Were all the Sons of Feanor really that bad?

[Maedhros_the_Tall]

I was thinking, after reading something else in another thread, about the sons of feanor, and it got me to thinking. Yes, the brothers did some rather naughty things, but were they necessarily all that bad, or was it just, mainly, Celegorm, Caranthir and Curufin? Maedhros is obviously the leader, but he often regrets the deeds of the brothers, or is the one to make the compromises. Maglor never struck me as being evil at all, and we hear very little of Amrod and Amras. So, the question I put is do you think they were truly evil, or was it mainly Celegorm, Caranthir and Curufin? Or, was it the oath? Or perhaps even a mixture of both!

[Nazgûl-king]

I don't really think the sons of Fëanor were really that evil, I think it was more the oath that was evil then them. I think in a certain sense the oath was kind of like the curse Morgoth put on Húrin and his family, except that while the curse seems to have turned deads to evil, the oath drove the sons of Fëanor to do the evil deeds.

[Macalaure]

None was evil. They did some rather evil things, enough to no longer make them able to touch a Silmaril, but that's not the same as being really evil. Without the Sons of Feanor, no Siege of Angband (or rather, a much weaker one) and no Union of Maedhros, although their deeds were also the cause for the Union's failure, so there's some good to outweigh their evil to a little extent, too.

But all of them were part of each Kinslaying (well, all who were alive at the respective point), so you can make no argument to spare any of his guilt

Maedhros is less guilty because he didn't take part in the Burning of the Ships. He receives most of the glory for the positive deeds of the sons, because he commanded them. He was also, on the side of his House, responsible for the reconciliation between the Noldor. But he also effectively commanded the second two Kinslayings. He regretted the things done to Dior's sons.

Most of the time Maglor is of like mind with Maedhros. Only at the very end he becomes more moderate and the one most easy to empathize with. His deeds were not less evil than Maedhros' just because he didn't command them.

Counting on their guilt, Celegorm and Curufin additionally have the whole Nargothrond thing against them, and Celegorm had a central part in the attack on Doriath.

Caranthir is often grouped with the other two Cs, sometimes unjustly. The attitude he displays towards Angrod doesn't make him likeable, and we are not told of any regret, but in the end, he did not commit any more evil than Maglor.

Originally Posted by Maedhros

Or, was it the oath?

Without the oath, I very highly doubt any of them would have become any evil. Each had their personal strength and weaknesses of character, of course, but so did their cousins, for example. An interesting topic to discuss and speculate maybe: how would Fingolfin's and Finarfin's sons and daughters have acted if they had somehow been made to swear the oath?


I feel like linking to a rather old thread of mine, which touches the subject:

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=12814


Nice thread, and welcome to the Downs, Maedhros.

[Maedhros_the_Tall]

I must take my hat off to an excellent answer, and the author of a better thread! Also, thanks for the welcome : )

Good idea Macalaure, then I put it to you, how do YOU think Fingolfin's and Finarfin's sons and daughters would have acted if they had also sworn Feanor's oath?

[TeleriFan]

No imo not all were bad, i kinda warmed up to Maedhos and Maglor a bit because they were not as harsh as the others...and they took care of ELrond and Eloros if i remember correctly. The only ones i really couldnt stand was Curufin, Celegom and Caranthir.

[skip spence]

Credit should go to Tolkien for not depicting these guys in an entirely bad light. All of them have their redeeming moments within the tales, and none of them were "evil".

I don't belive evil was a word Tolkien used much (or at at all) in his books, and not by accident. Evil is an absolute concept. In order to be evil, one must clearly recognise Good and reject it. The problem is that not even the Valar can do this with absolute certainty, and Feanor much less so. Most of us do our best to be good, but it isn't easy, and some do more than others. Feanor and his sons certainly made some poor decisions, but I belive they all did what they though they had to do. Some, like Maglor and Maedros, were better than others, but none of them were all bad, far from it.

Instead of evil, which is an unsuitable word, we should speak about pride and greed. These are ever the deadliest sins in Arda, and the downfall of the Feanorians together with many others.

[Thinlómien]

No, none of them was evil. Macalaure pretty much said it all, but there remains one thing I'd like to say. There was gentleness and pity even in Caranthir, when he rode to offer aid to Haleth's people when he heard of their sorrows and valiant fight. But Haleth and her people proudly ignored this. (Ooh, this is one of my favourite scenes in the whole Sil. So very powerful.)

[Elmo]

I thought Haleth was a stupid old croan that caused her people a lot of unnecessary hardship...but that's a different topic

[Maedhros_the_Tall]

Originally Posted by Elmo

I thought Haleth was a stupid old croan that caused her people a lot of unnecessary hardship...but that's a different topic

Ha, yeah I've always thought that! Especially when she moves them for the second time!!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

None was evil. They did some rather evil things, enough to no longer make them able to touch a Silmaril, but that's not the same as being really evil. Without the Sons of Feanor, no Siege of Angband (or rather, a much weaker one) and no Union of Maedhros, although their deeds were also the cause for the Union's failure, so there's some good to outweigh their evil to a little extent, too.

Evil? Perhaps, perhaps not. Despicable, craven, haughty, savage? Those are the descriptions I would lay on their heads. If one eliminates the Oath of Feanor as an excuse, there are some evil deeds that cannot be explained away, save that these were some malignant elves.

Of the sons of Feanor, Celegorm seems the most malevolent. In addition to being involved in two separate Kinslayings, he attempted to murder Beren, tried to carry off Luthien (an attempted rape and forced marriage), and it was his servants who kidnapped Dior's sons, Elured and Elurin (and most likely murdered them). It was Celegorm and Curufin who spoke against Finrod and led to that noble elf's eventual death, and their continued malingering caused the weakening of Nargothrond, as well as the sapping of strength from the Union of Maedhros (Thingol, of course, would have nothing to do with the likes of Celegorm).

Ironically, Maedhros and Maglor eventually abandoned the Oath of Feanor, which was supposedly at the heart of all the murder, betrayal and death. One wonders about the level of free will inherent in these elves, and whether or not the chain of mayhem could not have been broken (there were elves of conscience who chose not to participate in either of the Kinslayings, after all). Had they the wisdom and the strength to stay the madness earlier, then perhaps Morgoth would not have destroyed all the great Elvish kingdoms of the 1st Age. Celebrimbror, Curufin's son, either defied the Oath or (most unlikely) was not forced to take it.

[Maedhros_the_Tall]

At which point do you feel Maedhros and Maglor abandon the oath? When they cast their respective Silmarils away?

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Maedhros

Good idea Macalaure, then I put it to you, how do YOU think Fingolfin's and Finarfin's sons and daughters would have acted if they had also sworn Feanor's oath?

I don't really have an opinion formed, it just came to my mind.

Alright, let's speculate.

The first question is, of course, would they have sworn it in the first place, had they been in the same situation. Turgon, Finrod, and Galadriel would probably have had the strength to withstand it. The others? Fingon, Angrod, and Aegnor were said to have a mind not entirely unlike to those of Feanor’s sons. Is Orodreth the kind to withstand peer pressure?

Finarfin's children, being half Telerin, would have turned their back on Feanor’s House, and therefore the whole issue, at Alqualonde, before or after participating in the Kinslaying. They either would have followed their father and submitted to the judgement of the Valar (either hoping that by this they could escape the Everlasting Darkness, or simply accepting their fate), or followed Fingolfin like they did in "reality". The oath would have continued to troubled them, though, and it’s difficult to say whether at some point they would have done something “evil”.

We know that Fingon was almost as eager to leave Aman as Feanor's Sons were and I think he would have acted similarly to Maedhros and Maglor and been the most moderate among the oathtakers. He might have had the strength to abandon the oath at some point.

Originally Posted by skip

I don't belive evil was a word Tolkien used much (or at at all) in his books, and not by accident. Evil is an absolute concept. In order to be evil, one must clearly recognise Good and reject it.

This is the concept of evil I was applying here, too.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

If one eliminates the Oath of Feanor as an excuse, there are some evil deeds that cannot be explained away, save that these were some malignant elves.

True. However, it cannot just be eliminated and it’s not just an excuse. Without the oath as a cause, there would have been no kinslayings. The first was maybe rash, but the second two were caused by somebody else holding a Silmaril. You’re right that the deeds of Nargothrond cannot be explained by the oath alone. In fact, the oath alone would have commanded Celegorm and Curufin to take part in Finrod’s mission (although there would have been some very ugly scenes in the end, of course).

Originally Posted by Morthoron

One wonders about the level of free will inherent in these elves, and whether or not the chain of mayhem could not have been broken (there were elves of conscience who chose not to participate in either of the Kinslayings, after all).

I think at least Maedhros and Maglor were aware how atrocious their deeds were. I keep wondering what words Maedhros had for Celegorm and Curufin when he learned of the Nargothrond issues. The problem is, that at the same time they thought that they were right. Dior and Elwing held a Silmaril, which they considered to be their own. From their point of view, these two held an item which was not their own - and were obstinate about it.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Celebrimbror, Curufin's son, either defied the Oath or (most unlikely) was not forced to take it.

