Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I thought it would be good to have a thread where people can ask questions pertaining to the books. and to start this thread off my question is, is glorfindel of rivendale the same as glorfindel of gondolin? I have read other internet sites that argue it both ways, but i was reading Return of the Shadow (history of middle earth) and it said that it was intended that he was one in the same (i will check it tonight so i can site a page number) and that mandos had released him back to middle earth. So basically what is everybodies thoughts and are there any other refrences either way on the subject.

The Simarillion index rather plainly splits them into two different people.

Nothing official from Tolkien ever said that Glorfindel returned.

I agree with the two separate people theory.

Hmm, let's see if I have a good question...just a minute, I need to rack my brain...

k here is what i found in "Return of the Shadow" page 214-215. this is taking place just before the council of elrond- "glorfindel tells of his ancestory in gondolin" years later, long after the publication of LOTR, my father gave a great deal of thought to the matter of glorfindel, and at that time he wrote "in LOTR is one of the cases of somewhat random use of the names found in the older legends, now referred to as the silmarillion, which escaped reconsideration in the final published form of LOTR". He came to the conclusion that glorfindel of gondolin, who fell to his death in combat with a balrog after the sack of the city, and glorfindel of rivendale were one in the same: he was release from mandos and returned to middle earth in the second age" -Christopher Tolkien
this makes me wonder if there is other info about it (i think Christopher refers to a letter) and second why glorfindel and not others such as ecthelion?

Because it's all very confusing...

Here's what the Encyclopedia of Arda says:

interesting, so i guess if i am reading it right when LOTR was written they were not intended to be the same character (nor was it even really thought about). Later on tolkien gave much thought to it and finally determined that they were one in the same. I still havent found the last 3 books in the history of middle earth except on the internet and they are hardback. guess i am going to have to try harder to find them!

k next question, this seemed a little far fetched to me but i had read (again on the internet) that thranduil and legolas were in gondolin and escaped the sack of the city. i find this far fetched, but maybe there ancestory is from there or something. Is there any literature that pertains to this?

Back to the Encyclopedia of Arda...

From the looks of it that seems quite impossible. After reading bios for Legolas, Thranduil, and Oropher (Legolas' grandfather), it seems that they never dwelt in Gondolin, but were Sindarin elves from the country of Lindon who traveled eastward to found their forest kingdom. Lindon was in the north-west, while Gondolin was in the south.

Then again, I'm not entirely sure about it.

I think I finally thought of a question: Why...oh, I forgot again...

Ya, i complete agree, very unlikely. It was kind of a stupid question but i had read it in a forum like this and i thought it would be kind of cool if there was any support for it. I was hoping more people would be posting questions. this is a great resource and there are some people here who really know there stuff. Im the only one posting any questions!!! well heres another one. Is there any literature that confirms or denies that balrogs have wings?

another question, i am so full of them. where do dragons come from? it is said that morgoth couldnt create anything new but only in mokery of other creatures. orcs were in mockery of elves, trolls in mockery of ents. So where do dragons fit in? mockery of the eagles? or maybe they were mair like balrogs? hopefully Ush will get in on this, he knows his stuff.

Hey, I know some of this stuff too...sort of.

I'm pretty sure that Balrogs have wings. It says so in the book, unless the Balrog is stretching his arms to full wingspan, which would seem pretty stupid and wouldn't make sense, because then it would be called armspan or something like that.

Hmm, dragons, dragons, dragons...I'll be right back...

i have a question, are there any drawings of balrogs besides the one from morgoth

Drawings of Balrogs? Hmm, I wouldn't know about that...

My Middle-Earth book says that Sauron and Morgoth formed dragons together, Glaurung being the first.

didn't know sauron had a part

Well I know there is a big contreversy over whether balrogs have wings or not and i think the main cause for it is that there isnt any literature supporting it either way. I was hoping that perhaps C. tolkien had published something about it and if anyone in this forum can quote the information.

