* * Revised Fall of Gondolin pt.4 -- >end [the remaining sections] * *

[Aiwendil]

FG-A-02: I think the Q30 evidence is enough to justify retaining this change.

FG-A-04: I agree that we should probably leave out both names. What makes you say that 'Tarnin Austa' is 'almost certainly not valid'? As far as I know, there's no later conflict with it, though there is also no later use of either element.

FG-A-05: Okay.

FG-A-06.05: Agreed.

FG-B-03.05: I'm not sure about this one. There was often a need to reduce the number of Balrogs in specific instances during the attack, but here it seems that, even in the revision, we are talking about 'the Balrogs' as a group, mingled with the other forces of Morgoth before they actually entered the city. Even if we are talking about just 7 Balrogs, I think it can still be plural here.

FG-B-04: I'm not sure what you mean here.

FG-B-06.05a: Good catch, but I think perhaps we could revise it a little more tightly. What about:

yet of the leap of that axe Dramborleg that was swung by the hand of Tuor were they still more afraid, for it sang like the rush of eagle's wings in the air and took death as it fell[.] {, and five of them went down before it.}

I think 'took death as it fell' can stand as a general description of the activity of the axe (not a specific description of the current battle). But if this is thought still to be too risky, we could just use:

yet of the leap of that axe Dramborleg that was swung by the hand of Tuor were they still more afraid, for it sang like the rush of eagle's wings in the air[.] {and took death as it fell, and five of them went down before it.}

or:

yet of the leap of that axe Dramborleg that was swung by the hand of Tuor were they still more afraid[.] {, for it sang like the rush of eagle's wings in the air and took death as it fell, and five of them went down before it.}

FG-B-06.05b: Two points about this:
1. I don't see a need for changing plural to singular, since we retain the plural in the previous paragraph (as indeed we should); and
2. Unless there is a mistake in the transcription of this, the text as it stands is not plural. 'The Balrog's' is possessive singular; i.e., the whip of one Balrog.

I also don't see the need for changing 'that' to 'a' with regard to the dragon. We have not made any deletions that invalidate the demonstrative (it refers to the dragon mentioned two paragraphs before).

So I would delete FG-B-06.05b.

FG-B-07.05: I must say I don't see the need for this either. 'Men' in the original text (uncapitalized) clearly does not mean 'humans'; it simply means 'forces', 'soldiers'. There is no reason to change it except for style, and that is something that we are consciously avoiding in this revision.

FG-D-06: Agreed.

FG-D-07.5a: Good point.

FG-D-07.5b: I think it would be safer to stick with a and not suggest that Maeglin discovered the secret way.

Concerning Rog: I would still rather keep his name. There is no suitable replacement and any invented name would be by far a worse choice. The only possible improvement I can think of would be to add a circumflex over the 'o'. Even this seems somewhat uncertain. If it's not acceptable, the only other option is to delete the character, causing considerable awkwardness and possibly necessitating some major deletions.

I'm far more concerned about Rog's slaying of a Balrog than about his name. Looking over the revisions, I am suddenly very unsure about FG-B-03. I will think about this.

[ August 04, 2003: Message edited by: Aiwendil ]