Tolkien Gateway

Talk:Amrod

(Redirected from Amarthan)

See Talk:Amras - nikolet 21:51, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

[edit] Ehm ... which version of name belongs with which version of the Legendarium?

As far as I can gather from The Shibboleth of Feanor, in the version where one of the twins died in the Shipburning at Losgar, the one who died (remaining the younger twin with the fathername Telufinwë) was Umbarto/Ambarto, and Amrod, was the Sindarin form of Ambarto, the mothername applied to this twin. Subsequently, Tolkien substituted Amarthan, as the Sindarin form of Umbarto. Pityafinwë, 'Little Finwë' was certainly never used for Fëanor's youngest son, since that was the meaning of Telufinwë, 'Last Finwë'. Thus in this version of the Legendarium, Amrod, changed to Amarthan, was the Sindarin name of Ambarto/Umbarto, with the fathername Telufinwë.

Amrod certainly never was the Sindarin version of Pityo, nor was it the name of the twin that survived, and the name Ambarussa was shared by Amrod for a time, not the other way round.

So the article as it stands belongs rather under the title of Amras, or even Amros, with certain corrections to names.

See also Talk:Amras -- Mithrennaith 01:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

According to commentary in HoME XII under the mother names on (p.353) and the note 62 (p. 366) Tolkien exchanged mother names of the twins and turned Ambarto into Umbarto to fit the legend: "It was then, no doubt, that my father changed the name Ambarto to Umbarto in the list and reversed the names of the twin brothers (see note 62), so that Ambarussa becomes the elder of the two and Ambarto/Umbarto the youngest of Fëanor's children, as he is in the legend told here." Thus the information of Amras being the fated twin burnt in Losgar seems to be correct. There is no information on exchanging Amros and Amras on father name list, as I understand only Ambarussa & Ambarto/Umbarto were exchaned, not father nor Sindarin names? Sirielle
It is correct that no names were exchanged on the father-name list, but the Sindarin names are actually the translations/Sindarizations of the mother-names (with the exception of Curufin and the partial exception of Maedhros, which are not relevant here), as is also confirmed in Vinyar Tengwar #41. So exchanging the mother-names undoubtedly implies the exchanging of the Sindarin names, Ambarussa being Sindarized as Amros, Ambarto being Sindarized/translated Amrod and Umbarto being translated Amarthan. So it is certainly Amrod/Amarthan who was burnt. -- Mithrennaith 17:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Following on my discovery of my misreading on Talk:Amras, I feel prompted to explain further about the relationship between the Sindarin names (which are the ones most used) and the Quenya names (in this case the mothernames).
For it is by no means only in Vinyar Tengwar #41 that the origin of the Sindarin names of the Noldor as Sindarizations or translations of Quenya names is explained. It is found throughout ‘The Shibboleth of Fëanor’. In order, in the Note on Mother-names, ¶3 Tolkien writes:
The ‘true names’ remained the first two, but in later song and history any of the four might become the name generally used and recognized. The true names were not however forgotten by the scribes and loremasters or the poets, and they might often be introduced without comment. To this difficulty - as it proved to those who in later days tried to use and adapt Elvish traditions of the First Age as a background to the legends of their own heroes of that time and their descendants - was added the alteration of the Quenya names of the Ñoldor, after their settlement in Beleriand and adoption of the Sindarin tongue.
In the following long note on The names of Finwe's descendants, ¶4 he writes:
The changes from the Quenya names of the Ñoldor to Sindarin forms when they settled in Beleriand in Middle-earth were on the other hand artificial and deliberate. They were made by the Ñoldor themselves. This was done because of the sensitiveness of the Eldar to languages and their styles. They felt it absurd and distasteful to call living persons who spoke Sindarin in daily life by names in quite a different linguistic mode.
In Christopher’s editorial note on The names of the Sons of Fëanor, he writes, before giving his father’s lists of (Quenya) father- and mothernames:
There are many experimental etymological notes on the Eldarin words referring to red colour and copper, and on the names of the twin brothers, which are here omitted. In the first list I have added the Sindarin names for clarity.
It is these experimental etymological notes that are largely given in VT #41. But from this it is also clear that the Sindarin names, included in the list of fathernames in [], were not there in Tolkien’s own text, but were added editorially by Christopher. Therefore, when Tolkien subsequently changed the order of the mother-names of the twins, he did not also change the order of the Sindarin names, simply because in his text they were not there. Christopher obviously saw no need to note that they should also be exchanged, because that did not in itself say anything about his father’s text. So no conclusions about the eventual order of the Sindarin names can be drawn from this. Then in the fifth paragraph of Christopher's explanation after the legend of the shipburning, he quotes his father as writing:
All the sons save Curufin preferred their mother-names and were ever afterwards remembered by them. The twins called each other Ambarussa. The name Ambarto/Umbarto was used by [?no one].
Finally, in the last endnote, #65, Christopher writes about his father’s text:
[The text ends with brief notes on the 'Sindarizing' of the Quenya names of the Sons of Feanor, but these are too rapid, elliptical, and illegible to be reproduced. It may be mentioned, however, ..... that the Sindarin form of Ambarussa (numbered 6, i.e. the elder twin) is here Amros, not Amras.]
So, literally, Amras>Amros is the Sindarin form of Ambarussa. On top of this, to the title of his editorial note on The names of the Sons of Fëanor Christopher adds: with the legend of the fate of Amrod. So to him it was clear that it was Amrod who was burnt at Losgar, and that should make it as clear that Amrod is the Sindarin form of Ambarto. Therefore, even without having access to VT #41, there should not be any doubt that swapping the mothernames of necessity leads to swapping of their Sindarin forms, which are the Sindarin names, also, and it seems Christopher thought there could not be any doubt. The notes described in note 65 are given in VT #41, and there this information is confirmed, and the Sindarin form of Umbarto is given as Amarthan (actually a translation).
On the forms Amras and Amros it should be noted that in ‘The Shibboleth of Fëanor’ Amras is only found in Christopher’s annotations and additions. Tolkien himself wrote Amros, as the Sindarization of Ambarussa, Amrod as the Sindarization of Ambarto and Amarthan as the Sindarin translation of Umbarto, and there is no indication that he used the form Amras in this text and its related material. Therefore, if the version of Amrod’s death in the Shipburning at Losgar is to be treated as canonical on Tolkien Gateway, as is the case, the acceptance also of the name Amros instead of Amras and of Amarthan as another name for Amrod as canonical cannot be avoided. The appearance of the separation of the forms Amros and Amarthan from the ‘legend of the fate of Amrod’ is only artificially created by Christopher’s editorial selections and insertions, it is not based on Tolkien’s own texts. -- Mithrennaith 23:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
This is totally correct and, leaving aside that C. Tolkien titled the section in The Shibboleth as "the legend of the fate of Amrod" (not Amras), VT #41 leaves no doubt: "Had Amros (2) Ambarto lived, it [i.e. the name Ambarto] would probably have been [Sindarized] as Amrod." In view of this, and since nobody has edited the article yet (I guess it's been forgotten?), I'm going to try and amend it.--84.125.23.220 12:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)