Chapter 1: Of the Beginning of Time

[Findegil]

BD-12: It seems we a situation of turned tabels. Both of you agree to skip that passage about the reckoning of time but now I have made some caacluclations and might be willing to include it incooperating the 144 YS = 1VY:

§29 BD-11b Thus began the Days of the Bliss of Valinor, and thus began also the count of Time. For the Trees waxed to full bloom and light, and waned again, unceasingly, without change of speed or fullness. Telperion came first to flower, and a little ere he ceased to shine Laurelin began to bud; and again ere Laurelin had grown dim Telperion awoke once more. Therefore the Valar took the time of the flowering, first of Telperion and then of Laurelin, to be for them a Day in Valinor; and the time when each Tree was flowering alone they divided into five hours, each equal to the time of the mingling of their lights, twice in each Day. <LQ {In seven hours the glory of each tree waxed to full and waned again to naught; and each awoke once more to life an hour before the other ceased to shine.} Thus in Valinor twice every day there came a gentle hour of softer light when both Trees were faint and their gold and silver beams were mingled. Telperion was the elder of the Trees and came first to full stature and to bloom; and that first hour in which he shone alone, the white glimmer of a silver dawn, the {gods}[Valar] reckoned not into the tale of hours, but named it the Opening Hour, and counted therefrom the ages of their reign in Valinor. Therefore at the sixth hour of the First Day, and of all the joyous days thereafter until the Darkening, Telperion ceased his time of flower; and at the twelfth hour Laurelin her blossoming. And each day of the {gods}[Valar] in Aman contained twelve hours, and ended with the second mingling of the lights, in which Laurelin was waning but Telperion was waxing.> BD-12 <AAm
Of the {Beginning of Time and its }Reckoning of Time[/i]
§5 Time indeed began with the beginning of Eä, and in that beginning the Valar came into the World. But the measurement which the Valar made of the ages of their labours is not known to any of the Children of Ilúvatar, until the first flowering of Telperion in Valinor. Thereafter the Valar counted time by the ages of Valinor, whereof each age contained one hundred of the Years of the Valar; but each such year was BD-12.1{longer than are nine}[nearly as long as one hundred and forty and four] years under the Sun.
§6 Now measured by the flowering of the Trees there were twelve hours in each Day of the Valar, and BD-12.2{one}[fifteen] thousand of such days the Valar took to be a year in their realm{.}>BD-11.5{There were thus twelve such hours in every Day of the Valar; and one thousand of those Days was held to be a Year}, for then the Trees would put forth a new branch and their stature would increase. BD-12.2 <AAm It is supposed indeed by the Lore-masters that the Valar so devised the hours of the Trees that one hundred of such years so measured should be in duration as one age of the Valar (as those ages were in the days of their labours before the foundation of Valinor). Nonetheless this is not certainly known.
§7 But as for the Years of the Trees and those that came after, one such Year was BD-12.3{longer than nine}[a bit less than one hundred and forty and four] such years as now are. For there were in each such Year BD-12.4{twelve}[one hundred and eighty] thousand hours. Yet the hours of the Trees were each seven times as long as is one hour of a full-day upon Middle-earth from sun-rise to sun-rise, when light and dark are equally divided. Therefore each Day of the Valar endured for four and eighty of our hours, and each Year for BD-12.5{four and eighty}[one million and two hundred thousand and sixty] thousand: which is as much as BD-12.55{three}[fifty-two] thousand and five hundred of our days, and is somewhat BD-12.6{more}[less] than are BD-12.65{nine and one half}[one hundred and forty and three and three quarters] of our years (BD-12.67{nine and one half and eight hundredths and yet a little}[one hundred and forty and three and seven tenths and a little less than four hundredths]).
§8 It is recorded by the Lore-masters that this is not rightly as the Valar designed at the making and ordering of the Moon and Sun. For it was their intention that ten years of the Sun, no more and no less, should be in length as one Year of the Trees had been; and it was their first device that each year of the Sun should contain seven hundred times of sunlight and moonlight, and each of these times should contain twelve hours, each in duration one seventh of an hour of the Trees. By that reckoning each Sun-year would contain three hundred and fifty full days of divided moonlight and sunlight, that is eight thousand and four hundred hours, equalling twelve hundred hours of the Trees, or BD-12.7{one tenth}[the one hundred and fiftieth part] of a Valian Year. But the Moon and Sun proved more wayward and slower in their passage than the Valar had intended, as is hereafter told, and a year of the Sun is somewhat longer than was BD-12.75{one tenth}[the one hundred and fiftieth part] of a Year in the Days of the Trees.
§9 The shorter year of the Sun was so made because of the greater speed of all growth, and likewise or all change and withering, that the Valar knew should come to pass after the death of the Trees. And after that evil had befallen the Valar reckoned time in Arda by the years of the Sun, and do so still, even after the Change of the World and the hiding of Aman; but BD-12.8{ten}[one hundred and forty and four] years of the Sun they account now as but one year, and one thousand but as a century. This is drawn from the Yénonótië of Quennar BD-12.85 : quoth {Pengoloð}[Pengolodh].
§10 It is computed by the lore-masters that the Valar came to the realm of Arda, which is the Earth, five thousand Valian Years ere the first rising of the Moon, which is as much as to say BD-12.9{forty-seven thousands and nine hundred and one}[five-hundred-and-three thousands and ninety] of our years. Of these, three thousand and five hundred (or thirty-three thousand five hundred and thirty of our reckoning) passed ere the measurement of time first known to the Eldar began with the flowering of the Trees. Those were the Days before days. Thereafter one thousand and four hundred and five and ninety Valian Years (or BD-12.95{fourteen thousand of our years and three hundred and twenty-two}[two-hundred-and-fourteen thousand and nine hundred and six and a quarter]) followed during which the Light of the Trees shone in Valinor. Those were the Days of Bliss.>
BD-13<Ainulindale D{Thus it was that the Earth lay darkling again, save only inValinor,}But as the ages drew on to the hour appointed by Ilúvatar for the coming of the Firstborn. ...

LT Descriptions of Valars’ Dwellings: An other question beside the MT-material: Aiwendil posted:

... I place them much later, incorporating them into the passage in AAm that describes (in far less detail) the places where some of the Valar dwell.

Could you guide me to that AAm passage? I can't identify it in your draft nor in th original AAm text. In your draft the LT descriptions are mixed with passages from Ainulindalë D. But that wouldn't suggest such a late placement.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

I assume you are refferring to the 144 YS = 1 Year in Aman from the MT text: Aman. I had thought about this as well. It would increase the amount of time before the sun and moon, but as this was Tolkien's plan, I think it might be worth it. If we agree that this is the best solution, then we need to go through the drafts and find every place where we have removed specific dates or amounts of time.

[Aiwendil]

Originally Posted by ArcusCalion

However, what about the AAm text is inherently better or worse than the LQ text?

I don't think it's inherently better or worse; I just think that, all else being equal, it's desirable to minimize how often we go back and forth between texts. I took AAm rather than LQ as the basis only because AAm exists in a "second phase" (c. 1958) typescript, while LQ in this section only exists in a "first phase" (c. 1951) version.

On the MT Questions

I'm now coming around on the question of the opening section and the "measureless regions" of Ea. The cosmology in the Ainulindale C and D already matches this conception, which shows that this feature is independent of the changed cosmology of Myths Transformed.


On the other hand, I'm still rather convinced that the Primeval Light and, most especially, the Dome of Varda, are part and parcel of the Myths Transformed cosmology, and that in rejecting the new story of the sun and moon we must reject them as well. I think this is clearest in the case of the Dome of Varda. The Dome is introduced thus in MT III:

What happened in Valinor after the Death of the Trees? Aman was 'unveiled' - it had been covered with a dome (made by Varda) of mist or cloud down through which no sight would pierce nor light. This dome was lit by stars — in imitation of the great Firmament of Eä. This now rendered Valinor dark except for starlight [i.e. after the death of the Trees]. It was removed and Aman was lit by the Sun - its blessing was thus removed. (Melkor's defilement of the Sun must thus precede the Two Trees which had light of Sun and Stars before Melkor [?tainted] it - or the Trees [?could ?would] be lit by light before the [?Turbulence] of Melkor.)

The function of the dome here is clearly to prevent the light of the defiled Sun from shining in Valinor, and thus allow the image of Valinor lit by the Trees to remain part of the mythos despite the change whereby the Sun already exists. Christopher Tolkien states this plainly:

The Dome of Varda must have been contrived after the ravishing of Árië by Melkor, in order to keep out the Sun's polluted light; and Aman was lit beneath the Dome by the Two Trees.

The Dome of Varda arose entirely as a consequence of the decision that the Sun must have existed from the beginning, as a way of preserving a feature of the mythology (i.e. Valinor lit by the Trees) that Tolkien wanted to preserve. Without the new story of the Sun, I can see no justification for retaining the Dome.

The “Primeval Light” also seems to me to have been introduced as a direct consequence of the new story of the Sun. That, at least, would again appear to be Christopher Tolkien’s view:

But on the other hand, it is an essential idea that the light of the Trees was derived from the Sun before it was 'tainted'. A resolution of this conflict may be found (reading 'could', not 'would', in the last phrase) in the idea that the light of the Trees was an unsullied light preserved by Varda from a time before the assaults of Melkor.

That is, the new story, wherein Melkor defiles the Sun, presents the problem of where the unsullied light of the Trees came from. This was solved by inventing the Primeval Light that Varda had kept. Without the new story, that problem does not arise, and so no solution is necessary.

BoT-23, -24: I think the LQ and AAm extracts still slightly contradict each other, as they ascribe the failure to overcome Melkor to different things. If we agree that the explanation from LQ is to be preferred, since it agrees with MT, then I think we need remove the AAm (BoT-24) extract completely.

Names of the Trees: As you have already agreed to use Silpion, I just want to say that I favor Aiwendil's general change of Silpion > Telperion, as Tolkien did himself, but in this and the few other cases in the Sun and Moon story where it is appropriate to use Silpion, I think we should.

After agreeing to use “Silpion” here, I find myself doubting it again. In LT, the names given by the Lorien and Yavanna are afterward the usual names for the Trees (even if they receive other names in addition). If we retain “Silpion”, though, then we are inventing the fact that the original name given by Lorien was later for some reason displaced as the usual name, which seems a bit odd. So I am, after all, still tempted to change “Silpion” to “Telperion” here.

Originally Posted by ArcusCalion

Gathering of the Lights: This seems to be the most controversial point in the chapter, as it is a difficult one. If Kullulin/Silindrin are to be removed, then many of the LT descriptions of Valinor need heavy editing, and the Tale of Sun and Moon as well (but this we already know). I think personally that there is no reason to remove them, as it says that the Maiar removed the light from the wells and watered the friths and fields of Valinor with in in AAm, so why is it contradictory to have the cauldrons and the wells of varda? I agree that they are most likely abandoned, but there is nothing against their inclusion alongside the wells. ALternatively, we could simply say the Wells of Varda are the cauldrons, and have them made after the trees, leaving the part about the lack of light for Aule's building out.

I’ve been thinking about this, and for me it just keeps coming back to the fact that no Tolkien text has two separate sets of receptacles for the light, so that if we include both the cauldrons and the wells, we are inventing a fact about Valinor that is not supported anywhere. I see two options here: 1. leave ambiguous the place where the light is stored when it is gathered to Valinor, or 2. completely replace the cauldrons with the vats and have the light stored there when it is gathered. Looking at LQ and AAm, I don’t see any statement as to when Varda’s vats were made; they are not mentioned until after the Trees are made, but they could well have been originally made to hold the light that was gathered from the ruins of the Lamps. So my inclination is to go with option 2, which also allows us to retain more of LT by changing the cauldrons to wells. One might even wonder if perhaps we could retain the names “Kullulin” and “Silindrin” for them, though that might be a step too far.

BD-12: I’m extremely hesitant to simply alter the math here to get a number close to 144.

Actually, the more I look into this issue, the more confusing it seems to become.

First, in AV and AB (c. 1930), and retained in AV 2 and AB 2 (mid to late 1930s), the Valian year is stated to be equivalent to ten years.

In the drafting for what became Appendix D, given in HoMe XII, the Eldar are said to reckon in yéni, one of which is equivalent to a century, 100 years of the sun. This was written in 1949 or 1950.

Then in AAm as originally written (around 1950-1952), the Valian year was again said to be 10 years (I had not really noted this until now). This was emended such that the Valian Year (based on the waxing and waning of the Trees) was equivalent to 3,500 solar days, or about 9.582 solar years. Another thing I hadn’t noted earlier is that this whole passage on the reckoning of time was marked to be removed from AAm and transferred to the Tale of Years - which indeed it was, being included (with a few minor changes, but nothing affecting the math) in two manuscripts of the Tale of Years.

Then in the text published as Appendix D to The Lord of the Rings in 1955, the yén is stated to be 144 years of the sun rather than 100 that it was in the draft.

I find it very doubtful that the yén/Valian year was changed from 10 years to 100 years then back to 10 years and then to 9.582 years and finally to 144 years. It seems clear to me, instead, that appendix D with its 100 -> 144 figure and the Annals with their 10 -> 9.582 figure are talking about different things. That is, at least up to the mid-1950s, the yén and the “Valian year” were not synonymous. Note that the appendix is speaking only of the Eldarin calendar, while the annals (at least in the elaborate passage in AAm) are talking about the reckoning of the Valar. These two systems need not be assumed to be identical! (And indeed, I think that what we can conclude from the passages mentioned above is that they were not identical).

Now, in MT XI Tolkien gives a different explanation for the Valian year in reference to the rate of change perceived by the Valar, and in a related note on the proposed much-expanded chronology, he wrote “144 Sun Years = 1 Valian Year”. Here, it would seem, the Eldarin yen of Appendix D and the Valian year of the annals have been identified with each other. Christopher Tolkien sees this as directly tied to the new cosmogony:

It will be seen that, as a consequence of the transformation of the 'cosmogonic myth', a wholly new conception of the 'Valian Year' had entered. The elaborate computation of Time in the Annals of Aman (see pp. 49-51, 59-60) was based on the 'cycle' of the Two Trees that had ceased to exist in relation to the diurnal movement of the Sun that had come into being - there was a 'new reckoning'. But the 'Valian Year' is now, as it appears, a 'unit of perception' of the passage of the Time of Arda, derived from the capacity of the Valar to perceive at such intervals the process of the ageing of Arda from its beginning to its end.

I think we must reject this new conception for two reasons. First, because, as Christopher notes, it is a consequence of the new cosmology, and second because the 144 year figure is tied to a projected major revision of the chronology (itself related to the new cosmology), greatly enlarging the time between the awakening of Men and the time of the ‘great tales’ of Beren, Túrin, et al.

My inclination, then, is to either retain the 9.582 figure, on the assumption that Eldarin yéni and Valian years are different units, or to remove the whole passage and leave things ambiguous.

Originally Posted by Findegil

Could you guide me to that AAm passage? I can't identify it in your draft nor in th original AAm text. In your draft the LT descriptions are mixed with passages from Ainulindalë D. But that wouldn't suggest such a late placement.

Sorry, I meant Ainulindalë D, not AAm. In any case, I think we are agreed on putting the descriptions of the Valar’s dwellings from LT here, correct?

[Findegil]

So I think we all agree to take AAm as basis text for the draft to come.

On the MT Questions

Okay for the “measurless regions” of Eä. That means we should use a part of MT opening section.

The Primeval Light and the Dome of Varda: I do not fully agree to your arguments, but I can see your reasoning and for the sack of safety I can go on without it.

