The Never Asked Question

I really don't know how to understand that my Guild-mates just don't have any questions to put forward...and it 's always me!


Anyway, here I come again...

I know that there are some people here who love mathematics and statistics (which I don't). To them - my question:
Counting back from our year 2003 - When was the War of the Ring and the LOTR-events ? What time of the history of the "real" world could they coincide with?

Ah, Lhunithiliel. Do you expect a tru answer to this question?
Actually Tolkien did say something abou the next Ages. He said:
1. The next Ages would last fewer years.
We can guess around 2000 each.
2. The Third Age was the last Age where a divine spirit would cause the troubles. From now on, people would have to deal with individuals that would assume all powers but would still be mortal.
That means we must search for such persons whose defeat would mean the end of each Age, since Tolkien always meant to finish his Ages with such events.
You can make these choices throughout history, but the best guess would be that only two Ages have passed and we're now at the beginning of the Sixth. That means that the WoR happened 4000 years ago.

See, Gate? You HAVE answered this question, no matter how stupid it was...
I have read opinions on this matter. Some say - the 5-th, others - 6-th Age....
So.....4000 years back.... Hm.... Interesting.....

THANKS as ever!
******

A new question:

The Council of Elron in Rivendel was summoned becuase there had come representatives of various races living in ME and fighting the common Enemy. It's interesting, of course, that they had come WITHOUT being particularly called, yet...

Why there were no representatives from Rohan? What do you think?

I mean, Rohan seems to have always had quite an essential strategic importance in the events in ME, including the War of the Ring . Yet, when the destiny of ME is being discussed - they are not there! Because I believe that even if the representatives of the free peoples of ME had come to Rivendel at one and the same time "by chance" , still there is some understanding , a hint that they had been actually called somehow. Then why Rohan had not been invited?

I vaguely recall Tolkien himself mentioning somewhere us being in the 7th (or was it 6th age) nowadays.

But, as always, it is not quite so simple... This is becoming one of my favourite phrases

We have a few hints which - IMO - partly are in agreement with each other, but partly are contradictional on that issue:

• Tolkiens statements about the location
• The absence of Christianity
• Medieval civilization and warfare (arrows, swords, Gronds (the battering-rams , chainmails, etc.)
• Gunpowder, but not yet firearms
• Beginnings of industrialisation (Shire)

To name but a few...

i think i read it somewhere that Tolkien estimated the ages to be round 3000 year old and we are in the seventh age. I think it was in an essay on a site which had the domain middle name TOlkien.
Anyway, I think Rohirrim weren't specifically called to the council. as you said that yourself that they had gathered there by-chance. I think Tolkien actually meant the story to flow in a way as not to involve rohirrim and indeed by the description of Gandalf and before the arrival of the trio to Rohan and Before Boromir's speech, i always thought to Rohan as a more-or-less-evil country.
And as Boromir pointed out, Rohirrim gave little head to other matters then that of their own country and they weren't openly at war against Sauron.
Even if they had been invited, two things might have had happened.

1. Grima, who afterwall was quite influential would have had persuaded the king to scorn the invitation and even Eomer wouldn't had persuaded Theodoen for he would have been weary of the elf's. The Rohirrim feared elves, (The Lady of golden Wood fiasco).

2. The rider might have been lost in the many peril's.

But i myself think that As it is clear that Elrond didn't send invitation to Boromir to come, he also might not have invited anyone from Rohan. For dwindling or Not Gondor was considered to be the major empire of Men and a representative from it would have been believed to be the ambasador of The whole South.

The hint Lhun about which you are talking about might be the constant threat of Sauron that would always be in the back of the mind of all free kingdom. So as Tolkien has mentioned in more then one places that Elrond was considered wise among men and elf and even at that time elves were the symbol's of wisdom and as the gates of Lorien were shut and Rivendell was the only elvish fortress within reach of the Empires of third earth, they thought it the logical place to gather and converse about Sauron?

"'You have done well to come,' said Elrond. 'You will hear today all that you need in order to understand the purposes of the Enemy.......'That is the purpose for which you are called hither. Called, I say, though I have not called you to me, strangers from distant lands. You have come and are here met, in this very nick of time, by chance as it may seem. Yet it is not so. Believe rather that it is so ordered that we, who sit here, and none others, must now find counsel for the peril of the world."
"The Council of Elrond": FOTR/LOTR

Elrond "calls" none to him. Rather, he has made himself available by virtue of his years of laboring against Sauron for just such a time as those powers of "Good" see fit to make use of him. In this, we see Tolkien's "Christian" understanding of the refusal of self-will and acceptance of obedience to a "Higher Power" even though we might not understand that Power's designs. This same rejection of the individual will in favor of another's course - even though that course seems senseless (Aragorn choosing to follow Merry and Pippin rather than Frodo, Gandalf going into Moria after being warned by Aragorn that his doom awaits him there etc.) - is the sign of true good. On the other hand, insistence upon the individual's will in the face of every indication of disaster, is a sign that the character is pursuing evil, no matter what they might believe to the contrary (Denethor, Boromir etc.).

Much of Tolkien's work involves not so much rational decisions based upon cold hard fact, but exactly the opposite: apparently irrational decisions which fly in the face of both fact and accepted wisdom. The only thing is that these decisions (such as the decision to attempt to destroy the Ring) are based upon an effort to achieve the common good and not the desires of any one individual or race. It is only through this sublimation of the individual will for the good of the many that the "impossible" is eventually achieved.

Right, The Men of Forodwaith. The people living in the bay of Forochel are remnants of Forodwaith, men of far off days accustomed to the bitter cold of Morgoth's realm.

So does it mean that were they in the first age part of the tribes of Swarthy Men shut into Hithlum or were they the inhabitants of the Northern passes of Ered Luin?

Or was the Northernly waste at that time occupied with people under command of Morgoth? If so then how did they survive?

Well, Beleg, me being still a humble apprentice in Tolkien's writing can not give an answer to this.

I myself have come across something that I cannot understand.

From: HoME IX – Drowning Anadune//The Fall of Numenor

But to men of the three faithful houses rich reward was given. Fionwe son of Manwe came among them and taught them; and he gave them wisdom, and power, and life stronger than any others have of mortal race. [Added: and the span of their years, being unassailed by sickness, was thrice that of Men of Middle-earth, and to the descendants of Hurin the Steadfast even longer years were granted, I even to three hundreds

Click to expand...

But didn't all members of Hurin's family died? The tragic story "The Children of Hurin"...Or am I mixing and forgetting facts?


And another thing from the same source:

'Now
Elrond, and Elros his brother, were descended from the line of both Hador and of Beor, fathers of Men, and in part also both from the Eldar and the Valar, for Idril and Luthien daughter of Melian were their foremothers. None others among Men of the Elder Days had kinship with the Elves, and therefore they were called Halfelven. The Valar indeed may not withdraw the gift of death, which cometh to Men from Iluvatar, but in the matter of the Halfelven Iluvatar gave them judgement. And this they judged: choice should be given to the brethren. And Elrond chose to remain with the Firstborn, and to him the life of the Firstborn was given, and yet a grace was added, that choice was never annulled, and while the world lasted he might return, if he would, to mortal men, and die. But to Elros, who chose to be a king of men, still a great span of years was granted, seven times that of mortal men; and all his line, the kings and lords of the royal house of Numenor, [added: being descended from Hurin,] had long life even according to the span of the Numenoreans, ...

Click to expand...

So, how come that to Elrond it was permitted to "change camps" and to Elros - not?

It must be referring not to the direct descendants of Húrin, but to the family in general, which I don’t think that was completely lost.

About Elrond, I had read somewhere also that the choice was not ultimate in the case of choosing to be an elf. Elrond (and any other in his condition), did not choose to be an Elf, he simply hadn’t chosen anything yet. He could even change the decision and die as a mortal man. But by going to Valinor, he chose finally to be an Elf.
Now, I know that this is contradictory to the writings of Silmarillion that Elrond chose from the beginning to be an Elf, but… this is the general problem with HOME.

Gate7ole posted:

About Elrond, I had read somewhere also that the choice was not ultimate in the case of choosing to be an elf. Elrond (and any other in his condition), did not choose to be an Elf, he simply hadn’t chosen anything yet.

Click to expand...

This may be supposition from someone's speculation. I don't recall anything like this myself.

As to Lhunithiliel's query, I think that Elros' choice to become a Man was intened to be included in the information that he "chose to be a king of men, ...", Tolkien perhaps intending to indicate concisely both his choice and one of the reason's he made it, that he was by birth heir to the three Houses of the Edain.

It would seem the becoming an Elf and dwelling with the Eldar was understood to disquality Elrond from taking the inherited position from the human side of his inheritance.

I don’t remember where I read it (in HOME probably). But glimpse of it are found in the Appentices:

But to the children of Elrond a choice was also appointed: to pass with him from the circles of the world; or if they remained, to become mortal and die in Middle-earth.

Click to expand...

Thus, Elladan and Elrohir had still not chosen during the War of the Ring. They were yet neither Men nor Elves. It was a temporary condition. I may be wrong, but I think this was also applied to Elrond in the earlier writings.

Originally posted by jallan
It would seem the becoming an Elf and dwelling with the Eldar was understood to disquality Elrond from taking the inherited position from the human side of his inheritance.

Click to expand...

Thanks for being here!
But, you know, I felt it just the other way around - Elrond chose to become an Eldar and this was highly appreciated by the Valar. In fact so highly pleased they were that they gave to him some additional "grace". To the King of Men - yes!, a most generous gift, no doubt, but no FREE CHOICE any more! For him (Elros) and his heirs!
Could it be again the ever-present hint that the whole story in the Silmarillion (HoME-resp) is told from the point of view of the Elves!?!

Gate, about Hurin, but who was left? Leilath (I must have written the name wrongly ) died very young and as for his elder children and his wife - well tales tell about their tragedy. Then we know that Hurin himself looked for death and died never having any other family.
Anyway, could this HoME-placed extract tell us that perhaps Tolkien had something else on mind concerning Hurin's destiny? But...on the other hand, if I remember well from various things I've read, that the tales of Hurin and the one about Tuor were some of the first Tolkien wrote....

Humm, Strictly Speaking the Clan of Hurin was destroyed totally. His elder daughter died, His other Daughter and Son Wed eachother and both died before the conceived child was born.
So None of Hurin's race was left. But same can't be said for their Father's race for Tuor alone remained from their.

But Here another issue comes to my mind.

The Stewards of Gondor were from the Race of Hurin. (I am writing this from a public computer, so i cant provide the quote, but it is stated in the appendix of Lotr.)

So which Hurin was that who was the forefather of the Stewards of Gondor?

Lhun, whenever you read a passage ALWAYS read its notes!
Just after the passage you quoted, there is a note saying:
The descendants of Húrin the Steadfast: presumably an inadvertence for Huor, father of Tuor, father of Eärendil.
Or were you checking us if we’re paying attention to your questions?

No, Gate!
I am the "bad student" here!
It's that I was looking for some information about Men and I came across this extract and I read it ...one...and twice...and more times and I thought I must have been confusing sth. So I decided to look for some help... I HONESTLY did not see theat note!
I'll take this critisism! and I'll look more carefully in the notes.
It's just that I haven't started reading seriously the HoME...just bits....

So, what now...? It says that actually not Hurin bu HUOR was meant?

As for the Stewards being decendents of Hurin ... ...just the same "mistery" remains... doesn't it!

The Hurin of the Stewards is not the same Hurin of the First Age.
This Hurin is the "Húrin of Emyn Arnen", the earliest stewards recorded. From then, the stewardship was inherited from father to son, so Denethor was a descendant of this Hurin.

Oh! But OF COURSE!
Thank you, Gate!

I can't believe it!
1010 posts !

Well, here is something for those who know much more than me.

I remember some battle scenes describing the cruelty of the Orcs.
I was amazed to read about a "habit" of them to cut off the enemy's head and impale them.
At the battle of MT they threw cut off heads over the walls...

Why am I interested in these horrors?
Because in the centuries of the Otoman Empire in our lands this was a usual way of "treating" people,who fought in rebellious outbreaks. The Turkish soldiers did such things. This is what historian say.
But there were some European travellers who were passing in those times through the lands of the former Bulgarian Kingdom and they too desribed similar pictures - piles of cut off heads along the roads, people hanging in front of their houses, cut off heads impaled...

Brrrrr!

Any idea about why Tolkien used this "war tactics" on behalf of the Orcs? Anything do do with real history? How much did he know about Eastern Europe and the wars and the rebellions of the local population againsta the Sultan?

okay Lhun you are not far from the point. Actually some people criticized Tolkien for using kind of Mongolian Origin's for Orcs.

Here is a citiation from the Letters, Letter NO. 210.

*"The Orcs" Tolkien continues a little further on "are definately stated to be corruptions of the Human forms seen in ELves and Men. They are or were squat, broad, flat-nosed sallow skinned with wide mouths and slant eyes infact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeons) least lovely mongol Types.*

I wont call Tolkien a rachist because of this. Tolkien meant them as the Degraded and Repulsive Versions of Mongols, not as Mongols. Being an Asiain myself I don't think that Tolkien speaks here of a rachist. After all Imaginary examples are based on Real life things.
Probably in the sub-concious of his mind Tolkien had in View the Huns that Attacked Europe in the Early Middle Ages.

Actually this part of Letter #210 has caused a lot of critizism and is often quoted as a "proof" for Tolkien's racism.

But as a matter of fact the invasion of the Huns (and their cruelty) was what mainly caused the westward migration of the Gothic (and German) tribes and which brought the Angles and the Saxons to England. England throughout his history has been repeatedly "invaded" from the South and East (Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons).

Considering Tolkiens influences (Beowulf, Sir Gawain, etc.) IMO Middle-earth could roughly be compared with Western-, Central- and Northern-Europe (incl. England) at the time between 500a.Chr. - ~500p.Chr. with the Roman Empire (faintly) representing Harad and the Mongolic Empire Rhûn.

And in this context the remark in Letter 210 appears in a totally different light.

...and maybe this also answers Lhun's question to some degree...