Why did Glorfindel come back to life?

[Radagast The Brown]

In the Silmarilion Glorfindel was killed by a balrog in near Gondolin. How could he be in Rivendel in LOTR? :confused:

[Nibs]

It's not clear whether or not they are the same. Tolkien reuses many names throughout Middle-Earth, such as Denethor and most of the Dwarven-lords. To my knowledge (or maybe just my opinion), they're different persons. This is probably just another facet of details where it's merely your opinion.

[Ñólendil]

Actually Tolkien wrote an essay about it, it's published in Peoples of Middle-earth. As it turns out they are indeed the same person. Glorfindel died, his spirit went to Mandos, he was purged of all guilt and restored to his body in the Blessed Realm. He remained there and gained back the innocence of the unrebellious Eldar, before heading off to Middle-earth in the Year of Dread in the Second Age (1600) in order to aid Gil-Galad against Sauron.

[Nibs]

So that's why we keep you Ents around here... maybe I'll change my opinion after I read that. Thanks.

[markedel]

Of course what's mysterious is it seems the elves of rivendell did nothing for the last millennium of the third age.

[Wayfarer]

The short answer:

All elves come back to life.

The real question is "Why did Glorfindel and Glorfindel alone return to Middle Earth"

[bropous]

But again, we come to the question of whether a s**** of writing by JRR, or even an essay, can override the authority of the writings as published. Of course, Silmarillion was edited by Christopher, and didn't he admit somewhere (I'm not sure where) that the Glorfindel thingy was his own mistake?

I know there is a lot of interesting info in the additional collections of Tolkien's writings, but I look rather askance at them because he didn't integrate that material into his published writings (Silmarillion aside). Not in any way saying that one could not use those additional writings as sourcing, I just don't give greater credence to those collections. For all we know, those essays were written, perused, then tossed aside by Ronald. A lot of disjointed s****s of writings might confuse the issue.

Again, I don't think the re-emergence of the reincarnated Glorfindel, or whether Glorfindel of LotR is the same as the Silmarillion Glorfindel, can be definitively resolved, neither through the writings published while Ronald was still alive and re-editing, nor through the post-mortem collections of his discarded and unincorporated works.

[broken record removed from turntable] ;)

[bropous]

Just as an aside, dear Mooters, the previous post included no "expletives", the filter took out a very common word and replaced it with asterisks. The word used was a synonym to "shard, shred, remnant, small bit, torn part" and the filter thought it was a slightly unkind word with an "s" tacked on front.

Just in the interests of full disclosure......

[markedel]

ANd the Simarillion is heavily edited itself (re fall of doriath)

[afro-elf]

know there is a lot of interesting info in the additional collections of Tolkien's writings, but I look rather askance at them because he didn't integrate that material into his published writings (Silmarillion aside). Not in any way saying that one could not use those additional writings as sourcing, I just don't give greater credence to those collections. For all we know, those essays were written, perused, then tossed aside by Ronald. A lot of disjointed s****s of writings might confuse the issue.



Perhaps they were not integrated into the story because the refection did not come after they were published, maybe print concstraints, maybe he never thought that his books would warrant such discussion and he was just clearing things up for himself
but in the end who knows? ( the shadow knows. mwahhaaa!!!)

i guess BOTH shadows where meant in the above


though you don't give greater credence, do you view them as equal or lesser

In another most you mentioned HOB, LOTR, and the SIL as things you "accept"
why the last?

[bropous]

I except from accepting the final tome(s) as authoritative because, considering Ronald's editing and re-editing process, the writings contained in HoME did not receive the same level of revision as Hobbit or LotR. Silmarillion can also be considered as "less than totally authoritative" because, although Ronald edited and re-edited it throughout many years, it is still a compilation with the hand of Christopher inserted. So, LotR and Hobbit are primary authority, Silmarillion and a couple others secondary, and HoME tertiary. Writings by authors aside from Chris and Ron would be quaternary.

[Radagast The Brown]

now I didn't understand-Glorfindel and Glorfindel are different elves or the same elf?

[afro-elf]

It depends on what you accept


some people " who are EVEN good guys" like bropous " (afro-elf tenses waiting for the back lash)

tend to give less credit to works that are not LOTR or HOB

however, Jrrr tolkein DID write that it is ONE glorfindel

[Findegil]

Borpous, if I take your view strictly, then the question is viod. Since only looking to the Texts published by JRRT himself only a few listener to The Fall of Gondolin in the Essay club of the university of Leeds in 1926 would know about Glorfindel of Gondolin. And I don't think anybody of them would even remember it.

I admit that your view can be taken. It is only The Silamrillion I am wondering about. What you say is, that it is better to take a text more or less heavily edited by Christopher Tolkien that in part he even considered now as failure than the sources out of which he worked.

Regrads
Findegil

[Radagast The Brown]

OK. I think I'll believe to my sister and you (afro elf and Findegil) if you said that there's just one Glorfindel.

[bropous]

"What you say is, that it is better to take a text more or less heavily edited by Christopher Tolkien that in part he even considered now as failure than the sources out of which he worked."

Incorrect. I state exactly the converse, that the texts of Ronald take precedence over the work edited by Christopher from a nearly-completed original (Silmarillion), and that Silmarillion takes precedence over the History of Middle-Earth series because that series is more of a collection of (with exceptions) unfinished or discarded versions of what was covered in the LotR and Silmarillion (along with some other material).

Also, I do not in any way see Christopher Tolkien as any stripe of "failure". He did fantastic work assembling a final version of silmarillion, and his hard and intense work in editing "HoME" cannot be overlooked. However, he is simply not John Roald Ruel.

[Dwarven Sen]

i have always believed that there is one glorfindel because well actually there is no because it s just what i believe i dont think anyone lashed your back

i have to say in ther lord of the rings glor was a poncy bugger i think dying ruined his personality a little
mind you being i guess being swapped for arwen will do that to some guys

[Findegil]

and that Silmarillion takes precedence over the History of Middle-Earth series because that series is more of a collection of (with exceptions) unfinished or discarded versions of what was covered in the LotR and Silmarillion (along with some other material)

Before we are going on with all this misunderstandings: the quoted sentence is one I am talking about. The History of Middle-Earth gives use a chance to see what parts of The Silmarillion is original and which are "rewritten" by Christopher Tolkien. And I wondered that you will not take that chance. Overall I think we can't make such a general decision, but had to deal with the single texts.

Only to make that point clear: I didn't say that I think Christopher Tolkien made mistakes. I quoted loosely what he himself said in The History of Middle-Earth volume 11 The War of the Jewels in the chapter about the Fall of Doriath.

I hope this Time I made my point clearer than before.
Findegil

[bropous]

Yes, much clearer, but still not on the mark completely. Actually, in that quote, I observe that there were exceptions in HoME. And no, it does not mean I won't give HoME a chance, I just think if your're looking for a definitive answer, such as Glorfindel's possible reincarnation, if it can't be found in the primary source, you go to the secondary, if it ain't in the seondary, you go to the tertiary, so forth. It does not mean to totally discount HoME. I just think that Tolkien's editing/re-editing/re-editing process had not been applied to (most of) the material in HoME. It is this crucible process that makes one source any more "authoritative" than another.

HoME is still Tolkien, just different visions of his world from very esoteric focuspoints. Its usefulness is not in dispute, just questions as to whether it can be as reliable as, for say, Lord of the Rings in discerning the Master's final intent.

[afro-elf]

That was stated quite clearly

thanks

[Ñólendil]

Of course, Silmarillion was edited by Christopher, and didn't he admit somewhere (I'm not sure where) that the Glorfindel thingy was his own mistake?

