Talk:Númenóreans

From Tolkien Gateway

Spelling[edit]

Not to nitpick, but diacritical marks can be important. Númenóreans has an accent over the 'o', but Númenor does not.--Theoden1 18:39, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Not to be ungrateful for the observation, but you know, when you write several hours into the night for an extensive article like this, small details can elude one's mind, especially since like 20-30 minutes passed since I finished writing. But thank you for being fast on correcting me. As always. ~~ Þelma 18:58, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
I can see you put alot of work into this, and you should be congratulated. Whenever you do an extensive job on an articles, usually some polishing is needed afterwards. I experienced it several times.--Theoden1 19:02, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
Nice job so far. A little more polishing, and it will be ready to be nominated for Featured Article status. Perhaps add some more detail about the Downfall. --Theoden1 10:54, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
Agree on this one. And the Epilogue part needs to be expanded too. I'm not pleased with it right now. Will work on both of them later today.~~ Þelma 10:59, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
I would agree with a FA nomination. Just one minor irk: the Appendices are to The Lord of the Rings, not The Return of the King. -- Ederchil 11:10, 28 July 2008 (EDT)
Corrected. Never used the Appendices as reference before. ~~ Þelma 11:19, 28 July 2008 (EDT)


Epilogue[edit]

Þelma, I see you killed off those couple of lines I put in the Epilogue. It was at the end of a long list of small changes, and I saw later it was repetitive, so I won't start an edit war over it. But deleting sentences like that is not a friendly act. This article is moving towards FA status, however, and it had a surprising number of small glitches throughout.--Theoden1 10:39, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Read the article, and I mean READ it, word for word, link for link, don't just superficially go through it, then read again what you wrote, what I left and what I deleted, and at last tell me if this has anything to do with friendship or repetitive sentences. ~~ Þelma 11:43, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

Tone[edit]

Anyone thinks that the tone of the article is a bit more story-telling than it should? I would work for some more encyclopedic tone and take care for chronological narration. However I see above that Þelma "put a lot of work" and I would hate to ruin it. Sage 17:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

+1 (and it needs more references). --Morgan 19:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Human/Mannish[edit]

Tolkien used "Mannish" instead of "Human" in the writings of his legendarium. However, the phrase "human sacrifices" (used in this article) is so commonly used - can we change it to "mannish sacrifices" without distorting English usage/style too much?--Morgan 22:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Council of the Sceptre[edit]

Referring to the Council of the Sceptre as an executive branch of the Númenórean government may be a bit of a problem, as their is no evidence it was responsible for the execution of the laws created by any legislative branch. Rather, it seems to be a deliberative and advisory body to the Monarch, but probably exercises no authority of its own save when circumstances prevent the Monarch from exercising their own authority. Such bodies are well documented throughout real history, and in fact the British Parliament is descended from such a body. In point of fact, the Council of the Sceptre is more like the precursor to a legislative branch, but seeing as it is unlikely that the Council passes laws independtly of the King, even that label is incorrect. --Corsair Caruso 17:26, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

It's an error with the very old template which is replicated in countless articles. It'll get fixed eventually but don't worry about it. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 17:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
So you're asking me not to edit it, then? The Council of the Sceptre article rather nicely summarizes the most relevant information with the citation from note 23 of Aldarion and Erendis. Literally replacing the words "executive branch" with "advisory council" would probably take care of most of the issue. --Corsair Caruso 17:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm saying that this problem occurs on lots of articles and it's not worth starting a talk page discussion about it. Be brave: if you think things need editing, edit them. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 18:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Lifespan[edit]

Why did you choose the 5x lifespan for the Numenoreans instead of the 3x lifespan ? In Nature of Middle-Earth, there's 2 texts dated 1965 that speak of :

- part 1 chap 18 : 3x lifespan (written after sept 1965)

- part 3 chap 11 : 5x lifespan (circa 1965)

But a 5x lifespan brings to a problem in the history of Erendis and Aldarion (dated 1965 or more) where the lifespan difference between them is an important point. I think it would be better to put the 5x lifespan as an other version of the legendarium, don't you think ? Erendis 11:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)Erendis

In my opinion, the lifespan of "normal" Númenóreans in Númenor who were not of the line of Elros in the main part of the article should be based on works that were written by J.R.R. Tolkien that were published when he was still alive. That means that from Appendix A I (i) from LOTR "span of lige" "in the beginning thrice that of lesser Men". Tolkien tried to ensure consistency between his works and to remove errors and did not change this sentence in the second edition of LOTR that was published in 1965. The sentence with "a life-span about five times as long as that of ordinary men" in the chapter Lives of the Númenóreans in The Nature of Middle-earth seems to be an unfinished manuscript that seems to conflict with the unfinished story of Aldarion and Erendis and both were not published when J.R.R. Tolkien was still alive. As a consequence, I agree that the five times lifespan should be mentioned in an Other versions of the legendarium section and that the three times lifespan should be mentioned in the main text of the article. --Akhorahil 09:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)