INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2273
J.R.R.TOLKIEN’S LEGENDARIUM: THE INTERSECTION OF LINGUISTICS,
MYTH, AND FANTASY
Burieva Nargiza Kuchkarovna
PhD, associate professor Jizzakh state pedagogical university,
department of Foreign languages
Abstract:
This article explores the deep connection between J.R.R. Tolkien’s linguistic
research and the creation of his Middle-earth legendarium. It examines how Tolkien’s early
fascination with languages like Old English, Welsh, Finnish, and Gothic influenced his
invented tongues and myth-making. Drawing on philological studies and the theoretical work of
Owen Barfield, the article highlights language’s aesthetic, nominative, accumulative, and myth-
creating functions in Tolkien’s work. It also situates Tolkien’s legendarium within the broader
context of 20th-century fantasy literature and cultural studies, emphasizing the role of
imagination in bridging ancient mythological consciousness and modern storytelling.
Keywords:
J.R.R. Tolkien, Middle-earth, linguistic research, invented languages, philology,
Old English, Welsh, Finnish, Gothic, myth-making, Owen Barfield, fantasy literature,
legendarium, language functions, imagination
Annotatsiya:
Ushbu maqola J.R.R. Tolkinning lingvistik tadqiqotlari bilan uning O’rta yer
afsonalar to‘plami yaratilishi o‘rtasidagi chuqur bog‘liqlikni o‘rganadi. Tolkienning eski ingliz,
velsh, fin va got tillariga bo‘lgan dastlabki qiziqishi uning ixtiro qilingan tillari va afsonalar
yaratilishiga qanday ta’sir qilganini tahlil qiladi. Filologik tadqiqotlar va Owen Barfieldning
nazariy ishlari asosida maqola tilning estetik, nom beruvchi, yig‘uvchi va afsona yaratuvchi
funksiyalarini yoritadi. Shuningdek, Tolkinning afsonalar to‘plamini 20-asr fantastika adabiyoti
va madaniy tadqiqotlar kontekstida joylashtirib, qadimgi mifologik ong bilan zamonaviy hikoya
san’atini bog‘lovchi tasavvurni ta’kidlaydi.
Kalit so‘zlar:
J.R.R. Tolkin, O’rta yer, lingvistik tadqiqotlar, ixtiro qilingan tillar, filologiya,
eski ingliz, velsh, fin, got, afsona yaratuvchilik, Owen Barfield, fantastika adabiyoti, afsonalar
to‘plami, til funksiyalari, tasavvur.
Аннотация:
В данной статье исследуется глубокая связь между лингвистическими
исследованиями Дж.Р.Р. Толкина и созданием его легендариума Средиземья.
Анализируется, как ранний интерес Толкина к таким языкам, как староанглийский,
валлийский, финский и готский, повлиял на его искусственные языки и мифотворчество.
Опираясь на филологические исследования и теоретические работы Оуэна Барфилда,
статья выделяет эстетическую, номинативную, аккумулирующую и мифотворческую
функции языка в творчестве Толкина. Кроме того, легендариум Толкиена
рассматривается в контексте литературы фантастики XX века и культурологических
исследований, подчеркивая роль воображения в соединении древнего мифологического
сознания и современного повествования.
Ключевые слова:
Дж.Р.Р.Толкин, Средиземье, лингвистические исследования,
искусственные языки, филология, староанглийский, валлийский, финский, готский,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2274
мифотворчество, Оуэн Барфилд, фантастическая литература, легендариум, функции
языка, воображение.
INTRODUCTION
John Ronald Reuel Tolkien was an English writer, poet, and professor of Anglo-Saxon. He is
best known as the creator of the cycle of books about Middle-earth, which came to be known as
the Legendarium.
It is impossible to pinpoint exactly when the idea of the Legendarium began to take shape, since,
according to Tolkien himself, it had existed in his subconscious since childhood. As a young
boy, the future writer was fascinated by the fairy tales of George MacDonald and Andrew Lang.
These stories about distant, unexplored worlds stirred the boy’s imagination and eventually
became the foundation for his own fantasies.
His own experiments in fantasy began with attempts to create a new language. Therefore, the
hypothesis is proposed that the author's linguistic experiments served as the foundation for his
creative work. To achieve this goal, the following tasks should be addressed:
Analyze Tolkien’s own linguistic research;
Trace the origins of influences on his work;
Identify the characteristic features of the functioning of linguistic means.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
To address the stated objectives, the following research methods were used: biographical,
historical-cultural, comparative, and hermeneutic. The theoretical foundation includes works by
both Russian and foreign literary scholars, such as J.R.R. Tolkien by S. Alekseev, The Road to
Middle-earth by T. Shippey, and J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography by H. Carpenter [1; 4; 12].
The findings of this research can be used as material for specialized courses on 20th-century
foreign literature and cultural studies.
Mabel Tolkien taught her children to read from an early age and, noticing Ronald's interest,
began introducing him to the basics of Latin. For his curious mind, this was not enough, so the
boy started inventing new words for the various phenomena around him. For example, by
analogy with the word “somediv”, he coined the word “youdiv” to mean "some-you" [8, p.
701]. The number of ideas grew, and the game was no longer seen as something insignificant.
Already in King Edward’s School, John Ronald was deliberately writing full phrases in
languages unknown to anyone and was the top student in Ancient Greek and Latin. At the same
time, he also began studying Old English, Norse, and Welsh. Together with his friends Rob
Gilson, Geoffrey Smith, and Christopher Wiseman, Tolkien founded a secret society called the
TCBS (Tea Club and Barrovian Society), whose goal was to change the world through art.
Tolkien saw his contribution primarily in the realm of linguistic experimentation and his early
poetic works.
“Returning, if I may, to the human touches and the question of when I began all this — it's like
asking someone where language itself comes from. It is an inevitable development, though
shaped by external circumstances, of something innate from birth. It has always been with me:
a sensitivity to linguistic patterns that affect my emotions like color or music; a passionate love
for all things that grow; and a deep response to legends (for lack of a better word) that contain
what I would call the north-western temper and atmosphere. In any case, if you want to write
that kind of story, you must go back to the roots...”
— wrote Tolkien in a letter to the English poet W. H. Auden [ibid., p. 356].
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2275
A love for language study determined the writer’s future path. In 1913, he enrolled at Exeter
College, Oxford University, initially in the Classics department, later transferring to the more
suitable Faculty of English Language and Literature. As a student, Tolkien not only enjoyed
learning new languages (he studied German, Latin, French, and Greek simultaneously), but also
exploring works written in ancient tongues.
One of his professors, George Brewerton, noticing this interest, gave the young man a textbook
on the Anglo-Saxon language, the study of which was not part of the required curriculum. Upon
close examination, Old English poetry and the literature of medieval England reminded him of
the dialect spoken by his mother’s ancestors [4, p. 42]. Thus, the future of the writer was
determined — he would go on to dedicate his academic career to the study and teaching of
Anglo-Saxon.
Tolkien’s interest extended beyond just the Anglo-Saxon language. In order to read the poem
Kalevala, he studied the basics of Finnish grammar. Finnish would later serve as the prototype
for the language of the Dwarves. The Elvish language Sindarin, on the other hand, was based
on grammatical structures borrowed from Welsh.
Referring to Tolkien’s lecture English and Welsh [11], one may assume that in creating his
languages, the writer focused primarily on the external form of words rather than their internal
meaning. For instance, when describing the Welsh language, Tolkien wrote:
“I will not now attempt to explain what I mean by calling a language as a whole ‘beautiful,’ or
what precisely it is that makes Welsh beautiful to me, since for my conclusion it is sufficient to
state the personal, subjective, if you will, experience of a strong aesthetic pleasure derived from
the Welsh language — whether I hear it or read it” [ibid., p. 196].
In his lecture, while explaining the subjective reasons for his perception of the Welsh language,
Tolkien also pointed to one of the motivations behind creating new languages:
“Most English-speaking people, for instance, will admit that cellar door is beautiful, especially
if dissociated from its sense (and its spelling). More beautiful than, say, sky, and far more
beautiful than beautiful. Well, in Welsh I find an extraordinary number of such 'cellar doors';
and beyond that, on a higher plane, a wealth of word-forms that are pleasing in their connection
of sound and sense.” [ibid., p. 198]
Thus, the Elvish language — created based on Welsh — captivated the author primarily
through its sound. Evidence of this can be found in the poetry written in Sindarin. While some
songs were presented in The Lord of the Rings [7] along with translations, the song “A Elbereth
Gilthoniel,” which is dedicated to the goddess of light Elbereth, is given only in Elvish. This
emphasizes the aesthetic function of the language.
Another language Tolkien used in his linguistic experiments was Gothic. In particular, its roots
can be found in the dialect spoken by the rulers of Rohan (Ristan) before the rise of the Éorlings,
whose language was based on Old English. In this way, the author emphasized the idea that the
land had once been inhabited by a different civilization with its own culture, traces of which
could still be detected in the modern speech of the Rohirrim.
In The History of the Goths by Jordanes [3], there is an account of the Battle of the Catalaunian
Plains, where the Gothic king Theodoric was trampled to death by his own cavalry. Tolkien
describes a similar death for the Rohirrim king Théoden during the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.
Tolkien was drawn to the Gothic language and Gothic culture primarily because it was the first
Germanic language to be recorded in written form. Through the study of Gothic, philologists
were able to trace the development of the modern English language based on linguistic kinship.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2276
Tolkien closely followed all new research on the Gothic language, and in his classes, students
studied Gothic “as a primary source of poetic inspiration, just as it was for the ancient English
and Scandinavians” [15, p. XCVII].
Thus, the use of Gothic reflected the accumulative function of language.
RESULTS AND DICUSSION
The experiments continued but were considered merely a pastime of a philology student.
Everything changed when some words required a context: Tolkien decided to create stories in
which he could use the various speech constructions he invented based on the languages he
studied. In a conversation with his close friend C.S. Lewis, he admitted that he had “discovered
that it is impossible to invent a language without simultaneously inventing a mythology” [1, p.
36].
By synthesizing elements from different languages, Tolkien created new words and phrases that
needed tangible representations. Since these could not be found in reality, Tolkien began to
create them himself, in his imagination. In total, Tolkien created five artificial languages spoken
by his characters: “I am a philologist, and all my works are philological in nature” [8, p. 362].
The English version of the fantasy genre, within which Tolkien’s secondary world was created,
was theoretically shaped during meetings of the Inklings—a literary club founded by Tolkien
and Lewis along with their colleagues from Oxford. The theorist of the Inklings was Owen
Barfield—a poet, writer, and philosopher, recognized as the “first and last Inkling.” His
contribution to the development of the fantasy genre lies not only in defining the concept but
also in understanding modern myth-making as a whole.
In his works Poetic Diction: A Study in Meaning (1928) and Saving the Appearances: A Study
in Idolatry (1957), Barfield argued that myth is “the product of the mental labor of humanity
from the dawn of time” [6, p. 384]. According to him, myth reflects the direct perception of an
ensouled world. This ensoulment is conveyed through the meanings of words as reflections of
attitudes toward natural (literal meaning) and supernatural (figurative meaning) forces.
In this context, myth originated before the rise of civilizations, when human consciousness was
different and characterized by what Barfield called “original participation.” Modern humans
have lost this kind of understanding of the world, and its echoes are reflected in myth.
Barfield’s idea traces back to the philosophy of French philosopher and ethnologist Lucien
Lévy-Bruhl and his theory of the law of mystical participation (participation mystique). In his
work Primitive Thinking (1922), Lévy-Bruhl suggested that the thinking of ancient humans was
based on identifying objects of different orders with one another, which also allowed the same
object to be represented in several places simultaneously.
According to Barfield’s theory, the human world was inhabited by “others” — beings that
humans contrasted with themselves — animals, trees, plants, various experiences, and
phenomena. In human understanding, everything, like the human being himself, was alive.
From this arises the modern understanding of the concept of deity, which Barfield consciously
avoids because, in his theory, all things are equal and no hierarchy exists. Simply put, humans
felt the presence of a living soul in these very “others.”
It is important to note that the “soul” was not perceived by humans as a separate entity; rather,
it was an unknown category distinguishing the living from the non-living. These souls existed
throughout the world in relationships of participation. Through this participation, humans of
ancient times connected their lives with the rest of the world; through participation, all elements
of the world were present alongside one another and interacted:
“Participation is a supersensory relationship between a person and a phenomenon” [13, p. 40].
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2277
Reflecting these relationships, the original myth embodied a multiplicity of meanings that
modern consciousness tries to grasp and decipher. Similarly, ancient words contained several
meanings that today are considered distinct. Thus, language at its early stages primarily
embodied the literal meaning of words, since abstract concepts did not exist in human
consciousness:
“Mythology is the ghost of a concrete meaning” [Ibidem, p. 92].
As an example, Barfield cites the concept of “soul” (“pneuma”), which was originally
understood simultaneously as “breath,” “life,” “wind,” “air,” and “spirit.”
The philosopher argued that the divide between ancient and modern consciousness could not be
bridged by reason alone, as scholars had previously attempted, but rather through imagination,
which would lead to a balance between human self-awareness and the world perceived by it. In
his concept, this synthesis was called “final participation.”
Barfield primarily emphasized that the creation of a modern myth by an author is only possible
if one abstracts away from all kinds of abstract ideas. At its core, myth is concrete and therefore
as far removed as possible from metaphor and allegory. To support this view, he cited
phenomena of language and the theory of a single universal language.
The unity of sound and meaning in words made it possible to find a material embodiment of the
human mind — speech. Friedrich Nietzsche, in his work On Music and Words, explained this
synthesis by stating that human sensations are first reflected in the speaker’s intonation, which
then gives rise to the sound of specific words.
The gap between the meaning of a word and its sound, which has occurred in modern times, is
due to the separation between its inner content and its external form, a process in which
scientific and technological progress plays a significant role.
Thus, in his scholarly research, Owen Barfield sought to show that humanity, increasingly
distancing itself from nature—the primary source of creative energy—“limits itself within the
narrow confines of metaphorical thinking and idolatry” [14, p. 5].
Tolkien came to the same conclusion in his youth, as modernization and urbanization
increasingly took over more territory, thereby taking away places cherished from childhood
memories. The idea of the negative impact of progress fully took shape during World War I,
when scientific and technological advancements in the form of new types of weapons caused
the deaths of many people.
Barfield’s theory broadened Tolkien’s understanding of a return to natural roots, which also
found expression in the creation of the world of Middle-earth. Any tools and weapons used by
the protagonists were forged by hand, while the dark forces relied on military technology to
equip their armies.
But what Tolkien liked most was the idea of the intersection between language and myth. At
the same time as the founding of the Inklings club, Tolkien was in the process of searching for
ways to develop his languages. Therefore, the desire to recreate an originally English
mythology found practical expression in his linguistic experiments.
It was at the Inklings meetings that, intentionally, the first serious works—according to the
author himself—were brought to life, such as the story of Beren and Lúthien, The Children of
Húrin, excerpts from The Ainulindalë, as well as a playful tale about a small and unassuming
hobbit. These had not yet formed a unified cycle about Middle-earth at that time, but the very
idea of his own mythology had firmly taken root in the writer’s soul.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2278
Oxford professor of Old English language and poetry Tom Shippey, in his work The Road to
Middle-earth, called Tolkien’s entire multi-volume work a “philosophical-linguistic epic,”
noting that “philology is the only suitable guide to Middle-earth” [12, p. 16].
Deliberate simplicity and etymological multidimensionality coexisted in the creation of new
words, which is most evident when analyzing the toponyms of Middle-earth, where names such
as the Hill or the Long Lake stand alongside major human settlements like Gondor or Rohan,
each having their own translations in other languages of Tolkien’s world, thereby revealing the
nominative function of language.
Rohan, also known as the Riddermark, is the name of the Land of Riders in Westron (the
common tongue), while the Rohirrim themselves called their lands the Mark. Shippey
considered two possible sources for the borrowing of this toponym: the Anglo-Saxon kingdom
of Mercia, in whose territory Tolkien’s native Birmingham was located; and the common name
“Mierce,” used by the neighboring West Saxons for all Anglo-Saxon lands, which was meant to
be pronounced as “Mark” or “Marka” [Ibid., p. 58].
“But one should not think that philologists, in chasing details, neglect the author’s intent and
thereby differ from literary critics. Their profession simply requires them to pay attention not
only to the behavior of a word in its immediate context but also to its roots, its equivalents in
other languages, its relatives and descendants, as well as the cultural metamorphoses that the
history of a given word may reveal,” wrote Shippey, pointing out that understanding the
characters’ images requires attention to their speech [Ibid., p. 79].
