<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haunting Spirit
Posts: 93</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: movements of galadriel and MT
----------------------------
Quothe jallanite:
No-one has yet commented on the contradiction between what Galadriel tells of her movements in the chapter "The Mirror of Galadriel" in The Lord of the Rings and the text of the published Silmarillion.
---------------------------------
There is no real contradiction. Note the woring of the sentence in 'Of Beleriand and its Realms': "But none of the Noldor went ever over Ered Lindon, while their realm lasted...". This is refering to the realm of the Noldor as a whole, not the individual realms of the various chieftains and kings. The realm of the Noldor lasted until the Fall of Fingolfin and Ruin of Beleriand (ca. 456+), or, at the latest, the Nirnaeth Arnoediad and the death of Fingon (ca. 472). After the death of Fingolfin the Noldor and their realm were no longer united and after Fingon's death the kingship of the Noldor was nominal at best as Turgon had little intercourse with the outside world. That Galdriel passed over the Ered Luin 'ere the fall of Nargothrond and Gondolin' that is before ca. 495 is canon. When she fled Beleriand with Celeborn is arguable, but obviously sometime between ca. 457 and 495. Perhaps after the death of Finrod? What is contradicted is the version wherein Galadriel departs seperately from Valinor and flees Beleriand _possibly_ quite shortly after arriving there (see UT).
-----------------------
Quote:
Certainly no later writing mentions any departure from Beleriand by Galadriel or any Elf during the First Age.
-------------------------------
It is mentioned in one of the variants of Galadriel's history (written very late).
----------------------------------
Quothe Lindil:
I guess you have stumbled on a perfect case in point, although I can see no heavy damage from leaving her movement into Beleriand at the end of the 1st age vague in the silmarillion if there was no text to draw on to rectify it. I would guess it to be oversite on CRT's part , who knows maybe it will be corrected in the new edition. It doesn't sound likely though.
------------------------------------
Hopefully there is no need to consider it a contradiction. I am not so sure that it is an oversight on CT's part. Looking at some of the passages that formed this it may well be that he saw it similar to how I have attempted to explain it above.
It reads the same in the 2nd edition Silmarillion as well.
----------------------------------
Quothe Aiwendil:
Regarding Celebrimbor, Gil-Galad, and the High Kingship: I think that Celebrimbor's rejection of Curufin as a father is good enough grounds for his not getting the Kingship.
----------------------------------
As Lindil pointed out the Feanorians as a whole were 'Dispossessed'.
--------------------------------
Quote:
The real question, then, is why didn't it go to Idril, and then to Elrond? I still think that the statement about Neri and Nissi being equal rules out a purely male-descent for Elven kingships and such. Personally, I prefer Gil-Galad as the son of Fingon, but Tolkien's latest ideas here are very clear, and I don't think it's impossible to reconcile them with the rest of the Silm.
-----------------------------------
It could not have gone to Elrond after Idril in any event. Elrond had yet to be born (although in the early versions it was Elrond who ruled not Gil-galad who had yet to be invented). However the statement about the Neri and Nissi being equal is qualified: "There are indeed some differences between the natural inclinations of neri and nissi, and other differences that have been established by custom (varying in plave and in time, and in the several races of the Eldar)." quoted from 'Laws and Customs'.
Tar-Elenion--------------------- I will come with Fire and Sword, and put your cities to the Torch, your men to the Blade, your women and children in Chains</p>
__________________
Tar-Elenion
|