What is it with the Noldor?
jsberry
Just because they saw the light of the trees? Did that make them
bigger, stronger, smarter, and more "magical"? Likewise, did the
Sindar have some powers that the Dark Elves did not, or were they
afforded some kind of superior status just because they crossed the
mountains first?
McREsq
>Just because they saw the light of the trees? Did that make them
>bigger, stronger, smarter, and more "magical"?
In a nutshell, yes.
> Likewise, did the
>Sindar have some powers that the Dark Elves did not, or were they
>afforded some kind of superior status just because they crossed the
>mountains first?
Yes, but what really gave the Sindar their position over the Avari adn other
Dark Elves was the influence of the High Elf Thingol and Melian who set of a
sort of Valinor-lite in Doriath.
Russ
The American
"jsberry" <jsb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:51431c0.04072...@posting.google.com...
> Were the Noldor actually more "powerful" than the other elves? Why?
> Just because they saw the light of the trees? Did that make them
> bigger, stronger, smarter, and more "magical"?
Other Elves like the Sindar?
Yes.
All Elves that went to Valinor and lived under the Light of the Trees *were*
more "powerful" compared to Sindar.
Not sure how. It's like their souls absorbed and kept some of the light.
Thingol was elevated to a higher level because of all the Sindar he saw the
Trees. Later her saw the same light in the eyes of Melian and was content.
Now if you're also talking about the comic book power levels of all the
Elves I'd say it's in order:
Vanyar (they destroyed Beleriand!)
Noldor
Teleri
Sindar
Dark Elves
> Likewise, did the
> Sindar have some powers that the Dark Elves did not, or were they
> afforded some kind of superior status just because they crossed the
> mountains first?
"Power" as in the "shining figure of white light" like Glorfindel?
But the Sindar were more culturally advanced than the Dark Elves.
The Sindar trafficked with the Dwarves and had the influence of Melian for
their arts.
The Dark Elves were just primitive compared to the culture of the Sindar and
more so the Valinorian Elves.
Imho!
T.A.
the softrat
The Noldor had been to Aman and had absorbed learning from the Valar
and the Maiar, and had absorbed spirituality just from being there.
The Sindar were beneficiaries of the Wisdom of Melian. All of the
three kindreds of the Eldar were initially spiritually enlightened and
enpowered as witness their decision to follow a Vala to the Undying
Lands. The Dark Elves demonstrated their lower levels of enlightenment
by rejecting the call to the Undying Lands. It's not so much what they
received thereby as that their response to the call initially filtered
the 'sheep' out of the 'goats'. Then it got better by exposure to
Orome. And so on....
the softrat
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
mailto:sof...@pobox.com
--
Can you look at an aardvark and see nothing funny?
Jussi Jaatinen
jsberry wrote:
> Were the Noldor actually more "powerful" than the other elves? Why?
> Just because they saw the light of the trees?
They both saw the Light, and conversed and received instruction from the
Valar and Maiar. You might compare this to differences in human culture:
human Middle-Aged societies were advanced in their own way - in
metallurgy, religions etc and are comparable to the Avari. On this
scale, the Calaquendi ("Light-Elves") are comparable to people with
masters degrees received in the past 100 years. This only applies to the
"instruction from the Valar and Maiar" part of the above, I can't really
think of an analogy for the Light of the Trees.
> Did that make them
> bigger, stronger, smarter, and more "magical"?
Yes. Living in Valinor brought those Elves to their full potential, not
reached in Middle-Earth.
BR,
-JJ
Johnny1A
> "jsberry" <jsb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:51431c0.04072...@posting.google.com...
> > Were the Noldor actually more "powerful" than the other elves? Why?
> > Just because they saw the light of the trees? Did that make them
> > bigger, stronger, smarter, and more "magical"?
>
> Other Elves like the Sindar?
> Yes.
> All Elves that went to Valinor and lived under the Light of the Trees *were*
> more "powerful" compared to Sindar.
> Not sure how. It's like their souls absorbed and kept some of the light.
> Thingol was elevated to a higher level because of all the Sindar he saw the
> Trees. Later her saw the same light in the eyes of Melian and was content.
>
> Now if you're also talking about the comic book power levels of all the
> Elves I'd say it's in order:
>
> Vanyar (they destroyed Beleriand!)
No, they didn't.
>
> > Likewise, did the
> > Sindar have some powers that the Dark Elves did not, or were they
> > afforded some kind of superior status just because they crossed the
> > mountains first?
>
> "Power" as in the "shining figure of white light" like Glorfindel?
> But the Sindar were more culturally advanced than the Dark Elves.
In some ways, so probably were the Numenoreans. I suspect the
Dunedain at the height of their power and knowledge probably surpassed
the Avari in many ways (except for such things as personal
immortality, of course).
Shermanlee
Johnny1A
J.R.R.T. always seemed a little divided about whether the decision to
call the Elves to Valinor was a good idea or not. It's mentioned in
the Silmarillion that the Valar were divided on the matter, and that
Ulmo thought the Elves shoul remain in Middle Earth.
(I've noticed that Ulmo is often portrayed as a voice of wisdom, so
I'm not sure if Tolkien agrees with him on that point or not.)
I don't think Tolkien thought the summons was an immoral idea, but I'm
not sure he thought it was a _wise_ idea.
Shermanlee
The American
"Johnny1A" <sherm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> J.R.R.T. always seemed a little divided about whether the decision to
> call the Elves to Valinor was a good idea or not. It's mentioned in
> the Silmarillion that the Valar were divided on the matter, and that
> Ulmo thought the Elves shoul remain in Middle Earth.
>
> (I've noticed that Ulmo is often portrayed as a voice of wisdom, so
> I'm not sure if Tolkien agrees with him on that point or not.)
>
> I don't think Tolkien thought the summons was an immoral idea, but I'm
> not sure he thought it was a _wise_ idea.
>
But with Arda Marred it wasn't the best option for the Elves to stay in ME.
Valinor was the only option where their bodies would have been sustained
through all the Ages of the World.
And even then it wasn't clear.
T.A.
The American
> "The American" <a_real_american@hot-(my-email-is-messed-up)-mail.com>
wrote in message news:<27WdnYmMluB...@conversent.net>...
> > "jsberry" <jsb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:51431c0.04072...@posting.google.com...
> > > Were the Noldor actually more "powerful" than the other elves? Why?
> > > Just because they saw the light of the trees? Did that make them
> > > bigger, stronger, smarter, and more "magical"?
> >
> > Other Elves like the Sindar?
> > Yes.
> > All Elves that went to Valinor and lived under the Light of the Trees
*were*
> > more "powerful" compared to Sindar.
> > Not sure how. It's like their souls absorbed and kept some of the light.
> > Thingol was elevated to a higher level because of all the Sindar he saw
the
> > Trees. Later her saw the same light in the eyes of Melian and was
content.
> >
> > Now if you're also talking about the comic book power levels of all the
> > Elves I'd say it's in order:
> >
> > Vanyar (they destroyed Beleriand!)
>
> No, they didn't.
>
Maybe not literally but who else?
Orcs?
I know, no one knows for sure.
So I'm going with what we have in the Sil: Orcs, Dragons and Vanyar, 1 Maiar
and a desparate depleted Morgoth.
T.A.
AC
That seems like a pretty ludicrous interpretation to me. Are you saying
this just for a bit of trolling, or do you honestly believe the Vanyar had
the capacity to tear Beleriand apart?
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
Johnny1A
Where did you get the idea that there was only 1 Maia present? We
don't even know for sure that the Valar themselves were not there, as
I suspect myself they were. At the very least, even if they weren't
there, I'm sure their power was in play, meaning that the natural
elements would have been in turmoil.
Shermanlee
The American
"AC" <mightym...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:slrncg8i9m.id....@aaronclausen.alberni.net...
No, just thinking out loud.
I did say that "no one knows for sure".
And that's all that it says in the Sil and that's where I'm getting my info,
not HoME.
Or did I miss the mention of another Host in the Silmarilion?
We don't really know much about the Vanyar.
Except that they were very close to Manwe and Varda.
Maybe they learned a few things other than how to make swords and shields
like the Noldor.
Imo.
T.A.
McREsq
<a_real_...@hotspammail.com> writes:
>But with Arda Marred it wasn't the best option for the Elves to stay in ME.
>Valinor was the only option where their bodies would have been sustained
>through all the Ages of the World.
>And even then it wasn't clear.
Actually, in one story Iluvater told MAnwe he made a mistake bringing the Elves
to Aman.
Russ
The American
"McREsq" <mcr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040726101422...@mb-m11.aol.com...
That does sound familiar.
Do you remember from where?
T.A.
ste...@nomail.com
: "McREsq" <mcr...@aol.com> wrote in message
: T.A.
Look at the Appendix to "Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth"
in "Morgoth's Ring".
Stephen
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>Where did you get the idea that there was only 1 Maia present? We
>don't even know for sure that the Valar themselves were not there, as
>I suspect myself they were.
If any Valar were present, Eönwë would not have been in charge; he
was in charge, therefore no Valar were present.
In the beginning of Rings of Power it says that Eönwë had no power
to pardon someone of his own order, so he told Sauron to go to
Valinor. If a Vala had been present, Eönwë would have said, "Wait a
tick; I'll just pop round and see if Tulkas or Aulë can hear your
case."
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
ste...@nomail.com
: "Johnny1A" <sherm...@hotmail.com> wrote in
:>Where did you get the idea that there was only 1 Maia present? We
:>don't even know for sure that the Valar themselves were not there, as
:>I suspect myself they were.
: If any Valar were present, Eönwë would not have been in charge; he
: was in charge, therefore no Valar were present.
Remember, that is just your interpretation, not the TRUTH. :)
Stephen
Johnny1A
> "Johnny1A" <sherm...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> >Where did you get the idea that there was only 1 Maia present? We
> >don't even know for sure that the Valar themselves were not there, as
> >I suspect myself they were.
>
> If any Valar were present, Eönwë would not have been in charge; he
> was in charge, therefore no Valar were present.
>
> In the beginning of Rings of Power it says that Eönwë had no power
> to pardon someone of his own order, so he told Sauron to go to
> Valinor. If a Vala had been present, Eönwë would have said, "Wait a
> tick; I'll just pop round and see if Tulkas or Aulë can hear your
> case."
Yeah, _at that point_.
But that doesn't mean they couldn't have come and gone already. By
the time they captured Sauron, Eonwe could have been supervising
'cleanup' (with a large stretch of continent submerged and
who-knows-how-much collateral damage, that would have been a major
task).
I don't say the Valar were there, I only note that the text of the
Silmarillion is not inconsistent with them being there at some point
in the battle.
Shermanlee
The American
You're on the verge of entering the fan-fic world.
T.A.
R. Dan Henry
It's a pretty big assumption, yes. However, his second line of
argument, which you snipped, is IMO conclusive that there were no
Valar around when Sauron was taken. This doesn't rule out them having
been there at some point and gone home early.
Richard Daniel Henry
danh...@inreach.com
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
>> Silmarillion is not inconsistent with them being there at some point
>> in the battle.
The American <a_real_...@hotspammail.com> wrote:
> You're on the verge of entering the fan-fic world.
shermanlee's impression was certainly the impression that I
got. Why would it have been called the "Host of Valinor" if it
was mostly Vanyar plus Eonwe? Wouldn't it have been called the
Host of the Vanyar, or the Host of the Calaquendi or something
like that?
Anyway, the cataclysmic submergence of Beleriand could
hardly be attributable to just some Elves. Calaquendi had been
stomping around Beleriand for centuries at that point without
making so much as a new puddle. For that matter, who was it who
hewed Morgoth's feet from under him and bound him with Angainor?
That was Tulkas's schtick. If the Vanyar plus Eonwe were able
to do that, then they had grown equivalent to the Valar.
--Jamie. (a Dover edition designed for years of use!)
andrews .uwo } Merge these two lines to obtain my e-mail address.
@csd .ca } (Unsolicited "bulk" e-mail costs everyone.)
McREsq
>
>> "Johnny1A" <sherm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:b3030854.04072...@posting.google.com...
>>> I don't say the Valar were there, I only note that the text of the
>>> Silmarillion is not inconsistent with them being there at some point
>>> in the battle.
>
>The American <a_real_...@hotspammail.com> wrote:
>> You're on the verge of entering the fan-fic world.
>
> shermanlee's impression was certainly the impression that I
>got. Why would it have been called the "Host of Valinor" if it
>was mostly Vanyar plus Eonwe? Wouldn't it have been called the
>Host of the Vanyar, or the Host of the Calaquendi or something
>like that?
>
> Anyway, the cataclysmic submergence of Beleriand could
>hardly be attributable to just some Elves. Calaquendi had been
>stomping around Beleriand for centuries at that point without
>making so much as a new puddle. For that matter, who was it who
>hewed Morgoth's feet from under him and bound him with Angainor?
>That was Tulkas's schtick. If the Vanyar plus Eonwe were able
>to do that, then they had grown equivalent to the Valar.
I thought the drowning of Valinor was not only due to the efforts of the Host
but also to Morgoth.
Russ
The American
I also like the thought, which I think I heard first here, that Beleriand
didn't fully sink right away. The lowlands might have flooded suddenly but
the mountains and higher elevations might have slowly sunk over the
thousands of years of the 2nd Age. Cirdan with his special mission might
have been given the foreknowledge on where to relocate (now I'm fan-fic'n).
Now here's a line that could be interpreted a few ways:
"But at the last the might of Valinor came up out of the West, and the
challenge of the trumpets of Eönwë filled the sky; and Beleriand was ablaze
with the glory of their arms, for the host of the Valar were arrayed in
forms young and fair and terrible, and the mountains rang beneath their
feet."
To me, the "challenge of Eönwë" clearly shows that he's in charge.
Not a Valar. I don't see Ulmo, Orome or Tulkus taking commands from a
subordinate though it's possible I guess.
BUT "were arrayed in *forms*" could very well mean Maiar taking the forms of
Elves and Men.
Though form has many meanings as well.
A host of Maiar I could see messing with Middle Earth plate tectonics.
"and all the pits of Morgoth were broken and unroofed, and the might of the
Valar descended into the deeps of the earth."
That's probably when Beleriand was *really* broken.
T.A.
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
> Now here's a line that could be interpreted a few ways:
> "But at the last the might of Valinor came up out of the West, and the
> challenge of the trumpets of Eönwë filled the sky; and Beleriand was ablaze
> with the glory of their arms, for the host of the Valar were arrayed in
> forms young and fair and terrible, and the mountains rang beneath their
> feet."
Thanks, I had forgotten the exact quotation. If it really
says "the host of the Valar", then that's more explicit than I
remembered.
> To me, the "challenge of Eönwë" clearly shows that he's in charge.
> Not a Valar. I don't see Ulmo, Orome or Tulkus taking commands from a
> subordinate though it's possible I guess.
No, Eönwë was the HERALD. He was the one who blew the
trumpets to issue the challenge. The challenge was the challenge
from the Valar, given expression by the trumpets of Eönwë.
Now why he was the only one left hanging around at the end
to deal with Maedhros and Maglor et al. is another question. I
guess as herald, it would have been natural for him to act as an
ambassador or envoy from Manwë, to represent the will of the
Valar in Middle-earth.
> BUT "were arrayed in *forms*" could very well mean Maiar taking the forms of
> Elves and Men.
> Though form has many meanings as well.
> A host of Maiar I could see messing with Middle Earth plate tectonics.
I guess I can see a bunch of Maiar referred to as the "Host
of the Valar", but I would think that that name would refer to a
posse with at least some Valar in it.
Gorbag
"Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in
message news:2mqb95F...@uni-berlin.de...
> The American <a_real_american@hot-(my-email-is-messed-up)-mail.com> wrote:
> > BUT "were arrayed in *forms*" could very well mean Maiar taking the
forms of
> > Elves and Men.
> > Though form has many meanings as well.
More likely it refers to the fact that the army was in formation. E.g.,
Triplex Acies (used by the Roman army).
> I guess I can see a bunch of Maiar referred to as the "Host
> of the Valar", but I would think that that name would refer to a
> posse with at least some Valar in it.
One can refer to the host of the king, etc. without the king being present.
I take the reference to the alignment or allegiance of the host (army), not
the constitution of it.
Dave Stallard
> Now if you're also talking about the comic book power levels of all the
> Elves I'd say it's in order:
>
> Vanyar (they destroyed Beleriand!)
> Noldor
> Teleri
> Sindar
> Dark Elves
You're forgetting the Sylvan Elves, who come directly below the Sindar
in your nobility ranking. These are the ones that turned aside from the
Great Journey before reaching Beleriand, generally around the Anduin.
Of these, the Laiquendi might be considered a sub-division, since they
reached Beleriand eventually, and took up residence in Ossiriand.
Dave
Ancalagon The Black
> More likely it refers to the fact that the army was in formation. E.g.,
> Triplex Acies (used by the Roman army).
>
I know I have come late to this thread, but I have to disagree here. "arrayed
in forms young fair and terrible" cannot refer to a military formation of
soldiers, IMHO. It is more likely that it refers to the physical bodies of the
host, and also their raiment. So, IHMO there were Eldar and Maiar (but not
Valar), the Maiar were in the form of Eldar, and all were armed to the teeth.
> One can refer to the host of the king, etc. without the king being present.
> I take the reference to the alignment or allegiance of the host (army), not
> the constitution of it.
I agree here totally. "Host of the Valar" simply means the army was organised,
sent and strategically commanded by them. Tactically, it would seem that Eonwe
was in charge. I should know, I was there...;-)
Best,
--
Ancalagon The Black, Secret Fire Of Angband
ancalagon...@virgin.net
Christopher Kreuzer
> "McREsq" <mcr...@aol.com> wrote
>> Jamie Andrews wrote:
>>> Anyway, the cataclysmic submergence of Beleriand could
>>> hardly be attributable to just some Elves.
>> I thought the drowning of Valinor was not only due to the efforts of
>> the Host but also to Morgoth.
> I also like the thought, which I think I heard first here, that
> Beleriand didn't fully sink right away. The lowlands might have
> flooded suddenly but the mountains and higher elevations might have
> slowly sunk over the thousands of years of the 2nd Age.
<snip>
> "and all the pits of Morgoth were broken and unroofed, and the might
> of the Valar descended into the deeps of the earth."
>
> That's probably when Beleriand was *really* broken.
I thought there was a reference to the sinking of Numenor also reshaping
the coast of Middle-earth and that the submergence of Beleriand was
completed at that point.
Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
KLange
> The American wrote:
>
> > Now if you're also talking about the comic book power levels of all the
> > Elves I'd say it's in order:
> >
> > Vanyar (they destroyed Beleriand!)
Actually, I don't think the Vanyar were alone in the Host of Valinor.
There were Finarfin Noldor too, and no doubt Maiar and maybe Valar. In
fact, I think the Maiar and Valar were the ones who destroyed
Beleriand in the War of Wrath, not the Vanyar, because no Elves (even
great ones like the Vanyar) could do that much damage. Besides, wasn't
the Host of Valinor considered separate or distinct from the Vanyar
and Finarfin Noldor forces?
> > Noldor
> > Teleri
> > Sindar
> > Dark Elves
>
> You're forgetting the Sylvan Elves, who come directly below the Sindar
> in your nobility ranking. These are the ones that turned aside from the
> Great Journey before reaching Beleriand, generally around the Anduin.
> Of these, the Laiquendi might be considered a sub-division, since they
> reached Beleriand eventually, and took up residence in Ossiriand.
>
> Dave
I think that the Sylvan Elves are the Dark ELves, because aren't the
Dark Elves those who never made the journey to Aman and thus never saw
the light of the Trees, which is why they're called the Dark ELves.
The American
"KLange" <KLa...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:f0b50c87.04080...@posting.google.com...
> Dave Stallard <stal...@bbn.com> wrote in message
news:<2mspnvF...@uni-berlin.de>...
> > The American wrote:
> >
> > > Now if you're also talking about the comic book power levels of all
the
> > > Elves I'd say it's in order:
> > >
> > > Vanyar (they destroyed Beleriand!)
>
> Actually, I don't think the Vanyar were alone in the Host of Valinor.
> There were Finarfin Noldor too, and no doubt Maiar and maybe Valar. In
> fact, I think the Maiar and Valar were the ones who destroyed
> Beleriand in the War of Wrath, not the Vanyar, because no Elves (even
> great ones like the Vanyar) could do that much damage.
On second thought I think I'd like to take back the " they destroyed
Beleriand" comment.
I'd like instead to say that they were such a powerful military force that
Morgoth, in his attempt to keep them away or beat them back, destroyed much
of the lowlands of Beleriand.
I believe the Noldor remnant from Valinor helped out but was only a small
part of the forces sent.
I also believe that no Valar went but many Maiar did with Eonwe being in
charge of everyone.
FWIW, YMMV, IMHO.
T.A.
Conrad Dunkerson
news:f0b50c87.04080...@posting.google.com...
> In fact, I think the Maiar and Valar were the ones who destroyed
> Beleriand in the War of Wrath, not the Vanyar, because no Elves
> (even great ones like the Vanyar) could do that much damage.
In earlier versions of the story it is clear that there were 'Maiar' (aka
'sons of the Valar') with the Host. Later only Eonwe is mentioned. I
suspect the intent was still that there were other Maiar there. Of the
Valar nothing is said except that Manwe specifically was not there.
That said, when winged dragons were unleashed the Host was driven back...
until Earendil arrived and took down Ancalagon. So one half-elf in a flying
boat did something the Host (whatever it was comprised of) could not. Thus
it is not impossible that Elves did the damage which sunk Beleriand.
Actually, I think alot of the damage could be attributed to Morgoth's
defeat. Tolkien wrote about how Morgoth disseminated his power into the
physical materials from which Middle Earth was formed. When Morgoth was
defeated the land which he had corrupted and controlled might be expected to
crumble and fall apart as Barad-dur did when Sauron was defeated (and the
Ring destroyed).
> Besides, wasn't the Host of Valinor considered separate or
> distinct from the Vanyar and Finarfin Noldor forces?
Not that I can think of.
> I think that the Sylvan Elves are the Dark ELves, because
> aren't the Dark Elves those who never made the journey to
> Aman and thus never saw the light of the Trees, which is why
> they're called the Dark ELves.
The term 'Dark Elves' is sometimes applied to the Avari (who never set out
on the journey) alone or more broadly to all those who never reached Aman
whether they set out on the journey or not. The Silvan Elves are certainly
'Dark Elves' in the later sense, but whether they were also Avari... or how
>much< of their ancestry was Avari rather than 'non-Valinorean Teleri' is a
matter of some debate.
The American
"Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:2vRRc.1961$Po1.1448@trndny08...
>
> Actually, I think alot of the damage could be attributed to Morgoth's
> defeat. Tolkien wrote about how Morgoth disseminated his power into the
> physical materials from which Middle Earth was formed. When Morgoth was
> defeated the land which he had corrupted and controlled might be expected
to
> crumble and fall apart as Barad-dur did when Sauron was defeated (and the
> Ring destroyed).
>
*YES*!
PERFECT.
This is how I'll always think Beleriand sank (or at least until something
better comes along but I think this is the best so far).
Thank you.
T.A.
McREsq
>The Silvan Elves are certainly
>'Dark Elves' in the later sense, but whether they were also Avari... or how
> >much< of their ancestry was Avari rather than 'non-Valinorean Teleri' is a
>matter of some debate.
Technically, the Teleri are all Eldar so 'non-Valineorean Teleri' is not quite
correct. Lindar is the real clan name and Teleri refers to the Eldarin Lindar
(i.e. those who followed last on the journey). So, I guess it would more
properly be 'non-Valinorean and non-Sindarin Lindar'.
Thus the groupings that could have made up the original Silvans are the Avari
(both Lindarin and Tatyar) and the Nandor. As you point out there is some
debate over the proportions and whether the Avari are part of the Silvans. I
think the case is strong that Silvans were primarily Avari with a good chunk of
Nandor (and in the Second Age we have the addition of some back-to-basics
slacker Sindar and the odd Noldo).
Russ
Russ
Jussi Jaatinen
KLange wrote:
> because no Elves (even
> great ones like the Vanyar) could do that much damage. Besides, wasn't
> the Host of Valinor considered separate or distinct from the Vanyar
> and Finarfin Noldor forces?
Not to mention that there probably weren't that many Vanyar in
existence, and their skills were more oriented toward the arts than
warfare. The Noldor were more oriented toward weapons and the physical
world in general.
-JJ
Gorbag
"Ancalagon The Black" <ancalagon...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:4114d...@127.0.0.1...
> Gorbag wrote:
>
>
> > More likely it refers to the fact that the army was in formation. E.g.,
> > Triplex Acies (used by the Roman army).
> >
>
> I know I have come late to this thread, but I have to disagree here.
"arrayed
> in forms young fair and terrible" cannot refer to a military formation of
> soldiers, IMHO. It is more likely that it refers to the physical bodies
of the
> host, and also their raiment. So, IHMO there were Eldar and Maiar (but
not
> Valar), the Maiar were in the form of Eldar, and all were armed to the
teeth.
Let's try a paraphrase:
they stood in phalanx young fair and terrible
...works for me. "young fair and terrible" are adjectives modifying the
subject, not the prepositional phrase object. The latter is the preferred
reading of "in forms *that* were young fair ..." which causes the focus to
move. Otherwise the sentence focus remains on the subject.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Technically, the Teleri are all Eldar so 'non-Valineorean Teleri'
> is not quite correct.
Not really. Tolkien described the entire third 'clan' of Elves that set out
on the Great March, including those who never reached Aman, as "Teleri"
numerous times. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say that is the STANDARD term
used to describe that group.
Yes, it later came to be used only of those who actually reached Aman, but
that does not change the original meaning.
As such, the intent of 'non-Valineorean Teleri' is fairly obvious.
> Lindar is the real clan name and Teleri refers to the Eldarin
> Lindar (i.e. those who followed last on the journey). So, I guess
> it would more properly be 'non-Valinorean and non-Sindarin
> Lindar'.
Except that the topic under discussion was the definition of 'Dark Elves'
and the ancestry of the 'Silvan Elves'... both of which should include the
Sindar (though they are sometimes called 'Grey' Elves rather than 'Dark'...
but only sometimes). As you noted yourself further on, some of the Sindar
joined the Silvan Elves in the Second Age. If you prefer 'non-Valinorean
Lindar' over 'non-Valinorean Teleri' that's fine, but the fact is that the
latter is the more common (and thus more generally understandable) term.
> As you point out there is some debate over the proportions and
> whether the Avari are part of the Silvans. I think the case is
> strong that Silvans were primarily Avari with a good chunk of
> Nandor (and in the Second Age we have the addition of some
> back-to-basics slacker Sindar and the odd Noldo).
While I think that they were primarily 'Nandor' with a sizable percentage of
Avari mixed in and, after the First Age, many Sindar and the odd Noldo.
Christopher Kreuzer
Gorbag <gor...@invalid.acct> wrote:
> "Ancalagon The Black" <ancalagon...@virgin.net> wrote
>> Gorbag wrote:
>>
>>> More likely it refers to the fact that the army was in formation.
>>> E.g., Triplex Acies (used by the Roman army).
>>
>> I know I have come late to this thread, but I have to disagree here.
>> "arrayed in forms young fair and terrible" cannot refer to a
>> military formation of soldiers, IMHO. It is more likely that it
>> refers to the physical bodies of the host, and also their raiment.
>> So, IHMO there were Eldar and Maiar (but not Valar), the Maiar were
>> in the form of Eldar, and all were armed to the teeth.
>
> Let's try a paraphrase:
Let's try actually quoting the line in question...
"...and Beleriand was ablaze with the glory of their arms, for the host
of the Valar were arrayed in forms young and fair and terrible, and the
mountains rang beneath their feet."
> they stood in phalanx young fair and terrible
"the host of the Valar were arrayed young and fair and terrible" could
be modified to "the host of the Valar stood in phalanx young and fair
and terrible".
But unfortunately there are two extra words there:
"in forms"
Now: "the host of the Valar were arrayed in forms, young and fair and
terrible" if a comma is inserted after 'forms', then I would agree that
young and fair and terrible referred to Valar, and that forms might
refer to how the Valar were arrayed. But in fact there is no comma, so I
conclude that young and fair and terrible refers to 'forms', which makes
it clear that the phalanx meaning of form makes far less sense than the
'body' meaning of form.
> ...works for me. "young fair and terrible" are adjectives modifying
> the subject, not the prepositional phrase object. The latter is the
> preferred reading of "in forms *that* were young fair ..." which
> causes the focus to move. Otherwise the sentence focus remains on the
> subject.
But if you lose the words 'that were', you need to insert a comma to
clarify the sentence. Otherwise hopeless confusion is caused.
McREsq
>> Technically, the Teleri are all Eldar so 'non-Valineorean Teleri'
>> is not quite correct.
>
>Not really. Tolkien described the entire third 'clan' of Elves that set out
>on the Great March, including those who never reached Aman, as "Teleri"
>numerous times. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say that is the STANDARD term
>used to describe that group.
That was my point. All Teleri went on the Journey and so all are Eldar. So
the Teleri are comprised of the Nandor, Sindar and Valinorean Teleri.
>Yes, it later came to be used only of those who actually reached Aman, but
>that does not change the original meaning.
>
>As such, the intent of 'non-Valineorean Teleri' is fairly obvious.
I see the confusion after reading below. I thought you were referring to the
original Silvans, not the Silvans as they were augmented after the First Age.
In that context I thought the term "non-Valinorean Teleri" as imprecise because
it included the Sindar.
>> Lindar is the real clan name and Teleri refers to the Eldarin
>> Lindar (i.e. those who followed last on the journey). So, I guess
>> it would more properly be 'non-Valinorean and non-Sindarin
>> Lindar'.
>
>Except that the topic under discussion was the definition of 'Dark Elves'
>and the ancestry of the 'Silvan Elves'... both of which should include the
>Sindar
I disagree with the latter. The Silvans people already existed and thus the
Sindar cannot be said to be part of the Silvan ancestry. Some Sindar may have
*joined* the Silvans but when you talk about 'Silvan ancestry' it means to me
that you are talking about the original Silvans.
> (though they are sometimes called 'Grey' Elves rather than 'Dark'...
>but only sometimes). As you noted yourself further on, some of the Sindar
>joined the Silvan Elves in the Second Age.
As stated above, I didn't think you were referring to that time period. I
thought you were talking about the original Silvans.
If you prefer 'non-Valinorean
>Lindar' over 'non-Valinorean Teleri' that's fine, but the fact is that the
>latter is the more common (and thus more generally understandable) term.
If we're talking about original Silvans than my term is correct. Your term is
accurate if discussing the Silvans after the First Age.
You originally wrote: "The Silvan Elves are certainly 'Dark Elves' in the later
sense, but whether they were also Avari... or how
>much< of their ancestry was Avari rather than 'non-Valinorean Teleri' is a
matter of some debate."
I thought you were talking about original Silvans and thus thought the term
'non-Valinorean Teleri' incorrect because it includes the Sindar which were
clearly not part of the original Silvans.
>> As you point out there is some debate over the proportions and
>> whether the Avari are part of the Silvans. I think the case is
>> strong that Silvans were primarily Avari with a good chunk of
>> Nandor (and in the Second Age we have the addition of some
>> back-to-basics slacker Sindar and the odd Noldo).
>
>While I think that they were primarily 'Nandor' with a sizable percentage of
>Avari mixed in and, after the First Age, many Sindar and the odd Noldo.
If the Silvans were primarily Nandor and only a minority Avari, what happened
to all the Avari? If we start with the proportions given for the original
Elves, that leaves a lot of unaccounted for Avari.
Russ
KLange
>
> 'sons of the Valar') with the Host. Later only Eonwe is mentioned. I
> suspect the intent was still that there were other Maiar there. Of the
> Valar nothing is said except that Manwe specifically was not there.
From the Simarillion: "The host of the Valar prepared for battle; and
beneath their white banners marched the Vanyar, the people of Ingwė,
and those also of the Noldor who never departed from Valinor, whose
leader was Finarfin the son of Finwė."
It seemes to me that Tolkien was or may have been counting the Host of
the Valar separate from the Elf troops. He didn't say that the Host of
the Valar was made up of elves, rather that the Vanyar and Noldor
marched beneath their banners.
Also, he said that the "Host of the Valar arrayed themselves in forms
young, and fair, and terrible and the mountains rang beneath their
feet".
Elves, even great and powerful ones like the Vanyar, are still
basically corporal beigns, they're limited to the bodies they have.
However, I can certainly see Maiar and maybe Valar arrainging
themselves in forms beautiful and frightining to scare the crap out of
Morgoth's forces. Also, I can't picture mountains ringing beneath
Elves' feet, but I certainly can picture them ringing beneath Maiaric.
>
> That said, when winged dragons were unleashed the Host was driven back...
> until Earendil arrived and took down Ancalagon. So one half-elf in a flying
> boat did something the Host (whatever it was comprised of) could not. Thus
> it is not impossible that Elves did the damage which sunk Beleriand.
Actually, the reason Earendil smoked Ancalagon was because he was in a
flying boat, and could thus get at him, while any Maiar or maybe even
Valar would have been basically limited to being on the ground, IMHO.
> Actually, I think alot of the damage could be attributed to Morgoth's
> defeat. Tolkien wrote about how Morgoth disseminated his power into the
> physical materials from which Middle Earth was formed. When Morgoth was
> defeated the land which he had corrupted and controlled might be expected to
> crumble and fall apart as Barad-dur did when Sauron was defeated (and the
> Ring destroyed).
That's certainly a factor, too, probably.
R. Dan Henry
<conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Actually, I think alot of the damage could be attributed to Morgoth's
>defeat. Tolkien wrote about how Morgoth disseminated his power into the
>physical materials from which Middle Earth was formed. When Morgoth was
>defeated the land which he had corrupted and controlled might be expected to
>crumble and fall apart as Barad-dur did when Sauron was defeated (and the
>Ring destroyed).
I wouldn't put it past Morgoth to have deliberately done as much
damage as he could to the land when it became clear he was going to
lose as a last act of spite. He certainly wasn't going to get any more
use out of it.
Richard Daniel Henry
danh...@inreach.com
Conrad Dunkerson
> I see the confusion after reading below. I thought you were
> referring to the original Silvans, not the Silvans as they were
> augmented after the First Age.
Ah, nope. Third Age variety.
> If the Silvans were primarily Nandor and only a minority
> Avari, what happened to all the Avari?
- Killed off by Orcs in the East
- Corrupted INTO Orcs
- Killed off by Men in the East
- Killed off by various other things
- Already faded away to an incorporeal existence
- Still living happily far to the East outside the story
- Corrupted by the Keebler corporation
- Whatever
It has been argued in the past that there might be a limit to the number of
Elves which could be born... based on the fact that they usually had few
children and Tolkien indicated that this required 'life' which they did not
get back. If NOT their population would eventually grow out of control.
Combine a limitation like that with slain Avari not being re-embodied in the
East and it would seem very likely that they would eventually be wiped out
by simple attrition.
But even if we reject all of that... there is nothing in the story
preventing the Avari from still being far to the East in the time of the
Third Age.
Now, a return question... given that the Nandor were specifically said to
have settled in all the areas where Silvan elves (First OR Third Age
variety) were found why would you suppose that those established populations
were superceded by Avari immigrants? There is no record of such a mass
migration that I am aware of.
AC
My understanding is that Beleriand was broken during the War of Wrath, but
that all but Lindon and some islands were sunk in the Downfall.
--
Aaron Clausen
mightym...@hotmail.com
WOODY: How's it going Mr. Peterson?
NORM : It's a dog eat dog world out there, Woody, and I'm wearing
milkbone underwear.
Christopher Kreuzer
> Christopher Kreuzer <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> The American wrote:
<snip>
>>> "and all the pits of Morgoth were broken and unroofed, and the might
>>> of the Valar descended into the deeps of the earth."
>>>
>>> That's probably when Beleriand was *really* broken.
>>
>> I thought there was a reference to the sinking of Numenor also
>> reshaping the coast of Middle-earth and that the submergence of
>> Beleriand was completed at that point.
>
> My understanding is that Beleriand was broken during the War of
> Wrath, but that all but Lindon and some islands were sunk in the
> Downfall.
I think that was my impression as well. Probably based on this quote
from 'Akallabeth':
"And all the coasts and seaward regions of the western world suffered
great change and ruin in that time; for the seas invaded the lands, and
shores foundered, and ancient isles were drowned, and new isles were
uplifted; and hills crumbled and rivers were changed into strange
courses."
The earlier cataclysm, in the War of Wrath, is described thus in the
preceding section of 'The Silmarillion':
"...they looked upon a world that was changed. For so great was the fury
of those adversaries that the northern region of the western world were
rent asunder, and the sea roared in through many chasms, and there was
confusion and great noise; and rivers perished or found new paths, and
the valleys were upheaved and the hills trod down; and Sirion was no
more."
This is also described in 'Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age':
"In the Great Battle and the tumults of the fall of Thangorodrim there
were mighty convulsions in the earth, and Beleriand was broken and laid
waste; and northward and westward many lands sank beneath the waters of
the Great Sea. In the east, in Ossiriand, the walls of Ered Luin were
broken, and a great gap was made in them towards the south, and a gulf
of the sea flowed in. Into that gulf the River Lhun fell by a new
course, and it was called therefore the Gulf of Lhun. That country had
of old been named Lindon by the Noldo, and this name it bore thereafter;
and many of the Eldar still dwelt there, lingering, unwilling to forsake
Beleriand where they had fought and laboured long."
The impression I get is that some parts of Beleriand other than Lindon
are still there after the War of Wrath, but are a desolate wasteland.
This desolation being caused by the tumults following the fall of
Thangorodrim. And then, as you say, a further drowning took place after
the Downfall of Numenor.
McREsq
<snip>
>> If the Silvans were primarily Nandor and only a minority
>> Avari, what happened to all the Avari?
>
>- Killed off by Orcs in the East
>- Corrupted INTO Orcs
>- Killed off by Men in the East
Not according to Of the Rings of Power which says there was peace in the
eastlands for this time:
"Elsewhere in Middle-earth there was peace in for many years; yet the lands
were for the most part savage and desolate, save only where the people of
Beleriand came. Many elves dwelt there indeed, as they had dwelt through the
countless years, wandering free in the wide lands far from the Sea; but they
were Avari, to whom the deeds of Beleriand were but a rumor and Valinor only a
distant name. And in the south and the further east Men multiplied; and most of
them turned to evil, for Sauron was at work."
>- Killed off by various other things
>- Already faded away to an incorporeal existence
>- Still living happily far to the East outside the story
>- Corrupted by the Keebler corporation
>- Whatever
>
>It has been argued in the past that there might be a limit to the number of
>Elves which could be born... based on the fact that they usually had few
>children and Tolkien indicated that this required 'life' which they did not
>get back. If NOT their population would eventually grow out of control.
>Combine a limitation like that with slain Avari not being re-embodied in the
>East and it would seem very likely that they would eventually be wiped out
>by simple attrition.
Effective immortality would offset that. Moreover, the same would apply to the
Nandor who started out with a much lower population (8/144 vs 56/144) and who
suffered severely themselves in the First Battle of Beleriand. The Nandor who
remained east of the Blue Mountains would have fared the same as the Avari so
there no distinction there.
>But even if we reject all of that... there is nothing in the story
>preventing the Avari from still being far to the East in the time of the
>Third Age.
Couldn't have been that far because as the Of the Rings of Power quote reveals,
Men awoke to the east of the the Avari. And the LOTR quote (in full below)
that the East-elves comprised the majority of the population of Mirkwood and
Lorien.
>Now, a return question... given that the Nandor were specifically said to
>have settled in all the areas where Silvan elves (First OR Third Age
>variety) were found why would you suppose that those established populations
>were superceded by Avari immigrants? There is no record of such a mass
>migration that I am aware of.
How about LOTR:
"The Elves far back in the Eldar Days became divided into two main branches:
the West-elves (the Eldar) and the East-elves. Of the latter kind were most of
the elven folk of Mirkwood and
Lorien..."
Since Nandor were Eldar, they fall into the West-elves category and thus that
leaves the Avari as comprising East-elves who were the majority of the
popualation of Mirkwood and Lorien.
This is confirmed by a draft of the Second Age Tale of Years: "750...Remnant of
the Telerin Elves (of Doriath in ancient Beleriand) establish realms in the
woodlands far eastward, but most of these peoples are Avari or East-elves."
Other evidence:
- "But the Loremasters of later days, when more friendly relations had been
established with the Avari of various kinds in Eriador and the Vale of
Anduin..." (WotJ pg 409)
and
- "For in contrast, the Lindarin elements of the western Avari were friendly to
the Eldar, and willing to learn from them; and so close was the feeling of
kinship between the remnants of the Sindar, the Nandor and the Lindarin Avari,
that later in Eriador and the Vale of Anduin they often became merged
together." (WotJ, Quendi and Eldar, pg 381)
- "They were, it seems, filled with an inherited bitterness against the Eldar,
whom they regarded as deserters of their kin, and in Beleriand, this feeling
was increased by envy..." (pp 377 and
409).
- Tolkien confirms it linguistically. "The Avarin forms cited by the Loremaster
were: kindi, cuid, hwenti, windan, kinn-lai, penni...The form penni is cited as
coming from the 'Wood-elven' speech of the Vale of Anduin, and these Elves were
among the most friendly to the fugitives from Beleriand, and held themselves
akin to the remnants of the Sindar."
(pg 410). We're talking about the word for their race and the fact that it is
the Avarin form 'penni' would indicate their dominance.
- "For in many places the Avari became closer in friendship with [the Dwarves]
than the Amanyar or the Sindar."
The only proof I can remember off the top of my head that supports a mostly
Nandorin element are the quotes from Unfinished Tales, which are from a "late
eymological essay" that CJRT later described in HoME as follows:
"A word must be said of these 'historical-philological' essays...they were
composed on a typewriter. These texts are, very clearly, entirely ab initio;
they are not developments and refinements of earlier versions. The ideas, the
new narrative departures, historical formulations, and etymological
construction, here first appear in written form (which is not to say, of
course, that they were not long in the preparing), and in that form,
essentially, they remain. The texts are never obviously concluded, and often
end in chaotic and illegible or unintelligible notes and jottings. Some of the
writing was decidedly experimental..." POME pg 294.
Thus I would question the weight of thus UT evidence versus the LOTR and WotJ
evidence.
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
>>- Killed off by Orcs in the East
>>- Corrupted INTO Orcs
>>- Killed off by Men in the East
> Not according to Of the Rings of Power which says there
> was peace in the eastlands for this time:
"This time"? Many thousand years passed between the start of the Great March
and the Third Age. Their population could have been depleted at various
points throughout that timeframe.
> The Nandor who remained east of the Blue Mountains would
> have fared the same as the Avari so there no distinction
> there.
There is no reason to assume that. If they lived in different areas they
would encounter different dangers and have different rates of population
growth / decline.
> Couldn't have been that far because as the Of the Rings
> of Power quote reveals, Men awoke to the east of the the
> Avari.
What of it? There are vast distances to the East of Greenwood and environs
wherein Avari could have lived and Men still have awoken yet further East.
> And the LOTR quote (in full below) that the East-elves
> comprised the majority of the population of Mirkwood and
> Lorien.
And as we have discussed before LotR does not say that 'East-elves' were the
Avari. The term 'East-elves' applied just as much to the Nandor.
>> Now, a return question... given that the Nandor were
>> specifically said to have settled in all the areas where
>> Silvan elves (First OR Third Age variety) were found why
>> would you suppose that those established populations
>> were superceded by Avari immigrants? There is no record
>> of such a mass migration that I am aware of.
> How about LOTR:
> "The Elves far back in the Eldar Days became divided into
> two main branches: the West-elves (the Eldar) and the
> East-elves. Of the latter kind were most of the elven folk
> of Mirkwood and Lorien..."
This does not address my question... it says nothing about a migration of
Avari or the existing Nandor populations being overtaken.
> Since Nandor were Eldar,
Sometimes yes, sometimes no... in LotR no. As we have discussed before.
> they fall into the West-elves category and thus that
> leaves the Avari as comprising East-elves who were the
> majority of the popualation of Mirkwood and Lorien.
In LotR the Eldar were the Elves who reached Aman and the Sindar... and thus
the Nandor were East-elves and the majority of the population of Mirkwood
and Lorien. :)
<snip references legitimately implying Avari dominance>
> - "For in contrast, the Lindarin elements of the western
> Avari were friendly to the Eldar, and willing to learn
> from them; and so close was the feeling of kinship
> between the remnants of the Sindar, the Nandor and the
> Lindarin Avari, that later in Eriador and the Vale of
> Anduin they often became merged together."
> (WotJ, Quendi and Eldar, pg 381)
We both agree that Nandor, Avari and Sindar became merged together. This
does not speak of percentages of populations and thus is not particularly
relevant.
Note however that it says "of the WESTERN Avari"... implying that there are
still Avari living off in the East. Negating your 'the Avari should still
outnumber the Nandor' bit (even if we assume it is valid) because these
excess Avari could well be in the East... leaving them a minority amongst
the Silvans.
> - "They were, it seems, filled with an inherited
> bitterness against the Eldar, whom they regarded as
> deserters of their kin, and in Beleriand, this feeling
> was increased by envy..." (pp 377 and 409).
Doesn't say they were Avari.
> - "For in many places the Avari became closer in
> friendship with [the Dwarves] than the Amanyar or the
> Sindar."
Relevance? The Silvan elves were NOT particularly close in friendship with
the Dwarves... rather the opposite in fact.
> The only proof I can remember off the top of my head
> that supports a mostly Nandorin element
Ah, well let me supply some;
"The Silvan Elves (Tawarwaith) were in origin Teleri, and so remoter kin of
the Sindar, though even longer separated from them than the Teleri of
Valinor. They were descended from those of the Teleri who, on the Great
Journey, were daunted by the Misty Mountains and lingered in the Vale of
Anduin, and so never reached Beleriand or the Sea."
UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
"The Silvan Elves hid themselves in woodland fastnesses beyond the Misty
Mountains, and became small and scattered people, hardly to be distinguished
from Avari;
but they still remembered that they were in origin Eldar,
members of the Third Clan, and they welcomed those of the
Noldor and especially the Sindar who did not pass over the
Sea but migrated eastward..."
UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
"They are not counted among the Eldar, nor yet among the Avari. The
[Nandar>] Nandor who turn back they were called...
The Nandor are the host of Dan, the Wood-elves..."
MR, Later QS I Chapter 3, ~28 & ~30
Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
versions of the story, and now I have some of the context, but
I'm still unclear on some things. I don't have HoME V (yet!!),
so maybe some more of the context is there.
Conrad Dunkerson <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> In earlier versions of the story it is clear that there were 'Maiar' (aka
> 'sons of the Valar') with the Host. Later only Eonwe is mentioned. I
> suspect the intent was still that there were other Maiar there. Of the
> Valar nothing is said except that Manwe specifically was not there.
Well, yes, in the earlier versions Fionwe (the Eonwe
equivalent) is there with the "sons of the Gods", "sons of the
Valar" or "children of the Valar". However, it's not completely
clear to me that these are equivalent to the Maiar. Do you have
any context or quotations for that?
It seems that JRRT in the earlier conceptions thought of
there being the Gods/Valar, and then a bunch of more or less
vaguely-specified beings, such as Melian, who is described as a
"fay" IIRC. There are also the "sons of the Valar", chief among
whom is Fionwe, the son of the chief Vala Manwe. These are seen
as the ones that finally defeat Morgoth in the War of Wrath.
Now, one question is: Why did JRRT introduce these "sons
of the Valar" in this way? What is the point? I don't think
they come into the mythos anywhere significant except here. All
I can think is that he was thinking of real-world myth cycles in
which a new generation of gods kills some of the old gods, or
the demon opponents of the old gods. (We can get into
speculation about wish-fulfillment w.r.t. WWI... but that's a
bit off-topic.)
Later he seems to have disposed of the idea of the
"sons/children of the Gods/Valar", and regularized everything so
that there were just the Valar and the Maiar, for instance
making Melian into a Maia. However, I couldn't find the point
in HoME at which he did this. Even HoME XI seems to contain
references to the original phrases unemended. Perhaps JRRT
didn't do this; perhaps CT and GGK did it for the published
Silm. Are there any quotations to support it either way?
In any case, the idea of there being other supernatural
beings at the War of Wrath besides Eonwe and Elves seems to have
been a constant through most of the history. It seems to me
that the phrasing in the published Silm is just an artifact.
There isn't any denial that there were others besides Eonwe;
there isn't any explicit statement that there were, either; but
phrases carried over like "the host of the Valar" and "arrayed
in forms young and fair and terrible" do tend to suggest the
passages in Silm about the Ainur clothing themselves in shapes,
and they suggest (IMHO) that there were other Ainur there.
Now, in the latest version of the mythos, does it make
sense that only the Maiar were there? There was no parent/son
thing going on anymore, so there seems not to be any compelling
reason only the Maiar would have come. I guess I always
imagined Tulkas coming along, because of the reappearance of
Angainor and because I couldn't imagine Manwe holding him back
when other Ainur were going. I have to admit JRRT never
mentioned any Valar being there; OTOH, the "sons" concept
precluded the actual Valar being there, but that concept was
disposed of.
I guess the fundamental question is: what is the
equivalent, in the latest version of the mythos, of "Fionwe and
the sons of the Valar"? Is it Eonwe and some others of the
Maiar? Is it Eonwe and some other Ainur, including Maiar and
Valar? Or is it just Eonwe?
> That said, when winged dragons were unleashed the Host was driven back...
> until Earendil arrived and took down Ancalagon. So one half-elf in a flying
> boat did something the Host (whatever it was comprised of) could not. Thus
> it is not impossible that Elves did the damage which sunk Beleriand.
I agree with some others that Earendil was a special case,
because he was special even for an Elf in being in a flying
boat, because he had the Silmaril, and because the "forms" in
which the (fill in the blank) had "arrayed" themselves in didn't
happen to be flying forms. (Possibly because they didn't expect
so many flying opponents.)
> Actually, I think alot of the damage could be attributed to Morgoth's
> defeat. Tolkien wrote about how Morgoth disseminated his power into the
> physical materials from which Middle Earth was formed. When Morgoth was
> defeated the land which he had corrupted and controlled might be expected to
> crumble and fall apart as Barad-dur did when Sauron was defeated (and the
> Ring destroyed).
I don't think there was anything special about Beleriand in
that regard. All of Middle-earth was "Morgoth's Ring", so I
can't see his defeat affecting Beleriand more than the rest of
Middle-earth.
In one version that I scanned in HoME, the point at which
the ground shook the most and the land crumbled was when "Fionwe
and the sons of the Valar" went down into Utumno and wrestled
with Morgoth. So if Maiar =~ Sons of the Valar, then it could
be the Maiar that caused most of the damage.
McREsq
>
>>>- Killed off by Orcs in the East
>>>- Corrupted INTO Orcs
>>>- Killed off by Men in the East
>
>> Not according to Of the Rings of Power which says there
>> was peace in the eastlands for this time:
>
>"This time"? Many thousand years passed between the start of the Great March
>and the Third Age. Their population could have been depleted at various
>points throughout that timeframe.
The paragraph covers a broad swath of time:
""Elsewhere in Middle-earth there was peace in for many years; yet the lands
were for the most part savage and desolate, save only where the people of
Beleriand came. Many elves dwelt there indeed, as they had dwelt through the
countless years, wandering free in the wide lands far from the Sea; but they
were Avari, to whom the deeds of Beleriand were but a rumor and Valinor only a
distant name. And in the south and the further east Men multiplied; and most of
them turned to evil, for Sauron was at work."
>> The Nandor who remained east of the Blue Mountains would
>> have fared the same as the Avari so there no distinction
>> there.
>
>There is no reason to assume that. If they lived in different areas they
>would encounter different dangers and have different rates of population
>growth / decline.
We have no data on that. We do know, however, that the Nandor who did enter
Beleriand suffered grievously.
>> Couldn't have been that far because as the Of the Rings
>> of Power quote reveals, Men awoke to the east of the the
>> Avari.
>
>What of it? There are vast distances to the East of Greenwood and environs
>wherein Avari could have lived and Men still have awoken yet further East.
>> And the LOTR quote (in full below) that the East-elves
>> comprised the majority of the population of Mirkwood and
>> Lorien.
>
>And as we have discussed before LotR does not say that 'East-elves' were the
>Avari. The term 'East-elves' applied just as much to the Nandor.
Both the LOTR text and other contemporaneos writing show that East-elves means
Avari.
LOTR states:"The Elves far back in the Eldar Days became divided into two main
branches: the West-elves (the Eldar) and the East-elves. Of the latter kind
were most of the elven folk of Mirkwood and
Lorien..."
Unless you're going to argue that the two main branches elves were divivded
into were something other than Eldar (which the text equuates to West-elves)
and Avari, I'm not sure how you can consider the statement ambiguous.
The quote from the draft Tale of Years is also relevant: "750...Remnant of
the Telerin Elves (of Doriath in ancient Beleriand) establish realms in the
woodlands far eastward, but most of these peoples are Avari or East-elves."
The 1951 LQ1 texts states: ""But other of the Eldar there were who set out
indeed upon the Westward March, but became lost upon the long road, or turned
aside, or lingered on the shores of Middle-earth." (Morogth's Ring pg 163).
Thus Tolkien identified the Nandor as among the Eldar, and thus West-elves
The following quotes from PoME also establish this point:
And there is little doubt that at the time he wrote Appendix F, East-elves were
Avari (quote from the Appendicies section in PoMe):
pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The East-elves that being content
with Middle-earth remain there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward, but lingered on the shores
of Middle-earth until the return of the Noldor."
pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in the world; *and many
were
Eastern Elves that had hearkened to no summons to the Sea*, but being content
with Middle-earth remained there and remained long after, fading in the
fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men usurped the lands. Of that kind were
the Elves of Greenwood the Great."
The East-elves were the Avari.
>>> Now, a return question... given that the Nandor were
>>> specifically said to have settled in all the areas where
>>> Silvan elves (First OR Third Age variety) were found why
>>> would you suppose that those established populations
>>> were superceded by Avari immigrants? There is no record
>>> of such a mass migration that I am aware of.
>
>> How about LOTR:
>
>> "The Elves far back in the Eldar Days became divided into
>> two main branches: the West-elves (the Eldar) and the
>> East-elves. Of the latter kind were most of the elven folk
>> of Mirkwood and Lorien..."
>
>This does not address my question... it says nothing about a migration of
>Avari or the existing Nandor populations being overtaken.
Since East-elves are Avari, they must have migrated in order to make up most of
the populations of Mirkwood and Lorien.
>> Since Nandor were Eldar,
>
>Sometimes yes, sometimes no... in LotR no. As we have discussed before.
I disagree. As the contemporaneous writings quoted above show, the Nandor were
firmly considered Eldar when LOTR was written.
>> they fall into the West-elves category and thus that
>> leaves the Avari as comprising East-elves who were the
>> majority of the popualation of Mirkwood and Lorien.
>
>In LotR the Eldar were the Elves who reached Aman and the Sindar... and thus
>the Nandor were East-elves and the majority of the population of Mirkwood
>and Lorien. :)
That's not what LOTR said.
><snip references legitimately implying Avari dominance>
>
>> - "For in contrast, the Lindarin elements of the western
>> Avari were friendly to the Eldar, and willing to learn
>> from them; and so close was the feeling of kinship
>> between the remnants of the Sindar, the Nandor and the
>> Lindarin Avari, that later in Eriador and the Vale of
>> Anduin they often became merged together."
>> (WotJ, Quendi and Eldar, pg 381)
>
>We both agree that Nandor, Avari and Sindar became merged together. This
>does not speak of percentages of populations and thus is not particularly
>relevant.
Yeah, but you just snipped the quotes that shwo Avari *dominance*
>Note however that it says "of the WESTERN Avari"... implying that there are
>still Avari living off in the East. Negating your 'the Avari should still
>outnumber the Nandor' bit (even if we assume it is valid) because these
>excess Avari could well be in the East... leaving them a minority amongst
>the Silvans.
That there might be Avari further to the east of Greenwood in no way negates
the fact that the Avari were EAst-elves and this the dominant group comprising
the Silvans.
>> - "They were, it seems, filled with an inherited
>> bitterness against the Eldar, whom they regarded as
>> deserters of their kin, and in Beleriand, this feeling
>> was increased by envy..." (pp 377 and 409).
>
>Doesn't say they were Avari.
Of course it does.
>> - "For in many places the Avari became closer in
>> friendship with [the Dwarves] than the Amanyar or the
>> Sindar."
>
>Relevance? The Silvan elves were NOT particularly close in friendship with
>the Dwarves... rather the opposite in fact.
Maybein the Third Age, but that quote is referring to earlier times.
>> The only proof I can remember off the top of my head
>> that supports a mostly Nandorin element
>
>Ah, well let me supply some;
>
>"The Silvan Elves (Tawarwaith) were in origin Teleri, and so remoter kin of
>the Sindar, though even longer separated from them than the Teleri of
>Valinor. They were descended from those of the Teleri who, on the Great
>Journey, were daunted by the Misty Mountains and lingered in the Vale of
>Anduin, and so never reached Beleriand or the Sea."
>UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
>
>"The Silvan Elves hid themselves in woodland fastnesses beyond the Misty
>Mountains, and became small and scattered people, hardly to be distinguished
>from Avari;
>
> but they still remembered that they were in origin Eldar,
> members of the Third Clan, and they welcomed those of the
> Noldor and especially the Sindar who did not pass over the
> Sea but migrated eastward..."
>UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
Right, as I said the main evidence of your theory is the flawed text in UT.
>"They are not counted among the Eldar, nor yet among the Avari. The
>[Nandar>] Nandor who turn back they were called...
Yes, the Nandor's position moved around a bit but even your quote stands for
the fact that Eldar and Avari are the two main groupings and thus still
supports the idea the East-elves are Avari. Other LQ1 text places the Nandor
firmly as Eldar, as does the drafts of the appendicies. I quoted them above.
The Nandor werer never, ever, considered one of the two main groups of Elves so
it is impossible for them to be considreed the East-elves described in the LOTR
quote.
>The Nandor are the host of Dan, the Wood-elves..."
>MR, Later QS I Chapter 3, ~28 & ~30
As argued above, your position on the LOTR quote rests on a bad foundation.
The quote starts with the premise that there were two main groups of Elves. We
all know the two main group are Eldar and Avari but you make the argument that
Tolkien ignored this most basic concept and instead meant that the two main
groups of Elves were Eldar and Nandor.
There is significant contemporaneous writings that show Tolkien understood
East-elves to mean Avari, including draft Tale of Years, LQ1 and PoMe text
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> Both the LOTR text and other contemporaneos writing
> show that East-elves means Avari.
You are welcome to quote the text where LotR indicates that East-elves
are Avari. You have not done so. You have quoted the separation into
East and West elves and that the West-elves were equated with the Eldar.
You have not shown that Eldar includes all elves except the Avari...
because in LotR it does not. And your statement above is therefor
false.
<snip same quotations as last message - same response>
> The 1951 LQ1 texts states: ""But other of the Eldar there
> were who set out indeed upon the Westward March, but
> became lost upon the long road, or turned aside, or
> lingered on the shores of Middle-earth." (Morogth's
> Ring pg 163).
Which could refer simply to the Sindar.
> Thus Tolkien identified the Nandor as among the Eldar,
> and thus West-elves
In some places Tolkien defined 'Eldar' as including the Nandor. In some
places he defined 'Eldar' as excluding them.
> pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The
> East-elves that being content with Middle-earth remain
> there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
> kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward,
> but lingered on the shores of Middle-earth until the
> return of the Noldor."
The Teleri who lingered on the shores were the Falathrim or in a broader
sense the Sindar. Not the Nandor... who would thus be East-elves.
> pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in
> the world; *and many were Eastern Elves that had hearkened
> to no summons to the Sea*, but being content with
> Middle-earth remained there and remained long after,
> fading in the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men
> usurped the lands. Of that kind were the Elves of
> Greenwood the Great."
The Nandor who left the Great March and stayed in the East never reached
the sea.
> The East-elves were the Avari.
And the Nandor.
> I disagree. As the contemporaneous writings quoted
> above show, the Nandor were firmly considered Eldar
> when LOTR was written.
"Elves has been used to translate both Quendi 'the speakers', the
High-elven name of all their kind, and Eldar, the name of the Three
Kindreds that sought for the Undying Realm and came there at the
beginning of Days (save the Sindar only)."
LotR, Appendix F.II
The Sindar are the only non-Calaquendi Eldar. Ergo, the Nandor are not
Eldar. Ergo, the Nandor are not West-elves. Ergo, the Nandor are
East-elves. Per LotR.
> Yeah, but you just snipped the quotes that shwo
> Avari *dominance*
I had written;
"<snip references legitimately implying Avari dominance>"
Those references? It's not like I hid or ignored them. Yes, those
references make your point... and then there are the others I quoted
which directly contradict it.
>> Relevance? The Silvan elves were NOT particularly
>> close in friendship with the Dwarves... rather the
>> opposite in fact.
> Maybein the Third Age, but that quote is referring
> to earlier times.
Where is there any indication that the Silvan elves were EVER close in
friendship with the Dwarves?
> Right, as I said the main evidence of your theory is
> the flawed text in UT.
It being 'flawed' because it directly contradicts your view? :)
> As argued above, your position on the LOTR quote rests
> on a bad foundation. The quote starts with the premise
> that there were two main groups of Elves. We all know
> the two main group are Eldar and Avari
Funny... LotR says that they are the West-elves and the East-elves.
LotR equates 'West-elves' with 'Eldar'. It does NOT equate 'East-elves'
with 'Avari'.
> but you make the argument that Tolkien ignored this most
> basic concept and instead meant that the two main
> groups of Elves were Eldar and Nandor.
Given how many times we have been over this you HAVE to know that this
is a dishonest representation of my position. HAVE to. How many times
have I explained that per LotR West-elves = Eldar = Calaquendi + Sindar
while East-elves = Nandor + Avari?
I have NEVER argued that the East-elves were the Nandor alone and you
bloody well know it.
We agree that the Avari were East-elves. I disagree with your unfounded
(in LotR) claim that they were the ONLY East-elves.
McREsq
>> Both the LOTR text and other contemporaneos writing
>> show that East-elves means Avari.
>
>You are welcome to quote the text where LotR indicates that East-elves
>are Avari. You have not done so. You have quoted the separation into
>East and West elves and that the West-elves were equated with the Eldar.
>You have not shown that Eldar includes all elves except the Avari...
>because in LotR it does not. And your statement above is therefor
>false.
No, it's not. I never said the LOTR alone shows it. I said LOTR and other
contemporaneous texts show it.
><snip same quotations as last message - same response>
>
>> The 1951 LQ1 texts states: ""But other of the Eldar there
>> were who set out indeed upon the Westward March, but
>> became lost upon the long road, or turned aside, or
>> lingered on the shores of Middle-earth." (Morogth's
>> Ring pg 163).
>
>Which could refer simply to the Sindar.
Nope. The Sindar did not get lost or turn aside. The Nandor, however, did.
>> Thus Tolkien identified the Nandor as among the Eldar,
>> and thus West-elves
>
>In some places Tolkien defined 'Eldar' as including the Nandor. In some
>places he defined 'Eldar' as excluding them.
Tolkien most often included them among the Eldar. In some cases he said they
were neither Eldar nor Avari. He never equated them with the Avari.
>> pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The
>> East-elves that being content with Middle-earth remain
>> there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
>> kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward,
>> but lingered on the shores of Middle-earth until the
>> return of the Noldor."
>
>The Teleri who lingered on the shores were the Falathrim or in a broader
>sense the Sindar. Not the Nandor... who would thus be East-elves.
Except portions of the Nandor arrived in Beleriand before the arrival of the
Noldor.
Also, the description describes the East-elves as being content to remain in ME
even to 'today' (presumably the in-story time the text was written). However,
we know that once the desire for the Sea was awakened it could not be quenched.
>> pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in
>> the world; *and many were Eastern Elves that had hearkened
>> to no summons to the Sea*, but being content with
>> Middle-earth remained there and remained long after,
>> fading in the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men
>> usurped the lands. Of that kind were the Elves of
>> Greenwood the Great."
>
>The Nandor who left the Great March and stayed in the East never reached
>the sea.
Yet the *did* hearken to the summons to the Sea. Even if they did fall of the
Journey, that desire was always latent and could be revived.
>> The East-elves were the Avari.
>
>And the Nandor.
No textual proof.
>> I disagree. As the contemporaneous writings quoted
>> above show, the Nandor were firmly considered Eldar
>> when LOTR was written.
>
>"Elves has been used to translate both Quendi 'the speakers', the
>High-elven name of all their kind, and Eldar, the name of the Three
>Kindreds that sought for the Undying Realm and came there at the
>beginning of Days (save the Sindar only)."
>LotR, Appendix F.II
>
>The Sindar are the only non-Calaquendi Eldar. Ergo, the Nandor are not
>Eldar. Ergo, the Nandor are not West-elves. Ergo, the Nandor are
>East-elves. Per LotR.
No. As we both have stated, in several conceptions, Nandor were considered
neither Eldar nor Avari. Thus the Eldar being West-elves and the Avari being
East-elves is completely consistent with that quote above.
>> Yeah, but you just snipped the quotes that shwo
>> Avari *dominance*
>
>I had written;
>"<snip references legitimately implying Avari dominance>"
>
>Those references? It's not like I hid or ignored them.
I didn't say you did.
> Yes, those
>references make your point... and then there are the others I quoted
>which directly contradict it.
Primarily from one questionable source: the late etymological essay in UT.
>>> Relevance? The Silvan elves were NOT particularly
>>> close in friendship with the Dwarves... rather the
>>> opposite in fact.
>
>> Maybein the Third Age, but that quote is referring
>> to earlier times.
>
>Where is there any indication that the Silvan elves were EVER close in
>friendship with the Dwarves?
You mean besides the direct quote I provided? - "For in many places the Avari
became closer in friendship with [the Dwarves] than the Amanyar or the
Sindar."
So, in the face of that quote please provide contrary evidence. For example,
it appeared the Silvans qere quote friendly with Durin's folk of Khazad-dum
(before the Balrog, that is)
>> Right, as I said the main evidence of your theory is
>> the flawed text in UT.
>
>It being 'flawed' because it directly contradicts your view? :)
No, because CJRT describes it thusly:
"A word must be said of these 'historical-philological' essays...they were
composed on a typewriter. These texts are, very clearly, entirely ab initio;
they are not developments and refinements of earlier versions. The ideas, the
new narrative departures, historical formulations, and etymological
construction, here first appear in written form (which is not to say, of
course, that they were not long in the preparing), and in that form,
essentially, they remain. The texts are never obviously concluded, and often
end in chaotic and illegible or unintelligible notes and jottings. Some of the
writing was decidedly experimental..." POME pg 294.
That's your primary source.
>> As argued above, your position on the LOTR quote rests
>> on a bad foundation. The quote starts with the premise
>> that there were two main groups of Elves. We all know
>> the two main group are Eldar and Avari
>
>Funny... LotR says that they are the West-elves and the East-elves.
>LotR equates 'West-elves' with 'Eldar'. It does NOT equate 'East-elves'
>with 'Avari'.
Contemporaneous writings do.
>> but you make the argument that Tolkien ignored this most
>> basic concept and instead meant that the two main
>> groups of Elves were Eldar and Nandor.
>
>Given how many times we have been over this you HAVE to know that this
>is a dishonest representation of my position. HAVE to. How many times
>have I explained that per LotR West-elves = Eldar = Calaquendi + Sindar
>while East-elves = Nandor + Avari?
>
>I have NEVER argued that the East-elves were the Nandor alone and you
>bloody well know it.
Then you have yet to explain your position that the Nandor were the dominant
population of the Silvan elves. How could the small Nandorin population,
decimated in Beleriand become the dominant Elven population in Rhovanion and
Eriador?
>We agree that the Avari were East-elves. I disagree with your unfounded
>(in LotR) claim that they were the ONLY East-elves.
But that's not even the key disagreement. They key disagreement is the
dominant population of the Silvan elves.
Russ
Stan Brown
(to Mcresq)
>You have not shown that Eldar includes all elves except the Avari...
>because in LotR it does not.
Conrad, I now realize why I've always been confused about the
nomenclature of the kindreds of Elves in LotR.
Which Elves were neither Avari nor Eldar? Can you point me to the
section I ought to read to understand this better?
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen's site)
Tolkien letters FAQ:
http://users.telerama.com/~taliesen/tolkien/lettersfaq.html
FAQ of the Rings: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/ringfaq.htm
Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
more FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
The American
"Stan Brown" <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b8de8703...@news.odyssey.net...
> "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
> (to Mcresq)
> >You have not shown that Eldar includes all elves except the Avari...
> >because in LotR it does not.
>
> Conrad, I now realize why I've always been confused about the
> nomenclature of the kindreds of Elves in LotR.
>
> Which Elves were neither Avari nor Eldar? Can you point me to the
> section I ought to read to understand this better?
>
Yes. I thought I had a pretty good understanding of all of the groups of
Elves but after this thread I'm totally lost.
T.A.
McREsq
>Conrad, I now realize why I've always been confused about the
>nomenclature of the kindreds of Elves in LotR.
>
>Which Elves were neither Avari nor Eldar? Can you point me to the
>section I ought to read to understand this better?
The argument breaks down this way. LOTR, App F states that the Elves were
divided into two main groups: West-elves (Eldar) and East-elves. I have been
arguing that East-elves are Avari because Eldar and Avari were the two main
groupings.
Conrad argues that East-elves means Avari and Nandor.
The Nandor's place changed. At times they were firmly in the Eldar camp;
however there are references to them being neither Eldar nor Avari.
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> No, it's not. I never said the LOTR alone shows it. I
> said LOTR and other contemporaneous texts show it.
Ah. I thought you were saying;
'It is shown independantly both by LotR and by other contemporaneous
writings.'
The above suggests you actually meant;
'It is shown by LotR in conjunction with other contemporaneous
writings.'
That is... if we take definitions from contemporaneous writings and
apply them to things said in LotR we can get to the conclusion you draw.
That is true.
However, if we stick to definitions in LotR itself we cannot... and
indeed must draw the opposite conclusion.
> Nope. The Sindar did not get lost or turn aside.
Sure they did. They didn't go to Aman did they? Ergo, they turned
aside. Elwe got lost, as did many of those who went looking for him.
> The Nandor, however, did.
The Nandor did not 'linger on the shores of Middle-earth', as the
quotation also says.
> Tolkien most often included them among the Eldar.
I haven't done a count of all the references but I don't think it
particularly matters... we agree that the definition of 'Eldar' was not
constant. Ergo, I hold that a definition of 'Eldar' from one text
should not be applied to another text when that other text already HAS a
definition of Eldar contradictory to the one being 'imported'.
> In some cases he said they were neither Eldar nor Avari.
> He never equated them with the Avari.
Nor do I. I equate the Avari AND Nandor with 'East-elves'.
> Except portions of the Nandor arrived in Beleriand
> before the arrival of the Noldor.
True, though they weren't exactly lingering near the shores even then.
> Also, the description describes the East-elves as
> being content to remain in ME even to 'today' (presumably
> the in-story time the text was written). However,
> we know that once the desire for the Sea was awakened it
> could not be quenched.
Which wasn't a problem if it was never awakened... as was apparently
commonplace for the majority of them for millenia.
> No. As we both have stated, in several conceptions,
> Nandor were considered neither Eldar nor Avari.
But you yourself were just arguing that the Nandor must be either
'East-elves' or 'West-elves'. The quotation certainly seems to imply
that all the elves were split between those two main groups. If the
Nandor were not Eldar/West-elves then they must be East-elves.
> Primarily from one questionable source: the late
> etymological essay in UT.
Two sources. Just as relevant is;
"The Nandor are the host of Dan, the Wood-elves..."
MR, Later QS I Chapter 3, ~30
>> Where is there any indication that the Silvan elves
>> were EVER close in friendship with the Dwarves?
> You mean besides the direct quote I provided? -
> "For in many places the Avari became closer in
> friendship with [the Dwarves] than the Amanyar or the
> Sindar."
The direct quote you provided which says absolutely nothing about Silvan
elves? Yes... something other than that would be good.
There are several instances of Silvan elves NOT getting along with
Dwarves. Which, combined with the quotation above, would tend to be
another minor evidence >against< the Silvan elves being largely Avari.
Avari got along with Dwarves... Silvans did not.
> So, in the face of that quote please provide contrary
> evidence.
"So to the cave they dragged Thorin - not too gently, for they did not
love dwarves, and thought he was an enemy. In ancient days they had had
wars with some of the dwarves, whom they accused of stealing their
treasure."
TH, Flies and Spiders
Haldir's reaction to Gimli. The Nandor helping Beren to wipe out the
Dwarves who killed Thingol. Numerous statements that Elf-Dwarf
relations were just generally strained with few exceptions.
> For example, it appeared the Silvans qere quote friendly
> with Durin's folk of Khazad-dum (before the Balrog,
> that is)
Cite?
>> It being 'flawed' because it directly contradicts
>> your view? :)
> No, because CJRT describes it thusly:
> "A word must be said of these 'historical-philological'
> essays...they were composed on a typewriter. These texts
> are, very clearly, entirely ab initio; they are not
> developments and refinements of earlier versions. The
> ideas, the new narrative departures, historical
> formulations, and etymological construction, here first
> appear in written form (which is not to say, of
> course, that they were not long in the preparing), and
> in that form, essentially, they remain. The texts are
> never obviously concluded, and often end in chaotic and
> illegible or unintelligible notes and jottings. Some of
> the writing was decidedly experimental..." POME pg 294.
Setting aside that CT does not there say that these texts are 'flawed'
or anything more like it than that they were "experimental"... he is not
in fact referring specifically to the UT texts, but rather to all such
'historical-philological' writings JRRT had written around 1968-70.
Especially the three he was presenting there in PoME; Of Dwarves and
Men, Problem of Ros, and Shibboleth of Feanor. So if the UT text is
"flawed" based on what CT says above then so is Shibboleth. Which I
don't think you are going to argue. So can we drop the 'texts which
directly contradict my position are to be excluded' dance?
It should be noted that CT also said, "It was also a time when my father
was moved to write extensively, in a more generalized view, of the
languages and peoples of the Third Age and their interrelations, closely
interwoven with discussion of the etymology of names."
PoME, pg 293
Precisely the issues we are debating here.
> That's your primary source.
One of the two.
> Then you have yet to explain your position that the
> Nandor were the dominant population of the Silvan elves.
Also untrue... I have explained many times that I reach that conclusion
because;
A: Tolkien clearly said they were in at least two instances.
B: The Nandor were ALWAYS 'Silvan elves'. The Avari were not.
C: Every single place the Silvan elves were found was said to have been
settled by the Nandor. No mention is EVER made of the Avari displacing
Nandor populations.
> How could the small Nandorin population, decimated in
> Beleriand become the dominant Elven population
What do you mean BECOME? Even you have previously admitted that they
BEGAN as the dominant Elven population in the region. After the Nandor
split off from the Great March the Avari were in the East and the rest
of the Elves in the West... the Nandor were the ONLY Elves near the
Misty Mountains, and thus the 'dominant' population there.
No 'becoming dominant' required. Just REMAINING so.
Why should the 'decimated Nandor of Beleriand', as you put it, be
considered the only Nandorin component of the Third Age Silvan Elves?
There were OTHER Nandor >outside< Beleriand after all... and they just
happened to live in precisely the same area as the Silvan elves were
later found.
> in Rhovanion and Eriador?
Where do you get this? Tolkien's statement from LotR which we have been
debating spoke of the elven populations in Mirkwood and Lorien.
If anything I'd say that Eldar (Noldor and Sindar) were probably
dominant in Eriador in the Second Age. By the time of LotR their
numbers had dwindled and there might well have been more Silvan elves
(of whatever ancestry) in the region than other kinds, but I can't think
of a direct statement to that effect.
My argument has been in regards to the ancestry of the Silvan elves in
general... not those particular geographic regions. If we want to break
it down in detail;
Silvan Elves of Beleriand = Nandor with few exceptions
Original Silvan Elves of Rhovanion = Nandor (100%)
Third Age Silvan Elves = Nandor + Avari + Sindar + Noldor
This last in that 'order of precedence' in my view. Various elves from
Beleriand to the West and the Avari to the East merging with the
existing Nandor Silvan population. The Nandorin, aka 'Silvan', culture
being maintained as other elves joined them.
Conrad Dunkerson
news:MPG.1b8de8703...@news.odyssey.net...
> Which Elves were neither Avari nor Eldar?
> Can you point me to the section I ought to read to
> understand this better?
The problem is that it isn't consistent throughout the texts. Looking
solely at LotR... the 'Avari' and the 'Nandor' do not appear. Neither
name is mentioned in LotR. Nor do 'Vanyar' or 'Teleri'. Yet there ARE
references to 'the Three Kindreds of the Eldar', the Eldar being the
elves of Aman and the Sindar, and there being 'East-elves' and 'lesser
kindreds' who were not Eldar... thus describing all of those un-named
groups.
The best source for all of this is Appendix F. Various relevant
passages;
"Elves has been used to translate both Quendi, 'the speakers', the
High-elven name of all their kind, and Eldar, the name of the Three
Kindreds that sought for the Undying Realm and came there at the
beginning of Days (save the Sindar only)."
Quendi = All Elves
Eldar = Three Kindreds of Undying Realm + Sindar
"The Elves far back in the Elder Days became divided into two main
branches: the West-elves (the Eldar) and the East-elves."
West-elves = Eldar = Elves of Aman + Sindar
East-elves = Non Eldar
"Of the Eldarin tongues two are found in this book: the High-elven or
Quenya and the Grey-elven or Sindarin. The High-elven was an ancient
tongue of Eldamar beyond the Sea, the first to be recorded in writing.
It was no longer a birth-tongue, but had become, as it were, an
'Elven-latin', still used for ceremony, and for high matters of lore and
song, by the High Elves, who had returned in exile to Middle-earth at
the end of the First Age."
Grey-elves = Sindar
High Elves = Elves of Aman who returned to Middle-earth
A possibly contradictory definition of High Elves can be found in
Appendix B, 'The Second Age';
"In the beginning of this age many of the High Elves still remained.
Most of these dwelt in Lindon west of the Ered Luin; but before the
building of the Barad-dur many of the Sindar passed eastward, and some
established realms in the forests far away, where their people were
mostly Silvan Elves."
This seems to include the Sindar amongst the High Elves... effectively
making 'High Elves' synonymous with 'Eldar' and 'West-elves' (unless we
take High Elves to be a Middle-earth specific term and thus exclude the
'Vanyar' and 'Teleri' of Aman)... but the previous quotation would seem
to differentiate between the Sindar and the High Elves.
"The Exiles, dwelling among the more numerous Grey-elves, had adopted
the Sindarin for daily use; and hence it was a tongue of all those Elves
and Elf-lords that appear in this history. For these were all of
Eldarin race, even where the folk that they ruled were of the lesser
kindreds."
There were lesser kindreds (note the plural) of Elves than the Eldar /
West-elves. Outside LotR the groups which do not fit the definition of
Eldar given above are the Avari and the Nandor. Neither is specifically
named or described in LotR, but those are the logical "lesser kindreds"
mentioned here.
An additional classification can be found in Appendix E.II;
"The Tengwar were the more ancient; for they had been developed by the
Noldor, the kindred of the Eldar most skilled in such matters, long
before their exile."
This confirms the LotR-external info about the Noldor being the
Eldar/High Elves who returned to Middle-earth.
Offhand I can't think of any other definitions of 'elven groups' beyond
confirmations of the above.
The definitions of 'High Elves' and 'East-elves' are the usual subjects
of debate because of the limitations of the available evidence as
outlined above.
Conrad Dunkerson
> The argument breaks down this way. LOTR, App F states
> that the Elves were divided into two main groups:
> West-elves (Eldar) and East-elves. I have been
> arguing that East-elves are Avari because Eldar and
> Avari were the two main groupings.
Not Calaquendi & Moriquendi?
> Conrad argues that East-elves means Avari and Nandor.
West-elves = Calaquendi
East-elves = Moriquendi
> The Nandor's place changed. At times they were firmly
> in the Eldar camp; however there are references to them
> being neither Eldar nor Avari.
True, but they (and the Avari) were always Moriquendi.
McREsq
<snip>
>> Nope. The Sindar did not get lost or turn aside.
>
>Sure they did. They didn't go to Aman did they? Ergo, they turned
>aside. Elwe got lost, as did many of those who went looking for him.
>
>> The Nandor, however, did.
>
>The Nandor did not 'linger on the shores of Middle-earth', as the
>quotation also says.
Let's look at the quote again: "But other of the Eldar there were who set out
indeed upon the Westward March, but became lost upon the long road, or turned
aside, or lingered on the shores of Middle-earth." (Morgoth's Ring pg 163).
Notice the word "or". Some Eldar started on the march and became lost, others
turned aside, and others lingered on the shores. The Nandor comprise the first
two and the Sindar the last.
>> Tolkien most often included them among the Eldar.
>
>I haven't done a count of all the references but I don't think it
>particularly matters... we agree that the definition of 'Eldar' was not
>constant. Ergo, I hold that a definition of 'Eldar' from one text
>should not be applied to another text when that other text already HAS a
>definition of Eldar contradictory to the one being 'imported'.
Perhaps, but these quotes come from LOTR drafts:
Draft Second Age Tale of Years: ""750...Remnant of the Telerin Elves (of
Doriath in ancient Beleriand) establish realms in the
woodlands far eastward, but most of these peoples are Avari or East-elves."
PoME pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The East-elves that being
content with Middle-earth remain there, and remain there even now; and the
Teleri,
kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward, but lingered on the shores
of Middle-earth until the return of the Noldor."
PoME pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in the world; *and
many
were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to no summons to the Sea*, but being
content with Middle-earth remained there and remained long after, fading in the
fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men usurped the lands. Of that kind were
the Elves of Greenwood the Great."
The Nandor *did* ultimately hearken to the summons of the Sea.
>> In some cases he said they were neither Eldar nor Avari.
>> He never equated them with the Avari.
>
>Nor do I. I equate the Avari AND Nandor with 'East-elves'.
>
>> Except portions of the Nandor arrived in Beleriand
>> before the arrival of the Noldor.
>
>True, though they weren't exactly lingering near the shores even then.
Right, because that describes the Sindar.
<snip>
>> No. As we both have stated, in several conceptions,
>> Nandor were considered neither Eldar nor Avari.
>
>But you yourself were just arguing that the Nandor must be either
>'East-elves' or 'West-elves'. The quotation certainly seems to imply
>that all the elves were split between those two main groups. If the
>Nandor were not Eldar/West-elves then they must be East-elves.
The LOTR quote speaks of the two *main* branches. Thus since we know there are
conceptions where the Nandor were neither Avari nor Eldar, this language is
consistent: there were two main branches, Eldar and Avari, and a minor branch,
the Nandor not fitting entirely either of the two main branches.
>> Primarily from one questionable source: the late
>> etymological essay in UT.
>
>Two sources. Just as relevant is;
>
>"The Nandor are the host of Dan, the Wood-elves..."
>MR, Later QS I Chapter 3, ~30
I don't think that quote establishes your point.
>>> Where is there any indication that the Silvan elves
>>> were EVER close in friendship with the Dwarves?
>
>> You mean besides the direct quote I provided? -
>> "For in many places the Avari became closer in
>> friendship with [the Dwarves] than the Amanyar or the
>> Sindar."
>
>The direct quote you provided which says absolutely nothing about Silvan
>elves? Yes... something other than that would be good.
Look closely at the quote: it speaks of the Avari being friendlier with
dwarves than with Amanyar (Noldor) and Sindar. Meaning it is speaking of a
time when all were living in relative proximity to eachother. This could only
refer to Second Age Eriador and Rhovanion.
>There are several instances of Silvan elves NOT getting along with
>Dwarves.
Well, yes, but these occur when they fell under Sindarin lordship.
Which, combined with the quotation above, would tend to be
>another minor evidence >against< the Silvan elves being largely Avari.
>Avari got along with Dwarves... Silvans did not.
Yes, there was estrangement at the end of the Third Age, but that quote is
referring to an earlier period.
>> So, in the face of that quote please provide contrary
>> evidence.
>
>"So to the cave they dragged Thorin - not too gently, for they did not
>love dwarves, and thought he was an enemy. In ancient days they had had
>wars with some of the dwarves, whom they accused of stealing their
>treasure."
>TH, Flies and Spiders
Obviously that is talking of the sacking of Doriath and Thranduil was a Sinda.
>Haldir's reaction to Gimli.
Again, that is Third Age nonsense. Celeborn explained they blamed the dwarves
for unleashing the evil in Khazad-dum
> The Nandor helping Beren to wipe out the Dwarves who killed Thingol.
Or not. Tolkien decided on Ents. But even so, this is a First Age Beleriandic
event. The Laiquendi were a lost race.
Numerous statements that Elf-Dwarf
>relations were just generally strained with few exceptions.
Right, they were strained the the Eldar. They were not strained with the
Avari.
>> For example, it appeared the Silvans qere quote friendly
>> with Durin's folk of Khazad-dum (before the Balrog,
>> that is)
>
>Cite?
How about the Silvan army passing through Khazad-dum to help fight Sauron's
army in Eriador during the War of the Elves and Sauron? Allowing an army to
pass through one's realm is pretty friendly.
>>> It being 'flawed' because it directly contradicts
>>> your view? :)
>
>> No, because CJRT describes it thusly:
>
>> "A word must be said of these 'historical-philological'
>> essays...they were composed on a typewriter. These texts
>> are, very clearly, entirely ab initio; they are not
>> developments and refinements of earlier versions. The
>> ideas, the new narrative departures, historical
>> formulations, and etymological construction, here first
>> appear in written form (which is not to say, of
>> course, that they were not long in the preparing), and
>> in that form, essentially, they remain. The texts are
>> never obviously concluded, and often end in chaotic and
>> illegible or unintelligible notes and jottings. Some of
>> the writing was decidedly experimental..." POME pg 294.
>
>Setting aside that CT does not there say that these texts are 'flawed'
>or anything more like it than that they were "experimental"... he is not
>in fact referring specifically to the UT texts, but rather to all such
>'historical-philological' writings JRRT had written around 1968-70.
>Especially the three he was presenting there in PoME; Of Dwarves and
>Men, Problem of Ros, and Shibboleth of Feanor. So if the UT text is
>"flawed" based on what CT says above then so is Shibboleth. Which I
>don't think you are going to argue. So can we drop the 'texts which
>directly contradict my position are to be excluded' dance?
No, it depends on the point being proven. You're using this questionable text
as your primary source for the idea that the Nandor are Silvans. These UT
texts you cite contradict your own position. The UT cites say the Silvans are
*exclusively * Nandor. Even you agree that Avari comprised a significant chunk
of the Silvans.
<snip>
>> Then you have yet to explain your position that the
>> Nandor were the dominant population of the Silvan elves.
>
>Also untrue... I have explained many times that I reach that conclusion
>because;
>
>A: Tolkien clearly said they were in at least two instances.
Only clearly in one.
>B: The Nandor were ALWAYS 'Silvan elves'. The Avari were not.
>
>C: Every single place the Silvan elves were found was said to have been
>settled by the Nandor. No mention is EVER made of the Avari displacing
>Nandor populations.
Who said displace? The Avari simply moved in in greater numbers and merged
with the Nandor to become the Silvan race.
>> How could the small Nandorin population, decimated in
>> Beleriand become the dominant Elven population
>
>What do you mean BECOME? Even you have previously admitted that they
>BEGAN as the dominant Elven population in the region. After the Nandor
>split off from the Great March the Avari were in the East and the rest
>of the Elves in the West... the Nandor were the ONLY Elves near the
>Misty Mountains, and thus the 'dominant' population there.
Only until the Avari too moved West. Since they were much greater in number
they became the dominant partner in the Silvan fusion.
>No 'becoming dominant' required. Just REMAINING so.
>
>Why should the 'decimated Nandor of Beleriand', as you put it, be
>considered the only Nandorin component of the Third Age Silvan Elves?
>There were OTHER Nandor >outside< Beleriand after all... and they just
>happened to live in precisely the same area as the Silvan elves were
>later found.
Yes, but they were a small people. Only 8/144 to begin, then some of their
number entered Beleriand and were massacred (in the First Battle and later the
Laiquendi were lost). Thus whatever Nandor remained in relative safety in
Eriador and the Vale of Anduin were a comparitavely tiny population. It would
not take much for the Avari migration wet to overwhelm the small Nandorin
remnant in this area.
>> in Rhovanion and Eriador?
>
>Where do you get this? Tolkien's statement from LotR which we have been
>debating spoke of the elven populations in Mirkwood and Lorien.
The LOTR texts refer to this because they are speaking of the Third Age. by
which time the Silvans were only to be found in Rhovanion (specifically
Mirkwood and Lorien). However there once was a great Silan population in
Eriador that was decimated in the War of the Elves and Sauron in the Second
Age.
>If anything I'd say that Eldar (Noldor and Sindar) were probably
>dominant in Eriador in the Second Age.
I disagree. There would have been a large Silvan population in Eriador until
the War of Elves and Sauron.
> By the time of LotR their
>numbers had dwindled and there might well have been more Silvan elves
>(of whatever ancestry) in the region than other kinds, but I can't think
>of a direct statement to that effect.
>
>My argument has been in regards to the ancestry of the Silvan elves in
>general... not those particular geographic regions. If we want to break
>it down in detail;
>
>Silvan Elves of Beleriand = Nandor with few exceptions
I disagree. There were no Silvan Elves in Beleriand. There were Nandor (Dan's
people) and Laiquendi (who were Nandor themselves). The Silvans were the
fusion of Avari and Nandor that occurred in Eriador and Rhovanion. If there
were any Silvans in Beleriand they would have been only a few later arrivals.
>Original Silvan Elves of Rhovanion = Nandor (100%)
No, the Avari arrived much earlier. Heck, the Avari arrived in Beleriand in
the First Age so would have been well ensconsed in Rhovanion much earlier. It
was the Avari migration to Rhovanion and Eriador that when fused with the
Nandor produced the Silvan race.
>Third Age Silvan Elves = Nandor + Avari + Sindar + Noldor
>
>This last in that 'order of precedence' in my view. Various elves from
>Beleriand to the West and the Avari to the East merging with the
>existing Nandor Silvan population. The Nandorin, aka 'Silvan', culture
>being maintained as other elves joined them.
This is how I see it.
1)Separation
2)Avari stay behind in East
3)Nandor stop at Hithaeglir and settle in Vale of Anduin
4)Some Nandor migrate around Misty's and settle in Eriador.
5)Some Nandor continue on into Beleriand (there are the people of Dan and the
Laiquendi)
6) At some point Avari pick of stakes and migrate West. Avari migration might
have been reason why some Nandor migrated into Eriador in Item 4 above.
7) Avari migration continues into Eriador and even a few make it to Beleriand.
8) The fusion of Avari and Nandor in Rhovanion and Eriador create the Silvan
culture which thrives in relative peace during Melkor's imprisonment and the
Wars of Beleriand
9) War of Wrath. Noldorin and Sindarin refugees arrive in Eriador. Some Sindar
'go native' and join the Silvan realms, ruling them in some cases.
10) War of Elves and Sauron: Silvan population in Eriador decimated. Silvan
realms in Rhovanion continue on through Third Age.
Russ
Shanahan
> "Stan Brown" <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote...
>> "Conrad Dunkerson" <conrad.d...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
>> rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>> (to Mcresq)
>>> You have not shown that Eldar includes all elves except the
>>> Avari... because in LotR it does not.
>>
>> Conrad, I now realize why I've always been confused about the
>> nomenclature of the kindreds of Elves in LotR.
>>
>> Which Elves were neither Avari nor Eldar? Can you point me to
>> the section I ought to read to understand this better?
>>
>
> Yes. I thought I had a pretty good understanding of all of the
> groups of Elves but after this thread I'm totally lost.
Yah, me too. As far as I can tell, there are two problems:
a) overlapping nomenclatures of Tolkien's origin;
b) Tolkien changing his mind/refining his concepts. ;)
I decided a while ago to just accept the diagram at the end of _The
Silmarillion_ <ducks and covers> as it lays out the nomenclatures
pretty clearly. No doubt, when you've been around here a long
time and have figured out everything else there is to be figured
out, then you start delving into these matters. <g> I just
haven't gotten to that point yet.
Ciaran S.
--
On seeing 'Hamlet' acted in live theatre:
"Could one only have seen it without ever having
read it or knowing the plot, it would have been terrific."
-JRRT, Letter #76
McREsq
>"McREsq" <mcr...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20040819145120...@mb-m11.aol.com...
>
>> The argument breaks down this way. LOTR, App F states
>> that the Elves were divided into two main groups:
>> West-elves (Eldar) and East-elves. I have been
>> arguing that East-elves are Avari because Eldar and
>> Avari were the two main groupings.
>
>Not Calaquendi & Moriquendi?
No. The Separation of the Eldar and Avari is the main distinction. The
Calaquendi/moriquendi distinctions doesn't satisfy for two reasons. First, it
was a distinction only cared about by the High Elves. The Sindar ignored it.
Secondly, it does not fir the West-elves/East-elves divide because the Sindar
were West-elves but Moriquendi.
>> Conrad argues that East-elves means Avari and Nandor.
>
>West-elves = Calaquendi
>East-elves = Moriquendi
Uh, Sindar are Moriquendi.
>> The Nandor's place changed. At times they were firmly
>> in the Eldar camp; however there are references to them
>> being neither Eldar nor Avari.
>
>True, but they (and the Avari) were always Moriquendi.
But the Sindar (save Thingol) were never.
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
>Conrad wrote;
> Notice the word "or". Some Eldar started on the march
> and became lost, others turned aside, and others lingered
> on the shores. The Nandor comprise the first two and
> the Sindar the last.
The first two things are true of the Nandor. All three are true of the
Sindar.
> Draft Second Age Tale of Years: ""750...Remnant of the
> Telerin Elves (of Doriath in ancient Beleriand) establish
> realms in the woodlands far eastward, but most of these
> peoples are Avari or East-elves."
A: While I agree that this is probably meant to equate 'Avari' and
'East-elves' it could also be describing two >different<
classifications... 'either Avari OR East-elves' rather than 'Avari, also
called East-elves'.
B: This text was removed in the published version of the chronology. A
similar statement (without reference to Avari) appears in the
descriptive paragraph prior to the timeline;
"...but before the building of the Barad-dur many of the Sindar passed
eastward, and some established realms in the forest far away, where
their people were mostly Silvan Elves."
C: Note that this also uses 'Telerin Elves' rather than 'Sindar'... the
prior term appears quite a bit in the drafts, but was completely excised
in the published form. Tolkien was changing the terminology he wanted
to present.
> PoME pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The
> East-elves that being content with Middle-earth remain
> there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
> kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward, but
> lingered on the shores of Middle-earth until the return
> of the Noldor."
This speaks of the Sindar (here, as above, called 'Teleri') and the
East-elves... but does not define who these East-elves were except that
they were not exiled Noldor or Sindar/Teleri.
> PoME pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds
> in the world; *and many were Eastern Elves that had
> hearkened to no summons to the Sea*, but being content
> with Middle-earth remained there and remained long after,
> fading in the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men
> usurped the lands. Of that kind were the Elves of
> Greenwood the Great."
> The Nandor *did* ultimately hearken to the summons of
> the Sea.
The Nandor *originally* hearkened to the summons... *ultimately* they
did not.
> The LOTR quote speaks of the two *main* branches.
Technically it speaks of the Elves becoming divided into two main
branches. Not some of the elves. All of the elves. There were then
sub-branches of those two main branches, but all elves fell into one or
the other.
As you yourself were arguing in this very discussion until the Nandor
were excluded from the 'West-elves' branch.
>> "The Nandor are the host of Dan, the Wood-elves..."
>> MR, Later QS I Chapter 3, ~30
> I don't think that quote establishes your point.
Why? It clearly says that the Nandor were the Wood-elves. Silvan elves
is clearly synonymous with Wood-elves (as you have previously stated
yourself). It establishes my point by directly stating it.
That said... hey, why not a few more?
"The Silvan Elves were Middle Elves according to the Numenorean
classification, though unknown to the Atani until later days: for they
were like the Sindar Teleri, but were laggards in the hindmost companies
who had never crossed the Misty Mountains and established small realms
on either side of the Vales of Anduin. (Of these Lorien and the realm
of Thranduil in Mirkwood were survivors in the Third Age)."
PoME, Of Dwarves and Men
"Silvan Elves Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
Mountains but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
Great."
UT, Index
"Silvan Elves Also called Woodland Elves. They appear to have been in
origin those Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
Mountains, but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
Great"
Silm, Index
>> The direct quote you provided which says absolutely
>> nothing about Silvan elves?
> Look closely at the quote: it speaks of the Avari being
> friendlier with dwarves than with Amanyar (Noldor) and
> Sindar.
I'm still not seeing any relevance to the SILVAN elves.
> Meaning it is speaking of a time when all were living
> in relative proximity to eachother. This could only
> refer to Second Age Eriador and Rhovanion.
It is impossible to be closer in friendship with people you come in
contact with (Dwarves) than people you don't (Noldor and Sindar)?
Doesn't seem logical to me, but let's suppose it was... ok, there were
Avari who came into contact with Noldor and Sindar. That still says
nothing about the Silvan elves. Avari could come into contact with
elves from Eriador (not many Noldor made it to Rhovanion) without
themselves being the primary elven group in the region.
>> There are several instances of Silvan elves NOT getting
>> along with Dwarves.
> Well, yes, but these occur when they fell under
> Sindarin lordship.
Not true. The Laiquendi fought the Dwarves in Beleriand. The Silvan
elves in The Hobbit were said to have fought wars with the Dwarves in
ancient days (prior to their being under Sindarin lordship).
> Yes, there was estrangement at the end of the Third
> Age, but that quote is referring to an earlier period.
Above you say it could only be in reference to the Second Age... but
there were still Noldor and Sindar around in the Third Age. Why
COULDN'T that be the time period in question?
Yet going back and looking up your original quotation I find that it is
>neither<;
"He [Eol] had great smith-craft ... and many therefore believed that he
used the morgul, the black arts taught by Morgoth. The Noldor
themselves had indeed learned much from Morgoth in the days of his
captivity in Valinor; but it is more likely that Eol was acquainted with
the Dwarves, for in many places the Avari became closer in friendship
with that people than the Amanyar or the Sindar."
WotJ, Quendi and Eldar (409)
It is therefore a FIRST age reference. It might be applied more
generally, but it cannot then exclude the Third Age.
>> "So to the cave they dragged Thorin - not too gently,
>> for they did not love dwarves, and thought he was an
>> enemy. In ancient days they had had wars with some of
>> the dwarves, whom they accused of stealing their
>> treasure."
>> TH, Flies and Spiders
> Obviously that is talking of the sacking of Doriath and
> Thranduil was a Sinda.
The sacking of Doriath was "wars"? That incident was likely included,
but it was not the only cause of grievance.
> Again, that is Third Age nonsense. Celeborn explained
> they blamed the dwarves for unleashing the evil in
> Khazad-dum
Silvan elves not getting along with Dwarves. The age doesn't matter.
>> The Nandor helping Beren to wipe out the Dwarves
>> who killed Thingol.
> Or not. Tolkien decided on Ents.
Doesn't change the view of Silvan - Dwarven conflict.
> But even so, this is a First Age Beleriandic event.
As was the original reference.
> Right, they were strained the the Eldar. They were
> not strained with the Avari.
Actually there are references to Dwarf - Avari wars too. :)
If anything the Noldor are the only elven group who ever DID get along
with the Dwarves... the Eol quotation just says that some Avari got
along better with Dwarves than they did with Eldar - which isn't saying
much.
> How about the Silvan army passing through Khazad-dum
> to help fight Sauron's army in Eriador during the War
> of the Elves and Sauron? Allowing an army to pass
> through one's realm is pretty friendly.
The Dwarves fought beside the Noldor and Sindar in the first age. That
didn't make them best buddies. Likewise they aided the Elves of
Mirkwood in the Battle of Five Armies despite having been on the verge
of blows themselves just beforehand. They cooperated against common
>evil< enemies, but that didn't mean they liked each other.
> No, it depends on the point being proven.
So it is not (as you have been claiming) the essays which are 'flawed' -
just the specific points where they disagree with you.
> You're using this questionable text as your primary
> source for the idea that the Nandor are Silvans.
Again, that is not true. It is one of several texts directly stating
that conclusion. In addition to those texts I have noted the obvious
historical and geographic connections between the Nandor and Silvan
elves.
> These UT texts you cite contradict your own position.
> The UT cites say the Silvans are *exclusively * Nandor.
> Even you agree that Avari comprised a significant chunk
> of the Silvans.
They could not be generalizing? Or maybe I'm wrong and the Avari were a
very small proportion. :)
At that, the few texts which identify these elves as Avari ALSO speak of
them being ONLY Avari... in contradiction of >your< view. :)
I think it likely that Tolkien was speaking in generalities. We know
that some of the Silvan elves were Sindar and Noldor, but Tolkien does
not say that every time he describes their origins. Ditto for the
Nandor/Avari split (whichever way it went).
>> A: Tolkien clearly said they were in at least
>> two instances.
> Only clearly in one.
At least three. Possibly four or five. So far.
>> C: Every single place the Silvan elves were found was
>> said to have been settled by the Nandor. No mention
>> is EVER made of the Avari displacing Nandor populations.
> Who said displace? The Avari simply moved in in greater
> numbers and merged with the Nandor
Ok... no mention is ever made of the Avari doing THAT. There are
references to the different elven kinds being merged together, but no
such 'great migration of Avari'.
> to become the Silvan race.
Except that the Nandor were ALREADY the Silvan race.
> Only until the Avari too moved West. Since they were
> much greater in number they became the dominant partner
> in the Silvan fusion.
Assuming that ALL of the Avari moved west to that region... and that the
Avari had remained more numerous than the Nandor after many long
millenia. Neither of which appears in the texts.
> Yes, but they were a small people. Only 8/144 to
> begin, then some of their number entered Beleriand and
> were massacred (in the First Battle and later the
> Laiquendi were lost). Thus whatever Nandor remained
> in relative safety in Eriador and the Vale of Anduin
> were a comparitavely tiny population.
Which would have grown given that relative safety.
>> If anything I'd say that Eldar (Noldor and Sindar) were
>> probably dominant in Eriador in the Second Age.
> I disagree. There would have been a large Silvan
> population in Eriador until the War of Elves and Sauron.
There was a large Eldar population in Eriador until then too.
> 1)Separation
> 2)Avari stay behind in East
> 3)Nandor stop at Hithaeglir and settle in Vale of Anduin
> 4)Some Nandor migrate around Misty's and settle
> in Eriador.
> 5)Some Nandor continue on into Beleriand (there are
> the people of Dan and the Laiquendi)
We agree up to here except that I term all of the Nandor above 'Silvan
Elves'.
"The Gladden Fields (Loeg Ningloron). In the Elder Days, when the
Silvan Elves first settled there, they were a lake formed in a deep
depression..."
UT, Disaster of the Gladden Fields (note 13)
Your list above puts the elves who first settled the area near the
Gladden Fields as Nandor. This text names them Silvan.
> 6) At some point Avari pick of stakes and migrate West.
> Avari migration might have been reason why some Nandor
> migrated into Eriador in Item 4 above.
> 7) Avari migration continues into Eriador and even a
> few make it to Beleriand.
Again, we agree here except on a matter of scale. How do we know that
more than a few Avari made it into Rhovanion and Eriador? That a few
reached Beleriand does not mean that substantially more were to be found
in the lands east of there. This is the weakest point of your
argument... there is NO record of large numbers of Avari entering the
region. You assume that this must have happened to result in the Avari
dominance you posit.
> 8) The fusion of Avari and Nandor in Rhovanion and
> Eriador create the Silvan culture which thrives in
> relative peace during Melkor's imprisonment and the
> Wars of Beleriand
As above, I believe that the Silvan culture already existed and was
being joined by Avari in smaller numbers than you suggest.
> 9) War of Wrath. Noldorin and Sindarin refugees arrive
> in Eriador. Some Sindar 'go native' and join the Silvan
> realms, ruling them in some cases.
Ditto for even fewer Noldor.
> 10) War of Elves and Sauron: Silvan population in
> Eriador decimated. Silvan realms in Rhovanion continue
> on through Third Age.
Agreed.
So there are really only two areas of disagreement (I suspect you left
out the 'Silvan Noldor' because they were rare)... when did the 'Silvan
culture' arise and how many Avari migrated into the lands where the
Nandor lived. With the latter being the primary issue.
The problem is that Tolkien clearly described it >both< ways. However,
I think the 'Nandor dominance' is the more strongly established case;
Dominant Group: Nandor Avari
Direct Statements?: Yes Yes
Originally Silvan?: Yes No
Settled area?: Yes No
Tolkien directly stated that the Third Age Silvan elves were Nandor AND
(in apparent contradiction) that they were Avari. However, he also
described the Nandor as 'Silvan' right from the start of their existence
while the Avari only become 'Silvan' in conjunction with the Nandor.
Further, the Nandor were specifically stated to settle in the places
where Third Age Silvan elves were later found while there are no
references to large Avari migrations into those same areas.
Ergo, it seems to me that the only way to take 'Avari dominance' over
'Nandor dominance' is to give more weight to the direct statements that
the Silvan elves were Avari than to those which indicate they were
Nandor - AND ignore the other pro-Nandor evidence while assuming things
unstated by Tolkien to 'bridge the gap' from Avari not being present to
becoming dominant.
McREsq
>
>> Notice the word "or". Some Eldar started on the march
>> and became lost, others turned aside, and others lingered
>> on the shores. The Nandor comprise the first two and
>> the Sindar the last.
>
>The first two things are true of the Nandor. All three are true of the
>Sindar.
Either way, the Nandor are included in the definition.
It also speaks of them "remain[ing] there even now".
>> PoME pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds
>> in the world; *and many were Eastern Elves that had
>> hearkened to no summons to the Sea*, but being content
>> with Middle-earth remained there and remained long after,
>> fading in the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men
>> usurped the lands. Of that kind were the Elves of
>> Greenwood the Great."
>
>> The Nandor *did* ultimately hearken to the summons of
>> the Sea.
>
>The Nandor *originally* hearkened to the summons... *ultimately* they
>did not.
Ultimately they did.
>> The LOTR quote speaks of the two *main* branches.
>
>Technically it speaks of the Elves becoming divided into two main
>branches. Not some of the elves. All of the elves. There were then
>sub-branches of those two main branches, but all elves fell into one or
>the other.
It doesn't explicitly say that it says: "The Elves far back in the Elder Days
became divided into two main branches: the West-elves (the Eldar) and the
East-elves."
There's enough wiggle room that that statement can be considered consistent
with either conception of the Nandor (i.e. as 'Eldar or as 'neither Eldar nor
Avari'.)
There's also another draft reference I forgot about from the draft of the
Appendix on Languages:
"According to Elvish historians the Elven-folk, by themselves called the
Quendi, and Elven-speech were originally one. The primary division was into
Eldar and Avari. The Avari were those Elves who remained content with
Middle-earth...."
This confirms that Tolkien's conception was theat the pirmary division was
Eldar and Avari which means the West-elves and East-elves are sysnonymous,
respectively. It also confirms his understanding that it was the Avari
"remained content in Middle-earth" which matches up with the quotes above.
>As you yourself were arguing in this very discussion until the Nandor
>were excluded from the 'West-elves' branch.
>
>>> "The Nandor are the host of Dan, the Wood-elves..."
>>> MR, Later QS I Chapter 3, ~30
>
>> I don't think that quote establishes your point.
>
>Why? It clearly says that the Nandor were the Wood-elves. Silvan elves
>is clearly synonymous with Wood-elves (as you have previously stated
>yourself). It establishes my point by directly stating it.
>
>That said... hey, why not a few more?
>
>"The Silvan Elves were Middle Elves according to the Numenorean
>classification, though unknown to the Atani until later days: for they
>were like the Sindar Teleri, but were laggards in the hindmost companies
>who had never crossed the Misty Mountains and established small realms
>on either side of the Vales of Anduin. (Of these Lorien and the realm
>of Thranduil in Mirkwood were survivors in the Third Age)."
>PoME, Of Dwarves and Men
That's a good quote for your position.
>"Silvan Elves Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
>Mountains but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
>Great."
>UT, Index
That's simply a restatement of the Galadriel and Celeborn text.
>"Silvan Elves Also called Woodland Elves. They appear to have been in
>origin those Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
>Mountains, but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
>Great"
>Silm, Index
We don't know the source but probably also from the UT conception.
<snip>
>>> "So to the cave they dragged Thorin - not too gently,
>>> for they did not love dwarves, and thought he was an
>>> enemy. In ancient days they had had wars with some of
>>> the dwarves, whom they accused of stealing their
>>> treasure."
>>> TH, Flies and Spiders
>
>> Obviously that is talking of the sacking of Doriath and
>> Thranduil was a Sinda.
>
>The sacking of Doriath was "wars"? That incident was likely included,
>but it was not the only cause of grievance.
You don't know that.
<snip>
>> How about the Silvan army passing through Khazad-dum
>> to help fight Sauron's army in Eriador during the War
>> of the Elves and Sauron? Allowing an army to pass
>> through one's realm is pretty friendly.
>
>The Dwarves fought beside the Noldor and Sindar in the first age. That
>didn't make them best buddies. Likewise they aided the Elves of
>Mirkwood in the Battle of Five Armies despite having been on the verge
>of blows themselves just beforehand. They cooperated against common
> >evil< enemies, but that didn't mean they liked each other.
The Dwarvesa llowing a Silvan Army to pass through Moria and then fighting
alongside them against Sauron is not evidence of friendly relations?
>> No, it depends on the point being proven.
>
>So it is not (as you have been claiming) the essays which are 'flawed' -
>just the specific points where they disagree with you.
No, the source is flawed period. However, it's one thing to cite a flawed
source for information consistent with more established texts; it's quite
another thing to cite flawed sources for information contradicting more
established sources. Much of the Galadriel and Celeborn material is directly
inconsistent with more established HoMe texts and indeed the published LOTR.
The UT texts you cite also contradicts your position in different ways. You
argue that the LOTR excludes Nandor as Eldar however the UT text includes them
as Eldar: "but they still remembered that they were in origin Eldar, members
of the Third Clan, and they welcomed those of the
Noldor and especially the Sindar who did not pass over the Sea but migrated
eastward..."
>> You're using this questionable text as your primary
>> source for the idea that the Nandor are Silvans.
>
>Again, that is not true. It is one of several texts directly stating
>that conclusion.
I count two texts that support your position. The Of Dwarves and Men and the UT
Galadriel and Celeborn text.
> In addition to those texts I have noted the obvious
>historical and geographic connections between the Nandor and Silvan
>elves.
And I have never denied the Nandor lived in the areas that came to be Silvan
realms. My point is that the Avari also moved into those regions and in
greater numbers.
>> These UT texts you cite contradict your own position.
>> The UT cites say the Silvans are *exclusively * Nandor.
>> Even you agree that Avari comprised a significant chunk
>> of the Silvans.
>
>They could not be generalizing? Or maybe I'm wrong and the Avari were a
>very small proportion. :)
>
>At that, the few texts which identify these elves as Avari ALSO speak of
>them being ONLY Avari... in contradiction of >your< view. :)
No they don't the texts I am citing say the Avari or East-elves are "most" of
the population of these realms.
>I think it likely that Tolkien was speaking in generalities. We know
>that some of the Silvan elves were Sindar and Noldor,
I don't agree they became Silvan per se. Let me use an analogy. My ancestors
came over the Sea from Ireland. Let's say I go back to Ireland, buy land and a
thatched roof cottage in a small village, run a sheep farm, drink stout in the
local pub, the whole nine yards. Yes, I am living amongst the Irish, even hold
Irish citizenship but ultimetly, I am still a "Yank". Yes there were Sindar
and some Noldor who joined the Silvans but I woun't quite say they truly became
Silvan.
but Tolkien does
>not say that every time he describes their origins. Ditto for the
>Nandor/Avari split (whichever way it went).
>
>>> A: Tolkien clearly said they were in at least
>>> two instances.
>
>> Only clearly in one.
>
>At least three. Possibly four or five. So far.
You're multicounting from the same UT source.
>>> C: Every single place the Silvan elves were found was
>>> said to have been settled by the Nandor. No mention
>>> is EVER made of the Avari displacing Nandor populations.
>
>> Who said displace? The Avari simply moved in in greater
>> numbers and merged with the Nandor
>
>Ok... no mention is ever made of the Avari doing THAT. There are
>references to the different elven kinds being merged together, but no
>such 'great migration of Avari'.
We have great numbers of Avari mentioned living peacefully: ""Elsewhere in
Middle-earth there was peace in for many years; yet the lands were for the
most part savage and desolate, save only where the people of Beleriand came.
Many elves dwelt there indeed, as they had dwelt through the countless years,
wandering free in the wide lands far from the Sea; but they were Avari, to whom
the deeds of Beleriand were but a rumor and Valinor only a distant name. And in
the south and the further east Men multiplied; and most of them turned to evil,
for Sauron was at work."
If East-elves are Avari (as several drafts from the Appendicies show) then
there are references.
