The differences between Elves and Men

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I've been wondering what the physical differences between Elves and Men were.
I mean, beside ears of course.
Thanks.

[Kuruharan]

Actually, there is disagreement over whether elves had pointed ears or not.

[Veritas]

As Eru said in the Silmarillion, the elves were created 'looking like' the Valar, beautiful, smart, magical powers, immortal etc. But the men were mortal, driven to discover things, and more influenceble than the elves, who were more 'at themselves'.
The elves knew much more, but the staid more at home, never showing themsleves. The Fellowship of the ring were almost the first non-elves who entered Lothlorien.
The men were more expanding people, with great empires like Gondor and Rohan.
There is thus a great difference between elves and men.

[piosenniel]

Elves were a very tall people, graceful, skilled, light on their feet, with exceedingly keen senses attuned to the world about them.

Some of these attributes were passed on to the race of Men when Elves and Men had families together. So, saying - Elves and Men must have shared the same physiology for them to be able to reproduce with each other.

Veritas -- Hi! Nice picture!!

[Keeper-of-Vilya]

Elves were tall, graceful, beautiful, swift, wise, powerful, regal, attune to nature, lovers of the earth, and were imortal.
They were also more resistant to evil, temptation, and being swayed than men were. In comparison Elrond was right to some degree - Men are weak. At least some of them... smilies/smile.gif

[MallornLeaf]

It never actually said that elves had pointed easrs. . . that's just a stereotype of our society. Elves were tall, fair, and like the valar. Men (as I always imagined) were more "scruffy", not as fair, and obviously not as tall.

[Elrian]

It never actually said that elves had pointed easrs. . . that's just a stereotype of our society
In one of Tolkiens letters he states that Elves had leaf shaped ears. Most leaves come to a point, or points.

[TarElendil]

If u read the sil, it says that the physical traits of the two races were much alike in the first age. In the third age it was the time of the waning of the elves and Men were now become more powerful, thought not in all instances wiser.

[TarElendil]

oh, and the "not as tall" comment earlier.
maybe so if you compare the Men of the First age with the elves of the Noldor. The Noldor were come out of Valinor.
Numenoreans were very tall compared to other men and taller than most elves, as well as stronger.

[akhtene]

As the Elves avakened under the light of stars, that light ever after shone from their eyes.
The Elves were immortal and ageless, though they could be killed or die of great grief. Otherwise they never knew sickness or grow weak with age.

[Eol]

Elian: what letter was that statement found in and when in comparison to his books? He also did not specify what type of leaf according to your quote. For all we know they rounded. Ears or no ears, it does not really matter.

As far as physical differences, I feel there would be little between the Men and the Elves. I recalled reading that tolkien did not want the stereo type of the fantasy characters, expecially with the elves. He never reached the point of not using "elf" , "drawf", or "human". So the elves are fair. In comparison to what? Yes were read of stars and stuff, but translate this into laymens terms?

Whatever physical differences that may exsist, it cannot take away from the mindset and emotions that is shared between the Men and the Elves. That is the thing that we should more be concerned about, you would have a better converstation, one that is a bit more mature.

[Elrian]

There's actually a thread on it, so here's the link. Pointy Ears (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000905)

[Lush]

Oh it's easy, the former is desirable, the latter is tolerable.... smilies/biggrin.gif

I mean...I'm kidding. Right?

[Fingolfin of the Noldor]

In one of Tolkiens letters he states that Elves had leaf shaped ears. Most leaves come to a point, or points.

Actually I believe you are thinking of the linguistic connection between "lhaw" and "las." in the etymologies.

The only thing which, i believe, is stated in the letters is that hobbits have slightly pointed "elvish" ears. whether this is a reference to the quendi or rather traditional elves is a matter of debate.

[Rose Cotton]

Elves were tall, fair, and like the valar.

And who says the valar don't have pointy ears. I mean really, does it matter what shape their ears are. They could be shaped like bat wings and it would not make any difference. Were battles won because of the apperence of the elves? I'm sorry if I sound rude. I indeed believe that the elves have pointy ears and even think that hobbits may have a small point too. But I don't think we will get far by debating this. It's the same thing with balrogs.

I think that there is a "magical" presence around the elves that few men have. And when I say magic I don't mean abra kadabra. It's like what's said in the LotR in Lothlorien. It's a deep sort of magic that can't really be seen.

If there's any magic about, it's right down deep, where I can't lay my hands on it, in a manner of speaking.-Sam

Does that make sence?

Actually I see alot of simmalarites between elves and men. I am right now making my way through the Silmalarion. And the elves act alot like I would expect men to. Anyway, that's my two cents. smilies/biggrin.gif

[Beleglas]

Men are taller and broader then elves, elves are slimmer and have a more sophisticated sort of humour and song.

[TarElendil]

Men are taller and broader then elves, elves are slimmer and have a more sophisticated sort of humour and song.
In most cases elves of the first age were taller than men. Numenoreans were taller than most elves, but the late second age and third age was the waning time of the elves.
more sophisticated sort of humour? not really... song? prolly, especially the sindar elves..

[Guinevere]

Mae govannen !

I`m in the middle of reading the Silmarillion, just like Rose Cotton. And there I get quite a different impression of the elves than from LotR. Just like Rose is saying, the elves act much more like ancient human heroes. They have vices and weaknesses and some have even a nasty character. I really started asking myself what the difference between elves and men are, apart from the immortality.??

In LotR the elves seem much more different from men, they are more spirital and have a mysterious, magical aura. And none of them is wicked. They appear to me like a link between the valar and men.

How can this be explained?
Perhaps because "their wisdom waxed from age to age" and by the time of the third age they must have accumulated a lot of wisdom...? and the wicked ones have long ago met their doom and are no more in Middle-earth.
Does anyone have a better explanation ?

Suilad, Guinevere

[Daniel Telcontar]

When Tolkien wrote LOTR, I think he wanted the elves to be exotic and creatures without faults. Compared to the Sil, there are few elves in LOTR. In the Sil they are the dominant race, and I think he made them more human because it would make the story more interesting, and because they were no longer exotic beings, but rather everyday stuff.

[akhtene]

I can think of two explanations to that. It seems to me that the Lord of the Rings was written from the human (or shall i say mortals') point of view, so the elves are portrayed as an ancient, mystirious, somewhat superior race. The Silmarillion is more like elven cronicles and probably describes things as elves saw them.
Another thought, The Silmarillion describes the 'childhood and youth' of elven race (if it's possible to say so). The childhood -the time when elves were invited to Valinor, taught and cared for there. Youth - rebelling against all authorities, desire to do what they thought right, gaining experience and making mistakes (often deadly). And just because they were immortal they accumulated life experience and wisdom, it was not lost with every next generation, as it happens with men when only the wise learn on someone else's mistakes. And by the time of the Lord of the Rings the wicked had probably had enough time to get what they deserved or to repent and change their ways.
So I believe immortality (not just physiological, but ability to accumulate knowledge) is what made elves so different from men. And I suppose the same immortality eventually makes elves 'weary of the world' and so at some distance from it. Maybe the two races were not meant to be so differnt from the beginning, it just happened with time.

[Guinevere]

Thank you for your answers !

Akhtene, I like your theory of the childhood and youth of the elvenrace. Sounds very convincing!
In chapter 11 of the Sil.,Tolkien also writes:
"In those days they were more like to the bodies of Men, since they had not so long been inhabited by the fire of their spirit, which consumes them from within in the courses of time "

But, in those old days, how could you tell from the outside if a person was an elf or a Man , if they had no pointy ears ? Because the elves were "fair of face beyond the measure of Men" ? Well, that`s starting the discussion all over, and I guess there is no real answer to it.

Suilad, Guinevere

[arathorn]

oh, and the "not as tall" comment earlier.
maybe so if you compare the Men of the First age with the elves of the Noldor. The Noldor were come out of Valinor.
Numenoreans were very tall compared to other men and taller than most elves, as well as stronger.

Numenoreans weren't taller than the the Eldar:
They were called “halflings”; but this refers to the normal height of men of Númenórean descent and of the Eldar (especially those of Ñoldorin descent), which appears to have been about seven of our feet.’
'The Quendi were in origin a tall people. The Eldar (...) they were in general the stronger and taller members of the Elvish folk at that time. In Eldarin tradition it was said that even their women were seldom less than six feet in height; their full-grown elfmen no less than six and a half feet, while some of the great kings and leaders were taller.'
Numenoreans weren't stronger than the Eldar once they physically resemble the Eldar. Most men from the third-age couldn't see the difference between them:
"The Númenóreans ... are in constant communication with their ancient friends and allies, either in the bliss of Eressea, or in the kingdom of Gilgalad on the shores of Middle-earth. They became thus in appearance and even in powers of mind, hardly distinguishable from the Elves..."

[tom the eldest]

The elves are fairer than men,and much more agile,wiser,and also elves,particularly the noldor,can crafted many things that impossible to made by men.men,are more susceptible to corruption,but they still a powerful race.they are possibly stronger than elves,but their crafting skill are probably lower than the elves,seeing that they cant made a palantie,like fëanor does.men also less wise than the elves,and more arrogant.

[Lotrelf]

I find this passage very fascinating from The Silmarillion.
In those days Elves and Men were of like stature and strength of body, but the Elves had greater wisdom, and skill, and beauty; and those who had dwelt in Valinor and looked upon the Powers as much surpassed the Dark Elves in these things as they in turn surpassed the people of mortal race. Only to the realm of Doriath, whose queen Melian was of the kindred of Valar, did the Sindar come near to match the Calaquendi of the Blessed Realm.
Immortal were the Elves, and their wisdom waxed from age to age, and no sickness nor pestilence brought death to them. Their bodies indeed were of the stuff of Earth, and could be destroyed; and in those days they were more like to the bodies of Men, since they had not so long been inhabited by the fire of their spirit, which consumes them from within in the courses of time. But Men were more frail, more easily slain by weapon or mischance, and less easily healed; subject to sickness and many ills; and they grew old and died.
I think this sums up all.

[arathorn]

I find this passage very fascinating from The Silmarillion.

I think this sums up all.

Not really since Tolkien change his mind later.

[arathorn]

The elves are fairer than men,and much more agile,wiser,and also elves,particularly the noldor,can crafted many things that impossible to made by men.men,are more susceptible to corruption,but they still a powerful race.they are possibly stronger than elves,but their crafting skill are probably lower than the elves,seeing that they cant made a palantie,like fëanor does.men also less wise than the elves,and more arrogant.

Noldor elves are definitely stronger than men (average) only equaled by Numenoreans and some from the House of Hador.

[tom the eldest]

Turin turambar definitely surpassed ordinary elves in term of strengh.he take-out glaurung alone(although he died too).

[arathorn]

Turin turambar definitely surpassed ordinary elves in term of strengh.he take-out glaurung alone(although he died too).

Fully agreed Turin was maybe the strongest man ever and would definitely be on pair with the Noldor princes.
First Age eldar weren't inhumanly strong physically(except for the ones who have seen the light of the trees and gained more spiritual power such as Fingolfin in wrath) the difference is that the Eldar were like a man very tall but with a very good muscle distribution over the body(strong but perfectly balanced). So men are less perfect and shorter(average), then they would appear broader so some would say stronger. In the case of Numenoreans the same happened for they were also blessed by the Valar and were many times said to be tall and strong but still if you read Tal-Elmar tale you will see that some second age men probably descend the House of Haleth were broader than Tal-Elmar(Numenorean descendant) but definitely not stronger.

Here are some quotes that made me interpret that way:

'' But in the dim dusk of a winter's day there appeared suddenly among them a man, as it seemed, of great bulk and girth, cloaked and hooded in white...'' - This is a physical description of Beleg in comparison to the men that were following Túrin Turambar. But Beleg was known for his strength too so we can just understand that he's above average Eldar and also from average men, although the Noldor were in general a little larger in build.

In general the Sindar appear to have very closely resembled the Exiles, being dark-haired, strong and tall, but lithe." The History of Middle-earth, vol. XI, The War of the Jewels: "Quendi and Eldar,"

"The Númenóreans ... are in constant communication with their ancient friends and allies, either in the bliss of Eressea, or in the kingdom of Gilgalad on the shores of Middle-earth. They became thus in appearance and even in powers of mind, hardly distinguishable from the Elves..."

“…and they were tall and dark-haired and strong like fir-trees, and from them most of the Noldor later were sprung.

Felagund put forth all his power and burst his bonds; and he wrestled with the werewolf, and slew it with his hands and teeth. –Here Finrod was strong enough to burst his bonds to save Beren (one of the strongest men the tales tell and wasn't capable of escaping).

[Lotrelf]

Not really since Tolkien change his mind later.

What mind change? Will you please elaborate? I think the thoughts mentioned here are what I said in my post. I may be wrong--or I am. *shrug*

[arathorn]

What mind change? Will you please elaborate? I think the thoughts mentioned here are what I said in my post. I may be wrong--or I am. *shrug*

Only about their height the rest he probably maintained.

The sentence you came up with was written around - 1937.

They were called “halflings”; but this refers to the normal height of men of Númenórean descent and of the Eldar (especially those of Ñoldorin descent), which appears to have been about seven of our feet.’ - around 1968.

See the difference now? I hope I could help you.

[tom the eldest]

Im correcting myself.turin didnt die when he killed glaurung.rather,he passed out,and while he passed out ninielnienor killed herself.then after turin wake up glaurung tell him that his sister is dead with his last breayh,so turin killed himself.this show how strong turin is,he survive a confrontation with glaurung and kill it too.then he only passed out from exhaustion.

[arathorn]

Im correcting myself.turin didnt die when he killed glaurung.rather,he passed out,and while he passed out ninielnienor killed herself.then after turin wake up glaurung tell him that his sister is dead with his last breayh,so turin killed himself.this show how strong turin is,he survive a confrontation with glaurung and kill it too.then he only passed out from exhaustion.

I'm not saying Turin wasn't awesome but that was definitely not a direct confrontation since he cheap-shot the dragon with the mightiest sword ever.

[tom the eldest]

No,im not directing it at you,im just adding some information that i miss:D

[Galin]

What mind change? Will you please elaborate? I think the thoughts mentioned here are what I said in my post. I may be wrong--or I am. *shrug*

You are not wrong in my opinion Lotrelf, since to my mind this description is very sweeping and very general [Men versus Elves] and I think it means to very generally ward off the idea of a notable difference in height, according to modern conceptions [see below].

Also, Arathorn has noted that this text appears in the Quenta Silmarillion of the later 1930s -- and it does, but it was also never revised by JRRT himself much later...

... the description occurs in Quenta Silmarillion section 85, and in the 1950s [early 1950s] Tolkien altered the following sentence within this same section: 'Only in the realm of Doriath...' for example, and made another change in wording elsewhere in section 85. And in the later 1950s Tolkien again seemingly looks at this section and brackets in pencil three passages concerning the 'mortality' of the Elves...

... again these revised passages and later bracketing [suggesting further revision at least], made at different times, both appear in section 85, but the passage you quoted about height is left alone and is employed by Christopher Tolkien for the 1977 Silmarillion. One could argue that Tolkien 'missed' this like height description in section 85, and hadn't truly updated the whole section, or that he hadn't revised it because he hadn't revised it 'yet'...

... but I think it's something that doesn't need correction in any case, and I think it's because...

... Tolkien knows he is working against a modern or Victorian conception of 'Elves' as fairies who can hide behind flower petals, and given that, of 'like height' has plenty of room for later, more specific details.

I would even suggest that this passage is the result of evolution from the very early comparison: 'Men were almost of a stature at first with Elves, the fairies being far greater and Men smaller than now;...' From The Book of Lost Tales, which idea changed, but even in the 1960s and early 1970s Tolkien still knows his readers are going to associate, or at least might naturally associate, 'modern ideas' when they encounter the word Elves.

I note Tolkien's description that the fairies were far greater, to get them closer to Men, and that Men were smaller than 'now', in other words, we are looking at an alteration from both sides, so to speak, but a notable one on the Elvish side, to get the Elves closer in stature to Men -- even though Men are generally larger than Elves according to certain other texts from this same [generally speaking] 'early' phase, including a notable comparison to the Elves being compared to mannish children!

Leaving aside the Cottage of Lost Play here, of course Tolkien's Elves went [externally speaking] from, if not as small as Victorian fairies, from seemingly somewhat small in The Book of Lost Tales to rather tall according to later ideas, post-Lord the Rings, but even in The Lord of the Rings Appendices Tolkien can be seen 'warding off' modern notions connected with the term Elves [his comment about wings for instance]...

... and I think this passage you quoted still has some of that behind it. In my opinion it's not meant to be precise, but to aid in letting the reader know that we are not here dealing with the Elves of popular fancy.

[mhagain]

Tolkien's final words on the matter seem to have been expressed in his author's commentary to the Athrabeth Fonrod ah Andreth (HoME 10):

There are certain things in this world that have to be accepted as 'facts'. The existence of Elves: that is of a race of beings closely akin to Men, so closely indeed that they must be regarded as physically (or biologically) simply branches of the same race.

So there we have it: physically and biologically Elves and Men are the same species (Eruhini), and any differences between them (on the purely physical or biological level) are merely nothing more than common intra-species variation.

Some of the common tropes about Elves are not even suggested, or even outright denied, by Tolkien's work. That they're can't get drunk is false: Galion did. That they're immune to poison is false: Aredhel died of poisoning.

Of course outside of the physical and biological aspects there are other differences.

[cellurdur]

The differences are that Elves are more in tune with this world. They have 'magic' tougher bodies and can also control their bodies better.

In terms of physical characteristics Elves are taller, more beautiful and much, much stronger. They also tend to be more agile.

The Noldor were generally taller than the Sindar.

The exceptions to this are the Numenoreans and the House of Hador, who are the tallest and strongest. Descendants of Earendil also had 'magic'.

[arathorn]

The differences are that Elves are more in tune with this world. They have 'magic' tougher bodies and can also control their bodies better.

In terms of physical characteristics Elves are taller, more beautiful and much, much stronger. They also tend to be more agile.

The Noldor were generally taller than the Sindar.

The exceptions to this are the Numenoreans and the House of Hador, who are the tallest and strongest. Descendants of Earendil also had 'magic'.

That's pretty much everything in physical terms. Nice post!!!

But don't forget you are talking about the Eldar, Silvan elves tend to be shorter and weaker.
Agreed the average Numenoreans and some Hadoreans could reach even the Eldar Noldor strength.
The Noldor were also somewhat larger than the Teleri.

[tom the eldest]

Tolkien's final words on the matter seem to have been expressed in his author's commentary to the Athrabeth Fonrod ah Andreth (HoME 10):



So there we have it: physically and biologically Elves and Men are the same species (Eruhini), and any differences between them (on the purely physical or biological level) are merely nothing more than common intra-species variation.

Some of the common tropes about Elves are not even suggested, or even outright denied, by Tolkien's work. That they're can't get drunk is false: Galion did. That they're immune to poison is false: Aredhel died of poisoning.

Of course outside of the physical and biological aspects there are other differences.


Isnt galion get drunk because the wine of dorwinion is so strong?

[IxnaY AintsaY]

Felagund put forth all his power and burst his bonds; and he wrestled with the werewolf, and slew it with his hands and teeth. –Here Finrod was strong enough to burst his bonds to save Beren (one of the strongest men the tales tell and wasn't capable of escaping).

One of the most riveting moments in The Silmarillion for me. I've always seen this as being a feat of spirit or maybe "magic" rather than strength, but I'll admit that brutish muscle is a much simpler explanation. Put Turin or Fingolfin in the same situation and with the same wording, and I'd probably view it the same as you, so it may just be my preconception of Finrod.

Where is Beren described as especially strong? It might be implied by the Leap of Beren--anything else?

[arathorn]

One of the most riveting moments in The Silmarillion for me. I've always seen this as being a feat of spirit or maybe "magic" rather than strength, but I'll admit that brutish muscle is a much simpler explanation. Put Turin or Fingolfin in the same situation and with the same wording, and I'd probably view it the same as you, so it may just be my preconception of Finrod.

Where is Beren described as especially strong? It might be implied by the Leap of Beren--anything else?

Well this is a feat of both physical strength and spiritual. While physically Turin was a match for Fingolfin in my opinion he didn't have the spirit to be above someone that was taken to be a Vala himself.
The preconception about elves being less in build and strength than men is very common don't worry since in others "cultures" they really are, even for Tolkien in the beginning the elves were shorter and slimmer than men. Finrod although far from being the strongest of the princes he's still above even the Noldor average(in strength).
Beren was many times described as being especially strong in the Silmarillion, The Peoples of Middle Earth vol. XII and in the LOTR - Remember Boromir talking about the strength of Turin and Beren(both Edain) instead of talking about some great and tall Numenorean which he descent and probably had more information since both were from the first age.

[arathorn]

Isnt galion get drunk because the wine of dorwinion is so strong?

Yes and poison was made by an elf, so what Tolkien was trying to say is that things that were made by humans such as their wines and poisons weren't capable of affecting the elves in the same way.

[tom the eldest]

The differences are that Elves are more in tune with this world. They have 'magic' tougher bodies and can also control their bodies better.

In terms of physical characteristics Elves are taller, more beautiful and much, much stronger. They also tend to be more agile.

The Noldor were generally taller than the Sindar.

The exceptions to this are the Numenoreans and the House of Hador, who are the tallest and strongest. Descendants of Earendil also had 'magic'.

What about the silvan,teleri and vanyar?

[arathorn]

What about the silvan,teleri and vanyar?

Just look at my last comment about what the said. and Sindar=Teleri.

[IxnaY AintsaY]

Well this is a feat of both physical strength and spiritual. While physically Turin was a match for Fingolfin in my opinion he didn't have the spirit to be above someone that was taken to be a Vala himself.
The preconception about elves being less in build and strength than men is very common don't worry since in others "cultures" they really are, even for Tolkien in the beginning the elves were shorter and slimmer than men.

By "my preconception" I only meant mine of Finrod himself. (Not that I think of him as 110 lb. weakling either.:))

As far as the general question of Elven physical strength relative to that of men goes, my casual opinion is that the former would tend to be greater than the latter, on average* but still within the scope of the recognizably "human"-- recognizable in a fable that is, if not in a scientific article.

There'd be heroic paragons and exceptions among both kindreds, of course.

*Even excepting the elderly, ill, and infirm among the mortals.


...although far from being the strongest of the princes he's still above even the Noldor average(in strength).

Citations needed? ;)

Beren was many times described as being especially strong in the Silmarillion, The Peoples of Middle Earth vol. XII


Ah, I do see the footnote in "Of Dwarves and Men" in the latter now, thank you.

and in the LOTR - Remember Boromir talking about the strength of Turin and Beren(both Edain) instead of talking about some great and tall Numenorean which he descent and probably had more information since both were from the first age.

I think you must mean the narrator describing the wounding of Shelob:

"The blade scored it with a dreadful gash, but those hideous folds could not be pierced by any strength of men, not though Elf or Dwarf should forge the steel or the hand of Beren or of Turin wield it."

That's a good catch. Thank you.

[tom the eldest]

I think that among the elves there are also differences.the noldor are the one that has the most crafting skill,and they are very thirsty of knowledge.this is why they can made the palatir,silmaril,and the ring of power with the aid of annatar,and that why morgoth and sauron both target them.the vanyar have less crafting skill i think,but they are the most loyal to the valar.the teleri,meh they are average quality.the elves also has different taste of weapon.the noldor likes sword and shield,the teleri like bow and arrow,and the vanyar like spear.there are also hierarchy in the three house of elves right?


ADD:the vanyar skill is in poetry,and manwe and varda love them because of this.the teleri like building ships,but they stil pretty much average joe for me.

[arathorn]

Actually the Sindar liked long-bows and axes.
The Silvan liked short-bows and long-knives.

[arathorn]

Citations needed? ;)

Finrod was never mentioned as a warrior like Fingolfin, Fingon,or Maedhros and all of them have descriptions of their mighty while Finrod only about how wise he was.
In my pinion if Fingon fought the wolf instead the history would have been different.

[tom the eldest]

Actually the Sindar liked long-bows and axes.
The Silvan liked short-bows and long-knives.

Huh,they did?but they stil of telerinian descent right?i guess they get more diverse in selection of weapons.but yeah,the three main elves kind like spear,bow or sword and shield.

[arathorn]

Huh,they did?but they stil of telerinian descent right?i guess they get more diverse in selection of weapons.but yeah,the three main elves kind like spear,bow or sword and shield.

In my opinion this has nothing to do with their sub-race mentality.
Mirkwood is a very dense forest and a long-bow wouldn't be a good a idea just as a big sword or a spear, but in the battle of the five armies they used spears for the battle was in the open.
Lorien they used long-bows because the forest wasn't very dense(some huge mallorn tress) and there were some Sindar and Noldor that always used that weapons during the ages.

[mhagain]

Yes and poison was made by an elf, so what Tolkien was trying to say is that things that were made by humans such as their wines and poisons weren't capable of affecting the elves in the same way.

Are you quite sure that Tolkien actually said that? I can get very drunk on incredibly strong wine too, but that doesn''t give me immunity to weaker wines.

Huh,they did?but they stil of telerinian descent right?i guess they get more diverse in selection of weapons.but yeah,the three main elves kind like spear,bow or sword and shield.

The Silvan were mostly descended from the Nandor, who were mostly of Telerin origin but had picked up some Avari on the way to Beleriand (per the note CT cites in his commentary on GA38).

What's interesting about the Avari is that according to Quendi and Eldar they were evenly divided between the Second and Third clans, so the seemingly common assumption that all Avari were Teleri in origin doesn't hold true. A further note in Quendi and Eldar states:

The first Avari that the Eldar met again in Beleriand seem to have claimed to be Tatyar

With the Tatyar being, of course, the Second Clan, and these Avari therefore actually being kin to the Noldor.

What all of this establishes is that some of the Silvan Elves were very probably Tatyar in origin, descended from those who the Nandor picked up before they entered Beleriand and who were likely to have been those first who the Eldar met (and note that Tolkien is careful to say "Eldar", not "Noldor" here, so this could just as easily be Thingol's folk).

[Galin]

I think the issue with the Avari, and even the true meaning of the term Eldar, depends upon which citation one employs.

Not unlike the issue of Eldarin height, although I already know what I'm going to get if I make the seemingly impossible claim that maybe not every 'late' description Tolkien wrote about Eldarin height was meant to be fused into one concept. Ahem.

:p

It's once again sifting among [mostly] draft texts, with certain ideas arguably revised, others made uncertain by a 'lack' of mention perhaps, still others written years after something else, made all somewhat nice and tidy by Christopher Tolkien, for us, but who knows what Tolkien had in front of him when he was creating a 'new' text years after he had written something related...

... I put author-published description in a strong postion. We are looking for a measure of certainty it seems, at least often enough , and despite even Tolkien's penchant for change, which arose even with respect to already published text [for example publishing that Galadriel's father was named Finrod, then (second edition) changing it to Finarfin], author-published is as 'certain' as we can get in my opinion... with even Tolkien illustrating that he is revising a different animal, if so.


Anyway there is text in [I]Of Dwarves And Men which suggests that the idea of Avari in Beleriand was rejected; and late text in which the Tawarwaith, or Silvan Elves, of Mirkwood are simply noted as Telerin Elves in origin, hardly to be distinguished from Avari.

But that seems to distinguish them to the reader! And it's later description than Quendi and Eldar, and again, the Avari of Beleriand seem abandoned according to Of Dwarves And Men... sooo, what of Avari in the Anduin Vale however? Abandoned idea or back to Quendi And Eldar for that much? In any case the Avari are not mentioned outside of the remark I referred to, so read it as is, and arguably there's no real reason to think any Avari, Tatyarin or Nelyarin, had mixed in by Frodo's day.

Or is there? Not that I recall. Again if we toss in a text made years before, then we have the concept rather certainly. But that's a different matter... again keeping in mind that that text has the Avari in Beleriand!

And then there's the tantalizing notion [published by Tolkien] that the Silvan Elves of Lorien sail Over Sea. Hmm, would Avari sail? Could they sail? Was it only the Silvan Elves of Telerin origin that sailed, although that is never stated in the published account itself... it's just implied that the Silvan Elves in general could sail Over Sea if desired.

Mix and match. Hey it's not like I don't do it too, or think it's wrongheaded in every case. Tolkien, after all, need not be confined to tell his full 'tale', or explain every matter fully, within each and every text, for the other side of the coin here.

I'm just sayin'.... maybe a little less certainty with respect to some of these height and strength issues?

Or nah. What fun is that ;)

And I won't even go into the definition of Eldar... although one of these passages is Tolkien-published. Huzzah.

[mhagain]

<snip>awesome</snip>

Nail on the head.

The key problem is : "which writings do you accept?" You can't accept all of them because they contradict each other. CT acknowledges this and gives ample warning as early as his foreword to the Silmarillion.

A complete consistency (either within the compass of The Silmarillion itself or between The Silmarillion and other published writings of my father's) is not to be looked for, and could only be achieved, if at all at heavy and needless cost.You can't accept none of them because then you'd have no history and we may as well go back to having fun bad-mouthing Peter Jackson.

