ISSN -

inyar engwar
Number  · January 

Feature
“Words of Joy”: Five Catholic Prayers
in Quenya 
— J.R.R. Tolkien
Part One:
. Átaremma (Pater Noster) 
. Aia María (Ave Maria) 
. Alcar i Ataren (Gloria Patri) 

Departments
Editor’s Musings  Resources 
E.L.F. News 
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Editor’s Musings
In this issue I am very pleased to publish the first part (of two) of a pre-
sentation and analysis of five hitherto unpublished Quenya texts by J.R.R.
Tolkien, being his translations of five Catholic prayers: the Pater Noster, the
Ave Maria, the Gloria Patri, the Sub Tuum Praesidium, and the Litany of
Loreto. e first three of these are presented in this issue, and the last two
will be presented in the next issue. All five texts have been co-edited by Pat-
rick Wynne, Arden R. Smith, and myself. As always, we are deeply indebted
to Christopher Tolkien and the Tolkien Estate for providing copies of these
texts for publication, and for their unstinting generosity and encouragement
in support of our work. We are also grateful to John Garth for his careful
proofing and many helpful comments, all of which have improved our pre-
sentation.
It is interesting, instructive, and a bit sobering to compare Tolkien’s trans-
lations of the Pater Noster with that made by Patrick Wynne and myself and
published in VT  (before we were aware even of the existence of Tolkien’s
version, of course), and to consider the near-hits and the many misses of our
own effort.
Finally, I would like to extend my sympathies to all those affected, directly
or indirectly, by the horrifying events of September , aer which we are all
in need of some words of joy. Áme etelehta ulcullo.
— Carl F. Hostetter

Enyalien
is issue of Vinyar Tengwar is lovingly dedicated
to the memory of my parents
Lois Jane Wynne (-) and
Richard Dale Wynne (-)
Rest well, Mom and Dad.
— Patrick Wynne


Vinyar Tengwar is produced by the editor on an Apple PowerBook G, using an

Epson U scanner, Microso Word v. X, and Adobe InDesign ..
VT is set in the Adobe Minion Pro OpenType font family, and also uses the
Graeca, IPAKiel, TransCyrillic, and TransRoman PostScript fonts
available from Linguist’s Soware, Inc. (http://www.linguistsoware.com/).
VT is printed on an HP LaserJet DTN.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Announcing

Parma Eldalamberon 13
e Alphabet of Rúmil & Early Noldorin Fragments
by J. R. R. TOLKIEN

Parma Eldalamberon ‘e Book of Elven-tongues’ is a journal of the Elvish

Linguistic Fellowship. is issue has two sections containing newly pub-
lished writings by J. R. R. Tolkien: e Alphabet of Rúmil edited by Arden
R. Smith; and Early Noldorin Fragments edited by Christopher Gilson, Bill
Welden, Carl F. Hostetter, and Patrick Wynne. Both of these have been pre-
pared with the guidance of Christopher Tolkien and with the permission of
the Tolkien Estate.
e Rúmilian Sarati are the earliest of the Elvish writing systems devised
by Tolkien, ultimately envisioned as the historical precursor to the Fëano-
rian Tengwar, the Elvish script seen in e Lord of the Rings. e Alphabet
of Rúmil is an edition of Tolkien’s Rúmilian writings, with examples of the
script reproduced in facsimile, including charts of the sounds represented by
the letters, and both Elvish and English texts written in Rúmilian. Transcrip-
tions of these texts and detailed commentary on the chronology of the docu-
ments and evolution of the conception of the writing system are included in
this edition.
Early Noldorin Fragments is a collection of Tolkien’s word-lists and gram-
matical description of the Noldorin language from the s. ese trace the
evolution of the language from its beginnings as the Goldogrin of the Gnom-
ish Lexicon to its conception as the Exilic Noldorin that would appear in e
Etymologies. ese writings reveal the emergence of significant conceptual
details, such as the use of vowel mutation to mark Noldorin plural nouns,
or the place of Old Noldorin in the internal history of the language. Detailed
annotations and commentary on these conceptual developments in the doc-
uments are included in this edition.

PARMA ELDALAMBERON no.  is a -page journal, in  / x  inch

format, with cover illustrations by Adam Victor Christensen. Individual
copies are available for ., which includes shipping anywhere in the
world. e journal will be mailed in a padded envelope and sent by priority
mail within the U.S. or via airmail to all other locations. Payment must be in
U.S. funds, check or money-order payable to:
Christopher Gilson,  Miller Ave., Ste. , Cupertino, CA , USA


Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Átaremma V, Aia María III, and Alcar i Ataren (at right)

Átaremma VI and Aia María IV

Copyright © e Tolkien Trust

January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

“Words of Joy”
Five Catholic Prayers in Quenya
(Part One)
by J.R.R. Tolkien
Edited by Patrick Wynne, Arden R. Smith, and Carl F. Hostetter
J.R.R. Tolkien’s texts © e Tolkien Trust

Introduction

Among Tolkien’s linguistic papers are two related, though now separated, sets
of Quenya translations of five Catholic prayers: the Pater Noster (Átaremma)
in  versions (hereinaer At. I–VI), and the Ave Maria (Aia María) in four
versions (AM I–IV); and the Gloria Patri, the Sub Tuum Praesidium, and
the Litany of Loreto, each in only a single version, with the translations of
the Gloria Patri and Litany le unfinished. Tolkien gives these texts without
title or translation, either in English or Latin. e first set of Quenya texts,
together with related notes, occupies three sides of two sheets of paper. e
first sheet (with the texts appearing on the verso) has At. I and AM I written
rapidly and roughly with much emendation in ballpoint pen, followed by At.
II, again in ballpoint though later emended with a wide-nibbed pen, which
was also used to add some grammatical notes at the bottom of the page
pertaining to these emendations. e second sheet has At. III, AM II, the
Sub Tuum, the Litany, and At. IV on the recto, with more grammatical
notes squeezed into the top and bottom margins, all written with the same
nib pen employed in the emendation of At. II. e verso of this second
sheet is filled with charts of various prepositions inflected with enclitic
pronouns in two numbers (singular and plural) and three persons, again
written in nib pen.
e second set of Quenya translations, located in a separate file, is written
on the fronts of two of Tolkien’s personalized Merton College postcards, each
headed with the printed line: “F P J. R. R. TOLKIEN, M
C, O.” e first card has At. V and AM III written with a nib
pen in a careful and calligraphic hand, with a single neat emendation in ink
and a few other changes and alternative forms added lightly in pencil. e
card also bears the partial translation of the Gloria Patri, written in nib pen
in a more loose and stylized hand in the right-hand margin at right-angles
to At. V and AM III, and partially overlapping the ends of the lines of these
two prayers. e second postcard bears At. VI and AM IV, incorporating
nearly all of the changes made to At. V and AM III. At. VI and AM IV are
fair copies, written very carefully (and without further emendation) with
a nib pen in a type of simplified blackletter with archaic letter-forms for
lower-case r and s. ese archaic forms for r and s (lacking in At. V and AM
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

III) are also used in the Gloria Patri, which suggests that the Gloria Patri was
written aer At. VI and AM IV rather than before.
It would appear that while the texts in the first group (At. I–IV, AM
I–II, the Sub Tuum, and the Litany) were all written within a short time of
each other, a significant period of time must have passed before Tolkien
undertook the composition of the second group (At. V–VI, AM III–IV, and
the Gloria Patri). is break in the development of these texts is indicated
by the fact that the two groups were placed in different files, and by the
relatively large number of changes in vocabulary between At. IV and V, and
between AM II and III. Note, for example, in At. IV and V: turindielya vs.
aranielya (line ), mendelya vs. indómelya (line ), rohtammar vs. úcaremmar
(line ), avatyarilta vs. apsenet (line ), and mittanya vs. tulya (line ); and
in AM II and III: erulissenen vs. Eruanno (line ), olesse vs. carelye (line
), manna vs. aistana (lines  and ), etc. It is even possible that Tolkien
wrote At. V and AM III without consulting At. I–IV or AM I–II. If this
is the case, then the fair manuscript of At. V may have been preceded by
other dra materials, now lost.
A number of clues for dating these manuscripts may be noted:

• e use of ballpoint pen in At. I, AM I, and At. IIa. Christopher Tolkien

notes that this is a sign of late composition; see IX:, X: n.,
and X:.
• e dates of adjacent manuscripts. e manuscripts of At. I–IV were
placed, along with a variety of other texts and notes, in a separate
cardboard folder within its box-file. ree of the other texts in this
cardboard folder bear specific dates:  Dec. ,  Sept. , and  Oct.
. e file in which the postcards of At. V–VI were placed contains
documents of a later vintage; those that can be dated with certainty
range from c.  to .
• e use of emme, me, -mma throughout these texts as  pl. exclusive ‘we’
(‘we, but not you’; ‘ours, but not yours’). Contrast the use of -mma as
inclusive ‘our’ (‘yours and mine’) in Eleni silir lúmesse omentiemman
‘e stars shine on the hour of our meeting’ (VI:) dating to late 
(see VI:, last paragraph). -mme is still the  pl. exclusive in Quendi
and Eldar (–); cf. avamme, vamme ‘we won’t’ (XI:). But in the
restructuring of the pronominal system that preceded the publication of
the Revised Edition of e Lord of the Rings ()—and resulted also in
the shi of -lm- to -lv- as the marker of the  pl. inclusive—the endings
in -mm- became purely dual.
• Consistent use of c instead of k in spelling Quenya words, the convention
employed in e Lord of the Rings.
• A statement from  (see the analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v. aire)
that aina had become obsolete save in Ainur; this may indicate that at
least the texts preceding the postcard versions date from before .
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

• e change of masta (At. I–IV) to massa (At. V–VI); cf. the use of massa in
massánie ‘Lady, breadgiver’ in Of Lembas (composed sometime between
 and ; XII:).
• e use of Ëa ‘the World that Is, the material Universe’ in At. V and VI.
is name first emerged around , in the emendations to text D of
the Ainulindalë (X:, –).
• e use of Eruman in At. V and VI for ‘Heaven’ as the abode of God
beyond the confines of Ëa (see the analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v.
menelle). is suggests that At. V and VI postdate the  revision of the
Quenta Silmarillion, in which the name for the narrow land between the
mountains and the sea north of Taniquetil was emended from Eruman
to Araman (X:), thus making Eruman available for use in its new
application to Eru’s dwelling place.
• e use of Merton College postcards for writing At. V–VI, AM III–IV,
and the Gloria Patri. Tolkien was elected Merton Professor of English
Language and Literature in  and retired in .

Taken together, these clues indicate that the Quenya translations presented
here were probably written sometime in the s.
It should be noted that Tolkien was apparently not concerned with
marking long vowels consistently, especially in the earliest dras of these
texts, which for the most part were written very roughly and with much
experimentation. erefore, the lack of a long vowel in one form or version
of a word where it would be expected etymologically, and where it is marked
long in one or more of the other versions of the text, is not necessarily
to be considered as significant, and so is not necessarily treated as such
in our analyses.
Finally, we may note something of the personal significance of these
prayers to Tolkien, apart from their obvious significance to a devout
Roman Catholic. In a letter to Christopher (then serving in the R.A.F.
and on the point of being posted to South Africa) dated  January ,
Tolkien recommends to his son: “If you don’t do so already, make a habit
of the ‘praises’. I use them much (in Latin): the Gloria Patri, the Gloria in
Excelsis, the Laudate Dominum; the Laudate Pueri Dominum (of which I am
specially fond), one of the Sunday psalms; and the Magnificat; also the Litany
of Loretto* (with the prayer Sub tuum præsidium). If you have these by heart
you never need for words of joy.” (L:)
* Loretto is an alternate spelling of Loreto; both spellings are well-attested.
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

. Átaremma (Pater Noster)

e six Quenya translations of the Lord’s Prayer (At. I–VI) were each
written as single, continuous paragraphs; for ease of comparative analysis the
traditional lineation has been introduced for each in this edition, along with
marginal line numbers. Tolkien provided no English gloss for these texts, and
given the wide familiarity of the Lord’s Prayer, editorial addition of parallel
English glosses for each version has not been deemed necessary, though
the English (King James), Latin (Vulgate), and original Greek versions are
provided in the historical notes following the analysis of forms.
Each version of the Átaremma is presented in its final emended form,
followed by a list of all changes made to that version. e text of At. II has
required a more elaborate mode of presentation, due to the fact that it bears
two distinct layers of emendation. At. II was originally written entirely in
ballpoint pen, with a small number of changes made at the time of writing
using the same pen. is text as emended in ballpoint is given here as At. IIa.
Tolkien later returned to this ballpoint text and emended it more extensively
using a distinctive wide-nibbed pen (evidently the same pen used aerward
to write At. III–IV, AM II, the Sub Tuum and Litany of Loreto). is later
revision is given here as At. IIb, followed by a list of all changes made in
nib pen. While emending At. IIb, Tolkien also jotted a number of concise
notes below the text (in the same nib pen), primarily addressing grammatical
points on imperative constructions that arose in the course of emendation.
ese notes are presented at the appropriate points in the analysis of
forms that follows the texts. ere are also etymological notes written
on the verso of the postcard containing At. V, pertaining to new forms
appearing in At. V and VI, and these are also cited at the appropriate
points in the analysis.

Átaremma I
ataremma menelzea na
na aire esselya.
nā túle turinastalya
na carina mendelya
 ier menelle ar tér cemenze.
A antale men hyáze ilyarea mastamma
ar avatyara mello lucassemmar
ier emme avatyarir ta va menya lucandor
ar úa mittanya me terpellienna
 one na etrúna me ulcallo.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Emendations:

Line : menellea > menelessea > mi menel > menellea > menelzea. Two
other forms, menello and menelda, were written to the right and allowed
to stand, apparently as alternatives; below these the words ma menelle
were struck out.
Line : na esselya aire > na aire esselya. na in this line is preceded by a
rejected, and apparently incomplete, form airel; Tolkien may have begun to
write **airelya in error for esselya.
Line : na turinastalya tūle > nā túle turinastalya. e macron of nā
in the emended line is certain, though all other occurrences of na as
an independent form in the various versions have a short vowel. Both
occurrences of turinastalya in the workings for this line have a horizontal
mark over the u, which is most likely the crossbar of the preceding t, though
it could also be a macron. Cp. túrinastalya in At. II (a & b) and túrindielya in
At. III, but turindielya in At. IV.
Line : is line originally began kemende ar yé, with ye (with short vowel)
written again aer yé. e last word in this line was emended from kemenze
> cemenze. e diacritic in tér is uncertain; it might also be a macron or
the crossbar of the preceding t.
Line : anta > antale, with le added above and to the right. amen >
men. siare > hyáre > hyáze.
Line : avatyaremme > avatyarirat > avatyarir ta. lucandollommar >
menya lucandollor (the final -a in menya is clear; the final consonant in
lucandollor might also be -n) > va menya lucandor.
Line : úna > úa. men > me. ferti > terfantie > terpellienna (note that ferti
and terfantie are unfinished forms).
Line : anat > one. olcallo > ulcallo.

Átaremma IIa
A Ataremma i menelzea
na aire esselya,
na tule túrinastalya.
na carina mendelya
 ier menelze tier cemenze.
Alye anta men hyáze ilyázea mastamma
ar avatyara mello i luciemmar
ier emme avatyarir ta va menya lucindor
úalye mittanya me terpellienna
 ono na etrúna me va ulco. san na
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Emendations (made in ballpoint pen):

Line : i mennelzea (probably a slip) > i menelzea.

Line : ar ter > tier.
Line : e final -a in menya is again clear. lucandoll > lucindoll > lucindor
(the first two forms are unfinished).
Line : úa > úalye.
Line : ulcallo > va ulco.

Átaremma IIb
Ai Ataremma i meneldea
esselya na aire,
á tula túrinastalya.
á cara mendelya
 ya(n) menelde ar san cemende.
Alye anta men siare ilyărea mastamma
ar ávatyara mello i luciemmar
yan emme avatyarilta va menya lucindor
alalye mittanya me insangarenna
 ono et·a·rúna me va úro. násan
Emendations (made in nib pen):

Line : A (At. IIa) > Ai. menelzea (At. IIa) > meneldea.
Line : esselya added in nib pen before na, with original esselya in
ballpoint aer aire allowed to stand.
Line : na tule (At. IIa) > á tula.
Line : na carina (At. IIa) > á caran > á cara.
Line : ier (At. IIa) > ya(n). menelze (At. IIa) > menelde. tier (At. IIa) > ar
san. cemenze (At. IIa) > cemende.
Line : hyáze (At. IIa) > hyáre > siare. ilyázea (At. IIa) > ilyărea.
Line : avatyara (At. IIa) > ávatyara.
Line : ier (At. IIa) > yan. Original avatyarir ta in ballpoint was allowed to
stand, with tar added in nib pen above the final -r (indicating avatyaritar);
tar was then struck out and replaced with -lta (indicating avatyarilta).
Line : úalye (At. IIa) > alalye. insangarenna was added in nib pen above
terpellienna, with the original form in ballpoint allowed to stand.
Line : na etrúna (At. IIa) > et·a·rúna. aly’ etrúna was written below
et·a·rúna, then struck out. va ulco (At. IIa) > var-úra > var-úro > va úro.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Átaremma III
Ataremma meneldea,
esselya na aire,
túrindielya á tuluva,
á cara mendelya
 san cemende ya menelde na.
Alye anta men siare ilyarea mastamma,
ar ávatyara mello menye rohtar
yan emme avatyarilta rocindillomman.
Álalye mittanya me insangarenna
 ono va úro aly’ eterúna me.
Emendations:
Line : i meneldea > meneldea.
Line : aira > aire.
Line : mendelya á cara > á cara mendelya.
Line : cemendel (probably a slip) > cemende.
Line : menye luhtar > menye rohtar. A form luhtammar was written above
the phrase menye luhtar as an alternative (this was of course done before
the change of luhtar > rohtar).
Line : lucindillomman > rocindillomman.
Line : ono [> on’] et·á·rúna me va·úro > ono va úro alye [> aly’]
eterúna me.

Átaremma IV
Ataremma meneldea,
esselya na aire,
turindielya á tuluva,
á cara mendelya
 san cemende ya menelde na.
Alye anta men siar ilyarea mastamma
ar ávatyara mello rohtammar
yan emme avatyarilta menya rohtaliello.
Álalye mittanya me insangarenna
 ono· va úro aly’ eterúna me.
Emendations:

Line : e ending -sse was written above the -nde of cemende, apparently
to indicate an alternative form cemesse.
Line : mastammar (probably a slip) > mastamma.
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Line : luhtammar > rohtammar.

Line : luc (unfinished form) > rucindillomman > menya ruhtaliello >
menya rohtaliello.
Átaremma V
Átaremma meneldëa
na airë esselya :
aranielya na tuluva :
na carima indómelya
 cemende sívë menelde.
Ámen anta síra ilaurëa massamma,
ar ámen apsene úcaremmar
sív’ emme apsenet tien i úcarer emmen.
Álame tulya úsahtienna
 mal ám’ etelehta ulcullo. násië
Emendations:
Line : Added above meneldëa as an alternative: i ëa pell’ Ëa.
Line : carina > carima.
Line : sívë was underlined, with tambe written in the le margin as an
alternative. Erumande was written in the right margin as an alternative
to menelde.
Line : Faint pencilled markings over the e suggest that Tolkien intended
to emend úcarer > úcarir (though the form remains úcarer in At. VI).
Line : sahtienna > úsahtienna (this emendation made in ink).
Line : mal was underlined, with a curved mark written against it in the
le margin, which suggests that it was being considered for replacement.
However, mal remains in line  of At. VI, although a checkmark was added
in the margin to the le.
Átaremma VI
Átaremma i ëa han ëa ·
na aire esselya ·
aranielya na tuluva ·
na care indómelya
 cemende tambe Erumande :
ámen anta síra ilaurëa massamma ·
ar ámen apsene úcaremmar
sív’ emme apsenet tien i úcarer emmen.
Álame tulya úsahtíenna
 mal áme etelehta ulcullo : násie :
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Analysis of Forms

Note: Bold headwords are from At. I, with later forms discussed under their
earlier counterparts. All words cited are Quenya unless otherwise noted.

Line :
Ataremma ‘Our Father’: Ataremma (At. I–IV) is composed of atar ‘father’
(V: s.v. ATA-) and -mma  pl. exclusive ‘our’ (cf. avamme, vamme ‘we
won’t’ (exclusive), XI:). e long vowel of Átaremma (At. V–VI) does
not appear in the Quenya word for ‘father’ anywhere but here. It is perhaps
the result of affective lengthening, distinguishing *Átar ‘God the Father’
from atar ‘father’; cf. the lengthened consonant in hypocoristic atto. e
most likely possibility, however, is that the long vowel is a contraction of
the interjection a! with the initial vowel of atar; cf. the use of a and ai as
interjections or vocative particles in At. II.
menelzea na ‘who art in heaven’: In At. I–V Tolkien renders ‘in heaven’
with various forms derived from menel ‘firmament, high heaven, the region
of the stars’ (R:). menello, an alternative form in At. I, is probably a genitive
‘of heaven’ (cp. Altariello, gen. of Altáriel, R:) though interpretation as an
ablative ‘from heaven’ (cp. Rómello ‘from the East’, abl. of rómen, R:) is also
possible. e other alternative form in At. , menelda, is clearly an adjective;
its ending -da probably has the same etymology as -da in elda, Eldar ‘People
of the Stars’ (S:), < CE adjs. *eldā, elenā ‘connected or concerned with the
stars’ < *ELE (XI:). Tolkien ultimately settled on the idea of glossing ‘in
heaven’ in line  with an adjective derived from a locative form; this becomes
evident in comparing the adjectives in line  with the corresponding locatives
in line . us At. IIa has adj. menelzea < loc. menelze; and At. IIb–V have adj.
meneldea < loc. menelde. In At. I the form first written was adj. menellea <
loc. menelle; this was emended to menelessea, in which the locative derivation
is even more apparent; cp. kaimassea, prob. *‘bedridden, sick’ < loc. kaimasse
*‘in bed’ < kaima ‘bed’ (V: s.v. KAY- ‘lie down’). menelessea was replaced
by a prepositional phrase mi menel ‘in heaven’, which was in turn emended
to menellea (the original form), with Tolkien finally settling on menelzea
(the equivalent locative in At. I line  was le as menelle rather than being
similarly emended to menelze, probably an oversight).
Tolkien evidently realized aer writing At. V that the idea of God
dwelling in “the region of the stars” or “the firmament” was an inaccurate
representation of the Elvish conception of Eru, as well as of present-day
theological concepts of Heaven. us, when making pencilled emendations
to the completed ink text, he added an alternative phrase above meneldëa
in line : i ëa pell’ Ëa, which must mean ‘who is beyond Ëa (the World that
Is)’. is is essentially a paraphrase rather than a translation. It echoes a
passage from Version C of the Ainulindalë (X:) describing the dwelling
place of Eru: “us it came to pass that of the Holy Ones some abode still
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

with Ilúvatar beyond the confines of the World” (emphasis added).1 pell’, an
elided form of pella ‘beyond’ (R:), is used in this phrase as a preposition.
In“Galadriel’s Lament” pella is used as a postposition in the phrase Andúne
pella ‘beyond the West’ (it remains postpositional in Tolkien’s rearrangement
of the Lament into “a clearer and more normal style”, R:). In At. VI
the phrase used is i ëa han ëa, with pell’ replaced by han. is previously
unpublished word appears in some roughly pencilled notes from c. ,
where it is glossed as ‘beyond’ and derived from √han ‘add to, increase,
enhance, honour (espec. by gi)’ (cf. Eruhantale ‘anksgiving to Eru’,
UT:). Tolkien’s dissatisfaction with translating ‘heaven’ as menel is also
evident in a pencilled alternative added to line  (see the analysis of line
 s.v. menelle).

Line :
na ‘let it be’: e verb na ‘be’ (V: s.v. NĀ-) is used here as a subjunctive
or imperative. is sense depends on word order, according to Tolkien’s
notes written below At. IIb, which state: “na preced. = ‘let it be’: na aire
‘be holy’, aire •° na ‘is holy’.” na also has a subjunctive or imperative sense
when preceding a verb, e.g. aranielya na tuluva ‘thy kingdom come’ (At.
V–VI), na care indómelya ‘thy will be done’ (At. VI), na etrúna me ulcallo
‘deliver us from evil’ (At. I).
aire ‘holy’: Cf. aire-tārio ‘holy-queen’s’ (R:). e deleted form aira in At.
III could reflect uncertainty as to whether aire was a noun or an adjective.
In this regard, cf. Tolkien’s note to e Shibboleth of Fëanor (XII: n.):
“e adjective aira was the nearest equivalent to ‘holy’; and the noun airë
to ‘sanctity’. Airë was used by the Eldar as a title of address to the Valar and
the greater Máyar. Varda would be addressed as Airë Tári.” An etymological
note from Sept.–Oct.  gives √aya-n ‘treat with awe/reverence’ with the
derivatives aire (airē) ‘sanctity, holiness’ and airëa ‘holy—applied to persons
(aina is obsolete, except in Ainur)’.
esselya ‘thy name’: esse ‘name’ (V: s.v. ES-), -lya ‘thy’.
Apart from a couple of deleted words, the versions of this line differ only
in word order: na esselya aire (At. I deletion) > na aire esselya (At. I–IIa) >
esselya na aire (At. IIb–IV) > na aire esselya (At. V–VI).

