Elves socioeconomic system.

[mormegil]

I've always wondered and could not find an adequate answer anywhere but I want to know what the socioeconomic conditions of the elves were?

How did they choose their rulers? What, if any, real powers did their rulers posses?

I've seen some monetary discussion of Hobbits but not Elves, did they have such. I know that they enjoyed treasure and some even coveted it but what was its purpose? Was it used to purchase items or was their existance an utopian society where all shared equally with neither poor nor hungry? Was it requisite that they be employed, we see this in other societies but other than smith work I do not see much employement by way of the Elves. Is this ideal or is it indolence?

[littlemanpoet]

I think that Tolkien's set-up was that Elves were by nature able to turn a thing envisioned into reality. Supreme crafts-elves. I would wager that all elves, by definition, would have some ability that they could use to bring back to themselves at the very least self-sufficiency (Eol); but much more likely, their knowledge would have continued to develop and increase over thousands of years. Imagine whole community of Leonardo da Vinci types who didn't die but passed their knowledge on. I would think that elves would basically thrive. The only indications of economy that I can recall are the Elves in Mirkwood from The Hobbit, who send empty barrels back downstream. So there was no doubt trade with Men, which suggests that Elves also had what Men wanted.

[Elu Ancalime]

I think that (with an Arda withou Melkor) the elves could have created the utopian society, like that envisioned by Marx and Engels. They might have still had "Lords" but they could be strictly cultural and not political. Like what was stated in the Tolkien and Western Government thread, Tolkien himself would have preferred an Absolute Monarchy, but in Men that can not go uncoruppted, so the elves would only have had to estblish a "higher class" out of nessecity to protect themselves from Melkor. There is a story that Tolkien wrote late in life about how the first elves and founders of the Vanyar, Nolder, and Teleri were not Ingwe Finwe, and Elwe, but Imin, Tata, and Enel, wth their wives. it s called the "Cuivienyarna." The only online reference to it I found was on wikipedia. It may shed some light on how the elves "started out," if we consider it canon:Cuivienyarna
________
EASY VAPE VAPORIZER

[littlemanpoet]

It is interesting that the first thing that happens is the finding and claiming of sleeping Elves. Thus, the three eldest couples took ownership of the loyalty of the others.

It is interesting to me that this is a very late writing. I usually have doubts about Tolkien's latest writings because they often are attempts to resolve theological issues; but this appears to attempt to resolve an issue of feigned history, and as such, seems acceptable to me.

That said, I see an authoritative structure of political organization, with the seeds lord- and lady- ship rather than anything resembling the thought of Marx and Engels. From what writings of Tolkien do you derive such a conclusion, Elu?

[Lalwendë]

In the corrupted world that they lived in the Elves couldn't make a Utopian society as they were constantly beleagured and/or in conflict.

The Calaquendi and Moriquendi were deeply suspicious of each other, certainly in Beleriand. I think this is certainly understandable on the side of those Elves who had remained in Middle-earth as the return of the Noldor also brought with it the return of Morgoth and war. While the Noldor seem to feel they cannot always trust the Elves who have stayed. Even amongst the Noldor there is an incredible amount of hatred.

All of the Elves were subject to constant war, and this resulted in insular communities such as Lothlorien. I wonder just how Utopian a society could be if it was in a constant state of siege and defence. Freedoms must have been restricted to a great degree.

I also think that Elves would not necessarily have developed their Art to its full potential, especially as the Third Age came around. Less Elves were being born, and hence new creative minds were not coming into being, and some great minds must have departed Middle-earth for good. The Elves were also mixing less with other races and cultures and so their Art would not be absorbing and working with those influences. Maybe they were developing a particular Elven Art to a high degree, but I wonder just how good that could be without new ideas to work upon? That's a question relevant to our world too!

[Rhod the Red]

The social system of Elvish society is not covered really, an exception to the other races in his books. Other than absolute monarchs(not regressive), like in Mirkwood, Elves appear self-governing. Rivendell appears to be without government as we know it. The fact that some Elves are called 'lord' and 'lady' may just be a reward for brave deeds or something.

Calling Boromir a 'lord' of Men would be correct in the context Tolkein usues it, other trhan rulership. It can mean a great warrior or wise bystander, in Tolkiens usage

[Lalwendë]

I don't know. Galadriel always strikes me as a pretty powerful ruler. She may not be unkind, but she certainly does 'rule' Lothlorien.

[littlemanpoet]

Elvish government seems, by all accounts available, to be rather authoritarian (in the strictest sense of the word), along hereditary lines. Elrond was the senior Elf of his line, his rule over the remnants of Doriath of Beleriand. Galadriel ruled over Elves that had never been west of the Misty Mountains, but was deemed the greatest (along with Celeborn) and most worthy to rule. Thranduil is a bit of a mystery. How old is he said to have been? Clearly his authority is also hereditary.

As to Art, all Elvish craft was nature-based and not concerned with originality, but with beauty and workmanship (work-elf-ship?). I wager that contemporary art critics would consider all Elvish art quite backward or at least 'retro'.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Elvish government seems, by all accounts available, to be rather authoritarian (in the strictest sense of the word), along hereditary lines. Elrond was the senior Elf of his line, his rule over the remnants of Doriath of Beleriand. Galadriel ruled over Elves that had never been west of the Misty Mountains, but was deemed the greatest (along with Celeborn) and most worthy to rule. Thranduil is a bit of a mystery. How old is he said to have been? Clearly his authority is also hereditary.

Thranduil is a good 3000+ years old at the time of the War of the Ring, and I would hazard that he was a good deal older. With his father Oropher, he had fought in the War of the Last Alliance. And it was from Oropher that he inherited the realm of Mirkwood.

Now, Oropher was a Sindarin Elf of Doriath, and seems have belonged to the noble class. Beyond that, we do not know anythng about him. Fanfiction likes to speculate that he was related to Celeborn, and thus to Thingol, and so would have something of a heritary right to rule the Elves of Mirkwood, who were primarily Telerin in stock, but whether or not they would have recognized his claim, or honoured it, or even whether or it existed (it is based on a very slender line from Celeborn, addressing Legolas, when he calls the Elves of Mirkwood his "kin"), we cannot say.

Elrond, in addition to being the direct heir of Thingol, was also (with the death of Gil-galad) the most direct heir of Finwë, and so the rightful chief of all the Eldar in Middle-Earth, though he seems not to have stressed this particularly much.

[Anguirel]

It's always fascinating to me that the Elves seem to favour primogeniture, while the early Men follow tanistry. (Bregolas, Lord of the Beorings, was succeeded by his brother Barahir; after him any of Baragund, Belegund and Beren could have been possible successors.)

The Noldor famously set primogeniture aside when Maedhros renounces the High Kingship, giving it to Fingolfin, but it's clear the circumstances there are deeply unusual...

You'd sort of expect it to be the other way round, what with the vague Celtic air of the Elves. Hrrrmm.

[littlemanpoet]

Now that I know from context what "tanistry" means....

.... that's an interesting observation, Ang. What would one expect such long life to have to do with hereditary rights?

Imagine that you are a 1,000 year old Elf and you have a brother who is a mere 200 years younger than you, and your father is roughly 1200 years older than either of you. While there are battles and warfare, there is no guarantee that father is going to die and pass on his realm to his first son any time soon. It could take a nother couple thousand years. So what do you do? What do you do if you're the second son? I know what I would do: I wouldn't wait around, I'd go and seek to create a new realm for myself where the Elvish population is sparse. But Tolkien's Elves didn't do that so much, did they? They stayed in the realms of their fathers and did'nt even wait - rather, it was as if they hoped never to become the hereditary ruler of their father's realm, for who wants father to die? What a strange situation....

[mormegil]

Reading through this I'm still left asking: How much actual power did the Elf rulers have? We have a good idea with Gondor and their monarchy but I don't feel it was the same. I feel more that the rulers were the wisest or greatest and their followers were more willing to follow as opposed to subjects to a crown.

[littlemanpoet]

Your ideas remind me, Mormegil, of The Prince. Love or fear? Which is the stronger engine to garner support for government? Which lasts longer? Which is harder to achieve, for a Man? for an Elf?

[Anguirel]

LMP and morm, you've both raised questions that I just can't resist wading into. You see, I'm at heart (well, one of them) a medieval historian. Inheritance, suzerainty, appanages, fiefs, septs, feuds, royal authority...these things make me excited.

Ahem. LMP first.

Originally Posted by LMP

Imagine that you are a 1,000 year old Elf and you have a brother who is a mere 200 years younger than you, and your father is roughly 1200 years older than either of you. While there are battles and warfare, there is no guarantee that father is going to die and pass on his realm to his first son any time soon. It could take another couple thousand years. So what do you do? What do you do if you're the second son? I know what I would do: I wouldn't wait around, I'd go and seek to create a new realm for myself where the Elvish population is sparse. But Tolkien's Elves didn't do that so much, did they? They stayed in the realms of their fathers and did'nt even wait - rather, it was as if they hoped never to become the hereditary ruler of their father's realm, for who wants father to die? What a strange situation....

Well, under primogeniture, even among us humans the second son is quite unlikely to inherit the kingdom, fief, whatever. The real difference is that even the heir apparent is in a sort of second son situation. Barring misfortune, as you say, none of the sons will inherit. I certainly hope Cirdan didn't have any sons; they must have been frightfully frustrated if so...or imagine, say, Ingwe, who almost certainly had a numerous throng of descendants and whose chances of being dethroned were literally nil!

So, as you say, sons (first and second) are probably more likely to resort to ambitious adventuring. This immortality of Elves might have, therefore, increased their drive to acquire temporal wealth. We do actually see a lot of Elves founding realms-in the Silmarillion. In Valinor, the royal families are cooped up under their unquestioned heads, drifting from Valarin hall to Valarin hall. The Rebellion of the Noldor must have released a lot of supressed creative and acquisitive energy. We can see this in the magnificent dreams and thirst for power of Galadriel, for instance.

Once in Beleriand, the situation is rather different (quite remniscent of the Crusader States) in that even the Kings are in daily danger of death. Inheritance becomes a frequent occurence in need of control under a system. It seems from, say, the mostly orderly transitions of the High Kingship, that the Elves early settled that that system should be basically primogeniture-following Feanor's own precedent, I suppose.

Imagine what might have happened without such an inheritance system with such Anguirel-Idols as Celegorm, Curufin and Maeglin running about!

Yet still there are so many cadet royals that many kingdoms like Nargothrond or Thargelion are founded by younger siblings and their descendants.

Even in the Third Age we see an example of such a pioneering elven realm-Legolas' land in Ithilien, because despite being "Prince of Mirkwood" (allow me to spit on that absurd phrase) he wasn't likely to inherit it anytime soon...

Now, morm. You wonder about actual power possessed by Elvenkings.

I say it depends on the circumstances, time, and even the personality of the ruler involved.

Let's take those alpha-Elvenkings-Finwe, Ingwe, Elwe, Olwe. I imagine these as sort of ancestor-gods roled into chieftains. They exemplify the characteristics of the people they govern. It's not so much that Finwe rules the Noldor, as that he is the Noldor, and in my view the reason the High Kingship in Middle-Earth foundered is that by the Third Age there was no one who could...act as a symbol of the entire Noldorin race.

Before arriving in Valinor, these Kings would, I think, have had a great deal of power and responsibility in practical terms; as protectors, guardians, certainly shepherds, fathers of their people, and war-leaders when needed too. Their role in Valinor would be more ceremonial and diplomatic, with perhaps little need for authoritarian decisions, acting as mediators with the Valar.

Returning to Beleriand, by the First Age things would be a lot more variable, but probably generally the Kings would be-and would need to be-extremely powerful. They after all kept large enough armies in the field to keep Morgoth locked in for some time. That needs unquestioned obedience. While Thingol, safe in Melian's Girdle, wouldn't need such centralised power, I'm pretty sure he'd demand it anyway, as the most venerable Elven ruler left.

There are exceptions to this. If you ask me Finrod and Orodreth would both have ruled Nargothrond with the consent and counsel of a large aristocracy-an aristocracy who were to reject Finrod and keep Orodreth generally sedate. (They're loyal to the House of Finarfin though-Celegorm can't usurp Nargothrond directly, it seems.) Elwing's rule over the Havens probably needed the advice of her nobles.

But generally, I don't hold with this "Elves are proto-democrats/anarchist-syndicalists/fully paid up members of the Green Party" stuff. They were in a feudal situation and would have needed feudal government of one kind or another. Into the Third Age, Thranduil of the Hobbit is very much an absolute faery-king, able to march to war on a whim if he chooses, riding at the head of his hunt.

Galadriel and Celeborn's rule of Lothlorien, Elrond's rule of Imladris and Cirdan's of Mithlond are all different cases, however. Galadriel rules as "Lady", and she and Celeborn are stewards of a realm without its true king, drowned Amroth. Elrond and Cirdan both rule the remnants of the High Kingship in Lindon. Elrond has some royal blood, but rules, it seems to me, primus inter pares, in a quite collegiate way almost. He is Master, and I can really see him Master of Rivendell College Cambridge! (I get the feeling he's Cambridge. Don't know why exactly.) Cirdan is vaguely noble but is really there because no one else with a real claim is, well, left. Notice that these positions seem to be quite interchangeable; Celeborn, without any hereditary claim, succeeds Elrond at Rivendell. Perhaps the Elves came late to tanistry here!

