British classicist Anthony Everitt, a professor, arts council advisor, and a writer for the European press about cultural matters, has greeted the Third Millennium by writing a wonderful introduction to the life and times of the man many people think of as the greatest Orator and lawyer of all time - the classical Roman politician Marcus Tulllius Cicero. The book Everitt produced is - at 330+ pages - easily accessible to modern readers, explaining not only the life of his subject in a clear eyed, lucid manner, but more importantly Everitt takes time out to explain the breathtaking and momentous events in Roman history in which Cicero himself was a player. It was Cicero's fate, to have lived (and died) in the death throes of the Roman Republic, when it finally collapsed into being an dictatorial Empire.
Everitt starts his story on March 15, 44 B.C. where he tries to describe the scene of the assassination of Julius Caesar from what it must have been like for Cicero, who happened to have a front row view of the grisly scene. But in a deft manuever, Everitt quickly shifts his tale to a 12 - 13 page synopsis which covers of the overall socio - political situation that Rome finds herself in during the last 100 years before the failure of the Republic. He shows us the Roman Constitution, describing the formal political posts within the government, including the Roman Senate, the roles of Tribunes (representing "the people"), Quaestors (officials who collected taxes), Adeiles (which put on civic events - at their own expense!), Praetors who acted as Judges and administered laws, all of which had to be served before one could run for Consul - the supreme executive in the Republic. During this part of the story, Everitt also discusses the origins of the terrible problem of land reform and redistribution within the Republic, which threatens powerful vested interests. By doing this, Everitt provides the reader a clear eyed account of the the main tectonic forces which were causing the Republic to tear itself apart. He plainly states his belief that the Roman Constitution had too many checks built within its system and that major social questions and problems of the day were left to fester simply because they could not be resolved within the political system as it was during Cicero's day.
Everitt then starts his tale with Cicero's beginnings in 106 B.C. when he was born to a well to do provincial family in the town of Arpinum, which was about 70 miles southeast of Rome. Cicero and his brother were given a good education by their father and when they came of age, their father arranged to have his boys educated by some well regarded rhetoricians of the day in Rome itself. Cicero's background as an provincial outsider, who did not belong to any of the old time prominent families of the city, was to have an interesting effect on his career. It was remarkable that this outsider was, within a span of 20 years, to go from being an unknown lawyer to reaching the highest pinnacles of power within the Republic.
Along the way, Everitt shows us glimpses of Cicero's teachers, such as Scaevola, Diodotus, and Philo. We see the young Cicero meet his wife Terentia, his children - especially his love for his daughter Tullia, as well as some of his contemporaries, - the young Julius Caesar, Pompey (whom he met during his brief military career), and his greatest friend the urbane Titus Pomponius Atticus, known to us simply as Atticus. It is to Atticus that we owe a huge debt of gratitude for much of our knowledge of Cicero. For it was with Atticus that Cicero kept up a 25+ year correspondence of letters, many of which have miraculously survived and have come down to us.
We also get to see Cicero, who was an extremely precocious boy, got swept up in the excitement of watching the great orators of the day slug out in (often corrupt) legal duels held the legendary Roman Forum. Early on, Cicero resolved that he too would be a lawyer. Cicero worked hard at studying rhetoric and perfecting his oratorical style, eventually writing a book on the topic. It would be his sheer ability to persuade jurists and public opinion that would bring him to the pinnacle of Roman life and ensure his memory.
Everitt shows us the effects of the acts of the ruthless dictator Lucius Felix Sulla, Consul when Caesar, Atticus, Pompey, and Cicero were in their teens and twenties. Sulla, was to cast a long shadow over the career paths of each of these men. Sulla was an army general and politician, who among other things had instigated a proscription amongst the Roman elite when the boys were young. This was to have differing effects amongst the young men: Caesar was to become something of a radical, who eventually decimated the Republic. Atticus, though staying involved at the edges of public life, essentially moves to Greece and settles into a life of making money and living Epicurean values. Meanwhile, Cicero who was horrified at the chaos and turbulence that afflicted his youth, became attached to a conservatism in which he felt the Republic had to be saved by means of bringing the various social groups together and uplifting "better" men into public life.
Everitt guides us through the long arc of Cicero's career, where after he reaches the pinnacle of power, he is ruined by a political rival, Clodius, then later rehabilitated. Early on, we see Cicero's famed corruption trial against Verres, the governor of Sicily, by which Cicero first comes to public notice. We see Cicero being banished from Rome by Clodius and later on govern a province. Everitt shows us Cicero's interest in training and promoting the careers of younger men, his retreat into books when things weren't going well, and he covers Cicero's incredible burst of writing in the last years of his life before he at last falls victim to a new Civil War era proscription by Marc Antony and Octavian at the age of 63. Everitt also touches points at times in his narrative on some of the great "what if" questions that might have changed the fate of what happened. Everitt includes a post mortem, where he concludes his narrative over the outcomes of the Roman Civil war between Caesar and the Republican forces.
This book is a first rate book for those who want to read a solid introductory tale of what classical Roman life was like. Everitt also includes a bibliography for those who are interested in further reading into a topic of Roman history and the lives of its notable citizens, as well as including some questions that readers can discuss (or ponder) once they have finished his tome. Trust me, Everitt has written a book that is a page turner. Once you have started reading this book, you just can't wait to see what's going to happen next. And that's how every biography or history book should be written.
The Wizard rates this book an A+.
Wizard.
In continuing with my previous post on Tim Blanning's account of the Europe of 300 years ago, I present two follow ups on what happened in Europe (and indeed the early American Republic) in transportation. The first involves looking at the rest of the lessons from improved road building and my next blog entry will look at Blanning's writings on the use of waterways in Europe.
As was intimated in the previous post, Blanning writes that it was the British and the French who worked hardest at improving road building. However, pouring large amounts of money into road building did not in of itself translate into a leap towards modernity, indeed the results between what happened in France and what happened in Britain could scarcely be different. Though the French monarchs of the Ancien Regime poured growing resources into road building in the 18th century, where those resources went was a bit uneven as were the results. The highways and arterial roads were greatly improved and this indeed sped up travel in France considerably. However lateral roads linking up provincial towns were still in dire condition, something that was noticed by none other than Adam Smith:
In France, however, the great post-roads, the roads which make the communication between the principal towns of the kingdom, are in general kept in good order, and in some provinces are even a good deal superior to the greater part of the turnpike roads of England. But what we call the cross-roads, that is, the far greater part of the roads in the country, are entirely neglected, and are in many places absolutely impassable for any heavy carriage. In some places it is even dangerous to travel on horseback, and mules are the only conveyances which can safely be trusted.
Adam Smith then went on to add something else that was a big problem in France with regards to road building:
The proud minister of an ostentatious court may frequently take pleasure in executing a work of splendour and magnificence, such as a great highway, which is frequently seen by the principal nobility, whose applauses not only flatter his vanity, but even contribute to support his interest at court. But to execute a great number of little works, in which nothing that can be done can make any great appearance, or excite the smallest degree of admiration in any traveller, and which, in short, have nothing to recommend them but their extreme utility, is a business which appears in every respect too mean and paltry to merit the attention of so great a magistrate. Under such an administration, therefore, such works are almost always entirely neglected.
As the French say, plus ca change, plus c'est la meme.
Blanning goes on to write that the problem in France was that only a small proportion of the population could travel up and down the royal routes. Blanning writes that according to Pierre Goubert most of the population of France still lived in the conditions mentioned in my previous post - i.e. they were still living out their lives within a 5-10 mile radius of their places of birth, ergo their lives were still limited to that of the family, neighbors, the notary, the weekly farmers market and the seigneurial court. This meant that France continued to be fragmented in character, inhibiting the initial formation of an 18th century French national economy along with its vast advantages to entrepreneurs and businessmen of being able to reap economies of scale and scope through greatly expanded markets. That would not be accomplished until much later. In other words, the royal roads of the French Monarchy were not reaching the peasantry of France and they were the majority of the nation's people!
To be fair to the French, they were not the only ones which fell to the siren song of building roads mostly to please the courts of nobility, rather than to tie together cities and lesser towns. Blanning writes that the Spanish elites were also guilty of committing this sin, as were the Italians. And to reiterate, pursing this policy of road building for royal privilege rather than to integrate the nation resulted in fragmentation. According to John Lynch:
As natural produce, raw materials and manufactures could usually be transported only on the backs of mules and donkeys, the radius of any local economy was correspondingly short. For example, the price of wheat in Almeria was twice of what it was at Guadix, just 50 miles (80 kilometers) away. So the population followed the examples of the other coastal towns and imported grain from France, Italy or even Africa.
These issues (including the substantial price differentials in goods resulting from fragmented economies) were sidestepped in the United Kingdom. Of course helped immensely that the UK is a correspondingly small island, ergo the distances were not as great which was a big advantage in a world where travel was slow. It also helped that solutions from the national center were not trusted in Britain, ergo the solution of using turnpikes which were self funding. Moreover, they were also extended to towns and villages in the periphery, a fact that led to better and busier roads outside the main highways and arterials, which was noticed by contemporaries of the day.
It also helped businessmen, entrepreneurs, and travelers that the United Kingdom had a unified system of tariff structures, outside of those levied by the operators of turnpikes. When most people in the modern day world think of trade issues, they probably think of the some alleged exploitation of workers in the developing world, or of some disease or defects of products shipped in from other countries. It seems people seldom remember from history that the single biggest inhibition to trade were the seemingly endless number of levies which were slapped on travelers and merchants by an ongoing parade of officials - royal, provincial, and municipal, not to mention those laid by estates and monasteries! The Holy Roman Empire was particularly riddled with this problem, as was the Habsburg Monarchy. However France and Spain also suffered badly, even though they were nation states on paper. In fact both countries were a motley accumulation of territories which were acquired over hundreds of years. There was little movement for political reform on tariffs since so many were profiting from the system that was in place - and yes, much of that profiting was personal and was not going into public coffers. Stopping to pay the endless line of tariffs not only made trade and travel much more expensive, it also slowed trade and travel down. America's Founders noticed this and stipulated in the United States Constitution that the power to set tariffs was to be denied to the States without Congressional authority.
And last but not least, the improvement of European roads also helped alleviate to some degree one of the greatest horrors our ancestors faced - that of hunger and famine. Blanning writes that there is good evidence that Europe went through a cooling period that was particularly pronounced in the latter half of the 17th century. Mean temperatures were 0.9 - 1.5 Celsius cooler than they were from the 1920's - 1960's and that this cooling had a negative impact on agricultural production. Of course, agriculture was much different 300 years ago. Machinery did not exist. Cereals were a big part of the European diet and varieties were often not adapted to take maximum advantage of the soils.
For our ancestors, it wasn't a question of whether a crop failure and a year (or more) of dearth would come. It was a matter of when and it wasn't unusual for mortality rates to reach 20 percent when crop failures did strike. In two of his most unforgettable pages, Blanning describes in a hair raising narrative what would happen in a year where a crop failure struck. Still, the situation did start to improve during the 18th century and into the 19th. Some of the improvement came from improved governmental action made possible by the improved road and distribution system, while better farming and agricultural methods, not to mentioned improved weather all helped to cut down the length and severity of food shortages, though Europeans continued to be plagued by subsistence outbreaks. Widespread shortages occurred in France in 1741, the 1770's and most notably in 1788-1789 (which many believe was one of the factors which helped trigger the French Revolution), but it should be noted that many acute food shortages were local in scope!
Enough for now. Part three comes next week.
Wizard
Based on the strength of some book reviews on web sites I normally visit, I headed down to a Borders Books near where I live and purchased The Pursuit of Glory: Europe 1648 - 1815, by Tim Blanning, a Professor of History at Cambridge University and a Fellow of the British Academy. Blanning's book is a tour de force of a wonderfully rich subject - what happened in Europe during the 170 years between the conclusion of the Treaty of Westphalia and Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo. I am now about 100 pages into this book.
Of interest here is that Dr. Blanning starts off his book with a most curious topic - the amazing improvement in transportation and communications which occurred, particularly in Britain and France, during this period. Blanning also notes that in Eastern Europe, little changed in terms of infrastructure during this time. Blanning of course gives due to what happened when railroads were invented, but in his first 40 pages Blanning compares the difference of what transportation was like in the middle of the 17th century and what it was like 150 years later.
As a student of history, I knew that for most of mankind's history, transportation was slow and expensive for most and that not many people traveled more than 10 or so miles away from the homes they were born in during their own lifetimes unless something compelled them to. Nonetheless, Blanning's book drives home exactly how expensive it really was for our ancestors to travel and that travel was rarely faster than walking pace.
Some exerpts:
1) (If one desired to travel outside of one's own town - Wizard)
"Four or six draught animals were needed to pull a coach and they had to be changed every 6 to 12 miles, depending on the condition of the roads. In England it was calculated that one horse was needed for every mile of a journey on a well-maintained turnpike road. So, for the 185 miles from Manchester to London, 185 horses had to be kept stabled and fed to deal with the seventeen changes required by the stagecoaches which traveled the route. Those horses in turn required an army of coachmen, postillions, guards, grooms, ostlers and
stable-boys to keep them running. As a coach could carry no more than ten passengers, fares were correspondingly high and out of reach of the mass of the population. A journey from Augsburg to Innsbruck by stagecoach, although little more than 60 miles as the crow flies, would have cost an unskilled laborer more than a month's wages just for the fare."
2) "Almost everyhere the 'roads" were tracks, with no foundations or drainage and consequently deeply pitted by wheel-ruts."
'more like a retreat of wild beasts and reptiles, than the footsteps of man', in the view of an English observer writing in the early eighteenth century.... The roads of Europe were essentially those of the Roman Empire - after fourteen hundred years of neglect.
3) Blanning includes a table of travel times from London 1700-1800 in hours:
1700 1750 1800
Bath: 50 40 16
Edinburgh 256 150 60
Exeter 240 120 32
Manchester 90 65 33
4) Blanning talks about how forced labor from the farming peasantry was not an efficient method of infrastructure improvement. Instead...
"By that time, however, another method had been found. This was the 'turnpike', a word which originally designated just a barrier across a road to keep marauders out."
Blanning goes on to say that one of the beneficiaries of turnpikes were members of Parliament, who could now travel to London much more comfortably from their country homes - and proceed to pass more Acts of Parliament which created more turnpike roads!
5) Improvements in roads and road surfaces greatly dropped freight costs. To quote Blannning:
...but freight too could benefit. Much larger and more heavily laden wagons could pass along the improved roads: in the 1740's three-ton loads were permitted, by 1765 that had been doubled. The improved surfaces meant that fewer draught animals per ton were required. Writing in 1767, Henry Homer claimed that 'the carriage of grain, coal, merchandise, etc. is in general conducted with little more than half the number of horses a with which it formerly was.'
6) Writing in the middle of the 19th century, the German social historian Karl Biedermann estimated that travelling had been fourteen times more expensive two generations earlier!
7) Blanning wrote that the expansion of Europe's infrastructure also created a new class of society - the highwaymen - who would prey on hapless coach riders since cash was demanded up front in exchange for being permitted to use the turnpikes. Some wondered whether all this newly found mobility was worth the crime and congestion. London had streets choked full of coaches and wagons.
8) And perhaps my favorite excerpt:
"The turnpikes brought speed and mobility into a society previously characterized by their opposites. This was a culture-shock which many found upsetting - especially when the lower orders started to move out of their villages, on to the roads and into the towns, picking up insubordinate habits on the way. John Byng complained bitterly in 1781:
'I wish with all my heart that half the turnpike roads of the kingdom were plough'd up, which have imported London manners and depopulated the the country - I meet milkmaids on the roads, with the dress and looks of Strand mistresses, and must think that every line of Goldsmith's Deserted Village contains melancholy truths.'
The reference to Goldsmith's poem is revealing, for it is an elegy for a lost world of rural innocence and harmony, from which the forces of modernization have banished the inhabitants to urban anomie and vice."
300 years later, some people are still complaining that mankind's vastly increased mobility has resulted in the same urban ills. It seems that for some people, the more things change the more things stay the same. At the same time, one really does need to remember that one of the primary reasons why we build the cities we do today is because we can - due to the staggering drops of transportation costs in real terms. Otherwise we would still be living in huddled and cramped conditions.
Wizard.
I present to the public a photo story book of a Tolkien literary pilgrimage I made to Oxford in January 2007.
Several months ago wrote of my visits to the United Kingdom on behalf of the Big Evil Company. Two items which I never got around to writing about were a pair of visits I made to visit the places of legend where J.R.R. Tolkien lived, taught, worked, and wrote his stories. My first trip occurred during the weekend of January 20-21, 2007. I made a follow up visit on February 3, 2007. I had to make the follow up trip because of several factors. First, I took a train to get to Oxford since renting a car would have been a pain in the rear to do. The train which I had originally booked from the Paddington Station was canceled, leaving myself and dozens of other passengers stranded. One British man traveling with his girlfriend was less charitable. "God Damn!" he shouted. I caught the next train, but that train was a slow one which stopped at about 8-10 places before getting to Oxford. The trip took 1 hour and 45 minutes one way to only go 67 miles. One trio of 40-something British men who got on at Reading talked about the girls they thought were hot and how Felicity Kendall was the hottest thing they ever laid eyes on. They also complained that they could have gotten to Oxford faster if they had taken a car.
So I get to Oxford at perhaps 1:30pm. This gave me only 3-4 hours to make my trips. I eventually wended my way through the town to St. Giles Road and found the Eagle and Child pub. As the Wikipedia entry notes, I am now a marked figure amongst the fans of Professor Tolkien.
From there I made it to the Tolkien's house at 20 Northmoor Road. I wandered around the neighborhood that day, soaking up the feel of what the Professor's world was like. I saw St. Aloysius Church where the Tolkien's would sometimes worship. However the day turned cloudy and it started to drizzle. It was a brisk day and the weather reminded me of how I always envisioned Frodo's travels through to Rivendell in Arnor. I decided it would be better if I made my way back to London since I was on foot.
Because my time had been cut short, I had not been able to locate Tolkien's grave. I made a considerable effort to locate all six of Tolkien's homes as well as where he taught school. I made a second trip on February 3, 2007. This time I was able to find Wolvercote Cemetary. I had planned to purchase some flowers to lay at the Tolkien's headstone, but that thought got pushed out of my mind as I walked along the road. Incredibly, I didn't realize that the Tolkiens had lived at 22 Northmoor Road, right next door to 20 Northmoor Road, so I stopped by the neighborhood again before I made my way back.
So there you have it. I never thought I would be get around to making this pilgrimage and I will never forget those two days as long as I live. Having walked those streets of that ancient university town helped me understand how it was that the man whose stories of magic, fantastic races and creatures, war, conflict, romance and heroism which had entranced me as a teenager growing up in suburban America could have written them. The Professor wrote of what was all around him, but as a boy growing up in 1970's America I never understood that. We didn't have the Internet, nor the wave of secondary literature which has been produced over the past 15-20 years to help Tolkien fans understand what the Professor was writing about. As I wrote in one my of my photo notes, it became clear to me that there was no way that Middle Earth could have been invented by someone living anywhere else and not by any other man.
And that is my Ode to J.R.R. Tolkien.
Wizard.
Well, yesterday's Grand National came and went. And how did the Wizard fare? Well gentle readers, I hate to admit that the Crystal Ball was cloudy when it came to viewing this event, but me thinks that many had clouded visions when it came to picking winners yesterday.
A brief rundown on the Grand National yesterday. Of the 40 horses which entered the race, only 13 finished. There were several false starts and the Brits don't start the horses out of a gate when running this race.
I put a total of 200 pounds down on three horses, Point Barrow, Dun Doire, and Le Duc, none of whom finished. Point Barrow was heavily backed, but stumbled jumping over the very first grass fence! There are thirty grass fence jumps in this 4.5 mile race. Dun Doire pulled up at fence 23, while Le Duc unseated his jockey at fence number 6. The winner finished in the 4.5 mile distance in 9 minutes and 12 seconds and had 33-1 odds. The horse who finished fourth had 100-1 odds. In all, I think the bookies went home happy, as did the tiny number of those who actually bet on the long shots.
In other news, Prince William and his longtime beau Kate Middleton have split. How sad. Ms. Middleton has that classic Brit Girl look to her which makes my head turn. Somehow I hope that the two of them will reconsider maybe in another 3-4 years and end up getting married anyway.
Two Tolkien related items of note:
1) Yesterday afternoon I watched a soccer match between Sheffield United and West Ham United on the BBC-1. And guess who happened to be in a private box at the stadium enjoying the match?
The answer: Sean Bean. It seems Mr. Bean had childhood dreams of being a football star and playing for the hometown team.
The first TV shot showed Sean Bean with a bit of an unhappy look on his face, but the score was 0-0. Later after the Sheffielders put in a few through the net and won the game 3-0, Mr. Bean got just as pumped up as the rest of the crowd and went home with a smile on his face.
2) Today I took a long walk this afternoon to Camden Town and happened upon the famous street markets which stretch for many blocks. If any of you ever have a chance to come to London, you really should make an effort to see the Camden markets. These markets are probably the biggest hidden gem that tourists and short time folks like myself should see, but rarely do since they aren't widely advertised as part of touristy London.
Anyway, as I wended my way through the stalls and houses, I found myself walking into a place which advertised lots of old maps. I love looking at old maps (though I rarely buy them), but I so happened to stumble onto a used book store which was right next to where the maps were kept.
I had stumbled upon my own mines of Mithril.
For 30 pounds cash, I will be burdening myself on the trip home with the following books:
1) A 1985 Unicorn / Unwin Paperback version of The Silmarillion.
2) A 1981 copy of The Tolkien Quiz Book, compiled by Nigel Robinson and Linda Wilson.
3) A 1993 copy of The Tolkien Companion by David Day.
4) A 1968 copy of Understanding Tolkien and The Lord of the Rings, written by William Ready.
5) Four copies of The Hobbit, including a 1975 edition which had artwork depicting Smaug from Tolkien himself; a 1993 edition which has cover artwork depicting Smaug from John Howe; a 1988 edition with cover artwork depicting Smaug from David Garland; and a 1989 edition which has cover artwork depicting Rivendell from Ted Nasmith.
6) And last by not least, my Precious! I found a 1995 printing of a one book edition of The Lord of the Rings which is none other than the one with the classic John Howe portrait of Gandalf on the cover. I thought I would never find one of these. I fell in love with it on the spot and I already know that this version will become my favorite of all my Tolkien collection. The cover artwork has a dark green tint to it, but I consider this to be priceless.
As it was, I also threw down money on some incense, a City wide map of London, and some t-shirts from British rock bands The Jam, the Cure, and Joy Division which you just can't get back home. I ended up dropping about 100 pounds today, but had a blast doing it!
Ciao for Now.
Wizard
As visitors of this site know, I read Karen Armstrong's "A History of God" roughly two years ago. Upon reading Ms. Armstrong's opus, I immediately hit upon some ideas which have probably never been voiced in the entire opus of Tolkien commentary. Some have speculated that amongst the many influences that Tolkien incorporated in his work is that of the Judeo - Christian Bible. In the subtle, but far sighted view of The Mighty Wizard, that supposition is quite true, but not in the ways that are most apparent to those who might make such assertions.
I have to admit that I although I was raised as a Lutheran, I had not read the Bible for many years when I came across Karen Armstrong's work. One of the ideas which truly resonated with me in Armstrong's writing was that as one makes a trek through the Bible, one comes across the idea that in the early chapters of the Bible, God comes across as an immediate presence. As the chapters fly by, indeed as the the book shifts from the Old Testament to the New Testament, one comes across the idea that God is slowly shifted away from being an immediate physical being and is slowly withdrawn as a physical presence. God becomes more and more of a transcendental force in the Universe as the pages go by.
Do you want examples of what I am talking about? Well how about this gentle readers:
In the Bible, God appears to Abraham in Genesis in person - see here and here. So as one can see, in Genesis, God (along with what might be two Angels) appears personally to Abraham. Imagine that! One day, here you are being a pious everyday servant of God, and then poof! Here is God right in front of you. "He" is just taking a stroll down the street and decides that he is going to pop on in. Well, it appears that Abraham is on pretty good terms with God and Co. He tells Sarah to fetch some bread, whip up some cakes, and then sit down to a meal of a freshly slaughtered calf. While this is going on, God tells Abraham and Sarah that they will be having a son soon, even if Sarah is far beyond the age of fertility. God also tells Abraham that Sodom and Gohmorrah are going down. Why? Because God is fed up with their immorality and God has decided that it's time for them to go, that's why.
The point of this epistle is to show that God was very much alive, personal, and active in the ancient world. In contrast, as one plows through the Bible, one encounters the idea that God becomes more and more of a remote figure in our own vale of tears. God speaks through burning bushes, God ceases to be a "God of place" (meaning that a Diety exists in a certain physical location), an idea that was a prevalent one in the ancient world. Later it emerges that God is the only God and that God exists everywhere, a powerful idea when the Israelites are exiled from their homeland due to war and conquest. Eventually, God has largely disappeared altogether except to talk to us in our consciences and as voices in the wind. We have our own free wills to guide our actions and effectively hold our own destinies. The last great miracle is the miracle of Jesus Christ, being the last true incarnation of God on earth, coming to wash the sins of humanity away and assure a place for us in Heaven if we were to accept Jesus as Savior.
So what does all of this have to do with Tolkien and Middle Earth? Well as all Tolkien lovers know, Tolkien starts off his mythology (at least from a chronological perspective) in The Silmarillion. In The Silmarillion, we learn of the creation of the world, the creation of Arda and of Middle Earth. We learn of the origination of the deities of Tolkien's world, the original convulsions which rocked the world (is this a metaphor for the convulsions which scientists think helped shape our own universe?), the origination of the various races of being that populate Tolkien's world, and of the happenings of the First Age of Middle Earth.
Now, on page 20 of the Silmarillion Tolkien writes of the Ainur (Valar and Maiar - greater and lesser "Angels" if you will), that they entered Ea - the World that Is. Well, that is that SOME of them entered the World. Some of the Ainur decided to stay with Illuvatar. We go on to read of the Fall of Melkor (Morgoth), and of his rebellion. We read of the wars of the gods, the imprisonment of Melkor, his stealing of the Feanor's jewels (The Silmaril - which gives the tome its name), and of the sorrows of the First Age. At the end of the First Age, the gods hear an appeal to overthrow Morgoth and his minions (including Sauron, the Balrogs, and the Dragons). They do so.
So where does that leave us at the beginning of the Second Age? Well, the Valar tell Sauron to return to the Blessed Realms to accept punishment, but Saruon refuses, deciding to stay in Middle Earth ostensibly to help rework the world to help heal the wounds which Middle Earth has suffered (an ambition somewhat shared by the Elves). In effect we now have a single deity of considerable - but not infinite - power who is active in Middle Earth. During the Second Age we see Sauron invest a considerable amount of his angelic being into helping create the Rings of Power, devices that were able to hold back the forces of time and effectively embalm the world about them. They would bring wealth, power, and a false kind of immortality to some of their bearers, but as with so many things that Sauron did, there was fine print at the bottom of the contract. It would have served the 9 men whom received the Rings for Men to have considered their bargain with Sauron a bit more carefully.
So we do have a Deity active in Middle Earth who is capable of doing some fairly heady stuff, even perhaps (I am being speculative here) of some minor reshaping of Middle Earth itself with considerable effort. After all, mountains slide down after the Ring is destroyed, as does the very physical foundations of his fortress of Barad - dur. Sauron however isn't clearly capable of acts of true creation (meaning something out of nothing). Sauron with his One Ring and his minions surrounding him were also not great enough to face down the Numenoreans late in the Second Age. The One Ring is great enough to preserve Sauron's life when he gets caught up in the great catastrophe of the sinking of Numenor, but Sauron pays dearly for surviving. He can no longer assume fair and beautiful forms with which to beguile his enemies and advance his aims. Sauron now only has force and terror with which to accomplish his goals.
After the end of the Second Age, we find ourselves in a Third Age with NO active Deities for quite some time. The Valar have effectively been removed in their governing of the World and the Blessed Realms can only be reached by a Straight Way which is open only to a few. Sauron is dissipated for many centuries after losing the One Ring to Isildur. But even when the Valar decide to send the Maiar Wizards to Middle Earth, they send them bound under very tight restrictions. Most notably, the Wizards are entombed in the form of old Men, and as such they suffer from the many of the same afflictions that we humans face imprisoned in our own bodies - those of doubt, fear, and uncertainty about the future. The lesson here is that the act of being entombed in a human body, even for a minor Angelic figure, can be a tramatic experience. Many of these things could indeed be amplified by the fact that the Wizards do not die and are bound to be in Middle Earth for a long, long time. The Wizards seem to be physically strong and vigorous, free of disease and other human physical afflictions, as one might expect from a Deity which is incorporated into a human form. They still have some of their inherent angelic powers, as well as being attuned to subject matters which were inherent to their previous lives - Saruman having great smithcrafting skills for example. But as a whole, even with these minor deities being active in Middle Earth, we find that they are - as a group - at the periphery of events for many centuries during the Third Age. One could imagine in effect that these Wizards might have been seen during much of the Third Age as nothing more than meddling old men, kibitzers on the side of the road. It seems that only when Men started to notice that these old men didn't die that people probably started to take them seriously. When Saruman finally loses sight of the reason as to why he was sent to Middle Earth in the first place, we find that he wants to reshape the world to his own purposes, much the same way that the Elves and Saruon wanted to. But losing sight of one's original purpose or reason for adventuring into endeavors is a common failing of people in our own world. And bear in mind that we humans tend to live perhaps 80 years. Try remembering your purposes when you live for millennia!
What we find at the end of the Third Age of Middle Earth is that Middle Earth is now largely to be shaped by Men with all their foibles. Tom Bombadil still lives in the Old Forest (what was that about gods - if Bombadil is a Maiar - inhabiting certain places?), while we never learn of the fates of Radagast and the other two Wizards. Tolkien wrote in supplementary literature that the two other Wizards may have founded cults, but the fact that the three other Wizards (at least on paper) do not play large roles in Middle Earth's outcomes shows a number of things. Namely that Tolkien's mythology, awesome as it is, really is a very incomplete mythology. We do not by any means know the entire story of Middle Earth. We know nothing of Saruman's wanderings in the East for many generations, nor do we know of Gandalf's dealings, much less those of the missing Wizards. There are tons of undiscovered peoples and stories just waiting to be made up in Tolkien's world. Middle Earth really was a much larger place than we know from the stories and it is possible that our MIA Wizards did many things we were never told about. But we are also left to infer that the three remaining Wizards were not to play very large roles in the upcoming Fourth Age, if any at all. After all, the original goal of sending the Wizards to Middle Earth to encourage those of free will to oppose the will of Sauron had been accomplished. There was no reason for the remaining Wizards to stay in Middle Earth.
There is therefore, a subtle but profound parallel between the Christian Bible and Tolkien's world concerning the intervention of divine powers in their histories. There are the convulsions of Gods in their beginnings, which tends to subside as time moves forward. Eventually, we as Men are left in our own world (and in Middle Earth) to act within our free will while drawing inspiration from largely transcendant Divinities. Sadly, we are left with only our own devices, our doubts, and can only hope that Miracles can save us when we think we need them the most. And it is there where the parallels between the Bible and Tolkien's Middle Earth end because the Christian Bible does offer a guarantee, while the only thing that Tolkien as an human author can offer is hope without a guarantee.
I may have mentioned previously that I am a member of a Houston area Inklings meeting group, which of course focuses on the writings of J.R.R.Tolkien, Clive Lewis (C.S. Lewis), and other Inklings writers. Amongst our regulars are published Tolkien authors Professor Jane Chance and Michael Martinez. Tonight's meeting was supposed to follow the agenda of discussing the film "The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe", but as things often are at shindings like this, we wandered all over the place and only talked briefly about the recent film. We will probably circle back around next month and talk about Lewis.
