Talk:Elf (Middle-earth)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Elf (Middle-earth) has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles. Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.
Assessment A This article has been rated as A-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents 1 Not a single elf... 2 Thranduil 3 Middle-earth -> Arda 4 "not to be found in Tolkien's writings" ...except in LotR ,and the Etymologies, and... 5 spelling choices 6 Hair color 7 Capitalisation: Elves, elves, elf, Elf etc 8 What does this means? 9 Elfs? 10 Alcohol 11 Arwen the lastborn of her folk (in Jackson)? 12 Maeglin's non-grey eyes 13 Proposed move 14 Elves are Germanium based life forms? 15 "convenient rendering" 16 Definitions; Jargon 17 Expert help needed 18 Proposed merge 19 Sundering - the image 20 Elves first appear in The Hobbit  ??? 21 Elvish vs Elven 22 What is a 'High Elf'? 23 Follow up to Peer Review 24 Magic 25 Tuatha Dé Danann 26 Image(s)

[edit] Not a single elf...

"it is specifically told that not a single Elf joined Morgoth or Sauron, the Enemies"

How about Maeglin? Ausir 23:57, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Or what about the entire Elvish origin of Orcs for that matter. — Jor (Darkelf) 00:19, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'll just delete this sentence. Ausir 00:21, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

And another edit conflict ;-) I was busy rewriting it. — Jor (Darkelf) 00:23, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(cough). The elves where captured by Morgoth, and tortured and "brain washed" until they were faithful only to his service under the condition that he released them to Middle Earth. Try the Silmarrilion. I've read it three times.

[edit] Thranduil

What about Thranduil, of the Mirkwood Elves? He held one of the three rings... --Timo 23:59, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

No, he didn't. Ausir 00:01, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Are you sure? I think its in the appendix of LOTR. However, he was still important, as he ruled one of the elven forests, then after the Wars of the Rings, he and Elrond cured Mirkwood from the gloom --Timo 00:02, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

It's not in the appendix. Mirkwood was mainly cleared by Celeborn of Lórien. Thranduil was mainly a fringe figure, a Sindar who had become almost like his Silvan subjects. Thranduil was not even king at the time of the forging of the Rings of Power: his father Oropher was. The holders of the Elves were Gil-galad (two rings) and Galadriel: Gil-galad's rings went to his lieutenants Elrond and Círdan. Círdan then gave his ring to Gandalf. — Jor (Darkelf) 00:19, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

To be more precise, there where many elven rings, but only three remained , the others where taken back by Sauron, when he saw, that the elves were getting to know, how to control these rings. DJ 08:45, 17 Aug 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Middle-earth -> Arda

Could someone move it back to Elves (Middle-earth)? While this disambiguation is not entirely correct, we chose it some time ago because Middle-earth is more commonly known than Arda. Besides, it's a bitch fixing all those double redirects :>. Ausir 09:59, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Seconded. The article ought to use the same disambiguation as the other M-e articles. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 16:42, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Another option I’d be happy with is to move the main article to Quendi, making all other links redirects. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 16:43, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Moved back. [[User:Anárion|Image:Anarion.png]] 21:58, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] "not to be found in Tolkien's writings" ...except in LotR ,and the Etymologies, and...

"...for example the now clichéd special affinity with nature and bows, as well as explicit references to "pointy ears", are not to be found in Tolkien's writings..."

This is not entirely accurate. The Elves of LotR are and The Hobbit are mostly woodland Elves (from Lórien and Mirkwood). The Noldor in the Silmarillion have very little to do with the woods, but the Sindarin Elves of Doriath certainly had a strong affinity for nature. Anyway, the most prominent Elf in LotR is Legolas, a Wood-Elf with a bow, so the associations come rather naturally from that, even though it isn't fair to assume that all haves have an affinity with nature and bows (although the former more than the latter has some real basis in fact).

As for pointy ears, there are two distinct references. In Letters, at one point Tolkien refers to Hobbits as having "ears only slightly pointed and 'elvish'" (27), though of course that doesn't have to imply that his own Elves have pointed ears. However, the Etymologies in The Lost Road are quite explicit: "(Some think this is related to the next and *lasse 'ear'. The Quendian ears were more pointed and leaf-shaped than [?human].)"

Basically, the pointy ear question has been a subject of some debate, but unlike the great mystery of the Balrog's wings, the evidence is actually fairly conclusive. They probably did have pointed ears, although based on practical considerations they must have been only slightly pointed and "leaf-shaped", not the huge, spiky things common especially in Anime.

Anyway, I'm not exactly sure how to correct this without going into great depth. I will probably add something about the pointy-ear thing eventually. --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 17:52, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The pointed ears: yes, the [las]/[lassë]] quote is probably enough evidence. Also Tolkien's pictures of Elves seem to depict them with prominently drawn ears — suggesting they were pointed.

However, the Elves' affinity with nature is different than it is in AD&D: Elves simply were more in touch with it than Men, not as clichéd as the AD&D Silvan Elves.

Bows are not necessarily "fixed" on Elves either: with the exception of Beleg there is no special mention of bowmen under the Elves, and the Ñoldor in particular seem to have favoured swords and spears. [[User:Anárion|АПА́ДІОП]] 18:25, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that it's unfair to say that Tolkien's Elves necessarily have any special affinity with woods or with bows. But I think that the AD&D clichés most likely come from perceptions of Elves in LotR (specifically Legolas), and these perceptions are not entirely groundless. --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 23:33, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I was bold and went ahead and added some material about this. Feel free to edit. --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 00:04, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Good rewrites there. No need to change. [[User:Anárion|АПА́ДІОП]] 09:54, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] spelling choices

I noticed that the spelling Ñoldor has been used after a recent change. I don't think this is appropriate. The canonical spelling, used in all the books that people actually read (apart from the hardcore fans) is Noldor.

The spelling Ñoldor is also unnecessarily confusing, since most people know the letter ñ from Spanish, and will not know how it is pronounced here.

In general, I think that articles about Tolkien in Wikipedia should use the conventions of LotR and Silm unless they are specifically discussing earlier stages of the mythology. JulianBradfield 14:20, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The conventions in The Lord of the Rings were, in rare cases, later changed by Tolkien. The conventions in The Silmarillion are sometimes just plain wrong. There are places where Christopher Tolkien admits that he made mistakes (no one is blaming him, considering the difficult of the task). There is some discussion of the form Ñoldor at Talk:Ñoldor. If you want to discuss the current convention for dealing with such issues (which was the clear consensus at the time, but there is always room for improvement), under which the Ñ spelling is preferred, the discussion at the moment seems to be at Template talk:Mecanon (later archived to Talk:Middle-earth canon/archive2 Carcharoth 01:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC) ) (but see also Talk:Middle-earth and Middle-earth canon for some of the previous discussions). [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 19:14, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Hair color

Especially given the films' "all elves are blonde" simplification, it might be nice to include a summary of exactly what is said in the various texts about elven hair color. (See e.g. the discussions [1] and [2] and [3].) —Steven G. Johnson 22:34, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Elves are not all blonde. If you look at the scene in LOTR-TFOTR where the elves dwarves and men etc. are at council deciding who is to take the ring to mordor, you can clearly see a darked haired elve sitting down. He is supposedly names figwit.

And what about Orcs and Goblins, whose origion are Elves?

All elves are blonde in the films? What about Arwen? Elrond? A large number of the extras in Rivendell? --UrbaneLegend 11:54, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Celegorm's hair colour is heavily contested given the context of the word usage of 'fair' in his work. Never did Tolkien state to have Celegorm to have a golden colour of his hair, J.R.R. Tolkien in History of Middle Earth, Shaping of Middle-earth (part 4) of him being 'Fairfax', i.e. fair-haired. What strikes me is that in that certain parts of the series, characters with blond hair are described golden haired, where as Tolkien himself also wrote dark-haired elves as being fair. The fairfax relates to an translation into of the Quenta Noldorinwa into Old English, but in the translation, there is a clear translation to golden-haired, namely: his daughter is Fripuswip Fealuleome (i.e. Finduilas Failivrin; fealuleome perhaps 'golden light'). In HOME XII, the often the correct context is given and this is just one example because I can come up with more references of fair-haired in correlation to dark hair colours: There were fair-haired men and women among the Folk of Beor, but most of them had brown hair (going usually with brown eyes), and many were less fair in skin, some indeed being swarthy. To equal fair-haired to blonde is just incredibly wrong and I cannot imagine it would be the purpose of this article to give incorrect information. 21:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC) Citations used from HOME IV and Home XII, Rhapsody

As stereotypical it is, the movies did portrait many elves as blonde. However, professor T never once said that the majority was such, nor any other colour. The term "fair" does not mean the archaic form (always) and might even refer to their skin. The Vanyar were descrobed as "golden-haired", the Noldor as "dark" and the Teleri as "of many colours" though their unique rademark was their silverhair (Galadriel's mother and Celeborn most noteably). It... was mostly a mistake Jacksson made with all the blonde elves since the only blonde Elf that had no Vanyar blood ever described was Thranduil ("... and a circlet of red leaves lay around his golden hair" or something, the Hobbit) and he was of Sindar origin. ---Hackeru

Tolkien made it very clear, in many places, that most Elves have dark hair. Only the Vanyar are blond (or 'golden-haired'). 169.253.4.21 (talk) 13:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)TexxasFinn

[edit] Capitalisation: Elves, elves, elf, Elf etc

My instinct tells me that Elvish, the Elves, Elven should be capitalied, but "Legolas is an elf", "two elves are dead" should not ("Lupin is a Man" seems wrong to me). Why is every Elf* and Elv* word capitalized? (This is not a rhetorical question - I speak from ignorance and a desire to know the answer). Lupin 21:54, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Consistency: Tolkien used lowercase "man" to describe any male (even non-humans), but always used uppercase Men when referring to humans. Other race names (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents etc.) were also always capitalized. Therefore when within a Middle-earth context, and referring to the Middle-earth races, uppercase should be used. Thus: Oberon was king of the elves or fairies, and Thingol was (a) king of the Elves. Jordi·✆ 23:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Interestingly, hobbits is often not capitalized in LOTR, though. Also, we have "elven-cloak", "elven-fingers", "elven-song", "elven-blood" and "elven-blades", but "Elven-tongue", "Elven-lore", "Elven-stars" and "Elven-lords". Lupin 01:15, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hobbits-as-a-race is questionable: they're clearly an offshoot of Men. Also, LotR is supposed to be Frodo's story: he would not have capitalized the word. Hobbits don't appear in the Silm or in other texts (asides from the occasional origin or footnote, where they *are* Hobbits, not hobbits). The examples you mention such as elven-cloak are not supposed to mean "Elven cloak" (cloak belonging to an Elf), but rather "elven-cloak" (cloak of an Elvish style, cloak coming from the Elves). Again these occurences are all from LotR (I can't recall or quickly find any from the Silm or HoME), and most of them in dialog. Jordi·✆ 01:25, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

So do you think we should capitalize "hobbits" here? How about "orcs" (capitalized in LoTR) or "trolls" (not capitalized in LoTR)? Lupin 01:39, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'd capitalize them all—in a M-e context of course. It's what both J.R.R. and Christopher Tolkien did/do (most of the time), and it's consistent. Trolls by the way is capitalized in the appendices (see the end of appendix F-I for example): "some held that they were not Trolls but giant Orcs". Note also the "troll-race" in the sentence before: the troll-race are the Trolls. Jordi·✆ 01:53, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Hobbits-as-a-race is questionable: they're clearly an offshoot of Men." Yes, so clearly that hobbits are half our size and have pointed ears. =P On an unrelated note, I'd never heard about elves dying after being raped. Source? --71.112.234.168 10:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of elves dying from being raped, or being raped at all. I've read all of the published books and history of middle earth series, I'm deleting the sentence.

I think there is a reference to Elves dying from being raped somewhere in the last three volumes of HoMe -- in fact, almost certainly in Morgoth's Ring, probably in "Laws and Customs Among the Eldar". Unfortunately, I don't have the exact reference, but I think the passage is written in a very dignified, tasteful way, like all of Tolkien's references to sex, and therefore may not be clear to some readers. I also seem to recall that the reference is in one of the notes to the essay rather than the essay itself, so it's not particularly prominent. Gildir

The torture and torment of Celebrian (Elrond's wife, Galadriel's daughter, Arwen's mother) by the orcs is clearly implied as having been of a sexual nature. She is unable to recover from the horror of it after her rescue and leaves Middle-earth to seek healing in Valinor. --David

Above Jordi said, "Other race names (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents etc.) were also always capitalized." This is incorrect. When referring to the race (or sub-races, kindreds) directly as a whole, he capitalized them because they are proper nouns. When referring just a group of them, especially an unspecialized group, as a creature or creatures, he didn't capitalize them because they aren't proper nouns.

Tolkien explained it well when he commented on this capitalization style in Letter No. 21, a note to an employee at his publisher: "Men with a capital is, I think, used in text when 'human kind' are specifically intended; and man, men with a minuscule are occasionally and loosely used as 'adult male' and 'people'."

'Hobbits' is capitalized on many occasions, but throughout the story you usually don't see it capitalized because it is being used in reference to the four in the Fellowship, or hobbits generically - not the entire 'hobbit kind.' It's capitalized in the very first sentence of the prologue, and several times afterwards: "This book is largely concerned with Hobbits, and from its pages a reader may discover much of their character and a little of their history."

While it is not capitalized in instances such as these:
"Then they went round the hole, and evicted three young hobbits (two Boffins and a Bolger) who were knocking holes in the walls of one of the cellars."

Here are some other examples to illustrate the difference between This and this.

Elves/elves:
"He could dimly see the grey forms of two elves sitting motionless with their arms about their knees, speaking in whispers."
"Not Elves; for the woodland folk were altogether noiseless in their movements. "

Dwarves/dwarves:
"As is told in The Hobbit, there came one day to Bilbo's door the great Wizard, Gandalf the Grey, and thirteen dwarves with him: none other, indeed, than Thorin Oakenshield, descendant of kings, and his twelve companions in exile."
"‘Beyond the eyes of the Dwarves are such foretellings,’ said Gimli." - Slow Graffiti 06:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What does this means?

"The bride’s mother gives the groom a jewel to be worn, but the marriage is achieved with its consummation" The consumation of what?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Sex. --CBD _☎ ^✉ 12:24, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elfs?

When is "elf" ever pluralised as "elfs"? It's ungrammatical; and I've never seen it done. "Dwarves" is a different kettle of fish. --UrbaneLegend 12:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

The writer could be speaking of different elf races, in which case I suppose "elfs" could be correct, but it still sounds rather strange. I think it should be changed, any objections? --Eruhildo 21:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alcohol

I've deleted this paragraph. It stated that in "Jackson's Middle-earth" elves are immune to alcohol. This is not demonstrated, as the paragraph claimed it was, in the drinking game scene. The beer does have a (very mild) effect on Legolas - he says he can feel it, and that it makes his fingers tingle. It is not claimed that he is completely immune to alcohol. A small point, but it's not a misconception on the part of Jackson. --UrbaneLegend 12:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Elves are certainly not immune to the effects of alcohol. In the Hobbit both the butler and the chief guard drink themselves into a stupor. -- Jordi·✆ 20:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arwen the lastborn of her folk (in Jackson)?

I'm sort of sure this exists, and Jackson and company made this up, but then again... I was going to add the following because of a statement building on bodiless spirits Lingering - that at the end of the world, only young Elves would remain visible since they really won't stop reproducing:

Theoretically, if the Elves did exist, at the end of the world the youngest of them would still be visible, since for them all to become invisible would logically require that all Elves stop reproducing at some point. Incidentally, this voluntary cessation of reproduction appeared in material related to the Jackson films. In the material (not explicitly stated in the films themselves), Arwen is supposed to be the lastborn of her people, thus her being called "the Evenstar" (evening star). However, this does not appear in the books.

202.78.127.202 03:44, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maeglin's non-grey eyes

Could anyone please provide a quote? I'm sure he had grey eyes. If not, my mistake. 202.78.127.202 03:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elves are Germanium based life forms?

