Fourth Age
Michael Martinez
On 12/11/96 11:03AM, in message <32aeedba...@news.vistec.net>, Lalaith
<andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de> wrote:
[snip]
> Cf. Letter 256: "Since we are dealing with MEN it is inevitable that
> we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their
> nature: their quick satiety with good. So that the people of Gondor in
> times of peace, justice and prosperity, would become discontented and
> restless - while the dynasts descended from Aragorn would become just
> kings and governors - like Denethor or worse."
>
> This is in sharp contrast with a rejected statement in HoME XII which
> gave a prophecy that Eldarion's realm would outlast him for millenia.
I see neither the sharp contrast that you do here, nor the statement that the
"prophecy" was rejected. The final version of "The Heirs of Elendil"
certainly does not include the statement in the second version:
"Here ends the Red Book. But it was foretold that Eldarion
the son of Elessar should rule a great realm, and it should
endure for a hundred generations of men; and from him should
come the kings of many realms in after days."
But this statement IS included in T4, the version of "The Tale of Years" which
was proposed to the publishers in 1954 (according to Christopher):
"Of Eldarion son of Elessar it was foretold that he should rule
a great realm, and that it should endure for a hundred generations
of Men after him, that is until a new age brought in again new
things; and from him should come the kings of many realms in
long days after. But if this foretelling spoke truly, none
now can say, for Gondor and Arnor are no more; and even the
chronicles of the House of Elessar and all their deeds and
glory are lost."
The compression which occurred for sake of publication should not, in my
opinion, be viewed as a culling of traditions, whereas such culling occurred
in "The Heirs of Elendil". Rather, it seems evident that Tolkien was forced
to drop material that he viewed as canonical. If we must exclude anything
merely because it was not published in LOTR, then we must exclude virtually
everything that was not published in LOTR.
The prophecy, BTW (if I may slightly change the subject), gives us a marker
for the end of the Fourth Age: approximately 2500 years, which reflects a
generation of Men of about 25 years. Such a span is purely arbitrary, but it
is consistent with what Tolkien writes in the footnote of his letter to Rhona
Beare (dated 14 October 1958, Letter #211):
"I imagine the gap [between the Fall of Barad-dur and our Days] to
be about 6000 years; that is we are now at the end of the Fifth
Age, if the Ages were of about the same length as the S.A. and
T.A. But they have, I think, quickened; and I imagine we are
actually at the end of the Sixth Age, or in the Seventh."
If I may be permitted a little rigid literalism here for the sake of
illustrating my point, we could postulate the following timeline:
1958 - 6000 = 4042
Fall of Barad-dur was in 4042 BCE
Hence,
Dating By Age BCE AYS
------------- ---------- -----------------------------------------------
FA 1 10,892 BCE 1 Fingolfin enters Hithlum.
FA 455 10,438 BCE 455 Dagor Bragollach. Fingon becomes High
King of the Noldor-in-Exile. Many
Marachians and Beorians flee Estolad
and return to Eriador. Barahir becomes
Lord of Ladros. Most of the Beorians
flee to Dor-Lomin.
FA 473 10,420 BCE 473 Nirnaeth Arnoediad. Turgon becomes
High King of the Noldor-in-Exile.
FA 510 10,383 BCE 510 Gondolin is destroyed. Ereinion Gil-
galad becomes High King of the Noldor-
in-exile.
FA 532 10,361 BCE 532 Elrond and Elros are born in Arvernien.
FA 587 10,306 BCE 587 Breaking of Thangorodrim. Elrond (and
Elros?) present at the battle.
FA 590 10,303 BCE 590 Many Eldar leave Middle-earth.
SA 1 10,302 BCE 591 Cirdan establishes Mithlond. Gil-galad
establishes Forlond. Celeborn establishes
Harlond?
SA 32 10,271 BCE 622 Cirdan's mariners take the Edain to the
isle of Elenna (Numenor).
SA 40 10,263 BCE 630 Latest probable date for founding of
Edhellond.
SA 442 9861 BCE 1032 Elros Tar-Minyatur dies in Numenor.
SA 600 9703 BCE 1190 Veantur the Numenorean sails to Middle-
earth. Gil-galad arranges for him to
meet with Edainic men from Eriador.
SA 1590 8713 BCE 2180 Celebrimbor forges Vilya, Narya, and Nenya.
SA 1600 8703 BCE 2190 Sauron forges the One and the Elves learn
who he is.
SA 1695 8608 BCE 2285 Sauron invades Eriador. Gil-galad sends
Elrond to Eregion with an army.
SA 1697 8606 BCE 2287 Sauron destroys Eregion. Elrond retreats
north to found Imladris.
c.SA 1698 8605 BCE 2288 Sauron overruns Eriador.
c.SA 1700 8603 BCE 2290 About this time, the Edain of Eriador may
cross the Hithaeglir to settle in the Vales
of Anduin (becoming, eventually, the Free
Men of the North, or Northmen).
SA 1701 8602 BCE 2291 With Numenor's help, Gil-galad defeats
Sauron and drives him from Eriador.
c.SA 1702 8601 BCE 2292 Gil-galad holds the first White Council
and names Elrond his Viceroy in Eriador.
c.SA 1800 8503 BCE 2390 About this time, the Numenoreans begin
to establish permanent havens in Middle-
earth.
SA 3320 6983 BCE 3910 Downfall of Numenor. Elendil and his sons
establish Arnor and Gondor.
SA 3429 6874 BCE 4019 Sauron attacks Gondor. The Last Alliance
of Elves and Men is formed by Gil-galad
and Elendil.
SA 3434 6869 BCE 4024 Battle of Dagorlad.
SA 3441 6862 BCE 4031 Sauron battles Gil-galad and Elendil. End
of the War. Mordor destroyed.
TA 1 6861 BCE 4032 Cirdan becames Lord of Mithlond and Lindon.
Isildur becomes High King in Gondor.
Amroth becomes King of Lothlorien.
