![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
The Ruin of Beleriand and the Fall of Fingolfin
Here we go again. This is the first draft of the chapter. To garante that I can edit this I will split the chapter into its sub-chapters.
Our basis text is that of Quenta Silmarillion given in HoME volume 5; page 279-89. I have take up the §-numbers form that text for the easier identification of the changes form LQ. All additions and changes are makred with their source. The text is reduced to the parts we have to change. There are 4 groups of changes, one for each sub-chapter: RB-DB-xx for Ruin of Beleriand - Dagor Bargolach RB-DF-xx for Ruin of Beleriand - Death of Fingolfin RB-SE-xx for Ruin of Beleriand - Sige of Eithel Sirion RB-SM-xx for Ruin of Beleriand - Swarthy Men Beside that we have of course the general changes, but they are collected in a thread of their own. Some conventions of my writing: Normal Text is from the basic text that is mentioned above (when I change the basic-Text it will be mentioned) Bold Text = source information, comments and remarks {example} = text that should be deleted [example] = normalised text, normaly only used for general changes <source example> = additions with source information example = text inserted for grammatical or metrical reason /example/ = outline expansion Normally if an inserted text includes the beginning of a new § these is indicated by a missing “>” at the end of the § and a missing “<” at the beginning of the next. Quote:
Last edited by Findegil; 11-24-2010 at 09:55 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Part two of the text:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Part three of the text:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Part four of the text:
Quote:
Please feel free to disagree with me! Respectfully Findegil |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
Ok, I was reading your draft. The structure with mine is different because I follow the sequence of Sil77 but in the narrative sense tells the same. I don't think it matters.
Two things, in a first reading, leaving apart the parentage of Orodreth (in my text is the brother of Finrod) I think that is better to place the fled of his wife and sons (including Ereinion, not named Gil-galad yet), with him to Nargothrond when Sauron attacks Minas Tirith. And why you change the placing of the sentence about Celegorm and Curufin in Nargothrond? Greetings |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
About the flight of Gil-galad with his mother: I think the main diffrence between your version and what I propose here, is that Gil-galad and his mother never came to Nargothrond in my version. They are send to the Havens, when things in the north become dangerous. Thus I avoid having Gil-galad involved in the Fall of Nargothrond, which would mean naming a way of escape for him. It is debateable when Gil-galad recived this name.
About Celegrom and Curufin: My understanding is that the brothers got to Nargothrond only after they had rescued Orodreth retreat from Tolsirion. Therefore I told at first only that they retreated to the West from Aglon. Respectfully Findegil Last edited by Findegil; 05-20-2009 at 08:22 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | ||
Newly Deceased
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 10
![]() |
[QUOTE=Findegil;597184]Part three of the text:
Quote:
2. "pursuing them by..." sounds ungrammatical to me 3. Should be Anfauglith Maybe: Quote:
Last edited by Ekimeniso; 01-10-2011 at 02:07 PM. Reason: Inserted "Maybe:" |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
RB-SE-04:
I agree to your suggestion how to deal with the redundancy. But I am not sure that we could not still use 'Fauglith'. The full name was Dor-na-Fauglith 'Land of the Gasping Dust'. Anfauglith would then be 'The Gasping Dust' and Fauglith simply 'Gasping Dust'. Respectfuly Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Newly Deceased
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 10
![]() |
Quote:
But something different: how are the changes of the course of events in the Shibboleth generally treated? In this case Fingon's kingship of the Noldor... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
I propose this, (the phrasing is retranslated from spanish, I'm sorry)
§159 ... Thus the folk of Haleth dwelt yet for many years in watchful peace in the forest of Brethil; and behind their guard the kingdom of Nargothrond had respite and mustered anew its strength. But fearing now that all strong places were doomed to fall at last before the might of Morgoth, {he sent away his wife{ Meril}}[Orodreth's wife left the people of Nargothrond and went] to her own folk in Eglarest, and with her went their son, yet an elvenchild, Ereinion.> |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Gondowe: So if I understand correctly, you propose that Orodreth's wife and Gil-Galad first come with Orodreth to Nargothrond and then at some later (but presumably not much later) point are sent away to Eglarest. Is that right?
I don't see any compelling evidence in either direction (placing Gil-Galad's flight before or after the fall of Minas Tirith). But a case can perhaps be made that, despite the alteration of Gil-Galad's parentage, we should still use the date of 456 given in GA. In GA Minas Tirith is taken in 455, so this would seem to favour Gondowe's version. Does that make any sense? I'm not entirely sure about it myself. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
Quote:
Yes Aiwendil, that's right, and I think the 456 date could be a good date. Greetings |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | ||
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
I have looked deeper into the question how to introduce Gil-galads departure into our texts. What is to be analysed is mostly in note on the Later Quenta Silmarillion in HoME 11. I give this note in full as fare as it is concerned with Gil-galad:
Quote:
In the third note the reason for the wife of Fealgund is very specifically his death in Tol-in-Gaurhoth. Thus it is not useable since we have to switch to Orodreth wife. But I wonder now if the second note, placed in the story of Beren and Luthien before Felagund leaves Nargothrond is not reffering to Gil-galad as Orodreth’s son? Christopher Tolkien thinks it reffers to Felagunds wife and son. But would not Felagund be much better equiped to order his own wife - obviously the queen of Nargothrond - then Orodreth, the steward? May be some one with a better take at english gramatic can tell me if the note must reffer to Felagunds son and wife or if it can not as well reffer to Orodreth family. If it can then I think we should use that second note an incooperate it into our Beren and Luthien poem, like this: Quote:
Respectfully Findegil |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 | ||||
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I also noticed that some of your verses don't have eight syllables after the style of Ann-thennath. Did you not follow that form? Last edited by Aran e-Godhellim; 05-29-2009 at 09:30 AM. |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | ||
Newly Deceased
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 10
![]() |
One quick question:
Quote:
Quote:
Greetings |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |||
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
RB-DF-04b:
Quote:
RB-DF-07.5: I don't think we had the suggestion to put in the lamentation in Gondolin at the point Fingolfin is buried before. I like your suggestion to add it even before the building of the cairn. But I would leave Turgons action as in subordinate clause and hold then 'him'. Also we might chnage Gondolin in one place, becuase other wise we get a bad style by our emendation. Either we use 'Tumladen' in the first place or 'in the City' in the second. I prefer 'Tumladen' in the first, because 'in the city' would only move the problem to a double 'city': Quote:
I did not consider to take up the full sentence when I suggested the addition (don't ask me why), but I see that it will work better with that clause: Quote:
Findegil |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |
Newly Deceased
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 10
![]() |
I agree on all points
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |