![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#81 |
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Taking these in reverse order:
864 or 863 - I take the point that XVII.3(7) uses 2016, not 864/144, as the date of the Finding. That means Tolkien's error in XIII.1 was the reverse of what I thought it was, and I need to adjust the dates as Arvegil suggested. (Note: XVII.3(7) also dates the March to 2232, which is later and more precise than the dating in XIII.3.) I suspect this throws off the 3100 years from the arrival in Aman to the end of the Age; I'll have to run the calculations. Aging - XVIII is later than XVII.3(7), so I have to use 72 years as adulthood for named Elves. All this means is that in the beginning, the Quendi aged faster - which is suggested in multiple generational schemes. I have no problem with that, and it's part of why I didn't list every generation-start date in the first place. Celeborn - the simplest solution here is to leave Celeborn's birth-date in place, but to remove his father's name and reference the later source as to why. There's nothing in the late sources saying he was born in Aman, right? He could still be born on the March; we already saw that there was time for him to be a grandson of Elmo, and Olwe is older. (The rest of Elmo's descendents have no birth-years, so are out of scope anyway.) Celebrimbor - At the risk of being facetious, there's no reason he couldn't be a Teler of Alqualonde and Curufin's son. His birth is long before Feanor's exile, so he could have stayed with a Telerin mother; and PoME notes that Curufin's wife was of wholly different temperament to him. To go full synthesis on the tales, he could have sailed with Celeborn and Galadriel, reconciled with his father and uncles, lived in Nargothrond with them, rejected them, travelled to the Nirnaeth with Gwindor, and wound up retreating to Gondolin with Turgon. –but all that matters is that there's no source contradicting the claim that he was the son of Curufin. Beleriand - There is no natural divide in the GA timeline (unlike AAm, which splits very nicely into early history / late history blocks): it's all supposed to be early. So other than Elwe's awakening (and Luthien), it all has to be anchored on a single date. There is no obvious right answer; I'll need to work up a table of all the options, once I've got the rest of the numbers adjusted. Luthien - Given that Luthien's birthdate is fixed solely on the basis of "one third of Melkor's imprisonment", that will need to be maintained. There is no other basis for including her at all. The Fall of Utumno - Did Utumno fall at the beginning or end of the Great March? The only case for "beginning" is the VI.B claim that the Arising and Fall of Men happened during the Captivity, and that only indicates "beginning" if you take the relative dates of the Awakening/Finding/Fall, rather than the absolute date of 10 VY after the Finding. With several later sources stating or implying that the Fall of Men was solely at Melkor's hands, we can ignore that tenuous argument entirely, and go with the plain text that says Utumno fell after the March was over. I'll have to work the numbers on most of these points, but other than Beleriand I think this is a solid plan. hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#82 | |||||||||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
Also, take a look at this quote (pp. 141-2): Quote:
Which implies that there's something else other than Elves reaching adulthood which is pushing the parent/child age gap upwards. EDIT: Totally irrelevant rant incoming - why do you think Tolkien felt that he should change the '5 generations from OG Elves, c. FA 1080 March' to '24/25 generations from OG Elves, FA 2232 March'? 'Schemes 1 and 2' have: 1) c. 864 years from Awakening to Finding, plenty of time for Melkor to find and terrorize the Elves 2) the total number of Elves at Cuivienen at the onset of the March, c. 26-55,000, a very decent number indeed 3) the infinitely more reasonable (and prettier) 5 generations from OG Elves to Ambassadors (seriously, the later figure of 24/25th generation for the Ambassadors is as comical and ugly as the 72 years for Feanor crossing the ocean) Why can't he just leave well enough alone?? ![]() I'm not suggesting of course that you take up the earlier schemes, but I had to vent somewhere. ![]() Quote:
However, I think Tolkien's latest word (CT dates it to about a month before Tolkien died) on the subject was that he was a grandson of Olwe (via one of Olwe's sons I assume): Quote:
Problem here is of course that it makes Galadriel and Celeborn first cousins. Quote:
The latest we hear of Celebrimbor's descent is from 'Of Dwarves and Men' (c. 1969): Quote:
I don't think the gymnastics required to square this with his other accounts is worth it, even if possible. Concerning Celebrimbor (and Celeborn above) I think we should stick to what CT said: Quote:
Quote:
As I mentiond before, AAm has an interesting note attached to it (note to §81, p. 106): Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-06-2024 at 02:01 AM. |
|||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#83 | ||||||||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Reposting the Late Timeline for the new page.