Line :
nā túle ‘come’: e subjunctive/imperative of the verb tul- ‘come’ (V:
s.v. TUL-) is variously expressed. na … tūle (At. I deletion), nā túle (At.
I), and na tule (At. IIa) make use of the ‘be’ verb and the aorist stem in -e,
but with vowel lengthening in the earlier versions. á tula (At. IIb) includes
the imperative particle á (XI:–) and an -a suffix (cf. imperative a laita
‘praise’, LR:), whereas á tuluva (At. III–IV) makes use of the future stem.
na tuluva (At. V–VI) reverts to the use of na; cf. nai hiruvalye Valimar ‘may it
be that thou wilt find Valimar’ in“Galadriel’s Lament” (R:–). For the use
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

of preceding na as a subjunctive/imperative particle, see line  s.v. na.

turinastalya ‘thy kingdom’ (At. I): turinasta ‘kingdom’, -lya ‘thy’. e
form túrinastalya occurs in At. II. Neither turinasta nor túrinasta appears
elsewhere, but they are clearly derivatives of TUR- ‘power, control, mastery,
victory’ (V:), whence turin ‘I wield, control, govern’. *turina-, *túrina- in
these forms are perhaps past or passive participles, ‘governed’, derived from
this verb (see line  s.v. carina). e ending -sta in turinasta is probably the
same suffix -sta ‘-land’ seen in the the names of the five promontories of
Númenor, Forostar ‘Northlands’, Andustar ‘Westlands’, etc. (UT:), which
is evidently derived from SAT- ‘space, place, sc. a limited area naturally or
artificially defined’ (VT:–,  n.). e literal sense of turinasta may
therefore be ‘governed region’.
túrindielya (At. III) and turindielya (At. IV) contain turindie, túrindie
‘kingdom’. e first element here is probably *turindo ‘king’, masc. agentive
form of tur- ‘wield, control, govern’ (as melindo ‘lover’ from mel- ‘love’, V:).
Compare also tūrin (n) in QL s.v. TURU (PE:-), originally glossed as
‘king’ with the meaning changed to ‘kingdom’. e ending -ie is probably
the abstract noun suffix -ie, seen in mornië ‘darkness’ (R:), látie ‘openness’
(VT:), etc. e form aranie ‘kingdom’ in aranielya (At. V–VI) appears to
have this same structure: aran ‘king’ (XI:) + abstract -ie.

Line :
na ‘be’ (At. I–IIa, V–VI): As in line  (q.v.), na is used in preceding position
in this line as a subjunctive/imperative. á (At. IIb–IV) is the imperative
particle, as in line .
carina ‘done’ (At. I–IIa, V): KAR- ‘make, do’ (V:) with -ina, the suffix
of the “general ‘passive’ participle”, as Tolkien calls it in a description of the
Quenya verbal system, probably from the s, where he gives the example
karina ‘made’; cf. rákina, past participle of rak- ‘break’ (MC:). e suffix
-ima, like -ina frequently used in the formation of adjectives (e.g. melima
‘loveable, fair’, V: s.v. MEL-), appears in carima (At. V revision). On the
formation of the subjunctive/imperative forms cara (At. IIb–IV) and care
(At. VI), see the discussion of tula, tule/túle in line  s.v. nā túle. ese forms
lack the passive element; á cara mendelya appears to mean ‘do thy will’ rather
than ‘[may] thy will be done’. caran (At. IIb deletion) is probably only a slip,
since -n would indicate the first person singular.
mendelya ‘thy will’ (At. I–IV): mende ‘will’ (unattested elsewhere), -lya ‘thy’.
mende ‘will’ is probably derived from √men- ‘move, proceed (in a direction
intended by a person)’, which appears in etymological notes associated with
the Ósanwe-kenta (c. –) along with derivative menta ‘send, cause to go
(in a desired direction)’ (VT:). Note that Tolkien’s glosses here emphasize
volition: to move in an intended direction, to send in a desired direction.
is same sense of will in connection with this root occurs again in an
unpublished text from the late s, which gives √men- ‘have as object,
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

(in)tend, proceed, make for, go towards’.

indómelya (At. V–VI) contains indóme, which appears with the gloss
‘settled character, also used of the “will” of Eru’ in etymological notes on
Quenya vocabulary from , where it is derived from in-i-d ‘mind, inner
thought’; cf. indo ‘resolve, will’ (VT:).

Line :
ier ‘as’ (At. I–IIa): is does not appear to be attested in any of Tolkien’s
other writings. ya(n) (At. IIb–IV) has the same meaning, and it is certainly
to be connected with the relative stem YA- (V:), seen in yassen ‘which-in
(pl.)’ (R:) and yar ‘to whom’ (MC:–). e deleted ye and yé may also
be derived from the same stem. ier is therefore probably also derived from a
deictic stem, specifically I- (V:), whence i, used both as a definite article
and as a relative pronoun.
menelle ‘in heaven’: menelle (At. I), menelze (At. IIa), and menelde (At.
IIb–V) are all locative case forms of menel ‘heaven’, each exhibiting a different
phonetic result of contact between the final consonant of menel and the
locative suffix -(s)se: *menel-se > menelle, menelze, menelde. Compare the
locative forms of cemen ‘earth’ in this same line: *kemen-se > cemesse,
cemenze, cemende (see s.v. cemenze below). e adj. menelessea (At. I
deletion) appears to be derived from loc. menelesse, in which the locative
suffix is preceded by an epenthetic or stem vowel; the coexistence of such
forms side-by-side with directly suffixed forms such as menelze, menelde is
demonstrated by an unpublished declension of tāl, c. , which gives the
locative forms as talasse and talse.
Erumande, presumably a locative form of Eruman (cp. loc. cemende ‘on
earth’ in At. IIb–VI), appears in At. V as a pencilled marginal alternative to
menelde, and as the primary form in At. VI. For Tolkien’s dissatisfaction with
menel as a translation of ‘heaven’ in its Christian sense, see the analysis of
line  s.v. menelzea na. Eruman as used here evidently consists of Eru ‘God’
+ man, the same element seen in Aman ‘Blessed, free from evil’ (S:) and
Manwë ‘Blessed Being’ (L:), with the name intended as *‘the Blessedness
of Eru’ or *‘the Blessed Dwelling of Eru’. is is the only known occurrence
of an Elvish name for the dwelling-place of Eru beyond Eä, referred to in
the Ainulindalë as “the places of the dwelling of Ilúvatar” and “the Timeless
Halls” (S:, ). e form Eruman, however, dates back to the very beginning
of Tolkien’s mythology, though with a different meaning and application. In
the Lost Tales the name was originally given to the region south of Taniquetil
and meant ‘beyond the abode of the Mánir’ (I:, –). e name was later
applied to the land “in the East of East” where Men awoke (later Hildórien,
IV:, ) and to the dark and empty region between the mountains
and the sea north of Taniquetil (IV:, ). In the  revision of the
Quenta Silmarillion, the name for the narrow land north of Taniquetil was
emended to Araman (X:), a change that le Eruman available for use in
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

its subsequent incarnation as the name of Eru’s abode. It is interesting to note

that despite changes in application and etymology, Tolkien seems always to
have felt that the name Eruman was appropriate for some distant, mysterious
place beyond the regions normally inhabited by Elves and Men. Moreover,
Eruman is persistently associated with key locations in the journey of the
souls of Men aer death. In the Lost Tales, Eruman (also Habbanan, Arvalin)
is a kind of purgatory for dead Men, “where they wander in the dusk and
wait in patience till the Great End” (I:). In At. V–VI it is God’s home, the
place where the souls of Men will ultimately be reunited with their maker; cf.
Tolkien’s commentary on the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, which states that
“the Elves believed that the fëar of dead Men also went to Mandos … ere
they waited until they were surrendered to Eru.” (X:).2
tér ‘so’: tér (At. I), ter (At. IIa deletion), and tier (At. IIa) relate to ier in
the same way that san (At. IIb–IV) relates to ya(n). e forms in t- would
then derive from TA- ‘that’ (V:) and san from the demonstrative stem S-
(V:). In At. I, IIa (deletion), and IIb, these are used in conjunction with ar
‘and’. e construction ier … ar ter / ya(n) … ar san appears to have a literal
meaning of ‘as … so also’. e use of relative and demonstrative stems in this
construction is remarkably similar to that found in the Esperanto translation,
kiel en la ĉielo, tiel ankaŭ sur la tero, in which ki- is the interrogative and
relative stem and ti- the demonstrative.3
sívë (At. V) ‘as’ appears to be a combination of SI- ‘this, here, now’
(V:) and ve ‘as, like’ (R:–). tambe (At. V alternative, VI) could
similarly be derived from TA- ‘that’, specifically from *tan (cf. anaphoric
tana ‘that’) + ve.
cemenze ‘on earth’: kemende (At. I deletion), kemenze (At. I deletion),
cemenze (At. I–IIa), cemende (At. IIb–VI), and cemesse (At. IV alternative)
are locative forms of kemen ‘“the Earth” as an apparent flat floor under
menel’ (X:). -nde, -nze, -sse show varying concepts of the result of
contact between the final consonant of kemen and the locative suffix -(s)se.
Tolkien showed equal uncertainty over the locative form of menel (see
above s.v. menelle).

Line :
A: A (At. I) is an imperative particle; see line  s.v. nā túle. Alye (At.
IIa–IV) combines it with the pronoun (e)lye ‘thou’; also see below s.v. men.
Tolkien’s notes below At. IIb state that “imper. takes ā¨ with enclitic pronom.
form: alye”, followed by a statement that was probably meant to read “Subject
[follows] inflected verb”.4 is might refer to the contrast in word order
between imper. alye anta ‘give’ in line  of At. IIb, with enclitic pronominal
subject preceding the verb, and á tula túrinastalya ‘thy kingdom come’ in
line  of At. IIb, in which the subject túrinastalya follows the verb inflected
for the imperative.
antale ‘give’ (At. I): is consists of anta ‘give’ (V: s.v ANA-) +
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

the pronominal suffix -le ‘thou’. All other versions have anta ‘give’ (At. I
deletion, IIa–VI).
men ‘(to) us’ (At. I–IV): me ‘us’ + dative ending -n. Ámen (At. V–VI) and
amen (At. I deletion) include the imperative particle á, a as a prefix.
hyáze ‘this day’: siare (At. I deletion, IIb, III), siar (At. IV), síra (At. V–VI),
hyáre (At. I deletion, IIb deletion), hyáze (At. I–IIa). e first element in siar,
siare, síra is clearly SI- ‘this, here, now’ (V:). e hy- in hyáre, hyáze may be
of the same origin, assuming development of si- > sy- > hy- (development of
initial sy to hy is normal in Quenya; see LR:, entry for Y). Also compare
hya ‘this by us’ < root HYA- of the same meaning in QL (PE:). e
second element -ar, -are, -áre, -áze in these forms is clearly connected with
áze > áre ‘sunlight’ (LR:–), derived in unpublished etymological notes
(c. ) from √AS- ‘warmth’; also compare are ‘day’< AR- (V:). e
ending of síra (At. V–VI) is less clear etymologically. ough the word is
used adverbially, the second element may be an adjectival suffix like that seen
in íra ‘eternal’ (V: s.v. GEY-). On the other hand, as- ‘warmth’ perhaps had
a reversed form *sa- (comparable to or-/ro- ‘rise’ and an-/na- ‘towards’), with
*sī-sā ‘this-day’ > síra; cf. SAHA, SAHÁYA ‘be hot’ in QL (PE:).
ilyarea ‘daily’ (At. I, IIb–IV): Also ilyázea (At. IIa) and ilaurëa (At.
V–VI). ilyarea and ilyázea contain ilya ‘all, the whole’ (R:; V: s.v. IL-),
compounded with an adjectival derivative of are, áze ‘day’ (see above s.v.
hyáze). ilaurëa (At. V–VI) is derived from the unsuffixed stem il- ‘all’ rather
than ilya, and from aurë ‘day’ (S:) rather than are, áze.
mastamma ‘our bread’ (At. I–IV): masta ‘bread’ (V: s.v. MBAS-), -mma
 pl. excl. ‘our’. massamma (At. V–VI) contains the form massa, seen in
massánie ‘Lady, breadgiver’ in Of Lembas (composed sometime between
 and ; XII:–).

Line :
ar ‘and’ (At. I–VI).
avatyara ‘forgive’ (At. I–IIa): ava- < AWA- ‘away, forth; out’ (V:; cf.
XI:–, –), tyar- ‘cause’ (< KYAR- ‘cause, do’, whence also agentive
tyaro ‘doer, actor, agent’; V: s.v. KAR-, V: s.v. KYAR-). e literal
meaning of this compound thus appears to be ‘to do away with’. Derivation
of ava- in this form from AB-, *ABA ‘refuse’ (see below) is also possible
phonologically, though less likely from a semantic standpoint. e long
vowel of ávatyara (At. IIb–IV) is due to coalescence of the imperative
particle with the initial vowel.
apsene (At. V–VI), according to the etymological notes on the verso of At.
V, is from “sen- ‘let loose, free, let go’; ab(a)sene- > apsene- ‘remit, release,
forgive’.” e element sen- is unattested elsewhere with this meaning. e
first element ab(a)- is not explained in these notes; it looks like a prefixed
form of AB- ‘refuse, deny’ (V:–; cf. *ABA ‘refuse’, XI:, –). e
original meaning of this root in the Etymologies was ‘go away, depart’, with an
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

additional entry giving AB- ‘retreat, move back, refuse’. It must be this earlier
or alternative sense of ‘go away, move back’ that is present in ab(a)sene-; cp.
the equivalent Greek and Latin verbs used in this line of the Lord’s Prayer,
ajfivhmi ‘let go, send away’ and dimitto ‘send away, send forth, let go’.
mello ‘(from) us’ (At. I–IV): me ‘us’, -llo (abl.). ámen (At. V–VI) is the
dative form with a prefixed imperative particle, as in line .
lucassemmar ‘our debts, our trespasses’ (At. I): lucasse ‘debt, trespass’
(unattested elsewhere), -mma  pl. excl. ‘our’, -r plural suffix. e meaning of
lucasse would seem to rule out derivation from LUK- ‘magic, enchantment’
(V:), but the root would most likely have the form *luk- nonetheless
(*duk- is also phonologically possible, with initial *d- > l- as usual in Quenya,
but no such root is recorded). An etymological note from c.  gives √luk
‘haul, drag’, whence Q. lunka ‘wain’, though this also seems unconnected in
sense. A more likely possibility is that luc- in lucasse is somehow related to
ulca ‘evil’ (At. I, line ; also in henulka ‘evileyed’ IX:,  n.). Both might
derive from a stem *(u)luk-, not attested but possible as an extended form
of ULU()- in QL (whence ulca ‘bad, wicked, wrong’, PE:). Interestingly,
QL also gives the root ULUKU- (ibid.) with derivative ulku ‘wolf ’ (Gn. ulug).
ere is no explicit statement in QL that this is an extension of ULU()-,
though the fact that the gloss of Gn. ulug ‘wolf ’ in GL (PE:) was emended
to ‘dragon’ hints at the possibility (both being notoriously wicked creatures in
Tolkien’s works). Cp. also ÚLUG- in the Etymologies (V:), with derivatives
meaning ‘hideous, horrible’. e second element in lucasse is evidently the
same abstract suffix -sse seen in nouns such as valasse ‘divinity’ and handasse
‘intelligence’ (V: s.v. BAL-, V: s.v. KHAN-). i luciemmar (At. II)
includes the definite article i and replaces lucasse with lucie, the latter with
abstract noun suffix -ie (see the analysis of line  s.v. turinastalya). luhtar
(At. III deletion) and luhtammar (At. III alternative, At. IV deletion) derive
from the same stem *luk- + the suffix -ta seen in many nouns, e.g. nahta
‘a bite’ (< NAK- ‘bite’, V:), ñalta ‘radiance, glittering reflection’ (< ÑAL
‘shine by reflection’, XII:).
rohtar (At. III) and rohtammar (At. IV) replace *luk- with *rok-. is is
possibly to be equated with (o)rok, a base denoting “anything that caused fear
and/or horror” (X:); cf. RUK- ‘demon’ (V:), *RUKU (XI:–).
e phrase menye luhtar, emended to menye rohtar (At. III), makes use
of an independent possessive pronoun menya, pl. menye ‘our’ ( pl. excl.)
instead of the possessive suffix -mma seen in luhtammar, rohtammar. With
menya ‘our’ compare ninya ‘my’ in indo-ninya ‘my heart’ in Fíriel’s song
(V:); both appear to be based on the dative forms: men ‘(to) me’ (see line
 s.v. men), nin ‘for me’ (R:).
úcaremmar (At. V–VI) exhibits a form úcar (or possibly úcare) ‘trespass’,
unattested elsewhere but transparently *‘bad deed’, < ú ‘not, un-, in- (usually
with bad sense)’ (V: s.v. UGU-) and kar ‘deed’ (V: s.v. KAR-); cf.
German Untat and Qenya ulkarma ‘misdeed’ (in QL s.v. ULU(), PE:).
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Line :
ier ‘as’: ier (At. I–IIa), yan (At. IIb–IV), sív’ (elision of síve, At. V–VI)
‘as’: see line .
emme ‘we’ (At. I–VI):  pl. excl. (emphatic). Also compare the emphatic
nominative pronouns inye ‘I too’ (V:) and elye ‘even thou’ (R:).
avatyarir ‘forgive’ (At. I–IIa): aorist plural of avatyara ‘forgive’; see line
. e unmarked plural in -ir is used because the person of the subject is
marked by emme. avatyarirat (At. I deletion) adds a pronominal ending
(cf. ta below) representing the direct object ‘them, those’. avatyaritar (At.
IIb deletion) switches the positions of the plural suffix and the object
pronoun ta, whereas avatyarilta (At. IIb–IV) has pl. -l instead of -r before
the pronominal ending5—compare the similar structure of kárielto ‘they
made’ (V:), with pl. -l + pronominal ending -to (which in this instance
marks the subject rather than object). avatyaremme (At. I deletion) includes
the  pl. excl. suffix, marking the subject ‘we’. apsenet (At. V–VI) is apsene
(as in line ) with the pronominal ending -t, serving the same function
as -at, -ta above.
ta ‘them, those’ (At. I–IIa): An unpublished discussion of Common Eldarin
pronominal stems (c. s) gives the  pl. stem ta, regarded as “impersonal”
in the sense that it refers “only to ‘abstracts’ or to things (such as inanimates)
not by the Eldar regarded as persons”. is description fits the usage of ta
here, which refers back to pl. lucassemmar ‘our trespasses’ (abstract noun
lucasse ‘trespass’) in the previous line: ier emme avatyarir ta ‘as we forgive
them [the trespasses]’ va menya lucandor ‘from our trespassers’. Cp. ta
‘that, it’ (V: s.v TA-). is same discussion gives the corresponding
“personal”  pl. stem (i.e. that which refers to persons rather than to abstracts
or inanimates) as te; cp. te ‘them’ (= Frodo and Samwise) in A laita te
‘Praise them!’ (LR:).
va (At. I–IIb) ‘from’: is is derived from AWA- ‘away, forth, out’ (V:).
Where va does not appear in At. I–IV (including deletions), the ablative
case is used instead.
menya (At. I–IIb, IV) ‘our’. See line  s.v. lucassemmar.
lucandor ‘debtors, those who trespass’ (At. I): lucandor and lucindor (At.
IIa–b) are composed of the base *luk- (perhaps ‘to do evil’; see line ),
the masc. agentive suffix -ndo seen in melindo ‘lover’ (V: s.v. MEL-),
and plural -r. lucandollor (-n?) (At. I deletion) is an ablative plural form.
lucandollommar (At. I deletion) and lucindillomman (At. III deletion) are
ablative plurals with -mma  pl. excl. ‘our’; these forms also show Tolkien’s
uncertainty whether to use -r or -n as the plural suffix in such a construction.
rocindillomman (At. III) replaces *luk- with *rok-, and rucindillomman (At.
IV deletion) replaces *rok- with *ruk-; see line . is root *ruk- can perhaps
be associated with *RUKU, an element referring to the dark shapes sent
by Melkor to Kuiviénen and to the terror these shapes inspired (XI:),
and rúkina ‘confused, shattered, disordered’ (MC:), both of which have
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

strong negative connotations.

ruhtaliello (At. IV deletion) and rohtaliello (At. IV) take a different
approach from the agentives in -ndo discussed above. Here rohtalie, ruhtalie
appear to be compounds, the first element of which is a noun rohta, ruhta
‘trespass’. rohta appears with this meaning in At. III–IV; ruhta is a variant
substituting *ruk- for *rok- (cp. the verb ruhta- ‘terrify’ < *RUKU, XI:
n.). e second element is lie ‘people’ (V: s.v. LI-), as in Eldalie ‘the
Elven-folk’ (XI:). us rohtalie, ruhtalie are literally ‘trespass-people’
= ‘people who trespass, those who trespass’. ese collective nouns are
grammatically singular, hence use of the ablative singular -llo in the inflected
forms instead of pl. -llon, -llor.
e version of line  in At. V–VI, sív’ emme apsenet tien i úcarer emmen,
differs substantially in syntax from the versions in At. I–IV. With avatyar-
‘forgive’ in At. I–IV, the person whose transgressions are being forgiven is
placed in the ablative (using either the case ending -llo or the preposition
va), as yan emme avatyarilta rocindillomman ‘as we forgive those [trespasses]
from our trespassers’ (At. III). On the other hand, apsene- ‘remit, release,
forgive’ in At. V–VI places the person in the dative: sív’ emme apsenet tien ‘as
we forgive those [trespasses] for them’ (cf. also ámen apsene úcaremmar, lit.
‘for us forgive our trespasses’, in line ). e dative tien points to a nominative
form tie ‘they’, unattested but perhaps a demonstrative equivalent of lie
‘people, folk’ (V:). e remainder of this line in At. V–VI, i úcarer emmen,
is lit. ‘who do ill to us’. úcarer here seems to be an aorist plural of úcar-
‘trespass’, though úcarir might be expected instead (the latter form does
seem to be indicated in an emendation to At. V, though the change was
not carried over into At. VI), while emmen is the dative of emphatic emme
‘we’. e wording of the King James Version, “as we forgive our debtors,”
is thus more closely reflected in At. I–IV, whereas the construction in
At. V–VI is reminiscent of the Roman Catholic “as we forgive those who
trespass against us.”
Note on the order of inflexional elements: Forms in this line containing
both a possessive pronominal suffix and case ending employ the order
Noun + Case + Pronoun: lucando-llo-mma-r, lucindi-llo-mma-n, rocindi-llo-
mma-n, rucindi-llo-mma-n (of these, only rocindillomman was not rejected).
is order also occurs in the Sub Tuum: sangie-sse-mma-n ‘in our necessities’.
Elsewhere in these texts the order of Noun + Pronoun + Case is used:
ortírie-lya-nna ‘to thy patronage’ (Sub Tuum; cp. tielyanna ‘upon your path’,
UT:,  n.); carva-ly-o, móna-ly-o ‘of thy womb’ (AM III–IV); fírie-mm-o,
effírie-mm-o ‘of our death’ (AM I–II).

