Armour pt 2

Earlier when I said Richard's armour may have been stripped off of him by locals taking anything from the dead on the battlefield they could get their hands on, I was challenged by cries of how he would be easily recognised because of his crown, banner etc. What if his helmet with crown attached had been knocked off by a savage blow to the head? Entirely possible. Also let me remind you that not that long after James IV King of Scotland fought in battle, crown on his helmet, and doubtless with banners flying. He too was killed, he too was stripped of armour and valuables, and it took over a day to find his corpse before they could remove it to a place of burial.
Paul


Richard Liveth Yet!

On Oct 20, 2012, at 8:00 AM, Paul Trevor Bale wrote:

> Earlier when I said Richard's armour may have been stripped off of
> him by locals taking anything from the dead on the battlefield they
> could get their hands on, I was challenged by cries of how he would
> be easily recognised because of his crown, banner etc. What if his
> helmet with crown attached had been knocked off by a savage blow to
> the head? Entirely possible. Also let me remind you that not that
> long after James IV King of Scotland fought in battle, crown on his
> helmet, and doubtless with banners flying. He too was killed, he too
> was stripped of armour and valuables, and it took over a day to find
> his corpse before they could remove it to a place of burial.
> Paul
>
That's why I think it could have been very likely. They'd won, and
Tudor certainly wouldn't have stopped them considering he would date
his reign from the day before the battle, making Richard, in his mind,
anyway, a traitor.

Gilda

I totally agree
So often when looking back to the 15th cent it is easy to fall into the Hollywood perception of Camalot with knights in shining armor saving damsels and slaying dragons.
In reality life was very hard for the majority having a mortality of 40 years with a newborn baby having a 1:5 chance of surviving
Personal hygiene did little to stop widespread epidemics with medicine only found through the church.
I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
George


Sent from my iPad

On Oct 20, 2012, at 8:00 AM, Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:

> Earlier when I said Richard's armour may have been stripped off of him by locals taking anything from the dead on the battlefield they could get their hands on, I was challenged by cries of how he would be easily recognised because of his crown, banner etc. What if his helmet with crown attached had been knocked off by a savage blow to the head? Entirely possible. Also let me remind you that not that long after James IV King of Scotland fought in battle, crown on his helmet, and doubtless with banners flying. He too was killed, he too was stripped of armour and valuables, and it took over a day to find his corpse before they could remove it to a place of burial.
> Paul
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
>

--- In , Gilda Felt <gildaevf@...> wrote:
>
>
> Tudor certainly wouldn't have stopped them considering he would date
> his reign from the day before the battle, making Richard, in his mind,
> anyway, a traitor.
>
> Gilda

This to me rates as among one of the most vilest acts implemented by Tudor...I wonder if Morton was involved in dreaming up that one. ..it says more about Tudor than anything could ever say.....and if my memory serves me correct even Croyland laments it...Eileen
>

George Butterfield wrote:

//snip// I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is
fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield.

Perhaps, because such acts of "kindness and knightly honor" WERE so rare is
the reason they were shown as proof of how exemplary some of the leaders of
this period were?
A medieval example of how "man bites dog" is news, so to speak.

I agree. Most arts deal with ideals of situations and objects. A modern photographer by example takes shots of things that are remarkable and not ordinary. The ideas of honor are subject to christianity whose rules usually demand a certain effort, a moulding of character and go a long way until achieved. Two messages: it´s desirable to be bound by honour but also that it is a difficult task. It might have appeared that the most profitable way isn´t always the honourable way...and being human means also to be a subject to sin and weakness.
I guess that the people of the medieval age feared damnation but since there was a chance for sins being forgiven it was alright to be selfish and simply human.

--- In , "Douglas Eugene Stamate" <destama@...> wrote:
>
> George Butterfield wrote:
>
> //snip// I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is
> fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield.
>
> Perhaps, because such acts of "kindness and knightly honor" WERE so rare is
> the reason they were shown as proof of how exemplary some of the leaders of
> this period were?
> A medieval example of how "man bites dog" is news, so to speak.
>

Hi, George 



People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today, knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.



Regarding Tolkien 



For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third Age.



Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having an overly-rosy view of men  but in fact, upon reading his books, you see that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of the concept of honour on the battlefield; I think it's more a case of kill or be killed, as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the West.



*The Hobbit* is dark for a children's book. *Lord of the Rings* is darker than *The Hobbit.* And the other legends that were published after Tolkien's death in *The Silmarillion* and *The History of Middle-earth* are even bleaker than the first two books. Consider that Tolkien's ideal creations, the Elves, before and during the course of *The Lord of the Rings* are in the process of leaving Middle-earth forever. Then consider the fact that Arwen, the immortal Elf who is in love with the human Aragorn, will be giving up her immortality by remaining in Middle-earth. Furthermore, in Tolkien's conception, she will not only lose her immortality, she will be separated from Aragorn forever when he dies (his soul will survive but go to the Halls of Waiting) and then she will suffer the demise of both her body and her soul. A very bleak concept but one is very consonant with the heritage of the Norse and Anglo-Saxon myths that Tolkien was immersed in.



Other examples of great flaws of evil, despair and cruelty among men can be seen in the various threads of the brothers Boromir and Faramir and their father Denethor. Boromir attempts to take the One Ring from Frodo but then sacrifices himself, allowing Frodo to escape the orcs. Faramir's efforts, though nobly intended, are rejected as being inferior to those of Boromir by Denethor, whose spirit has been broken by his viewing events in the palantir which have been created by the Dark Lord Sauron. Faramir, out of hopelessness or in a last futile attempt to win his father's favour, then leads a suicidal attack on the orcs in Osgilliath. Denethor finally goes completely bonkers and attempts to immolate himself and Faramir alive. At last there is a happy ending when Faramir and Eowyn fall in love  but only after both of them have been broken by the terrible events of the War of the Ring.



Johanne



From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of George Butterfield
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:29 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Armour pt 2





I totally agree
So often when looking back to the 15th cent it is easy to fall into the Hollywood perception of Camalot with knights in shining armor saving damsels and slaying dragons.
In reality life was very hard for the majority having a mortality of 40 years with a newborn baby having a 1:5 chance of surviving
Personal hygiene did little to stop widespread epidemics with medicine only found through the church.
I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
George

Sent from my iPad

:

· <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHEzdWZ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEzNTA3Mzk3Njc-?o=6> New Members 1

· <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNjQ0cXE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> New Files 1

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb2c2M2ZkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM1MDczOTc2Nw--> Visit Your Group

<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNmFhZnViBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> Yahoo! Groups

Switch to: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional> Text-Only, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Digest> Daily Digest " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe " <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20redesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback

.

http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=5527791/grpspId=1705297333/msgId=17218/stime=1350739767/nc1=5008816/nc2=3848614/nc3=4025338

Tolkien himself said his stories were intended as a native British mythology, which he felt to be lacking. The myths of the Celts and Saxons, while great (and remember, Tolkien was a world authority on Anglo-Saxon; he wrote the entries for the 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannic, and his studies of Nordic and Finnish myths deeply influenced his Hobbit and LotR). His outlook, despite his own Roman Catholicism, was very pagan, in many ways. 

The chivalric Arthur was a later gloss upon far older, non-Christian traditions. Read The Mabinogion for a much less courtly view...,

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 11:19 AM
Subject: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)


 
Hi, George 

People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today, knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.

Regarding Tolkien 

For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third Age.

Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having an overly-rosy view of men  but in fact, upon reading his books, you see that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of the concept of honour on the battlefield; I think it's more a case of kill or be killed, as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the West.

*The Hobbit* is dark for a children's book. *Lord of the Rings* is darker than *The Hobbit.* And the other legends that were published after Tolkien's death in *The Silmarillion* and *The History of Middle-earth* are even bleaker than the first two books. Consider that Tolkien's ideal creations, the Elves, before and during the course of *The Lord of the Rings* are in the process of leaving Middle-earth forever. Then consider the fact that Arwen, the immortal Elf who is in love with the human Aragorn, will be giving up her immortality by remaining in Middle-earth. Furthermore, in Tolkien's conception, she will not only lose her immortality, she will be separated from Aragorn forever when he dies (his soul will survive but go to the Halls of Waiting) and then she will suffer the demise of both her body and her soul. A very bleak concept but one is very consonant with the heritage of the Norse and Anglo-Saxon myths that Tolkien was immersed in.

Other examples of great flaws of evil, despair and cruelty among men can be seen in the various threads of the brothers Boromir and Faramir and their father Denethor. Boromir attempts to take the One Ring from Frodo but then sacrifices himself, allowing Frodo to escape the orcs. Faramir's efforts, though nobly intended, are rejected as being inferior to those of Boromir by Denethor, whose spirit has been broken by his viewing events in the palantir which have been created by the Dark Lord Sauron. Faramir, out of hopelessness or in a last futile attempt to win his father's favour, then leads a suicidal attack on the orcs in Osgilliath. Denethor finally goes completely bonkers and attempts to immolate himself and Faramir alive. At last there is a happy ending when Faramir and Eowyn fall in love  but only after both of them have been broken by the terrible events of the War of the Ring.

Johanne

From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of George Butterfield
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:29 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Armour pt 2

I totally agree
So often when looking back to the 15th cent it is easy to fall into the Hollywood perception of Camalot with knights in shining armor saving damsels and slaying dragons.
In reality life was very hard for the majority having a mortality of 40 years with a newborn baby having a 1:5 chance of surviving
Personal hygiene did little to stop widespread epidemics with medicine only found through the church.
I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
George

Sent from my iPad

:

· <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHEzdWZ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEzNTA3Mzk3Njc-?o=6> New Members 1

· <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNjQ0cXE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> New Files 1

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb2c2M2ZkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM1MDczOTc2Nw--> Visit Your Group

<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNmFhZnViBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> Yahoo! Groups

Switch to: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional> Text-Only, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Digest> Daily Digest " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe " <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20redesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback

.

http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=5527791/grpspId=1705297333/msgId=17218/stime=1350739767/nc1=5008816/nc2=3848614/nc3=4025338

I think the Hobbit is actually darker and more disturbing than LOTR - especially if you include the back story detailing the War of the Dwarves and the Elves. All of this is supposedly to be included in the upcoming movies; I just hope they don't gloss it over because of the perception of the Hobbit as a "Children's" story. I also hope they get the orcs/goblins right this time, or are they going to be northern working class caricatures to go with the cockney villains of the LOTR Trilogy?.



________________________________
From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2012, 17:19
Subject: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)


 
Hi, George 

People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today, knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.

Regarding Tolkien 

For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third Age.

Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having an overly-rosy view of men  but in fact, upon reading his books, you see that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of the concept of honour on the battlefield; I think it's more a case of kill or be killed, as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the West.

*The Hobbit* is dark for a children's book. *Lord of the Rings* is darker than *The Hobbit.* And the other legends that were published after Tolkien's death in *The Silmarillion* and *The History of Middle-earth* are even bleaker than the first two books. Consider that Tolkien's ideal creations, the Elves, before and during the course of *The Lord of the Rings* are in the process of leaving Middle-earth forever. Then consider the fact that Arwen, the immortal Elf who is in love with the human Aragorn, will be giving up her immortality by remaining in Middle-earth. Furthermore, in Tolkien's conception, she will not only lose her immortality, she will be separated from Aragorn forever when he dies (his soul will survive but go to the Halls of Waiting) and then she will suffer the demise of both her body and her soul. A very bleak concept but one is very consonant with the heritage of the Norse and Anglo-Saxon myths that Tolkien was immersed in.

Other examples of great flaws of evil, despair and cruelty among men can be seen in the various threads of the brothers Boromir and Faramir and their father Denethor. Boromir attempts to take the One Ring from Frodo but then sacrifices himself, allowing Frodo to escape the orcs. Faramir's efforts, though nobly intended, are rejected as being inferior to those of Boromir by Denethor, whose spirit has been broken by his viewing events in the palantir which have been created by the Dark Lord Sauron. Faramir, out of hopelessness or in a last futile attempt to win his father's favour, then leads a suicidal attack on the orcs in Osgilliath. Denethor finally goes completely bonkers and attempts to immolate himself and Faramir alive. At last there is a happy ending when Faramir and Eowyn fall in love  but only after both of them have been broken by the terrible events of the War of the Ring.

Johanne

From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of George Butterfield
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:29 AM
To:
Subject: Re: Armour pt 2

I totally agree
So often when looking back to the 15th cent it is easy to fall into the Hollywood perception of Camalot with knights in shining armor saving damsels and slaying dragons.
In reality life was very hard for the majority having a mortality of 40 years with a newborn baby having a 1:5 chance of surviving
Personal hygiene did little to stop widespread epidemics with medicine only found through the church.
I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
George

Sent from my iPad

:

· <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHEzdWZ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEzNTA3Mzk3Njc-?o=6> New Members 1

· <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNjQ0cXE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> New Files 1

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb2c2M2ZkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM1MDczOTc2Nw--> Visit Your Group

<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNmFhZnViBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> Yahoo! Groups

Switch to: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional> Text-Only, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Digest> Daily Digest " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe " <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20redesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback

.

http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=5527791/grpspId=1705297333/msgId=17218/stime=1350739767/nc1=5008816/nc2=3848614/nc3=4025338

> I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
> George
I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic, For example
Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern idealization.
> Johanne
I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an army of that time.
This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
George

On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:

> Hi, George ý
>
>
>
> People in former times couldnýt take effective precautions against the spread of disease, since they didnýt know about germs. Also, imo, we today, knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
>
>
>
> Regarding Tolkien ý
>
>
>
> For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a childrenýs story originally separate from Tolkienýs creation of Middle-earth in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third Age.
>
>
>
> Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having an overly-rosy view of men ý but in fact, upon reading his books, you see that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of the concept of ýhonour on the battlefield;ý I think itýs more a case of ýkill or be killed,ý as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly noble in the way they go about it. Itýs just that we know that the Witch King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the West.
>
>
>
> *The Hobbit* is dark for a childrenýs book. *Lord of the Rings* is darker than *The Hobbit.* And the other legends that were published after Tolkienýs death in *The Silmarillion* and *The History of Middle-earth* are even bleaker than the first two books. Consider that Tolkienýs ideal creations, the Elves, before and during the course of *The Lord of the Rings* are in the process of leaving Middle-earth forever. Then consider the fact that Arwen, the immortal Elf who is in love with the human Aragorn, will be giving up her immortality by remaining in Middle-earth. Furthermore, in Tolkienýs conception, she will not only lose her immortality, she will be separated from Aragorn forever when he dies (his soul will survive but go to the Halls of Waiting) and then she will suffer the demise of both her body and her soul. A very bleak concept but one is very consonant with the heritage of the Norse and Anglo-Saxon myths that Tolkien was immersed in.
>
>
>
> Other examples of great flaws of evil, despair and cruelty among men can be seen in the various threads of the brothers Boromir and Faramir and their father Denethor. Boromir attempts to take the One Ring from Frodo but then sacrifices himself, allowing Frodo to escape the orcs. Faramirýs efforts, though nobly intended, are rejected as being inferior to those of Boromir by Denethor, whose spirit has been broken by his viewing events in the palantir which have been created by the Dark Lord Sauron. Faramir, out of hopelessness or in a last futile attempt to win his fatherýs favour, then leads a suicidal attack on the orcs in Osgilliath. Denethor finally goes completely bonkers and attempts to immolate himself and Faramir alive. At last there is a happy ending when Faramir and Eowyn fall in love ý but only after both of them have been broken by the terrible events of the War of the Ring.
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
>
>
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of George Butterfield
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:29 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Armour pt 2
>
>
>
>
>
> I totally agree
> So often when looking back to the 15th cent it is easy to fall into the Hollywood perception of Camalot with knights in shining armor saving damsels and slaying dragons.
> In reality life was very hard for the majority having a mortality of 40 years with a newborn baby having a 1:5 chance of surviving
> Personal hygiene did little to stop widespread epidemics with medicine only found through the church.
> I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> :
>
> ý <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHEzdWZ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEzNTA3Mzk3Njc-?o=6> New Members 1
>
> ý <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNjQ0cXE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> New Files 1
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb2c2M2ZkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM1MDczOTc2Nw--> Visit Your Group
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNmFhZnViBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> Yahoo! Groups
>
> Switch to: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional> Text-Only, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Digest> Daily Digest ý <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe ý <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use ý <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20redesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback
>
> .
>
> http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=5527791/grpspId=1705297333/msgId=17218/stime=1350739767/nc1=5008816/nc2=3848614/nc3=4025338
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In , George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...> wrote:
>
> > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
> > George
> I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,


Wasn't chivalry -- courtly love -- a romantic ideal back in the day, that is, the 13th century?

Katy

Yes, Katy. And a bit before, as well. It was "rediscovered," post Industrial Revolution, as an antidote to the dreary regimentation of life, as people came to the cities, looking for work, and it peaked with the Arts and Crafts/PreRaphaelite movement(s).

Judy

 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: oregon_katy <oregon_katy@...>
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)


 


--- In , George Butterfield <gbutterf1@...> wrote:
>
> > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
> > George
> I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,

Wasn't chivalry -- courtly love -- a romantic ideal back in the day, that is, the 13th century?

Katy

Dear George -



Instead of clarifying you have confused things a bit (at least in my little
pea brain). The first lines that you quote, above where you address me, were
written by you not by me. For example, I never wrote anything about
Neuchwanstein. I would suggest that, when you quote a previous message, it
is best to leave it in a format that makes it pretty clear who the author of
the earlier message was and exactly what you are replying to.



My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so, you
yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien wrote
romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing was
in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends. That's
what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
would have attributed to the French (egad!).



Johanne

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



-----Original Message-----

From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of George
Butterfield

Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM

To:

Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)



> I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction

> like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George

I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
idealization.

> Johanne

I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an
army of that time.

This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
idealogical one that many would like it to have been.

George



On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
wrote:



> Hi, George -

>

>

>

> People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today,
knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.

>

>

>

> Regarding Tolkien -

>

>

>

> For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually
the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as
it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth
in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did
decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
*The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
Age.

>

>

>

> Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of
the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
"kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry
stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the
West.



<snip>

Chivalry and knightly honour only applied (as the name suggests) among the mounted nobility and their ladies. You could kill, abuse and rob the peasantry as much as you liked because they didn't count... Not the clergy though or you'd go to Hell.

--- In , "Douglas Eugene Stamate" <destama@...> wrote:
>
> George Butterfield wrote:
>
> //snip// I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is
> fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield.
>
> Perhaps, because such acts of "kindness and knightly honor" WERE so rare is
> the reason they were shown as proof of how exemplary some of the leaders of
> this period were?
> A medieval example of how "man bites dog" is news, so to speak.
>

Am angry that though filming a smaller book they are spinning it out into 3 x 3D movies to make extra bucks!!
Paul


On 20 Oct 2012, at 22:07, david rayner wrote:

> I think the Hobbit is actually darker and more disturbing than LOTR - especially if you include the back story detailing the War of the Dwarves and the Elves. All of this is supposedly to be included in the upcoming movies; I just hope they don't gloss it over because of the perception of the Hobbit as a "Children's" story. I also hope they get the orcs/goblins right this time, or are they going to be northern working class caricatures to go with the cockney villains of the LOTR Trilogy?.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2012, 17:19
> Subject: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>
> Hi, George 
>
> People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today, knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
>
> Regarding Tolkien 
>
> For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third Age.
>
> Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having an overly-rosy view of men  but in fact, upon reading his books, you see that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of the concept of honour on the battlefield; I think it's more a case of kill or be killed, as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the West.
>
> *The Hobbit* is dark for a children's book. *Lord of the Rings* is darker than *The Hobbit.* And the other legends that were published after Tolkien's death in *The Silmarillion* and *The History of Middle-earth* are even bleaker than the first two books. Consider that Tolkien's ideal creations, the Elves, before and during the course of *The Lord of the Rings* are in the process of leaving Middle-earth forever. Then consider the fact that Arwen, the immortal Elf who is in love with the human Aragorn, will be giving up her immortality by remaining in Middle-earth. Furthermore, in Tolkien's conception, she will not only lose her immortality, she will be separated from Aragorn forever when he dies (his soul will survive but go to the Halls of Waiting) and then she will suffer the demise of both her body and her soul. A very bleak concept but one is very consonant with the heritage of the Norse and Anglo-Saxon myths that Tolkien was immersed in.
>
> Other examples of great flaws of evil, despair and cruelty among men can be seen in the various threads of the brothers Boromir and Faramir and their father Denethor. Boromir attempts to take the One Ring from Frodo but then sacrifices himself, allowing Frodo to escape the orcs. Faramir's efforts, though nobly intended, are rejected as being inferior to those of Boromir by Denethor, whose spirit has been broken by his viewing events in the palantir which have been created by the Dark Lord Sauron. Faramir, out of hopelessness or in a last futile attempt to win his father's favour, then leads a suicidal attack on the orcs in Osgilliath. Denethor finally goes completely bonkers and attempts to immolate himself and Faramir alive. At last there is a happy ending when Faramir and Eowyn fall in love  but only after both of them have been broken by the terrible events of the War of the Ring.
>
> Johanne
>
> From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of George Butterfield
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:29 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Armour pt 2
>
> I totally agree
> So often when looking back to the 15th cent it is easy to fall into the Hollywood perception of Camalot with knights in shining armor saving damsels and slaying dragons.
> In reality life was very hard for the majority having a mortality of 40 years with a newborn baby having a 1:5 chance of surviving
> Personal hygiene did little to stop widespread epidemics with medicine only found through the church.
> I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield
> George
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> :
>
> · <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHEzdWZ2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEzNTA3Mzk3Njc-?o=6> New Members 1
>
> · <http://groups.yahoo.com/group//files;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNjQ0cXE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZmaWxlcwRzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> New Files 1
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb2c2M2ZkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM1MDczOTc2Nw--> Visit Your Group
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkNmFhZnViBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzU1Mjc3OTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1Mjk3MzMzBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMzUwNzM5NzY3> Yahoo! Groups
>
> Switch to: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change%20Delivery%20Format:%20Traditional> Text-Only, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email%20Delivery:%20Digest> Daily Digest " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> Unsubscribe " <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Use " <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Feedback%20on%20the%20redesigned%20individual%20mail%20v1> Send us Feedback
>
> .
>
> http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=5527791/grpspId=1705297333/msgId=17218/stime=1350739767/nc1=5008816/nc2=3848614/nc3=4025338
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Hi, Paul -



Making *The Hobbit* into three films (or even two instead of one, for that
matter) isn't as much a result of greed as you might think. A lot of it is a
matter of economics, true - studios prefer (as a rule) shorter films to
allow more showings per day and thus greater income from ticket sales. But,
as a rule, justice in a 2 hr. film can be done where the story is roughly
the length of a novella (i.e., shorter than a novel). So, while it may seem
like inflation to make 3 films out of *The Hobbit,* I think the truth is
that they could have made *more* than 3 films for *The Lord of the Rings.*
You know there is a lot in the books they had to cut, and there was a lot of
material filmed that was never used (e.g. Gimli and Legolas touring the
Glittering Caves on their way back home after the War of the Ring) and a lot
of stuff they never filmed at all, like the Scouring of the Shire and Tom
Bombadil. I think were they starting over now on *LOTR,* they might well
consider making more than three films - after all, the only reason that
*LOTR* is a trilogy is that the original publisher, Allen & Unwin, broke one
volume that contained six books (which was the way Tolkien originally wrote
it) into three books, because of the cost of publishing one huge volume that
might well have never made a profit. So, economic concerns in these matters
are nothing new. I'm not a real fan of *The Hobbit,* unlike *LOTR,* but I
do have a lot of faith in Peter Jackson's cinematic sense and love for the
material. Oh, btw, the reason they expanded from two to three films was that
PJ had already filmed more stuff than could be included in two films. Rather
than cut it out, he was able to persuade the studio to greenlight three
films rather than just two. Clout like that is a rarity in Hollywood.



Best thing - I think we're going to get a lot more of Smaug the Dragon this
way! :-)



Johanne

-----Original Message-----

From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Paul Trevor
Bale

Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:30 AM

To:

Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)



Am angry that though filming a smaller book they are spinning it out into 3
x 3D movies to make extra bucks!!

