by Tesha M.C. Pettit
An author who revels in Old Norse literature that stresses the importance of the hierarchical Lord/thegn relationship to the death, J.R.R. Tolkien allows his characters to disobey their lords, and not only that, but goes so far as to hold that behavior up as a standard of what is right instead of what was traditionally viewed as good. In The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien stresses love and service to All rather than a focus on Self; this interpretation of Tolkien’s work, which was first presented by Rose Zimbardo (69) in 1968, is shown throughout the six-book novel in a complicated string of events. I will focus on the dueling natures of rulers Denethor and Théoden; through a detailed analysis of their relationships with thegns Peregrin and Meriadoc, two Hobbits, the point Tolkien is trying to make shines through: serving the All as Théoden does is more exemplary than serving Self as Denethor does. Only then can Aragorn’s apotheosis from Ranger to King, his merciful attitude towards his retainers, and his service to All the people of Middle-earth be fully appreciated.
Tolkien reinvents the Germanic idea of servitude and reflects his Catholic values in this work of fiction by weaving examples of both bad and good side-by-side in order to teach readers about what he considers the ultimate lord/thegn relationship to be: that of the Christian God to his servants, marked by a consideration of others before Self. But as he avoids outright religion in The Lord of the Rings, he stays away from direct Christian comparisons and instead reinvents the traditional motifs in such a way as to illustrate what he thinks is important. Transforming the act of disobedience is one of Tolkien’s most compelling tools. While the Old English Norse culture valued pride and honor above all at the expense of many lives, Tolkien shows how there is something more powerful: love. It is love that drives the fellowship in The Lord of the Rings, love that triumphs over evil, love that remains at the end. To start this study, it is imperative to evaluate Tolkien’s attitude towards the traditional Germanic concept of the Lord/thegn relationship as evident in what he wrote about Beorhtnoth and the Battle of Maldon. Following that, a close examination of the details of Denethor’s rigid Lord/retainer relationship with Pippin in contrast to how Théoden treats his thegn Merry will illustrate how Aragorn represents the fulfillment of Tolkien’s treatment of the Lord/thegn debate.
THE WORST: Beorhtnoth
To begin, we must consider how the theme of disobedience is not confined to one incident in The Lord of the Rings; rather, we see it repeated time and again. Pippin disobeys Denethor -- and convinces Beregond to do the same -- in order to save Faramir’s life. Merry and Èowyn were told to stay home to be safe, but instead both ride to battle in Gondor and bring about the death of the Nazgul Witch King. Hama does not take Gandalf’s staff; Sam refuses to leave Frodo to die in the Orc fortress and continue on to Mount Doom alone; and Gollum disobeys master Frodo when he bites off Frodo’s ringfinger and thus saves Middle-earth.
Why is disobedience such a common occurrence? Tolkien is actively combating the idea in Germanic literature that a thegn must follow his lord’s lead no matter what the consequence by presenting a pattern of disobedience in The Lord of the Rings. Tolkien appears to be saying that there are very good reasons for disobedience, and sometimes it is only because of the disobedience that good happens, such as the killing of the Witch King by Èowyn and the freeing of Théoden from Wormtongue’s spell. These instances of disobedience are closely tied up with Tolkien’s concern for both allegiance and choice, for loyalty and free will, as Marjorie Burns keenly observes (147). The disobedience stems from love and care rather than from hate and ill will.
In Anglo-Saxon society, the ideal structure was one of comitatus, (“followers”) staying loyal to their leader even in death. As Stuart D. Lee and Elizabeth Solopova explain:
“It goes back as far as Tacitus’ descriptions of the Germanic tribes in Germania (14) in which he states: ‘it is infamy during life … to return alive from a battle where their Prince is slain.’ This, it would appear, is indicative of the Anglo-Saxon ideal of the warriors defending their lord. This relationship essentially represents the structure of Anglo-Saxon society in which the lord, brave and noble, rewards his followers with land and rings and protection at the political/strategic level, whilst in return they are loyal to him to the death, the most ignoble act being the desertion of his body on the field of battle” (219).
Tolkien’s discordant view of the expectations of a thegn to his lord are most clearly shown in his poem The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth, Beorhthelm’s Son, a work commonly viewed as a meditation on the faults of the heroic spirit. In Tolkien’s commentary on the poem, he first provides background information on Beorhtnoth, the duke of Essex who last led his men to battle against the Vikings near Maldon in 991. He was “a man renowned in his day: powerful, fearless, proud,” observes Tolkien (Reader 3). When the Danes arrived, they posited that a fair fight could only be fought if they were allowed to cross the river causeway, cunningly avoiding the resolute defenses of the Englishmen. Writes Tolkien:
“Beorhtnoth accepted the challenge and allowed them to cross. This act of pride and misplaced chivalry proved fatal. Beorhtnoth was slain and the English routed; but the duke’s ‘household,’ his heordwerod, containing the picked knights and officers of his bodyguard, some of them members of his own family, fought on, until they all fell dead besides their lord” (Reader 5).
This acquiescence to the Viking request is attributed to Beorhtnoth’s ofermod, his pride and overconfidence, in the original version of the incident found in the incomplete poem The Battle of Maldon. What is ofermod? At its most basic, ofermod means “over courage,’ but the word has negative connotations as mod can also mean “arrogance” and “pride” leading to a translation of “too much pride,” according to Tom Shippey. He adds that Tolkien translated it as “overcasting pride,” suggesting that Beorthtnoth made his mistake out of the diabolical pride created by heroic tradition as expressed in Old English poetry (Roots 331). In other words, the fault of the heroic tradition is a mindset of the Self rather than the All, the diabolical Lucifer versus the selfless Christ. Tolkien saw many problems with this Norse/Germanic “heroic tradition,” especially as it played out in Nazi Germany. In his version of the Battle of Maldon, told after the fray by the fictional characters Torthelm and Tîdwald as they search for Beorhtnoth’s body, Tolkien refers to the ruler as “Too proud, too princely! / But his pride’s cheated and his princedom has passed” (Reader 16). Tîdwald states: “Our lord was at fault.” In another essay on Beorhtnoth titled Overmod, Tolkien comments scathingly on the duke: “Yet this element of pride, in the form of a desire for honour and glory, in life or after death, tends to grow, to become the chief motive, driving a man beyond the bleak heroic necessity to excess -- to chivalry” (22). While most roundly praise the northern heroic spirit, Tolkien argues that its drawback is that it drives men “to outstrip their bravery” (Lee and Solopova 222). In his desire to be a hero, Beorhtnoth was prepared to sacrifice not only his own life, but those of his retainers. Tolkien fundamentally disagrees with Beorhtnoth’s actions, according to Shippey: “Tolkien’s view was that he had no right to expend the lives of his men as well as his own” (Essay 332). To combat this false view of heroism, Tolkien set out to show what true heroism -- one that can be integrated with Christianity -- would look like when he wrote The Lord of the Rings. In contrast to Beorhtnoth’s irresponsible behavior, in The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien provides readers with examples of responsible leaders; but for that to be effective, however, Tolkien also had to show what an excess of the northern heroic style looked like in the character of Denethor.
THE BAD: Pippin & Denethor
To fully appreciate the lessons to be learned through Denethor’s character, we must first realize that the conflict of The Lord of the Rings is found not merely in presenting good characters and evil characters, but in closely contrasting similar characters with one another, such as Denethor with Théoden. “Tolkien’s best characterizations … are based on more than two-sidedness and mixed attitudes. Their complexity derives instead from a shadowing and matching with other characters,” says Burns (5), who is not the only one to see this pattern. Jane Chance stresses in several essays how Tolkien’s entire works illustrate this balance of good versus evil in the world, and how people can tip over to the other side quite easily. Frodo nearly becomes Gollum when he refuses to take off the ring at Mount Doom, and ironically it is Gollum who saves Frodo by biting off his finger and falling to his doom in the fires of Mount Doom. This is a Christian concept: Satan versus God, evil versus good, and how all men can easily be one or the other (“the hero must realize that he can become the monster” [Epic 200]). In the Bible, there are many men who are teetering on this border: David did wrong with Bathsheba; Peter denied Christ three times. What saves them from everlasting doom is love. In The Lord of the Rings, the love Merry holds for Théoden drives him to pledge his allegiance as a squire of Rohan. Théoden loves his subjects and marches off to fight Sauron to save them and the rest of Middle-earth. Because of Gandalf’s love for the members of the fellowship, he fights the Balrog. Love is the highest law, according to Tolkien.
Denethor is the antithesis to this belief. It is through him that Tolkien illustrates the folly of pride and service to Self. Chance observes that the leadership styles of the tyrannical Denethor and Théoden are complementary: “The tyrant commands his followers by edict, rule and law; the true leader commands through respect and love, like a benign father to son” (Mythology 100). There are many similarities between the two. Both are rulers of their lands, but both are manipulated by evil counselors (Théoden by Grima Wormtongue and Denethor by Sauron through the palantir) and so fall into despair as evil enters their lands rather than to action. Both lose a son in The Lord of the Rings: Théoden’s son Théodred is slain in the West Marches a few days before Gandalf arrives at his court, and Denethor’s son Boromir dies protecting hobbits, Pippin and Merry, from the Orcs. Their reactions to trials sets these leaders apart. Both Denethor and Théoden suffer from depression, but while Théoden takes the way out as offered by Gandalf despite his sorrow “that these evil days” should be his (TT 121), Denethor refuses his aid, reminding Gandalf that he is the ruler in Gondor and as thus won’t be made “a tool of other men’s purposes” (RK 30).
In the character of Denethor, Tolkien mingles an excess of heroic temper; you might even say it is the ancient Ragnarok spirit, points out Shippey (Road 173). He trusts his own sense of what is important and is easily offended by counsel. There is no purpose higher for Denethor than his own rule: “And that is a sentiment that the Dark Lord could express too -- except that each means his rule to prevail,” Richard Purtill observes (85). Denethor’s own words betray him as a poor ruler, and this is amplified in his relationship with Pippin. Denethor places Himself first above the greater All of his kingdom. When Gandalf and Pippin enter his hall, he scorns Gandalf’s counsel. Rather than consider what will happen to his people if the Dark Lord attacks, Denethor has allowed himself to be consumed by his own grief at the loss of his eldest son Boromir. While he acknowledges that there is much else to speak of with Gandalf, “much of more import,” to him it is “less pressing” (RK 29). He would rather focus on his personal darkness.
Prior to Pippin’s first meeting with Denethor, Gandalf warns him: “Be careful with your words, Master Peregrin! … Théoden is a kindly old man. Denethor is of another sort, proud and subtle, a man of far greater lineage and power, though he is not called a king” (RK 25). The comparison of Théoden to Denethor here is certainly no accident but is intentional by Tolkien, a call to readers to pay attention to the differences in these two rulers and how they treat the Hobbits, their thegns. The exchange between Denethor and Pippin begins when Pippin recognizes the object Denethor holds as being Boromir’s horn. Questioned by Denethor, he recalls Boromir’s death, focusing on his bravery: “I honour his memory, for he was very valiant. He died to save us, my kinsman Meriadoc and myself …” (RK 28). A noble and proud man, Denethor can’t believe that his strong son died while a small Halfling survived, and belittles Pippin with this question: “How were you to escape, and yet he did not, so mighty a man as he was, and only orcs to withstand him?” (RK 27). At this point, driven by his memory of Boromir’s courage and death in the woods, and also by pride in his own people, Pippin offers his service to Denethor:
Then Pippin looked the old man in the eye, for pride stirred strangely within him, still stung by the scorn and suspicion in that cold voice. “Little service, no doubt, will so great a lord of Men think to find in a hobbit, a halfling from the northern Shire; yet such as it is, I will offer it, in payment of my debt.” Twitching aside his grey cloak, Pippin drew forth his small sword and laid it at Denethor’s feet. (RK 28)
Here Tolkien provides the reader with an example of two types of pride: Denethor’s is a deep-rooted pride in part because through his use of the palantir he has fell under Sauron’s evil spell, while Pippin’s stems from humility, courage and belief in his own people. However, Pippin’s desire to prove his worth could be twisted into evil if he’s not careful, turned into the ofermod that spelled the end for Beorhtnoth and the madness that consumes Denethor in the end. By allowing Pippin to walk that fine line, Tolkien illustrates how all men are given a choice between selflessness and selfishness. Through the trials Pippin subsequently faces, he remains a Hobbit, rooted by his desire for the simple pleasures afforded by food and ale, rather than for power or renown.
Pippin’s offer of service pleases Denethor, who responds with a “pale smile” (RK 28). “It touched his heart,” Gandalf observes later (RK 32). Yet though Pippin’s offer stirred Denethor, it was still but one move in his effort towards mastery of the halfling. Warns Gandalf: “There is another side to it. You are at his command and he will not forget. Be wary still!” (RK 32). Denethor’s desire to rule Pippin is in sharp contrast to what drives Théoden, who treats Merry with love rather than pride. Even Merry’s method of swearing allegiance is in marked contrast to the vows Pippin makes. While both lay down their swords as is custom, Merry’s oath of allegiance is a heartfelt and spontaneous action. Pippin’s decision to serve Denethor is also spontaneous and heartfelt, but it springs from a desire to repay Denethor in an eye-for-an-eye manner for the untimely loss of his son. This is stressed in the oath Pippin swears, which is legally binding and invokes the usual terms of the bond between lord and warrior, according to the Germanic comitatus ethic.
“Here do I swear fealty and service to Gondor, and to the Lord and Steward of the realm, to speak and to be silent, to do and to let be, to come and to go, in need or plenty, in peace or war, in living or dying, from this hour henceforth, until my lord release me, or death take me, or the world end. So say I, Peregrin son of Paladin of the Shire of the Halflings” (RK 28).
Denethor’s response is cold and formal, a fitting description of their lord/thegn relationship: “And this do I hear, Denethor son of Ecthelion, Lord of Gondor, Steward of the High King, and I will not forget it, nor fail to reward that which is given: fealty with love, valour with honour, oath-breaking with vengeance” (RK 28). Despite the “love” mentioned in his response, Denethor’s treatment of Pippin is marked by a lack of respect and care.
Although in their first meeting, Denethor acknowledges “looks may belie a man” (RK 28) and thus accepts him into Gondor’s service, ultimately Denethor sees no more use for Pippin than as a mere servant, and a servant in the most traditional sense of the word. He has Pippin serve him food and drink and entertain him with song, rather than train him for battle. “You shall wait on me, bear errands, and talk to me,” Denethor tells Pippin (RK 79). Like many others, Denethor assumes that because the Hobbits are small, they are helpless and weak. Beregond confesses to this attitude, but he changes his mind after hearing Pippin speak of his long journey thus far: “I thought it was the whim of our Lord to take him a noble page, after the manner of kings of old, they say. But I see that it is not so, and you must pardon my foolishness” (RK 35). The Hobbits may be small but they are strong of heart, and despite the troubles facing Middle-earth and the new nation he has sworn allegiance to, Peregrin Took will not despair. Faltering in fear for a moment when a Black Rider flies by high in the sky, Pippin recovers. “No, my heart will not yet despair,” he tells Beregond, who is encouraged by his strength (RK 39). Pippin’s belief in the strength of Gondor and the forces of good is in direct contrast to Denethor’s attitude. According to Chance, Denethor’s failure is marked by an inability to love: “Denethor fails as a father and as Steward-ruler because he gives in too readily to hopelessness and despair (he fears too easily that Faramir will die and that Gandalf will be the new ruler of Gondor). Resisting his powerlessness to control the fate of his son and of his own city, he preserves the one power he believes he does have, to kill himself” (Mythology 111). In this, Denethor shows himself as a Germanic king more interested in glory and honor than in his men’s welfare; he is a lord like Beorhtnoth overtaken by his ofermod.
Denethor’s corruption and subsequent suicide earn him the label “heathen,” a title Tolkien twice applies to him, connecting him with suicide as a typical expression of the Norse stoic spirit. When notified that the first circle of the city is burning, Denethor announces he is heading for his pyre and compares himself to “heathen kings”: “We will burn like heathen kings before ever a ship sailed hither from the West” (RK 98-99). Later, when Gandalf arrives in time to save Faramir from being burned alive, he chastises Denethor: “Authority is not given to you, Steward of Gondor, to order the hour of your death. … And only the heathen kings, under the domination of the Dark Power, did thus, slaying themselves in pride and despair, murdering their own kin to ease their own death” (RK 129). Tolkien also uses the term “heathen” six times in regard to Beorhtnoth in his poem The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth. Not only does Denethor ignore the good of his subjects, but he is so self-absorbed that he must take both of his sons to death with him. In an egomaniacal display, he breaks his own staff of power, proving himself the spoiled child determined to have things as he wants or not at all, and the sinner who will not repent.
The opposite of Denethor, Pippin is an example of the Christian focus on All versus Self; when he sees Faramir (the future ruler of Gondor) in peril, he does what is needed to save his life. In this action, Pippin, a subordinate, disobeys his Lord, which would have been unacceptable in the Germanic culture, creating a key moment in this analysis of Tolkien’s opinion of the Lord/thegn relationship. “Especially when the Hobbits defy their lords’ wishes, they ultimately manage to do what is right for their lord, their people, and their own development,” remarks Lynette Porter (86). Chance also comments on this controversial behavior: “Pippin’s literal infraction of the release actually marks his obedience to the higher goal of ‘fealty and service to Gondor’ and not just to the ‘Lord and Steward of the realm.’ At the time that Pippin ‘disobeys,’ the Steward has become quite mad. Is disobedience of such a ruler disservice?” (Mythology 101). As we have already discussed, Tolkien did not think so; instead, he considered a ruler who would drive his retainers to death beside him to be immoral, such a leader as Beorhtnoth whose pride led to the death of many worthy men, and thus he shows Pippin making his own decision about what is right and wrong. Rather than base his response to his lord’s actions on blind loyalty, Pippin instead acts on what he thinks is right and honorable, a situation that illustrates how Tolkien tweaked the Germanic Lord/thegn relationship in order to reflect his emphasis on Christian principles: notably, All versus Self through love and servitude.
THE GOOD: Merry & Théoden
Examining the relationship of Merry and Théoden in direct contrast to that of Pippin and Denethor establishes a plethora of differences. While Denethor seeks to promote his own desires, Théoden wishes the good of his people. Denethor serves himself; Théoden the All. Defying a leader, which should be an example of selfishness, is instead transformed by Tolkien into an example of what is right. We see several instances of disobedience surrounding the character of Théoden. Merry and Èowyn were told to stay home to be safe, but instead both ride to battle in Gondor (Èowyn disguised as Dernhelm with Merry hidden beneath her cloak), and fulfill the prophecy regarding the Witch King’s death. Èomer allows Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli to go free when he encounters them following the trail of orcs, contrary to the law of the land. He also disobeyed his king Théoden by pursing the raiding orcs himself through Rohan and slaying them at the edge of Fangorn, and so saving the Hobbits from the clutches of Isengard, which would have put Frodo’s mission in jeapordy. The king of Rohan reflects on the wisdom of Èomer’s choice: “I owe much to Èomer. Faithful heart may have froward tongue” (TT 126). In this paragraph, Tolkien opts to use a Middle English word dating from the 13th century which means “turned away,” “adverse” or “habitually disposed to disobedience and opposition,” hinting closely at the dissimilarities in attitude between what was valued by the medieval Germanic culture and what Tolkien values.
Another, and perhaps more important example of when disobedience is preferable to blind obedience, occurs when Gandalf and his companions arrive in Edoras. Hama does not take Gandalf’s staff, despite being ordered to by Wormtongue. While musing about his choice, Hama says: “The staff in the hand of a wizard may be more than a prop for old age. Yet in doubt, a man of worth will trust to his own wisdom. I believe you are friends and folk worthy of honor, who have no evil purpose. You may go in” (TT 116). Hama’s words illustrate the situations when Tolkien believes disobedience is acceptable; this is when a man ”will trust to his own wisdom” because he thinks that the choice is better in the long run than what he was ordered to do, which mirrors Pippin’s decision in regards to Faramir. Hama’s decision has a positive outcome, proving that a man of worth can discern the better of two hard choices. Once inside the halls of Edoras, Gandalf tells Théoden to “come out before your doors and look abroad. Too long have you sat in shadows and trusted to twisted tales and crooked promptings” (TT 119). With this move, the king of Rohan leaves the darkness, stands erect and drops his staff to act as “one new-awakened” (TT 120). When he grasps hold of a sword (encouraged to do so by Gandalf and provided a weapon by Èomer) the transformation from old man to warrior takes place, and Hama’s misdeed is shown to be the best choice he could have made:
Slowly Théoden stretched forth his hand. As his fingers took the hilt, it seemed to the watchers that firmness and strength returned to his thin arm. Suddenly he lifted the blade and swung it shimmering and whistling in the air. Then he gave a great cry. His voice rang clear as he chanted in the tongue of Rohan a call to arms. … The guards … looked at their lord in amazement, and then as one man they drew their swords and laid them at his feet. “Command us,” they said. (TT 122)
Théoden is once more the Anglo-Saxon definition of heroic warrior-king and his men recognize this, pledging their renewed allegiance by laying their swords at his feet in an act reminiscent of the Germanic contract between warrior and king. They are his to command. They will follow him to the death if necessary, because they love him.
The link between Théoden and Rohan to that of the Anglo-Saxon warrior is very strong despite Tolkien’s denial that he did not model the Rohirrim off Anglo-Saxons. As horse people, the Rohirrim are tied to the Anglo-Saxons, and their very names are Old English words (for example, Théoden, which appears in Beowulf, means “king”). Throughout Lord of the Rings, Tolkien stresses the physical heroism of the Rohirrim, and particularly so in the battle at Helm’s Deep, which resembles those described in The Battle of Maldon and other medieval Anglo-Saxon poems. Unlike the connection between Beorhtnoth and his thegns, which ends in death, the friendship between Théoden and Merry celebrates life; as Porter observes: “Denethor’s parting words to Pippin tell him to prepare for death. In contrast, Théoden sternly tells Merry that he is too small to go to war and he must stay behind to be safe. Théoden consistently acts to protect Merry and values his friendship” (85). Denethor’s response to a crisis focuses on death, which mirrors the stress medieval Germanic literature put on death beside one’s Lord in battle, while Théoden ventures outside that stereotype and enjoys Merry’s company between battles.
The relationship of Théoden and Merry is one of mutual respect and friendship; they connect through tales of their own differing people told as they ride between battles. When Merry is low in spirit because he misses the companionship of Pippin, Théoden’s small act of inviting Merry to sit at his side during dinner makes a huge impact: “He had never felt more grateful for any kindness” (RK 50). Théoden follows that up by informing Merry that he’s had a “good hill-pony” made ready for Merry, and he will outfit him in gear of war. These acts of kindness (compared to the pride that drives Pippin in his relationship with Denethor) spur Merry to swear allegiance to King Théoden. “Filled suddenly with love for this old man, he knelt on one knee, and took his hand and kissed it. ‘May I lay the sword of Meriadoc of the Shire on your lap, Théoden King?’ he cried. ‘Receive my service, if you will’” (RK 50). Upon Théoden’s acceptance, Merry states, “As a father you shall be to me,” to which the king concurs, establishing a care-filled lord/thegn relationship compared to one based merely on duty. Chance comments on the value of this exchange: “Good words can express love for another as cunning words can seek to subvert another for the speaker’s own selfish ends” (Epic 218). Merry’s vow, in contrast to the oath Pippin made to Denethor, “expresses voluntary love for, rather than involuntary duty to, his king. And Théoden, unlike Denethor, represents the ideal Germanic lord who truly loves (rather than uses) his men“ (Epic 223). Viewing Merry as an equal, Théoden gifts him with a pony, stout jerkin of leather, belt, knife and shield. It doesn’t end there; as the Rohirrim muster to the aid of Rohan, Merry cements his relationship with Théoden by riding at his side, by turns telling him tales of the Shire and listening to stories about the Mark and its mighty men of old. Their bond is strengthened while camped at Dunharrow beneath the feet of the White Mountains when Théoden encourages Meriadoc to sit beside him and lighten his heart with tales. Yet, despite their friendship, when the time comes to ride off to what will be Théoden’s final battle, he instructs Merry to stay behind. ‘But why, Lord,’ Merry protests (in words much like Èowyn’s), ‘did you receive me as a swordthain, if not to stay by your side? And I would not have it said of me in song only that I was always left behind!’ (RK 77). Here Théoden illustrates his love and care for Merry, showing that he views the relationship as a father to son: “I received you for your safe-keeping,” Théoden tells Merry (RK 77).
Nonetheless, Merry will not stay behind, but rather defies his lord and rides away with Èowyn to battle at Pelennor Fields. There, he sees Théoden fall before the Nazgul king, and horror overtakes him. “‘King’s man!’ his heart cried within him. ‘You must stay by him. As a father you shall be to me, you said.’ But his will made no answer” (RK 115-16). The bravery displayed by Èowyn when she reveals herself and provokes the Nazgul Witch King awakens his “slow-kindled courage”, however, and he avenges Théoden with his own swipe at the enemy. Together, Èowyn and Merry, a woman and a halfling, destroy the Witch King and his voice “is never heard again in that age of the world” (RK 117). Merry then stays beside Théoden to hear his last words honoring his warriors – in contrast to the mad ravings Pippin hears from Denethor at the end – and accompanies both the injured Èowyn and the body of Théoden into the city of Minas Tirith. Following this heroic deed and steadfast loyalty, Merry, who like Èowyn, feared insignificance, becomes a “Rider of Rohan,” “Holdwine of the Mark,” a halfling who is held in honor in Minas Tirith and who, along with Pippen (“Prince of the Halflings”), receives great homage back at home, observes Burns (148). Most importantly, Merry and Pippin have proved that despite their seeming disobedience of their lords, their notion of service fulfilled the requirements of a good German thegn and, in Tolkien’s mind, that of the good Christian, as well. For it is what Pippin and Merry did without sword that earns them true praise. In Tolkien’s work, versus that of medieval texts, the heroism of the warrior “depends more on love and loyalty than on expressions of valor in battle,” according to Chance (Epic 221), and in this we see how Tolkien’s view of heroism and the proper conduct for a thegn differs from the Germanic ideal. Neither Merry nor Pippin bases their actions on blind loyalty to their leaders. They make their own decisions based on their internal codes of honor, which are shaped by what they believe to be good and true, and as Théoden praises Èomer for doing, so Tolkien holds up Pippin and Merry as examples of ethical behavior in action.
THE BEST: Aragorn & Host of Gondor
Norse literature clearly states what the expected responsibility of thegn to Lord was, but it does not deal with how the Lord was responsible for the lives of his retainers. Tolkien directly addresses this in The Lord of the Rings. Unwilling to be responsible for the death of his niece to whom he has been a father, Théoden instructs her to stay back and lead the women and children; he’s acting out of love for Èowyn rather than his own selfish reasons, which he also demonstrates in his actions towards the hobbit Merry whom he has recently met. But even Théoden is overshadowed in merciful actions by the virtuous Aragorn, a Christ-like figure, who is recognized as a king by his treatment of the wounded: “The hands of the king are the hands of a healer, and so shall the rightful king be known” (RK 139). Celtic sentiment balances out the Norse warrior in Aragorn, and we have a king men will willingly follow and lay down their lives for. Aragorn doesn’t take this responsibility lightly, or subject his retainers to carry out his own will over the good of the All; he will not ask his thegns to do anything he is unwilling to do, and he remains attuned to the minds of the soldiers.
When some of the host are unmanned while marching towards the Black Gates of Mordor, and will neither walk nor ride further north, Aragorn looks at them, and there is pity in his eyes rather than wrath:
“Go,” said Aragorn. “But keep what honour you may, and do not run! And there is a task to which you may attempt and so be not wholly shamed. … Then some being shamed by his mercy overcame their fear and went on, and the others took new hope, hearing of a manful deed within their measure that they could turn to, and they departed. (RK 162)
The character of Aragorn is a response to the attitude Tolkien expressed in The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth: “When your shield is shivered / between shame and death is hard choosing” (Reader 10). Aragorn proves himself to be a knowledgeable and merciful leader who understands the difficulty men feel when facing death, and as Lord he is driven by compassion rather than anger by the actions of his thegns. In this understanding of the real cost of war shown through Aragorn’s actions is the pain and agony Tolkien saw firsthand in World War I. His own life experiences molded a new view of the Lord/thegn relationship in Old English literature, and Tolkien created a King in Aragorn who exemplifies these qualities that he admires, as well as the others-before-self attitude of Christ.
Tolkien was inspired by the courage and resolve demonstrated by his own countrymen in the trenches of the World War I, which he phrased as “the indomitable courage of quite small people against impossible odds,” according to Humphrey Carpenter (Biography 180). He disliked the officers who, in pride and folly made unrealistic and disastrous decisions, sending the common soldiers to their deaths; men like his childhood friends Rob Gilson and G.B. Smith died in France during World War I. This opinion came out very clearly later in life when he wrote The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth, and is also illustrated by which characters Tolkien shows in a favorable light. Anne Pienciak observes, echoing lines from The Battle of Maldon: “Théoden believes in the heroic ethic of the Anglo-Saxon epics: ‘Will shall be the sterner, heart the bolder, spirit the greater as our strength lessens’” (28). The warrior never gives into despair no matter how the battle goes. The same could also be said of Aragorn who marches to the Black Gates knowing he cannot win the battle, but determined to distract Sauron so that Frodo’s quest might succeed. Tolkien strongly believes that war fought for selfish purposes will feel empty when won, while a battle fought for others will be fulfilling. In a letter that he never sent, Tolkien stated: “I think that the ‘victors’ can never enjoy ‘victory’ -- not in the terms that they envisaged; and in so far as they fought for something to be enjoyed by themselves (whether acquisition or mere preservation) the less satisfactory the ‘victory’ will seem” (Letters 235). Here again Tolkien emphasizes All versus the Self; it is only those battling for the good of others out of love and servitude who are able to feel satisfaction when it is over. A battle fought for Self is empty.
It is this strong belief in servitude versus selfishness that drove Tolkien when he began fashioning a world in his fiction. By creating two similar characters in the Hobbits Merry and Pippin, Tolkien provides a way to examine how the choices of both leaders and thegns affect one another. Using disobedience as his method of pinpointing what is truly right and wrong, Tolkien encapsulates his opinion that a man must use his own judgment and not blindly follow orders, even when they come to a thegn from his Lord. Ofermod is a trait to be avoided and shunned for it leads to death, while true loyalty focuses on the larger good. Through disobedience, Pippin and Merry prove their worth to their adopted countries, and ensure that their names are praised long after they return home to the Shire; neither acts courageously out of any desire for personal acclaim, however, but from an unselfish desire to do what is right and honorable for All. Completeness is not to be found in the selfishness, pride and eventual despair of Denethor, but in the love and compassion of Théoden, Aragorn, Merry and Pippin. It is through this shift in focus that Tolkien’s lesson to his readers can be found: serve All rather than Self.
Works Consulted
Burns, Marjorie. Perilous Realms: Celtic and Norse in Tolkien’s Middle-earth. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005. Print.
Carpenter, Humphrey. J.R.R. Tolkien: a Biography. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. 2000. Print.
Carpenter, Humphrey ed. with the assistance of Christopher Tolkien. The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. 2000. Print.
Chance, Jane. “The Lord of the Rings: Tolkien’s Epic.” Understanding The Lord of the Rings: The Best of Tolkien Criticism. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 195-232. Print.
---. The Lord of the Rings: The Mythology of Power. Rev ed. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2001. Google Book Search. Web.
Flieger, Verilyn. Foreword. The Tolkien Fan’s Medieval Reader. New York: Cold Spring Press, 2004. Print.
Jones, Leslie Ellen. Myth & Middle-earth: Exploring the Legends Behind J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit & The Lord of the Rings. New York: Cold Spring Press, 2002. Print.
Kreeft, Peter. The Philosophy of Tolkien: The Worldview Behind the Lord of the Rings. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2005. Google Book Search. Web.
Lee, Stuart. D. and Elizabeth Solopova. The Keys of Middle-earth: Discovering Medieval Literature through the Fiction of J. R. R. Tolkien. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2005. Print.
Pienciak, Anne. J.R.R. Tolkien’s Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. New York: Baron’s Educational Series, 1986. Google Book Search. Web.
Porter, Lynnette R. Unsung Heroes of The Lord of the Rings: From the Page to the Screen. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2005. 56-89. Google Book Search. Web.
Purtill, Richard L. J.R.R. Tolkien: Myth, Morality, and Religion. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003; 1984. Google Book Search. Web.
Shippey, T. A. J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2002. Print.
---. The Road to Middle-Earth: How J.R.R. Tolken Created a New Mythology. Rev a expa ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2003. Print.
---. “Tolkien and ‘The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth.’” Roots and Branches: Selected Papers on Tolkien. Ed. Thomas Honegger. Switzerland: Walking Tree Publishers, 2007. 323-339. Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. Fellowship of the Ring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1954. Print.
---. The Return of the King. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1955. Print.
---. The Tolkien Reader. New York: Ballentine Books, 1966. Print.
---. The Two Towers. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1954. Print.
Zimbardo, Rose A. “Moral Vision in The Lord of the Rings.” Understanding The Lord of the Rings: The Best of Tolkien Criticism. ed. Rose A. Zimbardo and Neil David Isaacs. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2004. 68-75. Print.
