Tolkien, books and order!

[WaleX]

Hi everyone!

First time I post here, but im a big fan! Now that the presentation are done let's get into it!

When I was 12 I first read the "The lord of the rings" and I find it awesome. Back then, i didn't know that they were other books in the Tolkien work. When the movies show i re-read the books and "The hobbits" for the first time.

But it's been a while and I want to read all the tolkien work in chronological order of the story. Just to make myself clear, i think "the Silmaillon" will be the first book and "the lord of the rings" the last...

Does anyone know a website, that tell me, or can post here the order of all the other books i need to read to get all the work of Tolkien in chronological order?

Thanks!


(Sorry for the poor english, i usually speack fench!)

[Closet_Skeleton]

Tolkien didn't write that many books.

Basically;

Silmarilion first

Then the Hobbit

Then Lord of the Rings (fellowship first, then two towers, then return of the king)

Then you simply run out of books.

For is entire published work, Wikipedia has a list but it's mostly his scholarly works from his University position http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolkien#Bibliography

[Winterwind]

Well, then there are all the other books composed posthumously by his son (the Silmarillion being only the first one of those).

But I think going by chronological order doesn't make that much sense. The books were not written that way.

A good reading order would be, in my humble opinion:

The Hobbit (prequel to the Lord of the Rings)
The Lord of the Rings (the great story itself)
The Silmarillion (the story of the world prior to that)
Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth (expanding on some of the stories from the Silmarillion; quite a drafty feeling though, not for everyone's taste)

There's also this entire History of Middle-Earth series, but I haven't read it, so I can't say anything about it.

Basically, the order in which the books were published.

You can find the entire list, publishing order and everything in Tolkien's Wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolkien#Bibliography).

EDIT: Edit ninja'ed!

[Telonius]

In "Middle-Earth Time," the order is:
1. The Silmarillion
(2). The Lay of the Children of Hurin - takes place during the events described in The Silmarillion
3. The Hobbit
4. Lord of the Rings

They were published in this order:
1. The Hobbit
2. Lord of the Rings
3. The Silmarillion
4. The Lay of the Children of Hurin

EDIT: There were several other books, such as "Unfinished Tales" and the "History of Middle Earth" series. I don't include them in with the rest of the books, since they're generally just compilations of Tolkien's notes, showing how the idea of Middle Earth was developed.

[WalkingTarget]

A good reading order would be, in my humble opinion:

The Hobbit (prequel to the Lord of the Rings)
The Lord of the Rings (the great story itself)
The Silmarillion (the story of the world prior to that)
Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth (expanding on some of the stories from the Silmarillion; quite a drafty feeling though, not for everyone's taste)

There's also this entire History of Middle-Earth series, but I haven't read it, so I can't say anything about it.

Basically, the order in which the books were published.


I agree with this assessment. The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales are much tougher to read than the others. The Hobbit wasn't even initially supposed to be part of the Arda mythology that Tolkien had been writing off and on since 1917 or so. He had just included Gondolin and Elrond to fill out the setting of the Hobbit a bit for publication. It wasn't until publishers were bugging him to write a sequel that he decided to tie things together officially.

[Rare Pink Leech]

A good reading order would be, in my humble opinion:

The Hobbit (prequel to the Lord of the Rings)
The Lord of the Rings (the great story itself)
The Silmarillion (the story of the world prior to that)
Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth (expanding on some of the stories from the Silmarillion; quite a drafty feeling though, not for everyone's taste)

I second this as the reading order. You just have to read The Hobbit before The Lord of The Rings. I haven't read The Silmarillion, but I know it's a dense work, so I really wouldn't recommend it as the introduction to Tolkien for anyone. Basically, you start with the easiest to read and go from there. If you like The Hobbit, give that a try; if you're able to get all the way through The Lord of the Rings (and there are a lot of people who can't), then you're enough of a Tolkien fan to tackle the other material.

[Turcano]

The Hobbit wasn't even initially supposed to be part of the Arda mythology that Tolkien had been writing off and on since 1917 or so. He had just included Gondolin and Elrond to fill out the setting of the Hobbit a bit for publication. It wasn't until publishers were bugging him to write a sequel that he decided to tie things together officially.

Yeah, it goes a long way in explaining The Hobbit's anachronisms, like the presence of giants, which are only mentioned in passing in LotR and are obvious retcons.

[Skjaldbakka]

I would recommend reading the Silmarillion first, as you seem to have already read LoTR once. There is a lot of stuff you'll pick up that way, that are just obscure names otherwise. Like the Glorfindel's history, for example. Poor guy.

[WaleX]

Thanks guys!

Ill check those website and consider your opinion!

[factotum]

Yeah, it goes a long way in explaining The Hobbit's anachronisms, like the presence of giants, which are only mentioned in passing in LotR and are obvious retcons.

I think that would be an "inconsistency" more than an anachronism. In any case, I don't really have a problem with giants existing in Middle-earth--they only ever seemed to hang out in the Misty Mountains anyway, and there are all sorts of weird creatures that get only passing mentions in the books. (If you want a far more glaring example of an inconsistency, what the heck was Tom Bombadil doing in LOTR? Where the heck did he come from? It's also noticeable that there is no creation myth for the Hobbits mentioned in the Silmarillion, and you can hardly say that they were obvious retcons into LOTR...).

[Rare Pink Leech]

It's also noticeable that there is no creation myth for the Hobbits mentioned in the Silmarillion, and you can hardly say that they were obvious retcons into LOTR...

Don't you know? At the dawn of time the first Hobbits emerged from a pipe weed plant in the area known as The Shire, and immediately started eating, drinking, and generally being merry. Nothing at all happened to them that's worth mentioning until The Hobbit began :smallbiggrin: