Why didnt Ulmo recover a Silmaril?
I3U7N5
haven't seen any info on it so...
Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power to do
so.
graci..
--B
Matthias Koch-Schirrmeister
> why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never recovered by
> Ulmo?
I could imagine that it _was_ recovered, but the Valar decided to keep it
hidden to maintain peace.
Anyway, it's just speculative.
Matthias
--
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Douglas Adams, 1953-2001
rand mair fheal
<bwag...@hotmail.com> wrote:
it wasnt their property
they should wait until feanor consents to let them have it
paulh
I've wondered this, but have seen no answer...
paulh
Graeme
>>it wasnt their property
they should wait until feanor consents to let them have it
>>
a) Feanor is dead, and so doesn't own anything.
b) Your explanation falls apart when we consider what the Valar DID do
with the Silmaril Beren recovered.
c) The shift key is still the one just below your Enter key.
Madman2001
> Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
> consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
> recovered by Ulmo?
Similiarly (or Silmarily), I have long thought that instead of
trekking to Mount Doom, they could have cast the One Ring into the
sea, right about that same spot. Of course, that would not have
destroyed Sauron or been as exciting a book.
Speculatively yours,
Madman
Xaonon
Madman2001 <4fis...@compuserve.com> teithant i thiw hin:
It wouldn't really work, either:
-> 'Then, said Glorfindel, 'let us cast it into the deeps, and so make the
-> lies of Saruman come true. For it is clear now that even at the Council
-> his feet were already on a crooked path. He knew that the Ring was not
-> lost for ever, but wished us to think so; for he began to lust for it for
-> himself. Yet oft in lies truth is hidden: in the Sea it would be safe.'
-> 'Not safe for ever,' said Gandalf. 'There are many things in the deep
-> waters; and seas and lands may change. And it is not our part here to take
-> thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age
-> of the world. We should seek a final end of this menace, even if we do not
-> hope to make one.'
--
Xaonon, EAC Chief of Mad Scientists and informal BAAWA, aa #1821, Kibo #: 1
Visit The Nexus Of All Coolness (a.k.a. my site) at http://xaonon.cjb.net/
"Saruman the White does not stand for this treatment. Showed Gandalf my
Wizard Wrestling Federation moves. Have delivered smackdown. Go me."
AC
wrote:
I think that it was adequately explained in the Counil of Elrond the
perils of throwing the Ring in the Sea. It would appear that the
Silmaril in question was somehow put beyond the reach of anyone, or at
least beings that could make mischieve. In the case of the Ruling
Ring, it is quite expressely stated that at best it would put off the
final confrontation to some later time.
---
AaronC
I3U7N5
> > > consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
> > > recovered by Ulmo?
> >
> > Similiarly (or Silmarily), I have long thought that instead of
> > trekking to Mount Doom, they could have cast the One Ring into the
> > sea, right about that same spot. Of course, that would not have
> > destroyed Sauron or been as exciting a book.
>
> It wouldn't really work, either:
>
> -> 'Then, said Glorfindel, 'let us cast it into the deeps, and so make
the
> -> lies of Saruman come true. For it is clear now that even at the Council
> -> his feet were already on a crooked path. He knew that the Ring was not
> -> lost for ever, but wished us to think so; for he began to lust for it
for
> -> himself. Yet oft in lies truth is hidden: in the Sea it would be safe.'
The lies of Saruman being that during the meetings of the White Council
Saruman speculated that becasue the ring was lost in the Anduin that it had
been rolled into the sea and was forever and not something to worry about.
Of course, as stated above, this was just a ruse by Saruman to bide time
until the ring, searching for its master would be uncovered.
--B
James Bell
Ulmo is the god of the sea. If it is there in the ocean that means he
already *has* it or at least has primary access to it.
Why didn't he return it? Why would he?
Jim
James Bell
"AC" <sp...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3cbdbbc5...@news2.randori.com...
Which is fine for men and hobbits who wouldn't have to worry about it in
either their or most likely even their great-great-great-grandchildren's
lifetimes. But for any Elves who felt any responsibility whatsoever to ME,
the Ring had to be dealt with in a permanent manner to preserve the future.
Sure, they could have tossed the Ring into the sea and all left for the west
but that would have been irresponsible.
Not to mention poor Gandalf, who would probably be obligated to hang around
Middle Earth for millennia until the Ring could be finally found and
destroyed. Certainly he wouldn't look forward to that experience, knowing
Sauron was already growing powerful despite his lack of Ring.
The ocean wasn't going to do the trick.
Jim
I3U7N5
Out of the reach of those who would make mischief is fine, however, it
doesnt answer the question at hand which is why wouldn't the Valar make some
effort to reclaim the lost Silmaril which seemed so important to them
previously.
--B
James Bell
We don't know that they didn't. Throwing it into the sea is saying, in
effect, "Here, Ulmo, it is all yours."
IOW, the Valar *do* have it.
Jim
Doug Elrod
No doubt Aule could have retrieved the Silmaril buried on the land, also,
if he wanted to. It's not clear what that would have accomplished, though.
Even if the strength of the Valar could have broken the Silmarils, that
would probably not be the same as unmaking them. And only Feanor knew
how, and if, that was possible. (Well, apparently Mandos foresaw that it
was possible :-))
A similar question is whether Sauron would/could have unmade the One Ring,
re-incorporating the part of himself that went into it, if it no longer
served his purposes. (The Ring does seem to have *preserved* Sauron
through calamities that would have "killed" a Balrog. So perhaps
Sauron wouldn't ever want to do that.)
-Doug Elrod (dr...@cornell.edu)
Jason Atkinson
BTW, I think it is doubtful that the Free People of the West would
have been able to stand up to the onslaught of Sauron even if he did
not have the Ring.
Jay Random
I3U7N5 wrote:
I don't know of any specific reason that Tolkien stated. However, since
Beleriand (where Maglor lived) was quite close to the rift that
separated Middle-earth from the Undying Lands in the downfall of
Númenor, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if the sea-bed on which the
Silmaril landed dropped right out of Arda in the cataclysm.
Conrad Dunkerson
news:3cbd89ed$0$3684$39ce...@nnrp1.twtelecom.net...
> Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
> consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
> recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power
> to do so.
It is a big ocean.
I can't imagine why this question has come up so many times recently.
It has always seemed a non-issue to me... the Silmaril went into the
ocean. It was lost. End of story.
Strider
"Jason Atkinson" <jaat...@vt.edu> wrote in message
news:3cbddefc...@news.vt.edu...
Exactly! Which is why the destruction of the ring was so imperative.
It was not just a mtter of hiding the ring from Sauron. Throwing it
into the deep sea might have done that pretty well. But the urgen
matter at hand was the defeat and destruction of Sauron, and only the
destruction of the ring could accomplish that.
Al
Brett Evill
Oddly enough we were discussing that earlier this week.
In the first place, it isn't certain that Maglor's silmaril *wasn't*
recovered. The recovery might concievable have occurred and simply be
unknown to the sources at Rivendell from which Bilbo constructed his
'Translations from the Elvish'.
On the other hand, there are hints in 'The Silmarillion' that those at
Rivendell believed that the Valar considered the bottom of the sea to be
the right and appropriate place to leave that silmaril for the time
being (until judgement day).
--
Regards,
Brett Evill
<ev...@NO.webone.JUNK.com.MAIL.au>
rand mair fheal
> some
> > effort to reclaim the lost Silmaril which seemed so important to them
> > previously.
>
>
> We don't know that they didn't. Throwing it into the sea is saying, in
> effect, "Here, Ulmo, it is all yours."
what effort?
they asked feanor for the three once
he refused
they had nothing more to do with it
except perhaps at the end when they will ask feanor again
and this time he will agree
Brett Evill
, "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>"I3U7N5" <bwag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:3cbd89ed$0$3684$39ce...@nnrp1.twtelecom.net...
>
>> Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
>> consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
>> recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power
>> to do so.
>
>It is a big ocean.
>
>
>I can't imagine why this question has come up so many times recently.
Twice.
>It has always seemed a non-issue to me... the Silmaril went into the
>ocean. It was lost. End of story.
The problem is that under the circumstances, "went into the ocean" does
not imply "lost" in the case of any item that Ulmo or Ossë cared to
have.
Brett Evill
mair_...@yahoo.com (rand mair fheal) wrote:
>> > doesnt answer the question at hand which is why wouldn't the Valar make
>> some
>> > effort to reclaim the lost Silmaril which seemed so important to them
>> > previously.
>>
>>
>> We don't know that they didn't. Throwing it into the sea is saying, in
>> effect, "Here, Ulmo, it is all yours."
>
>what effort?
>
>they asked feanor for the three once
>he refused
>they had nothing more to do with it
They made the one Earendil brought them into the Morning and Evening
Star. They sent Eonwë with a huge army to fight the War of Wrath, and
when he had defeated Morgoth and siezed the silmarils he withheld them
from their rightful owners claiming that they were now up to the Valar
to make disposition of. (I believe that Eonwë must have been acting on
instructions, but there's no evidence in the books.)
These might not be huge efforts, but they are significant.
Besides which, who mentioned effort as evidence of the Valar's motives?
There is adequate evidence that they considered the silmarils to be
important in their statements, eg. Mandos's statement that the fate of
Arda was locked up in the silmarilli.
Cam Kirmser
news:mair_fheal-17...@c3.ppp.tsoft.com...
As I recall, the Valar's contention is that they are the true owners of the
light of the Silmaril, therefore the jewels belong to them.
Aris Katsaris
"Cam Kirmser" <ckir...@xkillspamx.charter.net> wrote in message
news:ubs5s6i...@corp.supernews.com...
> "rand mair fheal" <mair_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:mair_fheal-17...@c3.ppp.tsoft.com...
> >
> > they should wait until feanor consents to let them have it
>
> As I recall, the Valar's contention is that they are the true owners of the
> light of the Silmaril, therefore the jewels belong to them.
They never made that contention. Eonwe himself says that the Silmaril
would belong to Maedhros and Maglor had it not been for the cruel
and merciless acts that they commited to obtain it - and which made
their right void.
After that, the Silmarils were meant to be brought back to Valinor, not
as "ownership" of the Valar, but as common property of them all - same
thing that was done to Earendil's Silmaril, taken where it could be seen
by all and owned by none.
Aris Katsaris
Tamim
snip
> After that, the Silmarils were meant to be brought back to Valinor, not
> as "ownership" of the Valar, but as common property of them all - same
> thing that was done to Earendil's Silmaril, taken where it could be seen
> by all and owned by none.
k
Where did you read that?
"But Eönwë answered that the right to the work of their father, which
the sons of Fëanor formerly possessed, had now perished, because of
their many and merciless deeds, being blinded by their oath, and most of
all because of their slaying of Dior and the assault upon the Havens.
The light of the Silmarils should go now into the West, whence it came
in the beginning; and to Valinor must Maedhros and Maglor return, and
there abide the judgement of the Valar, by whose decree alone would
Eönwë yield the jewels from his charge"
Apparently the ultimate fate of the Silmarils wasn't decided yet and
M&M were at least hoping that the Silmarils might be given back to them.
"But Maedhros answered that if they returned to Aman but the favour of
the Valar were withheld from them, then their oath would still remain,
but its fulfilment be beyond all hope; and he said: 'Who can tell to
what dreadful doom we shall come, if we disobey the Powers in their own
land, or purpose ever to bring war again into their holy realm?'"
Donald Shepherd
(graem...@aol.compost) says...
> fheal wrote:
> >>it wasnt their property
> they should wait until feanor consents to let them have it
> >>
>
> a) Feanor is dead, and so doesn't own anything.
Yet as an Elf, what if he was reborn?
Hmmm... what is the status on inheritance in Elves, especially with
regards to rebirth?
> b) Your explanation falls apart when we consider what the Valar DID do
> with the Silmaril Beren recovered.
> c) The shift key is still the one just below your Enter key.
Heh, have fun trying to get him to change.
--
Donald Shepherd
<donald_...@hotmail.com>
The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they'll be when you
kill them.
rand mair fheal
<ev...@NOSPAM.webone.com.au> wrote:
> In article <mair_fheal-17...@c73.ppp.tsoft.com> ,
> mair_...@yahoo.com (rand mair fheal) wrote:
>
> >> > doesnt answer the question at hand which is why wouldn't the Valar mak=
> e
> >> some
> >> > effort to reclaim the lost Silmaril which seemed so important to them
> >> > previously.
> >>
> >>
> >> We don't know that they didn't. Throwing it into the sea is saying, in
> >> effect, "Here, Ulmo, it is all yours."
> >
> >what effort?
> >
> >they asked feanor for the three once
> >he refused
> >they had nothing more to do with it
>
> They made the one Earendil brought them into the Morning and Evening
> Star. They sent Eonw=EB with a huge army to fight the War of Wrath, and
actually elwing had already inherited
and bound it earendils brow before he met the valar
they chose not to interfere in disposition
> when he had defeated Morgoth and siezed the silmarils he withheld them
> from their rightful owners claiming that they were now up to the Valar
> to make disposition of. (I believe that Eonw=EB must have been acting on
> instructions, but there's no evidence in the books.)
the war was to stop morgoth
none of the sons of feanor were present when he was taken
eonwe initially took them but when the sons of feanor claimed them
eonwe explicitly gave way to them
when they were burned it was observed the sons had no right to them
but neither was it claimed for the valar
think about the palantir
rightful ownership was very important to jrrt
rand mair fheal
<ckir...@xkillspamx.charter.net> wrote:
read it again
after they had been generous with the light of the tree
they thought feanor should be generous in return
but it was his choice
theres a difference between charity and theft
paulh
<ckir...@xkillspamx.charter.net> wrote:
>> > Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
>> > consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
>> > recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power to
>do
>> > so.
>>
>> it wasnt their property
>> they should wait until feanor consents to let them have it
>
>As I recall, the Valar's contention is that they are the true owners of the
>light of the Silmaril, therefore the jewels belong to them.
Ha..bloody DMCA in action again!
paulh
Conrad Dunkerson
news:3cbe...@iridium.webone.com.au...
> They made the one Earendil brought them into the Morning and Evening
> Star.
Or, put another way, they let Earendil keep it and asked him to use
it as a symbol of hope for his people (both groups).
> They sent Eonwė with a huge army to fight the War of Wrath, and
> when he had defeated Morgoth and siezed the silmarils he withheld
> them from their rightful owners claiming that they were now up to
> the Valar to make disposition of.
It is not altogether clear that the Silmarils DID belong to the sons
of Feanor. First, they contained the light of the Two Trees which
was created by Yavanna and belonged to everyone. The crystals which
held the light were created by Feanor and thus would 'belong' to him,
but then it is entirely possible that the Silmarils should go to
Feanor rather than his sons. Finally, with Feanor's permission Varda
had 'hallowed' the Silmarils so that no 'unclean' hands could touch
them without being burned... as indeed happened to Maedhros and Maglor.
Eonwe must have been well aware that this would happen and that the
sons of Feanor had forfeit not only their 'right', but also their
ABILITY to keep the Silmarils.
Conrad Dunkerson
> "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> I can't imagine why this question has come up so many times
>> recently.
> Twice.
Three times, though one of them may have been on a different forum.
>> It has always seemed a non-issue to me... the Silmaril went into the
>> ocean. It was lost. End of story.
> The problem is that under the circumstances, "went into the ocean"
> does not imply "lost" in the case of any item that Ulmo or Ossė
> cared to have.
How?
Where does it say 'Ulmo or Osse could find any item in the water that
they wanted to'? What evidence is there to support this idea? Is it
limited to those two or could all of the Ainur find anything they
wanted wherever it happened to be? If it WAS just those two why do
only they have this power. If it WASN'T just those two why could none
of the Ainur find Melkor and/or Ungoliant (with the Silmarils) during
the whole 'Darkening of Valinor' incident?
Stan Brown
>As I recall, the Valar's contention is that they are the true owners of the
>light of the Silmaril, therefore the jewels belong to them.
Look again at the episode of the darkening of Valinor. The Valar
_ask_ Fëanor to give them the Silmarils, but in terms that clearly
indicate they are making a request and not claiming a right.
"Then Manwë spoke and said: 'Hearest thou, Fëanor son of Finwë, the
words of Yavanna? Wilt thou grant what she would ask?'"
--
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/tech/faqget.htm
I3U7N5
> > doesnt answer the question at hand which is why wouldn't the Valar make
> some
> > effort to reclaim the lost Silmaril which seemed so important to them
> > previously.
>
>
> We don't know that they didn't. Throwing it into the sea is saying, in
> effect, "Here, Ulmo, it is all yours."
>
> IOW, the Valar *do* have it.
>
> Jim
Technically speaking, sure I guess you could say that if it is in the sea
then Ulmo does have the Silmaril but if you wanted to follow that and
stretch it a bit couldn't you say Aule has the Silmaril that went into the
fire?
I dunno, that just seems too loose of an answer for me.
--B
I3U7N5
"Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Uqmv8.37004$QC1.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Heh, you're kidding right?
Thats like saying, "Whyy all the bother with that Frodo? He destroyed the
ring right? So ok the job's done. End of story."
How would you feel had you never read what happened to Frodo after quests
end? All you read is the ring was gone, he and Sam were picked up by the
eagles...FIN. Would that content you?
The Silmarils are a central theme in which the characters revole in much of
the early canon of Tolkien's work. The making of, the controversy over, the
theft of, the quest of reclaimation, etc etc....why WOULDN'T you want to
know what happened to them?
Being content with the fact that they're just *gone* isn't enough for me
after all thats come because of them. The Silmarils seem much more important
than that, least to me.
--B
I3U7N5
> > does not imply "lost" in the case of any item that Ulmo or Ossė
> > cared to have.
>
> How?
>
> Where does it say 'Ulmo or Osse could find any item in the water that
> they wanted to'? What evidence is there to support this idea? Is it
> limited to those two or could all of the Ainur find anything they
> wanted wherever it happened to be?
Correct me if I'm wrong but IIRC theres a passage in the T.S. that mentions
streams and brookes are bringing Ulmo news and information about ME. I'd
imagine if he gets some type of consciousness from the waters of the earth,
it is safe to say that he'd have some sort of knowledge about the Silmaril
(a pretty important item) being in the ocean.
>If it WAS just those two why do
> only they have this power. If it WASN'T just those two why could none
> of the Ainur find Melkor and/or Ungoliant (with the Silmarils) during
> the whole 'Darkening of Valinor' incident?
Pure speculation but competing forces at work? The Valar are looking for
them, Melkor is using his power, as well is Ungoliant, to hide themselves
from the them.
--B
James Bell
"Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Uqmv8.37004$QC1.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Why? Because if the Silmaril can be lost for all eternity in the ocean then
the Ring could have, too. If the Ring could not have been lost for all
eternity in the ocean, then neither could the Silmaril. You can't have it
both ways unless, as I think Jay pointed out, the Silmaril dropped
completely out of Arda. If it did not, it either remains to be found or it
has been found.
Jim
Andy Lavens
There seems to be a bit more than that - the Silm states that the 'jewels
could not be found or brought together again unless the world be broken
and remade.' In the same way that the Ruling Ring lay hidden for years,
so the Silmarils would be hidden beyond all hope of finding. Yes, they
COULD be found, but only by wrecking most of the world to find them.
AC
<conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Where does it say 'Ulmo or Osse could find any item in the water that
>they wanted to'? What evidence is there to support this idea? Is it
>limited to those two or could all of the Ainur find anything they
>wanted wherever it happened to be? If it WAS just those two why do
>only they have this power. If it WASN'T just those two why could none
>of the Ainur find Melkor and/or Ungoliant (with the Silmarils) during
>the whole 'Darkening of Valinor' incident?
I agree with this. There has been a lot of presumption that the Valar
were omnipotent, that within their spheres of influence they were
absolute. This is clearly not the case. If Ulmo was all-knowing
about the waters of Arda, then the awakening of the Elves beside
Cuiviénen would certainly have been known to him. In fact, Orome
literally stumbled upon them.
---
AaronC
AC
wrote:
>Why? Because if the Silmaril can be lost for all eternity in the ocean then
>the Ring could have, too. If the Ring could not have been lost for all
>eternity in the ocean, then neither could the Silmaril. You can't have it
>both ways unless, as I think Jay pointed out, the Silmaril dropped
>completely out of Arda. If it did not, it either remains to be found or it
>has been found.
As the point was made, the world was changed in the Akaballeth, so it
is just as likely that the Silmaril was put beyond the reach of even
the Valar.
As for the Ring, even without actually possessing it, Sauron was still
powerful. Its destruction assured Sauron's absolute defeat. If it
were to continue to exist, Sauron's power would continue to grow.
---
AaronC
Russ
When you consider that a Silmaril set in the sky was visible to those on
Middle-earth, it's not to much to consider that water Ainu could locate a
Silmaril on the water; especially when they would know the general location to
look.
Russ
Michael O'Neill
>
> I'm sure this has been covered but I'm relatively new to the group and
> haven't seen any info on it so...
>
> consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
> recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power to do
> so.
>
He just never told anyone.
<snicker>
M.
Andy Lavens
> "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:Uqmv8.37004$QC1.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> "I3U7N5" <bwag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:3cbd89ed$0$3684$39ce...@nnrp1.twtelecom.net...
>>
>> > Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
>> > consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
>> > recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power
>> > to do so.
>>
>> It is a big ocean.
>> I can't imagine why this question has come up so many times recently.
>> It has always seemed a non-issue to me... the Silmaril went into the
>> ocean. It was lost. End of story.
>>
>>
> Heh, you're kidding right?
>
> Thats like saying, "Whyy all the bother with that Frodo? He destroyed
> the ring right? So ok the job's done. End of story."
That's not the point - the LotR is written as a story about Frodo and the
rest of the company. (If you want the same story from a neutral
perspective, have a look at 'Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age'
where Frodo and Sam's adventures are described in less than a page.) If
it had been a book from the ring's perspective, it would have ended as
the ring had fallen into Mount Doom.
The Silmarillion, on the other hand, is not constructed as a story at
all, but a collection of myths that describe the interaction of the
Valar, elves and men, and how Melkor and the Silmarils were so devisive
in that relationship. Despite this, their focus is on the Silmarils -
they are the common thread running through the book. And once they are
lost, never to be recovered, what else can be said?
> How would you feel had you never read what happened to Frodo after
> quests end? All you read is the ring was gone, he and Sam were picked up
> by the eagles...FIN. Would that content you?
I think I've talked about this above - LotR focussed on the company of
the ring (and the hobbits in particular), and since the entire company
did not die at the same time as the ring was destroyed, it seems right
that the story should have continued.
> The Silmarils are a central theme in which the characters revole in much
> of the early canon of Tolkien's work. The making of, the controversy
> over, the theft of, the quest of reclaimation, etc etc....why WOULDN'T
> you want to know what happened to them?
We do know what happened to them - they were lost. Not in the 'losing
your car keys' sense, but in the 'losing a family member' sense.
> Being content with the fact that they're just *gone* isn't enough for me
> after all thats come because of them. The Silmarils seem much more
> important than that, least to me.
They are important, but like all things, their time passes, and other
things concentrate the mind. The difference between the Silmarils and the
Ring is that people knew that the Ring had not been lost in the same
sense - it was lying within reach of someone, and eventually it would be
found. The Silmarils, so JRRT says, would not be found unless 'the world
was broken and remade'. I would translate that into 'never' without much
trouble.
Graeme
Mount Doom, they could have cast the One Ring into the sea, right about that
same spot. Of course, that would not have destroyed Sauron or been as exciting
a book.
>>
And Sauron would have conquered the West, which may actually have been
exciting, but it would have been kind of a downer.
Andy Lavens
The ring wasn't lost in the ocean, it fell into a river. It was Saruman
who suggested that it had been swept into the sea (and even then he knew
that it was not the case).
There are two different types of loss (see my other message), and I think
that Tolkien is referring to permanent loss rather than the 'where are my
car keys?' kind of loss.
Graeme
>>when they were burned it was observed the sons had no right to them
but neither was it claimed for the valar
>>
No. The burning had nothing to do with ownership. It had to do with "mortal
or unclean flesh" touching them. Maedhros and Maglor still owned the
Silmarilli, but couldn't even touch their own property, being "unclean", making
it all for nought.
>>think about the palantir
And think about using capitals and periods while you're at it. E. E. Cummings,
you ain't.
AC
<andrew...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>The ring wasn't lost in the ocean, it fell into a river. It was Saruman
>who suggested that it had been swept into the sea (and even then he knew
>that it was not the case).
I think the statement he was trying to make is if the Silmaril could
be lost in the Sea until the End, then why couldn't the Ring.
I believe that if the Silmaril was anywhere to be easily found, the
change of the world would have meant it was likely lost forever.
Tossing the Ring into the Sea would not have had the same result,
since it was after the Downfall of Numenor.
---
AaronC
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>Fheal wrote:
>>>when they were burned it was observed the sons had no right to them
>but neither was it claimed for the valar
>>>
>
>No. The burning had nothing to do with ownership. It had to do with "mortal
>or unclean flesh" touching them. Maedhros and Maglor still owned the
>Silmarilli, but couldn't even touch their own property, being "unclean",
>making
>it all for nought.
That's what you get for letting Varda hallow the Family Jewels.
;-)
Russ
Graeme
Feanor. First, they contained the light of the Two Trees which was created by
Yavanna and belonged to everyone.
>>
But that's silly. It's like saying that if I take a photograph of the
Washington Monument, then the photograph belongs to the public. That's not
right. Even if the monument gets destroyed, and I've got the only photo of
what it looked like when it was around.
There was no question of whether or not Feanor owned the Silmarilli before the
Trees were destroyed. There's really not one afterward either. Though
certainly, under the circumstances, the public-minded thing would have been to
have given one up.
We never get to hear the exact wording of this oath. It's not clear whether
each of the 8 swore to pursue anyone who kept a Silmaril from HIM, or from the
group collectively. It would have been a booger if the sons had ultimately
recovered the stones and been required to fight each other for them.
Graeme
he wanted to. It's not clear what that would have accomplished, though.
>>
Not much. The window of opportunity by which the Silmarilli could have been
used to revive the Trees was long since closed. Probably nobody could stand to
look at the things, except as a star or something.
Imagine if Ulmo DID recover one, and pop it on a stand in a museum in Tirion,
or something. A permanent reminder of the Kinslaying and of what jerks the
relatives of the Noldor of Valinor had been. Probably better off keeping them
buried.
Andy Cooke
>
[snip]
> We never get to hear the exact wording of this oath. It's not clear whether
> each of the 8 swore to pursue anyone who kept a Silmaril from HIM, or from the
> group collectively. It would have been a booger if the sons had ultimately
> recovered the stones and been required to fight each other for them.
The Oath does have the following evolution:
Earliest version: ("Flight of the Noldoli" 132-141, Lays of
Beleriand)
"Be he friend or foe or fould offspring
of Morgoth Bauglir, be he mortal dark
that in after days on earth shall dwell,
shall no law or love nor league of Gods,
no might or mercy, not moveless fate,
defend him for ever from the fierce vengeance
of the sons of Feanor, whoso seize or steal
or finding keep the fair enchanted
globes of crystal whoso glory dies not,
the Silmarils. We have sworn forever!"
Next Version: ("Lay of Leithian" 1634-1643, Lays of Beleriand)
"Be he friend or foe, or seed defiled
of Morgoth Bauglir, or mortal child
that in after days on earth shall dwell,
no law, nor love, nor league of hell,
nor might of Gods, not moveless fate
shall him defend from wrath and hate
of Fëanor's sons, who takes or steals,
or finding keeps the Silmarils,
the thrice-enchanted globes of light
that shine until the final night"
Also in the same lay, quoted by Celegorm 1848-1587
"Be he friend or foe, or demon wild
of Morgoth, Elf, or mortal child,
or any that here on earth may dwell,
no law, nor love, nor league of hell,
no might of Gods, no binding spell,
shall him defend from hatred fell
of Fëanor's sons, whoso take or steal
or finding keep a Silmaril.
These we alone do claim by right,
our thrice enchanted jewels bright."
Last version in "Annals of Aman" para 134, in Morgoth's Ring:
"Be he foe or friend, be he foul or clean,
brood of Morgoth or bright Vala,
Elda or Maia or Aftercomer,
Man yet unborn on Middle-Earth,
neither law, nor love, nor league of swords,
dread nor danger, not Doom itself,
shall defend him from Fëanor, and Fëanor's kin,
whoso hideth or hoardeth, or in hand taketh,
finding keepeth or afar casteth
a Silmaril. This swear we all:
death we will deal him ere Day's ending,
woe unto world's end! Our word hear thou,
Eru Allfather! To the everlasting
Darkness doom us if our deed faileth.
On the holy mountain hear our witness
and our vow remember, Manwë and Varda!"
--
Andy Cooke
James Bell
"Andy Lavens" <andrew...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2002.04.18.16...@nottingham.ac.uk...
> On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 15:31:42 +0100, James Bell wrote:
>
>
> > "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> > news:Uqmv8.37004$QC1.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >> "I3U7N5" <bwag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3cbd89ed$0$3684$39ce...@nnrp1.twtelecom.net...
> >>
> >> > Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
> >> > consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
> >> > recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power
> >> > to do so.
> >>
> >> It is a big ocean.
> >>
> >>
> >> I can't imagine why this question has come up so many times recently.
> >> It has always seemed a non-issue to me... the Silmaril went into the
> >> ocean. It was lost. End of story.
> >
> > Why? Because if the Silmaril can be lost for all eternity in the ocean
> > then the Ring could have, too. If the Ring could not have been lost for
> > all eternity in the ocean, then neither could the Silmaril. You can't
> > have it both ways unless, as I think Jay pointed out, the Silmaril
> > dropped completely out of Arda. If it did not, it either remains to be
> > found or it has been found.
> >
> > Jim
>
> The ring wasn't lost in the ocean, it fell into a river. It was Saruman
> who suggested that it had been swept into the sea (and even then he knew
> that it was not the case).
Pitching the Ring into the sea was an option discussed at the Council of
Elrond. The option was not acceptable because the Ring would eventually
have been found.
> There are two different types of loss (see my other message), and I think
> that Tolkien is referring to permanent loss rather than the 'where are my
> car keys?' kind of loss.
Tolkien probably meant they are lost permanently. However, it has been
established that falling to the bottom of the ocean would *not* accomplish
this. That leaves the question open about the Silmaril.
Jim
AC
wrote:
>Tolkien probably meant they are lost permanently. However, it has been
>established that falling to the bottom of the ocean would *not* accomplish
>this. That leaves the question open about the Silmaril.
The intent was that none of the Silmarils would be available to anyone
until the End, when they would be retrieved and used to rekindle the
Two Trees. We know that Beren's Silmaril is up in the sky and
apparently beyond reach of anyone. As to the ultimate fate of the
other two, Tolkien never illuminated us, though I can only assume that
he never intended either to be retrieved by anyone *within* Arda until
the End.
---
AaronC
The American
> Technically speaking, sure I guess you could say that if it is in the sea
> then Ulmo does have the Silmaril but if you wanted to follow that and
> stretch it a bit couldn't you say Aule has the Silmaril that went into the
> fire?
>
ha!
good point.
it's funny how we can miss the obvious sometimes.
rand mair fheal
> the early canon of Tolkien's work. The making of, the controversy over, the
> theft of, the quest of reclaimation, etc etc....why WOULDN'T you want to
> know what happened to them?
perhaps jrrt was thinking that the -things- were not important
and his characters finally succeeded when they stopped fighting for -things-
and started fighting for -people-
Graeme
characters finally succeeded when they stopped fighting for -things- and
started fighting for -people-
>>
You're trying to force-fit your own message into a completely different story.
And frankly your story sucks compared to his. Imagine if Maedhros and Maglor
had had a little heart to heart with each other at the very end. "I think
we've learned a valuable lesson from this, bro." "What's that, bro?" "Maybe
these things aren't that important after all. Maybe we should be out donating
blood or working at the children's home or something." "You're right. I feel
awfully silly now." "Me too, let's go."
P.S.: The Shift key is still the one underneath enter. The period key is two
right from the letter M.
Conrad Dunkerson
news:a9mleh$c7c$1...@solaris.cc.vt.edu...
> Why? Because if the Silmaril can be lost for all eternity in the
> ocean then the Ring could have, too. If the Ring could not have
> been lost for all eternity in the ocean, then neither could the
> Silmaril.
A: I never said that the Silmaril would be lost for eternity. I am
arguing that Ulmo could not just zip over and pick it up whenever he
felt like it. Indeed, Tolkien wrote that the Silmaril WOULD
eventually be recovered from the ocean.
B: The Ring possessed a 'will' of its own and had displayed the
ability to 'get itself found'. The Silmarils had not. The situations
would thus not be the same.
C: If the Ring had remained lost - Sauron would have won.
Conrad Dunkerson
> The Silmarils are a central theme in which the characters revole
> in much of the early canon of Tolkien's work. The making of, the
> controversy over, the theft of, the quest of reclaimation, etc
> etc....why WOULDN'T you want to know what happened to them?
I wouldn't >want< to know what happened to the Silmarils because I
think I >do< know what happened to them;
"And thus it came to pass that the Silmarils found their long homes;
one in the airs of heaven, and one in the fires of the heart of the
world, and one in the deep waters.
...but their joy in victory was diminished, for they returned
without the Silmarils from Morgoth's crown, and they knew that
those jewels could not be found or brought together again unless
the world be broken and remade."
Silm, Of the Voyage of Earendil
"The Second Prophecy of Mandos
Thus spake Mandos in prophecy, when the Gods sat in judgment in
Valinor, and the rumour of his words was whispered among all the
Elves of the West. When the world is old and the Powers grow weary,
then Morgoth, seeing that the guard sleepeth, shall come back through
the Door of Night out of the Timeless Void; and he shall destroy the
Sun and Moon. But Earendel shall descend upon him as a white and
searing flame and drive him from the airs. Then shall the Last
Battle be gathered on the fields of Valinor. In that day Tulkas
shall strive with Morgoth, and on his right hand shall be Eonwe,
and on his left Turin Turambar, son of Hurin, and Beren Camlost,
returning from the Doom of Men at the ending of the world; and the
black sword of Turin shall deal unto Morgoth his death and final end;
and so shall the children of Hurin and all Men be avenged.
Thereafter shall Earth be broken and re-made, and the Silmarils
shall be recovered out of Air and Earth and Sea; for Earendel shall
descend and surrender that flame which he hath had in keeping. Then
Feanor shall take the Three Jewels and bear them to Yavanna Palurien;
and he will break them and with their fire Yavanna will rekindle the
Two Trees, and a great light shall come forth. And the Mountains of
Valinor shall be levelled, so that the Light shall go out over all
the world."
JRRT's final known version, reconstructed from LROW QS Conclusion
~31-32 and interpretation of the alterations listed in WotJ LQS - Last
Chapters of the QS
Conrad Dunkerson
news:20020418122525...@mb-cp.aol.com...
I had written;
>> It is not altogether clear that the Silmarils DID belong to the
>> sons of Feanor. First, they contained the light of the Two Trees
>> which was created by Yavanna and belonged to everyone.
> But that's silly. It's like saying that if I take a photograph of
> the Washington Monument, then the photograph belongs to the public.
There is something of a difference.
The light of the Two Trees was of vital importance to the world as a
whole. The Washington Monument is a big spike. :)
Nor were the Silmarils just a 'picture' - they were more analogous
to a 'storage device', holding something vital that was not created
by and did not belong to the person who created the storage device...
more similar to an electronic copy of an important document on a
diskette with all other copies destroyed.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Correct me if I'm wrong but IIRC theres a passage in the T.S. that
> mentions streams and brookes are bringing Ulmo news and information
> about ME. I'd imagine if he gets some type of consciousness from the
> waters of the earth, it is safe to say that he'd have some sort of
> knowledge about the Silmaril (a pretty important item) being in the
> ocean.
The One Ring lying in the Gladden?
The Elves awakening beside the waters of Cuivienen?
Did Ulmo know about these things and just choose not to do anything?
He might get news through water, but does that mean that he knew
EVERYTHING that happened in the water? Or that he had the ability
to locate anything in/near the water? If so, why did he take no
action on the two issues above?
> Pure speculation but competing forces at work? The Valar are looking
> for them, Melkor is using his power, as well is Ungoliant, to hide
> themselves from the them.
Possibly, but again there is the Elves at Cuivienen... another
rather important issue (far more than the Silmarils even) that the
Valar were unaware of until they stumbled upon it - even though they
knew it was going to happen. And in that case no 'competing force'
unless Eru hid the event himself (in which case the same could be
true of the Silmarils). Melkor discovered the Elves before the Valar,
but that they did not locate them before he had any chance to 'block
it' shows that the Valar could not just 'know' these things.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Not much. The window of opportunity by which the Silmarilli could
> have been used to revive the Trees was long since closed.
Why? Tolkien wrote several times that the Silmarils would eventually
be used to revive the Trees millenia later.
Aris Katsaris
>
> "Andy Lavens" <andrew...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:pan.2002.04.18.16...@nottingham.ac.uk...
> >
> > who suggested that it had been swept into the sea (and even then he knew
> > that it was not the case).
>
> Pitching the Ring into the sea was an option discussed at the Council of
> Elrond. The option was not acceptable because the Ring would eventually
> have been found.
As Gandalf pointed out magical rings had a way of wanting to be found.
Not so with the Silmarils, it seems. Especially since they found their long
homes,
why would they want to be anywhere else?
But the ring's natural place was on Sauron's finger, unfortunately, not in the
ocean.
Aris Katsaris
Russ
"Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>C: If the Ring had remained lost - Sauron would have won.
Consider this:
He lost at Erebor
He lost in Greenwood
He lost in Lorien
He lost at Minas Tirith.
And after Pelennor, the forces arrayed defending Minas Tirith were much
stronger than before the battle.
If the Ring were not in play, Aragorn would not have led his army to Morannon.
Could Sauron really have won? Could his forces that successfully fought a
"Really the Last Alliance" after taking the losses he just took?
Are we seeing the makeup of a backup plan?
Russ
Russ
"Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>Did Ulmo know about these things and just choose not to do anything?
He was smoking doobies with the River-woman?
Russ
AC
Losses? Mordor was filled with armies. The battles you mentioned
were Sauron's first major forays in what he obviously planned as a
major war. He loses them, but his foes have pretty limited forces,
while he apparently had an extremely large supply of troops.
>
>Are we seeing the makeup of a backup plan?
No, we were just seeing the first act in what would have been the
destruction of the lands not yet under the Shadow.
---
AaronC
rand mair fheal
> >stronger than before the battle.
> >
> >If the Ring were not in play, Aragorn would not have led his army to
Morannon.
> >
> >Could Sauron really have won? Could his forces that successfully fought a
> >"Really the Last Alliance" after taking the losses he just took?
>
> Losses? Mordor was filled with armies. The battles you mentioned
> were Sauron's first major forays in what he obviously planned as a
> major war. He loses them, but his foes have pretty limited forces,
> while he apparently had an extremely large supply of troops.
answered by denethor and aragorn
Tamim
snip
> Nor were the Silmarils just a 'picture' - they were more analogous
> to a 'storage device', holding something vital that was not created
> by and did not belong to the person who created the storage device...
> more similar to an electronic copy of an important document on a
> diskette with all other copies destroyed.
If they were public property then I don't see why wouldn't the Valar
have tried to find them and the break them to revitalize the trees?
To me it seems that the Valar still considered them property of Feänor
and didn't use them until Feanor himself gave the permission after the
last battle.
--
AC
Since Feanor was the only that apparently could break the Silmarils,
it would require his release from the Halls of Mandos.
---
AaronC
Graeme
He lost in Greenwood
He lost in Lorien
He lost at Minas Tirith.
And after Pelennor, the forces arrayed defending Minas Tirith were much
stronger than before the battle.
>>
The book is very explicit in that the West could not possibly win a war of
attrition. The enemy can more afford to lose a host than we can a company, and
all that.
Minas Tirith was stronger than before, but the Southlands were weaker. There
were no more Rohirrim to come, and the gate of Minas Tirith was broken. They
were winning battles, but clearly losing the war.
paulh
Saying stuff like...'ya gotta meet this friend of mine, he's your type, his
names Tom'..
paulh
Morgoth's Curse
>In article <1lJv8.38896$QC1.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
>"Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
>>C: If the Ring had remained lost - Sauron would have won.
>
>Consider this:
>
>He lost at Erebor
He won that battle - the enemy was only routed after the fall of
Sauron.
>He lost in Greenwood
>He lost in Lorien
>He lost at Minas Tirith.
>
>And after Pelennor, the forces arrayed defending Minas Tirith were much
>stronger than before the battle.
Minas Tirith may have been better manned after the battle of Pelennor,
but that is not saying much. You have to take battle wounds, loss of
defensive structures (e.g. the Gate), damaged weapons, loss of horses,
etc in account. Plus you need to consider the problem of fighting on
several different fronts simultaneously as Prince Imhrail pointed out.
That was why Gandalf was so anxious to get the armies moving: The
longer they stayed in Minas Tirith, the more likely it was that Sauron
could muster the forces necessary to flank and destroy them.
>If the Ring were not in play, Aragorn would not have led his army to Morannon.
>
>Could Sauron really have won? Could his forces that successfully fought a
>"Really the Last Alliance" after taking the losses he just took?
>
>Are we seeing the makeup of a backup plan?
>
>Russ
It's possible that Sauron would have won if he had mustered all of his
strength in Mordor and assailed his enemies one by one, but he had
already learned the hard way that his enemies could be very dangerous
if he allowed them to forge an alliance. That was precisely why he
attacked on so many different fronts. He might have lost the battles,
but he had also destroyed the ability of his enemies to help each
other and, moreover, he had plenty of reinforcements in the East and
South. The Free People of Middle-earth could not possibly hope to win
a war of attrition.
Morgoth's Curse
rand mair fheal
> several different fronts simultaneously as Prince Imhrail pointed out.
> That was why Gandalf was so anxious to get the armies moving: The
> longer they stayed in Minas Tirith, the more likely it was that Sauron
> could muster the forces necessary to flank and destroy them.
that was irrelevant
if frodo wasnt wandering about in mordor
staying minas tirith wouldve been the best course
the whole point of aragorns attack was to keep sauron looking at him
they hoped sauron would think aragorn had the ring
and that the ring lured aragorn into a rash attack against mordor
gandalf and aragorn and the rest had no hope their attack would succeed
or that they would even survive
their personal survival was not the issue
nor even the survival of gondor
but rather to confuse sauron long enough for frodo to succeed
and that way humanity would win
and suaron did focus all his thought and energy on aragorns army
and ignored the two spies slowly walking into the heart of his realm
until it was too late
rand mair fheal
<pa...@fahncahn.com> wrote:
tom bombadil is dead
no no no no
he is in the old forest
looking in
tom bombadil is dead
no no no no
he is in the old forest
looking in
hell take you trips around the barrow
bring you back to your own marrow
tom bombadil
tom bombadil
Russ
<mnk...@att.net> writes:
>>He lost at Erebor
>
>He won that battle - the enemy was only routed after the fall of
>Sauron.
>
Yep, you're right. However, with the victory of Thranduil in Greenwood, the
siege of Erebor could have been lifted.
Russ
Russ
>He might have lost the battles,
>but he had also destroyed the ability of his enemies to help each
>other and, moreover, he had plenty of reinforcements in the East and
>South.
I disagree and think precisely the opposite occurred. Lorien and Greenwood
were now freed to help the dwarves and men of Dale to the East and Gondor to
the South. The Ents were now available. And possibly the Dunlendings could be
convinced to lend a hand.
>The Free People of Middle-earth could not possibly hope to win
>a war of attrition.
True, which is why the Free Peoples would not fight such a war.
Russ
Russ
>Plus you need to consider the problem of fighting on
>several different fronts simultaneously as Prince Imhrail pointed out.
>That was why Gandalf was so anxious to get the armies moving: The
>longer they stayed in Minas Tirith, the more likely it was that Sauron
>could muster the forces necessary to flank and destroy them.
Well, the primary reason to get the army moving was the Ring. But if that's
not an issue, there's no reason to get the army moving.
It's not so easy though. Sauron no longer held the crossings of the Anduin and
without the WK it would be much harder than before to gain them back.
With the capture of Umbar's fleet, their rear was safe from attack from the
sea. And Gondor had a riverine fleet available to stop any attempt to cross
the Anduin.
Russ
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>>>He lost at Erebor
>He lost in Greenwood
>He lost in Lorien
>He lost at Minas Tirith.
>
>And after Pelennor, the forces arrayed defending Minas Tirith were much
>stronger than before the battle.
>
>
>The book is very explicit in that the West could not possibly win a war of
>attrition. The enemy can more afford to lose a host than we can a company,
>and
>all that.
Right, but at the time those opinions were voiced, I do not think they Wise
could have conceived of having been so successful on the battlefield. With the
victories in Greenwood and Lorien, those forces are now freed to help out in
the east and south. In addition, the power of the Ents could no be brought to
bear against Mordor.
The Witch King was no more. Umbar was rendered impotent and Gondor now
controlled the seas with not only it's own fleet but also the fleet captured
from Umbar.
>Minas Tirith was stronger than before, but the Southlands were weaker.
Right, but because there was no longer any threat from Umbar, weakening the
southern fiefs was ok.
>There
>were no more Rohirrim to come, and the gate of Minas Tirith was broken. They
>were winning battles, but clearly losing the war.
I think you may be overestimating the numbers of Sauron's armies. Clearly they
were vast, but let's not go overboard here. The force Aragorn led to Morannon
was said to be equal to the vanguard of Gondor at it's height. However, if the
RIng was not in play, Aragorn would obviously not have moved his army so and it
would have remained at Mina Tirith along with the forces left behind in the
story.
The forces of Gondor had leaders of the caliber of Gandalf, Aragorn, Eomer,
Imrahil and Faramir. Gandalf the Wite, in particular, was a formidable force
no freed of earlier Valar-imposed restrictions. Sauron had no underling who
could oppose Gandalf the White. Sauron *lost* his best commander. Moreover,
with the victories in Greenwood and Lorien some help might have been
forthcoming from the Silvan realms.
Gondor could also have counted on some help from the Ents and also may very
well have convinced the Dunlendings formerly allied with Saruman to join their
cause, especially after they were treated so fairly by the victorious Rohirrim.
All I'm arguing here is that the Free Peoples were in considerably better shape
than before.
Russ
AC
Possibly not, but I do not think that Elrond's fears were unfounded,
or that what Denethor saw was false. Clearly Gandalf did not believe
that the forces that could be brought to bear would be permanently
enough to hold back Sauron. They may have won for a year or even a
decade or two, but Sauron had long planned for this war. Admittedly
the revelation of the Heir of Elendil and the accompanying fear that
the Heir would use the Ring hastened Sauron.
In a way Sauron resembles Germany in 1939, not totally prepared for a
massive war, but a great deal more prepared than his enemies. The
biggest problem for the Free Peoples of the West of Middle Earth was
that there was no potential ally beyond the Sea, unless you believe
the Valar would not have permitted Sauron's dominion to last. In
which case, they may have battled Sauron to a stalemate, but how long
could that last? I think that, even without the Ring, Sauron would
have been victorious in the end, without some further intervention
from the Valar or Eru himself.
---
AaronC
Cam Kirmser
news:p8bsbu81e7gfqhpoq...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:47:04 -0500, "Cam Kirmser"
> <ckir...@xkillspamx.charter.net> wrote:
> >> > Is there anything written by Tolkien or perhaps a general speculative
> >> > consensus on why the Silmaril cast by Maglor into the sea was never
> >> > recovered by Ulmo? It seems as though he would surely have the power
to
> >do
> >> > so.
> >>
> >> it wasnt their property
> >> they should wait until feanor consents to let them have it
> >
> >As I recall, the Valar's contention is that they are the true owners of
the
> >light of the Silmaril, therefore the jewels belong to them.
>
> Ha..bloody DMCA in action again!
DMCA?
Cam Kirmser
news:MPG.1728670f3...@news.odyssey.net...
> Cam Kirmser <ckir...@xkillspamx.charter.net> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>
> >As I recall, the Valar's contention is that they are the true owners of
the
> >light of the Silmaril, therefore the jewels belong to them.
>
> _ask_ Fëanor to give them the Silmarils, but in terms that clearly
> indicate they are making a request and not claiming a right.
>
> "Then Manwë spoke and said: 'Hearest thou, Fëanor son of Finwë, the
> words of Yavanna? Wilt thou grant what she would ask?'"
Having been soundly chastised, I will go to the corner and cogitate upon my
transgressions...
Donald Shepherd
(ckir...@xkillspamx.charter.net) says...
Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
--
*Dlanod*, *the* *Sparkly* *Nazgul*
Pimp of Morgoth, Worshipper of Arwen Lune, Rider of Ducks
Afraid to say more lest _another_ copyright thread starts...
Zorgus
At the Battle of Pelenor Fields, Sauron only sent the forces of Minas
Morgul (which included some Southrons), and the Corsairs of Umbar.
Frodo witnessed these forces marching out of the Morgul Vale.
Aragorn forced Sauron's hand when he used the Palantir, so in his
haste, Sauron only sent the forces from Minas Morgul instead of all of
Mordor. Aragorn, using information he got through the palantir,
intercepted the Corsairs. This left the Morgul force without backup.
Also, there were forces from Morgul that were not even engaged at
Pelenor up on the road around the Druadan Forest. These the Rohirrim
had evaded with the help of Gan-buri-gan.
Pelenor represented only a division of the entire Mordor army.
At the Black Gates, the Lords of Gondor would have been crushed like
bugs had not the Ring been destroyed.
Breon
Zorgus2002@@yahoo.com
"Eschew Surplusage." Twain
Eschew the surplus @ to reply
Autumnfox
> > doesnt answer the question at hand which is why wouldn't the Valar make
> some
> > effort to reclaim the lost Silmaril which seemed so important to them
> > previously.
>
The purpose that they wanted it for was no longer an issue. They wanted it
to try and heal the trees. Instead they tried other means to heal them which
produced one flower(the sun) and one fruit(the moon.)
The fate of the one cast into the sea was of no further consequence to the
story, so it's ultimate fate will never be known.
Graeme
>>There is something of a difference. The light of the Two Trees was of vital
importance to the world as a whole. The Washington Monument is a big spike.
:)
Nor were the Silmarils just a 'picture' - they were more analogous to a
'storage device', holding something vital that was not created by and did not
belong to the person who created the storage device... more similar to an
electronic copy of an important document on a diskette with all other copies
destroyed.
>>
Okay, let's alter the analogy a bit. Instead of a picture, let's substitute a
recording. Let's say it's the 19th century, and I have a recording of Daeron
the Minstrel singing his greatest hits. Let's furthermore say that I
personally invented the phonograph, and used it to make this recording. At
some point after I did this, Daeron suffered an injury that caused him to lose
his voice permanently. All that remains of it is the recording that I made.
Is that a more apt analogy? And if so, who owns the recording? It's certainly
Daeron's voice, not mine. But the storage device is mine, and without that, it
wouldn't exist at all. And presumably Feanor had permission to make his
"recording" of the light of the Trees.
Nevertheless, I think we could all agree that I'd be a pretty rotten guy if I
kept my recording completely to myself, and denied the voice of Daeron to the
rest of his many fans. That would be even more true if, by breaking my record,
I could somehow restore the real Daeron's voice to the way it was before.
But we're not talking about what's nice, but about what one's actual
obligations are. Is the recording mine (and therefore something which I can
give away, as an act of generosity)? Or is it Daeron's, in which case he can
simply take it from me, with or without my permission?
(We're in danger here of dragging up that whole intellectual property rights
discussion that we all had over the pirate DVD, I hope you realize.)
Graeme
Gates, the Lords of Gondor would have been crushed like bugs had not the Ring
been destroyed.
>>
Yeah, but can you imagine the look on Sauron's face afterwards?
"What the HECK??? OK, I give up. Where the #$&* IS it?????"
Graeme
could have conceived of having been so successful on the battlefield.
>>
Even after the Battle of the Pelennor, Gandalf says that, mad as a hatter
though he may have been, Denethor was right, and that the war was without hope,
whether they sat there to endure siege after siege, or whether they marched out
to meet the enemy.
Hang on. A direct quote is in order here. "Hardly has our strength sufficed
to beat off the first great assault. The next will be greater. This war then
is without final hope, as Denethor perceived. Victory cannot be achieved by
arms, whether you sit here to endure siege after siege, or march out to be
overwhelmed beyond the River."
And this was after the Pelennor. So yeah, even though the West was clearly
beating the point spread at the time, the game was still hopeless. That's what
the book itself says on the matter.
You could try to argue that Gandalf just got it wrong, and the true situation
was much more favorable, for the reasons you've cited. But as there's no
indication in the book that Gandalf was in error, it would be bad writing if
that were the case.
>>With the victories in Greenwood and Lorien, those forces are now freed to
help out in the east and south.
>>
They won battles, but the war wasn't over in those theaters. Meaning they
couldn't spare any troops. Though, if the book anywhere suggests otherwise,
I'd be glad to accept it.
>>In addition, the power of the Ents could no be brought to bear against
Mordor.
>>
I don't see the Ents marching against Mordor (and even if they did, they're
very vulnerable to fire, not to mention woodpeckers). Saruman (admittedly not
the most credible of sources) says that their help can't be counted on again.
And I tend to agree with him. They responded to a direct threat against their
own lands, but would they march off to Minas Tirith to fight Sauron? I sure
don't think so.
Graeme
war, but a great deal more prepared than his enemies.
>>
In some ways, there is a certain similarity. But in other ways, it's just the
opposite. In France in 1940, the Germans were actually OUTNUMBERED, but won
anyway through superior training and tactics (something Sauron never had. In
that sense, he was more like Stalin's Soviets than anyone else, winning through
sheer numbers).
In fact, all through the war, the German infantry was 1½ to 2 times more
effective than Allied infantry, a fact that was still winning them small
localized battles right up to the very end.
Zorgus
>
>I think you may be overestimating the numbers of Sauron's armies. Clearly they
>were vast, but let's not go overboard here. The force Aragorn led to Morannon
>was said to be equal to the vanguard of Gondor at it's height.
I think it's compared to "a" vanguard of Gondor at it's height. A
vangaurd is only a portion of an army, that which includes the field
commander. A fully outfitted army would not go into battle with only
a vanguard.
> However, if the
>RIng was not in play, Aragorn would obviously not have moved his army so and it
>would have remained at Mina Tirith along with the forces left behind in the
>story.
>
>The forces of Gondor had leaders of the caliber of Gandalf, Aragorn, Eomer,
>Imrahil and Faramir.
And Gimli. ... and that's it for heroic types. The rest were normal
(if seasoned) troops. All but Gandalf could have been felled with the
blow from an Olag-hai's club.
> Gandalf the Wite, in particular, was a formidable force
>no freed of earlier Valar-imposed restrictions. Sauron had no underling who
>could oppose Gandalf the White.
Any one of the remaining Nazgul could have "opposed" Gandalf, and
Gandalf could probably have defeated one alone... but eight at one
time???
> Sauron *lost* his best commander. Moreover,
>with the victories in Greenwood and Lorien some help might have been
>forthcoming from the Silvan realms.
When? The last assault on Lorien occurs only 10 days before the battle
of the Morannon. and the battle of Dale is only 2 days after that.
For the Lorien troops to finish the battle, re-muster, and march to
Minas Tirith would have taken several weeks, especially if you factor
in the time it would take a messanger to get there to summon them in
the first place. (Forget the people in Dale and Thranduil in
Mirkwood. You're looking at months before they arrive.) Sauron would
have the same time to re-inforce and increase his troops. He could
re-occupy Minas Morgul by that time.
>
>Gondor could also have counted on some help from the Ents and also may very
>well have convinced the Dunlendings formerly allied with Saruman to join their
>cause, especially after they were treated so fairly by the victorious Rohirrim.
Those people would have taken a long time to muster, especially the
Dunlendings. It takes Theoden over a week to get from the Hornburg to
Pelennor. The Dunlendings were far less organized, and probably a lot
more reluctant. Maybe the Ents would have sent Huorns, but not
without plenty of discussion.
>
>All I'm arguing here is that the Free Peoples were in considerably better shape
>than before.
>
The Free Peoples had won some battles, but not the war (thanks,
Graeme). If Sauron had sat and let all the Free Peoples muster, and
then met all of them with all of his host on an open field of battle,
then yes, maybe the Free Peoples would have had a chance. However,
Sauron wouldn't have let them muster. If Aragorn had stayed in Minas
Tirith, Sauron would have flooded the Morgul Vale with new troops, and
attacked Minas Tirith again before reinforcements could have arrived.
Even if Lorien was able to make it in time, would Lorien and Gondor
have been able to withstand another siege? I don't believe so.
The Free Peoples were just not in a position to make a real
show of direct force against Sauron. My guess is if the Free Peoples
had been able to muster without being attacked, then the only thing
they could have done was to besiege Mordor, and then you have the war
of attrition you're trying to avoid in the first place.
>Russ
Breon.
Donald Shepherd
(graem...@aol.compost) says...
> I don't see the Ents marching against Mordor (and even if they did, they're
> very vulnerable to fire, not to mention woodpeckers).
Beware the Nine, who ride on woodpeckers!
--
*Dlanod*, *the* *Sparkly* *Nazgul*
Pimp of Morgoth, Worshipper of Arwen Lune, Rider of Ducks
"If Tolkien had meant for us to have a sense of humor, he would have told
us so." - Mark Reichart
Conrad Dunkerson
> Okay, let's alter the analogy a bit. Instead of a picture, let's substitute a
> recording. Let's say it's the 19th century, and I have a recording of Daeron
> the Minstrel singing his greatest hits. Let's furthermore say that I
> personally invented the phonograph, and used it to make this recording. At
> some point after I did this, Daeron suffered an injury that caused him to lose
> his voice permanently. All that remains of it is the recording that I made.
> Is that a more apt analogy?
Closer. The primary difference at this point being that while Daeron
was apparently a fine singer, his music was not a gift of vital
importance to all living beings - as the light of the two trees was.
> But we're not talking about what's nice, but about what one's actual
> obligations are. Is the recording mine (and therefore something which I can
> give away, as an act of generosity)? Or is it Daeron's, in which case he can
> simply take it from me, with or without my permission?
The record certainly belongs to you. The songs recorded on it
certainly belong to Daeron. Assuming that Daeron allowed you to make
the recording their might be an assumption that he was granting you
'ownership' of that particualr recording of his songs - but that is
not a given. Whether there was such an assumption in the case of the
light of the Silmarils (or even an explicit granting of the right to
place some of that light in the gems) is an open question. Hence my
original statements that touched off this branch of the thread;
"It is not altogether clear that the Silmarils DID belong to the sons
of Feanor. First, they contained the light of the Two Trees which was
created by Yavanna and belonged to everyone."
The light of the Silmarils may or may not have belonged to Feanor (and
thus his sons). In the example with Daeron, if there was no agreement
that you would have the right to the songs then Daeron could
reasonably demand that you 'erase' the recording but not that you
destroy the phonograph or even the physical record... just the
recording on it. Nor could he demand that the physocal record be
given to him since it was not his. Arguably it might be possible to
transfer the recording from the record to another storage device, but
it is not clear that you would be under any obligation to do so. Of
course, if it was assumed that Daeron (or Feanor) DID gain all right
to the 'copy' then that is the end of the matter... but no such
statement was made in either case, and indeed Feanor's right to the
light was questioned.
Michael P Reed
> >>In a way Sauron resembles Germany in 1939, not totally prepared for a
> massive
> war, but a great deal more prepared than his enemies.
> >>
>
> In some ways, there is a certain similarity. But in other ways, it's just
> the
> opposite. In France in 1940, the Germans were actually OUTNUMBERED, but won
> anyway through superior training and tactics (something Sauron never had.
> In
> that sense, he was more like Stalin's Soviets than anyone else, winning
> through
> sheer numbers).
Finland 1939/40 would be the best example IMHO.
> In fact, all through the war, the German infantry was 1½ to 2 times more
> effective than Allied infantry, a fact that was still winning them small
> localized battles right up to the very end.
Alas for the poor Germans, WWII was a combined arms war. Although their small
unit doctrine and training was par excellence, higher up the chain it got worse
to downright bad.
--
Regards,
Michael P. Reed
Cam Kirmser
news:MPG.172b4be09...@mail.uq.edu.au...
*snip*
> Digital Millenium Copyright Act.
D'oh!! I coulda had a V-8!. Geez, I must be getting stupid in my old age.
I've written enough letters against that bilious mass of protoplasm. I will
go write 500 times, "I am a yutz..."
Should I post it?
Morgoth's Curse
>In article <a6dvbug8ptt6gf630...@4ax.com>, Morgoth's Curse
><mnk...@att.net> writes:
>
>>He might have lost the battles,
>>but he had also destroyed the ability of his enemies to help each
>>other and, moreover, he had plenty of reinforcements in the East and
>>South.
>
>I disagree and think precisely the opposite occurred. Lorien and Greenwood
>were now freed to help the dwarves and men of Dale to the East and Gondor to
>the South. The Ents were now available. And possibly the Dunlendings could be
>convinced to lend a hand.
Sauron had destroyed their ability to effectively form an alliance and
send assistance to each other partially because each ruler still had
to guard against another assault. (Even Theodon left small
detachments in Rohan to protect his realm.)
To use an example from your posts, let's imagine that Thrainduil
decides to relieve the siege of the Lonely Mountain after his victory
in Mirkwood. He obviously has to consider several critical factors:
1) The threat from Dol Guldur and/or the East is not yet eliminated:
New troops could attack while the realm is relatively undefended. 2)
The fitness of his own army and its logistics: His warriors have
just fought an extended battle against superior forces and among the
survivors there will be those who are too wounded to participate in
another campaign, plus weapons will need to be repaired or replaced,
food supplies procured, etc. 3) The issue of strategy and tactics:
How the army will cope with the threat of an attack during the march
to Erebor; whether he has the numbers to actually attack in battle or
whether he needs to conduct a guerrilla style offensive or, for that
matter, whether it would be more sensible to join his forces with
those of Lorien (as actually happened) instead.
It should be fairly obvious that every lord (whether man, dwarf or
elf) had to grapple with such issues. There is also the question of
whether they would have really trusted each other. Saruman, one of
the mightiest of the Wise, had been coopted and had duped the
Dunlendings into serving him. I find it interesting that no one
(except perhaps Gandalf) appeared to count on further assistance from
the Ents after the destruction of Isengard. Neither Theodon nor
Aragorn asked Treebeard whether the Ents would help fight Mordor or
protect Rohan while the Rohirrim were in Gondor.
>>The Free People of Middle-earth could not possibly hope to win
>>a war of attrition.
>
>True, which is why the Free Peoples would not fight such a war.
>
>Russ
In the absence of the Ring, that was the only type of war that the
Free Peoples would be able to fight.
Morgoth's Curse