the elessar

[Galin]

Yes it was Feanor [The Shibboleth of Feanor] who was refused by Galadriel... concerning the Nerwenian hair matter.

Another possibility is that Olórin took ship to Edhellond in the Second Age. Not that I necessarily would choose version A over B, but again this merely allows a way to step around the question of Nenya in the Third Age.

Granted A notes that the 'years' of her exile were wearing heavy on Galadriel, but I think there is still plenty of years in the Second Age for this, before Numenor fell. Another thing that threw me a bit before was the brief statement that Olórin had arrived with the Elessar out of the West, as if referencing only one trip; but that too seems vague enough to me.

And yes I think Celebrimbor the Feanorean was a later idea than the text of the Elessar, which is why I plug Enerdhil back in as the Elf from Gondolin without Celebrimbor. Again we are dealing with a still private [to Tolkien] text, not necessarily updated after Celebrimbor's change to a Feanorean [although there was some revision regarding Galadriel's ban, for example].


With respect to the first version of the two competing Elessar tales, Hammond and Scull (Reader's Guide) also note that, in comparison to what was already published: '... the tale seems to suggest that there was a breach of trust, in that Galadriel did not keep the Elessar for the one destined to receive it'...

... because in The Lord of the Rings Galadriel said that she had given the stone to her daughter. In the second version Tolkien explicitly refers to Galadriel giving the stone to her daughter, so it doesn't seem like he had forgotten this. I suppose Galadriel still could be said to have 'handed it on when the time came' as technically the jewel had come to her once again to give to Aragorn (if we look at Gandalf's statement more as a prediction), though even so, she handed it on before Elessar came to receive it.

I noted this in the thread: http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=15599

[cellurdur]

Like with the Princes of Dol Amroth, Tolkien left two versions. I personally now favour the version of Celebrimbor making a second Elessar.

The question of Gandalf turning up in the Second Age would raise all sorts of problems. At that point Sauron had not yet grown so powerful that the West could not defeat him unassisted.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by cellurdur

Like with the Princes of Dol Amroth, Tolkien left two versions. I personally now favour the version of Celebrimbor making a second Elessar.

Is it like this however [it might be but I can't recall right now]?

In other words, are there two internal versions of something relating to the Princes of Dol Amroth?

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

Is it like this however [it might be but I can't recall right now]?

In other words, are there two internal versions of something relating to the Princes of Dol Amroth?

Well I assume they are 'internal'. We have the one story where the Princes are descendants of Imrazor and Mithrellas.

Then we have the other version where the princes are close relatives to Elendil and he personally raises them to the rank of 'prince'. This is the version I tend to favour, but we have two accounts, which though are not definitely conflicting like the case with the Elessar are not harmonious and cannot really be forced to fit together.

[Galin]

Well, sorry to be pedantic but do we know these two versions are not Tolkien simply changing his mind?

I have a vague memory of CJRT giving a possible explanation about how to reconcile two 'somethings' about Dol Amroth... but I'm pretty sure there [if this is the same matter], he also admits or suggests the likelihood of these being two accounts that were not necessarily both meant to be confused from a story-internal perspective.

I mean we could have more than two versions of The Elessar if we merely look at what JRRT wrote about it, but The Elessar as a text is clearly treating the variant tales as both found within the subcreated world...

... which is why, as I say above: it's one thing to chose version B as a reaction to something seemingly problematic in A, but version A was not merely a discarded idea by comparison [Tolkien rejecting A for B], and is still intended as a tale within the conceit.

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

Well, sorry to be pedantic but do we know these two versions are not Tolkien simply changing his mind?

I have a vague memory of CJRT giving a possible explanation about how to reconcile two 'somethings' about Dol Amroth... but I'm pretty sure there [if this is the same matter], he also admits or suggests the likelihood of these being two accounts that were not necessarily both meant to be confused from a story-internal perspective.

I mean we could have more than two versions of The Elessar if we merely look at what JRRT wrote about it, but The Elessar as a text is clearly treating the variant tales as both found within the subcreated world...

... which is why, as I say above: it's one thing to chose version B as a reaction to something seemingly problematic in A, but version A was not merely a discarded idea by comparison [Tolkien rejecting A for B], and is still intended as a tale within the conceit.

This is why I said I assumed they are 'internal'. However, even if this is a case of Tolkien changing his mind we have Imrahil's words that the story of extra Elf blood flowing through the veins of the princes is internal.

'So it is said in the lore of my land'

So we can accept that there is at least one internal story of the Princes being descendant of an elf.

As for whether this was simply Tolkien changing his mind or two external stories, Christopher Tolkien seemed to favour the latter idea.

'While not impossible (merging the two stories) these explanations to save consistency seem to me less likely that that of two distinct and independent 'traditions' of the origins of the Lords of Dol Amroth'

[Galin]

Originally Posted by cellurdur

As for whether this was simply Tolkien changing his mind or two external stories, Christopher Tolkien seemed to favour the latter idea.
'While not impossible (merging the two stories) these explanations to save consistency seem to me less likely that that of two distinct and independent 'traditions' of the origins of the Lords of Dol Amroth'

But that's the same in my opinion, so I'm a bit confused here. That is, if we have Tolkien changing his mind, then we have two external stories.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Galin

... which is why, as I say above: it's one thing to chose version B as a reaction to something seemingly problematic in A, but version A was not merely a discarded idea by comparison [Tolkien rejecting A for B], and is still intended as a tale within the conceit.

In UT, the variant stories of the Elessar are said by CJRT to be on the same four page text. After the Gondolin made jewel was lost, the text reads:

In ages after there was again an Elessar, and of this two things are said, though which is true only the Wise could say, who are now gone.

Curiously, the text ends with:

The Elessar was made in Gondolin by Celebrimbor....But that passed away. But the second Elessar was made also by Celebrimbor in Eregion at the request of the Lady Galadriel.

It's difficult to see why, in light of the introduced ambiguity in the main body of the story, Tolkien would end in such a declarative fashion about which version was the truth.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

It's difficult to see why, in light of the introduced ambiguity in the main body of the story, Tolkien would end in such a declarative fashion about which version was the truth.

My explanation is that this 'concluding' section of the text is not a conclusion of the text proper, but an external summation with an intended revision from Tolkien regarding Celebrimbor and Enerdhil. Christopher Tolkien describes...

'Enerdhil appears in no other writing; and the concluding words of this text show that Celebrimbor was to displace him as the maker of the Elessar in Gondolin.'

And the seeming clarity that the first jool passed away could be a revision too, but I'm more inclined to think this is due to the brevity of summing up both tales. As I posted earlier, the further external factor is, in my opinion, that when Celebrimbor becomes a Feanorean he is arguably not going to remain a smith in Gondolin.

Thus if we take The Elessar as 'canon' it arguably reads better with Enerdhil anway!

In my opinion. Again to me it doesn't read like part of the text, but a summation of the two with an 'intended' change that never occurred.