One more thing that makes aragorn the natural enemy of Sauron its the fact that Aragorn its the rightful heir to the ring of Barahir. Saurons ring represents hate, the wish to control other, fury and power while the ring of Barahir represents Loyalty, friendship and the wish to oppose the dark lords. The ring of barahir its almost as old as sauron himself it was that ring which was owned by finrod who challenged him to a battle of magic, it was owned by Beren who together with Luthien challenged him and later would take a silmaril from Sauron's master's crown. It was owned by the Numenoreans who helped Gilgalad defeat him at the begining of the second age, Elendil had it when sauron was defeated in the war of the last alliance and finally the ring went to be owned (i believe) by Eldarion the first High king of the 4th age. The 2 rings help differentiate the 2 kings from one another and in my personal opinion The ring of barahir crowns the true king of men. GREAT video btw.
@@Shirohige4yonko According to Wikipedia (the font of all knowledge on all subjects) . "The ring was forged by the Ñoldor in Valinor at some point towards the end of the Years of the Trees in the First Age. It was brought to Middle-earth by Finrod Felagund as an heirloom of the House of Finarfin. Finrod carried the ring until the year FA 455, when Barahir, an Adan, saved his life during the Dagor Bragollach. Finrod gave Barahir the ring as a sign of friendship between himself and Barahir's house. " . Indeed old, reaching back to well before the awakening of Men. Older than I thought, so you were at least as correct as I.
Whoa, whoa, whoa guys. This is the internet. You're not allowed to be respectful of each other, listen to each other, and concede where the other makes good points. Where's the hate? The mocking? The dehumanization? You may lose your commenting privileges over this. 😊
A bit of a deeper dive into a couple of topics I have looked at in the past: Aragorn's kingly nature and Sauron's fear of what he represents. Hope you enjoy! Support the channel: www.patreon.com/stevengibb
I saw a post recently that essentially described Sauron’s failure to recognise the true nature of the threat to him as similar to derivative fantasy author works failing to understand the general heart of Tolkien’s story when they interpret him. Some authors don’t understand the hobbits and see them as ‘annoying’ because they’re more focused on the juvenile (not innately bad but certainly naive) power fantasy that they impose onto Aragorn, as a divine ruler who conquers evil with might, which Aragorn did not do. Sauron similarly thinks that Aragorn is the ‘main character’ and Aragorn is happy to allow him to think that because like Tolkein, Aragorn understands that it is the little folk volunteering and doing the actual work together that represent the true threat to the likes of Sauron (this I think is the true reason he is likely to be a good king, though he is venerated he understands that he is a servant of the people he rules and his duty is to their welfare.
Mortal men from a greater lineage are more likely to wield power and influence and decide the fate of middle earth. Yet. Samwise. A gardener and simple and loyal friend to Frodo and his famous uncle. He is the greatest hero of all. He carried on when even the “heroes” of ancestry and blood couldn’t go on. And that is Tolkiens lesson to us all. Anyone can be a hero. Through love and through morality. Anyone can be strong.
This is a masterpiece , you really are the best Tolkien channel for every analysis of the characters or the lore. Sadly in France we have no one like you to explain it so well. I'm glad your channel exist Steven.
@@LeHobbitFan Absolument et depuis le début de the Red Book. Tant mieux si nous sommes plusieurs, j’apprécie ne pas être isolée ici à l'ouest de l’ouest de la Terre du Milieu. 😏
I quite enjoy these long form videos, where you actually explore the 'rabbit holes'. The calm delivery makes this a great listen when winding down at the end of the day.
I think that the biggest practical reason Sauron feared Aragorn is something you only glanced over at this video, not giving it the emphasis it deserved. That thing being Ar-Pharazon and his Numenorian host. During the second age when Sauron was at the height of his power he proclaimed himself as king of all men and thought no-one would dare challenge him. Ar-Pharazon, the proud Numenorian king, did so, seeing himself as the king of all men, being the king of the strongest kingdom of men: Numenor, at the height of its power. Thus Ar-Pharazon raised a host and declared war on Sauron. Sauron quickly realized his host was no match for the Numenorians, surrendered and humbled himself before Ar-Pharazon. In hind sight we all know this was a ruse and part of Sauron's plan to bring the downfall of Numenor but in the moment Sauron was genuinely afraid of this great Numenorian host, and one could say that this plan of his as it happened in the lore was actually his plan B, a plan he improvised after seeing the full might of Numenor marching against him. Aragorn, being of Numenorian blood himself, was a symbol of this threat. Sauron feared Aragorn too could raise a mighty host of men that could challenge his own. He was scarred by a great host of men once, he wasn't about to be caught, with his pants down so to speak, again. Moreover you forgot that before the Kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor was actually a single kingdom of men, created by the exiles of Numenor. Gondor and Arnor were 2 kingdoms that split off from this united kingdom, much as Arnor split apart like you mentioned in the video. Aragorn's lineage meant that he had claim to both kingdoms(Gondor and Arnor) thus being in a unique position to reunite the kingdom of the exiles of Numenor. This would have been the greatest threat Sauron has faced since his face off against Numenor, and of course means that all his plans of weakening the race of men would have failed.
The Ring seems, naturally, to be magical. It seems like Tolkien's vision of magic is something along the lines of being able to will things to be a certain way. The Rings were designed to enhance this power in certain ways. The Three were designed by the Elves to enhance their will to keep things from decaying, which is actually a form of evil to which Elves are susceptible. All of them seem to have power to shape the minds of others. I sort of think the One enhances the ability to dominate the will of others, the power by which anyone can shape the world. Aragorn, being a descendant of both Maia and Elves, has this kind of will, to shape reality, and could use the Ring to dominate the wills of others. Sauron put his power to dominate into the ring, and now anyone with similar ability to dominate can level up by using it.
This video is a fantastic reminder about the importance of one's *role* in the legendarium. Remember that the Valar are described as the *powers* of Arda - I understand them as the as the function of Arda. Sauron's fear was not that he would be usurped as the lord of the ring, but that his role in Arda would be usurped. And Aragorn represented a top candidate to replace his role. (Steven's previous video on Gandalf's speech is a perfect example of one's role)
For all the “problematic” bloodline/race issues in Middle-earth, it’s worth noting that individuals are still more than their ancestry. We’re explicitly told, in a story where time makes things worse, not better, that Aragorn is more like Elendil than any who came before him. So on top of everything else, Aragorn has something special about him individually.
Circumstances have a stronger say in these matters than adherence to any previous qualities. Aragorn had some exceptional circumstances, like being raised in the house of Elrond.
Nice to see you are making more videos again ! Though ,I was confused due to the change of the channel name . It’s a very good topic you have here . I see a lot of people asking those questions . Sadly they are too lazy to try understand the answers from the books,or look for good sources like your channel .
Hello again Katya. Yes, I ended up testing the name change before I was going to announce it but then realised once you change it you can't for two weeks 😅 apologies for the confusion!
Absolutely epic. I needed this so badly and had no idea. I want so badly to understand fully Aragorn every time I read it and I feel like maybe I do when I read the book but it ebbs from me in the intervening months. This captures him so perfectly I feel. I would like to hear more about Aragorn vs Dickhead in the palantír one day if you're of a mind.
I think about Earnur being egged on into a duel with the Witch-king a lot. It's interesting how Tolkien had the rule of kings in Gondor end due to what may be the last king's pride or fear of looking like a coward. How does that compare to Fingolfin challenging Morgoth to a one-on-one? Or to Morgoth accepting Fingolfin's challenge? Or to Aragorn revealing himself to Sauron through the Orthanc-stone, which hastened the Siege of Minas Tirith? Was there pride in Aragorn's provoking of Sauron, just justified pride where Earnur's was unjustified, or was the provoking purely strategic?
If we take them one by one: Fingolfin certainly had a bit of pride in challenging Morgoth but I feel it was mostly down to grief and rage. It was the last resort in his mind, the end of his people, and as their King he 'had' to do this for them. Some honour in his grief that (despite his death) still showed the world that Morgoth could be challenged in some way and wasn't invulnerable. Morgoth accepted the challenge out of fear and pride. His captains were watching, he had boasted about being the true Elder King and Lord of everything. If someone was banging at his door challenging him to a fight, it would look like cowardice if he didn't annihilate him, a King no less. He had to strike him down to show who was the boss. The fact he feared the challenge tells us a lot about Morgoth at this time, how far he had fallen. If this was the time he was sending the Valar running then he'd have been insulted at such a challenge... Aragorn's choice seems to indicate some pride if we remember Gandalf thinking it was perhaps too soon to do so. I see it as Aragorn understanding his role more than he ever had before. He understood the stone was his by right, he understood that the fight was getting taken to Sauron, why did he have to hide now? Almost like a justified pride and confidence in his own kingly qualities and role in the conflict. He was justified in doing this as he can see by Sauron's reaction to it.
@@TheRedBook There is another piece to Aragorn's choice to take and use the Palantir. Ever since he considered following Frodo & Sam across Anduin, at some level he had been thinking of their plight. Drawing the attention of Sauron away from his own land, distracting him, disrupting his plans - all a calculated risk to promote the essential function of the Fellowship: destruction of the Ring. He judged he had the strength, and he did - barely, but he did. Astounding that a Man could hold firm against a Maia, and that is a testament to the kingliness of Aragorn - that he could, successfully, take such a risk for the support of a task beyond any Man.
@@TheRedBook I don't think you did, you mentioned how the line of Anarion was extinguished and calling Aragorn Isildur's heir of Gondor, but not his descent through the Kings of Gondor, save Elendil and Isildur.
@@Knight860 Steven is right. I found where he said that Aragorn can trace his lineage in both the North and South Kingdoms. You will find it here at 16:37.
@@Knight860 Steven is pretty thorough in his research. I guess he could have mentioned Fíriel by name, but the video was about Aragorn and not everyone in his family tree. There are some significant women in the Legendarium. All of Elendil's bloodline come from Silmariën, who should have been the first Queen of Numenor, but only men could be kings back then.
I'd like to suggest an alternative look at Lord of the Rings...and by that I mean the title itself. I know it's usually taken as a given when we read the title that said title is talking about Sauron, the maker of the one ring and the Lord of the Rings himself, but I wonder if the title of the series might also be taken as a hint to the central conflict within the books: that being whether to seize the power of Sauron and the tyrannical nature he embodies, or to let it go, destroying it in such a manner that not only defeats him, but prevents tyranny such as his from rising again-ensuring that there is no Lord of the Rings that can rise again. My reason for this was admittedly inspired by a part of the books that doesn't make it into any films: when Frodo awakes and reunites with his friends in Rivendell, and Pippin tells the people in the room to all hail his cousin, "The lord of the ring!" At this point, Gandalf, chastises him and reminds him that there is only one lord of the rings. I know this seems to support the traditional view of the title, but besides this scene foreshadowing the temptation Frodo (as well as Sam, Boromir, Faramir, Aragorn, Galadriel, and others) face along this journey, I think one can also draw a connection to what Gandalf is in Gondor, both when he warns Denethor that he would not have known his son Faramir if he had seized the ring to bring it back, as well as later during the council when he explains they must give Frodo his chance even at the cost of their own lives. In the latter case, he explains that this is to ensure Sauron cannot return, and to make sure no tyranny like his can ever rise again, even if every generation will face some type of evil. With what's been discussed here before regarding how the ring *can* be used by one of strong will to overthrow Sauron, but at the cost of becoming a tyrant themselves (IE, making a world where all are subject to them and even they are enslaved to their lust for power), I think we can see the title Lord of the Rings as not only a reference to the antagonist, but to the primary conflict of the story and the overall legendarium: that is to say, trying to bend all that you can to your own will until it overrides your morality and sanity or accepting your limitations and unique position within the larger reality and morally operating within the world accordingly. This comes to a head in the ring as the ultimate instrument to exact ones will on the world in conjunction to the capabilities of one who wields it, whether it is the petty yet monstrous actions of Gollum because of his desire, obsession, and gluttony, or the world-altering terror that could be unleashed by Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel, Elrond, or Aragorn. Sorry if this seems a strange point to stick on. I always found it strange that the title was based on the antagonist, but I figure it makes a lot more sense when looked at as a hint to what all this fighting is about.
Excellent as always! On another subject, I'd like to know if you have thoughts on something I've viewed as a flaw in Tolkien's LOTR's, and it has given me intense distress because I think his work is one of the greatest. Most of the LOTR's theme, tension and what drives it's story is based on Sauron getting the ring. At all cost, he must not get it! If he does, the world and everything good in it will perish! But Sauron already had the ring, and he seemed to of lost it fairly easy. Why wasn't the world doomed then when Sauron had it in the first place? This idea seems to take the power away from everything at stake after Sauron lost it. He is not this great enemy, and he is not that powerful even if he gets the ring back. Maybe I'm looking to deeply into this, as there are flaws in any story. And also Tolkien's story, side stories and it's characters are beautiful, meaningful and masterfully crafted even without this element. Do you have some good insights and counter arguments to this idea? I'd appreciate them :) Maybe you have a video on this very subject or are working on one, or maybe Tolkien has addressed this very thing? take care!
Hello, Yes, this is a common question. The reasons are fairly logical actually and I hope I can explain it properly. The reason it is said that Sauron will "win" if he recovers the ring is that destroying the ring is the last hope of defeating him as destroying it will diminish him to the point where he will no longer trouble the world. Sauron did not need the ring to "win" the War of the Ring. His armies were vastly greater than all his enemies, over time he would have won. The only hope of the West to defeat him is to destroy the ring. So, if Sauron recovers it, that hope is lost. He will also be able to immediately understand all that has been done with the Three Rings. He will understand Gandalf, he will know Galadriel and Elrond, their havens that have long eluded Sauron's power will fall to him because they will no longer be able to use their rings, unless they want to be dominated by him. They'd have to take them off again and you'd see Lothlorien and Imladris fall to Sauron. The greatest of the Elves would lose a bit of strength in their fight against him. And if we go back to the Second Age. Sauron lost because his enemies were not vastly overwhelmed by Mordor. The Last Alliance of Elves and Men was a very great force. Great Kings of Elves and Men. The ring didn't make Sauron some warlord on the battlefield, it was to dominate the other rings. His enemies took the fight to him and at great cost they overthrew Mordor. But such a force was never found again. His enemies in the Third Age are nowhere near as great as his Second Age enemies. Again, it's not about Sauron getting the ring, putting it on, and everyone loses. It's about that last hope of being able to defeat him being lost. He'd have his superior armies and he'd be holding the one thing that could defeat him. Middle-earth would 100% lose without outside aid. It's about his enemies strength and Mordor's strength. 2nd Age and 3rd age are VERY different in that regard.
If you are familiar with the story of Achilles, you may find parallels between his story and Aragorn’s. I highly recommend doing some research on it yourself. Connection to mythical parentage (lost/forgotten) Fighting an unwinnable battle (fights a river, fights Sauron/Nazgul, Witch King of Angmar) Taught by elder (Gandalf, Priam) Tragedy (Briseis, Boromir) Quest (Fellowship, Thetis’ prediction of Achilles death) Just a few thoughts. Could simply discuss the heroes journey but I think there’s an even deeper connection between the two pairs of mothers and sons. Achilles and Thetis / Aragorn and Gilraen. Just goes to show what kinds of connected themes these stories have, how inalienable and permanent they appear over time.
One of my favorite of Tolkien's lessons is that mortality is infinitely more precious, valuable, worthwhile, and desirable than immortality. One of my favorite movie quotes that illustrates this is from Achilles in the film Troy: "The gods envy us. They envy us because we’re mortal, because any moment may be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we’re doomed. You will never be lovelier than you are now. We will never be here again."
One of the film's best quotes because it is lifted straight from the source material. That is said in The Iliad. And I think that is what many don't understand when there is the discussion about the Gift of Men in Tolkien. We are told that leaving the world and not having to suffer its fate until its end is a good thing, yet everyone disagreeing still craves the immortality of the Elves as if it were inherently 'better'.
@@TheRedBook Right. It comes down to fear and greed. The fear of losing everything you have, your possessions, your loved ones, your life. And the desire to keep living, to not lose your friends and family, to not lose your things. I personally feel that boredom, grief, and sorrow would make immortality absolutely miserable.
If generational trauma can be applied anywhere, it could be applied toward lineages in mythological fairytales…not that this concept totally applies to this situation, but even in history (and most notably seen in the Bible) ancestry lists were almost treated like resumes. “Look at this great man I am descended from! Or this woman. Or these heroes. This is why you can trust me, because I am descended from them.” They would purposely leave out unimportant/infamous names to buoy their status. Love this video. Thank you Steve!
@@TheRedBook true enough, but he came closer than any member of the Children of Illuvatar should have been able to have come. Showing that "power rankings" alone are not sufficient when it comes down to "who would win"-as you alluded to.
@@TheMarcHicks Yeah, the whole power ranking idea is completely overshadowed by fate/destiny as well. Power is far more nuanced in Tolkien than a lot of the modern audience seems to get. Gil-galad and Elendil managed to defeat Sauron, and themselves, but they still did. Combat isn't the only indicator of some sort of power.
I feel like using the Ring and being a Master of the Ring is a massive distinction. And it really does only truly answer to one individual, Sauron. You might form a relationship with it, but not the one you want. I wouldn’t say that line Jackson’s adaptation is entirely inaccurate…
It doesn't "truly answer to one individual", that's why the line is wrong. Another can bend the power within it to their own will, it is then theirs, not Sauron's. It is an inaccurate idea they added to the films.
My own personal theory is that the Ring contains the Soul and Spirit of Morgoth himself. Bathed in the Fire of Mt. Doom his Essence was cleansed and was re-united with Illuvitar. In essence, showing Divine Forgiveness such as Tolkien strived for.
Gold is the material that has most of Morgoths essence in, but I don't think his 'soul' is in the ring. The whole of Arda is 'Morgoth's Ring'. But Sauron's soul is bound to the One Ring.
Morgoth's essence is distributed through his own 'Ring' - which is the physical world of Arda. Refer to the Morgoth's Ring section of The History of Middle-Earth.
Morgoth created Orodruin in the First Age, well after Arda's creation and the destruction of Beleriand. I imagine he put something extra of his power into its creation. Whether it is that power or Morgoth's Ring power, something beyond Sauron's innate power must've been in the One Ring.🤔
@@Enerdhil Morgoth couldn't have created Orodruin then as the time of the destruction of Beleriand also marks when he was captured and cast into the Void. It had to have been much earlier.
Thanks to Tolkien I appreciate my Catholic background a lot more, and I'm also a staunch monarchist now, maybe not a believer in current monarchies as we know them, but surely I await for a king that we all know.
It is well established that the one ring enhances the innate powers of its bearer. Aragorn's power is his divine, kingly authority (as witnessed by Legolas as a flicker of light playing on his brow like a crown). The ring itself is a tool of domination that grants Big Brother-like surveillance capabilities, imstant understanding of all languages and endlessly prolonged life. When one wears the ring and commands any creature of darkness including the Nazgul, none can reject the command of the lord. Saruman says as much to the face of the Nazgul. But beyond all that, Aragorn has an aura of surety, an armor of righteousness that Sauron perceives. He knows that he has no right to rule and that he's an imposter. A common bully with an uncommon power. Aragorn has every right to rule and people follow him out of love and trust. Sauron must always fear betrayal while Aragorn can always depend on his friends. And also, Sauron hasn't yet forgotten his humiliation at the hands of the Numenorean kings. No, he has many good reasons to fear Aragorn.
the greatest power that they had against sauron was himself like they say in the two towers wise fool because accoding to what he would do and the addiction of the ring if aragorn had touched it hed have wanted his fix of ring and he would have weilded it and had the inner strength to weild it and defeatr at helms deep made sauron think that they used the ring so according to his thinking and knowing that the ring is far to important to give to hobbits they would have weilded it and gone to minas tirith and taken down the black gates and cast sauron down thats according to saurons thinking and logic but they all knew the dangers of the ring and they could see into the future and the phrophecy of it been saurons doom with the return of the king sauron had good reason to faer aragorn but alas they played a trick on him and only just before his doom did he realise
Sauron is a real angel or little Demi-god. Therefore he knows God is real, had firsthand knowledge of God, and knew God created Arda to be inherited by men.
I get triggered when people get squeamish over the idea of bloodlines. It's sad when Tolkien discussions are tainted by modern tabuls rasa pseudoscience progressive ideologies. Blood and race are real.
Do you think the idea that you can reliably predict good rulers according to their bloodline, is backed up by science? There's a vast gulf between "all human behavior is nurture, there's no nature to it" and "royals and nobles are made of different stuff from the rest of us, that's why they're fit to rule", filled with more nuanced opinions that you're eliding. Likewise, someone can believe that there's variation in traits across different ethnic groups, without believing those differences are so extreme as to make some groups reliably more likely to take the more evil side in conflicts, and _that_ is what bothers people when they're reading Tolkien, like how the Men of the Mountains and Dunlendings with their swarthy Pre-Numenorean blood both serve Sauron, while the Dunedain and the arguably-more-closely-related-to-Dunedain-than-the-Haladin-descended-Pre-Numenoreans-are Northmen (Black Numenoreans excepted) reliably show up in history as heroes. I see two ways you can take it. One is what Gibbs seems to say in the video, that Tolkien was making a mythic world that behaves according to logics one shouldn't try to operate according to in real life, logics like "heroic descent". Another way (which isn't incompatible with the first) is that Tolkien did believe such things even in real life, but you can still enjoy his writings even if you disagree with those values. (He was really a monarchist, wasn't he, even if he called himself an "anarcho-monarchist".) Either way, I think readers can have serious criticisms of Tolkien's ideologies and prejudices implicit in his writings, while (1) still enjoying him and valuing him, and (2) not just being triggered pseudoscience-espousing zombies who can be so easily written off.
The comment does well to sum up why I've probably not covered this stuff before. I'll need to start videos by saying "I don't think the Legendarium is real".
It’s as simple as this. Tolkien was catholic. To a fault. But his works mirror the same ficton as the bible. It’s more nuanced and interesting. However. Tolkiens work is. Good vs evil. It’s black and white. So let’s take Sauron as Lucifer? (You could argue morgoth) but that’s not the story that was told. Eru is god supposedly? That makes the Miar angels? But Aragorn is mortal flesh. Eru created him. As he did other beings. But he seems to have an affinity and a love for man. Aswell as the flaws of man. As “god” does in the bible. In that way. Aragorn is Christ. But then. We see it’s just ideas for Tolkien. Because the smallest people in Tolkiens world. They save the world. They defeat Shelob. They mortally wound The Witch king of Angmar.. Then Sméagol, Bilbo and Frodo bear and destroy the one ring together. They come from a place that the great heroes of Middle Earth didn’t know. Ever Sauron didn’t know what the shire was. That is Tolkiens lesson.
10:06 I mostly agree but I do feel a bit uncomfortable with it, none the less because a lot of the ideas used to justify the worst crimes of the last 500 years, were either inspired by or extrapolated from a lot of these mythological tropes. It isnt Tolkien fault that this is the case, but you can see why bad faith actors (in this case meaning, literally nazis from the actual nazi party in the 1940s and many of their modern counterparts) enjoy these aspects of the legendarium and are ever greedy to pervert his works for their own gain. It is because these same bad faith actors, base their justifications for what they want to do, on the narratives used to justify European imperialism, and those narratives were in turn often based on this sort of mythology as well as the more violent and chauvinistic interpretations of Christian scripture, which just happens to be where Tolkien also drew inspiration from. Therefor, whilst Tolkien himself thought that imperialism was a detriment to both the oppressor and the oppressed, and despised fascists with an admirable passion, his work just so happens to play into the world views of people who love those things. It is regrettable.
The use of myth and legend by some people to try and justify their horrific actions goes much farther back than 500 years ago. It's probably as almost as old as the oldest such tales. But Tolkien never used his writings to try and justify atrocities in the real world; he hated such things.
I think we were robbed of the 1st and 2nd ages, those would’ve been so much crazier and so much more satisfying (hard to get more satisfying than LOTR) and would’ve put LOTR in a better perspective.
One more thing that makes aragorn the natural enemy of Sauron its the fact that Aragorn its the rightful heir to the ring of Barahir. Saurons ring represents hate, the wish to control other, fury and power while the ring of Barahir represents Loyalty, friendship and the wish to oppose the dark lords. The ring of barahir its almost as old as sauron himself it was that ring which was owned by finrod who challenged him to a battle of magic, it was owned by Beren who together with Luthien challenged him and later would take a silmaril from Sauron's master's crown. It was owned by the Numenoreans who helped Gilgalad defeat him at the begining of the second age, Elendil had it when sauron was defeated in the war of the last alliance and finally the ring went to be owned (i believe) by Eldarion the first High king of the 4th age. The 2 rings help differentiate the 2 kings from one another and in my personal opinion The ring of barahir crowns the true king of men. GREAT video btw.
Sauron would be a maiar, preexisting earth itself, far older than the ring of Barahir.
@@DonMeaker yeah missed the mark on that one but the point still the same. The ring it's ancient as well.
@@Shirohige4yonko According to Wikipedia (the font of all knowledge on all subjects)
.
"The ring was forged by the Ñoldor in Valinor at some point towards the end of the Years of the Trees in the First Age. It was brought to Middle-earth by Finrod Felagund as an heirloom of the House of Finarfin. Finrod carried the ring until the year FA 455, when Barahir, an Adan, saved his life during the Dagor Bragollach. Finrod gave Barahir the ring as a sign of friendship between himself and Barahir's house. "
.
Indeed old, reaching back to well before the awakening of Men. Older than I thought, so you were at least as correct as I.
Love your insight into these themes, represented by the two rings. Ultimate victory in the ring of sacrifice and love.
Whoa, whoa, whoa guys. This is the internet. You're not allowed to be respectful of each other, listen to each other, and concede where the other makes good points. Where's the hate? The mocking? The dehumanization? You may lose your commenting privileges over this. 😊
A bit of a deeper dive into a couple of topics I have looked at in the past: Aragorn's kingly nature and Sauron's fear of what he represents. Hope you enjoy!
Support the channel: www.patreon.com/stevengibb
So like Adam and Lucifer
I saw a post recently that essentially described Sauron’s failure to recognise the true nature of the threat to him as similar to derivative fantasy author works failing to understand the general heart of Tolkien’s story when they interpret him. Some authors don’t understand the hobbits and see them as ‘annoying’ because they’re more focused on the juvenile (not innately bad but certainly naive) power fantasy that they impose onto Aragorn, as a divine ruler who conquers evil with might, which Aragorn did not do. Sauron similarly thinks that Aragorn is the ‘main character’ and Aragorn is happy to allow him to think that because like Tolkein, Aragorn understands that it is the little folk volunteering and doing the actual work together that represent the true threat to the likes of Sauron (this I think is the true reason he is likely to be a good king, though he is venerated he understands that he is a servant of the people he rules and his duty is to their welfare.
Based
Mortal men from a greater lineage are more likely to wield power and influence and decide the fate of middle earth. Yet. Samwise. A gardener and simple and loyal friend to Frodo and his famous uncle. He is the greatest hero of all. He carried on when even the “heroes” of ancestry and blood couldn’t go on. And that is Tolkiens lesson to us all. Anyone can be a hero. Through love and through morality. Anyone can be strong.
This is a masterpiece , you really are the best Tolkien channel for every analysis of the characters or the lore. Sadly in France we have no one like you to explain it so well. I'm glad your channel exist Steven.
Ça fait plaisir de savoir qu'on est plusieurs Français à suivre Steven !
Thank you very much :)
@@LeHobbitFan Absolument et depuis le début de the Red Book. Tant mieux si nous sommes plusieurs, j’apprécie ne pas être isolée ici à l'ouest de l’ouest de la Terre du Milieu. 😏
nous sommes plusieurs !
I concur
I quite enjoy these long form videos, where you actually explore the 'rabbit holes'. The calm delivery makes this a great listen when winding down at the end of the day.
Of all the channels devoted to Tolkein's works, this is arguably the finest.
I think that the biggest practical reason Sauron feared Aragorn is something you only glanced over at this video, not giving it the emphasis it deserved. That thing being Ar-Pharazon and his Numenorian host. During the second age when Sauron was at the height of his power he proclaimed himself as king of all men and thought no-one would dare challenge him. Ar-Pharazon, the proud Numenorian king, did so, seeing himself as the king of all men, being the king of the strongest kingdom of men: Numenor, at the height of its power. Thus Ar-Pharazon raised a host and declared war on Sauron. Sauron quickly realized his host was no match for the Numenorians, surrendered and humbled himself before Ar-Pharazon. In hind sight we all know this was a ruse and part of Sauron's plan to bring the downfall of Numenor but in the moment Sauron was genuinely afraid of this great Numenorian host, and one could say that this plan of his as it happened in the lore was actually his plan B, a plan he improvised after seeing the full might of Numenor marching against him.
Aragorn, being of Numenorian blood himself, was a symbol of this threat. Sauron feared Aragorn too could raise a mighty host of men that could challenge his own. He was scarred by a great host of men once, he wasn't about to be caught, with his pants down so to speak, again. Moreover you forgot that before the Kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor was actually a single kingdom of men, created by the exiles of Numenor. Gondor and Arnor were 2 kingdoms that split off from this united kingdom, much as Arnor split apart like you mentioned in the video. Aragorn's lineage meant that he had claim to both kingdoms(Gondor and Arnor) thus being in a unique position to reunite the kingdom of the exiles of Numenor. This would have been the greatest threat Sauron has faced since his face off against Numenor, and of course means that all his plans of weakening the race of men would have failed.
The Ring seems, naturally, to be magical. It seems like Tolkien's vision of magic is something along the lines of being able to will things to be a certain way. The Rings were designed to enhance this power in certain ways. The Three were designed by the Elves to enhance their will to keep things from decaying, which is actually a form of evil to which Elves are susceptible. All of them seem to have power to shape the minds of others. I sort of think the One enhances the ability to dominate the will of others, the power by which anyone can shape the world. Aragorn, being a descendant of both Maia and Elves, has this kind of will, to shape reality, and could use the Ring to dominate the wills of others. Sauron put his power to dominate into the ring, and now anyone with similar ability to dominate can level up by using it.
This deeper analysis is truly amazing. I hope you do more.
Thank you :)
I do have over 100 videos of it if you haven't watched them all
This video is a fantastic reminder about the importance of one's *role* in the legendarium. Remember that the Valar are described as the *powers* of Arda - I understand them as the as the function of Arda. Sauron's fear was not that he would be usurped as the lord of the ring, but that his role in Arda would be usurped. And Aragorn represented a top candidate to replace his role. (Steven's previous video on Gandalf's speech is a perfect example of one's role)
For all the “problematic” bloodline/race issues in Middle-earth, it’s worth noting that individuals are still more than their ancestry. We’re explicitly told, in a story where time makes things worse, not better, that Aragorn is more like Elendil than any who came before him. So on top of everything else, Aragorn has something special about him individually.
Circumstances have a stronger say in these matters than adherence to any previous qualities. Aragorn had some exceptional circumstances, like being raised in the house of Elrond.
Your videos are works of art. Thank you!
Nice to see you are making more videos again ! Though ,I was confused due to the change of the channel name .
It’s a very good topic you have here . I see a lot of people asking those questions . Sadly they are too lazy to try understand the answers from the books,or look for good sources like your channel .
Hello again Katya. Yes, I ended up testing the name change before I was going to announce it but then realised once you change it you can't for two weeks 😅 apologies for the confusion!
@@TheRedBook no worries ,pretty sure the majority figured out it’s you ! Once we klick on your videos ,of course there is no doubt :)
I probably should formally announce it but I never seem to think much about that stuff. Glad to see familiar faces though :)
@@Ka_T_yajust saw you shared the video on your Facebook, very cool 🤘
Absolutely wonderful work; these videos last me a long time. Thanks for taking the time to make this, and high production value as always!
Great job my friend. Excellent addition to the channel!
Well, this might be my new favorite channel. gonna do a deep dive into all your videos. thanks for what you're doing!
Absolutely epic. I needed this so badly and had no idea. I want so badly to understand fully Aragorn every time I read it and I feel like maybe I do when I read the book but it ebbs from me in the intervening months. This captures him so perfectly I feel. I would like to hear more about Aragorn vs Dickhead in the palantír one day if you're of a mind.
Aye, i'm on for the Patreon.
Simply brilliant 👏🏼
I think about Earnur being egged on into a duel with the Witch-king a lot. It's interesting how Tolkien had the rule of kings in Gondor end due to what may be the last king's pride or fear of looking like a coward.
How does that compare to Fingolfin challenging Morgoth to a one-on-one? Or to Morgoth accepting Fingolfin's challenge? Or to Aragorn revealing himself to Sauron through the Orthanc-stone, which hastened the Siege of Minas Tirith? Was there pride in Aragorn's provoking of Sauron, just justified pride where Earnur's was unjustified, or was the provoking purely strategic?
If we take them one by one:
Fingolfin certainly had a bit of pride in challenging Morgoth but I feel it was mostly down to grief and rage. It was the last resort in his mind, the end of his people, and as their King he 'had' to do this for them. Some honour in his grief that (despite his death) still showed the world that Morgoth could be challenged in some way and wasn't invulnerable.
Morgoth accepted the challenge out of fear and pride. His captains were watching, he had boasted about being the true Elder King and Lord of everything. If someone was banging at his door challenging him to a fight, it would look like cowardice if he didn't annihilate him, a King no less. He had to strike him down to show who was the boss. The fact he feared the challenge tells us a lot about Morgoth at this time, how far he had fallen. If this was the time he was sending the Valar running then he'd have been insulted at such a challenge...
Aragorn's choice seems to indicate some pride if we remember Gandalf thinking it was perhaps too soon to do so. I see it as Aragorn understanding his role more than he ever had before. He understood the stone was his by right, he understood that the fight was getting taken to Sauron, why did he have to hide now? Almost like a justified pride and confidence in his own kingly qualities and role in the conflict. He was justified in doing this as he can see by Sauron's reaction to it.
@@TheRedBook There is another piece to Aragorn's choice to take and use the Palantir. Ever since he considered following Frodo & Sam across Anduin, at some level he had been thinking of their plight. Drawing the attention of Sauron away from his own land, distracting him, disrupting his plans - all a calculated risk to promote the essential function of the Fellowship: destruction of the Ring. He judged he had the strength, and he did - barely, but he did. Astounding that a Man could hold firm against a Maia, and that is a testament to the kingliness of Aragorn - that he could, successfully, take such a risk for the support of a task beyond any Man.
Great video as always. I'm looking forward to the next exclusive members stream!
Great listen mate! Keep it up and you may become as good as the guy from the red book channel!
That guy? What happened to him 😉
@@TheRedBook Who even knows. Glad you're carying the torch! ;)
top notch as always
Great video, thanks! I hope you can make more frequent appearances.
Fantastic. Thank you.
Aragorn is also a descendent of Anarion through his ancestor Firiel of Gondor who married Arvedui the Last King of Arthedain.
Pretty sure I mention he descends from both lines, at some point...
@@TheRedBook I don't think you did, you mentioned how the line of Anarion was extinguished and calling Aragorn Isildur's heir of Gondor, but not his descent through the Kings of Gondor, save Elendil and Isildur.
@@Knight860
Steven is right. I found where he said that Aragorn can trace his lineage in both the North and South Kingdoms. You will find it here at 16:37.
@@Enerdhil Okay I must of missed that then, my apologies.
@@Knight860
Steven is pretty thorough in his research. I guess he could have mentioned Fíriel by name, but the video was about Aragorn and not everyone in his family tree. There are some significant women in the Legendarium.
All of Elendil's bloodline come from Silmariën, who should have been the first Queen of Numenor, but only men could be kings back then.
Thank you for this video of my favorite character in The Lord of the Rings.
Thank you so much ❤️❤️❤️
Cheers Steven
This video is going to be my number one reference, for my friends that have only seen the adaptations. (Since they won't read 🙄)
Do they ask "Why didn't Aragorn just use the zombies to cut Mordor in half?"
@@TheRedBook
Yes....🧟♂️🧟♂️🧟♂️🧟♂️🧟♂️
Amazing stuff!
I'd like to suggest an alternative look at Lord of the Rings...and by that I mean the title itself.
I know it's usually taken as a given when we read the title that said title is talking about Sauron, the maker of the one ring and the Lord of the Rings himself, but I wonder if the title of the series might also be taken as a hint to the central conflict within the books: that being whether to seize the power of Sauron and the tyrannical nature he embodies, or to let it go, destroying it in such a manner that not only defeats him, but prevents tyranny such as his from rising again-ensuring that there is no Lord of the Rings that can rise again.
My reason for this was admittedly inspired by a part of the books that doesn't make it into any films: when Frodo awakes and reunites with his friends in Rivendell, and Pippin tells the people in the room to all hail his cousin, "The lord of the ring!" At this point, Gandalf, chastises him and reminds him that there is only one lord of the rings. I know this seems to support the traditional view of the title, but besides this scene foreshadowing the temptation Frodo (as well as Sam, Boromir, Faramir, Aragorn, Galadriel, and others) face along this journey, I think one can also draw a connection to what Gandalf is in Gondor, both when he warns Denethor that he would not have known his son Faramir if he had seized the ring to bring it back, as well as later during the council when he explains they must give Frodo his chance even at the cost of their own lives. In the latter case, he explains that this is to ensure Sauron cannot return, and to make sure no tyranny like his can ever rise again, even if every generation will face some type of evil.
With what's been discussed here before regarding how the ring *can* be used by one of strong will to overthrow Sauron, but at the cost of becoming a tyrant themselves (IE, making a world where all are subject to them and even they are enslaved to their lust for power), I think we can see the title Lord of the Rings as not only a reference to the antagonist, but to the primary conflict of the story and the overall legendarium: that is to say, trying to bend all that you can to your own will until it overrides your morality and sanity or accepting your limitations and unique position within the larger reality and morally operating within the world accordingly. This comes to a head in the ring as the ultimate instrument to exact ones will on the world in conjunction to the capabilities of one who wields it, whether it is the petty yet monstrous actions of Gollum because of his desire, obsession, and gluttony, or the world-altering terror that could be unleashed by Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel, Elrond, or Aragorn.
Sorry if this seems a strange point to stick on. I always found it strange that the title was based on the antagonist, but I figure it makes a lot more sense when looked at as a hint to what all this fighting is about.
Great video
Excellent as always! On another subject, I'd like to know if you have thoughts on something I've viewed as a flaw in Tolkien's LOTR's, and it has given me intense distress because I think his work is one of the greatest.
Most of the LOTR's theme, tension and what drives it's story is based on Sauron getting the ring. At all cost, he must not get it! If he does, the world and everything good in it will perish! But Sauron already had the ring, and he seemed to of lost it fairly easy. Why wasn't the world doomed then when Sauron had it in the first place? This idea seems to take the power away from everything at stake after Sauron lost it. He is not this great enemy, and he is not that powerful even if he gets the ring back.
Maybe I'm looking to deeply into this, as there are flaws in any story. And also Tolkien's story, side stories and it's characters are beautiful, meaningful and masterfully crafted even without this element.
Do you have some good insights and counter arguments to this idea? I'd appreciate them :) Maybe you have a video on this very subject or are working on one, or maybe Tolkien has addressed this very thing? take care!
Hello,
Yes, this is a common question. The reasons are fairly logical actually and I hope I can explain it properly. The reason it is said that Sauron will "win" if he recovers the ring is that destroying the ring is the last hope of defeating him as destroying it will diminish him to the point where he will no longer trouble the world. Sauron did not need the ring to "win" the War of the Ring. His armies were vastly greater than all his enemies, over time he would have won. The only hope of the West to defeat him is to destroy the ring.
So, if Sauron recovers it, that hope is lost. He will also be able to immediately understand all that has been done with the Three Rings. He will understand Gandalf, he will know Galadriel and Elrond, their havens that have long eluded Sauron's power will fall to him because they will no longer be able to use their rings, unless they want to be dominated by him. They'd have to take them off again and you'd see Lothlorien and Imladris fall to Sauron. The greatest of the Elves would lose a bit of strength in their fight against him.
And if we go back to the Second Age. Sauron lost because his enemies were not vastly overwhelmed by Mordor. The Last Alliance of Elves and Men was a very great force. Great Kings of Elves and Men. The ring didn't make Sauron some warlord on the battlefield, it was to dominate the other rings. His enemies took the fight to him and at great cost they overthrew Mordor. But such a force was never found again. His enemies in the Third Age are nowhere near as great as his Second Age enemies.
Again, it's not about Sauron getting the ring, putting it on, and everyone loses. It's about that last hope of being able to defeat him being lost. He'd have his superior armies and he'd be holding the one thing that could defeat him. Middle-earth would 100% lose without outside aid. It's about his enemies strength and Mordor's strength. 2nd Age and 3rd age are VERY different in that regard.
Love your voice. Thank you for your great analysis of Tolkiens works.
Love Aragorn as a character.
Nice work dude thanks
If you are familiar with the story of Achilles, you may find parallels between his story and Aragorn’s.
I highly recommend doing some research on it yourself.
Connection to mythical parentage (lost/forgotten)
Fighting an unwinnable battle (fights a river, fights Sauron/Nazgul, Witch King of Angmar)
Taught by elder (Gandalf, Priam)
Tragedy (Briseis, Boromir)
Quest (Fellowship, Thetis’ prediction of Achilles death)
Just a few thoughts. Could simply discuss the heroes journey but I think there’s an even deeper connection between the two pairs of mothers and sons. Achilles and Thetis / Aragorn and Gilraen.
Just goes to show what kinds of connected themes these stories have, how inalienable and permanent they appear over time.
thanks for the content cheers from Toronto.
Well spoke brov!
As far as I'm concerned, Mr Gibb's word is canon.
One of my favorite of Tolkien's lessons is that mortality is infinitely more precious, valuable, worthwhile, and desirable than immortality.
One of my favorite movie quotes that illustrates this is from Achilles in the film Troy:
"The gods envy us. They envy us because we’re mortal, because any moment may be our last. Everything is more beautiful because we’re doomed. You will never be lovelier than you are now. We will never be here again."
One of the film's best quotes because it is lifted straight from the source material. That is said in The Iliad. And I think that is what many don't understand when there is the discussion about the Gift of Men in Tolkien. We are told that leaving the world and not having to suffer its fate until its end is a good thing, yet everyone disagreeing still craves the immortality of the Elves as if it were inherently 'better'.
@@TheRedBook Right. It comes down to fear and greed. The fear of losing everything you have, your possessions, your loved ones, your life. And the desire to keep living, to not lose your friends and family, to not lose your things. I personally feel that boredom, grief, and sorrow would make immortality absolutely miserable.
So awesome
Yay!! Don’t leave ever!
If generational trauma can be applied anywhere, it could be applied toward lineages in mythological fairytales…not that this concept totally applies to this situation, but even in history (and most notably seen in the Bible) ancestry lists were almost treated like resumes. “Look at this great man I am descended from! Or this woman. Or these heroes. This is why you can trust me, because I am descended from them.” They would purposely leave out unimportant/infamous names to buoy their status.
Love this video. Thank you Steve!
Oh yeah, it's Tolkienin' time!
In keeping with what you said re: no classes or stats, we should never forget that Fingolfin-an Elf-came close to defeating Morgoth-a Valar.
Vala*
But he was never close, not really. Fingolfin could not defeat Morgoth but he could, and did, make him suffer in pain.
@@TheRedBook true enough, but he came closer than any member of the Children of Illuvatar should have been able to have come. Showing that "power rankings" alone are not sufficient when it comes down to "who would win"-as you alluded to.
@@TheMarcHicks Yeah, the whole power ranking idea is completely overshadowed by fate/destiny as well. Power is far more nuanced in Tolkien than a lot of the modern audience seems to get. Gil-galad and Elendil managed to defeat Sauron, and themselves, but they still did. Combat isn't the only indicator of some sort of power.
I feel like using the Ring and being a Master of the Ring is a massive distinction. And it really does only truly answer to one individual, Sauron.
You might form a relationship with it, but not the one you want.
I wouldn’t say that line Jackson’s adaptation is entirely inaccurate…
It doesn't "truly answer to one individual", that's why the line is wrong. Another can bend the power within it to their own will, it is then theirs, not Sauron's. It is an inaccurate idea they added to the films.
❤
My own personal theory is that the Ring contains the Soul and Spirit of Morgoth himself. Bathed in the Fire of Mt. Doom his Essence was cleansed and was re-united with Illuvitar. In essence, showing Divine Forgiveness such as Tolkien strived for.
Gold is the material that has most of Morgoths essence in, but I don't think his 'soul' is in the ring. The whole of Arda is 'Morgoth's Ring'. But Sauron's soul is bound to the One Ring.
Mt.Doom has Melkors essence due to him destroying the lamps.
Morgoth's essence is distributed through his own 'Ring' - which is the physical world of Arda. Refer to the Morgoth's Ring section of The History of Middle-Earth.
Morgoth created Orodruin in the First Age, well after Arda's creation and the destruction of Beleriand.
I imagine he put something extra of his power into its creation. Whether it is that power or Morgoth's Ring power, something beyond Sauron's innate power must've been in the One Ring.🤔
@@Enerdhil Morgoth couldn't have created Orodruin then as the time of the destruction of Beleriand also marks when he was captured and cast into the Void. It had to have been much earlier.
Thanks to Tolkien I appreciate my Catholic background a lot more, and I'm also a staunch monarchist now, maybe not a believer in current monarchies as we know them, but surely I await for a king that we all know.
I'm definitely not a monarchist but it would be hard not to be if the likes of Aragorn existed. Such kings are relegated to the realms of fantasy.
@@TheRedBook I'm talking about Christ..mellon nin :)
Of course. He's as real as Aragorn to me :D .
@@TheRedBook I know that fact, so it's good :) you love Aragorn, this video is proof of that, it's a great video and great work, honestly
It is well established that the one ring enhances the innate powers of its bearer. Aragorn's power is his divine, kingly authority (as witnessed by Legolas as a flicker of light playing on his brow like a crown). The ring itself is a tool of domination that grants Big Brother-like surveillance capabilities, imstant understanding of all languages and endlessly prolonged life. When one wears the ring and commands any creature of darkness including the Nazgul, none can reject the command of the lord. Saruman says as much to the face of the Nazgul. But beyond all that, Aragorn has an aura of surety, an armor of righteousness that Sauron perceives. He knows that he has no right to rule and that he's an imposter. A common bully with an uncommon power. Aragorn has every right to rule and people follow him out of love and trust. Sauron must always fear betrayal while Aragorn can always depend on his friends. And also, Sauron hasn't yet forgotten his humiliation at the hands of the Numenorean kings. No, he has many good reasons to fear Aragorn.
7:08 Sussy Gandalf ඞ
the greatest power that they had against sauron was himself like they say in the two towers wise fool because accoding to what he would do and the addiction of the ring if aragorn had touched it hed have wanted his fix of ring and he would have weilded it and had the inner strength to weild it and defeatr at helms deep made sauron think that they used the ring so according to his thinking and knowing that the ring is far to important to give to hobbits they would have weilded it and gone to minas tirith and taken down the black gates and cast sauron down thats according to saurons thinking and logic but they all knew the dangers of the ring and they could see into the future and the phrophecy of it been saurons doom with the return of the king sauron had good reason to faer aragorn but alas they played a trick on him and only just before his doom did he realise
sauron wanted to make middle earth great again.
Sauron is a real angel or little Demi-god. Therefore he knows God is real, had firsthand knowledge of God, and knew God created Arda to be inherited by men.
@macrosense yes but by the 3rd age he thought God no longer cared or had abandoned Arda.
I get triggered when people get squeamish over the idea of bloodlines. It's sad when Tolkien discussions are tainted by modern tabuls rasa pseudoscience progressive ideologies. Blood and race are real.
Particularly if there are elves and/or Maia in your family tree.
Do you think the idea that you can reliably predict good rulers according to their bloodline, is backed up by science? There's a vast gulf between "all human behavior is nurture, there's no nature to it" and "royals and nobles are made of different stuff from the rest of us, that's why they're fit to rule", filled with more nuanced opinions that you're eliding.
Likewise, someone can believe that there's variation in traits across different ethnic groups, without believing those differences are so extreme as to make some groups reliably more likely to take the more evil side in conflicts, and _that_ is what bothers people when they're reading Tolkien, like how the Men of the Mountains and Dunlendings with their swarthy Pre-Numenorean blood both serve Sauron, while the Dunedain and the arguably-more-closely-related-to-Dunedain-than-the-Haladin-descended-Pre-Numenoreans-are Northmen (Black Numenoreans excepted) reliably show up in history as heroes.
I see two ways you can take it. One is what Gibbs seems to say in the video, that Tolkien was making a mythic world that behaves according to logics one shouldn't try to operate according to in real life, logics like "heroic descent". Another way (which isn't incompatible with the first) is that Tolkien did believe such things even in real life, but you can still enjoy his writings even if you disagree with those values. (He was really a monarchist, wasn't he, even if he called himself an "anarcho-monarchist".)
Either way, I think readers can have serious criticisms of Tolkien's ideologies and prejudices implicit in his writings, while (1) still enjoying him and valuing him, and (2) not just being triggered pseudoscience-espousing zombies who can be so easily written off.
That was a very kind way of calling intenzityd3181 and people like Tolkien a racist. 🤪
The comment does well to sum up why I've probably not covered this stuff before. I'll need to start videos by saying "I don't think the Legendarium is real".
@@TheRedBook
Really?!!😱 The Legendarium is not real?!!😱😱😱😱😱
It’s as simple as this. Tolkien was catholic. To a fault. But his works mirror the same ficton as the bible. It’s more nuanced and interesting. However. Tolkiens work is. Good vs evil. It’s black and white.
So let’s take Sauron as Lucifer? (You could argue morgoth) but that’s not the story that was told.
Eru is god supposedly? That makes the Miar angels?
But Aragorn is mortal flesh. Eru created him. As he did other beings. But he seems to have an affinity and a love for man. Aswell as the flaws of man.
As “god” does in the bible. In that way. Aragorn is Christ.
But then. We see it’s just ideas for Tolkien.
Because the smallest people in Tolkiens world. They save the world. They defeat Shelob. They mortally wound The Witch king of Angmar.. Then Sméagol, Bilbo and Frodo bear and destroy the one ring together.
They come from a place that the great heroes of Middle Earth didn’t know. Ever Sauron didn’t know what the shire was. That is Tolkiens lesson.
10:06 I mostly agree but I do feel a bit uncomfortable with it, none the less because a lot of the ideas used to justify the worst crimes of the last 500 years, were either inspired by or extrapolated from a lot of these mythological tropes. It isnt Tolkien fault that this is the case, but you can see why bad faith actors (in this case meaning, literally nazis from the actual nazi party in the 1940s and many of their modern counterparts) enjoy these aspects of the legendarium and are ever greedy to pervert his works for their own gain. It is because these same bad faith actors, base their justifications for what they want to do, on the narratives used to justify European imperialism, and those narratives were in turn often based on this sort of mythology as well as the more violent and chauvinistic interpretations of Christian scripture, which just happens to be where Tolkien also drew inspiration from. Therefor, whilst Tolkien himself thought that imperialism was a detriment to both the oppressor and the oppressed, and despised fascists with an admirable passion, his work just so happens to play into the world views of people who love those things. It is regrettable.
What happened 500 years ago that was either worse or not due to heroic fiction? You do realise Tolkien didn't publish LOTR until the 1950s?
The use of myth and legend by some people to try and justify their horrific actions goes much farther back than 500 years ago. It's probably as almost as old as the oldest such tales. But Tolkien never used his writings to try and justify atrocities in the real world; he hated such things.
I think we were robbed of the 1st and 2nd ages, those would’ve been so much crazier and so much more satisfying (hard to get more satisfying than LOTR) and would’ve put LOTR in a better perspective.