Creating a new Silmarillion -- some ideas...

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 1</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
When I first suggested that people try to work together to define a working canon for The Silmarillion, I foresaw there would be much disagreement. The methodology employed thus far has been, I think, too loose (but given that this is a new process, some evolution from a freeform discussion toward a more formal model of presentation must be expected).

Ultimately, all who participate in the project must become, for lack of a better phrase, &quot;Silmarillion scholars&quot;. That is, you must define a fundamental set of ground rules by which your arguments, suggestions, and objections can be gauged according to the purpose of the project.

What constitutes a textual canon? It's the group of texts which are generally regarded to be authoritative. This project assumes that the published Silmarillion is not canonical. That is essentially axiomatic, an incontrovertible condition.

I think if you want to define a canon, you will need to follow a process very similar to that taken by J.R.R. Tolkien himself: write an outline that you all can agree upon.

&quot;Quenta Silmarillion&quot; is only a part of The Silmarillion. &quot;Ainulindale&quot; and &quot;Valaquenta&quot; are two separate parts. Each may, in itself, be adequate enough that you don't need to examine their structures or compatibility with other texts. Instead, they may serve as the foundation for establishing compatibility.

I think one of the problems you're all struggling with is that you are convinced Tolkien would have rewritten the entire cycle. That is not necessarily a given. He questioned the validity of the proposal late in his life. Why would Elves, who were long-lived and possessed of great memories, and whose &quot;science&quot; had been largely given to them by the beings who built the universe, believe &quot;nonsense&quot; such as the creation of the Sun and Moon from two leaves of dead trees?

Would these Elves have conveyed such a fantastic history to Men? Tolkien decided they would not have. So is The Silmarillion really an Elvish history? The answer is NO, it its NOT an Elvish history, although it purports to be. And there Tolkien stumbled. He couldn't reconcile his great love of the myths which had been the heart and soul of his mythology with the desire to create a plausible history for the Elves.

You have to choose between two evils: do you want to define a &quot;Silmarillion&quot; canon or do you want to construct the plausible history for the Elves? If the latter, then the project is really not about defining a &quot;Silmarillion&quot; canon. The two goals are nowhere near related. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

The Silmarillion is the legendary cycle of stories which tell the history of the Elves who built a civilization capable of producing three exquisite jewels over which a long and terrible war was fought. That IS the purpose of the cycle. Its purpose is not to retell cosmic history. Its purpose is not to vindicate science. It began as a mythology and any attempt to redefine it as a scientifically plausible work of fiction would be comparable to taking the Greek or Norse myths and rewriting them to conform to the axioms of science.

If you want a &quot;Silmarillion&quot; canon, you must abandon these notions of trying to bring the origin stories into line with scientific thought. Tolkien would have destroyed the Silmarillion in his effort to make it more plausible. The story itself is a work of art, a piece of genius which illuminates the human experience. It doesn't need to be scientifically validated.

Return to the root and grow the plant anew. Tolkien started out with the intention of creating a mythology. He ended up with the half-expressed intention of replacing the mythology with science fiction. Would that have been any better than the original idea? Would it have moved the characters any closer to realism? Could Beren have become any more heroic, or Turin any more tragic, if the sun and moon under which they walked and loved and feared were billions of years older rather than hundreds?

A true canon for The Silmarillion must tell essentially the same story as the published one. That means the Sun and Moon are created by the grieving Valar only as Men are about to awaken. That means the Elves are taught to believe in a universe which gave light to a flat world sufficient enough to sustain the sleeping plants, and that the plants could still sustain the civilizations and creatures where the Elves and Dwarves lived.

Since J.R.R. Tolkien was unable to reconcile his vision with natural history, you will also be unable to do so.

I think this project should be more concerned over whether Balrogs should have wings, and whether Andreth should be a part of the cycle. Should Turin return with the Host of Valinor to help defeat Melkor?

These are far more relevant questions, and perhaps easier ones to answer, than the pursuit of a scientifically plausible &quot;Silmarillion&quot; canon.

http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pile o' Bones
Posts: 24</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Creating a new Silmarillion -- some ideas...

Michael; I find the argument interestin, and am currently over in Duneadains camp discussin this very thing. The question ya pose is: can they be Mythology and Science fact both. Answer is yuppers. Can it be done with Tolkien's own work as he probably would have and can it be done without re-writing Tolkien? Yuppers. Your points of Balrog wings and such are personal opinions inserted into a proposed canon. I think the object here is to use what's available from Tolkien without creating new or defining further that which is hotly debated simply as a convenient 'clarification'. Andreth is a part of the saga, yup. Turin at the end? Workin backwards from last material to beginnin, if he isn't eliminated from direct statements to to contrary, then I really don't see why he should be excluded from 'Mannish' lore or legend. If anything this solidifies the Mythology inside a Mythology that Tolkien seems to have arrived at as a solution for problem areas. The tale of Turin is defined by Tolkien as a Mannish tale not an Elvish one, and is suggested by him as a piece for the ATANATARION.

Does this make things of this nature Mythology or science fact, or can they exist side by side as Tolkien seems to have been attempting to accomplish at the end? They can, as far as I see. As I mentioned in another thread somewhere, I'd personally like to see all the references incorporated. Does that make it right to do so. No. Should it be done so? No. Tolkien was willing to drop the trees because he couldn't resolve the situation. Shame he didn't see the solution I saw (opinion). I 'believe' even the lamps could be salvaged without textual problems. Would it affect the story? Depends on what material survives the cuts. Then a decision would be made, not presaged cause it's a cool idea and there was alot written on it.

So from this; if Tolkien was willing to drop and change events (done frequently) should this project do otherwise? I'm not advocating actual words bein written which would infringe copyright, but a discussion on elements that can be resolved. It's up to those who wish, to create the words on screen (for personal use).

In the end; the Silmarillion is what one sees it to be, since in essence it is malleable to all, with the additional material Christopher has given. This is much the same for LOTR if that were to be done as an example. People read into the text what they envision. There is no singular absolute rendering of events in the minds of all people. When you picture the Ford of Rivendell, do you see what others have seen or do you see it in your mind's eye based on a place you've seen or one you've imagined? Would you alter a word of the text if it didn't EXACTLY conform to your personal vision? Maybe you picture the cloaks of the nazgul appearing on the banks with details not mentioned. Would it be correct to add these new words? With the additional material from the HISTORY would you add the words Gandalf speaks to Frodo (as he awakes from Elrond's healing) concerning the fate of the Nine Rings simply because it's a clarification (which may or may not have been abandoned)? Using LOTR as an example shows how this should be accomplished.

I mentioned earlier (in a thread somewhere), should (in this aped example) Trotter the hobbit, or Odo the hobbit, or the many rings of power or the elf-wraiths be retained simply because they were written, when later text shows they were abandoned and would conflict with existing text? No. they are eliminated, despite the fact that they are interesting. Would it be correct to attempt to eliminate other text relating to these points so they could be inserted? I think the answer speaks for itself. NO. This project (if undertaken) must keep these points in mind. Not every single detail is important. Now we have in the SILMARILLION a different problem. These divergent points are present and must be deciphered, not integrated.

Would this classify as 'canon'? I think so, as far as is possible anyway with what is available. And in this an empathy with Christopher may be seen quite clearly.

Perhaps the definition of working canon needs clarification.

</p>

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 2</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Creating a new Silmarillion -- some ideas...

You've missed my point completely (and I am not inserting personal opinions into the canon, I am giving examples of things which can or should be done).

You cannot mix science and Tolkien's mythology together successfully. Tolkien devised the mythology originally to be a mythology. Mythologies are not based on science.

There is no deciphering involved in defining a canon for The Silmarillion. A canon can only be devised from existing texts, not from unwritten texts and outlines of ideas which were never given full form.

http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>

[Mithadan]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 65</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
New Silmarillion

Michael and Saulotus - Despite the fact that you appear to disagree with one another, I agree with you both to a degree.

Barring the discovery of a lost and unpublished text, I think that JRRT's desire to rework the fundamental cosmology of the Trees and the Sun and Moon cannot be accomplished and should not be attempted in this format. JRRT's proposed change is too fundamental and impacts on too many other tales and themes for us to attempt to incorporate it into a &quot;canon&quot; as anything other than a footnote. In another thread, I commented that the &quot;round earth&quot; theory impacts upon the tales regarding: (1) the pillars; (2) Varda's creation of the stars; (3) the coming of the elves; (4)the creation of the Trees; (5) the destruction of the trees; (6) the geography of Ea; (7) the coming of men; (<img src=cool.gif ALT="8)"> the star of Earendil; (9) Numenor and its Downfall; and (10)the Straight Road. Are we entitled to meddle to this extent in JRRT's work without more guidance from the author and still call this a &quot;canon&quot;? In my opinion, no. We would transgress the line between creating a historical work and creating new fiction. A great tale might be a conversation between elves in Eressea in which they laugh about man's cosmological beliefs and set the record straight but this would be fan fiction, not canon. Hmmmm, I might take that one on myself. Actually, I think I will.

Saulotus, I agree with you that our efforts (or lack thereof) suffer from a major problem. We have put the horse before the cart. We are trying to decide how to write and what to include in a &quot;canon&quot;, without deciding what the &quot;canon&quot; will be. I have said this many times before and venture to foretell that if this basic issue is not resolved, there may be no canon. If we don't decide what we are to be writing, we cannot write it. My opinion? Annotate the Silmarillion, chapter by chapter. This will allow for a degree of creativity while still allowing us to cite the sources of our material. We also need to determine who is on board, because this will determine the scope. Ten people working can do more than three.

</p>

[Mithadan]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 66</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Somehow its funny, Michael, that you are &quot;newly deceased&quot;.

</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pile o' Bones
Posts: 25</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Creating a new Silmarillion -- some ideas...

Posted by Michael Martinez
&gt;&gt;You cannot mix science and Tolkien's mythology together successfully. Tolkien devised the mythology originally to be a mythology. Mythologies are not based on science.&lt;&lt;

As an answer to this:

Originally posted to Dunedains camp discussion group.

Posted by Earendur
Is the aproxcimate age of Arda mention anywhere?

Answered by Eruve
Not really. You can calculate the length of the first three ages, more or less, since
you have to approximate the length of the First Age (500+ years). But before the
First Age even began (at the first rising of the moon, or was it the sun, I don't
remember now, but with a week's difference between the two, that doesn't
change much) there were thousands and thousands of years that are difficlut to
calculate, since Tolkien seems to have changed his mind on this matter, and it isn't
clear what conclusion he drew.

Answered by Grand Admiral Reese
I've seen guesstimates from between 11,000 years to several hundred thousand
years.

Answered by Eruve
The confusion comes in because before the ages of the Sun, time was measured in
Valian years. Morgoth's Ring tell us 5000 Valian Years passed before time began to
be measured in solar years. Now a Valian year is longer than a solar year, but how
much longer? At first we are told it was 9.582 times longer. Later on Tolkien seems
to have changed this to 144 times longer. It's not entirely clear which figure is
right. So this gives us either 47 910 years or 720 000 years before First Age began
(take your pick).

Answered by Aragorn II Elessar
Hmm.. Is not 47 000 year a verry short time to create Arda?
Would it not be more likely that they would have used more time?

Answered by Eruve
I think Arda was already created (at least partly) before the Valian years start.
The entry under the first year of the Annals of Aman states: &quot;After ages of labour
beyond knowledge or reckoning in the great halls of Ea the Valar descended into
Arda in the beginning of its being, and they began there their labour fore-ordained
for the shaping of its lands and its waters, even form the foundations to the
highest towers of the Air.&quot; It seems there was something already there, a sort of
raw material, that the Valar only had to shape and refine. Arda is, after all, a part
of Ea, so there was already a beginning that occurred in the previous ages during
the making of Ea.

As a matter of interest, here are some other dates: in VY 1500 Tulkas descends
into Arda.
VY 1900 the two lamps are set up and the Valar continue their labours.
VY 3400 The Feast of the Spring of Arda on Almaren. Melkor begins to delve
Utumno.
VY 3450 Melkor makes war on the Valar and overturns the lamps.
VY 3500 Valinor is completed. Yavanna sings up the Two Trees. From this point,
the count of years begins anew as the Years of the Trees. These last for 1500
years and are of the same length as the Valian Years.

Answered by Saulotus
Yuppers. Valian years weren't counted until the Valar like actually descended into
Arda. before that was the shaping, which as you quote took like a very long time.

This also has the novelty of dinosaurs havin the time to exist, since there are
possibilities there considerin the steed of the nazgul and the dragons and stuff, but
that's another discussion.

ONE of the reasons that Tolkien gives for the Valar allowing the elves to come to
Aman is that the Valian year is the same length as an elven one, and would not
interfere with their life-cycle, and why men were not allowed entry to Aman since
it would affect theirs. We know from LOTR that an Elven year is 144 years (based
upon the legend of the awakening of 144 elves). This is like explicit in Tolkien's
later work. The 9+ years was like way earlier.

So; the figure of 720,000 years prior to the first age when the Valar came to Arda
is more or less a bulls-eye. I like still have problems with the amount of time after
the destruction of the trees for Fingolfin to reach Beleriand, since the dates are
given in annal form. I've seen some people stating it was days, not years. But this
day thing is like so incorrect it ain't even funny (easily somethin like 1,000+ miles in
5 days on foot? yaright.). 720 years is way too long, and even if ya absolutely
insist on keepin the 9+ year rate despite evidence to the contrary, it's still like 45+
years, and like still too long.

Answered by Eruve
I have trouble with that bit, too. OTOH there may have been an ultimate
reconciliation somewhere, had Tolkien ever gotten around to revising everything.
He stated himself (in Morgoth's Ring) the the Sun and Moon bit was nonsense and
must be considered a myth within the legendarium, that the sun and moon as we
know them within our Solar System must have always existed and that, since the
Valar had a part in the making of it all they would have known this and have
taught it to the Elves who came to Aman. So maybe he would have eventually
worked out that the Valian Years (144 solar years) would only hold within the
domain of the Valar (under the Dome of Varda, say), and that once Feanor et al
took the oath, and the Doom of the Noldor was pronounced, and the Noldor left,
the were removed from the Valar's domain and in a way released into the world and
from that point the Noldor were living solar years. So it then took Fingolfin 4 years
to wander and eventually cross the Helcaraxe. I suppose that's one way to
reconcile it all. There could certainly be others. This is of, course, pure speculation
on my part.

Answered by Saulotus
Ok dude, I like see what ya are sayin here, but I think I see a few problems with it.

As far as I can tell, and have explained (somewhere?), the created sun and moon
from the trees ain't myth. The whole story of this creation is perfectly snuggled up
in bed holdin a teddy with the sun and moon created at the beginning, and like
really kinda CAN'T be otherwise. if ya want the full details, I'm thinkin I put it on
Barrow downs.

Don't know 'bout the 144 year thing only in Valinor dude. LOTR text kinda maintains
that elven years were 144. I think you're sayin that after they left Valinor they
were like returned to mortal years or sumpin. I think you may have sumpin there,
but elven years are still 144 years long.

I think the 4 year thing is just about right dude, and is like way better than 45+
and 720. This actually holds hands mostly with the explanation I referred to above
there I think. But I'll reduce it fer ya; there were 2 suns and 2 moons. The sun and
moon created from the trees were for Valinor only. There like already WAS a sun
and moon for middle-earth. Glad ya mentioned the Dome tho. Most people I think
feel that this is some type of structure, it ain't. The only problem area I've come
across is the flowers springin at Fingolfin's feet, but the closest I can come
textwise there is the Clouds of Melkor bein blown away (burned away?) and the
Sleep of Yavanna bein lifted with the light of the 'uncorrupted' sun of the trees
which returned to Valinor. IIRC there was sumpin about the sun crossin the sky
several times. But that seems to like hold with that also if it's destroyin clouds.
Then the sun goes bye-bye back to Valinor and the old 'corrupted' sun (as we
know it) is back. One of my points was that when Valinor goes bye-bye, where
does it get it's light? Where did it get it with the Dome in place before it went
bye-bye? Valinor is like removed from the physical world. ok, so where? it's still
shining like white light whenever anyone looks to the west who can see it. Where
the light comin from? Was the Treeish sun and moon myth? Nope, not as far as I
can tell.

Answered by Eruve
FYI, I'm a dudette .

I haven't read all of HOME so I know I'm missing some texts here and there. I was
basing my little theory solely on Morgoth's Ring, but what you say about there
being two suns and moons works for me... I was saying it was a myth because
there's a text in MR where JRRT is kind of thinking on paper and calls the whole sun
and moon story nonsense and then tries to work it in by saying it's a Numenorean
myth.

I understand about the Elven yen always being 144 solar years. I guess I wasn't
clear. I didn't mean the Elves themselves aged on a faster time scale, just the
events after the Doom of the Noldor took place during 4 solar years, instead of 4
Valian Years.

Answered by Saulotus
Oh. Ok, sorry.

Yeah; it does make a little more sense don't it? Havin two suns and moons. Opinion
of course.

Ok; NOW I see. Yeah, that makes sense. 4 'solar' years is better. I suppose the
annals could be written usin Valian tree time (144 years) and when it went
bye-bye, all the elves had to judge time with was the regular sun. I can buy into
that as sumpin that makes total sense.

I suppose the Numenorean myth thing could still be taken at face value also.
Possibly a forgettin of the fact that there were 2 suns and moons, and attributin
everything to the one they did know of. The last time a Numenorean talked with an
elf was like 350 years before the downfall, and that was in secret. The last true
open contact was like 600 years before the downfall, so I suppose things could get
a little confused fer them. I mean it's not like the old tales were openly taught or
learned. Could be that as far as they knew the sun and moon they knew WAS
created from the trees; but maybe that's just a misunderstandin from the tales of
the elves. it's not like they could SEE another sun and moon (if they were in
Valinor) so that would be the natural assumption I suppose.

Answered by Eruve
I think the tales would have been passed along by word of mouth and so things
could get easily confused. And eventually a small detail like the sun and moon in
Valinor wasn't the same sun and moon as the rest of the world could drop out of
the tellin, especially if it made things confusing. And no Numenorean had ever been
to Valinor to see things for himself...

Answered by Saulotus
This is like beginnin to sound like that mythology within a mythology thing Tolkien was lookin for ain't it?
Eruve; can you see where we like actually changed anything?
Did it make sense? REALLY make sense?

In answer to Mithadan and your ten points;
Those points are already answered by Tolkien.

</p>

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 3</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

If being &quot;newly deceased&quot; makes on dead on, I have no problem with that. What happens when you hit 1000 posts? Does a little hobbit coroner come out and sing, &quot;You're not only merely dead, you are most sincerely dead!&quot;?

[&quot;Wizard of Oz&quot; fans should see the connection.]

http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 4</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

The identification of the Elven yen (144 solar years) with the Valian Years of &quot;Annals of Aman&quot; is inappropriate. Tolkien clearly had 9.58 years in mind when he devised the &quot;Annals&quot;. The Elven yen, on the other hand, goes back to The Lord of the Rings itself, and has nothing to do with Elven biology. It is merely a convenient calendaric division, undoutbedly related in some fashion to Tolkien's fascination with the number 144.

Eventually he decided there were originally 144 Elves, and the Elven yen may be interpreted as a dedication to their memory. It's no more significant than a century is to Men. The Elves observed solar years while counting time in Yeni.

Fingolfin wandered through Araman during the Years of the Trees, and there would have been no reason to assume a conversion to solar years in time frame after Mandos pronounced the Doom of the[/i]&lt;/i&gt;&lt;!--EZCODE ITALIC END---

http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_profile&u=00000101>Michael Martinez</A> Edited by: 9/15/00 1:39:27 pm

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 26</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Michael, this mistakenly looks like a quote, but is worded as personal opinion.
I don't think Christopher would refer to his father as Tolkien.
9+ years was used, yup, but is like clearly shown in MYTHS TRANSFORMED; Aman and Mortal men to be abandoned and replaced with 144=1 Valian with associated reasonin along with reference to unpublished notes for confirmation and relevant (same section) published text concernin the lifespan of men.

</p>

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 5</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> 9+ years was used, yup, but is like clearly shown in MYTHS TRANSFORMED; Aman and Mortal men to be abandoned and replaced with 144=1 Valian with associated reasonin along with reference to unpublished notes for confirmation and relevant (same section) published text concernin the lifespan of men. <hr></blockquote>

Wrong. What is shown in &quot;Myths Transformed&quot; is that JRRT was going to revise the entire cosmology, not that he was going to slip 144 solar years into the place of the 9.58 solar years in the calculations for &quot;Annals of Aman&quot;.

&quot;Annals of Aman&quot; belongs to a different cosmology. In the second end note to the &quot;Aman&quot; essay Christopher Tolkien writes:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> It will be seen that, as a consequence of the transformation of the 'cosmogonic myth', a wholly new conception of the 'Valian Year' had entered. The elaborate computation of Time in the Annals of Aman (see pp. 49-51,59-60) was based on the 'cycle' of the Two Trees that had ceased to exist in relation to the diurnal movement of the Sun that had come into being -- there was a 'new reckoning'. But the 'Valian Year' is now, as it appears, a 'unit of perception' of the passage of Time of Arda, derived from the capacity of the Valar to perceive at such intervals the process of the ageing of Arda from its beginning to its end. See note 5.<hr></blockquote>

Note 5 reads:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> There is now a vast discrepancy between Valian Years and 'mortal years'; cf. also 'his whole life would last little more than one half-year' (p. 42<img src=cool.gif ALT="8)"> , 'In the seventh part of a year a Man could be born and become full-grown' (p. 429). In notes not given in this book, in which my father was calculating on this basis the time of the Awakening of Men, he expressly stated that 144 Sun years = 1 Valian Year (in this connection see Appendix D to The Lord of the Rings<img src=mad.gif ALT=">:"> 'It seems clear that the Eldar in Middle-earth...reckoned in long periods, and the Quenya word yen really means 144 of our years'). Placing the event 'after or about the time of the sack of Utumno, Valian Year 1100' (see pp. 75,80), a gigantic lapse of time could now be conceived between the 'arising' of Men and their first appearance in Beleriand.<hr></blockquote>

Note 4 asserts that &quot;presumably, the old structure of dates in the chronicle of Aman may be retained, although the meaning of those dates in terms of Middle-earth will be radically different.&quot; i.e., in the transformation to the new cosmogonic myth, Tolkien hoped to retain as much of the original Valian Year chronology as possible, but it is not possible to reverse-transform the 144 Solar Year = 1 Valian Year identification to &quot;Annals of Aman&quot;.





http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 27</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

&gt;&gt;Tolkien hoped to retain as much of the original Valian Year chronology as possible, but it is not possible to reverse-transform the 144 Solar Year = 1 Valian Year identification to &quot;Annals of Aman&quot;.&lt;&lt;

So dude, we've got 9+ solar years equal to 1 Valian year meanin a man born in Valinor like would mature in 2 Valian years and die in like 6 or so. OR we've got a man born in Valinor who would mature in like one seventh of a Valian year by the 144 year idea expressed explicitly and restated in text as a man's maturity age and who would die around a half year (3-4 sevenths). Text says a man couldn't accomplish the same in twelve times twelve years (144). We've got elves growing to maturity in 3,000 solar years or 313 Valian years by the 9+ idea, OR we've got them maturin at 20.8 Valian years by the 144 idea. We've got statements that the eldar aged at the same rate in Valinor as in Middle-earth. We've got the elves stated as growing to maturity in about the same time as mortal men do in Middle-earth (20 years or so; that 3,000 year thing). Add in the statement about a mortal's whole life only lastin less than a half year and I think the answer is fairly obvious and all from the same text which is accord with LOTR text.

So far; accordin to this text dude, I'm going with the flawless 144 year thing instead of the frightful, textual inconsistant, problematic, 9+ year thing you suggest.

The old dates retained are the Annals of Aman dates despite the new range of years, not the 9+ conversion, and why the vast change is stated.

</p>

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 6</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> So dude, we've got 9+ solar years equal to 1 Valian year meanin a man born in Valinor like would mature in 2 Valian years and die in like 6 or so.<hr></blockquote>

Wrong. You're misapplying the revised cosmology to the LOTR-era cosmology.

http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 28</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Nope, usin LOTR references just like the text agrees with.
Tolkien MADE them coequal.
I've already stated that there are no references in LOTR that would condradict this.
I'm not tryin to apply pre-LOTR text to the revised and corrected chronology as some are.

</p>

[Michael Martinez]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Newly Deceased
Posts: 7</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Nope, usin LOTR references just like the text agrees with.
Tolkien MADE them coequal.<hr></blockquote>

You are way off base, and clearly don't understand the material you're dealing with.

I won't be responding to you any further on this subject.

http://www.xenite.org/Xenite.Org: Science Fiction and Fantasy</a>
http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/Lord of the Rings Movie news</a>
http://www.xenite.org/xor/home.shtml1500+ Hercules/Xena Links</a>
</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 29</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

That's cool.

Just stayed within the text.

</p>

[Mithadan]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 67</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Hmmmmmmm. Go off line for a few hours and look what happens. Saulotus, what exactly was the point behind the long post with quotes from Dunadain's Camp? It somehow didn't seem to be in context with deciding on canon scope and format. Am I missing something?

BTW, I'm not prepared to debate the length of a Valian year. I recall reading what you and MM were referring to but don't recall the upshot of CT's analysis of JRRT's notes (not that CT is absolutely authoritative, if he were we wouldn't be talking about a canon).

</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 30</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

&gt;&gt;Saulotus, what exactly was the point behind the long post with quotes from Dunadain's Camp?&lt;&lt;

Dude, that was like related to the quote at the beginin about mythology and science not possible together.
This was Michael's contention and was like an answer to such claims from me.

The Valian thing wasn't involving Christopher except on the fringe. It was like directly related to the MYTHS TRANSFORMED section XI Aman, and Aman and mortal men texts and meanin.

Michael's argument is that Tolkien kept the 9+ year thing with some apparent time warp convolution thing goin on or sumpin. Mine was that the text is explicit otherwise and uses the 144 year thing which is WHY the text was created. It also extended to Michael's idea that the footnote was specifically referrin to the keeping of the 9+ year thing, while mine is that it was referrin to the retention of the annal dates of ANNALS OF AMAN. Then I went and examined the two positions side by side and judged what corresponded to text material.

Then Michael concluded I had no concept of what was written and went bye-bye.

Text is available in print. Read and decide for yourself what was meant.

</p>

[Mithadan]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 68</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

OK, I re-read it and get your point The 2 sun and moon thing is interesting. I'll have to chew on it for a while. I don't agree that it resolves my 10 points. First, the list is an enumeration of items that would have to be dealt with in order to adopt JRRT's round earth, etc. Stated otherwise, its also a list of reasons why we shouldn't go down that road in preparing a canon. Essentially, if we have to change everything to make our position fit it ain't &quot;canon&quot;. Your 2 sun/moon theory makes for interesting discussion and a lively thread, but we can't hold it out to the world as representing what JRRT intended because we would have to &quot;make it fit&quot; with what he had written to (near) completion. Second, what about Earendil's star? That still doesn't fit within the &quot;scientific&quot; conception.

</p>

[Mithadan]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 69</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Saulotus, aren't you ever off-line. I hope you're on the west coast. Fits with &quot;Dude&quot;. I followed the Valian year thing, just didn't know how you got there from here (here being the beginning of the thread). I've read Morgoth's Ring more than once but don't currently have a copy of it. I recall reading the 144 year thing, doing the math and shaking my head thinking that it just didn't fit with the annals, just as you and Eruve discussed (Eruve's a &quot;dudette&quot;?, didn't know that). Even at 9 years, the events at the end of the annals don't really work. Interesting how JRRT was into the number 144 though (Bilbo's B-day party, 144 guests, etc.)

</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 31</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

&gt;&gt;Saulotus, aren't you ever off-line.&lt;&lt;
I am alot actually dude. Slow days when I don't have to show, I can be found here and there. Right now I'm just workin on some listings for the weekend, but its gettin late now. WC is a yuppers. I'm new to the boards so still gettin used to them.

With the dudette Eruve discussion, the 5 year annals like worked out to make sense with everythin else in there. I'd referred to that discussion before on occasion here among others. Sortof the problem with postin to multiple boards I guess.

Which math are ya like talkin about there dude? The math of the last 5 years after the trees before the first age or the math in MT concernin the 144 or both?


</p>

[Mithadan]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 70</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

The time between the darkening of Valinor and the coming of the Noldor to Beleriand in particular, although other details in the annals don't seem to make sense even at 9 solar years per Valian year let alone 144 per.

</p>

[Saulotus]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Animated Skeleton
Posts: 32</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Yup. That's what the discussion discovered also. The best answer (and it even makes sense) seems to be like the one arrived at.

</p>

[Telchar]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 94</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

It's an interesting discussion that Dude S and Mr. MnM had about the length of a Valarian Year.
I have a question to Saulotos: If it took aprox. 20-21 times 144 = 3000 years of the sun for elves to mature doesn't it put up too many new problems?

For instance: How old were Legolas? I always thought him born it the Third Age. We know that the chrildren of Elrond were born early in the Third Age - Were they only just to achive maturity at the time of the War of the Ring?
What about Maeglin ... how many Valarian Years would he be at the sack of Gondolin? 1 or maybe 2 - It just doesn't fit!!!
Hi, Elrond and Elros, you're now 1/20th from maturity hmm... could you please take the most important choice in your life???

Could you explain where I'm going wrong? - for I must be misunderstanding something.

Cheers Telchar

</p>

[Orald]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shadow of Malice
Posts: 845</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

I think it takes about 50 years of the sun for elves to reach maturity. Doesn't sound like a long time, especially when you are in Valinor, but that is it. Someone else could give you the reference, I just remember it being discussed.

Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil be good to have been.</p>

[Tar Elenion]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wight
Posts: 101</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

Saulotus has withdrawn from this board.
'Laws and Customs of the Eldar' in Morgoth's Ring implies that Elves came to maturity at about 50 years of age and generally married about that time or soon thereafter. They would not come to 'full growth' until about 100 years.

Tar-Elenion--------------------- I will come with Fire and Sword, and put your cities to the Torch, your men to the Blade, your women and children in Chains</p>

[Orald]

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Shadow of Malice
Posts: 847</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: New Silmarillion

I know, Saulotus was such a breath of fresh air in heavy discussion, and yet he still knew his stuff.

Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil be good to have been.</p>

[Mhoram]

I agree with Mike. It's apples and oranges, tolkien's original conception and work was done with 9.58, he may have intended to rework the whole bit with 144 but never got done, so we have to stick to the 9.58 and the writting that goes along with it.

Saul was knowledgable, but if I had to listen to 'like' and 'dude' all the time, i'd kill someone.

[Mithadan]

Just reviewed this thread again. Saul's use of surfer-speak was part of his on-line persona and he eventually dropped it. I just noticed that Michael takes credit for the canon idea in his first post here. [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] The canon project and this forum had its genesis in some threads in which Lindil and I exchanged ideas, later joined by Saul and others. Lindil is the mover and shaker here.