Quote:
|
I like to make a coment on this: What we do in deleting it is taking a single very compressed account of the message (and the Cristhoper Tolkiens Sil'77 text) over the explicit older texts and the suggestions of at least one junger text. The version pruduced should, in my view, be at least dubious about content of the message.
|
To some extent, I'm inclined to agree with you. Certainly the evidence against the first part of the message is not nearly as great as we all seem to have originally thought. I think it's quite probable that this element was never removed.
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.
Quote:
|
Since these last half sentence was clearly true for Maeglin and Idril it would not have been unnatural or unlawfull for them to marry. The addition in the Sil'77 was in my view false and we shouldn't make the same failure a second time.
|
In Q30 it is said: "for he desired Idril, and despite his close kinship purposed to possess her . . ." This indicates at the very least that their close kinship would ordinarily be something that would inhibit his desire; this element is lacking in the old Tale. So it seems wise not to use the exact words of the Tale here since they
could be thought to conflict with this later element.
But is not the next to the last paragraph of the chapter 'Of Maeglin' in the '77 from the late work on Maeglin by JRRT? There it is said that Maeglin's desire for Idril is an 'evil fruit of the Kinslaying'