Unnumbered Tears - what if?

[Mithadan]

The Silmarillion relates that but for the treachery of man, the elves might have won the Nirnaeth Arnoediad (Battle of Unnumbered Tears). OK. So what if they won the battle (keeping in mind that a battle is not a war)? What would have happened? The West would still be fenced against them. Besides, what could they do with, or to, Morgoth?

[Taimar]

An interesting notion, Mithadan. If the Nirnaeth had instead been a glorious victory, I don`t think that it necessarily have won the war for the Eldar and Edain. Morgoth would simply have shut Angband tight and sat it out. I doubt that the victorious army would have had the strength necessary to launch a successful assault upon Angband itself. Consider the practical difficulties in besieging the place. It states in the Sil. that their armies lacked the numbers to surround Angband, so Morgoth would have able to send out sorties at will, gradually weakening the besiegers. The lands around Angland were desolate and it would have been difficult to keep a large army supplied. I think that the Eldar and Edain would have retreated and tried to keep Morgoth`s forces hemmed in as best they could. They would certainly have regained lands lost during the Dagor Bragollach, and perhaps have been in a situation akin to that which existed after the Dagor Aglareb, where Morgoth was held in check for a couple of centuries.

However, looking further ahead, there are some more things to think about. The Nirnaeth Arnoediad probably convinced even the proudest of the Noldor and Edain that they could never defeat Morgoth without aid from Valinor. Morgoth was convinced that this help would never arrive, so it led to him becoming overconfident.

Would Tuor ever have arrived in Gondolin? Highly unlikely. I think that the aftermath of the Nirnaeth Arnoediad was what JRR would have termed `eucatastrophe`, since the crushing defeat led ultimately to the marriage of Tuor and Idril, the birth of Earendil and ultimately the salvation of the peoples of Middle-earth.

[Maédhros]

I don`t think that it necessarily have won the war for the Eldar and Edain. Morgoth would simply have shut Angband tight and sat it out. I doubt that the victorious army would have had the strength necessary to launch a successful assault upon Angband itself.

I think that you're probable right, but the host of Morgoth would have been greatly reduced, since he had emptied Angband. Perhaps the elves would have ventured inside Angband and could have maybe "Captured" Morgoth.
I wonder if they would capture Morgoth, then what?

[HerenIstarion]

I believe that in the case (as well as elswhere, and even if unconsiously so), Tolkien was employing the Christian idea of humiliation as the means of reducing pride and making one capable of receivibng heaven's gifts. To put it short - without utterly shattered hope, the Eldar would not have been ready to accept help from the West (the point being, we are so good at beating Morgoth, who cares what that Mandos told us back than, ha!). The loss helped tham see that there were no other resources to rely upon but the West for them, while the victory would simply postpone the defeat

[Finwe]

I think that the Valar wanted the Noldor to humble themselves before them, before thinking of giving them aid. When Earendil set out on his voyage West, it wasn't his action itself that impressed the Valar, it was the humility behind it. Without that humility (which wouldn't have been there if the Elves had won the Nirnaeth Arnoediad), the Valar wouldn't have sent aid.

On a second note, perhaps this victory would have just put off that final flood of darkness. If this victory could have been comparable to, say, the Dagor Aglareb, then the Elves would eventually have been defeated by Morgoth anyway. This would just put off the War of Wrath.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I think Morgoth's embryonic force of winged dragons must have existed by that time. Had the Eldar and Edain won Nirnaeth, and threatened his stronghold, surely he would have released them. Considering the dismay of the Hosts of Valinor when they were released, their effect on the far smaller army of the Eldar would have been ruinous.

But enough about that.

...the Eldar might have won the day, had all their host proved faithful.

(The Silmarillion 20 - emphasis mine)

Mandos' prophecy at work. So the sentence could have meant:

The Eldar might have won the day, were they not under the doom of Mandos.

Since the doom of Mandos had taken effect when they rebelled, and left for Middle-earth, the only way they could not be under Mandos' curse was if they never rebelled and left Valinor. That means they would have won the fifth battle were they not there.

Crazy, I know. It just means victory at Nirnaeth was impossible.

You could have said that earlier.

I was trying to support my statement! Statements need supporting facts, or they'll be like legless Ents, or legless Balrogs.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

[Mandos(?): ]To evil end shall all things turn that [the House of Fëanor] begin well; and by treason of kin unto kin, and fear of treason, shall this come to pass.

(The Silmarillion 9)

...and [Maedhros, son of Fëanor] began those counsels [i.e., unite again, and make new league and common council] for the raising of the fortunes of the Eldar that are called the Union of Maedhros.

(The Silmarillion 20)

See? The battle was doomed from the beginning.

[Luthien_ Tinuviel]

And taking that one step further, they had to lose by logic, too. Since "to evil end shall all things turn that [the House of Fëanor] begin well....", they must ultimately have been defeated. Seeing as they won the second and third battles, it stands to reason that they must then lose the fourth and fifth battles, as they did. It seems to me that if they had paid the Doom of Mandos any heed at all, they should have expected this. But whether or not they had seen it coming, chances are they would have been defeated anyway. Would they have been routed as thoroughly as they were, though, is the question. I think they would have; doom in effect an' all that, but perhaps not. Yet going into the Ninaeth Arnoediad expecting a loss would have severely decreased morale and even further lowered the chances of victory so...... they were doomed, as Elenrod said. Every way you look at it, they were doomed.

[Finwe]

Poor Noldor.

Also, the line "they might have won had all their hosts proved faithful" doesn't concretely say that they would have won. It just says that they might have won. Even if the Easterling men had proved faithful, Morgoth was still infinitely more resourceful and powerful than the forces of the Elves. There were plenty of ways he could still defeat them.

[symestreem]

Yet neither by wolf, nor by Balrog, nor by Dragon, would Morgoth have achieved his end, but for the treachery of Men.

How did the Doom of Mandos cause the treachery of the Eastlings? The 'hosts' that were not true were not those of the Eldar, but those of the Men.

[doug*platypus]

I think the treachery that occured could still be loosely considered as "kin unto kin". The faithful sons of Bór were distantly akin to the sons of Ulfang, because they were all Swarthy Men. In Chapter 20, The Silmarillion says that:

Great was the triumph of Morgoth, and his design was accomplished in a manner after his own heart; for Men took the lives of Men...

Anyone who joined with or came into contact with the exiled Noldor (Teleri, Edain and presumably also Swarthy Men) joined the ranks of the cursed. Thingol brought his own doom on him when he spoke of his desire for a Silmaril, and of the Edain it was said:

All these were caught in the net of the Doom of the Noldor...

I think that Nilpaurion Felagund is right; the treachery that took away all hope of victory in the Nirnaeth was a result of the Curse of Mandos.

[davem]

Let's look at this from the Noldor's point of view for a moment:

As for the 'Doom of Mandos' - do the Noldor really believe it? They saw the Valar brought to apparent ruin, in their own land, saw Morgoth kill the Trees under their noses. I wonder if they didn't have some sense that lots of things were possible - even if the Valar said they weren't. Perhaps we're dealing with a people who had faced what seemed the ultimate disaster, set off on their own on what appeared a suicide mission - taking back the Silmarils from Morgoth - & seemed, against all odds to be on the road to winning.

You can almost imagine them thinking: Maybe the Valar don't know everything. Isn't it worth the risk? And the Valar had left them (& the Sindar, men & dwarves, who had not offended) to their fate. Morgoth is a threat to their very existence - what were they supposed to do? Stand back & do nothing & let him wipe them out piecemeal? They either have to fight, hit him as hard as they can & attempt to defeat him, or wait till he destroys them. They can't go back. They have nowhere to run. We have the clash of the two contending themes of the Music being made mainifest - conflict in the world is inevitable because its a conflict which began before the world. This a battle between forces attepting to actualise the different themes - Morgoth's forces are continuing to 'sing' the themes he introduced in eternity. The Elves - for all their 'sin' are still attempting to 'sing' the theme Eru propounded to the Ainur by Eru before the 'Ea!' was spoken & Arda came into being.

