🧝Galadriel and the Rebellion of the Noldor

[Thorin]

It' been a while since I've posted anything of substance but I was leafing through my copy of 'Unfinished Tales' this morning and decided to read the account of 'History of Galadriel and Celeborn'.

I came across something that I must have missed the first time I read it.

Christopher Tolkien says this:

"A wholly different story, adumbrated but never told of Galadriel's conduct at the time of the rebellion of the Noldor appears in a very late and partly illegible note: the last writing of my father's on the subject of Galadriel and Celebron, and probably the last on Middle-earth and Valinor, set down in the last month of his life"

In this account the details have changed dramatically.

- Galadriel gets tired of Aman and wants something different so she heads to Alqualonde where she meets Celeborn and they hop a Teleri ship to Middle-earth. This occurred at the time when Melkor destroyed the two trees

- Galadriel didn't take part in the rebellion but her and Celeborn fought Feanor and the Noldor at Alqualonde when the burning of the ships occurred.

- Without taking leave of the Valar, both G & C escaped in an untouched ship.

- In so leaving when she knew that Manwe at this time would forbid it, Galadriel was placed under the ban

- At the end of the First Age, they refused a an offer by the Valar to return to Valinor

We see that this was written at the very end of Tolkien's life. Christopher Tolkien says this change:

"..arose from 'philosophical' (rather than 'historical') considerations, concerning the precise nature of Galadriel's disobedience in Valinor on the one hand and her status and power in Middle-earth on the other'

Now, obviously for historical and literacy accuracy we must go off of Sil and he Appendicis of LOTR.

However, this is Tolkien's world and creation and we see that Tolkien's heart was obviously in another direction concerning what Galadriel did.

So should we view the Galadriel of LoTR in the context of how Tolkien ultimately saw her history?

 

[Gothmog]

Actually, for historical and literacy accuracy we must go off the Appendicis of LoTR as only these were published in JRRT's lifetime. The Sil. and all the rest were published posthumously. The only reason for accepting The Silmarillion as "canon" is that it was the first book published by Christopher and is the best known of all the works. However, Christopher knew that his father intended more work on much, if not all, of what is in there but could only work with the papers that were available (and legible) to him at that time.

In fact, although JRRT did send the drafts of the Sil to the publishers they were not at that time ready for publishing. JRRT sent them in for assessment as to whether they were in fact worth continuing to work on for later publishing. In fact it would seem that JRRT intended the Silmarillion to be about the same size as LoTR or around 4 times the size of the Sil that Christopher was able to put together. So we are free to read all the later works that have been published and make up our own minds on the matter. For this we can be greatful to Christopher for the work he has done not only on making the original Silmarillion ready for publishing but for allowing us to read all the rest of the work.

 

[Elthir]

Here I think text published by Tolkien himself far outweighs even a late 'outline or sketch' (adumbrated tale). Tolkien published...

'... refer to the special position of Galadriel. She was the last survivor of the princes and queens who had led the revolting Noldor to exile in Middle-earth. After the overthrow of Morgoth at the end of the First Age a ban was set upon her return, and she had replied proudly that she had no wish to do so. She passed over the Mountains of Eredluin with her husband Celeborn (one of the Sindar) and went to Eregion.' JRRT The Road Goes Ever On​

I note that here Tolkien is also considering already published text, Galadriel's song for example. The late version that you're referring to makes Celeborn and Galadriel first cousins, as well as contradicting the easy implication that Celeborn was Sindarin (also published in first editions of The Lord of the Rings).

Of course JRRT was no stranger to revision, even where already published work is concerned. We have examples of revision between editions of The Lord of the Rings. On the other hand we have examples of where he clearly or arguably forgot what had already appeared in print and, as in the case of his later thoughts on ROS for example, rejected them upon remembering (andros and etc). Or, about an issue concerning something in The Hobbit for example, Christopher Tolkien noted: 'I mention all this as an illustration of his [father's] intense concern to avoid discrepancy and inconsistency, even though in this case his anxiety was unfounded.'

In any case Tolkien, the world class 'niggler' had indeed decided what to reveal about Galadriel to Readers, and the late texts, including a letter which seems to include the same or similar ideas, then become, by contrast, essentially 'private papers'. I have run across the argument that it's not merely the fact that this version is late but that it had important Christian connections to Tolkien (and thus great weight). My answer however to that is...

I note that in a letter dated 1971, in which Tolkien replies to something Ruth Austin had said (that is, he thinks it is true that he owes much of Galadriel ['this character'] to Christian and Catholic teaching and imagination about Mary), Galadriel is still described (same letter) '... but actually Galadriel was a penitent: in her youth a leader in the rebellion against the Valar (the angelic guardians)', adding that she proudly refused forgiveness or permission to return at the end of the First Age.

Basically, the idea of an unstained Galadriel being removed from the Rebellion is not necessarily 'more Christian' than the penitent version. If one paints it that way to give it greater weight, Tolkien himself need not have with respect to any ultimate decision (a theoretical decision with respect to publishing).

In my opinion the Rebel Noldo is the better story... but in any case it is also the story published by the author himself.

Galin

 

[Thorin]

Gothmog,

Glad to see one of the Eldar from the 1st Age of TTF here.
Galin and Goth, as far as the written authority goes, you have a point.

However, we must take into account Tolkien's ULTIMATE views on the matter. Concerning that the truth and validity of an author's work is directly linked to their views on the matter, we cannot dismiss this quote in confirming who Galadriel and Celeborn are supposed to be:

"the last writing of my father's on the subject of Galadriel and Celeborn, and probably the last on Middle-earth and Valinor, set down in the last month of his life"

If it is written in someone's will that his sister will receive everything after he dies, but near the end of his life he says, 'I really wanted my brother to receive it' but didn't get the chance to change the the written will. Legally what is written down is what stands, however, if there is a change in heart, we cannot say that what was written down ultimately reflects the intentions of what the person felt it was to be.

 

[jallan]

Gothmog,

Glad to see one of the Eldar from the 1st Age of TTF here.
Galin and Goth, as far as the written authority goes, you have a point.

However, we must take into account Tolkien's ULTIMATE views on the matter. Concerning that the truth and validity of an author's work is directly linked to their views on the matter, we cannot dismiss this quote in confirming who Galadriel and Celeborn are supposed to be:

"the last writing of my father's on the subject of Galadriel and Celeborn, and probably the last on Middle-earth and Valinor, set down in the last month of his life"

If it is written in someone's will that his sister will receive everything after he dies, but near the end of his life he says, 'I really wanted my brother to receive it' but didn't get the chance to change the the written will. Legally what is written down is what stands, however, if there is a change in heart, we cannot say that what was written down ultimately reflects the intentions of what the person felt it was to be.

Quite true ... but what if Tolkien did not recall exactly what he had already written about Galadriel and Celeborn in published material? He might, in this case not have cared or he might have cared. We don't know.

One notes that authors sometimes seem to remember less about what they have written than many fans, in part, perhaps because they are less obsessed by it, but in part, also, that they have have trouble at a later date remembering which of various thoughts they had about a particular character were actually put down in the finished work.

I am personally willing to accept the latest story of Celeborn and Galadriel, but don't claim to know that this would have been the latest story if Tolkien had lived longer.

Personally, I think, at least after so much the Christopher Tolkien has included in his History of Middle Earth series, that a revised Silmarillion might be a good thing. But even that would not present J.R.R. Tolkien's ULTIMATE thoughts. For example, J.R.R. Tolkien planned that Sador in The Children of Húrin should be changed into a drûg in future writings. But there is no sign of this in the recently published Children of Húrin because J.R.R. Tolkien did not act on this decision in surviving documents.

 

[Elthir]

To rant a bit more here

On the one hand we have a finished description, approved and intended for publication by its author, and indeed published by him. On the other hand we have an adumbrated tale, albeit later, but never finished and never published, and which contains ideas that contradict already published material.

And despite Christopher Tolkien's attempt to explain the late text, we have no way to really know if Tolkien had even remembered everything he had published (Jallan makes a good point). If Tolkien himself had not written 'most of this fails' on the essay concerning ROS for example, would this text then show that he was deciding (after real consideration) to revise or contradict what he had published in The Lord of the Rings?

What about Celebrimbor? Christopher Tolkien notes his father probably had forgotten what he had published in The Return of the King when he wrote certain later ideas.

The matter of Sador, Man or Drûg (since it's brought up) is a different case: the scales are even as far as published by Tolkien goes, and basically now one has 'planned idea' versus 'more developed idea' (with respect to actual narrative by the author). As Jallan says we cannot know JRRT's truly 'ultimate' decision in any case -- and this sense of ultimate seems to relate to published text -- in other words if Tolkien had decided to reject Sador the drûg we would know his ultimate decision on the matter if he himself published something like the version Christopher Tolkien has now constructed.

I think, possibly due to the sheer amount of 'unpublished material' many Tolkien fans are used to dealing with these days, that this matter has gotten slightly out of hand: Tolkien published material is simply a different animal than the rest. And the argument that unpublished, contradictory material should supersede something Tolkien himself decided to reveal to his Readership needs something more compelling than a later date in my opinion.

Galin

 

[Grond]

To rant a bit more here

On the one hand we have a finished description, approved and intended for publication by its author, and indeed published by him. On the other hand we have an adumbrated tale, albeit later, but never finished and never published, and which contains ideas that contradict already published material.

And despite Christopher Tolkien's attempt to explain the late text, we have no way to really know if Tolkien had even remembered everything he had published (Jallan makes a good point). If Tolkien himself had not written 'most of this fails' on the essay concerning ROS for example, would this text then show that he was deciding (after real consideration) to revise or contradict what he had published in The Lord of the Rings?

What about Celebrimbor? Christopher Tolkien notes his father probably had forgotten what he had published in The Return of the King when he wrote certain later ideas.

The matter of Sador, Man or Drûg (since it's brought up) is a different case: the scales are even as far as published by Tolkien goes, and basically now one has 'planned idea' versus 'more developed idea' (with respect to actual narrative by the author). As Jallan says we cannot know JRRT's truly 'ultimate' decision in any case -- and this sense of ultimate seems to relate to published text -- in other words if Tolkien had decided to reject Sador the drûg we would know his ultimate decision on the matter if he himself published something like the version Christopher Tolkien has now constructed.

I think, possibly due to the sheer amount of 'unpublished material' many Tolkien fans are used to dealing with these days, that this matter has gotten slightly out of hand: Tolkien published material is simply a different animal than the rest. And the argument that unpublished, contradictory material should supersede something Tolkien himself decided to reveal to his Readership needs something more compelling than a later date in my opinion.

Galin

I'm with you here Galin. What is published is the written word and the only "authoritative" voice that can speak to what must be deemed "canon". What Tolkien would or could or should have done is not pertinent since no one actually knows those things except for our deceased author who didn't do it.

We are left to speculate, ponder, argue and ultimately be disappointed since all of these wonderful "addendums" are not published and edited by the author.

Cheers,

grond

 

[Thorin]

Hello Grond! Good to hear from you my old friend.

As far as the written word, the question of authority becomes hazy.

The Silmarillion was a post-humous publication. It obviously was not a finished work by Tolkien. Is it really safe to say that notes that were compiled and published by someone other than Tolkien in 1977 are more authoritative then other notes written by the author (and his last thoughts and beliefs on the subject) in 1973 shortly before his death?

Hmm....

 

[Elthir]

Well the main quote I am raising is from The Road Goes Ever On in any case... a book published by Tolkien himself, and in which he is considering something from The Lord of the Rings itself.

The text in the '77 constructed Silmarillion can be added if it doesn't conflict with Galadriel '... last survivor of the princes and queens who had led the revolting Noldor to exile in Middle-earth.'

 

[Alcuin]

(My books are in a great pile by my desk & have been for many months. No quotes tonight. I stopped by to read up on old friends…)

Christopher Tolkien wrote (in Letters) that as his father came into the last year or two of his life, his memory was not as clear as it had been earlier. He further asserts (I think this is in Letters, but I also believe there is an extensive discussion in Unfinished Tales) that as he came toward the end of his life, his father became concerned with showing that Galadriel had less guilt or no guilt in the Rebellion of the Noldor.

The rule of thumb is to accept whatever was written latest in Tolkien’s life as the last word on that subject; however, there are a few problems in accepting what was written on Galadriel in the last two years of Tolkien’s life.

• Tolkien was generally careful to see to it that what he wrote subsequently agreed with what had been published in Lord of the Rings. What was written about Galadriel in the last two years of Tolkien’s life is not in accord with what was published in Lord of the Rings. This is fundamentally at odds with his practice on almost every other matter, even to the point of rejecting ideas because they were precluded by what was published in Lord of the Rings.
• Christopher Tolkien asserts that his father’s memory was not as clear in those years as it had been. The argument is not one of incompetence, but, as I recall from Christopher Tolkien’s comments on this matter, rather one of forbearance in reading what was written during this period.
• There is far more written material in which Galadriel was part of the Rebellion of the Noldor, and in fact, in which she was one of the principal proponents for departure, a leader in the rebellion. This material is, I believe, key to understanding Galadriel’s motivations in Lord of the Rings, and particularly in her trial in which she was tempted by the One Ring, in her melancholy song as the Company of the Ring departed Lórien in boats on the Anduin, and in the fallen Saruman’s bitter taunts against her in the ruins Eregion.

Finally, I am always for the interpretation that adds greatest depth and poignancy to the story. Galadriel sneaking off like a teenager who has permission to go, but whose permission is suddenly rescinded because of some incident by an unruly mob, is both less interesting and less dynamic than the tale of a prideful, powerful queen of the Eldar who must lose everything – her daughter, her granddaughter, her kingdom, her spouse (Celeborn stayed in Middle-earth for at least a while after Galadriel departed), her own secret desire for domination and rulership, and even the continuity of Elvish society in Middle-earth – before she can receive absolution and permission to return to Valinor. “Gee, Mom and Dad, I’m sorry I broke curfew,” carries nothing in comparison to a tale of self-abnegation and redemption.

There are, as I remember it, three outlines for the history of Galadriel and Celeborn described in Unfinished Tales:

1. Galadriel is a leader of the Rebellion of the Noldor, and Celeborn is a kinsman of Thingol and Olwë living in Beleriand;
2. Galadriel is a leader of the Rebellion of the Noldor, and Celeborn is a kinsman of Thingol and Olwë living in Alqualondë;
3. Celeborn is a kinsman of Thingol and Olwë living in Alqualondë, and he and Galadriel had permission to leave Valinor until Fëanor led his rebellion.

Now I ask you, which of those is most romantic, most complex, and delivers the richest tale? It is, I believe, the one most in accord with
Lord of the Rings.

 

[Snaga]

I think you've brought this debate to where it needs to be, Alcuin. The most interesting question is which version 'feels' right. I have never liked the suggestion that that Celeborn dwelt in Alqualondë.

It would unravel much else: for surely the difficulty of Galadriel and Angrod in revealing the misdeeds of the Noldor would not have applied to Celeborn, one of the Teleri. Surely he would have told all to Thingol, his kinsman? I haven't thought through what that would have implied to the rest of the Quenta, but it would require further revision that JRRT never embarked on or considered (as far as I am aware).

 

[Elthir]

Adding Celeborn into the mix...

With respect to the 'Teler from the Undying Lands' idea, Tolkien had (twice) published that Celeborn was one of the Sindar. Published in The Return of the King first edition (revised wording impacted this passage however, see below). In any case Celeborn the Sinda again appears in The Road Goes Ever On, as posted previously in the passage concerning Galadriel...

'...She passed over the Mountains of Eredluin with her husband Celeborn (one of the Sindar) and went to Eregion.' JRRT RGEO

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]In The Return of the King an earlier form of one passage reads...[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]'The Exiled Noldor dwelt in Lindon, but many of the Sindar passed eastward and established realms in the forests far away. The chief of these were Thranduil in the north of Greenwood the Great, and Celeborn in the south of the forest. But the wife of Celeborn was Noldorin ...' Appendix B [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]In the revised version 'Thranduil was one of these' (compare to 'The chief of these...') but the rest of the sentence makes no mention of Celeborn. Gil-galad is mentioned in the following sentence (living in Lindon), then 'In Lindon south of the Lune dwelt for a time Celeborn, kinsman of Thingol...'
[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]As a kinsman of Thingol Celeborn was thought of as a grandson of one of Thingol's brothers -- in one conception Elmo, in another Olwe. M[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial]aking him a grandson of Olwe draws him closer to Galadriel on the family tree -- first cousins actually (closer than if he was the grandson of Elmo).[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]There is also the issue of Celeborn not leaving Middle-earth with Galadriel; one wonders 'why not' if he was a Teler from Oversea to begin with. I suppose it could be explained in some way, but I note the following published by Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull in which Tolkien is seemingly considering this matter in general. The interesting part here is the comment that Celeborn had never seen the Blessed Realm...[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]'(...)These comments imply that Celeborn could have left Middle-earth with Galadriel if he had wished, and Tolkien's replies to queries from readers seem to confirm this. In his unpublished letter to Eileen Elgar, begun 22 September 1963 he comments that Celeborn and Galadriel were of different kin: Celeborn was of that branch of the Elves that, in the First Age, was so in love with Middle-earth that they had refused the call of the Valar to go to Valinor; he had never seen the Blessed Realm. Now he remained until he had seen the coming of the Dominion of Men. But to an immortal Elf, for whom time was not as it is to mortals, the period in which he was parted from Galadriel would seem brief.' [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial]Hammond And Scull, The Lord of the Rings Reader's Companion [/FONT]

 

[Turgon]

I actually don't have anything to add to this discussion. I just wanted to comment on the fact that this is one of the very few instances on TTF where I have heard Tolkien mentioned as a writer of fiction, rather than as a chronicler of an obscure history. It's actually quite refreshing.

