Talk:Cosmology of Tolkien's legendarium/Archive 1

Suggestions for improvement

Suggest identifying the languages involved, quoting a few uses of the stars involved, and a few quotes from Letters. Also say which books the different stars are mentioned in, and tie that in to a timeline (ie. dates for when Tolkien wrote about each object). Also, tone down references to speculation, as that is a red rag to bulls, or rather, say who is doing the speculation, and give a reference. Carcharoth 02:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

For almost all of the uncertain ones the person doing the speculating is Christopher Tolkien and the reference is given immediately afterwards. For those which have been guessed at by other people I can dig up references. Translations of all the names make sense. If we are going to add details of where/when they appear in the books I'd like to merge in the contents of some of the articles which are just stubs... rather than having significant amounts of info on these things in two places. --CBD 02:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

You mean the articles in Category:Middle-earth astronomy and Category:Middle-earth in space? I've been going through the ~900 unassessed articles, and lots of them can be merged into list-like articles. Is it best to step back and plan that, or do it as and when? Carcharoth 03:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, most of the pages in those categories are linked from this page and several are short enough that they could be incorporated into it. An overall plan for list building efforts might be worthwhile, but in many cases I think it is going to happen as people get to things. --CBD 11:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

See here for a quick first pass at how we might want to organize the various lists with existing pages shown. Several of those existing pages could probably also be merged. --CBD 12:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

That looks good. Have you seen List of Middle-earth weapons? The intro and ending are a bit dodgy, but the bits about specific weapons are short, authoritative, and nicely referenced. IMO, that is what we should be aiming for. The various ISBNs of the books can be listed at the end (they aren't at the moment). Would you want to try that citation style over here? Carcharoth 23:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Middle-earth

You know that Middle-earth is simply just one continent on Arda? Calling this article "Middle-earth cosmology" looks just plain stupid. Jon Harald Søby 06:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Read the first sentence of the article. It refers to Tolkien's 'Middle-earth legendarium'. The term 'Middle-earth' does, indeed, refer to a particular continent of Arda. It also, in some cases, refers to all lands/continents where humans dwell. In some instances it refers to the world as a whole, and in yet other cases it refers to the all the stories and details relating to Tolkien's invented world. Tolkien himself used the term in all of these ways. The title of this article, as indicated by the first sentence, is using it in the last of them... to refer to the cosmology of the entire cycle of stories. The debate about other possible options has been held repeatedly, but can be gone through again if you wish. Would 'Eä cosmology' be better? I think it runs aground of the fact that alot more people have heard of the 'Middle-earth stories' than have heard of Eä... and there's still the same 'geography' problem you object to, given that the Timeless Halls were outside of Eä. Is there some term OTHER than Middle-earth which anyone has ever applied to the whole of Tolkien's invention? --CBD 13:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

What about "Cosmology of Tolkien's legendarium"? That makes it quite clear that the article is about Tolkien's works with being overly specific. — 71.147.52.209 (talk) 00:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The title can mean "cosmology as understood by the inhabitants of Middle-Earth" (which is not necessarily entirely accurate, but the Valar aren't talking). —Tamfang (talk) 16:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Who keeps adding all those comparisons?

Someone, possibly the same person who maintains this website, seems hellbent on comparing and referencing absolutely everything in this article with possible (and sometimes pretty farfetched) equivalents in Christian theology or real-life astronomy. Considering that this article was nominated for deletion once already, pushing your idea that The Lord of the Rings is a thinly-veiled Christian allegory may not be the best of moves. I'm adding an Original Research and Disputed tags to the article. Any arguments? Post them here. -84.186.193.246 (talk) 21:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

So you've only discovered this article? This was all sourced a year ago. 222.126.61.128 (talk) 06:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

run that by me again?

Nothing within the Void of any power or strength can be used within the Void.