So,(as Tolkien stated) the Valar were at fault in holding back & barricading Valinor. The themes will contend throughout history till the Great End. The Noldor have committed a terrible offence in the Kinslaying, but the Valar have shirked their obligation. They contended with Melkor in the Anulindale, but they have refused to continue that contention within the world. The Noldor should not have been deserted by the Valar, who behave like offended children instead of the Holy Ones given stewardship of Arda by Eru that they are. Why should they have to crawl back to the Valar & beg them to help. When they do try & get back to ask the Valar just refuse to listen. The Valar have ultimate responsibility for dealing with Morgoth, but are hiding behind the Pelori, being self righteous, while the Noldor, the Sindar, Men & Dwarves are shedding their blood & losing their lives, doing their job for them.

Of course, this is not the whole story - the Valar do intervene, they don't leave the people of Middle Earth to their fate, but from the perspective of the Noldor in ME it could easily seem that way. The Valar have good reason to be wary of direct confrontation with Morgoth, they don't know how devastating the consequences of all out war between them & Morgoth will be on Beleriand, or Middle Earth as a whole.

But war is inevitable, because the Music set out this eternal & temporal contention, so this battle is inevitable, & they would have had to fight it sooner or later, even if they knew defeat was unavoidable. Whatever the Noldor did, out of pride, fear loss, desire, anger, however much they can be said to have brought their fate on themselves, the Valar (again as Tolkien said) are not wholly in the right, because in the end dealing with Morgoth is their responsibility, not the Noldor's (or anyone else's), & they shouldn't have to be begged to do it.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I agree with your point about Nirnaeth being inevitable. But your point about the Valar being at fault...well...

...and a new theme began amid the storm, like and yet unlike to the former them, and it gathered power and had new beauty. But the discord of Melkor rose in uproar and contended with it, and again there was a war of sound [there being a battle of music between the Ainur and Melkor's theme before] more violent than before, until many of the Ainur were dismayed and sang no longer, and Melkor had the mastery.

(The Silmarillion, Ainulindalë - emphasis mine)

The Ainur were also actualising their role in the conflict against Melkor - most of them sat it out, except, as examples, Melian and Ulmo. For a time, as the Eldar gained power and beauty in Arda, Morgoth's hatred will be poured out on them, and, for a while, they will be overpowered. The Valar not participating in that fight was pre-ordained by the Music, so any blame could be excused as them only doing what they could do, bound to the Music as they are.

[Firefoot]

Let's say it looked like they would win. Everyone proved faithful and the battle is looking good. I don't think Morgoth would at this point sit back and watch it happen. I could see two things happening:

A) He himself doesn't have anymore orcs/balrogs etc. left to fight, so he himself goes. I doubt if the Elves, Men, etc. could stand against the might of Morgoth himself. This I see as the less likely of the two.
B) The Elves, Men, etc. prove victorious. Morgoth admits defeat for that day, but waits and rebuilds his strength to an even mightier force than before and comes back out with his larger armies and utterly destroys the people. This one, I think is comparable to Sauron, matter of the Ring aside. He was defeated in the Last Alliance, but he waited and took form again, rebuilt his armies, and set out to destroy the world, and would have won had it not been for the Ring.

Either way, Morgoth's victory is inevitible, and the Elves' war on him impossible without the aid of the Valar.

If (B) were to be the one that occured, I think some of the Elves, like Fëanor's sons, would probably try to get the Silmarils back, but I think it would probably be hopeless. Morgoth is entirely too powerful for them to get them. They would have died in the attempt.

I agree the battle was inevitible and also necessary for them to have any hope of surviving. But it was hopeless. They never really had a chance against a foe so great.

[HerenIstarion]

Exclude clause A.

Morgoth (probably) would have been afraid to come out "for though his might was greatest of all things in this world, alone of the Valar he knew fear". And his duel with Fingolfin is stated to be the last skirmish Morgoth participated in in person. There have been some knocking on his doors and shouting of "come out" in times preceeding the battle discussed (Feanor upon landing almost there, and Fingolfin's march to the doors), but he did not bother himself to get out of his cosy armchair (or off hard and cruel throne) to make battle in person back than too: "Then the Elves smote upon the gates of Angband, and the challenge of their trumpets shook the towers of Thangorodrim; and Maedhros heard them amid his torment and cried aloud, but his voice was lost in the echoes of the stone"

[davem]

Nilpaurion,

I do wonder about the extent to which the Valar's inaction is due to them trying to 'actualise the Music' - which they are bound to do, IMO, & how much is down to shock, confusion & self doubt. They thought they were doing the right thing up to then, & suddenly it all collapses like a pack of cards.

At that point they suddenly cease to do anything effective against Melkor, as if they're afraid that any major action will blow up in their faces, so they wait until they feel they know what they should do - but lets face it, if it hadn't been for the Noldor in ME Morgoth would have had a free rein to do whatever he wanted. The Valar, in their confusion, & desire to see the Noldor humbled, desert Men, Dwarves & Sindarin Elves.

I agree with H-I as regards Morgoth - I recall an essay which describes him at the end 'cowering stupidly' in his lowest dungeon as the forces of the Valar (finally) assail Angband. But then, Morgoth isn;t some kind of Byronic 'anti-hero', going down in a blaze of glory. Tolkien wouldn't have created such a personification of evil, because he had seen real evil on the Somme, & knew that it's really cowardly, self obsessed & cruel. This is the difference between a writer like Pullman, who has lived a safe middle class existence & can play with the idea of evil being darkly attractive, & one like Tolkien who knew evil for what really was, & couldn't play around with it in that way.

[Firefoot]

I do wonder about the extent to which the Valar's inaction is due to them trying to 'actualise the Music' - which they are bound to do, IMO, & how much is down to shock, confusion & self doubt. They thought they were doing the right thing up to then, & suddenly it all collapses like a pack of cards.

Shock, confusion, doubt - isn't that exactly what caused them to stop making music in the first place? They were confused at what was going on because of Melkor's theme and they weren't sure what they were supposed to be doing anymore. They were making music the way they thought was right - and indeed it was! - and then Melkor started his own theme and the music of those Ainur "collapsed like a pack of cards", as Davem so well put it. I don't think they were actively "trying" to actualise the music - they don't have to be for the music to unfold. I agree with Nilpaurion - their non-participation was pre-ordained by the music.

[davem]

Quote:I don't think they were actively "trying" to actualise the music - they don't have to be for the music to unfold. I agree with Nilpaurion - their non-participation was pre-ordained by the music.

But then you could still say they were following the Music. My own feeling is that they lost a sense of what the Music was directing them to do, rather than stopping becuase the Music was stopping them. If they were 'stopped' by the Music from acting, then that would mean that the Noldor were meant to go to ME - though probably not in the way they did - & that they were meant to hold Morgoth at bay till the Valar could act effectively against Morgoth - which would mean that the Noldor's 'sin' is not in leaving Valinor - in fact they should have gone - which would mean the Valar were wrong to try & stop them.

[Maédhros]

I do wonder about the extent to which the Valar's inaction is due to them trying to 'actualise the Music' - which they are bound to do, IMO, & how much is down to shock, confusion & self doubt. They thought they were doing the right thing up to then, & suddenly it all collapses like a pack of cards.

I have to say that I totally disagree with this notion.
From Vinyar Tengwar: Ósanwe Kenta

If we speak last of the "folly" of Manwë and the weakness and unwariness of the Valar, let us beware how we judge. In the histories, indeed, we may be amazed and grieved to read how (seemingly) Melkor deceived and cozened others, and how even Manwë appears at times almost a simpleton compared with him: as if a kind but unwise father were treating a wayward child who would assuredly in time perceive the error of his ways. Whereas we, looking on and knowing the outcome, see now that Melkor knew well the error of his ways, but was fixed in them by hate and pride beyond return. He could read the mind of Manwë, for the door was open; but his own mind was false and even if the door seemed open, there were doors of iron within closed for ever.
How otherwise would you have it? Should Manwë and the Valar meet secrecy with subterfuge, treachery with falsehood, lies with more lies? If Melkor would usurp their rights, should they deny his? Can hate overcome hate? Nay, Manwë was wiser; or being ever open to Eru he did His will, which is more than wisdom. He was ever open because he had nothing to conceal, no thought that it was harmful for any to know, if they could comprehend it. Indeed Melkor knew his will without questioning it; and he knew that Manwe was bound by the commands and injunctions of Eru, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always, even knowing that Melkor would break them as it suited his purpose. Thus the merciless will ever count on mercy, and the liars make use of truth; for if mercy and truth are withheld from the cruel and the lying, they have ceased to be honoured.

At that point they suddenly cease to do anything effective against Melkor, as if they're afraid that any major action will blow up in their faces, so they wait until they feel they know what they should do - but lets face it, if it hadn't been for the Noldor in ME Morgoth would have had a free rein to do whatever he wanted. The Valar, in their confusion, & desire to see the Noldor humbled, desert Men, Dwarves & Sindarin Elves.

While it is true that the Valar seemed to desert Men, it appears that it was not so.
From Morgoth's Ring: Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth. The Tale of Adanel

Some say the Disaster happened at the beginning of the history of our people, before any had yet died. The Voice had spoken to us, and we had listened. The Voice said: 'Ye are my children. I have sent you to dwell here. In time ye will inherit all this Earth, but first ye must be children and learn. Call on me and I shall hear; for I am watching over you.'
We understood the Voice in our hearts, though we had no words yet. Then the desire for words awoke in us, and we began to make them. But we were few, and the world was wide and strange. Though we greatly desired to understand, learning was difficult, and the making of words was slow.
In that time we called often and the Voice answered. But it seldom answered our questions, saying only: 'First seek to find the answer for yourselves. For ye will have joy in the finding, and so grow from childhood and become wise. Do not seek to leave childhood before your time.'
But we were in haste, and we desired to order things to our will; and the shapes of many things that we wished to make awoke in our minds. Therefore we spoke less and less to the Voice.
Then one appeared among us, in our own form visible, but greater and more beautiful; and he said that he had come out of pity. 'Ye should not have been left alone and uninstructed,' he said. 'The world is full of marvellous riches which knowledge can unlock. Ye could have food more abundant and more delicious than the poor things that ye now eat. Ye could have dwellings of ease, in which ye could keep light and shut out the night. Ye could be clad even as I.' ...
The first Voice we never heard again, save once. In the stillness of the night It spoke, saying: 'Ye have abjured Me, but ye remain Mine. I gave you life. Now it shall be shortened, and each of you in a little while shall come to Me, to learn who is your Lord: the one ye worship, or I who made him.'

It seems that the Valar could not come to the aid of Men as when the Elves came because Men were counselled by Eru himself. Now of course, when one reads the Published Silmarillion it is understandable to come up with the idea that after the Fall of the Ñoldor, the Valar left all of ME for the Ñoldor to battle Morgoth. It is indeed IMO, that the Sindar elves and the dwarves were unjustly punished in a matter between the Ñoldor and the Valar though.

One has to question the idea of what would have happened if the Valar had fought earlier with Morgoth? Look that most of Beleriand had been destroyed in the War of Wrath. Can you imagine how much more of ME would have been destroyed in an earlier battle? Morgoth as a being, would have had more inherent power in itself than he had at a later point. IMO, much more of Arda would have been destroyed.

Or course, the Valar themselves are not perfect an even they lacked estel.
From Morgoth's Ring: Converse of Manwë and Eru

but it was not until the death of Míriel in Aman that Manwë appealed directly to Eru for counsel. Eru 'accepted and ratified the position' - though making it plain to Manwë that the Valar should have contested Melkor's domination of Middle-earth far earlier, and that they had lacked estel: they should have trusted that in a legitimate war Eru would not have permitted Melkor so greatly to damage Arda that the Children could not come, or could not inhabit it.

