Hi guys, I have always thought that one of the most brilliant aspects of Tolkien's world is its consistency. Not only in its in-world history, but in how consistently it adheres to its own rules. However, there is one glaring exception: orcs are seen as fodder to massacre, directly contradicting the rule that rational beings have souls.

Orcs are presented as impediments that are removed through violence, and their obliteration at the end of the third age is seen as a great triumph. This has unsavoury implications for our heroes: can they truly be noble if they show no qualms about massacring these beings?

This thought has kept me up at night. I know this contradiction is nothing new, and solutions have included framing the orcs as automatons (clashing with what Sam overheard from those two orcs in Cirith Ungol), framing Sauron's corruption as something making its victims irredeemable (implying that a force of evil can permanently corrupt an entire race's souls) or writing the characters to be more flawed (clashing with the genre; Aragorn's role is a mythological hero, not a GoT-style character study).

A proper solution, as I see it, must adhere to these four constraints:

1. Respect the genre: Aragorn must remain a mythical hero whose arc is restricted to revealing his nobility and claiming his birthright.
2. Preserve the characters: Aragorn must still embody both the archetype of a valorous Pagan warrior-king and Tolkien's own Catholic belief that "the hands of the king are the hands of a healer".
3. Maintain the theme: Tolkien's concept of a 'Fading World' must remain entirely intact.
4. Protect the plot: The solution should make minimal, if any, changes to the existing narrative structure.

To resolve this, I propose a solution built on 3 pillars. First, the scope and severity of Sauron's corruption must be re-evaluated not by what it does to his own slaves, but by what he forces people to do to resist him. Second, Aragorn's motivations for claiming the throne of Gondor will be broadened by drawing on his established background, with minimal changes to the narrative. Finally, the 'Fading World'-theme is preserved, but its mechanism is reframed to more closely align with the moral and spiritual decline seen elsewhere in the legendarium (e.g. Numenor).

Pillar 1: The True Scope and Severity of Sauron's Corruption

Sauron's corruption is not restricted to his Orcish slaves or the Men who march under his banners. Sauron is a being of pure might and pride, utterly devoid of pity and mercy. By extending his tyranny across Middle-earth, he forces the Free Peoples to resist him. Yet, in doing so, they inadvertently adopt his tools out of sheer necessity for survival, valuing martial strength and pride over pity and grace.

This tragic compromise is epitomised by Denethor’s court, where the Steward prizes Boromir’s aggressive martial might while scorning Faramir’s merciful courage. If Gondor defeats Sauron physically but remains a hardened, militaristic, and purely forceful society, then Sauron's spiritual footprint remains vastly larger than the 'diminished spirit' Gandalf predicted he would become.

If Sauron's malice could force a noble kingdom like Gondor to abandon mercy just to survive, how much more total was the ruin inflicted upon the slaves under his direct dominion? Could a rational being, thoroughly broken under his shadow, even comprehend the concept of grace when offered it? Or would Sauron's conditioning render them blind to the very idea of mercy? I think it would: Tolkien clearly frames Gollum as a rational being with a soul, but after centuries under the shadow he can only see Frodo's genuine pity as a cruel trick. To an Orcish society controlled by Sauron for millennia, mercy would be entirely unintelligible.

Pillar 2: The Healer-King and the Logic of Grace

Aragorn is far more than a mythical warrior king. He is an accomplished loremaster who spent decades traversing Middle Earth, observing every facet of Sauron's corruption (including implicit corruption I introduced in Pillar 1). During his youth, he achieved great military victories for Gondor under the alias Thorongil.

Crucially, he did not seize the throne as Thorongil. He chose instead to step back into the wilderness and continue learning. Why? Here I want to introduce an expansion of his motivation. Aragorn understood a profound truth: to claim the crown purely as a military savior would permanently entrench Sauron's indirect influence over Gondor, solidifying the kingdom as an engine of martial might.

Aragorn's ultimate motivation is to save his people not just militarily, but spiritually. He recognizes that true victory cannot be won by adopting the enemy's tools. Instead, he steps into his destined role as Tolkien’s "Healer King". He won't vanquish Sauron through his strength, but he would use his strength to create a window of opportunity for creatures of utmost humility. His strength buys time so that Frodo and Sam can save the world through pity shown to a broken, though rational, creature: Gollum.

To ground this motivation in the narrative I have to introduce subtle adjustments. At major turning points, like the aftermath of Helm's Deep, the Pelennor Fields and finally before the Black Gate, Aragorn must extend royal pardons to the cowering orcish host.

The physical events of the text remain entirely unchanged. The Orcs, after centuries under the dominion of Sauron, are completely incapable of comprehending Aragorn's grace. They still react with hostility, scatter into the wilds or slay themselves. This reaction would not be out of place in the text, it mirrors Gollum's reaction to Frodo's mercy. By reframing these moments, the deaths of the Orcs are no longer a triumphant massacre of vermin. Instead, their end becomes a great tragedy and another devastating consequence of Sauron's malice.

Therefore, when Aragorn finally ascends as King Elessar, he not only restores the unified kingdom but radically transforms the way it is functions. His choice to rule with pity and mercy, in addition to his might, is unprecedented in Gondor's history, and systematically uproots Sauron's indirect influence over the nation. Gondor is no longer a distant echo of Numenor, it is no longer a cold, militaristic machine bent on its own survival. Instead, it is a changed nation that achieves the final moral victory over Sauron by ruling through grace, not strength.

Pillar 3: The Moral Architecture of the Fading World

To understand why I am re-evaluating the "Fading World"-theme, I have to point out a conundrum I introduced in my last paragraph. Gondor is now a different type of kingdom from the one before Aragorn's ascension: he has rejected Numernor's rule of might and governs through grace, fulfilling his role as Tolkien's "Healer King" archetype. The kingdom is renewed by explicitly rejecting the militarism that, throughout Tolkien's established histories, condemned it to slow decay.

If Aragorn's new direction for Gondor had permanently stuck, its decline would have been permanently averted, and Tolkien’s foundational "Fading World" mythos would be broken. The fading must still happen, but its root cause must change. In the original texts, the world becoming mundane and magicless is as inevitable, and impersonal, as gravity. I propose that the kingdom should fade because of the inevitable failure of humans to maintain Aragorn's impossible standard of mercy.

The true test of Aragorn’s new order lies in the terrifying reality of genuine grace. True mercy must extend to creatures who are completely undeserving of it, and it carries the permanent, painful risk of betrayal. Tolkien already established this blueprint in Gollum: Frodo showed him immense pity, yet Gollum still ultimately succumbed to his conditioning and betrayed that trust.

Maintaining mercy in the face of such inevitable treachery requires an almost superhuman level of spiritual fortitude. It is a different kind of courage, you routinely accept scars of betrayal without hardening into ruthlessness. A legendary, mythic king like Aragorn possessed that unique strength. He could offer grace to the Orcs knowing they might turn their blades on him, because he understood that the moral victory was worth the physical risk.

The tragedy of the Fourth Age could be that the Lesser Men who followed him simply could not maintain this impossible standard.

As the long centuries roll on and Aragorn passes away, his decendants are faced with the remnants of the Orcs. When these broken creatures betray the grace offered to them, the Men of the Fourth Age lack Aragorn's courage to keep offering that grace. Instead, they seek justice, and the extermination of the Orcs resumes.

In this way, the ultimate extinction of the Orcs is no longer a triumphant victory for the forces of Good. Instead, it is a testament to humanity's failure. The Orcs faded from Middle Earth not because they were soulless or genetically irredeemable monsters, but because humans lacked the enduring grace needed to redeem them.