The way I understand it, only Feanor and his sons were under the oath. Those who followed them were bound only by their loyalty.

[Lalaith]

Originally Posted by Elmo
I thought Haleth was a stupid old croan that caused her people a lot of unnecessary hardship...but that's a different topic

Ha, yeah I've always thought that! Especially when she moves them for the second time!!
__________________

Oh - in the words of Thrain, "this cannot be borne!"
And it's "crone", by the way.
But back to the question.
For Catholics, the first and greatest of the seven deadly sins was pride. The other side of pride was despair: hence, by that sin fell the angels.
Which of the sons suffered most from pride, and which from despair?

I think of poor Maglor, singing of his terrible grief for eternity.
Curufin, who in his despair tried to kill Luthien herself.
Maedhros, who tried so hard to strive for honour and yet hurled himself into the chasms of the earth once he gained his Silmaril.

Perhaps Amrod, killed at Losgar, was the most fortunate of them all.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

[Celeborn] tried to carry off Luthien (an attempted rape and forced marriage)

Not so sure about the attemted rape thing. I remember reading something about rape being an unthinkable act by any elf. What he had in mind was probably something more along the lines of locking her up in his tallest tower. If she wouldn't put out that is. After all, nice girls are known to fall for bad guys. Perhaps she'd think there was good in him; if she'd just treat him well and love him he'd change for the better. And he was a looker, nicknamed Celeborn the Fair.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Ironically, Maedhros and Maglor eventually abandoned the Oath of Feanor, .

Maedros or Maglor did not abandon the oath. They discussed it after the war of wrath, but decided to try to take the silmarils by force after all, and did so as well. But Eonwe would not slay them and allowed them to escape with the jewels. The hallowed Silmarils burned their hands however and tortured no less by their concience Maglor hurled one silmaril into the sea while Maedros threw the other and himself into a firey pit.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

One wonders about the level of free will inherent in these elves, and whether or not the chain of mayhem could not have been broken (there were elves of conscience who chose not to participate in either of the Kinslayings, after all). Had they the wisdom and the strength to stay the madness earlier, then perhaps Morgoth would not have destroyed all the great Elvish kingdoms of the 1st Age.

One must remember though that had it not been for Feanor's oath and the flight of Noldor, Morgoth would have laid Beleriand to waste much earlier in all likelihood. The whole of ME would have fallen under his dominion very quickly. Without the oath, in other words, none of the great kingdoms would have existed, save Doriath only, which also would have fallen much earlier. Maybe there would have been other kingdoms and glorious deeds, but that's a story never told.

Edit: Well, perhaps it wasn't the oath that was nessesary to stay Morgoth, rather the return of the Noldor. But would the Noldor have left Aman if it wasn't for Feanor? I think not. And would Feanor have suffered for anyone to touch his silmarils. Never happen.

One interesting thought however is whether they could abandon the oath, and what would've happened then. It is told that they named the One in it and that this was a grave matter not to be messed around with. Yet, it is clear that the Valar wanted them to abandon the oath. What was Eru's point of view, one wonders?

Celebrimbror, Curufin's son, either defied the Oath or (most unlikely) was not forced to take it

As far as I'm aware, Celebrimbor is never mentioned in any of the first age tales. Maybe he wasn't even born then? I do believe he was though, but the oath was not in effect after the first age as there were no Silmarils left to fight about: they were all unattainable. One was at the bottom of the ocean, another lost under the crust of the earth, the third a star up in the sky.

Edit: cross-posted with Lalaith and Mac

[Maedhros_the_Tall]

The only time Celebrimbor is mentioned in the tales of the first age (at least in the Silmarillion) is to say that he shunned his father and stayed in Nargothrond when the brothers were driven out.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by skip spence

Not so sure about the attemted rape thing. I remember reading something about rape being an unthinkable act by any elf.

A cardinal sin perhaps, but not unthinkable. Tolkien softened his stance on Eol raping Aredhel, editing that section to read that perhaps she was a little willing *Wink, wink, nudge, nudge*, but I believe rape was the outcome in the 1st draft. Had Maeglin's plans succeeded, he would have forcibly married his cousin (and forced marriage can be construed as rape). As far as Celegorm, he had every intention of forcibly marrying Luthien and deludedly thought such a match would gain Thingol's allegiance (like that would have turned out well!).

Originally Posted by Macalaure

I think at least Maedhros and Maglor were aware how atrocious their deeds were. I keep wondering what words Maedhros had for Celegorm and Curufin when he learned of the Nargothrond issues. The problem is, that at the same time they thought that they were right. Dior and Elwing held a Silmaril, which they considered to be their own. From their point of view, these two held an item which was not their own - and were obstinate about it.

