Q: What Kind of Creature is Goldberry?
ANSWER: The short answer to this question is “I don’t know; nor does anyone else.” There are many long answers, of which none were (to my knowledge) provided by J.R.R. Tolkien. Even Christopher Tolkien does not discuss who or what Goldberry is. But she is the wife of Tom Bombadil and J.R.R. Tolkien would not make that marriage accidental.
Bombadil himself puzzles many readers, who have for decades argued over what he is. Some people think he is a Vala (Ulmo, maybe, or perhaps Aulë). Other people think he is a Maia. Neither Tolkien provides any direct support for either point of view. J.R.R. Tolkien himself wrote that Tom was “an aborigine – he knew the land before men, before hobbits, before barrow-wights, yes before the necromancer – before the elves came to this quarter of the world.”
The word aborigine is a linguistic mistake according to some etymological sources. It is supposedly derived as an incorrect singular form from Aborigines, supposedly the name of an ancient tribe from whom the Romans claimed descent. Sources speculate that the tribal name may have been modeled on the Latin expression ab origine (“from the beginning”). Tolkien therefore meant that Tom Bombadil was native to Middle-earth “from the beginning”.
But he is not counted among the Children of Ilúvatar, so he is something else.
Many people point to Tolkien’s description of Bombadil in Letter No. 19 (dated to December 1937) as “the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside” and simply dismiss him as some sort of personification of nature. However personifications were originally merely poetic devices, not really meant to be physical beings (but of course numerous fantasy books and role-playing games have since added this layer to the onion). Tolkien’s 1937 description of Bombadil is not intended to define him as a being, especially not within the context of Middle-earth.
In 1954, in a draft of a letter he composed for Peter Hastings (No. 153), J.R.R. Tolkien responded to Hastings’ criticism of Bombadil: “He also cited the description of Bombadil by Goldberry: ‘He is.’ Hastings said that this seemed to imply that Bombadil was God.” To this Tolkien replied:
As for Tom Bombadil, I really do think you are being too serious, besides missing the point. (Again the words used are by Goldberry and Tom not me as a commentator). You rather remind me of a Protestant relation who to me objected to the (modern) Catholic habit of calling priests Father, because the name father belonged only to the First Person, citing last Sunday’s Epistle – inappositely since that says ex quo. Lots of other characters are called Master; and if ‘in time’ Tom was primeval he was Eldest in Time. But Goldberry and Tom are referring to the mystery of names. See and ponder Tom’s words in Vol. I p. 142.
And skipping a paragraph:
I don’t think Tom needs philosophizing about, and is not improved by it. But many have found him an odd or indeed discordant ingredient. In historical fact I put him in because I had already ‘invented’ him independently (he first appeared in the Oxford Magazine) and wanted an ‘adventure’ on the way. But I kept him in, and as he was, because he represents certain things otherwise left out. I do not mean him to be an allegory – or I should not have given him so particular, individual, and ridiculous a name – but ‘allegory’ is the only mode of exhibiting certain functions: he is then an ‘allegory’, or an exemplar, a particular embodying of pure (real) natural science: the spirit that desires knowledge of other things, their history and nature, because they are ‘other’ and wholly independent of the enquiring mind, a spirit coeval with the rational mind, and entirely unconcerned with ‘doing’ anything with the knowledge: Zoology and Botany not Cattle-breeding or Agriculture …
Tolkien is speaking in the role of master story-teller, explaining his art to someone who is interested in the details of the story; he is not the narrator of the story, and so the allusion to Oxford Magazine is explanatory, not canonical to the story itself.
Whatever Bombadil is supposed to be, he is compatible in some way with Goldberry. But it does not follow that Goldberry must herself be of the same kind or nature as Bombadil; nor that her mother, the River-woman, is of that same kind. She is never said to be an Elf but Goldberry could for all intents and purposes be an Elf, one of the last of the Nandor who never fled Eriador. Or she could simply be a Maia as some have supposed, but there is no direct support for including either Goldberry or the River-woman among the Maiar. And Tolkien is not specific about how many “orders” of beings or creatures Ilúvatar has made. In “Valaquenta” there is an oblique reference to an unknown number of such “orders”:
These are the names of the Valar and the Valier, and here is told in brief their likenesses, such as the Eldar beheld them in Aman. But fair and noble as were the forms in which they were manifest to the Children of Ilúvatar, they were but a veil upon their beauty and their power. And if little is here said of all that the Eldar once knew, that is as nothing compared with their true being, which goes back into regions and ages far beyond our thought. Among them Nine were of chief power and reverence; but one is removed from their number, and Eight remain, the Aratar, the High Ones of Arda: Manwë and Varda, Ulmo, Yavanna and Aulë, Mandos, Nienna, and Oromë. Though Manwë is their King and holds their allegiance under Eru, in majesty they are peers, surpassing beyond compare all others, whether of the Valar and the Maiar, or of any other order that Ilúvatar has sent into Eä.
We know there are the Ainur, of whom some became the Valar and Maiar; and there are the spirits Yavanna summoned, who became the Eagles and the Ents; and there are the Children: Elves, Dwarves, and Men. But there are other things we cannot explain, such as Ungoliant (and the giant spiders) and the dragons. They appear to be rational spirits. Perhaps also the trolls that Melkor made in mockery of the Ents were inhabited by spirits intended for something else.
So Bombadil could be one of several or many aboriginal spirits whom Ilúvatar made specifically for Arda. But it could also be that Bombadil, Goldberry, and the River-woman are Ainur who are not directly attached to any of the Valar. For example, “Ainulindalë” makes an interesting point about the universe (which is called “the World”):
Now the Children of Ilúvatar are Elves and Men, the Firstborn and the Followers. And amid all the splendours of the World, its vast halls and spaces, and its wheeling fires, Ilúvatar chose a place for their habitation in the Deeps of Time and in the midst of the innumerable stars. And this habitation might seem a little thing to those who consider only the majesty of the Ainur, and not their terrible sharpness; as who should take the whole field of Arda for the foundation of a pillar and so raise it until the cone of its summit were more bitter than a needle; or who consider only the immeasurable vastness of the World, which still the Ainur are shaping, and not the minute precision to which they shape all things therein…
Emphasis is mine. This reference to the ongoing work of the Valar throughout the universe (here called “the World”) seldom receives much commentary, but there are other references to the broad scope of this work. Further on in “Ainulindalë” Tolkien writes:
Now the Valar took to themselves shape and hue; and because they were drawn into the World by love of the Children of Ilúvatar, for whom they hoped, they took shape after that manner which they had beheld in the Vision of Ilúvatar, save only in majesty and splendour. Moreover their shape comes of their knowledge of the visible World, rather than of the World itself; and they need it not, save only as we use raiment, and yet we may be naked and suffer no loss of our being. Therefore the Valar may walk, if they will, unclad, and then even the Eldar cannot clearly perceive them, though they be present. But when they desire to clothe themselves the Valar take upon them forms some as of male and some as of female; for that difference of temper they had even from their beginning, and it is but bodied forth in the choice of each, not made by the choice, even as with us male and female may be shown by the raiment but is not made thereby. But the shapes wherein the Great Ones array themselves are not at all times like to the shapes of the kings and queens of the Children of Ilúvatar; for at times they may clothe themselves in their own thought, made visible in forms of majesty and dread.
And the Valar drew unto them many companions, some less, some well nigh as great as themselves, and they laboured together in the ordering of the Earth and the curbing of its tumults…
This summoning of companions is retold in several places, such as in the following passage:
But Manwë was the brother of Melkor in the mind of Ilúvatar, and he was the chief instrument of the second theme that Ilúvatar had raised up against the discord of Melkor; and he called unto himself many spirits both greater and less, and they came down into the fields of Arda and aided Manwë, lest Melkor should hinder the fulfilment of their labour for ever, and Earth should wither ere it flowered…
Two of these powerful spirits were Varda and Tulkas, who were apparently laboring elsewhere within Eä. For many years I had the strong impression that Tulkas had remained with Ilúvatar, but The Silmarillion does not say that; rather, it says he came last to the “fields of Arda”. Tolkien identified Arda with the Solar System, so Tulkas seems to have always been within Eä and he only arrived at Arda after Melkor started the first war.
One could read these texts to mean that there are Ainur scattered across the universe, and that only some of them became directly involved in the affairs of Arda as the Valar and Maiar; and if that is so then Tolkien used the name Valar to refer to all the Ainur who entered Eä and subsequently only to those greater Ainur who settled in Arda itself, to watch over its progress. This interpretation does therefore leave room for Ainur who never attached themselves to either Melkor or the Valar to dwell in Arda; and so Bombadil, Goldberry, and the River-woman might be numbered among such Ainur. Gandalf says something interesting to his hobbit friends when he bids them good-bye before reaching the Shire:
‘But if you would know, I am turning aside soon. I am going to have a long talk with Bombadil: such a talk as I have not had in all my time. He is a moss-gatherer, and I have been a stone doomed to rolling. But my rolling days are ending, and now we shall have much to say to one another.’
Gandalf could certainly have a friendship with Bombadil just as he does with Aragorn or Bilbo, but some readers have inferred from this passage that Gandalf and Bombadil may know each other from ancient, ancient days. While this strikes me as a weak argument for Bombadil being one of the Ainur, it certainly has its appeal, especially if you do not insist he must be one of the Valar of Valinor.
