Editors Introduction

his is the rst issue of Tolkien Studies, a refereed journal dedicated to the scholarly study of the works of J. R. R. Tolkien. Tolkien Studies is the rst academic journal solely devoted to Tolkien. As editors, our goal is to publish excellent scholarship on Tolkien as well as to gather useful research information, reviews, notes, and documents. With the exception of a lead article in each issue (solicited from acknowledged experts in the eld) all articles published have been subject to anonymous, external review. All articles require a positive judgment from the Editors before being sent to reviewers, and articles that the Editors agreed upon had to receive at least one positive evaluation from an external referee in order to be published. In the cases of articles by individuals associated with the journal in any way, each article had to receive at least two positive evaluations from two different outside reviewers. All identifying information was removed from the articles before they were sent to the reviewers, and all reviewer comments were likewise anonymously conveyed to the authors of the articles. The Editors agreed to be bound by the recommendations of the outside referees. Douglas A. Anderson Michael D. C. Drout Verlyn Flieger Tolkien Studies encourages researchers to send us offprints of articles for inclusion in the yearly Bibliography and Years Work. These, and copies of books for review, should be sent to: Tolkien Studies c/o Prof. Michael D. C. Drout Wheaton College Norton, MA 02026 Electronic submissions should be sent to any of the following Douglas A. Anderson <nodens@locallink.net>: Michael D. C. Drout <mdrout@wheatonma.edu> Verlyn Flieger <verlyn@mythus.com>

Acknowledgments
The Editors would like to thank Wheaton College, Norton, MA, for institutional, technical, and clerical support. Editorial assistants Laura Kalafarski, Stefanie Olsen, and Mariah Herbst were instrumental in bringing the rst issue to press as were Marilyn Todesco and Ken Davignon. Thanks also to Vaughn Howland and Patrick Conner.

vi

Conventions and Abbreviations

Because there are so many editions of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, citations will be by book and chapter as well as by page-number (referenced to the editions listed below). Thus a citation from The Fellowship of the Ring, book two, chapter four, page 318 is written (FR, II, iv, 318). The Silmarillion indicates the body of stories and poems developed over many years by Tolkien; The Silmarillion indicates the volume published in 1977. Abbreviations B&C Beowulf and the Critics. Michael D. C. Drout, ed. Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 248. Tempe, AZ: Arizona Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 2002. The Adventures of Tom Bombadil and other verses from the Red Book. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1962. The Fellowship of the Ring. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1954.Second edition, revised impression, Boston: Houghton Mifin,1987. The Hobbit. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1937. Fiftieth anniversary edition, Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1987. The War of the Jewels. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: HarperCollins; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1994. The Lays of Beleriand. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: George Allen & Unwin; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1985. The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Humphrey Carpenter, ed. with the assistance of Christopher Tolkien. London: George Allen & Unwin; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1981. The Lost Road and Other Writings Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: Unwin Hyman; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1987. The Book of Lost Tales, Part One. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1984. vii

Bombadil FR

H Jewels Lays Letters

Lost Road Lost Tales I

Lost Tales II The Book of Lost Tales, Part Two. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: George Allen & Unwin; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1984. LotR MC Morgoth PS Peoples RK The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien; the work itself irrespective of edition. The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1984. Morgoths Ring. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. London: HarperCollins; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1993. Poems and Stories. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1994. The Peoples of Middle-earth. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: HarperCollins; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1996. The Return of the King. London: George Allen & Unwin 1955. Second edition, revised impression, Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1987. The Silmarillion. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: George Allen & Unwin; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1977. Sauron Defeated. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: HarperCollins; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1992. The Return of the Shadow. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: Unwin Hyman; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1988. The Shaping of Middle-earth. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: George Allen & Unwin; Boston Houghton Mifin, 1986. Tree and Leaf. London: Unwin Books, 1964. Second edition, London: Unwin Hyman, 1988; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1989. The Two Towers. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1954. Second edition, revised impression. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1987. The Treason of Isengard. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: Unwin Hyman; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1989.

S Sauron Shadow Shaping TL

TT

Treason

viii

UT

Unnished Tales of Nmenor and Middle-earth. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: George Allen & Unwin; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1980. The War of the Ring. Christopher Tolkien, ed. London: Unwin Hyman; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1990.

War

ix

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others: Tolkiens Elvish Problem

TOM SHIPPEY
n chapter 15 of C. S. Lewiss 1938 novel Out of the Silent Planet, Elwin Ransom the philologist for the rst time encounters a sorn, one of the tall, intellectual species that inhabits the highlands of Mars. They fall into a discussion of Oyarsa, the spiritual being who rules the planet, and Augray the sorn tells him that Oyarsa is an eldil. The eldila seem insubstantial to humans and Martians, Augray explains, but this is a mistake. The eldila can go through walls and doors not because they themselves are insubstantial but because to them our material world is insubstantial. These things are not strange, says Augray, though they are beyond our senses. But it is strange that the eldila never visit ThulcandraThulcandra being the silent planet itself, Earth: Of that I am not certain, said Ransom. It had dawned on him that the recurrent human tradition of bright, elusive people appearing on the earthalbs, devas, and the likemight after all have another explanation than the anthropologists had yet given. What, one may well ask, are albs and devas? The second word presents no difculties. If one looks it up in the Oxford English Dictionary, the sense given for deva, entirely appropriately for the context above, is a bright, shining one. . . a god, a divinity; one of the good spirits of Hindu mythology. All the OED has to offer for alb, however, is that it is a tunic or ecclesiastical vestment, while albs does not occur at all. Tolkiens connections with this passage are multiple. In the rst place it is generally agreed that Elwin Ransom is an affectionate portrait of Tolkien himself. In the second place, the whole novel is now known to have grown out of the famous agreement by Tolkien and Lewis, in 1936, to write separate ctions, Lewis taking the theme of space-travel and Tolkien that of time-travel.1 Tolkiens contribution was never nished or published in his lifetime, seeing print eventually rst as The Lost Road and then as The Notion Club Papers, in volumes V and VIII respectively of The History of Middle-earth.2 In both, the name Elwin, or forms of it such as Alwyn or Alboin, are signicant.3 However, the immediate connection with the passage above is that albs is surely a word borrowed by Lewis from Tolkien, perhaps in conversation. *albs is in fact the unrecorded and hypothetical, or reconstructed ProtoCopyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

Tom Shippey
Germanic form of the word which descends into English as elf, into Old English as lf, into Old Norse as lfr, into Middle High German as alp, and so on. It then makes an entirely suitable match with deva, being mythological, widespread, and bearing witness to a human attempt to label some phenomenon outside their normal comprehension. Only Tolkien is likely to have told Lewis such a thing. It would be entirely typical of Lewis, whose recorded remarks show several errors in Old English morphology, though he taught the subject at Magdalen College,4 to mis-hear it, and to assume the -s was a plural ending, so making alb-s (wrongly) parallel with deva-s. What the word and the passage show is that Tolkien had considered the whole problem of the variant forms of elf in Germanic languages, and presumably talked about it. It must have been a topic of Inkling conversation, one of several we can infer from cross-comparison of Lewiss, Tolkiens, Williamss, and Barelds works (and possibly others as well). If Tolkien had considered the problem, we may again well ask what conclusions he had come to, and what further problems in the conicting traditions of North-West Europe he would have encountered. The purpose of this essay is to suggest that it was indeed in these problems even more than in the traditionsthat Tolkien found inspiration for his ction in the various versions of the Silmarillion, and eventually in sections of The Lord of the Rings. The problems take a certain amount of explanation. One may begin with the thought, fundamental to the early investigators of comparative philology and mythology, that if a word existed in several cognate, i.e., clearly related but nevertheless independent, forms in different languages, then the word and presumably the concept behind it must go back to a time before the languages separated from each other: the word and idea of elf, then is quite literally immemorially old.5 But how does one then cope with the fact that the different linguistic and cultural traditions often seem to have quite different ideas of what the word means? Does this just mean that the word never did have any clear, agreed, stable referent (probably because the whole thing was pure fantasy, just mythical, made-up from nothing)? Such an answer makes good sense, but was entirely unacceptable to Tolkien. This is the opinion of the anthropologists which Lewiss Ransom suddenly nds himself doubting.6 Or is it the case that we have not understood the data? That we need to think differently, as Augray the sorn tells Ransom he must rethink the idea of eldila? This was the view of Tolkien and the Inklings. The data as regards elves had been known to investigators, at least in great part, since well before Tolkiens time.7 There are some ten words for elf in Old English, the male and female forms lf and lfen, and the compound words land-, dn-, feld-, munt-, s-, wter-, wudu-, and possibly

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

berg-lfen, or, more rarely, -lf, i.e., hill-, land-, eld-, mountain-, sea-, water-, wood-, and once again mountain-elf. These look promisingly precise and varied, but are in fact almost always glosses, words written in over a Latin text to translate a hard word in Latin, in this case and respectively to items four to nine in the list above castalides, moides, oreades, naiades, nymphae, and dryades. The simplest explanation is that an AngloSaxon translator long ago, stumped for an equivalent to naiad, nymph, dryad, decided not unreasonably to solve all his problems at once and create sea-elf, water-elf, wood-elf, etc. Meanwhile Anglo-Saxon medical or magic texts throw up another run of more interesting if more threatening compounds, such as lfadl, wterlfadl, lfsiden, lfsogoa, the names of elf-diseases like (it has been suggested) chicken-pox, dropsy, lunacy, epilepsy, anaemia.8 The last is a guess from lfsogoa, elf-sucking, and indicates that one way elves were thought to work their damage was by a kind of vampirism, while we also hear several times of elf-shot or ylfa gescot, which implies a belief (perhaps illustrated in one of these texts) in invisible disease-bearing darts. Elves also appear to have been associated with sexual temptation. Several charms associate the elves with nihtgengan, night-walkers, with temptations of the end and with am mannum e deofol mid hm, the people the devil has sex with. It is not surprising that Anglo-Saxon elves are commonly called malignant by modern scholars.9 And yet it is a compliment for a woman to be called lfsciene, elf-beautiful, and Anglo-Saxons stubbornly continued to give their children names like lf-wine, lf-red, lf-stan, and so on, Elf-friend, Elf-counsel, Elf-stone. Some of the names, like the common Alfred and the rare Elwin (as in Elwin Ransom), have remained in use to this day, though no longer with any sense of their meaning, and some of the beliefs about sexually alluring elves, elf-hills, and elf-changelings also lasted into the modern period. The Scandinavian tradition is even more well-attested, though not as old, and on the face of it rather different. The lfar are mentioned thirty times in the poems of the Elder Edda, though in a rather restricted list of uses: usually they occur in association with either the sir, the pagan gods, or with the itnar, the giants, as if to imply universality: everyone knows it, elves and gods, tell me its name among the elves, tell me its name among the giants, and so on. There are hints of meaning in the poems of the Elder Edda, as there are here and there in sagas. But the work which attracted most attention from the beginning of modern investigation, and which seemed closest to giving answers of the thoroughness and complexity which philologists demanded, was the Prose Edda of Snorri Sturluson, the nearest thing we have to a mythical handbook of pre-Christian belief. Commentators often forget that Snorri was not writing a pagan text. He wrote his work in the 1230s, by which time Iceland had been Christian 3

Tom Shippey
for more than two centuries, and Snorris own family had been Christian for six generations. He knew no more about what pagans really did, or really thought, than we would about the folk-beliefs of the eighteenth century. His work was in essence an attempt to explain poetic diction, the phrases used and allusions made in traditional poetry, but to do this he had to tell stories, often about the gods, giants, elves, dwarves, and other supernatural creatures of the pre-Christian world. The connected nature (and the literary power) of what Snorri wrote perhaps aroused unreal expectations in his rst modern admirers, for what Snorri says about elves is hard to make out. He invariably uses lfr as a compound, one of these being lfheim or Elf-home. But every other time he uses lfr, he prexes it with a word of color, ljs-, dkk-, or svart-, i.e., light-elves, dark-elves, black-elves. A critical passage is this one: S er einn star ar er kallar er lfheimr. ar byggvir flk at er ljslfar heita, en dkklfar ba niri jru, ok eru eir lkir eim snum en myklu lkari reyndum. Ljslfar eru fegri en sl snum, en dkklfar eru svartari en bik. There is one place that is called Alfheim. There live the folk called light-elves, but dark-elves live down in the ground, and they are unlike them in appearance, and even more unlike them in nature. Light-elves are fairer than the sun to look at, but dark-elves are blacker than pitch.10 What Snorri says is clear and unequivocal, but it raises an immediate problem. Dark-elves (dkklfar), he says, are black (svart). Surely that means that they are black-elves (svartlfar)? But everywhere else in Snorris work, it is clear that when he says black-elves (svartlfar), he means dwarves: Odin sends Skirnir Svartlfaheim til dverga nokkurra, to the home of the black-elves to certain dwarfs, and Loki too goes into Svartlfaheim where he too comes across a dwarf. There is a simple explanation here, which is that while Snorri identies four groups, lightelves, dark-elves, black-elves, and dwarves, there are really only two: the last three are just different names for the same group. The rst group, meanwhile, are very like angels, or for that matter eldilathese are Lewiss albswhile the last group have been made to seem faintly diabolic, quite like the Anglo-Saxon elves of the medical textbooks, indeed. This line of thought has the blessing of being clear, and of not multiplying entities, but it was once again quite unacceptable to early investigators, including Tolkien: it meant, in effect, throwing away their best text, just as my suggestion about a bafed Anglo-Saxon translator above meant saying that dn-lf and the rest were just ghost-words, with no real meaning in Anglo-Saxon culture. Neither proposal has been popular, and Tolkien devoted considerable ctional energy to providing 4

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

more face-saving refutations to both. It is not absolutely clear when Tolkien focused for the rst time on what we may call the elf-problem. When he did do so, though, it would be natural for him to look at what the authorities said, and entirely characteristic of him (as happens so often with Tolkien and the OED) then to found a theory on profound disagreement with scholarly opinion, and to make a determined attempt to protect the original sources, if necessary by explaining how they could have been mistaken. The author of Sir Gawain, after all, or perhaps the scribe who copied him, had made the same mistake as C. S. Lewis, taking a singular ending in -s to be a plural, writing wodwos for what should have been *wodwosen. It was the job of the true scholar, Tolkien thoughthe exemplies it frequently in his edition of the Old English Exodus and the Finnsburg poemsto rescue poems and myths from their careless or uncomprehending scribes and annotators. And this is what he tried to do, in my opinion, with the elves. The original sources mentioned above had been known to scholars for centuries, if with very little original circulation. Snorris Prose Edda, for instance, had been edited by the Dane Peter Resen (Resenius) as early as 1664, while the Old English medical texts and glosses had been discovered at various times up to the 1830s. The elf-problem, however, did not surface until scholars began to ask themselves not just about the words, but about what they represented. And here two famous scholars, in particular, are likely to have attracted Tolkiens attention. The rst was the Dane, N.F.S. Grundtvig (1783-1872). There are several reasons why Tolkien might have paid careful attention to him. Nikolai Grundtvig was, for one thing, the rst person in modern times to read Beowulf intelligently. (It was he, for instance, alone of the rst seven reviewers of the rst modern edition of the poem, Grmur Thorkelns of 1815, who realized that the poem began with a funeral, not a Viking raid as the editor had thought.) He continued to be an active scholar for nearly sixty years after that, with particular interest in Beowulf, in Old English, and in Northern mythology. But even more importantly, Grundtvig did for Denmark what Tolkien would have liked to do for England: he gave it a history and a mythology founded on ancient sources, but released again into national life and national politics by his popular writings, his many songs and hymns, and his creation of the Grundtvig High Schools with their avowed aim of protecting national culture, primarily from German encroachment.11 Grundtvig in Denmark, Lnnrot of the Kalevala in Finland: if Tolkien ever had role-models, they would be these. Grundtvigs rst book on mythology, Nordens Mytologi, was published in 1808, at which point works like Beowulf were still unpublished. Grundtvig rewrote the work as (different spelling) Nordens Mythologi in 1832, and in

Tom Shippey
this he turned his attention to Vtter, Alfer, og Dvrge, Wights, Elves, and Dwarves; he was, I believe, the rst to note and be concerned about Snorris inconsistencies in the Prose Edda, as noted above. His solution was to go part of the way toward the reductionist four-groups-down-to-two model outlined above, with one signicant compromise. Light-elves were obviously angelic, and black-elves were evidently dwarves, but perhaps dark-elves were different from both: Alfer var det gamle Nordens Engle, og Dvrgene kun et Mellem-Slags af dem: hverken Lys-Alfer eller Mrk-Alfer, men saa at sige Skumrings-Alfer. Elves were the angels of the ancient North, and dwarves only a middle grade of them: neither light-elves nor darkelves, but so to speak elves of the twilight.12 The trouble with this otherwise neat solution, one might say, is that it puts black-elves in between the other two groups, where one might expect them to be a limiting term. But it does introduce the rather attractive idea of Skumrings-Alfer, elves of the twilight. Jacob Grimms Deutsche Mythologie, the rst edition of which was published in 1835, may have owed more to Grundtvigs pioneering work than Grimm was prepared to admit. The philological battle-lines were already drawn upthey were to become real battle-lines in the two Prusso-Danish wars over Schleswig-Holstein, or Slesvig-Holsten, in 1850-51 and 1864with the Germans, and Grimm in particular, claiming that Scandinavian languages were really just a branch of Germanic, with the Eddas and sagas in effect common intellectual property, and Scandinavian scholars replying furiously that Scandinavia had a right to cultural as well as political autonomy. It was a problem and an annoyance for Grimm that the Middle High German word for elf seemed to have been lost, to be replaced in modern German by a borrowing from English, Elfe, Elfen. Grimm dealt with this by deleting the latter from his Deutsches Wrterbuch or German Dictionary and inserting a modernized version of the former: Elb, Elbe. But he too was bothered by Snorri, though his solution was signicantly worse than Grundtvigs, vague and indecisive. I give it below, in sections, in Grimms German and in the translation of J. S. Stallybrass, with my own attempts to explain what he meant interpolated: Man ndet in dem Gegensatz der lichten und schwarzen elbe den dualismus, der auch in anderen mythologien zwischen guten und bsen, freundlichen und feindlichen, himlischen und hllischen geistern, zwischen engel des lichts und der nsternis aufgestellt wird. (Grimm 1:368) 6

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

Some have seen, in this antithesis of light and black elves, the same Dualism that other mythologies have set up between spirits good and bad, friendly and hostile, heavenly and hellish, between angels of light and of darkness. (Stallybrass 2: 444-5) Grimm is here, I think, contradicting Grundtvig without mentioning him. He feels that Grundtvig has abandoned Snorris tripartite division too readily: Sollten aber nicht drei arten nordischer genien anzunehmen sein: lioslfar, dcklfar, svartlfar? But ought we not rather to assume three kinds of Norse genii, lioslfar, dcklfar, svartlfar? The trouble with this is Snorris statement above that dark-elves are black, which would lead to the rst reduction, dark-elves = black-elves. But Grimm cannot accept this because he knows it would lead on to black-elves = dwarves. He therefore continues: ich erklre damit freilich Snorris satz dcklfar eru svartari en bik fr irreleitend. No doubt I am thereby pronouncing Snorris statement fallacious: dark-elves are blacker than pitch. The easiest way out at this stage is to say, rather unconvincingly, that maybe Snorri was half-right, did not choose his words carefully, at any rate has to be overruled: dckr scheint mir weniger das entschieden schwarze, als das trbe, nstere; nicht niger, sondern obscurus, fuscus, aquilus. Dckr seems to me not so much downright black as dim, dingy; not niger but obscurus, fuscus, aquilus. Grimm backs this up with a sentence about a reference to dwarves and a dwarf name that contain or resemble the word iarpr, dark, which actually does not seem to help his case that dark-elves are different from black-elves and dwarves, but concludes that rejecting Snorris one-off statement on the whole saves more trouble than it creates: dann bliebe die gleichstellung der zwerge und schwarzelbe gltig, aber auch jener alteddische unterschied zwischen zwergen und dunkelelben gerechtfertigt.

Tom Shippey
In that case the identity of dwarfs and black elves would still hold good, and at the same time the Old Eddic distinction between dwarfs and dark elves be justied. Grimm then embarks on a lengthy search for other references in German story to tripartite color-systems, but ends abruptly, perhaps aware of his own inconclusiveness: Festgehalten werden muss die identitt der svartlfar und dvergar. One thing we must not let go: the identity of svartlfar and dvergar. Snorri can be trusted, then, when he says something Grimm is prepared to accept, but has to be ruled out when his statement is unwelcome. I believe that Tolkien must have read this passage in the most familiar account of Northern mythology and was probably annoyed by it. However, along with Snorri and Grundtvig and the other Old English texts mentioned above, Grimms argument does raise a whole sequence of problems which cry out for some better solution. I would list them as follows: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) What are light-elves and dark-elves, and what is the difference between them if it is not a matter of color? If it is not a matter of color, why does Snorri say that dark-elves are black? If dwarves are different from elves, as almost all early evidence agrees, then why call them black-elves? What are all these Old English groups, like wood-elves and seaelves, and where do they t in? Is there anything to be said for Grundtvigs idea that there may have been elves of the twilight?

Anyone familiar with The Silmarillion can see how clearly and incisively, if imaginatively, Tolkien was in the end to answer these questions. Did he have the questions, if not the answers, in mind from the beginning? He was to say of himself at one point, with reference to ents, As usually with me, they grew rather out of their name, than the other way about (Letters 313), and I would suggest that the same may be true of Tolkiens elves. One of the starting points of his whole developed mythology was this problem in nomenclature, this apparent contradiction in ancient texts and in one ancient text in particular, a problem made only more challenging by the groping attempts of earlier scholars to solve it. 8

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

However, as the twelve volumes of The History of Middle-earth have made abundantly clear, it was also characteristic of Tolkien to edge up on the solution to a problem through several or many stages of dissatisfaction. The Book of Lost Tales thus does not, as far as I can see, contain the basic distinction later to be made between Light-elves and Dark-elves: such references as are indexed are to later stages of Tolkiens conception. There is however an interesting passage in Lost Tales I which suggests that Tolkien was already considering the terms, and was perhaps aware of Grundtvigs compromise solution quoted above. In Gilfanons Tale, just after the rst mention of Dark Elves, we are told of a certain fay . . . Tu the wizard: wandering about the world he found the . . . Elves and drew them to him and taught them many deep things, and he became as a mighty king among them, and their tales name him the Lord of Gloaming and all the fairies of his realm Hisildi or the twilight people. The missing word in the phrase the . . . Elves above, Christopher Tolkien reports, could be either dim or dun (Lost Tales I 244). Dun would correspond to one of the Anglo-Saxon glossary words noted above, but dim is one of Grimms suggestions, at least as translated by Stallybrass.13 Meanwhile Gloaming is a good translation of the rst word in Grundtvigs phrase Skumrings-Alfer, but twilight people is used as well. Perhaps Tolkien had already rejected the concept black-elves, looking on this as an uninformed variant on dwarves, as it seems to be, but at this point had no explanation of dark-elves other than to say that they were only to be glimpsed at twilight. The index of Lost Tales II supports the suggestion that Tolkien was groping, for there one nds ten different groups of elves, but not yet Light-elves. The tale of The Fall of Gondolin already has the character of Meglin (later Maeglin), son of El, but very little is said of the latter other than that tale of Isn and El may not here be told (165). The Lay of the Fall of Gondolin, included among the Poems Early Abandoned in The Lays of Beleriand, goes a little further in describing the capture of Isn by El: that she ever since hath been / his mate in Doriaths forest, where she weepeth in the gloam; / for the Dark Elves were his kindred that wander without home (146). But though the idea of a White Lady glimpsed in the half-light was to remain through to The Silmarillion, there is no further advance on the dark/light distinction. Tolkien seems to have no clear idea of what a dark-elf is, in which, of course, he is in agreement with his predecessors; and the term light-elves is not used at all. This last was to change with the writing of The Earliest 9

Tom Shippey
Silmarillion, in the late 1920s, where we nd (Shaping 13) the division of the Eldar into three groups, Light-elves, Deep-elves, and Seaelves, corresponding closely though not exactly to the Vanyar, Noldor, and Teleri of The Silmarillion. The real breakthrough comes, however, in the Quenta of 1930. Here we nd that the Quendi, led by Ingw, are the Light-elves, the Noldoli, led by Finw, are the Deep-elves, and the Teleri, led by Elw, are the Sea-elves (Shaping 85). A vital addition, though, is that many of the eln race were lost upon the long dark roads . . . and never came to Valinor, nor saw the light of the Two Trees. . . . The Dark-elves are they. One might note at this time the use of the invented Anglo-Saxon terms Lohtelfe, deorc-elf[e],14 in The Earliest Annals of Valinor (Shaping 286, 288), words which correspond exactly to Snorris ljslfar, dkklfar. This decision to make the light/dark distinction not a matter of color, as Grimm had tacitly assumed, was a brilliant stroke, rather like Augray the sorn explaining the eldila. But one result was that it left El, identied already as a Dark Elf, see above, without any clear mark of distinction. He is mentioned in both The Earliest Silmarillion and the Quenta as the Dark-elf El (Shaping 34, 136, with variant spellings), but in both cases this could just mean that he is a Dark-elf, one of the Dark-elves: there is nothing particular to mark him out. His son Meglin, though, is picked out as swart (Shaping 141), a word that goes back to Lost Tales I (165), as if Tolkien had not yet quite abandoned hope of reconciling Snorris dkklfar and svartlfar could El be seen as a Dark-elf, but also the Swart-elf ? This hint was never taken up, and indeed may never have been in Tolkiens mind, but as so often with Tolkien, it seems that for him to solve one problem was to generate another. Tolkien was to develop his basic distinction between those who had and those who had not seen the Light of the Two Trees in The Lhammas and The Quenta Silmarillion (see Lost Road 197, 215), while some of his terminology became canonical in the familiar passage from chapter 8 of The Hobbit, published in 1937, about the Wood-elves: more dangerous and less wise than the High Elves of the West, these latter further particularized as the Light-elves and the Deep-elves and the Sea-elves. As for the Wood-elves, they: lingered in the twilight of our Sun and Moon, but loved best the stars; and they wandered in the great forests that grew tall in lands that are now lost. They dwelt most often by the edges of the woods, from which they would escape at times to hunt, or to ride and run over the open lands by moonlight or starlight, and after the coming of Men they took more and more to the gloaming and the dusk.15

10

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

They are, in other words, very much Skumrings-Alfer, twilight-elves. At this stage, one might say, Tolkien had settled the rst and fth of the questions outlined above and made space for a solution to the fourth. The other two, however, remained quite obscure: why dark-elves might be black, as Snorri reported, and what if anything they had to do with dwarves. Both are nevertheless settled rmly and even convincingly by the re-organization of the story of El, Dark Elf par excellence, in chapter 16 of the Silmarillion. It is astonishing how much of previous speculation is taken up and dealt with on pages 132-3 of that work. We learn rst that El was named the Dark Elf, and here it is his personal appellation, not just a generic description. The reason he is the Dark Elf is that he has left Doriath for Nan Elmoth, and there he lived in deep shadow, loving the night and the twilight under the stars. He resents in particular the Noldor among the Light-elves, as usurpers, but for the Dwarves he had more liking than any other of the Elvenfolk of old. From them he learns metalwork and devises a metal of his own. He named it galvorn, for it was black and shining like jet, and he was clad in it whenever he went abroad. His son Maeglin is called (by his mother) Lmion, Child of the Twilight. From these few sentences one could construct a story which would explain all that Snorri says, without corroborating it. It would not be true that there were three kinds of elf, for there were no black-elves, no svartlfar at all. Just the same, in later story someone might well think there were, for while there were no black-elves, there was an elf always dressed in black, whom someone might have labeled the Black Elf. Similarly, this svartlfr was certainly not a dwarf, but was associated with them and shared some of their characteristics, like the fascination with metalwork. Again, in careless repetition like could become the same as. Finally, there may be no such generic term as a Skumrings-Alf or twilight elf, but if Maeglin is Child of the Twilight, then his father might again, mistakenly, be heard as the twilight, especially as that is the time he goes abroad. One may at this point see the force of Christopher Tolkiens repeated statements that the Silmarillion was seen all along by his father as a compendium, which needs to be read from the point of view of someone looking back at events from a much later period.16 A text, to Tolkien Sr., was not just the words on the page one happened to be reading, it was also the whole history of how the words got therea history, in many of the works he devoted his professional life to studying, of misunderstanding and downright error. One might paraphrase by saying that Tolkien (like Grimm) was prepared to say that Snorri Sturluson had just got it wrong. But unlike Grimm he insisted on providing a story to explain how Snorri got it wrong, and to make that explanation plausible and even natural. In much the same way, Tolkien approached the oddly contradictory Anglo-Saxon accounts, where descriptions of malignant elves contrasted 11

Tom Shippey
with a seeming deep-rooted respect for them. In The Lord of the Rings he confronts this problem at least three times. The feeling that elves are dangerous is expressed rst by Boromir, who does not want to enter the Golden Wood of Lothlrien, because of that perilous land we have heard in Gondor, and it is said that few come out who once go in; and of that few none have escaped unscathed (FR, II, vi, 353). Aragorn corrects Boromir, but does not entirely deny what he says. Boromirs feelings are then echoed by omer (TT, III, ii, 34-35), who uses elvish to mean uncanny, and also believes the Lady of the Wood to be some kind of sorceress. This time Gimli corrects him. Just the same, though both men are misinformed, there is a basis for their fear and suspicion, as Sam Gamgee points out. When Faramir, wiser than his brother, nevertheless hints that Galadriel must be perilously fair, Sam picks up the implied criticism and half-agrees with it: I dont know about perilous. . . . It strikes me that folk takes their peril with them into Lrien, and nds it there because theyve brought it. But perhaps you could call her perilous, because shes so strong in herself. You, you could dash yourself to pieces on her, like a ship on a rock; or drownd yourself, like a hobbit in a river. But neither rock nor river would be to blame (TT, IV, v, 288). At the end of a long chain of transmission it might be agreed that to be lfsciene like Galadriel would be an immense compliment, but at the same time that any association with elves might well be disastrous for ordinary people; the end of this chain is line 112 of Beowulf, eotenas ond ylfe ond orcneas, in which elves and orcs have become much the same thing.17 Tolkien put a very high value on his ancient texts, like Beowulf and the Prose Edda, but he knew they were the work of fallible mortals, and probably several generations away from what he would have regarded as authentic tradition. What he meant to do, then, was to recover the authentic tradition which lay further back than any account we possess, the tradition which gave rise to Snorri and Beowulf and the Eddic poems and the AngloSaxon charms and all the other scraps of evidence, which however integrated them, resolved their contradictions, and explained the nature of their misunderstandings. The idea that there was some such authentic tradition is the thought that strikes Ransom/Tolkien in Lewiss story quoted at the start of this essay. It is possible, of course, that the whole idea is mistaken, and highly probable that even if there were to have been some original single integrated conception of elves or devas then, it is now beyond recall. Nevertheless, Tolkiens reconstructions are not only imaginative, they are also rigorous, controlled both by respect for evidence and awareness of the nature of the evidence. Philology was a hard science, not a soft science. This is one of the qualities which makes Tolkiens work inimitable.

12

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

NOTES 1 2 3 4 The best account of this is John D. Rateliff (199-218). There is a full-length study of them by Verlyn Flieger, A Question of Time: J.R.R. Tolkiens Road to Farie. I discuss the origin and signicance of the name in its variant forms in chapter 9 of The Road to Middle-earth, 3rd ed. Lewis for instance wrote a piece in praise of Tolkien, the title of which began Hwt we holbytlan . . . , clearly echoing the opening words of Beowulf, Hwt we Gar-Dena. . . . But Gar-Dena is genitive plural. The genitive plural of holbytla would be, not holbytlan, but holbytlena. Lewis was extremely learned and an excellent Classicist, but he could not be called a philologist in Tolkiens sense of the word This point is made explicitly by Max Mller in his essay Modern Mythology (1856). The essay is best known now for Mllers attempt to relate all myth to celestial phenomena, for his argument that myth is a disease of language, and for the parody of the whole theory by R. F. Littledale, The Oxford Solar Myth, in which the Rev. Littledale proved by Mllers own methods that Mller was himself a solar myth. Most of the essay, however, is a reasoned statement of the methods of comparative philology, before the proposal is made that a similar technique could be used to create comparative mythology. Both Mllers and Littledales pieces can be found reprinted in Mller, Comparative Mythology: An Essay. Tolkien refers to Mller, while inverting the disease of language thesis, in On Fairy-Stories. It is not absolutely clear which anthropologists Lewis meant here, but probably not American structural or cultural anthropologists. He was probably thinking of post-Mllerian schools of thought like the followers of J. G. Frazer, or the ritual school of Jane Harrison. Lewiss essay The Anthropological Approach attacks later and minor members of these groups (301-11), and they appear in disguised form in his 1956 novel Till We Have Faces. I discuss the data at much greater length in Alias Oves Habeo: The Elves as a Category Problem. The essays in the collection to which it belongs discuss the accounts of various groups of Germanic nonhumans, elves, dwarves, trolls, dragons, etc., but all contributors have been warned not to discuss Tolkien. The problem now is to imagine any solutions other than Tolkiens: a measure of his success. See the valuable book by M. L. Cameron, Anglo-Saxon Medicine. As a

13

Tom Shippey
professor of biology, Cameron is able to talk about the recipes and their possible efcacy in a pragmatic way. 9 See, for instance, Nils Thun (378-96) and also Heather Stuart (31320).

10 For the original, see Sturluson (19), translated in Faulkes (19-20). 11 For an account in English of Grundtvigs life and works, see Allchin. 12 Grundtvig, Nordens Mythologi (1832), 263, with my translation. 13 In context dun-elves sounds better, but in that case one wonders whether Tolkien could be playing on the two senses of the word, Old English dn-lf, mountain-elf, and modern English dun, i.e., dark. 14 The form deorc-elfa in Shaping (288) is another genitive plural. 15 The text given appeared rst in the revised edition of 1966. Earlier versions have slightly different wording, and the twilight is the twilight before the raising of the Sun and Moon (Hammond and Anderson 32). 16 Christopher Tolkien makes the point in Lost Tales I: To read The Silmarillion one must place oneself imaginatively at the time of the ending of the Third Agewithin Middle-earth, looking back (4). This is good advice, but the exercise becomes much easier if one has prior experience of the way texts and stories change over time. 17 The line is part of the introduction of the monster Grendel. The poet says that all the monster-species derive from the rst murderer, Cain, and exemplies them as ettins and elves and (?) demon-corpses, and the giants, who fought against God for a long time. This is the most hard-line hostile statement made about elves in any ancient source, and must have caused Tolkien some thought, as it comes from a text he respected and valued greatly: it was often identied by early scholars as an interpolation, not the work of the original poet. WORKS CITED Allchin, A. M. N.F.S. Grundtvig: An Introduction to His Life and Work. Oakville, CT: Aarhus University Press, 1997. Cameron, M. L. Anglo-Saxon Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

14

Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others

Flieger, Verlyn. A Question of Time: J.R.R. Tolkiens Road to Farie. Kent, Ohio and London: Kent State University Press, 1997. Grimm, Jacob. Deutsche Mythologie, 4th ed. 3 vols. Berlin: Dmmler, 187578. ______. Grimms Teutonic Mythology, translated by J. S. Stallybrass. 4 vols. London: George Bell and Sons, 1882-88. Hammond, Wayne G. with Douglas A. Anderson. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Descriptive Bibliography. Winchester: St Pauls Bibliographies; New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Books, 1993. Lewis, C. S. The Anthropological Approach. In Selected Literary Essays of C.S. Lewis, edited by Walter Hooper. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969. Mller, Max. Comparative Mythology: An Essay, edited by A. Smythe Palmer. London: Routledge; New York: Dutton, 1977. Rateliff, John D. The Lost Road, The Dark Tower, and The Notion Club Papers: Tolkien and Lewiss Time Travel Triad. In Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth, edited by Verlyn Flieger and Carl F. Hostetter. Greenwood: Westport, CT, 2000. Shippey, Tom. The Road to Middle-earth. 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton and Mifin, 2003. ______. Alias Oves Habeo: The Elves as a Category Problem. In The Shadow-walkers: Jacob Grimms Mythology of the Monstrous, edited by Tom Shippey. Tempe: Arizona State University Press, forthcoming. Sturluson, Snorri. Edda: Prologue and Gylfaginning, edited by Anthony Faulkes. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982. Sturluson, Snorri. Edda, translated by Anthony Faulkes. London: Dent, 1987. Stuart, Heather. The Anglo-Saxon Elf. Studia Neophilologica 48 (1976): 313-20. Thun, Nils. The Malignant Elves, Studia Neophilologica 41 (1969): 37896.

15

Tom Shippey on J. R. R. Tolkien: A Checklist

Compiled by DOUGLAS A. ANDERSON BOOKS: The Road to Middle-earth London: George Allen & Unwin, 1982 [hardcover] Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1983 [hardcover] London: Grafton, 1992 [trade paper, revised and expanded] London: HarperCollins, 1997 [trade paper] Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2003 [trade paper; third revised edition] J. R. R. Tolkien: Author of the Century London: HarperCollins, 2000 [hardcover], 2001 [trade paper] Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2001 [hardcover], 2002 [trade paper] REVIEWS, FOREWORDS AND JOURNALISM (INCLUDING INTERVIEWS): Blunt Belligerence. TLS, 26 November 1982, 1306. [Review of Mr. Bliss (1982) by J. R. R. Tolkien] Defending Middle-earth. Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts 9 no. 3 (1998): 251-53. [Review of Defending Middle-earth (1997) by Patrick Curry] A Feeling for Language. Christian History 22, no. 2 (May 2003): 14. The Foolhardy Philologist. TLS, 13 May 1977, 583. [Review of J. R. R. Tolkien: A Biography (1977) by Humphrey Carpenter] Foreword to The Peoples Guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, edited by Erica Challis, 13-15. San Diego: Cold Spring Press, 2003. Foreword to A Tolkien Compass, edited by Jared Lobdell, vii-xi. Chicago: Open Court, 2002. An Interview with Tom Shippey, by Nils Ivar Agy. Angerthas 20 (June 1987) and Angerthas 21 (October 1987); reprinted in Angerthas 31 (Angerthas in English 2; July 1992): 27-49. An Interview with Tom Shippey. Houghton Mifin promotional
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

17

Tom Shippey on J.R. R. Tolkien

materials, May 2001. [Republished at: http://greenbooks.theonering. net/turgon/les/060101.html Accessed January 2004] An Interview with Tom Shippey. Questions and answers with Tom Shippey, posted at HarperCollins website, October 2001. [http://www.tolkien.co.uk/jrrtolkien/interviews_shippey.asp Accessed January 2004] An Introduction to Elvish. Mallorn, no. 13 (1979): 7-10. [Review of An Introduction to Elvish (1978), edited by Jim Allan] J. R. R. Tolkien: A Descriptive Bibliography. The Library, 6th series, 17 no. 1 (March 1995): 91-93. [Review of J. R. R. Tolkien: A Descriptive Bibliography (1993) by Wayne G. Hammond with the assistance of Douglas A. Anderson] Not Worn Lightly. TLS, 9 January 2004, 18. [Review of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King lm by Peter Jackson] A Philologist in Purgatory. TLS, 28 August 1981, 975-76. [Review of The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien (1981), edited by Humphrey Carpenter] The Plot Unravels. TLS, 20 December 2002, 18. [Review of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers lm by Peter Jackson] Shot from the Canon. Chronicle of Higher Education, 7 September 2001. Silmarillion: The Oddest Tolkien Yet. Oxford Mail, 15 September 1977, 4. [Review of The Silmarillion (1977) by J. R. R. Tolkien] Take CourageThings May Not Be as Bad as They Seem. Daily Telegraph, 2 January 2003. Temptations for All Time. TLS, 21 December 2001, 16-17. [Review of The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring lm by Peter Jackson] Tolkien and Me. Posted at Borders.com, June 2001 [Ofine, January 2004]. Tolkiens Art. Notes and Queries 225 (n.s. v. 27 no. 6; December 1980): 570-572. [Review of Tolkiens Art (1979) by Jane Chance Nitzsche] Tom Shippeys Favourite Books on J. R. R. Tolkien. Guardian Unlimited, December 2001 [http://books.guardian.co.uk/top10s/

18

Tom Shippey on J.R.R. Tolkien

top10/0,6109,608925,00.html Accessed January 2004] Why the Critics Must Recognize Lord of the Rings as a Classic. Daily Telegraph, 2 January 2002. CRITICAL ARTICLES: Allegory Versus Bounce: Tolkiens Smith of Wootton Major, with Verlyn Flieger. Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts 12, no. 2 (2001): 186-200. Commentary and translation of The Clerkes Compleinte by J. R. R. Tolkien. Arda 1984 (1988): 3-8. Creation from Philology in The Lord of the Rings. In J.R.R. Tolkien: Scholar and Storyteller, edited by Mary Salu and Robert T. Farrell, 286316. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979. Goths and Huns: The Rediscovery of Northern Cultures in the Nineteenth Century. In The Medieval Legacy, edited by Andreas Haarder, 51-69. Odense, Denmark: Odense University Press, 1982. Grimm, Grundtvig, Tolkien: Nationalisms and the Invention of Mythologies. In The Ways of Creative Mythologies: Imagined Worlds and Their Makers, vol. 1, edited by Maria Kuteeva, 7-17. Telford: Tolkien Society Press, 2000. Light-elves, Dark-elves and Others: Tolkiens Elvish Problem. Tolkien Studies 1 (2004): 1-15. Long Evolution: The History of Middle-earth and Its Merits. Arda 1987 (1992): 18-39. A Look at Exodus and Finn and Hengest. Arda 1982-83 (1986): 72-80. Noblesse Oblige: Images of Class in Tolkien. Lembas Extra 93/94 (1994): 27-43. Orcs, Wraiths, Wights: Tolkiens Images of Evil. In J. R. R. Tolkien and His Literary Resonances: Views of Middle-earth, edited by George Clark and Daniel Timmons, 183-198. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000. The Other Road to Middle-earth: Jacksons Movie Trilogy. In Understanding The Lord of the Rings, edited by Neil D. Isaacs and Rose A. Zimbardo. Boston: Houghton Mifin, forthcoming. Tolkien and Iceland: The Philology of Envy. Delivered at the Sigurur Nordal Institute, September 2002. [Posted at: http://www.nordals. hi.is/shippey.html. Accessed January 2004] Tolkien and the Gawain-Poet. Proceedings of the J. R. R. Tolkien Centenary 19

Tom Shippey on J.R.R. Tolkien

Conference, edited by Patricia Reynolds and Glen H. GoodKnight, 213-219. Altadena: Mythopoeic Press, 1995. [Co-published issue of Mallorn no. 30 and Mythlore no. 80.] Tolkien and The Homecoming of Beohrtnoth. Leaves from the Tree: J. R. R. Tolkiens Shorter Fiction, edited anonymously, 5-16. London: Tolkien Society, 1991. Tolkien and the West Midlands: The Roots of Romance. Lembas Extra 1995 (1995): 5-22. Tolkien as a Post-War Writer. Scholarship & Fantasy: Proceedings of the Tolkien Phenomenon (1993), edited by K. J. Battarbee. Anglicana Turkuensia 12 (1993): 217-36. [Reprinted in Proceedings of the J. R. R. Tolkien Centenary Conference, edited by Patricia Reynolds and Glen H. GoodKnight Altadena: Mythopoeic Press, 1995, 84-93.] Tolkiens Academic Reputation Now. Amon Hen 100 (1989): 18-22. Tom Shippey Speaks at the Tolkien Society Annual Dinner, Cambridge, April 23, 1983. In Digging Potatoes, Growing Trees, vol. 1, edited by Helen Armstrong, 31-52. Swindon: The Tolkien Society, 1997. [Also headed: I Thought of the Incident of Zeebrugge, Which Nobody Wrote about at all...] Tom Shippey Speaks at the Tolkien Society Annual Dinner, Norwich, April 13, 1991. In Digging Potatoes, Growing Trees, vol. 2, edited by Helen Armstrong, 13-23. Swindon: The Tolkien Society, 1998. [Also headed: What Have These People Got in Common? One Thing They Had All Been Shot at.] Tom Shippey Speaks at the Tolkien Society Annual Dinner, York, April 19, 1980. Digging Potatoes, Growing Trees, vol. 1, edited by Helen Armstrong, 6-30. Swindon: The Tolkien Society, 1997. [Also headed: Inspiration and Invention, or, Where Tolkien Got Stuck] The Undeveloped Image: Anglo-Saxon in Popular Consciousness from Turner to Tolkien. In Literary Appropriations of the Anglo-Saxons from the Thirteenth to the Twentieth Century, edited by Donald Scragg and Carole Weinberg, 215-236. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. The Versions of The Hoard. Lembas 100 (2001): 3-7. A Wose by any Other Name. Amon Hen 45 (1980): 8-9.

20

The Adapted Text: The Lost Poetry of Beleriand

GERGELY NAGY
he Silmarillion is perhaps the linguistically most rened work of J.R.R. Tolkien. Polished for a lifetime, it is not surprising that it is written in a most remarkable and memorable of styles. In fact it has more than one style (as it is more than one text). Several distinct styles can be found in the variants of the Silmarillion tradition (now available in the volumes of The History of Middle-earth), which David Bratman distinguishes as the Annalistic, Antique, and the Appendical (71-75). But in the published Silmarillion, one has the feeling the categorization which Bratman suggests for the contents of the History volumes does not t perfectly: styles change within units of the text, and the three categories seem somewhat loose and vague anyway. The movements of style and the resulting disunity in the 1977 text produce a tting effect: Tolkien succeeds in implying, merely by the stylistic differences, that the Silmarillion is indeed a compendious volume, made long afterwards from sources of great diversity (S 8). Taking into account that it is in fact an editorial text, selected and made consistent from the numerous versions, according to (with some remarkable exceptions, I believe to its advantage)1 the latest intentions, by Christopher Tolkien, its style denitely signals how truly compendious it isit suggests a history for the text, an evolution, in which the cryptic and compressed narrative of the 1926 Sketch of the Mythology or the Quenta Noldorinwa (written in the 1930s) became expanded to the majestic story (and language) in the Silmarillion. Part of the ction (and the point) of the Silmarillion is, however, that inside the textual world it is not a unied text either, but a compendium, a collection of texts. As such, it surely has a history there too; the different versions of the presentation frame (from the Lost Tales to the latest intentions) hint that Tolkien imagined it to be a sort of comprehensive manuscript of a (narrative or historical) tradition.2 There are a number of conclusions to be drawn from viewing the Silmarillion text so (of which I hope to make a more extensive study in the future); in this paper I will examine one of the aspects which bears closely on both the stylistic renement and its implications, and on the history of the texts. It is clear that we are meant to view the Silmarillion thus, and in the manuscript analogue its being an editorial text diminishes in problematic value. The text of the 1977 Silmarillion as we now have it includes and preserves many traditionsthat is what its compendious nature means. But the curious duplication of the text (the supposition that it is, just as it
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

21

Gergely Nagy
stands, a text inside the textual world too) makes this actually a double claim. The text has a history in primary philology (= Tolkien philology, as texts by J. R. R. Tolkien), and another one within, for secondary philology (as I elsewhere called this level).3 The two provenances may partly be parallel; but the differences in style in the 1977 Silmarillion text do more than suggest history and leave it at that. They also suggest different things for primary and secondary philology; and the difference is signicant and critically meaningful. Doubtless many readers have noticed that amidst the surges of style in the Silmarillion (from the elevated mythological prose of the Ainulindal to the drier descriptive prose of, say, On Beleriand and Its Realms) there are passages, short strings of sentences, individual sentences, or even single clauses which read as if they were poetry adapted to prose. In primary philology, this feeling is sometimes justied when we look up the variants and sources in the history of the textbut only in the stories which Tolkien wrote in verse, and the adapted passages are found much more widely than that. In secondary philology, however (up to a certain level parallel to this, since the verse works are also duplicated texts, the adapted sources), the case is more complex. The adapted passages do not indicate lost Tolkien texts: they indicate poetic works in the textual world (a number of which are mentioned but never written).4 In the manuscript context and the provenance of texts, this is in no way unusual: verse adapted to prose (and vice versa) is frequently found in medieval manuscripts and is equally easy to pick out. Malorys Tale of King Arthur and the Emperor Lucius betrays its source, the alliterative Morte Arthure in a similar way. Had this vanished (as it nearly has, except for the single remaining manuscript), Malorys text would be an indication that such a poetic work had once existed; it would point to it, even though the alliterative Morte was not extant. The adapted texts in the Silmarillion also indicate poetic tradition in the textual world, both deepening the breadth of cultural implications in the text (and enriching the world it creates) and offering us fragments of the actual text of these lost poetic works. Like philologists writing on the lost poetic sources of an extant prose text, we will have to take a textual approach to be able to determine the signicance of this phenomenon in the Silmarillion. We will have to consider the textual features that make a passage adapted: its syntactic and rhetorical structures, rhythm, and euphony devices; these will have to stand out in marked contrast to the context. It is only then that we can go on to the interpretation of the implications, the suggestions about the poetic traditions and the texts themselves which become meaningful when integrated into the whole system of the Silmarillion. There is a wellmarked contrast between the styles of the Ainulindal and most of the

22

The Adapted Text

Quenta Silmarillion proper; our task will be to examine when the stylistic differences within one text lend support to a theory of adaptedness, and further, what this theory means in the interpretation of the whole. Many of the passages that stand out from the stylistic register of their context do so by virtue of their rhetorics, their stricter syntactic patterns. This is in some cases underlined by the specic use of rhythm, alliteration, and rhymes. Let us look at some examples:5 1. and they built lands and Melkor destroyed them; valleys they delved and Melkor raised them up; mountains they carved and Melkor threw them down; seas they hollowed and Melkor spilled them; and nought might have peace or come to lasting growth, for as surely as the Valar began a labour so would Melkor undo it or corrupt it. (S 22) Then he looked upon their glory and their bliss, and envy was in his heart; he looked upon the Children of Ilvatar that sat at the feet of the Mighty, and hatred lled him; he looked upon the wealth of bright gems, and he lusted for them; but he hid his thoughts, and postponed his vengeance. (S 65) and they came to the Enchanted Isles and escaped their enchantment; and they came into the Shadowy Seas and passed their shadows, and they looked upon Tol Eressa the Lonely Isle, but tarried not; and at the last they cast anchor in the Bay of Eldamar. (S 248)

2.

3.

One might argue that these are not necessarily adapted from poetry; they simply show a conscious use of the syntactic structure of parataxis and balanced clausestheir authors were good rhetoricians at any rate. They all share a repeated pattern: two clauses connected with a simple conjunctive and (in boldface; occasionally with but), the rst and second clauses bearing a structural and thematic similarity to each other (in italics; e.g., in example 1: they built lands, valleys they delved, mountains they carved, and seas they hollowed, where even the inversion adds a further stylistic overtone to the parallel); a clever utilization of polysyndeton and parallel syntactical structures. Further devices are to be observed in other examples: 4. and the House of Fanor hastened before them along the 23

Gergely Nagy
coast of Elend: not once did they turn their eyes back to Trion on the green hill of Tna. ... but at the rear went Finarn and Finrod, and many of the noblest and wisest of the Noldor; and often they looked behind them to see their fair city. (S 85) 5. I would not have any say that Trin was driven forth unjustly into the wild, and gladly would I welcome him back; for I loved him well. ... I will seek Trin until I nd him, and I will bring him back to Menegroth, if I can; for I love him also. (S 200)

In these, parallel structures are not conned to clauses only. Example 4 uses antithesis in parallel structures (very appropriate for the contrast between the attitudes of the different Noldorin houses); while in 5 (from a dialogue of Thingol and Beleg) we see tripartite parallel sentences (except for Belegs short conditional clause), concluding on the same thematic note (and nearly the same words). The structures in examples 1-5 are all syntactically grounded stylistic devices, making use of parallel clauses, parataxis, and repetition. Other traits which might indicate stylistic differences from the context are more specically poetic devices. The following passages will be sufcient to demonstrate them: 6. But now upon the mountain-top dark Ungoliant lay; and she made a ladder of woven ropes and cast it down, and Melkor climbed upon it and came to that high place, and stood beside her, looking down upon the Guarded Realm. (S 74) Then Finrod was filled with wonder at the strength and majesty of Menegroth, its treasuries and armouries and its [many-pillared halls of stone]; and it came into his heart that he would build wide halls behind ever-guarded gates in some deep and secret place beneath the hills. (S 114) 24

7.

The Adapted Text

8. The light of the drawing of the swords of the Noldor was like a fire in a field of reeds. (S 191)

Example 6 uses paratactic structures very similar to those seen in 1-3, while also occasionally taking up alliteration (boldface) and starting with a line whose rhythm denitely stands out from the context.6 Example 7 makes much more of alliteration, and further introduces rhymes (italicized; both internal, as in line 3, and end-rhyme, as in lines 7-8). The whole of the passage is strongly rhythmical (the last line can be a shorter coda, a closure to the stanza; and line 4 is in fact a verse line from one of Tolkiens other poems7). Finally, example 8 again exhibits a very interesting regularity of beat. This is partly again syntactical, since the pattern of multiple genitives determines the rst line, but it goes on to the second line, where the alliteration underscores the effect. It is surprising how well these passages sound (and even scan, especially example 8) when read out loud; but that still does not make them adapted. Research into the primary history of these passages shows that they are denitely not adapted from verse (with the exception of line 4 of example 7; see n. 7 above). They come from the prose Silmarillion tradition, and are nearly all present in comparable form in some earlier version (except example 1, for which I have found no source,8 and example 5, which emerged in the more or less independent Trin tradition9). They evolved sometimes suddenly,10 sometimes by slow steps of renement,11 sometimes obviously by editorial action.12 Slow shifts of structure and wording produced these texts (occasionally with the discarding of versions which would perhaps have done better13), and a detailed collation can reveal much about how Tolkien reformulated his sentences and worked step by step in shaping the language of his text. In fact, the text had really become a tradition, where with time the work incorporated many layers and changes that are preserved or discarded according to the needs of the actual version worked on. The secondary history, however, is more suggestive. These passages, as the nal result of the painstaking stylistic development, stand out from their context by their marked language use: in the textual world, they can be indicative of conventions of style in certain narrative situations. All the passages mark central scenes, climaxes, or privileged points in the narrative; their author was obviously aware of how such climaxes and centers should be handled stylistically. As examples 1-5 show, certain rhetorical and syntactical structures were held to be appropriate; the noted afnity of high material to parataxis is denitely borne out in these parts. Thus, on the one hand, these examples of the adapted texts can give us an insight into the ways stylistic conventions function in the minds of ctitious authors in the textual world (which at the same time implicitly argues that the Silmarillion constructs numerous such authors 25

Gergely Nagy
and author rolesagain, as obviously part of its meaning); but on the other hand, the contrast between these examples and their contexts can suggest conclusions about the transmission of the texts. It is equally possible that these passages stand out because of a certain stylistic leveling, carried out by the scribes or adapters (or perhaps editors) transmitting the texts. Marked style in central scenes and climactic parts is always more likely to be preserved in redaction than in cases where the redactor does not sense the scene to be central or important; and while authors can easily be supposed to be conscious of stylistic conventions, scribes and redactors perhaps cannot. The implications of these parts, in terms of the secondary history of the texts, thus yield conclusions both about the origin of the text (its author and its conventional context) and its provenance, both its production and reception. One could reply that the examples are still not necessarily poetry adapted to prose; they are simply poetic prose, which is not quite the same thing. The style of the Silmarillion, of course, is generally poetic anyway, except for the stretches of descriptive narrative (interpolations in a thematically compiled narrative manuscript?); it merely rises higher sometimes, as sometimes it descends lower. But even to judge the whole text poetic, and suppose that the passages cited are more poetic (still not amounting to poetry proper) is to evaluate by distinct criteria of stylein other words, to suggest poetic qualities a text has to stand in a context of poetic conventions, and it is exactly this that I am arguing the adapted texts indicate. They do not have to be actually adapted from verse (as most of them are not, and we would not know anyway if they were in the textual world); the point is that they indicate conventions. In another example, we can easily observe how the devices seen above sometimes appear in such density that the reader can hardly avoid the conclusion of adaptedness: 9. and even as the Noldor set foot upon the strand their cries were taken up into the hills and multiplied, so that a clamour as of countless mighty voices lled all the coasts of the North; and the noise of the burning of the ships at Losgar went down the winds of the sea as a tumult of great wrath and far away [all who heard that sound were lled with wonder]. (S 106)

Here we have all: parataxis (though somewhat looser), alliterative patterns bridging the lines, the rhythm of the genitives (their quick pace even suggesting the crackling of the re?) and of the nal line (the part of which I enclosed in square brackets is incidentally a perfect blank verse line). Tolkien once started an alliterative poem on The Flight of the 26

The Adapted Text

Noldoli (given in Lays), though it never reached the actual crossing; one is tempted to speculate that this short fragment might have come from its textual world counterpart. Further conclusions are possible about the implied poetic conventions from the evidence of the adapted texts. In the primary history of the texts, these passages sometimes really nd a foundation in a real poetic tradition: that of Tolkiens own poetic texts. The cases in point are those when the passage in question is not from a story that is treated in those poetic works, but just a short textual bit that agrees with the poetic corpus (sometimes even against the prose). One such case is he piled the thunderous towers of Thangorodrim (S 118). This occurs in the Quenta Silmarillion (105; late 1930s); but before that, the prose tradition invariably spoke only of the towers of Thangorodrim, never supplemented with the alliterating epithet. The thunderous towers, however, can be seen in more than one place in both the verse Trin (ll. 714 and 951) and the Lay of Leithian (ll. 2051 and 3281).14 Both poems preceded the writing of the Quenta in the late 1930s, and I think it is evident that the epithet came to the prose tradition from the poetic onea corroborated case of adaptation where the fragment of poetry embedded in the prose points justiably to the poetic use. Another such detail is the curious imagery which accompanies Lthiens remaining at the gates of Menegroth during the Hunting of the Wolf: [a] dark shadow fell upon her and it seemed to her that the sun had sickened and turned black (S 185). An irregular (because of the alliteration in the second half-line) alliterative line might be hiding in this (if it is, it is unattested); but at least the image of the sickening sun is paralleled in the verse Trin,15 again pointing to a use of the image in the poetic tradition. These details suggest, rstly, that a tradition does exist. Epithets are apparently used in it;16 alliteration is a structural as well as a euphonic device (otherwise alliterating phrases would not travel together). If such indications are supported by the material of primary philology, there is no reason to disregard the implications in secondary philology. Perhaps the most easily accessible part of the implied poetic convention is its forms; we have already seen that alliteration and rhyme, certain rhythms (iambic?) are among the formal features (see Wynne and Hostetter 116, 118-20, 122). Some other examples will show what else we can recover. Another phrase belonging here is wild and wary as a beast (S 165), which appears in the prose Trin tradition (UT, 110), but has a parallel in the Lay of Leithian.17 [A] dark lord upon a dark throne in the North (S 205) recalls the Ring Poems repeated formula for Sauron, while 10. and far and wide in Beleriand the whisper went, under wood and over stream and through the passes of the hills. (S 205) 27

Gergely Nagy
seems to point to the similar structures in Bilbos rst poem in The Hobbit (chapter 19, 359-60 and see below n. 7) and is marked by a characteristic rhythm. Two other instances of adapted verse lines are and waited while the long years lengthened (S 44) and and none were safe in eld or wild (S 195): both exhibit easily scanning rhythm and rather conventional-looking phrasing, in the rst case underscored by the use of alliteration and the gura etymologica. Alliteration and rhythm are beautifully seen together in 11. But there was a deep way under the mountains delved in the darkness of the world by the waters that owed out to join the streams of Sirion. (S 125) Finally, in two further examples rhythm and alliteration work closely together to produce a most remarkable effect: 12. Wisdom was in the words of the Elven-king, and the heart grew wiser that hearkened to him. (S 140-41) 13. Little foresight could there be [for those who dared to take so dark a road]. (S 84) These pleasantly scanning lines (again, a faultless blank verse line is found in example 13) reinforce our conclusions about formal characteristics in the implied poetic traditions. Many of these conclusions are in fact corroborated by what we know about Elvish poetic modes (Wynne and Hostetter);18 Tolkien (and his editor, Christopher Tolkien) here builds into his text parts which not only create cultural practices as mere facts or frameworks but also give some of their content. We have already encountered cases where this reference to a poetic tradition was (in a general way) supported; in some longer stretches and numerous smaller examples adaptation from verse is a fact in the primary history of the texts. These examples, in stories which had been treated by Tolkien in poetic form, allow a useful glimpse of the process of what Tolkien does when he is really adapting from his own verse. Not only do these instances show the actual passage of the text from poem to prose; in the secondary layer, they also suggest cultural practices which integrate into the contexts seen in the Silmarillion, practices that seem to appear as narrated, described. Most of such actually adapted texts come from the verse Trin, but the Lay of Leithian is also a source. Only a few of them longer than a phrase or a few lines, they corroborate the theory of poetic style and its conventions inside the textual world (like wild and wary as a beast, already quoted, or guard him and guide him [S 209], a favorite phrase in the Trin story19). 28

The Adapted Text

A relatively large number of lines go back explicitly to the verse Trin. In one certainly adapted line, bearing a burden heavier than their bonds (S 208)20 we can actually see how the adapter straightens out the syntax of the line (and makes a perfectly regular clause out of exactly the same phraseswhich is still betrayed by its rhythm and alliterations). Other such lines are that grief was graven on the face of Trin and never faded (S 208),21 and he walked as one without wish or purpose (S 209).22 Lines whose origin I cannot clearly establish also fall into the pattern, and look very much like the actually adapted texts in their poetic devices. [H]e listened to his lore and the tale of his life (S 204), in the dim dusk of the winters day (S 204), in a mirror mishapen by malice (S 214), and the couplet she ed as in a madness of fear, / swifter than a deer (S 219) are all lines where the beat, alliterations, and rhymes strongly suggest a poetic source. The verse Trin never advanced to the later part of the story where these are found; but the lines do not appear to my knowledge in the Unnished Tales Narn or the Quentas either. There are also lines which derive from the prose texts, with conclusions very similar to what we have already seen. [S]et a doom upon them of darkness and sorrow (S 197), although it has parallels in the verse Trin,23 is really closer to the wording of the Quenta Silmarillion (ch. 16 22), as is during that time his grief grew less (S 199)24 to Quenta Silmarillion ch. 17 34.25 Saeross taunt with its rm three-line structure also comes ultimately from there (ch. 17 39 = UT 80), while the line he was senseless in a sleep of great weariness (S 207) from the Quenta Noldorinwa (12, with minor variation). The dying Glaurungs slandering of Trin to Nienor (S 223), with its perceivable line structure and alliterations, has a source in the Unnished Tales Narn (138), and Trins plea to his sword to slay me swiftly (S 225) also derives from there (UT 145).26 These fragments of the poetic tradition testify for the formal features we have already deduced, and ll the bare suggestions of conventional poetic forms with contenthere we have scraps from the poetic handling of the Trin story, both primary and secondary, both extant and lost. Secondary philology is all the more central here, because the Trin part explicitly claims a poetic source, the Narn i Hn Hrin. Elsewhere I have examined the critical importance of this suggestion in detail (see my Great Chain); what is signicant in the present context is that such source references, coupled with lines adapted from poetry (both in fact, as can be shown by collation, and in ction, as in the cases where no primary poetic source can be found but formal features of the texts in question place them in close connection with corroborated instances) form a special set within the corpus of the adapted texts. Perhaps a source reference in the vicinity or thematic sphere of such texts can be

29

Gergely Nagy
used as complementary evidence of the texts integrity with the poetic tradition (as in the case of the fragment from the Noldor poem [example 9, perhaps also 8]the Noldolant, mentioned earlier [S 98], could then be equated with the source of this fragment); such instances would be of especial importance in the study of the implied poetic conventions and practices. Further grounding is available in this class of instances for the interaction of prose and verse traditions, the stylistic conventions for central/climactic scenes, and I believe that even something about the compositional principles and methods, some of the implied cultural context of the poetry can be recovered. The rst such important passage from the Trin story is: 14. Then Trin stood stone still and silent, staring on that dreadful death, knowing what he had done. (S 208) The image itself is part of the prose tradition;27 but that, in turn, and much of the actual wording of the text as well, goes back to the verse Trin (ll. 1273-74): stone-faced he stood standing frozen on that dreadful death his deed knowing Nearly all the alliterating words, together with the alliteration pattern itself, doubtless derive from the poem; the imagery and to some extent the very phrasing of this very moving central scene traveled between the versions virtually unchanged. One is, then, tempted to see an analogue in the following passage: 15. tall and terrible on that day looked Trin, and the heart of the host was upheld as he rode on the right hand of Orodreth. (S 212) Though I have found no source, either in the prose or in the verse traditions, for these lines (the verse Trin never reached this point in the story), the parallels with the previous example strongly suggest to me a similar evolution: style and the formal devices of the poetic convention are equally well preserved in this other (though minor) climactic scene. Perhaps the best example for the processes of adaptation, also indicative of compositional methods, is seen in the scene of Fingolns duel with Morgoth. This is recounted in the Lay of Leithian, prompted by the description of Anfauglith and the gates of Angband (ll. 3478-3634); otherwise it is not related to the story of the Geste. The very fact that it is inserted points to a compositional method which is characterized by its situationalism: mention of a place, or name, or event, can set the author at any point to present other stories or episodes which have a 30

The Adapted Text

connection to the cue, even if they do not advance the action, fragment it, or impede upon its forward thrust. This is a feature reminiscent of the methods of oral composition; the oral poets control on the store of formulae and narrative chunks he has in his head is fundamentally different from the relationship of his literate colleague to his materials in being much more determined by his mnemotechnics and mechanisms of preservation (Havelock 175). Parallels can be found in Homer, for example: the catalogue of ships in Book 2 of the Iliad grows out of Helens showing the Greek leaders to the Trojans from the walls. This is a link backwards, and at once a historical contextualizing; but it surely does not advance the plot, nor is it a necessary requisite (Havelock 177-79). There are similar situational anticipations and recountings in the Silmarillion (most notably in Of Thingol and Melian, S 55). The oral poet has to repeat, tell the stories again and again, in order to keep them known and remembered, and to remember them himself (Havelock, 91-93; see further 145-64); this is why he goes into them as soon as they are cued. C. S. Lewiss commentary on the Lay of Leithian in one place picks out something similar (when Thingols minstrels recall the stories of Fanor and the Silmarils, lines 1132-61) as expanded by the late redactors who found their audiences sometimes very ignorant of the myths (Lays 391). This is partly the same case (though this passage is more of a digression, modeled on those in Beowulf, than a situational episode launched by a cue in the narrative), since both later interpolation and original narrative aim at the preservation of stories. The difference is again in the authorial vs. redactorial layers, which thus are clearly visible (at least to Lewis) in the poetic work itself. But as author and redactor in this case stand in two readily distinguishable cultural contexts, orality and textuality as the source of texts are brought up for critical consideration. The passage from the Silmarillion that can be counted as adapted runs as follows: 16. for the rocks rang with the shrill music of Fingolns horn, and his voice came keen and clear down into the depths of Angband; ... Therefore Morgoth came, climbing slowly from his subterranean throne, and the rumour of his feet was like thunder underground. (S 153) The passage, as example 14 above, is extant in the prose tradition,28 but very close similarities exist between it and a part in the Lay of Leithian (lines 3545-47 and 3558-62): while endless fastnesses of stone 31

Gergely Nagy
engulfed the thin clear ringing keen of silver horn on baldric green. ... Then Morgoth came. For the last time in these great wars he dared to climb from subterranean throne profound the rumour of his feet a sound of rumbling earthquake underground. On the one hand, we see again that this tragic climax keeps its poetic form in the prose redaction; and on the other, we again get a glimpse of the actual poetic texts which might serve as sources in other places in the narrative. The actually adapted texts do more than imply an underlying tradition in verse: they in fact preserve it, and had Christopher Tolkien not decided to publish The Lays of Beleriand, these instances would be the only traces of it left (compare the case of Malory and the nearly vanished Morte Arthure). It is not surprising, in textual-world terms, that there are so many adapted lines and passages in this part of the Silmarillionthese are culturally central stories in the textual world (the human-stories of the elves, as Tom Shippey applied Tolkiens phrase for them). We have here further suggestions about the cultural use of the poetic tradition in the textual world, to create heroic narrative poems of these central stories. It is then perfectly natural that prose adaptations from these high-prestige poetic compositions stay closer to the texts of the poems: again, not only origin but also transmission details are implied. I have saved for the end three examples which could easily have tted elsewhere, but which I consider to be most representative and suggestive, worthy of individual scrutiny. We have seen in the primary history that the adapted texts were either derived from the prose tradition, reached by small steps of renement from early versions sometimes not at all outstanding (indeed often not very easily distinguishable); or were derived from the poetic works; or appeared all of a sudden in one or other version. The following examples are, I assume, no exceptions, though for one of them I have not been able to nd any comparable parallels. These are also the most interesting cases of the adapted text, in terms of secondary philology: beautiful and perfectly crafted lines of great style and poetry, tight structure, a very high standard of renement. Great poetry is implied to be behind them. The rst of these is a part of the Quenta Silmarillion proper, Ch. 1, that to my knowledge has no extant parallels; its use of nearly all the devices we have found to belong to the implied poetic tradition places it with the adapted texts.

32

The Adapted Text

16. Green things fell sick and rotted, and rivers were choked in weeds and slime, and fens were made, rank and poisonous, the breeding place of flies; and forests grew dark and perilous, the haunts of fear; and beasts became monsters of horn and ivory and dyed the earth with blood. (S 36) The paratactic and repetitive structure at once draws attention to this passage. Made up of three two-line units, each telling about the corruption of a certain sphere, plus an initial 1+1 pair, its parallels are thematic as well as structural. The rhythm of the lines is broken twice with the shorter fourth and sixth lines, while the assonance of slime and ies, and the fuller rhymes poisonous and perilous (italicized), strengthened by the alliteration, keep the composition together. Alliteration further links (very appropriately) fens and ies, forests and fear. This stanza is highly reminiscent of the style of the Ainulindal, both formally (as seen in example 1) and thematically, and suggests a lost poetic tradition of the cosmogony, in fragments and style preserved in the prose redaction.29 And this is, I believe, unmistakably poetry. Another gem of stylistic polishing has a long textual history, but it is no less outstanding and suggestive for that. It is in the Quenta Silmarillion proper, Ch. 7, and appeared for the rst time in comparable form in the Quenta Noldorinwa (3), then went through the Quenta Silmarillion (46) and both versions of the Later Quenta (49b); but it was longer and less concentrated. About Fanors work, we are told: 17. Then he began a long and secret labour, and he summoned all his lore, and his power, and his subtle skill; and at the end of all he made the Silmarils. (S 67) The longer and earlier versions of these three lines had none of this crystallized compactness, welded together by the rhythm (both of the paratactic structure and of the enlisting of Fanors tools: lore, power, and skill) and the pattern of alliteration. It also did not have the effective closure of the last iambic line (in this case not a blank verse line, since it is one foot longer than that), nor the assonance of the last couplet. The alliteration pattern took long to establish: up to the Later Quenta, Fanors labour was said to be long and marvellous, even though the verb summon, which ultimately, I believe, inuenced the insertion of secret, had been present since the Quenta Silmarillion version. Here again we can see in the history a change (in the end discarded) which was for the worse. While the third tool on the list had always been subtle(subtle magic in the Quenta Noldorinwa, skill in the Quenta Silmarillion), it was 33

Gergely Nagy
changed to subtle craft in the Later Quenta, but then evidently back again to t the patternI assume authorially, since the versions known to me require an unjustiable amount of editorial change to produce the reading quoted. What secondary history this fragment comes from we cannot tell; yet it points surely toward a poetic text in the textual world. The last and most complex of the adapted texts I would like to draw attention to is also in the Quenta Silmarillion proper, in the interpolated descriptive chapter Of the Sindar. The style of this chapter is generally eclectic (it would probably be classied to belong either to the Annalistic or the Appendical style), due to its compilation nature; it tells of many things,30 and one has the feeling it is heavily compressed.31 But at one point, as if in summary, the following three sentences are inserted: 21. In Beleriand in those days the Elves walked, and the rivers owed, and the stars shone, and the night-owers gave out their scents; and the beauty of Melian was as the noon, and the beauty of Lthien was as the dawn in spring. In Beleriand King Thingol upon his throne was as the lords of the Maiar, whose power is at rest, whose joy is as an air that they breathe in all their days, whose thought ows out in a tide untroubled from the heights to the depths. In Beleriand still at times rode Orom the great, passing like a wind over the mountains, and the sound of his horn came down the leagues of the starlight, and the Elves feared him for the splendour of his countenance and the great noise of the onrush of Nahar; but when the Valarma echoed in the hills, they knew well that all evil things were ed far away. (S 95) This is already present in the Grey Annals, with two variant readings.32 The three long sentences, each starting with In Beleriand and each describing a different aspect of one-time Beleriand, are truly remarkable

34

The Adapted Text

for their tight but graceful structure, touching imagery, and majestic style. Though they exhibit no use of rhythm or alliteration comparable to previous examples, I have classed them as denitely adapted text, since the very conscious use of syntactical structures itself creates a rhythm which is genuinely poetic. In addition to the In Beleriand starting, shared by all stanzas, two of them (the rst and the third) also have time clauses at the start, in the same position as second line. It is these two stanzas that make more use of parataxis, thus framing the second stanza which is exclusively hypotactic. The three stanzas are unied by their imagery and their use of comparisons and similes: the pattern is given in the rst stanza, after a four-line quick-paced setting which supplies the tone of the imagery as well. Images of nature, more and more complex, dominate the stanzas. They do not only become more complex linguistically (with more and more adverbials in the subordinate clauses) but also in conception: by the time we reach the second stanza, the similes of Thingol and the Maiar decidedly go into abstractions, leading on to the description of Orom, very appropriately. The Orom stanza, by the way, is less distinctively stylized than the rest; one is tempted to suspect an impatient ctitious redactor who did not clearly understand the purpose of the natural images and was not very well-versed in theology. The third stanza, as C. S. Lewis would have put it, is perhaps corrupt; but the beauty of the original can still be seen, since the original design is discoverable. The In Beleriand stanzas are a striking instance of what differences style can produce even within a single textwhich itself is interpolated as different into the narrative thrust of the tale of the Noldor. They illustrate perfectly that these differences are anything but mere ornament. They are there for specic reasons; either because the author or the editor put them there, or let them stand there. But both ways, they point to something prior to the work of the author and the editor. They imply texts and forms, conventions and traditions, which stand behind any text in a compendium; and, perhaps more importantly and most clearly perceivably in these stanzas, they sometimes supply the actual words that stand in the background. Tolkiens texts work in a variety of ways to produce depth behind themselves. This feeling of depth can be illusory, or it can be real: I hope to have shown that at least in some instances in the Silmarillion, the poetic depth created by the adapted texts is very real. For, returning to the earlier counterpoint, even if we say that these are not adapted poetic texts but simply poetic prose, we have presupposed poetic style and poetic convention already. Like Old English rhythmical prose, which is very hard to differentiate from Old English alliterative verse proper, the adapted texts cannot be proclaimed non-poetic and their poetic suggestions denied. If we did not know alliterative verse,

35

Gergely Nagy
its patterns and beats, we would never be able to detect rhythmical prose: we judge poetic prose in terms of (and in forms of) poetry, and this nally shows that poetry is the reference point. It is a fact of cultural history that narratives are composed rst in verse (which offers better mnemotechnical opportunities) and only then in prose: Tolkiens text and Tolkiens world follow this rule. In striving for verisimilitude and authenticity, Tolkien apparently repeats cultural history. One cannot write a mythology, primarily because myths are not written; what is great about Tolkien is that he manages to write not only texts but traditions. He goes even further: he supplies the background of his narratives with poetic traditions which are not therebut the very supposition uncovering this fact is based on pieces which are there, actual fragments from ctitious poetic traditions. This congenial device makes use of the painstaking stylistic renement, and again shows up how important textual transmission is to the interpretation of Tolkienindeed, how very crucial textuality is in Tolkiens mythopoesis. In terms of primary interpretation, this is signicant and is perfectly integrated to the system of the Silmarillion. This work is not only about telling stories that go with other stories (like the Lord of the Rings or the Hobbit): it is about the story of stories, both in a historical and a metactional sense. Tolkien shows us how narratives are preserved; yet not only narratives are his concern but also language, the actual words that tell the tale. The preservation of style together with matter is a wellknown phenomenon, as is the editors and redactors leveling of style. The Silmarillion discusses how stories come to be told in exactly these words: either the author (origin) or the editor/redactor (transmission) is conscious of the stylistic conventions. Both ways, the point is the existence and content of the conventions; Tolkien manages to have it both ways, and say something both about the nature of the poetic narrative sources (the cultural contexts, contents, and use) and the implied manuscript context (transmission). The Silmarillion, exactly as it stands in the 1977 text, is a profound work: an anatomy of story. I said earlier that Tolkiens texts have subtle ways to create depth behind themselves, and I have examined in detail one of these ways; but it has in this inquiry, I hope, become clear that Tolkien has even subtler ways to ll this depth. The Silmarillion text, being a compilation of traditions and an editorial text, both in the primary and the textual worlds, works very much like an actual manuscript, holding in itself traces not only of the traditions that went into its making, but very often of the actual texts. This is no lost poetry of Tolkien, however; this is Tolkiens prose, paradoxically, one might say, giving us a glimpse of the lost poetry of Beleriand.

36

The Adapted Text

NOTES 1 2 3 4 See the section Myths Transformed in Morgoths Ring, and Bratman (77). Cf. Charles Noad ( 37). In The Great Chain of Reading: (Inter-)Textual Relations and the Technique of Mythopoesis in the Trin Story. Such are, for example, the Aldudeni of Elemmr (S 76), the Noldolant of Maglor (87), the Narsilion (99), the Fall of Gondolin (242), and the Lay of Erendil (246). Tolkien actually started to write the last two (see both in Lays). In all quotations from the Silmarillion, the changed typography of the text and all emphases are mine, which I will not be indicating separately. The reference to the page number of the text is found parenthetically after each quotation. I introduce the lineation of the texts because it helps to show the poetic qualities (or occasionally, the unpoetic qualities of prose printed as verse) of the passages. To some extent similar is the passage at S (107) There upon the connes of Dor Daedaloth, the land of Morgoth . . . though he was wrapped in re and wounded with many wounds. Alliteration also gains prominence here, and parataxis no longer dominates the syntax. One of the lines (Fanor was surrounded, with few friends around him) also has a certain rhythmic quality: reinforced by the alliteration, its effect is not unlike that of Old English alliterative poetry. The phrase wrapped in re could easily come from exactly this poetic tradition: cf. Beowulf, l. 2595 (fyre befongen). Most readers know this line from Gimlis song in Moria (FR, II, iv, 329-30); it originally stood in the Lay of Leithian, l. 14, though it seems (see n. to ll. 14-18, which are the lines that appear in Gimlis song: Lays 193) that the many-pillared halls of stone ultimately derive from C. S. Lewiss commentary on the Geste. See further, Lays 375-76. In referring to texts in the History of Middle-earth series, I will always use the internal divisions of the texts concerned: lines, or paragraphs. In referring to notes, or material in the commentaries, I will refer by page number. The source of the texts referred to as sources below is as follows. The verse Trin and The Lay of Leithian were published in Lays, The Sketch of the Mythology and the Quenta Noldorinwa (called the Quenta) are to be found in Shaping. The Quenta Silmarillion, the Later Annals of Valinor, and The Fall of Nmenor are in Lost Road, while the Later Quenta and the Annals of Aman appear in 37

Gergely Nagy
Morgoths Ring. The Grey Annals appear in War of the Jewels. 8 Perhaps a sentence in the Quenta Silmarillion 11 (they laboured at their rst tasks in the ordering of the World and Morgoth contested with them, and made war) could be considered the ultimate source; but I found no intermediate stages in the stylistic evolution. The lines quoted in example 5 are found word for word in the Narn i Hn Hrin (UT 85).

10 Example 4 appeared in the Quenta Silmarillion 69 in substantially the same form; the parallel referred to in n. 6 was likewise an insertion in the Quenta Silmarillion 88 (though the Later Annals of Valinor, at Valian Year 2995, had the phrase wrapped in re). Example 8 also emerged in the Quenta Silmarillion, in chapter 16 11: the difference is only two words which later on fell out of the text. 11 Examples 2, 3, and 6 derive in some embryonic but recognizable form from the 1926 Sketch of the Mythology, and made it through the Quenta Noldorinwa and the Quenta Silmarillion (sometimes modied between the two versions). Examples 2 and 6 were further rened in the Later Quenta Silmarillion. 12 Example 6 had always been bipartite, its rst line (or its source) separated from the rest by several sentences (they were in different paragraphs in the Quenta Silmarillion and the rst version of the Later Quenta [56-7]); it was in the second version of the Later Quenta that the rst line in this form emerged (57), but the rest disappeared there, and was put there, I assume editorially, from the Annals of Aman 107-8, where it occurs (although in slightly different form). Interpolation from the Annals of Aman was a frequent editorial practice in the construction of the 1977 Silmarillion. 13 Like the inversions in the Quenta Noldorinwa version of example 2, line 7: his thoughts he hid and his vengeance he postponed. 14 In referring to Tolkiens long narrative poems, I will refer by the line numbers of the rst version, unless otherwise noted. 15 Second version, l. 492: and the stars were hid and the sun sickened. See also: it seemed to her [Nienor] that the sun sickened and became dim about her (UT 119). This instance shows the connectedness of the two great poetic traditions, the Trin and the Beren stories; the afnity, it appears, remains even in their later prose redactions (as the prose Narn in UT). 16 The use of epithets (in many cases alliterating) is a standard practice

38

The Adapted Text

both in the prose tradition (e.g., the relatively stable epithets of Fanors sons, S 60) and in the poetic one (e.g. Hrins and Trins epithets in the verse Trin, or those of Fanors sons in Leithian, passim). 17 Line 655: as wild and wary as a faun (the alliteration stays even though Leithian is a work in rhymed couplets). Wild and wary as the beasts is also said of the Pkel-men in the Lord of the Rings (RK, V, v, 105). 18 The article treats formal and linguistic features only and does not discuss thematic aspects and implications of the cultural context. Also, we cannot be sure that only Elvish poetic tradition went into Bilbos Silmarillion manuscript. 19 It is paralleled by he guarded and guided his grim comrade in the verse Trin, l. 1427. 20 Cf. the verse Trin, l. 1336: a burden bore he than their bonds heavier. 21 Cf. the verse Trin, ll. 1419-20: That grief was graven with grim token / on his face and form nor faded ever. 22 Cf. the verse Trin, l. 1422: Thence he wandered without wish or purpose. 23 First version, ll. 99-100; second version, ll. 240-42. 24 Cf. the verse Trin, l. 334: his lot was lightened. 25 Cf. also 30, and UT (74). 26 But cf. the verse Trin, l. 1363: and slay me swift, O sleep-giver. 27 Sketch 12, he is turned to stone; Quenta Noldorinwa 12, he is turned as to stone. 28 In fact, it derives with very minor variations from the Quenta Silmarillion 144. One phrase also seems to have a parallel in the Sketch, 8: The North shakes with the thunder under the earth. In the Hobbit, the phrase roaring like thunder underground is applied to Smaug when he discovers the theft of the cup by Bilbo (273), and in outline V to The Story of Frodo and Sam in Mordor, Orodruin produces a constant rumble underground like a war of thunder (Sauron 11). In the Lord of the Rings, this becomes a deep remote rumble as of thunder imprisoned under the earth (RK, VI, iii, 216-17). The image, as can be seen, was very appealing to Tolkien and his ctitious authors. 39

Gergely Nagy
29 A passage similar in its use of rhythm and alliteration is found in the Akallabth (And Men dwelt in darkness . . .; S 260), and derives ultimately from the second version of The Fall of Nmenor (1). 30 Elw and Melian; the Dwarves, their cities and cultural interactions with them; the building of Menegroth; Lenw and the Nandor; the runes of Daeron, up to the point when the passage comes. 31 It in fact is: it comes from the Grey Annals, the last version of the Annals of Beleriand, and illustrates very well what happens when a text in the Annalistic style is presented as continuous prose. Its origin thus explains both its diversity of material and something of its style, and opens up a further direction of adaptedness (here from annals) another case where the textual tradition from which an adaptation comes is clearly thematized. 32 The passage is in the annal to year 1350 of the Grey Annals; it compares Thingol to the sons of the Valar, and makes thought ow in a tide from the heights to the deeps. In the case of deeps to depths, the change is clearly according to a pattern (perhaps there is also an assonance with rest); the other change is necessitated by the loss of the concept of the sons of the Valar.

WORKS CITED Bratman, David. The Literary Value of The History of Middle-earth. In Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth, ed. Verlyn Flieger and Carl E. Hostetter. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. Havelock, Eric A. Preface to Plato. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963. Nagy, Gergely. The Great Chain of Reading: (Inter-)Textual Relations and the Technique of Mythopoesis in the Trin story. In Tolkien the Medievalist, ed. Jane Chance, ed. New York and London: Routledge, 2002. Noad, Charles. On the Construction of The Silmarillion. In Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth, ed. Verlyn Flieger and Carl E. Hostetter. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. Wynne, Patrick, and Carl F. Hostetter. Three Elvish Verse Modes: Annthennath, Minlamad thent / estent, and Linnod. In Tolkiens

40

The Adapted Text

Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth, ed. Verlyn Flieger and Carl E. Hostetter. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000.

41

Do the Atlantis story and abandon Eriol-Saga

VERLYN FLIEGER
nce upon a time, wrote Tolkien to a publisher in 1951, I had a mind to make a body of more or less connected legend . . . which I could dedicate . . . to England; to my country (Letters 144). Much as he described (though perhaps not quite as he intended) his legendarium of Middle-earth, now published in entirety many years after his death, is indeed a body of more or less connected legend. It is also a body of overlapping, competing, endlessly revised, and often incomplete texts, the outcome of more than half a lifetimes worth of invention. In such an assembly of material it is perhaps over-optimistic to expect total consistency, and with a few exceptions such as Ainulindal, the stories of Beren and Lthien, and those of Trin Turambar, such consistency is not there. What is there, underlying all the intertangled, often unnished texts, is a xed purposeTolkiens intent to create a mythology for England. It might be asked, Why for England especially? England had managed without a mythology for centuries and suffered no apparent damage. Tolkien, however, was not the only Englishman who felt the lack. E. M. Forster, although no mythologist, had asked rhetorically in Howards End, Why has not England a great mythology? lamenting that, Our folklore has never advanced beyond daintiness, and the greater melodies about our country-side have all issued through the pipes of Greece. . . . England still waits for . . . the great poet who shall voice her, or, better still, for the thousand little poets whose voices shall pass into our common talk (Forster 279). Tolkiens letter expressed much the same sentiment: I was from early days grieved by the poverty of my own beloved country; it had no stories of its own . . . . There was Greek, he wrote, and Celtic, and Romance, Germanic, Scandinavian, and Finnish (which greatly affected me) but nothing English, save impoverished chapbook stuff (Letters 144). 1 It is not unreasonable to suppose that Tolkien might have seen himself as Forsters great poet, perhaps even, through the multiple voices of his mythology, as the thousand little poets as well. Both Tolkien and Forster were responding to a perceived connection between mythology and nationalism that engendered what Tom Shippey has called a mythological arms race (Shippey, Grimm, Grundtvig, Tolkien 8). Beginning with the Grimms in the early nineteenth century, folklorists had ransacked the attics of the past for ancient texts whose stories and myth-embedded language would support cultural identity and encourage nationhood. Tolkiens comment about Finnish is especially
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

43

Verlyn Flieger
apposite. Elias Lnnrots Kalevala, a compilation of mythic songs from rural Finland, gave the Finns a sense of national identity, and Lnnrots example clearly spurred Tolkien to attempt something similar. While still a student at Oxford, he had written of Kalevala, I would that we had more of it leftsomething of the same sort that belonged to the English (Carpenter 89). To want something of the same sort for England would hardly be surprising in an imaginative young Englishman whose country was at war, and Tolkiens ambition was apparently already forming in the years 19141916.2 Clear in itself, his ambition raises two related questions. What exactly did he mean by a mythology that belonged to the English?3 And how would he ensure that his invented one belonged? In answer to the rst question, he meant it would embody what he saw as the English (not British) heritage, and would incorporate into a ctive legendarium elements from myth and history that fostered a sense of specically English identity, as Kalevala had done for the Finns. The larger question is How would his invented mythology belong? His answer to that is more complex and convoluted, for there is evidence to suggest that it underwent a structural re-conception at a particular point in its development. The evidence is minimal, but provocative in its implications. It is a single cryptic note Tolkien jotted to himself on a scrap of paper at some time in the winter of 194546. Telegraphically brief, and neither explained nor elaborated, the note requires decoding, and even then is open to more than one interpretation. It reads simply, Do the Atlantis story and abandon Eriol-Saga, with Loudham,4 Jeremy, Guildford, and Ramer taking part (Sauron 281). Reading this over half a century after it was written, we cannot be certain what the note meant to Tolkien at the time, although item by item its component parts are identiable. The rst item, the Atlantis story relates to The Notion Club Papers, the narrative he was working on at the time, in which Loudham, Jeremy, Guildford and Ramer are principal characters. Its unnished text is included in Volume 9 of The History of Middle-earth, Christopher Tolkiens compendious edition of his fathers mythology. The second item, the far older and longer EriolSaga begun in 1917, was in fact the body of more or less connected legend, the frame and content of the mythology as a whole. It comprises Volumes 1 through 5 of The History. The two verbs in the notedo and abandonseem plain and straightforward. It is only when all the terms are arranged in the sentence that the trouble begins, for the meaning of the whole is obviously greater than the sum of its parts. Fortunately, there are clues pointing toward meaning, all of them having to do with narrative structure. To gather them, we have to range over a wide span of years from 1917 to 1945-46. For clue number one

44

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

we must go back to 1936, the year of Tolkiens bargain with C. S. Lewis that he would write a time-travel story and Lewis a space-travel one.5 Tolkiens response to the bargain was The Lost Road, the original Atlantis story and precursor of The Notion Club Papers. As Tolkien sketched it out, a contemporary English father and son on the coast of Cornwall, Alboin and Audoin Errol,6 were the frame for a journey into English history and myth. Clue number two takes us back to 1917 and the story of Eriol, the voyager who sailed westward to the Lonely Isle of Tol Eressa,7 and there heard and recorded The Lost Tales of Elnesse (Lost Tales I 22), stories told by the fairies (also called Gnomes, later Noldor) of the creation of the world and the history of Middle-earth. This was the Eriol-Saga. Clue number three brings us again to the mid-forties, the time of The Notion Club Papers and its accompanying note, which heralded an apparent change in the narrative intent of that story. The relevance to the note of clue number one, The Lost Road, lies as much in what Tolkien planned as in what he actually wrote, for the story was never nished. His outline, however, took the Errol father and son through successively earlier episodes in real history to their nal destination in the imaginary pre-historic Second Age of Middle-earth. Here they would both witness and experience the destruction of his island of Nmenor. Like the real-world myth of Atlantis when its people angered the gods, Nmenor and its inhabitants were (with a few exceptions) to be overwhelmed by a great wave and drowned in the sea. In each episode, the recurring pair were to be known by some form (Langobard, AngloSaxon, Elvish) of their modern English names8 (all of them translatable as Bliss-friend and Elf-friend). The noteworthy aspect of the story was that the vehicle for their travel would be no Wellsian time-machine, but instead their ancestrally transmitted memories of a past they could not have experienced in their own personae. However, like so many of Tolkiens efforts, this rst time-travel venture was a casualty of his frequent writing habit of leaving one thing unnished to begin another. The story had progressed no further than two or three chapters, with sketches and outlines for the historical and mythic episodes, when work slowed to a halt and the time-travel idea was shelved. A probable reason was the immediate success of The Hobbit in September 1937, followed by Tolkiens equally immediate start on the requested sequel in December of that same year. His writing time thereafter was almost entirely occupied with the new Hobbit which became The Lord of the Rings. Nearly ten years later, taking a break from his labor on this unexpectedly long work, Tolkien turned again to time-travel and Atlantis with The Notion Club Papers. This he described to Stanley Unwin as, taking up in an entirely different frame and setting what little had any value in

45

Verlyn Flieger
the inchoate Lost Road (Letters 118). What had value was apparently the concept of inherited memory leading to the destruction of Atlantis/ Nmenor, while the entirely different frame completely changed the setting, the characters, and the format. The scene was re-located from Cornwall to his contemporary Oxford, the father and son protagonists re-imagined as the members of an Oxford club, and the narrative re-cast as the recently discovered minutes of club meetings. Although The Notion Club Papers is the lineal descendent of The Lost Road, it is a considerably more complex and sophisticated piece of work. The rather stilted dialogue of the Errol father and son is replaced by the energetic debates of the Notion Club, a ctionalized portrait of Tolkiens actual Inklings (notion, i.e., inkling). The result is verisimilitude; the exchanges among the members have the crackle and bite of real conversation. That in its inception The Notion Club Papers had intentional autobiographical elements is beyond doubt. Indeed, the earliest drafts assign specic characters (Loudham, Jeremy, Ramer, and Guildford among them) the identities of Tolkien and his fellow-Inklings Lewis, Havard, and Dyson, with other minor characters more or less recognizable as well. These resemblances are not accidental, nor are they capricious. Although in subsequent revisions, this specicity is swallowed up in the ction, it remains to affect the current of the narrative, like rocks just below the surface of a river. Like Tolkien, many members of the Club are scholars attached to Oxford colleges. More like Tolkien, several are philologists by training. Even more like Tolkien, they have specic interests that mirror his own curiosity about the history of languages, a love for fairy-tales, a knowledge of North-West European mythology, and (most important to the Papers) a highly developed taste for science ction. In fact several, rather like the author of The Notion Club Papers, are themselves writers of such ction. This new format and cast of characters allowed room for more discussion, and gave Tolkien the chance to hand off to various speakers theories about narrative techniquesfor science ction in particular and fantasy worlds in general. These are the conceptual background for his apparent decision to: Do the Atlantis story and abandon Eriol-Saga, with Loudham, Jeremy, Guildford, and Ramer taking part (Sauron 281). This brings us to clue number two and the Eriol-Saga. Like The Lost Road and The Notion Club Papers this was a frame-story, this one with a double function. First, the frame was to set up a context in which mythic stories could believably be told and transmitted, a situation within which the entire mythology would be unfolded. Second, and within this context, it was to establish the Englishness of the legendarium. As Christopher Tolkien writes:

46

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

The story of Eriol the mariner was central to my fathers original concept of the mythology. . . . In those days . . . the primary intention of his work was to satisfy his desire for a specically and recognizably English literature of faerie. . . . In his earliest writings the mythology was anchored in the ancient legendary history of England; and more than that, it was peculiarly associated with certain places in England (Lost Tales I 22). Since the mythology was to be of faerie, that is to say, Elvish, there had to be a way to make it the property of Men and thereby English. Eriol the voyager was the link. He was at rst imagined as belonging to a vague historical period before the Anglo-Saxon invasions of the island of Britain, and, according to Christopher Tolkien, was to be close kin of famous gures in the legends of North-western Europe (Lost Tales I 22). He was called Angol after the regions of his home, and was thus a kind of proto-Angle, a pre-English inhabitant of Europe. Later, his name now changed to lfwine, he became an Englishman of the Anglo-Saxon period of English history, who sailed west over sea to Tol Eressa, which would, at the end of the story become [my emphasis] England, the land of the English (Lost Tales I 24).9 In the earliest versions of the myth, then, England, though not originally named as such, was to be present as both a historical and a geographical reality.10 The gure of Eriol, however, went through further changes. Christopher Tolkien states plainly that his role was at rst to be more important in the structure of the work than (what it afterwards became) simply that of a man of later days who came to the land of the fairies and there acquired lost or hidden knowledge, which he afterward reported in his own tongue: at rst, Eriol was to be an important element in the fairy history itselfthe witness of the ruin of Elvish Tol Eressa.11 The element of ancient English history or historical legend was at rst not merely a framework, isolated from the great tales that afterwards constituted The Silmarillion, but an integral part of their ending. (Lost Tales I 23) It was later, in what Christopher Tolkien calls the second [unrealized] Scheme for the Tales, that the concept of Tol Eressa as England was dropped in favor of an actual Britain (here named Luthany), that Eriol was changed to lfwine, and the role of the witness of the ruin was diminished. His part, writes Christopher, was now only to learn and record (Lost Tales II 301).

47

Verlyn Flieger
The English anchor continued to drop away as the mythology developed through its many overlapping and competing prose and poetic versions, and Eriol/lfwine continued to recede in importance, while the tales of Fanor and the Silmarils, of the children of Hrin and their tragic fate, and the great romance of Beren and Lthien, came more and more to appear on their own. But as we have seen, like The Lost Road, the entire mythology was put aside late in 1937, when Tolkien began the sequel to The Hobbit, which became the Lord of the Rings. Fortunately for the reading public, that work (after long genesis) was brought to completion and published. Less fortunately, both the EriolSaga and his two tries at the time-travel Atlantis story were left unnished at Tolkiens death. This was a pity, because each venture had, in a different way and at a different time in its authors creative life, explored uncharted narrative groundthe former by marrying actual history and real-world myth to a ctive mythology, and the latter by using memory as a vehicle for time-travel. At rst glance, however, there is little in either venture that suggests, as does Tolkiens note, that one might either give way to, or lead to the other. The third and nal clue is the narrative line of the third frame-story, The Notion Club Papers. According to Christopher Tolkien, the story divides into two distinct though chronologically sequential parts. Part One, existing in manuscript versions A, B, C, and nal D, Tolkien called The Ramblings of Ramer, and with reason, for it is almost entirely theoretical and highly discursive. Criticism of a science ction story by Michael Ramer leads to vigorous debate about space-travel, the plausibility of current literary devices for getting off the planet, and nally to Ramers account of his actual psychic experiments and rambles along that line. It seems clear that Tolkiens initial impulse was a reply to C. S. Lewiss space-travel stories. Not only was his early working title, Out of the Talkative Planet, an obvious reference to Lewiss Out of the Silent Planet, but Lewis and his space novels are (among others) specically singled out for criticism. All this becomes a long preamble to a tale when space-travel gives way to time-travel in Part Two, the whole of manuscript E, called The Strange Case of Arundel Lowdham. Now the emphasis shifts from the ramblings of Ramer to the un-summoned Nmenorean memories of Lowdham, the frame of the rest of the narrative. Theory becomes an introduction to actuality, past events erupt into the present, and happenings of an increasingly psychic nature engulf the meetings. The latter half of manuscript E, the part most explicitly like The Lost Road, was (at the point where the story breaks off) developing as a journey via successive identities back through real time into mythic time and ultimately to Tolkiens entirely imaginary Second Age and the destruction of Nmenor. With such marked change, it seems reasonable 48

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

to conjecture that the narrative intent of the story might also have shifted ground from Part One to Part Two. It is at this crucial point that the two items cited in the notethe Atlantis story and the Eriol-Sagaapparently collided, for according to Christopher Tolkien, the note was undoubtedly written before [Tolkien] began the writing of the manuscript E, which explicitly takes up the Atlantis story. My suggestion is that the note had to do with the frame, and that it was Tolkiens answer to the question of how his invented mythology would belong to the English. He was contemplating conceptual changes that would connect one frame (the Atlantis story) to the other (the Eriol-Saga), and would extend the Englishness of his mythology beyond history and pre-history into the realm of psychohistory and para-psychology. Both changes concerned strategy of presentation, nding a way to portray the story convincingly as a mythology. Most real-world mythologies, such as Kalevala, are set before the public by collectors or compilers like Lnnrot, who function as the editorial bridge over the inevitable disconnect between the old (frequently oral) stories and the modern audience from a different time or culture reading a written text. Admiration for Kalevala notwithstanding, Tolkien had no ambition to be a folklore collector. His dismissal of English chap-book stuff makes it clear that he had rejected that route out of hand. He wanted instead to be the sole inventor of a cohesive ctive mythology, in his own words, a body of more or less connected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic, to the level of romantic fairy-story . . . which I could dedicate . . . to England (Letters 144). The crucial element is the phrase to England. To invent a mythology is one thing; to persuade a particular (in this case specically English) reading public of its validity not just as myth but as their myth however ctiveis quite another. For this Tolkien needed some kind of sub-creative credibility,12 a source that could convincingly transmit the ancient stories to future English audiences, and an equally plausible means by which they could arrive in the contemporary (presumably English) readers hand. He had models aplenty, but like Lnnrot, they all, to some degree, emphasized their distance from the material they retold. For example, Snorri Sturlusons thirteenth-century Prose Edda, which Tolkien knew well, re-told Norse myths. The rst section, Gylfaginning (The Deluding of Gyl) used the traveler Gyl, whose by-name, like Eriols, was Gangleri (Wanderer). Gyl journeyed to the home of the gods to question them (also like Eriol) about the creation and nature of the world. Snorris own Prologue, however, made it clear that as an enlightened Christian and a thoroughly modern man, he did not believe the stories he set down.

49

Verlyn Flieger
The medieval clerics who copied at second or third hand the stories we call Celtic mythology were often at pains to de-mythicize them. The redactor of the Tin B Calnge (the epic Cattle Raid of Cooley) in the Book of Leinster stated rmly, I who have written this story, or rather this fable, give no credence to the various incidents related in it. For some things in it are the deceptions of demons, others poetic gments; some are probable, others improbable, while still others are intended for the delectation of foolish men (ORahilly 272). The nineteenth-century ballad collectors such as Bishop Percy and Francis Child, as well as more scientic folklore scholars such as the Grimms and Lnnrot, all looked on the stories they collected and published as fossils of ancient beliefs which they sought to preserve. Tolkiens comment on this was that they were using the stories not as they were meant to be used, but as a quarry from which to dig evidence, or information about matters in which they are interested (On Fairy-Stories 119). There were, alternatively, the great romantic frauds, the Chattertons and Macphersons who out of a love for myth or in a real effort to stimulate interestor bothpassed off their own inventions as the real thing. But they were frauds whose inevitable unmasking not only disqualied but cheapened what they wrote. The task Tolkien set himself was not just to create a mythology but to give it credibility. The great collections Tolkien knew were no longer tales told by the faithful, but specimens gathered between covers for analysis and classication. How was he to nd a middle ground as neither scientist nor fraud? What would be his strategy of presentation? He had avoided the problem in The Hobbit by writing it as a childrens book. It faced him squarely with the Silmarillion, which did not t under the childrens book rubric.13 Who would be telling his stories, to whom, and why? His rst answer had been Eriol/lfwine, but the note accompanying The Notion Club Papers seems to signal a change in approach. When Tolkien wrote it, he obviously had something in mind which we can only guess at now: how doing the Atlantis story related to abandoning the Eriol-Saga, and what would have been the consequences of such a move. One possibility has been proposed by Christopher Tolkien, who says, The only explanation that I can see is that the Eriol-Saga had been, up to this time, what my father had in mind for the further course of the meetings of the Notion Club, but was now rejecting in favour of Atlantis. In the event he did not do so; he found himself drawn back into the ideas he had sketched for The Lost Road (Sauron 28182). This is a reasonable scenario, but not the only conceivable one. It is also possible that Tolkien might have been contemplating a less sweeping, yet more structurally and psychologically profound change. Now the

50

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

words do and abandon come into play. While they can suggest that Tolkien might have been considering exchanging one frame for another, they might equally suggest that, in order to save all the work already done on the Eriol-Saga without carrying it further, he meant instead to nd a mechanism by which the two frames could meet and join. Abandonment does not necessarily mean wholesale rejection. It could as easily mean simply leaving the Eriol-Saga where it was and bringing the Atlantis story back through time to connect to it. The Notion Club Papers would become the mythologys entry-point and the Atlantis story the mechanism of transmission for the whole. Such a connection, had it been carried out, would have brought about fundamental changes. As mentioned above, it would have stretched history into psycho-history. In addition, it would have solved a practical problem of increasing concern to Tolkienhow to bring a mythical, ahistorical, at-earth faery mythology into a realistic, historical, round world. In Part Two of the Papers Jeremy poses the question Tolkien was trying to answer: If you went back would you nd myth dissolving into history or history into myth? He then goes on to make what is a halfrhetorical but in light of Tolkiens note a most revealing query: Perhaps the Atlantis catastrophe was the dividing line? (Sauron 249). Atlantis was going to be precisely that in Tolkiens mythology, the line which both divided and connected the Atlantis story and the Eriol-Saga In his essay On the Construction of The Silmarillion,14 Charles Noad states that The Notion Club Papers reveals Tolkiens thought concerning the relationship of his myth to history. Discussions . . . hint at a way in which the past as recalled by myth and legend might have a reality of its own, distinct from the true past (Noad 50). Noad asserts that the appearance of Nmenor, rst in The Lost Road and subsequently in The Notion Club Papers, had two effects on Tolkiens overall concept. First, it introduced the concept of a transition from a at to a round world. Second, it implied that there was a good deal of unrecorded history between the era of the Elvish myths and our known history (63). Taking these in order, we can see rst, that the transition from a at world to a round one came naturally out of the most Atlantean aspect of the story, the Drowning of Nmenor, in which cataclysm a chasm opened in the sea and the at world was bent and rounded on itself. The Lost Road of the title story is the straight way West, left hanging in the upper air when the lower world falls away beneath it. Second, the timegap between the modern time-travelers and the events of the Eriol-Saga leaves ample space between the era of the Elvish myths and our known history. Although Noad does not cite it, a statement Tolkien made in a 1945 letter to Christopher supports this position: I do not now feel either

51

Verlyn Flieger
ashamed or dubious on the Eden myth, wrote Tolkien. It has not, of course, historicity of the same kind as the N[ew] T[estament], which are virtually contemporaneous documents, while Genesis is separated by we do not know how many sad exiled generations from the Fall, but certainly there was an Eden on this very unhappy earth (Letters 109-110). The timing of the letter (earlier in the same year he began The Notion Club Papers), the sentiment expressed, and the phrase exiled generations, all strongly suggest that Tolkien might have seen a connection between the posited GenesisNew Testament gap and the similar stretch of history between his own Genesis (Ainulindal in the Eriol-Saga) and the Atlantis story. His frequent allusions to his Elves in Middle-earth as exiles would support this view. The change would have dramatically altered the character and personality of the witness. Noad declares that Tolkien considered jettisoning the entire Pengolo-lfwine framing device, and instead having the myths retold by Nmenoreans and their successors,15 thus allowing for a new form of transmission (64). If, as seems likely, these Nmenorean successors were to culminate in Loudham, Jeremy, Guildford, and Ramer, the form of transmission would necessarily be new because the witness or witnesses would be fundamentally different. Instead of inhabitants of a pre-historic, mythic, primarily Elvish world, they would be contemporary Englishmen of Tolkiens own time and Tolkiens own town of Oxford. This strategy has implications for narrative style, which would replace generic fairy speech with contemporary, even colloquial English. Eriol, even when he became lfwine, was little more than a formal mouthpiece for questions, and as a listener had little discernible personality. The Notion Club members, especially Lowdham, are bursting with personality. They are not listeners; they are talkers, debaters, and interrupters. They are opinionated, abrasive, argumentative, intellectually curious. It is not an accident that the working sub-title of The Notion Club Papers was Out of the Talkative Planet. The change in setting and dramatis personae is for the better; but just what about the Atlantis story could have been the catalyst that turned Tolkien back to re-consideration of the Eriol-Saga? The most obvious candidate is Lowdham, whose character becomes more strongly marked as the story progresses, and who as Alwyn (lfwine) Arundel (Erendel, Elendil), is clearly scheduled to assume the role of witness. Christopher Tolkien writes: Only when the manuscript B was completed (and the text of Part One of the Papers very largely achieved) did the thought enter: Do the Atlantis story. With Loudhams standing beneath the Radcliffe Camera and staring up at the 52

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

sky the whole course of the Papers was changed. . . . But when my father wrote Do the Atlantis story he also said that the Eriol-Saga should be abandoned, although there is no mention of any such matter in Part One. (Sauron 28182) More than the course of the Papers would have changed. Blended with the Papers, the nature of the mythology itself would have altered, for it would have offered a particularly and peculiarly Tolkienian answer to the question In what way would the story be English? Finally, to the earlier-conceived historical and geographical connection would be added a psychological and psychic one. Now it would be English not simply because it was about England or because it happened in England, but because it was ingrained in the memory of countless generations of Englishmen, memory revived, re-experienced, and repossessed by Lowdham (and presumably also by Jeremy, Guildford, and Ramer), through the genetic re-collections of their ancestors. This is to say the least a mode predicated not on Wellsian time-machinery but on Jungian psychology and the theory of the collective unconscious, plus something as close to reincarnation as makes no matter. Part One of the Papers nds the members of the Club arguing about the necessity for aesthetic harmony between an authors way of getting there (whether there is through time or space) and the there that is got to. Defending his storys way of getting there, Ramer argues that it should not affect the story thus arrived at, for it is a mere frame, a device and no more. Guildford responds that it must, instead, be a coherent part of the picture. An authors way of getting to Mars, say, is part of his story of his Mars. . . . Its part of the picture . . . and it may seriously affect all thats inside (Sauron 163). He then offers his own method of getting there. It is, he tells the Club, the only known or likely way in which anyone has ever landed on a world, which is, Incarnation. By being born (Sauron 170). On this premise, Tolkiens way of getting to his Mars, i.e., Nmenor and its mythic past, by inherited memory would also seriously affect all thats inside. It would make English history and myth, as well as his own pre-English mythology, the property of inborn, genetically transmitted remembrance, possessed by the English whether they know it or not. In addition, these changes would have had a practical effect on the credibility mechanism, the way in which the story comes to the modern reader. In his later commentary on his own publication of the Silmarillion Christopher Tolkien wrote that it was certainly debatable whether it was wise to publish . . . a version of the primary legendarium standing on its own and claiming, as it were, to be self-explanatory. The published work, he wrote, had no framework, no suggestion of what it is and how (within the imagined world) it came to be. This, he declared, I 53

Verlyn Flieger
now believe to have been a mistake (Lost Tales I 5). Tolkien would have agreed. Lack of framework is precisely the problem, a problem with which he found himself unendingly concerned. It was not easy, for he had to drive three horses simultaneously, and they were not all trotting in the same direction. The rst horse carried the source of the stories and the situation within the ction itself wherein they arose, the internal tale-teller and primary audience. For expediency, we may designate this rst horse as the framestory of the voyager Eriol/lfwine. The second horse was the vehicle by which the stories were preserved and/or passed down. Somehow there had to be some reliable means other than oral transmission for the bringing forward of the tales from age to age. This, too, was originally assigned to Eriol/lfwine, who recorded the tales in a ctive book. Both together we may take to be the Eriol-Saga. These two horses trot along comfortably together. The third horse, not entirely broken to harness, was to carry the ultimate means of transmission, the rationale for the book as nally published and held in the modern readers hand. The rst and second horses carry the story from oral to written form. Although Eriol-lfwine is told the tales, and although as originally conceived, he is the direct link between the stories and the reader, the actual vehicle of transmission is a written book. Tolkiens earliest title of The Book of Lost Tales makes this explicit, and he had inserted behind the early versions of the Lost Tales evidence to suggest the presumptive existence of a written text, which text had a variety of origins. Among them was: The Golden Book of Heorrenda being the book of the Tales of Tavrobel (Lost Tales II 290) As its title implies, this was to be the work of one Heorrenda16 of Hgwudu, the son of Eriol (nicknamed Wfre), who was using those writings that my father . . . did make in his sojourn in the holy isle [Tol Eressa] (Lost Tales II 291). Another version, following the switch from Eriol to lfwine, gave the book not only an origin but a precise location: The Golden Book of Tavrobel the same that lfwine wrote and laid in the House of a Hundred Chimneys at Tavrobel, where it lieth still to read for such as may (Lost Tales II 310). Tolkiens fragmentary The History of Eriol or lfwine as set out by Christopher Tolkien, states that Eriol is bidden to write [my emphasis] down all he has heard, that his book lies untouched . . . during many

54

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

ages of Men, and is added to by the compiler of the Golden Book (Lost Tales II 282). Against this is written Tolkiens note that it may perhaps be much better to let Eriol himself see the last things and nish the book (Lost Tales II 282). Another note species, The last words of the Book of Tales. Written by Eriol at Tavrobel before he sealed the book, while yet another proposes a Prologue by the writer of Tavrobel [presumably the compiler of the Golden Book cited above] telling how he found Eriols writings and put them together (Lost Tales II 287). It seems clear that Tolkien was of several minds as to just how to have the tales transmitted, and tried out a variety of redactors and/or compilers for the book. This brings us to the third and most problematic horse, the nal means of transmission, the rationale for the book in the readers hand. Whether Eriol sealed the book, or a later compiler found and continued the account, there still had to be a plausible way for it to be published. How did it get from Eriol or Heorrenda or an unnamed compiler, to the modern reader? Who brought it into print, and how, and why? The Eriol-Saga had no answer to this question. The Atlantis story as told in The Notion Club Papers did. Tolkiens answer, his transmission device, was the nesting of text within text within text, each deriving from a successively earlier time.17 The primary-level, or outside, text is presented as the publication of the recently-discovered minutes of the Notion Club found on the top of one of a number of sacks of waste paper in the basement of the Examination Schools at Oxford (Sauron 255), and edited by their discoverer, Mr. Howard Green. Mr. Howard Green, Tolkiens imaginary Snorri-cumLnnrot, is a type familiar in nineteenth-century adventure ction, the remote but realistic pseudo-editor who provides the occasion for the story and interjects explanatory notes and comments. H. Rider Haggard was fond of the device, employing it in She and King Solomons Mines, and Tolkien has followed in his footsteps. Contained within the pages of Mr. Greens book is the secondarylevel single page from the much older manuscript book in the possession of Edwin (Eadwine, Audoin) Lowdham, father of Notion Club member Alwin Arundel (arendil, Elendil, Alboin, lfwine, Elwin) Lowdham.18 This page is itself a transcription by yet a third party of a considerably more ancient Nmenorean book written by Elendil which has somehow survived the cataclysm of the downfall of Nmenor. Within the ction the second text is introduced by Lowdham, who describes it as a manuscript leaf, some sort of a diary or notes in a queer script. . . . I only found one loose leaf of it among the papers that came to me (Sauron 235). When he and Jeremy stumble away from a meeting on the night of the storm Lowdham inadvertently leaves behind a leaf of paper. It is picked up by Ramer, who identies it as the leaf of his fathers

55

Verlyn Flieger
manuscript that he told us about (Sauron 255). Showing it to the Club at a later meeting, he comments that this stuff looks to me like the work of a man copying out all he had time to see, or all he found still intact and legible in some book (Sauron 259). Unable to recognize the script (it is in fact Fanorian Tengwar; see the reproductions of this page in Sauron Defeated [31921]), but making an educated guess that the language is Anglo-Saxon, Ramer decides to get the help of an Anglo-Saxon expert, and takes the page round to old Professor Rashbold at Pembroke for translation.19 Rashbold quickly pegs it as Old English of a strongly Mercian (West-Midland) colour, and comments that the style has the air of a translation (Sauron 257). If it is a translation, who was the translator? Remembering that Lowdham found it among his fathers papers we might be tempted to assign the task to old Edwin Lowdham. Further embedding awaits us, however, for Edwin Lowdham was the possessor but not necessarily (in his own persona, at least) the translator. This is an even earlier avatar, as Tolkiens sketches, outlines, and notes make clear. In two projected continuations of the King Sheave episode that closes the last recorded meeting of the Club, Tolkien has lfwine and Trowine, the AngloSaxon avatars of Lowdham and Jeremy, set out to sea and sail West. Both continuations bring the voyagers to the Straight Road, but their ship is driven back by storm. The sketches break off there, with an outline for their projected continuance following: Trowine [Jeremy] sees the straight Road and the world plunging down. lfwines [Lowdhams] vessel seems to be taking the straight Road and falls [sic] in a swoon of fear and exhaustion. lfwine gets view of the Book of Stories; and writes down what he can remember. Later eeting visions. Beleriand tale. Sojourn in Nmenor before and during the fall ends with Elendil [Lowdham] and Voronw [Jeremy] eeing on a hill of water into the dark with Eagles and lightning pursuing them. Elendil has a book which he has written. His descendants get glimpses of it. lfwine has one. (Sauron 279) In the context of this outline, the book must be seen not just as 56

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

an imaginative concept, but as the prototype credibility device for the whole mythological conceit. The Book of Stories of which lfwine gets a view is very probably a version of the Golden Book (whether of Tavrobel or Heorrenda). If lfwine writes down what he can remember, it would presumably be in his own language, Anglo-Saxon. lfwines earlier, Nmenorean self, Elendil, who survives the downfall, has yet another book which he has written. According to the outline, Elendils descendants get glimpses of it, and lfwine (clearly one of those descendants) has one. This is quite probably the source of the page from Edwin Lowdhams manuscript, that portentous clue to the past which is dropped by Lowdham, picked up by Ramer, and translated by old Rashbold of Pembroke. Elendils book leads to lfwines translation which leads to Edwin Lowdhams manuscript, of which the single leaf dropped by Lowdham and picked up by Ramer is embedded in the Notion Club papers, the minutes found by Mr. Howard Green who then becomes both editor and publisher of The Notion Club Papers.20 Here is where and how the Atlantis story connects to the book which contains the Eriol-Saga. The journey into the past brings the protagonists closer with each successively older identity until they hold in their hands the book or books in which the earliest stories were brought forward. In his commentary appended to the narrative portions of The Lost Road, Christopher Tolkien writes: With the entry at this time of the cardinal ideas of the Downfall of Nmenor, the World Made Round, and the Straight Road, into the conception of Middle-earth, and the thought of a time-travel story in which the very signicant gure of the Anglo-Saxon lfwine would be both extended into the future, into the twentieth century, and extended also into a many-layered past, my father was envisaging a massive and explicit linking of his own legends with those of many other places and times: all concerned with the stories and dreams of peoples who dwelt by the coasts of the great Western Sea. All this was set aside during the period of the writing of The Lord of the Rings, but not abandoned, for in 1945, before indeed The Lord of the Rings was completed, he returned to these themes in the unnished Notion Club Papers. (Lost Road 98) Tolkiens proposal to do the Atlantis story and abandon the EriolSaga would bring the Eriol-lfwine gure into the present not just by extending him into the future but by starting him off there. The reader would encounter the farie myth by way of a more novelistically 57

Verlyn Flieger
conceived work, which would in turn affect the ethos and spirit of the legendarium contained within both. It would have made the Englishness a geneticeven psychicas well as historic and geographic element in the story. This is a profound change. The position of The Notion Club Papers in Tolkiens development as a writer is important here. It is not unreasonable to assume that condence in his own powers as a writer had been strengthened, rst by the success of The Hobbit, and second by his more recent experience in sustaining a story of much greater length and complexity. By 1945 he had been at work on The Lord of the Ringswith intermittent starts and stops for some eight years. He had had sufcient practice at writing ction that he might now have felt ready to take some risks. Certainly, he was preparing to deal, in ction and through barely disguised ctive voices, with experiences of the mind and psyche to which he had heretofore only briey alluded.21 The mystical strain in Tolkiens nature is at its clearest in the parapsychological spin he puts on the characters in The Notion Club Papers, which deals with reincarnation, out-of-body experiences in time and space, the psychic import of dreams, and most important of all, collective unconscious manifest in inherited memory. These were the kinds of things he had more cautiously (and safely) dealt with by way of fantasy in The Lord of the Rings 22 but was now ready to risk addressing in more realistic ction. By using regression through the serial identities and memories of Notion Club members as his path backward into the mythology, Tolkien would be providing a series of specically and genetically English embedded frame-narrators, each contained in the one before him, and all leading the reader deeper and deeper into the ction and the mystery. Rather surprisingly, there is a hint of something like this in The Lord of the Rings, as I noted, in a slightly different context, in A Question of Time. Early in the story Merry Brandybuck, rescued from the Barrow by Tom Bombadil, experiences for a eeting instant a memory from the ancient past of being speared through the heart by the men of Carn Dm (FR, I, viii, 154). This is a ashback to an episode from the Second Age of the parent mythology, the Silmarillion, and is clearly an occurrence of which the present-day Merry has no rst-hand knowledge nor any conscious recollection. It is a brief moment, no more; it has no apparent signicance beyond itself, and nothing in the rest of the story depends on it. Still, it is there. Such incidents are more numerous, more psychologically portentous, and more essential to the plot in The Notion Club Papers. Here the protagonists experience multiple ashbacksrecall Lowdham standing beneath the Radcliffe Camera and staring up at the skyto anterior

58

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

memory, referring to the Eagles of the Lords of the West, Zigr (Sauron), and Elven-Latin, all of which were intended to pay off in the Nmenorean climax to the story. Such episodes do not come out of nowhere, but are grounded in their authors own consciousness. References both implicit and explicit to reincarnation, genetic memory, and the concept of inherited memory of a homeland and of its (literally) native language are scattered throughout Tolkiens published Letters. Here are some examples: Letter # 44 to Michael Tolkien. Though a Tolkien by name, I am a Sufeld by tastes, talents, and upbringing, and any corner of that country [Worcestershire] (however fair or squalid) is in an indenable way home to me as no other part of the world is (Letters 54). Letter # 95 to Christopher Tolkien. It is things of racial and linguistic signicance that attract me and stick in my memory. Still, I hope one day youll be able (if you wish) to delve into this intriguing story of the origins of our peculiar people. And indeed, of us in particular. For barring the Tolkien (which must long ago have become a pretty thin strand) you are a Mercian or Hwiccian (of Wychwood) on both sides (Letters 108). Letter # 163 to W. H. Auden. I am a west-midlander by blood (and took early to west-midland Middle English as soon as I set eyes on it) and I daresay such linguistic tastes . . . are as good or better a test of ancestry as blood-groups (Letters 213). Letter # 165 to Houghton Mifin Co. It is, I believe, as much due to descent as to opportunity that Anglo-Saxon and Western Middle English have been both a childhood attraction and my main professional sphere (Letters 218). And most conclusively, I think: Letter # 153 to Peter Hastings. Reincarnation may be bad theology (that surely, rather than metaphysics) as applied to Humanity. . . . But I do not see how even in the primary World any theologian or philosopher, unless very much better informed about the relation of spirit and body than I believe anyone to be, could deny the possibility of re-incarnation as a mode of existence, prescribed for certain kinds of rational incarnate creatures (Letters 189). The recurrent mention of Mercian or West-Midland ancestry points 59

Verlyn Flieger
pretty clearly not just to Tolkiens forebears, but to the page from Edwin Lowdhams diary identied by old Rashbold as Mercian and WestMidland. Add to these inherited taste, tastes as a test of ancestry, the combination of racial and linguistic signicance, childhood attraction due to descent, and nally the possibility of re-incarnation as a mode of existence for certain kinds of rational incarnate creatures. The sum of all these is evidence of the authors personal belief as well as a writerly preference for descent, ancestry, and reincarnation as a viable mode of time-travel.23 The Notion Club Papers anatomizes the concept. Part One, The Ramblings of Ramer, is directly relevant to the mechanical problem of transmission. Whatever was Tolkiens original intent for this, it becomes a set-up for Part Two, where, in The Strange Case of Arundel Lowdham, the story gets down to business, to time-travel, and to incarnation. Or reincarnation. Here we see, in the memory-ashbacks rst of Lowdham, and then of Jeremy, and later their combined memories as they travel up and down the west coasts of Britain and Ireland, how incarnation would work as a time-travel device. During the great storm that breaks up the meeting on night 61, the two begin to experience actual regression in time and identity directly back to Nmenor and the corresponding perhaps identicalstorm that brings about its downfall. They move into Nmenorean identities, call each other by Nmenorean names Abrazn and Numruzrand apparently occupy Nmenorean space. These regressions continue after they leave the meeting and Oxford itself and go in search of their memories. What, nally might have been the effect on the mythology had Tolkien carried through his intent to abandon the Eriol-Saga and do the Atlantis story? The answer can be found in his own notes to The Notion Club Papers where the concept apparently developed. These, plus his references in the Letters to inherited memory and recognition of an unknown home and language, all support the likelihood that the Atlantis story would have changed the approachand through that the ethos and spiritof the whole legendarium. There would have been a radical re-vision of the over-arching concept of belonging to England. The traditional method of starting a mythology at the beginning with Creation would have been replaced with the far less conventional narrative entry from what for Tolkien would have been the middle, (i.e., modern, reader-contemporary period). The imagined End (which he never got to) would still be far off in a future quite clearly still ahead of our own world. In addition, the shift would have augmented the rather tenuous and changeful thread of historical and territorial continuity whether as Tol Eressa or actual Britainwith the para-psychological thread of continuity through memory. More radical still, such memory

60

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

would have been presented as passing through a series of successively receding incarnations of the same two individuals. Thus the mythology would have been for England in a psychical, as well as historical sense. The change would have made the mythology the common possession of a generic collective memory, as well as of a shared piece of ground and its shared history. Tolkiens sketches and outlines for continuation of The Notion Club Papers, as well as for the earlier The Lost Road, indicate that this would have been played out in episodic recapitulations of existing incidents in English myth and historysuch as his fully realized treatments of the mythical arrival of King Sheave, and the historical raid of the Danes at Porlock. These were to reappear through memories, with Loudham, Jeremy, Guildford, and Ramer taking part, and were to culminate in the book or perhaps books referred to in Tolkiens notesthe Book of Stories, and Elendils book. The entire concept could be re-stated in the words Tolkien used to describe the work of the Beowulf poet. It is an historical poem about the pagan past, or an attempt at oneliteral historical delity founded on modern research was, of course, not attempted. It is a poem by a learned man writing of old times [my emphasis], who looking back on the heroism and sorrow feels in them something permanent and something symbolical (Monsters 26). Like Tolkiens profound and scholarly, but also highly personal vision of Beowulf, his own mythology is meant to give the illusion of surveying a past, pagan but noble and fraught with deep signicancea past that itself had depth24 and reached backward into a dark antiquity of sorrow25 (Monsters 27). It could be argued nonetheless that the whole question is not just moot but irrelevant, since Tolkien never followed through, either by completing The Notion Club Papers as a self-contained work, or by effecting the enormous shift in perspective and psychology that doing Atlantis as the frame and entry-point for the whole mythology might have brought about. The change was never carried out, and what we have is what we get. What we get is an unnished symphony whose implications outrun its execution. Over against this, I would argue with Sir Philip Sidney that the skill of the articer standeth in the idea or foreconceit of the work and not in the work itself ; or at least, that the idea or foreconceit is as important as the execution. This is especially so in the case of Tolkien, where the skill of the articer is contained in the foreconceit, though the work itself was never fully realized. The whole notion of conceiving and carrying through a singly authored, wholly invented mythology needs further examination. Tolkiens method of making it English through memory ancestrally transmitted and re-experienced in episodes from English myth and history should be reconsidered in light of Shippeys concept of the

61

Verlyn Flieger
mythological arms race, the pervasive ambition of European cultures to stake a claim to nationhood through myth. Finally, the actual structure of the legendarium and its potential changes merit close interrogation. Fragmentary, confusing, and inconclusive though the evidence may be, the working out of Tolkiens dream of a mythology for England the soaring height of the ambition, the breadth and depth and range of the undertaking, and the resultant complicated collection of stories, sketches, notes begun, abandoned, and begun again, always moving in the direction of a complex but deeply-felt visioninvites inquiry beyond what it has so far received.

NOTES
1 This is probably a reference to a kind of popular folklore that was the stock reading matter of ordinary people during the eighteenth and much of the nineteenth centuries. Popular with the pre-industrial rural and urban poor, chapbooks continued as a staple of childrens literary fare in the twentieth century. They told the stories of gures such as Guy of Warwick, Bevis of Hampton, Hugh of Lincoln, and the Seven Champions of Christendom. The relationship of war to mythology and nationhood merits attention. One example is Germanys use of the Siegfried myth in World War II. A less ominous, but equally telling example of Tolkiens felt connection is his poem The Voyage of Earendel, written in September 1914, a month after England entered World War I in August of 1914. Another early poem, The Shores of Faery, was written sometime in 1915. Tolkien was called up to military service in July 1915. I suggest that the imminence of war, with its implied destruction of existing culture, fueled, if it did not create, Tolkiens desire to give his country a mythology. See Shippey, Grimm, Grundtvig, and Tolkien. Some answers, of course, have already been offered. Jane Chances Tolkiens Art: A Mythology for England discusses the general concept, but chiey in the context of Tolkiens medieval scholarship and its relation to The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Tom Shippey offers the concept of an asteriskmythology in his article Long Evolution: The History of Middle-earth and its Merits in Arda, 1987. See also Carl Hostetter and Arden Smiths A Mythology for England in Proceedings of the J.R.R. Tolkien Centenary Conference held in Oxford in 1992, which examines the Englishness of Tolkiens mythology from a linguistic perspective. In that same volume Anders Stenstrms A Mythology? For England? diagrams and deconstructs the not62

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

quite accurate but nonetheless by now almost canonical phrase a mythology for England. 4 Tolkien varied between two spellings of this name, but nally settled on Lowdham. In my own discussions, I will use this form, but will quote it as it appears in Tolkiens texts. Tolkien wrote that Lewis said to me one day: Tollers, there is too little of what we really like in stories. I am afraid we shall have to try and write some ourselves. We agreed that he should try space-travel and I should try time-travel (Letters 378). In his commentary on The Lost Road, Christopher Tolkien notes the similarity between Errol and Eriol, and allows the possibility that the resemblance might have been intentional. The history of Tol Eressa is complex. Originally conceived as an island in the West cut loose and dragged near to the Great Lands (later Middleearth), it then occupied the geographical location of England. As will be seen, this concept was soon dropped. Earlier versions of the names included Anglo-Saxon Eadwine and lfwine, modern Edwin and Elwin, the Nmenorean Elendil and Herendil. The Notion Club Papers featured Alwyn Lowdham, son of Edwin Lowdham. See Lost Tales II (219-92) for Christopher Tolkiens discussion in The History of Eriol or lfwine of his fathers correlation of places in Tol Eressa with actual places in England.

10 Both the pseudo-geography and the pseudo-history of this scheme underwent a complicated series of changes over the course of Tolkiens long development of the story. I will deal here with only the last and most radical modication. For the others, the reader is referred to Christopher Tolkiens painstaking unraveling of this extremely complicated matter in Lost Tales I, and The History of Eriol or lfwine in Lost Tales II. 11 The concept of Tol Eressa went through many changes, and its ruin is difcult to pin down. Christopher Tolkien may be alluding to some obscure references in Tolkiens notes to the Battle of the Heath of the Sky-roof, which Eriol witnessed. See his discussion in Lost Tales II (285293). 12 Sub-creation was Tolkiens term for the construction of an imaginary or Secondary world inviting Secondary belief. Successful sub-creation required the inner consistency of reality

63

Verlyn Flieger
(On Fairy-Stories 168). 13 Tolkiens New York Times obituary quoted him as saying of The Hobbit that its not even very good for children. . . . I wrote some of it in a style for children. . . . If I hadnt done that, though, people would have thought I was loony (New York Times, September 3, 1973). 14 In Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth, ed. Flieger and Hostetter. 15 Pengolo was a later narrator/scribe who contributed to the book, and thus added to the Eriol/lfwine frame. 16 The name Heorrenda had for Tolkien its own peculiar place in his connection of his invented mythos to English literature and history. In the chapter called The History of Eriol, or lfwine and the End of the Tales in Lost Tales II, Christopher Tolkien notes that his fathers lfwine character was at one point intended to be the son of one Dor the Minstrel, explaining that, in the great Anglo-Saxon manuscript known as the Exeter Book there is a little poem of 42 lines to which the title of Dor is now given. It is an utterance of the minstrel Dor, who, as he tells, has lost his place and been supplanted in his lords favour by another bard, named Heorrenda. . . . From this poem came both Dor and Heorrenda. . . . I do not think that my fathers Dor the Minstrel of Kortirion and Heorrenda of Tavrobel can be linked more closely to the Anglo-Saxon poem than in the names alonethough he did not take the names at random. He was moved by the glimpsed tale [of Dor] (even if, in the words of one of the poems editors, the autobiographical element is purely ctitious); and when lecturing on Beowulf at Oxford he [Tolkien] sometimes gave the unknown poet a name, calling him Heorrenda. (323) In his edition of Beowulf and the Critics, Tolkiens hitherto-unpublished drafts of Tolkiens Beowulf essay, Michael Drout points out in his introduction that in other lecture notes (which, according to dates on some associated envelopes, seem to have been written or at least re-copied in 1962) Tolkien suggests that the Beowulf poet should be called Heorrenda rather than X. Drout also notes that in Bodleian Library, MS Tolkien A28 C, fol. 6v rather than X is written interlinearly in pencil and marked for insertion with a caret (Drout 18). At some level, then, Tolkien intended an association of his own mythos not just with English history and literature, but with a specic

64

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

poet and poem. 17 Tolkien even got the jump on his own time-scale by setting the Papers themselves forward from his own time of composition (c. 1945-46) rst to a ctive future of approximately 1980 to 1990 (Sauron 155) when the Notion Club was presumed to have thrived, and then to the even later discovery and publication of the papers in the early years of the 21st century. 18 See Christopher Tolkiens note 60 in Sauron Defeated that, In [ms.] E, Jeremy addresses Lowdham as arendil, subsequently changed to Elendil (290). 19 This insertion of himself into the storyGerman Tol-khn translates into English as Rash-bold, and Tolkiens rst appointment at Oxford was as Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon at Pembroke Collegeis Tolkiens most explicit autobiographical reference, the ultimate in textual embedding, as well as a wholly personal inside joke. 20 Tolkien also used the device in The Lord of the Rings. The rst edition Foreword states that it is drawn for the most part from the memoirs of the renowned Hobbits, Bilbo and Frodo, as they are preserved in the Red Book of Westmarch, which was compiled, repeatedly copied, and enlarged and handed down. The uncredited editor has supplemented this account with information derived from the surviving records of Gondor (FR, 1st ed., Foreword 7). This strategy was present even in the earliest draft chapters of The Lord of the Rings. In The Return of the Shadow. Bilbo himself introduces the idea at the Council of Elrond, saying plaintively that he is just getting on with my book, and adding, If you want to know, I am just writing an ending for it. I had thought of putting and he lived happily ever afterwards to the end of his days . . . and anyway there will evidently have to be several more chapters, even if I dont write them myself (405). The second edition Prologue notes that the book, which was in origin Bilbos private diary, was continued with Frodos account of the War, and added to by Sam (FR, Prol. 14). Bilbo and his successors function as both Gangleri and Snorri, with the outside voice of the Prologue introducing both the story and the history of the story, reinforcing the conceit that this account of the Third Age is drawn mainly from the Red Book of Westmarch, which is that most important source for the history of the War of the Ring (FR, Prol. 14). The divisions of the Prologuea socio-historical account of hobbits, a discussion of pipe-weed, a note on the political structure of the Shire, and a nal Note on the Shire Records (not in the rst 65

Verlyn Flieger
edition)serve to frame, historicize, and validate the account of the nding of the Ring, and to support the impression that the book is an actual artifact. The Lord of the Rings is thus presented as a living narrativethe story itself; as a means of transmissionthe book; and as the mechanism to bring the book to the readerthe editorial Prologue. The device appears again in The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, presented as a spin-off of The Red Book. Here another pseudoeditor ascribes the verses to The Red Book, and assigns authorship to Bilbo and his friends, or their immediate descendants (Bombadil 7). 21 Such allusions include his comment in On Fairy-stories that in dreams strange powers of the mind may be unlocked, and his repeated references in his letters to his recurring Atlantis dream of the great green wave that overwhelmed him and from which he always awoke gasping. 22 See my discussion of Frodos dreams in A Question of Time, chapter eight. 23 In this context, it is important to note that it was not just recurrence of identity, but lineal descent that provided the operative concept. A note appended to The Notion Club Papers species that the theory is that the sight and memory goes [sic] on with descendants of [the Nmenorean identities] Elendil and Voronw (= Trowine) but not reincaration; they are different people even if they still resemble one another in some ways even after a lapse of many generations (Sauron 278). Tolkiens later note, given by Christopher Tolkien on page 281, reads simply Loudhams ancestry, and suggests that Tolkien intended to amplify the concept by tracing Lowdhams descent, though how far back he would have gone cannot be determined. Lowdhams father is Old Edwin (Eadwine, Audoin, Elendil, arendil). 24 See Tom Shippeys discussion of depth in The Road to Middle-earth (272-81). 25 Michael Drout points out that Tolkiens A-Text states that: Beowulf is not an actual picture of historic Denmark and Sweden circa 500 A.D. But it is with certain defects, of course, at a general view, a self-consistent picture, an imaginative construction. The whole must have succeeded admirably in creating in the minds of the poets contemporaries the illusion of surveying a past, pagan but not ignoble and fraught still with deep signicanceindeed a past that had itself depth and reached back into the mists. This last is an effect of and a

66

Do the Atlantis Story and abandon Eriol-Saga

justication of the use of episodes and allusions to old tales which are all notably darker more pagan and despairing than the foreground. Tolkiens B-Text, which is closer to the published essay, expands this: Beowulf is not an actual picture of historic Denmark or Gautland or Sweden circa A.D. 500. But it is (with of course certain defects here and there of minor detail) at a general view a self-consistent picture, an imaginative construction. The whole must have succeeded admirably increating in the minds of the poets contemporaries the illusion of surveying a past, pagan but not ignoble and fraught still with a deep signicance, a past that itself had depth and reached back into the mists of countless human sorrows. This impression of depth is an effect and a justication of the use of episodes and allusions to old tales-which are all notably darker, more pagan, and despairing than the foreground (Drout 75, 139). In writing about the Beowulf poet Tolkien was also writing about himself; his clear intent in his own work was not to give an actual picture of the pre-historic mythic past of England, but rather a self-consistent picture, an imaginative construction. WORKS CITED Carpenter, Humphrey. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1977. Chance, Jane. Tolkiens Art: A Mythology for England. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 2001. Flieger, Verlyn. A Question of Time. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1997. Forster, E. M. Howards End. Everymans Library 25. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1991. Hostetter, Carl, and Arden Smith. A Mythology for Emgland. In Proceedings of the J.R.R. Tolkien Centenary Conference 1992, edited by Patricia Reynolds and Glen GoodKnight. Altadena: Mythopoeic Press, 1995. Noad, Charles. On The Construction of The Silmarillion. In Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth, edited by Verlyn Flieger and Carl Hostetter. Westport. CN: Greenwood Press, 2000. 67

Verlyn Flieger
ORahilly, Ceile, ed. Tin B Calnge, from the Book of Leinster. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, 1967. Shippey, Tom. Grimm, Grundtvig, Tolkien: Nationalisms and the Invention of Mythologies. In The Ways of Creative Mythologies: Imagined Worlds and Their Makers, Vol. I, edited by Maria Kuteeva. Telford: the Tolkien Society, 2000. ______. Long Evolution: The History of Middle-earth and its Merits. Arda 7 (1987): 18-39. ______. The Road to Middle-earth, 2nd ed. London: Grafton, 1992.

68

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

ANNE C. PETTY
olkiens fascination with the Finnish national epic, Kalevala, created by nineteenth-century physician and folklorist Elias Lnnrot, is well recognized. Anyone who has read his collected letters knows this. In 1914, he wrote the following to his anc Edith Bratt: Had an interesting talk with that quaint man Earp I have told you of and introduced him (to his great delight) to the Kalevala, the Finnish ballads. Amongst other work I am trying to turn one of the storieswhich is really a very great story and most tragicinto a short story somewhat on the lines of Morris romances with chunks of poetry in between (Letters 7). Fifty years later he was still fascinated, as he revealed in a 1964 letter to Christopher Bretherton: The germ of my attempt to write legends of my own to t my private languages was the tragic tale of the hapless Kullervo in the Finnish Kalevala. It remains a major matter in the legends of the First Age (which I hope to publish as The Silmarillion), though as The Children of Hrin it is entirely changed except in the tragic ending (345). That fascination went further and deeper than the single story idea of the hapless Kullervo, as I intend to show in this study. The attractiveness of the Kalevala, according to Michael Branch, in A History of Finlands Literature, lies in the grandeur and universality of its themes, the coherence of its plots, and the splendor of its poetry (4), qualities that kept Tolkien engaged with the material for many years of his life. Humphrey Carpenter, Tolkiens ofcial biographer, dates Tolkiens rst encounter with the Kalevala around 1911 during his nal term at St. Edwards School, shortly before his enrollment at Oxford. According to Carpenter, He wrote appreciatively of this strange people and these new gods, this race of unhypocritical lowbrow scandalous heroes, adding the more I read of it, the more I felt at home and enjoyed myself. He had discovered the Kalevala in W. H. Kirbys Everyman translation, and he determined to nd an edition in the original Finnish as soon as possible (57). Thus began Tolkiens long-term association with this Finnish source that would surface in his own work as both content (the Silmarils, and various treatments of Trin Turambar) and form (the sprawling collection of myths, tales, annals, poems, and chronicles of the Silmarillion proper, as well as Quenya, the Elvish language inspired by Finnish). In casting his vast world of Middle-earth as Englands pre-history, transmitted from ctional sources (Elves of Tol Eressa) to historical
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

69

Anne C. Petty
scribes (Eriol/lfwine from The Book of Lost Tales), Tolkien assumed the role of mediator, the scholar-scribe who gathers ancient knowledge and shapes it for consumption by later societies. The several guises Tolkien used for this purpose of mediation are well documented in Verlyn Fliegers article, The Footsteps of lfwine, from Tolkiens Legendarium. In an ironic case of life imitating art imitating life, Christopher Tolkien, as literary executor, performed for his fathers repository of invented mythology and legends the same kind of service Lnnrot accomplished for the Finnish folk epic. Looked at from this perspective, the label of Englands Lnnrot applies equally well to both father and son, although for very different reasons. As mediator, according to Tom Shippey, J. R. R. Tolkien was following the model of earlier philologist-creators whose great projects of national identity reconstruction were both literary and linguistic (Author xv). Included in this grouping with Lnnrot and his contemporaries are the German brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, who published three volumes of fairy tales as well as a critically acclaimed German Grammar; Danish cleric, philosopher, reformer, poet, and educator Nikolaj Frederik Severin Grundtvig and his son Sven, a University of Copenhagen lecturer and archivist; and Jrgen Moe and his son Moltke of Norway, whose editions of Norwegian tales and legends became the foundation for the Norwegian Folk Archives. The important point of commonality among these gures is their response to the national Romanticism movement sweeping across northern Europe in the 1800s. Thus, for each, a nations language was recorded through folklore and sanctioned through literature to the point where it became a means of dening the identity of the nation and if the traditions they found appeared fragmentary and deteriorated, it was the task of collectors and editors to restore them (Kvideland and Sehmsdorf 4). Most inuential for Tolkien, of course, was Elias Lnnrots restoration of Finnish language and folkloric heritage through his creation of the Kalevala and Kantele. Shippeys notion of the philologist-creator provides three productive ways of looking at the Kalevalas inuence over Tolkiens writing: intention, language, and content. Each of these perspectives is explored below. Intention This rst element concerns the compilers objective, what Lauri Honko refers to as the collectors purposive role in the making of the text and the editors impact on the nal form (3). According to F. P. Magoun, Lnnrots commentaries from his prefaces to both the old and new Kalevala clearly state that he intended his rune-collecting work to serve as an ethnic memory of the ancient Finnish people and their language. He feared that the knowledge contained in the runes would disappear and be 70

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

lost forever from the national consciousness. In the 1849 Preface to the New Kalevala, Lnnrot explained that because these poems are coming to be the oldest specic memories surviving for the Finnish people and the Finnish language as long as these exist at all, one is called upon to arrange them with all possible care and diligence (Magoun 374). This is not unlike Tolkiens stated purpose in constructing his history of Middleearth, which he included in a synopsis of The Lord of the Rings sent to editor Milton Waldman at the Collins publishing house: I had a mind to make a body of more or less connected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic, to the level of romantic fairy-storythe larger founded on the lesser in contact with the earth, the lesser drawing splendour from the vast backclothswhich I could dedicate simply to: to England; to my country. (Letters 144). For both men, the perceived goal was not the desire to gain fame as a published author but to render a service to the literary heritage of their individual nationsin other words, to provide historic continuity with the past through an epic that would serve as a mirror of the national soul expressed in its folk poetry, whether performed by Finnish runesingers or Elvish bards. To set this issue in context, this section addresses Lnnrots role as a folklorist and his achievement in creating the Kalevala. From that basis, we can move to the ways in which Tolkiens work reects Lnnrots inuence, including the fact that Christopher Tolkien ultimately performed Lnnrots role by collecting and editing his fathers vast unpublished material into The Silmarillion, Unnished Tales, and The History of Middle-earth. The succinct biographical note appearing in the Everymans Library edition of W. F. Kirbys 1907 translation, Kalevala: The Land of the Heroes, provides these bare essentials: ELIAS LONNROT. Born 1802. Finnish philologist, poet, and folklorist. Practised medicine in country districts, where he transcribed traditional ballads, among them the Kalevala cycle, which he published from 1838 to 1849. Became professor of Finnish literature at Helsinki, and died 1884 (ii). As one of Shippeys philologistcreators, Lnnrots abilities as a collector and editor of folklore went far beyond merely transcribing traditional ballads in the unique scheme he developed for that purpose. Encouraged and funded by the Finnish Literary Society, Lnnrots ofcial collecting forays into the Archangel Karelia region began in 1831 and continued through 1835, although he had done some transcribing of rune singing before this. Inspired both by amateur folklore enthusiasts such as C. A. Gottlund and several highly capable singers having many poem variants at their command, the idea of creating a national epic for Finland was in Lnnrots mind as 71

Anne C. Petty
a goal very early in his career (Branch 22), not unlike Tolkiens youthful ambitions concerning his proposed mythology for England. As signicant as Kalevala was in establishing Finlands folklore heritage for posterity, it certainly was not the rst attempt to study and catalog the structures, myths, and motifs of Finlands native poetry. To set Lnnrots work in context, one needs to look back at least a century before the 1835 publication of Kalevala. As Felix Oinas explains in his Studies in Finnic Folklore: Homage to the Kalevala, a number of signicant studies and attempts at collection were underway as early as 1700 with Daniel Juslenius arguments that Finnish folklore demonstrated the great age of Finnish culture (10). Of greater importance is the work of Henrik Porthan, especially his ve-part De poesi Fennica (1766-78), wherein, says Oinas, his recognition of the signicance of folksong variants for establishing the earlier forms of the songs makes him a forerunner of the comparative study of folklore. Another work, Mythologia Fennica, written in 1789 by Porthans contemporary, Christfrid Ganander, provided an encyclopedia of folk beliefs and heroes derived from folk poetry, a valuable resource for Lnnrot and his contemporaries in the Finnish Literary Society of the early 1830s. The published collections of Zachris Topelius in 1822 helped conrm the need for a more aggressive attempt to gather and document these epic-style poems sung mostly in the eight-syllable trochaic line now known as Kalevala-meter. The stage was set for the Finnish Literary Societys choice of Lnnrot as their best emissary in the eld, following his completion of a doctoral degree in medicine from the University of Helsinki in 1832. Although Lnnrot was a meticulous compiler who kept copious notes and transcriptions, the fact that he was also a composer of his own Kalevala-meter verse, which he wove into the fabric of the original material, was not immediately apparent when the rst version of the epic was published (Kuusi, Bosley, and Branch 30). Perhaps to understand the dilemma created by this fact, it should be stated what the Kalevala is not. The cycle of 50 runos (runes or verses) is not a single long epic with a continuous plot that has been handed down intact from ages past. As a compilation of verses sung by many different runesingers over many generations, the Kalevala cycle is also not the work of a single poet, and yet, in one sense, it is, which presents the problem of what Lauri Honko calls the oral/literary paradox. In the preface to his 1988 translation, Eino Friberg stated the problem in this way: The ambiguity between the Kalevala as a published work and the Kalevala as an oral folk expression through the runo-singers has, of course, been a general feature in discussion of the work ever since Lnnrots day (11). Although the verses were collected from mostly uneducated rural singers, Lnnrot himself determined the arrangement of the verses into a kind of loose history of

72

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

two warring territories (Kalevas region and the land of Pohjola). This was arbitrary on his part and bears little resemblance to the context in which he may have heard and collected the runes. It must also be taken into account that he composed the opening and closing lines himself, to establish a symmetrical framework for the story groupings. He had absorbed the style and spirit of the authentic verses, but in content and placement these verses are clearly his own work, added to create a framework for the organization he planned to impose on the collected material. Summing up Lnnrots role, Matti Kuusi states, While in terms of its basic components the Kalevala has its origin in folk poetry, its overall shape and structure are the work of Elias Lnnrot (30). In a similar vein, Tolkien liked to say that he was merely recording the events of The Lord of the Rings instead of creating the book. Temperament and creativity had an effect on both Lnnrots and Tolkiens output that was similar. In the face of their far-reaching aspirations, both men were endless revisers, each expressing real fears that his work might prove overwhelming and never see the light of day. Both authors found themselves plagued by self-doubt regarding the worth of their efforts due in large part to consistency issues and the compulsion toward perfection. As he struggled to complete The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien worked backward through the continually evolving Silmarillion, trying to maintain consistency within his steadily developing mythology. Similarly, Lnnrots arrangement of the runes consumed years of his time as he tried to visualize a somewhat consistent storyline that could also encompass the many magic charms, runes of domestic rites and ceremonies, and stand-alone tales such as that of Kullervo. Dubious, to say the least, wrote Lnnrot in his Preface to the 1835 Old Kalevala, of my ability to produce something suitable, I have occasionally been plagued with doubt to such an extent that I have been on the verge of throwing the whole thing into the re. This temptation arose because I did not believe it in my power to edit these songs as I wanted to (Magoun 374). Tolkien wearily confessed to his publisher that instead of writing a simple sequel to The Hobbit, he had instead created a monster. Both authors seem to have experienced recurring creative burnout, as evidenced in letters to friends and colleagues that describe each pouring over stacks of manuscripts late into the night, often foregoing food and sleep in an attempt to nish the work to his own satisfaction. Like Tolkien, Lnnrot was a copious letter writer, documenting his process and concerns over his work to friends, relatives, and academic associates. The practice served both men, who were very private and cerebral, with a means of dealing with their frustrations and reaching out to others of like mind. I begin to feel a bit desperate: endlessly frustrated, Tolkien wrote to his son Christopher in 1969 and several months later echoed

73

Anne C. Petty
those sentiments, When you pray for me, pray for time! in a letter to his son Michael (Letters 401, 404). For posterity, the collected letters of both authors have proved invaluable in the study of their art and intentions. Language The two-fold meaning of language in the context of this paper reects the dichotomy of the philologist/creator: (1) the creation of language (as original invention, in Tolkiens case, or its elevation to ofcial status and national symbol, as fostered by Lnnrot), and (2) the actual word choice employed by both men in the writing of their literary creations. The philologist part of the equation, language creation, was one of Tolkiens most astonishing abilities and provides a direct link to the Kalevala. Evidence from his letters reveals that he was captivated by both the sound and look of Finnish: The archaic language of lore is meant to be a kind of Elvenlatin. . . . Actually it might be said to be composed on a Latin basis with two other (main) ingredients that happen to give me phonaesthetic pleasure: Finnish and Greek. It is however less consonantal than any of the three. This language is High-elven or in its own terms Quenya (Elvish). (176) The above excerpt from Tolkiens 1954 letter to Naomi Mitchison establishes the initial connection between Quenya and Finnish, and in his letter to W. H. Auden the following year, that connection is further revealed: Most important, perhaps, after Gothic was the discovery in Exeter College library, when I was supposed to be reading for Honour Mods, of a Finnish Grammar. It was like discovering a complete wine-cellar lled with bottles of an amazing wine of a kind and avour never tasted before. It quite intoxicated me; and I gave up the attempt to invent an unrecorded Germanic language, and my own languageor series of invented languagesbecame heavily Finnicized in phonetic pattern and structure. (Letters 214) In J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century, Shippey conrms the aural appeal Finnish had for Tolkien, explaining that again and again in The Lord of the Rings he has characters speak in these languages without bothering to translate them. The point, or a point, is made by the sound alonejust as allusions to the old legends of previous ages say something without the legends necessarily being told (xiv). 74

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

The pleasure Tolkien derived from Finnish was not limited to its phonaesthetic qualities; there is evidence that he also found it visually pleasing. The visual aesthetic of Finnish as written out likely played an important factor in Tolkiens development of the tengwar or script for Quenya. The notion that Tolkiens artistic eye loved the look of letters on the page as well as the sound of the language, the allusive as well as communicative qualities, is established by Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull. A masterful calligrapher, Tolkien knew the beauty of a page fully written in tengwar (201), for example, as shown in Aragorns letter to Sam, included by Christopher Tolkien in Sauron Defeated. As Hammond and Scull describe it, It is a beautiful manuscript even to those who cannot read the wordsrhythmic, graceful, and exotic, like the movements of a dancer (201). It is not difcult to see where the suggestion for these beautiful rows of em curves and graceful descenders could have rst appealed to Tolkien. Printed Finnish with its limited number of consonants and doubled, umlauted vowels produces a very similar effect. Look, for example, at lines 335-40 at the end of Runo 1 from the untranslated Kalevala (SKS 2000 edition): Polvin maasta ponnistihe, ksivarsin knnltihe. Nousi kuuta katsomahan, pive ihoamahan, otavaista oppimahan, thti thymhn. (6) It is not necessary to understand the language in order to appreciate the unique visual effect of printed Finnish. For comparison, the script running across the title pages of all three volumes of The Lord of the Rings provides a good example of how the shape and ow of tengwar characters echoes passages from the Kalevala. The second meaning of language listed above concerns the issue of textualization, the rendering of core epic ideas into words, whether oral (primary) or written (secondary), a wordsmithing process of prime importance to both Lnnrot and Tolkien. In Lnnrots case, his objective was to transform his codication of various oral performances into written, literary form, thereby creating a master version of the epic in question, preserving the avor of the singers individual performances while combining them into one coherent version. According to Honko, although this approach was completely acceptable in Lnnrots day, it has been looked on with disfavor from later folklore scholars concerned with accuracy in reporting and preservation. Current thinking has shifted yet again, coming to a realization that what we experience as literary value or beauty is there in the original oral textualization and is merely 75

Anne C. Petty
magnied, not created, in the written codication. The linguistic power of the oral genre becomes accentuated in the new non-oral form capable of living on as a piece of literature proper (Honko vii). In Tolkiens case, the oral epic and lyric poetry of his legendarium give the illusion of collected folk poetry handed down orally and eventually textualized in the pages of such records as the Quenta Silmarillion and the Red Book of Westmarch. In this way, the poetry of Middle-earth supplies the depth of authenticity required in Tolkiens mythmaking process. The Kalevala textualization existed in three different versions, each more lled out and ambitious than the one before, as Lnnrot observed and recorded more songs during his years traveling through East Karelia. His Proto-Kalevala contained sixteen verses but was not published. Sensing that much more could be gathered, Lnnrot made further forays into the White Sea Karelia district, which brought him into contact with singers that greatly changed his ideas about the epic he was compiling (Oinas 33). He observed that the highly talented singers possessed a mental catalogue or vocabulary of poem segments and phrases for particular characters storylines and could spontaneously arrange them while performing. Thus, no one performance of a given epic segment, of Vinminen or Lemminkinen, for example, was ever the same. The mini-epics he heard were uid in content and detail, while remaining constant in theme and general storyline. This special folksong language in which many standard expressions are known to the singers of the epics is referred to as the epic register, and an individual singers ability to use this epic register becomes his or her epic idiolect (Honko 21). It was not possible to completely predict in what way any given version or arrangement of epic elements would be performed; part of their creativity was to draw spontaneously from their mental store of poem segmentstheir inherited epic register. Lnnrot realized that he could consider his collection of thousands of poetry lines as his own epic register and the two versions of the Kalevala as the product of his own epic idiolect. The Old Kalevala (as it later became known), which appeared in 1835 and contained thirty-six songs, was followed fourteen years later by the New Kalevala, Lnnrots 1849 compilation that became the ofcial version. It consisted of fty verses organized into fourteen mini-epics. As well as epic poems, the New Kalevala also contains numerous charms, spells, lyric folksongs, festival songs for weddings and feasts, and maxims. A sense of the wider pool of folk poetry available to Lnnrot in shaping his epic can be found in the anthology Finnish Folk Poetry: Epic, compiled and translated by Matti Kuusi, Keith Bosley, and Michael Branch. This concept of epic register is applicable to Tolkien as well. Both epic register and idiolect are useful in characterizing the language of Tolkiens poetry and his formal high narrative style, often described

76

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

as biblical. For example, the phrases beyond all hope or rescue unlooked for appear frequently through all his ction, and especially at moments of high emotion and epic drama, indicating that these are signicant entries in his personal epic register. A random sampling from the Silmarillion nds the phrases occurring in the tale of the Fifth Battle, For unsummoned and unlooked for Turgon had opened the leaguer of Gondolin (190); in the return of the Noldor to Middle-earth where the Elves of Beleriand express amazement at their mighty kindred, who thus returned unlooked-for from the West in the very hour of their need (108); after Berens rst encounter with Lthien Tinviel, [b]eyond his hope she returned to him where he sat in darkness (166); in the overthrow of Morgoth during the War of Wrath, where the slaves imprisoned in Angband came forth beyond all hope into the light of day (252). In The Lord of the Rings, we nd the phrase spoken by Aragorn at Gandalf s appearance in Fangorn, Beyond all hope you return to us in our need! (TT, III, v, 98); he speaks a variant when the Rangers arrive after the battle of Helms Deep, Of all joys this is the least expected! (RK, V, ii, 47); at the battle of the Pelennor Fields, omer speaks the phrase to Aragorn, Yet twice blessed is help unlooked for, and never was a meeting of friends more joyful (RK, V, vi, 123). A variant of this register entry can be found in both The Hobbit and The Return of the King when rescue comes unexpectedly from the eagles. Both Gandalf and Bilbo utter the same cry: The Eagles are coming! The Eagles are coming! (H, xvii, 345; RK, V, x, 169). Marjut Huuskonens article on the 1999 symposium on oral and traditional epics at the University of Turku (occurring on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the New Kalevala) states that Lnnrot was acknowledged not only as a collector, a scribe and a compiler but as a singer with a mental text of an epic in his mind (Kuusi, Bosley, and Branch 21). As has just been demonstrated, this assessment applies equally well to J. R. R. Tolkien. The problem of textualization applies as well to Christopher Tolkiens published form of the Silmarillion. Did his father intend the tales to be ordered in that way or for those versions to become the published ones? No one knew his fathers mind better than Christopher regarding the state of the Silmarillion material, yet even so, there is no way to know for certain, given the elder Tolkiens penchant for revision and reworking, what a nal version would have looked like. Like Lnnrot, Christopher Tolkien was required to make executive decisions, some small (punctuation and spelling consistency) and some larger (arrangement and sequencing), in order to publish a master version from many different versions and fragments available.

77

Anne C. Petty
Content Entire books have been written about the organization and content of Lnnrots Kalevala, and it is beyond the scope of this paper to investigate all the ways in which Kalevala inuence can be found in Tolkiens works. One can cite, for example, the cosmological runes (Tolkiens Ainulindal); epic themes such as doomed lovers (Beren and Lthien, Trin and Finduilas) or a magical object that holds the fate of the realm (the Silmarils and the One Ring); episodic stories grouped into larger sections (the tales of the Quenta Silmarillion); character archetypes (the wise shaman as Gandalf and the god of the underworld as Melkor, Morgoth, or even Shelob); stylized poetic conventions (repetition, redundancy, epithets, the power of three); native language of the epic (the evolving lexicon of Quenya); magic revealed in the power of song (Lthiens song that conquers the stronghold of Angband or Yavannas singing that calls into being the Two Trees of Valinor); or the landscape of mysterious islands bordered by misty coasts and inland waterways (the topography of Middle-earth and Nmenor). For the purpose of this study, the eld of discussion has been narrowed to the elements that most directly link Tolkien with Lnnrot, in other words, those aspects of the Kalevala that earn Tolkien the label of Englands Lnnrot. Where content is concerned, this means the tale of Kullervo and the core epic of the Sampo. We know that Tolkien borrowed the idea of Lnnrots amalgamated character Kullervo because he states this fact in his letters, as mentioned above. As Lnnrot had done with his source runes, Tolkien applied his own textualization to the story elements he found in the Kalevala. Using his own epic register, he reforged the Finnish material into a tragedy that would t into the larger scheme of the Quenta Silmarillion, which included villains such as Morgoth and Glaurung and helpers such as Beleg and Gwindor (in the published edition of the Silmarillion). In the same way, Lnnrot had found a kernel of a story in many separate lines of collected poetry, about the ill-fated youth whose behavior brings him to ruin, that particularly appealed to Lnnrots sense of tragedy. Unlike Tolkiens skillful blending of Trin into the Silmarillion backstory, Kullervos tale does not t seamlessly into the other mini-epics of Vinminen, Lemminkinen, and the Sampo, but sits within the larger framework of the Kalevala in runes 31-36. Kullervos story begins with the invocation to tragedy, when his doom is recognized at birth (in W. F. Kirbys translation): Presently when I am bigger, And my body shall be stronger, Ill avenge my fathers slaughter, And my mothers tears atone for. 78

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

This was heard by Untamoinen, And he spoke the words which follow: He will bring my race to ruin, Kalervo reborn is in him. (71) In similar fashion, from the Silmarillion, Tolkien began his tale Of Trin Turambar with the explicit statement that here is an account of high tragedy involving a doomed youth: Here that tale is told in brief, for it is woven with the fate of the Silmarils and of the Elves; and it is called the Tale of Grief, for it is sorrowful, and in it are revealed most evil works of Morgoth Bauglir (S 198). Randel Helms treatment of the Silmarillion includes a lengthy discussion of Tolkiens use of the Kullervo story, observing that the idea of the tale bubbled slowly in the back of his mind, waiting to attach itself to a larger, more comprehensive theme and that it is a tale that begs to be transformed (6), which coincidentally describes Lnnrots reaction to the story as well. Regarding Tolkiens use of the Sampo legend, the connection is by inference rather than direct borrowing. For one thing, the sampothe object itselfwas never dened by Lnnrot or his source singers in either version of the Kalevala, which leaves its use as inspiration for subsequent authors wide open. According to K. Brje Vhmki, this mysterious object is the single most studied and explored element of Kalevala research, including such efforts as Julius Krohns Finnish-language Poetry During the Era of Swedish Rule (1862), E. N. Setls The Sampo Riddle (1932), Matti Juusis The Sampo Epos (1949), and Juha Pentikainens Kalevala Mythology (1989), which comes down to Vhmkis assessment that the options are endless (Karni and Jarvenpa xvi). The Sampo cycle, common to many collected folksongs, was incorporated by Lnnrot as the nucleus for the Kalevala, according to Oinas, consisting of three main episodes: the creation of the world, the forging of the Sampo, and the theft of the Sampo (38). How this basic pattern was woven into Tolkiens legendarium can be seen in the history of the Silmarils. In his in-depth explication of the Sampo/Silmaril connection, What Tolkien Really Did with the Sampo, Jonathan B. Himes asserts that as an object of mystery, the Sampo provided ample fuel to Tolkiens creative re such that he incorporated its properties into several mythical objects of cosmic importance: the three jewels forged by Fanor, and the Two Trees sung into existence by Yavanna. Randel Helms asserts that in many of its details the story of the Silmarils is a recasting of the story of Ilmarinen, Wainamoinen, and the Sampo (44). Indeed, there are numerous clues in Tolkiens Silmarillion material, both in the Silmarillion and in The War of the Jewels, that lead back to the Kalevala and the Sampo. A general list could include the inspiration to create an object of power (Runo X:96-100); its forging by a smith/artisan 79

Anne C. Petty
of great skill (X:270-422); its theft by deception and spell casting, especially by one who had a part in the inspiration to create it (XL:65-170); the thief and his accomplice making a fast getaway with the Sampo, leaving its owners behind in a stunned state (XLII:171-260); the ght to recover the Sampo resulting in its breaking into several pieces (XLIII:259-294); a curse uttered on the heads of all who would steal the Sampos parts (XLIII:305-330); the effects of the curse being felt throughout the region; the sun and moon being stolen by the agent of darkness (XLVII:1-40); the supreme power replacing the stolen light with a new sun and moon (XLVII:41-82); a piece of the celestial light/re being swallowed by a creature (XLVII:248); when the creatures belly is split open, the re burning the hands of the one who retrieves it (XLVII:201-248); a great war fought to retrieve the objects of light from the dark stronghold where it is hidden (XLIX:111-230); and nally, departure of a sky-ship bearing the sage/shaman who offers hope of another Sampo (L:480-500). The leap is not far to envision Fanors creation of the Silmarils from the celestial light of the Two Trees, the theft of the Silmarils by Melkor and his accomplice Ungoliant through surprise and a spell of darkness, Fanors fateful oath that brings doom on the heads of his lineage and all who take possession of the Silmarils, the way in which the Silmarils burn the hands of all who touch them with less than pure intent, the separation of the three jewels when Beren and Lthien take one from Morgoths iron crown, the march of the Valar on Thangorodrim to overthrow Morgoth and regain the jewels, and Erendils appearance in the heavens in his sky ship with the Evening Star (Silmaril) on his brow. Of particular interest to this discussion is Christopher Tolkiens undertaking in assessing and assembling the Silmarillion materials. Charles E. Noads article, On the Construction of The Silmarillion, emphasizes the nature of the task Tolkien left behind for his literary executor and son. According to Noad, Christopher Tolkiens own introduction to the Silmarillion material admits of the underlying textual complexity at which the published version did not hint. This returns to the same Kalevala dilemma discussed in the beginning of this paper, that the source material is an assemblage of texts, each with its own history and provenance, and, by implication, a relationship between the world in which it is a text and the world of which the text itself speaks (32). Christopher Tolkiens Foreword to the rst volume of The Book of Lost Tales neatly sums up the many daunting challenges of his role as both executor and philologist-creator. In addressing both his own doubts and those of noted scholars about the publication of the 1977 single volume titled the Silmarillion, he noted the following: It is certainly debatable whether it was wise to publish in 1977 a version of the primary legendarium standing on 80

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

its own and claiming, as it were, to be self-explanatory. The published work has no framework, no suggestion of what it is and how (within the imagined world) it came to be. This I now think to have been an error. (Lost Tales I 5) As Christopher Tolkien headed into what could be considered his lifes work, The History of Middle-earth, he could not foresee then how many volumes and years it would take to adequately rein in the massive repository of his fathers imagination. Like Lnnrot before him, he expressed doubt that such a compendium would even be possible: I have applied to this present book an overriding title intended to cover also those that may follow it, though I fear that The History of Middleearth may turn out to have been over-ambitious (9). As it turns out, his ambitions were equal to the task and, like Lnnrot, the fearsome textual jigsaw puzzle became a widely acclaimed product that could only have been rendered by the unique combination of philological expertise and creative desire to learn and embrace a thing for its own sake. The Legacy of Lnnrots Kalevala and Tolkiens Legendarium Epic is about heroes making history, or what passes for history, wrote Keith Bosley in the introduction to his 1988 Kalevala translation (xiv). This exactly describes the nature of the argument this paper has investigated. The Kalevala and the mythology of Middle-earth were both compiled and invented by their authors, each of whom created a ctional framework upon which to hang their tales. Tolkiens invented world is presented with such authenticity and depth of detail that readers can easily imagine his having collected and transcribed the histories of Arda from ancient sources, which was his expressed intent: I have long ceased to invent. . . . I wait till I seem to know what really happened. Or till it writes itself (Letters 231). Where Lnnrot is concerned, one must be prepared to recognize both his tenacious skills as a collector and objective recorder of native folk poetry and his literary skill in fashioning an authentic cohesive framework for the epic from the raw materials of oral verses. In attempting to create a mythology for England, ostensibly to replace that which was lost during the Norman invasion and onward (Letters 144), Tolkien joined the ranks of other scholar/authors who wished to access national spirit through both research and literature. While it is clear that both Finlands language and national epic were among Tolkiens earliest sources of literary inspiration, what may not be as apparent are the ways in which temperament and creative output further connect all three philologist-creators under examination here. Like Lnnrots massive collection of over 65,000 lines of folk poetry (according to University

81

Anne C. Petty
of Helsinki Professor Matti Kuusi), the material comprising Tolkiens legendarium, including its underpinning mythology and evolving languages, threatened to spill out of his control (Letters 333). It would, in fact, prove to be greater than one person could master, eventually pulling son Christopher into its shaping as well. What readers absorb from these author/editors is a visiona sense of ancient times, told with realistic depth and detailthat reects universal themes and motifs of exuberance, contentiousness, warlike aggression, loyalty versus deception, wickedness and guilt, generosity and trust, innocence and the ensuing heartbreak over its loss. The heroes of these works seem real and awed, which makes their fate compelling. The longevity of both the Kalevala and J. R. R. Tolkiens published ction attests to the talents (as well as the obsessions) of these two similar authors, and, through the efforts of Christopher Tolkien, readers will likely be devouring the majesty of the Silmarillion tales and the desperation of the Ring quest, as well as the mystery of the Sampo, well into the new millennium. Comparison of Lnnrot and Tolkien as mediators of literature and language reveals scholars with a similar obsessive attention to detail and a similar taste for epic sweep and high tragedy. Although Lnnrot succeeded in completing what most consider his masterwork during his lifetime, and Tolkien did not (if you consider the Silmarillion material his lifes work), the challenges and difculties each encountered were driven by the same grandiose vision of a literary epic drawn from the national character of their respective countries. By adding Christopher Tolkiens twelve-volume History into the mix, the cycle is now complete. WORKS CITED Carpenter, Humphrey. J. R. R. Tolkien: A Biography. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1977. Bosley, Keith, trans. The Kalevala, compiled by Elias Lnnrot, 1849. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989. Branch, Michael. Kalevala: from myth to symbol. Written for Virtual Finland, www.virtualnland.com, by Professor Michael Branch, School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University of London, March 9, 2000. Flieger, Verlyn, and Carl F. Hostetter, eds. Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle-earth. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000.

82

Identifying Englands Lnnrot

Friberg, Eino, trans. The Kalevala: Epic of the Finnish People, compiled by Elias Lnnrot. 1849. Helsinki: Otava Publishing Company, Ltd., 1988. Hammond, Wayne G., and Christina Scull. J. R. R. Tolkien: Artist & Illustrator. Boston: Houghton Mifin Company, 1995. Helms, Randel. Tolkien and the Silmarils. Boston: Houghton Mifin Company, 1981. Himes, Jonathan B. What Tolkien Really Did with the Sampo. Mythlore 22, no. 4 (2000): 69-85. Honko, Lauri. Textualization of Oral Epics. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000. Huuskonen, Marjut. Making the Brilliants Shine: The Kalevala and the Worlds Traditional Epics. Folklore Fellows Network 18 (November 1999): 16-21. Jones, Michael Owen, ed. The Kalevala: Essays in Celebration of the 150 Year Jubilee of the Publication of the Finnish National Epic. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for the Study of Folklore & Mythology, 1987. Karni, Michael G., and Aili Jarvenpa, eds. Sampo: The Magic Mill. Minneapolis: New Rivers Press, 1989. Kirby, W. F., trans. Kalevala: The Land of the Heroes, compiled by Elias Lnnrot, 1849. New York: E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc., 1907. Kuusi, Matti, Keith Bosley, and Michael Branch, eds. Finnish Folk Poetry: Epic. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society, 1977. Kvideland, Reimund, and Henning K. Sehmsdorf, eds. Nordic Folklore: Recent Studies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989. Magoun, Francis Peabody Jr., trans. The Kalevala or Poems of the Kaleva District, compiled by Elias Lnnrot, 1849. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1963. Noad, Charles. On the Constructions of The Silmarillion. In Tolkiens Legendarium, edited by Verlyn Flieger and Carl F. Hostetter. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. Oinas, Felix J. Studies in Finnic Folklore: Homage to the Kalevala. Indiana University Uralic and Altaic Series 147. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura, 1985. Pentikainen, Juha Y. Kalevala Mythology, translated by Ritva Poom. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1989. 83

Anne C. Petty
Schooleld, George C., ed. A History of Finlands Literature. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998. Shippey, Tom. J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2001. ______. The Road to Middle-earth. 2nd ed. London: Grafton, 1992.

