Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Mortality Question

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > Characters > Mortality Question   [1] [2] >>
My question is this:

(My question assumes that the child of a elf/man union is mortal, because Eldarion was mortal and he was the son of Aragorn, a Man, and Arwen, an Elf.)

Why should Elrond and Elros be offered a chance to choose between Mortality and Immortality?
According to the assumption above, the are not half-elves, but just plain men, as are their parents, Earendil and Elwing.


This is why:

Earendil is of the race of men because he was the son of a Elf/Man union, Tuor (man) and Idrial (Elf)

Elwing is of the race of men because: Beren and Luthien (elf/man union) have a son, Dior, who, according to the assumption, is a mortal. He weds Nimloth (elf) and again, according to the assumption, their daughter Elwing should be mortal.

Therefore, if both Earendil and Elwing are mortal, how can their sons be half-elves?

Though I am not sure, I believe the key to this puzzle lies in Dior, because I have not read anywhere that Dior/Nimloth was an elf/man union, and that in fact there were only three unions: Arwen/Aragorn, Earendil/Elwing, and Beren/Luthien. Yet how can Dior be Immortal when he is a son of one of these unions?

This is the predicament. Maybe the answer is plainly described and I have overlooked it. Can anyone help?
Ahhh, but you forget that Luthien dies as an elf and returnes as a mortal. And Dior is
born after they are sent back to life. So he is indeed a man, not an half-elf. Smile Smilie
So if Dior is a mortal man then the question still stands... Shouldn't Elwing be a mortal? Thus meaning that Elrond and Elros should not have been given the choice?
Quote:
(My question assumes that the child of a elf/man union is mortal, because Eldarion was mortal and he was the son of Aragorn, a Man, and Arwen, an Elf.)

Arwen became mortal after her father had left Middle-earth. Hence, Eldarion was the son of two mortals and your assumption should be directed to the dustbin.

Arwen wasn't an Elf either, she was Half-Elven, meaning she could still choose to be counted amongst Men, which indeed happened when she chose to live with Aragorn.

Until the Valar didn't decree that Eärendil & Elwing + their offspring, Elrond & Elros, could choose for themselves among which race they'd be counted, it was simply unknown whether they were mortal or immortal.

You might also dive in this thread : Why was Dior immortal?
Seems like the half-elven have an unfair advantage. Arwen's life-span was somewhat longer than Aragorn's so all they have to do is wait until they are fed up with immortality before deciding to be mortal. Is there a cut-off point for deciding, such as a) the leaving of one's half-elven parent from ME or b) committment such as marriage? Could Arwen have married Aragorn without making that decision, thus allowing her offspring to make their own choice?
Quote:
Could Arwen have married Aragorn without making that decision, thus allowing her offspring to make their own choice?

I suppose she could, but then she and Aragorn would be seperated forever when Aragorn dies. And their children would have to choose which parent they most likely would never ever see again. And it would have made a lousy love story. “Oh I love you, Aragorn, spend the rest of your life with me! It will only be about 1/3000 of a second of my life, and then we will be seperated for ever. But we elves have a good memory so I’m pretty sure I won’t forget you! What do you say, hunnybunny?”

Quote:
so all they have to do is wait until they are fed up with immortality before deciding to be mortal.

This is not too different to what the kings of old did, before Morgoth came and convinced men that death was not a gift of men, but a curse. They lived their lives and when they felt their time was up, they said “good bye, see you later” and layed down peacefully and died. As Aragorn did.

Personally I believe that Arwen would have died as a human even if Aragorn had died in the battle against Sauron. I think her choise was basicly taken when she fell in love with him. But that is just a guess on my part.
Quote:
Personally I believe that Arwen would have died as a human even if Aragorn had died in the battle against Sauron. I think her choise was basicly taken when she fell in love with him. But that is just a guess on my part.