Is it true that elves are Ge-77 based life forms, and this explains their apparent immortality? --The1exile - Talk - Contribs - 10:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I've never ever seen any evidence in any of Tolkien's works that would indicate that. Where such an idea would come from is beyond me. --Eruhildo 00:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "convenient rendering"

Is it accurate to describe "Elf" as a convenient rendering of "Eldar" and "Quendi"? Wouldn't "Elf" in fact be a convenient rendering of whatever the Westron word for the Quendi/Eldar is? john k 00:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Tolkien stated that he used 'elf' because it was 'close enough' to his 'Quendi' to provide a general idea... like 'wizards' was a reasonably similar term for describing his 'Istari'. Thus 'elf' is a "convenient rendering" of 'Eldar', 'Quendi', and any/all other terms for them in any language. However, since the article specifically references the 'Red Book of Westmarch', which was ostensibly written in Westron, it would in that instance have been being used in place of the Westron term. It's an 'approximate English translation' from any language though. --CBDunkerson 12:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. But when it is used in Tolkien's own works that are supposedly from the Red Book, it is used as the equivalent of the Westron, presumably, since references to the Eldar or the Quendi are not translated, but left in the original Sindarin (or Quenya?) The reference ought to be clarified. john k 14:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The Westron word for Elf is known, by the way: Nimîr (directly from early Adûnaic). There are no indications in Westron there were different terms for Quendi vs Eldar, and thus Nimîr is clearly the word translated by Elf. We can thus presume that Tolkien's "convenient rendering" of 'Quendi/Eldar' as 'Elves' is also present in the Red Book: where Tolkien used 'Elf' Frodo (Bilbo) used 'Nimîr'. -- Jordi·✆ 18:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, nice. If we can source that, it would be useful to include, I think. john k 02:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Definitions; Jargon

This is a fascinating Wiki entry, but it includes a lot of words from Tolkien that are either not defined in this entry, are defined several paragraphs later, or you have to follow a link to find the definition. This makes the article seem jargony and hard to follow for the reader. Can you put in a short definition when you need a new term, and then the reader can understand, or, if they want more detail, they can follow the link? Just my 2 cents. Regards, Ssilvers 04:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd love to give a hand, but I'm such a Tolkien fan I don't always see stuff like that. Could you point some out for me? --Eruhildo 08:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expert help needed

This article is one step up from list form in places, with much essay-style conjecture and a preoccupation, in places, in criticising Peter Jackson's interpretation. The tone of the article needs formalizing. I don't have the specific expertise necessary myself! ▫ Urbane Legend ^talk 09:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I am working on it. It is however an enormous rewrite, so am doing it in my sandbox, but I do not plan to be finished in the next few days. Bryan 13:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merge

I propose to merge the Fate of the Elves of Middle-earth into Elf (Middle-earth). The former is still mainly filled with speculation, which is frowned upon in Wikipedia. It is a well-written essay worthy of the authoring of a respected Tolkien scholar with plausible guesses derived from hints to "what presumably happened" to the Elves of Middle-earth; however, much of the information there could be condensed in length as well as speculation (along with adding inline citations) to fit into the history section. Comments? —Mirlen 11:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

In full agreement with this. -- Jordi·✆ 14:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Since there doesn't seem to be any more objections, can we considered this as merge? —Mirlen 14:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

agree —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryan Tong Minh (talk • contribs)

I just did a quick merge of the text from there to here. Obviously it should be cleaned up and verified. The stuff about 'Arwen being the last Elf' was actually on this page previously (see discussion about it above) almost verbatim, so it looks like this content has moved back and forth a bit. --CBD 13:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sundering - the image

I propose that we make a new more correct and better image, the current one is wrong. It shows Falathrim as being separate from Sindar while Falathrim were a subgroup of Sindar as were the Eglath (later Iahtrim) and Mithrim (who merged with Gondolin Elves). The Laiquendi/Laegrim also weren't separte group that came of Nandor but were in fact a subgroup of Nandor like the Silvan Elves/Twarwaith (later merged with Avari who came to west). Also the Teleri->Falmari connection isn't quite clear on this picture, more correctly it doesn't show that Teleri split into three groups. Also it would be good if we could somehow show how the three main groups came to be (Eldar) along with the 'Unwilling' (Avari). --Factanista 12:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elves first appear in The Hobbit  ???