84

A Middle English Version By J.R.R. Tolkien

Sir Orfeo:

Edited, with introduction and notes by

CARL F. HOSTETTER

Introduction

n 1944, the Academic Copying Ofce in Oxford published an unknown (but presumably small) number of copies of an anonymous, twentypage booklet titled Sir Orfeo. The rst sixteen pages of this booklet comprise a version of the Middle English poem that, while based for the most part on the text of the fourteenth-century Auchinleck Manuscript, has been altered and emended throughout in accordance with the grammar of the earlier South-Eastern dialect of Middle English. The result is a Middle English version of the poem that is not only, as the booklets author observes, much more metrical than that of Auchinleck, but thatif the authors theory that the poem was composed in Essex in the thirteenth century is accurateis closer to what must have been the original form of the poem than are any of the three surviving manuscripts, which have been infected . . . with the forms of later language and different dialect. Although the booklet itself does not bear its authors name, it has been identied as a work by J.R.R. Tolkien. In their J.R.R. Tolkien: A Descriptive Bibliography, Wayne G. Hammond and Douglas A. Anderson note of this booklet that one of the ve known copies, held by the English Faculty library at Oxford, contains a note, reported to be in Tolkiens hand, which states that this edition of Sir Orfeo was prepared for the naval cadets course in English, which Tolkien organized in January 1943 and directed until the end of March 1944 (209). Hammond and Anderson further report the existence of three other copies of the booklet in which the lines of the poem have been numbered in pencil, by tens, in what appears to be Tolkiens hand. Two of these copies have in addition a few textual emendations in pencil, again apparently in Tolkiens hand. It is upon one of these two emended copies that the present edition is based.
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

85

Carl F. Hostetter
J.R.R. Tolkiens Middle English version and Modern English translation The attribution to Tolkien of this Middle English version of Sir Orfeo and its brief accompanying note is further supported by certain similarities with Tolkiens Modern English verse translation of Sir Orfeo and its brief accompanying note, published posthumously in the book Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Pearl, and Sir Orfeo (23, 12337).1 Both notes locate the composition of the poem in the South-East of England,2 and both notes use precisely the same phrase in describing the transmission of the poem as having been subject to the corruptions of error and forgetfulness. Comparison of the poems themselves reveals, in addition to striking correspondences of formatting and punctuation,3 a number of instances in which Tolkiens translation departs from the texts of the surviving manuscripts in precisely the same manner that the Middle English version does: (In the following comparisons, V = the Middle English version of the booklet, T = Tolkiens translation, A = Auchinleck MS, H = MS Harley 3810. Both V and T use A as the source for all lines except 124 and 3346, which are supplied by H.) l. 4: H has frely ing where V has ferly thing. In his note on this line Sisam glosses frely as goodly, and remarks that the Lai le Freine (a poem of the Auchinleck MS that has essentially the same opening lines as the H version of Sir Orfeo) has here ferly, which he glosses as wondrous (209). In his companion Vocabulary, Tolkien glosses frely in Sisams text as pleasant (deriving it from Old English frolic of the same meaning) and ferly in Sisams note as wonderful (< OE fr-lice suddenly), corresponding to a noun of the same form that he glosses as marvel. T has marvellous thing, suggesting that the ME form underlying the translation is ferly, and hence agreeing with V against the MS. l. 82: A has out of hir witt out of her wit where V (correcting a defective rhyme) has out of mende out of mind. T has out of mind. ll. 241, 245, 249: A has He at hadde ywerd He that had worn, He at hadde had castels He that had had castles, and He at had yhad knites He that had had knights, respectively, each a relative construction employing the pronoun at. V has He hadde ywered He had worn, He hadde had castels He had had castles, and He hadde yhad knites He had had knights, respectively, in each case dropping the relative pronoun (presumably to improve the meter). T has He once had . . . worn, He once had castles, and He once had many a . . . knight, respectively, like V omitting the relative that. 86

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

l. 265: A has His here of his berd, blac His hair of his beard, black where V has His her and berd, all blake His hair and beard, all black. T has His hair and beard all black. l. 368: A has was all of burnist gold was all of burnished gold, while V has was maked al of burnissed golde was made all of burnished gold. T has was builded all of burnished gold. l. 381: A has what he wold haue ydo what he would have done, while V (correcting a defective rhyme) has what his wille were what his will were. T has what might be his will. l. 392: A has non armes nade no arms had, while V has no fet no armes nadde no feet nor arms had. T has [had] no arms, nor feet. Other examples could be cited, but these are the most striking. It should be noted that there are instances where the translation agrees with the MS against the Middle English version (e.g., in l. 419, A has O lord, he seyd, if it i wille were where V has and seide: O lord, if thi wille were; while T has O lord, said he, if it be thy will), and it must be allowed that a verse translation necessarily makes concessions to language and meter that may obscure or falsely emphasize details of the relationship between the source(s) and the translation. Nonetheless, these examples strongly suggest that Tolkiens translation of Sir Orfeo was based at least in part on the booklets emended Middle English version. The date of Tolkiens Modern English translation of Sir Orfeo does not appear to have been established with much precision. Christopher Tolkien wrote, in his Preface to Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Pearl, and Sir Orfeo only that it was, like the c. 1944 Pearl and the c.1950 Sir Gawain, also made many years ago (7). Concerning Basil Blackwells ultimately unrealized plans of c. 1942-44 to publish Tolkiens translation of Pearl, see Hammond and Andersons Bibliography (32123). The Bodleian Library catalogue of its Tolkien manuscript holdings has the following entry: A33/1 Typescript and manuscript transcripts and translations of Sir Orfeo [fols. 1-47], with . . . various drafts of the translation of Pearl, with . . . letters from (Sir) Basil Blackwell about the translation, 1942-4; but while it may be more than mere archival accident that Tolkiens transcripts and translations of Sir Orfeo are located with letters of 1942-44 concerning his work on another Middle English poem, this evidence is circumstantial at best. Humphrey Carpenters statement that Tolkien had originally translated [Sir Orfeo] for a wartime cadets course at Oxford (141) would, if accurate, seem to demonstrate that Tolkien produced both his Middle English version and his translation of Sir Orfeo for the naval cadets course, i.e., c. 1943-44. But it may be that Carpenter has simply confused Tolkiens translation with the present Middle English version. 87

Carl F. Hostetter
However, that Tolkiens translation appears to be based at least in part on his Middle English version of 1944 strongly suggests that it was made in or after 1944. There is in addition one piece of evidence internal to the translation that suggests very strongly that it was made before 1945: lines 36364 of the translation (The vault was carven and adorned / with beasts and birds and gures horned) show that when he translated them Tolkien still read animal animal in l. 364 for a form that was corrected to aumal enamel in a 1945 revision to his Middle English Vocabulary (see the Appendix below for details). If the translation was in fact based on his 1944 Middle English version of the poem, it is then very likely that the translation was likewise made in, or not long before, 1944. Tolkiens version and Sisams edition In 1922, Tolkien published A Middle English Vocabulary, his rst book, which comprised a complete glossary of the Middle English poems included by his colleague and former tutor Kenneth Sisam in his Fourteenth Century Verse and Prose, which was rst published the previous year. (Tolkiens Vocabulary was intended to be published together with Sisams collection as a single volume, but delays in the Vocabularys preparation resulted in their separate initial publications.) Among the poems in Sisams collection is an edition of Sir Orfeo. Tolkiens version follows Sisams edition very closely, not only in formatting and punctuation, but also in sharing certain readings that, according to Bliss, are original to Sisams edition, as well as in adopting most of Sisams editorial revisions and suggestions. (In the following comparisons, V = Tolkiens Middle English version of the booklet, S = Sisams edition, A = Auchinleck MS, H = MS Harley 3810. Both S and V use A as the source for all lines except 124 and 3346, which are supplied by H.) Sisam notes that the original text preserved nal -e better than the extant MSS (208), and provides the following examples of restored readings: l. 119: And seyd<> us e king<> to l. 172: at noing help<> e no schal l. 357: Al e vt<>mast<> wal l. 466: So, sir, as e seyd<> nou Tolkiens version of these lines agrees with Sisams restoration of nal -e precisely. It seems possible to suppose that Tolkiens impetus to produce an emended version of Sir Orfeo originated in this note. 88

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

l. 4: H, S have frely goodly, but Sisam notes that Lai le Freine has ferly wondrous (208). V has ferly. l. 12: H has moost to lowe, which S emends to moost o loue based on the corresponding line of the Lai le Freine (208). V has moost of loue. l. 20: H, S have Maden layes and af it name. Sisam remarks that the curious use of it after the plural layes is perhaps not original (209). V has sg. lay. l. 46: H, S have Suche ioy and melody in his harpyng is. Sisam remarks that ioy and overload the verse, and are probably an unskilful addition to the text (209). V has such melodie. . . . l. 82: S has reuey<se>d but Sisam suggests that some such form of ravished is probably right (209). V has rauissed. ll. 1578: A, S have the rhymes palays: ways. Sisam suggests that the original rhyme was perhaps palys: wys wise. V has palise: wise. l. 247: A, S have comensi. Of this line, Sisam notes that the metre points to a disyllabic form . . . comsi (209 n. 57). V has cmsi. l. 285: S, V have dim. Bliss notes that Sisam was the rst to print dim, where earlier editors had written dun (53). l. 333: A has wroche, which S emends to wreche (and was apparently the rst to do so, judging by Blisss note [53] in which he takes Sisam to task for emending what he notes is a genuine form). V has wreche. l. 363: A has auowed, which S emends to anow<rn>ed, a reading adopted by Tolkien as Vs anourned. l. 419: A, S have O lord, he seyd, if it i wille were. Sisam remarks that this line is too long metrically, and suggests that it may once have been: And seyd Lord, if i wille were (210 n. 382). V has and seide: O lord, if thi wille were. l. 483: A has Bot wi a begger ybilt ful narwe, which S emends to Bot wi a begger y<n> bilt ful narwe. Sisam explains that ybilt of the MS. and editors cannot well be a pp. meaning housed. I prefer to take bilt as sb. = bild, build a building; and to suppose that y has been miswritten for , the contraction for yn (211). V has but with a begger in bilt ful narwe. Taken together, these comparisons indicate that Tolkiens Middle English version of Sir Orfeo was based on Kenneth Sisams edition, while his Modern English translation was based on his own Middle English version; and further that the translation was, like the version, made in 1944.

89

Carl F. Hostetter Sir Orfeo We reden ofte and nde ywrite, as clerkes don us to wite, the layes that ben of harping ben yfounde of ferly thing. Sum ben of wele, and sum of wo, and sum of ioye and merthe also; sum of trecherie, and sum of gile, and sum of happes that fallen by while; sum of bourdes, and sum of ribaudrie, and sum ther ben of the fairie. Of alle thing that men may se, moost of loue forsothe they be. In Britain thise layes arn ywrite, rst yfounde and forth ygete, of aventures that llen by dayes, wherof Britouns made her layes. When they owher mighte yheren of aventures that ther weren, they toke her harpes tho with game, maden lay and af it name. Of aventures that han befalle I can sum telle but nout alle. Herkne, lordinges that ben trewe, and I wol ou telle of Sir Orphewe. Orfeo was yore a king, in Ingelond a hei lording, a stalworth man and hardi bo, large and curteis he was also. His fader was cmen of King Pluto, and his moder com of King Iuno, that sum time were as godes holde for auentures that thai dede and tolde. [Orpheo most of onything loued the gle of harping; siker was euery god harpour of him to haue moche honour. Himselue loued for to harpe and laide theron his wittes scharpe.

10

20

30

Text of Sir Orfeo Copyright 2004, the J.R.R. Tolkien Copyright Trust

90

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

He lerned so, ther nothing was a better harpour in no plas; in the world was neuer man yborn that euer Orpheo sat beforn, and he mite of his harping here, he schulde thinke that he were in one of the ioyes of Paradis, suche melodie in his harping is.] This king soiourned in Traciens, that was a citee of noble defens; for Winchester was cleped tho Traciens withouten no. He hadde with him a quen of pris, that was ycleped Dame Heurodis, the fairest leuedi for the nones that mite gon on bodi and bones, ful of loue and godenesse; ac no man may telle hir fairnesse. Bifel in the cmessing of May, when miri and hot is the day, and oway beth winter-schoures, and eueri feld is ful of oures, and blosme breme on eueri bou oueral wexeth miri anou, this iche quen, Dame Heurodis, tok to hir maidenes two of pris and wente hir in an vndrentide to playe bi an orchard-side, to se the oures sprede and springe, and to yhere the foules singe. Thai sette hem doune alle thre vnder a fair ympe-tre, and wel sone this faire quene fel on slepe opon the grene. The maidnes durste hir nout awake, but lete hir ligge and reste take. So sche slepe til afternon, that vndertide was al ydon. Ac as sone as sche gan awake, sche cride and lothli bere gan make, sche froted hir honden and hir fet, and crached hir visage, it bledde wet; hir riche robe hye al torende,

40

50

60

70

80

91

Carl F. Hostetter
and was rauissed out of mende. The two maidnes hir biside no durste with hir leng abide, but ourne to the palais rit and tolde bothe squier and knit that her quen awede wolde, and bade hem go and hir atholde. Knites and leuedis ourne tho sexti damiseles and mo; in the orchard to the quen hye come, and her vp in her armes nome, to bed hye broute hir atte laste, and helde hir there ne faste; ac euer sche held in one cri, and wolde vp and wende owy. When Orfeo herde that tiding, neuer him nas wers for no thing. He com with knites tene to chaumbre rit biforn the quene, and biheld, and seide with grete pitee: O leue lif, what is tee, that euer et hast ben so stille, and now gredest wonder schille? Thi bodi, that was so whit ycore, with thine nailes is al totore. Allas! thi rde, that was so red, is now al wan as thou were ded; and also thine ngres smale beth al blodi and al pale. Allas! thi louesome eyen two loketh so man doth on his fo. A! dame, ich biseche merci. Let ben al this rewful cri, and tel me what the is, and hou, and what thing may the helpe now. Tho lay sche stille atte laste, and gan to wepe swithe faste, and seide thus the kinge to: Allas! mi lord, Sir Orfeo, seththen we rst togider were, ones wrothe neuer we nere, but euer ich haue ylued the as mi lif, and so thou me.

90

100

110

120

92

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

Ac now we mote dele atwo; do thi beste, for I mot go. Allas! quath he, forlorn icham. Whider wiltow go, and to wham? Whider thou gost, ichil with the, and whider I go, thou schalt with me. Nay, nay, sir, that nout nis. Ichil the telle al hou it is: as ich lay in this vndertide, and slepe vnder our orchard-side, ther come to me two faire knites wel y-armed al to rites, and bade me cmen an hiing and speke with her lord the king. And ich answerde at wordes bolde, I durste nout, no I nolde. Thai priked oain as thai mite driue; tho com her king also bliue, with an hundred knites and mo, and damiseles an hundred also, alle on snow-white stedes; as white as milk were her wedes: I no sei neuer et bifore so faire creatures ycore. The king a croune hadde on his molde, it nas of siluer, no of rede golde, ac it was al on precious ston, as brite so the snne it schon. And as sone as he to me cam, wolde ich, nolde ich, he me nam, and made me with him ride opon a palfray bi his side, and broute me to his palise wel atired in iche wise, and schewed me castels and tours, riuere, forest, frith with ours, and his riche stedes ichon; and seththen me broute oain hom into our owen orchard, and seide to me thus afterward: Loke, dame, that tow be to-morwe her vnder this ympe-tre, and than thou schalt with ous go,

130

140

150

160

93

Carl F. Hostetter
and liue with ous euermo; and if thou makest ous ylet, whar thou be, thou worst yfet, and totore thine limes al, that nothing helpe the no schal; and thei thou best so totorn, et thou worst with ous yborn. When King Orfeo herde this cas, O we! quath he, allas! allas! Leuer me were to lete mi lif than thus to lese the quen mi wif ! He asked conseil at iche man, ac no man helpe him no can. Amorwe the vndertide is cme, and Orfeo hath his armes nme, and wel ten hundred knit with him, ich y-armed stout and grim; and with the quene wenten he rit vnto that vmpe-tre. Thai made scheltrm in iche side, and saide thai wolde ther abide, and die there euerichon, er the quen schulde fram hem gon. Ac et amiddes hem ful rit the quene was oway ytwit, with faierie was forth ynme; men niste wher sche was bicme. Tho was ther crying, wep and wo. The king into his chaumbre is go, and ofte swoned opon the ston, and made swiche diol and swiche mon that nei his lif was al yspent: ther was non amendement. He cleped togider his barouns, erles, lordes of renouns; and when thai alle ycmen were, Lordinges, he saide, biforn ou here ich ordainy min heie steward to wite mi kingdom afterward; in mi stede ben he schal, to kepe mi londes oueral. For now ichaue mi quen ylore, the fairest leuedi that euer was bore,

170

180

190

200

210

94

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

neuer eft I nil no woman se. Into wildernesse ichil te, and liue ther euermore with wilde bestes in holtes hore. And when e vnderstonde that I be spent, make ou than a parlement, and chese ou a newe king. Now doth our best with al mi thing. Tho was ther weping in the halle and gret cri among hem alle; vnnethe miten olde or nge for weping speke a word with tnge. Thai kneled adoune alle yfere, and praide him, if his wille were, that he no schulde fram hem go. Do way! quath he, it schal be so. Al his kingdom he forsok; but a sclauine on him he tok; he nadde no kirtel, no no hod, scherte, no non other god. But his harpe he took algate, and dede him barfot out of ate; no man moste with him go. O way! what ther was wep and wo, when he that er was king with croune wente so pouerlich out of toune! Thurgh wode and ouer heth into the wildernesse he geth. Nothing he nt that him is aise, but euer he liueth in gret malaise. He hadde ywered fow and gris, and on bedde purpre bis; now on harde hethe he lith, with leues and with gresse him writh. He hadde yhad castels and tours, riuere, forest, frith with ours; now thei it cmsi snewe and frese, this king mot make his bed in mese. He hadde yhad knites of pris bifore him knelande, and leuedis; now seth he nothing that him liketh, but wilde wormes bi him striketh. He that hadde yhad plentee

220

230

240

250

95

Carl F. Hostetter
of mete and drink, of ich deintee, now may he al day digge and wrote er he nde his lle of rote. In smer he liueth bi wilde frute and berien but gode lite; in winter may he nothing nde but rote, grasses, and the rinde. Al his bodi was oway ydwine for misaise, and al to-chine. Lord! who may tellen al the sore this king suffred ten er and more? His her and berd, al blake and rowe, to his girdelstede were growe. His harpe, whereon was al his gle, he hidde in an holwe tre; and when the weder was cler and brit, he took his harpe to him wel rit, and harped at his owen wille. Into alle the wode the soun gan schille, that alle the wilde [bestes] that ther beth for ioie abouten him thai teth; and alle the foules that ther were come and sete on ich a brere to here his harping a-ne, so miche melodie was therine; and when he his harping lete wolde, no best bi him abide nolde. He mite se him bisides oft in hote vndertides the king o Faierie with his route cmen hunten him al aboute, with dim cri and blowinge, and houndes also berkinge; ac no best thai neuer nome, no neuer he niste whider thai bicome. And other while he mite him se as a gret ost bi him te wel atourned ten hundred knites, ich y-armed to his rites, of cuntenaunce stout and fers, with manie desplayed baners, and ich his swerd ydrawen holde; ac neuer he niste whider thai wolde.

260

270

280

290

96

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

And other while he sei other thing: knites and leuedis come dauncing in queinte atire, gisely, queinte pas and softely: tabours and trumpes ede hem bi and al manere menstraci. And on a day he sei him biside sexti leuedis on horse ride, gentil and iolif as brid on ris: nout o man amonges hem nis. And ich a faucoun on honde bere, and riden on hauking bi o riuere. Of game thai founde wel god haunt: maulard, hairoun, and cormeraunt. The foules of the water ariseth, the faucouns hem wel deuiseth; ich faucoun his praye slou. That sei Orfeo and lou: Parfay! quath he, ther is fair game, thider ichil, bi Godes name! Ich was ywne swiche werk to se. He aros and thider gan te. To a leuedi he was ycme, biheld, and hath wel vndernme, and seth bi al thing that it is his owen quen, Dame Heurodis. erne he biheld hir, and sche him ek, ac noither to other a word no spek. For misaise that sche on him sei, that hadde ben so riche and hei, the teres felle out of hir eien. The other leuedis this yseien, and maked hir oway to ride, sche most with him no leng abide. Allas! quath he, now me is wo. Whi nil deth now me slo? Allas! wreche, that I no mite die now after thisse site! Allas! to longe last mi lif, when I no dar nout with mi wif, no hye to me, o word speke. Allas! whi nil min herte breke! Parfay! quath he, tide what bitide, 97

300

310

320

330

Carl F. Hostetter
340 whider so thise leuedis ride, the selue way ichille strecche; of lif no deth me no recche. His sclauine he dede on also spac, and heng his harpe opon his bac, and hadde wel god wil to gon: he no spared noither stub no ston. In at a roche the leuedis rideth, and he after, and nout abideth. When he was in the roche ygo wel thre milen other mo, he com into a fair cuntraye, as brit so snne on smeres daye, smothe and plain and al grene, hille no dale nas non ysene. Amidde the londe a castel he sei, riche and real and wnder hei. Al the vtemaste wal was cler and schene as cristal; an hundred tours ther were aboute, degiseliche, and batailed stoute; the butras com out of the diche, of rede golde y-arched riche; the vousour was anourned al of ich manere diuers animal. Withinne ther were wide wones alle of preciouse stones. The werste piler on to biholde was maked al of burnissed golde. Al that lond was euer lit, for when it was the therke nit, the riche stones lite gnne, as brit as doth at none snne. No man may telle, no thenche in thout, the riche werk that ther was wrout; bi alle thing him thinkth it is the proude court of Paradis. In this castel the leuedis lite; he wolde in after, if he mite. Orfeo knokketh atte gate, the porter redi was therate, and asked what his wille were. Parfay! quath he, icham harpere,

350

360

370

380

98

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

thi lord to solace with mi gle, if his swete wille be. The porter vndede the ate anon, and let him in the castel gon. Than gan he biholde abouten al, and sei ther liggeand within the wal folk that thider were ybrout, and thoute dede and nere nout. Sum ther stode withouten hadde, and sum no fet no armes nadde, and sum thur bodi hadde wounde, and sum ther laye wode, ybounde, and sum y-armed on horse sete, and sum astrangled as thai ete, and sum in water were adreinte, and sum with re were forschreinte. Wiues ther laye on childbedde, sum were dede and sum awedde; and wnder fele ther laye bisides, rit as thai slepe her vndertides. Eche was thus in this warld ynme and thider with fairie ycme. Ther he sei his owen wif, Dame Heurodis, his leue lif, slepen vnder an ympe-tre: bi hir wede he knew that it was he. When he biheld thise meruailes alle, he wente into the kinges halle. Than sei he ther a semly sit, a tabernacle blissful, brit; therinne her maister king him sete, and her quene, fair and swete. Her crounes, her clothes, schine so brite that vnnethe biholden hem he mite. When he hadde biholden al that thing, he kneled adoune biforn the king, and seide: O lord, if thi wille were, mi menstraci thou schulde yhere. The king answerde: What man artow that art hider ycmen now? Ich, no non that is with me, no sente neuer after the; seththen that ich her regni gan,

390

400

410

420

99

Carl F. Hostetter
I no fond neuer so hardi man that hider to ous durste wende, but that ichim walde ofsende. Lord, quath he, trowe ful wel, I nam but a pouer menestrel; and, sir, it is the manere of ous to seche mani a lordes hous; thei we nout welcme be, et we mot proferi forth our gle. Biforn the king he sat adoune, and tok his harpe miri of soune, and tempreth it as he wel can, and blissfule notes he ther gan, that alle that in the palais were come to him for to here, and liggeth adoune to his fete, hem thenketh his melodie so swete. The king herkneth and sitt ful stille, to here his gle he hath god wille; god bourde he hadde of his gle, the riche quen also hadde he. When he hadde stint harping, seide to him than the king: Menstrel, me liketh wel thi gle. Now aske of me what it be, largeliche ichil the paye. Now speke, and tow mit assaye. Sir, he seide, ich biseche the thattow woldest iue me that iche leuedi brit on ble that slepeth vnder the ympe-tre. Nay, quath the king, that nout nere! A sori couple of ou it were, for thou art lene, row, and blac, and sche is louesum withouten lac; a lothlich thing it were forthi to sen hir in thi cmpaini. O sir, he seide, gentil king, et were it a wel fouler thing to here a lesing of thi mouthe, so, sir, as e seide nouthe, what ich wolde aski, haue I scholde, and nedes thi word thou most holde.

430

440

450

460

100

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

The king seide: Seththen it is so, take hir bi the hond and go; of hir ichil thattow be blithe. He kneled adoune, and thonked him swithe; his wif he tok bi the honde, and dede him swithe out of that londe, and wente him oute of that thede: rit as he com the way he ede. So long he hath the way ynme, to Winchester he is ycme, that was his owen citee; ac no man knew that it was he. No forther than the tounes ende for knoweleche no durste he wende, but with a begger in bilt ful narwe ther he tok his herbarwe to him and to his owen wif, as menestrel of pouer lif, and asked tidinges of that londe and who the kingdom held in honde. The pouer begger in his cot tolde him euerich a grot: hou her quen was stole owy ten er ygon with faiery; and hou her king en exile ede, but no man wiste in whiche thede; and hou the steward the lond gan holde; and other mani thing him tolde. Amorwe, oain the none-tide, he maked his wif ther abide; the beggeres clothes he borwed anon, and heng his harpe his rigge opon, and wente him into that citee, that men mite him biholde and se. Erles and barounes bolde, buriais and leuedis gunne him biholde. Lo! thai seide, swiche a man! Hou long the her hongth him opan! Lo, hou his berd hongth to his kne! He is yclnge also a tre! And as he ede bi the strete, with his steward he gan mete, and loude he sette on him a cri:

470

480

490

500

510

101

Carl F. Hostetter
Sir steward, he seide, merci! Icham an harpour of hethenesse; help me now in this destresse! The steward seide: Cm with me, cm! Of that ichaue thou schalt haue sm. Euerich harpour is welcme me to for mi lordes loue Sir Orfeo. In castel the steward sat atte mete, and mani lording was bi him sete. Ther were trmpours and tabourers, harpours fele and crouders. Miche melodie thai maked alle, and Orfeo sat stille in halle, and herkneth. When thai ben al stille, he tok his harpe and tempred schille, the blisfulest notes he harped there that euer man yherde with ere; ich man liked wel his gle. The steward biheld and gan y-se, and knew the harpe also bliue. Menstrel, he seide, so mote thou thriue, wher haddestow this harpe and hou? I praye thattow me telle now. Lord, quath he, in vncouthe thede, thur a wildernesse as I ede, ther I founde in a dale with liouns a man totore smale, and wolues him frete with tethe scharpe. Bi him I nd this iche harpe; wel ten er it is ygo. O, quath the steward, now me is wo! That was mi lord Sir Orfeo. Allas! wreche, what schal I do, that haue swiche a lord ylore? A way! that euer ich was ybore! that him was so harde grace yarked, and so vile deth ymarked! Adoune he fel aswon to grounde. His barouns him tok vp in that stounde and telleth him hou it geth it is no bot of mannes deth. King Orfeo knew wel bi than his steward was a trewe man

520

530

540

550

102

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

and loued him as he aute do, and stont vp and seith thus: Lo, Steward, herkne now this thing: if ich were Orfeo the king, and hadde ysuffred ful ore in wildernesse miche sore, and hadde ywnne mi quen owy out of the londe of faiery, and hadde ybrout the leuedi hende rit here to the tounes ende, and with a begger her in ynme, and were miselue hider ycme pouerliche to the, thus stille, for to assaye thi gode wille, and if ich founde the thus trewe, no schulde thow it neuer rewe: sikerliche, for loue or aye, thou schulde be king after mi daye. And if of mi deth thou hadde ben blithe, thou schulde haue voided also swithe. Tho alle that therinne sete that it was King Orfeo vnderete, and the steward him wel yknew; ouer and ouer the bord he threw, and fel adoune to his fete; so dede euerich lord that there sete, and alle seide at o crying: e beth our lord, sir, and our king! Glade thai weren of his liue. To chaumbre thai ladde him also bliue, and bathed him and schof his berd, and tired him as king apert. And seththen with gret processioun thai broute the quen into the toun with al manere menstracie. O lord! ther was gret melodie! For ioie thai wepe with her eien that hem so sounde ycmen seien. Now Orfeo newe corouned is, and eke his quen Dame Heurodis, and longe liued afterward, and seththen king was the steward.

560

570

580

590

103

Carl F. Hostetter
Harpours in Bretaine after than herde hou this meruaile bigan, and made herof a lay of god liking and nempned it after the king: that lay is Orfeo yhote, god is the lay, swete is the note. Thus com Sir Orfeo out of care. God graunte ous alle wel to fare.

600

[Tolkiens editorial note] There are three MSS. of this poem: A (Auchinleck, before 1350); H (Harley, fteenth century); B (Bodleian, Ashmole, fteenth century). The introduction, lines 124, and also lines 3346, are from H. The rest of this version is based on A, though the spelling has in a few points been altered, and nal -e has been restored or omitted in accordance with the grammar of earlier Southern English. In a few cases the lines have been emended by small changes, especially of word-order. The result is a much more metrical version than that offered even by MS. A, though several lines (as e.g. 96) remain obviously defective and corrupt. The defective rhymes of the MSS. in lines 812 (torett witt); 14950 (on hed gold red); 1578 (palays ways); 3812 (he wolde haue ydo a minstrel, lo!) have been remodelled in accordance with evidence supplied by other poems of the same MS. (A) or of similar date and origin. Some rhymes, however, remain defective, as for instance 413 sete (for the sg. sat) with 414 swete. Sir Orfeo appears to be a translation or adaptation made from a now lost Old French original in the thirteenth century in the South-East of England (that is probably in Essex); but it passed through several hands of copyists, or the mouths of reciters, between the author and the oldest surviving MS., and these, in addition to the corruptions of error and forgetfulness, have infected it with the forms of later language and different dialect: the inuence of Northern and (probably) South-Western dialect can be detected in MS. A. The original appears to have used the old native form hye or he for sche and they (thai), though these are the forms used in the MS. in all but a few cases (note the rhyme in 1856). MS. A uses throughout for the th that is here substituted. is used for gh in the middle or ends of words; at the beginning of words it is the equivalent of modern y, as also in compounds: as vnderete = underyete, 576. Comparison of readings With the exception of Tolkiens substitution of th for throughout, his indications of short , and differences of single vs. double quote, all 104

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

differences of orthography, form, word-order, and punctuation between Tolkiens version and Sisams edition (imprint of 1928) are indicated, as of course are all additions by Tolkien. These notes, therefore, when used in conjunction with Tolkiens Middle English Vocabulary, provide a key to Tolkiens own gloss for nearly all forms. In the few cases where Sisams edition differs in a signicant manner from Blisss edition (1954), this is also indicated. In these indications citations from Tolkiens version are given in bold before a square bracket; those from the editions follow in italics. Readings from Blisss edition are preceded by an abbreviation indicating the source MS: A = Auchinleck; B = Ashmole 61 (Bodleian 6922); H = Harley 3810; L = Lay le Freyne (Auchinleck f.261a ff.). Lines 124: These lines, and ll. 33-46, corrupt in A, are provided by H. Sisam also gives these lines from H. 1. reden] redyn. nde ywrite] fynde ywryte. 2. us] H vs. wite] wyte. 3. harping] harpyng. 4. ferly] frely. Cf. Sisams note: Lai le Freine has ferly wondrous (208). 6. ioye] H joy; L ioie. Lines 78: These lines follow ll. 910 in H. Sisam likwise transposes these lines. This ordering agrees with that of the corresponding lines of L: Sum bee of wer and sum of wo, and sum of ioie and mire al-so, and sum of trecherie and of gile, of old auentours at fel while. 7. trecherie] trechery. gile] gyle. 8. while] whyle. 9. bourdes] bourdys. ribaudrie] rybaudry; H rybaudy. 10. fairie] feyr. 12. of loue] o loue; H to lowe; L o loue. 13. Britain thise] Brytayn is. arn] arne. ywrite] ywryte; H y-wrytt. 14. rst] furst. forth] fore. 15. llen] H fallen. 16. Britouns] Brytouns. 17. owher mighte yheren] myght owher heryn; H myt owher heryn. 18. weren] weryn. 19. harpes tho with] harpys wi. 20. lay] layes. Cf. Sisams note: The curious use of it after the plural 105

Carl F. Hostetter
layes is perhaps not original. Lai le Freine has: And maked a lay and yaf it name (209). 22. I] Y. telle ] telle, . alle] all. 23. Herkne, lordinges] Herken, lordyngys. 24. I] y. Sir] H Syr. 25. was yore a king] was a king; A was a kinge. 26. Ingelond a hei] Inglond an heie. 28. curteis] curteys. 30. moder com of] moder of. 31. holde ] yhold, . 32. auentures] auentours. tolde] told. Lines 3346: These lines, corrupt in A, are provided by H. Sisam also gives these lines from H. 33. onything] ony ing. 34. loued] louede; H lovede. harping] harpyng. 35. siker] syker. god] gode. harpour] harpoure; H harpure. 36. him] hym. honour] honoure; H honour. 37. Himselue] Hymself. harpe ] harpe, . 38. laide] layde. 39. lerned] lernyd; H lerned. 40. harpour] harper. 41. yborn] born. 42. euer] H onus. Bliss notes that All editors except Ritson [Ancient Engleish Metrical Romances, 1802] have printed euer for the onus of the manuscript (55). beforn] byforn. 43. mite] myt. harpyng] harping. here] H her. 44. were] H wer. 45. ioyes] ioys. Paradis] Paradys. 46. harping] harpyng. suche melodie] suche ioy and melody. Cf. Sisams note: ioy and overload the verse, and are probably an unskilful addition to the text (209). 47. soiourned] soiournd. 48. citee] cit. 51. He hadde with him] e king hadde. pris] priis. With Tolkiens metrically improved version cp. the corresponding lines of H: He ha a quene, ful feyre of pris; and of B: And with hym hys quen off price. 52. Heurodis] Herodis; A Heurodis. 53. leuedi for the nones ] leuedi, for e nones, . 106

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

54. mite] mit. 55. and godenesse] and of godenisse. 56. fairnesse] fairnise. 57. Bifel in] Bifel so in. 59. schoures] schours. 60. oures] ours. 63. iche] ich. 64. tok to hir maidenes two of pris ] Tok to maidens of priis, . With Tolkiens metrically improved version cp. the corresponding line of H: Toke with hur ii. maydenes of pris. 65. wente hir in] went in. 66. playe] play. orhcard-side] orchard side. 67. springe] spring. 68. yhere] here. singe] sing. 69. sette] sett. doune alle] doun al. 71. faire] fair. 72. maidnes durste] maidens durst. 74. but] bot. reste] rest. 75. afternon] afternone. 76. ydon] ydone. 78. cride] crid. 80. bledde wet] bled wete. 81. torende] torett. 82. rauissed] reuey<se>d; A reueyd. Cf. Sisams note: reuey<se>d or some such form of ravished is probably right (209); and cp. B ravysed. out of mende] out of hir witt. 83. two] tvo. maidnes] maidens. 84. durste] durst. hir leng] hir no leng. 85. but ourne] bot ourn. palais rit] palays ful rit. 86. tolde] told. 87. wolde] wold. 88. bade] bad. atholde] athold. 89. Knites and leuedis ourne tho] Knites vrn, and leuedis also, . 90. sexti damiseles] damisels sexti. mo; ] mo, . 91. quen] A quene. 93. to bed hye broute hir] and brout hir to bed. laste] last. 94. helde] held. faste] fast.

107

Carl F. Hostetter
95. one] o. 96. wolde] wold. and wende owy] and owy. 97. herde] herd. 99. com] come. 100. chaumbre] chaumber. biforn] bifor. 101. seide] seyd. pitee] pit. 102. leue lif] lef liif. Cf. Sisams note concerning this line: O lef liif (where the metre indicates leu for the original) (287). tee] te. 103. et] ete. 105. whit] white. 108. is now al] is al. 111. louesome] louesom. two] to. 114. Let] Lete. rewful] reweful. 116. helpe] help. 117. laste] last. 118. faste] fast. 119. seide] seyd. kinge] king. 122. wrothe] wro. 123. but] bot. 124. lif] liif. 125. mote] mot. dele atwo] delen ato. 126. beste] best. I] y. 130. I] y. 131. nis. ] nis; . 133. lay in this] lay is. 135. two faire] to fair. 136. wel] wele. 137. bade] bad. hiing] heiing. 138. king] A kinge. 139. answerde] answerd. bolde] bold. 140. I durste] Y durst; A Y no durst. I nolde] y nold. 141. mite] mit. 144. damiseles] damisels. 145. alle] al. snow] snowe. 146. milk] milke. 147. I] Y. sei] seie. et] ete. 148. faire creatures] fair creatours. 108

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

149. a croune hadde on his molde] hadde a croun on hed. 150. rede golde] gold red. 151. al on] of a. 152. brite so] brit as. 153. sone] son. 154. wolde] wold. nolde[ nold. 156. palfray ] palfray, . 157. broute] brout. palise] palays. 158. wel atired in iche wise] wele atird in ich ways. With ll. 15758 cf. Sisams note: The original rime was perhaps palys: wys wise (209); and cp. H palys: y-wys. 160. riuere, forest] riuers, forestes. Cf. l. 246. 162. broute] brout. 163. owen] owhen. 164. seide] said. 165. dame, that tow] dame, to-morwe atow. Cf. Sisams note to l. 102: assimilation of unlike sounds, as atow 165 for at ow (209). 166. to-morwe her] rit here. With Tolkiens metrically improved version of ll. 16566 cp. the corresponding lines of B: And seyd, Madam, loke at thou be / to-morow here, vnder ys tre. 172. helpe] help. 173. thei] ei. 174. et] ete. 175. herde] herd. 177. lif] liif. 178. wif] wiif. 179. conseil] conseyl. iche] ich. 180. helpe him] him help. With Tolkiens metrically improved version cp. the corresponding line of B: Bot no man helpe hym ne canne. 182. nme] ynome. Cp. H name, B nam. 183. wel] wele. knit] knites. him, ] him . 185. quene] quen. 187. iche] ich a. 188. saide] sayd. wolde ther] wold ere. 189. die there] dye er. 190. schulde] schuld. Cf. l. 225. 191. et] ete. 192. quene] quen. ytwit] ytuit; A y-tvit. 109

Carl F. Hostetter
193. faierie was forth] fairi for. 194. niste wher] wist neuer wher. With Tolkiens metrically improved version cp. the corresponding line of B: The ne wyst wer sche was com. 195. crying] criing. wep] wepe. 196. chaumbre] chaumber. 197. ofte] oft. 199. nei] neie. lif] liif. was al yspent] was yspent. 202. erles] erls. 203. alle] al. 204. saide] said. biforn] bifor. 208. oueral] ouer al. 209. For ] For, . 211. I] y. 212. wildernesse] wildernes. 215. vnderstonde] vnderstond. I] y. 218. thing. A inge. 219. weping] wepeing. halle ] halle, . 220. gret] grete. 221. miten olde or nge] mit old or ong. 222. weping] wepeing. tnge] tong. 223. adoune alle] adoun al. 224. praide] praid. 225. schulde fram] schuld nout fram. Cf. l. 190. 227. forsok] forsoke. 228. but] bot. sclauine] sclauin. tok] toke. 229. nadde no kirtel, no no hod] no hadde kirtel no hode. 230. scherte, no non other god] schert, <no> no noer gode. 231. But] Bot. harpe] harp. took] tok. 232. of] atte. 233. moste] most. 234. wep] wepe. 235. he that er was king] he, at hadde ben king. croune ] croun, . 236. wente] went. toune] toun. 237. Thurgh] urch; A urth. 238. wildernesse] wildernes. 239. aise] ays. 110

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

240. but] bot. malaise] malais. 241. He hadde ywered fow and gris] He at hadde ywerd e fowe and griis. 242. bedde purpre bis; ] bed e purper biis, . 243. harde] hard. 244. and with gresse him] and gresse he him. 245. He hadde yhad] he at hadde had. 246. riuere] riuer. Cf. l. 160. 247. now thei] now, ei. cmsi snewe] comenci to snewe. Cf. Sisams note to l. 57: The metre points to . . . comsi in l. 247 (209). 249. He hadde yhad] He at had yhad. pris] priis. 250. bifore] bifor. knelande] kneland. leuedis; ] leuedis, . 252. but] bot. 253. hadde] had. plentee] plent. 254. deintee] deynt. 257. wilde frute] wild frut. 258. but] bot. 260. but] bot. grasses] grases. 261. ydwine] duine. 262. misaise] missays. to-chine] tochine. 263. tellen al the] telle e. 264. suffred] sufferd. er] ere. 265. her and berd, al blake] here of his berd, blac. 266. were] was. 267. harpe] harp. 269. and when] and, when. cler] clere. 270. took] toke. harpe] harp. 271. owen] owhen. 273. It is unclear why Tolkien has bracketed [bestes]. It appears in A, and has no brackets in Sisam. 276. brere ] brere, . 277. a-ne] ane. 278. melodie] melody. therine] erin. 279. wolde] wold. 280. nolde] nold. 281. mite] mit. 282. hote] hot.

111

Carl F. Hostetter
283. Faierie] fairy. route] rout. 284. cmen hunten] com to hunt. aboute] about. 285. blowinge] bloweing. 286. berkinge] wi him berking. 287. neuer] no. 288. niste] nist. 289. mite] mit. 291. wel] wele. 294. manie desplayed] mani desplaid. 295. ydrawen holde; ] ydrawe hold, . 296. niste] nist. wolde] wold. 297. sei] seie. 298. come dauncing] com daunceing. 299. queinte] queynt. 300. queinte] queynt. softely: ] softly; . 301. trumpes] trunpes. bi ] bi, . 302. manere] maner. 303. sei] seie. 304. horse] hors. 305. ris: ] ris, . 306. nis] er nis. 307. honde] hond. 308. hauking] haukin. 309. god] gode. haunt: ] haunt, . 310. maulard, hairoun] maulardes, hayroun. cormeraunt. ] cormeraunt; . 311. The] e. 312. wel] wele. 313. praye] pray. 314. sei] seie. Orfeo ] Orfeo, . 317. ywne] ywon. 318. aros ] aros, . 320. wel] wele. 322. owen] owhen. Dame] Dam. 323. erne] ern. ek] eke. 324. spek] speke. 325. misaise] messais. sei] seie. 112

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

326. hadde] had. hei] so heie. 327. felle] fel. hir eien] her eie. 328. yseien] yseie. 330. leng] lenger. 333. wreche] A wroche. I] y. mite] mit. 334. die] dye. thisse site] is sit. 335. longe] long. lif] liif. 336. I] y. wif] wiif. 338. herte breke!] hert breke? 339. what] wat. 340. thise] is. 341. ichille strecche] ichil streche. 342. lif] liif. recche] reche. 343. sclauine] sclauain. 344. heng] henge. harpe] harp. 345. hadde] had. god] gode. gon: ] gon, . 346. spared] spard. 350. wel] wele. milen] mile. 351. cuntraye] cuntray. 352. smeres daye] somers day. 354. nas non] nas er non. 355. londe] lond. sei] sie. 356. real and] real, and. hei] heie. 357. vtemaste] vtmast. 358. cler] clere. schene] schine (cf. the entry Schene in Tolkiens Vocabulary). 359. aboute] about. 360. degiseliche] degiselich. batailed stoute] bataild stout. 362. golde] gold. 363. anourned] anow<rn>ed. A auowed. Cf. Blisss note that Sisams emendation to anow[rn]ed fails to carry conviction (54). 364. manere] maner. animal] A aumal; see the Appendix. 365. Withinne] Wiin. were] wer. 366. alle] al. preciouse] precious. 367. werste] werst. 368. maked al] al. burnissed golde] burnist gold. 370. was the therke] schuld be erk and. 113

Carl F. Hostetter
371. lite] lit. 372. none snne] none e sonne. 375. alle] al. thinkth] ink at. 377. lite] alit. 378. wolde] wold. mite] mit. 380. redi was] was redi. 381. his wille were] he wold haue ydo. 382. harpere, ] a minstrel, lo! Cf. Sisams note to this line): The line is too long (210). 383. thi lord to solace] To solas i lord. 386. let] lete. in] into. 387. gan he] he gan. biholde] bihold. abouten] about. 388. sei ther] seie ful. Sisam indicates with daggers that ful in this line is a corruption; he suggests that perhaps ful should be deleted as a scribes anticipation of folk in the next line (210-11). 389. folk] of folk (see previous note). thider were] were ider. 390. thoute dede ] out dede, . nere] nare. 391. ther stode] stode. hadde] hade. 392. no fet no armes nadde] non armes nade. 393. thur urch; A urth. bodi] e bodi. 394. ther laye] lay. 395. y-armed] armed. horse] hors. 397. in water were adreinte] were in water adreynt. 398. were forschreinte] al forschreynt. 399. laye] lay. 400. were dede ] ded, . 401. laye] lay. 404. and thider with fairie] wi fairi ider. 405. sei] seie. owen wif] owhen wiif. 406. leue liif] lef liif. 407. slepen] slepe. 408. hir wede] her cloes. knew] knewe. 409. When he biheld thise meruailes] And when he hadde bihold is meruails. 410. wente] went. 411. sei] seie. 412. blissful, brit; ] blisseful and brit..

114

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

413. therinne] erin. him sete] sete. 414. quene, ] quen. 415. brite ] brit, . 416. biholden hem he mite] bihold he hem mit. 418. adoune biforn] adoun bifor. king, ] king. . 419. and seide: O lord, if thi wille were] O lord, he seyd, if it i wille were. Cf. Sisams note to l. 382: l. 419 may once have been: And seyd Lord, if i wille were. (210); also note B: And seyd: Lord, and i wyll were. 420. schulde] schust. 421. answerde] answerd. artow ] artow. 424. sente] sent. 425. her] here. 426. I] Y. hardi] folehardi. 427. durste] durst. 428. but] bot. walde] wald. 430. I] Y. but] bot. menestrel] menstrel. 431. manere] maner. 433. thei] ei. welcme] welcom no. 434. et] ete. 435. Biforn] Bifor. adoune] adoun. 436. harpe miri] harp so miri. soune] soun. 437. it ] his harp, . wel] wele. 438. blissfule] blisseful. 439. alle] al. palais] palays. 440. come] com. 441. adoune] adoun. 442. melodie] melody. 444. god] gode. 445. god] gode. 447. stint harping] stint his harping. 448. seide to him than] an seyd to him. 449. wel] wele; A wel. 451. largeliche] largelich. paye] pay. 452. assaye] asay. 453. seide] seyd. 454. thattow] atow.

115

Carl F. Hostetter
455. iche leuedi ] ich leuedi, . ble ] ble, . 459. row] rowe. 460. louesum ] louesome, . 462. cmpaini] compayni. 463. seide] seyd. 464. et] ete. wel] wele. 466. seide] seyd. 467. wolde] wold. I scholde] y schold. 468. thi word thou most holde] ou most i word hold. 469. seide] seyd. 470. hond ] hond, . 471. thattow] atow. 472. adoune] adoun. Sisam begins a new paragraph with this line. 473. wif] wiif. honde] hond. 474. londe] lond. 475. wente] went. oute] out. thede: ] ede, . 476. com] come. 479. owen citee] owhen cit. 480. knew] knewe. 482. no durste he] <he> no durst. 483. but] bot. in bilt] y<n> bilt; A y-bilt. narwe ] narwe, . 484. herbarwe ] herbarwe, . 485. owen wif] owhen wiif. 486. menestrel] a minstrel. lif] liif. 487. londe ] lond, . 488. honde] hond. 489. cot] cote. 490. tolde] told. 492. ygon] gon. faiery] fairy. 494. but] bot. wiste] nist. 495. holde] hold. 496. thing] inges. tolde] told. 497. oain the none-tide] oain nonetide. 498. wif] wiif. 499. beggeres] beggers. 500. harpe] harp. 501. wente] went. citee] cit. 116

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

502. mite] mit. biholde] bihold. 503. Erles] Erls. barounes bolde] barouns bold. 504. buriais] buriays. gunne him biholde] him gun bihold. 505. Lo! ] Lo, . seide] seyd. 506. her hongth] here honge. 507. hongth] honge. 508. yclnge] yclongen. 509. bi] in. H has by. 511. sette] sett. cri] crie. 512. seide] seyd. 513. hethenesse] heenisse. 515. seide] seyd. cm! ] come; . 516. sm] some. 517. Euerich harpour] Euerich gode harpour. welcme] welcom. to ] to, . 519. In castel] In e castel. 521. trmpours] trompour<s>. 522. fele ] fele, . 523. melodie] melody. 524. in halle] in e halle. 526. tok] toke. harpe] harp. 527. blisfulest] bli<sse>fulest. 528. euer man yherde] euer ani man yherd. 529. wel] wele. 530. y-se] yse. 531. knew] knewe. harpe] harp. also] als. 532. seide] seyd. mote] mot. 533. wher haddestow] where hadestow. harpe ] harp, . 534. I praye thattow] Y pray at ou. 536. thur] urch; A urth. wildernesse] wildernes. I] y. 537. I] y. 538. liouns] lyouns. tortore] totorn. 539. tethe scharpe] te so scharp. 540. I nd] y fond. iche harpe] ich harp. 541. wel] wele. er] ere. 544. I] y. 546. that euer ich] that ich. 547. harde] hard. 117

Carl F. Hostetter
549. Adoune] Adoun. 550. stounde ] stounde, . 551. geth ] ge . 552. is] nis. mannes] manes; A mannes. 553. knew wel] knewe wele. 555. aute do] aut to do. 556. seith] seyt. 560. wildernesse] wildernisse. 561. ywnne] ywon. 562. londe] lond. faiery] fairy. 566. miselue] miself. 567. pouerliche] pouerlich. 568. assaye] asay. 569. and if ich] and ich. 570. no schulde thow] ou no schust. 571. sikerliche] sikerlich. aye] ay. 572. schulde] schust. daye] day. 573. of mi deth thou hadde] ou of mi de hadest. 574. schulde] schust. 575. alle] al o. therinne] erin. 577. wel yknew] wele knewe. 578. threw] rewe. 579. adoune] adoun. fete] fet. 580. there] er. 581. alle seide] al ai seyd. crying] criing. 583. Glade] Glad. weren] were. 584. chaumbre] chaumber. also bliue] als biliue. 585. him ] him, . schof] schaued. 586. as king] as a king. 588. broute] brout. toun ] toun, . 589. manere menstracie] maner menstraci. 590. O lord!] Lord! gret melodie] grete melody. 591. eien] eie. 592. seien] seie. 593. Now Orfeo] Now King Orfeo. corouned] coround. 594. and eke his] and his. 595. longe liued afterward, ] liued long afterward; . 118

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

596. king was] was king. 598. herde] herd. 599. god liking ] gode likeing, . 600. king: ] king; . 601. is Orfeo] Orfeo is. 602. god] gode. 603. out of care] out of his care. 604. graunte] graunt. wel] wele.

Revisions to the printed text of 1944 Tolkiens pencilled revisions (incorporated into text) l. 75: afternone > afternon l. 76: ydone > ydon l. 96: and owy > and wende owy l. 281: Hi > He l. 309: haunt > haunt: l. 600: nemoned > nempned l. 11: se > se, l. 70: Vnder > vnder l. 192: ytwit > ytwit, l. 323: erne > erne l. 381: were > were. l. 391: sum > Sum l. 452: assaye. > assaye. l. 453: Sir, > Sir, l. 456: ympe-tre. > ympe-tre. l. 457: Nay, > Nay, l. 521: tabourers > tabourers, l. 533: Wher > wher l. 568: wille > wille, l. 582: e > e l. 587: and > And Note: Auchinlech > Auchinleck

119

Carl F. Hostetter
Editorial changes Appendix: Revisions to Sisams Fourteenth Century Verse and Prose due to Tolkien The rst edition (1922) of Tolkiens Middle English Vocabulary contains the following corrigenda to Sisams text: p. xlv, l. 7: for carat read caret p. xlvii: for Jessop read Jessopp p. 21, l. 259: for be read he p. 28, l. 493: for enn read en p. 43, footnote to l. 69: omit for: p. 62, l. 100: for tyste read t<r>yste (Morris); and adjust note at p. 225. p. 103, l. 254: for largeand read large and p. 175, l. 1: for Daib. read Diab. [sic; l. 1 of the page, but l. 99 of the poem CFH] p. 214, note to a: for The best . . . are read This poem is largely a translation of sentences excerpted from Rolles Incendium Amoris, cc. xlxli (Miss Allen in Mod. Lang. Review for 1919, p. 320). Useful commentaries are p. 226, note to l. 153: in l. 8 for t read t p. 243, n. to ll. 56: for external covering read covering over it p. 291, table, last column, 1 sg.: for -e or (e)s read (e) or (e)s Sisams text was corrected in exact accordance with these corrigenda when it was reprinted in 1923. In 1945 (according to Bliss, see below; the earliest example I have seen is in the 1946 impression), the entry Animal (Sir Orfeo l. 364) in the Vocabulary was altered from: Animal, n. animal, ii 364. [OFr. animal.] in the rst edition (1922) to: Animal, n. ii 364, a misreading for aumal q.v. at the same time adding this entry: Aumal, n. enamel, ii 364. [OFr. aumail.] Line 364 of Sisams text of Sir Orfeo was corrected accordingly by 1967 (but not as of 1950). Presumably at the same time animal was emended to aumal, the following was added to Sisams notes on Sir Orfeo (Sisam 1967 210): 120

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

364. aumal, enamel. Holthausens correction for animal (Anglia, vol. xlii, p. 427) is conrmed by the MS. The reference is to the following in Holthausens 1918 article, Zum mittelenglischen Romanzen (On the Middle English Romances): Animal ist sinnlos, O bietet amell, H metalle. Ersteres wird richtig sein, vgl. das NED. unter amel email. Natrlich wre hier emal zu schreiben. Animal is senseless, [MS Ashmole 51] offers amell, [MS Harley 3810] metalle. The rst would be correct, compare the OED under amel enamel. It would be natural to write emal here. Holthausens misgivings about animal are apparently motivated solely by a judgment that it yields an inappropriate sense. There is no indication in his article that he based his proferred reading, emal, on an examination of the Auchinleck MS itself. By contrast, Bliss, in his rst edition of Sir Orfeo (1954), reading directly from the MS, gives the form as aumal (32), noting: 364. All editors have printed animal for aumal, although there are only ve minims in the manuscript, and although the noun animal is not recorded until the end of the sixteenth century (OED s.v.). The correct reading was pointed out by Professor J. R. R. Tolkien (A Middle English Vocabulary, impression of 1945, s.v. animal) (54). However, in the second edition (1966), Bliss revised this note to read: 364. All editors have printed animal for aumal, although there are only ve minims in the manuscript, and although the noun animal is not recorded until the end of the sixteenth century (OED s.v.). The correct reading was rst published by Professor C. L. Wrenn, TPS [Transactions of the Philological Society] (1943), 33. See RES [Review of English Studies] N.S. viii (1957), 58 footnote 4 (54). (The citation in Wrenn reads: Auchinleks anmal, then, may well be an error for aumal (u and n scribal confusion), which is a quite plausible form of amal, that of RES is to Tolkiens student and protg S.R.T.O. dArdennes review of the rst edition of Blisss Sir Orfeo, to which the RES editor supplied this footnote: The reading aumal seems to have been published rst by Professor C. L. Wrenn in The Value of Spelling as Evidence, Trans. Phil. Soc., 1943, p. 33; but the manuscript had been so read by Miss S. I. Tucker in 1938.)

121

Carl F. Hostetter
Hence, although Sisams note correctly refers to Holthausen as rst noticing the difculty with the reading animal, it was not he but Wrenn who rst published the correct MS reading aumal. It appears that Wrenn, not Tolkien, was ultimately responsible for the change in the Vocabularythat Tolkiens Middle English version of Sir Orfeo, printed in 1944, has the reading animal suggests that he did not himself arrive at the correct reading aumal before 1944, and thus after Wrennbut it may be presumed that it was Tolkien who was proximately responsible for it. It is interesting to note that Tolkiens English translation of l. 364 (Tolkien 1975 131), with beasts and birds and gures horned, shows that he still read animal when he made the translation, suggesting that he made his translation before 1945. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to Wayne Hammond for providing me with a photocopy of Tolkiens Middle English version of Sir Orfeo, and for suggesting this study of it. I am further grateful to Wayne and to Christina Scull and Arden R. Smith for their assistance in the pursuit of various references and in researching the revisions to Tolkiens Vocabulary and Sisams reader. I also thank the Tolkien Estate for their very kind permission to republish the complete text of Tolkiens version of Sir Orfeo. NOTES 1 In his preface to Sir Gawain, Christopher Tolkien notes that at that time (1975) he was not able to discover any writing by my father on the subject of Sir Orfeo other than the very brief factual note on the text that is given in the introduction (8). He was unaware at that time of the existence of his fathers Middle English version (private correspondence). (Tolkien did in fact leave some writings on the poem, not seen by this editor, now held by the Bodleian Library.) A judgment notably not shared by Sisam, who describes its dialect as South-Western (cf. 13, 207). This despite the restructuring of sentences sometimes required by verse translation. It should be noted, however, that it will be argued below that the formatting and punctuation of the Middle English version is due to that of Sisams edition; hence that of Tolkiens translation may also be due to Sisam, directly or indirectly.

2 3

122

Tolkiens Middle English Sir Orfeo

WORKS CITED Bliss, A. J., ed. Sir Orfeo. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1954. . Sir Orfeo. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966. Carpenter, Humphrey. Tolkien: A Biography. Boston: Houghton Mifin Company, 1977. dArdenne, S.R.T.O. Review of Sir Orfeo, edited by A. J. Bliss. Review of English Studies, New Series VIII (1957): 5759. Hammond, Wayne G. and Douglas A. Anderson. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Descriptive Bibliography. New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Books, 1993. Holthausen, F. Zum mittelenglischen Romanzen, sec. VIII. Anglia XLII (1918): 42529. Sisam, Kenneth. Fourteenth Century Verse and Prose. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1921. I also make specic reference to the imprints of 1923, 1928, 1946, 1950, and 1967, each of which was (slightly) revised from previous versions. Where no imprint is specied, references apply to any of these imprints. Tolkien, J.R.R. A Middle English Vocabulary. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1922. I also make specic reference to the imprint of 1945, which was (slightly) revised from previous versions. Where no imprint is specied, references apply to any of these imprints. Tolkien, J.R.R., trans. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Pearl, and Sir Orfeo. Introduction by J.R.R. Tolkien. Edited with a preface by Christopher Tolkien. Boston: Houghton Mifin Company, 1975. [Tolkien, J.R.R., ed]. Sir Orfeo. Oxford: The Academic Copying Ofce, 1944. Wrenn, C. L. The Value of Spelling as Evidence. Transactions of the Philological Society (1943): 1439.

123

Frodos Batman
MARK T. HOOKER
But be not afraid of greatness. Some men are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them. William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

hile The Lord of the Rings was not published until the early 1950s, it is nevertheless to some extent a product not of World War II but of the six months during which Tolkien fought with the 11th Lancashire Fusiliers during World War I, before trench fever took him back to England. Tolkien wrote that Sam was a reection of the English soldier, of the privates and batmen I knew in the 1914 war, and recognized as so far superior to myself (Carpenter 91). For the modern reader, the most likely association with the word batman is Batman and Robin of lm and comic book fame. Tolkien, however, had another image in mind. Before World War II, when ofcers were indeed gentlemen, in the British sense of the word, having a soldierservant was the accepted order of the day. The word batman comes not from cricket bats, as some have suggested, but from the French word bt, which means pack saddle. A batman was, therefore, the man who took care of the luggage carried on the pack-horse or pack-mule. In time, the word also came to mean an ofcers valet, who, among other things, also took care of his ofcers baggage. The literature of World War I recounts a number of examples of the loyalty and devotion of batmen to the ofcers they cared for. An examination of these stories, which were written by British line ofcers who, like Tolkien, saw combat in World War I, offers an insight into the kind of batmen with whom lieutenant Tolkien came into contact in the 1914 war. We have no evidence that Tolkien read these stories himself, but the characteristics of the batmen described in them are much the same as the characteristics that Tolkien ascribes to Sam. He [Sam] did not think of himself as heroic or even brave, or in any way admirable except in his service and loyalty to his master, wrote Tolkien in a letter to a reader (Letters 329). William Noel Hodgson (1893-1916) wrote under the pseudonym Edward Melbourne. A lieutenant with the Devonshire Regiment, he died in the rst day of the Battle of the Somme. He was a Georgian poet
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

125

Mark T. Hooker
in the style of Rupert Brooke, and he also wrote stories and essays about the war. His short story Pearson1 is a tale about his resourceful batman named Pearson (77-81). Lieutenant Colonel Graham Seton Hutchison (1890-1946)the author of numerous books on World War Iwrote a biography of his batman, Peter McLintock (Biography of a Batman 21122). The relationship between Hodgson and his batman is the kind that P. G. Wodehouse (1881-1975) parodied in his Jeeves and Wooster stories. Shortly after Jeeves had been engaged, Bertie Wooster tries to establish who is in charge in their relationship by saying that he is not one of those men who becomes an absolute slave to his valet. Jeeves irreproachably polite reply, however, leaves no doubt as to the absurdity of Berties statement (Jeeves Takes Charge 8). Hodgsons story, being much more compact, gets straight to the point. Hodgson has learned that it is best to acquiesce in all that Pearson does: He is my servant, and if he were Commander-in-Chief, the war would be over in a week. But I should get no baths, so I am glad he isnt. And I doubt whether he would care to be, himself; at present he is supreme in his own sphere, and knows it and knows that the other servants know it. The only thing that he does not know is his own limitationsnobody else does eitherthey have never been reached. . . . A good soldier servant is one of the greatest marvels of our modern civilization. To posses one is better and cheaper than living next door to Harrods. Do you want a chair for the [Ofcers] Mess? You have only to mention it to Pearson. Are you starving in a deserted village? Pearson will nd you wine, bread and eggs. Are you sick of a fever? Pearson will heal you. From saving your life to sewing on your buttons, he is infallible. (77) To prove his point about Pearsons ingenuity, Hodgson offers the reader some concrete examples. Having relocated his unit into some lthy trenches, Hodgson soon discovers that he is infested with lice. Pearsons unhesitating reaction to this news is that the lieutenant requires a bath and a change of clothes. He will see to it. Hodgson, bowing to what he perceives as the reality of trench warfare, dismisses Pearsons reply with a joke. If Pearson would be so kind as to call him a cab, he could drop in on his tailors on the way to the Jermyn Street Baths. The reality of trench warfare, however, proved to be what Pearson made of it. A short while later, Pearson called Hodgson back to his dug-out, where a hot bath and change of clothes awaited. To those who have never experienced the privations of combat, Hodgsons description of this exploit as epic may 126

Frodos Batman
seem overblown. It is not. In combat, where clean, dry socks seem worth their weight in gold, a warm bath and a complete change of clothes would ransom a host of kings. Hodgsons mention of Pearson nding a chair for the Ofcers Mess is echoed in the other story he tells about Pearson. The empty house that they had taken over to use as the Ofcers Mess had a cold stone oor. In response to a comment by the President of the Mess, Hodgson offhandedly volunteers Pearson to get them a carpet to make the Mess more comfortable. This time it is the President of the Mess who represents the accepted perception of the reality of life in a combat zone in World War I. He doubts that it is possible; after all, the boy is not a conjurer. Hodgsons belief in Pearsons genius prompted him to bet the President of the Mess ve francs that Pearson could produce a carpet for the Mess by tea time the next day. The most likely source of carpets in the area was a nearby town that was under daily enemy artillery re. Pearson asked Hodgson for permission to go to the town to look for a carpet, but Hodgson refused because of the danger. The next day, just before the deadline for the bet, Pearson appeared in the Mess, covered in sweat, carrying a carpet and two rolls of linoleum. He had gone to the town anyway, because Hodgson had not expressly forbidden him to go. I could not let you lose a bet, sir, for the sake of a little trouble, said Pearson. As if in anticipation of the incredulous, modern, peacetime reader, Hodgson closes his paean to Pearson with the comment that there are many like him, I am sure, though I prefer to think of him as supreme. But when next a soldier friend boasts of his servantas they always do sooner or later, remember that he is not always such a liar as he appears. Tolkiens readers would do well to remember Hodgsons caution, when they consider Sams role in Tolkiens works. Tolkien isas Hodgson put itboasting about the batmen of his acquaintance, all rolled into one ctional character. Youre a marvel, says Frodo to Sam in the Tower of Cirith Ungol, echoing Hodgsons comment about Pearson, when Sam produces the Ring that Frodo had imagined lost (RK, VI, i, 188). Hutchisons batman was named Peter McLintock. He was, said Hutchison, the best, most intimate friend man ever had (211). He was a faithful servant, a friend and counselor, an ever-present companion to give me condence in the darkness of a dangerous night, and good cheer, when fortune favored a visit to battalion headquarters (215). [Peters] friendliness took complete possession of the necessary, though often inconvenient, affairs of life. In such things Peters service was priceless. No matter at what hour I would return to the cubby hole for sleep, it was as dry and as warm as human ingenuity could devise. Eggs and small 127

Mark T. Hooker
comforts he conjured from behind the lines without any promptings from me. . . . He would . . . prepare a varied menu from interminable bread, plum-and-apple jam, and the sickly meat and vegetable ration. He would clean my limited wardrobe, wash and mend the socks and shirts, keep me supplied with tobacco, dry my boots and stockings. The batman was Multum in parvo to his charge, omnipresent, yet ubiquitous. . . . And he would run when his ofcer went over the top, and ght by his side. When the ofcer dropped, the batman was beside him. (219-20) Peters friendship expressed itself in little acts of vigilant kindness. Opportunities for the rendering of triing services and for the doing of kindness were for ever present, every hour and every day. The batmans attitude was one of selfsubordination, and he tarried neither to consider the worthiness of his charge nor the nature of the service asked. He gave freely, the man of humble origin and pursuit, to one at least temporarily exalted with authority. By his ready service, words and gestures he won affection, by his forethought and unknown sacrices he penetrated quietly and unobtrusively into the heart of the master of his goings and of his comings. (221-22). These two short stories by Hodgson and Hutchison taken together provide a list of traits that any good batman should have. Sam has a great many of them. He does not have the trait of healing, which Tolkien gives to others of more stately bearing, like Elrond and Aragorn. He also has no opportunity to dry Frodos boots and stockings, since Hobbits do not wear shoes. Tolkien clearly establishes the relationship between Sam and Frodo as master and servant by spreading those two descriptors throughout the text. As Frodo prepares to leave the Shire, the excuse given for Sam going with him is that Sam was going to do for Mr. Frodo (FR, I, iii, 78), which is another way of saying that he is going to be Frodos valet or butler. At the feast in Rivendale, Sam begs to be allowed to wait on his master (FR, II, i, 240). Tolkien accentuates this by peppering Sams speech with plenty of Mr. Frodo, sir, echoing the customary form of address of a valet to his master and a soldier to an ofcer. Tolkien also drops a number of hints as to Sams duties at Bag End as the story progresses. As Frodo awakens in the Tower of Cirith Ungol, for example, Sam tries to sound as cheerful as he had when he drew back the curtains at Bag End on a summers morning (RK, VI, i, 187). This phrase evokes an image almost straight out of Jeeves and Wooster. Tolkien makes Sam 128

Frodos Batman
sound almost like Jeeves, when Sam replies with an unperturbed Very good, sir! to Frodos announcement that he is leaving the Shire for good and that neither of them may ever come back (FR, I, iv, 96). Hodgsons comment about having to give up hot baths were Pearson to become Commander-in-Chief and his story about the clean clothes and the hot bath nd a brief reection in Tolkiens tale in Pippins offhand comment upon awakening in the r-wood after their rst night out of the Shire. Pippin commands Sam to have his breakfast ready at nine thirty, and inquires if his bath water is hot yet (FR, I, iii, 81). Both requests would be logical, if made of a batman or valet, and Sam takes no offense at them, reecting Hutchisons description of Peter McLintocks attitude of selfsubordination, which Hutchison said kept him from considering the nature of the service asked or the worthiness of his charge. While Sam clearly has an attitude of selfsubordination, he, unlike Hutchisons Peter McLintock, does have a considered opinion as to the worthiness of his charge. Sam had always felt that Frodo was so kind that he was in some ways blind to what went on around him. At the same time he held fast to the contradictory opinion, that Frodo was the wisest person in the world (with the possible exception of Bilbo and Gandalf) (TT, IV, iii, 248). In fact, Sam loved Mr. Frodo (TT, IV, iv, 260; RK, VI, i, 177). This is a very different picture of the relationship between an ofcer and his batman than the ones presented in Hodgsons and Hutchisons short stories. Perhaps Pearson and McLintock both loved their charges, too, but their charges were simply not aware of the fact, just as Hutchison was not aware of all the sacrices that McLintock made for him. One of Hutchisons unknown sacrices can be found echoed in the chapter Mount Doom, in which Frodo and Sam are struggling through Mordor toward their nal goal, almost out of water to drink. Sam lets Frodo drink from their meager supply of water, but does not drink any himself (RK, VI, iii, 213, 216). Frodo is almost unaware of everything at this point (RK, VI, iii, 215), but the narrator lets the reader in on Sams secret. Earlier in the tale, as they are just leaving the Shire, Tolkien has Frodo complain in jest that they have saddled him with all the heaviest things in his pack. Sam stoutly volunteers to take on some of Frodos burden, saying that his pack is quite light, which the narrator pointedly informs the reader is a not true. At this stage of their journey, Frodo is still alert enough to recognize that Sam is making a sacrice for him, and makes a resolution to look into it at their next packing (FR, I, iii, 80). Forethought was one of Hutchisons characteristics for Peter McLintock. Sam shows himself worthy of this appellation in the scene in which he is checking the contents of his pack, one that Aragorn notes was rather large and heavy (TT, III, i, 21). It held Sams chief

129

Mark T. Hooker
treasure, his cooking utensils, a box of salt, a supply of tobacco, int and tinder for starting res, woolen hose, linen, and a number of small things that Frodo had forgotten, that Sam planned to produce in triumph when Frodo asked for them on the trail (FR, II, iii, 293). One of these items nds a special resonance in Hutchisons comment about how McLintock kept him supplied with tobacco, as well as in Tolkiens tale, where a whole segment of the Prologue is devoted to pipe-weed (FR, Prol., 17-18). Most importantly for the story, Sams pack also held a length of Elvish rope, which they would need later in the mountains (TT, IV, i, 214-17). At the Breaking of the Fellowship, Sam is the one who grabbed a spare blanket and some extra packages of food before they left (FR, II, x, 423). All these things point to Sams forethought. McLintocks little acts of vigilant kindness, as Hutchison termed them, can be seen in Sams actions too. In the morning, after the Hobbits rst encounter with the elves on their way to Rivendale, for example, Frodo awakes to nd Pippin already up. Pippin prods him to get up and have some of the food that the elves left them. The bread was as delicious as it was the night before and Pippin would have eaten it all, if Sam had not insisted that he leave some for Frodo (FR, I, iv, 95). Both Hodgson and Hutchison comment on their batmans skill at supplementing their rations. In Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit, Sam exhibits the same sort of initiative as was exhibited by the two real-life batmen, by conjuring upas Hutchison put itsome rabbits for Frodo to eat. That Gollum was actually the one who caught the rabbits is unimportant. It was Sam who sent him out to hunt them (TT, IV, iv, 260). The same was probably true of Pearson and McLintock. To the batmans charge, it was not important who took the eggs out from under the chicken, but rather who arranged for them to appear unexpectedly on his plate at breakfast. Hodgsons image of Pearson coming up with wine, bread and eggs when he was starving in a deserted village nds its reection in Tolkiens chapter on the Tower of Cirith Ungol. The tower could hardly have been more deserted. It was strewn with the bodies of the Orcs that had killed one another (RK, VI, i, 179). Tolkien plays on the emptiness, repeating it for effect. [I]t was empty, save for two or three more bodies sprawling on the oor. . . . The dead bodies, the emptiness, intones the narrator. I do believe that theres nobody left alive in the place! . . . Ive met nothing alive, and Ive seen nothing, said Sam (RK, VI, i, 181, 189). The plot line remains the same in Tolkiens version of the tale, but there is a slight adjustment to the details. It is not that Sam found them some food. His nd was some clothing for Frodo. It was Frodo himself who found the food among some rags on the oor (RK, VI, i, 190). Sams success in his scavenger hunt for clothes is no less a triumph

130

Frodos Batman
of conjuring, as both Hodgson and Hutchison put it, even though he was not the one to nd the food. Hodgsons comment about the range of Pearsons services is likewise echoed in Tolkiens tale. Hodgson pairs saving his life with sewing on his buttons to show the incredibly wide gamut of services that Pearson provided for him. In Tolkiens tale, the explicit comparison is missing, but the attentive reader can easily construct a similar one from the events of the tale. Saving Frodos life comes most vividly to mind in The Choices of Master Samwise, in which Sam defends Frodo from Shelob. Sam, in fact, stood ready on numerous occasions to defend Frodo. For example, as the company ees the Black Riders on their way to Buckland, the narrator says that the Black Riders would have to ride over Sam to get to the wagon where Frodo was hidden (FR, I, iv, 106). Pippin says, Sam is an excellent fellow and would jump down a dragons throat to save you (FR, I, v, 114). These efforts at saving Frodos life can easily be paired with the simple task of having Sam run down to his home to drop off the key to Bag End as they departed (FR, I, iii, 79). Sewing on a button or dropping off a key are inconsequential services when compared to saving ones life, but they are part and parcel of the job of a batman. Tolkien also manages to work in a jest in much the same vein as Hodgsons throw-away line about calling him a cab so that he could drop in on his tailors on the way to the Jermyn Street Baths. In the Tower of Cirith Ungol, after Sam frees Frodo from the Orcs, and they prepare to ee the tower, Frodo, with a wry smile, poses the equally nonsensical question of whether Sam has made inquiries about inns along the way (RK, VI, i, 190). In the context of LotR, Hutchisons description of the condence that McLintocks companionship gave him in the darkness of a dangerous night nds a special resonance in Tolkiens tale of a journey into a land of unabated darkness. Hutchisons terse description pales, of course, in comparison to the detail of Tolkiens, but the two, nevertheless, describe the same bond to be found between an ofcer and his batman in combat. Understanding this relationship is one of the key difculties for the modern, peacetime reader. An ofcer and his batman were from different social classes. While Frodo represents the English ofcer and gentleman, born to greatness, as it were, Samlike Pearson and McLintockwas not born to greatness, but had greatness thrust upon him. The change in the relationship between Sam and Frodo as the quest progresses reects a change in the English class structure that was brought about by World War I. The literate divide, for example, was only one of a number of very real class factors that were a part of Tolkiens time. The need for reading and writing was not at all a universally accepted idea among Hobbits. Bilbo had taught Sam to read and write, but Sams father was not so sure

131

Mark T. Hooker
that it was a good idea (FR, I, i,32). In his short story Half and Half, Hodgson explains how the factor of class difference was made less distinct by the war. This is the story of a sergeant from the Highlands, whom Hodgson deftly characterizes by replicating the sergeants accent, a technique that Tolkien also used, though sparingly. In Tolkiens tale, Sams father, the Gaffer, and a stranger from Michel Delving both say jools instead of jewels, the crowning touch to a dialogue full of turns of phrase that mark them as men of limited education. Sams dialogue is peppered with a number of less obvious turns of phrase that clearly mark him as a member of that class as well. Hodgsons story begins with the sergeant asking: Wull Ah tell ye the tale of Micheal Starr thet wes in oor regiment? (103). This opening line characterizes the sergeant much more deftly and economically than a long, detailed narration. He was a man of humble origin and pursuit, as Hutchison termed McLintock. Having established who the sergeant was, Hodgson turns quickly to the relationship between himselfan ofcer and a gentlemanand the sergeant. It was curious, said Hodgson, how intimate we had become, he and I, although at the time neither of us was aware of the incongruity. The incongruity that Hodgson nds curious was that in peacetime, neither the sergeant, nor Hodgson would have had a relationship that allowed them to swap stories in the fashion described in Hodgsons short story. This is the same incongruity that troubles the modern peacetime reader. In the next sentence, Hodgson explains how this change in their relationship had come about. There are, I suppose, times when an unconscious strain tunes all our natures up to a single note, and though he was as fully armed with the carelessness of experience as I was with the recklessness of ignorance, we must both of us have been at high tension, for as I realized two days later I had had neither bite nor sup for thirty hours and never knew I was hungry. Tolkien shows exactly the same ne edge of the strain of combat in The Tower of Cirith Ungol, in which, having rescued Frodo, Sam is reminded of food and water by Frodos wry question about the inns along the way. I dont know when drop or morsel last passed my lips. Id forgotten it, trying to nd you, says Sam (RK, VI, i, 190). Relationships like these, forged in the strain of combat, changed post-war English society profoundly. In Tolkiens version of this change, Sam becomes Frodos heir, and goes on to become Mayor of the Shire, the most famous gardener in history, and keeper of the knowledge of the Red Book (RK, VI, ix, 309). It is an interesting change, that has Sam wearing more than one hat, which is an aptly appropriate metaphor for English society, which indeed did, and to some extent still does, judge

132

Frodos Batman
a mans social status by the hat that he wears. Sam moved up in social status, but kept to his roots. The change in the society of the Shire is also less widespread than in England after World War I. Sam was, after all, the only representative of his class to participate in the perilous adventure that reshaped class relationships. There were a great many more British private soldiers and batmen who went off to war and discovered that things could be different. Sams participation in the quest to destroy the Ring was a punishment for eavesdropping on Frodo and Gandalf, when they were planning Frodos departure (FR, I, ii, 73). Gandalf does not say what kind of punishment Sam will receive. A reader with no foreknowledge of the tale could suppose that the punishment would be having to leave the Shire (uncommon for Hobbits), or that it would be exhausting, or uncomfortable, or even terrifying, but because Tolkien does not say what the punishment is, the readerand Samare not immediately scared off by it. Sams reaction to this punishment is one of enthusiasm. He is happy to go, because he will get to see Elves and all! Hooray! (FR, I, ii, 73). It is only latermuch like the British soldiers who went off to World War I full of enthusiasmthat Sam will nd out how terrifying his quest is. And we shouldnt be here at all, if wed known more about it before we started, says Sam to Frodo (TT, IV, viii, 320). Tolkien repeats the plot line of Sam listening at the window later in the episode at the Council of Elrond, but with a slight difference. Sam has taken up his new job of batman, helping and serving Frodo. Elronds pronouncement upon discovering Sam, therefore, is not a punishment, as was Gandalf s, but an evaluation of his performance in his new role as Frodos batman (FR, II, ii, 284). From this point on Sam is Frodos ever-present companion, to use Hutchisons description of his batman, Peter McLintock. As Frodo and Sam discuss leaving Lrien to get on with their quest, Tolkien shows Sam in the role of counselor, another of Hutchisons descriptions of Peter: Youre right, said Sam. . . . I dont want to leave. All the same, Im beginning to feel that if weve got to go on, then wed best get it over. Its the job thats never started as takes longest to nish, as my old gaffer used to say. And I dont reckon that these folk can do much more to help us, magic or no. (FR, II, vii, 376) Job is a key word in the story, and Tolkien repeats it again and again to help dene Sams character and explain his motivation. The word job presents a problem for some modernespecially Americanreaders who think rst of mac-jobs and unskilled labor, and only later, if at all, 133

Mark T. Hooker
think of the other meanings of the word job that were more common in the time that Tolkien was writing The Lord of the Rings. The MerriamWebster Dictionary denes job as: job \jb\ n. 1: a piece of work 2: something that has to be done: DUTY 3: a regular remunerative position jobless adj.12 Sams job has to be understood in the context of the duty of a batman: to serve and protect his charge. The second meaning from The MerriamWebster Dictionarydutycomes clearly to the fore in The Tower of Cirith Ungol, in which Sam turned quickly and ran back up the stairs. Wrong again, I expect, he sighed. But its my job to go right up to the top rst, whatever happens afterwards (RK, VI, i, 184). As Sam and Frodo draw closer to Mount Doom, Tolkiens attention returns to Sams job. Even though his death appears to be the most likely outcome, duty and honor require that Samlike Hutchisons and Hodgsons batmengo on. So that was the job I felt I had to do when I started, thought Sam: to help Mr. Frodo to the last step and then die with him? Well, if that is the job then I must do it (RK, VI, iii, 211). Tolkiens description of Sams job here is exactly the same as the job description that Hutchison gives for a batman: And he would run when his ofcer went over the top, and ght by his side. When the ofcer dropped, the batman was beside him. Hodgson was killed during an attack on German positions south of Mametz. Pearson was found dead at his side. They are buried together with their comrades in arms in the trench they died taking. Peter McLintock died at Hutchisons side and is buried in Ration Farm Military Cemetery, la Chapelle-dArmentires, France. Tolkien gave the story of his batman a happy ending: Sam returned to the Shire to marry his sweetheart, Rose Cotton. Sams job was indeed a punishment, and in more ways than just the privations that he suffered when he accompanied Frodo to Mount Doom and back. To do his job, Sam had to leave Rose Cotton and she was not particularly pleased with him for that. She viewed the year that he was gone with Frodo as wasted (RK, VI, ix, 304). This, in general, mirrors a feeling about the service of private soldiers (enlisted men) that was widespread in England in the period following World War I. NOTE 1 Dated March 23, 1916

134

Frodos Batman

WORKS CITED Carpenter, Humphrey. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1977. Hodgson, William Noel. Verse And Prose In Peace And War. London: Smith, Elder & Co., 1916, 1917. Hutchison, Graham Seton. The W Plan. London: Thornton Butterworth Ltd., 1929. . Biography of a Batman. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode. 1929. (Reprinted from the English Review, August 1929.) . Colonel Grants To-morrow. London: Thornton Butterworth, 1931. . Footslogger: An Autobiography. London: Hutchison, 1931. . The Sign of Arnim. New York: Cosmopolitan Book Corporation, 1931. . Warrior. London: Hutchison & Co. Ltd., 1932. . Life Without End. New York: Farrar & Rinehart, 1934. . Pilgrimage. London: Rich & Cowan, 1935. (A guide to the battleelds of France and Belgium.) . According to Plan. London: Rich and Cowan, 1938. Wodehouse, P. G. (Pelham Grenville). Selected Stories. New York: The Modern Library, 1958. . Jeeves and The Feudal Spirit. Kent: Hodder and Stoughton, 1977. . Jeeves and The Hard-boiled Egg and Other Stories. London: Bloomsbury, 1997. . Jeeves Omnibus. London, Jenkins, 1931, . Life with Jeeves. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1981. . Right ho, Jeeves. c. 1922. London: Barrie & Jenkins, 1978. . Stiff upper Lip, Jeeves. c. 1963. New York: Perennial Library, 1990. . Thank You, Jeeves. London: H. Jenkins, 1956. 135

Mark T. Hooker
. The Inimitable Jeeves. c. 1923. London: Vintage, 1991. . The Return of Jeeves. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954. . Very Good, Jeeves! London: H. Jenkins, 1958.

136

Tolkiens Prose Style and its Literary and Rhetorical Effects

MICHAEL D. C. DROUT

hile J.R.R. Tolkiens prose style in The Lord of the Rings has been both attacked and defended, its details have seldom been analyzed in terms of specic aesthetic effects.1 This lacuna in Tolkien criticism is certainly understandable, given the perceived necessity of rst defending Tolkiens work as a worthy object of serious literary (rather than sociological or pop-cultural) study: critics have spent much effort countering ill-informed and even logically contradictory claims about Tolkiens work, and the discussion of writing style has had to be given short shrift in the effort to make the study of Tolkien academically respectable.2 But the analytical neglect of Tolkiens prose style has had the unfortunate effect of ceding important ground to Tolkiens detractors, who, with simple, unanalyzed quotations, point to some word or turn of phrase and, in essence, sniff that such is not the stuff of good literature.3 I would even contend that a reaction against Tolkiens non-Modernist prose style is just as inuential in the rejection of Tolkien by traditional literary scholars as is Modernist antipathy to the themes of his work, the ostensible political content of The Lord of the Rings, the popularity of the books, or even Tolkiens position outside the literary mainstream of his day (all of which have been well documented and countered by recent critics).4 A complete analysis (or justication) of Tolkiens style is beyond the scope of any one essay, but in this paper I hope to make a start at a criticism of some of the passages most obviously unlike traditional Modernist literature: the battle of owyn against the Lord of the Nazgl and Denethors self-immolation. The style of these passages is not, contra some of Tolkiens most perceptive critics, over-wrought or archaic. Rather, Tolkien produces a tight interweaving of literary referencesspecically, links to Shakespeares King Lear in both style and thematic substance with grammatical, syntactic, lexical, and even aural effects. His writing thus achieves a stylistic consistency and communicative economy that rivals his Modernist contemporaries. At the same time his treatment of Lear shows his engagement with ideas (in this case, the problem of pride and despair among the powerful) that have long been considered among the great themes of English literature.
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

137

Michael D.C. Drout

Because the following analysis will repeatedly switch from sentencelevel writing, to discussion of characters, to the themes of the book, it is necessary to quote the key passage: But lo! suddenly in the midst of the glory of the king his golden shield was dimmed. The new morning was blotted from the sky. Dark fell about him. Horses reared and screamed. Men cast from the saddle lay grovelling on the ground. The great shadow descended like a falling cloud. And behold! it was a winged creature: if bird, then greater than all other birds, and it was naked, and neither quill nor feather did it bear, and its vast pinions were as webs of hide between horned ngers; and it stank. . . . Upon it sat a shape, black-mantled, huge and threatening. A crown of steel he bore, but between rim and robe naught was there to see, save only a deadly gleam of eyes: the Lord of the Nazgl. To the air he had returned, summoning his steed ere the darkness failed, and now he was come again, bringing ruin, turning hope to despair, and victory to death. A great black mace he wielded. But Thoden was not utterly forsaken . . . one stood there still: Dernhelm the young, faithful beyond fear; and he wept, for he had loved his lord as a father. Right through the charge Merry had been borne unharmed behind him, until the Shadow came; and then Windfola had thrown them in his terror, and now ran wild upon the plain. Merry crawled on all fours like a dazed beast. . . . Then out of the blackness in his mind he thought that he heard Dernhelm speaking. . . . Begone, foul dwimmerlaik, lord of carrion! Leave the dead in peace! A cold voice answered: Come not between the Nazgl and his prey! Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to the houses of lamentation, beyond all darkness, where thy esh shall be devoured, and thy shrivelled mind be left naked to the Lidless Eye. A sword rang as it was drawn. Do what you will; but I will hinder it, if I may. Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me! Then Merry heard of all sounds in that hour the strangest. It seemed that Dernhelm laughed, and the clear voice was like the ring of steel. But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. owyn I am, omunds daughter. You 138

Tolkiens Prose Style

stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him. (RK, V, vi, 114-117) We begin our analysis with a subtle literary reference to King Lear that connects triangularly the Lord of the Nazgl, Denethor, and Shakespeares mad King.5 This reference is the Lord of the Nazgls threat Come not between the Nazgl and his prey which echoes King Lears Come not between the dragon and his wrath (I, i, 122). The two passages are syntactically identical, relying on the fronting of the verb come in order to delete the dummy morpheme do (the effect of this grammatical shift will be discussed in detail below). While it is true that the Lear passage and the RK passage do not mean identical things (the Nazgl is talking about something physical; Lear is more metaphorical), the similarity is signicant: the passages can be transformed from one to another with the mere substitution of two nouns, one of these being the substitution of one monster for another (Nazgl for dragon). This reference, then, connects the Lord of the Nazgl to Lear and invokes, through the principle of metonymy, the greater, more echoic context of the referenced literary tradition,6 creating a set of interconnecting references that can tell readers more about the characters involved than is explicit in the narrative. These links also provide some hints that can be used to understand better the complex interplay of ideas (aesthetic, political, moral, and religious) in The Lord of the Rings. Now one mere turn of phrase would indeed be a lot to hang a comparison on, but there are additional similarities as well as other information that we can use to show Tolkiens knowledge of and interest in Lear. Both these similarities and the shared themes, moreover, connect Lear not only to the Lord of the Nazgl, but also to Denethor. Examining, via the materials published by Christopher Tolkien in The History of the Lord of the Rings, the development of this passage and the description of Denethors suicide suggests that an original connection with Lear in the owyn passage went on to shape further the development of the character and actions of Denethor. That is, what was at rst a one-time stylistic invocation of King Lear ended up shaping a number of characters, making more complex Tolkiens discussion of kingship, and allowing a further analysis of the moral and religious problems associated not only with the phenomenon that Tolkien, following W. P. Ker and E. V. Gordon, called northern courage, but also with the problems of kingship (legitimacy, authority, duty toward people) that are important components of The Return of the King.7 When Denethor nally descends into madness and attempts to burn himself and Faramir alive, he orders his servants (hitherto blocked by Beregond at the door of the tombs) to bring him a torch: Come hither! 139

Michael D.C. Drout

he cried to his servants. Come, if you are not all recreant! (RK, V, vii, 130). Similarly Lear calls Kent recreant after Kent has criticized Lears treatment of Cordelia (I, i,170). Recreant is an unusual word even in such similar contexts.8 While it appears in Chaucer, Malory, and also in Shakespeares Henry VI part II, the OED lists no uses after 1897.9 I have been unable to nd it anywhere else in Tolkiens corpus of writings, suggesting that, although it is an anachronistic word, it is not a diagnostically Tolkienian anachronism (such as pale used as to describe a jewel or light, fell used both as an adjective and a noun, or, perhaps the infamous eyot).10 Thus its use bespeaks a connection with (although it does not prove a denite source in) Lear that is not contradicted by further parallels. Additional scenes link Lear and The Return of the King. The scene in which Imrahil shows owyn to be alive by noting that her faint breath shows on his polished vambrace is similar to the scene in Lear where the King tries to determine if Cordelia still lives. Tolkien writes: Then the prince seeing her beauty, though her face was pale and cold, touched her hand as he bent to look more closely on her. Men of Rohan! he cried. Are there no leeches among you? She is hurt to the death maybe, but I deem that she yet lives. And he held the bright-burnished vambrace that was upon his arm before her cold lips, and behold! a little mist was laid on it hardly to be seen. (RK, V, vi, 121) Compare Lear: Lend me a looking glass; / If that her breath will mist or stain the stone, / Why, then she lives. (V, iii, 266-67) The rage of omer upon nding owyn apparently dead is also similar to Lears rage at the death of Cordelia: owyn, owyn! he cried at last: owyn, how come you here? What madness or devilry is this? Death, death, death! Death take us all! Then without taking counsel or waiting for the approach of the men of the City, he spurred headlong back to the front of the great host, and blew a horn, and cried aloud for the onset. Over the eld rang his clear voice calling: Death! Ride, ride to ruin and the worlds ending! (RK, V, vi, 119) Compare Lear: And my poor fool11 is hanged! No, no, no life? Why should a dog, a horse, a rat have life,

140

Tolkiens Prose Style

And thou no breath at all? Thoult come no more Never, never, never, never, never! (V, iii, 311-14) While the lines themselves are not identical, the repetition is similar: rst the no, no, no life? parallel the death, death, death! Death take us all! and then the repetitions of never and death (we can attribute the ve nevers against the four deaths to the requirements of pentameter). Furthermore, there are similarities in the immediate situations: at the loss of a beloved female relative, the protagonist goes madof course Lear has been quite mad for some time before Cordelias death, but her death is the nal straw. Lear himself dies, while omer only rides off to ruin and the worlds ending, but the madness and grief are identicaland the substantive differences between Lears, omers, and Denethors actions when faced with similar situations, which I discuss in detail below, are actually emphasized by this initial similarity. The Fool in Lear mentions seven stars (I, v, 35), as does the rhyme that Gandalf recites to Pippin: Seven stars and seven stones / And one white tree, (TT, III, xi, 202).12 And the tone of the passage when the Doctor in Lear offers consolation to Cordelia: Be comforted, good madam. The great rage / You see, is killed in him is similar to the scene in the Houses of Healing at the conclusion of which Aragorn says, The worst is now over. Stay and be comforted (RK, V, viii, 141). Finally, the scene in which Denethor asks Pippin what services the hobbit can perform as esquire (RK, V, iv, 79-80) is similar to the scene in which Lear asks Kent what services he can perform (I, iv, 31). No single one of these parallels is in itself entirely conclusive (though note that I have presented them in descending order, from most probable to least), but we have additional evidence that Tolkien had thought a great deal about King Lear, its literary worth, and its position in English literature. That Tolkien knew King Lear well, and that he admired the play, seems clear from the following passages from Beowulf and the Critics: On page xxvi, when everything seems going right, we hear once again that the main story of Beowulf is a wild folk-tale. Quite true of course, as it is of King Lear except that silly would in the latter case be a better adjective. (40)13 Are we to refuse King Lear either because it is founded on a silly folk-tale (the old naif details of which still peep through as they do in Beowulf) or because it is not Macbeth? Need we even debate which is more valuable? (55) Yet it is notfor it is a folk-tale used by a considerable poet for the plot of a great poem, and that is quite a different thing. As different as the Lear of Shakespeare from the same 141

Michael D.C. Drout

tale recounted in the chronicle of Layamonindeed the difference is greater, for already in Layamon we have a tale told with art, not a mere example of story-motives. (97). And that plot is not perfect as the vehicle of the theme or themes that come to hidden life in the poets mind as he makes his poem of the old material. As is true enough of Shakespeares use of old material. King Lear is a specially clear example. (140 n.) Tolkiens statement that he disliked Shakespeare has been much quoted,14 though Shippey has shown the inuence of Macbeth and A Midsummer Nights Dream on The Lord of the Rings (Road 133-44). That Tolkien uses Lear in Beowulf and the Critics as a rhetorical example of what is excellent in literature does not prove that he ascribed to this view, but it does show, I think, that he knew the play and its links to Layamons Brut well enough. It seems no great logical leap, then, to deduce that when Tolkien began to grapple with issues of kingship,15 madness, and succession in The Lord of the Rings, King Lear came to mind.16 Looking at the evolution of the key passages discussed above also supports this view. The rst appearance of the idea that owyn will slay the Lord of the Nazgl appears in one of the outline passages in The War of the Ring: Thoden slain and owyn slays the King of the Nazgl and is mortally wounded. They lie in state in the white tower (War 25556). This plan was then revised: Charge of the Riders of Rohan breaks the siege. Death of Thoden and owyn in killing the Nazgl King, and again revised to: Final assault on Minas Tirith [added: [11 >] 10 night]. Nazgl appear. Pelennor wall is taken. Sudden charge of Rohan breaks siege. Thoden and owyn destroy Nazgl and Thoden falls [struck out: Feb 12] (War 260). A later version describes the charge of Rohan and Thodens death, but does not mention owyn. Christopher Tolkien notes that in outlines I, II and III it is said that Thoden and owyn (who is not mentioned here) slew or killed or destroyed the King of the Nazgl (War 267 n. 41). A further outline gives another method of bringing owyn into the battle: Go back to Merry. Charge of Rohan. Orcs and Black Riders driven from the gate. Fall of Thoden wounded, but he is saved by a warrior of his household who falls on his body. Merry sits by them. Sortie saves King who is gravely wounded. Warrior found to be owyn. The Hosts of Morghul reform and drive them back to the gate. At that moment a wind rises, dark is rolled back. Black ships seen. Despair. Standard of Aragorn (and Elendil). omers wrath. Morghul taken between 2 forces and defeated. omer and 142

Tolkiens Prose Style

Aragorn meet. (War 275) These various outlines show that Tolkien was struggling with the shape of the narrative of the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. At this point in the composition of RK he had not yet developed the secondary line of conict, Denethors despair and madness. But now note the rst wellrealized draft of the scene: But Thoden was not alone. One had followed him: owyn daughter of omund, and all had feared the light of her face, shunning her as night fowl turn from the day. Now she leapt from her horse and stood before the shadow; her sword was in her hand. Come not between the Nazgl and his prey, said a cold voice, or he will bear thee away to the houses of lamentation, beyond all darkness where thy esh shall be devoured and thy shrivelled mind be left naked. She stood still and did not blench. I do not fear thee, Shadow, she said. Nor him that devoured thee. Go back to him and report that his shadows and dwimor-lakes are powerless even to frighten women. (War 365-66, my emphasis) Christopher Tolkien writes: I think that my father wrote this well before the period of composition we have now reached, and I would be inclined to associate it (very tentatively) with the outline sketches for Book V, where the event described here is several times referred to, and especially with the Outlines III and V. In these, in contrast to what is said in I and II (p. 256) there is no mention of owyns wounding or death: Thoden and owyn destroy the Nazgl and Thoden falls (III, p. 260); Thoden is slain by Nazgl; but he is unhorsed and the enemy is routed (V, p. 263). Whatever its relative dating, the piece certainly gives an impression of having been composed in isolation, a draft for a scene that my father saw vividly before he reached this point in the actual writing of the story. When he did so, he evidently had it before him, as is suggested by the words of the Lord of the Nazgl (cf. RK p. 116). (War 365-66) It therefore seems possible to interpret the process of composition as follows: Tolkien was struggling with the details of the battle before Minas 143

Michael D.C. Drout

Tirith (whether this is on the Pelennor Fields or at Osgiliath is still an open question). He determined that Thoden and owyn would somehow destroy the Lord of the Nazgl. He then wrote the scene quoted above and used the phrase reminiscent of Lear, Come not between the Nazgl and his prey. This original reference to Lear (conscious or not) then went on to inuence the rest of the narrative as Tolkien realized that the Lear parallel illuminated some of the complexities of the issues of kingly and stewardly responsibility and succession. In the outline stages of composition Tolkien foresaw Denethors grief and his potential conict with Aragorn over the ending of his familys rule: interview with Denethor and his grief at news of Boromir (War 276) and then developed this idea further, as Christopher Tolkien notes, Denethors devastation is expressed as a surmise of Pippins: Grief maybe had wrought it: grief at the harsh words he spoke when Faramir returned [>remorse for the harsh words he spoke that sent Faramir out into needless peril]. And the bitter thought that, whatever might now betide in war, woe or victory beyond all hope, his line too was ending (War 337). Denethors anger at the ending of his line (in defeat or victory) then leads Tolkien to the analysis that there is likely to be conict between Aragorn and Denethor: Words of Aragorn and Denethor. Denethor will not yield the Stewardship, yet; not until war is won or lost and all is made clear. He is cold and suspicious and ? mock-courteous. Aragorn grave and silent. But Denethor says that belike the Stewardship will run out anyway, since he seems like to lose both his sons. Faramir is sick of his wounds. If he dies then Gondor can take what new lord it likes. Aragorn says he will not be taken, he will take, but asks to see Faramir. Faramir is brought out and Aragorn tends him all that night, and love springs between them. (War 360) Denethors madness is not yet established (and his grief is caused solely by Boromirs death and Faramirs apparent fatal sickness, not by the defeat he sees coming via the palantr, which has not yet entered the story), though his anger at the thought of the loss of the Stewardship is made clear. But the combination of grief and wrath does now enter the story, only it is attached to omer: Thoden falls from horse sorely wounded; he is saved by Merry and owyn, but sortie from Gate does not reach them in time before owyn is slain. Grief and wrath of omer (War 359). It is at this point that Tolkien decided to introduce the madness of Denethor, the Stewards attempted burning of Faramir, and his self144

Tolkiens Prose Style

immolation. The additional reasons for his madness (via the visions Denethor has seen in the palantr) are also developed: Gandalf sweeps aside the men and goes in. He upbraids Denethor, but Denethor laughs at him. Denethor has a palantr! He has seen the coming of Aragorn. But he has also seen the vast forces still gathered in Mordor, and says that victory in arms is no longer possible. He will not yield up the Stewardship to an upstart of the younger line: I am the Steward of the sons of Anrion. He wants things to be as they wereor not at all (War 375). This section is further developed thus: But Denethor laughed. And going back to the table he lifted from it the pillow that he had lain on. And lo! in his hand he bore a palantr. Pride and despair! he said. Did you think that [the] eyes of the White Tower were blind? he said. [Added in pencil, without direction for insertion: This the Stone of Minas Tirith has remained ever in the secret keeping of the Stewards in the topmost chamber.] Nay, nay, I see more than thou knowest, Grey Fool. (War 378) We cannot be sure that the language from King Lear (recreant) has yet entered the scene, though it seems likely, since Christopher Tolkien notes that the page continues very close to the nal text of The Return of the King, citing the page (130) on which recreant appears (War 378). But the word either entered at this stage, or in the nal manuscript, which is not far removed from this draft. Thus we see, I think, how the rst elements of Lear language (Come not between) are expanded as Tolkiens understanding of the complexities of the madness of Denethor develops. It is not necessary to pursue the detailed evolution of the more minor points of comparison (Pippins service with Denethor, the misting of Prince Imrahils vambrace by owyns breath), since they merely substantiate the more signicant evidence discussed above. Rather, I now want to turn to the artistic effects generated by Tolkiens linking to Lear via the metonymic device of stylistic similarity. We can use style and sources to create a syllogism: the Lord of the Nazgl is to be compared to King Lear; Denethor is to be compared to King Lear;17 therefore Denethor is to be compared to the Lord of the Nazgl.18 We can even ground this syllogism in the syntax of the most compelling similarity between Lear and RK: when Lear says come not between the dragon and his wrath he is speaking of himself; Lear is the dragon he is discussing. To begin to transform the Lear quotation into the Tolkien quotation we 145

Michael D.C. Drout

substitute Nazgl for dragon. Thus if Lear = the dragon, and the dragon = Nazgl, then Lear = Nazgl. And even if the above syllogisms are not convincing to all, it seems safe to say (even without the Lear comparison) that the Lord of the Nazgl is what Denethor would have become had he somehow gained the One Ring: a mighty man with great abilities twisted into darkness. Such a comparison is not as far-fetched as it might at rst seem. Note that while Tolkiens original conception seems to have been that the Lord of the Nazgl was a renegade member of the IstariGandalf reveals that the W[izard] King . . . is a renegade of his own order . . . [?from] Nmenor (War 326)he abandons this idea and makes the Black Captain a king of men rather than a wizard: King of Angmar long ago (War 334). In The Silmarillion we learn that those [men] who used the Nine Rings became mighty in their day, kings, sorcerers, and warriors of old and among those [Sauron] ensnared with the Nine Rings three were great lords of Nmenoran race (S 289). It seems reasonable to infer that the Lord of the Nazgl was one of these Black Nmenoreans because he is the greatest of the Ringwraiths and the Nmenoreans were greater than other Men. It is therefore worth noting Gandalf s comment to Pippin that Denethor is not as other men of this time and whatever be his descent from father to son, by some chance the blood of Westernesse runs nearly true in him (RK, V, i, 32). Thus Denethor is closer in abilitiesGandalf says that he can perceive things far away if he uses his strong willto a pure-blooded Nmenorean (which, presumably, the Lord of the Nazgl would be, since he would have taken up his ring before the Nmenoreans mingled with lesser men) than other men of Gondor.19 Seeing the present actions and character of Denethor, therefore, may allow us to infer something about the past of the Lord of the Nazgl. When we compare King Lear to both Denethor and the Lord of the Nazgl, the resultant triangular relationship brings to the forefront several themes that Tolkien juggles throughout The Lord of the Rings but are particularly evident in this section of The Return of the King, most signicantly the problem of, as Gandalf puts it, pride and despair among the great (RK, V, vii, 129). It is exactly pride and despair that drives Lear to madness and creates the wreckage of his (divided) kingdom. Madness and selshness are of course evil things in general (see Boromirs temptation, Gollums degradation), but in kings these failings are all the more dangerous because of the power focused in the person of the king. Kings are not permitted to despair; they must always hope for their people. Gandalf says essentially this to Denethor when he tells him that your part is to go out to the battle of your City, where maybe death awaits you. This you know in your heart (RK, V, vii, 129). This

146

Tolkiens Prose Style

productive use of pride and despair is in fact the path that omer takes in his madness and griefwhich are temporaryturning his own personal pain into an instrument for the service of his people and his cause. omer avoids Lears fate because his sense of responsibility toward his own people overcomes his individual grief (RK, V, vi, 122). Tolkien thus seems to be suggesting that madness and grief at the loss of loved ones, or at the probable loss of ones beloved city, are not per se irrational and evil responses, but to succumb to them by committing additional evil is indeed a sin. In a medieval context, this would be the sin of wanhope, of abandoning faith in God and refusing to believe that one can be saved in even the darkest circumstances.20 Chaucers Parsons Tale discusses this sin and its cures in great detail. Tolkiens treatment of kingly responsibility (in Denethor, Thoden, and omer) is yet another example of the complexities of his thought: it is a democratic virtue for kings to care more about their people than themselves; the king as servant of as well as ruler over his people is a standard trope of medieval and post-medieval discussions of kingship.21 Yet Tolkien nowhere questions the authority of kings to rule based solely on their blood-lines. Thoden even describes the kingdom of Rohan as his personal property when he tells Saruman that the wizard would have no right to rule me and mine for your own prot even if Saruman were ten times as wise (TT, III, x, 185). Further complicating the matter is the real damage that Denethor does to other people through his evil actions. The madness of kings is not like the madness of ordinary men, and through Denethors behavior not only is his own life lost, but also those of Thoden and the porter whom Beregond slays at the entrance to the Hallows. This seems to me another clear link to Lear, where others suffer for the kings faults. The addition of the Lord of the Nazgl into the equation, however, shows that there is an additional telos for the despair and madness of the powerful: the ultimate, active evil of the Witch King that we see as a parallel to Denethors attempt to burn Faramir alive. It is of course speculation to try to determine how the Black Captain fell to Sauron, but it seems to me that Tolkien, with the triangular connection of Denethor, Lear, and the Lord of the Nazgl, suggests that it is through the despair of not being able to accomplish ones sworn and beloved duty to country that a man may be ensnared. Certainly Denethor had other motivations pushing him close to the edge of evil: his jealousy towards the disguised Aragorn (when Aragorn served Gondor as Thorongil) points out that Denethor too closely identies his citys glory and survival with his own exalted position, and Tolkien says as much in Appendix A (RK, A, 335-37). But despair at the loss in the long defeat (to use Galadriels words in FR, II, vii, 372), the very spiritual sickness

147

Michael D.C. Drout

that Gandalf cures in Thoden (TT, III, vi, 119-23), can be seen as that which leads a good and powerful man to evil, rather than a desire for evil for its own sakewhich would certainly be the default assumption for the Lord of the Nazgls original motivation for serving Sauron. Thus if I am correct in noting the parallels between Lear and Tolkien, the hackneyed criticism that all of Tolkiens characters are either purely good or purely evil is even further shattered (not that it was very substantial to begin with).22 Not only do readers of the Lord of the Rings, as Shippey and others have noted, see the good fall away into evil (Saruman, Boromir, Denethor),23 but we may nd the good that they once were in the backgrounds of those who have turned to evil. If the Lord of the Nazgl was originally like Denethor, a great and powerful man driven to madness and enslavement by the sin of wanhope, a sin brought on by external circumstances, but nevertheless a sin, then more of the full complexity of Tolkiens thought is evident, for the evil character was not originally evil (as Elrond says of Sauron)24 and the critics who see such characters as one-dimensionally evil thus miss the important discussion of free will and duty that undergirds Tolkiens moral philosophy for Middle-earth.25 The dramatization of these themes in Lear is supposedly an example of the great genius of Shakespeare, a genius no one doubts. It is therefore signicant, it seems to me, that Tolkien adds to the discussion not only the negative examples discussed above, but the positive examples of omer, Thoden, and, of course, Aragorn, the king in exile who has devoted his entire life to service before seeking rule. We might thus further extend this analysis to see parts of The Return of the King as a commentary on the themes brought forth by Shakespeare in King Lear. Lear might have avoided his madness, and he certainly would have avoided his tragedy, if from the beginning he, like Aragorn, had been focused upon his duty of service rather than the prerogatives of kingly (and fatherly) power. He might have pulled back from the brink, like omer, if he were able to see that his people at that moment desperately needed leadership. The above discussion suggests links between Lear and The Return of the King at both the stylistic and the thematic levels. Although such links do not prove the aesthetic worth of Tolkiens work, they do show that The Lord of the Rings is not, as has sometimes been claimed,26 completely separate from major currents of literary style and thought (although Tolkien was of course deliberately outside the fashionable currents of his day).27 Furthermore, the literature so invoked is not the supposedly uninuential literature of the early Middle Ages, but that of Shakespeare, the very heart of the English literary tradition, whose invocation elsewhere in twentieth-century texts is often taken as a hallmark of authorial competence and seriousness. In pointing out this linkage of

148

Tolkiens Prose Style

The Return of the King to King Lear, I have shown how Tolkien was engaged directly in a continuing evaluation and elaboration of some of the great themes of English literature. In his presentation of the dangers, virtues, and duties of kingship, Tolkien has advanced Shakespeares discussion and raised issues as important in the twenty-rst century as they were in the seventeenth. Are we to dismiss King Lear because its source is a silly folktale? Obviously not. And we would be equally foolish to dismiss The Return of the King from a discussion of the treatment of politics by twentyrst-century writers, even though Tolkiens work resides fully within the fantasy genre. I now return to the style as a thing in itself rather than merely as a means of invoking a larger, traditional context. As I have noted, the style of the passage in The Return of the King is metonymically linked to the passage in Lear through what can be called a gure of grammar, the non-standard sentence structure used by both Tolkien and Shakespeare. But what if we did not have the Shakespearean parallel? Would the style of the key sentence, and that of the passage as a whole, be effective in achieving Tolkiens aesthetic purpose? Rosebury criticizes the battle of owyn and the Lord of the Nazgl as highly-wrought with risky heroic mannerisms (Rosebury 67-68), but, as we shall see, I am not sure this judgment is entirely negative.28 It is worth making a brief linguistic analysis of the key sentence in the passage Come not between the Nazgl / dragon and his prey/ wrath. First, let us examine what can be called the canonical form of the sentence, which would be expressed [You] do not come between the Nazgl / dragon and his prey/ wrath (see Figure 1).29 The NP of the sentence is simply You, with the remainder of the sentence being composed of a VP inside of which is the auxilliary do, the negative not and another VP that includes the main verb come and the prepositional phrase between. To get from this structure to Tolkiens (and Shakespeares) surface structure, we apply several transformation rules. You deletion is a standard method of marking the imperative mood (although its deletion is not required and in fact using you in an imperative sentence can increase the urgency of the command). In this case you deletion removes the obvious subject of the sentence and in fact reduces the surface structure of the sentence to a type of VP called a V-bar. This deletion of the NP would move the VP do not come between to the very beginning of the sentence. The next transformation is the deletion of the dummy morpheme do from the beginning of the sentence, leaving us with the ungrammatical *not come between With the auxilliary do now missing from the leftmost slot in the sentence, the main verb come is permitted to move to this crucial location, and the PP nested within the VP now moves up to

149

Michael D.C. Drout

a regular PP with two NPs and a conjunction beneath it (Figure 2). The non-canonical sentence allows the rst word out of the Lord of the Nazgls mouth to be an imperative verb directed at Dernhelm / owyn. Given the power of all the Nazgl to summon and command that we have seen elsewhere in The Lord of the Rings30 the reader sensitive to the prose style will, for a brief moment, see the Lord of the Nazgls communication with owyn as of a piece with his manipulation of other individuals and as tting with the Nazgls powers of domination and control. Deleting do also allows Tolkien to avoid even for an instant the readers being distracted by the function word do, instead beginning the dramatic confrontation with a verb of action. The use of the negative not immediately after come (permitted by the deletion of do) then serves to refocus the scene on the Nazgls desire to destroy Theoden, not Dernhelm. One can in fact read the scene as explicating, in micro, the Nazgls ravening hunger to dominate and destroy living beings. Immediately upon seeing Dernhelm/owyn, the Nazgl, for an instant, seeks to summon her. He then turns to his more pressing task. The grammar of the sentence gives us a brief look at the thought processes

S NP Pron Aux VP NEG VP V PP

You

do

not

come

between the Nazgl and his prey.

Figure 1
150

Tolkiens Prose Style

of the monster. The poetic term for this forced re-interpretation of the sentence is apo koinu. Continuing the analysis of this sentence illuminates the Nazgls character even more clearly. Dernhelm/owyn is commanded not to come between the Nazgl and his prey; the Lord of the Nazgl refers to himself in the third person, as a thing, but he also refers to Theodens body as his prey, using the possessive adjective to mark ownership. This jarring contrast of speaking simultaneously about oneself in the third person and proclaiming ownership (i.e., the Lord of the Nazgl does not own himself, but he believes that Theodens body is his) illustrates the loss of selfhood but not loss of acquisitiveness that is perfectly in keeping with the Nazgls character as a Ringwraith: note that Gollum frequently uses both the self-referential third person and the possessive. The character of a Ringwraith is exactly to have lost self while becoming possessed by insatiable desire, or as owyn notes in the draft passage from The War of the Ring (quoted above), the Witch King has been devoured by Sauron (365-66).

S VP V V NEG Prep NP Det Come not between the N Nazgl and PP NP Conj NP Poss his N prey.

Figure 2
151

Michael D.C. Drout

Immediately after commanding Dernhelm/owyn not to interfere, the Lord of the Nazgl issues his threat, which returns to the rst sense of the verb come with which the passage begins: Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to the houses of lamentation, beyond all darkness, where thy esh shall be devoured, and thy shrivelled mind be left naked to the Lidless Eye. Now the summons that was implicit in come but which had been temporarily removed via not (thus leading to an apo koinu effect) is reinvoked and Dernhelm/owyn is indeed menaced with a horrible command. Note that the Nazgl still continues to speak of himself in the third person but that his additional threat (beyond bearing Dernhelm/owyn away) is put into the passive voice. The Nazgl works as the agent of the Lidless Eye and, master of power and terror or no, he lacks individual agency, even for evil. We should also respect Tolkiens horric artistry in the passage, particularly in the use of the phrase shrivelled mind. Here again Tolkien causes readers to hold two ideas simultaneously: it is Derhhelm/owyns mind that will be devoured, but the word shriveled invokes an image of the brain, naked and disembodied. This image is more terrifying than the ghost-like existence that the literal text of the threat suggests (i.e., if all esh is devoured, the brain would be also), but by stylistic conation of mind and brain conveys an image of torture that is both mental and physical.31 This image of horror is abruptly interrupted by the sound of Dernhelm/owyns sword. Tolkiens use of the passive voice focuses the readers attention not on the agency of owyn/Dernhelm (an agency called into question by the hypnotic power of the Lord of the Nazgl) but rather on Merrys perception of the scene though closed eyes. Using the active voice (Dernhelm drew his sword) would have shattered the carefully established point of view. owyns statement Do what you will; but I will hinder it, if I may then grammatically echoes the Lord of the Nazgls original command but turns the rhetorical tables on the monster. One you is deleted from the surface structure of her sentence to form the imperative, but this deletion also serves to show owyns lack of respect for the Lord of the Nazgl. She does not address him. Rather, her reference to him is a pronoun embedded in a VP so that the you comes almost at the end of the sentence. owyns next words contrasts her own agency with the Nazgls lack of individual freedom;she uses the pronoun I twice (in this exchange the Lord of the Nazgl never uses I, only the object-case pronoun me),32 and concludes her sentence with an if -clause that further emphasizes both the freedom that she possesses and her relative lack of power (in contrast to the Nazgl, who possesses power but not freedom). The Nazgls response, in the form of a rhetorical question, shows

152

Tolkiens Prose Style

that owyn has gotten the upper hand in the verbal duel, for the Nazgl actually states the outcome threatened by owyn, and even though he phrases it as a question, he nevertheless brings the idea of being hindered into being from his own mouth in an echo of owyns statement. The remainder of the scene is relatively straightforward action in standard English subject-verb-object order with one important exception, owyns statement But no living man am I. The transformation of I am no living man to no living man am I could be considered an archaism, since Tolkiens sentence is in object-verb-subject order, but in fact rather than mere archaism, this modication of traditional word order is absolutely essential for aesthetic effect of the sentence, since owyn is again echoing and mocking the Lord of the Nazgls statement No living man may hinder me, a statement written in subject-verb- object order. If owyn were to say I am no living man, the rhetorical effect would be lost. The further non-standard constructions in the paragraph owyn I am and if you be not deathless are also not uncontrolled archaisms but rather stylistic necessities. I am owyn omunds daughter would place two similar names in too close proximity for the purposes of the rapidly moving paragraph (note that Tolkien does stack names in other places, but those are in moments of formal speech, not immediate combat); breaking them up with I am provides a pleasing aural effect. Furthermore, if you be not deathless is in fact grammatically accurate for the situation, though it is a subtlety of English grammar not often noted: be, while not a pure subjunctive, indicates the progressive aspect of an action (Kaplan 177-84). In Anglo-Saxon, which lacks a specied future tense, beo is in fact a present subjunctive. Since owyn does not at this point know if the Lord of the Nazgl is or is not deathless, her use of be is both grammatically and logically justied as well as being tied to Anglo-Saxon usage, which is consistent with her being of the people of Rohan.33 The only remaining non-standard usages in the scene are the use of the interjection lo!, the verbs smite and blench, and the word naught to describe the Nazgls invisible head.34 Rosebury writes that one might well wish away the lo! and the behold!, calling the use of lo! an admittedly crude note, although he then goes on to argue that the exalted, as if it were scriptural style of the passage invites us to perceive the intervention of the Witch-king on his pterodactyllike steed as an epiphany of the diabolic and thus might be justied (68). This is effective criticism, and all the more valuable for actually bothering to pay attention to the interplay of subject and style. But I think Rosebury is mistaken in invoking Scripture as a stylistic model for the passage.35 The use of lo!, while it certainly may have Scriptural

153

Michael D.C. Drout

antecedents, has a much closer source (for Tolkiens writing, at least) in Anglo-Saxon literature, where the word hwaet! is used to mark not only the beginning of poems but also scenes of great import (the rst word in Beowulf is hwaet!).36 Tolkien, in his translations of Beowulf rendered hwaet as lo! Likewise the words smite and blench both have immediate Anglo-Saxon antecedents, the Old English verbs smitan and blencan. These words are completely appropriate for owyn (she uses smite: blench is used by the narrator) because the Rohirrim speak Anglo-Saxon and thus a narrator who is associated with owyn would be creating a unity of affect (to use the Joycean term) by using words with Anglo-Saxon roots.37 The use of naught (from Old English na + wiht = no thing) serves as an additional link between the Lord of the Nazgl and Denethor. Note that when Denethor is at the height of his rage, just before he burns himself, he tells Gandalf, But if doom denies this to me, then I will have naught: neither life diminished, nor love halved, nor honour abated (RK, V, vii, 130). The nothingness that Denethor, in his selsh despair, calls for is in fact the nothingness that is the Lord of the Nazgls current being.38 Furthermore, Denethors I will have naught, neither phrasing is reminiscent of Lears repeated negations, his nos and nevers again reinforcing the triangle of Lear, Nazgl, and Denethor. owyns nal statement in the scene I will smite you, if you touch him is structurally parallel with her previous threat I will hinder it, if I may, but this time the warning is made more pointed, directly at the Nazgl. I will smite you is nearly as simple a sentence as can be formed in modern English (only the modal will makes the sentence even slightly complex) and her change from the subjunctive if I may to if you touch him gives owyn complete command of the situation even though both statements are if-clauses. Just as the sound of her ringing sword begins to cut through the haze of fear generated by the Lord of the Nazgl, so too does the parallel steel of her voice shatter the supernatural malice of the monster as effectively as her eventual sword stroke. This analysis, then, shows that Tolkiens style in this particular scene (one previously singled out for criticism) is anything but simply archaic. Rather, Tolkien has created precisely controlled stylistic and grammatical effects, with a rigorously maintained point of view that not only frames the scene in terms of Merrys presence but also links it, grammatically, metonymically, and lexically, with the rest of the world he has built and with the wider intertextual culture of which The Lord of the Rings is a part. After examining the scene in such detail it becomes clear that Tolkiens deliberate stylistic construct is in fact remarkably rich and successful not only in his own terms but also in terms of the stylistic canons of

154

Tolkiens Prose Style

Modernist Literature in which, supposedly, form follows function. The analysis also supports Ursula Le Guins contention that the craftsmanship of The Lord of the Rings is consistent at all levels of construction, from the individual sentence to the macro structure of the journey, a repeated stress and release pattern (105). This tightly inter-connected series of aesthetic effects (one might even call the multi-level repetition a fractal structure) is one of the aspects of Tolkiens ction that separates his from other fantasies, and other forms of literature, that are far less meticulously crafted. The foregoing analysis has provided some suggestions, I hope, for how Tolkiens prose style might be approached without abandoning the productive research pathways of source study or thematic analysis. If I am correct, much of the great beauty and power of The Lord of the Rings comes in part from Tolkiens ability to produce aesthetic effects simultaneously on multiple levels, so that the effects created by, say, the use of Anglo-Saxon syntax and lexicon are connected with the themes of cultural interaction and individual morality that are integral to Tolkiens vision. Critics who have been embarrassed by the non-standard elements of Tolkiens style (and they are more common than they are likely to admit in print) might want to reconsider their defensiveness and instead try to determine why that style, as different as it is from canonical Modernism, works so effectively to achieve Tolkiens purposes. And critics who have focused solely on source or themes should note that the analysis of style may unearth new sources and shed new light on traditional themes as well. NOTES 1 A conspicuous counterexample is Paul Edmund Thomas exemplary Some of Tolkiens Narrators, in Flieger and Hofstetter (161-81), but Thomas analysis is only tangentially related to my own in this article since I am focusing more on dialogue than narrative voice. For the most effective sustained argument about the academic respectability of the study of Tolkiens work, see Shippey, J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. For a discussion of why many other defenses of Tolkien have fallen short, see Drout and Wynne (11317). For recent, particularly sad but entirely representative specimens of these complaints, see Turner (16) and Shulevitz. Shulevitz in fact appears willing to discount the entire Lord of the Rings because Tolkien uses the phrase let us hasten. For effective defenses of Tolkiens 155

Michael D.C. Drout

style, see Rosebury (54-80) and Shippey ( J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century 223-25). For a Modernist defense of Tolkiens craft see Kramer: Now a grown-up reader, I found myself astonished by the unagging quality of the prose, the range of Tolkiens descriptive powers, by how integrally the plot is integrated with the landscape. . . . How many writers can write 15 pages describing a trek through a sinister forest without repeating themselves? It is also worth noting the contradiction between some criticisms of Tolkiens prose: on the one hand he is overly archaic and full of wrench[ed] syntax (Stimpson 25); on the other he writes in transparent, workmanlike prose (Attebery 21-23). Tolkien himself argued convincingly that his style was intentional and an essential aesthetic component of his writing (see Letter 171, Letters 225-26). 4 5 6 See Shippey ( J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century 305-28 ) and Timmons (1-10). There are additional parallels with H. Rider Haggards Eric Brighteyes, but that discussion is beyond the scope of this essay. Here I am adopting John Miles Foleys denition of metonymy: within a traditional literature, use of traditional referents (which can be formulas, type-scenes, grammatical gures or stylistic idiosyncrasies) can invoke, pars pro toto, the larger and more echoic context of the tradition (Foley 7). Foleys work is focused on oral and oral-derived texts, but I think it can also be used to support intertextual references like this one. The phrase northern courage, which Tolkien uses in Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics is not entirely original with him but has antecedents in W. P. Ker, The Dark Ages 57-58 and E. V. Gordon, An Introduction to Old Norse xxviii-xxxv. Although it may have appeared in adventure romance novels of the kind that Tolkien would have read as a boy. With the exception of the passage quoted above, recreant is not found in electronic full-text searches of H, LotR, S, UT, Farmer Giles, Smith, Roverandom, and The History of Middle-earth, volumes I-V and X. See below for a discussion of the word in History of Middle-earth volumes VI-IX. History of Middle-earth volumes XI and XII were visually but not electronically searched. A more typically Tolkienian anachronistic word might be blench in the same passage (though not quoted above). This word (from Anglo-Saxon blencan), is found in Layamon, Ancrene Wisse, the Owl and the Nightingale, Chaucers Knights Tale, and Shakespeares Measure for Measure and would be 156

8 9

Tolkiens Prose Style

more likely than the etymologically French recreant to be used by Tolkien independently of a specic source such as Lear. A version of recreant, the late Middle English recrayed, appears in the York Resurrection play, where it is spoken by Pilate. This parallel is suggestive because Pilate calls the soldier false recrayed knight (415, l. 364) while Denethor (raging in the same way that Pilate rages in medieval tradition) rst says to Gandalf Now thou stealest the hearts of my knights also immediately before saying Come, if you are not all recreant! (130). This is the only time that Denethor uses the word knight to describe an ordinary soldier of Gondor. Otherwise Tolkien reserves knight (up to this point) for the mounted men of Rohan and Dol Amroth. 10 Catherine Stimpson singles out eyot as an example of Tolkiens poor writing: If we expect He came to an island in the middle of the river, he will write to an eyot he came(25). This cavil is effectively demolished by Rosebury, who notes (among other errors by Stimpson) that the phrase to an eyot he came never appears in LotR (65-66). 11 Note that fool here is a term of endearment for Cordelia. 12 The seven stars Lear refers to are the Pleiades; to my knowledge the source of the seven stars in Tolkiens rhyme has not been completely explained, although the Valacirca, the Sickle of the Valar and sign of doom has seven stars (S 48). In the index entry under Star, as emblem, Tolkien writes that the banners of the seven (of nine) of Elendils ships which bore palantri were adorned with stars (RK, Index, 440). See also Christopher Tolkiens discussion in The War of the Ring of what exactly J.R.R. Tolkien meant by the star of the Dnedain that is said, in the Tale of Years (Appendix B) to have been given to Master Samwise (War 309 n. 8). Perhaps the seven stars of Lear insinuated themselves into Gandalf s rhyme or into the earlier mythology and are thus the ultimate source for the number of stars on Elendils banner. 13 Tolkien is here referring to R. W. Chambers, Beowulf and the Heroic Age, the introduction to Archibald Strongs Beowulf Translated into Modern English Rhyming Verse. 14 For Tolkiens comment that he disliked cordially Shakespeares plays, see Carpenters Biography (27). 15 I am using kingship for what could more properly be called kingship and / or stewardship because, in Denethors mind at least, the two have become one. 157

Michael D.C. Drout

16 In fact, it is hard to imagine that in a discussion of the madness of kings King Lear would not immediately come to mind for any student of English literature. Shakespeares play is the locus classicus for the topic. 17 For just a moment we will set aside the omer / Lear comparison. 18 My contention is not completely inconsistent with Shippeys discussion of Denethor and Saruman in J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century (16974). 19 See RK, Appendix A for the blood of Nmenoreans being mingled with lesser Men after the Kin-strife (328). See also Faramirs comments to Frodo (TT, IV, v, 286-87). 20 This is the sin that Sam seems constitutionally unable to commit; even though he has no objective hope, he refuses to give in to despair (TT, IV, iii, 246). For a good discussion see Shippey, J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century (152-55). 21 Not that Tolkien needed such sources, since the politics are obvious and important even in the twentieth century, but both Piers Ploughman (literature) and the Policraticus of John of Salisbury (philosophy) present rather extended medieval meditations upon the theme. 22 Summarized neatly and then effectively demolished in Shippey, J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century (147-48). See also Rosebury (3334). 23 See Shippey, Orcs, Wraiths, Wights and Tolkien as Post-War Writer. 24 For nothing is evil in the beginning. Even Sauron was not so (FR, II, ii, 281). 25 For a more nuanced discussion see Ellison (21-29). 26 The criticism that there is no lineal connection between Tolkien and other important literature is the same cavil aimed at Beowulf and Anglo-Saxon literature by no less a literary luminary than Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch (21-25). 27 See Shippey, J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century, 305-18. 28 Rosebury says that while the stylistic variation in the passage could make for an unsightly patchwork . . . in fact the amplitude of the narrative is such as to allow gradual modulations between the exalted style and the plain (68).

158

Tolkiens Prose Style

29 I have used standard tree diagrams and linguistic terminology. Abbreviations are: S = Sentence, NP = Noun Phrase, VP = Verb Phrase, PP = Prepositional Phrase, N = Noun, Prep = Preposition, Pron = Pronoun, Det = Determiner (sometimes called an article), Poss = Possessive Adjective. A canonical sentence is composed of an NP and a VP. For further explanations and discussion, see Kaplan (218-10, 230-32 and passim). 30 See FR, I, iii, 83; FR, I, xi, 207-208; FR, I, xii, 225-27; FR, II, ii, 25859;TT, IV, viii, 315-16; RK V, iv, 92-94, 97, 102-103. 31 For a similar image of monstrosity see C.S. Lewiss That Hideous Strength. 32 The Lord of the Nazgl uses the possessive pronoun my in his exchange with Gandalf (RK, V, iv, 103). 33 John Tinklers Old English in Rohan notes the use of specic Anglo-Saxon words and phrases as part of the vocabulary of the Rohirrim, but he does not examine the embedding of Anglo-Saxon words in other contexts. 34 For an explanation of Tolkiens use of an expanded lexicon, see Flieger (Splintered Light 47). 35 Rosebury may be thinking of Luke 2:10, but there are other places in The Return of the King where the Biblical inuence is far more pronounced, for example in the song of the eagle to the people of Minas Tirith after the fall of Sauron (RK, VI, v, 241). This parallel is noted by Shippey (Road 151-53). 36 Hwaet is literally what, but the word is used to begin a number of poems, including Beowulf, The Dream of the Rood, Andreas, Exodus, and Juliana. Tolkien calls it a genuine anacrucis, that is, an exclamation separate from the regular metrics of the line. Its purpose is to focus the readers attention, which it does successfully in both Old English poetry and The Return of the King. Tolkien translated hwt as lo! He also used lo! in his Trin poem in Lays. 37 owyns use of dwimmerlaik is also signicant in establishing her as a native speaker of Old English (see Shippey, Road 224). Note that in his original drafts of the scene Tolkien was still struggling with the proper spelling for this word; he rst tried dwimor-lakes (War 365 and see Christopher Tolkiens note 2 on page 372). While I believe that the parallel use of lo! in RK and Beowulf weakens the case for a Scriptural parallel, I do not in this case believe that the actual details of the battle between owyn and the Lord of the Nazgl are 159

Michael D.C. Drout

drawn from Anglo-Saxon sources (though there are some echoes of Judith). For a scene whose dramatic contours are almost certainly drawn from Old English, and which uses Old English syntax even more obviously, see the battle between Fingon and Gothmog, Lord of Balrogs, in the Silmarillion (193). 38 For a discussion of Denethors naught, see Shippey ( J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century 173-74). WORKS CITED Attebery, Brian. Tolkien, Crowley, and Postmodernism. In The Shape of the Fantastic, edited by Olena H. Saciuk. New York: Greenwood, 1990. Carpenter, Humphrey. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 1977. Chambers, R. W. Beowulf and the Heroic Age. Beowulf Translated into Modern English Rhyming Verse, edited by Archibald Strong. London: Constable, 1925. Drout, Michael D. C. and Hilary Wynne. Tom Shippeys J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century and a look back at Tolkien criticism since 1982. Envoi 9, no. 2 (2000): 101-34. Ellison, John A. Images of Evil in Tolkiens World. Mallorn 28 (2000): 21-29. Flieger, Verlyn. Splintered Light: Logos and Language in Tolkiens World. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1983. Flieger, Verlyn, and Carl F. Hostetter, eds. Tolkiens Legendarium: Essays on The History of Middle Earth. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. Foley, John Miles. Immanent Art. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1991. Giddings, Robert, ed. J.R.R. Tolkien: This Far Land. London: Vision, 1983. Gordon, E. V. An Introduction to Old Norse. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1927. Kaplan, Jeffrey P. English Grammar: Principles and Facts. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1989.

160

Tolkiens Prose Style

Ker, W. P. The Dark Ages. 1904. Westwood, CT: Greenwood Press, 1979. Kramer, Kathryn. Eternal Sense of Place. New York Times, 30 December 2002. Le Guin, Ursula K. Rhythmic Patters in the Lord of the Rings. In Meditations on Middle-earth, edited by Karen Haber. New York: St. Martins, 2001. Lewis, C. S. That Hideous Strength: A Modern Fairy-Tale for Grown-Ups. New York: Scribner, 1996. Quiller-Couch, Arthur, On the Lineage of English Literature. In Cambridge Lectures (London: J. M. Dent and Sons, 1943). Rosebury, Brian. Tolkien: A Critical Assessment. London: St. Martins, 1992. Shakespeare, William. King Lear, edited by David Bevington. In The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, vol. 5. New York: Bantam Books, 1988. Shippey, T. A. The Road to Middle-Earth. London: Allen and Unwin, 1982. . Tolkien as Post-War Writer. In Scholarship & Fantasy: Proccedings of the Tolkien Phenomenon May 1992, edited by K. J. Battarbee. Anglicana Turkuensia 12 (1993): 217-36. . Tolkien as a Post-War Writer. In Proceedings of the J.R.R. Tolkien Centenary Conference 1992, edited by Patricia Reynolds and Glen H. GoodKnight. Milton Keynes: Tolkien Society, 1995. . Orcs, Wraiths, Wights: Tolkiens Images of Evil. In J.R.R. Tolkien and his Literary Resonances, edited by George Clark and Daniel Timmons. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. . J.R.R. Tolkien: Author of the Century. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2001. Shulevitz, Judith. Hobbits in Hollywood. New York Times, 22 April 2001. Stimpson, Catherine. J.R.R. Tolkien. New York: Columbia University Press, 1969. Timmons, Daniel Patrick. Introduction. In J.R.R. Tolkien and his Literary Resonances: Views of Middle-earth, edited by George Clark and Daniel Patrick Timmons. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000.

161

Michael D.C. Drout

Tinkler, John. Old English in Rohan. In Tolkien and the Critics, edited by Neil D. Isaacs and Rose A. Zimbardo. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968. Turner, Jenny. Reasons for Liking Tolkien. The London Review of Books 23, no. 22 (15 November 2001): 15-24. York Plays: The Plays Performed by the Crafts and Mysteries of York on the Day of Corpus Christi in the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries ..., edited by Lucy Toulmin Smith. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885.

