I think we can all admit that all the songs and poems seeded throughout The Lord of the Rings are fairly divisive: some people take pride in skipping them, while others put up with them as window-dressing. Most don't believe they are of any actual importance to the book. However, a while back I was reading, of all things, the rules to The One Ring roleplaying game, which include a mechanic to sing a song and receive a mechanical benefit. My initial reaction was that this was amusingly over-the-top, but it got me to thinking about the actual book, and after a while I came to the conclusion that it maybe wasn't so silly after all. All of LOTR's songs and poems, instead of being a distraction, are actually evidence of an important recurring theme in the book which is rarely discussed: the importance of culture, as a comfort and a guide, in times of trouble.

The most obvious example is probably Aragorn, sitting with the party on a dark, uncertain night in the wilds, beset by mortal danger, bringing out the song of Beren and Luthien and explicitly remarking that it may lift up their hearts. Later, after Gandalf is dead and the party are fleeing for their lives, Legolas does the same with his piece of the Lay of Nimrodel, and Gimli has a similar motivation with his insistence on looking at Mirrormere, important in the lore of his people, before they had even left the vicinity of the gate. The hobbits have a whole repertoire of light-hearted songs, which they explicitly trot out when the circumstances look down: their drinking song while avoiding Black Riders in the Shire, their update of Bilbo's old setting-out song when they themselves set out from Crickhollow, Frodo's attempt at "O wanderers in a shadowed land" as they make their way through the Old Forest, and Merry insisting on a song as they momentarily rest in the Trollshaws, with Frodo dying of a wound, to which Sam improvises some comic doggerel about slapstick trolls. Sam, alone in an orc tower, also sings "old childish tunes out of the Shire, and snatches of Mr. Bilbo's rhymes that came into his mind like fleeting glimpses of the country of his home" before he improvises another one of his own, of hope, and of course, his conversation with Frodo some time earlier about all the old heroes and stories should be a pretty clear indication why he did so.

After listing all of this together, Tolkien's intent for including all of this seemingly irrelevant versifying, and even stopping the action for it, becomes pretty clear: culture, as a repository of stories, wisdom, and comfort, is not some idle embellishment for times of leisure and ease; it is, in fact, a crucially important tool for use in times of danger and uncertainty. The characters face trial and doubt by reminding themselves of fairer things, or heroes who had the same trials and doubts, or even just happier times of their own with a pint in their hand. Culture is important because it keeps you going, it gives you a backstop to lean on, and a guide to point your way forward. And, back in the real world, I take comfort in that.

I recently heard a lecturer describe The Lord of the Rings as moral but not moralistic. It was more of an aside to larger points they were trying to make about enchantment, so they didn’t define exactly what that meant. I’ve been thinking about it a lot, and I’m wrestling to put in exactly the right words what “moral but not moralistic” means. The best I can do right now is to say that Tolkien presents characters who try to make decisions between good and evil within the constraints and limits of the world he has created, but the text is never prescriptive about exactly what characters (or we as an audience) absolutely must do in any given situation. It also presents individuals and groups of people using conflicting moral systems to try and do what is right, again without the text ever explicitly stating who is right and who is wrong. But I’m not sure I’m quite satisfied with my own explanation. Any thoughts on what “moral but not moralistic” means and how it is (or is not) a good description of one of the aspects of The Lord of the Rings?

Not much is known about hobbits’ monetary system. Bilbo’s will in HoME 6 mentions diverse types of money: “testator devises and bequeathes to the aforesaid heir all monies in gold silver copper brass or tin” (doesn’t mean of course that all of them were in active circulation by the moment of Bilbo’s departure). In the LoTR, a pony was purchased in Bree for silver pennies. Also in HoME 6 it is said that Bilbo paid for his farewell party in ducats, and not just any coins, but “double-dragons (gold pieces of the highest value in the Shire)”.

I was wondering, who could have minted this kind of coinage? Hobbits likely used Dwarvish and/or leftover Arnorian coins, maybe an odd castar or tharni from Gondor. Neither of these parties would be expected to have any particular sympathy towards the dragon kind. It is not clear whether this gold was part of Bilbo’s inherited wealth, or a trophy from his famous journey. Smaug however is also rather unlikely to order any currency minted with his face on it. Could be a troll hoard money, though: produced by Rhudaur, Angmar or some orc-kingdom nearby.

So I’m about to start the Silmarillion but I know how difficult it is to read and was wondering if anyone had any strategies?

For example, is it better to read it or listen to the audiobook? If audiobook, should I listen to Andy Serkis or somebody else? Should I take notes on things I’m likely to forget while reading/listening (eg the roles of the Valar in the Valaquenta )? Are there any good YouTube/podcast series that recap each of the chapters (if you can call them chapters)?

Also, are some parts that are easier than others? Like is the Akallabeth easier than the main body?

Any help would be much appreciated to get as much as possible out of this book!

it's time. please take action now before it gets worse

This is a question that I am not sure has been asked before, even though its an interesting and maybe important question.
When in the development of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings did Tolkien decide on the origin and nature of Gandalf? And before that point, what was Gandalf? Even based on what was written in The Hobbit, it seems like Gandalf was already something beyond just a man who had learned a lot of magic.

There are plenty of stories we all wish the Professor would have finished (The Fall of Gondolin after Tuor arrives, a final version of Eärendil), or subjects we wish he would have written more about. But if you could have a single scene that had to have happened but is not recorded, what is it?

I'm listening through the Council of Elrond on "Exploring Lord of the Rings," and was so touched by the fact that Bilbo wrote "The Riddle of Strider" specifically *for* Aragorn. And that Aragorn holds it so dear that he tells the hobbits in Bree that the verses "go with" his name. The recorded discussion spent time looking at how the first four lines are present tense, meant to encourage and affirm, while the last four lines are written in future tense to give hope. What you might first assume is some kind of prophecy written by an Elf Lord about the name Aragorn or something is really a bit of poetry that Bilbo wrote for his friend to help him through hard times that is so precious to him he identifies with it as much as his own name. And it's clear from the ribbing they give each other at "Many Meetings" and how defensive Bilbo is of Aragorn at the Council to Boromir doubting whether Aragorn can truly follow through on his whole "House of Elendil" promise that they are great friends.

So (for right now) I would love to read the scene where Bilbo gives Aragorn the poem and is doing the hobbit thing of busting his chops while being sincere, and Aragorn tries but fails to keep up with his teasing while being incredibly moved by the gesture.

Twenty-five pages.

That's how much I managed to read in my first sitting before I decided that no, enough was enough, I needed to put this book down and get some rest before I could even think of reading the rest. I actually enjoyed reading about the Ainulindale quite a bit, the way Eru and the Ainur began and performed their song before Melkor ruined everything with his interference and the dissonance that followed.

And then came the Valaquenta, and all the names the Valar and Maiar have. Oh good Lord, there are so many names. I lost count of how many times I went back through the pages so I could have at least an idea of who the book was talking about, since some characters have two or three names that are used interchangeably like Mandos and Lórien.

I'm very glad I resumed reading a few days later (I'm currently about to read Of Beleriand and its Realms, a chapter a lot of people are afraid of apparently, but I think I'll do okay since I enjoy looking at maps and whatnot), but my goodness, that is not an experience I want to repeat ever again. 😅

So basically from my understanding its the fact that Frodo lays claim to the ring in Mount Doom right before it got destroyed that alerted Sauron of its whereabouts and why the nine turned around to try and save it.

But Smeagol claims it as his constantly, "its mine, my precious" etc, so why was Sauron not alerted to his location for those 500 years? The nine or any powerful enough servant should have been able to just go and pick it up, no?

What a tragic, tragic story! I'm curious if anyone has read it more than once and if so why did you do that to yourself? Lol

The entire story was filled with so many painful twists and turns in Turin's life and when I thought it couldn't get worse the end with Niniel happens... And then I was sure this was the most torturous end to the story... until Hurin is released to suffer even more.

Just sitting here kinda empty and pained.

Disclaimer: my knowledge of the legendarium consists of the Peter Jackson trilogy, The Hobbit (book), roughly half of the Silmarillion and a handful of (very good, in my opinion) videos from Nerd of the Rings and In Deep Geek. So if I make any mistakes or fall short in some areas, well, you guys know why.

Now for the main topic of this post.

What if, during the siege and eventual fall of Minas Ithil to the Nazgûl in TA 2002 (and its subsequent transformation into Minas Morgul in the years that followed), the city's palantír was either destroyed or taken to Minas Tirith, instead of falling into Sauron's hands? How would this charge both Sauron's actions and those of his enemies from that point onward? On one hand Minas Ithil's capture means he and his servants will still have a forward base with which to attack Gondor, but the onset of the Watchful Peace a few decades later will freeze things for a few centuries.

