General changes in TftE

[Findegil]

In this post I have collected all general changes that were used so far. And in future work I will add to it what ever diserves a general teratment. I also would like to concentrat henc forth all discussion of general changes in this thread. Such a collection will make it easier to check all texts under development for general changes that are needed.

{Bansil} per [b]Sil77

{Cristhorn}[Cirith Thoronath] per Sil77

{Eärendel}[Eärendil] per QS77 and LR.

{Elfinesse}[Elvenesse] per Tolkien's general change of Elfin to Elven from earlier to later writings.

{Glingol}[Glingal] per QS77.

{Gondothlim}[Gondolindrim] per QS77.

{Indor}[Galdor] when it refers to the grandfather of Tour per UT

{Inwë}[Ingwë] per QS77.

{Isfin}[Aredhel] per QS77.

{Kôr} and {Côr}[Túna] per QS77. In BoLT Kor corresponds to both the later Tirion and Túna, being the name of both the City and the hill on which it stands. In the sole mention in “The Fall of Gondolin” it is the hill that is meant.

{Malkarauki}[Valaraukar] per Valaquenta published with QS77.

{Meglin}[Maeglin] per QS77.

{Melko}[Morgoth] per QS77. After BoLT Tolkien almost never uses Melkor in narration of events following Fëanor’s invention of the name Morgoth, except in a back-reference to ancient times.

{Noldoli}[Noldor] per QS77. Noldoli, though possibly still a valid form, is not used at all in QS77 or late Tolkien writings.

{Peleg}[Huor] per QS77 and “Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin”.

{Place of the Gods}[Place of the Ainur]. Tolkien almost entirely drops “Gods” as a English translation in later writings. One would normally change “Gods” to “Valar”, but the Elvish form Gar Ainion specifically refers to the Ainur, that is, not just to the Valar but also to the Maiar and to the Ainur who remained outside EÄ. The English translation should be equally wide. “Place of the Holy Ones” would be full translation, but is perhaps to cumbersome.

{Sorontur}[Sorontar] per “The Etymologies” (under THOR-, THORON-) and “The Wanderings of Húrin” in The War of the Jewels (HoME 11).

{Throndor}[Thorondor] per QS77 and LR.

{Tumladin}[Tumladen] per QS77.

{Amon Gwareth}[Amon Gwared] per “The War of the Jewels” (HoME 11), Part Two the Later Quenta Silmarillion, 12, “Of Turgon and the Building of Gondolin”. Christopher Tolkien notes: To this my father made some corrections: Nivrost > Nevrast as in the preceding chapters; Eryd Wethion > Eryd Wethrin; Handir > Huor (see above); and Amon Gwareth > Amon Gwared.

{Gnome}[Elf] or [Noldo] and {Gnomes}[Elves] or [Noldor]. “Gnomes” was dropped by Tolkien in LR and later writings, often replaced by Noldor. It would be better artistically to retain the original variation Gnome/Gnomes and Noldo/Noldli which can be best done by replacing Gnome/Gnomes by Elf/Elves except where a general reference to Elves would not fit, as in “the Gnomes were exiles at heart, haunted with a desire for their ancient home that faded not.” Then use Noldor.

{House of the Swan}[House of Hador] per UT when it refers to Tuors ancestry. The sign of Annael remains the Swan.

{Lothlim}[Lothrim] This latter is the probable correct Sindarin form.

{Salgant}[Talagant] per “The Eytmologies”. Under the stem ÑGAN-, ÑGÁNAD- ‘play (on stringed instrument)’ which produces various forms meaning ‘Harp’ or ‘harp-playing’, is found:
talagant harper (*tyalañgando), cf. Talagant [>] of Gondolin [TYAL].
Under TYAL- ‘play’ is:
Cf. tyalañgandō = harp-player (Q tyalangan): N Talagand, one of the chiefs of Gondolin (see ÑGAN).
Christopher Tolkien adds a note to ÑGAN-, ÑGÁNAD-:
Talagant appears in literary source, but cf. Salgant in the tale of The Fall of Gondolin, the cowardly but not wholly unattractive lord of the People of the Harp: II. 173, 190-1, etc.
Talgand was almost certainly Tolkien’s planed replacement form for Salgant the lord of the People of the Harp.

{Thornhoth}[Thoronhoth] This latter is the probable correct Sindarin form.

{Thorn Sir}[Thoron Sîr] This updates the two elements for the name from Gnomissh to their QS77 and LR Sindarin forms, but I’m not sure the syntax of this later name is valid.

{Bad Uthwen}[Way of Escape], the Elvish name of the “Way of Escape”. The Etymologies” gives:
BAT- tread. *báta : ON bata beaten track, pathway; EN bâd.
But does Uthwen still exist in Sindarin in any form? If kept, it probably should appear as Bâd Uthwen with the circumflex accent.
Need be replaced by Way of Escape.

{Gar Ainion}[Place of the Ainur]. I originally thought to retain this. The logic was that Gar Lossion ‘Place of Flowers’ occurs as the Gnomish name of Alalminórë, replacing an earlier Losgar. This would not necessarily mean Losgar was incorrect, rather that Tolkien had replaced one correct form with another using the same Elvish words, ‘Flower-place’ by ‘Place of Flowers’. Since Losgar occurs in the Silmarillion tradition as the name of the place where Fëanor burned the ships, presumably gar is still valid Sindarin meaning ‘place’.
However upon closer examination the later ‘Losgar’ cannot mean ‘Flower-place’ which would be Lothgar. If gar means ‘place’ still, it might mean ‘Snow-place’ or ‘Snow-white place’. But I find nothing anywhere indicating what meaning Tolkien intended for this place-name, and the fact that the first element must now have a different meaning does not give me any confidence that the last element has the same meaning as in Gnomish.

Gwarestrin. This must stand as there is nothing newer and nothing in published Sindarin corpus that helps in either determining its validity in Sindarin or in creating a possibly more correct Sindarin form. At least gwar- seems still valid as in Amon Gareth/Gwared upon which Gondolin is built. Also valid is the stem TIR- which is contained in –estrin according to the explanation of the name in BoLT 1, Appendix.
Nost-na-Lothion. Translated ‘Birth of Flowers’. In “Etymologies” under NŌ- ‘beget’ occurs Noldorin form noss ‘house’, example Nos Finrod ‘House of Finrod’. In BoLT 1 under Duilin, appears nos ‘house’ as well as related forms nosta- ‘be born’, nost ‘birth; blood, high birth; birthday’, and nôs ‘birthday’. Nost appears only in this citation and the name Nost-na-Lothion, none of the ‘birth’ forms appears later, so it is not at all clear that Tolkien would have considered it still valid. But no other words meaning “born” of “birth” are given by Tolkien, so this might still stand.

{Tarin Austa}[Gates of Summer], the Elvish name for the festival “Gates of Summer”. Nether of the elements appears in extant later Sindarin. But there is also no conflict. (The place name Tarn Aeluin is a mixed form in which tarn is the English word meaning ‘small mountain lake’.) Sindarin tarn meaning ‘gate’ might exist. Austa is not impossibly an alternate name for ‘summer’ alongside laer. Can be dropped as uncertain.

{Glommweaver}[Ungoliant] and {Ungoliantë}[Ungoliant] per QS77

{Legolas Greenleaf}[Laegolas] Legolas means ‘green-leaves’ a woddland name – dialectical form of pure Sindarin laegolas: *lassē (High-elven lasse. S. las(s)) ‘leaf’; *gwa-lassa<gwa-lassie ‘collection of leaves, foliage’ (H.E. olassiē, S. golas, -olas); *laika ‘green’ –basis LAY as in Laire ‘summer’ (H.E. laica, S. leag (seldom used, usually replaced by calen), woodland leg).”
Quoted from Letter 211.
“’Technically’ Legolas is a compound (according to rules) of S. laeg ‘viridis fresh and green, and golass ‘collection of leaves, foliage’.”
Quoted from Letter 297.
‘ae’ and ‘ai’ are often interchangeable (eg Aeglos, Aiglos (Gil-galad’s spear)).
Laica (LAY) is cognate with S. laeg ~ Helge F. prefers to also honor “older” word laiqua as a viable Quenya word as well. Laiqa shows old “Qenya” orthography.
Tolkien gave the next elements in both High and Grey Elven (S. golas. –olas Q. olassië) as denoting a collection of leaves.
Quenya laiqua (LAYAK) Sindarin cognate *laeb (Noldorin lhoeb in Etym.)
Quenya laica (LAY) Sindarin cognate laeg (cf. Q&E WotJ laegel, Laegrim)
The term Laiquendi “Greenelves” was likely originally conceived of as resulting from laiqua+quendi. But laica can also “fit” here, so to speak ~ according to Helge F., the element may be a reduced form of _laica_ , or prefixed _lai_ may represent only the base itself (LAY), or maybe even laica+quendi > Laiquendi considering rocco+quén > roquen “knight”.

{Nauglafring}[Nauglamír] per QS77.

{Gods}[Valar] Tolkien almost entirely drops "Gods" as a English translation in later writings.

{Diriel} and {Dinithel}[Amras] per QS77. But normally Amras will be deleted since we consider him killed by the burning of the ships at Losgar.

{Damrod}[Amrod] per QS77.

{Tun}[Túna] per Sil77

{Maidros and Maedhros to Maeðros per HoME X

{Celegorn}[Celegorm] per Sil77

{Taur-na-Fuin}[Taur-nu-Fuin] per Sil77

[Haleth]{Halmir} per HoME 11 when it refers to Haleth the Hunter

{Hundor}[Haldir] per HoME XI

{Haud-ina-Nengin}[Haudh-en-Nirnaeth] per Sil77

{Nivrost}[Nevrast] per Sil77

Tower of {Ingildon}[Nimrais] per Sil77

{Teiglin}[Taeglin] per WH note 55:
Taeglin(d) better Taeglind
*taika (√taya mark, line, limit > tayak) mǽre, boundary, limit, boundary line.
linde 'singer / singing', name (or element in names) of many rivers of quick course that make a rippling sound.
mǽre is an Old English word of the same meaning. – It seems that the form chosen for the published Silmarillion should have been Taeglin rather than Teiglin (see p. 228, §28).

{Flinding}[Gwindor] per Sil77 but this change does only ocoure in the verse and Flinding is often used in the alliteration. Thus each line needs some special solution.

{Fuilin}[Guilin] per Sil77 but this change does only occur in the verse and Fuilin is often used in the alliteration. Thus each line needs some special solution.

{Flinding go-Fuilin}[Gwindor, Guilin’s son] this seems to be covered by the two entry above but since in such lines Flinding and Fuilin are both in the alliteration it is here surely necessary to change the alliteration.

{Dor-na-Fauglith}[Dor-nu-Fauglith] per Sil77

{dragon-helm}[Dragon-helm] just for consistency.

{dwarfen}[dwarven] per Tolkiens general use of the old plural when refering to Dwarves.

