The enmity between elves and dwarves

[Ithrynluin]

I've created this thread so that all and any discussion about this topic can go here instead of in the topic suggestions thread. Of course, this does not mean that the debate has to start right away.

The topic is: Elves and Dwarves: Who was more to blame for the enmity between the two races?

State your side: the tree-huggers or the stone-fondlers. :p

I wouldn't mind debating for either, even though I prefer the elves as a people.

[Turgon]

Count me in for this one, sounds like it could produce a really cool debate. Not quite sure what side I will come down on, probably the elves though. Yes, I'd like to be on the elven side.

:)

[Thorondor_]

I would like to be on the elf side.

[Ithrynluin]

Tree-hugger side! :mad:

[chrysophalax]

I had intended to possibly judge this time around, but I like this topic, soooo...Elven side, please. If there appear to be too many on this side, I will be willing to switch.

[Snaga]

I am very willing to prove the heinous crimes of the golug-hai. Count me in on the side of the beardlings.:D

[YayGollum]

Hm. So all of the people wishing to debate for the side of the elves are debating that the elves were more evil, when it came to generating racism? No, it looks as if they are looking to defend the sickeningly popular race, for some reason. Craziness. I am already certain that I can beat everyone when it comes to proving that the elves were more responsible for generating racism. The Dwarves are easily the best.

[Maedhros]

I would like to be in the sides of the dwarves also.

[DGoeij]

I'm not much of a debater, but I would love to see this one. Replying to cheer you lot on. :D

[Bethelarien]

I don't really have time to actually debate right now, but I'd be more than willing to judge.

[Turgon]

So are we going to stick with certain sources in this debate? I'm thinking back to the question raised in the other debate thread.

[Maedhros]

So are we going to stick with certain sources in this debate? I'm thinking back to the question raised in the other debate thread.
Why would we need certain definite sources in this debate. If there were a definite prove in one source that would greatly influence one way or another, then I would be in favour of doing it, as was the case of a debate a long time ago, that I prohibited the use of "Osanwe-Kenta".

[YayGollum]

Well, some would be more comfortable knowing that all of the participants would only be allowed to use the few books that they actually own. When somebody shows up with some superly obscure quote from some book that they've never been able to track down, they are understandably saddened. I, of course, wouldn't mind which books anybody uses, since I can always bring my amazingly irrefutable logic to bear.

Either way would work for myself, then. I was merely answering the question. I was attempting to come up with a topic that would only work for The Hobbit or for the movies, but I'm sue that people could still dig out some quotes from some Letters about that The Hobbit book or some commentary from some D. V. D. things that explains some writer's intentions. :rolleyes:

[Thorondor_]

Why would we need certain definite sources in this debate. If there were a definite prove in one source that would greatly influence one way or another, then I would be in favour of doing it, as was the case of a debate a long time ago, that I prohibited the use of "Osanwe-Kenta".
That ought to make things interesting :D. I agree with Maedhros.

[Turgon]

Why would we need certain definite sources in this debate. If there were a definite prove in one source that would greatly influence one way or another, then I would be in favour of doing it, as was the case of a debate a long time ago, that I prohibited the use of "Osanwe-Kenta".

That's fine with me too, Maedhros, I was really just raising the question asked in the other thread.

[Barliman Butterbur]

So are we going to stick with certain sources in this debate? I'm thinking back to the question raised in the other debate thread.

Why? Surely every reader of the saga has his own opinion and can back it up! It's a case of the elves wearing perfume and pastel colors with gauzy diaphanous veils walking around with a flower at the nose versus the elves tromping around with leather jerkins, armpits like thornbushes, with beards full of a year's meals and weaponized strength body odor. What's to debate? http://www.myfilestash.com/userfiles/ArchiesBoy/lolrofl.gif

Barley

[Snaga]

So far we have Ithy, Turgon, Chrys and Thorondor vs Maedhros, Snaga and Yay. Do we need to wait for even numbers on each side? Or should we just get to it?

*sharpens sword of truth*;)

[Thorondor_]

Pride goeth before a fall :p

[Snaga]

I read that about the elves!!:D

[Ithrynluin]

I didn't actually choose a side. My last post was referring back to Turgon and Thorondor, who were saying they chose the Elven side, and I just pointed them to the correct term. :) I would actually prefer the Dwarven side slightly, just for the fun of it, though I'm not sure I'll have the time to debate at all.

So far we have:

Team A aka the Elven team aka the Tree Huggers - The Dwarves were more to blame for the enmity between them and the Elves: chrysophalax, Thorondor_, Turgon.

Team B aka the Dwarven team aka the Stone Fondlers - The Elves were more responsible for the enmity between them and the Dwarves: Maedhros, Snaga, YayGollum.

Perhaps we can wait a couple more days for any others to join...

[Turgon]

Just out of curiousity - why has the thread been closed?

[Snaga]

Yes - I just noticed that!:confused:

Good debate everyone!:)

[Thorondor_]

My bet is that it is a temporary issue. Perhaps Ithy may enlighten us :).

[Ithrynluin]

I'm afraid I will have to interfere in the debate at this point, as I believe parts of post #14 by Maedhros really disrupted the flow of the debate, and in a way that greatly threatens to diminish the quality of it. Yes, I am referring to the ever controversial issue of canonicity. In addition to being controversial, however, the issue is also endlessly...ah, I'll just be brutally honest here - BORING's the word, and there is no place for it in a debate, unless the debate revolved around the issue of canonicity itself; if allowed to continue, I am fairly certain the thrill and enjoyment of debating would plummet for the participants, and the judges would probably demand my head served on a platter for leading them on with the false pretense that they would actually get to read a debate about elves and dwarves.

I think it was in this thread that some of the participants-to-be raised the question regarding the limitation of sources for this debate. I have decided against it, because frankly - I would hate doing that, for if there's something written about a certain topic somewhere, I just wouldn't feel it was correct that the participants were forbidden to tap into these sources.
Also, I had read the Quenta Noldorinwa quite some time ago, and it has always been my view (simplistic though it may be) that the earlier HoME volumes (I-V) contain earlier fragments of the mythology, whereas the later ones (X-XII) contain the more finalized texts and stuff that could be considered the most authoritative above all else. For if the version of the Fall of Doriath from HoME IV is considered as JRRT's final and complete say on the matter, why then is it not included in the later Quenta Silmarillion of HoME X-XI? :confused: I think it may be because it is rife with inconsistencies and would clash with the rest of the legendarium if it was included in that form.

But hey, I am no expert on this issue so I went looking for clarification about this incredibly exciting topic to a source I have trusted for years now - Steuard Jensen's Tolkien "Meta-FAQ", specifically the part dealing with the canonicity of Tolkien's collective body of work (http://tolkien.slimy.com/publist.html). Of course, you may say that Mr. Jensen's views are not canonical (ahem), but let me assure you that he is a noted Tolkien expert and many others have participated in his FAQ project also, and have done very thorough and diligent research before arriving at any kind of conclusions, so I would say it holds a high amount of credibility.

Anyhow, this is how Mr. Jensen goes about classifying the works:

1. Canonical ("true" canon): Tolkien's published writings, showing his vision in its final form.
2. Adopted Canon: Finished work incorporated into the canonical body after it was written (often after some revision), while possibly leaving inconsistent loose ends. In most cases, these are trusted just as much as "true" canon.
3. Final Intent: Works or information which, while not published in his lifetime, was Tolkien's unambiguous intent at the time of his death.
4. Ambiguous Final Intent: Works or information for which Tolkien's intent at the time of his death was unclear (such as contradictory passages whose relative date is uncertain, or texts which while not specifically contradicted are old enough that Tolkien probably intended to rewrite them).
5. Reconstructed: Tales assembled from Tolkien's collected writings by Christopher and his assistant(s).
6. Developmental: Tolkien's early drafts of a story, largely superceded by later writings or abandoned completely.

The Silmarillion: Tolkien's lifework, edited and published posthumously by his son Christopher. Somewhat biblical in style at the beginning (perhaps in part because Tolkien never had the chance to rewrite it in more narrative form), it contains the entire history of Middle-earth from its creation to the end of the Third Age. This is the last book about Middle-earth to have a single, coherent storyline, which makes it essential for a good understanding of the First Age. Reconstructed, and therefore not really canonical, because of the changes made so the story would be coherent.

Although most of the events described in The Silmarillion took place thousands of years before the time of The Lord of the Rings, it is almost certainly best to read LotR first, for several reasons. First, LotR is written as a novel, while much of of The Silmarillion reads like a history book. Second, many readers enjoy the glimpses of Middle-earth's history that are mentioned in LotR because they are just glimpses; it's probably good to experience that at least once before you fill in all those gaps. Finally, the last section of The Silmarillion actually includes a plot summary of LotR filled with spoilers.

Sections in the database

* The Quenta Silmarillion in general: Reasonably canonical
* Ainulindale: Quite canonical
* Valaquenta: Fairly canonical
* QS Ch. 2: Of Aule and Yavanna: Fairly canonical
* QS Ch. 14: Of Beleriand and its Realms: Fairly canonical
* QS Ch. 19: Of Beren and Luthien: Reasonably canonical
* QS Ch. 21: Of Turin Turambar: Reasonably canonical
* QS Ch. 22: Of the Ruin of Doriath: Invented during editing based on old, conflicting notes
* QS Ch. 23: Of Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin: Reconstructed from very early texts
* Akallabeth: Final Intent
* Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age: Final Intent
* Genealogies: Mostly canonical (Gil-galad's parentage is wrong)
* Appendix: Elements in Quenya and Sindarin Names: Quite canonical (I think)

The Shaping of Middle-earth (HoMe IV): The earliest development of Middle-earth as a world in its own right. In addition to the earliest sketches of what would become the Silmarillion, this book contains some of Tolkien's earliest maps of Arda, including his only hints at extrapolation beyond the area shown on the usual maps of LotR (make sure you find a copy that includes them! Some paperback editions leave them out). Developmental.

Sections in the database

* The Earliest Silmarillion: Developmental
* The Quenta: Developmental
* The First 'Silmarillion' Map: Developmental
* The Ambarkanta: Developmental
* The Earliest Annals of Valinor and Beleriand: Developmental
* Appendices: Translations into Old English: Developmental

(This is the Quenta Noldorinwa Maedhros quoted in his post. I think it would be a good idea to cite your sources more precisely, because not everyone knows at the mere mention of the name where this text can be found, i.e. HoME IV.)

As you can see, the Quenta is labeled as "Developmental" which is the lowest grade of canonicity.

So, my (again, probably overly simplistic) view is that both these texts are almost equally unauthoritative or unfinished, and that the participants should be able to use both without the one overriding the other, if we can agree to that. (Or perhaps this is too idealistic a stance, and using both these texts simultaneously would be impossible?)

Therefore, I kindly ask all of you to remove posts, or parts of posts, dealing with what is considered canonical, from the debate. Of course, you don't have to comply with this, in which case I will ask the judges to simply ignore this and evaluate "only" the debate proper. Some of you bound to disagree with my decision, but I hope I have at least laid out the reasoning behind my decision for all to see. Finally, if you guys feel that I am grossly overreacting , I would be willing to retract my decision, though very reluctantly.

[Thorondor_]

There is another issue of canonicity regarding the whereabouts of Celeborn. LotR states one thing, UT another (not even so in all versions). What should we do in such cases? Is there any worth in nitpicking these other sources?

After consultations, I agree with Ithy. I hope the debate will be opened soon.

[chrysophalax]

For myself, I accept this decision regarding this particular debate, however....I would like to re-state my previously stated position of what do debaters do if they (like myself) don't have all the works of JRRT? What I proposed elsewhere (am not certain if anyone other than YayGollum saw this), was that there be a separate debate for those of us with limited resources, wherein only certain agreed upon texts will be cited. I'll gladly leave the weightier topics to the brains on the forum, but that shouldn't exclude those of us who just enjoy a good debate!

[Turgon]

I'm finding this whole issue rather confusing. I agree with your points Ithryn, in fact one of my main concerns about HoME is just that. You go pulling at different parts of it, and I don't know, it's all very... well... I don't know. As Gandalf says. He who breaks something to see how it works has left the path of wisdom. Or some such thing. Anyhoo, that's besides the point, though amusingly ironic. For instance in Noldorinwa we have Mim being the first dwarf ever to enter into the Quenta, presumable the hunting of the petty dwarves not being part of this stage of development. Is Mim even a petty dwarf in the QN? Yet, the other team still bring up the issue of the treaty. How can we have both? All rather strange. I'm not sure how we can use both versions of the tale however. They are at variance are they not? And it is such a large part of this whole question. Well I guess I'll just wait and see what the other team have to say. Wiser heads than mine may able to make some sense of it.

[Snaga]

Hmmm... I take your point Ithy, and I'm very grateful for your source on 'canonicity' (surely that isn't a word!!).

I would think it was a shame to delete what has been posted about the level of weight that should be given about the various sources in the debate. I found it highly illuminating, and I debate in order to learn as well as anything else.

I see perhaps two other options. Firstly, we could agree that nothing further can be said about the rights and wrongs of what may have happened in Doriath - since there is no single authoritative source. The judges could be directed to score that issue as a draw, and we carry on.

Or, secondly, we could just close the debate, perhaps with each team providing the usual closing statement.

This latter way forward might be for the best, although I admit it might be a shame to do so. But since now Thorondor is trying to strike down Unfinished Tales as well, we may well be bereft of further ground to cover. We already have quite a substantial number of posts for the judges to consider...

What does everyone else think?

[Maedhros]

I'm afraid I will have to interfere in the debate at this point, as I believe parts of post #14 by Maedhros really disrupted the flow of the debate, and in a way that greatly threatens to diminish the quality of it.
Very well. I will withdrew my participation from this and any other future debates in this forum.

The prince of darkness is a gentleman.

[Barliman Butterbur]

Y'see ... THIS is why I read for Tolkien's reasons: simply to enjoy a really long tale. I just shake my head at the way this whole thing died a' borning...

Barley

[YayGollum]

Argh. In the beginning, it was decided that sources from all over could be used. To myself, that meant that all information from all sources would be considered equally in the decisions of judges. Sure, some sources inform us of very different things. oh well. Yay for the quality of points and counterpoints to give the judges their decisions? No? Why accept all sources in the first place, then? If believing one quote from one book means that you couldn't believe a quote from a different book, and not everyone participating will agree to allow that one quote takes precedence, then why not allow both points and merely attempt to prove or disprove them separately? Too difficult? Or mayhaps too annoying for those who enjoy using quotes that wouldn't allow others? oh well. It can be done.

[Ithrynluin]

Very well. I will withdrew my participation from this and any other future debates in this forum.

I go out of my way to try to be fair, and THIS is what I get?

Very mature, Maedhros.

I am wondering, though, IF you had planned to use that quote in the debate from the start, and IF you really believed it would be game-breaking for the other team, why not say anything beforehand? Surely such an unbalanced question would not be fair, unless of course one is only out to win.

[YayGollum]

Is telling people about your amazing plans before you implement them required in these debates? If not, I see no problem. The question of whether we should be allowed to use any source came up, and we decided that any source could be used. So what if someone finds something from a source that makes someone else's source look bad? That's just more for people to debate about. Yay? Also, is there something wrong about wishing to win?

[Snaga]

Can I appeal for calm here? We are all friends here and can surely resolve this without anger.

Actually, I don't think Maedhros' intervention can be said to be 'game-breaking' since even QN leaves some room for argument. And I think in any case, Yay is right to say it is unreasonable to expect debate participants to reveal their hand at the outset.

I also think that the moment you have debates which allow use of work not published in the authors life-time, the possibility of arguments over canonicity are nearly inevitable. Unfortunately, this debate focuses to a large degree on one of the haziest areas of all. Probably there is a lesson for us all to take more care about the topic in advance.:)

I do also think that Ithrynluin's decision that 'canonicity' is too 'boring' is a very personal point of view, and others might find the issue quite interesting. I think the weighing of different sources and interpretations is a matter of great interest. Of course, it is incumbent on both sides not to bore the judges, and any side that does that may not find it helps their cause. But I am confident that our judges could sort the wheat from the chaff, and come to a sensible verdict based on the evidence presented.

I'm aware that we participants would all have an axe to grind (to use an old expression from Belegost:D) in this. I wonder whether the most sensible suggestion of all is to ask the judges to decide what they want to do about this?

[Thorondor_]

I agree with Snaga's latest post. It would sure be fun to continue and clarify some issues. However, if the rest of my team feels differently, I will side with them.

[Turgon]

Personally I think it would be a shame to end the debate, I think this is the first time I have really enjoyed myself whilst debating. As Snaga points out, we are all friends here, and I really don't want anything to sour that. There does remain a question over the judging though. Will all the judges be familiar with the complexities of the disputed texts? Will they even be interested? Also this debate shows no signs of slowing down so that is going to mean a lot of stuff to go through. I spent about five hours judging the last debate, and that was a relatively short one. It is a big ask of the Judges. Also as Snaga has pointed out, what is left to debate once the Ruin of Doriath is left out?

As I have said, I will go with the general opinion regarding the next step. Regardless of how it turns out I do appreciate all you have done to keep this going Ithryn. You have gone above and beyond what is expected of you.

[Ithrynluin]

Well then, feel free to continue as if nothing happened.

[Maedhros]

I go out of my way to try to be fair, and THIS is what I get?

Very mature, Maedhros.

I am wondering, though, IF you had planned to use that quote in the debate from the start, and IF you really believed it would be game-breaking for the other team, why not say anything beforehand? Surely such an unbalanced question would not be fair, unless of course one is only out to win.
You are kidding right? Fair?
I asked BEFORE the debate about the sources that could be used, and I received no negative answer from no one. If you had a problem with it, why not state it BEFORE the debate.
The person that chooses the topic makes the rules, I just followed them. You flip-floped.
So according to you, I should send my arguments to my opponents before the debate begins? Should I send my quotes and my post to them say a week in advance. Is that fair to you?
You have done a great disservice to the debates here in TTF and to the participants in this debate.
To suggest that Team A is unable to counter that quote from the Quenta, is to think lesser of them. The purpouse of a debate is not who wins or losses, is about the persons who dare to get involved and to learn and discuss JRRT works. It's a battle of wits and passion, and it should be fun. I consider the judging of a debate irrelevant.
I want to thank all of the members of this debate for participating, and I too will do an "Ithrynluin" and return to the debate.

Also Ithrynluin, I don't know if you can be an objective judge in this debate, based on the bias that you have against me, but if you think that you can I have no problem with you as a judge.

[Ithrynluin]

I think this "episode" occured mostly due to different interpretations and expectations. This is not the debate tournament, where there were strict rules and a couple of people who bounced ideas off one another and were in charge of ensuring balanced topics. When I came up with the topic at hand, I explicitly said that the idea is off the top of my head, so I expected others to comment if they thought any balance problems could arise. No one did.

As for underestimating team A, perhaps it seems like I did so, I don't know, but what I wanted to prevent is this debate turning into one about canon, putting the original topic in the background.

Also, I don't know where you came up with any "bias". Frankly, I don't really care either. It's all in your head.

[Thorondor_]

Can we get on with it? As they say in poker, "the table is crying" :p

[chrysophalax]

I agree with my teammates. Let's get on with it!