For my part I think that Bombadil, Goldberry, and the River-woman are something other than Ainur. That Tolkien would call Bombadil an aborigine seems significant to me. He never describes any of the Ainur in this way. They were not made within the World but outside of it. The Ainur entered Eä to give it shape and fulfill Ilúvatar’s purpose. Bombadil abstains any direct management of Arda, except to keep the most dangerous things from killing people. His role does not strike me as being Ainurian but rather something else, something maybe intended only to exist in Middle-earth. Bombadil is incomplete, when compared to the Ainur and the Children and the Eagles and Ents. He does not require “philosophizing”, I think, because Tolkien only wanted to include him in a utilitarian sense to help move the story forward. To philosophize about Bombadil (and Goldberry and the River-woman) would mean that Tolkien would have to find a place for them among the spirits Ilúvatar sent into Eä.
I don’t think J.R.R. Tolkien ever would have explained Bombadil within the context he devised for other beings. Bombadil simply “is” and the reader must accept him as that and nothing more. Bombadil is the lens through which we see both Goldberry and her mother. And therefore I think they are just like him: there but unexplainable. They cannot be either Ainur or Children, but there is certainly room for them to be something else. If you want to explain who or what Goldberry is (and the River-woman) I think you have to do so only through her connection to Bombadil.
# # #
Have you read our other Tolkien and Middle-earth Questions and Answers articles?
In The Lord of the Rings alone, Tolkien names (or gives specific descriptions although usually brief) of at least 95 females (most of these are in the appendices). Of these 95, only 6 actually have speaking roles in the story – Eowyn, Galadriel, Goldberry, Rosie and Mrs. Cotton, and Ioreth of Gondor. Of these 6, Eowyn obviously is given the biggest part being in several chapters from her appearance in Rohan right up until the end. Galadriel is mostly in the chapters about Lothlorien, and appears again at the end. Goldberry, though, is not far behind, appearing in two chapters.
To me anyway, Goldberry has some significance greater than the Cottons (or other female hobbits) or women of Gondor or even Arwen who is mentioned in many places, but makes no real appearance until the end. Goldberry is significant enough that she even reappears after the hobbits have left hers and Tom’s house bidding them farewell. That in itself suggests that Tolkien had a definite role for her.
Also, there is her almost mystical disappearance during the daytime where it would seem she is everywhere and yet nowhere to be found, especially during her ‘wash’ day. I think Tolkien was trying to tell us something here that he couldn’t quite put into words himself.
Tolkien as you state calls Bombadil an aborigine. Regardless of what that exactly means (and I have been told over and over again that Tolkien says exactly what he means), it does suggest along with Tom’s own thoughts on his being – he was there in the beginning – that he was at the least created (or existed) prior to the coming of the Children. Goldberry most likely has a mother which would make her something different than Tom. This was sort of part of my question earlier, if the Ainur could have children, could Goldberry’s mother possibly be one these Ainur? That to me makes her something else -which strongly suggests the two are different ‘species’ – for lack of a better term.
I would guess if Tolkien were around, he would call them additional spirits, neither Ainur nor Children of Iluvatar, but spirits such as dragons, Ungoliant, and others. That is, until he had time to pull together all his thoughts about Middle-Earth and its creation.
Your question implies that an aborigine like Tom cannot have children but Tolkien did not write anything to suggest that there could never be any Tom, Jr. Hence, the River-woman could just as easily be of the same order as Tom as of any other order (such as the Ainur).
It really comes down to how you want to think of the characters. There is room for almost every interpretation in what Tolkien wrote. I do draw the line at Tom being one of the Valar. That would not be consistent with their reluctance to interfere directly in Middle-earth. Tom was of Middle-earth and he played a role there just like all the other inhabitants.
Has anyone considered whether Tom and Goldberry belonged to the same general class of beings as the spirit of Caradhras? In LotR, it is hinted, though not stated outright, that Caradhras had a sense of identity, a personality, an awareness of what was happening around him, the ability to affect natural forces in his domain, the ability to make decisions, and even a rudimentary voice (I am referring primarily to Book II, Chapter III). He was also inherently “of” Middle-earth and had resided in Middle-earth longer than Sauron (though not longer than Melkor, who created the Misty Mountains). As far as I can tell, these are all traits that Caradhras shared with Tom, and perhaps with Goldberry as well. Of course, unlike Tom or Goldberry, Caradhras lacked a physical body aside from the mountain peak itself. If Caradhras was a semi-anthropomorphic spirit of Middle-earth, it seems plausible that Middle-earth naturally included many such semi-anthropomorphic spirits. Perhaps Tom and Goldberry were spirits of Middle-earth that had acquired human forms through some mysterious process. Perhaps Goldberry’s mother was literally a river that happened to have a feminine persona (just as Gimli referred to Caradhras as being masculine).
This interpretation may align with Galdor’s description of Tom as lacking the power to defeat Sauron, “unless such power is in the earth itself. And yet we see that Sauron can torture and destroy the very hills” (LotR, p. 266). Similarly, it seems likely that the destruction of Caradhras (the mountain) would result in the demise of Caradhras (the spirit).
I was always interested in that passage and what it means. On the one hand it is comment of one of the characters in-story and though an Elf of great wisdom it may not be accurate, on the other I wondered what it might say about power of both Sauron and Bombadil. Sauron as a Maia, an Ainu would have some ‘power over matter’ especially overs substances of the world, as former disciple of Aule and one of ‘his’ spirits, craftsman and master artificer so does it mean that Sauron can use his power to destroy and shape landscape in way of ‘magic’ or that simply by his devices and labour of his servants who are mining for resources, inudstrial activity causing untold destruction like the slag piles before Morannon, or BOTH. And whether truly Bombadil is not sufficiently powerful to face Sauron, though Gandalf opinion which is in most cases wiser also says that Tom would be probably the last to fall. Tom says he has no power over Black Riders or that he himself closes his inlfuence to the boundaries he himself set but one has to wonder what if he was involved more?
What about Tom, Goldberry, the Riverwoman being in some way associated with the original musics/song of the Ainur? Just as the musics seems to be revealed as related to the cosmos and Middle Earth, perhaps this existential relationship could be expressed in these characters. They are in some sense the living music, song originally, now incarnate in Middle Earth and in some sense Middle Earth itself or a theme of Middle Earth/the original songs. Of course, there is no proof of this, there is insufficient material, but could it be a potential option consistent with what is known? I also wonder if Ungoliant fits in here as part of the music corrupted by Melkor, but not necessarily corrupt in her initial ‘conception’.
I heard a wild fan theory that nameless things below Moria may be by-products of the discords of Melkor, no idea who first thought about that seems rather strange. But we are told that Eru gave the Song being so, any discordant elements too would…come into existance in some form or another haha.
Certainly though there is lots of ‘things’ unnamed, unknown, mysterious creatures outisde of the known ones explicitly mentioned by Tolkien. There are things either living underground unknown even to Orcs or monsters of diverse kinds bred and twisted life forms made by Dark Lords. We know they ARE (or are at least hinted, implied to be) but we know nothing of them, of their shapes and abilities, of their origin. There must be things that were bred by Morgoth (or simply twisted/altered by his power like during Spring of Arda) that were neither Orcs, Trolls, Dragons, Wargs and Werewolves, there are also bat-like vampires, Stone Giants and there are things that appear to be fiction inside of fiction products of folklore like creatures from hobbit poems. There is lots of mystery 🙂 as the world isn’t as clear and well explained even in reality.
There is certainly much mystery within Middle Earth and even answers to the questions I asked about Tom’s, Goldberry’s and Ungoliant’s nature would be personal (applying to my interpretation only) rather then general and canonical (for all). Mysteries in Middle Earth may be small (what was up the side passage in the paths of the dead) and great; they are part of what makes Middle Earth magnificent and a very rich nourishment for my imagination. One of the of the ideas I entertain for myself is ‘How central to the original songs of the Ainur and therefore the character of Middle Earth itself are the Hobbits?’; I love to believe they embody one of the most magnificent and central mysteries of this absorbing world which has been such a favourite resting place for me for years.
PS: One of the delights of a blog like this one, with all the different topics exposed and the opening up of varied sources, is the further enriching of my own imagination of Middle Earth.
Mr. Martinez, I just reread your response to my initial post, and thinking about it, I went back and reread my original question of some time ago which part of this blog has tried to answer. I wondered in that question, why Tom and Goldberry didn’t have children, rather then assuming that Tom couldn’t. Now thinking about it some more, I wonder even more on that, since the only known Maiar to live in Middle-earth and ‘wed’, had children. I believe I read somewhere that orcs also did procreate, so being a married couple, one would think it highly possible that Tom and Goldberry would have had children, especially since Goldberry was somebody’s child once. But I would also guess that Tolkien may not have wanted to deal with all the possibilities that might entail, and instead, keep just a single descendent line refreshed every so often with a higher order strain (Thingol and Melian, Beren and Luthien, down to Aragorn and Arwen – or maybe having children now makes me wonder why everyone doesn’t).
Tom was not phased by the ring or the powers of evil; but perhaps, having children did phase him – nappies etc 😉
But there is another text jrr, don’t remember which book, about the elves awakening. Especially the first elf who meets orome, but then is not recognized as a king of any of the 3 tribes. Could he be tom, first and most powerfull of all elves? (Except perhaps for feanor)
I like to entertain the idea of Bombadil being a prototype for the Children; Illuvatar’s ‘Adam’ if you will (minus the whole ‘Original Sin’ business).