Book of lost tales (part 1) help

[Morgoth Bauglir]

I just purchased The Book of Lost Tales Part one and am only a few pages into it. Im at the part where he is telling Eriol and the other inhabitants of the cottage about the cottage of lost play.

My question is that when does this take pplace? It must be after Earendel (this is how its spelt in the book) guides the men to Numenore, because there are references to Earendel constantly. Furthermore, i would like to know if eriol (Aelfwine) is related to Earendel, because i beleive there was a reference to that also.

And it also says that the cottage in valinor (not erresea) was gaurded by the eldar and that it was where the lost children of men wandered to.

Also, is the cottage Eriol is presently in the cottage that Vaire and her husband are referring to?It doesnt seem like it because it seems like the cottage being talked about in the story is somewhere else. And are Vaire and her husban vala?

Thanks in advance, this is very confusing to me and i appreciate all help. i hope i didnt make it too confusing for you.

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: Morgoth Bauglir ]

[Dimaldaeon]

The book of Lost Tales is made up of some of Tolkien's earliest writings and as such doesent match the storyline that we know.
Eriol is not descended from Earendil (I made the same error when i first read it) what the reference means is that a ray from Earendil fell on Eriol when he was a baby and as such is destined to be a mariner.

[Rumil]

In his early stories Tolkien was trying to forge a link between Middle Earth and Anglo Saxon times. Eriol was supposed to be an Anglo Saxon (for want of a better name!) adventurer from the Germanic tribes which invaded Britain who, by a bizarre fluke, sailed instead to Valinor.

He also toyed with the idea that Britain was made from Tol Eressea, which had been sent back to Middle Earth, and that Kor-Tirion was in fact Warwick Castle. Tolkien himself lived in Warwick for a time. Did he dream of elves inhabiting the Kingmaker's high towers?

In the Eriol tales, the 'hidden garden' idea appears. This may be related to the early 20th century gardens in Warwick. (I used to live there a few years ago and saw a documentary where they restored one of the hidden gardens) These gardens were plots of land purchsed by well-off town dwellers in Victorian times which were walled off from the rest of the world and transformed into private, beautifully manicured spaces for the relaxation of the upper-middle classes.

Oh dear i appear to have rambled (too much port I expect) so my theory that Minas Tirith is, in fact, Birmingham University will have to wait.

[Morgoth Bauglir]

thanks alot that helped tons!

[Dimaldaeon]

wait a minute if Tolkien thought this and the west of Eressea is the best (Having basked in the light of Valinor) and Ireland is made up of the west after Ossë tried to drag it west then Ireland is the best part. (Patriotism wells up in Dimaldaeon)

[InklingElf]

wait a minute if Tolkien thought this and the west of Eressea is the best (Having basked in the light of Valinor) and Ireland is made up of the west after Ossë tried to drag it west then Ireland is the best part. (Patriotism wells up in Dimaldaeon)

-Really???

[Carannillion]

Correct, the cottage in the story is a different one. It's "lost", never to be found again. The whole idea was abandoned, actually - BoLT is not to be considered canon, it's simply a collection of notes and sketches. A study of Tolkien's writing process.

The Lost Children of Men probably went into the woods and died... Only elves were allowed to Valinor(except for our heroes, of course [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img])

Also, Vaire and her husband are not of the Valar. Personally, I have an impression that they're either Maia or elves (I prefer the latter - anyone have the truth or other opinions?)

[ November 02, 2002: Message edited by: Carannillion ]

[Galorme]

They're elves friend, but not as we know them. The books of lost tales are old, don’t try and link them in with the ‘cannon’ books in a direct way. Just keep reading, and once you have finished the Histories you will have seen how the story changed, some of it blossomed and some of it died. Personally I think that the BoLTs are better than the newer stories, but they only really ‘work’ if you forget about the new books.

Remember the sleeper in the tower…

[ November 05, 2002: Message edited by: Galorme ]

[Maédhros]

The interesting thing about BOLT, is that some stories have more detail that is lacking in the newer versions. For example, in The Music of the Ainur, there is great detail when Ilúvatar says to Melkor all the things that he had introduced in the Music.
Or in the Chaining of Melko, the detail of when the Valar went ot Utumna to capture Melko, and that Manwë went with Tulkas, Aulë, etc. Very interesting.

[InklingElf]

well it is the Book of Lost Tales afterall [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Man-of-the-Wold]

Actually, I look at the BoLTs as somewhat different stories, but not without elements of detail and insight for better appreciating the Canon.

They reflect a time when Tolkien was striving to relate what he had, with the Anglo-Saxon world that he thought had been lamentably diminished as part of English heritage.

So on the one hand he has a more Earthly traveler encounter this diverse group of Elves, and thus explain where the stories come from. However, so much with the movement and placement of islands, and where and when folks went, is very complex and simply not fully developed to the point that it all makes sense or is even entirely comprehensible. And, of course, it was quite correct, as JRRT discovered the better he got at deciphering the Elvish Lore in the Red Book of Westmarch.

Also, the feel of everything is a little different. The Elves are at once more primitive but more fairy like and different from Men. And they are more various in type, rather than degree. And Dwarves are not like those of the Unexpected Party.

Still, there is much there as with the Fall of Gondolin in Part II that may express various details (give or take corrections) that JRRT only suppressed for failomg to tie up all of the loose threads, but that can be generally accepted for understanding more of the details involved with what happened.

[Gazing]

Originally Posted by Morgoth Bauglir

I just purchased The Book of Lost Tales Part one and am only a few pages into it. Im at the part where he is telling Eriol and the other inhabitants of the cottage about the cottage of lost play.

My question is that when does this take place? It must be after Earendel (this is how its spelt in the book) guides the men to Numenore, because there are references to Earendel constantly. Furthermore, i would like to know if eriol (Aelfwine) is related to Earendel, because i believe there was a reference to that also.

[ November 01, 2002: Message edited by: Morgoth Bauglir ]

If we look at the actual text of the first version of "The Cottage of Lost Play," in BOLT-1, pp. 13 -21 - hardback edition, there are some very intriguing differences observable when comparing this early Earendel to the more developed Earendil of later texts, especially in BOLT-2 and the Silmarillion.

I think here, Morgoth Bauglir has largely "got it right:" Eriol and Earendel are related.

In fact, it appears from p. 13, that Eriol (in this first version of "The Cottage of Lost Play") is to be seen as the actual, "flesh-and-blood" son of Earendel, or so I interpret the passage:

"Now it happened on a certain time that a traveler from far countries, a man of great curiosity ... brought in a ship as far west even as the Lonely Island, Tol Eressea in the fairy speech..." (BOLT-1, 13) Here JRRT identifies Eriol as a MAN.

"Now at that time [in the evening] the desire of new sights is least , even in one whose heart is that of an explorer; and then even such a son of Earendel as this wayfarer..."(BOLT-1: p. 13 hdbk ver, my emphasis) Here we get the data that our "traveler" is the son of Earendel.

"Then thought Eriol (for thus did the people of the island after call him...)" (BOLT-1, p. 14) and here we get the identification of our traveler, he is, in fact, Eriol.

If the traveler is a Man, and he is the son of Earendel, then, at this time in JRRT's thought, Earendel must have been a Man as well; or IF Earendel is half-elven here, then Eriol would not be classed as a Man, would he? We have no indication from the text (BOLT-1, pp 13-21) that Eriol is ever classed as anything other than a mortal human Man, so it is unlikely that his father would be anything other than a Man.

On p 18 (BOLT-1) we have confirmation that Eriol is the son of Earendel when Lindo says: "For that this night we entertain a guest, a man of great and excellent travel, a son meseems of Earendel..." Eriol then requests a tale of the Lonely Island, its history, and of this he is told, but there is no mention of the quest of Earendil (as found in the Silmarillion). No mention is made of Earendel as anything other than a mortal Man, a human sea-farer. There is no message quest to seek the assistance of the Valar, no silmaril upon Earendel's ship, nothing to indicate the half-elven status of the later tales...