Thranduil becomes King of Northern
Greenwood the Great.
TA 2 6860 BCE 4033 Isildur slain by Orcs near Amon Lanc.
TA 3 6859 BCE 4034 Ohtar reaches Imladris.
TA 10 6852 BCE 4041 Valandil becomes High King in Arnor.
TA 863 5999 BCE 5104 Arnor is divided into Arthedain,
Cardolan, and Rhudaur. No more High
Kings of the Dunedain are proclaimed.
TA 1356 5506 BCE 5387 Rhudaur attacks Cardolan and Arthedain.
Cirdan leads or sends an army to Arthedain.
TA 1409 5462 BCE 5440 Angmar invades Arthedain. Cirdan and
Elrond help end the invasion. Rhudaur
ceases to exist. The last prince of
Cardolan perishes. Arthedain absorbs
what's left of Cardolan.
TA 1600 5471 BCE 5631 Marco and Blanco found the Shire.
TA 1636 5435 BCE 5667 The Great Plague devastates Eriador and
Gondor.
TA 1974 5097 BCE 6005 Angmar destroys Arthedain. Arvedui dies.
TA 1975 5096 BCE 6006 Battle of Fornost Erain. End of Angmar.
TA 1981 5090 BCE 6012 The Dwarves abandon Khazad-dum and many
Elves flee Lothlorien. Amroth dies and
Nimrodel is lost. Edhellond is finally
abandoned by the Elves.
TA 2510 4561 BCE 6541 Battle of Parth Celebrant. Eorl leads the
Eotheod south to Gondor's aid. Rohan is
founded.
TA 2590 4481 BCE 6621 Thror re-establishes his people in Erebor.
Gror settles in Emyn Engrin.
TA 2770 4301 BCE 6801 Smaug attacks Erebor and Dale. Thror
and his family escape. Many of Durin's
Folk settle in Emyn Engrin. Girion of
Dale's wife and young child escape to
Esgaroth.
TA 2799 4262 BCE 6830 Battle of Nanduhirion. Azog slain.
TA 2931 4130 BCE 6962 Birth of Aragorn II.
TA 2941 4120 BCE 6972 Thorin and Company return to Erebor.
Battle of the Five Armies. Bolg slain.
The White Council drives Sauron from
Dol Guldur. Erebor is re-established
by Dain.
TA 3019 4042 BCE 7050 The War of the Ring. Sauron overthrown.
Aragorn establishes the Reunited Kingdom
and marries Arwen. Celeborn establishes
the Kingdom of East Lorien.
TA 3021 4040 BCE 7052 Elrond, Galadriel, and Gandalf leave
Middle-earth, taking Frodo and Bilbo
with them.
c.FO 1 4039 BCE 7053 About this time, Legolas and Gimli lead
part of their peoples to Gondor?
FO 15 4024 BCE 7067 Aragorn visits Arnor.
FO 60 3980 BCE 7112 Departure of Samwise over Sea.
FO 63 3977 BCE 7115 Death of Eomer.
FO 82 3958 BCE 7134 Death of Faramir.
FO 120 3920 BCE 7172 Death of Aragorn. Arwen returns to
Lorien. Legolas (and Gimli?) sail
over Sea.
FO 121 3919 BCE 7173 Death of Arwen in Lorien.
FO 172 3868 BCE 7227 Last notations made in the Thain's Book
by Findegil.
c.FO 220 3820 BCE 7272 Eldarion passes away.
c.FO 2700 1320 BCE 9772 End of the Fourth Age.
The Fifth Age could have lasted from 1319 BCE to approximately 550 AD (about
1870 yeats). The Sixth Age, if it's still going on, has lasted about 1446
years.
Why did I pick AD 550? Because that was about the time when the Gothic
Kingdom in Italy was destroyed, and also was about the time when the
Anglo-Saxons started making headway against the British Celts once again. It
signalled the end of the ancient world and brought on the "modern" world.
This is relatively late for most people who think in terms of when the
Medieval period may have started, but I think the transition from age-to-age
is a very abrupt thing. Classical civilization was altered radically in the
6th Century AD, and Tolkien may have agreed with that assessment to some
extent.
If we want to speculate on when Eldarion might have been born, I would guess
sometime in the years FO 30 - 40. This way he would have died no older than
190 years and perhaps at only 180 years.
But I think one can only wonder about how long Celeborn stayed in
Middle-earth. Since there is no record of his having left, it must be that
many years after his departure Men or Hobbits went to Imladris and found no
one there.
--
++ ++ "Well Samwise: What do you think of the elves now?"
||\ /|| --fbag...@mid.earth.com
|| v ||ichael Martinez (mma...@basis.com)
++ ++------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Geard
Michael Martinez is getting a bit carried away on this one. Still, I guess
we are all allowed a bit of arrant speculation from time to time. But
specifically:
> c.FO 220 3820 BCE 7272 Eldarion passes away.
Where does this date come from?
> If we want to speculate on when Eldarion might have been born, I would
guess
> sometime in the years FO 30 - 40. This way he would have died no older
than
> 190 years and perhaps at only 180 years.
Given that Elessar lived 209 years, why would Eldarion have lived
significantly less? And why such a late birth-date? I have always imagined
that Elessar and Arwen would have got into the family business fairly
quickly. Afterall they were human, not elves with millenia to play with.
On Numenor, Vardamir (who lived 410 years) had his four children over a
period of 30 years. Tar-Amandil (lived 411) had three children over 27
years, Tar-Elendil (lived 401) had three over 22 years. All these Kings
lived a lot longer than Elessar, and comparatively speaking would have
married earlier. So I doubt Elessar drew out his family over such a long
period of time.
Granted, Eldarion had sisters, but how many? And can we say he was the
youngest child? No.
Stephen Geard
Tasmania
Lalaith
mich...@swcp.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
>> This is in sharp contrast with a rejected statement in HoME XII which
>> gave a prophecy that Eldarion's realm would outlast him for millenia.
>
>I see neither the sharp contrast that you do here, nor the statement that the
>"prophecy" was rejected. The final version of "The Heirs of Elendil"
>certainly does not include the statement in the second version:
So you agree now that "The Heirs of Elendil" may be considered more or
less canonic?
>The compression which occurred for sake of publication should not, in my
>opinion, be viewed as a culling of traditions, whereas such culling occurred
>in "The Heirs of Elendil". Rather, it seems evident that Tolkien was forced
>to drop material that he viewed as canonical. If we must exclude anything
>merely because it was not published in LOTR, then we must exclude virtually
>everything that was not published in LOTR.
Didn't we have just that in the infamous "Mouth" thread?
>If I may be permitted a little rigid literalism here for the sake of
>illustrating my point, we could postulate the following timeline:
>
> 1958 - 6000 = 4042
<timeline snipped: man, it seems you have too much time to spare...>
>The Fifth Age could have lasted from 1319 BCE to approximately 550 AD (about
>1870 yeats). The Sixth Age, if it's still going on, has lasted about 1446
>years.
>
>Why did I pick AD 550? Because that was about the time when the Gothic
>Kingdom in Italy was destroyed, and also was about the time when the
>Anglo-Saxons started making headway against the British Celts once again. It
>signalled the end of the ancient world and brought on the "modern" world.
About this signalling there is much discussion. I have also seen the
statement that the ancient age ended when Romulus Augustulus was
unthroned and replaced by Odoacar in 476 AD. Others have applied the
coming of the Dark Age to the closing of Plato's academy in Athens by
emperor Justinian, 529 AD. But I see your point... :-)
>This is relatively late for most people who think in terms of when the
>Medieval period may have started, but I think the transition from age-to-age
>is a very abrupt thing. Classical civilization was altered radically in the
>6th Century AD, and Tolkien may have agreed with that assessment to some
>extent.
I am indeed surprised that you did not set the beginning of the
current age to the hypothetic birth date of Jesus Christ.
>But I think one can only wonder about how long Celeborn stayed in
>Middle-earth. Since there is no record of his having left, it must be that
>many years after his departure Men or Hobbits went to Imladris and found no
>one there.
Anyway, Maglor was the last - ages later, he was known as Ahasver,
meanwhile converted to Judaism...
- Lalaith
----------------------------------------------------------------
"American English consists of five words: 1. OK, 2. Dollar,
3. Dollar, 4. Dollar, 5. Dollar."
(from a German travel guide)
Michael Martinez
In article <01bbe8f2$47fccc60$a0f3868b@default>, "Stephen Geard" <sge...@msn.com> wrote:
>Michael Martinez is getting a bit carried away on this one. Still, I guess
>we are all allowed a bit of arrant speculation from time to time. But
>specifically:
>
>
From some comment buried somewhere in POME about Eldarion living approximately
100 years after Aragorn's death. I don't have the book with me and cannot
check it, but if you look in the Index you'll find the page reference. It is,
I believe, one of those pages.
>> If we want to speculate on when Eldarion might have been born, I would
>>guess sometime in the years FO 30 - 40. This way he would have died no
>>older than 190 years and perhaps at only 180 years.
>
>Given that Elessar lived 209 years, why would Eldarion have lived
>significantly less?
209 years? I thought it was 190. To be honest, I didn't check his death age.
Just pulled that number out of the air.
>And why such a late birth-date? I have always imagined that Elessar and Arwen
>would have got into the family business fairly quickly. Afterall they were
>human, not elves with millenia to play with.
Is there some passage which states Eldarion was the eldest child? I don't
recall one.
In any event, if you look in the "Tale of Years" (LOTR), there is an entry for
some year when Sam, Rose, and Elanor go to Gondor for a year. I'm curious
about whether Tolkien intended that to coincide with the birth of Aragorn's
heir.
[Heck, if I'm going to speculate, I might as well go all out.]
Michael Martinez
In article <32b07722...@news.vistec.net>, andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de (Lalaith) wrote:
>mich...@swcp.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
[snip]
>So you agree now that "The Heirs of Elendil" may be considered more or
>less canonic?
Lalaith, why do I feel this is a loaded question? What would I be committing
myself to if I said "yes" or "no"? :)
[snip]
>>Why did I pick AD 550? Because that was about the time when the Gothic
>>Kingdom in Italy was destroyed, and also was about the time when the
>>Anglo-Saxons started making headway against the British Celts once again. It
>>signalled the end of the ancient world and brought on the "modern" world.
>
>About this signalling there is much discussion. I have also seen the
>statement that the ancient age ended when Romulus Augustulus was
>unthroned and replaced by Odoacar in 476 AD. Others have applied the
>coming of the Dark Age to the closing of Plato's academy in Athens by
>emperor Justinian, 529 AD. But I see your point... :-)
Heh. As the lead proponent for the creation of soc.history.ancient, I assure
you I am WELL versed in this "much discussion". :p
>>This is relatively late for most people who think in terms of when the
>>Medieval period may have started, but I think the transition from age-to-age
>>is a very abrupt thing. Classical civilization was altered radically in the
>>6th Century AD, and Tolkien may have agreed with that assessment to some
>>extent.
>
>I am indeed surprised that you did not set the beginning of the
>current age to the hypothetic birth date of Jesus Christ.
Well, I thought about it, but I don't think that would be consistent with
Tolkien's view that the ages were gradually shortening. In fact, an "age"
ends with some sort of cataclysmic event. AD 550 wasn't exactly cataclysmic,
but it was certainly more upsetting than AD 1 (in which year most historians
don't even feel Christ was really born).
David Salo
It is of some interest if one wishes to apply the measurement of "Ages"
to our time to examine just what an Age was in Middle-earth; what
circumscribed its end and beginning.
The First Age's end was marked by the downfall of Morgoth and of his
rule in Middle-earth.
