Arwen vs. Galadriel

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by cellurdur

Finally on the topic of Elvish maturity.

I will first address the brief note that we have in the Unfinished Tales, where Tolkien says that the Eldar aged much the same way as the Numenoreans.

"Thus (as the Eldar) they grew at much the same rate other Men, but when they had achieved 'full growth' they then aged, or 'wore out', very much more slowly."-Unfinished Tales, Line of Elros.

This comment here certainly implies that Elves and Men aged MUCH the same and would certainly dismiss the notion of the Eldar taking 3000 years to mature. However, what does Tolkien mean by 'much the same'? Is an elf taking 50 years to mature, a Hobbit taking 33 years and a Dunedain taking 33 years that different? Without any further elaboration I am not convinced that this is enough to dismiss the detailed essay he wrote about Elvish aging.

But did anyone say "Laws and Customs" should be "dismissed", anyway? I thought the question was whether it can be considered the final word on the subject. Not the same thing.

I am unaware of any other source we have from Christopher Tolkien, which further addresses the issue except for 'Laws and Customs' and the part in the Children of Hurin.

The Children of Hurin was compiled much later than even the HOME. Christopher Tolkien had even more time to evaluate his fathers notes and take out things he did not think would quite fit.

Christopher Tolkien also tells us that Tolkien completed most of the Children of Hurin after the publication of LOTR.

We've been through this before, I think? I have the greatest respect for Christopher Tolkien's judgement regarding his father's work, but to not to the extent of treating him as some kind of high priest of Tolkienicity. -And yes, that's hyperbole and not meant literally- but honestly, cellurdur, you're pinning so much on his editorial decisions that it almost comes to that.

Also, there is what I said earlier: Sador's words point to *a* difference- but is it the one in "Laws and Customs"? Or something else again? I don't think there's any way of telling for sure.

Personally I think it's a very big jump to assume that Tolkien dismissed the idea of Elves maturing at 50 given Christopher Tolkien never commenting on this one note. It becomes an even bigger stretch when we see how the mortal (an ultimately descendant from Man) Hobbits have evolved to reach full maturity at 33.

I, for my part, assume nothing of the kind. However, the bare fact that he may
have done so casts doubt on the whole line of reasoning based on Dior/Earendil/Elwing's ages- which was the original point. For that matter just the fact that it's not the *only* version does that.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

But did anyone say "Laws and Customs" should be "dismissed", anyway? I thought the question was whether it can be considered the final word on the subject. Not the same thing.

Exactly. What you have to understand about LACE is that (per C. Tolkien who has some weight or doesn't have weight depending on the lunar cycle) it was written by men and not the Eldar; therefore it is a retelling of ancient lore, so there is an accuracy issue from the start, considering what we know about chroniclers adding or deleting information to suit their needs and prejudices. One only has to look at Beowulf, a poem Tolkien cherished, to know that it was a pagan tract rewritten with a Christian patina many years later and not by the same hand(s).

In addition, Tolkien abandoned the whole idea of using Aelfwine as transmitter of Elvish tales in favor of Bilbo Baggins' Red Book Of Westmarch, but then it seems he may have reconsidered later when compiling the Narn i Hîn Húrin. In any case, the entire LACE section would need to be edited and changed, and Tolkien never went back to it. It obviously was not a pressing item in his agenda, and as C. Tolkien admitted it was "sometimes obscure, and tantalising in its obscurity" -- which it certainly is.

Finally, as nearly as I can tell, Tolkien never adjusted anything timewise in his chronologies to account for changes he made according to LACE, nor does any quotes I've seen from either Galin or Cellardur indicated a fixed time for maturity of Elves (or, more importantly, Half-elves); in fact, Tolkien bounces back and forth throughout his life from something as outlandish as 3000 years right down to the same as mortal men. As Galin pointed out, the last mention from Tolkien indicated they aged relatively the same.

It is variable and certainly not definitive. It is not canon in the sense that Sauron created the One Ring and Gollum destroyed It and himself in Mount Doom.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

We've been through this before, I think? I have the greatest respect for Christopher Tolkien's judgement regarding his father's work, but to not to the extent of treating him as some kind of high priest of Tolkienicity. -And yes, that's hyperbole and not meant literally- but honestly, cellurdur, you're pinning so much on his editorial decisions that it almost comes to that.

Also, there is what I said earlier: Sador's words point to *a* difference- but is it the one in "Laws and Customs"? Or something else again? I don't think there's any way of telling for sure.

Sador's quote is not definitive:

'for in their first youth the Children of Men and Elves seem close akin. But the children of Men grow more swiftly and their youth passes soon; such is our fate.'

Does the youth of Men pass soon? Without a doubt. Like I stated previously, considering that up to the most recent times, mortal men died very early, women even earlier (depending on how many children they bore, they were lucky to get past 30). Throw in the plague or even an infected tooth, and death was swift. So they married very early as well, mid-teens was common. The historical record as far back as the Biblical Hebrews indicates very early marriages (betrothal being at 12 1/2 years-old). Tolkien the scholar would be most aware of this information, even without the interwebz.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I, for my part, assume nothing of the kind. However, the bare fact that he may
have done so casts doubt on the whole line of reasoning based on Dior/Earendil/Elwing's ages- which was the original point. For that matter just the fact that it's not the *only* version does that.

A jury of one's peers could not convict with the reasonable doubt spread in and out and all about.

But the real question is...did Half-elves have Balrogs wings? And did they sprout them when they grew beards?

[Galin]

It [L&C] is variable and certainly not definitive. It is not canon in the sense that Sauron created the One Ring and Gollum destroyed It and himself in Mount Doom.

I agree. And 'canon' for me is author-published stuff. That doesn't mean I ignore the legends of the Elder Days of course, but that's a more complicated issue.

What you have to understand about LACE is that (per C. Tolkien who has some weight or doesn't have weight depending on the lunar cycle) it was written by men and not the Eldar; therefore it is a retelling of ancient lore, so there is an accuracy issue from the start, considering what we know about chroniclers adding or deleting information to suit their needs and prejudices. One only has to look at Beowulf, a poem Tolkien cherished, to know that it was a pagan tract rewritten with a Christian patina many years later and not by the same hand(s).

That's true but I'm not sure why Elfwine would necessarily be considered wrong about a given something, unless we have more of an internal reason to question him. I mean, what you say is arguably built in, I guess, but when it comes to specific ideas the reader, if told 50 or 100 let's say, would probably take this as 'the best he or she can know' -- again, unless something else internal shakes the notion somewhat.

The Eressean orc-origin idea was internally delivered as a belief for instance, but should the reader question the Wise of Eressea? And even if we did, if Tolkien himself had published this 'origin' alone, we might wonder a bit but in the end would still probably be noting this origin as 'fact', at least as far as what appears in the 'true' legendarium that is.

In general, Elfwine was supposed to get his information rather directly from Eresseans, which is actually the 'more reliable' [in my opinion] transmission compared to the later idea.

I'm going on memory here, but I think the role of Elfwine possibly 'survived' in text until the later 1950s, around the time of L&C. Certainly The Lord of the Rings first edition was published before this of course, but I would have to check the first edition 'transmission references' compared to the second edition to say anything possibly meaningful about that.

That said, and not that you said or think otherwise, but the loss of Elfwine might only mean we need a new 'internal author' with some niggling to reflect this...

... but that said too, there seems to be notions within L&C that were revised, or arguably were, or are at least a bit questionable. For example, even the naming customs appear to have been revised according to Christopher Tolkien [compared to the shorter text on naming from the later The Shibbolerh of Feanor]. But I wonder if the 'missing' Chosen-name of the Noldor, for instnce, is only missing due to brevity, and the consideration that it doesn't seem to be a custom among the other Eldar in any case.

But certainly I agree that L&C awaited revision if it was to become part of the author-published legendarium.

Finally, as nearly as I can tell, Tolkien never adjusted anything timewise in his chronologies to account for changes he made according to LACE, nor does any quotes I've seen from either Galin or Cellardur indicated a fixed time for maturity of Elves (or, more importantly, Half-elves); in fact, Tolkien bounces back and forth throughout his life from something as outlandish as 3000 years right down to the same as mortal men.

There is a note from CJRT that seems to say he thinks his father means, at one point anyway [from something in a text], that one can just 'plug in' 144 Sun Years and employ the old dates that were witten with the much smaller ratio [almost 10] in mind.

And while that works to drastically lengthen the years concerned, for instance from the Awakening of the Quendi [which gives much more time for 3,000 years to maturity to begin to dwindle] to the Rebellion, it just doesn't seem to work in all places, as the flight of the Noldor would take notably long, if I recall correctly.

As Galin pointed out, the last mention from Tolkien indicated they aged relatively the same.

Well with Tolken one never knows

But I would be surprised if anything turned up about Elven ageing that could certainly be dated after Eldarin Hands, Fingers and Numerals.

At the moment I'm not sure what text is later than the other: the one that represents 50 [some 100], or 3,000 but dwindling in Middle-earth; or the citation from the Line of Elros actually. I'm not sure it's possible to even know between these examples, but I haven't looked at the external dating recently.

By the way I do remember it was someone at Barow Downs who opened my eyes to the possibility [and in my opinion probability] that the notion was 3,000 and dwindling in Middle-earth...

... it was years ago now, but thanks to that person