12 Of the Flight of the Noldor

[Findegil]

gondowe, I can see your reasoning. It is true that the direct sense of these introduction is that the Noldor are fare from the Pelori, which makes your placement more likely. And yes you are also right that Taniquetil is the highes of all mountains, and might be in a flat world, as we propose it, seen from very, very far away.

So that would mean:

§158 Therefore Fëanor halted and the Noldor debated what course they should now take. But soon they began to suffer anguish from the cold, and the clinging mists through which no gleam of star could pierce; and many of them repented of the road and began to murmur, especially those that followed Fingolfin, cursing Fëanor, and naming him as the cause of all the woes of the Eldar. FoN-EX-23.5 <Q&E {Most significant, they cite from an ancient legend of the flight the tale that as}As the mists of Araman wrapped the distant mountains of Valinor from the sight of the Noldor, Fëanor raised his hands in token of rejection and cried: 'I go. Neither in light or shadow will I look upon you again, Dahanigwishtilgūn.' So it was recorded, though the writers of the histories no longer knew what he meant. For which reason the strange word may have been ill transmitted. But even so it still bears some likeness to Taniquetil though it can no longer be analysed. (In a few versions, say the Loremasters, it was written dāhanigwiš-telgūn.) > FoN-EX-24b <Shibboleth Fingolfin {had }prefixed the name Finwë to Ñolofinwë{ before the Exiles reached Middle-earth}. This was in pursuance of his claim to be the chieftain of all the Noldor after the death of Finwë, and so enraged Fëanor.>

ArcusCalion, there is no direct rule against the creation of a footnote, but up to now we never found a reason good enough to do so. Creating a footnote is a change more serious then it seems at first glance. The authorship of the text lifted into a footnote is obscured in two ways: On an outer view it is no longer clear, if it is the author JRRT writing or us as editors? And on a inside view the same question can be asked. That alone must make us critical. My feeling is that if we can not introduce something into the main text without an explanatory footnote (even so the text of the footnote comes from JRR Tolkien) we should leave it out. The only excaption is if JRR Tolkien used a footnote himself.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

As loathe as I am to admit it, I think Elenwe (and her death) have to go.

This comes from 'Maeglin' (c. 1970) in The War of the Jewels (§12, p. 323):

'Turgon ... had no heir; for Elenwë his wife perished in the crossing of the Helcaraxë': here A has 'Turgon ... had no heir: for his wife, Alairë, was of the Vanyar and would not forsake Valinor'. On the page of jottings that concludes the abandoned later 'Tale of Tuor' (see Unfinished Tales p. 56) a note which I did not include says that 'Alairë remained in Aman'.

So, here we have Alaire as the wife of Turgon and the mother of Idril, and she stays in Aman.

However, the text B(ii) changes 'Alairë' to 'Anairë' (confusingly enough):

The typescript B as typed has 'Alairë', but on both A and B(ii), not on B(i), my father corrected (presumptively in 1970) the name to 'Anairë'.

Thus, it would seem that we should change 'Elenwe' to 'Anaire', but given the fact that there's no alternative name for the wife of Fingolfin (also called Anaire), I think we are justified in keeping 'Alaire' instead.


P.S. Keep in my mind though, some of the changes in general that Tolkien made to the Elven family trees and even the most basic staples of the mythology from 1970 onward were wild - and I have my reservations about keeping them.

[Arvegil145]

Not directly related to this thread - but Tolkien also seems to have abandoned the 'Amarie story' (again, )

This comes from a late note (after 1966) to 'Of Dwarves and Men', The Peoples of Middle-earth (pp. 317-8):

During their dwelling in Nargothrond as refugees he [Celebrimbor] had grown to love Finrod and his wife, and was aghast at the behaviour of his father and would not go with him. He later became a great friend of Celeborn and Galadriel.

Christopher Tolkien follows:

The reference in the first of these notes to the wife of Finrod Felagund is notable, since long before, in the 'Grey Annals', the story had emerged that Felagund had no wife, and that 'she whom he had loved was Amárië of the Vanyar, and she was not permitted to go with him into exile'. That story had in fact been abandoned, or forgotten, but it would return: see the note on Gil-galad, p. 350.

However, the 'note on Gil-galad' that CT references is from August 1965, predating the first note.


So, why did Tolkien seemingly abandon the story of Amarie, and Finrod having no wife? I doubt we'll ever know for sure, but I have a feeling that he intended to return to 'Gil-galad son of Finrod' idea (which I think was also the most longeval of the ideas for Gil-galad's parentage, if I'm not mistaken) - but this is just speculation.

[Findegil]

A reason could be that he wanted to avoid the same storry for the wifes of Felagund and Turgon. When Anairë wife of Turgon stayed in Aman, the wife of Felagund had to go with him into Middle-earth.

Gildor Inglorion from LotR comes to mind another possible reason.

The question with this change is: do we keep the rescue of Idril during the crossing of the ice? Up to now I considered here being a small child at that point, but that might have been wrong from the start.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Findegil

A reason could be that he wanted to avoid the same storry for the wifes of Felagund and Turgon. When Anairë wife of Turgon stayed in Aman, the wife of Felagund had to go with him into Middle-earth.

Gildor Inglorion from LotR comes to mind another possible reason.

The question with this change is: do we keep the rescue of Idril during the crossing of the ice? Up to now I considered here being a small child at that point, but that might have been wrong from the start.

