who was legolas's mother?
Xenith_Arphan
it has ever been mentioned throughout any of the
books/appendixes/resources written by tolkien, but I'll ask anyways.
does anyone know *anything* about legolas's mother? its assumed she
was an elf, but even that's been questioned.
AC
wrote:
By whom? Just because hsi mother's name isn't recorded in no way
means he wasn't of completely Elvish parentage. Heck, we don't even
know for sure who Gil-galad's parents were, but there's no question
that he was an Elf.
---
AaronC
Michael O'Neill
We do know who Gil-galad's father was:
From the Silmarillion...
"And when the tidings came to Balar of the fall of Gondolin and the
death of Turgon, Ereinion Gil-galad son of Fingon was named High King of
the Noldor in Middle-earth."
And from the index...
"Gil-galad 'Star of Radiance', the name by which Ereinion son of Fingon
was afterwards known. After the death of Turgon he became the last High
King of the Noldor in Middle-earth, and remained in Lindon after the end
of the First Age; leader with Elendil of the Last Alliance of Men and
Elves and slain with him in combat with Sauron. 186, 239, 302, 305, 315,
330-1, 335, 359-60, 362-5, 369-70"
As for Fingon...
Fingon The eldest son of Fingolfin, called the Valiant; rescued
Maedhros from Thangorodrim; High King of the Noldor after the death of
his father; slain by Gothmog in the Nirnaeth Arnoediad. 64, 94-6, 98,
101, 128-9, 137, 140, 144, 156, 166, 183, 186, 194, 198, 231-9, 302, 354
There's probably a family tree somewhere, but I'm too knackered tonight
to do a search. Over to you.
As for Legless' Mom, wasn't it Mrs. Thranduil?
M.
Russ
writes:
>We do know who Gil-galad's father was:
<snip>
CJRT acknowledged in HOME that he made a mistake in the published Silmarillion.
Russ
AC
wrote:
>AC wrote:
>>
>> On 27 Mar 2002 11:50:05 -0800, xen...@sluggy.net (Xenith_Arphan)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I know this has probably been asked a million times, and I don't think
>> >it has ever been mentioned throughout any of the
>> >books/appendixes/resources written by tolkien, but I'll ask anyways.
>> >
>> >does anyone know *anything* about legolas's mother? its assumed she
>> >was an elf, but even that's been questioned.
>>
>> By whom? Just because hsi mother's name isn't recorded in no way
>> means he wasn't of completely Elvish parentage. Heck, we don't even
>> know for sure who Gil-galad's parents were, but there's no question
>> that he was an Elf.
>
>We do know who Gil-galad's father was:
<references to published Silmarillion snipped>
>There's probably a family tree somewhere, but I'm too knackered tonight
>to do a search. Over to you.
I'm well ware of what the published work states, but that was taken
from a marginal note in one of the texts. In fact, Tolkien himself
apparently never made up his mind. There is equally good (and
perhaps better) evidence that Gil-galad was a "Finrodian". I'm not
faulting CT on this, he felt he had to pick something for the
published work. It may have been better if he had just left
Gil-galad's parentage obscure.
---
AaronC
Jette Goldie
That was what I was going to say. :-)
--
Jette
(aka Vinyaduriel)
"Work for Peace and remain fiercely loving" - Jim Byrnes
je...@blueyonder.co.uk
http://www.jette.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fanfic.html
Banazir the Jedi Hobbit
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 21:18:24 +0000, Michael O'Neill <o...@indigo.ie>
> wrote:
> >We do know who Gil-galad's father was:
>
> <references to published Silmarillion snipped>
>
> >There's probably a family tree somewhere, but I'm too knackered tonight
> >to do a search. Over to you.
> I'm well ware of what the published work states, but that was taken
> from a marginal note in one of the texts. In fact, Tolkien himself
> apparently never made up his mind. There is equally good (and
> perhaps better) evidence that Gil-galad was a "Finrodian".
You probably meant a "Finarfinian", right?
As son of Orodreth, he would have been Finrod Fleagund's (hey, I like
that tyope) nephew.
> I'm not faulting CT on this, he felt he had to pick something for the
> published work. It may have been better if he had just left
> Gil-galad's parentage obscure.
"You are the only son of a Noldorin King. You are a well-liked
child..."
(For all the fans of the Roguelike game Angband)
--
Banazir
Xenith_Arphan
> "Michael O'Neill" <o...@indigo.ie> wrote
> > As for Legless' Mom, wasn't it Mrs. Thranduil?
>
> That was what I was going to say. :-)
So to review, it seems tolkien never once mentioned who his mother
was... and seemingly never decided...
I wonder where all tolkiens notes and such are... (ie those that were
used to compile the silmarillion after his death by his son)
Douglas Taylor
> I wonder where all tolkiens notes and such are... (ie those that were
> used to compile the silmarillion after his death by his son)
My goodness, Tolkien perished by his son's hand?
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Doug
--
-----
peel off the "sticker" to reply
Graeme
Silmarillion.
Russ
>>
Nevertheless, Gil-Galad is the son of Fingon (whether he was supposed to be or
not) unless a revised edition of The Silmarillion which corrects this is
released.
AC
Huh? It has been explained that when Christopher was compiling and
editing what would become the published work from numerous textual
sources that he erred in the parentage of Gil-galad. I don't think
anyone will state that where CT admitted a mistake in the published
work, that the published work still stands above other citations.
There was only one reference (as I recall) in any of the later
writings to Gil-galad being the son of Fingon, and though it may have
made sense at the time that the published work was being assembled, it
does appear that the case for it was extremely weak at best.
---
AaronC
Graeme
what would become the published work from numerous textual sources that he
erred in the parentage of Gil-galad. I don't think anyone will state that
where CT admitted a mistake in the published work, that the published work
still stands above other citations. There was only one reference (as I recall)
in any of the later writings to Gil-galad being the son of Fingon, and though
it may have made sense at the time that the published work was being assembled,
it does appear that the case for it was extremely weak at best.
---
AaronC
>>
Which volume of HOME is this discussed in? Cause it doesn't really seem to be
a *mistake* as such (like when Finarfin was misspelled as "Finarphir" in Return
of the King). If Gil-galad really is mentioned in the later writings as
Fingon's son, then it doesn't seem to be a mistake at all, merely another case
where JRRT went back and forth on something a few times, and this is the one
that found its way into the final work.
Unless, as Clinton would say, it depends how we define the word "mistake".
That's why I need to read it again.
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
The published Silmarillion is not JRRT's Silmarillion but CJRT's. Now that
CJRT published the source materials in History of Middle-earth, The
Silmarillion is somewhat irrelevant except as a convenience.
Russ
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>Which volume of HOME is this discussed in? Cause it doesn't really seem to
>be
>a *mistake* as such (like when Finarfin was misspelled as "Finarphir" in
>Return
>of the King). If Gil-galad really is mentioned in the later writings as
>Fingon's son, then it doesn't seem to be a mistake at all, merely another
>case
>where JRRT went back and forth on something a few times, and this is the one
>that found its way into the final work.
>
>Unless, as Clinton would say, it depends how we define the word "mistake".
>That's why I need to read it again.
There was a single reference in all of Tolkien writing to GG being son of
Fingon: a pencilled margin note in Grey Annals. All other post-LOTR references
have him being a Finarfinian - first as son of Finrod and then as son of
Orodreth.
Russ
Smaug69
> On 29 Mar 2002 05:49:19 GMT, graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) wrote:
>
> >>>CJRT acknowledged in HOME that he made a mistake in the published
> >Silmarillion.
> >
> >Russ
> >>>
> >
> >Nevertheless, Gil-Galad is the son of Fingon (whether he was supposed to be or
> >not) unless a revised edition of The Silmarillion which corrects this is
> >released.
>
> Huh? It has been explained that when Christopher was compiling and
> editing what would become the published work from numerous textual
> sources that he erred in the parentage of Gil-galad.
But, IIRC, J.R.R. himself wasn't even too sure about it. Since he was
in the process of retconning the history of some ME things late in
life anyway, it's not unreasonable that he created two different
lineages for Gil-galad at some point and forgot about it.
> I don't think
> anyone will state that where CT admitted a mistake in the published
> work, that the published work still stands above other citations.
> There was only one reference (as I recall) in any of the later
> writings to Gil-galad being the son of Fingon, and though it may have
> made sense at the time that the published work was being assembled, it
> does appear that the case for it was extremely weak at best.
There was enough proof/evidence for CT to publish it that way
originally so I don't think it's any weaker than the other way.
Smaug69
AC
>sp...@nospam.com (AC) wrote in message news:<3ca4011e...@news2.randori.com>...
>> On 29 Mar 2002 05:49:19 GMT, graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) wrote:
>>
>> >>>CJRT acknowledged in HOME that he made a mistake in the published
>> >Silmarillion.
>> >
>> >Russ
>> >>>
>> >
>> >Nevertheless, Gil-Galad is the son of Fingon (whether he was supposed to be or
>> >not) unless a revised edition of The Silmarillion which corrects this is
>> >released.
>>
>> Huh? It has been explained that when Christopher was compiling and
>> editing what would become the published work from numerous textual
>> sources that he erred in the parentage of Gil-galad.
>
>But, IIRC, J.R.R. himself wasn't even too sure about it. Since he was
>in the process of retconning the history of some ME things late in
>life anyway, it's not unreasonable that he created two different
>lineages for Gil-galad at some point and forgot about it.
You are right that there was no final decision, but since only one
reference in any materials that CT has published shows a link to
Fingolfin, and he admits himself that it was a mistake, who am I to
disagree.
>
>> I don't think
>> anyone will state that where CT admitted a mistake in the published
>> work, that the published work still stands above other citations.
>> There was only one reference (as I recall) in any of the later
>> writings to Gil-galad being the son of Fingon, and though it may have
>> made sense at the time that the published work was being assembled, it
>> does appear that the case for it was extremely weak at best.
>
>There was enough proof/evidence for CT to publish it that way
>originally so I don't think it's any weaker than the other way.
Except is was very weak, and he admitted it later on. I'm not trying
to pick at CT. As everybody knows, I'm a supporter of his. However,
when he states that he felt it was an error, and his knowledge of the
material is far larger than mine, until somebody comes up with a
better argument, I'll agree with that. A single marginal note is not
at all compelling, but I suspect CT felt at that time of putting
together the published work that it made some sense.
---
AaronC
Graeme
in any materials that CT has published shows a link to Fingolfin, and he admits
himself that it was a mistake, who am I to disagree.
>>
He admits that it was a MISTAKE (a goof, a flub, an error, et cetera), or he
just wishes now that he hadn't done it that way. Those are two different
things.
If Tolkien really did write in the later years that Gil-galad was Fingon's son,
then putting it in The Silmarillion was not a mistake, but rather an editorial
decision. There are probably dozens of such editorial decisions that we could
second-guess until Turin returns and smites Melkor, but when a book is
published as a complete work, as The Silmarillion was, then you have to pick
something and stick with it.
He picked Fingon. He wishes now that he hadn't. Unless there's more evidence
that establishes it as a positive *error* rather than a bad editorial decision,
then as far as I'm concerned, that's the way it is.
That's why I want to see the HOME passage in question to see exactly what he
said, but nobody's cited it yet. I vaguely remember this, but don't feel like
hunting, since surely somebody knows.
Graeme
Exactly. Similarly, HOME isn't JRRT's Silmarillion either, and that's where
the claim that this is an error comes from.
>>Now that CJRT published the source materials in History of Middle-earth, The
Silmarillion is somewhat irrelevant except as a convenience.
Russ
>>
It's the only one that's presented as a complete work, and the one most
consistent with Lotr.
The Silmarillion is the book published at JRRT's express wish, HOME is the
Source material published without his express wish. To me that makes The
Silmarillion carry more weight.
AC
I'm not denying its weight, but it certainly cannot be considered
"canon" in the same way that LotR and its appendices are. There was a
great deal of fluidity, and decisions that were made 25 years ago can
be reconsidered. CT states quite clearly that the parentage of
Gil-galad was not a certain thing. I'm not questioning the choice, it
certainly "fits" better than Finrod or Orodreth, but then again, that
may be a prejudice built up by reading the published work first.
Part of the reason for CT bringing out HoMe was to explain why he made
certain decisions, and as part of the process, he obviously came to
regret some. I think Gil-galad's parentage was one of those; made
upon extremely scanty evidence over other, far more compelling
candidates. It is no more "wrong" in a way than any of the other
editorial decisions that were made. However, it just isn't as "right"
as it could have been.
---
AaronC
Smaug69
incoherently:
I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but here are some
excerpts from POME(pp. 349-351).
CT:
"My father originally supposed that Gil-galad was the son of Felagund
King of Nargothrond....but it remained his belief until after the
completion of Lord of the Rings...and from Of the Rings of Power,
where in the published text(Silmarillion p.286) Fingon is an editorial
alteration of Felagund."
me:
[of course, at that point in the Tale of Years, Galadriel was
considered to be Gil-Galad's sister]
CT:
"Thus Orodreth was now moved down a generation, becoming Finrod's son
rather than his brother. In the next stage my father...noted that
Finrod 'had no child(he left his wife in Aman)' and moved Artanaro
Rhodothir[Orodreth] to become, still in the same generation, the son
of Finrod's brother Angrod..."
"The name of Angrod's son(still retaining the identity of 'Orodreth')
was then changed from Artanaro to Artaresto. In an isolated note found
with the genealogies, scribbled at great speed but nonetheless dated,
August 1965, my father suggested that the best solution to the problem
of Gil-galad's parentage was to find him in 'the son of 'Orodreth',
who is here given the Quenya name of Artaresto, and continued:"
JRR:
"Finrod left his wife in Valinor and had no children in exile.
Angrod's son was Aratesto, who was beloved by Finrod and escaped when
Angrod was slain, and dwelt with Finrod. Finrod made him his 'steward'
and he succeeded him in Nargothrond. His Sindarin name was
Rodreth(altered to Orodreth becasue of his love of the mountains ..
... His children were Finduilas and Artanaro = Rodnor later called
Gil-galad.(Their mother was a Sindarin lady of the North. She called
her son Gil-galad.) Rodnor Gil-galad escaped and eventually came to
Sirion's Mouth and was King of the Noldor there."
CT:
"The only further change was the rejection of the name Artaresto and
its replacement by Artaher, Sindarin Arothir; and thus in the
excursus (note 23) Arothir(Orodreth) is named as Finrod's 'kinsman and
steward', and (note 47) Gil-galad is 'the son of Arothir, nephew of
Finrod'.
me:
[so the final geneology is that Angrod is the father of Orodreth and
Orodreth is the father of Gil-galad and Finduilas]
CT:
"There can be no doubt that this was the last word on the subject; but
nothing of this late and radically altered conception ever touched the
existing narratives, and it was obviously impossible to introduce it
into the published text of The Silmarillion. It would have nonetheless
have been very much better to have left Gil-galad's parentage
obscure."
"There is no trace among the many notes and suggestions written onto
the genealogical tables of a proposed descent of Gil-galad from
Finarfin; but in any case Aldarion and Erendis and the closely related
Description of Numenor preceded by some time (I would now be inclined
to date them to about 1960) the making of Gil-galad into the grandson
of Angrod, with the note of August 1965 given above. Much closer
analysis of the admittedly extremely complex material than I had made
twenty years ago makes it clear that Gil-galad as the son of
Fingon...was an ephemeral idea."
------
If his intial analysis of that particular material yielded Gil-galad
as the son of Fingon why would subsequent analyses yield something
else? Either it was easy to pick that info out and stick it into The
Silmarillion in the first place or it was very difficult- almost
impossible- and so it should not be included because you're not sure
and you don't want to make a mistake.
And if this later info was not connected with the original narratives
then why should it have any bearing anyway? We all know that Tolkien
was significantly changing/reconsidering some things in ME late in
life so maybe it all should be considered with a grain of salt. I
really don't know what to make of this supposed "error."
------
"If there's anything more exquisite than Queen Anne's lace, I haven't found it."
Russ
>I'm not questioning the choice, it
>certainly "fits" better than Finrod or Orodreth, but then again, that
>may be a prejudice built up by reading the published work first.
Actually, GG being a Finarfinian fits much better. As a Finarfinian, GG was
more than half Teleri which made him a much more acceptable "High King of the
Elves of the West" than a Fingolfinian who were suspect in the Kinslaying. In
fact, there was a stong undercurrent of anti-Noldor hostility among the Sindar
after the First Age. Those Sindar who set up realms east of the Misty
Mountains are examples of this thinking.
Russ
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>>>The published Silmarillion is not JRRT's Silmarillion but CJRT's.
>
>Exactly. Similarly, HOME isn't JRRT's Silmarillion either, and that's where
>the claim that this is an error comes from.
There is not such thing as 'JRRT's Silmarillion.' Such a thing never occurred.
All we have is CJRT's Silmarillion and JRRT 's actual writings. I'll take the
latter.
>>>Now that CJRT published the source materials in History of Middle-earth,
>The
>Silmarillion is somewhat irrelevant except as a convenience.
>
>Russ
>>>
>
>It's the only one that's presented as a complete work,
Presented by whom?
> and the one most
>consistent with Lotr.
The parentage of Gil-galad is irrelevant to LOTR.
>The Silmarillion is the book published at JRRT's express wish,
No it wasn't. JRRT did not expressly wish his son CJRT to pore through his
unfinished manuscripts and typescripts and cobble together something to be
published after his death.
>HOME is the
>Source material published without his express wish. To me that makes The
>Silmarillion carry more weight.
THis 'express wish' thing is completely incorrect.
Russ
Russ
(Smaug69) writes:
>And if this later info was not connected with the original narratives
>then why should it have any bearing anyway? We all know that Tolkien
>was significantly changing/reconsidering some things in ME late in
>life so maybe it all should be considered with a grain of salt. I
>really don't know what to make of this supposed "error."
>
An important point your missing is that for almost 30 years (and for all of
post LOTR), GG was a Finarfinian (whether as son of Finrod or as son or
Orodreth). Contrasted against that history was a single pencilled margin note
in Grey Annals which said GG was son of Fingon - that's the entire textual
history of that idea.
The issue is not even close.
Russ
Graeme
>>I'm not denying its weight, but it certainly cannot be considered "canon" in
the same way that LotR and its appendices are. >>
Oh I agree, but this is a case of Silmarillion vs. HOME, not Silmarillion vs.
Lotr. And Lotr says nothing about who Gil-galad's parents were, one way or the
other.
>>
There was a great deal of fluidity, and decisions that were made 25 years ago
can be reconsidered. CT states quite clearly that the parentage of Gil-galad
was not a certain thing.
>>
Well, if it's not certain, how can we say that he made a definite mistake in
making Fingon the father? It sounds more and more like he just made an
editorial decision that he regrets.
>>I'm not questioning the choice, it certainly "fits" better than Finrod or
Orodreth, but then again, that may be a prejudice built up by reading the
published work first.
>>
To me it fits better because it was already established that Fingolfin's house,
not Finarfin's, ruled the Noldor in Middle-Earth, after Maedhros coughed it up.
If Gil-galad had been of Finarfin's house, then you'd think that Elrond would
have been the next High King of the Noldor after the death of Turgon.
>>Part of the reason for CT bringing out HoMe was to explain why he made
certain decisions, and as part of the process, he obviously came to regret
some. I think Gil-galad's parentage was one of those; made upon extremely
scanty evidence over other, far more compelling candidates.
>>
Well, as I say, I've just explained why I think that Fingon is more compelling
than Orodreth. I don't really see the case for the other side, honestly. But
I do think that the editorial decision that CJRT made in 1977 has to stand
unless the book gets revised. He believed in the decision in 1977, but doesn't
now. I think he made the best decision the first time, even if he no longer
thinks so. And right or wrong, I think it's too late to change it.
Graeme
occurred.
>>
Then you must accept a half dozen different answers, rather than just one.
Orodreth was both Finrod's brother and his son, and hundreds of other
discrepancies. Elrond's father is both Earendel and Earendil, et cetera.
>>All we have is CJRT's Silmarillion and JRRT 's actual writings. I'll take
the latter.
>>
I might agree with that in cases where it can be shown that what's in The
Silmarillion is NOT JRRT's writing (such as The Fall of Doriath). If JRRT had
NEVER said that Fingon was the father of Gil-galad, then I'd be more inclined
to treat it as a mistake. But if he said both yea and nay on that question,
then both are "JRRT's writings", and it comes down to the subjective question
of which one you think carries more weight.
As for whether or not it was JRRT's intention that the Silmarillion be
published after his death, we seem to disagree on that. I've always heard that
it was. The Silmarillion foreword is vague, Christopher saying that the task
fell to him, without being quite clear about what that means. In any case, it
was certainly NOT JRRT's intention that HOME be published.
Graeme
post LOTR), GG was a Finarfinian (whether as son of Finrod or as son or
Orodreth).
>>
Well, for that matter, Elrond's father was Earendel longer than he was
Earendil.
>>
Contrasted against that history was a single pencilled margin note in Grey
Annals which said GG was son of Fingon - that's the entire textual history of
that idea.
The issue is not even close.
>>
Well, part of that is the fact that you're lumping all the different
Finarfinian parentages into one. Granted, even if properly broken up, they'd
still be quantitatively greater than one passage in The Grey Annals. On the
other hand, there's no denying that JRRT did write it, it's not something that
CT made up himself. And to me, it makes more sense that way. The High
Kingship of the Noldor in Middle-Earth belonged to Fingolfin's House, not
Finarfin's. If Gil-galad had been a Finarfinian, then Elrond would have been
the next High King of the Noldor after Turgon, not Gil-galad. I feel confident
that if JRRT had published the Silmarillion himself, he would have resolved
this difficulty one way or the other. Either made Gil-galad a Fingolfinian, or
have made note of some specific incident in which the Kingship passed to
Finarfin's house.
But without such a resolution coming from JRRT's own hand, I have to pick the
other alternative. We're both picking something that JRRT himself wrote.
You're chosing quantity, and I believe that I'm chosing quality.
AC
>No it wasn't. JRRT did not expressly wish his son CJRT to pore through his
>unfinished manuscripts and typescripts and cobble together something to be
>published after his death.
That's not what I recall. I do believe that JRRT wanted his son to
bring the work to some sort of completion.
---
AaronC
AC
>>>There is not such thing as 'JRRT's Silmarillion.' Such a thing never
>occurred.
>>>
>
>Then you must accept a half dozen different answers, rather than just one.
>Orodreth was both Finrod's brother and his son, and hundreds of other
>discrepancies. Elrond's father is both Earendel and Earendil, et cetera.
That's quite likely. The published work is good reading, but when CT
released HoMe, we all got to see the source.
>
>
>>>All we have is CJRT's Silmarillion and JRRT 's actual writings. I'll take
>the latter.
>>>
>
>I might agree with that in cases where it can be shown that what's in The
>Silmarillion is NOT JRRT's writing (such as The Fall of Doriath). If JRRT had
>NEVER said that Fingon was the father of Gil-galad, then I'd be more inclined
>to treat it as a mistake. But if he said both yea and nay on that question,
>then both are "JRRT's writings", and it comes down to the subjective question
>of which one you think carries more weight.
I think a single marginal note which even CT himself questions is
evidence enough that the choice of Gil-galad's parentage was not
ultimately the right one.
>
>As for whether or not it was JRRT's intention that the Silmarillion be
>published after his death, we seem to disagree on that. I've always heard that
>it was. The Silmarillion foreword is vague, Christopher saying that the task
>fell to him, without being quite clear about what that means. In any case, it
>was certainly NOT JRRT's intention that HOME be published.
No, but that does not invalidate the problems that have cropped up
because of editorial choices. CT made decisions 25 years ago that he
regrets. That doesn't make him bad or even destroy the published work
as literature. What it does mean is there are areas, like Gil-galad's
parentage, where the published work fails as a device of scholarly
investigation (if that doesn't sound too pretentious).
---
AaronC
Graeme
bring the work to some sort of completion.
---
AaronC
>>
Yes, that's what I've always heard too. Is there anyone who can settle this
question one way or the other?
Graeme
enough that the choice of Gil-galad's parentage was not ultimately the right
one.
>>
Yes, I agree that quantitatively, the evidence is in favour of Gil-Galad the
Finarfinian. My argument is based on quality.
I think there's a real weakness in transferring the kingship away from the
House of Fingolfin with no explanation whatsoever. I believe that Gil-galad
must be of the House of Fingolfin to explain why Elrond was not named High King
of the Noldor after the death of Turgon (or Earendil, more likely).
I see two possible resolutions for this problem: 1) DON'T do it. 2) Provide
some explanation as to why and how it happened. It could be as simple as
saying that Earendil was denied (or refused) the kingship because of his half
human lineage.
If there were, anywhere in Tolkien's writings, some kind of explanation for the
switch, then I'd be inclined to accept that, and go with the quantity which
says that Gil-galad is a Finarfinian. But without such a reference, I'm left
to either make one up myself, ignore the problem completely, or pick the only
explanation in JRRT's writings that seems to solve the problem.
It's a subjective question, to be sure, but to me, going with the latter is the
lesser of three evils.
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>>>An important point your missing is that for almost 30 years (and for all of
>post LOTR), GG was a Finarfinian (whether as son of Finrod or as son or
>Orodreth).
>>>
>
>Well, for that matter, Elrond's father was Earendel longer than he was
>Earendil.
Earendel and Earendil are the same person. Fingon and Finrod and Orodreth are
not. You're comparing apples and oranges. You're comparing a spelling
difference to a change in genealogy.
>Contrasted against that history was a single pencilled margin note in Grey
>Annals which said GG was son of Fingon - that's the entire textual history of
>that idea.
>
>The issue is not even close.
>>>
>
>Well, part of that is the fact that you're lumping all the different
>Finarfinian parentages into one.
Yes, because that's the key difference in the two conceptions.
>Granted, even if properly broken up, they'd
>still be quantitatively greater than one passage in The Grey Annals. On the
>other hand, there's no denying that JRRT did write it, it's not something
>that
>CT made up himself.
And it never made it's way into a formal text. The idea never made it out of
the margin.
>And to me, it makes more sense that way. The High
>Kingship of the Noldor in Middle-Earth belonged to Fingolfin's House, not
>Finarfin's. If Gil-galad had been a Finarfinian, then Elrond would have been
>the next High King of the Noldor after Turgon, not Gil-galad.
Elrond was a female-line heir which, at best, means he takes after a male-line
heir (cf. Numenorean inheritance custom described in Aldarion and Erendis in
Unfinished Tales).
> I feel
>confident
>that if JRRT had published the Silmarillion himself, he would have resolved
>this difficulty one way or the other. Either made Gil-galad a Fingolfinian,
>or
>have made note of some specific incident in which the Kingship passed to
>Finarfin's house.
He did. The last eligible (i.e. male line heir) Fingolfinian died. That meant
it passed to the next in line which was the senior male member of the House of
Finarfin: Gil-galad.
>But without such a resolution coming from JRRT's own hand, I have to pick the
>other alternative. We're both picking something that JRRT himself wrote.
>You're chosing quantity, and I believe that I'm chosing quality.
If it quality then why did Tolkien himself never revisit the idea after the one
pencilled margin note? Why did GG consistently remain a Finarfinian both
before and after?
Russ
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>>>I think a single marginal note which even CT himself questions is evidence
>enough that the choice of Gil-galad's parentage was not ultimately the right
>one.
>>>
>
>Yes, I agree that quantitatively, the evidence is in favour of Gil-Galad the
>Finarfinian. My argument is based on quality.
>
>I think there's a real weakness in transferring the kingship away from the
>House of Fingolfin with no explanation whatsoever.
I don't understand what you mean. There was a very simple explanation: no more
eligible heirs left among the Fingolfinians. When Turgon died, the only
Fingolfinians left were a female (Idril) and a female line male (Earendil).
