Tolkien's final First Age timeline

[Huinesoron]

The timeline is restored! Making use of the now-accepted order of the NoME part 1 texts, I've constructed it from the latest sources back.

A lot of it fits together really nicely - the founding of Tirion (from the Annals of Aman) falls naturally at the beginning of a yen, and things like Melkor's release and the making of the Silmarils can be made to do so too. There are three main things I've missed off entirely:

- The Awakening of Men. Tolkien wanted this to be both well before the fall of the Trees, and at least 50 (long) Valian Years after the Awakening of the Quendi. But he also wanted only 38 VY between Elves awakening and the Trees going dark. It doesn't fit; I'd have to invent a date.

- The birth of Galadriel. With the timelines we have, she cannot simultaneously be pre-adult at the Darkening, and older than the Silmarils, but that's what the two latest sources tell us. If Tolkien wanted to reconcile them, he would have needed to dramatically reduce the timeline between those two events, and he never indicated such a change.

- The birth of Aredhel. I'm annoyed by this, because it's actually one of the last dates Tolkien added to the Annals of Aman. But the Annals make the Aman years about 1.5x the length they are in later timelines, and I just can't fit her in before the Silmarils are created without pretty much inventing dates for all Finwe's descendents. So she has been excluded.

I also see from this thread that there's a mention of the March crossing Caradhras somewhere in NoME 3. I'm... just gonna hope that's earlier than the timelines that say otherwise.

hS

[Tar Elenion]

Thank you.

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

The timeline is restored! Making use of the now-accepted order of the NoME part 1 texts, I've constructed it from the latest sources back.

A lot of it fits together really nicely - the founding of Tirion (from the Annals of Aman) falls naturally at the beginning of a yen, and things like Melkor's release and the making of the Silmarils can be made to do so too. There are three main things I've missed off entirely:

- The Awakening of Men. Tolkien wanted this to be both well before the fall of the Trees, and at least 50 (long) Valian Years after the Awakening of the Quendi. But he also wanted only 38 VY between Elves awakening and the Trees going dark. It doesn't fit; I'd have to invent a date.

- The birth of Galadriel. With the timelines we have, she cannot simultaneously be pre-adult at the Darkening, and older than the Silmarils, but that's what the two latest sources tell us. If Tolkien wanted to reconcile them, he would have needed to dramatically reduce the timeline between those two events, and he never indicated such a change.

- The birth of Aredhel. I'm annoyed by this, because it's actually one of the last dates Tolkien added to the Annals of Aman. But the Annals make the Aman years about 1.5x the length they are in later timelines, and I just can't fit her in before the Silmarils are created without pretty much inventing dates for all Finwe's descendents. So she has been excluded.

I also see from this thread that there's a mention of the March crossing Caradhras somewhere in NoME 3. I'm... just gonna hope that's earlier than the timelines that say otherwise.

hS

Out of sheer curiosity, what would that same timeline you posted look like when translated into the 'Annals of Aman' tradition (i.e. YT 1050 - YT 1500) with the Valian year lasting for 9.582 solar years?

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

Out of sheer curiosity, what would that same timeline you posted look like when translated into the 'Annals of Aman' tradition (i.e. YT 1050 - YT 1500) with the Valian year lasting for 9.582 solar years?

Okay, let's do a quick rundown, converting "Final Timeline" dates into "AAm YT" dates:

YT 1050: Awakening of the Quendi.
YT 1110: Melkor discovers the Quendi and builds Angband.
YT 1260 (AAm 1085): Orome discovers the Quendi.
YT 1265 (AAm 1090): Valar decide to attack Melkor.
YT 1280 (AAm 1102): Ambassadors travel to Valinor.
YT 1281 (AAm 1104): Great Debate.
YT 1282 (AAm 1105): Great March begins.
YT 1303: March reaches Greenwood.
YT 1304 (AAm 1115): March reaches Anduin.
YT 1333 (AAm 1125): March reaches Beleriand.
YT 1334 (AAm 1128): Teleri reach Beleriand.
YT 1349 (AAm 1130): Elwe lost.
YT 1350 (AAm 1133): Noldor and Vanyar land in Aman.

Most of the events in Aman are dated in my timeline from the Annals anyway, so I'll just end with:

YT 1615 (AAm 1495): Death of the Two Trees.

The biggest difference is that the later timelines add almost 200 "YT" between the Awakening and the Finding. That was, ultimately, the reason Tolkien made all these changes: to give the Quendi time to grow a big enough population for all the trials he needed to put them through. The later timeline also extends the stay by Anduin, and the stay in Beleriand; but then chops the years in Aman down by about 100 YT.

Put another way: if Imin went with the March and reached Valinor, then by the time the Trees died he would have spent 5/6 of his life living under them by the Annals - but only 1/2 of it under the "Final Timeline".

hS

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

Okay, let's do a quick rundown, converting "Final Timeline" dates into "AAm YT" dates:

YT 1050: Awakening of the Quendi.
YT 1110: Melkor discovers the Quendi and builds Angband.
YT 1260 (AAm 1085): Orome discovers the Quendi.
YT 1265 (AAm 1090): Valar decide to attack Melkor.
YT 1280 (AAm 1102): Ambassadors travel to Valinor.
YT 1281 (AAm 1104): Great Debate.
YT 1282 (AAm 1105): Great March begins.
YT 1303: March reaches Greenwood.
YT 1304 (AAm 1115): March reaches Anduin.
YT 1333 (AAm 1125): March reaches Beleriand.
YT 1334 (AAm 1128): Teleri reach Beleriand.
YT 1349 (AAm 1130): Elwe lost.
YT 1350 (AAm 1133): Noldor and Vanyar land in Aman.

Most of the events in Aman are dated in my timeline from the Annals anyway, so I'll just end with:

YT 1615 (AAm 1495): Death of the Two Trees.

The biggest difference is that the later timelines add almost 200 "YT" between the Awakening and the Finding. That was, ultimately, the reason Tolkien made all these changes: to give the Quendi time to grow a big enough population for all the trials he needed to put them through. The later timeline also extends the stay by Anduin, and the stay in Beleriand; but then chops the years in Aman down by about 100 YT.

Put another way: if Imin went with the March and reached Valinor, then by the time the Trees died he would have spent 5/6 of his life living under them by the Annals - but only 1/2 of it under the "Final Timeline".

hS

Interesting!

But the motive behind my original question (other than curiosity) was that I'm trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, so to speak:

1) The 'square peg' being Tolkien's various 144:1 SY to VY conversions, the messing around with the dates in general, and the plethora of other things incompatible with:

2) The 'round hole' - being Tolkien Gateway's policy of adopting the 'Annals of Aman' timeline + the 9.582:1 SY to VY conversion.


So now I'm left trying to include as much information as possible from Tolkien's 'latest' writings on these subjects (such as the birth-years for certain characters such as Ingwe, Finwe, Elwe, etc.), while also following the YT 1050-1500 timeline!

And as if that was not enough, there is the question of whether I should use Tolkien's later '24/25 generations scheme at the time of the Great Debate', or the previous (and much more manageable for TG purposes) '5/6 generations scheme'.



All in all, since Tolkien Gateway uses the flat-world, published Silmarillion, 'Annals of Aman' scheme, I think the best approach would be to convince the recalcitrant folks there to simply tweak the year of the Awaking of the Quendi from YT 1050 to YT 1000 or something along those lines...but I'm getting ahead of myself.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

So now I'm left trying to include as much information as possible from Tolkien's 'latest' writings on these subjects (such as the birth-years for certain characters such as Ingwe, Finwe, Elwe, etc.), while also following the YT 1050-1500 timeline!

Yikes. Um, hmm. Probably the best approach on the birth years would be to keep their ages at the Debate the same - that was what Tolkien was trying to fix when he set their birthdates. It still keeps them born between the Finding and the Debate, without having to alter the time before the Finding.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

And as if that was not enough, there is the question of whether I should use Tolkien's later '24/25 generations scheme at the time of the Great Debate', or the previous (and much more manageable for TG purposes) '5/6 generations scheme'.

Um. Hmm. The Annals has a much shorter timeframe here - 330 years or so compared to 2000 in Tolkien's later schemes, or 800-odd in the earliest ones in XVII.3. You'd have to assume a generation of ca. 50 years to get six in, which means Ingwe (born 140 years before the March) should be waiting eagerly for his great-grandchildren by the time they set out. That does actually fit with... is it LaCE that says Elves reached adulthood in 50 years? It means a lot of characters (Finwe, Elwe, Indis) put off getting married for a long time, but I suppose you could rationalise that as being because of the changes taking place in their society.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

All in all, since Tolkien Gateway uses the flat-world, published Silmarillion, 'Annals of Aman' scheme, I think the best approach would be to convince the recalcitrant folks there to simply tweak the year of the Awaking of the Quendi from YT 1050 to YT 1000 or something along those lines...but I'm getting ahead of myself.

That seems like it would be hard to reference?

I do want to say that the Gateway is a fantastic reference source, so thank you for all your work over there.

hS

[Arvegil145]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

- The birth of Galadriel. With the timelines we have, she cannot simultaneously be pre-adult at the Darkening, and older than the Silmarils, but that's what the two latest sources tell us. If Tolkien wanted to reconcile them, he would have needed to dramatically reduce the timeline between those two events, and he never indicated such a change.

- The birth of Aredhel. I'm annoyed by this, because it's actually one of the last dates Tolkien added to the Annals of Aman. But the Annals make the Aman years about 1.5x the length they are in later timelines, and I just can't fit her in before the Silmarils are created without pretty much inventing dates for all Finwe's descendents. So she has been excluded.

Does your project treat works published during Tolkien's lifetime as taking precedence over those that are later but unpublished?

I ask because I think that Galadriel being pre-adult at the Darkening is at odds with what is said about her in The Road Goes Ever On (p. 60):

She [Galadriel] was the last survivor of the princes and queens who had led the revolting Noldor to exile in Middle-earth.

- emphasis mine


Well, technically, not literally at odds with it, but rather I find it unlikely (or at least unsatisfactory) that a teenager (for all intents and purposes) was one of the principal leaders of the rebellion of the Noldor. (Her being pre-adult would also drastically reduce her share of responsibility in the rebellion IMO.)

And, regardless of how you feel about the above argument, I'd still think the simplest solution to all this mess with Galadriel is to just bite the bullet and incorporate the AAm date instead (which also solves the Aredhel problem since they share the same birth year).

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

- The Awakening of Men. Tolkien wanted this to be both well before the fall of the Trees, and at least 50 (long) Valian Years after the Awakening of the Quendi. But he also wanted only 38 VY between Elves awakening and the Trees going dark. It doesn't fit; I'd have to invent a date.

I'm curious about how you would handle this (even though you said you wouldn't, but, indulge me?).

Not quite sure if this was Tolkien's 'final' idea (pretty sure it isn't, actually), but my favorite is the one where Sauron was responsible for the fall of Men (which at least gives a clear lower limit for the Awaking of Men, which is after Melkor is taken captive).



EDIT: I was thinking that, perhaps, it is possible to Sherlock our way to a rough date of the Awaking of Men by constraining the dates via the clues given to us about the Awaking of the Dwarves. There are two major sets of evidence I'd like to present.


1) In The War of the Jewels, there are two rough dates given for the Awaking of the Dwarves:

- a) the Dwarves awake at about the same time that the Eldar leave for Valinor (dates from c. 1958):

But it is not known when Durin or his brethren first awoke, though some think that it was at the time of the departure of the Eldar over sea.

- WotJ, 'Later Quenta', 'Concerning the Dwarves', Text 'e', pp. 211-2


- b) the Dwarves are already awake before the Eldar reached Beleriand (dates from c. 1959/1960):

Indeed it was one of their grievances against the Eldar that they had hunted and slain their lesser kin [Petty-dwarves], who had settled in Beleriand before the Elves came there.

- WotJ, 'Quendi and Eldar', 'Appendix B', 'The Petty-dwarves', pp. 388-9

So, in conclusion, if we adopt the earlier 1.a, then the Dwarves awake either in c. VY 870 (Noldor and Vanyar depart) or c. VY 872 (Teleri depart). Alternatively, if adopt the later 1.b, then the Dwarves awake some time before c. VY 869.


The next piece of evidence is:

2) In The Peoples of Middle-earth, there are likewise two contradictory ideas as to when the Dwarves awake in relation to Men:

- a) the Awaking of the Dwarves precedes that of Men (dates from c. 1969):

They refer to legends of the Ages of Awakening and the arising of the Speaking Peoples: first the Elves, second the Dwarves (as they claimed), and third Men.

- PoME, 'Of Dwarves and Men', Note 21, pp. 321-2


- b) the Awaking of the Dwarves postdates that of Men (dates from c. 1972/3):

Durin I, eldest of the Fathers, 'awoke' far back in the First Age (it is supposed, soon after the awakening of Men), ...

- PoME, 'Last Writings', p. 383

Therefore, depending on whether we adopt 2.a or 2.b, the Awaking of Men either predates (2.b) or postdates (2.a) the Awaking of the Dwarves - whose awaking took place either in c. VY 870-2 (1.a), or some time before c. VY 869 (1.b).


In other words, if we assume the later texts from both 1 and 2, the Dwarves should awake before c. VY 869, and Men should awake not long before the Dwarves.

To be perfectly honest, I kind of prefer the earlier version of 1 (1.b) because it at least gives us a nice, concrete figure (VY 870/2) - and if we take the 'Dwarves awake when the Elves leave for Valinor' to mean 'when the Teleri leave', then that gives us c. VY 872 as the date for the Awaking of the Dwarves: and since it is said in 2.b that the Dwarves awoke shortly after Men, depending on your definition of 'shortly', one could put a provisional date for the Awaking of Men as, say, c. VY 870 (departure of Noldor and Vanyar). Which also means that Men existed for almost 3,000 years before they arrived in Beleriand.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.


P.S. What do you think about this timeline (based on yours) that I found on reddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans...ted_first_age/

+ the image (https://i.imgur.com/VZ3LnUK.png)

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

Does your project treat works published during Tolkien's lifetime as taking precedence over those that are later but unpublished?

It does not, which is one reason it isn't anywhere near the New Silmarillion forum. The reason I've excluded Galadriel is that "Galadriel is older than the Silmarils" and "Galadriel is a teenager at the Death of the Trees" are both later statements than "this is how many years there were between the making of the Silmarils and the death of the Trees". I have a horrible feeling that last statement is actually sourced to the Annals of Aman, so yes, using the AAm date would be by far the easiest option. I can't, though, because the point is "latest" - but I couldn't bring myself to hypercompress the Silmarils-to-Exile timeline as the sources would indicate.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

I'm curious about how you would handle this (even though you said you wouldn't, but, indulge me?).

Okay, so. NoME 1.VI(B) gives a timeline of:

• VY1000: Awakening of Eldar
• VY1090: Finding of Eldar
• VY1100: Arising and Fall of Men, during the Captivity of Melkor.

The simplest solution would be to simply scale the Finding:Arising gap to the final Awakening:Finding gap. There are 14 VY from the Awakening to the Finding; so there should be 1.56 VY between the Finding of the Quendi and the Arising of Men. That would place the Arising in VY 866/80, which... actually works really well? It's 9 years after the March begins, when the Eldar are camped out at Rhun. There is no clear date for the fall of Utumno, but if we read "The Valar delay moving against Utumno for fear that war would affect the Quendi" to mean "the Valar did not attack Utumno until the Eldar had moved away", then Utumno probably falls sometime in those 9 years (why would they wait longer?). In fact, the Arising of Men might have occured because of the fall of Utumno, mystically speaking. Sauron is free to move around at this point - he's not attested harassing the Eldar for at least another solar century.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

EDIT: I was thinking that, perhaps, it is possible to Sherlock our way to a rough date of the Awaking of Men by constraining the dates via the clues given to us about the Awaking of the Dwarves. There are two major sets of evidence I'd like to present.

Oops, I forgot about the Dwarves entirely! Taking your sources, Tolkien's latest written ideas on them are:

1. They "'awoke' far back in the First Age (it is supposed, soon after the awakening of Men)" - PoME p.383, ca. 1972-3
2. They (specifically the Petty Dwarves) "settled in Beleriand before the Elves came there" - WotJ p.389, ca. 1959-60

So I think I have to take the reverse of your position: the Dwarves awoke not long after Men, somewhere in the later years of VY866. If we call this VY866/144, it gives them 2VY + 54SY (ie 342SY total) to invent racism and drive the petty-dwarves into Beleriand proper. I have no problem with that timeline, and when I get a chance I will integrate both this and Men above into the document.

Originally Posted by Arvegil145

P.S. What do you think about this timeline (based on yours) that I found on reddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans...ted_first_age/

+ the image (https://i.imgur.com/VZ3LnUK.png)

Oh, neat! I didn't realise I was Reddit-famous. It looks like they have a more reliable VY > SY conversion (I freely admit I didn't check for off-by-one errors, or typos in Tolkien's calculations), so I should probably adopt those. That probably means going back and checking that the dates are originally VY, and that I haven't misplaced something by wrongly converting a SY date.

I disagree on their methodology for the Valinorean years; I still agree with what I said on the timeline, that "It seems likely that Tolkien would have retained the relative spacing within each of these sets of dates". But that's a judgement call! It's entirely legitimate to do it their way - I just didn't.

One interesting point is that they said it was "too at variance with the established chronology for comfort". They're right, and that means that if someone was trying to use this timeline, they should probably use the Reddit variant. But I'm trying specifically to work out what Tolkien's "final version" would have been - and he was in no way bound by his own earlier dating schemes.

And one thing that worries me is that they say "We know that the Valar delayed moving against Utumno until after the Elves... came to Valinor." That would mess up my tidy logic on the Arising of Men, so I have to go and hunt down that source and see if it actually says that... and when it was written.

hS