Name Changes?

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by gondowe

Yes, I know. But, still in my opinion, as the Athrabeth is of the same time, it could only reveal that the swap is a thought of this years 1958-59 (or the unknown date of the pencilled notes) and that perhaps later was forgotten or rethought.

Greetings

A lot of 'ifs', 'coulds', 'maybes'...

Do I think that it's possible that Tolkien changed his mind later on? Certainly. But you can make the same argument about half of the stuff that we included in 'The New Silmarillion' - especially the names: Tolkien kept changing those all the time as if he was changing his socks!

Also, I'm quite aware that Tolkien in his late years had a habit of just inexplicably changing some elements of the story, the most egregious example of it being IMO the fact that he seems to have totally forgotten about the existence of Fingolfin in the notes to the 'Maeglin' text!


However, in the absence of any concrete, textual proof that he reverted back to the older idea, the evidence is pretty clear: the latest texts dealing with the subject of Hador's family tree have him as the son of Malach Aradan and brother to Adanel.

[Findegil]

Arvegil145 you convinced me at least. I suport the change. It will make same toilsome reading to bring to trough, but as you siad, we addopted changes with less clear evidence.

Respectfully
Findegil

[gondowe]

Ok. The ifs, coulds and maybes are only in order to be prudent. With the years I learned to be so.
I only wanted to share my opinion.
I do think that there are proofs that it was not his last idea about the matter as wrote in my previous post. But if you are convinced it's ok, go on.

Greetings.

[gondowe]

By the way. About Dor-na-Daerachas and Dor-Gyrth-i-chuinar. Were they discussed? If not, what do you think?

Greetings

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by gondowe

By the way. About Dor-na-Daerachas and Dor-Gyrth-i-chuinar. Were they discussed? If not, what do you think?

Greetings

I just checked both, and I agree. They are from very late sources (1970 + ), and I can't find any examples where he reverted back to the other forms.

[Findegil]

Dor-na-Daerachas and Dor-Gyrth-i-chuinar: Could one of you give us a bit more of context here. What is the source for these changes? Of course we all have a bundle of source text that we could search to find out, but I at least have some other work at hand (some even for this project). And since you Gondowe has brought them up, you could have given the information without any work more than writing a few lines here. And you Arvegil145 seems to have looked them up anyhow. So why not charing a bit more than only the final result and making life easier for all other participants?

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Findegil

Dor-na-Daerachas and Dor-Gyrth-i-chuinar: Could one of you give us a bit more of context here. What is the source for these changes? Of course we all have a bundle of source text that we could search to find out, but I at least have some other work at hand (some even for this project). And since you Gondowe has brought them up, you could have given the information without any work more than writing a few lines here. And you Arvegil145 seems to have looked them up anyhow. So why not charing a bit more than only the final result and making life easier for all other participants?

Respectfully
Findegil

I apologize, I was busy with other stuff too when I posted my reply to gondowe.

1) 'Dor Gyrth i chuinar' comes from the 'Letter 332' (just at the end) written in January of 1972:

But now she has gone before Beren, leaving him indeed one-handed, but he has no power to move the inexorable Mandos, and there is no Dor Gyrth i chuinar, the Land of the Dead that Live, in this Fallen Kingdom of Arda, where the servants of Morgoth are worshipped. . . . .

2) 'Dor-na-Daerachas' comes from The War of the Jewels, 'Of Beleriand and Its Realms', Note 30 to the 'North-eastern' section of the map of Beleriand, p. 187:

B 12 to A 13 'read (71) Dor-na-Daerachas': the number 71 oddly but certainly refers to the year 1971; the addition is very late, since it does not appear on the photocopy of the map used by my father c.1970 (see p. 330 and note 1, also p. 191, after §74).