Tolkien Forums

Beorn is a skin-changer..that is the description that Gandalf gives. He is partly a man and partly a bear. Again, this is one of those questions where also i would like have more answers. What are those "powers" or "magic-skills" of his and how he can transform to bear anytime he wants..opinions please...

Unfortunately Tolkien didn't write very much about the Skin Changers, and the only one that he ever wrote about was Beorn.  Basically they were just beings that had the ability to change their form, although I am not sure if they could only choose between a couple of forms or if they were able to take on the physical form of anything that they liked.  In the case of Beorn he was only described as taking on the shape of a man and a bear.

Incorrect i am afraid Agarwaen. By rule of The One i will provide quotations from here forth when needed. Ungoliant could change form:

"In a ravine she lived, and took shape as a spider of mountrous form, weaving here= black webs in a cleft of the mountains."

This appears that Ungoliant was indeed a Maiar and as you know bound to phisical form on Arda. She took the form of a Spider.

If that is not sufficiant I am sure you know of Melkor being able to configure his shape as a black cloud, as somone fair or as a terrible spirit. i cannot provide the quote but I don't think there is need anyhow.

 

 

Yeah you're both right. I was just writing from my memory and Sauron was only one which came to mind. That shape chancing doesn't seem like something normal and human thing to do..there is certain mystery around Beorn and i dont know if it's the same case with Tom. Deliberate enigma?

Very true! Tolkien leaves Beorn a mystery, just like Bombadil and so many other things we wish to discover in his world. He could be a Maiar, or mabey just what he is said to be, a skin changer who turns into a bear, either at will or at sertain times. We will probably never know.

Bah, you beat me here by a few hours, Elendil. I had that exact same quote.

Anyways, it's very clear that Beorn is a Man, and no more. He is dead by the time of the Fellowship of the Ring and has a number of descendants. He had some very interesting abilities, but he was still a Man.

I also noticed that someone mentioned that they thought Ungoliant was a Maia. I must say that I heartily disagree with this, even though it's rather off-topic. In the Valaquenta, there is no mention of her. She is not mentioned under the section "The Maiar" or "The Enemies", in which the Ainur that appear in The Silmarillion are mentioned, including the Balrogath. The fact is, we do not know what Ungoliant is.

I may be wrong here but i kinda remember that Olorin is only "wizzie" who is mentioned in valaquenta. There are other maiar named but he is only one from Istari.

Also here is another quote:

"For of the maiar many were drwn to his (Melkor) splendour in the days of his greatness, and remained in that allegiance down into his darkness; and others he corrupted afterwards to his sevice with lies and treacherus gifts. Dreadful amoung these spirits were the Valaraukar, the scourges of fire that in Middle-earth were called Balrogs, demons of terror.
Among those of his servants who have names the greatest was that spirit whom the Eldar called Sauron, or Gathaur the Cruel. In his beginning he was of the maiar of Aule, and he remained mighty in the lore of that people. In all the deeds of Melkor, the Morgoth upon arda, in his vast works and in the deceits of his cunning, Sauron had a part, and was only less evil than his master in that for long he served another and not himself. But in after years he rose like a shadow of Morgoth and a ghost of his malice, and walked behind him on the smae ruinous path down into the Void". (Valaquenta)

This clearly states that only soem of the Maiar who had names are listed above.

Correction - the halls of Eru lied with the confines of Ea and not in the Void as you are suggesting Narguzir:

"But when they were come into the void, Iluvatar said to them: 'Behold your music!' And he showed to them a vision, giving to them sight where before there was only hearing; and they saw a new World made visible before them, and it was globed amid the Void, and it was sustained therein, but was not of it." (Anulindale)

It clearly says here that the Ainur and Eru dwelled not in the Void itself. Therefore this is the same area, called the outer darkness that Ungoliant lay before coming into the world itself and where Melko fled to after his chase by Tulkas.

I don't know about Ungoliant being one of the ainur, but about Beorn

Well everything has been said, he was a man with magic abilities, a bit of a wiz. But I think it was one of the remains from the Hobbit as a children's tale and though this is pure speculation, the Beornings may be something Tolkien wasn't completely happy about.

Then again... there are other such creatures of which origins are unknown.

TM, I think you didn't understand what I tried to ask. With origins I meant, where did the idea come from, the concept of a skinchanger, such an unusual creature even in the world of Tolkien.

About the origins you gave. If Beorn was a descendant of the Edain of the first age that still doesn't explain anything about the ability of the Beornings.

Were-bear? These skin-changers appear to be known to the Maiar and probably fall under the strange creatures category. Some aberration in the music of the Ainur that produced things like the watcher in the water and hobbits and probably a host of other unexplained mortal creatures in Arda.

It's quite clear that Beorn was indeed a man as has been said several times.  Tolkien considered him a man and the dwarves considered him (and the beornings) a man. 

TM, I think you didn't understand what I tried to ask. With origins I meant, where did the idea come from, the concept of a skinchanger, such an unusual creature even in the world of Tolkien.~Andu

I would like to expand on what Galin said a bit...

I don't necessarily agree.  If we look at Beorn's characteristics, what Tolkien does with him is he plays off the history and myths of the berserkers and also the evolution of the etymology.

I'll start with the etymology of Beorn, as it did evolve over the years.  At first the old english word 'beorn' meant bear, however over time it evolved to come and mean 'warrior.'  Tolkien is playing with this etymology change about Beorn's story.  Beorn's ability to change into a bear, and his 'warrior' status:

’Frodo learned that Grimbeorn the Old, son of Beorn, was now the lord of many sturdy men, and to their land between the Mountains and Mirkwood neither orc nor wolf dared to go.

’Indeed,’ said Gloin, ’if it were not for the Beornings, the passage from Dale to Rivendell would long ago have become impossible. They are valiant men and keep open the High Pass and the Ford of Carrock. But their tolls are high,’ he added with a shake of his head; ’and like Beorn of old they are not over fond of dwarves.'~Many Meetings

Then just by reading the part he played in the Battle of Five Armies we can just see why 'warrior' is a good name to describe Beorn.

Then comes the ties to berserkers.  The 'berserkergang' was the practice of the berserkers...or the elite fighting Viking warriors.  Meanings of 'berserker' tend to vary from place to place, but the two most common are:

1) 'bare a sark' - which refers to the berserkers who did not like to wear any armor.

2) And I think this one is closer to Beorn - meaning 'bear-shirt' - as berserkers would like to get bear skins and wear them into battle...where they actually believed they turned into bears and had all the strength/fighting qualities of a bear.

There are some other one's for example...'ulfhednar' means 'wolf-coats' which would be similar to the meaning of 'bear-shirt.' For an example Kveldulfr was described as a berserker in Egin's Saga who could change into a wolf.)

If we look at descriptions of Beorn fighting, we can see Tolkien playing off of two common beliefs about the berserkers.  The 'frenzy/fury/madness' (perhaps even insanity) of the berserkers, and their invulnerability to weapons.  Both were common myths about the berserkers, both which describe Beorn:

’Swiftly he returned and his wrath was redoubled, so that nothing could withstand him, and no weapon seemed to bite upon him.'~The Battle of Five Armies

So, if we think about it, Beorn as a skin-changing berserker man, it wouldn't be all that uncommon.  As Tolkien is playing off the evolution of Beorn's etymology and the qualities/tales of the berserkers.

-- Edited by Lord Lórien at 18:20, 2006-11-16

I'm sorry for the confusion...I see why it is.  I meant that I didn't agree with Andu thinking it was 'unusual' even in LOTR.  Not that I disagreed with what you said.

very interesting...I did have a suspicion that the origins of Beorn lied in hte Norse mythology, but I never had any information on this matter.
thank you Galin and Lord Lorien for very well explaining this, great posts from both of you, and a new thing I have learned.

I am so glad that I found this thread. I have always been fascinated by the idea or concept of Beorn. I only ever studied basic Greek mythology and never knew where the idea for Beorn came from. The shape shifting that is attributed to Beorn didn't strike me as odd because even in the Silmarillion an account at least is given of Luthien and Haun shape-shifting.

"He (Haun) turned aside therefore at Sauron's isle, as they ran northward again, and he took thence the ghastly wolf-hame of Drauglin, and the bat-fell of Thuringwethil. She was the messenger of Sauron, and was want to fly in vampire's form to Angband; and her great fingered wings were barbed at each joint's end with an iron claw. Clad in these dreadful garments Haun and Luthien ran through Taur-nu-Fuin, and all things fled before them." pg.176 Of Beren and Luthien-The Silmarillion

What struck me as odd is in my Tolkien concordance there is suspicion cast on the validity of Bilbo Baggins' report on Beorn even though the dwarves and Gandalf were present with him.

