Beren in Dagor Dagorath

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

It includes what I suspect is the last Dagorath text from HoME XII "The Problem of Ros":


So late-stage Tolkien was thinking of a more general battle. If Turin is taking on Ancalagon (as well as Morgoth), perhaps Beren should face his own monster? A Wolf would be more of an iconic foe for him than Sauron, especially since the quote names him Camlost, after his missing hand. Perhaps he's there for a rematch with Carcharoth - or, yes, Wolf Sauron, bigger and badder and grumpier than before.

hS

Just a slight correction, if you don't mind - Andreth's prophecy in The Problem of Ros does not refer to Dagor Dagorath, but rather the ending to the War of Wrath in the First Age.

Why Tolkien did that, meaning shifting Turin's fate from killing Morgoth at the end of time to Turin killing Ancalagon in the War of Wrath, is anybody's guess IMO.

One thing to keep in mind though, is that the prophecy is made by Andreth, a mortal woman of the Edain (as opposed to Mandos), in this conception of the legendarium - and it may well have been the case that Tolkien, when he decided that the histories of the Elder Days were Mannish in origin and that the Elves had no predictions of their own regarding the ending of the world, simply intended Andreth's prophecy to have been one among many others.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

Just a slight correction, if you don't mind - Andreth's prophecy in The Problem of Ros does not refer to Dagor Dagorath, but rather the ending to the War of Wrath in the First Age.

Why Tolkien did that, meaning shifting Turin's fate from killing Morgoth at the end of time to Turin killing Ancalagon in the War of Wrath, is anybody's guess IMO.

One thing to keep in mind though, is that the prophecy is made by Andreth, a mortal woman of the Edain (as opposed to Mandos), in this conception of the legendarium - and it may well have been the case that Tolkien, when he decided that the histories of the Elder Days were Mannish in origin and that the Elves had no predictions of their own regarding the ending of the world, simply intended Andreth's prophecy to have been one among many others.

It looks like I was ambivalent in the other thread, but on rechecking I'm pretty sure it's the Dagorath. Christopher concludes that it's the War of Wrath, but there's two pieces of evidence suggesting otherwise:

1/ Andreth died just after the Bragollach, about a decade before Turin was even born. The "one prophecy among any others" explanation would have to assume that she correctly foresaw the birth of Turin and Morgoth's emnity with him, and the creation of Ancalagon - but then added a false prophecy on the end about him coming back 50 years after his death.

2/ The context in which "the language of the Folk of Haleth was not used", and wouldn't be unless Turin returned from the Dead, is Earendil's appeal to the Valar. There isn't a lot of time between those two events; and "Problem of Ros" namechecks Numenor, which means if it has an internal existence at all (which the ambiguity in the prophecy suggests), it must be a Numenorean or Gondorian text writing after the War of Wrath.

It seems more plausible that between footnote and text, Tolkien used two different meanings of Last Battle, than that he suddenly decided to resurrect Turin for the War of Wrath and simultaneously overturn Earendil's longstanding killing of Ancalagon.

If it is a reference to the War of Wrath, then for the Dagorath we're back where we started: there's no references to a battle later than the Lost Tales, just to a four-on-one duel with Morgoth.

hS

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

1/ Andreth died just after the Bragollach, about a decade before Turin was even born. The "one prophecy among any others" explanation would have to assume that she correctly foresaw the birth of Turin and Morgoth's emnity with him, and the creation of Ancalagon - but then added a false prophecy on the end about him coming back 50 years after his death.

But do we have to assume that part of her prophecy is false?

2/ The context in which "the language of the Folk of Haleth was not used", and wouldn't be unless Turin returned from the Dead, is Earendil's appeal to the Valar. There isn't a lot of time between those two events; and "Problem of Ros" namechecks Numenor, which means if it has an internal existence at all (which the ambiguity in the prophecy suggests), it must be a Numenorean or Gondorian text writing after the War of Wrath.

I'm not sure I understand what it is you find problematic here. Does this connect with issue 1? Sorry If I'm being dim here.

It seems more plausible that between footnote and text, Tolkien used two different meanings of Last Battle, than that he suddenly decided to resurrect Turin for the War of Wrath and simultaneously overturn Earendil's longstanding killing of Ancalagon.

My "in story" (tentative) theory: the Numenorean Myth (the former Second Prophecy) is a garbling, in part, of Andreth's Prophecy, altering her (in my opinion) more-likely-to-be-true prophetic inspiration into a next stage bit of myth-making . . .

. . . in other words, the tale grew in the telling: the "Last Battle" of Andreth's Prophecy is ultimately confused for an end-of-times "Last Battle" myth, in which Turin the famous dragon slayer goes from giving Ancalagon his death stroke (prophecy) -- to delivering Morgoth his death stroke.

Or not. If that doesn't work?

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Galin

But do we have to assume that part of her prophecy is false?

I mean... no? But if Turin actually returned for the War of Wrath, the total absence of this concept anywhere else in the Legendarium, the contradiction with the statements that Beren was the only mortal to return from death, and the fact that he would have waited in the Halls of Mandos for 50+ years rather than moving on, all make it difficult to accept at face value. It also takes a mythic Returning Hero and turns him into a historically-verifiable event: Bilbo could ask Elrond about it and be told, "Oh yeah, Turin came back for a bit; I chatted with him, he was intense." It just doesn't feel like it fits.

Originally Posted by Galin

I'm not sure I understand what it is you find problematic here. Does this connect with issue 1? Sorry If I'm being dim here.

Sorry, I think I got tangled up in my own thoughts. Tolkien wrote "unless the prophecy of Andreth the Wise-woman should prove true". As the author, he obviously knows whether the prophecy is true or not; that says to me that this statement is an in-universe one, like so many of his notes and jottings. If it's in-universe, when was it written?

