Galadriel's Ban
 

I was looking over the front page of the Barrow-Downs and it had the history of Galadriel. Anyway, something caught my eye and I decided I was unsure as to the authenticity of what was stated. Basically, it said that at the end of the First Age, Galadriel was forbidden to return to Valinor being the last of the Noldorin leaders alive. Where does it say this and is it Galadriel saying it herself, or is this a pronouncement of the Valar or is this just stated by an omniscient narrator at some part?

And if it was Galadriel who said this (and not directly from the Valar or a Tolkien as he is narrating the story) then I think that Galadriel must have been mistaken. This side story draws many similarities to Dr. Faustus in that both do something wrong and then believe that they can't be saved.

And really if you think about it, why would Galadriel's punishment have been worse than anyone else's? She did not take part in the kinslaying, and in different versions of her story left by completely different means and for other reasons than many of the Noldor.

As far as I know, Galadriel was not forbidden to return by the end of the First Age, she could return as much as anybody by the end of the First Age: all Noldor were pardoned back then. She willingly decided not to return, yet, my belief is that she thought she could at last now start a "new life" and base her own realm in Middle-Earth. She was kinda stubborn back then. And only later she perhaps wondered (cf. her songs) whether she still has the chance to return - or rather, to escape yet from the fading world.

Well, I'm at work so I can't quote specifics, but Galadriel fell under the Doom of Mandos when she and the Noldor fled from Valinor. Even though she did not take part in the Kinslayings, all Noldor who left at that time fell under the Ban. There was an amnesty after Morgoth was defeated and the Silmarils were lost at the end of the 1st Age, but she refused to return to Aman. So, refusing the amnesty, Galadriel invoked a further ban that was only lifted at the end of the 3rd Age.

I understand that you are at work, and unable to find a specific quote, as long as one is found eventually.

And the point of my question was asking whether or not it is truly a ban by the Valar or more self-imposed. I seem to recall something along the lines of Galadriel not returning because she wanted to search out new lands for her own, as you said, but I don't believe making that decision would or should have any more repercussions than returning. I mean, it isn't like all of the Noldor returned at the end of the First Age, many did but many stayed. And the Noldor were a blended people by this time, many likely being descended from Sindar as well.

It would just seem prudent to me, if I were a Vala, to stop laying down Dooms after a while.

The problem is that Tolkien could never make up his mind, either about the manner of Galadriel's departure, or the nature of the Ban. So in one place he says that Galadriel "proudly refused" to return into the West, and in another he says that the Ban was not lifted for the chief actors in the Rebellion, including Galadriel (actually the only C.A. left alive).

If we want to intrude 'argument from canon', it's pretty clear from the two songs in the chapter "Farewell to Lorien" that Galadriel wanted to go back, but was prohibited from doing so.

Firstly, how it all started for Galadriel...

From a late, primarily philological essay according to the UT:

Also, from a letter written in 1967:

However, there seems to have been a development here as CT continues by saying:

In this philological essay I mentioned there does not seem to be a trace of a ban being lifted:

Furthermore from another story about Galadriel and Celeborn:

Finally, a quote from a partially unintelligible (sp?) note, the last thing Tolkien ever wrote on Galadriel and Celeborn and also one of the last things he wrote on M-e in general.

So, to conclude, did Tolkien wish to include the ban in the stories?

At first apparently no, in earlier writings at least no such idea is existent. There is no ban, Galadriel simply is too proud to leave M-e, wants a realm of her own to rule and so goes east. She afterwards simply realises that M-e is no longer the palce for her and she goes back to Aman.

It is in later writings that a type of purge takes place and Galadriel feels that she is still under a ban of the Valar. She rejects the proposal to return and thus somewhat separates herself from the Valar and manages to bring herself closer to them by refusing the Ring and by aiding the free people of M-e in their fight against Sauron.


Btw, this is just a number of quotes I felt summed up the whole topic best, however for deeper knowledge I strongly recommend reading the entire "The History of Galadriel and Celeborn" chapter in the Unfinished Tales. A lot more interesting information on these two and also on Amroth to be found there.

Yes Galadriel had been banned. The letter of 1967 (already quoted in the thread) 'goes with' the following:

In Unfinished Tales (in commentary following a very late sketch removing Galadriel from the Rebellion) CJRT notes that Galadriel's actions 'could still be transformed radically, since The Silmarillion had not been published.'

However The Road Goes Ever On had been published, so there were some details about Galadriel that Tolkien himself had made official for his readers.

Yes, Galin: and although I generally give great weight to CT's opinions in this case I disagree with him. I can't see how 'Farewell to Lorien' can be read except as implying the existence of the Ban, the text of Namarie admitting I think to little other interpretation than the one JRRT assigned to it in RGEO in 1967. (And "I sang of trees...." even more so).

Thank you, I appreciate the quotes. I read UT a few years back after craving more having already read the Silm and bits of HoME, but over the past few years I have forgotten much and wanted a clarification, which has now been provided thanks to the excerpts included in this thread. Recently I have started the process over again, currently bouncing back between Silm, UT and tLR, so I may stop in again for other questions now and then. Again, thank you.

There is the statement in The Mirror of Galadriel that seems to imply Artanis is allowed to pass Oversea: 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel' This is before her songs of course. In any case, someone was going to add it eventually I guess, despite the strong statements in RGEO.

On the Kinslaying: from her introduction (in text) to the Elder Days in the early 1950s, it seems 'the people of Finarfin had had no part in the kinslaying of Alqualonde' (from Concerning Galadriel and Celeborn, written possibly between the end of 1959 and March 1960, according to Hammond and Scull in Chronology). In earlier text Angrod appears to confirm this before Thingol (War of the Jewels).

In 1968 however (Shibboleth of Feanor): 'she fought fiercely against Feanor in defence of her mother's kin'.

Did Galadriel herself kill? Well it doesn't say that, but now she is involved at least, in some way and measure, in the Kinslaying. In the even later adumbrated tale (Unfinished Tales) Galadriel is removed from the Rebellion, and the implication is that she was in Swanhaven before Feanor, and still 'fought heroically in defense of Alqualonde against the assault of the Noldor' Contemporary with this late text is the letter to Lord Halsbury, where Tolkien notes that Galadriel was 'unstained' and had committed no evil deeds.

Unless I've missed something Galadriel had no part whatsoever in this event for some years (in Tolkien's mind, though hard to say more than 'as evidenced on paper at least'). And then she is given a heroic part defending the Teleri.

Well, nobody, I think, ever suggested that Galadriel had incurrd guilt in the Kinslaying- she fell under the Ban (along with her brothers) for continuing on after the Doom of Mandos.

The funny thing is (as I'm sure you all know), the character of Galadriel (including the poems attributed to her) first emerged during the writing of LotR, and she was only written into the Legends of the First Age after LotR had been completed.
Considering that, I think it highly unlikely that the Professor had any precise idea of who she was, what she had done previously and whether there was a Ban on her or not when he wrote the Lothlórien chapters. (Although, once he had invented her, his mind probably worked like mad trying to determine where she came from and trying out possible back-histories for her.)
For all we know, he wrote her songs (especially 'I sang of leaves...', which I actually prefer to 'Namarie') just because they felt right at the time and only afterwards went into constructing various and mutually contradicting historical explanations for what his Muse had dictated.

As for Galadriel's temptation scene: 'going into the West' was the common fate of all Elves in the Third Age; that was rather trivial, even Ted Sandyman knew about it (cf the conversation at the Green Dragon, The Shadow of the Past). OK, Galadriel, being enamoured of Middle Earth, tried to resist it; and surely the Ring offered her the ultimate chance of doing so, giving her the unique chance to order M-E according to her own liking. Rejecting the temptation, she simply accepted the fact that her own fate would be just like that of the rest of her people: "I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel", instead of becoming a Dark Queen. None of this seems to call for a special Ban on her being lifted or not to explain her words and actions.

I apologise for butting in, but I found this really interesting.

I have never before considered that Galadriel was banned from Valinor. I always presumed that she did not wish to return before the end of the Third Age. If she had been banned - how could she then return? Simply helping to defeat Sauron could not have been in the clause surely? As far as I know, the Valor could not (or did not) communicate with those in Middle Earth, so could not pardon her. So how, if she had been banned, could she then go back?

Ah- Tolkien explains that in a letter, although the context is that of Arwen and Frodo. At Sauron's fall Gandalf is essentially Manwe's Ambassador Plenipotentiary, with full authority to dispense, much like Eonwe at the end of the First Age. I don't think we need boggle at the notion that Gandalf the White was in some mystical way 'in contact' with the West.

I didn't consider that. Is that how Arwen could send Frodo in her place? (I wondered how that could be allowed too!)

Hmm, but isn't this at least a bit problematic within the context of RGEO?

In reconciliation I once thought (my own idea not JRRT's idea) that maybe Galadriel had somehow received a special and immediate 'inner message' from the Valar -- that is, her rejection of the One Ring ended her ban and she is 'realizing' it with these words -- but in any case the chronology is still off here, as Galadriel sings her songs after this moment, and the meaning behind the songs cannot be doubted once RGEO is considered.

If I see it as a hopeful idea within this statement, then it almost works ;)

Not having the Letters and other resources at hand, I am taking this from memory, but...

Arwen, according to Tolkien, didn't send Frodo in her place, as if she had a ticket on the boat that she handed to him (more or less Tolkien's words!). The passage of any mortal into the West was something that had to be approved of by the Valar, and Gandalf, as was said, was their representative and acted on their behalf, with their approval, in sanctioning this idea. Galadriel's ban was initially that of all the Noldor who rebelled and left Aman in defiance of the Valar. At the end of the First Age, she felt that she had done nothing that needed pardon and refused to return; having done that, she believed her exile to be permanent (which was not necessarily so), and was allowed to return because of all she had done during her time in Middle-earth, especially her refusal to take the Ring. This permission would have been passed on to her through Gandalf.

In the end of The Sil, when it talks about the Noldor being pardoned, it says something like "some wished to remain in ME, where they've done so much". Elrond remained, and GilGalad remained, and a whole bunch of Noldor remained as well, not because of pride, but because of love for ME. Galadriel is an exeption, because she's the only living leader of the Noldor. However, that doesn't mean that her reasons have to be different from everyone else (even though Tolkien says that she still had a ban and she was proud).

I agree that these texts seem to indicate a ban, even if Tolkien hadn't yet thought of a reason for Galadriel specifically to be banned.

Anyway, the reason I "woke up" this thread concerns a possible next stage in the imagined history. At one point Galadriel reveals: "We have dwelt here since the mountains were reared and the sun was young . . . [addition]
And I have dwelt here with him since the days of dawn, when I passed over the seas with Melian of Valinor; and ever together we have fought the long defeat.”

Would this not suggest a "phase" (if possibly short lived, and ultimately revised of course) wherein Galadriel is not even part of the Rebellion? One person elsewhere on the world wide web has stated that Galadriel's songs could not, then, have referred to her ban -- I disagree with that so far, due to how I read the textual sequence given in The Treason of Isengard. . . and I'm wondering if you, or anyone, read the TOI description as I do. Which is (so far?):

manuscript -- no Melian statement
fair copy manuscript -- no Melian statement
typescript (not made by Tolkien) -- basically a copy of the fair copy -- no Melian info as typed

Melian added "later" on both typescript and manuscript

And Christopher Tolkien describes: "The initial workings for Galadriel's songs were nonetheless found with the earliest manuscripts of this chapter, both her song upon the swan-boat (of which there is also a finished text) and Namarie. The completed form of the first reads: . . ."

Maybe that's a bit vague, but if I read things rightly, I think it might leave room for two ideas here. If not, it seems
a bit odd that Tolkien should be thinking Galadriel has been banned within the same conception that she passed over the sea with Melian.


Of course, ultimately the Melian statement is dropped, with revision to the "mountain sentence", but I just wondered if you or anyone cared to comment further here.

Huh. It's really hard to figure out what Tolkien might have been thinking here. The footnote you quote points to HoME V and the Later Annals of Valinor as the most recent (at the time) version of Melian's story; that has her leaving Aman before the Elves even awake, and apparently not returning until Thingol's death. Could Tolkien have actually considered either having Melian leave Aman after the arrival of the Noldor, or letting her travel between the two regions freely? Either seems like it would massively distort Thingol's story.

Or - is this early enough in the writing of LotR that he could just have been stealing a name, like he did with Glorfindel? If the sentence had stayed, would he have written anguished notes decades later asking whether there could possibly be two Melians?

Relatedly, there's a post-1955 note somewhere in NoME stating "Galadriel is made sister of Finrod" (emphasis in original), which in context seems to be Felagund. Given that the Finrod > Finarfin, Inglor > Finrod change only came about after the First Edition of LotR, does "is made" imply that the two statements in the Appendices that Galadriel is Felagund's sister didn't exist until the Second Edition (ie, "I am now making")? That would at least allow her to cross the Sea significantly earlier than the Rebellion, which the later youthful Galadriel would have trouble with. (Does anyone have a First Edition they can check?)

hS

My first edition (fifth impression) has Galadriel " . . . sister of Felagund of the House of Finrod." With Finrod (later Finarfin) being her father here.

If that helps!

The problem of course is that "later" could mean any time between the making of the amanuensis typescript, and 1973.

Unless these texts went to Marquette with the initial, which would give a somewhat earlier terminus ante quem, but your point is valid either way.

I think it's always dangerous to assume that Tolkien definitely meant a change to the story when he might have just been misremembering details... but there's a LOT of change to the First Age narratives between the 1930s and the Later Quenta texts, and whenever Tolkien happened to think in the moment he jotted down that idea that Melian might have come out from the west, it does seem at least a little bit like the germ of the idea that would come later: that Galadriel would sail from the west separately from the banned Noldor (with Teleporno and a couple other Teleri), and it certainly seems like the origin of the idea that takes hold in the Tale of the Years and later, that Galadriel had some connection with Melian and Menegroth.

For possible clarity, the "addition" here is not simply that Galadriel passed over with Melian, but as I quoted above: "We have dwelt here since the mountains were reared and the sun was young [addition] And I have dwelt here with him since the days of dawn, when I passed over the seas with Melian of Valinor; and ever together we have fought the long defeat."

Which, to my mind, all together is a precursor of the final form published in Fellowship: "He has dwelt in the West since the days of dawn, and I have dwelt with him years uncounted, for ere the fall of Nargothrond or Gondolin I passed over the mountains, and together through ages of the world we have fought the long defeat."

So as I currently see things, the Melian idea, whenever it was added, still drops out in the revision which takes us to the form published in 1955 -- in other words, it appears to have been added before the final version is reached, and is rejected in any case.

Anyway WCH, I assume by your remark that you agree that the ban (that you find in Nerwen's songs) and the Melian concept could belong to enough of a separate time in the draft phase, and thus could represent separate ideas . . . otherwise, if the songs "go with" the Melian idea, arguably it becomes harder to explain why Galadriel should be banned if she isn't even part of the Rebellion.


Or is my reading of the TOI description off in some way? I've simplified it a bit, but that's the sequence as I see it . . . so far.

I'm having trouble coming up with a timeline, mentally, although I suppose it could be straightened out by someone a bit more familiar with the textual history (Bill Fliss has a big chart covering all of Marquette's holdings). The problem I have is that the "Melian passage" appears to post-date the "over the mountains" version, as if it was a passing idea for a change which was then rejected. Or, another possibility, it is an idea Tolkien had post-publication.

Part of the problem here is dating the typescript referenced here. Tolkien did not have much of the LR typed by someone else, nor usually close to the time of writing (except for Book IV, so that CT could be sent a copy). Most chapters remained in manuscript fair copy until he typed the whole thing himself between late 1948 and late 1949- and then a second time in 1952-55.

Thanks for this.

Given what you say here, I could be off in my opinion that the Melian idea ["addition"] pre-dates the "over the mountains" version -- but if it post dates this version, then it seems I could all the more (at least) argue that Galadriel's songs don't necessarily go with the Melian idea.

Of course, neither scenario [simply being an Exile -- or a companion with Melian] necessarily means Galadriel has been banned, but as I say, I certainly agree with you that both songs suggest it.

It does seem a bit odd to me if we were dealing with a post-publication idea, imagining that JRRT would go back to the drafts to add this, but it's not impossible I guess!

Possibly foolish questions alert, but concerning The Nature of Middle-Earth text "Concerning Galadriel & Celeborn"

. . . mmm, what is it, exactly :D

Carl Hostetter explains: "1) manuscript drafting and writing in black nib-pen on Oxford college documents dated 1955, to which Tolkien subsequently gave the title "Concerning Galadriel & Celeborn, and 2) . . ."

Okay, so is the actual text in NOME being characterized as drafting apart from nib-pen writing, with the "whole" being the text that is paraphrased in Unfinished Tales?

This would make sense given the brevity of the NOME text compared to the UT paraphrase, and explain why a seeming quote in the paraphrase does not appear in the NOME text [Christopher Tolkien puts quotes around "but they failed to find the strength" as if it's a quote from the original, but such a quote is not found or noted in the NOME presentation] . . .

The description in Unfinished Tales reads: "The text bearing this title is a short and hasty outline, very roughly composed, which is nonetheless almost the sole narrative source for the events in the West of Middle-earth up to the defeat (. . .) the text is much emended, and it is not always possible to see what belongs to the time of composition of the manuscript and what is indefinitely later."

Anywho, I first assumed (!) that in NOME we were getting the whole text as JRRT wrote it (with emendations being noted), rather than a paraphrase, even though it might cover some of the same territory. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

____


Another NOME question concerning the chapter The Silvan Elves And Silvan Elvish

Section: note 9 states: "The opening of this footnote was previously published at UT: 259. "LR III 363" = LR: 1082". "Thither they returned twice before the Last Alliance": in the contemporary History of Galadriel and Celeborn, upon the revolt in Eregion of the Mirdain at the instigation of Sauron, Galadriel alone passed through Khazad-dum to Lorinand (UT: 237), took up rule, and remained there until she departed to seek Celeborn at Imladris, prior to the Council there (UT: 240) . . ."

But "Thither they returned twice before the Last Alliance" is given in the section Amroth and Nimrodel, dated 1969 or later -- and the subsequent history described in this note is a summation of Concerning Galadriel & Celeborn, which is dated much earlier.

What then is the word "contemporary" referring to?

Granted, in UT this section is preceded by a somewhat vague: "Elsewhere there is one other reference to their movements during those years", but it turns out, that this "elsewhere" is part of the footnote about Oropher, and is indeed characterized in NOME as a late typescript occupying sides of printed Allen and Unwin notices dated 1968.

Or am I misreading that too!