Skip to main content

tolkiens legendarium - How well-known is the theology of Middle-earth, in Middle-earth?


One thing that is notably absent in Middle-earth is any mention of temples, churches, priests or religious rites. There are passing mentions of Men who would "worship" Sauron, but generally the world of Middle-earth seems much less religious than medieval Europe, or even classical antiquity. One never hears about "the cult of Aule" or "the cult of Yavanna," although historically there were many "cults of Athena" or "cults of Poseidon." Aragorn doesn't (to my memory) make an offering to Tulkas before battle, nor does he pray to Eru Ilúvatar for victory, and all the holidays and solemnities seem to commemorate historical figures, not religious ones.


This is especially strange in a world where there are still living witnesses, like Galadriel, to the actions of the Valar and other "divine" beings, and where there are still Maiar wandering around talking to people and putting on flashy firework shows.


Now, a lot of people talk about how Tolkien didn't want the Valar to be considered "gods," but at the same time he did use phrases like "the gods of old" numerous times. Clearly, these beings would have qualified for worship in most cultures. And even without the Valar being considered a true pantheon, there is still Eru, a closer analogue to the Christian God of Tolkien's beliefs, and we know the denizens of Middle-earth knew of him (Him?) because of the line "Eru, who in Arda is called Ilúvatar." And yet, Ilúvatar seems not to be terribly important to anyone on a daily basis.


So my question is this: how familiar with the "theology" of Middle-earth were the citizens of Middle-earth? Would the average merchant in Rohan know about the Valar and the Maiar and Iluvatar and the Music of the Ainur? The average noble in Minas Tirith? The younger Elves, like Legolas? The Dwarf Lords?


Were the theological truths about the formation of the world, the Valar and the Maiar just so well known that they weren't worth commenting on, or had they been forgotten by most? And if they had been forgotten, why wasn't the knowledge (whether through deliberate teachings or casual conversation) re-invigorated by witnesses like Gandalf or Galadriel?



Answer




Tolkien deliberately omitted references to "religion" in his works; see Letter 142:



I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like 'religion', to cults or practices, in the imaginary world.



Letter 153, which he wrote to a reader who one must feel took many things entirely too seriously, elaborates further, and it's worth quoting the entirety of a footnote to it, although I'll break it up to avoid a "wall of text".


First a general overview:



There are thus no temples or 'churches' or fanes in this 'world' among 'good' peoples. They had little or no 'religion' in the sense of worship. For help they may call on a Vala (as Elbereth), as a Catholic might on a Saint, though no doubt knowing in theory as well as he that the power of the Vala was limited and derivative. But this is a 'primitive age': and these folk may be said to view the Valar as children view their parents or immediate adult superiors, and though they know they are subjects of the King he does not live in their country nor have there any dwelling.



On Hobbits:




I do not think Hobbits practised any form of worship or prayer (unless through exceptional contact with Elves).



Numenor, both before and after Sauron's arrival, including other Men who didn't go there:



The Númenóreans (and others of that branch of Humanity, that fought against Morgoth, even if they elected to remain in Middle-earth and did not go to Númenor: such as the Rohirrim) were pure monotheists. But there was no temple in Númenor (until Sauron introduced the cult of Morgoth). The top of the Mountain, the Meneltarma or Pillar of Heaven, was dedicated to Eru, the One, and there at any time privately, and at certain times publicly, God was invoked, praised, and adored: an imitation of the Valar and the Mountain of Aman. But Numenor fell and was destroyed and the Mountain engulfed, and there was no substitute.



And the Dunedain in Middle-earth:



Among the exiles, remnants of the Faithful who had not adopted the false religion nor taken part in the rebellion, religion as divine worship (though perhaps not as philosophy and metaphysics) seems to have played a small part; though a glimpse of it is caught in Faramir's remark on 'grace at meat'.




Letter 156 covers High Elves:



The High Elves were exiles from the Blessed Realm of the Gods (after their own particular Elvish fall) and they had no 'religion' (or religious practices, rather) for those had been in the hands of the gods, praising and adoring Eru 'the One', Ilúvatar the Father of All on the Mt. of Aman.



There are many other mentions of religion in Middle-earth scattered throughout the Letters, but the general outcome and completely consistent observation is that Middle-earth has no religion as we would understand it today.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...