The beginning of the Second Age was marked by the foundation of
Mithlond and Lindon, and within a few years by the colonization of Numenor
by the Edain; that is, it marked the beginning of new realms by the Eldar
and Edain, with little connection to the old realms in Beleriand.
The end of the Second Age was marked by the downfall of Sauron and his
loss of the One Ring, which appeared (at the time) to mark the end of evil
in that form in Middle-earth. It corresponded also to the downfall of
Numenor (about a century earlier) and the foundation of Gondor and Arnor.
The Third Age began with new kings of both Arnor and Gondor, and the
loss of living memory of Numenor by all but a few.
The Third Age ended with the final defeat of Sauron, and the political
revival of Gondor and Arnor as kingdoms in personal union.
So it appears that ages are marked by the defeat of a powerful evil
spirit (which does not seem applicable in our time) and by radical
political change, which sweeps away the old states and rulers, or
institutes new ones.
In European and near Asian history this has only happened a few times
on the requisite scale -- Cyrus' conquest of Babylonia and his
establishment of the Persian Empire in 539 BCE, or the victory by Alexander
over the Great King of Persia in 330 BCE (a very clean break) are possible
candidates. Yet from the vantage point of the middle ages looking back,
Europe appears to be little more than a collection of successor states to
the Roman Empire, reading Latin or Greek and following the last Imperial
religion, imbued with traditions of empire; just as Third Age western
Middle-earth was full of successor states to Gondor and Arnor, or of
peoples strongly influenced by them.
But as ages begin on an 'up' note, with the prevailing state dominant
and in full strength, it would seem that an "Age of Rome" would properly
begin with the establishment of Roman hegemony over the Mediterranean in
the middle of the 1st century BCE; the remainder of the age would involve
its slow decay. But the collapse of the Western Empire did not mark the
fall of the Empire as a whole: it persisted for another millennium, though
parochial western scholars prefer to call it the "Byzantine Empire". The
Byzantines always called _themselves_ 'Romaioi'; and their state, shrunken
though it was, still preserved the Roman tradition better than in the west,
comparable to Gondor's preservation of the traditions of Numenor. Tolkien
indeed made the comparison in his letter to Milton Waldman (#131), calling
Gondor "a kind of proud, venerable, but increasingly impotent Byzantium."
As long as Byzantium endured, the age could not have been said to end; but
the sack of Constantinople in 1453 brought new scholarship to an already
renascent West. The drastic cultural changes between c.1450 and 1520 might
mark the beginning of a new Age, which one can only suppose is still
continuing. In our times, 1500+ years for an Age is not too bad.
Although Tolkien said that a gap of 6000 years between our times and
the end of the Third Age would be sufficient for 'literary credibility', I
think it is not; 4000 BCE is too close to our times, and interferes too
much with what is known about history; allowing another 3000 years of a
Fourth Age to bring us up to 1000 BCE is simply impossible. I would prefer
to push it back to say 6000 BCE (if not earlier), giving a gap of 8000
years, and allowing for an entirely prehistoric Fourth Age of 6000-3000
BCE.
David Salo
Jim Gregors
Michael Martinez wrote:
>
> In article <01bbe8f2$47fccc60$a0f3868b@default>, "Stephen Geard" <sge...@msn.com> wrote:
> >Michael Martinez is getting a bit carried away on this one. Still, I guess
> >we are all allowed a bit of arrant speculation from time to time. But
> >specifically:
> >
> >
>
> From some comment buried somewhere in POME about Eldarion living approximately
> 100 years after Aragorn's death. I don't have the book with me and cannot
> check it, but if you look in the Index you'll find the page reference. It is,
> I believe, one of those pages.
>
You are right. The passage is on p.410, PoME.
> >> If we want to speculate on when Eldarion might have been born, I would
> >>guess sometime in the years FO 30 - 40. This way he would have died no
> >>older than 190 years and perhaps at only 180 years.
> >
> >Given that Elessar lived 209 years, why would Eldarion have lived
> >significantly less?
>
> 209 years? I thought it was 190. To be honest, I didn't check his death age.
> Just pulled that number out of the air.
>
Aragorn's age at the time of his death may have been either 190 or 210
years, depending on which version of Appendix A you choose. I agree
with you that Eldarion died around the same age as Aragorn (within +/-
20 years at the most) and did not achieve the life-span of the early
kings of Numenore.
> >And why such a late birth-date? I have always imagined that Elessar and Arwen
> >would have got into the family business fairly quickly. Afterall they were
> >human, not elves with millenia to play with.
>
> Is there some passage which states Eldarion was the eldest child? I don't
> recall one.
>
Neither do I. Since he has at least two sisters, he could have been
born quite late.
Jim G.
Janez Brank
Michael Martinez wrote:
>
> 209 years? I thought it was 190. To be honest, I didn't check his death age.
> Just pulled that number out of the air.
The number 190 is given in the LotR, Appendix A, (iii) (near the end of
the section, page 324).
----------------------------------------
Janez Brank (janez...@guest.arnes.si)
Lalaith
dmro...@students.wisc.edu (David Salo) wrote:
> Although Tolkien said that a gap of 6000 years between our times and
>the end of the Third Age would be sufficient for 'literary credibility', I
>think it is not; 4000 BCE is too close to our times, and interferes too
>much with what is known about history; allowing another 3000 years of a
>Fourth Age to bring us up to 1000 BCE is simply impossible. I would prefer
>to push it back to say 6000 BCE (if not earlier), giving a gap of 8000
>years, and allowing for an entirely prehistoric Fourth Age of 6000-3000
>BCE.
Now this is really a futile discussion. Whether 4000 or 6000 BCE, at
no time did the map of Europe resemble that of Middle-earth, nor does
its history fit to anything known by archaeological or historical
evidence. You have to accept that Arda just is not our real earth but
only one which could have been: a parallel world which started out
differently and developed into a different direction. Given that, the
hypothetical distance between "them" and us is entirely irrelevant.
- Lalaith
- Lalaith
------------------------------------------------------
OBJECTIVE (adj.): my opinion.
SUBJECTIVE (adj.): the others' opinion.
Lalaith
mich...@basis.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
>>So you agree now that "The Heirs of Elendil" may be considered more or
>>less canonic?
>
>Lalaith, why do I feel this is a loaded question? What would I be committing
>myself to if I said "yes" or "no"? :)
Your Fall to Darkness, yes or no.
>Well, I thought about it, but I don't think that would be consistent with
>Tolkien's view that the ages were gradually shortening. In fact, an "age"
>ends with some sort of cataclysmic event. AD 550 wasn't exactly cataclysmic,
>but it was certainly more upsetting than AD 1 (in which year most historians
>don't even feel Christ was really born).
Perhaps Constantine's decision to make Byzantium the Christian capital
of the Empire would be such an event? Or the final split into West and
East Rome, from which Europe is suffering till this very day (it is
not accidental that the borderline rane through ex-Yugoslavia)?
Lalaith
mich...@basis.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
>Is there some passage which states Eldarion was the eldest child? I don't
>recall one.
Neither do I. (Perhaps a compilation of all data we find in the
various sources concerning the Fourth Age would be feasible?)
>In any event, if you look in the "Tale of Years" (LOTR), there is an entry for
>some year when Sam, Rose, and Elanor go to Gondor for a year. I'm curious
>about whether Tolkien intended that to coincide with the birth of Aragorn's
>heir.
Irrelevant assumption and non sequitur.
David Salo
In article <32b2a66d...@news.vistec.net>,
andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de (Lalaith) wrote:
> Now this is really a futile discussion.
So is every other discussion that occurs here. What's the difference?
> Whether 4000 or 6000 BCE, at
> no time did the map of Europe resemble that of Middle-earth,
And at no time did the shape of Europe resemble that which is given in
Ptolemy's _Cosmographia_, or the various mediaeval Mappae Mundi: so your
point is?
> nor does
> its history fit to anything known by archaeological or historical
> evidence.
Nor does Malory's (or Wolfram von Eschenbach's) Arthurian Britain "fit
to anything known by archaeological or historical evidence." Which does
not mean that the legend does not still have a temporal locus of c. 5th
century CE. So your point is?
> You have to accept that Arda just is not our real earth but
> only one which could have been: a parallel world which started out
> differently and developed into a different direction.
I don't _have_ to accept anything, including that interpretation, which
is certainly not what Tolkien envisioned. Tolkien wrote that he had chosen
an imaginary historical period of _our real earth_ to write his story in:
Letter #165: "'Middle-earth', by the way, is not a name of a never-never
land without relation to the world we live in... And though I have not
attempted to relate the shape of the mountains and land-masses to what
geologists may say or surmise about the nearer past, imaginatively this
'history' is supposed to take place in a period of the actual Old World of
this planet."
Letter #183: "Middle-earth is not an imaginary world...The theatre of my
tale is this earth, the one in which we now live, but the historical period
is imaginary. The essentials of that abiding place are all there (at any
rate for inhabitants of N[orth] W[est] Europe), so naturally it feels
familiar, even if a little glorified by the enchantment of distance in
time."
Letter #211: "I have, I suppose, constructed an imaginary _time_, but
kept my feet on my own mother earth for _place_."
_The Lord of the Rings_ prologue: "Those days, the Third Age of
Middle-earth, are now long past, and the shape of all lands has been
changed; but the regions in which Hobbits then lived were doubtless the
same as those in which they still linger: the North-West of the Old World,
east of the Sea."
Appendix D: "The year no doubt was of the same length, for long ago as
those times are now reckoned in years and lives of men, they were not very
remote according to the memory of the Earth."
The distinction between that and the pseudoscientific jargon of
"parallel worlds" or "alternate realities" is not small. Use of imaginary
history is the staple of all the writers of mythical tales: whether those
of the Carlovingian, Arthurian, or Germanic romances - clearly sited in
historical time, though decidedly contradicting our historical data - or of
Homer, or the authors of the Mahabharata, who set their epics at a
reasonably well-defined time, but one so far back in history that at that
time "anything might happen". Likewise with the Kalevala; likewise with
the fairy-tales that begin "Once upon a time".
Unlike parallel worlds, which (like parallel lines) never meet or have
contact with each other, imaginary histories, if followed far enough into
the future, eventually do merge into the known present: Arthur's Britain
becomes the England of the Seven Kingdoms, the realms of Sigurdhr and Atli
and Gunnarr eventually become the Holy Roman Empire and Hungary, the world
of the Achaean heroes eventually becomes just Greece and Ionia, while (in
the Roman vision) the story of Aeneas becomes part of the early history of
Italy. Likewise, the history of the Three Ages is clearly intended to be
understood as an imaginary prologue to the present time of _our real
earth_.
> Given that, the
> hypothetical distance between "them" and us is entirely irrelevant.
Maybe, but not to Tolkien, who thought it sufficiently relevant to write
a note about it, concerning "literary credibility": that is, whether a
reader would be successfully able to suspend disbelief, if told that
such-and-such a story took place X years ago? I merely wanted to point out
that, if one allows 3000 years for an entirely prehistoric Fourth Age, a
Third Age ending in c. 4000 BCE no longer possesses even "literary
credibility".
David Salo
David Salo
In article <32B2CF...@concentric.net>, Jim Gregors
<sl...@concentric.net> wrote:
> You are right. The passage is on p.410, PoME.
This excerpt from a letter (which had already appeared in the published
edition of Tolkien's letters) reads, in part: "I have written nothing
beyond the first few years of the Fourth Age. (Except the beginning of a
tale supposed to refer to the end of the reign of Eldarion about 100 years
after the death of Aragorn.)"
But now, with the actual tale that he was referring to in front of us,
we can see that Tolkien mis-remembered the occasion of the story, which
_actually_ occurs five years or less after the death of Aragorn.
