Tidbits of Curiosity

[Urwen]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

-The Fall of Gondolin: Idril. The view the story takes of Turgon could only come from his daughter; the surviving Lords of the City wouldn't be so critical. Tuor probably made some contributions (like the long, rambling bit before he gets to the city), but I think the meat of the story is Idril's: would Tuor really have given his wife all the credit? If not told to Earendil, it was probably at least told for his benefit - so yes, Maeglin really did try to throw him off a cliff and/or stab him, because the kid actually remembered that part. The general creepiness of Unc'a Lomion, however, is exaggerated by hindsight.

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Ultimately, yeah: there's a lot of opportunity for biased narration. Not around the Fall of Gondolin, though: you'd have to cast Earendil as a liar for that to work, and I think the Valar would have something to say. But Hurin and Elendil are prime candidates for bending the truth.

Or I can take a third option and say that Meglin was possessed, and hence the actions others saw him do weren't done by him, but Melkor/Sauron controlling his body. He, of course, wrestled the control from them near the end in order to save Earendil, and goad Tuor into slaying him as a form of atonement.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Urwen

Or I can take a third option and say that Meglin was possessed, and hence the actions others saw him do weren't done by him, but Melkor/Sauron controlling his body. He, of course, wrestled the control from them near the end in order to save Earendil, and goad Tuor into slaying him as a form of atonement.

Is that even a thing in Arda? I can think of multiple instances of people being kiiind of driven to things by evil power (Boromir and Frodo, for example), but it's clear that they're still responsible for their actions. And I can think of multiple 'evil impersonates people' instances - Eilinel and Amlach, say - but that's not possession either.

I can't think of any examples of an evil Power straight-up possessing someone; I might just be being tired, though?

hS

[Urwen]

Well, what if they did, just in this one case? After all, Morgoth was genuinely afraid that Earendil would contribute to his downfall (which he did). And right there was someone whose own desires just so happened to align with Morgoth's, making it even easier to possess him.

[Pervinca Took]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Is that even a thing in Arda? I can think of multiple instances of people being kiiind of driven to things by evil power (Boromir and Frodo, for example), but it's clear that they're still responsible for their actions. And I can think of multiple 'evil impersonates people' instances - Eilinel and Amlach, say - but that's not possession either.

I can't think of any examples of an evil Power straight-up possessing someone; I might just be being tired, though?

hS

I don't believe Frodo was responsible for his actions at the very end, when the Ring was at its point of maximum power. 'Impossible, I should say, for anyone to resist, especially after long possession, months of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted' - JRRT.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Pervinca Took

I don't believe Frodo was responsible for his actions at the very end, when the Ring was at its point of maximum power. 'Impossible, I should say, for anyone to resist, especially after long possession, months of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted' - JRRT.

Fair; but resist what? I've always read that as Frodo succumbing to temptation, not compulsion. I suppose you could see that as a form of possession - but I don't think arguing 'it wasn't Maeglin's fault, Morgoth just gave him an overwhelming temptation (to murder his cousin's son and kidnap her)' is going to win any points in Urwen's eyes...

hS

[Pervinca Took]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Fair; but resist what? I've always read that as Frodo succumbing to temptation, not compulsion. I suppose you could see that as a form of possession - but I don't think arguing 'it wasn't Maeglin's fault, Morgoth just gave him an overwhelming temptation (to murder his cousin's son and kidnap her)' is going to win any points in Urwen's eyes...

hS

Same thing, by then. Compelling him to yield to temptation. We're talking very, very extreme pressure.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

The Translations are said to be from Rivendell's records, which presumably were previously records in Lindon, but how did they get into there?

I've always gone with the head-canon that in the last days of Arthedain, the library of Fornost or copies thereof were sent to Rivendell for safekeeping. After all, Tolkien in his later period keeps telling us that the Silmarillion incorporated (garbled?) Mannish traditions- which wouldn't have been the case with material written in Lindon or by Elrond (or Glorfindel*)

Why would Bilbo have used these Arnorian materials ("from the Elvish" because written in Sindarin)? Probably because Elvish historiography was in a style relatively alien to mortal minds, written by and for conditional immortals with perfect recall. History written by Men would have been more comprehensible to a Hobbit.

___________________
*Another potential source for the Fall of Gondolin

[Urwen]

What are your opinions on Feanor?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Urwen

I won't reply to that, because it seems like you want this thread to end.

People don't usually end threads by asking for thoughts, but you read what you want to read.

What do you want, Urwen? You're upset when people don't post for a while, you're upset when people post. You quote your own questions to bump them up to get more responses, but out of the blue you decide to ignore some responses. Can we just have a voluntary discussion? Is that too much to ask?

Originally Posted by Urwen

Or I can take a third option and say that Meglin was possessed, and hence the actions others saw him do weren't done by him, but Melkor/Sauron controlling his body. He, of course, wrestled the control from them near the end in order to save Earendil, and goad Tuor into slaying him as a form of atonement.

But would that not imply Morgoth knew about what Earendil meant? Aside from the question of whether possession is possible, it has to have a purpose. If Morgoth had such control over Maeglin, why would he choose to deploy him this way? He could have sent him to kill Turgon, or to do more damage to the city defenses, or basically anything more useful than killing a 6-year-old.

The other thing is, if he really felt so horrible that he needed death as an atonement, why the need to goad Tuor? The cliff is right there. And goad Tuor how - by struggling to kill his wife and son? If we go into complete alternative histories of events (ie not just the motivations but the actions are different), what would be the goading action? Words?

I don't think this particular version makes it past Occam's razor, but maybe with some modifications it could work.

[Urwen]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

People don't usually end threads by asking for thoughts, but you read what you want to read.

What do you want, Urwen? You're upset when people don't post for a while, you're upset when people post. You quote your own questions to bump them up to get more responses, but out of the blue you decide to ignore some responses. Can we just have a voluntary discussion? Is that too much to ask?

I want to cure my boredom, is all.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

But would that not imply Morgoth knew about what Earendil meant? Aside from the question of whether possession is possible, it has to have a purpose. If Morgoth had such control over Maeglin, why would he choose to deploy him this way? He could have sent him to kill Turgon, or to do more damage to the city defenses, or basically anything more useful than killing a 6-year-old.

The other thing is, if he really felt so horrible that he needed death as an atonement, why the need to goad Tuor? The cliff is right there. And goad Tuor how - by struggling to kill his wife and son? If we go into complete alternative histories of events (ie not just the motivations but the actions are different), what would be the goading action? Words?

I don't think this particular version makes it past Occam's razor, but maybe with some modifications it could work.

Read my last post on the subject.