thanks for the various references -- back to reading, I'm afraid (The
Lost Road and Hammond & Scull's new companion tops the wishing list
at the moment).
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are
subtle and quick to anger.
- Gildor Inglorion, /The Lord of the Rings/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
Tar-Elenion
Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid says...
> In message <news:MPG.1e08a9c7a...@newsgroups.comcast.net>
> Tar-Elenion <tar_e...@hotmail.com> enriched us with:
> >
> > In article <Xns972BB865...@130.133.1.4>,
> > Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid says...
> >>
>
> <snip>
>
> > By the Annals of Aman the Noldor were in Valinor for about 3500
> > Sun Years.
>
> Rather insufficient to put any significant stains on the moon, I'd
> say ;-)
>
> The problem with invoking poetic license on this is that it would
> work either way, and render the passage useless for all our purposes
> (both dating the awakening of the Dwarves and discussing Round vs.
> Flat world).
I don't know what you are referring to. I have not invoked poetic
licence.
>
> <snip>
>
> >> The point is that he was definitely 'playing around' with the
> >> Round World version when he was writing LotR, but that he went
> >> back to the Flat World version before the final edit of LotR.
> >
> > The Akallabeth proper, and some of its versions (DA) are also
> > 'Round World' (Sauron is a source of the 'Flat World' 'deceit' in
> > DA).
>
> Unfortunately I don't have Sauron Defeated to look at the Drowning; I
> wondered if you could outline the part that corresponds to the
> rounding of the world in the Akallabêth (as published in Silm)?
I am not sure what you are asking?. There is no rounding of the world in
the Akallabeth proper. Akallabeth is a round world version. Otherwise
the wording is similar: great rift open, Numenor drowns, Blessed Realm
removed etc.
>
> CT does note in PoMe that 'something like three-fifths of the precise
> wording in of the second text of /The Drowning of Anadûnë/ [...]
> survived in the /Akallabêth/.' So, with DA written from a explicit
> Round World perspective, that perspective would obviously survive
> into much of the Akallabêth, even if the explicit references were
> removed.
>
> In looking at the account of the Akallabêth published in appendix A
> of LotR, I find it is interesting that there appears to be no
> explicit references to either version -- everything can be
> interpreted as consistent with either.
Think about reading it as though you have only read LotR and The Hobbit,
and know nothing else.
>
> >> Are there any passages where Tolkien went from more ambiguity
> >> to less in LotR / TH or are all examples of the the same kind
> >> as the one mentioned from TH that went from unambiguously
> >> Flat World version to ambiguously either?
> >
> > The various passages in LotR that have an extent Sun/Moon were not
> > changed.
>
> Apart from the dubious passages already mentioned (Durin and the
> Ents)[*], are there any passages in LotR that unambiguously refer to
> the Round World version?
Well, as you consider these passages dubious and ambiguous, then no,
there is nothing in LotR that has JRRT directly stating the Sun and Moon
were extant before the Elves awoke.
Of course by just reading LotR and The Hobbit, there is no reason to
suspect something different, and if one accepts JRRT's 'creation myth'
versus 'creation reality' justification no reason to not accept an
extant sun and moon per LotR and Hobbit as 'historical reality' as well
as the mythological version as mythology.
>
> [*] 'Dubious' because there are other chronology problems if we
> accept these passages at face value.
>
> > I don't see the passge in the Hobbit as 'ambiguous'.
>
> The passage does not, IMO, in the revised version, necessarily mean
> that the Wood-elves were 'lingering in the twilight of our Sun and
> Moon' prior to the time when the Noldor returned from Aman -- it can
> be read as being in agreement with the Flat World version, according
> to which the Noldor didn't find any lingering Wood-elves until
> /after/ the Moon and the Sun had risen.
Even ignoring that the passage was explicitly changed, I can't see how
to read it as you suggest. It is talking about what was before the
Noldor returned.
>
> So that is what I meant by 'ambiguous' -- that it does not
> necessarily contradict either version.
>
> <snip>
>
> Thanks for the various references -- back to reading, I'm afraid (The
> Lost Road and Hammond & Scull's new companion tops the wishing list
> at the moment).
I am awaiting the release of the companion here as well.
Troels Forchhammer
> Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid says...
>>
<snip>
>> In looking at the account of the Akallabêth published in appendix
>> A of LotR, I find it is interesting that there appears to be no
>> explicit references to either version -- everything can be
>> interpreted as consistent with either.
>
> Think about reading it as though you have only read LotR and The
> Hobbit, and know nothing else.
I don't question the natural reading given only these books as they
presently stand. On that point I agree with your view, that the Round
World version is the natural reading of the text.
The point I was considering was whether, in the case of indecision /
doubt in Tolkien's mind, there was anything in either book that would
require renewed editing should he have decided to publish a Flat World
version of the Silm (other than possibly the two passages we have
already discussed about Durin and Ents), and if there were any
indications of a conscious policy in this direction (I am uncertain if
Tolkien would made a deliberate effort to implement the Round World
version without stating it explicitly, but of course, given that it
ought to be the 'default reading' by any modern reader, he may have
chosen not to).
[The change in TH]
> Even ignoring that the passage was explicitly changed, I can't
> see how to read it as you suggest. It is talking about what was
> before the Noldor returned.
I don't think the text, if you read only the current version,
necessitates that reading. It may be the natural reading, but I don't
think it is inevitable. On the other hand, if you see it as necessarily
referring to the same period that was covered by the equivalent
sentence in the original version, there can be only that one reading.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <t.forch(a)email.dk>
The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement.
R. Dan Henry
<little...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>There is one loose end left dangling in this chapter, one from an
>earlier iteration of the legendarium: Salmar, who 'made the horns of
>Ulmo', is presumably a Maia of Ulmo, but this is his solitary
>appearance.
I noticed him, but there's nothing terribly surprising about him. There
are many, many Maiar we don't know at all. Salmar may be an
extraordinary horn-maker, but have nothing else noteworthy about him.
>In the Lost Tales he was a Vala, subordinate to Ulmo (like Osse), also
>called Noldorin; then he was a shadowy, ill-drawn figure (unlike Osse,
>who always had more of a personality), brother of Omar-Amillo (another
>lost Vala), concerned with music and friendly to the Noldor. CT
>himself points out that this is his only mention apart from what was
>published in the Silmarillion.
Interesting, although not terribly important. If he was always a
"musical" figure, it makes sense that he would have a musical reference
as his only appearance and not figure in the main action of conflict
(it's the Maiar who get into the front line confrontations that get the
most press).
>Did anybody else notice this solitary reference when they first read
>the Silmarillion? Did you take it as a hint of greater depths to the
>story (like Queen Beruthiel), or just as sloppy editing?
First reading? That's a terribly long time ago, so I can't say. I did
notice it immediate this time round as a Maia who wasn't in the
Valaquenta listing. But any history has its minor player, most of whom
are unnamed and some of whom make only a brief appearance and are heard
no more, so I didn't think it odd.
--
R. Dan Henry
danh...@inreach.com
JimboCat
>Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
>When young was mountain under moon;
>Ere ring was made, or wrought was woe,
>It walked the forests long ago.'
Ah, excellent! But it is well-known that Treebeard is an unreliable
witness. Tolkien wrote (some Letter) that he does not know everything,
and is mistaken on some things.
>Sun and Moon are inexistence when the Elves awake
Huh? In every story I recall, the Elves awoke under the stars.
>It is not my solution, it is JRRT's. See the Myths Transformed section
>of Morgoth's Ring (HoME 10):
And a bad solution, too. <g> I am not at all unhappy that the Professor
failed to live long enough to complete this re-alignment of the old
myths. It would never have worked as well for me, anyway. I *like* the
flat earth, turned to a ball at the sinking of Numenor. Very cool
stuff. Power of Iluvatar, and all that...
Down with revisionism!
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
Death to all fanatics!
Tar-Elenion
10313...@compuserve.com says...
> Tar-Elinion wrote:
>
> >Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
> >When young was mountain under moon;
> >Ere ring was made, or wrought was woe,
> >It walked the forests long ago.'
>
> Ah, excellent! But it is well-known that Treebeard is an unreliable
> witness. Tolkien wrote (some Letter) that he does not know everything,
> and is mistaken on some things.
Letter 153.
However that was not Treebeard that was Gandalf.
"'It is not wizardry, but a power far older,' said Gandalf: 'a power
that walked the earth, ere elf sang or hammer rang."
>
> >Sun and Moon are inexistence when the Elves awake
>
> Huh? In every story I recall, the Elves awoke under the stars.
They awoke under the stars but the Sun and Moon are in existence, for
example in the Cuivienyarna (WotJ, Q&E):
"Imin, Tata and Enel awoke before their spouses, and the first thing
that they saw was the stars, for they woke in the early twilight before
dawn", and etc.
Or also from Q&E:
"But already before the final separation *mori-kwendi may have referred
to the glooms and the clouds dimming the sun and the stars during the
War of the Valar and Melkor, so that the term from the beginning had a
tinge of scorn, implying that such folk were not averse to the shadows
of Melkor upon Middle-earth."
<snip>
Christopher Kreuzer
> Tar-Elenion wrote:
>
>> Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
>> When young was mountain under moon;
>> Ere ring was made, or wrought was woe,
>> It walked the forests long ago.'
>
> Ah, excellent! But it is well-known that Treebeard is an unreliable
> witness. Tolkien wrote (some Letter) that he does not know everything,
> and is mistaken on some things.
Even though, as Tar-Elenion pointed out, it was Gandalf, this passage,
and the bit before it ("'a power that walked the earth, ere elf sang or
hammer rang") doesn't precisely say that the Elves awoke after the Sun
rose. It merely says that Ents came before the Elves, and before the
dwarves, and before the Ring, and that the Ents walked under the Moon.
There is still a tiny little loophole, if you take that text in
isolation, that lets the Sun rise after the Elves awake... :-)
And to stretch the point even further, the text is saying that the Ents
walked the forests when the Moon was young. This could be some
indeterminate time after the "ere elf sang" moment. In other words, the
Elves could also have walked under that young Moon, and also been around
before the Moon, but have arisen after the Ents did.
>> Sun and Moon are inexistence when the Elves awake
>
> Huh? In every story I recall, the Elves awoke under the stars.
Tar-Elenion pointed out that it was night, or rather just before dawn,
when they awoke. I quite like this idea, as I've found the idea of the
Elves journeying West under the starlight across Middle-earth to be
either faintly ridiculous, or just eerie.
>> It is not my solution, it is JRRT's. See the Myths Transformed
>> section of Morgoth's Ring (HoME 10):
>
> And a bad solution, too. <g> I am not at all unhappy that the
> Professor failed to live long enough to complete this re-alignment of
> the old myths. It would never have worked as well for me, anyway. I
> *like* the flat earth, turned to a ball at the sinking of Numenor.
> Very cool stuff. Power of Iluvatar, and all that...
You can still have the Sun and Moon in existence when the Elves awoke,
and still have a flat Earth that Iluvatar globed after the Fall of
Numenor. What I don't like about the changes Tolkien was in the process
of making, is that the story of the Sun and Moon being a fruit and
flower of the Two Trees would have become just a myth. I think. I guess
it would also have been hard to retain the link between Sun and Moon and
the Two Trees, while still having the Silmarils being the last
repository of the pure light that was before Sun and Moon.
<spoiler warning for Narnia chronicles>
.
.
.
.
Did Tolkien ever write about the fate of the Sun and Moon at the end of
days? I'm asking this because I read the end of 'The Last Battle' a few
days ago, and I was rather impressed with the way C.S. Lewis wrote the
ending of his world of Narnia, especially the fate of his Sun and Moon.
I know Tolkien wrote about a final battle. Is it as impressive as the
creation myth (Ainulindale) that he wrote?
Morgil
> JimboCat <10313...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>
>>Tar-Elenion wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ere iron was found or tree was hewn,
>>>When young was mountain under moon;
>>>Ere ring was made, or wrought was woe,
>>>It walked the forests long ago.'
>>
>>Ah, excellent! But it is well-known that Treebeard is an unreliable
>>witness. Tolkien wrote (some Letter) that he does not know everything,
>>and is mistaken on some things.
>
>
> Even though, as Tar-Elenion pointed out, it was Gandalf, this passage,
> and the bit before it ("'a power that walked the earth, ere elf sang or
> hammer rang") doesn't precisely say that the Elves awoke after the Sun
> rose. It merely says that Ents came before the Elves, and before the
> dwarves, and before the Ring, and that the Ents walked under the Moon.
>
> There is still a tiny little loophole, if you take that text in
> isolation, that lets the Sun rise after the Elves awake... :-)
Or a bigger loophole might be to speculate that the passage
only refers to a specific region in Middle-Earth, which
belonged to the Ents before Elves and Dwarves came along,
and not to all of the Middle-Earth. Or simply that whoever
wrote the poem didn't know any better. :-)
>>>Sun and Moon are inexistence when the Elves awake
>>
>>Huh? In every story I recall, the Elves awoke under the stars.
>
>
> Tar-Elenion pointed out that it was night, or rather just before dawn,
> when they awoke. I quite like this idea, as I've found the idea of the
> Elves journeying West under the starlight across Middle-earth to be
> either faintly ridiculous, or just eerie.
Stars were probably much brighter back then, being freshly
made. Even in LotR the stars are said to be bright enough
to cast a shadow in the right circumstances. Add to that
the superior vision of Elves and it becomes quite believable.
The major problem I find with Sun and Moon always being
in existence is that it takes the ground off from some
key elements of the saga - most importantly the special
relationship of Elves with stars and Varda, and the whole
deal with the Two Trees and Darkening of Valinor. Even
though there might be some way to combine these different
ideas, they would lose most of their effectiveness in the
process, which IMO would be a big loss.
Morgil
JimboCat
>Stars were probably much brighter back then, being freshly
>made.
I'd go with that. It fits in with the general decline and fading of
Arda which is a constant theme in JRRT.
>Even in LotR the stars are said to be bright enough
>to cast a shadow in the right circumstances.
They still are! Well, one of them, at least. Earendil's star (aka
"Venus") is currently just starting to fade from its greatest
brightness. If you are far from any city lights and have good vision
you may be able to see it cast shadows (I never have).
>Add to that
>the superior vision of Elves and it becomes quite believable.
Agreed.
>The major problem I find with Sun and Moon always being
>in existence is that it takes the ground off from some
>key elements of the saga
Agreed again.
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
"The meek shall inherit the Earth. The rest of us are going to the
stars." - Peter Diamandis
R. Dan Henry
<spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
>
>Quenta Silmarillion (QS)
>Chapter 1 - Of the Beginning of Days
>This is a good place to point out that all the chapters in Quenta
>Silmarillion start with the word 'Of'. Each chapter is 'hung' on a
>certain subject matter, a 'peg' so to speak, and is often a loose
>collection of tales and histories centred to a greater or lesser extent
>on that subject. This also means that there is no definite plot, or
>storyline, running through Quenta Silmarillion, but we are instead
>dipping into a history of the major events and characters, before and
>during the First Age, and we are eventually being shown the overarching
>history of the Silmarils, and the Men and Elves that were caught up in
>that history. [2]
It is still, however, far more organized than real mythologies are until
later generations attempt to produce a coherent narrative history and
overall structure out of the various stories of their ancestral beliefs.
Turning JRRT's notes and multiple versions of tales into _The
Silmarillion_ would have been rather like the task of the later
mythologists who approached the stories with an attitude, yet of
reverence, but with a self-conscious eye for turning the stories into a
whole.
>But we start, as always, at the beginning, with chapter 1: Of the
>Beginning of Days.
IMO, that's not where real mythologies start and it is only in the
rationalizing of the mythology that origins become the starting point of
telling the tales. In the creation of the stories, origins of various
things would have been accounted for at different times, in different
stories later synthesized (or not). Certainly, I can't see anyone
devising the origin of the gods until there were stories of the gods in
circulation.
>- "hearing in the far heaven that there was battle in the Little
>Kingdom" - what is the 'far heaven' and the 'Little Kingdom' here, the
>places from whence and to where Tulkas comes?
Only thing I'd add to what's been said here is to mention that "Farmer
Giles" takes place in "the Little Kingdom" and Tolkien was at one time
prepared to write up more tales of the Little Kingdom for publication.
Obviously, this is a different usage, but thought I'd mention it.
>- The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other creation
>myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier objects than the
>Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in fact greater creations.
"and the Valar set them upon high pillars, more lofty far than are any
mountains of the later days." Should the pillars be considered
mountains, then? Or were there just some really tall mountains in those
days that weren't the pillars? I'd think the pillars would have been
made to tower over everything, since they were lighting the world. Maybe
it means the Pelori were higher and they're not "of the later days"
because they've been removed from the round world.
>- The first seeds and creatures of Yavanna - mosses, grasses, great
>ferns, tall trees, beasts on land and sea, but no flowers or birds.
*Really* tall trees, with their tops in the clouds. More reason to think
that the Two Trees were pretty darned big; why would Yavanna start
scaling down for them?
>- The lights of the Lamps - the blending of the light of the lamps seems
>to be a foreshadowing of the blending of the light of the Two Trees. But
>the light of the Lamps is steady and unchanging, with no waxing and
>waning. As well as not giving rise to the Count of Time we see with the
>Two Trees, does a steady and unchanging light make any sense
>biologically? The Valar would have had to have changed things anyway (or
>would they?), so maybe Melkor did them a favour by destroying the Lamps?
It was working for the Spring of Arda. If Men and Elves are not made for
constant light, that would only be because Eru foresaw the destruction
of the Lamps.
>- "who were yet to come in a time that was hidden from the Valar" - we
>see here that the Valar do not know when the Children (Elves and Men)
>will awake. In the Ainulindale, we were told that when Iluvatar showed
>the Ainur a vision of their Music: "they saw with amazement the coming
>of the Children of Iluvatar", but it seems that they were not aware of,
>or shown, the details.
Well, they had no part in the Music that creates the Children, so they
don't have cues from their own parts. And while they did get the Vision,
I think they can be excused not checking the time when the Children came
forth. First, they were too fascinated by the Children to take notes.
Second, they obviously didn't get full details, or they'd have done
things like put a guard on the Lamps. Third, they were living in the
Timeless Halls -- how can you expect them to think to figure out the
time something their watching in a vision takes place with respect the
vision's internal time? The Valar don't even think of marking time once
they're in Ea, until the Trees become the world's first clock.
>- Valinor - this is described as being "more beautiful even than
>Middle-earth in the Spring of Arda". This seems to contradict the more
>common model of things declining over time in Arda and Middle-earth, of
>things never being quite as good as before. Is this completely true? Do
>you think some aspects of the Spring of Arda were more beautiful and
>gone beyond recall?
Probably. That doesn't mean that the smaller scale Valinor couldn't be
more beautiful, because it contains some new things of its own.
>- The Two Trees - These are Telperion and Laurelin (and they are given
>many other names beside).
Anything in Tolkien with only one name isn't very important.
>- "wells of water and of light" - the dews of Telperion seem to
>correspond to the water, and the rain of Laurelin to the light, but it
>seems that the 'water' from Telperion is in fact light, but whether it
>can really be described as 'light' is not clear: "the light that was
>spilled from the trees endured long, ere it was taken up into the airs
>or sank down into the earth". It seems that this is a very mythical kind
>of light, maybe even a metaphor of some kind.
I picture it as a liquid like water, but with a natural glow.
Eventually, the light gives out ("taken up into the airs"), but lasts a
long time after falling from the Trees.
>Do these metaphors of
>water and of light have anything to do with, maybe, the starlight of
>Varda and the waters of Ulmo, or the tears of Nienna? Remember that it
>is Varda who is said to hoard the light of the Trees, and it is she who
>later makes stars from the dews of Telperion.
Says in this chapter, "Middle-earth lay in a twilight beneath the stars
that Varda had wrought in the ages forgotten of her labours in Ea." And
then later, the dew-stars are clearly additions to the ancient stars. Is
this double-creation of the stars in the early versions of the
mythology, or is this one of those cases where two versions have been
folded together and both kept?
>- "in the darkness Melkor dwelt, and still often walked abroad, in many
>shapes of power and fear" - this is a stark contrast to the beautiful
>land of the Valar.
But showing he still has the power to take new forms at will; his
corruption has not yet bound him to a fixed form.
>- "the fairest of all gems were the Silmarils, and they are lost" - I
>have a theory that sometimes a story can be _more_ interesting if you
>know what happened.
Certainly. The History Channel would be in trouble if knowing the Nazi
lose "spoiled" WWII stories. I think it is more interesting that the
mythology has mortals inventing something natural like gems. But then it
later is described as them finding the gems and merely being the first
to cut them into pleasing shapes to show them off, which isn't nearly as
impressive or as interesting a twist on mythological origin stories.
Feanor's techniques may have involved making gems from scratch. It isn't
clear if he "made with skill" his "gems greater and brighter than those
of the Earth" by modification of normal stones or by building them up
from scratch. But in any case, these are not the ordinary gems we know,
but magical stones known only through tales.
>- "flowering meads of Valinor" - obviously the Valar have got around to
>making flowers now.
And that's one way to surpass the Spring of Arda.
>- Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the Valar
>had departed?
Decided or merely spoke up about? I mean, maybe he thought he'd send off
the volunteers first, then mention that they'd be sitting around the
world envying Men the ability to die.
Christopher Kreuzer
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 21:07:42 GMT, "Christopher Kreuzer"
> <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Chapter of the Week (CotW) - The Silmarillion
>>
>> Quenta Silmarillion (QS)
>> Chapter 1 - Of the Beginning of Days
>
>> This is a good place to point out that all the chapters in Quenta
>> Silmarillion start with the word 'Of'. Each chapter is 'hung' on a
>> certain subject matter, a 'peg' so to speak, and is often a loose
>> collection of tales and histories centred to a greater or lesser
>> extent on that subject. This also means that there is no definite
>> plot, or storyline, running through Quenta Silmarillion, but we are
>> instead dipping into a history of the major events and characters,
>> before and during the First Age, and we are eventually being shown
>> the overarching history of the Silmarils, and the Men and Elves that
>> were caught up in that history. [2]
>
> It is still, however, far more organized than real mythologies are
> until later generations attempt to produce a coherent narrative
> history and overall structure out of the various stories of their
> ancestral beliefs. Turning JRRT's notes and multiple versions of
> tales into _The Silmarillion_ would have been rather like the task of
> the later mythologists who approached the stories with an attitude,
> yet of reverence, but with a self-conscious eye for turning the
> stories into a whole.
When did that happen? I know that the brothers Grimm worked in the field
of Germanic myths in the 19th century, and that Lonnrot did the same
with the Finnish myths (collected as the Kalevala) at about the same
time (or maybe that was the 18th century). And weren't the Scandinavian
myths being collected together at about the same time as well?
Would it be right to compare what JRRT and his son did, with what these
18th/19th century mythographers did? Was JRRT consciously imitating
them, given his comments on "a mythology for England" (or for the
English) and the way he was heavily influenced by the Kalevala?
And of course, Tolkien in his professional work was following in the
footsteps of these mythographers in his work in philology. I think I
would be right to say that comparative philology was a large part of
what JRRT did in his professional work:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_philology
And this is closely related to comparative mythology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_mythology
Here is a quote that might be particularly relevant to the discussion
about the Aesir in another thread (comparative linguistics is another
term for comparative philology):
"Study of early religion of this kind is heavily connected to
comparative linguistics, because the apparently distinct behaviour of
gods and other figures makes it difficult to draw identifications
without finding linguistic connections." (from that wikipeida entry for
comparative mythology)
And I have a quote here from Tom Shippey, concerning a collection of
essays that he has edited, "The Shadow-Walkers: Jacob Grimm's Mythology
of the Monstrous":
"[this] looks at Tolkien's mighty predecessor, and at the evidence for a
coherent North-Western European mythology. This will reassert
comparative philology/mythology, a movement once of great importance and
now brought back, by Tolkien, from oblivion." (T.A. Shippey, Progress
Report 3 - Tolkien 2005).
A more accessible source about that book is here:
http://www.asu.edu/clas/acmrs/publications/mrts/germany.htm
"...two of the most popular works of the Western world remain Grimms'
Fairy Tales, and Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, another reconstruction of
the mythological world which Grimm pioneered."
The review/blurb goes on to say:
"They cover material in Old and Middle English, Old and Middle High
German, Old Norse, and the modern languages of North-West Europe,
especially of Iceland, home of the strongest living folk-tradition.
Sagas, eddas, epics, and romances mix with folk-tales, place-name
evidence, and surviving superstition. They throw unexpected light on
'the shadow-walkers', the ancient creatures that still haunt the modern
imagination."
Sounds fascinating! This book sounds like essential reading for anyone
interested in Tolkien's myth-making and learning more about the
tradition that he was part of. The bit about "shadow-walkers" reminds me
of this bit from the Elves awakening by Cuivienen:
"...Melkor, ever watchful, was first aware of the awakening of the
Quendi, and sent shadows and evil spirits to spy upon them and waylay
them [...] the most ancient songs of the Elves, of which echoes are
remembered still in the West, tell of the shadow-shapes that walked in
the hills above Cuivienen, or would pass suddenly over the stars..." (Of
the Coming of the Elves)
Hmm. I'm going to have to get hold of a copy of the book now and read
the essay on shadow-walkers! :-)
>> But we start, as always, at the beginning, with chapter 1: Of the
>> Beginning of Days.
>
> IMO, that's not where real mythologies start and it is only in the
> rationalizing of the mythology that origins become the starting point
> of telling the tales. In the creation of the stories, origins of
> various things would have been accounted for at different times, in
> different stories later synthesized (or not). Certainly, I can't see
> anyone devising the origin of the gods until there were stories of
> the gods in circulation.
So... /The Silmarillion/ is a rationalized mythology! :-)
Which is a good point, and you are right to emphasize it. Tolkien has
provided a start and end point and given us the overarching story from
beginning to end, as Christopher Tolkien explains in the Foreword.
As you say, this is very different from the way mythologies start, but
is what they end up as. Would the BoLT tales be more like the random
stories told around a fireplace that are "real" mythologies? And did
Tolkien himself go through this process you call "rationalizing" in
writing his legendarium?
And can this be compared to the history of real-world mythologies? Does
anyone know the history and development behind, say, the Egyptian
mythology, the Norse mythology, the Greek/Roman mythology, the stories
in the Old Testament in the Bible, or any other of the world's
mythologies and religions and ancient stories?
<snip>
>> - The Lamps of the Valar - are there any parallels with other
>> creation myths? These lamps seem to be much greater and mightier
>> objects than the Two Trees are later, but maybe the Trees are in
>> fact greater creations.
>
> "and the Valar set them upon high pillars, more lofty far than are any
> mountains of the later days." Should the pillars be considered
> mountains, then?
Well, if they were narrow at the base, they might be prone to falling
over. Now, I wonder what Melkor did to make them fall over? "I think
I'll look cool leaning on these pillars with my dark sunglasses on..."
:-)
I was going to say they must have been wide at the base, even as big as
mountains, but then wondered how Melkor overthrew them. But then I
remembered that Melkor and the other Valar were quite capable of moving
mountains.
> Or were there just some really tall mountains in
> those days that weren't the pillars? I'd think the pillars would have
> been made to tower over everything, since they were lighting the
> world. Maybe it means the Pelori were higher and they're not "of the
> later days" because they've been removed from the round world.
I don't think it is really a hidden reference to the Pelori. I agree
that the pillars were tall because they were lighting the world, but the
"more lofty far than are any mountains of the later days" is a very
poetic style of writing. It seems to be doing three things in one little
phrase:
- The Lamp pillars are very tall, taller than mountains.
- The use of 'more lofty far' makes it a superlative statement, possibly
even another of these rhetorical superlatives that are used to provide
atmosphere, rather than to specify exactly what was highest.
- The phrase 'than ... the later days' interjects some of the 'grandeur
of old', if I may coin a phrase, the looking back to a Golden Age when
mountains were higher than they were today.
The last two points are really combined to create the poetic effect.
Compare the same sentence without the poetic bit:
1) "and the Valar set them upon high pillars." [boring!]
2) "and the Valar set them upon high pillars, more lofty than the
mountains." [slightly more interesting...]
3) "and the Valar set them upon high pillars, more lofty far than are
any mountains of the later days." [nice!]
Of course, it is possible to over-use, or mangle, this writing
technique, and it might be a matter of personal taste whether you like
it or not. I think Tolkien tends to get the balance about right, and I
enjoy the way he uses this writing technique.
>> - The first seeds and creatures of Yavanna - mosses, grasses, great
>> ferns, tall trees, beasts on land and sea, but no flowers or birds.
>
> *Really* tall trees, with their tops in the clouds. More reason to
> think that the Two Trees were pretty darned big; why would Yavanna
> start scaling down for them?
So what happened to those early trees? They are described as "living
mountains", and trees can get pretty darned big today, but the clouds
come down to them really, or the trees grow on mountain slopes. Is there
a natural limit to the size of trees? Were there bigger trees in the
past (in our world)? Was Tolkien aware of the redwood trees, which I
think are the biggest trees around today?
>> - The lights of the Lamps - the blending of the light of the lamps
>> seems to be a foreshadowing of the blending of the light of the Two
>> Trees. But the light of the Lamps is steady and unchanging, with no
>> waxing and waning. As well as not giving rise to the Count of Time
>> we see with the Two Trees, does a steady and unchanging light make
>> any sense biologically? The Valar would have had to have changed
>> things anyway (or would they?), so maybe Melkor did them a favour by
>> destroying the Lamps?
>
> It was working for the Spring of Arda. If Men and Elves are not made
> for constant light, that would only be because Eru foresaw the
> destruction of the Lamps.
Hmm. OK, I guess I'll have to be happy with that!
<snip>
>> - The Two Trees - These are Telperion and Laurelin (and they are
>> given many other names beside).
>
> Anything in Tolkien with only one name isn't very important.
LOL!
>> - "wells of water and of light" - the dews of Telperion seem to
>> correspond to the water, and the rain of Laurelin to the light, but
>> it seems that the 'water' from Telperion is in fact light, but
>> whether it can really be described as 'light' is not clear: "the
>> light that was spilled from the trees endured long, ere it was taken
>> up into the airs or sank down into the earth". It seems that this is
>> a very mythical kind of light, maybe even a metaphor of some kind.
>
> I picture it as a liquid like water, but with a natural glow.
> Eventually, the light gives out ("taken up into the airs"), but lasts
> a long time after falling from the Trees.
I'm not so sure the liquid and light aspects can be separated like this.
I think of the "taken up into the airs" bit as like water evaporating.
The idea of having a liquid left behind after the light has gone feels a
bit wrong. Would it be better to think of it as something more like
calor, the 18th-century concept of energy as a liquid entity that had a
physical being (when in fact energy is a bit trickier to describe than
that)?
I'm also reminded of the descriptions of Morgoth disseminating his
essence into the world, the concept of Morgoth's Ring, and the way this
essence could be gathered together again (or not), as in (I think)
Sauron's Ring, and whether all this relates to modern concepts of energy
and entropy.
>> Do these metaphors of
>> water and of light have anything to do with, maybe, the starlight of
>> Varda and the waters of Ulmo, or the tears of Nienna? Remember that
>> it is Varda who is said to hoard the light of the Trees, and it is
>> she who later makes stars from the dews of Telperion.
>
> Says in this chapter, "Middle-earth lay in a twilight beneath the
> stars that Varda had wrought in the ages forgotten of her labours in
> Ea." And then later, the dew-stars are clearly additions to the
> ancient stars. Is this double-creation of the stars in the early
> versions of the mythology, or is this one of those cases where two
> versions have been folded together and both kept?
I think I forgot that there were two lots of stars. Varda made both lots
in this version of the mythology. Don't know what earlier versions said.
There was something about sparks from Aule's tools. There is also a bit
from the Ainulindale:
"Iluvatar chose a place for their habitation in the Deeps of Time and in
the midst of the innumerable stars..." (Ainulindale)
We are told that Ea was dark and unformed when the Valar entered into
it, and this might be Iluvatar chosing a habitation within Ea that the
Valar create (including the innumerable stars - created by Varda), so we
should probably distinguish between the work the Valar did in Ea as a
whole, and their work in Arda:
"So began their great labours in wastes unmeasured and unexplored, and
in ages uncounted and forgotten..."
[This seems to be the creation of the universe/Ea as a whole - and
clearly links to the "wrought in the ages forgotten of her labours in
Ea" bit about how she made earlier stars before the bigger, better
ones.]
"...until in the Deeps of Time and in the midst of the vast halls of Ea
there came to be that hour and that place where was made the habitation
of the Children of Iluvatar." (Ainulindale)
[and here we have the creation of Earth and maybe the solar system -
there are problems though, as are to be expected, in trying to shoehorn
Tolkien's mythology to fit the astronomical worldview - as he
discovered!]
I'm not sure what I meant by "the tears of Nienna", only that she
watered the mound with her tears both when the trees were created and
when they died. Surely her tears aren't just plain old lacrimal fluid?
:-) There seems to be some symbolism going on here.
>> - "in the darkness Melkor dwelt, and still often walked abroad, in
>> many shapes of power and fear" - this is a stark contrast to the
>> beautiful land of the Valar.
>
> But showing he still has the power to take new forms at will; his
> corruption has not yet bound him to a fixed form.
Hmm. Was Melkor a "shadow-walker"? :-)
<snip>
>> - Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the
>> Valar had departed?
>
> Decided or merely spoke up about? I mean, maybe he thought he'd send
> off the volunteers first, then mention that they'd be sitting around
> the world envying Men the ability to die.
I get the impression, that while the Valar are doing their labours
creating Ea, Eru is contemplating how to shape his creation, his
Children. But I think what I am trying to get at is whether Iluvatar can
change what happens. Is he bound by the Music, as the Ainur and Elves
are? I get the impression he elaborated on his theme of Children after
the Valar had departed, especially giving Men this new gift. So even if
the Valar had understood that part of the Music, things weren't staying
the same.
The Valar's knowledge of the Music seems a bit like a double-edged
sword. They think they know what will happen, but really only Iluvatar
knows that, and the Valar don't really know enough to make the decisions
they do. They too, like Elves and Men, have to trust to the will of
Iluvatar, and he seems able to change things to a certain extent.
JimboCat
>So what happened to those early trees? They are described as "living
>mountains", and trees can get pretty darned big today, but the clouds
>come down to them really, or the trees grow on mountain slopes. Is there
>a natural limit to the size of trees?
Yes, but it is a limit based on physics, which is known to have been
different before the Fall of Numenor and the rounding of the world...
>Were there bigger trees in the
>past (in our world)?
Nope. The tallest trees today are hard up against the physical limit.
Trees simply can't lift water from their roots any higher than they
currently go. In fact, a naive examination of the physics would
indicate that trees couldn't get higher than about thirty feet (ten
meters). They actually do about ten times more, and it takes a careful
examination of the mechanism to figure out how they do that.
>Was Tolkien aware of the redwood trees, which I
>think are the biggest trees around today?
I would think so: they are (and have been for a century or more) quite
world-famous.
Jim Deutch (JimboCat)
--
For some reason this is never our really unique adaptation, the
largest asses (in terms of body mass) ever produced by evolution.
Humans are truly the Lords of the Buttock. - James Nicoll
R. Dan Henry
direct, polite questions before disappearing and if 2 year old threads
can be replied to, this isn't all that late) before I unsubscribe for
the foreseeable future. Time is once again too precious for literary
discussions and so I shall away.
On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:48:50 GMT, "Christopher Kreuzer"
<spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
In general? I don't know, but I'd speculate it happens when a mythology
is written down by those who still believe in it. Written documents
allow for easier comparison of passages in different stories and bring
out inconsistent details or clashing perspectives that can be hard to
spot in oral tradition. It also requires a certain sophistication in
logic, as well, in order to recognize that contradictions represent a
problem.
>I know that the brothers Grimm worked in the field
>of Germanic myths in the 19th century,
But they didn't actually believe the stories, so they tried to record
them accurately, without needing to worry about justifying the system as
a whole. I don't think Germanic/Nordic mythology ever was really
rationalized the way that Greek, Roman, Jewish, and Christian mythology
have been.
> and that Lonnrot did the same
>with the Finnish myths (collected as the Kalevala) at about the same
>time (or maybe that was the 18th century). And weren't the Scandinavian
>myths being collected together at about the same time as well?
I don't know; I can't claim any expertise in this field. But certainly
the process began earlier, but by the time these stories were written
up, the recorders weren't generally approaching them as "true" and thus
had little reason to be concerned with conflicts between texts.
>Would it be right to compare what JRRT and his son did, with what these
>18th/19th century mythographers did?
You won't go to hell for it, but I think the Tolkiens were going beyond
the role of "recorders" and attempting to rationalize the mythology; of
playing the game of being believers for whom it was all "true". Whereas,
for someone studying a pre-existing body of myths with the intention of
recording, analyzing, or interpreting them in a scholarly or
semi-scholarly way, forcing a rationalization on them is an act of bad
faith, mis-representing the mythology as having a form it does not in
fact possess. Whereas, Tolkien, making it up as he went along, could
force it down any road he pleased.
>The review/blurb goes on to say:
>
>"They cover material in Old and Middle English, Old and Middle High
>German, Old Norse, and the modern languages of North-West Europe,
>especially of Iceland, home of the strongest living folk-tradition.
>Sagas, eddas, epics, and romances mix with folk-tales, place-name
>evidence, and surviving superstition. They throw unexpected light on
>'the shadow-walkers', the ancient creatures that still haunt the modern
>imagination."
>
>Sounds fascinating!
True enough, but one couldn't possibly expect to find in that anything
like the consistency Tolkien was striving for. I think in that respect
he was influenced at least partly by his own beliefs. The mythology he
believed in is not only rationalized, it has a long tradition of efforts
to reconcile what conflicts survived the rationalization process.
>So... /The Silmarillion/ is a rationalized mythology! :-)
>Which is a good point, and you are right to emphasize it. Tolkien has
>provided a start and end point and given us the overarching story from
>beginning to end, as Christopher Tolkien explains in the Foreword.
Which is why I think the Bible influenced the structure of the
mythology, in spite of the deep influence of northern myths on other
elements of the mythology.
>As you say, this is very different from the way mythologies start, but
>is what they end up as.
Eventually, if they survive, and if the believers develop a rational
enough mindset and apply it to their myths.
>Would the BoLT tales be more like the random
>stories told around a fireplace that are "real" mythologies?
I'd answer that if I could find time to actually read BoLT. :-)
>And did
>Tolkien himself go through this process you call "rationalizing" in
>writing his legendarium?
If nothing else, his attempts to rewrite the mythology with a round
Earth from the beginning was an attempt to rationalize it in a larger
context that encompassed much of the modern popular science.
>And can this be compared to the history of real-world mythologies?
Yes. Although I'm certainly not qualified to do so with any meaningful
result. I've already said what I think are key differences, but there's
also the enormous difference that Tolkien could work alone and even
conscious acts of rationalization of living mythologies, like the
putting together of the New Testament, are the product of cultural
influences (including political factors) rather than individual acts of
creativity.
><snip>
>>> - The first seeds and creatures of Yavanna - mosses, grasses, great
>>> ferns, tall trees, beasts on land and sea, but no flowers or birds.
>>
>> *Really* tall trees, with their tops in the clouds. More reason to
>> think that the Two Trees were pretty darned big; why would Yavanna
>> start scaling down for them?
>
>So what happened to those early trees?
The lamps, remember? Biggest forest fire ever? Untold destruction and
ruin? The ones that didn't burn fell down, I imagine. The Valar didn't
seem big on building to earthquake-safety codes. Plus, they're all
dawn-of-time overdone and had to go so the little Children didn't get
*too* dwarfed by it all. (No offense meant to the Dwarves.)
>I'm not so sure the liquid and light aspects can be separated like this.
>I think of the "taken up into the airs" bit as like water evaporating.
>The idea of having a liquid left behind after the light has gone feels a
>bit wrong. Would it be better to think of it as something more like
>calor, the 18th-century concept of energy as a liquid entity that had a
>physical being (when in fact energy is a bit trickier to describe than
>that)?
Except, then what happens to the light aspect? Is there a glow of
light-water vapor rising above the West?
>>> - Does it mean anything that Iluvatar decided all this _after_ the
>>> Valar had departed?
>>
>> Decided or merely spoke up about? I mean, maybe he thought he'd send
>> off the volunteers first, then mention that they'd be sitting around
>> the world envying Men the ability to die.
I confess, this was something of a smartass remark. However, I don't see
how Iluvatar could be deciding this after the Valar depart, assuming
he's omniscient. And I think he must have had that thought even as he
sung Men into being, to think of providing such a gift. That's so basic
to human nature, I think it had to be part of the theme.
>I get the impression, that while the Valar are doing their labours
>creating Ea, Eru is contemplating how to shape his creation, his
>Children. But I think what I am trying to get at is whether Iluvatar can
>change what happens. Is he bound by the Music, as the Ainur and Elves
>are?
Not bound by it, no, but his foreknowledge isn't due to the Music,
rather whatever binding power is in the Music beyond the Music being an
expression of the Ainur's personalities in the first place, is
Iluvatar's doing.
>I get the impression he elaborated on his theme of Children after
>the Valar had departed, especially giving Men this new gift.
I don't. I see this as just an elaboration on its meaning. And actually
I don't even think this happened; who is supposed to be our witness to
this event? The Music, the Valar could have reported, but this is after
their departure. I think it has to be insertion by (a) later
commentator(s), trying to extrapolate Iluvatar's intent. I think that's
why this is an "it is said" passage -- in this case, the scribe who
recorded it was wise to doubt its literal truth.
Why do you interpret this passage as describing a change? Just the bit
about Eru sitting in thought? That could have been about pondering how
much to reveal, even if the whole thing is taken literally.
>The Valar's knowledge of the Music seems a bit like a double-edged
>sword. They think they know what will happen, but really only Iluvatar
>knows that, and the Valar don't really know enough to make the decisions
>they do.
I don't think most of their decisions are based on foreknowledge for the
most part.
>They too, like Elves and Men, have to trust to the will of
>Iluvatar, and he seems able to change things to a certain extent.
Well, there's certainly divine intervention, but there's nothing to
indicate that this wasn't part of the third theme and so woven into the
Music, requiring no "change" -- the Valar couldn't follow that enough to
grasp the Children, so they'd hardly be expected to pick up on subtle
bits of event tweaking. Maybe Manwe or Ulmo did get Gandalf's
resurrection partly puzzled out and that's how the Wizards got sent in
the first place.