[davem]

In this, what I see is Tolkien, having the original story of the Valar's inaction - which worked on BoLT, & even in the Quenta, when they were less 'Angelic' in a strictly, shall we say, 'Catholic' sense, attempting to construct a theological explanation for the Valar's inaction. The later writings, as Christopher Tolkien has stated, caused numerous problems for his father, as he attempted to make them conform to scientific & theological standards. I struggle with Tolkien's reasoning here

Quote:Should Manwë and the Valar meet secrecy with subterfuge, treachery with falsehood, lies with more lies? If Melkor would usurp their rights, should they deny his? Can hate overcome hate?

This doesn't work as a justification for their lack of immediate action, & their demand that the Noldor be broken & they themselves be begged for aid, before they will intervene. This is the story of thousands of years of hellish suffering, enslavement & violent death of innocents. Could the Valar not have known what was really going on?

Was Tolkien attempting to find an explanation for the suffering in this world - why doesn't God intervene to stop the horrors? Well, God can't go tricking evil people, & taking away their freedom, can He?

What Tolkien seems to be doing is constructing an explanation, attempting to fathom the motives of God in a world where suffering continues unabated. These later writings are profound theological explorations, but do they belong in ME?

In LotR the explanation is simpler, & more profound - Frodo tells Sam that suffering is simply 'like things are in the world. Hopes fail, an end comes' all else is our feeble attempt to fathom the mind of God, & work out the reason for suffering. These later writings are the attempt of an old man to make sense of his life, & of life & death in general. He is using the medium of his Legendarium to explore questions that baffled him. He has long since left behind his desire to create a mythology for England, or to create a mythology at all.

The events he is using for his theological explorations are in stories which were never meant for such deep analysis. He had written stories to bring back a sense of magic & wonder to a world which he felt had lost it - through war & industrialisation. In these last writings he is using those stories to do something else. They aren't part of the stories, they are his comments, & thoughts on things much deeper. They can be used to give depth to the stories - but that was never their intent, & they contradict too often the stories themselves. But that is not important, because we're dealing with something of a wholly different order. As Christopher Tolkien has stated, these writings became the repository of some of his father's profoundest thoughts.

If we take the stories themselves, the actual events of the tales, out interpretations may stand alongside Tolkien's own - because what we have in the pieces quoted are simply Tolkien's attempts to interpret tales he had long since ceased to tell, & was in the process of trying to understand.

[the phantom]

If they were 'stopped' by the Music from acting, then that would mean that the Noldor were meant to go to ME - though probably not in the way they did - & that they were meant to hold Morgoth at bay till the Valar could act effectively against Morgoth - which would mean that the Noldor's 'sin' is not in leaving Valinor - in fact they should have gone - which would mean the Valar were wrong to try & stop them.

Well, that's pretty much what I have always believed, though I don't exactly think that the music "stopped" the Valar and made it so they couldn't have acted differently. I think the music just foretold that they wouldn't act differently than they did.

[HerenIstarion]

this thread grew reminiscent of Evil Things thread, heh.

Well, since most of what I can do will be repeating my own comments from over there, and in that I will fall short of Maédhros since I lack access to VT resources, I will add just a bit only:

Where meant re:

1. The whole history was meant to happen as it did, for Eru is omniscient and was certainly in the know what was going to happen when He said Ea. (things might have been different, but they could not have been better - as quoted from Leaf by Niggle
2. Freedom of choice is not eliminated by omniscience of Eru and the maxim of "it all was meant to be in this way"

And why should not we lend our ears to Tolkien, even if it seems to some that he contradicted himself in his later writings, after all?

[symestreem]

So we've pretty much established that the loss of the Battle of Unnumbered Tears was possibly the lesser of evils, and that the treachery of the Men was caused by the curse of the Noldor. Doesn't this imply that the curse actually brought good to the elves? (Relatively speaking of course; it also brought all of the Narn i Hin Hurin.) If they'd left Middle-earth without being cursed, would it have turned out worse for them?

[HerenIstarion]

and that the treachery of the Men was caused by the curse of the Noldor

Quite a difficult issue, this. I'd say, treachery of Men was the consequence of the choice the Men who betrayed elves did, but, for the Noldor, treason may have been the result of their blindness and haughtiness, not imposed, but predicted by the curse of Mandos.

