![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#121 | ||
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
VE-13.045 As you have already guested this change was based on our working assumption that there existed only 3 to 7 Balrogs (see the famous thread Bye Bye Balrogs). After the Fall of Gondolin were Gothmog and the Balrog of Glorfindel were killed, we have to assume that in the War of Wrath only 1 to 5 Balrogs fought. We know for sure that 1 fled and hid himself under the mountains of Moria. Leaving none to 4 Barlogs to utterly destroyed or as well to hid themselves. We tried to keep the possibilities open by saying that they were destroyed if they did not hid themself. But as at seems we did not make it correctly. Please advise if how we can better this passage, without specifying any numbers of Balrog slain or hid away.
Eredlindon: You are right that we have to introduce a change. But the hyphen is not correct. I think we should add to the general changes: {Eredlindon}[Ered Lindon] per Sil77. It also corosponds to the spelling in LotR (see e.g. Ered Nimrais). Introducing this I found also: {Eredwethion}[Ered Wethrin] per Sil77. Posted by ArcusCalion: Quote:
Posted by ArcusCalion: Quote:
Respecfully Findegil |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#122 | ||
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
Maybe
Quote:
This is the quote: Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#123 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
VE-13.045: Okay, your 'any' seems good.
VE-19: I agree to the chnage {Leithien}[Lindon]. About Morogth thrust through the Door of Night: I think we agree that we can not change the text. As you suggest I am very symphatic with a edited version of MT in Part 3. Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#124 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Well, I was going to read through all the new discussions before jumping in again, but I've changed my mind.
I think ArcusCalion's suggestions are almost all good; thanks for catching these things! The only one I would look at again is VE-13.045, where I think the "any" sounds too legalistic and out of place. I actually do think the "they" is grammatically all right - "save they fled" meaning "unless they fled". Is the version of this chapter in the private forum up to date? I have a file of notes on further changes and things I'd caught (from 2009!), which I don't think I ever posted for discussion, but I want to make sure they apply to the latest version of the text before I do so. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#125 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
The version in the members only forum is not up to date. Since the discussion here was not ended I did not update it so far. See your mail.
Repscetfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#126 | ||||||||||||||||||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
All right, below are my notes on the Earendil chapter. I think that a few of these points are things that ArcusCalion also noted, and have been addressed (Gwareth/Gwared, Leithien).
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#127 |
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
Aiwendil It's funny, I find myself pointing out less of these errors than I catch, because I usually just correct them in my own personal "clean" "readable version" of the texts. Your changes are all great though, especially the removal of the "thus they" from "thus they escaped their enchantments." That has never sat well with me, but I didnt question it, thinking it was already finalized.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#128 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Glad you agree with my suggestions!
VE-01: A possibility to fix the end of the alliterative fragment here: Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#129 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
VE-01: Agreed to all your changes.
Don't you know that the best mariners can not swim? A good swimmer would probably leave a ship in danger to early. So I don't think Voronwë would necessarily be a swimmer. VE-07: Corrected. VE-10: Agreed. VE-11: Agreed. VE-11.025: Agreed. 'Maybe it was due ...': I agree to remove 'thus they'. I will research the sources. but that might take some time. VE-11.02: Agreed. VE-11.04: Corrected. VE-13.02: Corrected. VE-15: Corrected. VE-19: Following ArcusCalion's idea we changed {Leitian}[Lindon]. VE-21: Agreed. Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#130 | ||||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Two important things:
1) It's not Amrod that dies in the Third Kinslaying - it's Amros (previously called Amras)! Tolkien switched the birth order of the two when he came up with the 'Feanor burning his youngest son' story. 2) Maglor is supposed to die by throwing himself into the sea in the later conceptions. Examples: Quote:
also Quote:
and lastly Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#131 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
1) I really don't think this is true. The point of the story is that Amrod, or Ambarato, is indeed Umbarato, the fated one. In his notes on the "Shibboleth", CT notes:
Quote:
2) I'm really hesitant about this, because it's very easy to see these as merely instances of careless phrasing. In the post-LotR revision to the Tale of Years, written around the same time as the Grey Annals (i.e. c. 1951), it is still only Maidros who perishes, implying the story of Maglor casting the Silmaril into the sea was still present. That at least means that the Lay of Leithien must be taking poetic license, and maybe indicates that Tolkien was phrasing things carelessly in the letter. And "Concerning 'The Hoard'" is of course not primarily concerned with this; I'm inclined to take these little asides in Tolkien's explanations of things to fans with a grain of salt. Those are my doubts, anyway. It must be said, however, that three such statements do begin to look like a pattern. I may also be letting my personal feeling get in the way here. The image of Maglor casting the Silmaril into the sea is one of the best and most striking moments in the Legendarium, and if Tolkien decided to eliminate it, I think he made his story far worse thereby. But of course that shouldn't have any bearing on this. I don't know. Perhaps conflicting stories are told about what happened to Maglor. After all, no one is likely to have been there to witness his and Maedhros's fates. I would be satisfied with being cagey about it, inserting a "Some have said" that Maglor perished in the sea, "but others tell that" he cast the Silmaril into the sea and wandered the shores lamenting. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#132 | |||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
1) I'm not sure I understand what you're saying - because we seem to agree, unless I'm missing something.
The reason I said that it was Amrod/Amarthan who dies at Losgar is because the 'Earendil' text in the private forum still has this line: Quote:
However, I would like to point out that the story of one (or two) of Feanor's sons being burned alive potentially goes back all the way to the 'Annals of Aman', as per this note: Quote:
2) Personally, I'm not particularly attached to either version of the story, even though I think that Maglor dying alongside Maedros, each with their own Silmaril, has some poetic quality at least. With that said, I think it's really a stretch to interpret these three quotes in any way other than that Maglor dies.
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-23-2023 at 02:59 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#133 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Oh, I was confused because you wrote:
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#134 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
![]() Ummmhh...I don't think we're getting through to each other. In my last comment (and I edited it recently) I should have said that Amrod/Amarthan dies at Losgar: and that it was a mistake to have him be at the Mouths of Sirion during the Third Kinslaying - that should be Amros there! Amrod is Sindarin for 'Ambarto'. Amarthan is Sindarin for 'Umbarto' ("the Fated"). Tl;dr It's clearly Amrod/Amarthan who dies at Losgar in YT 1497, and Amros (the older Ambarussa) dies at the Mouths of Sirion in FA 538. To quote the Shibboleth (p. 355): Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 08-23-2023 at 03:11 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#135 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Sorry, I must be tired today - for some reason even though you wrote "the Third Kinslaying" I thought you were saying Amrod did not die at Losgar. We're in agreement.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#136 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Hello again! Nice to read a new wave of activity!
I checked in my working copy and it has in line from 'Earendil' already teh correct reading of 'Amros'. So probabaly this has been observed before and corrected but without updating the text in privat forum. As I do not update that text un regular basis, this is quite likely. Respectfuly Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#137 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Is there any particular reason that this line from the 1930 Quenta was excluded:
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#138 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
As I don't remember any duscission about it, I think we simply overlooked it. We used insteed the rendering from QS77 (see VE-07.3). But I think we should change it to:
Quote:
Findegil |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#139 | ||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
If, however, we do keep that statement, I think we need to remove the previous sentence, and perhaps soften the statement with a "some say": Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#140 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
If we would include the Q30, note 3 stuff, I would rather use a little bit more of the QS77 text we used so fare instaed of introducing some editorial inserts:
Quote:
Findegil |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#141 | |||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
So, at least in 1954, Tolkien clearly thought that Tuor was counted among the Eldar.
__________________
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#142 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
I agree with Arvegil in the Tour matter
Greetings |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#143 | |
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Why is The Second Prophecy of Mandos included in TNS?
Since per the notes to the Athrabeth, Tolkien recontextualized this legend as a Mannish/Numenorean myth? Not that I'm advocating removing the actual details of it, but the current fusion of the 'Prophecy of Mandos' + the mention of 'it is said among Men' seems like fanfic.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#144 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Sorry Arvegil145, I do not understand what you mean her. Didn't we do, with the combi of the 'Phophecy of Mandos' and 'it is said among Men' exactly what Tolkien did in the notes to the Athrabeth: 'recontextualizing this legend as a Mannish/Numenorean myth'?
What about that is like fan-fiction? Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#145 | |||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Also, don't forget the ending of the Valaquenta...
__________________
Quote:
Last edited by Arvegil145; 09-06-2023 at 03:17 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#146 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#147 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
I had forgotten about Letter 153. I agree that this justifies the statement about Tuor, and I think Findegil's suggestion for the text there is good.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#148 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
If I understood now at a long last, what you mean correctly, Arvegil145, you would like either to leave out the sub-chapter title The Second Prophecy of Mandos or change it. Right?
As I just posted in another thread, since the project has decided against the idea of Middle-earth equivalents of our text, we do not make any direct statement how the overall text or this chapter has come down the long year. What we do in our text is give a clear indication that this prophecy was only know as rumour about Men (directly below the sub-title). I don’t think that any Elf would have had a full knowledge of all prophecies Mandos had made in all the long time that allowed for a transfer of knowledge about it to Men. Thus the question is, even if we think about a larger group of Elves, what could they have said, if Men reported about such a prophecy? In my opinion they could only have voiced some doubts about its authorship by Mandos (and only by that cast some doubts on its content). And that is exactly what we have done. And that is especially true if we consider that they ‘had no myths or legends dealing with the end of the world’. How could they gainsay any myths or legends of Men about the far future, without any knowledge (feigned or real), myth or legend of their own? Respectfully Findegil P.S.: I appreciate, that the arguments are backuped by quotes. But sometimes it easier to understand the intention when you take the time to make a proposal for the change in question. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#149 | ||
Shade of Carn Dûm
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tol Morwen
Posts: 331
![]() |
Quote:
Therefore, I take back my proposal for the removal of the sub-chapter 'The Second Prophecy of Mandos'! However, with that said, what is the provenance for the other statements about the 'End of Days', 'Dagor Dagorath', 'Manwe descending from Ilmarin', etc.? Not that it really matters for our purposes, but I'm still curious.
__________________
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#150 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Okay, seems I did not make my line of think clear enough. My assumption was from the start, if the prophecy is only a roumor among men the sub-chapter tilte is of course no more authoritativ than the content and equaly who wrote it, it reffers to not more than the roumor of men.
'End of Days': I would think Finrod allude to that concept in the Athrabeth. 'Dagor Dagorath' and 'Manwe descending from Ilmarin': Came from a discussion about Gandalf, when he could no longer been asked. So equaly if the author is considered to be a Hobbit or a Gondorian, he is a learned person of the early Fourth Age. The ultimate source could thus be either elvish via Imladris or ( Manish or Elvish ) via Númenor - ( Arnor - Imladirs ) or Gondor. Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |