This is a great template!!! However I have to note that it uses some misconceived terminology. According to a recent discussion, the years are not "of the Sun" because they aren't counted according to when the Sun was created. Third Age 100 is not the "100th year of the Sun of the Third Age". Perhaps Mith intended to mean "solar years" in which case the term would be changed to coranar.
Also the Four Ages are nowhere defined as "Ages of the Children of Iluvatar"; this was a term that Tolkien considered briefly but never elaborated. The Four Ages don't seem to have a specific definition and are called just Ages. Sage 06:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- I hope you accept that actually this is all quite messy, especially as Tolkien's wasn't entirely consistent. This is why I have had to make certain decisions.
- How is Third Age 100 not the 100th year of the Sun of the Third Age? With the exception of leap-days (three every twelve years instead of one every four years), a an elvish coronar is the same as a year; I'm not sure what distinction you are trying to make. Tolkien refers to "years of the Sun" and in particular I think p. 51 of Morgoth's Ring rather backs up my usage. Furthermore, in terms of the First Age, I had to make the distinction between years of the Sun and years of the Trees (as we have both in the First Age); Tolkien himself makes this exact same distinction (in both Morgoth's Ring and War of the Jewels).
- In terms of the "Ages of the Children of Ilúvatar", Tolkien did use this term (as opposed to "Ages of the Sun" which he did not). In comes up several times in both Morgoth's Ring and War of the Jewels. In terms of understanding the chronology, do you not think that it is a useful phrase? We want people to understand the chronology as best as possible and that was a key consideration in the terminology. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 11:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)