No, he did not. I don't see why Tolkien's essay should be discarded. It is not even in discord with the Lord of the Rings or the Silmarillion as published (which holds considerably less authority than the former). The 'Glorfindel' text is an essay which makes the "two" Glorfindels of The Fall of Gondolin and The Lord of the Rings to be the same, and Tolkien remarked that it improved the story. He wrote some time after 1968 and he never went against the decisions he made in that essay. I think it should be accepted.

"I know there is a lot of interesting info in the additional collections of Tolkien's writings, but I look rather askance at them because he didn't integrate that material into his published writings (Silmarillion aside)."

J. R. R. didn't or Christopher? If you mean the former, what material are you referring to? Where in The Hobbit, The Book of Lost Tales, The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, The Road Goes Ever On or the Lord of the Rings should Tolkien have put his Glorfindel essay? Where should he have said that the "two" were one and the same? I don't understand your logic. Nothing in the Peoples of Middle-earth, in my opinion, should hold as much authority as anything published during Tolkien's life time, but that's no reason to "look askance" at them.

Again, I don't think the re-emergence of the reincarnated Glorfindel, or whether Glorfindel of LotR is the same as the Silmarillion Glorfindel, can be definitively resolved, neither through the writings published while Ronald was still alive and re-editing, nor through the post-mortem collections of his discarded and unincorporated works.

Why do you believe this? I take the opposite view: there is a very clear, coherent essay written by Tolkien late in his life that explained the whole deal, and the man never went against this essay as far as anyone knows. As far as I'm concerned the whole issue is definitely resolved.

There is nothing in The Silmarillion or the Lord of the Rings (the latter here being much more weighty than the former) that would suggest there were two different Glorfindels. There are two texts that shed light on the subject, they are found in the Peoples of Middle-earth, and both say that they were the same Glorfindel.

the History of Middle-Earth series because that series is more of a collection of (with exceptions) unfinished or discarded versions of what was covered in the LotR and Silmarillion (along with some other material).

This is entirely incorrect. No offense, but I don't think you've taken a close look at some of the HoMe books. Drag out the History of the Silmarillion and Peoples of Middle-earth. You'll find that many unfinished and discarded texts, and many unrelated texts found their way into the Silmarillion as published via Christopher Tolkien. The Doriath chapter was nearly completely the work of the son. You'll read Christopher beat himself up a lot about the stuff he put in The Silmarillion, a couple of times he even wonders if he should have tried it. In PoMe you'll actually find material that was omitted from the Lord of the Rings by accident. The entire primitive mythology of the Silmarillion as published was "discarded" by J. R. R. Tolkien in favor of a scientific one.

The Silmarillion is nice to read, but I think most take it way too seriously. When you really get into studying the texts you'll find that the more you know -- the less you know. "Canon" is not an easy thing to find.

[bropous]

"Nothing in the Peoples of Middle-earth, in my opinion, should hold as much authority as anything published during Tolkien's life time, but that's no reason to "look askance" at them."

But, nolendil, by "look askance" I meant "Nothing in the Peoples of Middle-earth, in my opinion, should hold as much authority as anything published during Tolkien's life time", just in shorthand. This is exactly what I am getting at, that the works published in his lifetime take precedence. Absolutely I do not mean his works not published post-mortem are garbage; quite the opposite. They are still Tolkien, but just don't hold the same authority. I can see now that it has been a semantic difference, which is understandable.

I agree.

But again, I consider JRR's revision process when it came to the material HE had published, and it is very likely that the essay you indicate is clarifying may very well have been discarded when he faced having it in print. He may not have, who actually knows. all I am saying is the stuff he edited and re-eidted has to be more clearly his real intent, not the stuff in notebooks or piles of papers on his desk, truly fascinating as those materials may be.

Yes. A closer look at the whole of HoME would lend better light to the issue, but sorry, it is so dry and so disjointed and so esoteric I have a real problem reading it in depth. I imagine a lot of others would find the same thing. And, I just can't get over the fact that it just wasn't put through the editing/re-editing process by JRR himself and am not totally sure he himself would call it as authoratative.

Lemme see if I've sown the seeds for another semantic miscommunication. ;) Good post, Nolendil. You ain't a mod for nothing.

