Of Balrogs and Rog:
Originally posted by Aiwendil
Quote:
|
4. Retain the Balrog (or Balrogs), retain Rog's attack, but eliminate the death of the Balrog. The advantage here is that we retain most of the structure of the narrative and alter it only in one detail. The disadvantage is that we would be required to insert some fabricated text for the outcome of Rog's attack (something to the effect that the Balrog was driven back, I suppose).
|
Looking at this issue now, I would rather use this part. Why, because as Aiwendil has posted, in the
Quenta Noldorinwa, there is the mention of Rog and of his deeds in the battle. I would remove his slaying of the balrog because in the two instances where a single balrog was defeated in Gondolin, the battle was described as an elf vs balrog.
The slayings of several balrogs by Rog and his men would seem out of order with the latest view of JRRT regarding Balrogs.
Originally posted by lindil
Quote:
|
1- his name. As all here may well recall, I am strongly [ I suppose adamantly is probably the best word ] opposed to the name. CJRT basically says in a footnote in the Q30 that Rog 'almost certainly' would not have survivied his fathers next revision of the FoG. Thus he does not make it into the 77/00 text. I heartily concur.
|
lindil, you are right about the footnote but, the fact remains that the name Rog does appears in the
Quenta Noldorinwa. It would seem odd to remove the character because of his name. For example, in the description of the houses of the Ñoldor of Gondolin, we would either use a generic name like
captain of the Hammer of Wrath or an enmended name such as Polwë, etc.
I would personally retain the name Rog or try to fit in later Sindarin or Quenya.
Good to see you back lindil. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
[ August 12, 2003: Message edited by: Maédhros ]