BoT-24, BoT-25: I do not agree to this. Following MT Melkor is to mighty at this time to be overcome. But none the less he can fell into fear seeing the reaction of the Valar and take to flight back to Utumno, which he reaches before Tulkas can overtake him. And in Utumno he is safe since the Valar could not afford the craft needed to overcome Utumnos fortifications because they had to save what could be saved f their work.

Silpion: It seems we only can chose which fact we will create: either Lorien named the Tree not Silpion but Teleperion or the name given by Lorien did not become the normally used one. I tend to the second.

Gathering of the Lights: If you feel safer not using the names, that is okay for me. So our solution is to use the descriptions of the cauldrons but name them “wells” as it was in the latest version and take the two as the only wells?

BD-12: The argument that the Eldarin Yén form LotR is a different unit from the Valian Year referred to here does not hold any water for me. It is for me unbeleiveable, that he Eldar in Middle-earth (specially the Exiles) would use a longer entity for the measurement of time then the Valar in Valinor. If the relation would be the other way around (Eldar counting with 10 time of a Year of the Sun and the Valar with 144 times) I could agree to it. But why should the Eldar in Middle-earth use a longer period?
So I think safety rules! Let as skip the passages and be ambiguous about the time scale and remove all references to “Valian Years”.

Aiwendil wrote:

Sorry, I meant Ainulindalë D, not AAm. In any case, I think we are agreed on putting the descriptions of the Valar’s dwellings from LT here, correct?

Yes, but under the assumption that we were following the structure of AAm. What is now the reason for postponing the descriptions from the time in the story where they are build? The structure of Ainulindalë D we did not use. So why follow it here?

Respectfully
Findegil

[Aiwendil]

Originally Posted by Findegil

BoT-24, BoT-25: I do not agree to this. Following MT Melkor is to mighty at this time to be overcome. But none the less he can fell into fear seeing the reaction of the Valar and take to flight back to Utumno, which he reaches before Tulkas can overtake him. And in Utumno he is safe since the Valar could not afford the craft needed to overcome Utumnos fortifications because they had to save what could be saved f their work.

My concern was just that there is a slight contradiction if we say first that the Valar did not overcome Melkor because Utumno was too strong and then immediately say that the Valar did not overcome Melkor because they were busy saving what could be saved of their work. However, you may be right that it could be a combination of both explanations. Maybe all that is needed here is a slight editorial insertion to connect the two extracts, like:

BoT-24<AAm In the confusion and the darkness Melkor escaped, though fear fell upon him; for above the roaring of the seas he heard the voice of Manwë as a mighty wind, and the earth trembled beneath the feet of Tulkas. But he came to Utumno ere Tulkas could overtake him; and there he lay hid. And the Valar could not at that time overcome him, for <LQ {In the darkness and the confusion of the seas the Valar could not at that time overcome Melkor; for} his strength had increased with his malice, and he had now gathered to his service many other spirits, and many evil things also of his own making.> And moreover the greater part of their strength was needed to restrain the tumults of the Earth, and to save from ruin all that could be saved of their labour; and afterward they feared to rend the Earth again, until they knew where the Children of Ilúvatar were dwelling, who were yet to come in a time that was hidden from the Valar.>

Silpion: It seems we only can chose which fact we will create: either Lorien named the Tree not Silpion but Teleperion or the name given by Lorien did not become the normally used one. I tend to the second.

True. I don't have a strong opinion on this, so I'm fine with using "Silpion" if that's your preference.

Gathering of the Lights: If you feel safer not using the names, that is okay for me. So our solution is to use the descriptions of the cauldrons but name them “wells” as it was in the latest version and take the two as the only wells?

All right, yes, though part of me wants to use the names, I think they are not suitable in later Quenya. So we'll skip the names and replace the cauldrons with "wells".

BD-12: The argument that the Eldarin Yén form LotR is a different unit from the Valian Year referred to here does not hold any water for me. It is for me unbeleiveable, that he Eldar in Middle-earth (specially the Exiles) would use a longer entity for the measurement of time then the Valar in Valinor. If the relation would be the other way around (Eldar counting with 10 time of a Year of the Sun and the Valar with 144 times) I could agree to it. But why should the Eldar in Middle-earth use a longer period?

I'm puzzled by this as well, but this is a conclusion I can't escape when looking at the history of Appendix D and of the Annals. But the more I think about it, the more I think I could accept it. The yen need not be a comparable unit to the Valian year - after all, if one person speaks in terms of miles and another in meters, that doesn't mean that they must have radically different concepts of distance.

But that's a moot point. If you find the issue too uncertain, we can do as you suggest, skipping the passage and avoiding references to Valian years.

Yes, but under the assumption that we were following the structure of AAm. What is now the reason for postponing the descriptions from the time in the story where they are build? The structure of Ainulindalë D we did not use. So why follow it here?

Ah, I understand what you mean. I suppose there's no pressing reason to put this passage at the end of the chapter. But some of the description here from Ainulindale D telling of the Valar's behaviour during these ages (particularly Yavanna's and Orome's trips to Middle-earth) seems to me like it should come after we have told all about the Trees and the darkness in Middle-earth. And I very much prefer to have all this description of the dwellings and behaviour of the Valar together, so I am still somewhat inclined to put it at the end of the chapter. I do see that putting it earlier would have the advantage that it allows us to tell of the dwellings of the Valar at the time when they are built (as in LT), but I still find the placement at the end somewhat better. However, I won't be obstinate about this, so if you both definitely want to put it earlier, I could probably find a way to agree to that.

[ArcusCalion]

I like this combination Aiwendil!

I think I am with Fin on the Silpion issue, as I see no real reason to change it here.

It seems a shame to lose the names, and I see no reason that they are not valid. Kulullin contains the elements kulu- and -lin, which mean "gold" and "a musical sound" respectively. Culu is a valid word for gold (the metal) in later Quenya, and is an element in one of the names of Laurelin (Culumalda, although culuma might mean orange, the element culu- is clearly related to gold.) Lin is a perfectly valid word in later Quenya. If the name needs updating at all, it would simply be to change the double "l" to a single one, but even that seems unnecessary to me. Silindrin is said to mean "Moon Cauldron" by Christopher Tolkien, and the element sil- is the "Qenya" term for moon, which in Quenya is "Isil." however, the verb silë in Quenya means "to shine," and could be used in a compound. -ndrin is less clear. There is no clear etymology for it, but using CT's analysis, it could mean cauldron. In "Qenya" we have the word tambë for cauldron, with a Gnomish cognate as tambos. However, this word does not reappear in Quenya or Sindarin, and so may not be valid. Thus, -ndrin could be easily thought to be an element denoting "cauldron" in Quenya, although the phonology is not up to date. Similar to the way Gwarestrin -> Gwarestirin in our version, we could do Silindrin -> Silindirin. As it is though, these names are not too difficult to salvage, and it would be a shame to lose them.

In regards to the dating, I say ambiguity is our friend.

About the placement of the descriptions of the dwellings of the Valar, I would say that there it would be somewhat awkward to describe them so late, but I do see the advantage of the Light and the trees in the descriptions. I have no preference either way, but if the fuller versions of the descriptions are to be used, it might be best to put them at the end, so we can use the parts that reference the Trees.

[Findegil]

So the 9.58 will be removed.

Aiwendil wrote:

And I very much prefer to have all this description of the dwellings and behaviour of the Valar together, ...

That is a valid argument to which I can agree. What follows in AAm (so it si in the next section) are the journeys of Yavanna and Ororme to Middle-earth. That means we follow still the structure of AAm but use Ainulindalë D and add to that from LT.

Bot-24, BoT-25: Nice edit, I think we should go with it.

Good research of the elements of the names, ArcusCalion. I am not against the names. If your research confinced Aiwendil that they are useabel, that is okay for me.

Respectfully
Findegil