In fact, this first version gives us the further information that Earendel, far from being an immortal "half-elf," has long since died, died a mortal's death, after seeing, and hearing, and dreaming of the Fairy Realm. But, just like the Mortal Man "loony" in the poem, "The Sea Bell," Earendel died still trying to find Faerie: "Now all his life was he restless, as if a longing half-expressed for unknown things dwelt within him; and 'tis said that he died among the rocks on a lonely coast on a night of storm -- and moreover that most of his children and their children since have been of a restless mind -- and methinks I know now the truth of the matter" (BOLT-1, p. 20)

So, what we have here, if we restrict ourselves to just this text in BOLT-1, pp 13 - 21, is a tale of two MEN, who travel by the same "straight path" over the sea toward the same Fairy Land, and they are father and son, Earendel and Eriol.

The confusion arises a bit later, when JRRT alters this original tale to fit with his later development of Earendel (the Man) who becomes morphed into Earendil (the Half-Elf, Half-man). This all gets rather confusing because JRRT has so many "re-used" themes and "re-used" characters in his palimpsestic texts. But, at this moment, in BOLT-1, (pp 13-21) we have nothing yet regarding the Half-Elven nature of Earendel.

Christopher Tolkien muddies this issue (the original mortal-man aspect of Earendel) almost immediately when he mentions in his commentaries on this first tale (BOLT-1, pp 22-27) that his father, JRRT, reworked the material several times, giving different versions of the Eriol narrative. Unfortunately Chris does not have dates for these "notes" so it will probably be very difficult to get an idea of which version came first. But, it appears from the text that "The Cottage of Lost Play" as presented in pages 13-21, was the oldest form of the narrative.

As we know, JRRT often "reworked" his material, and sometimes abandoned a later versions to go back to an earlier one, or he might scrap the entire theme, to work just bits and pieces of the earliest material into later works. I think we can see this happening in this first section of BOLT-1, pp 13-21. It looks like, from the quote that Earendel actually died, we have an initially mortal man, a sea-farer, Earendel. He is twice listed as the "father" of Eriol, the mortal man, in this same section.

But, once we leave this section, the storyline changes, as recorded in the notes JRRT wrote later, in fact the story changes several times. Eriol is now introduced as the son of Eoh, related to Hengest and Horsa, the Anglo-Saxon "leaders" of the real-life historical sources. Then Christopher Tolkien mentions a further text/ note by JRRT to the effect that Eriol may be seen as a "metaphorical" son of the Star Earendel: "If a beam [of light] from Earendel fall on a child new-born he becomes 'a child of Earendel' and a wanderer." (BOLT-1, p. 24) Here Earendel is not given either a human nor even an Elven persona, but would seem rather to be, quite simply, a star.

What I think happened here, is that JRRT took up the character Earendel, and altered this person dramatically, and wrote new material about him, changing him from an original mortal man, into a messenger-salvation character of Half-Elven descent. At this point, it was necessary to alter the material in the first version of "The Cottage of Lost Play," and subsequently, Eriol is now presented as a "metaphorical" son of Earendel, not his actual son; and the data concerning the original mortal "death" of Earendel is simply expunged.

But all this "notational" material comes after the initial story. In the first textual version, pp 13-21, it really seems clear to me that Eriol is meant to be a mortal man, and is meant to be the son (in the flesh) of another mortal man, Earendel. And Earendel, to further cement his "manhood," has in fact died a mortal's death "among rocks on a lonely coast on a night of storm..." (BOLT-1, p. 20)

So, when precisely in BOLT (BOLT-1 or BOLT-2), does JRRT actually change the character of Earendel from a mortal seafarer, and father of the mortal Eriol (also a seafarer) to the half-elven prince we find in The Silmarillion?

[Galin]

Welcome Gazing! I hate to welcome and quibble, but...

Originally Posted by Gazing

(...) In fact, it appears from p. 13, that Eriol (in this first version of "The Cottage of Lost Play") is to be seen as the actual, "flesh-and-blood" son of Earendel, or so I interpret the passage:

I still question a 'son of Earendel' in what sense? Passing over your references to Eriol as a Man, and where he is called a son of Earendel, and arriving at...

In fact, this first version gives us the further information that Earendel, far from being an immortal "half-elf," has long since died, died a mortal's death, after seeing, and hearing, and dreaming of the Fairy Realm. But, just like the Mortal Man "loony" in the poem, "The Sea Bell," Earendel died still trying to find Faerie: "Now all his life was he restless, as if a longing half-expressed for unknown things dwelt within him; and 'tis said that he died among the rocks on a lonely coast on a night of storm -- and moreover that most of his children and their children since have been of a restless mind -- and methinks I know now the truth of the matter" (BOLT-1, p. 20)

So, what we have here, if we restrict ourselves to just this text in BOLT-1, pp 13 - 21, is a tale of two MEN, who travel by the same "straight path" over the sea toward the same Fairy Land, and they are father and son, Earendel and Eriol.

I don't think this passage refers to Earendel but rather 'one of our father's fathers' who died among the rocks, and it's noted that this person (it is implied) had travelled the Path of Dreams as a child. If I recall correctly, here and elsewhere there is no certain association with Earendel to this character. If there is, please post it of course; but so far I can't agree that this is necessarily Earendel.

In very early poetry (written in 1914 according to Hammond and Scull), Earendel launches a ship into the sky, though in this version Tolkien is not quite sure what the poem is all about. JRRT will continue to write poetry about Earendel in any case, starting again in this same year.

[Gazing]

Hello, Galin, some of my best learning experiences have come about as the result of "Quibbling." LOL.

I'm going through the indices of BOLT-1 and BOLT-2, "fine-combing" the material with a particular eye toward the Earendel mythos, it is a complex matter made even more difficult by the sometimes notational nature of Tolkiens own phrases, where an "easily elucidated," single and precise meaning is not to be found.

The example you proffer is quite apropos:Then Eriol said:

"'Now these are tidings sad and yet good to hear, and I remember me of certain words my father spake in my early boyhood. It had long, said he, been a tradition in our kindred that one of our father's fathers would speak of a fair house and magic gardens, ... and these things he said he had seen and heard as a child, as if a longing half-expressed for unknown things dwelt within him; and 'tis said that he died among rocks on a lonely coast on a night of storm -- and moreover that most of his children and their children since have been of a restless mind -- and methinks I know now the truth of the matter." (BOLT-1, p. 20 hd bk ver)

To which person does the long string of "he s" pertain? Depending upon my momentary bent of interpretation it could refer to Eriol's father, or could refer to an earlier ancestor, as the tale is related by Eriol's father.

I am thinking now that "chronology" is the key to this issue: when was The Cottage of Lost Play" written, and when do we find the first indisputable evidence of Earendel/ Earendil as something other than a human, mortal Man mariner?

Unfortunately, there is a good deal of confusion surrounding the BOLT Tales regarding the individual times of their composition, so we cannot simply assume that later chapters in the narrative sequence were actually written in the order in which they appear. Nor can we be certain of the dates of revision of any given chapter. The "Tale of Earendel," appears quite late in the BOLT text (BOLT-2, pp254 ff, pap ver) but, it is prefigured in "The Fall of Gondolin," (BOLT-2, pp 146 ff). Here we have a problem, because, according to Chris Tolkien, Scull and Hammond, Michael Drout (Ency.) and even JRRT himself, Letter #297) this Tale, "The Fall of Gondolin," was composed long before most of the BOLT material. JRRT suggests, in a Letter from 1967, 50 years after, that "The Fall of Gondolin" came before the rest of the Tales. Here, Chris Tolkien, Scull and Hammond, Michael Drout seem to think that "The Cottage of Lost Play" was still written first of all, and being an introductory chapter, rather than a full Tale, it simply slipped JRRT's mind.

I was initially led to considering this issue, the potential mortal Man nature of the original Earendel, as it made no sense to place an Elf, a Fay, a Faery, or Fairy into the ancient form of an Imran -- the literary device of a Mortal Man becoming enamoured of the "Other World" of Faerie, and then setting out upon a maritime venture seeking to actually find that realm. Tolkien's Eriol Tale, his poem "Loony," (later "The Sea Bell"), are "proper" examples of the Imram. JRRT considered this topic minutely and even wrote his own version of an Imram based on St. Brendan's voyages.

So, how does Earendel morph into an Elven character making the same kind of perilous journey to the "Other World" of Faerie, an Imram? I see here, in the 1910 - 1917 period of Tolkien's life, an attempt to make sense of the Old English poem, sometimes attributed to Cynewulf (c. 750 - 825 CE):

"Eala Earendel engla* beorhtast ofer middangeard monnum sended.
Hail Earendel, brightest of angels, Above Middle-earth sent unto men."

JRT was quite aware that the original meaning of the Greek-based term "angel" is "messenger" and could refer to heavenly beings and mere mortals equally.

I think, in "The Cottage of Lost Play," that JRRT was initially interpreting the Earendel of this Old English poem in the light of the Imram device. In which case, Earendel would have to be a Mortal Man. So far, I must admit, I have a tenuous and troubled line of connections here that I am "trying," -- perhaps the whole web will collapse of its own weight? We'll see.

For now, I'm trying to establish the first incontrovertible evidence for Earendel's Elven (half-Elven) nature, the first instance of the use of a Silmaril connected with Earendel, and the first mention of a definite "salvific/ messenger" function for Earendel, the half-elven who acts as spokesperson for both kindreds (Elf and Man) in the attempt to persuade the Valar to intervene directly in the course of Middle-earth history. The fully evolved Earendil, (the change in spelling marks the later, fully evolved character) found in the pages of the Silmarillion, seems to represent quite an alteration in the old Imram form. Earendil, in the latter work, is no longer a Fay-haunted mortal Man trying to reach (for his personal "salvation") the unobtainable Fairy Realm, he is instead, a half-Elven character classed along with the rebellious Noldor, and thus denied entry into the western "Other World" of Faerie.

Thanks for the great "Quibbling," Galin!

[Galin]

Concerning Earendel: looking back at the early poetry (and related material): in a short prose preface to The Shores of Faery and in the outline associated with The Bidding of the Minstrel, Christopher Tolkien notes that: '... Earendil was conceived to be an old man when he journeyed into the Firmament' (Tale of Earendil, BLT II)

Also, I note an earlier reading with respect to a passage in The Cottage of Lost Play (note 5 to CLP): 'shall it be of Earendel the wanderer, who alone of the sons of Men has had great traffic with the Valar and Elves, who alone of their kindred has seen beyond Taniquetil, even he who sails for ever in the firmament.'

Here Earendel being of Mannish heritage seems emphasized, but that said...

'... how so Earendel was the son of Tuor and Idril and 'tis said the only being that is half of the kindred of the Eldalie and half of Men. He was the greatest and first of all mariners among men and saw regions that men have not yet found nor gazed upon for all the multitude of their boats. He rideth now with Voronwe upon the winds of the firmament nor comes ever further back than Kor, else would he die like other men, so much of the mortal is in him.' JRRT, Name List To The Fall Of Gondolin

Hmmm. And do we know how Tolkien viewed the 'half-elven' at this time? I would need to investigate that further in any event, but in the Quenta Silmarillion of the mid to late 1930s at least, it's noted that all those who had a measure of mortal blood were mortal, unless other doom be granted them -- although this is quite a bit later than the BLT material, however it's interpreted.

And again, if FG was written before CLP...


With respect to what came first, CLP or FG, Hammond and Scull appear to find this matter inconclusive in my opinion, and even cite a note that might suggest Tolkien, at least at one point, considered CLP a 'tale' itself -- among other evidence of course, and again, I get the feeling there is no way to certainly tell which was written first.

Scull and Hammond have posted here (at least once that I recall) so maybe they'll correct me about that, or add some material perhaps, but knowing whether FG was written before CLP -- or basically at the same time -- or after CLP, would be notable here, if it's possible to tell.


I don't have the Drout book myself. Anyway, interesting question