"Magic" in middle earth

[Tinman]

Ive been trying to understand magic in middle earth. What exactly is happening when a spell is cast or magic is evoked? It seems clear that their are different methods to making magic work too. The other cases, it seems like the magic is so mundane, that it the people who beleive it is magic, are only superstitious!

So who then is capable of performing actual magic (what ever that is...)? The wizards clearly have some capacity to control the world around them... speaking with animals, conjuring flames and light, locking doors.

Can wizards do this because they are, after all, maiar, and have control over the world? Or do they just have knowledge of how this magic works? Knowledge that any one with time, and a strong enough will, could accomplish (perhaps not as well as a wizard, but to a lesser degree).

Elves it seems have some sort of inate "magic", that is so natural to them selves that they do not call it that. What about their magical gear like glowing blades? Has an elf cast a "spell" on these gondorian blades? Is this glowing blade something that any elf could create (an inate power to the race), if he know how to first construct the blade, or would an elf familiar with "magic" have to design it?

Is this magic any different from dwarven magic? Moon letters and hidden doors with magic words? Who is capable of "casting" these spells? Is it that, like elves, their craftsman ship is just SO incredable, that tards like me who can hardly construct a lego set look at their mastercraft as "magical"?

What about men? Certainly they are capable of using magic devices (palantir comes to mind), but are they capable of learning it as well?

[Willow Oran]

I think the simplist, most general way of defining the 'magic' used in Middle Earth would be that it is usually some combination of the person's will/spirit and a skilled action.

The Northern-European mythologies that Tolkien was drawing on tend to feature skilled singers and skilled metal-workers very prominently. Smiths, because of the usefulness of what they could make, would have been extremely important, and in oral traditions singers/poets were the people with the knowledge of the history and the laws.

It's this type of craft that we see the elves and dwarves using. The Istari seem to be able to manipulate the natural world with less visible effort, and though it's very probable that Words such as Gandalf uses to create fire are closely related to elvish Songs of power, there is less craft involved in enacting the maia's will upon the physical world than is necessary for the elves.

Middle-Earth's 'magic' then, is mostly a literary development of very real examples of knowledge being equivalent to power. Presumably Tolkien's men would have been just as capable of attaining the knowledge of those 'magical' crafts as the elves and dwarves, but perhaps we see it happening less often because:

- the structures of the stories require that primary usages of 'magic' crafts be from the older, fading races,

- Men have shorter lifespans in which to develop the necessary power,

- Tolkien just didn't write any major human characters who used it.

There are mortal magic users; but human sorcerers such as the Mouth of Sauron and shapeshifters like Beorn, show up briefly as side characters and, not being the focus of the story, are never properly explained.

[Noble Elf Lord]

If I may say something...?

Since you, Willow, mentioned the Mouth of Sauron, I remembered that it has been said (don't remember where) that under Sauron's guidance, he became a mighty sorcerer, right? So, if we indeed presume that magic is a craft, rather than, for example, a separate, word-controlled, infinite pool of "raw energy" and its usage, this would mean that whatever knowledge of "magic" Sauron had, could be passed on to mortals, although as you said, their life spans are too short for developing powers like those of the Maiar. (But do these powers grow naturally upon spellcasting, or are they made better by active sorcery?)

This also suggests that despite the strength (willpower/knowledge etc.?) needed for greater "spells", their weaker counterparts could be performed by anyone with the know-how. If not, we should assume that there's something in the very being of the Maiar that allows the manipulation of the physical and the Shadow-world.
Also, the Noldor, as we know, have great power over that which is invisible; be that magic or "craft", both require knowledge. So, is there any difference between magic knowledge and everyday kl, after all? What be the difference? Every skill requires study and widening ones mind.

This craft-view, however realistic, feels to me like a needle on my M-E bubble. It would explain a lot, but the story would suffer greatly - namely, the magic would be gone. :(

Those are my thoughts. Childish? That means I can enjoy these stories more. :)

[Willow Oran]

This craft-view, however realistic, feels to me like a needle on my M-E bubble. It would explain a lot, but the story would suffer greatly - namely, the magic would be gone.


