In Defense of Celebrimbor by AdmirableMonster

Celebrimbor is quite a beloved character in fandom these days.  The Lord of Eregion (according to the Appendix of the Lord of the Rings), who worked with Sauron in the Second Age to forge the Rings of Power and was later most unfortunately used as a banner by his erstwhile companion of the smithy.  Unsurprisingly, as with almost any character in Tolkien who does not figure in the main text of The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings, he has spawned numerous characterizations, some of which I personally enjoy more than others. Such is the life of a fan.

It is not my purpose in this essay to make any arguments about Celebrimbor’s characterization—all fanworks are equally valid and equally beautiful, and I cherish anyone writing about characters that I like.  Keep up the excellent work, friends!  But I am going to present an argument about Celebrimbor’s role to combat what I see as a very omnipresent assumption in the fandom that I do not think deserves to be omnipresent.

I will freely confess that it is entirely possible I am arguing against a strawman, or a perception of a particular fandom direction that only exists in my own head, but arguing against this line of reasoning has been quite helpful in solidifying some of my own understanding and takes on Celebrimbor, so please bear with me.  

Now that I’ve beaten around the bush for three paragraphs, here is the antithesis of my essay: Celebrimbor is a tragic hero who was duped into aiding Sauron in his conquest of Middle Earth and who redeemed himself through his constancy under torture, refusal to give Sauron information about the Three Rings and ultimate horrific death.  This line of reasoning perhaps arises from the fact that Sauron fails to garner an “in” with Gil-galad, Elrond, or Galadriel when he pops up as Annatar in the Second Age, but has “ better fortune with the Noldor of Eregion and especially with Celebrimbor, who desired in his heart to rival the skill and fame of Fëanor” (UT, pg 236).  The “Celebrimbor-was-duped” interpretation presumably relies on the relatively straightforward statement that “Celebrimbor was not corrupted in heart or faith, but had accepted Sauron as what he posed to be” (UT, pg 237).

The crucial point that I see in fandom circles (or maybe just in my own head) is the assumption that without Celebrimbor and the Gwaith-i-Mírdain, there would have been no One Ring, or at least that the Rings of Power would have ultimately been very different, perhaps less powerful.  After all, they worked with Sauron to forge them, and there is mention in the Silmarillion (Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age) that Sauron sought to corrupt the Elves because they were more powerful than Men.  With this assumption in hand, Celebrimbor’s work with Sauron is clearly a terrible mistake arising from his proud desire to live up to the fantastical workings of Fëanor (who may or may not be, according to which particular version we take, his grandfather).  He has “let the Devil in” as it were, and at the end, when he repents of this, he gives his life to make up for it.

In my opinion, this is a very Calvinist interpretation of the text.  It reminds me of a story my Scottish mother (who was brought up in that tradition) likes to tell, a joke about God.  In the joke, sinners in Hell cry out to the lord, begging for salvation, saying that they did not know what they did.  “Well,” says God, “ye ken tha noo.” (Well, you know now.)

This has always irked me, as while I would not consider Tolkien’s body of work to be unaffected by his own devout Catholicism, firstly, Catholicism and Calvinism are substantially different, and more importantly, this notion runs directly counter to what I consider to be one of the most important and overriding themes in all of Tolkien’s work: mercy.  If we consider Celebrimbor to have made a terrible mistake, even committed a grave sin, ought he not to be pitied?  Does he deserve death?

Maybe.  As Gandalf says, “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life.” (LOTR, pg 60).  All right, I don’t really think that most people view Celebrimbor’s torture and bannering as some sort of deserved punishment.  But I do think that even if we shift from “deserved punishment” to “redemption-via-torture” we’re still a lot closer to vengeance than to mercy.  Backing up a few paragraphs in Lord of the Rings, I’ve often seen people quote the earlier exchange between Frodo and Gandalf:

“What a pity that Bilbo did not stab the vile creature when he had the chance!”

“Pity? It was pity that stayed his hand…the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many.” (LOTR, pg 59)

Please note that that ellipse in the middle is doing a lot of heavy lifting.  Gandalf’s original statement isn’t about the effects of Bilbo’s pity on Middle Earth at all—it’s about the effect of his pity on him.  The actual full line is “Pity? It was pity that stayed his hand.  Pity, and Mercy: not to strike without need.  And he has been well rewarded, Frodo.  Be sure that he took so little hurt from the evil, and escaped in the end, because he began his ownership of the Ring so.  With Pity.” (LOTR, pg 59)

Pity and mercy (and love) are key elements in the body of Tolkien’s work.  They work all kinds of miracles: love can walk into the darkest place and come out unscathed, love sends hordes of eagles to the rescue—love is enduring and in my opinion pity and mercy and love stand at the heart of The Lord of the Rings and everything it stands for.

To me, this leads to a contradiction: Celebrimbor’s great error or sin or mistake, in this line of reasoning, is letting Sauron into his city and believing him¹.  But surely this is an act, if not of pity, at least of kindness and of trust? After all, he “was not corrupted in heart or faith.”  Furthermore, it is said of the Three that they “remained unsullied, for they were forged by Celebrimbor alone.” Celebrimbor is not corrupted, and the works of his hands remain unsullied.  How can that be, if he has committed a sin?  Celebrimbor is aligned here with Bilbo, who “took so little hurt from the evil” though Celebrimbor did not, admittedly, escape in the end…

But he helped Sauron forge the Rings of Power!  And the Rings of Power were (largely) evil.  Therefore this must be a sin, surely?  Or at least a mistake?

This is where my STEM background shows because I’ve cleverly done a proof by contradiction here.  If our assumptions lead us to a contradiction—perhaps it is the assumptions that are wrong.

At this point, I want to draw attention to another parallel, that Tolkien himself conveniently raises: the parallel between Celebrimbor and Fëanor.  Celebrimbor wants to “rival [Fëanor’s] skill and fame.”  And Fëanor, too, was working as a smith when the Dark Lord of his time (Melkor) rocked up and started doing in YT Valinor what Sauron does in Second Age Eregion.  Fëanor, however, wasn’t having any of it: “Melkor indeed declared afterwards that Fëanor had learned much art from him in secret, and had been instructed by him in the greatest of all his works ; but he lied in his lust and his envy, for none of the Eldalië ever hated Melkor more than Fëanor son of Finwë, who first named him Morgoth ; and snared though he was in the webs of Melkor’s malice against the Valar he held no converse with him and took no counsel from him.” (pg. 66, Silm)

Fëanor’s ill-fated Silmarils: they, too, are uncorrupted and unsullied, but due to Fëanor’s ill-considered Oath, they leave a trail of bloodshed and violence.  Meanwhile, Celebrimbor’s Three, despite being “subject to the One” do not: they are kept hidden and safe during the Second Age, and in the Third Age, they are used to create safe havens, including Rivendell, which is instrumental in Frodo’s salvation, the formation of the Fellowship, and the ultimate defeat of Sauron in Mordor.  Which seems like a pretty impressive feat for something conceived of sinfully.

One more note, in defense not only of Celebrimbor’s morals but of his deliberate application thereof.  Was he really duped?  As I said earlier, this interpretation presumably comes from the line that he “had accepted Sauron as what he posed to be.”  But Christopher Tolkien, in Unfinished Tales, quotes a letter of his father’s from September 1954, in which he [J.R.R] says: “At the beginning of the Second Age he [ Sauron ] was still beautiful to look at, or could still assume a beautiful visible shape — and was not indeed wholly evil, not unless all “reformers” who want to hurry up with “reconstruction” and “reorganization’ are wholly evil, even before pride and the lust to exert their will eat them up.” (UT, pg. 254, note 8)  So perhaps, in Celebrimbor’s accepting Sauron as what he posed to be, he was not being duped but rather seeing and believing in the part of Sauron that was not wholly evil. 

We assumed—and this assumption led to a contradiction—that Celebrimbor’s actions ultimately resulted in helping Sauron and therefore those actions must have been a sin of sorts—that he was corrupted by the Dark Lord.  But what if we assume something different?  What if we assume that Celebrimbor “corrupted” Sauron?

What if, without Celebrimbor’s help, Sauron would still have ended up forging the Rings of Power?  What then?  There would have been no Three, nothing “unsullied.”  No safe haven in Rivendell.  No ultimate defeat of the Dark Lord.  The works of Celebrimbor’s hands, unlike those of Fëanor’s, ultimately lead to the salvation of Middle Earth.  Now everything makes sense: Celebrimbor is not corrupted, he doesn’t sin — instead, like Bilbo, he is a source of pity and love. Unlike Bilbo, sadly, he does not survive his encounter with Sauron², but the Three do, and they are a crucial piece of defeating darkness and pain.  Celebrimbor’s pity, like Bilbo’s, rules the fate of many.

1. I will grant this is muddied a little by the version in UT, where in addition to just letting Sauron in and believing him, he does also rebel against Galadriel.

2. Unless you read my series about the Holly-folk, that is.

Sources Cited:

(Silm) Tolkien, J.R.R. (1977). Tolkien, Christopher (Ed.) The Silmarillion (2023 Hardback Edition). London: HarperCollinsPublishers Ltd.

(UT) Tolkien, J.R.R. (1980). Tolkien, Christopher (Ed.) Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-Earth (2023 Hardback Edition.) London: HarperCollinsPublishers Ltd.

(LOTR) Tolkien, J.R.R. (1954) The Lord of the Rings (2021 Illustrated Hardback Edition). London: HarperCollinsPublishers Ltd.

Leave a Comment