{Tengwethil}[Taniquetil] per Sil77

{Ylmir}[Ulmo] per Sil77

{Nan-Tathrin}[Nan-Thatren] per Sil77

Tower of {Ing}[Ingwë] per Sil77

{Dorlas}[Darlas] per WH Note 55

{Dairon}[Daeron] per Sil77

{Inglor}[Finrod] per LotR

{Finrod}[Finrafin] per LotR

{Thu} and {Gorthu}[Sauron] or [Gorthaur] per LotR; this change is very difficult since Thu is often used in the rhyme. Tolkien replaced it in some cases by Gorthu but this is also not longer valid and its replacment Gorthaur does not work in the rhyming. Thus we have to find some individual solution for each line.

{Glorund}[Glaurung] per Wanderings of Húrin.

{Glingal}[Laurelin] per Sil77 but further changes are needed in the Line.

{Belthil}[Silpion] per Sil77 but further changes are needed in the Line.

{Cranthor} and {Cranthir}[Caranthir] per Sil77

{Egnor}[Aegnor] per Sil77

{Umboth-Muilin}[Aelin-uial] per QS77 and UT

{Lhandroval}[Landroval] per LotR

{Crisaegrim}[Crissaegrim] per Sil77

{Gyrth-I-Guinar}[Dor Firn-i-Guinar] per Sil77

{Gumlin}[Galdor] per HoME XI

{Bladorion}[Ard-galen] per HoME XI

{Noldorin}[Sindarin] per HoME XI

Dagor {Vreged-sir}[Bragollach] per QS77

Battle of Sudden {Fire}[Flame] per QS77

{Bëor}[Bregor] when referring to the Father of Barahir per HoME XI

{Gelion}[Duin Daer] per HoME XI

{Thargelion}[Talath Rhúnen] or [Dor-Caranthir] per HoME XI

{Minnastirith}[Minas Tirith] per QS77

{Gochressiel}[{Crisaegrim}[Crissaegrim]] per QS77

{Dorlomin}[Dor-Lómin] for consistency with UT and QS77

{Galion}[Galdor] per HoME XI

{Gumlin}[Galdor] per QS77

{Úrin}[Húrin] per LR.

{Tinwelint}[Thingol] per LR.

{Hisilómë}[Hithlum] per “The Shaping of Middle-Earth”: The Sketch of Mythology
The six remaining sons of Fëanor (Maglor, Celegorm, Curufin, Damrod, Díriel, and Cranthir) ate encamped about the lake Mithrim in Hisilómë (Hithlum, or Dorlómin, the land of shadows in the North-west), when they hear of the march of Finweg and his men who have crossed the Grinding Ice.

{Rodothlim}[elves of Nargothrond] per QS77.

{Artanor}[Doriath] per QS30.

{Cûm an-Idrisaith}[Cûm-nan-Arasaith] (Mound of Avarice) per QS30. This need linguistic revision.

{Gwenniel}[Melian] per QS30.

{Angamandi}[Angband] per QS30.

{Nauglath}[dwarves of Nogrod] or [Naugrim] per QS77

{Indrafangs}[dwarves of Belegost] when not referring to the dwarves of Moria per QS77

{Karkaras (Knife-fang)}[Carcharoth ('the Red Maw')] per QS77.

{i·Guilwarthon}[Dor Firn-i-Guinar] per QS77.

{Sarnathrod} and {Sarn Athrad}[Athrad Daer] per QS77.

{Auredhir}[Eluréd and Elurín] per QS77.

{Ermabwed}[Erchamion] per QS77.

{Mavwin}[Morwen] per QS77.

{Nienóri}[Nienor] per UT.

{Egnor}[Barahir] per QS77 when it refers to Beren’s father.

{Galweg}[Orodreth] per QS77.

{Silver Bowl}[Dimrost] (the Rainy Stair) per QS77.

Respecfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

Anotherone was found:

{Tavros} and {Tauros}[Tauron] per LQ

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

{Díriel}[Amros] and {Amras}[Amros] due to The Shibboleth of Fëanor and The problem of ROS.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

A question arose that is best discussed here:
We have changed Maedhros to Maeðros. Does that mean that we also change Eledhwen to Eleðwen?

Respectfully
Findegil

[Maédhros]

A question arose that is best discussed here:
We have changed Maedhros to Maeðros. Does that mean that we also change Eledhwen to Eleðwen?
I think that it should. After all the change of dh to ð has to be valid in general I think. Perhaps Aiwendil could know more about it?

In our version of the Fall of Gondolin, in the later part that uses the material from the Tales, Echtelion, is called Lord of the Fountain, it should be Fountains, as it is in UT.

[Findegil]

I have worked in the plural to title of Ecthelion.

If dh to ð is a general change then the following names must be changed:
{Eledhwen}[Eleðwen]
{Amon Rûdh}[Amon Rûð]
{Glóredhel}[Glóreðel]
{Aredhel}[Areðel]
{Bar-en-Danwedh}[Bar-en-Danweð]
{Adanedhel}[Adaneðel]
{Annon-in-Gelydh}[Annon-in-Gelyð]
{Lisgardh}[Lisgarð]
{Haudh-en-Nirnaeth}[Hauð-en-Nirnaeth]

Radhurin I would not change because I think it renders to Rad-Hurin and not to Raðuirn.

Comments to all this neames are most welcome.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aran e-Godhellim]

If I may, I would suggest a reverse-change. "ð" to "dh," rather than vice-versa.

"Edh" is after all simply a single letter that represents the voiced dental fricative sound, much as "thorn" was a single letter used for the unvoiced dental fricative sound. In The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien quite consitantly used "dh" for ð, just as he used (and we use) "th" for þ. See "Caras Galadhon."

The only reason I see for retaining ð is to give the Quenta Silmarillion a more archaic feel...but if that is the case, should we not be consistant and use þ as well?

[Aiwendil]

The dh > ð change we've been implementing was certainly not intended to create a more archaic feel (one of our principles is that personal aesthetic considerations are not to enter into our decisions). Rather, it was motivated by Tolkien's (rather late) apparent decision to use 'ð' rather than 'dh'. (I must admit I never got around to researching whether this was indeed his latest idea, but we had been assuming it was).

You raise a good point, though: 'dh' is used throughout The Lord of the Rings. A similar case is that of 'Orc' vs. 'Ork'; Tolkien's decision to spell it with a 'k' was not taken up by our project because throughout LotR it is spelled with a 'c'. I think the 'dh' issue is the same, and we must revert to 'Maedhros', etc.

Incidentally, it's a little odd that Tolkien apparently decided on a general change of 'dh' to 'ð' but not of 'th' to 'þ', isn't it? Thus we see 'Pengoloð', etc., but never, for example, 'Þingol'.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Well, that's not exactly true; we do see the form "Þindikollo" in "The Shibboleth of Fëanor." But you're right, he didn't usually use that form.

[gondowe]

What do you think about {Valmar}[Valimar]

[Aiwendil]

Hello, Gondonwe, and welcome to the project!

Thanks for bringing this point up - I don't think we have discussed the name Valmar/Valimar before. It looks to me like this is another case where the spelling in The Lord of the Rings ('Valimar') must take precedence, so I think the change must be made.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I agree.

[Findegil]

ð to dh: I do not really agree that we should go back to dh. dh is not as comen in English as is th and therefore it is more necessary to distinguish it from a combination of d and h by simple coincidenc. This is especially true if we consider that at the end of his life Tolkien did well know that his books would certainly find an international readership. Thus even so his elvish names were nromally not translated the reader not very familar with english would probably not be aware of dh representing the voiced dental fricative sound. th on the other hand much better known all ofer the world. Therefore a change form th to þ does not seem to be necessary. Concerning the spelling in LotR I do not think that we should look at the spelling in this book for evidence. Other then in content, I think that, the spelling could much more easily be changed in such cases like dh to ð or Orc to Ork.

Valmar versus Valimar: I wonder if Valimar is the later name?

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aran e-Godhellim]

But dh is the modern spelling. It should simply be noted in a "note on pronunciation" like Tolkien had.

[Aiwendil]

Findegil wrote:
Concerning the spelling in LotR I do not think that we should look at the spelling in this book for evidence.

Why not? Aren't we obliged to use the spelling used in the works published during Tolkien's lifetime? Moreover, if readers are expected to make do with 'dh' in LotR, why shouldn't they in the Silmarillion? Indeed, one could even argue that readers used to 'dh' in LotR would be thrown off more by 'ð' than by 'dh'. Many readers (certainly most English-speaking ones) would be completely unfamiliar with the letter ð and would likely pronounce it as a 'd'.

On Valimar - I glanced quickly through HoMe earlier and it looks like 'Valmar' is the earlier (and far more common) form, though I'm not clear on whether 'Valimar' definitively replaced it or not. But the point is, I think, moot, as 'Valimar' is used in LotR and must take precedence.

[gondowe]

On Valimar - I glanced quickly through HoMe earlier and it looks like 'Valmar' is the earlier (and far more common) form, though I'm not clear on whether 'Valimar' definitively replaced it or not. But the point is, I think, moot, as 'Valimar' is used in LotR and must take precedence.

That what i think and for this reason I used Valimar in my "Traducciones"

Greetings

[Aiwendil]

I decided to collect all the general name changes to date in alphebatical order for convenience. This should include everything in Findegil's list in post 1 as well as various other changes discussed in other threads. It's quite likely there are some I've missed, but these can always be added. I have for now left out dh/ð spelling changes since that issue's not yet resolved.

{Amon Gwareth}[Amon Gwared] per “The War of the Jewels” (HoME 11), Part Two the Later Quenta Silmarillion, 12, “Of Turgon and the Building of Gondolin”. Christopher Tolkien notes: To this my father made some corrections: Nivrost > Nevrast as in the preceding chapters; Eryd Wethion > Eryd Wethrin; Handir > Huor (see above); and Amon Gwareth > Amon Gwared.

{Amras}[Amros] per Shibboleth and Ros

{Angamandi}[Angband] per Q30.

{Artanor}[Doriath] per Q30.

{Auredhir}[Eluréd and Elurín] per QS77

{Avranc}[Daruin] per WH note 55.

{Bad Uthwen}[Way of Escape], the Elvish name of the “Way of Escape”. The Etymologies” gives:
BAT- tread. *báta : ON bata beaten track, pathway; EN bâd.
But does Uthwen still exist in Sindarin in any form? If kept, it probably should appear as Bâd Uthwen with the circumflex accent.
Need be replaced by Way of Escape.

Battle of Sudden {Fire}[Flame] per QS77

{Bansil}[Belthil] per QS77

{Belthil}[Silpion] when it refers to the tree in Valinor, per QS77.

{Bëor}[Bregor] when referring to the Father of Barahir per HoME XI

{Bladorion}[Ard-galen] per HoME XI

{Bronweg}[Voronwë] per QS77and late 'Tuor'

{Celegorn}[Celegorm] per QS77

{Celon}[Limhir] per 'Of Maeglin'

{Côr} [Túna] or [Tirion] per QS77. In BoLT Kor corresponds to both the later Tirion and Túna, being the name of both the City and the hill on which it stands. It should be changed to 'Tirion' when it refers to the city and 'Tuna' when it refers to the hill.

{Cranthor} and {Cranthir}[Caranthir] per QS77

{Crisaegrim}[Crissaegrim] per QS77

{Cristhorn}[Cirith Thoronath] per QS77

{Cûm an-Idrisaith}[Cûm-nan-Arasaith] (Mound of Avarice) per Q30. This need linguistic revision.

Dagor {Vreged-sir}[Bragollach] per QS77

{Dairon}[Daeron] per QS77

{Damrod}[Amrod] per QS77.

{Díriel}[Amros] per Shibboleth and Ros

{Dorlas}[Darlas] per WH note 55.

{Dorlomin}[Dor-Lómin] for consistency with UT and QS77

{Dor-na-Fauglith}[Dor-nu-Fauglith] per QS77

{dragon-helm}[Dragon-helm] just for consistency.

{dwarfen}[dwarven] per Tolkiens general use of the old plural when refering to Dwarves.

{Eärendel}[Eärendil] per QS77and LR.

{Egnor}[Aegnor] per QS77 (except where it refers to Beren's father)

{Egnor}[Barahir] per QS77when it refers to Beren’s father.

{Elfinesse}[Elvenesse] per Tolkien's general change of Elfin to Elven from earlier to later writings.

{Ermabwed}[Erchamion] per QS77.

{Finrod}[Finarfin] per QS77 when it refers to Felagund's father.

{Flinding go-Fuilin}[Gwindor, Guilin’s son] this seems to be covered by the two entries 'Flinding' and 'Fuilin' but since in alliterative verse Flinding and Fuilin are both in the alliteration it is here surely necessary to change the alliteration.

{Flinding}[Gwindor] per QS77 but this change does only ocoure in the verse and Flinding is often used in the alliteration. Thus each line needs some special solution.

{Fuilin}[Guilin] per QS77 but this change does only occur in the verse and Fuilin is often used in the alliteration. Thus each line needs some special solution.

{Galion}[Galdor] per HoME XI

{Galweg}[Orodreth] per QS77.

{Gar Ainion}[Place of the Ainur]. I originally thought to retain this. The logic was that Gar Lossion ‘Place of Flowers’ occurs as the Gnomish name of Alalminórë, replacing an earlier Losgar. This would not necessarily mean Losgar was incorrect, rather that Tolkien had replaced one correct form with another using the same Elvish words, ‘Flower-place’ by ‘Place of Flowers’. Since Losgar occurs in the Silmarillion tradition as the name of the place where Fëanor burned the ships, presumably gar is still valid Sindarin meaning ‘place’.
However upon closer examination the later ‘Losgar’ cannot mean ‘Flower-place’ which would be Lothgar. If gar means ‘place’ still, it might mean ‘Snow-place’ or ‘Snow-white place’. But I find nothing anywhere indicating what meaning Tolkien intended for this place-name, and the fact that the first element must now have a different meaning does not give me any confidence that the last element has the same meaning as in Gnomish.

{Gar Thurian}[Gar Thoren] per 'Etymologies':
under 3AR-, section GARAT-. The text is: GARAT-** Q arta fort, fortress.* N garth : cf. Garth(th)oren 'Fenced Fort' = Gondolin*** distinguish Ardh-thoren = Garthurian. Garthurian now has a different meaing as appears under the stem THUR- where it is an Ilkorin form and applies to Doriath, not Gondolin. The entry readsCf. Ilk. Garthurian Hidden Realm (= Doriath), sc. garð-thurian; Noldorinized as Arthurien, more completely as Ar(ð)*thoren*:* thoren (* tháure¯na¯) pp. of thoro- fence [see 3AR]. So in the mature language system Gar Thurian or Garthurian is now a dialectical North Sindarin name for Doriath (with a proper Sindarin counterpart Ardh-thoren) and Garth(th)oren has taken its place as one of the by-names of Gondolin.


{Gelion} and {River Gelion} [Duin Daer] per 'Of Maeglin'.

{Glingal}[Laurelin] when it refers to the tree in Valinor per QS77

{Glingol}[Glingal] per QS77.

{Glommweaver}[Ungoliant] and {Ungoliantë}[Ungoliant] per QS77

{Glorund}[Glaurung] per Wanderings of Húrin.

{Gnome}[Elf] or [Noldo] and {Gnomes}[Elves] or [Noldor]. “Gnomes” was dropped by Tolkien in LR and later writings, often replaced by Noldor. It would be better artistically to retain the original variation Gnome/Gnomes and Noldo/Noldli which can be best done by replacing Gnome/Gnomes by Elf/Elves except where a general reference to Elves would not fit, as in “the Gnomes were exiles at heart, haunted with a desire for their ancient home that faded not.” Then use Noldor.

{Gochressiel} [Crissaegrim] per QS77

{Gondothlim}[Gondolindrim] per QS77

{Gondothlimbar}[Gondothrimbar] per 'Etymologies'; under GOND-, this later form properly rendering the meaning 'City of the Dwellers in Stone' in Sindarin.

{Gods}[Valar] Tolkien almost entirely drops "Gods" as a English translation in later writings.

{Gorthu} and [Sauron] or [Gorthaur] per LR; this change is very difficult since Thu is often used in the rhyme. Tolkien replaced it in some cases by Gorthu but this is also not longer valid and its replacment Gorthaur does not work in the rhyming. Thus we have to find some individual solution for each line.

{Gumlin}[Galdor] per HoME XI

Gwarestrin. This must stand as there is nothing newer and nothing in published Sindarin corpus that helps in either determining its validity in Sindarin or in creating a possibly more correct Sindarin form. At least gwar- seems still valid as in Amon Gareth/Gwared upon which Gondolin is built. Also valid is the stem TIR- which is contained in –estrin according to the explanation of the name in BoLT 1, Appendix.

{Gwendelin} [Melian] per QS77.

{Gwenniel}[Melian] per Q30.

{Gyrth-I-Guinar}[Dor Firn-i-Guinar] per QS77

{Haleth}[Halmir] when it refers to Haleth the Hunter per LQ

{Haud-in-Nengin}[Haudh-en-Nirnaeth] per QS77

{Hisilómë}[Hithlum] per “The Shaping of Middle-Earth”: The Sketch of Mythology "The six remaining sons of Fëanor (Maglor, Celegorm, Curufin, Damrod, Díriel, and Cranthir) ate encamped about the lake Mithrim in Hisilómë (Hithlum, or Dorlómin, the land of shadows in the North-west), when they hear of the march of Finweg and his men who have crossed the Grinding Ice.

{House of the Swan}[House of Hador] per UT when it refers to Tuors ancestry. The sign of Annael remains the Swan.

{Hundar}[Haldir] per LQ when it refers to Halmir's son.

{Hundor}[Haldir] per LQ.

{i·Guilwarthon}[Dor Firn-i-Guinar] per QS77.

{Ing}[Ingwë] per QS77

{Inglor}[Finrod] or [Felagund] per LR

{Inwe}[Ingwë] per QS77

{Indrafangs}[dwarves of Belegost] when not referring to the dwarves of Moria per QS77

{Isfin}[Aredhel] per QS77

{Karkaras} (Knife-fang)}[Carcharoth ('the Red Maw')] per QS77.

{Kôr} [Túna] or [Tirion] per QS77. In BoLT Kor corresponds to both the later Tirion and Túna, being the name of both the City and the hill on which it stands. It should be changed to 'Tirion' when it refers to the city and 'Tuna' when it refers to the hill.

{Legolas Greenleaf}[Laegolas] Legolas means ‘green-leaves’ a woddland name – dialectical form of pure Sindarin laegolas: *lassē (High-elven lasse. S. las(s)) ‘leaf’; *gwa-lassa<gwa-lassie ‘collection of leaves, foliage’ (H.E. olassiē, S. golas, -olas); *laika ‘green’ –basis LAY as in Laire ‘summer’ (H.E. laica, S. leag (seldom used, usually replaced by calen), woodland leg).”
Quoted from Letter 211.
“’Technically’ Legolas is a compound (according to rules) of S. laeg ‘viridis fresh and green, and golass ‘collection of leaves, foliage’.”
Quoted from Letter 297.
‘ae’ and ‘ai’ are often interchangeable (eg Aeglos, Aiglos (Gil-galad’s spear)).
Laica (LAY) is cognate with S. laeg ~ Helge F. prefers to also honor “older” word laiqua as a viable Quenya word as well. Laiqa shows old “Qenya” orthography.
Tolkien gave the next elements in both High and Grey Elven (S. golas. –olas Q. olassië) as denoting a collection of leaves.
Quenya laiqua (LAYAK) Sindarin cognate *laeb (Noldorin lhoeb in Etym.)
Quenya laica (LAY) Sindarin cognate laeg (cf. Q&E WotJ laegel, Laegrim)
The term Laiquendi “Greenelves” was likely originally conceived of as resulting from laiqua+quendi. But laica can also “fit” here, so to speak ~ according to Helge F., the element may be a reduced form of _laica_ , or prefixed _lai_ may represent only the base itself (LAY), or maybe even laica+quendi > Laiquendi considering rocco+quén > roquen “knight”.

{Lhandroval}[Landroval] per LR

{Lothengriol}[Loth-a-ladwen] per 'The Lay of the Fall of Gondolin' (in 'Poems Early Abandoned, HoMe III).

{Lothlim}[Lothrim] This latter is the probable correct Sindarin form.

{Mahtan}[Sarmo] per Shibboleth

{Maidros} [Maeðros] per HoME X

{Malkarauki}[Valaraukar] per Valaquenta published with QS77.

{Mavwin}[Morwen] per QS77.

{Meglin}[Maeglin] per QS77.

{Melko}[Morgoth] per QS77. After BoLT Tolkien almost never uses Melkor in narration of events following Fëanor’s invention of the name Morgoth, except in a back-reference to ancient times.

{Minnastirith}[Minas Tirith] per QS77

{Nan-Tathrin}[Nan-Tathren] per QS77

{Nauglafring}[Nauglamír] per QS77.

{Nauglath}[dwarves of Nogrod] or [Naugrim] per QS77

{Nienóri}[Nienor] per UT.

{Noldoli}[Noldor] per QS77. Noldoli, though possibly still a valid form, is not used at all in QS77or late Tolkien writings.

{Noldorin}[Sindarin] per HoME XI

Nost-na-Lothion. Translated ‘Birth of Flowers’. In “Etymologies” under NO- ‘beget’ occurs Noldorin form noss ‘house’, example Nos Finrod ‘House of Finrod’. In BoLT 1 under Duilin, appears nos ‘house’ as well as related forms nosta- ‘be born’, nost ‘birth; blood, high birth; birthday’, and nôs ‘birthday’. Nost appears only in this citation and the name Nost-na-Lothion, none of the ‘birth’ forms appears later, so it is not at all clear that Tolkien would have considered it still valid. But no other words meaning “born” of “birth” are given by Tolkien, so this might still stand.

{Nivrost}[Nevrast] per QS77.

{Peleg}[Huor] per QS77and “Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin”.

{Pengolodh} and {Pengoloð} [Thingódhel] per Q&E

{Place of the Gods}[Place of the Ainur]. Tolkien almost entirely drops “Gods” as a English translation in later writings. One would normally change “Gods” to “Valar”, but the Elvish form Gar Ainion specifically refers to the Ainur, that is, not just to the Valar but also to the Maiar and to the Ainur who remained outside EÄ. The English translation should be equally wide. “Place of the Holy Ones” would be full translation, but is perhaps to cumbersome.