Since there was a male line heir in the House of Finarfin, that heir had
precedence.
I think most people around here agree that there was at least a male-line
preference among the Noldor (although there is a difference of opinion on
whether or not female line heirs could inherit in the absence of a male-line
heir - i.e. the situation after Gil-galad died). This is a well known
inheritance system known as the Salic system.
> I believe that Gil-galad
>must be of the House of Fingolfin to explain why Elrond was not named High
>King
>of the Noldor after the death of Turgon (or Earendil, more likely).
Again, the reason was that he was a female line heir. Again, I direct your
attention to the original Numenorean custom set forth in Aldarion and Erendis
in Unfinished Tales.
>I see two possible resolutions for this problem: 1) DON'T do it. 2) Provide
>some explanation as to why and how it happened. It could be as simple as
>saying that Earendil was denied (or refused) the kingship because of his half
>human lineage.
Or more likely because he was a female line heir.
>If there were, anywhere in Tolkien's writings, some kind of explanation for
>the
>switch, then I'd be inclined to accept that, and go with the quantity which
>says that Gil-galad is a Finarfinian. But without such a reference, I'm left
>to either make one up myself, ignore the problem completely, or pick the only
>explanation in JRRT's writings that seems to solve the problem.
>
>It's a subjective question, to be sure, but to me, going with the latter is
>the
>lesser of three evils.
Russ
Smaug69
incoherently:
>In article <3ca716a5.15903120@news-server>, smau...@xxcarolina.rrxx.com
>(Smaug69) writes:
>
>>And if this later info was not connected with the original narratives
>>then why should it have any bearing anyway? We all know that Tolkien
>>was significantly changing/reconsidering some things in ME late in
>>life so maybe it all should be considered with a grain of salt. I
>>really don't know what to make of this supposed "error."
>>
>
>An important point your missing is that for almost 30 years (and for all of
>post LOTR), GG was a Finarfinian (whether as son of Finrod or as son or
>Orodreth).
So shifting things around counts? If we take the last thing written as
canon then there are wholesale changes in some the histories and
backgrounds of people/things in ME.
> Contrasted against that history was a single pencilled margin note
>in Grey Annals which said GG was son of Fingon - that's the entire textual
>history of that idea.
>
>The issue is not even close.
So if JRR really made a mistake in the lineage and forgot about it for
30 years or so then the mistake would be considered more canon just
because it was around longer? I don't understand that logic.
Smaug69
incoherently:
>In article <20020330025054...@mb-me.aol.com>,
>graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>
>>>>An important point your missing is that for almost 30 years (and for all of
>>post LOTR), GG was a Finarfinian (whether as son of Finrod or as son or
>>Orodreth).
>>>>
>>
>>Well, for that matter, Elrond's father was Earendel longer than he was
>>Earendil.
>
>Earendel and Earendil are the same person. Fingon and Finrod and Orodreth are
>not. You're comparing apples and oranges. You're comparing a spelling
>difference to a change in genealogy.
Well, JRR changed Artanaro to Artaresto and Rodreth to Orodreth,plus a
couple of other changes were in there as well. I can understand why CT
found it all confusing initially.
>>Contrasted against that history was a single pencilled margin note in Grey
>>Annals which said GG was son of Fingon - that's the entire textual history of
>>that idea.
>>
>>The issue is not even close.
>>>>
>>
>>Well, part of that is the fact that you're lumping all the different
>>Finarfinian parentages into one.
>
>Yes, because that's the key difference in the two conceptions.
>
>>Granted, even if properly broken up, they'd
>>still be quantitatively greater than one passage in The Grey Annals. On the
>>other hand, there's no denying that JRRT did write it, it's not something
>>that
>>CT made up himself.
>
>And it never made it's way into a formal text. The idea never made it out of
>the margin.
>
>>And to me, it makes more sense that way. The High
>>Kingship of the Noldor in Middle-Earth belonged to Fingolfin's House, not
>>Finarfin's. If Gil-galad had been a Finarfinian, then Elrond would have been
>>the next High King of the Noldor after Turgon, not Gil-galad.
>
>Elrond was a female-line heir which, at best, means he takes after a male-line
>heir (cf. Numenorean inheritance custom described in Aldarion and Erendis in
>Unfinished Tales).
I figured you would work this in to the thread at some point. And I
say again, something that's done by tradition usually stays that way
because nothing has come up to create a problem. Once a problem arises
then a change has to be made. I don't see why that could not have been
the case with the line of Finwe before the end of the First Age.
>> I feel
>>confident
>>that if JRRT had published the Silmarillion himself, he would have resolved
>>this difficulty one way or the other. Either made Gil-galad a Fingolfinian,
>>or
>>have made note of some specific incident in which the Kingship passed to
>>Finarfin's house.
