Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Books Discussion » Discuss the Books » The "Only One Legolas" thread
Author Topic:
cirdaneth
Books Admin & Books Forum Moderator
Posts: 2069
Send Message
Avatar
Post The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: May 30, 2007 09:08
The topped Legolas thread contains ongoing arguments about the number of Legolasses (Legolai?) intended by Tolkien. Several members felt most comfortable with one Legolas, so this thread is for them, and any others of that persuasion. :heart:

Extracts from One Legolas supporters:
Domestic Goddess felt there was only one Legolas. Fingolfin_cw said i think Tolkien meant him to be the same, but the main argument for One Legolas came from

Narithil:
There is really little evidence to support either Legolas theory (i.e. one or two) strongly; therefore, anyone can believe whatever he or she likes. I believe that if given more time, Tolkien would have connected the stories into one Legolas, but no one will ever really know unless we raise Tolkien from the dead to ask him. So, it really is just a matter of opinion.

Cavear_and_cigarettes agreed: when Tolkien wrote LotR he revised certain chapters of the Hobbit (ie. the ones with Gollum) to make an easier, more logical segue into his new book(s). seeing as there is more than one example of his "living" (growing, changing) literature, I think it is fair to assume that more would have been said of Legolas.

nairithil: The whole question of one or two Legolases can be solved by answering one question. If Tolkien had prepared his other works for a final publishing, would he have connected this Legolas to that in LOTR, or would he have just changed his name?

Fool, obstinate fool!" You bet that's me! I won't change my mind. I'm so glad someone else finally agrees with me, Sorry, maybe I am a bit insane. You still won't change my mind!

This thread has been set up as a safe haven for those who believe there should be only one Legolas and wish to speculate about his back-story pre- and post-Gondolin and on to LotR and a grey ship to the West.

Arguments to the contrary belong in the topped Legolas thread. Any posted here will be ruthlessly excised. :evil:

All we have to decide is what to do with the Legolas that is given to us.


[Edited on 30/5/2007 by cirdaneth]
LOTRluver43235
Council Member
Posts: 126
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: May 30, 2007 11:36
agreed!!! why would Tolkien create two characters of the same name? why not two different names if they are indeed two different characters? we don't know how old Legolas is exactly, so there's no evidence against it being one elf. when Tolkien repeated names he usually put II after the younger character. example: Denethor and Denethor II (Steward of Gondor and father of Boromir and Faramir). however, the name Denethor in LOTR references the Steward of Gondor because Tolkien wrote about him before the other. try to argue that!!
pitya
Council Member
Posts: 591
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: June 25, 2007 08:56
as well as the fact that name recurrence generally only occurs in lines of Men, i.e. Denethor and Aragorn etc. for general practicallity purposes i would say elves didn't give their children the same name of another elf (if they knew of the elf, of course, but the elven world was small enough and the languages so different i don't think they'd run into that problem too often).
HannaofElves
Council Member
Posts: 15
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: April 19, 2008 05:06
I agree. Why would there be two Legolases? It just dosen't make sense. There should be just one Legolas.
cirdaneth
Books Admin & Books Forum Moderator
Posts: 2069
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: April 19, 2008 08:27
Thanks for reviving this subject Hanna! Of course we'll never know for sure, but bearing in mind Tolkien's habit of writing what came int his head and then thinking it over to "find out what really happened" I like to think that we would have had only one Legolas in the end.

Sadly, Tolkien was unable to live the several lifetimes he needed, so we must do it for him

For a start ... it's intriguing that not only was there a Legolas in Gondolin, but also a Galdor, and of course Glorfindel. All three names were present at the Council of Elrond in LotR, and it seems to be accepted that there was only one Glorfindel, so perhaps the other two also. Makes sense to me.
Loslote
Mother Goose of Vána & CoE Volunteer
Posts: 3222
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: October 26, 2008 05:03
I think that Legolas of Mirkwood is the same as the Legolas of Gondolin because, in the Treason of Isengard, Christofer Tolkien notes: 'This is probably the point at which my father determined on the change of Galdor to Legolas. Legolas Greenleaf the keen-eyed thus reappears after many years from the old tale of The Fall of Gondolin; he was of the House of the Tree in Gondolin, of which Galdor was lord.'
Celebrian
Council Member
Posts: 420
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: October 26, 2008 04:19
Makes sense to me, especially considering that Legolas said that Fangorn Forest "almost" made him feel young again.
cirdaneth
Books Admin & Books Forum Moderator
Posts: 2069
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: The "Only One Legolas" thread
on: February 11, 2013 02:06
*Bump: Please note the general Legolas thread is no longer "topped" but is around somewhere I think. This thread is purely for discussion of "One Legolas" possibilities.
LegolasXXXXX
Council Member
Posts: 586
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: The
on: May 16, 2013 04:45
Loslote said:I think that Legolas of Mirkwood is the same as the Legolas of Gondolin because, in the Treason of Isengard, Christofer Tolkien notes: 'This is probably the point at which my father determined on the change of Galdor to Legolas. Legolas Greenleaf the keen-eyed thus reappears after many years from the old tale of The Fall of Gondolin; he was of the House of the Tree in Gondolin, of which Galdor was lord.'


I would have to agree with that logic...however, I forget if the Legolas in The Silmarillion is called Greenleaf also...hafta check...
Lindarielwen, I hope that wherever you are it is incredible and filled with all the things that you love. Looking forward to our next meeting.
Elthir
Council Member
Posts: 433
Send Message
Avatar
Post
on: May 22, 2013 09:26
LegolasXXXXX, if I may try to answer your question here: Laigolas Legolast was [possibly] the name of the Gnome of Gondolin here, with Laigolas [not Legolas technically] meaning 'Green-leaf'. Tolkien noted [The Book of Lost Tales]:


'Note: Laigolas = green-leaf (...) But perhaps both were his names, as the Gnomes delighted to give two similar sounding names of dissimilar meaning, as Laigolas Legolast, Turin Turambar, etc. Legolas the ordinary form is a confusion of the two.'


So if this is true, Legolas -- the ordinary form -- was a confusion of two similar sounding names, leaving the question open [as far as I know]: when was it confused? In other words, did anyone ever actually call this being 'Legolas' in Gondolin, or was this a later confusion that appeared only in the written tale of The Fall of Gondolin?

In any case, Tolkien would later imagine the etymology of Legolas very differently -- much later, after he wrote The Lord of the Rings, Legolas meant 'Green leaves [foliage]' and was not a confusion of two Gnomish names, but a dialectal form of Sindarin Laegolas.

So Legolas represents a Silvan dialect [the sound e instead of the sound -ae-], which goes with Legolas of Mirkwood.

[Edited on 05/22/2013 by Elthir]
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email