An Englishman speaking French and a Ravening Raven King

The other day, Bruce Charlton wrote a post on the Ring and its Evil influence titled "Why the evil of the One Ring cannot for long be resisted by anyone At All".

Both the title and several statements such as the opening paragraph suggest that "possession" of the Ring is what will ultimately corrupt a person, and then various examples of Beings are brought out who ultimately rejected the idea of possessing the Ring because they knew they would be corrupted:  Elrond, Galadriel, and Aragorn.

Then, curiously, he brings up Tom Bombadil and says that we can't really take him into account because he seems "completely uninterested, so the question does not really arise".  In saying this, he misrepresents what actually happened with Tom and the Ring, and thus misses some important ramifications for his thesis.

Anyway, it has been awhile since I commented over on his site.  My experience has been if you have an alternative thought but you are a) alive, and b) your last name doesn't rhyme with Starfield, then it might not be very productive to bring it up.

But I couldn't let this gloss over and slight of Tom stand!

So, I wrote a comment calling out that Tom had been misrepresented.  Not only did Tom possess the ring (even trying it on!), but he demanded that Frodo give it to him, which was a request that Frodo found himself unconsciously complying with.  But, of course, Tom gave it right back to Frodo.  It was shown very clearly in this scene - very purposefully so, I believe - that the Ring literally had no power over Tom, who was the Master (a point that Gandalf will also specifically state at Elrond's Council).  Thus, the broad statement that the Ring corrupts all that possess it found its contradiction in the very Being of Tom.

My response should be no surprise to anyone who reads my blog, as I have some different views as to just who Tom actually is.

However, after submitting the comment, I thought maybe I shouldn't have (due to the reasons cited above).  Bruce replied, stating that his point had rather been that the Ring corrupts those who possess it AND wish to use it against others.  Thus Tom, rather than contradicting him, actually proved his point.

I am not going to go into that more here, though.   I am more interesting in some details from his response which made me glad I went ahead and posted the comment, even if Bruce's overall pushback was predictable.  Bruce has unknowingly been on fire ever since!  

In his response to my point on Tom, Bruce did a very interesting thing.  He started his comment by leveraging a French quote:  Au contraire, mon ami

Why did I find this interesting?  Well, recall that I have shifted both the Shire and Tom Bombadil's House from England to France.  And here I had an Englishman attempting to spin some things relative to Tom and his story by starting off in French.  How strange!  It was so strange that I asked whether Bruce reads this blog, and thus used French on purpose.  I don't believe he does, but he didn't respond.

It gets even more interesting.  He then goes on to compare Tom with a magpie.  What?  Here is his entire response so you see the French and his use of the magpie:

@WW - Au contraire mon ami - Tom illustrates my thesis perfectly, because I am talking about the effect of "claiming" The Ring, of taking the One Ring to *use* it. This intention is opening the door to evil and inviting it inside. .

Tom's interest was more like that of a magpie intensely but briefly attracted by a pretty trinket; he seemed bored by The Ring very quickly, and moved onto discussing badgers after only about a minute. Frodo was irritated that Tom made so light of the subject.

This was too funny and random.  Recall that magpies factor in quite heavily in our story here, at least indirectly.  The Pied Piper is Pied because of his Black and White clothing, and that term of being Pied comes from the black and white magpie.

Interestingly, the magpie is directly related to Tom in the story we have explored here.  Whether the Pied Piper, the Black and White Rabbit, Willy the Orca, etc., we have a Being (Faramir-Eonwe) who I have guessed was the son of Aule and Yavanna at one point, with Aule being later and now disguised as Tom Bombadil in our world here.  Thus one of the Pied Beings we have been discussing here directly ties back to Tom.

Faramir's own discovery and reaction to the Ring is as close to Tom's as we might expect from a mortal Man.  Whereas Tom discovered and inspected the Ring simply by declaring that it be placed in his hand, Faramir uncovered its presence and its power through skillful questioning of Frodo and Sam, with Sam finally giving up the secret.  I think it is an understated moment when Faramir drops the matter after discovering the Ring.  As he stated, in Frodo's possession was the answer to all of his riddles and dreams.  But it was almost as if Faramir's intense interest in the riddle of Isildur's Bane was in finding the answer itself, not actually in possessing it.  Meaning, once Faramir got his answer, his curiosity was satisfied and he had no problem in letting it go.   He told Frodo to not talk about it again, and the discourse turned to other matters.  Tom and Faramir, in their own respective ways, inspected the Ring and then let the matter drop.

It turns out that Bruce's analogy of the magpie may have been driven by his most recent post about, what else, magpies.  The post mentions the Newcastle United Magpies, a soccer team in England.  The Newcastle team sports Black and White jerseys, and thus are also Pied.

When I saw the name of the team, I saw it as New Castle United, or a United New Castle.  Of course I would, because Pied Beings have come up on this blog as assisting with the creation of a New Castle.  One meaning of castle is a "fort, citadel, stronghold; fortified village".

This matches up fairly exactly with Tirion (Jerusalem) and New Jerusalem as the Holy Places which will be both United and comprised of United Beings, becoming strongholds or fortresses to which all who wish to come will gather to.  

If you look up "gather" on Etymonline, the word I have been using to talk about what will happen with respect to these Holy Places, the first word you will get back in the definition is "Unite".

So, if Unite is Gather, then United is Gathered, and thus in New Castle United we have something that says New Fortress Gathered.

Interesting, huh?

It gets a bit better, and incorporates another related story.

William Tychonievich weaves in the magpie thread over on his latest post The minds of corvids, and tigers.  Magpies are corvids, and he mentions some of the Black and White symbolism in his post, but actually spends more time discussing Ravens (who have black feathers, I believe).

I didn't know that Ravens are also known as wolf-birds, which was interesting given some of where this will go next.

But, I looked down at the comments, and there was Bruce Charlton again!  In his comment he wrote a couple interesting things.

First, he used the number 10,000 (actually, 10,000s, but the 10,000 is what jumped out to me).  Why was this interesting?  It was said in either Words of the Faithful or Words of them that Slumbered, that the invasion of Eressea and Aman by Pharazon and the Numenoreans occurred ~10,000 years ago.  That specific number was brought up multiple times, actually.  Here, for example, is a prophecy that is claimed to be from Asenath in Words of Them Which Have Slumbered, which discusses the, at that time, future invasion by Pharazon:

And now Eru shall in his recondite wise foresight, bring here to tread, a one not invited [Pharazon].  This doing, driving to conclusion one house's governorship, and the placing of a second there to rule, for a time, appointed in years, ten thousand; and ending in the long distant forth of turning years...

So, my mind went instantly to Pharazon just by association with the number and the fact that he has been on my mind lately.  Thus, I am thinking about him, vaguely, as I read the rest of the comment.  Bruce then concludes his by writing:

I'm always on the look-out for signs of the Raven King's return to his capital city...

Because Pharazon was already working on my mind a bit, when I saw Raven King I associated this title with him also (thinking of the Black Numenoreans).  And, of course, that particular Raven King left his capital city (Armenelos) in his assault on Heaven, and never returned to it, partly because that city was buried under a wave and could not be returned to.

I then had the thought to look up the meaning of Raven.  

One meaning, obviously, is just a reference to the bird, so as a noun.  But to my surprise, Raven is also a verb.  It means:

"to prey, to plunder, devour greedily" and "to seize, pillage; to sweep down, cascade"

Oh man!  Bingo!

Again, I already had Pharazon associated with the Raven King, and here I find the definition to match up exactly with his actions.  And not just on Eressea and Aman, to be sure, but this is how the Numenoreans treated the Men on Middle-earth, also.  But my mind is focused right now on the actions specific to Pharazon's assault.

So the Raven King whose return Bruce is looking for can actually be restated as something like "The King who Preys and Plunders".  Pharazon.

And remember that connection between the Raven and Wolf (Ravens being the Wolf-Bird)?  Here is the line from Words of the Faithful relative to the Wolves and their actions on Eressea, which actually uses the verb form of Raven in describing them, I just went back and found out:

Thus came Pharazon, rolling upon a wave of mist substantial. . . .and from his ships leapt the wolves, aglow in their guts, skeletally streaking across the bay their own shadow and silhouette, in one.  And they ravening... desired lighter things to consume, luminescent in dreadful anticipation, to take in their clutching maws, the oil, and to chew fat; the seeds of ancient light...

.. and in the night without day, nor sun's setting, consumed there all the fruits and bulbs gathered, and drank up the pooled light of ancient vintage..."

So Pharazon, his Men, and these Wolves plundered Eressea, and ate all of their fruit and drank up all of their light.  

The question that Eresseans have, some at least, is why?  This is fairly clear through the phrase that WJT didn't realize he was voicing through those excel spreadsheet words.  Why did they come and do this, when they had everything anyone could have wanted?  That is the riddle they want the answer to.

My current hypothesis lies in yet one more meaning to Raven, and I think you will then see where I am coming from.

To "rave", per Etymonline, also comes from raven as well, meaning "to show signs of madness or delirium, to rage in speech" and "to behave madly, be crazy"

Thus, the Ravening Raven King.

As I indicated in past posts, my guess is that the Numenoreans were Sick, some shadow had taken hold of them and they became, frankly, crazy and mad.  Perhaps not dis-similar to what Mormon observed happening to his own people at the conclusion of his civilization in the Book of Mormon.

The question ought to be, first, what caused this, and second, can it be cured?  My current guess, as I have indicated before, is that the cause can both be known and its effects cured, including for Pharazon the Ravening Raven King.