🧝Fingon and Turgon guilty of the Kinslaying?

[Confusticated]

Ahh! If a moderator sees this anytime soon, will you make the title more fitting?

In HoME X, Annals of Aman:"Moreover Fingon and Turgon were bold and fiery of heart and loath to abandon any task to which they had put their hands until the bitter end, if bitter it must be."

From HoME X, in LQ: "Moreover Fingon and Turgon, though they had no part in that deed, were bold and fiery of heart and loath to abandon any task to which they had put their hands until the bitter end, if bitter it must be."

That 'deed' being the Kinslaying at Alqualonde.

CT notes that the passage here in LQ preceded the one in Annals.

Was the omission in Annals of the statement in LQ that Fingon and Turgon had no part in the kinslaying done with the intention of leaving the possability that they did have a part? The otherwise exact wording can imply Tolkien was looking at the QL text at the time he wrote the passage in Annals?

How could it be that Fingon was present but had no part in the Kinslaying? Are we to think he just stood around and watched? I have a hard time with that.

For a long time I had supposed that Fingon did fight in the battle at Alqualonde, but while it is possable (and especially within the context of The Silmarillion) is there any reason to believe it other than 'it just seems like something Fingon would have done'?

I have also imagined Aegnor and Angrod were at the head of the host with Fingon. I began to question this when in a discussion with someone, he pointed out Angrod's claim to Thingol that they (the sons of Finarfin, I guess?) were guiltless in the kinslaying, from which one can reasonably conclude (based on The Silmarillion alone, and neverminding Annals and LQ) that they were not up front with Fingon, assuming one thinks anybody who was up front had to have been involved. However, since Tolkien at one point (LQ) stated Fingon and Turgon had no part and then later (Annals) does not say one way or the other, it must then be possable Aegnor and Angrod actually were up front with Fingon, as being up front did not mean one was certainly involved in the battle (as evident by Tolkien's statement in LQ that Fingon was not involved). Another thing discussed was Turgon's location in the Host, which I used to image was most likely back with Finrod and Finarfin (given his friendship with Finrod, love of Tirion, being 'The Wise', and his earlier speaking against Feanor), however given the context in which Tolkien did state (in LQ) that Fingon and Turgon had no part, there is beyond a doubt implication that Turgon was up with his brother, in addition the same implication (though this implication is not as strong I think) comes from the fact Tolkien mentions both Fingon and Turgon being 'bold and fiery of heart...' Likewise, the failure to mention Aegnor and Angrod at this point, may indicate they were not up front. There is also mention of a 'host of Turgon' leaving Valinor... at least in PoME regarding Glorfindel, but I'll have to look for pther references to such a host, and I don't recall any right off hand.

What do y'all think?

PS: Might Aredhel have been up with the Feanorians? Be interesting to know what her opinion had been in the rebellion.

 

[Ithrynluin]

CT notes that the passage here in LQ preceded the one in Annals.

The Silmarillion; Of the Flight of the Noldor
There they received the pardon of the Valar, and Finarfin was set to rule the remnant of the Noldor in the Blessed Realm. But his sons were not with him, for they would not forsake the sons of Fingolfin; and all Fingolfin's folk went forward still, feeling the constraint of their kinship and the will of Fëanor, and fearing to face the doom of the Valar, [color=sky blue]since not all of them had been guiltless of the Kinslaying at Alqualondë[/color]. Moreover Fingon and Turgon were bold and fiery of heart, and loath to abandon any task to which they had put their hands until the bitter end, if bitter it must be. So the main host held on, and swiftly the evil that was foretold began its work.

Well it seems to me that Tolkien omitted the ''though they had no part in that deed' part for a reason. The host of Fingolfin was not guiltless in the Kinslaying, and this, coupled with the fact that Tolkien left out this part makes me believe that it is more likely than not that Fingon and Turgon were guilty of the Kinslaying.

 

[Confusticated]

thanks for replying

The host of Fingolfin was not guiltless in the Kinslaying, and this, coupled with the fact that Tolkien left out this part makes me believe that it is more likely than not that Fingon and Turgon were guilty of the Kinslaying.

Well the first part, the bit about some of Fingolfin's host being guilty in the kinslaying, is also stated in the LQ where it goes on to say T&F had no part.

I wonder where Fingolfin was at during all of this. Maybe just obsession with 'The Flight of the Noldor' haha!

So I take you think Turgon was up with Fingon?

Another thing that can be tossed into the mix is that Thingol was very much against Feanorians, due to kinslaying, right? Well, he wasn't so much against the house of Fingolfin... does this indicate they were not involved in the kinslaying, or could it be Thingol just didn't know they were? Or maybe he knew they were but still gave more blame to Feanor's sons.

Also toss in that Turgon had a wife and daughter with him. But this may not say much... just a small detail that might fuel some speculation one way or the other.

 

[Ithrynluin]

Re: thanks for replying

Originally posted by Nóm
Another thing that can be tossed into the mix is that Thingol was very much against Feanorians, due to kinslaying, right? Well, he wasn't so much against the house of Fingolfin... does this indicate they were not involved in the kinslaying, or could it be Thingol just didn't know they were? Or maybe he knew they were but still gave more blame to Feanor's sons.

I'm sure the Fëanorians bore the brunt of the assault upon Alqualondë, and were also less prone to feeling guilty or bad about it. This would have reflected in their attitude and bearing. I don' think that was the case with those of Fingolfin's people who were guilty. Perhaps that's why Thingol's attitude towards Fingolfin & co. was so much milder than towards the House of Feanor. And later on, kidnapping Luthien didn't help much either.

 

[Inderjit S]

Well, the text in the Published Silmarillion implies that Fingon came to the succour of the Feanorians, ash he was leading the foremost part of Fingolfin's host. Since it is stated in the Later Quenta Silmarillion (HoME 10) as the quote provided by Nom shows, that Fingon and Turgon had no part in the deed of the kin-slaying we can assume that Fingon is simply noted as being at the head of Fingolfin's vanguard. Argon, may or may not have taken part, he is noted as being impetuous and at one point of the story (or his story) he is said to have been killed at Alqualonde, this shows that at least one person from the house of Fingolfin or Finarfin may have taken part. An interesting point here, is that in the earlier Quenta's (HoME 4,5) Orodreth, Angrod and Aegnor, at one point or another were close friends with some of the sons of Feanor (Usually Curufin and Celegorm) would this mean that they marched with the Feanorians in Alqualonde? (At one point of course, this idea was later dropped and they were later changed to becoming closer to Fingolfin's sons, Angrod and Aegnor to Fingon and Finrod to Turgon, though Finrod is never attributed with being very close to any Feanorian.)

Another thing that can be tossed into the mix is that Thingol was very much against Feanorians, due to kinslaying, right

The Feanorians maliciously attacked the Teleri. The host of Fingolfin came to the aid of their kinsmen who were falling, as they believed they had been the wailaid. Their guilt was no where near as great as the Feanorians, they were merely aiding their kin when they thought the Teleri had been instigated the battle, and they were sorry for it afterwards, though I am sure the Feanorians were too. Elwe also comments on them atoning for their deeds in their betrayal by Feanor and their crossing of the Helcaraxe.to see his

 

[Curufin]

On Thingol and the House of Fingolfin:

Was it not possible that Thingol favored the House of Fingolfin because they had endured the Helcaraxe -- and the trials and loss of that experience were as a measure of pennance (at least to some) for any part they may have played in the Kinslaying. There may be a passage in the QS somewhere regarding this, but I don't have it at hand.

 

[Inderjit S]

Elwe's words Concerning Fingolfin.

With Fingolfin and his people I will also keep friendship, for they have bitterly atoned for such ill as they did

Of the Noldor in Beleriand; Published Silmarillion

 

[Confusticated]

Hmm you guys put up a good case for Thingol being okay with Fingolfin and sons and all their people, even had they been guilty in the Kinslaying.

Thanks for the replies everyone, and don't hesitate to come back if you think of something to add!

hehe Inder, I see your warning points are dropping off. Isn't it about time you get them back up to a respectable level.

 

[Ithrynluin]

Originally posted by Inderjit S
and they were sorry for it afterwards, though I am sure the Feanorians were too.

Certainly not Celegorm, Curufin and Caranthir. These three never showed much sentiment at all, and they never rued any of their deeds. I'm sure Maedhros, Maglor and Amrod/Amras did repent, but their Oath prevented them from bettering their relationship with Thingol.

 

[Fingon_Findekáno]

Felt like doing a bit of necroposting here, just for fun.😋

“Thrice the people of Fëanor were driven back, and many were slain upon either side; but the vanguard of the Noldor were succoured by Fingon with the foremost of the host of Fingolfin, who coming up found a battle joined and their own kin falling, and rushed in before they knew rightly the cause of the quarrel; some thought indeed that the Teleri had sought to waylay the march of the Noldor at the bidding of the Valar.” -Of the Flight of the Noldor

“There they received the pardon of the Valar, and Finarfin was set to rule the remnant of the Noldor in the Blessed Realm. But his sons were not with him, for they would not forsake the sons of Fingolfin; and all Fingolfin’s folk went forward still, feeling the constraint of their kinship and the will of Fëanor, and fearing to face the doom of the Valar, since not all of them had been guiltless of the Kinslaying at Alqualondë. Moreover Fingon and Turgon were bold and fiery of heart, and loath to abandon any task to which they had put their hands until the bitter end, if bitter it must be. So the main host held on, and swiftly the evil that was foretold began its work.” -Of the Flight of the Noldor

“Then Angrod spoke bitterly against the sons of Fëanor, telling of the blood at Alqualondë, and the Doom of Mandos, and the burning of the ships at Losgar. And he cried: ‘Wherefore should we that endured the Grinding Ice bear the name of kinslayers and traitors?’
‘Yet the shadow of Mandos lies on you also,’ said Melian. But Thingol was long silent ere he spoke. ‘Go now!’ he said. ‘For my heart is hot within me. Later you may return, if you will; for I will not shut my doors for ever against you, my kindred, that were ensnared in an evil that you did not aid. With Fingolfin and his people also will I keep friendship, for they have bitterly atoned for such ill as they did...” -Of the Noldor in Beleriand

All that being said, I do believe at least some of the Nolofinwians did participate in the Kinslaying at Alqualondë, particulalry Fingon. They didn’t see how it began, but regardless jumped in to aid the Fëanorians when they thought the Teleri were the ones who were trying to stop them.

When it came to the pronunciation of the Doom of Mandos over the Noldor, Fingolfin’s people didn’t feel like they really had any choice but to keep going, one of the reasons being that they were afraid of what the Valar would do to them since they had participated in the Kinslaying. In regards to the popular quote about Fingon and Turgon right there, I interpret that to mean more about them being determined to keep going now, even if the road is bitter. They’d gone this far already, and they weren’t going to back out now. For better or worse, they were doing this.

As for why Thingol was still on relatively good terms with the Nolofinwians later on, they were considered to have paid for their wrongs by crossing the Helcaraxë. Their people had experienced enough suffering through that, and it probably helped that they hadn’t been the true instigators of the fight, like the Fëanorians had been. Like the Arafinwians, they had been ensnared in the evil that happened there, just perhaps a little more so than they had been, since they actually participated.

*All quotes are from The Silmarillion

 

[Elthir]

Welcome to JRR Tolkien's changing mind!

As I try to read the evidence here: in the pre-Lord of the Rings Silmarillion (no Galadriel yet! gasp!) the Finarfinians are the last group of the departing Elves, and simply arrive too late at Swanhaven to do anything.

In the post-Lord of the Rings Silmarillion (early 1950s, The Lord of the Rings still awaiting publication, but Galadriel exists! Huzzah!), the words of the Finarfinians to Thingol reflect (again, according to my view) that they did not participate in any fighting at Swanhaven.

In the 1960s (or at least in an addition to a "later" text), "suddenly" Galadriel and Finrod are there in time to help defend Swanhaven!

And in the 1970s, Galadriel (no longer part of the Exiled Companies!) is defending Swanhaven, erm, with Celeborn (Tolkien has seemingly forgot what he himself had already published regarding both Galadriel and Celeborn here)!

__________

Fingon and Turgon (or subtitle) Annals of Aman versus Quenta Silmarillion

Why read slash write the Annals? We get helpful dates and chronology about the same events in Quenta Silmarillion. But given that these two sources are. . . erm, two different sources, why not throw in a detail (or details) in one source, that isn't found in the other -- or why not describe the same event slightly differently, on purpose, in a way that either illuminates, or fogs, a given something?

For myself, I think Tolkien did intend a measure of this.

But if so, how do we (me) tell what is an intentional extra detail versus what is simply Tolkien changing his mind?

That is, unless there's evidence elsewhere to help answer this question: did JRRT purposely leave out the Fingon and Turgon detail (not fighting) in the Annals, because it was to appear in the "longer" Quenta Silmarillion tradition -- or do the Annals, given that the writing of this section is later than the writing of the corresponding QS section (if not significantly later) -- illustrate (by omission) that JRRT had dropped the idea that Fingon and Turgon did not participate?

Tolkien did take up the Quenta Silmarillion at a later date, but in any case, he didn't reach this point in the text!

Add to this: according to Christopher Tolkien, the tradition of the Annals was becoming more like Quenta Silmarillion in its expression, and The Tale of Years of the First Age was to take over for the Annals; and indeed, Christopher Tolkien blended both traditions (Annals and QS, along with other texts) in his constructed Silmarillion.

Or maybe don't add that. Or any of this post. I don't know