>
>He did. The last eligible (i.e. male line heir) Fingolfinian died. That meant
>it passed to the next in line which was the senior male member of the House of
>Finarfin: Gil-galad.
>
>>But without such a resolution coming from JRRT's own hand, I have to pick the
>>other alternative. We're both picking something that JRRT himself wrote.
>>You're chosing quantity, and I believe that I'm chosing quality.
>
>If it quality then why did Tolkien himself never revisit the idea after the one
>pencilled margin note? Why did GG consistently remain a Finarfinian both
>before and after?
Who knows? Maybe he just forgot all about it.
Graeme
male-line heir (cf. Numenorean inheritance custom described in Aldarion and
Erendis in Unfinished Tales).
>>
I haven't read Aldarion and Erendis in a while. Does it actually say that
Numenorean custom follows after Noldorin custom? All elves didn't necessarily
do it that way, as Dior was King of Doriath after Thingol, despite being a
female line heir.
If Aldarion and Erendis does say that (and I'll look it up too), that would
effectively neutralize my objection. In which case, who is Gil-galad's father?
Is everyone agreed that it's Orodreth? Or are they just agreed that it wasn't
Fingon?
Graeme
more eligible heirs left among the Fingolfinians. When Turgon died, the only
Fingolfinians left were a female (Idril) and a female line male (Earendil).
Since there was a male line heir in the House of Finarfin, that heir had
precedence.
>>
Someone else raised this point, and I hadn't considered it. Even if Tolkien
didn't come out and say that this was the way the Noldor did things, it's at
least a reasonable possibility, which weakens the objection I'm raising
considerably. I'll have to re-read Aldarion and Erendis and see exactly what it
says on the subject.
Russ
(Smaug69) writes:
>>An important point your missing is that for almost 30 years (and for all of
>>post LOTR), GG was a Finarfinian (whether as son of Finrod or as son or
>>Orodreth).
>
>So shifting things around counts? If we take the last thing written as
>canon then there are wholesale changes in some the histories and
>backgrounds of people/things in ME.
Apart from certain cosmology issues, there are not really any wholesale
changes.
>> Contrasted against that history was a single pencilled margin note
>>in Grey Annals which said GG was son of Fingon - that's the entire textual
>>history of that idea.
>>
>>The issue is not even close.
>
>So if JRR really made a mistake in the lineage and forgot about it for
>30 years or so then the mistake would be considered more canon just
>because it was around longer? I don't understand that logic.
He didn't forget about it - he revisited the issue several times. He made
numerous references to GG's heritage during the period we're discussing; and
with the exception of the pencilled note he was always a Finarfinian.
Russ
Russ
graem...@aol.compost (Graeme) writes:
>>>Elrond was a female-line heir which, at best, means he takes after a
>male-line heir (cf. Numenorean inheritance custom described in Aldarion and
>Erendis in Unfinished Tales).
>>>
>
>I haven't read Aldarion and Erendis in a while. Does it actually say that
>Numenorean custom follows after Noldorin custom?
No. It says it was an inherited custom. The question is inherited from whom.
Considering the original Numenorean custom differed from the Beorean, Halethith
and Sindarin customs, that leaves the Noldorin and Hadorian as the only
possibilities. However, the Numenorean custom included concepts that only the
Noldor and not the House of Hador dealt with (for example, a king dying without
a son. The House of Hador never faced that situation; the Noldor obviously
did), that leaves the Noldor as the only remaining likely choice.
> All elves didn't
>necessarily
>do it that way, as Dior was King of Doriath after Thingol, despite being a
>female line heir.
That was Sindar, not Noldor.
>If Aldarion and Erendis does say that (and I'll look it up too), that would
>effectively neutralize my objection. In which case, who is Gil-galad's
>father?
> Is everyone agreed that it's Orodreth? Or are they just agreed that it
>wasn't
>Fingon?
Orodreth was Tolkien last word on the matter. GG was removed as Finrod's son
when Tolkien decided to make Finrod unmarried.
Russ
Russ
(Smaug69) writes:
<snip>
>>Elrond was a female-line heir which, at best, means he takes after a
>male-line
>>heir (cf. Numenorean inheritance custom described in Aldarion and Erendis in
>>Unfinished Tales).
>
>I figured you would work this in to the thread at some point.
How could I not. The person I was replying to was questioning how a Finarfinian
GG would inherit over Turgon's issue. Even most of those who disagree with me
on the point that a female line heir could never inherit, tend to agree with me
that male line heirs at least have a preference over famle line heirs.
For 30 years? He made GG a Finarfinian time and time again. Whether you like
it or not, the fact is there.
Russ
Smaug69
You also have to take into to account that while the Numenoreans did
practice some the same things the Elves did they also did many things
differently.
Smaug69