Another thing...Why did the elves not fight?

[Lord of Angmar]

But I do think that we must recognise, on a general level, that Elves did display the character flaw that Essex highlights.(The Saucepan Man)

I assume that by "on a general level" you mean that while it is a common trait among Elves, it cannot be ascribed to each and everyone of the Firstborn. I can think of many prominent Elves of the First Age who displayed this character flaw, (Thingol, many of the Sons of Feanor, Saeros, etc.), but I can think of an equal or greater number who displayed no such trait (Luthien, Felagund, Beleg and Gwindor, to name a few). And though I do agree that there was a good deal of patronage of the Edain by the Elves of Beleriand, I also think that Men being appointed as 'underlords' was in many cases as much a sign of respect and friendship as it was a means of patronization.

As well as their sin of pride, this doesn't give them an excuse to be a pretty nasty bunch of beings for a lenghty period of their history (ie kinslaying, etc).(Essex)

I agree with HerenIstarion that as far as races of Middle-earth go, the Elves are just as 'good' as any other. If I were to write an argument similar to the sentiments you have expressed above for each of the other major races, it would go something as follows:

-Dwarves: Lustful, greedy, proud and arrogant, hiding in their mountains hoarding their wealth, without even enough respect for the other inhabitants of Middle-earth to share their language.

-Men: Easily corruptible, prone to usurpation and treachery. From Ulfang to Ar-Pharazon, Men have countless times proven that they do not deserve to inherit the earth.

The only denizens of Middle-earth who are, as a race, guilty of no (recorded) 'sinful' wrongdoing are the Bombadilians (including Goldberry).

[The Saucepan Man]

I assume that by "on a general level" you mean that while it is a common trait among Elves, it cannot be ascribed to each and everyone of the Firstborn.

I would actually go further and say that it was (in the First Age at least) an inherent part of Elvish nature to consider themselves superior to Iluvatar's other children. Often this manifested itself in a negative way, but I think that, in many individuals (those that you mention, for example), it manifested itself instead in a positive way. Although I would still maintain that it is patronising for the Elves to grant to Men a part of the land which they had claimed for themselves but over which they in fact had no greater right save by dint of having got there first. And, while I do agree that Elves such as Luthien and Beleg came to regard individual Men as their equals, it does not necessarily follow that they regarded the entire race of Man on the same basis.

During the Second Age and certainly by the Third Age, it seems to me that Elves were coming round to a much fuller understanding that that which made them different from Men did not necessarily make them superior, no doubt prompted by an acknowledgement that their time was fading.

[Lord of Angmar]

During the Second Age and certainly by the Third Age, it seems to me that Elves were coming round to a much fuller understanding that that which made them different from Men did not necessarily make them superior, no doubt prompted by an acknowledgement that their time was fading.

I agree entirely with this general trend.

Although I would still maintain that it is patronising for the Elves to grant to Men a part of the land which they had claimed for themselves but over which they in fact had no greater right save by dint of having got there first. And, while I do agree that Elves such as Luthien and Beleg came to regard individual Men as their equals, it does not necessarily follow that they regarded the entire race of Man on the same basis.

I still wouldn't call this necessarily patronising. After all, nobody really has any 'right' to land save by the order in which they appeared there and, sadly, by the military strength of the land 'owners' or desirers. I agree about your point about Elves such as Beleg and Luthien, in theory, though I do not see any proof readily available to support (or, I suppose, to controvert) it. Does that make our theses 'uncanonical?'

By the way, I seem to have fallen victim to the quote mark addiction as well.

[Vanya]

I woldn'say Elves had more faults than other races. Except for Feanor and his sons, who commited horrible crimes, and caused so much suffer, other Elves through history showed great courage, spirit and were too wisu too be stuck-up. It's peple themselves that are guilty if Elves treated them badly. How many times they folowed Morgoth, and betrayd Elves? Except for Three Houses, most of them were enemys to Eldar. Eldars esteemed those families very much - didn't Finrod died to save Beren? As for the others, if I remember correctly, it is said that after NA (or was it LA) the hearts of Eldar and Man astranged? In both cases, it was the treachury of man ( Ulfang at NA and Isildur refusing to destroy the ring at LA).
So, if Elves had it enough with man, you can't blame them. And even then, they helped their own doom, by helping Frodo.

[Etharius]

sorry Essex, i assumed you were female.

[Saraphim]

Welcome to the Downs, Etharius! But if you ever want to have a social life of any kind, leave now! Look at my sig; you'll never get out!

Anyway. *looks around suspiciusly*

You should definitly read the Silmarilion, and the innumerable other books raleted to Middle-Earth. You'll find that the Elves do quite a bulk of the fighting. Especially Fingolfin.

In my opinion, the elves were all either dead, gone over to Valinor, or simply tired of fighting. Many of them still did, the Mirkwood elves is an example of this, because thier lands were threatened.

[doug*platypus]

Before this discussion turns instead to "Eldar: Wise Teachers or Just Jerks?"... whoops, too late! .... I'd like to address the first post made by Etharius.

I was pretty dissappointed at the elves in story of LotR. They didn't fight at Helms Deep or at Minas Tirith and neither at that other place. I think they are either wussies or stuck-up. Why were they not prepared to sacrifice themselves for the destruction of Sauron and the ring?

While you're obviously entitled to your own opinion of Elves as "wussies", this judgment appears to have been made on them in great haste. The Barrow-Downs is a great source of extra information that you may not know about Tolkien's books. I've often found that knowledge brought to the discussion by other forum users has completely shattered my previous assumptions and misconceptions about Middle Earth.

Elianna has described very well the part that Elves did play in the wars of the Third Age. The Appendices are the best source of information for the deeds of the Elves and Dwarves during the War of the Ring, but some things can also be gleaned from the text. Thranduil and his Elves fought with evil creatures in Mirkwood. Galadriel, Haldir and the Elves of Lórien fought off three separate assaults from Dol Guldûr. I am not completely clear on the role of Elrond and Glorfindel at Imladris, but I think there was some threat from the Ettenmoors. At any rate, their part of the world was too wild and dangerous to abandon for the war in the south.

I can understand how the movies may have affected peoples' perception of the War of the Ring greatly. Peter Jackson chose to limit the conflict to the war in Gondor, thus shooting himself (and the story) in the foot. As Maédhros pointed out, the Elves of Lórien could not have come to Helm's Deep; they were already fighting Sauron on another front. That is part of the reason that many fans of the book were so upset by this significant change in the story. The movies would have us believe that the War took place in Rohan and Gondor only. This was NOT the case. The Dwarves of Erebor were NOT solely "hiding in their mountains seeking riches". Their King, Dáin Ironfoot, was killed defending against the forces of Sauron in the War of the Ring. And Elrond, in my humble opinion, still cared greatly for the fate of Middle Earth. There is nothing in the text to suggest he did not.

Most important of all, as already pointed out, the destruction of the One Ring meant that Lórien and Rivendell would both eventually cease to exist unchanged as centres of Elvendom in Middle Earth. Galadriel and Elrond both resisted the temptation to take the One. They let it go to be destroyed; both were acting selflessly (and/or wisely) for the greater good of Middle Earth. And don't forget that Elrond allowed his daughter to marry Aragorn and lose the opportunity to go to the Undrying Lands with him.

There are many easily found and convincing reasons why Elves were not "wussies" OR "stuck-up" OR "not prepared to sacrifice themselves". This is why I provided Etharius with that link to the Novices and Newcomers Forum. I believe that the question would have been more suitably posted there. But perhaps I was wrong.