Why not Ecthelion?

[Yregwyn]

Why was it Glorfindel that was reincarnated and sent back? Yes he was a great warrior/elf-lord and he saved Tuor and company from the Balrog when they were fleeing Gondolin. I would never bad mouth him. Its just that Ecthelion killed what 4 Balrogs and then turned around and killed Gothmog. He dies as well but still thats 5 Balrogs, one being the greatest of them all. I just think Ecthelion is over looked alot of times. I mean Gorfindel got sent back and what did Ecthelion get, Denethor's father named after him haha JK. Unless mayby he had done his part or something like that. Ecthelion is prolly my fav character besides Finrod, "Ecthelion of the Fountain" how cool of a name is that?

[IxnaY AintsaY]

You say it like being sent back to the Middle-earth backwater was a reward, when actually Glorfindel was being punished for taking out some minor, wet-behind-the-wings Balrog recruit through pure clumsiness. Meanwhile Ecthelion obliterated Gothmog and his toughest hench-rogs left and right using nothing more than a puddle and his freakin' hat*.

*I may have taken some minor liberties with this story.

[Nogrod]

I'm not willing to be a spoil-sport or anything, but wasn't it the case that Tolkien had to come up with this resurrection-idea only when he realised he had used the same name for two different characters both being remarkable enough they just couldn't have been two different persons - not to talk of the fact that one had actually died already before the second came along?

[Zigûr]

Is it at all possible that Glorfindel volunteered to return to Middle-earth? Maybe Ecthelion simply wanted to "enjoy his retirement" as it were - we have to assume that, in the fulness of time, he was re-embodied in Aman and got to go about his business.

What with no Elves ever permanently dying (except Fëanor I suppose, and however the Finwë-Míriel tradeoff ended up working out, and perhaps some others - I always liked that line which might be in Morgoth's Ring about the reports of resurrected Eldar about the fëa of the Avari in Mandos) it must have become really crowded in Aman after a while. I know the Eldar did not reproduce as quickly as Men but still...

[Yregwyn]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Is it at all possible that Glorfindel volunteered to return to Middle-earth? Maybe Ecthelion simply wanted to "enjoy his retirement" as it were - we have to assume that, in the fulness of time, he was re-embodied in Aman and got to go about his business.

Ya maybe he felt bad so he volunteered, i like to think they were setting around talking with Ecthelion teasing Glorfindel "hey at least i fell in the water on pourpose"..... haha

[Aiwendil]

You should remember that Ecthelion only killed multiple Balrogs in the very early 'Lost Tales' version of the story. At that point, Balrogs were conceived of quite differently from the great demons of fire and darkness that they became around the time of the writing of LotR. If the later 'Fall of Gondolin' had been carried further, it is highly doubtful that Ecthelion would have killed any Balrogs beyond Gothmog.

Of course, you're free to disagree - but one can't simply throw things written years apart together willy-nilly and expect any kind of coherence.

[Elmo]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Is it at all possible that Glorfindel volunteered to return to Middle-earth? Maybe Ecthelion simply wanted to "enjoy his retirement" as it were - we have to assume that, in the fulness of time, he was re-embodied in Aman and got to go about his business.

What with no Elves ever permanently dying (except Fëanor I suppose, and however the Finwë-Míriel tradeoff ended up working out, and perhaps some others - I always liked that line which might be in Morgoth's Ring about the reports of resurrected Eldar about the fëa of the Avari in Mandos) it must have become really crowded in Aman after a while. I know the Eldar did not reproduce as quickly as Men but still...

Plenty of elves permanently die, none of the Moriquendi were reborn. I'm sure it's Morgoth's Ring where it's said the Dark Elves were seen in the Halls of Mandos but did not speak to the Eldar.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Elmo

Plenty of elves permanently die, none of the Moriquendi were reborn. I'm sure it's Morgoth's Ring where it's said the Dark Elves were seen in the Halls of Mandos but did not speak to the Eldar.

I can't agee. As far as I'm aware, generally speaking, all Elves had the potential to be reincarnated. What passage in Morgoth's Ring states otherwise?

In Morgoth's Ring CJRT states something incorrect about Elven reincarnation with respect to his father's 'final' intent -- later corrected by CJRT in the notes to the Glorfindel essays in any case -- although if I recall correctly it wasn't about the issue you raise here.

So, just a general caution for employing MR when it comes to Elven reincarnation.

[Yregwyn]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I'm not willing to be a spoil-sport or anything, but wasn't it the case that Tolkien had to come up with this resurrection-idea only when he realised he had used the same name for two different characters both being remarkable enough they just couldn't have been two different persons - not to talk of the fact that one had actually died already before the second came along?

Ya but its way funner to think that reincarnation was how it went.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I'm not willing to be a spoil-sport or anything, but wasn't it the case that Tolkien had to come up with this resurrection-idea only when he realised he had used the same name for two different characters both being remarkable enough they just couldn't have been two different persons - not to talk of the fact that one had actually died already before the second came along?

No that wasn't the case

Tolkien's Elves were reincarnated (in some fashion) even in the early The Book of Lost Tales, thus well before Tolkien somewhat randomly borrowed the name Glorfindel for The Lord of the Rings -- not wholly randomly it seems, if we judge by a note in the drafts for The Lord of the Rings that Glorfindel should tell of his ancestry in Gondolin (although obviously Tolkien did not have Glorfindel tell of this in the ultimate version of the story).

Also Tolkien would not have been forced to use Glorfindel for The Silmarillion, and it hadn't been published by him -- meaning if JRRT really could not find out the 'truth' of this matter to his satisfaction, he didn't have to explain a scenario with 'two Glorfindels' in any case...

... as his readership only knew about one.

[Yregwyn]

Originally Posted by IxnaY AintsaY

You say it like being sent back to the Middle-earth backwater was a reward, when actually Glorfindel was being punished for taking out some minor, wet-behind-the-wings Balrog recruit through pure clumsiness. Meanwhile Ecthelion obliterated Gothmog and his toughest hench-rogs left and right using nothing more than a puddle and his freakin' hat*.

*I may have taken some minor liberties with this story.

ROFL Ecthelion Rules All!!!! I can see im gonna like you Ix, u think like me. No really that just shows the difference in caliber from 1st age to 3rd. Gandalf died killing Durins Bane, Ecth woulda never missed a step especially if he had Glamdring..... Thats why they didnt send him. Sauron didnt have anything to stand against him, the Valar wanted to make it a little sport huh? haha Glad i found this spot my wife hates LOTR and none of my friends read so its awesome to get to actually talk with someone about it!

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Yregwyn

that just shows the difference in caliber from 1st age to 3rd. Gandalf died killing Durins Bane, Ecth woulda never missed a step especially if he had Glamdring.

Maybe, but I think you also need to consider circumstances. Gandalf met "B" on a narrow bridge where there was no room to dodge. He destroyed B's sword in a moment and dropped B into the gulf a moment later - it was only his being surprised by the whip and unable to avoid it that made the struggle even close.

War may be a science, but individual battles often turn on the simplest of circumstances. Except for that one chance of failing to avoid a whip (a simple slash of his sword to cut the whip-cord before being dragged in would suffice), and we would be saying how Ecth had to resort to desparation and kamikazi to >barely< kill B at the cost of his life, while Gandalf snuffed out Big-B with a swift 1-2 punch (parry sword; break bridge; End-of-story ... all done, no hu-hu) - and practically without breaking a sweat!

[Yregwyn]

Originally Posted by Puddleglum

Maybe, but I think you also need to consider circumstances. Gandalf met "B" on a narrow bridge where there was no room to dodge. He destroyed B's sword in a moment and dropped B into the gulf a moment later - it was only his being surprised by the whip and unable to avoid it that made the struggle even close.

War may be a science, but individual battles often turn on the simplest of circumstances. Except for that one chance of failing to avoid a whip (a simple slash of his sword to cut the whip-cord before being dragged in would suffice), and we would be saying how Ecth had to resort to desparation and kamikazi to >barely< kill B at the cost of his life, while Gandalf snuffed out Big-B with a swift 1-2 punch (parry sword; break bridge; End-of-story ... all done, no hu-hu) - and practically without breaking a sweat!

Good point. But.....the 1-2 punch as you put it would not have killed the Balrog just dumped him in a under ground lake. I think the breaking of the flame sword was more Glamdring then anything though, but i agree the bridge made it alot more complicated. Although the bridge wasnt the hard part for Gandalf it was chasing the wet Balrog who was running scared from him. He pursued him for what 8 days? Then finally cornerd him on Durin's Tower and 2 more days of fighting after that. No bridge it would have more then likely been over in minutes. In Ecth's defence he had only 1 arm (depending on what version we look at), for either part of or the whole fight.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by Yregwyn

No bridge it would have more then likely been over in minutes.

Maybe, or perhaps not.

After they had fell into the cold lake, so cold it almost stopped Gandalf's heart, the balrog's "fire was quenched" and did not ignite again until they reach the summit of Celebdil.

Originally Posted by TTT, bk. 3, ch. 5, p. 125

Out he sprang, and even as I came behind, he burst into new flame

Remember, the balrog was essentially fighting without a weapon after they fell.

Originally Posted by FotR, bk. 2, ch. 5, p. 392

From out of the shadow a red sword leaped flaming.

Glamdring glittered white in answer.

There was a ringing clash and a stab of white fire. The Balrog fell back and its sword flew up in molten fragments.

So it is said as they clash deep beneath the mountain, "ever he clutched at me, and ever I hewed him, till at last he fled into dark tunnels" [TTT, ch. 5]. It appears to me as though this is not just 1 minute of sparring, rather a prolonged encounter before the balrog fled all the way up the mountain.

Even before their physical encounter recall Gandalf's exclamation to the company.

Originally Posted by FotR, ch. 5, p. 387-388

I have met my match, and have nearly been destroyed... You will have to do without light for a while: I am rather shaken... The counter spell was terrible. It nearly broke me... I have never felt so spent, but it is passing.

The encounter left him totally winded. He could not even make a light for them in the dark. I'd figure the battle could have gone either way.

Finally they both let loose on the precipice, which neither walked away from.

Originally Posted by TTT, bk. 3, ch. 5"

Those that looked up from afar thought that the mountain was crowned with storm. Thunder they heard, and lightning, they said, smote upon Celebdil, and leaped back broken into tongues of fire... A greatsmoke rose about us, vapour and steam. Ice fell like rain. I threw down my enemy, and he fell from the high place and broke the mountainside where he smote it in his ruin. Then the darkness took me

These do not seem to be quick encounters. Gandalf says, "Those that looked up from afar thought that the mountain was crowned with storm." A one or two minute long storm? I think not. Also He says, "I have never felt such a challenge" [FotR, bk. 2, ch. 5].

[Yregwyn]

Ya i know what you mean my the different versions, so i guess i should have said earlier that this topic was posted using what the middle earth wikipedia says. Thats where i go if i have a question and dont feel like goin to find the book or if im away from home. like you said its whatever version you wanna look at.

[Yregwyn]

Im just happy to have someone to talk about it with.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Yregwyn

Why was it Glorfindel that was reincarnated and sent back?

Tolkien seems to find a number of reasons why Glorfindel was reincarnated before the ban was lifted (which is different from being sent back of course, but being under the ban was problematic). He didn't list them like this, but here goes:

1) Glorfindel was an Elda of high and noble spirit (I'm going to assume exceptionally high and noble is meant)

2) he incurred the ban reluctantly only because of kinship and allegiance to Turgon, and love for his Kindred.

3) he took no part in the Kinslaying

4) 'More important': he had sacrificed his life, enabling Tuor and Idril to escape, a deed of vital importance to the designs of the Valar.

So Glorfindel was purged of any guilt -- in note 12 Tolkien describes that his guilt had been small, and once again refers to his noble character, among other things. He was released from Mandos, and Manwe restored him to bodily life -- and he gained the primitive innocence and grace of the Eldar. It is then said he became a friend and follower of Gandalf!

Glorfindel remained in the Blessed Realm, but his ultimate return (it is said) must have been for the purpose of strengthening Gil-galad and Elrond, in SA 1600 it appears.

Its just that Ecthelion killed what 4 Balrogs and then turned around and killed Gothmog. He dies as well but still thats 5 Balrogs, one being the greatest of them all.

It's already been noted, but these Balrogs were more destructible than Tolkien would later imagine them. I doubt these numbers were going to stand -- and actually, there is evidence that JRRT imagined as little as three, or at most seven Balrogs, ever existing.

The matter of Balrog numbers is a bit complicated, and involves 'when Tolkien wrote what' (as there are plenty of descriptions written when Tolkien imagined very many Balrogs existing), but the idea at least (in my opinion) notably calls into question the number of Balrogs that were going to be slain in any theoried, updated revision of The Fall of Gondolin...

... the detailed version of which never got very much beyond Tuor's coming to the city [see Unfinished Tales], although Tolkien did some updating with Maeglin too.

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

Tolkien seems to find a number of reasons why Glorfindel was reincarnated before the ban was lifted (which is different from being sent back of course, but being under the ban was problematic). He didn't list them like this, but here goes:

1) Glorfindel was an Elda of high and noble spirit (I'm going to assume exceptionally high and noble is meant)

2) he incurred the ban reluctantly only because of kinship and allegiance to Turgon, and love for his Kindred.

3) he took no part in the Kinslaying

4) 'More important': he had sacrificed his life, enabling Tuor and Idril to escape, a deed of vital importance to the designs of the Valar.

So Glorfindel was purged of any guilt -- in note 12 Tolkien describes that his guilt had been small, and once again refers to his noble character, among other things. He was released from Mandos, and Manwe restored him to bodily life -- and he gained the primitive innocence and grace of the Eldar. It is then said he became a friend and follower of Gandalf!

These are thorough account of the reasons that Tolkien gave. I think it's interesting that Glorfindel left with Turgon, because of the kinship the two shared. With his blonde hair, it seems that Glorfindel probably had significant Vanyar ancestry. At the same time he was a Noldor prince. I always thought that he was a descendant of one of Finwe's daughters that had married a Vanyar relative of Elenwe, hence the close kinship to Turgon.

It's already been noted, but these Balrogs were more destructible than Tolkien would later imagine them. I doubt these numbers were going to stand -- and actually, there is evidence that JRRT imagined as little as three, or at most seven Balrogs, ever existing.

The matter of Balrog numbers is a bit complicated, and involves 'when Tolkien wrote what' (as there are plenty of descriptions written when Tolkien imagined very many Balrogs existing), but the idea at least (in my opinion) notably calls into question the number of Balrogs that were going to be slain in any theoried, updated revision of The Fall of Gondolin...

... the detailed version of which never got very much beyond Tuor's coming to the city [see Unfinished Tales], although Tolkien did some updating with Maeglin too.

I don't think the matter of Balrogs are complicated at all. Tolkien just changed his mind on them from being a race of fire creatures, to being demons. He is also quite clear on reducing the number and even says that the fight between Glorfindel and the Balrog would have to be rewritten. With the story we have, it is almost a given there were no more than 3-7 Balrogs.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by cellurdur

I don't think the matter of Balrogs are complicated at all. Tolkien just changed his mind on them from being a race of fire creatures, to being demons. He is also quite clear on reducing the number and even says that the fight between Glorfindel and the Balrog would have to be rewritten. With the story we have, it is almost a given there were no more than 3-7 Balrogs.

Well, I said the matter of Balrog numbers, and let me complicate that a bit more then

Yes Tolkien clearly made one marginal note in the later 1950s [or sometime later, as it's hard to tell], and revised one passage -- which revision did not however, speak to how many Balrogs actually existed.

And yet Tolkien does not revise other texts that still refer to very many Balrogs. Why not? When I look at all of them, some might be explained by saying that he simply didn't get around to them, but I'm not sure that necessarily works perfectly for all examples.

And since there are seemingly more edited Silmarillion readers that HME readers, many do not realize that it was Christopher Tolkien, not JRRT himself, who edited the pasages in question. This often enough 'complicates' the discussion, especially since Christopher Tolkien did not edit the War of Wrath passage in this respect, which often enough gets raised in the discussion.

That is, Silmarillion-readers-only do not necessarily know that the War of Wrath passage was written well before the marginal note, nor that Christopher Tolkien has edited other reference where his father did not.

And as this marginal note is not part of the text proper, was Tolkien going to truly give a specific number in the tale itself? And if so, three or seven? Or was JRRT just going to revise all the passages concerned to make the matter ambiguous -- while not refering to large numbers at least.

And while Tolkien did write another, this time certainly 'late' note, that the duel with Glorfindel and the 'demon' may need revision, that in itself does not tell us that the revisions were going to let the reader know how many Balrogs actually existed.

Revise what? Add a shadow? Make this Balrog more powerful? Shorten it? Since Tolkien wrote demon and seems to 'avoid' Balrog in this late text, was he going to have Glorfindel fight a notable demon if 'lesser than Balrog' kind of demon -- hardly seems likely to me after all the external history behind Glorfindel slaying a Balrog, but I have read someone argue this possibility nonetheless.

So it can get 'a bit' complicated in my opinion

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

Well, I said the matter of Balrog numbers, and let me complicate that a bit more then

Yes Tolkien clearly made one marginal note in the later 1950s [or sometime later, as it's hard to tell], and revised one passage -- which revision did not however, speak to how many Balrogs actually existed.

And yet Tolkien does not revise other texts that still refer to very many Balrogs. Why not? When I look at all of them, some might be explained by saying that he simply didn't get around to them, but I'm not sure that necessarily works perfectly for all examples.

And since there are seemingly more edited Silmarillion readers that HME readers, many do not realize that it was Christopher Tolkien, not JRRT himself, who edited the pasages in question. This often enough 'complicates' the discussion, especially since Christopher Tolkien did not edit the War of Wrath passage in this respect, which often enough gets raised in the discussion.

That is, Silmarillion-readers-only do not necessarily know that the War of Wrath passage was written well before the marginal note, nor that Christopher Tolkien has edited other reference where his father did not.

And as this marginal note is not part of the text proper, was Tolkien going to truly give a specific number in the tale itself? And if so, three or seven? Or was JRRT just going to revise all the passages concerned to make the matter ambiguous -- while not refering to large numbers at least.

And while Tolkien did write another, this time certainly 'late' note, that the duel with Glorfindel and the 'demon' may need revision, that in itself does not tell us that the revisions were going to let the reader know how many Balrogs actually existed.

Revise what? Add a shadow? Make this Balrog more powerful? Shorten it? Since Tolkien wrote demon and seems to 'avoid' Balrog in this late text, was he going to have Glorfindel fight a notable demon if 'lesser than Balrog' kind of demon -- hardly seems likely to me after all the external history behind Glorfindel slaying a Balrog, but I have read someone argue this possibility nonetheless.

So it can get 'a bit' complicated in my opinion

Your entire argument is just stretching the what is possible.

1. We have been through this and we have seen that Christopher Tolkien has the right to edit any unpublished material he liked. What he says and edits is good enough for me.

2. Tolkien was a busy man and had a very demanding full time job. He never got to rewrite many things that he planned to do. It's a very weak argument to use that he had not rewritten the stories as an excuse. Especially, since it's very easy to edit the number of balrogs. More importantly he never in later work suggested that there were numerous balrogs again.

3. It simply does not fit with the story that the likes of Tuor or Ecthelion were killing Balrogs by the handful. We have seen that Gandalf died fighting one and it was a real threat to Lothlorien, that contained Galadriel.

4. Tolkien constantly refers to Balrogs as demons throughout his letters and notes. So just, because he refers to Glorfindel's battle with 'demon' hardly implies he planned to change it from a Balrog to some other beast.

So I am sorry to say the matter is a very simple one. There were no more than 7 Balrogs in the story as we know it and no reason that there should even be more than 3.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by cellurdur

Your entire argument is just stretching the what is possible.

Well more than one possibility makes things more complicated, especially since, included within my statement is the idea that not everyone has read HME -- that alone makes it a 'bit' complicated in my opinion, at least as far as discussion goes.

1. We have been through this and we have seen that Christopher Tolkien has the right to edit any unpublished material he liked. What he says and edits is good enough for me.

Yes let's bring canon considerations into the matter. That never complicates things

2. Tolkien was a busy man and had a very demanding full time job. He never got to rewrite many things that he planned to do. It's a very weak argument to use that he had not rewritten the stories as an excuse. Especially, since it's very easy to edit the number of balrogs. More importantly he never in later work suggested that there were numerous balrogs again.

I never say above that by not revising a given passage containing many Balrogs 'proves' that Tolkien was of two minds, but rather that it doesn't exactly make the matter as cut and dry as you seem to be trying to make it now...

'Sauron came against Orodreth, the warden of the tower, with a host of Balrogs.' Of the Ruin of Beleriand And the Fall of Fingolfin [Christopher Tolkien edited this to: '... named Gorthaur, came against Orodreth, the warden of the tower upon Tol Sirion.' Of The Ruin Of Beleriand]

But not only did Tolkien not revise 'host of Balrogs' in the early 1950s -- while making revisions to this same passage [passage 143], Christopher Tolkien even notes a revision to passage 143 on LQ2, which puts this revision [even if more minor than the early 1950s revision], in the same time phase as the '3 or 7' Balrog note...

... at least generally, so we don't know which comes later, the revision to 143 or the marginal note, and now one has to argue that Tolkien maybe just missed this reference, even on LQ2. Well, maybe is part of the point: it helps complicate matters 'a bit' because people will have different opinions about how to view these things.

3. It simply does not fit with the story that the likes of Tuor or Ecthelion were killing Balrogs by the handful. We have seen that Gandalf died fighting one and it was a real threat to Lothlorien, that contained Galadriel.

I haven't said otherwise. Still it's a fact [and not that you said otherwise] that after Tolkien wrote the Moria passage he still imagined very many Balrogs existing in Middle-earth in the First Age.

4. Tolkien constantly refers to Balrogs as demons throughout his letters and notes. So just, because he refers to Glorfindel's battle with 'demon' hardly implies he planned to change it from a Balrog to some other beast.

Well, all I said was that someone else raised this, and that I thought it very unlikely myself.

In any case the point there was, in response to you bringing up this statement from JRRT about Glorfindel, was that Tolkien's note about Glorfindel's fight with the demon possibly needing revision tells us nothing about Balrog numbers.

So I am sorry to say the matter is a very simple one. There were no more than 7 Balrogs in the story as we know it and no reason that there should even be more than 3.

Yes and The Lord of the Rings is about a short guy trying to get rid of some evil jewelry