Tolkien Gateway



[edit] Imladris?

Is there evidence that Celeborn once ruled Imladris? That info was added by Linathiel. ~ Earendilyon 03:21, 21 May 2008 (EDT)

It is not specifically stated, only that he dwelt there, if memeory serves me. -- Ederchil 03:48, 21 May 2008 (EDT)
Celeborn never ruled Imladris. He dwelt there for some time during the second age, he again went to live there after Galadriel had sailed away into the West.--Legolas 10:29, 21 May 2008 (EDT)
I agree with Legolas, Imladris was founded by Elrond, sent by Gil-galad, and ruled by him ever since, until he passed overseas. It is never stated who ruled Imladris after that, one may suppose that his sons, who remained there for a time, did so, though Celeborn was of course their senior, in years, status and powers. But he had no inherent authority in Imladris, that was a Noldorin settlement under the High King and his lieutenant(s). -- Mithrennaith 19:58, 21 May 2008 (EDT)
Deleted from the info-box. ~ Earendilyon 06:32, 22 May 2008 (EDT)
Maybe Linathiel simply thought realm = residence? -- Ederchil 09:09, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

[edit] Opening sentence and infobox

I know that this whole article should just be re-written, but in the mean time we should avoid making such bold statements of objectivity in the opening sentences. Under our new canon policy we can only really say that he was an elf of unknown/disputed origins who married Galadriel and lived for a time in L√≥rien. My main reason for prompting this discussion is because even using the Teleri infobox is a conscious judgement on our part. Do we have a generic Elf infobox?-- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  14:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree. We currently don't have a generic elf infobox, but we should have on for situations like this. --Amroth 19:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

[edit] Controversy

I believe the information from the published versions must come always first and the unpublished information from Tolkien's notes should be stated as alternatives (as in Controversy) later date or not. Therefore, Celeborn of Doriath, kinsman of Thingol should be 'accepted' as canon (for it is in the published books) and added to the main article and Celeborn of Alqualonde should be in the Controversy section. I don't understand the purpose behind this, making it so is misleading since Celeborn of Aman (Falmari) is a whole alternate history not only concerning him but Galadriel and the history of Lorien. And then Amroth must be accepted as their son as well. Besides, C. Tolkien suggests in Unfinished Tales, that the first original scenario (Celeborn and Galadriel meeting in Doriath) should be the 'right' version.

Amaranth 08:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

In the matter of the Silmarillion, the "published version" is not a choice by Tolkien but a posthumous product and contains interpretations by Christopher. As such, the Silmarillion as a "published version" doesn't hold any more authority than portions of UT or HoMe. In some points TG has accepted the later history, such as the early death of Amras and Gil-galad's parentage. I am not justifying it, just giving some explanation. Sage 10:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand and I am not against the content itself, but the order of it. It is even clearly stated in the controversy section that the widely accepted version is the one in the Silmarillion yet the main article still presents the alternative version as the accepted one. Since there's a dispute over this part, the alternative content in the main article should be moved to Controversy section, and the version of Celeborn from the Silmarillion should be presented as the primary one. A swap in the order of the content is my suggestion. Amaranth 17:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
And I understand you didn't speak about removal of content but what we accept as primary content. That's what I talked about and our logic here. In Amras we accept his early death and we have a section about his (almost nonexistent) role in the published Silmarillion. In Gil-galad we accept Orodreth as his parent and include a section discussing his connection to Fingon in the published Silmarillion. We disregard that Tolkien didn't have a time to develop his legendarium according to his newer ideas but we accept them nonetheless. It seems that Celeborn follows the same pattern. The case of Celeborn is somewhat different as CT seems to have a preference to the earlier version. Can you quote his reasoning? Sage 19:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
It should be noted that our canon policy has changed last year (see Forum:Tolkien Gateway canon policy). --Amroth 21:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm not here to argue which version is canon; "1. It is not our place to decide what is canon and what is not. - Tolkien Gateway canon policy "

So you can't tell me 'we accept A or B as canon' according to this policy. I'm not trying to do that either. But I do not wish make this a personal debate, so that's not my point. My point is the right order of the content presented in the articles, disputable content from from later sources that my contain any inconsistency with the earlier versions should fall under their own category, not the other way around. This is to avoid confusion and inconsistency between versions. It's not suggesting which is more canon or the removal of the content from any other version. After reading The Silmarillion this article would confuse me unless I read HoME and UT.

On the other hand, the making of Celeborn into a Telerin Elf of Aman contradicts not only statements in The Silmarillion, but also those cited already (p. 228) from The Road Goes Ever On and Appendix B to The Lord of the Rings [...] - C.Tolkien, Unfinished Tales

Since we can't decide which one is more canon, I think these content should be under a category (as in the example of many other character articles) such as "Other Versions of the Legendarium."

Unfinished Tales consists of essays and stories composed after The Lord of the Rings which were generally consistent with The Lord of the Rings. The book reveals parallel traditions regarding the history of Galadriel and Celeborn, the nature of the Istari, and a few minor sub-plots. Although some people argue that the book is generally acceptable as canon, readers must bear in mind the fact that no true consistency exists between these unfinished tales and the earlier works. -TG 'Canon'

If we put these seperate contents in the same category throughout all other articles that have disputable backgrounds I believe this would make them clearer (and better organized) for all readers. --Amaranth 07:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Amaranth.--Morgan 08:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
As do I. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 12:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I notice that the Galadriel article narrates the newer version, therefore it's contradictory to this article. It sure will look strange to someone who wishes to read the couple's history. Sage 14:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, her article contains both versions mixed together. I intend to revise it as well by seperating the information from different versions under "Other versions.." category. --Amaranth 14:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

About this line: "A Sindarin origin as Elmo's grandson has been the most widely accepted one of all but Celeborn as a Telerin prince seems a late development, and there is some dispute as to which is the more canonical."

It's explicitly said in "The Road Goes Ever On" that Galadriel "passed over the Mountains of Ered-luin with her husband Celeborn (one of the Sindar) and went to Eregion." (This passage is mentioned by C.Tolkien in Unfinished Tales as well) Since everything that was published by Tolkien himself must be taken as more canon than any of his drafts or unpublished notes (no matter how late they are), shouldn't that mean that Celeborn is a Sinda in canon and there's no such controversy?

I mean, this is not as the subject of Amras, where all accounts were unpublished and thus the latest one is the "correct" one, isn't it? Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).

[edit] Generic Elven infobox

I have a proposal that Celeborn's current infobox should be replaced with the generic Elven infobox I just created recently, considering the controversy considering his nationality (Nandor -> Sindar -> Falmar). Woolly Mammoth 17:24, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Why did you bother to start this discussion when you made the edit anyway, just 4 hours later? --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 10:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Canon policy incoherencies

I have observed that in all the articles in this site, information from the texts published by Tolkien himself is always given in the main article and infobox, while contradictory versions from unpublished works is relegated to the "Other versions" sections. Yet this article is an anomaly in the sense that it doesn't follow that rule. It presents the Sindarin and Telerin origins of Celeborn together, as if both had the same authority, but they don't. The Sindarin origin appeared in The Road Goes Ever On, a work which belongs to canon, but the Telerin one was only published posthumously by Cristopher. One can speculate that Tolkien would have chosen the later version over the earlier one, but the fact remains that the only canon story is the one given in The Road Goes Ever On. If it's agreed upon, I'd like to fix this. Besides, the article of Galadriel clearly puts the "Celeborn as Sindar" in the main article, and relegates theoad Telerin origin to "Other versions".-- 00:56, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

I have found a letter from J.R.R. Tolkien (and to me, at least, of uttermost interest), which I would gladly publish it here:

It comes from the Letter 347' found in The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien.

It goes like this:

"The 'High-Elves' or exiled Noldor had, for reasons that the legend of their rebellion and exile from Valinor explains, at once adopted Sindarin, and even translated their Q. names into S. or adapted them. Galadriel though beautiful & noble enough in form is not a Q. name, any more than Gil-galad, which contains the S. word galad; and Celeborn is a transi, of the orig. name Telporno; though said to be a kinsman of King Elu Thingol he was so only afar off, for he too came from Valinor." - J.R.R. Tolkien

Now, even though some parts of the letters SEEMINGLY contradict those elaborated in the LOTR, I don't think that the Professor's ideas should be discarded just because, me seems, there is an almost zealot-like adherence to the published works of Tolkien. I have ABSOLUTELY no doubt that, if he lived long enough to finish all that he set forth to accomplish, he would have revised the LOTR, perhaps not in a grand scale, but I'm sure he would have altered a thing or two, if he ever went on on revising the LOTR (and The Hobbit for that matter). Leonid 20:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Besides, The Road Goes Ever On contains many conceptions that were brewing in Tolkien's mind at that time - Celeborn being a Sinda is (to me, at least) a fleeting idea that was superseded as he developed a much more sophisticated conception of the mythology. And, concerning the Appendices to the Lord of the Rings, I have some qualms considering its "canonicity" - insofar as to the fact that that there are some (if not necessarily many) loose ends and contradictions. In the end, I am more prone to take Tolkien's final word on the subject - whether it contradicts LOTR and The Hobbit, I don't care. Call me insolent if you want, but I would be glad (although at the same time fearful) to embark on a journey to get the LOTR and The Hobbit in line with The Silmarillion (not the '77 version), but a new revised Silmarillion, GREATLY expanded, which in my opinion would rival LOTR (at least in the word-count).
And I would gladly post here this note on the essay "Of Dwarves and Men" (Home XII):
"Cf. the name Celebrin-baur > Celebrimbor. This was a Sindarized form of Telerin Telperimpar (Quenya Tyelpinquar). It was a frequent name among the Teleri, who in addition to navigation and ship-building were also renowned as silversmiths. The famous Celebrimbor, heroic defender of Eregion in the Second Age war against Sauron, was a Teler, one of the three Teleri who accompanied Celeborn into exile. He was a great silver-smith, and went to Eregion attracted by the rumours of the marvellous metal found in Moria, Moria-silver, to which he gave the name mithril. In the working of this he became a rival of the Dwarves, or rather an equal, for there was great friendship between the Dwarves of Moria and Celebrimbor, and they shared their skills and craft-secrets. In the same way Tegilbor was used for one skilled in calligraphy (tegil was a Sindarized form of Quenya tekil 'pen', not known to the Sindar until the coming of the Noldor)." When my father wrote this he ignored the addition to Appendix B in the Second Edition, stating that Celebrimbor 'was descended from Feanor'; no doubt he had forgotten that that theory had appeared in print, for had he remembered it he would undoubtedly have felt bound by it.
There's much presumption in deciding what Tolkien would have or would have not chosen in the end, specially considering that this wasn't the only time in which he went back to earlier versions, after discarding the supposed developments (e.g. the case of Finrod who went from being married, to having no wife, then married again, then having no wife once more). As things are, we have only his published writings to judge what he approved enough to send it to print. And in any case, regardless of what personal views are on this subject, the policy followed in this site and among most Tolkienists is that published writings come first. This is quite explicit in the article about "canon", and it's the line followed in the majority of articles.-- 22:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)