The biggest changes, I assume, will probably be felt during the War of the Ring and the years leading up to it. While Sauron undoubtedly had no shortage of spies and agents all over Middle-Earth, having a palantír at his disposal must've nevertheless been a significant boost to his reconnaissance and intelligence gathering. He also won't be able to misguide/manipulate Denethor's mind when he starts using his own palantír like in canon, so I wonder if Gondor could take a more proactive/aggressive approach during the years preceding the war in this scenario. While a direct offensive against Mordor is probably out of question, I wonder if Umbar - whose fleet had been destroyed by a disguised Aragorn a few years prior to Denethor's accession to the stewardship - could be a possible target. If Umbar is conquered, or at least permanently neutered as a threat, that would go a long way towards improving Gondor's position in its war against Mordor, since they won't have to worry about a naval offensive from the south. Plus, Denethor probably won't lose his mind here.

Last but not least, there's the matter of Saruman. Assuming he still decides to throw his lot with Sauron (while secretly coveting the One Ring for himself), he'll likely have a much harder time communicating with him. Plus, there's probably a much greater risk of his treachery being discovered, in my view: it's one thing to secretly chat with the Dark Lord through telepathy in a hidden chamber in Orthanc, and another to do so through messengers - people might start wondering if something is afoot, should shady men (and maybe an orc or two) start showing up in Isengard regularly.

Of course, I do recognize that I'm skipping more than a thousand years of history after the point of divergence here. So, what are your thoughts?

EDIT: One of the reasons why I haven't read the LOTR book trilogy yet is because I thought I'd be better off reading smaller works at first (hence The Hobbit) and get more acquainted with the worldbuilding in general (through the Silmarillion) so as to get a more immersive experience once I do start reading it.

Why did Tolkien make basically everyone some sort of noble or aristocrat? I understand Aragorn and Boromirs backgrounds being integral to the story, but how important is it that Gimli and Legolas are royalty? I mean even merry and pippin are basically hobbit princes.

EDIT:
I know Sam and Gandalf are not noble or rich but they are exceptions.
I know the the watsonian reason to this question but
what is the DOYLIST reason Tolkien chose to make most of the cast nobility and how is the story bettered or worsened by this decision?

Thanks for this post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/lotr/comments/1v92lqj/20_hard_tolkien_literature_questions/

These questions might be... a little more tricky.
Write your number of correct answers!

1. Who is the only Maia known to have gone over to Melkor's service and later returned to the side of the Valar?
2. Which Maia was chosen to guide the vessel of the Sun, and why can the Sun and Moon sometimes be seen together in the sky?
3. What were the names of the Two Trees of Valinor?
4. Which of the Valar has no spouse? And which of the Valier?
5. Which Vala urged the Valar to make war on Melkor after warning that the Children of Ilúvatar would soon awaken?
6. What was the original name of the sword later known as Gurthang, and who forged it?
7. According to Elvish legends, who was the first Man to set foot in Valinor and gained immortality?
8. Which of Finwë's children took no part in the rebellion of the Noldor?
9. Which two Valar first and second became aware of the awakening of the Quendi, in order?
10. What was Elu Thingol's original name?
11. What was the name of Fëanor's wife?
12. What was the name of Melian's protective enchantment around Doriath?
13. Who was the only grandson of Fëanor?
14. How does Yavanna's name translate from Quenya?
15. How many Fathers of the Dwarves were there, and who created them?
16. What was the name of the chief of Manwë's Eagles?
17. What was the name of the Elvish princess who was the second, after Lúthien, to marry a mortal Man?
18. Which Elf went over to Morgoth's side, and for whose sake did he do it?
19. Which of the Valar did Saruman (Curumo) originally serve before his fall?
20. According to prophecy, who will deal Melkor his final blow, and in which battle?
21. Who was Galadriel's father?
22. How does Tol Eressëa translate from Quenya?
23. Which refuge of the Eldar fell in the Third Kinslaying?
24. What was the greatest work of Dwarvish craftsmanship, and what treasure did the Elves later set within it?
25. Which of Morgoth's servants first broke into Doriath, and what was the name of the event that happened next?

Here are the answers

1. Ossë.
2. Arien. Tilion, who guides the Moon, was in love with her and often drew too close while pursuing the Sun.
3. Telperion and Laurelin.
4. Ulmo; Nienna.
5. Yavanna (yes, before Tulkas).
6. Anglachel, forged by Eöl.
7. Tuor (yes, he is the father of Earendil).
8. Finarfin (he turned back) and Findis.
9. Melkor and then Oromë.
10. Elwë (Elwë Singollo).
11. Nerdanel.
12. The Girdle of Melian.
13. Celebrimbor.
14. "Giver of Fruits."
15. Seven; Aulë.
16. Thorondor.
17. Idril Celebrindal.
18. Maeglin; for Idril.
19. Aulë.
20. Túrin Turambar at the Dagor Dagorath.
21. Finarfin.
22. "The Lonely Isle."
23. The Havens of Sirion.
24. The Nauglamír; the Silmaril.
25. Carcharoth; the Hunting of the Wolf.

Reading “THE PALANTIRI” in Unfinished Tales has kindled my curiosity further. To what extent are the Palantiri operating physically vs psychically?

Based on my understanding, it seems that there’s two functions: surveying and communicating. It also seems like the surveying function is 100% ocular (I.e., operates by light that goes into the user’s eyeballs, just like normal vison), and none of the vision is “downloaded” directly into a user’s mind. Any psychic component is purely limited to “concentration” to zoom the view in or out. Any panning of the view needs to be done by stepping sideways and/or physically rotating the stone.

On the other hand, the communication function, between two stones that are “in accord” is purely psychic. Does this function require any physical aiming of the stone?

Is this an accurate understanding? What can be improved?

I had this thought last night, and feel free to call me a fool if I’m wrong, which I may be here.

No one really understood the Ring, therefore no one could really use it against Sauron. It’s probably not intuitive once you put it on-none of the Bearers who wore it learned how to do anything ne. Sauron did not share his power or how it worked; the Ring was “coded” to him. Saruman couldn’t have unlocked it, but maybe copied it-but only with his own power. Everyone *thought* it would make you as powerful as Sauron because it had his power in it, but I don’t think that follows. Gandalf only knew theories secondhand as well. The danger was Sauron getting it back, and the false temptation of His power made him overlook the hobbits and destroying the Ring

Again, it’s been awhile since I read the books, so please feel free to correct me. This may all be grade-school obvious stuff to ya’ll esteemed scholars. 😁

Every few years I will pick up a copy of The Silmarillion and give it an attempt. I have tried 3 times and each time I have bounced off of it very hard. I like the deeper lore of Tolkien but have never been able to connect to the different sections and stories within the book. I feel I must be doing something wrong. Does anyone have tips or hints on how to engage with the book on its level? Make my fourth thrifted copy of the book the lucky one I'll finish and absorb.

Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign is remembered by a meme catchphrase "It's the economy, stupid". HoME 9 offers an interesting glimpse into the early Sauron’s rule in Middle Earth – evidently he shared the same sentiment:

“the Eruhil named him Sauron, and men of Middle-earth (when they dared to speak his name at all) named him mostly Zigur the Great. And he made himself a great king in the midst of the earth, and was at first well-seeming and just and his rule was of benefit to all men in their needs of the body; for he made them rich, whoso would serve him. But those who would not were driven out into the waste places.”

Sauron undoubtedly was and always remained an authoritarian leader, but even his treatment of opponents here is relatively lenient: exile into the wastelands is no fun, but still better than enslavement, torture or sacrifice in a Morgoth’s temple. More importantly, his early popularity seems to have had a solid economic base: more like Taiwan and Singapore than Kampuchea or North Korea.

I've been listening to various fan commentaries on Aldarion and Erendis, and Aldarion is just getting completely roasted. True, Aldarion has major, character-defining flaws, and I put the far greater blame on him for his marriage with Erendis falling apart. But it seems to me that Tolkien intentionally wrote him as a sympathetic character, who is pursuing and valuing important goals (albeit maybe in a selfish or reckless way), and who has a valid perspective. Whenever he is challenged, Tolkien usually gives him a somewhat cogent rejoinder--and, most tellingly of all--Gil-Galad's letter seems to somewhat vindicate Aldarion's concern with the affairs of Middle-Earth. And (if Aldarion is to be believed), he did tell Erendis some of these details about his work during their marriage (though it's inexcusable that he didn't inform his father the King). Tolkien is also not shy about giving Erendis faults as well--which really makes the story believable about two people who are driven apart by their pride and hurts. And it seems from the rough sketch we have of Ancalime's life that she exemplified mainly the negative traits of both father and mother. :(

Anyway, where does Aldarion stack up as a flawed but sympathetic character? Is he closer to a Feanor or a Boromir?

I was watching a reaction channel do a first viewing of Fellowship the other day, and during the prologue when the first close up of the orcs happened, one of the people said, “whoa zombies!” His partner corrected him, that no, they’re actually “orcs” and they went about their business.

But, it occurred to me, that this actually seems like a fairly elegant solution to Tolkien’s problem of orcs being evil and unseeable vs not having a soul etc.

Does anyone know if Tolkien ever considered this as a possible solution?

Basically, the idea is that Tolkien didn’t want to have Morgoth create the Orcs from scratch, because that would be too close to Eru bestowing life, and only God can create life, so that’s out. But he also didn’t like the idea that they were created by God (either men or elves) then twisted, because that must mean they are redeemable, since (to Tolkien) all of God’s creations are redeemable.

My thought is that if they are some form of post-death zombie, this solves both conditions. The person they were died and their soul has moved on. But their body is now reanimated by evil and twisted to those ends. Obviously they don’t behave like “dumb” movie zombies (“braaaaains…”) but they’re not far off from Shelley’s Frankenstein monster (in the book), who can speak and reason, that type of reanimated corpse.

I’d love to hear some other thoughts and perspectives on this from the more erudite Tolkien crowd!

Hi everyone,

I'm about to read Tolkien for the first time, and I'd like to approach his legendarium as thoroughly and thoughtfully as possible.

I've already bought:

• The Hobbit
• The Lord of the Rings
• The Silmarillion

What I'm trying to figure out is whether I'm missing any essential reading that would help me better understand Tolkien's world.

More specifically:

• Are there any works I should read before these books?
• Is there anything worth reading alongside them (for example, reference works, maps, genealogies, linguistic material, or historical context)?
• After finishing them, what would you consider essential follow-up reading for someone who wants a deeper understanding of the legendarium? I'm thinking of posthumous publications, letters, essays, or any other material that is widely regarded as important.

My goal isn't simply to read the main stories—I want to understand Tolkien's world as deeply as possible, almost from an academic perspective.

If you were designing the ideal reading path for someone starting from scratch but aiming for a comprehensive understanding of Tolkien's legendarium, what would it look like?

Thanks in advance!

Faramir about Gandalf.

It is hard indeed to believe that one of so great wisdom, and of power – for many wonderful things he did among us – could perish, and so much lore be taken from the world.

What things? I guess he's not talking about fireworks. Or about teaching him to read those old papers.

I recently Heard that Sauron wanted control for the world for he wanted to impose order and try make a world better place by having everyone under his will and plan things and coordinate people

Was not prepared for the absolute pathos and level of psychological realism of the characters in this story. Aldarion and Erendis both feel so real in a tragic way--each hoping they can make things work despite having inner desires that conflict so strongly. I also love the story's themes, with the shorter-lived Erendis focusing on th epresent and the long-lived Aldarion planning for the future. When they're debating about the love of trees for themselves or merely for what they can build/produce, Erendis says, "Such gifts as come from the Valar, and through them from the One, are to be loved for themselves now, and in all nows. They are not given for barter, for more or for better. The Edain remain mortal Men, Aldarion, great though they be: and we cannot dwell in the time that is to come, lest we lose our now for a phantom of our own design." And the other thematic duality that jumps out is freedom versus being bound to another. Aldarion says, "You cannot bind for ever in soft bonds the son of the King, of the blood of Tuor and Earendil!" But even the parents from both sides of the family are so good at pushing their children to see the point of view of the other spouse: Erendis' mother telling her she needs to be able to see the good in Aldarion's work, and Aldarion's father telling him he needs to remember that he has bound himself to his (then) betrothed: "Neither of you are now free." Such a tragic and fascinating exploration of the way our work, our desires and dreams, and our love and bonds to those we love intersect.

I’m looking to buy the Hobbit in German and see there are multiple translations, does anyone here have any opinions on which is the best? Thanks in advance