Should the first "within the Void" be removed? Or should one "within" be "without"? —Tamfang (talk) 16:52, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Stars in Ilmen

The article puts the stars and planets as part of Ilmen. However, in Tolkien's writings, only the Sun and Moon are in that region of the sky. It's suggested that the stars and planets (which are treated just like stars) are part of Eä, but not of Arda. For example in Ainulindalë: "And amid all the splendours of the World, its vast halls and spaces, and its wheeling fires, Iluvatar chose a place for their habitation in the Deeps of Time and in the midst of the innumerable Stars." And in the first chapter of Quenta Silmarillion: "Middle-earth lay in a twilight beneath the stars that Varda had wrought in the ages forgotten of her labours in Eä." We're also told that Eärendil passed through the Door of Night, thus leaving Arda. I would suggest that the stars and planets (including Eärendil) are put under "Eä", at the same level as the void. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.22.86.50 (talk) 10:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Some of the stars apparently were made by Varda after the Ainur entered Arda. Did the Valar, after moving in, make anything else outside Arda? —Tamfang (talk) 18:53, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, that may seem incoherent, but in any case Tolkien's legendarium often has similar problems, since many parts of the legends were never fully revised. For example, Morgoth passes over the walls of night in the beginnings of Arda, but later can't escape the Void. The way I see it, there's two options for the article: offer the more coherent (though outdated) version from Tolkien's earlier texts (like Ambarkanta), or offer the later conceptions at the cost of some incoherencies. There's a text from Parma Eldalamberon no. 17 (given also in History of Middle Earth vol. X) that explains more clearly the creation of stars as part of Eä, but not Arda:

"In the 'demiurgic period', before the establishment of Arda 'the Realm', while the Valar in general (including an unnamed host of others who never came to Arda) were labouring in the general construction of Ea (the World or Universe), Varda was in Eldarin and Numenorean legend said to have designed and set in their places most of the principal stars;"

This comes from an index of names that Tolkien prepared for the second edition of Lord of the Rings (1966), so it's likely one of his last statements on the issue 95.22.86.50 (talk) 09:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cosmology of Tolkien's legendarium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150321023845/http://www.mythgard.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Mythmoot2_Larsen_Astronomy-in-Fantasy1.pdf to http://www.mythgard.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Mythmoot2_Larsen_Astronomy-in-Fantasy1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:11, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

"By whom", why?

The "by whom" citations in the Arda subsection of "Flat-earth cosmology" are unnecessary and just plain silly. Any question of "by whom" here is either covered in the accompanying text or is unanswerable because Tolkien, himself, has remained silent about it. In either case, insisting that these actions be explicitly ascribed to a personage is counterproductive.

The first such instance in this section ("Illuin was set[by whom?] upon Helcar and Ormal upon Ringil) is preceded by the statement that "To support the lamps, the Vala Aulë forged two enormous pillars of rock: Helcar in the north of the continent Middle-earth, and Ringil in the south." It serves no purpose to then raise doubt that someone else did the setting. In the second tag: "When Melkor destroyed the Lamps, two vast inland seas (Helcar and Ringil) and two major seas (Belegaer and the Eastern Sea) were created,[by whom?]..." it should be obvious to all but the most superficial of readers that "were created" here means that the creation was a result of the destruction—not a separate act of creation, as the tag would imply.

I have not taken it upon myself to remove these "by whom" citation tags, as it isn't generally a good idea to remove such things unless some form of consensus is reached, but it is my strongest recommendation that they be removed, and that future Wikipedia editors not behave so childishly. rowley (talk) 16:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree: the tags are pointless. -- Elphion (talk) 15:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

I have removed the citations, accordingly. Thanks for weighing in. rowley (talk) 17:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Eru Ilúvatar

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was Merge. Jack Upland (talk) 21:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

---

The information on Eru Ilúvatar could easily be merged this article. There is a lot of overlap: for example, the correspondence with Peter Hastings. Most of what we have there is based on Tolkien's letters or is uncited. It is hardly an article about a fictional character, but rather a representation of the Christian God in Tolkien's imaginary world. Eru is not mentioned in Tolkien's best-selling novels, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, so on a fictional level He is not very notable.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• Merge Eru Iluvatar is not a character, but a concept. He fits better in the broader concept of Cosmology.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:18, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

During the deletion discussion in 2007, it was asserted that this article had adequate references. However, by my count there are 19 paragraphs that don't have references. Many of the references that do exist cite primary sources.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:42, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Yes, we should update the article with more references, since it's changed a lot since 2007. But there's nothing wrong with primary sources -- especially for fiction, since the author's text remains the most reliable source for details of his work. This is doubly true for Tolkien since the vast Tolkien Industry typically gets details wrong or imposes its own views on Tolkien's material. Secondary sources are more useful for describing how the concepts developed or changed over time. -- Elphion (talk) 15:31, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

(Added) Also, several of the paragraphs that are technically unreferenced do refer to specific works. References for those should be easy to add. -- Elphion (talk) 15:37, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Tom Bombadil

Does anyone here know whether Tom has ever been seen as connected with the Virgin Mary? I ask because his colours are blue and gold, and he's married to goldberry (for whom, when he is first seen, Tom is collecting lillies).

If that isn't Marian iconography, I'm a bullfrog! LeapUK (talk) 09:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Hence your name.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:08, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

• Tolkien was a Catholic, but we need sources that support this claim, ideally ones linked to actual explicit statements on the matter connected to Tolkien himself.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:42, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Merger proposal 2

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was Merge. Jack Upland (talk) 22:24, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

---

I propose that Children of Ilúvatar be merged to the "Creation account" section. It is only a stub, and it makes more sense in the context of this article.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:31, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

• Merge This is a good start. There is no reason to have articles on every term Tolkien ever used.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Exotheology

Taken from the lead:

The legendarium examines the possibility of alternative theologies, in the sense of exotheology, by postulating immortality (via reincarnation) for the Elves, contrasting with the fate of Men, who remain subject to mortality.

What does this mean? Exotheology relates to "the examination of theological issues as they pertain to extraterrestrial intelligence". How is that relevant? The source is a letter by Tolkien which states that Men are mortal. This is uncontroversial, but I don't see how it supports this sentence.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Removed.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Finnish Language Citation Needed

In the Flat Earth Cosmology section, the sentence Tolkien likely derived the name Ilmen from ilma, the Finnish word for air, without a reference given, is pure supposition on the part of some unnamed (and uncredentialed) Wikipedia editor. Accordingly, I have added a citation needed tag. rowley (talk) 21:13, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

"Magic Isles" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Magic Isles. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 5#Magic Isles until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm (talk) 23:05, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Progress

This article has a decent mix of secondary sources, but the text is mainly descriptive and cited directly to Tolkien (primary sourcing) rather than analytic, discussing why and how and the origins of his ideas. The article indeed lacks an Analysis section. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Durin's Crown

I don't think it was ever definitively stated that the Valacirca (Ursa Major) was Durin's Crown. More likely, it was the constellation of Corona Borealis, which, as stated in the Song of Durin, was seen in a reflection in Mirrormere. So, although Corona Borealis appears "flipped" in the sky compared to the depiction on the symbol, Durin saw it as such when it was reflected. 32.215.43.210 (talk) 07:31, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Found a reliable source, and have edited the article accordingly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

The VT #13 citation is literally a 'letter to the editor', and thus only a reliable source as to the theory held by that single letter writer. In contrast, Tolkien wrote in Index IV, under the entry for 'star', that "Seven stars (above a crown and anvil), emblems of Durin ... represented The Plough". --CBD 18:35, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Well this does look like a case where primary is best, as a simple matter of authorial intention stated directly. The same doesn't work when interpretation is required, of course. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:05, 22 April 2022 (UTC)