"Beorn- In the late Third Age, Beorn was the chieftain of the clan of Northern Men whose traditional duty it was to maintain the trade routes from Eriador to Wilderland, particularly over the high pass of the Misty Mountains and across the Ford of Carrock. Bilbo Baggins attributed many strange characteristics to Beorn; whatever the truth of these stories, he was certainly a Man of ursine strengh, fiery temper and a suspicious nature.
Like all his clan, the Beornings, he hated Orcs even more than strangers, and thus later came to play a vital role in the Battle of Five Armies, where his opportune arrival and berserker rage helped to overthrow the Goblin army. Beorn personally slew Bolg, the chief of the Orcs. The Beornings were akin to the Eotheod and to the Men of the Vales of Anduin; their language was a Northern dialect related to that of Dale."
pg. 83 The Complete Tolkien Companion by J.E.A. Tyler

Obviously, nothing is said about his ability to shape-shift other than the incredulous note about Bilbo's "stories". I think it odd also that, as far as I've read, both here and my companion, nothing is mentioned about the odd, at the very least, animals that lived with Beorn. Sheep, dogs and ponies, to mention a few, that were able to stand upright and set tables. More than the shape-shifting, I am curious about these animals. Was Beorn's homestead a place for magical or misfit animals; a haven for odd or advanced ME creatures or did it bear some enchantment that allowed himself and his animals to do unusual things? Maybe all the animals on that homestead were posessed of spirits escaped from Valinor. I would love to hear more thoughts on this.

Lomoduin

I didn't remember any implication of shape shifting in the Tom Bombadil story but I'm excited to research it. You do the same and I'll get back to you to compare notes.

Curiously yours,

Lomoduin

Okay,

I have done 'some' snooping and I still can't find anything about Tom shape-shifting. He is an interestin, to say the least, character but I think that is something for another thread, as this one is about Beorn. I will post there next.

I do think it's very interesting that Beorn and Tom do have some things that are undeniably in common. For instance, both of them have dwellings that are built long and low and have low furniture perfect for sitting Hobbits. Also, they both laid a table with no meat to eat. Not only that, it was the same stuff; honeycomb, yellow cream, white bread and butter!

Weird, huh?

Bear, nice ideas, but many of them make little sense to me. All this talking about Beorn being someone of divine descent seems quite nonsensical, especially as Tolkien clearly said Beorn is a MAN. A "magician", meaning he knows things others don't and consider magical, but still only a man. The story about the bears is clearly just a myth, and if Beorn did have some special descent, he would not have been said to be just a man.

I do agree with the idea that Bombadil and Beorn ate similar things due to different reasons. Beorn because he would not bear harm an animal and Bombadil because he was a nature spirit, or at least I see him as one. However, nature spirit means he was not a spirit belonging to any Valar, not a companion. Gandalf also knows that Tom had actually nothing to do with the Valar, he was his own master and had always been. Like Goldberry they seemed to be nature spirits that perhaps like Ungoliant were created together with the music.

To support my point here is my entry for the old lore contest here on the TF debating that Tom is a nature spirit:

~ Bombadil as a Nature Spirit ~

Tolkien's own comments in Letter #153 provide support for looking
outside the list of "usual Silmarillion entities" to explain Bombadil:

"Also T.B. exhibits another point in his attitude to the Ring, and its
failure to affect him. You must concentrate on some part, probably
relatively small, of the World (Universe), whether to tell a tale,
however long, or to learn anything however fundamental - and therefore
much will from that 'point of view' be left out, distorted on the
circumference, or seem a discordant oddity. The power of the Ring over
all concerned, even the Wizards or Emissaries, is not a delusion - but
it is not the whole picture, even of the then state and content of that
part of the Universe." Letter #153

One could read this as saying that Bombadil, despite being in nature
similar to the Wizards, falls outside of the main picture because he is
not affected by the Ring. However, an equally natural reading is that
the picture of Middle-earth presented in LotR is incomplete in a more
fundamental way. This 'active' interpretation encourages us to expand
our knowledge of the "content of that part of the Universe" by
identifying a new type of being, of which Bombadil is an example.
Among the first hints that Bombadil could be some sort of nature spirit
is his first mention in Letters: in Letter #19, Tolkien asks his
publisher:

"Do you think Tom Bombadil, the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and
Berkshire countryside, could be made into the hero of a story?" Letter #19

The letter provides a starting point for this theory, showing that Tom
Bombadil was a "nature spirit" when Tolkien first imagined him. It seems
reasonable to wonder if this view remained unchanged.
Canonical support for this claim can be found in Galdor's statement at
the Council of Elrond:

"Power to defy our Enemy is not in him, unless such power is in the
earth itself. And yet we see that Sauron can torture and destroy the
very hills."LOTR, Fellowship of the Ring

Galdor directly associates the power of Bombadil with that of "the earth
itself", and even uses Sauron's ability to destroy the hills as an
argument that Sauron could defeat Bombadil. This may be the strongest
evidence that Tom is essentially related to the natural world.
Also the fact he lived in the Old Forest and had a special power over
all the living things here, also indicates that Tom Bombadil was a
nature spirit. He, as "Master" of the nature in this land, could even
command Old Man Willow to release Pippin.

There are enough other reasons to think he was in no way linked to the Valar.