The Lord of the Kingdom

Tim Challies recently had a post entitled “The People Who Shape Our World,” spawned by Time magazine’s list of 100 influential people. Included in the list were such deep thinkers as Tyra Banks, George Clooney, and the group experts on international politics and all things presidential, The Dixie Chicks.

Tim used the article as a springboard to discuss heroism - and the lack thereof - not only in our culture but in the church. Whereas past generations had the voices and teachings of such men as Edwards, Spurgeon, Wesley, and others, our present-day millieu of Christian pop stars are not so wonderful. Tim writes,

The heroes and influencers of our culture are rarely heroic. We prefer fleeting fame to grand accomplishment, coverage to character. Sadly, it seems that this lack of discernment is seen within the church as much as without. Many of the men and women who have risen to the ranks of influencers and leaders within the church lack the godliness and character that ought to set apart those to whom we give special honor. How else to we explain T.D. Jakes, Joyce Meyer, Creflo Dollar and so many other Christian ‘heroes?’”

There is, I think, something else to be noted and it involves one of the many critical themes in The Lord of the Rings. To understand it fully, it is necessary to first provide some background that was ignored in Peter Jackson’s movies and only hinted at in the book. It has to do with size and power, two symbolically significant matters in Tolkien’s masterpiece.

In Unfinished Tales, written by J.R.R. Tolkien and compiled by his son Christopher, an Appendix is provided at the end of the chapter “Disaster of the Gladden Fields”; the subtitle of the Appendix is “Númenórean Linear Measures.” Tolkien explains,

Measures of distance are converted as nearly as possible into modern terms. ‘League’ is used because it was the longest measurement of distance: in Númenórean reckoning (which was decimal) five thousand rangar (full paces) made a lár, which was very nearly three of our miles. Lár meant ‘pause’, because except in forced marches a brief half was usually made after this distance had been covered . . .

“The Númenórean ranga was slightly longer than our yard, approximately thirty-eight inches, owing to their greater stature. Therefore five thousand rangar would be almost exactly the equivalent of 5280 yards, our ‘league’: 5277 yards, two feet and four inches, supposing the equivalence to be exact. This cannot be determined, being based on the lengths given in histories of various things and distances that can be compared with those of our time.

“Account has to be taken both of the great stature of the Númenóreans (since hands, feet, fingers and paces are likely to be the origin of names of units of length), and also of the variations from these averages or norms in the process of fixing and organising a measurement system both for daily use and for exact calculations. Thus two rangar was often called ‘man-high’, which at thirty-eight inches gives an average height of six feet four inches; but this was at a later date, when the stature of the Dúnedain appears to have decreased, and also was not intended to be an accurate statement of the observed average of male stature among them, but was an approximate length expressed in the well-known unit ranga. (The ranga is often said to have been the length of the stride, from rear heel to front toe . . .)” (pp. 285-286)

The point of this long (and perhaps tedious) explanation is to demonstrate that the Númenóreans were a people of large physical stature. Although, as Tolkien noted, they had diminished somewhat by the time the ranga was established, they were still of unusual height even by today’s standards. The average Númenórean - such as many of the Rangers in Middle-earth - would have been 6′4″ at least and, it is assumed, proportionally built: many people above average height are tall because they have long legs, somewhat out-of-proportion to their body. The Númenóreans, too, would have had long legs but their bodies would have been proportionate, making them not only tall but physically big and imposing.

Tolkien adds,

Elendil was said to be ‘more than man-high by nearly half a ranga‘; but he was accounted the tallest of all the Númenóreans who escaped the Downfall (and was indeed generally known as Elendil the Tall).”

Even if we reduce Elendil’s height to more than man-high by one-third of a ranga (since he was not quite half more) he would still have been 7′6″. Now there are a couple of ways to be 7′6″: one could be Manute Bol, the NBA center from Sudan. Manute was 7′6″ and weighed 200 pounds (shown here with 5′6″ Muggsy Bogues). Somehow I don’t think that’s what was in Tolkien’s mind as he thought of Elendil. Elendil and the Númenóreans were fierce and feared warriors that were capable of tremendous feats of strength and great triumphs in battle. Manute, whatever else may be said of him, is hardly fierce or feared.

