# "Riddles in the Dark" Creatures nosing about - Older than Orcs and Goblins?



## CirdanLinweilin (Aug 26, 2018)

So, this tidbit of information is both mystifying, satisfying (in a way) and already got me curious.

So when Bilbo takes a plunge to Gollum's domain under the mountain, the narrator talks about creatures older than orcs in some corners of the mountain. 

Could these be the same "_Nameless things" _that Gandalf mentions in _Fellowship of the Ring?_
Creatures, just watching, waiting, peering, and scoping out a poor little hobbit, and some wretched creature once a Hobbit, and miserable Goblins.


Any ideas? What _are _these creatures older than orcs and goblins?

CL


----------



## TrickOrTreat (Aug 26, 2018)

I've just reread Riddles in the dark, and after looking specifically for the mention of these "old creatures" have found nothing, could you perhaps find the passage and chapter in which it's mentioned and also the passage and chapter where Gandalf mentions "nameless things" (I assume it's in Moira). The "nameless things" are most likely a reference to the Balrog and other creatures of Melkor.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 26, 2018)

I can help with the latter reference:

_'Far, far below the deepest delving of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he.'
_
The Two Towers, Chapter 5, The White Rider

I'll have to look for the other one.

And welcome to the forum, TrickOrTreat!

EDIT: The other reference is indeed from "Riddles in the Dark":

_Even in the tunnels and caves the goblins have made for themselves there are other things living unbeknown to them that have sneaked in from outside to lie up in the dark. Some of these caves, too, go back in their beginnings to ages before the goblins, who only widened them and joined them up with passages, and the original owners are still there in odd corners, slinking and nosing about._


----------



## TrickOrTreat (Aug 26, 2018)

Hmmm, this is actually quite interesting. Well what I think the creatures Tolkien is referencing are servents of Melkor because in The Silmarillion Tolkien writes
"But the mountains were the Hithaeglir, the Towers of Mist upon the borders of Eriador; yet they were taller and more terrible in those days, and were reared by Melkor to hinder the riding of Oromë.". 
I do think that Gandalf is most likely referencing the same creatures that were written about in the Hobbit.
We know that Tolkien had put thought to the wider world even while writing The Hobbit because in the foreword of The Fellowship of The Ring 
"The process had begun in the writing of _The Hobbit,_ in which there were already some references to the older matter: Elrond, Gondolin, the High-elves, and the orcs, as well as glimpses that had arisen unbidden of things higher or deeper or darker than its surface: Durin, Moria, Gandalf, the Necromancer, the Ring. The discovery of the significance of these glimpses and of their relation to the ancient histories revealed the Third Age and its culmination in the War of the Ring.".
I actually really find this interesting, it's always fun to find references to the wider world in The Hobbit.
Thanks for the welcome!


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 26, 2018)

TrickOrTreat said:


> I think the creatures Tolkien is referencing are servents of Melkor



That could well be; however, I'd leave open two other possibilities: one, that they are datable to Melkor's tampering with Middle Earth, but rather than being "his" creatures, are a product, or byproduct, of the general poisoning that occurred in its attempted transformation into "Morgoth's Ring". In which case, he, like Sauron, may not even have been aware of their existence.

The other possibility is that they _pre_-date Morgoth's entry. It's difficult to imagine these things being a part of Eru's plan, but the existence of evil things wholly apart from Melkor is hinted at in various places, Ungoliant being the prime example. They _could_, like her, be creatures from the Outer Darkness, which somehow got into Arda, and "sneaked in" to the Misty Mountains _after _their raising by Melkor.

And there is in fact a third possibility: though we very naturally associate underground "nameless things" that "gnaw the world" with horror and evil, neither of the quotes above actually make that moral judgment. Gandalf does, in the passage quoted, go on to say:

_'Now I have walked there, but I will bring no report to darken the light of day.'
_
This would appear to form a "moral" judgement, reinforced by the light/darkness opposition, which is normally equated with good/evil. But the passage continues:

_'In that despair my enemy was my only hope, and I pursued him, clutching at his heel. Thus he brought me back at last to the secret ways of Khazad-dum. . .'
_
This, it seems to me, indicates that the danger to Gandalf lay, not in the "nameless things", but the possibility of becoming lost in the dark tunnels they had made. That would fit the Ironic fictional mode which forms this part of Gandalf's story-arc, and of which a sense of lost direction is an important aspect.

I raise this as a possibility because in romance, though the black/white, evil/good polarization of characters comes to the fore, there is another category of characters who, in critic Northrop Frye's words:

_. . .elude the moral antithesis of heroism and villainy _[and]_ generally are or suggest spirits of nature. They represent partly the moral neutrality of the intermediate world of nature and partly a world of mystery which is glimpsed but never seen, and which retreats when approached.
_
This description certainly seems to apply to the creatures, whatever they are, in both The Hobbit and LOTR. They may be frightful to us, as they would have been to Bilbo, had he actually encountered them in other than his fears, but they are not described as _innately _evil.

And in fact, some of the "spirits of nature" which go on to prove helpful to the "good" characters are initially, or originally, feared: Treebeard and the Druedain, for example. Even the Silvan elves of Lorien have this effect on the hobbits, at least. Frye gives, as the reason for this, that

_Such characters are, more or less, children of nature, who can be brought to serve the hero, like Crusoe's Friday, but retain the inscrutability of their origin. As servants or friends of the hero, they impart the mysterious rapport with nature that so often marks the central figure of romance.
_
That very well describes Tom Bombadil, perhaps the foremost character of this kind in the story, but it applies to the others as well; as Treebeard says:

_'I am not altogether on anybody's_ side, _because nobody is altogether on my_ side,_ if you understand me.'
_
I'd suggest a range of characters who "elude the moral antithesis" to a greater or lesser extent, from Bombadil, who, though we would have to place him on the "good" end of the scale, would be, as Gandalf says, a very dangerous guardian for the Ring, through the Druedain, who, despite their hatred of orcs, are feared and hunted by men, to (possibly) include even the "nameless things".


----------



## Deleted member 12094 (Aug 26, 2018)

This brings to my mind some more references to unknown creatures mentioned in vague terms.

There is the discussion at the Green Dragon:

_Those whose business took them to the borders saw strange things. [...] ‘Queer things you do hear these days, to be sure,’ said Sam._​
... and an expression from Aragorn at the Council:

_“Strider” I am to one fat man who lives within a day’s march of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little town in ruin, if he were not guarded ceaselessly._​
Remember, there's also this:

_the world being after all full of strange creatures beyond count_​
Not to mention Shelob... complex fauna, no doubt!


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 26, 2018)

Not to mention flora!

Or does Old Man Willow count?


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Aug 26, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Not to mention flora!
> 
> Or does Old Man Willow count?


You guys are just awesome, thanks for replying and having this stellar conversation to my humble question.


CL


----------



## TrickOrTreat (Aug 27, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> That could well be; however, I'd leave open two other possibilities: one, that they are datable to Melkor's tampering with Middle Earth, but rather than being "his" creatures, are a product, or byproduct, of the general poisoning that occurred in its attempted transformation into "Morgoth's Ring". In which case, he, like Sauron, may not even have been aware of their existence.
> 
> The other possibility is that they _pre_-date Morgoth's entry. It's difficult to imagine these things being a part of Eru's plan, but the existence of evil things wholly apart from Melkor is hinted at in various places, Ungoliant being the prime example. They _could_, like her, be creatures from the Outer Darkness, which somehow got into Arda, and "sneaked in" to the Misty Mountains _after _their raising by Melkor.
> 
> ...


What actually interests me is Gandalf's quote saying "_They are older than he_", referencing Sauron. Sauron was a Maiar created along side the Ainur. The only thing that predates the Ainur and Maiar is Eru. I think this lends credence to your second theory that these creatures actually predate Melkor.


----------



## Miguel (Aug 27, 2018)

TrickOrTreat said:


> What actually interests me is Gandalf's quote saying "_They are older than he_", referencing Sauron. Sauron was a Maiar created along side the Ainur. The only thing that predates the Ainur and Maiar is Eru. I think this lends credence to your second theory that these creatures actually predate Melkor.



Ungoliant may belong in this group of "Nameless things".


----------



## Kinofnerdanel (Aug 27, 2018)

I took a university class on Tolkien's mythology, and the teacher was the leader and one of the founders of the Hungarian Tolkien Society, taking part in the international academical dialogue discussing the author, that is why I evoke him as a somewhat reliable source. He stated the Ainulindale broutht order into chaos, that Eru had shaped and arranged and structured _something_ out of the volatile void that predated existence. Ungoliant emerged from this void, this is why she wasn't darkness, but nothing - she was non-existence itself, thus capable of not merely transforming or corrupting light, but devouring it entirely.

He also said that from a philosophical point of view this wasn't entirely the battle of good and evil, but that of order and chaos. Likewise, Melkor couldn't accept the subtle presence of his voice resulting in the harmony of the choir, and cacophony, disarrangement, Arda Marred followed. That is what we call evil.

My point is: those beings (along with Ungoliant) can very well be from the void, the chaos which is abhorred compared to the "artificially" arranged structure of existence. Their presence surely wasn't part of Illuvatar's plan.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 27, 2018)

Sounds like a very interesting course, Kinofnerdanel. Similar thoughts concerning Ungoliant (and her descendant Shelob) here:

http://www.thetolkienforum.com/inde...t-and-bombadil-opposites-of-each-other.23482/

BTW, TrickOrTreat, I've seen some older threads here on the meaning of Gandalf's statement. One of the arguments put forward is that the "nameless things" are older than Sauron's time _after_ he arrived in Middle Earth. I have no opinion on this, but it's an idea.


----------



## Miguel (Nov 28, 2018)

Who is _"the hunter/dark rider"_ and_ "the shadow-shapes that walked in the hills above Cuiviénen, or would pass suddenly over the stars" _?.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 28, 2018)

Miguel said:


> Who is _"the hunter/dark rider"_ and_ "the shadow-shapes that walked in the hills above Cuiviénen, or would pass suddenly over the stars" _?.


Wasn't the hunter, Oromë who Melkor tricked the elves into thinking was evil?


I don't know about the shadow shapes, however.


CL


----------



## Miguel (Nov 28, 2018)

> "_and the Quendi said that the Hunter had caught them, and they were afraid."_





> "_and of the dark Rider upon his wild horse that pursued those that wandered to take them and devour them." _



It seems like it's an actual fiend who "appears" to be riding a horse. It is unclear if those two quotes refer to the same being tho. Looks like these shadow shapes could fly, probably a variety of em?.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 28, 2018)

Miguel said:


> It seems like it's an actual fiend who "appears" to be riding a horse. It is unclear if those two quotes refer to the same being tho. Looks like these shadow shapes could fly, probably a variety of em?.


Gotcha, I am going to have to reread _The Silmarillion _to be sure!!


CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Nov 28, 2018)

Interesting. Reminded me immediately of the shadow that Frodo "saw or felt" passing "over the high stars" in Hollin.


----------



## Miguel (Nov 28, 2018)

It was him all along!.







Taking this into consideration, it could have been a mixture of things here:


> "_and either he sent indeed his dark servants as riders, or he set lying whispers abroad, for the purpose that the Quendi should shun Oromë, if ever they should meet."_




Those shades that fly kinda remind me a little of that _Gong_ creature concept that was abandoned.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 28, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Interesting. Reminded me immediately of the shadow that Frodo "saw or felt" passing "over the high stars" in Hollin.


I always assumed that to be a Black Rider on a flying creature.

Who knows, though, how long it took for the riders to be given new, terrible mounts.



CL


----------



## BountyHunter (Dec 6, 2018)

Miguel said:


> It was him all along!.



VENGER!!!


----------



## Miguel (Dec 6, 2018)

BountyHunter said:


> VENGER!!!



Yes.



> _"his dominion was torment"_


----------



## BountyHunter (Dec 6, 2018)

Now I'm gonna drag out my D&D DVDs and rewatch. Love this show!!


----------