[Maedhros]

I think this "episode" occured mostly due to different interpretations and expectations. This is not the debate tournament, where there were strict rules and a couple of people who bounced ideas off one another and were in charge of ensuring balanced topics. When I came up with the topic at hand, I explicitly said that the idea is off the top of my head, so I expected others to comment if they thought any balance problems could arise. No one did.

As for underestimating team A, perhaps it seems like I did so, I don't know, but what I wanted to prevent is this debate turning into one about canon, putting the original topic in the background.

Also, I don't know where you came up with any "bias". Frankly, I don't really care either. It's all in your head.
There were 14 posts in the debate thread, and the only one that you complained was mine. Of all of the other participants, you inferred that I was unfair to the others. You broke your own rules, because of MY POST. I call that BIAS.

And the funny thing, is that this debate has nothing to do with canon. Nothing at all, as I will prove with my next post. So all of this Buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, was for nothing. ;)

The ancient one I like sometimes to see,
And not to break with him am always civil;
'Tis courteous in so great a lord as he,
To speak so kindly even to the devil.

[Ithrynluin]

You missed the actual reason why your post was the only one mentioned. And that is, with your post you started the whole affair of canonicity (consciously or not, irrelevant), and the other participants began to discuss/dispute it. Therefore, had it not been for those parts of your post #14, none of the debate around canon would have ensued. I also suggested that everyone edit out the canon-related writing from their posts, so I'm a bit baffled why you're putting up a martyr act here, saying you were somehow singled out. Like I said, you imagined the bias.

And hopefully, this "buzz" was not for nothing, and we can all gain something valuable from this for future debates, like Snaga mentioned.

[Snaga]

Well, I just posted again. I hope that's ok?!:)

[Maedhros]

You missed the actual reason why your post was the only one mentioned. And that is, with your post you started the whole affair of canonicity (consciously or not, irrelevant), and the other participants began to discuss/dispute it. Therefore, had it not been for those parts of your post #14, none of the debate around canon would have ensued. I also suggested that everyone edit out the canon-related writing from their posts, so I'm a bit baffled why you're putting up a martyr act here, saying you were somehow singled out. Like I said, you imagined the bias.

And hopefully, this "buzz" was not for nothing, and we can all gain something valuable from this for future debates, like Snaga mentioned.
Simple. You made the rules, and then break them to please you. What is that I think is boring thing? It was WRONG for you to stop the debate. It is a great thing that the others posters were against you. This is the first time that I have seen in a debate that all of the sides agree on something.

[Thorondor_]

Maedhros, you promised us a big surprise in the thread. Are you going to make good on that promise?;)

[Ithrynluin]

Simple. You made the rules, and then break them to please you. What is that I think is boring thing? It was WRONG for you to stop the debate. It is a great thing that the others posters were against you. This is the first time that I have seen in a debate that all of the sides agree on something.

I didn't break anything. I didn't impose anything upon anyone but asked after the participants' opinions and got them. All of the posters were against me and all of the sides are agreeing on something? I'm not really sure which thread you pulled this convoluted take on things from -- It wasn't this one -- but feel free to cling on to this view to your heart's content. You've always been such a drama queen, Maedhros. :p

[Snaga]

Come now, let's stop the squabbling!:rolleyes: I can just imagine the two of you, with the ownership of the Nauglamir at stake... I suppose it is to be welcomed you probably would just argue about it, and not ACTUALLY start a war over it!:D Nevertheless, lets not have 6000 years of enmity betwixt you!:;)

[Gothmog]

The question of "What is Canon" comes up often in debates and discussions and always is a bone of contention.

So then, just what is "Canon"?

Personally I only accept as "Canon" those books prepared for publication by J.R.R. Tolkien. All others to me are open to interpretation and argument. Even had J.R.R.T. actually completed his revised and expanded Silmarillion so that it had been published during his lifetime, still there would have been inconsistencies between what was in the Hobbit and LoTR and what was in the Sil.

In terms of the Legendarium, the Hobbit and LoTR were 'The Present', the Silmarillion was 'The Past'. In fact the Sil was the history of Arda that came down by way of Numenor and therefore was what Men remembered of the stories they heard from the Elves. Some Elves did remember the events directly or heard them from others who were closer to the events (such as Elrond, Galadriel and Celeborn and also Glorfindel) but for the most part the histories were stories that had passed down from long ago.

If we look at our own history books, how accurate are they? We read them and can be reasonably sure that an event took place but the exact time, context, place and cause can be, and often is, very much open to debate. If you compare two stories of the same event written by participants on opposite sides then you can often wonder how two such different events could happen at the same time in the same place and not interfere with each other.

In looking at the different drafts and sketches of various stories in Tolkien's Legendarium it often seems that each version was written by a different person. This may be due to each being written from a different perspective.

So I find the question of "Canon" to be completely irrelevant. A simple way of dealing with the use of such disparate sources is to consider each source as written by a different historian and arguing from a point of equal weight.

[chrysophalax]

I'd really like the chance to make a final post later on tonight, if I may.

Also, seems to me that the wily old Balrog makes some sense. It's the skill of the debator that's really being judged.All this hemming and hawing over sources has taken away all the focus from what could have been a truly interesting topic.

As to further surprises...wasn't having most of the participants going at each other "fun" enough?:(

[Snaga]

Final post? I thought we had another week to go, more or less?:confused:

[chrysophalax]

Hm, thought I read in the other thread that Turgon was turning it over to the judges, sorry.

[Turgon]

Nope, at least I don't remember doing so. Do we have any judges yet to turn this over to?

:D

In terms of the Legendarium, the Hobbit and LoTR were 'The Present', the Silmarillion was 'The Past'. In fact the Sil was the history of Arda that came down by way of Numenor and therefore was what Men remembered of the stories they heard from the Elves. Some Elves did remember the events directly or heard them from others who were closer to the events (such as Elrond, Galadriel and Celeborn and also Glorfindel) but for the most part the histories were stories that had passed down from long ago.

I still maintain that the Silmarillion is Bilbo's 'Translation from the Elvish'.

:p

[Snaga]

Not sure if there are any, and if we keep going as we have been, noone will want the 'honour'!

I think in your last post, Turgon, you suggested that on a particular issue we had said all that there was to be said and you suggested we turned it over to the judges. That's probably where the confusion crept in.

Anyway, I am pretty well in accord with Gothmog's point of view, but I do feel very uneasy about bits that are published as the Sil but are not Tolkien's work. If you can do that, maybe Jackson has authority too?!;) *stirs*

[Maedhros]

Maedhros, you promised us a big surprise in the thread. Are you going to make good on that promise?
I'm posting it right now.
I didn't break anything. I didn't impose anything upon anyone but asked after the participants' opinions and got them. All of the posters were against me and all of the sides are agreeing on something? I'm not really sure which thread you pulled this convoluted take on things from -- It wasn't this one -- but feel free to cling on to this view to your heart's content.
Who was for your suggestion of stopping the debate?
Why did you feel that team is is incompetent to respond to my post?

[Chymaera]

Sorry I just had to post this somewhere

I say Autumn, you say Fall. Where is the problem?



The Autumn of Gondolin :D hahaha

Good luck with the judging. I enjoyed the debate.

[YayGollum]

:rolleyes:

Anyways, why haven't you been jumping into these debateses, Chymaera person? But oh well. Care to toss your own judgement while everyone is sure to grumble about the two judges that we're waiting for? I am certain that you, at the least, would choose the correct team. :D

[Snaga]

Hello all. Just wanted to say I enjoyed the debate, and sorry for suddenly drying up. I had all sorts of work commitments and other stuff going on, and any way I'd made my most burning points, although there was something juicy that I never got to use from those nasty Feanorians.

Anyway - good debating everyone!:)