Who is older - Tom Bombadil or Treebeard?

[HALETH✒🗡]

While JRRT conceded that some of his characters showed character traits to be found in people mentioned in the Bible, he was adamant that in all cases the differences were far greater. He would have considered any such attempt, on his part or by others, to introduce specifics of the Bible into a story as blasphemous. An incarnation on earth of "The One" thousands of years before the New Testament would probably top his list of blasphemies.
It sounds almost like you're trying to find allegories to the Bible in his works ... 🥶

Of course I can't be totally sure that my idea is right. However, I don't see anything blasphemous in it. Even though Tolkien imagined that Middle-Earth is the past of our world, I think he would agree that these worlds are rather different in some sense. For example, the first chapter of The Silmarillion has a lot in common with The Bible but not everything is similar there.

I think "fatherless" is more meant in elves, or human, or dwarfs eyes... not in Tom's eye.
From the perspective of all living beings created after Tom, he is the oldest one... fatherless...

It may be so.

Tolkien would never even suggest that Eru would fall to Sauron.

Did Bombadil fall to Sauron?

 

[Radaghast]

Did Bombadil fall to Sauron?

No, but at the Council of Elrond it's suggested that he could not hold off Sauron forever.

Could that power be defied by Bombadil alone? I think not. I think that in the end, if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First; and then Night will come.’

‘I know little of Iarwain save the name,’ said Galdor; ‘but Glorfindel, I think, is right. Power to defy our Enemy is not in him, unless such power is in the earth itself. And yet we see that Sauron can torture and destroy the very hills. What power still remains lies with us, here in Imladris, or with Cirdan at the Havens, or in Lórien. But have they the strength, have we here the strength to withstand the Enemy, the coming of Sauron at the last, when all else is overthrown?’

Before this, Gandalf says that Tom would be a most "unsafe guardian", that he would forget about it and might even throw it away. These are not qualities a devout believer would ascribe to his god, even in the mouth of a fictional character, and especially if that character was an emissary of said god.

Just on a side note, hiding the Ring (at Tom's, in the sea, etc.) would not make any difference even if Sauron never looked for it. He had the power to overtake Middle-earth without it. This is a point that is curiously rather absent or, at best, understated in the book.

 

[HALETH✒🗡]

Before this, Gandalf says that Tom would be a most unsafe guardian, that he would forget about it and might even throw it away. These are not qualities a devout believer would ascribe to his god, even in the mouth of a fictional character.

I do agree then. I've forgotten about this episode.

 

[Olorgando]

Of course I can't be totally sure that my idea is right. However, I don't see anything blasphemous in it. Even though Tolkien imagined that Middle-Earth is the past of our world, I think he would agree that these worlds are rather different in some sense. For example, the first chapter of The Silmarillion has a lot in common with The Bible but not everything is similar there.

That's putting it mildly.

Apparently, many readers have compared "The Silmarillion", or at least its part(s) "Ainulindalë" (and "Valaquenta"?) to the Old Testament, and specifically early parts of Genesis. All I can say to that is that those making the comparisons cannot have read at least one of the books closely enough, perhaps even both. I'm thinking of JRRT's cutting comment in the foreword to the Second Edition: "Some who have read the book, or at any rate have reviewed it ..."
Yes, there were (and are!) people "in the public eye" who have gained a certain reputation there (by whatever means) who are not shy about spouting mental diarrhea about topics about which they know nothing (like not having read LoTR - and this is not the only book I know this about). With the Internet, this situation has gotten infinitely worse ...

I'm not getting into JRRT's comparisons of Galadriel to aspects of the "virgin" Mary, or of Gandalf or Frodo to aspects of Jesus ...

But the "incarnation of The One" is THE central tenet of Christian belief, bar none. New Testament. The Christian denominations disagree on details (unfortunately raising the disagreements to points of dogma). JRRT as a devout, conservative Vaticanum I Catholic (he was unhappy with much of the Second Vatican Council), would not have touched an earlier incarnation of "The One" in his writings with a 100-foot, never mind 10-foot pole.

