Question for the Sindarin experts: is Meril still valid?

[Orphalesion]

Heyo,

We all know that Tolkien kind of neglected to give names to a lot of the wives of the ancient Elf lords. Celebrimbor's wife has no name, Maglor's and Caranthir's wives have no names and neither does Orodreth's wife, the mother of Finduilas (and possibly Gil-Galad)....or does she?

A long while ago I have read somewhere in the HOMIE (I think it was the Shibboleth of Feanor? Not sure) that Tolkien tossed the idea around that Gil-Galad's mother was named "Meril" (Sindarin for "rose", at one point explicitly called the Elvish equivalent of the English name Rose).

Does anybody know if that is valid still from a linguistic standpoint? Does the word "Meril" fit into Sindarin as it existed at the time of Tolkien's death?

It would be nice to have a few more female names in the genealogies.

Curiously it would also make the house of Finarfin, the only house in which all members of the first age (except Gil-Galad) have named spouses or love interests (Amarië, Eldalotë/Edhellos, Andreth, Celeborn, Gwindor, Turin and Meril)

I really wish Tolkien had been more generous with giving the Elf Lords wives and daughters. It seems like he made attempts sometimes (Findis and Irimë, once writing that Ar-Feiniel was "the first daughter of Fingolfin", but he abandoned them rather quickly, ven all three of the nameless Fëanorian ladies get left behind in Aman) It seems a lot of the time Elf women are only mentioned when a Mortal Man needs a love interest, if Galadriel hadn't shown up in the Lotr and needed a back story, we wouldn't have had any female member of the House of Finwe who isn't there just to be wife, mother or love interest of somebody :(

Which is a shame because Tolkien could write women just as compelling as men if he set his mind to it as Galadriel and Morwen prove. Even the female you have to piece together from the HOME are often compelling, compare for a moment Miriel and Nerdanel to rather pale male characters like Fingon or Angrod whom not even the HoME improve much.

[Formendacil]

If it is from Shibboleth, then it's almost certainly acceptable Sindarin, since the Shibboleth is quite late--mid-1960s, though I'm hesitant to quote a year, but even if it were from the 1950s, it would still be post-publication of the LotR, and if my memory is correct, it would be contemporaneous with the 2nd Edition of the LotR, in which Tolkien did tinker a bit with the Elvish in the book--though my impression (I am not a Sindarin expert) is anything post-LotR is probably going to hold sufficient water. It's when you start going into the pre-LotR versions of things, especially back at the Book of Lost Tales end, that you run into problems.

(That said, I have no memory of Gil-galad's mother's name in the Shibboleth, but it's been a while since I read that volume... I'm rereading the Book of Lost Tales right now, so "Meril" reminds me more of the Queen of Tol Eressëa in that text--but given how many other very early names stayed in circulation (Beren, Manwë, Ulmo, etc) or came back (Legolas), it would not surprise me to see Tolkien reusing the name--and if it had that much staying power in his mind, I really wouldn't worry about it being acceptable Sindarin.)

EDIT: Digging out my copy of The Peoples of Middle-earth (the HoME volume including the Shibboleth), I don't see "Meril" in the index--and the HoME indices are generally excellent. A cursory, but I think accurate, skim of the text, especially the commentary towards the end where Christopher Tolkien goes through the history of Gil-galad's parentage (or lack thereof) reveals nothing either. If Meril was ever put forth as the name of his mother, it would not seem to have been the Shibboleth. My suspicion is it might be fanon, though of a deft sort.

[Orphalesion]

^ Yup looked again myself (don't have the HoME anymore, lost all but the first two volumes :-( ) the name Meril for Gil-Galad's mother is not complete fanon, according to an old thread on Barrow-Downs it appears in the Quenta Silmarillion version as presented in Volume 5 of the HoME (the Shaping of Middle Earth) which, as far as I can gather from the names, seems to be very contemporary to the first edition of the Lord of the Rings.

In it Meril is the wife of Felagund and mother of Gil-Galad (and briefly of Galadriel and possibly Gildor).

So darn, it is at the very least, very very dubious if the name and word would have survived in Tolkien's final conception, which is a shame because even aside form providing another named wife, it would also provide an Elvish name for roses, which is always useful.

[jallanite]

Meril (no English translation given here) appears in the current (Post–Lord of the Rings) version of the Silmarillion as the wife of Felagund and mother of Gilgalad in The War of the Jewels (HoME 11), page 242. I don’t find her in The Shaping of Middle-earth (HoME 4) at all.

Christopher Tolkien notes:Felagund’s wife Meril has not been named before, nor any child of his, and this is the first appearance of Gil-galad from The Lord of the Rings.
Meril was also the Sindarin name given to Rose Cotton in Tolkien’s Epilogue to The Lord of the Rings in Aragorn’s letter to Sam and his family. See Sauron Defeated (HoME 9) and a transcription of the English letter at http://theshirefellowship.net/index.php?option=com_agora&task=viewtopic&pid=9881 . In the first version of the letter Meril appears as Beril, but in later versions as Meril. In the Book of Lost Tales the name Meril seems to mean ‘Flower’ in general, not ‘Rose’ in particular.

I don’t see any reason to think that Tolkien ever rejected the meaning ‘rose’ for Sindiarin meril. But, as usual, one never knows. Phonetically I see no problem with Meril as a Sindarin name in Tolkien’s late conception.

[Orphalesion]

Ah, awesome thanks!

So it is pretty validated. That's cool. I got the information of her appearing in HoME V here: http://forum.barrowdowns.com/archive/index.php?t-4470.html

[Galin]

I think Tar-Elenion meant: in an early alteration to a text from HME V, not in the text from HME V itself, although granted even if so I can see the reason for confusion. Anyway you did say HME V but gave the name of HME IV, throwing Jallanite off I'm guessing.

I think the name Meril is a bit dubious for the mother of Gil-galad, considering that in another note (p. 242, War of the Jewels) Tolkien refers to Felagund's wife [this note was struck out, although not necessarily due to the lack of a name here] and in yet another, he leaves a blank space for Inglor's wife's name.

The alteration with the name Meril is said to be made 'much earlier' than certain other alterations CJRT gives regarding this chapter -- in any case it doesn't appear in the early typescript, and is earlier than the revisions made to the LQ2 typescript. We don't know if the blank space version is the latest of the three references noted here, as the dating seems a bit questionable in general.

Anyway we can add the note from 1965 (reproduced in The Shibboleth of Feanor at least), where Gil-galad's mother is not named but is noted as a Sindarin lady from the North.

Although none of that necessarily means Meril as a name in general was abandoned. It seemed to be on the Qenya side of things in BOLT, but apparently was Noldorin or Sindarin enough for the King's Letter, and Sindarin for this alteration to QS.

[jallanite]

Anyway you did say HME V but gave the name of HME IV, throwing Jallanite off I'm guessing.

It was obvious from Christopher Tolkien’s note on The War of the Jewels, page 242, that all supposed earlier mentions of Meril in HoME are bogus as Christopher Tolkien states that this Meril, Felagund’s wife, is first mentioned here. I accordingly ignored all the supposed earlier references as erroneous.

The mention of Meril was believed by Christopher Tolkien to have been made after The Lord of the Rings which was good enough for me. That the name is Sindarin would be normal, as most names in the published Silmarillion are Sindarin. Phonetically the name could be either a Quenya or Sindarin form.

You are quite right that J. R. R. Tolkien seems to have later blanked the name, unless Meril is mentioned in some source that Christopher Tolkien has not reproduced.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

While Meril certainly could be either Q or S, don't forget that nearly all Silmarillion names are given in Noldorin -> Sindarin form. Prior to the Great Linguistric Shift* this was perfectly normal; afterwards T had to ret-con an explanation.

In the (pre-Shift) Epilogue it's quite clearly Noldorin as is the rest of the letter; in the Shibboleth T is explicitly discussing Quenya-speaking Noldor in Aman and uses both their Quenya and (retrospective) Sindarin names, but never tells us which Meril is supposed to be.

------------------

*The point in the early 50's, first manifested in the 'linguistic excursus' to the Grey Annals, where Tolkien abandoned the conception dating back to or before the Lost Tales where the Second Language or "Noldorin" had evolved from Quenya in Valinor and then among the Exiles in Middle-earth, and made it "Sindarin" instead.

[Galin]

Heheh... that's why I cheated when I wrote my: '... but apparently was Noldorin or Sindarin enough for the King's Letter' because I couldn't remember when the letter was written with respect to the shift.

[Arvegil145]

meril (rose) is valid in Sindarin, but what would be the Quenya equivalent?

Another thing: what would be the proper name of Meril-i-Turinqui from the Lost Tales in light of the development of Tolkien's linguistic material

- meril is glossed as "flowers" in the Lost Tales
- turinq(u)i is glossed as "queen" in the Lost Tales

But what about the hyphens before and after "i" in the name of Meril-i-Turinqi

In the later mythology meril means rose, and tári means queen.

My question is: how would that name be updated to Quenya?

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I'm afraid that what you're asking, here and in the parallel post, is for something that hasn't yet been written: a comparative philology of BoLT-era Gnomish and Qenya relative to post-LR Sindarin and Quenya. One would really have to have available a full set of linguistic "laws" covering the evolution of the Elvish tongues in Tolkien's mind over some six decades.

This much at least we do know: nearly all of the names and words in BoLT are Qenya except for those (relatively) few which are explicitly Gnomish, as in the Fall of Gondolin.

[Arvegil145]

Well...why not start a forum-offshoot concerned primarily with linguistic material (not now of course, 27th century would do :smokin:)


I don't know how well-versed are you in the languages (certainly better than I), but if you are indeed, could you be so kind to propose some changes in a thread I started not while ago.http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=18935

Thank you in advance!

[jallanite]

Tolkien was a writer of fiction. His Elvish languages were fictional. They were at first a private invention as a hobby, and then developed, so far as they were developed, as background material for the fiction he wrote.

There is no way in which any fictional language can be automatically updated. Forms in any fictional language depend on whatever the author of the language invents and on whatever rules the inventor creates. Tolkien never set down anything like a complete grammar of either Quenya or Sindarin. And Tolkien might at any time change any of his rules, or invent a new rule.

In letter 347 in Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien occurs:The names in the line of Arthedain are peculiar in several ways; and several though S. in form, are not readily interpretable. But it would need more historical records and linguistic records of S. than exist (sc. than I have found time or need to invent!) to explain them.
The same is true for many other oddities of the Elvish languages.
Arvegil145 asks, “meril (rose) is valid in Sindarin, but what would be the Quenya equivalent?”

I see no reason to believe that the Quenya cognate would not also be *meril, but see no reason to think that such a Quenya form existed, or necessarily had the same meaning as its Sindarin cognate. Tolkien gives several cases where a supposed cognate form does not exist in the other Eldarin language or exists with a different meaning.

Arvegil145 asks, “But what about the hyphens before and after "i" in the name of Meril-i-Turinqi?”

Hyphens are elsewhere used by Tolkien to indicate that the hyphenated form is a single name in the form presented. The form i is in later Quenya translated ‘the’ in the poem Namárië in the phrase i falmalinnar ‘the foaming waves-many-upon (pl.)’ So Meril-i-Turinqi might be literally translated as ‘Flowers, the Queen of’. Again, this is only a guess.

Read the essay http://www.elvish.org/articles/EASIS.pdf for the disgust that such guesses have raised in one commentator on Tolkien’s Elvish.

[Arvegil145]

Tolkien was a writer of fiction. His Elvish languages were fictional. They were a first a private invention as a hobby, and then developed, so far as they were developed, as background material for the fiction he wrote.

There is no way in which any fictional language can be automatically updated. Forms in any fictional language depend on whatever the author of the language invents and on whatever rules the inventor creates. Tolkien never set down anything like a complete grammar of either Quenya or Sindarin. And Tolkien might at any time change any of his rules, or invent a new rule.

In letter 347 in Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien occurs:
The names in the line of Arthedain are peculiar in several ways; and several though S. in form, are not readily interpretable. But it would need more historical records and linguistic records of S. than exist (sc. than I have found time or need to invent!) to explain them.
The same is true for many other oddities of the Elvish languages.
Arvegil145 asks, “meril (rose) is valid in Sindarin, but what would be the Quenya equivalent?”

I see no reason to believe that the Quenya cognate would not also be *meril, but see no reason to think that such a Quenya form existed, or necessarily had the same meaning as its Sindarin cognate. Tolkien gives several cases where a supposed cognate form does not exist in the other Eldarin language or exists with a different meaning.

Arvegil145 asks, “But what about the hyphens before and after "i" in the name of Meril-i-Turinqi?”

Hyphens are elsewhere used by Tolkien to indicate that the hyphenated form is a single name in the form presented. The form i is in later Quenya translated ‘the’ in the poem Namárië in the phrase i falmalinnar ‘the foaming waves-many-upon (pl.)’ So Meril-i-Turinqi might be literally translated as ‘Flowers, the Queen of’. Again, this is only a guess.

Read the essay http://www.elvish.org/articles/EASIS.pdf for the disgust that such guesses have raised in one commentator on Tolkien’s Elvish.


Thanks for the input - but what, for example, would be an "updated" version of, say, "Tavrobel" (I have been tempted to replace with "Taurobel"), or Gereth and Evranin (and Evromord), and such from the "Lost Tales"

One more question - what would be a Quenya translation of "Queen of Roses" (like, for example, Elentári translates as "Queen of Stars")

[Arvegil145]

I think Tar-Elenion meant: in an early alteration to a text from HME V, not in the text from HME V itself, although granted even if so I can see the reason for confusion. Anyway you did say HME V but gave the name of HME IV, throwing Jallanite off I'm guessing.

I think the name Meril is a bit dubious for the mother of Gil-galad, considering that in another note (p. 242, War of the Jewels) Tolkien refers to Felagund's wife [this note was struck out, although not necessarily due to the lack of a name here] and in yet another, he leaves a blank space for Inglor's wife's name.

The alteration with the name Meril is said to be made 'much earlier' than certain other alterations CJRT gives regarding this chapter -- in any case it doesn't appear in the early typescript, and is earlier than the revisions made to the LQ2 typescript. We don't know if the blank space version is the latest of the three references noted here, as the dating seems a bit questionable in general.

Anyway we can add the note from 1965 (reproduced in The Shibboleth of Feanor at least), where Gil-galad's mother is not named but is noted as a Sindarin lady from the North.

Although none of that necessarily means Meril as a name in general was abandoned. It seemed to be on the Qenya side of things in BOLT, but apparently was Noldorin or Sindarin enough for the King's Letter, and Sindarin for this alteration to QS.

Hey, Galin!

Considering your vast knowledge of anything Tolkien, if you might be interested to work on the "Translations from Elvish" - you would be most welcome there!

[jallanite]

Thanks for the input - but what, for example, would be an "updated" version of, say, "Tavrobel" (I have been tempted to replace with "Taurobel"), or Gereth and Evranin (and Evromord), and such from the "Lost Tales"?

Where will you replace Tolkien’s forms, and why do you call it “updating”? How does what appears to me to only be random, and somewhat ignorant, changes, now valid? The only person who has the legal right to make such changes is the author, Tolkien, and his son Christopher, to whom he gave the right in his will.

In The Lost Road and Other Writings (HoME 5), in the section “The Etymologies”, Christopher Tolkien gives in part his father’s comments under the entry PELL(ES)-:Q peler; opele walled house or village, ‘town’; N gobel, cf. Tavrobel (village of Túrin in the forest of Brethil, and name of village in Tol Eressea) [ᴛᴀᴍ];
Under the entry TAM- Christopher Tolkien writes in part:(cf. ɴᴅᴀᴍ) knock. *tamrō ‘woodpecker’ (= knocker): Q tambaro; N tafr (= tavr), tavor, cf. Tavr-obel [ᴘᴇʟʟ(ᴇꜱ)].
Christopher Tolkien on pages 412-3 discusses Tavrobel further, pointing out that in accounts written following The Lord of the Rings in his father’s writing on Túrin this Tavrobel in Brethil is replaced by Ephel Brandir on Amon Obel. He also notes that in writings of this period the town on Tol Eressea where Ælfwine visits Pengolodh is sometimes named by his father as Tathrobel.

One more question - what would be a Quenya translation of "Queen of Roses" (like, for example, Elentári translates as "Queen of Stars")

We have probably no extant Quenya translation of ‘rose’ in Tolkien’s writing following his writing of The Book of Lost Tales. If indeed Tolkien had decided that the form Qenya Meril still existed in Quenya and Tolkien now intended it to mean ‘rose’ in Quenya as it did in Sindarin, then the obvious translation would be Meriltári.

[Arvegil145]

What I was talking about is the etymology of names, not the names themselves - for example, in Croatian prozor means window - I was thinking of taking the etymology of, say, a certain Qenya name and see how would it be translated into Quenya or Sindarin.

[jallanite]

I don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

[Arvegil145]

I don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

Edain is the Sindarin equivalent of Quenya Atani.

What would be the Sindarin and Quenya equivalents to the names (not all of them) found in the "Lost Tales"?

[Arvegil145]

I also ask because I am revising The Cottage of Lost Play (for my own mirth) and The Ruin of Doriath (actually, revisiting it).

Thank you.


P.S. I don't know much about languages, so please forgive me for my ignorance. Also, for what reason is Littleheart (son of Bronweg) named in that manner?

[jallanite]

You are quite at liberty to revise “The Cottage of Lost Play” for non-commercial reasons, as far as I am concerned.

But basically trying to ‘update’ Tolkien’s Qenya and Gnomish appears to me to be futile. We do not even know what Tolkien intended most of the names to mean and therefore have no way of deciding whether those names even need translating. If by “updating” you mean, what would Tolkien have updated these names to if he were updating them in 1971 and wished them to appear in 1971 Quenya and 1971 Sindarin, then the answers you have been given seem to me to be all you will get: nobody no matter how great their linguistic knowledge knows or could reasonably guess how Tolkien would have updated the names, save for the Tolkien of 1971.

As Orphalesion has indicated (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=701746&postcount=8) Tolkien would probably have replaced the name of Lindo’s wife Vairë by some other name, because giving her the same name as one of the Valier would have seemed disrespectful. Which other name? I don’t know, nor does anyone I believe.

Tolkien writes in “The Cottage of Lost Play” that Littleheart “sailed in Wingilot with Eärendel in that last voyage wherein they sought for Kôr.”

Yet in Tolkien’s last-written full account of Eärendil’s voyage to Tirion his mariner companions in Vingilot are named as Falathar, Airandir, and Erellont and it is implied that all three are Men, not Elves.

Tolkien writes in The Book of Lost Tales Part II (HoME 2), page 148:Here is set forth by Eriol at the teaching of Bronweg’s son Elfrith [emended from Elfrinniel] or Littleheart (and he was so named for the youth and wonder of his heart) ….
Christopher Tolkien writes on page 201, “this is the only place where the meaning of the name ‘Littleheart’ is explained.”

[Arvegil145]

Thank you for your substantial answer.

I DO realize that many of the names in the Lost Tales did not bear any meaning, or if they did little is known about it.

But if their etymology is obscure or nonexistent I would still like (since you appear to know much about the linguistic material) to have your advice on what names could be kept from Tolkien's early writings that do not contradict the later development of Sindarin or Quenya. For example (as I have written before):

- Gereth
- Evranin
- Nielthi
- Ilfiniol
- Tavrobel (studying its etymology, I have somewhat naively rendered it to "Taurobel")
- Bodruith
- Valwë
- Tulkastor
- Fankil
- Naimi

What do you make of these?

P.S. Could Voronwë in the later texts still have a son? It seems to me unlikely, but it might be possible (somehow).

[William Cloud Hicklin]

If you really think you can take down a windmill or two, then the only approach that might, sort of, work would be by "translation out and in:" analyze the meanings of BOLT nomenclature insofar as is possible using the Gnomish and Qenya Lexicons (published in Parma Eldalamberon 11 and 12) supplemented by the Early Quenya Fragments (PE 14) and the Name-list to The Fall of Gondolin, Si Qente Feanor and "Names and Required Alterations" connected with The Cottage of Lost Play (PE 15), and then re-translate back into post-LR Sindarin and Quenya attested forms or regular derivations from attested roots. Of especial value here might be Tolkien's "Words, Phrases and Passages in various tongues in The Lord of the Rings" published in PE 17. As a general guide Jim Allan's Introduction to Elvish is still very useful, although published before HME.

Avoid like the plague the various "Neo-Sindarins" and "Neo-Quenyas" peddled by certain parties, especially the Sudarin concocted for the movies. You're creating neo-Elvish yourself, no need to make it exponential.

[Arvegil145]

If you really think you can take down a windmill or two, then the only approach that might, sort of, work would be by "translation out and in:" analyze the meanings of BOLT nomenclature insofar as is possible using the Gnomish and Qenya Lexicons (published in Parma Eldalamberon 11 and 12) supplemented by the Early Quenya Fragments (PE 14) and the Name-list to The Fall of Gondolin, Si Qente Feanor and "Names and Required Alterations" connected with The Cottage of Lost Play (PE 15), and then re-translate back into post-LR Sindarin and Quenya attested forms or regular derivations from attested roots. Of especial value here might be Tolkien's "Words, Phrases and Passages in various tongues in The Lord of the Rings" published in PE 17. As a general guide Jim Allan's Introduction to Elvish is still very useful, although published before HME.

Avoid like the plague the various "Neo-Sindarins" and "Neo-Quenyas" peddled by certain parties, especially the Sudarin concocted for the movies. You're creating neo-Elvish yourself, no need to make it exponential.


The problem is, I have no clue whatsoever about the linguistic material of Tolkien - and to take the names from the Lost Tales (along with their etymology) and "update" them, so to speak, to Quenya and Sindarin - I am not up for the task.

[jallanite]

But if their etymology is obscure or nonexistent I would still like (since you appear to know much about the linguistic material) to have your advice on what names could be kept from Tolkien's early writings that do not contradict the later development of Sindarin or Quenya.

None of the names you list cause any phonetic difficulties in either later Quenya or Sindarin, including Tavrobel. That does not mean that Tolkien would have considered the names valid in later Quenya or Sindarin for other reasons, or would not have.

For example Tolkien says of the name Glorfindel on page 379 of The Peoples of Middle-earth (HoME 12), bolding mine:
The name is in fact derived from the earliest work on the mythology: The Fall of Gondolin, composed in 1916-17, in which the Elvish language that ultimately became that of the type called Sindarin was in a primitive and unorganized form, and its relation with the High-elven type (itself very primitive) was still haphazard. It was intended to mean ‘Golden-tressed’,⁴ and was the name given to the heroic ‘Gnome’ (Ñoldo), a chieftain of Gondolin, who in the pass of Cristhorn (‘Eagle-cleft’) fought with a Balrog [> Demon], whom he slew at the cost of his own life.

Its use in The Lord of the Rings is one of the cases of the somewhat random use of the names found in the older legends now referred to as The Silmarillion, which escaped reconsideration in the final published form of The Lord of the Rings. This is unfortunate, since the name is now difficult to fit into Sindarin, and cannot possibly be Quenyarin.

⁴ [For the original etymology of Glorfindel, and the etymological connections of the elements of the name, see II.341.]
Helge Fauskanger at http://folk.uib.no/hnohf/ndnn.htm speculates on why Tolkien later saw the name Glorfindel to be problematical:
We are not told precisely what was "wrong" with the name Glorfindel (that is, why it did not fit Tolkien's late vision of Sindarin very well), but part of the problem may well have been that a name of this shape ought to have become *Glorfinnel by the late Third Age. The simplest solution would seem to be that it was simply an archaic First Age form, preserved or revived by its reincarnated owner (since Tolkien did decide that Glorfindel of Rivendell was the same person as Glorfindel of Gondolin way back in the First Age).
Note that Fauskangar admits this is only speculation.

All comments so far on your posts indicate that you have set yourself a task that those who have commented, and whom you recognize as more knowledgeable in Elvish linguistics than yourself, consider impossible.

P.S. Could Voronwë in the later texts still have a son? It seems to me unlikely, but it might be possible (somehow).

This is typical of your questions. What has Tolkien written that indicates that he ever necessarily thought Voronwë didn’t have a son, or a daughter, or many children? We are told nothing of any wife of Voronwë before his return to Gondolin, but that is also the case in the Book of Lost Tales. All we know is that in the later Silmarillion Littleheart was not one of Eärendil’s campanions on his final voyage in Vingilot or that Littleheart was a companion, but is named as Falathar, or Aerandil (Airandil), or Erellont, not as Ilfiniol, or Ilverin, or Elfrith, or Elbenil as in the Lost Tales. It is not definitely written by Tolkien that any of Eärendil’s mariner companions were not Elves.

I am a loss as to why you are updating “The Cottage of Lost Play” at all when apparently in Tolkien’s latest thought Eriol has no part in this, whether of Eriol’s “former names the story nowhere tells”, whether Eriol was Ottor Wǽfre the father of Hengest and Horsa who traditionally first settled the English in England, or whether Eriol was Æscwine, an 11th century Englishman.

Tolkien’s latest thought is that Silmarillion is a translation made by Bilbo Baggins in Rivendell into Westron of a traditional summary of old tales written in Gondor.

[Arvegil145]

This is typical of your questions. What has Tolkien written that indicates that he ever necessarily thought Voronwë didn’t have a son, or a daughter, or many children? We are told nothing of any wife of Voronwë before his return to Gondolin, but that is also the case in the Book of Lost Tales. All we know is that in the later Silmarillion Littleheart was not one of Eärendil’s campanions on his final voyage in Vingilot or that Littleheart was a companion, but is named as Falathar, or Aerandil (Airandil), or Erellont, not as Ilfiniol, or Ilverin, or Elfrith, or Elbenil as in the Lost Tales. It is not definitely written by Tolkien that any of Eärendil’s mariner companions were not Elves.

Surely, Littleheart was not a companion of Eärendil, but that doesn't mean that he should have been jettisoned so lightly. Voronwë was a young Elf during the War of the Jewels, and though Gondolin was a blissful place, it is said in the "Athrabeth" that the Eldar do not wed nor bear children at times of war. And if Voronwë sailed with Tuor and Idril (although that is not a sure statement), what might have been his fate during their voyages: did they indeed make it to Aman, and there dwell now in peace, or have they been lost somewhere in the seas about Aman.

And even if Voronwë made to Aman at last, and had a son there, why should his son dwell now in Tol Eressëa? And all of Littleheart's elven names strike me a bit odd - naturally - and I cannot make my mind whether to keep him in my revised version.


I am a loss as to why you are updating “The Cottage of Lost Play” at all when apparently in Tolkien’s latest thought Eriol has no part in this, whether of Eriol’s “former names the story nowhere tells”, whether Eriol was Ottor Wǽfre the father of Hengest and Horsa who traditionally first settled the English in England, or whether Eriol was Æscwine, an 11th century Englishman.

I am NOT talking about Ottor from Angeln - I am talking about Aelfwine from England and his stay at Eressëa - with needed emendations of course.

P.S. Mar Vanwa Tyaliéva - The Cottage of Lost Play - was in Tolkien's later writings referred to the House of Elrond - and its meaning was "House of Past Mirth".

And, of course, I would NOT keep the "children" in the Cottage of Lost Play - nor would I retain its name - in the end, of what purpose is the part "of Lost Play" in its name without the children of Men travelling through the Olorë Málle to taste the bliss of Aman before they die.

Limpë would of course have to go - it contradicts EVERYTHING written about the fates of Elves and Men in the later course of Tolkien's lifetime.


My idea is this - Aelfwine journeys to Eressëa; there he is greeted by the Elves and there is a description of the island - and then, travelling through the country, he comes to a house (the Cottage) - in this sense, simply an Eressëan version of the Last Homely House - and there, he is shown the various old texts, and is taught many things by Pengolodh (in which he, in the later versions, seems the primary source of Aelfwine's oral teachings).

I admit, such a project needs a lot of tinkering with the texts, but I am COMPLETELY hellbent on keeping Aelfwine and his stor(y)ies.


Tolkien’s latest thought is that Silmarillion is a translation made by Bilbo Baggins in Rivendell into Westron of a traditional summary of old tales written in Gondor.

The sheer abundancy of the mentions of Aelfwine and his teaching in the late writings, brings your claim to naught (at least in my opinion).

And wouldn't it be more likely that a script written in Old English would be preserved (if somewhat in a fragmentary form) all the way up to Tolkien's time than a book written 7000 years ago (also in a language and script completely unknown in later times - it would take a Champollion to decipher it - referring, of course, to Bilbo's books and the writing system in which they were written - Tengwar).

[jallanite]

Surely, Littleheart was not a companion of Eärendil, but that doesn't mean that he should have been jettisoned so lightly.

Littleheart in Tolkien’s writing is, true, not mentioned under that name in anything published outside of The Book of Lost Tales. So Littleheart still existed, unmentioned under that name, in Tolkien’s conception, or he had been written out in Tolkien’s conception.

If Littleheart still existed in Tolkien’s conception, and his role was somewhat the same, then obviously in the published Simarillion he is one of Eärendil’s three mariner companions on his voyage to Tirion in Vingilot, that is he is Falathar, or Erellont, or Aerandir. Or possibly Tolkien for some reason just dropped the character altogether. But your assumption that Littleheart was just “jettisoned” is only an unverified assumption, and I am not going to argue any unverified assumptions, for or against.

And even if Voronwë made to Aman at last, and had a son there, why should his son dwell now in Tol Eressëa?Well, if Littleheart existed in Tolkien’s conception, then he would have to dwell somewhere. Tolkien in The Book of Lost Tales puts him in as the gong-warden in the Cottage of Lost Play in Tol Eressëa. However Tolkien says nothing about when exactly Littleheart was fathered, though Voronwë says nothing to Tuor about having a wife when he guides Tuor to Gondolin. It is only another unverified assumption by you that Voronwë later married and fathered Littleheart in Aman. Yet considering that Voronwë in Tolkien's later conception was a mature Elf, though still somewhat young, and had been born in Middle-earth, and that no Elf had gone from Middle-Earth to Aman for ages before Eärendil and Littleheart and perhaps other companions did so, I imagine that Tolkien imagined that Littleheart was born shortly after Tuor and Voronwë came to Gondolin. Presumably Voronwë married then.

Tolkien could imagine that his Littleheart was born at a time that he might have been of age to be a mariner who accompanied Eärendel to Kôr. I see nothing that speaks against Tolkien’s imagining.

Nor do I see anything in your revised fan-fiction that would cause any difficulty.

And all of Littleheart's elven names strike me a bit odd - naturally - and I cannot make my mind whether to keep him in my revised version.A poor reason to use by someone who is concerned only that his Elvish names make sense phonetically in Quenya or Sindarin. Personally, I see nothing wrong with any of the Elvish forms given.

I am NOT talking about Ottor from Angeln - I am talking about Aelfwine from England and his stay at Eressëa - with needed emendations of course.You mean Ælfwine, not Aelfwine, of course. Your English is as bad as your Elvish. And up until now you were not talking about this at all, only about your wish to produce a new version of “The Cottage of Lost Play.”

I admit, such a project needs a lot of tinkering with the texts, but I am COMPLETELY hellbent on keeping Aelfwine and his stor(y)ies.

The sheer abundancy of the mentions of Aelfwine and his teaching in the late writings, brings your claim to naught (at least in my opinion).Not in my opinion. Not a surprise.

And wouldn't it be more likely that a script written in Old English would be preserved (if somewhat in a fragmentary form) all the way up to Tolkien's time than a book written 7000 years ago (also in a language and script completely unknown in later times - it would take a Champollion to decipher it - referring, of course, to Bilbo's books and the writing system in which they were written - Tengwar).Yes, in theory that would seem to be more likely. But in fact your story is pure fiction, just as Tolkien’s The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings is pure fiction, as is Robert E. Howard’s story series about Conan the Barbarian. The backstory behind how the books came to be, as set forth by implication in the books themselves, is obviously phony, and the resultant works are none the worse for that. People expect fantasy fiction to be fictional.

I first encountered the Bilbo Baggins theory in a fanzine article soon after the Ballantine edition was first printed. I don’t recall which fanzine but I believe someone was quoting Tolkien. That the published Silmarillion was supposedly adapted from Bilbo Baggins’ Translations from the Elvish is put forth in various modern articles, not seriously of course.

Please think before you respond and see if what you want to post makes sense.

[Galin]

In his Foreword to The Book of Lost Tales Christopher Tolkien assumes the same thing that Robert Foster had published in his Complete Guide to Middle-earth, that Quenta Silmarillion was no doubt one of Bilbo's translations.

"So also I have assumed: the 'books of lore' that Bilbo gave to Frodo provided in the end the solution: they were "The Silmarillion". But apart from the evidence cited here, there is, so far as I know, no other statement on this matter anywhere in my father's writings; and (wrongly, as I think now) I was reluctant to step into the breach and make definite what I only surmised."

Christopher Tolkien, Foreword, The Book Of Lost Tales volume I

Richard Plotz talked with Tolkien on November 1, 1966, just after the second, revised edition (Allen and Unwin) had been published in October, after the Ballantine Books revised edition had been published as well.

Tolkien tells him that one of the snags delaying publication of The Silmarillion is its quasi-biblical stle, which Tolkien considers "his best, but his publishers disagree. Another problem is that of finding a story line to connect all the parts. At the moment, Professor Tolkien is considering making use of Bilbo again ... perhaps the Silmarillion will appear as his research in Rivendell."

Hammond And Scull, Chronology

I find his phrasing interesting, as it looks like Tolkien had already added his Note On The Shire Records (revised edition), which included that Bilbo's Translations From The Elvish were "almost entirely concerned with the Elder Days". And JRRT had added in Appendix A (revised edition) that the ancient legends of the First Age were Bilbo's chief interest.

Admittedly Quenta Silmarillion is not specifically noted in either of these descriptions from the second edition, but in any case this is how Plotz put it.

[jallanite]

Since the second edition of the Lord of the Rings was first published by Ballantine in 1965 while Plotz’s interview with Tolkien occurred on November 1, 1966, indeed it more than “looks like Tolkien had already added his Note On The Shire Records (revised edition), which included that Bilbo’s Translations From The Elvish were ‘almost entirely concerned with the Elder Days’.”

Thanks for verifying that this was not just my theory.

Tolkien does refer to Ælfwine still in some texts written following The Lord of the Rings and so Tolkien did at least for a time consider some version of his Ælfwine story as still valid. Possibly he considered that Ælfwine was given the complete Thain’s Book version of the Red Book of Westmarch by Pengolodh in Tol Eressëa. (Also possibly not.)

Tolkien also in some writing imagines himself as in contact with present-day Hobbits. For example in the FOREWARD to the first edition, Tolkien writes:To complete it some maps are given, including one of the Shire that has been approved as reasonably correct by those Hobbits that still concern themselves with ancient history.
The complications of a tale that required both Ælfwine and present-day Hobbits may be sufficient to explain Christopher Tolkien’s remarks on page 5 of The Book of Lost Tales Part I (HoME 1):The original mode, that of The Book of Lost Tales, that in which a Man, Eriol, comes after a great voyage over the ocean to the island where the Elves dwell and learns their history from their own lips, had (by degrees) fallen away. […] I think that in the end he concluded that nothing would serve, and no more would be said beyond an explanation of how (within the imagined world) it came to be recorded.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

The sheer abundancy of the mentions of Aelfwine and his teaching in the late writings, brings your claim to naught.

However, I am not aware of any text in which Aelfwine* appears that postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade (that is, before the publication of the Lord of the Rings), and in no event later than, at the extreme, January 1960,** still well before the Revised Edition in 1965.


-----------------
*Sorry, JA, but for forum posts, chasing down off-keyboard lenitions isn't worth the bother

**The latest possible date for Dangweth Pengolodh

[jallanite]

However, I am not aware of any text in which Aelfwine* appears that postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade (that is, before the publication of the Lord of the Rings), and in no event later than, at the extreme, January 1960,** still well before the Revised Edition in 1965.

You are aware that Dangweth Pengolodh is dated by Christopher Tolkien as “cannot be later than the end of 1959,” that is, possibly written after “the first half of the decade.” And in The War of The Jewels (HoME 11) Ælfwine appears prominently in “The Annals of Aman”, “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)”, and “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)”, only the first of which Christoopher Tolkien dates even to the period before The Lord of the Riings was even fully published. Nothing you have put forward here disagrees with anything that either I or Arvegil145 has posted and it is inconsistent with itself.

*Sorry, JA, but for forum posts, chasing down off-keyboard lenitions isn't worth the bother
Lenitions‽ Do you even know what the word means? Apparently not. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenition.

Almost all forums available on the web allow access to Unicode which currently contains 120,520 graphic characters, more characters than were available to most professional publishers even 15 years ago. I very much enjoy this access and will ɴᴏᴛ give it up only because another poster feels it “isn’t worth the bother.”:rolleyes:

[Zigûr]

Almost all forums available on the web allow access to Unicode which currently contains 120,520 graphic characters, more characters than were available to most professional publishers even 15 years ago. I very much enjoy this access and will ɴᴏᴛ give it up only because another poster feels it “isn’t worth the bother.”:rolleyes:
Come, come, jallanite, no one is asking you to give it up, but there probably isn't the need to correct people who may not be aware of or familiar with Unicode, or simply aren't sufficiently interested in going to the trouble of using it. It is fairly standard on this forum, I believe, for people to not always include Professor Tolkien's exact use of accent marks, for instance. I use them myself, but I can understand that many posters lack the inclination to use them.

I agree with you, however, that I personally do not see a role for Ælfwine later in the story in Professor Tolkien's later conceptions, for thematic reasons if nothing else. I like the idea to an extent, but I also feel like it makes the connection between the Primary and Secondary Worlds a little too strong.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

CT can date Dangweth Pengolodh no more precisely than to the 50s, not later than the Jan 1960 date of its newspaper wrapper, but thought it more probably from earlier in the decade than later. AAm and LQI both fall into the bracket 1950-53; LQII (if there is an Aelfwine reference in it; I can't find one) refers specifically to an amanuensis typescript which reflects the status of QS as emended between the earlier typescript and 1958- so, yes, that range extends past 1955, fine and so what. Nothing in "postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade... and in no event later than, at the extreme, January 1960" is self-contradictory or in disagreement with what is known or deduced of the chronology, and certainly is in full accord with my point that there is no mention of Aelfwine which can be dated after or even within five years of the LR 2d Ed... and none which can with certainty be dated even to within a decade of it.

---------------------

Ligatures. Brain-poot. Sheesh!

Yes, Unicode is available; it's also a PITA for what is after all just casual messaging, not a matter for your professional publishers, past or present. It frankly was a bit pompous for you to insult a poster's command of English simply because he's not pedantic enough to go hunt down U+00C6 or Alt-0198 amongst all those tens of thopusands of available codes.

I find it even more inexplicable that you would jump all over my post made in support of your contention!

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Back OT: I can't run it down, but somewhere there is a Tolkien statement, relatively late, of a tradition ascribing authorship of the Akallabeth to Elendil; this would represent a conscious change to the conception reflected in the text of Akallabeth itself, which was on its own terms expressly an Aelfwine-Pengolodh document.

[jallanite]

LQII (if there is an Aelfwine reference in it; I can't find one) refers specifically to an amanuensis typescript which reflects the status of QS as emended between the earlier typescript and 1958- so, yes, that range extends past 1955, fine and so what. Nothing in "postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade... and in no event later than, at the extreme, January 1960" is self-contradictory or in disagreement with what is known or deduced of the chronology, and certainly is in full accord with my point that there is no mention of Aelfwine which can be dated after or even within five years of the LR 2d Ed... and none which can with certainty be dated even to within a decade of it.

See pages 208–09 for the mention of Ælfwine in Laws and Customs Among the Eldar which is in the chapter with the page heading “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)”. On page 225 occurs the notation, “So spoke Ælfwine.” On page 257 Tolkien in another later essay under the same page heading includes a footnote from Ælfwine about Míriel Sirende.

These references to Ælfwine are also written following publication of The Lord of the Rings and are what I was talking about.

You posted:However, I am not aware of any text in which Aelfwine* appears that postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade (that is, before the publication of the Lord of the Rings), …
The Lord of the Rings was published in three volumes over the course of a year from 29 July 1954 to 20 October 1955. Christopher Tolkien dates all the material in the sections headed “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (I)” and “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (II)” as following this, not “before the publication of The Lord of the Rings.”

I recognize and agree with your intended “point”, but that was not what you posted.
Ligatures. Brain-poot. Sheesh!

Yes, Unicode is available; it's also a PITA for what is after all just casual messaging, not a matter for your professional publishers, past or present.You ignore why Unicode is today essentially the sole set of protocols for language posting, universally. Casual messaging is hardly to be involved with numerous dead languages and minority languages, except in the sense that Unicode intends, in the future, to allow any language, no matter how much used or little-used it may be, to be printed.

It frankly was a bit pompous for you to insult a poster's command of English simply because he's not pedantic enough to go hunt down U+00C6 or Alt-0198 amongst all those tens of thopusands of available codes.Gee whiz, I was only talking about one code, for ‘Æ’. And one hardly needs to hunt through tens of thousands of available codes, but only the codes used for producing the Latin script. Just look up ’Latin’ at http://www.unicode.org/charts/ or look up http://unicode.org/charts/collation/ for the characters in more-or-less normal order or look up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_script_in_Unicode or many other sites.

If one realizes that ‘Æ’ and ‘æ’ were part of both the old MS-DOS Character set and the so-called Microsoft ANSI character set for Western Europe, and the original Apple-Macintosh character set one would realize that these two codes will be found early in the Unicode character set: so see http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0000.pdf and http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0080.pdf.

You are trying to make it seem hard to code ‘Æ’ and naturally failing when Arvegil145 seems to have no problems finding the vowels with diacritics. Nor do you. But you now think it smart to show that you could use Unicode but refuse to do so.
I find it even more inexplicable that you would jump all over my post made in support of your contention!I found your post inaccurate for reasons I have explained. You believed that your post supported my contention, but it did not. What you posted was not in agreement with my contention.

Come, come, jallanite, no one is asking you to give it up, but there probably isn't the need to correct people who may not be aware of or familiar with Unicode, or simply aren't sufficiently interested in going to the trouble of using it.

I normally do not remark on such things, when I even notice them.

