How old was Gimli when...

[Etharius]

He went to Valinor with the Elf?

[samwise8504]

he was 139 during the war of the ring so he would of been 261 when he went to valinor i think

[Legolas]

Born 2879 of the Third Age, left 120 of the Fourth Age.

The Third Age extended to 3021, so he was ~142 when the ringbearers left. samwise8504 is right - 120 years later he would've been ~261-262 depending on what time of year he was born.

[Pippinn]

But we readers don't know if Legolas and Gimli reached Valinor. It's never said.

[Legolas]

Sure we do. They did reach Aman.

[Lobelia]

Actually, we don't know. All it says is that they set off. Probably it's implied that they got there, but it doesn't actually say so. I remember coming across a piece of fan fiction that said they set off, but ran into a storm and were drowned. "Hang on, hang on," I thought and had another look at the Appendices ... but no, it only said they set off. Likewise with Sam - it said there was a tradition in his family that he went, not that he actually did. The only member of the Fellowship we know for sure made it is Frodo, because it describes his arrival in the novel. :)

[Legolas]

Actually, we do know. Tolkien said they did.

Frodo, Sam, Bilbo, and Gimli made it (http://www.barrowdowns.com/faq_mortalsinv.asp) .

[The Saucepan Man]

Just because Tolkien told us in his Letters, it doesn't mean that we have to accept it (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=10593&page=5). ;)

Although I am inclined to. :)

[Legolas]

In that line of thinking, nor does Tolkien writing that the Fellowship was made of four hobbits, two men, a wizard, a dwarf, and an elf mean that you have to accept it.

Depends on if you go by what Tolkien wrote, or what you wish his story to be like. I am 'inclined' to the first, since he wrote it and I didn't. ;) :rolleyes:

As adequately explained by Sharku,

I see no point whatsoever, in any form of literary research, to question a 'fact' Tolkien gave us, within or without the fiction, since anything relating to the Legendarium is necessarily part of the fiction. What would be the point of denying the authority of a quote such as the one from the Letters, explaining that Sauron was of human form? One might get a different idea of Sauron when reading the books, and that in itself is interesting, but the fact is part of the whole. If a reader refuses to acknowledge certain parts of a work of fiction (or actual fact, for that matter), there's nothing I can do about it, but that person's position in a discussion forum is difficult to say the least. Conversely, I doubt someone with a clear idea of his own which one is unwilling to give up would ask such a question anyway.

So...Tolkien said they made it and died peacefully sometime later. Whether you believe him is up to you, but there's little significance in not believing him outside of your own head.

[The Saucepan Man]

In that line of thinking, nor does Tolkien writing that the Fellowship was made of four hobbits, two men, a wizard, a dwarf, and an elf mean that you have to accept it. Why would I not accept that? It's in the book.

I differ from Sharkey in making a distinction between the texts finalised and published by Tolkien in his lifetime and his other materials (in particular his Letters).


... there's little significance in not believing him outside of your own head. My head is significant to me. ;)

[Legolas]

In that thought, the author said so with no intention of changing his mind. Why would you question it? The issue lies within your difference with Tolkien, not Sharku. The book was published with his knowledge; also with his knowledge, he sent those letters out to readers who would undoubtedly share their findings with others who had read the book. The book is not a self-contained book. It has a own story that can stand on its own, but the nature of the book does not allow everything to be told inside it - that does not mean matters not contained were not already settled. It's part of a legendarium created by Tolkien. Not accepting something written in the History of Middle-earth would be more acceptable because many of those matters remain unsettled...the Letters are entirely different. Those quoted in my article linked to above are final decisions communicated to readers after the publishing of the book. Nowhere is there any doubt or incompleteness shown, or chance of Tolkien changing his mind on the matter. Your head is significant (and brilliant, no doubt, in some ways), but in such a matter, differing in opinion with Tolkien about what happens in his created world still matters little outside of it.

Still remains..."I see no point whatsoever, in any form of literary research, to question a 'fact' Tolkien gave us, within or without the fiction, since anything relating to the Legendarium is necessarily part of the fiction. What would be the point of denying the authority of a quote such as the one from the Letters, explaining that Sauron was of human form?"

[The Saucepan Man]

Legolas, as far as this thread goes, we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one since we are veering wildly off-topic. But, if you do want to continue this dicussion, I will be happy to do so on the Canonicity (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=10593&page=1&pp=40) thread, where we have been kicking this issue (and many others) round for some weeks now.

I do agree that, when one comes to a discussion board such as this, one should acknowledge Tolkien's further thoughts and interpretations on his own published works (assuming that one is aware of them), even if one does not accept them. And I also accept that one will be in some difficulty arguing one's case where the purpose of the thread is to discover Tolkien's intentions on a particular issue (although that need not necessarily be the purpose of a topic).

And, just to reiterate, I am inclined to agree with Tolkien that Legolas and Gimli reached Aman. ;) :D