Why did Legolas set sail for the Grey Havens only after Aragorn's death?

[Galin]

Culturally I would say Legolas is one of the Tawarwaith or Wood-elves, but according to one description, the remigrant Sindar might have brought at least some measure of West-elven culture with them too. A late text (Unfinished Tales) generally notes that these Silvan Teleri had become a small and scattered people, hardly to be distinguished from Avari, but that under Sindarin leadership they 'became again ordered folk and increased in wisdom,' and some learned writing from the Sindar.

This at least seems (to me anyway) to imply that they brought some Beleriandic culture into play, noting the history of Galadriel and Celeborn relates that the Silvan Elves of Lorien became subject to 'Sindarizing' under the impact of Beleriandic culture. Legolas, as the son of a Sinda, was the son of an Elda... by blood he might be fully Sindarin, or not. But what does blood mean regarding this question?


However another late text in Unfinished Tales notes Oropher and folk: 'wished indeed to become Silvan folk and to return, as they said, to the simple life natural to the Elves before the invitation of the Valar had disturbed it.'

As I said above, however Legolas had Sindarin blood (at least in part) in any case, but admittedly I'm not really sure what that alone might mean as far as being accounted an Elda or not -- in The Lord of the Rings the Eldar are the West-elves while the Silvans of Lorien and Mirkwood are the East-elves -- and in my opinion Legolas did not himself live in Beleriand at least, about as West as one could go without sailing to Aman.


It's possible (though I've no text to support it) that the 'definition' of Eldar Tolkien later wrote about (taken up into The Silmarillion by CJRT) was yet another internal distinction: meaning Eldar first referred to all Elves (Peoples of the Stars), then to the West-elves, then later to the Marchers (Eldor), whether or not they had reached Beleriand.

I'm not sure Tolkien saw the latter idea as an internal addition to the use or application of Eldar (rather than forgetting what he had actually published already), but the term seems to have changed a bit internally in any case.

Erm, what was the question again!

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Galin

Erm, what was the question again!

I think there is intense debate about the definitions of the words 'eldar' and 'sindar'. I fear I may have to listen very carefully as the hair and eye color of assorted characters might shift unexpectedly.

[LadyBrooke]

Eldar is a hard word to define in Tolkien works. In various places, it seems to mean the elves that sailed across the sea, the elves that intended to sail regardless of whether they made it, and just a plain synonym for elf. Rereading LotR this afternoon, I was struck by a line that talked about the lifespan of the Eldar. It seemed an odd way to phrase it to me...after all, if they Eldar are only those elves that intended to sail, does that mean the Nandor and Avari have a different life span? Calaquendi and Moriquendi are much simpler...

In my opinion, blood doesn't matter, as much as what the person declares himself to be - after all, we consider the members of the Houses of Fingolfin and Finarfin to be Noldor, in spite of the fact that we know that Finarfin's children were only a quarter Noldor, and Fingolfin's couldn't have been more then three-quarters. Going back to the question of Legolas, I think it is impossible to give a definite answer on whether he was one, because we simply don't know. His family tree is very sketchy, and so is the definition if Eldar.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

Rereading LotR this afternoon, I was struck by a line that talked about the lifespan of the Eldar. It seemed an odd way to phrase it to me...after all, if they Eldar are only those elves that intended to sail, does that mean the Nandor and Avari have a different life span? Calaquendi and Moriquendi are much simpler...

All Elves are basically immortal unless they are killed or they die from weariness. After their death most go to the Halls of Mandos*. Their fear stay there until (and unless) they are rebodied.

*Some Elves don't accept the summons of Mandos and do not come to his Halls, but I'm really hazy on that...

[Galin]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

Eldar is a hard word to define in Tolkien works. In various places, it seems to mean the elves that sailed across the sea, the elves that intended to sail regardless of whether they made it, and just a plain synonym for elf.

If push comes to shove, for myself I don't see why the author-published definition should not take first place above 'unpublished' writing -- and I think The Lord of the Rings is clear enough, despite any examples that might be raised otherwise, that technically at least, 'Eldar' does not refer to all Elves, as Appendix F draws a rather notable distinction (among the Quendi the Eldar were as kings). Also, from Appendix F again:

'... and hence it [Sindarin] was the tongue of all those Elves and Elf-lords that appear in this history. For these were all of Eldarin race, even where the folk that they ruled were of lesser kindreds.'