However Arvegil145 in other places uses Tolkien’s diacritics properly, so it looks like he normally knows what he is doing in that area. As do most posters on this forum. I thought it somewhat amusing that a poster so concerned with what is proper Elvish should make such a silly error in Old English. I am sorry now that I commented on it

[Galin]

I found another reference from Hammond and Scull, this time in their Reader's Guide, companion to their volume titled Chronology:

"... that one of these was to be the Quenta Silmarillion. In support of this idea is a report by Dick Plotz that when he visited Tolkien on 1 November, 1966,

"he, half-heartedly I suppose, was thinking up schemes for rendering the Silmarillion publishable. So far, I think what he is doing is relating it to Bilbo's stay in Rivendell, which is what he said to me.

Now there is a hint of this somewhere in The Lord of the Rings.... But apparently when Bilbo went to Rivendell he was surrounded by Elves and all Elven records for seventeen years. Here was living history and he attempted to write it down, and this is what became the Silmarillion ["An Edited Transcript of Remarks at the December 1966 TSA [Tolkien Society of America] Meeting"; Niekas 19 (Spring 1967), p. 40]

Hammond and Scull, Reader's Guide


I would add that Rivendell contained Numenorean lore too. The Adventures of Tom Bombadil was published in 1962, so before Tolkien revised the second edition of The Lord of the Rings and added his Note On The Shire Records. In The Adventures of Tom Bombadil we find the description, for example:

"These two pieces, therefore, are only re-handlings of Southern matter, though this may have reached Bilbo by way of Rivendell. No. 14 also depends upon the lore of Rivendell, Elvish and Numenorean, concerning the heroic days at the end of the First Age; it seems to contain echoes of the Numenorean tale of Turin and Mim the Dwarf."

This is partly why I think the "Bilbo transmission" and the "Numenorean transmission" can be the same tradition.

[jallanite]

I imagine the Silmarillion as something like Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Ovid begins his work with a story of creation. But the story he tells is not based on any mythological account, but on more advanced philosophical speculations, principally on the speculations of Hērákleitos. This name was Latinized to Heraclitus and his teachings were particularly honored by the Stoics. Stoicism was the foremost popular philosophy among the educated elite in the Hellenistic world and the Roman Empire. After the 5th century ʙᴄᴇ, no Greek writer of repute thought the world was anything but round.

So Ovid here, following the science of his time, naturally imagines that his Earth is spherical in shape. See http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/ovid/meta/meta01.htm.

Yet when telling the story of Phaéthōn, the son of the Sun god (see http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/ovid/meta/meta02.htm), whose name Ovid Latiinizes as Phaeton, Earth is conceived of as flat and the Sun god is conceived of as dwelling, before sunrise, in a marvelous palace at the east of the flat earth.

Apparently, like Ovid’s Metamorphoses, or like Apollódōrus’ Bibliothḗkē (‘The Library’), the Silmarillion was conceived by Tolkien as a work of great prestige in Gondor, prestige that meant it continued to be copied although it was known that ‘the Wise of Númenor’ found many errors in it. It is not surprising that a least one copy, or many copies, would be found in the library at Rivendell for Bilbo to translate.

Tolkien writes, as published on page 374 of Morgoth’s Ring (HoME 10):The cosmogonic myths are Númenórean, blending Elven-lore with human myth and imagination. A note should say that the Wise of Númenor recorded that the making of stars was not so, nor of Sun and Moon. For Sun and stars were all older than Arda. But the placing of Arda amidst stars and under the [?guard] of the Sun was due to Manwë and Varda before the assault of Melkor.
Tolkien does not indicate whether this note, and presumably other notes, was to be represented as a translation from the source written in Sindarin, as a note by Bilbo, or as a note by himself.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

You posted:However, I am not aware of any text in which Aelfwine* appears that postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade (that is, before the publication of the Lord of the Rings), …
The Lord of the Rings was published in three volumes over the course of a year from 29 July 1954 to 20 October 1955. Christopher Tolkien dates all the material in the sections headed “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (I)” and “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (II)” as following this, not “before the publication of The Lord of the Rings.”

I recognize and agree with your intended “point”, but that was not what you posted.


Yes, it is. I have no reason why you are being not only hostile, but hostile over your incorrect parsing not my error. Setting aside the reference in Laws and Customs, which I had overlooked, all of the A/P references after the writing of the Lord of the Rings are to be found in those writings dating from Tolkien's renewed work on the Elder days following the writing of the LR circa 1950-52* (which includes, contra your assertion, the material titled by CT "The Later Quenta Silmarillion I"), with the exception of Dangweth Pengolodh, which CT is "inclined" to place "earlier in the decade rather than later," and the aborted preface to the Narn, of uncertain date but seemingly related to the Grey Annals.

In other words, there is simply no basis for your complaint; there are no known Aelfwines after the 1950s, and all of those (but for the exception you raised) can either be firmly dated to the period before 1954, or probably date from that period.

* In fact, there are no A/P refs in GA; those few found in QS are "quoth Aelfwines" incorporated in the 1951 LQ1 typescript. A single "quoth" note in the AAm manuscript was struck out before the typescript was made. Ainulindale D is no later than 1951.


Gee whiz, I was only talking about one code, for ‘Æ’. And one hardly needs to hunt through tens of thousands of available codes, but only the codes used for producing the Latin script. Just look up ’Latin’ at http://www.unicode.org/charts/ or look up http://unicode.org/charts/collation/ for the characters in more-or-less normal order or look up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_script_in_Unicode or many other sites.

[...]

You are trying to make it seem hard to code ‘Æ’ and naturally failing when Arvegil145 seems to have no problems finding the vowels with diacritics. Nor do you. But you now think it smart to show that you could use Unicode but refuse to do so.
it

Not hard, but inconvenient. You yourself admit one has to "look it up," even if it's not "hard" to do it. It's not on the keyboard, and thus for me (and the majority of others) a PITA for casual posting. Your presuming to insult another's intelligence or knowledge on that basis is the sort of thing that gives "pedantry" a bad name.

While you're at it, do you plan to jump on the Tolkiens père et fils for writing Hrothgar rather than Hroðgar?

[jallanite]

Yes, it is. I have no reason why you are being not only hostile, but hostile over your incorrect parsing not my error.

I pointed out what you posted. I will do so again:rolleyes::However, I am not aware of any text in which Aelfwine* appears that postdates the 1950s, probably the first half of the decade (that is, before the publication of the Lord of the Rings), …
See http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=702099&postcount=30.

First, the “the publication of The Lord of the Rings" occurred from 29 July 1954 to 20 October 1955. Your statement “probably the first half of the decade (that is, before the publication of the Lord of the Rings)” doesn’t even make sense in respect to the rest of your sentence.

But if I interpret your statement to mean that Ælfwine does not appear in any text postdating the publication of The Lord of the Rings, then the statement is simply wrong.

Setting aside the reference in Laws and Customs, which I had overlooked, …One example of where you were wrong in your original post.

… all of the A/P references after the writing of the Lord of the Rings are to be found in those writings dating from Tolkien's renewed work on the Elder days following the writing of the LR circa 1950-52* (which includes, contra your assertion, the material titled by CT "The Later Quenta Silmarillion I"), with the exception of Dangweth Pengolodh, which CT is "inclined" to place "earlier in the decade rather than later," and the aborted preface to the Narn, of uncertain date but seemingly related to the Grey Annals.I am aware of no “assertion” by me that is incorrect.

In other words, there is simply no basis for your complaint; there are no known Aelfwines after the 1950s, and all of those (but for the exception you raised) can either be firmly dated to the period before 1954, or probably date from that period.On page 47 of Morgoth’s Ring Christopher Tolkien states:This work [the Annals of Aman] undoubtedly belongs with the large development and recasting of the Matter of the Elder Days that my father undertook when The Lord of the Rings was finished (see p. 3).
On page 110 “Quoth Ælfwine” occurs. Christopher Tolkien notes on page 121:This passage, from ‘But indeed a darker tale . . .’ and including the footnote, was struck out at a later time than the changes given in notes 5–7 and perhaps in revision of the text before the making of the typescript, in which it does not appear. The whole addition by Ælfwine is enclosed within brackets as originally written.
The removal of “Quoth Ælfwine” occurred in a later typescript and is discussed by Christopher Tolkien on page 127 §127.

On page 130 occurs the footnote: “* Marginal notes against Arien and Tilion: ‘dægred Æ’ and ‘hyrned Æ’.” I assume that “Æ” stands for Ælfwine and so does Christopher Tolkien on page 136 §172. Who else could be meant?

For “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)” Christopher Tolkien comments on page 191 his doubts on whether for the last three chapters of the Quenta Silmarillion his father was drawing on the Annals of Aman for the Quenta Silmarillion, or vice versa, and comes to the conclusion that all that can be proved is that they “were closely contemporary.” That is, these last chapters the Quenta Silmarillion was also being written following the publication of The Lord of the Rings. In chapter 6 occurs a footnote by Ælfwine mentioning Byrde Míriel.

* In fact, there are no A/P refs in GA; those few found in QS are "quoth Aelfwines" incorporated in the 1951 LQ1 typescript.In fact, the last three chapters published in “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)” were not part of the 1951 typescript, but a later continuation of it in Tolkien’s handwriting, probably written about the same tine as The Annals of Aman. See page 184. I guess you missed that. Are you hoping that those reading will not recall the other examples I gave of the presence of Ælfwine in the chapter with the page heading “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)”?

A single "quoth" note in the AAm manuscript was struck out before the typescript was made.Christopher Tolkien imagines this passage was struck out because his father changed his mind about the validity of this version of the origin of Elves. See page 123 §127. Since a footnote is later attributed to Æ and Ælfwine occurs in later texts, I very much don’t believe that the removal was, at this time, because Tolkien intended to remove Ælfwine from his mythology. I don’t see that this matters, as he still obviously did at least for a time consider Ælfwine valid following The Lord of the Rings, and following this removal.

Ainulindale D is no later than 1951.Very true, but that has no relevance that I see. I never mentioned Ainulindale D in this thread.

What I originally posted at http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=702126&postcount=31 was the following:You are aware that Dangweth Pengolodh is dated by Christopher Tolkien as “cannot be later than the end of 1959,” that is, possibly written after “the first half of the decade.” And in The War of The Jewels (HoME 11) Ælfwine appears prominently in “The Annals of Aman”, “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)”, and “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)”, only the first of which Christoopher Tolkien dates even to the period before The Lord of the Riings was even fully published.
I admit the my mention of a year’s difference in dating for Dangweth Pengolodh was not worth mentioning but I still stand behind it and the rest of my statement, other than that my use of the word “prominently” is questionable. And I should have written “beginning of the first” instead of simply “first”and spelled Christoopher as Christopher.

Not hard, but inconvenient. You yourself admit one has to "look it up," even if it's not "hard" to do it.Yes. And one may find oneself looking for a keyboard key that one seldom uses. I don’t see any difference. I do see that modern computers do not limit me to just the keyboard characters, so I choose not to be so limited. I find the vast number of characters I can use a delight, not an inconvenience.

It's not on the keyboard,and thus for me (and the majority of others) a PITA for casual posting. Your presuming to insult another's intelligence or knowledge on that basis is the sort of thing that gives "pedantry" a bad name.Can you prove your word ‘majority’? No don’t bother. It doesn’t matter to me and I suspect doesn’t matter to anyone here who chooses to use diacritics which the forum ediitor allows, or chooses not to. Might as well think that anyone will be swayed in their spelling if someone could prove that either colour or color was the preferred spelling of the majority.

See near the end of this post, http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=206919&postcount=1post, for an example where Mister Underhill assumes that listing one method of producing non-keyboard characters will be an aid to users. You might post your own diatribe that anyone who uses non-keyboard characters is being stupid. Trouble is, that would make you look stupid. Those who use non-keyboard characters don’t find using non-keyboard characters stupid or we wouldn’t be doing it.

Of course Mister Underhill’s example assumes that the user is using a Windows keyboard set for English, and his examples will not necessarily work for other languages, nor will they work for those using a Macintosh or Linux machine. I also find this Alt-key method over-complex for my taste.

I have in the past used several methods at different times. The user can switch to different virtual keyboards. The user may customize any keyboard to behave as they wish it to behave. The user may use a utility which replaces output values to two or more values with one new wished-for extra value. See http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/utilities.html for a list of various utilities.

Currently I usually use a free program WinCompose. See http://www.freewarefiles.com/WinCompose_program_98325.html. To include Æ one types ComposeKey A E. To include á one types ComposeKey a '. The ComposeKey is by default assigned to the right-Alt key.

It really does seem to bother you that I use utilities to type non-keyboard characters. That is not enough to make me stop. It bothers me that you don’t see that I was quite right in the presence of Ælfwine in three chapters in Morgoth’s Rings, but the mentions are there in the text, despite your attempts to claim that they aren’t. I did apologize for the presumed insult to Arvegil145. I do so again. I apologize to Arvegil145 for blaming him for not using an uppercase Æ in his spelling of Ælfwine.

But, I will not apologize for accurate statements. False claims that the forms aren’t there or were written earlier won’t make the forms go away.

While you're at it, do you plan to jump on the Tolkiens père et fils for writing Hrothgar rather than Hroðgar?Certainly not! Why would I? That would be absurd, unless I were quoting a passage in which they themselves or someone else were using the form Hroðgar I probably wouldn’t use that form. Similarly I would not normally use the spelling Hꞃōðᵹāꞃ with real insular letters. Christopher Tolkien uses the spelling Ælfwine throughout and so I do. It seems to me to be silly not to do the same when the computer system allows it and it is so easy. And in real Old English æ and ae have different sounds, which is, I assume, why Christopher Tolkien, and I presume, his father, followed this distinction. Old English [æ] is pronounced as in Modern English cat. To pronounce the Old English ae as a diphthong I guess you would start with the [a] in father and end with the [ɛ] in let. But I’m no expert in Old English.

When typing ‘Ælfwine’, I suppose, unless Tolkien was using a special Varityper machine, he would have typed ‘AElfwine’.

[Arvegil145]

Hello, master Jallanite!

I have long delayed the response to your insolent and pompous statement.

You see...I DO use the ALT-codes when writing the names of say, FinwË or ThÉoden, but the problem is (which obviously you did not perceive) that the letters (both capital and small) Æ, Ê, Û, and a few others I CANNOT write down with ALT-codes but only with copy-paste method. If you wonder why, I will tell you a little secret - I come from a Slavic country which DOES NOT use such symbols. On my keyboard there are the following symbols: Č, Ć, Đ, Ž, Š - which do not require any bothering with ALT-codes.

So please, think before you write down such erroneous and ignorant comments.


Yours truly, a Slavic, ignorant, non-English speaking self.


P.S. I don't really think that any of our discussions belong to this thread - they are so off-topic that I find it hilarious.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Aha! Who is wrong like big dog here?

On page 47 of Morgoth’s Ring Christopher Tolkien states:
This work [the Annals of Aman] undoubtedly belongs with the large development and recasting of the Matter of the Elder Days that my father undertook when The Lord of the Rings was finished (see p. 3).

Yes- by which CT means after his father had finished the writing of the Lord of the Rings, in 1949, not its publication in 1954-55. That misapprehension on your part explains why you misread my original post, and further leads you to misdate the last three chapters of QS.

In the foreword to Morgoth's Ring I emphasized the distinction between the first period of writing that followed in the early 1950s the actual completion of The Lord of the Rings, and the later work that followed its publication...

The number of new works that my father embarked upon in that first 'phase,' highly creative but all too brief, is astonishing. There were the new Lay of Leithian.... the Annals of Aman and new versions of the Ainulindale; the Grey Annals, abandoned at the end of the tale of Turin; the new Tale of Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin.... and all the new tale of Turin and Nienor from Turin's return to Dor-Lomin to their deaths in Brethil. There were also an abandoned prose saga of Beren and Luthien; the story of Maeglin; and an extensive revision of the Quenta Silmarillion.

And further,


[A] calendar, with dates in September, October, and November 1951, was used for riders to Tuor and the Grey Annals (the last version of the Annals of Beleriand and a close companion work to the Annals of Aman)

[Yes, this is the very same passage on Page 3 of MR to which your own cite refers back. Your passage continues:]

...and it stands in close relationship to the revision at that time of the corresponding parts of the Quenta Silmarillion (V.204-43, referred to throughout as QS), the text which had been abandoned at the end of 1937. Equally clearly it followed the last text of the Ainulindale (D)

You have been led astray by your misdating of AAm and subsequent dating in reference to it.
The Lord of the Rings was published in three volumes over the course of a year from 29 July 1954 to 20 October 1955. Christopher Tolkien dates all the material in the sections headed “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (I)” and “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (II)” as following this, not “before the publication of The Lord of the Rings.” was simply, completely wrong.



My point still stands, untouched by your carping: all mentions of Aelfwine post-LR date from the 1950s, and all but one Aelfwine document either definitely or probably date from JRRT's creative surge in 1949-53 between the LR's completion and publication. There is no extant evidence for Aelfwine's continued existence after the 1950s, and certainly none near or subsequent in time to 1965-66, the period of the Revised Edition and the Plotz interview, where the Bilbo-vector came to the fore.

-----------------------------------------------




It really does seem to bother you that I use utilities to type non-keyboard characters. That is not enough to make me stop.

Got paranoia? Sheesh, talk about a persecution complex! I don't give a rat's patoot whether you use 'em or not. I was and am bothered by the hoity-toity way in which you slammed Arvegil:

You mean Ælfwine, not Aelfwine, of course. Your English is as bad as your Elvish.

I daresay Arvegil's English is much better than your Czech, Polish or Croatian.

[jallanite]

On page 300 of Morgoth’s Ring (Home II) Christoper Tolkien prints a short article entitled “Note on Dating” in which he discusses his guesses on the chronology of the texts printed in “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (II)”. I don’t see reason in printing out the whole thing but will summarize. Christopher Tolkien dates all the material to 1957–59. In particular he finds the text called Laws and Customs among the Eldar and Chapter 6(–7) of the Quenta Silmarilion were typed on a “new typewriter with a rather distinctive typeface” upon which the first letter that he knows to be typed by his father was dated January 1959. Both of these texts mention Ælfwine.

I have mentioned this previously, but you have have once posted and once implied that a sole example of Ælfwine was found. For my mentions see:See pages 208–09 for the mention of Ælfwine in Laws and Customs Among the Eldar which is in the chapter with the page heading “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)”. On page 225 occurs the notation, “So spoke Ælfwine.” On page 257 Tolkien in another later essay under the same page heading includes a footnote from Ælfwine about Míriel Sirende.
If only a sole reference had been found that would still be sufficient to show that at that time Tolkien still thought Ælfwine to be valid.

The source is in http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=702192&postcount=35.

You are wrong that I misunderstood a mention of Tolkien’s publication the Lord of the Rings for a mention of his creation of it. If I have done so in anything I have posted, that is not something I have done in these posts in general. Posting inaccurately is something I try not to do, though I sometimes fail to live up to it.

The last three chapters of “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (I)” were written by Tolkien later than the first five chapters and after the amanuensis typescript was made. Christopher Tolkien dates the amanuensis typescript to 1958. In this later manuscript (dating to 1958 or later), there is, in chapter 6, a footnote purportedly by Ælfwine in which he mentions Bryde Míriel. There is also a footnote about Orcs attributed to Ælfwine in chapter 7. In his summary of chapter 8 Christopher Tolkien compares a similar passage in AAm to the Quenta Silmarillion and makes it clear that AAm here mentions Ælfwine, but he does not clarify whether or not the Quenta Silmarillion also does at this place.

Note that I do not discuss anywhere the earlier potions of LC 1, which Christopher dates to 1951, or discuss the contents of the later amanuensis typescript as it is simply a copy of the 1951 text.

Christopher Tolkien makes it quite clear on page 47 that he dates The Annals of Aman to “the large development and recasting of the Matter of the Elder Days that my father undertook when The Lord of the Rings was finished (see p. 3)”, and I am aware of this. But on page 3 he does not specifically mention it save when the says that The Annals of Aman (not dated at this point) were a close companion work to the Grey Annals. And he does not indicate when this “development and recasting” ended. He never, so far as I know, actually dates The Annals of Aman, save in part on page 191 when he questions which was earlier: the portions of The Annals of Aman then being worked on or the corresponding chapters 6–8 of the Quenta Silmarillion. He concludes only that he cannot decide but “that the two texts were closely contemporary.”

This dates the portions of the Annals of Aman, against which Tolkien was writing, about 1958, Of course the early sections of the Annals of Aman could be earlier, even much earlier.

The only mention of “Ælfwine” in the Annals of Aman are to a quotation about Ælfwine’s opinion of the creation of the Orcs including some words attributed to “Pengoloð”. See §127. This passage is mostly omitted in the typescript including the mention of Ælfwine and in any case this passage is probably early. Later in the Annals of Aman §172 occurs the footnote “* Marginal notes against Arien and Tilion: ‘dægdred Æ’ and ‘hyrned Æ’” in which I assume that Æ stands for Ælfwine, and so does Christopher Tolkien in his comment.

You will find portions of what I type above repetitive. I wanted to include everything because, possibly because of my previous wording, you seem to have misunderstood some of it.

My point still stands, untouched by your carping: all mentions of Aelfwine post-LR date from the 1950s, and all but one Aelfwine document either definitely or probably date from JRRT's creative surge in 1949-53 between the LR's completion and publication.Your point never stood. I don’t accept it and have given my reasons. Do you still not understand?

Christopher Tolkien does not definitely date any of the passages I have discussed from “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)” or “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)” to before 1958. The one mention of Æ in The Annals of Aman is dated about the same time as the last three chapters of the Later Quenta Silmarillion (I), close to 1958, possibly even later.

There is no extant evidence for Aelfwine's continued existence after the 1950s, and certainly none near or subsequent in time to 1965-66, the period of the Revised Edition and the Plotz interview, where the Bilbo-vector came to the fore. I never claimed otherwise, never. You have no reason to complain about this.

Got paranoia?Not at all.

Sheesh, talk about a persecution complex!No thanks.

I don't give a rat's patoot whether you use 'em or not.That’s good.

I was and am bothered by the hoity-toity way in which you slammed Arvegil:That was bad behavior and I apologize for it again: I apologize, for it again, Arvegil145.

I daresay Arvegil's English is much better than your Czech, Polish or Croatian.I daresay it is.

Hello, master Jallanite!

Hello, Arvegil145.

I have long delayed the response to your insolent and pompous statement.No problem. I was being unreasonably snarky, and I apologize.

You see...I DO use the ALT-codes when writing the names of say, FinwË or ThÉoden, but the problem is (which obviously you did not perceive) that the letters (both capital and small) Æ, Ê, Û, and a few others I CANNOT write down with ALT-codes but only with copy-paste method. If you wonder why, I will tell you a little secret - I come from a Slavic country which DOES NOT use such symbols. On my keyboard there are the following symbols: Č, Ć, Đ, Ž, Š - which do not require any bothering with ALT-codes.That explains everything. I knew you normally posted using non US-keyboard values where appropriate.

So please, think before you write down such erroneous and ignorant comments.Good advice.

Yours truly, a Slavic, ignorant, non-English speaking self.One of the most intelligent persons, or perhaps the most intelligent person, I ever knew had Slavic parents. She was Alexandra Kiceniuk and contributed to my book http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Middle-Earth-Published-Writings-Professor/dp/0905220102.

P.S. I don't really think that any of our discussions belong to this thread - they are so off-topic that I find it hilarious.I agree. It is fun when a discussion opponent is too stubborn to admit he is wrong, but perhaps I should just not respond to William Cloud Hicklin at all.

[Ivriniel]

On page 300 of Morgoth’s Ring (Home II) Christoper Tolkien prints a short article entitled “Note on Dating” in which he discusses his guesses on the chronology of the texts printed in “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (II)”. I don’t see reason in printing out the whole thing but will summarize. Christopher Tolkien dates all the material to 1957–59. In particular he finds the text called Laws and Customs among the Eldar and Chapter 6(–7) of the Quenta Silmarilion were typed on a “new typewriter with a rather distinctive typeface” upon which the first letter that he knows to be typed by his father was dated January 1959. Both of these texts mention Ælfwine.

I have mentioned this previously, but you have have once posted and once implied that a sole example of Ælfwine was found. For my mentions see:See pages 208–09 for the mention of Ælfwine in Laws and Customs Among the Eldar which is in the chapter with the page heading “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)”. On page 225 occurs the notation, “So spoke Ælfwine.” On page 257 Tolkien in another later essay under the same page heading includes a footnote from Ælfwine about Míriel Sirende.
If only a sole reference had been found that would still be sufficient to show that at that time Tolkien still thought Ælfwine to be valid.

The source is in http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=702192&postcount=35.

You are wrong that I misunderstood a mention of Tolkien’s publication the Lord of the Rings for a mention of his creation of it. If I have done so in anything I have posted, that is not something I have done in these posts in general. Posting inaccurately is something I try not to do, though I sometimes fail to live up to it.

The last three chapters of “The Later QUENTA SILMARILLION (I)” were written by Tolkien later than the first five chapters and after the amanuensis typescript was made. Christopher Tolkien dates the amanuensis typescript to 1958. In this later manuscript (dating to 1958 or later), there is, in chapter 6, a footnote purportedly by Ælfwine in which he mentions Bryde Míriel. There is also a footnote about Orcs attributed to Ælfwine in chapter 7. In his summary of chapter 8 Christopher Tolkien compares a similar passage in AAm to the Quenta Silmarillion and makes it clear that AAm here mentions Ælfwine, but he does not clarify whether or not the Quenta Silmarillion also does at this place.

Note that I do not discuss anywhere the earlier potions of LC 1, which Christopher dates to 1951, or discuss the contents of the later amanuensis typescript as it is simply a copy of the 1951 text.

Christopher Tolkien makes it quite clear on page 47 that he dates The Annals of Aman to “the large development and recasting of the Matter of the Elder Days that my father undertook when The Lord of the Rings was finished (see p. 3)”, and I am aware of this. But on page 3 he does not specifically mention it save when the says that The Annals of Aman (not dated at this point) were a close companion work to the Grey Annals. And he does not indicate when this “development and recasting” ended. He never, so far as I know, actually dates The Annals of Aman, save in part on page 191 when he questions which was earlier: the portions of The Annals of Aman then being worked on or the corresponding chapters 6–8 of the Quenta Silmarillion. He concludes only that he cannot decide but “that the two texts were closely contemporary.”

This dates the portions of the Annals of Aman, against which Tolkien was writing, about 1958, Of course the early sections of the Annals of Aman could be earlier, even much earlier.

The only mention of “Ælfwine” in the Annals of Aman are to a quotation about Ælfwine’s opinion of the creation of the Orcs including some words attributed to “Pengoloð”. See §127. This passage is mostly omitted in the typescript including the mention of Ælfwine and in any case this passage is probably early. Later in the Annals of Aman §172 occurs the footnote “* Marginal notes against Arien and Tilion: ‘dægdred Æ’ and ‘hyrned Æ’” in which I assume that Æ stands for Ælfwine, and so does Christopher Tolkien in his comment.

You will find portions of what I type above repetitive. I wanted to include everything because, possibly because of my previous wording, you seem to have misunderstood some of it.

Your point never stood. I don’t accept it and have given my reasons. Do you still not understand?

Christopher Tolkien does not definitely date any of the passages I have discussed from “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (I)” or “The Later Quenta Silmarillion (II)” to before 1958. The one mention of Æ in The Annals of Aman is dated about the same time as the last three chapters of the Later Quenta Silmarillion (I), close to 1958, possibly even later.

I never claimed otherwise, never. You have no reason to complain about this.

Not at all.

No thanks.

That’s good.

That was bad behavior and I apologize for it again: I apologize, for it again, Arvegil145.

I daresay it is.



Hello, Arvegil145.

No problem. I was being unreasonably snarky, and I apologize.

That explains everything. I knew you normally posted using non US-keyboard values where appropriate.

Good advice.

One of the most intelligent persons, or perhaps the most intelligent person, I ever knew had Slavic parents. She was Alexandra Kiceniuk and contributed to my book http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Middle-Earth-Published-Writings-Professor/dp/0905220102.

I agree. It is fun when a discussion opponent is too stubborn to admit he is wrong, but perhaps I should just not respond to William Cloud Hicklin at all.

Hi Jallante,

I think the central point you're making is that Ungoliant ate Morgoth's unsighted means of being unfriends, forever (don't you recall that was how Galadriel spoke of Feanor). Of course, the central tenet of any cogent, re-Ungolianted reverso-Spectral Vector Director (rSVD c.f. fMRI scanning) would place unFrodo-ing ahead of re-Frodo-ing.

I mean, the point you make about Elrond not really being Orcish, but Elfish--woops--El-V-ish, by, um, let's see, it's not exactly 'half', because transgenomic theories remind us that recombinant--Illearth Stones--make Lord Foul, really hot, in comparison to reading difficult posts.

I'd rather be burned in the fires of -- I forget which ones were hotter -- not hot like Lord Foul, 'bad boi hot', but you, know, 'burning' hot. Though, I'm not quite sure what would happen in any romantic encounter with Lord Foul, 'by the light of the Illearth Stone'. I'm not sure quite at all how that would impact Canon ideas you've raised in your post.

Seriously, the thread is termed Sindarin something or other, and since reading ur post and finding my mind again, I think putting on-topic to Sindarin something or others is probably best.

Sometimes Sindarin-o-ramas are interesting, and Celebrimbor--not being Sindarin, did of course, have Sindarin friends. He must have, right? I'm sure Christopher Tolkien would enjoy and appreciate how his name is---battered-- about in your post.

Thanks for ur post

[Ivriniel]

Heyo,

We all know that Tolkien kind of neglected to give names to a lot of the wives of the ancient Elf lords. Celebrimbor's wife has no name, Maglor's and Caranthir's wives have no names and neither does Orodreth's wife, the mother of Finduilas (and possibly Gil-Galad)....or does she?

A long while ago I have read somewhere in the HOMIE (I think it was the Shibboleth of Feanor? Not sure) that Tolkien tossed the idea around that Gil-Galad's mother was named "Meril" (Sindarin for "rose", at one point explicitly called the Elvish equivalent of the English name Rose).

Does anybody know if that is valid still from a linguistic standpoint? Does the word "Meril" fit into Sindarin as it existed at the time of Tolkien's death?

It would be nice to have a few more female names in the genealogies.

Curiously it would also make the house of Finarfin, the only house in which all members of the first age (except Gil-Galad) have named spouses or love interests (Amarië, Eldalotë/Edhellos, Andreth, Celeborn, Gwindor, Turin and Meril)

I really wish Tolkien had been more generous with giving the Elf Lords wives and daughters. It seems like he made attempts sometimes (Findis and Irimë, once writing that Ar-Feiniel was "the first daughter of Fingolfin", but he abandoned them rather quickly, ven all three of the nameless Fëanorian ladies get left behind in Aman) It seems a lot of the time Elf women are only mentioned when a Mortal Man needs a love interest, if Galadriel hadn't shown up in the Lotr and needed a back story, we wouldn't have had any female member of the House of Finwe who isn't there just to be wife, mother or love interest of somebody :(

Which is a shame because Tolkien could write women just as compelling as men if he set his mind to it as Galadriel and Morwen prove. Even the female you have to piece together from the HOME are often compelling, compare for a moment Miriel and Nerdanel to rather pale male characters like Fingon or Angrod whom not even the HoME improve much.

Yes, I love the take in your post. There were truly some wonderful stories and hidden accounts of Lore in the lost womanly lineages. I'd have very much loved a lot more on many of the famous houses, though as you point out, Tolkien did bring us some very moving womanly heroes.

Ivriniel, my Avatar has Imrahil as a descendant. Gilmith (star mist), a sister of the long gone forebear of Imrahil has stirred my curiosity deeply, at times. We never discovered if she had progeny or who they were, and what fate or legacy they brought us.

Aredhel - on some days, evokes antipathy and vomitronic tendencies (all that imagery of 'flowing white veil-y/teal-y wisps on her hunting horse rides in Valinor didn't work for me), but on others, I love her as a great hero of the Noldor. I'd especially love to see Lines of the Vanyar and womanly lineages of those, and 'which witch was which' at the battle when Beleriand was broken.

Cheers :)

PS: on some days, (after perhaps one too many gin and tonics), I giggle with my long loved geek pals, imagining that Sauron, really, was just a very angry woman, suppressed by male dominant social order, and so, just got so jack about it all, that she dressed as a 'drag king' and 'tricked' everyone in Valinor into seeming male.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I agree. It is fun when a discussion opponent is too stubborn to admit he is wrong, but perhaps I should just not respond to William Cloud Hicklin at all.

Speak for yourself! I have conceded that Aelfwine appears in Laws and Customs. You, however, have yet to back away from your curious contention that the Annals and the "last three chapters" of the Later Silmarillion I postdate the publication of the Lord of the Rings, and this is not so.

Although, as will be seen in
Part One of this book, a potentially destructive doubt had
emerged before my father finished work on The Lord of the
Rings, nonetheless in the years that immediately followed its
completion he embarked on an ambitious remaking and en-
largement of all the Matter of the Elder Days, without departure
from the essentials of the original structure.
The creative power and confidence of that time is unmistak-
able. In July 1949, writing to the publishers on the subject of a
sequel to Farmer Giles of Ham, he said that when he had finally
achieved The Lord of the Rings 'the released spring may do
something'; and in a letter to Stanley Unwin of February 1950,
when, as he said, that goal had been reached at last, he wrote:
'For me the chief thing is that I feel that the whole matter is now
"exorcized", and rides me no more. I can turn now to other
things...' It is very significant also, I believe, that at that time he
was deeply committed to the publication of The Silmarillion
and The Lord of the Rings 'in conjunction or in connexion' as a
single work, 'one long Saga of the Jewels and the Rings'.
But little of all the work begun at that time was completed.
The new Lay of Leithian, the new tale of Tuor and the Fall of
Gondolin, the Grey Annals (of Beleriand), the revision of the
Quenta Silmarillion, were all abandoned. I have little doubt that
despair of publication, at least in the form that he regarded as
essential, was the prime cause. The negotiations with Collins
to publish both works had collapsed.

Morgoth's Ring, vii

The evidence is clear that when The Lord of the Rings was at last
completed my father returned with great energy to the legends of the
Elder Days. He was working on the new version of the Lay of Leithian
in 1950 (III.330); and he noted (V.294) that he had revised the Quenta
Silmarillion as far as the end of the tale of Beren and Luthien on
10 May 1951. The last page of the later Tale of Tuor, where the
manuscript is reduced to notes before finally breaking off (Unfinished
Tales p. 56), is written on a page from an engagement calendar
bearing the date September 1951, and the same calendar, with dates in
September, October, and November 1951, was used for riders to Tuor
and the Grey Annals (the last version of the Annals of Beleriand and a
close companion work to the Annals of Aman, the last version of the
Annals of Valinor).

Morgoth's Ring, 3

Of the Annals of Aman, which I shall refer to throughout by the
abbreviation 'AAm', there is a good clear manuscript, with a fair
amount of correction in different 'layers'. Emendations belonging to
the time of composition, or soon after, were carefully made; and the
manuscript gives the impression of being a 'fair copy', a second text.
But while passages of drafting may have been lost, I very much doubt
that a complete 'first text' of the Annals existed (see further p. 121
note 17). The work undoubtedly belongs with the large development
and recasting of the Matter of the Elder Days that my father
undertook when The Lord of the Rings was finished (see p. 3), and it
stands in close relationship to the revision at that time of the
corresponding parts of the Quenta Silmarillion (V.204-43, referred to
throughout as QS), the text that had been abandoned at the end of
1937.

Morgoth's Ring, 47

As with the Annals of Valinor (Aman) (p. 47), my father did not
begin revision of the Quenta Silmarillion as a new venture on blank
sheets, but took up again the original QS manuscript and the
typescript (entitled 'Eldanyare') derived from it (see V.199 - 201) and
covered them with corrections and expansions. As already seen (p. 3),
he noted that the revision had reached the end of the tale of Beren and
Luthien on 10 May 1951. The chapters were very differently treated,
some being much more developed than others and running to several
further texts.
An amanuensis typescript was then made, providing a reasonably
clear and uniform text from the now complicated and difficult
materials. This was made by the same person as made the typescript of
Ainulindale' D (p. 39) and seems to have been paginated continuously
on from it. I shall call this typescript 'LQ 1' (for 'Later Quenta 1', i.e.
'the first continuous text of the later Quenta Silmarillion'). It seems
virtually certain that it was made in 1951( - 2).

[...]

Finally , my father turned to new narrative writing in the Matter of
the First Age before the Hiding of Valinor. The first chapter, Of the
Valar, much altered at this time, became separated off from the
Quenta Silmarillion proper under the title Valaquenta; while the sixth
chapter, Of the Silmarils and the Darkening of Valinor (numbered 4 in
QS, V.227), and a part of the seventh, Of the Flight of the Noldor
(numbered 5 in QS), were very greatly enlarged and gave rise to new
chapters with these titles:
Of Finwe and Miriel
Of Feanor and the Unchaining of Melkor
Of the Silmarils and the Unrest of the Noldor
Of the Darkening of Valinor
Of the Rape of the Silmarils
Of the Thieves' Quarrel
This new work exemplifies the 'remoulding' to which my father
looked forward in the [December 1957] letter to Rayner Unwin cited above. It repre-
sents (together with much other writing of a predominantly specula-
tive nature) a second phase in his later work on The Silmarillion. The
first phase included the new version of the Lay of Leithian, the later
Ainulindale, the Annals of Aman and the Grey Annals, the later Tale
of Tuor, and the first wave of revision of the Quenta Silmarillion,
much of this work left unfinished. The years 1953 - 5 saw the
preparation and publication of The Lord of the Rings; and there seems
reason to think that it was a good while yet before he turned again to
The Silmarillion, or at least to its earlier chapters.

[I]Morgoth's Ring, 141-42

After much experimentation the plan I have
followed is based on this consideration: seeing that a great deal of the
development can be ascribed to a relatively short time (the '1951
revision'), it seems best to take LQ 1, marking the end of that stage, as
the 'common text'. But while I print LQ 1 in full as it was typed (as far
as Chapter 5: Chapters 6 - 8 are differently treated), I also include in
the text the corrections and expansions made to it subsequently,
indicated as such. This gives at once a view of the state of the work in
both LQ 1, at the end of the 'first phase', and in LQ 2, at the beginning
of the 'second phase' some seven years later.

Morgoth's Ring, 143

6 OF THE SILMARILS AND THE DARKENING
OF VALINOR.

The textual history of this chapter is entirely different from that of any
of the preceding ones. In the first stage of revision, only few and slight
changes were made to the QS manuscript (the old QS typescript text
having stopped at the end of the previous chapter), and these were
taken up into LQ 1. But after LQ 1 had been made, my father returned
to the old manuscript, and on the verso pages began a new version -
rather oddly, paginating it on from the end of the QS typescript, and
retaining the chapter number 4. This was clearly an element in the
revision of 1951.

[...]

A comparison will show that the new writing in LQ stands in close
relation to the corresponding part of AAm. New elements in LQ
appear also in AAm, such as Feanor's mother Miriel ($78, p. 92), the
devising of letters by Rumil and Feanor ($$80, 83), or the placing of
the making of the Silmarils after the release of Melkor (p. 104, $92).
There are constant similarities of wording and many actual identities
of phrase (notably in the encounter of Feanor with Melkor at
Formenos, LQ $54, AAm $102).
Can precedence be established between the two? It is scarcely
possible to demonstrate it one way or the other... I think in fact that the two
texts were closely contemporary.

Morgoth's Ring, 184, 191

(II) THE SECOND PHASE.

An acute problem of presentation arose in the treatment of the late
expanded version of Chapter 6 Of the Silmarils and the Darkening of
Valinor (see pp. 142, 184 ff.)... For this reason I have divided this part
of the book into two sections, and give here separately the late
narrative versions of Chapters 1, 6, and a part of 7 together with the
essay on the Eldar. To date these writings (and those given in Part
Four) with any real precision seems impossible on the evidence that I
know of, but such as there is points clearly in most cases to the late
1950s and not much later (for detailed discussion see p. 300).

Morgoth's Ring, 199

Note on Dating.

It is convenient to collect here the evidence, such as it is, bearing on the
date of this late rewriting, and the texts associated with it.
I have mentioned that in a letter of December 1957 my father told
Rayner Unwin that it was his intention to 'get copies made of all
copyable material', with a view to 'remoulding' The Silmarillion; and I
have suggested that the amanuensis typescript LQ 2 of The Silmaril-
lion and that of the Annals of Aman, which were made on the same
typewriter and probably belong to the same time, may therefore be
tentatively ascribed to about 1958 (see pp. 141 - 2).
If this dating is accepted for the moment, then the annals inserted
into the manuscript of AAm concerning the death of Miriel, the
'Doom of Manwe concerning the espousals of the Eldar', and the
marriage of Finwe to Indis must have preceded 1958 or belong to that
year, since they appear in the typescript of AAm as typed (p. 101 notes
1 and 4, p. 127, $120); while the rider FM 1 to LQ concerning Finwe
and Miriel is certainly contemporary with the AAm insertions
(p. 205). The story of Finwe and Miriel in the manuscript (A) of Laws
and Customs among the Eldar certainly followed FM 1, but the two
texts were probably close in time (p. 233). It is thus notable that in the
letter written by my father in October 1958 (see pp. 267, 270) this
story and its implications were in the forefront of his mind.
The second text of the story of Finwe and Miriel (FM 2, p. 254)
intended for inclusion in The Silmarillion very probably preceded the
typescript (B) of Laws and Customs among the Eldar, since this latter
was typed on a new typewriter with a rather distinctive typeface. Also
typed on this machine were the Valaquenta and the texts of the late
rewriting of Chapter 6( - 7). The first letter of my father's that I know
of to be typed on the new typewriter is dated January 1959.
There is no actual proof of date in any of this, of course, but taken
together it points clearly, I think, to the late 1950s as the time when
the story of Finwe and Miriel arose and Laws and Customs among the
Eldar was written.

Morgoth's Ring, 300


Given that you have cited some of these very passages, it is startling indeed that you have somehow managed to extract from them something other than what they plainly say: that the Annals and the 'first phase" revision of QS, together with much else, were produced in a great surge of creativity 1949-52; in fact the very reason that CT divided the chapter "The Later Quenta Silmarillion" into two 'phases' was precisely to separate this material from the later matter composed circa 1958 arising from the new conception of the House of Finwe.