Ents play a pretty important role in The Lord of the Rings. However, they existed as far back as the First Age.

I expected them to have a pretty big role in The Silmarillion when I started reading it. I imagined they'd already been an important aspect of it, and that Tolkien "borrowed" them to his new work. However, they barely appear in The Silmarillion, at least in its published form.

Did Tolkien come up with the notion of Ents as he was writing The Lord of the Rings, and only then went back and inserted them into The Silmarillion?

  • 15
    Why would an important role in one book necessarily imply an important role in another? Hobbits play an even more important role in LOTR, but they have even less appearances in the Silmarillion than the Ents.
    – Annatar
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 12:54
  • 8
    At some point in LOTR, Frodo asks an Elf about Hobbit origins and is told that the Elves mainly kept track of their own history. They were more interested in themselves than in other races. Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 12:57
  • 9
    @Annatar and indeed, Tolkien came up with Hobbits as he was writing The Hobbit, not while writing the Silmarillion
    – Wade
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 13:12
  • 5
    @Wade Tolkien was "writing the Silmarillion" for his entire life. He could have inserted some Hobbits later on, too. It's a valid question to ask when he came up with what, I just wanted to point out that one should not expect something to be important in the Silmarillion just because it was important in the other works (and vice versa, too).
    – Annatar
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 13:51
  • 4
    @Wade: But don't we see Dwarves and Men because they interacted with Elves? Going by memory, it seems as though we only see things relevant to those interactions. For a purely human parallel, mainstream history has a lot about the Romans, but mentions the Persians only when they're at war with Rome, and about all that's ever mentioned of India is the "Periplus of the Erythraean Sea" and a couple of maps.
    – jamesqf
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 22:18

3 Answers 3


Tolkien did indeed create the Ents for The Lord of the Rings, only inserting them into The Silmarillion as he revised it later. From a relatively early point (probably following the hobbits' encounter to Old Man Willow, who was an older character from Tolkien's poems about Tom Bombadil), he had decided to include a more elaborate tree-related scenario later in the story, although it still took some time for him to finalize the nature of the Ents.

He discussed his creative process in a letter written in 1955 (letter 163, to the poet W. H. Auden). The letter actually comes from before the printed edition of The Return of the King appeared, although well after it had been rendered in final form.

Take the Ents, for instance. I did not consciously invent them at all. The chapter called 'Treebeard', from Treebeard's first remark on p. 66, was written off more or less as it stands, with an effect on my self (except for labour pains) almost like reading some one else's work. And I like Ents now because they do not seem to have anything to do with me. I daresay something had been going on in the 'unconscious' for some time, and that accounts for my feeling throughout, especially when stuck, that I was not inventing but reporting (imperfectly) and had at times to wait till 'what really happened' came through. But looking back analytically I should say that Ents are composed of philology, literature, and life. They owe their name to the eald enta geweorc of Anglo-Saxon, and their connexion with stone. Their pan in the story is due, I think, to my bitter disappointment and disgust from schooldays with the shabby use made in Shakespeare of the coming of 'Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill': I longed to devise a setting in which the trees might really march to war. And into this has crept a mere piece of experience, the difference of the 'male' and 'female' attitude to wild things, the difference between unpossessive love and gardening.


It would have been a big task without anything else; but I have been a moderately conscientious administrator and teacher, and I changedp rofessorships in 1945 (scrapping all my old lectures). And of course during the War there was often no time for anything rational. I stuck for ages at the end of Book Three. Book Four was written as a serial and sent out to my son serving in Africa in 1944. The last two books were written between 1944 and 48. That of course does not mean that the main idea of the story was a war-product. That was arrived at in one of the earliest chapters still surviving (Book I, 2). It is really given, and present in germ, from the beginning, though I had no conscious notion of what the Necromancer stood for (except ever-recurrent evil) in The Hobbit, nor of his connexion with the Ring. But if you wanted to go on from the end of The Hobbit I think the ring would be your inevitable choice as the link. If then you wanted a large tale, the Ring would at once acquire a capital letter; and the Dark Lord would immediately appear. As he did, unasked, on the hearth at Bag End as soon as I came to that point. So the essential Quest started at once. But I met a lot of things on the way that astonished me. Tom Bombadil I knew already; but I had never been to Bree. Strider sitting in the corner at the inn was a shock, and I had no more idea who he was than had Frodo. The Mines of Moria had been a mere name; and of Lothlórien no word had reached my mortal ears till I came there. Far away I knew there were the Horse-lords on the confines of an ancient Kingdom of Men, but Fangorn Forest was an unforeseen adventure. I had never heard of the House of Eorl nor of the Stewards of Gondor. Most disquieting of all, Saruman had never been revealed to me, and I was as mystified as Frodo at Gandalf's failure to appear on September 22. I knew nothing of the Palantíri, though the moment the Orthanc-stone was cast from the window, I recognized it, and knew the meaning of the 'rhyme of lore' that had been running in my mind: seven stars and seven stones and one white tree. These rhymes and names will crop up; but they do not always explain themselves. I have yet to discover anything about the cats of Queen Berúthiel. But I did know more or less all about Gollum and his plan, and Sam, and I knew that the way was guarded by a Spider. And if that has anything to do with my being stung by a tarantula when a small child, people are welcome to the notion (supposing the improbable, that any one is interested). I can only say that I remember nothing about it, should not know it if I had not been told; and I do not dislike spiders particularly, and have no urge to kill them. I usually rescue those whom I find in the bath!

The next year (letter 180, unsent), he added:

So through being a philologist by nature and trade (yet one always primarily interested in the aesthetic rather than the functional aspects of language) I began with language, I found myself involved in inventing 'legends' of the same 'taste'. The early work was mostly done in camps and hospitals between 1915 and 1918 — when time allowed. But I think a lot of this kind of work goes on at other (to say lower, deeper, or higher introduces a false gradation) levels, when one is saying how-do-you-do, or even 'sleeping'. I have long ceased to invent (though even patronizing or sneering critics on the side praise my 'invention'): I wait till I seem to know what really happened. Or till it writes itself. Thus, though I knew for years that Frodo would run into a tree-adventure somewhere far down the Great River, I have no recollection of inventing Ents. I came at last to the point, and wrote the 'Treebeard' chapter without any recollection of any previous thought: just as it now is. And then I saw that, of course, it had not happened to Frodo at all.

  • 3
    There's some stuff in the early drafts where the Ents' precursors are evil.
    – Spencer
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 14:53
  • 2
    @Spencer If I remember correctly, Tolkien had planned very early on for Gandalf to be imprisoned and unavailable to help the hobbits at the beginning of their journey. In the final version he was a prisoner of Saruman but his first idea is that he was a prisoner of a giant called Treebeard.
    – Ginasius
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 15:37
  • 8
    And note of course that "Ent" is just an Old English word for "giant". Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 16:23
  • @DanielRoseman Which is consistent with Tolkien's rendering of Westron into English (or possibly in this case, Rohirric into Old English).
    – Spencer
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 19:54
  • This seems conclusive. Do you think there's anything (say in HoMe) regarding the process of editing them into Silm?
    – Wade
    Commented Sep 8, 2021 at 0:56

Tolkien wrote this in letter 180, in 1956:

[...] though I knew for years that Frodo would run into a tree-adventure somewhere far down the Great River, I have no recollection of inventing Ents. I came at last to the point, and wrote the 'Treebeard' chapter without any recollection of any previous thought: just as it now is. And then I saw that, of course, it had not happened to Frodo at all.

So he invented them as he was writing LoTR.

  • I think, early in Fellowship, that Merry (maybe Pippin) mentioned tales of walking trees near the Shire. Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 20:05
  • 3
    It's Sam, in a brief passage in "The Shadows of the Past".
    – chepner
    Commented Sep 7, 2021 at 20:18

I found further evidence for the fact Tolkien spontaneously came up with Ents as he was writing The Lord of the Rings, and only then edited them into the legends of the Elder Days.

There are or were no Ents in the older stories – because the Ents in fact only presented themselves to my sight, without premeditation or any previous conscious knowledge, when I came to Chapter IV of Book Three. But since Treebeard shows knowledge of the drowned land of Beleriand (west of the Mountains of Lune) in which the main action of the war against Morgoth took place, they will have to come in.

(From The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, letter no. 247 [to a reader]).

  • 1
    I accepted my own answer because Tolkien directly addressed the issue in question in this letter, and it gives a very concise (and in my opinion, slightly more conclusive) answer to the question.
    – Wade
    Commented Sep 9, 2021 at 11:37
  • This letter is actually quite significant as it is the entire basis by which Christopher justified his decision to add the two mentions of Ents into the published SIlmarillion.
    – ibid
    Commented Sep 10, 2021 at 5:22

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.