Tonight, Michael Martinez brought up a previous train of conversation which was that "Tolkien Fandom" big guns Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull have come out with a book (sorry, as of this writing, I am not sure what the name of the book is. I am not that up to snuff on Tolkien) where Martinez said that Hammond and Scull have come out on two tired old questions that have plagued Tolkien religion worshippers (oops - fans) for ages: 1) Do Balrogs and Wings and 2) Did the One Ring speak to Gollum when Sam, Frodo, and Gollum were near Mount Doom on the final stages of the quest to destroy Sauron's Ring? Martinez went on to say that Hammond and Scull apparently (I cannot remember precisely what was said and I don't have the book) have come out against Balrogs having wings and that the Ring did not speak - the voice being either Frodo's, or even Sauron's or Galdalf's! Of course this conversation went on for a bit with arguing either way in which I did contribute to the "Ring speaking" debate, but to be honest I was bored with this. So, decided to pose another much more fundamental question.
So what, pray tell, did I ask my fellow Inklings enthusiasts? I started off by stating that the "Balrogs / Wings" question was not the most interesting issue to me when it came to thinking about Balrogs. To me, the most interesting thing about Balrogs was something far more fundamental and important - namely, why was it that Balrogs decided to follow or pay allegiance to Morgoth? In fact, I will go ahead and state that this question is THE fundamental issue surrounding the existence of Balrogs. Everything else that Balrogs do, and everything which happens to Balrogs (including the slaughter of most Balrogs at the end of the First Age), ultimately stem from their initial decision to pledge their allegiance to Morgoth. Balrogs are creatures which play role of some significance in Tolkien's myths and it absolutely blows my mind that as of the writing of this weblog essay on this website, nobody has ever bothered to ask a question of such fundamental importance in Tolkien fandom! I have probably 20 or so Tolkien related books besides The Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, and The Silmarillion and to my recollection, I have never once come across any published author who has asked this question. To the contrary, if one punches in the words "Balrogs" and "wings" into the Goolge search engine, one comes up with 12,400 webpages dedicated to the issue. These facts speak volumes of the world of Tolkien fandom and I would venture to say that such a state of affairs goes further to the wider world of science fiction and fantasy writing in general.
And what do those volumes say, one may ask? Well, one might ask whether there are plenty of questions that need to be asked, questions that obviously nobody in Tolkien fandom has ever bothered to have asked before. It seems that there is a tunnel vision that afflicts Tolkien readers (and sci - fi / fantasy readers in general?) that focuses on arguing over the text and doesn't stop to ask questions of Tolkien's stories which are of great significance. Yikes, sounds like we are talking about believers of Monotheism arguing over the Torah, the Koran, or the Bible, and we might as well should be.
So I posed the question. And what was the immediate response of this enthusiastic, rabid, and opinionated group? Well gentle readers, the silence was deafening.After some moments, Mr. Martinez spoke up and asked whether Balrogs were "followers" of Morgoth? I don't know, but if you ask me, reading about creatures which fight wars (and die) on behalf of a leader figure should pretty much be counted as followers. A woman named Pego ventured that Morgoth wanted fiery figures around him. Yet another, named Tom Lytle, mentioned something to the effect that Balrogs might have felt an attraction to Morgoth as something of a "kindred" spirit. Of course, there is always the oldest reply in the book: Balrogs followed Morgoth because Tolkien said so! So there you idiotic schmuck! Next question please...
Tolkien writes in the Valaquenta that:
"But he (Morgoth) was not alone. For of the Maiar many were drawn to his splendour in the days of his greatness, and remained in that allegiance down into his darkness; and others he corrupted afterwards to his service with lies and treacherous gifts. Dreadful among these spirits were the Valaraukar, the scourges of fire that in Middle-earth were called the Balrogs, demons of terror."
In the immediate aftermath of my first question, I asked a follow up question - what was it that Morgoth offered them (meaning Balrogs)? After all, surely if someone, even if that someone is a deity, wants you to follow them, then surely they must offer you something - right? Again, Mr. Martinez replied "maybe he (Morgoth) offered them nothing". Well maybe Morgoth offered Maiar and Balrogs nothing other than simply allowing them to bask in his splendor, but at the risk of assigning human like qualities to the Valar and Maiar, such an idea also goes against what is quid quo pro natural. Would Morgoth's aura of magnificence really be enough to convince an angelic being to go to war for such a deity? If not, then wiser Maiar might ask of Morgoth the question of "if I follow you, then what's in it all for me? What will you offer me in return?" Even the Christian faith asks that believers simply believe that Christ is the Savior of mankind and your reward will be in Heaven in the afterlife.
Tolkien often asks an awful lot of his readers and rarely does Tolkien ask more of his readers then when he tells them that Morgoth attracted angelic spirits to his service via lies and treacherous gifts. If Morgoth did so, then what were those treacherous gifts? One Ring type plot gifts? Grants of miraculous powers which then turned on their users? Like so much else, Tolkien doesn't tell us. But one has to remember that this is writing of both theological and cosmological scale. As for the lies Morgoth might have told lesser Maiar in order to attract them to his service, then one has to start asking questions regarding the powers of judgment which various Maiar possess. For example, would a Maiar fall to a lie that if that Maiar were to follow Morgoth, then when Morgoth subdued Arda (or whatever Morgoth's future plans would be), then that Maiar would be given perhaps a realm to rule as reward for his / her / its service to him? Would they really believe such words? Such musings are not idle ones. They go straight to the heart of issues such as the plot by the Valar to send the Wizards to Middle Earth in the Third Age, bound in the form of Men, to counter the will of Sauron. The fact that the Valar decided to do this in the light of knowing the historical record of Maiar behavior boils down to a breathtaking gamble on the part of the Valar.
Then there is the matter that the powerful are steadily leaving Tolkien's worlds, which in turn leaves us with the dreary, mundane, and unsupernatural world that we live in today. In this Tolkien parallels the stories of many religions which follow similar themes.
Moreover, Morgoth might have been quite a splendorous being, but for lesser figures to follow him, they surely must have been mulling over the consequences of what they were getting into by swearing their allegiance to him. How long was it before the Balrog of Moria burst forth after the wars that ended the First Age and which brought down Morgoth? One wonders at the fear and rage the Balrog of Moria might have felt after what transpired at the end of the First Age. Saruon felt much the same, as we are told of this in text. It also might explain why it was that the Moria Balrog never bothered to bow to Saruon (as far as we know?) or visit his horrors on Middle Earth until discovered two full millennia into the Third Age.
But to go on to the second question of this weblog entry, it is clear that few are asking these questions. That is why I decided to pose the question in the first place, as I have come to believe that if the full vision of Tolkien's fantastic myths are to reach their full fruition, then we must become more imaginative as fans and that would mean asking more of ourselves than simply rehasing tired old arguments such as whether Balrogs had wings or not. More musing on other seldom thought of matters will follow.
Ciao for now
TMW
News came about last week that archaeologists found what they believe is the original tomb of Edward the Confessor, the prenultimate Anglo - Saxon king of England and patron saint of England until the 14th century. Reports indicated that the tomb was found using radar to scan the floors of Westminster Abbey. It is well known that Edward's body was moved twice in the centuries after the Norman invasion and conquest of England, but researchers didn't know of the location of where Edward was originally buried. The tomb will remain untouched.
So gentle readers, why did The Mighty Wizard decide to post this piece of news under the Tolkien column of arcane Tolkien influences? After all this is history, but my suspicion is that many wargamers, sci - fi / fantasy readers could really care less of real human history - at least until they get older. Well, the reason I decided to post this story under arcane Tolkien influences is that Edward was the monarch who started the ritual of laying his kingly hands on his subjects so that they could be healed of their illnesses. From the Yahoo UK webpage:
"His reign was marked by an outbreak of peace after years of fighting, and he was revered throughout his realm as a man of saintly pursuits who was credited with being able to cure people simply by touching them."
This ritual continued to be practiced until the reign of Queen Anne - a period of some 670 years. The Mighty Wizard imagines that the practice probably stopped when people started wondering how effective the practice was at curing those with ailments.
Hmmm... A King that can heal with his hands. Any Tolkien fanatic should be having light bulbs go off in their heads upon hearing that little piece of cultural history. And maybe you Sci - Fi / Fantasy readers should take a renewed interest in reading anthropology and history.
Regards and Ciao for now
TMW
I belong to a Tolkien Meeetup group here in Houston, which I have attended for the past 2 years or so. Actually we have a fairly active group which includes such luminaries in the world of Tolkien fandom like Literature Professor Jane Chance of Rice University and Tolkien researcher Michael Martinez, both of whom have published works on Tolkien.
At last month's meetup, it was agreed that we would have a Trivial Pursuit contest. I haven't read too closely the works in quite a while, but a little brushing up should get me into fighting shape when it comes to a Tolkien Trivial Pursuit contest. Ah yes, I once knew every spell of Elves, Men, and Orcs for opening such doors. I can still recall 10 score of them even without searching my mind...or something to that effect.
More intriguingly, Mr. Martinez suggested that we present some ideas as to where Tolkien might have gotten some of his inspirations. Many people who are familiar with Tolkien's works know that Tolkien was inspired by the Finnish myth the Kalevala, and by Beowulf. But what about some possible ideas from other writings? Well, it seemed to The Mighty Wizard that Mr. Martinez might be slyly looking for help with future writings, so I have decided to use my trusty weblog to publish some ideas as to where I think Tolkien might have gotten inspiration and have them on the public record before anyone else does. More to the point, my musings might raise some eyebrows because it is highly likely that the very few of the Sci - Fi / Fantasy crowd which read the Classics. What a shame because they really are worth reading.
----------
My first essay as to where Tolkien might have gotten inspiration from comes from Edward Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is found on page 309 of the Penguin Classics edition of Gibbon's work. The year is A.D. 270 and the Roman Emperor Aurerlian is fighting a Germanic People called the Alemanni. After improbably defeating them in three battles, the most important of which was the Battle of Fano, the German Barbaric hordes reasoned to themselves that they simply could not have lost to the Roman Emperor on their own. It was noted that in this time of extreme danger to the Western Empire, the Roman Senate had ordered that the Sibylline books be consulted. Any sacrifice would be offered by the Emperor and the Senate to appease the gods. But to return to the subject of Tolkien inspiration, I invoke Gibbon's timeless writing style:
"However puerile in themselves, these superstitious arts were subservient to the success of the war; and if, in the decisive battle of Fano, the Alemanni fancied they saw an army of spectres combatting on the side of Aurelian, he received a real and effectual aid from this imaginary reinforcement."
Hmmm. It must have been that the Roman Emperor could invoke supernatural ghosts to his aid, which is what really defeated the Barbarian hordes. Wow! Does that idea sound familiar to Tolkien fans?
It seems that that Mighty Wizard is a deeply learned fellow...
Ciao for now.