Respectfully
Findegil

I see nothing wrong with keeping the rescue of Idril, and judging by the NoME, Idril was definitely not a child, though she was young.

But I think we definitely have to change Elenwe > Alaire (I would avoid 'Anaire', as I stated in my previous reply), regardless of whether or not we reject the 'Elenwe dying at Helcaraxe' story.

[Findegil]

Having read the source text now a bit farther I am not longer sure that we have to change {Elenwë}[Alairë]. The text in HoME XI, Meaglin reads:

'Turgon... had no heir; for Elenwë his wife perished in the crossing of the Helcaraxë': here A has 'Turgon ... had no heir: for his wife, Alairë, was of the Vanyar and would not forsake Valinor'. On the page of jottings that concludes the abandoned later Tale of Tuor (see Unfinished Tales p. 56) a note which I did not include says that 'Alairë remained in Aman'. That this was the case because she was a Vanya is reminiscent of the story of Amarie, beloved of Felagund, who was a Vanya, 'and was not permitted to go with him into exile' (p. 44, $109). The typescript B as typed has Alairë, but on both A and B(ii), not on B(i), my father corrected (presumptively in 1970) the name to Anairë. The substitution of Elenwë in The Silmarillion was based on the Elvish genealogies of 1959 (see pp. 229, 350), where Anairë (defined as a Vanya 'who remained in Tuna') was later corrected to 'Elenwë who perished in the Ice'; on the same table at the same time Anairë was entered as the wife of Fingolfin, with the note that she 'remained in Aman'.
In a note added to the typescript of the Annals of Aman (X.128, $163) my father said that in the crossing of the Helkaraxe 'Turgon's wife was lost and he had then only one daughter and no other heir. Turgon was nearly lost himself in attempts to rescue his wife - and he had less love for the Sons of Feanor than any other'; but Turgon's wife is not named.

(Underlining of later was added by me.)
First to the Alairë/Elenwë change reported here: the A text from 1951 and the typescript B(i) and Carbon Copy B(ii) as typed from 1970 or later have the name Alairë and that is changed in A and the carbon copy B(ii) but not in B(i) to Anairë. Christopher Tolkiens statment her means, I think' that the corretion in the genealogies of 'Anairë a Vanyar who remained in Tuna' to 'Elenwë who perished in the Ice' was later than the text of 'Meaglin'. And at the same time giving the name and the story of staying back in Tuna to the wife of Fingolfin. As both names are found in The Shibboleth, which is at least later then 1968 I would assume the following sequence:
a) Meaglin text written in 1959 with Turgons wife named Alairë and staying in Aman.
b) Meaglin text typed in 1970 with Turgons wife named Alairë and staying in Aman.
c) Shibboleth written with Fingolfins wife named Anairë and Turgons wife named Elenwë and perishing in the Ice.
d) Meaglin A and B cusorily corrected with Alairë => Anairë

b) and c) could be exchanged if the retaining of Alairë instead of Elenwë is assume an over sight.

As Arvegil145 mentioned already JRR Tolkiens memory was not fully reliable so late in his life. Therefore I would assume that when he corrected the 'Meaglin'-text he had forgotten the change of Alairë => Elenwë and the story of breaking Ice. Therefore what he corrected was just the name (on some linguistical ground, I would think).

In effect that would mean we have keep Elenwë and her perishing in the Ice for the wife of Turgon!

Respectfully
Findegil

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Findegil

Having read the source text now a bit farther I am not longer sure that we have to change {Elenwë}[Alairë]. The text in HoME XI, Meaglin readsUnderlining of later was added by me.)
First to the Alairë/Elenwë change reported here: the A text from 1951 and the typescript B(i) and Carbon Copy B(ii) as typed from 1970 or later have the name Alairë and that is changed in A and the carbon copy B(ii) but not in B(i) to Anairë. Christopher Tolkiens statment her means, I think' that the corretion in the genealogies of 'Anairë a Vanyar who remained in Tuna' to 'Elenwë who perished in the Ice' was later than the text of 'Meaglin'. And at the same time giving the name and the story of staying back in Tuna to the wife of Fingolfin. As both names are found in The Shibboleth, which is at least later then 1968 I would assume the following sequence:
a) Meaglin text written in 1959 with Turgons wife named Alairë and staying in Aman.
b) Meaglin text typed in 1970 with Turgons wife named Alairë and staying in Aman.
c) Shibboleth written with Fingolfins wife named Anairë and Turgons wife named Elenwë and perishing in the Ice.
d) Meaglin A and B cusorily corrected with Alairë => Anairë

b) and c) could be exchanged if the retaining of Alairë instead of Elenwë is assume an over sight.

As Arvegil145 mentioned already JRR Tolkiens memory was not fully reliable so late in his life. Therefore I would assume that when he corrected the 'Meaglin'-text he had forgotten the change of Alairë => Elenwë and the story of breaking Ice. Therefore what he corrected was just the name (on some linguistical ground, I would think).

In effect that would mean we have keep Elenwë and her perishing in the Ice for the wife of Turgon!

Respectfully
Findegil

By 'later', I assume you mean later than 'Maeglin A'?

Besides, I'm not sure about your dating of the 'Shibboleth' - is there any evidence that it postdates 'Maeglin B'?


Other than that, though, I think you make a pretty good case.