Isildur's Curse

[Blackheart]

Originally Posted by Elemmire

An interesting corrolary is also in the story of Beren and Lúthien, where at Lúthien's request, Beren manages to remain in Mandos. Although I have read that the fëar of Men have no real power after death to withstand the call of Mandos, occurences like this must be taken into account.

The difference there is, Beren swore to wait for Luthien on the Hither Shore. As a disembodied soul. In order for them to come back, it took a special dispensation and an intercession from Manwe to Eru...

Luthien didn't somehow bind him, nor even plead for Mandos to hold him. He tarried in the halls of Mandos. Any Mortal could likely do that, had they reason enough.

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Blackheart

Now how are you interpreting the fact that office of high priest of the NUMENOREANS (not the high priest of ARDA) , which was held by the kings until it was forfieted in the downfall, was passed on into exile after the loss of Meneltarma?
:
:

BH - I would suggest that Wayfarer probably means that he was the Priest of Iluvatar to the Dunedain... by extension perhaps, to all men.

Actually though - Elendil was still top dog at this time. It's apparent that he had not yet fallen and that Isildur did not have the Ring when he received the Oath at Erech - for otherwise the Men who swore the Oath would have no opportunity to break it, since at that time, Sauron was evidently defeated and the trouble was past.

It seems that the Oath was the thing. It may have helped that Isildur had some sort of royal standing... it may have been something special about the Stone of Erech - but the taking of the Oath seems to have been the key.

[Blackheart]

All that are left of the Numenoreans that honor Eru ARE the Dunedain...

I doubt any of the Black Numenorians hold much with worshiping Eru...

But no, what I was pointing out was that even if the King of Westernesse was titled with High Preist, it wouldn't supercede Manwe, who had already noted that he couldn't hold the souls of men, nor stave off death... not without special dispensation anyway....

[Attalus]

I agree with Wayfarer. It was the oath that bound them, obviously an oath to Eru as has been posted. Consider the power of the Oath of Fëanor, as has been alluded to, and the Oath that Gollum swore on the Precious, which has not. Obviously, the Ring is not Eru, but this is but another example of the terrible power of oaths in Tolkien's world.

[me9996]

Originally Posted by Attalus

I agree with Wayfarer. It was the oath that bound them, obviously an oath to Eru as has been posted. Consider the power of the Oath of Fëanor, as has been alluded to, and the Oath that Gollum swore on the Precious, which has not. Obviously, the Ring is not Eru, but this is but another example of the terrible power of oaths in Tolkien's world.

I gess it's unadamus, (er..) unademuss .

I hope you know what I'm trying for

P.S.
The 90 second rule is realy anyoying!

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by me9996

...P.S.
The 90 second rule is realy anyoying!

Really? We've been talking about doubling it!

[Rían]

NOOOO! Don't double it!! IT's really annoying for us fast typists!!


Anywho, am in a tearing hurry but found an interesting quote from Letter #156 -

from JRRT letter 156
Also when the 'Kings' came to an end there was no equivalent to a 'priesthood': the two being identical in Númenórean ideas.

I think whoever said it was the WORDS of the oath (prob. including the name of Eru), not the one who directed the oath (i.e., Isildur), that made the oath binding had a good idea.

[Attalus]

Originally Posted by me9996

I gess it's unadamus, (er..) unademuss .

I hope you know what I'm trying for

P.S.
The 90 second rule is realy anyoying!

LOL, I think that you mean unanimous.

RÃ*an, I quite agree. About the Name of Eru, not the fast typing.

[Elemmírë]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I think whoever said it was the WORDS of the oath (prob. including the name of Eru), not the one who directed the oath (i.e., Isildur), that made the oath binding had a good idea.

That's an idea I can definitely agree with also, RÃ*an.

However, how often were oaths made that included the name of Eru? From the Silmarillion, emphasis mine own:

They swore an oath which none shall break, and none should take, by the name even of Ilúvatar...

The fact that the word "even" is included when speaking of the Oath of Fëanor makes me doubt that oaths including the name Eru were not all that common.

[Blackheart]

Main Entry: oath
Function: noun
1 : a solemn attestation of the truth of one's words or the sincerity of one's intentions; specifically : one accompanied by calling upon a deity as a witness

Seeing as Tolkien was a philologist, I somehow doubt that he would have called an oath an oath unless it actually invoked the name of a divine witness.

Otherwise he would have called it a vow.

[Nurvingiel]

What's the Meneltarma? It seems relevant to this thread.

Another powerful Oath is the one made by the Stewards of Gondor to uphold the line of the King! This causes them (essentially) to turn over the throne to a distant King who appears as if out of legend, after hundreds of years of successful and stable rule by the Stewards.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

meneltarma is the mountain in the middle of numenor, has a hallow to eru on the summit, but no other temple or such like.

[Elemmírë]

Originally Posted by Blackheart

Main Entry: oath
Function: noun
1 : a solemn attestation of the truth of one's words or the sincerity of one's intentions; specifically : one accompanied by calling upon a deity as a witness

Seeing as Tolkien was a philologist, I somehow doubt that he would have called an oath an oath unless it actually invoked the name of a divine witness.

Otherwise he would have called it a vow.

I don't agree.

From "Minas Tirith" in "The Return of the King."

Here do I swear fealty and service to Gondor, and to the Lord and Steward of the realm, to speak and to be silent, to do and to let be, to come and to go, in need or plenty, in peace or war, in living or dying, from this hour henceforth, until my lord release me, or death take me, or the world end. So say I, Peregrin son of Paladin of the Shire of the Halflings.

There's an oath of fealty, no mention of Eru in it at all. And if you doubt it is actually therefore an oath, all you need to do is look at the next line where Denethor says "oath-breaking with vengeance." It is an oath.

And also considering that Tolkien was a philologist, I don't think the word "even" would have been thrown in to the description of the Oath of Fëanor if swearing to Eru was a common occurrence.

[Blackheart]

Originally Posted by Elemmire

There's an oath of fealty, no mention of Eru in it at all. And if you doubt it is actually therefore an oath, all you need to do is look at the next line where Denethor says "oath-breaking with vengeance." It is an oath.

If it's an oath of fealty, it is a strange one. Because if you look at any oath of fealty in the middle ages, it includes a reference to god as the ultimate witness.

But then Tolkien may have been operating under the assumption of the faithful Numenoreans as "elevated humanity", at least from a christian viewpoint.

'The precept, "Swear not at all," refers probably to
ordinary conversation between man and man (Matt. 5:34,37). But if the words are taken as referring to oaths, then their intention may have been to show "that
the proper state of Christians is to require no oaths; that when evil is expelled from among them every yea and nay will be as decisive as an oath, every promise as binding as a vow." '

In other words, the oath would have been understood to name Eru as witness, without direct invocation.

[me9996]

Originally Posted by Blackheart

Main Entry: oath
Function: noun
1 : a solemn attestation of the truth of one's words or the sincerity of one's intentions; specifically : one accompanied by calling upon a deity as a witness

Seeing as Tolkien was a philologist, I somehow doubt that he would have called an oath an oath unless it actually invoked the name of a divine witness.

Otherwise he would have called it a vow.

So a valar did it? Okay, we're done...

P.S.
What is the reson for the 90 second rule?!?

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Originally Posted by Blackheart

If it's an oath of fealty, it is a strange one. Because if you look at any oath of fealty in the middle ages, it includes a reference to god as the ultimate witness.

But who's to say that the Hobbit's knew about Eru. They were simple creatures and had no real love for any creatures save themselves, and they were not learned (save a few) in the histories of elves, men etc.

[Blackheart]

I doubt that denethor would have used a special form for a hobbit.
I can only reiterate that it is a strange form for a fealty oath.

Tolkien also would have been very aware of the form, so there's probably a definate reason for the omission...

If you could figure it out you could proabably get a master's thesis out of it...

[Valandil]

LM - perhaps Denethor would not invoke the name of Eru in that oath because of his OWN rebellion... his unwillingness to step aside for the Man who would be King. Note that the oath is one of loyalty to the Steward... not to the King himself.

I did not think enough about this to be convinced of it... it was just a passing thought. What do the rest of you think?

[Elemmírë]

Originally Posted by me9996

So a valar did it? Okay, we're done...

P.S.
What is the reson for the 90 second rule?!?

Please stop complaining about the 90 second rule. They don't plan to change it, and I honestly don't blame them. Constant and annoying complaining is not going to help, and might actually make things worse.

We're not done. First of all, Blackheart is claiming that it was Eru, not a Vala, who did it. Though I might have some problems with the concept, I think it's theoretically acceptable. The Valar, however, clearly do not have the power to do such a thing.

Val... it still holds, I think, that as far as I know (will have to check up on it later), we only have one instance where an oath included the name "Eru", and in this case, it was said that they swore even by Eru... And I've mentioned that twice, so I'll quit with that particular argument now...

It is an interesting thought, but I'm not convinced that oaths were usually sworn to Eru. You'd think that after the First Age, they'd have learned to do away with oaths altogether...

[Blackheart]

Originally Posted by Valandil

LM - perhaps Denethor would not invoke the name of Eru in that oath because of his OWN rebellion... his unwillingness to step aside for the Man who would be King. Note that the oath is one of loyalty to the Steward... not to the King himself.

I did not think enough about this to be convinced of it... it was just a passing thought. What do the rest of you think?

Actually that's a damned cogent point...