Lord of the Rings Fanatics Plaza

I read a rumor in an article on the Amazon series that the actress Ema Horvath has been cast to play Isildur's sister, "Carine." If true, she is an invented character, but that's not the purpose I started this thread.

I started wondering how the TV series would portray Isildur, because in Peter Jackson's movies it was obvious Isildur was a "weakness" that Aragorn needed to overcome. Grumpy Elrond proclaims that "Men are weak" and Aragorn has a line about Isildur's blood flows through his veins, "the same weakness."

These musings led to the ultimate purpose of this thread, in wondering what other people thought about Tolkien's Isildur. Sort of similar in the Celebrimbor thread, discussing the friendship between Celebrimbor and "Annatar," what are people's impressions of Tolkien's Isildur? Would you say when he claims the Ring after Sauron is thrown down (by Gil-galad and Elendil) that is merely a moment of weakness? Or is there something more, that Isildur is actually a weak, as in he has a weak will, character? And overall, just what are you impressions of Isildur?

Since getting to grips with Tolkien's various engagements with the end of ancient English history as he glimpsed it through Beowulf, I cannot escape the feeling that Isildur was drawn from the historical Ingeld, last of the priest-kings of the ancient North.

This is an amazing lost story, which Tolkien has given us (but as he only comments and not invents there is no copyright, and if the movie and TV studios had a whit of genuine creative insight this is the story they would have brought now to the screens!) Tolkien discusses the 'tragedy' of Ingeld and Freawaru in 'On Fairy-stories' but you need to read the commentary on Beowulf to get the historical picture that he (singularly among scholars, it seems) reconstructed.

In the ancient North was a confederacy of tribes, including the Angles (English) and a priestly tribe, the Heathobards. The Heathobards lived on the island of Zealand and were the guardians of the ancient cult and temple on the island, at which all the tribal confederacy worshipped. The worship was (obscurely) connected to an ancient Heathobard legend of the Great Peace of King Froda (when a gold ring would remain untouched on the highway). As Tolkien points out in his commentary, the Heathobard royal house in the Migration Age gave to the male heirs names related to the cult. The Heathobard king when this history is glimpsed in Beowulf is named Froda and his son Ingeld (the god of the cult is named Ing).

What Tolkien saw was the arising of a new power in the North - the Danes, who overthrew the old order and utterly destroyed the Heathobards. The historical story that Tolkien discerns in Beowulf begins after the first Danish victories and conquest of Zealand, with the Danish king Hrothgar now building a great mead hall, Heorot, on the land of the ancient temple. The Danes have taken the ancient cult for their own. Hrothgar names his daughter Freawaru, which means Protector of Frey (Frey is the name the Norsemen give to Ing). Meanwhile, the Heathobards are nursing their wounds wherever they have ended up - but they are still a power, and still connected by deep tradition with the ancient cult of Frey/Ing. But their king is now Ingeld, whose father, Froda, has been killed by Hrothgar.

Ingeld has the duty to revenge his slain father. But Hrothgar tries the diplomatic path, offering Ingeld marriage to Freawaru if they can patch up a deal. Ingeld marries Freawaru - and by all accounts here is a genuine love story; at least, Tolkien (OFS) underlines that it was told in Anglo-Saxon England as a love story.

Behind the scenes, so to speak, in Tolkien's great 1936 lecture 'Beowulf: the Monsters & the Critics', is Tolkien's ire with his great teachers, Ker and Chambers, who both valued the 'tragedy' of Ingeld and Freawaru above the fairy story of the ogre Grendel who haunts Heorot. He makes the valid point that, while the material certainly lends itself to romance, and while Freawaru can only appear a tragic figure (for loving Ingeld), Ingeld - the last of the priest-kings of the ancient North - was weak: "thrice faithless and easily persuaded".

You see, having married the Danish princess some incident in his own mead hall leads Ingeld to declare war on his father-in-law. The Heathobards return to their old home and burn Heorot to the ground. But it is a Danish victory: Ingeld is killed and the Heathobards utterly destroyed, wiped off the map of history. The new order in the North is Danish, the English set sail over the sea to a new homeland, and Freawaru is left with a broken heart.

So for better or for worse, I think of Isildur as imagined as a distant ancestor of Ingeld, the last king of the ancient North: the same blood flows in both.

Thanks for that enlightening reply @Chrysophylax Dives! I will hopefully have more time this weekend to share more detailed thoughts, but the story of Ingeld and Freawaru has my head churning with ideas.

It certainly gets me thinking about Isildur's curse upon the Men of Dunharrow. He calls them faithless and accuses them of Sauron worship. At the time he places the curse, he does not have the Ring, Sauron has not been defeated yet. But I think one could argue that when Sauron is defeated, by claiming the Ring Isildur proved"faithless and easily persuaded." (Edit: correcting a mistake in this paragraph. Initially I thought Isildur had claimed the Ring when he places the curse on the Men of Dunharrow. However, I realized that the battle and siege of Barad-dur had not started yet)

Isildur certainly is a tricky character to pin down. There is the Silmarillion Isildur, who sneaks into Armenelos and saves the fruit of the White tree, nearly at the cost of his own life. But the LOTR Isildur had his version of "the Fall;" as Tolkien might describe. He succumbed to the Ring, and actually dies in a rather dishonorable way: trying to flee with the Ring, but the Ring betrays him and he's shot by orcs who were placed as watchers to catch anyone trying to flee the ambush.

Now of Isildur it is told that he was in great pain and anguish of heart, but at first he ran like a stag from the hounds, until he came to the bottom of the valley... (Unfinished Tales: Disaster of the Gladden Fields)

When I first read the OP I immediately thought of exactly that passage about saving the fruit of the White Tree. I think it's quite interesting to point out a few things:

"and Isildur said no word, but went out by night and did a deed for which he was afterwards renowned." (Akallabêth, Sil)

I think it's important that he does it by his own will and by himself. It's his grandfather telling his father and brothers about this and Isildur takes it upon himself to do this deed. And that he was renowned for this deed.

I think Isildur is meant to be a heroic figure and that he has such a tragic fall, driven by the ring, demonstrates precisely the corrupting nature of the ring. So that when characters like Denethor or Boromir suggest that man should be able to use Isildur's Bane it is obviously folly, because it corrupted Isildur you know, the guy who saved The White Tree!

Romeran wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:59 am When I first read the OP I immediately thought of exactly that passage about saving the fruit of the White Tree. I think it's quite interesting to point out a few things:

"and Isildur said no word, but went out by night and did a deed for which he was afterwards renowned." (Akallabêth, Sil)

I think it's important that he does it by his own will and by himself. It's his grandfather telling his father and brothers about this and Isildur takes it upon himself to do this deed. And that he was renowned for this deed.

I think Isildur is meant to be a heroic figure and that he has such a tragic fall, driven by the ring, demonstrates precisely the corrupting nature of the ring. So that when characters like Denethor or Boromir suggest that man should be able to use Isildur's Bane it is obviously folly, because it corrupted Isildur you know, the guy who saved The White Tree!

It is difficult with the Ring because *everyone* is corrupted (save Bombadil, and those who refuse from the start, like Gandalf and Galadriel). Still, the corruption always seems to expose a weakness of one kind or another. I think we are meant to see heroic beginning but a failure of courage along the way. At least, I presume that weakness = failure of courage (e.g. the courage to keep faith).

This is the most fascinating thing to me about Tolkien's creation. You can come to different conclusions about Isildur, or Celebrimbor, and many other characters yet they are equally valid, or true.

To @Romeran's post, I hadn't looked at Isildur's tragic fall from that perspective before, but it makes sense. If the Ring brought down someone as mighty and heroic as Isildur, how can we not come to the conclusion, Boromir's and Denethor's positions are complete folly? Isildur therefor is a strong character, who had independent will, but the Ring exposed a character flaw (his pride, as Isildur writes "my pride has fallen") and leads him to an un-heroic end.

To @Chrysophylax Dives' post, it's hard to overlook the fact that Isildur's weakness was exposed. It took a powerful weapon, the One Ring to do it, but in the end he failed. Even if there aren't many, he fell, where others like Aragorn and Faramir succeeded.

Through my own Boromir-biased glasses, I see some similarities and differences between Boromir's story and Isildur's. Boromir was a renowned general and hero of Gondor during his time. Named after another "warrior," the Ruling Steward Boromir. He is propped up as the stronger, more worthy brother, but Tolkien writes in "the test," Faramir proved stronger:

It did not seem possible to Faramir that anyone in Gondor could rival Boromir, heir of Denethor, Captain of the White Tower, and of like mind was Boromir. Yet it proved otherwise at the test. (Appendix A: Gondor and the Heirs of Anarion; The Stewards)

One perhaps important difference though is Boromir never sets eyes on the Ring, yet is still corrupted by it. Isildur was a Ring-bearer. Another larger difference though, is Boromir's story ends "heroically." He admits to Aragorn he attempted to take the ring, takes personal responsibility, and dies obeying a command from his "King." to find the hobbits and protect them. I would say he starts out propped up as a "great hero," but perhaps undeservedly and the Ring exposes this weakness. Yet as Gandalf says, it's fortunate the hobbits came along, if only for Boromir's sake:

"Poor Boromir! I could not see what happened to him. It was a sore trial for such a man: a warrior, and lord of men. Galadriel told me he was in peril. But he escaped in the end. I am glad. It was not in vain that the young hobbits came with us, if only for Boromir's sake." (The Two Towers: The White Rider)

Boromir's story ends with a heroic deed. I can see an argument that he was a weak character at the Council of Elrond, but dies a stronger one, for accepting responsibility for his failure: "I am sorry. I have paid." (The Two Towers: The Departure of Boromir). This deed means he "escaped [the Ring] in the end."

As discussed already in this thread. I agree that Isildur was stronger in his youth, but by succumbing to the Ring, it brought down even the mighty Isildur to a lowly end. And unfortunately for Isildur's sake, there were no young hobbits he could defend, his heroic deed happened long before.

Romeran wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:59 am When I first read the OP I immediately thought of exactly that passage about saving the fruit of the White Tree. I think it's quite interesting to point out a few things:

"and Isildur said no word, but went out by night and did a deed for which he was afterwards renowned." (Akallabêth, Sil)

I think it's important that he does it by his own will and by himself. It's his grandfather telling his father and brothers about this and Isildur takes it upon himself to do this deed. And that he was renowned for this deed.

I think Isildur is meant to be a heroic figure and that he has such a tragic fall, driven by the ring, demonstrates precisely the corrupting nature of the ring. So that when characters like Denethor or Boromir suggest that man should be able to use Isildur's Bane it is obviously folly, because it corrupted Isildur you know, the guy who saved The White Tree!

This post has been going round my head all day; I think I did not appreciate its significance properly earlier. To what you say here about heroism, Romeran, we should add also the great heroism of Isildur in taking up his father's broken sword and defeating Sauron! His fall is great; but up until the moment that the One Ring is before his hand, I think (am I missing something) there is no sign of weakness.

Together with the discussion of the friendship of Celebrimbor and Sauron on the other thread, I'm starting to appreciate how I don't quite have a handle on the 2nd Age stories that are the vital background of The Lord of the Rings.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:19 am So for better or for worse, I think of Isildur as imagined as a distant ancestor of Ingeld, the last king of the ancient North: the same blood flows in both.

This was a thoroughly fascinating post @Chrysophylax Dives, I hadn't refreshed the page when I had submitted my first post so I didn't see it. Very interesting to see some of the real "lore" that Tolkien used as inspiration. I confess to knowing far more about Tolkien's work than his inspiration and it's been many years since I read OFS or Beowulf & the Critics.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:52 am It is difficult with the Ring because *everyone* is corrupted (save Bombadil, and those who refuse from the start, like Gandalf and Galadriel). Still, the corruption always seems to expose a weakness of one kind or another.

And Faramir, don't forget Faramir, in fact I think that Isildur (and Boromir and Denethor both to a certain extend) fall to the corruption of the ring makes it particularly noble that Faramir can resist form the start -- he had the power to take it from Frodo and he even says as much:

" 'But fear no more! I would not take this thing, if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory. No, I do not wish for such triumphs, Frodo son of Drogo." (The Window On the West, TTT).

