"Aurë entuluva! day shall come again." Húrin each of the 70 times he slew a Troll at the Nirnaeth Arnoediad |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
10-29-2011, 08:16 AM | #1 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,034
|
Counting the Sun Years
Possible stupid question alert! in suggesting a range for Maedros' travail upon the precipice, should one count a full 9.582 years between the start of VY year 1500 and Sun Year 1? Or should this not be assumed?
And with respect to the Crossing of the Ice: according to The Annals of Aman Fingolfin and the Noldor began this passage in VY 1497, and according to both The Grey Annals (GA) and The Tale of Years (both published in The War of the Jools), Fingolfin and the Noldor crossed the Straits of Ice in VY year 1500. And in GA 1497 it is noted that Feanor landed at Drengist: 'In this same year of the Valar (but some seven years after in the later reckoning of time) Feanor came over Sea...' I assume this means that around seven Sun Years into 1497, Feanor lands in Middle-earth -- considering that the passing of the ice must have started after Feanor departed, but still within 1497. But I don't recall any notation that a new reckoning in Sun Years is begun before a full Valian Year had transpired. Granted, it seems that if the Annals were to survive (from an external standpoint), they were to become a Numenorean compilation in any case (based on communications with the Exiles, further based on Rumil's work), working with a notion of the Sun hailing from one of the Trees, and thus a new reckoning, but still, working within this context... ... or have I muddled something important here? |
11-07-2011, 11:57 AM | #2 | ||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
11-07-2011, 01:02 PM | #3 | |||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,034
|
Thanks Aiwendil!
That's because I poorly explained part of my post I was looking to get an opinion on the timing of the crossing, so that much worked out -- but my secondary reason to post the bit about the seven years was to show that Tolkien could, and did, basically give Sun Year indications of at least one thing 'within' a Valian Year (1497). And so, when I ended with (which should not have ended that paragraph however, as it helped to confuse things): 'But I don't recall any notation that a new reckoning in Sun Years is begun before a full Valian Year had transpired. I merely meant: if 1500 is not a full 'year' why not mention this -- that is, why not note something similar to the short digression in GA concerning Feanor? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
So far I'm still musing on this... what do you think? |
|||
11-08-2011, 08:46 AM | #4 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
|
Since the Valian Years were described as the shortes lenght of time that could be observed by the Valar by the changes of Arda, I would think that they very exactly planed the launching of sun and moon. But from AAm I get the impression that it was at the very begining of the Valian Year 1500 that the moon came into the sky the first time.
Respectfuly Findegil |
11-08-2011, 09:04 AM | #5 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,034
|
Thanks Findegil.
I suppose I could toss in another factor here: it seems that if the Annals were to survive (from an external standpoint), they were to become a Numenorean compilation in any case (based on communications with the Exiles, further based on Rumil's work), working with a notion of the Sun hailing from one of the Trees, and thus a new reckoning. Anyway, if the Moon and Sun rose so early in 1500 as to be less than one Sun Year, as opinioned elsewhere, one might wonder why not move from 1499 to SY 1? Or again, why no notation if this 'year' was so considerably shorter. Hmm. |
11-08-2011, 02:10 PM | #6 | ||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
Quote:
I have to say I'm moving toward thinking that 1500 was a full year and that the first rising of the Moon was set for the very end of the year by the Valar. The opinion you quote from another forum does make a fair point: Quote:
So I can similarly see the making of the Sun and Moon and the arranging for their operations taking quite a bit longer than one might first guess, and I can easily persuade myself that it was not until the end of 1500 that all was made ready. Yes, the fact that the rising ofthe Sun and Moon is described immediately after the '1500' header in AAm does tend to make the reader assume that it happens at the beginning of the year, but this assumption could very well be in error. If the only events that a given annal reports are ones that occurred toward the end of the year, why should it not simply launch into them, as the 1500 annal does? Moreover, it's worth noting that the annal before 1500, which describes the making of the Sun and Moon, is headed '1495 - 1500'. Reading those dates inclusively, one could suppose that the events it describes extend well into the year 1500. The author of the Annals then broke the account of the actual rising of the Sun and Moon into a separate entry simply to specify its date more exactly. One still might complain that having the first rising of the Moon come exactly at the end of YT 1500 seems too neat and coincidental. But really, is it any more of a coincidence than having the Age of the Trees last for a nice, round 1500 years? Or the Age of the Lamps for a nice, round 3500 years? Indeed, the Sun Years beginning exactly at the end of a Valian year probably makes more sense than the Ages of the Lamps and the Trees being integral numbers of centuries, since in the former case we can at least suppose that the Valar purposefully waited for the beginning of a new year. The ends of the ages were triggered by Melkor's actions - it's hard to imagine Melkor planning his destruction of the Lamps, for instance, to line up so neatly with the Valian calendar! |
||
11-10-2011, 11:01 AM | #7 | ||||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,034
|
I'm leaning more toward a full year for 1500 myself. Reading the entries 1495-1500, and 1500 again, I get the feeling that matters of chronology within the entry might be of secondary importance to the description of events and beings and so on -- as it arguably should be. In entry 1495 -1500 we have (section 166):
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The Grey Annals entry for 1500 has much less to report, but notes that, seemingly at the end of 1500: 'And even a they set foot upon Middle-earth, the ages of the stars were ended, and the time of the Sun and Moon was begun, as it told in the Chronicle of Aman. ____________________ A look back at the Annals of Valinor (the later version as compared to the even earlier version), a preceding concept where 1 Valian Year = 10 Sun Years: Quote:
Last edited by Galin; 11-10-2011 at 11:12 AM. |
||||
|
|