What? You think she wouldn't have married Legolas? Rolling Eyes Smilie

Quote:
Arwen's life-span was somewhat longer than Aragorn's so all they have to do is wait until they are fed up with immortality before deciding to be mortal

It didn't work that way... Aragorn wanted her to 'decline the dusk', if she wanted to be faithful to him, meaning that she had to choose mortality if she'd want to marry him. He didn't want any cheap tricks. See Appendices.
What can I say? My tongue got firmly stuck in my cheek.
I checked out the "Why was Dior Immortal" thread and the question was never fully answered.

One side of the argument states that Dior was mortal because he was the son of two mortals, and Manwe says that anyone with mortal blood is mortal.

Another side states that Dior was immortal because Tolkien writes from The Book of Lost Tales, Vol 2: The Nauglafring:
Quote:

Now fare the long days of Elfinesse unto that time when Tuor dwelt in Gondolin: and children then had Dior the Elf, ...

Not to mention my argument that Dior/Nimloth was never stated as an elf/man relationship.

And yet another side states that Dior was a half-elf because he himself says:
Quote:

I am the first of the Peredhil (Half-Elven) but I am also heir of King Elwe, the Eluchil

(Also, in the Encyclopedia of Arda Dior is acknowledged as a half-elf)


Which argument, then, is correct?
Quote:
Another side states that Dior was immortal because Tolkien writes from The Book of Lost Tales, Vol 2: The Nauglafring:

Quote:

Now fare the long days of Elfinesse unto that time when Tuor dwelt in Gondolin: and children then had Dior the Elf, ...

You shouldn't pay much attention to what's in HoME, because it often contains material which goes linea recta against what's in the Silmarillion or UT... in the Silmarillion Dior is the son of Beren & Lúthien; Eärendil is Tuor's son.

Quote:
Which argument, then, is correct?

Since there is really no conclusive answer : all of them.
Quote:
Quote:
Which argument, then, is correct?

Since there is really no conclusive answer : all of them.

Such are the tales from which never ending discussions are made. Teacher Smilie
Just to reinforce Virumor's note about not looking at HoME. In the Lost Tales, Beren is an Elf. Thus, it is no surprise that when he has a child with Luthien, that child, Dior, is also an Elf. So the Lost Tales don't help us at all in determining what happens in the later version of the story, when Beren is of course a man.

As for the Half-Elves. It's important to note that Earendil, upon arrival in Valinor, is actually fully mortal--despite his heritage. Thus, we read in the Silmarillion (and similarly in HoME also, if you wish): "Then Earendil, first of living Men, landed on the immortal shores." So it is clear that Earendil is mortal. And indeed, his mortality is necessary if we are to make sense of the Valar's confusion: Manwe says, "Shall mortal Man step living upon the undying lands, and yet live?"

So Earendil is mortal at this point. And, no doubt, Elwing is also. It is only after Earendil comes to Valinor with the Silmaril that he is awarded the choice of mortality or immortality--of being human or being elf. Thus, we hear Manwe's decision: "To Earendil and to Elwing, and to their sons, shall be given leave each to choose freely to which kindred their fates shall be joined, and under which kindred they shall be judged." The decision of Manwe is news to the confused Valar. It is not the case that all half-elves always had a choice of what fate they would have. It is only Earendil's family who is given this choice.

Elros and Elrond are included because Manwe decided to include them is the easy answer. A more explanatory answer might be that the choice of Earendil and Elwing wouldn't be too free if it wasn't also given to their children. How are they to choose to be immortal if it only means that they will be separated for ever from their children?

As for Dior. There's no real reason to believe that he is immortal. As indicated above, the choice of the Half-Elven was only instituted after Earendil came to Valinor with the SIlmaril. Dior died long before then, so it unlikely he was able to choose his fate. Also note that both his parents were mortal at the time of his birth (whereas Idril was immortal at the time of Earendil's birth, and Tuor, supposedly, became immortal). And as said, it seems straightforward that Elwing, Dior's daughter, is also mortal--even though her mother is an Elf. So there it is clear: Dior is also mortal.

Though one might still wonder how he got the name Aranel if this is true.
Quote:
Though one might still wonder how he got the name Aranel if this is true.

And one might perhaps wonder about the following : he married an Elf, Nimloth, and if he was mortal, then why wouldn't this union be also included in the list of unions between Elf and Man, being Tuor & Idril, Beren & Lúthien and Arwen & Aragorn? I could be wrong, but I believe there were only 3 unions mentioned between Elves & Men (but then there's also the lesser known union between Imrazôr and Mithrellas).

One might also wonder whether - after what had happened to Lúthien and what her choice had cost the Sindar- another Man in that calamitous part of the First Age would be allowed to marry a high ranking member of the Sindar (I believe Nimloth was the niece of Celeborn, who reportedly was related to Elwë through his grandfather Elmo).

Or maybe it was simply enough that Díor was Lúthien's son and the Sindar didn't wish to lose the jewels of her genes forever.
Virumor - because the reference to the three unions (which is given explicitly in Appendix A) is itself somewhat silly. If Dior was an elf, then Elwing was almost certainly an elf, unless all craziness broke out. And if Elwing was an elf, then Earendil and Elwing was also a union of elf and man--because Earendil is clearly human at the time he has kids. And the quote also excludes any chance of an elf-man union occuring in the line of Dol Amroth--which Tolkien clearly does not want to outright exclude, even if he isn't willing to outright say it happened. So that quote is itself a problem even inf Dior is considered an elf.

You are correct on Nimloth's heritage--her father is said to be Galathil, who is Celeborn's brother. though at teh same time as this geneology was written, Tolkien also gives thought to the idea that Nimloth might be Celeborn's and Galathil's sister. It is not entirely clear which thought came later, but Christopher Tolkien thinks it is the former (HoME XI).

But i find it no surprise that Dior would marry an elf. He comes to Doriath and rebuilds the kingdom, claiming to be Thingol's heir and accepted as king by the Sindar. He is even named Aranel by the Sindar (something along the lines of "royal elf" or "noble elf" if we take the liberty to translate it using its roots). If the Sindar are willing to accept him into their society to this extent--actually taking them to be the head of their society--it is hardly a surprise that he should himself marry an Elf. So I think your last guess is following the right track. Given Dior's heritage, the Sindar are willing to accept Dior as one of their own.

And given that it is rather clear that the choice of the Half-Elves was instituted only because of Earendil, it seems that Dior ought to be mortal. So this explanation about this name, marriage, and kingship--ad hoc though it might be--seems a little bit more desirable, even necessary.

Also, though the Beren and Luthien story cost the Sindar Luthien, it is treasured as a beautiful story by the Elves, not as a tragic story. And we actually know that it serves to lighten up their fear of foreign men--as we see when Thingol gladly takes Turin into his house.
Quote:
And given that it is rather clear that the choice of the Half-Elves was instituted only because of Earendil, it seems that Dior ought to be mortal. So this explanation about this name, marriage, and kingship--ad hoc though it might be--seems a little bit more desirable, even necessary.

That made me think... of the couple, Elwing was the first to choose to which race she would be counted. Now if her father was an Elf, then why would she need to choose? This seems like another pointer that Dior was indeed mortal. Logically speaking, this is beyond any doubt.

It seems that just because of some of JRRT's writings (primarily in HOME) conflicting with what's in the Silmarillion, that there's still some confusion. That reference to the 3 unions mentioned in the LOTR Appendices, also seems to be among those.

About Beren & Lúthien and Aragorn & Arwen though, it is striking that those men married their spouses when they were Elves (or in case of Arwen, counted amongst Elves), but after this marriage the spouses became as mortal women, and gave birth to their offspring as mortal women.

It is also striking that in any case, the children of Tuor & Idril and Díor & Nimloth are mortal. I'm having a little bit of trouble finding a reason for this... that's why I rather like to think that the race of both Eärendil and Elwing was just 'unknown' (as I recall, Ulmo seemed to say this during the Council of Manwë) although Eärendil was more inclined to choose the race of his father, and Elwing the race of Elves.
I think you're right to highlight the confusion involved in saying what race Elwing and Earendil actually are--as it did even confuse the Valar. But as a general rule, it seems that when a Man and an Elf have a kid together, that kid is human by default. The Tuor-Idril relationship seems to make this especially clear, given that Tuor later became immorta himself (so the legend goes).

I think this makes sense. It is the gift of Eru to Men that reigns supreme, and it is this which cannot be interfered with. It wouldn't be a surprise that the mortality of men is more important (something which is, in a sense, a birthright that can't be taken away) given its role in the mythos.

That the quote from Appendix A is this problematic is kind of concerning. It's not a text we'd like to ignore. That the narratives concerning Dior are problematic is not reallly confusing at all. Tolkien never got back to writing the story of the fall of Doriath, so there's very little consistent, late writings involving Dior's role in Doriath. We hear him called half-elven, and,also the father of the half-elven, named "aranel" and "Thingol's heir" but we don't really hear anything about him. Nor are these texts something which stand out as especially authoritative on the issue (for instance, the name "Aranel" appears in teh Grey Annals, but then isn't used again; much of the story of Dior given in the Silmarillion--including, e.g., his receiving the Silmaril--comes from little tidbits in the later versions of the "Tale of Years," written after the Grey Annals. He is only Eluchil, not Aranel, in these texts).
It is questionable as to the race under which the Half-Elven fall. As said above, mortality was a gift, so it is a sort of demonstration of Eru's generosity that a child born of a man and an elf should receive the gift as a blessing too. However, Eru does seem to have forgotten about the individual minds that always like to have fate in their own hands. Minds that will accept the gift or scorn the gift.

The Valar were confronted with a difficult task, of course. It seems to be the only loose end Eru had left in Arda, but they managed to obtain his word on it in the end didn't they? My memory doesn't serve me as well as it used to... But it was difficult, because Elves and Men were like different creatures altogether. They weren't just different tribes within the same species, they were different altogether, in terms of fea, and not hroa. In terms of hroa, they would be very very similar, which makes breeding possible, but in terms of fea, they are very different. Thus they would be viewed by the Valar as different species altogether, and how could you classify a mule as either a horse or an ass? The mule would have to have a classification of its own, and that is the only solution to this problem, which was what the Valar thought up (possibly with the help of Eru).

This solution also happens to give the Half-Elven their freedom of choice and fate, which may be an even heavier burden than that of the pure Elves, seeing as the Half-Elven have to say goodbye to one half of themselves forever.
Quote:
As said above, mortality was a gift, so it is a sort of demonstration of Eru's generosity that a child born of a man and an elf should receive the gift as a blessing too. However, Eru does seem to have forgotten about the individual minds that always like to have fate in their own hands. Minds that will accept the gift or scorn the gift.

Receiving the gift of Man means that one is going to die, no matter if those offspring of Man and Elf want it or not. There is no way around it. It is not something one can get rid of, if one doesn't accept it. Look at all those Númenoran kings, longing for immortality and clinging to their lives.

It was only after Manwë's decree (undoubtedly under Eru's approval) that Eärendil & Elwing, and their offspring, were able to freely choose (although there's limited freedom... Elros chose to be counted amongst Men, making all of his offspring Men, without the chance to change this, unlike Elrond's offspring --- this is another pointer that Eru's gift is "stronger" than the Elves' immortality, as it is irrevocable).

Had Eärendil & Elwing never made it to Valinor, they would've simply remained mortal, as Westerly wizard has explained above. And in the end it was due to Ulmo, expressing the ambivalence of the couple's lineage, that Manwë consulted Eru and made his decree.

No wonder, since Ulmo was the only Vala who had never left the Exiles, and did his part so that in the end Morgoth would be defeated.

Quote:
It seems to be the only loose end Eru had left in Arda, but they managed to obtain his word on it in the end didn't they?

They weren't loose ends. They were needed. Perhaps they were even the result of Eru's 'corrections' to Melkor's discord in the Music of the Ainur.

Eärendil, for instance, was the saviour of Atani & Eldar in the First Age. His birth was foretold (and arranged) by Ulmo.

For the same, Beren & Lúthien's meeting was fated, for Beren was able to cross the Girdle of Melian around Doriath... and in the end their last two offspring, Arwen & Aragorn, united the two Half-Elven lines, tying up those loose ends after all work was done.
The "loose end" in here is meant as why did Eru not think of the Half-Elven that would appear on earth? The Two Children of Iluvatar are bound to mix, and Eru knew that when he allowed them biologically to breed. How can he be so naive as to think that everybody would be happy to have his "gift"?
You may consider it a loose-end, I do not. Imo, the Half-Elven were part of the corrections Eru made to Melkor's discord in the Music of the Ainur.

As for not everyone being happy with the Gift of Men, that is something that comes natural to Men. This has nothing to do with naïvity, it's merely a consequence of the freedom that was granted to Men by Eru.
the half-elven are definitely not a loose end that Illuvitar didn't think of. Are they not a siginificant part of Eru's themes which, in the end, triumph over Melkor's compositions?
Quote:
Are they not a siginificant part of Eru's themes which, in the end, triumph over Melkor's compositions?

I believe so, yes.
I guess that Eru never meant for Middle-earth to enjoy peace and plenty, did he? I mean, he practiacally set the war-pieces in their places and watched them fight and make peace and fight and make peace and fight and yadayadayada. Was that the theme? Was he trying to prove something? Or was Arda all just one big experiment Eru was conducting?
Methinks Tolkien's creation of Eru's creation was patterned after the mess we have on our earth. Instead of their saying, 'the Devil made me do it,' they say, 'Morgoth made me do it,' with the same results: War, Famine, Pestilence, Death—oh yes—and Ronnie*

* The fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse according to Terry Pratchett in his Thief of Time, which I am currently reading again. Big Laugh Smilie
Quote:
I mean, he practiacally set the war-pieces in their places and watched them fight and make peace and fight and make peace and fight and yadayadayada. Was that the theme? Was he trying to prove something? Or was Arda all just one big experiment Eru was conducting?

Eru's theme does not contain anything of that, Eru's theme = perfect utopia. But the theme that came into being, was not Eru's theme, but the theme played by the Ainur and hence imperfect as it's merely an interpretation of Eru's theme; this, together with Melkor's discord, is the primary reason for all misery that happened in Arda throughout the Ages, not Eru - Eru merely made sure that in the end everything would be right by making modifications and putting Melkor in his place.

Eru only created the Ainur, Quendi, Atani (and granting life to Naugrim and animals), the 'blank sheet' of Arda and set the Ainur's theme in motion ("Eä!"), but after that left all other affairs to his disciples safe when he removed Aman from Arda.
Oh yes I'll say that Eru wanted perfect utopia, but by including Melkor in the Ainur and granting him such great power, he did sow the seed of discord, didn't he?
Melkor did. Eru corrected it. Why is this so hard to understand? Leave the Creator be, lest you be smitten and thrown into the gloomy depths of the Void for eternity.
Well, if the Creator is Allpowerful, and Allknowing, then why did he call to his service Melkor, an Ainu he knew would start discord? Surely he meant to let the world take some strife? It's like the loving parent who lets his child take a whiff of a cigarette just to learn how bad smoking is.
What good is a movie without drama and action? And after all Arda was just for Iluvatar's entertainment. You can't have evil without good and you can't have any good without evil either.
Quote:
You can't have evil without good and you can't have any good without evil either.

Sure you can have good without evil, for good is always the beginning. In the beginning there was no evil, even Melkor and Sauron weren't.

There can be no evil without good, instead, for evil is nothing more than a transgression from good, a rejection of good.
If there was never any evil then there could be no good. Things would simply 'Be'. However once evil has been it is possible for good to survive thereafter alone. Vice versa with evil.

If you look at it scientifically 'Darkness' (the black of space) will always triumph over light becuase it is not possible for light to exist forever. However the Darkness of space will go on for eternity, even if all else would fail.
it wouldn't. who said darkness was evil. if you go back to the ainulindale in the silmarillion you will see that it is said that everywhere was void. if darkness of which the void was made of was evil then why should illuvatar allow the world to be surrounded by it. i think that in ME melkor adopted black as his form because he hated it. i say so because he spent so much time there looking for the flame imperishable that he must have come to hate. but its also a supposition.

also i think that light will never go out. we might think so because we cannot see it but it will always be there. think about beleriand after the fifth battle. only turgon remained among the great princes who still had his dweling and hope of victory had died within everyone else, yet at the end there had been light for all even those who had beleived they had been utterly defeated.
Scientifically darkness doesn't exist, because it is defined as the "absence of light". Only light exists, since it is either energy or matter, depending on how one looks at it (packets of energy or photons). Since darkness is the absence of light, it is nothing; it cannot be defined without light, though light can be defined without darkness since it does not depend on it.

Besides, scientifically "light" is much more than the narrow spectrum we can see (wavelenghts between 350 nm and 750 nm), it is electromagnetic radiation of any wavelength. If we could see gamma/cosmic radiation for instance, the entire universe would be quite colourful.

Energy/matter can never fade or disappear, due to conservation of energy/matter. All matter in the universe, including the matter we are made of, was once tightly packed together in the primordial atom before the Big Bang... even after we die and millions years in the future, the matter of which we consist will still exist, in the core of stars, or in other planets or comets... we are truly eternal.
Thorin - I was talking about Light and Darkness. In real terms Light is just light and Dark is just Dark. But in religous and mythylogical terms Dark = Evil, Light = good.

Viromer - Have you not heard of Dark Matter? It is more than just absense of light, it is in a way like the Darkness of Ungoliant, for it has being of its own and is more than 'Lack of light'. it is everywhere.
Virumor is correct scientifically but I guess when it comes to figurative literature, I shall have to agree with Lord of All. Darkness is treated as an independant entity in books just because its most commonly used to denote evil. But that's all figurative.
Actually Lord of All is correct, there is such thing as Dark Matter! He just used the LOTR Fantasy description of it. I'll give you a shortened version of the scientific definition.

Quote:
In astrophysics, dark matter means matter that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation (such as light, x-rays and so on) to be detected directly, but scientists think they exist because of the gravitational effects on visible matter.
Thank you. Dark Matter is 'matter' - e.g. - it has being of its own and is not simply the absense of light. Tiny little particles that are found everywhere.
Scientists know it exists but have yet to find means of detecting it. It is, if you like, The, or One of the, 'foundations of existance'. And coincidentally its Dark.
Actually, it has not yet proven that dark matter exists, but scientists now use it as a 'patching tool' because they cannot find enough matter (the 'missing matter' problem) to make the universe open (which is widely accepted) + the fact that the Keplerian laws do not apply on the rotation of galaxies. The other solution to the problem of missing mass is modifying Newtonian potentials, but this has not (yet) a large following among cosmologists.

If somebody wants to interpret 'evil'/'darkness' as 'dark matter', then that's fine for me. I guess others might interpret 'antimatter' as 'evil' and 'matter' as 'good'. Following such a simplistic viewpoint, one could say for instance that since approximately 25% of the universe consists of dark matter, and hence of 'evil', 'evil' can never win because they are in the minority.

Either way, one can hardly call it a 'foundation of existence', since no living beings here on Earth consist of 'dark matter', let alone stars, planets and other celestial objects.. let alone in Tolkien's works.

Quote:
Dark Matter is 'matter' - e.g. - it has being of its own and is not simply the absense of light. Tiny little particles that are found everywhere.

Darkness is... in the first post of yours I've replied to, you did not even mention or make it clear you interpreted 'darkness' as 'dark matter' which it is not, scientifically.

And it is by no means clear where dark matter is located; scientists cannot even detect it in a laboratory, so how exactly can you say that it is 'everywhere'? Did you win the Nobel prize for physics this year, perchance?
Nah i just pay attention to Documentaries.

You can belive what you want Vir. In the world and universe we live in there is no 'Good' and 'Evil'.

Who is to say that shooting another guy is evil? It seems nasty to us, in our own little world, but animals kill eachother each day.

The fact is we are the only species that tries to percieve Good and evil in the world and therefore it sems to me that we are doing it out of ignorance.

