I'm not saying that JRRT decided that he Legolas was going to go on to be in the fellowship in the 1930s when he wrote the book, but i would guess that Legolas, in some form, appeared in the Fall of Gondolin, and he then appeared again in the LoTRs. While the stories don’t exactly fit together perfectly, this is not unusual of a Lost Tale. I think that if JRRT had come to re-write the Fall he would have included Legolas in some (equally cryptic) way.

For starters it is not Legolas', its Legolai. I think that the evidence is that
1) They have the same name (Including Surname).
2) They are both associated with Trees (house of the leaf?),
3) They both withdraw the Lonely Isle
4) They are both night-sighted.
5) The main piece of (still circumstantial) evidence is that when JRRT re-read the Fall he saw Glorfindel's name and thought "damn I have used the same name", and he never commented on Legolas being there, even though Legolas has a much larger part in the LoTRs than Glorfindel.

I seem to have started another Balrog debate, though now its much more me against the forum.

Galorme, their surnames would be the same because Legolas literally MEANS Greenleaf.

Also, as for your night sight comment, Elves had good eyesight. It probably wasn't that rare to be nightsighted.

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: *Varda* ]

You are at liberty to say that all you want. However they are two different Elves. Completely seperate characters.


They dont fit together at all.
Greenleaf is the translation of Legolas. It is not a surname.
Having the same name is not evidence that they are the same character. Several Elves share the same name, and are different characters.

Legolas of Gondolin is a Gnome (Noldo) of the House of the Tree.
Legolas son of Thranduil is a Sinda who dwelt in Mirkwood.

One goes after the defeat of Melko, the other in the Fourth Age

Elves could see well in the dark.

That is evidence against them being the same.
If they were the same Elf it would be deserving of comment. But Legolas of Gondolin was not a major character nor was his name so striking as Glorfindel.

[ September 21, 2002: Message edited by: Tar Elenion ]

umm... im not pretty sure how old legolas is, but im positive he is more than 500 years old. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

I'm sorry, because I like your way of thinking, and in general I am with you in this discussion but this isnt't an argument at all. When you read the remarks about Galdor that are attached to the Essay about Glorfindel it becomes clear that JRR Tolkien hadn't read FoG at that time (beacuse he did not know if Galdor survived FoG). Christopher Tolkien said that he thinks his father were not even able to locate the manuscript. So that JRR Tolkien not mentioned Legolas in these circumstances did only mean he didn't remembered him to be in the FoG.

Respectfully
Findegil

don't tell me you guys didn't know!If he was 2,931 years old,then why was he in that war for freedom in Middle-Earth 3,000 years ago?Besides,Elves are ageless according to Tolkien.It's his book,he can say whatever he wants.

Use spaces between words. Elves aren't ageless, they are immortal. There is a distinct difference. While the fëa of an Elf cannot be destroyed the body or hroa(the union of which 'makes' an Elf) is eventually consumed, changing the nature of both over time.

2,931 is a movie only age. We don't know how old he is from the books.

I am confused on this myself, because I know JRRT makes a big deal about not re-using elf names. BUT: in this case, the name has to be common if it just Greenleaf (but in what language, eh? I don't speak elf, someone tell me.) NEXT: it doesn't make sense for me to think that his grandfather was the King of Mirkwood at the time of the last alliance (SA 3434), and his father is noted at that battle and ruled thereafter, why would Legolas be the one at Gondolin (FA 510?)? What was the rest of his family doing at that time? Why three generations in 500 years, and then nothing more in 3000? Or, if Legolas was at the battle of the Last Alliance, why doesn't he mention it?
Tolkien reacted strongly to Glorfindel being used twice, but in this case, he just didn't have time to edit it, I think. I wasn't sure when I read the Silm. section, though, so maybe Galorme is right. But really, the more likely option is that they are two different people. I also feel that Legolas was a fairly young elf, and that he is supposed to be so. But, I'm no elf-expert.

No he does not make a big deal about it. He 're-used elf names' on several occasions. Glorfindel was considered a special case and thus the re-use of that particular name was considered innapproriate.

All right, I know I will probably get shot with words for saying this, but what's the point of arguing about it? JRRT is dead, so he can't answere all the questions about the Legolas Gondolin vs. Legolas Mirkwood controversy, nor that of Glorfindel. Will someone please tell me what's wrong with this picture?

There are no questions to answer. Legolas of Mirkwood is not Legolas of Gondolin. Glorfindel of Rivendell is Glorfindel of Gondolin.

Well, I'm glad that's sorted, then. [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

I found this in The Treason of Isengard