One could push Tolkien concerning the word 'all' here, but shirly Thranduil was an Elf lord, and no Elf appears more 'in this history' than the son of this ruler, Legolas Greenleaf. Unless I'm reading this wrongly...

In my opinion, blood doesn't matter, as much as what the person declares himself to be - after all, we consider (...)

Still, in a given discussion I think Legolas could claim to be Eldarin as well as one of the Silvan Folk, if he thought that the former distinction was relevant... depending upon whether or not a son or daughter of a confirmed Elda can also be said to be Eldarin for whatever reason.

Is the son of a Light Elf himself a Dark Elf because he had not lived in Aman nor seen the light of the Trees? Or is there something outside of the 'definition' that can or might be considered?

[LadyBrooke]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

All Elves are basically immortal unless they are killed or they die from weariness. After their death most go to the Halls of Mandos*. Their fear stay there until (and unless) they are rebodied.

*Some Elves don't accept the summons of Mandos and do not come to his Halls, but I'm really hazy on that...

I know that...I was commenting on the fact that it is a rather strange way for Tolkien to phrase it, given the fact that the Eldar don't include all elves, hence the

Originally Posted by Galin

If push comes to shove, for myself I don't see why the author-published definition should not take first place above 'unpublished' writing -- and I think The Lord of the Rings is clear enough, despite any examples that might be raised otherwise, that technically at least, 'Eldar' does not refer to all Elves, as Appendix F draws a rather notable distinction (among the Quendi the Eldar were as kings).

I don't think that LotR's is clear at all concerning the elves for the most part, after all directly contradicting his definition in the appendix are examples in the text itself that make no sense going by that definition of Eldar...going by just LotR, there is no statement that Legolas is one of the Sindar. Therefore, going by your statement that unpublished writings should not take precedence over author-published statements, Legolas is not an Eldar.

Still, in a given discussion I think Legolas could claim to be Eldarin as well as one of the Silvan Folk, if he thought that the former distinction was relevant... depending upon whether or not a son or daughter of a confirmed Elda can also be said to be Eldarin for whatever reason.

He might be able to, but he doesn't. That makes all the difference in the world to me. He or Tolkien could have included himself as an Elda, if he thought that it was important or that it was correct to refer to him as. He doesn't, so all we have are the writer's words that he was a Silvan elf and a wood elf, versus thoughts that he could be or might be one of the Eldar.

Is the son of a Light Elf himself a Dark Elf because he had not lived in Aman nor seen the light of the Trees? Or is there something outside of the 'definition' that can or might be considered?

The definition seems clear enough to me - only those elves that have dwelt, for whatever amount of time, in Valinor are Calaquendi. Everyone else, including descendants, are Moriquendi. Otherwise, wouldn't the descendants of Thingol that chose immortality, be Calaquendi? Yet it states that Thingol alone of all his people (which would include his daughter) was one of the Calaquendi.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

Yet it states that Thingol alone of all his people (which would include his daughter) was one of the Calaquendi.

Don't be so literal - Tolkien was a Philologist, not a Lawyer.

The "People" of Thingol were, generally, the people he ruled - ie: The Sindar. Luthien was a special case, arguably a UNIQUE case. If she happened to be a (maybe the Single) exception to the statement, a Philologist like Tolkien would not have felt the need to convert his statement into a legally and logically rigorous, iron-clad contractual declaration. His point that Thingol was seen as different from his people (due to having seen the Trees) remains true - whether Luthien was an exception or not.

In Luthien's case, being the daughter of a Maia and a Caliquendi could have included her in the Elves-of-Light designation. But, even if not, it doesn't reduce who she was.

As far as Descendents are concerned, I'm not so sure that descendents of Caliquendi aren't also considered Caliquendi - is it said anywhere that (for ex) Erenion Gil-galad was not a Caliquendi (being son of Fingon)??

[LadyBrooke]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

Don't be so literal - Tolkien was a Philologist, not a Lawyer.

Exactly. Tolkien was a philologist. He knew the power of words, he knew the meaning of words, and he was very careful in his choice of words. I have trouble believe that a man who invented his own usable languages and wrote a guide to translating his books, would carelessly use the word "only" if it wasn't true. Everywhere else, he was careful to list if there were exception. And yet, he didn't do it in this case, which leads me to believe that Thingol was the only Calaquendi in Doriath.

