Skip to main content

tolkiens legendarium - How could the Istari have prominent beards and still be considered elves by Men?


The beards of the Istari Gandalf and Saruman¹ feature prominently in Tolkien's works, while elves are not able to grow beards². Despite this discrepancy which is easy to spot for Men, they believed that the Istari were elves or very old and wise men. This is even reflected in on of their names: "Gandlaf" is Westron for "elf of the staff" or "Wand elf"³.



How is this discrepancy explained? Since elves do not have beards, how could persons with large and thick beards be considered elvish?


¹ I leave the other three Istari out of this, since so little is known about them.


² As an aside: Is there any elf that does have a beard?


³ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istari



Answer



It could be an honest mistake born of ignorance.


Since Men don't know much about elves, they may think the beards are a sign of the great age and wisdom of the Istari. Elves are weird and wild, why shouldn't the oldest and wisest of them have beards? (See below: they actually can!)


Remember, we're used to having access to all the information--those living in Middle-Earth often had only rumor and old stories to based their conjecture on. Since Gandalf did live among the elves for a while (and it's hinted he looked like an elf at least sometimes), this is not an unreasonable conclusion to reach.


"Elf" may be honorary or symbolic or both.


Elves are associated with magic so it makes sense for powerful wizards whose origin is unknown to be associated with elves in the stories and titles given to them by ignorant Men.



Perhaps it's just a symbolic title, using "elf" as a way of saying "old and wise and magic and scary," and nobody ever actually thought Gandalf was literally an elf. (Did anyone think Grima actually had a worm for a tongue, or that Saruman looked like Rainbow Dash?)


An aside about sources, since you're asking on etymological grounds.


The name "Gandalf" comes from the oldest written source of real-life Nordic mythology, the Eddas, where he is described is both an elf and a dwarf. His name really is derived from the words for "magic staff" and "elf." Tolkien may have given him these titles in Middle-Earth as well as an in-joke for students of Nordic mythology. (In Nordic mythology, "elf" basically meant "non-god but non-human magic-user" and "dwarf" often just meant a kind of elf that wielded a particular kind of magic.)


As for elves with beards in canon...


Elves rarely grow beards, but they can in their later lives.


There are a few examples of elves with beards (CĆ­rdan, Mahtan, and perhaps Tinfang Gelion). They are all older elves, mostly in the third cycle of their lives, so you could spend a human lifetime with an elf and never see him with stubble if he's not old enough yet. It would also be reasonable to think that older elves might shave to appear younger.


The text saying otherwise may be deliberately wrong.


Most of Tolkien's works are written as in-universe retellings of stories, and have flaws and inaccuracies because of this.


So when the narrator of The Hobbit states that elves can't grow beards, it could be a simplification or a mistake of the narrator. Since elves don't grow beards very often--and can't unless they're pretty old--it'd be reasonable for someone who wasn't extremely familiar with elves to assume none of them can.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...