Valar / Greek and Roman gods

[The Might]

Yes, your eyes aren't playing any tricks on you I have indeed started a new topic after centuries of inactivity and lurking around. I've been so busy I simply had no time to post anything and I just looked in here from time to time. But now I had an idea in my head and I just had to post it here on the Downs.

I wanted to start a discussion about the differences and the similarities between the Valar and the Greek and Roman gods and by this I mean the most important gods, 12 in number for the ancients if I remember well. It's easy to notice stuff like Aule and Hefaistos, but what's more to this whole business?

Also, I will admit that I have not checked if any such topic exists, so in case there is already is something like this out there a link would be nice and then you can close the thread.

Yours,
Might

[Morthoron]

Well, right off the bat the Valar are much more detached from humanity, aren't they? They don't exhibit neither the same range of emotions, nor entangle themselves in mortals' everyday life as the Greek pantheon did. Aside from Nienna's weeping and the noted tempers of Tulkas and Orome, there just aint much emotion in that colorless bunch (no wonder none of them had children -- they couldn't get stirred up enough to even try).

Of course there are similarities from one pantheon to the next, the general studies/abilities of each Valar (Manwe the sky, Mandos of Hades, Aule of earth, Ulmo the sea, etc.) matches the hierarchical equivalents of the Greeks in form if not direct comparison; however, the Greek pantheon were more human in their foibles, jealousies, loves, anguish, rages, etc., than the lofty Valar.

Overall, I think I'd rather party with the Greeks than the Valar.

[Lindale]

You couldn't trust the Greek gods. One minute they'll favor you, the next they won't. Because all of a sudden they became insanely jealous or heard a prayer from someone they favor more. The Valar is "higher" than that I suppose. They are, erm, more civilized.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

In earlier versions (BoLT etc.) the Valar were more emotional, more human, so to speak. Tolkien's original idea was for them to have children; he changed that in later versions. So perhaps his first concept was closer to Greek/Roman gods; they evolved to more angelic beings as the legendarium grew.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I think I can only support what's been said here this far - well, maybe except for Morthoron's choice with whom to party (and I would also vehemently protest against "colorless bunch", at least when it comes to Ulmo, but that's another topic ), because indeed, as Lindale mentioned, there was this problem with the Greek gods that they were too "chaotic", what more, they were so prone to the negative emotions and stuff, that they could easily choose to pick up a fight with you or curse you if you said something they didn't approve, and if three goddesses came to you to ask which of them you consider the most beautiful, you'd better run for it.

When speaking of the early drafts Esty mentioned, I think the Valar stood closer to those at the very beginning of their existence and in their early days in Arda, in the sense that they were still learning a lot - I am thinking now about their failures with Melkor (letting him run free in Aman), the gigantic battle before when Utumno was destroyed - they themselves considered it a mistake on their part, or of course Aulë's attempt with the Dwarves (he definitely had something to learn in that event, which he then did), and we could find many more. The Valar became detached only later, slowly, more and more detached from the Middle-Earth as the events were getting closer to the Elves' fading and with the coming of the dominion of Men. So, to be true towards them, they were not that much detached in the sense that they would not care about M-E: they did care, but it just wasn't that much of their business, especially when it came to the Children, because the Children were not in their "domains" (unlike water, plants, whatever), but they were Ilúvatar's Children (and you can see that when you read the Sil, I think there's something like the Valar thinking about how much they should interfere when the Children of Ilúvatar awakened). And I think it goes further with Men than with Elves, who, after all, could come - and did come - to Aman, and remained in Arda (the realm of Valar, at least at the beginning), but Men's ultimate fate was different and had nothing to do with Valar at all.

Speaking of fate (and getting back to comparing Valar and the Greek gods), you can also see that Valar did not influence people's individual fates as much as the Greek gods did (except for Melkor in the tale of Húrin and his children, for example) - the Greek gods were supposed to have pretty much direct influence over every person's fate. There's nothing like that with Valar, once again I believe for the reason I stated in the paragraph above.

So, overall I would say the strongest similarity would be these "portfolios", sky, sea, nature, whatever; and I think the Greek gods and Valar are similar to an unattentive observer "on first sight", but when one looks deeper, the images seem to part a lot.

[Morthoron]

Pffft! Nonsense! Who wouldn't rather party with Dionysus than Nienna? All that weeping and carrying on. And Tulkas? No thanks, bud, no wrestling for me today. I have no interest being in the grip of a big sweaty Vala.

Seriously though, it must be stated that the Greek pantheon were, in fact, gods, and the Valar were not, but rather emissaries of Eru, the one god; therefore, their capacities and limitations were completely different, even if they shared many of the same natural attributes/affinities. It is a compliment to Tolkien, however, that his synthesis of biblical and classical creation stories produced a genesis far more poetic in its grandeur than the material he based it on. In this case, the end product is greater than the sum of its parts.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Overall, I think I'd rather party with the Greeks than the Valar.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with you on this one, Morthoron. The Greek gods where what I call modern day college students (with no offense intended for you college students). Unlike the Valar the seven Greek gods inherited the earth from their parents, Cronus and Mother Earth, overthrowing both of them and living off of their wealth as you might say. The Greek gods complained, argued, plotted, fought, and begrudged each other. In fact their was very little harmony or authority at all with them, other than the most powerful of them governs all (even that didn't work sometimes). So in short the Greek gods are a bunch of siblings who where saved from death by their mother only to dishonor her, and their father, living off of their parents blessings, governing through fear, and gave some really cool parties. Hephestus is excluded from all this, I like him!

The Valar on the other hand had a sense of morality, order, knew the difference between right and wrong and generally had good moods. Just look at the difference between Tulkas and Ares, there's almost no similarity in their moods. Another main difference is the Valar's respect of life, they genuinely cared for the peoples of Arda, unlike the Greek gods who used the humans as pawns for amusement or to get pleasure from.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Groin Redbeard

I'm afraid I'm going to have to side with you on this one, Morthoron.

No need to be afraid, Mr. Redbeard, I don't bite...much.

Come on over later. Thor, Loki and the Aesir are coming to the barbeque, and we're going to drink mead until we vomit (or pass out, whichever comes first). I just hope Odin doesn't do magic tricks with his one eye again (it's very disconcerting to see that cerulean orb floating in a glass of ale).

[wispeight]

[QUOTE=Morthoron;566226]No need to be afraid, Mr. Redbeard, I don't bite...much.

Did you just trope his rhetoric?

I like the level upon which the gods were discussed on this thread. It was interesting.

Since I saw that Loki was included, I want to try and remember an opinion which was once put before me in regard to Loki falling out of favor with the other gods. He was often relied upon to get things done to the benefit of this or that god. While concurrently, being often reviled as a distasteful necessary evil. In turn, Loki did not agree with the self proclaimed perfection that the gods supposedly possessed with Baldr epitomizing it. I will not opine on what Loki or myself personally think about the attaining of perfection. I've read what opinion of perfection he supposedly had, and I have developed my own.

Loki supposedly killed Baldr and I feel that this might be mere assertion and it could quite possibly have been another god, jealous of the esteem Baldr enjoyed from so many deities.

I've read something indicating that Loki might pertain to a position not so distant in height above mind. That part of mind that can closely participate with matter, a more direct connect.

Maybe there is a moral somewhere among my above ramblings. This theme might point to the physical necessity of doing, and dammit! I just ain't perfect about it! and there is the problem, for it is intrinsic within us - whether we are aware of it or not- to always be striving toward the pinnacle of pefection. Deny it all you want as many as who might. OM

[Alfirin]

Actually, in at least some versions of the legends I've heard, Loki was only a sort of "honorary" Aesier. He was by birth, a Joton (one of the bad giant/troll races) who impressed Odin so much with his shapeshifing ability that Odin brough him to Asgard and made him his blood brother. Most of the other gods hated Loki, but they coulnt do anything to him since he had Odin's blood in him now. they also gave him some credit for using his shapeshifting abilites to turn himself into a mare and draw the gant stomasons horse off before the stonemason could make good on his promise to wall all of Asgard in one day, thereby simultaneously saving the Aesier from losing Freya (and by extension access to the golden apples of immortality and youth) and simultaneously providing Odin with Slephnir his hyperfast eight legged steed. As to Baldur both points are tecnically correct. It was Loki who found out Baldur's one weakness (mistletoe) made the arrow out of it and tricked someone into shooting it. but it was tecnically another God who took the shot. But there is no question that Loki has a dark side, I mean look at who his Children were, Hel (queen of the underword), The Midgard Serpent, and Fenrir who ultimately bit off Tyr's hand (shades of Charcaroth and Beren?) Also wasnt he the god supposed to pilot the boat of dead men's fingernails during Ragnarok? thats enough for now.