yes, the summoning, the rebellion, the plea for intercession are all intertwined. but its conceivable that the elves might have transgressed in some other way, even if the summons had not occurred.

So. If This section of the Silmarillion is a tragedy, I see The Oath as a major engine of it. We began to discuss how the oath works. In one subtherad I commented that it seemed the SoF were only bound by it when it suited them, & Feanoriel answered:

Quote

I think that's a thoroughly plausible reading. One can see the Oath as very solemn promise, without any supernatural power. Such a thing in real life can be very hard to give up: it takes:

• humility (I was wrong to say I would do that)
  
• courage (to accept the risk of damage to your reputation, and possibly to your political office or even life. To believe others will see that a change of plan is wiser and nobler that the fulfillment of an oath),
  
• imagination (to see a better solution), and lastly
• ability to start over again (unlike Macbeth with his “I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o’er.”)
  
• I think I could quickly come up with a long list of real-world leaders who have wooden-headedly stuck to a policy long after it ceased to be sensible.
  
  Going further, one could see the oath as being an obsession or compulsion the SoF are under. One could imagine this as purely psychological: but the oath has gone beyond something that they could give up by overcoming their stubbornness, pride and fear. It's not at all feasible for them to give it up without outside help.
  Going further - I've heard of people who are unfortunate enough to suffer from a compulsion or obsession report that it is experienced by them as an outside force: it tells or forces them to do something
  Going further - this is fantasy. "But Tolkien, who knows what he can do". Maybe the Oath being experienced as an outside force can, in this fantasy universe turn it truly into an outside force, and swearing the oath has summoned or created a sort of demonic force which now won't let them go.
  All are possible readings, I think.

A most wonderful synopsis of the potential avenues of thought and ways in which the F-troop could have reversed their thinking. In conjunction with Faenoriel's idea, I wonder two things:
If the Oath IS a compulsion, does it arise from the devotion of the F-troop to Feanor? Is it because of his essential fascination, or a deep love that he was able to inspire, and thus the sacredness, and potentially the supernatural aspect, of their last words to him are the driving force?
OR
Is the compulsion related to the Jewels themselves instead?

Because one gets a different read, a different valuation of the F-troop based on which star we think they are following...a deep and abiding, if misguided loyalty; even fear of failure maybe - or a fatal fascination, a possessive lust, for the Silmarils.

A few references: In Letter #131 (look at me jumping the gun.) "The fall of the Elves comes about through the possessive attitude of Feanor and his seven sons to these gems...their evil oath dogs all their later heroism, generating treacheries and undoing all victories." This written in JRRT's story summation BEFORE the Jewels are stolen by Morgoth. I think this might be important because it is the possessive lust for the return of the Jewels that in part propels the Rebellion and the Return. The beginning, as it were, of the odyssey. Also important is that it directly concerns a living Feanor and his feelings.

Two parts from Sil where the Oath awakens:
"...but now hearing of the renewal of Doriath and of Dior's pride the seven gathered again from wandering, and they sent him (Celegorm I think) to claim their own." In previous sentences we read that no member of F-troop would ever assail Luthien while she wore the Nauglamir. (Of the Ruin of Doriath.)

"But in time the knowledge of their oath unfulfilled returned to torment him and his brothers..." (Of the Voyage of Earandiil.)

These reference though, are both later and do not concern Feanor himself, but just the boys. So with the knowledge that Luthien had a Silmaril, and even after it is made into a pretty thing (costing her father's life) for her to wear - the F-troop takes no action. Fear of Luthien? Adulation of her? The feeling that it belonged with one so fair? Perhaps any or all of those. But in any case, with knowledge of its whereabouts, not enough compulsion awakens related to the Jewel itself to propel them into action.

The quoted reference, in which Luthien and her enchantment, or her intimidation (or both) are no longer the showcase for the Jewel. No, instead we read of "Dior's pride..." which seems to be a tipping point. So we read a 'feeling', perhaps their disappointment in not honoring Feanor and wounded pride themselves, as motivation: not, it would seem, the item itself. And the second reference, to their 'torment' in not fulfilling their Oath, also seems to be a 'feeling' unrelated to possession of the Jewel itself, but to carrying out their last solemn and impassioned words to Feanor.

So I think as Faenoriel's states wonderfully, their 'warped conscience and pride', their devotion to Feanor, drives them. WE may know that though - as well as the narrator's voice perhaps - but another question: do they? Or considering the wording of the Oath do they think it IS supernatural?

To relate it to this chapter (nice right? After I just wandered willy-nilly all over the place) I wonder if they DID think it was supernatural, does that mean their feeling (whichever one) of not assailing Luthien is then stronger than their fear of not fulfilling the Oath?

And I am rather coming down on the side of fear, pride and conscience (albeit a crooked one) being the force. In which case we don't discount the appeal of the Silmarils but the 'Elven' story is the more compelling I think.

Nah, just teasing...

what mandos granted beren was unheard of, and countermanded the fate of the second-born... it was probably a one-time only thing, and special dispensation must have been granted by eru (who probably had this in mind all along).

i think part of it is poetic -- if you do bring a character back from the dead and that person mixes with the rest of us, we're going to ask that person, "so what was it like?" by removing beren and luthien to a disclosed but isolated location, they are living proof of mercy and faith, but the mystery endures.

but faith, by definition, can have no proof.... so their existence after the halls of mandos visit.... how do we know? who visited them? did they have servants? or did they do all for themselves, in a sort of rustic purity (which tolkien admired)?

perhaps the more "proof" that luthien and beren have returned is given, the more faith is undermined. best to leave it sketchy.

it's interesting that the words of the oath called everlasting darkness (or something similar) upon any oathbreaker... .that sounds like something only eru could do... only eru has the power to change the fate of the elves (who are bound to arda). the most the valar could do (aside from manipulate events to harry them) would be to lock them up in mandos.

so.... i'm not sure that everlasting darkness awaits the oathbreakers, but i still think the oath has reactive/interactive powers, and still may fall to interpretation via the valar.

Help! I'm stuck in a quote box, and I'm running out of lembas.