So you have to accept some of them, and once again CT puts it best:

Moreover, my father came to conceive The Silmarillion as a compilation, a compendious narrative, made long afterwards from sources of great diversity (poems, and annals, and oral tales) that had survived in agelong tradition; and this conception has indeed its parallel in the actual history of the book, for a great deal of earlier prose and poetry does underlie it, and it is to some extent a compendium in fact and not only in theory.So you need to work on the basis that you're dealing with writings that are going to contradict each other, that aren't going to give the full story, and that sometimes you're going to have to piece together a story that works for you from multiple different sources.

Reading the Silmarillion is to a large extent like reading a popular history account of ancient Mesopotamia. You know that decades or centuries of work deciphering ancient writings, putting together evidence, and trying to present what in the end only amounts to a current consensus underlies it, but it still has value on it's own and is still worth reading if you want to learn.

Arguing about content in HoME is like arguing over which of the Sumerian Kings List, the Epic of Gilgamesh or some merchants tablets from Nineveh contains the true account. It's fun to do for those of us who have an interest, but we need to do so with a keen awareness that we'll never really know. We're not arguing the case for fact, we're arguing the case for our own interpretation.

Both CT and JRRT this time:

Divergent versions need not indeed always be treated solely as a question of settling the priority of composition; and my father as "author" or "inventor" cannot always in these matters be distinguished from the "recorder" of ancient traditions handed down in diverse forms among different peoples through long ages (when Frodo met Galadriel in Lorien, more than sixty centuries had passed since she went east over the Blue Mountains from the ruin of Beleriand). "Of this two things are said, though which is true only those Wise could say who now are gone."

And I think that sums it up the best.

[arathorn]

Not unlike the issue of Eldarin height, although I already know what I'm going to get if I make the seemingly impossible claim that maybe not every 'late' description Tolkien wrote about Eldarin height was meant to be fused into one concept. Ahem.



HAHAHAHA!!!! that was good but is still hard to understand why do you prefer to create divergences.

[arathorn]

I think one of the hardest things ever in Tolkien's work is about who is and who is not an Eldar. And why are the avari weaker than the Edar if they also Telerin in origin. And I also think the Nandor elves seemed to be less powerful than the Sindar but some would say they are exactly the same.

[IxnaY AintsaY]

Arguing about content in HoME is like arguing over which of the Sumerian Kings List, the Epic of Gilgamesh or some merchants tablets from Nineveh contains the true account. It's fun to do for those of us who have an interest, but we need to do so with a keen awareness that we'll never really know. We're not arguing the case for fact, we're arguing the case for our own interpretation.

Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man. ;)

[arathorn]

Are you quite sure that Tolkien actually said that? I can get very drunk on incredibly strong wine too, but that doesn''t give me immunity to weaker wines.


I said that didn't affect them in the same way, not that doesn't affect them.
They can get drunk with men's wines but it takes more time.

[Galin]

HAHAHAHA!!!! that was good but is still hard to understand why do you prefer to create divergences.

I thought you might enjoy that ;)

Anyway I wouldn't say I prefer to create divergences, but rather if I read two draft texts which even seemingly [or arguably] conflict, while I might be able to imagine a way in which they can be read as consistent, I feel I am also bound to at least consider that Tolkien might have been revising, changing his mind and creating a variant idea... or simply writing something new, perhaps having forgotten what he wrote possibly years before.

But for another example: when I have two descriptions published by the author that seem to be problematic, unless I have reason to think an arguable internal conflict is purposeful, then I am often the first to try to imagine how they can be said to be consistent, or consistent enough, or find some sort of 'internal-ish' explanation.

Divergent versions need not indeed always be treated solely as a question of settling the priority of composition; and my father as "author" or "inventor" cannot always in these matters be distinguished from the "recorder" of ancient traditions handed down in diverse forms among different peoples through long ages (when Frodo met Galadriel in Lorien, more than sixty centuries had passed since she went east over the Blue Mountains from the ruin of Beleriand). "Of this two things are said, though which is true only those Wise could say who now are gone."

A nice enough way to look at things, but I also think some might take this 'too far' [subjective as that is], or employ it too loosely perhaps, essentially creating internal inconsistencies out of external revisions, and thus essentially 'undermining' the art of subcreation.

But that's a matter for another thread perhaps :D

[Galin]

I think one of the hardest things ever in Tolkien's work is about who is and who is not an Eldar.

Not if you take what Tolkien himself published as the answer, and put the problematic rest at the doorstep. Aha! A confident answer based upon my own ideas about canonical status!

:rolleyes:

Anyway the correct answer is: Eldar at first referred to all Elves, but then came to refer to those Elves who passed Over Sea during the Great March, plus the Sindar only!

The Silmarillion concept is 'wrong'. Debate is pointless. You will be assimilated, and so on. This post is something like ironic. But doesn't it just figure that I really think that 'should' be the answer, even still.

Oh well :D

[arathorn]

Not if you take what Tolkien himself published as the answer, and put the problematic rest at the doorstep. Aha! A confident answer based upon my own ideas about canonical status!

:rolleyes:

Anyway the correct answer is: Eldar at first referred to all Elves, but then came to refer to those Elves who passed Over Sea during the Great March, plus the Sindar only!

The Silmarillion concept is 'wrong'. Debate is pointless. You will be assimilated, and so on. This post is something like ironic. But doesn't it just figure that I really think that 'should' be the answer, even still.

Oh well :D
I always though in the same way you do.
So the Nandor aren't considered Eldar... That explains a lot.

[arathorn]

Exactly Galin for you to be write there must be to many possibilities:
1- Interpret the sentence in another possible way, so changing his mind.
2- It's only a "change" if it was written after 1968 and we don't know when it was.(another reason for not to trust the Authors)

[Galin]

I always though in the same way you do.
So the Nandor aren't considered Eldar... That explains a lot.

We agree? Well it had to happen sometime ;)

Yes The Lord of the Rings not only decribes the Eldar [as basically 'West-elves'] in Appendix F, the translation section, but in the language section describes the Silvan tongues as not-Eldarin [although not Eldarin doesn't necessarily mean Avarin].