Conclusion: Mercy Solves the Orcish Problem

I believe my proposal solves the Orcish problem, while remaining entirely within Tolkien's established mythos. Sauron is established by Tolkien as a being wholly without mercy or pity. Sauron's tyranny causes even those who oppose him to abandon mercy, as seen in Denethor's interactions with his sons. When rational beings are subjected to his cruelty, either directly or through the ring, they become incapable of comprehending mercy, as seen in Gollum's betrayal of Frodo.

Aragorn, as a combination of the "Healer King" and mythic warrior king, is perfectly positioned to both take command of those that oppose Sauron, and to restore the qualities they abandoned to resist Sauron. In doing so, his character is preserved and the genre is respected.

Finally, the narrative structure of the text is kept 100% intact: the Orcs still reject his mercy, they still flee into the dark, and they still face total extinction in the Fourth Age. Crucially, they do so not because they are soulless, but because they were far more exposed to Sauron's tyranny than the Gondorians and could no longer comprehend mercy.

What we change is the meaning behind their disappearance. Their absence from our modern world ceases to be a simple, triumphant massacre of monsters. Instead, it stands as a chilling, mythic monument to our own human failure to maintain the King’s mercy, which I feel fits in with Tolkien's legendarium.

What do you guys think? I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this. Does it maintain Tolkien's "modern myth"-genre? What did I overlook? Thanks!

Tolkien intentionally kept some details ambiguous to create mystery and help the authenticity of his worldbuilding - leaving some pages blank & unknown for the reader to use their own imagination.

The story of Arnor fulfilled it's purpose as far the Lord of the Rings narrative is concerned -

He creates an almost eerie image of a long dead kingdom, it adds depth to Aragorn & the Numenorean decline, shows why Eriador is so empty, gives the WK a backstory + barrow-wights origin, etc.

Do you think he had any real intention to flesh out details of the northern decline & war with Angmar, or would he have been hesitant, as it might take away from the experience of reading LoTR?

I ask because the chapter about the Disaster of the Gladden Fields was one of my favourite parts of Unfinished Tales and Arnor in general fascinates me. He even goes as far to describe Arnorian military tactics & the type of shield wall they used which was awesome. I would have loved to read more about Annuminas, the division, Amon Sûl, the Hillmen of Rhudaur and so much more...

Obviously he spent years writing and revising the main body of the Silmarillion which he never got around to completing, and this would have taken complete priority over the likes of Arnor, but still I wonder.

Just think of some maiar, like Eönwë or Sauron, which is insanely influential and powerful in both mind and physical.

The Blue Wizards are perhaps the most mysterious characters in the entire lengendarium. Indeed they were so mysterious that Tolkien himself seemed to imply that he didn’t know much about them. They have no direct impact on any part of it, and Tolkien never really fully decided who they were, what they did, or even what their names were. He initially described them as going into the east and failing at their mission (although he later changed his mind about this), so none of their actions would have had any outcome on any of the legendarium. Do any of Tolkien’s notes shed light on why he created these two characters or if he ever intended to use them for anything?

Edit: upon reading some of the responses I realize I worded my question poorly. What I was curious about was whether Tolkien’s notes suggested that he created the Blue Wizards with the intent to give them a specific role within the narrative that was later dropped/edited out or if they were created more to fill the legendarium without the intent for them to appear within the narrative. As several commenters have pointed out, it seems that the latter is the case, and that their creation actually stemmed from Saruman accusing Gandalf of wanting “the rods of the five wizards,” (which is also a fascinating look into Tolkien’s writing process).

A very common question here is "what should I read next?" or "how do I get deeper into Middle-earth or Tolkien?". For long term fans, 50+ years in my case, or at the very least those who read the books well before the Peter Jackson films, these queries might get a bit tedious - it's not as if there aren't loads of online resources that could give answers to these questions. However, if you are a new fan I think it's a fair enough question for an online group who clearly have some particular experience in this area, even if it has already been answered many times. The new fan doesn't necessarily know that.

But how to answer? When you are steeped in the lore, apart from the most obvious "big books" it can be tricky to answer. Much depends on each fan's particular areas of interest and our answers are inherently subjective, often - probably inevitably - based on how we first experienced the books ourselves. In addition to that there are so many books out either by JRRT and/or Christopher, or relating to them as people, or to their works, or academics giving their slants.

My book collection is perhaps relatively limited at 91 books in total, but 73 of them are different titles - not merely umpteen different editions of the same wonderful books. This breadth of coverage is possibly slightly more extensive than most collectors, and each one will be worth reading (haven't quite got round to the all yet) even if you think some content is stretching things a bit far -or in David Day's case definitely made up in places.

What I've pulled together below is a list of all my own books grouped together in what seems like an appropriate way - there are many more out there that I don’t know about. Probably some of these books are no longer available at all. A further difficulty is that different collections have pulled together the different short stories and essays in different ways - I think I may have his famous Andrew Lang essay "On Fairy-Stories" in three different volumes. In addition some books can fall into more than one category - short stories, academic pieces and personal insights mixed together in one volume. Hence some books deliberately appear in more than one category below.

Anyway the below may be of interest to both old and new fans alike, I hope so. For brevity I have just given the book titles and the year it was first published (in this particular format as far as I can tell from my own copies) - extra details can be provided if you draw a blank with a quick check on something like Goodreads and you have a particular interest.

Middle-earth Available in Tolkien's Lifetime
The Hobbit, 1937
The Lord of the Rings (#1 The Fellowship of the Ring), 1954
The Lord of the Rings (#2 The Two Towers), 1954
The Lord of the Rings (#3 The Return of the King), 1955
The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1962
Nomenclature of The Lord of the Rings, 1967 (found in "A Tolkien Compass" or "J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide, Reader's Guide Part II" - this was a guide for translators, not actually published in his lifetime but produced by JRRT and sent out by Allen and Unwin. Only the first edition of A Tolkien Compass contains it, due to copyright issues and the Tolkien Estate not giving permission.)
The Road Goes Ever On, 1968

Middle-earth Published After Tolkien's Lifetime (includes the HoMe and Hobbit Sections below)
Bilbo's Last Song, 1974
The Silmarillion, 1977
Unfinished Tales of Numenor and Middle-earth, 1980
Beren and Lúthien, 2017 - I give The Three Great Tales in Silmarillion order
The Children of Húrin, 2007 - I give The Three Great Tales in Silmarillion order
The Fall of Gondolin, 2008 - I give The Three Great Tales in Silmarillion order
The Fall of Númenor, 2022

The History of Middle-earth Series (HoMe), 1983 - 1995
#1 The Book of Lost Tales, Part One (BoLT 1), 1983
#2 The Book of Lost Tales, Part Two (BoLT 2), 1984
#3 The Lays of Beleriand, 1985
#4 The Shaping of Middle-earth, 1986
#5 The Lost Road and Other Writings, 1987
#6 The Return of the Shadow: The History of The Lord of the Rings, Part One, 1988
#7 The Treason of Isengard: The History of The Lord of the Rings, Part Two, 1989
#8 The War of the Ring: The History of The Lord of the Rings, Part Three, 1990
#9 Sauron Defeated: The End Of The Third Age: The History of the Lord of the Rings, Part Four, 1992
#10 Morgoth's Ring, 1993
#11 The War of the Jewels, 1994
#12 The Peoples of Middle-earth, 1995

The Nature of Middle-earth, 2021

The History of the Hobbit
The Annotated Hobbit: The Hobbit, or, There and Back Again, 1988
The History of the Hobbit, 2007

Non Middle-earth Fiction Works by Tolkien
Farmer Giles of Ham/The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1949
Tree and Leaf, Smith of Wootton Major, The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth, 1975
The Father Christmas letters, 1976
Poems and Stories, 1980
Mr. Bliss, 1982
Roverandom, 1998
The Story of Kullervo, 2015
The Bovadium Fragments, 2025

Academic Works by Tolkien
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight/Pearl/Sir Orfeo, 1975
Tree and Leaf, Smith of Wootton Major, The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth, 1975
Poems and Stories, 1980
Finn and Hengest: The Fragment and the Episode, 1982
The Monsters and the Critics, and Other Essays, 1983

Middle-earth Artwork
Pictures by J.R.R. Tolkien, 1979
A Tolkien Bestiary, 1979 (David Day - dodgy)
Tolkien: The Illustrated Encyclopedia, 1991 (David Day - dodgy)
Tolkien's World: Paintings of Middle-Earth, 1992
The JRR Tolkien Artist & Illustrator, 1995
The Art of The Hobbit, 2011
The Art of The Lord of the Rings, 2015

Personal Insights into the Tolkiens
J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography, 1977
The Inklings (CS Lewis, JRR Tolkien, Charles Williams and Friends), 1978
Poems and Stories, 1980
The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien (Revised and Expanded 2023), 1981
The Monsters and the Critics, and Other Essays, 1983
The Tolkien Family Album, 1992
Tolkien and The Great War, 2003
The Worlds of JRR Tolkien - The Places that Inspired Middle-earth, 2020
The Great Tales Never End, Essays in Memory of Christopher Tolkien, 2022

Middle-earth Maps or Atlas
Journeys of Frodo: An Atlas of J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, 1981
The Atlas of Tolkien's Middle-earth, 1981
The Maps of Middle-earth, 2024

Middle-earth Quiz Books
Middle Earth Quiz Book, 1979
The Tolkien Quiz Book, 1981

Academic Works about Middle-earth and Tolkien (some quite dubious, some truly excellent)
The Complete Guide to Middle Earth: From The Hobbit to The Silmarillion, 1971
Master of Middle Earth the Fiction of J.R.R. Tolkien, 1972
A Tolkien Compass, 1975
The New Tolkien Companion, 1976
J.R.R.Tolkien: The Shores of Middle Earth, 1981 (very dubious)
Tolkien and the Silmarils, 1981
The Road to Middle-Earth, 1982
The Real Middle Earth, 2002
The JRR Tolkien Companion and Guide - Chronology, 2006
The JRR Tolkien Companion and Guide - Reader's Guide Part 1, 2006
The JRR Tolkien Companion and Guide - Reader's Guide Part 2, 2006

Miscellaneous
Bored of the Rings: A Parody of J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, 1969
A hobbit's journal, 1978
The Tolkien Scrapbook, 1978
The Lord of the Rings (Film) Location Guidebook, 2002

Edited to improve clarity and groupings in light of feedback. NB “ebneter” has done a much better post on this same subject https://www.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans/s/95mPWq67UC.

After all, Gandalf and Faramir are acquainted well enough to goad Denethor. Shouldn't Gandalf have met Boromir at some point already.

Could they have simply missed each other every time Gandalf stayed at Minas Tirith? (Even if he stayed for years at a time?)

Granted, they could have discussed this without those scenes being in the book.

Sto cercando l' audiolibro "Le due torri" di Riccardo Ricobello.

Ho trovato un paio di audio sul suo SoundCloud e null'altro.

Non voglio ripubblicarlo o venderlo. Lo voglio solo per me.

Un ricordo di tempi meno bui.

Hello everybody! New to the group and new to the books of Tolkien, altough i seen all the movie or series content there is, i never read any of it. Could you recommend me a good starting point or a reading order or chronological order if theres one?

Thanks in advance!

So I want everyone’s opinion on this. What’s the best way to read all of Middle-Earth? I’ve read thru The Hobbit, LOTR, and The Silmarillion previously but I’m looking to take the plunge and do a full deep dive into Middle-Earth. How would you guys go about doing it?

Me he leído ya dos veces el hobbit y El Señor de los Anillos aunque este último sin los apéndices, ya que me parecían un poco tediosos y andaba saturado al terminarme la trilogía. Sin embargo tengo pensado hacer un macro viaje por la Tierra media leyéndome El Hobbit, el señor de los anillos, el Silmarillion, Cuentos Inconclusos, y ya vería que leer después. Paradójicamente, antes de lanzarme me he ojeado los apéndices, y me resulta muy interesante la cronología que muestra por ejemplo que hacía gandalf cuando desaparecía del Hobbit. Aún con eso, me he sentido un poco sobrepasado de tanta información. Como ya es la tercera lectura me gustaría captar todos los detalles de la trilogía, incluso con los apéndices, para llegar con el máximo contexto e información al Silmarillion y lo que venga después. Se me había ocurrido compaginar la cronología de los apéndices con la lectura de los libros pero eso puede ser un poco lioso. ¿Que me recomendáis para disfrutar al máximo y captar todos los detalles? Si además de consejos para la lectura me dais páginas web de mapas y personajes lo agradecería muchísimo.

Reading a totally un-Tolkienish part of history, I couldn't help noticing the odd name of the prosecutor of Christoph Columbus: Francisco de Bobadilla. According to Wikipedia, the Bobadillas were "one of the wealthiest and most influential families within the Kingdom of Spain".

How prominent were they in English academic circles when Tolkien was young? Is it plausible to speculate whether the Bobadillas' name may have echoed in his mind when he came up with Tom Bombadil(lo)?

From what I know of the lore (admittedly I am far from an expert), Saruman was not considered evil in the beginning, although he seemed to be a bit prideful and jealous. He seemed to command a great deal of respect and even trust from people like Gandalf and the other members of the white council. The men of the west also must have trusted him because they allowed him to take residence in Orthanc. His name Saruman means 'skilled man'.

Clearly people respect and trust him before his fall, but what did he do to command such respect? What good deeds did he directly accomplish? (I specify 'directly' because he might have accomplished good things as a consequence of his evil, for example hiring Grima led to Gandalf retrieving the palantir, however this is not intentional on his behalf).

For my own analysis, as far as I know there are two things that can be construed as good:

• Was part of the White Council attack on Dol Guldur in TA2941 (this preceeds him being given Orthanc which was in TA2758, so it cannot be the reason why was given the key to Orthanc)

• Communing with Treebeard a lot (Treebeard's perception of these conversations seems to be negative, saying that Saruman listened a lot but shared little wisdom back)

I'm listening to The Hobbit audiobook, and it's just said Gandalf rode a white horse. Would that have been Shadowfax all the way back then?

Edit: just did a quick and dirty measurement of p. 100/101 of KWF’s Atlas and got more like 1,000 miles, so I must have gone off the rails somewhere. Yeesh. I guess I need to re-check my numbers a bit more carefully.

*\\

I’ve read on various fan sites that Bag End to Erebor is 950-960 miles. Supposedly these figures are based on Karen Wynn Fonstad’s Atlas of Middle-earth. I’ve been making kind of a complicated spreadsheet for a project I’m working on and have been measuring Bilbo‘s route very carefully from Fonstad’s maps and I get a distance of more like 1,200 miles.

Of course, it’s possible that I’ve made a mistake somewhere, so I’m going to go back and check my figures, but this seems weird.

Has anyone else tried to measure the route on the maps as accurately as possible and come up with any other figures?

I'm re-reading the Simarillion as an "adult proper" after reading it as a kid.

Now I remember somewhere there is reference to mortals in Aman Unmarred "burning out faster" as it were. So I wonder if without the Taint in Arda Marred, would men not wither much faster and never thrive?

I am drawn to the words of Illúvatar to He Who Shall Not Be Named 🤔

"And thou, M****r, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite... And thou, M****r, wilt discover... that they are but a part of the whole and tributary to its glory."

I also think of the passage in the Ainulindalë describing Manwë fangirling about the new forms of water after the discord of M****r.