In that foreword to the Second Edition, JRRT also mentioned "applicability" residing in the freedom of the reader (contrasting it to "allegory" as the purposed domination of the author). What is "applicability"? Perspective, I would propose, background.
To swing wide, someone reading LoTR with a Confucian, Daoist, Hindu, or Buddhist background might find applicabilities (I hypothesize here) that would leave JRRT responding "oh, really?". Closer to home (leapfrogging the other two Abrahamic religions), Eastern Orthodox-, Lutheran-, Calvinist-derived applicabilities might have him scratching his head (while grumbling). Then all of the philosophies that are not considered religions ...

And last, applicabilities may stem simply from the lives all people have lived, their unique experiences (with or without adhering to any of the above-mentioned systems - though no one remains unaffected by the one dominant where they live). To this JRRT could have no answer.

 

[Eljorahir]

I don't know if Tom Bombadil is really the oldest. But, I did hear a rumor that Old Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow; Bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow.

 

[Áramandë Amaniel]

I can recall, if it's mentioned if Melian served any Vala, for example.

Melian served Vána and Este, if I remember correctly.

 

[Elthir]

(. . .) JRRT as a devout, conservative Vaticanum I Catholic (. . .), would not have touched an earlier incarnation of "The One" in his writings with a 100-foot, never mind 10-foot pole.

Agreed Gando.

Quotes from JRRT from draft letter 181:

"The incarnation of God is an infinitely greater thing than anything I would dare to write."

"There is no embodiment of the One, of God, who indeed remains remote, outside the World, and only directly accessible to the Valar or Rulers."

"There is no 'embodiment' of the Creator anywhere in this story or mythology."

The closest Tolkien got to touching upon the subject within his legendarium was the Old Hope [of Men], referred to in the Athrabeth Finrond ah Andreth . . .

"They say," answered Andreth, "they say that the One will himself enter into Arda, and heal Men and all the Marring from the beginning to the end. (. . .) Yet there is no power conceivable greater than Melkor save Eru only. Therefore Eru, if He will not relinquish His work to Melkor, who must else proceed to mastery, then Eru must come in to conquer him. (. . .)

Commentary:

Since Finrod had already guessed that the redemptive function was originally, specially assigned to Men, he probably proceeded to the expectation that "the coming of Eru", if it took place, would be specially and primarily concerned with Men: that is to an imaginative guess or vision that Eru would come incarnated in human form. This, however, does not appear in the Athrabeth.

But in any case, even the Old Hope would seem to refer to the incarnation of God that JRRT himself believed in [Jesus of Nazareth of course] -- an event in history still far in the future with respect to the characters of the legendarium.

 

[cart]

ah.. the timeless debate.
glad to see it

 

[Rivendell_librarian]

While JRRT conceded that some of his characters showed character traits to be found in people mentioned in the Bible, he was adamant that in all cases the differences were far greater. He would have considered any such attempt, on his part or by others, to introduce specifics of the Bible into a story as blasphemous. An incarnation on earth of "The One" thousands of years before the New Testament would probably top his list of blasphemies.
It sounds almost like you're trying to find allegories to the Bible in his works ... 🥶

I've been disturbed about this post. I think accusing another forum member of blasphemy is the kind of over-the-top language that the Internet encourages, but such overblown language should be avoided. Tolkien's work is a work of fiction, and that applies to Eru as well.

 

[Eljorahir]

My answer, just for fun:

Long ago in a classroom far far away I remember learning about the different types of numbers:
Counting Numbers, Whole Numbers, Real Numbers, Positive, Negative, Rational, Irrational (OK now it's getting a little strange. Really? Irrational numbers?), and for the grand finale... Imaginary Numbers!!! (OK teacher. This time you've gone too far! Imaginary numbers. Now I know you're just trolling me. This is math class for Eru's sake!) Then, we spent a week or so doing math with imaginary numbers. I've never recovered from this traumatizing experience.

So, for me, Treebeard's age is a positive real number and Tom's age is an imaginary number. Asking which is the higher number is asking an unanswerable question because the numbers are not in the same category of existence.

 

[Rivendell_librarian]

Well having read these excellent answers I've decided to go with Tom Bombadil as older than Treebeard for the reason that he is a unique one-of-a-kind being, whereas Treebeard is the oldest of a race of beings. And I know that is far from conclusive. But like many questions of philosophy, it's the pondering of the question that is of value, even if there can be no sure answer.