Tolkiens concept of Elves were first published in the Hobbit, but surely they appeared in The Cottage of Lost Play and other writings long before then? Why is this not mentioned, nor the rest of HOME? --Davémon 22:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, The Hobbit was published before 'The Cottage of Lost Play', which was published posthumously. 'The Cottage of Lost Play' was written before The Hobbit, but not published before. Carcharoth 21:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Elvish vs Elven

I always wondered if there was an "official" difference between these two adjectives. Is elvish used exclusively for languages? Or can one say "elvish sword" in the same manner as "elven sword"? If there is an official source, it might be interesting to add it to the article. --DarthMuffin 02:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I know of no official statement to the fact, but generally in Tolkien's works (I have read the Hobbit, Lord of the Rings, and The Silmarillion), Elvish refers specifically the the language(s) of Elves, while Elven refers to anything else related to Elves, usually an object or person, such as in "Three rings for the Elven kings under the sky..."--UrsaLinguaBWD (talk) 05:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What is a 'High Elf'?

The funny thing is that 'High Elf' re-directs to this article, in spice of the fact that nowhere does the term 'High Elf' occur on this page. Isn't this rather a problem? --Peter Knutsen 12:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks for spotting that. High Elves (Tareldar) should redirect to Calaquendi. I've done that now, and added a note here as well. Carcharoth 13:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Hang on. I'm confused now. High elf, High Elves and High Elf all redirect to High elves, and looking at the redirects towards Elf (Middle-earth), I can't find anything corresponding to the re-direct you point out. Can you explain further?

There is a contradiction in this arcticle ! They say that elves celebrate conception and after that they say that elves point of view about sex is intimate. --Tepes Doamne 04:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I dont think that gondolin sholdent be placed in the castels i wich elves live (cave castels) . It is built from the ground and has no part of it in caves. --Tepes Doamne 16:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The High Elves were the Noldor; the Deep Elves were the Vanyar; the Sea Elves were the Teleri.

169.253.4.21 (talk) 13:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)TexxasFinn

[edit] Follow up to Peer Review

Davemon, thanks for submitting this article to peer review. I've left a note at the WikiProject here. I mostly agree with your recent removal of that large section of what is mostly original research. Stuff like that needs to be sourced, removed, or at least extensively rewritten in an encyclopedic style. The A-grade was an internal WikiProject one. Hopefully we can get this to something that is genuinely GA or A standard, or at least a high-class B standard. Carcharoth 21:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I've made some edits - mainly to the middle section - removing some repeated info, and a little "own research" - I didn't want to hack at it too much.

The section on "beards" I feel is of debateable importance..87.102.89.127 15:22, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I also removed the list of languages as it repeats the substantial part of the aricle "elvish languages"87.102.89.127 15:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I feel much of the language information may be reintroduced, but be better integrated into the article so removing the section seems like a step in the right direction. The significance of beards is somewhat debatable. On the one hand it helps Tolkien 'visually' differentiate between the humanoid races in The Hobbit, and on the other, I know of no reliable sources which discuss this issue at any length, so the purpose of beards in a wikipedia article is even more doubtful. I do have a concern that there seems to be only one source for much of the text, that Morgoths Ring is a primary source, and much of the "history of the elves" section whilst paraphrasing The Silmarillion (another primary source) has no references at all! --Davémon 18:13, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Magic

Do the elves of Middle-Earth possess any magic? If so, perhaps it should be included in the article. Aidoflight 22:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tuatha Dé Danann

I have changed: "Some of the stories Tolkien wrote as their 'legends' are directly influenced by Celtic mythology.^[1] For example, the "Flight of The Noldoli (later Noldor)" is based on the Tuatha Dé Danann and Lebor Gabála Érenn, and their migratory nature comes from early Irish/Celtic history.^[1] The Elvish language Sindarin has "a linguistic character very like (though not identical with) British-Welsh ... because it seems to fit the rather 'Celtic' type of legends and stories told of its speakers".^[2] Tolkien's comments regarding his distaste for Celtic legends^[3] are a product of his Anglophilia rather than a commentary on the texts themselves or their influence on his writing.^[1]"

to:

