# When an oath is not an oath!



## Maedhros (Apr 4, 2003)

From the _Published Silmarillion:Of the Return of the Noldor _


> Then his sons raised up their father and bore him back towards Mithrim. But as they drew near to Eithel Sirion and were upon the upward path to the pass over the mountains, Fëanor bade them halt; for his wounds were mortal, and he knew that his hour was come. And looking out from the slopes of Ered Wethrin with his last sight he beheld far off the peaks of Thangorodrim, mightiest of the towers of Middle-earth, and knew with the foreknowledge of death that no power of the Noldor would ever overthrow them; but he cursed the name of Morgoth thrice, and laid it upon his sons to hold to their oath, and to avenge their father.


I have always wondered how the sons of Fëanor would have acted if Fëanor insted of making his sons keep their oath, would have granted them leave of it.
Would have the proud Maedhros, gone back on his word then? Would many evils would have prevented?
Or was the pride of the Sons of Fëanor too much for them to go back on their word?


----------



## Gothmog (Apr 4, 2003)

I do not think that it would have made much difference. The Oath had been taken by his sons. Proud or Humble they were caught.

From the Silmarillion: Chapter 9: The Flight of the Noldor


> Then Fëanor swore a terrible oath. His seven sons leapt straightway to his side and took the selfsame vow together, and red as blood shone their drawn swords in the glare of the torches. *they swore an oath which none shall break, and none should take*, by the name even of Ilúvatar, calling the Everlasting Dark upon them if they kept it not; and Manwë they named in witness, and Varda, and the hallowed mountain of Taniquetil, vowing to pursue with vengeance and hatred to the ends of the World Vala, Demon, Elf or Man as yet unborn, or any creature, great or small, good or evil, that time should bring forth unto the end of days, whoso should hold or take or keep a Silmaril from their possession.
> 
> Thus spoke Maedhros and Maglor and Celegorm, Curufin and Caranthir, Amrod and Amras, princes of the Noldor; and many quailed to hear the dread words. *For so sworn, good or evil, an oath may not be broken, and it shall pursue oathkeeper and oathbreaker to the world's end*.



And from the same chapter



> Then all halted and stood still, and from end to end of the hosts of the Noldor the voice was heard speaking the curse and prophecy which is called the Prophecy of the North, and the Doom of the Noldor.
> 
> 'Tears unnumbered ye shall shed; and the Valar will fence Valinor against you, and shut you out, so that not even the echo of your lamentation shall pass over the mountains. On the House of Fëanor the wrath of the Valar Leith from the West unto the uttermost East, and upon all that will follow them it shall be laid also. *Their Oath shall drive them, and yet betray them, and ever snatch away the very treasures that they have sworn to pursue*. To evil end shall all things turn that they begin well; and by treason of kin unto kin, and the fear of treason, shall this come to pass. The Dispossessed shall they be for ever.



So it was already too late for the sons to renounce the Oath. In trying to do so they would have been driven still by the Oath freely given. Feanor had not the authority to remove it, So while his command would drive his sons even more telling them to forget it would not work.


----------



## Ithrynluin (Apr 4, 2003)

It was only a reminder for his sons to not forget the Oath they swore and to pursue it ruthlessly at all cost and by any means.

I can't imagine Fëanor saying otherwise nor his sons accepting anything else other than the fulfillment of the Oath. He never struck me as particularly wise or forgiving. That was his ruin basically.


----------



## Arvedui (Feb 3, 2006)

At the time when Fëanor still had the option of releasing his sons from their Oath, the blood was still running hot in them. They had abandoned the rest of the Noldor on the other side of Helcaraxë, and they probably realized that their father was dying.
Adding that to the pride of most of the sons, I do not think that it would have mattered. Maybe Amrod and Amras could have considered going back on their word, but I don't quite see the others doing that.


----------



## Annaheru (Feb 3, 2006)

Remember when Maglor rescues Elrond and Elros the Sil speaks of how sick of the oath he is, but in the end it still compels him to seize the Silmarils in Eonwe's camp. The oath doesn't seem like something you can ever really escape.

If all the brothers had renounced their oath in the beginning what would have been different? Perhaps they don't betray Felagund (which would mean he leads his people against Angband- in which case, would the events leading to Earendil's voyage have happened? hmm, opens all sorts of questions on destiny and fate. . .), perhaps the 2nd and 3rd kin-slayings don't happen, or again, perhaps they would. Maglor and Maedhros couldn't overcome the oath's influence, so maybe the only difference would be in how much pity we give them. I think gollum gets more pity than the sons of Feanor, because the Ring's influence come's to mind quicker.

I have always pitied Feanor and his sons (from posts I've read I would say more than most). The desire of the Silmarils-which would have had a greater affect on them than other elves since they were exposed to them even after Feanor denied all others access-must have been immense. One of them drove Thingol and a few hundred dwarves mad with lust. How much more if you or your father made them? The oath, taken in the shadow of this loss, and the death of a father (and grandfather) becomes easier to understand in this context. 

Is this grounds for voiding it: the madness of grief? I doubt it, only the Valar and Eru himself (on whom they swore) could do so, if such a thing is even possible.

In the end I would say no. 

That ten minutes in which they swore an oath chained them upon a course they could not change. Perhaps the Professor meant them to serve as a warning: that we never speak or act in anger, grief or fear.


----------



## Thorondor_ (Feb 3, 2006)

> Maybe Amrod and Amras could have considered going back on their word, but I don't quite see the others doing that.


However, in Of the voyage of Earendil and the war of wrath, Maglor argues against keeping the oath, realising it would bring about more evil than keeping it. Too bad he yielded to the will of Maedhros .


----------



## Arvedui (Feb 8, 2006)

Well, that didn't exactly happen shortly after Fëanor could have given them leave from the oath, did it?  
Quite a few hundred years, as I recall.......


----------



## Withywindle (Feb 11, 2006)

The oath was not sworn to their father, although largely it was sworn for his sake. the sons were bound individually by it and "The Everlasting Darkness" would be the wages of an Oath breaker. So Feanor could not release his sons, nor lay on them any additional obligation.

Tolkien treats the matter of Oaths very seriously: the Dead held for 3000 years by the Oath of Erech, Gollums oath "by the Precious". The oaths of Middle Earth once taken, however rashly, and however much regretted, must be fulfilled.


----------