 

[Elros]

I believe that Tom is a nature spirit
כלומר, הוא מסמל חלק מהטבע.
Maybe, hill ghost

 

[Ent]

I believe that Tom is a nature spirit
כלומר, הוא מסמל חלק מהטבע.
Maybe, hill ghost

OK, so... to the original Thread question - in your view would that make him older than, or younger than, Treebeard.

I believe that Tom is a nature spirit

Welcome aboard, by the way, Elros. Hope you enjoy your time here. There's a lot to see and review and read. Enjoy.

 

[Olorgando]

I've been disturbed about this post. I think accusing another forum member of blasphemy is the kind of over-the-top language that the Internet encourages, but such overblown language should be avoided. Tolkien's work is a work of fiction, and that applies to Eru as well.

R_l, I'm not accusing anybody of anything ... but I can well imagine that JRRT would, or might, consider such - well, allegory of? - the Bible in such a way, given the strength of his religious beliefs. To clarify, with "consider", I don't mean he would state as much in writing. From what I believe I can gather from Humphrey Carpenter's book "The Inklings", JRRT was not the confrontational type. That would be much more in character for C.S. Lewis, who once described himself (in discussions at Inklings meetings) as a "bow-wow dogmatic".

To put it another way, my views on people who use the term "blasphemy" etc. in earnest ... way outside anything I could post while conforming to TTF rules ...

 

[Elros]

אוקיי, אז... לשאלת השרשור המקורית - לדעתך זה יגרום לו להיות מבוגר או צעיר יותר מ-Treebeard.


ברוך הבא לסיפון, דרך אגב, אלרוס. מקווה שאתה נהנה מהזמן שלך כאן. יש הרבה מה לראות ולקרוא. תהנה.

אני מאמין שכן.
אגב, התיאוריה שטום הוא אלוהים שגויה מיסודה.
למה?
טולקין עצמו אמר שטום לא יכול להתמודד מול האויב.

 

[Ent]

אני מאמין שכן.
אגב, התיאוריה שטום הוא אלוהים שגויה מיסודה.
למה?
טולקין עצמו אמר שטום לא יכול להתמודד מול האויב.

Would that I could read this... I might be profited thereby.
Can anyone translate for me please?
If not that's OK I think I can deal with it later... I believe it's Hebrew for which i have a chart. (I'm far more than a bit rusty working in the Hebrew.)

 

[Elros]

I believe so.
By the way, the theory that Tom is God is fundamentally wrong.
Why?
Tolkien himself said that Tom could not face the enemy.

 

[Ent]

@Elros - Thank you.
And I agree about Tolkien's view on Bombafil not being the 'God' of this piece of work.

Of course, Tolkien had Gandalf, Glorfindel and Galdor both express his view.

‘No,’ said Gandalf, ‘not willingly. He might do so, if all the free folk of the world begged him, but he would not understand the need. And if he were given the Ring, he would soon forget it, or most likely throw it away. Such things have no hold on his mind. He would be a most unsafe guardian; and that alone is answer enough.’

- We certainly can't attribute absentmindedness and a lack of safety as a guardian to Eru.

‘But in any case,’ said Glorfindel, ‘to send the Ring to him would only postpone the day of evil. He is far away. We could not now take it back to him, unguessed, unmarked by any spy. And even if we could, soon or late the Lord of the Rings would learn of its hiding place and would bend all his power towards it. Could that power be defied by Bombadil alone? I think not. I think that in the end, if all else is conquered, Bombadil will fall, Last as he was First; and then Night will come.’

‘I know little of Iarwain save the name,’ said Galdor; ‘but Glorfindel, I think, is right. Power to defy our Enemy is not in him, unless such power is in the earth itself. And yet we see that Sauron can torture and destroy the very hills. What power still remains lies with us, here in Imladris, or with Círdan at the Havens, or in Lórien. But have they the strength, have we here the strength to withstand the Enemy, the coming of Sauron at the last, when all else is overthrown?’

 

[Elros]

בכל מקרה, יש משהו בטום שהוא יותר מבוגר מ- Treebeard .
וסליחה, לפעמים אני מתבלבל בין עברית לאנגלית.

 

[Elbereth Vala Varda]

This is a very unique question. I would say Bombadil, since we do not know his nature or race, and we know that Ents were created. Tom seems almost ever-being, and I have long wondered if he is actually a Valar or even Iluvatar himself in disguise.