Missing Moirae?

[AbercrombieOfRohan]

I have been researching Greek mythology of late, especially the use of fate among the ancients. From my limited research it also seems that the vast majority of deities that control fate are women. In Greek mythology they had the Moirae, the three fates who controlled everyone's destiny, including the Gods and Moira the supreme controller of fate. Also in Slavic mythology, they had the Rodyanitse, deities very similar in purpose and stature to the Moirae. But it seems that every culture had it's own way of dealing with the phenomenon of fate.

So this made me think back to Tolkien (of course), and as far as I can tell the only sort of deity who controls fate is Namo who "forgets nothing; and he knows all things that shall be, save only those that lie in the freedom of Iluvatar." (Silmarillion) But he isn't a woman, and I can't for the life of me think of any time in Tolkien that he uses a woman to supervise fate, with the possible exception of Luthien. Can you help me?

Also, since that is a very limited topic of discussion, do you think Tolkien believed in fate? As a scholar in mythology, do you think they (ancients such as Homer and Virgil) and classic literature influenced this absence of Lady Luck?

Mods, I wasn't sure whether this ought to go into the Novices and Newcomers forum or the books, so I took a stab in the dark. Please move it if necessary.

[Saurreg]

Yes. There is a personification of "Fate"

I quote from the Valaquenta:

Vairë the Weaver is his (Námo) spouse, who weaves all things that have ever been in Time into her storied webs, and the halls of Mandos that ever widen as the ages passed are clothed with them.

"... ever been.." here is important because it holds in it an attribute that the events have occurred already and that the divine weaver was but a scribe of history; a compiler of past events. So to take the words literally at face value, one can argue that fair Vairë was not the personifcation of fate.

I enjoy reading up on world mythology and through the course of my readings I have never came across a western nor oriental personifcation of fate that dealt its trade in an ad-hoc, come-at-the-moment, made-fresh-to-order manner. If these ancient mythologies would have you believe - the fate of the world and its inhabitants have been established eons ago even before the start of time. Nothing is given to chance nor opportunity; everything has been planned. And because these "fates" are not just mere deities but a representation of the basic elements of life and thought , they are beyond the reckoning of chronology. And Since they see all, they know all and they planned all outside the scope of time, ...ever been... is perhaps what they see in all events. To the personified fate, the future was already pre-ordained so long ago that to her, it had already happened.

This is my view of Tolkien's Vairë when he wrote of her being the weaver of stories that have ever being. Her closest real-life counterparts would have been the Norse Norns whom were also personified as elderly weavers whose work spanned beyond time. Like my interpretation of Vairë, they saw events in a different light from the Gods or men; "It has already happened," said one of them to Odin "look for it yourself." And our great Norse God would rummage through the bundles of woven fabric looking for signs from the future, bewildered by those cryptic words.

No. There is no personification of fate

This point of view is taken from the analysis of events in Tolkien's Silmarillion. In particular it would take into view the inability of the Valars to control or forsee events that would shape Middle Earth and themselves.

The first event would have been the mass asunder of the elves that led to the creation of the high elven caste, the birth and development of Feanor, the self-imposed exodus from paradise and kin-slaying, and ultimately the return of the enlightened firstborn to Middle Earth that would shape it's future; especially that of men. As of now it is still debatable whether or not the Valars did the right thing by giving in to fuzzy emotions and bringing a whole lot of huggable beautiful people to Valinor simply because the latters looked good. Vanity that would result in lamentation and grief; and none, NONE of the Valars ever spoke against it or gave fair counsel.

The second event would be the releasing of Melkor from bondage and the subsequent darkening of Valinor. Had the Valars or even one of them been the arbiter of fate, why did they not see it coming? Enough said.

And lastly, the Akallabêth; the inability of the Valar to comprehend the consequences of the Numenoreans' conquest for paradise and the subsequent need for the Higher Power to intervene. Does this not show the inability of the Valar to know what to do in the event of an occurrance?

In all three events, the Valars have shown themselves to be short-sighted, unable to forsee events of immense magnitude of consequence and the inability to know what to do. In summary, they were not in control of the fate of Middle Earth nor those of themselves and are hence not personifications of "fate"

Yes and no. Depends.

Oxford dictionary defines fate as:

the development of events outside a person’s control, regarded as predetermined by a supernatural power.

Say if an ant was to crawl pass my keyboard now and I so happen to notice, I can either be merciful and let it pass or I can simply press a finger on it and snuff the life out of said insect. Am I not the arbiter of the ant's fate? And to this insect, is my action not beyond comprehension? Not something that can be understood easily? Supernatural?

Similarly on the same scale , was the enigmatic Tom Bombadil not the one who controlled the Hobbits fates as they crossed the barrows? As was Galadriel when she decided to let Eorl and his horsemen pass her domain unmolested (I should think she could easily crush them if she wanted to)? Both said characters worked mysteriously and to the hobbits and the horsemen, they were beyond natural. And I should suspect that even if the said parties resisted these two "fates", their actions would have been furtile given the immense power both entities wielded.

By taking this third point of view we can say that there are the "fates" in Tolkien's work but not of the normal omnipotence associated with powers beyond as in common folklore or mythology.

Implied matriarchy/feminine dominance in Tolkien's work

On the contrary AbercrombieOfRohan, I can give many examples of said topic that greatly influences the fate of many on middle earth.

Let's start with Varda - the maker of the stars, the sun and the moon. Manwë is the most powerful, so stated the Valarquenta and hence ruler of Arda and leader of the Valars and Maiars. Great indeed is the power of the lord of wind and air, but was it not the light of Varda that drove great fear into both Morgorth and his hordes? Was not the sun the bane of all dark creatures? And who was the one who gave Arien the vessel of blinding light and heat? Was it not Varda? And Arien, a female Maia - was she not slightly feared by Morgoth himself? And what of the Vial of Galadriel and the almost hypnotic chant calling for Elbereth's aide during frodo's darkest? Why not the Talisman of Manwë or the Medallion of Oromë?

Here we see good a good example whereby the powers wielded by female characters were indeed greater than their male counterparts as the reader could read for himself - and yet we are told that no, the 'weaker" males are more powerful. They are lords. Rubbish!

Down the lesser scale we go, and out pops up Melian the All Powerful and Luthien. Both possessed powers beyond any contemporary male counterpart on Middle Earth and the passages explicitly tell us so. The Girdle of Melian was impenetrable even to Morgoth himself and Luthien possessed great magical arts of enchantment and transformation. No other male character had such powers in their disposal.

And lastly we have Galadriel whom I suspected was Tolkien's idea of the all- powerful woman. She was made to be physically as tall as the tallest male elves and in the books, she seemed to possess even greater power than any other male elves around. In short she made the other male elves look like wusses with her immense power.

So I don't really have much problem finding examples of "feminine" fates in the books.

[AbercrombieOfRohan]

Implied matriarchy/feminine dominance in Tolkien's work

On the contrary AbercrombieOfRohan I can give many examples of said topic that greatly influences the fate of many on middle earth.

I don't disagree, in fact I heartily agree, but what I'm saying is; Is that sort of fate the same fate as the Three Fates of Greek Mythology? They actually spun fate. In Edith Hamilton's Mythology she claims that the Three Fates were the only thing that Zeus feared, because he didn't have the power to undo it. The sort of fate that Galadriel had was power of choice and reason, she didn't kill Eorl because she knew him to be useful to her cause. I don't think it was an act of divinity, "I can't kill him because it's not his time to die" sort of thing. But may be it was, is that how you see it?

[Saurreg]

Originally Posted by AbercrombieOfRohan

I don't disagree, in fact I heartily agree, but what I'm saying is; Is that sort of fate the same fate as the Three Fates of Greek Mythology? They actually spun fate. In Edith Hamilton's Mythology she claims that the Three Fates were the only thing that Zeus feared, because he didn't have the power to undo it. The sort of fate that Galadriel had was power of choice and reason, she didn't kill Eorl because she knew him to be useful to her cause. I don't think it was an act of divinity, "I can't kill him because it's not his time to die" sort of thing. But may be it was, is that how you see it?

As long as she controlled his future and acted in an irresistable way, yes.