{Rodothlim}[Elves of Nargothrond] per QS77.

{Saeros}[Orgol] per CoH

{Salgant}[Talagand] per “The Eytmologies”. Under the stem ÑGAN-, ÑGÁNAD- ‘play (on stringed instrument)’ which produces various forms meaning ‘Harp’ or ‘harp-playing’, is found: (copy note)

{Sorontur}[Sorontar] per “The Etymologies” (under THOR-, THORON-) and “The Wanderings of Húrin” in The War of the Jewels (HoME 11).

{Sarn Athrad} and {Sarnathrod}[Athrad Daer] per 'Of Maeglin'.

{Silver Bowl}[Dimrost] per QS77.

{Tarin Austa}[Gates of Summer], the Elvish name for the festival “Gates of Summer”. Nether of the elements appears in extant later Sindarin. But there is also no conflict. (The place name Tarn Aeluin is a mixed form in which tarn is the English word meaning ‘small mountain lake’.) Sindarin tarn meaning ‘gate’ might exist. Austa is not impossibly an alternate name for ‘summer’ alongside laer. Can be dropped as uncertain.

{Taur-na-Fuin}[Taur-nu-Fuin] per QS77

{Tauros}[Tauron] per LQ

{Tavros} [Tauron] per LQ

{Teiglin}[Taeglin] per WH note 55:

{Tengwethil}[Taniquetil] per QS77

{Thargelion}[Talath Rhúnen] or [Dor-Caranthir] per HoME XI

{Thorn Sir}[Thoron Sîr] This updates the two elements for the name from Gnomissh to their QS77and LR Sindarin forms, but I’m not sure the syntax of this later name is valid.

{Thornhoth}[Thoronhoth] This latter is the probable correct Sindarin form.

{Throndor}[Thorondor] per QS77and LR.

{Thu} [Sauron] or [Gorthaur] per LR; this change is very difficult since Thu is often used in the rhyme. Tolkien replaced it in some cases by Gorthu but this is also not longer valid and its replacment Gorthaur does not work in the rhyming. Thus we have to find some individual solution for each line.

{Tinwelint}[Thingol] per LR.

{Tower of Ingildon}[Tower of Nimras] per QS77.

{Tumladin}[Tumladen] per QS77.

{Tun}[Túna] per QS77

{Umboth-Muilin}[Aelin-uial] per QS77and UT

{Úrin}[Húrin] per LR.

{Valmar}[Valimar] per LR

{Ylmir}[Ulmo] per QS77

[gondowe]

And What about {Celon}[Limhir]

[Findegil]

I think we simply mist that change.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I added {Celon}[Limhir] and a few others I missed.

[gondowe]

As a constructive question (I know I´m new here) If Duin Daer and Limhir are accepted. Why not Thargelian or Thorewilan for Thargelion?. That are from the same (I think) late source.

Greetings

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I believe all the "Thargelion" forms were replaced by either "Dor-Caranthir" (so called by the Noldor) and "Radhrost." (the name in Doriathrin)

Or was "Radhrost" replaced by "Talath Rhúnen?" I was a bit confused as to whether that was a replacement or a translation from Doriathrin to common Sindarin.

[gondowe]

And what about {Gelmir}[Faramir] (the elf with Arminas)

[Findegil]

Good catch, especially since you found the source of the change in The Voyages of Earendil.

I think we have to change {Gelmir} to [Faramir] and exchange two of 'Falathar, Aerandir, and Erellont' with Faramir and Arminas, but which two?

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

Are we sure about {Gelmir} [Faramir]? As far as I can tell, the only source is one of the Narn plot synopses, but I see nothing to suggest that this synopsis post-dates or takes precedence over the ones in which he is named Gelmir.

[gondowe]

I think is not necessary exchange the companions of Earendil, although Tolkien had pointed it. Perhaps the best reason is that you said, whose two?

I found this change because with your work in the narn Hurin, have convinced me in retake my old work in this text and forget the official CoH of CT. But having as basis the CoH and adding the parts of the lay as prose. And of course with this I have to change for the brother of Gwindor whith the same name that is the fist reason to take the change. Change the other names and include as an appendix TWoH as i had edited it .

And for the same reason I revised my Beren and Luthien text enlarging as I could with more material from the lay to have more pages and can name it Narn.

And the new idea is to join the three narns in a book.
What do you think I wanted to tell this in the other thread but i tel you now.

Greetings

[Findegil]

Gelmir son of Guilin and Gelmir companion of Arminas is for sure a no go. And this is also for sure not a case like Rumil the sage of Trion and Rumil the marchwarden of Lorien. Both Gelimrs are from the same tribe of the Noldor.

But if we take up this part of the note, why not the one about these two beeing Earendils companiens later. And I made up my mind to which of the triple has to go instaed: Falathar and Aerandir. Both names sound to me like Epesse taken up after all the voyages undertaken with Earendil. My Elvish is wonting in this, but the first element in Falathar names a coastline and Aerandir means Seewanderer for sure, while I can't make much out of Erellont. Probably we should name them here with their fuller name:But Eärendil, alone of living Men, landed on the immortal shores; and he said to Elwing and to those that were with him, three mariners who had sailed all the seas beside him, and VE-11.025 Note from WH <Faramir> Falathar, <Arminas> Aerandir, and Erellont were their names:

The idea to put the three great tales in one book together is a sound one. When I started to involve my self to this project, also dreamed of a germany version of the final product. And for the fragments of the Lay's I thought of going the same way as your propose (I don't have the skill to recast them in apropirate lays in German). Such a tarnslation would also adress the stylistic issue that Lindil brought up earlier in the project, since any translation would smooth the style some what. But take care, it is a long and hard work.

Respectfully
Findegil

[gondowe]

Of course the narns are in prose except some passages of the lay of Leithian but in spanish are not rhyme only rhetorical poetry language. But for this I have the english version to read it in loud voice.
I am a Wagnerian like Tolkienian and I like very much alliterative verses, that like the Narn Hurin would sound well in German.

A question, who are supposed to have composed the tales:

Ainulindale Rumil

Valaquenta Pengolodh?

Quenta Silmarillion Pengolodh

Narn Beren ?

Narn Hurin Dirhaval

Narn Gondolin Pengolodh?

Akallabeth ?

Of .... the second and third Age AElfwine?

Tale of Years First age Qennar Onotimo
Second Age Pengolodh?
Thiird Age


Greetings

[Aiwendil]

Findegil wrote:

Gelmir son of Guilin and Gelmir companion of Arminas is for sure a no go.


I’m not sure of this. Aren’t both named ‘Gelmir’ in the ‘Narn’ material? It would appear that Tolkien felt the repetition of the name was not a problem. I suppose one could argue that he decided it was a problem and the name ‘Faramir’ was intended to resolve it. But there is no indication that the ‘Faramir’ note is later or more authoritative than the text that uses ‘Gelmir’. On the contrary, UT (though I admit it’s not the most reliable source) seems to suggest that the ‘final’ version (such as it was) uses ‘Gelmir’.

A word about the repetition of Elvish names in general – I’ve been rather convinced for some time now that Tolkien’s statement that this did not happen should be interpreted to mean that Elves did not honour ancestors or historical figures by giving their names to their children (whereas Men did). Names could however be repeated ‘accidentally’. Thus Galdor of the Grey Havens was not named after Galdor of Gondolin; he was merely given the name ‘Galdor’ which happened also to have been the name of one of Gondolin’s captains. The same applies to Rumil and to Legolas (though I know Findegil has other ideas about the latter). ‘Glorfindel’ was different because, as Tolkien says, it was 1. a striking and slightly unusual name and 2. the name of a very famous hero of the First Age. Similarly, we would not expect another Elf to be named ‘Feanor’, for example. Another situation in which Elvish names are repeated (perhaps more pertinent here) is within a family. Thus, unless my memory fails me, all of Finwe’s sons and all of Feanor’s sons were given the father-name ‘Finwe’ and distinguishing prefixes were adopted later. And then there’s the name ‘Ambarussa’ that Nerdanel gave to both of the twins.

The upshot of all this is that I feel it’s often not a problem for an Elvish name to be repeated. The two Gelmirs may have been named alike accidentally, by parents who were each unaware of the other. Or they could be related and Gelmir could be a repeated family name like ‘Finwe’. Add to this the fact that either name could be either a father-name, a mother-name, or an after-name.

I agree that ‘Falathar’ and ‘Aerandir’ sound like epessi. They could also be prophetic mother-names, with ‘Gelmir/Faramir’ and ‘Arminas’ being the father-names. But then, ‘Erellont’ could be an epesse as well (I’m not sure what it means either, though the ‘er’ might mean ‘one’, ‘alone’, as in ‘Eru’ and ‘Eriol’). Further, we have no way of telling whether Falathar is Gelmir/Faramir and Aerandir Arminas or vice versa. And finally, one could potentially interpret the note as altering the story so that Earendil had five companions rather than three. With all this uncertainty, I’m a little hesitant about introducing the names (though I’d like to).

[Findegil]

I do not have answeres for all the tales and I doubt some of the authors you put in:

I am not sure how was supposed to tell AElfwine the Silmarillion and the Valaquenta.

Narn Beren as you call it was old. I think we have signs that it was already known in Beleriand probably composed shortly after Beren and Lúthien returned from Mandos. But by whom, we don't know.

Narn Gondolin: I have no real idea, but in The Lost Tales it is told by Littlehaert son of Voronwe. He is not a bad candidate for that tale even so do not know if he ever apeared after The Lost Tales.

The Akalabeth was the work of Elendil. I think we are told so some were.

Of .... the second and third Age I don't think Aelfwine is a good candidate for this text. I would think Bilbo would be fitting.

Qennar Onotimo wrod some work about the counting of time but he is quoted in the Annals. That means it is more likly that Pengolodh worte the Annals of Aman. For the Gray Annals we are never told who made them. I wouldn't credit one single author with them. Probably they were gebun by Dairon but others finished them.
The Tale of the Years of the second and thrid age were made by Hobbits. I think Peregrin Took is credited with them. It is told in the prefarce of the Appendices.
I think that Tolkien later envisage all the Tales of the Years to have the same author. In the case of the First Age (and probably the the times before sun and moon) they were drawn from the longer Annals and for the later ages composed from the knowledge gained in Imladris and Minas Tirth.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

Cross posting with Aiwendil. (I never thought that this would happen!)

Do we real have on single text of the Narn that has in it Gelmir son of Guilin and Gelmir companion of Arminas? I don't think so. But still the point has some wight looking into the Grey Annals, were the encounter of Túrin with Arminas and Gelmir originates. But still in that text it is a rider made later then the main body of the text in which Arminas and Gelmir come to Nargothrond.
The impresion from what we have of these notes and plot synposes is that Faramir was a later replacement probably oferlook when the typescript of the coming to Nargothrond was made.

I agree in pricipal that the reuse of names inside the elvish race was not very stricly followed. (Also it is not only Legolas who is one and the same in my oppion, we also sufficient hints that Galdor of the Havens was one and the same Galdor of the Tree, Lord of Gondolin.) A connextion between Gelmir co of Arminas and Gemil son of Guilin would be strange in my oppion. Wouldn't Gelmir visit his kin Gwindor and or Guilin who are prominent in the tale? Such a detail could of course be lost, but stil it seems unlikely to me. And for a simple coincidence they are not fare enough seperated for my feeling. Even so Gelmir co of Arminas had none, Guilin and his family had some high reputation about the Elves of Finrafins house.

All over I think it is safer to replace Gelmir by Faramir.

Your doubts about the companiens of Earendil have more wight. I have to look into some sources and consider this a bit longer before giving some appropirate answere.

[Aiwendil]

Do we real have on single text of the Narn that has in it Gelmir son of Guilin and Gelmir companion of Arminas?


Well, the early portions of the Narn and the fragments from the middle are at least closely contemporary, and it certainly seems that Tolkien wrote about Gelmir the companion of Arminas when the story of Gelmir Guilin’s son was already in place. Note also that Gelmir Arminas’s companion appears in the later ‘Tuor’, written (as far as I can tell) after the Grey Annals but before the beginning and middle sections of the Narn.

But for me the question is simply this: was the note with the name ‘Faramir’ written before or after the text given in UT with Gelmir and Arminas? This is of course impossible for us to answer conclusively. From CT’s description of the note and from the text as presented in UT, I get the impression that the ‘Gelmir’ text is the latest form and that the plot-synopsis with ‘Faramir’ was only an outline that preceded it. I fully recognize though that the evidence is very shaky; and moreover it’s possible that CT himself misunderstood the relations among the texts when he published UT. Also, given that Gelmir and Arminas had already appeared in ‘Tuor’, it is perhaps a little strange that Tolkien should change the name to Faramir only to later revert to Gelmir. I need to think about this a little bit more (and would like to hear other opinions – Aran, Maedhros?), but I suppose I can see a fair argument for the change to Faramir.

On the subject of the authors of the texts, a few comments:

- I think that one cannot reconcile Tolkien’s latest ideas with Aelfwine of England as the transmitter of the legends, especially given Bilbo’s ‘Translations from the Elvish’. It has always seemed strange to me that Aelfwine appears in texts as late as the 1950s Ainulindale and the ‘Dangweth Pendolodh’, and I cannot fully explain this. But I think that, particularly once the idea entered that the Silmarillion was of Numenorean origin, Aelfwine ceased to be.

- I had always assumed the Valaquenta to be the work of Pengolodh, but searching for it a while ago I could find no statement at all pertaining to its authorship. Nonetheless, Pengolodh (Thingodhel, I suppose I must get used to calling him) seems a likely source.

- The Quenta Silmarillion is in MT said to have been written in Numenor. I think that this can be accepted even if one rejects the cosmological elements of MT.

- I seem to recall (though I’m not certain) a statement that all the ‘Great Tales’ of the Atanatarion were written by Men. That would mean none of ‘Beren and Luthien’, ‘Tuor’, or ‘Earendil’ could have been written by an Elf.

- I’m also quite sure Elendil is said explicitly to be the author of the Akallabeth, though I can’t recall the source at the moment. Perhaps LotR appendices?

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I believe LotR does name Elendil as the author of the Akallabeth; I'll check.

I personally believe that Tolkion envisioned many different versions of the Great Tales, all coming down different lines. I think that Bilbo's "Translations," the records of Minas Tirith and Numenor, and Ælfwine's translations in Tol Eressa were considered not mutually exclusive forms of transmission, but rather that Tolkien envisioned himself as taking them all together and plucking bits of information from each to get a rounded and complete history.

I will have to look into the Gelmir/Faramir issue more closely before formulating an opinion.

[gondowe]

As for the names: I think that if we assume a rule (or in my case if I assume a rule) there must be no exceptions, and I admit that I have no solution in the case of Rumil, and possibly will be the exception of all rules.
So, for me, there cannot be two Gelmirs. And as I said before Legolas of the LOTR cannot be in FoG, but Galdor is more possible (and i replace Legolas for Galdor as i said).

In the matter of transmission of the lore, Tolkien left unfinished this, ( I also can not explain Aelwine in post LOTR texts, but if he is, then Tolkien wanted to retake the character) and we can imagine things, because does not alter the history that is told. And i always thought that the hobbits and AElfwine are compatible.
At the time Aelfwine arrives in Eressea the hobbits are dead, the books in middle earth(Europe) are lost, and the only source is that of Eressea.
Aelwine talks with Pengolodh or whoever and translate the books of Bilbo and Frodo with material Numenorean and new material added when they arrived at the end of the third age in the isle, but also translate other material (because I think is not told what contains exactly the Translations of the Elvish of the Red Book).

The vision of the whole Aelfwine material must be human because part of the sources are human and he is a Middle Age human too.

Greetings

[Findegil]

About Falathar, Aerandir, Erellont and Faramir/Gelmir, Arminas:

I looked up some more elements of the names:
FALAS - coastline, surfe; THAR - beyond => The name has a meaning like beyond the surf, out at the high see
Aerandir => Seewanderer
ERE - lonely; EL - Star; LONT - probably related to LOND way on see, passage as in Aqualonde = passage of the swans => I have no clou how to combine that with a good sense.

The three companiones were named in the Quenta Silmarillion for the first time. There Aerandir was named Airandir and that name was later changed on the copy made for the Later Quenta Silmarillion material. We can not say when this change was made, and we have no clou when exactly the note about Faramir and Arminas was written.

With all this uncertainties it would probably be the best solution to be ambiguous: We could us the not in the place were Faramir/Gelmir and Arminas leave Nargothrond and stick to the names of Earendils companions. Thus we leave all decisions to the reader. He can chose for himself out of the following possible interpretations:
a) Falathar, Aerandir and/or Erellont were epessi of Faramir/Gelmir and Arminas
b) Faramir/Gelmir and Arminas were companions of one of Earendils earlier journeys.
The only choice we remove is the possibilty that Earendil had more then three mariners with him on his last travel. But I see no way around here. We could either stick to three or we must ad some construction that makes clear that there were more. At least of course we could also skip the names and the number. But then we would have Faramir/Gelmir and Arminas named earlier and looking like Earendils sole companions.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I think that solution is probably the best. One question we should at least consider is whether to note that they were companions of Earendil at their appearance in 'Turin' or their appearance in 'Tuor'. I suppose that since the idea appears in a Narn plot synopsis, it makes sense to go with the former, although that might be a little odd because their last appearance will be in 'Tuor' (even though it occurs earlier chronologically).

[Findegil]

I thought about how to introduce the note, and that is what came of it:Then {Gelmir}[Faramir] and Arminas departed, and went back to the South: but despite Túrin's taunts they would gladly have awaited battle beside their kin, and they went only because Círdan had bidden them under the command of Ulmo to bring back word to him of Nargothrond and of the speeding of their errand there. And NA-EX-56.65 <WH; Note 11 Faramir and Arminas were later Earendil's companions on voyage.> Orodreth was much troubled by the words of the messengers; but all the more fell became the mood of Túrin, and he would by no means listen to their counsels, and least of all would he suffer the great bridge to be cast down. For so much at least of the words of Ulmo were read aright.I adopted Faramir for this extract because I think the discussion is leaning to this.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

What about {Lalaith}[Lalaeth] based on the genealogical tables associated with LQ2? These are from December 1959, which I'm fairly sure is later than the 'Narn' (though I can't find any definitive statement on when the early portions of the 'Narn' were written).

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Well, the ai<ae shift is pretty common in Sindarin. I'd say that change is likely.


Oh, and thank you, Aiwendil!

EDIT: "Thoron Sîr" should probably be altered to "Sîr Thoron" (as in "Aran Moria").

[Aiwendil]

Indeed, as Jallanite (I think) noted so long ago:
{Thorn Sir}[Thoron Sîr] This updates the two elements for the name from Gnomish to their QS77 and LR Sindarin forms, but I’m not sure the syntax of this later name is valid.


Certainly it seems that if the meaning is to be 'River of (the) Eagle' then it would have to be 'Sîr Thoron'. But it seems to me rather that 'eagle' is being used adjectivally: 'Eagle River'. But I don't know if that kind of noun-noun construction is used in later Sindarin.

On another note: Having thought about it some more, I now think it quite probable that the plot-synopsis in which 'Faramir' occurs is later than the texts that use 'Gelmir' and that Tolkien changed the name precisely to avoid the repetition of the name. Earlier I had supposed that the fact that CT used 'Gelmir' in UT suggested he thought that was the final form adopted in the Narn. However, it now occurs to me that he likely used 'Gelmir' so as to agree with the '77. So I think we're agreed on {Gelmir}[Faramir] now.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Well, adjectives in Sindarin (outside of compounds) are also typically after their noun, so the construction should still change.

[Aiwendil]

Good point! Okay, I suppose that unless we can find a counter-example showing that the syntax is acceptable, we should change {Thorn Sir}[Sîr Thoron].

[gondowe]

I suppose you have adopted Lalaeth, and Sir Thoron as definitive, don't you?
And for the note about Faramir and Arminas by Findegil above, have you decided to change, what names of the Earendil's companions.

What had you decided about Gil-galad, I didn't remember to ask you if you had discussed about him (I suppose so). I had adopted the name Rodnor as son of Orodreth (with Finduilas and Haldir), but Orodreth still son of Finarfin.

Greetings

[Findegil]

Gondowe, this thraed is a bit diffrent from other: In general a change needs an agreement of the hole group. Somtimes unisono as seldom as possible by voting. In such questions as mostly collected here it is more a kind of silence agreement to what an expert decided or (since we have the luck in the moment that more than one linguistic expert is activ) two experts found by discussion. Hotly debatable subjects will be discussed in seperate threads.


Lalaith => Lalaeth: Seems fairly save.

Thoron Sir => Sîr Thoron: Aiwendil and Aran agreed, so it seems done.

Gelmir [the companien of Arminas] => Faramir: Done after Aiwendil agreed.

About the note making Faramir and Arminas companions of Earendil: We will take up the note into the text of the Narn, but we not change any names in The Voyage of Earendil simply because Faramir and Arminas could have been companions of Earendils earlier voyages and not the last one.

Gil-galad's parantag is: Gil-galad son of Orodreth son of Angrod son of Finarfin.
Haldir son of Orodreth is not included in our version. In our oppinion Haldir son of Orodreth was the literary anchester of Handir Lord of Brethil.

Respectfully
Findegil

[gondowe]

About the note making Faramir and Arminas companions of Earendil: We will take up the note into the text of the Narn, but we not change any names in The Voyage of Earendil simply because Faramir and Arminas could have been companions of Earendils earlier voyages and not the last one.

Gil-galad's parantag is: Gil-galad son of Orodreth son of Angrod son of Finarfin.
Haldir son of Orodreth is not included in our version. In our oppinion Haldir son of Orodreth was the literary anchester of Handir Lord of Brethil.



Ok Findegil.
As for the first matter and I said before I think we must leave the three original companions, but I think that in QS is said that they were companions of Eärendil in all the seas, or something like this.

As for the second matter, I'm agree in your opinion but Haldir can be a good reason (as is said in the rejected annal) to the increase of vigilance in the forest of Narog, and the other one is a man so I don't have problems with the names. And the matter of Orodreth brougth me a more difficult rework in the whole text, for that reason I kept him as son of Finarfin.

Greetings

[Aiwendil]

Gondowe wrote:
And the matter of Orodreth brougth me a more difficult rework in the whole text, for that reason I kept him as son of Finarfin.

Indeed, the matter of Orodreth's parentage and children is among the most difficult in the Legendarium. I, at least, did not appreciate just how tricky an issue it is when I first read HoMe - only in actually working on editing the texts in this project did some of the difficulties become apparent. If nothing else, I do now better understand Christopher Tolkien's decision to leave Orodreth the son of Finarfin and Gil-Galad the son of Fingon.

I think we must leave the three original companions, but I think that in QS is said that they were companions of Eärendil in all the seas, or something like this.

QS says that they had 'sailed all the seas beside him'. It's not completely clear to me that this means that there was no occasion when Earendil sailed in a ship without them - but even if it does, we could still suppose any of the following:

- On his early voyages, Earendil's companions were Aerandir, Erellont, Falathar, Arminas, and Faramir

- Two of Aerandir, Erellont, and Falathar are merely other names for Arminas and Faramir (Elves have at least a mother-name and a father-name and often additional after-names)

- Arminas and Faramir were indeed with Earendil on his great voyage but either became separated from him or died in the course of his adventures before he and his remaining companions reached Aman

[gondowe]

Making Gil-galad (Rodnor) as son of Orodreth not complicate so much the edition, only the add of the concept that he flew with his mother from the attack of Nargothrond. And for example I introduce a passage when Sauron took Minas Tirith that Orodreth flew to Nargothrond with his wife and his sons Finduilas Haldir and the young Rodnor. The name Gil-galad was given by his mother and introduced in the last chapter, previously I omitted the word Gil-galad.

By the way It's also easy (I think, as I did) to take the great history of the dead of Amrod in the burning of the ships. (I think it´s more dramatical for the character of Fëanor), because the participation of the twins were minor in the history and I only omit the references to Amrod ( always "and Amras"), the plurals, and "seven sons" to "six sons", etc.

Greetings

[Findegil]

We have not worked out the earlier chapters of the Beleriandic history, but the Concept to name Gil-galad late and use his name Ereinion would be suitable.

We took Ereinion as valid throughout. So I could not recall when that discussion was held the last time we worked on the "Voyages of Earendil" and I still can't. With a bit of luck Aiwendil has some idea were to search, since I did not find it in the obvious places.

Yes, we have also burned Amrod at Losgar. But we did not change 'seven sons' to 'six sons'. The general change would be 'seven sons' to 'sons'. We thought the is more in accordance with that Feanorians attemp to hush it up, so to speak. When a number was needed we added 'remaining' or a similar phrase before the number.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I must admit to some confusion over Rodnor vs. Ereinion. I thought I recalled a discussion at some point where we decided on 'Ereinion'. But I cannot now find it. Moreover, looking at my old posts in several threads, I realize that I have been inconsistent myself, in one place saying that 'Rodnor' should be emended to 'Ereinion' and in one place the exact opposite.

So it's probably best to make a fresh start in considering the matter. I just re-read the note on Gil-Galad's parentage from XII and, while it's still far from clear, I think the evolution of his name goes something like this:

Late 1930s: In FN II, Gil-Galad (in his first appearance) is the son of Felagund.
Early 1950s: In LQ, Gil-Galad is the son of Felagund.
Early 1950s: In GA, Felagund has no children; a note states that Findor Gil-Galad is the son of Fingon.
c. 1960: In 'A Description of the Island of Numenor' and 'Aldarion and Erendis', Finellach Gil-Galad is a descendant of Finarfin (though the exact relationship is unspecified).
August 1965: In a note on the genealogy of the House of Finwe, Gil-Galad becomes 'Artanaro = Rodnor', the son of Orodreth. The genealogical table itself was then altered to show this.
1968: In 'The Shibboleth of Feanor', he is called 'Ereinion Gil-Galad'.

Somewhat confusingly, CT notes that work on the genealogical table of the House of Finwe continued while the 'Shibboleth' was being written. However, he makes no mention of the name 'Ereinion' in this discussion.

Nonetheless, I think the conclusion to be drawn is more or less clear: at some point between 1965 and 1968, 'Ereinion' replaced 'Artanaro/Rodnor' as Gil-Galad's name. So I think we are correct to adopt 'Ereinion'.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I agree on adopting Ereinion.

[gondowe]

I was revising PoME, and I think that the sentence that made take the decision of Rodnor is That CT said after the last tree of genealogies that he was sure was the last idea of his father, but it's true that remains not clear the matter.
I don't know. Perhaps you are rigth, and the best name is Ereinion.

[Aiwendil]

Yes, Christopher Tolkien's discussion in XII is not completely clear. He says among other things that:

In the last of the genealogical tables Artanaro (Rodnor) called Gil-Galad appears

Thus implementing the note of August 1965. The date of this 'last of the genealogical tables' is not clear, but CT says that these genealogies were still being used and altered when the excursus from the 'Shibboleth of Feanor' was written. This would suggest that the use of 'Rodnor' on the genealogical table was contemporary with the use of 'Ereinion' in the text, in which case the question of which came later is very doubtful.

However, he also notes that some corrections were not made to the genealogy - e.g. the genealogy still has the earlier three daughters of Finwe and Indis whereas in the 'Shibboleth' text they had two daughters. So it seems that the 'Shibboleth' excursus represents, at least in some respects, later ideas than the genealogical table.

Nonetheless, CT, after giving a brief schematic of the final situation arrived at in the table, remarks:

There can be no doubt that this was my father's last word on the subject

But I think that what he is referring to here is not Gil-Galad's name but his parentage. That is, the last word on Gil-Galad's parentage is that he was Orodreth's son. He certainly does not offer any evidence that the name 'Ereinion' in the 'Shibboleth' was superceded by the name 'Rodnor' in the genealogical table.

[Findegil]

Okay, so Ereinion it seems to be. But do we have a Quenya equivalent? Or would we take Aratanáro fro that still? Of course it is not absolutly necessary for him to have a Quenya name, and it not necessary for us to have give one.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I think 'Rodnor' is just the Sindarin translation of 'Artanaro', 'high flame' or 'flame commander'. Cf. Feanaro -> Feanor and Findarato, Angarato -> Finrod, Angrod. So I suppose that if 'Rodnor' was superceded by 'Ereinion' then 'Artanaro' is obselete as well.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

That is correct. The only other possibility is that his name was "Artanaro [translated Rodnor] (his father-name) Ereinion (his mother name) Gil-galad (an epesse)."

Araniondo (or something to that effect) would probably be Quenya for Ereinion. My Quenya studies are slightly less fresh in my mind than my Sindarin ones, so you might want to check that before taking my word for it.

[Findegil]

I personally would jump at this last idea that Atanaro was his father-name natrually given in Quenya which would have yielded Rodnor in Sindarin. But Ereinion was his mother-name given in Sindarin, since his mother was a Sinda of Dorthonion. Later he got the epesse Gil-galad (natrually in Sindarin, since that was the dayly speech of the time).

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I realized there's another change we didn't note: Bauglir < Baugron as per a note to the later versions of the Valaquenta.

[Aiwendil]

Good catch; however, there is an occurrence of 'Bauglir' in the first part of the Narn, and we know that this cannot have been an editorial change by CRT from 'Baugron' because he says in X that 'Baugron' occurs nowhere else. Vq 2 and the first portions of the 'Narn' both date from the late 1950s, so it's difficult to say which is the later occurrence.

This is a somewhat ambiguous case, but my inclination is to take 'Bauglir' as the more conservative choice, since 'Baugron' occurs only once and may have been a mere passing idea. Better, in my view, to be conservative and not accept a late name change than to inadvertantly accept a rejected one.

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I'm not so sure. I think this alteration is not a "change," per se, but rather an update. "Bauglir" is a Gnomish name; there is no Sindarin ending "-lir." "Baugron," however, matches then Sindarin masculine ending seen in Sauron and Daeron, from older "-ondo."

I think the Bauglir < Baugron note came from a time where the Professor was updating old names to match the new styles, but he later forgot it and wrote the form he was used to writing. In fact, isn't the Valaquenta the same document which saw the change Tavros < Tauron, which is a change of the same form?

[gondowe]

Like many other names, it's difficult and hard to think change one that have so much tradition, perhaps the same professor would think the same. But if linguistically it's updated I think we must change it.

Greetings

[Findegil]

We have changed names even without having a replacement from Tolkien for the reason that their Sindarin was outdated. In this case we have a replacment and even so it only appears once when we deailing with a late change that is so much to be wondered. Even if Tolkien used the name 'Bauglir' at a later occasion (which is not sure) we have precedents of such backward and forward changes before he was used to the changed form.

In short: I think 'Baugron' is to be taken.

I have looked up all occassions were 'Bauglir is used in our text adn the change would not creat any problem in rhyming couples (in aliteration both seem near enough to be exchangeable any way, but Bauglir was never used in that either in our text).

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

I'm still not convinced about 'Baugron'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's no known reason that 'Bauglir' would be invalid in later Sindarin. We have, anyway, other names ending in '-ir' (e.g. Gwaihir, Amdir).

My reasoning on which to use is more or less this:

If we knew that the relevant part of the Narn was written before Vq 2, then it would be clear that we should take 'Baugron'. On the other hand, I would say that if we knew that it was written after Vq 2, we would have to take 'Bauglir'. Our principles would allow us to disregard a later occurrence of 'Bauglir' only if it was either unworkable (which it isn't) or a clear case of a mere error on Tolkien's part (which I don't think we can establish). So the 'correct' choice comes down to the matter of which was written first, Vq 2 or the relevant passage in the Narn.

We have no way, that I can see, to figure out this question of chronology, and thus no indication which name is 'correct'. In the situation where the question rests on another, undecidable, question, my inclination is to be conservative and go with the name that is well established rather than the one that only appears once.

That's my logic and, as you can see, it leads me to favour 'Bauglir'. I'm not dogmatic about it, though, and I could perhaps be persuaded.

[gondowe]

I am a nostalgic and I would like to keep Bauglir.
But Tolkien wrote even one only time Baugron.
We know that the last one is a Sindarin updated.
It's true that the dates are a mistery, but The Narn possibly was written before Vq2 (I say this by memory, but the Narn was started more or less in 1951, and the Second revission of QS about 1958, isn't it?) If is so, seven years to write all the portions of the narn are enough.
So I vote for Baugron.

Greetings.

[Aiwendil]

We know that the last one is a Sindarin updated.

Sorry to belabour the point, but I don't think we know this. I could be wrong, but I don't know of a reason that 'Bauglir' is not valid in mature Sindarin.

It's true that the dates are a mistery, but The Narn possibly was written before Vq2 (I say this by memory, but the Narn was started more or less in 1951, and the Second revission of QS about 1958, isn't it?)

The end of the Narn was written in 1950-1951, but the first part was, I believe, written in the late 1950s.

[gondowe]

...I don't know of a reason that 'Bauglir' is not valid in mature Sindarin.


I'm not a specialist in language (even in my Spanish)..

I was trying to find in the review of words in Sindarin in MR made in VT and Baugron is not reckoned lamentably.

Greetings

[Aran e-Godhellim]

I'm still not convinced about 'Baugron'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's no known reason that 'Bauglir' would be invalid in later Sindarin. We have, anyway, other names ending in '-ir' (e.g. Gwaihir, Amdir).

Sorry, that doesn't hold up. The ending is not "-ir" in any of those cases. In Gwaihir, the ending is -hir, meaning "lord," thus "Wind-lord." In Amdir, the ending is -dir. This is, by context, a Silvan - not Sindarin - name, so the second element is uncertain, but the first is certainly related to am-, meaning "up, uprising". Finally, as I stated before, the ending in Bauglir is probably -lir, which is unattested in mature Sindarin.

The name comes from the word "baug," meaning "oppression," which is the same root found in Balrog. This shows that it does have an associated consonant "l," so it is possible the ending really is -ir, but I still don't think that gets you out of trouble. Bauglir doesn't look like Sindarin (it looks like a "plural" partitive plural in Quenya, but that is of course absurd), and given later patterns we should expect "Oppressive One" to come out Baugron, just like Daeron (Shadowy One) and Sauron (Putrid One).

[gondowe]

This was a long time without knowing about you.

I would like to retake conversation proposing {Ered}[Eryd] as is stated by the Professor in Words, Phrases and Passages in various Tongues in TLOTR. He wrote that both plurals are valid in Sindarin but in Silmarillion must use the second.

Greetings

[Aran e-Godhellim]

Actually, since the Silmarillion is more archaic, it makes sense to use the non-analogical original form.

[Tar-Telperien]

Hello. I have returned from an absence of years; my interest in this project has recently been renewed. You're still doing such excellent work after all these years. I've not had much of a part aside from offering simple suggestions here and there, which I'm about to do again.

Gwarestrin. This must stand as there is nothing newer and nothing in published Sindarin corpus that helps in either determining its validity in Sindarin or in creating a possibly more correct Sindarin form. At least gwar- seems still valid as in Amon Gareth/Gwared upon which Gondolin is built. Also valid is the stem TIR- which is contained in –estrin according to the explanation of the name in BoLT 1, Appendix.

I'm afraid this won't work, for phonological reasons if nothing else. The consonant cluster -str- appears to be disallowed in later Sindarin. For example, the terms nothrim 'house' and nothlir 'family line' come from the word nost; when the word is compounded, -st because -th- to avoid the disallowed combinations -str- and -stl-. This process also happens in the very term Gondothrimbar, one of the other names of Gondolin: it is gond + ost + rim + bar. The compound **ostrim is impossible, so it becomes othrim instead. Thus, "Gwarestrin" as such has to be replaced by something else.

We seem to have a few options:

1. The most conservative one is simply to replicate the phonological process discussed above and replace Gwarestrin with Gwarethrin. I would have suggested this, but since Tolkien later replaced Gwareth with Gwared, it might be better to do something else, since the concept of a voiceless consonant at the end of the word has been done away with.

2. Therefore, another option is to use Gwaredrin, or something similar, thus preserving Tolkien's later preference of Gwared over Gwareth. (I am confused about the morphological boundary of this word. Is it Gwares-trin, or Gwarest-rin, or Gwar-estrin, or what?)

3. The third option would be to get rid of the (surely outdated) suffix -trin or whatever it is, along with changing the phonology. I lean toward this, but it would require more conjecture and editorial intrusion. What I'm most tempted to suggest is Minas Gwared, since minas was a common designation of citadels in later Sindarin. It works perfectly with the translation given in the text (Tower of Guard) and preserves the clear connection between the name of the city and the hill it stands on that exists in the original term Gwarestrin. The problem with this one, of course, is that it takes the most liberty with the text and ruins the alliteration of the Seven Names: all the names of Gondolin aside from Loth and Loth-a-laden start with G. Perhaps Gwarmindon could work? Mindon means an isolated hill with a central watch tower, which is essentially what Gondolin was.

EDIT: Okay, after having looked it up in the Fall of Gondolin names list, estrin apparently combines esc and tirin. If we want to be conservative, we could put that extra i back in and call it Gwarestirin. The well-known tir root would become more visible that way, in addition to the word being phonologically correct.

I don't know enough about Sindarin to come up with any other options. But it would seem that something has to be done about this glaring phonological error.

[Findegil]

It seems we have 2 open ends in this thread:

Bauglir -> Baugron:
It seems that Tolkien made a kind of standarisation of names late in his life. We already adopted Tauros -> Tauron, in another thread we discuss Maedros -> Maedron. All in all this makes the changes more consistent to me. I would adopt both Maedros -> Maedron and Bauglir -> Baugron

Gwarestrin -> ???
I think it would not be good to produce any new name like 'Minas Gwared' or 'Gwarmindon'. I would rather go with the conservativ approach and use 'Gwarestirin'.

Respectfuly
Findegil

[gondowe]

Hello, two new proposals:

Change {Erchamion}[Erchamon] per Eldarin, hands, Fingers and Numerals, VT47:pg 7

include only in the Valaquenta an allusion of Mairon as the original name of Sauron per Words, Phrases and passages PE17, pg183:
for example:
Among those of his servants that have names the greatest was [Mairon,] that spirit whom the Eldar [later] called Sauron, or Gorthaur the Cruel. In his beginning...

Greetings

[Findegil]

{Erchamion}[Erchamon]: I think since 'Eldarin, hands, Fingers and Numerals' is a late text, this change is to be adopted.

The intorduction of 'Mairon' as Saurons real name isn't really a general change. But it is a good idea and I will post the proposed change in the thread discussing the Valaquenta.

Respectfuly
Findegil

[Findegil]

{Palúrien}[Kementári] by a pencilled change on LQ 2. This was as it were a casual change, not made in §15 (nor in §5). Kementári occurs in the Valaquenta (p. 202).

This was discussed in the thread about the Ainulindalë as AINU-14. The change will become more prominet in the Valaquenta in is therefore taken up to be a general one.

Respectfuly
Findegil

[Findegil]

A general change found in the linguistic material discussed for insertion into chapter 4:

{Eglath}[ Egladrim] per Q&E.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

4 new general changes:
{Endon}[Endor] per AAm The reference to the site of Kuivienen is interesting. Of this no more is said in the other tradition than that it lay ‘in the East of the Middle-earth’ (QS $20, preserved throughout the later texts). In AAm Kuivienen lay N.E. of Endon, the midmost point. In the list of names accompanying the Ambarkanta (IV. 241) appears ‘ambar-endya or Middle Earth of which Endor is the midmost point’, and Endor is written over the centre of the middle-land in the Ambarkanta diagrams (IV.243,245) — on the map (IV.248-9) it is marked as a point: ‘Endor Earth-middle’, and here it was corrected to Endon, the form in the present passage of AAm, though later changed back again to Endor (so also on the typescript of AAm my father corrected Endon to Endor here and in $41, p. 80). See IV.254-5.

{Eredlindon}[Ered Lindon] per Sil77. It also corosponds to the spelling in LotR (see e.g. Ered Nimrais).

{Eredwethion}[Ered Wethrin] per Sil77.

{Palisor}[Endor] per QS77. See as well {Endon}[Endor].

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

General Changes:
I would like to re-open an old decision:{Gnome}[Elf] or [Noldo] and {Gnomes}[Elves] or [Noldor]. “Gnomes” was dropped by Tolkien in LR and later writings, often replaced by Noldor. It would be better artistically to retain the original variation Gnome/Gnomes and Noldo/Noldli which can be best done by replacing Gnome/Gnomes by Elf/Elves except where a general reference to Elves would not fit, as in “the Gnomes were exiles at heart, haunted with a desire for their ancient home that faded not.” Then use Noldor.I would like to be more specific. Still the wish for the variation is okay. And as well we should look at specific cases like the given example. But Tolkien later often used ‘Exiles’ as a Name for the Noldor in Beleriand. And I think that is exactly the meaning we would most often need as a replacement for ‘Gnomes’. But he never used it in singular. So I propose:{Gnome}[Elf] or [Noldo] and {Gnomes}[Exiles] or[Elves] or [Noldor]. “Gnomes” was dropped by Tolkien in LR and later writings, often replaced by Noldor. It would be better artistically to retain the original variation Gnome/Gnomes and Noldo/Noldli which can be best done by replacing Gnome/Gnomes by Elf/Exiles except where a general reference to Elves is needed or Exiles would not fit, as in “the Gnomes were exiles at heart, haunted with a desire for their ancient home that faded not.” In this last case use Noldor.
And I would like to add three changes. In the course of the material for the chapters 4 we added linguistic stuff. In these we have Tolkien using short hand ‘Q’, ‘PQ’, ‘S’ ‘T’. I think we should expand all this: {PQ}[Primitive Quendian] due to the fact that we are writing narrative and not linguistic essays.

{Q}[Quenya] due to the fact that we are writing narrative and not linguistic essays.

{S}[Sindarin] due to the fact that we are writing narrative and not linguistic essays.

{T}[Telerin] due to the fact that we are writing narrative and not linguistic essays.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

I have two questions about general changes:

1. Is it Anfauglith or Dor-nu-Fauglith for the land formerly known as Ard-galen?

2. Is it Haudh-en-Ndengin or Haudh-en-Nirnaeth for the Hill of the Slain? if the latter, where is the source on that?

[Findegil]

Dor-nu-Fauglith and Anfauglith: Up to now I thought that both are valid. But we might have to prove that up. But I am far away from my books.

Haudh-en-Nirnaeth was used in both the late Tuor and his coming to Gondolin and in the Narn.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

Quick question. Is it Eledhwen or Edhelwen? The published Sil has Eledhwen, but the Wanderings of Hurin seems to have Edhelwen.

[Findegil]

Edhelwen/Eledhwen: The Index to [HoMe XI sayes:Edhelwen Name of Morwen. 142, ... , 296. Earlier form Eledhwen 51, ... ,230, translated Elfsheen 51, ... , 79That means it is Edhelwen.

I also looked up the Anfauglith/Dor-nu-Fauglith case: So it seems that for a time both were used in paralle, but at the end Anfauglith became the sole name. as the Index to HoMe XI sayes:Dor-na-Fauglith Earlier Name of Anfauglith ... So yes we have to change it. In some place it is used in the aliteration. In this cases I used 'dry Anfauglith'.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

I have a comment about the change Kalakiryan -> Calacirya

In "the Road Goes Ever On" Tolkien glosses "Calaciryan, Calaciryandë as "the region of Eldamar (Elvenhome) in and near the entrance to the ravine, where the Light was brighter and the land more beautiful" It is theorized that -yandë is a Quenya suffix meaning "place of" or "land" which is rarely used, as it appears only in words like Valariandë and Ossiriandë. In the Sindarin, however, it is more common as -ian or -ien, and appears in many place names. Thus, the term: Calaciryan would appear to be a valid term in the final understanding, in reference to the land around the Calacirya. Should this be changed in our texts to reflect this?

[Findegil]

I would say yes if the reference is to the land around and not to the ravine.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

Ah, so Calaciryan (or the long form Calaciryande) is the surrounding land, while the Calacirya is the pass itself. That seems to make sense.

[ArcusCalion]

A minor change, but the Quenya version of Thingol given in LQ (Singollo) was replaced in Q&E with Sindicollo. We should make a general change throughout. It is only used three times I believe, so it is not a major change.

[ArcusCalion]

Another minor question, but in the Notes from the Shibboleth (by far the latest notes on the subject as far as I can tell) Orodreth (given as an altered form of Rodreth) was replaced. This is how we have edited it in the current draft: Quenya Artaher (stem artaher-) 'noble lord' was correctly Sindarized as Arothír. (altered to Orodreth because of his love of the mountains.) However, the parenthetical section was taken from a reference to the earlier name Rodreth, and now that this has changed, it does not make sense. Should we then change all occurrences of Orodreth to Arothír (with the long í as per the VT41 SF notes)?

[Findegil]

I have taken up {Singollo}[Sindicollo]. But for Orordreth we used the argument that the names must be valid sitll since we have ruler of Gondor called by the same name.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

While I see the logic that the fact of the name existing for a lord of Gondor proves it's a valid name, I do not see how it makes it any more applicable to Arothir as a name.

[Findegil]

Well, many (if not all) Truchsess of Gondor were named after 'heros' of the First Age. I would not assume that there was a second charachter call Orodreth after whom Orodreth of Gondor was named. We rather thought that Tolkien if faced by the fact that Orordreth of Gondor existed would have thought that Arothír got the old epithet for the same reasons. (With the Change of the name the charachter does not change, so the feature that warranted the name remains.)

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

We have to add one change at least:
{Longbeards}[Long-beards] per LotR if the Dwarves of Moria a meant.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

Should we then change the other kindreds of the Dwarves to match this? The Fire-beards, Black-locks etc. as opposed to Firebeards and Blacklocks?

[Findegil]

That is a difficult question. But we have used a similar argument of consistency for the ‘Eredlindon’ and ‘Ered-Lindon’ versus ‘Ered Lindon’ case. So I think we should include these changes:
{Blacklocks} per the use of ‘Long-beards’ in [b]LotR in contrast to ‘Longbeards’.
{Broadbeams} per the use of ‘Long-beards’ in [b]LotR in contrast to ‘Longbeards’.
{Firebeards}[Fire-beards] per the use of ‘Long-beards’ in LotR in contrast to ‘Longbeards’.
{Ironfists}[Iron-fists] per the use of ‘Long-beards’ in LotR in contrast to ‘Longbeards’.
{Stiffbeards}[Stiff-beards] per the use of ‘Long-beards’ in LotR in contrast to ‘Longbeards’.
{Stonefoots}[Stone-foots] per the use of ‘Long-beards’ in LotR in contrast to ‘Longbeards’.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Findegil]

A general change found in Tal-Elmar:

{Tal-elmar}[Tal-Elmar] due to the continuation of Tal-Elmar.

Respectfully
Findegil

[gandalf85]

After reviewing "Of the Laws and Customs Among the Eldar," we decided on the change:

{re-birth}[re-housing]
{re-born}[re-housed]

[Findegil]

Tolkien later used always ‘c’ instead of ‘k’ in elvish names. Probabaly we will find a lot more, but here are the first such changes:

{Valakirka}[Valacirca] per later use of c instead of k.

{Koivie-neni} and {Kuivienen}[Cuiviénen] per Sil77.

{Helkar}[Helcar] per later change of k to c.

{Helkarakse}, {Helkaraxe} and {Helkaraxë}[Helcaraxë]

{Kalaquendi}[Calaquendi] per later use of c for k.

{Orokarni}[Orocarni] per later use of c for k.

{Ork}[Orc] and {Orkor} and {Orks}[Orcs] per later use of c for k. But keep ‘Orkish’ since the pronaunciation of ‘Orcish’ would be completely of.

While adding these general changes to our list I found this one:
{Palisor}[Endor] per QS77
In QS77 we find:The Noldor came at last far into the north of Arda; and they saw the first teeth of the ice that floated in the sea, and knew that they were drawing nigh to the Helcaraxë. For between the land of Aman that in the north curved eastward, and the east-shores of Endor (which is Middle-earth) that bore westward, there was a narrow strait, through which the chill waters of the Encircling Sea and the waves of Belegaer flowed together, and there were vast fogs and mists of deathly cold, and the sea-streams were filled with clashing hills of ice and the grinding of ice deep-sunken. …This passage is drived directly from AAm, §157 but their the name is ‘Endar’. But in the commentary for this § we find: Endar 'Middle-earth'. The form Endon was used earlier in AAm of 'the midmost point' of Middle-earth ($38), where it was changed on the typescript to Endor (p. 80). These forms Endon and Endor had appeared in the Ambarkanta and maps (see p. 76, $38). In The Lord of the Rings Quenya Endore, Sindarin Ennor, means not the midmost point but Middle-earth itself, and in a letter of 1967 (Letters no.297, p. 384) my father referred to Q. Endor, S. Ennor = Middle-earth, with the etymology en(ed) 'middle' and (n)dor 'land (mass)'; cf. also Aran Endor 'King of Middle-earth', note 9 above. But in the present passage the form Endar is perfectly clear, as also again in $$158, 163. The typist however in each case, for some reason, typed Endor, and my father did not alter it. On the other hand, in the title of the next section in AAm (p. 129) the typist put Endar as in the manuscript, and again my father let this stand. In the published Silmarillion (p. 89) I printed, hesitantly, the form Endor.
This passage concerning the Helkaraxe derives not from QS but from AV 2 (annal 2994, almost the same in AV 1), and it is very notable that it remains in complete congruence with the cosmography of the Ambarkanta (see IV.238, 254).
So we are left with two issues:
- We have to find a better replacement for Palisor. I do not know how we came to Endor anyway since it fitted in neither definition. Palisor is introduced thus in the BoLT:Behold the woods of the Great Lands, even in Palisor the midmost region where the pinewoods murmur unceasingly, ... If we look up all it uses we find that Palisor included both {Koiven-neni}[Cuiviénen] where the Elves awoke and Murmenalda in Hildórien where Men awoke. The best fitting name for this from Ambrakanta Map IV would be ‘Mid-Land’. So I propose:
{Palisor}[Mid-Land] due to Ambrakanta Map IV
- And we have to find a replacement for Endor as the name of the midmost point of Middle-Earth, since Endor is used for Middle-earth it self. And Endon/Endor does not only appears on the Ambrakanta Maps but as well in our text. With no better idea at the moment I would suggest to geo back to Endon. Thus:
{Endor}[Endon] if the midmost point of Middle-Earth is meant.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

We have to add one change at least:
{Longbeards}[Long-beards] per LotR if the Dwarves of Moria a meant.

Respectfully
Findegil

Are you sure?

Because in my 50th Anniversary copy of the LOTR, it says:

Durin is the name that the Dwarves used for the eldest of the Seven Fathers of their race, and the ancestor of all the kings of the Longbeards. - Appendix A, 'Durin's Folk', p. 1,071

[Arvegil145]

Tolkien later used always ‘c’ instead of ‘k’ in elvish names.

While Tolkien did move in the general direction of replacing 'k' with 'c', this was far from universal, and many times he used both the 'k' and 'c' variations in names in a single text!

[Findegil]

{Longbeards}[Long-beards] per LotR if the Dwarves of Moria a meant. I am not sure about this, but I think it is longstanding general change, that I took up without lookking up the source. I will compare some editions of LotR later and come up with a proposal. Mostlikley the 50th-Aniversary edition will rule.

'c' for 'k' in evish names: It is clear that we are systematic with this change than Tolkien ever has been (or could be, due to his way to write and work with manuscripts). If any name strics you as 'resisting' change, meaning that there is never found an example of it writen with 'c' or some good argument why it would not be changed to 'c' like in 'orkish' we could take that name out.

Respectfully
Findegil

[gondowe]

Tolkien in his published works alway changed k for c. The texts we manage are not text revised for publishing.

Greetings

[Arvegil145]

Tolkien in his published works alway changed k for c. The texts we manage are not text revised for publishing.

Greetings

Fair enough - it's only a cosmetic change anyway. However, what about cases such as 'Melkor'?

[Arvegil145]

Also, since I don't really know where else to ask this:

What is the consensus here on using material from The History of The Lord of the Rings?

[gondowe]

There is examples of using Melcor and Tulcas by Tolkien himself in the texts edited by CT. Melkor and Tulkas is rooted by the tradition of CT, also Kementari. The rest as Orcs, Orkor, Elenmacil, Osanwe centa, Essecenta Eldarinwa, etc up to you.
He used the k to know the real fonema he wanted to use. But in publishing he wanted to use the c as is spoken in latin, celtic or OE for example.

Greetings

[Arvegil145]

There is examples of using Melcor and Tulcas by Tolkien himself in the texts edited by CT. Melkor and Tulkas is rooted by the tradition of CT, also Kementari. The rest as Orcs, Orkor, Elenmacil, Osanwe centa, Essecenta Eldarinwa, etc up to you.
He used the k to know the real fonema he wanted to use. But in publishing he wanted to use the c as is spoken in latin, celtic or OE for example.

Greetings

Huh...you're right - he does use 'Melcor' in more than one occasion, the one in Vinyar Tengwar 49 being the latest I think (from 1968).

Still feels weird though, given how used to the name I am.

Anyway, I agree.

[Aiwendil]

"Melcor" and "Tulcas" do occur, but even in very late texts we also have "Melkor" (e.g. in the Shibboleth inf 1968 and in several of the 1972-73 texts given in "Last Writings"). Valarin-derived names, it seems, did not fall under the general late policy of preferring "c" to "k" in translating Quenya, even if he did toy with applying the policy to Valarin as well.

So I really think we must keep the "k" in names like Melkor, Tulkas, and Kementari, even though we replace it with "c" in Quenya names like Valacirca and Elemmacil.

[Arvegil145]

"Melcor" and "Tulcas" do occur, but even in very late texts we also have "Melkor" (e.g. in the Shibboleth inf 1968 and in several of the 1972-73 texts given in "Last Writings"). Valarin-derived names, it seems, did not fall under the general late policy of preferring "c" to "k" in translating Quenya, even if he did toy with applying the policy to Valarin as well.

So I really think we must keep the "k" in names like Melkor, Tulkas, and Kementari, even though we replace it with "c" in Quenya names like Valacirca and Elemmacil.


Again, I'm pretty zen on all of this. Whatever the consensus is, I'll go with it.

[Arvegil145]

What is the basis of the 'Eledhwen' > 'Edhelwen' change? Because the Kinship of the Half-elven (c. 1964) has 'Eledwen' instead (I think?).

https://tolkiengateway.net/w/images/3/32/J.R.R._Tolkien_-_Kinship_of_the_Half-elven.jpg

[Findegil]

Well, we followed the HoMe XI, Index that stated it was the later form. The references given in the Index are to The Grey Annals.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

Does anyone here have the new Collected Poems by Hammond and Scull?

Because the book has the original Mîms Klage poem in English, titled The Complaint of Mîm the Dwarf in the table of contents.

[Findegil]

I think it arrieved last week, but my wife ordered it and catched it, so I think I will get it as a Christmas gift. So I have to wait a bit.