Scientifically what being or group of beings layed down the laws to what is right on wrong? What being, who can speak for the entire universe, stated that killing and so on was wrong? We just evolved from primitive animals (at least most have) and became what we are today. Nowhere along the track did I here a guy shout out 'Right guys here is what is good and evil'....

Therefore Good and evil only truly exist in Myths and religions - hence dark - equals evil and light - good. And if we take this into account most of what makes up the Universe is actually dark.

And Vir - You are wrong there. Dark matter takes up 90% of all other matter:

"Observable matter takes up no more than about 10 percent of the total amount of matter predicted to exist in the universe. The rest dubbed dark matter because it cant be "seen" or detected in the same way that gas, dust, and other observable matter can remains largely a mystery to astronomers precisely because its so difficult to find. Now, researchers have a new tool for uncovering the elusive stuff."

And also it does definately does exist:

"The existence of dark matter has been known for a long time, and has even been mapped in various places over the past decade," explained astrophysicist David Wittman of Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies.
- both quotes from Space.com

(PS - Vir if you think there is more light in the universe than Dark I recommend taking a good long look into the starry sky and telling me what you see more of. Do you see some Black patches in a sea of Light? or do you see some light specks in an immeasurable dark sea? I think you will find the latter more likely).
Different scientist have different opinions on theories, especially when they are theories such as Dark Matter; which one side cannot really prove it's existence, while it's even harder to dis-prove of it.

Therefore it's hard to argue a case such as this when even the specialist cannot. Although i think it's safe to say the majority of the scientists working on the subject will tell you there is a better chance of it's existence and helps explain how and why subjects astrophysics behave as they do.
But four hundred years from now, if the human race lasts that long, they may find that another of our earlier ideas was slightly wrong, similarly to the way the geocentric nature of the universe was thought to be by our forefathers some four hundred years ago. Good and evil are metaphysical values while light and darkness are physical values and as such they shouldn't be mixed except in discussions where there are no winners and losers. Anyone who does so must accept the wrath of indignation and the sling of arrows that will be let loose by the otherside, no matter which side they have happened to choose. Elf With a Big Grin Smilie But it is alright as long as we keep it civil without name calling or mixing religion and politics into it.
Gosh but this thread has certainly progressed a long way from whatever it was we were talking about!

It was Iluvatar, right? And the whole "who should be immortal and who should not" confusion, too. The question lay with the racial classification of Dior, if I recall right. I, for one, think that there should not be much doubt as to what race he was counted amongst. He was a man, wasn't he? That's why Elwing is called "Half-Elven"? I mean, once Luthien made the choice, it was it. She became a mortal, her share of the Elven 'immortality' was no more, thus it could not be passed on to her descendants, which would make Dior one huundred percent Man in terms of mortality (genetically, he would still have the blood of Elves and Maia flowing in his veins).

What seems more illogical is the fact that Tuor got to the Undying Lands when he is definitely mortal. That he achieved immortality is someonthing more worth questioning. Why did Eru grant him that? Why did he decide to take back the gift that was given to Men? Was it because of love? Unlikely, since Beren's love did not earn him a place in the Halls of Mandos that Elves go to. Was it because of his clean soul and Elf-like status in Gondolin? That somehow doesn't really strike me as a good reason, either. Men like Beor had clear consciences but that didn't prevent his death. And the Elf-like status part is certainly illogical. It is highly unlikely that Eru would grant a man immortality simply because he was treated like an Elf.

But my conclusion is that Tuor had the Gift taken away because he was a combination of the above. He had love as well as purity as well as Elf-like temperaments (which I think he got from living among them). He probably seemed too tied to Arda (as the Elves are) to be simply a Visitor (as Men are).
From the UT:
Quote:
'...But first I will teach thee,and some things thou shalt hear which no Man else hath heard, nay, not even the mighty among the Eldar.' And Ulmo spoke to Tuor of Valinor and its darkening, and the Exile of the Noldor, and the Doom of Mandos, and the hiding of the Blessed Realm.

