Login

**Robert Vermaat** · 02-19-2004, 12:08 AM

What does Stonehenge have to do with the Germans? Nothing at all, except maybe the coach-loads of them being driven to and from Salisbury Plain. Did anyone say it was made by Germans? Pity, really, since I know how dearly you love the Germans.. 
No, I reacted to to this little teaser of yours:Quote:<hr>He simply couldn't face the fact that his master race (and remember the Anglo Saxon British had much of the "Third World" under their heel in his day, were little more than cavemen when the mediterranean world had an advanced civiliazation.<hr> 
I misunderstood, and thought of Tolkien as an Englishman, whereas you of course had him down as a wannabe-German... 
 
Oh and, don't believe anything you read on the Internet. Tolkien-bashing has been very 'in', especially since the movies threathened to become popular and loads of 'purist' (in whatever field) felt it necessary to air their superiority. Sometimes, despite the smashing movies, I feel the book had better been left alone. especially since the Christian Right has kidnapped Tolkien, the net is full of very praising comments about him. 
 
 
Robert

Daniel S Peterson · 02-19-2004, 08:14 PM

Robert, 
Actually, none of the sites I took my info from were 'bashing' sites. They were very even handed and actually pro Tolkien. To many outside of RAT there is nothing wrong with a Rampant Germanophile who wanted to rid the English Language of all its impure latin and other untermensch languages. His study of Gothic German dialects seems to have little to do with Britain as well. Although the Beowulf manscript (apparently Tolkiens most favorite fable), was found in Britain, it is unquestionably a Germanic-Sandanavian tale with no British tie-ins at all, save for the anglo-saxon invaders taking it there. If Tolkien was more into British than German lore, he undoubtedly would have worked to improve the King Arthur legends, (you know, the Romano British good guys who fought against Tolkiens rampaging anglo-saxon destroyers of civilization). Tolkien thought the Anglo Saxons were the good guys, and created his Germannic Never Never Land with them (in the guise of anglo-saxon speaking Riders of Rohan) as the principal heroes. 
 
 
I agree that it seems shameful indeed that certain Christian groups are embracing Tolkien. After all weren't these same people burning Harry Potter books because they promoted magic and sorcery - abominations to God? I guess they didn't get very far with this, so the next time decided, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em", for after all, the magic and sorcery in LOTR should be just as abominable to God as that in Harry Potter. 
 
I was under the impression that everybody in LOTR was a "Godless Heathen", which smacks a bit like the 1933-1945 Germannic ideal. It is odd Tolkien would disdain the Christian God, when even his great hero Beowulf called out for Him to help him in his fight with the fire drake. I guess all of his boozing and murdering finally caught up with him, since the dragon killed him. Actually, I have it on good authority that the dragon wasn't killed at all. That's why his cowardly retainers didn't bring back the creature's head as proof of the deed in the story. They claimed they "rolled the dragon into the sea, never to be seen again." Hmmm, sounds very suspicious to me. 
Dan

Frank Miranda · 02-19-2004, 09:14 PM

Hi Dan, Are you sure about Tolkein disdaining the Christian God? I ask because I personally have not analyzed him deeply enough to make such an observation, I just enjoy a good yarn. I recall reading somehwere that Tolkein was a devout Roman Catholic- which would not at all be odd considering the polytheistic nature of, say, The Silmarillion, in my opinion. In my own case, I'm Catholic, I believe in neither Little Green Men nor dragons, but I love good fantasy and sci-fi. So perhaps it just seems that Tolkein is such because he wrote such intense fantasy (I've also read his own reason for writing the lore of Middle Earth- as an excuse to justify his penchant for inventing languages. Perhaps this was in jest, but who knows for sure). 
 
As to Beowulf- it's been many years since I have read it, but what we have now was greatly altered by Christian scribes to excise all mention of other gods (except for Fate, which the early monks either did not realize was a god in this case, or felt the readers wouldn't make that connection anyway). 
We will never know to whom or what Beowulf really called for help. 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=frankmiranda>Frank Miranda</A> at: 2/19/04 10:16 pm

Crispvs · 02-19-2004, 09:34 PM

Dan, 
 
Have you read Beowulf? 
 
The last time I did I had the definite impression that its major themes were not "boozing and murdering", but loyalty, the building of bonds between peoples and the need of a king to protect and provide for his people. Certainly everyone drinks together in Heorot, but I seem to remember that the only one who mentioned murder was Grendel's mother, and a literal reading of the text would tend to cast doubt on Beowulf being the homicidal maniac. 
 
Beowulf's fight with the dragon is another expression of the king who needs to provide for and protect his people. The dragon is a menace to his people and it possesses a treasure which would allow the now aged Beowulf to employ and equip more warriors with which to protect his people from outside invasion. The fact that he alone is able to fight the dragon is another expression of this same thing. It is the duty of the king to protect his people. Beowulf by this time is the king and so it is he who must be seen to both protect his people by removing the threat and provide for them from the wealth that the dragon holds. 
 
By the way, 'The Bog People' was written by P.V. Glob, not P.V. Blob. 
 
Crispvs

02-20-2004, 10:00 AM

Um. Good morning to you. I just wandered in here virtually by accident, my eye having been caught by a friend's post and thought I'd put in my own few comments. I'm a fairly rampant Tolkienite actually. I adored the films, even though I had a few issues with them, and I equally adored the books having rediscovered them after many years absence. 
 
To me, whatever media they are presented in, they're powerful stories/sagas/call 'em what you will. I'm also going to say that they're strongly spiritual (please note that I do NOT say "Christian") - though I have the distinct impression that by suggesting that the films and books might have a spiritual quality, I'm setting myself up for a walloping! 
 
As Tolkien went to so much trouble to create a world that had it's OWN mythology, history and languages, then it certainly is very easy to believe in it. But then of course, he drew upon realities in his own life to assist in this creation, so it's hardly surprising that it should take on a feeling of real life. It's been suggested, for example, that his experiences in the trenches during WWI had much influence on his depictions of Mordor and the creation of the faithful "batman" character of Sam. 
 
It would be erroneous to regard LoTR as an "Abomination" in any form. It would be equally erroneous to dismiss it as a children's story that got out of hand. It is multi-layered and draws upon a huge number of resources to create this "fantastical" world. 
 
So why is it that so many people "live" it? It's because the books are about courage, self-sacrifice, fellowship, friendship, love, struggles against the odds, the corrupting influence of power, loss, loyalty, heroism, and personal development, amongst others. They're monumental in conception and action. Jackson has done a pretty good job of transferring some of these qualities to the screen, together with some brilliant special effects (though as I said before I have SOME issues with the films). 
 
How can something be an abomination, (though I strongly suspect that Dan's posts have all been very much tongue in cheek) if when you've read it or watched it, you feel uplifted, or a slightly better person or WISH to be better or more informed? How can something be wrong if it creates intelligent debate, or inspires great artwork or an interest in writing, or a desire to investigate further the fascinating sources behind the story (however "glamorised" they might be in the films?") 
 
 
 
 <img src="http://vicinity.homestead.com/files/kingfishersquare.jpg" style="border:0;"/> 
 ~You have so much to enjoy and to be, and to do~ 
(including visiting [url=http://pub107.ezboard.com/bmirabilevisu" target="top]MIRABILE VISU [/url]) 
 Photo by Balazs Karman and Laszlo Novak 
[url=http://pub107.ezboard.com/bmirabilevisu" target="top]<img src="http://redrocket.homestead.com/files/mv/mvban3c.gif" style="border:0;"/>[/url] 
 
 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=valamber>Valamber</A> at: 2/20/04 11:17 am

Goffredo · 02-20-2004, 02:03 PM

The passionate WHYs of Valamber probably have no answer. Human nature is too complex. Some wisdom might be obtained by remembering that human nature is complex and people do and feel things for strange reasons, even when not possessed by some magical object like a ring. 
 
I stand by what I previously wrote: 
"... it would not be the first nor the last time a great artist, creator of lasting works of art, would, in private, be a jerk."

Daniel S Peterson · 02-20-2004, 07:55 PM

Frank, 
I have read several places that Tolkien was a "Catholic Humanist". I guess that means someone born into the catholic faith, though not a particular believer in it. I personally cannot imagine him a Christian at all, for despite his great talent, he failed to promote his supposed faith in any of his books that I know of. Instead, his books take place in a time before Christ, with no mention of Jehovah/God. Yet it takes place in our world for the 'good' humans are Anglo-Saxon speaking Germanic supermen prevailing over the swarthy and totally evil untermensch "Easterlings and Southerners". 
 
If the standard Biblical Hell truly exists (although I have a different notion), I can imagine Tolkien there, for who if anyone is most responsible for the whole Dungeons and Dragons/New Age/Sorcery etc. craze? His popular books clearly were the catalyst, and unquestionably this stuff, attractive as it it, has driven innumerable people, particularly children, away from Christianity, for better or worse. 
 
So you are a Catholic and don't believe in dragons? They are mentioned throughout the Bible, and my research indicates they are the common name for those Biblical creatures known as Cherubim, Seraphim and Destroyers. If not dragons per se, they are clearly a form of 'flying Serpent-like creature', large enough for 'God' to ride on their backs, like the Bible says. Or are Catholics more selective of what passages in the Bible are 'true' and which are not? I have heard once of a Catholic Priest who claimed throughout his studies he was never required to read the Bible, and once he finally did, became an evangelical Christian. You see, in the Bible, people can have their "Dungeons and Dragons" without the Godless Middle Earth of Tolkien. 
 
Crispus, 
Of course I have read Beowulf, it is probably the best window we have into the violent and superstitious world of the dark age Germanic warrior there is. It is amusing to see how people love to analyse other people's art and literature, it is even a profession for some. One of my favorite episodes of 60 Minutes is the one were some great art critic explained all of the "hidden meanings and symbolism", in some guy's painting, and then they talked to the artist himself who said there was no symbolism and hidden meanings in his work at all, he just "whacked it out to make some money". All of this analysis of Beowulf could equally be nonsense. Beowulf's kingdom was real, we know some of the people mentioned in the story were real. It is very possible this is simply the retelling of 'real' events, exaggerated by the dark age germanic witnesses to it. 
These people's whole lives revolved around raiding and killing their neighbors, so let's say Beowulf and his band went on a typical raid and he met a very ignominious death, maybe he was stabbed to death by a mere worman he was trying to rape, for example. 
Naturally his trusted warriors aren't going to say what really happened, they'd invent some @#%$ and bull story of a more heroic death, like he 'slew a dragon' to make the folks back home feel better over his loss. Over the years, the story became more and more embellished to its final form. 
 
Or if we go the 'symbolic meaning approach', this could have been a Christian morality story, for being killed/devoured by a dragon symbolized going to hell. Beowulf could have lived, and still saved his people simply by returning the stolen cup, for the author made the point that dragon molested no one prior to the cup's theft. Beowulf's greed got the best of him, therefore God allowed the dragon to kill him, and his whole kingdom was destroyed by the Swedes without his leadership. This makes more sense to me than your version. I suspect though we are both somewhat right, it began as a Pagan Germanic 'hero' story that evolved to a Christian morality one. Many researchers believe the Grendel episode is from a different author than the dragon sequence, and possibly then, originally a different 'hero' altogether. 
 
Yes, I knew he was Glob, but it was a typo. Thanks though. 
 
Valamber, 
 
I do not feel spiritually uplifted by Tolkien. I only see these stories' evil, seemingly racist underbelly, where German-speaking Nordic heroes are unbelievably good, and the darker skinned peoples of all points further south or east are unbelievably bad, without a single reedeeming quality, and fit only to be slaughtered. Tolkien was a product of those times when these were popular concepts. But not only are these ideas sinister in our more enlightened times, but they are also terribly unrealistic. It is like the old B westerns where anyone wearing a dark hat is bad. In Middle Earth, the bad guys wear the dark skin and don't speak German. So despite his impressive work with the languages, the geneology, etc, that gives his fantasy world much more depth than perhaps any other writer's, it is all for naught when the Anglo saxon good guys are simply too good, and the untermensch are so incredibly bad that it literally becomes a ridiculous satire. Apparently, many people cannot see this, but even the anonymous dark ages germanic mind that conceived Beowulf, gave a principal villain, the Mother of Grendel, far more compassion than any of the evil, dark skinned 'cannon fodder' that inhabited middle earth. They are no more than the digital targets to be slaughtered in their thousands in today's asinine video games. It is downright stupid and if such a transparent thing had been written by anyone less clever than Tolkien, it would have been forgotten long ago. 
 
And as I said before, Tolkien's clear motive behind his whole fantasy world was to give his Germanic heroes of middle earth a ficticious, advanced civilization and superior culture he believed his real German ancestors so richly deserved, though archaelogy had proven were incredibly backward and primitive compared to the advanced civilizations of the classical world who became the evil Southerners of his stories. 
 
But I agree he was an excellent writer, and it is a shame he did not write more stories like Farmer Giles of Hamm, which doesn't take place in the Germanic Never-Never Land that is Middle Earth, but in Medieval Britain, and like the popular film, "Shrek", was virtually a satire of the kind of fairy tale nonsense that the rampant Tolkien addicts take far too seriously. 
 
Dan 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=danielspeterson>Daniel S Peterson</A> at: 2/21/04 6:03 pm

02-21-2004, 04:34 AM

... I suppose, I'm a bit late with that answer ... 
 
Off course I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t remember all films that I have seen, when I was a kid, but I do remember Ã¢â‚¬Å“Fall of the Roman EmpireÃ¢â‚¬Â

Frank Miranda · 02-21-2004, 06:11 PM

Dan- thanks for the insight into Tolkein- very informative! As I mentioned before, I have never read any of his writings outside the ME universe- personal stuff, etc. 
 
"So you are a Catholic and don't believe in dragons?" 
 
Ha ha! Well, allow me to qualify my statement- I don't believe in Smaug...or his other literary relatives. Although I have been known to tilt at windmills. I've read many descriptions of the various angelic orders, including the one you referenced- I have to admit, it makes an interesting study. I've never heard of the story you mentioned concerning the priest- and in this post-Vatican II world, I find it not one bit unbelievable of the possibility of a priest who never read the Bible- but it makes me wonder which of the umpteen revised versions of the Bible he finally did read!

Daniel S Peterson · 02-21-2004, 10:39 PM

Frank, I would agree that in the 'real world' there never were any 'slayable' dragons of the kind in Tolkien and other fairytales. Had there been, I am sure some remains of them would have been found by now. (Since the Bible states they cannot be harmed by men, that would explain the lack of remains, but I suppose over the ages, imaginative and convincing liars have made pretty good dragon-slayers.) Of course, simple logic too, would dictate that if giant, highly intelligent reptilian carnivores ran amok, uncontrolled by a higher spiritual form, they would have certainly exterminated the human race long before we could develop weapons that we could fight them with. Even if the rather intellectually-challenged theropod dinosaurs with brains the size of walnuts survived the Mesozoic era, we most assuredly wouldn't be here now! 
 
I became interested in dragons totally apart from the fantasy craze, since they are mentioned innumerable times in historical accounts and curiously appear in virtually every religion around the world (plus the fact that I have always kept their more primitive relatives, crocs and monitors, as pets.) In the Bible itself, and contemporary scripture no longer in the Bible, these Reptilian Seraphs and Cherubs are never referred to as part of an 'angelic order' as you suggest, but either as 'creatures', or quite literally, as 'dragons' in the Greek, though 'fiery flying serpents' (saraphs) in Hebrew. (Perhaps 'regimenting' even the angels into a military-like rank structure is one of the things which defined Catholicism as 'Roman'.) 
 
I find it amusing how theologians could imagine these creatures in a human form with ridiculous swans' wings sprouting between thier shoulder blades when the Bible plainly states they were of an immense size and God rode on their backs, like the people riding dragons in some D&D novels, or ringwraiths riding Tolkien's nasty Nazgul birds (turned into dragons by Jackson -- by popular demand?), in the recent LOTR films. Picturing God 'riding' on the back of a human-like angel seems a bit obscene, and I also, cannot picture a human-like, haloed angel swallowing sinners alive, which is another one of these creatures' Biblical attributes, not to mention spewing fire in the classic fairytale tradition. 
 
Other Mesopotamian religions which closely paralleled Judaism graphically depicted what the Hebrews could only describe, and here we see their Gods riding on the backs of winged, reptilian 'dragons', though in firmly attached thrones, rather than straddling the beasts, which undoubtedly wasn't considered very god-like! 
 
Dan

Thiudareiks Flavius · 02-22-2004, 07:44 AM

Hadrianus wrote: 
 
Quote:<hr>I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think that people have to be Ã¢â‚¬Å“ashamedÃ¢â‚¬Â

Thiudareiks Flavius · 02-22-2004, 11:06 AM

Hmmm, I just noticed this earlier post from Dan, though it's hard to tell if this one is meant as humour or not: 
 
Quote:<hr>I have read several places that Tolkien was a "Catholic Humanist". I guess that means someone born into the catholic faith, though not a particular believer in it.<hr> 
 
Then you'd guess wrongly and completely misunderstand "humanist". "Humanism" is a strong, long and learned tradition within Catholicism in particular and Christianity in general, which places humanity, in all its forms, at the centre of the focus of faith. The motto of famous Catholic humanists like Erasmus and Thomas More was the dictum from Terence: "Homo sum; humani nil a me alienum puto" (I am human: nothing that is human is foreign to me). 
 
You seem to be thinking of "Secular Humanism" - a philosophical stance similar to its Christian predecessor but which, as the word "secular" indicates, is divorced from any supernatural beliefs. 
 
Tolkien was definitely a Humanist and was, as a devout Catholic, definitely not a Secular Humanist. 
 
Quote:<hr>I personally cannot imagine him a Christian at all, for despite his great talent, he failed to promote his supposed faith in any of his books that I know of.<hr> 
 
Odd reasoning. Despite your inability to "imagine" him a Christian, it is common knowledge that he was a devout Catholic. The fact that he did not "promote" his faith overly in his fictional work is simply a matter of choice - he found the overt Christian allegory in the work of his friend C.S. Lewis rather clumsy. Despite this, he wrote in one letter that The Lord of the Rings was "a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision". Elements of the book, for example, have subtle but distinctly Christian overtones - the Fellowship sets out from Rivendell on Christmas Day and Frodo achieves his quest at Easter the next year. 
 
Quote:<hr>Instead, his books take place in a time before Christ, with no mention of Jehovah/God.<hr> 
 
The question of "virtuous pagans" and the theology of the pre-Redemption period was one that intrigued many medieval Catholics, including the writer of Beowulf. Like that poem, The Lord of the Rings is depicted in a pre-Redemption world and Tolkien depicted a Christian universe pre-Christ. This means Christian theology lurks in the background of his work, but it is definitely there if you look for it. In Ithilien, Faramir and his men observe the old Numenorean custom of facing to the west for a moment of silent contemplation of "Iluvatar" or "Eru" - their name for the Christian God - and in Numenor there was a temple to Eru on the highest peak of the island. God is also referred to obliquely as a force in the flow of events, particularly by Gandalf (who, as a Maia, is effectively an angel in human form) who talks about "Providence" and refers to seemingly "chance" events which were "meant" to happen. 
 
Quote:<hr>Yet it takes place in our world for the 'good' humans are Anglo-Saxon speaking Germanic supermen prevailing over the swarthy and totally evil untermensch "Easterlings and Southerners".<hr> 
 
This is plain wrong in every respect, as I have detailed in my previous post. 
Tim O'Neill / Thiudareiks Flavius 
 
Visit 'Clades Variana' - Home of the Varus Film Project 
 
Help create the film of Publius Quinctilius Varus' lost legions. 
 
Come to my [url=http://www.ancientworlds.net/member/Gunthigg/Thiudareiks" target="top]Stathigg[/url] in [url=http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/City/23413" target="top]Germania[/url] at the [url=http://www.ancientworlds.net/" target="top]Ancient Worlds[/url] community.

Daniel S Peterson · 02-22-2004, 06:28 PM

Actually, Tim, we all had this little bet going, on how long your expected and indignent response to my "Tolkien baiting" would be, and with the extra bit you added, I think I won! 
 
But I am glad you pointed out that great literary minds (which I never claimed to be), have come to basically the same conclusions about Tolkien as I have. 
 
One can be a 'rampant Germanophile' and not be a Nazi, and I believe I made this quite clear in the beginning that I knew Tolkien despised them, but his reasons for doing so, merely confirms the obvious, and is verified by his own words. The great motive of this LOTR story is clearly to pull his beloved Anglo-Saxon ancestors out of their real hovels of cow dung and twigs and put them in the ivory towers of his fantasy world. And it is to give his Middle Earth version of 'Europe' whole new races of subhuman, wanton destroyers of civilisation, which in fact, was the real role of those same ancestors of his (and yours, and mine). Yes, and why not make them good 'pre-Christian' Christians too, since he knew they really worshipped trees and pagan idols. The Orcs of Middle Earth clearly fill the niche of the Germans in 'historical earth', and now the Germans in his world are an advanced civilization. I can see why a lot of white people love this story, for there is nothing at all clever about their plots. The absurd circumstances that must be contrived in both Hobbit and Rings to pull off the proverbial 'happy endings' makes these nothing more than rather lame 'fairy tales', though ones unfortunately tainted by overtones of racial superiority, not that this would not have been commonplace in virtually anything written in those days. 
 
Most of the public does not recognize the obvious here, for it is subtly camouflaged by layer after layer of meaningless 'Tolkien trivia', whether it be appendices full of complex geneologies that though impressive, have no bearing on the story, or the grammatical rules and alphabet diagrams of his nonsense languages. This seems to confirm the old adage about "baffling them with bull@#$&*", and Tolkien is the unquestionable master at this art, so much so, that his writings have literally become a religion to those too ignorant to see the basic motive behind it all. I truly think he wanted it that way, for the Simarillion reads like a King James version of the Bible, almost to the point of seeming blasphemous. 
 
In my job, I have met and interviewed many American veterans of WWII. They were great men who fought and won a 'good war' against a genuine evil. Being largely 'Anglo-Saxons' of the same, first half of the 20th century as Tolkein, when intermingling with the 'modern' intregatrated army of today, their racial beliefs and views sometimes prove a great embarrasment. They are not 'evil' men by any means, nor was Tolkien, and they were predominantly Christian men, but they were brought up with a different set of values about race then most of us from the last half of that century. Ideals and notions that were commonplace and aceptable then have become evil now. This is clearly seen in his work, though not to the point of labeling him as a 'Nazi' to be sure. You can deny these basic truths but you are only fooling yourself. Accept it for what it is. 
 
Dan

02-23-2004, 07:47 AM

Quote:<hr>And Tolkien hated Hitler.<hr> 
 
I knew that before, like I also read one of his letters, where he spoke up for Jews and against the racist Laws in Germany at that time (that was even before the Second World War broke out!) He made that clear in two letters, one as a comment to the question of the RÃƒÂ¼tten & Loening Verlag, whether he is an Ã¢â‚¬Å“AryanÃ¢â‚¬Â

Daniel S Peterson · 02-23-2004, 07:14 PM

Hadrianus, 
Contray to popular belief, Tolkien did not create the word "orc" any more than the other classic fantasy standbys of elf, dragon, troll or dwarf. 
I seem to recall people thinking it was an abbreviation for "Oxford Rugby Club" but in fact, it was merely taken from "The Legends of Charlemagne" which Tolkien well knew. The orginal "ORC" was a well armored, dragon-like sea creature (ripped off directly from the familiar Greek myth as virtually every other Medieval story), with a penchant for devouring sacrificial maidens chained to rocks. The hero in this case, Rogero momentarily stuns the beast by the reflection of his shield, long enough to rescue the damsel. 
From a previous thread, some readers were surprised to learn of Bilbos theft of the cup from Smaug was taken directly from the Beowulf legend, but Tolkien stories are quite filled with the like. 
 
I think the only thing truly "original" done by Tolkien, was changing his beloved Germanic barbarians from the authentic destroyers of the real "Middle Earth" (that land between heaven and hell), to the the righteous saviours of his fantasy Middle Earth, and the descendent of those barbarians, (Nazis or otherwise), have naturally praised him ever since. 
 
But for those of you who want to compose amusing satires of his fairy tales (if it is even possible to satirize such nonsense), fear not, you can use ORC without fear of copyright restrictions leveled by lawyers of the Tolkien Corporation, for it is yet one more Tolkien 'rip-off'. 
 
Dan

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	Any Tolkien Scholars out there?	Anonymous	10	2,152	05-24-2004, 03:27 AM Last Post: Muzzaguchi