[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

I much prefer interpretation no. 2, and not just because it gives me less of a headache - I prefer it mainly because I just can't see the Valar hanging around for hundreds of years waiting and waiting, especially since the assault of Angband was already under way when the Eldar started the March, and that would undoubtedly be of terrible proportions - but still evidently not terrible enough to not do it while the Eldar were still in Middle-earth.

I prefer it myself, and for the same reason. But I don't feel confident saying it's definitely what Tolkien preferred.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

In regards to VI.(A) - what about that footnote about Sauron corrupting Men after the Captivity of Melkor?

Okay, I've had to take a step back and think about this. if the "Awakening of Men" (VI.A) and the "Arising and Fall of Men" (VI.B) are separate events, then both accounts can be true: men Awaken before the Finding of the Quendi, and are corrupted during the Captivity of Melkor.

VI.A's final timeline has:

• VY 1000: Quendi awake
• VY 1075: Men awake
• VY 1085: Quendi found

Rescaling to the Final Timeline, that puts the awakening of Men around VY 862/50. The "arising and fall" takes place after the Finding - "not very long (in Elvish terms)" - for which the VY 866/80 date works nicely. Men have been around for about 600 years by the time they "arise" (move out of their original lands?) and are corrupted by Sauron. Perhaps we should be picturing something like the Fall of Numenor - Numenor reached its greatest power right before its fall, and perhaps the original Men did too.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

By the way, what source did you use for the 20 solar years figure for the exile of the Noldor? And if it's unsourced and we're making stuff up, I'd lean more toward the figure in the Difficulties in Chronology (p. 71)

I think it's just the Annals of Aman, which kill the trees in 1495, and land Feanor in Beleriand in 1497.

You looked at 1.X, but I think 1.XVIII actually supersedes it. 1.XVIII claims "the March [back to Middle-earth] took a whole life-year of the survivors at whatever rate they were living, sc. to the young [but] "grown" it added 1 growth-year (3 loar); to the older and full-grown 1 life-year (144 loar)." The Timeline assumes that when Tolkien later said Elves aged as fast as Men he still meant "in their own terms", so this puts an upper limit of 3SY between the death of the Trees and Fingolfin reaching Middle-earth. If we keep the AAm ratio of 2:5 for Feanor and Fingolfin's journeys, then yes, Feanor takes something like a year, and with no making up of stuff.

hS