# Which was the most effective? The Doom of Mandos or the Curse of Morgoth?



## Arvedui

*The Doom of Mandos*


> 'Tears unnumbered ye shall shed; and the Valar will fence Valinor against you, and shut you out, so that even the echo of your lamentation shall pass over the mountains. On the House of Fëanor the wrath of the Valar lieth 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 ever be for ever.
> 
> 'Ye have spilled the blood of your kindred unrighteously and have stained the land of Aman. For blood ye shall render blood, and beyond Aman ye shall dwell in Death's shadow. For though Eru appointed to you to die not in Eä, and no sickness may assail you, yet slain ye may be, and slain ye shall be: by weapon and by torment and by grief; and your houseless spirits shall come then to Mandos. There long shall ye abide and yearn for your bodies, and find little pity though all whom ye have slain should entreat for you. And those that endure in Middle-earth and come not to Mandos shall grow weary of the world as a great burden, and shall wane, and become as shadows of regret before the younger race that cometh after. The Valar have spoken.'
> *The Silmarillion: Of the Flight of the Noldor*



*The Curse of Morgoth*


> Therefore Húrin was brought before Morgoth, for Morgoth knew that he had the friendship of the King of Gondolin; but Húrin defied him, and mocked him. Then Morgoth cursed Húrin and Morwen and their offspring, and set a doom upon them of darkness and sorrow; and taking Húrin from prison he set him in a chair of stone upon a high place of Thangorodrim. There he was bound by the power of Morgoth, and Morgoth standing beside him cursed him again; and he said ' Sit now there; and look out upon the lands where evil and despair shall come upon those whom you lovest. Thou hast dared to mock me, and to question the power of Melkor, Master of the fates of Arda. Therefore with my eyes thou shalt see, and with my ears shalt hear; and never shalt thou move from this place until all is fulfilled unto its bitter end.' *The Silmarillion: Of the Fifth Battle*



*Which was the most effective? That is which was most fully complete in its intent, The Doom of Mandos or The Curse of Morgoth. *


----------



## Celebthôl

LOL we did this, in a debate a while back i do believe .

The way i see it is that The Curse of Morgoth was, as there was no way if would be released, it was totally effective and didnt falter, whereas The Doom of Mandos had loops-holes such as they let Galadriel back when they said no one was allowed back. The bottom line is that the Valar are forgiving, Morgoth is not.


----------



## Ithrynluin

> _Originally posted by Celebthôl _
> *The Doom of Mandos had loops-holes such as they let Galadriel back when they said no one was allowed back. The bottom line is that the Valar are forgiving, Morgoth is not. *



But the exiles *could not* get back when they found themselves in dire straits - facing Morgoth in all his glory upon Middle Earth. Nor was Galadriel allowed back until all 'supernatural' forms of evil were vanquished, to which she contributed. They were shut out and left to themselves.

The same could be said of Morgoth's curse. Melian did try to avert the curse and counter Morgoth's plans, but unfortunately it failed. Who is to blame for that is another matter. Was Morgoth's power out of the reach of Melian to counter?


----------



## Celebthôl

None the less, Galadriel was let back in when the Valar stated none would be allowed back and they would wither and fade.

Morgoth was a Valar, Melian was not. There was no way she could contend him to break his curse.


----------



## Grond

It has always seemed to me that the Curse of Mandos was directed at the House of Feanor. All who followed came under its jurisdiction but only the House of Feanor was specifically cited. I see that as the "out" that allowed Galadriel (and other Noldor who departed after Melkor's final defeat) to go back to Eldamar. 

Just my thoughts!


----------



## Arvedui

First of all, Galadriel could have gone back after the final overthrow of Morgoth, but her pride caused her to stay:
_HoME X, Morgoth's Ring, The Shibolleth of Fëanor:_


> Pride still moved her [Galadriel] when, at the end of the Elder Days after the final overthrow of Morgoth, she refused the pardon of the Valar for all who had fought against him, and remained in Middle-earth.


And I think that this also serve to show that the Doom of Mandos wasn't final. Even Maedhros and Maglor should have gone baack to Valinor if it wasn't for the Oath that caused them to make one last desperate attempt at taking the Silmarils for themselves

But the Curse of Morgoth sure worked until its bitter end, didn't it?


----------



## Erestor Arcamen

Wasn't it written somewhere at the fleeing of the Noldor from Valinor that Galadriel didnt take the oath, but follwed anyways becasue she dreamt of having her own realm or something like that? I could be wrong my memory of those days is faded, as I too yearn for the West.


----------



## Gothmog

The problem with trying to argue this question is that the two things are completely different. The Curse of Morgoth is a declaration of intent that the things he says *will* come to pass because he wishes it. The Doom of Mandos on the other hand is simply a foretelling of what is going to happen regardless of what the Valar may want.

Morgoth in making his curse is saying whatever path you choose this will happen.
Mandos in pronouncing his Doom is saying, if you choose this path these things will happen.

So in effect they are both equally effective in what they do.


----------



## Thorondor_

> The Curse of Morgoth is a declaration of intent that the things he says *will* come to pass because he wishes it. The Doom of Mandos on the other hand is simply a foretelling of what is going to happen regardless of what the Valar may want.
> 
> Morgoth in making his curse is saying whatever path you choose this will happen.
> Mandos in pronouncing his Doom is saying, if you choose this path these things will happen.


"On the House of Feanor the wrath of the Valar lieth from the West unto the uttermost East, and upon all that will follow them it shall be laid also"
I think that Mandos says here that it is (also) the power of the valar at work in the doom of the noldor.


----------



## YayGollum

"Tears unnumbered ye shall shed" ---> One point. Unless someone knows of a character that counted every tear? 

"and the Valar will fence Valinor against you, and shut you out" ---> One point. 

"so that not even the echo of your lamentation shall pass over the mountains." ---> No score.

"On the House of Fëanor the wrath of the Valar lieth from the West unto the uttermost East" ---> No score. I saw no wrath. Also, as a tiny as well as sideways note, I just checked to see if some sea god even messed with them on their way over, and I noticed something cool. Something about some helpful wind showing up to take them to that Middle Earth place, as if the Feanor character was in charge. Eru, wishing to see more of the cool movie that he sat down to watch? I wouldn't know. Unless there's a bit of wrath on the evil Manwe dude's part, saying ---> "Fine! You wish to go? I'll help! Have some wind! Go and get yourselves killed, for everything that I happen to care about, at least at the moment!" *much pathetic and overly dramatic sobbing*  

"and upon all that will follow them it shall be laid also." ---> No score. Same thing. Maybe I should have just left it attached? oh well.

"Their Oath shall drive them," ---> One point. 

"and yet betray them," ---> Half of a point, I guess. It sort of did.

"and ever snatch away the very treasures that they have sworn to pursue." ---> No score. When did that happen? *hides from people who might prove him wrong* 

"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." ---> No score. Hm? That's just craziness. To evil end shall all things turn? All things? That is a bit too large.

"The Dispossessed shall they ever be for ever." ---> No score. It didn't turn out to be for forever.

"Ye have spilled the blood of your kindred unrighteously" ---> No score, unless I am only allowed to look at one viewpoint's moral code.  

"and have stained the land of Aman." ---> No score. just because ---> Isn't Aman the continent? Or is it just the collection of any random lands that might be considered paradisical that got taken away? Am not sure. They definitely didn't stain that continent, at least. Unless they mean to use 'stained' in some not literal sense.   

"For blood ye shall render blood," ---> One point.

"and beyond Aman ye shall dwell in Death's shadow. For though Eru appointed to you to die not in Eä, and no sickness may assail you, yet slain ye may be, and slain ye shall be: by weapon and by torment and by grief;" ---> One point. Well, if they can be killed at all, aren't they dwelling in Death's shadow pretty much anywhere? oh well.

"and your houseless spirits shall come then to Mandos. There long shall ye abide and yearn for your bodies," ---> One point, most probably. 

"and find little pity though all whom ye have slain should entreat for you." ---> Hm. Cool. This is an achingly obvious answer on where Orcs and trolls and dragons and things go when they die.  Oh. Unless they were only talking about the people that these Noldor types had killed so far. oh well. One point, most probably.

"And those that endure in Middle-earth and come not to Mandos shall grow weary of the world as a great burden, and shall wane, and become as shadows of regret before the younger race that cometh after." ---> One point. Sure, why not? I wouldn't be surprised if that stuff happened to at least one elf spirit.

"The Valar have spoken." ---> One point. Yes, they have spoken at all and about anything. I guess.  

Versus ---> 

"a doom upon them of darkness and sorrow;" ---> One point.

"Sit now there; and look out upon the lands where evil and despair shall come upon those whom you lovest. Thou hast dared to mock me, and to question the power of Melkor, Master of the fates of Arda. Therefore with my eyes thou shalt see, and with my ears shalt hear; and never shalt thou move from this place until all is fulfilled unto its bitter end." ---> One point. All of that stuff happened, at all. Except for maybe that last part. It depends on what Mel was talking about when he mentioned all gettting to be fulfilled until some end. Who knows what 'all' or 'end' he might have been thinking of? 

Final Score ---> Nine as well as one half of a point for the Doom Of Some Dude Sometimes Called Mandos. Two points for Mel's curse.

Anyways, I could have broken that up a bit more, to give Mel some more points, but the other side still would have won, since it had more to say. Now I gots to ask (maybe this was brought up before, but I don't remember this debate very well. I wonder what points I thought up back then.   ) ---> What is meant by effective? More stuff worked for the Mandos thing, but that's just because he mentioned more stuff. More stuff happened to the Noldor types, but that's just because we happen to be writing about an entire race versus one dude and his family. Must I now rate my points while using a scale of one to ten? ---> 

"Tears unnumbered ye shall shed" ---> This gets a six. Could have gotten more, but it's a pretty annoying little bit of prophecy. Who is going to count every tear? The few who have the ability to do that wouldn't even care to.  

Versus ---> 

"a doom upon them of darkness and sorrow;" ---> This gets a ten because that was an especially dark as well as sorrowful doom. Poor guys.  

Craziness.


----------



## Gothmog

Thorondor_ said:


> "On the House of Feanor the wrath of the Valar lieth from the West unto the uttermost East, and upon all that will follow them it shall be laid also"
> I think that Mandos says here that it is (also) the power of the valar at work in the doom of the noldor.


The point being that The Doom of Mandos was a foretelling of what would happen if the Noldor followed the path they were on then. Had they turned aside it would have been different. It is only on the House of Feanor that the Wrath of the Valar lay, and even then Mandos only foretold what would happen, he did not Curse them. Morgoth on the other hand did not give a choice of paths. He cursed the House of Hurin regardless of any change of path by those of the house.


----------



## Arvedui

YayGollum, your view on this is most refreshing!
I just love it!!!


----------



## Thorondor_

> The point being that The Doom of Mandos was a foretelling of what would happen if the Noldor followed the path they were on then


I don't think there was any "if" (at least for the oath-takers), since the herald says: "Their Oath shall drive them" - though I may be wrong in this interpretation.


> It is only on the House of Feanor that the Wrath of the Valar lay, and even then Mandos only foretold what would happen, he did not Curse them


I still doubt that in the doom we are only dealing with "simply a foretelling of what is going to happen regardless of what the Valar may want", otherwise there would be no need for mentioning the wrath of the valar. Moreover:


Of the flight of the noldor said:


> And they heard a loud voice, solemn and terrible, that bade them stand and give ear. 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.Much it foretold in dark words, which the Noldor understood not until the woes indeed after befell them; but all heard the curse that was uttered upon those that would not stay nor seek the doom and pardon of the Valar.





Of the noldor in Beleriand said:


> And Ulmo warned Turgon that he also lay under the _Doom of Mandos_, which Ulmo had no power to remove.
> - Thus it may come to pass, he said, that the _curse of the Noldor_ shall find thee too ere the end, and treason awake within thy walls


----------



## Gothmog

> I don't think there was any "if" (at least for the oath-takers), since the herald says: "Their Oath shall drive them" - though I may be wrong in this interpretation.


Of course there was an "if". Those of the Noldor who did indeed turn aside from this path and returned to Valinor recieved the pardon of the Valar. As for the oath-takers, this was beyond the power of the Valar to change. They had irrevocably set their own feet upon that path by their own actions.


> I still doubt that in the doom we are only dealing with "simply a foretelling of what is going to happen regardless of what the Valar may want", otherwise there would be no need for mentioning the wrath of the valar.


The only thing that Mandos said the Valar would actively do is to shut Valinor off from the Noldor who left at that time and in that manner. All else is simply a foretelling of the results to the Noldor of continuing on that path. As for the 'Wrath of the Valar' They do not say that they will do anything to the House of Feanor or those that follow, only that they will do nothing to help them and will ignore their cries.


> And Ulmo warned Turgon that he also lay under the Doom of Mandos, which Ulmo had no power to remove.
> - Thus it may come to pass, he said, that the curse of the Noldor shall find thee too ere the end, and treason awake within thy walls


Of course Ulmo had no power to remove the Doom of Mandos. The foretelling was not at that time complete. As for the 'Curse of the Noldor'. That is not from the Valar but from a small company of the Noldor themselves. The Oath of Feanor is the 'Curse of the Noldor' all the woes of that people came from the uttering of those fateful words by Feanor and his short-sighted sons!

So the Doom of Mandos was a warning to those who followed the oath-takers of what this self-imposed curse would cause.


----------



## Ingwë

> So the Doom of Mandos was a warning to those who followed the oath-takers of what this self-imposed curse would cause.


The Doom of Mandos was a warning to the Elves who followed Fëanor and the Curse of Melkor was to the Elves of Fëanor. However, the Curse of Melkor is because of his hate to Fëanor and the Doom of Mandos is because of the Fëanor's Oath. Melkor hated the Elves and wanted to destroy them. Mandos didn't hate them but the oath made him angry (and not only him). I think that the Doom and the conversation before it was the last try to make the Elves not to leave Valinor. 
The Curse of Melkor was removed after his overthrowing but the Doom of Mandos remained till the last Fëanor's sons died  So I think that the Doom of Mandos was more effective. And we mustn't forget that the Doom of Mandos was 'supported' by the other Valar; Melkor's curse was only of him.


----------



## Gothmog

Ingwë, The 'Curse of Morgoth' was directed at Hurin and his family. The Curse of the Noldor that I was refering to is contained in the Doom of Mandos. Mandos only foretold what that self-imposed curse of the oath-takers would do to themselves and to the Noldor as a people.


----------



## Thorondor_

> As for the oath-takers, this was beyond the power of the Valar to change. They had irrevocably set their own feet upon that path by their own actions


Then I guess we are in agreement - for the oath-takers, given the nature of their oath, there is no "if", just as there was no "if" in the case of those affected by Melkor's curse.


> The only thing that Mandos said the Valar would actively do is to shut Valinor off from the Noldor who left at that time and in that manner. All else is simply a foretelling of the results to the Noldor of continuing on that path.


I disagree. It is not just a foretelling, it is also a curse(sorry for repeating); from Of the flight of the noldor:


> And they heard a loud voice, solemn and terrible, that bade them stand and give ear. 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_.Much it foretold in dark words, which the Noldor understood not until the woes indeed after befell them; *but all heard the curse* that was uttered upon those that would not stay nor seek the doom and pardon of the Valar





> As for the 'Wrath of the Valar' They do not say that they will do anything to the House of Feanor or those that follow, only that they will do nothing to help them and will ignore their cries


Imo, what the wrath of the valar does is to punishe the exiled through this curse, which reinforces the prophecy.


----------



## Gothmog

Ok, with the exception of shutting off the Noldor from Valinor and ignoring their cries for help. What did the "Curse" claim that the Valar would do or cause to happen to any of the Nodor, even those of the house of Feanor, while they were in Middle-earth?

It seems to me that the only Valarian "Curse" involved the Valar saying "Ok, if that is how you want it, that is how you can have it" and what would happen after they came to Mandos. Not much of a "Curse". Though no doubt the Noldor later thought it somewhat over-the-top, but that is not really surprising is it? 

As for the "Wrath of the Valar" Feanor and his sons had done something that the Valar could not or would not forgive, The Oath. The rest of the Noldor, even those who followed Feanor at least had the possibilty of forgiveness. According to Mandos those that came to his house would remain there for a very long time before having a chance of being reincarnated. The oath-takers would simply not be reincarnated.


----------



## Alcuin

Gee, I don’t know. The Curse of Morgoth on Húrin’s family is pretty tense. He did this because Húrin defied him, and Morgoth sought to humble and break him. If you consider it, that’s a rather petty reason to expend that kind of power, but then, as the ultimate tyrant, it is quite typical of tyrants in the real world to insist upon worship and adoration, murdering and torturing those who refuse. (E.g., Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Saddam… don’t mean to be political or invoke Godwin’s Law, just to cite some recent real-world examples, and even the older ones are within living memory of many TTF members.)

Morgoth had corrupted the very stuff of Arda, as Tolkien describes in _Morgoth’s Ring_:


> To gain domination over Arda, Morgoth had let most of his being pass into the physical constituents of the Earth – hence all things that were born on Earth and lived on and by it, beasts or plants or incarnate spirits, were liable to be ‘stained’.


Morgoth could command the will of the Elves even from afar, as Tolkien tells it in _Silmarillion_:


> But ever the Noldor feared most the treachery of those of their own kin, who had been thralls in Angband; for Morgoth used some of these for his evil purposes, and feigning to give them liberty sent them abroad, but their wills were chained to his, and they strayed only to come back to him again.


 This he did to many whom he released. Whether the unfortunate Gwindor was so enchanted is unknown, but I read no evidence of this into the telling of the story.

The purpose of Glaurung, however, was quite different: Glaurung was actively seeking to destroy Turin and Níniel, and he enchanted Turin 


> Glaurung spoke behind [Turin], saying in a fell voice: ‘…if thou tarry for Finduilas, then never shalt thou see Morwen again, and never at all shalt thou see Nienor thy sister; and they will curse thee.’
> 
> But Turin passed away on the northward road, and Glaurung laughed once more, for he had accomplished the errand of his Master.


When the Curse of Morgoth ran its course, it was done and over. Not at Cabed-en-Aras on the Teiglin in Brethil, but in Doriath before the thrones of Thingol and Melian:


> …Melian … said: ‘Húrin Thalion, Morgoth hath bewitched thee; for he that seeth through Morgoth’s eyes, willing or unwilling, seeth all things crooked…. With the voice of Morgoth thou dost now upbraid thy friends.’
> 
> And hearing the words of Melian Húrin stood moveless, and he gazed long into the eyes of the Queen; and there in Menegroth, defended still by the Girdle of Melian from the darkness of the Enemy, he read the truth of all that was done, and tasted at last the fullness of woe that was measured for him by Morgoth Bauglir. And he spoke … ‘Receive now, lord, the Necklace of the Dwarves, as a gift from one who has nothing, and as a memorial of Húrin of Dor-Lómin. For now my fate is fulfilled, and the purpose of Morgoth achieved; but I am his thrall no longer.’


So the Curse of Morgoth required Morgoth’s active intervention through Glaurung his agent, an expenditure of his power, and came to a definite and specific end. (As an aside, the Second Doom of Mandos says that at the Dagor Dagorath, Turin will return with the Black Sword and truly kill Morgoth once and for all, avenging all Elves and Men for the wickedness of Morgoth, and specifically for his Curse on the House of Húrin.)

In contrast, the Doom of Mandos required no effort on the part of the Valar except that they made it impossible for the Noldor and their allies to return to Valinor by creating a sea of shadows in the approaches to Valinor. The Doom of Mandos ran on its own, a consequence of the terrible Oath of Fëanor and his sons, and from the distrust sown among all the Eldar as a consequence of the slaughter of the Teleri at Alqualondë. It ensnared the Sindar, most notably Thingol, by mere association with the Noldor and Edain; and in Thingol’s case, by naming a Silmaril as the bridal-price for Lúthien. Finally, the Doom of Mandos never ended: it continued to haunt the Noldor even in Tol Eressëa where they dwelt in regret and still outside Valinor, unable to forget and unable to amend their actions. The Doom of Mandos was not a “spell” but a foretelling, a “doom,” a matter of fate. 

In one respect, comparing the Curse of Morgoth to the Doom of Mandos is like the proverbial comparison of apples and oranges: they are different things: the one a spell, the other a warning from foresight; their curse the Noldor brought upon themselves. But from another perspective, the Curse of Morgoth led to a limited, albeit horrific series of events; while the Doom of Mandos caused nothing, but foreshadowed the fall of the Eldar and Edain, to some extent the destruction of Beleriand, and the end of the House of Fëanor:

For Celebrimbor son of Curufin son of Fëanor was caught also by that doom (from the version in _Morgoth’s Ring_):


> ‘Lo! on the House of Fëanor the wrath of the gods lieth from the West into 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 the treason of kin unto kin, and the fear of treason, shall this come to pass. The Dispossessed shall they be for ever.


 and indeed, Celebrimbor made the Rings of Power with the Noldorin Mírdain of Eregion, they were snatched away from him, what he began well was turned to evil ends, and he was dispossessed of both the Rings and his kingdom, Eregion, leaving Gil-galad of the House of Fingolfin (or Finarfin, depending upon which lineage you prefer) to rule the Noldor.


----------



## Gothmog

Alcuin, A very good post. You put it much better than I could. 

I agree with you.


----------



## Thorondor_

If I understand you (Gothmog and Alcuin) correctly, you would mean that the sufferings of the noldor is a "natural" consequence of the deeds of Feanor (i.e. the valar did nothing to worsen the situation of the exiled and that they only unveil the course of future events). I don't see any evidence of this; is there any law given by Eru or other authority which states that deeds similar to those of Feanor lead to consequences similar to those stated in this Doom? The only link given between the evil causes and the afterwards suffering is the curse of Mandos, which is something "active":


Of the return of the noldor said:


> Thus because of the curse that lay upon them the Noldor achieved nothing, while Morgoth hesitated, and the dread of light was new and strong upon the Orcs





Of the noldor in Beleriand said:


> And Ulmo warned Turgon that he also lay under the Doom of Mandos, which Ulmo had no power to remove. 'Thus it may come to pass,' he said, 'that the curse of the Noldor shall find thee too ere the end, and treason awake within thy walls. Then they shall be in peril of fire





Of Maeglin said:


> And however that might be, Idril loved Maeglin not at all; and knowing his thought of her she loved him the less. For it seemed to her a thing strange and crooked in him, as indeed the Eldar ever since have deemed it: an evil fruit of the Kinslaying, whereby the shadow of the curse of Mandos fell upon the last hope of the Noldor. But as the years passed still Maeglin watched Idril, and waited, and his love turned to darkness in his heart. And he sought the more to have his will in other matters, shirking no toil or burden, if he might thereby have power





Of Beren and Luthien said:


> And now they murmured that Finarfin's son was not as a Vala to command them, and they turned their faces from him. But the curse of Mandos came upon the brothers, and dark thoughts arose in their hearts, thinking to send forth Felagund alone to his death, and to usurp, it might be, the throne of Nargothrond; for they were of the eldest line of the princes of the Noldor





Of Tuor and the fall of Gondolin said:


> And he gave warning to Turgon that the Curse of Mandos now hastened to its fulfilment, when all the works of the Noldor should perish; and he bade him depart, and abandon the fair and mighty city that he had built, and go down Sirion to the sea


Just as a vala power can be at work in a blessing (such as Varda blessing the silmarils, or the blessing of Earendil's ship) so too is the power of the valar at work in punishing the noldor


Alcuin said:


> For Celebrimbor son of Curufin son of Fëanor was caught also by that doom (from the version in Morgoth’s Ring):
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Lo! on the House of Fëanor the wrath of the gods lieth from the West into 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 the treason of kin unto kin, and the fear of treason, shall this come to pass. The Dispossessed shall they be for ever.
> 
> 
> 
> and indeed, Celebrimbor made the Rings of Power with the Noldorin Mírdain of Eregion, they were snatched away from him, what he began well was turned to evil ends, and he was dispossessed of both the Rings and his kingdom, Eregion, leaving Gil-galad of the House of Fingolfin (or Finarfin, depending upon which lineage you prefer) to rule the Noldor.
Click to expand...

I don't think that reffering to Celebrimbor helps your case very much, as: Celebrimbor repudiated the deeds of his father, knowing that evil followed the oath-takers; after the war of wrath, "the curse was laid to rest"("Of the voyage of Earendil and the war of wrath"); the power rings have nothing to do with "the very treasures that they [the oath-takers] have sworn to pursue".


----------



## Alcuin

The Valar did not sew the seeds of distrust and betrayal amongst the Noldor. The murder of the Teleri at Alqualondë and the desertion of the followers of Fingolfin at the Helcaraxë did that. In fact, the only part of the Doom of Mandos that operated here was foretelling.



Of the Return of the Noldor said:


> Thus because of the curse that lay upon them the Noldor achieved nothing, while Morgoth hesitated, and the dread of light was new and strong upon the Orcs


 You ignored the passage immediately preceding this one:


> Therefore coming at length to Hithlum [Fingolfin] made his first camp and dwelling by the northern shores of Lake Mithrim. No love was there in the hearts of those that followed Fingolfin for the House of Fëanor, for the agony of those that endured the crossing of the Ice had been great, and Fingolfin held the sons the accomplices of their father. Then there was peril of strife between the hosts; ... the followers of Fëanor ... now withdrew before them, ... and the lake lay between them. Many of Fëanor’s people indeed repented of the burning at Losgar, and ... they would have welcomed them, but they dared not, for shame.
> 
> Thus because of the curse that lay upon them the Noldor achieved nothing, while Morgoth hesitated, and the dread of light was new and strong upon the Orcs


 In context, it reads a little differently. Perhaps I am mistaken, but that does not sound like a magic curse to me: it sounds like the inevitable outcome of treachery that old friends and kinsfolk would not trust one another. 



Of the Noldor in Beleriand said:


> And Ulmo warned Turgon that he also lay under the Doom of Mandos, which Ulmo had no power to remove. ‘Thus it may come to pass,’ he said, ‘that the curse of the Noldor shall find thee too ere the end, and treason awake within thy walls. Then they shall be in peril of fire


Are we to believe that treason and the fear of treason was the work of the Valar? Was it the result of some fiendish curse invoked upon the Noldor by the wicked rulers of Valinor? Maybe it is, but it seems to me that fear of treason was the result of (1) what had actually happened to the Teleri and the followers of Fingolfin, both of whom were betrayed by the partisans who adhered to Fëanor, and (2) betrayal induced by Morgoth, who, as we all know, was actually working as an agent of Manwë’s nefarious plans to rule the world. (Bwa-ha-ha-ha!)



Of Maeglin said:


> And however that might be, Idril loved Maeglin not at all; and knowing his thought of her she loved him the less. For it seemed to her a thing strange and crooked in him, as indeed the Eldar ever since have deemed it: an evil fruit of the Kinslaying, whereby the shadow of the curse of Mandos fell upon the last hope of the Noldor. But as the years passed still Maeglin watched Idril, and waited, and his love turned to darkness in his heart. And he sought the more to have his will in other matters, shirking no toil or burden, if he might thereby have power


 Ah, yes, Maeglin fell under the Curse of Mandos, who doomed him to love his mother’s niece. But you know, that rather sounds to me as if it reflects a decline in the moral and ethical fiber of the Noldor, like the way Celegorm and Curufin treated Lúthien and then attempted to murder Beren, so that Huan the Hound was compelled to rebel against Celegorm, his master, to defend them. Or the way in which Celegorm and Curufin betrayed Finrod, and sought to wrest control of Nargothrond from Orodreth. It would seem that what Maeglin did was worse yet in the eyes of the Noldor (judgmental lot, aren’t they?), and I think that this means that such “a thing strange and crooked in him” was the result not of the magic or malice of the Valar, but of the decline in their own moral fiber. Maybe I’m wrong.



Of Beren and Lúthien said:


> And now they murmured that Finarfin’s son was not as a Vala to command them, and they turned their faces from him. But the curse of Mandos came upon the brothers, and dark thoughts arose in their hearts, thinking to send forth Felagund alone to his death, and to usurp, it might be, the throne of Nargothrond; for they were of the eldest line of the princes of the Noldor


 Oops! Just did that one – that’s the betrayal of Finrod at Nargothrond again. But I am certain that someone can tell me how Námo Mandos is responsible for the reprehensible character of the brothers Celegorm and Curufin. Why, Oromë probably tempted Huan to turn against Celegorm in a dream! But maybe, just maybe, that curse was brought upon Celegorm and Curufin by their own actions, and upon the rest of the inhabitants of Nargothrond by their lack of moral courage in refusing to support Finrod.



Of Tuor and the fall of Gondolin said:


> And he gave warning to Turgon that the Curse of Mandos now hastened to its fulfillment, when all the works of the Noldor should perish; and he bade him depart, and abandon the fair and mighty city that he had built, and go down Sirion to the sea.


 The paragraph immediately following this reads, 


> Then Turgon pondered long the counsel of Ulmo, and there came into his mind the words that were spoken to him in Vinyamar: ‘Love not too well the work of thy hands and the devices of thy heart; and remember that the true hope of the Noldor lieth in the West, and cometh from the Sea.’ But Turgon was become proud, ... and he trusted still in [Gondolin’s] secret and impregnable strength, though even a Vala should gainsay it; ... Maeglin spoke ever against Tuor in the councils of the King, and his words seemed the more weighty in that they went with Turgon’s heart; and at the last he rejected the bidding of Ulmo and refused his counsel. But in the warning of the Vala he heard again the words that were spoken before the departing Noldor on the coast of Araman long ago; and the fear of treason was wakened in Turgon’s heart. ...


 Let us see, what flaws of character do we find here? (1) “Turgon was become proud," (2) “he trusted still in [Gondolin’s] … strength, though even a Vala should gainsay it,” (3) “the fear of treason was wakened in Turgon’s heart.” Why should the fear of treason be awakened in his heart? “the words that were spoken before the departing Noldor on the coast of Araman long ago”? or did those words remind him of Ulmo’s counsel: “‘the work of thy hands and the devices of thy heart; and remember that the true hope of the Noldor lieth in the West, and cometh from the Sea.’”I suspect it is the latter.

Your best argument, I believe, is here, if you can show that Mandos’ words to the Noldor were indeed a curse, and that this is the reason Turgon feared treachery, that for this cause Maeglin “turned to darkness in his heart” and betrayed the people of Gondolin, whom he should have defended with his body and life. But it seems to me that Turgon “rejected the bidding of Ulmo and refused his counsel,” and knew in his heart that by doing so, he risked experiencing the same bad outcome that the rest of the Noldor had suffered: betrayal of Elf against Elf, and treason and treachery within his own walls. At least grant me that Ulmo was not part of this supposed curse upon the Noldor by the Valar! But I cannot see that the Valar cursed Turgon at all: his own rebellion against Ulmo, who had led him to the Vale of Tumladen where Turgon’s people built Gondolin; and that of his twisted and morally defunct nephew, Maeglin, doomed him and his city.

The story of Celebrimbor does not help my case in the superficial sense. But consider this: Celebrimbor was living in Eregion because he rejected the rule of Gil-galad; when Gil-galad denied Sauron-Annatar admittance to Lindon, he gained acceptance in Ost-in-Edhil; and Sauron betrayed Celebrimbor. Was it because of some malediction pronounced by Mandos against the House of Fëanor that Sauron did these things? I argue that it was not: it was Sauron’s own wickedness and treachery. But I also argue that even this Mandos foresaw, not as a “curse” or malediction or overarching malice of the demiurgic powers of Arda: but as the unfortunate but inevitable outcome of wickedness, faithlessness, and a loss of moral character: for the forging of the Rings of Power was based upon a desire by the Eldar that remained in Middle-earth to have their cake and eat it, too: to live in the mortal lands, where they were superior merely by being Elves, without fading, without regret, without the grief of the passage of time. So Sauron the Necromancer ensnared them, and all their works came to naught.

Was all this the “curse of Mandos,” a malediction pronounced upon the Noldor by the Valar? Or was it rather the result of rebellion, of murder, of treachery, of greed, and of pride? And if rebellion, murder, treachery, greed, and pride are wicked among Men and lead to evil fortune, are they otherwise among the Eldar?


----------



## Arvedui

Having read the latest posts, I think that there might be a little misunderstanding. As Alcuin points out, there is no "curse" of Mandos. Just a "Doom." And at least in my opinion, there is a huge distinction between the one and the other.


----------



## Thorondor_

I would like to know your opinion about this passage I previously reffered to:


Of the Voyage of Earendil and the War of Wrath said:


> And when they came into the West the Elves of Beleriand dwelt upon Tol Eressea, the Lonely Isle, that looks both west and east; whence they might come even to Valinor. They were admitted again to the love of Manwe and the pardon of the Valar; and the Teleri forgave their ancient grief, and the curse was laid to rest


All that I have seen so far is how the "curse of Mandos" (an expression which, in the Sil, is used as such in two occasions, and generrally reffered to as simply curse) has actually come into being; nothing contradicts the fact this term was rightfully used by Tolkien; let's look at some definitions of the term:
- an appeal to some supernatural power to inflict evil on someone or some group
- a prayer asking that a god or similar spirit bring misfortune to someone; an imprecation or execration, the opposite of a blessing or charm
- a calling on a god or spirit to visit trouble or evil upon a person
And this idea is futher reinforced in HoME X, Of the first kinslaying and the doom of the noldor:


> $152 All halted and stood still, and from end to end of the hosts of the Noldor the voice was heard speaking the Prophecy of the North and the Doom of the Noldor. 'Turn back! Turn back! Seek the pardon of the Valar lest their curse fall upon you!' So the voice began, and many woes it foretold in dark words, which the Noldor understood not until the woes indeed after befell them


----------



## Gothmog

However, as you so rightly point out a 'curse' is:


> - an appeal to some supernatural power to inflict evil on someone or some group
> - a prayer asking that a god or similar spirit bring misfortune to someone; an imprecation or execration, the opposite of a blessing or charm
> - a calling on a god or spirit to visit trouble or evil upon a person


For such a thing to be from the Valar it must also include the will of Manwe. In the Sil. there is a comment about the High King of Arda


> For Manwë was free from evil and could not comprehend it


So how could one who 'was free from evil' do evil knowingly? As is said in the quote Manwe could not comprehend evil, how much chance then that he could do it?


----------



## Thorondor_

Then again, in Morgoth's Ring, Manwe is represented as being the closest to Eru of all minds, and, as said in Osanwe-kenta, Manwe, being ever open to Eru he did His will, and he was bound by the commands and injunctions of Eru, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always. So, I don't see a problem with his choice, if it was his, anyway.


----------



## Gothmog

Thorondor_ said:


> Then again, in Morgoth's Ring, Manwe is represented as being the closest to Eru of all minds, and, as said in Osanwe-kenta, Manwe, being ever open to Eru he did His will, and he was bound by the commands and injunctions of Eru, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always. So, I don't see a problem with his choice, if it was his, anyway.


So you are now saying that the 'Curse' came from the command of Eru?

I know that this is said of Manwe and is indeed the reason that he is High King of Arda. However, in all things, even in the case of Melkor and his release, Manwe would not do evil even to prevent evil. And it still stands that the only active parts of the 'curse of the Noldor' can be traced back directly and solely to the acts and words of Feanor and his sons. Either to the oath they swore or to the acts such as the Kinslaying (in which the followers of Feanor were the cause and main participants) or the burning of the ships leaving most of the Noldor with no transport to Middle-earth.


----------



## Thorondor_

> So you are now saying that the 'Curse' came from the command of Eru?


 I wouldn't go as far as that; the least I will argue for is that Manwe's actions are in accordance with Eru's will/laws, and since Eru is the ultimate instance of good, I see don't see a moral problem here.


----------



## Gothmog

However, the Valar separated 'Good' and 'Evil' within Arda, something that Eru never did. We do not know what exactly Eru considered 'Good' and what he considered 'Evil' we can only be sure that his views on the matter were different from ours and from the views of the Valar.

In doing Eru's will, Manwe would act according to his own conception of what was 'Good' and what was 'Evil' not Eru's of which he was uncertain at best.


----------



## Alcuin

(*Ahem *– _Alcuin clears his throat in case he is forced to eat crow, since Thorondor can cite a use of the word “curse” used in the narrative outside character quotations in conjunction with the Doom of Mandos. Not yet willing to concede… He makes a dreaded 2-part post: this is 1 of 2. _)


Whether in the actions of Fëanor at the quays of Olwë, or his betrayal of his brother Fingolfin and the rest of the Noldor at Helcaraxë; in the actions of Celegorm and Curufin in assaulting Lúthien and then Beren, or in attempting to seize the throne of Nargothrond; or in Maeglin’s forbidden lust for Idril, and his subsequent betrayal of Gondolin; in the ruin of Doriath by the Sons of Fëanor, and the murder of the sons of Dior, Eluréd and Elurín, at “the hands of the cruel servants of Celegorm”; or the assault upon the camps of the Havens of Sirion by the Maedhros and Maglor, so that Elwing leaped as it were to her death in the sea bearing the Silmaril (she was saved by Ulmo, who intervened again, evil old Vala); or in the murder of the guards in the camp of Eönwë when Maedhros and Maglor took the Silmarils: all of these things were the work not of the Valar, but of the Noldor, so that they brought the greater part of their woes upon themselves, they dared not trust one another; and all their works came to nothing. They trusted themselves, and not to the will of Eru as revealed by the Valar; they rebelled, and they slaughtered one another and even the children of their own folk; they showed a shocking and horrific failure of morals and of character. 

That is a real curse: but it is also a self-inflicted wound. It is not the Curse of Mandos. It is the Curse of the Noldor, and they did it to themselves.

The Curse of Morgoth is pretty clearly a *malediction*. Roget’s II: The New Thesaurus, Third Edition, 1995 defines "malediction" as "A denunciation invoking a wish or threat of evil or injury: anathema, curse, damnation, execration, imprecation. Archaic : malison."

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000 offers this for *maledict.*
 ADJECTIVE: Archaic Accursed.
 TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: mal•e•dict•ed, mal•e•dict•ing, mal•e•dicts To pronounce a curse against.
ETYMOLOGY: Middle English maladicte, from Latin maledictus, past participle of maledcere, to curse : male, ill; see mel-3 in Appendix I + dcere, to speak; see deik- in Appendix I.
 From Indo-European Roots,
ENTRY: *mel-3*
DEFINITION: False, bad, wrong. 1. mal-, malice, malign; dismal, malady, malaria, maledict, malefactor, malefic, malentendu, malevolence, malison, malversation, from Latin malus, bad, and male, ill (> malignus, harmful). 2. Perhaps suffixed zero-grade form *m-s-. blame, blaspheme, from Greek blasphmos, blasphemous, perhaps from *ms-bh-mo-, “speaking evil” (*bh-, to speak; see bh-2). 3. Suffixed form *mel-yo-. markhor, from Avestan mairiia-, treacherous. (Pokorny 2. mel- 719, mlo- 724.)
ENTRY: *deik-*
DEFINITION: To show, pronounce solemnly; also in derivatives referring to the directing of words or objects. Oldest form *dei-, becoming *deik- in centum languages.
 Derivatives include teach, toe, addict, preach, judge, revenge, and disk.
I. Variant *deig-. 1. O-grade form *doig-. a. teach, from Old English tcan, to show, instruct, from Germanic *taikjan, to show; b. (i) token, from Old English tcen, tcn, sign, mark; (ii) betoken, from Old English tcnian, to signify; (iii) tetchy, from Gothic taikns, sign; (iv) tachisme, from Old French tache, teche, mark, stain. (i)–(iv) all from Germanic *taiknam. 2. Zero-grade form *dig-. digit, from Latin digitus, finger (< “pointer,” “indicator”).
II. Basic form *deik-. 1. Possibly o-grade form *doik-. toe, from Old English t, tahe, toe, from Germanic *taihw. 2. Basic form *deik-. dictate, diction, dictum, ditto, ditty; addict, benediction, condition, contradict, edict, fatidic, herb bennet, indict, indiction, indite, interdict, juridical, jurisdiction, maledict, malison, predict, valediction, verdict, veridical, voir dire, from Latin dcere, to say, tell. 3. Suffixed zero-grade form *dik--. abdicate, dedicate, preach, predicament, predicate, from Latin dicre, to proclaim. 4. Agential suffix *-dik-. a. index, indicate, from Latin index, indicator, forefinger (in-, toward; see en); b. judge, judicial; prejudice, from Latin idex (< *yewes-dik-), judge, “one who shows or pronounces the law” (is, law; see yewes-); c. vendetta, vindicate; avenge, revenge, from Latin vindex (first element obscure), surety, claimant, avenger. 5. deictic, deixis; apodictic, paradigm, policy2, from Greek deiknunai, to show, and noun deigma (*deik-m), sample, pattern. 6. Zero-grade form *dik-. disk; dictyosome, from suffixed form *dik-skos, from Greek dikein, to throw (< “to direct an object”). 7. Form *dik-. dicast; syndic, theodicy, from Greek dik, justice, right, court case. (Pokorny dei- 188.)
It was *malediction*: Morgoth spoke of bad things to come to Horn, his wife, and his innocent, helpless children. Loverly sentiments, eh?

Let us track the specifics of what Morgoth achieved. Morwen and the children were isolated, and through they were not immediately assaulted by the Easterlings, Morwen moved to get her children to safety, starting with Turin, whom she sent to Doriath. 

Okay, bad outcomes can we attribute to Morgoth’s Malediction to mar Morwen’s minor master & maidens. Turin is welcomed by Thingol in memory of Beren, but hated by Saeros is – what? a jerk? a racist? under the influence of the black will of Morgoth? Maybe he’s just a first-class jerk with a phenomenally murderous temper who considered killing Turin and then who lost his footing when for his own revenge Turin set him to run naked through the forest. And Turn, believing he would find either no justice or harsh justice, fled. Sad. But maybe not designed.

Next he falls in with the outlaws, with the faithful Beleg in pursuit (with a curse sword, perhaps?) Turin and Beleg gather some outlaws and begin to assail the orcs, in the process dispossessing Mîm the Petty-Dwarf of his home and his sons. Mîm when captured by orcs in turn betrays them, “Then the Orc-captain laughed, and he said to Mîm: ‘Assuredly Turin son of Húrin shall not be slain.’” Well, the hand of Morgoth at work: he is targeting and deliberately fouling Turin’s plans, seizing him and hauling him off. Beleg follows in pursuit, meets the broken Gwindor escaped (or allowed to escape) from Angband. They find Turin, who wakens in a fright, seizes the sword and kills his best friend, Beleg. I think the death of Beleg counts as a real outcome of the Curse of Morgoth brought about by his wicked will.

Gwindor leads the broken Turin to Nargothrond, where Gwindor’s old beloved, Finduilas, falls madly for Turin, and Turin is … well, not unreceptive. In fact, Turin might be in love with Finduilas, 


> 'Who are you?' said Turin.
> 'A wandering Elf, a thrall escaped, whom Beleg met and comforted,' said Gwindor. 'Yet once I was Gwindor son of Guilin, a lord of Nargothrond, until I went to the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, and was enslaved in Angband.'
> 'Then have you seen Húrin son of Galdor, the warrior of Dor-Lómin?' said Turin.
> 'I have not seen him,' said Gwindor. 'But rumour of him runs through Angband that he still defies Morgoth; and Morgoth has laid a curse upon him and all his kin.'
> 'That I do believe,' said Turin.


 Does Morgoth sit back and let his curse run quietly? No, not all: he sends Glaurung Father of Dragons to work his wicked will. Glaurung was sent a-purpose: not only to destroy Nargothrond, but to end the romantic relationship of Turin and Finduilas. (Good Heavens! Beren and Lúthien produced Dior, then Elwing, and ultimately Elros and Elrond; and Tuor and Idril produced Eärendil, Elros and Elrond. What might Turin and Finduilas produce? In some of the genealogies, Finduilas is the sister of Gil-galad – a warrior of some renown, as I recall.) I’d call that direct intervention.

Once again, I say that Glaurung was actively seeking to destroy Turin and Níniel. This was part of his primary task:


> Glaurung spoke behind [Turin], saying in a fell voice: ‘…if thou tarry for Finduilas, then never shalt thou see Morwen again, and never at all shalt thou see Nienor thy sister; and they will curse thee.’
> 
> But Turin passed away on the northward road, and Glaurung laughed once more, for he had accomplished the errand of his Master.


Then Glaurung bewitches Nienor so that she suffers deep amnesia. Instead of falling in love with Brandir, a gentle man who sought to preserve his people to fight another day, Nienor newly rechristened as Níniel falls in love with Turin and enters an incestuous relationship neither ever intended. I’d call that the result of direct intervention.

Finally, poor old Turin kills Brandir unjustly: “twisted by the Dark Side, he has become.” (Sorry. I gave in…) Then he and Níniel commit suicide – as a direct result of the malice of Morgoth revealed through his servant, Glaurung. 

Húrin, set free kills Mîm the Petty-Dwarf in Nargothrond, is arrested by the men of Brethil, and a kind of civil war erupts so that the leadership of the Second House of the Edain is eliminated by fratricide (see “The Wanderings of Húrin” in _The War of the Jewels_ for the full story of Húrin in Brethil); is this not another of the works of the will of Morgoth?


----------



## Alcuin

_(part 2 of 2 - suffering under the Curse of Verbosity. It must be inflicted by Mandos.)_

Finally Húrin delivers the Nauglamír to Thingol, and though Melian breaks the hold that Morgoth has upon his mind, Thingol is enchanted by the Nauglamír, falls under a spell of desire, and hires the dwarves of Nogrod to set the Silmaril in it. The dwarves fall under the spell, too, there is a war between the dwarves and the Sindar, and Doriath falls; eventually Beren and the Greenelves and the ents catch the dwarves of Nogrod on the way home, and they who should have been allies slaughter one another at Rathlóriel. This was necessitated by the assault on Doriath, an indirect result of the Curse of Morgoth. Oh, and the Girdle of Melian came down, so that Doriath was open to attack.

What has Morgoth accomplished?
 He broke Húrin.
He prevented a union between Turin and Finduilas.
He desecrated Turin and Níniel.
He destroyed Turin, a dangerous enemy.
He destroyed Nargothrond.
He destroyed the People of Haleth.
Húrin worked his will by taking the Nauglamír to Thingol, where Thingol was enchanted.
Thingol is killed by dwarves, ending centuries of friendship and cooperation between these two enemies of Angband, sowing seeds of distrust that still bore fruit between Thorin and Thranduil and between Gimli and Celeborn over 6,000 years and 2 ages of the world later.
Doriath is eventually ruined, and a dangerous impediment to Morgoth’s vile plans is eliminated.
That was, from Morgoth’s accounting, a pretty good investment, despite a requirement for frequent intervention.

What did the Curse of the Noldor accomplish in the interests of the Valar? Can you cite an incident in which the Valar intervened to bring about some bad outcome for the Noldor or their allies? Ulmo intervened several times, risking the wrath of Manwë for defying his will by assisting Elves and Men. But Ulmo intervened to work good; which of the Valar intervened to work ill? 

The rivalry, distrust, fratricide, treachery, treason, kidnapping, and murder among the Eldar in Beleriand cannot be attributed to a curse placed upon them by the Valar, in my view. It *can *be explained by a collapse in the morals and ethics of the Noldor themselves: each bad thing they did made the next bad thing easier, just as it does for men today. Look at the _Tragedy of Macbeth_ by Shakespeare: 


> Of all men else I have avoided thee.
> But get thee back, my soul is too much charged
> With blood of thine already.


 Each of Macbeth’s murders becomes easier than the one before until at last, 


> I 'gin to be aweary of the sun
> And wish the estate o' the world were now undone.


 Maybe Turin feels that way. Maybe Maedhros and Maglor feel that way at the end. But do any of these unfortunates come to their desperate end through a wicked curse imposed against them by the Valar, or as a result of the Curse of the Noldor, the result of their own choice of the easier, wicked path instead of the more difficult, correct one?

Can you cite an example of the Valar taking action to develop a bad outcome upon the Noldor or the Sindar or the Edain as a result of the Doom of Mandos? Is there any sign that they intervened to insure the bad outcome or make it worse? How has this curse operated to be a curse and make the situation worse?


----------



## Thorondor_

Alcuin, given my poor understanding of English when it comes to subtler arguments, I am *very *prepared to eat crow . Having said that, I see this as a great opportunity to learn from persons who obviously have greater knowledge in all things Tolkien.


> What did the Curse of the Noldor accomplish in the interests of the Valar? Can you cite an incident in which the Valar intervened to bring about some bad outcome for the Noldor or their allies?


 Then again, the "interest" of the valar was to punish the exiled. And why would you have me believe that a curse needs active involvment on the part of the curser, for it to follow its course? The very little I know of this matter points to no such necessity.

In HoME II, it is either Mim or Urin who "cursed that gold with a dread curse so that none might enjoy it, and he that held any part of it found evil and death to come of it" and, concerning the na "In this Necklace the Silmaril was set; but the curse of the gold was on him, and he defrauded them of part of their reward". And further:



The Nauglafring said:


> Doughty were those outlaws and great wielders of sword and axe from their warfare with Orcs,'so that many were slain ere the king, seeing that peace and pardon might no longer be, summoned a host of his warriors, and those outlaws being wildered with the stronger magics of the king' and confused in the dark ways of the halls of Tinwelint were all slain fighting bitterly; but the king's hall ran with gore, and the gold that lay before his throne,' scattered and spurned by trampling feet, was drenched with blood. Thus did the curse of Mim the Dwarf begin its course; and yet another sorrow sown by the Noldoli of old in Valinor was come to fruit.


 As we can see:
- the curse layed on the gold was uttered by a dying person (be it Mim or Urin), who had no further involvment in the developing of the events;
- although this can be traced back to a "sorrow sown by the noldor", this curse has a path of its own, it exists as itself.

And, furthermore, this is how Chris compared the version of the curse of Mandos from the Sil with the one from BoLT:


Commentary on The Flight of the Noldoli said:


> In The Silmarillion there is a suggestion that the speaker of the Prophecy of the North was Mandos himself 'and no lesser herald of Manwe', and its gravity, indeed its centrality in the mythology, is far greater; hem there is no suggestion of a 'doom' or 'curse', but only a foretelling. This foretelling included the dark words 'Great is the fall of Gondolin'.


 While initially it was "only a foretelling", it became (also) a curse/doom.
What does "doom" signify? Here are some definitions I advance:
- A decision or judgment, especially an official condemnation to a severe penalty
[SIZE=-1]- (to) [/SIZE]condemn to certain destruction or failure (oxford).


> In doing Eru's will, Manwe would act according to his own conception of what was 'Good' and what was 'Evil' not Eru's of which he was uncertain at best.


 I disagree:


Of the valar said:


> Manwe is dearest to Iluvatar and understands most clearly his purposes





> Ulmo intervened several times, risking the wrath of Manwë for defying his will by assisting Elves and Men


 I disagree again:


Ainulindale said:


> And Manwe and Ulmo have from the beginning been allied, and in all things have served most faithfully the purpose of Iluvatar.





Of Men said:


> Men have feared the Valar, rather than loved them, and have not understood the purposes of the Powers, being at variance with them, and at strife with the world. Ulmo nonetheless took thought for them aiding the counsel and will of Manwe


----------



## Gothmog

You dissagree about Manwe being uncertain of Eru's view of Good and Evil and cite


> Manwe is dearest to Iluvatar and understands most clearly his purposes


However, understanding his purposes is not the same as understanding his views.


> _Of the Sun and Moon and the hiding of Valinor_
> Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been.


This shows that Eru had a wider view of what was happening than any of the Valar including the one who 'understands most clearly'. Eru's view of what is good and evil is obviously not the same as the narrow view of one who is in Arda.


----------



## Thorondor_

> This shows that Eru had a wider view of what was happening than any of the Valar including the one who 'understands most clearly'. Eru's view of what is good and evil is obviously not the same as the narrow view of one who is in Arda.


But this only reffers to events that will happen, which are hidden to the valar, due to the fact that Eru maintains his freedom of action, beyond what was revealed to his "mind offsprings"; none of this implies that not knowing the future equals lack of right values.


----------



## Gothmog

I would just like to ask, where have I in any post Stated or even Implied that there was any "lack of right values"? I cannot answer further until I know just what you mean by this.


----------



## Thorondor_

> Eru's view of what is good and evil is obviously not the same as the narrow view of one who is in Arda.


This is what I had in mind; if my interpretation wrongly reflects your idea, I apologise.

And I think it is important for what the two of us are debating to quote Mandos' answer to what Manwe had stated:


> _But Mandos said:
> - And yet remain evil_. To me shall Feanor come soon.'


which I think proves my idea further: even if something evil might cause good in the future (beyond the knowledge of even the valar), it still remains evil (or, well, at least in this case).


----------



## Gothmog

The point you have the problem with has nothing to do with lack of Right Values on the part of any charater. It simply shows that what Eru thought of as Good or Evil is dependant on his wider knowledge of creation. Things that from the viewpoint of those in Arda would be evil were to him necessary and contribitory to the glory of the creation and therefore good. It is also possible that some things that from within Arda were good, were infact not contributing to the creation and therefore, if not actually evil, at least not Good.

However, the Valar, (and this was part of their purpose in Arda) give definitions to Good and Evil within Arda based it would seem, on what the harm or otherwise of the acts not on how the they may contibute to creation. So regardless of what view Eru took the Valar and Manwe especialy would work within the framework of what they see as Good.

So the comment by Mandos that the acts would remain evil only works within Arda and it is only by the definitions of good and evil within Arda that we can discuss this matter. Eru's view of the matter is beyond the knowledge of the Valar and of us.


----------



## Thorondor_

> Things that from the viewpoint of those in Arda would be evil were to him necessary and contribitory to the glory of the creation and therefore good


But Manwe is aware of this:


Myths transformed said:


> He must have grasped with great clarity what even we may perceive dimly: that it was the essential mode of the process of 'history' in Arda that evil should constantly arise, and that out of it new good should constantly come





> Eru's view of the matter is beyond the knowledge of the Valar and of us


So, why bring the subject in the very first place?


----------



## Gothmog

Yes I agree that Manwe was aware of the difference in view between the Valar and Eru on the matter of good and evil. However, he could only work within the limits that they (the Valar) setup in Arda. He could not use what he saw as evil for good purposes.



Thorondor_ said:


> Eru's view of the matter is beyond the knowledge of the Valar and of us
> 
> 
> 
> So, why bring the subject in the very first place?
Click to expand...


I don't know, why did you? 



Thorondor_ said:


> I wouldn't go as far as that; the least I will argue for is that Manwe's actions are in accordance with Eru's will/laws, and since Eru is the ultimate instance of good, I see don't see a moral problem here.


I was simply answering this point in a rather verbose way.


----------



## Thorondor_

> However, he could only work within the limits that they (the Valar) setup in Arda


I doubt that whatever rules the valar setup in Arda took precedence over Eru's in Manwe's actions; as I have previously reffered to:


Osanwe kenta said:


> Manwe was bound by the commands and injunctions of Eru, and would do this or abstain from that in accordance with them, always


----------



## Gothmog

And if you can show me the command or injunction from Eru that would cause Manwe to do what he saw as evil in this case I will accept defeat.


----------



## Thorondor_

Osanwe kenta said:


> The office of the Elder King was to retain all his subjects in the allegiance of Eru, or to bring them back to it, and in that allegiance to leave them free.


  .


----------



## Alcuin

Gee, I don’t know, Thorondor_. I can’t see that the quote from "Osanwe Kenta" shows that Manwë has any mandate or authority to commit or even condone evil in the pursuit of his task of seeing to it that “all his subjects [were] in the allegiance of Eru, or [brought] back to it,” particularly with the stipulation that “in that allegiance to leave them free.” I don’t see how Manwë could force one of the Children of Eru to freely act against that person’s will. In fact, if I am not mistaken (and I could be), the Ainur were specifically prohibited from such an undertaking. 

I think the logic that using perverse means to obtain a desirable outcome is rather like the person who robs a bank (and kills or risks killing a teller) to buy food to feed an orphanage. It makes a great story in the movie _The Blues Brothers_, but that doesn’t make it acceptable behavior. I don’t think Manwë or the rest of the Valar can deliberately propagate evil and claim that the ends justified the means. Nor is it sufficient to argue that because some good was salvaged from evil enough to justify Manwë effectively enslaving Elves and Men to accomplish his goals.

Now, that doesn’t mean that everything the Valar set out to do with good intentions turned out well, or that they didn’t accidentally create problems. In summoning the Elves to Valinor, for instance, the Valar later seemed to have decided that they might have made an error. There is an proverb in English that “The road to hell is paved with good intentions,” and I believe that Tolkien even quotes it at one point in one of his writings (a letter, if I recall correctly). While it is usually quoted with direct reference to its religious merit, it is also used to describe how folks can accidentally create problems – sometimes terrible or even horrific problems – without meaning to. “Accidents” are unintentional harm, but they hurt nonetheless.

All my rambling aside, I don’t see how Manwë could claim that some evil he deliberately inflicted upon someone else should be excused by Eru: since Manwë is Eru’s agent, that would mean that Eru either condones or commits acts of evil, and I believe that – at least by definition in Tolkien’s sub-creation – this just cannot be. Now, if Manwë does or permits something that somehow works out badly by accident (e.g., unchaining Melkor, who proceeds to mar Fëanor, kill the Two Trees, murder Finwë, steal the Silmarils, and generally wreck havoc, leaving mayhem in his wake), well, that’s an “Aw, #%@!” situation, but it isn’t the same as purposefully setting out to do something harmful.

How you argue your point is your business, but you might be better off from a rhetorical standpoint to hammer away at Tolkien’s use of the word _curse_ to describe what befell the Noldor, and then seeing if we can fend off the blows. Digging for an evil Manwë, or even one tainted by deliberate malice, is, in my opinion, likely to be a dry well.


----------



## Alcuin

We’ve touched on whether or not Ulmo was acting in concert with or even in accord with Manwë regarding the exiled Noldor in Middle-earth, and batted about whether he was in conflict with the rest of the Valar or not.

The Valar in particular and the Ainur in general were not some monolithic group: Tolkien depicts them as individuals, usually of good will, usually cooperating to achieve a common goal, with the exception of Morgoth and Sauron and their allies; and the additional exception of Ossë (the sea-storm Maia) and some of the others whose motives were sometimes inscrutable to the Elves.

In particular, Ulmo was the odd man out in the Valar’s collective decision about how to handle Morgoth, the exiled Noldor, the rest of the Elves in Beleriand and Middle-earth, and the Edain. This passage is excepted from “Of Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin” in _Silmarillion_:


> But Morgoth thought that his triumph was fulfilled… Yet by Sirion and the sea there grew up an Elven-folk, … dwelling ever nigh to the coasts of Arvernien, under the shadow of Ulmo’s hand.
> 
> And it is said that in that time Ulmo came to Valinor out of the deep waters, and spoke there to the Valar of the need of the Elves; and he called on them to forgive them, and rescue them from the overmastering might of Morgoth, and win back the Silmarils, wherein alone now bloomed the light of the Days of Bliss when the Two Trees still shone in Valinor. But Manwë moved not; and of the counsels of his heart what tale shall tell?
> 
> The wise have said that the hour was not yet come, and that only one speaking in person for the cause of both Elves and Men, pleading for pardon on their misdeeds and pity on their woes, might move the counsels of the Powers; and the oath of Fëanor perhaps even Manwë could not loose, until it found its end, and the sons of Fëanor relinquished the Silmarils, upon which they had laid their ruthless claim. For the light which lit the Silmarils the Valar themselves had made.


 Two things are happening here. The first one is that Ulmo appears to be alone in arguing that the Valar needed to intercede in Middle-earth against Morgoth sooner rather than later. The second is that the Oath of Fëanor somehow complicated matters, as Maglor and Maedhros later debated, because in their madness Fëanor and his sons had called upon Eru to witness their oath; at the end, the brothers realized that this had rendered the whole enterprise hopeless, they were casting about for some way to minimize their losses, and they chose badly. This is from “Of the Voyage of Eärendil and the War of Wrath” in _Silmarillion_:


> Maedhros answered that if they returned to Aman but the favour of the Valar were withheld from them, then their oath would still remain, but its fulfillment be beyond all hope; and he said: ‘Who can tell to what dreadful doom we shall come, if we disobey the Powers in their own land, or purpose ever to bring war again into their holy realm?’
> 
> Yet Maglor still held back, saying: ‘If Manwë and Varda themselves deny the fulfillment of an oath to which we named them in witness, is it not made void?’
> 
> And Maedhros answered: ‘But how shall our voices reach to Ilúvatar beyond the Circles of the World? And by Ilúvatar we swore in our madness, and called the Everlasting Darkness upon us, if we kept not our word. Who shall release us?’
> 
> ‘If none can release us,’ said Maglor, ‘then indeed the Everlasting Darkness shall be our lot, whether we keep our oath or break it; but less evil shall we do in the breaking.’
> 
> Yet he yielded at last to the will of Maedhros…


 So first of all, Tolkien says that a lifetime of many centuries or even a few millennia doesn’t mean the Eldar make better decisions than we mere mortals. (Hippocrates has the correct solution to this dilemma: “First do no harm.” That would give the Maglor the correct solution.) The second element in this passage is that Oath again: it’s mucking up the whole operation.

Ulmo’s dissent from the consensus position was pretty strong. He took some liberties in pursuing his own agenda, to put it mildly, but he insisted that he had better insight into what to do than even Manwë and Mandos in this situation. I suppose if you’re a demiurge, you get to make that claim; real people people claim to be better than their peers in business, medicine, law and politics every day, and sometimes they are. If it’s your profession – or your avocation at TTF – your opinion is as good as anyone else’s! 

This passage is from “Of Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin” in _Unfinished Tales_. Ulmo has arisen out of the sea and is speaking to Tuor at Nevrast:


> Ulmo spoke to Tuor of Valinor and its darkening, and the Exile of the Noldor, and the Doom of Mandos, and the hiding of the Blessed Realm. “But behold!” said he, “in the armour of Fate (as the Children of Earth name it) there is ever a rift, and in the walls of Doom a breach, until the full-making, which ye call the End. So it shall be while I endure, a secret voice that gainsayeth, and a light where darkness was decreed. Therefore, though in the days of this darkness I seem to oppose the will of my brethren, the Lords of the West, that is my part among them, to which I was appointed ere the making of the World. Yet Doom is strong, and the shadow of the Enemy lengthens; and I am diminished, until in Middle-earth I am become now no more than a secret whisper. The waters that run westward wither, and their springs are poisoned, and my power withdraws from the land; for Elves and Men grow blind and deaf to me because of the might of Melkor. And now the Curse of Mandos hastens to its fulfillment, and all the works of the Noldor shall perish, and every hope which they build shall crumble. The last hope alone is left, the hope that they have not looked for and have not prepared. And that hope lieth in thee; for so I have chosen.”
> 
> …
> 
> And as Ulmo said these things the mutter of the storm rose to a great cry, and the wind mounted, and the sky grew black; and the mantle of the Lord of Waters streamed out like a flying cloud. “Go now,” said Ulmo, “lest the Sea devour thee! For Ossë obeys the will of Mandos, and he is wroth, being a servant of the Doom.”


 I like this passage for a couple of reasons. First, it is where Ulmo explicitly says, “I seem to oppose the will of my brethren” by helping Turgon. (And don’t forget that Finrod built Nargothrond at the behest of Ulmo, too, in a dream sent to him at the same time Turgon received his dream. So Ulmo was doubly rebellious in helping the Noldor this way.) Next, Ulmo is watching over Middle-earth through the waters, but he is losing his ability to determine what transpires to affect the outcome of affairs by using his power in the waters because of the encroachment of Morgoth. In this, he is similar to Manwë’s watching over Middle-earth (and Númenor, during its existence) using the eagles. Third point – and I rather like this part best – Ossë “works” for Ulmo, if you don’t mind the expression, but not only is he insubordinate, he tries to kill the messenger! Ulmo basically tells Tuor, get out of here or Ossë will kill you because he knows I’m sending you to warn Turgon. 

Finally there is the Doom – or Curse – of Mandos. In this case, Ulmo does say that it’s a “curse”. But again, I ask, how is it that Mandos has cursed the Noldor in the sense of calling down malediction upon them? Morgoth pronounces a malediction upon Húrin, and what happens to Turin and Nienor is very clearly and explicitly the result of Morgoth’s malicious attentions, and Glaurung is the instrument he uses to accomplish his vile invective. The Valar blocked the Noldor and their Sindarin allies from sailing back the West by setting up the Enchanted (or Shadowy) Isles to confuse their passage and by sending storms to drive the ships back. And I can’t figure out how to attribute to Mandos – or the rest of the “good” Valar – some act of malice or contribution to malice that must accompany a _curse_ that is a _malediction_, which indicates to me that this was not a malediction, but a “doom.”


----------



## Gothmog

Thorondor_, That is only a job description. There is no command, order or injunction in ther to tell Manwe that he must use evil means to achieve good ends. Manwe is required to do what is in the description but allowed to use his own means of achieving it.

In fact, when all means within his view of good have been exhausted, Manwe does not turn to what he thinks of a evil to solve a problem. He hands over control to Eru. This is shown in Akalabeth at the time of the Numenorean invasion of Arda.


----------



## Thorondor_

> Now, if Manwë does or permits something that somehow works out badly by accident (e.g., unchaining Melkor, who proceeds to mar Fëanor, kill the Two Trees, murder Finwë, steal the Silmarils, and generally wreck havoc, leaving mayhem in his wake), well, that’s an “Aw, #%@!” situation, but it isn’t the same as purposefully setting out to do something harmful.


 However, in their mandate, the valar chained persons, imprisoned them, banished them, hurt/killed,.. pretty harmful, wouldn't you say? Why can they do those things?

Given the divine nature of Manwe, I think that this whole "evil means" situation is also addressed in (draft) Letter #212


> _A divine 'punishment' is also a divine 'gift', if accepted, since its object is ultimate blessing,_ and the supreme inventiveness of the Creator will make 'punishments' (that is changes of design) produce a good not otherwise to be attained: a 'mortal' Man has probably (an Elf would say) a higher if unrevealed destiny than a longeval one





> you might be better off from a rhetorical standpoint to hammer away at Tolkien’s use of the word _curse_ to describe what befell the Noldor, and then seeing if we can fend off the blows
> And I can’t figure out how to attribute to Mandos – or the rest of the “good” Valar – some act of malice or contribution to malice that must accompany a _curse_ that is a _malediction_, which indicates to me that this was not a malediction, but a “doom.”


 I would like to ask you, in this situation, what do you see as the significant difference between the terms "doom" and "curse" (sorry if you provided it so far and I missed it)?


> Digging for an evil Manwë, or even one tainted by deliberate malice, is, in my opinion, likely to be a dry well


 I never argued for an "evil Manwe"; I actually said is that "the least I will argue for is that Manwe's actions are in accordance with Eru's will/laws, and since Eru is the ultimate instance of good, I see don't see a moral problem here."


> “I seem to oppose the will of my brethren”


 "Seem" isn't much of a strong argument. As I have quoted from the Silmarillion, "Manwe and Ulmo have from the beginning been allied, and in all things have served most faithfully the purpose of Iluvatar". I think that this and my other quote leave little room for your claim that "Ulmo intervened several times, risking the wrath of Manwë for defying his will by assisting Elves and Men". And, as noted of Ulmo in Of Feanor and the Unchaining of Melkor, 


> But Ulmo was not deceived, and Tulkas clenched his hands whenever he saw Melkor his foe go by; for if Tulkas is slow to wrath he is slow also to forget. But they obeyed the judgement of Manwe; _for those who will defend authority against rebellion must not themselves rebel._





> Ossë “works” for Ulmo, if you don’t mind the expression, but not only is he insubordinate, he tries to kill the messenger


 I am not sure what is the point here; the behaviour of Osse is due to his previous association with Melkor:


Of the maiar said:


> It is said that in the making of Arda he endeavoured to draw Osse to his allegiance, promising to him all the realm and power of Ulmo, if he would serve him. So it was that long ago there arose great tumults in the sea that wrought ruin to the lands. But Uinen, at the prayer of Aule, restrained Osse and brought him before Ulmo; and he was pardoned and returned to his allegiance, to which he has remained faithful. For the most part; for the delight in violence has never wholly departed from him, and at times he will rage in his wilfulness without any command from Ulmo his lord.


----------



## Gothmog

Thorondor_ said:


> However, in their mandate, the valar chained persons, imprisoned them, banished them, hurt/killed,.. pretty harmful, wouldn't you say? Why can they do those things?


Please give specific examples of these harmful things.



> Given the divine nature of Manwe, I think that this whole "evil means" situation is also addressed in (draft) Letter #212


No this refers to what Eru can/will do. The Valar are Far more limited in their actions.



> I never argued for an "evil Manwe"; I actually said is that "the least I will argue for is that Manwe's actions are in accordance with Eru's will/laws, and since Eru is the ultimate instance of good, I see don't see a moral problem here.


And as part of the ultimate instance of good is the requirement of evil represented by Melkor and the of good represented by Manwe. However, Eru remains as much as possible outside of Arda so within Arda Eru is not in fact the 'ultimate instance of good' than position is given to Manwe in opposition to Melkor. For Manwe to use means that he considers to be Evil would require a direct order from Eru. Since there is no such order I cannot see how Manwe could be involved in a curse.


----------



## Thorondor_

> However, Eru remains as much as possible outside of Arda


I think this is a matter of debate; as Finrod says in "Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth":
"He is already in it, as well as outside,' said Finrod. 'But indeed the "in-dwelling" and the "out-living" are not in the same mode"
an idea which I think is further reinforced by his various known interventions, or implied, when Tolkien reffers to the "freedom of Eru".


> Please give specific examples of these harmful things


 Chaining, imprisoning, slaying of Melkor; the banishment of Feanor from the city; and hurts/kills inflicted in the wars in which the valar were involved one way or the other.

I think that the following versions will make it clear that we are dealing with a curse, one of "evil fortune":


OF THE FLIGHT OF THE NOLDOR said:


> $71. But most of them escaped and continued their journey, some by ship and some by foot; but the way was long and ever more evil going as they went on. After they had marched for a great while, and were come at length to the northern confines of the Blessed Realm - and they are mountainous and cold and look upon the empty waste of Eruman - they beheld a dark figure standing high upon a rock that looked down upon the shore. Some say it was the herald of the Gods, others that it was Mandos himself. There he spake in a loud voice, solemn and terrible, the curse and prophecy which is called the Prophecy of the North, warning them to return and ask for pardon, or in the end return only at last after sorrow and unspeakable misery. Much he fore- told in dark words, which only the wisest of them understood, concerning things that after befell. But all heard the curse he uttered upon those that would not stay or seek the doom and pardon of the Valar, for the spilling of the blood of their kindred at Alqualonde and fighting the first battle between the children of earth unrighteously. For this the Noldor should taste death more often and more bitterly than their kindred, by weapon and by torment and by grief; and evil fortune should pursue the house of Feanor, and their oath should turn against them, and all who now followed them should share their lot. And evil should come most upon them through treachery of kin to kin, so that in all their wars and councils they should suffer from treason and the fear of treason among themselves. But Feanor said: 'He saith not that we shall suffer from cowardice, from cravens or the fear of cravens'; and that proved true also.





Sketch of the mythology with especial reference to the 'Children of Hurin' HoME IV said:


> The flight begins.' The Teleri will not join. The Gnomes cannot escape without boats, and do not dare to cross the Grinding Ice. They attempt to seize the swan-ships in Swanhaven, and a fight ensues (the first between the races of the Earth) in which many Teleri are slain, and their ships carried off. A curse is pronounced upon the Gnomes, that they shall after suffer often from treachery and the fear of treachery among their own kindred in punishment for the blood spilled at Swanhaven. They sail North along the coast of Valinor. Mandos sends an emissary, who speaking from a high cliff hails them as they sail by, and warns them to return, and when they will not speaks the 'Prophecy of Mandos' concerning the fate of after days.'





Note on the Noldorin princes HoME IV said:


> It is curious that the curse upon the Gnomes, that they should suffer from treachery and the fear of treachery among their own kindred, is separated from the Prophecy of Mandos; but it is not said by whom this curse was pronounced. Nothing is told in S as originally written of the content of the Prophecy of Mandos, save that it concerned 'the fate of after days', but my father subsequently added that it told of 'the curse of war against one another because of Swanhaven', thus bringing the 'curse' into the content of the 'Prophecy', as in The Silmarillion. There is no trace of the old prophecies concerning Turgon and Gondolin), but nor is there any sug- gestion of the nature of the doom of the Noldor as it is stated in The Silmarillion.





ANNALS OF VALINOR said:


> In 2993 it is said they came to a place where a high rock stands above the shores, and there stood either Mandos or his messenger and spoke the Doom of Mandos. For the kin-slaying he cursed the house of Feanor, and to a less degree all who followed them or shared in their emprise, unless they would return to abide the doom and pardon of the Valar. But if they would not, then should evil fortune and disaster befall them, and ever from treachery of kin towards kin; and their oath should turn against them, and a measure of mortality should visit them, that they should be lightly slain with weapons, or torments, or sorrow, and in the end fade and wane before the younger race. And much else he foretold darkly that after befell, warning them that the Valar would fence Valinor against their return


----------



## Gothmog

> I think this is a matter of debate; as Finrod says in "Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth":
> "He is already in it, as well as outside,' said Finrod. 'But indeed the "in-dwelling" and the "out-living" are not in the same mode"
> an idea which I think is further reinforced by his various known interventions, or implied, when Tolkien reffers to the "freedom of Eru".



An Interesting point since as Finrod says in "Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth":



> 'Now none of us know, though the Valar may know, the future of Arda, or how long it is ordained to endure. But it will not endure for ever. It was made by Eru, *but He is not in it*. The One only has no limits. Arda, and Ea itself, must therefore be bounded.





> Please give specific examples of these harmful things
> 
> 
> 
> Chaining, imprisoning, slaying of Melkor; the banishment of Feanor from the city; and hurts/kills inflicted in the wars in which the valar were involved one way or the other.
Click to expand...


Ok, as for Melkor, Manwe was under orders to deal with him.

From: Of the Coming of the Elves and the Captivity of Melkor


> Manwë sat long in thought upon Taniquetil, and he sought the counsel of Ilúvatar. And coming then down to Valmar he summoned the Valar to the Ring of Doom, and thither came even Ulmo from the Outer Sea.
> Then Manwë said to the Valar: '*This is the counsel of Ilúvatar in my heart: that we should take up again the mastery of Arda, at whatsoever cost, and deliver the Quendi from the shadow of Melkor*.'



The first time they deal with Melkor they chained him and imprisoned him for three ages in Mandos. Not a very evil thing even under the direct orders of Eru himself.

The second time they had to deal with Melkor they had to put right the problems caused by their (or at least Manwe's) mistake of erring on the side of good. It had also reached a point where Melkor's continued inhabitation of Arda posed a direct threat to the existence of Arda due to his dissemination of his power through the substance of Arda and the risk of Melkor totally destroying Arda rather than allow any other to rule. The only way that this could be prevented was for Melkor's physical body to be destroyed allowing his spirit to be removed from the circles of the world with the permission and help of Eru.

As for the hurts/killing during the wars of the Valar vs Melkor, these were the results of the necessity imposed on the Valar at those times by Eru.

In the case of Feanor's banishment, where was the evil/harm caused by the Valar? The evil awoken in Feanor's heart by Melkor caused him to draw sword against close kin. The Valar banished him from Tirion for this evil act but did nothing else to him.




> I think that the following versions will make it clear that we are dealing with a curse, one of "evil fortune":



And I think that they would indeed make it clear if we knew which version, if any of those, JRRT would have used. Unfortunately The Sil. was still a 'Work in Progress' when the professor died. So we have the problem of reconciling a Manwe 'who is free of evil' with one who without orders from above uses something that he sees as evil for good purposes. A problem, no doubt that Tolkien himself would have been working on.

Of the versions you cited only one specifically states that the curse was laid on the Noldor by Mandos. Of the others it is not entirely clear just where the curse comes from in that it is uttered by Mandos while giving the Prophecy of the North. During the ongoing work Tolkien did on this story he had already moved away from the great rage and division within the Valar and Elves of Valinor found in BoLT 1 to sorrow for the marring of Feanor in the Sil.

The thing is, the Valar erred on the side of what they thought Good even under the direct orders of Eru. When told to "take up again the mastery of Arda, at whatsoever cost, and deliver the Quendi from the shadow of Melkor." They would not continue the evil of war past the point of capturing Melkor. Instead of retaining the mastery of Arda and clearing the rest of Melkor's servants they called the Quendi to leave Middle-earth for Aman so as to protect them both from the evils of Melkor and the evils of war with Melkor's servants.


----------



## Thorondor_

> An Interesting point since as Finrod says in "Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth":
> 
> 
> 
> 'Now none of us know, though the Valar may know, the future of Arda, or how long it is ordained to endure. But it will not endure for ever. It was made by Eru, *but He is not in it*. The One only has no limits. Arda, and Ea itself, must therefore be bounded.
Click to expand...

 I think that the reconciliation between our quotes relies on the fact that Finrod doesn't believe that Eru, Himself, is wholly in Ea, but admits to Him having the possibility to achieve that:


> 'He is already in it, as well as outside,' said Finrod. 'But indeed the "in-dwelling" and the "out-living" are not in the same mode.'
> 'Truly,' said Andreth. 'So may Eru in that mode be present in Ea that proceeded from Him. But they speak of Eru Himself entering into Arda, and that is a thing wholly different. How could He the greater do this? Would it not shatter Arda, or indeed all Ea? '
> 'Ask me not,' said Finrod. 'These things are beyond the compass of the wisdom of the Eldar, or of the Valar maybe. But I doubt that our words may mislead us, and that when you say "greater" you think of the dimensions of Arda, in which the greater vessel may not be contained in the less. 'But such words may not be used of the Measureless. If Eru wished to do this, I do not doubt that He would find a way, though I cannot foresee it. For, as it seems to me, even if He in Himself were to enter in, He must still remain also as He is: the Author without. And yet, Andreth, to speak with humility, I cannot conceive how else this healing could be achieved. Since Eru will surely not suffer Melkor to turn the world to his own will and to triumph in the end. Yet there is no power conceiv- able greater than Melkor save Eru only. Therefore Eru, if He will not relinquish His work to Melkor, who must else proceed to mastery, then Eru must come in to conquer him.


 with the comment:


> Therefore, since it was unthinkable that Eru would abandon the world to the ultimate triumph and domination of Melkor (which could mean its ruin and reduction to chaos), Eru Himself must at some time come to oppose Melkor. But Eru could not enter wholly into the world and its history, which is, however great, only a finite Drama. He must as Author always remain 'outside' the Drama, even though that Drama depends on His design and His will for its beginning and continuance, in every detail and moment. Finrod therefore thinks that He will, when He comes, have to be both 'outside' and inside; and so he glimpses the possibility of complexity or of distinctions in the nature of Eru, which nonetheless leaves Him 'The One'.





> As for the hurts/killing during the wars of the Valar vs Melkor, these were the results of the necessity imposed on the Valar at those times by Eru.


 My point is exactly this: that in their actions, the valar are acting in accordance with Eru, even when doing things which, _in and of themselves_, are evil (quotes from the same source):
- "that Drama depends on His design and His will for its beginning and continuance, in every detail and moment"
- "his attempt to dominate the structure of Ea, and of Arda in particular, and alter the designs of Eru (_which governed all the operations of the faithful Valar_)"


> And I think that they would indeed make it clear if we knew which version, if any of those, JRRT would have used.


 However, _all_ versions speak of evil casted upon the elves through this curse.


> Of the others it is not entirely clear just where the curse comes from


 Hm, I am not sure I understand (or follow the point); in all 3 versions, there is refference to Mandos concerning the curse:

- "Some say it was the herald of the Gods, others that it was Mandos himself"
- "but my father subsequently added that it told of 'the curse of war against one another because of Swanhaven', thus bringing the 'curse' into the content of the 'Prophecy' [of Mandos], as in The Silmarillion"
- "and there stood either Mandos or his messenger and spoke the Doom of Mandos"

the formulation being more or less similar to Sillmarilion:
"Some say that it was Mandos himself, and no lesser herald of Manwe"


----------



## Gothmog

> I think that the reconciliation between our quotes relies on the fact that Finrod doesn't believe that Eru, Himself, is wholly in Ea, but admits to Him having the possibility to achieve that:


Actually it is even easier than that. Looking at the comment you also posted.


> Therefore, since it was unthinkable that Eru would abandon the world to the ultimate triumph and domination of Melkor (which could mean its ruin and reduction to chaos), *Eru Himself must at some time come to oppose Melkor. But Eru could not enter wholly into the world and its history, which is, however great, only a finite Drama*.


So Eru would only do so when it was Necessary. Or as I said earlier


> However, Eru remains as much as possible outside of Arda





> My point is exactly this: that in their actions, the valar are acting in accordance with Eru, even when doing things which, in and of themselves, are evil


Even when they remove the Elves from Middle-earth were by Eru's will they were placed and intended to live?

When they act in accordance with Eru's express orders they how can they do anything that is in and of itself evil? Eru you say is the ultimate instance of Good. He only does what is good for his creation.

However, in the case of the Rebelion of the Noldor there is no evidence that Eru gave orders to the Valar to over-rule their choice of actions.



> Hm, I am not sure I understand (or follow the point); in all 3 versions, there is refference to Mandos concerning the curse:


But only one of them (ANNALS OF VALINOR, HoME IV) specificaly states that Mandos cursed them. In the others he only says about the curse. The Doom of Mandos covered more than just the curse of the Noldor. 


> "but my father subsequently added that it told of 'the curse of war against one another because of Swanhaven', thus bringing the 'curse' into the content of the 'Prophecy' [of Mandos], as in The Silmarillion"


The Doom of Mandos foretold many things that were to come. The tale of the Curse was Included in the Doom but it was not The Doom, they were not interchangable.


----------



## Alcuin

Thorondor_ said:


> in their actions, the valar are acting in accordance with Eru, even when doing things which, in and of themselves, are evil


 This echoes the argument by philosophers that God cannot be good because He tolerates the existence of evil; or alternately that He is, by one means or another, the source of evil Himself. If we pursue this line of argument, *dapence* will descend upon us at some point and lock closed the thread; but if we stick to Tolkien’s own words, I think we can follow it some distance.

Before I proceed, however, I must pause to point out a couple of fallacies in your argument. Surgeons wound their patients every time they cut upon them: sometimes those wounds are deep and vital, and indeed, without the intense attentions of the surgeon and his assistants, and following that of many other practitioners, they would certainly be fatal. To ascribe to the surgeon some evil intent would be ridiculous: his intent is not to harm but to heal. Slicing open a man or woman with a sharp knife would normally be an action that would entail arrest and imprisonment, but for the surgeon, failure to do so might be malpractice. 

It is not the action but the intent that defines whether someone is committing evil. Indeed, evil can arise where no action has yet taken place: it can and does fester in the heart, as it did with Fëanor before his jealous assault upon Fingolfin in Tirion in Finwë’s palace. There are times, as in war, in which there is no other action that can be taken that is not destructive unless one wants to be himself destroyed. Those who initiate evil must bear all the consequences of their actions, including the actions of those who are not evil who must kill or destroy to stop them. The police are not charged with violating traffic regulations when they speed after a felon in hot pursuit; nor are soldiers charged with murder for the killing they must do of necessity in combat.

Evil entered into Eä and thus into Arda through the machinations of Melkor even before it came into physical being. From Letter 212 (a draft of an extension of letter 211 to Rhona Beare, 1958):


> The Ainur took part in the making of the world as ‘sub-creators’: in various degrees, after this fashion. They interpreted according to their powers, and completed in detail, the Design propounded to them by the One. This was propounded first in musical or abstract form, and then in an ‘historical vision’. In the first interpretation, the vast Music of the Ainur, Melkor introduced alterations, not interpretations of the mind of the One, and great discord arose. The One then presented this ‘Music’, including the apparent discords, as a visible ‘history’.


 In this case, Eru did not create the “alterations, not interpretations” that Melkor made, but he translated them into Eä as a literal depiction of the Music of the Ainur as it then existed, alterations and all. The inclusion of Melkor’s discordance is annunciated by Ilúvatar himself in _Ainulindalë_: 


> ‘Behold your Music! This is your minstrelsy; and each of you shall find contained herein, amid the design that I set before you, all those things which it may seem that he himself devised or added. And thou, Melkor, wilt discover all the secret thoughts of thy mind, and wilt perceive that they are but a part of the whole and tributary to its glory.’


 There is no indication in _Ainulindalë_ that Eru was pleased with what Melkor had done: in fact, *quite* the opposite. Melkor’s motive was selfish and usurperous: 


> [Melkor] had gone often alone into the void places seeking the Imperishable Flame; for desire grew hot within him to bring into Being things of his own, and it seemed to him that Ilúvatar took no thought for the Void, and he was impatient of its emptiness. Yet he found not the Fire, for it is with Ilúvatar. But being alone he had begun to conceive thoughts of his own unlike those of his brethren.


 By incorporating even Melkor’s discord into Eä and not purging it, Eru demonstrates which of the two of them, Creator or creation, is the Greater, who is the Master, and that all things must eventually work to the will of Eru. This does not mean that Eru either devised evil or sanctioned it, but that those who work evil must find that Eru can master even their wicked deeds and overcome them:


> Then Ilúvatar spoke, and he said: ‘Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Ilúvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.’


 Melkor must eventually arrive to a conclusion similar to the words set in the mouth of the fiend Beelzebub in Book 2 of Milton’s _Paradise Lost_ in which he acknowledges that the fallen angels cannot be free of their service to God despite their rebellion and consignment to Hell:


> And know not that the King of Heav’n hath doom’d
> This place our dungeon, not our safe retreat
> Beyond his Potent arm, to live exempt
> From Heav’ns high jurisdiction, in new League
> Banded against his Throne, but to remaine
> In strictest bondage, though thus far remov’d,
> Under th’ inevitable curb, reserv’d
> His captive multitude: For he, be sure,
> In highth or depth, still first and last will Reign
> Sole King, and of his Kingdom loose no part
> By our revolt, but over Hell extend
> His Empire, and with Iron Scepter rule
> Us here, as with his Golden those in Heav’n.


 To attribute to Eru the rebellion of Melkor and his wickedness is to fail to understand the cosmology of Tolkien’s subcreation, I believe. To assign evil motivation to the Chaining of Melkor and his imprisonment in the Halls of Mandos is a wild misinterpretation: to be good does not entail allowing oneself to be enslaved or slaughtered, but like the archangel Michael in _Paradise Lost_ or Tulkas, Oromë, and Eönwë in _Silmarillion_, it means to fight back. Aragorn does not submit himself to death or servitude to Sauron, he *fights*, and he gathers and leads others to war. That he and those he led were willing, if necessary, to sacrifice themselves in hopeless combat at the Black Gate does not lessen in any way his willingness – or indeed the necessity – of fighting back, of imposing evil. But nowhere can I find any reason to ascribe to Aragorn any evil intent, any malice, because he slew and destroyed his enemies and their works.

The passage you quote from “Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth” is part of Finrod’s conversation after Andreth has revealed to him a secret that Men have kept from the Eldar, the “Old Hope”:


> ‘What then was this hope, if you know?’ Finrod asked.
> 
> ‘They say,’ answered Andreth, ‘they say that the One will himself enter into Arda, and heal Men and all the Marring from the beginning to the end. This they say also, or they feign, is a rumour that has come down through years uncounted, even from the days of our undoing.’


 I think this is a clear-cut case of Tolkien’s Christian faith entering into his subcreation. And I think I will leave this part line of the thread at that, before we all get our mitts smacked.


----------



## Alcuin

Gothmog said:


> The Doom of Mandos covered more than just the curse of the Noldor.
> 
> 
> 
> "but my father subsequently added that it told of 'the curse of war against one another because of Swanhaven', thus bringing the 'curse' into the content of the 'Prophecy' [of Mandos], as in The Silmarillion"
> 
> 
> 
> The Doom of Mandos foretold many things that were to come. The tale of the Curse was Included in the Doom but it was not The Doom, they were not interchangable.
Click to expand...




Thorondor_ said:


> I think that the following versions will make it clear that we are dealing with a curse, one of "evil fortune":


 For my part, it seems to me that any idea that this was a “curse” was a product of the earlier works, when the Noldor were still the Gnomes, and that as the story became more fully developed, it became more and more a “doom” or “prophecy,” two words that would seem to me interchangeable in this context. In fact, the ultimate fate of the world, in which Morgoth returns to Arda and Turin returns to destroy him in the Dagor Dagorath is called the “Second Prophecy of Mandos,” while this “Doom of Mandos” is the First Prophecy.

In any case, to predict or prophesy or even to confirm as a doom that the outcome of one’s actions are going to be unpleasant, regrettable, repulsive, or even ‘of “evil fortune”’ does not constitute an evil intent on the part of the speaker. I cannot for myself see evil intent in the words that Mandos spoke in Araman; otherwise, would not the followers of Finarfin who returned to Tirion have suffered as well? If this is truly a curse, then why do they not fall to killing and betraying one another? Or are they exempted because they have turned away from following Fëanor?

Consider Tolkien’s own words about this matter outside the context of the tales appear in Letter 131 to Milton Waldman, written in late 1951:


> The sons of Fëanor take a terrible and blasphemous oath of enmity and vengeance against all or any, even of the gods, who dares to claim any part or right in the Silmarilli. They pervert the greater part of their kindred, who rebel against the gods, and depart from paradise, and go to make hopeless war upon the Enemy. The first fruit of their fall is war in Paradise, the slaying of Elves by Elves, and this and their evil oath dogs all their later heroism, generating treacheries and undoing all victories.
> ...
> The oath of the sons of Fëanor becomes operative, and lust for the Silmaril brings all the kingdoms of the Elves to ruin.
> 
> ... Eärendil the Wanderer ... is ... a representative of both Kindreds, Elves and Men, is to find a sea-passage back to the Land of the Gods, and as ambassador persuade them to take thought again for the Exiles, to pity them, and rescue them from the Enemy. His wife Elwing descends from Lúthien and still possesses the Silmaril. But the curse still works, and Eärendil’s home is destroyed by the sons of Fëanor. But this provides the solution: Elwing casting herself into the Sea to save the Jewel comes to Eärendil, and with the power of the great Gem they pass at last to Valinor, and accomplish their errand ... The last two sons of Fëanor, compelled by their oath, steal them, and are destroyed by them, casting themselves into the sea, and the pits of the earth.
> 
> ... the Exiled Elves were, if not commanded, at least sternly counseled to return into the West, and there be at peace. They were not to dwell permanently in Valinor again, but in the Lonely Isle of Eressëa within sight of the Blessed Realm.


------------------------------------------​


Élhendi said:


> Which was the most effective? That is which was most fully complete in its intent, The Doom of Mandos or The Curse of Morgoth.


 Élhendi’s thread-starter dealt with which of these two pronouncements by a Vala “was most fully complete in its intent.” If I may, let me ask you two direct questions that might perhaps allow us to set aside the issue of “Curse” or “Doom” and return to the original subject of the thread, Thorondor_: Do you attribute the Prophecy of Mandos to malice by the Valar against the Noldor? And would you agree that the Curse of Morgoth on Húrin and his family arises out of his malice?


----------



## Gothmog

Alcuin


> This echoes the argument by philosophers that God cannot be good because He tolerates the existence of evil; or alternately that He is, by one means or another, the source of evil Himself. If we pursue this line of argument, dapence will descend upon us at some point and lock closed the thread; but if we stick to Tolkien’s own words, I think we can follow it some distance.


Have no fear on this. Religion can be discussed on TTF so long as it is in relation to Tolkien and/or his works.


----------



## Thorondor_

> So Eru would only do so when it was Necessary. Or as I said earlier
> 
> 
> 
> However, Eru remains as much as possible outside of Arda
Click to expand...

Well, if our positions are reconciled as such, then your previous argument about Eru not being the ultimate instance of good lost its force. While Eru Himself is not in Ea, he also "dwells" in it, and "that Drama depends on His design and His will for its beginning and continuance, in every detail and moment" - and this quote alone should give you the reason why the valar acted the way they did.


> When they act in accordance with Eru's express orders they how can they do anything that is in and of itself evil? Eru you say is the ultimate instance of Good. He only does what is good for his creation.


Yes, in the same idea, I previously quoted from the letters that "divine 'punishment' is also a divine 'gift', if accepted, since its object is ultimate blessing". Eru, (or his agents acting in accordance with his will), can do things which are evil in and of themselves, but which ultimately produce good [since "of all His designs the issue must be for His Children's joy" (and his designs "governed all the operations of the faithful Valar_"_)].


> But only one of them (ANNALS OF VALINOR, HoME IV) specificaly states that Mandos cursed them


So does "Of the flight of the noldor":
"Some say it was the herald of the Gods, others that it was Mandos himself. There he spake in a loud voice, solemn and terrible, the curse and prophecy which is called the Prophecy of the North"


> The Doom of Mandos foretold many things that were to come. The tale of the Curse was Included in the Doom but it was not The Doom, they were not interchangable.


I disagree; in only one instance (Sketch of the mythology with especial reference to the 'Children of Hurin' HoME IV) the curse and the doom are separated.


> It is not the action but the intent that defines whether someone is committing evil.


I completely agree, that is why I see no problem with the fact that the valar cursed the noldor - an aspect which you and Gothmog dislike about them.


> In this case, Eru did not create the “alterations, not interpretations” that Melkor made, but he translated them into Eä as a literal depiction of the Music of the Ainur as it then existed, alterations and all.


However, as you yourself quoted:
"all those things which it may seem that he himself devised or added"
(again, the "seem" part rather ruins your argument)
"And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite"
Even Melkor does Eru's will, perhaps even when he was singing.


> For my part, it seems to me that any idea that this was a “curse” was a product of the earlier works, when the Noldor were still the Gnomes, and that as the story became more fully developed, it became more and more a “doom” or “prophecy,” two words that would seem to me interchangeable in this context. In fact, the ultimate fate of the world, in which Morgoth returns to Arda and Turin returns to destroy him in the Dagor Dagorath is called the “Second Prophecy of Mandos,” while this “Doom of Mandos” is the First Prophecy


I believe that the reconciliation between our positions, one which would be in accordance with Tolkien's writting, is that the will (or doom) of the valar is carried out to its completion by the curse (as an instrument of their will).


> To assign evil motivation to the Chaining of Melkor and his imprisonment in the Halls of Mandos is a wild misinterpretation


I think there is a misunderstanding here: where did I say it had an evil motivation?


> In any case, to predict or prophesy or even to confirm as a doom that the outcome of one’s actions are going to be unpleasant, regrettable, repulsive, or even ‘of “evil fortune”’ does not constitute an evil intent on the part of the speaker


Same question: where have I argued the valar had evil motivations?


> Do you attribute the Prophecy of Mandos to malice by the Valar against the Noldor?


No; it was a "right" "retribution" for what they have done, esspecially in a holy land.


> And would you agree that the Curse of Morgoth on Húrin and his family arises out of his malice?


Yes.


----------



## Arvedui

Just one thought on Eru being the ultimate Good:
If he was, how could he have made Melkor as an offspring of his thoughts?

Just a question...

*hides*


----------



## Thorondor_

Élhendi said:


> Just one thought on Eru being the ultimate Good:
> If he was, how could he have made Melkor as an offspring of his thoughts?


I think the answer is given in Myths Transformed:


> Nonetheless this gift of Ilúvatar to the Valar has its own peril, as have all his free gifts: which is in the end no more than to say that they play a part in the Great Tale so that it may be complete; for without peril they would be without power, and the giving would be void.
> 
> He must have grasped with great clarity what even we may perceive dimly: that it was the essential mode of the process of 'history' in Arda that evil should constantly arise, and that out of it _new good should constantly come_


----------



## Arvedui

I am afraid that I might slide slightly out of topic here, but still...
My point was that as long as some of the Ainur became "evil" (Melkor, Sauron, balrogs, etc), and as they are offspring of Eru's thoughts, then I find it hard to believe that Eru was all good.

But that is another discussion, and I think that there is a thread about it somewhere.

Ah, yes. Here it is http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?t=1051


----------



## Thorondor_

Well, the evil thing is that the thread is closed, though I would have liked to think some of the points were not so correct. For example, there is one instance where Eru is reffered to as Almighty:


The theory of the work said:


> In the margin of the text of this page, which ends at this point, my father wrote: 'The Almighty even after the Fall allowed an earthly paradise to be maintained for a while; but the Eledai were bidden to withdraw thither as men spread - if they would remain as they had been: otherwise they would fade and diminish.'


 And I think that the degree of determinism is very high in Ea, as pointed previously:


Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth said:


> that Drama depends on His design and His will for its beginning and continuance, in every detail and moment


 and concerning discord (at least some aspects of it):


Myths transformed said:


> Out of the discords of the Music — sc. not directly out of either of the themes, Eru's or Melkor's, but of their dissonance with regard one to another - evil things appeared in Arda, which did not descend from any direct plan or vision of Melkor: they were not 'his children'; and therefore, since all evil hates, hated him too





> My point was that as long as some of the Ainur became "evil" (Melkor, Sauron, balrogs, etc), and as they are offspring of Eru's thoughts, then I find it hard to believe that Eru was all good.


 Why? Just because there is an intermediary step (evil) between two levels of good (one attainable "as it is", and one attainable through struggle against evil, so that evil is a source of more good, beauty and meaning)? Not to mention that "of all His designs the issue must be for His Children's joy" (Atrabeth).


----------



## Gothmog

Thorondor_ said:


> Well, if our positions are reconciled as such, then your previous argument about Eru not being the ultimate instance of good lost its force. While Eru Himself is not in Ea, he also "dwells" in it, and "that Drama depends on His design and His will for its beginning and continuance, in every detail and moment" - and this quote alone should give you the reason why the valar acted the way they did.


Our positions are reconciled in that according to both he does not interfere in Arda unless it is necessary. This does not mean that we agree on the how much interference that amounts to. Eru does not direct every action by the Valar or any other creature in Arda. That would prevent him from giving free-will to any. He set a very broad out-line which had a certain beginning and a certain end, what happened in between was decided in the Music of the Ainur.

The Valar acted in the way they did because Eru gave them free-will to add to his design according to their will and power. Don't forget, while Eru gave the basic theme the Valar added to it in the Music. Eru caused Arda to be according to that combined effort. So while it depends on Eru's will for continuance in every detail, not every detail is from Eru. He also ensures that the details put in by the Ainur are included in his original design.

What your argument results in is a total lack of free-will in Arda. Eru controls everything that happens in Arda. Therefore there can be no good and no evil, all things are exactly as Eru wills it. I am aware that Free-will is limited. It is only the ability to pick without coercion between the choices available. However, if Eru is making all the decisions then there are no choices for the Valar and the Free-will given in the Ainulindale does not exist.




Thorondor_ said:


> Yes, in the same idea, I previously quoted from the letters that "divine 'punishment' is also a divine 'gift', if accepted, since its object is ultimate blessing". Eru, (or his agents acting in accordance with his will), can do things which are evil in and of themselves, but which ultimately produce good [since "of all His designs the issue must be for His Children's joy" (and his designs "governed all the operations of the faithful Valar")].



The quote from the letter (212) does not mention his agents


> A divine 'punishment' is also a divine 'gift', if accepted, since its object is ultimate blessing, and the supreme inventiveness of the Creator will make 'punishments' (that is changes of design) produce a good not otherwise to be attained:



His agents acting in accordance with his will are incapable of such actions. The "divine 'punishment' that is a divine 'gift' is in the hands of Eru alone. It refers to changes of the Doom of peoples or persons that lie only in the hand of Eru such as changing the fate of Lúthien from that of Elf-kind to Mortal-kind. The only time that the Valar were given a say in such acts was in the case of the 'Half-Elven' where Doom was given to Manwe



> Of the Voyage of Eärendil and the War of Wrath
> 
> But when all was spoken, Manwë gave judgement, and he said: 'In this matter the power of doom is given to me. The peril that he ventured for love of the Two Kindreds shall not fall upon Eärendil, nor shall it fall upon Elwing his wife who entered into peril for love of him; but they shall not walk again ever among Elves or Men in the Outer Lands. And this is my decree concerning them: to Eärendil and to Elwing, and to their sons, shall be given leave each to choose freely to which kindred their fates shall be joined, and under which kindred they shall be judged.'


However, while Doom (the decision) of what would happen to the 'half-elven' was given to Manwe, the Power to change fates was not.



> Letter 153 To Peter Hastings
> As for 'whose authority decides these things?' The immediate 'authorities' are the Valar (the Powers or Authorities): the 'gods'. But they are only created spirits – of high angelic order we should say, with their attendant lesser angels – reverend, therefore, but not worshipful ; and though potently 'subcreative', and resident on Earth to which they are bound by love, having assisted in its making and ordering, *they cannot by their own will alter any fundamental provision. They called upon the One in the crisis of the rebellion of Numenor – when the Númenóreans attempted to take the Undying Land by force of a great armada in their lust for corporal immortality – which necessitated a catastrophic change in the shape of Earth*. Immortality and Mortality being the special gifts of God to the Eruhini (in whose conception and creation the Valar had no part at all) it must be assumed that no alteration of their fundamental kind could be effected by the Valar even in one case: the cases of Lúthien (and Túor) and the position of their descendants was a direct act of God. The entering into Men of the Elven-strain is indeed represented as part of a Divine Plan for the ennoblement of the Human Race, from the beginning destined to replace the Elves.






Thorondor_ said:


> So does "Of the flight of the noldor":
> "Some say it was the herald of the Gods, others that it was Mandos himself. There he spake in a loud voice, solemn and terrible, the curse and prophecy which is called the Prophecy of the North"



No, in the others, including "Of the Flight of the Noldor" Mandos simply speaks about it. There is no statement in there that the Curse came from him or any of the Valar.



Thorondor_ said:


> I disagree; in only one instance (Sketch of the mythology with especial reference to the 'Children of Hurin' HoME IV) the curse and the doom are separated.



In the comment you quoted it stated quite clearly that Tolkien at that point Included the curse of the Noldor into the content of the Prophesy of the North. Therefore the two are not the same. The Prophesy includes a statement about the Curse and the statement about the Curse is only a part of the Prophesy.


Thorondor_ said:


> I completely agree, that is why I see no problem with the fact that the valar cursed the noldor - an aspect which you and Gothmog dislike about them.



Where have I even hinted that I dislike this about them? For my part I am arguing that they did not curse the Noldor since they could not do so without acting in the same way as Melkor, that is acting contrary to their nature.


----------

