Lord of the Rings Fanatics Plaza

Hello Aiks

I’m glad you didn’t find it boring. I’m happy you found:

a solid base of convincing that Goldberry is based on similar older legends and myths.

I now want to link all that evidence to the textual portrayal of Goldberry in The Fellowship of the Ring. Just as importantly, I also want to connect it to his On Fairy-stories paper which will give added oomph. But it’s going to take a few posts!




The Reason behind the Many Semblances of Goldberry?


To make headway what’s needed now is to switch attention to story germination and to recognize the phenomenon of oral drift. Then to reinforce the Washerwoman/Banshee connection, as no others have done, contemplate imagery of Goldberry outdoors on her washing day. Once brooded over, the Professor’s footsteps will likely have been traced which should be helpful – if not enlightening!

To understand Tolkien’s thinking on how legends and myths historically arose and how orally they had migrated and diffused across Europe, we should particularly heed remarks in his On Fairy-stories paper. By stripping away the complex arguments surrounding competing ‘origin’ theories, we gain a valuable glimpse of how the Professor’s mind whirred. Meticulously charted was his train of thought when it came to the Norse god: Thórr.

Proffered up was how the legend of Thórr might have arisen based on:

“… stories about an irascible, not very clever, redbeard farmer, of a strength beyond common measure, a person (in all but mere stature) very like the Northern farmers, the bœndr by whom Thórr was chiefly beloved?” 
– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 124, HarperCollins, 1983

In broad summary, Tolkien asks how might the husbandman have been viewed by a passer-by when out in the fields at a time lightning flashed and thunder sounded? Could it be:

“… that the farmer popped up in the very moment when Thunder got a voice and face; …”? 
– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 124, HarperCollins, 1983

 Or perhaps the tale had simply become embellished when:

“… there was a distant growl of thunder in the hills every time a story-teller heard a farmer in a rage.” 
– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 124, HarperCollins, 1983

Of course the take-away from this conjecture, are scenarios that show us a possible ‘root’ to a myth. Most reasonably, he argued, Thórr simply stemmed from extreme weather phenomena occurring in the presence of an extraordinarily strong and vocal farmer with the scene glimpsed or heard by outsiders. Such accounts, one can imagine, spread across the population from mouth-to-mouth becoming exaggerated along the way.








Tolkien’s logic trail is highly revealing. And we can use it to think along the same lines for Goldberry. Because we need to put ourselves in the Professors’ shoes as best as we can; it’s our best chance for success. Besides the comparison is good – because both ‘Fairy Stories’ lecture material and Goldberry’s ontological evolution in The Lord of the Rings were being sorted out at much the same time*. Of course, once again, to maximize benefits – we will need to attune into imagery and Nature. Maybe not featuring Asgardian “thunder in the hills” – but instead much mellower ‘singing in the hills!!!

… to be continued




* According to Letter #33 (from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981), by the end of August 1938 Tolkien had finished drafting all three chapters involving Goldberry. By the beginning of December 1938 per Letter #35 (from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981) chapters were revised to the point (as Christopher Tolkien reports in The Return of the Shadow) that some of the story reached its final form. Yet it is clear that by the ‘third phase’ of writing (which appears to have been progressing in December 1938) our chapters of interest still differed considerably from the final text. In any case, The Lord of the Rings had to be shelved after Christmas 1938 for a while to focus on the ‘Andrew Lang Lecture’. It was delivered on 8 March 1939. We now know much preparation was also done in the year before its delivery. Tolkien had almost three months of 1938 available at the point of acceptance: 

“Andrew Bennett, Secretary of the University Court at the University of St Andrews, writes to Tolkien, inviting him to deliver an Andrew Lang Lecture (i.e. On Fairy-Stories). … Tolkien will quickly send a positive reply.” 
– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2006 Edition, Chronology, 8 October 1938, C. Scull & W. Hammond, Addenda & Corrigenda 

The overlap for developing the lecture paper’s content and the firming-up of Goldberry’s character for what became The Fellowship of the Ring is thus hardly deniable.

Hello Aiks

I don’t know if you have read Tolkien On Fairy-stories, 2014 by Verlyn Flieger and Douglas Anderson. In any case it gives the history of the development of his 1939 On Fairy-stories lecture to final published paper. Also presented is a lot of draft material behind the finished product. Jason Fisher criticized Flieger & Anderson’s work for failing to link it strongly to The Lord of the Rings.

What I’m trying to do is show how Goldberry fits in with the essay in terms of being behind Tolkien’s idea of ‘hearsay’ and ‘diffusion’. I hope the following starts to make some sense when considering the two works in conjunction.




… continued from my previous post


So getting to The Lord of the Rings - how might a stray traveler from Bree-lands or Buckland viewed a yellow-haired maiden washing (presumably clothes) beside a stream in the middle of a natural downpour? Because without doubt Goldberry was out in the elements. After Tom told the hobbits:

“ ‘This is Goldberry’s washing day,’ … ‘… Too wet for hobbit-folk …’ ”, 
– The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

our dutiful hostess eventually came in from outside after singing from:

“… up above them.”
 – The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Because the song was “the tale of a river” – one could conclude that Tolkien placed Goldberry a short distance upstream and adjacent to the Withywindle flow to do her chore. It was nearby as Pippin noted from a westward facing window:

“The stream ran down the hill on the left …”.
 – The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Further downstream the waters had earlier been reported to be brown. Would newly washed away silt off the hilltop have made a muddy-bottomed rivulet seem reddish* from afar? Perhaps sunlight shining through some lingering clouds described to be: 

“… like lines of soiled wool stained red at the edges, …”,
 – The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil   (my underlined emphasis)

tinged the waters to the same hue?

To a wayward local – perhaps a Buckland or Bree hobbit passing by, the sight of Goldberry engaged in washing would surely have seemed bizarre. Washing clothes in near blood-colored waters might have been imagined as the case. Even stranger would have been the singing. So to the ear would that have come across as pleasingly sweet from a distance? Or would the pitter-patter of rain and an added wind have muffled and distorted Goldberry’s melodious tones?

We were made aware how even the hobbits:

“… could hear few words, …”. 
– The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Thus from afar, without coherency, the song might have sounded more akin to Banshee-like wailing or even Washerwoman mourning than one of gladness. What would a terrified wayfarer have reported to family and friends?

Just as one can imagine a washerwoman at work, one can also visualize the stream setting as rocky and boulder-strewn to beat and lay clothes upon. There is every reason to believe that Goldberry went out in her silver dress and scaly shoes to perform the laundering. The Fellowship of the Ring text gives no indication that a change in attire occurred after entering back into the house and before the hobbits reported on her striking outfit. Again, how to an off course traveler would Goldberry have appeared – sitting on a rock in a silvery gown blending into similar hued footwear? Is it purely coincidental how the girdle was chosen to be white, matching skin complexion, and conveniently providing separation of the upper torso to her lower body? Indeed – in bending over to do her washing, with her hair falling in front, would the upper half to the dress even been visible? Then from a distance, what might she have resembled?

Yes, you already know where I’m heading. Coupling such lustrous garb with her singing, surely the imagery resounds with what we, in this day and age, would term a ‘mermaid’!




Hmm … from gleaning beyond Tolkien’s bare depiction, one can easily imagine how elements of the ‘Washerwoman at the Ford’, the ‘Banshee’ and ‘Mermaid’ legends could have arose. Just like Thórr, one might opine that these creatures were creations of partial nature-allegory and oral drift. Goldberry was at the heart of it all; while hobbit-chatter had been the initial means of dispersion!


… to be continued



* There exists some precedence that such an idea could have entered Tolkien’s mind given the following text in the original release of The Hobbit:

“I don’t know what river it was, a rushing red one, swollen with the rains of the last few days, that came down from the hills and mountains in front of them.” 
– The Hobbit, Roast Mutton, 1937 Edition   (my underlined emphasis)

Hello Aiks

I don't have access to what Flieger and Douglas wrote. Or what Fisher commented on theirs. So no, I have not. All pretty recent from 2014? I guess Thor somewhere turns up in their works?

Yes - and Thor turns up in Tolkien’s 1947 version of On Fairy-stories. You can find a pdf online easy enough.


I finally looked into your ‘Little Corner’. I was mesmerized. You are such a strong person.







… continued from my previous post


Though I have discussed the ‘Washerwoman’, ‘Banshee’, ‘Water-nymph’ and ‘Undine’ while touching on the ‘Nixie’ and ‘Mermaid’, there definitely are other creatures which loosely relate. Forming part of a broad spectrum of our worlds’ mythical female water-beings, we have Sirens* and Lorelei** as well as England’s own water goddess: Sabrina of the Severn, and hags: Peg Powler and Jenny Greenteeth.
















Perhaps most intriguing of all British water-maidens are ‘The Lady of the Lake’ and Morgan le Fay of Arthurian legend.












I will have much to say about these two on another occasion. But for now, it is obvious such beings also have traces of Goldberry in their legendary makeup or demeanor. Given a wide-ranging collection of European female water-entities, we are now at the appropriate point to acknowledge that many ingredients were likely thrown into the pot to make the delicious soup of our world’s water-maiden mythologies. Yet even more importantly we mustn’t forget to consider how they have happened to be ladled out of the “Cauldron of Story”***. Nor fail to reflect upon whether Tolkien, in a moment of inventive inspiration, seized the ladle and filled the soup bowl set before him!


… more to come



* Tolkien in his youth actually wrote a poem titled The Sirens. Till date, it remains unpublished:

“He writes a poem, Wood-sunshine, … He will later date another poem, The Sirens, also to this month.” 
– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Chronology, July 1910, C. Scull & W. Hammond

Tolkien’s poem Glip of 1928, in siren fashion, has a ‘wicked mermaid’ who:

“… draws ships onto the rocks with her song, …”. 
– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Reader’s Guide, Glip, C. Scull & W. Hammond


** Lorelei was a fabled Rhine-maiden who sat on a rocky tor overlooking the river while luring mariners to their deaths on treacherous rocks below. Her traceable origins are similar to Richard Wagner’s Rhine-maidens of the German epic poem: Nibelungenlied.




 
In 1911 on his journey to Switzerland, Tolkien voyaged on the Rhine passing Lorelei Rock en-route.


*** In an BBC interview in 1962 with John Bowen, Tolkien related “the cauldron of story” in On Fairy-stories as an author’s “private stock”.

…. continued from previous post



And so now the time has come to make sense of Goldberry’s many faces and put together a reasonable theory based much upon Tolkien’s declared positions in OFS.


In OFS Tolkien lucidly declared that at the center of a fairy tale was an inventor. How the invention migrated across different lands and times was through processes termed: ‘diffusion’ and ‘inheritance’. But the important point to note is that there must have been a source:

“At the centre of the … diffusion there is a place where once an inventor lived. Similarly with inheritance (borrowing in time): in this way we arrive at last only at an ancestral inventor.”

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 121, HarperCollins, 1983

And so ancient fairy tales as we know them today were all a result of:

“… three things: independent invention, inheritance, and diffusion, …”.

- The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 121, HarperCollins, 1983

All three:

“… evidently played their part in producing the intricate web of Story.”

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories pg. 121, HarperCollins, 1983

Unfortunately, because distortion, exaggeration and misrepresentation naturally occurred through:

“… diffusion at various times from one or more centres.”,

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 121, HarperCollins, 1983

obtaining a true source was virtually impossible, as the “web of Story” had become exceedingly complex and: 

“… beyond all skill … to unravel …”.

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 121, HarperCollins, 1983

Tolkien conveyed that of the three processes:

“… invention is the most important and fundamental, and so (not surprisingly) also the most mysterious. To an inventor, that is to a storymaker, the other two must in the end lead back.”

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 121, HarperCollins, 1983

In creating the mysterious ‘invention’, Tom:

“… he is just an invention …”,

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #144 – 25 April 1954, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

and likewise Goldberry, it is theorized that Tolkien exercised immense creativity and knowledge to formulate two special ‘ancestral’ beings. These entities, placed within a mini fairy tale of the greater fairy tale, would be the imagined latent progenitors from which many different folktales and legends of early Europe were derived. The Professor, no doubt, desired a fair amount of enigmatic originality. No single real-world archetype would be able to fit to a tee, because that was not his aim. Indeed, quite the opposite. Tom and Goldberry, I believe, were meant to be the historical source material for a multiplicity of our ancient legends and myths, not the other way round.








A – Ireland: The Washerwoman at the Ford, The Banshee, Etain, The Morrigan

B – Scotland: The Washerwoman (Bean Nighe)

C – France: The Washerwoman, Pressina, Melusine, Mary-Morgan, Korrigans

D – Denmark: The Little Mermaid

E – Germany: Nixies, Undine, Lorelei

F – Greece: Persephone, Water-nymphs: Naiads, Sirens

G – Wales: The Lady of the Lake, Morgan le Fay

H – Italy: Water-nymphs
 
I – Slavic Countries (not shown): Rusalki

O – England: Peg Powler, Jenny Greenteeth, Sabrina, Coventina



… to be continued



* The map is fittingly of today’s resultant European geography. It is intended for conceptual illustration only.

** The intent of the ‘Diffusion Map’ is to show that all roads eventually lead back to Goldberry. The directness of the paths should not be taken literally. Tolkien pointed out that it is quite possible to have different centers of diffusion. For example, though a legend might have migrated to Germany from England, its progression to Denmark might have resulted from Germany only. This would make Germany a subcenter for further diffusion.

Hello Aiks

Across the setting of time, it is impossible to keep myths and legends in pure form.

Absolutely - Tolkien certainly agreed. And so do I.

Tom and Goldberry are Tolkien's invention on mysterious deities in his Legendarium. Storywise, yes they are a basis to our myths and legends today.

That is precisely what I am saying. I think that the evidence points to purposeful fragmentation of Goldberry and Tom’s makeup - ultimately making them ‘sources’. This, I think, is a most worthy role and befitting of Tolkien’s intellect.



…. continued from my previous post

Inevitably in inventing sources, Tolkien had been left with just one logical choice. Only certain characteristics and literary snippets pertinent to the merry couple would end up diffusing across to select creatures of our world’s mythologies. This idea can be gathered from:

“These tales are ‘new’, they are not directly derived from other myths and legends, but they must inevitably contain a large measure of ancient wide-spread motives or elements.”
– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #131 – late 1951, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (Tolkien’s emphasis)

With those:

“… mythological stories, legends, tales, Romances that come to us from many sources, from Hellas by many channels, from the Celtic peoples Irish and British, and from the Teutonic …”,

– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Reader’s Guide, Reading – pg. 1053, Tolkien Papers, Bodleian Library, Oxford

being directly responsible for Goldberry’s fragmentary makeup.

To Tolkien, at the very least: 

“… there was always a kernel of fact behind a legend …”.

– Lecture of 14 February 1938, Report in Amon Hen 28, August 1977

And sometimes just a kernel. For it would be an exceptional matter for age-old stories to have been handed-down through history while matching all the original facts without any distortion. And that, I surmise, is precisely why no existing archetype or entity in our primary world matches Goldberry exactly. Deducing what we can from On Fairy-stories, and taking a small leap of faith – ‘out of box’ thinking gives us a remarkably sensible, logical and bow-wrapped answer that just about fits all the known facts.

Can I be absolutely sure? Unfortunately, when it comes down to it, only the Professor would have been able to provide a rubber-stamping. Nonetheless, I believe he left us more than enough clues. Particularly compelling are his ideas in On Fairy-stories which, as he stated, were put to practical use. The:

“… ‘Andrew Lang’ lecture at St Andrews on Fairy-stories; … was entirely beneficial to The Lord of the Rings, which was a practical demonstration of the views that I expressed.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #234 – 22 November 1961, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (my underlined emphasis)

Without specifying the merry couple – he came as close as possible to admitting his plan when insisting the basis of The Lord of the Rings was:

“… mythical-historical …” using “… deeply rooted ‘archetypal’ motifs …” which he put “… into an entirely new setting, …”.

– Tolkien letter to B.A. Baeyens, 16 December 1963   (Tolkien’s emphasis)

Then surely Goldberry was integral to the exercise? On our part wouldn’t it be irrational to deny that possibility? So it’s at this point we need to revisit the discussion on the many faces of Goldberry while bearing the theme of “deeply rooted ‘archetypal’ motifs” in mind.


… to be continued

Another Face: Melusine

When it came to Goldberry one can sensibly conclude that her strongest ‘archetypal’ roots included not only the classical Greek nymph (see posts of Dec 28 2023, Mar 13 2024) but also the Teutonic undine (see posts of Mar 24 2024, Apr 13 2024, May 04 2024). But what was their mythical-historical relationship to each other? Beyond the obvious young/female/water-entity, that is. And then would Tolkien have been interested in unraveling commonality and tracing roots?

This last question is easy to answer. For fairy-stories, inbuilt was a strong:

“… desire to unravel the intricately knotted and ramified history of the branches on the Tree of Tales …”.
– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 120, HarperCollins, 1983

Thus, we are on firm ground as we ourselves seek a path that Tolkien might well have followed!

Now in the waters of the Mummelsee, a large lake in the heart of Germany’s Black Forest:

“Here, according to ancient tradition, dwell beautiful Undines, who are formed as if of snowy lilies, …”.
– Knowledge Volume XI – pg. 107, 1st March 1888








Clearly the connecting ‘motif’ of Germanic undines to Greek nymphs entailed ‘metamorphosis’ and the ‘water-lily’. Not just the white type, but also its less glamorous sister, the ‘yellow water-lily’. For it is by no accident that the lake was so named:

“Mummel: The yellow pond lily (Nuphar lutea)”,
– German-English Dictionary, dict.cc

Or that a shape-changing process was involved:

“During the daytime these maidens, in the form of water lilies, rock gently upon the smooth waters, … the flower-like form … serves to delude mortals and conceals their true nature.”
– Legends of the Rhine, Mümmelsee: The Water Sprites – pg. 292, H.A. Guerber, 1895

Underlying the physical metamorphosis motif was the spiritual one of ‘gaining a human soul’. One that Paracelsus claimed was not only a desired trait of undines, but also belonged to an earlier myth – that of the half water-nymph ‘Melusine’*:

“… she ‘was possessed by the evil spirit, of which she would have freed herself if she had stayed with her husband to the end’ … Paracelsus characterizes Melusine as a nymph, associates her with other water figures like the siren, singles her out for her similarity to humans and her desire to acquire a human soul, …”.
– Melusine’s Footprint: Tracing the Legacy of a Medieval Myth, The Alchemical Transformation of Melusine – pgs. 98-99, M.R. Elmes, 2017

Unlike other creatures, and despite the Fall of Man, humanity still had a chance at redress and being restored to God. Melusine, though granted a far longer lifespan than Homo sapiens, ultimately sought to attain salvation by living and dying as a normal, mortal woman. For in Tolkien’s words, according to the thoughts of Paracelsus – she knew that to the human race:

“… certainly Death is not an Enemy!”
– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #208 – 10 April 1958, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Likewise – on our part it would be a huge mistake to confuse:

“… true ‘immortality’ with … serial longevity.”
– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #208 – 10 April 1958, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981 (Tolkien’s emphasis)



... to be continued



* The tale appears in Chronique de Melusine in Le Noble Hystoire de Lusignan. It tells of a beautiful nymph-like fairy-woman who is cursed by her mother to change into serpent-tailed half-monster every Saturday. The metamorphosis is discovered by her husband, and Melusine is forced to flee in shame and return to the sea.

Hello Aiks


Thank you for the compliment!

I gave a very short synopsis of Melusine at the very end of my last post.
She is quite a famous European fairy tale figure and even the multinational US Company Starbucks gives her pride of place (see picture in my post below).





… continued from my previous post

Fouqué’s 1811 soul-searching Undine story is thus traceable beyond a Paracelsian water-elemental to the chronologically earlier fairy tale of Melusine written by Jean d’Arras c. 1392-1394. The eminent folklorist Sabine Baring-Gould certainly agreed:

“The beautiful legend of Undine is but another version of the same story.”

– Curious Myths of the Middle Ages, Volume 2, Melusina – pgs. 220-221, S. Baring-Gould, 1868

As did Charlotte Yonge whose commentary expanded beyond Melusine:

“ ‘Undine’ is a story of much lighter fancy, … No doubt it was founded on the universal idea in folk-lore of the nixies or water-spirits, one of whom, in Norwegian legend, was seen weeping bitterly because of the want of a soul. Sometimes the nymph is a wicked siren like the Lorelei; but in many of these tales she weds an earthly lover, and deserts him after a time, sometimes on finding her diving cap, or her seal-skin garment, which restores her to her ocean kindred, sometimes on his intruding on her while she is under a periodical transformation, as with the fairy Melusine, more rarely if he becomes unfaithful.”

– Undine, F. de La Motte Fouqué, Project Gutenberg E-book, Introduction by C. Yonge

Knitted into the tangle is the motif of ‘chastity’ – a subject hardly approachable in folklore and fairy tales, though more visibly projected in the ancient legends of Rome and Greece. From virginal nymphs being pursued by lustful Greco-Roman gods, to Sabrina from Comus* ever swift to aid virgins with her love for maidenhood, to marriage being a necessity for an unsullied Undine – love had a carnal side. Indeed, for all ‘humanity’ clothed in the raiment of flesh, fulfillment could only be achieved (at least classically) through a physical union of male and female. But to be ‘pure’ love, the female had to be ‘unspoilt’. And that representation since biblical times had most strongly been symbolized by the Madonna – and ‘white lilies’.

Not to be missed then was Tom’s action of plucking water-lilies from Goldberry’s Withywindle pool. Symbolic ‘deflowering’ one might presume. With utmost subtlety had Tolkien conveyed that Tom was not only Goldberry’s husband, but also her ‘first’ physical lover?

Then were all these motifs, legends and fairy tales known to Tolkien? C.S. Lewis, who knew him better than any of us, effectively proclaimed the Professor to be:

“… a specialist in fairy-stories.”

– Review of The Hobbit for the Times Literary Supplement, 2 Oct 1937

I wouldn’t dare to disagree. Yet in this instance the evidence is scant.

It is possible that Tolkien first ran across Melusine as an undergraduate. Forming part of the reading syllabus – a compulsory examination question was set on the novels of Sir Walter Scott:

“Tolkien sits Paper A5: History of English Literature. There are twelve questions, with no limit as to the number to be answered: one each on Old English poetry; … Sir Walter Scott as a novelist; …”.

– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Chronology, 12 June 1915, C. Scull & W. Hammond

And in Scott’s Quentin Durward** we have a brief synopsis of Melusine’s story. Moreover, an acknowledgement was made concerning linkage to other mythical water-entities whom I have already focused upon:

“… The fairy Melusina: a water fay who married a mortal on condition that she should be allowed to spend her Saturdays in deep seclusion. … Her history is closely interwoven with the legends of the Banshee and Mermaid. …”.

– Quentin Durward, Chapter VII, Sir W. Scott, 1823

Fortuitously we know for certain that Tolkien was acquainted with Melusine before The Lord of the Rings. And there does exist a telling suggestion that for her case, Tolkien had a grasp of how both diffusion and inheritance occurred:

“It is indeed easier to unravel a single thread in the web – that is a detail, or motive or incident – than to trace the history of the picture defined by many threads.”

– Tolkien On Fairy-stories, Manuscript A – pg. 181, V. Flieger & D. Anderson, 2014

Clearly the “detail” and single “thread” he had in mind we’re related to his jotting of the previous sentence, namely the:

“Story of Raimondin and Melusine.”

– Tolkien On Fairy-stories, Manuscript A – pg. 180, V. Flieger & D. Anderson, 201








… to be continued



* The motif of chastity was lectured on by Tolkien’s fellow Inkling:

“Tolkien probably attends Charles Williams’ second lecture, on Milton’s Comus which pays special attention to chastity.”

– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Chronology, 5 February 1940, C. Scull & W. Hammond

** It is admitted that there is no record of Tolkien having read this novel. However, one must acknowledge there exist reasonable odds that he did. C.S. Lewis, one might note, actually purchased Quentin Durward in 1926.

Hello Aiks

Glad you’re enjoying the research. Unfortunately it’s rather long winded as I feel that a decent amount of evidence is needed to support what I’m advocating. So apologies for that!



… continued from my previous post

Had the Professor tracked forward in time to see key features of Melusine progressively evolve in Fouqué’s Undine, Andersen’s The Little Mermaid* and then Heyse’s Die Nixe**? Then backwards, were those components present in the makeup of Melusine’s predecessors: Arthurian nymphs*** and those trailing all the way to Greek legend? 

To the above – possibly so; given the clues – even probably so. For in updated thoughts he heavily implied her case was unique. To unravel a thread was humanly impossible:

“Except in particularly fortunate cases, or in a few details.”

– Tolkien On Fairy-stories, Manuscript B MS. 4 F 73-120 – pg. 221, V. Flieger & D. Anderson, 2014

Which allows us to attain a more thorough answer in that – surely those “few details” are ones already put forward; namely motifs of water-lilies, metamorphosis, chastity and attaining true immortality.

So if by good fortune some underlying details in a thread associated to Melusine were indeed historically traceable both forwards and backwards through specific motifs – one can easily fathom the last step. For us, a most important one. Because it was one designed to send us even further back. To successfully subcreate the Professor willfully imagined his way back into the depths of time. Yes, as Randel Helms has noted (among other scholars) - this is likely another case where Tolkien employed:

“… one of his favorite literary tricks, the creation of the ‘real’ source or origin of a famous tale.”

– Tolkien and the Silmarils, Akallabêth – pg. 64, Randel Helms, 1981

Expanding on my earlier conclusion, I believe that the intricate oral and literature-based ‘Web of Story’, historically stemming from various cultures and tribes across Europe, had a few threads imaginatively unraveled by Tolkien himself. Supposedly for this unique case – myth, legend, fairy tale and folklore were all linked. In a place geographically close to Oxford, in a bygone mythical era, lay the center of diffusion for a particularly ingenious invention.

Yes, the source behind the stories of many mystical female water-entities of our world**** was ultimately Goldberry herself. On the Professor’s part, how neat a “practical demonstration” was that!




* The connecting thread being again – one of metamorphosis (in this instance the transformation of a fish-tailed mermaid to a bipedal human), as well as winning a soul (through a human male’s returned love).

** In 1908 Paul Heyse published Die Nixe which possessed a theme similar to Fouqué’s Undine:

“… mermaids and nixies had no soul and could only partake in such a one, if they loved a human being and one who also loved them reciprocally and made them a matrimonial bride.”

– Märchen und Spukgeschichten by P. Heyse of 1908, translated in ‘Metamorphosis’ – pg. 360, D. Gallagher, 2009

*** The origin of the Arthurian Morgan le Fay lies as a Breton water-nymph. Thus an implied transformation from a water-being to one completely at home on land exists. Her documented shape-shifting abilities add to a thread of metamorphosis being a common link to other mythical female water-maidens pertinent to this discussion.

A further link to Greek female water-deities is Morgan le Fay’s role as a ‘seductress’. She is also connected to Melusine via the legendary isle of Avalon. 

**** The folklorist Wirt Sikes seems to have pondered on the origins of female water-entities. The tack put forward was that their roots ultimately lie in natural phenomena. However no further elaboration on how they might be historically linked was provided:

“The water-maidens of every land doubtless originally were the floating clouds of the sky, or the mists of the mountain. From this have come certain fair and fanciful creations with which Indo-European folk-lore teems, the most familiar of which are Undine, Melusina, Nausicaa, and the classic Muse.”

– British Goblins, Welsh Folk-lore, Fairy Mythology, Legends and Traditions, Chapter III – pg. 47, W. Sikes, 1880

Sabrina & Coventina

Requiring some further discussion are two legendary water-maidens closer to home. I have already touched upon Peg Powler, Jenny Greenteeth and Morgan le Fay. But I want to point out that Sabrina and Coventina are also English water-goddesses who have links to Goldberry, albeit faint ones.




Sabrina is the legendary water-nymph of the Severn river. Her literary origins lie in Geoffery of Monmouth’s Historia regum Britanniae. Five centuries later she reappears in Milton’s 1634 Comus:

“There is a gentle Nymph not farr from hence,

That with moist curb sways the smooth Severn stream, 

Sabrina is her name, a Virgin pure, …”,

and is associated with water-lilies thus:

“Song:

Sabrina fair
Listen where thou art sitting

Under the glassie, cool, translucent wave,

In twisted braids of Lillies knitting …”.

Then in 1748 it appears Sabrina was made the subject of the poem: An Invocation to a Water-Nymph, by Thomas Warton (the Elder), Professor of Poetry at the University of Oxford. It is possible Tolkien encountered Sabrina and the aforementioned lines in his youth from reading Bertram Windle’s Life in Early Britain*, The Bronze Period – pg. 114, 1897.










We know Ronald and Edith stayed in Clevedon on the Severn in 1916 for a week’s honeymoon (see Christina Scull & Wayne Hammond’s The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Chronology, 22 March 1916). Sabrina (Latin) and Severn (English) are etymologically related (see Tolkien Studies Volume XI, pg. 72) with the name Sabrina being recorded by the Roman historian Tacitus:

“SEVERN R. …C. 90 Tacitus Sabrina, …”.

– The Place-names of England and Wales, pg. 437, J.B. Johnston, 1915

Though Tolkien’s interest in etymology was aroused by his mother (see Letter #294 from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981), whether he became acquainted with the river’s legends and etymological sources at the time of his honeymoon, is unknown.




Coventina, a Roman deity, is the most ancient of water-nymphs historically associated to England. Her connection to Tolkien’s mythology is tenuous – as no direct** evidence exists that the Professor knew of her. Bas-reliefs found at Carrawburgh (near Hadrian’s wall) in 1876 depict her seated on a lily or in tripartite form with water-vessels as part of the scene (the plate below is from The Legendary Lore of the Holy Wells of England, 1893 by R.C. Hope, and courtesy of Wikimedia). Hence, we have a slight link (beyond the obvious nymph, lily and water theme) to Goldberry and her earthenware vessels housing those displaced water-lilies Tom fetched. 






Given that the names of many English towns and cities originate with the Romans, a likely etymological root of the English city of Coventry stems from Coventina. As Richard C. West points out:

“The beginnings of the city of Coventry date much earlier, from Roman times.”

– Tolkien Studies, Volume 2 – pg. 8, “And She Named Her Own Name”: Being True to One’s Word in Tolkien’s Middle-earth, R.C. West

Tolkien certainly investigated the source of ‘Coventry’ per Letter #97 (from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981), dismissing any link to ‘convent’ and instead pointing to much earlier origination from Anglo-Saxon: Cofan-treo, meaning Cola’s tree (Catholic Herald, February 1945 – reprint 18th September 1981). However, his research does not appear to consider a potentially even earlier Roman naming origin.




* Indirect evidence exists that Tolkien read Bertram Windle’s, Life in Early Britain, 1897 (because of childhood memories concerning the ancient meaning of ‘Ond’).

** Windle also published: A Collection of Archaeological Pamphlets on Roman Remains, 1878. Coventina is discussed within.

However, though it is recorded Tolkien was interested in the early history of British lands, no record exists of Tolkien ever running across this publication. Also of interest, is that Bertram Windle was uncle to Michael Maxwell Windle – a fellow Exeter college student and friend of Tolkien’s.

Hello Aiks

Keeping track, I quite understand, is not easy. I ought to provide a summary, at least an interim one. Your prompt is timely and warranted. I think I will try and do so after the next post.





… continued from my previous post

Finally, the time has come to wrap-up my thoughts on Tom’s beautiful consort. That is with respect to our world’s fairy-stories.

For Goldberry too has fairy tale links other than those already exposed. And I’m going to discuss two others.

Counterpart to a diminutive Tom Thumb, of English lore, is Thumbelina in the so-titled Hans Christian Andersen* tale. Here we see another small and beautiful maiden (indeed extremely tiny) who is associated to a water-lily and ends up finding a partner of similar size. Had the legend of Goldberry indeed dwindled to modern-day fairy-story?









Perhaps one of the most interesting items in the original tale is the ending where Thumbelina is renamed:

“ ‘You must not be called Tiny any more, …’ … ‘… We will call you Maia.’ ” 

– Hans Andersen’s Fairytales, Little Tiny (or Thumbelina) – pg. 25, H.C. Andersen, Translation by H. Paull, 1888

Apart from the term appearing in Tolkien’s mythology, Maia** in our world is the name of the Greek Goddess of Spring (and rebirth), a shy nymph – eldest and most beautiful of the seven sisters Pleiades star-cluster. Perhaps then it was the ‘cold’ bluish ‘Netted Stars’*** Goldberry awaited to see arise and pass overhead while:

“Waiting on the doorstep for the cold starlight, …”.