You see, I always figured Mandos as someone not cursing in a sense as giving cause to following effect, but predicting what effects will follow if such and such course of action is taken

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I always figured Mandos as someone not cursing in a sense as giving cause to following effect, but predicting what effects will follow if such and such course of action is taken.

Exactly what I was thinking, too. He only speaks what will be.

This quote of Maédhros perked me up:

...the Valar should have contested Melkor's domination of Middle-earth far earlier, and that they had lacked estel: they should have trusted that in a legitimate war Eru would not have permitted Melkor so greatly to damage Arda that the Children could not come, or could not inhabit it.

Perhaps Eru, knowing of the Ainur's reaction to Melkor's themes, had used his Elder children to redress this lack of faith. Morgoth's initial strength slowly dissipated due to his hatred and his desire to dominate the Eldar; hence when the host of Valinor assaulted Middle-earth, Morgoth was no longer able of doing damage, catastrophic or not.

Of course it would have been better if they had done this earlier...

And what of the Valar's "immaturity" and "dismay"?

It is told that after the flight of Melkor the Valar sat long unmoved upon their thrones in the Ring of Doom, but they were not idle, as Fëanor declared in the folly of his heart.

(The Silmarillion 11 - emphasis mine)

So much for dismay...

...and [the Valar's] thought passed beyond Eä and forth to the End...

(The Silmarillion 11)

You could tell me many more interpretations of "the End," but I believe it was the end of the vision of Ainulindalë,

And some have said that the vision [i.e., of Ainulindalë] ceased ere the fulfilment of the Dominion of Men and the fading of the Firstborn...

(The Silmarillion, Ainulindalë)

Nobody would want to fade. The Valar knew that eventually, the Younger shall supplant the Elder Children of Ilúvatar. Hence, they tried to hold back the Eldar from marching to their own sorrow - all that they would accomplish there they could not own forever.

Of course, they could have utilised force to this end. But they didn't. Though unwilling, they let the Noldor go whither they will.

Now the Kinslaying. Why throw a last surprise at the departing ones?

[Mandos(?): ]Ye have spilled the blood of your kindred unrighteously and have stained the land of Aman. For blood ye shall render blood...

The Silmarillion 9 - emphasis mine)

It was merely a punishment for the Kinslaying.

[symestreem]

Originally Posted by davem

Tolkien wouldn't have created such a personification of evil, because he had seen real evil on the Somme, & knew that it's really cowardly, self obsessed & cruel.

By the Somme I assume you mean the Western Front in World War I. I question your portrayal of the war as 'evil'. Who exactly was evil? The Central Powers, for seeking domination? The Allied Powers, for opposing them and causing bloodshed? I also question the extent to which Tolkien saw real evil on the front lines. Soldiers do what they are told- this was before the Nuremberg trials. The evil to be found would have been in the high command, not the men-at-war. That doesn't mean that the war was right- I just think that evil has to be deliberate. For example, Morgoth was evil because he was trying to be evil, but Feanor was not evil.

[davem]

Originally Posted by symestreem

By the Somme I assume you mean the Western Front in World War I. I question your portrayal of the war as 'evil'. Who exactly was evil? The Central Powers, for seeking domination? The Allied Powers, for opposing them and causing bloodshed? I also question the extent to which Tolkien saw real evil on the front lines. Soldiers do what they are told- this was before the Nuremberg trials. The evil to be found would have been in the high command, not the men-at-war. That doesn't mean that the war was right- I just think that evil has to be deliberate. For example, Morgoth was evil because he was trying to be evil, but Feanor was not evil.

What is your concept of evil, if the Somme battlefield doesn't graphically portray the presence of it for you? Try this link & then tell me there was no deliberate evil to be seen on the Somme:

http://toosvanholstein.nl/greatwar/t.../tolkiene.html

Its not about individual persons doing 'evil' things - its much deeper & more horrible , a callous disregard, a lack of compassion, a deliberate infliction of suffering & degradation. All too often done for the 'highest' reasons, by people convinced they're in the right . Morgoth is a 'symbol' of something monstrous which is just way too close to most of us, & the 'spirit' of Morgoth was in the air of the Somme.

[Lalaith]

There is evil to be found in all wars, but not all wars are alike in cause and situation. I apologise for what I know is generalisation, but I think WWI was, overall, an evil situation which was the result of unbelievable blundering stupidity from those in charge on both sides. WWII was different in that the evil there was more deliberate, one-sided and premeditated.
It is interesting that Tolkien's work, born out of the first kind of evil, actually in general portrays the latter.

[symestreem]

My definition of evil, as best as I can put it into words, is doing something bad or harmful deliberately without extenuating circumstances, to further your own ends or to hurt people. The Somme line was a case of two opposing groups fighting for their lives because their commanders ordered them into battle. There were cases of evil in this campaign, there's no doubt about that. However, the two groups of soldiers killing each other was not evil, or not evil on their part. It was the result of misguided and possibly evil decisions by the command.

[davem]

Well, the soldiers didn't have to obey their orders to kill, so we can't absolve them entirely of any moral resposibility for their actions. They were moral beings, not robots.

Also, we can't say how much deliberate cruelty, & therefore 'evil', was committed by individual soldiers. I just think its too simplistic to say the 'evil' ones were all in the war rooms, & everyone on the battlefield was morally good.

What you have to keep in mind is that WW1 was the first war of the Machines - planes & tanks appear for the first time, there is the use of such things as heavy machine guns, barbed wire, high explosives, barbed wire stretched across the battlefield, & yet the men, from the commanders down are still basically 'victorians'. Men are sent across the mud into machine gun fire with fixed bayonets! There are still cavalry divisions - officers riding horses into battle & fighting with swords.

If you think about that madness surely you're struck by the presence of something beyond callous or incompetent commanders dispatching innocent, unthinking young men to their deaths. There was something else. It was hell & hell is suffused with the presence of evil. there was something'evil' in all that waste, a good part of a whole generation thrown away, the soldiers themselves throwing their own lives away. Some thing more than insanity was going on there, & I don't know what else to call it but 'evil' - not evil individuals, but evil nonetheless.

[symestreem]

Originally Posted by davem

Tolkien wouldn't have created such a personification of evil, because he had seen real evil on the Somme, & knew that it's really cowardly, self obsessed & cruel.

Originally Posted by davem

It was hell & hell is suffused with the presence of evil. there was something'evil' in all that waste, a good part of a whole generation thrown away, the soldiers themselves throwing their own lives away. Some thing more than insanity was going on there, & I don't know what else to call it but 'evil' - not evil individuals, but evil nonetheless.

In the first quote, you seem to be talking about evil with a face, or evil personified, as you said. In the second, you are talking about a nameless, faceless evil, that appears like the mist. I agree with you that there was wrongness and evil in World War I (and II, and all the others) but it was not the personified evil, like Morgoth and Sauron, found in Tolkien's books. Both forms of evil that you discussed appears in Tolkien's books. The second form may well have come from Tolkien's war experiences- I can't imagine anyone going through that and not being affected by it- but where does he get the idea for the Morgoth-and-Sauron type of evil? Isn't it just as stereotypical as Pullman's Lord Asriel, and the Bell-villain? Is there this kind of evil in the world?

[davem]

I suppose it depends whether you believe that 'evil' must have a motivation beyond human weakness & selfishness. I struggle with this idea most of the time, as its not exactly 'logical' to believe in the existence of some kind of 'Demon King'. Yet there are things that people do, individually & collectively, which seem in their effects, beyond the results of weakness & selfishness. I don't know whether its something 'internal' or 'external' to us, but its not part of our conscious selves. The desire to control, coerce, dominate, destroy, is in us, & can't always be traced to the effects of 'society' on us. You can look at all the economic & social reasons for the rise of Nazism, but none of that will explain the Holocaust.

Tolkien gives evil a mythological form in Middle Earth, & we get Morgoth & Sauron, but the 'effect' they have on Middle Earth is very much the kind of horrors we have witnessed in the past century - whether we can conclude from that that there is some kind of objectively existing 'evil' force behind events like the Somme & the Holocaust is one I can't answer - ask a theologian