Quote:
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
... yeah all right we'll leave him as Curufin's. Quote:
Quote:
![]() hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#84 | |||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
I mean, try constructing the 20-30 generations of Elves via '72 years as adulthood + 3 years of gestation', and see where you end up. (The timeline is either too long or it's too short, depending on how you apply the '72 years'). And regardless, you will inevitably end up with your own timeline, not that of Tolkien. In other words - you can either preserve the timeline or you can preserve the '72 years to adulthood' figure - but combining it is going to end up with a Frankenstein's monster of a timeline. Quote:
Quote:
Regardless, it's an explicit addition to the AAm, so I think it should be regarded as such, and adopted into your revised AAm timeline. In fact, from there, you can anchor the early dates of GA in YT 1133/1200, and the later dates in c. 5473/4 (rough date of the First Battle of Beleriand). The mess in the middle I leave to your capable hands. ![]() And yes, I'm aware of all the problems with this method - it's just that I don't think they are as problematic as they appear to be. Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-06-2024 at 05:28 AM. |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#85 | ||||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
~ Adopting the 2016 Finding has immediately messed up the Finwean dates something awful. Since the 5018 date for Galadriel and Aredhel is counting backwards from 888/1, it remains fixed, while Finrod's birth jumps back 153 SY. That messes up the "standard gap between children" - Finwe's remains 192 SY, Finarfin's is now 245 SY, and Fingolfin's children are spaced 383 and 736 SY. I think the best approach is to recalculate based on an approach I rejected before: using Feanor's AAm birth year (360 SY after Finwe reached Aman), and keeping Fingolfin's birthdate in AAm 1190 despite moving his parents' marriage back about 50 SY. That version of the timeline puts Finrod's birth in 4423, 595 SY before Galadriel - which means an even gap between the four children of Finarfin is 198 SY, and means I can keep the calculations pretty much as they are. As a bonus, this method on the new timeline means that "AAm 1362" falls in 5017 - only one year out from our "Galadriel at 20" date for Aredhel and Galadriel. I'm more than happy to take that as evidence! hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#86 | ||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
You might as well throw away the entirety of XIII.1 (the basis of the timeline), since it is predicated upon a completely different idea of Elvish ageing. Even if it doesn't seem obvious immediately, I guarantee that the XIII.1 would get completely wrecked if the later figure were applied. You can relatively easily get away with certain things, however, this ('Scheme 7') is too specific to do so. Maybe not, but Tolkien's '60/'70s are definitely calling out such a thing as..."unnatural". Quote:
I don't even know if Tolkien would've kept the whole 1/3 captivity of Melkor when he added this note to the AAm. Maybe, maybe not - but at least now you have a concrete figure in an 'AAm framework'. Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-06-2024 at 07:58 AM. |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#87 |
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Okay, timeline is stable again with the revised Finweans.
On aging: the only pre-Valinor reference to the 72 years is Celeborn, who is already a dubious date on so many levels; not least that we've had to discard the 3100 years already, so he should be born in Beleriand (or Aman) now regardless. Various texts mention the idea that the aging rate of the elves changed over their history. For example XVI says "All the elaborate calculations [about aging] are both cumbrous, and in early narrative (Awaking and Finding, March, etc) quite unworkable." Tolkien seems to have used and rejected this idea at various times, but since we need to reconcile XIII.1 and XVIII, it is the best tool around. The Eldar simply grew up slower after they reached Aman. (I think the only direct use of 72 years that affects the timeline is Miriel's death; everything else is around "mortal-equivalent" ages or just comparatives within the AAm.) So yeah, I'm happy with it as it is. Beleriand/the Grey Annals remains a mess. ![]() Blue highlighting is events pushed after Melkor's unchaining; orange is events pushed back before Elwe's awakening. Working from left to right:
In GA, Denethor arrives 479 SY before the unchaining of Melkor; none of these options even come close, even the ones that push Luthien's birth back to the March. I think the best single timeline is actually the Luthien one: it's non-compressed (unlike the Relative ones), and is the only one that gets at least the Orcs into Beleriand before Melkor is unchained. I don't see any way we can hybridise the Elwe timeline with any of the late-anchored ones: whatever you do, events are going to swap positions. Any of the compressed timelines would of course work, but I've avoided compressing related events in Aman; taking any of these would mean Menegroth only takes 300 SY to build rather than 500, for example, and I feel like Tolkien would have kept the 500. But I'm open to being convinced. What looks least-wrong? hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#88 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
And in regards to the GA - 300 SY vs 500 SY building Menegroth is completely trivial from the perspective of Elves, isn't it? The dates approaching the death of the Trees won't be pretty - but you dealt with that in the AAm, haven't you? And as the second anchor point you can take the 'First Battle of Beleriand' which occurred around the time that Feanor was getting to Middle-earth: and since that only took 1 solar year in your timeline (incl. Fingolfin and co. over Helcaraxe) - how does the timeline work in this context?
__________________
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#89 | |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
@Huinesoron - I was wondering if we could deduce when the Ents were awakened? Or even if Tolkien gives a specific time range.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#90 | ||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Can you give us an update, @Huinesoron
![]() Anyway, I've been musing over the 'Cirdan' text in the PoME - and, depending on how you interpret the following quote, it might suggest that at least some of Olwe's children were born in Middle-earth: Quote:
Now, given the fact that this was written in the last year or so of Tolkien's life (1972/3), the family tree of Elwe and Olwe might've changed somewhat. For example, we see in the NoME (3.XVI.Text 1, pp. 348-9), that in mid-60's (?) Tolkien at least considered Earwen to be a sister of Elwe and Olwe (and Nelwe), but that whole passage was struck through. Nonetheless, there are only few interpretations of the above passage that I can think of: 1) Elmo still existed as a character at this point - and he had more children (or grandchildren) than just Galadhon, or Celeborn as in the revised timeline, and some of them went to Aman: and it is these that are referred to as '...and his own nearest kin' 2) Earwen was reintroduced as a sister of Elwe and Olwe in Tolkien's final years, and she goes to Aman with Olwe - and she and her children (Finrod, Galadriel, etc.) are referred to as '...and his own nearest kin': possible, but given that Tolkien struck out the passage that refers to her as a sister of Elwe and Olwe years before + Tolkien going out of his way to make Indis the same generation as Finwe (otherwise, Earwen would be generation above Finarfin), I find it unlikely 3) Cirdan had siblings/nephews/nieces who went to Aman - maybe the most likely interpretation, however the way the passage is worded ('...find Olwe and his own nearest kin...'), I think it might allude to 4) Olwe already had children (either just the sons, or sons + Earwen - my money is on just the sons, since I have a feeling that Tolkien wanted Earwen to be of an age with Finarfin) Unfortunately, there's nothing concrete here, and I don't think you can draw a strong conclusion one way or another. However, I'd like to point out that Ingwe conceived children in Aman too. Oh yeah! Why I made this post in the first place - here's the relevant passage as to Cirdan's existence at Cuivienen: Quote:
First off, I think you have to revise the timeline again, due to "during their long tarrying on the shores of the 'Sea of Rhun'"... Second, while this quote alone doesn't necessarily say that Cirdan was alive during the Elves' existence at Cuivienen, the "in all this work" part makes me think that Cirdan was alive at least when the Elves reached the Sea of Rhun. Moreover, and I think this is the strongest evidence for him being born at Cuivienen, there's this: Quote:
Nōwē here refers to Cirdan's original name - and the only characters we find (other than Elenwe and Voronwe) which have the suffix -wë are Ingwë, Finwë, Elwë, Olwë, Nelwë (replacement for Elmo?) and Lenwë (+ Morwë and Nurwë, the abandoned OG leaders of the Avari). This, plus the above quote about boat-making, indicates to me Cirdan was most certainly born at Cuivienen.
__________________
Quote:
|
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#91 | |||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Before I make my point about Ents, it occurred to me that maybe you could add certain dates before the First Age (i.e. before VY 850/1) -
1) the creation of the Two Trees (VY 1/1) 2) the creation of the Dwarves by Aule, and other still applicable events (https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Year_of_the_Trees_1000 ) As to the Ents - Elves were clearly in contact with the Ents at some point; when exactly? Who knows. But it seems that they inspired Ents towards language. There's this quote from Letter 131: Quote:
Especially given these three quotes in conjunction: 1) Quote:
+ 2) Quote:
+ 3) Quote:
How do you make sense of this mess?