Tuor was very involved with Arda, since he was the only one in Middle-Earth a Vala told all this stuff to. Perhaps this, in addition to his other virtues, is why he is numbered among the Eldar.
Quote:
What seems more illogical is the fact that Tuor got to the Undying Lands when he is definitely mortal. That he achieved immortality is someonthing more worth questioning. Why did Eru grant him that? Why did he decide to take back the gift that was given to Men? Was it because of love?

We do not know anything of that, we don't even know whether Tuor & Idril made it safely to the Undying Lands, for cryin' out loud, so it's all speculation or rather something that the Eldar and Edain liked to think.
Well, there is some evidence. I mean, our reincarnated Glorfindel came back, didn't he? And if he came from Valinor, then he would undoubtly have seen his old pal Tuor (if Tuor made it there) and when Glorfindel reaches Middle-Earth, and sees descendants of Tuor like Elrond, he would undoubtly have either confirmed or denied the truth of the stories concerning Tuor. And since what we read now is the narrative that has been pulled together long after Glorfindel left again, we can assume that the legends concerning Tuor are accurate.
i never heard that the glorfindel of LoTR was the same one of the fall of gondolin. is it true?
Quote:
And if he came from Valinor, then he would undoubtly have seen his old pal Tuor (if Tuor made it there) and when Glorfindel reaches Middle-Earth, and sees descendants of Tuor like Elrond, he would undoubtly have either confirmed or denied the truth of the stories concerning Tuor.

There are a few very big 'ifs' in there.

If they had died at sea, both of them would've passed to the Halls of Mandos, and Idril would've stayed there, whilst Tuor would not UNLESS the same choice as Lúthien was given him - and such a special event would surely have been written down by JRRT somewhere, but since he did not, it seems that Tuor passed beyond Arda and Idril stayed behind.
but at least we have hope that they both deserved and got something better because i remember having read somewhere that the fate of tuor was sundered from that of his kin.

maybe he got a place at the feet of the valar for he himself was a tool of posiedon (cannot remember the sea vala's name).

but its as u say vir onli IF this and IF that
Quote:
Cloveress
which would make Dior one huundred percent Man in terms of mortality (genetically, he would still have the blood of Elves and Maia flowing in his veins)


I don't know what Dior actually was, but if he didn't perish before his time I believe he would have had the choice, just as his daughter Elwing, and her 2 songs Elrond and Elros did.

And about Tuor reaching Valinor, it's really unclear what actually happened. I have also read cases where people claim Glorfindal from LOTR is reincarnated after his death at the Fall of Gondolin, and even if that is the case I have never read anywhere, since his returning to M-E, about him mentioning anything about Tuor, or his kin for that matter.
I have searched long and hard for you and my effort was not in vain:

"Also very notable is 'Glorfindel tells of his ancestry in Gondolin.' Years later, long after the publication of The Lord of the Rings, my father gave a great deal of thought to the matter of Glorfindel, and at that time he wrote: '[The use of Glorfindel] in The Lord of the Rings is one of the cases of the somewhat random use of the names found in the older legends, now referred to as The Silmarillion, which escaped reconsideration in the final published form of The Lord of the Rings.' He came to the conclusion that Glorfindel of Gondolin, who fell to his death in combat with a Balrog after the sack of the city (II.192 - 4, IV.145), and Glorfindel of Rivendell were one and the same: he was released from Mandos and returned to Middle-earth in the Second Age." - HOME - The Return of the Shadow
Quote:
I don't know what Dior actually was, but it he didn't perish before his time I believe he would have had the choice, just as his daughter Elwing, and her 2 songs Elrond and Elros did.


That is a confusing point, but I've always thought that since Luthien made the choice to be a mortal, her descendants would also be mortal. It's like when Elros chose to be mortal, all his descendants became mortal.

And as for Tuor, THANK YOU LoA! I know I have read that passage about Glorfindel somewhere.So I guess that proves me right about Tuor's fate being sundered from his kin. Otherwise, Glorfindel would surely have said something to correct the songs and tales of Tuor being immortal when he resided in Rivendell.
  [1] [2] >>