***********************
From a recent book review by John Houghton
… In “The Noldorization of the Edain: The Roman-Germani Paradigm for the Noldor and Edain in Tolkien’s Migration Era” (305-327), Richard Z. Gallant sets out extensive parallels between the encounters of Rome and the Germanic tribes and the relationships of the three houses of the Edain to the Fingolfian Noldor. The histories—written in each case by the more developed civilization—show the barbarians passing through three similar stages on their way from being tribes to becoming a kingdom: incorporation into the higher culture’s army, entrance into a state of association with that culture, and adoption of the other culture’s legal framework (in the secondary world, the “social norms and values” of the Noldor, 321).
Houghton, John (2020) "Tolkien and the Classical World (2021), edited by Hamish Williams," Journal of Tolkien Research: Vol. 11 : Iss. 2 , Article 4.
Review available for free at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/journaloftolkienresearch/vol11/iss2/4
Tolkien and the Classical World, edited by Hamish Williams, available at Powell's Books.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Note: This essay was inspired by Kossack IM in 2017, when they commented:
I am a bit surprised. I thought: Writing about the nothern heroic values — we surely will discuss Turin!
Out of of the three heroes of the Silmarillion — Tuor, Beren, Turin — Turin is the most tragic. And there isn’t even an oath or several to excuse him: Mostly his pride does him in. Including kinslaying (Brandir).
So, I’ve dedicated this essay to IM: thank you IM for pointing me in the direction of the Edain when I was at the time only focused on the Noldor and equally thank you for the inspiration!
*************************
… continued from last week ...
4. Noldorization-Romanization: Three Phases
The three chiefdoms (or kindreds, as Tolkien terms them) are essentially a tribal confederation and may be classified as gentes formed by, as Herwig Wolfram puts it, “constitutional and political processes” (1997: 8). These processes begin with the encounter of Elves and Men, and, to paraphrase Evangelos Chrysos (2003: 13), it is reasonable to expect that the Edain’s relationship with Elvendom had a tremendous impact in their formation15 as a confederation. In the Roman context, these constitutional and political processes were, according to Chrysos, the first phase of Romanization and of setting the barbarian gentes on the path to regnum. This first phase incorporated the “individual or corporate recruitment of barbarians during the migration period in the Roman army” (2003: 13-14). This, in turn, cultivated soldiers and officers in Roman social values and “solidarity with the Roman world” (ibid.).
[...] O CORNUTORUM SENIORUM - auxilia palatina Cornuti seniores [‘the horned ones’], the romanised “good barbarians” of Ammianus’ account of the Battle of Argentoratum [Strasbourg], 357 CE.
In the Elvish historical narrative, the three houses of the Edain find solidarity with the Elves and their ideology of overthrowing “the Shadow, or if that may not be, to keep it from spreading once more over all Middle-earth” (MR 310-311). Furthermore, such incorporation constituted not only the political and military structures of the Edain houses but also the Elvish warrior ethos.
The influence of the Elvish warrior ethos upon the Edain may be detected in their adoption of Northern courage, which the Noldor have displayed since their flight from Valinor (Gallant 2014, 2020). Wolfram notes that “[…] the driving force of tribal life was the pathos of heroism. Barbarian traditions are the tales of the ‘deeds of brave men’ – only the warrior matters; tribe and the army are one” (1997: 8). The Elvish narrators highlight this pathos of heroism in the Great Tales that center around heroes such as Túrin Turambar, Beren, and Tuor: heroes who are celebrated for their Northern courage. Tacitus presented this courage as one of the defining traits of his Germani. It was a courage that is stimulated by their ranks, which are composed of families and clans (Germ. 7) in which they kept faith, to the death, with the warband leader; later, when they were employed by the Roman Empire, this meant the Emperor.16 Any conflict of loyalty to the warband leader and cowardice leads to “infamy and reproach for life” (Germ. 14). This Germanic conflict-situation, for instance, underlies the story of Húrin’s comitatus-man Sador17 although Sador is presented as an old, lame, and kindly veteran. This is the Stoff 18 of the theory of Northern courage, the ethos of Germanic heroic epic.
Alan Lee Húrin on Horseback
We see that Men abide by a northern ethos of oaths, loyalty, and liege lords – the very virtues of loyalty to the chieftain described by Tacitus, among others. Bëor remains in “the service of the King of Nargothrond while his life lasted” and committed the rule of “his folk […] [to] Baran, his elder son” (Sil 165). Húrin’s statement to his wife Morwen – “When I am summoned, Morwen Eledhwen, I shall leave in your keeping the heir of the House of Hador” (CH 45, italics added) – illustrates the Chieftain’s obligation to the Elvish lords and subscribing to the warrior ethos of Northern courage and the comitatus.
The comitatus in Classical times was a manifestation of this creed or ethos. Speidel notes that “warbands (Männerbünde) with their own ways of bravery and ‘willfulness’, underpinned these warrior styles. Sanskrit svadhā, ‘inherent power, habitual state, custom’, is kindred to Greek and English ethos, ‘character, behavior’, and to Latin sodales ‘warband’.” (2004: 193). What holds the comitatus together is the “creed of unyielding will” (BMC 21) that allows a chief’s followers “to defend, to protect him, to ascribe one’s own brave deeds to his renown […]” (Germ. 14). This creed is made explicit by swearing an oath:
The man is received into it [i.e. the comitatus] by swearing an oath of allegiance to his master, placing his hands in his Lord’s hands or his head on his [Lord’s] knee. As a result, he is committed to unconditional obedience and firm loyalty. The Lord in turn gives him the necessary livelihood, food and weapons, and at other times also special gifts.19 (de Vries 1964: 60, my translation)
The oath strongly enforces and reinforces the norms and values of the ethos’ code of behavior. This ethos is not only a creed of conduct by which heroes behaved accordingly but also an “outlook of chieftains and the picked warriors of their comitatus” (ibid.). In other words, it is an ethos that constituted social and political entities.
The second phase of Romanizing the gentes into regnum, Chrysos explains, “is the path migrating gentes took when they entered the wide orbit of the Roman world either in accordance with a peace treaty as foederati or subjected to Roman domination as dediticii” (2003: 14). In Tolkien’s Beleriand, as conquest or aggression between Elves and Edain is nonexistent at this time, there is no need for explicit peace treaties. Rather, Elves and Men embrace each other much like long-lost brothers: “love for them [the Edain] stirred in his [Felagund’s] heart,” and “they loved him” (Sil 162-163). Nevertheless, the encounter of Felagund (a Fingolfian and the Lord of Nargothrond) sparks the establishment of the (Elvish) hegemony and its (Edain) vassals. The relationship is, nonetheless, a foederati or gentiles sort of relationship with what we may consider functionally as an ‘empire’, in which they took Felagund as their lord “and were ever after loyal to the House of Finarfin” (ibid.).
The establishment of power relations between the Eldar and Men begins almost as soon as the Edain are introduced. Our first impression of the Second-comers is that “they were tall, and strong, and comely, though rude and scantily clad; but their camp was well-ordered, and they had tents and lodges of boughs about the great fire in the midst; and there were fair women and children among them” (WJ 216). The Noldorin rhetoric is not unlike Tacitus’ description of the Germani: “fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames […]. They wrap themselves in a cloak which is fastened with a clasp […]” (Germ. 4.17). What is more interesting, however, is a political process establishing power relations, which begins immediately. Firstly, it mirrors Roman-barbarian relations, and, secondly, it falls within the ethos of Northern courage that first defined the Eldar, beginning with Fëanor (Gallant 2014: 109).
Ted Naismith
The encounter that establishes the Eldar-Atani relationship begins simply enough – Felagund picks up a crude harp as the Men sleep, and he begins to play and sing. There is a quality of enchantment to his song so that those who wake up and listen find that “wisdom was in the words of the Elven-king, and the hearts grew wiser that hearkened to him […]” (Sil 163). The enchanting song reveals the ontological20 wisdom of the Elves:
Thus, it was that Men called King Felagund, whom they first met of all the Eldar, Wisdom, and after him they named his people The Wise. Indeed they believed at first that Felagund was one of the gods, of whom they had heard rumour that they dwelt far in the West; and this was (some say) the chief cause of their journey. But Felagund dwelt among them and taught them true lore: and they loved him and took him for their lord, and were ever after loyal to the house of Finrod. (WJ 217).
Felagund’s song21 establishes his position as a vastly more wise and noble being, and the Edain ascribe this characteristic to all of the Eldar as “The Wise.” The superior wisdom of King Felagund drives Bëor’s people into a consensual but vassal-like fealty. Balan is the leader of the Edain (they do not have kings, yet, which is another signifier of a primitive Germanic people), but he, upon meeting Felagund, changes his name to Bëor, which in fact means vassal (Sil 165; WJ 217). This becomes a title that the leaders bear until the time of Bregolas and Barahir (WJ 217). Bëor’s name-change and abnegation of rule suggest that a process of vassalization begins immediately during this first encounter.
This relationship in which Bëor’s people enter with Felagund, and eventually that of all Edain with the Noldor, mirrors the relationship of laeti or gentiles with Rome, in which barbarians are granted land, status, and protection within the empire in return for military service (Maas 2012: 63). Thus, Bëor’s people “came into Dorthonian and dwelt in lands ruled by the house of Finarfin” (Sil 166), and Haleth settles in Brethil on the condition that she protects Thingol’s borders and the Crossing of Teiglin. Eventually, the Elf-kings, “seeing that it was not good for Elves and Men to dwell mingled together without order, and that Men needed lords of their own kind, set regions apart where Men could live their own lives, and appointed chieftains to hold these lands freely” (Sil 171, italics added).
Nevertheless, the second phase of the ‘Romanization’ process is seen in Bëor’s example of vassalization and in developing the institution of the Germanic comitatus among the Edain nobility:22
Then many young and eager men of the Edain went away and took service with the kings and lords of the Eldar. Among these was Malach son of Marach, and he dwelt in Hithlum for fourteen years; and he learned the Elven-tongue and was given the name Aradan. (WJ 219)
Here, young men of the elite take service in the courts, learning their ways and language and even taking on foreign names. This was quite a common practice among the Romans and barbarians and an effective measure of Romanization. On the Roman model of appointing client kings (‘chieftains’), Michael Kulikowski notes as follows:
[…] Roman policy had always encouraged to flourish along imperial borders, kings who supplied a measure because of the stability that came with continuity of family and status, but who could also be kept weak enough to present very infrequent challenges to the empire. What such client kings actually ruled was always contingent upon what the emperor allowed them to rule at any given time – their royal authority was real, and recognized by their followers, but insecurely linked to the land in which that authority happened to be exercised. (2012: 33)
These Germanic client kingdoms were “firmly part of the Roman world” (Heather 2006, 83) but were also subject to unrest and rebellion. However, in Tolkien’s world, because the Noldor have no fear of rebellious Edain chieftains, there is no indication that they are kept weak as the Romans kept their client kings. The Elvish hegemony appointed Edain kings (chieftains) to rule designated lands within Elvish territory with an obligation of military support. These Elvish lands (Dorthonian, Dor-lómin, Brethil) that are given to the Edain to settle in under the power of their own (appointed) lords are ‘bufferzones’ to Anfauglith/Ard-galen and Thangorodrim.
We are perhaps reminded here of Constantine’s reforms and his “defense in depth” (Southern and Dixon 1996: 37-38) strategy of deploying permanent mobile field armies, especially in the context of the Eldar settling Edain in buffer-zones. The Roman Empire established buffer zones along the frontier, often manned by local limitanei garrisons and/or laeti and gentiles, who would take the brunt of any attack over the borders (Zos. II. 34. 2). On this arrangement, Millett remarks as follows:
[This was a] [l]oosely decentralized administration which allowed overall control by Rome while leaving the low-level administration in the hands of traditional aristocracies. This enabled most area brought under Roman control to be run without a significant military presence and with light burden on the conquerors. (Millett 1990: 8)
The process of transforming the Edain gentes into a regnum on the frontier, as well as their military obligation to the Elvish lords, seems to be the role in which the Eldar have placed the Edain. Their military obligation becomes clearer in the narration, and it is likely voluntary as well as obligatory since the Edain also subscribe to the ideology of containing the Shadow.
Húrin states as follows: “If it be the Elvin-kings fall, then it must go evilly with the Edain; and we dwell nearest to the Enemy” (CH 46, italics added). Several hints of this role that the Elvish kings ascribe to the Edain are also provided to us in The Silmarillion; for example, when Caranthir offers Haleth recompense after an orc raid “and seeing, over late, what valour there was in the Edain, he said to her: ‘If you will remove and dwell further north, there you shall have the friendship and protection of the Eldar, and free lands of your own” (Sil 170). Or we may consider King Thingol commanding that “Men should take no lands to dwell in save in the north…” (Sil 167, italics added) – conveniently between Morgoth and his Elvish kingdom. The Sindarin King Thingol, in this narrative, does not seem to hold the Edain with the same esteem as the Noldorin chroniclers. Subsequently, he forbids them from entering his kingdom because of troubling dreams (and, it may be said, they settled too close) (Sil 167).
The third phase, according to Chrysos, is the adoption of the Roman legal framework for the “physical existence and the institutional consolidation of the new politics as regna” (2003: 16). Tolkien, however, did not leave us with a leges barbarorum or very much in the area of Elvish law outside the sphere of the mortality/immortality divide.23
Furthermore, one may argue that a true regnum of Men did not reach fruition until the Akallabêth, which describes various laws in detail, particularly regarding succession. Nonetheless, we do see the start of the processes of regnum by means of acculturation and adoption of social norms and values – Noldorization.
In the case of the Edain, the text explains that Men, like Roman laeti, “were the allies of the Eldar in war but marched under their own leaders”; however, they also take “service with the kings and lords of the Eldar,” “the most part of them soon learned the Grey-elven tongue,” and they even raised monuments dedicated in Sindar such as Haleth’s barrow, “Tór Haretha, the Lady Barrow, Haudh-en-Arwen in the Sindarin tongue” (Sil 170-171).
Tolkien, the philologist, seems to stress the importance of language as a cornerstone to Elvendom and acculturation. In the Roman world, it was likewise especially important in the Romanization process to adopt Latin as the official language. “You also needed to speak ‘proper’ Latin, so that Latin literary education spread too, and to show that you had bought into the values of classical civilization” (Heather 2006: 439). Tacitus clearly emphasizes this in his Agricola:
He [Agricola] likewise provided a liberal education for the sons of chiefs, and showed such a preference for the natural powers of the Britons over the industry of the Gauls that they who lately disdained the tongue of Rome now coveted its eloquence. (21; Church and Brodribb (trans.) 1942)
Furthermore, language is an important expression of acculturation that is performed as it is spoken or sung. It “is a product of culture, that is, it is cultivated” (See ‘Laws and Customs among the Eldar’ (MR 207-253)). This is also true of the Noldorization of the Edain. The members of House of Bëor forsake their own language in favor of the language of the Eldar. Later, as the other two kindreds came into contact with the House of Bëor, more language problems between them are solved by the ‘lingua franca’ of Sindarin (WJ 219). A process of linguistic and Elvish cultural assimilation turns these kindreds into “Elf-friends” (Sil 164).
The assimilation of Edain into Eldar nobility: “an extensive nexus of kinships at all social levels, including the leading figures in the gentes among themselves and with members of the Roman aristocracy and even the imperial families […]”
The cultural assimilation of the Edain is not limited to language and abstract concepts. There is also the traditional and material culture of the Edain that plays no small part in the later legendarium, specifically in The Lord of the Rings. During the second phase of Romano-Germanic kingdom generation, Chrysos writes that among Romans and barbarians, there was “an extensive nexus of kinships at all social levels, including the leading figures in the gentes among themselves and with members of the Roman aristocracy and even the imperial families […]” — leading figures who were expected to conform to the “demand for access to standardized forms of political discourse […] by the regna” (2003: 15). Furthermore, this demand required the following:
[That there were] several forms of imitatio imperii […]. [For example,] [t]he court, the language, public ceremonies involving the king, court rituals, his titles and dress, forms of distinct munificence to the people and many other expressions of power were imitating Roman forms that were thought to safeguard and support the position of the rex as dominus over his gens and the Roman population in his regnum. (16)
What we see during the First Age (and certainly during the Second and Third Ages) is a creation of this kinship nexus among the “royalty” of the Eldar and Edain: Lúthien and Beren, Tuor and Idril, Elwing and Eärendil, as well as their offspring Elrond and Elros, who eventually claim leadership over the Eldar and Atani respectively. Their political discourse is harmonized, or ‘universalized’, in order to further the Fingolfian ideology of withstanding the Shadow of Morgoth. Furthermore, cultural traditions such as (the Sindarin) language, courtly education, and military cohorts and formations are carried out by the Edain, Númenórean kings, and Dúnedain throughout the ages to “safeguard and support the position of the rex as dominus over his gens in his regna” (Chrysos 2003: 16).
Anke Eißmann Finrod bequeaths his ring, and his oath, to Barahir
Symbols of the cultural traditions, material culture, are also carried by the kings of Men. If we recall the Battle of Sudden Flame, the comitatus of Barahir fights through hordes of orcs to save king Finrod Felagund. Like a heroic warlord giving arm rings to his men, Felagund “swore an oath of abiding friendship and aid in every need to Barahir and all his kin, and in token of his vow he gave to Barahir his ring” (Sil 176). The ring “was in the fashion of two serpents with emerald eyes, one devouring and the other serpent supporting a crown of golden flowers” (Foster 2003: 347), and in time it serves to identify the descendants of Barahir.25
“… was in the fashion of two serpents with emerald eyes, one devouring and the other serpent supporting a crown of golden flowers” (Foster 2003: 347
Beren uses the ring to plead for Felagund’s aid, after which it disappears from the Quenta Silmarillion narrative. Like similar accoutrements and artifacts given to barbarian kings by the Romans, the Ring of Barahir symbolizes not only the rex but also, later, the majesty of Gondor and her pedigree: “Roman artifacts were greatly desired and their distribution a means by which kings in these areas maintained their power” (Halsall 2014: 69). Or, in our context of Elvendom and the West, its importance in “safeguarding and supporting the position of the rex” (Chrysos 2003: 16) becomes clear in Appendix A to The Lord of the Rings (RK 323) as it is an heirloom of the Northern Kingdom along with the Shards of Narsil, the star of Elendil, and the scepter of Ann minas. These “heirlooms” are material culture traditions that reinforce the authority of kings and give Aragorn the right to rule.
Beren uses the ring to plead for Felagund’s aid, after which it disappears from the Quenta Silmarillion narrative. Illustration by Anke Eißman
Note that in the Roman world, “[R]oman ideas of power, mediated through objects associated with the Empire,” in which “[…] the barbarians employed Roman material to emphasise [sic] status, or differential access to power […].” (Halsall 2014: 58). Likewise, in Middle-earth, these material artifacts are symbols of lineage, pedigree, and rightful kingship.
5. Conclusion
Tolkien’s migratory First Age provides certain conditions that are structurally reminiscent of the Migration Era of the Roman world in the fourth and fifth centuries. These conditions provide for a structurally ideological framework in which acculturation, or Noldorization, enables the confederation of the Edain to progress from a gentes-like state of the Edain Houses to the regnum of Númenor. The power dynamics of this relationship are similar in function to the dynamics between Romans and Germanic barbarian confederations of the Migration Era, in which Noldorization consists of vassal relationships, military support and buffer zones, the education of aristocratic youth in Noldorin royal courts, and the language acquisition of Sindar (the language of the Grey Elves). In addition, this relationship produces material and cultural symbols that the Edain aristocratic elite carry as core-traditions of identity, which are interlaced throughout the legendarium and add a sense of verisimilitude. The process of Noldorization and its resulting heroic conflict-situations, which form the Stoff of Germanic heroic epics, provide fertile ground for the Great Tales and the Fingolfin/Edain sapientia, whose purpose is “to defend the Children of Eru, Andreth, all the Children and not the proud Eldar only!”
Links to previous diaries in the series
Notes
15 “If we base our analysis on the well-established and accepted assumption about the gentes being not solidly formed and statically established racial entities but groups of people open to constant ethnogenetic change and adaptation to new realities, then it is reasonable to expect that their relationship with the Empire had a tremendous impact on their formation” (Chrysos 2003: 13).
16 “[T]heir ethic was to keep faith with the warband leader – in this case the Roman emperor” (Speidel 2004: 197). This very duty to liege lord, the discipline and valour of ‘barbarians’, Tolkien keenly illustrates during the Battle of Unnumbered Tears where H rin and Huor allow their lord Turgon to escape and form a shield wall at the stream of Rivil where they stood against all “hosts” of Angband who “swarmed” against them (CH 59).
17 Thanks to Thomas Honegger for pointing out the irony of Sador’s lameness as it is due to a not-very- Germanic self-inflicted wound while cutting wood.
18 “Unter Stoff ist nicht das Stoffliche schlechthin als Gegenpol zu dem formalen Strukturelement der Dichtung zu verstehen, also nich talles, was die Natur der Dichtung als Rohstoff liefert, sondern eine durch Handlungskomponenten verknüpfte, schon au erhalb der Dichtung vorgepr gte Fabel, ein Plot , der das Erlebnis, Vision, Bericht, Ereignis, berlieferung durch Mythos und Religion oder als historische Begebenheit an den Dichter herangetragen wird und ihm einen Anreiz zu künstlerischer Gestaltung bietet” (Frenzel 2005: vii). “Under Stoff, the material is not simply the antipole to the formal structural element of poetry as raw material, but rather a fable linked by components of action, already pre-shaped outside of poetry, a “plot” that describes the experience, vision, report, event, and tradition through myth and religion or as a historical event brought up to the poet and offering him an incentive for artistic design” (my translation).
19 “Diese Wort setzt ein Treueverh ltnis voraus. Das ist auch wohl das wichtigste Merkmal der Gefolgschaft. Der Mann wird in sie aufgenommen, indem er seinem Herrn einen Treueid schw rt und dabei die H nde in die des Herrn oder sein Haupt auf dessen Knie legt. Dadurch ist er zu unbedingtem Gehorsam und fester Treue verpflichtet. Der Herr seinerseits gibt ihm den notwendigen Lebensunterhalt, Speise und Waffen, und daneben zu bestimmten Zeitpunkten auch besondere Geschenke” (de Vries 1964: 60).
20 Ontological differences of being are inherent in the Elves and Men by decree of Il vatar, Tolkien’s godhead. These differences center around mortality and immortality as well as the ‘higher’ culture of Elvish sub-creation and wisdom. Note, however, as Men are ‘Noldorized’, the ontological differences begin to blur, again by divine decree. The Edain, and subsequently the N men reans, experience a longevity of life and a sub-creativity of their own, becoming more ‘Elf-like’ to a certain degree. This ontological ‘uplifting’ also establishes the differences and boundaries between the ‘Higher Men’ and ‘Middle Men’ when the Faithful return to Middle-earth.
21 We can assume both form and content of the song have an enchanting and superior aesthetic quality that overwhelms B or’s people.
22 “Very noble birth or great services rendered by the father secure for the lads the rank of a chief; such lads attach themselves to men of mature strength and of long approved valour. It is no shame to be seen among the chief’s followers. Even in his escort there are graduations of rank, dependent on the choice of the man to whom they are attached […]. The chief fights for victory; his vassals fight for the chief […]” (Tac. Germ.13, 14).
24 It should be noted that in contrast to Hatto, Tolkien actually does equate language with physical, racial appearance: “[…] the language of Hador was apparently less changed and more uniform in style, whereas the language of B or contained many elements that were alien in character. This contrast in speech was probably connected with the observable physical differences between the two peoples” (PME 308). This seems to be the old, traditional proposition that “a race = a culture = a language” (Barth 1998: 11).
25 “An Elven-ring, made by the Noldor in Valinor and given by Finrod to Barahir during Dagor Bragollach as a pledge of his aid to Barahir and his kin. When Barahir was slain in Dorthonion, his hand bearing the ring, was cut off as proof of his death, but Beren recovered both hand and ring, at great peril to himself. He brought the ring to Nargothrond during the Quest of the Silmarils, and Finrod fulfilled his pledge, giving his life to save Beren in the dungeons of Minas Tirith. The ring was somehow preserved through the rest of the First Age (probably by Dior and Elwing), and apparently passed into the hands of the Faithful of N menor in the Second. In the Third Age it was one of the heirlooms of the North-kingdom; at the fall of Arthedain Arvedui gave it to the chief of the Lossoth, from whom it was afterwards ransomed. Thereafter it was kept at Rivendell” (Foster 2003: 347).
Bibliography
Ammianus Marcellinus .The Later Roman Empire (AD 354-378). 2004. Translated by Walter Hamilton. 2004. First edition 1986. London: Penguin Books.
Ando, Clifford. 2000. Imperial Ideology and the Provincial Loyalty in the Roman Empire. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.
2005. ‘Interpretatio Romana.’ Classical Philology 100 (1): 41-51.
Richard Gallant : The Roman-Germani Paradigm for the Noldor and Edain 325
Barth, Fredrik. 1998. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference. Long Grove: Waveland Press.
Church, Alfred J. and William Jackson Brodribb (trans.). 1942. Complete Works of Tacitus. Edited by Moses Hadas. New York: Random House.
Chrysos, Evangelos. 2003. ‘The Empire, the Gentes and the Regna.’ In J rg Jarnut and Walter Pohl (eds.), with the collaboration of S ren Kaschke and Hans-Werner Goetz. Regna and Gentes. Leiden: Brill, 13-19.
de Vries, Jan. 1964. Die geistige Welt der Germanen. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Foster, Robert. 2003. The Complete Guide to Middle-earth: From The Hobbit to The Silmarillion. London: HarperCollins.
Frenzel, Elisabeth. 2005. Stoffe der Weltliterature: Ein Lexikon dichtungsgeschichtlicher
L ngsschnitte. Tenth edition, überabeitete und erweiterte Auglage unter Mitarbeit von Sybille Grammetbauer. First edition 1962. Stuttgart: Alfred Kr ner.
Gallant, Richard Z. 2014. ‘Original Sin in Heorot and Valinor.’ Tolkien Studies 11: 109-129. 2020. ‘The ‘Wyrdwrīteras’ of Elvish History: Northern Courage, Historical Bias, and Literary Artifact as Illustrative Narrative.’ Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, and Mythopoetic Literature 38.2 (no. 136): 25-44. .
Hall, Edith. 1989. Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halsall, Guy. 2014. Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hamilton, Walter (trans.). 2004. Ammianus Marcellinus: The Later Roman Empire (AD 354-378). First edition 1986. London: Penguin Books.
Hatto, A.T. (ed.). 1980. The Traditions of Heroic and Epic Poetry. Volume 1: The Traditions. London: The Modern Humanities Research Association. 1989. Traditions of Heroic and Epic Poetry. Volume 2: Characteristics and Techniques. London: The Modern Humanities Research Association.
Haverfield, Francis J. 1923. The Romanization of Roman Britain. Fourth edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Heather, Peter. 2006. The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hingley, Richard. 2005. Globalizing Roman Culture: Unity, Diversity and Empire. London: Routledge.
Hornblower, Simon, Antony Spawforth, and Esther Eidinow (eds.). 2012. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jordanes. The Origin and Deeds of the Goths. 2014. Translated by Charles C. Mierow. First edition 1908. Edited by J rg Jarnut and Walter Pohl with the collaboration of S ren Kaschke and Hans-Werner Goetz. Wroclaw: Amazon.
Kulikowski, Michael. 2002. ‘Nation versus Army: A Necessary Contrast?’ In Andrew Gillet (ed.). On Barbarian Identity: Critical Approaches to Ethnicity in the Early Middle Ages. Turnhout: Brepols, 69-84.
2012. ‘The Western Kingdoms.’ In Scott Fitzgerald Johnson (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 31-59.
Maas, Michael. 2012. ‘Barbarians: Problems and Approaches.’ In Scott Fitzgerald Johnson (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 60-91.
MacGeorge, Penny. 2002. Late Roman Warlords. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mathisen, Ralph W. 2011. ‘Catalogues of Barbarians in Late Antiquity.’ In Ralph W. Mathisen and Danuta Shanzer (eds.). Romans, Barbarians, and the Transformation of the Roman World. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 17-32.
Mierow, Charles C. (trans.). 2014. Jordanes: The Origin and Deeds of the Goths. First edition 1908. Edited by J rg Jarnut and Walter Pohl with the collaboration of S ren Kaschke and Hans-Werner Goetz. Wroclaw: Amazon.
Millett, Martin. 1990. The Romanization of Britain: An Essay in Archaeological Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Obertino, James. 2006. ‘Barbarians and Imperialism in Tacitus and The Lord of the Rings.’ Tolkien Studies 3: 117-131.
Ridley, Ronald T. (trans.). 1982. Zosimus: New History. Volume 2. Leiden: Brill.
Scanlon, Larry. 1994. Narrative, Authority and Power: The Medieval Exemplum and the Chaucerian Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Southern, Pat and Karen R. Dixon. 1996. The Late Roman Army. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Speidel, Michael P. 2004. Ancient Germanic Warriors: Warrior Styles from Trajan’s Column to Icelandic Sagas. London: Routledge.
Straubhaar, Sandra Ballif. 2004. ‘Myth, Late Roman History, and Multiculturalism in Tolkien’s Middle-earth.’ In Jane Chance (ed.). Tolkien and the Invention of Myth: A Reader. Lexington KY: University of Kentucky Press, 101-117.
Tolkien, J.R.R. 1965a. The Return of the King. Second edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
1965b. The Two Towers. Second edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
1998. Unfinished Tales. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. London: HarperCollins.
1999. The Silmarillion. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. London: HarperCollins.
2002a. Morgoth’s Ring. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. The History of Middleearth 10. London: HarperCollins.
2002b. The Peoples of Middle-earth. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. The History of Middle-earth 12. London: HarperCollins.
2002c. The War of the Jewels. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. The History of Middle-earth 11. London: HarperCollins.
2008. The Children of H rin. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. London: HarperCollins.
White, Hayden. 1985. ‘The Historical Text as Literary Artifact.’ In Tropics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 81-100.
Wolfram, Herwig. 1997. The Roman Empire and Its Germanic Peoples. Translated by Thomas Dunlap. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.
Woolf, Greg. 2013. ‘Ethnography and the Gods in Tacitus’ Germania.’ In Eran Almagor and Joseph Skinner (eds.). Ancient Ethnography: New Approaches.
London: Bloomsbury Academic, 133-152.
Zosimus. New History. Volume 2. 1982. Translated by Ronald T. Ridley. Leiden: Brill.
About the Author
Jeff Dem holds a BA in Russian and Eastern European Studies and Creative Writing from the University of Michigan, a MA in Germanic Languages and Literatures from the University of Virginia, and a Dr. phil. (magna cum laude) from the Philosophische Fakultät of the Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena in Anglistische Mediävistik. His dissertation 'The Germanic Narrative of the Eldar in J. R. R. Tolkien’s Legendarium: Northern Courage, Wyrd and Redemption' is soon to be submitted as a book.
READERS & BOOK LOVERS SERIES SCHEDULE