 

[solicitr]

In the late version, there is another problem, in that Tolkien had written elsewhere that first cousins were not permitted to marry among the Eldar. True, 'Maeglin' was unpublished in his lifetime: but there is nothing to suggest that this was an idea Tolkien rejected.

 

[Elthir]

Here's a text that goes into the matter a bit, from Morgoth's Ring

'The Reborn that were unwedded always return to their own kin. For the marriages of the Eldar do not take place between 'close kin'. This again is a matter in which they needed no law or instruction, but acted by nature, though they gave reasons for it later, declaring that it was due to the nature of bodies and the processes of generation; but also to the nature of fear. 'For', they said, 'fear are also akin, and the motions of love between them, as say between a brother and sister, are not of the same kind as those that make the beginning of marriage.' By 'close kin' for this purpose was meant members of one 'house', especially sisters and brothers. None of the Eldar married those in direct line of descent, nor children of the same parents, nor the sister or brother of either of their parents; nor did they wed 'half-sisters' or 'half-brothers'. Since as has been shown only in the rarest events did the Eldar have second spouses, half-sister or half-brother had for them a special meaning: they used these terms when both of the parents of one child were related to both of the parents of another, as when two brothers married two sisters of another family, or a sister and a brother of one house married a brother and sister of another: things which often occurred. Otherwise 'first cousins', as we should say, might marry, but seldom did so, or desired to do so, unless one of the parents of each were far-sundered in kin.'​

This is imbedded within text that contains the reincarnation of Elves being achieved by rebirth as Elf-children (this form of reincarnation was later abandoned, but not Elvish reincarnation in general of course).

 

[solicitr]

I *think* that if the old Professor were able to look down and comment, he would suggest that we view all this material the way he (perforce) had to view the materials concerning Saxon England- incomplete fragments, garbled traditions, variants and contradictions. By Tolkien's day scholars were beginning to demonstrate that Bede and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are not sober fact, but a collection of some fact mingled with legends and oral traditions. Ultimately 'canon' is a vain pursuit, a shibboleth. JRRT after all spent a lot of time considering transmission and documentary sequences, even if he never worked out a solution he liked.

 

[Elthir]

There's still a difference however, in that, while a legendarium that was published could contain fragments and variant traditions, concerning which The Drowning of Anadûnê (Mannish) versus Akallabêth (Mixed) is a nice example, or the internal variant tales regarding the Elessar, the mere existence of unpublished draft versions of something are simply not the same animal as published versions.

And generally speaking, Tolkien was concerned with a certain level of consistency, yes, along with an 'intended' measure of variance due to source. But these things were ultimately for JRR Tolkien to sort out, and it is arguable that if he had, Readers would never have been privy to 'drafts' (especially only adumbrated stories), that became discarded in the process.

 

[solicitr]

I don't disagree- but I think that readers today have the right and duty of exercising discernment, and not try to impose hard lines. After all, virtually everything to do with the Elder Days was unpublished in 1973; nonetheless we can take most of it as read, uncontroversially, given evidence of a 'fixed' tradition with which Tolkien never evinced dissatisfaction, or which he deliberately changed, as with the building of Gondolin. Then, at the margins, we have both confused 'internal traditions,' as with the Fall of Numenor and the transmission of the Silmarillion; firm decisions by Tolkien never executed, such as the revised astronomical myth; and matters upon which, from the available evidence, he was fuzzy, like Gil-galad's parentage. In these cases all we can do is discuss the variants and the textual circumstances, not force an artificial certainty by declaring "A is non-canonical therefore B is 'true.'"

 

[Thorin]

I still can't help but feel that regardless of what was written and published, the creator's most recent views are very important to the full understanding of Middle Earth. What we are saying is that by ignoring Tolkien's ideas at the end of his life, when he has had enough time to rumenate on his creation and what he truly feels about it, Tolkien has no control over what he has done. Middle Earth has taken on its own life and history and Tolkien is merely a spectator.

Had Tolkien said these things very early on at the beginning while the history was being formed but we ended up with the written word we have now, that would be one thing. However, the creator himself spoke and changed his views after all was said and done. It may be easier and more appropriate for us to say, 'No, we will accept what was previously published as the truth'. We cannot disregard the good professors ideas on this matter simply because they contradict what early work he did previously. It may not be consistent, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have significant meaning to Tolkien's views on Galadriel, Celeborn and the rebellion.