|
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 13, 2016 17:56:04 GMT -6
Tolkien would remind you that his writings are not allegory (except Leaf by Niggle). You may find parallels or applicability, but he did not intend to equate anything in his published stories with anything in real history.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Feb 13, 2016 19:43:35 GMT -6
so nice, let's say it twice. Tolkien would remind you that his writings are not allegory (except Leaf by Niggle). You may find parallels or applicability, but he did not intend to equate anything in his published stories with anything in real history.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Feb 14, 2016 0:08:06 GMT -6
And there are also parallels to the sacking of rome by the vandals with Osgiliath being rome and Minas Tirith being the hold out of Ravenna. In fact peer reviewed articles by people with Ph.Ds have made this exact point. Specifically pointing out that no Saxon city would be made of stone like Osgiliath and Minas Tirith and this detailed use of stone is meant to draw parallels to roman architecture.
No one is denying that Tolkien didn't know of these historical happenings and perhaps borrowed bits from your source, but he also knew of other historical happenings and while Tolkien undoubtably drew inspiration from multiple histories of Europe, he says very clearly that he did not model any one history with ME. Because you are only familiar with one parallel, doesn't mean Tolkien was only familiar with one.
For example, Aragorn contains aspects of Charlemagne, Arthur, Jesus and perhaps others. That is what Tolkien is saying when he says things may be "applicable" but not allegorical. In C.S. Lewis novels, Azlan the lion is jesus. That is allegory. 1 to 1 comparison. Tolkien specifically disavowed this style of writing.
Why was the use of allegory antithetical to Tolkien? One reason is that he was attempting to write a Homeric pre-history of Europe. When one reads the Histories of Middle Earth, Aman, the western realm of the elves is suppose to become England. Tolkien was writing an English "greek" mythology. He was attempting to write a prehistory of Western Europe and so making an allegory would be antithetical to this. It would no longer be a possible and actual history replete with languages and myths, it would be fantasy.
Tolkien was doing something much much bigger than retelling stories with the serial numbers filed off.
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Feb 14, 2016 21:38:33 GMT -6
In C.S. Lewis novels, Azlan the lion is jesus. That is allegory. 1 to 1 comparison. As Lewis explained, even his Narnia Chronicles are not allegories. Suppose God the Son, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, were to become incarnate on another planet (in this case, Narnia). What would His Incarnation be like? Aslan and His acts give an imaginative answer to that question. Lewis did in fact write an allegorical work, entitled Pilgrim's Regress. Its title obviously references Paul Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, which is a clear example of allegory. In Bunyan's allegory, there are characters with names such as Christian, Mr. Legality, Civility, Obstinate, Pliable, etc. and places with names such as City of Destruction, Celestial City, the Hill of Difficulty, Valley of the Shadow of Death, etc. Reading it will give one a good taste of the flavor of allegory, a flavor conspicuously absent from Tolkien's work (except for "Leaf by Niggle") and from Lewis's work (except for Pilgrim's Regress).
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Feb 15, 2016 11:15:49 GMT -6
I've read the Bede's old english chronicle. Obviously Tolkien was an absolute expert on that time period. If he had never written LoTR he would still be considered an important literary figure for his lectures on Beowulf alone. Where you see the battle of 991 to the Balrog battle at Kazad Dum I see that same battle with Gimli, Aragorn and Eomer at the battle of Hornburg where the trio hold the bridge giving women and children time to flee deeper into the glittering caves. See what I did there? Listen, (or should I say Hwat?!) I am very open to the idea of Tolkien taking historical moments, like specific battles and translating them into similar battle in the books, but that is a far cry different from then saying that the entire book is based off of this one single battle and these one characters and that therefore the book is about vikings invading england and orcs are vikings. Aragorn is definitely not simply a 1:1 for an anglo-saxon king. For a variety of reasons, but least of all because his character emphatically looks down upon warrior societies (like men of rohan and gondor have become) because he himself is versed in the liberal arts. Numenorians were versed in learning. Aragorn bridges the classical hight of education through the dark ages and into a reunification of Europe under Charles the Great. It's clear as day. "The hands of the king are the hands of a healer" is basically what was said about Charles. But, even though I believe Aragorn contains a strong dose of charlegmane, I'm not going to say that the plot of the book is about France and therefore orcs are the enemies of the Franks. Also its funny you mention Alfred. The etymology of the name "Alfred" means "Elf Friend". This indeed was of particular interest to Tolkien. The story of the Children of Hurin from the Silmarillion was, in part, a means of creating a link between men and elves, creating of lineage of kings who were "elf friends." Yes, clearly Tolkien lifted things out of European history, but he did it outside of any chronology and outside of any one particular culture. Mythologically there is christian neo-platonicism mixed heavily with the Finnish Edda. Gandalf is odin and Pythagoras. Aragorn is Alfred and Odysseus and Charlemagne and and...Characters and larger plots are not just one thing, but mixtures of things, greater than the sum of their parts.
|
|
premmy
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 295
|
Post by premmy on Feb 15, 2016 20:20:23 GMT -6
Yeah, it's "like" the conquest of Northumbria, but it's also like the taking of Rome, and it's also like World War I in which Tolkien fought and lost most of his friends (Saruman has industry and Sauron's army has service numbers!), and its like the Mongol conquest and like the Ottoman conquest (Minas Ithil = Constantinople, Minas Morgul = Istanbul, Minas Tirith = Vienna) and like the European conquest of the Americas (several times Sauron offers various treaties and it's clear he doesn't intend to keep them), and it's like a whole bunch of other wars in history in general.
Singling out one particular invasion and showing it up as some sort of unique parallel is rather misleading.
|
|
randyb
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 92
|
Post by randyb on Feb 15, 2016 20:50:50 GMT -6
It's like history... and stuff... and like that thing that happened to these people... and it's totally just like that... and... um... SAN DIMAS HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL RULES!!
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 16, 2016 9:46:56 GMT -6
Wow I feel as if I have run into something religious here or that I spoke up in a elementary class room and my fellow students are trying to bully me down. That is fine if you don't agree with me but I ask you to please refrain from posting on my thread, start your own thread hazing me elsewhere. People seem to want to trip all over themselves to attack and criticism me that I am trying to reinterpret all of Tolkiens works. All I stated was that I think that the historical events that happened in the middle of the Third age to the northern Kingdom of Arnor resemble to me, the Viking Invasion of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms in the 8th to the 11th century. That is it, no more! That is OK if you have no interest in history go back to your DC and Marvel comic books for all I care. I thought it might be interesting if I compared a map of Eriador with a couple google maps showing 264 Wake Green Rd, Birmingham B13 9QF, UK, the childhood home of Tolkien and its accompanying hamlet of Sarehole which he said he used as a model for the Shire with the ancient capital of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Mercia which is where Tamworth is now located. Interesting the relation of the Shire to Fornost and the relation between 264 Wake Green Road and Tamworth. Tolkien's childhood home Location of the capital of Mercia
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Feb 16, 2016 12:38:42 GMT -6
The Internet is not good at showing emotions. I don't disagree with you and think you have an interesting parallel that perhaps others haven't noticed. I just think you went, perhaps, a bit far in equating orcs to Vikings and that the witch king of Angmar had very different motivations than invading Vikings had.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 16, 2016 12:56:10 GMT -6
The Internet is not good at showing emotions. I don't disagree with you and think you have an interesting parallel that perhaps others haven't noticed. I just think you went, perhaps, a bit far in equating orcs to Vikings and that the witch king of Angmar had very different motivations than invading Vikings had. Yes I probably went too far with that but hey, is the earth going to fall out of orbit or something because I made those statements? I didn't mind your arguments Cooper, you are a scholar.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 16, 2016 13:11:01 GMT -6
Although quoting from that great Tolkien website Stormcrow posted from in my Carn Dum thread tolkiengateway.net/wiki/OrcI had remembered hearing that in a documentary about the battle of Hastings, and that is were I was getting it to refer to the Vikings. I am sure the Vikings seemed like a plague of evil to the Anglo-Saxons, gosh with names like Erik Blood Axe and Ivar the Boneless how couldn't you not think they weren't orcs?
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 16, 2016 16:05:05 GMT -6
So thinking about the Etymology of the word Orc and the information that is on the Tolkien Gateway website, tolkiengateway.net/wiki/OrcI thought well maybe I should find some more information about Tolkien and Beowulf. I only know vaguely the story of Beowulf but I am collecting some books, audiobooks and video documentaries. There is a BBC documentary by Michael Wood I am going to watch. I thought it was fun I found a book by Tolkien on Beowulf that has been published by his son. Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary By J. R. R. Tolkien So! what do I immediately see in this review? He looks closely at the dragon that would slay Beowulf "snuffling in baffled rage and injured greed when he discovers the theft of the cup" And what happens in the Hobbit? Bilbo steals a cup from Smaug's horde and when Smaug discovers the theft he flies into a rage! And interesting this other book I found says by the review that the poem Beowulf was probably composed at the court of King Beornwulf of Mercia! The Origins of Beowulf: From Vergil to Wiglaf
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 16, 2016 16:59:00 GMT -6
Yes, Tolkien very consciously and explicitly modeled Bilbo's first meeting with Smaug on the Beowulf story of the thief and the cup.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 17, 2016 8:03:57 GMT -6
Yes I have always wanted to run a D&D campaign based on this map from J. E. A. Tyler's "The Complete Tolkien Companion" using the history in Appendix A at the back of the Return of the King. That is why I have been collecting books on the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms because even though I have all the MERP stuff I would like to create my own campaign.
|
|
|
Post by cadriel on Feb 17, 2016 10:02:17 GMT -6
It'd be weird for Gondor to be the subject of a Viking invasion parallel. Tolkien already has two explicit Englands in Middle-Earth. On the one hand, the Shire is an idealized version of idyllic English country life circa the 19th century or so, and the Hobbits are meant to parallel the traits of the English people that Tolkien was fond of (and also some of their pettiness that he was not altogether fond of).
Meanwhile, the Rohirrim were explicitly patterned on the Anglo-Saxons circa 1066. Their names and speech patterns were specific to Anglo-Saxon England and their look was based on the Bayeux Tapestry. Tolkien, of course, was an expert on the period and put his knowledge to use with the parallel.
Given that, it is quite odd to see the orcs invading Gondor as a parallel to the Viking invasions of England. The people of Gondor, being generally descended at least in part from the men of Númenor, were not British in either the sense of the Hobbits or the Rohirrim.
The other problem with drawing a parallel is that the orcs are highly industrial, in a way the Norse and other invaders never were. It was a deliberate breaking of any historical parallel by making the "barbarians at the gate" the more technologically advanced people. This was not a direct allegory but certainly a commentary on Tolkien's opinion of technological progress, one certainly driven by his personal experience in World War I.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 17, 2016 10:20:42 GMT -6
I keep repeating myself that I am not applying a universal to all of Tolkien's works. I wasn't applying my idea to everything. Its just a half-assed formulated idea probably based on a couple glasses of wine, please don't take all of this too seriously.
When I was reading about the Vikings and watching Michael Wood's awesome BBC series on Alfred the Great. I got the idea that the Northern Kingdoms (successors of the Kingdom of Arnor) Arthedain, Cardolan and Rhudaur and their wars with Angmar reminded me of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms of Mercia, Wessex and Northumbria and their wars with the Vikings.
That is it!!! No more than that!!
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Feb 17, 2016 12:55:01 GMT -6
@ Otto Harkaman : nice maps !
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Feb 17, 2016 13:07:55 GMT -6
The Northern and southern kingdoms, as previously said , sound very much like the Roman empire after the parting by Constatin. Arnor is like the Western Roman Empire : a colder climate , more "barbaric" populations, and first to fall because of internal strife , divisions (the way the late Western Roman Empire was constantly parted by secessions), and inside enemy (the "evil men of Rhudaur" being more akin to the germanic tribes that the roman empire had massively incorporated as auxiliaries).
Gondor would be the equivalent of the Byzantine empire: warmer climate, more cultured popoulation, longer survival, yet constantely threatened by the Easterlings.
This can be extendded to the Rohan/England parallel : the Rohirrins, albeit northeners in origin, are open to Numenorean influence , in the same manner than medieval Anglo-Saxons were under latin influence by the intermediary of christianity , but kept a strong gernaic underlying mentality.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 17, 2016 13:49:28 GMT -6
@ Otto Harkaman : nice maps ! I don't know if J. E. A. Tyler's "The Complete Tolkien Companion" is still in print, I have a epub copy but when I was young I had the physical book, sometime in the late 70s. I was lucky to have found in a used paperback bookstore a copy of Robert Foster's earlier "A Guide to Middle Earth" in fantastic shape. I lost my first copy long ago.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 17, 2016 14:09:02 GMT -6
Is there a timeline somewhere when Tolkien wrote what and when? - This looks like an interesting one www.tolkiensociety.org/author/timeline/
I do have all of his son's present books about the formation of his father's conception of Middle Earth but I have not gotten to reading them. At the moment I am very fascinated with Beowulf, I am watching Michael Wood's great BBC documentary at this moment. I put a copy of Seamus Heaney's translation of "Beowulf" as read by George Guidall on my ipod. I plan on looking over that interesting book edited by Christopher Tolkien. Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary By J. R. R. Tolkien
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 17, 2016 14:58:39 GMT -6
Interesting from that timeline above October 1953 Publication of The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth Beorhthelm’s SonA copy of the text www.csun.edu/~dar04956/literature/lordoftherings/tolkien_homecoming.pdfI know Cooper we traded off on this earlier because I had found a paper on the Tolkien Society which I now realize was an academic analysis of this paper. I find what they got out of it silly also. All I had done earlier was to show if I did a google search using the key words Tolkien and Anglo-Saxon Chronicles was that I could pull up a lot of references. I deleted my post because earlier I had just wanted to delete this thread, I really didn't want to get in a debate with everyone. I post this here now to show that Tolkien had obviously been thinking of the Vikings and the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms fighting them. Read the above copy or if you have the Tolkien reader read this in there. The paper's from the Tolkien Society analyzing this paper which I don't necessarily agree with; www.tolkiensociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Anglo-Saxon-Part-1.pdfwww.tolkiensociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Anglo-Saxon-Part-2.pdf
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Feb 17, 2016 15:26:39 GMT -6
While Tolkien's experience in the war certainly colored, and perhaps made more vivid, his descriptions of Mordor and the aftermaths of battle and the emotional struggles of Frodo and Sam near the end of their journey, but Tolkien's opinion of technology was, I don't believe, influenced either by his love of nature or his experiences in war. Rather, being true to what he was creating, he borrowed from a very strong philosophical train of thought from neo-plantonic thinkers through the early patriarchs of christianity of making a strong distinction between "virtues" and "maleficarum". Tolkien follows the bible in treating astrology and astrological "magic" as virtuous (tower of moon and stars, use of Palantiri for divination among many other examples of pythagorean mysticism all fall under virtuous magic. Necromancy, mantike and other forms of divination (necromancy in Tolkiens books needs to be understood in neoplatonic/christian terms, not D&D terms) were malifici. The Saruman and Saurons use of machinery falls under a rubric that St. Augustine would understand. Tolkiens description of magic is as close to what magic was thought of actually being during most of human history.
Anyway, for those interested in many of the facininating "applicability" in Tolkien's work would do well to buy the "J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia" edited by D.C Drout. You will get about 1000 pages of short articles by scholars doing exactly what people in this thread are doing. Its an enjoyable mental exercise as we all can agree.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 27, 2016 5:22:46 GMT -6
Interesting, from The Book of Lost Tales part Two, in the History of Eriol or Aelfwine
page 329
and from my A Guide to Middle Earth by Robert Foster
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Feb 27, 2016 22:31:32 GMT -6
When Tolkien was writing about Ælfwine, there was no "First Age" or "Third Age" of Middle-earth. Long after the fall of Gondolin, Ælfwine, called Eriol, visits the Lonely Isle of the elves outside of Valinor. When the elves fare forth to defeat Melko, Ulmo drags the Lonely Isle back to Middle-earth. When the battle is over, he drags it back west again, but Osse causes part of it to break off; this part is what becomes England. Ælfwine's sons, Hengist and Horsa, conquer it, and England is born.
While this was the idea, the Forodwaith actually were Scandinavians; they weren't just inspired by them. The name Forodwaith actually means "men of the north." However, by the time The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings get fully incorporated into Middle-earth, the Ælfwine story had been completely abandoned. There are still men in the north who, living in the north, are naturally called Forodwaith, but there is no reason to think that these northmen were supposed to be, or be like, vikings. In the Third Age their remnant are called Snowmen, the Lossoth, and are described as living in snow houses, riding sleds, and never having seen a ship before.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Feb 28, 2016 0:57:22 GMT -6
