[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

You are talking about the constructed works here, not merely posthumously published statements as written by JRRT himself. And in any case no where does Christopher Tolkien state which version of Sador is 'canon' for instance.

Well he puts one version in the story and published it. That's good enough for me.

Well CJRT didn't publish the quote in question. He gave that authority to Hammond and Scull, and we as readers can see or interpret contradiction even if no one mentions something -- noting that I already mentioned the way Hammond and Scull presented the 'Elendil' variations, for example.

Not necessarily. Think long about something, write with brevity and to the point. And you keep saying 'brief note' despite that we haven't yet seen all the commentary.

This just causes more problems. If we don't have the full commentary then we can not garner the context. For instance I remember a discussion about what was meant by Erendis' 'beauty seldom seen in Numenor.' One person argued it meant she was dark haired, but by looking at text elsewhere Christopher judged it to mean she was an incredibly beautiful woman much like Morwen.

Without context we have no indication of things he said prior. I really don't see how this can be viewed as a contradiction with such little evidence.

As I said, CJRT did publish part of one of these in UT -- you actually quoted a part of the 'artwork descriptions' without realizing it.

But no they do not 'need validation' from CJRT to hold equal standing with the rest of the same commentary from the creator of Middle-earth. And The Children of Hurin is arguably 'not canon' as it is clearly the work of Christopher Tolkien not JRRT.

Where does CJRT claim The Children of Hurin is canon?

Is everything in Vinyar Tengwar or Parma Eldalamberon 'lesser' material somehow, if CJRT merely gave certain texts to the Linguistic Team to publish and comment on?

If it is published by Christopher then I do consider it as part of the canon as far as we can know such things. Christopher has the right to edit and publish any work he sees fit. He knows more about Tolkien's intentions than anyone and we can begin to argue about level of canon, but for me it is certainly above anything published anywhere else.

If Christopher published only part of that quote he probably had full access to the other passages he did not publish and was found in the Hammond book.

Yes that was where I pointed out that you characterized one text as a 'brief note' versus an 'entire essay' -- when Christopher Tolkien characterized your 'entire essay' as a note rather.

Semantics indeed

There is a difference between a 'brief note' and the way that Christopher Tolkien used the term. As said previously I believe a short (I now understand it may have been longer) note about art is less likely to be as accurate as a considered passage on elves.

Well let's see if I have spoken to certain issues or not, as...


... the artwok quote says 7 feet and so on, as I quoted. What issue needs addressing there? I don't quibble with what this text says about the Numenoreans of old in general.

The problem is that a generic 7 foot is often used to describe someone much taller. It is very common for tall people to be described as 6ft even if they are taller or short people to be described as 5ft. These statements are not to be taken literally. Even the term a 'six footer' only means that someone is over 6ft.

That's because there is no average height noted in the text under consideration, and I interpret that quote as it stands. That said, my interpretation yet allows for not every Elf being exactly 6 foot 6, as I already described above.

Which is why I said the text is does not contradict anything. If there is no mention of an average height, then why should it contradict the average height being close to 7 foot as mentioned elsewhere?

Elendil might have been a reflection of this. Then again Tolkien might have said, but wait, that makes Thingol even taller? Maybe I need to rethink things a bit.

Maybe, but it's worth noting that Elendil, according to the note where he is 7'11, is not even the tallest man in Numenor during his own lifetime. So Tolkien had no problem with other men being taller than Elendil.

EDIT
I just looked at the full quote from the artwork again. Now I have seen it in full context, there is no way that it means Elendil was just 7ft tall.


'the Númenóreans before the Downfall were a people of great stature and strength, the Kings of Men; their full grown men were commonly seven feet tall, especially in the royal and noble houses. In the North where men of other kinds were fewer and their race remained purer this stature remained more frequent, though in both Arnor and Gondor apart from mixture of race the Númenóreans showed a dwindling of height and of longevity in Middle-earth that became more marked as the Third Age passed. Aragorn, direct descendant of Elendil and his son Isildur, both of whom had been seven feet tall, must nonetheless have been a very tall man..., probably at least 6 ft. 6; and Boromir, of high Númenórean lineage, not much shorter, (say 6 ft. 4).'

We now have more context and we can see Elendil the TALL, must be a lot more than 7ft. Tolkien tells us that it was common for men to be seven fee tall and especially in the royal houses. Now we are supposed to believe that a man nicknamed the TALL was the 'common height.' This is why context is so important. Elendil has to be significantly above 7ft for his nickname to make any sense.