Now it may be that Tolkien's false memory reflects his own conviction
that Eldarion's reign would last about 100 years beyond Aragorn's death;
but we cannot be sure about that. There are a number of writings from
these last few years of Tolkien's life which contain startling
contradictions to everything which had gone before, and which cannot - if
any kind of coherence is to be maintained in the body of work - be
considered 'canonical'. E.g. the placement of Turgon as Finwe's son; and
the revision of the story of Galadriel and Celeborn, which makes Celeborn
into a Telerin Amanya elf, directly contradicting statements made in _The
Lord of the Rings_. Therefore I am skeptical about drawing conclusions
from this statement.
It may also be that this mis-statement contains the germ of a revision
of the tale; but given that he also disparages the possibility of the tale
in the same letter ("the King's Peace would contain no tales worth
recounting") this seems to me extremely doubtful.
David Salo
David Salo
One more (Letter #151): "Middle-earth is just archaic English for _he
oikoumene_, the inhabited world of men. It lay then as it does. In fact
just as it does, round and unescapable. That is partly the point. The new
situation, established at the beginning of the Third Age, leads on
eventually and inevitably to ordinary History, and we here see the process
culminating."
DS
Michael Martinez
On 12/15/96 3:48AM, in message <32b2aa5e...@news.vistec.net>, Lalaith
<andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de> wrote:
> >In any event, if you look in the "Tale of Years" (LOTR), there is an entry
> >for some year when Sam, Rose, and Elanor go to Gondor for a year. I'm
> >curious about whether Tolkien intended that to coincide with the birth of
> >Aragorn's heir.
>
> Irrelevant assumption and non sequitur.
Hardly, since I was posing a question, not making/stating an assumption.
And as for it being a non sequitor, I can only point out that we are
discussing possible years for the birth of Eldarion. Since no birth year is
given, all the years in the first half of the 1st century Fourth Age are
eligible for consideration.
Hence, it's quite extremely relevant and it follows that one should ask
whether Sam's trip to Gondor in SR 1442 (FO 20) was related to the birth of
Eldarion, Aragorn's heir.
Michael Martinez
On 12/15/96 3:48AM, in message <32b2a8b8...@news.vistec.net>, Lalaith
<andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de> wrote:
> Perhaps Constantine's decision to make Byzantium the Christian capital
> of the Empire would be such an event? Or the final split into West and
> East Rome, from which Europe is suffering till this very day (it is
> not accidental that the borderline rane through ex-Yugoslavia)?
The First Age ended with the War of Wrath.
The Second Age ended with the War of the Last Alliance of Elves and Men.
The Third Age ended with the War of the Ring.
My guess is that the Fourth Age should have ended with some sort of war or
something. The 14th Century BC was pretty much a period of turmoil (although
the centuries to either side of it were somewhat rough, too).
We can postulate the Fall of Troy and the Exodus may have occurred around the
end of the Fourth Age. In northern Europe a new culture, the Lusatian
culture, appeared around that time. They had walled towns and roads and dwelt
mostly in what are now Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia. Their culture
is documented only through archaeology, of course, but it lasted something
like 600-800 years.
So, if we accept that period as being around the end of the Fourth Age, what
would mark the end of the Fifth? Perhaps Alexander's march across the eastern
Mediterranean and parts of Asia was "cataclysmic", but I'm not sure it was,
since he was really spreading Hellenistic (is that the right term?) culture
all over the place.
By AD 550, at least, the last vestiges of Roman power collapsed in the West
and the Ostrogoths lost their bid to remain an independent but associated part
of the Empire. The break between East and West was completed in that century
and the new Germanic nations began to take shape: the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms,
the Frankish empire, and the Visigothic Kingdom. Of course the Vandal kingdom
was destroyed and the Lombard kingdom was yet to be created, so there was
still some turmoil.
Lalaith
mich...@swcp.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
>On 12/15/96 3:48AM, in message <32b2a8b8...@news.vistec.net>, Lalaith
><andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps Constantine's decision to make Byzantium the Christian capital
>> of the Empire would be such an event? Or the final split into West and
>> East Rome, from which Europe is suffering till this very day (it is
>> not accidental that the borderline rane through ex-Yugoslavia)?
>
>The First Age ended with the War of Wrath.
>
>The Second Age ended with the War of the Last Alliance of Elves and Men.
>
>The Third Age ended with the War of the Ring.
>
>My guess is that the Fourth Age should have ended with some sort of war or
>something. The 14th Century BC was pretty much a period of turmoil (although
>the centuries to either side of it were somewhat rough, too).
However, I agree that the 14th century is a good candidate. The
invasion of the Sea Peoples was certainly one of the most drastic
events in the younger history of the Mediterranean. The Santorin
eruption of 1644 BC may be another option.
>So, if we accept that period as being around the end of the Fourth Age, what
>would mark the end of the Fifth? Perhaps Alexander's march across the eastern
>Mediterranean and parts of Asia was "cataclysmic", but I'm not sure it was,
>since he was really spreading Hellenistic (is that the right term?) culture
>all over the place.
Hellenistic is the right term, yes. Perhaps you have to consider
Alexander's march together with the events before: the terrible
Peloponnesian War which destroyed the Greece of old, the hegemonial
rise of Philipp II. and finally of Alexander - this very much changed
the ancient world.
The 6th century BC may be another choice, that mysterious time when
many prophets of new religions appeared: Zoroaster, Buddha, perhaps
Ezechiel, and others.
What do you think of the Third Punic War?
Lalaith
dmro...@students.wisc.edu (David Salo) wrote:
>> Now this is really a futile discussion.
>
> So is every other discussion that occurs here. What's the difference?
Some are more futile than others...
>> Whether 4000 or 6000 BCE, at
>> no time did the map of Europe resemble that of Middle-earth,
>
> And at no time did the shape of Europe resemble that which is given in
>Ptolemy's _Cosmographia_, or the various mediaeval Mappae Mundi: so your
>point is?
