Skip to main content

Why did Christopher Tolkien remove all references to England and Ælfwine from the published Silmarillion?


Reading through the History of Middle-Earth series, it's quite clear the Tolkien had England and Eriol/Ælfwine of England in his mind though most of the history of developing the legendarium. The idea of Ælfwine of England (as the translator of the elvish legends) survives well into the later writings, including the Quenta Silmarillion, and even beyond LoTR.


Is it explained anywhere why Christopher removed any such references from the published Silmarillion?



Answer



In the foreword to The Book of Lost Tales: Part 1, Christopher Tolkien briefly discusses this decision, saying that he believed his father to have ultimately abandoned the idea of Eriol/Ælfwine as a framing device:



[I]t is certainly debatable whether it was wise to publish in 1977 a version of the primary 'legendarium' standing on 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.



The letter of 1963 quoted above shows my father pondering the mode in which the legends of the Elder Days might be presented. The original mode, that of The Book of Lost Tales, in which a man, Eriol, comes after a great voyage over the ocean to the island where the Elves dwell and learns their history from their own lips had (by degrees) fallen away. When my father died in 1973 'The Silmarillion' was in a characteristic state of disarray: the earlier parts much revised or largely rewritten, the concluding parts still as he had left them some twenty years before; but in the latest writing there is no trace or suggestion of any 'device' or 'framework' in which it was to be set. I think that in the end he concluded that nothing would serve, and no more would be said beyond an explanation of how (within the imagined world) it came to be recorded.


History of Middle-earth I The Book of Lost Tales Part 1 Foreword



We may argue over whether or not Christopher Tolkien was correct to believe this, but we can see a clear decline in the direct involvement of Eriol/Ælfwine over the development of the story; by the post-Lord of the Rings Silmarillion, he's been reduced from being an active participant in the story (as he was, as Eriol, in The Book of Lost Tales) to being a background character, with marginal notes and preambles only.


Christopher Tolkien notes Ælfwine's diminishing role later in Morgoth's Ring, following the long debate over the fate of Míriel:



In these writings is seen my father's preoccupation in the years following the publication of The Lord of the Rings with the philosophical aspects of the mythology and its systemisation [sic]. Of the deliberations of the Gods the sages of the Eldar preserved a record among the books of their law. How far away from these grave Doctors seems the 'horned moon' that rode over Ælfwine's ship off the costs of the Lonely Isla (11.321), as 'the long night of Faerie held on'!


Ælfwine is still present as communicator and commentator; but there have been great changes in Elfinesse.


History of Middle-earth X Morgoth's Ring 3: "The Later Quenta Silmarillion" Part 2 The Second Phase IV "Later Versions of the Story of Finwë and Míriel"




I've heard other fans speculate that Ælfwine was omitted to reduce the complexity of the work and, while I can't find any direct evidence to support that, it seems a plausible theory. By this point it's clear that Ælfwine is only tangentially connected to the narrative; in earlier versions of the story he served as a way for the reader to enter Tolkien's world (a role played by the hobbits in Lord of the Rings), but he no longer plays that role in later writings. Christopher Tolkien may have felt that disrupting the narrative with the occasional "quote Ælfwine" would have been needlessly disruptive to the reader, and I for one would have a hard time arguing with that.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...