Aldarion and Erendis

[Findegil]

AE-SL-05: Agreed.

BL-HL-07: I don't think that we need exactly this head line, but I am sure we need some kind of seperating. If this head line is to much of an editorial addition by Christopher Tolkien, we might us a simpel '* * *' as our own addition.

AE-SL-43 & AE-SL-44: If we are to skip one or more of the versions given, we must find a better reason for it than just that we find it better to give only one. If we look at the story about the Elessar, than in that we can argue that one of these is no longer possible due to some change in other parts of the tale of Arda. But what is the arguement that would make one of these versions unusable?

AE-SL-44: I agree that the remark at the beginning of the chapter about Soronto means we have to us him here. To me it is clear that Tolkien first made notes and than wrote the full story as far as it goes. So if Soronto is named in the full story as an important character, he is to be used here. But as your combination showes, that does not make the rest invalid.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

BY-HL-07: I would prefer the '****' instead of the subheading.

AE-SL-43/44: I was basing it off of the rules of the project:

7. Personal aesthetics are not to be used in establishing the actual events in the narrative; all changes and decisions must be justified by the above principles, either:
a) with explicit indication; that is, a text of greater precedence contradicting a text of lesser precedence, or
b) with implicit indication that JRRT almost certainly would have changed/deleted it. But we must base this on some evidence or text from JRRT or CJRT; that is, a text of greater precedence suggesting beyond reasonable doubt a contradiction with a text of lesser precedence, or
c) in cases where two options are given precisely equal validity by the above guidelines, by a majority vote based on personal aesthetics and individual opinions.

My main worry is that this idea of two versions is not built into Tolkien's narrative, it is a function of CT's compilation. Therefore, to give both versions is itself an editorial choice on our part, and I feel we have no real justification for it. If they can be combined then I think that is best, but for 43 I don't think they can be combined. For 44 I think combination works, but if you think we can include the first version as well, then I am open to it. I simply think that giving several alternate versions is not possible within the scope of the project without real justification.

[Findegil]

BY-HL-07: Okay since I can go with both, it will be '* * *'.

AE-SL-43/44: I can understand your argument, but still I am very reluctant about any simple choice. At least we must try to give a good reason why the one we take is the version of our choice.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

AE-SL-43/44: Why do we need a reason? The rules are very clear, if there are two competing versions of the same story, and both have equal validity, we choose one based on aesthetics and a consensus of the group.

[Findegil]

Posted by ArcusCalion:

Why do we need a reason?

If you would like to get a choice be consens you need to convince the group. And without giving your reason for the choice you prefer that will be hard to reach even in a small group like we are right now.

Respectfully
Findegil

[ArcusCalion]

The more I think about it, the less the path forward on this issue is clear to me. We have three possibilities before us, each one a conscious choice on our part:

1) We stick with giving both versions, which was never intended by Tolkien
2) We pick one version, even though there is no way to choose which is better
3) We combine them in some way, which for the first instance is impossible.

In general I am inclined to 3) but this only solves the issue for one of the two complications. The first instance of competing narratives demands either 1) or 2) and I am readily unsure which to choose. As you say, I must give a reason why I prefer one version over the other, but I cannot give any, because they are both equally preferable. Therefore I find myself unable to decide what to do in this case, but lean now more towards your original solution, which is 1). I would appreciate others' thoughts on the matter.

[Findegil]

I am not that sure that JRR Tolkien never intended to give alternatives in the narative. He goes so far as to tell us that this particular tale survived the down fall because of the special interrest that Elendil had in it. But was Elendils interrest in the end of the tale strong enough? The shadow that he observed is found in the earlier interactions of Aldarion and Erendis.
Anyhow I don't imaging Elendil carrying books in his ship. He is reported as author of the Akallabêth, so I think he rather wrote or let write the story of Aldarion and Erendis anew after the Downfall. And thus a good 2000 years later it is more then possible that with nearly all books of Númenor lost, what was remembered where conflicting versions.

Respectfully
Findegil