I would personally argue that the enduring Elvish political division in the 2nd and 3rd Ages is not "Sindar vs Noldor" but rather "Sirion vs Balar (and, uncomfortably, Amon Ereb)" -- that is, the remnants of the peoples of Beleriand who were largely isolationist vs those who -- by either choice and ability-- were not.
Notably, Sirion is the explicit destination of:
The refugees of Gondolin, an extremely isolationist polity which did not contribute to the Siege of Angband; did not respond to the Dagor Bragollach, despite their proximity to Tol Sirion; did not admit refugees; and only barely joined the Union of Maedhros. I don't give Turgon much credit for this, because as narratively dramatic as an unannounced relief force is, Turgon denied Fingon and Maedhros the opportunity to plan the battle with the addition of his forces. The western front may not have been the best place for them to be!
The refugees of Doriath, a polity which spent nearly the entire span of Morgoth's residence in Beleriand isolated behind the Girdle, and benefited immensely from the safety brought by the Siege of Angband without contributing anything to it. I am inclined to believe that, considering Thingol's stated distrust of the Northern Sindar, his ban on the Noldor entering Doriath, and the explicit notation that the refugees of Nargothrond were allowed to come to Doriath, that he was not opening his borders to anyone except them.
It is also the likeliest destination for many of the refugees of Nargothrond, who fled to Doriath after Glaurung's attack -- and after Orodreth's ascension to the throne, Nargothrond was increasingly secretive and isolationist and did not join the Union of Maedhros even at Fingon's command. After the Nirnaeth they "did not suffer" other elves to cross their lands, and Annael (Tuor's Mithrim foster-father) ends up in Balar so they were likely turning away all refugees -- and this despite Orodreth's wife canonically being Northern Sindar.
Balar, on the other hand, was the explicit destination of:
The Falathrim under Círdan, who were closely connected to both Nargothrond and the Fingolfinian strongholds in Mithrim
The Northern Sindar of Hithlum, who were vassals of Fingolfin and Fingon (under no known singular leader)
And regardless of whether you accept Gil-Galad son of Fingon or Gil-Galad son of Orodreth, it's very likely that as the seat of the High King of the Noldor, Balar was also home to the Noldorin remnants of Fingon's host that didn't (presumably) get swept up into the Fëanorian forces following the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, which at that point would have included the remnants of the Aegnor and Angrod's forces from Dorthonion, Fingolfin's forces, and Fingon's own forces.
Amon Ereb, which I think is broadly aligned with "Balar" on the "Balar vs Sirion" scale, but probably uncomfortably so (especially after the 2nd and 3rd Kinslayings), was of course host to the remnants of the Noldorin and Sindarin forces of Himlad/Himring/Thargelion, plus a large contingent of the Northern Sindar who were outriders in the plains and highlands of the northeast. The Green-elves of Ossiriand were likely split between the two camps or purposefully neutral.
How does this map onto the political landscape of the 2nd / 3rd Ages? The elven realms east of the Misty Mountains (the Greenwood and Lothlorien) are implied to have a distinctly different character from those west of the Misty Mountains (Eregion, Lindon, and Imladris) despite both being noted to have Noldor & Sindar mixing.
IMO the easiest way to reconcile this is to assume that east of the Misty Mountains, "Sirion" prevails-- this is where the "Sindar princes of the Silvan elves" (Celeborn and Oropher->Thranduil) rule, and most Noldor present are largely Gondolidrim or from Nargothrond. Any Green-elves who were incredibly opposed to the rule of the Noldor likely migrated in this direction to their ancestral homes near the Anduin.
West of the Misty Mountains, on the other hand, I assume that "Balar" largely prevails-- this is where Gil-Galad rules, and where the Sindar of Hithlum, the Falas, and the northern plains --and the remaining Fingolfinian, Dorthonion, Fëanorion Noldor, and some fraction of the Gondolidrim-- spread out in complex ways between Lindon (which encompasses remnants of both Ossiriand and Thargelion), Eregion, and Imladris. It's likely that Harlindon specifically-- one of the last remmants of Ossiriand-- is home to a large body of Green-elves who will not be parted from their homes, but who may have wildly varying opinions on Noldorin rule and ... the 1st Age in general.
(Side note: I do think this works with Gil-Galad son of Orodreth, by the way. It just requires his mother, a woman of the Northern Sindar, to be uncomfortable with her husband's isolationism and refusal of refugees and leave with her son when he's sent to foster/safety on Balar, and for Gil-Galad to identify more with his mother's people -- and by extension, the Fingolfinian and, more uncomfortably, Fëanorian Noldor with whom they had long relationships-- than Nargothrond).
Feanor having more children than any other of the Eldar is, to me, inextricable from the racial anxieties that eventually culminated in the Oath and subsequent Exile. One of the key features of such anxieties is the fear of being outnumbered, overrun, by the multitudinous throngs of the Other, your ways of life overwritten and your resources co-opted. We see these fears play out in the Shibboleth with Feanor resisting and politicizing the þ > s shift; we see it in a formerly generous people growing jealous of their rights and possessions with Feanor being chief amongst them; we see it in how the Teleri were the largest of the three clans that made the journey to Valinor. To Feanor, the Noldor are a people under attack, beset on all sides, and outnumbered. His decision to have seven sons should be understood not just as a symbol of his virility and status, or some personal fondness for children, but also as a larger call to the Noldor to shore up their numbers lest they be ousted by some lesser race.
so here is my melkor hot take of the day. i dont think melkor is more evil than sauron.
like yes, tolkien said sauron is less evil than melkor bc he is devoted and obedient to him, i.e. catholic theological legalese, since love and obedience are the catholic virtue things that dont originate from evil. cool. ASIDE FROM THAT.
and like, melkor is totally MORE POWERFUL than sauron by like orders of magnitude. sure. melkor is the evil soup that suffuses the world like original sin and the fall do in catholic theology.
but like if in looking at intent and what they do, i dont think you can say that for sauron's relative power, i hesitate to say he is more evil, but he is evil in a more insidious and dangerous way common to our age.
like i see melkor very much representing the evil of the natural world (and to some degree part of the universal plan of eru iluvatar). he is volcanoes. he is the blight of winter. he is disease and pestilence and decay. he is the coming of darkness, the destruction of creation. the entropy of the universe. he desires the spark or life but can only subdivide endlessly like bacteria.
but that is part of the fallen world in theological terms even if it shouldn't be part of a healed world of immortal quasi spiritual (or actually spiritual) beings. it is imperfection if the goal is deathlessness. but it is part of the world.
and to a degree i see valar as having this sort of impersonal force of nature quality about them. not just melkor. they all do. tolkien describes them like heavenly bureaucrats. they arent tied to the world and dont understand the world in a tangible personal way that even the maiar do.
sauron is different and i think there is a reason sauron is the villain in the books in the second and third age and specifically in the main book he published. he is the evil of our modern world.
because most mythologies dont have two dark lords. one representing chaos and destruction and one representing order and coercion and industry.
it represents a fundamental swing in how cultures started to conceptualize evil. we mastered science and thus a lot of the things that were a curse from the gods were being solved. and yet. the world wasn't becoming less evil. we still want to control each other, to subjugate others. we want to tame nature so much it kills her and makes her barren. we covet power because we are afraid of the lack of it.
so yeah. sauron and melkor are both evil. but sauron was subject to melkor (or natural evils) until we subdued and chained him. and then sauron's evils were dominant.
(is this character analysis or fictional theology? idk.)
i love these characters because they are symbolic of how we conceptualize evil in the world, as well as being stand-ins for a certain character archetype. i dont have to write them just as them being evil. but they are great for writing about difficult subjects because of their symbolic nature.
(and maybe like sauron i too love volcanoes and snow and mushrooms and thus am a bit enchanted with the force of nature that is melkor. i used to study a LOT of catholic theology, and now as an outsider looking in im like, maybe i can play with these myths and tropes. at the same time, the ultimate plan of eru iluvatar is meant to be a mystery.)
ngl dior and elving denying feanorians the silmarill feels a bit like the british museum not giving back the lindow man(or anything else they "brought from colonies"). like wdym you're not giving it back because it's been years and it's already a piece of important cultural heritage for your people OUR DAD MADE IT
Hold on, I'm having Elrond thoughts right now. He looked at the mistakes of his ancestors and said "Nope. Not doing that again." When he sends Aragorn on the quest to destroy the ring he doesn't do it to get rid of him, like Thingol did with Beren. He does it because he knows love is powerful and he wants him to succeed. When he builds a secret kingdom, he makes sure to make it warm and welcoming for weary travelers, instead of keeping it hidden for everyone but a few select individuals. When the fellowship gets together, he tells them to swear no oaths. He's a symbol of the reconciliation between peoples: He has blood from the Maiar and blood from the Edain, he was raised by Feanorians, he is married to a lady born from the love of a Noldo and a Sinda. He keeps a pet hobbit around his house and takes him with him when he leaves Middle Earth. His father is a wandering star that shines for all, and when people need help they go to Elrond, because they know Elrond can help. So yeah, those are the Elrond thoughts I'm having.
Thingol, Luthien, and Dior’s claim to the silmaril bugs the living daylights outta me and I’m gonna break down why. This goes a bit beyond ownership laws.
Starting with basics. What are the silmarils? Gems created by Fëanor that hold the light of the Two Trees. Who in Beleriand saw the light of the trees and no doubt misses it like a limb? Are here in part to avenge their destruction? The Noldor.
The Sindar never went to Valinor. They might find the gems beautiful but that’s it. There’s no cultural or emotional connection to them beyond ‘pretty stone, look how awesome our princess was.’ There’s no appreciation for what they hold. No understanding that this stone is one of the *last* things that holds the ancient light of the Trees.
The Noldor meanwhile not only saw the Light, they had entire festivals surrounding it. Grew their entire culture, their lives, under and around it. Now the trees are destroyed, their king killed defending these jewels. And this last beacon of hope, a piece of the home they can never return to, a piece of light that will never come back, is being kept by people who can’t even begin to understand the significance of what they keep.
Now imagine being the sons of the one who made this jewel from a culture of people who value craft above all else.
Not only is it light, it’s the result of years of toil and experimentation of your father, the one who managed to do what no one had ever even thought of. Fëanor’s sons would have been the first to see these jewels, probably saw him make prototypes, work equations whilst they worked on their own crafts. Provided what relief they could to his ever working mind and inadvertently gave him ideas that helped solve problems he encountered along the way. Suddenly it’s not only a key part of their culture, it’s something core to their family.
Then Fëanor is killed and in many ways it’s the most important thing they have left of their father. Now it’s a source of memory too, for someone doomed to the Halls for eternity. Who they’ll likely never see again unless they’re killed.
Now from what I’ve heard, Tolkien says the Fëanorions lost their right to the Silmarils when they killed for them. Which makes no sense considering the Silmarils were *created* by Fëanor. Yes the light was created by the Valar, but what, you’re gonna say ‘I created electricity so that lightbulb you made is actually mine.’ That’s not how it works. Fëanor made the casing for the stones and figured out how to hold the light, without aid from the Valar. It doesn’t matter what actions they take, the right to the Silmarils remain theirs and theirs alone. The jewels hold no power of their own, they’re literally objects. Healing objects at most. Morals do not dictate their ownership, hallowed or not.
Tolkien going on to say the right of Doriath’s Silmaril actually goes to Beren and Luthien for taking it from Morgoth gives me frankly coloniser vibes.
‘Oh this thing I stole was originally stolen from you? Too bad. I took it so it’s mine now. Don’t care how important it is to you, your entire culture, and your people.’
Get where I’m coming from?
All in all the whole situation gives me Bad Vibes and I really don’t like the attitude the Sindar have to the Silmaril. In terms of Elwing, I can partly forgive her purely based on trauma response. Fine. Doesn’t make it right, but I understand. But that never would’ve been a problem if her father, grandmother, or great grandfather had the sense to acknowledge the silmaril was never theirs to keep. Don’t like the Fëanorions, (too bad) at least give it back to the Noldor.
I actually like the idea that maglor was very much against all the kinslayings before they happened, each time fighting against it as hard as he could before capitulating in the face of his brothers' determination. I think his tendency towards despair and his avoidance of death actually helped him out at that point, the oath couldn't pull at him as hard because he was fully convinced there was no chance anyways and he didn't want to die.
I like to think each of the brothers had their own reasons driving them forward actually (yknow beyond the soul binding oath and the looming threat of the super-void and all). Maedhros did it because he couldn't see any other way out after fingon. He had played every card in his deck and it all turned to dust, now he was simply in too deep. The sunk ship fallacy at its finest. Celegorm was the most genuinely consumed by the oath towards the end, giving himself over to it entirely like an animal becomes consumed when rabid. Curufin wanted to save their father and the more the others started resenting feanor, the more he felt it was up to him to stay loyal and true. Caranthir was the most like maglor, but also had a closer connection to life and feared what would come if they didn't succeed. Ambarussa wanted to protect each other—the others too ofc but each other most of all.
And maglor? A lifetime of being someone else's second, of playing the caretaker, of repeated attempts of leadership that were ultimately miserable experiences—he gave himself over. Not willing to lose more, he clung onto what he had left no matter what. I think maglor represents how sometimes compliance and loyalty are violent—that standing aside and letting others dictate your life is ultimately also a choice you make with consequences attached.
I also don't think this side of him softens his character at all. Because the crux of the matter is, he still did them. Yes, the first one was out of confusion and loyalty towards his father. Yes, the others were commited only for the sake of his brothers. Yes, it was all because he refused to betray his family. But do any of his victims know that? Do they care? Did he kill any less because of it? Or did loyalty drive him to fight even harder? The act of it remains, even if his reasons were different and even if he was reluctant. And no matter what their reasons were, senseless slaughter is the act all the sons of feanor commited. I think giving them individualized reasons just sweetens the pot and brings more color to his later actions
One problem I have with Tolkien’s approach toward Galadriel's characterization in The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales is that her desire for her own kingdom to rule is painted as a bad thing that she needs to let go of. She’s “proud” for wanting that kind of position and needs to be humbled enough to realize she shouldn’t. But the text never depicts Fingolfin or Fingon or Turgon or Finrod or Aragorn - or any of the male characters who become rulers - as wrong for having the same aspiration.
