Some Elvish Dialogue

The Broken Sword, V.

"'...Imric, earl of Britain's elves...'" (p. 34)

- addresses the Erlking:

"'Were it not that men must never be sure their children are stolen, so that they would call their gods to avenge them, elves would make no changelings.'" (p. 35)

I am having trouble understanding this sentence. Imric means that, if men ever did know for sure that elves had replaced human children with changelings, then the men would call on their gods to avenge the loss of those children and, if that were to happen, then elves never would make changelings to exchange with human children. Elves make changelings only for this purpose and would not make them otherwise because of their:

"'...wild and evil nature...'" (ibid.)

Seeking illumination in the original text of the novel, we are even more confused because there we read:

"'Were it not that men must never be sore their children are stolen, so that they would call their gods to avenge it, elves would make no changelings at all.'"

-Poul Anderson, The Broken Sword (London, 1988), 5, p. 27.

I have very carefully reread this sentence in both editions in order to make sure that there are no copying errors on my part.

We learn some of what human beings can do that other intelligent species cannot:

use every metal;

touch holy water;

walk on holy ground;

speak the new god's name.

The Erlking points out that, if Skafloc turns to the new god, then the elves will lose him. In the original text, the Erlking had spoken not of Skafloc turning to the new god but of him turning Christian but presumably this part of the dialogue was changed because it involved the Erlking speaking the new god's name even though not as a noun but as the first syllable of an adjective.