Paul

But supposedly Richard was killed right in front of Henry Tudor,

Marie


--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Earlier when I said Richard's armour may have been stripped off of him by locals taking anything from the dead on the battlefield they could get their hands on, I was challenged by cries of how he would be easily recognised because of his crown, banner etc. What if his helmet with crown attached had been knocked off by a savage blow to the head? Entirely possible. Also let me remind you that not that long after James IV King of Scotland fought in battle, crown on his helmet, and doubtless with banners flying. He too was killed, he too was stripped of armour and valuables, and it took over a day to find his corpse before they could remove it to a place of burial.
> Paul
>
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Nobody actually says so Marie. In fact details of the battle are skimpy, to put it mildly, and the excavations are showing a lot of new things, namely the fluidity of the battle, and the actions of the French pikemen.
Paul

On 22 Oct 2012, at 11:04, mariewalsh2003 wrote:

>
> But supposedly Richard was killed right in front of Henry Tudor,
>
> Marie
>
>
> --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>>
>> Earlier when I said Richard's armour may have been stripped off of him by locals taking anything from the dead on the battlefield they could get their hands on, I was challenged by cries of how he would be easily recognised because of his crown, banner etc. What if his helmet with crown attached had been knocked off by a savage blow to the head? Entirely possible. Also let me remind you that not that long after James IV King of Scotland fought in battle, crown on his helmet, and doubtless with banners flying. He too was killed, he too was stripped of armour and valuables, and it took over a day to find his corpse before they could remove it to a place of burial.
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> Richard Liveth Yet!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Richard Liveth Yet!

Hi,

Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion has a lot of Celtic-derived material.

At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis' attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances, with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen. Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
Marie


>
>
>
> My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so, you
> yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien wrote
> romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing was
> in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends. That's
> what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> would have attributed to the French (egad!).
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of George
> Butterfield
>
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
>
> To:
>
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>
> > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
>
> > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
>
> I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> idealization.
>
> > Johanne
>
> I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an
> army of that time.
>
> This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
>
> George
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi, George -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today,
> knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Regarding Tolkien -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually
> the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as
> it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth
> in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did
> decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> Age.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of
> the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry
> stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the
> West.
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
>

I agree. Tolkien merged all these elements into his story. It also is metaphorical of the early 20th C., WW I, the Industrial Revolution. My friend Michael actually had a long conversation with the Professor at The Eagle and Child, and Tolkien readily admitted to all these sorts of influences...but he also said (and this is true for all writers) that much emerged from his mind without intention. He simply wrote, allowing everything he knew to inform his writing. His creation of the Elvish languages were outgrowths of the Indo-European languages, not made-up from gibberish, and their similarities to real languages were intentional. He also wasn't above the occasional "inside" joke....

Judy 
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 6:39 AM
Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)


 

Hi,

Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion has a lot of Celtic-derived material.

At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis' attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances, with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen. Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
Marie

>
>
>
> My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so, you
> yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien wrote
> romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing was
> in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends. That's
> what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> would have attributed to the French (egad!).
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of George
> Butterfield
>
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
>
> To:
>
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>
> > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
>
> > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
>
> I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> idealization.
>
> > Johanne
>
> I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an
> army of that time.
>
> This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
>
> George
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi, George -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today,
> knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Regarding Tolkien -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually
> the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as
> it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth
> in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did
> decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> Age.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of
> the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry
> stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the
> West.
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
>

It's also true Prof Tolkien contradicted himself on numerous occasions. Read his Collected Letters, which includes one written to my late friend. Michael's correspondence with and about him, including a sort of transcript of their "interview" is now at Cornell University. One of the things that "rocked my world" was that Tolkien deeply regretted the character of Eowyn! Apparently, as fictional characters sometimes will, she "wrote herself" and he was much distressed by the whole Aragorn-Eowyn "flirtation."  Go figure.

Judy
 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 6:39 AM
Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)


 

Hi,

Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion has a lot of Celtic-derived material.

At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis' attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances, with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen. Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
Marie

>
>
>
> My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so, you
> yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien wrote
> romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing was
> in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends. That's
> what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> would have attributed to the French (egad!).
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of George
> Butterfield
>
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
>
> To:
>
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>
> > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
>
> > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
>
> I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> idealization.
>
> > Johanne
>
> I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an
> army of that time.
>
> This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
>
> George
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi, George -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today,
> knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Regarding Tolkien -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually
> the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as
> it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth
> in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did
> decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> Age.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of
> the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry
> stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the
> West.
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Judy,

Wasn't you friend Michael lucky? As was my English teacher at school, who had been one of his students - without her constantly plugging LotR I might never have read it.
Of course you are completely right about the Elvish languages being built up from Indo-European elements, but Tolkien also as you say left himself room for the odd little joke, and he was a good enough linguist that he was usually able to combine the two, although occasionally he had to plead the excuse of an odd dialect for one or two of the names that he seems to have lifted virtually wholesale from elsewhere, such as Nimrodel (Nimrod?) and Amroth (a place on the Pembrokeshire coast, an area where he took several holidays).
Namarie,
Marie

--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> I agree. Tolkien merged all these elements into his story. It also is metaphorical of the early 20th C., WW I, the Industrial Revolution. My friend Michael actually had a long conversation with the Professor at The Eagle and Child, and Tolkien readily admitted to all these sorts of influences...but he also said (and this is true for all writers) that much emerged from his mind without intention. He simply wrote, allowing everything he knew to inform his writing. His creation of the Elvish languages were outgrowths of the Indo-European languages, not made-up from gibberish, and their similarities to real languages were intentional. He also wasn't above the occasional "inside" joke....
>
> Judy 
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 6:39 AM
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion has a lot of Celtic-derived material.
>
> At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis' attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances, with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
> I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen. Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
> Marie
>
> >
> >
> >
> > My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> > can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> > tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so, you
> > yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> > think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien wrote
> > romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing was
> > in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends. That's
> > what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> > necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> > especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> > from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> > would have attributed to the French (egad!).
> >
> >
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> >
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@
> >
> > or jltournier@
> >
> >
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From:
> > [mailto:] On Behalf Of George
> > Butterfield
> >
> > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
> >
> > To:
> >
> > Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> > Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
> >
> >
> >
> > > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
> >
> > > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
> >
> > I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> > heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> > For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> > idealization.
> >
> > > Johanne
> >
> > I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> > attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> > somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> > as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an
> > army of that time.
> >
> > This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> > idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
> >
> > George
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi, George -
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> > spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today,
> > knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> > epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Regarding Tolkien -
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> > legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually
> > the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as
> > it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> > pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> > children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth
> > in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did
> > decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> > making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> > Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> > *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> > Age.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> > an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> > that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of
> > the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> > "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry
> > stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> > him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> > noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> > King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the
> > West.
> >
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Are we not accepting any more that Richard felled Henry's standard bearer?
Also, what are we to make of the letter from the French mercenary, who described Richard coming is whole division, Henry wanting 'to be on foot in the midst of us, and in part we were the reason why the battle was won'?
Marie

--- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@...> wrote:
>
> Nobody actually says so Marie. In fact details of the battle are skimpy, to put it mildly, and the excavations are showing a lot of new things, namely the fluidity of the battle, and the actions of the French pikemen.
> Paul





>
> On 22 Oct 2012, at 11:04, mariewalsh2003 wrote:
>
> >
> > But supposedly Richard was killed right in front of Henry Tudor,
> >
> > Marie
> >
> >
> > --- In , Paul Trevor Bale <paul.bale@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Earlier when I said Richard's armour may have been stripped off of him by locals taking anything from the dead on the battlefield they could get their hands on, I was challenged by cries of how he would be easily recognised because of his crown, banner etc. What if his helmet with crown attached had been knocked off by a savage blow to the head? Entirely possible. Also let me remind you that not that long after James IV King of Scotland fought in battle, crown on his helmet, and doubtless with banners flying. He too was killed, he too was stripped of armour and valuables, and it took over a day to find his corpse before they could remove it to a place of burial.
> >> Paul
> >>
> >>
> >> Richard Liveth Yet!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Richard Liveth Yet!
>

Ah, true, Marie...and I consider myself enormously fortunate to have known Michael. We were neighbors; he and his wife bought a flat in our building. It never occurred to me he was anyone but "Michael" until one day, I was flipping through the index to Tolkien's letters and saw his name.

"Is this you?" I asked, a wee bit embarrassed.
"Oh, yes," he said. And he hauled out a box of old letters. It was the first of many wonderful afternoons where he told me amazing stories and also read to me. He knew WH Auden. He was once tossed bodily from Sen. Joe McCarthy's office. And he was a Ricardian, to boot. When he passed away at 86, I felt as if I'd lost a close member of our family...still miss him terribly.

Judy

 
Loyaulte me lie


________________________________
From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
To:
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)


 
Hi Judy,

Wasn't you friend Michael lucky? As was my English teacher at school, who had been one of his students - without her constantly plugging LotR I might never have read it.
Of course you are completely right about the Elvish languages being built up from Indo-European elements, but Tolkien also as you say left himself room for the odd little joke, and he was a good enough linguist that he was usually able to combine the two, although occasionally he had to plead the excuse of an odd dialect for one or two of the names that he seems to have lifted virtually wholesale from elsewhere, such as Nimrodel (Nimrod?) and Amroth (a place on the Pembrokeshire coast, an area where he took several holidays).
Namarie,
Marie

--- In , Judy Thomson <judygerard.thomson@...> wrote:
>
> I agree. Tolkien merged all these elements into his story. It also is metaphorical of the early 20th C., WW I, the Industrial Revolution. My friend Michael actually had a long conversation with the Professor at The Eagle and Child, and Tolkien readily admitted to all these sorts of influences...but he also said (and this is true for all writers) that much emerged from his mind without intention. He simply wrote, allowing everything he knew to inform his writing. His creation of the Elvish languages were outgrowths of the Indo-European languages, not made-up from gibberish, and their similarities to real languages were intentional. He also wasn't above the occasional "inside" joke....
>
> Judy 
>  
> Loyaulte me lie
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mariewalsh2003 <[email protected]>
> To:
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 6:39 AM
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion has a lot of Celtic-derived material.
>
> At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis' attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances, with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
> I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen. Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
> Marie
>
> >
> >
> >
> > My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> > can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> > tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so, you
> > yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> > think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien wrote
> > romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing was
> > in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends. That's
> > what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> > necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> > especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> > from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> > would have attributed to the French (egad!).
> >
> >
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> >
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@
> >
> > or jltournier@
> >
> >
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From:
> > [mailto:] On Behalf Of George
> > Butterfield
> >
> > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
> >
> > To:
> >
> > Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> > Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
> >
> >
> >
> > > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
> >
> > > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
> >
> > I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> > heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> > For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> > idealization.
> >
> > > Johanne
> >
> > I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> > attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> > somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> > as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of an
> > army of that time.
> >
> > This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> > idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
> >
> > George
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi, George -
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> > spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we today,
> > knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> > epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Regarding Tolkien -
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> > legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain. Actually
> > the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain as
> > it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> > pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> > children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth
> > in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien did
> > decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> > making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> > Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> > *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> > Age.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> > an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> > that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little of
> > the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> > "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by Merry
> > stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> > him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> > noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> > King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of the
> > West.
> >
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi, Marie -

Umm. . . yes and no and maybe. <smile> Yes, it is true that Tolkien was
inspired by more than just Norse myths. I didn't mean to imply that the
sources of his inspiration were limited to Norse languages and myths, only
that that was the most significant influence on him, since his primary aim
in creating Middle-earth and the Silmarillion was to create "a mythology for
England," and he had made a study of Norse languages (Old Norse, for one)
and literature. The speech of the people of Rohan in *LOTR* was related to
Anglo-Saxon. But it's also true that Sindarin, one of his Elvish languages,
was inspired by Welsh, and the other, Quenya, by Finnish, of all things.
Humphrey Carpenter, Tolkien's biographer, indicates that, growing up in the
Midlands, Tolkien used to see trucks going into Wales with Welsh signage, so
that inspired him early on with a fascination for the Welsh language.



You have said a lot of "may-be's" about influence from Arthurian legends,
and I am pretty sure Tolkien would vehemently deny all of them. As I said
before, he did not appreciate Latin and especially French influence on
English. But that isn't to say it's not there in places, perhaps
unconsciously, in Tolkien's work. For example, Gandalf has a number of names
in other languages, especially "Mithrandir" and the "Grey Wanderer." But in
the languages of the Haradrim (I think, somewhere in the South, anyway) he
was known as "Incanus," which also happens to be Latin for "grey-haired."
Makes sense to me, but Tolkien denied that that was where he got the word
from, and he created an alternative etymology for the word Incanus as used
in LOTR. Tricky devil! He was determined that, insofar as he had anything to
say about it, one could not pin any borrowing from Latin or French on him! J



Johanne



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Johanne L. Tournier



Email - jltournier60@...

or jltournier@...



"With God, all things are possible."

- Jesus of Nazareth

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of mariewalsh2003
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:40 AM
To:
Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)






Hi,

Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon
and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon
tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in
the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also
specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and
the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at
learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion
has a lot of Celtic-derived material.

At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis'
attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the
Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on
the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think
there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances,
with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in
for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by
turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is
demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in
which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of
the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into
medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced
as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia
Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen.
Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r
instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
Marie

>
>
>
> My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so,
you
> yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien
wrote
> romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing
was
> in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends.
That's
> what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> would have attributed to the French (egad!).
>
>
>
> Johanne
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of George
> Butterfield
>
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
>
> To:
<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
>
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>
> > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
>
> > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
>
> I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> idealization.
>
> > Johanne
>
> I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of
an
> army of that time.
>
> This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
>
> George
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi, George -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we
today,
> knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Regarding Tolkien -
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain.
Actually
> the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain
as
> it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of
Middle-earth
> in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien
did
> decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> Age.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little
of
> the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by
Merry
> stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of
the
> West.
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
>

--- In , Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Marie -
>
> Umm. . . yes and no and maybe. <smile> Yes, it is true that Tolkien was
> inspired by more than just Norse myths. I didn't mean to imply that the
> sources of his inspiration were limited to Norse languages and myths, only
> that that was the most significant influence on him, since his primary aim
> in creating Middle-earth and the Silmarillion was to create "a mythology for
> England," and he had made a study of Norse languages (Old Norse, for one)
> and literature. The speech of the people of Rohan in *LOTR* was related to
> Anglo-Saxon. But it's also true that Sindarin, one of his Elvish languages,
> was inspired by Welsh, and the other, Quenya, by Finnish, of all things.
> Humphrey Carpenter, Tolkien's biographer, indicates that, growing up in the
> Midlands, Tolkien used to see trucks going into Wales with Welsh signage, so
> that inspired him early on with a fascination for the Welsh language.
>
>
>
> You have said a lot of "may-be's" about influence from Arthurian legends,
> and I am pretty sure Tolkien would vehemently deny all of them. As I said
> before, he did not appreciate Latin and especially French influence on
> English. But that isn't to say it's not there in places, perhaps
> unconsciously, in Tolkien's work. For example, Gandalf has a number of names
> in other languages, especially "Mithrandir" and the "Grey Wanderer." But in
> the languages of the Haradrim (I think, somewhere in the South, anyway) he
> was known as "Incanus," which also happens to be Latin for "grey-haired."
> Makes sense to me, but Tolkien denied that that was where he got the word
> from, and he created an alternative etymology for the word Incanus as used
> in LOTR. Tricky devil! He was determined that, insofar as he had anything to
> say about it, one could not pin any borrowing from Latin or French on him! J

Hi Johanne.
I think you're possibly over influenced by commentators like Tom Shippey who concentrate on the Anglo-Saxon influences because that is their own field of expertise. As far as I recall, Tolkien actually wrote that creating a mythology for England had been his goal when he was young. The result of that is much of the Lost Tales, where the elvish city of Kor is a legendary version of Warwick. Out of all that eventually came Middle Earth. But it always did include a lot more than AS and Norse myth. You mention Finnish - Tolkien adored the Kalevala and the influence of that can also be seen in the Silmarillion. What he was often doing was creating a 'back story' that could serve as an imagined source for tales from different North European cultures that shared a common theme. He often used the proper names in his tale as a pointer. I wrote some articles back in the 1980s for the Tolkien Society journal on the Celtic influences on the 'histories' of the First and Second Ages, and also on the source tales - Norse, Finnish, Welsh, Irish and even Greek - that have been woven into the story of Turin. It is now, I think, generally accepted that the Irish Tuatha De Danaan were the chief inspiration for the Elves of Middle Earth. Both were immortals who preceded mortals in the land, interacted with them after their arrival but gradually retreated to the Otherworld. There is nothing like that in surviving Germanic myth.
In the story of Numenor we even have the myth of Atlantis, and Tolkien never denied the parallel; Atalante was even supposed to be one of its names after it sank in the sea. But another name for the drowned Numenor was Mar-nu-Falmar, Land Under Wave, which is the name of an Otherworld country visited by the hero of an Irish story (Tir fa Thon in the Gaelic).
There is also a nod in the story of Numenor ot the Irish legend of the Flood, in which the bit of Ireland that did not sink beneath the sea was called Tol Tuinde (the mound of the wave). All that is left of Numenor is the central mountain, the Meneltarma, which becomes known as Tol Meneltarma (correct me if I am wrong - I haven't read it for years). Just as Elendil and his sons survived the drowning of Numenor, so Fintan survived the drowning of Ireland. If my memory serves me correctly, Tolkien made a reference to the name Fintan in his notes, translating it as 'White Fire', which is also the English translation of Narsil, Elendil's sword.

Given that the Arthurian legends are Brythonic Celtic in their origin it would be surprising if Tolkien rejected them out of hand. Yon Michael whom we heard about from Judy, thought he freely acknowledged all the sorts of influence I mentioned. His complaint about the Arthurian legends (and Celtic stories in general) was that whilst full of bright beauty they were a bit random, like a stained glass window that had been broken and put back together haphazardly. So he rearranges the story. His views on French influence on the English language are a completely separate issue, and besides some of the Arthurian stories were written in English or German, or there are extant Welsh-language versions of them such as Peredur. I only gave a taste in my post of all the Arthurian parallels. (And there is reference to things Arthurian not just in LotR. 'Avallone' must have been meant to resemble 'Avalon'.) Besides, there is no way LotR, which spans a continent, would have worked if Tolkien had confined himself throughout to Germanic sources. The Rohirrim are Anglo-Saxons, yes (and their language is the Mercian dialect of Old English, with revised spelling). But what about the Men of Gondor?
You can also see the influence of the stories of Roland and Oliver on the Gondor sections. And 'Willehalm'. And all sorts of other things, the geography of Ancient Egypt included!
Actually, Tom Shippey's claim that Tolkien avoided French-derived words is exaggerated. I kept a bit of an eye out from time to time last time I read LotR and there are really rather a lot of them.

I quite accept that a lot of influences were unconscious; if Tolkien had just been cribbing from or trying to rearrange medieval texts the book would have been very dull and stilted. All that he had ever read, and all that he had ever seen, was all there in his subconscious, simmering down together into that soup.
The general pattern of LotR does have a very Arthurian feel. It has been suggested that in Aragorn Tolkien has given Arthur the son he never had. Aragorn's father, of course, is named Arathorn, pretty close to Arthur. Dunadan and Sir Dinadan ....
Marie






>
>
>
> Johanne
>
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Johanne L. Tournier
>
>
>
> Email - jltournier60@...
>
> or jltournier@...
>
>
>
> "With God, all things are possible."
>
> - Jesus of Nazareth
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> From:
> [mailto:] On Behalf Of mariewalsh2003
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:40 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Whilst it's true that there is much in Tolkien was Professor of Anglo Saxon
> and there is much in his writing that derives from Norse and Anglo Saxon
> tales, this is far from being the limit of his inspiration, particularly in
> the Lord of the Rings, which takes us far southward. Tolkien also
> specialized in Middle English, and made translations of Pearl and Gawain and
> the Green Knight. He also loved the Welsh language, and once had a stab at
> learning Irish, though he never got very far with it. Even the Silmarillion
> has a lot of Celtic-derived material.
>
> At the time Tolkien was writing LotR he was having to vie for CS Lewis'
> attention with Charles Williams, a new friend of Lewis' who had joined the
> Inklings, and at that time Williams was writing a long poetic work based on
> the Arthurian matter. Amongst a host of other allusions in the LotR, I think
> there is also a sense in which it is a reworking of the Arthurian romances,
> with many of the heirlooms, such as the Ring and the Elfstone, standing in
> for various aspects of the Grail. Tolkien has 'improved' the original by
> turning it on its head, so that the main grail substitute, the One Ring, is
> demonic rather than holy and must be got rid of rather than found, and in
> which ends rather than begins with the Arthur figure gaining the crown.
> I believe that the nods to the Arthurian corpus can also be found in some of
> the proper names. 'Rivendell', for instance, could be translated into
> medieval French as Perceval. Elyazar, the Grail King, is perhaps referenced
> as Elessar. And there is a French Arthurian tale called the Historia
> Meriadoci about a hero called Meriadoc; it includes a lady called Orwen.
> Telcontar might even be an anagram of Lancerot (Lancelot can have an r
> instead of a c, as in Lanzerote).
> Marie
>
> >
> >
> >
> > My comments were intended as a response to what you had written. But they
> > can also stand on their own. You may have been intending to comment on the
> > tendency of modern people to romanticize earlier times, but in doing so,
> you
> > yourself mentioned Tolkien and the fact that his writing is "fiction." I
> > think I made a logical inference that you were indicating that Tolkien
> wrote
> > romanticized fiction about an age of chivalry, when in fact his writing
> was
> > in part a reaction against the medieval corpus of Arthurian legends.
> That's
> > what I was trying to make clear in my email: that his writing does not
> > necessarily epitomize chivalric ideals, although individual characters,
> > especially Aragorn, are noble, even kingly. But Tolkien's ideal was taken
> > from northern myths, and he explicitly rejected any influences which he
> > would have attributed to the French (egad!).
> >
> >
> >
> > Johanne
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Johanne L. Tournier
> >
> >
> >
> > Email - jltournier60@
> >
> > or jltournier@
> >
> >
> >
> > "With God, all things are possible."
> >
> > - Jesus of Nazareth
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> > [mailto:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of George
> > Butterfield
> >
> > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:46 PM
> >
> > To:
> <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>
> >
> > Subject: Re: OT - Is chivalry romantic in
> > Tolkien? (was Armour pt 2)
> >
> >
> >
> > > I love to read Tolkien like many other members however it is fiction
> >
> > > like kindness and knightly honor on the battlefield George
> >
> > I would like to attribute a lot of our gothic fantasy to our Victorian
> > heritage and the romanticism during that period for all things heraldic,
> > For example Neuschwanstein Castle as a complete relatively modern
> > idealization.
> >
> > > Johanne
> >
> > I think that you digress from the point it was not health nor the
> > attributes of Tolkien that was my point, but that our 21st cent eyes are
> > somewhat tainted by idealogical Knightly ideals which are largely a myth
> > as were the living conditions and moral attitudes of the rank and file of
> an
> > army of that time.
> >
> > This period of our history was pretty brutal for all concerned and not the
> > idealogical one that many would like it to have been.
> >
> > George
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 20, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Johanne Tournier <jltournier60@>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi, George -
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > People in former times couldn't take effective precautions against the
> > spread of disease, since they didn't know about germs. Also, imo, we
> today,
> > knowing as much as we do, still have problems controlling the spread of
> > epidemics and dealing with other chronic health problems.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Regarding Tolkien -
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > For one thing, his world was intended to be a recreation of a lost
> > legendary past, not a recreation of Arthurian or Medieval Britain.
> Actually
> > the world of the hobbits has as much in common with 18th. century Britain
> as
> > it does with any earlier period (e.g. Bilbo wears a waistcoat and smokes a
> > pipe), which I guess goes back to the genesis of *The Hobbit* as a
> > children's story originally separate from Tolkien's creation of
> Middle-earth
> > in *The Silmarillion.* At some point in the process of writing, Tolkien
> did
> > decide that the Shire was in Middle-earth, and then there was a process of
> > making the geography and history compatible with the earlier history. The
> > Silmarillion, for example, was set in the almost-mythical First Age, while
> > *The Hobbit* and *The Lord of the Rings* were set much later in the Third
> > Age.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Two, Tolkien has been criticized by some people over the years as having
> > an overly-rosy view of men - but in fact, upon reading his books, you see
> > that almost everything is almost unremittingly grim. There is very little
> of
> > the concept of "honour on the battlefield;" I think it's more a case of
> > "kill or be killed," as in the case where the Witch King is killed by
> Merry
> > stabbing him from behind and thus disabling him, allowing Eowyn to finish
> > him off in a frontal assault. We cheer, but there is nothing particularly
> > noble in the way they go about it. It's just that we know that the Witch
> > King and the other Dark Powers are far more to be feared than the Men of
> the
> > West.
> >
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>