You say 'Faeries' & I say 'Fairies'

[drigel]

But what defines that world if not the narrative whose veracity we're doubting?

This does bring me back to my original inclination to force both Faeries together. It is translators conciet I admit, but the perspective of the narrator in LOTR and Silm should be taken into account. Whats hinted at in LOTR (but not the Silm) are the cultural apprehension towards elves in general. It bespeaks of the waning of the men/elf relationships. I think of Bormir's fear of entering Lorien when I consider this, as an example.

Admittedly, it does touch on the waning theme, and the general ignorance of men (hobbits, et al), and their wariness of "magic". But could the old tales (or old wives tales ) not also have roots (going all the way back to the 1st age) of people's direct interaction with the more "wild" elves? Not even the Ossiriand Green Elves - where there was at least a structure of leadership, and a civilization of sorts, which (to me) implies a rule/law/code of behavior set of "rules" to live by sort of thing, but elves who answered to no lord. Eol does come to mind, but even he seemed to be on a level higher (skillsets, taste in women) than the rustic, naturally free elves that the traditional model references. It goes back to the question of ommision. They arent part of any story in the works, but those old tales of caution are.

Or is that too much of a leap?