Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
03-02-2009, 05:14 PM | #1 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
|
Pengolodh - is it his name?
Hi, I looked around for a thread on this, but couldn't find one.
My question is, should we actually use the name "Pengolodh" for the last of the Lambengolmar? The reason I ask is because in one of his later writings, Tolkien wrote that "Pengolodh" was to be replaced by "Thingódhel." This change actually makes sense in light of its context in the "Quendi and Eldar" essay. Etymologically, "Pengolodh" seems to mean (somewhat freely) "one who has wisdom with words," or "the Noldo of words." (As a note, this means it was likely an epesse.) The "golodh" is obviously the same form as the Sindarin word for "Noldo." However, in "Quendi and Eldar" Tolkien states that the form "Golodh" was used almost exclusively in Doriath, and never among Feanor's sons or their allies. This throws its use in Pengolodh's name into question. Also, in the same essay, Tolkien states unequivocally that the common name for one of the Noldor was "Gódhel." Therefore, "Thingódhel" would mean "Grey-Noldo," a fitting title. (Though perhaps it should be spelt with the Latin "þ," as Professor Tolkien was apt to do.) Last edited by Aran e-Godhellim; 03-03-2009 at 04:55 PM. Reason: grammar |
03-03-2009, 10:48 AM | #2 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
Greetings, Aran. Thanks for bringing this point up. I don't have HoMe at hand now, so perhaps you can remind us where the proposed name 'Thingodhel' appears? Is it in 'Quendi and Eldar' itself? It's been a little while since I've read that.
|
03-03-2009, 01:42 PM | #3 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
|
It's mentioned in one of the notes to "Quendi and Eldar." Apparently, Tolkien wrote on the margin of the document that Pengolodh was to be changed to Thingódhel.
Thanks for the welcome! |
03-04-2009, 11:46 AM | #4 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
Indeed, it seems pretty clear from this note that 'Pengolodh' must be changed to 'Thingódhel' unless some later source can be found to contradict this.
A possible contradiction may perhaps be found in 'Danweth Pengolodh'. Now, 'Danweth Pengolodh' itself was written sometime between 1951 and 1959, with CT preferring an earlier date to a later one; 'Quendi and Eldar' on the other hand is from 1959-1960. So the 'Thingodhel' suggestion almost certainly post-dates 'Danweth Pengolodh' itself. However, CT notes that the text was enclosed in a newspaper dated 5 January 1960 on which Tolkien wrote 'Two items from the lore of Pengoloð'. So we do have a use of the name Pengoloð that could post-date 'Thingodhel'. |
03-04-2009, 12:45 PM | #5 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
I just found this in the 'Cirdan' text given in 'Last Writings' in HoMe XII:
Quote:
|
|
03-04-2009, 02:36 PM | #6 | |||
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Halls of Mandos
Posts: 86
|
Quote:
Quote:
To retain the element 'golodh,' we would have to somehow reconcile it to the statements in "Quendi and Eldar." It's much simpler in my opinion to simply accept the new form as correct, and say Tolkien forgot what he had written, which he often did. (Much to our chagrin!) Still, my argument is far from bullet-proof. Last edited by Aran e-Godhellim; 03-06-2009 at 11:55 AM. Reason: grammar |
|||
|
|