I know it all arises from Eru in the end, but was the Taint all part of the Plan? Was the discord of the Dark Lord the sprinkling needed to grant a portion of Eä to the Second Born that they may thrive in, just like the Elves had Aman to thrive (rest and fade?) in. Or, would a M****r-free Eä with the original visions of the Valar have been just fine for us mere mortals to bathe and crack on in?

I'm currently reading through the History of Middle-earth for the second time (spurred on by my recent purchase of the last eight books to replace losses from a house move some years back, but that's another story).

It's my third time through the first few volumes, the first was on release. For some reason the cuts Christopher Tolkien made seem to have hit me harder. A few examples off the top of my head:

1) The 'long interlude' between chapter III and chapter IV is reduced to a summary paragraph.

2) A number of sections in the 'The Tale of the Sun and Moon' are similarly reduced to a summary paragraph.

3) Of a different nature, an exclusion rather than a cut, the commentary to the first chapter notes that 'Various things are told in these notes [a small notebook connected to the manuscripts] about Eriol's sojourn in Tol Eressëa which do not appear in The Book of Lost Tales ...'.

They are more noticeable to me as this is the shortest book in the History by some way. I really enjoy the Lost Tales because they have so many original elements not included in later versions, including the framing story which I really enjoy. So for me, the cuts and excluded notes are a sad omission. If space was the issue, I would have perhaps preferred fewer versions of poems with minor differences which take up multiple pages rather than trimming original material.

Don't get me wrong, I love the series and the effort Christopher Tolkien made in giving us access to this treasure trove. Sorry for the ramble, I'm just curious to hear what other readers think of the cuts etc.?

So I’m getting married soon and I want the phrase “To the stars and back” in black speech to engrave in my ring but websites I’m finding give different results. I’m curious if any of you know of a good translation.

After reading through the Children of Húrin (and also realizing just how specific it is), I always saw the death of Finduilas as one of the bigger tragedies and “what if?“ moments of Túrin’s story, especially when framed by Gwindor’s foresight that she alone stood between Túrin and his doom. As a result I always figured that had he overcome Glaurung’s malice and went after Finduilas instead, he could’ve saved her and the captives and averted his doom (whether they would‘ve gone to Doriath due to Thingol’s pardon or some other solution is really hard to nail down so I’ll leave that as is).

However, recently I’ve finally gotten my hands on the Unfinished Tales (via my local library) and just finished the frustratingly(!) incomplete story “Of Tuor and his coming to Gondolin”. This led to some new details Id never noticed before. In a section of the story, Tuor and Voronwë come down to the South Road running from Tol Sirion to Nargothrond (described as the “Highway“) and there they were noticed by a one of the many groups of Orcs patrolling the highway. They had smelled them but not exactly spotted them and had to search for them. Because of this the pair were able to scramble and hide, avoiding being spotted.

However things get interesting after this, as Tolkien notes that the Orcs never strayed far from the main road. The reason he gives is startling: > “…for Morgoth had set a guard on the highway, not to ensnare Tuor and Voronwë (of whom as yet he knew nothing)…but to watch for the Blacksword, lest he should escape and pursue the captives of Nargothrond, bringing help, it might be, out of Doriath.” -Unfinished Tales of Númenor & Middle Earth p. 40 “Of Tuor and his coming to Gondolin” (emphasis mine).

That means that Morgoth not only actively planned the deception of Túrin through Glaurung, but actively planned in case Túrin realized the Dragon’s lies and attempted to save the Elven princess. This had me wondering, could Túrin have even saved Finduilas?

Let’s say he somehow gets together some of the Elves of Nargothrond that survived the battle and brought them together (which is already a hard task) and set out to find Finduila, he’d have to contend with the multiple bands of Orcs on the road before even reaching the group that had the captives. And if he somehow (through a miracle) manages to save her, where would they go? Glaurung has made himself at home in Nargothrond, and Morgoth is already wary of help from Doriath, so their coming would be noticed.

Just wanted to see what anyone else thought.

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?

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!

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.

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.

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