There is a little text that conferms it. I think that was the idea anyway.

EoA says that the origin of dragons is unknown. Glaurung was issued from the gates of Angband, so it is either one of Morgoth's creatures or he corrupted some grand thing.

WELL I AM HOPIN THAT SOMEONE CAN SITE A REFRENCE FOR BALROGS AND WINGS, AND WHERE DRAGONS COME FROM. THEY ARENT SOMETHING MORGOTH JUST CREATED SINCE HE CANT DO THAT SO IT MUST BE SOMETHING HE CURUPTED.

Corrupted creature seems more likely, and it makes you wonder if at some point dragons were consider grand and beautiful things instead of terrifying monsters that look at you with a look that says "You look tasty...I wonder if you're good when turned into charcoal..."

Corrupted creature seems more likely, and it makes you wonder if at some point dragons were consider grand and beautiful things instead of terrifying monsters that look at you with a look that says "You look tasty...I wonder if you're good when turned into charcoal..."

ya they must have been mair (excuse the spelling) that were corrupted, but then again it talks about glaurung and how when he first came out of angband he wasnt fully mature. I wouldnt think that a mair would have to mature?

Maiar. It's a hard word, and not completely real either...

I don't think that dragons were Maiar, just powerful creatures. The Maiar were more powerful than fire-breathing and flying, for they could change shapes at will and the like.

well powerful creatures created from what? and balrogs were maiar and they couldnt change shape. at one time i am sure they could but not after being corrupted. I would just like to know what they came from since morgoth couldnt create anything wholly new.

Okay, so most of the Maiar could change shape...if they wanted to.

Ush, a little help about that shape-shifting Maiar thing? That's my question.

well you are right, in the begining all miair could assume any form they wanted but some that became corrupt lost that ability.

I was wondering if any one had heard this as well. there isnt going to be an extended dvd for return of the king due to jackson doing a remake of king kong. does any one have any further info on it?

sounds like a false rumour to me. I can't see there not being an extended dvd

Yes, that would be just plain stupid...

does any one know the release date for the two tower dvd? i saw an article that said in the UK it had been pushed back from june 30th (i didnt even know it was supposed to come out june 30th) so if it is pushed back in the UK i would assume it will be pushed back in the US also. Dangit!

pushed back?why pushed back???

Because people get much more anticipated for its release...

okay how do people feel about this one, we all know that Sauron was defeated when the ring was destroyed. we can also be resonably sure that if he got the ring he would have swept across middle earth and his victory would have been complete. but what if they decided to hide the ring. Sauron obviously didnt know the location of the ring so lets say it was hidden in the Falas with cirdan. so lets assume that all the battles would have taken place similarly to what really happened. So could Sauron be defeated in that manner? I think he would have been subdued for another 3000 years. my reasoning is Saruman was defeated, gondor won the battle of the pelenor fields, Rivendale survived the assault on it as well as Lorien. Erebor would have fallen and the battle at the black gate would have been lost. so would the armies attacking erebor and the army at the black gate be enough to re-assail minis tirith as well as destroy lorien and rivendale? i dont think so, but i guess you can then ask would rivendale, lorien, and what ever was left in gondor be strong enough to destroy baradur again?

If the Ring was hidden and not destroyed, not only would the fight at the Black Gate have been lost, but Aragorn would have been killed and the line of Gondor's kings would be lost forever, as well as a large portion of the Gondorian and Rohirrim population be wiped out. With the armies destroyed, Sauron would have then destroyed the rest of Rohan and Gondor, since most of the warriors of both lands were at the battle at the Black Gate. The Elves' armies have been diminished because of the Elves leaving Middle-Earth, and would not be able to stand against the thousands of Orcs pouring their way. After the Elves have left Middle-Earth or been entirely destroyed, hobbits would have been enslaved and would not last long in slavery (as Tolkien has said many times), and eventually Sauron would reach Cirdan. Sauron's second darkness would be slower than it would have been with the Ring, but it would complete within a couple hundred years, if not thousands. Barad-dur would stand tall and invincible, and, unless the Valar acted and destroyed Sauron, the land would be Sauron's and the Orcs would run rampant, destroying any last trace of Men and Elves.

That's my theory of what would happen if the Ring was hidden.

true, the line of kings would be gone, the remaining left to defend gondor and rohan would most likely lose, but remember Sauron was scrambling to get enough troops to the black gate to overwhelm Aragorn. So would the remaining forces of Sauron be strong enough to destroy Lorien and rivendale. i dont think so unless there was major reinforcement from the east that we dont know about. Also if they werent trying to decieve Sauron Aragorn would not have gone to the black gate and with those forces minis tirith would stand for a long time. Your probably right though in saying that if sauron won it would take hundreds of years. I dont think he would win in the intial attacks it would take years for him to build up enough soldiers, but Elves would also be more inclined to leave middle earth. and ya hobbits there is no question, they wouldnt even be a factor in defending middle earth.

No, Rex's basic point is correct- the Battle of the Black Gate is the crucial point. Remember, the good guys were going to be slaughtered there. Denethor tells Gandalf after Pelennor Fields that they have only destroyed a small portion of Sauron's forces and Gandalf says that whilst Denethor was taken by depression, he was not wrong.

ROTK makes it very clear that the good guys faced annihilation at the Black Gate but that when the Ring, and Sauron, was destroyed, the bad guys panicked and fled.

And if they had not gone, as you suggest, they were still doomed as it was clear that Minas Tirith (which had been breached, remember) could not be held.

That being the case, the Elves would have still faced the destruction they feared.

Gandalf rejected hiding the Ring for very good reasons.

i guess you didnt understand my last post. i agree with rex. i know they were about to be wiped out at the black gate, but remember he was strugling to get his forces to the gate in time. in example remember the hurried troop of orcs that ran into frodo and sam? he probably had enough to defeat them but he wanted to overwhelm them, plus he though Aragorn had the ring, in which case it would require all his forces, if aragorn could wield it properly. it also says that lorien could fall to no power except if sauron himself came. again i agree with you guys, Sauron would win, but it wouldnt be in the intial attacks. now i do beleive that he COULD be defeated though. only one wall in minis tirith was breeched. it would take a massive amount of saurons force to overtake the other 6 if Aragorn was there, and after that he would need to move onto helms deep, then rivendale, then lorien. and what i am saying is after all that, he does not have sufficient force to sweep across all lands. And lets say that while assailing minis tirith all the other forces left where able to band together, (unlikely) i would have to think that that would be enough to defeat Saurons forces but not Sauron himself.

That initial breach of Minas Tirith was made out to be cataclysmic. There was no real effort from Suaron needed to destroy the forces at the Black Gate. But let me quote here as to what Gandalf saw as the future of Minas Tirith:

"Hardly has our strength sufficed to beat off the first great assault. The next will be greater. This war then is without final hope."

No, Minas Tirith would NOT have held very long at all. It would have fallen very fast. Sauron's forces vastly outclassed the good guys. And once the good guys were defeated Sauron would have been free to assault Lorien himself.

In fact, if the army defeated at Pelennor Fields was only a small part of his strength, he could almost certainly have besieged Minas Tirith and still wiped out the rest of the free world in any case.

All of which was moot; as pointed out in FOTR hiding the Ring was impossible.

ush, you make a good point, but here is another question for you. gandalf does make it clear that there is no hope, but just looking at armies against armies, where are these massive armies Sauron has? the only reason i ask is Rivendale was attacked but the attackers were destroyed, same with Lorien. Rohan was supposed to be attacked but the ents destroyed that army as well. the only successful campaign for Sauron was the lonely mountain, and his mightiest army (i assume) was defeated at the black gate. where are these massive forces and why didnt he use his full power? the only thing i can think of is maybe gandalf said that because he knew that Sauron had an almost limitless resource of soldiers out of the east. What do you think?

The Black Gate wasn't really his mightiest army. The invading army there was VERY small- as they said, smaller than the vanguard alone of the Gondorian army would have been in days past- and only a casual effort from Sauron was needed to destroy it.

Sauron simply had massive reserves.

where do you think he had these reserves and why didnt he use them? i would have thought he would try and squish everyone in one mighty blow.
imagine this on the movie screen, i cant waint!!!

ok. J.R.R.Tolkien wasn't exactly a veteren strategists.

great.
After following much of the discussions from these guys, you go and blame it on the author.
Kinda slaps us and brings us back to reality doesn't it? (groan)

well he wasn't damn reality, i hope we all living in fake world and reality doesn't exist.

Like the Matrix?

Sauron could have done the whole "wipe out everything with a final blow," but that was just not how Sauron did things. Plus, it wouldn't be much fun, now, would it?

I have a question. If Sauron was supposedly the most powerful Maiar that ever existed, how come he's always been defeated when he enters a battle himself? He fell to the great wolf-killing dog in the Silmarrillion, and he fell to Elendil and Gil-Galad, and Isildur at the Last Alliance.

I think it was simply tactically impossible for Sauron to use his whole force in one battle. You simply couldn;t fit them onto the field. The reserves, one assumes, were in Mordor.

Rex, Sauron was always a powerful Maia, no doubt, but he didn't actually become Numero Uno until the Ring was built. And remember that dog that beat him was a. on a good day and b. also the hound of one of the Valar! It was Maia-strong in of itself. So a fair fight.

And he didn't fall to Elendil and Gil-Galad, did he? He killed them both. And remember, these two heroes were so unstoppably strong that they had bested everything that Sauron had sent against them- Gil-Galad in particular was meant to be utterly unstoppable in battle.

So Sauron had to take to the field himself. But let us remember who it was he was fighting at that point. We know he was up against:

Gil-Galad
Elendil
Isildur
Elrond
Cirdan

Egad! Bascially a gathering of the hardest damn people on the continent, that was! Sauron killed the two greatest before Isildur got in his killing blow.

hm...

well you make it sound like all five of them fought sauron and i dont beleive that was so. the movie has kind of misguided people. Sauron was already defeated when Isildur finally cut the ring from his finger. it was elindil and gilgalad who fought him alone. i wish i could remember what book i read this in but the only person to witness the final conflict was isildur, otherwise elrond and cirdan would have had the knowledge to destroy the ring right then and there.

Elrond and Cirdan DID want the ring destroyed there and then but it was Isildur who had it and he refused! And what I am saying has nothing to do with the films. And Sauron was not defeated enough to have not KILLED Gil-Galad and Elendil, was he?

Sorry, Turin, but you are wrong, they WERE all there. Direct quote from FOTR:

"I beheld the last combat on the slopes of Orodruin where Gil-Galad fell... few marked what Isildur did; he alone stood by his father and by Gil-Galad only Cirdan stood, and I."

How much more clear do you want it? You really should check your basic facts on these things.

and dude your an ass!!! i never said they werent there, i said they took no part in the fighting against sauron. of course they were there, but it was elendil and gilgalad who defeated sauron, not elendil, gilgalad, isuldur, elrond, and cirdan. even in the quote you gave me you prove my point, elrond beheld, not partook in the battle. it is like many other battles in tolkiens world where the two combatants (in this case 3) defeated one another, for example ecthelion and gothmog, or huan and morgoths hound, or glorfindel and that balrog, or gandalf and the balrog he fought. and "few marked what isildur did", well didnt i say isildur took the ring and no one saw? well i may have been wrong in saying that isildur was the only one who saw the final conflict, but if no one saw what he did wouldnt you think that no one saw the final moments of the battle? so before you give me your high and mighty attitude (which since i got on this forum you have been giving me, i dont think you like people challenging you when your wrong) check and read carefully other peoples posts before jumping all over them. plus "check your facts", why when you can check them and prove my point for me. i dont sit infront of the computer all day with my books sitting open in front of me ready to slam any one when they improperly quotes something or when they read into it a little more then what was written. " how much clearer do you want it?" dude if you want to make a point make a point, dont be an ass about it, especially when your off the mark.

"The only person to witness the final conflict was Isildur"

YOUR words, in black and white, in your own post. RIGHT there. For EVERYONE to read. And utterly wrong. As you yourself admit that in your post, just what is your problem?

That being the case, I was fully justified in pointing out your error.
So get of your damn high horse and pay attention to what I say. Because it is YOU who made the mistake. And if you are going to go around contradicting what other people say, Turin, then I consider it a basic courtesy to check your facts first. If you erroneously correct me after I have checked the books, then you should expect a certain amount of hosility at your presumption and arrogance.

And Elrond and Cirdan DID see what Isildur did. As also described in the books, they tried to persuade him to destroy it but he refused.

Turin, if you cannot take being wrong, then that is your problem. But if you start mouthing off like that again I will edit your post and give you an official warning, clear?

Another thing about Sauron sending out all of his reserves: it would have left Mordor unguarded, had someone approached it while his armies were tearing everything apart.

Yes, though that said that is the kind of mistake that bad guys make all the time.

Sauron tried really hard for that not to happen, didn't he? Didn't work though...

I think they needed to show Gil-Galad more. I mean, we don't even get to see him get killed!

He was pretty much removed from movie continuity. For an unstoppable hero, Elendil hardly got a good part either.

EDITED- as warned.

Your tone and attitude is unacceptable, Turin. If you want to make your points in a clear and logical way then you may go on and do so. Carry on as you are and I will continue to take action against you.

And do not even THINK about trying to carry on this argument in the threads. No-one else is interested.

Now, if we could move on please, folks...

dude, ush, im sorry, i can see why you wouldnt want some one reading something that critises you. but the audience i wanted read it. again i am sorry, i made an error in a statement and am perfectly happy with admitting i was wrong. and if any other time i am wrong, please people let me know and i will gladly apologize, just be polite, pleezzzz. and anyone if i think your wrong i will gladly tell you why i think so and do my best to quote sources. but again if i think your wrong and your not please let me know why i am wrong, again just be cool about it.

captain rex, i totally agree, we needed to see more of gigalad and elendil. check this, i think this would have been sweet, elendil charge sauron so sauron turns to strike him down, but just then gigalad jumps up and stabs sauron right in the side with his spear. sauron screems out but slowly a fire creeps up the spear and consumes gilgalad. just as his ashes hit the ground elendil strikes sauron across the shoulder with a might blow, but it does little but pisses him off so he flings elendil against the rock face. then it picks up where the movie was. though not quit like the book it would have been sweet.

Turin, you may criticise me all you like, though most of what you say has no backing. I will even happily repeat what you said- that I cannot bear people saying I am wrong, and that I jump down your throat in a way that you did not with, for example, the question of the two Glorfindels. Your post was not edited because it criticised me. It was edited because I just told you not to mouth off, and then you went and did just that.

But if I am aggravated it is because I get cross when I say things derived from the books and then someone tries to make out I am wrong. Now, let me make some points clear

1. Your Glorfindel example is faulty. I made two simple points. First, that the Glorfindel index entry in the Silmarillion had them as two different people. Secondly, nothing official from Tolkien ever made out that Glorfindel returned. After that, some info was posted saying that Tolkien was THINKING about making them the same person. But that does not change either of my points at all, so the reason you could not jump down my throat then is that you had no basis to.

2. You insist that only Gil-Galad and Elendil fought Sauron. Other than that they were the only ones killed, I see no basis for assuming that. We know that the five I said were at that fight. We know the three surivivors were all by Sauron when the Ring was cut from his finger. I take it as a fair supposition that all five were opposing him- and much of the reference material I can find on-line seems to take the same view.

ALL we know of the fight is this:

Present were: Sauron, Elendil, Gil-Galad, Isildur, Elrond, Cirdan

Sauron killed Gil-Galad and Elendil

Isildur cut the Ring from Sauron.

Now, why the assumption that only the two who died actually fought?

So when Rex asks how Sauron lost, I think it was very reasonable indeed to point out the presence of the five mighty opponents who were at that fight.

You may disagree that Elrond and Cirdan did anything if you want (quite WHY they would just stand there is another matter) but do not make out I am automatically wrong in some unquestionable way. And when most of your post contained inaccuracies it is no wonder at all that I was not impressed by what you had to say.

I am holding no hard feelings, but I will continue to be aggravated when errneously corrected after consulting source material, and I will continue to delete posts made in defiance of what I say as mod. There is nothing personal in that at all.

k well in an effort to be hospitable i am going to address your issues.

first you stating that my glorfindel thing is faulty and i didnt jump on you because i had no backing is not true, i would not jump on someone like that when they are wrong. now the glorfindel issue falls upon wether you think that only published works by tolkien are correct or stuff that christopher tolkien has written is also correct. i get the feeling that you by denounceing my quote from return of the shadow you dont feel chris's stuff is accurate, but in that case you cant quote silmarillion since he compiled it.
now since it is 5'oclock and work is out, i am out of here and will address your other attacks on my statements later (after some research) lol

All Chris says in that book is, as I say, that Tolkien was thinking about making them the same person, but there are a vast and staggering amount of things that JRR was THINKING about doing or changing.

The fact remains that in the Silmarillion, which aside from The Hobbit and LOTR is the only thing close to definitive finished Tolkien (with Chris himself pointing out how dodgy Unfinished Tales is and The Silmarillion itself being far from perfect), they are different people. What JRR was thinking of doing to change that is academically interesting- but factually irrelevant. The two points I made held. They are different in the Sillmarillion. Nothing official Tolkien released ever said Glorfindel returned. These points remain facts.

Meanwhile, I really would rather that you did not drag this thing about Sauron's death on and on. What I have said is the info we have from LOTR and the Silmarillion and there isn't really much to be added to that. I have given an answer I rather suspect Rex is happy with and I do not want this all bogged down on this issue; I want it to move on.

well said.

Some where I read that in the act of killing Sauron, Elendil and Gil-Galad were slain. I doubt it...

Ush always proves his point. End of that discussion.

Those five were indeed there, even if it only shows three of them in the film, the three in the film being Elrond, Elendil, and Isildur. I thought I might have seen Gil-Galad sent flying with the others that Sauron smote with the mace, but I'm not sure...

And we already solved the Glorfindel problem, that he was going to be the same character but Tolkien never officially made them the same.

Next question, before the arguing gets out of hand.

k well here is my final point, i am going to address the glorfindel and who battled sauron isue then i am done.

glorfindel- here is a quote from return of the shadow page 214-215. "he came to the conclusion that glorfindel of gondolin, who fell to his death in combat with a balrog after the sack of the city and glorfindel of rivendale were one in the same: he was released from mandos and returned to middle earth in the second age." so since this is a letter from jrr tolkien i take it as fact that the two were the same. the only discussion left is wether or not the tolkien world an individual beleives in ends with the published works of the hobbit and the lord of the rings or if the individual beleives in the final form of the evolving world tolkien created.

k now for sauron-
return of the king appendix b page 455 year 3441-
"Sauron overthrown by elendil and gilgalad, who perish"
the complete guide to middle earth page 206
definition of gilgalad-
"in 3441 gilgalad and elendil overthrew sauron but were themselves slain"
definition of elendil-
"elendil was one of the leaders of the last alliance which overthrew sauron and, with his friend gilgalad, its greatest warrior. he was slain, along with gilgalad, by sauron on the slopes of oroduin, but they in turn overthrew their enemy"
definition od sauron-
"Sauron was overthrown by gilgalad and elendil, but killed both his foes."
and finally the most conclusive evidence is found in the simarillion, of the rings of power and the third age, page 365
"but at the last the seige was so strait that sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with gilgalad and elendil, and they both were slain, and the sword of elendil broke under him as he fell. but sauron also was thrown down"
so there is my proof that elendil and gilgalad alone battled sauron. i never said that cirdan and elrond werent there. as a matter of fact elrond was gilgalads herald (complete guide to middle earth, page 147). as far as the circumstances involved in the fight (why didnt the others join in) i could speculate that the others were occupied with orcs or sauron was his own champion and men andelves sent there champions to battle him, but ush doesnt like me speculating.

You did say they weren't there at first, actually. And all your quotes prove nothing! First of all, 'overthrown' means Sauron's forces were defeated, not that he himself was killed. Overthrown does NOT mean killed. It only refers to his military defeat. What you offer is NOT proof. "But Sauron also was thrown down". It does not say BY THEM, does it? It just says he was thrown down, and that those two were killed. You are ASSUMING the rest. Those are the same quotes I read from which I provided the only points we know about that battle. Your idea that those two fought him alone is still only OPINION.

You are making absolutely no difference to my argument at all. STILL all that shows is that in that battle Gil-Galad and Elendil were killed. It gives us no other information whatsoever.

And please do not bother repeating yourself over the Glorfindel thing. We have already had that quote and it still makes NO difference to what I said at all.

Now, you have pointlessly extended both arguments. Before I asked you politely. Now I am straight telling you- STOP. Rex himself has said he is happy with what I have said. Move on, next question.

EDITED

No, Turin. No last words, or final points. You were directly told to stop. That question is done with. No more. Please do not defy such an instruction again.

Well what do you peeps think about this:

There is also a Legolas Greenleaf in the story of the Fall of Gondolin (in the First Age), but it is not known if they are the same elf. That Legolas led the refugees over the plains, because he was night-sighted.

IS legolas also a reborn elf? Or not?

He COULD be, though the Legolas of the books doesn't display the conspicuous power one might expect from a veteran of the First Age.

Turin asked a question like that earlier. It seems Legolas' family came from the far west, from Lebannon if I remember correctly. Then again, it would be nice if I knew where I could find Gondolin on a map.

Please do not drag on the arguements that we have already discussed. Elendil and Gil-Galad were slain by Sauron, Isildur killed Sauron, and Elrond and Cirdan were there to watch while fighting Orcs. Glorfindel of Gondolin and of Rivendell were meant to be the same people but not officially declared the same (no, a letter from Tolkien to a friend or his son are not really that official), and I had already mentioned that quote. Those questions have ended. I don't mean to be rude, but arguements tend to make me angry and I don't like getting angry while sitting at the computer talking about stuff I enjoy with other people that enjoy the same things...

That argument is done with; there will be no more said about it. I already made that clear. Any attempts to prolong it will be edited out just as Turin's post was.

Goody.

captain rex, thank you. i feel exactly the same as you just said about the previous discussions. but any ways i thought i had heard some where about legolas in gondolin, but thanks to novithliel i dont think i am going crazy.

With being Crazy is nothing wrong Me myself am crazy....haha...
I know about Legolas family.....I translated something about his family......and I have seen a map from Gondolin once.......But where?!??

will shelob, the huge spider, be featured in rotk? since she wasn't in ttt like she was in the book. gosh, another movie with spiders, ack! ewie! ^.~

---nb: use spoiler tags for spoilers, please---

yes shelob will be in ROTK

What a big secret...

what is gondolin a city in Gondor? it's old capital?

gondolin is an ancient city of elves. it was considered the last great hope of the elves in their battles with morgoth (saurons master). the city finally fell near the end of the first age.

whatever happened to morgoth??? like...was he desroyed or does he still inger??? geez i need to read history of middle earth again...

whare was gondolin?

it was somewhere southeast of the shire..i think....its not on mai middle earth map ne1 kno??