– The Fellowship of the Ring, The Old Forest

These are all very fitting fragmentary links for Tom’s partner. Yet I think the most impressive one resides in Andrew Lang’s The Blue Fairy Book in the Estonian tale of The Gold-Spinners.

… to be continued





* Tolkien’s familiarity with Hans Christian Andersen’s tales is not in doubt:

“I was of course given Hans Andersen when quite young. At one time I listened with attention which may have looked like rapture to his stories when read to me. I read them myself often.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #234 – 22 November 1961, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

** The terms Tolkien used for the demigods of his mythology appear to have ultimately (and uncharacteristically) been derived from North European lore. ‘Maia’ from the Danish tale of Thumbelina, ‘Vala’ from the Finnish Kale-vala and ‘Ainu’ from the diminutive folk of Lapland.

*** The Remmirath (Pleiades) had already been described in an earlier chapter upon the hobbits’ meeting with Gildor. 

It should be noted that Tolkien was taught astronomy as a child and the subject interested him:

“… speaking for myself as a child, I can only say that a liking for fairy-stories was not a dominant characteristic of early taste. … I liked many other things as well, or better: such as history, astronomy, botany, grammar, and etymology …”.

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 135, HarperCollins, 1983   (my underlined emphasis)

Incorporation of this distinctive star formation may have resulted from childhood memories of looking at Sarehole skies:

“On a clear night, the stars ruled the sky.”

– The Worlds of J.R.R. Tolkien, England to the Shire – pg. 13, J. Garth, 2020

The Pleiades cluster are renowned for their blue glow.

Hi @Priya, I have been deep in my own writing and have only now begun to catch up with all your posting. May I say that the research evidenced above is deeply impressive!

Your basic idea that Tolkien imagines Goldeberry a source of various water-maidens who appear in later fairy-stories strikes me as sound. I suppose it is another way of phrasing what Shippey calls asterisk-reality, an unknown origin conjectured from the known, later variants. In any case, it seems right.

My only question atm concerns dates. Do you envisage Goldberry as already so imagined in the 1934 'Adventures of Tom Bombadil' or only developed as such in Fellowship?

Hello Aiks

Thanks for staying tuned in. I might skip an interim summary, as I’m getting closer to wrapping up my thoughts on Goldberry!

I like H. Andersen too. Though funnily Tolkien wasn’t too complimentary towards him. I was in Copenhagen a few years ago and I visited the Little Mermaid statue - which was adorable!


Hello Chrysophylax Dives

I’m glad the accumulated evidence is beginning to have an impact. I’ve always believed Tolkien had a worthy plan for Goldberry (& Tom). It’s just that Tolkien’s carry through is beguiling because of its sophistication.

As I’ve tried to emphasize, Tolkien always had a story behind a name. At the point the name ‘Goldberry’ was selected (at an unknown time prior to the 1934 poem publication date), I presume an extensive background story started to form in his mind. Some of which made it into the poem.

There are certainly traces in the 1934 poetry suggesting an assignation of elements relating Goldberry to the classic Greek water-nymph, nixie and mermaid. But I think such an underlying theme spurred him on for TLotR where quite obviously, at least per my research, much was expanded on. It is my belief that Goldberry was the catalyst to giving Tom the same sort of covert ‘source function’ in TLotR.




… continued from my previous post

So on to The Gold-Spinners*. Here we have a fairytale from Andrew Lang’s Blue Fairy Book that I think is well connected to the theme of water-lilies, chastity, love, marriage and female metamorphosis. It is a tale Tolkien surely must have read about because the Blue Fairy Book is one which Tolkien talks about in his On Fairy-stories paper**.

Within our fairy tale of interest we have a situation where a virginal maiden having escaped from the clutches of an old woman, falls in love with a prince, only to be bewitched into a ‘yellow water-lily’. Remaining in this flower form for a year – she is no longer human and just like Fouqué’s Undine, her soul will be lost because she will never experience in the flesh again:

“… the golden gifts God has given to each mortal … love, joy, sorrow.”

– Undine, About this Book – pg. viii, F. de la Motte Fouqué, told by M. Macgregor, 1907

However, in passing by the stream the prince hears her lament:

“Alas! bewitched and all forsaken,
’Tis I must lie for ever here!”.

– The Blue Fairy Book, The Gold-Spinners – pg. 178, A. Lang, 1892

Noticing:

“… a yellow water-lily floating on the surface of the water, …”,

– The Blue Fairy Book, The Gold-Spinners – pg. 178, A. Lang, 1892

he realizes: 

“… flowers do not sing, and in great surprise he waited, hoping to hear more. Then again the voice sang: …”.

– The Blue Fairy Book, The Gold-Spinners – pg. 178, A. Lang, 1892

So he requests the aid of the Wizard of Finland*** asking him:

“ ‘… how I may restore a maiden transformed into a flower to her own form.’ ”

– The Blue Fairy Book, The Gold-Spinners – pg. 179, A. Lang, 1892

Uttering the furnished spells, he transforms himself temporarily into a crab (and with pincers loosens the roots of the yellow water-lily) and then changes both of them back into human form:

“ ‘… say: “From a crab into a man, from a water-lily into a maiden,” and ye both will be restored to your own forms.’ ”

– The Blue Fairy Book, The Gold-Spinners – pg. 179, A. Lang, 1892









 
But was part of the source of The Gold-Spinners – Tom and Goldberry? Specifically – the couple’s river-capering captured in The Adventures of Tom Bombadil. Had our world’s fairy tale over the ages become an embellishment of Goldberry emerging within a bed of water-lilies, rather than a prince cutting free one and transforming her by magic? Is this the way Tolkien reconciled his ‘truth’ behind a fairytale metamorphosis?

Surely the answer is before us? Surely now we can all see the incredible sophistication behind Tolkien’s plan. How he managed to pick out from folklore and a multitude of fairy-stories a mythological foundation to Goldberry, and all intricately woven around the yellow water-lily. Surely with all the prior noted antecedents, it makes perfect sense. Once again - I believe Tolkien created Goldberry to be the source of a wide variety of real-world fairy tales, folklore and legends.








… to be continued



* Titled: The Water-lily. The Gold-Spinners in Andrew Lang’s The Blue Fairy Book. The fairy tale also appears as The Hero of Esthonia, Vol. I, 1895 by W.F. Kirby.

** Curiously, Tolkien declined to directly refer to The Gold-Spinners in preparatory notes for his On Fairy-Stories lecture of 1939 when commenting on Lang’s selection of fairy tales:

“… in the Blue Book … There are four from Scandinavia; …”.

– Tolkien On Fairy-stories, Manuscript B – pg. 214, V. Flieger & D. Anderson, 2014

He indicated those four caught his attention being: 

“… an ingredient not often obtained by English people … except in the Andrew Lang books, …”.

– Tolkien On Fairy-stories, Manuscript B – pgs. 214-215, V. Flieger & D. Anderson, 2014

However, the tale from Estonia was also a relatively rarely published tale in English. In any case, given that Tolkien was formulating The Lord of the Rings chapters involving Goldberry in the 1938~1939 time-frame – it’s virtually certain he was aware and read The Water-lily. The Gold-Spinners.

*** Again we see a Scandinavian/Nordic ‘flavor’.

Hello Aiks

The Little Mermaid is cute - but actually not that impressive. Copenhagen is a beautiful city - but I don’t remember seeing any museum dedicated to Hans Christian Andersen. I think he deserves his own though!




… continued from my previous post

Looking back at my previous post, the metamorphosis illustration by Sandwyck from flower to a yellow rippling haired maiden is a powerful and evocative one for me. The story itself is one we can be fairly certain Tolkien ran across in his acquaintance with Andrew Lang’s colored fairy books as a youth and later researched into just as work started in earnest on what became The Lord of the Rings. Once again, we see the yellow water-lily is a key motif. The setting is a stream. But I wanted to give readers of this thread more of a flavor of Tolkien’s extreme botanical knowledge.

An apt example of how Tolkien used a river, water-flora and ancient language, in combination, to connect his imaginary epoch to our world is laid out in one of his letters:

“… the … Gladden River, … which contains A.S. glædene ‘iris’, in my book supposed to refer to the ‘yellow flag’ growing in streams and marshes: sc. iris pseudacorus … not iris foetidissima to which in mod. E. the name gladdon (sic) is usually given, at any rate by botanists.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #297 – August 1967, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (A.S. an abbreviation of ‘Anglo-Saxon’, sc. an abbreviation of ‘scientific’, my underlining)

Given such a thought train – one can apply parallel thinking to our particular species and the Withywindle tributary flowing into:

“… the … Brandywine River, … which contains A.S. used Lat. nimphea ‘lily’, in my book supposed to refer to the ‘yellow water-lily’ growing in streams and marshes: sc. nuphar lutea … to which in mod. E. the name brandy-bottle (sic) is usually given, at any rate by botanists.”

Perhaps Tolkien would have provided such an explanation – if asked!


 




 
* Latin Name=Nimphea, Anglo-Saxon=Eadocca, from Archbishop Alfric’s Vocabulary (pg. 136) in Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies, Volume 1, 1884 by Thomas Wright.

** It has been remarked that Tolkien was very likely acquainted with this manuscript – see Michael Drout’s J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: Scholarship and Critical Assessment – Leechbook and Herbarium (pg. 350).

Hello Aiks

I obviously missed that museum!

I believe those ancient manuscripts of England were mainly put together by ecclesiastical folk. And survived because of their dedication and devotion to preservation.




… continued from my previous post

I want to continue to highlight Tolkien’s botanical expertise. At the same time I want to both speculate, extrapolate and digress a little more. Maybe it will help spark further understanding or ideas about the story behind Goldberry?

Now, among botanists the yellow water-lily is commonly termed ‘spatterdock’ for reasons that remain murky. The ending ‘dock’* is also employed in the names of several other broad-leafed English plants, and probably stems from Anglo-Saxon ‘docca’. For instance, the Anglo-Saxon name for the water-lily is ‘eadocca’ – literally the ‘water dock’.

Tolkien doesn’t specify the species of lily in The Adventures of Tom Bombadil poem, although he does tell us the season is summer. It is quite possible Tolkien envisaged the yellow variety as present by the ‘waterside’ with its white relation. In English waterways both the yellow and white kind often coexist in close proximity:

“Equally frequent and generally in company with the white water-nymph, we find its yellow Naiad sister, Nuphar lutea, …”.

– The Illustrated London Almanack, Volume 6, White and Yellow Water-lilies – pg. 56, 1867





 



 
With Tom wallowing in the water, as Goldberry pulled him under, and no doubt droplets flying in the air, one can imagine the floating leaves, stems and flowers of nearby yellow water-lilies becoming spattered with water. If one had asked Tolkien – perhaps he would given a mythological incident as the source of the nickname ‘spatterdock’? Reflected perhaps in her dew-drop description:

“Her long yellow hair rippled down her shoulders, her gown was green, green as young reeds, shot with silver like beads of dew; …”.
- The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil (my underlined emphasis)

Don’t be surprised if there was such a connection. For the linking of The Adventures of Tom Bombadil poem to The Lord of the Rings had, I believe, subtle elements to it too. The seemingly innocent descriptive phrase: “beads of dew” was quite possibly part of her deeper ‘story’. As the Professor confessed:

The tale was written:

“… slowly and with great care for detail, …”.
- The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Autumn 1971, Letter #328 , published by H. Carpenter, 1981

And habitually, he said:

“I would always rather try to wring the juice out of a single sentence, or explore the implications of one word … And I am afraid that what I would rather do is what I have usually done.”
- The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, Valedictory Address by J.R.R. Tolkien, published by C. Tolkien, 1984




* Tolkien appears knowledgeable on this matter as he comments on “plants with big broad leaves, e.g. burdock” in Letter #93, 24 December 1944 (from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981).

Hello Aiks

Copenhagen is an amazingly quaint city. I’ll definitely look out for that museum on my next trip there! But no travel plans at the moment.

What I would like to chat about now is Goldberry’s mother. I think there’s been far too little research into her among the Tolkien fan community. However, I’m going to lead into her slowly.





 

A Peculiar but Wholesome Relationship 


Even at the very early stages of drafting The Lord of the Rings storyline featuring Tom and Goldberry – Tolkien put considerable thought into the characters he wished to cast, in addition to the depth of the narrative. In February 1939 having shaped just a few chapters he confessed:

“The writing of The Lord of the Rings is laborious, because I have been doing it as well as I know how, and considering every word.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #35 – 2 February 1939, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Much later he confirmed the book:

“… was written slowly and with great care for detail, …”.

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #328 – Autumn 1971, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

No doubt, just like his Silmarillion tales, much of the initial effort for the new adult-oriented fairy-story was directed towards:

“… the construction of elaborate and consistent mythology …”. 

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #19 – 16 December 1937, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

And the end result was a:

“… coherent structure which it took … years to work out.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #190 – 3 July 1956, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981









 
Yet at first read there seems to be ample incoherence and some off-putting inconsistencies surrounding our idyllic couple. Indeed, even seasoned readers have felt the side activity between the hedge-border of Buckland, and entrance to Bree was unnecessary. Opinions have often been voiced that Tolkien left a distraction which never added much value to the overall tale. It has been argued an omission would have rid Middle-earth of two of its ‘weirdest’ characters. And to some – that would have been no major loss.

However, Tolkien’s purpose was for the hobbits to experience:

“… an ‘adventure’ on the way.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #153 – September 1954, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (Tolkien’s emphasis)

Yet what an adventure! As I’ve already revealed in Chrysophylax Dives’s Bombadil thread, there was much more to it than meets the eye. Much more than any reader has realized to date. So to truly unveil more of the book’s deepest secrets – we will first need to study our odd couple in microscopic detail, because vital clues have been missed by all and sundry.

Now when it comes to the merry duo – quite rightly the reader is entitled to be a little perturbed. Here we have the unusual situation of an overly energetic wrinkly old man cohabiting with a beautiful young maiden who exhibits a degree of worrisome servility*. The contrast in looks and dress code – from ancient and stout with a wardrobe of inelegance, to youthful grace with stylish garb – cannot be missed. Most peculiarly, both of them sang to an extent what many consider beyond the ordinary; while oddly – even much talk resembled rhyme. And some of this ineloquent (seemingly nonsensical) verse is decidedly annoying. To make matters worse, comic relief was added of the strangest kind in belittling the power of the Ring. Crassly put maybe – still it is understandable how one can generally enjoy The Lord of the Rings, yet actively dislike Tom and Goldberry.

The age disparity between the merry pair is certainly a matter which has been frowned upon. Without foreknowledge of the 1934 The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, a casual reader could have been easily confused over their exact relationship. One can sympathize how for a mid-50’s BBC broadcast, with perhaps just The Lord of the Rings at-hand, a presenter might automatically have assumed non-marital rapport. Tolkien was obviously aghast at the misconstrual:

“… worse still was the announcer’s preliminary remarks that Goldberry was his daughter (!), …”.

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #175 – 30 November 1955, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Yet another point of mixed feelings is signs of a scandalous abduction or even elopement! In the poem: The Adventures of Tom Bombadil – Tom forcibly removes Goldberry from her habitat and then seemingly coerces her to be his wife. The situation is a little muddy as some view her as a tad flirtatious and the departure from her river abode as a happy event. Her mother, the ‘River-woman’, although falling short of voicing disapproval, clearly misses her presence:

“… on the bank in the reeds River-woman sighing …”.

– The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1934 (& 1962) poem


… to be continued



* Goldberry refers to Tom as ‘Master’ or ‘master’ four times. In this day and age such a term of address between a husband and wife has distinct subservient undertones. Even though the following quote dates from 1969 – undoubtedly Tolkien would have known the negative connotations associated to ‘master’ at the time of writing the ‘Bombadil chapters’ beginning in 1938:

“As for Master: … In high uses it would be presumptuous and profane to adopt such a title; in lower uses it is conceited.”
– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #309 – 2 January 1969, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Hello Aiks

if you do approach this from Ainu status what Iarwain Ben-Adar, the elven name of Tom Bombadil, the one without a father...

When Elrond calling Tom ‘fatherless’ - I believe Tolkien used archaic language. Very simply ‘fatherless’ just meant Tom’s ‘origin was unknown’. I had a go at spelling this out in Chrysophylax Dives’s ‘Bombadil’ thread per post of Wed Dec 13, 2023 11:52 pm.

viewtopic.php?p=65568#p65568

Introducing Mary


Before I move on to speculating about the river-woman, I want to unveil a yet deeper floral angle associated to Goldberry, and also an ever so subtle entwinement of Mary, mother of Jesus in a religious parallel.

The annual ritual of ‘angelic’ Tom delivering white water-lilies to Goldberry is somewhat akin to the depiction in famous religious art of the archangel Gabriel bringing white Madonna lilies to Mary at the time of the Annunciation (spring).

“I had an errand there: gathering water-lilies, green leaves and lilies white to please my pretty lady, …”.

– The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Water-lilies they may have been in the case of Tom – but nevertheless the likeness is a close one. Perhaps Christian imagery was the true:

“Water-lily motive …”

– The Return of the Shadow, VI Tom Bombadil – pg. 117, 1988

Tolkien was so keen on developing. For though it was fall, Bombadil undoubtedly brought, what had been, the last Withywindle ‘lilies of spring’* to Goldberry, Thus once again we are left with a form of veiled Christian symbolism!






 
To underpin Christian axioms Tolkien relied on English folklore. In particular flower based folklore which had somehow wrapped itself around the Madonna. So it was with endowed flowering plants named after ‘Our Lady’ that Tolkien symbolically endowed Tom’s partner. In both The Adventures of Tom Bombadil and The Fellowship of the Ring we have:

Yellow Flag Lily**: Mary as ‘Our Lady of Sorrows’.
Forget-me-not***: Known as the ‘Eyes of Mary’.
White Water-lily****: Mary as ‘Our Lady of the Lake’.

But how had these native English flowers become aligned with the Blessed Virgin? That’s what Tolkien must***** surely have wondered. Who had assigned these titles? Certainly they were absent in the Bible. Frustratingly – the answers lost in the mire of history could only be guessed at. But this could be turned to his advantage!



* The Fellowship of the Ring subtly emphasizes the lilies of the Withywindle “open first in spring and there they linger latest”. Discarded is any final text promoting Tom is collecting “the last lilies of summer” per a jotting in The Return of the Shadow, VI Tom Bombadil – pg. 117.

** Its sharp leaves like swords are an allusion to Christ’s Passion. The fluttering of the flowers was thought to resemble flags blowing in the breeze. But in Middle English, the word ‘flagge’ referred to a rush or reed. In discussing the plant (Letter #297, from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981) the Professor only focused on Anglo-Saxon etymology. He acknowledged no connection to the French fleur-de-lys. Neither was he interested in touching on the Greek link to the goddess Iris. Although he might have been aware that this plant:

“… was dedicated to Juno queen of heaven”.

– The Magazine Flowers, Volume 1 – Issue 3, Irises in Romance and Garden – pg. 105, 1912   (my underlined emphasis)


*** According to Catholic lore, this flower is a reminder to faithful Christians that Mary looked at Jesus with her motherly eyes and saw the face of God.

**** One among the numerous names given to the white water-lily (Nymphaea alba) is:

“… ‘The Lady of the Lake,’ … ‘The Naiad of the River’ …”.

– The Little English Flora, Water lily Nymphæa – pg. 73, G.W. Francis, 1839

****** A parallel exists in that we know Tolkien pondered on how animals had become attached to plant names. Having pontificated on the Harebell and Foxglove, the Professor’s research had led to a conclusion that:

“The causes of these ancient associations with animals are little known or understood. Perhaps they sometimes depend on lost beast-fables.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #93 – 24 December 1944, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Hello Aiks

Sorry for the digression - but in this journey, I have to try to dwell a little on Goldberry’s mother. And both fairytale and religion play a part is my best guess.

I’m thinking Tolkien introduced an underlying theme involving Mary. But to your point about purity of mind and heart - I couldn’t agree more, yet surely she was also physically a virgin at conception with the Holy Spirit. Isn’t that what is primarily being alluded to by her title: ‘Blessed Virgin’?





The River-woman’s Religious Face: Parallels to Mary


Tolkien’s respect for, devotion and awe of Mary in her earthly role, ran through his very core. With reverence he divulged it was:

“… Our Lady, upon which all my own small perception of beauty both in majesty and simplicity is founded.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #142 – 2 December 1953, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Of all mankind she remained:

“… the only unfallen person, …”.

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #212 – October 1958, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (Tolkien’s italicized emphasis on ‘unfallen’)

Having decided to hold his own wedding in Her church:

“22 March 16  Tolkien and Edith are married by Father Murphy after early Mass, in the Church of St Mary the Immaculate in Warwick.”,

– The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide 2017 Edition, Chronology, 22 March 1916, C. Scull & W. Hammond

one might presume that Mary and Joseph remained Tolkien’s guiding light of:

“… the highest ideal of love between man and woman.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #43, – 6-8 March 1941, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981



 



 
Such marital perfection was, I deem, carried through to the novel – but not as direct allegory. There was subtlety and genuine invention involved. A virginal river-maiden endowed with a perfect new fairy tale soul underwent such shaping with Christian principles in mind. A matter that didn’t escape the attention of Father Murray:

“… the female characters each in their way seem like reflections of Our Lady.”
- Tolkien Studies 16, A Letter from Father Murray – pg. 135, R. West, 2019

In reply, Tolkien appeared to agree:

“I think I know exactly what you mean by … your references to Our Lady, …”.

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #142 – 2 December 1953, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

Then given his personal attachment to Mary and a hint there were reflections of her in some female characters – we ought not to neglect the River-woman. For there is an engineered affinity to Mary, mother of Jesus, and there are yet more biblical undertones needing revelation. Left behind were some submerged clues of curiosity which require lateral thinking on our part. To extract and lay bare unrecognized artistry we will have to ruminate upon those two matters emphasized throughout in discussing the River-woman’s daughter. Those being ‘botany’ and ‘fairy tale’. Because I think Tolkien asked himself an interesting question. Could it be that in times long past – blooming flora had holiness attached to them? Yes, even in pre-Christian days? It seems quite possible Tolkien thought so:

“… I believe that legends and myths are largely made of ‘truth’, and indeed present aspects of it that can only be received in this mode; and long ago certain truths and modes of this kind were discovered and must always reappear.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #131 – late 1951, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (my underlined emphasis)

Having seen Mary’s stamp impressed on Goldberry via her floral wear per my previous post, one will soon see other evidence …



… to be continued

Hello Aiks

Glad you’re willing to give the ‘Mary’ link some consideration!

I’ve wondered about Goldberry’s dad too. Though I will eventually speculate on this matter - I really have not much that is hard evidence.


… continued from my previous post


(a) Anguish at the Loss of her Child

Even though we have only the scantest of information – it was the River-woman lamenting the loss of her ‘perfect’ child who equally-well mirrored Mary:

“… on the bank in the reeds River-woman sighing …”.

– The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1934 (& 1962) poem

Because it is possible that the ‘sighs’ of the River-woman were, for a Catholic, a foreshadowing echo of the Madonna’s anguish. Probably the best examples of this thematic weaving are to be found in the Lamentations hymn sung at Matins (morning prayer) for Holy Saturday. Within, we find such lines as:

“Thy virgin mother mourned, sighing ‘Woe is me, O Light of the world! Woe is me, mine Illumination! O most beloved Jesus,’ …”,
- Book of Divine Prayers and Services of the Catholic Orthodox Church of Christ, pg. 894, 1938 (my underlined emphasis)

and

‘Who will give me the water for tears, that I may weep for my sweet Jesus.’
- Book of Divine Prayers and Services of the Catholic Orthodox Church of Christ, pg. 894, 1938 (my underlined emphasis)

So when it comes to water - the two Saint Mary Church’s associated to The University of Oxford lie reasonably close by to the Cherwell* (University Church of St. Mary the Virgin & St. Mary Magdalen). At times, they too mourn the departure of the Child and the Saviour. In the Oxford poet Frederick Faber’s** work – Mary’s loss is poignantly depicted:

“When the sound of the scourging went up to heaven, the smothered sighs of Mary’s bursting heart went up with it.”

– The Foot of the Cross; or, The Sorrows of Mary, The Compassion of Mary – pg. 423, F. Faber   (my underlined emphasis)


… to be continued




* Tolkien may have been aware that the river Cherwell in Oxfordshire had some historic basis for a resident water-nymph. Thus, the Withywindle was a correspondingly suitable candidate from a mythological standpoint: 

“… Where many a Water-Nymph her Streamlet leads …
… Sometimes, we from the Cherwell’s winding Stream, …”.

– Juvenile Poems on several occasions, Elegy – pg. 125, By a Gentleman of Oxford, 1764

According to A Thames Voyage by Thomas Noel of Merton College, Oxford:

“… The water-nymph’s delight !

Those milk-white cups with a golden-core, …”.

– The Flowering Plants of Great Britain, Vol. I, Nymphaeaceae – Water-lily Tribe – pg. 26, A. Pratt, 1855

And then poetry in mythical mode from the Poet Laureate Thomas Warton depicted rivalry between the Isis and Cherwell’s water-maidens:

“Proud Nymph, since late the Muse thy triumphs sung,

No more with mine thy scornful naiads play, …”.

– The Complaint of Cherwell, T. Warton, 1761

In Michael Drayton’s Poly-Olbion, many English rivers are depicted with their own water-nymph. The Cherwell too possesses one (see map center below). 











** Now the Cherwell (upon which the Withywindle was likely based) and its white water-lilies had already been associated to the blessed Madonna. The Oxford poet Frederick Faber published a book of poetry in 1840 titled: The Cherwell Water-Lily and Other Poems. In it, the first poem (of the same name) directly linked Mary to the river’s water-lily. Three lines in particular stand out:

“Deep rung St. Mary’s stately chime 
… 

Fair Lily! thou a type must be

Of virgin love and purity!”

If Tolkien had ever read the verse – the last two lines would surely have a struck a chord with Goldberry:

“Thou art to him a very fairy,

A widowed father’s only daughter.”

Daughter of the river the water-lily was described to be – and synonymously for Tolkien’s tale it was Goldberry who was the fairy-like “river-daughter”. For one must recall she was cast as the very essence of a water-lily (see early posts in this thread).

Tolkien had other connections to Frederick Faber. As one of the more important clergymen of the Birmingham Oratory, Faber was at one point second to Cardinal Newman^ (the founder) himself. Tolkien was raised under the guardianship of Father Francis Morgan (after his mother died) who knew Cardinal Newman personally. The Oratory and the teachings of the resident priests were well known to Tolkien in early childhood. It was here that the ritual of taking the Blessed Sacrament became ingrained.

Religious study was most certainly part of the curriculum and Father Faber’s books were likely to have been read and studied. As well as The Cherwell Water-lily, other books written by Faber include The Blessed Sacrament and The Foot of the Cross; or, The Sorrows of Mary. Such material has been so well regarded that it is even in print today. Tolkien’s devotion to the Blessed Sacrament and Mary is recorded in his letters (Letters #43, #142 & #250 from The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981). In such respects he seems to have followed in the mindset and footsteps of Father Faber.

^ The Newman Association was founded in 1942. During its early years, Tolkien was a Vice-President.

Happy holidays Aiks

was the Virgin Mary considered to be alive still when Jesus was crucified?

Yes - most definitely.

Sure, sure. I don't live to see all my opinions or thought being right all the time.

Oh Aiks, there’s no criticism intended

Some speculation or better thoughts might be nice on Goldberry's dad. I know very well there is not or very little hard evidence to find on the matter.

The best I can offer is the Poly-Olbion map (see my post of 20 Dec 2024) where we also see a presence of mythological ‘father’ River spirits (e.g. Tame).

How this sort of idea would have been incorporated into Tolkien’s mythology - I don’t know. Perhaps, there exists a Father River spirit in a river adjoining or near to the Withywindle? Or perhaps in the globing of the world - many rivers became sundered or no more? Perhaps the ‘River-man’ became separated from the River-woman and their child?





Given the spirit of the season and particularly this auspicious day, I thought it would be appropriate to discuss the topics of Christianity and the supremely important role Mary played in my deemed connection of her to Tolkien’s mythology!



… continued from my previous post



(b) Floral Folklore 

It is significant that the River Withywindle was purposely yet enigmatically named after the ‘bindweed’:

“Withywindle.  River-name in the Old Forest, … It was a winding river bordered by willows (withies). … (Withywindle was modelled on withywind, a name of the convolvulus or bindweed).”

– Guide to the Names in The Lord of the Rings, Place-names, J.R.R. Tolkien




 






 
Tolkien seemed to appreciate that ‘Withywindle’ included elements of ‘winding’ and ‘willows’ – an apt description of the river’s contoured path and tree-lined borders to his mind. But from what was said – it was really ‘bindweed’ which influenced his naming decision. Hmm … so a flower was his motive? Why was that we must ask ourselves?

Was it because the plant had the innate quality of Faërie in so far as it coiled around its host widershins*? Or was it because ‘withywind’ in his mentor’s monumental dialectal work** made an allusive albeit broken referral to Goldberry? Thus, leaving us with a visually apt tie-in to the bindweed’s ripened berries:

“WITHYWIND … the field bindweed, C. arvensis … With a bunch of berries of the wythwind, VERNEY L. Lisle (1870) …”.

– The English Dialect Dictionary, Vol. IV, Joseph Wright, 1905   (my underlined emphasis)











Maybe these matters are both true – but the real reason probably centers around a fairy-story. An intriguingly short tale that connects the lily-like flower produced by the bindweed to Mary. From a Grimm’s fairy tale, the bindweed is known as ‘Our Lady’s Little Glass’. The tale in its entirety is as follows:

“Once upon a time a waggoner’s cart which was heavily laden with wine had stuck so fast that in spite of all that he could do, he could not get it to move again. Then it chanced that Our Lady just happened to come by that way, and when she perceived the poor man’s distress, she said to him, ‘I am tired and thirsty, give me a glass of wine***, and I will set thy cart free for thee.’ ‘Willingly,’ answered the waggoner, ‘but I have no glass in which I can give thee the wine.’ Then Our Lady plucked a little white flower with red stripes, called field bindweed, which looks very like a glass, and gave it to the waggoner. He filled it with wine, and then Our Lady drank it, and in the self-same instant the cart was set free, and the waggoner could drive onwards. The little flower is still always called Our Lady’s Little Glass.”

– Grimm’s Household Tales, translated by Margaret Hunt, Legend 7 Our Lady’s Little Glass, 1884   (my underlined emphasis)


This lowly and often inconspicuous weed, that many in our times consider a nuisance, was blessed. For if there is truth to the fairy tale – to Tolkien, it had a sacred connection to the most perfect mother of our history. With a beauty of its own: its fruit – matured gold berries, its flower – of lily shape, and its ‘withywind’ name, this hardy plant became a last trace reminder of a mythological river long ago. Waters where, ‘once upon a time’ – another mother dwelt with her child; a daughter destined to be hallowed with a ‘lily-white’ soul, foreshadowing the Savior to come. Once again:

“… I believe that legends and myths are largely made of ‘truth’, and … long ago certain truths … were discovered and must always reappear.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #131 – late 1951, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (my underlined emphasis)


… to be continued




* The plant winds counterclockwise around its host (see Wikipedia article on ‘Convolvulus arvensis’).

** The English Dialect Dictionary which Tolkien himself obviously browsed:
“E.D.D. is certainly indispensable, … and I encourage people to browze in it.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #6 – 13 February 1923, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981

*** As well as ‘withywind’, the field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis is called the ‘withywine’ and ‘withwine’. Note the connection of wine with the fairy-story of Our Lady’s Little Glass.

Hello Aiks

Here are some of my last thoughts on the River-woman.


… continued from my previous post



(c) The Legend of the Morgan

Very loosely linked to Mary mother of Jesus is the legendary Breton water-nymph: the Mary-Morgan*. She is a fabled golden-haired water spirit, half woman and half fish. Her alluring songs enchant men who often end up drowning. According to the French folklorist Paul Sébillot, the Morgan was the source of the mermaid. And others have likened her to a siren:

“M. le Braz speaks of a Celtic belief that a fairy lives in the sea ‘as beautiful as an angel, but cruel as death itself.’ … and they call her Mary Morgan, born of the sea.”
- Dublin Review - Volume 149, Fiona McLeod, Pg. 337, 1911

So how did the Morgan connect in a religious manner to Mary and the Son of God? How had the Morgan acquired the epithet of ‘Mary’ - is something one might wonder?

A Wikipedia article* on the ‘Morgen’ tells of a legend of her aiding Mary and the infant Jesus. Then is that the reason why she was so titled?

For Tolkien’s mythology, there seems to be a sort of loose parallel right there of a water-entity giving motherly aid to a child who had acquired a perfect soul. However, there are many legends about the Morgan. And a blending of other matters is a possibility.

We also have a religious element which centers around St. Anne - the blessed Virgin’s mother. Anne is an apocryphal figure not mentioned in The New Testament, but folklore has it that she was born in Brittany and journeyed to the Holy Land:

“ST. ANNE DE LA PALUDE.- St. Anne in Brittany is the great healer … it is said, she was carried out to sea in a ship under the conduct of an angel and conveyed to the coast of Judea where the Virgin was born. When old, she returned to Brittany and became the patroness of fishermen …”.
- Nature, August 25, 1928

A festival is held in her honor because of her reputed role in saving poor fishermen from drowning and the lure of the Morgan:

“… St. Anne intervened to save them in shipwreck. Local legends make it clear that the festival perpetuates a festival of a sea goddess. The tradition is that Ahes or Dahut, daughter of King Gralon of Ker-Is, once frequented the wood of Ploumarech, where she, with her maidens, washed her royal linen. She was drowned by her father and became a siren who, with her beauty, wooed sailors to their destruction in the sea. As Mary Morgan, a beautiful woman with golden hair, but below a fish-like monster, she lures young men with her passionate songs until they cast off their clothes and plunge naked into the sea.
- Nature, August 25, 1928

St. Anne is also venerated in religious hymns. According to Christian-Latin poetry: Matins Responsary 6:

Anna floret ut lilium
In summi regis curia,
Thronum adepta regium Cum immortali gloria,
Inter matronas rutilans,
Ut sol mundum illuminans.
- MR6, AH 25.19

“Anne blossoms like a lily in the highest court of the king, having obtained the royal throne with immortal glory. Like the sun lighting the world, she is the one shining among mothers. … St. Anne, the apocryphal mother of the Virgin Mary, is celebrated through a series of comparisons that appropriates some of the vocabulary of Marian symbolism. Anne is first compared to a lily, widely understood as signifying the Virgin's undefiled purity. She is also situated allegorically within an imperial court, "having obtained the royal throne with immortal glory." This regal imagery co-opts another attribute of her illustrious daughter, who held the epithet "Queen of Heaven" (Regina caeli).”
- St. Anne in Renaissance Music, Chapter1: Mary’s Mother: Devotion, Politics, and Music, M. A. Anderson, 2014










So from religious apocrypha we see St. Anne connected to white lilies just like Mary (& Goldberry), while from folklore and legends we see an untamed and mischievous water-entity who is subject to her control. Echoes of a pre-marital Goldberry one might mull. Given a known attraction**** to tales from Brittany, there’s a distinct possibility such folklore was taken and then re-molded by Tolkien. For who knows how much had got mixed up in the pot of soup? Of the little written about her, aspects of the River-woman have, one might conclude, some legendary and religious Marian undertones.





Hmm … so after assimilating the revelations and discussion of (a), (b) and (c), parallels to Christianity, flower lore and mer-women legends finally become more lucid. The foreshadowing River-woman now meshes neatly with the rest of the biblical, floral and fairy tale framework upon which the character of Goldberry is founded!


… more on Goldberry to come …



* She is mentioned by Giraldus Cambrensis as a Celtic goddess, and in Arthurian legend is ‘Morgan le Fay.’

** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgen_(m ... _creature)

*** A few km’s from the shores of Brittany, Sainte-Anne-d'Auray is a highly spiritual place where Saint Anne, grandmother of Christ, is said to have made her only earthly appearance.

*** Tolkien wrote an English interpretation of a famous Breton tale calling it The Lay of Aotrou and Itroun. According to the scholar Dimitra Fimi per her website article: Tolkien’s “ ‘Celtic’ type of legends”: Merging Traditions, the Professors’ Celtic book collection include Barzas-Breiz: Chants Populaires de la Bretagne (Ballads of Brittany) by Théodore Hersart de La Villemarqué and Lais by Marie de France, among other unnamed titles.

Hello Aiks

Don’t worry about not being able to relate to Christianity. I think you can be of any faith or even no faith and still understand (and maybe even come to mildly appreciate) the religious facets Tolkien put into his works

Already in Chrysophylax Dives’s ‘Bombadil’ thread I have exposed much Christian symbolism entwined around Tom’s abode, actions and words. And such exposure spills over to Goldberry as I’ve already pointed out in this thread; yet there is more! This and the next post will discuss four other textual examples Tolkien, I believe, inserted with deft dexterity.



(a) The Shape of the Cross

Curiously the link of the white lily to religion went deep into English history:

“The Venerable Bede, writing in the early part of the eighth century, declares ‘the great white lily’ to be a fit emblem of the resurrection of the Virgin; the pure white petals signifying her body; the golden anthers her soul within, shining with celestial light.”

– The Floral Symbolism of the Great Masters – pgs. 51-52, E. Haig, 1913

That combination of yellow and white became part of Christian folklore:

“… it was said that the lily had been yellow until the day the Virgin Mary stooped to pick it.”

– Folklore and Symbolism of Flowers, Plants and Trees, Sacred Plants – pg. 33, E. & J. Lehner, 1960

While the term ‘lily-white’ eventually made it into our dictionaries:

“ ‘Lily-white’: innocent and pure; unsullied …”. 

– Collins English Dictionary, Online Edition

But it was the three color combination of yellow, white and green, that we see prevalent in English water-lilies, that enabled Tolkien to mirror a similarly displayed Goldberry with a religious theme. A theme which entailed water-lilies rather than any other flora. Seemingly from his mythology stemmed the true source of today’s flower/religion motif. Because with utmost subtlety Goldberry was cleverly postured to reflect that ultimate of Christian symbols. To shut out the dark, fear of the wild and bring comfort to the four weary travelers, the shape Tolkien deliberately had her assume was that of the Holy Cross!

“… closing the door she turned her back to it, with her white arms spread out across it.”

– The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Did you notice it before?
But more importantly do you see it now?
 








(b) The Way into Paradise

Juxtaposed in a rejection of the ‘dark’ by way of a ‘closed door’ and the symbolic crucifix shape, was another deliberate Christianized later appearance. In direct contrast she was depicted as ‘framed in ‘light’ within an ‘open door’ – a traditional portrayal of the path to salvation. And Goldberry was given more divine undertones than I’ve already alluded to; for there she was – holding a lit candle to ‘show the way’!

“Goldberry stood in the door behind, framed in light. She held a candle, …

– The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Again,

Did you notice it before?
But more importantly do you see it now?
 



… to be continued

Hello Aiks

I’m a little surprised that you can’t visualize Goldberry’s clothed body assuming the shape of a cross.


“… closing the door she turned her back to it, with her white arms spread out across it.”

– The Fellowship of the Ring, In the House of Tom Bombadil

Can you try again?

The purpose behind my inclusion of the picture, was purely to show how closely lilies are associated with the Christian crucifix. Remember from my early posts how Goldberry is portrayed as effectively a ‘ lily queen’. So I think Goldberry’s pose at the door was deliberate on Tolkien’s part, with a hidden Christian ulterior purpose.



… continued from my previous post


(c) Handheld Light

Perhaps most beguiling of all was Tolkien’s innovative employment of deceptive imagery. Once again, we must think with ‘Mooreeffoc’ in mind. Because then it is possible to visualize how the white fingers of Goldberry’s cupped hand veiling a yellow flame, symbolized a white water-lily’s petals within which lay its golden core. Once more, we should hearken to Bede’s body and soul linking analogy:

“… the pure white petals signifying her body; the golden anthers her soul within, shining with celestial light.”

– The Floral Symbolism of the Great Masters – pgs. 51-52, E. Haig, 1913

With supreme ingenuity is how Tolkien connected this queen of English flowering plants to holiness in an Age long ago. And though not a flower of the field, a devout Professor surely knew that this magnificent plant befitted the Savior’s words:

“ ‘Consider the lilies* … I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.’ ”

– The Bible, King James Version, Luke 12:27


(d) A Hand Signal

Just as Tolkien provided symbolic imagery at our first meeting with Goldberry, there’s a good chance he followed suit at our last viewing. His knowledge of signaling** is unquestionable. And so it’s the river-daughter’s hand movements that can be construed to artfully convey a discrete Christian message:

“… she was standing still watching them, and her hands were stretched out towards them. As they looked she gave a clear call, and lifting up her hand she turned and vanished behind the hill.”
– The Fellowship of the Ring, Fog on the Barrow-downs

The encoding was simple. Embrace the previous theme of the Cross and seek out His light, for the doorway was open to salvation. That was the purpose behind her outstretched arms. The ‘call was clear’ (to all who would heed it):

“But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.” 
– The Bible, King James Version, Romans 10:20-21










 
Ultimately by Goldberry raising her hand*** and having it point skywards – she symbolically indicated it was God in heaven that would take care of their souls. Since it was He who had gifted her with eternal life. At least that was the way of fairy-story.



To summarize, hardly perceptible then was an embedding of core doctrine; an implicit Christian theme whose recognition has escaped us. Partly that has been down to a sizable separation of three powerful scenes, but mainly because we have failed to conceptualize with mixed motifs of salvation, flora and limb positioning in mind. Yet once we do – it all falls in place!



* It is possible Jesus was indeed referring to the white water-lily:

“… it must be remembered that the only white lily known to the Jews was the water-lily. … From the time of the Crusaders pilgrims to Palestine have sought to find there the lily whose array was beyond that of ‘Solomon in all his glory.’ But the lily referred to by Christ has never been satisfactorily ascertained. The popular idea that it was the lily of the valley has been evolved from the simple and lowly character of Christ, but that lily, loving cold Norway best, is unknown in tropical regions.”

– Harpers New Monthly Magazine – Volume 42, The Sacred Flora – pg. 90, December 1870


** Tolkien was an active Battalion Signal Officer during World War I.

*** Interpretative as also involving arm raising – as, for example, pupils being asked to raise hands by a class teacher. 

Hello Aiks

Thank you for reconsidering Goldberry’s posture




Goldberry in Bliss?

In an earlier post I briefly touched upon Goldberry and Tom’s courtship as well as the River-woman’s seeming disapproval.

“… on the bank in the reeds River-woman sighing …”.

– The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1934 (& 1962) poem

To this I would like to add a few more comments.

Whether we readers like it or not, there exist slight undertones of a kidnap followed by some brainwashing – resulting in a subtly sinister aspect to the episode. Tom flaunted a ruthless streak as evidenced by the way he dealt with Old Man Willow and the Barrow-wight. Hints of this trait can be glimpsed in the Bombadil goes Boating poem. Though much was said in jest, the hobbits of Buckland were certainly wary of him with their verbal raillery being:

“… tinged with fear …”.

– Preface to: The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1962

Undeniably the implication of the taunt:

“ ‘… you’ll find no lover!’ ”,

– The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, 1934 (& 1962) poem

is that Tom would become Goldberry’s lover. Whatever the sexual connotations, negatively compounded by mismatched ages, to Tolkien – Tom was not the stereotypical ‘dirty old man’. Far from it, I do deem. As a devout Christian raised in staid Victorian/Edwardian societies where ‘sex’ was practically a taboo subject, Tolkien may never have realized an issue would even arise in the minds of some readers. Yet how can we fault him for not anticipating or catering to our more liberal yet more critical world of the 21st Century?

To the Professor, one can surmise, Tom and Goldberry represented an ideal couple blissfully in love, and in harmony with all ‘good’ and natural creatures within very discretely defined lands. Many have compared the pairing to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and maybe such an arrangement was deliberately so portrayed. Married in the eyes of God, with the local animals being auspicious witnesses, is not too unlike the state of the first couple in their first dwelling. And this biblical face is, for now, more so reflected in Goldberry. For being a source, per my proposal earlier on in this thread, she is indeed Eve-like.



 









Beyond companionship, Tom offered Goldberry a great deal. He provided wisdom, knowledge, protection, laughter, a new home and refreshingly – a new way of life. Instead of aquatic fare, the food on Tom’s table was from the soil and animal produce. It was a different type of existence – which nonetheless Goldberry neatly slotted into while still being nearby her old haunt. There are absolutely no signs that ‘Master’ Bombadil constrained Goldberry in any way, or that she was unhappy. She displayed tolerance to her husbands’ songs and complemented them with her own. For the reader at least, the one verse explicitly vocalized was far from irritating unlike his oft repetitious lilt.


… to be continued

Hello Aiks

In wider perceptive, there are a lot of moral ethics in the whole legendarium. Actually it is packed with it throughout. Bombadil and Goldberry are no exception, being delivered to this morality.

Absolutely spot on. Tolkien touches on Bombadil’s attitude in Letter #144, specifically with regard to war and pacifism.



Understanding Goldberry’s Genus: A Way Forward

Despite all of these interesting matters, when it comes to Goldberry, there are still a couple of loose ends that need tying up. One of these is identifying the type of creature she represented in Tolkien’s mythology. The other is the River-woman. Beyond the obvious, what was she? And if Goldberry was a literary source of some of our world’s mythological water-maidens (as already suggested) was her mother something even more basic?

We must ask ourselves, why is there no sign of her blessing the wedding? Had Tom forbidden her attendance at the marriage ceremony? Had he quarreled with his future mother-in-law? Why does Goldberry visit her mother’s pool only once a year? Was Goldberry a bad daughter in forsaking kin for Tom? Why had she become so estranged when the Withywindle was relatively close by?

To attempt to tackle these seemingly unanswerable mysteries, we must employ logic and once more try to fathom Tolkien’s underlying purpose. In particular, we must once again heed his remarks on myth and invention:

“But an equally basic passion of mine ab initio was for myth …”,

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #131 – late 1951, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (Tolkien’s italicized emphasis on ‘ab initio’)

“… I am interested in mythological ‘invention’, and the mystery of literary creation (or sub-creation as I have elsewhere called it) …”.

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #180 – 14 January 1956, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (Tolkien’s emphasis)

From its inception Tolkien desired to create a new tale which not only linked to our history, but also our mythologies:

“After all, I believe that legends and myths are largely made of ‘truth’, and indeed present aspects of it that can only be received in this mode; and long ago certain truths and modes of this kind were discovered and must always reappear.”

– The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #131 – late 1951, Edited by H. Carpenter, 1981   (Tolkien’s emphasis)

And so for Goldberry being a forerunner from deepest antiquity, as already advocated ‘Myth and Fairy tale’ could reasonably be added to the statement:

“Legend and History have met and fused.”

– The Monsters and the Critics and Other Essays, On Fairy-stories – pg. 156, HarperCollins, 1983

Just like his creation of Sellic Spell, which was an attempt to imaginatively reconstruct the fairy tale which he believed lay behind Beowulf, I believe the Professor tried to make sense in his own mind of our world’s supernatural water-maidens. And so ingeniously the idea developed to make his great fairy-story their ultimate source.

To strengthen such a postulation, I have had to dig deep and ponder upon the roots of European mythologies. For I have a sneaking suspicion, as I have already alluded to, that there was a tad more to the essence of Goldberry and her mother that we can glean. To piece together the few rudimentary clues available – we must more assiduously examine the case for these two creatures ultimately belonging to the legendary race of ‘elementals’.


… to be continued

Hello Aiks

Do you think Tom would forbid Goldberry to tend her own wedding, or are you speaking of her mother? Hmm, I had forgotten Goldberry visits once a year her mother, but not in return. There could be dislike in place? A form of discontent?

Yes, I am speaking of Goldberry’s mother. Sorry if that didn’t come across clearly.




… continued from my previous post


Earthlings: Soulless Elementals tied to Mother Earth


Mankind’s belief in elementals goes back to a time before Christianity. Ancient peoples held a doctrine that inanimate things (and even animals and plants) had souls of their own. However the concept of an after-life for them was far from universal. Many believed, upon death, those soul-forms effectively regressed to chaos; a dispersion back into Mother Nature as the components of their constitution were incapable of manifesting any higher spiritual activity. Effectively then, all parts of their makeup were tied to planet Earth forever.

Early Christians took the spiritual side a step further by developing theologies of dichotomy and trichotomy*. All living beings possessed body (soma) and spirit (pneuma) but it was only man to whom God had gifted a soul (psyche). At physical expiry, all spirit and body would dissolve into the basic matter making up the planet. However man being a special life-form meant his unique soul – an imprint of his very essence – was predestined to depart the world and reach a higher plane of existence.

A slightly different and more complex flavor developed in Teutonic mythology:

“… of men the spirit is immortal, but the body mortal, and of beasts both body and soul are mortal; so Berthold …. allows being to stones, being and life to plants, feeling to animals. Schelling says, life sleeps in the stone, dozes in the plant, dreams in the beast, wakes in man.”

-Teutonic Mythology, Chapter XXI, Vol IV – pg. 1478, J. Grimm – translated by J.S. Stallybrass

In any case, by the time of the European Renaissance some of those storied metaphysical forms of life, seemingly not of flesh and blood or plant-matter, were termed ‘elementals’ and, perhaps confusingly so, cast under the general designation of fairies or fays. Paracelsus in the 16th century classified true elementals as belonging only to inanimate matter – specifically four of the ancient Aristotle elements: air, water, earth and fire.



 


 
Given such mythology has roots in some our world’s most ancient literature, and undoubtedly Tolkien’s early** knowledge of that, we are obliged to consider whether he included elemental-type entities in his writings. If so, we ought to consider whether there is sufficient evidence implicating Goldberry and maternal kin to be of that race too. Exactly why should we follow such a path? Well – because Paracelsus’ elementals of water were water-maidens that he’d titled: Undines!***


… to be continued



* One source Tolkien ought to have been familiar with is the South English Legendary:

“For example, the ‘Legend of St Michael’ in the thirteenth century South English Legendary describes a tripartite soul: humans share the first soul with trees and other plants, this being the soul of substance; … the second soul is that of the spark of life and breath, which humans share with other animals … According to the Legend of St Michael, these first two souls die with the body. But the third soul is spiritual in substance and shared with angels – this soul is immortal …”.

– ‘Fairy’ in Middle English Romance – pgs. 50-51, C.A. Cole, University of St Andrews, 17 December 2013

Tom Shippey in The Road to Middle-earth (pgs. 238 & 239), 2003 has deduced that Tolkien knew and employed elements of the Early South English Legendary in his mythology.

** Christopher Gilson and Patrick Wynne make the following comment in Parma Eldalamberon XIV on Tolkien’s The Creatures of the Earth of the early 1920’s:

“Tolkien’s elemental fays may owe something to the four varieties of elemental “spirit-men” described by Paracelsus: …”.

– The Creatures of the Earth, J.R.R. Tolkien, see Parma Eldalamberon XIV

*** See my lengthy account of Goldberry’s resemblance to Undine beginning in my 24 March 2024 post.

Hello Aiks

Hmm in large parts of the world Christianity merged with the local gods, into a coexistance together.

Very true

In bright daylight this may be very well, inanimate things were stilled, but at night and in the dark, that get's another more mystic meaning and inanimate things come alive, real or in strong imagination.

Ooh - you sent a shiver up my spine!




… continued from my previous post


Now to the best of our knowledge in very early hierarchy Tolkien had already pigeonholed many of our world’s mythological creatures – though inhabiting our physical planet – as originating outside of it:

“… the Mánir and the Súruli, the sylphs of the airs and of the winds.”

– The Book of Lost Tales I, The Coming of the Valar and the Building of Valinor – pg. 66

“… brownies, fays, pixies, leprawns, … for they were born before the world …”.

– The Book of Lost Tales I, The Coming of the Valar and the Building of Valinor – pg. 66


Belonging to the mix were mythological water-spirits.Because The Book of Lost Tales I tells us aquatic entities (the Oarni, Falmaríni and Wingildi – see pg. 66) accompanied the greatest of the Ainur upon their arrival in Arda. 

One can thus reasonably conclude that at this early stage of development:

(a) Tolkien had familiarized himself with elementals, for ‘sylphs’ was a word coined by Paracelsus.

(b) An origin outside of the physical Universe made such creatures divine.






 



In this same general time period a telling note points to him pondering on classifying some mythical female water-beings, namely mermaids*, as either:

“… earthlings, or fays? – or both …”.

– The Book of Lost Tales II, The Tale of Eärendel – pg. 263

If I were to take an educated guess, pre-The Lord of the Rings Tolkien wasn’t quite sure where mermaids should be placed because of possibly belonging to another wholly different category to divine fays**; an ethnological category he obviously termed: “earthlings”. But exactly what were they?


… to be continued



* It is quite possible that ‘Oaritsi’ which mermaids were first designated under (see The Book of Lost Tales I), was simply a sub-classification^ of ‘Oarni’ – classified as ‘spirits of the sea’. The Oarni were, per early mythology, divine in originating before the creation of the World. Mermaids, we must note, were also equated as Oarni in The Book of Lost Tales II.

^ Hence Oaritsi appearing in parentheses next to Oarni in The Creatures of the Earth, per Parma Eldalamberon XIV. 

** ‘Fays’ – what we might interpret as ‘fairy-folk’. For Tolkien, creatures of a divine nature originating outside of the Universe. Yet once inside and clothed in the raiment of Arda, and then having reproduced, progeny being termed ‘semi-divine’ is descriptively apt. It is quite probable that some fays were viewed by Tolkien as equivalent to ‘nature spirits’, though he never explicitly used that term.