![]() |
![]() |
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 | |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
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.> |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
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. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
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 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | ||
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 |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | ||||
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. |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Really good.
It remains the question which note we take as basis. Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
It looks very good the addition to the Narn, and in the sense of time passed, (not so close to the fall of Minas Tirith) perhaps it's a better place.
I want to insist in the Gil-galad surname, perhaps I'm mistaken but, is not later the note about that was his mother who gave the name for the helm and mail, and that it means Star of Radiance, not Starlight? So perhaps it would be better to place his 'surnaming' by his mother in a later time ,when he is High King, in the later chapter? Greetings |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Quote:
The name Gil-galad, however, is not a compound, but rather a juxtaposition of gil with a completely separate word galad meaning "shining radiance; reflection." Thus we translate this name (following regular Sindarin conventions) "Star-of-Radiance." Since Gil-galad was the form finally chosen by Tolkien, we must accept "Star of Radiance" as the accurate translation. Perhaps we could simply omit the two lines about his epessë? Last edited by Aran e-Godhellim; 05-29-2009 at 09:32 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Findegil wrote:
Quote:
However, we can't simply read it in isolation. Christopher Tolkien seems rather confident that the third note replaced the second - and this is supported by the fact that the second note was struck out. In the third note, Gil-Galad is clearly Felagund's son, not Orodreth's. I think this strongly suggests that the second note was intended to refer to Felagund's wife/son as well. It seems very unlikely to me that Gil-Galad's parentage would be switched from Felagund to Orodreth and then switched back, without other evidence for such a progression. More likely, he was Felagund's son in all three QS notes and the second note, probably written in haste, was unintentionally expressed ambiguously. I'm also skeptical of taking the date of Gil-Galad's departure from these QS notes. Christopher Tolkien seems quite certain that these predate the note in GA that places Gil-Galad's (there Fingon's son) departure in 456. Now, one could perhaps speculate that with the final placement of Gil-Galad as Orodreth's son there is an implicit return to the date in the second QS note. But I think such a proposal is highly speculative. If, as I suggest, all three QS notes have Gil-Galad as Felagund's son, then all three would appear to depend on Felagund's movements. In the first proposal, his wife and son depart after his defeat in the Bragollach. In the second, they depart when he leaves on the quest of the Silmaril. In the third, they depart after hearing of his death. I don't see any reason that any of these dates should be particularly favoured if they are in fact Orodreth's wife and son. So at this point, my vote is still to go with the 456 date and place their departure in this chapter. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
I'm fine with either date.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | ||
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Greetings. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Well, Deluwaith (no "d") would be modern Sindarin for Deadly Nightshade. Taur-nu-Fuin would be "Forest under Shadow," or "Mirkwood." I think we must keep the first line's distinction between the two names intact.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
Yes, I agree, I wanted to mean that there are redundant the two paragraphs and only maintain the names in the context of the last one.
Greetings |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Oh, okay.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
I agree that the two statements about Taur-nu-Fuin are redundant, but it's not immediately obvious to me which should be kept and which removed. I suppose that GA being the later text, it should be the second, despite the fact that the QS description is more vivid. Of course, we could combine them, but this risks awkwardness. I think I would advise:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | ||
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
Sorry for the long silence, there were some other businesses at hand.
About Gil-galad's departure: Aiwendil worte: Quote:
What we have to do is to from a text that gives a reason why Orodreth send away his wife and son at this time. And the obvious reason at this point is the news of the death of Fingolfin reaching Nargothrond (where Orodreth and his family were at this time). I supose that we can still take the notes to the QS as to form our text. And for our propose the first of the notes is the best fitting. I supose: Quote:
Respectfully Findegil |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
1. Good date 456. But, it would be better in this place?, What do you think? we have a mention of nargothrond with some momentarily peace
RB-DF-13 <GA and the Orcs did not dare to cross the {Taiglin}[Taeglin] for many years after.> 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. RB-DB-18b <LQ2; Correction to QS But fearing now that all strong places were doomed to fall at last before the might of Morgoth, {he}[Orodreth] sent away his wife{ Meril} to her own folk in Eglorest, and with her went their son, Ereinion, yet an elvenchild.> I still think what is said above about the eppesë Gil-galad. 2 On Taur-nu-Fuin I agree with Aiwendil's last, but Mirkwood, Forest under Nightshade, or both. Greetings |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
I don't think that a time of relative peace is the time when Orodreth would send away his wifw and son. In all situations that Tolkien envisaged for that journey it was time of stress and realisation of the danger that the father and/or the relam was in not a time of breathtaking and temporary peace.
One possibility abot Gil-galad would be to let his mother-name be Gilgalad = Starlight and his later epesse Gil-galad = Star-of-Radiance given for his shiny armour. But that might be a bit artifical. If we only name him Ereinion here, the read might be lost who he is. Thus if we decide to take only Gil-galad as his name I would think, we have to insert some phrase like: 'and with her went their son, [Ereinion,] yet an elvenchild, {and Gilgalad Starlight he was called for the brightness of his eye}[who later was called Gil-galad].>' Respectfully Findegil Last edited by Findegil; 06-15-2009 at 12:43 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
I would like to find a place when the wife of orodreth and Ereinion live for some more years in Nargothrond than only one. In the case I said above it would be 3 years, in 458. and it would be more credible that after a time of stress, but not the end of the war (as is stated in the same phrase of the correction inserted "But fearing now that all strong places were doomed to fall at last before the might of Morgoth") be the best moment to protect his son, it would be securer.
As for the statement "Ereinion, who later was called Gil-galad" is right. Greetings |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
I'm okay with saying "Ereinion, who was later called Gil-galad," or even just plain "Gil-galad." My reasoning is that a scribe writing this could well have used the more familiar name to get his reader's attention, or at least to make it more interesting. Tolkien himself said that old names were often forgotten and replaced by new ones in Elven histories.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,033
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
However in the Shibboleth of Feanor proper (written on publication notes dated 1968) Gil-galad is stated to be an epesse rather, meaning 'Star of Radiance', and was given to him because his helm and mail shone from afar (and etc. p. 347-348). I don't recall any reason within the Shibboleth to think that Gil-galad was a nickname and a Mother-name. It appears to be just an epesse there. Quote:
To try to post all the mentions of this name from Words, Phrases, and Passages might be interesting, but arguably would not be very helpful, as Tolkien can change his mind from one note to the next. Although at one point JRRT translates Gil-galad 'radiant star' from a kalat- 'radiance, radiate' and a root KAL- shine. So we have the word 'radiance' here, but still this is variant enough from the idea of a root ÑAL- 'shine by reflection' and a word *ñalatâ 'radiance, glittering reflection (from jewels, glass or polished metals, or water)' -- both the root ÑAL- and *ñalatâ are found in the later Shibboleth papers, and which meanings go hand in hand with the reason for his epesse given there. Quote:
My opinion on these points anyway. Last edited by Galin; 06-18-2009 at 06:38 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,714
![]() |
The difference between "Star-of-Radiance" and "Starlight" is small in my oppinion. Therefore I called the distinction artefical in my earlier post.
Since we seem to have settle now on Gil-galad as an eppesse, I suggest we take up the not proposed ealier about Ereinion called Gil-galad later. Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | ||
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 245
![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
So I propose keep "Ereinion called Gil-galad later" in this chapter. And state in the last chapter ( when he is High King after Turgon's death and he is supposedly not yet a child, but young for an elf, and can dress for war) that he was called Gil-galad because of his mail and helm...etc. Named by his mother or not. What do you think? Greetings |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 | |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Quote:
It is possible Tolkien removed the linguistic barrier he earlier erected between the two forms, but I still argue that the archaic form was ñil-ñalatâ, "star-of-radiance" - which was equated to simple "star-light" - rather than ñil-calad. My reasoning is that the "c" in calad should not have mutated to a g, as it is not compounded fully, but retains its individuality. Also, one would expect "light-of-star" to be calad-ñil. In contrast, the progression ñ<g is found in all positions of mature Sindarin, and ñil-ñalatâ fits perfectly with the mature Sindarin pattern for possessives. Last edited by Aran e-Godhellim; 06-18-2009 at 02:41 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,033
![]() ![]() |
My point (the part that was not simply added information from WPP) is more basic: if one looks at what Tolkien himself published, we find hyphenated Gil-galad translated as Starlight. For myself I would see nothing wrong or inaccurate with the project following this. I realize that over the years Tolkien changed his mind about the etymology of Gil-galad, but I'll put it this way, if you said: since Celeborn the Teler (from Aman) was the latest idea from Tolkien we must accept this history as accurate... I would also have to disagree.
Since I assume the Silmarillion project is not going to delve into the etymology of the name, or its external history, to my mind 'what Tolkien published' seems a simple enough path to follow. In a sense it's not really about whether 'Starlight' or 'Star of Radiance' is used, but this is a small example of a larger textual issue. And one that I tend to possibly annoy people about ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
Perhaps Tolkien deliberately gave two (somewhat) conflicting interpretations to indicate that the "Sindarin Loremasters" were themselves unsure of its ultimate derivation.
In any event - and I'm sorry if this wasn't clear before - what I was trying to say in my previous post was that translating "Gil-galad" as "star-light" is fine with me, as long as the linguistic situation 'behind-the-scenes' is understood. I simply like to justify things for my own sake, even if the justification is never printed. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
There are plenty of cases where the English translations Tolkien provides for Elvish names are somewhat loose, and plenty of cases in which he gives alternate, slightly different translations. So I don't think that 'starlight' vs. 'star of radiance' is really a matter of tremendous importance.
Moreover, I tend to think that the presence or absence of a hyphen may be more of an issue with the transliteration into the English alphabet than with the actual name. I may have simply forgotten, but is there an equivalent of a hyphen in Tengwar? In any case, we all seem to agree that 'Gil-galad' and 'star-light' are fine to use. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
![]() |
No. Hyphens aren't even represented by spaces in the Tengwar, but Tolkien used them to distinguish between different kinds of mutations in the Latin alphabet.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | ||||||||||||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Finally, some comments on the first section.
First, a general comment on the text: There is a lot of jumping back and forth between QS and GA here. This is to be expected, given the textual situation, and I think that for the most part it is skillfully done; but I worry a little that in trying to provide as complete and detailed an account as we can, we may be slicing up Tolkien's prose too indiscriminately. In particular, I think we must be careful not to use additions from other sources merely for the sake of added verbiage, but only when some substantive detail is gained. I will try to point out specific places where this is an issue. RB-DB-01: This is a good example of my concern above. Here we have cognate sentences in QS and GA: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
§141: There are some missing Celegorn > Celegorm changes here: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
§143: Here again some difficulties arise from the mixture of QS and GA. But first of all there is an issue of chronology. The situation appears to be that the assault on Minas Tirith was placed in 457, two years after the Bragollach, in AB 2 and in QS. In GA it was moved first to 456 and then to 455, the same year as the battle, and before the death of Fingolfin. Our text as it stands has the earlier chronology, and this at the very least must be changed. But, as previously, I'm somewhat inclined to take the bulk of the passage from GA instead of from QS. As far as I can tell, nothing of substance appears here in QS that is absent from GA. The only thing I would perhaps want to salvage from QS is the description of Sauron, which is given at greater length in QS and was revised in LQ. If we take this, then we must remove the redundant description from GA. I would therefore suggest this: Quote:
|
||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,033
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
It seems discussed here a bit... http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=4479 I'm not a member of this Silmarillion project, but as a fan of Tolkien's nomenclature I'll give this a go: Ambarto becomes the youngest or 'last' child, thus matching up better with Telufinwe 'Last Finwë' (though this was not specifically marked it appears). Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Good to see you, Galin!
I will have to look into the name issue some more, but as far as I can tell you are correct. My memory is a bit hazy on some of these issues. Glancing at the Name Changes thread, though, I noticed that in fact we had (at my suggestion!) already settled on "Amros" rather than "Amras". I'm less clear on the Amrod vs. Amarthan point, as (alas) I still don't have any of the Vinyar Tengwar (maybe those ought to go on my Hanukkah/Christmas wish-list). However, my point here was simply that it is Amras/Amros who is alive and well in Beleriand at this point and Amrod/Amarthan who died at Losgar, and not the other way around. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,033
![]() ![]() |
Oops Aiwendil, yes I was essentially agreeing with you regarding the basic question I quoted.
I guess I could have made that clear enough without blathering on so much about the Amrod/Amarthan question, it's just that this question is one I have mused about myself. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |