# The true hero of the Simarillion.



## Alatar

I have been thinking after the true villan and true hero of lord of lord of the rings, who is the true hero of the Sil. This is alot more complicated as it covers a longer period of history but here it goes.


----------



## Ingwë

The Silmarilion is a sad book, very sad. Many fair Elves were slain and many Men were killed by the Evil forces. I don't think there is a hero in the Sil.
Fëanor was slain, Fingolfin was killed by Melkor, Gondolin was destroyes and Nargothrond, too; Beren and Lúthien died, Thingol was killed by the Dwarves, Túrin Turambar has killed himself, Húrin Talion died and Morwen Eledhwen - my favourite female character. Is there a hero? All fair persons were slain.    Interesting thread, Alatar. I will be glad to see more posts here. 

And as far as I know _Valar_ in plural and _Vala_ in single.


----------



## Alatar

Ah but that is not for them to decide only to decided what to do with what time they are given.
I am not judgeing on sucess but rather bravery and noble caractericts. That is why i voted for fingolfin, no sucess but he tried.


----------



## Alatar

I forgot Earendil and i can only do 10 poll options.​Btw ingwe is right it is vala i was not think ing clearly, hence that^


----------



## Greenwood

Earendil is the one.


----------



## Ingwë

Well, he can use only 10 characters in the poll. But we can post our favourites here. 
You think that Earendil is the hero but he don't play part in the events in the earlier First age. He wasn't born when Fingolfin was slain and Thingol fell. But his role is very important: he helped the Elves and Men to destroy Melkor with the help of the Valar.


Btw yoy have not written Tuor but Tour. Wow, public poll


----------



## Confusticated

If we compare this with the Third Age, Earendil's role was like Frodo's, Ulmo's like Gandalf's. (Beren and Luthien like Bilbo ... and so on) I never question that Frodo was the hero of LotR. That Earendil and Frodo had relatively short roles doesn't count against them in my view. Earendil is the first person who comes to mind when I see the question here. _ ...the looked for that cometh at unawares, the longed for that cometh beyond hope! _


----------



## Alatar

Nóm said:


> If we compare this with the Third Age, Earendil's role was like Frodo's, Ulmo's like Gandalf's. (Beren and Luthien like Bilbo ... and so on)/QUOTE]
> That is a good comparison, though bilbo being beren is a little weird, though i do not doubt that that hobbit would be very proud if unworthy of that title.


----------



## Gothmog

There you go. Slight polishing to the poll.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur

I have to agree with Ingwë: no heros. There were certainly heroic _deeds_, but after all is said and done, no one was really left standing. And the structure of the book prevented it in a sense: it being a patchwork of separate sections, and being incomplete. It was a recounting almost of a series separate challenges and crises with no real continuity (at least not to me), with the exception of the very early parts. I don't think The Silmarillion shows the elves in a very good light, taken all in all. They are at least as much the slaves of their emotions and get into as much trouble because of them as any of the tribes of men.

Barley


----------



## Hammersmith

Aside from Beren and Luthien's tale being my favourite in the Sil (maybe in the whole Middle Earth saga) I voted for Beren because it was his initial act of bravery and nobility that set in motion the final victory. He was never defeated by Morgoth, and he died happy and content, with the woman he loved. Even Aragorn didn't go out as well as that.

But really, I voted for him because he's my favourite. A few other characters may have more of a right to cal themselves "THE hero"


----------



## Greenwood

Hammersmith said:


> Even Aragorn didn't go out as well as that.


???????????????????????? !!!!!!!!

Did I miss something or does your copy of LOTR have a different set of appendices than mine?


----------



## Hammersmith

Greenwood said:


> ???????????????????????? !!!!!!!!
> 
> Did I miss something or does your copy of LOTR have a different set of appendices than mine?


Oh, sure he died old and content, but the woman he loved was doomed to wander the earth shedding bitter tears for a year after his death. Close runner up, but Beren had it better


----------



## Thorondor_

> He was never defeated by Morgoth


Tho Beren is a great hero indeed, a mouse passing by a sedated cat could hardly claim any merit .


----------



## Alatar

I think that a hero can not be judged for his sucess, Finrod is a hero, though he died, he lay down his life to savehis freind and ended up saving ME.


----------



## Beleg

Beleg Beleg


----------



## Ingwë

Alatar said:


> Ah but that is not for them to decide only to decided what to do with what time they are given.
> I am not judgeing on sucess but rather bravery and noble caractericts. That is why i voted for fingolfin, no sucess but he tried.


 
All the heroes of the Silmarilion tried. All the Elves and Men tried overthrowing the Enemy so you can't judge only trying


----------



## Alatar

I go for how hard they tried, and what they were will9ing to lose and what they did, finrod dueling with sauron with spells! If galadriel did that and won... make you wondoer what finrod would have done with the ring.


----------



## Hammersmith

Thorondor_ said:


> Tho Beren is a great hero indeed, a mouse passing by a sedated cat could hardly claim any merit .


But a mouse whose girlfriend lulled the cat to sleep could


----------



## Ellatur

i picked earendil


----------



## Ingwë

Alatar said:


> I go for how hard they tried, and what they were willing to lose and what they did, *F*inrod dueling with *S*auron with spells! If *G*aladriel did that and won... make you wondoer what *F*inrod would have done with the *R*ing.


Beren lost his hand, Finrod died defending his friend, Fëanor was slain by the Balrogs, Lúthien chose mortality, Fingolfin was killed by Morgoth, Turin wed his sister... They all tried very hard. 
Finrod was slain in the First age and the One Ring was forged in the Second age. ...I cannot say what would happen if Finrog took the One Ring.


----------



## baragund

I voted for Tuor, because he set so many important things in motion.

But I have a special place in my heart for Barahir who, along with his 12 companions, bedeviled the occupying forces of evil in Dorthonion for so long before finally being defeated by deceit and betrayal.


----------



## Thorondor_

Hammersmith said:


> But a mouse whose girlfriend lulled the cat to sleep could


 
Yes, he could claim that he is one heluva Don Juan mouse


----------



## ingolmo

Definately Earendil. He sailed back to Valinor, he took a Silmaril and sailed into the sky forever.


----------



## Eledhwen

I voted for Beleg because of his heart, his valour and his honour. He paid for them with his life - by the sword of the man he was protecting.


----------



## Iluvatar

I went with Tuor on this one, since as ststed above he's the one who puts the whole thing in motion so far as getting the Valar involved.

But, given that rationale, I'd have rather put down Ulmo, who throughout all the incarnations of the story, from the Lost Tales to the Sil, was not the idiot that were the other Vala. Ulmo never ever ever forsook the Elves and eventual Men, whereas Manwe and the others helped out in only fits and starts and at times were downright obstructionist in the battle against Morgoth. Unfortunately, Ulmo was not an option, and I have no interest in the catch-all Vala selecftion.

Could I have voted for Earendil? Definitely, and the chances of my doing so would have been increased hugely had Tolkien ever got hisself off his lazy keyster  and actually written the story. You liked Samwise against Shelob? Well, howze about Earendil going mano-a-monstero against Ungoliante? Now that's what I'm talking about.


----------



## Alatar

Iluvatar said:


> I went with Tuor on this one, since as ststed above he's the one who puts the whole thing in motion so far as getting the Valar involved.
> 
> But, given that rationale, I'd have rather put down Ulmo, who throughout all the incarnations of the story, from the Lost Tales to the Sil, was not the idiot that were the other Vala. Ulmo never ever ever forsook the Elves and eventual Men, whereas Manwe and the others helped out in only fits and starts and at times were downright obstructionist in the battle against Morgoth.


Well said, though Earendil never fought Ungolaint, even in the BolT it is never said for certain, just that he came near to her shadows or somthing.


----------



## Ponte

Without Fëanor there would have be no Silmarills and so the light of the trees would have been forever lost. Therefor Fëanor is the true hero of The Silmarillion.


----------



## Ingwë

Almost 2 years later my thoughts have changed a bit... I voted Earendil, but I still don't think he is the real hero because he only finished what his fathers have started. The story is won't be the same without any of the characters in the poll. They're all great.
Btw, I would have voted for Beren and Luthien if I had such an option. I don't think they must be separated.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur

Alatar said:


> I have been thinking after the true villan and true hero of lord of lord of the rings, who is the true hero of the Sil.



It was _Eru,_ natch, widout which you ain't got *nuttin'!* (Unless you count JRR, widout which you ain't got Eru!)

Barley


----------



## Grond

Ingwë said:


> Almost 2 years later my thoughts have changed a bit... I voted Earendil, but I still don't think he is the real hero because he only finished what his fathers have started. The story is won't be the same without any of the characters in the poll. They're all great.
> Btw, I would have voted for Beren and Luthien if I had such an option. I don't think they must be separated.


As all my old friends here know... Fingolfin is my favorite hero but... Earendil is the greatest hero. With Elwing's inspiration, he sailed to Valinor and risked all (both her and him) for the salvation of the Noldor. He then gave up his greatest gift (to die a man) and agreed to sail the heavens for eternity. That's sacrifice and that's a hero.



Barliman Butterbur said:


> It was _Eru,_ natch, widout which you ain't got *nuttin'!* (Unless you count JRR, widout which you ain't got Eru!)
> 
> Barley



I would hardly call Eru the Hero... he's more of the playwright. He created Melkor and, hence, Himself brought evil into the Music. He's as much villain as hero. Or maybe it's just "He Is!" My, that sounds familiar.

Cheers,

grond


----------



## Luke Sineath

why do people insist that there are no heroes because everyone dies? that doesn't rule out heroism at all, *especially* in tolkien's mythology--for his mythology is based on the scandinavian worldview. you guys are thinking more of the greek concept of heroism. 

scandinavian heroism carries with it the implication that the hero is definitely doomed and will eventually die. the hero knows this, but carries on anyway. E.V.Gordon, a friend and collaborator of tolkien's, wrote a brilliant few pages on the concept of heroism in the north in his book _An Introduction to Old Norse_:


> Most of the sagas are tragedies, because a good death was the greatest triumph of heroic character, and only in defeat and death was all the hero's power of resistance called into play. Indeed, most heroic literture is tragic, and most true tragedies are heroic. It is the essence of tragedy that there should be a note of triumph in the catastrophein that the hero's spirit remains unconquered; tragedy, too, is a version of the evil in ife, and how it is overcome, though it appears to win. The only difference in principle between the tragedy of the sagas and the tragedy of Shakespeare is that Shakespeare usually makes the disaster result from some flaw in the hero's character; while in the sagas the disaster is inevitable simply because the hero is heroically uncompromising. (xxxi-xxxii)


----------



## Noldor_returned

It has to be Earendil. He was the one responsible for the Valar stepping in. Sure others had a worthy contribution, but he ended it. Turin slayed the dragon, whoop-de-doo. Tuor rescued heaps of people. Good on him. Seriously. What other choice is there?


----------



## Ingwë

Luke Sineath said:


> why do people insist that there are no heroes because everyone dies? that doesn't rule out heroism at all, *especially* in tolkien's mythology--for his mythology is based on the scandinavian worldview. you guys are thinking more of the greek concept of heroism.


Well, I didn't insist there are no heroes, I think all of them [well, most of them] are heroes. They lived in heroic time. I just think there is no such a thing as true hero. If Earendil didn't sail he wouldn't save the peoples of Beleriand, but if Tuor didn't take the journey to Gondolin there wouldn't be Earendil and so on. I mean most of the acts of the characters are related in a way that if one event doesn't occur, then the following won't occur, too. The chain will be broken. And having in mind they all suffered, I cannot say one is "more hero" than another. 
Some time ago there was a voting for the greatest bulgarian ever. I didn't vote because we have too many heroes, real heroes and I cannot just pick one and say "he is the greatest". And many people think this way. Even though we selected one of the nominated ones 

By the way, I'm glad to see a neighbour here


----------



## Barliman Butterbur

Luke Sineath said:


> ...why do people insist that there are no heroes because everyone dies?



Indeed! Heroism lies in _effort_ above and beyond the call, not necessarily success.

Barley


----------



## Ponte

Luke Sineath said:


> why do people insist that there are no heroes because everyone dies?:
> 
> 
> 
> To quote The Havamal of The Poetic Edda:
> 
> 
> 
> Deyr fè
> deya frændr,
> deyr sjálfr it sama;
> ek veit einn
> at aldri deyr;
> dómr um dauan hvern.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which in english would be something like:
> Beast die,
> Friend die,
> You do the same;
> One thing I know
> that never dies;
> dome of dead man.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## UnderTheOath

I'm with the 56% majority on this one: Definitely Earendil.

I mean, he was the one that ended the whole thing.


----------



## Noldor_returned

Morgoth: Yeah what?! You want to start me?
Earendil: Nah I'll finish you!
Morgoth: You and whose army?
Earendil: This army *points to Valar*
Morgoth: Bugger.


----------



## Finrod Felagund

in my opinion there isn't a hero in the Silmarillion as it is told like a mythology and there is no important character who survives from the Noldors return to the chaining of Morgoth. Middle Earth was saved by Earendil and those who helped the Silmaril come to him. In terms of heroic deeds all Earendil did was escape Gondolin and sail across an Ocean.


----------



## Grond

Finrod Felagund said:


> in my opinion there isn't a hero in the Silmarillion as it is told like a mythology and there is no important character who survives from the Noldors return to the chaining of Morgoth. Middle Earth was saved by Earendil and those who helped the Silmaril come to him. In terms of heroic deeds all Earendil did was escape Gondolin and sail across an Ocean.


Welcome good Finrod; however, I suggest you reread the chapter on Earendil. He was able to sail across to Valinor... a feat no other man survived. He stepped onto the sacred ground knowing that he would be doomed... and he did this to implore the Valar to help man and elf vanquish Melkor/Morgoth. Then, he pilots Vinglot in the great battle and personally slays Ancalagon the Black, greatest of all wurms. Lastly, he sails the heavens while wearing one of the Silmarils. Too cool and a lot more than just "...all Earendil did was escape Gondolin and sail across an Ocean."

Cheers,

grond


----------



## Finrod Felagund

Ah good point, i badly underestimated him and i forgot about the Ancalagon slaying part. However i still believe that the Silmarillion doesn't have a hero. But i do agree i need to read that chapter again (after i've finished _The Amber Spyglass)._


----------



## Amarie Veanne

Although I must admit that Turin is definitely doesn't belong to my list of favourite characters, I voted for him...
There is no doubt, for my part, that he is the real hero in the Silmarillion; it can be so easily seen in all that care and devotion Tolkien gave in creating this character for so many years.
The story of Turin Turambar, along with the tale of Beren and Luthien,is the central piece of the work, and by that mean obviously much importance is given to it.


----------



## Erendis

I voted for Luthien,she is definetly in my opinion the greates hero in the book. She was the first elf ever to give up immortality, to risk everything and to change Eru's plan (we can call it that way) just for love. If that's not heroic,I don't now what is


----------



## Ithrynluin

I voted for Beren since he seems the most well suited to the typical definition of a hero, but I could have just as easily gone with Luthien or Finrod, and to a lesser extent Earendil and Tuor because they had it too easy.


----------



## Snaga

Why can't I vote for Morgoth!?! Noone wins more battles than he!

From this lot, I think Beren or Earendil fit the 'hero' image the best. Neither are my favourite characters - Earendil is never fleshed out as a character at all. But he kills Ancalagon, and if you believe some of the older tales, he takes out Ungoliant too. (I prefer this story to later ones!). I suppose he gets it by a nose.


----------



## The Tall Hobbit

I think that Tolkien intended for Turin to be the true hero of the Sil.

Although the published version of the Sil does not include it, many of the older drafts of the book ended with a prophecy that Turin would be the one to finally defeat Morgoth once and for all.

For example:

From HOME vol. 5 - _The Lost Road_: 


> Thus spake Mandos in prophecy, when the Gods sat in judgement in Valinor, and the rumour of his words was whispered among all the Elves of the West. When the world is old and the Powers grow weary, then Morgoth, seeing that the guard sleepeth, shall come back through the Door of Night out of the Timeless Void; and he shall destroy the Sun and Moon. But Earendel shall descend upon him as a white and searing flame and drive him from the airs. Then shall the Last Battle be gathered on the fields of Valinor. In that day Tulkas shall strive with Morgoth, and on his right hand shall be Fionwe, and on his left Turin Turambar, son of Hurin, coming from the halls of Mandos; and the black sword of Turin shall deal unto Morgoth his death and final end; and so shall the children of Hurin and all Men be avenged.
> 
> Thereafter shall Earth be broken and re-made, and the Silmarils shall be recovered out of Air and Earth and Sea; for Earendel shall descend and surrender that flame which he hath had in keeping. Then Feanor shall take the Three Jewels and bear them to Yavanna Palurien; and she will break them and with their fire rekindle the Two Trees, and a great light shall come forth. And the Mountains of Valinor shall be levelled, so that the Light shall go out over all the world. In that light the Gods will grow young again, and the Elves awake and all their dead arise, and the purpose of Iluvatar be fulfilled concerning them. But of Men in that day the prophecy of Mandos doth not speak, and no Man it names, save Turin only, and to him a place is given among the sons of the Valar.


----------



## Amarie Veanne

That's a great quote in proving Turin is really the true hero of the Silm. 
And also a magnificent story, and it's really a pity it didn't end up in the published version; and it's also great there isn't much said about that battle of Morgoth with Turin... it keeps the mysticism alive.
The same thing goes for the story of the renewal of the Two Trees.


----------



## YayGollum

A great quote in proving Turin is really the true hero of that The Silmarillion book? I would call it yet another achingly tragic addition to Turin elfbane's story. Almost enough to make me feel sorry for the guy. Sure, he'd be too stupid to see it as anything but a good thing, but I detect extra tragedy! He never got to be much without Mel. Mel caused most of the bad stuff that happened to the guy, then, even after he dies, he gets turned into a zombie just to show everybody how low Mel sank. Mel, who's been stuck in the Void without much use for a body, nothing to train up for a fight with, a spirit that can't be especially full of fight after so long is in one corner. In the other, we've got a recently re-animated dude. Eru booms, "What's up, dude? Having all kinds of fun? Doesn't matter. Check out that one corner. It's Morgoth! Dude who messed you up! Go get him!" Turin elfbane, superly simple, grabs Gurthang and hacks away at the defenseless Mel. Afterwards, they tell him that he is promoted to be a kid of Valar types, proving that he never had the pretty little gifts that Eru tossed at humans. He was just another robot, another sock puppet, another method to display Eru's storytelling.


----------



## Amarie Veanne

The fact that Turin is a tragic character doesn't imply that he cannot be the hero of the Silmarillion. So what if his destiny was tragic and his life was manipulated by Morgoth ever since he was born until his very death? If you look back at our history of literature, you will find that a tragic hero has been a recipe for a good story for centuries and centuries, even from ancient Greek literature, respectively Oedipus. As for me, Turin has much likeness with the character of Oedipus, especially in the question of being unable to escape from their destiny.
And I do not agree that Turin was a puppet, because even Melkor was afraid and knew that Turin had the ability and power to escape his destiny, even though he did not.


----------



## YayGollum

The fear that a puppet could defy you doesn't prove that the thing has sentience of its own. Anyways, most of what you write is true. I never wrote that he wasn't some kind of hero. I merely wrote about how your quote makes him look even more tragic that I remember believing before. Sure, I'd call him a hero. Probably not the main hero of that The Silmarillion book, but then, I don't remember ever voting on this poll. I'd have to think for a while about how to turn one of my favorite characters into the main hero.


----------



## Sagan369

Don't get Yay going on who the true hero of LOTR is!!


----------



## Eledhwen

*Re: The true hero of the Silmarillion.*

The Silmarillion is such a diverse collection of stories over a very long time frame, that selecting a supreme hero for the whole book is like those "all time greatest footballer"-type programmes on the budget TV channels and the talent shows where viewers have to vote between a roller skater on a trapeze or a cute kid singing Annie. I don't think you can compare, say, an Elf or Ainu of the original population of Valinor with the desparate struggles of one of the race of men against the later evils.

I would argue that the greatest hero of one story cannot be compared to the greatest hero of another. Most of them seemed to be prepared to fight to their deaths, and the one about whom the most detail was written might not necessarily have been the most valiant.


----------



## YayGollum

Okay, being bored and taking a bit of time to think about it, I went with ---> A Vala. I didn't even check to see how unpopular the option was, and it turns out that I am the only one to make that vote.  I chose by way of thinking about The Silmarillion the way I would think about The Lord Of The Rings. Gollum was the hero because he was the guy to actually destroy the One Ring, so Aule is the hero because he was the guy who actually neutralized Mel. He made the chains that Mel couldn't get out of. Probably those Doors Of Night, too, keeping the guy in the Void. I can't really remember who dug Mel out of his house, caught him, and chained him up. Probably Tulkas, but I hate that guy. Very evil sam-like. 

Anyways, I couldn't go with most of those characters, because they only got some minor victories, couldn't be thought of as definitive. Turin elfbane got to somehow kill Mel, but only in some crazy stories that elves made up. I don't see that it is definite. It's merely a happy little ending that they thought up to make things look nice. I don't get why lots like to go with Earendel, either. What? So he was a good errand boy. Does the messenger who calls up some army for his master get called the main hero of a war, in any other story? Not that I know of.

Also, mayhaps I'll come up with some way to change my vote to Feanor.  He's easily the best of the characters on the poll, but he seems like more of a trouble-maker than a hero.


----------



## Bucky

There's really no hero....

It's a story of downfall.
Even in the end, they don't regain The Simarills and they let Sauron walk away to wreak havok for 6418 more years (go figure).


----------



## Eledhwen

There can be heroes in a downfall.

I think the Valar gave Morgoth so many chances because they really could not get their heads around the concept of pure evil. Sauron too managed to convince enough people that he was a reformed character in his early career to buy the time he needed to wreak major havoc.

Throughout Tolkien's works, the heroes extend mercy to the fallen, often to great grief. This occurs right through to the also-ran evildoers in The Lord of the Rings, such as Saruman and Gollum, and even the hobbits who helped despoil The Shire. Whether such mercy is heroic or foolish in the extreme is another discussion.


----------



## Bucky

Whether such mercy is heroic or foolish in the extreme is another discussion.


I think it goes back to Tolkien's Christian roots......

The only problem with this is that Middle Earth doesn't have a Messiah like OUR earth, so mercy leads not to redemption (hopefully), but being duped, again & again & again......


----------



## Eledhwen

Bucky said:


> The only problem with this is that Middle Earth doesn't have a Messiah like OUR earth, so mercy leads not to redemption (hopefully), but being duped, again & again & again......


As Galadriel put it, they "fight the long defeat". We end the story with the beginning of the IV Age; and Tolkien himself admitted it was too dull a time to write a sequel for, as by his own pen the magic had been removed from middle-Earth. It's series of heroes (mini-messiahs) culminated in an act of self-sacrifice that saw off the last of the great magic of the time.

The good guys' failure to be ruthless with the early evil left the world bereft of its perilous realm; though pockets still existed. The blue wizards remained in the East. Bombadil and Radagast also remained (at least, I dont' remember any update on Radagast - please let me know if you have further info).


----------



## Mimzy

Ulmo. He was the only Vala who loved the Children of Eru with all his heart.


----------



## Eru Ilúvatar

Ulmo gets my vote.


----------



## Peeping-Tom

Hmm... how many threads are there off this kind?

Well, nevermind...

In all the others, I've voted for *Eärendil* whereever I could.

But, really all within that family-line could get my vote...

Tuor, Idril : for their effort in rescuing vital persons (themselves included) from a falling Gondolin.

Eärendil, Elwing : Main persons behind the rescue of all Middle-Earth on behalf of all "non-evil" races.

Elrond, Elros : Without whom, EM-united (Elf/Men in the Last Alliance) would never have occured and the evil would have won.


----------



## Sulimo

I agree with Alatar. Hero is very subjective. Earendil was the savior, but Finrod was the embodiment of a hero. I do kinda wish more had voted for Fingolfin. He is my next favorite, and also why weren't Turin or Fingon on there?


----------



## Sulimo

sorry missed Turin. Turin could also be argued for the main hero. I mean he is Sigurd.


----------



## Zenith

Hold on there. How can you even argue Turin is the true hero of the Silmarillion? Turin was the main cause of the fall of the greatest kingdom of the Noldor? I mean, I know he slew Glaurung and distracted Morgoth for a while, but how crucial was his story? This is something I have been wrestling with for a long time. I love the story but all the others progress towards the final battle. The tale of Turin Turambar, apart from being very informative about the happenings in Beleriand and also an excellent tale, doesn't connect with the War of Wrath directly. I feel I must be blind but if anyone can explain how Turin can be the true hero, please, I will be in your debt.


----------



## Mimzy

Poor Turgon!


----------



## Bard the Bowman

Where, in the name of Illuvatar, is Ulmo? Ulmo is the true hero of the Silmarillion. Ulmo is the architect of the salvation of the Noldor. Let me outline the heroes.

1. *Ulmo*: Ulmo is the one Valar who never forsakes the Noldor. He is the one who commissions Finrod and Turgon to establish their secret kingdoms. It is Ulmo who issues the initial warning to Turgon. It is Ulmo who saves Voronwe and sends Tuor (the hope of the Noldor) to Turgon. And it is Ulmo who defends Earendil when he comes to Valinor. 

2. *Earendil*: Earendil is the herald of the Noldor, their saviour. It is he who goes forth to Valinor on behalf of Middle-earth. Because of him, the hosts of the West come forth and assail Morgoth. However, he also saved the day and slew Ancalagon, to turn the tide of the battle. 

3. *Tuor *and* Turgon*: These two are the next in line. They are the vessels of Ulmo and so don't hold as much weight, yet they are still very important. Through Turgon came Idril, and through Idril and Tuor came salvation. But, it was Turgon who created Gondolin, a hidden stronghold against Morgoth in the days of darkness; the last beacon of light for the elves of Middle-earth. Tuor was the messenger. His task was crucial, and because of it the secret escape pathways were built, and from him came Earendil. 

Now for some of the overrated heroes. 

1. *Turin: *Judging by the votes, Turin is the most overrated hero, seeing as how he was the cause for so much grief and woe. Ulmo had two hopes; Gondolin and Nargothrond - the hidden kingdoms. Turin destroys one of Ulmo's lifelines in Nargothrond. Plus he kills the Strongbow. Turin though does do immense good. He and his army of outlaws free the lands from Morgoth for a time. From Nargothrond the lands are made safe again, for a time. And Brethil is liberated through his vigilance, and Glaurung is slain. However, many others did similar things in defense. 

2. *Feanor: *Feanor is no true hero, unless by the fact that he creates opportunities for other heroes to arrive. Feanor brings shame on the Noldor. He slays his own kin, abandons Fingolfin, is rash and reckless, and haughty and arrogant. He does not display the characteristics of a hero, save in battle, and does no deed that brings about any good for the Noldor. 

3. I will now speak briefly about the other heroes. *Beleg* was just a valiant elf. That's all. *Fingolfin* was a wise king, and it may be that his leadership, and *Fingon's* afterwards, saved the Noldor. But they did not seem irreplaceable. *Beren* was indeed a hero, since he did halt Morgoth's forces for a time alone, and he did accost Angband. But that does not qualify him to be the true hero. After all, the stealing of the Silmaril did more evil than good, for though it brought hope, it was the cause of the destruction of Doriath and the death of Huan. He wasn't as integral as the true heroes. 

4. *Finrod: *Finrod, ah yes. Definitely the most admirable character in the Silmarillion. He reminds me somewhat of Faramir. Finrod is definitely a great hero. Virtuous and strong, I was sorry to see him die. He founded Nargothrond, which lasted for a long while. However, he was not that vital, as Nargothrond continued after he was dead. I just wish he had survived and once again ruled Nargothrond. He wouldn't have given in to the counsels of Turin, I am sure.


----------



## Prince of Cats

I have to agree with pretty much everything Bard there said :*up Turin, in my opinion also, is far overrated. There were a few impressive moments in Children of Hurin, thinking here of his final meeting with Glaurung, but far more often I find him irritating and far from the Hero. I think Beleg though was a bit of hero in himself, along with Finrod, by way of their heroic sort of friendship ... Kind of like how is so often attributed to Sam, the hobbit from the third age


----------



## Bard the Bowman

Hold on, what do we mean by "true hero"? Do we mean, who was the greatest hero? Or do we mean, which hero was most important? Finrod was definitely the greatest. Beleg was very admirable too. Little wonder that Finrod was most loved of the Noldor. 

But Ulmo is the most important hero.


----------



## Confusticated

I agree with you about the significance of Ulmo's role, but I don't necessarily think it was heroic. Did he go beyond what his duty was, make great sacrifices or place himself in peril? I think that Ulmo's seeming opposition to the other gods was the part he was meant to play. To me, a hero goes far beyond what is expected of him in putting the needs of others before his own well being.

Finrod is definitely my favorite hero, but there were many others.


----------



## Bard the Bowman

Right Nom. That's what I was talking about. Are we sticking with the letter definition of hero? Or are we simply referring to importance? Respectively, my choices are Finrod Felagund and Ulmo.


----------



## Confusticated

Just a random thought on another hero.


I think it was heroic of Finarfin to lead some of the Noldor back to Valinor. It must have taken courage to face the Teleri and Valar. It was surely difficult to leave his children and siblings, being fully aware of the curse they would suffer.


----------



## Bard the Bowman

I have to disagree with you Nom. Nearly all the other named people in this thread, including others who weren't named, such as Hurin, Huor, Luthien, Mablung, Gelmir, Arminas, are more heroic than Finarfin. 

Going by simply by the definition of hero, the three greatest were in my opinion, Finrod Felagund, Hurin Thalion (you could almost count Huor there too, but Hurin's defiance of Morgoth impressed me, especially considering the fact he was a mere man), and Beleg Cuthalion. I don't think I need to recite the reasons I think so. We all know them.

Honourable mentions: Fingon, Fingolfin, Beren, Huan, Glorfindel


----------



## Turgon

I actually agree with Nom. Finarfin's actions in repenting of the the Noldor's actions during the dark period after Finwe's death and the Stealing of the Silmarils were extremely heroic. They are just not as obvious. It was an act of amazing moral strength. Sometimes it takes more courage to lay down your arms than it does to take them up, I think this was true in Finarfin's case. He put what was truly best for his people ahead of his own honour. I have a saying: _Honour reckons not itself._ Which mean to be truly honourable, you must put thoughts of your own honour aside, even if it means seeming dishonourable before others. It must have been one hell of a wrench to turn his back on his beloved brother Fingolfin and his children - possibly forever. That right there is strength, courage, and selflessness. All true aspects of a hero.


----------



## Bard the Bowman

I admit Finarfin showed courage. I just don't think he should be ranked up there with heroes like Fingon and Fingolfin and Finrod. Or pretty much any of the Noldor who took flight. Remember, he was reluctant to go anyway, and only went at the urging of his sons. How much bravery and courage did it take to give in to his natural inclination? There was no perseverance involved. If I may quote Batman Begins, "It's not who you are underneath, but what you do that defines you". Let us compare and contrast Finarfin to his brother Fingolfin:

*Finarfin: *Led a portion of the Noldor back to Valinor. Humbled himself. Sacrificed being with his sons. Let us not forget that he also stood by (i'm assuming) while the other Noldor slaughtered the Teleri, kin of his wife. 

*Fingolfin: *Humbled himself before Feanor. (if that isn't heroic, then I don't know what is) Forgave the Feanorians for the betrayal at Losgar. Endure the Grinding Ice. Ruled the Noldor wisely. Fearlessly challenged and dueled Morgoth. And Fingolfin isn't even the greatest hero, but his list of achievements seems to dwarf Finarfin's.


----------



## Turgon

You raise some good points Bard, and get 10 cool points for the Batman Begins quote... I only saw that film for the first time a couple of months ago and really loved that line.

It's all a matter of perspective though, and how you wish to put a spin on things.



> Led a portion of the Noldor back to Valinor.


 And saved his people a fruitless battle against Morgoth, let's not forget that it was the Host of Valinor who won the final victory in that war.



> *Finarfin:* Humbled himself.
> 
> *Fingolfin:* Humbled himself before Feanor.



Why is Fingolfin's act of humility somehow more heroic than Finarfin's?



> Let us not forget that he also stood by (i'm assuming) while the other Noldor slaughtered the Teleri, kin of his wife.



As did most of the Noldor. Fingon even got involved in the fighting, as did many of the House of Fingolfin. Given what is written in the Silmarillion though, I always presumed that Finarfin's Host did not arrive on the scene until after the deed was done, and that it played the larger part in his decision to return home.



> Forgave the Feanorians for the betrayal at Losgar.



It could be argued that, given what had gone before, this was an act of folly, and that forgiving Feanor yet again was putting his own honour before that of his people.



> Fearlessly challenged and dueled Morgoth.



Again it could be argued that Fingolfin had lost control of himself here, and that his duty as High-King was to his people first and only. It could also be argued that as Plato once said, courage cannot exist without fear, and that to fight without fear is a form of madness in which courage plays no part.

Now I'm not saying I agree or disagree with anything I've written above, I'm just spinning them for larks. Given my user-name I obviously have a lot of love for the House of Fingolfin, and Fingolfin's battle against Morgoth never fails to fire me up... but Finarfin's repentence and humility took a lot of stones, and yes, more so than Fingolfin's fight with Morgoth... and ultimately he was proven right. 

Sometimes I think Finarfin gets a raw deal because of his sugary Vanyar heart, but I'm one of those guys who love people for who they are, not for who I want them to be. So I happen to really like the guy...^^


----------



## Bard the Bowman

Oh by all means forgiving the Feanorians was an act of folly, as were so many other deeds done by heroes. For instance, Beleg and Gwindor saving Turin from the orcs was a noble deed, but it resulted in the destruction of Nargothrond. So, it is Fingolfin's forgiving quality that is admirable. The fact that he is able to forgive those who deserted him and left his people to die. 

Isn't it easier to humble yourself to someone who deserves the honour, such as Manwe, than to follow someone as proud and arrogant as Feanor?

I see what you're saying about Fingolfin's madness, and I've heard before that courage isn't the absence of fear, but acting despite fear. 

Again, I am not disputing the fact that Finarfin possessed some commendable characteristics, but I think that those of the heroes of the Wars of Beleriand are far more expressed, and always much more weight is lent to the heroes of battle.


----------



## Turgon

Again Bard I think it's just a matter of perspective. If I take my own personal experiences into account. I would say for me it is the opposite. I find it quite easy to humble myself and say sorry just to make peace and to be the better man. Humbling myself when I know I'm in the wrong and I've hurt the ones I love? That's much, much harder. But that's a personality thing, and something which I think is different for each and everyone.


----------



## Bard the Bowman

True true Turgon. It's a difference of opinion here. I guess you could also make the case that Fingolfin said those words rashly, as it says in the Silmarillion something to this effect, "but they did not know yet what his (Fingolfin's) words would mean." Not the exact quote, but similar to that. Fingolfin had no idea he would be following Feanor into the jaws of death, so it could be argued that his reverence to Feanor was just to make peace and nothing more. Let me clarify; it *could *be argued. However, I still think Finarfin took the easy road. All he did was follow Feanor to the harbours. His people had no part in the Kinslaying, so for me, I think his choice was the easier one. A simple apology in exchange for comfort and safety, yet little or no renown.


----------



## Troll

I don't often march in lockstep with public opinion, but I cast my vote for Earendil.

I find it much more difficult to identify with the Elves of the story - even the most human of them - due to their many, many advantages over common men. They're immortal, immune to disease, equipped with all kinds of crafts and powers. To the last of them, they're described as being pretty attractive by human standards. To be sure they're far from a race of Mary Sues, but nevertheless I find the human protagonists of the Silmarillion to be much more of the "scrappy underdog" type I find so sympathetic.

I chose Earendil over Turin not just because Earendil never slept with his sister (yuck), but because he was basically the culmination of the entire history of the First Age. I get the feeling that everything that transpired in the First Age was really building up to the arrival of Earendil the half-elven savior - but that's just narrative convenience, so I don't really credit that to him personally.

Rather, I give him mad props for making the trip to Valinor and arguing against the gods themselves to change their minds, which can't be easy. As tough as it must have been for Finarfin to ask forgiveness, imagine how much tougher it would have been for Earendil to come and ask not just for foregiveness, but for help - especially considering that he was the first Man to speak at any length with one of the Valar. (Maybe Beren had a chat with Mandos, but Luthien did the persuading there.)

Furthermore, he fought Ancalagon the _fire-breathing_ dragon in a wooden ship, with a melee weapon. Can't top that.

Plus, I think he had, on the balance, the most consistently awesome bloodlines of descendants out of anybody else in the series. Sure Ar-Pharazon was a bit of a prat, but with guys like Elrond and Aragorn who trace their descent directly to him, he's kind of what I'd call a big deal.


----------



## Turgon

Troll said:


> Furthermore, he fought Ancalagon the _fire-breathing_ dragon in a wooden ship, with a melee weapon. Can't top that.


 
When you put it like that it does sound rather impressive...^^

I don't think I've ever voted in this poll for the simple fact that I've never really seen The Silmarillion having a stand out hero... but you make some really good points in favour of Earendil in your post Troll. I've always liked Tuor, but in some sense he is like an anti-Turin and seems to get all the breaks, but looking deeper I don't know. Tuor starts off as a thrall and ends up as a lord in a great elven city, where as Turin starts off as a lord in a great elven city and then proceeds to make a right hash of things. I know destiny played a big part in both of their fates... but I can't help but think that Tuor was just smarter you know?


----------



## Bard the Bowman

There are some tragic events I don't blame Turin for. Like when Glaurung lied to him and he went to Dor-lomin instead of to Finduilas. A mistake, but one made out of love for his family and not because of his pride. And marrying his sister; how was he supposed to know? Killing Beleg, well what would you do if you had been captured and tormented by orcs and in the darkness you see a figure crouching over you and pricking you with a drawn blade?

But he should have saved Nargothrond. He should have listened to Mablung. He should have listened to Beleg, but that is more forgivable since he was sitting pretty with his band of outlaws. 

And if you think Earendil deserves top spot because he killed Ancalagon with a melee weapon, what about Turin? Let us examine the facts:

Turin is simply a man. Earendil is the half-elven grandson of Dior granted full immortality.

Turin has Gurthang. Earendil has the Silmaril and Vingilot.

Turin is facing the wingless father of dragons. Earendil is facing the mightiest (and winged) dragon of all time. 

Turin killed Glaurung singlehandedly. Earendil, who knows? Maybe two eagles grabbed Ancalagon? Would anyone disagree if I made the claim that Earendil had some sort of help?

It's a close call I think just based on these. I myself feel inadequate to judge this one, but I think I have to give the nod to Turin based on the fact that Earendil does have the Silmaril and he is half-elven with a bit of Maiar thrown in.

Earendil is certainly is one of the most important characters (second only to Ulmo), but to judge as a hero? Of course going by the fact he did kill Ancalagon we have to assume he possesses some heroic qualities. Bravery, skill in battle, leadership. But we never really get a good look at his character. I'm sure he has many other heroic virtues, but I never really was able to view them in-depth. That's why it's so much easier to judge people like Tuor and Turin and Hurin and Finrod and Celegorm and Thingol.


----------



## Troll

IMO, Turin isn't a tragic hero. To be a tragic hero in the classical sense, you must be undone by your own greatest strength. Turin is just a man who was misled by the magical curse on his father - his own character flaws contributed little to his downfall; though some poor decisions on his part lead to the fall of Nargothrond, it's not like architecture could have been particularly heroic anyway...

I don't consider it to be very narratively satisfying to see a man come to nothing because he had the bad luck to be cursed by a power beyond his control. Oedipus, whose story has many parallels (read: Tolkien ripped off), was ruined by his own choices and determination to uncover the truth of his parentage; Turin had a similar situation with Glaurung's dissipating spell on his sister. However, the really "tragic" part of his story (discovering that he'd married his sister) was a narrative convenience - why didn't he meet some nice human girl he wasn't secretly related to? I feel like bad things happened to Turin only because they had to so that Tolkien could tell the story he wanted to tell, hence the "curse."

In the course of his journey he did various remarkable things - including killing Glaurung by getting the drop on him in an ambush - but overall his is the story of someone who's been screwed by the narrator.

Earendil, on the other hand, braved the Shadowy Seas alone (until Elwing showed up with the Silmaril), debated Manwe Sulimo for the fate of Arda, flew head-on into the world's first aerial dogfight, killed the biggest dragon ever with a sword, is now an honest-to-goodness star, and his heir Eldarion rules basically the entire known world.

Turin will get to lay the dolorous stroke on Morgoth, which may bestow on him the title of "Biggest Damn Hero Ever," but that didn't make it into the Silmarillion.

Diff'rent strokes. When you're not designing a mythology organically, but are developing one to a specific purpose to support and expand on a story that needs X, Y, and Z to happen to exist, there can't really be a perfectly even-handed treatment of all the characters involved.


----------



## Bucky

I find it an odd question...

The true hero of a tragedy where just about all the good guys die?

I'd say the last paragraph of the story 'Arda marred' just about sums it up, or Eru's first respons to Melkor's rebellion in the music, that it all comes back to his glory, just like God & satan, is about the sum of things.

It's even harder to pull a single hero out of The Silm than a single one out ot TLOR...

Is Frodo the hero?

He could've never made it without Sam...

So, is Sam the hero?

He'd never have had an errand without Frodo...

Is Gandalf the hero?

He couldn't have done it directly as he couldn't oppose Sauron directly with force & is sort of a chessmaster moving pieces...

Is Aragorn?

He couldn't even muster more than 30 Rangers from the North on his own....

But given the chance, Kings & leaders GIVE him their allegiance...

Theodan?

He could've gone back to Edoras & rebuilt Rohan after defeating Saruman....

Faramir?

He could've taken the Ring, but didn't...

And, opposed Aragorn becoming King ~ as could've Imrahil at the most crucial time..

Teamwork defeated Sauron.

Heck, little Hobbit Merry & Pippin play crucial rolls at several junctures, as does a woman, Eowyn, decades before 'girl power' became all the vogue in fighting scenes in movies versus 226 pound hunks like the Witch-king. :*D

And so it is in The Silmarillion ~ even moreso as it takes place over hundreds of years.

It strikes me Tolkien wrote it very much like the bible and not just the creation tale, which is so obviously based on God/Satan..Eru/Morgoth & their similar falls.

But, folks come in and out of both 'tales' & you only get a glimpse of their lives for the most part, with a few exception of the most part: the parts that have to do with the main theme. Otherwise, you don't need to know everything about them...

It's on a need to know basis. ;*)

It's the main theme to each that matters: tradegy to ultimate victory in both cases. :*cool:


----------



## Bard the Bowman

Obviously it's a collective effort from a number of parties. However, you have to examine which character (if we're trying to figure out who was most important) is behind the most events, accordingly weighted. So we will forget hypothetical scenarios.

Gandalf naturally springs to mind. And that is true. In the Silmarillion, Ulmo springs to mind. They are the driving forces behind all the events that lead up to the salvation. Ulmo was always at work, utilizing messengers and issuing warnings to the Noldor. Gandalf likewise was setting many events in motion, and the others were simply agents in his master plan.


----------



## Troll

Puppetmasters are not heroes. Heroes are the guys on the front lines - people like Aragorn and Beren are heroes.

Now, if you want to question the value of a hero as compared to a subtle manipulator that's all well and good, but a guy behind the scenes, no matter how useful to his cause, simply is not a hero.


----------



## Turgon

Troll said:


> Puppetmasters are not heroes. Heroes are the guys on the front lines - people like Aragorn and Beren are heroes.
> 
> Now, if you want to question the value of a hero as compared to a subtle manipulator that's all well and good, but a guy behind the scenes, no matter how useful to his cause, simply is not a hero.



Being a hero has no relation to whether you are on the front line or behind the scenes, absolutely none. Being a hero is about what you accomplish, and you can accomplish great things in any walk of life.


----------



## Bard the Bowman

Turgon you are absolutely correct that it is not limited to the front lines. While heroes are generally outlined by courage, and the most prominent displays of courage occur on the battlefield, they are not limited to that. However, if you are going by "what you accomplish", then Ulmo is the greatest hero as well as the most important. Being a hero is, by definition, one who has admirable and noble qualities, not necessarily by what you accomplish. Beleg accomplished nothing by devoting himself to Turin, yet that does not make him any less of a hero. While Ulmo certainly possesses such qualities, there are others in which these are more pronounced, such as Finrod and Beleg. This is why I make the distinction between the greatest hero and the most important hero. 

And I think Gandalf and Ulmo are anything but subtle puppetmasters. Ulmo perhaps did not place himself in as much peril of Gandalf, but both were actively involved, and Gandalf certainly participated in his fair share of dangerous adventures, while somehow still managing to oversee his master plan.


----------



## Troll

Turgon said:


> Being a hero has no relation to whether you are on the front line or behind the scenes, absolutely none. Being a hero is about what you accomplish, and you can accomplish great things in any walk of life.


 I disagree. Being a hero requires you to place yourself at risk in order to accomplish something of value. A hero is an extremist, someone who will risk anything and go to any length to achieve a goal. Gandalf and the Fellowship can be heroes because they placed themselves in personal, mortal danger time and again to oppose evil. Fingolfin died fighting Morgoth - he failed, but he strove to accomplish something of great merit and paid with his life. Frodo is a hero, because though he failed to complete his mission, he risked his very soul in the battle with the Ring.

Denethor can even be a hero, since he put his sanity on the line wrestling with Sauron's will. He lost, yes, but he gave it his best shot. Elrond was a hero in the War of the Last Alliance, but he was *not* a hero in the War of the Ring - he sat back and let others do the dirty work. Same for Galadriel; she only got involved personally at Dol Guldur after Sauron's northern forces had already been routed at the Lonely Mountain. Cirdan is certainly no hero - he always let other people do the heroing, even though he provided indispensible support to Earendil, who _was_ a hero.



Lovemuffin said:


> Ulmo is the greatest hero as well as the most important.


There's a reason Athena isn't called the hero of the Odyssey. :*rolleyes: Immortal gods aren't heroes because any setback to an immortal is trivial. What would Ulmo have lost had Turgon ignored his advice? Nothing. Ulmo put nothing at risk, so he is no hero.

I don't think the Valar can even be harmed in any lasting way by Morgoth, so I don't even consider Tulkas a hero. Besides, the Valar lost any claim they may have had to heroism from the Years of the Trees onwards when they abandoned Middle-Earth so they could hang out behind the Pelori. They had many heroic proxies and inspired many heroic deeds, but they themselves refused to risk their divine behinds after crushing Utumno. They ain't heroes.



Lovemuffin said:


> Being a hero is, by definition, one who has admirable and noble qualities, not necessarily by what you accomplish.


You can be just as noble as you like, but you're not a hero until you put your own tush on the line. I'm sure Radagast was quite the noble fellow as well. You don't have to succeed - you're still a hero if you die trying. But you still have to try to accomplish a task in which success is not certain, and in which failure holds some personal consequence to you.


----------



## Turgon

I guess our definition of 'hero' just differs from yours Troll. I can see your point, I just disagree with it. In my definition risk is not always a factor. Sacrifice can define a hero just as much, as can service, or endurance, none of which require risk. I do see where you are coming from with Ulmo, but the reason Athena isn't the hero of the Odyssey is because she perform another role in the story, and I see Ulmo as playing a similar role in The Silmarillion. Gods can be heroes however. Prometheus was an immortal god, he suffered greatly for his actions, but ultimately he was released. Yet there was a time, not that long ago, when he was considered the greatest hero of humankind.


----------



## Troll

Turgon said:


> I guess our definition of 'hero' just differs from yours Troll. I can see your point, I just disagree with it.


:*up I can respect that. If you're game, I'd like to continue the conversation to get a better idea of what you mean.



> In my definition risk is not always a factor. Sacrifice can define a hero just as much, as can service, or endurance, none of which require risk.


It seems to me that a trait like endurance is meaningless unless there is some consequence for failing to endure, or some hardship associated with that endurance. People who endure torture to withhold the location of the rebel base are heroic; people who endure a trip to Disneyland are ordinary.

I don't think risk always has to be on the battlefield, but the essence of heroism is putting something of your own at stake for a purpose beyond yourself. Can you name someone from real life or fiction who never put anything of their own at stake, who you nonetheless consider a hero?



> Prometheus was an immortal god, he suffered greatly for his actions, but ultimately he was released. Yet there was a time, not that long ago, when he was considered the greatest hero of humankind.


In my formulation, Prometheus can still be called a hero - he traded (what he thought would be) an eternity of torture in exchange for humanity's awakening. Jesus would fall into a similar category - he never fought a battle, but (some say) he took a death on the cross for human salvation.


----------