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Celeborn, without any hereditary claim, succeeds Elrond at Rivendell. Perhaps the Elves came late to tanistry here!

To focus on one very small point in a large, intriguing post, Celeborn was, after Elladan and Elrohir, the Heir Apparent under primogeniture to the Sindarin lordship after Elrond- assuming that Men, by the simple fact of being Men, are excluded.

This assumes also (and I believe it justified) that Elladan and Elrohir died/went to Valinor before Celeborn assumed the lordship of Rivendell.

With Elrond gone and his offspring dead/gone as well, the next closest kinsman along the Telerin line was Celeborn, grandson of Elmo, Thingol's younger brother.

So, to be pedantic, 'twas a situation that remained proper within a primogenituric context.

[Anguirel]

Ah. But Elrond always seemed to me to be ruling Rivendell (a part of the mostly faded realm of Lindon) by right of his Noldorin descent...

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

They exemplify the characteristics of the people they govern. It's not so much that Finwe rules the Noldor, as that he is the Noldor, and in my view the reason the High Kingship in Middle-Earth foundered is that by the Third Age there was no one who could...act as a symbol of the entire Noldorin race.

When you put it in that way, it reminds me very much of ents and Treebeard...

Did the ents adopt this part of old Elvish culture when the adopted language? Who knows. Or maybe that kind of leadership was sort of "natural" for ents too...

[Macalaure]

Very interesting post, Anguirel. However, I disagree at some points.

Originally Posted by Anguirel

So, as you say, sons (first and second) are probably more likely to resort to ambitious adventuring. This immortality of Elves might have, therefore, increased their drive to acquire temporal wealth. We do actually see a lot of Elves founding realms-in the Silmarillion. In Valinor, the royal families are cooped up under their unquestioned heads, drifting from Valarin hall to Valarin hall. The Rebellion of the Noldor must have released a lot of supressed creative and acquisitive energy. We can see this in the magnificent dreams and thirst for power of Galadriel, for instance.

I don't think immortality has a lot to do with it. The Elves were content in Valinor and the heirs were content with most probably never getting into power. This is just the nature of the Elves, Men would have found it much harder to cope with it. The Elves don't start to demand realms of their own until Melkor influences them (yes, even Galadriel) and with the Vanyar even this doesn't work.

Even in the Third Age we see an example of such a pioneering elven realm-Legolas' land in Ithilien, because despite being "Prince of Mirkwood" he wasn't likely to inherit it anytime soon...

Again, I don't think Legolas left Mirkwood because there wasn't anything to inherit there. He left because he liked Ithilien better (who could blame him for that?). Being a prince, of course, he then took some of his father's people with him. I don't recall if this is stated, but does Legolas ask for permission to do it? This is important, I think.

Returning to Beleriand, by the First Age things would be a lot more variable, but probably generally the Kings would be-and would need to be-extremely powerful. They after all kept large enough armies in the field to keep Morgoth locked in for some time. That needs unquestioned obedience.

I'm not sure whether you are still referring to the alpha-Elvenkings here. If so, then I disagree. Prior to the Bragollach, Fingolfin made up his mind and wanted to attack Morgoth with all power of Elves and Men. Maedhros liked the cushions of his couch better, and that was it. And prior to the Nirnaeth, Fingon's power was obviously not enough to get Orodreth to move. Even in Beleriand, the power of the High Kings was few more than ceremonial, I think. Fingolfin and Fingon ruled Mithrim - farther their influence did not spread. The siege of Angband only worked because the leaders of the three houses of the Noldor agreed to it, not because Maedhros and Finrod obeyed.
I don't think that the High Kingship of the Noldor held a lot of power, or if it did, it at least wasn't used to be exercised. Turgon, the High King's son, completely vanished with a lot of the King's folk from one day to the other without leaving an address and without asking for leave. Later, Turgon himself becomes King, but he is in no position to effectively rule anything but his own realm.
If you're referring to beta-kings like the early Turgon etc., then you might be right.

I think it is similar with the Teleri of Beleriand. Officially, Thingol is the King of them all, even the Laiquendi if I recall it correctly. But what did his word count in the Falas or in Ossiriand (Ossiriand is particularly interesting, as they are the only Elves to not have a proper ruler at all. Ah! Got it. That's why they're called Green-elves )? A lot of the Sindar were wandering around the whole of Beleriand and the lands to the north. Though they were under the rule of Thingol, they were virtually free - how could an order reach them? To me, this contrasts a lot to the likes of Beleg, Mablung or Eöl, over whom Thingol's rule is much stronger and more immediate.

[Kuruharan]

I'm not sure whether you are still referring to the alpha-Elvenkings here. If so, then I disagree. Prior to the Bragollach, Fingolfin made up his mind and wanted to attack Morgoth with all power of Elves and Men. Maedhros liked the cushions of his couch better, and that was it. And prior to the Nirnaeth, Fingon's power was obviously not enough to get Orodreth to move. Even in Beleriand, the power of the High Kings was few more than ceremonial, I think. Fingolfin and Fingon ruled Mithrim - farther their influence did not spread. The siege of Angband only worked because the leaders of the three houses of the Noldor agreed to it, not because Maedhros and Finrod obeyed.
I don't think that the High Kingship of the Noldor held a lot of power, or if it did, it at least wasn't used to be exercised. Turgon, the High King's son, completely vanished with a lot of the King's folk from one day to the other without leaving an address and without asking for leave. Later, Turgon himself becomes King, but he is in no position to effectively rule anything but his own realm.
If you're referring to beta-kings like the early Turgon etc., then you might be right.

I'd assumed he was referring to the kings in their own realms.

What I wonder about is the structure of said monarchies. I'm not sure that any of them really answer to the description of feudal with vassals and fiefs, etc. Elven monarchies might be closer to absolutism, in the sense that the king maintains a centralized government without a whole lot of delegation of power (maybe that should be "permanent delegation of power" but that gets tangled up with the Elven lifespan).

[Anguirel]

Kuru has the right of it regarding what I meant by "Kings"-I was just talking about all the Elven rulers in First Age Beleriand.

Kuru's feudalism vs absolutism question requires us to think about the other classes of Elven society, less well-documented classes, beyond Kings. I think this might be an interesting line of thought.

Well, let's think about the higher nobility, insofar as we know about them. The scantily described commoners can be dealt with, appropriately, later...

I discount royal cadets without realms of their own, like Maeglin, who acted as counsellors-they might be said to have power by virtue of regal blood.

In Gondolin, we have, thanks to the Fall of Gondolin, an extremely well-documented Elven elite (if sometimes of debatable canon status). Egalmoth, Rog, Glorfindel and even Tuor possess considerable authority below the King. Is this delegation of royal power? Maeglin's House was bound faster to him than to Turgon, but again that's a slightly different case. Basically Turgon seems to rule in Council, you might say, but always has the final decision. The Houses of Gondolin seem not unlike feudal entities.

So if Gondolin can be taken as typical, feudalism does seem to be some kind of norm. As Gondolin is supposed to reflect Tirion, blueprint of Noldor culture...I'd say that's all pretty good grounds for suspecting a feudal system.

In Nargothrond a similar model is traceable. We see hints of nobles-Edrahil, who I think is described as Finrod's steward at some point; Guilin, Gwindor and Gelmir, a noble family notable enough to be linked in marriage to the Blood Royal; and the nameless adherents of Celegorm and Curufin. The Council here actually has sufficient power to defy the King. It's almost more oligarchic than feudal-and certainly not absolutist.

However, I can see Hithlum and the Feanorion realms being run on far more authoritarian, regal, Homeric lines. We hear little of notable nobles serving Feanor's sons, except for perhaps occasional lines about "folk of Caranthir" or "servants of Celegorm". The blazing personalities of the Seven seem to eclipse those around them.

[Lalwendë]

Thinking about the Noldor coming over to Beleriand, it made sense for some of the sons and brothers to go off and found their own realms. Here was a country that to all intents and purposes was empty, save for a few resident Moriquendi and Dwarves (but they would not stand in the way of those who had 'seen the Light' ). There was a surfeit of strong minded noble Elves. And last but not least, there was a Morgothian horde to be challenged.

It would not have made sense to pick out the loftiest Elf Lord and have him rule one realm where all these Elves could live, even if they had wanted it to be so. The population was scattered, and strategically placed to challenge Morgoth or to hide from his minions in safety. In addition, the 'client realms' gave those Elves who were of noble birth but not in line to be top dog the opportunity to flex muscles and not be in as much conflict with each other had they been in one realm. I can imagine such a situation would have led to intrigue and murder.

