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

[SlverGlass]

Please do forgive me if the question sounds infantile or has already been discussed.

According to the Appendix B of Lotr, Legolas set sail, along with Gimli, in the year 1541 after King Elessar's death. But why did he wait for such a long while? Most of the elves had already set sail by then, so why didn't he?

Legolas had started feeling the call of the sea since before the destruction of the One Ring. This wait seems a little meaningless. Then why choose such a path? Am I missing out something obvious?

[Inziladun]

That isn't an "infantile" question at all.

Firstly, most of the remaining Noldor in Middle-earth (Gildor, et al) had already gone, but it's clear many of the Silvan Elves in Mirkwood were still there, and apparently fairly content.

As for the timing of Legolas's departure, it seems to be connected to the death of King Elessar, who, except Gimli, was the last remaining member of the Fellowship in ME. Legolas seems to have simply felt that was the right time, and there was no further reason to linger in mortal lands.

[SlverGlass]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

As for the timing of Legolas's departure, it seems to be connected to the death of King Elessar, who, except Gimli, was the last remaining member of the Fellowship in ME. Legolas seems to have simply felt that was the right time, and there was no further reason to linger in mortal lands.

That's what was my conclusion. However, despite the general camaraderie between Legolas and Aragorn, nowhere in the books is a deeper friendship shown. It just doesn't feel appropriate that Legolas would time such an important step in my life in accordance with Aragorn's death.

However, your theory about the Silvan elves still residing in ME holds a lot of merit. Thank you for not deeming my question "infantile", Inziladun. I am a little nervous as this is the first thread that I have started in the Downs.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

That's what was my conclusion. However, despite the general camaraderie between Legolas and Aragorn, nowhere in the books is a deeper friendship shown. It just doesn't feel appropriate that Legolas would time such an important step in my life in accordance with Aragorn's death.

Legolas did have some measure of respect, and even reverential love, for Aragorn. When Gimli and Legolas recount to Merry and Pippin their experiences in the Paths of the Dead, Gimli makes the comment that it was only "the will of Aragorn" that kept him going. Legolas answered:

'And by the love of him also,' said Legolas. 'For all those who come to know him come to love him after his own fashion...'

ROTK The Last Debate

Additionally, Gimli, who was probably Legolas's best friend, was over 262 years old when they set sail (according to ROTK Appendix C), and that was pretty old for a Dwarf. Couple Gimli's old age with the death of Elessar, and what more did ME have for Legolas?

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

However, your theory about the Silvan elves still residing in ME holds a lot of merit. Thank you for not deeming my question "infantile", Inziladun. I am a little nervous as this is the first thread that I have started in the Downs.

No need to be nervous. Everyone here was a newbie at some point.

[Selmo]

Hello, SlverGlass.

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

According to the Appendix B of Lotr, Legolas set sail, along with Gimli, in the year 1541 after King Elessar's death. But why did he wait for such a long while?

The time would not seem long to Legolas, he's an immortal Elf.

The passing of time would mean nothing to him but, as Inziladun has said, the passing of his friends of The Fellowship would mean much to him.
If Legolas wanted Gimli to accompany him into The West, he could not risk waiting any longer.

.

[Findegil]

Probably it was more Gimlis timing that that of Legols. I think that Legolas would have stayed in Middle-Earth as long as Gimli lived. That Gimli feeling old age aproache him, having the wish to see Galadriel again and seeing his freind Elessar dead, thought somthing like now or never. Thus it could have been his timing and not that of Legolas.

Respectfuly
Findegil

[SlverGlass]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Legolas did have some measure of respect, and even reverential love, for Aragorn. When Gimli and Legolas recount to Merry and Pippin their experiences in the Paths of the Dead, Gimli makes the comment that it was only "the will of Aragorn" that kept him going. Legolas answered:

ROTK The Last Debate

Additionally, Gimli, who was probably Legolas's best friend, was over 262 years old when they set sail (according to ROTK Appendix C), and that was pretty old for a Dwarf. Couple Gimli's old age with the death of Elessar, and what more did ME have for Legolas?

I agree with both points. Thank you for quoting that paragraph from The Last Debate. I had forgotten about it :-).

It does make sense that the 'Eldar' of the fellowship would be the last to 'depart'.

And I totally agree with you, Selmo. Those years would have been no more than a blink of an eye for an elf.

[Rumil]

Interesting question Silverglass,

Agreeing with the points above.

Also this implies maybe that there was no 'Mrs Legolas' does it not?

As I remember Legolas decided to set up a Silvan Elf settlement in Ithilien after the War as well as bringing trees etc to cheer up Minas Tirith. I don't think I've heard any more on the subject, anyone spotted anything in HoME etc?

Would be an interesting place Ithilien in the early 4th Age, run by Faramir and Eowyn, with presumably Legolas as leader of a wood-elf settlement, with all subordinate to Aragorn and Arwen. Quite rare to have such a multi-ethnic realm, apart from Bree and Dale perhaps.

There might be ongoing efforts to heal the orcish defilement of the land and perhaps hunts into the mountains and towards Minas Morgul to clear out the remaining orcs etc. Minas Morgul itself required many years before it could be 'cleansed' according to Aragorn, but maybe the rebuilding of Osgiliath might be in progress?

[Galadriel55]

Aragorn was also the last link to the "old world". Gandalf put him in charge of preserving as much as he could, but with his passing many ther things would pass too, IMO.

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

I am a little nervous as this is the first thread that I have started in the Downs.

Hm, you should see my first thread that I've started - the title incuded "Gandalf the Geat". (the one typo that everyone seems to notice )

[Morthoron]

Perhaps it was merely a matter of Tolkien tying up loose ends by offering a bit of finality for each member of the Fellowship. That way, fan-fic writers couldn't go on and on about Legolas well into the 4th and even 5th Ages.

[SlverGlass]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Hm, you should see my first thread that I've started - the title incuded "Gandalf the Geat". (the one typo that everyone seems to notice )

As it is said, we find heart in other people's misery; your post does wonders to boost my confidence, Galadriel55. :-). Just kidding:-). Thanks for the boost-up.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Perhaps it was merely a matter of Tolkien tying up loose ends by offering a bit of finality for each member of the Fellowship. That way, fan-fic writers couldn't go on and on about Legolas well into the 4th and even 5th Ages.

It doesn't stop them, does it? :-). But you have to agree that, at times, it is fun to read about those alternate situations and endings.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

As it is said, we find heart in other people's misery; your post does wonders to boost my confidence, Galadriel55. :-). Just kidding:-). Thanks for the boost-up.

No problem, Slver! I can't exactly call it misery, though. :-)

Originally Posted by Morth

Perhaps it was merely a matter of Tolkien tying up loose ends by offering a bit of finality for each member of the Fellowship. That way, fan-fic writers couldn't go on and on about Legolas well into the 4th and even 5th Ages.

True. For some reason, that simple solution - just to make the story a good story - escapes me in every thread. :-P The only problem is that the majority of those who are obsessed with Legolas are really obsessed with Mister Bloom. Who knows what they can think of if they think tha Legolas stayed in ME?! =O

What is it with Legolas obsessions anyways? Why Legolas? I like him too, but he's not the only character!

[SlverGlass]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

What is it with Legolas obsessions anyways? Why Legolas? I like him too, but he's not the only character!

I agree. Legolas is one of my favorite characters. But the book version of him, not the movie one. I was a little too disappointed about the movie version:-). Legolas' character was so insightful and mature in the book. After all, he is the prince of an elven realm... Ah well! You can't get them all, I guess.

[Anguirel]

I think Legolas must have had a fairly healthy pre-Bloom fanbase, Galadriel55. He was certainly my favourite character at my first reading as a rather serious, self-important and chivalric little boy...

The reasons why, for reasons that rationally must be coincidental but certainly don't feel that way, were all extirpated from or altered in the films.

Obviously I always thought Elves were cool but for me this controversial passage picked out Legolas in particular:

Frodo looked up at the Elf standing tall above him, as he gazed into the night, seeking a mark to shoot at. His head was dark, crowned with sharp white stars that glittered in the black pools of the sky behind.

and yes, I did interpret that as dark hair (not an unbiassed reader though). Then he only went and shot the blimming Nazgul steed. One of the finest moments of action Tolkien ever wrote I think; for a believer in the old heroic combats, he's always surprisingly excellent at archery moments; no Homeric contemner of Paris the archer he. I actually have a theory that shooting suits novelists much better than hand-to-hand fighting. An arrow going through the air, subject to aim, wind, accident, is a sort of perfect image of suspense. Tolstoy's duels are much more exciting, short-lasting, awe-inspiring than the stylish fiddling around of Dumas's rapiers. Anyway. This feat of archery was cut from the film, as far as I can see because the director thought the action might spoil the vibe of his soporific Enya-larded drift down the Anduin.

Legolas's next fine moment was his contribution to the Lament of the Winds. I've always loved that, though I understand why few songs made it cinematically. Still, sad.

And now, to at last reach the ostensible topic of this thread, how about the wonderful verse of Galadriel's warning?

"Legolas Greenleaf long under tree
In joy thou hast lived. Beware of the Sea!
If thou hearest the cry of the gull on the shore,
Thy heart shall then rest in the forest no more."

I seem to recall Legolas takes this as a warning that he is likely to be killed. Remember that on first reading you have next to no idea about the rules of the game re: Elves and the Sea, just indistinct feelings of elegy, often at an age before you know about anything else elegiac. I wouldn't be surprised if it was here (or maybe in some war at Troy retelling, but close enough) that I got the impression it was in some sense good to die, noble to be resigned to fate and defeat. I can see in the film this would have been complex: a prophecy about a peripheral character that doesn't even come true in any obvious clunking way (as no true prophecy should). But complex is beautiful, and I really resent that there was no reference to Legolas and the gulls in the film at all, except a nod in that admittedly lovely glimpse of Elves going seaward in FOTR: EE.

I think Tolkien's last footnotes about Legolas are a way of reconciling this sense of elegy (about which there is SO much good, short Ang-Sax poetry) with Gimli's more upbeat spirit, of wagers, promises to visit Aglarond, grim irony. Of course there are times when the buskin is on the other foot: Gimli has his sentimental side too, and Legolas raises the spirits (not the Spirits) in the Paths of the Dead.

Another lovely, structurally purposeless aside is Legolas's recognition of Imrahil's elven heritage; Imrahil himself being a sort of incidental flourish of a character.

Finally, when Saruman warns "it will be a grey ship, and full of ghosts", I think of Legolas, going off at last to fulfil that prophecy, as much as or more than I do of the Ringbearers.

[Folwren]

Interesting and insightful post, Anguirel. I have known several people who liked Legolas best in the book long before the movies came out, and those were boys, too, so it's really not a Bloom-fan thing. I'm more of a hobbit liking person, so I the elves never quite caught my fancy, but I can understand your sentiments. I, too, love that part when Legolas shoots the Nazgul's steed. I've always liked this painting of that part. (I still don't know how to put a picture into the text.)

SlverGlass, I always assumed Legolas waited to leave until Aragorn died because of his ties to him on account of their fellowship. I think that although Tolkien did not describe in very great depth the comradeship between Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli, it was still there to a great extent. They would not leave him when he wanted to go through the Paths of the Dead, and they ran long leagues with him to save Merry and Pippin, and they fought battles together. All these trials and hardships and adventures are bound to bring a trio together, and while they might not become friends like Legolas and Gimli were able to be friends, on account of Aragorn being their leader, they still loved him. So, I feel that it was the loyalty to Aragorn that kept him in ME that long.


Good question and welcome to the Downs.

-- Foley

[Mithalwen]

I was another pre-film Legolas fan. It was the elves that captured my imagination though I liked other characters -it wasn't quite like the Leggy bopper frenzy. I must admit that I have long puzzled about Legolas' response to Galadriel's prophecy and Ang's explanation never occured. I just thought it was because the Silvan and Sindarin elves hadn't the same connection to Aman as the Noldor who had lived there and were Exiles returning home.

But while I agree that he would have waited the (to him) relatively short time for the sake of fellowship, isn't also possible that Gimli could only hope to be admitted to the undying lands when he is close to death, no matter what grace attached to him. Sam and Bilbo go there to die rather than to live. Frodo presumably lived long enough to be reunited with Sam but he is a little different - I think he effectively died to Middle Earth as a result of the attack on Weathertop - Gandalf notices the change and notes to himself that he might become like a vessel of light. It is not dissimilar to the description of Glorfindel, that preceded it living on "both sides" similtaneously.

[Anguirel]

Folwren, I'd forgotten that picture existed but it was definitely at the back of my mind. Probably the single finest argument for a dark Legolas, and the bow is pretty like kickass as well isn't it...reminds me, in a respectful manner of course, of that vaguely unintentionally homoerotic passage somewhere in the Prof's notes where he compares Legolas to "a young tree"...

[blantyr]

I've always wondered, since Legolas did set sail after Aragorn's death, whether he should have offered Arwen a berth.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by blantyr

I've always wondered, since Legolas did set sail after Aragorn's death, whether he should have offered Arwen a berth.

I'm sure both Legolas and Arwen knew that wouldn't have been allowed. Arwen had made her irrevocable choice to turn her back on immortality, and the West was no longer open to her.

[Galadriel55]

As I said before, I have nothing against the book Legolas. In fact, he is one of my (many) favourite characters. He is likable, and sort of half-serious and Elvish at the same time.

My comment reffered to those who are nuts about Bloom-Legolas, who appear not to notice anyone else.

Originally Posted by Foley

SlverGlass, I always assumed Legolas waited to leave until Aragorn died because of his ties to him on account of their fellowship. I think that although Tolkien did not describe in very great depth the comradeship between Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli, it was still there to a great extent. They would not leave him when he wanted to go through the Paths of the Dead, and they ran long leagues with him to save Merry and Pippin, and they fought battles together. All these trials and hardships and adventures are bound to bring a trio together, and while they might not become friends like Legolas and Gimli were able to be friends, on account of Aragorn being their leader, they still loved him. So, I feel that it was the loyalty to Aragorn that kept him in ME that long.

I think your post summs it up fairly well, Foley.

[SlverGlass]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

I think Legolas must have had a fairly healthy pre-Bloom fanbase, Galadriel55. He was certainly my favourite character at my first reading as a rather serious, self-important and chivalric little boy...

The reasons why, for reasons that rationally must be coincidental but certainly don't feel that way, were all extirpated from or altered in the films.

Obviously I always thought Elves were cool but for me this controversial passage picked out Legolas in particular:



and yes, I did interpret that as dark hair (not an unbiassed reader though). Then he only went and shot the blimming Nazgul steed. One of the finest moments of action Tolkien ever wrote I think; for a believer in the old heroic combats, he's always surprisingly excellent at archery moments; no Homeric contemner of Paris the archer he. I actually have a theory that shooting suits novelists much better than hand-to-hand fighting. An arrow going through the air, subject to aim, wind, accident, is a sort of perfect image of suspense. Tolstoy's duels are much more exciting, short-lasting, awe-inspiring than the stylish fiddling around of Dumas's rapiers. Anyway. This feat of archery was cut from the film, as far as I can see because the director thought the action might spoil the vibe of his soporific Enya-larded drift down the Anduin.

Legolas's next fine moment was his contribution to the Lament of the Winds. I've always loved that, though I understand why few songs made it cinematically. Still, sad.

And now, to at last reach the ostensible topic of this thread, how about the wonderful verse of Galadriel's warning?

"Legolas Greenleaf long under tree
In joy thou hast lived. Beware of the Sea!
If thou hearest the cry of the gull on the shore,
Thy heart shall then rest in the forest no more."

I seem to recall Legolas takes this as a warning that he is likely to be killed. Remember that on first reading you have next to no idea about the rules of the game re: Elves and the Sea, just indistinct feelings of elegy, often at an age before you know about anything else elegiac. I wouldn't be surprised if it was here (or maybe in some war at Troy retelling, but close enough) that I got the impression it was in some sense good to die, noble to be resigned to fate and defeat. I can see in the film this would have been complex: a prophecy about a peripheral character that doesn't even come true in any obvious clunking way (as no true prophecy should). But complex is beautiful, and I really resent that there was no reference to Legolas and the gulls in the film at all, except a nod in that admittedly lovely glimpse of Elves going seaward in FOTR: EE.

I think Tolkien's last footnotes about Legolas are a way of reconciling this sense of elegy (about which there is SO much good, short Ang-Sax poetry) with Gimli's more upbeat spirit, of wagers, promises to visit Aglarond, grim irony. Of course there are times when the buskin is on the other foot: Gimli has his sentimental side too, and Legolas raises the spirits (not the Spirits) in the Paths of the Dead.

Another lovely, structurally purposeless aside is Legolas's recognition of Imrahil's elven heritage; Imrahil himself being a sort of incidental flourish of a character.

Finally, when Saruman warns "it will be a grey ship, and full of ghosts", I think of Legolas, going off at last to fulfil that prophecy, as much as or more than I do of the Ringbearers.

You make some very good and well thought out comments, Anguirel. As I mentioned before, the movies, though great they may be, didn't tug my heartstrings merely due to the alternation of the personality of the character. Among the elves, Legolas and Lord Elrond had always been a little closer to my heart. However, the movie took away the finer points that had made them so dear to me in the first place. Their characters became something different in the movies. Not necessarily bad, not they were certainly not the Legolas and Elrond whom I had grown to admire and even, respect.

Originally Posted by Folwren

SlverGlass, I always assumed Legolas waited to leave until Aragorn died because of his ties to him on account of their fellowship. I think that although Tolkien did not describe in very great depth the comradeship between Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli, it was still there to a great extent. They would not leave him when he wanted to go through the Paths of the Dead, and they ran long leagues with him to save Merry and Pippin, and they fought battles together. All these trials and hardships and adventures are bound to bring a trio together, and while they might not become friends like Legolas and Gimli were able to be friends, on account of Aragorn being their leader, they still loved him. So, I feel that it was the loyalty to Aragorn that kept him in ME that long.

I agree Folwren. You put forward some very good points. I had quite forgotten that not all emotions need direct physical manifestations to show itself. Thank you for refreshing my memory and thoughts.

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Folwren, Probably the single finest argument for a dark Legolas, and the bow is pretty like kickass as well isn't it...reminds me, in a respectful manner of course, of that vaguely unintentionally homoerotic passage somewhere in the Prof's notes where he compares Legolas to "a young tree"...

The picture was beautiful. This was the first time that I came across it. Thanks Folwren. I must say that the Professor's comparison is dead on the mark, Anguirel. Not surprising, of course, as Legolas is his creation. Even as one of the Eldar, Legolas, according to me, came forward as an extremely flexible minded elf, who didn't backtrack in face of some new discovery and always remain open for knowledge. Thus, he 'grows', in mind and character, throughout the book and helps us to grow with him.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

As I said before, I have nothing against the book Legolas. In fact, he is one of my (many) favourite characters. He is likable, and sort of half-serious and Elvish at the same time.

My comment reffered to those who are nuts about Bloom-Legolas, who appear not to notice anyone else.

That was obvious, Galadriel. The fanatic craze about Bloom-Legolas is a little over the head. Or maybe a lot over the head.

Your phrase, 'Half-serious and Elvish at the same time', describes Legolas perfectly, Galadriel. For me, Legolas is and will remain the most 'human elf'.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

Your phrase, 'Half-serious and Elvish at the same time', describes Legolas perfectly, Galadriel. For me, Legolas is and will remain the most 'human elf'.

Thank you. I'd call him a "Hobbit-Elf", though.

[SlverGlass]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I'd call him a "Hobbit-Elf", though.

Now that you mention it... There is, indeed, an innocence in Legolas, as seen in hobbits. Not to forget, his unusally simple way of perceiving things.

[Nolwë_Namiel]

Originally Posted by SlverGlass

Even as one of the Eldar, Legolas....

Sorry, Legolas was not one of the Eldar. The term Eldar is applied only to those elves who accepted the summons of the Valar and entered Aman, including Elwë Singollo.

Since his father and grandfather are both stated in the HOME to be Sindarin, he is at least half-Sindarin. As to the other half, the HOME also states that only a handful of Sindar went with Oropher and Thranduil and they soon merged with the Silvan elves. This would account for the possibility that Legolas' hair was indeed dark for all elves, except the Vanyar and Teleri, were dark-haired.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Nolwë_Namiel

Sorry, Legolas was not one of the Eldar. The term Eldar is applied only to those elves who accepted the summons of the Valar and entered Aman, including Elwë Singollo.

