Foresight in Tolkien

Question

There's no doubt that in Tolkien's world, foresight really exists. There are many examples: Aragorn correctly predicting that "the years of [Elrond's] abiding run short at last"; Malbeth the Seer foreseeing thousands of years before that Aragorn would ride the Paths of the Dead; the prediction that the Witch-king would not fall "by the hand of man", and so on.

So, within the Universe, how does this work? We know that not even the Valar know the future in detail, as they are ignorant of Eru's plans for the end of the world. Does this knowledge come from outside — from Eru himself? Are these examples of foresight Eru intervening in minor ways to help his time-bound creatures?

Answer 1

In The Silmarillion, Eru propounded a great theme to the Ainur and they turned this theme into music. The Valar are a subset of the Ainur, all of whom participated in the making of the music which Eru afterward transformed into the world. So they were there, heard and played the music, but they know only as much as they created or heard and the portions in which they played little part they know only incompletely. Not all of the Ainur entered into the world, so not all of the great music is known completely to any one individual. Some Elves in LOTR spent ages with the Valar and learned some of this music.

In the book, one of the most powerful beings depicted is Tom Bombadil and, though Tolkien admitted he was an something of an anachronism ("In historical fact I put him in because I had already 'invented' him independently [...] and wanted an 'adventure' on the way."), it is obvious that his power derives from music.

Outside this canon, one can presume that those who are well-versed in the music can anticipate the modes and movements. At least in shorter intervals.

The obvious implication of this is that the music has fixed the fate of the world.

Answer 2

It is limited foresight — prophecy, which indicates events that are to come, without (usually) being specific, although the details are cleared after the event. However, in other cases, it is simply wisdom applied to situations.

Aragorn on Elrond: It was becoming clear to Aragorn that things were changing in the world, and that the reign of the Elves was drawing to an end — his own presence being a part of this. So he predicted that Elrond would leave Middle-earth shortly — a prediction that anyone with some insight could have made.

Paths of the Dead: This was a significant shortcut route, so it was reasonable that someone would find themselves forced to use it eventually. It would have to be someone of Aragorn's stature and significance to make it through. Many others had tried and failed.

Witch-king: Prophecy in the truest sense. One that was emphasised because it made him seem invincible.

I think it is a case of Eru providing wise people to guide and support his creation, and, at times, intervening to make relevant prophetic words come true (like the Witch-king).

So I think there are two things going on. Firstly, prophecy is much easier to interpret after the event, which is when most of it is confirmed. Those that are seen to be true are identified as fulfilled, those that are not are forgotten. Think Nostradamus.

Secondly, Eru provides wise people, who can see the way events are going, and can predict the future course of events to an extent. It is like when you predict what is going to happen in a film, not because you have seen it before, but because you know where it is going.

Answer 3

There are several fine answers here, but no one has pointed out that Tolkien made a direct statement in The Silmarillion that greatly illuminates the question:

And many other things Ilúvatar spoke to the Ainur at that time, and because of their memory of his words, and the knowledge that each has of the music that he himself made, the Ainur know much of what was, and is, and is to come, and few things are unseen by them. Yet some things there are that they cannot see, neither alone nor taking counsel together; for to none but himself has Ilúvatar revealed all that he has in store, and in every age there come forth things that are new and have no foretelling, for they do not proceed from the past. And so it was that as this vision of the World was played before them, the Ainur saw that it contained things which they had not thought. And they saw with amazement the coming of the Children of Ilúvatar, and the habitation that was prepared for them; and they perceived that they themselves in the labour of their music had been busy with the preparation of this dwelling, and yet knew not that it had any purpose beyond its own beauty. For the Children of Ilúvatar were conceived by him alone; and they came with the third theme, and were not in the theme which Ilúvatar propounded at the beginning, and none of the Ainur had part in their making.

So the Ainur (which includes the Valar and the Maiar) thus have considerable foreknowledge. (Though it is most likely to fail or be incomplete when Elves or Men are involved.) For the Ainur, foresight is memory.

For others like Malbeth, things are foggier as he seems to have been either Elf or Man and thus not to have the foresight of the Ainur. Other Men and Elves also, at time, show similar foresight. E.g., Glorfindel in one of the appendixes to The Lord of the Rings:

Then the Witch-king laughed, and none that heard it ever forgot the horror of that cry. But Glorfindel rode up then on his white horse, and in the midst of his laughter the Witch-king turned to flight and passed into the shadows. For night came down on the battlefield, and he was lost, and none saw whither he went.

Eärnur now rode back, but Glorfindel, looking into the gathering dark, said: "Do not pursue him! He will not return to this land. Far off yet is his doom, and not by the hand of man will he fall." These words many remembered

I'm afraid that the source of this foreknowledge will remain a mystery, though a special gift of Eru seems to be the most likely.

And likewise Aragorn's realization that Elrond's time in Middle-earth drawing to a close — if it is anything more than a shrewd observation.

Answer 4

Tolkien discussed foresight in Ósanwe-kenta.

But no part of the 'future' is there, for the mind cannot see it or have seen it: that is, a mind placed in time. Such a mind can learn of the future only from another mind which has seen it. But that means only from Eru ultimately, or mediately from some mind that has seen in Eru some part of His purpose (such as the Ainur who are now the Valar in Eä). An Incarnate can thus only know anything of the future, by instruction derived from the Valar, or by a revelation coming direct from Eru. But any mind, whether of the Valar or of the Incarnate, may deduce by reason what will or may come to pass. This is not foresight, not though it may be clearer in terms and indeed even more accurate than glimpses of foresight.

Minds that have great knowledge of the past, the present, and the nature of Eä may predict with great accuracy, and the nearer the future the clearer (saving always the freedom of Eru). Much therefore of what is called "foresight" in careless speech is only the deduction of the wise; and if it be received, as warning or instruction, from the Valar, it may be only deduction of the wiser, though it may sometimes be "foresight" at second hand.

Basically, true "foresight" comes from Ainur who have seen the future, or directly from Eru. But prediction based on deduction is also called "foresight".

Answer 5

There is another possibility which is that in Tolkien's world, the words of a seer have the same power as the words of an oath, i.e. to make a self-fulfilling prophecy.

We know that in Middle-earth words (and song) have power, power to fulfill each being's innate spiritual power (fëa) in the Unseen World and effect the physical world through the body (hröa).

We also know from The Silmarillion (apart from the references in The Lord of the Rings and the general medieval literary setting) that oaths have power once taken, as do curses; and that the power of an oath somehow derives from its appeal to Fate, i.e. the Music. When sworn on a powerful creature, the oath-taker is calling upon that being to witness his or her oath. That is why Tolkien suggests (and medieval thinkers decreed) that oaths should rarely be taken, as they have power just like song.

In this context it is possible that prophecy works the same way, i.e. a manifestation of the spirit world upon the physical world through speech, foreordaining a certain conclusion.

People who subscribe to a certain type of magical thinking in real life are very common, to wit, not wanting to make it real by predicting it (i.e. jinxing it). To be a prophet in Middle-earth, one would presumably have to be inspired. (i.e. have some glimpse of the Music, through vision or otherwise.)

Making false prophecy would presumably carry the same penalty (or curse) as taking oaths in vain. (Note that the curse example can be seen as the penalty exacted by he who to an oath is sworn upon the oath-keeper.)

Supporting Example from the Text (to back up my hypothesis): When Fëanor says "this thing I will not do" in promising not to relinquish the Silmarils, Mandos ominously decrees "So it is doomed".

This could be a prophecy or a promise; either way, when invoked, Mandos accepts it as if it were an oath; in reality, he knows (more or less) what the outcome will be.

Note: while looking up the exact quote, I found this: Green Eggs and Silmarils

^{Fëanor: I'm Fëanor.
More skilled than any Elf before.
These are my sons: one, two, three, four,
five, six, and seven – maybe more!}

^{I made these gems: one, two, and three.
They are the best. Don't you agree?}

^{You may not hold a shiny gem.
You may not even look at them.
I do not want you at my door.}

^{Valar:
Can we have your jewels, please?
We need to fix our dying Trees.}

^{Fëanor:
I will not give them for the Trees.
Not even if you say "oh please."
You cannot have them here or there (...)}

Answer 6

I guess it depends on whether you believe more in fate or free will but, since Tolkien's world was created from the pre-established themes of the music, I tend to lean more towards fate. In that context, I would think that these prophecies or foresights were simply subtle themes that existed in the music by design rather than exceptions or interventions by external forces.