TURN ON THE SOUND. YOU CAN'T MISS THIS. THIS IS FANTASTIC.

Dedicated to @redeemer46 ❤

Thank you so much for your donation. I am very grateful to you for what you did, for your support and kindness. Can't express it with words, so I hope Thranduil can express it better.

Oh my gosh, it's Thranduil on the ship to Valinor 😍😍😍

Legolas Greenleaf + book quotes 

Lord of the Rings: Return of the King

So here's one of the coolest things that has happened to me as a Tolkien nut and an amateur medievalist. It's also impacted my view of the way Tolkien writes women. Here's Carl Stephenson in MEDIEVAL FEUDALISM, explaining the roots of the ceremony of knighthood: "In the second century after Christ the Roman historian Tacitus wrote an essay which he called Germania, and which has remained justly famous. He declares that the Germans, though divided into numerous tribes, constitute a single people characterised by common traits and a common mode of life. The typical German is a warrior. [...] Except when armed, they perform no business, either private or public. But it is not their custom that any one should assume arms without the formal approval of the tribe. Before the assembly the youth receives a shield and spear from his father, some other relative, or one of the chief men, and this gift corresponds to the toga virilis among the Romans--making him a citizen rather than a member of a household" (pp 2-3). Got it?

Remember how Tolkien was a medievalist who based his Rohirrim on Anglo-Saxon England, which came from those Germanic tribes Tacitus was talking about? Stephenson argues that the customs described by Tacitus continued into the early middle ages eventually giving rise to the medieval feudal system. One of these customs was the gift of arms, which transformed into the ceremony of knighthood: "Tacitus, it will be remembered, describes the ancient German custom by which a youth was presented with a shield and a spear to mark his attainment of man's estate. What seems to the be same ceremony reappears under the Carolingians. In 791, we are told, Charlemagne caused Prince Louis to be girded with a sword in celebration of his adolescence; and forty-seven years later Louis in turn decorated his fifteen-year-old son Charles "with the arms of manhood, i.e., a sword." Here, obviously, we may see the origin of the later adoubement, which long remained a formal investiture with arms, or with some one of them as a symbol. Thus the Bayeux Tapestry represents the knighting of Earl Harold by William of Normandy under the legend: Hic Willelmus dedit Haroldo arma (Here William gave arms to Harold). [...] Scores of other examples are to be found in the French chronicles and chansons de geste, which, despite much variation of detail, agree on the essentials. And whatever the derivation of the words, the English expression "dubbing to knighthood" must have been closely related to the French adoubement" (pp 47-48.)

In its simplest form, according to Stephenson, the ceremony of knighthood included "at most the presentation of a sword, a few words of admonition, and the accolade." OK. So what does this have to do with Tolkien and his women? AHAHAHAHA I AM SO GLAD YOU ASKED. First of all, let's agree that Tolkien, a medievalist, undoubtedly was aware of all the above. Second, turn with me in your copy of The Lord of the Rings to chapter 6 of The Two Towers, "The King of the Golden Hall", when Theoden and his councillors agree that Eowyn should lead the people while the men are away at war. (This, of course, was something that medieval noblewomen regularly did: one small example is an 1178 letter from a Hospitaller knight serving in the Latin kingdom of Jerusalem which records that before marching out to the battle of Montgisard, "We put the defence of the Tower of David and the whole city in the hands of our women".) But in The Lord of the Rings, there's a little ceremony.

"'Let her be as lord to the Eorlingas, while we are gone.' 'It shall be so,' said Theoden. 'Let the heralds announce to the folk that the Lady Eowyn will lead them!' Then the king sat upon a seat before his doors and Eowyn knelt before him and received from him a sword and a fair corselet."

I YELLED when I realised what I was reading right there. You see, the king doesn't just have the heralds announce that Eowyn is in charge. He gives her weapons.

Theoden makes Eowyn a knight of the Riddermark.

Not only that, but I think this is a huge deal for several reasons. That is, Tolkien knew what he was doing here.

From my reading in medieval history, I'm aware of women choosing to fight and bear arms, as well as becoming military leaders while the men are away at some war or as prisoners. What I haven't seen is women actually receiving knighthood. Anyone could fight as a knight if they could afford the (very pricy) horse and armour, and anyone could lead a nation as long as they were accepted by the leaders. But you just don't see women getting knighted like this.

Tolkien therefore chose to write a medieval-coded society, Rohan, where women arguably had greater equality with men than they did in actual medieval societies.

I think that should tell us something about who Tolkien was as a person and how he viewed women - perhaps he didn't write them with equal parity to men (there are undeniably more prominent male characters in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, at least, than female) but compared to the medieval societies that were his life's work, and arguably even compared to the society he lived in, he was remarkably egalitarian.

I think it should also tell us something about the craft of writing fantasy.

No, you don't have to include gut wrenching misogyny and violence against women in order to write "realistic" medieval-inspired fantasy.

Tolkien's fantasy worlds are DEEPLY informed by medieval history to an extent most laypeople will never fully appreciate. The attitudes, the language, the ABSOLUTELY FLAWLESS use of medieval military tactics...heck, even just the way that people travel long distances on foot...all of it is brilliantly medieval.

The fact that Theoden bestows arms on Eowyn is just one tiny detail that is deeply rooted in medieval history. Even though he's giving those arms to a woman in a fantasy land full of elves and hobbits and wizards, it's still a wonderfully historically accurate detail.

Of course, I've ranted before about how misogyny and sexism wasn't actually as bad in medieval times as a lot of people today think. But from the way SOME fantasy authors talk, you'd think that historical accuracy will disappear in a puff of smoke if every woman in the dragon-infested fantasy land isn't being traumatised on the regular.

Tolkien did better. Be like Tolkien.

I feel like we as a society don’t talk enough about the fact that Faramir and Boromir could see the future, and that Faramir might have been a fucking psychic??

No listen now I’m finding page references because I honestly can’t believe I didn’t find this weirder the first million times I read these books

So we all know that the reason Boromir goes to see Elrond in the first place is because Faramir has been having these dreams about “seeking the sword that was broken” in Imladris and that Isildur‘s bane is there and such. Presumably after Denethor ignores him for long enough, whoever is sending out these prophetic dreams gets fed up and sends one to Boromir so Denethor will actually finally listen and take action (my complex feelings about Denethor are for another post lmao)

So there’s some solid evidence that Faramir, and at least to some extent Boromir can fucking. SEE THE FUTURE. And that little fact just doesn’t really get brought up again AT ALL in Fellowship of the Ring? (JRR Tolkien I love you but why were we deprived of the random travel conversations the fellowship must have had while traveling all over middle earth together)

Later on, Faramir describes seeing Boromir’s body in the boat he was sent down the Anduin in, and he knows way ahead of time that Boromir was dead – another instance of somehow knowing about things that happened hundreds of miles away when there is ABSOLUTELY no way he should have.

BUT THEN things get a lot weirder in The Two Towers when Faramir captures Frodo and Sam and Gollum. Faramir is interrogating Gollum about whether he had ever been to Henneth Annun before, and this is what happens: 

That’s kind of a really weird thing to say. Maybe Faramir is being poetic and not literal when he says he can see into Gollum’s mind, but the elaborate description of their eye contact almost makes it seem like there’s something else going on here. Plus, somehow the eye contact alone is enough for Faramir to judge definitively that Gollum is telling the truth. This brings up something Gandalf says to Pippin about Denethor:

Like father, like son, it seems. I bet Denethor just loved that. 

Again, maybe Gandalf is just speaking figuratively and is saying that Denethor is just really insightful. But it’s kind of weird to interpret it like that that in light of Gandalf putting that right next to a statement about Denethor’s bloodline that makes him and Faramir “different” somehow. Is Gandalf saying that they both can literally perceive “what is passing in the minds of men”??

BACK TO ITHILIEN (sorry this is more of a ramble than a well structured essay)

Faramir is asking Gollum if he knows what Cirith Ungol really is:

“As if something had stabbed him”?? There’s really no indication of what this “stabbing” could be in this context. It’s not Smeagol trying to keep Gollum from spilling the beans, because Gollum is the one who wants to keep the hobbits in the dark about Shelob. So who/what is stabbing his fucking mind?

Faramir sends Gollum away with Anborn and is talking to Frodo about Gollum.

Gollum leading Frodo to no good might be the understatement of the year, as well as an incredibly accurate one. I don’t need to keep saying this but of course he could be speaking poetically or figuratively. It just seems to me that there’s a LOT of these instances over the course of these books.

Putting Denethor and Faramir in a room together is, of course, always fucking wild for a MYRIAD of reasons, but let’s look at (the part that always fucking kills me) this scene:

I’m pretty sure this is the first(?) instance of Faramir being referred to as Gandalf’s pupil. I’m highlighting this point because it kind of sets a precedent as to why Faramir and Denethor, despite both seeming to have these supernatural abilities to read people and situations, come to SUCH different conclusions about what to do with The Ring. Faramir has been studying with Gandalf, a magical wizard, since he was a kid. I really don’t think it’s that far of a stretch that Gandalf, who once again is literally a god or Maia or whatever, was able to teach him how to actually use this ability to read and/or influence minds. (Plus he wasn’t wrecking his own mind by staring into a palantir 24/7 but I digress)

I’ve been writing for too long, so here’s just a couple of other points that come to mind.

Anyway. Those are my two cents on the subject. Everyone in the line of Stewards is a fucking psychic to some extent and that’s what Tolkien intended

Psychics are a thing in Tolkien – there’s foresight, which seems to be a combination of precognition and remote viewing, and there are also Seers, who have mystic visions and prophecies. It’s stronger in Numenorians and Elves than regular Men, but the noble houses of Gondor are descended from the Numenorians. So yes this is very possible within the existing worldbuilding.

The friendly hospitality of Elrond is severely tested.

Thor is like a mix between a dwarf and an elf… tall and handsome..muscular and rude during meals XD

I did a crossover because I could not decide what to draw! they are my favourite fandom so it will become another poster!

*HAPPY BIRTHDAY TOLKIEN!*

If you want him, come and claim him!

LIV TYLER as Arwen in THE LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY 2001 - 2003 | dir. Peter Jackson

THE LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY   1954-1955, writ. J.R.R. Tolkien / 2001-2003, dir. Peter Jackson

—The King of Attolia, Megan Whalen Turner

—A Civil Campaign, Lois McMaster Bujold

—The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien

Man, I just read the same book over and over again, don’t I.

LEGENDARIUM TAROT  by Sceith-A

The original first page of The Lord of the Rings.

I know the hobbit movies make a big deal about how angsty teen Legolas is and completely screwed his relationship with his dad Thranduil. But whenever I read the Lord of the Rings I cannot help but think: my goodness, but Thranduil must have really spoiled Legolas rotten.

We first meet Legolas at the Council of Elrond. He is dressed simply and for light travel, and does not choose to wear his title as a Prince, instead identifying himself as a messenger from Thranduil, his king. Indeed he often chooses to call Thranduil his king rather than his father, which many have taken as a sign that relations between the two are strained.

However, I propose the direct opposite - that his many mentions of Thranduil as his Elven-Lord demonstrates not only his love for Thranduil, but also his respect and admiration of what a great king his father is for his people.

Consider this: whenever he mentions Thranduil or Mirkwood it is always with warmth and a subtle longing. He doesn't ever speak of his home in anything other than good terms, even if it has been marred and fallen into becoming Mirkwood (as opposed to Greenwood the Great).

And it isn't just to maintain pride in front of outsiders. When you contrast the way Boromir speaks of Gondor and his father the steward Denethor, to the way Legolas speaks of Mirkwood and Thranduil, it becomes clearer. Boromir is proud of his family, country and heritage and boasts of it. He claims Gondor is the main protector of Middle-earth, and that they have been fighting Mordor the hardest. But deep down he is questioning his father's rule, and is uncertain of Gondor's future.

Legolas is almost the opposite. He doesn't ever boast of his country, although Mirkwood, just like Gondor, is right at Mordor's doorstep. Instead he shares with the company personal anecdotes that show (not tell) exactly how good life is there despite the Shadow. He doesn't waver in his believe of his people's strength; indeed only he and Aragorn could face Galadriel without any fear or hesitation.

I think the reason why Legolas always mentions Thranduil as a king or lord is not because he doesn't want to acknowledge Thranduil is his father. It is that Legolas is so in awe of Thranduil and so respectful of him that whenever he is mentioned Legolas' first thought is not 'that's my dad and we're related', but instead is 'that's my king and my hero and he's so awesome'.

He doesn't consciously mention Thranduil as his father because his mind frame is not to introduce the company to Thranduil the way you would introduce your friends to your parents. He doesn't want them to think of him as just a nice uncle who is the father of a friend.

Legolas introduces Thranduil as his king because he wants the company to respect him as such, as the ruler of a great country who has done great deeds. He wants the company to see Thranduil as someone in-charge, as someone who is capable and should be given the proper courtesies accorded to him.

Some may question, in that case why doesn't Legolas call him 'my father the king'? It would highlight both Legolas' relationship to Thranduil as well as Thranduil's kingship.

I think this has to do with the circumstances as well as Legolas' humble personality. It is true that he doesn't ever make a big deal out of being prince, but at the same time this title means nothing much in the fellowship company. There is Aragorn, who would be king of Gondor. Boromir, eldest son of the ruling Steward of Gondor. Gimli, cousin of Balin who is the Lord of Moria. Gandalf, member of the Istari and councilor of many kingdoms. Peregrin, son of the Thain of Shire. Meriadoc, son of the Master of Buckland. Frodo, heir to Bilbo and a celebrity (of sorts) of the Shire.

Virtually everyone in the fellowship had a title (except Sam) and there is really no point in highlighting it among themselves when it doesn't matter. The only time where Legolas being Prince of Mirkwood would matter is when meeting other elves or when meeting allies of Mirkwood (like Dale for example). In which case in the former, Legolas being son of Thranduil is more than enough recognition for Elrond and Celeborn (as both of them were Sindar elves, and thus kin of Thranduil). And for the latter there wasn't any opportunity to do so.

Thus Legolas not mentioning the king is also his father is his way of downplaying his title as Prince, something which signifies his humility as well.

Finally, what makes me certain that Thranduil is a very caring father is Legolas' personality itself. Galadriel mentions that Legolas had always lived in joy, and this is very evident throughout the book.

In the entire journey, Legolas is shown to never despair. The only moment of fear was when he saw the Balrog (a famous elves bane) but otherwise he was also never fearful. This is despite the overwhelming circumstances the company finds themselves in. He always sees the bright side in every situation, frequently makes jokes and funny quips, and is in an overall joyful mood.

From the Hobbit, we learn that this cheerful outlook is shared by the Mirkwood elves, regardless of the growing Shadow. The only person who was affected at all was Thranduil himself, who was always wary of Mordor rising again. But he took careful pains to never affect his people, and they were always in good spirits despite the war that was happening.

I think Legolas was very well loved as a child, and always carefully sheltered. Not from the horrors and realities of war like death and destruction (because we can see he is a very capable warrior). No, he was instead sheltered from the despair and sorrow that would normally accompany death and destruction.

Legolas would see death and elves dying in battle, and Thranduil would tell him of the halls of Mandos and how death is just a path back to the Valar. He would look at the destruction of the woods and the land, and Thranduil would tell him it is like the passage of winter, but spring would come and the land would flourish again.

Legolas would have grown up knowing that even though bad things are happening, good things are still to come, and that's why he always has such hope in him and such joy. Unlike the mortal lives of Men and Dwarves, Elves are immortal and they can afford to wait for the end of the Shadow. There is no hurry, and because Mirkwood is untouched by any of the Rings, they don't need to worry about the power of the Three fading.

Legolas is happy and joyful because he is beloved, and I think that is a consequence of Thranduil's nurturing personality. It just makes much more sense when you compare him to the other characters who had lost both parents (Aragorn and Eomer), or had a stern and demanding father (Boromir and Faramir).

Legolas remains unchanged for the most part at the end of the journey because he was already in such a good place to start with. I think that is quite a comforting thought.

By The Numbers: The Lord of the Rings Films

Last chance to participate in the Tolkien Fanfiction Research Study!

Hi! I’m just telling everyone I know who reads or writes Tolkien fic to please consider participating in a research survey! (Which, I’m realizing now, @roselightfairy​ actually sent to me first, so credit where credit’s due, I suppose.) The study is run by two fan studies scholars who are also long-time Tolkien fic writers & consumers. 

Info & Survey HERE or @tolkien-fanfiction-survey​.

The survey closes on March 31st, 2021.

Please reblog, DM, and spread the word!

Below the cut, I’m tagging anyone I follow who might want to participate or signal boost. Sorry for being weird about it since I don’t talk to most of y’all, just creep, but… I’m a researcher myself so I just feel very passionately about supporting others in their data collection, lmao.

Keep reading

Happy International Women’s Day! (March 8th, 2021)