Aiwendil you are right thinking that it would be better that many members could opine in these matters, because it is one of these that with no clear evidence of text written by the professor can be understood in several ways. It’s in some ways a matter of taste and personal understanding.
Quote:
Originally posted by Aiwendil
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.
|
I have not time to look for but I think that there’s not textual evidence, apart for the mention of the Grey Annals that I have no repaired (remembered) in, and for me is a good one in the way of going against the counsel of war, in spite of its compression.
Quote:
Originally posted by Aiwendil
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 second kin-slaying had taken place and there had no solution, and a hate of Turgon and every elf towards Fëanor house is dramatical in any case. Perhaps there would be no third kin-slaying, but insisting, there are only suppositions with no textual evidence.
Greetings