LotR -- Book 3 - Chapter 04 - Treebeard

[Boromir88]

The reason I go with Glorfindel, atleast over Gandalf the "grey," would be since Glorfindel's death I think he learned a lot. I believe what he says in The Council of Elrond to be quite accurate, although it's just suposition. Maybe, not necesarrily more then Gandalf the White, since I also believe Gandalf learned a lot from his death, and reincarnation, but it's just a matter of opinions .

You might be right about Treebeard, since he does "shut himself," into Fangorn, and for countless amounts of years stayed out of the wars, saying it was for Elves, Men and wizards. And he didn't have much care, besides for Fangorn, that could cast in some doubt. I take his knowledge about Saruman to be accurate, since he used to spend time with the guy .

[the phantom]

Surely, he is simply describing Treebeard as the oldest living Ent, rather than the oldest living creature. After all, it was the Elves who "woke" the Ents

I thought that the Elves woke the "trees".

Isn't there a difference?

Ents came from Yavanna's thought. Eru told her (through Manwe) that at the same time the elves woke up, her thoughts would awaken and summon spirits from afar to go and dwell in some of the plants and animals. So ents have a fea and woke up at the same time as the first elves.

But this doesn't mean that the elves couldn't have roused trees from their sleep. Tolkien said that animals could be raised to a higher level and taught to speak, but that speaking does not necessarily indicate a soul. So talking trees are basically just animals that got raised to a higher level by the elves. Ents, however, have feas, and were already awake before the elves came walking by.

Does this work for everyone?

[davem]

I’m later than usual for this thread & a lot of important points have already been made. Its difficult to know where to begin. As this is a long chapter, & we have a couple of weeks to go into it, I’ll take it bit by bit. First off:

Its clear at least, that the LotR Ents appeared first, & that Tolkien wrote them back into theSil. In HoME we find him speculating on their origin:

Did first lord of the Elves make Tree-folk in order to or through trying to understand trees? And...

Notes for Treebeard.

In some ways rather stupid. Are the Tree-folk (Lone-walkers) hnau that have gone tree-like, or trees that have become hnau*?

Difference between trolls - stone inhabited by gobli-spirit, stone-giants, & the ‘tree-folk’

* hnau are a Lewisian idea - conscious beings with souls.

So, Tolkien has invented the Ents, but hasn’t come up with an account of them. It seems like he knew they were there, but had no idea where they had come from. In fact, in letter 157 he says:

I always felt something ought to be done about the peculiar Anglo-Saxon word ent for a ‘giant’ or mighty person of long ago - to whom all old works were ascribed.

It does seem though that he ‘knew’ they weren’t beings like Trolls - unnnatual creatures - stone animated by goblin spirits, or stone- giants - natural creatures who had existed always in their current forms. The Ents are rational beings who may have once been something else - ordinary trees, perhaps, which were given sentience.

Whatever, Tolkien, through Treebeard, does have something interesting to say about tom Bombadil:

What about whom? said Treebeard. ‘Tombombadil? Tombombadil? So that is his what you call him. Oh, he has got a very long name. He understands trees, right enough; but he is no herdsman. He laughs & does not interfere. He never made anything go wrong, but he never cured anything, either

It seems Treebeard feels that it is important to be an active participant in the world - Bombadil is in the wrong as far as the Ent is concerned, because while he may not have done anything bad, he hasn’t done any good, either. Yet Treebeard himself has been passive enough in his own land up to this point, & has to be stirred up to take action. Treebeard seems to think a lot, but he isn’t a great doer. And he doesn’t have Bombadil’s excuse, either.

Another interesting tidbit from HoME, perhaps tying it into the Lorien theme, is Treebeard’s comment on the distance he has carried Merry & Pippin to his Ent-house:

’I have brought you three times twelve leagues or thereabouts, if measurements of that kind hold good in the country of Fangorn.

It almost seems as if at this point Tolkien is thinking of Fangorn as an otherworldly place similar to Lorien; In Lorientime may move differently to the outside world, in Fangorn it is space[/i] that follows different laws. Or perhaps just as the Elves perceptions affect their understanding of time, the Ents perceptions affect their understanding of distance. Perhaps the Ents are more complex beings than may at first appear.

But to the actual chapter under discussion. Th efirst thing that struck me was Treebeard’s statement:

"For one thing it would take a long while: my name is growing all the time, and I've lived a very long, long time; so my name is like a story. Real names tell you the story of the things they belong to in my language, in the Old Entish as you might say. It is a lovely language, but it takes a very long time to say anything in it, because we do not say anything in it, unless it is worth taking a long time to say, and to listen to.

Which ties in with what he said in the draft about Tom Bombadil:

[i]Tombombadil? Tombombadil? So that is his what you call him. Oh, he has got a very long name.

So, in Entish a ‘name’ isn’t just a ‘label’, its a ‘story’. Its the story of the thing itself. To know a thing or person’s Entish name is to know their history, their nature, everything about them.

’Hm, but you are a hasty folk, I see,’ said Treebeard. ‘I am honoured by your confidence; but you should not be too free all at once. There are Ents & Ents, you know; or there are Ents & things that look like Ents but ain’t, as you might say.’

This is interesting, not simply because its a warning to innocents who have strayed into a potentially dangerous place, but for another reason. Names were once considered to be magical things. To know a thing’’s true name was believed to give him or her power over it. Le Guin uses this idea in the Earthsea books, but it was a common belief once uopn a time. But Tolkien uses the idea himself in the Conversation with Smaug. Bilbo, there, is extremely careful to avoid telling his right name to Smaug.

The other interesting thing about Entish names is that they are very often incomplete or unfinished. The ‘right name’ of a person or thing is their story, & it continues to change & develop as long as their ‘story’ (their life or existence) goes on. Perhaps it doesn’’t even attain a final form even then - not if their acts or one time existence continue to have repercussions after they’ve gone. Its easy to understand Treebeard’s confusion over Pippin’s statement about Gandalf’s fall:

’But you speak of Master Gandalf as if he was in a story that had come to an end.’

Because to him its not just a case of Gandalf dying, but of the end of that particular story. Gandalf, for Treebeard, was both in a story & the story itself. He is being told that the story ‘Gandalf’ has been finished. The Entish name of anything is its story, but do the Ents see everything as just a ‘story’? Perhaps for the Ents the story is more is more important than the person or thing it is told about? Treebeard seems incredibly concerned about the ending of stories, because when a story ends it may be put aside & forgotten, & the telling of tales is the reason Entish exists. Perhaps Treebeard feels some connection between the fading of his race & the fading of his language? After all, when the Ents finally die out, Entish will die out too, & so will the stories which were told in it. After the last Ent has died there will be no-one left who knows the name of the ‘thing’:

’we are on, where i stand & look out on fine mornings, & think about the Sun, & the grass beyond the wood, & the horses, & the clouds, & the unfolding of the world....

Its Entish name will be lost forever, hence it’s story will be lost forever, & it will become just a ‘hill’, one among many, & thus nothing special - even as the trees Treebeard has known from nut & acorn, trees with voices & names of their own - stories of their own - will become simply ‘trees’, sources of timber, any of which may be cut down - to feed the fires of Orthanc, or anything else ‘orcs’ may decide to do with them.

When a thing’s ‘right name’ is forgotten, its story is lost, & then it becomes worthless. It is only the Ents who keep those stories alive - even the Elves have developed other concerns. Ents are the ‘record keepers’ of Middle earth, & something vital will be lost with their passing. Its easy to overlook that - that the Ent’s role in Middle earth is to be its ‘living memory’ - & see their passing as a tragedy for them alone. It isn’t. Its a loss for the whole of Middle earth & everyone in it, because the ‘stories’ that make up ‘Middle earth’ are the stories of its people, places & things, & the only ones who know those stories are the Ents. The right names of things, their stories, will be forgotten, & those things will then begin to lose any sense of their real value & their unique identity. The Ent’s tragedy is Middle earth’s tragedy, because their passing will inevitably bring about its passing. Middle earth will become the world we know, precisely because there are no Ents who know every ‘thing’s’ ‘right name’,& are able to tell it’s story. No ‘right name’ means no true story, & no true story means no uniqueness, no meaning.

We are witnessing the beginning of a terrible loss - even greater in some ways for the world than the loss of the Elves - but we may not realise it, because the form it takes is the dying out of a bunch of strange walking & talking trees.

[Boromir88]

Its Entish name will be lost forever, hence it’s story will be lost forever, & it will become just a ‘hill’, one among many, & thus nothing special - even as the trees Treebeard has known from nut & acorn, trees with voices & names of their own - stories of their own - will become simply ‘trees’, sources of timber, any of which may be cut down - to feed the fires of Orthanc, or anything else ‘orcs’ may decide to do with them.

An interesting find davem, and it's possible that Treebeard, and the Ents decided to go take out Saruman in an attempt to be remembered for something. If the Ents sit back in the forest, and die out, their language, their stories will pass away. But, perhaps if they do something to help the people's of Middle-earth, will sing songs, and make stories about them.

"Of course, it is likely enough, my friends," he said slowly, "likely enough that we are going to our doom. The las march of the Ents. But if we stayed at home and did nothing, doom would find us anyway, sooner or later. That thought has long been growing in our hearts; and that is why we are marching now. It was not a hasty resolve. Now at least the last march of the Ents may be worth a song. Aye," he sighed, "we may help the other peoples before we pass away...

Treebeard seeing that the Ents are fading away, and will eventually fade away, fears that Ents will be forgotten. That is if the Ents sit back and did nothing. Ahh, but if he helps the other people, then perhaps they may be remembered yet.

Back to my first post about the "green light," within Treebeard's eyes, as well as Bregalad. Perhaps the "green light" is the Ent spirit, or symbolism of the Ents being a race that is fading away. When the Hobbits first see Treebeard...

These deep eyes were now surveying them, slow and solemn, but very penetrating. They were brown, shot with a green light.

When Treebeard considers no thought of Saruman, or helping out Middle-earth, Treebeard's eyes is just a "green light," and represents the fading away of the Ents. But, when Treebeard gets roused...

Treebeard raised himself from his bed with a jerk, stood up, and thumped his hand on the table. The vessels of light trembled and sent up two jets of flame. There was a flicker of green fire in his eyes.

Now the "green light," is a "flame," and there may be hope of the Ents being remembered in history. Then Treebeard suppresses these thoughts, saying he got "caught up in the moment...

At last Pippin looked up, and Pippin could see a sad look in his eyes, sad but not unhappy. There was a light in them, as if the green flame had sunk deeper into the dark wells of his thought.

After Treebeard suppresses his thought, the "green flame," sinks back deeper into his eyes, as if fading, a long with the Entish race. The final occurance when the Bregalad realizes the Ents are going to war...

Bregalad, his eyes shining...

again, hope remains that the Ents will be remembered.

The Ents, as davem has pointed out, don't have Bombadil's excuse to stay out of things. When the Ents have their chance to help Middle-earth, there is a chance that the Ents will be remembered, represented by the "green flame," and "shining eyes." If the Ents pull a Bombadil, then they will fade away, they won't be remembered, and their green flame reduces to a green light, and fades away, deeper into their eyes. Sorry, if it seems a bit jumbled, but the thought just came to me, and I'm spewing it out .

[davem]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Treebeard seeing that the Ents are fading away, and will eventually fade away, fears that Ents will be forgotten. That is if the Ents sit back and did nothing. Ahh, but if he helps the other people, then perhaps they may be remembered yet.

Very interesting point - this desire to be remembered, to continue in the 'Tale' ...(Following on from my last post, a few more thoughts on the nature of Ents: )

"We are tree-herds, we old Ents. Few enough of us are left now. Sheep get like shepherds, and shepherds like sheep, it is said; but slowly, and neither have long in the world. It is quicker and closer with trees and Ents, and they walk down the ages together. For Ents are more like Elves: less interested in themselves than Men are, and better at getting inside other things’.. And yet again Ents are more like Men, more changeable than Elves are, and quicker at taking the colour of the outside, you might say. Or better than both: for they are steadier and keep their minds on things longer.

‘Ents are more like Elves: less interested in themselves than Men are, and better at getting inside other things’.

Are Elves less interested in themselves than Men? When did that happen? The Elves of the First Age certainly couldn’t be said to be uninterested in themselves. If Treebeard is right this must be something that has happened to the Elves of Middle earth over time. And yet to what extent have they grown uninterested in themselves? Their chief concern seems to be departing into the West, leaving Middle earth forever. This does not seem to imply a lack of self interest. In fact, the Elves of Lorien in particular seem pretty much self obsessed, with not much interest in the outside world, or anything but their living dream.

Again, what does he mean when he says that Men are more changeable, quicker at taking on the colour of the outside - in fact, [i]what is that supposed to mean when its at home? ‘Taking on the colour of the outside’? does it mean that Men are too swayed by ‘surfaces’, by image, or that they are more prone to be swept along by ‘fashions’ & trends, carried along by the crowd, the concerns of the moment?

And does this give any insight into Treebeard’s words about the Elves? Does he mean that Elves are not concerned with themselves as a power, a force for change & domination within Middle earth any longer? Elves are no longer thinking of themselves as having a role in Middle earth. They have turned inwards, focussed on their individual destinies, not on the destiny of Middle earth. That role has passed to Men. Yet Treebeard’s judgement of Men’s new role doesn’t seem too high. The Elves have succumbed & accepted their destiny, but they are not up to it apparently, as far as Treebeard is concerned. They will probably make a mess of things.

In his opinion (understandably perhaps) the Ents are better than Elves or Men. They are more consistent than the Elves - they ‘have their feet on the ground’ (or in it), - & are less fickle than Men, less prone to wandering off looking for pastures new. For an Ent the grass is never greener on the other side of the fence.

The Ents are deeply ‘rooted’ both in the earth, & in the past. This is probably because their language is a language of ‘’right names’, which tells the stories of the earth & the beings which inhabit it. Every story is worth hearing & telling for the Ents. Their constancy is the constancy of the storyteller who tells his story through, even if there is no-one to hear it. The storytelling traditon is very old, & there’s an account of one traditional storyteller from the West of Scotland told in Rees’ ‘Celtic Heritage’ in the aftermath of the appearance of TV & Radio:

There came a time when it was but rarely that he had an opportunity himself of practicing his art in public. So, lest he should lose command over the tales he loved, he used to repeat them aloud ... using the gesticulations & the emphasis, & all the other tricks of narration, as if he were once again the centre of fireside storytelling ... On returning from market, as he walked slowly up the hills behind his old grey mare, he could be heard declaiming his tales to the back of the cart. (Quoted in Matthews’ The Western Way’ (vol 1: The native Tradition)

Its not too difficult a stretch to see the last Ent in Middle earth in a similar position, wandering through the last lonely stretch of forest, sadly singing the stories of all the lost places & beings he had once known.

Treebeard is lamenting the fact that no-one loves the woods as he does - we could probably extend that & say that no-one loves the plants & animals & people of Middle earth as he does, because no-one knows their stories as he does - & even he is forgetting - he cannot remember the rhymes of lore. Perhaps the Ents will finally die out not through grief or sickness, as with Elves, or through natural mortailty as with Men & other races, but through forgetfulness. They wiil forget, slowly, all their lore, all their true stories, & return to what they had been, before they were awakened & taught to speak the ‘right names’ of things.

As for the Entwives, it would seem that the deep difference between them is that while the Ents want to discover & tell the stories of things the way they are, the Entwives want to change the stories, adapt them to suit their own temperament:

But the Entwives gave their minds to the lesser trees, and to the meads in the sunshine beyond the feet of the forests; and they saw the sloe in the thicket, and the wild apple and the cherry blossoming in spring, and the green herbs in the waterlands in summer, and the seeding grasses in the autumn fields. They did not desire to speak with these things; but they wished them to hear and obey what was said to them. The Entwives ordered them to grow according to their wishes, and bear leaf and fruit to their liking; for the Entwives desired order, and plenty, and peace (by which they meant that things should remain where they had set them). So the Entwives made gardens to live in. But we Ents went on wandering, and we only came to the gardens now and again.

If the Entwives refused to speak to the plants & trees it could only be because they did not want, or need, to hear their stories. And that being the case, what, really, would Ents & Entwives have in common? The very stories the Ents lived to tell would be an irritation to the Entwives. And the ‘stories’ the Entwives wished to tell would have been empty & felt ‘contrived’ to the ents. Neither Ents nor Entwives had any desire to hear what the other had to say. A classic breakdown of communication - grounds for separation in anyone’s book .....

[Lalwendë]

It almost seems as if at this point Tolkien is thinking of Fangorn as an otherworldly place similar to Lorien; In Lorientime may move differently to the outside world, in Fangorn it is space[/i] that follows different laws. Or perhaps just as the Elves perceptions affect their understanding of time, the Ents perceptions affect their understanding of distance. Perhaps the Ents are more complex beings than may at first appear.

Is distance in Fangorn similar to a 'country mile', i.e. much more than a mile, or is it a concept which is lost in such a strange and magical place? This is interesting, as in Lorien, the peculiar concept of time is similar to that in the underworld - people being taken there may spend just a day, or so they think, when they have really spent seven years there. In Fangorn, maybe there is no set pattern to distance and space, and after all, such things are only a human construct to 'help' us fathom the world out. Maybe those trees move about so much that distance becomes irrelevant - who hasn't found themselves lost in a woodland and had the distinct feeling that the tress are somehow conspiring to make us lost?

If the Entwives refused to speak to the plants & trees it could only be because they did not want, or need, to hear their stories. And that being the case, what, really, would Ents & Entwives have in common? The very stories the Ents lived to tell would be an irritation to the Entwives. And the ‘stories’ the Entwives wished to tell would have been empty & felt ‘contrived’ to the ents. Neither Ents nor Entwives had any desire to hear what the other had to say. A classic breakdown of communication - grounds for separation in anyone’s book .....

Sometimes I think that a parallel could be drawn with the coming of agriculture to this world. At one time there was a vast 'wildwood' covering all of Britain, even right across our moors and mountains, and we humans lived as hunter gatherers there. But then came agriculture and the ordering and taming of the land, just as the Entwives did in Middle Earth. And the wildwood became an entirely separate entity (sorry...) to the tamed landscape. Neither side of our landscape would have anything worth saying to the other side; the woods must be kept trimmed back and the fields must be sprayed with pesticides and kept in order. Perhaps we have forced our own wildwood in to the situation of that of the ents. In Sherwood Forest there is an oak tree so old and immense it must be supported by props, and I wonder what tales that tree could tell; there are certainly many legends surrounding it.

And then what happens to trees for commercial reasons? They are cut down and in the rings we really can read the story of the times those trees have lived through - we can work out what years were dry, which were wet, which years the tree suffered damage. But when we read those tales it is too late, and that tree is alas dead, and will never tell any more stories of our times or anyone else's.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Lalwende

In Fangorn, maybe there is no set pattern to distance and space, and after all, such things are only a human construct to 'help' us fathom the world out. Maybe those trees move about so much that distance becomes irrelevant - who hasn't found themselves lost in a woodland and had the distinct feeling that the tress are somehow conspiring to make us lost?

I think its easy to get the idea that Fangorn is a 'natural' place - even the Ents themselves seem absolutely 'natural' beings, but look at the way Treebeard creates illumination in various forms - jets of light from the vessels on the table, the water droplets he shakes off turning into sparks of light, the trees all around him shining with light - what causes this effect? Does Treebeard have some kind of 'magical' power - & if so, what is its nature? We discussed the different kinds of magic in Middle earth back in the Khazad dum chapter, the Word of Command, etc - is this 'magic' displayed by Treebeard of a similar kind or different?