Q: Why is Sauron vastly weaker with the Ring destroyed than he is with the Ring lost? Either way he doesn't have its power! Seems like it should be the same either way, except for "minor" things like having to rebuild his fortress. I can sort of answer this myself, but I need to hear it well-elucidated.

Now, was it essential to use Mount Doom to destroy it, or would any hot volcano do the trick? If there's another volcano somewhere else, I'd think it's safer to go to it even if it's much farther away, rather than penetrate Mordor's borders. And if it's Mount Doom only, why would place of origin be a factor at all? There's no inherent "power" involved in that, I'd think.

And finally, any time invisibility is used as a plot device you run into problems, and it's true here too. The Ringwraiths are invisible under their robes, and Frodo should be the same way--his clothes should still be visible. Yet that's not the case, and when Sam puts it on we even see the weird special case that Sting is invisible in the sheath yet visible if drawn!

–Lidless Eye

Q: My question is quite simple: Why was Bilbo's Sting visible to the spiders while Aragorn clearly couldn't see Frodo's sword on Weathertop?

This has puzzled me some time now. Can it be because it was Sting in Mirkwood and it wasn't on Weathertop, or what?

–Mathias Söderman

A: Okay, lots of questions here. First of all, the obvious reason for Sauron’s power loss upon destruction of the Ring is simply that with the Ring destroyed, the power itself ceases to exist. Sauron put a great deal of his own "native power" into the Ring, with the Ring as its focus and channel. With the Ring gone, the power is dispersed, scattered, unfocused, unusable. Sauron must have been drawing on the strength contained in the Ring throughout the War, even though he never had the Ring to hand. So without that source of power to draw upon, he was no longer able to sustain his fortress, his land, the Nazgûl or his vast armies that were dependent upon his will.

Tolkien states clearly that no ordinary fire would do the trick of destroying the Ring. He does toy with the idea of dragonfire, but goes on to say that even in the hottest of the old dragons, the flames would not have harmed the Ring. Clearly, there is a power inherent in the furnace of Mount Doom, perhaps put there by Sauron, perhaps there merely because it was indeed the "point of origin" of the Ring, that is required for its destruction.

Invisibility is a hard nut to crack, and I’ve never seen a writer yet deal well with it. Even my beloved C. S. Lewis contradicts himself in several places with his "invisible monopods" in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. First of all, the clothing issue. As far as the difference between the robes of the Nazgûl and the clothing of Frodo and/or Sam, I would find this one relatively easy to explain away. The Nazgul are not trying to be invisible; their black robes and black horses are part of their intimidation factor. They could not very well ask questions of the Gaffer or of Butterbur if neither could see them, right? So though they are invisible to the naked eye, we see they are capable of wrapping a robe around their invisible shapes so that they can have dealings with the living.

As far as swords, I do not know that Sting was clearly visible to the spiders in The Hobbit. The passage reads: "He had taken off his ring when he rescued Fili and forgotten to put it on again, so now they all began to splutter and hiss: ‘Now we see you, you nasty little creature! We will eat you and leave your bones and skin hanging on a tree. Ugh! He’s got a sting has he! Well, we’ll get him all the same…." At this point they could see Bilbo, Sting and all. Later he puts on the Ring again, and appears to vanish, sword and all. At least, no more mention is made of the sword. It is not made clear whether anybody but Sam could see Sting while he was wearing the Ring at the end of The Two Towers; there’s no reason to suppose the Ring-wearer would be invisible to himself, so the fact that Sam could see Sting doesn’t mean anybody else could. Also, it is not said whether or not anybody saw Frodo’s Barrow-blade on Weathertop.

So to wrap up, it seems that anything the Hobbits were wearing came in for their share of invisibility, including sword belts and swords. The black robes of the Nazgûl were visible because they were meant to be–they were coverings to disguise the fact that their bodies were invisible so that they could have dealings with the living.

–Anwyn

Update!

An update to each part of the Invisibility question:

For the Nazgûl part, many of you have written in clamoring to me about the nine rings and how the Nazzies weren’t wearing them at the time, etc. etc….. The question above does not ask how it is that the Naz are invisible, it simply asks how it is that they are and their robes are not. Gandalf tells Frodo (thanks to Galgareth for hilighting the appropriate quote, although I said much the same in my answer):

"Because they are real horses, just as the black robes are real robes that they wear to give shape to their nothingness when they have dealings with the living." ‘Dealings with the living…’ It says something about how long I’ve been reading these books that I used those exact words without remembering that I was quoting. At any rate, the Naz, whatever the powers of their rings, have long since faded into the spiritual world and become nothing physically; the robes were still in the physical world. And this gives me a clue for the rest of the invisibility problem…

An alert reader wrote in with the appropriate quotes as evidence that swords in the hands of Ring-wearing Hobbits can indeed be seen. In my zeal to find the Hobbit quote that I actually used, I missed this one:

"…spider-rope run hastily backwards and forwards from trunk to trunk. Out came his little sword. He slashed the threads to pieces and went off singing.

"The spiders saw the sword, though I don’t suppose they knew what it was…"

This is after a passage that clearly states he put on the Ring. Uh-oh! The same alert reader (Neal S.) included the quotations that refer to Frodo’s Barrow-blade under Weathertop, and to Sam’s carrying Sting in the pass of Cirith Ungol. It doesn’t say that the Orcs actually saw the sword, but it does say that Sam expected them to be able to, if he drew it out. Therefore I’m back to trying to explain how it is that an invisible person can wield a visible sword…

So I will say this. It seems clear that the Ring makes the being invisible, but not objects held by that being. Which begs the question of why do their clothes and belts and belt buckles and brass buttons and things become invisible with them. I think it goes back to what I said above about physical/spiritual world. The Nazzies live permanently in the spiritual world, but they can adorn their "nothingness" with physical robes. I believe that when Frodo (or Sam, or Isildur, etc.) puts on the One Ring, his whole person, including clothes, is taken from the physical world into the spiritual. Later, when he is being is transferred into the spiritual plane, clothes will become a non-issue. Whatever clothes he is wearing at the time of the final transformation will be taken across the border with him, and then he will be free to grab some clothes that are still in the physical world, if he wants to have "dealings with the living." This is made clear in a quotation pointed out to me by yet another alert reader, known to me only as "ZDK." It is during the attack at Weathertop, after Frodo puts on the Ring: "He was able to see beneath their black wrappings… under their mantles were long grey robes; upon their grey hairs were helms of silver; in their haggard hands were swords of steel." So this says that whatever clothing they were wearing at the time of the "final transformation" into the spiritual world, caused by their Rings, stayed with them in the spiritual world, but that later they can pick things up in the physical world, like black robes, if they want to have "dealings with the living."

Hope that is more clear.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: Hey Guys, pretty basic question: are Morgoth's mace, Grond (The Hammer of the Underworld), and the battering ram used during the Siege of Gondor, also named Grond, the same thing? It seems to me that Morgoth's giant mace might well resemble a battering ram when wielded by many soldiers, explaining the magnitude of it being used; but it also seems unlikely that it would have survived the fall of Beleriand and the Valar would have allowed it to exist. What are your thoughts?

–Minderbinder

A: No, there’s no way I can see the great mace of Morgoth surviving. When Thangorodrim was rent open and destroyed by the Valar, that place was really destroyed! And we know Morgoth was running like Chicken Little, begging for mercy. Grond could not have been passed down through any means.

The battering ram wielded on the Pelennor was newly forged in Mordor, taking its name from Morgoth’s ancient weapon. It was Grond in name only, yet the name itself held much of its terror and power.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: Is there a connection between the towers of the sons of Elendil and their names? — Minas ANOR/ANÁRion, Minas ITHIL/ISILdur?

–Elrond Halfelven

A: Anor and Anár are respectively the Sindarin and Quenya words for the Sun; Ithil and Isil are likewise Elvish for the Moon. Each of the sons of Elendil resided in the fortress associated with his name, as told in "Of the Rings of Power".

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: Sauron was a Maia, right? The key word is WAS. What was Sauron during the War of the Ring and before, though? It says in the Silmarillion Sauron was a Maia IN HIS ORIGIN.

–William Walshe

A: Starting with the notion that Maiar are beings of spirit, lesser in power but similar in nature to the Valar, we see they can follow a pattern we would equate with our "demons" or "fallen angels" in Christianity–that is, that Maiar (and Valar; see also Morgoth) can choose to descend into evil and to live outside the will of Iluvatar. When this happens in Christianity, the resultant beings are called by humans "demons" or "devils," but according to general Christian belief, they still retain the substance of their being, i.e. their spirit and their immortality. Therefore, if we follow a similar line of reasoning for "fallen" or evil Maiar, then perhaps semantically Sauron might be called something different, but in essence he is still a Maia, still a spirit with power and immortality. If evil beings were given a different generic name, Tolkien doesn’t mention it in anything I’ve read.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: How did Círdan the Shipwright and Gil-galad have time to pack up their stuff and evacuate to the Isle of Balar while the rest of Beleriand was falling apart? Were they warned by the Valar beforehand or was the destruction of Beleriand so slow that they had time to get to safety? And how did they know that the Isle of Balar wasn’t going to be destroyed along with the rest of Beleriand?

–Aldo Adamo

A: Perhaps we should unravel an inherent flaw in your question. You are thinking of the War of Wrath, which was the cataclysmic battle that changed the geography of all Beleriand, most of it sinking under the waves. But the battle you refer to, where Círdan escapes, is the Fifth Battle, (the "Battle of Unnumbered Tears") which happened over a century earlier. That war included the destruction of most of Círdan’s people, and his Havens at Brithombar and Eglarest. I imagine there was sufficient time during the Battle to plan and prepare for escape, considering there was a lengthy siege. So much of the coast had been overtaken by the Morgoth’s forces that a refuge on the Isle of Balar seemed sensible.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: Tell me about Eärnur. How did he die? What was the challenge of the Witch-king? Wasn't he later defeated in battle?

–Aretakis Bros

A: This is covered pretty well in the account of the Line of Anárion, Appendix A; the Witch-king mockingly challenged Eärnur to single combat when he received the crown of Gondor (which challenge Eärnur refused), and again seven years later. This time he accepted the challenge, and "rode with a small escort of knights to the gate of Minas Morgul. None of that riding were ever heard of again."

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: As a long time role-player in Middle-earth (using the old-school ICE rolemaster system), my group and I have always assumed that Rivendell was the safest place in Middle-earth because creatures of evil, or men with evil in their hearts, could not find it. The role-playing books justify this with Elrond's wisdom, and the Elven ring protecting the hidden valley from all evil. And yet I just read in Unfinished Tales that Gandalf feared Imladris would be assaulted by Sauron before the War of the Ring. I realize that one should always side with the books when these types of discussions arise, but I was wondering what your opinion was. Could Sauron have assaulted a place that was protected, and if he could, why did he not?

–Birkin

A: First, as a disclaimer, I have to say that any information obtained from the Tolkien role-playing stuff is suspect. Many things, most notably names for all nine Nazgûl, were completely fabricated by the game makers. That being said, your questions about Rivendell deserve some serious scrutiny. First of all, I question whether or not Rivendell really could not be found by beings of evil intent. There is no doubt that it was difficult to find without specific knowledge of its location, and it has been proven that it is not so easy for evil things to enter the valley even when they are following good folks. Let’s see just exactly what is said. From The Hobbit: "Hidden somewhere ahead of us is the fair valley of Rivendell where Elrond lives in the Last Homely House. I sent a message by my friends, and we are expected." This is Gandalf speaking. Clearly he was long acquainted with the Elves of Rivendell, and would have sent messages warning them to be ready to welcome dwarves and Mr. Baggins. Going on: "That sounded nice and comforting, but they had not got there yet, and it was not so easy as it sounds to find the Last Homely House west of the Mountains. It was difficult to find, but we aren’t told yet how evil things fare who try to find it. For that we go to Fellowship. Obviously Aragorn, having been raised in Rivendell, knew the way, and they met also on the Road Glorfindel. They were followed by the Nine, though, so it seems that there is definitely no ward on the place to keep evil things from coming close. Whether or not they knew the way without following Strider’s party is open for debate. As for them being allowed in, we see that they were not. "Who made the flood?" asked Frodo. "Elrond commanded it," answered Gandalf. "The river of this valley is under his power, and it will rise in anger when he has great need to bar the Ford." Basically all this tells us is that evil things could not enter in small numbers on susceptible feet or horses. Gandalf later says "Evil things do not come into this valley; but all the same, we should not name them … We are sitting in a fortress. Outside it is getting dark." Which brings us to your second question, about the possibility of an assault. Could Sauron have attacked Rivendell in force? I believe he certainly could have tried, and in the end, possibly succeeded. Later on, in the Council, it is made clear that this is a possibility, but that Sauron is likely to attempt it only when everything else has failed. Galdor says, "Power to defy our Enemy is not in [Bombadil], unless such power is in the earth itself. … 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?" "I have not the strength," said Elrond; "neither have they."

In a nutshell, this says to me a couple of things about Rivendell and Sauron. 1) That Elrond and his Elven ring can do many things for the defense and protection of Imladris, but that he will not be able to withstand the coming of Sauron only by the power of the Elven ring. 2) That Sauron might attempt to attack Rivendell when everything else has been conquered. The benefits of this are obvious. By hitting everything else first, Sauron would build his power, add to the numbers of his armies, and weaken the Elves’ morale. 3) That it would be best for Sauron to wait until he again possesses the One Ring. This speaks to your third question: why did he not attack if he could? Obviously to take an Elven stronghold by force would take a lot of his power and army. He would want to have as much power to hand as possible. Once the Ring is again on his finger, he can twist the power of the Elven rings and aid his entry into Rivendell, so it is prudent for him to wait. He knows that Elrond isn’t going anywhere, and if he does, he won’t take the One Ring with him, so he has nothing to lose by waiting to gather his strength.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: Hi. When Frodo claims the Ring for himself it is said that on Sauron’s command, the Nazgûl flew to Mount Doom. But a few seconds later Gandalf yells, "The Eagles are coming!!" Then the Eagles swoop down at the Nazgûl. But they were in Mordor flying to Mount Doom at that time, so how can the Eagles attack them near the Black Gate? It is also stated that the Nazgûl were fleeing back into Mordor. But they were a long way from the Eagles (towards Orodruin).

–Ruud

A: Close, but not exactly. The timeline of these events shifts a little bit forward during the chapter "Mount Doom" and then shifts back at the beginning of the next chapter "The Field of Cormallen." Tolkien overlaps chronological time for just a few moments so the reader can piece together the entire series of events. But they do happen in order and it all fits.

When the Eagles first appear, swooping down on the Nazgûl and the Dark Forces, the Ring had not yet been claimed by Frodo. That happened a few seconds, if not a full minute, later. When Sauron became aware of the hobbit he instantly commanded the Ringwraiths to descend on Mount Doom. Thus they vacated the skies above the Morannon, and within a few minutes met their destruction with the Ring’s unmaking.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: I have often wondered about the "other evils in the world older than Sauron" that Gandalf spoke of. Are they as powerful, and only dormant? Did they seek or serve Sauron when he was at his height in power? Do they plague the world when the elves and great men of old no longer are around to challenge them? What about the Balrogs? Are they all accounted for? The one Gandalf fought was the strongest of the remaining, but the lesser ones would surely pose a problem for mortal men? And the watcher and Shelob, they were independent evils I believe, Shelob for sure, but still seem to serve Sauron. How did the watcher in the lake come to be? What happened to it? I'm sure the lake would have been drained with the return of the king and the freedom for the dwarves to delve the mountain without the Balrog; did they destroy the watcher then? And are there other interesting obscure creatures drifting about that fans may not have heard of that you could tell us about?

–Benn

A: This is a complex and somewhat metaphysical question. In a sense, because Melkor was active in the shaping of the world, all of Middle-earth contains some degree of the "Morgoth ingredient" or another. So we have examples of "hostile nature" in the form of the Watcher in the Water, or Old Man Willow. Sauron had little interest in such natural forces, except where they were directly useful to him; he may not even have known of Shelob.

Balrogs are, of course, fallen Maiar, spirits of fiery destruction, and are as old as Sauron in some sense. It is not explicitly stated that the Balrog of Moria was the only one remaining in the world, though the existence of even that one came as something of a surprise to Gandalf and his friends.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: Could Frodo's mithril coat have turned the Black Rider’s knife?

–Benn

A: Ah, a tricky "what-if" question! The quotation of a few passages will serve us well here: "In one hand he held a long sword, and in the other a knife … He sprang forward and bore down on Frodo … A shrill cry rang out in the night; and [Frodo] felt a pain like a dart of poisoned ice pierce his left shoulder." We are told later about the wound, that the Black Rider was not trying to kill Frodo (else he would have swiped off his head with that sword!) but to pierce his heart with a Morgul-knife. "I fear … they believe your master has a deadly wound which will subdue him to their will." Sauron obviously wanted Frodo alive to be tortured with his crime of holding the Ring. Gandalf says as much later. But all this is really secondary to your question! Bilbo gives Frodo the marvelous mithril-coat in Rivendell, after he is healed from the wound. "But I should feel happier if I knew you were wearing it,’ [said Bilbo]. ‘I have a fancy it would turn even the knives of the Black Riders." Bilbo obviously believed, or wanted to believe, that it would do so, and indeed, I think it is not an unreasonable supposition. We know that their knives were designed to splinter so that a bit would remain to poison the victim–remember that Elrond removed a splinter of the knife from Frodo’s shoulder before he could be completely healed. If foiled by a coat of mail so impervious as mithril, we can surmise that the knife would splinter on the mail and not be able to pierce the victim, or else that it would simply be turned back. We see many examples later of other weapons being turned back by mithril, even an orc-spear hurled with force, and we are not led to suppose that the knife itself was stronger or bound with mail-piercing magic; only that it was provided with the means to do what it was meant to do–pierce and poison the victim, working its way to his or her heart.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: I know that Beleriand was located west of Eriador and that the Blue Mountains (Ered Luin) that are shown in the maps of the Silmarillion at the East are the same that appear at the northwest of the LOTR maps. My question is: was Beleriand located north of Eriador or just next to it? Was the Shire in the same latitude as Doriath or in the latitude of Ossiriand, or even the Isle of Balar?

–Aldo Adamo

A: Beleriand was west of the Ered Luin pretty much adjacent to the lands of Eriador. Starting in the lands that would someday be the Shire, you could go straight west across the mountains and you’d end up in the heart of East Beleriand, skirting the southern bounds of Doriath eventually coming upon the Fens of Sirion. My source is the Atlas of Middle-earth, by Karen Wynn Fonstad. She went to a lot of trouble to realign the maps of the First and Second Ages after the History of Middle-earth series was published. Check it out.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: Was Melian the only Maia ever to get married and have a child? Was she the only one that could do so? I'm only familiar with LOTR and the Silmarillion, and I don't remember hearing about this happening anywhere else.

–Erin Dillenbeck

A: Melian is the only Maia known to have wedded or begotten children. On the other hand, there are enigmatic characters like Goldberry, the "river's daughter," who may represent some extraordinary ancestry of her own. Nothing can be said with certainty about this.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: This morning’s discussion on Barliman’s centered on soccer. Trying to get the conversation more on topic, I posed a question if there were any sports/games in LOTR. The most obvious is the orc head count between Gimli & Legolas, but I was thinking along the lines of darts or cards or horse racing. (Were there games at Bilbo's big party? Sack races?) I thought there was reference to hobbits/Bilbo playing pebble tossing games: "now Bilbo was a pretty good shot, having played toss-the-pebble as a lad." But I of course can’t find that. Am I dreaming? There may have been a mention of hunting for sport also. Any ideas?

–Brian McCarty

A: I believe the passage you were thinking of is from The Hobbit. Bilbo is preparing to save his friends from the giant spiders of Mirkwood. "…looking about he saw that in this place there were many stones lying in what appeared to be a now dry little watercourse. Bilbo was a pretty fair shot with a stone, and it did not take him long to find a nice smooth egg-shaped one that fitted his hand cosily. As a boy he used to practice throwing stones at things, until rabbits and squirrels, and even birds, got out of his way as quick as lightning if they saw him stoop…" This answers your question about the quote; it goes on to illuminate your query about games in general. "…and even as a grownup he had still spent a deal of his time at quoits, dart-throwing, shooting at the wand, bowls, ninepins, and other quiet games of the aiming and throwing sort…." So that says clearly that hobbits played many games we’re familiar with today: darts, as you mentioned, and even bowling of sorts. As far as Bilbo’s "long-expected party," all that is said is that it was "a variety of entertainments rolled into one." Chief among these were Gandalf’s fireworks, food and drink, and the presents handed out. These, as we know, included many musical instruments, at which the hobbit-children were evidently adept at playing. We must assume that for the other entertainments, since the party lasted the whole day and into the night, that there were indeed games available, probably those mentioned above and others. As educated speculation, I would say the hobbits as a rule tended towards outdoorsy games of skill rather than things like card-playing.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: Hey, you guys have a great site and are very knowledgeable and informative. Gandalf's names include Mithrandir, Tharkûn, and Incánus. Incánus is a name he is called in the South. In Unfinished Tales, Christopher Tolkien has a whole chapter on The Istari. He references this question, saying that Incánus is Latin for grey (my dictionary says "very-white"). The Romans once invaded England from the south. Perhaps in the south, Tolkien was playing with the idea of a Roman-like civilization? There seem to be savages in the south, but he could very well have been thinking of a Roman civilization. I thought it was interesting. Maybe you guys can give your take on it? Thanks.

–Janus4986

A: Well, I’m not so sure about this theory. At the end of the day Tolkien seems to have dismissed the reference to Latin. In Unfinished Tales Christopher also states that his father’s use of incánus was ultimately given a Quenya etymology, making it fit in with his extant language forms. He "suggests" the connection to the Latin word, but "at the end of the discussion he remarked that the coincidence in form of the Quenya name and the Latin word must be regarded as an ‘accident.’"

I am not inclined to think Tolkien was drawing a correlation between the far South (the Harad kingdoms) and the ancient Romans. He stated often enough how much he disliked allegory, and it is improbable he would develop a story element along these lines.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: I was just wondering if human blood affected the lives of elves in Middle-Earth. Tolkien always seems very interested in family trees, blood lines, etc... and the whole Arwen/Aragorn thing (her living so much longer) is one of the most tragic themes at the end of the book. However, Elrond, the leader of the elves at Rivendell, is called Elrond Half-Elven. Didn't this human blood affect his life-span? This means Arwen too, was at least part human, and what with Aragorn's Numenorian blood, you would think the difference wouldn’t be that great. Also, weren't any of the other elves concerned about Elrond's "tainted" blood (i.e. did they call him a "half-breed" behind his back?) It didn't seem like anybody was too concerned with all this, but it just seems inconsistent with Tolkien's interest in lifespans and blood lines.

–Alex Hesser

A: Although Elvish ancestry is said to "ennoble" the bloodlines of humans, and seems to have resulted in long lifespans for Elros and his heirs, the classification of a being as a Man or an Elf is an either/or choice. With the exception the heirs of Beren and Luthien, all the descendants of Men (even when Elvish blood is evidently present, as, for example, in the royal house of Dol Amroth) retain the Gift of Men and die and leave the world. Anyone who is of the kindred of the Elves (even if they are given the grace to claim this kinship freely, as in the case of Elrond and his children) is immortal, and bound forever to Arda.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: The Children of Ilúvatar (Elves and Men) were each given separate gifts. I assume death is actually the gift (or one of the gifts) of Men, but what exactly is the gift of the Eldar? Can you expand on this concept?

–Blake McIntire

A: Simply put, the Gift of the Elves was their immortality, and the Doom (or Gift) of Men was their mortality or death. Elves could be killed in battle, but their immortal souls would still gather in the Halls of Mandos in Valinor. If they were not killed, they would continue in the body indefinitely, usually, as we know, returning over-Sea back into Valinor when they were weary of Middle-earth. Now most Men would think that a fantastic gift, and in fact the fall of Númenor was due largely to the jealousy and greed of the kings of Men, desiring the immortality of the Elves so that they could enjoy their wealth longer. But to the Elves it may appear slightly different. It is written that the Elves do not know and even the Valar do not know the destination of the souls of men after their inevitable death, but we are given a few clues, clues that tell us that perhaps the Men are headed for a more glorious destiny than the Eldar can imagine even in Valinor. The older legends of Silmarillion speak of the meeting of the souls of Beren and Lúthien after they had died, but to me, the most telling evidence is in Lord of the Rings. I submit a passage from the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen in Appendix A. The grace of old was given Aragorn, that he should be able to order the hour of his own death, and when he decided upon the time, Arwen stood beside his bed, bitter in the knowledge that she had chosen the Doom of Men and would thus have to abide Aragorn’s death and, later, her own. But Aragorn, though he says that all comforting words are fruitless at such a time, nevertheless speaks convincingly to her of what they have to hope for beyond death that even the Eldar cannot aspire to: "Behold! We are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory. Farewell!"

So we see that it looks unequal on the face of it: Elves given immortality in the world (which includes Valinor) and Men destined to perish. But it seems clear that while Elves’ souls are forever bound within the world, even in Valinor, Men may be headed for something even greater beyond the world, where they will again be with their loved ones. Perhaps that’s not necessarily so for Elves; being immortal in the world, they can choose to go whither they will, and Celeborn seems to imply that he will lose Galadriel when she takes a notion. He says to Aragorn at their parting: "Kinsman, farewell! May your doom be other than mine, and your treasure remain with you to the end!"

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: Do the Elves give the Golden Wood the magical air or vice versa? And with that magic with the woods, where does the Sea fit in?

–Benn

Q: I would like to ask, how come the Elves of the Second and Third ages were so much less powerful than the Elves of the First Age? For example, in First Age, elves like Glorfindel and Turgon slew Balrogs, and Fingolfin fought with Morgoth! The Elves of later days could not compare to them.

–Dhruv

A: It’s not a matter of the Elves having less power as time went on; rather they were playing a less and less active role. Many Elves in LOTR (Galadriel, Círdan) certainly could compare to the ‘Elves of yore’ because they were the exact same people appearing in the First Age or before! They strove against the Enemy in mighty battles, as you say, but that was no longer the case during the Third Age. Most of the more powerful Eldar had returned to Valinor by this time. Though fewer in number, the remaining Elves were still puissant; only their participation in world events waned. These smaller populations that stayed behind receded from Middle-earth, preferring to stay in their "enclaves." This period of history was deliberate in Tolkien’s greater design, of course.

And it correlates to the query about the Golden Wood. It is Galadriel’s Ring that is at work in Lothlórien, slowing down the flow of time and preserving the unearthly beauty of the land. In Letters, No. 131, Tolkien called the Elves’ use of the Three Rings as "operative in preserving the memory of the beauty of old, maintaining enchanted enclaves of peace where Time seems to stand still and decay is restrained, a semblance of the bliss of the True West."

This is the larger, if not more profound, theme in Tolkien’s works: the Delaying of the Elves. The Sea comes into the novel because it calls to the Elves constantly in their hearts. For they are destined to leave behind their small pockets of "preservation," to depart Middle-earth by sailing over-sea, and thus return to the Undying Lands. The various reasons and circumstances of their lingering is endlessly fascinating, and is covered primarily in The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: Okay. Legolas is a son of a king, right? Why don't people treat him as such? And another thing; why did he bow to Imrahil, instead of being treated as an equal? I know you guys are so wonderful when it comes to Elvish laws and customs. I feel really stupid . . . could you please help me out? Thank you so much!

–Lauren M. Robinson

A: Little is actually said about the laws of inheritance and kingship among the Eldar. Considering that these are immortal beings, perhaps this is not unexpected. There is little prestige in being the heir apparent to someone who is going to live for several thousand years more. In the case of Legolas, we do not even know that he is Thranduil's only son, or his eldest son, while Imrahil is a reigning monarch, though he is titled "Prince" -- there is no King until Elessar takes the throne of Gondor.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: Hi, I have a question about men, and Aragorn in particular. In Tolkien's works, we see that in many cases men can be rather foolish and arrogant (Boromir, Denethor), and they are sometimes portrayed as weak, and a race that is not very noble. But then we get Aragorn, a kind, wise, very knowledgeable, yet a strong warrior in times of battle. He almost seems the complete opposite of every other man in Tolkien's books. What made Aragorn so different from other men? Was it his noble blood? His upbringing in Imladris? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

--Sam Rankin

A: Good question! First thing to remember, though, may be that the other men weren’t entirely one-sided. Boromir was described as "proud and restive," which may answer well enough to our description of "arrogant," but he was also doughty in battle, strong in defense of his homeland, and brave and bold in strange and dangerous journeys. His father Denethor was in a unique position. Yes, he too was arrogant, used to the exercise of his will, but he wasn’t a fool. Though he was ensnared by the temptation of the palantír, the qualities that led to his entrapment were very much well-intentioned. The problem, however, lies in the fact that his intentions were very single-minded: the defense and prosperity of Gondor, and the glory and acclaim he felt that Gondor should have had from all other lands for being their protector against the Shadow. It is this single-mindedness which led to his downfall, and it is also what makes us see him as less than he is, especially when brought up against Aragorn. I think you are on the right track with his upbringing in Imladris; raised by Elves who do not espouse any one human concern but who look out for the good of all Middle-earth, he would have a broader viewpoint and would know, as Denethor and Boromir did not, that securing the Ring for Gondor’s use would not have aided Gondor but rather ensured its ultimate doom. Then, too, he was the Heir of Elendil, as Boromir and Denethor were not. He was raised from his youth knowing that a high destiny was laid on him, and that he would have to be high-minded, of noble purpose, and unswerving determination in order to fulfill it. But he’s not the only example of an upright man; don’t forget Faramir, who "though not less resolute" than Boromir, seemed to have a broader vision than either his brother or his father, and to recognize that at times great men must give way to greater (Denethor’s house to Aragorn’s) for the good of all.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: Who lives in the coastal territories between the Gulf of Lune and the Bay of Belfalas (Harlindon, Minhiriath, Enedwaith, etc.)? Is there any mention to the populations of those areas anywhere in the books?

–Aldo Adamo

A: Men lived there, basically, but Tolkien does not offer much detail on them during the War of the Ring. We know these areas were frequented by the Númenoreans during the Second Age and many havens they established later became permanent settlements after S.A. 1200. Tolkien states that these areas were deforested and claimed by Men; and included in the North Kingdom of Arnor at its height, when it stretched to include all lands west of the River Greyflood down to the coast. Lands east of the Greyflood (called Enedwaith) belonged to Gondor.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: I could be overlooking something obvious, but do you have any ideas on why the Witch-king would forgo the flying beast and opt for a horse during the siege of Minas Tirith? A flying beast (that apparently could shoot poisoned darts) would not be as vulnerable as a horse (as the Riders learned at the Ford), and although the Witch King could not anticipate facing Gandalf, he had to expect some type of opposition. Perhaps riding into the town as a conquering hero is more of a formal ceremonial statement than flying in(?).

–Hrnbrgr@aol.com

A: Perhaps. It is also possible that there was simply no large open space to land the huge beast within the city walls; or that a single flying beast would be particularly vulnerable to archery fire from the walls while in the air. If you intend to lead a ground-based army through a breach in a wall, it is probably best to be on horseback. This is, of course, all a matter of speculation.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: At the beginning of The Hobbit, they mention one named "Golfimbul," and his creation of golf, due to his head rolling. Who is Golfimbul, and what part does he play for Tolkien?

--Jdogg008@aol.com

A: You have almost answered your own question! J The exact passage runs thus: "…Old Took’s great-granduncle Bullroarer, who was so huge (for a hobbit) that he could ride a horse [as opposed to a pony, which any adult hobbit could presumably manage]. He charged the ranks of the goblins of Mount Gram in the Battle of the Green Fields, and knocked their king Golfimbul’s head clean off with a wooden club. It sailed a hundred yards through the air and went down a rabbit-hold, and in this way the battle was won and the game of Golf invented at the same moment."

Again, like the names of the Trolls, I believe this was a device written for its comic use, and not for a larger legendarium. I believe Golf was actually invented in the British Isles, so this was a lighthearted way for Tolkien to connect his English mythology with some actual facts of our times. As for the goblins, we are told of a time when the world was less peaceful, even in the Shire, and that hobbits had sometimes to fight for their land, such as during a particularly harsh winter when Wargs crossed the frozen Brandywine. The Battle of the Green Fields, or Greenfields, is mentioned two other times. From the Prologue: "The last battle, before this story opens, and indeed the only one that had ever been fought within the borders of the Shire, was beyond living memory: the Battle of Greenfields, S. R. 1147, in which Bandobras Took routed an invasion of Orcs." You see here that he has reverted from the use of the word "goblins" in the Hobbit to the more linguistic "Orcs," as used in LotR. And again, at the end of Return of the King: "So ended the Battle of Bywater, 1419, the last battle fought in the Shire, and the only battle since the Greenfields, 1147, away up in the Northfarthing."

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: Dear Q & A, Wolves are my favourite animal, and I feel that they get bad press a lot of the time, so of course I was confused by the Wargs in Tolkien. Are they wolves under a special influence, or a separate species? And in LOTR, are all wolves wholly evil, or are there good and bad wolves? Or are they neutral, swayed by the Orcs?

–Rosamond Brown

A: Yes, the wolves have a hard time of it, poor things. Today we know much more about the behavior and lives of these noble animals than a hundred years ago. They are beautiful and very special. Tolkien may or may not have known better, but that’s beside the point. For his purpose, he needed wolves to ‘play the villain.’ They were perfect for the role of the fierce, wild, and altogether Northern European savage beasts. Many great tales and myths (especially Norse) feature a wolf in a fearsome aspect. In creating a new myth, Tolkien adapted this traditional portrayal of the beasts. Such is their lot.

In Middle-earth, Wolves were evil from the start, apparently. Morgoth bred the two greatest and most fell Wolves, Draugluin and Carcharoth. His Lieutenant Sauron sometimes assumed the form of a Wolf. Orcs used the smaller breeds as beasts of burden (often in lieu of horses). I find no separation of benevolent wolves in any text. Wargs was a name that classified the evil Wolves found in the north vales of the Anduin.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: How old is Elros? Is he still alive in LOTR? He was in the video game. If so isn't Aragorn the heir of Elros, and they are in the same house, that's really weird, not counting the fact that Aragorn and Arwen are cousins. And why was Aragorn's lineage considered less than Arwen's? (Appendix A it says that Aragorn's lineage was nothing compared to her dignity, not exactly comparing lineage, I know.) It's the same thing except Aragorn has more of it. That whole story is very weird.

–Shan Parmley

A: Elros died in year 442 of the Second Age (see Appendix B). Video games came much later, when the palantíri were brought to Middle-earth near the end of the Second Age.

Aragorn is indeed Arwen's first cousin, about sixty times removed, but Arwen is not only the daughter of Aragorn's multi-great uncle Elrond, but the grand-daughter of Galadriel of the house of Finarfin. So while "the blood of the Númenoreans became much mingled with that of other men, and their power and wisdom was diminished, and their life-span was shortened," (Of the Rings of Power), Arwen represented the union of two great houses of the Noldor and Sindar.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: More a musing than a question, really. Anyone who has read Lord of the Rings more than once can rattle off a long list of persons from whom the Ring must be kept at any cost--persons capable of wielding it and replacing Sauron as Dark Lord, not just Sauron himself and the unscrupulous Saruman but also our friends Aragorn, Elrond, Galadriel, and most especially Gandalf. At least, this is the usual list. What about Fangorn? Of course, Treebeard isn't in our usual list simply because the Ring never comes anywhere near to Fangorn Forest, but it's instructive to consider what the Old Ent might have done with that kind of power. Once there was one wood stretching all the way from Fangorn in the southeast to the Old Forest in the northwest. With Treebeard in charge, there would be again, and the Old Forest would be the most hospitable and cheerful part of it. Every acre of Middle-earth an acre of forest, and every tree a Huorn, brimming over with malice for all non-tree beings, and when necessary pulling up its roots to join in bloodthirsty raids against any member of any race that has ever hefted an axe. In Sauron's world, the free peoples end up as slaves. In the world of an Entish Dark Lord, they end up as fertilizer. Okay, the orcs end up as fertilizer first, but I wouldn't hold out too much hope for the rest of us. There's a passage somewhere in The Two Towers that very distantly alludes to this, along the lines of "the reason people aren't mad at Ents is because Ents don’t do that sort of thing," isn’t there?

Anyway, is this speculation at all sensible, or am I totally off-base?

–Ben Newman

A: No, I think you’re on to something. I believe the passage to which you refer shows us Gandalf conversing with Treebeard: "So Saruman would not leave?" [Treebeard] said. "I did not think he would. His heart is as rotten as a black Huorn’s. Still, if I were overcome and all my trees destroyed, I would not come while I had one dark hole left to hide in."

"No," said Gandalf. "But you have not plotted to cover all the world with your trees and choke all other living things. But there it is, Saruman remains to nurse his hatred…" It’s a fascinating speculation. I do believe that if Treebeard took up the Ring, unless the power of Nature that is in him acted as it seems to in Tom Bombadil, that the Ring would indeed have most of the usual effect on him. Remember how Galadriel says that she would begin as a fair, wise and bountiful queen who would "set things to rights?" But she continues ominously, "But it would not stop with that, alas!" She knows well enough that even good intentions can be twisted by the Ring. So, in all probability, would it be with Treebeard, unless he has more power to withstand than I think. Although he is one of the oldest beings in Middle-earth, still yet, he is a being, and ultimately a fallible mortal.

– Anwyn

back to top

Q: What is the "Void?" I know from The Atlas of Middle-earth that it’s all around Arda but is it just uncharted land, or black space-like nothingness?

–Tyler Custer

A: As brief as I can be: the Void is an utter vacuum of nothing. It is akin to the Void in the Old Testament book of Genesis. Nothing to be found in it, neither life nor light. It is furthest outward beyond the sky (the ‘Inner Airs’), the Ekkaia (‘Encircling Seas’), beyond Arda itself and all the Circles of the World. Read again the Introduction to Fonstad’s Atlas for further details.

–Quickbeam

back to top

Q: I have noticed that many names of the Noldor are in the Sindarin tongue, such as Galadriel and some of the sons of Feanor, although the Noldor did not originally speak in this tongue. Are there any records of the names that these Noldor were originally called in the Undying Lands? What would their Quenya names be? I am sure some names would not be hard to transfer from Sindarin to Quenya or from Quenya to Sindarin, but what's your take on this naming system?

–Blake McIntire

A: Yes, JRRT discussed the etymologies of the given names of the house of Finwë in "The Shibboleth of Fëanor", which appears in "The Peoples of Middle-earth", the last of the twelve History of Middle-earth volumes. The Quenya form of Galadriel's name is given as Altariel, which is the Quenya form of the Telerin name given her by Celeborn (in one account), Alatáriellë her `true' name is there given as Artanis (`noble woman'). There is much more information in that essay, too extensive and complex to summarize briefly.

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: Does the ring necessarily grant invisibility to all (or all mortals) who wield it? Gandalf says that it grants each bearer abilities corresponding to their strength, ability and stature. It is thus entirely possible that a casual wearer (not someone who has domination over all its power, such as Sauron, but anyone who does not know its secrets) will only use the powers that correspond to what they are already inclined. The wearers we are accustomed to are hobbits who are short, can walk very quietly and are hard to spot when they don't want to be seen, so they would naturally bring out the power to disappear from the natural world (and enter the wraith or spiritual world (Glorfindel existed both in the spiritual world and natural world so if the Ring grants immediate entry into the spiritual world it wouldn't necessarily make the wearer invisible)) while it might not be an immediate effect of wearing the ring for others (although it will eventually overtake anyone who wore it long and sought for secrecy). The other powers of the Ring are acquired if you have a natural inclination toward it (increased hearing, domination over others) so why would invisibility be different?

–Clarissa

A: Wow. You make your case very clearly. I must say I’m dismayed not to have any examples in the printed word of a being other than somebody of Hobbit-kind or Tom Bombadil putting on the Ring. (I include Gollum in ‘Hobbit-kind.’) Obviously we have heard it said that ‘the Ring has no power over [Bombadil],’ because he has no ambition for power. We have also heard Gandalf and/or Galadriel speak to the Ring’s providing power in measure according to the native power, or desire for power, of its wearer. So your question brings it even more specific: is the power also measured out in kind according to the kind of native power of its wearer? Gollum thought it very useful for hiding and slinking, so invisibility is a good little power for what he wanted. Likewise Bilbo, when he found the Ring, was in need of an escape mode from Gollum, so invisibility served him as well. Frodo knew what power the Ring granted Bilbo, and was under the expectation that it would do the same for him when he put it on. Likewise Sam. My first wonderment is, what would have happened if Boromir had put on the Ring?

Obviously his first desire would not have been stealth, but strength. He desired to be able to crush the might of Mordor with his sword. Of course, we know that eventually the Ring would have set up Gondor as a second Mordor if this had come to pass, but Boromir either refused to understand this or simply didn’t see it. Anyway, we are left to wonder if invisibility would have come to him too. And the more I think of it, the more I think perhaps not. At least, I think it’s not something that can be assumed. Assuming would be all too easy to do, since that’s the primary effect of the Ring we’ve seen so far, but I think you make a good case for beings of other gifts being granted other powers. Unfortunately, the bottom line is that nothing I’ve read in Tolkien gives a basis in fact for these deductions, so while I feel you’re really on to something there and I would have a tendency to cautiously agree with you that invisibility would not automatically be the result of anybody putting on the Ring, Tolkien simply doesn’t tell us.

– Anwyn

Update!

Oops! I don’t know where my brain was on this one–maybe I just liked the idea of the Ring having varied powers according to varied beings, but an alert reader has written in to keep me straight. Peter Kinnaird writes:

"What about Isildur? He wore the ring and, correct me if I'm wrong, we are never told that he became invisible, but rather that when it slipped from his finger, he became visible and the orcs shot him. This would seem to imply that he was once invisible, and it’s unlikely that he was born with such an ability. I would suggest that Boromir's wearing of the ring would be similar."

Of course, he’s right; somehow the story of Isildur completely slipped my mind when I was writing this Answer. I am forced to fall back on a previous answer in which I hypothesized that the first duty of the Ring was to bring its wearer into the spiritual world, and the first method of accomplishing this was to cut the wearer off from the visible physical world. I’m going to turn 180 here and say that although the idea of the Ring not acting the same way for everybody is enticing, the evidence we have suggests that it does, at least for all mortals, procure invisibility as the first effect.

back to top

Q: G'day. I'm a LoTR fan from Australia and just stumbled across your site. Now, for a number of days now I have been looking through all the books on M.E. and Tolkien in my local library and I have yet to find one peice of information: Are the Riders of Rohan decended from the Three Houses of the Edain, (who subsequently went north and lived with the Woodmen and Beornings, not going to Numenor) or are they decended from men who never went into the Elvish Land (I forget its name, starting with B) like the Easterlings? Thanks if you can help me!

–K & A Pye

A: In the story of Cirion and Eorl in "Unfinished Tales", we are told that "These Northmen were descendants of the same race of Men as those who in the First Age passed into the West of Middle-earth and became the allies of the Eldar in their wars with Morgoth. They were therefore from afar off kinsmen of the Dúnedain or Númenoreans, and there was great friendship between them and the people of Gondor". There is also a footnote, "The Northmen appear to have been most nearly akin to the third and greatest of the peoples of the Elf-friends, ruled by the House of Hador."

–Ostadan

back to top

Q: Why was Gandalf so absolutely shocked when Faramir comes to Gondor with word of Frodo's plan to pass into Mordor via Cirith Ungol? Although I recognize that Cirith Ungol wasn't exactly a vacation spot, what other choice did Frodo have? Indeed, even with Gandalf's help, what other choice WOULD Frodo have had? To spend months hiking around the Ered Lithui (I think that's the name, I don't have a map in front of me but the Ash Mountains at any rate), through enemy country in the form of Rhûn and Khand, past the Barad-dûr itself, and THEN to Mt. Doom? Or perhaps instead it would be FAR more feasible to try to get past the certainly impregnable defenses of the Morannon and Towers of the Teeth at Cirith Gorgor. And then if you sneak by that you can try to slink through Udûn, which at the time of the War of the Ring was pretty much wall to wall with Sauron's army. And, if you happen to get past that, you've got to do the Morannon all over again with the Isenmouthe at Carach Angren. It was my impression that the Ephel Duath and Ered Lithui were only passable at those 2 points; it seems that one of them is completely out of the question, so what choice is there but the other? Why is Gandalf so terrified?

On a related note: some people I have spoken with claim Durthang guarded a pass through the Ephel Duath, but I assert it did not. However, I am usually left hanging as I don't really know what it DID guard. It seems to be an anomaly: none of the other Gondorian fortresses are that far into Mordor, or at least require that much hiking through Mordor to get there. Furthermore, it doesn't really appear to guard much of anything important. What's the deal with Durthang?

--AppleFan84@aol.com

A: I agree with your assessment of the difficulties getting into Mordor. I can only suppose that Gandalf perhaps thought that they would find away to sneak around the feet of the mountains, or through the gates. And remember, they certainly would not have gone to Cirith Ungol without Gollum. Gandalf understood instantly, as Faramir did not, that Gollum was probably leading them straight to Shelob for his own profit. I believe Gandalf considered that, without Gollum, left to wander on their own, they would’ve found a hole or a little-guarded outlet to slide through unobserved, and so his terror stemmed mostly from the fact that they were following Gollum. Remember again, without Gollum, who can say whether Shelob would’ve been able to catch them or not?

As for your second question, you’ve posed me quite a pretty little problem. I found the reference to Durthang easily enough, but it is difficult to discover exactly where it lies. Tolkien describes a square in the northwestern corner of Mordor, formed on the west and north sides by the Ephel Duath and the Ered Lithui, respectively, and on the southern and eastern sides by spurs that stretch out east from the Ephel Duath and south from the Ered Lithui. Inside this square is Udûn, and he speaks of many Orc-holds and fortresses on the slopes of these spurs. The question is, exactly where is Durthang? The passage states: "A few miles north, high up in the angle where the western spur branched away from the main range, stood the old castle of Durthang, now one of the many orc-holds that clustered about the dale of Udûn." Western spur?? The way the lay of the land has already been describe, it should be talking about an eastern spur. That would make perfect sense. A spur jutting east from the Ephel Duath, with a castle sitting in the angle where the spur joins the range, guarding the corner. But that’s not what it says, it says western spur. Ugh!! It goes on to describe a road that seems to come south for a few miles and then turn east and run along a shelf in the spur, until it meets the crossroads at the mouth of Udûn. For my sanity, I’m going to assume that my interpretation is correct and that Tolkien is actually speaking of the spur that juts east from the Ephel Duath. Otherwise Sam and Frodo wouldn’t have been in a position to see it, for one thing. And for another, he clearly states that the road turns east to the Isenmouthe. It couldn’t do this if the fortress weren’t at the western edge of the whole business. As for a pass there, through the Ephel Duath, maybe yes, and maybe no. Remember, all Gondorian holds inside Mordor were built to guard the way out, not the way in. A castle positioned as the one I’ve described would be able to command all the ground just south of the small mountain spur that forms the southern wall of the Udûn. No fortress clustered in the mouth of the vale itself would have quite the same range of sight. So maybe a pass, and maybe not, but certainly a view of all open ground where enemies could go.

– Anwyn