![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Re-reading this thread I noticed something - in note 65 to the "Shibboleth", it is stated that in a note associated with the text, the Sindarization of "Ambarussa" is given as "Amros" rather than "Amras".
Does this mean that we should be implementing a general change Amras > Amros? Or is there a later instance of "Amras" that nullifies the change? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bourg-en-Bresse, Ain, France
Posts: 14
![]() |
I think Amros to be better: it appears in The Shibboleth (c. 1968) whereas the LQ2 (where Amras is attested) is dated from about 1958 (Compare also with rhosc brown in the Etymologies).
aravanessė |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Welcome to the project, aravanesse!
I think you are right - in any case, the Shibboleth is certainly later than LQ2. Unless we can find another instance of the name 'Amras' in the late writings, I think we will have to implement a change to 'Amros'. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bourg-en-Bresse, Ain, France
Posts: 14
![]() |
Thank you.
![]() Amros is also attested in a text dated from 1968 or later (in any cases, after the Shibboleth of Fėqnor), cf. The Problem of ROS. I have not found another references of Amras in HoMe X, XI and XII that don't belong to LQ2 or to a later text. (Moreover, what do you think about the 'five sons of Fėanor' mentioned in HoMe XI p. 329 ?) aravanessė |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
A warm welcome to the project aravanessė from my side as well.
Concerning Amros: A good catch by you, Aiwendil. I could alos not find any later reference to Amras, so I will take up the general change: {Dķriel}[Amros] and {Amras}[Amros]. About the 5 sons of Fėanor: This is one of the hard puzzels. My take at it would be that he meant the five cheifs of realms in exil which were: Marches of Maešros Maelors Gap Himlad and the Pass of Aglon -> Celegorm Dor Caranthir Plian of East Beleriand -> Amros We see Curufin only together with his older brother Celegorm, so he might be missing from thelist of rulers. On the other hand Amros could be missing because I Ever have the feeling that East Beleriand was not realy a realm. But nor a hunting ground for the youngest of Fėanors sons. Respectfully Findegil |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bourg-en-Bresse, Ain, France
Posts: 14
![]() |
Quote:
aravanessė |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,036
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[added in the Margin: 'Though Maedros is now so long established that it would be difficult to alter'. In a later note, however, my father declared that he would change Maedros to Maedron.] Even if this later note was attached specifically to this essay in some way, for example, the use of 'later' implies to my mind that this change was originally not connected to the specific thrust of the (failed) solution. And if it was, I can't think why Tolkien would need to deal with both of the 'two' to solve his problem. It looks to me as if the proposed solution rather centered on a Beorian ros 'foam, white crest of waves', which could further connect to the Ship-name Rothinzil. But Andros had already been published |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |