Was feanor evil?

[Mhaedros]

Cortez wouldnt have burned the ships if he had 2000 men waiting for him in spain. JAL or MBA, please close this thread

[KnightsTemplar]

Tolkien took that from Hernan Cortes, who also burned his ships upon landing in Mexico, so as to encourage his men to fight harder and achieve what they set out to accomplish. That entire scene with Feanor was based right out of real history. Except Cortes wasn't a dick, and he succeeded in obtaining all that he desired.

IIRC the ships are given to him- he could do whatever he want to do with them.
But the ships of Feanor wasn't his- he just took them away.
This is literally plunder.

Except this.

[RTW Fan]

Tolkien took that from Hernan Cortes, who also burned his ships upon landing in Mexico, so as to encourage his men to fight harder and achieve what they set out to accomplish. That entire scene with Feanor was based right out of real history. Except Cortes wasn't a dick, and he succeeded in obtaining all that he desired.

Yeah, and the moslem that conquered Spain burned ships as well. As well as someone in Celtic myths who I cannot for the life of me remember.

FWIW It is not being a troll to disagree.

I stick by what I have written that Feanor was considerably less evil than the Teleri who were willing to kill other elves to protect their ships. They knew Feanor's character, oath and vendetta, and they begrudged him the opportunity to fulfil the retrieval of something of value, when they were equally willing to kill for something that they argued that they valued equally. (But as was shown by their failure to follow Feanor, they clearly did not value)

Edit: and what is the obsession with closing the thread? If you are not interested in the argument, than do not argue...

[smoesville]

Yeah, and the moslem that conquered Spain burned ships as well. As well as someone in Celtic myths who I cannot for the life of me remember.

FWIW It is not being a troll to disagree.

I stick by what I have written that Feanor was considerably less evil than the Teleri who were willing to kill other elves to protect their ships. They knew Feanor's character, oath and vendetta, and they begrudged him the opportunity to fulfil the retrieval of something of value, when they were equally willing to kill for something that they argued that they valued equally. (But as was shown by their failure to follow Feanor, they clearly did not value)

Edit: and what is the obsession with closing the thread? If you are not interested in the argument, than do not argue...

In my reading of the Sil i got the impression the Teleri didn't try to kill the Noldor but tried to remove them from the ships at which point Feanor killed one of them and it escalated from that.

[RTW Fan]

@ KnightsT'
Now lets be carefull to put RTW's point blanc illogical code of loyalty as out starting point to judge what went on.
If an usurper is the person standing up against a in hierarchy higher positioned persons ill decisions - then that "usurper" is rather a paragorn and a hero. An usurper is one who take the power in an unlawfull way - though first we have to know that laws to take into account.

The reality is that we can not be entirely sure of the laws that Tolkien set out for the eldar. However, it is clear that what and how Fingolfin spoke before the council was out of line according to how he was ought to have set forth his opinion. This can be deduced both from Feanor's reaction and the fact that he felt compelled to say that he would follow Feanor.

Finarfin, whom by RTW logic should be be called an usurper, is not such one.
A persons only and highest loyality is not blind loyalty and, if the world maintain any etichs, should not be it so. The laws from which one draws legitimacy are after all multiple.
Otherwise any resistence against a, say mad bloody tyrant, should be deemed wrong just because the hierarchy wont allow it.

Feanor was not a tyrant.

Finarfin leaves, for that you may call him a traitor but not an usurper. And people follow him based upon the same reasons as Finarfins. You may call them traitors but that do not make Finarfin a usurper. And we are never told Finarfin wants power (another key qualification to be an usurper) but is "set to rule".

Yet noone was calling Finarfin a usurper, they were calling Fingolfin a usurper, as well as by blood right, Finarfin had the right to rule in Tuna.

Either the people or the Valar or both has spoken, two autohrities higher than hierechy-cunducts, and thats not to usurp. Noldors custom is is proven to have multiple kings when people and royal lords are spread apart - in Beleriand under Fingolfin at least Finrod and Turgon were named kings under the Highking.
So, unless if Fëanor came back demanding the rule and Finarfin resisted, there's no stealing of power as no kings power is exercised and thus no authority stolen.

See this is where we differ, I feel that Finarfin did steal power, but that does not make him a usurper.

But in Fingolfins case, if he would turned back to Valinor it would been in direct line with what his king wanted - no usurptation but loyal, bit of a Catch-22 if he's to be accused to be an usurper if going back
As the case is academical we can assume Fingolfin if forgiven also would be "set to rule", thus not usurper till Fëanor decleared right to rule the ones left in Aman directly.

But Fingolfin had already presented himself as a usurper having led his own mission. If he did indeed not want to be known as a usurper, he would have refused Maedhros' offer once he got to Beleriand.

[KnightsTemplar]

Yet noone was calling Finarfin a usurper, they were calling Fingolfin a usurper, as well as by blood right, Finarfin had the right to rule in Tuna.

See this is where we differ, I feel that Finarfin did steal power, but that does not make him a usurper.

But Fingolfin had already presented himself as a usurper having led his own mission. If he did indeed not want to be known as a usurper, he would have refused Maedhros' offer once he got to Beleriand.

All that was left, of the royal blood of Noldor, was Finarfin.
How can you 'steal' from nothing?
He's more like a subsitute or pinchhit more than anything.

In the 'order of precedence', Fingolfin was higher than Meadhros in any way.
Consider the real life example, it's rightful to do so.
He's a direct descendent, not bastard or anything. More rightful than anything.

[smoesville]

In the 'order of precedence', Fingolfin was higher than Meadhros in any way.
Consider the real life example, it's rightful to do so.
He's a direct descendent, not bastard or anything. More rightful than anything.

The Eldar seem to use primogenitor as a way of picking successors so in that way Fingolfin, half brother to the king, is not a better claimant than any of the sons of Feanor or even their children. By primogenitor the claim of the brother of the king would only become king if the children of the king are deceased or under age or as happened they give up their own claim.

[Ngugi]

To disagree is certainly not trolling, that argument was instead based upon a chain of logic from your part where theres so rigid 'law's that Fingolfin was to usurp when speaking before and about Fëanor but ignoring that Fëanor tried to make the people following him instead of the king.*

We are not told teleri intended to kill anybody (they could likely swim as Tolkien do not state that anybody drowned), nor that teleri begun to kill anybody. I hope you least will be clear about that such an interpretation is not based upon what Tolkien wrote. It may just as well been [and honestly more likely was ,considering their former conduct + Valars judgement] Fëanors host that draw swords first ready to kill. It is very wrong to onesided accuse teleri, just as unwarranted as accursing noldor one-sided.

When [Fëanor] judged that his strength was enough, he went to the Haven of the Swans and began to man the ships that were anchored there and to take them away by force. But the Teleri withstood him, and cast many of the Noldor into the sea. Then swords were drawn, and a bitter fight was fought upon the ships, and about the lamplit quays and piers of the Haven, and even upon the great arch of its gate. -SIlmarillion

Is worth measured in how likely you want to kill somebody for it? Perhaps life is valued higher - thus they did not want to battle, thus they did not follow, thus its even more likely they did not begun mortal combat at the harbour.
Considering Olwë he did the best thing a true friend could do;

'We renounce no friendship. But it may be the part of a friend to rebuke a friend's folly.'

The reality is that we can not be entirely sure of the laws that Tolkien set out for the eldar. However, it is clear that what and how Fingolfin spoke before the council was out of line according to how he was ought to have set forth his opinion. This can be deduced both from Feanor's reaction and the fact that he felt compelled to say that he would follow Feanor.

*So its to usurp the power from the second in command to be loyal and tell the first on that the second one is usurping power [trying to lead the people away from Aman under his leadership as pointed out in post ]. Your priorities when it comes to breach of conduct is very, very confusing.