How? Knowing that they are produced through learned skills doesn't make the swords any less shiny or the songs of power any less impressive.

For me the idea that there is craft involved in the magic makes it more exciting, more awe-inspiring precisely because it serves so strongly to connect this piece of fiction with stories central to existing cultures. It highlights the author's craft as a storyteller and in doing so draws a bit of that story-internal magic outside the story and into reality.

[Noble Elf Lord]

How? Knowing that they are produced through learned skills doesn't make the swords any less shiny or the songs of power any less impressive.

For me the idea that there is craft involved in the magic makes it more exciting, more awe-inspiring precisely because it serves so strongly to connect this piece of fiction with stories central to existing cultures. It highlights the author's craft as a storyteller and in doing so draws a bit of that story-internal magic outside the story and into reality.

For me, it does. :(

My mind seems to be working vice-versa to yours... :D Good thing, though; we'll have some variety in this world and moot. :) I guess it's because I consider stories as they are regarded in Nightwish's "Elvenpath", an escape route; a different thing from this reality. That's what makes them so interesting, magical. ;) Also might have something to do with the fact that my life has been (very) far from a fairytale, and... well, you got my point.

[Tinman]

On crafting magic... does anyone have any insight on how this is done? Take for example "magic runes". Are these runes magical themselves? As in, if any skilled enough craftsman inscribed, correctly, they would yield the same effect, because they themselves are magical? Or is some one "casting a spell" on these runes, so the runes themselves have no magic of their own, but contain the magic put into them? In this method, only some one familiar with magic could do it, rather than some one familiar with crafting masterpieces.

[Willow Oran]

Unfortunately, the most accurate answer to your question concerning the runes is probably 'all of the above'. Runes can be considered magical in their own right because language in any crafted form, sung, spoken or written is very often magical, but specific types of runes, like the moon letters on the map in The Hobbit, probably required a specially skilled maker so that not only were the letters magical, but the way in which they were written was as well.

I guess it's because I consider stories as they are regarded in Nightwish's "Elvenpath", an escape route; a different thing from this reality. That's what makes them so interesting, magical. Also might have something to do with the fact that my life has been (very) far from a fairytale, and... well, you got my point.

What is Nightwish's "Elvenpath"?

I see your point and agree with it as it pertains to fairytales/folklore, but that's a different genre than the one I was referring to, one in which magic is often less specifically tied to skill and usually not used by humans without help from the supernatural. Escapism is an important and well documented function of fairytales and they seldom resemble reality for that reason.

The mythological/epic traditions that Tolkien drew on were performing different cultural functions and so the magic in them follows slightly different rules.

[Noble Elf Lord]

What is Nightwish's "Elvenpath"?

I see your point and agree with it as it pertains to fairytales/folklore, but that's a different genre than the one I was referring to, one in which magic is often less specifically tied to skill and usually not used by humans without help from the supernatural. Escapism is an important and well documented function of fairytales and they seldom resemble reality for that reason.

The mythological/epic traditions that Tolkien drew on were performing different cultural functions and so the magic in them follows slightly different rules.

"What is..."? My, it's a song which very strongly and even directly refers to Tolkien's works! :D Do listen it in youtube. :) And maybe try to find a video with lyrics? ;)

I see your point as well, and a good one it is. Even still, I prefer dwelling in "ancient" Middle-Earth - the one that is far away from everything real, which has the magic we cannot achieve by technology. At the same time, I respect your wisdom on the matter (far exceeds mine :)), and hope that you still enjoy these stories "child-immersively" sometimes, as if you were reading a fairytale. :)

[Gordis]

Hmm... interesting discussion. I am mostly in accord with Willow Oran, but I have some additions on the matter belowOn crafting magic... does anyone have any insight on how this is done? Take for example "magic runes". Are these runes magical themselves? As in, if any skilled enough craftsman inscribed, correctly, they would yield the same effect, because they themselves are magical? Or is some one "casting a spell" on these runes, so the runes themselves have no magic of their own, but contain the magic put into them? In this method, only some one familiar with magic could do it, rather than some one familiar with crafting masterpieces.
I think rune-letters in themselves are not magical, even the Moon-letters and Ithildin letters on Moria door are not magical per se, but simply a result of some higher technology that the outsiders mix with magic. Into the same category would fall the Palantiri, the hard stones of Orthanc etc.

What is magic about runes (for example those on the Anduril) is that they inscribe some spell once cast orally upon the object that the runes perpetuate. And if almost every competent smith can write runes on the object, only a very powerful person can cast the initial spell. So if a smith makes a replica of Anduril faithfully copying runes to a single tiny detail, the magic won't work at all: there was no initial spell cast orally.

The importance of saying/chanting spells aloud seems implied in the Legendarium. Gandalf says all his door-opening spells aloud, the WK shouts the words of the spell to open the Gates of Minas Tirith and, what is most convincing, IMO, is that Sauron had to utter the Ring-spell aloud, regardless of the danger of being overheard (and he was overheard by the Elves, which was detrimental to all his plans). But he simply HAD TO say it aloud.

The case of the One Ring is most enlightening. There was the initial spell uttered by Sauron back in SA 1600, and it is also written on the Ring. Isildur copied the Ring-spell on paper, but there was no magic about his notes. Gandalf spoke the Ash Nazg spell during the Council, but nothing bad has happened, apart from Elves wincing from the sounds of the Black Tongue. No doubt Saruman could make a replica of the One Ring and write Sauron's spell on it, but it wouldn't work: Saruman had not enough power and skill to reproduce the magic.

[Tinman]

Hmm... interesting discussion. I am mostly in accord with Willow Oran, but I have some additions on the matter below
I think rune-letters in themselves are not magical, even the Moon-letters and Ithildin letters on Moria door are not magical per se, but simply a result of some higher technology that the outsiders mix with magic. Into the same category would fall the Palantiri, the hard stones of Orthanc etc.

What is magic about runes (for example those on the Anduril) is that they inscribe some spell once cast orally upon the object that the runes perpetuate. And if almost every competent smith can write runes on the object, only a very powerful person can cast the initial spell. So if a smith makes a replica of Anduril faithfully copying runes to a single tiny detail, the magic won't work at all: there was no initial spell cast orally.

The importance of saying/chanting spells aloud seems implied in the Legendarium. Gandalf says all his door-opening spells aloud, the WK shouts the words of the spell to open the Gates of Minas Tirith and, what is most convincing, IMO, is that Sauron had to utter the Ring-spell aloud, regardless of the danger of being overheard (and he was overheard by the Elves, which was detrimental to all his plans). But he simply HAD TO say it aloud.

The case of the One Ring is most enlightening. There was the initial spell uttered by Sauron back in SA 1600, and it is also written on the Ring. Isildur copied the Ring-spell on paper, but there was no magic about his notes. Gandalf spoke the Ash Nazg spell during the Council, but nothing bad has happened, apart from Elves wincing from the sounds of the Black Tongue. No doubt Saruman could make a replica of the One Ring and write Sauron's spell on it, but it wouldn't work: Saruman had not enough power and skill to reproduce the magic.

Very well writen and some excellent logic. I'm sold.

On another note, gandalf seems to be the worst "door wizard" ever. He can't open the trolls magic door in the hobbit, wastes like an hour at moria, and then gets served in a door contest to the balrog.

[Gordis]

On another note, gandalf seems to be the worst "door wizard" ever. He can't open the trolls magic door in the hobbit, wastes like an hour at moria, and then gets served in a door contest to the balrog.Quite true. That's why the Witch-King called Gandalf "Old Fool".:D

[Willow Oran]

What is magic about runes (for example those on the Anduril) is that they inscribe some spell once cast orally upon the object that the runes perpetuate. And if almost every competent smith can write runes on the object, only a very powerful person can cast the initial spell. So if a smith makes a replica of Anduril faithfully copying runes to a single tiny detail, the magic won't work at all: there was no initial spell cast orally.

The importance of saying/chanting spells aloud seems implied in the Legendarium. Gandalf says all his door-opening spells aloud, the WK shouts the words of the spell to open the Gates of Minas Tirith and, what is most convincing, IMO, is that Sauron had to utter the Ring-spell aloud, regardless of the danger of being overheard (and he was overheard by the Elves, which was detrimental to all his plans). But he simply HAD TO say it aloud.


I agree with this completely as it applies to the Tengwar script. But I'm not sure your argument is so applicable to the runes.

We know that Tengwar was the primary script for several languages. It would have been in everyday use and therefore could not have been in itself magical because that's just dangerous and generally inconvenient. As in your examples then, an oral spell would have been necessary if one wished to use the script for magical purpose.

But we have much less information on how runes were used. We know the dwarves used them for writing, but not how often the dwarves usually wrote, what they wrote, or if runes were used for some types of writing and a different script for another.

And while we know Feanor created the tengwar for the express purpose of having a usable, intuitve alphabet, we don't know what Daeron was thinking when he created the cirth. He could potentially have created it for a less general purpose and so I would be cautious about applying the same rules of magical usage to both of them.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

If some runes are written in the woods but no one reads them, are they still magic?

[Gordis]

And while we know Feanor created the tengwar for the express purpose of having a usable, intuitve alphabet, we don't know what Daeron was thinking when he created the cirth. He could potentially have created it for a less general purpose and so I would be cautious about applying the same rules of magical usage to both of them.
I don't agree, sorry. Cirth had been developed before Daeron:The Cirth were devised first in Beleriand by the Sindar, and were long used only for inscribing names and brief memorials upon wood or stone. To that origin they owe their angular shapes, very similar to the runes of our times, though they differed from these in details and were wholly different in arrangement. The Cirth in their older and simpler form spread eastward in the Second Age, and became known to many peoples, to Men and Dwarves, and even to Orcs, all of whom altered them to suit their purposes and according to their skill or lack of it. One such simple form was still used by the Men of Dale, and a similar one by the Rohirrim.
But in Beleriand, before the end of the First Age, the Cirth, partly under the influence of the Tengwar of the Noldor, were rearranged and further developed. Their richest and most ordered form was known as the Alphabet of Daeron, since in Elvish tradition it was said to have been devised by Daeron, the minstrel and loremaster of King Thingol of Doriath. Among the Eldar the Alphabet of Daeron did not develop true cursive forms, since for writing the Elves adopted the Fëanorian letters. -App ESo, basically Daeron only improved Cirth, and nothing is said about magic. Being a minstrel, not a magician, Daeron likely had mostly artistic and practical reasons.

I think writing (in runes or otherwise) is just writing, no more. It can be used to inscribe spells or laundry lists.

[Willow Oran]

I had forgotten that bit, thanks.:)

[Tinman]

are there any examples that exist of "magic users" out side of the 5 istari and saurons evil forces?

Any of the free people who could be concidered "lesser wizards"?

also, if none exist, could they theoretically exist? Could an istari teach a elf or man the ways of wizardry without that person becoming corrupt/being completely incapable of replicating their abilities?

[Gordis]

are there any examples that exist of "magic users" out side of the 5 istari and saurons evil forces??
Yes, the Dunedain smiths of Cardolan, who forged the magic Barrow swords enspelled against the Witch-King.

Also the shape-shifting people of Beorn.

Many Dunedain were capable of prophecy: Malbeth, Aragorn's grandmother, Aragorn himself, Halbarad - well almost every Numenorean King had this ability to an extent (see UT: Aldarion and Erendis).

Could an istari teach a elf or man the ways of wizardry without that person becoming corrupt/being completely incapable of replicating their abilities? Sauron was able to teach a mortal Numenorean (MOS) "great magic" - so, I believe, each of the Istari could have taught mortal adepts. But it seems they chose not to. Acquiring power "beyond the measure of his kind" was considered an evil thing in Tolkien's universe.

[Tinman]

My friend and I argued this last point. He seems to think that good magic comes from the valar, and evil magic comes from morgoth.

Any man attempting to access this power is the pulling it from morgoth... so no "good lesser wizards" could exist. they'd all turn out like Wiki or MOS

[Earniel]

Any man attempting to access this power is the pulling it from morgoth... so no "good lesser wizards" could exist. they'd all turn out like Wiki or MOS
Not necessarily, I think. The Númenorean line had Elf-blood in them. It would make sense in that regard that those of Númenorean descent could access some inherited Elven magic. (For example, Isildur cursing the people that would become the Dead of Dunharrow) But I imagine the skills any Men could get this way were very limited either way.

[Willow Oran]

Don't forget that they also have Melian way back there in the family tree, maiar-blood along with elvish, though it would certainly get less and less with each generation.

[Coffeehouse]

Hmm... interesting discussion. I am mostly in accord with Willow Oran, but I have some additions on the matter below
I think rune-letters in themselves are not magical, even the Moon-letters and Ithildin letters on Moria door are not magical per se, but simply a result of some higher technology that the outsiders mix with magic. Into the same category would fall the Palantiri, the hard stones of Orthanc etc.

What is magic about runes (for example those on the Anduril) is that they inscribe some spell once cast orally upon the object that the runes perpetuate. And if almost every competent smith can write runes on the object, only a very powerful person can cast the initial spell. So if a smith makes a replica of Anduril faithfully copying runes to a single tiny detail, the magic won't work at all: there was no initial spell cast orally.

The importance of saying/chanting spells aloud seems implied in the Legendarium. Gandalf says all his door-opening spells aloud, the WK shouts the words of the spell to open the Gates of Minas Tirith and, what is most convincing, IMO, is that Sauron had to utter the Ring-spell aloud, regardless of the danger of being overheard (and he was overheard by the Elves, which was detrimental to all his plans). But he simply HAD TO say it aloud.

The case of the One Ring is most enlightening. There was the initial spell uttered by Sauron back in SA 1600, and it is also written on the Ring. Isildur copied the Ring-spell on paper, but there was no magic about his notes. Gandalf spoke the Ash Nazg spell during the Council, but nothing bad has happened, apart from Elves wincing from the sounds of the Black Tongue. No doubt Saruman could make a replica of the One Ring and write Sauron's spell on it, but it wouldn't work: Saruman had not enough power and skill to reproduce the magic.

Definitely a good post Gordis, a few basic things but really I hadn't quite thought of it that way. The idea about the cast of the spell and how it isn't transferred in writing but in originally 'uttering' is compelling, I think I agree wholeheartedly with it. I'll also add, though I suspect everyone knows the answer, that the reason Gandalf is such a 'poor door wizard' is that Tolkiens keeps getting that urge to sacrifice him in the name of Hobbit simplicity, at least in the case of the Gate of Moria:p There really should be some saying for this.. 'Don't set wizards to simple tasks' or 'How many wizards does it take to open a door' or something:p

Gandalf got it right once though! He did get a few well-known dwarves to pop up at the right Hobbiton door back in the days.. ;)

[Willow Oran]

Or perhaps he just wasn't as fluent a reader of sindarin and dwarvish as everybody assumes he is... which is sort of a silly thought given how much time the character had to master new languages. But maybe the Maiar were much more attuned to mastering the spoken word and had a bit of a weakness where the written word was concerned. They would never have needed it except in interactions with the Eruhini and their works, and what tripped Gandalf up at the doors of Moria was written wordplay, after all.

This theory has a ridiculous number of holes, of course, I'm just thinking 'out loud' at the moment.;)