I do wonder how convenient it was for some of the Noldor that Morgoth stole the Silmarils and that Feanor swore to retrieve them. Certainly in Valinor there was little if any chance for Elves to exercise power or independence, but in Beleriand they were free to explore the possibilities. Even Galadriel owned that in Middle-earth she was powerful and that in Valinor she would 'diminish'; she spent many years being a big fish in a small pond, whereas in Valinor she would probably be quite lowly in status compared to the Vanyar and the Valar.

[Kuruharan]

Basically Turgon seems to rule in Council, you might say, but always has the final decision. The Houses of Gondolin seem not unlike feudal entities.

So if Gondolin can be taken as typical, feudalism does seem to be some kind of norm. As Gondolin is supposed to reflect Tirion, blueprint of Noldor culture...I'd say that's all pretty good grounds for suspecting a feudal system.

-and-

However, I can see Hithlum and the Feanorion realms being run on far more authoritarian, regal, Homeric lines.

Interesting you would say this because Gondolin and Nargothrond do not seem conducive to feudal systems whereas Hithlum and the Feanorian realms do i.e. there doesn't seem to be land available for fiefs and vassalage in Gondolin and Nargothrond (who now beyond the Western Seas have passed away...I'm sorry, I just couldn't resist ). In Hithlum and the Feanorian realms there seems to have been plenty of land.

Perhaps Tolkien wasn't conceiving of this system as being exactly "feudal" in the way we traditionally think of it.

[radagastly]

I've been wondering some things, but haven't posted because I'm still at work and being on here is a bit of a no-no. But I can't resist, though this may be a bit of a tangent.

I keep thinking as I read this thread, what role Osanwe might play in the governing of an Elvish kingdom. Would not the leader with the greatest insight into the hearts and minds of his people be looked upon as the "wisest" or "greatest" and, as such, be the de-facto leader, worthy of at least some degree of obedience (or at least deference, as is most often the case in politics)? Would that insight inform and guide his decisions, lending approval, and therefore support, for his decisions and his position as leader? Does Osanwe work that way? Can that level of control or talent be inherited from parent to child, creating a "default" sort of royal family, later perhaps imitated by men?

Just wondering whether Tolkien saw this factor as having a significant impact on the social structure of the kingdoms of Beleriand.

[mormegil]

Another situation which has some documented leadership style and format was the council of Elrond. Certainly Elrond was the 'ruler' so to speak of Imladris, but yet he called counselors to the meeting, and their opinion was given due weight and consideration.

However the council of Elrond is a bit problematic as an example of Elvish rule in that it was a council that involved and pertained to all 'free people of Middle-earth'. Therefore Gandalf, Boromir, Gloin and others opinions were weighed. It's interesting too to note that Legolas and a contigent of Mirkwood was there to represent those Elves. 'International Elvish politics' so to speak is also fascinating. Thinking of how various Elf factions interacted both in the First, Second and Third age. Most notably in the third age the 'White Council' and in the First age the alliance formed and broken during the war with Morgoth.

[mark12_30]

Curve ball here-- from someone who always dodged political science.

Aiwendil makes a very interesting point in his essay on Elvish music. To crudely paraphrase the whole essay: Elvish music does not "evolve", it "devolves". (Galadriel makes a general reference, saying that when the Rings are destroyed, the elves who remain in Middle-Earth will fade to a rustic folk of wood and dell.) They start strong, and then dwindle and fade. Furthermore it was their job to prepare the earth for men-- and men eventually take over.

Aiwendil made this point quite well regarding elvish music-- see Aiwendil's magnificent essay.... (edit: argh, the link requires a login-- I don't remember needing to do that before?)

I wonder-- combining the Osanwe point with the "devolving" idea. In the early years, when the elves were fewer in number, osanwe would have provided a formidable method of understanding and guiding a group of people. A harmoniously-minded elf with peaceable intentions could have used osanwe to keep the realm peaceful and prosperous indeed. Even if you did have a king-- and it seems that they started with First, Second and Third, three 'kings', so to speak-- if they majored in osanwe, what need would there be for feudal attitudes, or dictatorial attitudes, or what have you?

If the society then got used to the idea of single leaders of the kingly type (of which I'm not yet convinced, wondering about a more clannish leadership instead-- and even kings keep counsellors and councils-- but to continue) then as osanwe was used less (devolving), more crude methods of government would have been required.

[Elmo]

Turgon of Gondolin

And here I am King; and whether you will it or will it not, my doom is law