Galadriel's Ban

[Galin]

For possible clarity, the "addition" here is not simply that Galadriel passed over with Melian, but as I quoted above: "We have dwelt here since the mountains were reared and the sun was young [addition] And I have dwelt here with him since the days of dawn, when I passed over the seas with Melian of Valinor; and ever together we have fought the long defeat."

Which, to my mind, all together is a precursor of the final form published in Fellowship: "He has dwelt in the West since the days of dawn, and I have dwelt with him years uncounted, for ere the fall of Nargothrond or Gondolin I passed over the mountains, and together through ages of the world we have fought the long defeat."

So as I currently see things, the Melian idea, whenever it was added, still drops out in the revision which takes us to the form published in 1955 -- in other words, it appears to have been added before the final version is reached, and is rejected in any case.

Anyway WCH, I assume by your remark that you agree that the ban (that you find in Nerwen's songs) and the Melian concept could belong to enough of a separate time in the draft phase, and thus could represent separate ideas . . . otherwise, if the songs "go with" the Melian idea, arguably it becomes harder to explain why Galadriel should be banned if she isn't even part of the Rebellion.


Or is my reading of the TOI description off in some way? I've simplified it a bit, but that's the sequence as I see it . . . so far.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Originally Posted by Galin

For possible clarity, the "addition" here is not simply that Galadriel passed over with Melian, but as I quoted above: "We have dwelt here since the mountains were reared and the sun was young [addition] And I have dwelt here with him since the days of dawn, when I passed over the seas with Melian of Valinor; and ever together we have fought the long defeat."

Which, to my mind, all together is a precursor of the final form published in Fellowship: "He has dwelt in the West since the days of dawn, and I have dwelt with him years uncounted, for ere the fall of Nargothrond or Gondolin I passed over the mountains, and together through ages of the world we have fought the long defeat."

So as I currently see things, the Melian idea, whenever it was added, still drops out in the revision which takes us to the form published in 1955 -- in other words, it appears to have been added before the final version is reached, and is rejected in any case.

Anyway WCH, I assume by your remark that you agree that the ban (that you find in Nerwen's songs) and the Melian concept could belong to enough of a separate time in the draft phase, and thus could represent separate ideas . . . otherwise, if the songs "go with" the Melian idea, arguably it becomes harder to explain why Galadriel should be banned if she isn't even part of the Rebellion.


Or is my reading of the TOI description off in some way? I've simplified it a bit, but that's the sequence as I see it . . . so far.

I'm having trouble coming up with a timeline, mentally, although I suppose it could be straightened out by someone a bit more familiar with the textual history (Bill Fliss has a big chart covering all of Marquette's holdings). The problem I have is that the "Melian passage" appears to post-date the "over the mountains" version, as if it was a passing idea for a change which was then rejected. Or, another possibility, it is an idea Tolkien had post-publication.

Part of the problem here is dating the typescript referenced here. Tolkien did not have much of the LR typed by someone else, nor usually close to the time of writing (except for Book IV, so that CT could be sent a copy). Most chapters remained in manuscript fair copy until he typed the whole thing himself between late 1948 and late 1949- and then a second time in 1952-55.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

( . . . ) Part of the problem here is dating the typescript referenced here. Tolkien did not have much of the LR typed by someone else, nor usually close to the time of writing (except for Book IV, so that CT could be sent a copy). Most chapters remained in manuscript fair copy until he typed the whole thing himself between late 1948 and late 1949- and then a second time in 1952-55.

Thanks for this.

Given what you say here, I could be off in my opinion that the Melian idea ["addition"] pre-dates the "over the mountains" version -- but if it post dates this version, then it seems I could all the more (at least) argue that Galadriel's songs don't necessarily go with the Melian idea.

Of course, neither scenario [simply being an Exile -- or a companion with Melian] necessarily means Galadriel has been banned, but as I say, I certainly agree with you that both songs suggest it.

It does seem a bit odd to me if we were dealing with a post-publication idea, imagining that JRRT would go back to the drafts to add this, but it's not impossible I guess!

[Galin]

Possibly foolish questions alert, but concerning The Nature of Middle-Earth text "Concerning Galadriel & Celeborn"

. . . mmm, what is it, exactly

Carl Hostetter explains: "1) manuscript drafting and writing in black nib-pen on Oxford college documents dated 1955, to which Tolkien subsequently gave the title "Concerning Galadriel & Celeborn, and 2) . . ."

Okay, so is the actual text in NOME being characterized as drafting apart from nib-pen writing, with the "whole" being the text that is paraphrased in Unfinished Tales?

This would make sense given the brevity of the NOME text compared to the UT paraphrase, and explain why a seeming quote in the paraphrase does not appear in the NOME text [Christopher Tolkien puts quotes around "but they failed to find the strength" as if it's a quote from the original, but such a quote is not found or noted in the NOME presentation] . . .

The description in Unfinished Tales reads: "The text bearing this title is a short and hasty outline, very roughly composed, which is nonetheless almost the sole narrative source for the events in the West of Middle-earth up to the defeat (. . .) the text is much emended, and it is not always possible to see what belongs to the time of composition of the manuscript and what is indefinitely later."

Anywho, I first assumed (!) that in NOME we were getting the whole text as JRRT wrote it (with emendations being noted), rather than a paraphrase, even though it might cover some of the same territory. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

____


Another NOME question concerning the chapter The Silvan Elves And Silvan Elvish

Section: note 9 states: "The opening of this footnote was previously published at UT: 259. "LR III 363" = LR: 1082". "Thither they returned twice before the Last Alliance": in the contemporary History of Galadriel and Celeborn, upon the revolt in Eregion of the Mirdain at the instigation of Sauron, Galadriel alone passed through Khazad-dum to Lorinand (UT: 237), took up rule, and remained there until she departed to seek Celeborn at Imladris, prior to the Council there (UT: 240) . . ."

But "Thither they returned twice before the Last Alliance" is given in the section Amroth and Nimrodel, dated 1969 or later -- and the subsequent history described in this note is a summation of Concerning Galadriel & Celeborn, which is dated much earlier.

What then is the word "contemporary" referring to?

Granted, in UT this section is preceded by a somewhat vague: "Elsewhere there is one other reference to their movements during those years", but it turns out, that this "elsewhere" is part of the footnote about Oropher, and is indeed characterized in NOME as a late typescript occupying sides of printed Allen and Unwin notices dated 1968.

Or am I misreading that too!