[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

The Master wants updateses, yes he does. Nice Master, very kind to poor Huinessssoron.

Sorry about that! It did sound like that to me on second viewing, but anyway...

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

In any event: I have decided to anchor on the birth of Luthien/3 Ages concept. I don't want to use a compressed GA, as I specifically didn't compress the "blocks" in AAm. Anchoring on either end gives problems. And Luthien's birth is the only date which has an internal logic to it (the rest are basically just 50 years apart each time). Obviously Tolkien would have just rewritten the entire thing - but if for some reason he hadn't, I think this is the most likely solution for him to have used.

I still have reservations about the whole '3 ages of the imprisonment of Melkor' - perhaps you could convert the 2874.6 figure (in the AAm) into something similar but more duodecimal - let's say 2,880 SY years (20 x 144).

Or otherwise - you could simply keep the whole 144 x 15 (i.e. 2,160 years) idea...I don't know.


Also! I thought that you would shave off 144 SY from the timeline - so that the timeline would end in c. 5,930 or so.

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

The Late Timeline is updated to match this conclusion; I've also removed Celeborn to his own little section at the bottom saying that he's not in there.



I think "his own" is deliberately there to avoid implying Olwe's family - "Olwe and his nearest kin" would mean that, so "his own" looks like an attempt to be explicit that it is Cirdan's kin. The fact that the sentence puts Olwe first might imply that Olwe is close kin to Cirdan; presumably he'd be an uncle, since as you rightly say, Cirdan Nowe was born at Cuivienen.

If you're going to remove Celeborn because he's problematic, you really ought to remove Galadriel, Celebrimbor, Gil-galad (though he doesn't feature in the timeline), etc.

My point is that Celeborn's ambiguous origins are no different than Galadriel's - in other words, please just refrain to using what Tolkien's own published texts involve, regardless of utter insanity that followed and progressively intensified as Tolkien was heading towards his '80s.

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Source? I'm not doubting it, I just don't remember seeing it. It would make sense - Ingwe seems to have been the most impatient to reach Aman, so he and Ilwen would avoid having more children on the March, and their second was born just before it.

Sorry, I was busy with other stuff - here it is:

Alone among the Eldar I have no wife, and must hope for no sons save one, and for no daughter. Whereas Ingwe and Olwe beget many children in the bliss of Aman. Must I remain ever so?

- MR, 'Later Quenta', §10, p. 258

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

That's in there; they linger by Rhun from 2232 to 2362.

Sorry, I'm a dumbass.

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

The Trees, yes; that's a nice fixed date. The Dwarves I can't do, for the same reason I've avoided the Council of the Valar; I have no evidence either way on whether Tolkien would keep the actual SY between those events and the Awakening, or the relative dating between the Trees and the Awakening. (Same goes for all the Almaren stuff, which has ends up looking much quicker against the 850 VY between the Trees and the Quendi - there's just no useful data.)

There's no 'Almaren stuff' in the revised timeline, since the whole 'Two Lamps' and the consequences of their destruction aren't a part of it.

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

No, all right. If we want to accept both "Ents are the first rational creatures" and "Elves are eldest", then I think we have to say that the Ents consider themselves to have only become rational when they acquired language. Fangorn hints at this, when he says Some of us are still true Ents, and lively enough in our fashion, but many are growing sleepy, going tree-ish, as you might say. Tree-ish Ents are no longer "true Ents" - just as pre-speech Ents weren't.

So the Ents were the first to be incarnated, and Ere iron was found or tree was hewn... it walked the forests long ago. But until Elves began it, of course, waking trees up and teaching them to speak..., they weren't (in their own view) truly Ents.

As for when... the published Silm has Yavanna coming up with the idea for Ents right after Aule creates the Dwarves, but Manwe says they will only come to be after the Children awaken. If we want the Ents to wake before the Quendi awake, then they must have been created at that time. When that would be, I'm not going to try and guess.

According to the latest version of the legendarium, Men awoke after the Dwarves - the whole "awaking after the Children of Iluvatar" makes zero sense unless the Ents awoke after Men.



EDIT: sorry, I left an [/I] instead of [/QUOTE]