Talk:Arwen/Archive 1

Old comments
why should the reader "see Radagast"? -TomCerul
 * Oops, I think I was confusing Radagast with Glorfindel. --Ed


 * After almost four weeks travelling, Frodo was increasingly ill from his injury sustained on Weathertop. Strider was still leading the way to Rivendell by a less trodden route. Sam, Merry and Pippin were weary, disheartened and becoming increasingly concerned for Frodo. Suddenly the party hears an approaching horse, with relief the Elf-lord Glorfindel arrives, sent to guide the party to Rivendell by Elrond.  Glorfindel gave Frodo his horse to carry him.  After a further two days march which took them to the ford of  Bruinen where the Black riders were waiting in ambush, Frodo is taken at great speed over the Ford whilst the remaining party stays to ward off the Black Riders. Frodo's last sight was of  Ellrond's and Gandalf's magic, making the waters rise, washing away  the black riders.

Aragorn-Arwen Relationship
In Aragorn's article, it says Aragorn and Arwen are first cousins 62-times removed. In Arwen's article, they're 63-times removed. Which is it? 207.31.229.4 13:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I checked the family tree. 62 appears to be the right answer.

Fate of the Half-Elven
Vicki, didn't Arwen give up her elvish immortality to marry Aragorn? Is that romantic or what? (smile) Ed Poor

Ah, maybe this is intentional, but Arwen translates to "noble lady", so the translation is incomplete. netcrusher88


 * In the movie, she did give up her immortality to marry Strider, but in the books, there is no reference to such a sacrifice. Shouldn't this be noted in the article? Please correct me if I'm wrong (provide reference, please). &mdash;Frecklefoot 15:32, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Actually, she did in the books as well . I didn't recall this either. --Mrwojo 16:50, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * If anyone is still wondering, this is the sort of thing that is understood from context. I can't remember if it is explicitly stated anywhere in LotR, but in parallel to the story of Beren and Lúthien, if Arwen wants to marry Aragorn, she must give up her immortality. (Which might, I suppose, be preferable to spending an eternity separated from him after his death. If they are both mortal, then whatever happens next happens to both of them.) --Aranel 19:32, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * It is explicitly stated in the appendices that the children of Elrond were counted as Elves, until Elrond left: then they had to chose to remain, and become mortal, or leave with him, and become Elves. Arwen stayed behind, Elrond, Elladan, Elrohir left. [[Image:Anarion.png]] 07:24, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I cannot find any such statement in the annex. In fact, before Elessar passes away he asks Arwen to take a ship to the West. She declines, saying that there are no more ships sailing westwards. I.e. she seems to have missed something. After Elessars death, Legolas is reported to build a grey ship and sail away to the West together with Gimli. Shouldn't they have offered Arwen a lift? --Johannes Rohr 20:18, 9 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Arwen dies of sadness from losing Aragorn; when he dies the light of the Valar leaves her eyes and then she goes to die at Lothlorien. In contrast, Luthien becomes mortal when she rescues Beren from death.  She deliberately dies to save him, and after convincing Mandos to return Beren to life, Beren and Luthien are both returned to life as mortals.  Tolkien does not express a steadfast rule about this (though the characters might), except that the half-elven get to choose if they are immortal or mortal, if they go to the Undying Lands or if they leave the world as mortals do.  There is much ambiguity about this aspect of them in Lord of the Rings, but I don't know if Unfinished Tales or somewhere else clarifies things. oneismany 17:29, 12 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The whole idea that Arwen can peddle away her mortality seems to me mistaken at best and contrived at worst. Elrond's words in Appendix A(v) are thoroughly unclear: Arwen will live while he is around, he does say, but his remark on what happens when he leaves is NOT that she will die if she stays, merely that she will come with him or stay.  The idea that his leaving engenders her death does not make sense; it is never explicit, and any implication of it is roundabout.  Her death is from sadness at loss, not from any choice she has made regarding her proximity to her father. Sighter Goliant 03:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The information on Arwen being a descendent of all three High Kings (Finwë, Ingwë, Olwë and Elwë) comes from The Peoples of Middle-earth and is something that Tolkien actually claimed, although you have to kind of play with it to get the connection to Ingwë (through Indis). I would really like to add something in the second section about the original idea among fans being that we thought they thought Arwen had to have a bigger role to avoid appearing sexist (because they had to have more "strong female characters"), but I'm not sure if that's actually true, or if it's just what we thought we-back-when. (Although, if it's in any way true, the irony...) --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 01:37, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Certainly some fans felt that Arwen should have had a bigger rôle, but not all of them. I for one still feel that replacing Glorfindel with Arwen was wrong, and Arwen became too powerful (Arwen called the flood, Arwen withstood Angmar, etc.).
 * As for Arwen's descent from all High Kings: she is of course also descended from the Sindarin King Elwë Singollo ("Thingol"), and Melian of the folk of the Maiar. But so is Aragorn (by a more remote way). [[Image:Anarion.png]] 07:24, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * ??? I wasn't talking about fans who thought Arwen should have a bigger role. I was talking about fans thinking that the filmmakers thought Arwen should have a bigger role. (And I was definitely involved with many long discussions on the subject at the time.) And I wasn't imply that Aragorn couldn't also claim the same descent - it's just more direct to explain Arwen's. (Since you can still say things like "great-great-grandmother"".) --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 13:50, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. The problem with elliptic speak! :) [[Image:Anarion.png]] 14:20, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The actual translation of her name is "noble maiden" not "noble laidy"

Arwen specifically says in Italic textThe Lord of the Rings: Return of the KingItalic text in the chapter "Many Partings" that hers is "the choice of Luthien". In the appendix about Aragorn and Arwen, Elrond says that he will only give Arwen's hand in marriage to Aragorn if he becomes king of both Gondor and Arnor, and that he would not diminish her life's grace for less cause than that. When Aragorn is on his deathbed and he tells her to find a ship to take her across the sea, and she says their is no ship to take her, it has nothing to do with Legolas's ship. She is referring to the fact that she has given up her right to do so, and so cannot by that reason. Aragorn's statement is either forgetful or wishful thinking out of love for her and recognition of her sorrow. Also, it says in the article that Elrond tried to get Arwen to go to the Undying lands during the War of the Ring, but I know of nothing in The Lord of the Rings or Unfinished Tales indicating this; only the Peter Jackson movies mention this that I know of, therefore it belongs under the "Adaptations" section; though it was clearly Elrond's personal desire that she come to the undying lands with him at some point, nothing in the books indicates that elves from Rivendell tried to do this during The War of The Ring or that Elrond tried to persuade her at this time.John ISEM 19:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have a strange question. I have not seen it explained in any article and a clarification may be necessary to be included somewhere for fools like me. Maybe one of you guys will help me clear this up. Arwen was actually immortal and somehow she was able to choose to die. That is not the issue I want to stress. What I'm thinking is that being an elf (or half-elf somehow, for those who just thought of correcting me) she doesn't have the Gift of Men (I think). Elves that were slain, had died by ill-chance, or by the wearing from the passing of the centuries, still remain bound to the World and so their spirits go to the Halls of Mandos. Arwen was not slain and did not die from ill-chance, but 'chose' to die. Where would her spirit be going? Men on the other hand, no matter how they die, leave the Circles of the World into a non-physical place unknown even to the Valar. This means that Arwen chose a mortal life to be with Aragorn and not live "forever" without him, but when they died, instead of staying together somehow, it seems to me they don't even go to the same place! Arwen's spirit would still be bound to the World and stay hanging around while Aragorn would not even be in the same dimension. Unless it is somehow different when she actually 'chose' to die. I wonder if the same thing happened, or what actually happened, to Beren and Luthien. RayLast (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yo Mistman123. As noted in the Lúthien case, Manwë (likely through Eru) changed the rules of creation for Lúthien and Lúthien alone. Lúthien shared Beren's "chains and curse" and as such, when she died, they would go to That Place (in lack of a name for the unknown destination Men go when dead), a place that neither Elf or Vala knew. That her fate and choice is that if Lúthien is no doubt, except one thing: Arwen most likely traveled to Mandos and was re-clad a body, since Tolkien makes no mention of her forsaking her immortality like Lúthien (sharing chains and curse, going far far away, Eru jumping in etc etc), BUT she did however chose to die. Elves can do that, just as they can die from grief and swords. Beren and Lúthien are, in lack of a better word: unique. Their, or her more like it, fate was the first time Eru intervened with Arda (First was that, second was the Choice of Halv-Elves and third was removing Valinor from the spheres). Of course, the arguement made by NotSignedPost further down on this page under "Elves or Edain" (last entry) is worth of notion. Hackeru (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Right, nevermind my previous post. After alot of digging in my bookcase, I found what I was looking for:

"Elrond chose to be among the Elves. His children- with a renewed Elvish strain, since thier mother was Celebrian dtr. of Galadriel - have to make their choices. Arwen is not a 're-incarnation' of Luthien (that in the view of this mythical history would be impossible, since Luthien has died like a mortal and left the world of time) but a descendant very like her in looks, character, and fate. When she weds Aragorn (whose love-story elsewhere recounted is not here central and only occasionally referred to) she 'makes the choice of Luthien', so the grief at her parting from Elrond is specially poignant. Elrond passes Over Sea. The end of his sons, Elladan and Elrohir, is not told; they delay their choice, and remain for a while." [The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, (#153)] and "But the promise made to the Eldar (the High Elves- not to other varieties, they had long before made their irrevocable choice, preferring Middle-earth to paradise) for their sufferings in the struggle with the prime Dark Lord had still to be fulfilled: that they should always be able to leave Middle-earth, if they wished, and pass over Sea to the True West, by the Straight Road, and so come to Eressea - but so pass out of time and history, never to return. The Half-elven, such as Elrond and Arwen, can choose to which kind and fate they shall belong: choose once and for all. Hence the grief at the parting of Elrond and Arwen." [The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, (#154)] Hackeru (talk) 21:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

who Lúthien 'defeted'
Lúthien did rescue Beren from Melcor(Morgoth) .Read The Lay Of Beren and Lúthien in The Silmarillion. User:HopefullGomer, 12 July 2005
 * When, exactly? The rescue from Sauron more dramatic and unambiguous. I agree that Beren would have gotten in serious trouble without Lúthien to put Morgoth to sleep, but I wouldn't say that she "rescues" him there, since they are working together. Anyway, she doesn't "defeat" Morgoth; she just temporarily inconveniences him. Sauron, on the other hand, she defeats so resoundingly that he has to give up his physical form and give over the keys to his fortress. -Aranel (" Sarah ") 02:32, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

okay, i didn't think about that time. i guess the time with Sauron was a lot more spectacular. i always did like that part in the book:) HopefullGomer 14:30, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that she did not defeat Sauron either; it was rather Huan who did it.--Galadh 07:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Arguments for and Against the changes
I pruned these sections down a bit but they probably should be reduced much more if not eliminated entirely. As presently constituted, they are original research. Even if a source could be found for them, I doubt it would justify devoting such a substantial portion of the article to them. I can think of no sources other than blogs and message boards, which probably should not be cited at all. I think it is encyclopedic to have comprehensive coverage of the ways that the film differs from the book. It is also encyclopedia to include mainstream reviews (i.e. probably not things which are published only on the internet), official commentary (i.e. from the DVD version), and anything that Liv Tyler or someone connected to Tolkien's estate has said about the changes. Arguments for and against the changes are non-encyclopedic. NPOV does not mean one POV half of the time and another POV the other half of the time. In fact, I'm going to take another look at it right now. savidan(talk) (e@) 00:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, "In addition to making Arwen a strong character" is also POV because some readers, like me, don't see Film Arwen as a "strong character". Maybe "a more visible character"? - changed.

Also, " Arwen had a very small role in the books outside of the Appendix." is contradicted by "...she plays a role in the plot which is disproportionate to the number of scenes in which she appears." Well, nobody's arguing that Film Arwen was more visible...

So all the arguments on Legolas's age and hair color and whether Balrogs have wings should go too?

And Arwen having her fate bound to the Ring is a legitmate gripe because it wasn't in the book, and is Jackson cruft (or crap). "Cruft" is a curious word... If she died of "grief" in the appendix, it was in wholly different circumstances.

203.215.117.196 12:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the reference to "an example of Girl Power, such as Guinevere in King Arthur" for several reasons.

1) The phrasing was stylistically awkward, poorly constructed. (Which everyone is guilty of from time to time.)

2) King Arthur was not a remake of anything; it was an attempt to put the theories of folklorist Linda Malcor to the screen in a dramatic context. (Those theories regard the idea of Arthur and his knights as Sarmatians; AFAIK, warrior women don't really enter into it.) Therefore, it was not a "change made in the original story" - there really isn't any one original Arthurian story, especially not that one can cling to if one wants to make a film actually set circa 500 CE. Most early Arthurian texts have a sort of fantastic high-medieval setting (that is, contemporary to their composition, but with fantasy elements).

3) There is a modern fictional tradition of making Guinevere a warrior based on historical Celtic models and the roles and mores associated with generic "Celtic Queenship," and an accompanying scholarly trend towards seeing a possible historical Guinevere in this light. In most tribes this would have meant the right to take lovers freely, and the duty to lead armies in battle a la Boudicca, among other things. You can make some argument as to whether or not this is historically probable... it might be for a Pict, as Guinevere is portrayed in that film; it probably wouldn't be for the Romanized British nobility of the actual period. The idea that Guinevere must have been a Pict is also a theory of Norma Lorre Goodrich's from her supposedly-nonfiction book Guinevere, which is held in almost no scholarly esteem (don't believe me? Ask around on the Arthurnet mailing list, where you can talk to all the people who write all the nonfiction books currently in print.) In King Arthur, the crypto-Pict tribe are called the Woads and are a sort of generalized blend of several different tribes and fantasy elements, but the Picts are probably the closest historical analogue to the Woads.

For those reasons, I'm not sure that it's appropriate to say that the whole Guinevere-as-archer thing is merely a representation of "Girl Power" marketing. It's more in line with most fictional presentations of the character in the last 25 years, and with some scholarship related to Celtic women. But, anyway, a terrible movie. LOTR was obviously much better, and the changes in Arwen's character were obviously made for the reasons suggested here: economy of character and the chance to give her something to do and make her more immediately compelling/heroic.

Name
I don't think that it is necessary to mention the similarity of the Names Arwen, Morwen and Urwen because -wen is the Quenya word for maiden, and occurs in many female names. -- Galadh 08:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Bryan 13:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Another Name
I have a small Elvish "dictionary" in the back of my copy of The Silmarillion; it says that, while -wen does indeed mean "maiden," it translates ar- to "tears." Wouldn't that make Arwen literally mean "maiden of tears?" Perhaps I'm horribly off, I am by no means fluent in Elvish; but it seems that something like that would make sense... Undomiel 06:09, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Undomiel. I'm guessing you are referring to the entry under 'ar-', "cf. also (Nirnaeth) Arnoediad '(Tears) without reckoning'.". In that construction the 'Tears' part is actually from 'Nirnaeth'... just as Niniel ('Tear Maiden') and Nienor ('Mourning') in the preceding index draw on the same root. The 'ar' in 'arnoediad' means 'beyond'... tears 'beyond' number. The 'ar' used in Arwen's name is actually from the next entry, 'ar(a)- = high, noble, royal...'. --CBDunkerson 22:11, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Elves or Edain?
In the section Arwen in the Books it now says "Still, only two other marriages between humans and Eldar are recorded in Tolkien's stories". I think the former version with "between Man and Elf" would be better; firstly because it would be easier to understand for people who are not that familiar with Tolkien's universe, and secondly because this could cause the misconception that there were other marriages between Avari and Men. --Galadh 06:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The 'three unions' thing is a messy concept. The 'Eldar' bit gets brought in to exclude the Silvan elf Mithrellas's marriage to a mortal (the line of Dol Amroth) from the three count, but there are other problems. Both Arwen and Elros were half-elves who chose mortality and married mortals... yet Arwen's marriage is counted as one of the 'three unions' while Elros's is not. The only difference on which to hang a distinction is that Arwen had lived a couple thousand years 'as an elf' before choosing mortality while Elros did so earlier in his life. Yet that runs into potential trouble with Dior (first of the half-elven) and his marriage early in life to an elf... why is that not a 'fourth union'? Luthien had actually become mortal by the time she had Dior, but was still accounted an 'elf' for purposes of the 'three unions' and him being half-elven. Et cetera. An unambiguous way of stating it might be, 'three unions of someone accounted a 'high elf' and a mortal'. For whatever reason Luthien and Arwen were considered 'high-elves (Eldar) who became mortals' rather than simply as mortals like Elros. --CBDunkerson 11:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the detailed explanation! Nevertheless I still don't clearly understand the argument. As a Silvan Elf, wouldn't Mithrellas be an Eldar as well, so that there were four marriages of Eldar and Men? I would agree to your suggestion, using the term 'high-elf'. (As far as I know the high-elves were the Calaquendi, not all the Eldar) --Galadh 15:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The term 'Eldar' originally referred to 'all Elves', but was later primarily used as a term for the Sindar and the Elves of Aman. The Nandor and Avari (and the Silvan elves primarily descended from those two groups) were thus not, in later usage, 'Eldar'. This is similar to the way that 'Edain' originally referred to all humans, but later only to the houses of the elf-friends. --CBDunkerson 00:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know, aren't High Elves not those who have seen the light of the trees? Bryan 18:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Heh, this is all gets exceedingly convoluted when the various drafts are taken into account... but the Sindar are sometimes included amongst the High Elves / Eldar. In any case the usual definition of 'High Elves' was those who had returned to Middle-earth from Aman and their descendants, which would include all of those involved in the 'three unions' since Thingol was the one non-Noldor who had done so (making Luthien a 'High Elf' under this definition even if the Sindar in general were not so accounted). --CBDunkerson 19:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * According to the articles Elf (Middle-earth) and Silvan Elves the Silvan Elves were actually Eldar.
 * Again, the terminology shifted over time. See Appendix F.I; "The Elves far back in the Elder Days became divided into two main branches: the West-elves (the Eldar) and the East-elves. Of the latter kind were most of the elven-folk of Mirkwood and Lorien...". --CBDunkerson 22:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I now changed it to High-Elves, which seems to be the best solution no matter which version of the legendarium we consider as canon.--Galadh 18:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Personally I believe that Arwen is wrongly called "Half-elven". In the appendices to LOTR it is quite clear that she is of the "Eldar" as she is accounted one of the three unions of "Eldar and Edain". Secondly Tolkien says that the choice between races was given to the Half-elven, yet in the same paragraph he says that ANOTHER choice was givewn to the children of Elrond, ANOTHER choice, but not the same choice of the Half-elves! Whilst the Half-elves could chose what race to belong too, the Children of Elrond had a different choice. To either go with their father when he left Middle-earth and stay immortal, or to remain in Middle-earth and accept mortality. Think people! Elrond had well chosen to be an Elf when he gave birth to his children, he married an elf and thus Arwen was the daughter of two Elves! However, because of the choice given to her ancestors, Arwen and her brothers were accorded a special grace (or some could say curse, as Arwen died of grief). But she WAS an elf. This is why she is compared with Lúthien, because both of them were by nature immortal (Remember the line in the Tale in which Tolkien writes "but Arwen was still by nature Elvish", half-elves are by nature both Elvish and mortal) and it is also why she is counted among the three unions of Elves and Men. If she wasn't an elf but a half-elf, then she wouldn't be the third union, because Half-Elves are not Elves until they chose! Arwen on the other-hand was born with no such choice. She was an elf, yet a special grace was given to her by Iluvatar (who in his mind had planned a third union between her and Aragorn). If Arwen had been a Half-elf, then it would have been no sacrfice chosing to stay with Aragorn, because Half-elves are NOT IMMMORTAL and if they chose to be Men it is in their blood and so natural to them, no sacrifice! But Arwen was an Elf, and so it was a sacrfice for her because like Lúthien she actually gave up her immortality. Do you want proof?

Appendix A of The Lord of the Rings

"At the end of the First Age the Valar gave to the Half-Elven an irrevocable choice to which kindred to belong...Elrond chose to be of Elf-kind...To him therefore was granted the same grace as the High Elves...But to the children of Elrond a choice was ALSO appointed..."

Therefore, they were High Elves, but given a choice like the Half-Elves, but unlike them they were immortal like their father and mother! The word ALSO is crucial here, because it shows that they themselves were not Half-Elves but were given a choice between immortality and mortality!

Pictures removed
The two images used in this article were deleted. See page history here and here. Carcharoth 17:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Why? Scorpionman 20:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Love Triangle sagas
I was just wondering if anyone else noticed the remarkable similarity of the love triangle involving Arwen, Aragorn and Eowyn of Lord of the Rings, and Siegfried, Brunhild and Kriemhild of the Nibelungenlied saga? Tolkien is said to have drawn much inspiration from the Norse sagas (particularly Nibelungenlied), so do you think it's worth mentioning in the article? JJ
 * There are always countless similarities between stories... dozens of other 'love triangles' could also be mentioned. However, in this case none of them would be correct in so far as Tolkien's 'motivations' were concerned. As originally written Tolkien had planned for Aragorn to marry Eowyn... there was no Arwen in the books at all until the black ships were coming up the river and the folk of Gondor despairing - and then suddenly the banner of the King, woven by Elrond's daughter, was displayed on the lead ship. In short, the book was almost completely finished before Tolkien created the character of Arwen... which is why there is alot more about her in the appendixes than in the book itself. Rather than rewriting the whole story Tolkien left it mostly as it was with a few minor adjustments, but he didn't set out to write a 'love triangle'. He just came up with a new character late in the story and changed his mind about who Aragorn should marry. :] --CBD 01:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Understandable. It's just that with the Nibelungenlied being what many call the most influential saga on Tolkien's writing (as it includes an enchanted ring, an army of ghosts and a "return of a king" so to speak), I happened to notice a profound similarity between the characters of Eowyn and Kriemhild, Aragorn and Siegfried and Arwen and Brunnhilde, particularly in their roles in the narrative and their relations to one another. However, the information on Tolkien's creation of Arwen is very interesting. JJ
 * Tolkien once wrote, of comparisons between his work and the Niebelungenlied, that both rings were round... and there the similarity ended. :] --CBD 18:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, sometimes writers can be a bit dismissive when they don't want their work compared to previous ones, especially so as to prevent accusations of plagiarism. For example, JK Rowling is exactly the same when people try to draw comparisons between Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings. JJ