The Avari migration is confirmed in several places:
""But the Loremasters of later days, when more friendly relations had been
established with the Avari of various kinds in Eriador and the Vale of
Anduin..." (WotJ pg 409)
It's alkso established linguistically since the Silvan word for Elf is an Avain
form: "The Avarin forms cited by the Loremaster
were: kindi, cuid, hwenti, windan, kinn-lai, penni...The form penni is cited as
coming from the 'Wood-elven' speech of the Vale of Anduin, and these Elves were
among the most friendly to the fugitives from Beleriand, and held themselves
akin to the remnants of the Sindar."
>> to become the Silvan race.
>
>Except that the Nandor were ALREADY the Silvan race.
>
>> Only until the Avari too moved West. Since they were
>> much greater in number they became the dominant partner
>> in the Silvan fusion.
>
>Assuming that ALL of the Avari moved west to that region... and that the
>Avari had remained more numerous than the Nandor after many long
>millenia. Neither of which appears in the texts.
No, there are several references that state the Avari east of the Blue
Mountains lived in relative peace during the long imprisonment of Melkor and
during the Wars in Beleriand. Thus there is no extenal factor to account for a
decline in their population. On the other hand, we do know of large hits taken
to the Nandor: the decimation of Dan's people and the complete destruction of
the Laiquendi.
Thus it would not take a very large Avarin migration to outnumber the remaining
Nandor in Rhovanion and Eriador.
>> Yes, but they were a small people. Only 8/144 to
>> begin, then some of their number entered Beleriand and
>> were massacred (in the First Battle and later the
>> Laiquendi were lost). Thus whatever Nandor remained
>> in relative safety in Eriador and the Vale of Anduin
>> were a comparitavely tiny population.
>
>Which would have grown given that relative safety.
As would the Avari.
>>> If anything I'd say that Eldar (Noldor and Sindar) were
>>> probably dominant in Eriador in the Second Age.
>
>> I disagree. There would have been a large Silvan
>> population in Eriador until the War of Elves and Sauron.
>
>There was a large Eldar population in Eriador until then too.
When? There were some Nandor, yes, but the other LEdar didn't arrive until
after the end of the First Age,a dn they were a "remnant" and "refugees"
>> 1)Separation
>
>> 2)Avari stay behind in East
>
>> 3)Nandor stop at Hithaeglir and settle in Vale of Anduin
>
>> 4)Some Nandor migrate around Misty's and settle
>> in Eriador.
>
>> 5)Some Nandor continue on into Beleriand (there are
>> the people of Dan and the Laiquendi)
>
>We agree up to here except that I term all of the Nandor above 'Silvan
>Elves'.
>
>"The Gladden Fields (Loeg Ningloron). In the Elder Days, when the
>Silvan Elves first settled there, they were a lake formed in a deep
>depression..."
>UT, Disaster of the Gladden Fields (note 13)
I don't think this point really even needs to be debated. We both agree that
for a time at least, the Nandor were the only Elven inhabitants of the Vale of
Anduin and Eriador. So if we want to consider them Silvans, that's fine.
However, at some point an Avarin migration began and I argue that that
migration significatly outnumbered the existing Nandor and so the Silvans
became an Avari-dominated race. This is strongly consistent with the
linguistic evidence.
>Your list above puts the elves who first settled the area near the
>Gladden Fields as Nandor. This text names them Silvan.
>
>> 6) At some point Avari pick of stakes and migrate West.
>> Avari migration might have been reason why some Nandor
>> migrated into Eriador in Item 4 above.
>
>> 7) Avari migration continues into Eriador and even a
>> few make it to Beleriand.
>
>Again, we agree here except on a matter of scale. How do we know that
>more than a few Avari made it into Rhovanion and Eriador?
We know the Avari had a much greater population. We know they lived in
relative peace so there was no external force keeping their population down.
And we have the linguistic evidence of the Avarin forms dominating the Silvan
language.
That a few
>reached Beleriand does not mean that substantially more were to be found
>in the lands east of there.
You expect numbers to be greater as you move east. If the van of the Avari
made it to Beleriand, you expect to see greater number to the east.
> This is the weakest point of your
>argument... there is NO record of large numbers of Avari entering the
>region.
There are if East-elves=Avari and there is also the linguistic evidence.
False, there is specific reference to Avari migration to Eriador and the Vale
of Anduin.
>Ergo, it seems to me that the only way to take 'Avari dominance' over
>'Nandor dominance' is to give more weight to the direct statements that
>the Silvan elves were Avari than to those which indicate they were
>Nandor - AND ignore the other pro-Nandor evidence while assuming things
>unstated by Tolkien to 'bridge the gap' from Avari not being present to
>becoming dominant.
I disagree. For your position to prevail, you have to rely on the internally
inconsistant and flawed UT text. You have to ignore strong evidence that
Tolkien understood East-elves to be synonymous with Avari. And you have to
discount all of Quendi and Eldar.
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote;
>> The first two things are true of the Nandor. All
>> three are true of the Sindar.
> Either way, the Nandor are included in the definition.
Could be... or it referred solely to the Sindar.
>> This speaks of the Sindar (here, as above, called
>> 'Teleri') and the East-elves... but does not define
>> who these East-elves were except that they were not
>> exiled Noldor or Sindar/Teleri.
> It also speaks of them "remain[ing] there even now".
As the Silvan Elves did. Saying nothing of what mix their ancestry was.
>> The Nandor *originally* hearkened to the summons...
>> *ultimately* they did not.
> Ultimately they did.
So all the Nandor went over to Aman and Tolkien just forgot to mention
it. Got it.
> "According to Elvish historians the Elven-folk, by
> themselves called the Quendi, and Elven-speech were
> originally one. The primary division was into Eldar
> and Avari. The Avari were those Elves who remained
> content with Middle-earth...."
> This confirms that Tolkien's conception was theat the
> pirmary division was Eldar and Avari which means the
> West-elves and East-elves are sysnonymous, respectively.
Heh... such great leaps of logic.
The language of the elves that set out on the Great Journey developed
differently than that of those who did not. Obviously so. But tell
me... are we here pretending that Nandor are or are not Eldar? If they
AREN'T Eldar then by this 'logic' they must be Avari. If they ARE Eldar
then this is a different definition than given in LotR.
> It also confirms his understanding that it was the Avari
> "remained content in Middle-earth" which matches up with
> the quotes above.
No, that isn't what it says. Continuing from where you left off;
"The Avari were those Elves who remained content with Middle-earth
[struck out:] and refused the summons of the Powers; but they and their
many secret tongues do not concern this book. The Eldar were those who
set out and marched to the western shores of the Old World."
Several things to note here;
1: The Avari being content with Middle-earth is in reference to the time
of the great schism... not after ages as you imply. They decided to
stay while the Eldar left.
2: This was actually struck out.
3: The Nandor do not fit into this conception at all. It indicates that
there are only 'Avari' who did not set out and 'Eldar' who journeyed all
the way to the western shores (Beleriand)... leaving out the Nandor who
left along the way entirely. Thus, you can use it to make your case if
you want to argue that Tolkien would have decided there weren't any
Nandor, but otherwise it can't speak to their status one way or another.
>> "Silvan Elves Nandorin Elves who never passed west
>> of the Misty Mountains but remained in the Vale of
>> Anduin and in Greenwood the Great."
>> UT, Index
> That's simply a restatement of the Galadriel and
> Celeborn text.
Or...
"In the event there was no index to The Lord of the Rings until the
second edition of 1966, but my father's original rough draft has been
preserved. From it I derived the plan of my index to The Silmarillion,
with translation of names and brief explanatory statements, and also,
both there and in the index to this book, some of the translations and
the wording of some of the 'definitions.'"
UT, Introduction (4.II)
>> "Silvan Elves Also called Woodland Elves. They appear
>> to have been in origin those Nandorin Elves who never
>> passed west of the Misty Mountains, but remained in the
>> Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the Great"
>> Silm, Index
> We don't know the source but probably also from the
> UT conception.
CT copied the UT conception published in 1980 when he released Silm in
1977? A good trick that.
>> The sacking of Doriath was "wars"? That incident was
>> likely included, but it was not the only cause of
>> grievance.
> You don't know that.
I absolutely do. There is no way that the Dwarves sack of Doriath could
be described as "wars" plural.
> The Dwarvesa llowing a Silvan Army to pass through
> Moria and then fighting alongside them against Sauron
> is not evidence of friendly relations?
It really isn't. Given that they definitely weren't friends.
> No, the source is flawed period.
Ah, so 'Shibboleth of Feanor' IS a 'flawed text'. Good to know.
> Much of the Galadriel and Celeborn material is directly
> inconsistent with more established HoMe texts and indeed
> the published LOTR.
Let's assume that is true. It is also irrelevant given that the
passages in question were not FROM the same texts as most of the
Galadriel and Celeborn material. They were presented there in UT
because it was a related issue.
> The UT texts you cite also contradicts your position
> in different ways. You argue that the LOTR excludes
> Nandor as Eldar however the UT text includes them
> as Eldar:
All true except that this does not contradict my position. In LotR
Eldar did not include Nandor. In the UT 'Silvan elves' text Eldar DID
include Nandor. However, in both 'Silvan elves' included the Nandor.
All of which is entirely consistent with my claims that the Nandor
sometimes were and sometimes were not Eldar and that they were Silvan.
> I count two texts that support your position. The Of
> Dwarves and Men and the UT Galadriel and Celeborn text.
I asked you to provide a reason for your insistence on not counting the
LQ1 text... you didn't do so.
Your refusal to accept one of Tolkien's direct statements on the issue
doesn't make it go away.
>>At least three. Possibly four or five. So far.
> You're multicounting from the same UT source.
No, I'm not.
UT Silvan text, LQ1, Of Dwarves and Men
That makes three. If one or both of the index entries were derived from
JRRT's own text that would make it four or five total.
>> Ok... no mention is ever made of the Avari doing THAT.
>> There are references to the different elven kinds being
>> merged together, but no such 'great migration of Avari'.
> We have great numbers of Avari mentioned living
> peacefully:
Which is notably different than a great migration...
> The Avari migration is confirmed in several places:
I don't dispute that Avari migrated. I dispute that there is any
reference speaking of them doing so in vast numbers sufficient to
replace the Nandor as the primary element of the Silvan elves.
> ""But the Loremasters of later days, when more friendly
> relations had been established with the Avari of various
> kinds in Eriador and the Vale of Anduin..." (WotJ pg 409)
How many?
Avari of various kinds?
> It's alkso established linguistically since the Silvan
> word for Elf is an Avain form: "The Avarin forms cited
> by the Loremaster were: kindi, cuid, hwenti, windan,
> kinn-lai, penni...The form penni is cited as coming from
> the 'Wood-elven' speech of the Vale of Anduin, and these
> Elves were among the most friendly to the fugitives from
> Beleriand, and held themselves akin to the remnants of
> the Sindar."
So we might assume this means Avari became dominant... but still no
reference to a vast migration which would account for that.
> No, there are several references that state the Avari
> east of the Blue Mountains lived in relative peace
> during the long imprisonment of Melkor and during the
> Wars in Beleriand. Thus there is no extenal factor to
> account for a decline in their population.
I have listed numerous possible such factors before. Orcs, Dwarves and
Humans being a good start.
> Thus it would not take a very large Avarin migration
> to outnumber the remaining Nandor in Rhovanion and
> Eriador.
Except that the Nandor of Eriador also had a relatively peaceful period
in which to expand their numbers... and actually lived there.
>> There was a large Eldar population in Eriador until
>> then too.
> When? There were some Nandor, yes, but the other LEdar
> didn't arrive until after the end of the First Age,
We were speaking of the Second Age.
> a dn they were a "remnant" and "refugees"
They were shining hosts who held Sauron at bay and then defeated him
with help from the Dunedain.
> I don't think this point really even needs to be debated.
> We both agree that for a time at least, the Nandor were
> the only Elven inhabitants of the Vale of Anduin and
> Eriador. So if we want to consider them Silvans,
> that's fine.
Well, it has some relevance in that the Nandor WERE originally called
'Silvan' elves and the Avari WEREN'T.
>> Again, we agree here except on a matter of scale. How
>> do we know that more than a few Avari made it into
>> Rhovanion and Eriador?
> We know the Avari had a much greater population.
I disagree and even if they did that doesn't say anything about many of
them having moved west.
> You expect numbers to be greater as you move east.
> If the van of the Avari made it to Beleriand, you expect
> to see greater number to the east.
So how many Avari made it to Beleriand? I can think of one... how many
does that imply to be further east?
>> This is the weakest point of your argument... there is
>> NO record of large numbers of Avari entering the region.
> There are if East-elves=Avari and there is also the
> linguistic evidence.
Nope... those would speak of Avari being dominant, but not of how they
GOT that way. There are direct statements that the Silvan elves were
Nandor AND that they were Avari. However, there are also direct
statements of how the Nandor GOT that way... but NOT the Avari. There
are no references to a mass migration of Avari outnumbering the existing
Nandor population.
> False, there is specific reference to Avari migration
> to Eriador and the Vale of Anduin.
No. Again, I don't dispute that there were Avari in the region... that
is a pre-requisite of them being part of the Silvan population. What I
have said is that there are no specific references to a LARGE Avari
migration. That is not false.
> I disagree. For your position to prevail, you have
> to rely on the internally inconsistant and flawed UT
> text.
Oi! Ok, allow me to be equally ridiculous... half of the texts YOU cite
are 'internally inconsistent and flawed' (based on no evidence
whatsoever) and I'll just pretend that the rest don't exist.
McREsq
<snip>
>>> This speaks of the Sindar (here, as above, called
>>> 'Teleri') and the East-elves... but does not define
>>> who these East-elves were except that they were not
>>> exiled Noldor or Sindar/Teleri.
>
>> It also speaks of them "remain[ing] there even now".
>
>As the Silvan Elves did. Saying nothing of what mix their ancestry was.
>
>>> The Nandor *originally* hearkened to the summons...
>>> *ultimately* they did not.
>
>> Ultimately they did.
>
>So all the Nandor went over to Aman and Tolkien just forgot to mention
>it. Got it.
I'm using your own source, UT: "The Silvan Elves [Russ: who in this conception
are Nandor alone] (it is remarked here) 'were
never wholly free of an unquiet and a yearning for the Sea which at times drove
some of them to wander from their homes.'"
>> "According to Elvish historians the Elven-folk, by
>> themselves called the Quendi, and Elven-speech were
>> originally one. The primary division was into Eldar
>> and Avari. The Avari were those Elves who remained
>> content with Middle-earth...."
>
>> This confirms that Tolkien's conception was theat the
>> pirmary division was Eldar and Avari which means the
>> West-elves and East-elves are sysnonymous, respectively.
>
>Heh... such great leaps of logic.
Not so great. In a draft he says the primary division was Eldar and Avari. In
the final version he says the main division was West-elves(Eldar) and
East-elves. In other drafts the East-elves are equated with Avari. I don't see
why you consider this a great leap.
>The language of the elves that set out on the Great Journey developed
>differently than that of those who did not. Obviously so. But tell
>me... are we here pretending that Nandor are or are not Eldar? If they
>AREN'T Eldar then by this 'logic' they must be Avari. If they ARE Eldar
>then this is a different definition than given in LotR.
We're not 'pretending' either. Tolkien used both conception, that they were
Eldar or neither Eldar nor Avari. My point is that either conception can work
with the words in the published LOTR.
>> It also confirms his understanding that it was the Avari
>> "remained content in Middle-earth" which matches up with
>> the quotes above.
>
>No, that isn't what it says. Continuing from where you left off;
>
>"The Avari were those Elves who remained content with Middle-earth
>[struck out:] and refused the summons of the Powers; but they and their
>many secret tongues do not concern this book. The Eldar were those who
>set out and marched to the western shores of the Old World."
>
>Several things to note here;
>
>1: The Avari being content with Middle-earth is in reference to the time
>of the great schism... not after ages as you imply. They decided to
>stay while the Eldar left.
>
>2: This was actually struck out.
Actually, haven't all these references to the Avari been struck out? I don't
think that means he was dicarding the Avari from his legendarium but rather
that the term was not necessary tyo add to the LOTR appendicies.
>3: The Nandor do not fit into this conception at all. It indicates that
>there are only 'Avari' who did not set out and 'Eldar' who journeyed all
>the way to the western shores (Beleriand)... leaving out the Nandor who
>left along the way entirely.
And thus consistent with the conception that the Nandor were neither Eldar nor
Avari.
Thus, you can use it to make your case if
Huh? A very easy trick. You don't think CJRT had the underlying UT texts when
he was writing Silmarillion? What I am saying is those two index entries
appear to come from the same root source: the text published in UT.
Interestingly, both index entries say the Silvans never passed west of the
Misty Mountains. That be definition would mean neither the Beleriand Nandor
nor the Nandor and or AVari in Eriador were Silvan elves.
>
>>> The sacking of Doriath was "wars"? That incident was
>>> likely included, but it was not the only cause of
>>> grievance.
>
>> You don't know that.
>
>I absolutely do. There is no way that the Dwarves sack of Doriath could
>be described as "wars" plural.
War between the Sindar and Dwarves and war between the Laiquendi and Dwarves.
2 wars.
>> The Dwarvesa llowing a Silvan Army to pass through
>> Moria and then fighting alongside them against Sauron
>> is not evidence of friendly relations?
>
>It really isn't. Given that they definitely weren't friends.
What evidence do you have of any ill-will between the people of Lorien and
Moria in the First and Second Ages.
>> No, the source is flawed period.
>
>Ah, so 'Shibboleth of Feanor' IS a 'flawed text'. Good to know.
The description on pp. 293 and 294 of PoME applies to all these texts. That is
why they must be used carefully. As I said, it's one thing to cite them for
ideas consistent with, or at least not inconsistent with established texts.
It's quote another to cite them for ideas inconsistent with established texts.
I don't think that is at all an unreasonable way to approach use of these
texts.
>> Much of the Galadriel and Celeborn material is directly
>> inconsistent with more established HoMe texts and indeed
>> the published LOTR.
>
>Let's assume that is true.
Nothing to assume, it is. Galadriel's place in the Finwe family tree for one.
Celeborn's presence at the sack of Doraith, for another.
> It is also irrelevant given that the
>passages in question were not FROM the same texts as most of the
>Galadriel and Celeborn material. They were presented there in UT
>because it was a related issue.
What is your evidence that the text you cite from UT is not from the
'historical-philological essays' described in POME? For example, PoME says
explicitly the Amroth and Nimrodel material comes from these texts.
>> The UT texts you cite also contradicts your position
>> in different ways. You argue that the LOTR excludes
>> Nandor as Eldar however the UT text includes them
>> as Eldar:
>
>All true except that this does not contradict my position. In LotR
>Eldar did not include Nandor. In the UT 'Silvan elves' text Eldar DID
>include Nandor. However, in both 'Silvan elves' included the Nandor.
>All of which is entirely consistent with my claims that the Nandor
>sometimes were and sometimes were not Eldar and that they were Silvan.
And I have said no different. I obviously take issue with their being
exclusively Nandor.
>> I count two texts that support your position. The Of
>> Dwarves and Men and the UT Galadriel and Celeborn text.
>
>I asked you to provide a reason for your insistence on not counting the
>LQ1 text... you didn't do so.
Because it doesn't equate the Nandor to Silvan Elves. It says one of their
nick-names was Wood-elves.
>Your refusal to accept one of Tolkien's direct statements on the issue
>doesn't make it go away.
>
>>>At least three. Possibly four or five. So far.
>
>> You're multicounting from the same UT source.
>
>No, I'm not.
>
>UT Silvan text, LQ1, Of Dwarves and Men
>
>That makes three. If one or both of the index entries were derived from
>JRRT's own text that would make it four or five total.
>
>>> Ok... no mention is ever made of the Avari doing THAT.
>>> There are references to the different elven kinds being
>>> merged together, but no such 'great migration of Avari'.
>
>> We have great numbers of Avari mentioned living
>> peacefully:
>
>Which is notably different than a great migration...
>
>> The Avari migration is confirmed in several places:
>
>I don't dispute that Avari migrated. I dispute that there is any
>reference speaking of them doing so in vast numbers sufficient to
>replace the Nandor as the primary element of the Silvan elves.
Again, the linguistic evidence below.
>> ""But the Loremasters of later days, when more friendly
>> relations had been established with the Avari of various
>> kinds in Eriador and the Vale of Anduin..." (WotJ pg 409)
>
>How many?
>
>Avari of various kinds?
Better than Nandor of one kind.
>
>> It's alkso established linguistically since the Silvan
>> word for Elf is an Avain form: "The Avarin forms cited
>> by the Loremaster were: kindi, cuid, hwenti, windan,
>> kinn-lai, penni...The form penni is cited as coming from
>> the 'Wood-elven' speech of the Vale of Anduin, and these
>> Elves were among the most friendly to the fugitives from
>> Beleriand, and held themselves akin to the remnants of
>> the Sindar."
>
>So we might assume this means Avari became dominant... but still no
>reference to a vast migration which would account for that.
Why would the Avarin language become dominant if the Avarin population was not
dominant?
And as I have said, considering the small population of Nandor to begin with,
it would not take much for an Avarin migration to soon outnumber the Nandor.
>> No, there are several references that state the Avari
>> east of the Blue Mountains lived in relative peace
>> during the long imprisonment of Melkor and during the
>> Wars in Beleriand. Thus there is no extenal factor to
>> account for a decline in their population.
>
>I have listed numerous possible such factors before. Orcs, Dwarves and
>Humans being a good start.
And again: the texts say the Avari lived in relative peace during this whole
time, thus excluding orcs, dwarves and humans as any sort of major impact on
their population.
>> Thus it would not take a very large Avarin migration
>> to outnumber the remaining Nandor in Rhovanion and
>> Eriador.
>
>Except that the Nandor of Eriador also had a relatively peaceful period
>in which to expand their numbers... and actually lived there.
As did the Avari. The Elves residing east of the Ered Luin, Nandor and Avari
alike, were living free and largely unmolested. Since the Avari started with
a much greater population and the Nandor did in fact suffer great losses in
Beleriand, the advantage goes to the Avari.
>>> There was a large Eldar population in Eriador until
>>> then too.
>
>> When? There were some Nandor, yes, but the other LEdar
>> didn't arrive until after the end of the First Age,
>
>We were speaking of the Second Age.
I was speaking of the First Age which is when all of this was occurring. The
Second Age is when we see the results. When the Sindarin and Noldorin
Loremasters migrated east and could study the Avari/Nandor cultures in Eriador,
Greenwood and the Vale of Anduin, the situation was already a fait accompli.
Thus, I am arguing the Avari migration had already occurred during the long
period of peace while Melkor was imprisoned.
>> a dn they were a "remnant" and "refugees"
>
>They were shining hosts who held Sauron at bay and then defeated him
>with help from the Dunedain.
Huh? They got their asses kicked. Eregion was destroyed, the vast forests of
Eriador destroyed and the men and Elves hunted down and killed, Elrond pushed
back and contained in Rivendell, and Gil-galad barely holding on at the River
Lune. It was the Numenoreans who defeated Sauron in that War, nor the Elves.
Moreover 1600 years had passed since the Eldar came to Eriador.
>> I don't think this point really even needs to be debated.
>> We both agree that for a time at least, the Nandor were
>> the only Elven inhabitants of the Vale of Anduin and
>> Eriador. So if we want to consider them Silvans,
>> that's fine.
>
>Well, it has some relevance in that the Nandor WERE originally called
>'Silvan' elves and the Avari WEREN'T.
These were names applied *by the Noldor and Sindar*. The first Wood-elves they
came across were the Nandor, so it is not surprising the term was first applied
to them. Later they came across other wood elves who were Avari.
>>> Again, we agree here except on a matter of scale. How
>>> do we know that more than a few Avari made it into
>>> Rhovanion and Eriador?
>
>> We know the Avari had a much greater population.
>
>I disagree
You disagree with the proportions in Quendi and Eldar?
and even if they did that doesn't say anything about many of
>them having moved west.
There is plenty of textual evidence they did move West and the linguistic
evidence shows they moved West in sufficient numbers to be culturally dominant
over the Nandor.
>> You expect numbers to be greater as you move east.
>> If the van of the Avari made it to Beleriand, you expect
>> to see greater number to the east.
>
>So how many Avari made it to Beleriand? I can think of one... how many
>does that imply to be further east?
Actually the texts says they entered Beleriand in small secretive groups.
>>> This is the weakest point of your argument... there is
>>> NO record of large numbers of Avari entering the region.
>
>> There are if East-elves=Avari and there is also the
>> linguistic evidence.
>
>Nope... those would speak of Avari being dominant, but not of how they
>GOT that way.
So you think they were beamed over by Scotty? How else would they become
dominant if not by migration?
There are direct statements that the Silvan elves were
>Nandor AND that they were Avari. However, there are also direct
>statements of how the Nandor GOT that way... but NOT the Avari. There
>are no references to a mass migration of Avari outnumbering the existing
>Nandor population.
Theres references to Avari migration and theres references to Avari become
culturally dominant. If you think there is another way for that to happen
besides the Avari migrating in sufficient numbers to overmatch the Nandor, I'd
like to hear it.
>> False, there is specific reference to Avari migration
>> to Eriador and the Vale of Anduin.
>
>No. Again, I don't dispute that there were Avari in the region... that
>is a pre-requisite of them being part of the Silvan population. What I
>have said is that there are no specific references to a LARGE Avari
>migration. That is not false.
Just see above.
>> I disagree. For your position to prevail, you have
>> to rely on the internally inconsistant and flawed UT
>> text.
>
>Oi!
Ai! Ai!
Ok, allow me to be equally ridiculous... half of the texts YOU cite
>are 'internally inconsistent and flawed' (based on no evidence
>whatsoever) and I'll just pretend that the rest don't exist.
What is internally inconsistent and flawed with Quendi and Eldar?
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
>> So all the Nandor went over to Aman and Tolkien just
>> forgot to mention it. Got it.
> I'm using your own source, UT: "The Silvan Elves
> [Russ: who in this conception are Nandor alone] (it is
> remarked here) 'were never wholly free of an unquiet and
> a yearning for the Sea which at times drove some of
> them to wander from their homes.'"
First - on your bracketed comment, the UT text says that Noldor and
Sindar joined the Silvan elves. So not 100% Nandor, but you are
probably remarking upon the absence of reference to the Avari.
Second - That they were never wholly free of the yearning for the Sea is
not remotely synonymous with 'they all went over the Sea'. They'd been
'not wholly free' of that yearning for millenia without leaving and
continued to do so.
BTW... since this 'Sea yearning' was a feature of all the Elves who set
out on the Great Journey, but NOT the Avari what precisely should the
Silvan elves experiencing it tell us about their makeup?
> We're not 'pretending' either. Tolkien used both
> conception, that they were Eldar or neither Eldar nor
> Avari. My point is that either conception can work
> with the words in the published LOTR.
Not with the section which says the Eldar were the elves that went to
Aman and the Sindar. As written that excludes the Nandor from being
Eldar in LotR.
>> 3: The Nandor do not fit into this conception at all.
>> It indicates that there are only 'Avari' who did not
>> set out and 'Eldar' who journeyed all the way to the
>> western shores (Beleriand)... leaving out the Nandor
>> who left along the way entirely.
> And thus consistent with the conception that the Nandor
> were neither Eldar nor Avari.
No. You are missing a distinction here. The text lays out ALL elves.
Some refused the journey and were called Avari. The rest went to the
western shores and were called Eldar (and then split after reaching the
shores). As this passage is written there AREN'T ANY Nandor. Not
'there are Nandor who are neither Eldar nor Avari'... their existence is
denied entirely. Which is why I say that this text (and indeed many of
the 'Avari dominance' texts) are founded upon an absence of the Nandor
from the equation. As if the idea of 'Avari Silvans' arises only when
the Nandor are left out.
> Huh? A very easy trick. You don't think CJRT had the
> underlying UT texts when he was writing Silmarillion?
> What I am saying is those two index entries appear to
> come from the same root source: the text published in UT.
Or... JRRT's own index definition.
> War between the Sindar and Dwarves and war between
> the Laiquendi and Dwarves. 2 wars.
The elves of Mirkwood were sufficiently Laiquendi in origin that they
considered the Dwarves' war with the Laiquendi to have been a war
against them?
>> It really isn't. Given that they definitely weren't
>> friends.
> What evidence do you have of any ill-will between the
> people of Lorien and Moria in the First and Second Ages.
Their hostility in the Third Age (yes, I know 'Balrog!' Needn't be only
cause), The Khazad-Dum / Eregion relationship being 'the first and only
friendship between Elves and Dwarves', the general 'hostility of even
good Elves and Dwarves', et cetera.
They cooperated in the war. They weren't friends.