For being such holy jewels, the Silmarils certainly brought out the worst in the elves, didn't they?

Originally Posted by skip spence

Maedros or Maglor did not abandon the oath.

Originally Posted by Maedhros_the_Tall

At which point do you feel Maedhros and Maglor abandon the oath? When they cast their respective Silmarils away?

I think it's quite implicit in the text that by casting away the Silmarils, both Maedhros and Maglor abandoned their oath:

"But the jewel burned the hand of Maedhros in pain unbearable; and he perceived that it was as Eonwe had said, that his right hitherto had become void, and that the oath was in vain."

Maedhros committed suicide, and Maglor threw his Silmaril away. What more can one say but that they voided their oaths?

Originally Posted by Macalaure

The way I understand it, only Feanor and his sons were under the oath. Those who followed them were bound only by their loyalty.

Originally Posted by skip spence

As far as I'm aware, Celebrimbor is never mentioned in any of the first age tales. Maybe he wasn't even born then?

Again, I am not sure if Celebrimbor took the oath (there is nothing in the canon which says he did or didn't), but given the mood of Curufin, his father, it would seem to me unlikely that the son could escape his father's zealotry save by out and out rebellion. And Skip, Celebrimbor was certainly a 1st Age Elf (whether he was born in Valinor or while in exile is conjecture), and most likely lived in Nargothrond. What is certain is that he played no part in any of the Kinslayings, which seems to me rather telling in regards to the relationship between father and son. Given the fealty between the sons of Feanor, an outright split had to occur between Curufin and Celebrimbor. In any case, what is certain is that the Doom of Mandos followed Celebrimbor. He did not return to Valinor to seek amnesty and he eventually became enmeshed in the making of the Rings.

Originally Posted by skip spence

One must remember though that had it not been for Feanor's oath and the flight of Noldor, Morgoth would have laid Beleriand to waste much earlier in all likelihood. The whole of ME would have fallen under his dominion very quickly. Without the oath, in other words, none of the great kingdoms would have existed, save Doriath only, which also would have fallen much earlier. Maybe there would have been other kingdoms and glorious deeds, but that's a story never told.

Edit: Well, perhaps it wasn't the oath that was nessesary to stay Morgoth, rather the return of the Noldor. But would the Noldor have left Aman if it wasn't for Feanor? I think not. And would Feanor have suffered for anyone to touch his silmarils. Never happen.

*Shrugs* Ah, isn't most of our discussions merely conjecture? What a barren board this would be if we didn't make some educated guesses!

I think that Feanor's rebellion was merely a pretext for some elves to leave (specifically Galadriel). The thought of leaving (although unspoken) was already there in many elves who dreamed of wider realms and adventure. The Noldor were particularly hotblooded, and it seems to me that they would eventually feel caged within the confines of Valinor. Aman may have been paradise, but the grass is always greener elsewhere (that is, of course, until you get there and have to pick through the weeds and crabgrass).

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

For being such holy jewels, the Silmarils certainly brought out the worst in the elves, didn't they?

Too true, and not just in the Sons of Feanor. Look at Thingol and the Dwarves that killed him.

About Celebrimbor:
Since in the Silmarillion it only says Celebrimbor turned his back on his father and nothing is said of the oath there or later on (as far as I'm aware), we can only assume that Curufin did not make his son swear the oath afterwards, although it's an interesting idea. But something important like that would have to be mentioned - it would have consequences for Celebrimbor's character, which in turn has consequences on the way we look at the making of the Rings.
I can't look up the quote right now, but I think it's stated somewhere in HoMe that Maglor and Curufin had wives, both of which decided to remain in Valinor (I really hope it's not some piece of fan fiction I'm remembering, that'd be embarrassing), so Celebrimbor had to be born in Valinor. His age at the time of the rebellion is of course unknown. It's possible he took part in the 1st Kinslaying - I don't think it's explicitly stated anywhere that he didn't. If he was old enough, he surely did.

[Morwen]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I think it's quite implicit in the text that by casting away the Silmarils, both Maedhros and Maglor abandoned their oath:

"But the jewel burned the hand of Maedhros in pain unbearable; and he perceived that it was as Eonwe had said, that his right hitherto had become void, and that the oath was in vain."

Maedhros committed suicide, and Maglor threw his Silmaril away. What more can one say but that they voided their oaths?

Abandoning the oath is what Maglor was urging in his conversation with Maedhros - to leave the Silmarils with Eonwe and forget about trying to regain them. However, they don't do this and I think that what was Maglor and Maedhros abandoned in the end was possession of the Silmarils and not the Oath itself.

