Whitney Evans Harrison Profile picture
Sep 12, 2022 27 tweets 9 min read Read on X
Since it seems unlikely we'll get a course-correction on this oath in #TheRingsOfPower, here's a thread I've wanted to do for awhile now about why Finrod's oath of sacrifice mattered for the outcome of the whole 1st Age.

Buckle up, this is one of my absolute favorite topics:
🧵
Thesis: the 1 Silmaril wrested from Morgoth w/o direct intervention of the Valar is only acquired b/c another oath from the doomed House of Finwë is fulfilled that serves as a counter-balance to the Oath of Fëanor.

So let's do some oath analysis:
2/25 Image
Oaths by the House of Finwë basically drive the First Age of Middle-earth, so let's look at these 2 side by side. They both move in three parts:

1) the action the oath promises,
2) the group it is promised to, and
3) the relation of the swearer to an associated object

3/25 ImageImage
In Fëanor’s oath, the action promised is pursuit with vengeance and hatred, a pledge of destruction and revenge.
4/25 Image
In Finrod’s oath, the action promised is “abiding friendship and aid in every need,” a pledge of love returned and in fact returned exponentially for what was given.
5/25 Image
Both are promised actions that escalate far beyond the inciting event: a stolen possession repaid with pursuit to the ends of the earth and a life once saved repaid with the promise of help in every need to a whole bloodline rather than a one-off return to pay the debt.
6/25
Also in both oaths, the group it’s directed toward expands far beyond the inciting event to include people/generations who do not exist at the time of the swearing:
7/25
In Fëanor’s oath, the subject moves from Morgoth who stole the Silmarils to include literally any creature you can imagine who might exist throughout history who has the audacity to come into possession of a Silmaril—even if they merely found one.
8/25 Image
This trail of wreckage ends up including entire kingdoms, repeated treachery, multiple kinslayings, and even young children left to perish in the wilderness.
9/25
In Finrod’s oath, the recipient moves from Barahir to include any of Barahir's kin as well. It expands beyond a “you had my back, now I have yours” return to encompass any current & presumably future generations. Further, it isn't aid in any need, it's aid in *every* need.
10/25
An immortal being making a promise like that means Finrod was signing up to potentially be on the hook to fulfill this oath repeatedly for thousands of years to a frick ton of ever-multiplying Barahir descendants if it hadn’t claimed his life within the first generation.
11/25 Image
Finally, you have the contrast between the relation of the swearer to an object involved in the oath:
12/25 ImageImage
In the Oath of Fëanor, it’s all about the swearers retaining (or regaining) possession of the valuable item(s) they consider central to their identity. If anyone else holds a Silmaril, it is a direct affront to their power, property, and birthright.
13/25
In Finrod’s, he instead takes the item that's a visible representation of his identity (the ring his father gave him that signifies his place in the family, his inherited position, and his father’s blessing—the badge of the house of Finarfin) & he gives it away to another.
14/25 Image
So in effect, you have an oath of taking going up against an oath of giving & in some way they seem to at least temporarily cancel each other out. Or at any rate, the oath of giving holds the oath of taking at bay as it is being fulfilled, which allows the quest to succeed.
15/25
To me, this all comes down to the primary animating power behind each oath: possessive love vs sacrificial love.

Or, to put it another way, it hinges on each oath-swearer's relationship to power and how it's used—a theme we see time and time again in Tolkien's writing.
16/25
Fëanor and his sons are driven by the need to be the sole possessors of the "unsullied light, and masters of the bliss and beauty of Arda.” This leads them so far as to even embrace racial supremacy as they add that "no other race shall oust us."
17/25 Image
This, of course, is an outgrowth of the whisperings of Melkor regarding the coming of Men: that they would supplant the Firstborn Children of Ilúvatar and that the Valar were party to this disinheritance.
18/25 Image
Whereas from the moment Finrod discovers the Edain, "love for them stirred in his heart" and he works consistently as a mediator to establish peace and friendship between the various Elven peoples and Men, which undergirds his oath and bond to Barahir.
19/25 Image
Put more succinctly: the oath of Fëanor is undertaken in the pursuit of supremacy and the oath of Finrod is undertaken in the pursuit of relationship.
20/25
Both oaths ultimately lead to the swearers losing their realms, treasures, power, freedom, and ultimately their lives. But pivotally, those losses are the costs extracted by the oath of Fëanor while they are losses willingly relinquished by Finrod as he seeks to fulfil his.
21/25
This is especially of note as Finrod uses the symbol of his own inheritance as the mark of his oath. He gives his own birthright to the Edain and thus even his own familial crest becomes known to history as "the ring of Barahir" rather than the ring of Felagund.
22/25 Image
He therefore serves as the antithesis of the racial supremacy Fëanor stirs up in the Noldor and simultaneously a model of what was intended for the Elves: to prepare the way for the Secondborn and pass the world on to them freely.
23/25
Again it is that very Tolkienian contrast of taking up power to master something versus laying power down to preserve something.
24/25
And so we return to where we began: changing Finrod's oath to one of aggression in #TheRingsOfPower fundamentally undercuts what it represented within the House of Finwë and within the First Age as a whole.
25/25
Art from the thread above from:
@AlanLee11225760
@JennyDolfen
Marya Filatova
Elena Kukanova
(and others for which I haven't been able to track down credits)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Whitney Evans Harrison

Whitney Evans Harrison Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Wevans0987

Dec 16, 2022
I have come back to this truth so often in the last year and a half. "Just let the justice system do it's thing" is what we're told over and over again as a critique for speaking publicly. The issue with that? Court deals with the aftermath, not the cause.
1/7
If your plan is to just rely on the justice system to "fix" the abuse that happened on your watch, then what what you're telling us is you're fine with maintaining a culture and system in which abuse was able to take root and flourish.
2/7
The justice system metes out consequences for actions taken, it does not change the culture that enabled those actions. Which is why @ACNAtoo has asked from day one for a thorough, independent investigation that addresses exactly those dynamics.
3/7 Image
Read 7 tweets
Nov 15, 2022
Just a reminder that Bp. Minns (who @ArchbishopFoley has put on duty to chaperone Bp. Ruch after his return) was already involved in supervising another @The_ACNA response to clergy abuse as an interim bishop.

Spoiler: it did not go well.🧵 (1/5)
acnatoo.org/pittsburgh/our…
He challenged the survivors' narrative at their first meeting, despite their stories having previously been confirmed by an investigation, and refused to discuss how their stories would be shared publicly to the parish.
(2/5)
He then proceeded to provide inaccurate answers at the subsequent parish Q&A session, despite having access to the accurate information via the previously completed investigation.
(3/5)
Read 5 tweets
Nov 1, 2022
Ah shit, this is going to be a whole thread isn't it... Ok, you know what? Let's go. 🧵

The arrival of the Noldor in Beleriand sets the stage for all of this. You have some of the original inhabitants (Thingol/Sindar) establishing the groundwork expectations re their home:
1/20 Image
The other princes of the Noldor (esp the sons of Fëanor) respond with anger at the perceived coldness when they expected to be welcomed as conquering/liberating heroes. Instead, they are rightly seen as posing an additional threat to the freedom and autonomy of the Sindar.
2/20
In response to this "slight," they turn their anger toward Finrod and his brothers as the messengers bearing the Sindar's requested boundaries, and immediately draw prejudicial lines based on "purity" of blood:
3/20 Image
Read 21 tweets
Apr 27, 2022
Helen's comparison here has stuck with me ever since I first read it when she submitted her pieces for publication.
What does it say about us as Christians when we vocally limit our care to only those "within" our circles? Where is our love of neighbor? Does Christ's love stop at the doors of your church foyer?
How can the Church hold up its head when we name someone who has consistently owned the complexities of her story and worked tirelessly to protect those who came after as "the devil's instrument"?
Read 5 tweets
Apr 25, 2022
Helen is one of the most thorough, detailed, and conscience-driven people I have had the honor of speaking with. I'm so incredibly thankful to her for speaking out and detailing her experience on the @MidwestAnglican Bishop's Council:
"If the church had always known that nobody from it actually reported this incident, then why was the message that 'we had done the right thing — we had reported this to the officials' the one that was trumpeted loudly for most of 2021, two years after these events took place?" Image
Regarding a letter from Bp. Stewart indicating his intent to end his LOA:

"I was dismayed with how very often throughout the letter Bp. Stewart used the singular possessive — me, my, mine — to describe the Diocese, the Bishopric and his own rights and position." Image
Read 10 tweets
Jul 10, 2021
The assertion here that Rez is tangential is nonsense. a) Rez is Stewart's seat and a large percentage of those involved in handling the abuse investigation are there
b) To quote: "seven of the victims were attending Church of the Resurrection at the time they were victimized (4 of whom were Rez youth).
c) Any church plant that comes out of "Mother Resurrection" is absolutely connected to it. You are not allowed the role of church planter out of Rez without being significantly tied to and part of that broader culture. "Daughter churches," is what they call their plants.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(