[Aiwendil]

FG-T-24: Looking back through old threads, I realized that I had completely forgotten about the discussion of this point in this thread. It seems that there, Maedhros and I converged on the view that Ulmo's counsel of war was likely not rejected, but that it would be safer not to include it; Findegil meanwhile favoured keeping it. In that thread, I wrote:

But by choosing not to put this element back in, we are not simply rejecting it. I think that our account could be taken as simply omitting mention of the first part of Ulmo's counsel. This seems a safer course than putting in a slightly dubious bit. However, if the general opinion is that our version as it stands does not leave room for that interpretation, then I think a very good case could be made for putting in Ulmo's first piece of advice.

But looking at the text now, I find it harder to imagine that Tuor's message included counsel of war that is simply not mentioned.

Originally Posted by Gondowe

In other way, in my opinion, the will of Ulmo always was (in the last conception of the professor, and due to that fulfillment) to carry Tour to Gondolin to bring into the world Eärendil, the only being, Half Elf, Half Man, designated with the help of the Silmaril (we can think that Ulmo knew very much due to his part in the Music) to come to Valinor and beg for pardon and help to the Valar.

That would seem a reasonable interpretation. But is there textual evidence that this was Ulmo's sole hope and his only reason for guiding Tuor to Gondolin? Might he not have foreseen two possible ways of overcoming Morgoth? He might even have correctly foreseen that Turgon would refuse to go to war and thus that Earendil would in fact turn out to be the only hope.

Originally Posted by Gondowe

So Turgon only would fly to the mouths of Sirion or Tol Sirion and wait the coming of the Host of West and then go to war against Angband, not before. ”But Turgon was become proud, and Gondolin as beautiful as a memory of Elven Tirion, and he trusted still in its secret and impregnable strength, though even a Vala should gainsay it”.
For that reason, in my opinion, the sentence in ToY could be ambiguous, it could be that Turgon want no alliance with the sons of Fëanor in any case.

That's an interesting line of reasoning, but I must say, it still seems to me very tortured to read the ToY entry in such a way. If the advice is that Turgon take his people down to the mouths of Sirion and then join with the host of the Valar when they arrive, why would he object to such an alliance? In that case, what would the kin-slaying have to do with anything? Surely going down to the mouths of the Sirion would not require an alliance with the sons of Feanor. If Ulmo's last warning only urged Turgon to go to the mouths of Sirion, I simply can't see why his refusal to follow it should have to do with his objection to an 'alliance'.

The only concrete piece of evidence that I can see against the counsel of war is this passage from GA:

Originally Posted by Grey Annals

There Tuor was brought before King Turgon, and spake the words that Ulmo had set in his mouth, bidding him depart and abandon the fair and mighty city that he had built, and go down to the sea.

But of course, this is a very compressed account.

So, I am (as I tend to be) ambivalent about this. I'm also hesitant to revoke a decision we made back when we had a greater number of active contributors. I'll think about it.