It is more likely that Elendil and all the Númenóreans were normally proportioned, i.e., having arms and legs that were appropriate to their torsos. That would make Elendil more the size of the late Andre the Giant, although presumably without the extra weight Andre carried in his later years. When in his prime, Andre likely tipped the scales at a svelt 450 pounds or so rather than the 500-plus he weighed towards the end of his life. In the photo on the left, he is playfully choking to death Hulk Hogan, who at 6′8″ may be about the size of Aragorn. It is to be remembered that Aragorn was the Dúnadan and in him the blood of the Númenóreans ran true and strong. Thus, Strider - who went about “at a great pace on those long shanks of his,” according to Barilman Butterbur - would have been an imposing and impressive figure, taller than most visitors to The Prancing Pony in Bree.

But even if Aragorn were “only” a normal-sized Númenórean at 6′4″, it is likely he looked quite different than the movie portrayal of him. Viggo Mortensen is a fine actor and did a good job as Aragorn, but Viggo is 5′11″ and somewhat slight of build. A better image (only with hair) might be the 6′4″ Bill Goldberg, former football player and dominating wrestler for a brief time. The sight of Goldberg might put fear into a foe’s heart, whereas Viggo’s less-than intimidating appearance and countenance might have just the opposite effect, actually giving them hope when seeing his normal or smallish stature. “Araberg” could do battle with an Uruk-Hai whereas Morensen is a bit of a stretch. And Tolkien wanted his myth to be believable.

All that has gone before is simply background for the point I wish to make in this post. The point is not one that is novel or original with me, but it is an important one that bears repeating. Despite the size of the Númenóreans, the power of Gandalf, the immortality and power of the elves, and the gritty determination of the dwarves and others of Middle-earth, it is none of these who actually shape the world of Middle-earth.

While the mighty - Gandalf, Sauron, Aragorn, Éomer, the Nazgûl, great armies and powers - are involved elsewhere, the fate of Middle-earth is determined by the small, weak, and overlooked. It is Frodo, Sam, and even Gollum - the least powerful characters in the story - who strike the deciding blow. Frodo is faithful in his mission, Sam finally gains compassion for Gollum, and Gollum unwittingly destroys himself and his precious, thus assuring the downfall of the mighty Sauron and the changing of Ages in Middle-earth.

Even Merry and Pippin, who seem to be incidental to the Fellowship at the beginning of the quest, make a major difference in the outcome. It is their capture and subsequent escape from the Orcs that brings the Ents into the fray; the Ents not only destroy Isengard and imprison Saruman but also facilitate the victory at Helm’s Deep. All because of two heroic hobbits who chose to be faithful to a friend instead of staying home.

Time will undoubtedly sell a lot of copies of their issue about “people who shape our world,” but it is only an illusion. They are not the truly great or even significant people. It is, rather, each individual Christian who is faithful in her or his walk with Christ that makes a difference. Most of us are simply hobbit-like people, unnoticed by the “movers and shakers” of Christendom, but it is the faithfulness and trustworthiness of the “halflings” in the Body of Christ that will shape and mold the future.

The history of the world ultimately is in the hands and mind of God, regardless of what Open Theologians might profess. Important things happen, not in the visible world but, in the unseen spiritual world. God has a purpose and that purpose will not be thwarted; this is obvious to anyone who reads the Bible cover-to-cover without imposing their preconceived doctrinal biases upon the text (impossible, but still to be attempted).

What is just as apparent is that God, like Tolkien in Middle-earth, will work through unexpected means to accomplish the great events of the future. In God’s case, it seems He always chooses that course or individual through which He achieves the greatest glory.

There are no “little people,” as Francis Schaeffer wrote, in the eyes of God and it is usually through them and not the “famous” or “powerful” that He accomplishes His purposes.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;
27 but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong,
28 and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are,
29 so that no man may boast before God.” - 1 Cor 1.25-29 (NASB)

I have read two books by Duriez, Tolkien and the Lord of the Rings: A Guide to Middle-earth and Tolkien and C.S. Lewis: The Gift of Friendship. While each is a valuable read in its own right, the following quotes are from the former. I will provide chapter titles for those readers who wish to read the quotes in their larger context - which I would encourage all readers to do, since extracted quotes cannot capture the fulness of Duriez’s (or others’) insights.

