[Glofin]

Well, this has all proved a very interesting read. (As did the re-read) However while the similarities between the Tuatha De Dannan and the elves are true, there is also allot more to the subject than Tolkien just throwing in some Celtic mythology into his books. Even in England you have old Celtic traditions that survive to this days, if festivals and folk tales and things of that nature. Some of the Celtic influence is due to the VERY complex history of the British Isles where you have Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Norman cultures mixing. England is really Anglo-Celtic, not Anglo-Saxon. But that is another story.

If I were to go into that I would be writing tomorrow morning. Yet I would like to set a few things straight about the Tuatha De Dannan, whether as a historical people or the gods of myth, as well as a few other errors with some Irish history if have read.

First of all with Tuatha De Dannan in particular, you have to realise that the legends we are reading now have come a very long way from the origins. It is known that the Christian monks who wrote them down would sometimes change certain details and have certain gods dying or this or that to promote Christianity. Also before the stories were written down, you have hundreds of years of embellishment being added to the stories. Then last of all, you have the translation itself. Really the translations are retellings and also colour the stories and interpret it in different ways due to the politics, social conditions, and limited knowledge of the subject at the time of the translations.

Many of the books today are still on the OUT DATED theories of the Victorian era. i.e. people trying to understand things, and sometimes making very wide stretches with certain facts. Much in the same way most people think the Vikings had horned helmets when they never really did.

It is a fact that there are many different translations about the both the origins and the relationships between the different Celtic peoples. Some of these are now being proved or disproved be recent DNA studies with Irish, Scots, Welsh, and people from Northern Spain and Gaul.

But it is pretty safe to say, that the Milesians, the Fir-bolg, and the Tuath de dannan, are different groups of Celts, migrating to Ireland at different times. The Formor, are also most likely a celtic people too. It is also important to note that there was no language difference between all these peoples, this is one reason why they are most likely all Celtic in origin.

But for the most part, the stuff about the Formor being a dark people, and being from Iberia, or the myths about the black Irish, or the darker pre-Celtic people in Ireland being consider fairies, or inferior in race, is all complete and utter bosh brought about by lack of facts in the Victorian period. It is mainly a way of explaining the existence of fairy-folk, monsters of legend and other odd bits and ends of Irish mythology, that has since been disproved.

For example there are no “Black Irish”. The “Black Irish” have the very same DNA (R1b Atlantic Modal Haplotype) as the Irish with Red, Brown or Blonde hair. The term Black is meant to describe hair colour.

One of there great mistakes in Celtic history is trying to separate the Proto-Celts, and the Celts. There ARE the same people. What we know as Celtic today did not just spring up out of the rocks. It had to develop. Nor once it developed did it sweep across Europe wiping out all that was already there. Celtic language and Celtic culture developed from the Proto-Celts. So really there is no difference, genetically they are the same people. This means that the Celts, did not wipe out the Proto-Celts, but actually the proto-Celts became what we know today as the Celts.


Still I am in no way un-thankful to the Victorian scholars and their interest in Celtic myths and culture. In fact it is mostly thanks to them that it still survives to this day unbroken from the Bronze Age.

The Milesians, the Fir-bolg, and the Tuatha De Dannan are all of the race of Nemed, which is related to the race of the Parthalonians which I think were mentioned earlier on this thread. This genealogy however is beyond saying one thing is right or wrong, since it goes as far back as the human race can remember. The best thing to too is to examine, ALL the different translations and try finding the most common version. Even in the myths there are different variations.




The Book of Invasions, especially its beginnings are very foggy. This is mainly because the original myths have been tampered with so as for all early races to be traced back to Noah of the Ark.

Now, in regard to the similarity between the Tuatha De Dannan and Tolkien’s elves:

Most of the similarities have already been discussed, however I will add a few of my own observations. First the underground strongholds of the elves, remind me much of the “fairy-mounds” of “Na Síthe” (Irish for the fairy-folk) which were supposedly their underground dwellings and strong holds.

Then there are the obvious similarities in appearance between the Tuatha de Dannan, and the elves, in particularly the Woodelves. This is also reflected in the language of the Woodelves, Sindarian. Still there are some shared characteristics between the Tuatha de Dannan and the Noldar as well.

However, I would not take the Celtic influence in Middle Earth too far. It is there, and strong in certain areas. Still it is among, the Norse, and very heavy Anglo-Saxon influences.

I believe that in truth, the make up of middle earth, is as complex as the make up of England. I seem to recall Tolkien once saying that one of his reasons for writing Middle Earth, was to give England a Mythology of it’s own.

The truth is that England is a beautiful land, that has belonged to many peoples, namely the Celts, (including the Welsh) the Norse and Anglo-Saxons, and last of all a ruling class of Normans. And it is this complex mingling of cultures that shows through in Middle Earth.

Glofin