But the term could also be applied to all Elves that went on the Great Journey, ncluding the Sindar.

Originally Posted by The Sil, Index

According to Elvish legend the name Eldar 'People of the Stars' was given to all Elves by the Vala Orome. It came however to be used to refer only to the Elves of the Three Kindreds (Vanyar, Noldor, Teleri) who set out on the great westward march from Cuivienen (whether or not they remained in Middle Earth), and to exclude the Avari.

Silvan Elves are said to be those Teleri that dropped out of the Great Journey to the East of the Blue Mountains (or was it Misty Mountains?). I guess some Avari could have come to the settlements later on.

So either way, Legolas is at least part Eldar.

[Galin]

According to The Lord of the Rings (author-published of course) the Eldar are the Elves of Aman plus the Sindar only (and returning Noldor of course). The East-elves of Mirkwood and Lorien were not considered Eldar, nor their languages Eldarin (Appendix F).

However Legolas had Sindarin blood in any case. I know The Silmarillion says (a bit) differently, but I'm not sure Tolkien was paying full attention to what he had already published when he wrote that which Christopher Tolkien chose to put into the 1977 Silmarillion.

[LadyBrooke]

But even using the LotR's definition of Eldar, and not the Silm version, which would need to be clarified as to which version is used as some of use one and others the other, Legolas also proclaims himself a Silvan elf, not an Eldar. When entering Hollin, he says "the Elves of this land were of a race strange to us of the silvan folk." No matter which book is used, somewhere there is evidence that Legolas was not one of the Eldar. In Letters, Tolkien states that he is one of the Woodelves. I fail to see the evidence that Legolas is an Eldar, to contradict the clearly stated, by Legolas himself, idea the Legolas is one of the Silvan elves.

And part Eldar does not count as Eldar. For example, Finrod is part Vanyar and Teleri, so can we proclaim him to be Vanyar or Teleri in spite of it being stated he is one of the Noldor?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

But even using the LotR's definition of Eldar, and not the Silm version, which would need to be clarified as to which version is used as some of use one and others the other, Legolas also proclaims himself a Silvan elf, not an Eldar. When entering Hollin, he says "the Elves of this land were of a race strange to us of the silvan folk."

I don't think that would necessarily be a point against Legolas being Sindarin.
Since silvan is not capitalised there, I could see that as Legolas speaking not as a Silvan Elf, but rather a silvan (wood-dwelling) elf to whom the culture of the Noldor was alien.

[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.

[Galadriel55]

I don't understand one thing. How does Legolas' heritage affect his departal from ME? He doesn't need to be one of the Eldar to leave, or to hear the call of the Sea (speaking of that one, Men also hear it, so why can's moriquendi?).

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.

[LadyBrooke]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I don't understand one thing. How does Legolas' heritage affect his departal from ME? He doesn't need to be one of the Eldar to leave, or to hear the call of the Sea (speaking of that one, Men also hear it, so why can's moriquendi?).

That's one thing I don't get either - why does it matter if he's an Elda? Moriquendi can hear it - regardless of whether Legolas is an Elda, there is no way for him to Calaquendi. Calaquendi is only the Noldor, Vanyar, and Falmari. He can't even be a descendant, unless Oropher's wife was a Noldor or something, which I think can be ruled out by the fact that he moved to Mirkwood to get away from them.

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.

The Sindar/Silvan elves all have messed up back stories, as do Orodreth (one of my fangirl obsessions) and Gil-galad.

[Selmo]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

Exactly. Tolkien was a philologist. He knew the power of words, he knew the meaning of words................

Tolkien also knew that the meaning of words could shift over time and change differently in separated cultures.
The Elves of Amman and Singolo's people had the same language in the begining but when the Noldor returned tto ME, Singolo had become Thingol. The languages had changed so much that communication between the two groups was very difficult. The Noldor had to learn Sindarin.

Just thing of the misunderstanding that can occur between the speakers of British English and American English.

.

[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