Scholarly Edition of The Adventures of Tom Bombadil

[Faramir Jones]

Originally Posted by Galin

With respect to the part of your post that I quoted, and although I'm guessing the answer is no, but do H&S look at all at the poem Tolkien was thinking of including (Kortirion), but did not include?

As a general answer to your question, Galin, pages 11-7 of the 'Introduction' deal with the issue of what poems were decided on for the book, including those that were rejected.

Specifically regarding 'The Trees of Kortirion', in a letter of 5th February 1962 from Tolkien to Rayner Unwin, already referred to by H and S in their Chronology, part of their Companion and Guide, pages 587-8, Tolkien said he had 'raked over' his collection of poems, and sent 4 more of them, including 'The Trees of Korthirion'. He singled out that poem, calling it 'too long and too ambitious and even if considered good enough would probably upset the boat'. He suggested that if 1-2 more poems were required, they be taken from those in LotR.

Unwin, in a letter of 12th February to Tolkien, one not referred to in the 'Introduction' but referred to on page 588 of the Chronology, listed the poems received from Tolkien, agreed that 'Kortirion' did not fit but thought that 1-2 poems from LotR could be included. A letter from Tolkien to him dated 12th April said that he had placed the 16 items 'in an order'. They were the final selection of poems published in the book.

I hope this is of assistance.

[Galin]

It does answer my question, thanks Faramir. I had done my own search for commentary about Kortirion in both letters and H&S's work (chronology and so forth), but it looks like there is no new commentary in the new book with respect to the specific question I wonder about.

I might buy it anyway! But even Tolkien's 'too long and too ambitious and even if considered good enough would probably upset the boat' doesn't necessarily speak to my question: "upset the boat" in what sense?

My question continues to be, if Tolkien considered the revised poem to be internal -- that is, a translation of some Middle-earthian author and not a reflection on Warwick by JRR Tolkien the poet --

... then who is the imagined author? And more importantly, what is this Kortirion... that the Edain built?

[Faramir Jones]

Originally Posted by Galin

My question continues to be, if Tolkien considered the revised poem to be internal -- that is, a translation of some Middle-earthian author and not a reflection on Warwick by JRR Tolkien the poet --... then who is the imagined author? And more importantly, what is this Kortirion... that the Edain built?

Glad to be of assistance, Galin.

Your questions are very good ones. They provoked me to look again (after a long while) at the revised poem, published in The Book of Lost Tales, Part I, found in Chapter I, pp. 39-43 of my edition. Both are obviously closely related, the identity of the author being dependant on that of Kortirion, which is as you say, the more important question.

I don't think we can say, from the benefit of our present knowledge, who the author is. Perhaps something might later be found in Tolkien's papers. But from what we have, we don't know. Perhaps Tolkien intended it to be that way; because out of the verses that appear in the Adventures, the authorship of only 5 of the 16 is definitely given. Verse 3 ('Errantry') is Bilbo's, as is 5 ('The Man in the Moon Stayed Up Too Late'); Verse 7 ('The Stone Troll'), is said to be Sam Gamgee's, as are 8 ('Perry-the-Winkle') and 12 ('Cat').

In his Preface, Tolkien said that the verses in the book were selected from those in the Red Book of Westmarch, which we better know as LotR. The selection was 'taken from the older pieces, mainly concerned with legends and jests of the Shire at the end of the Third Age', that 'appear' to be made by Hobbits, 'especially' by Bilbo and his friends 'or their immediate descendants'. Authorship was 'seldom indicated'. Those outside the narrative (i.e. the text) were 'in various hands and were probably written down from oral tradition'.

Perhaps Tolkien intended, as you said, to give 'Kortirion' an unknown author, which would in this case have been an unknown hobbit, using information on that city from various sources, like the unknown hobbit writing 'The Hoard' based on 'lore of Rivendell, Elvish and Númenorean'. But even in such a case, how could the subject matter of the poem fit in with the history of Middle-earth that was now 'fixed' in the published LotR, let alone in Tolkien's then unpublished writings of the First and Second Ages? I think that he was faced with the challenge of either completely revising the poem, or of making substantial revisions to what he had already written on Middle-earth, published and unpublished. (He'd already revised The Hobbit, to fit in with LotR regarding Bilbo, Gollum and the Ring.) It's fair to conclude, I think, that it might have been seen by him as too much of an effort, therefore it would be far easier to leave out that problematic poem.

I hope this makes some sense to you.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Faramir Jones

(...) Perhaps Tolkien intended, as you said, to give 'Kortirion' an unknown author, which would in this case have been an unknown hobbit, using information on that city from various sources, like the unknown hobbit writing 'The Hoard' based on 'lore of Rivendell, Elvish and Númenorean'. But even in such a case, how could the subject matter of the poem fit in with the history of Middle-earth that was now 'fixed' in the published LotR, let alone in Tolkien's then unpublished writings of the First and Second Ages? I think that he was faced with the challenge of either completely revising the poem, or of making substantial revisions to what he had already written on Middle-earth, published and unpublished. (He'd already revised The Hobbit, to fit in with LotR regarding Bilbo, Gollum and the Ring.) It's fair to conclude, I think, that it might have been seen by him as too much of an effort, therefore it would be far easier to leave out that problematic poem.

I hope this makes some sense to you.

It makes sense to me. I guess what fascinates me is the seeming "almost" here, that Kortirion almost (even though I really don't know how close it came) makes it into the author-published corpus. Kortirion as a place is from older versions of the mythology, and if it had been published in this selection, it would have "survived" in some form or sense.

I think (memory) this was the general, very simplified evolution:

A) Kortirion actually becomes Warwick itself, as Tol Eressea becomes England.

B) Kortirion is a place in Tol Eressea, built by Elves, but is later not Warwick itself.

C) In this poem, latest version, Kortirion is built by the Edain, and there are fading Elves there.


You make a good point though, as with other poems in the collection, the accuracy of some things can be considered doubtful due to arguable whimsy (a troll baking bread for Perry-the-winkle) or to an incomplete knowledge of something historical, or even to an artistic take on something historical.

In other words, maybe we aren't supposed to place Kortirion in any specific place or time in Middle-earth. The Edain built it, and that's that... and Tolkien gets to have this poetry published, still connected to his larger work, as it once was but in a different way.

And still as a tribute to Warwick! But then, for whatever reason that it might upset the boat, it doesn't get in of course.

Or something! Thanks for the considered replies!

[Faramir Jones]

We've had a nice discussion, Galin. It's made me think of going to see Warwick in the future...

I agree with your 'general, very simplified evolution' of Kortirion.

Despite, as you say, the lack of accuracy of some things in some of the poems, due to 'arguable whimsy', an 'incomplete knowledge of something historical', or an 'artistic take' on the same, there are still recognisable elements from actual events in these poems, such as 'The Hoard' being partly made out of elements of the tale of Túrin and Mîm the Dwarf.

At the risk of repeating myself, Tolkien may have realised that, if he included this particular poem in the Adventures, it would become 'canon', and necessitate a lot of work to fit it in to the 'accepted' narrative, as he had already done in revising 'Riddles in the Dark' in The Hobbit.

But as you rightly said, all this is speculation, in the absence of further information.