No I wasn't saying the people living in the wastes of Forodwatith in Middle Earth were vikings. I thought the word and the region named were interesting. But that earlier work was important, obviously he did revision upon revision adapting earlier writings to later writings etc. Wasn't he still revising the Lord of the Rings even after it was published? I hadn't known until recently how much he was working on his Beowulf lecturing when he was developing his ideas and writing the Hobbit. I can't wait to get to that book that was edited by his son containing his papers on Beowulf. In the Third Age their remnant are called Snowmen, the Lossoth, and are described as living in snow houses, riding sleds, and never having seen a ship before. The Lossoth reminded me more of the Finns, whose culture I believe Tolkien was familiar with. My thesis or hunch was that at one point of his writings (going back many revisions and changes) the Kingdom of Arnor (and the Kingdoms it split into Arthedain, Cardolan and Rhudaur) and its fight with Angmar seemed similar to me of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms fighting the Vikings. After Vikings had already invaded and taken over Northumbria and they were in the processes of destroying Mercia, Wessex and East Anglia. I was trying to show (in an earlier post above) with the maps from Google and the Baynes map of Middle Earth that if you use the location of Tolkien's childhood home in Birmingham and the Shire that the 9th century capital of Mercia located at what now is Tamworth corresponds to the location of Fornost the capital of Arthedain. Has anybody read about the Vikings invasions in the 9th century? I would have erased this thread long ago if I could because I really had no desire to get into so many arguments with people. Its like I said just a hunch I had.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Feb 28, 2016 11:22:28 GMT -6
by the time The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings get fully incorporated into Middle-earth, the Ælfwine story had been completely abandoned I realize this is completely parenthetical to the point you were trying to make, but, Ælfwine continued to appear in post-LR writings. “Dangweth Pengoloþ” and “Narn i Chîn Húrin,” both works from the 1950s, both present themselves as Ælfwine’s works or translations based on what he learned in Tol Eressëa. Tol Eressëa itself, of course, never ceased to be a part of the legendarium. As far as we know, Tolkien never intended to go back and do another full rewrite of the legendarium using Ælfwine as a framing device as he had in The Book of Lost Tales. However, Tolkien’s great time-travel epic (see volumes V and especially IX of HME) links the adventures of Elendil of Númenor, Ælfwine the Anglo-Saxon, and Alwin of modern England. The Ælfwine of this story experiences adventures akin to the BLT character. See also the recent publication The Fall of Arthur by Tolkien for more interesting info on how this would have all linked to the Arthurian legendarium.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Apr 20, 2016 3:51:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Apr 28, 2016 7:28:03 GMT -6
Otto Harkaman , have you read either The Road to Middle-Earth or J. R. R. Tolkien: Author of the Century by Tom Shippey? Given your inclinations as I understand them from this thread, both may contain material interesting to you -- as I recall, more linguistic and structural than strictly historical, but certainly along the lines of investigating LOTR in terms of Tolkien's professional training and lifelong interests. As far as the thread itself goes, my history is so bad I can't even have an opinion. But I do think it's worth following up on, even if it leads you down a very different path. I have always found following up on observations about LOTR to be rewarding.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on Apr 29, 2016 2:01:07 GMT -6
Thanks Hengest, Tom Shippey looks like an interesting author The Road to Middle-Earth is a fascinating and accessible exploration of J.R.R.Tolkien’s creativity and the sources of his inspiration. Tom Shippey shows in detail how Tolkien’s professional background led him to write The Hobbit and how he created a work of timeless charm for millions of readers. He discusses the contribution of The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales to Tolkien’s great myth-cycle, showing how Tolkien’s more ‘complex’ works can be read enjoyably and seriously by readers of his earlier books, and goes on to examine the remarkable 12-volume History of Middle-earth by Tolkien’s son and literary heir Christopher Tolkien, which traces the creative and technical processes through which Middle-earth evolved. The core of the book, however, concentrates on The Lord of the Rings as a linguistic and cultural map, as a twisted web of a story, and as a response to the inner meaning of myth and poetry.
By following the routes of Tolkien’s own obsessions – the poetry of languages and myth – The Road to Middle-earth shows how Beowulf, The Lord of the Rings, Grimm’s Fairy Tales, the Elder Edda and many other works form part of a live and continuing tradition of literature. It takes issue with many basic premises of orthodox criticism and offers a new approach to Tolkien, to fantasy, and to the importance of language in literature.The core of the book examines The Lord of the Rings as a linguistic and cultural map and as a response to the meaning of myth. It presents a unique argument to explain the nature of evil and also gives the reader a compelling insight into the unparalleled level of skill necessary to construct such a rich and complex story. Shippey also examines The Hobbit, explaining the hobbits' anachronistic relationship to the heroic world of Middle-earth, and shows the fundamental importance of The Silmarillion to the canon of Tolkien's work. He offers as well an illuminating look at other, lesser-known works in their connection to Tolkien's life.
|
|
|
Post by Otto Harkaman on May 3, 2016 4:29:04 GMT -6
I have been glancing over Tom Shippey's "The Road to Middle Earth" the Fourth chapter I find interesting "A CARTOGRAPHIC PLOT"
Here he is talking about names and places, this paragraph is examining Tolkien's "Farmer Giles and Ham"
|
|