The Moon! What Moon?!

[William Cloud Hicklin]

The newspaper-wrapper ca. 1965 raises a very interesting issue of analysis. It's certainly more than speculation or guesswork to identify each version of the Atlantis-myth with the three 'traditions'- The Drowning of Anadune with its Adunaic nomenclature and Numenocentric POV is unquestionably the 'Mannish' tradition; and the Akallabeth, elsewhere ascribed to Elendil himself, is literally a 'blended' tradition, its text representing a shuffling together of DA and the Fall of Numenor, with additional material- CRT illustrates this orthographically in HME IX p. 295f. Significantly, this Elendil-version amends DA material to bring it back to the Flat-world perspective, which is understandable since Tolkien's early Round-world experiments ca. 1946-48 had been rejected by 1951 and the explicitly Flat-world Annals of Aman.

But what was Tolkien thinking in the mid-1960's? I think it inescapable that the Elvish tradition, presumptively correct, is Flat-world, as is the Dunedainic tradition made under the influence of Lindon and Rivendell, whereas the one Round-world version must be taken as garbled (and indeed the earlier versions of DA are deliberately 'confused'). There follows a very strong deduction or supposition that by the mid-1960's Toklien had evolved a very sophisticated 'theory of the tale': the Flat world was correct, and the Breaking really did happen; but Men outside Eldarin tutelage were so small-minded/unimaginative/divorced from the Valar that they refused to believe that such naked Divine intervention had really occurred (after all it violates 'scientific' thinking).




I should emphasise that flat-world/round-world is not inextricably tied to the other part of the astronomical myth, the Sun and Moon. There is little doubt at all that JRRT had decided conclusively to abandon the flower and fruit story and that the Heavenly Lights had existed ab initio- indeed in the Hobbit 3rd Ed (1966) he emended text in just such a way.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

... But what was Tolkien thinking in the mid-1960's? I think it inescapable that the Elvish tradition, presumptively correct, is Flat-world, as is the Dunedainic tradition made under the influence of Lindon and Rivendell, whereas the one Round-world version must be taken as garbled (and indeed the earlier versions of DA are deliberately 'confused'). There follows a very strong deduction or supposition that by the mid-1960's Toklien had evolved a very sophisticated 'theory of the tale': the Flat world was correct, and the Breaking really did happen; but Men outside Eldarin tutelage were so small-minded/unimaginative/divorced from the Valar that they refused to believe that such naked Divine intervention had really occurred (after all it violates 'scientific' thinking).

Why (merely wondering about your reasons in more detail) do you state that the more correct flat-world legends are Elvish? because of the extant version of FN at the time of this note?

I should emphasise that flat-world/round-world is not inextricably tied to the other part of the astronomical myth, the Sun and Moon. There is little doubt at all that JRRT had decided conclusively to abandon the flower and fruit story and that the Heavenly Lights had existed ab initio- indeed in the Hobbit 3rd Ed (1966) he emended text in just such a way.

I agree. Tolkien does appear to very generally connect them 'in consideration', so to speak, in Myths Transformed text I -- being, I think, not unnaturally tied in general as 'counter conceptions' (this term based on Christopher Tolkien comments after text I):

'It is at any rate clear, for he stated it unambiguously enough, that he had come to believe that the art of the 'Sub-creator' cannot, or should not attempt to, extend to the 'mythical' revelation of a conception of the shape of the Earth and the origin of the lights of heaven that runs counter to the known physical tuths of his own days.'

But yes, 'evidence' of an early Sun is not necessarily evidence of Round World ideas, and I should have made that point before my comments on the legend of the Awakening of the Quendi. I tend to interpret these ideas as tied or that 'Early Sun' might imply Round World, but they need not be inextricably tied, as you say.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Why (merely wondering about your reasons in more detail) do you state that the more correct flat-world legends are Elvish? because of the extant version of FN at the time of this note?

Well, at the time of the note (ca 1965) the documents contained in the wrapper were all much older: FNIII poss. 1937, DA 1946, Akallabeth early 50's.

Matching up the three texts to the three 'traditions' of the note follow logically. DA can only be Numenorean, Ak has to be the 'blended' version, and that leaves FN as the 'elvish' version.

In determining which version is 'true' we must be guided by the internal logic of the legendarium. Tolkien himself of course maintained that the Eldar would know "true astronomy," learned directly from the Valar. One would assume that such knowledge would also be found in the House of Elrond, where exiled Noldor, Wizards, and Glorfindel redivivus were available: and the Akallabeth, whether written by Elendil or a later Arnorian with access to Rivendell (and Lindon), deliberately corrects the portions it copies from DA back to an explicitly flat-world framework.

The point I suppose is that in the mid-Sixties Tolkien ratified the old Fall of Numenor as an 'elvish' account, rather than simply rejecting it as obsolete (as he did with the Tale of the Sun and Moon). If FN retained its canonicity in his mind, then we must, I think, accept it as the teaching of the Wise, and presumptively 'true' (whereas Mannish texts Tolkien always characterises as garbled or unreliable).


Of course there is also the unresolved issue of the Silmarillion's missing frame-story, or, if you like, its unknown provenance. Tolkien still trotted out Pengolodh and Aelfwine in pretty late writings. OTOH he explicitly stated in his last years that the Sil was a Numenorean text- and ofr course CT is convinced that Bilbo was the vector.

These last two, at least, can be reconciled, if we suppose that the library at Imladris where Bilbo worked also served as the archive and repository of the surviving lore of Arnor, and that Elvish historiography was of such a nature as to be confusing or alien to a mortal mind- so that Bilbo preferred to work from Dunedainic texts (written of course in Sindarin). It is certainly the case that the section on Turin was (internally) an abridgment of the Narn i Chin Hurin, written by a Man, Dirhavel.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Well, at the time of the note (ca 1965) the documents contained in the wrapper were all much older: FNIII poss. 1937, DA 1946, Akallabeth early 50's. Matching up the three texts to the three 'traditions' of the note follow logically. DA can only be Numenorean, Ak has to be the 'blended' version, and that leaves FN as the 'elvish' version.

Did the envelope that contained the texts of DA contain these other documents? I did not think so from the description, though it doesn't matter much if it did.

In determining which version is 'true' we must be guided by the internal logic of the legendarium. Tolkien himself of course maintained that the Eldar would know "true astronomy," learned directly from the Valar.

Agreed, truer tales hailed from the 'gods' and those associated with them, and one notes that in DA it is the Nimîr that taught that the world was round. There were Men who found this hard to believe, or they believed it but were tricked by Sauron telling them it was flat. This is not consonant with the idea that the Elves knew the truth of a flat world of course.

One would assume that such knowledge would also be found in the House of Elrond, where exiled Noldor, Wizards, and Glorfindel redivivus were available: and the Akallabeth, whether written by Elendil or a later Arnorian with access to Rivendell (and Lindon), deliberately corrects the portions it copies from DA back to an explicitly flat-world framework.

Or the AK, being a mixed document, contains persistent mannish notions concerning the shape of the world. Generally speaking, contact with those who arguably know better need not mean a given idea in a given account will be corrected.

'It is now clear to me that in any case the Mythology must actually be a 'Mannish' affair (...) what we have in the Silmarillion etc. are traditions (especially personalized, and centered upon actors, such as Feanor) handed on by Men in Númenor and later in Middle-earth (Arnor and Gondor); but already far back -- from the first association of the Dúnedain and Elf-friends with the Eldar of Beleriand -- blended and confused with their own Mannish myths and cosmic ideas.' JRRT Text I Myths Transformed, Morgoth's Ring

The point I suppose is that in the mid-Sixties Tolkien ratified the old Fall of Numenor as an 'elvish' account, rather than simply rejecting it as obsolete (as he did with the Tale of the Sun and Moon). If FN retained its canonicity in his mind, then we must, I think, accept it as the teaching of the Wise, and presumptively 'true' (whereas Mannish texts Tolkien always characterises as garbled or unreliable).

But that is a big 'if' in my opinion, and I see no compelling evidence that Tolkien surely ratified such an old version as updated and correct (or correct on all points, like possibly the flying ships of the Numenoreans too, for example).

JRRT's note merely reveals that he thinks DA is good (for the reasons stated) in the proposed case of three different traditions... to my mind this is still a leap away from FN (or even DA actually) as it was written now going to stand 'as was'. I think this is pushing Christopher Tolkien's 'categorization' too far in too specific a way. If indeed we are left with FN III being the likely 'Elvish representative' in general, it would not take much revision to have it agree with what the Elves taught in DA.

posted earlier: There follows a very strong deduction or supposition that by the mid-1960's Toklien had evolved a very sophisticated 'theory of the tale': the Flat world was correct, and the Breaking really did happen; but Men outside Eldarin tutelage were so small-minded/unimaginative/divorced from the Valar that they refused to believe that such naked Divine intervention had really occurred (after all it violates 'scientific' thinking).

OK, if that's something they refused to believe, what do you suggest these Men did believe however (within the context that it is 'true' that the earth was originally flat)?

This is a very interesting take but I am still confused a bit by it... and not yet swayed.

It seems you are proposing (if what you suggest is correct), that in the 1960s and despite the concerns found in Myths Transformed, Tolkien decided that the 'truth' about the original shape of the world runs counter to that of the Primary World. Rather I think in Tolkien's legends 'scientific thinking' is what flat world thinkers are not engaging in. And one implication is that when certain Men found out the world was round they yet believed it had been flat -- and thus that meant Divine intervention, for what else could explain this.

I understand that DA is the confused Mannish myth, but what is being confused exactly? The notion in DA and the sketches is that the Eldar were teaching that the world was round. Men indeed might have confused something about these 'immortal' beings, or something about the lands from which they came (see also Christopher Tolkien's look at some of the purposed variances in SD)... but how is it that the Numenoreans thought the Elves were teaching round world notions if they were actually instructing them about a flat world? I can't see good reason for them to get this wrong. Of course it remains possible that I am confused, but I could find no text or commentary which seems to support this had somehow been garbled too.

[Galin]

Just thought I would add a few more opinions, possibly to inspire more here.

'The Notion Club Papers hinted at a concept that could have saved Tolkien his worries over the cosmology: that of two distinct pasts, the historical and the mythical, 'secondary planes and degrees,' merging at the fall of Atlantis/Númenor. Before that, the universe of the Ambarkanta was real. After, our astronomical universe, with its round earth, and solar system (...) is the reality. How the one can be antecedent to the other is simply left as an unfathomable mystery. Were a Wellsian time machine to go into the past, it would not go back to Númenor or Beleriand but to the prehistoric and geological past we are already familiar with. But it might still be possible to visit the mythical past via the more spiritual means suggested by Ramer in The Notion Club Papers.'

Charles E. Noad On the Construction of the Silmarillion Tolkien's Legendarium

Compare that to something from John D. Rateliff's 'And All The Days Of Her Life Are Forgotten The Lord of the Rings as Mythic Prehistory' (published in The Lord of the Rings 1954-2004 Scholarship in honor of Richard E. Blackwelder), where Rateliff suggests that Tolkien's solution, posited in The Notion Club Papers, was: '... that a change could come, so drastic that it changed not only the present and of course the future from that point on but even the past as well, so that the present now derived from a different past and the original past had no longer ever happened, being transformed from history -- the things that actually happened -- into myth; the things we remember that exist now only in legend and memory.'

In note 13 Rateliff quotes something from Tolkien in a 1965 BBC interview, that after the Downfall Númenor 'lived then only in memory. It lived in time but not present time... Númenor was drowned, and the Earthly Paradise removed, and so then you could get to Central America!...[The] world became round' and goes on to suggest that the Hobbits 'seem to experience his (Bombadil's) words more as shared memories than as told tales, experiences that predate a human or human-like occupation of the land.'