Line :
ar ‘and’ (At. I).
úa ‘do not’ (At. I, IIa deletion): ú ‘not’, a imperative particle; see above. úna
(At. I deletion) includes na ‘be’ rather than the imperative particle. úalye (At.
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

IIa) is úa with a suffixed (e)lye ‘thou’. alalye (At. IIb) and Álalye (At. III–IV)
replace úa with the negative imperative ala. Tolkien’s notes below At. IIb cite
“neg. imper. ala” and “neg. ‘no’ la.” (see also V: s.v. LA-). e long vowel
of Álalye shows that the negative imperative can have the same variation
in length as the imperative particle ā¨. Álame (At. V–VI) has the suffix -me,
indicating the direct object ‘us’ rather than the understood subject ‘thou’:
Álame tulya ‘do not lead us’.
mittanya ‘lead (into)’ (At. I–IV): e initial element in this verb is clearly
related to mitta- ‘enter’ (intr.) and mitta ‘in, into, inwards’ (QL s.v. MĪ(),
PE:), the latter form occurring much later in Mittalmar ‘Inlands’, the
central region of Númenor (UT:). e ending -anya has less obvious
connections, save that -ya must be the same causative verbal suffix seen
in tulya ‘lead’ in At. V–VI, lit. *‘cause to come’ < TUL- ‘come, approach,
move towards (point of speaker)’ (V:); also cf. metya- ‘put an end to’
(V: s.v. MET-). It is possible that -anya represents a causative form of
the same stem an- seen in anta- ‘give’ (V: s.v. ANA- ‘to, towards’), with
mittanya literally meaning *‘cause to give into’; cp. the English expression
give in to temptation.
me ‘us’ (At. I–IV): men (At. I deletion) is in the dative case. In At. V–VI me
is suffixed to the negative imperative ála; see above s.v. úa.
terpellienna ‘into temptation’ (At. I–IIa): terpellie ‘temptation’, -nna
(allative). e word terpellie is not attested elsewhere, but it appears to be
composed of ter ‘through’ (UT: n.), pel- ‘go round, encircle’ (S:; cf.
PEL(ES)-, V:), and the abstract noun suffix -ie. e base pel- refers to
an encircling boundary or barrier in such names as Ephel Dúath, Pelennor,
and Pelóri, as well as in pella ‘beyond (the borders of)’ (R:), so the literal
meaning of terpellie would appear to be ‘(going) through a barrier’, describing
temptation as an impulse to push through the boundaries defining moral
behavior. is fits with the Greek peirasmov" ‘temptation’, which is derived
from the Indo-European root per ‘lead over or through’.6 If the second
element of terfantie (At. I deletion) is connected with fana- ‘veil’ (R:), then
this form could also refer to passing through such a figurative barrier. A
late unpublished discussion of the root √phan- ‘cover, screen, veil’ gives the
verb fanta- ‘veil, cloak, mantle’.
insangarenna (At. IIb–IV), allative of the otherwise unattested insangare
‘temptation’, appears to consist of in(id)- ‘mind’ (UT:) and an abstract
noun *sangare ‘oppression’ closely akin to sanga ‘crowd, throng, press’ (<
STAG- ‘press, compress’, V:). For -re as an abstract noun suffix, compare
almare ‘blessedness’ and alma ‘good fortune, weal, wealth’ (V: s.v. GALA-).
insangare would thus literally mean ‘oppression of the mind’.
sahtienna (At. V) is explained in the etymological notes on the verso of
At. V, which give the root √thag- ‘oppress, crush, press’ (a fourth gloss, ‘force’,
was deleted), whence thakta- > Q. þahtie / sahtie ‘pressure or force (to do
something against one’s will or conscience)’.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

úsahtienna (At. V revision) and úsahtíenna (At. VI, probably a slip for
úsahtienna) seem to derive from addition of the prefix ú ‘not, un-, in-
(usually with bad sense)’ to the noun sahtie cited above (< √thag-). However,
the notes on the verso of At. V attribute úsahtie to a different stem: “saka-
‘draw, pull’; þ/sahta ‘induce’: úsahtie ‘inducement to do wrong’.”

Line :
one ‘but’: anat ‘but’ (At. I deletion) may be related to nā, nān ‘but, on the
contrary, on the other hand’ and a-nanta ‘and yet, but yet’ (V: s.v. NDAN-
‘back’, whence also prefix nan- ‘backwards’). one (At. I), ono and its elided
form on’ (At. II–III), and ono· (At. IV) must be cognates of nō ‘but’, which
appears in a Quenya sentence in notes on the word óre ‘heart, inner mind’
from : ore nin karitas nō namin alasaila ‘I feel moved to do so but judge
it unwise’ (VT:). ese forms are probably related to the early Q. prep. nō¨
‘aer (only of time)’ and adv. no ‘then, next (of time)’, both found in QL under
the root NŌ- ‘ahead, in front; aer, of time; tomorrow’ (PE:). Also cp. the
prefix nó-, which appears to mean ‘next’, in the alternative month-names for
the calendar of the New Era given in XII:; e.g. Ertuilë (April) *‘One-Spring
(month)’, Nótuilë (May) *‘Next-Spring (month)’.
mal ‘but’ (At. V–VI) seems unlikely to derive from any of the known roots
with the form mal-: MALA() ‘crush, squeeze, pulp’, MALA() ‘yellow’ (both in
QL, PE:), and MBAL- (whence malle ‘street’) in the Etymologies (V:).
Alternatively, mal could consist of elements ma- + -l, the latter perhaps being
the short form -l of ablative -llo sometimes encountered in noun declensions
from the s, e.g. abl. kiryal, kiryallo. e first element might be má
‘hand’, with mal perhaps meaning lit. ‘away from one hand’, i.e. ‘on the
other hand, on the contrary’. Another possible source is the neuter personal
pronoun ma ‘something, a thing’ (VT: n.), in which case mal might
mean ‘away from the thing (just mentioned)’, introducing a contrastive
or adversative clause.
na (imperative): is is used to mark the subjunctive/imperative in At.
I–IIa, but the imperative particle á, a is used in the other versions. us aly’
(i.e. alye, At. IIb deletion, III–IV), ám’ (i.e. áme, At. V), and áme (At. VI).
etrúna ‘deliver’ (At. I–IIa): Also eterúna (At. III–IV). e first element is
the prefix et- ‘forth, out’ (V: s.v. ET-), also in the form ete- with ómataina
(‘vocalic extension’; see XI: n.). e second element is given in the notes
below At. IIb as rūna ‘free’ (unattested elsewhere). Compare the etymology of
deliver, from Latin de ‘from, out of ’ + liberare ‘set free, liberate’. et·a·rúna (At.
IIb) and et·á·rúna (At. III deletion) include the imperative particle, inserted
between the prefix and the root. etelehta (At. V–VI) replaces rúna with lehta
‘loose, slacken’ (V: s.v. LEK-), also as adj. ‘free. released’ (VT:).
me ‘us’ (At. I–IV).
ulcallo ‘from evil’: olcallo (At. I deletion), ulcallo (At. I, IIa deletion),
ulcullo (At. V–VI) are ablative case forms of olca, ulca, and ulco respectively.
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

ulco appears as the object of the preposition va rather than in the ablative
case in At. IIa. ese are connected with Qenya ulca ‘bad, wicked, wrong’
given in QL s.v. ULU() (PE:), ulka ‘dark, gloomy, sinister’ < *ū¨k’lā ‘gloom,
gloomy’ (cited in a text from the s), ulka ‘evil’ in henulka ‘evileyed’ (IX:,
 n.), and olca ‘bad, wicked’ < *oklā < √oko- ‘evil, bad’ (in etymological
notes from c. ); cf. ÚLUG- ‘hideous, horrible’ (V:).
úra (At. IIb deletion) may be equated with úra ‘nasty’ < UG ‘dislike’ (in the
late essay on negation cited in VT:); cf. the negative stem UGU-, whence
úmea ‘evil’ (V:). úro (At. IIb–IV) appears to be the noun associated
with the adjective úra, and only appears following va ‘from’ (see line )
rather than in the ablative. Prefixed var- in the compound var-úra (At. IIb
deletion) shows addition of the ending -r (< -d < -da) indicating motion
to or towards a point, as in the adverb oär, which like va is also derived
from *AWA ‘away’ (XI:).
Note on “Amen”: e confirmatory response amen (Heb. āmēn ‘truly,
certainly, may it be so’) does not occur following the Lord’s Prayer as it
appears in the Bible, and a Quenya equivalent is lacking in At. I, III, and
IV. san na (At. IIa) and násan (At. IIb) are clearly intended as ‘may it be
so’, consisting of san ‘so’ (see line  s.v. tér) and na ‘be’ (see line ). násië
(At. V), násie (At. VI) substitute sie for san. e word sie ‘thus’ appears
in rough etymological notes from c. , and is derived from SI- ‘this,
here, now’ (V:).
Historical notes:
e Lord’s Prayer familiar from Matthew :– also occurs in a shorter
form in Luke :–. e version in Luke is thought likely to be closer to
the original, with that in Matthew being a later elaboration. e concluding
doxology “For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, for ever.
Amen”, common in Protestant liturgical usage, is lacking in important early
Greek manuscripts and is not used in the Catholic Church; hence it does not
appear in Tolkien’s Quenya translations.
ere follow the texts of the Lord’s Prayer in Greek, Latin, and English:
KATA MAQQAION : –
Pavter hJmw`n oJ ejn toi`" oujranoi`":
aJgiasqhvtw to; o[nomav sou:
ejlqevtw hJ basileiva sou:
genhqhvtw to; qevlhmav sou,
 wJ" ejn oujranw`/ kai; ejpi; gh`":
to;n a[rton hJmw`n to;n ejpiouvsion do;" hJmi`n shvmeron:
kai; a[fe" hJmi`n ta; ojfeilhvmata hJmw`n,
wJ" kai; hJmei`" ajfhvkamen toi`" ojfeilevtai" hJmw`n:
kai; mh; eijsenevgkh" hJma`" ei;" peirasmovn,
 ajlla; rJu`sai hJma`" ajpo; tou` ponhrou`.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Matthew : – (Vulgate)

Pater noster qui es in caelis,
sanctificetur nomen tuum.
Adveniat regnum tuum.
Fiat voluntas tua
 sicut in caelo et in terra.
Panem nostrum cotidianum da nobis hodie.
Et dimitte nobis debita nostra
sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris.
Et ne nos inducas in tentationem
 sed libera nos a malo.

Matthew : – (King James version)

Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
y kingdom come.
y will be done
 in earth, as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
as we forgive our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation,
 but deliver us from evil.
Editorial notes to Átaremma
. Also compare the following excerpt from the entry for Heaven in the online
version of The Catholic Encyclopedia (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/):
“eologians, therefore, generally hold that the heaven of the blessed is a
special place with definite limits. Naturally, this place is held to exist, not
within the earth, but, in accordance with the expressions of Scripture, without
and beyond its limits.”
. We are indebted to John Garth for pointing out this connection between
the use of Eruman in the Lost Tales and in At. V–VI, as well as for noting
the importance of the change of Eruman > Araman in the  revision of
the Quenta Silmarillion.
. La Sankta Biblio: Malnova kaj Nova Testamentoj Tradukitaj el la Originalaj
Lingvoj. Londono: Brita kaj Alilanda Biblia Societo. Edinburgo: Nacia Biblia
Societo de Skotlando, n.d.
. Tolkien first wrote “Subject follows verb”, then struck out “follows” and
wrote “inflected” above. If “Subject inflected verb” was the reading intended,
its sense remains cryptic. It seems more likely that “Subject [follows] inflected
verb” was what Tolkien meant.
. As noted in the Introduction (q.v.), the verso of the manuscript page bearing
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

At. III–IV, AM II, the Sub Tuum, and the Litany of Loreto contains charts of
various prepositions inflected with enclitic pronouns. is verso also has a
number of scattered forms in which Tolkien seems to be working out the details
of adding pronominal objects to the aorist stem cari- ‘make’ (which occurs in
the plural in i karir quettar ómainen ‘those who form words with voices’, XI:).
ese include the pair carita, carilta, evidently singular and plural verbs, with
carilta analogous to avatyarilta in At. IIb–IV. Below carilta is written carires,
evidently pl. carir + -es, a form of the  sg. pronoun se also seen in the charts
of inflected prepositions on the same page. A singular equivalent caris appears
below carita, but this was struck out. Also note that by the late s -ita had
been reimagined as the aorist “particular infinitive” ending, with karita meaning
‘to do’; see VT: n. , and VT:–.
. Julius Pokorny, Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (Bern:
Francke, –), I:–, especially  s.v. E. per- ‘versuchen, probieren,
riskieren, Gefahr’.
. Aia María (Ave Maria)
In the same manuscript pages on which Tolkien worked out the Átaremma,
he concurrently developed a Quenya translation of the Ave Maria. is
development spanned four versions of decreasing complexity of revision.
e first version was written (very roughly and with much experimentation)
in ballpoint pen; the other three with a nib pen.
All four versions of the Aia María are given below, incorporating
all of Tolkien’s emendations, which are detailed for each version. Each
version was written as a continuous paragraph, but for ease of analysis and
cross-reference a standard (and traditional) lineation has been imposed.
Tolkien provided no English translation, but one is given, together with the
standard Latin text and relevant Gospel passages, in the historical notes
at the end of this analysis.
Aia María I
Aiya María quanta erulissenen;
na héru olesse
elye na manna mi nínaron
ar manna i yáva carvalyo Yésus.
 Aire María, Eruamille,
alye arca atarme naicor
si ar lumesse i fíriemmo menya.
Emendations:

Line : Deleted false start [?a] M. liss > erulissenen quanta > quanta
erulissenen.
Line : le se > lese > olesse. na was originally written above le se, then
circled and marked for insertion before héru.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Line : manna na > elye na manna. A lengthy complex of rejected forms

precedes the arrival at nínaron: ness > nís > [?ni]quessen > [?ni]quissen >
qemissen > ninaliss > ninassen > nínaron. mil and e[?m] were also considered
and then rejected as alternatives to mi.
Line : qe > carvalyo — helv > carvalyo Yésus.
Line : arca alye > alye arca. p > atarmen t > atarmen > atarme. ulcarindor
> naikandor > naicandor > me naicandor > me naicor. naicandor was not
deleted aer naicor was written above it. me before naicandor / naicor was
written in the le margin and is apparently an inadvertent repetition of the
pronoun already expressed in atarme.
Line : Rejected before i fíriemmo: urtulm urt. Tolkien then wrote menya
above urt, before striking it through as well.

Aia María II
Aia María, erulissenen quanta;
i Héru olesse,
manna nalye mi nínaron
ar manna i yáva carvalyo Yésus.
 Aina María Eruamille
alye arca meterme i naiquear
sí ar lúmesse effíriemmo.
Emendations:

Line : Deleted false start Aia. Deleted aer María: Eruamille. quanta
erulissenen > erulissenen quanta.
Line : elye na [?m] manna > manna nalye.
Line : are > ar.
Line : Aire Mar > Aina Mar > Aini Maria > Aina María.
Line : atarme > meterme. i naici nar > i naiquear.
Line : are > ar.

Aia María III

Aia María quanta Eruanno,
i Héru carelye;
aistana elye mika nísi,
ar aistana i yávë mónalyo Yésus.
 Airë María Eruo ontaril
á hyame rá men úcarindor
sí ar lúmessë yá firuvamme. násië
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Emendations:

Line : Tolkien struck out car- of carelye in pencil and wrote a

replacement, possibly as or ar, in the margin.
Line : aistan’ > aistana. mitta > mika. A word in parentheses, possibly
mihta or mikta, is penciled in the right margin. is is joined by a line to
two pencilled words in the lower right corner of the card, reading mitka
(deleted) and mica.
Line : hrá > rá.
Aia María IV
Aia María quanta Eruanno ·
i Héru aselye ·
aistana elye imíca nísi ·
ar aistana i yave mónalyo Yésus :
 Aire María Eruo ontaril
á hyame rámen úcarindor
sí ar lúmesse ya firuvamme : násie :
Analysis of Forms
Note: Bold headwords indicate readings of the final text. Analysis of previous
forms and relevant emendations are grouped under their corresponding
headword. All Elvish forms cited are Quenya unless otherwise noted.

Line :
Aia ‘Hail!’: e prayer opens with the words of the angel Gabriel to
Mary at the Annunciation (Luke :), who greets Mary with ‘Hail!’
(Latin Ave). Aiya in the first version and Aia in all subsequent versions
are apparently simply variants of the same word. Cf. Aiya Earendil ‘Hail
Earendil!’ (LR:).
María ‘Mary’: e Latin name fits nicely within Quenya phonological
constraints.
quanta ‘full’. e Etymologies lists this adjective (there spelt qanta) under
the base KWAT- (V:). Cf. also quanta sarme ‘full writing’ (VT:),
penquanta ‘full to the brim, with mouth full’ (VT:), and (exhibiting the
plural form) quante tengwi ‘full signs’ (VT:); the Common Eldarin stems
for the number-word ‘’, kwaya, kway-am (VT:ff.), apparently referring
to “the full set of  fingers”; and the stems *KWA referring to ‘completion’,
*KWAN, and the verb stem *KWATA, whence quat- ‘fill’ (XI:). is verbal
cognate of the adjective has long been familiar from “Galadriel’s Lament”, in
the future-tense form enquantuva ‘will refill’ (LR:).
Eruanno ‘of grace’ is the genitive form of *Eruanna ‘grace’ = Eru ‘e One,
God’ + anna gi’ (cf. V: s.v. ANA-), so literally ‘of the gi of Eru’. In
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Catholic theology, grace is defined as God’s gi of undeserved forgiveness.

erulissenen (AM I–II) = Eru + lisse ‘grace, sweetness’ + -nen instrumental sg.
ending, so literally ‘with the grace/sweetness of Eru’. For the connection of
“grace” and “sweetness”, cf. the QL root LISI, said to have the “root meaning,
sweetness”, whence lis (list-) ‘grace, blessing’ and listea, listevoite ‘full of grace’
(PE:–); and lisse ‘sweet’ (LR:, R:).

Line :
i Héru ‘the Lord’. Cf. XII:; the base KHER- ‘rule, govern, possess’
whence Q. heru ‘master’ (V:); and the QL root HERE ‘rule, have power’
whence Q. heru ‘lord’ (PE:).
aselye ‘with thee’ = as- ‘with’ + elye ‘thou, you’ (see line ). To fully
understand this form, we must first examine the etymology of its precedents,
olesse (AM I–II) and carelye (AM III): On the verso of the sheet on which
the texts of At. III and IV, AM II, the Sub Tuum, and the Litany were written,
Tolkien provides the following chart of a preposition ó- ‘with’ inflected
with enclitic pronouns. Neither the meaning of the preposition nor the
coordinates of the chart are provided by Tolkien, but the latter are easily
deduced from the pronominal endings and the structure of the chart, and
the former from its use in this prayer and by noting the related prefix ó-
“(usually reduced to o- when unstressed), used in words describing the
meeting, junction, or union of two things or persons, or of two groups
thought of as units” (XI:):1

[Singular] [Plural]
[st] onye) óni óme
[nd] olye) óle óle
[rd] óse óte
[rd] ósa (ós) óta (ót)
rd
[ ] ótar ótari
We see from this chart that olesse ‘with you’ can be explained as the
preposition ó- ‘with’ (in reduced form in unstressed environment) +
(shortened)  sg. ending -le ‘you’ + locative sg. ending -sse ‘in, at’.2 e
subsequent forms carelye and aselye are presumably to be explained similarly
as variant prepositions (as-, car-) expressing accompaniment, with the (full)
 sg. ending –lye, but without the locative ending.
On the same page of preposition charts Tolkien wrote a sequence of
three forms: canye, calye, ca-. is (apparent) prepositional element ca- may
underlie car-, perhaps via an allative extension or ending in -r (cf. tar ‘thither’
= ta ‘that’ + allative -r ‘towards’, V: s.v. TA-; and the derivation of
the adverb öar < *awā by “addition of the ending –d (prehistoric –da)
indicating motion to or towards a point”, XI:). A list of prepositions
and a related discussion in a small bundle of papers apparently dating
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

from the mid-s (one of the sheets is dated “Nov. ”) gives the forms
ca, cata, cana ‘behind, at back of place’; though whether this is the sense
intended here is debatable.
In some very late notes (c. ), Tolkien gives a Common Eldarin form
as ‘and’ and its Sindarin reflex ah, realized as a before consonants; cf. Daur a
Berhael ‘Frodo and Samwise’ (LR:, L:) and the title Athrabeth Finrod ah
Andreth ‘e Debate of Finrod and Andreth’ (X:). In the current Quenya
example, as- ‘with’ may be a prepositional reflex of C.E. as and related to
the Quenya conjunction ar ‘and’.
e preceding versions le se and lese give separately and then combine
the independent forms le ‘you’ and se ‘at, in’ (the root of the latter is also
given in the aforementioned list of prepositions as sē ‘at’; cf. the locative
ending –sse).
Note on the lack of the copula: As in Latin, Quenya frequently omits the
copula (i.e., forms of the verb ‘to be’ when linking a subject with a predicate
complement): hence, in this prayer, i Héru aselye ‘the Lord [is] with thee’ (line
), aistana elye ‘blessed [art] thou’ (line ), and aistana i yave mónalyo ‘blessed
[is] the fruit of thy womb’ (line ).

Line :
aistana ‘blessed’ is possibly the past participle of an otherwise unattested
verb *aista- ‘bless’; but cf. the discussion of aista ‘holy’ in line  of the
Gloria Patri. With the adjective manna ‘blessed’ (AM I–II) cf. the base
MAN- ‘[a] holy spirit’ and the name Manwë ‘Blessed Being’ of the Lord
of the Valar (L:).
elye ‘thou’ ( sg.). Cf. emphatic elye ‘(even) thou’ in the last line of
“Galadriel’s Lament” (LR:, R:). na (AM I) is the verb ‘is’; nalye ‘you are’
(AM II) is the same verb with the  sg. ending –lye ‘thou, you’; cf. hiruva-lye
‘thou shalt find’ (LR:, R:).
imíca ‘among’. See the analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v. mittanya. e
list of prepositions mentioned in the discussion of aselye above gives the root
√mi whence imi, mi ‘in’, mitta- ‘insert’ and mina ‘into’; other entries include
mitta- ‘between’ and miki ‘among’. is miki is plainly an extension of mi
‘in’, and given its inherently partitive nature (sc., indicating a relationship
of a part with a whole), the ending -ki is perhaps to be explained as
partitive, similar to the ending -iko seen in the “Entu, Ensi, Enta Declension”
(VT:–), and to the ending -ika of the “Bodleian Declension”
(VT:–). imíca may then be similarly explained as derived from
imi with a partitive ending –ika—such an ending is explicitly labeled as
“partitive” (plural) in a chart of Quenya noun declensions dating from the
Leeds period (i.e., c. –)—while mika (AM III) is a similar partitive
form of mi. e rejected form mil (AM I) may be a similar, ablative form of
mi (cf. mal in At. V–VI, line ). Cf. the base MI- ‘inside’, whence Q. mi ‘in,
within’ (V:), and mí ‘in the’ in “Galadriel’s Lament” (LR:, R:).
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

nísi ‘women’ = nís- ‘woman’ + -i pl. suffix. Cf. the base NDIS- whence Q.
nisse, nis ‘woman’ (V:), pl. nissi (mentioned under the base NIS-, V:);
also nis ‘woman’, pl. nissi (X:–). nínaron (AM I–II) is apparently an
extension ní-na ‘woman’ of the related base NĪ- ‘woman’ (V:) with plural
-r + pl. partitive/derivative genitive ending –on (on which see V: s.v. GŌË-,
XI:–, ). e partitive/derivative genitive is apparently employed
here in conjunction with mi ‘in’ to convey the sense of being selected from
within a group: i.e., mi nínaron ‘(from) among women’, with the whole line
thereby indicating “you are selected from among all women as being blessed”.
e complex of rejected forms preceding the arrival at nínaron in AM I
shows Tolkien experimenting with different forms of the word for ‘woman’
([?ni]que-, [?ni]qui-, qemi-; cf. the QL root QIMI whence “qin (qim-)
woman, female. Oen as suffix -qin”, PE:), with the use of the partitive
plural -li (XI:), and with the use of the locative plural ending –ssen (cf.
mahalmassen ‘upon the thrones’, UT:,  n.).

Line :
ar ‘and’. are (AM II) is an alternate form of the conjunction that occurs
occasionally in Tolkien’s later writings.
aistana ‘blessed’. See line .
i yave, also yava (AM II), yáve (AM III) ‘the fruit’, are all derivatives
of the base YAB- ‘fruit’ (V:). Cf. the QL root YAVA whence Q. yāva
‘fruit, produce’ (PE:).
mónalyo ‘of thy womb’ = móna ‘womb’ + -lyo ‘of thy’ (the genitive form
of –lya ‘thy, your’, itself the possessive form of -lye ‘thou, you’). e apparent
stem mó- (cf. nína- ‘woman’ < NĪ- ‘woman’ in line  of AM I–II) may
refer to the womb by allusion to the travail involved in childbirth: the
Etymologies (V:) gives MŌ- with no gloss, with derivatives Q. mól ‘slave,
thrall’ and móta- ‘labour, toil’. Among some etymological notes, apparently
contemporary with and now located within the same bundle of papers as
these Catholic prayers (excluding the Merton College postcard versions,
which are located in a different file), is found the following entry: “mōl ‘slave’.
Said to be mō-l < √mō ‘labour, be afflicted’; Q. moia- < mōjă; but ?better
√mol”. Similarly, the apparent stem car- of carvalyo (AM I) may refer to the
womb as the site of creation of a new life and of ensoulment, with carva-
being “the (living) thing that makes” (cp. kelvar ‘living things that move’,
XI:, < KEL- ‘go, run’, V:); cf. the base KAR- ‘make, build, construct’
(V:), and Oienkarmë Eruo “e One’s perpetual production” (X:). e
form qe (AM I) may be an abortive start at deriving a word for “womb”
via synecdoche on a stem qe- *‘woman’; see the similar, rejected forms
in line  of AM I.
Yésus ‘Jesus’. As with María, this Latin name fits nicely within Quenya
phonological constraints. helv (AM I) is apparently the beginning of an
incomplete word translating the name Jesus, which itself is a Latinized form
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

of the Hebrew name Yehōshū‘a ‘help of Jehovah’. Q. helv- initially suggests

derivation from a root in *gel- or *khel- (*hel-), but the attested bases GEL-
‘sky’ (V:) and KHEL- ‘freeze’ (V:) seem inapplicable. It is also possible
to derive a stem hel- from bases in KHIL- (*HIL) or GIL- (note the
derivation in Etymologies of Melko < *Mailikō *‘Greedy One’ < MIL-IK-
via a-infixion, V:). No such base GIL- is attested, but the base KHIL-
‘follow’ (V:) might apply to Christ as the Son of God; cf. the stem -chil
‘heir’, the Sindarin reflex of this base, in the patronymic Eluchil ‘Heir of Elu
(ingol)’ of Dior (XI:); and the QL root HIL whence hil, hilde ‘child’,
hilu, hilmo ‘son’ (PE:).

