From* Volume 6, History of Middle-Earth: The Return of the Shadow*:
" ‘[The use of Glorfindel] in *The Lord of the Rings * is one of the cases of the somewhat random use of the names found in the older legends, now referred to as The Silmarillion, which escaped reconsideration in the final published form of The Lord of the Rings.’ " This is a quote from the writings of Professor Tolkein, as told by Christopher Tolkein at pg. 214 of my edition of the book (apparently the first edition).
So, as I thought, Tokein used the name originally without conciously thinking that this was Glorfindel, about whom he had written years earlier in creating the legends of the First Age. He simply was recycling names, and never managed to return to a consideration of whether to keep the name or discard it for another. Since it was published that way, he had to decide how it could be that Glorfindel was found in the Third Age in Elrond’s home. As Christopher Tolkein tells us, the Professor decided that he had been released from the halls of Mandos and returned to Middle-Earth during the Second Age.
In many things I am a fan of Professor Tolkein. But in the fact that he insisted upon after-the-fact rationalization to explain things of this nature, I think he simply took things too far. It was just as easy to say that the latter Glorfindel was a different elf; the given answer is perhaps too cute, forcing a whole new aspect to the mythology as created. But that’s just me.
Fair but I typically think of reincarnated as coming back as a baby in a new body. I had the understanding, the Elves leave the Halls as themselves but healed.
Yes, I’d go along with that, tho’ presumably with a new functioning body.
(Something else that was missed out with the film and its tie-ins; Elves who got themselves killed during the War of the Ring were not in fact sacrificing their immortality. They got an express ticket to the Halls of Mandos and the guarantee of a new body in due course, which by then would be not too long, as the Noldor had been pardoned by then and the other Elves had never been in bad odour.)
Too true, this is the same reason why they had no fear of the undead.
Arwen is the only one who made the sacrifice.
The Sacrifice of dying in the war was not much worse than leaving ME by boat. Either way they would eventually be in Valinor and could never expect to return to ME.
This brings up an interesting question. What is in the make up of an Elf to choose enslavement by Melkor over death? {It was implied orcs were bread from enslaved deformed elves.} There was also at least one example of Elves that spent very long times enslaved by Melkor, one I think was an Elf of Thingol’s house.
From the Human perspective, I would choose death over enslavement with the knowledge that I was off to the Halls.
There is something unexplored in the books that seemingly kept most elves from acts of suicide, even suicide in desperate circumstances.
Is my view wrong?
I would think the Halls were a superior alternative to Angband.
Anyone have a POV or any enlightment?
Well, assuming that Orcs were bred from Elves, these were stated to be Avari captured by Morgoth, and Avari had shunned the Valar from the early days (partly 'cos Morgoth had managed to spread fear to begin with), so didn’t know the whole truth about what awaited them over the Sea.
As for suicide, I should think that there’s a Christian-like assumption running here - that voluntarily killing yourself is defying the will of God: you’re supposed to confront your woes, not run away from them like that.
And of course, any Noldor still under banishment, all through the First Age, would know very well that they’d spend possibly the rest of eternity in the Halls, denied rehousing even if the very souls of their victims should cry out for it.
Yes to all 3 but there were Elves that were neither Avari nor under the Ban who were captured.
As far as the Suicide goes, if you are on a work detail and make a desperate attempt to escape even with a 99% chance of failure, would this count as suicide by christian standards? My opinion is no. I guess I am saying, it is what I would do.
I cannot remember the name of the elves specifically mentioned but I think he was tied up in the tragedy of Túrin.
I found it in Wiki: Gwindor
This was driving me nuts.
Elves were pretty tough to kill. They’d shrug off wounds that would slay most mortals, in the first age anyway. And I expect that orcs had orders not to kill the elves trying to escape, only recapture and hurt them.
And JRRT, being a devout Catholic, would have imbued his creations with the same repugnance of suicide that he himself would have, or so I guess.
By Christian (or at least Catholic, which Tolkien was; other denominations might vary) standards, it would indeed be justifiable to attempt escape with a low probability of success, so long as the intention were actually escape, and not to deliberately die in the attempt. Of course, it’s not required, nor even encouraged. One must also consider that an immortal being would probably have a more philosophical view towards a long captivity: When one lives for aeons, a few hundred years of imprisonment doesn’t look too bad.
Can I go back to Tom Bombadil? I always presumed he was supposed to be the “first man”, and the first immortal on Middle Earth; Fangorn being the first, and oldest, mortal. (Tom preceded trees, etc.) I’ve also presumed that, Tolkein being Christian, Tom represented Adam before the fall - what Man should have been. If, as I’ve read, the Ring allegorically represents industrialization, that the Ring has no power over Tom is then no surprise, industrialization having no allure to the first, natural man. Tom having no power over the Ring is also no surprise, as being able to use industry implies that it has allure. So, the Ring and Tom can co-exist, with neither having power over the other.
I think that Tom is in the story for many reasons, many mentioned by “well he’s back”. There are a few others, though. Tom explains the origins of Man, and especially those at Bree, and Hobbits. It is no accident that he is between Man and Hobbit in stature. I think Tom also indicates that there is a different solution to the Ring other than destroying it - incorruptability. But, incorruptability is not something that can be given, nor something that can be achieved on your own. This would sit well, allegorically, with Tolkein’s religion.
Also the quote from jrfranci, earlier in the thread:
“‘Eldest, that’s what I am… Tom remembers the first raindrop and the first acorn… He knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside.’”
In Genesis 2 v4, International Version:
This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens- 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth ** and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth [c] and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams [d] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- 7 the LORD God formed the man [e] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Tom B clearly fits that chronology. As far as Middle Earth is concerned, Elves are the first awakened, first born or something like that, but on Middle Earth, or parts East and South? This is something that has always confused me. The elves of Middle Earth awakened Fangorn, but he was there first, and Gandalf describes Fangorn as the oldest being in Middle Earth, or something like that. So, who was first, Fangorn or the Elves. Who was first, the elves of Middle Earth or Tom Bombadil? And what of the nymphs and such?
Guys. Stop trying to “explain” Tom Bombadil. He just IS. Tolkein added him to a story he was writing, set in Middle-Earth but not directly connected to much of anything else other than through the Ring. When they run into Tom Bombadil, the hobbits aren’t really running into a planned occurrence of Middle-Earth mythology. By the time the whoe shebang got put together, Tolkein didn’t want to take him out. But he never really managed a good explanation for him, either.
So he isn’t specifically ANYTHING; he’s just Tom Bombadil.