__________________
Quote:
|
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#92 | ||||||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
The Master wants updateses, yes he does. Nice Master, very kind to poor Huinessssoron.
Quote:
Quote:
In any event: I have decided to anchor on the birth of Luthien/3 Ages concept. I don't want to use a compressed GA, as I specifically didn't compress the "blocks" in AAm. Anchoring on either end gives problems. And Luthien's birth is the only date which has an internal logic to it (the rest are basically just 50 years apart each time). Obviously Tolkien would have just rewritten the entire thing - but if for some reason he hadn't, I think this is the most likely solution for him to have used. The Late Timeline is updated to match this conclusion; I've also removed Celeborn to his own little section at the bottom saying that he's not in there. ![]() Quote:
Quote:
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Well, obviously Fangorn is Tom Bombadil, as they are both Eldest... ![]() No, all right. If we want to accept both "Ents are the first rational creatures" and "Elves are eldest", then I think we have to say that the Ents consider themselves to have only become rational when they acquired language. Fangorn hints at this, when he says Some of us are still true Ents, and lively enough in our fashion, but many are growing sleepy, going tree-ish, as you might say. Tree-ish Ents are no longer "true Ents" - just as pre-speech Ents weren't. So the Ents were the first to be incarnated, and Ere iron was found or tree was hewn... it walked the forests long ago. But until Elves began it, of course, waking trees up and teaching them to speak..., they weren't (in their own view) truly Ents. As for when... the published Silm has Yavanna coming up with the idea for Ents right after Aule creates the Dwarves, but Manwe says they will only come to be after the Children awaken. If we want the Ents to walk before the Quendi awake, then they must have been created at that time. When that would be, I'm not going to try and guess. hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#93 | ||||||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
![]() Quote:
Or otherwise - you could simply keep the whole 144 x 15 (i.e. 2,160 years) idea...I don't know. Also! I thought that you would shave off 144 SY from the timeline - so that the timeline would end in c. 5,930 or so. Quote:
My point is that Celeborn's ambiguous origins are no different than Galadriel's - in other words, please just refrain to using what Tolkien's own published texts involve, regardless of utter insanity that followed and progressively intensified as Tolkien was heading towards his '80s. Quote:
Quote:
Sorry, I'm a dumbass. Quote:
Quote:
According to the latest version of the legendarium, Men awoke after the Dwarves - the whole "awaking after the Children of Iluvatar" makes zero sense unless the Ents awoke after Men. EDIT: sorry, I left an [/I] instead of [/QUOTE]
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-16-2024 at 03:35 PM. |
||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#94 | |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
BTW, @Huinesoron, what do you think about the idea of creating a post (recorded)-Fourth Age timeline?
There is, to my surprise, actually some meat to the basic skeleton that Tolkien mentioned in his '1960 of the 7th Age' comment - it most certainly wouldn't be a simple repetition of the dates of the SA and TA. Though I suppose that 'meat' might be significantly cut down if one were to exclude the 'Notion Club Papers'...
__________________
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#95 | ||||||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Using the AAm date definitely doesn't work, falling before even the Finding. The choice between 15 VY or 12 VY can be based on two things: 1. Per VI.B. "the rescue of the Quendi must be … before the assault upon Utumno". How far away do the Quendi need to be before the Valar will risk assaulting Melkor? Is "beyond the Greenwood" far enough? Equally, would they really wait more than 1 VY after the Quendi reached Beleriand to start the attack? 2. Tinuviel, Tinuviel. 12 VY puts her birth in 3409, as on the Timeline; 15 VY pushes it back to 2880, which is 223 SY before Elwe awakens. I think the combination of the direct statement from VI.B, and the calculations from Luthien, make 2833 the best date for the Chaining. If you wind up creating your own timeline, you can weight the evidence differently; all it affects is the Fall of Utumno and the Beleriand dates. Bonus calculation: per AAm, the war with Utumno lasted 11 "VY" (at 9.58 SY): a running battle 1090-92, the siege from 1092-1099, and the Chaining in 1100. If that timeline is maintained, then the war begins 105 SY before the Chaining. If the Chaining is 2401 (15 VY), then the war starts in 2296 while the Quendi are in Rhun; if the Chaining is in 2833, the war starts in 2728, one SY off from half a VY after "All the Eldar of the main host are in Beleriand". Quote:
Quote:
Celebrimbor the Sinda is hilarious, because it doesn't fit with anything else - Daeron has no wife and an infatuation with Luthien, so this Celebrimbor would have to be born in the Second Age, so can't be a descendent of Feanor or a resident of Gondolin. You already convinced me to drop that one. Quote:
Quote:
![]() Quote:
For one thing, the latest source on "how long ago was this" is NoME 1.VI (the "1960 of the 7th Age" text), which adds 3000 years to the usual "6000 years" version, contradicts the astronomy in LotR, and aligns best with stuff from the Lost Road era. And let's not even ask how long the Valar were in Arda before the creation of the Trees! (3500 AAm VY, but that's about a fifth of the time between the creation of the Trees and the Awakening of the Quendi. You'd probably want to either treat the pre-Trees stuff as 144SY years, making it 504 000 SY, or keep the ratio of 3500:1000 for Beginning-Trees:Trees-Awakening, which makes it about 428 000 SY.) hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#96 | |
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
The Unified Tolkien Timeline runs from the entry of the Valar into Arda, through to the discovery of the Notion Club Papers. It's not complete - I've skipped the bulk of the Grey Annals and Tale of Years (2nd-4th ages), and the Lost Road material from the 7th Age is missing - but it gets the outlines in place. I've used the current Late Timeline in its entirety, and drawn on the Ages discussion. As we're using latest sources, the question of how long ago this all was is simple: Bel. 310 is 16 000 years before 1960 CE. I've used the 2700-year Fourth Age from the Ages thread, and put the end of the Fifth Age at the end of the 4.2-kiloyear event; the dates pretty much line up, though it looks like our own Age must be coming to an end... hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#97 | ||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
As to Celebrimbor, descendant of Daeron, I have no comments other than one - maybe you shouldn't treat that which Tolkien wrote last as scripture. (Not saying you do - but anyway...) Quote:
All else is fanfiction in the worst way possible. Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#98 | ||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
There are 3264 years from the arrival to the end of the Age. That's far enough off that I can't honestly say it matches the 3100 XVIII statement, especially since that quote says it was probably wrong.
Quote:
Quote:
Not sure if you missed it, but I did put together a bare-bones Unified Timeline, from the entry of the Valar into Arda to the discovery of the Notion Club Papers. hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#99 | |||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
First of, I have to apologize for my tone in the above post - I haven't slept for two days and for some reason decided to post here. Not that any of that is an excuse.
Quote:
There was a clear purpose behind them in the 'Flat World legendarium' - they were the original light source on Arda back then: however, since the Sun existed from the beginning in Tolkien's later framework, there is obviously no need for a light source other than the Sun, except in the sense of said light containing the 'light of Iluvatar' that originally was contained within the Sun. That is where the Two Trees come into focus - their role in the RW legendarium isn't that of a light source per se, but as a last vestige of that 'holy' light, which later on is in turn only preserved in the silmarils. Problem is, the Trees were never intended to be the original source of light illuminating the whole world, even in the earliest legendarium - the Lamps filled that purpose in the pre-RW legendarium. But then, Tolkien changed his mind and made the Sun into the original source of light instead (assuming the same role that the Lamps had previously), with the Trees being created much later to preserve the 'holy' light which the Sun originally had. In other words, from a story-telling perspective, the Sun replaced the Lamps in its primary role as the original main source of light on Arda (or Ambar in the RW version). Or to put it this way: 1) 'Flat World legendarium': Lamps > Trees > Sun and Moon/Silmarils 2) 'Round World legendarium' (concerning the carriers of the 'holy' light): Sun > Trees > Silmarils Quote:
In regards to your timeline, I missed it - I'll check it out.
__________________
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#100 | ||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Your mention of the Sun no longer having its "holy" light in the Round World conception makes me think of the BoLT "rekindling of the Magic Sun", in which the Sun was originally strongly magical but was defiled by Melko (who may or may not have killed its pilot). Obviously the idea that the Eldar could restore the power of the Sun by sailing Eressea over to Europe and fighting Germans didn't come back, but it seems like Tolkien returned to at least some of this. Do you know what he decided had reduced the "holiness" of the Sun in the Round World model? hS
__________________
Have you burned the ships that could bear you back again? ~Finrod: The Rock Opera |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#101 | ||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 337
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-23-2024 at 02:06 AM. |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |