6 Oct, 2022
(edited)Edited by Urulókë on 2022/10/17 23:27:43
Edited by Urulókë on 2022/10/18 4:20:37
2022/10/6 6:51:24 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
AbstractTolkien's use of real-world science in fleshing out his secondary world of Middle-earth is well-known, including errors he made in the process. With the recent publication of The Nature of Middle-earth, additional attention has been paid to Tolkien's use of mathematics in the same vein. However, reviews of the volume tend to reflect misconceptions about the level of Tolkien's mathematical ability.
CommentsExpanded from a paper presented at the Tolkien Society’s 2022 Oxonmoot
Recommended CitationLarsen, Kristine (2022) "Moons, Maths, and Middle-earth: Misconceptions about Tolkien’s Scientific and Mathematical Prowess," Journal of Tolkien Research: Vol. 15: Iss. 1, Article 2.
Available at:
https://scholar.valpo.edu/journaloftolkienresearch/vol15/iss1/2[Admin note] The paper published above was withdrawn and is now available at
https://scholar.valpo.edu/journaloftolkienresearch/vol15/iss1/4
6 Oct, 2022
2022/10/6 13:30:36 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
Thanks for clarifying that Aelfwine. I was reading the paper this morning and it struck me as a poorly included piece of third hand 'chitter chatter'. Seeking out the editor himself seemed a much better direction.
Larsen could have easily come across the thread here too (
https://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/n ... t_id=33703#forumpost33703) as I doubt many people serious about reading NoME would not know of it. There you make clear that Tolkien had made errors, in the exchanges with others here. And that was very obviously after the book had been printed.
6 Oct, 2022
(edited)Edited by Aelfwine on 2022/10/6 13:38:41
Edited by Aelfwine on 2022/10/6 13:41:08
Edited by Aelfwine on 2022/10/6 13:41:42
Edited by Aelfwine on 2022/10/6 13:43:14
2022/10/6 13:33:02 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
I'd forgotten that mention of the calculation had been released as part of an online preview. But the point does indeed remain: by that point, it was too late to make alterations to the text, which had already long since gone to print.
Not that I would have made any alteration even if I could, since I did not and still have no intention of transcribing Tolkien's own calculation, as irrelevant to my actual points, being: "how?" and "why?" would Tolkien undertake such a calculation in the first place! THAT, together with the hours of detailed work he devoted to Elvish maturity and population growth, with its own sets of eye-splitting ratios, is what makes them examples of Tolkien's hitherto unguessed — at least by me — mathematical abilities. The idea that I meant by this to refer to any particular genius or use of advanced mathematics by Tolkien (as Larsen further mischaracterizes my words — "glowing endorsement" indeed) is a completely unwarranted leap, a teapot in search of a tempest.
17 Oct, 2022
2022/10/17 22:44:46 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
17 Oct, 2022
2022/10/17 22:50:27 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
The paper is no longer available. It was withdrawn so maybe a mod could update the opening post to note that for future visitors.
18 Oct, 2022
2022/10/18 1:47:36 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
The paper has been (cursorily, and pretty clearly begrudgingly) revised to address my chief criticism of it, and moved here:
https://scholar.valpo.edu/journaloftolkienresearch/vol15/iss1/4(Other issues remain — like deciding I mean one thing by a term ("precise") that I very clearly did not mean, and even though the author herself admits the one she assigns it is not the only possible meaning, seemingly so as to keep a grip on the axe she wants to grind — but correcting even such central matters is usually dismissed as mere quibbling, so there it lies.)
18 Oct, 2022
2022/10/18 14:06:49 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
I have no stake in this, but having read it, I think the tone of the article reflects poorly on its author and the journal that published it. I genuinely can’t imagine putting something like this in print, and I’ve had my share of academic disagreements with other scholars. Particularly odd was the bit about how the editor of NOME fails to point out a mathematical error (p.9), but actually he does point out lots of errors in the endnotes (p.10), but actually that’s not good enough because it isn’t “obvious to the reader” (p.10).
Moreover, the whole thing is based on an unsubstantiated premise: people are thinking of Tolkien as an “Einstein” (and it’s largely thanks to NOME). But who thinks this? Certainly none of the reviews cited in the article (pp.10–11), except maybe the one with the hyperbolic (but perhaps simply erroneous) use of the word “calculus.” Mostly the quotations just say that they were unaware that Tolkien had done so much calculation and that NOME is a bit of a slog to get through (unsurprisingly). I’m all for not mythologizing “great men,” but the need to do so in this case seems to be, well, imaginary.
18 Oct, 2022
2022/10/18 15:40:09 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time, London, Dublin, Lisbon, Casablanca, Monrovia
Thanks, glad to know someone else "gets it".