From Tolkien and the Lord of the Rings

1. “How The Lord of the Rings Relates to The Silmarillion“

In Chapter Five of his book, Duriez provides a bridge between the well-known (The Lord of the Rings) and the lesser-known but critical The Silmarillion. Although the latter explains much of the background for the former, it is difficult for most to start by reading a history and then to move on to the more developed, deeper story of The Lord of the Rings. As Duriez explains, however, The Silmarillion enables the reader to have a deeper appreciation and understanding of the events and people involved in The Lord of the Rings.

The rule of [the One] Ring over the lesser ones of the elves, dwarves, and mortals is a central motif of The Lord of the Rings. It is an objective token of the power of evil, and the spell it casts, which tests Bilbo, Frodo, Sam, Gandalf, Saruman, Gollum, the tragic Boromir and many others . . .

“The tales of The Silmarillion evolved through all the years of Tolkien’s adulthood, and strictly are only a part of the published book. The work chronicles the ancient days of the First Age of Middle-earth. It begins with the creation of the Two Lamps . . . and concludes with the great battle in which Morgoth is overthrown . . . The unifying thread of the annals and tales of The Silmarillion is, as its title suggests, the fate of the Silmarils, the gems crafted by Fëanor.

“The published Silmarillion is divided into several sections. The first is the Ainulindalë - the account of the creation of the world . . . The second section is the ‘Valaquenta’ - the history of the Valar. Then follows the main and largest section, the ‘Quenta Silmarillion - The Silmarillion proper (the ‘history of the Silmarils’). The next section is the ‘Akallabêth,’ the account of the Downfall of Númenor. The final section concerns the history of the Rings of Power and the Third Age.

2. Regarding “The Ages of Middle-earth”

Prior to the Ages, Ilúvatar (the creator-deity) created the world, first in conception in music and thin in giving it actual being . . . Tolkien’s mythology is distinctive in being centered upon elves rather than human beings, even though humans eventually get caught up in events and matters of interest to elves . . .

“Before the beginning of the First Age (taken as the rising of the sun) the Valar and later also many of the elves are established in the uttermot West, or Valinor. Fëanor makes the great gems, the Silmarils, which provide the underlying motif for The Silmarillion. Morgoth darkens Middle-earth by destroying the Two Lamps and brings shadow to Valinor by extinguishing the Two Trees . . . He hides in the cold north of Middle-earth, north of Beleriand, long drowned by the time of the events of The Lord of the Rings.

“Beleriand in the First Age is the setting for the tales of Beren and Lúthien, the elf-maiden, Túrin Turambar . . . and the Fall of Gondolin. In a momentous climax to the events, Eärendil the mariner sails to Valinor to intercede on behalf of the free peoples of Beleriand. In the Second Age the star-shaped island of Númenor (Atlantis) is given to the Dúnedail, the Men of the West, for their faithfulness in resisting Morgoth. Sauron, Morgoth’s lieutenant, secretly forges the great Ring in Middle-earth. He succeeds in aiding the corruption of Númenor, resulting in its destruction . . .

“In the Third Age, the Ring remains lost for many centuries. Gondor is a great power. Hobbits migrate to the Shire. The events of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings take place . . . The Fourth Age opened our present era of the domination of humankind, and the fading of the elves, where the Christian era gradually unfolds . . . The original geography of Middle-earth changes into its present shape . . . According to [Tolkien’s] letters (Letter 211] we may now be in a Sixth or even Seventh Age.

Duriez rightly points out that The Silmarillion, for all its wonderful histories and stories, is actually an unfinished work. Tolkien had intended at least four tales to be far more fully developed than they appear in The Silmarillion, such as “The Fall of Gondolin,” “The Tale of Túrin Turambar,” and “The Voyage of Eärendil the Mariner.” Although not expanded to Tolkien’s satisfaction, there is at least one tale that is given is great detain, as Duriez explains:

Tolkien regarded the tale of Beren and Lúthien, set in an earlier period that the story of Eärendil, as the pivotal story of The Silmarillion, the key to its interlocking themes and events. The tale also determines the outcome of events for Ages to come, not the least in its intermarriage of an elven princess and a mortal man, in which an elven quality becomes incarnate in humanity . . .

“”Lúthien herself was the product of a marriage between an elf and one of the Maiar, so she already had engelic blood in her veins. This angelic inheritance was thus added to the elvish inheritance she gave to Beren. For about 40 years the two lived in Tol Galen, and their only child, Dior, was the father of Elwing, who married the great mariner Eärendil. After the deaths of Beren and Lúthien, Dior inherited the Nauglamir, the necklace in which the silmaril was set.”

The stories in The Silmarillion - for example, “Of the Coming of the Elves and the Captivity of Melkor,” “Of Fëanor and the Unchaining of Melkor,” “Of the Silmarils and the Unrest of the Noldor,” and “Of the Voyage of Eärendil and the War of Wrath” - are too beautiful to be summarized here and the reader simply must read them in The Silmarillion. Duriez offers a long, wonderful description and accounting of the story of Beren and Lúthien, but it is far too long to be reproduced here.

3. Duriez also presents a section entitled “Beings, Places, Things, and Events” which provide wonderful descriptions of the major and minor “beings, places, things, and events” that unfold during the Three Ages of Middle-earth. The reader is encouraged to pour over this section for him/herself to gain an increased understanding of how many people and events are interwoven into Tolkien’s remarkable stories.

4. Perhaps Duriez’s most valuable section is “Key Themes, Concepts, and Images in Tolkien.” I will quote from a small percentage of the many observation he makes on various topics.

Allegory - An extended metaphor, or sustained personification . . . Tolkien pointed out that such an interpretation [of parts of his story] confused meaning with applicability. In his Foreword, he writes:

‘I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse ‘applicability’ with ‘allegory’; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.’

Christianity, Tolkien and - As a Christian, Tolkien rejected much of the Norse world outlook, but admired its imaginative power. These elements that he could transform into Christian meaning, he kept. Of course, he rejected the idea of a polytheistic assembly of gods. Also, he rejected its concept of fate, which conditioned not only humans, but also the gods. Instead, he attempted to portray a biblical vision of providence. This was a central theme of his fiction. Equally central was a passionate portrayal of free will, which also rejected fate . . .

“Tolkien has, in place of the Twilight of the gods, suggestions of a Last Battle at the end of a later Age of Middle-earth that is full of the Christian hope of the end of the world . . .

“Tolkien is particularly concerned with time, and Christian apocalypse. That is, his theme is to reveal the essential meaning behind human history. Pre-eminently like the biblical book of Revelation, he is concerned to bring hope and consolation in dark and difficult days . . .

“A fruitful way of considering Christian meaning in Tolkien is in terms of his commitment to a natural theology . . . Tolkien [in contrast to C.S. Lewis] finds real history and natural events a reliable guide to truth in themselves. Whereas traditional natural theology concentrates on the revelation of God in nature and cosmology, Tolkien particularly finds inevitable theology reveal in language and story, or myth . . .

“In a letter to W.H. Auden (in 1965), Tolkien commented on The Lord of the Rings in relation to Christian theology: ‘I don’t feel under any obligation to make my story fit with formalized Christian theology, though I actually intended it to be consonant with Christian thought and belief.”

Elven quality - In his invented mythology of Middle-earth, Tolkien intended that his elves were an extended metaphor of a key aspect of human nature. This ‘elven quality’ in human life was a central pre-occupation of Tolkien. Elves, like dwarves, hobbits, and the like, partially represent human beings . . . elves represent what is high and noble in human beings. In particular, they represent the arts. In their highest form, Tolkien regardd the arts as sub-creation, work done in the image of God and his created world. The elves may in fact be taken as a metaphor of human culture, highlighting its meaning . . .

“Tolkien balances the ‘elven’ side of human nature with the homely. Like MacDonald and Lewis, he founds his fantasy on the ordinary and on homeliness . . . Tolkien conscientiously tried to make his invention consonant with Christian belief. In the orthodox Christianity of Tolkien, the material world is a real creation of God’s where Christ’s incarnation and continued (though glorified) humanity are central . . .

“By the time of the Fourth Age - our own, where mythology such as Tolkien’s has moved into history - the elven quality mainly persists in human form. The three Ages recorded in Tolkien’s Middle-earth stories and annals are pre-Christian. Our present Fourth Age and beyond is the Christian era, where the elven quality is perhaps now pre-eminently a spiritual one, associated with Christianity, the grace of the gospel (or evangelium), and the presence of the Holy Spirit. Tolkien inclines to a ’spiritual’ view of art . . .

“Tolkien embodied the same ‘elven quality’ in human figures. This embodiment is more complex because humans are subject to the ‘gift of Ilúvatar,’ death, whereas elves are immortal. The Númenorean humans, though, were granted a life-span far exceeding the normal . . . Death was meant to highlight the eternal quality within themselves, which carried the promise of continuing life in the future in the plan of Ilúvatar . . .

“In Tolkien’s beginning, there are real elves (and a real Númenorean civilization). Now there is merely an ‘elven quality’ to human life, which some can see clearly andothers fail to perceive at all. In all the abstraction, there has been a real loss. He sees such a loss restored by the evangelium, as he points out in his seminal essay, ‘On Fairy Stories.’ Tolkien concludes: ‘God is the Lord, of angels, and of man - and of Elves. Legend and history have met and fused.’

“Tolkien saw the ‘elven quality’ embodied and made real in the incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ.”

Fairy stories - J.R.R. Tolkien’s lecture ‘On Fairy Stories’ . . . links God and humanity in two related ways. In the first, he, as an orthodox Christian, sees humankind - male and female - as being made in the image of God . . . The second way Tolkien links God and humanity is in similarities that exist by necessity between the universe of God’s making and human making . . .

“The successful writer fairy story ‘makes a Secondary World which your mind can enter. Inside it, what he relates is “true”: it accords with the laws of that world. In addition . . . a good fairy tale has three other key structural features. In the first place, it helps to bring about in the reader what Tolkien called recovery - that is, the restoration of a true view of the meaning of ordinary and humble things which make up human life and reality such as love, thought, trees, hills and food . . . Second, the good fairly story offers escape from one’s narrow and distorted view of reality and mean. This is the escape of the prisoner rather than the flight of the deserter. Third, the good story offers consolation, leading to joy . . .

“The consolation, argued Tolkien, only had meaning because good stories pointed to the greatest story of all. This story had all the structural features of a fairy tale, myth, or great story, with the additional feature of being true in actual human history. This was the Gospel, the story of God himself coming to earth as a humble human being, a king, like Aragorn, in disguise; a seeming fool, like Frodo and Sam, the greatest storyteller entering his own story.” (emphasis mine)

Myth, mythology - Tolkien intended his invented mythology to illuminate the real, primary world. He hope that it would bring to his reader recovery of a true view of things, escape from the prison of inaccurate and misleading presuppositions, and true consolation, consolation which pointed to the historical gospel story . . .

In review his friend’s The Lord of the Rings, C.S. Lewis describes just how Tolkien’s invented mythology is applicable to the primary, real world. Lewis concentrates on the aspect of recovery:

‘The value of the myth is that it takes all the things we know and restores to them the rich significances which has been hidden by the veil of familiarity. The child enjoys his cold meat, otherwise dull to him, by pretending it is buffalo, just killed with his own bow and arrow. And the child is wise. The real meat comes back o him more savoury for having been deipped in a story; you might say that only then is it real meat . . . By putting bread, gold, horse, apple, or the very roads into a myth, we do not retreat from reality: we rediscover it. As long as the story lingers in our mind, the real things are more themselves. This book applies the treatment not only to bread or apple but to good and evil, to our endless perils, our anguish and our joys. By dipping them in myth we see them more clearly. I do not think he could have done it in any other way.’

“Tolkien persuaded Lewis that, at the heart of Christianity, is a myth that is also a fact - making the claims of Christianity unique. But by becoming fact it did not cease to be myth, or lose the quality of myth . . . Human stories were interrelated and, by God’s grace, carriend insights into the true nature of things. It is the gospel, however, that has broken into this web of story from the real world.”

If what has been reproduced here of Duriez’s work has not enticed the reader to buy his book and read it for themselves, then it is doubtful that any additional quotes would achieve that end. But, as a final word, I must point to Duriez’s section on “Tolkien’s theology of story,” which alone is worth the price of the book. In this section Duriez explores Tolkien’s ideas on such topics as Sub-creation, natural theology and nature in Tolkien; Sub-creation, nature and grace in Tolkien; Story, grace and the centrality of elves; Paganism, and Tolkien as a Christian artist.

Namárië!