Immortality and the sons of Elrond

[Galin]

I agree with WCH on that -- and there's another letter too, where Tolkien states that Arwen was not an Elf. But The Letters of JRR Tolkien is proving a mixed bag for me on this issue in general. Also, I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that the two mentions (and only mentions?) that confirm Elladan and Elrohir remained behind after Elrond sailed were only added to the revised edition of The Lord of the Rings in the 1960s.

Not that that proves anything of course, but if true might give a better idea of the chronology anyway.

[Mithadan]

One last post to this thread, then I will say no more on this issue. The problem I have here is not that I necessarily disagree with the textual analyses that have been ably set forth by various members here. Rather, my issue is simply that one of the great appeals that Middle Earth has for me is its internal inconsistency, and here is one point where it is inconsistent. The children of Elrond and Elros all genetically possess elements of Mannish blood, assuming the "science of genetics" bears any real relevancy to the interpretation of mythology. To me, this means they should all be treated the same unless there is a good reason to the contrary.

The analysis I set forth in my last post explains the state of matters as we see them in LoTR. The problem is that the solution I outline is not what Tolkien appears to have settled upon. Rather, he treats the children of Elros and Elrond differently because... well just because. The importance of the Eru's gift cannot be the answer for why similarly situated persons are treated differently; Elrond's children have less Mannish blood than those of Elros, but based upon the analyses of multiple posters here, the presence of any Mannish blood is significant.

I suggest that genetics and the presence of physical Mannish blood does not determine this issue, else both sets of cousins would have possessed the choice regardless of the choice of their sires. Further Tolkien, in Laws and Customs Among the Eldar makes it clear that "[f]rom the beginning the chief difference between Elves and Men lay in the fate and nature of their spirits" The fëar of Men and Elves determine their fundamental nature, not their hroar or bodies. The fëar of Elves "far excelled over the spirits of Men in power over that 'raiment', even from the first days protecting their bodies from many ills and assaults (such as disease), and healing them swiftly of injuries, so that they recovered from wounds that would have proved fatal to Men."

It is the fëar that determine the nature of Men and Elves, not their bodies or their blood. When Half-Elven make their choice, it is a change to the spirits not to their bodies. So genetics has nothing to do with the effect of a Half-Elf's choice over the nature of their offspring. Elros' fëa was mortal as was his wife's and, accordingly, his children's spirits were Mannish. Elrond and Celebrian's fëar were Elvish. Why should the spirits of their children be otherwise. This is the problem I have here.

[Aiwendil]

Mithadan wrote:

The problem is that the solution I outline is not what Tolkien appears to have settled upon. Rather, he treats the children of Elros and Elrond differently because... well just because. The importance of the Eru's gift cannot be the answer for why similarly situated persons are treated differently; Elrond's children have less Mannish blood than those of Elros, but based upon the analyses of multiple posters here, the presence of any Mannish blood is significant.

I disagree, and would respectfully suggest that your argument here misses the point of the 'Gift of Eru' argument. You ask why Elrond's children are treated differently from Elros's; in other words, why is there an asymmetry between the cousins? The answer is that it's because there's an asymmetry between Men and Elves. Elros's children "ought" to be human, because both of their parents are. Elrond's children "ought" to be Elves, because both of their parents are. But the rule is that the Gift of Eru cannot be forcibly taken away from anyone with any Mannish heritage. So Elrond's children must be given the choice. Elros's children are not given the choice because there is no analogous rule to the effect that one with Elvish heritage cannot have immortality taken away. They have Elvish blood, but due to the asymmetry of the Gift of Eru, Elvish blood does not necessitate the option of immortality, whereas Mannish blood does necessitate the option of mortality.

One can perhaps dispute that account by calling into question the validity of Tolkien's statements in Letters and elsewhere, but I do not think one can make the charge of inconsistency in it. It coheres and it agrees with what is said in LotR.

It is the fëar that determine the nature of Men and Elves, not their bodies or their blood. When Half-Elven make their choice, it is a change to the spirits not to their bodies. So genetics has nothing to do with the effect of a Half-Elf's choice over the nature of their offspring. Elros' fëa was mortal as was his wife's and, accordingly, his children's spirits were Mannish. Elrond and Celebrian's fëar were Elvish. Why should the spirits of their children be otherwise. This is the problem I have here.

Well, one might first of all note that Tolkien stressed that there is a strong connection between a fea and its hroa. One can influence the other, and vice versa. And clearly the differences between Men and Elves were not solely spiritual.

But as for your question - is there necessarily anything problematic with the fea of the child differing from the fear of the parents? Certainly, there's no logical impossibility involved there. And, apparently, Tolkien didn't feel that there was a metaphysical impossibility either.

There's also an interesting supposition behind your argument here: that there are Elvish fear and there are Mannish fear, and that Elvishness or Mannishness is an intrinsic, perhaps unalterable, attribute of the spirit. I think we must question to what extent this is true. Yes, human spirits leave Arda after death while Elvish spirits do not; but does this imply any particular difference between the two classes of spirits themselves, beyond the difference in their ultimate fates? It seems plain, at least, that the Elvishness or Mannishness of a fea could be changed: Luthien provides an unambiguous case of an Elvish spirit becoming Mannish. When this happened, Luthien's soul, her will, her consciousness did not change. She had the same fea before and after; only its fate was different.

I suggest that a fea itself is not intrinsically Elvish or Mannish, though in most cases a particular fate is attached to it the moment it enters the world, due to its parentage. But that fate could be altered (as in Luthien's case); and in the case of Elrond's children, to whom the choice was granted even before they were born, neither fate would be prescribed to the fea when it first entered the world.

[Mithadan]

1

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Mithadan

1

Is the loneliest number?

[Galadriel55]

Can someone explain?...

What on earth does 1 have to do with...anything?

[jallanite]

Why is 1 the loneliest number?

It’s like the song says:

One is one and all alone,
And ever more shall be so.