So here are my thoughts on two literary villains, one the arch-traitor of Arthurian mythology, and the other the Silmarillion’s equivalent. I’m releasing it on May’s day as… that is the birthday of Mordred.
Tolkien was clearly acquainted with the Arthur myth, having begun writing The Fall of Arthur, his own take on the Arthurian mythos. Alas, he never finished it, even though he began in the 30s. What we do have, up to Arthur arriving back in Britain is pretty good. And there is a decent section after this going through the Arthurian mythos, I would certainly recommend this book.
But… could it have influenced his writings? To do so I will examine the characters of Mordred and Maeglin, both the nephews of Kings, both with incestuous desires, and both traitors.
Mordred, as is commonly known, was the nephew of King Arthur… at least, in the earliest of the standard accounts. His first appearance is actually in the Annales Cambriae for 537, which mentions
“Gueith Camlann in qua Arthur et Medraut corruerunt.”
Meaning “The strife of Camlann, in which Arthur and Medraut fell.”
Doesn’t even say if they were fighting on different sides.
Yet in Geoffrey of Monmouth the familiar idea of Mordred develops (though here he is called Modredus). He is Arthur’s treacherous nephew, the son of Arthur’s sister Anna and King Lot (though Geoffrey is a bit inconsistent, in other places he claims Lot was married to Uther’s sister… which is given an interesting spin in the Scotorum Historia where Modredus is the legitimate heir). I wrote another post on why he is Arthur’s nephew and how this relates to contemporary events and the themes of the Historia Regum Britanniae (https://cynicalclassicist.wordpress.com/2018/01/11/thoughts-on-historia-regum-britanniae-and-the-anarchy/). But Mordred, or in this version Modredus, is left as regent while Arthur is away fighting the Romans (I’ll be writing a dissertation on the Romans here). Long story cut short, due to Arthur killing the ruler of France Frollo (!) the Roman ruler Lucius declares war on him. Arthur goes overseas and while away Mordred usurps the throne, living adulterously with Guinevere. Arthur returns, Mordred calls on an army of Saxons, Scots, Picts and Irish to help him, but after some battles he and Arthur fight each other at Camblan. Mordred dies and Arthur “was carried off to the Isle of Avalon, so that his wounds might be attended to”, Geoffrey giving the date as 542.
More is added to Mordred as the mythos develops. His desire for Guinevere is there from the start, Geoffrey writing how he married her while usurping his uncle’s throne. In this version it could appear just a political action to help his claim. In Wace’s Roman De Brut when Arthur leaves Britain in Mordred’s hands the author mentions “He was in love with the queen, but this was not suspected. He kept it very quiet; and who would have believed he could love his uncle’s wife, especially the wife of such a lord, whose kin all held him in honour? Modret loved his uncle’s wife shamefully and was dishonorable.” Mordred’s actions are thus depicted as lust-motivated, giving a little more psychological profile to a standard usurper.
In Layamon’s Brut Mordred “was the dearest of men” to the Queen, and is treated as his partner in treason, Arthur even saying he will burn her when he returns.
Yet Mordred’s portrayal in regards to Guinevere starts shifting with the Vulgate Cycle’s La Mort le Roi Artu (The Death of King Arthur). In this Mordred’s usurpation is more developed than just a military coup while the King is away, Mordred using false letters of Arthur’s death to make sure he is made King. His desire for Guinevere takes on a more sinister light, as Guinevere is unwilling to wed him. It is also in these versions that the incestuous motif of Mordred, already present with his desire for his aunt, goes to another level. As the Stanzaic Morte Arthur says:
“That false traitour, Sir Mordred,
The kinges soster son he was
And eek his own son, as I rede”.
Beginning with the Vulgate Cycle Mordred goes from the son of Arthur’s sister and King Lot to the son of Arthur’s half-sister Morgause and Arthur through an affair before Arthur knew she was his sister. He becoms a symbol of Arthur’s own sin, who will later destroy the Kingdom, Arthur’s misdeeds coming back to bite him.
For a quick aside, the May Day aspect Arthur is told a child born on May Day will destroy him so he puts all the May Day babies in a boat and sets it out to sea. All the babies drown save Mordred.
How does all this on Mordred lead us to a Middle-Earth villain, Maeglin, considered the wickedest Elf to have ever lived? For a start Maeglin occupies the traitor role in the story. It is traditional that great heroic forces are only brought down by an internal foe who enables the enemies of his people access to victory. Maeglin occupies this place. His role in The Silmarillion is similar to Mordred’s place in the Arthurian mythos and to Roland’s treacherous stepfather Ganelon in La Chanson de Roland. That aspect even appears in A Song of Ice and Fire, the heroism of Robb Stark being brought down at the Red Wedding by his treacherous vassals Roose Bolton and Walder Frey. Traitor narratives extend all through our canon of media, Doctor Who having the treacherous Guardian of the Solar System Mavic Chen ally with the Daleks. The danger of the Fifth Column, a term coined by Emilio Mola during the Spanish Civil War, is particularly looked down on. Hence in The Divine Comedy the lowest circle of Hell is for traitors.
Of course traitors have a habit of screwing themselves over… but more on that later.
He is early to the mythos, appearing in The History of Middle-Earth Volume 2, The Book of Lost Tales, part 2, in The Fall of Gondolin. This was the earliest of the traceable Middle-Earth tales Tolkien wrote on paper, influenced by his time in the First World War. He began writing it in 1917 on a sheet of army marching music. And its getting a release this year!
The basic story is of the hidden Elf city of Gondolin which is discovered and destroyed by the forces of evil.
Early on Maeglin, or in the 1917 version Meglin is established as villainous. We hear of the King’s daughter Idril marrying the human hero Tuor…
But with that joy comes darkness.
“Thereafter dwelt they in joy in that house upon the walls that looked out south over Tumladin, and this was good to the hearts of all in the city save Meglin alone”.
Maeglin bears a similar role within his court to Mordred. He is the sister-son to the King of Gondolin, Turgon. The bond between a man and his sister-son is considered one of the most sacred bonds in older cultures, especially if a man has no sons of his own. This occurs a lot in old literature, Arthur and his sister-son Gawain, Mordred’s brother, and in Middle-Earth Théoden and Éomer. Therefore the treachery of Maeglin and Mordred would be considered particularly vile to their cultures. You could even place Ben Kenobi/Kylo Ren in that category.
Like Mordred Maeglin’s conception is… strange. In the early version we hear of Maeglin “he himself was nephew to the king by his mother the king’s sister Isfin; and that tale of Isfin and Eol may not here be told.” A sinister element is added, a mystery to the birth of this Elf.
When his mother Aredhel was in the woods the Dark Elf Eöl saw her and using his magic entrapped her, leading her to his house and married her “a matter in which she was not wholly unwilling” according to the published Silmarillion. Interestingly enough this is traditional Elvish behavior if we’re going with older folklore, from texts such as Sir Orfeo. Eöl has remained outside the normal boundaries of Elvish society, living in the woods.
In other versions, however, it was by force. Even if it was consensual Eöl did not allow her to leave or go through traditional Elvish marriage practices. As a result Maeglin’s very existence is the result of something sinister, his mother basically being kept prisoner by her husband.
We go on to Maeglin’s birth. “And Aredhel bore to Eol a son in the shadows of Nan Elmoth, and in her heart she gave him a name in the forbidden tongue of the Noldor, Lomion, that signifies Child of the Twilight; but his father gave him no name until he was twelve years old. Then he called him Maeglin, which is Sharp Glance, for he perceived that the eyes of his son were more piercing than his own, and his thought could read the secrets of hearts beyond the mist of words.”
His father seems neglectful and his name already has connotations of evil. Putting Maeg at the front really does make them sound evil.
At the age of 12 Maeglin and his mother escaped and fled to Gondolin, pursued by Eöl. He tried to kill Maeglin with a poisoned javelin for refusing to return with him, but Aredhel leapt in front and was killed. For this Turgon had the Dark Elf thrown from the walls of Gondolin. “And Maeglin stood by and said nothing; but at the last Eöl cried out: ‘So you forsake your father and his kin, ill-gotten son! Here shall you fail of all your hopes, and here may you yet die the same death as I.'”
It is not the same as Mordred’s beginning. But it has similar connotations of unnaturalness. And similar to his father Maeglin engages in lustful behaviour that ends up bringing about his end.
This slightly applies to those around Maeglin in his following. His sign is “a sable mole” (subtle) and “Less fair was he than most of this goodly folk, swart and of none too kindly mood, so that he won small love, and whispers there were that he had Orc’s blood in his veins, but I know not how this could be true.” The ideas of Orc’s blood are removed later and even here the narrator doubts this. Yet Meglin is still being portrayed as something sinister, unlike the other Elves even from his birth. Though I think his birth is already sinister enough. Like Mordred he is outside the normal bounds of society, born from a union outside of normal boundaries.
Like Mordred Maeglin is presented as being motivated by lust. He conceives a desire for the Princess Idril, the daughter of his uncle. An incestuous motif creeps into his story concerning his desire, like Mordred lusts after his uncle’s wife Maeglin lusts after his uncle’s daughter.
In the earliest texts there seems to be a political motive.
“Now he had bid often with the king for the hand of Idril, yet Turgon finding her very loth had as often said nay, for him seemed Meglin’s suit was caused as much by the desire of standing in high power beside the royal throne as by love of that most fair maid.”
When Earendal is born to Tuor and Idril the political aspect is again implied. “The envy
of Meglin was deep at his birth, but the joy of Turgon and all the people very great indeed.”
Much like Mordred the early Maeglin’s incestuous desire is framed as political, the incest angle is not played up.
However as the texts develop on Gondolin’s Fall the creepiness of Maeglin’s desire for his cousin is played up.
When Idril marries Tuor in the published text “Maeglin’s secret hatred grew ever greater, for he desired above all things to possess her, the only heir of the King of Gondolin.” There is still a political aspect but the lust has already been emphasized. In Chapter 16 of Maeglin we hear “For from his first days in Gondolin he had borne a grief, ever worsening, that robbed him of all joy: he loved the beauty of Idril and desired her, without hope. The Eldar wedded not with kin so near, nor ever before had any desired to do so.” With the incestuous aspect Maeglin is established as being outside the normal conventions of Elvish society.
“But as the years passed still Maeglin watched Idril, and waited, and his love turned to darkness in his heart. And he sought the more to have his will in other matters, shirking no toil or burden, if he might thereby have power.”
Maeglin’s lust is played up as the main factor in his villainy.
This links us back to Mordred, with his lust for Guinevere. We hear of him watching her and Lancelot in The Fall of Arthur:
“Mordred in secret mirthless watched them
betwixt hate and envy, hope and torment.
Thus was bred the evil, and the black shadow
o’er the courts of Arthur as a cloud growing
dimmed the daylight darkling slowly.”
The words on the darkness within Camelot are not unlike those describing the darkness within Gondolin.
It’s not just a political motive, it’s depicted in a predatory sense. The Arthurian poetry had already emphasized how wrong such a union would be. In Malory’s Le Morte D’Arthur the Bishop of Canterbury tells Mordred “Is not King Arthur your uncle, no farther but your mother’s brother, and on her himself King Arthur begat you upon his own sister, therefore how may you wed your father’s wife?” However in The Fall of Arthur Mordred is clearly framed in a sinister lustful sense. When Arthur has left Mordred behind…
“He heard nor heeded: his heart returned
to its long thraldom lust-tormented
to Guinever the golden with gleaming limbs”.
The text then goes on to describe
“His bed was barren; there black phantoms
of desire unsated and savage fury
in his brain had brooded till bleak morning.”
He then enters Guinevere’s bower and says she will share his crown with him. She reminds him of their relationship, calling him “dear nephew / to Arthur’s queen.'”
Mordred’s reaction…
“Then her eyes wavered,
and he set her beside him, seized her fiercely.
Grim words he spake – Guinever trembled…
…Thou at my side shall lie, slave or lady,
as thou wilt or wilt not, wife or captive.”
Mordred is a terrifying figure in this text, not just a usurper but a sexual predator. Though he doesn’t seem to be Arthur’s son in this version
I personally prefer playing up Guinevere’s resistance to Mordred. The original narrative has a sort of… blame the woman narrative, an idea that you can’t trust women to be left in power. Also with recent events, the #MeToo movement and so on, having Guinevere and Idril being harassed by an authority figure, especially as its someone they know, a relative, just makes the story more culturally relevant. Not unlike the reason Disney’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame has become more relevant. Seriously watch that film. And at some point watch Lindsay Ellis’ excellent video essay on the film. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIIWy3TZ1eI)
Could this image of the treacherous King’s nephew with incestuous lust have influenced the figure of Maeglin? Tolkien could certainly be influenced by his adaptations. It could be similar to another influence of Tolkien, The Tale of Kullervo, which influenced his tragic tale The Children of Hurin. Kullervo is a tragic figure who unknowingly lies with his sister, when she finds out she kills herself by jumping into a river, and later Kullervo slays himself with a sword that speaks and offers to take his life. The same details are present within The Children of Hurin, with Turin and his sister and sword. Tolkien before writing this wrote his own version, The Tale of Kullervo, which I personally think is a slight improvement on the original, ironing out some of the inconsistencies.
Idril’s reaction reminds me of Guinevere. In The Death of King Arthur Guinevere fears being left with Mordred and when he attempts to marry her takes refuge in the Tower of London. Similarly with Idril while the King cannot spot the evil nature of his nephew the object of the traitor’s desire knows and fears this. “And however that might be, Idril loved Maeglin not at all; and knowing his thought of her she loved him the less. For it seemed to her a thing strange and crooked in him, as indeed the Eldar ever since have deemed it: an evil fruit of the Kinslaying, whereby the shadow of the curse of Mandos fell upon the last hope of the Noldor.” While married to Tuor she prepares a secret passage out of Gondolin in case of Morgoth’s attack, hiding knowledge of it from even Maeglin. Linking to the Chanson genre, in the 1917 text she even has a dream of Maeglin throwing her son into a furnace which prompts the creation of the tunnel. Without her all of the people of Gondolin would have been lost.
Maeglin’s desire leads to his downfall, sure enough. While mining in the mountains he is captured by the forces of Morgoth, the First Dark Lord of Middle-Earth, basically Satan. In the earliest version Maeglin at once purchases his life by telling of Gondolin’s defenses and is told “Tuor and Earendel should Melko (Morgoth) burn, and Idril be given to Meglin’s arms”.
There is not such explicit language in the later version but the lust towards Idril is more primed as the motivator. Out of fear of torture he gives the exact location of Gondolin and information on its defenses, for which Morgoth “to Maeglin he promised the lordship of Gondolin as his vassal, and the possession of Idril Celebrindal, when the city should be taken; and indeed desire for Idril and hatred for Tuor led Maeglin the easier to his treachery, most infamous in all the histories of the Elder Days.”
By doing so, like Mordred, Maeglin is established as the greatest of traitors. Unlike Mordred though he is seen as the means by which the invading force tries to take power, while Mordred was hoping to rule himself. However Mordred is described as using Saxons as his forces, the force opposed to the Britons just as Morgoth’s forces are the enemies of the Elves.
The 1917 text describes him as being under a spell of Melko and very much acting out of terror of them. This is less apparent in the published version, where he is not shown as cowed by Morgoth, making him more villainous.
So finally the attack occurs when Eärendil is seven and the city is burnt down.
During the fall of Gondolin Maeglin tries to take Idril and murder Eärendil. In the first version Maeglin’s followers of the House of the Mole even fight on the side of the Orcs. But the eventual motif remains the same, Maeglin going after Idril. In the published Silmarillion his fate is quite brief. “Tuor sought to rescue Idril from the sack of the city, but Maeglin had laid hands on her, and on Eärendil; and Tuor fought with Maeglin on the walls, and cast him far out, and his body as it fell smote the rocky slopes of Amon Gwareth thrice ere it pitched into the flames below.”
In the original… “Now then Meglin had Idril by the hair and sought to drag her to the battlements out of cruelty of heart, that she might see the fall of Earendel to the flames; but he was cumbered by that child, and she fought, alone as she was, like a tigress for all her beauty and slenderness.” Tuor goes to rescue his family and “When Meglin saw this he would stab Earendel with a short knife he had; but that child bit his left hand, that his teeth sank in, and he staggered, and stabbed weakly, and the mail of the small coat turned the blade aside; and thereupon Tuor was upon him and his wrath was terrible to see. He seized Meglin by that hand that held the knife and broke the arm with the wrench, and then taking him by the middle leapt with him upon the walls, and flung him far out. Great was the fall of his body, and it smote Amon Gwareth three times ere it pitched in the midmost of the flames; and the name of Meglin has gone out in shame from among Eldar and Noldoli.”
There is a similar doom-laden feeling to the Battle of Camlann in the fall of Gondolin, as numerous prominent warriors are described being killed, Turgon dying when his tower collapses.
There’s even mutual killings, Ecthelion, Lord of the Fountain, kills Gothmog, Lord of Balrogs but dies as well. When Idril and Tuor escape with some of the people of Gondolin a Balrog attacks them but falls to its death with Glorfindel.
There is at least some optimism there in that from Eärendil Middle-Earth will be saved from Morgoth, as he brings the Valar from Valinor. Tolkien may have been going for the traditional ending of the Arthurian mythos where Constantine, son of Cador, succeeds Arthur. He does mention “the queen’s kinsman Cador the hasty” accompanying Arthur, so Cador is present. But who can say how it would have ended as Tolkien never finished it?
So it overall seems likely that Maeglin may have been the Middle-Earth answer to Mordred, the evil seed in the great court, the sister-son of the King he betrays, with incestuous desires. Mordred from The Fall of Arthur could have helped to inspire the eventual Maeglin, making their actions more motivated by lust for someone they couldn’t have rather than lust for power.
But draw your own conclusions.
Cynical Classicist 
Beautiful essay, Felix. Loved the Frollo comparisons and the Maegor/Maeglin play. You should write a successor post comparing Beren Erchamion and Luthien Tinuviel either with Dante Alighieri and Beatrice Portinari or with Will Parry and Lyra Belacqua-Silvertongue.
By the way, do you know a lot about Japanese mythology and lore?
LikeLike
Not a great deal to be honest. I think doing more comparisons I dont have the time for at the moment.
LikeLike