I would make a distinction between the requirement of the oath and ultimate objective. The Oath required the brothers to pursue with vengeance anyone who held a Silmaril and they did just that. If the objective of the oath was to ensure that one day either Feanor or his sons would get the Silmarils back then by the end of the First Age that was accomplished.

However, the brothers then realise that the oath was in vain. They cannot keep what they fought and killed to possess. However, that realisation does not lead them to surrender the Silmarils to Eonwe or anyone else. To do so would have been to truly abandon their Oath, to allow persons other than themselves to keep a Silmaril. They choose instead to put the Silmarils beyond the reach of anyone else.

To get back on topic, Maglor and Maedhros seem to be the only two of Feanor's sons who had any qualms about the "we will do anything to get what we want" nature of the Oath. Someone mentioned "free will" earlier. I saw the Oath here as a fetter on their free will and that within Tolkien's world that appears to be the nature of oaths in general.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Morwen

Abandoning the oath is what Maglor was urging in his conversation with Maedhros - to leave the Silmarils with Eonwe and forget about trying to regain them. However, they don't do this and I think that what was Maglor and Maedhros abandoned in the end was possession of the Silmarils and not the Oath itself.

I would make a distinction between the requirement of the oath and ultimate objective. The Oath required the brothers to pursue with vengeance anyone who held a Silmaril and they did just that. If the objective of the oath was to ensure that one day either Feanor or his sons would get the Silmarils back then by the end of the First Age that was accomplished.

However, the brothers then realise that the oath was in vain. They cannot keep what they fought and killed to possess. However, that realisation does not lead them to surrender the Silmarils to Eonwe or anyone else. To do so would have been to truly abandon their Oath, to allow persons other than themselves to keep a Silmaril. They choose instead to put the Silmarils beyond the reach of anyone else.

I see your reasoning and agree to a point, but the third Silmaril was indeed in someone else's hands, and they knew they could never retrieve it, and I don't think Maedhros was of sound mind when he killed himself (suicides seldom are, are they?); therefore, I don't believe he had the wherewithal to think he was ridding the world of the Silmaril when he made his leap, nor could Maglor believe that by merely tossing the Silmaril into the sea it would never be recovered (tides the way they are).

It sounds more to me like a huge sense of guilt and regret on their parts, and ridding themselves of further torment (in one case ending one's life, and the other throwing away a remembrance of sin), rather than fulfilling their oaths.

[Maedhros_the_Tall]

[QUOTE=Macalaure;558565]......assume that Curufin did not make his son swear the oath afterwards, although it's an interesting idea. /QUOTE]


Tha, in itself could potentially pose an interesting question. Did Curufin, in some part of himself, see the folly of the oath, and would not bring it to bear upon his son?

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

A cardinal sin perhaps, but not unthinkable. Tolkien softened his stance on Eol raping Aredhel, editing that section to read that perhaps she was a little willing *Wink, wink, nudge, nudge*, but I believe rape was the outcome in the 1st draft. Had Maeglin's plans succeeded, he would have forcibly married his cousin (and forced marriage can be construed as rape). As far as Celegorm, he had every intention of forcibly marrying Luthien and deludedly thought such a match would gain Thingol's allegiance (like that would have turned out well!)

Still I must defend poor old Celeborn in as much as to say he'd never rape Luthien. I think he had great desire for her, perhaps even love, and that his motives were not entirely political. Actually, his behaviour does sort of imply he was a fool in love or, at the very least, just a plain fool. Like you said, the whole thing was bound to end in disaster had he succeded in abducting her and killing his rival. Thingol would have gone to war with all his men if he thought his daugther was being mistreated.

The text I was refering to when I said rape was unthinkable is, if I'm not mistaken, "Laws and Customs of the Eldar". I can't check up any quotes now as I'm at work (not working mind you) now. Here I believe we are told that no crimes of passion are ever recorded among the Eldar and that rape of an elfwoman would be unthinkable. She would rather give up her physical life than to submit to anything of the kind, and elves can of course "die" of free will like Miriel, wife of Finwe, did. I also remember reading about Eöl and Aredhel and how he took her for wife "by force". I think Tolkien changed that because he wasn't happy with it, not because it was a sensitive issue. The elves tend to get "better" in T's later writings. Compare for example with what a scoundrel Thingol was in earlier versions of the tales, and his almost unpeccable behaviour in CoH.

As for Celebrimbor, I agree with whoever it was who said he most likely partook in the first Kinslaying. Of this, one can not know for sure however.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by skip spence

Still I must defend poor old Celeborn in as much as to say he'd never rape Luthien.

Did anyone say he would?

Celegorm, on the other hand...