Line :
Aire ‘holy’. See the analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v. aire. The
etymological note of  cited in that discussion states that aina (AM II;
also there in the deleted, apparently feminine form aini) is “obsolete, except
in Ainur”; but its occurrence in AM II and in the Quenya translations of
the Sub Tuum and the Litany strongly suggests that Tolkien had either not
yet written that note, or had reconsidered it. Cf. the base AYAN- whence
*ayan- ‘holy’, Q. Ainu ‘holy one’, f. Aini (V:). In the c. – essay Quendi
and Eldar, Tolkien explains Ainu as a borrowing from Valarin ayanūz, from
which was derived the adjective aina ‘holy’ (XI:).
Eruo ‘of God’ = Eru ‘the One, God’ + -o genitive sg. ending. In Quenya, a
noun in the genitive case normally precedes the noun it modifies, as here;
cf. Calaciryo míri ‘Kalakirya’s jewels’ and aldaron rámar ‘trees’ wings’ in
the version of “Galadriel’s Lament” given in “a clearer and more normal
style” (R:–).
ontaril ‘mother’ = onta- ‘to bear’ + -r agentive ending + -il feminine
ending. e Etymologies s.v. ONO- ‘beget’ lists onta- ‘beget, create’, whence
the agentive ontaro ‘begetter, parent’ with feminine form ontare (V:).
Eruamille (AM I–II) ‘Mother of God’ has as its second element amille,
evidently a longer form of amil ‘mother’ (V: s.v. AM- ‘mother’); cp.
Itarillë, longer form of Itaril (XII:).

Line :
á is an imperative particle; cf. XI:–, and the numerous examples
in the Átaremma. alye *‘do thou’ is the same particle with enclitic  sg.
pronominal ending -lye ‘thou, you’; see the discussion of aselye in line .
hyame ‘pray’, aorist singular verb (cf. Tolkien’s statement regarding “the
general (aorist) ‘infinitive’”, VT: n.). Such a form could arise from
an aorist verbal root in *syami-. ough no such root is attested, it can be
observed that the prefixion of s- to roots and bases is a not uncommon
derivational technique in the Eldarin tongues (as in Indo-European): cf. the
stem rot, s-rot ‘delve underground, excavate, tunnel’, whence both Q. rotto ‘a
small grot or tunnel’ and Q. hróta ‘dwelling underground, artificial cave or
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

rockhewn hall’ (XII: n.). Noting this, it possible that hyame derives
from a root in *yam- via s-prefixion. e QL gives the root YAMA ‘call’
whence yamin ‘shout, call, name’ (PE:), with an appropriate sense: note
that the Latin verb orare ‘pray’ is connected by some etymologies (e.g., Carl
Darling Buck in his Selected Indo-European Synonyms, entry ..) with
Greek and Russian words meaning ‘say, shout, cry out’. Note also the noun
yaime ‘wailing’ (MC:). e verb arca ‘pray’ (AM I) apparently derives
from the base RAK- ‘stretch out, reach’ (whence also ranko ‘arm’; V:) with
both prefixion and suppression of the sundóma (rak- > *a-r’k-), the literal
sense being ‘to reach out in supplication’ (either literally with the arms, or
figuratively with words or in thought).
rámen ‘for us’ = rá ‘for’ + men ‘us’ (see the analysis of the Átaremma, line 
s.v. men). e contemporary list of prepositions mentioned in the discussion
of aselye above gives the root ara ‘along side’ (in apparent contrast with
another root, ada ‘against, opposed to, opposite’). Noting that the sense of rá
‘for’ here in the intercessionary plea á hyame rámen ‘pray for us!’ is ‘on behalf
of ’, and further noting that English behalf is derived from Old English behealf
‘by the side’, it seems very likely that rá is derived from the root ara ‘along
side’. e form as first written, hrá, may be derived via s-prefixion from *sra-;
see the discussion of hyame above.
atarme, atarmen (AM I) and meterme (AM II) all seem to be similarly
derived from a prepositional element, ata- and mete- respectively, plus an
allative ending -r ‘to, towards’ (cf. tar ‘thither’ < TA- demonstrative stem ‘that’,
V:), prefixed to the pronoun -me(n) ‘us’ (see above). e same contem-
porary list of prepositions gives the root ata-, atta ‘across, over, lying from
side to side’; if this is the intended sense of ata- in atarme(n), it is perhaps
a reference to the intercessionary nature of prayer, especially Marian prayer.
Finally, mete- may derive from the base MET- ‘end’ (V:) and together with
the allative ending meter may have the literal sense of ‘towards the end’, or,
less literally, ‘for the purpose of, on behalf of ’. At the bottom of the page on
which AM II is written, Tolkien has written aly’ arca atarni and alya arca
atarni (with alya most likely a slip for alye), in both cases with atarni sub-
sequently deleted and in the first case with the word meterni substituted;
though untranslated, it is plain that all of these notes are experiments with
translating the plea “pray for me!”
úcarindor ‘sinners’ = ú- negative prefix ‘mis-’ + cari- aorist stem ‘make,
do’ (cf. hyame above) + -ndo agentive suffix + -r plural suffix, and so more
literally ‘those who do misdeeds’. See the discussion of úcaremmar ‘our
trespasses’ and i úcarer ‘who do ill’ in the analysis of the Átaremma, line
 s.v. lucassemmar and line  s.v. lucandor. For the plural agentive suffix
-ndo-r see the discussion of lucandor / lucindor (ibid.). úlcarindor (AM I) is
a similar formation using the prefix ul- denoting ‘evil’: cf. henulka ‘evileyed’
(IX:,  n.), and the base ÚLUG- whence Q. ulundo ‘monster’. e plural
agentive forms naicandor / naicor ‘sinners’ (AM I) imply a verb *naika-,
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

doubtless derived from the base NÁYAK- ‘pain’ (V:) —cf. the QL root
NAYA ‘hurt, grieve’ (PE:)—expressing the Catholic concept of sin as
that which harms the soul and grieves God. e phrase i naici nar (AM II)
translating “sinners” appears literally to mean ‘who are sinners’ or ‘who are
sinful’, with i ‘who’ the relative pronoun (cf. i Eru i ‘the One who’, UT:, 
n.), naici ‘sinners’ (probably the plural form of *naice, either a noun
‘sinner’ or an adjective ‘sinful’), and nar the plural copula ‘are’ (present pl.
form of ná ‘to be’). i naiquear (AM II) of the same meaning and similar
construction, less ambiguously employs an adjectival form, sg. *naiquea
‘sinful’ (suggesting derivation from a variant noun form *naique ‘sin’),
used substantively as a plural noun, with the copula, as oen in these
texts, le unexpressed.

Line :
sí, also si (AM I) ‘now’. Cf. sí, sin ‘now’ (V: s.v. SI- ‘this, here, now’).
ar ‘and’. are (AM II). See line .
lúmesse ‘at the hour’ = lúme ‘hour’ + -sse locative sg. ending. Cf. lúmenna
‘upon the hour’ (LR:, XI:). e same list of prepositions cited in the
discussion of aselye (line ) has an entry sē ‘at’. .
ya, also yá (AM III) ‘in/at which’, is the bare stem of the relative
pronoun that appears inflected with the locative plural ending as yassen
‘in which’ in “Galadriel’s Lament” (LR:, R:). ough uninflected, ya
here seems to have the same locative meaning. Some precedence for the
locative use of a bare stem is found in Goldogrin, in which the uninflected
inessive/nominative case is “occasionally used by itself as a locative, e.g. in
such expressions as bar at home” (PE:). See the discussion of ya(n) in the
analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.vv. ier and tier.
firuvamme ‘we will die’ = fir- ‘die, fade’ (MC:) + -uva future tense
suffix + -mme  pl. exclusive ‘we’ (i.e., indicating “I and some others, but
not you”; cf. avamme ‘we won’t’, “first plural exclusive”, XI:). e forms
fíriemmo (AM I) and effíriemmo (AM II) show a more English-like means
of translating “of our death”, employing the genitive form -mmo ‘of our’ of
the possessive form -mma (‘our’) of -mme, attached instead to the noun stem
fírie- ‘dying, death’. is noun stem is itself the gerundial/infinitival form of
the verb fir- (cf. en-yalie- ‘re-calling’, UT:,  n.). e initial element ef-
of effíriemmo ‘of our death’ is most likely an assimilated form of the prefix et-
‘forth, out’ (V: s.v. ET-), emphasizing the nature of the death of mortals
as a passing out of this world. urtulm and urt, deleted by Tolkien before
i fíriemmo in AM I, are apparently preliminary efforts; the former at least
probably to be completed as *urtulmo ‘of our death’, (though the underlying
ending -lme, presumably at this time still  pl. inclusive as it is in omentielmo
‘of our meeting’ in the first edition of e Lord of the Rings, seems not
entirely appropriate here). Cf. N./S. gurth ‘death’ (VI:, UT:,  n.),
which could be cognate with a Quenya form *urtu < *gur-; but if so, this
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

would be a variant concept, since elsewhere one sees Q. nuru < ÑGUR-
(V:), as in nuruhuine ‘Death-shadow’ (V:, ; IX:).
i and menya in AM I, though not deleted, are probably transitory thoughts
in experimentation with translating “of our death”. At first glance, menya
appears to be the same  pl. exclusive possessive pronoun menya ‘of our’ that
occurs in the Átaremma, lines  and . But the ending -mmo of fíriemmo ‘of
our death’ already expresses this possessive meaning; so if menya is indeed
the possessive pronoun, it is seemingly redundant. ere is however another
possible explanation of menya: the same entry sē ‘at’ in the aforementioned
list of prepositions also gives men as an alternative gloss. e gloss men was
subsequently struck through,3 but if Tolkien had the same concept of men
‘at’ in mind here, it may be that menya is to be analyzed as a preposition
men- ‘at’ + the relative stem ya ‘which’. If so, it would appear that Tolkien was
vacillating within AM I, as across the following versions, between expressing
“at the hour of our death” with a relative construction, i.e., something like:
*lúmesse menya fíruvamme ‘in the hour at which we will die’; and with a
genitival construction, e.g., *lúmesse fíriemmo ‘at the hour of our death’. e
appearance of i before fíriemmo is, if interpreted as the article ‘the’, likewise
seemingly redundant; but noting that i also serves as a relative pronoun (cf.
i Eru i ‘the One who’, UT:,  n.), it may also be explained as part of an
incomplete relative translation of “the hour of our death”.
násie ‘Amen, it is thus’ = ná ‘it is’ + -sie ‘thus’. See the Note on “Amen” in the
analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v. ulcallo.
Historical notes:
e first half of the Ave Maria is based upon two verses from the Gospel of
Luke, : and :. e second half is traced, in variant forms, to the th
century. e prayer achieved its current form in the th century.

Ave Maria, gratia plena, Hail Mary, full of grace,

Dominus tecum; the Lord is with thee!
benedicta tu in mulieribus, Blessed art thou amongst women,
et benedictus fructus ventris tui, Jesus. and blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus.
 Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Holy Mary, Mother of God,
ora pro nobis peccatoribus, pray for us sinners,
nunc et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen. now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

Luke :
Greek: Cai're, kecaritwmevnh, oJ kuvrio" meta; sou',
Be rejoicing (one) having been highly favored the Lord with you
Vulgate: Haue gratia plena, Dominus tecum: benedicta tu in mulieribus.
Hail of grace full Lord with you blessed you among women.
KJV: Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou
among women.
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

Luke :
Greek: Eujloghmevnh su; ejn gunaixivn,
(One) having been highly favored you among women
kai; eujloghmevno" oJ karpo;" th'" koiliva" sou.
and (one) having been highly favored the fruit of the cavity of you
Vulgate: Benedicta tu inter mulieres, et benedictus fructus uentris tui
Blessed you among women and blessed fruit of womb your
KJV: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

Editorial notes to the Aia María:

. An original alternative form onte to the  pl. óte was supplied and then
deleted. Tolkien also vacillated between ontar and ótari for the  pl. form, before
settling on ótari, with an apparently poetic form “†(ór)” written beneath. is
chart only gives the  pl. exclusive form óme, but charts for other prepositions on
the same page also incorporate the inclusive form, which is marked by -ngwe: e.g.
etemme, etengwe (cf. et ‘out’); mimme, mingwe (cf. mi ‘in’). Cp. -nguo in the Telerin
form of the Elvish greeting, ēl sīla lūmena vomentienguo ‘a star shines upon the
hour of the meeting of our ways’ (XI:), and the Quenya independent dative
pronoun *ngwin ‘for us’ (VT:–, ). Also noteworthy is the identity in this
chart of the  sg. and pl. forms, whereas the other charts feature a distinct form
of the  pl.: e.g.,  sg. etel(ye), mil(ye);  pl. etelle, mille. e two numbers of the
nd person are apparently identical only in their shortened forms, while the
lengthened forms show the contrast –lye sg., -lle pl.
. Note that Sindarin prepositions, like those of Quenya, are also conju-
gable—cf. anim ‘for myself ’ (LR:) and ammen ‘for us’ (LR:, VI: n.),
both containing an- ‘to, for’—as too are those of Welsh. And like Quenya
prepositions, Finnish prepositions, postpositions, and adverbs are at least
partially declinable.
. And replaced with jē; men- being subsequently reassigned as a gloss for
‘with (instr[umental])’.

. Alcar i Ataren (Gloria Patri)

In the right-hand margin of the same postcard on which Tolkien wrote
the fih version of Átaremma and the third version of the Aia María, and
oriented orthogonally to those texts and the card, he began a translation of
the Gloria Patri. Like the other texts on the card, it was written with a nib
pen. Its end is partially obscured by the ends of the lines of the Átaremma
and the Aia María that it was written over.

Alcar i ataren ar i yondon ar i airefean

tambe enge i et
Glory [be] to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
as it was [in] the [beginning]
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Emendation: faire aistan > airefean.

Analysis of Forms:
Alcar ‘glory’. e Etymologies s.v. AKLA-R- gives alkar or alkare ‘radiance,
brilliance’ and alkarinqa ‘radiant, glorious’ (V:). Cf. the Sindarin cognate
aglar ‘glory, radiance’ (LR:, R:–).
i ataren ‘to the Father’. ataren = atar ‘father’ + -e- stem vowel + -n dative
ending. With this dative ending cf. Tolkien’s explanation of enyalien in
“Cirion’s Oath”, UT: n.. See the analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v.
Ataremma. Cf. also the QL entry “Atar (-d) a more solemn word = father.
Usually [refers] to the st Person of Blessed Trinity” (PE:).
i yondon ‘to the Son’ = yondo ‘son’ + -n dative ending. e Etymologies s.v.
YŌ-, YON- ‘son’ gives Q. yondo of (presumably) the same meaning (V:).
Cf. also the QL entry “ION (form of Yon.) mystic name of God. nd Person
of Blessed Trinity” (PE:).
i airefean ‘to the Holy Spirit’ = aire ‘holy’ + fea ‘spirit’ + -n dative ending.
For aire ‘holy’ see the analysis of the Átaremma, line  s.v. aire. e Glossary
to the c.  Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth (published in Morgoth’s Ring)
lists both fëa “‘spirit’: the particular ‘spirit’ belonging to and ‘housed’ in any
one hröa of the Incarnates” and faire ‘spirit (in general)’ (X:). We are told
in another, contemporary text, where the two forms are cited as apparently
interchangeable, that “the ancient significance” of both was ‘radiance’ (X:),
and both are derived from a stem *phay- (the latter apparently via the
abstract suffix –re), itself to be identified with the Etymologies base PHAY-
‘radiate, send out rays of light’, whence Q. faire ‘radiance’ (V:). And
Tolkien’s notes to the latest (s?) version of Oilima Markirya list
faire ‘phantom; disembodied spirit, when seen as a pale shape’ (MC:).
(Note that both English fantasy and phantasm derive ultimately from an
Indo-European root *bha- meaning ‘to shine’.)
e QL has no such suitable root in *FAY-, but the rd Person of the
Blessed Trinity is referred to, as “Sā Fire, especially in temples, etc. A mystic
name identified with Holy Ghost” (PE: s.v. SAHA ‘be hot’). A similar
association of the Holy Spirit with fire is apparent throughout Tolkien’s
mythology; note for example the use of “e Flame Imperishable” as an
epithet for the Holy Spirit in the commentary on the Athrabeth (X:).
e association also occurs in Catholic theology, e.g. the Pentecostal Flame
(cf. Acts :–).
With the phrase faire aistan ‘to the Holy Spirit’, where the second word is
an attributive adjective aista ‘holy’ bearing the dative inflection, cf. Tolkien’s
explanation of Elendil Vorondo ‘of Elendil the Faithful’ in “Cirion’s Oath”
that “adjectives used as a ‘title’ or frequently used attribute of a name are
placed aer the name, and as is usual in Quenya in the case of two declinable
names in apposition only the last is declined” (UT:,  n.). Cf. also the
discussion of aistana ‘blessed’ in line  of AM I–II.
Page  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  January 

e forms aire and aista, both used here to mean ‘holy’, are evidenced in
and joined by a complex of related but contrastive etymologies spanning
decades of Tolkien’s conceptual evolution of his languages. e QL has
the entry AYA ‘honour, revere’, whence aire ‘saint’ (f.) and aista ‘honour,
reverence’ (PE:); while in the Etymologies we find aire ‘sea’ derived from
AYAR-, AIR- ‘sea’ (V:), and aista ‘to dread’ from GÁYAS- ‘fear’ (V:). All
these forms and concepts might seem hopelessly disparate and unrelated; but
that Tolkien in fact related them formally and semantically is indicated by
an extensive note to the very late (c. ) text e Shibboleth of Fëanor, in
which is given a Common Eldarin stem GAYA ‘awe, dread’, whence not only
Telerin and Sindarin words for ‘terror, great fear’ and names for the Great Sea
(e.g., Belegaer), but also the Quenya forms áya ‘awe, profound reverence and
sense of one’s own littleness in the presence of things or persons majestic and
powerful’, aira ‘holy’, and airë ‘sanctity’ (XII: n.).
tambe ‘as’. See the discussion of this word in the analysis of the Átaremma,
line  s.v. tér.
enge ‘it was’ = sg. pa.t. of ëa ‘be, exist’ (cf. X:). e (present-tense)
verb ëa had prehistorically the form *eña, as is shown by a statement in the
excluded portion of Appendix D to the essay Quendi and Eldar, in which
Tolkien says: “e former presence of intervocalic ñ, later lost in Quenya,
could be detected by consideration of the relations between tëa ‘indicates’
and tenge ‘indicated’, tengwe ‘sign’, and comparison with ëa ‘exists’ beside
engwe ‘thing’” (VT:–). e past-tense form enge arose from earlier *eññe,
a past-tense stem derived from *eña by the common past-tense derivational
technique of infixion of the homorganic nasal (i.e., n, ñ, or m, depending on
the quality of the following consonant) and substitution of the past-tense
stem vowel -e for present-tense -a (as, for example, in öante < *áwa-n-tē, the
past tense form of auta- ‘go away’ < *AWA, XI:).
i ‘the’.
et is perhaps the start of a Quenya word translating Latin principio,
English “beginning”, that would presumably have had a locative ending (-sse)
translating “in”. Cf. the base ET- ‘forth, out’ whence Q. prefix et- (V:).
Historical note:
e final form of the Gloria Patri (also called the Doxologia Minor) became
fixed in the th century. Together with the Pater Noster and the Ave Maria, its
recital completes each decade of the Rosary.
Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Sicut erat in principio, et
nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. As
it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without
end. Amen.
January  Vinyar Tengwar · Number  Page 

Resources
e following are just some of the resources available for the study of
Tolkien’s invented languages. For a more complete list, visit the Resources for
Tolkienian Linguistics web page at the URL listed below.

Primers
An Introduction to Elvish, edited by Jim Allan. (Somerset: Bran’s Head Books,
. ISBN ---). A venerable but still indispensable primer of
Tolkienian linguistics. ItE is available for . (. for US orders;
prices include postage) from the bookseller ornton’s of Oxford,  Broad
Street, Oxford OX AR, England. Tel. -, fax -,
e-mail [email protected]
Basic Quenya, by Nancy Martsch. Second edition. Quenya for beginners!
Twenty-two lessons, plus Quenya–English / English–Quenya vocabulary.
 plus postage: USA st class , book rate .; Canada airmail ,
surface .; Europe airmail , surface .. Make checks payable to
Nancy Martsch, P.O. Box , Sherman Oaks, CA , USA.

Dictionaries and Concordances

A Working Concordance, A Working English Lexicon, A Working Reverse
Dictionary (with or without meanings), A Working Reverse Index, A
Working Reverse Glossary. A Working Tolkien Glossary (in  volumes), A
Comprehensive Index of Proper Names and Places, available in printed form
and on disk (DOS format) from Paul Nolan Hyde,  Jean Parrish Ct.
NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico , USA.

Journals
Parma Eldalamberon. A journal of linguistic studies of fantasy literature,
especially of the Elvish languages and names in the works of J.R.R.
Tolkien. Editor: Christopher Gilson,  Miller Avenue , Cupertino,
CA , USA; e-mail [email protected]. Parma is an occasional journal,
sold on a per-issue basis. Write for current information.
Quettar. e Bulletin of the Linguistic Fellowship of e Tolkien Society.
Editor: Julian Bradfield. Subscriptions to: the Editor at Univ. of Edinburgh,
Dept. of Computer Science, King’s Buildings, Edinburgh EH JZ, UK;
e-mail [email protected]. Write for current status and rates.

Resources for Tolkienian Linguistics web page

For more information, including links to Internet mailing lists and web sites
devoted to Tolkienian linguistics, visit:
http://www.elvish.org/resources.html
 inyar engwar
e journal of the Elvish Linguistic Fellowship,
a Special Interest Group of the Mythopoeic Society.
http://www.elvish.org/VT
Vinyar Tengwar is a refereed journal indexed by the Modern Language Association.

Editor: Carl F. Hostetter,  Ambling Circle, Croon, MD , USA.

E-mail: [email protected]
Review panel: Ivan Derzhanski, Christopher Gilson, Arden Smith, & Patrick Wynne.
Cover design: by Patrick Wynne.
Subscriptions: A six-issue subscription costs  for US delivery,  for delivery to
Canada and South America, and  for delivery elsewhere (via airmail).
Subscription status page: http://www.elvish.org/members.html
Back issues: All back issues are perpetually available at the current per-issue
subscription price:  USA, . Canada and South America,  elsewhere.
Deduct  if ordering  or more back issues. For a complete list of the contents
of VT to date, visit:
http://www.elvish.org/VT/contents.html
Payments: All payments must be in US dollars. Make checks payable to Carl
Hostetter.
Submissions: All material should in some manner deal with Tolkien’s invented
languages. All submissions must be typed, or must be exquisitely legible: the
editor will not decipher lower-glyphics. e editor reserves the right to edit
any material (except artwork) for purposes of clarity, brevity, and relevance.
Ilúvatar smiles upon submissions by e-mail in Microso Word, RTF, or plain
text (ASCII) formats.
Copyright of all material submitted is retained by the author or artist, but VT reserves
the right to reprint the material at any time. Acknowledgement that original material
subsequently reprinted elsewhere first appeared in VT would be a welcome courtesy.
Quotations from the works of J.R.R. or Christopher Tolkien are copyright of their
publishers and/or the Tolkien Estate. All other material is © Vinyar Tengwar.

Bibliographical Abbreviations
H e Hobbit IV e Shaping of Middle-earth
LR e Lord of the Rings V e Lost Road
R e Road Goes Ever On VI e Return of the Shadow
TC A Tolkien Compass VII e Treason of Isengard
S e Silmarillion VIII e War of the Ring
UT Unfinished Tales IX Sauron Defeated
L e Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien X Morgoth’s Ring
MC e Monsters and the Critics XI e War of the Jewels
I e Book of Lost Tales, Part One XII e Peoples of Middle-earth
II e Book of Lost Tales, Part Two PE Parma Eldalamberon
III e Lays of Beleriand VT Vinyar Tengwar
Page references are to the standard hardcover/trade paperback edition unless otherwise noted.