The lives of the characters inJ. R. R. Tolkien's world ofMiddle-earth appear variously to be driven byluck or byfate. This is arranged in such a way that the characters'free will is never compromised; they must rely on their own courage, just likeOld English heroes likeBeowulf and figures fromNorse mythology. The text ofThe Lord of the Rings, while neverChristian on the surface, hints at the working of higher powers, whichthe cosmology inThe Silmarillion presents as the angelic or godlikeValar, who in turn carry out the will of the creator, the one GodEru Ilúvatar.
J. R. R. Tolkien was an English author andphilologist of ancientGermanic languages, specialising in Old English; he spent much of his career as a professor at theUniversity of Oxford.[3] He is best known for his novels about his inventedMiddle-earth,The Hobbit andThe Lord of the Rings, and for the posthumously publishedThe Silmarillion which provides a more mythical narrative about earlier ages. A devoutRoman Catholic, he describedThe Lord of the Rings as "a fundamentally religious and Catholic work",rich in Christian symbolism.[T 1]Thecosmology of Middle-earth includes theValar, who are "angelic powers" or "gods".[T 2] They are subordinate to the one God,Eru Ilúvatar, who created the world as described in theAinulindalë. Scholars have noted that the Valar resembleangels in Christianity, but that Tolkien presented them rather more likepagan gods, such as theÆsir inNorse mythology.[1][2]
TheEpiscopal priest and Tolkien scholarFleming Rutledge writes that inThe Lord of the Rings, and especially at moments like the wizardGandalf's explanation toFrodo in "The Shadow of the Past", there are clear hints of a higher power at work in events in Middle-earth:[4]
There was more than one power at work, Frodo. The Ring was trying to get back to its master ... Behind that there was something else at work, beyond any design of the Ring-maker. I can put it no plainer than by saying that Bilbo wasmeant to find the Ring, andnot by its maker. In which case you also weremeant to have it. [Tolkien's italics][T 3]
Rutledge writes that in this way, Tolkien repeatedly hints at a higher power "that controls even the Ring itself,even the maker of the Ring himself [her italics]", and asks who or what that power might be. Her reply is that at the surface level, it means the Valar, "a race of created beings (analogous to the late-biblical angels)". At a deeper level, as both Rutledge and the Catholic philosopherPeter Kreeft write, it means "the One", Eru Ilúvatar, or in Christian terms, divine Providence.[4][5]
| Level | Power | Action |
|---|---|---|
| InMiddle-earth | The Ring The Dark LordSauron | tries to "get back to its master"[T 3] tries to command the Ring to return to him |
| InEa's cosmology, surface level | The angelicValar | guide events in Middle-earth |
| In Ea's cosmology, deeper level | "The One",Eru Ilúvatar | has a plan for everything |
| InChristian terms | Divine Providence | intervenes in the universe |
And suddenly he feltthe Eye ... that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze. A fierce eager will was there. It leaped towards him; almost like a finger he felt it, searching for him. ... He heard himself crying out: Never, never! Or was it: Verily I come, I come to you? He could not tell. Then as a flash from some other point of power there came to his mind another thought: Take it off! Take it off! Fool, take it off! Take off the Ring! The two powers strove in him ... Suddenly he was aware of himself again. Frodo, neither the Voice nor the Eye: free to choose, and with one remaining instant in which to do so. He took the Ring off his finger.
The Tolkien scholarTom Shippey discusses the connection between the Valar and "luck" on Middle-earth, writing that as in real life, "People ... do in sober reality recognise a strongly patterning force in the world around them" but that while this may be due to "Providence or the Valar", the force "does not affectfree will and cannot be distinguished from the ordinary operations of nature" nor reduce the necessity of "heroic endeavour". He states that this exactly matches theOld English view of luck andpersonal courage, asBeowulf's "wyrd often spares the man who isn't doomed, as long as his courage holds."[6]
'Yes', said Gandalf... The Ring now has passed beyond my help... Very nearly it was revealed to the Enemy, but it escaped. I had some part in that: for I sat in a high place, and I strove with the Dark Tower; and the Shadow passed. Then I was weary, very weary; and I walked long in dark thought.'
In addition, the leapfrogging of the timeline by the multipleinterlaced story threads inThe Lord of the Rings allows Tolkien to make hidden connections that can only be grasped retrospectively, as the reader realises on reflection that certain events happened at the same time. Shippey gives as an instance the moment when Frodo sits onAmon Hen, the Seat of Seeing, puts on theOne Ring, and feels theEye of Sauron pressing towards him; at the same time, Frodo hears a voice urging him to take the Ring off, giving him just enough time to make up his mind and save the quest by complying.[7] Interlace, West notes, can "show purpose or pattern behind change".[8] This can appear, Shippey writes, as luck, where in daily life it is uncertain whether this is "something completely humdrum and practical or something mysterious and supernatural", just likewyrd.[9] In this case, the reader has to wait from book 2, chapter 10 ("The Breaking of the Fellowship")[T 6] until book 3, chapter 5 ("The White Rider") for Gandalf to reveal that the voice that Frodo heard was his.[T 7]
The scholar of humanitiesPaul H. Kocher similarly discusses the role of providence, in the form of the intentions of the Valar or of the creator, inBilbo's finding of theOne Ring and Frodo's bearing of it; as Gandalf says, they were "meant" to have it, though it remained their choice to co-operate with this purpose.[10]
The literary criticColin Manlove criticised Tolkien's attitude on free will, stating that Tolkien had ended free will and heroism "by cancelling them with luck" and his story made mortals "into puppets".[11]
The medievalistElizabeth Solopova comments that the monsterGollum has an important part to play, providing in her view the clearest testament to the role of fate inThe Lord of the Rings.[12] Beyond Gandalf's words, the story is structured in such a way that past decisions have a critical influence on current events. For instance, because Bilbo and Frodo spare Gollum, Gollum is able to destroy the Ring by falling into theCracks of Doom while Frodo fails to destroy it. Frodo, who is overpowered by the evil of the Ring, is saved by what seems to be luck.[12] The role of fate inThe Lord of the Rings is contrasted sharply with the prominent role that Tolkien gives to personal choice and will. Frodo's voluntary choice to bear the Ring toMordor is central to the plot of the whole story. Also important is Frodo's willing offer of the Ring to Gandalf, the heroAragorn, and the Elf-ladyGaladriel, and their conscious refusal of it, not to mention Frodo's final inability to summon the will to destroy it. Thus, both free will and fate play out throughout the story: fromSam's vision of old Gaffer Gamgee's wheelbarrow and theScouring of the Shire in the Mirror of Galadriel, toArwen Evenstar's choice of mortality.[13]
| Perceived event/chain ofcausation | Superficial explanation | Deeper explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Gollum slipped | Accident, luck | ————— |
Frodo spared Gollum's life | ————— | Free will and fate |
The Tolkien scholar Helen Lasseter Freeh notes that the longer version of the tale ofTúrin Turambar inUnfinished Tales (theNarn i Hîn Húrin[T 8]) contains a dialogue between the Dark LordMorgoth, who is a fallen Vala, and the heroic but mortal ManHúrin about fate and providence. Despite his imprisonment, Húrin insists that Morgoth cannot control everything, and while Morgoth does not directly contradict this, he says he will spread a "cloud of Doom" on everyone Húrin loves, and "wherever they go, evil shall arise". Túrin lives a life of disaster, in which Freeh sees the hand of fate, which threatens to overwhelm Túrin's free will.[14][15] Shippey comments that Morgoth is one of the Valar, whose power in the world appears as luck, or chance, or fate. Terrible things in theNarn seem to be coincidences; but, writes Shippey,Tolkien often gives double explanations of these events, one fate, one just accident.[15]
Shippey writes that the numerousproverbs inThe Lord of the Rings lend weight to the subtle implications of the text's interlaced structure, which for much of the time leaves the reader, like the characters, unaware of what else is going on in Middle-earth. While the real-world proverbs are broadly neutral, although some remain optimistic or gloomy, the invented proverbs are, he suggests, closer to Tolkien's thought. So Théoden's "Oft evil will shall evil mar", Aragorn's "The hasty stroke goes oft astray", or Gandalf's "A traitor may betray himself", all contribute to Tolkien's portrayal of what he believed was the character of reality. The implied message is that what appears as luck to the protagonists is indeed a higher purpose, and that all can work out well. But all the same, they must keep up their courage, and ignore, as Frodo and Sam do, "their bewilderments, infatuations, [and their] sense of being lost and abandoned".[16] The scholar of literatureRandel Helms writes that the "significance" of the destruction ofSaruman's realm ofIsengard is summarized by a pair of similar proverbs, Théoden's maxim, and Gandalf's "Often does hatred hurt itself"; the action of theEnts taking revenge on Saruman then shows just how providential control and cause-and-effect morality work out in practice.[17]
