few questions about the reliablility of M-E guides

Hello. I'm new here and ive been studying M-E for over a year now and i read all the books years ago and i've begun rereading them. anyways ive been looking for a reliable guide to middle-earth. Barnes and Noble has the illustrated encyclopedia of middle earth by David day, and i know that people despise david days bestiary, so the question is: " Is David Day's Encyclopedia a reliable source? it sure looks good."

How about the atlas of middle earth by Karen somebody. that is considered reliable correct?

[Lalwendë]

Easy answer is no, it's about as reliable as a two-legged chair. But it is very, very nice to look at so worth getting for the piccies.

Most reliable is Complete Guide To Middle-earth by Robert Foster, which is dull to look at but very good. Even more so is anything by Scull & Hammond (partic. their biographical stuff on Tolkien) but also expensive.

The Karen Wynn Fonstad atlas is ace, as is the Barbara Strachey Journeys Of Frodo.

If you want a freebie though, try Encyclopedia of Arda online

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by reverend X

Hello. I'm new here and ive been studying M-E for over a year now and i read all the books years ago and i've begun rereading them. anyways ive been looking for a reliable guide to middle-earth. Barnes and Noble has the illustrated encyclopedia of middle earth by David day, and i know that people despise david days bestiary, so the question is: " Is David Day's Encyclopedia a reliable source? it sure looks good."

How about the atlas of middle earth by Karen somebody. that is considered reliable correct?

David Day has been discredited for the assumptions and inventions that riddle his Middle-earth books. Personally, I would shun his work like the plague. Besides, with the release of Christopher Tolkien's 12 volume History of Middle-earth (often referred to by its acronym HoMe), there is really no need for outside reference material. HoMe is about as authoritative as one can get regarding Middle-earth.

Karen Wynn Fonstad is the cartographer you were referring to who did the Atlas of Middle-earth, which offers fairly representative maps of Middle-earth (even though the author Michael Martinez has found some inaccuracies in her measurements).

[Hyarion]

Hm, a reliable guide to Middle-earth. David Day's works will definitely not be on the list, take our word for it on this one and steer clear of anything by Day, which should be listed in the fan fiction section. The only one that comes to mind is The Complete Guide to Middle-earth, as previously mentioned. I've found Hammond/Scull's The J.R.R. Tolkien Companion and Guide to be superb, but as it focuses more on real-world entries, it may not be exactly what you're looking for. However none of the published books even come close to some of the online encyclopedias which are available. Below are some of my favorites in order of most-used to least-used.

* Tolkien Gateway
* Wikipedia's Tolkien section
* TuckBorough.net
* Encyclopedia of Arda
* Annals of Arda
* lotr.wikia.com

If you're looking for maps however, then the Atlas of Middle-earth is definitely recommended. While it may contain some inconsistencies, you really have to take a few liberties when creating a map. Images of maps are much more difficult to find online as the Estate goes after them rigorously.

thank you much for all of your help!

[Mithalwen]

While it is a wonderful source as far as information goes, I wouldn't glass HoME as a guide. I found the Foster (and the similer Tyler) invaluable while I got my head round the many similar names that crop up in the Silmarillion - but unless it has been updated they don't cover later published work. However the later stuff is annotated by Christopher Tolkien who is as good as it is going to get as a guide is concerned! However, I did buy the Hammond/ Scull Reader's companion to the Lord of the Rings and find it useful - it is particularly good if you don't already have the Letters etc.

Barbara Strachey's journeys of Frodo is extremely thorough and particularly helpful for the later parts of LOTR where so many paths diverge.

[Boromir88]

I've never really saw a purpose in using 'guides' I prefer just reading the words directly from the author, but guides to serve as good references and some interesting insights.

As Morothon says, stay away from David Day...he is just a blight that mixes book stuff, with movie stuff, and throws in a bunch of his own twisted made up stuff and slaps on Tolkien's name. What he does I find absolutely disgusting.

The best one out there is probably Robert Foster's guide (as Lal mentions). Foster even has Christopher Tolkien who admits to using it...so he must have done something right. The good thing about Foster's guide is he gives plain, unadultered info and doesn't take great 'leaps of faith' or assumes anything. He gives the references and info for anyone who wants to go and find everything for themselves and make up their own decision (which is something I like to do). So, Foster does exactly what a guide should do, and sadly there are many many so-called 'guides' out there who don't.

I see Mith mentions Tyler's guide...which also isn't a bad one. But it really is nothing compared to Foster's. Tyler's guide came out long before Unfinished Tales and some of his 'leaps of faith' turn out to be flat out wrong. And I find the purpose of any guide is to give good and accurate information...and thats what seperates the 'ok guides' from the 'great' ones (and the 'David Day guides').

So, I guess if you're looking for one, I suggest Robert Foster's The Complete Guide to Middle-earth...CT recommends it and uses it, so it's got to be the 'best of the best'

[Mithalwen]

I no longer have my copies of either guide for reference (lent and never returned alas) but both were editions that predated UT - and by the time I got to UT I needed them less, it was the Silmarillion and its many similar names that I really needed them for -.... so the difference was less marked...and I can't really remember them distinctly - save that one was a nice hardback and the other a huge and battered paperback.
WIthout them I use the encyclopedia of Arda or the HoME index.

[Boromir88]

but both were editions that predated UT~Mith

True, I was more trying to refer to the differences between how Foster handles what he didn't know and Tyler (since both guides were out before Unfinished Tales).

When Foster didn't 'know' something for sure, he would make a suggestion, have some input and give the references for people to go and look at where he's getting the info and judge just how 'accurate' he is. Foster doesn't jump to any conclusions when he doesn't have enough info, he says it 'could be this' or maybe something else.

While, Tyler did jump to conclusions at times and presented those 'conclusions' as unquestionable facts. For the most part Tyler's guide is a good guide, but his approach does lead to some inaccuracies. Foster doesn't present his conclusions as 'unquestionable facts,' and better yet he gives the reader references to find and reach their own conclusions. And I think that's what puts The Complete Guide to Middle-earth above all the other guides out there.