Chrysophylax Dives wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:52 am I think we are meant to see heroic beginning but a failure of courage along the way.

I definitely agree with that, it's supposed to be demonstrating that even the most noble of men will, with certainty, fall to the ring. It's Faramir's recognition of this fact which precludes him from taking the ring.

Boromir88 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:12 pm Through my own Boromir-biased glasses, I see some similarities and differences between Boromir's story and Isildur's. Boromir was a renowned general and hero of Gondor during his time. Named after another "warrior," the Ruling Steward Boromir. He is propped up as the stronger, more worthy brother, but Tolkien writes in "the test," Faramir proved stronger:

I love this take/comparison between Boromir and Isildur @Boromir88 and that, Faramir was prescient enough to forsee his fall which is what saved him:

" 'For myself,' said Faramir, 'I would see the White Free flower again in the courts of the kings, and the Silver Crown return, and Minas Tirith in peace; Minas Anor again as of old, full of light, high and fair, beautiful as a queen among other queens: not a mistress of many slaves, nay not even a kind mistress of willing slaves. War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword fort it sharpness, nor the arrow for it swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend: the city of Men of Numenor; and I would have her loved for her memory, her ancientry, her beauty, and her present wisdom. Not feared, save as men may feared the dignity of a man, old and wise." (The Window on the West, TTT)


This reminds me of Galadriel's (and Gandalf's) rejections where they see that, though they may start with noble aspirations, that this would inevitably lead to a dark fall, this is what allows them to reject the ring.

Isildur does not see this fate. Boromir sees it, but it's too late to save his life but not too late to save his honor. I think in some sense Boromir also redeems Isildur in this way, as they are very similar as you point out.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:08 pm To what you say here about heroism, Romeran, we should add also the great heroism of Isildur in taking up his father's broken sword and defeating Sauron! His fall is great; but up until the moment that the One Ring is before his hand, I think (am I missing something) there is no sign of weakness.

Exactly this! Up until he claims the ring as his own we have almost no reason to think Isildur would fall. And since so little was really known about the effects of the ring, it's almost reasonable for Isildur to have considered himself noble enough to have taken this thing. It is a tragedy how wrong he was, and not necessarily by any serious fault of his own.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:08 pm Together with the discussion of the friendship of Celebrimbor and Sauron on the other thread, I'm starting to appreciate how I don't quite have a handle on the 2nd Age stories that are the vital background of The Lord of the Rings.

I don't have a very good recollection of when these stories were written relative to when LotR was written but I've always loved how the "ancillary/history" stories that feature outside of LotR almost universally act to support the story within LotR.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:19 am Behind the scenes, so to speak, in Tolkien's great 1936 lecture 'Beowulf: the Monsters & the Critics', is Tolkien's ire with his great teachers, Ker and Chambers, who both valued the 'tragedy' of Ingeld and Freawaru above the fairy story of the ogre Grendel who haunts Heorot. He makes the valid point that, while the material certainly lends itself to romance, and while Freawaru can only appear a tragic figure (for loving Ingeld), Ingeld - the last of the priest-kings of the ancient North - was weak: "thrice faithless and easily persuaded".

You see, having married the Danish princess some incident in his own mead hall leads Ingeld to declare war on his father-in-law. The Heathobards return to their old home and burn Heorot to the ground. But it is a Danish victory: Ingeld is killed and the Heathobards utterly destroyed, wiped off the map of history. The new order in the North is Danish, the English set sail over the sea to a new homeland, and Freawaru is left with a broken heart.

Returning back to this post, now that it's a new day and fresher eyes for me. I found this story fascinating, and I don't think it's a coincidence that Isildur claims the Ring (according to Elrond) as weregild - payment for Sauron "injuring" Isildur, for the death of Isildur's father and brother:

"Alas! yes," said Elrond. "Isildur took it, as should not have been. It should have been cast then into Orodruin's fire nigh at hand where it was made. But few marked what Isildur did. He alone stood by his father in that last mortal contest; and by Gil-galad only Cirdan stood, and I. But Isildur would not listen to our counsel.

"This I will have as weregild for my father, and my brother," he said; and therefor whether we would or no, he took it to treasure it. But soon he was betrayed by it to his death; and so it is named in the North Isildur's Bane. Yet death maybe was better than what else might have befallen him." ( The Fellowship of the Ring: The Council of Elrond)

This definitely appears where Tolkien is pulling inspiration from Ingeld and this is where Isildur errs, perhaps for the first time. By claiming it as weregild, Isildur is essentially accepting the Ring as payment (and payment in gold!) for Elendil and Anarion dying in battle. And whether Elrond or Cirdan would have tried to claim it or not, Isildur "took it to treasure it."

Elrond also makes an interesting comment, along the lines of @Romeran's posts, that perhaps death was a better fate than what Isildur would have become had he possessed the Ring longer. Isildur could not foresee what he would have become, like those who were able to refuse the Ring did.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote:To what you say here about heroism, Romeran, we should add also the great heroism of Isildur in taking up his father's broken sword and defeating Sauron! His fall is great; but up until the moment that the One Ring is before his hand, I think (am I missing something) there is no sign of weakness.

This has been a question about the 2nd Age that has intrigued me forever. The Silmarillion account is rather vague. Isildur says to Elrond and Cirdan "Was it not I who dealt the Enemy his death blow?" (The Silmarillion: Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age), but the "summary" of what happened implies it was actually Gil-galad and Elendil who defeated Sauron:

But at the last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron was also thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the ruling ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own.

Then we have at the Council of Elrond, Elrond confirming after the confrontation with Sauron, there were only three people who know the truth. And of those three, the mortal is dead...I sense an Elvish conspiracy! All joking aside, it's another intriguing 2nd Age tale, and I wholeheartedly concur on this:

Chrysophylax Dives wrote:Together with the discussion of the friendship of Celebrimbor and Sauron on the other thread, I'm starting to appreciate how I don't quite have a handle on the 2nd Age stories that are the vital background of The Lord of the Rings.

"But at the last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron was also thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the ruling ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own."

I think it's notable the sequence of events as I've bolded here:

1. Elendil and Gil-galad are said to have been slain
2. Then, we learn that already dead, Elendirl physically falls (as opposed to metaphorically fall = dead, because we already know he's dead from point (1)) down and breaks his sword
3. Then we learn that sauron was also thrown down, i.e. his body physically hit the floor. ( )
4. Then we are told that Isildur doesn't pry the ring off of Sauron's defeated body, no, he has to physically cut the ruling ring from his hand. If Sauron was already defeated, why cut the ring?

I wouldn't say in this case that Isildur slew Sauron (corporeally) but rather that Elendil, Gil-galad, and Isildur collectively were responsible. Elendil and Gil-galad knock him down and that gives Isildur the opportunity to strike. At least that's my reading of the text.

Romeran wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 9:35 pm I wouldn't say in this case that Isildur slew Sauron (corporeally) but rather that Elendil, Gil-galad, and Isildur collectively were responsible. Elendil and Gil-galad knock him down and that gives Isildur the opportunity to strike. At least that's my reading of the text.

I'm glad you pointed that out. After posting I suspected that I was recounting the great opening intro of the movies, where Isildur picks up the broken sword and hurls it at Sauron - and went and looked at the text and saw what you say. Another case of hidden movie-dissolve of the text...

Reading this thread this morning - wow! There is so much here. A few random, scattered thoughts.

On the historical Ingeld and the hapless Freawaru: it is always helpful (I find) to bring up the historical lore that was before Tolkien's mind but it is important, I think, to bear in mind that we actually know much more about (in this case) Isildur than we do about Ingeld - on the historical figure we know only what Tolkien teased out (with astonishing philological skill) from between the lines of Beowulf; and in terms of filling out any portraits, we can no doubt learn much more about how Tolkien considered the historical Ingeld by looking at Isildur (and his kin) than the other way round.

On the Ring and mortal temptation. What I was really struck by on reading this thread yesterday was - and this picks up on a recent comment elsewhere by @Boromir88 about thinking of the One Ring as one of the Rings of Power - that up until the moment that Isildur cuts off Sauron's finger ('he only has nine!' recalls Gollum) the story of the Rings of Power has been purely mythical, that is, Elvish, that is, the story of the Smiths of Eregion and Sauron who then appeared fair of face. Isildur then steps into the story: the first entrance of a mortal into this strange new magic of Middle-earth.

As such Isildur is the original tempted-mortal, against whom we will compare not only Boromir, Denethor, Faramir, and Aragorn, but also Frodo Baggins, Sam Gamgee, and even Gollum. On judging Isildur and Boromir, remember that Frodo fails the test at the last - only Bilbo and Sam give up the One Ring voluntarily.

Am I correct that when Isildur takes the One the nine mortal men who hold the Nine are still living?

@Romeran, you wrote:

I don't have a very good recollection of when these stories were written relative to when LotR was written but I've always loved how the "ancillary/history" stories that feature outside of LotR almost universally act to support the story within LotR.

This is what really exercises me - because we are I think looking at J.R.R. Tolkien at his absolute most creative best: we are talking of a few years, a terrible time in the history of the real world - when the 'kernel' of The Lord of the Rings was forged, the Second Age imagined, and the essay On Fairy-stories penned.

The Second Age had been introduced in The Fall of Númenor, composed in 1936 and declaring (in its closing lines, after recounting the Last Alliance) the conclusion or final story of the ancient world as told by the elves. I read this ending as a middle-aged Tolkien drawing a line under his Silmarillion stories (or believing he was so doing). Beginning a sequel to The Hobbit at the close of 1937, Tolkien must now decide whether The Hobbit was set in the world of Myth before or the world of History after the destruction of Númenor - after some initial hesitation he opts (on the way to Weathertop) for History. And already in 1938 the story of the Last Alliance is extended, giving us Isildur - but solely for the purpose of explaining how the Ring got from the hand of Sauron to Gollum (this is from memory, and I should go back to the HOME volumes and double-check the details).

But the new hobbit story is transformed in 1940. (The new idea is present in 1939, but Tolkien hesitates). But when he picks up his pen to resume the story in summer 1940 Trotter (Strider), who was a hobbit, becomes the heir of Elendil and the new hobbit story becomes also the sequel to the The Fall of Númenor. Treason of Isengard shows Tolkien first sketching the Númenorean history in Middle-earth into the Council of Elrond. In fact, this Second Age history is developed through just about the entire process of writing The Lord of the Rings. For example, once the Palantir has entered the story at Orthanc, Tolkien 'knows' that this is one of 7, and that each Stone was housed in a tower, and so maps the South and North kingdoms by erecting 7 towers (some now in ruins). But only (I think) in a late typescript of 1948 does Weathertop become a place where once stood a tower and a Seeing Stone.

As for the elvish story of the Second Age (as indeed also the Dwarf), this appears to have been imagined 1940-1942. Consider this text from 1941, which - Christopher Tolkien suggests - was composed as the story arrived in Lothlórien but was meant to be inserted into the Council of Elrond:

In Ancient Days the Great Enemy [Morgoth] came to the lands beyond the Sea; but his evil purpose was for a time hidden, even from the rulers of the world, and the Elves learned many things of him, for his knowledge was very great and his thoughts strange and wonderful.

In those days the Rings of Power were made. It is said that they were fashioned first by Fëanor the greatest of all the makers among the Elves of the West, whose skill surpassed that of all folk that are or have been. The skill was his but the thought was the Enemy’s. Three Rings he made, the Rings of Earth, Sea and Sky. But secretly the Enemy made One Ring, the Ruling Ring, which controlled all the others. And when the Enemy fled across the Sea and came to Middle-earth, he stole the Rings and brought them away. And others he made like to them, and yet false. (Treason of Isengard, 255)

And delivered as a lecture in March 1939 but radically reworked in summer 1943, in a long pause from composition of The Lord of the Rings, we have the essay On Fairy-stories, the reflections on 'Fairy' of the man who has just penned the story between Moria and Orthanc.

Thank you for that breakdown @Romeran. I always remembered the way it's depicted in the film was not how Tolkien described it (although in making an adaptation there are countless scenes from a book that aren't going to translate well on screen. I was never bothered by the Prologue scene, because it got across the the essential events...Sauron slays Elendil, his sword is broken, Isildur uses the shards to cut the ring off Sauron's hand - eventhough I think Sauron looses like 3 or 4 fingers ). Anyway, I digress, because I've always kind of believed that description was a bit ambiguous. Isildur claims he dealt the death blow, and technically it looks like he did, yet it always seemed like it was just Gil-galad and Elendil who fought Sauron in that combat.

Chrysophylax Dives wrote:Reading this thread this morning - wow! There is so much here. A few random, scattered thoughts.

Indeed it never ceases to amaze me how a thread can sprout off into different branches you did not think would happen, but are glad they did. So, I'm going to throw another scattered thought into the mix, going back to the Men of Dunharrow who Isildur cursed. After the Dead fulfill their oath, Gimli makes the comment:

"Strange and wonderful I thought it that the designs of Mordor should be overthrown by such wraiths of fear and darkness. With its own weapons was it worsted." (Return of the King: The Last Debate)

This is a fascinating comment, because when Isildur curses the Men of Dunharrow, he accuses them of Sauron worship, but also shows foresight that this war against Sauron would go on:

"'Then Isildur said to their king: "Thou shalt be the last king. And if the West prove mightier than thy Black Master, this curse I lay upon thee and thy folk: To rest never until your oath is fulfilled. For this war will last through the years uncounted, and you shall be summoned once again ere the end." (Return of the King: The Passing of the Grey Company)

Fascinating how masterfully crafted this Tolkien's story is, and what you can still learn (or perhaps forgot you knew? )...I was today years old when I realized Sauron was in part defeated with his own weapons, just not the weapon Denethor, Boromir and many others thought they needed to use. By Isildur's foresight in cursing the Oath-breakers, his heir Aragorn is able to command the Dead Men to fulfill their oath, and thus Mordor "with its own weapons was it worsted."

Boromir88 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 29, 2022 1:32 am I read a rumor in an article on the Amazon series that the actress Ema Horvath has been cast to play Isildur's sister, "Carine." If true, she is an invented character, but that's not the purpose I started this thread.

I started wondering how the TV series would portray Isildur, because in Peter Jackson's movies it was obvious Isildur was a "weakness" that Aragorn needed to overcome. Grumpy Elrond proclaims that "Men are weak" and Aragorn has a line about Isildur's blood flows through his veins, "the same weakness."

These musings led to the ultimate purpose of this thread, in wondering what other people thought about Tolkien's Isildur. Sort of similar in the Celebrimbor thread, discussing the friendship between Celebrimbor and "Annatar," what are people's impressions of Tolkien's Isildur? Would you say when he claims the Ring after Sauron is thrown down (by Gil-galad and Elendil) that is merely a moment of weakness? Or is there something more, that Isildur is actually a weak, as in he has a weak will, character? And overall, just what are you impressions of Isildur?

I'm not going to get too deep into the discussion here as there are some really deep points of thought presented. My thoughts on the original post is the 'weakness' aspect of the Peter Jackson movies were wholly creations of the movie screenplay writing team. They needed it to fill out their abandonment of the northern line of Elendil story and the reason for Aragorn being up north, so it is all made up movie fanfic.

To me, Isildur was not 'weak' in the book story. He was fighting an epic battle and found himself going up against Sauron himself after seeing his father and brother slain and being exhausted. The actual portrayal of this in the movie was quite good in my opinion. Once Isildur cut Sauron's ring-finger off, it called to him as it does and once he had it in his hand, he was smitten by it. A point to consider is Isildur would have been extremely exhausted and likely full of adrenaline from the hard battle, along with that of grief from the deaths of his father and brother, so at the point he came in contact with the ring, he was deeply susceptible to it.

I'm a bit rusty on the lore, but I'm not sure if it is ever mentioned when Isildur first put the ring on, becoming invisible and stepped into the world of shadows.

As for the addition of a daughter of Elendil to the Rings of Power series, I could see that and I'm ok with that. Tolkien wasn't much for adding the women to the ancestral lines unless there was some important note to make on them. I could go on but this is about Isildur.