Does the Silmarillion Contradict Third age History? How Powerful Were Those First age

[R.R.J Tolkien]

Originally Posted by Andsigil

I meant that they were more powerful because, in the First Age, for example, everything was simply more powerful, bigger, and more connected to the Valar. This applies to other races, too. Among the Dwarves, for example:

• Telchar was a better smith than any subsequent Dwarven smith.
• Durin the Deathless needs no explanation.
• Azaghal fell fighting Glaurung. As mighty as Gimli was, I couldn't see him (or Dain, or Thorin, etc) wounding Glauring like Azaghal did.

While Tolkien explicitly said that his works were not Christian allegory, anyone who reads the Old Testament will see parallels in the concept of ancient = mightier.

And as i argued in my op these are more the result of the first ages being mythical, legendary writings, rather than the historical writings of the third age. Things that gain power over time such as wisdom would generally increase with time i think galadriel is a good example. However i am not ruling out the conclusion of your either, just i am not so sure the third age was that distinct in "power" from the first two ages.


I agree there are many biblical parallels in LOTR.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...f-Middle-Earth


but I am not sure I agree with the OT "mightier" depiction you suggest. In fact I see in the sillmarillion allot of the kind of hyperbole used in some old testament text i think supporting my view. for example in war literature of the time period used during the conquest.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...uest-of-Canaan