Well, "The Problem of Ros" mentions Numenor. That means the document as a whole must post-date the War of Wrath, and so any prophecy relating to it would have to be in the past tense ("unless the prophecy of Andreth was true, and Turin in the War of Wrath returned, and slew Ancalagon"). They would also know whether it happened.

Even if the "Turin" footnote is held to be earlier than other parts of the document - when earlier? It relays details of what Earendil said to Manwe, which means someone must have passed on to the recorder; that means it has to have been written between the arrival of the Armies of Valinor and the death of Ancalagon. I just have a hard time believing a continent-destroying war is a good time to jot down notes on what that Elros bloke's name means, oh and btw watch out for a grumpy guy with an evil sword, he's got an appointment with a dragon and you do NOT wanna get in his way.

Could Andreth have prophesies about the War of Wrath? Sure. Finrod in her presence speaks prophetically of both the Bragollach and Arda Renewed, so we know that both timeframes were available to foresight. But I don't think this source text can be held up as supporting such a prophecy.

hS

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

I mean... no? But if Turin actually returned for the War of Wrath, the total absence of this concept anywhere else in the Legendarium, the contradiction with the statements that Beren was the only mortal to return from death, and the fact that he would have waited in the Halls of Mandos for 50+ years rather than moving on, all make it difficult to accept at face value. It also takes a mythic Returning Hero and turns him into a historically-verifiable event: Bilbo could ask Elrond about it and be told, "Oh yeah, Turin came back for a bit; I chatted with him, he was intense." It just doesn't feel like it fits.

But this, in my opinion, rests on the matter being a historical certainty, so to speak. But what if Andreth's prophecy is uttered, and the truth of the words are never confirmed by internal characters or internal texts? I admit that this is how I think Tolkien was going to inject the idea into the Legendarium, which is arguably another way to say, this is how I'd do it.

My edited version of Quenta Silmarillion concerning the War of Wrath:


" . . . that the host of the Valar was driven back, for the coming of the dragons was with great thunder, and lightning, and a tempest of fire"

"But Earendil came, shining with white flame, and about Vingilot were gathered all the great birds of heaven and Thorondor was their captain, and there was battle all day and through a dark night of doubt. And before the rising of the sun, the host of the Valar prevailed, and well-nigh all the dragons were destroyed, even Ancalagon the Black, the mightiest of the dragon-host. And the towers of Thangorodrim lay in ruin; and all the pits of Morgoth were broken and unroofed . . ."


In short, it is never said who slew Ancalagon. No one knew exactly what happened to every single dragon slain, especially after night fell.

But in another section of the Legendarium, even perhaps in a footnote to some text about languages and names, the reader finds a prophecy about Turin! Did it happen? It seems unlikely that a prophecy should not come true, yet it can never be certainly determined, until perhaps the End -- in other words, if the prophecy "should prove true" -- not only after uttered, but also when this could ultimately be revealed as certain by the "gods" or Eru himself, then we would know that the language of Haleth's folk could indeed have been heard again.

( . . . )

Could Andreth have prophesies about the War of Wrath? Sure. Finrod in her presence speaks prophetically of both the Bragollach and Arda Renewed, so we know that both timeframes were available to foresight. But I don't think this source text can be held up as supporting such a prophecy.

Okay thanks for the explanation! I understand better now.

For me though, so far anyway, The Problem of ROS is essentially an external text. It begins with Tolkien-as-author writing about the problems he perceives, even with respect to Primary World words. Then he goes into: "Proposed solution. Associate the name Elros . . ."

And what follows is still, I think, more like Tolkien "talking to himself" [even if arguably slipping, now and again,
into "poetic prose" mode], working out the details that could exist within the Secondary World, in part, to allow the scenario to be true. I agree that the statement -- if the prophecy "should prove true" -- gives the air of an in-story note, but given the text as a whole, for myself (again, so far), I can't press it as a fully considered internal source. I think if the scenario had not failed, the text [if indeed such a text was to be the vehicle for any and all new history arrived at during the proposed solution] awaited a more considered in-story treatment with respect to purpose and authorship.

Admittedly this post may be less than compelling (to put it mildly) since it contains mere theory concerning how I
think Tolkien might have "intended" to incorporate such an idea, but I do find it "Tolkien-ish" . . .

. . . as subjective as that is

And then, as I further wonder, does Andreth's prophecy provide the Numenoreans a groundwork for the End Times Myth in which Turin goes from dragon slayer to dealing Morgoth himself a death blow.

[Galin]

Actually, now that I think more about it . . .

. . . I suppose I could look at the Problem of ROS text as starting off external, but once Tolkien goes into solution mode, we are in in-story territory.

If I look at things that way, I'll have to think even more about the matter, which makes me sleepy in any case!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Sorry, I think I got tangled up in my own thoughts. Tolkien wrote "unless the prophecy of Andreth the Wise-woman should prove true". As the author, he obviously knows whether the prophecy is true or not;

Sorry, I only have a quick reaction to this - a methodological one, so to speak: as I read the last sentence, it struck me that of course that is or may not be, strictly speaking, true. I mean that we know that Tolkien's modus operandi was (meticulous footnotes to footnotes and plans notwithstanding) was also that he is not inventing the story, he is discovering it. So in that framework, he himself may not have known whether ultimately the prophecy was true or not. Perhaps he would later "discover" that it was, disregarding everything. And perhaps the lack of clarity just reflects the fact that when he wrote those deliberations, he was not sure himself whether they are true or not.

(I personally like to operate in that framework, but this is only chiming in - if you are the type of seekers that want hard facts and definite solutions, obviously not stopping you. It only occurred to me to offer this alternative point for those who may like it, and in general to remind of that aspect of Tolkien's mythological writing.)