Ecthelion and glorfindel fought in all the battles of beleriand?

Elthir said:

Why Turgon "though" . . . I'm not sure what this is in response to specifically (from my post).

🐾

Click to expand...

Why not?

I'm wondering 'cause my earlier post has nothing to do with anything after SY 60, the year of the Dagor Aglareb, and I'm not sure what the planning of Gondolin has to do with anything in there either, so I don't understand what the "though" refers to, exactly.

Elthir said:

I'm wondering 'cause my earlier post has nothing to do with anything after SY 60, the year of the Dagor Aglareb, and I'm not sure what the planning of Gondolin has to do with anything in there either, so I don't understand what the "though" refers to, exactly.

Click to expand...

I can’t really remember, to be honest. Is that ok?

Oromedur said:

I can’t really remember, to be honest. Is that ok?

Click to expand...

Okay. No problem

Elthir said:

I think this much has already been answered by two "possibles" and one "plausible"

For example, did Fingon fight at the Kinslaying? According to The Annals of Aman and Christopher Tolkien's constructed Silmarillion (warning: mutliple f-sounds follow), the Feanoreans were succoured by Fingon with the foremost of Fingolfin's host . . .

. . . so, presumably yes. In any case Fingon was there . . .

. . . but then there's a text in Tolkien's Quenta Silmarillion, section 72, in which it it explicitly said that Fingon "had no part in that deed" (which writing, in any case, preceded AAM). The point here is not about the external textual situation actually . . .

. . . but its illustration of folks who were arguably somewhere -- some-where where-some fight or battle took place -- that yet need not have taken part in a given battle.

Or something

Click to expand...

it says in the Wikipedia that glorfindel is following the army of the Noldor in exile. Isn't that true? If it's true, glorfindel must be at battle.

Ecthelion Of The Fountain said:

it says in the Wikipedia that glorfindel is following the army of the Noldor in exile. Isn't that true? If it's true, glorfindel must be at battle.

Click to expand...

Glorfindel is one of the Etyangoldi (Exiled Noldor), and my previous responses were given with this in mind.


Wikipedia currently writes: "Tolkien eventually decided that each Elf's name should be unique, and therefore the two Glorfindels should be one and the same." footnote, Michael Drout Encyclopedia

Tolkien did not decide that all Elven names should be unique (and his character Nerdanel, wife of Feanor, gave two of her sons the same name), and I hope this, in my opinion misleading statement from Wikipedia, is itself an oversimplification of what is found in Michael Drout's Encyclopedia.

🐾

Ecthelion Of The Fountain said:

it says in the Wikipedia that glorfindel is following the army of the Noldor in exile. Isn't that true? If it's true, glorfindel must be at battle.

Glorfindel - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Click to expand...

Nearly everyone on the web uses Wikipedia. All the same, it has some severe but fortunately well-known shortcomings.

Wikipedia’s a great source for a quick overview of a subject, but woefully inadequate for full investigation. For one thing, some sections (particularly related to hot-button issues, like politics: Wikipedia leans so far Left it spins in little counter-clockwise circles) are dominated by a handful of deeply prejudiced or partisan editors who quickly revert corrections in order to press their positions, often to the detriment of facts and truth. (It’s “their” truth that counts: denial of objective Truth is a modern mental malady.) Wikipedia has had some infamous flops: one of the first involved former Nashville Tennesseean editor John Seigenthaler in which Wikipedia refused to correct a clearly erroneous and defamatory document concerning Seigenthaler, whose Wikipedia article claimed he was involved in the assassination of Robert F Kennedy. In fact, Seigenthaler and RFK were close friends, and for a time, Seigenthaler actually worked for Kennedy. Eventually the story was corrected, but not without considerable difficulty.

• NY Times article on Seigenthaler and Wikipedia
• A half-way decent blog post on the controversy
• Wikipedia’s article on the Seigenthaler affair (how deep the irony!)
• Wikipedia’s list of hoaxes (that it presently admits to)

In addition, Google has begun to deliberately skew its search results, as Rob Braxman outlines in this recent YouTube video. (And remember: Google (now calling itself “Alphabet”) owns YouTube. Best to watch it while you still can, although it’s 20 minutes long ).