TfW Spoilers - An Origin Story for GK?

[Glorelendil]

They swore an oath which none shall break, and none should take, by the name even of Ilúvatar, calling the Everlasting Dark upon them if they kept it not ..... For so sworn, good or evil, an oath may not be broken, and it shall pursue oathkeeper and oathbreaker to the world's end.

One cannot conclude from that that an oath has to be by the name of Ilúvatar in particular to have that power. That's a valid interpretation, but not a necessary one. I take it to mean that it was an extremely powerful oath, because they invoked Iluvatar's name, but that doesn't mean a slightly lesser oath wouldn't have kept their spirits from Mandos.

It would be like seeing a sentence "But he was wielding a mighty sword, forged in Gondolin, and struck the troll a mighty blow" and concluding that only swords forged in Gondolin can wound trolls.

In any event, there have been even more people who would know Ilúvatar's name than there were kings descended from Isildur, so even if we want to accept this contrived condition we have plenty of people capable of swearing strong enough oaths to become ghosts.

Problem solved! Ghosts in every ruin it is.

[Arthadan]

In Middle-earth words and specially sacred names hold power. Elrond didn't want Gandalf to use the Black Speech in Rivendell and Nazgûl flee when Noldorin Elves invoke the sacdred name of Varda Elentári (Elbereth Gilthoniel). So, I'd say knowing the name of eru/Ilúvatar is a requisite.

Now, I seriously doubt such an oath would be taken lightly. If I make an oatg to et bread every single day in the name of Eru and I don't, I doubt he'd take me seriously enough to curse to be a ghost if I don't. The Oathbreakers needed to "prove" their loyalty to Isildur with the sacred Oath (probably Isildur had something to do asking them to swear invoking Ilúatar, as he new too well the consequences). In short, you don'r risk damnation without a VERY good reason.

[Aeglosdir]

It is equally possible that if you swore an oath to Eru not to eat bread and you broke that oath, something bad would happen and you would turn into the Wandering Loafer or whatever. There may be a reason why people avoid swearing oaths to Eru in Middle-earth: when they do, they are actually bound to their words, come hell or high water.

It seems rather superficial to assume that the reason people wouldn't swear to Eru is that they don't know the Elvish name Eru (or Ilúvatar). If the Drúedain worship Eru but call him Zog, he would still listen, don't you think? It's not all in the name.

"What a lot of things you do use Good morning for!" I would say that in Middle-earth, if you were to swear some ridiculous oath to Eru and you really have no idea what you're saying (like a parrot), then you wouldn't be mechanically bound by it. But if you swore an oath to Eru, knowing fully well ('in your heart', as they say) who Eru is and what you are saying, then you are bound by it, even if it's something seemingly ridiculous as not eating bread. It was important enough to you to swear it on what you know to be the holiest; now you're bound to it.

Which also means that I'd disagree with your implication that Isildur somehow tricked the men of the White Mountains into invoking Eru. Not quite in the spirit of the books if you ask me. I would assume that they too believed in Eru, they knew what they were saying, but they thought they could get away with it.

[Glorelendil]

Again, Arthadan, your interpretation is perfectly valid. It's just not the only valid interpretation.

[Rich H]

Perhaps only a tangential point but this discussion got me thinking as to how oathbreaking is handled in the TOR rules.

Interestingly the following can be found as a Misdeed in the original Adventurer's Book:

Breaking an oath, treachery 4 points

But is no longer referenced in the Revised Book.

[Arthadan]

It seems rather superficial to assume that the reason people wouldn't swear to Eru is that they don't know the Elvish name Eru (or Ilúvatar). If the Drúedain worship Eru but call him Zog, he would still listen, don't you think? It's not all in the name.

I agree with you. By knowing the name I meant knowing the existence of what the name means.
Sauron created a religion spreaded to the east and south with him as the only allmighty god, and we know there is name for Oromë used by the Northmen... i think not instructed peoples knew some of the Valar and worship them as gods, cignoring completely the existence of the one true god. The only ones who knew about Eru were the Eldar and those they taught. How would a Wose know of Eru (no matter the name)?

Which also means that I'd disagree with your implication that Isildur somehow tricked the men of the White Mountains into invoking Eru. Not quite in the spirit of the books if you ask me. I would assume that they too believed in Eru, they knew what they were saying, but they thought they could get away with it.

I didn't mean he tricked them! I meant he knew better than them the power of such an oath. The oathbreakers probably knew it was a solemn oath and everything, but had they known the power of it, they would have been complete fools indeed to break it. Maybe they didn't know, believe or made believe by agents of the Enemy it was that powerful.

[poosticks7]

Perhaps only a tangential point but this discussion got me thinking as to how oathbreaking is handled in the TOR rules.

Interestingly the following can be found as a Misdeed in the original Adventurer's Book:

Breaking an oath, treachery 4 points

But is no longer referenced in the Revised Book.

Perhaps a clue to some later rules on Oath Making/Breaking - or perhaps cut for space.

[Aeglosdir]

How would a Wose know of Eru (no matter the name)?

What has Ingeld to do with Christ?

Tolkien discussed the relation of Christian and heathen thought in Beowulf, and Shippey relates this discussion to Middle-earth -- 'it is impossible to think of Aragorn as irretrievably condemned for his ignorance of Christianity', &c. Aragorn was a pre-Christian, even within the framework of the legendarium, insofar as Tolkien quite literally had Christ enter it in the 'Athrabeth' (though he had second thoughts about that story: 'too like a parody of Christianity'). In any case it does seem that Tolkien had given thought to your question. How would uneducated people know of the One?

As for the Woses, there may be a simple answer: from Númenor. More generally, though, I think Tolkien may have meant for his 'heathen' peoples to know of Eru intuitively -- by listening to the Music in their hearts, as it were.

According to the Tale of Adanel even the first Men knew the 'Voice'. They had received no education from the Elves. Thus they did not have a name for the Voice (nor a clear understanding of it), but they still knew it and could listen to it (or not).

In a game this view opens up all kinds of possibilites.

The oathbreakers probably knew it was a solemn oath and everything, but had they known the power of it, they would have been complete fools indeed to break it. Maybe they didn't know, believe or made believe by agents of the Enemy it was that powerful.

I don't think it's that implausible. Perhaps they convinced themselves that they were not really breaking their oath: no real change in their designs, just in their means ... and so on. Or, you could have emissaries of Sauron telling them that there are stronger powers than Ilúvatar in the world -- a power that could even relieve them from death! Special price, only for you.

[Rich H]

Perhaps only a tangential point but this discussion got me thinking as to how oathbreaking is handled in the TOR rules.

Interestingly the following can be found as a Misdeed in the original Adventurer's Book:

Breaking an oath, treachery 4 points

But is no longer referenced in the Revised Book.

Perhaps a clue to some later rules on Oath Making/Breaking - or perhaps cut for space.

I doubt it was just cut for space as it's only one line but it could have just been a mistake in editing - I may drop Andrew a line to see if he can clarify. Could be that there are some Oath Making/Breaking rules in development though.

[Arthadan]

Tolkien discussed the relation of Christian and heathen thought in Beowulf, and Shippey relates this discussion to Middle-earth -- 'it is impossible to think of Aragorn as irretrievably condemned for his ignorance of Christianity', &c. Aragorn was a pre-Christian, even within the framework of the legendarium, insofar as Tolkien quite literally had Christ enter it in the 'Athrabeth' (though he had second thoughts about that story: 'too like a parody of Christianity'). In any case it does seem that Tolkien had given thought to your question. How would uneducated people know of the One?

As for the Woses, there may be a simple answer: from Númenor. More generally, though, I think Tolkien may have meant for his 'heathen' peoples to know of Eru intuitively -- by listening to the Music in their hearts, as it were.

According to the Tale of Adanel even the first Men knew the 'Voice'. They had received no education from the Elves. Thus they did not have a name for the Voice (nor a clear understanding of it), but they still knew it and could listen to it (or not).

Aragorn knew of Eru because he was raised by the Noldor of Rivendell. Tolkien may have concluded those knowing and respecting Eru should not be considered pagans in a Christian sense, but that's another topic.

Some Woses who went to Númenor may have heard of Eru, but I find hard to believe they will replace their own system of beliefs (and even harder that they would manage to replace the whole religion of their people). Let's say some of them may have converted to Númenor faith in the Second Age.

We agree about Eru presenting himself in the Awakening of Men as a Voice. As you pint out they have no clear understanding of it and they dis not come into the western lands until the Second Age. So, those peoples who have managed to keep any tradition related to the Voice of uncertain origin over thousands of years is difficult that they use it in powertful oaths. Moreover, if they invoke Eru without knowing who he is and the power he holds, would be fair from him to considered bound by such an oath?