162

When Philology Becomes Ideology: The Russian Perspective of J. R. R. Tolkien

OLGA MARKOVA
Translated by M. T. Hooker Although I am old and gray of head, And free of the stresses that others all dread, I would learn English1 and only because The Professor in it wove a marvelous clause. Russian Tolkienist Limerick nterest in the literary creations of J.R.R. Tolkien took ight almost immediately after the publication of Lord of the Rings (1955). The political system in Russia during the Soviet period, however, was not quite receptive to a book like this. The Iron Curtain kept the Russian reader well protected from everything that was happening in western society. The concepts of twentieth-century English literature were distorted and details extremely scanty. The English authors who were translated were carefully selected, and the ofcial publication of translations of the works of such authors as G. K. Chesterton, C. S. Lewis, Charles Williams was practically impossible. That the publication of Kenneth Grahames The Wind in the Willows was hindered because the censor thought that the chapter Piper at the Gates of Dawn was dangerous is an excellent example of the situation that Tolkiens books were destined to encounter in the Soviet Union. In the 1950s, a group of translators who were devotees of western literature formed around Zinaida Bobyr, a well-known translator of science ction. The popularity of this genre in the USSR grew in the late-1950s following the launch of the rst articial earth satellite by the Soviet Union in 1957. Bobyrs list of translation credits includes Brian Aldiss, Isaac Asimov, John Gordon, Edmond Hamilton, Clifford Simak, and Stanislaw Lem, whom she translated from Polish. She was the one who rst decided to acquaint the Soviet reader with The Lord of the Rings. In order to get around the barriers of censorship, however, she had to nd a way to make it resemble the literature that was acceptable in the USSR, which meant that she had to reduce Tolkiens text either to a fairy tale or to science ction.
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

163

Olga Markova
Bobyrs translation combined The Hobbit and the trilogy under the common name of The Lay of the Ring [ K]. The book was subjected to a considerable abridgement, and at the beginning of each chapter there was a short interlude. The translators plan was that the book would be introduced by two letters, one written by Tolkien and one written by an imaginary friend of his. In his letter to the readers, Tolkien said that he received the manuscript and the accompanying cover letter from a friend who works at the Institute for Difcult Studies in Derbyshire. In this letter, the friend told Bobyrs Tolkien that as a result of some unbelievable circumstances he had been part of a certain experiment, which had ended tragically. In addition to Tolkiens friend, the other participants in the experiment were an Engineer, a Physicist, a Chemist, a Computer Scientist, and a Coordinator, the same cast of characters who appear in Stanislaw Lems Eden. The origin of the Tolkiens renowned All-powerful Ring was explained scientically as the Ring having been found when a drill core of basalt was melted. The heroes of the interlude record the Rings history in a series of ashbacks, drawing the conclusion that the Ring is a special device, a repository of information, which it releases when subjected to sparks.2 This approach was the translators idea of how to make it easier to get Tolkien into print. Fortunately, this monstrous plan was not successful, and this hideous hybrid remained a manuscript. Bobyrs work can, however, be viewed as the rst Russian novel inspired by The Lord of the Rings. The difference between this and other Russian Tolkienesque literature is that this one is attributed to Tolkien, and not to its real author. Having failed to publish The Lord of the Rings as Science-Fantasy, Bobyr tried to turn it into Fairy-Fantasy, producing yet another version of the trilogy under her editorship, adding something that nds no corollary at all in Tolkiens works: The Silver Crown of Westerness. In the Chapter Across the Mountains, Gandalf describes it as one of the great treasures that the foreign travelers from across the sea brought with them. It is not just any crown either. Whosoever dares to place the Silver Crown upon his head will receive omniscience and the greatest of wisdom, or will be turned to ashes on the spot, if he is not sufciently prepared for it. At the end of The Lay of the Ring, Aragorn uses the crown for his coronation. Despite all these machinations, disguising The Lord of the Rings as a translation, peppering it with elements from Russian folklore and terminology from science-ction (the term foreign travelers, for example, is used as an euphemism for extra-terrestrials in Russian science ction), even this abridged retelling was not allowed to be published. It was, however, typed by hand in three copies, which were bound into

164

When Philology Becomes Ideology

books that made the rounds of a small circle of the translators friends in the mid-1960s. It was nally ofcially published during Perestroika in 1990. The danger of The Lord of the Rings that was noted by some commentators was the hidden allegory of the conict between the individualist West and the totalitarian, Communist East. In a newspaper article entitled Tolkiens Cosmos, the social order instituted by Saruman is termed communistic, because the description of the lands under his sway could have easily been applied to the Soviet Union. Everything that the farmers grew was collected (think collective farm). Prohibitive rules and regulations were posted everywhere. All travelers from other countries were controlled. Defenders of justice and freethinkers were punished. The commentators conclusion being that The Lord of the Rings isamong other thingsa political pamphlet in which Tolkien included an encoded description of the conict of the political darkness of the East and the freedom of the West, and a prediction of the inevitable fall of Mordor and its analog on the real earth, the Soviet Union.3 It is interesting to notice that modern Communists think differently about this. They view the anti-industrial ideas of Tolkiens works as a return to primordial Communism, and discuss the possibility of creating a type of Red, Communist fantasy, whose father could be considered Tolkien.4 Soviet censors were not so optimistically inclined, and, therefore, the rst complete, ofcially approved translation done by Vladimir Muravev and Andrej Kistyakovskij (there are now nine published Russian translations) was not published until 1992. The appearance of the Muravev and Kistyakovskij translation was a dening moment in the history of Russian Tolkienism. The translation was maximally Russied and is very much more emotionally specic than the original. Sam and Frodo in the Muravev and Kistyakovskij translation are presented as very close friends, and the elves sound like uncouth teenagers when they speak. The translators emphasize aggression as a dominating motivation. In the preface to the translation, Muravev wrote: The magical world, through which Mr. Baggins journeyed, is not all that magical. It is our world in disguise, but you can see through the disguise with a little experience.5 Therefore, all of Tolkiens text was perceived as the personal experience of someone doing battle with the Soviet power structure. In addition to that, the intentionally aggressive tone helped the translators bring out the nature of authoritarianism: This is a book about the nature of power, which seeks after power over mankind, power without morals, an enslaving power, based on lies and violence.6 The Lord of the Rings was turned into a three-volume banner for the ght for freedom and human rights. It was natural that this viewpoint caused a certain mutation in the perception of Tolkiens works by the Russian

165

Olga Markova
reader and that the Russian brand of Tolkienism is a direct reection of that mutation. Even in this distorted form, The Lord of the Rings became a breath of fresh air for many a Russian intellectual. The Tolkienist Movement began to take shape at Moscow State University, and, almost immediately, an informer sent the KGB a denunciation of this secretive, underground group that went off into the woods to hold secret meetings and practice hand-to-hand combat. The student body was inltrated and it was learned that these people were reading the works of some American author, and that they called themselves Tolkienists.7 Inasmuch as the majority of the rst Tolkienists had been in the Comsomol, and some of them had even become Communists, the essence of the movement was expressed as an opposition to the structures of government and the movements ideological base was a revolt against the Soviet system. It was during this time that an article appeared entitled The Sources and Ideas of Russian Tolkienism. An indication of its content can be found in its antecedent. In this article, A. Barkova paraphrased the well-known work entitled The Sources and Ideas of Russian Communism by the Russian religious philosopher N. A. Berdyaev (1874-1948), who left Russia after the Revolution of 1917, and who attained the rank of Professor at Cambridge in 1947. Much in the same way that Berdyaev shifted from a philosophy of Marxism to a philosophy of individualism and freedom, the rst Tolkienists, reading the distorted Muravev and Kistyakovskij translation, saw in it a way out of the dead-end ideology, the structured, totalitarian world of evil, lies, and slavery. Tolkiens were not the only ideas that were sucked into the philosophical vacuum of Russia at that time. With the fall of the Communist regime, Russia was ooded with literature of so-called foreign Russian authors, philosophers, and historians, who had not accepted the Revolution and ed abroad after the Soviets took power, people like Berdyaev. There were also the works of banned authors who had been imprisoned in the Stalinist camps, like Solzhenitsyn. People tried to t Tolkiens ideas into the Russian paradigm and interpret them in the light of the teachings of Russian philosophers and theologians. For example, the All-powerful Ring was seen by some as the allegorical embodiment of sin, that Pavel Florenskij8 expounded upon in his The Pillar and Base of Truth. The Russian analogy of Tolkiens secondary world was found by others in The Rose of the World by Daniil Andreev.9 Despite efforts like these to nd tangents to Tolkien in Russian culture, the reason for the popularity of this English author in Russia is that many Russian ideas are abstractly philosophical in character and are of interest only to a narrow circle of intellectuals, while Tolkiens world is close at

166

When Philology Becomes Ideology

hand and seems real to many. The ideas contained in The Lord of the Rings became important and necessary in this unstable country that had long been held in intellectual slavery, because the values presented in Tolkiens books are not abstract categories and not utopian. He translated morality from the realm of words to the realm of action, which gave birth to the need to live Tolkiens world, and led to the creation of role-playing games. The basic trait of Tolkienesque culture in Russia at that time could be characterized as living in two worlds. Tolkiens mythology, which took one beyond the limits of historical time, became a sort of Magic Key to the unknown universe that opened the present time to the world of antiquity. The early 1990s saw Hobbit Games being held in many Russian cities. In Moscow, a City of Masters was founded. Gaming Masters not only worked out scenarios, but also made corresponding props and costumes. In the mid-1990s, the City of Masters counted about two hundred Tolkienesque clubs and organizations as participants in the Hobbit Games. The role-playing movement spread as far as Siberia, where the Siberian Con, which consists of a program of sword-ghting tournaments, concerts of original music, an overview of the games and a grand ball, is still held today. The popularity of the Hobbit Games, was, obviously, also inuenced by the fact that during the last two decades, Russian society has seen a rebirth of courtly gatherings, patriotic monarchists, Cossacks and other stylized recreations of the past, which provided an appropriate backdrop for them. Tolkiens world, however, has proved itself much wiser and more cozy, and, therefore, many Russian intellectuals moved right in to Middle-earth. Playing at The Lord of the Rings, which at rst served as a search for an alternative to Communist ideology, has today become an alternative for the contemporary ideology of the commercialization of society. Nevertheless, it would not be correct to equate Tolkienists with roleplayers, for whom the game has gradually become dominant, pushing Tolkiens books onto the background. The Russian Tolkienist movement underwent an internal split, making it look like a tree with two crowns on a single trunk. There are scholarly Tolkienists whose primary interests are the study and translation of Tolkiens literary legacy, and the creation of their own original songs, poems and art based on his works. There are the gamers, whose playing at Tolkiens bright world has gone beyond the borders of a simple game, to become a lifestyle, to form a special ritual, demanding serious self-discipline. Tolkienists have turned to the sources, which form the base for The Lord of the Rings: the literary heritage of the Celts, Northern mythology

167

Olga Markova
and folklore, etc., and Tolkiens works have become a guidebook into this rational, solid, inspired world. As a counterweight to the cult of technology, the cult of supermen, the cult of violence, Tolkien offered the reader a completely different path: to the earth, into the past, into the depths of myths and fairy tales, and for many this path has proved itself to be the true one, insomuch as the heroes of The Lord of the Rings live in a river of time measured in millennia, and not within the fragile shell of contemporary time, which separates the consciousness of man from its origins. Despite the depth and breadth of the Tolkien phenomenon, the mass media often refuse to note the positive facets of Tolkienism, intentionally exaggerating its sociological effect. Following a sensational article entitled A Black Mass. A Lesson for Life, 10 the Russian FBI (FSBRF) took an interest in Tolkienists. The author of the article accused Tolkiens readers of Satanism and sacricial rituals, an accusation that, when investigated, turned out to be complete nonsense and slander. A reluctance to delve deeper into the true essence of Tolkienism is also engendered by attempts to categorize it as a sect, and to view it as the emergence of neo-religiosity. These attempts are based on a chain of prerequisites. The rst structural prerequisite for the formation of a Tolkienian religion is the presence of a sacred text and the possibility of the construction of a sacred history. The next part of the structure is the presence of Tolkienists who have not read Tolkien.11 This is bound up in the ritual of the giving of names, which is likened to the catechism of new converts to Christianity.12 The reasons listed above, however, are not sufcient for the creation of a sect or neo-religious movement, just as an authors cult following by itself is insufcient. Structures like those above are simply a profanation, a desire to subvert Tolkiens works into a new ideology, a myth of mass culture or a game, the rules of which have little to do with an Oxford Professor. Russians, united by Tolkiens literary works, get together primarily to discuss his works and their own original works based on his creations. They are not locked into a secondary world, nor do they desire to be escapists. They are only expanding the boundaries of the real world. It is Tolkien himself who remains the Lord of the Minds of many a generation of Russian readers, and his books continue to inspire them to the creation of their own secondary worlds. The reason for the unagging popularity of J.R.R. Tolkien in Russia is that the pre-historic reality of his books is a continuation of, or, perhaps, the pre-quel to the thrilling novel written by the Author of the primary world (i.e. God), and, therefore, in any contexteven the most esoteric Tolkiens creations can nd a lively resonance and understanding. Time

168

When Philology Becomes Ideology

and space are not that important here, because the tale of this English author appeals to the universe and eternity. NOTES

There have been three various Russian editions of The Hobbit for Russian-speaking English learners. , (Hobbit, or There and Back Again): . .: , 1982. Learn English with the Hobbit: . J.R.R.T. , . : , 1992. Hobbit, or There and Back Again. : . , 2000.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

. , - // . No. 9, 1997. . . // . 30.01.1997. http://www.communist.ru/cgi-bin/article.cgi?id=0300dudko0101 ... . . 1. // . . . , . . ., 1992. . 15. u , 1992. . 27. . . // , No. 54, 02.08.2001. P. A. Florenskij (1882-1937) was a philosopher, theologian, engineer, biologist, mathematician, poet, orthodox priest, the Russian Leonardo da Vinci. In 1928, he was exiled to the Russian North; in 1933, he was arrested and sentenced to a Stalinist camp. He was executed by ring squad in 1937. The Pillar and Base of Truth is a religious tract, reecting his Weltanschauung, based on the Greek Orthodox tradition, in which he tries to synthesize science and religion, sense and sensibility, reason and intuition. L. Andreev (1906-1959) was a poet, author, religious philosopher, and 169

sociologist. He fought in World War II. In 1947, he was accused of anti-Soviet literary activity, arrested and sentenced to twenty-ve years in prison. The Rose of the World is a synthesis of all the religions of light, in which he tries to create a meta-history of Russia, Russian culture, human evolution and the spiritual growth of the individual. The Rose of the World is full of the mystical revelations of different cultures and religions. In it, Andreev presents his view of the meta-religion of the future as well as a hierarchical system of worlds, both visible and invisible. The book offers a tossed-salad of science, social utopias, and religious inspirations, forming a kind of occult superknowledge and claiming the power of being able to transform the world completely. 10 . . . // , No. 175, 11.09.1998. 11 .. . // , No. 24, 2000. 12 . : . // , No. 26, 2000.

170

NOTES and DOCUMENTS

A Note on Beren and Lthiens Disguise as Werewolf And Vampire-Bat

THOMAS HONEGGER
ource hunting can be a pleasant and rewarding way to pass the time for those Tolkien scholars who plough their strips in the eld of medieval literature for professional and/or recreational reasons. The discussion of Tolkiens possible sources and their inuence on his conception of Middle-earth has yielded important insights into the meaning of his work.1 For the time being, however, it looks as if the most important parallels and analogues have been investigated, although a sources and analogues volume uniting the most important texts still remains a desideratum. Future scholarly endeavor in this eld is therefore likely to yield results that are quantitative (yet another parallel / source of . . .) rather than qualitative. I do not intend to belittle the scholarly effort and diligence that go into such research,2 yet the results are, in my mind, often of minor relevance since they add little that is new to our critical understanding of the professors writings. Nevertheless, it would be wrong to dismiss source hunting altogether since there remain some areas that may prot from the identication of Tolkiens likely models and inuences. The following discussion of a possible source for Beren and Lthiens disguise as werewolf and vampire-bat is intended to provide an example of work in this direction. Most of Tolkiens ction is accessible without specic background information, which is especially true of those works that were published during his lifetime. The stupendous popular success of The Lord of the Rings would not have been possible if it had not at least halfway met the aesthetic expectations of modern readers or touched upon some half-remembered yet strongly felt desire for non-modernistic modes of narrative. Critics may wrinkle their noses at some of Tolkiens out-ofdate literary techniques or ideas,3 but such criticism is the consequence of a conscious choice to use a modernistic yardstick. The Silmarillion, to consider only the rst of the by now numerous posthumous publications, differs insofar as it was not designed to meet the modern readers expectations to the same degree as the works of ction completed during Tolkiens lifetime. Christopher Tolkien did his best to present the
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

171

Thomas Honegger
material as coherently as possible, yet even so its form and content often offend modern notions of narrative cohesion and structural propriety. It is therefore no surprise that many readers nd themselves wondering what the professor might have been thinking when he wrote the texts that went into this volume. Repeated reading helps the reader get used to the style and one eventually learns to accept or even admire many of the initially bewildering elements. Yet there remain some motifs and themes that prove curiously resistant to accommodation and which may not be reconciled with modern aesthetics either by repeated reading or by consulting the usual suspects among medieval source texts (Beowulf, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Ancrene Wisse, Chaucer, to name the most important). It is in such hard cases that the unearthing of possible models can shed light on the workings of Tolkiens literary imagination. The instance under consideration comes from the tale of Beren and Lthiena tale that was of such central importance to Tolkien throughout his life4 that it occurs time and again in his writings.5 The tale, as recounted in The Silmarillion, reverberates with folk tale motifs and archetypal themes and makes a strong appeal to modern readers emotions with its high style. Yet not all motifs and themes harmonize with the overall tone of the narrative. One element in particular strikes a discordant note, namely the dressing in skins episode. Beren and Lthien, in order to avoid detection during their journey to Angband, disguise themselves as a werewolf 6 and a vampire-bat7 respectively. The basic idea of approaching Morgoths stronghold disguised as servants of the enemy seems to have been part of the tale right from its inception, although the narrative motivation for this stratagem is not very convincing and, as is the case in some of the briefer versions, it could be omitted.8 The discordance of the motif is felt all the more because it is not, in this form, a common motif in western (medieval) literature.9 Interestingly, the earlier versions of the episode are more indebted to the widespread skin changing motif 10 than to the one of dressing in skins. In Lost Tales II (30), Huan, the hound of the Valar, slays the big cat Oikeroi and carries his fell as a trophy. Tinviel then uses Oikerois fur to disguise Beren. She sews him into the big cats fell and with the help of her magic completes the disguise so that Beren comes close to being turned into a real cat.11 Here the skin is obviously more than a simple covering and it functions as an important element in the process of magic metamorphosis. The later versions, however, move further away from the classical skin changing motif, and the putting on of a skin is no longer connected with magical transformationat least none is mentioned. We therefore have a replacement of the widespread and familiar skin changing motif by the signicantly less popular one of dressing in skins. Why, we may ask, did Tolkien change this part of the tale for

172

Notes and Documents: Beren and Lthiens Disguise

the worse (from a modern point of view, that is)? Did he, as he so often did, imaginatively adapt a motif from medieval literature? More to the point: Is there a couple in medieval European literature who dresses in skins to remain undetected? Such a couple can be found in the alliterative Middle English romance William of Palerne (c. 1350, South-west Midlands), which is a close rendering of the French Guillaume de Palerne (c. 1200). Tolkien is likely to have known the Middle English text in the edition by W. W. Skeat, prepared for the Early English Text Society and published in 1867. The romance recounts the life and adventures of William, Prince of Apulia, who, as a baby, is abducted by a werewolf and thus saved from a murderous plot. The child is then found by a cowherd, grows up as his son and is discovered by the emperor of Rome, who takes him to his court and appoints him page to his daughter Melior. They fall in love and ee together, making their way to Sicily where William rescues his mother from the king of Spains army. The story ends with William and Meliors marriage and his ascension to the imperial throne of Rome. The approximately 5500 lines of the romance accommodate many a fantastic event, one of which is of special interest for our present purpose. The situation is as follows: Melior is supposed to marry the son of the emperor of Greece the next day, but is determined to remain true to her beloved William. They decide to make their escape, and their servant Alisaundrine advises them to disguise themselves in polar-bear skins. The result seems to be quite convincing if we are to believe Alisaundrine, who comments on their new appearance: Ye arn so grisli a gost a gom on to loke, / that I nold for al the god that ever God made / abide you in a brod weie bi a large mile, / so breme a wilde bere ye biseme nowthe! (ll. 1730-33).12 Melior and William make off as white bears and, after their scheme has been discovered by the kitchen staff who notice the missing pelts, they change tactics and don the skins of hind and harthides provided by the ever helpful werewolf (who happens to be a bewitched Spanish prince in exile). William of Palerne and the tale of Beren and Lthien have, besides the dressing in skins motif, several other elements in common. Both narratives feature father gures who are opposed to a union between daughter and hero, both tales present helpful canines that possess special powers, and the opponents in both works are sorcerers. On their own, these parallels would be of little importance since there are enough tales that contain the same elements that their occurrence in William of Palerne and the tale of Beren and Lthien would seem fortuitous. Yet the fact that they occur together with the dressing in skins motif in both tales provides them with additional relevance and may be interpreted as evidence that Tolkien indeed knew and, in his own way, used elements from William of Palerne

173

Thomas Honegger
for his tale. The account of dressing in skins in the Middle English romance does not lack a certain humorous notewhich is absent in The Silmarillion. The earlier versions, however, use the motif in a way that is closer to the popular spirit of the romance. The dressing in skins motif ts well the overall folk tale tone of the aetiological fable explaining the enmity between cats and dogs, which occupies a prominent place in the earliest version of The Tale of Tinviel (c. 1917). The transfer of this folk tale motif to a less folksy context, as the later versions of the tale of Beren and Lthien tend to be, lies at the bottom of the estrangement of this episode from the dominant heroic-romantic tone of the rest of the tale. Tolkien may have welcomed the fact that part of the original popular tale was still recognizable here and theretestifying to the long and varied history of the narrative material. Yet from a purely aesthetic point of view, the motif has become an element that must strike modern readers as odd and rather jarring. The unearthing of a parallel and possible thematic source cannot remedy this aw, but it may help to soothe modern readers irritation at the non-t of this element. NOTES 1 2 3 4 The best and most comprehensive study in this area is still Tom Shippeys The Road to Middle-earth. See, for example, the papers in Clark and Timmons, many of which discuss Tolkiens possible sources. See Patrick Currys essay for a comprehensive critique of the critics. The gravestone of Edith Mary and John R.R. Tolkien bears, next to their Christian names, the inscription Lthien and Beren. See Carpenter (105), for an assessment of the biographical importance of the story for Tolkien. See the brief version told by Aragorn on Amon Sl (FR, I, xi, 20306), the reference to the full version the hobbits later listened to at Rivendell (FR, II, iii, 290), and the various versions as found in The Book of Lost Tales II and The Lays of Beleriand. Beren was arrayed now in the hame of Draugluin (S 179), i.e., Saurons incarnation as wolf. Lthien used the winged fell of Thuringwethil, the messenger of Sauron who ew to Angband in the form of a vampire. 174

6 7

Notes and Documents: Beren and Lthiens Disguise

8 9 The shorter versions, as found in Lost Tales II (The Tale of Tinviel) or Lord of the Rings, omit this episode. See the entries in Thompson (K 521.1, K 521.1.2 and K 649.7.2).

10 See Thompson (D 530 and D 531) for examples of transformation by putting on skin (clothing, etc.) in folk-literature. 11 The tale also exists in a typescript version that shows some changes and revisions (see Lost Tales II 41-48), but none which would affect the disguising plot. 12 Quoted from the edition by Bunt. I have replaced the letters yoke and thorn by y and th respectively. Translation: You are so terrifying an apparition to man to look at, that I would not want, for all the goods that God ever made, to meet you on a highway by a mile, such erce and wild beasts you seem now to be. Beren, when looking for the rst time at Lthien in her bat-shape, is similarly frightened: and horror was in his glance as he saw upon his ank a bat-like creature clinging with creased wings (S 179).

WORKS CITED Carpenter, Humphrey. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography. 1977. London: HarperCollins, 1995. Clark, George, and Daniel Timmons, eds. J.R.R. Tolkien and His Literary Resonances. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000. Curry, Patrick. Tolkien and His Critics: a Critique. Root and Branch Approaches towards Understanding Tolkien, edited by Thomas Honegger. Berne and Zurich: Walking Tree Publishers, 1999. Shippey, Tom. The Road to Middle-earth. 2nd ed. London: Grafton, 1992. Thompson, Stith. Motif-Index of Folk-Literature. 6 vols. Revised and enlarged edition. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1955-58. William of Palerne: An Alliterative Romance, edited by G.H.V. Bunt. Groningen: Boumas Boekhuis, 1985.

175

NOTES and DOCUMENTS

Possible Echoes of Blackwood and Dunsany in Tolkiens Fantasy

DALE J. NELSON
ared Lobdells A Tolkien Compass (1975) published Tolkiens Guide to the Names in the Lord of the Rings, but a reference that Tolkien makes to Algernon Blackwood, in the manuscript of his Nomenclature of The Lord of the Rings (to use Tolkiens own title for the essay), was omitted from Lobdells book. Tolkien thought that the Crack of Doom might have been derived from something written by Blackwood that he was unable to remember more precisely (Anderson 106). However, Lobdell himself, in his 1981 book England and Always: Tolkiens World of the Rings, suggested that Tolkien was inuenced by The Willows and The Glamour of the Snow, two stories of the supernatural by Blackwood (1869-1951). These stories appeared in 1907 and 1912 collections of Blackwoods tales. Lobdell could have suggested that a third Blackwood story, the oftreprinted The Wendigo, from The Lost Valley (1910), also left a mark on Tolkiens imagination. In this story, Fifty Island Water, a remote region of Canada, is haunted by a great Outer Horror, the embodiment of the Panic of the Wilderness, which steals its victims even from their tents, bearing them aloft to race across the skies with it, their anguished cries of pain and terror descending to appall their erstwhile companions. Dfago, the guide of a party of hunters, is reft away, leaving them bewildered. Blackwoods idea of a rapidly ying horror that crosses the skies, bringing dread to those who hear it and sense its presence, is much akin to Tolkiens conception of the soaring, mounted Nazgl who appear from time to time to strike panic in the hearts of Saurons opponents. Here is a passage from Blackwood: And it was in that moment of distress and confusion that the whip of terror laid its most nicely calculated lash about [the heart of one of the hunters]. It dropped with deadly effect upon the sorest spot of all, completely unnerving him. He had been secretly dreading all the time that it would come and come it did. Far overhead, muted by great height and distance, strangely thinned and wailing, he heard the crying voice of Dfago, the guide.
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

177

Dale J. Nelson
The sound dropped upon him out of that still, wintry sky with an effect of dismay and terror unsurpassed. He stood motionless an instant, listening as it were with his whole body, then staggered back against the nearest tree for support, disorganised hopelessly in mind and spirit. To him, in that moment, it seemed the most shattering and dislocating experience he had ever known, so that his heart emptied itself of all feeling whatsoever, as by a sudden draught. (186) Here is Tolkien, in the chapter The Siege of Gondor, in The Return of the King. Pippin and Beregond are on one of the walls of Minas Tirith: Suddenly as they talked they were stricken dumb, frozen as it were to listening stones. Pippin cowered down with his hands pressed to his ears: but Beregond, who had been looking out from the battlement as he spoke of Faramir, remained there, stiffened, staring out with starting eyes. Pippin knew the shuddering cry that he had heard: it was the same that he had heard long ago in the Marish of the Shire, but now it was grown in power and hatred, piercing the heart with a poisonous despair. . . . Another long screech rose and fell, and he threw himself back again from the wall, panting like a hunted animal. (RK, V, iv, 82) Both the Wendigo and the Nazgl are associated with snifng. Early in Blackwoods story, Dfago makes his companion uneasy as he rises from the campre to catch the scent of the distant creature (171), which is later said to be acrid and not unlike the odour of a lion (180), a penetrating, unaccustomed odour, vile, yet sweetly bewildering (200). The Ringwraith, a frightening, cloaked gure, who pursues the hobbits within the bounds of the Shire itself, sniffs from beneath its hood as it tracks them (FR, I, iii, 84-85). The Ringwraiths or Nazgl are hunters, pursuers, as well as warriors whose chief weapon is fear. Similarly, the Wendigo is a creature that chases its quarry: A vision of Dfago, eternally hunted, driven and pursued across the skiey vastness of those ancient forests ed like a ame across the dark ruin of his [companions] thoughts (187). Further, the Wendigo and the winged mount of the chief of the Nazgl appear to be ancient creatures. One of the hunters, a divinity student from Scotland, thinks that the hunters had witnessed something crudely and essentially primitive. Something that had survived somehow the advance of humanity had emerged terrically, betraying a scale of life 178

Notes and Documents: Echoes of Blackwood and Dunsany

still monstrous and immature. He envisaged it rather as a glimpse into prehistoric ages, when superstitions, gigantic and uncouth, still oppressed the hearts of men; when the forces of nature were still untamed, the Powers that may have haunted a primeval universe not yet withdrawn. (Blackwood 205) The Nazgl mount is described, at close quarters, thus: [I]t stank. A creature of an older world maybe it was, whose kind, lingering in forgotten mountains cold beneath the Moon, outstayed their day, and in hideous eyrie bred this last untimely brood, apt to evil. (RK, V, vi, 115) Here at last, incidentally, Tolkien has, like Blackwood, associated the Nazgl mount with a vile odor. Finally, the victims of the Wendigo and the Nazgl may become like them. There are two earthbound appearances of Dfago after his kidnapping by the Wendigo. The Dfago who rst returns to the hunters has a distorted, animal-like face, but worst of all is the change to his feet, which have become dark and oddly massed (203) like those of the Wendigo. This Dfago returns to the wilderness and the Wendigo. Later, the hunters nd Dfago, this time assuredly human, but ruined mentally and physically debilitated, awaiting them at their chief camp. Dfago now tries to survive, like the Wendigo, on moss (and cannot eat food), forlorn and broken beyond all reach of human aid (206-7). Frodo, similarly, was in danger of becoming a wraith. Gandalf tells him, as he convalesces in Rivendell after being attacked: They tried to pierce your heart with a Morgul-knife which remains in the wound. If they had succeeded, you would have become like they are. . . . You would have become a wraith under the dominion of the Dark Lord. . . . You were in gravest peril while you wore the Ring, for you were half in the wraith-world yourself. (FR, II, i, 234) Whether Tolkien was consciously inuenced by Blackwoods story or not, it seems reasonable to surmise that he had read it and that it affected his conception of the Ringwraiths and their aerial mounts. Blackwoods contemporary Lord Dunsany (1878-1957) also produced numerous volumes of fantastic ction published when Tolkien was young. Tolkien may have read Dunsanys fantasy when he wrote the rst version of The Mewlips (Knocking at the Door: Lines Induced by Sensations When Waiting for an Answer at the Door of an Exalted Academic Person, published in the Oxford Magazine on 18 February 1937); 179

Dale J. Nelson
certainly, by the time he came to revise it for inclusion in The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, in February 1967 he had sufcient acquaintance with Dunsanys work to be able to criticize the Irish peers Distressing Tale of Thangobrind the Jeweller as being in Dunsanys worst style (de Camp 243). The parallels between Dunsanys short story The Hoard of the Gibbelins, originally appearing in The Book of Wonder (1912), and Tolkiens poem The Mewlips appear to be sufciently strong to warrant condence that Tolkien had read Dunsany early on and, like so many lesser fantasists, been inuenced by him, if only this once. Dunsanys Gibbelins dwell in an evil tower . . . joined to Terra Cognita, to the lands we know, by a bridge across the River Ocean. Their immense hoard attracts a continuous supply of would-be thieves, who inevitably end up being devoured by the wicked creatures, who eat, as is well known, nothing less good than man (Dunsany 63). Alderic, a knight, reasons that he can break in to the hoard if he makes a hole in the tower wall, letting water and himself into their emerald-cellar, but, in the event, the Gibbelins were evidently waiting for him all along, and hang him up like an animal carcassand the tale is one of those that have not a happy ending (66). Tolkiens sly Mewlips likewise dwell outside the Terra Cognita of the Shire of the poems putative hobbit-author. They dwell not by the side of Ocean, but beyond the Merlock Mountains . . . by a dark pools borders, lurking in damp cellars where they count their gold and await victims (Bombadil 45). Anyone who seeks their hoard will nd the Mewlips, and they will feed; and when theyve nished, in a sack / Your bones they take to keep (46). Aside from the close similarities of situation in the story and the poem, the reader will detect a charming quality of insincerity; these are narratives that warn of imaginary dangers. Tolkiens letters and other sources for his life do not say very much about his recreational reading, but given his lifelong interest in literary fantasy and the parallels adduced above, one seems to be justied in suspecting that Tolkien was indebted to Blackwood and Dunsany. WORKS CITED Anderson, Douglas A. The Annotated Hobbit: Revised and Expanded Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2002. Blackwood, Algernon. Best Ghost Stories of Algernon Blackwood. New York: Dover, 1973. de Camp, L. Sprague. Literary Swordsmen and Sorcerers: The Makers of Heroic

180

Notes and Documents: Echoes of Blackwood and Dunsany

Fantasy. Sauk City, WI: Arkham House, 1976. Dunsany, Lord. Gods, Men and Ghosts: The Best Supernatural Fiction of Lord Dunsany. New York: Dover, 1972. Lobdell, Jared. England and Always: Tolkiens World of the Rings. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981. , ed. A Tolkien Compass. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1975.

181

Bibliography (in English) for 2001-20021 Compiled by Michael D. C. Drout with Laura Kalafarski and Stefanie Olsen
PRIMARY SOURCES Tolkien, J.R.R. The Alphabet of Rmil & Early Noldorn Fragments. The Alphabet of Rmil, edited by Arden R. Smith; Early Noldorin Fragments, edited by Christopher Gilson, Bill Welden, Carl F. Hostetter, and Patrick Wynne. Cupertino, CA: Parma Eldalamberon, 2001 . The Annotated Hobbit: Revised and Expanded Edition. Edited by Douglas A. Anderson. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2002. . Beowulf and the Critics, edited by Michael D. C. Drout. Tempe, AZ: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2002. . The Hobbit, or, There and Back Again. Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2001. [Newly corrected text]. . The Lord of the Rings. Illustrated by Alan Lee. 3 vols. London: HarperCollins; Boston: Houghton Mifin, 2002. [Newly corrected text; published simultaneously in UK & US]. . The Rivers and Beacon-hills of Gondor, edited by Carl F. Hostetter. Vinyar Tengwar, no. 42 (July 2001): 5-31. . The Road Goes Ever On. London: HarperCollins, 2002. [New edition, includes new setting of Lthien Tinviel]. . A Tolkien Miscellany. New York: Science Fiction Book Club, 2002. [Omnibus including Smith of Wootton Major, Farmer Giles of Ham, Tree and Leaf, The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Pearl, and Sir Orfeo]. . Tree and Leaf: Including the Poem Mythopoeia; The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth Beorhthelms Son. London: HarperCollins Publishers, 2001. . Words of Joy: Five Catholic Prayers in Quenya, Part One, edited by Patrick Wynne, Arden R. Smith, and Carl F. Hostetter. Vinyar Tengwar 43 (January 2002): 4-38.
Copyright 2004, by West Virginia University Press

183

Bibliography for 2001-2002

. Words of Joy: Five Catholic Prayers in Quenya, Part Two, edited by Patrick Wynne, Arden R. Smith, and Carl F. Hostetter. Vinyar Tengwar 44 (June 2002): 4-38. BOOKS Ang, Susan. The Master of the Rings. Duxford, Cambridge [England]: Wizard Books, 2002. Birzer, Bradley J. J.R.R. Tolkiens Sanctifying Myth: Understanding MiddleEarth. Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2002. Blake, Andrew. J.R.R. Tolkien: A Beginners Guide. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 2002. Boyd, Ian, C.S.B., ed. The Chesterton Review: J.R.R. Tolkien: Mythos and Modernity in Middle-Earth. Seton Hall University: South Orange, New Jersey, 2002. [Special issue of The Chesterton Review, 28.1and 2; individual contributions are listed below under Articles]. Bramlett, Perry C. I Am in Fact a Hobbit: an Introduction to the Life and Works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2003. Bruner, Kurt D. and Jim Ware. Finding God in The Lord of the Rings. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 2001. Chance, Jane. The Lord of the Rings: the Mythology of Power. 2nd ed., rev. and exp. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 2001. . Tolkiens Art: A Mythology for England. 2nd ed., rev. and exp. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 2001. Colbert, David. The Magical Worlds of The Lord of the Rings. New York: Berkley Books, 2002. Coren, Michael. J.R.R. Tolkien: The Man who Created The Lord of the Rings. Toronto: Stoddart, 2001. Duriez, Colin. Tolkien and The Lord of the Rings. Mahwah, NJ: Hidden Spring, 2001. Duriez, Colin and David Porter. The Inklings Handbook: A Comprehensive Guide to the Lives, Thought, and Writings of C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Charles Williams, Owen Bareld, and Their Friends. St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press, 2001. Ellwood, Robert S. Frodos Quest: Living the Myth in The Lord of the Rings. Wheaton, IL: Quest Books, 2002.

184

Bibliography for 2001-2002

Flieger, Verlyn. Splintered Light: Logos and Language in Tolkiens World. 2nd ed., rev. and exp. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 2002. Fredrick, Candace and Sam McBride. Women Among the Inklings: Gender, C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, and Charles Williams. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001. Gifford, Clive. So You Think You Know The Lord of the Rings. London: Hodder Childrens Books, 2002. Gillam, James H. Treasures from the Misty Mountains: A Collectors Guide to J.R.R. Tolkien. Burlington, ON: Collectors Guide Pub., 2001. Haber, Karen ed. Meditations on Middle-Earth. New York: St. Martins Press, 2001. Jones, Leslie Ellen. Myth & Middle-Earth. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Press, 2002. Lewis, Alex and Elizabeth Currie. The Uncharted Realms of Tolkien: A Critical Study of Text, Context, and Subtext in the Works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Oswestry: Medea, 2002. Lowson, Iain, Keith Marshall and Daniel OBrien. World of the Rings: The Unauthorised Guide to the World of J.R.R. Tolkien. London: Reynolds & Hearn, 2002. Petty, Anne C. One Ring to Bind Them All: Tolkiens Mythology. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 2002. [Reprint of her 1979 book with a new introduction and updated bibliography.] Smith, Mark Eddy. Tolkiens Ordinary Virtues: Exploring the Spiritual Themes of the Lord of the Rings. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002. [Published in the UK as A Closer Look at The Lord of the Rings.] Stanton, Michael N. Hobbits, Elves, and Wizards: Exploring the Wonders and Worlds of J.R.R. Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings. New York: Palgrave for St. Martins Press, 2001. Tolkien, Christopher. The History of Middle-Earth Index. Compiled by Helen Armstrong. London: HarperCollins, 2002. West, John G. ed. Celebrating Middle-Earth: The Lord of the Rings as a Defense of Western Civilization. Seattle, WA: Inkling Books, 2002. White, Michael. The Life and Work of J.R.R. Tolkien. Indianapolis, IN: Alpha, 2002. [Published in Great Britain as Tolkien: A Biography. London: Little, Brown, 2001]. 185

Bibliography for 2001-2002

ARTICLES Algeo, John. A Fancy for the Fantastic: Reections on Names in Fantasy Literature. Names 49, no. 4 (2001): 248-53. Anand, Valerie and Dale Nelson. TolkienWhy Is He Important Today? Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 39 (2001): 38-40. Arvidsson, Hakan. The Ring: An Essay on Tolkiens Mythology. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 45-52. Bauer, Erik. Its Just a Movie: Erik Bauer Speaks with Peter Jackson. Creative Screenwriting 9, no. 1 (2002): 6-12. Boyd, Ian. J.R.R. Tolkien: Mythos and Modernity in Middle-Earth. The Chesterton Review: The Journal of the Chesterton Society 28 (2002): 1-199.* Caldedcott, Stratford. The Horns of Hope: J.R.R. Tolkien and the Heroism of Hobbits. The Chesterton Review: The Journal of the Chesterton Society 28 (2002): 29-55.* Chance, Jane. Is There a Text in this Hobbit? Peter Jacksons Fellowship of the Ring. LiteratureFilm Quarterly 30, no. 2 (2002): 79-85. Chausse, Jean. Icons of Jesus Christ in The Lord of the Rings. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 39 (2001): 30-32. Cooper, Susan. There and Back Again: Tolkien Reconsidered. Horn Book Magazine, March 2002, 143-50. Craig, David M. Queer Lodgings: Gender and Sexuality in The Lord of the Rings. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 38 (2001): 11-18. Crowe, Edith L. Making and Unmaking in Middle-Earth and Elsewhere. Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, General Fantasy & Mythic Studies 23 (3 (89)) (2001): 5669. Curry, Patrick. Magic vs. Enchantment. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 38 (2001): 5-10. Davidson, Christine. Coming of Age: Changes of Heart: Growth and Enlightenment in The Lord of the Rings. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 39 (2001): 15-22. Dubois, Tom and Scott Mellor. The Nordic Roots of Tolkiens Middle Earth. Scandinavian Review 90, no. 1 (2002): 35-40. Edwards, Owen Dudley. Gollum, Frodo and the Catholic Novel. The Chesterton Review: the Journal of the Chesterton Society 28 (2002): 57-71.* 186

Bibliography for 2001-2002

Ellison, John. Images of Evil in Tolkiens World. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 38 (2001): 21-29. Ellison, John A. Treebeards Voice. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 28. Fadar, Shanti. A Fools Hope: Hobbits Rush in Where Heroes Fear to Tread. ParabolaThe Magazine of Myth & Tradition 26, no. 3 (2001): 48-52. Flieger, Verlyn. A Cautionary Tale. The Chesterton Review: the Journal of the Chesterton Society 28 (2002): 97-103.* Flieger, Verlyn and T.A. Shippey. Allegory versus Bounce: Tolkiens Smith of Wootton Major. Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts 12 (2 (46)) (2001): 186-200. Fuller, Graham. Trimming Tolkien. Sight & Sound 12, no, 2 (2002): 1820. Green, William H. King Thorins Mines: The Hobbit as Victorian Adventure Novel. Extrapolation 42, no. 1 (2001): 53-64. Gulliver, Peter [Peter Gilliver]. J.R.R. Tolkien and the OED. English Today: The International Review of the English Language 18 (4 (72)) (2002): 53-54. Horobin, S.C.P. J.R.R. Tolkien as a Philologist: A Reconsideration of the Northernisms in Chaucers Reeves Tale. English Studies 82.2 (2001): 97-105. Jellema, Rod. Auden on Tolkien: The Book That Isnt, and the House That Brought it Down. W. H. Auden: A Legacy, edited by David Garrett Izzo. West Cornwall, CT: 2002. 39-45. Kinsella, Sean. Elves and Angels in J.R.R. Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings. Notes on Contemporary Literature 32, no. 4 (2002): 10-11. Koravos, Nikolaos. Realistic Fantasy: The Example of J.R.R. Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 38 (2001): 31-35. Lane, Anthony. The Hobbit Habit: Reading The Lord of the Rings. The New Yorker, 10 December 2001, 98-105. Longenecker, Dwight. The Little Way through Middle Earth. The Chesterton Review: The Journal of the Chesterton Society 28 (2002): 105-11.* Mallinson, Jeffrey. A Potion too Strong?: Challenges in Translating the Religious Signicance of Tolkiens The Lord of the Rings to Film. 187

Bibliography for 2001-2002

Journal of Religion and Popular Culture (2002): 1. Marples, Laura. The Hamletian Hobbit. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 15-21. McKillip, Patricia A. Three Ways of Looking at a Trilogy. New York Review of Science Fiction 13 (12 (156)) (2001): 4-5. Nelson, Charles W. From Gollum to Gandalf: The Guide Figures in J.R.R. Tolkiens Lord of the Rings. Journal of the Fantastic in the Arts 13 (1 (49)) (2002): 47-61. Nelson, Dale. The Lord of the Rings and the Four Loves. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 29-31. Newman, Kim. Will It Ring True. Sight & Sound 12, no. 1 (2002): 4-5 Pettit, Edward. J.R.R. Tolkiens Use of an Old English Charm. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 39-44. Pretorius, David. Binary Issues and Feminist Issues in LOTR. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 32-38. Richmond, Donald P. Tolkiens Marian Vision of Middle-Earth. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 13-14. Rye, Steve. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Creative Screenwriting 9, no. 6 (2002): 40-42. Sarjeant, William A.S. The Shire: Its Bounds, Food and Farming. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 39 (2001): 33-37. Schweitzer, Darrell. Middle Earth Revisited; or, Back There Again. New York Review of Science Fiction 14 (9 (165)) (2002): 8-13. Smith, Arden R. Upphaega .slensk heiti. Vinyar Tengwar 42 (2001): 35-37. Smith, Patricia Burkhart. Ring Bearer: Patricia Burkhart Smith Talks with Philippa Boyens. Creative Screenwriting 8.2 (2001): 4,6, and 8. Timmons, Daniel. Hobbit Sex and Sexuality in The Lord of the Rings. Mythlore: A Journal of J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, General Fantasy & Mythic Studies 23 (3 (89)) (2001): 70-79. Tolley, Clive. Tolkiens Essay on Man: A Look at Mythopoeia. The Chesterton Review: The Journal of the Chesterton Society 28 (2002): 79-95. Turner, Allan. Legendary and Historical Time in The Lord of the Rings. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 39 (2001): 3-6. Turner, Jenny. Reasons for Liking Tolkien. London Review of Books, 15 188

Bibliography for 2001-2002

November 2001, 15-24. Wendorf, Thomas A. Greene, Tolkien, and the Mysterious Relations of Realism and Fantasy. Renascence 55, no. 1 (2002): 79-100. Willhite, Gary L. and John R.D. Bell. J.R.R. Tolkiens Moral Imagination. Mallorn: The Journal of the Tolkien Society 40 (2002): 7-12. OTHER MEDIA J. R. R. Tolkien: An Audio Portrait of the author of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Presented by Brian Sibley. London: BBC Worldwide, 2001. Available on two compact discs and on cassette. [Includes recordings of Tolkien from the 1960s and reminiscences by people who knew him.] A Visual Guide to J.R.R. Tolkiens The Two Towers. A Big Production for Kultur International. (DVD) West Long Branch, NJ: Kultur, 2002. NOTES
1

This bibliography attempts to collect works of signicant scholarly interest published in English. It will form the basis of The Years Work in Tolkien Studies 2001-2002, to be published in Tolkien Studies, vol. 2 in 2005. Please send additions and corrections to the editors. Published as part of a special issue of The Chesterton Review.

189