Elros's Choice

[bombur]

I am not particularily wise person, but I’d prefer long life over short and mortality over immortality. I do not prefer mortality over immortality because of fear that years would become unbearable however. I think Elros got the best deal.

Strangely a worn out quotation suits splendidly this question and ESPECIALLY Tolkiens approach to it: ”It is better to burn out then to fade away.”

It is difficult to say whether mortality gives a passionate incentive, reserve of power so to say or whether immortality blocks it. When the kingdoms of eleves fall during the first age, the mighty eleven nobles fell back step by step and build ever new weaker and weaker walls to protect their havens and kingdoms... perhaps Elros even foresaw this going on to the end of the third age... perhaps not. What did the humans do as their kingdoms fell? Beren Fought as guerilla in the Ered Gorgoroth till all his comerades were dead and then went on fighting befriending animals. Men like Turin made somewhat similar choises in their paths. There is some kind of fundamental difference between a serie of mens fierce battles to the bitter end and falling of one hidden eleven kingdom after another, is there not? I have this sort of emotional impression from parts of Silmarillion, though the impression may not be substantiated.

Perhaps Elros thought he was rejecting stagnation and stability in immortality and was instead buying into something dynamic, growing, changeable, volatile, passionate...

Is it ”worthy” task and true ”greatness” after all to maintain for some seven millenia a half-secret haven known by slight minority of the worlds living creatures, gathering wisdom endless, coming out of this sanctuary every once in a few millenia to take part in a great battle? Or is it possible to see as something more worthy role to have set to motion all the histories of Numenor, Gondor, Arnor, Arthedain, Cardolan, Umbar, etc. with all their numerous deeds, battles, lifes... good and evil?

Janne Harju