|
[{Ñoldor}[Noldor]: Agreed. We discussed that before, I just didn’t found the time to make that change effective in my drafts, because every instant is to be checked with the original source. I will do sooner or later.
EPE-EX-10: It has at this time be use to ferry the Vanyar and Noldor together and is know when coming back from Beleriand routed in the Bay of Eldamar, where its newly exposition to the light of the Trees differently from the first one, since it is farther away from the shore and that is described a few lines later. In the LT version Vanyar (their named Teleri) and Noldor were transported seperatly, therefore ‘two-times’ was right in that tale, but is wrong in our version.
EPE-EX-12.1: Agreed, I did only made the regular change with out any farther thought. But I would take ‘Eldamar’ as a replacement, since that seems to be the more regulary used name for the Bay.
EPE-EX-12.2: I agree on {magic}[marvellous]. But Silpion is still a valid name of the Tree. I have observed your trend to rename it in any instant, but I dout that this is necessary.
EPE-EX-12.3: Agreed.
EPE-EX-16: Your reasoning is good and I don’t think it is stylistic. It is rather due to the story line change we did introduce, so I will call it EPE-SL-02.
EPE-EX-16.1: You are right, in a way, but even in the old geography Arvalin was in the north and in the south touching the Shadowy Sea. So as it stood the text gave the infromtion only of the southern himispher and so does it as I changed it. What is the issue with that?
I agree to change {Arvalin}[Avathar and Araman] if it is fitting.
EPE-EX-16.2: Shiboleth is the later source so ‘Ingwi’ it should be.
EPE-EX-21 Is the beginning of the section taken from the Shibboleth, right before that title. So we should refer to your comment about the Sindarin names of the Valar as
EPE-EX-21.05: To have Sindarin names applied to the Valar does not render this passage untrue since they could have been invented by the Noldor after they adopted Sindarin as their dayly speech. I agree that we have to eliminate ‘(recalling the sound of his great horn)’ since that is contradicted by the story we have given at his arrival by the Elves. For the rest I am in doubt here. Could you provide the source for these names, please?
EPE-EX-21.1: We might include the full text, but probably not here. As yet it was forseen as a part of volume 3 (or not?). But even if we think it should be taken earlier, this place is too early, since all the names given here are given in a preview.
EPE-EX-21.2: I think it can stand because the footnote dose sguide the reader to the right place to look for the explaination, even so ‘Curufim’ is not mentioned.
EPE-EX-23: Agreed.
EPE-EX-23.1: I disagree to this. We discussed this before when editing the ‘Ælfwine and Dírhavel’ text for the introduction of the ‘Narn’. We produce a text in English for English readers. It is not supposed to have any Middel-earth existence as such, since we aknowledge that it is a compilation of us from different sources. So even if we remove Ælfwine and his references to Anglosaxon, we may nonetheless keep comparisions to English or German of today.
EPE-EX-23.2: That is a reference to another footnote. But as it stands it can only be filled with sensefull information when the text is in final editing. Alternatively we could remove it.
EPE-EX-29: Agreed.
EPE-EX-31.1: Good question. This is asking for in indept research if ‘Maiar’ was used in later texts and if ‘Máyar’ was used in any other place. Anybody with some time at hand, for such an endeavour?
EPE-EX-32.1: Agreed.
EPE-EX-32.5: Okay, I mist that. We will reinstall it.
EPE-EX-34.1: Okay, that was an artefact of a time when we called him ‘Maedron’. Since we came in the end back to ‘Maedros’, we can let this stand.
Respectfully
Findegil
|