Talk:Maiar

Associated Vala of Blue Wizards and Balrogs
Is there any information to indicate whom the Blue Wizards were associated with? And for Balrogs: I had always thought Balrogs were associated with Melkor. The article, however, indicates that they existed prior and were eventually corrupted by Melkor (as was the case for Sauron). Considering information that links Gothmog as a possible child of Melkor, I'd think that would be a good indication that these Maia were directly associated to Melkor rather than corrupted. Any thoughts? --Thisisbossi 06:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Found a reference that the Blue Wizards were of Oromë (though the reference is the Blue Wizards article itself). --Thisisbossi 06:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The blue wizards are reffered to as belonging to Orome in the Book of Lost Tales. In this work their names are given as Pallando and Alatar (one of whom was brought "as a friend"). The flip side is we know almost nothing about the blue wizards and even their names remained in flux for the duration of Tolkien's life. At one point he played with the notion that the 5th blue wizard was actually Glofindel to explain his reappearance on middle-earth--Darkling235 22:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

References to Angels not appropriate.
Unless there is reference to the word 'angel' in Tolkien's own material I can't see the analogue being useful. Though there is a supreme creator which created the Valar, Maia (or did the Valar create the Maia?) and Ea, the Valar are more like gods in the fashion of ancient Greek deities, characters with both divine and mundane attributes, individuals not entirely beholden to the creator and independent thereof - characteristics NOT attributed to angels. The Maia could be considers minor gods, though the analogue to angels seems better here than with the Valar. In any case 'angel' seems misleading, implying goodness and a whole bunch of other attributes that cannot be given to Tolkien's characters. Suggest removal of references to 'angel'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.167.197.212 (talk) 19:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Frankly the angel vs. archangel comparison seems to be contradictory also. This really needs attention by someone who knows Tolkien a bit. - Acq3 (talk) 03:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

"Much more powerful than mere mortals"
So not more powerful than elves? The phrase seems to continue the angels/men analogy, and as the "people" of arda aren't all men or all mortal it might be better rewritten--86.143.79.190 12:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Changes addressing the above
I've made changes to the article reflecting the following points:


 * 1) While Tolkien's letters use the term "angelic" (usually in quotes) to refer to the Valar and Maiar, he seems careful not to call them "angels".  He uses the term suggestively, not definitively.  These are beings in his subcreation, and he modestly wants to maintain a distinction between primary and secondary creation.
 * 2) Another reason for avoiding the term "angel" (and even more "archangel") is that Tolkien's beings do not share many of the characteristics that have come to be associated with those terms.  The Valar of Tolkien's world are almost unrecognizable in medieval angelology, for example, and their function in the world is quite different.
 * 3) The article (in my view) needs to acknowledge the different senses Tolkien used 'Valar' for.  We have sidestepped this in the past by calling Maiar "lesser Ainur"; but on the terminology of Ainulindale they would be lesser Valar.
 * 4) While Tolkien draws a clear distinction between the (greater) Valar and the Maiar, and refers to the Order of the Istari and to Sauron as being of "a different order" (not "Order") than the wizards, he never sketches anything like the formal traditional hierarchy of medieval angels.  It is clear that there is a great range of native power among both the Maiar and the Valar; but formalizing the differences as "Orders" goes well beyond the text -- with the single exception of the Istari, whose "Order" seems to refer more to their mission than to their power.
 * 5) I'm wary of any general comparison of Mair vs the Children of Eru.  They are very different kinds of beings, "powerful" in their own ways.

Elphion (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Concerning the Ainur as Angels, Tolkien in Carter's published letters mentions 'angelic' terminology over 20 times in relation to the nature of the Ainur (including the Valar and the Istari). He does use the term 'angelic' without quotations on more than one occasion and he does use the term 'angel' explicitly on more than one occasion as well. Of course he does not say they ARE Angels in a 'primary creation' sense but he does make it repeatedly explicit that they are angelic beings in his sub-creation. Thus editting out the term angel altogether does violence to his literary vision.

Also the current article makes a number of erroneous statements. The Valaquenta explicitly states that the Maia are Ainur of a lesser nature whereas the Valar are the greater powers. In the Valaquenta, Maiar are not Valar and Valar are not Maiar but both are Ainur. The Ainulindale states that some of the Ainur entered Ea and Arda and describes the activities of the Valar. The Maiar by name are never mentioned. However the Ainulindale states "And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults." Though not named, the companions are obviously the Maiar of the Valaquenta. As for the Parma Eldalamberon quotation ("Maia is the name of the Kin of the Valar, but especially of those of lesser power than the 9 great rulers" wrote Tolkien."), you have interpreted "Kin of the Valar" as a single term thus equating Maiar as Valar whereas based on the entirety of Tolkien's writings it is clear that the statement equates Maia with Kin who are thus related to the Valar but not of the Valar themselves. Alfwine (talk) 23:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * This would be an easier call if Tolkien had said in so many words that "Maiar are not Valar and Valar are not Maiar". "Valar" by itself, as the article already states, usually means the most powerful ones, and Christopher certainly takes that line in his annotations.


 * But there are passages where the term does not seem to be exclusive. Ainulindale introduces the Valar and proceeds to describes characteristics that seem to apply to all of the Ainur in Arda.  The draft of this work in The Lost Road does the same without introducing the term "Maiar", mentioning some of the lesser spirits by name in the discussion of the Valar.  The essay on the Istari in Unfinished Tales says that the Valar sent "members of their own high order" to Middle-earth, and that this was decided at "a council of the Valar" which clearly included lesser spirits (including Olórin, whom Manwë expected to be present).


 * You can argue that these passages -- and the many places where the Valar are mentioned in passing ("by the grace of the Valar"), where we assume the entire divine race is implicated -- are using "Valar" as a kind of synecdoche, but I think it's telling that there is no other term for "all of the Ainur who entered Arda". The passage quoted from Parma is hard to explain otherwise:  "Maia is the name of the Kin of the Valar, but especially of those of lesser power than the 9 great rulers."  What of the ones whose power isn't lesser?  What are they called?  The obvious answer is "Vala".  "Maia" here seems to be a shading of the meaning of "Vala".  The usage is not clear cut one way or the other, and I think the article should reflect that.


 * Your argument regarding "angels" does not answer my earlier point: Tolkien is clearly reticent to call them "angels" outright -- he doesn't want them to be confused with Christian angels.  I have no problem using "angelic", but I think using "angel" is closer to doing "violence to his literary vision" since he was so careful to keep the term out of his text.


 * -- Elphion (talk) 14:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with Elphion that Maia and Vala are not 2 exclusive terms. Maia are those of the Vala who are weaker in power. Ainulindale describes Vala as the Ainur that entered Arda, and since the Maia are Ainur who entered Arda, it follows that they are lesser Vala. Tolkien wrote in the Valaquenta, that the Maiar are "of the same order as the Valar, but of less degree". GreyWinterOwl (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Etymology?
I can't find any etymology for Maiar. Can somebody in the know confirm that there is none? It's sounds a bit like a Valarin word, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.153.172.28 (talk) 11:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Clarity
Speaking as someone who's not all that familiar with the Lord of the Rings series (or any of Tolkien's work): This page is utterly incomprehensible to outsiders. unless (talk) 20:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Sauron a Maia?
This article mentions that Sauron is one of the Maia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgoth - ie that Sauron and Gandalf are of equal status before Eru. Surely he should be mentioned here? — Precedingunsigned comment added by 124.171.51.73 (talk) 09:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Who is the he you are refering to it is not clear? GimliDotNet ( Speak to me,  Stuff I've done )  18:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

"Immortal"
I undid the addition of the modifier "immortal" in describing the Maiar. According to Tolkien (letter #156) Gandalf actually died and was sent back from death by Eru. It's arguable: the Elves are commonly called "immortal" too, though they too can die. I think "angelic" covers the territory for Maiar. -- Elphion (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2017 (UTC)