Peter Jackson: Amon Hen a "place of worship"??
 

This boarders on book vs. movie, but since I happened to watch a small piece of the commentary during the Amon Hen battle sequence. (My favorite...) Anyway, PJ was talking about all the ruins around the hills and slopes, and he said he wanted to create the effect of a former place of worship, a place of ancient Numenor. And I was wondering, because I've read both books of Lost Tales, and The Silmarillion, and the only instance of "worship" was Sauron, worshipping Morgoth. <P>Do you think this was a misspeak on PJ's part, or is there any other case of "worship" in Middle-Earth at ALL? <P>One of the most interesting concepts built in to Tolkien's idea of Monothiesm merged with Polythiesm (Eru over all, but several "gods", or as I like to call them, angels) is the fact that no one in Middle-Earth actually worships God, that is, Illuvatar.

I'm guessing when he said "worship" me meant something more like "reverence." That would make more sense concerning the statues of the kings of old or whatever.

I agree with Angadraug. There was no specific 'worship' of the deities in Middle Earth, no churches or shrines etc, so maybe he just wanted to get across the idea that these were important places, revered and respected, as were most of the works of the Men of Numenor.

Could the songs the Elves sang for Yavanna be constituted as a sort of worship?<P>That's the only thing I can think of off the top of my (eternally weary) head. <P>Then again, the songs themselves have nothing to do with a particular <I>place</I> of worship.<P>Which leads me to believe that if Peter Jackson really knows his Middle Earth, his use of the word "worship" did not have much of a religious connotation per se, though then again, it could have been Jackson's particular interpretation of what Amon Hen <I>means</I> for the characters overall. Maybe he did see some notion of religious worship in the book, and chose to incorporate it into the film.

wasn't there some form of temple on numenor?

<B>Knight Of Gondor:</B> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I've read both books of Lost Tales, and The Silmarillion, and the only instance of "worship" was Sauron, worshipping Morgoth. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Unfortunately not the case as the majority of my fellow islanders (The Kings Men/Black Numenoreans) actively worshipped Melkor via Saurons High Priestship and the vast dark temple that they defiled Númenor with. <B>Essex</B> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> wasn't there some form of temple on numenor? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Yep, and it was all for Melkor.

I don't think it was a place of worship persay. In my opinion it is more of a magickal tool and a place where rituals were held not necessarily worshiping a certain Valar.

Does nobody remember the Meneltarma, that place where Numenoreans went to worship Eru Iluvatar and to bury their kings. Worship does not have to mean what it connotes in the modern world. It is simply acknowledgement of a higher being or power and some display of reverence for that being. Countless times in JRR Tolkien's works, the people of Middle Earth praise the Valar and Eru, and whether there are religious ceremonies or simple praise in words, it still constitutes a form of worship.

Nicely phrased <B>Lord of Angmar </B> cant believe I forgot! It seems that Númenorean worship of Eru Ilúvatar on the Meneltarma was marked by the fact that “no building, no raised altar, not even a pile of undressed stones, ever stood there”UT P.166. This is in complete contrast to the worship of Melkor after the shadow fell, when the Black Númenoreans built tombs, altars and temples in fealty to Melkor, not just on Númenor but on Middle-earth itself (Akallabêth). Does JRRT therefore deliberately equate simple pagan naturism with good, and grandiose man-made constructivism with bad?<BR><B>Silmiel</B>, your point probably depends on what you define as ‘worship’ I guess, but from what we know of Melkor and Sauron they must have been well pleased with the many that were slayed “cruelly upon their altars” in the name of darkness.<BR>As to the original scene on Amon Hen, I thought it was excellent. The decaying structures and fallen statues covered in leaves and moss seemed really poignant and befitting of a once hallowed place gone to ruin. As I thought more about this scene I wondered if PJ/JRRT deliberately used this atmosphere of a fallen great civilization to reflect and draw focus to the personal fall and ruin of the once great Boromir?<p>[ October 09, 2003: Message edited by: Numenorean ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Does JRRT therefore deliberately equate simple pagan naturism with good, and grandiose man-made constuctivism with bad? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Well, since Tolkien was a Catholic, I highly doubt that he wanted to equate pagan naturism with good. Nevertheless, I'm sure he was trying to make a statement about religous pomp as opposed to simple worship.<P>He quite possibly perceived grandiose, man-made religous overtures as foolishness (thus letting that manifestation in Middle Earth fall on the Numenoreans who worshipped Melkor).<P>I do think, however, you were right when you said that Tolkien favored simple worship (minus the pagan naturism ). Tolkien probably felt that simple worship is a better, more pure expression of praise and admiration. Instead of constructing elaborate structures and performing intricate rituals, thus drawing the attention away from the divine and upon the human, simple worship is man humbly reaching out to God and praising Him.<p>[ October 09, 2003: Message edited by: aragornreborn ]

yeah, but religion is based on faith. ie we have no proof that god exists. I'm a catholic and believe in a God (but not like the good old catholics who say their's is only the one true god, and when they reach heaven have a bricked off section just for themselves as my priest joked last week!) but let's think about the situation on middle-earth. there was pretty much proof (albiet second hand except for the elves) that their gods existed. i.e. where else did the elves sail off to?<P>this could negate the need for worship to some extent, as to me that's what worship is about - faith.

On the contrary, there was no guarantee that Eru existed. Only the Valar could attest to Eru's existence. And one would have to trust the Valar to believe that. The Valar communicated mostly to elves. Not all the elves trusted the Valar. Not all men trusted elves. Thus there was little guarantee about any higher power. It still took faith. And worship is not dependent upon only faith, anyway. I can praise (not to say I woship it :P ) my laptop computer at being a technological marvel and I KNOW it exists.<p>[ October 09, 2003: Message edited by: aragornreborn ]

fair point on Eru, but I saw the Valar themselves as Gods.

OK, well, the Valar/Maia were definitely proven to the inhabitants of Middle Earth (even if they didn't know them by those titles, most knew of them). But I don't think that lessens the necessity to worship. Worship is acknowledging that the object of worship is greater than you and worthy of honor and glory. Thus, you should worship the greater being if it is clear he exists or if you just believe he does. In fact, if your belief is shaky, you would probably worship the being more when you had conclusive proof that he did indeed exist (and thus was deserving of worship and capable of punishing you if you didn't worship ).