Why did Glorfindel come back to life?

[Radagast The Brown]

In the Silmarilion Glorfindel was killed by a balrog in near Gondolin. How could he be in Rivendel in LOTR?

[Nibs]

It's not clear whether or not they are the same. Tolkien reuses many names throughout Middle-Earth, such as Denethor and most of the Dwarven-lords. To my knowledge (or maybe just my opinion), they're different persons. This is probably just another facet of details where it's merely your opinion.

[Ñólendil]

Actually Tolkien wrote an essay about it, it's published in Peoples of Middle-earth. As it turns out they are indeed the same person. Glorfindel died, his spirit went to Mandos, he was purged of all guilt and restored to his body in the Blessed Realm. He remained there and gained back the innocence of the unrebellious Eldar, before heading off to Middle-earth in the Year of Dread in the Second Age (1600) in order to aid Gil-Galad against Sauron.

[Nibs]

So that's why we keep you Ents around here... maybe I'll change my opinion after I read that. Thanks.

[markedel]

Of course what's mysterious is it seems the elves of rivendell did nothing for the last millennium of the third age.

[Wayfarer]

The short answer:

All elves come back to life.

The real question is "Why did Glorfindel and Glorfindel alone return to Middle Earth"

[bropous]

But again, we come to the question of whether a s**** of writing by JRR, or even an essay, can override the authority of the writings as published. Of course, Silmarillion was edited by Christopher, and didn't he admit somewhere (I'm not sure where) that the Glorfindel thingy was his own mistake?

I know there is a lot of interesting info in the additional collections of Tolkien's writings, but I look rather askance at them because he didn't integrate that material into his published writings (Silmarillion aside). Not in any way saying that one could not use those additional writings as sourcing, I just don't give greater credence to those collections. For all we know, those essays were written, perused, then tossed aside by Ronald. A lot of disjointed s****s of writings might confuse the issue.

Again, I don't think the re-emergence of the reincarnated Glorfindel, or whether Glorfindel of LotR is the same as the Silmarillion Glorfindel, can be definitively resolved, neither through the writings published while Ronald was still alive and re-editing, nor through the post-mortem collections of his discarded and unincorporated works.

[broken record removed from turntable]

[bropous]

Just as an aside, dear Mooters, the previous post included no "expletives", the filter took out a very common word and replaced it with asterisks. The word used was a synonym to "shard, shred, remnant, small bit, torn part" and the filter thought it was a slightly unkind word with an "s" tacked on front.

Just in the interests of full disclosure......

[markedel]

ANd the Simarillion is heavily edited itself (re fall of doriath)

[afro-elf]

know there is a lot of interesting info in the additional collections of Tolkien's writings, but I look rather askance at them because he didn't integrate that material into his published writings (Silmarillion aside). Not in any way saying that one could not use those additional writings as sourcing, I just don't give greater credence to those collections. For all we know, those essays were written, perused, then tossed aside by Ronald. A lot of disjointed s****s of writings might confuse the issue.

Perhaps they were not integrated into the story because the refection did not come after they were published, maybe print concstraints, maybe he never thought that his books would warrant such discussion and he was just clearing things up for himself
but in the end who knows? ( the shadow knows. mwahhaaa!!!)

i guess BOTH shadows where meant in the above


though you don't give greater credence, do you view them as equal or lesser

In another most you mentioned HOB, LOTR, and the SIL as things you "accept"
why the last?

[bropous]

I except from accepting the final tome(s) as authoritative because, considering Ronald's editing and re-editing process, the writings contained in HoME did not receive the same level of revision as Hobbit or LotR. Silmarillion can also be considered as "less than totally authoritative" because, although Ronald edited and re-edited it throughout many years, it is still a compilation with the hand of Christopher inserted. So, LotR and Hobbit are primary authority, Silmarillion and a couple others secondary, and HoME tertiary. Writings by authors aside from Chris and Ron would be quaternary.

[Radagast The Brown]

now I didn't understand-Glorfindel and Glorfindel are different elves or the same elf?

[afro-elf]

It depends on what you accept


some people " who are EVEN good guys" like bropous " (afro-elf tenses waiting for the back lash)

tend to give less credit to works that are not LOTR or HOB

however, Jrrr tolkein DID write that it is ONE glorfindel

[Findegil]

Borpous, if I take your view strictly, then the question is viod. Since only looking to the Texts published by JRRT himself only a few listener to The Fall of Gondolin in the Essay club of the university of Leeds in 1926 would know about Glorfindel of Gondolin. And I don't think anybody of them would even remember it.

I admit that your view can be taken. It is only The Silamrillion I am wondering about. What you say is, that it is better to take a text more or less heavily edited by Christopher Tolkien that in part he even considered now as failure than the sources out of which he worked.

Regrads
Findegil

[Radagast The Brown]

OK. I think I'll believe to my sister and you (afro elf and Findegil) if you said that there's just one Glorfindel.

[bropous]

"What you say is, that it is better to take a text more or less heavily edited by Christopher Tolkien that in part he even considered now as failure than the sources out of which he worked."

Incorrect. I state exactly the converse, that the texts of Ronald take precedence over the work edited by Christopher from a nearly-completed original (Silmarillion), and that Silmarillion takes precedence over the History of Middle-Earth series because that series is more of a collection of (with exceptions) unfinished or discarded versions of what was covered in the LotR and Silmarillion (along with some other material).

Also, I do not in any way see Christopher Tolkien as any stripe of "failure". He did fantastic work assembling a final version of silmarillion, and his hard and intense work in editing "HoME" cannot be overlooked. However, he is simply not John Roald Ruel.

[Dwarven Sen]

i have always believed that there is one glorfindel because well actually there is no because it s just what i believe i dont think anyone lashed your back

i have to say in ther lord of the rings glor was a poncy bugger i think dying ruined his personality a little
mind you being i guess being swapped for arwen will do that to some guys

[Findegil]

and that Silmarillion takes precedence over the History of Middle-Earth series because that series is more of a collection of (with exceptions) unfinished or discarded versions of what was covered in the LotR and Silmarillion (along with some other material)

Before we are going on with all this misunderstandings: the quoted sentence is one I am talking about. The History of Middle-Earth gives use a chance to see what parts of The Silmarillion is original and which are "rewritten" by Christopher Tolkien. And I wondered that you will not take that chance. Overall I think we can't make such a general decision, but had to deal with the single texts.

Only to make that point clear: I didn't say that I think Christopher Tolkien made mistakes. I quoted loosely what he himself said in The History of Middle-Earth volume 11 The War of the Jewels in the chapter about the Fall of Doriath.

I hope this Time I made my point clearer than before.
Findegil

[bropous]

Yes, much clearer, but still not on the mark completely. Actually, in that quote, I observe that there were exceptions in HoME. And no, it does not mean I won't give HoME a chance, I just think if your're looking for a definitive answer, such as Glorfindel's possible reincarnation, if it can't be found in the primary source, you go to the secondary, if it ain't in the seondary, you go to the tertiary, so forth. It does not mean to totally discount HoME. I just think that Tolkien's editing/re-editing/re-editing process had not been applied to (most of) the material in HoME. It is this crucible process that makes one source any more "authoritative" than another.

HoME is still Tolkien, just different visions of his world from very esoteric focuspoints. Its usefulness is not in dispute, just questions as to whether it can be as reliable as, for say, Lord of the Rings in discerning the Master's final intent.

[afro-elf]

That was stated quite clearly

thanks