Narnian Enemies: Introduction to The Last Battle

The tyrannical monarchy of Carlomen is not, however, Narnia’s greatest existential threat. In fact, though Carlomen does eventually invade and conquer Narnia, this was only possible due to a societal/theological rebellion that had already weakened Narnia. This rebellion was headed by Shift, the antichrist, the “prophet” of the false Aslan. 

(It is worth pointing out that Shift is a monkey who pretends to be a man, just as the antichrist is a man pretending to the be the savior.)

The story of this rebellion is told in the first part of the Last Battle. I have to admit that the plot of the first part of The Last Battle has, for me, always been troubling. The actions of the creatures are most bewildering. The willingness of Tirian and Jewel to give themselves up for the sake of “honor” is, to me, infuriating. There is a need for clarification, and maybe a little background is missing as well. While I am not sure I can explain everything, or anything, I will share some of my thoughts.

In the next post we’ll review the story of The Last Battle highlighting certain aspects that require explanation. This will set the stage for identifying the true enemy facing Narnia in its final days. With this identification we can then go backwards in time and try to imagine what allowed this enemy to gain a foothold in Narnia.

Narnian Enemies: Calormen

The introduction of Calormenes into the Chronicles of Narnia is found in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. While on the Lone Islands Edmund, Lucy, Reepicheep and Eustace were captured and put on the slave market. After some adventure, King Caspian, supported by the Lord Bern, a former friend of Caspian’s father, mounts a rescue. The slave market is closed for good and the slaves are set free. At that point two Calormene merchants approach our heroes. Lewis describes the encounter as follows:

The Calormen have dark faces and long beards. They wear flowing robes and orange-coloured turbans, and they are a wise, wealthy, courteous, cruel and ancient people. They bowed most politely to Caspian and paid him long compliments, all about the fountains of prosperity irrigating the gardens of prudence and virtue - and things like that - but of course what they wanted was the money they had paid.

These sentences paint a picture of Calormen as somewhere out of the Arabian Nights. Calormenes wear the clothes of the Middle East (and also carry scimitars rather than straight swords). They are courteous and speak with great eloquence but are really seeking something base and mundane. The fact that the Calormen currency is the crescent, cements the connection between it and the Ottoman Empire.

Yet, Lewis builds into Calormen society certain ideas which are patently at odds with a model of an Islamic Empire. First, the religion of Calormen is certainly not Islam. The chief deity of the Calormenes (though not the only one) is Tash who has four arms and the head of a vulture. The Calormenes worship idols of Tash and are said to practice human sacrifice. Tash is also regarded as the ancestor of the line of the Tisrocs (the empires of Calormen). All of which is totally at odds with Islam, a monotheistic religion which rejects idols and images of God. Why? If Lewis was seeking an Islamic enemy to Narnia, make the country fully Muslim!

I humbly suggest that the Muslim-like characteristics of Narnia's enemy is effectively a red-herring. Lewis endows Calormenes with some physical and cultural features of Muslims from the Middle Ages simply to recreate a Crusader-type defense of the Holy Land atmosphere in the Chronicles. However, the true conflict between Narnia and Calormen is not religion.

The major difference between Narnian society and Calormen society is the relationship between the common-folk and the great Lords, be they human or spiritual. In Calormen the populous is worthless in the eyes of the great leaders. Laws in Calormen are created by and for the elite. No man is allowed to stand in the presence of the Tisroc (who must be blessed upon mention of his name), and the traffic regulations in the capital city of Tashbaan are described as, “There is only one traffic regulation, which is that everyone who is less important has to get out of the way for everyone who is more important; unless you want a cut from a whip or punch from the butt end of a spear.” In Narnia, and its ally Archenland, however, “The king's under the law, for it's the law makes him a king.”

The same is true with the relationship towards the Gods. Tash seeks to conquer. He demands human sacrifice, he stretches his arms to “snatch all Narnia.” Borrowing from the description of the devil in the Screwtape Letters, Tash seeks to “draw all other beings into himself.” Aslan, of course, is the very opposite. Tash seeks human sacrifice, Aslan sacrifices himself for a human (Edmund). Tash seeks to swallow up Narnia, Aslan sends the Calormene crown-prince home to Calormen to be transformed back into a man in the Temple of Tash. Upon seeing Tash, Rishda Tarkaan falls face down to the ground. Upon seeing Aslan, Lucy’s face lights up and she runs towards him with joy.

This is the actual battle between Carlomen and Narnia. What is the purpose of the masses? To be servants whose will and very being are consumed by the elite, or to be sons who can receive blessings from He who seeks to give?

Calormene Poetry: Questions

Those who ask questions that do not concern them are steering the ship of folly towards the rock of indigence.

In a number of previous posts we have attempted to show that while, superficially, the apophthegms and maxims of Calormene poetry seem reasonable, in fact they are always inaccurate, or incomplete is some way. Either they are brought up slightly out of context, emphasize a point too much or too little, or simply miss the mark in a sometimes subtle way. The above verse is very much in line with our previous studies.

No doubt everyone knows or remembers the child (or adult?) who has a million questions, none of which concern the subject at hand. Facing such a person we would all like to hammer home Arsheesh’s lesson to Shasta, keep your mind on your work and do not pester me or anyone else about things that are irrelevant! However, we soon learn that the reason Arsheesh is not interested in answering Shasta’s question of, “What is there beyond that hill?” is not necessarily because it is irrelevant, but because he does not know. This demonstrates that Arsheesh’s invocation of the poetic verse is inappropriate. How does Arsheesh know whether or not Shasta’s question is irrelevant? Perhaps there is something of importance beyond the hill. Perhaps there is another village there that would buy his fish for a higher price or an inlet from the sea from which it is easier to catch fish. Certainly, those would be facts that should concern both of them!

Arsheesh’s utilization of the poetic verse now takes on different light. Arsheesh uses the verse not only to force Shasta to keep him mind on his work, but also to stave off questions that might force Arsheesh himself to rethink his chosen path in life. Questions open vistas to new possibilities and create doubts concerning the current situation. Arsheesh “had a very practical mind,” one that was not interested in thinking in new ways.

While the Talmud does report certain questions that are not to be asked, the silencing of questions is an anathema to Judaism. Our Sages taught:

“One who is shy will not learn” (Ethics of Our Fathers 2:5)

With this statement, the Sages highlighted not only the acceptance of questions, but their primacy. Only one not afraid to ask, will be able to learn. A true religion, honest philosophy, or constructive government is not afraid of questions. Only one who has something to hide, or is ashamed, or simply does not know is unwilling to address the curiosity of a student.

The Torah itself places questions in the mouths of future generations as they ask their parents about their People’s history. The Passover meal, the seder, centers around these questions. The Talmud goes a step further and institutes various rituals at the Passover seder designed to specifically to engender even more questions. The goal of Judaism then is not to squash curiosity but to peak curiosity, not to silence questions but to encourage them.

Why are questions so important? Why not simply insist to our children this is how it is, and that is final!? One possible reason is practical. Barring questions is simply not a good way to keep adherents. While some people may be satisfied with accepting as gospel whatever they are told, others are not. The danger inherent in questioning religion and authority is outweighed by the risk of losing followers who cannot then give voice to their doubts and queries.

However, I believe the real importance of freedom to question is a positive one. The Talmud insists that just as no two people have the same physical appearance, so too no two people possess the same intellect. Each individual has their own view on a myriad of concepts and their own ideas about a variety of issues. This is true even, and perhaps especially true, when it comes to forming a relationship with God and shaping our lives around His word. Each person must form a unique relationship with God and design their life in fulfillment of His word. In fact, to truly comprehend the most we can about God, for the maximum number of different perspectives, we must perceive how each individual uniquely fulfills these tasks. Individuality, however, comes about only when questions are encouraged and original thought is valued. The silencing of questions represses individuality and leads to uniformity.

Shasta asks questions. His adopted father attempts to stifle these questions for he is uninterested in individuality but only that the necessary work be completed. Even when on the verge of selling Shasta he cares only that he is paid enough to hire another boy. The other boy will do his work and thus be just as good as the baby Arsheesh saved from death and raised to a young man. Despite his father, Shasta continues to ask questions. And these eventually bring him to know the true God.

Narnians Without Narnia: Exile

I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it. I’m going to live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia. 

Thinking further, Puddleglum’s resolve to “live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia,” may not be a theological statement but a socio-historical one. Such a view, I believe, speaks more to Judaism than to Christianity. Let me try to explain…

For all that the Chronicles of Narnia are Christian works, Narnia is not a religion, but a state. A citizen of a state may experience a phenomenon that is inapplicable for a religion, exile. People in exile are separated from their homeland, but does this mean they are separated from their religion? Well, perhaps they are geographically kept from the performance of certain rituals, but with respect to the core belief system, the answer is no. Religion is portable. While a religion may designate holy places, theological truths are not bound by geography.

Puddleglum, trapped in a pit which is the witch’s lands, is very much in exile. He is separated from his wigwam, his reeds and rushes, and even from the blessed places of Cair Paravel and Aslan’s How. Nonetheless, Puddleglum rightly declares, “I’m on Aslan’s side even if there isn’t any Aslan to lead it.” Indeed, even though there appears to be no Aslan in the lands ruled by the witch, the theological truth of Aslan is universal and eternal.

Not as obvious is living as a Narnian. Must a Narnian separated from Narnia observe its rituals, adhere to its moral teachings and follow its customs and mores? Perhaps here, in exile, it is sufficient to hold on to the theological truth, without all of the trappings and formality? Puddleglum addresses this as well, “live as like a Narnian as I can even if there isn’t any Narnia.” It may be hard to follow the morals and rituals of Narnia while in exile, but he will nonetheless.

Judaism is a nation-based religion. It has a homeland, Israel. When suggestions were offered to form a Jewish homeland elsewhere, be it Uganda or Ararat, these were rejected, because Judaism is not just a religion but a nation. When Jews were exiled from their homeland, they questioned their role in the Diaspora. Assuming there is a God, does He still desire our service once he has divorced us from our homeland? No less an authority than Nachmanides suggests that adherence to commandments in the Diaspora is simply to ensure continued fidelity to them until such time the exile is over.

Nevertheless, while in exile, Jews did continue to hold on not only to the theological truths of Judaism, but also to the commandments and moral teachings. Adhering to the same declaration of Puddleglum, Jews declared that they will be on God’s side even when the surrounding culture shunned them for doing so and lived like Jews even when there was no Israel.

Narnia is not a model of the Vatican and certainly not of other Christian countries such as England or Spain. Narnia is modeled on Israel, and in that role the exile from Narnia has what to say to the Jew still living in the Diaspora.