Feanor was not a tyrant.

No, because he was not king yet. Fëanor was an usurper: "For Fëanor now began openly to speak words of rebellion against the Valar, crying aloud that he would depart from Valinor back to the world without, and would deliver the Noldor from thraldom, if they would follow him."
He had no right to do that - unless if the people had the right to chose to follow him instead of their king, but then you cant accuse Fingolfin for people following him later on. Nor if we would conclude he wanted to take power (which yet is not proven in quotes) he would make something wrong - unless Fëanor did wrong too and Fingolfin then did the right thing to talk to his father the king.

Yet noone was calling Finarfin a usurper, they were calling Fingolfin a usurper, as well as by blood right, Finarfin had the right to rule in Tuna.

See this is where we differ, I feel that Finarfin did steal power, but that does not make him a usurper.

Please define why? Because Fëanor did not accuse him?
Beside the difference that Finarfin did not tell Finwë about Fëanors revolution he did just the same things as his older brother. The very same.

But Fingolfin had already presented himself as a usurper having led his own mission. If he did indeed not want to be known as a usurper, he would have refused Maedhros' offer once he got to Beleriand

No, it was Fëanors mission upon which he tagged along, inspired by Fëanors speach perhaps but most by duty to his people and sworn loyalty to his king- even when Fëanor left them he, once more, did not claim the crown nor made up his own new misson á la 'Screw this people, lets go south end leave Fëanor in the north'..
An usurper takes power without the right to. Just as Finarfin apperently had in Tuna Fingolfin had bloodrights when his brother died. You cant accuse him for taking power offered him after his brother is dead. How do you usrp a corpse? Only if he had tried to take it from Fëanor when he ruled - which he did not - or unjustly take it from the next rightfull heir - which was not the case since Mhaedros gave it willingly and is never stated to wanted the crown, then or later. No, Mhaedros claimed it to be the right thing to give Fingolfin power;

For Maedhros begged forgiveness for the desertion in Araman; and he waived his claim to kingship over all the Noldor, saying to Fingolfin: 'If there lay no grievance between us, lord, still the kingship would rightly come to you, the eldest here of the house of Finwë, and not the least wise.' -Silm

To take responsibility as the royal familys oldest memeber in ME or follow a then-applying tradition of inheritance due to age of is just as likely reason as power thirst, give the guy some slack and revaluate the text once more.

[TWWolfe]

Also, the Teleri were the least warlike of all the elves. their true passions were singing and sailing. They did not pursue because while they mourned the loss of thier ships, they also knew that to follow the Noldor would in essence bind themselves to the same doom, and it would start a cycle of elf killing elf.

Also, they didn't really have the means to pursue the Noldor anyway, given how Feanor took every one of thier ships.

[RTW Fan]

To disagree is certainly not trolling, that argument was instead based upon a chain of logic from your part where theres so rigid 'law's that Fingolfin was to usurp when speaking before and about Fëanor but ignoring that Fëanor tried to make the people following him instead of the king.*

We are not told teleri intended to kill anybody (they could likely swim as Tolkien do not state that anybody drowned), nor that teleri begun to kill anybody. I hope you least will be clear about that such an interpretation is not based upon what Tolkien wrote. It may just as well been [and honestly more likely was ,considering their former conduct + Valars judgement] Fëanors host that draw swords first ready to kill. It is very wrong to onesided accuse teleri, just as unwarranted as accursing noldor one-sided.
Is worth measured in how likely you want to kill somebody for it? Perhaps life is valued higher - thus they did not want to battle, thus they did not follow, thus its even more likely they did not begun mortal combat at the harbour.
Considering Olwë he did the best thing a true friend could do;




*So its to usurp the power from the second in command to be loyal and tell the first on that the second one is usurping power [trying to lead the people away from Aman under his leadership as pointed out in post ]. Your priorities when it comes to breach of conduct is very, very confusing.


No, because he was not king yet. Fëanor was an usurper: "For Fëanor now began openly to speak words of rebellion against the Valar, crying aloud that he would depart from Valinor back to the world without, and would deliver the Noldor from thraldom, if they would follow him."
He had no right to do that - unless if the people had the right to chose to follow him instead of their king, but then you cant accuse Fingolfin for people following him later on. Nor if we would conclude he wanted to take power (which yet is not proven in quotes) he would make something wrong - unless Fëanor did wrong too and Fingolfin then did the right thing to talk to his father the king.

Please define why? Because Fëanor did not accuse him?
Beside the difference that Finarfin did not tell Finwë about Fëanors revolution he did just the same things as his older brother. The very same.


No, it was Fëanors mission upon which he tagged along, inspired by Fëanors speach perhaps but most by duty to his people and sworn loyalty to his king- even when Fëanor left them he, once more, did not claim the crown nor made up his own new misson á la 'Screw this people, lets go south end leave Fëanor in the north'..
An usurper takes power without the right to. Just as Finarfin apperently had in Tuna Fingolfin had bloodrights when his brother died. You cant accuse him for taking power offered him after his brother is dead. How do you usrp a corpse? Only if he had tried to take it from Fëanor when he ruled - which he did not - or unjustly take it from the next rightfull heir - which was not the case since Mhaedros gave it willingly and is never stated to wanted the crown, then or later. No, Mhaedros claimed it to be the right thing to give Fingolfin power;
To take responsibility as the royal familys oldest memeber in ME or follow a then-applying tradition of inheritance due to age of is just as likely reason as power thirst, give the guy some slack and revaluate the text once more.

Feanor had special rights with Finwe on account of the fact that Finwe took a second wife. Finwe had broken his traditional bond with Feanor.

[TWWolfe]

You know, this thread was nice and settled, the question was answered. Why did you need to bump it?

[Ngugi]

Feanor had special rights with Finwe on account of the fact that Finwe took a second wife.

Quote please.

[TWWolfe]

And i doubt one of those special rights is "Allowed to speak treason with impunity"

[RTW Fan]

Quote please.

I wish I had texts, and most of my knowledge comes from books I read many years ago, so sorry Ngugi, I probably cannot quote with the same knowledge as you However I do not mind be corrected by a quote, and everything that I write, I write from the sincerity of memory and interpretation.

If memory serves me correct, Feanor's mother Miriel could not be bothered living once Feanor was fully grown and laid down, died and her spirit went to Mandos. This annoyed the Valar, because they could no longer call it the "undying lands" or something like that, and they commanded her to return, but she obstinately refused. And they deduced that somehow the fabric of Melkor had entered their realm but Ulmo disagreed, just calling her soft or something like that.

And so the Valar gave Finwe a choice, wait for Miriel to desire to return, which may take all eternity, or to take a new wife and condemn Miriel to never be allowed to return. He took a new wife. This act, unprecedented, still provokes debate in online forums over whether it was legitimate.

Either way, Finwe's decision left Feanor permanently without a mother... and from it is obviously implied that Feanor had special rights, and was not bound within the hierachy in the same way that the others were, because he did not reap one of the fundamental rights of having a mother. And the totality of this was caused by Finwe's decision to take another wife.

Therefore, unlike Fingolfin, he had experienced death, which the absence of such was implicitly part of the covenant of the "undying lands".

[MachoKing]

Except Cortes wasn't a dick

He wasnt? Soooooo the slaughtering of millions in the name of exploration and civilization is something a nice guy does?

[TWWolfe]

He wasnt? Soooooo the slaughtering of millions in the name of exploration and civilization is something a nice guy does?

No, the Spanish as a whole did that. Cortes himself encouraged his people to inter-mingle with the natives, treated them fairly, and he was actually a decent ruler, as far as conquerors go.

[Elfhelm]

Quotes from the Silmarillion



Miriel was the name of Feanors mother who was called Serinde because of her surpassing skill in weaving and needlework for her hands were more skilled to fineness than any other hands even among the Noldor.

In bearing her son Miriel was consumed in spirit and body; and after his birth she yearned for release from the labour of living.When she had named him,she said to Finwe: 'Never again shall I bear child;for strength that would have nourished the life of many has gone forth into Feanor.'

Her last known words to Finwe were 'it is indeed unhappy, and I would weep iff I were not so weary.But hold me blameless in this, and in all that may come after.'
She went then to the gardens of Lorien and lay down to sleep but tho she seemed to sleep,her spirit left her body and passed in silence to the halls of Mandos.

It goes on to say more on Feanors feelings on his fathers remarraige, The wedding of his father was not pleasing to Feanor; from the start he had no great love for Indis,nor to Fingolfin and Finarfin,her sons.He lived apart from them,exploring the land of Aman,or busying himself with the knowledge and crafts in which he delighted.

In those unhappy times things which came to pass,and in which Feanor was the leader,many saw the effect of this breach in the house of Finwe,judging that iff Finwe had endured his loss and been content with the fathering of his mighty son, the course of Feanor would have been otherwise,and great 'evil' might have been prevented;for the sorrow of the house of Finwe is graven in the memory of the Noldorin elves.
But the children of Indis were great and glorious,and their children also;and had they not lived the history of the Eldar would have been much deminished.

[RTW Fan]

Quotes from the Silmarillion



Miriel was the name of Feanors mother who was called Serinde because of her surpassing skill in weaving and needlework for her hands were more skilled to fineness than any other hands even among the Noldor.

In bearing her son Miriel was consumed in spirit and body; and after his birth she yearned for release from the labour of living.When she had named him,she said to Finwe: 'Never again shall I bear child;for strength that would have nourished the life of many has gone forth into Feanor.'

Her last known words to Finwe were 'it is indeed unhappy, and I would weep iff I were not so weary.But hold me blameless in this, and in all that may come after.'
She went then to the gardens of Lorien and lay down to sleep but tho she seemed to sleep,her spirit left her body and passed in silence to the halls of Mandos.

It goes on to say more on Feanors feelings on his fathers remarraige, The wedding of his father was not pleasing to Feanor; from the start he had no great love for Indis,nor to Fingolfin and Finarfin,her sons.He lived apart from them,exploring the land of Aman,or busying himself with the knowledge and crafts in which he delighted.

In those unhappy times things which came to pass,and in which Feanor was the leader,many saw the effect of this breach in the house of Finwe,judging that iff Finwe had endured his loss and been content with the fathering of his mighty son, the course of Feanor would have been otherwise,and great 'evil' might have been prevented;for the sorrow of the house of Finwe is graven in the memory of the Noldorin elves.
But the children of Indis were great and glorious,and their children also;and had they not lived the history of the Eldar would have been much deminished.

No I am relating text from HOME.

Unfortunately, Finwë's petition proved very difficult to aid, because the Valar knew that it was against the design of Eru for the Elves to marry more than once.

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Statu...nwë_and_Míriel

[Rex331]

I don't mean to reignite an argument gents, but since Feanor and the story of his family are my favorite part of JRRT's Lore I want to at least post a few lines on how I feel. I don't believe Feanor was evil. He was the best at what he did and he knew it. This pride was his undoing and the cause of the tragic events that followed Melkor's meddling and thievery. In the beginning Feanor was doing what he thought was right because he could. If the Valar would not do their appointed duty then Feanor would. The farther along the quest took him, to further lengths would he go to accomplish it. In the end it destroyed him and his family.

[TWWolfe]

We've kinda come to the agreement that while Feanor himself was not evil, many of the deeds he committed were. The arguements now seem to be mostly whether he was a bad leader or not (he was).