[Ñólendil]

Absolutely I do not mean his works not published post-mortem are garbage; quite the opposite. They are still Tolkien, but just don't hold the same authority. I can see now that it has been a semantic difference, which is understandable

Okay. Thanks for making that clear.

and it is very likely that the essay you indicate is clarifying may very well have been discarded when he faced having it in print.

Well the essay was written during the last four years of Tolkien's life, I don't think he really had the chance to decide whether or not he wanted it published. The way it was written, it seems to me more like something he wrote for himself.

And, I just can't get over the fact that it just wasn't put through the editing/re-editing process by JRR himself and am not totally sure he himself would call it as authoratative.

I'm sure he wouldn't, in the sense you mean it. The History of Middle-earth is the history of Tolkien's writings about Middle-earth, not about the world itself. It's the individual texts one has to wonder about, as far as authority goes. If The Silmarillion has more authority than it is because The Silmarillion is a story and not a study of Tolkien's stories. In that way The Silmarillion is definitely a better authority. But I will follow the Shibboleth of Fëanor rather than The Silmarillion if I want to know who Gil-Galad is descended from, because the Shibboleth is where Christopher revealed his father's final idea on the matter, admitting that Gil-Galad as son of Fingon was an ephemeral idea, rejected and replaced. [It was replaced by Gil-Galad as son of Arothir {=Orodreth}, son of Angrod].

[Wulažg]

If Glorfindel was reincarnated, then it gives us an interesting parallel between him and Gandalf. They both died(falling off an abyss/mountain) saving their friends from a Balrog and they both came back a bit later to help in the fight again. Just as a question, has ANYONE defeated a Balrog without dying?

[bropous]

"The History of Middle-earth is the history of Tolkien's writings about Middle-earth, not about the world itself."

Actually this really clears up a real misunderstanding of HoME fo me. I took it literally as a history of Middle Earth and not of the writings. Good call.

[Ñólendil]

Thanks bropous.

Wulazg, not that we have heard about. Fëanor, Fingon, Ecthelion, Glorfindel, Gandalf, all fought Balrogs, all died. Of course many others were killed by Balrogs, but these are the people could slew some themselves (except for Fingon whose head was cloven by Gothmog's black axe long before the latter was slain in Gondolin).

[Wulažg]

There's an interesting passage in LoR... "And here in Rivendell there live still some of his chief foes:the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power.
'I thought that I saw a white figure that shone and did not grow dim like the others. Was that Glorfindel then?'
'Yes, you sas him for a moment as he is upon the other side, one of the mighty of the Firstbor. He is an Elf-lord of a house of princes..."

So Glorfindel had to have at least been to the Blessed Realm, and that wouldn't have happened if he was an elf other than the original Glorfindel, since the only Eldar from the Blessed Realm were from Gondolin at that point in time. Right?

[Ñólendil]

There could have been another Glorfindel that never went to Middle-earth before the Third Age in exile. Except that Tolkien expressly stated it had to be the same Glorfindel because no Elf ever bore the same name of a past Elf of historical importance. It was the same Elf.

Anyway, Glorfindel in the Third Age was more powerful than Glorfindel of the First, because he had returned to live in Valinor among the unrebellious High Elves and Holy Ones, regaining the innocence of the Eldar.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Ñólendil
There could have been another Glorfindel that never went to Middle-earth before the Third Age in exile. Except that Tolkien expressly stated it had to be the same Glorfindel because no Elf ever bore the same name of a past Elf of historical importance. It was the same Elf.
Michael Martinez wrote that Tolkien said Elven names were re-used, but Glorfindel was such a striking name that it would not have been re-used, therefore, making the two Glorfindels one and the same.

[Ñólendil]

Tolkien said two things: one was that "Glorfindel" was too striking a name to be reused (it is not Quenya and is hardly Sindarin), and also that no Elf bore the same name of another Elf of importance anyway. Both are said in the same essay in Peoples of Middle-earth.

[Willow Oran]

Why is it that the only people who fought Balrogs and got resurrected were the ones whose names started with the letter G?

I'm glad I'm not the only one who got confused by Glorfindel's resurection, for a while my friends and I thought that it was a case of spontaneous reincarnation.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Willow Oran
Why is it that the only people who fought Balrogs and got resurrected were the ones whose names started with the letter G?
That is not true. All elves could be resurrected by choice, with the exception of Feanor. Finrod was resurreted quite quickly according to Tolkien, the same as Glorfindel, because of their deeds and self-sacrifices. According to the text, "Dying, they were gathered to the Halls of Mandos from which in time they may return".

[afro-elf]

simply he came back to post on the moot

[bropous]

I think I'm pretty much convinced at this point that Glorfindel who rode Asfaloth is the same one who slew the Balrog. I think there has been plenty of back-and-forth on this issue and it seems to me the weight of evidence is on the side of the "single Glorfindel" theory.

So, the score so far, going into the second half:

Balrogs gots wings.

Glorfindel was a single Elf.

Sauron was a meanie.

Resume play.

[afro-elf]

nice to see ya again if only for a while


of course you can't forget the overwhelming evidence that i was arwen's nubian paramour.

Yes aragorn was a cuckold husband

[afro-elf]

He came back for the...

Whats some¡¡good one-line here?

[Inderjit Sanghera]

All elves could be resurrected by choice, with the exception of Feanor.

And of course, Finwe.

[Artanis]

Finwë??

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Inderjit Sanghera
And of course, Finwe. To the best of my knowledge, Feanor was the only Elf to be refused re-embodiment.

[Findegil]

When Finwe died he was alowed to meet Miriel in Mandos halls. And when he told her what had befallen after her refusal of reincarnation, she repented. And thinking longer over it she felt the call of her body and disiered for the life of an incarnated. But Mandos was stern and reminded her of Indis how was still alive and the wife of Finwe even so he was dead. But Finwe offered to stay in Mandos for ever, so that Miriel could live again. To that Mandos agreed, thinking it could be a way healing. So Miriel went forth from Mandos, and Finwe stayed there for ever.

All this can be found in The History of Middle-Earth; volume 10:Morgoth's Ring.

Respectfully
Findegil

[Artanis]

Thanks a lot Findegil, I found it in Morgoth's Ring now. :) But if Finwë could choose to stay in Mandos' Hall and reject further life, and this was approved by him, then I'm more confused than ever about the 'wilful death' of the Elves. :rolleyes:

[Gwaimir Windgem]

O, that's a nice story. I'm surprised I haven't seen it in the most romantic Tolkien story thread.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Artanis
But if Finwë could choose to stay in Mandos' Hall and reject further life, and this was approved by him

That choice is a life for a life. Doing so allowed Miriel to to come back. Thus no net life was lost. Also it was not view as (much of) an offence to Indis, because they had already been estranged when Finwe was killed.

[Falagar]

But what would happen when MÃ*riel and Indis "die" (loose their body)?

[Lefty Scaevola]

If one or both die and decline to come back to life, Then Finwe again would be allowed to choose to do, just as Miriel got the chooice back by Finwe sacrificing the option.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
That choice is a life for a life. Doing so allowed Miriel to to come back. Thus no net life was lost. Also it was not view as (much of) an offence to Indis, because they had already been estranged when Finwe was killed. Thanks Lefty. :) I see the point, to avoid Finvë living with two lawful wives. But it isn't the menage de trois Miriel - Finwë - Indis that troubles me, but Finwë's wilful separation of his fëa and his rhöa. I thought this was considered a weakness, and though the Valar would not hinder it, they would not approve it. But in Finwë's case they seem to accept it clear enough. I'm confused. :confused:

[Lefty Scaevola]

Because having two live wives is viewed to be even more unatural for elves. What a buch of prudes (the elves and the valar) If I were one of the greastest king of my race, I would demand a harem.

[Artanis]

Because having two live wives is viewed to be even more unatural for elves.OK, I see. Finwë would have wanted resurrection if it wasn't for Miriel's desire to go back to life. As at were, he volunteered to stay at Mandos until the world's end, which is not the same as rejecting further life.What a buch of prudes (the elves and the valar) If I were one of the greastest king of my race, I would demand a harem.Maybe you should consider becoming a muslim? I think male muslims are allowed to have four viwes. Would that match your capacity? :D

[Falagar]

Or you could just become Eru and change the rules :rolleyes:

[Fëannel]

There's never a certainty that the character's in Tolkien's works, when referred to, are the same; according to the Book of Lost Tales part 2 there was an Elf in Gondolin named Legolas Greenleaf, whose eyesight was exceptional, even for an elf; the same trait that the elf in the Fellowship of the Ring bore, and yet it was said by Orlando Bloom that the latter was only around about 2931 years old; too young to even be a part of the Last Alliance.
There are several repeated names of Men and Elves in different Tolkien works; for example, a man of the First Age was named Boromir.

[Inderjit Sanghera]

Legolas Greenleaf of BoLT and the one of the fellowship ARE NOT the same, just so if anyone is confused by Fëannel's statement.

[afro-elf]

Originally posted by Fëannel
There's never a certainty that the character's in Tolkien's works, when referred to, are the same; according to the Book of Lost Tales part 2 there was an Elf in Gondolin named Legolas Greenleaf, whose eyesight was exceptional, even for an elf; the same trait that the elf in the Fellowship of the Ring bore, and yet it was said by Orlando Bloom that the latter was only around about 2931 years old; too young to even be a part of the Last Alliance.
There are several repeated names of Men and Elves in different Tolkien works; for example, a man of the First Age was named Boromir.


Yes, such as the names Mablung, Minas Tirith, and Findalus; however, as shown above Glorfindel was the same.

[Inderjit Sanghera]

There were many cases in Elven re-naming. For example, Arakano, was Fingolfins (mother name?) and he passed that onto his youngest son, Argon. (Whose Quenyarin name was Arakano, which menas commander.) Also, Ambarussa, was the mother name of both the twin sons of Feanor (Amrod an Amras) and there was a Rumil in LoTR, the brother of Haldir, and a Rumil of BoLT and The Silmarillion, who was a famous loremaster.

There were a LOT of re-used Elven names amongst men, such Eglamoth, Ectelion and Denethor. Though sadly, no Feanor. :D

[Elf Girl]

Originally posted by Fëannel
it was said by Orlando Bloom that the latter was only around about 2931 years old; too young to even be a part of the Last Alliance.
However that was only the age PJ gave him, I don't believe we know his real age.

[Willow Oran]

If you try and figure out which names were repeated and which actually belong to the same person you'll just confuse yourself beyond all belief. In Glorfindel's case Tolkien specifically said that there was only one Glorfindel.

(I like your sig. Elf Girl, but Glorfie's MINE. I have the ring to prove it.)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally posted by Elf Girl
However that was only the age PJ gave him, I don't believe we know his real age.

Correct, Legolas' actual age is unknown, unless PJ found some obscure text that he doesn't want to share with everyone else.

[Inderjit Sanghera]

I doubt whether P.J is really foudn any text on Legolas's age because there aren't any. Just plain guesswork.

[afro-elf]

Originally posted by Inderjit Sanghera
I doubt whether P.J is really foudn any text on Legolas's age because there aren't any. Just plain guesswork.

I think that he was being facetious.

[Alcuin]

This is a good thread that deserves to be reignited. I recommend in particular the discussion between bropous and Ñólendil (beginning toward the end of the first page and moving onto the second).

I think the general consensus is that the spirit (fëa) of Glorfindel of Gondolin who died fighting a balrog that attacked the refugees that included Tuor, Idril, and young Eärendil in the Crissaegrim above the ruins of Gondolin went to Mandos when Glorfindel was killed. Because of his self-sacrifice in dying to protect others (most notably the seven year old Eärendil, who later arrived in Valinor bearing the Silmaril as an embassy begging clemency and assistance for Elves and Men in their struggle against Morgoth), his part in the Rebellion of the Noldor, which did not include any part in the Kinslaying at Alqualondë, was set aside. Moreover, Elves are by nature bound to Arda until its end, after which they do not know what is to become of them: this is the subject, in fact, of a beautiful essay by Tolkien published in Morgoth’s Ring, “The Debate of Finrod and Andreth.” Any Elf in the keeping of Mandos that had been purged of his failings (Elves are not without sin, though they seek to avoid it) may eventually be rehoused in a body (hröa, not born but prepared for each individual by the Valar) and resume his life as an embodied creature. So it was that Glorfindel also resumed his embodied life.

When and why did Glorfindel return to Middle-earth? At this point the storyline becomes a bit unclear, though the why is clear enough: Glorfindel returned to Middle-earth to fight against Sauron. The when is less clear. It seems to have been Tolkien’s first intention that Glorfindel returned when Gandalf the Grey came to Middle-earth sometime around the end of the first millennium of the Third Age. But there is also a note that suggests that Glorfindel returned in the middle of the Second Age during the War of the Elves and Sauron, when Sauron attacked the Noldor of Eregion and seized the Rings of Power, and then attacked Lindon to wipe out the surviving Eldar of Middle-earth, only to be attacked in turn from behind and utterly defeated by the expeditionary force of Númenor.

All of this is covered in an essay titled “Glorfindel” published in Peoples of Middle-earth. It is not “canon” in that it was written late in Tolkien’s life and not published during his lifetime; however, most readers accept this explanation, with the caveat that no one knows for certain when Glorfindel returned, whether during the Third Age or the Second. (Most people seem to prefer the Third Age; I prefer the Second; but it is of no import either way, unless you’re writing fan-fiction.)

A second issue is covered in this thread: the fëar (spirits, souls) of Fëanor and Finwë his father. Because of his heinous crimes – not so much in leading the Rebellion, but in the horrific and altogether unnecessary Kinslaying at Alqualondë – the spirit (soul) of Fëanor was bound in the Halls of Mandos until the End of Time. Finwë, however, was innocent in all this; but as related in this thread, after Fëanor’s mother MÃ*riel gave birth to him, she lost heart and laid down her life and went to Mandos; and after an age (during the time of the Two Trees), when she would not return despite the urging of the Maiar and Valar, Finwë was permitted to marry Indis, who gave birth to two sons, Fingolfin and Finarfin. After Morgoth slew Finwë at Fëanor’s fortress Formenos and stole the Silmarils, Finwë also went to Mandos. There he agreed to remain so that MÃ*riel might return at last to live as an embodied creature, while his spirit remained unhoused (without a body) in Mandos. That might have been, I think, in part so that Finwë could commune with his beloved son Fëanor, whose spirit was confined not only for his actions, which were all but unforgivable, but to reason with him and work toward his redemption; but that’s just my opinion.

A last note on this subject of canonicity: None of this is “canon” because none of it was published during Tolkien’s lifetime. His youngest son and executor Christopher published The Silmarillion in 1977 with the assistance of Canadian author Guy Gavriel Kay. Christopher Tolkien was the child most taken with his father’s stories, and has spent the decades since his father’s death in 1973 going through his father’s writings to preserve and illuminate them as best he can – and he has done a magnificent job! Because The Silmarillion was published four years after JRR Tolkien’s death, it cannot be considered canon, either; besides Christopher Tolkien himself remarks in places that he wishes he had included some things in The Silmarillion that he did not, while excluding others: there are many variants on most of the stories.

Bottom line: Glorfindel came back to life because Elves are bound to Arda as long as it exists. Unless they are barred from returning to an embodied existence, the Valar return them to bodies when they deem them ready, and Glorfindel was returned to a body. Glorfindel returned to Middle-earth to fight against Sauron.