|
 |
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
06-12-2018, 08:40 PM
|
#1 | |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
 |
BY-HL-20: What about the name of the HoME book: Sauron Defeated
LA-SL-01: I think we can take the entire opening of the paragraph instead of editing. I know it is a slight repeat of what was said in the last chapter, but there was an interlude between these things, and I think it is preferable to leave things as they are instead of changing the wording for such a little reason. LA-SL-02: I would say 'at Pelargir' since we have already given this name before. LA-SL-03: I think that this note actually simply says that they are reffering to the Prince of Dol Amroth when they say 'prince.' The word ernil is a Sindarin word for 'prince.' Therefore, I think the use of it here as a name is far too great a liberty. I also think that we should keep the origin of the name 'Dol Amroth' and I do not think it can be inserted later easily. Without a name, I do not think this note can be re-worked. Therefore I think we should keep it in its original place as a footnote to Cirion and Eorl. It is a minor note and will not be a big deal if it is not kept in the chronological narrative. LA-SL-04: Agreed LA-SL-05: Agreed, but I would return to the Of the Rings of Power text with "{and in}In the circle of Angrenost" because it flows better. LA-SL-05.5: Right after this paragraph, I think we can add in this bit from the Rivers and Beacon Hills of Gondor: Quote:
LA-SL-07: Agreed, but for the last tense change, it should be 'lay' not 'lied.' LA-SL-08: Agreed LA-SL-09: I am not sure this addition is justified, since it is such a small detail, and taking from a published text without good reason (like so) seems like it needs a very good reason. LA-SL-10: Agreed LA-SL-11: Agreed LA-SL-12: Agreed, but we agreed to change the name Malgalad to Amdír. LA-SL-13: I disagree with placing this here. We give this detail in the very next chapter, where the two are introduced as characters, and it fits much more smoothly there. I see no compelling reason to shift it here. LA-SL-14: Agreed LA-SL-15: Agreed LA-SL-16: I think we should end the chapter right where it leaves off before this addition. In my draft for the next chapter, I had this paragraph in the beginning as is, and I see no reason to place this here. The phrase "Then Sauron was for that time vanquished, and he forsook his body, and his spirit fled far away and hid in waste places; and he took no visible shape again for many long years." is a much more definitive ending to the entirety of the Second Age narrative, and I think it leaves us on a good final note. LA-SL-17: I do not think that this addition is needed, as it simply restates in slightly different words the meaning of the previous sentences. Therefore I do not see a good reason to take this passage from LotR, especially if the entire paragraph is used in its proper place next chapter. As to the following paragraph, I used it as the opening paragraph for the first chapter of the Fading Years. Last edited by ArcusCalion; 06-12-2018 at 08:55 PM. |
|
|
|
|
06-12-2018, 11:03 PM
|
#2 | |
|
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
|
BY-HL-20: 'Sauron Defeated' is a good idea, I didn't thought about that.
LA-SL-01:So you would start with 'Yet there came at length a stay in the onslaugth of Sauron upon the westlands.'? That does not strike me as a good starting sentence. I as well very much dislike to tell in short hand the story just given in full narrative. LA-SL-02: Agreed. LA-SL-03: Okay, I was not aware that Ernil is Sindarin for Prince. But I still think we should us the not here. I would edit it thus: Quote:
LA-SL-05.5: Agreed. LA-SL-07: Oops. of course you are right. The Rest later today. Respectfully Findegil |
|
|
|
|
|
06-13-2018, 12:26 AM
|
#3 | |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
|
BY-HL-20: Is this agreed then?
LA-SL-01: Like so: Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-13-2018, 11:31 AM
|
#4 |
|
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 248
|
One thing, if I remember well, Cirdan was the owner of Narya from the beginning, despite of the later note, because is published in TToYotTA in the Appendices of TLotR.
Greetings |
|
|
|
|
06-13-2018, 12:10 PM
|
#5 | |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
|
Gondowe, the Tale of years of the Third Age says this:
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-13-2018, 12:17 PM
|
#6 |
|
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 248
|
But I think at least CT thought Cirdan had owned it from the beginning , is said by him in some book, possibly UT. Nevertheless it is more factible that one ring-->one elf. And of course this will fix that Mithrandir would come to ME at TA. (Don't know if you reached a conclusion about that matter)
Greetings Last edited by gondowe; 06-13-2018 at 12:23 PM. |
|
|
|
|
06-13-2018, 12:32 PM
|
#7 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
|
I am confused as to what you are proposing. In all the documents that give details about the transmission of ownership of the rings, two were given to Gil-galad, and he distributed them to Elrond and Cirdan. This is in Of the Rings of Power and The History of Galadriel and Celeborn. The only text that says it was given directly to Cirdan is the VERY brief snippet in the Tale of Years of the Third Age, which is so compressed as to be barely a source of historical movement. I see no argument to give the ring to Cirdan directly, as this would go against all the source texts. As to the time of Gandalf's landing, there is also no debate. All the texts say that Gandalf, Saruman, and Radgast came during the Third Age around the time when the Shadow first came upon Mirkwood. Therefore there is also no reason to change or debate this. I included this event in my drafts for the Third Age, with some slight editing to reflect the new change that the two Blue Wizards came earlier in the Second Age.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
