[Findegil]

Posted by Maedhros:

Findegil, I was wondering if you could post your emendations that you would like to do with 4 paragraphs that you have mentioned before, regarding the clarifications of dragons.

I think you are talking about this conclusion of mine:

Aiwendil is right in his opinion that we could let the text stand as it is. That will produce 4 types of monsters of which 2 are mechanical and 3 are a new devised for the attack on Gondolin. Some of the original mentions would be change in the meaning and some will be obscure, so that in some places I at least feel a strong desire for "changes for clarity" (see especially §§ 76, 78, 94 and 121).

§ 121 is already given above with my proposed change and Aiwendil has hesitatingly agreed to it:

§ 121 Now they journeyed down that river but were again in fear from Morgoth, and fought affrays with his Orc-bands and were in peril from the wolfriders, but his {firedrakes}[drakes of fire] sought not at them, both for the great exhaustion of their fires in the taking of Gondolin, and the increasing power of Ulmo as the river grew.

In $76 Are two monsters involved. A type 2 and a type 3. And in view of the description of type 3, the "jaws of that worm" can only mean type 2. Thus the clear text would be:

§76 ... But there behold a quaking and a trampling, for the dragons labour mightily at beating a path up Amon Gwared and at casting down the walls of the city; and already there is a gap therein and a confusion of masonry where the ward-towers have fallen in ruin. Bands of the Swallow and of the Arch of Heaven there fight bitterly amid the wreck or contest the walls to east and west with the foe; but even as Tuor comes nigh driving the Orcs, one of those brazen snakes heaves against the {western} [eastern]/why was this change done?/ wall and a great mass of it shakes and falls, and behind comes a creature of fire and Balrogs [and monsters]/what kind of monsters are meant by this addition and for what was it done?/ {upon} [with] it. Flames gust from the jaws of that [brazen] worm and folk wither before it, and the wings of the helm of Tuor are blackened, but he stands and gathers about him his guard and all of the Arch and Swallow he can find, whereas on his right Ecthelion rallies the men of the Fountain of the South.

Mark that I do not really support the change I gave above. I only post it to make my interpretation of the scene clearer. The change might be nice or would smooth the reading but I don't think it is absolutely necessary.

Nearly the same goes for § 78. At first we see the approach of the type 3, but Tuor "hewed at a foot". But type 3 have no feet. So, it must again be a type 2 he is fighting against. In my original post I suggested to delete the type 3:

§ 78 But so it is that few cannot fight always against the many, and Ecthelion's left arm got a sore rent from a whip of the Balrog's and his shield fell to earth{ even as {that}[a] FG-B-06.05b dragon of fire drew nigh amid the ruin of the walls}. Then Ecthelion must lean on Tuor, and Tuor might not leave him, though the very feet of the trampling beast were upon them, and they were like to be overborne: but Tuor hewed at a foot of the creature so that flame spouted forth, and that serpent screamed, lashing with its tail; and many of both Orcs and Noldor got their death therefrom. Now Tuor gathered his might and lifted Ecthelion, and amid a remnant of the folk got thereunder and escaped the drake; yet dire was the killing of men that beast had wrought, and the Gondolindrim were sorely shaken.

Now "the trampling beast" is clearly the type 2 of § 76.

The problem in § 94 is an iron serpent spouting flame, which I find strange, but, well, we do not have any hard evidence that type 1 could not spout flame. So, I think the text must stand.

The gain of the addition of "dragons of fire" in the creation scene (what § is it in, I wonder), is that we prepare the reader for the later mentions of that type of monster. Otherwise in my view only the § 50 and § 76 are understood clearly as type 3. The reader could take all other „dragons of fire“ as a mere variant of "fire dragons" and therewith interpreted as type 4.

Respectfully
Findegil

Only amended a few typo's.

<font size=1 color=339966>[ 7:57 AM January 21, 2004: Message edited by: Findegil ]