Quote:
Originally Posted by R.R.J Tolkien
He did however wish to publish his sillmarillion. You would think he would have wanted this corrected if he wished to stick with it rather than his normative of...
|
Well, for myself I don't find this a very compelling point though, considering how much else had not been updated or revised even at the end of Tolkien's life. Christopher Tolkien even had to deal with some material that still dated to 1930!
And if the notion of reducing numbers waited till 1958 or later (going by the note being found on a text in this phase), then the notion/opportunity of getting
The Silmarillion published along with
The Lord of the Rings with Waldman, had passed...
... yes, Tolkien still wanted to revise, update, publish his Silmarillion in the later 1950s, 1960s, early 1970s but there was arguably plenty to do outside of this Balrog detail, not to mention work on the long prose versions of the Great Tales.
Quote:
|
and as you stated, he held the same view of balrogs [regardless of how they were categorized] for a long period, one note against it is not that great of evidence imo.
|
A note...
and a revision; a revision which CJRT arguably echoed for the 1977 Silmarillion, since...
Quote:
|
I just finished the 1977 sil and I believe it does not say thousands however it does mention many multiple times. More than 7, or at least so it seemed. Maybe someone could help with some direct quotes.
|
But you just read it! Why do I have to do the work... [wanders away]...
... [eats snack, returns] okay, if the Silmarillion index reference pages are complete, then there are no references to "many" Balrogs. Which makes sense to me, as why would CJRT alter a reference to hosts of Balrogs (or whatever), and leave some other reference indicating very many.
Actually, I know I've written a post concerning the Tolkien-made revision to AAm, including instances that were never changed by JRRT himself (for whatever reason), compared to CJRT's revised wording in the 1977 Silmarillion. It might even be here at BD somewhere, but I can't recall at the moment.
Anyway, as I said, there are instances of the anglicized plural (Balrog-s), and this "some few" survived text (with respect to the War of Wrath), and now I'll add that we have one description of "another" Balrog at one point, indicating two in the scene...
... or at least two, if you like