As an example, one can consider the development of the main character in the tale The Hobbit,
or There and Back Again — Bilbo. Throughout the narrative, Bilbo’s speech pattern remains
unchanged, thus portraying him as a simple and guileless character: “You see, it’s a completely
unbearable situation. I’m personally quite tired of it. I’d like to be back at home in the West,
where the people are not so stubborn” [10, p. 32]. However, this does not mean that his
character remains static. This is evidenced by his monologue upon the death of the leader of
their company, the dwarf Thorin Oakenshield: “Farewell, King under the Mountain. Truly a sad
adventure that must end so; and no mountain of gold is worth it. Yet I’m glad I shared its
hardships with you — that’s more than any Baggins has deserved” [Ibid., p. 49].
Thus, passing through a series of trials, the small hobbit undergoes an initiation and becomes a
true hero. The story begins and ends with a tea scene. But whereas at the very beginning Bilbo
was quite displeased with unexpected guests, at the end of his journey he is genuinely happy to
see his friends. Despite the internal changes the hero undergoes, Tolkien’s beloved character
remains just as simple-hearted, exclaiming at the arrival of guests: “That’s nice!” [Ibid., p. 53].
The image of the main character, as well as the entire tale, reveals Tolkien’s key stylistic
innovation as a writer. This innovation later became the foundation for all his creative work. C.
S. Lewis called this technique the “shift of tone” [Quoted in: 5, p. 49], which is explained by
the transition from everyday, mundane storytelling to the epic, and a return to the original
beginning — as if “There and Back Again.” Such a “shift of tones” can be observed both in
individual works (the same pattern of journey and hero’s development in The Lord of the Rings)
and throughout the entire concept of the Legendarium: from the children’s story about a little
hobbit to the grand mythological canvas depicted in The Silmarillion [9], which is built on
influences and borrowings from ancient cultures, most notably seen in the creation of artificial
languages.
Tolkien’s own personal experiences became the foundation for many stories in the
Legendarium. For example, the story of his own love is reflected in the tale of Beren and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2279
Lúthien, while the death of his father and the subsequent sleep (the “Atlantis complex”) found
their logical conclusion in the story of the fall of Númenor. However, Tolkien never set out
merely to describe his own life. As the French philosopher Gilles Deleuze asserted, “to write is
not to tell one’s memories, journeys, loves, and griefs, one’s dreams and obsessions. That
would mean committing the sin of excess realism or imagination” [2, p. 15]. By coexisting in
balance, the author’s fantasy and life experience, synthesized together, made it possible to
create a world where invented languages could acquire meaning.
Shippey noted that all the phenomena of Middle-earth, as products of Tolkien’s philological
research, were primarily born under the influence of the philological discoveries of the 19th
century [12, p. 37]. The century preceding Tolkien’s work was characterized by a vast number
of discoveries of linguistic laws, such as Kuhn’s law, Grimm’s law, Werner’s law, and so on. A
natural result of this was the growing popularity of lectures on comparative philology, which
sparked interest not only among scholars but throughout London’s high society: “The English
word invention (meaning ‘invention, fabrication’) originates, as is well known, from the Latin
invenire — ‘to find.’ Once upon a time, invention also meant ‘discovery,’ which Tolkien was
perfectly aware of. If someone were to say that the foundation of 19th-century philology was
the invention (finding, discovery) of languages, they would not be straying from the truth at all.
Tolkien often engaged in wordplay, comparing the languages he invented with those that were
‘discovered’ or reconstructed by scholars worldwide. In doing so, he aligned himself with his
own professional heritage… Tolkien’s personal history here appears simply as a separate,
concrete embodiment of the same overarching generalized idea looming in the background”
[Ibid., p. 38].
Thus, Tolkien’s Middle-earth was created based on invented languages; however, it was only
through the creation of this secondary world that these languages gained their vitality:
“Writing is a process of becoming that is never finished and is always in a state of doing,
transcending any inhabited or experienced material. It is a process—that is, a transition of Life
passing through the inhabited and experienced. Literature is inseparable from becoming: in the
act of writing, one becomes a woman, becomes an animal, a plant, becomes a molecule up to
the point of becoming indistinguishable. These becomings interlock with one another,
following, as in Le Clézio’s novel, some special line, or coexist on all levels, following, as in
Lovecraft’s mighty work, through doors, thresholds, and passages that make up an entire
universe” [2, p. 25].
The philological principles that underlie Tolkien’s poetological features are described in essays
such as “Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics,” “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,” “English
and Welsh,” “On Fairy-Stories,” and “The Secret Vice.” All these lectures, later published in
the collection “Beowulf and the Critics and Other Essays,” highlight the linguistic nature of his
research. In particular, the essay on Beowulf includes a detailed analysis of the poem’s
translation and its meter. What began as philological analyses laid the foundation for Tolkien’s
own fantastic stories, whose theoretical justification was presented in “The Secret Vice” and
“On Fairy-Stories.” In this context, language performs aesthetic, accumulative, and nominative
functions. Theoretical reflections by O. Barfield played a significant role in the development of
Tolkien’s work. His idea of the intersection between language and myth became the key to
understanding not only Tolkien’s Legendarium but also C. S. Lewis’s fantasy cycle The
Chronicles of Narnia, who, alongside Tolkien, is considered a founder of the English variant of
the genre.
CONCLUSION
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ISSN: 2692-5206, Impact Factor: 12,23
American Academic publishers, volume 05, issue 05,2025
Journal:
https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai
page 2280
Thus, in addition to the functions mentioned above, language performs a myth-making function,
the fulfillment of which can be traced throughout Tolkien’s entire div of work. This function
places reality and fiction on equal footing. The secondary reality created on the pages of his
works, despite its fictional foundation, has roots that reach back to the period before the dawn
of civilization. Therefore, only the myth-making function of language is capable of bridging the
gap between meaning-making elements that have since given rise to modern existential
problems. The global problems of the universe, which originate in language, cannot be
comprehended through reason alone but require imagination. By constructing a worldview that
spans from mythological consciousness to historical time, Tolkien fills a gap in the history of
his own country, reinterpreting human development through artistic invention. The
Legendarium is a complete system in which the author not only follows ancient traditions but
also revives and transforms them, creating a synthesis of archaic elements with later narrative
techniques inherited within the stream of English culture.
REFERENCES:
1. Alekseev, S. V. J. R. R. Tolkien. Moscow: Veche, 2013. 432 pages.
2. Deleuze, J. Critique and Clinic. St. Petersburg: Machina, 2002. 240 pages.
3. Jordan. On the Origin and Deeds of the Goths. Moscow: Publishing House of Oriental
Literature, 1960. 436 pages.
4. Carpenter, H. J. R. R. Tolkien: A Biography. Moscow: Eksmo, 2002. 330 pages.
5. Caldecott, S. The Secret Fire: Tolkien’s Spiritual Vision / translated from English. Moscow:
St. Andrew Biblical-Theological Institute, 2008. 224 pages.
6. Matveeva, A. S. Word and Myth in Owen Barfield’s Philosophical Concept // Bulletin of
Nizhny Novgorod University named after N. I. Lobachevsky. 2012, No. 4, Part 1, pp. 381–
384.
7. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Lord of the Rings. Moscow: AST, 2020. 752 pages.
8. Tolkien, J. R. R. Letters. Moscow: AST, 2019. 752 pages.
9. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Silmarillion. Moscow: AST, 2016. 416 pages.
10. Tolkien, J. R. R. The Hobbit, or There and Back Again. St. Petersburg: Azbuka, 2000. 57
pages.
11. Tolkien, J. R. R. “Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics” and Other Essays / translated by
the Elsewhere creative team. Moscow: AST, 2007. 416 pages.
12. Shippey, T. The Road to Middle-earth / translated from English by M. Kamenkovich. St.
Petersburg: Limbus Press, 2003. 146 pages.
13. 13. Barfield O. Poetic diction: A study in meaning. Middletown: Wesleyan University
Press, 1973. 238 p.
14. 14. Barfield O. Saving the Appearances: A Study in Idolatry. Middletown: Wesleyan
University Press, 1988. 191 p.
15. 15. Corpus Poeticum Boreale: in 2 vols. / ed. by G. Vigfusson, F. York Powell. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1883. Vol. 1. СXXIV+716 p.
