Dagor Dagorath = Armageddon???
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
Has Tolkien written anything coherent on D.D.
in the post-LotR era?
Archie
Conrad Dunkerson
news:ah0ag3$1om$1...@gavrilo.mtu.ru...
> Can anybody tell me what the Battle of Battles is?
> Has Tolkien written anything coherent on D.D.
> in the post-LotR era?
The Dagor Dagorath / Second Prophecy of Mandos / Last Battle was a
concept which evolved along with the rest of Tolkien's mythology
practically from beginning through the end of his work on Middle-
Earth. He may have been considering abandoning it very late in
life, but neither of the passages suggesting that is conclusive and
there are contemporary texts which continue to refer to it.
Christopher concluded that it >was< meant to be abandoned, and left
it out of The Silmarillion as a result... but was then at pains
trying to explain why it kept cropping up in subsequent texts.
Tolkien described Dagor Dagorath as a 'Ragnarok like' last battle
in which Melkor would return to Arda and be defeated... after which
the Silmarils would be recovered, the Two Trees reborn, and the world
broken and remade. Information about it can be found in almost all
of the HoME books (the most notable exceptions being those which
focus on the LotR drafts). The primary 'post LotR' information
about the Last Battle can be found in Morgoth's Ring though there are
also important bits in PoME and WotJ (the three 'post LotR' volumes).
The facts listed above were essentially consistent throughout all
versions. The primary item of variation was the combatants taking
part in the fight.
Bagronk the Happy Orc
<conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> in my phone cable...
>
> The Dagor Dagorath / Second Prophecy of Mandos / Last Battle was a
> concept which evolved along with the rest of Tolkien's mythology
> practically from beginning through the end of his work on Middle-
> Earth. He may have been considering abandoning it very late in
> life, but neither of the passages suggesting that is conclusive and
> there are contemporary texts which continue to refer to it.
> Christopher concluded that it >was< meant to be abandoned, and left
> it out of The Silmarillion as a result... but was then at pains
> trying to explain why it kept cropping up in subsequent texts.
>
> Tolkien described Dagor Dagorath as a 'Ragnarok like' last battle
> in which Melkor would return to Arda and be defeated... after which
> the Silmarils would be recovered, the Two Trees reborn, and the world
I mostly agree with you, Conrad. I'm quite sure it was meant to be
abandoned - it just does not fit into the history of Middle-earth as
it evolved in Tolkien's later writings. How should Melkor return to
Arda? Last we hear of him he's tossed into the outer regions of Ea,
bound, his feet hewn off, utterly powerless. I can think of several
in-story explanations how he could return, but none of them is
convincing.
a) He could somehow regain some power, grow new feet and return.
_Pro_: This might have been Tolkien's original idea before he noticed
how ultimate his defeat was at the end of the First Age. _Con_: Melkor
would not be able to do so, at least not as long as the other Valar
supervised the world. Of course, Eru might intervene - but why should
he do so?
b) Some other Dark Lord could take Morgoth's place and fight Dagor
Dagorath for him. _Pro_: This already happend once, with Sauron.
_Con_: We never hear of any other Ainu who would be able to take
Sauron's place. There might be some Balrogs left, but they don't seem
to be very interested in commanding great realms and conquering the
world.
c) The powers of old - Valar and Elves - would continue to fade away
from Middle-earth, while men suffered from another civilisation
breakdown. The power of 'good' in ME would be so diminuished that even
a relatively small and yet unknown agent of evil could become a threat
to all civilisation and life. _Pro_: This goes well with the general
'fading' of Valar and Elves. _Con_: It would reduce Dagor Dagorath to
a rather meager battle, not worth being named "Battle of the Battles".
My own little wacky theory that has just evolved: is it possible to
fight a Dagor Dagorath _without_ any supernatural forces? I doubt that
in Fouth Age or later, given the general tendency, any Ainu or
Elf-king would be able to set up a great realm in ME. Maybe Dagor
Dagorath was meant to be a battle between humans? Our World Wars have
shown that we alone are able to fight battles which can easily measure
up with any massacre of Ages I to III. An atomic world war (the danger
was very present at Tolkien's time) would serve rather well. Mankind
eliminated - the history and legends of Middle-earth coming to an end
- sounds like the right time for Eru to end this little Ea experiment
and summon the ghosts of the fallen to the evaluation of the
experiment. No Melkor involved, but our technology could be
interpreted as 'Melkor's work' or his 'influence remaining in Arda
Marred'. (Maybe nuclear bombs are misleading here, as they were not
discovered in the 20es and 30es - but WWI worked pretty well without
them.) _Con_: This, of course, is not only fatalistic, but also close
to an allegory, which Tolkien despised. But it seems the only possible
explanation to me, and the alternative is dropping the whole Dagor
Dagorath thing.
Comments?
--
Bagronk the Happy Orc
I suspect the problem is that you have too many paper clips up your
nose. (Prof. Urban "Reg" Chronotis)
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
>I found some words from "Conrad Dunkerson"
><conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> in my phone cable...
>>
>
>I mostly agree with you, Conrad. I'm quite sure it was meant to be
>abandoned - it just does not fit into the history of Middle-earth as
>it evolved in Tolkien's later writings. How should Melkor return to
>Arda? Last we hear of him he's tossed into the outer regions of Ea,
>bound, his feet hewn off, utterly powerless. I can think of several
>in-story explanations how he could return, but none of them is
>convincing.
Forgive my inquisitiveness, but what exactly was done to M./M.?
I got an impression (from M.'s Ring?) that he was physically executed,
not only crippled/chained (as the published Silm goes).
>
>a) He could somehow regain some power, grow new feet and return.
>_Pro_: This might have been Tolkien's original idea before he noticed
>how ultimate his defeat was at the end of the First Age. _Con_: Melkor
>would not be able to do so, at least not as long as the other Valar
>supervised the world. Of course, Eru might intervene - but why should
>he do so?
The Valar could lose their prescience due to the abrupt stop in the Music.
Manwe/Varda are groping in the mist of ignorance. Earendil could be
drawn away from the Door (he may err some day).
There are seeds of Morgoth's lies lying under the sky in the hearts of mortals.
>
>b) Some other Dark Lord could take Morgoth's place and fight Dagor
>Dagorath for him. _Pro_: This already happend once, with Sauron.
>_Con_: We never hear of any other Ainu who would be able to take
>Sauron's place. There might be some Balrogs left, but they don't seem
>to be very interested in commanding great realms and conquering the
>world.
That's a non-option.
>
>c) The powers of old - Valar and Elves - would continue to fade away
>from Middle-earth, while men suffered from another civilisation
>breakdown. The power of 'good' in ME would be so diminuished that even
>a relatively small and yet unknown agent of evil could become a threat
>to all civilisation and life. _Pro_: This goes well with the general
>'fading' of Valar and Elves. _Con_: It would reduce Dagor Dagorath to
>a rather meager battle, not worth being named "Battle of the Battles".
Agents of Evil pop up in another bestseller - the Apocalypse. The whole point
is that D.D. pretty much sounds like (*not resembles*!) the final battle of
Christianity. As we know from the Revelation, after a thousand years of the rule
of the saints the devil will come up with a great force.
>
>My own little wacky theory that has just evolved: is it possible to
>fight a Dagor Dagorath _without_ any supernatural forces? I doubt that
>in Fouth Age or later, given the general tendency, any Ainu or
>Elf-king would be able to set up a great realm in ME.
Elves were certain to have no _real_, physical power at the end of Arda
Marred, 'cause their hroar were a bit Morgoth-stained. So the Valar could
have no such host at their disposal as in the War of the Jewels, when
the High-Elves were replenished (re-embodied and sent back), albeit with
a delay.
The question of 'choice of players', i.e. Turin vs. Tulkas who would finally
overthrow Morgoth himself, IMO, is linked with the fading of the Elves.
> Maybe Dagor
>Dagorath was meant to be a battle between humans? Our World Wars have
>shown that we alone are able to fight battles which can easily measure
>up with any massacre of Ages I to III.
BTW, how many were Morgoth's servants in the War of the Jewels? If Sauron
could contrive a 1,5 M army, then Morgoth could go for 3-5 million Orcs
(remember that all Beleriand and the North were ablaze with war). And the WJ
outlasted both WWI and WWII.
> An atomic world war (the danger
>was very present at Tolkien's time) would serve rather well. Mankind
>eliminated - the history and legends of Middle-earth coming to an end
>- sounds like the right time for Eru to end this little Ea experiment
>and summon the ghosts of the fallen to the evaluation of the
>experiment. No Melkor involved, but our technology could be
>interpreted as 'Melkor's work' or his 'influence remaining in Arda
>Marred'. (Maybe nuclear bombs are misleading here, as they were not
>discovered in the 20es and 30es - but WWI worked pretty well without
>them.) _Con_: This, of course, is not only fatalistic, but also close
>to an allegory, which Tolkien despised. But it seems the only possible
>explanation to me, and the alternative is dropping the whole Dagor
>Dagorath thing.
>
>Comments?
>
1. D.D. has to have an object, that is the goal that Morgoth strives to attain.
Candidate version: Morgoth tries to avert the conversion from Arda Marred
to Arda Healed.
2. Eru's got to have some logic behind the design of the D.D.
C.V.: Breaking the Imbar and healing it with the Silmarils, probably - a technicality
to complete the removal of Morgoth's traces.
3. Morgoth must find some way to regain his physical body.
C.V.: Grow it.
4. M. has to escape somehow.
C.V.: Negligence and ignorance on the part of the Valar and Earendil, maybe -
some Mannish attempt to rescue M. (The Ban was: "Don't you touch that Door!"
<grin>)
5. M. has to be overthrown by someone in a personal combat.
C.V.: No idea, guys. Turin doesn't fit here. Tulkas? Too rash.
Cheers,
Archie
Conrad Dunkerson
news:ug2eju47nbcgk3hq5...@4ax.com...
> I'm quite sure it was meant to be abandoned - it just does not fit
> into the history of Middle-earth as it evolved in Tolkien's later
> writings.
How so? I don't see that at all... especially given that Tolkien
continued to write it in along with his later texts.
> How should Melkor return to Arda? Last we hear of him he's
> tossed into the outer regions of Ea, bound, his feet hewn off,
> utterly powerless.
There is no indication that he was 'utterly powerless' and even if
we take the line about his 'feet being hewn out from under him' to
mean that they were cut off it remains possible that he could
eventually repair the damage.
That said... how is this any different from the earlier writings?
Melkor was ALWAYS cast out into the void... and he always returned
for a final battle. That was true from the earliest versions of
the mythology to the latest. There were two passages which >might<
suggest that Tolkien changed his mind about this very late, but even
if so it still 'fit' with all versions of the mythology that Tolkien
had actually WRITTEN... in the same ways it always had.
> a) He could somehow regain some power, grow new feet and return.
> _Pro_: This might have been Tolkien's original idea before he noticed
> how ultimate his defeat was at the end of the First Age.
Something which he apparently 'overlooked' for more than a quarter
century.
> _Con_: Melkor would not be able to do so,
Why not?
> at least not as long as the other Valar supervised the world.
Which, of course, Tolkien specifically said that they didn't. Why
look for explanations for 'how Melkor could return' when Tolkien
specifically told us?
"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..."
LROW, Quenta Silmarillion - Conclusion ~31
<snip remaining theories>
The Valar (Powers) would slowly grow weaker over the millennia until
they are no longer powerful enough to keep Melkor out. I don't see
anything in the later versions of the mythology which would prevent
that.
Bagronk the Happy Orc
> news:ug2eju47nbcgk3hq5...@4ax.com...
>
> > tossed into the outer regions of Ea, bound, his feet hewn off,
> > utterly powerless.
>
> There is no indication that he was 'utterly powerless' and even if
> we take the line about his 'feet being hewn out from under him' to
> mean that they were cut off it remains possible that he could
> eventually repair the damage.
I don't believe so, for he could not even completely repair the stabs
he received from Fingolfin. And that was still before his realm was
hewn to pieces once again.
> > at least not as long as the other Valar supervised the world.
>
> Which, of course, Tolkien specifically said that they didn't. Why
> look for explanations for 'how Melkor could return' when Tolkien
> specifically told us?
>
> "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..."
> LROW, Quenta Silmarillion - Conclusion ~31
>
> <snip remaining theories>
>
> The Valar (Powers) would slowly grow weaker over the millennia until
> they are no longer powerful enough to keep Melkor out. I don't see
> anything in the later versions of the mythology which would prevent
> that.
Thanks for the source, I'm still reading BoLT1 and didn't know it. But
I still can't see why Morgoth should be anything else but powerless. I
don't even have an idea how he could get rid of that chain Angainor,
which served its purpose already when he was much more powerful. And
why do you assume that Morgoth should be excluded from the waning of
the Valar?
And even if he somehow could manage it - the problems I talked about
in my theory c), which you snipped, remain the same: there would be
very weak Valar, an at least equally weak Melkor, and these shadows of
Ainur should wage a battle worth the name "Battle of Battles"?
AC
>
> Thanks for the source, I'm still reading BoLT1 and didn't know it. But
> I still can't see why Morgoth should be anything else but powerless. I
> don't even have an idea how he could get rid of that chain Angainor,
> which served its purpose already when he was much more powerful. And
> why do you assume that Morgoth should be excluded from the waning of
> the Valar?
Morgoth is going to be regrouping for many ages.
>
> And even if he somehow could manage it - the problems I talked about
> in my theory c), which you snipped, remain the same: there would be
> very weak Valar, an at least equally weak Melkor, and these shadows of
> Ainur should wage a battle worth the name "Battle of Battles"?
The Valar actually aren't "weaker" in the sense that they have less power.
The line out of Lost Tales talks about them becoming older. Tolkien's
explanation, as I recall, was that as the history of Arda progressed, there
was less and less room for the Valar to intercede. They were essentially
trapped within the Music. Thus, in an indirect way, they become weaker.
But since we don't know the ultimate end of the Music, it is possible that
Melkor could, after long ages, regain a sufficient amount of strength to be
a threat.
--
AC
Brought to you by Ed the Invisible Orange Iguana of Doom, Creator of the
Universe.
Pradera
>
>And even if he somehow could manage it - the problems I talked about
>in my theory c), which you snipped, remain the same: there would be
>very weak Valar, an at least equally weak Melkor, and these shadows of
>Ainur should wage a battle worth the name "Battle of Battles"?
>
>
When there's a battle where Earendil and Turin fight alongside against
Melkor Returned, I would call it 'Battle of Battles' by all means.
Regardless of how unpowerful the Valar are.
--
Pradera
'Naze dare mo kesenakatta no
kono ude toorinuketa natsu no hi wo'
Akino Arai
---
Andy Cooke
>
"The dark spirit of Melkor's 'remainder' might be expected,
therefore, eventually and after long ages, to increase again,
even (as some held) to draw back into itself some of its formerly
dissipated power. It would do this (even if Sauron could not)
because of its relative greatness. It did not repent, or turn
finally away from its obsession, but retained still relics of
wisdom, so that it could still seek its object indirectly, and
not merely blindly. It would rest, seek to heal itself, distract
itself by other thoughts and desires and devices - but all simply
to recover enough strength to return to the attack on the Valar,
and to its old obsession. As it grew again it would become, as
it were, a dark shadow, brooding on the confines of Arda, and
yearning towards it."
HoME X, Morgoth's Ring - Myths Transformed section VII (iii)
[page 404 in my copy]
> And even if he somehow could manage it - the problems I talked about
> in my theory c), which you snipped, remain the same: there would be
> very weak Valar, an at least equally weak Melkor, and these shadows of
> Ainur should wage a battle worth the name "Battle of Battles"?
>
There are two explanations, both of which may be valid -
1. A rejuvenated Melkor battling even a weakened force of the
Valar and Maiar might cause greater destruction than Arda could
stand - we're talking about beings that raise up mountain chains
and island continents, demolish seas, and seed stars in the sky.
2. The fading of the Valar is, in the Myths Transformed
writings, put down to the continuing unfolding of the Song:
"The Valar 'fade' and become more impotent, precisely in
proportion as the shape and constitution of things becomes more
defined and settled. The longer the Past, the more nearly
defined the Future, and the less room for important change
(untrammelled action, on a physical plane, that is not
destructive in purpose). The Past, once 'achieved', has become
part of the 'Music in being' Only Eru may or can alter the
'Music'"
HoME X, Morgoth's Ring - Myths Transformed section VII (iii)
[page 401]
Which can be interpreted that the Valar have to protect the
Future as it must become, within the constraints of the Music to
date. As the Music unfolds, the greater the constraints upon the
Future, and the less freedom the Valar have to act. However, at
the ending of the Music, with the Future being completely unknown
(i.e. at Dagor Dagorath), these constraints are removed. The
Valar may act with the same freedom as in the Beginning. And the
greatest power of the Valar would meet the returning power of the
greatest Ainu of all* - who would only return once he felt that
he _could_ win. Result - Armageddon.
*In some conceptions. In others, Manwë is coëval with Melkor in
power. But the Myths Transformed version of a Melkor that could
battle the other Ainur to a standstill is, I feel, a stronger
image. Which is one of the great things about HoME - you can
choose a version of the mythos that best fits with your desires.
--
Andy Cooke
Flame of the West
> Thanks for the source, I'm still reading BoLT1 and didn't know it. But
> I still can't see why Morgoth should be anything else but powerless. I
> don't even have an idea how he could get rid of that chain Angainor,
> which served its purpose already when he was much more powerful. And
> why do you assume that Morgoth should be excluded from the waning of
> the Valar?
Probably because Tolkien said so, as Conrad demostrated.
--
-- FotW
Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-earth.
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
<...thanks a lot for the quotes\refs - haven't gotten to them yet...>
>
>Which can be interpreted that the Valar have to protect the
>Future as it must become, within the constraints of the Music to
>date. As the Music unfolds, the greater the constraints upon the
>Future, and the less freedom the Valar have to act. However, at
>the ending of the Music, with the Future being completely unknown
>(i.e. at Dagor Dagorath), these constraints are removed. The
>Valar may act with the same freedom as in the Beginning. And the
>greatest power of the Valar would meet the returning power of the
>greatest Ainu of all* - who would only return once he felt that
>he _could_ win. Result - Armageddon.
That's OK. But that resembles the initial wars fought before the coming
of the Children of Iluvatar: thunderstorms and smoke, mighty axes
grinding mountains to dust etc. What of Men (and other races,
which have no significant power at the time of D.D.)? What's
the order of the battle?
Archie
Pradera
>That's OK. But that resembles the initial wars fought before the coming
>of the Children of Iluvatar: thunderstorms and smoke, mighty axes
>grinding mountains to dust etc. What of Men (and other races,
>which have no significant power at the time of D.D.)? What's
>the order of the battle?
>
<!!! Mega spoiler (I think) !!!>
.
.
.
Well, first of all, there's Turin Turambar slaying Melkor Returned. I
consider it enough for Men part.
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
>Nasta? dzie? 23 lip 2002, gdy by? ?askaw napisa?:
>
>>That's OK. But that resembles the initial wars fought before the coming
>>of the Children of Iluvatar: thunderstorms and smoke, mighty axes
>>grinding mountains to dust etc. What of Men (and other races,
>>which have no significant power at the time of D.D.)? What's
>>the order of the battle?
>>
>
><!!! Mega spoiler (I think) !!!>
>
>
>.
>.
>.
>
>
>Well, first of all, there's Turin Turambar slaying Melkor Returned. I
>consider it enough for Men part.
That's no news (for me, at least since last winter (Northern Hemisphere)).
When I first read it, I was disconcerted. That looked like personal revenge.
Unfortunately, there's no other suitable hero left in the mythos.
I think that Tolkien was *forced* by the logic of events to put T.T. in
that place. And here's the question: when did Tolkien first draw the
primitive outline of D.D.? My POV is that if he had known that Turin would
be the only hero to fight M., JRRT would have shuffled the mythos all over
(like in the case of the Sun and the Moon).
OTOH, I don't know the exact setting of Turin's "resurrection". Maybe it was
to be like letting a prisoner on pardon, to pass the final test and be cleared
of sins.
Archie
AC
>>
>>Well, first of all, there's Turin Turambar slaying Melkor Returned. I
>>consider it enough for Men part.
>
> That's no news (for me, at least since last winter (Northern Hemisphere)).
> When I first read it, I was disconcerted. That looked like personal revenge.
> Unfortunately, there's no other suitable hero left in the mythos.
> I think that Tolkien was *forced* by the logic of events to put T.T. in
> that place. And here's the question: when did Tolkien first draw the
> primitive outline of D.D.? My POV is that if he had known that Turin would
> be the only hero to fight M., JRRT would have shuffled the mythos all over
> (like in the case of the Sun and the Moon).
The final battle was present from the very earliest writings, somewhere
after 1917.
>
> OTOH, I don't know the exact setting of Turin's "resurrection". Maybe it was
> to be like letting a prisoner on pardon, to pass the final test and be cleared
> of sins.
At least in the early versions, Turin became a Vala. I believe that was
later abandoned, but Turin slaying Melkor remained.
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
<...>
>At least in the early versions, Turin became a Vala. I believe that was
>later abandoned, but Turin slaying Melkor remained.
I wonder if JRRT had in mind (in 1917-1930) the real extent of Turin's
misfortune. The early versions must have had a Scandinavian scent
(Ragnarok), and not Christian (Armageddon)!! *1
Archie
----
*1 I judge by the underlying ethics: revenge vs. mercy/pity.
Pradera
>
>I wonder if JRRT had in mind (in 1917-1930) the real extent of Turin's
>misfortune. The early versions must have had a Scandinavian scent
>(Ragnarok), and not Christian (Armageddon)!! *1
>
>----
>*1 I judge by the underlying ethics: revenge vs. mercy/pity.
Well, it's hard to have pity on Uber-Satan coming back to utterly destroy
all creation... besides, there is pity in killing sometimes - in cases when
death is better than living as evil being, as some inquisitors teach.
And I wonder if 'killing' Melkor wouldn't just mean getting his spirit back
to Eru for judgement or sth like that
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
>Nasta? dzie? 23 lip 2002, gdy by? ?askaw napisa?:
>
>>
>>I wonder if JRRT had in mind (in 1917-1930) the real extent of Turin's
>>misfortune. The early versions must have had a Scandinavian scent
>>(Ragnarok), and not Christian (Armageddon)!! *1
>>
>>----
>>*1 I judge by the underlying ethics: revenge vs. mercy/pity.
>
>Well, it's hard to have pity on Uber-Satan coming back to utterly destroy
>all creation...
Pity for Men, not for Melkor/Morgoth!!! I was thinking along the lines of
personal vs. common cause as the driving forces for Turin Turambar.
>And I wonder if 'killing' Melkor wouldn't just mean getting his spirit back
>to Eru for judgement or sth like that
Accepted as a version. Origato.
Archie
Conrad Dunkerson
news:3D3CCD80...@erols.com...
> Probably because Tolkien said so, as Conrad demostrated.
That works... also because the Valar's power waned with the passage
of Time. Whereas Morgoth was in the 'Timeless Void'. That plus
the previously quoted bit from Morgoth's Ring about him being able
to reclaim some of the power he had put out into the world should
cover it. Tolkien gave explanations for all of these issues. Not
guaranteed to be 'final' of course, but it isn't just an unfounded
concept that he tossed off in passing either.
Flame of the West
> That works... also because the Valar's power waned with the passage
> of Time. Whereas Morgoth was in the 'Timeless Void'.
Which makes the Valar seem rather short-sighted. "How shall we
remove the threat of Morgoth and punish him? I know! Let's
remove him from Time so he'll remain strong while we weaken!"
Pradera
>> That works... also because the Valar's power waned with the passage
>> of Time. Whereas Morgoth was in the 'Timeless Void'.
>
>Which makes the Valar seem rather short-sighted. "How shall we
>remove the threat of Morgoth and punish him? I know! Let's
>remove him from Time so he'll remain strong while we weaken!"
>
Bah. They never were quite clever when it comes to dealing with Eviol.
loosers.
Adrian Ratnapala
> Conrad Dunkerson wrote:
>
>> That works... also because the Valar's power waned with the passage
>> of Time. Whereas Morgoth was in the 'Timeless Void'.
>
> Which makes the Valar seem rather short-sighted. "How shall we
> remove the threat of Morgoth and punish him? I know! Let's
> remove him from Time so he'll remain strong while we weaken!"
The Valar were never very clever. I mean going off to live in
La-La-Land will Morgoth stalked ME waiting for the comming of Men
was more than a little silly wasn't it.
Michael Martinez
> "Bagronk the Happy Orc" <NOvr-stef...@arcor.de> wrote in message
> news:ug2eju47nbcgk3hq5...@4ax.com...
>
> > I'm quite sure it was meant to be abandoned - it just does not fit
> > into the history of Middle-earth as it evolved in Tolkien's later
> > writings.
>
> How so? I don't see that at all... especially given that Tolkien
> continued to write it in along with his later texts.
As I have shown repeatedly, both here and elsewhere, you couldn't
navigate your way through a Tolkien text with a road-map and a Boy
Scout to guide you.
Regarding the Second Prophecy of Mandos and the return of Turin, I
cite once again The Peoples of Middle-earth.
THE PEOPLES OF MIDDLE-EARTH, pages 374-5:
$17 The language of the Folk of Haleth was not used, for they
had perished and would not rise again. Nor would their tongue
be heard again, unless the prophecy of Andreth the Wise-woman
should prove true, that Turin in the Last Battle should return
from the Dead, and before he left the Circles of the World for
ever should challenge the Great Dragon of Morgoth, Ancalagon
the Black, and deal him the death-stroke.
[This remarkable saying has long roots, extending far back
to the prophecy at the end of the old TALE OF TURAMBAR (II.115-16),
where it was told that the Gods of Death (Fui and Vefantur) would
not open their doors to Turin and Nienori, that Urin and Maywin
(Hurin and Morwen) went to Mandos, and that their prayers
Came even to Manwe, and the Gods had mercy on their
unhappy fate, so that those twain Turin and Nienori
entered into Fos'Almir, the bath of flame, even as
Urwendi and her maidens had done in ages past before
the first rising of the Sun, and so were all their
sorrows and stains washed away, and they dwelt as
shining Valar among the blessed ones, and now the love
of that brother and sister is very fair; but Turambar
shall indeed stand beside Fionwe in the Great Wrack,
and Melko and his drakes shall curse the sword of
Mormakil.
In the SKETCH OF THE MYTHOLOGY or 'earliest Silmarillion' of the
1920s the prophecy with which it ends (IV.40) declares that when
Morgoth returns, and 'the last battle of all' is fought,
Fionwe will fight Morgoth on the plain of Valinor,
and the spirit of Turin shall be beside him; it shall
be Turin who with his black sword will slay Morgoth,
and thus shall the children of Hurin be avenged.
The development of this in the QUENTA (IV.165) tells that in the
days of the last battle, on the fields of Valinor,
Tulkas shall strive with Melko, and on his right shall
stand Fionwe and on his left Turin Turambar, son of Hurin,
Conqueror of Fate; and it shall be the black sword of Turin
that deals unto Melko his death and final end; and so shall
the children of Hurin and all Men be avenged.
And the final passage of the QUENTA, concerning the prophecy of the
recovery of the Two Trees, ends with the words (IBID.):
But of Men in that day the prophecy speaks not, save of Turin
only, and him it names among the Gods.
These passages reappear in the revised conclusion of the QUENTA
that belongs with the QUENTA SILMARILLION of 1937 (see V.323-4,
333), with two changes: Turin in the Last Battle is said to be
'coming from the halls of Mandos', and in the final sentance
concerning the prophecy 'no Man it names, save Turin only, and
to him a place is given among the sons of the Valar.' In the
cursor corrections that my father made much later to this conclusion
(see XI. 245-7) he changed 'Turin ... coming from the halls of
Mandos' to 'Turin ... returning from the Doom of Men at the
ending of the world', and against the concluding passage
(including the reference to Turin as 'a son of the Valar') he
placed a large X.
Another reference is found in the ANNALS OF AMAN (X. 71, 76),
where it is said of the constellation Menelmakar (Orion) that
it 'was a sign of Turin Turambar, who should come into the world,
and a foreshadowing of the Last Battle that shall be at the end
of Days.'
In this last appearance of the mysterious and fluctuating idea
the prophecy is put into the mouth of Andreth, the Wise-woman
of the House of Beor: Turin will 'return from the Dead' before
his final departure, and his last deed within the Circles of the
World will be the slaying of the Great Dragon, Ancalagon the
Black. Andreth prophesies of the Last Battle at the end of the
Elder Days (the sense in which the term 'Last Battle' is used
shortly afterwards in this text, p.371); but in all the early
texts (the QUENTA, IV.160; the ANNALS OF BELERIAND, IV.309,
V.144; the QUENTA SILMARILLION, V.329) it was Earendil who
destroyed Ancalagon.]
Concerning the 1958 LQ 2 texts, Christopher Tolkien wrote in the
comments leading up to the paragraphs from which you drew your
citations the following words of caution:
It remains only to record the later history of the final element
in QS, the rewritten conclusion of the Quenta Noldorinwa, which
was given in V.323 ff. with such emendations as I judged to have
been made very early and before the abandonment of work on QS at
the end of 1937.
It is curious to find that a final typescript in the LQ 2 series
of 1958 (?) was made, in which the text of Q was copied from the
words 'Hurin gathered therefore a few outlaws of the woods unto
him, and they came to Nargothrond' (IV.132) to the end. IT HAS NO
TITLE, AND APART FROM SOME CORRECTIONS MADE TO IT BY MY FATHER HAS
NO INDEPENDENT VALUE: ITS INTEREST LIES ONLY IN THE FACT OF ITS
EXISTENCE. [Emphasis is mine.] The reason why it begins at this
place in the narrative is, I think, clear (though not why it
begins at precisely this point). At the time when my father decided
to 'get copies made of all copyable material' (December 1957,
see X.141-2) he provided the typist not only with the Quenta
Silmarillion papers but also with (among other manuscripts) the
Grey Annals. Thus the story of Turin, in that form, was (or
would be) secure in two typescript copies. But from the death of
Turin, if anything of the concluding parts of The Silmarillion
was to be copied in this way, it had to be the text of Q: for
there was nothing later (except the rewritten version of the
conclusion). YET IN THIS TEXT WE ARE OF COURSE IN QUITE EARLY
WRITING [Emphasis is mine]: for a single example among many,
Q has (IV.139) 'For Turgon deemed, when first they came into
that vale after the dreadful battle ...' -- an explicit reference
to the now long-discarded story of the foundation of Gondolin
after the Battle of Unnumbered Tears; and so this appears in the
late typescript. That was of cource a mere pis-aller, an insurance
against the possibility of a catastrophe, but its existence
underlines, and must have underlined for my father, the essential
and far-reaching work that still awaited him, but which he would
never achieve.
All of the citations from this document, even though they represent
'corrections', are stipulated by Christopher to be from early (hence
pre-LoTR) writing. Thus, in no way do they invalidate his comments
from The Peoples of Middle-earth; nor do they contradict what he wrote
there.
put-the-no-mail-...@mail.ru
<snipped flames and useful quotes>
> The development of this in the QUENTA (IV.165) tells that in the
> days of the last battle, on the fields of Valinor,
>
> Tulkas shall strive with Melko, and on his right shall
> stand Fionwe and on his left Turin Turambar, son of Hurin,
> Conqueror of Fate; and it shall be the black sword of Turin
> that deals unto Melko his death and final end; and so shall
> the children of Hurin and all Men be avenged.
OK. That's what I was looking for: the addition of _all Men_ indeed
moves Turin and Dagor Dagorath closer to Christianity, away from
any pre-/non-Christian mythos. It is not only personal vendetta,
but pity/anguish for all people.
The only thing that puzzles me is the original Tolkien's reason for
putting Turin among the Valar. Did he do it for sheer symmetry
(Tuor's among the Eldar, Luthien shares her fate with Men, why
not make a Man a Vala)? It's amazing to see in the Narn how Turin
speaks about the Powers while in Nargothrond.
<...>
Archie
Öjevind Lång
> "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message...
[snip]
> As I have said repeatedly, both here and elsewhere, it is indeed fortunate
>that we can rely on you for good information. Bravo, Conrad!
You, sir, are an impostor. It is clear from the tenor of your entire post
that you cannot be the real Michael Martinez.
Öjevind
Michael Martinez
> "Michael Martinez" hath written:
>
> > "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message...
>
> [snip]
>
> >navigate your way through a Tolkien text with a road-map and a Boy
> >Scout to guide you.
>
> You, sir, are an impostor. It is clear from the tenor of your entire post
> that you cannot be the real Michael Martinez.
There you go, you lying asshole. I fixed the quote for you.
Care to demonstrate your inability to be honest any other way?
Obviously, you're still among the ranks of those who want to keep the
flame wars going.
The Tolkien groups are SO fortunate to have a knowledgeable, on-topic
poster with integrity like you, Ojevind.
Flame of the West
> > >As I have shown repeatedly, both here and elsewhere, you couldn't
> > >navigate your way through a Tolkien text with a road-map and a Boy
> > >Scout to guide you.
>
> >
> > You, sir, are an impostor. It is clear from the tenor of your entire post
> > that you cannot be the real Michael Martinez.
>
> There you go, you lying asshole. I fixed the quote for you.
Get a sense of humor, will you?
Flame of the West
*ROTFL!*
Morgil
Flame of the West kirjoitti viestissä <3D42D12A...@erols.com>...
>Michael Martinez wrote:
>> There you go, you lying asshole. I fixed the quote for you.
>
>Get a sense of humor, will you?
Are you suggesting he should join TEUNC???
Morgil
Conrad Dunkerson
news:cd632508.02072...@posting.google.com...
> "IT HAS NO TITLE, AND APART FROM SOME CORRECTIONS MADE TO IT BY MY
> FATHER HAS NO INDEPENDENT VALUE: ITS INTEREST LIES ONLY IN THE FACT
> OF ITS EXISTENCE. [Emphasis is mine.]"
Note that it says "apart from some corrections". Christopher then
lists the specific alterations and in reference to the 'Second
Prophecy' materials writes;
"I neglected [in LROW] however to mention there the introduction
of a further subheading, The Second Prophecy of Mandos, at ~31.
I said of this text in V.324: 'The very fact that the end of
"The Silmarillion" still took this form when The Lord of the Rings
was begun is sufficiently remarkable'. It seems much more
remarkable, and not easy to interpret, that my father was treating
it as a text requiring only minor and particular revision at this
much later time."
WotJ, The Later Quenta Silmarillion (Last Chapters)
He continues to speculate that the changes may have been perfunctory
without considering whether the text still fit into the mythology or
"implying any sort of final approval of the content." Yet the fact
remains that Christopher continued to find references to this story
long after he had originally supposed his father to have abandoned it.
It also remains inescapable that Tolkien submitted the 1937 Quenta
Silmarillion manuscript to his publishers, that it contained the
story of Turin's return from death to defeat Morgoth in the Last
Battle, that he began work on LotR after A&U chose not to publish
The Silmarillion at that time (December of 1937), that from then
until 1950 he made only minor alterations to The Silmarillion
(mostly in 1938 and 1949) while writing LotR, and that he then again
submitted the story to be published... in direct conjunction with
LotR, and that the story he then tried to publish (at both A&U and
Collins) STILL contained the details of the Last Battle. This is
thus very much the 'same mythology' as The Hobbit and LotR because
Tolkien attempted to publish it alongside LotR. The two passages
which might suggest removal of the 'Second Prophecy' both came later.
Michael Martinez
Humor and TEUNC hardly have anything to do with each other.
Michael Martinez
> "Michael Martinez" <mic...@xenite.org> wrote in message
> news:cd632508.02072...@posting.google.com...
>
> > "IT HAS NO TITLE, AND APART FROM SOME CORRECTIONS MADE TO IT BY MY
> > FATHER HAS NO INDEPENDENT VALUE: ITS INTEREST LIES ONLY IN THE FACT
> > OF ITS EXISTENCE. [Emphasis is mine.]"
>
> Note that it says "apart from some corrections". Christopher then
> lists the specific alterations and in reference to the 'Second
> Prophecy' materials writes;
There you go again, cutting and snipping like you know what you are
doing. Christopher also wrote in the same paragraph: "YET IN THIS
TEXT WE ARE OF COURSE IN QUITE EARLY WRITING".
Q-U-I-T-E E-A-R-L-Y, Conrad.
That concept, totally contradictory to your half-baked theory, is
something you ALWAYS fail to mention, no matter how often it is
pointed out for you.
Good scholarship does not consist of doctoring or misrepresenting the
texts, no matter how good you think you have become at altering what
either Tolkien wrote.
> He continues to speculate that the changes may have been perfunctory
> without considering whether the text still fit into the mythology or
> "implying any sort of final approval of the content."
What he SAYS is:
"But his mode of emendation could sometimes be decidedly perfunctory,
suggesting not a close, comparative consideration of an earlier text
so much as a series of descents on particular points that struck his
attention; and it may be that such later emendations as he made in
this case are to be regarded rather in that light than as implying any
sort of final approval of the content."
In fact, Christopher stipulated that the bulk of the changes consisted
of nothing more than changing the names:
"The typist of LQ 2 was given the manuscript (see V.323) of the 1937
rewriting of the conclusion of Q, beginning 'And they looked upon
the
Lonely Isle and there they tarried not.' Some of the later, roughly
made emendations (see V.324) had already been made to the
manuscript,
but others had not. Up to the point where the rewrittin text begins
my father understandably paid no attention at all to the typescript,
but the concluding portion he corrected cursorily -- it is clear
that
he did not have the actual manuscript by him to refer to. These
corrections are mostly no more than regular changes of name, but he
made one or two independent alterations as well, and these are
recorded
in the notes that follow.
"The corrections to the manuscript, carried out as it appears in
two stages (before and after the making of the typescript), are
mostly fairly minor, and a few so slight as to not to be worth
recording. I refer to the numbered paragraphs in V.324-34."
As Christopher pointed out on more than one occasion that his father
only set out to have archival copies of the earlier manuscripts typed
up, and as he makes it clear here that JRRT was only correcting a
section of LQ 2 which was based directly on Q and for which he did not
have the manuscript available, it is quite evident to anyone with
sense that JRRT was not reinventing the Silmarillion mythology in
these particular pages, much less carrying it forward.
LQ 2 consists of fragments and at least two typed copies, all with
changes and emendations, some of which are unique to those copies
alone.
The passage you are at such pains to use as "proof" of the continuance
of the idea that Turin would return at the end of the world is one
which Christopher notes in THE PEOPLES OF MIDDLE-EARTH as having "a
large X" placed beside it -- and as is clear to anyone who actually
READS the HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH books, all such notations mean that
JRRT rejected those passages.
What remains inescapable is that you will undoubtedly continue to
pursue this ridiculous argument with all the fervor you can muster.
After all, there will always be a few people gullible enough to accept
whatever you say and pat you on the back for "good scholarship" when
you don't have the wit to accept Christopher's summation of the facts
at face value.
Instead, you prefer to insist that your judgement -- based on nothing
more than selective citation -- is better than his.
Don't expect me to EVER agree with your assessment of the Dagor
Dagorath references. I'll continue to side with the Tolkiens on this
issue, thank you.
Conrad Dunkerson
news:cd632508.02072...@posting.google.com...
> There you go again, cutting and snipping like you know what you are
> doing.
Yes, snipping text down to the specific points being replied to is
standard practice.
> Christopher also wrote in the same paragraph: "YET IN THIS TEXT WE
> ARE OF COURSE IN QUITE EARLY WRITING".
> Q-U-I-T-E E-A-R-L-Y, Conrad.
> That concept, totally contradictory to your half-baked theory, is
> something you ALWAYS fail to mention, no matter how often it is
> pointed out for you.
I'm sorry, but I do not see how that concept is in any way
contradictory to the facts I have cited. It is absolutely true that
the passage in question was a typed copy of 'quite early' material;
specifically the 1937 version of the conclusion of the Quenta
Silmarillion. However, this new typed copy was made some time around
1958 and Tolkien then made changes to it. The fact that the ~1958
changes were made to an early manuscript in no way changes the fact
that Tolkien DID make them, and that he did so much later.
> In fact, Christopher stipulated that the bulk of the changes
> consisted of nothing more than changing the names:
Yes, MOST of the changes were such. The changes to the 'Second
Prophecy' were not. How are changes to other parts of the text
relevant to the topic at hand?
> As Christopher pointed out on more than one occasion that his father
> only set out to have archival copies of the earlier manuscripts typed
> up, and as he makes it clear here that JRRT was only correcting a
> section of LQ 2 which was based directly on Q and for which he did
> not have the manuscript available, it is quite evident to anyone with
> sense that JRRT was not reinventing the Silmarillion mythology in
> these particular pages, much less carrying it forward.
And yet it remains inescapable that he wrote a new version of the
story of the 'Last Battle' containing elements which had never
existed before. That is a fact, and no amount of citation about
other passages in the same document is going to change the facts.
> The passage you are at such pains to use as "proof" of the
> continuance of the idea that Turin would return at the end of the
> world is one which Christopher notes in THE PEOPLES OF MIDDLE-EARTH
> as having "a large X" placed beside it -- and as is clear to anyone
> who actually READS the HISTORY OF MIDDLE-EARTH books, all such
> notations mean that JRRT rejected those passages.
No, you have made a mistake about either the placement of the 'X' or
the layout of the passage. The relevant text is;
"...and against the concluding passage (including the reference to
Turin as 'a son of the Valar') he placed a large X."
PoME, The Problem of Ros - Note 17
However, he also refers the reader to WotJ pages 374-375, where he
gives a more detailed account;
"Approximately against the last two sentences of the paragraph (from
'In that light the Gods will grow young again...') my father put a
large X in the margin of the manuscript."
WotJ, The Later Quenta Silmarillion
The concluding passage in question is;
"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 she will break them and with their fire rekindle the Two Trees,
and a great light shall come forth. In that light the Gods will grow
young again, and the Elves awake and all their dead arise, and the
purpose of Iluvatar be fulfilled concerning them. But of Men in that
day the prophecy of Mandos doth not speak, and no Man it names, save
Turin only, and to him a place is given among the sons of the Valar."
LROW, Quenta Silmarillion - Conclusion ~32
As can be seen by comparing Christopher's notes on the 'X' to the
passage he is referring to the material X'd out does not contain the
return of Turin, his defeat of Melkor, or the unmaking of the Silmarils
to rekindle the two trees. Tolkien retained these ideas in the 1958
version... adding that Beren would also return and removing only the
idea that Turin would become a 'son of the Valar' and the effects of
the light of the Two Trees.
You claim this 'X' as proof that Tolkien rejected the return of Turin,
but it is clear from the above that you are incorrect... the text
about Turin's return occurs at the end of the preceding paragraph (31)
and was not X'd at all. Indeed, it was updated;
"~31 'Turin Turambar ... coming from the halls of Mandos' > 'Turin
Turambar ... returning from the Doom of Men at the ending of the
world'. In the margin of the manuscript my father wrote 'and Beren
Camlost' without direction for its insertion."
WotJ, The Later Quenta Silmarillion
The idea of Turin's return was thus clearly retained and revised in
1958 and your view that it was X'd out is contrary to what Christopher
wrote.
> What remains inescapable is that you will undoubtedly continue to
> pursue this ridiculous argument with all the fervor you can muster.
Yes, I do consider it important to tell the true story and provide the
references which allow anyone who wishes to do so to see the actual
situation for themselves.
> After all, there will always be a few people gullible enough to
> accept whatever you say and pat you on the back for "good
> scholarship" when you don't have the wit to accept Christopher's
> summation of the facts at face value.
> Instead, you prefer to insist that your judgement -- based on nothing
> more than selective citation -- is better than his.
As shown above, you have apparently failed to understand Christopher's
summation. I agree with what he wrote. He did not indicate that
there was an X against the text of Turin's return. That is a fallacy
which you have stated - not something that Christopher wrote. The
truth is readily apparent from the LROW and WotJ quotations above -
which anyone with the books can verify for themselves.
> Don't expect me to EVER agree with your assessment of the Dagor
> Dagorath references. I'll continue to side with the Tolkiens on this
> issue, thank you.
You do not speak for the Tolkiens any more than I do. However, the
facts presented in the books remain immutable and show that I am quite
correct.
Michael Martinez
> "Michael Martinez" <mic...@xenite.org> wrote in message
> news:cd632508.02072...@posting.google.com...
>
> > There you go again, cutting and snipping like you know what you are
> > doing.
>
> Yes, snipping text down to the specific points being replied to is
> standard practice.
You really ARE that stupid, aren't you? I was talking about your
cutting and snipping of the Tolkien text, not the message.
>
> > Christopher also wrote in the same paragraph: "YET IN THIS TEXT WE
> > ARE OF COURSE IN QUITE EARLY WRITING".
>
> > Q-U-I-T-E E-A-R-L-Y, Conrad.
>
> > That concept, totally contradictory to your half-baked theory, is
> > something you ALWAYS fail to mention, no matter how often it is
> > pointed out for you.
>
> I'm sorry, but I do not see how that concept is in any way
> contradictory to the facts I have cited.
That's right, Conrad.
For once, you got something right.