"Dimitra Fimi has suggested that some of the stories Tolkien wrote as their 'legends' are directly influenced by Celtic mythology.^[1] For example, the "Flight of The Noldoli (later Noldor)" is based on the Tuatha Dé Danann and Lebor Gabála Érenn, and their migratory nature comes from early Irish/Celtic history.^[1] The Elvish language Sindarin has "a linguistic character very like (though not identical with) British-Welsh ... because it seems to fit the rather 'Celtic' type of legends and stories told of its speakers".^[4] In this view Tolkien's comments regarding his distaste for Celtic legends^[5] are a product of his Anglophilia rather than a commentary on the texts themselves or their influence on his writing.^[1]"

For the simple reason that Tolkien did not make such a claim that the 'Flight of The Noldor' was based on the tale of the 'Tuatha Dé Danann', nor that his disparaging remarks about Celtic Mythology were due to his 'Anglophilia' (maybe he just didn't like Celtic Mythology at that point of time). To state a theory as irrefutable fact is against Wikipedia's rules. It is a fact that some think that "the stories Tolkien wrote as their 'legends' are directly influenced by 'Celtic mythology'" not a fact that they ARE based directly on 'Celtic mythology'. In fact it begs the question of whether, if they are indeed influenced by 'Celtic mythology', they are influenced directly or indirectly in the first place. So no Davemon you cannot just push your point of view all over the place as if it is irrefutable fact! Please stop doing it! Sigurd Dragon Slayer (talk)

Fair enough. There are no facts, only verifiable sources, and the sources are cited. Personally I think the in-sentence attribution you are arguing for (rather than attributing by reference) is going to make the article read like he/said she/said, but lets run with it and see where it ends up.--Davémon (talk) 22:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, personally, something like wikipedia should agree with Tolkien over people who wish to argue with him on this issue; Tolkien denied a Celtic influence and infact called these beings 'Elves' because it is Germanic. 86.154.189.220 (talk) 22:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no, Wikipedia shouldn't treat authors opinions of their own work as more important than professional scholars or A. Authors lack independence, and will always be biased. Nevertheless, what wikipedia must do is show all significant views in an as unbiased, neutral way as possible. Tolkien called them 'Elves' because it is Germanic? If you can find a reference for that, please add it to the article. --Davémon (talk) 23:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but it is better than believing those who wish to argue against Tolkien. Tolkien denied a Celtic influence and picked the word 'Elf' (a Germanic word) for his creatures. He has 'Elves' in his work for the same reason he has Dwarves (Durin, Thorin, Kili, Fili etc...all the Dwarves are Germanic), Gandalf, Earendil, Trolls, Orc (from Orcneas), the Rohirrim snd virtually all of his world (infact Middle-earth is from Germanic and the Norse cognate is Midgard.

If you don't think 'Elves' are Germanic, compare the word with the other Germanic languages (Old Norse: áLfar and álfr singular. Danish: elver. Swedish: alver. Dutch: elf(singular), elfen and elven. Gothic *albs (singular) and *albeis.

Tolkien himself stated that he isn't inspired much by Celtic mythology and I would take his word over others who wish to argue with him; I find it a bit disrespectful doing so. It is most odd that everything beautiful has to be Celtic; a clear misunderstanding of Germanic mythology.

Similarities between the Tuatha Dé Danann or Sídh and Tolkien's Elves is coincidental based on the original traits he gave his otherwise Germanic creatures. The beauty and noblity of the elves, something that all the Celticists believe are merely Celtic, a present in Germanic folklore hence the saying "As pretty as an elf" and numerous names with 'elf' in them meaning noble-, wise- and fair/pretty-. 86.154.189.220 (talk) 11:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Tolkien himself says that Sindarin was Welsh-British. ie. Celtic in nature, and that this fitted the "rather 'Celtic' nature of the tales" (being the Silmarillion). Tolkiens opinion isn't a simple, single, fixed thing, and hopefully the article accurately reflects this. Nobody is saying Tolkiens elves weren't influenced by Germanic myth, it's just that so far only one source has been added to the article which covers this view. If you feel the article suffers a celtic-bias, then I hope you'll take the time to add well-referenced, cited material which supports the influence of Norse / Germanic mythology / folklore on Tolkiens Elves to the article in order to redress the balance. --Davémon (talk) 12:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Celtic languages are different from Celtic mythology. A link with Brythonic linguistically doesn't support a link with Irish (as the Tuatha Dé Dannan are indeed Irish and not Welsh) mythologically...plus Tolkien got offended when someone mistakingly thought that the Elves (and the world of Arda) were influenced by Celtic mytholoy.

This article does have a Celtic bias, it is quite plain. If it didn't the section about whether Tolkien is influenced by Celtic mythology would have ended with his own words on the matter (e.g. his "distaste" of Celticism).

Add references to the elves being Germanic? Firstly, I hardly need to as the look of them and the very word elf speaks for me and secondly it would be hard to find anything that doesn't strangely delve into Celticism in regards to elves as most seems to have read the article by Fimi and the misinformed book called Perilous Realms: Celtic and Norse in Tolkien's Middle-Earth (this book incorrectly uses Norse instead of Germanic and actually states that Germanic mythology is militant whereas Celtic is peaceful; utter nonsense)and people ignorantly thought elves to be Celtic (unsurprising considering that this is the age of Celtic misconception) and cannot admit that they were wrong; they thus try to hide their mistake my trying to make Tolkien's elves seem like the Tuatha Dé Dannan (Tolkien shows no real sign of being even remotely influenced by anything Irish) disguised as the Germanic elves; this is complete nonsense.

I am not surprised that this article is biased towards Celticism as most of wikipedia is. Contrary to what Marjorie Burns claims, it is Germanicism that needs to be defended as most people see it as ugly and barbaric whereas Celticism is seen as beautiful, tree-hugging (despite the fact that Germanic mythology has the whole world connected by a world tree) and peaceful. Germanicism is allowed no real champions like Tolkien anymore but instead has ro automatically be championed by racists (absurd, racism plays no part in Germanic mythology). 86.154.189.220 (talk) 02:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

That's some great stuff added to the article. I've slightly clarified some of the points regards Ingwe. Also there is a historical / development structure to the section, starting with Tolkiens early concept of elves, going through the early Silmarillion / Book of Lost Tales, through to the Hobbit (and then the Lord of the Rings then the later silmarillion, as the article developed). For that reason I've moved the comment regards Frey/Freya Lord/Lady to the end of the section generally right historical place. Also, we should check wether Ingwe is BOLT or the later sil, Inwe/Ingwe is properly placed in BoLT. --Davémon (talk) 10:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I have currently changed the order of many parts of the article as I think it should take the accademic essay route (e.g. certain subjects, e.g. Germanicism, Catholicism and Celticism, being located near each other). I just found the order to be somewhat off as it kept jumping from points to points. I think paragraphs about Catholicism should remain with other paragraphs of Catholicism. I am not going to say this is the correct order but I think it is the most comfortable.

Awaiting your input, Davémon, Sigurd and co.86.154.189.220 (talk) 13:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I think perhaps we need 2 sections. One is the "Development" which follows the historical development of Tolkiens elves. Ie - The elves in 'The Cottage of Lost Play' are simply not the same kinds of creatures as in Lord of the Rings. The second section would be "Sources and interpretations", which takes the thematic approach across all of Tolkiens works. The 'problem' I see with the thematic approach is that by isolating sources into themes, the historical narrative of Tolkien actually writing this stuff is lost, and it (IMHO) mistakenly treats Tolkien's Elves as a single, fixed immutable object on which people have opinions. As the current section is still nominally "Development" i've rearranged and titled accordingly. Davémon (talk) 15:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image(s)

Why, in the entirety of this article, is there but one picture, and a small and poor one at that. With all the images drawn of elves by so many people, can we not find a single one that follows Wikipedia's image use policies? Seriously, people. Even the "List of Objects in Middle-Earth" article has better images than this one.--UrsaLinguaBWD (talk) 05:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)