And I know there are those who will correctly tell me that Tolkien was rushed in the early 1950s, with the Appendices and so on, but heck he did revise the thing in the 1960s too.

And even if so, I say that even JRRT has to deal with what he publishes about the Subcreated World, despite that sometimes the way he dealt with it was to revise it!

Now, about 'High Elves'... :runs:

[arathorn]

[QUOTE=Galin;691067]We agree? Well it had to happen sometime ;)

I think the only things we don't agree is about the Eldar height and maybe one aspect of their physical appearance since you may think they are slimmer than men.

[Galin]

But you might only disagree with what you think I may mean about slimness...

... so I'm not sure I agree that we necessarily disagree about that ;)

Although granted you said maybe.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

but in the language section describes the Silvan tongues as not-Eldarin [although not Eldarin doesn't necessarily mean Avarin]

In 'Quendi and Eldar' (1959-60) Nandorin (and thus its derivatives Ossiriandic and Silvan) is expressly stated to be of Lindarin/Telerin origin, and therefore Eldarin.

This had been a question mark ca. 1936, it seems, since in the 'Lhammas' (B-version) the tongue of the 'Danians' was "like that of Doriath, but not the same" (amended from the A-text in which it was wholly unlike the speech of the Eldar and Beleriandic Ilkorins). But then in 'Lammasethen' Danian appears as a 'middle Quendian', neither Eldarin nor 'Lemberin'/Avarin (however, Thingol's folk are there promoted to 'Eldar').



The footnote to Appendix F is interesting. It doesn't appear in the first draft of that Appendix, written before the Great Linguistic Upheaval ca. 1951-52. From that time we find in the Grey Annals, entry VY 1350, that the Nandor (there so named for the first time) were explicitly Teleri, and so their language was Eldarin.

The App F draft itself alters the Lammasethen conception and distinguishes between Eldarin, Lemberin and Avarin tongues, the Lembi or 'lingerers' at that time incorporating both the Sindar and the Danians/Nandor; the "many secret tongues" of the Avari are said not to come into the LR. At this time of course Lemberin of Doriath and the Vales of Anduin was of course not Sindarin, which didn't yet exist (or more accurately, the language existed but was still called Noldorin and came from Valinor).

But App F as published appears on the face of it to return to the old conception, West-elves of Valinor and Avarin East-elves! (except for the 'promotion' of the Sindar). Indeed, text F4 of the appendix, written after the GLU with Sindarin now ensconced as the native tongue of Beleriand, says in so many words that the native peoples of Lorien and Mirkwood, despite their Sindarin nobility, were Avari: "many were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to no summons to the Sea, but being content with Middle-earth remained there, and remained long after, fading in fastnesses of the woods and hills....Of that kind were the Elves of Greenwood the Great; yet among them also were many lords of Sindarin race. Such were Thranduil and Legolas his son. In his realm and in Lorien both the Sindarin and the woodland tongues were heard; but of the latter notrhing appears in this book."

[Galin]

(...) In 'Quendi and Eldar' (1959-60) Nandorin (and thus its derivatives Ossiriandic and Silvan) is expressly stated to be of Lindarin/Telerin origin, and therefore Eldarin. (...)

Yes, and no doubt this issue is made notably misty and more complex due to posthumously published texts.


But App F as published appears on the face of it to return to the old conception, West-elves of Valinor and Avarin East-elves! (except for the 'promotion' of the Sindar). Indeed, text F4 of the appendix, written after the GLU with Sindarin now ensconced as the native tongue of Beleriand, says in so many words that the native peoples of Lorien and Mirkwood, despite their Sindarin nobility, were Avari: "many were Eastern Elves that had hearkened to no summons to the Sea, but being content with Middle-earth remained there, and remained long after, fading in fastnesses of the woods and hills....Of that kind were the Elves of Greenwood the Great; yet among them also were many lords of Sindarin race. Such were Thranduil and Legolas his son. In his realm and in Lorien both the Sindarin and the woodland tongues were heard; but of the latter notrhing appears in this book."

Well put as I expected :)

But I would emphasize 'on the face of it', as the word Avari was not employed in the final form of any text in the Appendix F, and the distinction between West-Elves [Eldar] versus the East-elves is maintained...

... but who are the East-elves? Not that you said otherwise, but I think they don't have to be Avari according to the author-published description [nor do the Minyar have to be named the Vanyar necessarily, on the Eldarin side of this coin]. They could be Telerin, they could be Avarin, they could be a mix of Teleri and Avari, as they are some grouping of Elves that are yet distinct from the West-elves -- those Elves who passed Over Sea plus only the Sindar.

And so what remains once the mist of all this posthumous complexity is blown away? To my mind: most of the Elves of Lorien and Mirkwod are East-elves, not Eldar, nor their languages Eldarin.

Which JRRT not only decided to publish in the 1950s, but if he was unhappy with this scenario, he yet didn't revise it given the chance in the 1960s.

[Morthoron]

Yes, and no doubt this issue is made notably misty and more complex due to posthumously published texts.




Well put as I expected :)

But I would emphasize 'on the face of it', as the word Avari was not employed in the final form of any text in the Appendix F, and the distinction between West-Elves [Eldar] versus the East-elves is maintained...

... but who are the East-elves? Not that you said otherwise, but I think they don't have to be Avari according to the author-published description [nor do the Minyar have to be named the Vanyar necessarily, on the Eldarin side of this coin]. They could be Telerin, they could be Avarin, they could be a mix of Teleri and Avari, as they are some grouping of Elves that are yet distinct from the West-elves -- those Elves who passed Over Sea plus only the Sindar.

And so what remains once the mist of all this posthumous complexity is blown away? To my mind: most of the Elves of Lorien and Mirkwod are East-elves, not Eldar, nor their languages Eldarin.

Which JRRT not only decided to publish in the 1950s, but if he was unhappy with this scenario, he yet didn't revise it given the chance in the 1960s.

They were, perhaps, Keeblerin Elves: shorter of stature, intent on perfecting baked goods (in imitation of the Noldorin Lembas), but still fond of living in trees.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Well, although the term "Avari" only entered the vocabulary with Quendi and Eldar, the description in F4 fits them to a tee: "hearkened to no summons to the Sea;" or perhaps rather, given the lack of a statement of active 'refusal' but including "content with Middle-earth remained there, and remained long after, fading in fastnesses of the woods and hills" it appears we have the Lemberi or 'Lingerers' of the Lhammas again.

--------------

I'm not one to try to draw bright lines of 'canonicity;' I think ultimately the legendarium is its history, and changes and inconsistencies are part of it. Given Tolkien's way of working andf constant changes of mind, I don't think it's helpful to set up one dustbin of "posthumously-published works" that includes everything from vague sketches about the Dome of Varda, speculative essays like 'Orks', and works like Quendi and Eldar which were never intended for publication but rather as 'background' or 'lore' for JRRT's private purposes, and which were I think intended (at the time of writing) to be 'definitive' (allowing of course for the transient nature of 'definitive' when we're dealing with JRRT!

I also wouldn't put disproportionate weight on 'dogs that didn't bark' in the Revised Edition, which was after all not a comprehensive overhaul but a quick-and-dirty job for the purpose of regularising the US copyright. Some things T happened to have in his head and was happy to include, like the extended account of the Kinslaying; some were fairly 'easy' name changes like Finrod > Finarfin (tho he was imperfect even with that one). But T in revision hadr a tendency to pounce upon particular things that caught his eye, not a systematic approach at all. Certainly it's the case that he had definitely changed his mind about the Silvan tongue, even if he didn't amend App F; his Letters are unequivocal.

[Galin]

I'm not one to try to draw bright lines of 'canonicity;'

Well that's my whole argument here :D

As I agree the draft texts imply Avarin Elves no matter when the term Avari came into use with its 'ultimate' meaning. But I'll add: not even author-published?


I think ultimately the legendarium is its history, and changes and inconsistencies are part of it. Given Tolkien's way of working andf constant changes of mind, I don't think it's helpful to set up one dustbin of "posthumously-published works" that includes everything from vague sketches about the Dome of Varda, speculative essays like 'Orks', and works like Quendi and Eldar which were never intended for publication but rather as 'background' or 'lore' for JRRT's private purposes, and which were I think intended (at the time of writing) to be 'definitive' (allowing of course for the transient nature of 'definitive' when we're dealing with JRRT!

I think it is helpful in some ways, if not in others. Or at least in one way.

I also wouldn't put disproportionate weight on 'dogs that didn't bark' in the Revised Edition, which was after all not a comprehensive overhaul but a quick-and-dirty job for the purpose of regularising the US copyright. Some things T happened to have in his head and was happy to include, like the extended account of the Kinslaying; some were fairly 'easy' name changes like Finrod > Finarfin (tho he was imperfect even with that one). But T in revision hadr a tendency to pounce upon particular things that caught his eye, not a systematic approach at all. Certainly it's the case that he had definitely changed his mind about the Silvan tongue, even if he didn't amend App F; his Letters are unequivocal.

I agree, Tolkien probably just 'missed' his chance. Maybe not too, as maybe his 'ros reaction' kicked in. But even if he simply missed his chance, why doesn't the answer that he published trump all else? Even Tolkien thought what he published in the Appendices about -ros must trump his change of mind later...

... and yes, he is not consistent here either; but I think it illustrates the different animal that even Tolkien knows he is dealing with -- and thus, for all we know, what he wrote in letters or any subsequent draft texts about the Eldar, would take a back seat to already published text...

... 'most of this fails' is a decision, yes, but based on consideration that simply doesn't exist with work that is still private to Tolkien -- even if that distinction is admittedly sweeping.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

The finny thing about the Problem of Ros is that Tolkien could easily have got out of the Cair Andros issue, had he thought of it (or wanted to!)

[Galin]

The finny thing about the Problem of Ros is that Tolkien could easily have got out of the Cair Andros issue, had he thought of it (or wanted to!)

I think so too actually... although there is Rauros as well. But JRRT didn't try here [seemingly], and in any case he knew he had to 'deal with it' in a way that he would not have had to if Cair Andros had not been published [as Sindarin].

Which is basically another canon-related thing to say :rolleyes: so I'll shaddup for now :D

[Ivriniel]

Mae govannen !

I`m in the middle of reading the Silmarillion,...<snip>--<snip>...I really started asking myself what the difference between elves and men are, apart from the immortality.??

Suilad, Guinevere

Elen Sila Lumenn Omentielvo :)

I have to say, when I was young, blind and romantically in love with all of Elvendom, I skimmed over quite a few traits that really do place Elves as not-so-nice, at times. So, I have to agree with this post.

For example, Turgon tossed Eol's father off the cliffs as punishment for Eol killing Aredhel. Eol--really not very nice as well--thought of his son, Maeglin and Aredhel as his possessions. Eol was a hot-headed, territorial Elf (like them all, really), banging on about Telerin lands overrun by imperial Noldor. Feanor, another maniacal ego-driven madman (sorry madelf :) ) decided to start a civil war and kinslaying over a pretty glowing jewel. Sons of Feanor - omg, imagine them at a dinner party when trying to have a nice quiet conversation about magic and beauty and the silmarils. I'm sure that by dessert, a number of hapless guests would be added to the Nolodorin long list of those vowed as a blood enemies for all eternity.

Elvish folk made rather nasty weapons that were extremely deadly, whose blades felled their own kind (e.g. Beleg). They were deeply xenophobic peoples who had exclusionary principles that governed territorial rights.

Though, their mystery, beauty, grace, wisdom and essence were also a deeply moving legacy. Though, I still love elves, I've grown to see how Melkor made Orcs of them. I also wonder about that natural hatred between those two races and what that really means about both Elves and Orcs, but for mirror-image reasons.