In Luthien's case, being the daughter of a Maia and a Caliquendi could have included her in the Elves-of-Light designation. But, even if not, it doesn't reduce who she was.

Where did I say that it did? The only thing I said was that she wasn't Calaquendi, and quite frankly, I don't think that lessens who she is. There's plenty of Calaquendi in the books, that I would judge to be worth far less then many of the Moriquendi. If somebody is judging a character on whether or not they are Calaquendi, then I'm not going to agree with them. Why is it important that some character be an Elda or one of the Calaquendi? Does anybody believe that the characters automatically become a lesser being for not being such?

As far as Descendents are concerned, I'm not so sure that descendents of Caliquendi aren't also considered Caliquendi - is it said anywhere that (for ex) Erenion Gil-galad was not a Caliquendi (being son of Fingon)??

One - Gil-galad's parentage was likely not intended to be Fingon. Christopher Tolkien has admitted this was a mistake. Secondly, is it stated that he was? The definition states one thing, that they had to live in Valinor, and without evidence to the contrary, such as a line stating that so-and-so who didn't live in Valinor was one, I have to hold to the definition.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

'I don't think that LotR's is clear at all concerning the elves for the most part, after all directly contradicting his definition in the appendix are examples in the text itself that make no sense going by that definition of Eldar...'

Appendix F notes that Eldar (West-elves) refers to the Elves that passed over Sea plus the Sindar only. That's a clear enough definition to my mind -- what examples are you speaking of in any event?

'... going by just LotR, there is no statement that Legolas is one of the Sindar. Therefore, going by your statement that unpublished writings should not take precedence over author-published statements, Legolas is not an Eldar.'

Yet in my opinion it's not exactly a wayward conclusion based on The Lord of the Rings, and I can add Robert Foster to that opinion. Thranduil is noted as Sindarin in The Lord of the Rings, and Legolas is his son. I'm sure we can all agree that there are ways to attack this arguably simplified conclusion (as we are already doing)... but in any case, the statement I already cited (Appendix F) appears to charactierize all the Elves and Elf-lords in this history (thus Legolas of course) as Eldarin.

Tolkien himself might niggle with calling Legolas Sindarin, but I think even he must admit that what he published naturally enough leads one down this path. The Oropher example is a good one: here I think the natural implication of published text is that Thranduil (not Oropher) established his kingdom in the Second Age before the building of Barad-dur -- or at least early enough in the Second Age.

Of course people can (and will) correct that based on Tolkien's private (and relatively brief) notes on the movements of some Elf named Oropher, who doesn't even get mentioned in Appendix B, but in my opinion such a 'correction' comes with a little asterisk at least, or should.

JRRT wrote: 'Legolas is translated Greenleaf (II 106, 154) a suitable name for a Woodland Elf, though one of royal and originally Sindarin line.' letter 297, 1967

A good way to put it perhaps

He might be able to, but he doesn't. That makes all the difference in the world to me. He or Tolkien could have included himself as an Elda, if he thought that it was important or that it was correct to refer to him as. He doesn't, so all we have are the writer's words that he was a Silvan elf and a wood elf, versus thoughts that he could be or might be one of the Eldar.

Again, I'm willing to give Tolkien some room when he uses the word 'all' but Legolas appears more than any other Elf 'in this history' so I think he would be an odd and rather notable exception to that statement.

Galadriel55 wrote: His background wasn't finished (according to the Enc. of Arda, there are two versions - one that says Oropher is a Sinda who came from across the River, and another that he was a Silvan Elf), so there's no point in trying to prove any story.

I see no great reason to think Tolkien was writing two different tales here -- regarding Oropher's clan status that is (basically the tale varies concerning his movements and the reasoning behind his movements). I would put it this way, Oropher was Sindarin, specifically said to be so in one text, yes, but still noted as the father of Thranduil in the other -- who is specifically noted to be Sindarin in Appendix B.


Again, did JRRT recall the 'implication' in Appendix B when he tested the Orophorian waters here? and if he did not, once having done so (in theory) would he necessarily try to add Oropher? Perhaps... he certainly could characterize Appendix B as extremely contracted history and wedge in Oropher... but one never knows.

But I digress