> As I said, it's one thing to cite them for ideas
> consistent with, or at least not inconsistent with
> established texts.
Russ, giving the differing opinions on what is and is not 'consistent'
and which texts are 'established' this basically comes down to - 'these
texts are fine where they support my position and horribly flawed where
they contradict it'.
>>Let's assume that is true.
> Nothing to assume, it is. Galadriel's place in the
> Finwe family tree for one. Celeborn's presence at the
> sack of Doraith, for another.
>> It is also irrelevant given that the passages in
>> question were not FROM the same texts as most of the
>> Galadriel and Celeborn material. They were presented
>> there in UT because it was a related issue.
> What is your evidence that the text you cite from UT is
> not from the 'historical-philological essays' described
> in POME?
That's not what I said. The UT text I cite IS from the
'historical-philological essays'. The inconsistencies you list above
are NOT. So, as I said, your 'Galadriel and Celeborn are inconsistent'
bit is irrelevant... the inconsistent items come from different texts
than the passages I am citing.
>> I asked you to provide a reason for your insistence
>> on not counting the LQ1 text... you didn't do so.
> Because it doesn't equate the Nandor to Silvan Elves.
> It says one of their nick-names was Wood-elves.
And you know full well that 'Wood-elves' and 'Silvan Elves' are
synonyms. You consistently use them that way yourself... except here
where it contradicts your position.
> Why would the Avarin language become dominant if the
> Avarin population was not dominant?
A: No text states that the Avarin language became dominant. We know
that one text mentions some Avarin words in the language.
B: The dominant language of the Noldor was... Sindarin.
C: According to LotR the dominant language of the Silvan elves was...
Sindarin.
>> We were speaking of the Second Age.
> I was speaking of the First Age
If you want to make an issue of it go back and retrace the thread. You
were not speaking of the First Age... you asked about the Nandorin
remnant of Beleriand in Rhovanion and Eriador - making it a Second or
Third age issue. I made responses for each of those ages and you were
in this reply thread questioning the Second Age response.
> Huh? They got their asses kicked. Eregion was
> destroyed, the vast forests of Eriador destroyed and
> the men and Elves hunted down and killed, Elrond pushed
> back and contained in Rivendell, and Gil-galad barely
> holding on at the River Lune.
True until Sauron was taken captive to Numenor. Then Gil-galad
reclaimed all of Eriador. There were still large numbers of Eldar
around in the Second Age.
> It was the Numenoreans who defeated Sauron in that
> War, nor the Elves.
It was the combined force.
> These were names applied *by the Noldor and Sindar*.
> The first Wood-elves they came across were the Nandor,
> so it is not surprising the term was first applied
> to them. Later they came across other wood elves who
> were Avari.
This is not stated anywhere in the texts, but it seems a reasonable
series of assumptions. Though again, the only 'Avari' ever called
Wood/Silvan elves are those living in regions originally settled by the
Nandor.
> You disagree with the proportions in Quendi and Eldar?
Actually yes, given that they only appeared once. That said, even
accepting them as gospel truth... they were the proportions many
millenia prior to the situation we are discussing. To my mind they are
all but worthless for estimating future populations.
>> Nope... those would speak of Avari being dominant,
>> but not of how they GOT that way.
> So you think they were beamed over by Scotty? How else
> would they become dominant if not by migration?
No, you are still dodging my point.
Yes, mass migration is the logical reason for 'Avari dominance'.
However, there is NO text stating that such a 'mass migration' took
place. Not texts which logically require that assumption or which might
support the possibility... texts which actually STATE it.
The 'Nandor dominance' theory relies upon the Nandor having first
settled those regions to be dominant there. There are texts which
clearly say that the Nandor DID settle those regions. The 'Avari
dominance' theory relies upon mass migration of Avari into those
regions. No texts describing such a mass migration exist. That is a
difference in how well the two theories are established in the body of
Tolkien's work. 'Avari dominance' appears full formed with no explicit
explanation for how it happened. We can make a very reasonable guess
and find evidence in support of that guess, but Tolkien never wrote
about it happening. 'Nandor dominance' has both the full formed
conclusion AND the detailed back-story.
> What is internally inconsistent and flawed with Quendi
> and Eldar?
The same things which are 'internally inconsistent and flawed' with the
'historical-philological essays' I've been quoting from UT... you know,
like your contradictions between OTHER UT texts than I have been quoting
and >external< (NOT internal) versions of the stories? Or 'Silvan' does
not equal 'Wood'. In short... just assume whatever equally unfounded
'disqualifications' you like.
McREsq
>
>>> So all the Nandor went over to Aman and Tolkien just
>>> forgot to mention it. Got it.
>
>> I'm using your own source, UT: "The Silvan Elves
>> [Russ: who in this conception are Nandor alone] (it is
>> remarked here) 'were never wholly free of an unquiet and
>> a yearning for the Sea which at times drove some of
>> them to wander from their homes.'"
>
>First - on your bracketed comment, the UT text says that Noldor and
>Sindar joined the Silvan elves. So not 100% Nandor, but you are
>probably remarking upon the absence of reference to the Avari.
>
>Second - That they were never wholly free of the yearning for the Sea is
>not remotely synonymous with 'they all went over the Sea'. They'd been
>'not wholly free' of that yearning for millenia without leaving and
>continued to do so.
>
>BTW... since this 'Sea yearning' was a feature of all the Elves who set
>out on the Great Journey, but NOT the Avari what precisely should the
>Silvan elves experiencing it tell us about their makeup?
That no matter what the conception, Nandor yearned to go over the Sea and Avari
didn't. Thus the citations equating East-elves with elves who did not yearn to
go over the seas can be said to be referring to Avari.
UT also supports my position: "Oropher had come among them with only a handful
of Sindar, and they were soon merged with the Silvan Elves...they wished indeed
to become Silvan folk and to return, as they said, to the simple life natural
to the Elves before the invitation of the Valar had disturbed it"
In this passage the Silvan way of life was the life before the Valar disturbed
it - in other words the Avarin life.
>> We're not 'pretending' either. Tolkien used both
>> conception, that they were Eldar or neither Eldar nor
>> Avari. My point is that either conception can work
>> with the words in the published LOTR.
>
>Not with the section which says the Eldar were the elves that went to
>Aman and the Sindar. As written that excludes the Nandor from being
>Eldar in LotR.
That doesn't make them East-elves either, which is my point.
>>> 3: The Nandor do not fit into this conception at all.
>>> It indicates that there are only 'Avari' who did not
>>> set out and 'Eldar' who journeyed all the way to the
>>> western shores (Beleriand)... leaving out the Nandor
>>> who left along the way entirely.
>
>> And thus consistent with the conception that the Nandor
>> were neither Eldar nor Avari.
>
>No. You are missing a distinction here. The text lays out ALL elves.
>Some refused the journey and were called Avari. The rest went to the
>western shores and were called Eldar (and then split after reaching the
>shores). As this passage is written there AREN'T ANY Nandor. Not
>'there are Nandor who are neither Eldar nor Avari'... their existence is
>denied entirely.
I disagree. The passages in LOTR can be correlated with the neither Eldar nor
Avari conception.
Which is why I say that this text (and indeed many of
>the 'Avari dominance' texts) are founded upon an absence of the Nandor
>from the equation. As if the idea of 'Avari Silvans' arises only when
>the Nandor are left out.
What? I disagree. I don't see the Avari-dominant texts excluding the Nandor at
all. The primary text I rely on, Quendi and Eldar places them in the Vale of
Anduin.
<snip>
>> War between the Sindar and Dwarves and war between
>> the Laiquendi and Dwarves. 2 wars.
>
>The elves of Mirkwood were sufficiently Laiquendi in origin that they
>considered the Dwarves' war with the Laiquendi to have been a war
>against them?
The Sindar would have been aware of it. Oh, and I thought of a third war: the
Sindar and the petty dwarves.
<snip>
>>> I asked you to provide a reason for your insistence
>>> on not counting the LQ1 text... you didn't do so.
>
>> Because it doesn't equate the Nandor to Silvan Elves.
>> It says one of their nick-names was Wood-elves.
>
>And you know full well that 'Wood-elves' and 'Silvan Elves' are
>synonyms. You consistently use them that way yourself... except here
>where it contradicts your position.
I think this is addressed below.
>> Why would the Avarin language become dominant if the
>> Avarin population was not dominant?
>
>A: No text states that the Avarin language became dominant. We know
>that one text mentions some Avarin words in the language.
Silvan uses the Avarin form 'penni', which is the word for the Elven race.
It's not just any word cited as being Avarin; it's the Silvan word for 'Quendi'
>B: The dominant language of the Noldor was... Sindarin.
Why? Because they were outnumbered.
>C: According to LotR the dominant language of the Silvan elves was...
>Sindarin.
I recall LOTR saying the language of the East-elves does not appear; rather
only Eldarin forms. This would be consistent with Avari-dominated East-elves
with the Nandorin element adopting the Avarin forms.
Alternatively, the move towards Sindarin would not be suprising after 6000
years of Eldarin rule since Avarin was not a written language. Sindarin would
inevitably come to dominate.
>>> We were speaking of the Second Age.
>
>> I was speaking of the First Age
>
>If you want to make an issue of it go back and retrace the thread. You
>were not speaking of the First Age... you asked about the Nandorin
>remnant of Beleriand in Rhovanion and Eriador - making it a Second or
>Third age issue. I made responses for each of those ages and you were
>in this reply thread questioning the Second Age response.
Right, but as I explain what we see in the Second Age is the *result*, because
that is when the Eldarin loremasters report on what they've seen an studied.
The actual migration and fusion of Avari and Nandor occurred in the First Age.
That was my point.
>> Huh? They got their asses kicked. Eregion was
>> destroyed, the vast forests of Eriador destroyed and
>> the men and Elves hunted down and killed, Elrond pushed
>> back and contained in Rivendell, and Gil-galad barely
>> holding on at the River Lune.
>
>True until Sauron was taken captive to Numenor. Then Gil-galad
>reclaimed all of Eriador. There were still large numbers of Eldar
>around in the Second Age.
Well they have another 1500 years or so after the War to recover.
>> It was the Numenoreans who defeated Sauron in that
>> War, nor the Elves.
>
>It was the combined force.
Sauron had defeated every elven force in the field and was on the brink of
defeating GG at the Lune. It was the Numenorean force that won the war.
>> These were names applied *by the Noldor and Sindar*.
>> The first Wood-elves they came across were the Nandor,
>> so it is not surprising the term was first applied
>> to them. Later they came across other wood elves who
>> were Avari.
>
>This is not stated anywhere in the texts, but it seems a reasonable
>series of assumptions. Though again, the only 'Avari' ever called
>Wood/Silvan elves are those living in regions originally settled by the
>Nandor.
That's simply restating the obvious. No one is contesting that the Nandor
settled these areas first.
>> You disagree with the proportions in Quendi and Eldar?
>
>Actually yes, given that they only appeared once.
In one text, yes. A very carefully written and revised text having all the
hallmarks of a final text.
> That said, even
>accepting them as gospel truth... they were the proportions many
>millenia prior to the situation we are discussing. To my mind they are
>all but worthless for estimating future populations.
There's nothing in the texts to indicate the population rate of the Avari and
non-Beleriandic Nandor developed any differently.
>>> Nope... those would speak of Avari being dominant,
>>> but not of how they GOT that way.
>
>> So you think they were beamed over by Scotty? How else
>> would they become dominant if not by migration?
>
>No, you are still dodging my point.
>
>Yes, mass migration is the logical reason for 'Avari dominance'.
>However, there is NO text stating that such a 'mass migration' took
>place. Not texts which logically require that assumption or which might
>support the possibility... texts which actually STATE it.
Again not surprising. The texts we are discussing are written after the fact
by Eldarin loremasters. They are analying a situation that has alrady
occurred. They see that Avari are all over the place in Eriador and Rhovanion.
They've analyzed the linguistics. They see the Avain population dominates.
They don't need to state the obvious.
>The 'Nandor dominance' theory relies upon the Nandor having first
>settled those regions to be dominant there. There are texts which
>clearly say that the Nandor DID settle those regions.
No one denies that. The Nandor obviosuly would have gotten there first because
they were on the Great Journey.
> The 'Avari
>dominance' theory relies upon mass migration of Avari into those
>regions. No texts describing such a mass migration exist.
Texts describing the result do.
That is a
>difference in how well the two theories are established in the body of
>Tolkien's work. 'Avari dominance' appears full formed with no explicit
>explanation for how it happened. We can make a very reasonable guess
>and find evidence in support of that guess, but Tolkien never wrote
>about it happening. 'Nandor dominance' has both the full formed
>conclusion AND the detailed back-story.
>
>> What is internally inconsistent and flawed with Quendi
>> and Eldar?
>
>The same things which are 'internally inconsistent and flawed' with the
>'historical-philological essays' I've been quoting from UT... you know,
>like your contradictions between OTHER UT texts than I have been quoting
>and >external< (NOT internal) versions of the stories? Or 'Silvan' does
>not equal 'Wood'. In short... just assume whatever equally unfounded
>'disqualifications' you like.
OK, let's compare Quendi and Eldar with the UT and Of Dwarves and Men text on
which you rely:
Quendi and Eldar: "...is extant in a typescript with carbon copy that can be
fairly certainly dated to the years 1959-60; and both copies are preceded by a
manuscript page...My father corrected the two copies carefully and in precisely
the same ways (except for a few later pencilled alterations)."
Compared with your primary cited texts: "A word must be said of these
'historical-philological' essays...they were composed on a typewriter. These
texts are, very clearly, entirely ab initio; they are not developments and
refinements of earlier versions. The ideas, the new narrative departures,
historical formulations, and etymological construction, here first appear in
written form (which is not to say, of course, that they were not long in the
preparing), and in that form, essentially, they remain. The texts are never
obviously concluded, and often end in chaotic and illegible or unintelligible
notes and jottings. Some of the writing was decidedly experimental..." POME pg
294.
I think those descriptions speak for themselves.
Russ
Stan Brown
>news:MPG.1b8de8703...@news.odyssey.net...
>
>> Which Elves were neither Avari nor Eldar?
>> Can you point me to the section I ought to read to
>> understand this better?
Just a quick thank-you for your explanation and quotes, Conrad!
Steuard, is Conrad's article Message-ID:
<YUbVc.6737$de4.4227@trndny07> good for addition to the FAQ?
Stan Brown
>Mountains but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
>Great."
>UT, Index
>
>"Silvan Elves Also called Woodland Elves. They appear to have been in
>origin those Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
>Mountains, but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
>Great"
>Silm, Index
Ah -- so the Silvan Elves were Nandor (and therefore Eldar), not
Avari.
That clears up another long-standing mistake in my mind. Thanks! (I
do read the LotR Appendices but have not yet come to the point of
reading the Indexes. :-)
Stan Brown
>[struck out:] and refused the summons of the Powers; but they and their
>many secret tongues do not concern this book. The Eldar were those who
>set out and marched to the western shores of the Old World."
>
>Several things to note here;
>
>1: The Avari being content with Middle-earth is in reference to the time
>of the great schism... not after ages as you imply. They decided to
>stay while the Eldar left.
>
>2: This was actually struck out.
According to that colon in the brackets, wasn't it the _following_
words that were struck out? Wasn't the un-struck-out text "The Avari
were those Elves who remained content with Middle-earth; but they
and their ..."
If the "content with M-e" bit were struck out, we'd have
"The Avari were those Elves and refused the summons of the Powers;
but they and their ..." which doesn't parse.
This doesn't affect your main point, of course.
Christopher Kreuzer
> (I do read the LotR Appendices but have not yet come to the
> point of reading the Indexes. :-)
Oh, you really must... :-)
Maybe the Indices can be added to Steuard's Custom Reading List?
McREsq
>rec.arts.books.tolkien:
>>"Silvan Elves Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
>>Mountains but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
>>Great."
>>UT, Index
>>
>>"Silvan Elves Also called Woodland Elves. They appear to have been in
>>origin those Nandorin Elves who never passed west of the Misty
>>Mountains, but remained in the Vale of Anduin and in Greenwood the
>>Great"
>>Silm, Index
>
>Ah -- so the Silvan Elves were Nandor (and therefore Eldar), not
>Avari.
Incorrect. And not even Conrad argues that Silvans were Avari alone.
>That clears up another long-standing mistake in my mind. Thanks! (I
>do read the LotR Appendices but have not yet come to the point of
>reading the Indexes. :-)
Actually it doesn't. Those are two index entries (one from UT and one from Sil)
of questionable source. The idea of Silvan=Nandor alone, only appears clearly
in 2 questionable late etymological texts.
Other more established texts evidence Avari being the dominant culture in the
Silvan realms.
Russ
Stan Brown
(quoting me, but incorrectly attributing the quote to Conrad)
>>Ah -- so the Silvan Elves were Nandor (and therefore Eldar), not
>>Avari.
>
>Incorrect.
You seem to be under the impression that simply rapping out
"incorrect" is a form of argument. Let me disabuse you of that
notion. Outside the world of Monty Python, argument is more than
one-word disagreements.
>And not even Conrad argues that Silvans were Avari alone.
I never said he did, you berk. That was _my_ mistake, as I said in
my article.
Matthew Bladen
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> says...
>
> You seem to be under the impression that simply rapping out
> "incorrect" is a form of argument. Let me disabuse you of that
> notion. Outside the world of Monty Python, argument is more than
> one-word disagreements.
No it isn't! ;-)
--
Matthew
Conrad Dunkerson
> Ah -- so the Silvan Elves were Nandor (and therefore
> Eldar), not Avari.
I believe so, but the shifting definitions of the terms and Tolkien's
changing ideas can create a very confusing tangle. The original Silvan
elves were certainly Nandor and I believe most of the evidence suggests
they remained the predominant portion of the Silvan population.
> Thanks! (I do read the LotR Appendices but have not yet
> come to the point of reading the Indexes. :-)
I've found a number of otherwise 'unspecified' details in the LotR, Silm
& UT indexes. Unfortunately, we don't know which details of the latter
two were written by JRRT or based on his definitions and which were made
up by CT based on his understanding of the texts.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Those are two index entries (one from UT and one from Sil)
> of questionable source.
They are "of questionable source"?
To be specific, it is unknown whether those definitions were written by
JRRT or CT. Neither of whom is a particularly 'questionable source'.
Why do we need to introduce 'spin' to Tolkien discussion? It is bad
enough that the news has been warped to such a degree that 'truth' is
subjective in politics... why emulate that here?
> The idea of Silvan=Nandor alone, only appears clearly
> in 2 questionable late etymological texts.
It appears in three sources other than the index entries. Nor do they
all say 'Silvan=Nandor alone' and those which do are in reference to the
early history when that was the case or likely speaking generally.
> Other more established texts evidence Avari being the
> dominant culture in the Silvan realms.
I disagree. There are numerous texts specifically laying out a detailed
backstory for how the Nandor came to be the Silvan elves and none doing
so for how the Avari would have. We can construct such a backstory by
assuming large migrations into the Nandor areas, but Tolkien never wrote
of this. Likewise the Nandor origin is supported by the very nature of
the Silvan elves... they felt the call to the Sea - as did the Nandor,
but not the Avari.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> That no matter what the conception, Nandor yearned to
> go over the Sea and Avari didn't.
But the Silvan elves DID... does that not inherently contradict them
being primarily Avari in origin?
> UT also supports my position: "Oropher had come among
> them with only a handful of Sindar, and they were soon
> merged with the Silvan Elves...they wished indeed to
> become Silvan folk and to return, as they said, to the
> simple life natural to the Elves before the invitation
> of the Valar had disturbed it"
> In this passage the Silvan way of life was the life
> before the Valar disturbed it - in other words the
> Avarin life.
Not true. The Avari were every bit as disturbed by the Valar as the
other elves. The way of life of the Elves before the invitation of the
Valar was the 'Quendi' group... not the Avari.
That said, the passage you quote also says that these Sindar adopted the
Silvan language (the first three words replaced by your "..." ellipsis
above are "adopting their language") in direct contradiction of LotR
where the Silvan elves adopted Sindarin. It would not have held up in
the face of the published evidence.
> I disagree. The passages in LOTR can be correlated
> with the neither Eldar nor Avari conception.
I don't agree, but actually the response was in reference to one of your
other quotations from the drafts where it is very clear that all elves
are split into either Eldar or Avari, but the Nandor do not fit under
EITHER category as defined... not 'there were Nandor who were neither
Eldar nor Avari', but rather 'there were no Nandor'.
> What? I disagree. I don't see the Avari-dominant
> texts excluding the Nandor at all. The primary text I
> rely on, Quendi and Eldar places them in the Vale of
> Anduin.
Quendi and Eldar doesn't say that the Avari were the dominant component
of the Silvan elves. You interpret some of the things it includes to
support that position, but it does not SAY that.
>> And you know full well that 'Wood-elves' and 'Silvan
>> Elves' are synonyms. You consistently use them that
>> way yourself... except here where it contradicts
>> your position.
> I think this is addressed below.
I do not see anything else in your message addressing this point.
>> B: The dominant language of the Noldor was... Sindarin.
> Why? Because they were outnumbered.
In the sense that the Noldor complied with Thranduil's order that only
Sindarin be spoken BECAUSE they were outnumbered by the Sindar in
Beleriand... yes.
However, this is notably different than your 'Avari dominance' theory.
The Noldor were not outnumbered by Sindar within all of their own realms
(though in some they may have been). The language did not change
because it was more commonly spoken by the internal population. It
changed because it was ordered by a superior external military force.
>> C: According to LotR the dominant language of the
>> Silvan elves was... Sindarin.
> I recall LOTR saying the language of the East-elves
> does not appear; rather only Eldarin forms.
BECAUSE the Silvan elves now spoke Sindarin. Does that mean that the
majority population of the Silvan elves was Sindar? Obviously not.
Thus my point about your 'presence of Avarin words in Silvan speech
means they were dominant portion of population' theory.
> Again not surprising. The texts we are discussing are
> written after the fact by Eldarin loremasters.
No, I'm pretty sure they were written by JRR Tolkien. :)
> They are analying a situation that has alrady occurred.
> They see that Avari are all over the place in Eriador
> and Rhovanion. They've analyzed the linguistics.
> They see the Avain population dominates. They don't
> need to state the obvious.
You're seriously arguing the hypothetical motivations of the
hypothetical loremasters whose work Tolkien hypothetically translated?
>> The 'Avari dominance' theory relies upon mass migration
>> of Avari into those regions. No texts describing such
>> a mass migration exist.
> Texts describing the result do.
Which is precisely my point. Texts describing the result of BOTH
theories exist. Texts describing HOW exist only for the Nandor theory.
Only the Nandor theory is consistent with Silvan elves feeling the 'Sea
longing'. Only the Nandor are called 'Silvan' prior to the merging of
different types of Elves. Hence my view that the Nandor origin is much
more firmly established in the texts.
Christopher Kreuzer
> "McREsq" <mcr...@aol.com> wrote:
> In the sense that the Noldor complied with Thranduil's order that only
> Sindarin be spoken BECAUSE they were outnumbered by the Sindar in
> Beleriand... yes.
>
> However, this is notably different than your 'Avari dominance' theory.
> The Noldor were not outnumbered by Sindar within all of their own
> realms (though in some they may have been). The language did not
> change because it was more commonly spoken by the internal
> population. It changed because it was ordered by a superior external
> military force.
I got the impression it changed more out of courtesy and for ease of
communication and a desire to fit in with their allies, rather than
being cowed by the military forces of Doriath. Similar to the Dwarves
using Westron in the Third Age. One of the Noldorin princes recognised
that Thingol granted the Noldor lands that he could not defend, and so
gained defenders of his northern borders without losing face. I don't
get any impression that Doriath's forces are superior to the Noldorin
forces.
<snip>
> You're seriously arguing the hypothetical motivations of the
> hypothetical loremasters whose work Tolkien hypothetically translated?
Well, you have to carry things through to their logical conclusions. You
can't just stop halfway through and go, hang on, it's only a book... :-)
<snip>
> theory. Only the Nandor theory is consistent with Silvan elves
> feeling the 'Sea longing'.
Is this the sea-longing that Legolas in RotK ('The Last Debate) says
lies: "deep in the hearts of all my kindred"?
Christopher
--
---
Reply clue: Saruman welcomes you to Spamgard
Stan Brown
rec.arts.books.tolkien:
(About why the Noldor in M-e switched from Quenya to Sindarin)
>I got the impression it changed more out of courtesy and for ease of
>communication and a desire to fit in with their allies, rather than
>being cowed by the military forces of Doriath. Similar to the Dwarves
>using Westron in the Third Age. One of the Noldorin princes recognised
>that Thingol granted the Noldor lands that he could not defend, and so
>gained defenders of his northern borders without losing face. I don't
>get any impression that Doriath's forces are superior to the Noldorin
>forces.
I agree it wasn't military force. I agree it was desire for
communication and for courtesy.
But we can be more specific. Thingol said he would not speak the
language of the Kin-slayers, murderers of the subjects of his
brother Olwė:
"Never again in my ears shall be heard the tongue of those who slew
my kin in Alqualondė! Nor in all my realm shall it be openly spoken,
while my power endures. All the Sindar shall hear my command that
they shall neither speak with the tongue of the Noldor nor answer to
it. And all such as use it shall be held slayers of kin and
betrayers of kin unrepentant." -- Silm 15, "Of the Noldor in
Beleriand"
I think the great majority of the Noldor who had been involved in
that dreadful deed felt guilt and shame over it, and when Thingol's
words were reported to them they figured it was one way to show that
they were deeply regretful for what they had done. And the Noldor
who had not been part of it would also switch languages to avoid
"guilt by association".
McREsq
>
>> That no matter what the conception, Nandor yearned to
>> go over the Sea and Avari didn't.
>
>But the Silvan elves DID... does that not inherently contradict them
>being primarily Avari in origin?
That statement was made in a conception in which all Silvan were Nandor. In
other words it says mroe about the Nandor than about the Silvans.
>> UT also supports my position: "Oropher had come among
>> them with only a handful of Sindar, and they were soon
>> merged with the Silvan Elves...they wished indeed to
>> become Silvan folk and to return, as they said, to the
>> simple life natural to the Elves before the invitation
>> of the Valar had disturbed it"
>
>> In this passage the Silvan way of life was the life
>> before the Valar disturbed it - in other words the
>> Avarin life.
>
>Not true. The Avari were every bit as disturbed by the Valar as the
>other elves. The way of life of the Elves before the invitation of the
>Valar was the 'Quendi' group... not the Avari.
>
>That said, the passage you quote also says that these Sindar adopted the
>Silvan language (the first three words replaced by your "..." ellipsis
>above are "adopting their language") in direct contradiction of LotR
>where the Silvan elves adopted Sindarin. It would not have held up in
>the face of the published evidence.
Conrad, that ignores almost 6000 years of time passing. Oropher came among
them at the beginning of the Second Age. The LOTR Appendicies were written at
the begining of the Fourth Age - 6000 years later. That's plenty of time for
the "court tongue" to take over as the usual daily language.
>> I disagree. The passages in LOTR can be correlated
>> with the neither Eldar nor Avari conception.
>
>I don't agree, but actually the response was in reference to one of your
>other quotations from the drafts where it is very clear that all elves
>are split into either Eldar or Avari, but the Nandor do not fit under
>EITHER category as defined... not 'there were Nandor who were neither
>Eldar nor Avari', but rather 'there were no Nandor'.
The same can be said of the published LOTR.
>> What? I disagree. I don't see the Avari-dominant
>> texts excluding the Nandor at all. The primary text I
>> rely on, Quendi and Eldar places them in the Vale of
>> Anduin.
>
>Quendi and Eldar doesn't say that the Avari were the dominant component
>of the Silvan elves. You interpret some of the things it includes to
>support that position, but it does not SAY that.
Fine, but that doesn't respond to what I said. I was simply saying that the
Avari-dominant texts don't exclude the Nandor - quote the opposite. On the
other hand the main Nandor-dominant texts exlcude the Avari.
>>> And you know full well that 'Wood-elves' and 'Silvan
>>> Elves' are synonyms. You consistently use them that
>>> way yourself... except here where it contradicts
>>> your position.
>
>> I think this is addressed below.
>
>I do not see anything else in your message addressing this point.
I did: my point about the Sindar and Noldor first meeting the Nandor and
calling them wood elves and only meeting Avarin wood elves later. You agreed,
as I recall.
>
>>> B: The dominant language of the Noldor was... Sindarin.
>
>> Why? Because they were outnumbered.
>
>In the sense that the Noldor complied with Thranduil's order that only
>Sindarin be spoken BECAUSE they were outnumbered by the Sindar in
>Beleriand... yes.
I don't see it that the Noldor complied with Thingol's order. It was a simple
fact of life: most of the population spoke Sindar.
>However, this is notably different than your 'Avari dominance' theory.
>The Noldor were not outnumbered by Sindar within all of their own realms
>(though in some they may have been). The language did not change
>because it was more commonly spoken by the internal population. It
>changed because it was ordered by a superior external military force.
That's another issue. I highly doubt the Sindar could have defeated Noldor.
moreover, I doubt Sindar was spoken where the sons of Feanor ruled, since the
Sindar didn't live there to begin with.
>
>>> C: According to LotR the dominant language of the
>>> Silvan elves was... Sindarin.
>
>> I recall LOTR saying the language of the East-elves
>> does not appear; rather only Eldarin forms.
>
>BECAUSE the Silvan elves now spoke Sindarin. Does that mean that the
>majority population of the Silvan elves was Sindar? Obviously not.
>Thus my point about your 'presence of Avarin words in Silvan speech
>means they were dominant portion of population' theory.
You're compressing 6000 years of time passing from when the Loremasters made
their study to when the Red Book was written.
>> Again not surprising. The texts we are discussing are
>> written after the fact by Eldarin loremasters.
>
>No, I'm pretty sure they were written by JRR Tolkien. :)
Next thing you'll be telling me is that Bilbo didn't write There and Back
Again.
>> They are analying a situation that has alrady occurred.
>> They see that Avari are all over the place in Eriador
>> and Rhovanion. They've analyzed the linguistics.
>> They see the Avain population dominates. They don't
>> need to state the obvious.
>
>You're seriously arguing the hypothetical motivations of the
>hypothetical loremasters whose work Tolkien hypothetically translated?
Well...yes. Tolkien took these in-story authorships seriously, why shouldn't
we?
>>> The 'Avari dominance' theory relies upon mass migration
>>> of Avari into those regions. No texts describing such
>>> a mass migration exist.
>
>> Texts describing the result do.
>
>Which is precisely my point. Texts describing the result of BOTH
>theories exist. Texts describing HOW exist only for the Nandor theory.
>Only the Nandor theory is consistent with Silvan elves feeling the 'Sea
>longing'.
Same thing. That only occurs within a Nandor-only conception so it's
self-fulfilling.
Only the Nandor are called 'Silvan' prior to the merging of
>different types of Elves.
They're called Wood-elves but I dont' recall the use of the word Silvan until
later texts.
Hence my view that the Nandor origin is much
>more firmly established in the texts.
How can the Nandor-only origin be much more firmly established in the texts
when your best evidence of that was written in the last couple of years of
Tolkien's life? Take away the 'late etymological text' eividence and you have
almost nothing.
Russ
McREsq
>(quoting me, but incorrectly attributing the quote to Conrad)
>>>Ah -- so the Silvan Elves were Nandor (and therefore Eldar), not
>>>Avari.
>>
>>Incorrect.
>
>You seem to be under the impression that simply rapping out
>"incorrect" is a form of argument. Let me disabuse you of that
>notion. Outside the world of Monty Python, argument is more than
>one-word disagreements.
Ni.
OK, you're statement above is wrong because in LOTR App F, it explicitly says
the Elves of Mirkeood and Lorien (i.e the Silvans) were mostly *not* Eldar.
>>And not even Conrad argues that Silvans were Avari alone.
>I never said he did, you berk.
Berk?
That was _my_ mistake, as I said in
>my article.
Russ
McREsq
>> Those are two index entries (one from UT and one from Sil)
>> of questionable source.
>
>They are "of questionable source"?
>
>To be specific, it is unknown whether those definitions were written by
>JRRT or CT. Neither of whom is a particularly 'questionable source'.
Not only do we not know who wrote the entries we don't know if was a simple
reletition of another primary source which would mean it's just double
counting. Thus, if the UT index entry simply came from the text in UT itself,
then counting both would be double counting.
>Why do we need to introduce 'spin' to Tolkien discussion? It is bad
>enough that the news has been warped to such a degree that 'truth' is
>subjective in politics... why emulate that here?
>
>> The idea of Silvan=Nandor alone, only appears clearly
>> in 2 questionable late etymological texts.
>
>It appears in three sources other than the index entries.
No, only 2: The text in UT and Of Swarves and Men. Your third souce simply
doesn't stand for that proposition. All your third source says is that the
Nandor were called "Wood-elves." That's hardly evidence of Nandor-only origin
on Silvan elves.
Nor do they
>all say 'Silvan=Nandor alone' and those which do are in reference to the
>early history when that was the case or likely speaking generally.
>
>> Other more established texts evidence Avari being the
>> dominant culture in the Silvan realms.
>
>I disagree. There are numerous texts specifically laying out a detailed
>backstory for how the Nandor came to be the Silvan elves and none doing
>so for how the Avari would have.
That's simply absurd. The texts explicitly speak of a westward migraion of
Avari up to and including 'small secret groups' entering Beleriand.
We can construct such a backstory by
>assuming large migrations into the Nandor areas, but Tolkien never wrote
>of this.
He wrote of a migration (the evidence being their undeniable *presence*). You
and I disagree as to the extent.
Likewise the Nandor origin is supported by the very nature of
>the Silvan elves... they felt the call to the Sea - as did the Nandor,
>but not the Avari.
Again, sorry. That's coming from the same conception. The text where the
Silvans yearned for the sea occurs in text where the Silvans are Nandor only.
There is other text speaking of elves without the yearning for the Sea being
Silvan elves.
Russ
McREsq
>> Ah -- so the Silvan Elves were Nandor (and therefore
>> Eldar), not Avari.
>
>I believe so,
That definition above is self defeating because, as you know, according to LOTR
non-Eldar were most of the population of the Silvan realms.
<snip>
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> That definition above is self defeating because, as
> you know, according to LOTR non-Eldar were most of
> the population of the Silvan realms.
And as YOU know LotR defines 'Eldar' to exclude the Nandor, but other
texts do not.
Even though this 'Nandor != Eldar' definition was published in LotR most
of Tolkien's other texts seem to include them amongst the Eldar.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> Not only do we not know who wrote the entries we don't
> know if was a simple reletition of another primary
> source which would mean it's just double counting.
If JRRT 'copied' the idea from other texts when he wrote the index entry
I don't see a problem. That only comes into play if it was CT who wrote
the index entry. In which case what we see in the Silm & UT indexes is
CT's opinion (at that time) as to the origins of the Nandor rather than
JRRT's.
> No, only 2: The text in UT and Of Swarves and Men.
> Your third souce simply doesn't stand for that
> proposition. All your third source says is that the
> Nandor were called "Wood-elves." That's hardly evidence
> of Nandor-only origin on Silvan elves.
Are you disputing that 'Wood-elves' = 'Silvan elves' or that the Nandor
being called "the Wood-elves" would indicate that they were the majority
population thereof?
>> I disagree. There are numerous texts specifically
>> laying out a detailed backstory for how the Nandor
>> came to be the Silvan elves and none doing so for how
>> the Avari would have.
> That's simply absurd. The texts explicitly speak of
> a westward migraion of Avari up to and including 'small
> secret groups' entering Beleriand.
The equivalent of Tolkien having written that 'the Nandor left the Great
March and some few of them came to Beleriand'... but that ISN'T all he
wrote about the Nandor. He repeatedly indicated that they settled the
areas around Mirkwood and Lorien. There is a solid backstory for the
texts stating that the Silvan elves were primarily Nandor. The
backstory for the Silvan elves being primarily Avari is much less
established... Tolkien never wrote of them joining the Silvan elves in
sufficient numbers to exceed the existing Nandor population. You have
constructed a reasonable theory of this happening, but you have to guess
at the details... precisely WHEN did it happen, WHY did so many Avari
come to join the Nandor, et cetera... because Tolkien never WROTE that
story. It is something you have constructed out of bits and pieces from
scattered texts.
>> Likewise the Nandor origin is supported by the very
>> nature of the Silvan elves... they felt the call to
>> the Sea - as did the Nandor, but not the Avari.
> Again, sorry. That's coming from the same conception.
> The text where the Silvans yearned for the sea occurs
> in text where the Silvans are Nandor only.
There are several texts where Silvan Elves yearned for the Sea...
including Lord of the Rings.
> There is other text speaking of elves without the
> yearning for the Sea being Silvan elves.
Cite?
Conrad Dunkerson
news:O15Wc.4986$Yt.60...@news-text.cableinet.net...
> I got the impression it changed more out of courtesy
> and for ease of communication and a desire to fit in
> with their allies, rather than being cowed by the
> military forces of Doriath.
Tolkien said different things about this. I agree that your view makes
more sense given other indicators that the Noldor were the more powerful
force. However, if anything that disagrees further with Russ's 'they
were outnumbered' reasoning for why the Noldor switched to speaking
Sindarin.
> Well, you have to carry things through to their logical
> conclusions. You can't just stop halfway through and go,
> hang on, it's only a book... :-)
I think you'll find that the 'meta-story' of original authors and
translators and suchlike breaks down very quickly if you examine it
closely... and even if not, attempting to divine the actions of people
whose names and characters we do not even know is effectively pure
speculation.
> Is this the sea-longing that Legolas in RotK ('The
> Last Debate) says lies: "deep in the hearts of all
> my kindred"?
Yes, that'd be the one. All of the 'Eldar' (including Nandor in this
usage) would sometimes feel a longing which caused them to wander, and
if they encountered the Sea they were drawn to it. The Avari felt no
such longing.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> That statement was made in a conception in which
> all Silvan were Nandor.
In LotR Legolas says,
"But deep in the hearts of all my kindred lies the sea-longing, which it
is perilous to stir."
RotK, The Last Debate
Indeed, I believe that the Silvan elves are consistently represented as
feeling the sea-longing.
> Conrad, that ignores almost 6000 years of time passing.
> Oropher came among them at the beginning of the Second
> Age. The LOTR Appendicies were written at the begining
> of the Fourth Age - 6000 years later. That's plenty of
> time for the "court tongue" to take over as the usual
> daily language.
But... how? The 'court tongue' WAS Silvan. So was the common tongue.
Why would Sindarin 'come back' after the Sindar had deliberately
abandoned it in favor of Silvan?
>> I don't agree, but actually the response was in
>> reference to one of your other quotations from the
>> drafts where it is very clear that all elves are split
>> into either Eldar or Avari, but the Nandor do not fit
>> under EITHER category as defined... not 'there were
>> Nandor who were neither Eldar nor Avari', but rather
>> 'there were no Nandor'.
> The same can be said of the published LOTR.
Not exactly. If we want to go THAT route then in the published LotR
'there were no AVARI' either.
> Fine, but that doesn't respond to what I said. I was
> simply saying that the Avari-dominant texts don't exclude
> the Nandor - quote the opposite.
The only text which supports the 'Avari dominant' view that I can think
of which DOESN'T exclude the Nandor is your Quendi and Eldar example.
All the others say 'the elves of these lands were Avari'.
> I did: my point about the Sindar and Noldor first meeting
> the Nandor and calling them wood elves and only meeting
> Avarin wood elves later. You agreed, as I recall.
I still don't see how this makes the Nandor not the Silvan elves...
unless you are saying that they WERE the Silvan elves (exclusively)
until the 'loremasters' encountered elves of Avarin descent and
classified these as 'Silvan' also.
> I don't see it that the Noldor complied with Thingol's
> order. It was a simple fact of life: most of the
> population spoke Sindar.
It has been my impression that some of the Noldorin kingdoms came to
have large Sindarin populations, but not all of them. Thus, most of the
population in Hithlum for instance probably spoke Quenya... until
Thingol told them not to.
> Next thing you'll be telling me is that Bilbo didn't
> write There and Back Again.
Be quite certain that he did not.
> Well...yes. Tolkien took these in-story authorships
> seriously, why shouldn't we?
To the extent that Tolkien did, well enough... in details and for
conclusions he did not draw... no. Otherwise we suddenly have a very
different book. Everything which the purported authors cannot have
known (the fox, Sauron's thoughts, what Frodo saw when approaching Aman,
et cetera) must be put down to 'artistic license' rather than something
which actually happened. Bilbo must be accounted the greatest of all
seers for his casual foreknowledge of express trains and other arcane
matters.
Once we get into the actions and motivations of characters in the
'meta-story' it becomes a matter of our own invention beyond the barest
fragments Tolkien used to sketch that framework.
> They're called Wood-elves but I dont' recall the use
> of the word Silvan until later texts.
The LQ1 passage calls them Wood-elves, which is synonymous with Silvan
elves. The 'Dwarves and Men' passage calls them "Silvan" when they
first settled the area near the Gladden Fields in the Elder Days.
> How can the Nandor-only origin be much more firmly
> established in the texts when your best evidence of
> that was written in the last couple of years of
> Tolkien's life?
Define 'best evidence'. Why are all the texts stating that the Nandor
settled the regions where we later find the Silvan elves not the 'best
evidence'? They clearly show that the Nandor were there.
> Take away the 'late etymological text' eividence and
> you have almost nothing.
Except the numerous texts showing the Nandor settling those areas, the
LQ1 text naming the Nandor as the Wood elves, and the fact that Silvan
elves felt the sea-longing (in at least three texts - including LotR).
It would also require taking away two different 'late etymological
texts' (those given in UT and 'Dwarves and Men').
Take away the LotR >draft< materials and you've got, what... Quendi and
Eldar?
Christopher Kreuzer
>> There is other text speaking of elves without the
>> yearning for the Sea being Silvan elves.
>
> Cite?
Probably not what Russ had in mind, but I am thinking of Maglor
wandering beside the sea after he threw the last Silmaril in (though
that might have been longing for the Silmaril) and also Tuor and
Earendil feeling the sea-longing. But that doesn't overturn Conrad's
point that the Avari did not feel the sea-longing. Only the 'higher
Elves', those of the original journey, the Eldar, felt the sea-longing.
At least I hope that is right.
Christopher Kreuzer
> "Christopher Kreuzer" <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> Well, you have to carry things through to their logical
>> conclusions. You can't just stop halfway through and go,
>> hang on, it's only a book... :-)
>
> I think you'll find that the 'meta-story' of original authors and
> translators and suchlike breaks down very quickly if you examine it
> closely...
Such as? I think the meta-story is flexible enough to cope with lots of
queries that ca be thrown at it.
> and even if not, attempting to divine the actions of people
> whose names and characters we do not even know is effectively pure
> speculation.
That is true.
McREsq
>
>> That statement was made in a conception in which
>> all Silvan were Nandor.
>
>In LotR Legolas says,
>"But deep in the hearts of all my kindred lies the sea-longing, which it
>is perilous to stir."
>RotK, The Last Debate
Legloas' kindred is indisputably Sindar!
>Indeed, I believe that the Silvan elves are consistently represented as
>feeling the sea-longing.
No, the only place that appears is the quote by a *Sindarin* prince and in the
UT conception in which all Silvan are Nandor and all Nandor are Eldar - a
conception at odds with the published LOTR.
>> Conrad, that ignores almost 6000 years of time passing.
>> Oropher came among them at the beginning of the Second
>> Age. The LOTR Appendicies were written at the begining
>> of the Fourth Age - 6000 years later. That's plenty of
>> time for the "court tongue" to take over as the usual
>> daily language.
>
>But... how? The 'court tongue' WAS Silvan. So was the common tongue.
>Why would Sindarin 'come back' after the Sindar had deliberately
>abandoned it in favor of Silvan?
Who ever said the Sindar abandoned their tongue? There is no evidence of that
at all. Quite the opposite. In fact, what we see are Silvan peoples accepting
the overlordship of Sindarin princes. It looks to be a bit of a symbiotic
relationship. The Sindarin refugees want to get back to their roots and the
Silvan elves want some of the cultural 'oomph' that the Sindar bring. Combined
with the Sindarin tingue being a written language and the Silvan not awritten
language and you have all the ingredients of a long term adoption of the
Sidarin tongue as the lingua franca over time. Tolkien was a philologist after
all.
>
>>> I don't agree, but actually the response was in
>>> reference to one of your other quotations from the
>>> drafts where it is very clear that all elves are split
>>> into either Eldar or Avari, but the Nandor do not fit
>>> under EITHER category as defined... not 'there were
>>> Nandor who were neither Eldar nor Avari', but rather
>>> 'there were no Nandor'.
>
>> The same can be said of the published LOTR.
>
>Not exactly. If we want to go THAT route then in the published LotR
>'there were no AVARI' either.
Both of our arguments require reference to texts outside the LOTR proper.
>> Fine, but that doesn't respond to what I said. I was
>> simply saying that the Avari-dominant texts don't exclude
>> the Nandor - quote the opposite.
>
>The only text which supports the 'Avari dominant' view that I can think
>of which DOESN'T exclude the Nandor is your Quendi and Eldar example.
>All the others say 'the elves of these lands were Avari'.
<puzzled> Which others?
>
>> I did: my point about the Sindar and Noldor first meeting
>> the Nandor and calling them wood elves and only meeting
>> Avarin wood elves later. You agreed, as I recall.
>
>I still don't see how this makes the Nandor not the Silvan elves...
>unless you are saying that they WERE the Silvan elves (exclusively)
>until the 'loremasters' encountered elves of Avarin descent and
>classified these as 'Silvan' also.
In a sense yes. Look, your quote appears to refer to an *early* study of those
elves. The first name is the people of Dan, the second is the wood-elves. The
people of Dan were early migrants to Beleriand who were decimated in the First
Battle and went back to Eriador. Thus if that quote comes from an early frist
age source, it's not surprising there is no reference to the Avari. Quendi and
Eldar reports only small secretive bands of Avari reaching Beleriand and only a
rare few of them becoming celbin.
>> I don't see it that the Noldor complied with Thingol's
>> order. It was a simple fact of life: most of the
>> population spoke Sindar.
>
>It has been my impression that some of the Noldorin kingdoms came to
>have large Sindarin populations, but not all of them. Thus, most of the
>population in Hithlum for instance probably spoke Quenya... until
>Thingol told them not to.
I disagree. We have three different groups. The Feanoreans planted themselves
in areas with little or no Sindarin population to begin with and knowing their
attitude, I highly doubt their day to day language was anythign other than
Quenya. However the other Noldorin realms had large, if not dominant Sindarn
populations - and that is where the issue would arise. Fingolfin was bending
over backwards to make nice with Thingol and Finrod was half a Teleri himself.
Thus it was a matter of practical politics in Hithlum, Nargothorond and the
rest of West Beleriand.
>> Next thing you'll be telling me is that Bilbo didn't
>> write There and Back Again.
>
>Be quite certain that he did not.
I'm quite certain you own siamese cats.
<snip>
>> They're called Wood-elves but I dont' recall the use
>> of the word Silvan until later texts.
>
>The LQ1 passage calls them Wood-elves, which is synonymous with Silvan
>elves.
Were they synonymous then? When is the first appearance of the term "Silvan"
elves.
> The 'Dwarves and Men' passage calls them "Silvan" when they
>first settled the area near the Gladden Fields in the Elder Days.
Right, but Of Dwarves is a later text.
>> How can the Nandor-only origin be much more firmly
>> established in the texts when your best evidence of
>> that was written in the last couple of years of
>> Tolkien's life?
>
>Define 'best evidence'.
UT and Of Dwarves and Men.
> Why are all the texts stating that the Nandor
>settled the regions where we later find the Silvan elves not the 'best
>evidence'? They clearly show that the Nandor were there.
But no one is denying they were they or that they were there first. We agree
100% on that.
>> Take away the 'late etymological text' eividence and
>> you have almost nothing.
>
>Except the numerous texts showing the Nandor settling those areas,
No one disagrees with that.
> the
>LQ1 text naming the Nandor as the Wood elves,
An early reference, it is preceded bycalling them the people of Dan, after all.
and the fact that Silvan
>elves felt the sea-longing (in at least three texts
Yes, the late etymological texts we are 'taking away'. And these texts
contradict LOTR. The texts that say the Silvan elves felt sea longing are the
same ones that say the Silvan elves are Eldar thus meaning they cannot be
East-elves.
> - including LotR).
No, all LOTR says is that Legolas - an undeniable Sinda - says his kindred has
the sea-longing.
>It would also require taking away two different 'late etymological
>texts' (those given in UT and 'Dwarves and Men').
Well, yes. That was my hypothetical: Take away those two texts and you have
almost nothing.
>Take away the LotR >draft< materials and you've got, what... Quendi and
>Eldar?
And LOTR: West-elves, East-elves.
Plus QS material
Russ
McREsq
>> No, only 2: The text in UT and Of Swarves and Men.
>> Your third souce simply doesn't stand for that
>> proposition. All your third source says is that the
>> Nandor were called "Wood-elves." That's hardly evidence
>> of Nandor-only origin on Silvan elves.
>
>Are you disputing that 'Wood-elves' = 'Silvan elves' or that the Nandor
>being called "the Wood-elves" would indicate that they were the majority
>population thereof?
At which point in time? The text was written from a Beleriandic point of view:
the first descriptive word is the 'Host of Dan'. This passage is written to
present a quite early situtation - when the only wood-elves known were Nandor.
It does after all come from the Quenta *Silmarillion*. Quendi and Eldar
reflects later scholarship when the loremasters finnaly were able to study the
Avari more in Eriador and beyond.
>
>>> I disagree. There are numerous texts specifically
>>> laying out a detailed backstory for how the Nandor
>>> came to be the Silvan elves and none doing so for how
>>> the Avari would have.
>
>> That's simply absurd. The texts explicitly speak of
>> a westward migraion of Avari up to and including 'small
>> secret groups' entering Beleriand.
>
>The equivalent of Tolkien having written that 'the Nandor left the Great
>March and some few of them came to Beleriand'... but that ISN'T all he
>wrote about the Nandor. He repeatedly indicated that they settled the
>areas around Mirkwood and Lorien.
Again, a point no one denies. I agree 100% the Nandor initially settled there.
There is a solid backstory for the
>texts stating that the Silvan elves were primarily Nandor.
Yes, up until the Avari moved west as well.
And the problem is your own primary source speaks of the *small* Silvan
population:
"The Silvan Elves hid themselves in woodland fastnesses beyond the Misty
Mountains, and became small and scattered people, hardly to be distinguished
from Avari; but they still remembered that they were in origin Eldar,
members of the Third Clan, and they welcomed those of the Noldor and especially
the Sindar who did not pass over the Sea but migrated eastward..."
UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
The problems with your reliance on theses UT texts is several fold:
1) they all limit the Silvan Elves to beyond the Misty Mountains
2) they all make Nandor Eldar
3) they make them a small scattered people - so how did they outnumber the
Noldor and Sindar
4) they admit the Avari were on-scene because they could be compared to them
Come to think of it, even if we accept the UT conception of the Nandor, all
that makes them is a small, scattered people. That's not inconsistent with the
Avari East-elves still being the dominant population of these realms
The
>backstory for the Silvan elves being primarily Avari is much less
>established...
And why is this surprising. These are *Noldo/Sinda* histories. A small host
leaving the Great Journey would be remembered. Portions of that host later
entering Beleriand and meeting their long lost kinsman would be an event in
Sindarin history. On the other hand the first time they meet the Avari in any
great numbers was only much later in the Second Age and the histories simply
report the obvious: they are here.
> Tolkien never wrote of them joining the Silvan elves in
>sufficient numbers to exceed the existing Nandor population. You have
>constructed a reasonable theory of this happening, but you have to guess
>at the details...
Not the important ones: 1) their much greater starting population; 2) their
undeniable presence and 3) the fact that the Silvan tongue uses Silvan form for
the term for their race.
> precisely WHEN did it happen, WHY did so many Avari
>come to join the Nandor, et cetera... because Tolkien never WROTE that
>story.
Tolkien never wrote why the Nandor eventually came to Beleriand either.
> It is something you have constructed out of bits and pieces from
>scattered texts.
>
>>> Likewise the Nandor origin is supported by the very
>>> nature of the Silvan elves... they felt the call to
>>> the Sea - as did the Nandor, but not the Avari.
>
>> Again, sorry. That's coming from the same conception.
>> The text where the Silvans yearned for the sea occurs
>> in text where the Silvans are Nandor only.
>
>There are several texts where Silvan Elves yearned for the Sea...
>including Lord of the Rings.
Only one text where a non-Sinda does and she is Nimrodel, a Nando.
>> There is other text speaking of elves without the
>> yearning for the Sea being Silvan elves.
>
>Cite?
Appendicies drafts:
pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The East-elves that being content
with Middle-earth remain there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward, but lingered on the shores
of Middle-earth until the return of the Noldor."
pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in the world; *and many
were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to no summons to the Sea*, but being
content with Middle-earth remained there and remained long after, fading in the
fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men usurped the lands. Of that kind were
the Elves of Greenwood the Great."
East-elves did not yearn the Sea.
Russ
McREsq
>> That definition above is self defeating because, as
>> you know, according to LOTR non-Eldar were most of
>> the population of the Silvan realms.
>
>And as YOU know LotR defines 'Eldar' to exclude the Nandor, but other
>texts do not.
It's not simply that the LOTR excludes them; rather it doesn't even acknowledge
their existence.
>
>Even though this 'Nandor != Eldar' definition was published in LotR most
>of Tolkien's other texts seem to include them amongst the Eldar.
Thus you have to shoehorn Eldarin Nandor into non-Eldarin East-elves.
The texts most strongly supporting the postion that the Nandor=Silvan (ie. IU
and Of Dwarves and Men) also 1) state Nandor were Eldar (contradicting LOTR);
and 2) state that they were a "small and scattered people" (contradicting them
being a large enough population to outnumber the Noldor, Sindar and Avari);
and 3) also state they were "hardly to be distinguished from Avari" (which
implies Avari were the larger population against which the Nandor were
compared).
You simply cannot parse one sliver from these late etymological texts and
ignore all the other slivers that actually contradict your argument.
Russ
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> It's not simply that the LOTR excludes them; rather
> it doesn't even acknowledge their existence.
To be specific, LotR neither acknowledges not DENIES the existence of
the Nandor... OR the Avari.
> Thus you have to shoehorn Eldarin Nandor into
> non-Eldarin East-elves.
Not really. The texts are inconsistent. Trying to apply a consistent
definition of 'Eldar' across texts where it is obviously changing is an
inherently flawed proposition.
> and 2) state that they were a "small and scattered
> people" (contradicting them being a large enough
> population to outnumber the Noldor, Sindar and Avari);
The text quoted in UT says that of the Silvan Nandor in ancient times...
immediately afterwards it says that when they took Noldor and Sindar
leaders (such as Galadriel, Celeborn and Oropher) at the start of the
Second Age 'they became again an ordered folk'.
> and 3) also state they were "hardly to be distinguished
> from Avari" (which implies Avari were the larger
> population against which the Nandor were compared).
Errr... no. It indicates that they WEREN'T Avari, but were similar to
them. It says absolutely nothing about Avari numbers. They could have
been 'hardly to be distinguished' from those fifteen Avari in the
corner.
> You simply cannot parse one sliver from these late
> etymological texts and ignore all the other slivers
> that actually contradict your argument.
You simply cannot combine texts using different definitions of terms to
construct a 'conglomerate argument'.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Such as? I think the meta-story is flexible enough to
> cope with lots of queries that ca be thrown at it.
How did Frodo (or Bilbo - depending on how far he got in writing up what
Frodo told him) know that a fox watched him and the others sleeping in
the Shire. How did he know what it was thinking?
How did Sam know what Frodo saw after giving the book to Sam and leaving
the Grey Havens (but before Sam himself gave the book to Elanor and
followed)?
How did the scribes of Gondor who ostensibly compiled the appendixes
know details of OUR ancient and modern world?
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> This passage is written to present a quite early
> situtation - when the only wood-elves known were Nandor.
So, the Nandor >were< the Wood / Silvan elves as first classified by the
'High Elves' (Noldor & Sindar), but later some Avari were also
classified as Wood / Silvan elves?
Couple of questions;
1: Why weren't the few Avari encountered in Beleriand considered 'Silvan
elves'? Or were they and this is assumed to just not be mentioned
because of their small population?
2: Assuming these ideas are correct - could there not then simply be
large numbers of Avari (classified as 'Silvan' by hypothetical
Noldor/Sindar observers) in the East? Leaving the Nandor as the
dominant Silvan population in their own lands?
>> There is a solid backstory for the texts stating that
>> the Silvan elves were primarily Nandor.
> Yes, up until the Avari moved west as well.
And beyond. Because there is no text stating that large numbers of
Avari moved west. Some of the Nandor entered Beleriand... but that
doesn't mean they became the dominant population there.
> "The Silvan Elves hid themselves in woodland fastnesses
> beyond the Misty Mountains, and became small and
> scattered people, hardly to be distinguished from Avari;
> but they still remembered that they were in origin Eldar,
> members of the Third Clan, and they welcomed those of
> the Noldor and especially the Sindar who did not pass
> over the Sea but migrated eastward..."
> UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
That text continues by saying that under the leadership of these early
Second Age immigrants the Silvan elves 'became again an ordered people'.
No longer scattered. Other texts indicate that their numbers increased.
> The problems with your reliance on theses UT texts is
> several fold:
I don't rely exclusively (or even primarily) on the two UT texts.
> 1) they all limit the Silvan Elves to beyond the Misty
> Mountains
Why is this a 'problem'?
The 'Silvan' index entry and the text in Appendix A of 'History of
Galadriel and Celeborn' do define 'Silvan' elves as only those who
remained east of the Misty Mountains, but this is yet another issue of
minor variations in terminology. Some of those who left the Great March
at the Misty Mountains stayed there (and are here defined as 'Silvan')
and some of them eventually moved on (and are here defined as
'Nandor'... which in other instances is the term for BOTH groups). The
story is still exactly the same, just the meanings of the terms used has
changed slightly.
> 2) they all make Nandor Eldar
The Appendix A text does. The index doesn't specify.
> 3) they make them a small scattered people
The Appendix A text does in the First Age. The index doesn't specify.
> - so how did they outnumber the Noldor and Sindar
<?>
Because only a few Noldor and Sindar joined them? They didn't absorb
the entire Noldor / Sindar population after all. Most remained in
Eregion in realms of their own. How is that even a question?
> 4) they admit the Avari were on-scene because they
> could be compared to them
Again, 'they' refers to a single text. Yes, it acknowledges that Avari
existed. Wasn't in dispute that I knew of.
> Come to think of it, even if we accept the UT conception
> of the Nandor, all that makes them is a small, scattered
> people.
In the First Age.
> That's not inconsistent with the Avari East-elves still
> being the dominant population of these realms
Yes, it really is. The 'small and scattered people' were the Silvan
elves... who were descendants of Teleri who left the Great March at the
Misty Mountains and remained there... and were hardly to be
distinguished from Avari. That all very much IS inconsistent with them
BEING Avari.
>> The backstory for the Silvan elves being primarily
>> Avari is much less established...
> And why is this surprising. These are *Noldo/Sinda*
> histories.
No, these are Tolkien's histories and in Tolkien's histories the
backstory for the Silvan elves being Avari is much less established than
the backstory for them being Nandor.
No hypothetical Noldo/Sinda anti-Avari prejudice or 'later familiarity
with Avari' required.
Hell, we don't even know the hypothetical authors of every text.
> On the other hand the first time they meet the Avari in
> any great numbers was only much later in the Second Age
> and the histories simply report the obvious: they are
> here.
So how do these 'Noldo/Sinda' histories report on the events of the
Nandor while they were NOT in contact with them? Or background on the
Dwarves and Humans of the region prior to contact? Why do we have
information about all of these if these texts must be viewed strictly
from the standpoint of what the 'High Elves' knew at the time?
> Only one text where a non-Sinda does and she is
> Nimrodel, a Nando.
She was certainly Silvan. I believe that means she was also of
primarily Nandorin ancestry.
YOU seem to be suggesting that every instance of Silvan elves clearly
being descended from 'Teleri who left the Great March at the Misty
Mountains' is an exception of some kind rather than evidence of that
being the normal state of affairs.
You had written;
>>> There is other text speaking of elves without the
>>> yearning for the Sea being Silvan elves.
>>Cite?
> Appendicies drafts:
> pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The
> East-elves that being content with Middle-earth remain
> there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
> kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward, but
> lingered on the shores of Middle-earth until the return
> of the Noldor."
Doesn't say they were Silvan. Doesn't say they didn't feel the yearning
for the Sea.
> pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in the
> world; *and many were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to
> no summons to the Sea*, but being content with Middle-
> earth remained there and remained long after, fading in
> the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men usurped
> the lands. Of that kind were the Elves of Greenwood the
> Great."
> East-elves did not yearn the Sea.
Actually it says that they 'had not' hearkened to the summons to the
Sea. We have discussed before whether this must mean that they never
set out or merely that they never completed it... in either case it
doesn't speak to whether their descendants would feel a sea-longing.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
>> In LotR Legolas says,
>> "But deep in the hearts of all my kindred lies the
>> sea-longing, which it is perilous to stir."
>> RotK, The Last Debate
> Legloas' kindred is indisputably Sindar!
Heh... I'd dispute that.
"'That is true,' said Legolas. 'But the Elves of this land were of a
race strange to us of the silvan folk, and the trees and grass do not
now remember them...'"
FotR, The Ring Goes South
Oropher was Sindar originally, but chose to become a Silvan elf. His
grandson simply considered himself Silvan. Indeed, at the time LotR was
written Legolas simply WAS Silvan with the whole 'Sindarin leaders' bit
not yet invented.
The Silvan elves felt the sea-longing. They were not Avari. Those
Avari who joined them became 'Celbin'.
>> But... how? The 'court tongue' WAS Silvan. So was
>> the common tongue. Why would Sindarin 'come back'
>> after the Sindar had deliberately abandoned it in
>> favor of Silvan?
> Who ever said the Sindar abandoned their tongue?
Tolkien? In the passage you were quoting? Which was my point in the
first place... you quoted;
"Oropher had come among them with only a handful of Sindar, and they
were soon merged with the Silvan Elves...they wished indeed to become
Silvan folk and to return, as they said, to the simple life natural to
the Elves before the invitation of the Valar had disturbed it"
I pointed out that the '...' you snipped out began with "adopting their
language". Any of this ringing a bell?
>> The only text which supports the 'Avari dominant' view
>> that I can think of which DOESN'T exclude the Nandor is
>> your Quendi and Eldar example. All the others say 'the
>> elves of these lands were Avari'.
> <puzzled> Which others?
The appendix drafts.
> I'm quite certain you own siamese cats.
No, I'm with Tolkien on that one.
> Were they synonymous then?
The two words (sylvan and wood) DO mean the same thing. Tolkien DID use
them interchangeably (in TH Thranduil and company are 'Wood elves' in
LotR they are 'Silvan elves').
> When is the first appearance of the term "Silvan" elves.
I don't know offhand. Why?
>> Take away the LotR >draft< materials and you've got,
>> what... Quendi and Eldar?
> And LOTR: West-elves, East-elves.
With East-elves undefined and West-elves excluding both the Nandor and
the Avari. Thus not making your point.
> Plus QS material
<?>
McREsq
>> Such as? I think the meta-story is flexible enough to
>> cope with lots of queries that ca be thrown at it.
>
>How did Frodo (or Bilbo - depending on how far he got in writing up what
>Frodo told him) know that a fox watched him and the others sleeping in
>the Shire. How did he know what it was thinking?
Because it was a book written for children - both hobbit and human.
>How did Sam know what Frodo saw after giving the book to Sam and leaving
>the Grey Havens (but before Sam himself gave the book to Elanor and
>followed)?
He checked with his sources in Rivendell.
>How did the scribes of Gondor who ostensibly compiled the appendixes
>know details of OUR ancient and modern world?
The use a modern terms is merely the conseit of the translator.
Russ
McREsq
First question: Does this now constitute a "Great Debate"??
Do we need a reuling from the Steuard of Gondor?
>> It's not simply that the LOTR excludes them; rather
>> it doesn't even acknowledge their existence.
>
>To be specific, LotR neither acknowledges not DENIES the existence of
>the Nandor... OR the Avari.
Hence out problem. The primary published text does not mention either of the
terms we are debating.
>> Thus you have to shoehorn Eldarin Nandor into
>> non-Eldarin East-elves.
>
>Not really. The texts are inconsistent. Trying to apply a consistent
>definition of 'Eldar' across texts where it is obviously changing is an
>inherently flawed proposition.
I wouldn't sat inherently flawed; rather inherently difficult.
>> and 2) state that they were a "small and scattered
>> people" (contradicting them being a large enough
>> population to outnumber the Noldor, Sindar and Avari);
>
>The text quoted in UT says that of the Silvan Nandor in ancient times...
>immediately afterwards it says that when they took Noldor and Sindar
>leaders (such as Galadriel, Celeborn and Oropher) at the start of the
>Second Age 'they became again an ordered folk'.
Unless they suddenly had a baby boom, that wouldn't affect their population.
>> and 3) also state they were "hardly to be distinguished
>> from Avari" (which implies Avari were the larger
>> population against which the Nandor were compared).
>
>Errr... no. It indicates that they WEREN'T Avari, but were similar to
>them. It says absolutely nothing about Avari numbers. They could have
>been 'hardly to be distinguished' from those fifteen Avari in the
>corner.
Possibly, but you usually don't compare the majority to the minority; rather
the converse.
>> You simply cannot parse one sliver from these late
>> etymological texts and ignore all the other slivers
>> that actually contradict your argument.
>
>You simply cannot combine texts using different definitions of terms to
>construct a 'conglomerate argument'.
We're both doing that. Or didn't you realize?
Russ
McREsq
>> This passage is written to present a quite early
>> situtation - when the only wood-elves known were Nandor.
>
>So, the Nandor >were< the Wood / Silvan elves as first classified by the
>'High Elves' (Noldor & Sindar), but later some Avari were also
>classified as Wood / Silvan elves?
Yes, as I said several days ago. The first wood-elves the Eldar met were the
Nandor in Beleriand. We've never disagreed on this point, so I don't know why
you keep repeating it.
>Couple of questions;
>
>1: Why weren't the few Avari encountered in Beleriand considered 'Silvan
>elves'? Or were they and this is assumed to just not be mentioned
>because of their small population?
As Quendi and Eldar makes clear, the Avari only entered Beleriand in small,
scattered and secretive groups. The Eldar would have hadly any contact with
them and only very few became celbin. It simply wasn't an issue.
>2: Assuming these ideas are correct - could there not then simply be
>large numbers of Avari (classified as 'Silvan' by hypothetical
>Noldor/Sindar observers) in the East?
Yes, to the east in Eriador and Rhovanion.
Leaving the Nandor as the
>dominant Silvan population in their own lands?
Define "own lands". The Nandor first stopped in the Vale of Anduin. But then
some migrated to Eriador and some continued on to Beleriand. Thus you have a
relatively small population spread from Greedwood to Beleriand - the very
definition of a small, scattered people.
>>> There is a solid backstory for the texts stating that
>>> the Silvan elves were primarily Nandor.
And an equally solid backstory that some time later (but before the end of the
First Age) the Avari settled in those same lands.
<snip>
>> "The Silvan Elves hid themselves in woodland fastnesses
>> beyond the Misty Mountains, and became small and
>> scattered people, hardly to be distinguished from Avari;
>> but they still remembered that they were in origin Eldar,
>> members of the Third Clan, and they welcomed those of
>> the Noldor and especially the Sindar who did not pass
>> over the Sea but migrated eastward..."
>> UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn
>
>That text continues by saying that under the leadership of these early
>Second Age immigrants the Silvan elves 'became again an ordered people'.
>No longer scattered. Other texts indicate that their numbers increased.
One would expect that over time. As with all the other populations.
>> The problems with your reliance on theses UT texts is
>> several fold:
>
>I don't rely exclusively (or even primarily) on the two UT texts.
I disagree. As far as I can see, you primary source are the late etymoloigcal
texts set forth in UT and Of Dwarves and Men. Thos are the only texts directly
making your argument.
>> 1) they all limit the Silvan Elves to beyond the Misty
>> Mountains
>
>Why is this a 'problem'?
What about Eriador or for that matter Beleriand.
>The 'Silvan' index entry and the text in Appendix A of 'History of
>Galadriel and Celeborn' do define 'Silvan' elves as only those who
>remained east of the Misty Mountains, but this is yet another issue of
>minor variations in terminology. Some of those who left the Great March
>at the Misty Mountains stayed there (and are here defined as 'Silvan')
>and some of them eventually moved on (and are here defined as
>'Nandor'... which in other instances is the term for BOTH groups). The
>story is still exactly the same, just the meanings of the terms used has
>changed slightly.
No, its more than a minor variation. The unattributed definitions exclude the
Silvan elves from Eriador and Beleriand.
>> 2) they all make Nandor Eldar
>
>The Appendix A text does. The index doesn't specify.
The index entries whose source is unknown. Let's deal with actual attributable
text.
>> 3) they make them a small scattered people
>
>The Appendix A text does in the First Age. The index doesn't specify.
Ditto. Now you're relying on text you can't even establish the authorship of.
>> - so how did they outnumber the Noldor and Sindar
>
><?>
The Silvans didn't outnumber the Eldar in Eraidor and Rhovanion?
>Because only a few Noldor and Sindar joined them? They didn't absorb
>the entire Noldor / Sindar population after all. Most remained in
>Eregion in realms of their own. How is that even a question?
Yes, the Eldar were primarily in Lindon adn Eregion; the Silvans populated the
rest of Eriador and Rhovanion.
>> 4) they admit the Avari were on-scene because they
>> could be compared to them
>
>Again, 'they' refers to a single text. Yes, it acknowledges that Avari
>existed. Wasn't in dispute that I knew of.
Except the definitions on which you rely ignore the existance of the Avari.
>> Come to think of it, even if we accept the UT conception
>> of the Nandor, all that makes them is a small, scattered
>> people.
>
>In the First Age.
What is your evidence the defintion you rely on are limited to that time
period? The UT text is describing the situation in the *Second* Age, not the
First Age. This is one reason your reliance on the UT text is untenable.
>> That's not inconsistent with the Avari East-elves still
>> being the dominant population of these realms
>
>Yes, it really is. The 'small and scattered people' were the Silvan
>elves... who were descendants of Teleri who left the Great March at the
>Misty Mountains and remained there... and were hardly to be
>distinguished from Avari. That all very much IS inconsistent with them
>BEING Avari.
No kidding. It's self evident the UT text excludes the Avari.
>>> The backstory for the Silvan elves being primarily
>>> Avari is much less established...
>
>> And why is this surprising. These are *Noldo/Sinda*
>> histories.
>
>No, these are Tolkien's histories and in Tolkien's histories the
>backstory for the Silvan elves being Avari is much less established than
>the backstory for them being Nandor.
Tolkien took great pains in his Silmarillion texts to maintain the conceit that
these were historical writings. Yuo can ignore that conceit, but it
nevertheless drove the writings.
>No hypothetical Noldo/Sinda anti-Avari prejudice or 'later familiarity
>with Avari' required.
>
>Hell, we don't even know the hypothetical authors of every text.
We don't need to. We do know that Bilbo translated much of these texts in
Rivendell into the Common Tongue
>> On the other hand the first time they meet the Avari in
>> any great numbers was only much later in the Second Age
>> and the histories simply report the obvious: they are
>> here.
>
>So how do these 'Noldo/Sinda' histories report on the events of the
>Nandor while they were NOT in contact with them?
They were in contact with them up until they reached the Hithaeglir and then
met up with them again later in Beleriand. The Nandor were recognized as Eldar
and thus a topic of study for the Loremasters.
Or background on the
>Dwarves and Humans of the region prior to contact?
Examples? I mean what background for Men do we have except for the Edain? What
background do whe have for the dwarves other than those of Nogrod, Belegost and
Khazad-dum? In fact, you argument evidecnes that these are Eldarin histories -
we only have information about peoples when and if they encounter the Eldar.
> Why do we have
>information about all of these if these texts must be viewed strictly
>from the standpoint of what the 'High Elves' knew at the time?
As above. The histories actually evidence the fact that these are Eldarin
histories. Whe do we get more information about hte Avari? When the Eldar meet
them in the Second Age. When do we learn about Men? When the Eldar meet the
Edain in Beleriand. Do we learn about non-Edain? No. What do we know about
dwarves? We only know about those dwarves who interacted with the Eldar -
those of Nogrod, Belegost and Khazad-dum. What do we know of the Nandor? We
know the rest of the Eldar left them behind at the Misty's and reencounted them
later in Beleriand. Again, an Eldar-centric history. When do we learn more of
the Avari? In the Second Age when the Eldarin Loremasters reach Eriador.
>> Only one text where a non-Sinda does and she is
>> Nimrodel, a Nando.
>
>She was certainly Silvan. I believe that means she was also of
>primarily Nandorin ancestry.
Well the text pretty much says so.
>YOU seem to be suggesting that every instance of Silvan elves clearly
>being descended from 'Teleri who left the Great March at the Misty
>Mountains' is an exception of some kind rather than evidence of that
>being the normal state of affairs.
Who do we meet besides Nimrodel? Amdir, Oropher, Amroth and Legolas are all
Sinda in background.
In fact, we apparently meet an Avar in the histories: Mithrellas.
>You had written;
>>>> There is other text speaking of elves without the
>>>> yearning for the Sea being Silvan elves.
>
>>>Cite?
>
>> Appendicies drafts:
>
>> pg 73: "There were also Elves of other kinds. The
>> East-elves that being content with Middle-earth remain
>> there, and remain there even now; and the Teleri,
>> kinsfolk of the High Elves who never went westward, but
>> lingered on the shores of Middle-earth until the return
>> of the Noldor."
>
>Doesn't say they were Silvan. Doesn't say they didn't feel the yearning
>for the Sea.
It says they were content in ME and remain there even now. "Now" presumably
being either when Elanor finished the Red Book or perhaps Findigil's writings.
>> pg 79: "for there were other Elves of various kinds in the
>> world; *and many were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to
>> no summons to the Sea*, but being content with Middle-
>> earth remained there and remained long after, fading in
>> the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men usurped
>> the lands. Of that kind were the Elves of Greenwood the
>> Great."
>
>> East-elves did not yearn the Sea.
>
>Actually it says that they 'had not' hearkened to the summons to the
>Sea.
Actually it said they "had hearkened to no summons to the Sea". The Nandor
*did* heakend to the summons of the Sea: first at the Separation with the rest
of the Eldar, and later in the Third and early Forth ages when it was
reawakened in them.
> We have discussed before whether this must mean that they never
>set out or merely that they never completed it... in either case it
>doesn't speak to whether their descendants would feel a sea-longing.
The Amroth and Nimrodel text said it was reawakened among the Nandor.
Russ
McREsq
>>> In LotR Legolas says,
>>> "But deep in the hearts of all my kindred lies the
>>> sea-longing, which it is perilous to stir."
>>> RotK, The Last Debate
>
>> Legloas' kindred is indisputably Sindar!
>
>Heh... I'd dispute that.
>
>"'That is true,' said Legolas. 'But the Elves of this land were of a
>race strange to us of the silvan folk, and the trees and grass do not
>now remember them...'"
>FotR, The Ring Goes South
Let's not carve this too thinly. Yes, Legolas viewed himself as Silvan, but he
was Sindarin in origin.
>Oropher was Sindar originally, but chose to become a Silvan elf. His
>grandson simply considered himself Silvan. Indeed, at the time LotR was
>written Legolas simply WAS Silvan with the whole 'Sindarin leaders' bit
>not yet invented.
Perhaps, but not all Silvan were created equal. Even you agree that Avari also
were part of the Silvan race but Avari could not journey over the Sea. By the
end of the Third Age, the Silvans were an eclectic bunch: Avari, Nandor, Sindar
and Noldor.
>The Silvan elves felt the sea-longing. They were not Avari. Those
>Avari who joined them became 'Celbin'.
That term was meaningless after the First Age.
I'm a little confused here. At times you argue that the Silvans were part Avari
(albeit not the majority) and here you're saying they were not Avari. Which is
it? What exactly am I arguing against?
>>> But... how? The 'court tongue' WAS Silvan. So was
>>> the common tongue. Why would Sindarin 'come back'
>>> after the Sindar had deliberately abandoned it in
>>> favor of Silvan?
>
>> Who ever said the Sindar abandoned their tongue?
>
>Tolkien? In the passage you were quoting? Which was my point in the
>first place... you quoted;
>
>"Oropher had come among them with only a handful of Sindar, and they
>were soon merged with the Silvan Elves...they wished indeed to become
>Silvan folk and to return, as they said, to the simple life natural to
>the Elves before the invitation of the Valar had disturbed it"
>I pointed out that the '...' you snipped out began with "adopting their
>language". Any of this ringing a bell?
Loo, *you're* the one relying on the UT text, so *you* explain why the text you
rely on says the Sidnarin princes adopted the Silvan tongue but by the end of
the Third Age Sindarin was the lingua franca.
>>> The only text which supports the 'Avari dominant' view
>>> that I can think of which DOESN'T exclude the Nandor is
>>> your Quendi and Eldar example. All the others say 'the
>>> elves of these lands were Avari'.
>
>> <puzzled> Which others?
>
>The appendix drafts.
Doesn't exclude the Nandor. The drafts speak of the Avari being *most* not all
of the peoples of the Silvan realms.
<snip>
>> Were they synonymous then?
>
>The two words (sylvan and wood) DO mean the same thing. Tolkien DID use
>them interchangeably (in TH Thranduil and company are 'Wood elves' in
>LotR they are 'Silvan elves').
Eh. I'm leery of giving TH too much credit. I doubt Tolkien was even
considering these issues when he wrote TH. He was considering them when he
wrote Quendi and Eldar and the late etymological texts.
>> When is the first appearance of the term "Silvan" elves.
>
>I don't know offhand. Why?
Curious. I'd like to compare his early usage of the term to contemporaenous
texts.
>>> Take away the LotR >draft< materials and you've got,
>>> what... Quendi and Eldar?
>
>> And LOTR: West-elves, East-elves.
>
>With East-elves undefined
Well, not completely. We know waht they are not: Eldar.
>and West-elves excluding both the Nandor and
>the Avari.
Not within LOTR. All we know of the West-elves is that they are Eldar. Nandor
and Avari are terms not addressed in the published LOTR.
> Thus not making your point.
>
>> Plus QS material
>
><?>
The ones that make Nandor=Eldar (and thus West-elves)
Russ
Dirk Thierbach
>> Thus you have to shoehorn Eldarin Nandor into
>> non-Eldarin East-elves.
> Not really. The texts are inconsistent. Trying to apply a consistent
> definition of 'Eldar' across texts where it is obviously changing is an
> inherently flawed proposition.
If the texts are inconsistent, what exactly are you arguing about? Ex
falso sequitur quodlibet. You won't be able to make a good theory if
the data is contradictory. If Tolkien was sufficiently undecided,
you even won't be able to make a good theory for a certain point
in the development.
And is the role the Nandor play really such important?
- Dirk
Christopher Kreuzer
[All the bits I was going to say... Dang! :-) ]
> Conrad wrote:
>
>>> Such as? I think the meta-story is flexible enough to
>>> cope with lots of queries that can be thrown at it.
>>
>> How did Frodo (or Bilbo - depending on how far he got in writing up
>> what Frodo told him) know that a fox watched him and the others
>> sleeping in the Shire. How did he know what it was thinking?
>
> Because it was a book written for children - both hobbit and human.
I agree and would phrase it this way: it is either an addition for
children made by the hobbit author, or an addition made by the
'translator', again for children. In other words, the talking fox is a
fiction within the conceit of a 'true' story.
>> How did Sam know what Frodo saw after giving the book to Sam and
>> leaving the Grey Havens (but before Sam himself gave the book to
>> Elanor and followed)?
>
> He checked with his sources in Rivendell.
Either that, or Frodo told him about his dream in Tom Bombadil's house
and Sam put two and two together (supported by Elvish sources). This is
supported by the fact that the text in the book says "as in his dream in
the house of Bombadil". Either that, or the entire "Frodo on the White
Ship" episode was embellished by Elvish scribes.
It helps to think of the story being retold down the ages, much as the
Greek myths have been retold for modern audiences. Disjointed, partly
lost narratives can be drawn together to form a fluent story. Bits can
be added and expanded to bring out the essence of the story and attune
it to the sensibilities of a modern audience. This allows almost
infinite flexibility to use the meta-story to explain and speculate on
the textual history.
>> How did the scribes of Gondor who ostensibly compiled the appendixes
>> know details of OUR ancient and modern world?
Where is our world mentioned in the appendices?
> The use a modern terms is merely the conseit of the translator.
Exactly.
Conrad Dunkerson
> Conrad wrote:
> Let's not carve this too thinly. Yes, Legolas viewed
> himself as Silvan, but he was Sindarin in origin.
Doesn't matter.
Legolas SAID that all his kindred felt the sea-longing.
Legolas VIEWED the Silvan elves to be his kindred.
Ergo... all the Silvan elves felt the sea-longing.
>> Oropher was Sindar originally, but chose to become a
>> Silvan elf. His grandson simply considered himself
>> Silvan. Indeed, at the time LotR was written Legolas
>> simply WAS Silvan with the whole 'Sindarin leaders'
>> bit not yet invented.
> Perhaps, but not all Silvan were created equal.
In terms of the sea-longing Legolas said they were.
> Even you agree that Avari also were part of the Silvan
> race but Avari could not journey over the Sea.
Ah, but those Avari who joined the Silvans would become Celbin, per
Quendi and Eldar, and thus presumably allowed to go over Sea.
> I'm a little confused here. At times you argue that
> the Silvans were part Avari (albeit not the majority)
> and here you're saying they were not Avari. Which is
> it? What exactly am I arguing against?
I am arguing that the Nandor became known as 'Silvan elves' and then
later Avari, Sindar and Noldor joined them and became part of their
Silvan culture. Thus, the Silvan elves had partly Avari ancestry and
likely even still some 'former Avari' amongst their numbers, but no
actual 'Avari'. By joining the Silvan elves they were giving up their
status as 'refusers'.
> Loo, *you're* the one relying on the UT text, so *you*
> explain why the text you rely on says the Sidnarin
> princes adopted the Silvan tongue but by the end of
> the Third Age Sindarin was the lingua franca.
<whap!>
The text in question comes from a passage >you< quoted from 'History of
Galadriel and Celeborn' Appendix >B< to support your point. I have been
quoting from Appendix >A<... which has the same 'Sindarin language
dominance' structure given in LotR. The texts in Appendix A and B are
not from the same source materials. UT is not a unified whole.
And I think I'm done with this particular merry-go-round.
> Doesn't exclude the Nandor. The drafts speak of the
> Avari being *most* not all of the peoples of the
> Silvan realms.
"for there were other Elves of various kinds in the world; *and many
were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to no summons to the Sea*, but
being content with Middle-earth remained there and remained long after,
fading in the fastnesses of the woods and hills and Men usurped the
lands. Of that kind were the Elves of Greenwood the Great."
IF, as you argue, 'Eastern Elves' were the Avari, then this says that
the Elves of Greenwood were Avari. Not mostly or partly Avari...
completely so. Of course, I dispute that definition of 'Eastern Elves',
but the question at hand was whether the 'Avari dominance' texts allow
for Nandor merging.
>> The two words (sylvan and wood) DO mean the same thing.
>> Tolkien DID use them interchangeably (in TH Thranduil
>> and company are 'Wood elves' in LotR they are 'Silvan
>> elves').
> Eh. I'm leery of giving TH too much credit. I doubt
> Tolkien was even considering these issues when he wrote
> TH. He was considering them when he wrote Quendi and
> Eldar and the late etymological texts.
And I'd argue that the very concept of 'Silvan' elves was born out of
the extensive reference to 'Wood' elves in 'The Hobbit'. Prior to that
I don't believe the term appeared in Tolkien's stories. Looking at the
drafts of LotR and much of the early part of the published book, they
continue to use 'Wood elves', but later in the book Tolkien started to
use 'Silvan'.
You had asked;
>>> When is the first appearance of the term "Silvan" elves.
>> I don't know offhand. Why?
> Curious. I'd like to compare his early usage of the
> term to contemporaenous texts.
Having looked it over I now believe that 'Silvan elves' was introduced
during the development of LotR as a replacement for 'Wood-elves'.
If accurate it would mean that 'Silvan elves' always equals
'Wood-elves', but not neccessarily the later. Specifically, 'Silvan
elves' is applied only to elves in LotR (and references to these same
elves in later texts)... those in Lorien and Mirkwood. Thus the UT bit
about 'east of the Misty Mountains' would appear to be correct.
'Wood-elves' was used more broadly of all the Nandor in various places.
>>and West-elves excluding both the Nandor and
>>the Avari.
> Not within LOTR. All we know of the West-elves is that
> they are Eldar.
And there is a definition of Eldar which identifies them as the Elves of
Aman and the Sindar only.
> Nandor and Avari are terms not addressed in the
> published LOTR.
They are not defined... but in no text were either the Nandor or the
Avari considered to be Sindar or Elves of Aman.