Nobody planted stories on Ptolemy's Cosmographia, expecting it to be
sufficiently precise.
> I don't _have_ to accept anything, including that interpretation, which
>is certainly not what Tolkien envisioned. Tolkien wrote that he had chosen
>an imaginary historical period of _our real earth_ to write his story in:
> Letter #165: "'Middle-earth', by the way, is not a name of a never-never
>land without relation to the world we live in... <snip>
> Letter #183: "Middle-earth is not an imaginary world <snip>
> Letter #211: "I have, I suppose, constructed an imaginary _time_, but
>kept my feet on my own mother earth for _place_."
<snip>
Letter #211: "All I can say is that, if it were 'history', it would be
difficult to fit the lands and events (or 'cultures') into such
evidence as we possess, archaeological or geological, concerning the
nearer or remoter part of what is now called Europe ... I could have
fitted things in with greater versimilitude, if the story had not
become too far developed, before the question ever occurred to me. I
doubt if there would have been much gain ..."
> The distinction between that and the pseudoscientific jargon of
>"parallel worlds" or "alternate realities" is not small. Use of imaginary
>history is the staple of all the writers of mythical tales: whether those
>of the Carlovingian, Arthurian, or Germanic romances - clearly sited in
>historical time, though decidedly contradicting our historical data - or of
>Homer, or the authors of the Mahabharata, who set their epics at a
>reasonably well-defined time, but one so far back in history that at that
>time "anything might happen". Likewise with the Kalevala; likewise with
>the fairy-tales that begin "Once upon a time".
Yet they rarely assume a continent vastly different from ours. The
Nibelungenlied, King Arthur, or Homer all feature fictitious
characters but (mostly) real places. From their point of view, it
COULD HAVE HAPPENED like that. While Middle-earth, alas, could not,
because back then Europe certainly was not as Tolkien described it.
Michael Martinez
In article <32b714d...@news.vistec.net>, andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de (Lalaith) wrote:
>What do you think of the Third Punic War?
I don't think it was of sufficient historical weight to be considered the end
of an age. Carthage by that time was no longer the great power it had once
been.
Morgoth was dominant at the end of the First Age. It took the coming of the
Host of Valinor to unseat him.
Sauron was not so much dominant as in a position to become dominant at the end
of the Second Age.
I think he was in a better position at the end of the Third Age.
But in all three ages the end came when a great power was toppled. The
question really is one of: "What marks the end of an age when there are no
great powers?"
At least, that's the way I see it. Perhaps it would require a change in the
patterns of power in the world. In which case, the Third Punic War is a good
candidate, but then so is Alexander's death.
Eric Adam Smith
: mich...@swcp.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
: >On 12/15/96 3:48AM, in message <32b2a8b8...@news.vistec.net>, Lalaith
: ><andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de> wrote:
: >
: >> Perhaps Constantine's decision to make Byzantium the Christian capital
: >> of the Empire would be such an event? Or the final split into West and
: >> East Rome, from which Europe is suffering till this very day (it is
: >> not accidental that the borderline rane through ex-Yugoslavia)?
: >
: >The First Age ended with the War of Wrath.
: >
: >The Second Age ended with the War of the Last Alliance of Elves and Men.
: >
: >The Third Age ended with the War of the Ring.
: >
: >My guess is that the Fourth Age should have ended with some sort of war or
: >something. The 14th Century BC was pretty much a period of turmoil (although
: >the centuries to either side of it were somewhat rough, too).
How about the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in the 1400's?
It was the final destruction of a long-lived empire (the Byzantine empire
being nothing more than a continuation of the Roman), and the
establishment of a new order as the Muslim Turks first became a true
threat to Christian Europe.
Certainly sounds like the beginning of a new age to me.
--
Eric Adam Smith
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt6699b
Internet: gt6...@prism.gatech.edu
Jim Gregors
Eric Adam Smith wrote:
>
> : mich...@swcp.com (Michael Martinez) wrote:
>
> : >On 12/15/96 3:48AM, in message <32b2a8b8...@news.vistec.net>, Lalaith
> : ><andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de> wrote:
> : >
> : >> Perhaps Constantine's decision to make Byzantium the Christian capital
> : >> of the Empire would be such an event? Or the final split into West and
> : >> East Rome, from which Europe is suffering till this very day (it is
> : >> not accidental that the borderline rane through ex-Yugoslavia)?
> : >
> : >The First Age ended with the War of Wrath.
> : >
> : >The Second Age ended with the War of the Last Alliance of Elves and Men.
> : >
> : >The Third Age ended with the War of the Ring.
> : >
> : >My guess is that the Fourth Age should have ended with some sort of war or
> : >something. The 14th Century BC was pretty much a period of turmoil (although
> : >the centuries to either side of it were somewhat rough, too).
>
> How about the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in the 1400's?
> It was the final destruction of a long-lived empire (the Byzantine empire
> being nothing more than a continuation of the Roman), and the
> establishment of a new order as the Muslim Turks first became a true
> threat to Christian Europe.
>
> Certainly sounds like the beginning of a new age to me.
>
I think the Muslim Turks were a threat to Europe long before they
conquered Constantinople, but you have a point.
Jim G.
David Salo
In article <32b6c8a9...@news.vistec.net>,
andrea...@wiesbaden.netsurf.de (Lalaith) wrote:
> Nobody planted stories on Ptolemy's Cosmographia, expecting it to be
> sufficiently precise.
I'm not altogether sure about that. How about Mandeville? (Mappae
mundi, anyway). But my point is really that the idea of maps as a
reliable, realistic depiction of the world is very much a modern
phenomenon. In the ancient and medieval world, maps were more nearly
illustrations of particular views of the world than scientific artifacts.
The T-O world maps, for instance are just reflections of a Christian
worldview, which demands that Jerusalem be at the center of the world, and
Eden be at the far east.
The other aspect of maps was as illustrations for travellers' tales.
Ptolemy's Cosmographia incorporates that aspect for most of its depiction
of the distant east: a longitude reckoning is based on such-and-such a
traveller claiming that he had gone so many days east by sea or land to get
to such-and-such a point. Ptolemy's maps also incorporate wholly mythical
locations: the 'Ottorocoras' at the far east of his map is nothing more
than the Indian 'Uttarakuru', a mythical land of the far north!
An even more extreme example, and perhaps more relevant for this topic,
is the maps produced in the 15th century based on Marco Polo's travels,
which were generally attached to the eastern edge of Ptolemy's maps.
Though these maps all show a family resemblance, they bear not the
slightest resemblance to the modern depictions of the eastward regions of
Asia: the only detail they have correct is that Asia has an eastern coast
with a general north-south trend! Otherwise, lands, mountains, and rivers
are scattered about: 'Tebet' (Tibet) becomes a region not far from the sea,
just west of Bangala (Bengal), which is on the Pacific Ocean! and north and
_east_ of Manzi, sc. the Sung-ruled lands of southern China.
The Map to the Lord of the Rings is just an illustration of a
particular voyage. As such, we shouldn't expect too much of it in terms of
its accuracy; and its failure to reflect what we know or believe about our
geography is not a sign that it is the geography of a 'parallel world'.
> > Letter #165: "'Middle-earth', by the way, is not a name of a never-never
> >land without relation to the world we live in... <snip>
> > Letter #183: "Middle-earth is not an imaginary world <snip>
> > Letter #211: "I have, I suppose, constructed an imaginary _time_, but
> >kept my feet on my own mother earth for _place_."
> <snip>
>
> Letter #211: "All I can say is that, if it were 'history', it would be
> difficult to fit the lands and events (or 'cultures') into such
> evidence as we possess, archaeological or geological, concerning the
> nearer or remoter part of what is now called Europe ... I could have
> fitted things in with greater versimilitude, if the story had not
> become too far developed, before the question ever occurred to me. I
> doubt if there would have been much gain ..."
I don't believe that there is any contradiction between the statements
in these letters. I have never suggested that _The Lord of the Rings_ was
'history', or that it in fact represents events that either did or could
have occurred in the distant past of Europe, before the Iron Age; I have
suggested that Tolkien intended, in literary terms, for the War of the Ring
to have taken place in an imaginary epoch of the past, antecedent to our
present, and reflected - if not in geology, geography, or archaeology - in
half-forgotten details of legends (witness the excursus on the Sheave
traditions within the Lost Road-Notion Club Papers stories) and also,
perhaps, in language. This is, indeed, the whole point of the Notion Club
Papers Time Travel story; that by going back into the past, one would
eventually reach the age of Numenor, and discover what real 'history' lay
behind some of the myths of Western Europe.
Also remember that when Tolkien was writing, in the 1940s, the theory
of plate tectonics and continental drift had very little credibility; it
was opposed by other theories, which involved the existence of 'land
bridges' between the various continents. This involved the supposition
that huge areas of land or sea could rise from the ocean, or sink back
under it. Within this kind of theory, ideas such as 'Atlantis', or the
kind of massive deformations of coastline which would be required to
transform Middle-earth of the Third Age into modern Europe, had a modestly
greater amount of plausibility.
> Yet they rarely assume a continent vastly different from ours. The
> Nibelungenlied, King Arthur, or Homer all feature fictitious
> characters but (mostly) real places.
Oh? Where is Lyonesse? Where is Cameliard? Where is the Grail
kingdom of Listinoise? Where is Gore? Where is Surluse? Where is
Strangore? Where is Garlot? Where is Camelot? Where is Bedegraine?
Where is Lonezep? Where is Carbonec? Where is Avilion?
> From their point of view, it
> COULD HAVE HAPPENED like that. While Middle-earth, alas, could not,
> because back then Europe certainly was not as Tolkien described it.
All you are saying is that for you, no story of this type could _ever_
have even 'literary credibility' (and that, likewise, Volsunga Sage (for
instance) is persistently un-credible as a story of 5th century Europe).
Fine. I won't dispute that. Yet I think that Tolkien thought that it
could have such credibility - provided one did not examine, say,
geographical details too closely - and attempted to provide a few links
between this imaginary past age and the present. But if it makes you - or
anyone else - who needs to 'frame' the story, more comfortable to set it in
an 'alternate universe' you may of course do so. It detracts from the
power of the stories to appear to cast new light on old myths, but the
increase in credibility may (for you) be sufficient to make that worth
while. Since I find 'alternate universes' no more credible than 'imaginary
pasts', it doesn't really work for me.
David Salo
Lirazel
David Salo writes:
>But my point is really that the idea of maps as a
>reliable, realistic depiction of the world is very much a modern
>phenomenon. In the ancient and medieval world, maps were more nearly
>illustrations of particular views of the world than scientific artifacts.
I am reminded of Dante's cosmology/geography, which was Ptolemaic with
Christian adaptions, and had *no land at all* in the Southern Hemisphere,
save for the Island of Purgatory! This, though Dante knew quite well that
Africa continued well south of Jerusalem. It's notable, as well, that the
only folks he met anywhere were either people he knew, people from recent
history, or people from Graeco-Roman mythology. I certainly don't expect
to find Hell (or Heaven) populated entirely by famous people and Italians,
but it doesn't keep me from enjoying _The Comedy_, and from getting
worthwhile truth from it.
I used to enjoy trying to "fit" Tolkien's Middle-Earth into the Fields I
Know--it seemed to lend an air of immanent enchantment to everything, as
if every tree were about to speak, or as if hobbits were watching every
path in the woods.
"And do legends live and walk the green earth?"
"The green earth, you say? That is a mighty matter of legend, though you
walk it in broad daylight." (? TT buried in son's pig-room)
Which is why I prefer the "unrecorded past" rather than the "parallel
worlds" interpretation.
Lirazel