half-status
If Elrond's children (with 3/16 mortal ancestry) were "half-elven" with the option to become Men, then were the children of Elros Tar-Minyatur (with 5/16 immortal ancestry) also half-castes with the option to become Elves? For how many generations? One would suppose that when the twins chose definitively to be one or the other, and married within their chosen kind, that was the end of ambiguity. But when you're the Author you don't have to make sense. &mdash;Tamfang 01:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No, Elros' choice doomed all his descendants to mortality, though they all had long lives. "Half-elf" is indeed used less than literally for anyone other than Eärendil. Uthanc 02:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Dior's parents were both mortal, so perhaps he was mortal too; that would make his children, and Elwing's children, literally half-elven. Supporting evidence for this concept is that Dior lived only 32 years (Timeline of Arda); according to Laws and Customs among the Eldar, Elves reach maturity about age 50.  &mdash;Tamfang 05:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Arwen's multiple Telerin descents
May be inserted if it's thought relevant. &mdash;Tamfang 02:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Middle-Eastern origin of the name Arwen?
J. R. R. Tolkien was a philoligist first and foremost. His ability to read multitudinous languages (living and dead) is well known. He drew plots and names from his many readings. I suspect that I may have finally recognized his inspiration for the name "Arwen."

In Edward Fitzgerald's "translation" (1st edition) of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, a quatrain referring to Khayyam's natal horoscope reads thus:

"I tell thee this -- When starting from the Goal,     Over the shoulder of the Flaming Foal      Of Heaven, Parw&iacute;n and Mushtar&iacute; they flung      In my predestined plot of Dust and Soul."

In the accompanying horoscope, the sun (Flaming Foal of Heaven) has just risen and, following next, in order, are Venus and Mercury, giving the indication that the names Parw&iacute;n and Mushtar&iacute; apply to Venus and Mercury (Mushtar&iacute; is very nearly the phonetic equivalent of this planet's current name).

While Venus is often known as the Morning Star, it is better known as the Evening Star. It is diffcult to escape the ease with which the combination of "Parw&iacute;n" and "Evening Star" can merge into "Arwen Evenstar."

The above seems to be a reasonable argument for a Persian origin to the name of one of Tolkien's characters.

Makuabob 15:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Past tense used in fictional articles
According to guides like Check your fiction, fictional articles should be written in past tense, as it distinguishes between real-life events, and fictional events. I'd like to go through this article right now, but I can't, and feel someone more aquaintanced with the LotR series might be able to do this better. Just though I should let people know. Disinclination 00:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * See Talk:The Lord of the Rings/Archive 03#In universe style. LOTR is (part of) a fictional history of Earth, and Tolkien deliberately wrote it that way; "Conversely, discussion of history is usually written in the past tense and thus 'fictional history' may be presented in that way as well" (Guide to writing better articles). It's also the WikiProject policy for Tolkien articles. Uthanc 09:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

63 times removed
Is 63 times removed mentioned or derivable from official texts? I thought that we don't have an actual number of Lords of Andúnië? The Lords of Andúnië claims there are 18, and the article seems to claim it as canon rather than an estimate based on the number of generations for the Kings of Númenor. – Pedantic79(talk) 05:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible Movie/Book Conflict
It's possible I've misunderstood this but it's something that's bothered me since the first time I saw the film so if I have got it right it could be worth mentioning: At one point, in The Two Towers if I remember correctly, Elrond's argument against Arwen's desire to marry Aragon is that after he dies she will be left alone in Middle Earth until the end of time. This appears contradictory to every other mention of the issue - not only in the books but in the films as well. In every other case the problem was stated as being that she would have to give up her immortality in order to marry Aragorn and everyone except Arwen considered that an unacceptable sacrifice. Surely if that wasn't the case - if she could marry him and remain immortal it wouldn't actually be a problem - she could have lived out her life with him and then after his death made the journey to Valinor to rejoin her people (who probably wouldn't even consider it a long time to have remained behind).

Even if that last part is wrong and for some reason she would be unable to go to Valinor after his death I'm certian it's still the only time when anyone suggested she could maintain her immortality after marrying Aragorn.

Danikat (talk) 23:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed text
I've removed the following text from the page. It has little to do with Arwen directly and belongs in a discussion about the work as a whole. Some criticize The Lord of the Rings for including few named female characters and thus accuse Tolkien of sexism. However, in the essay Laws and Customs among the Eldar, which appears in Morgoth's Ring, Tolkien writes that male and female Elves are in fact viewed in Elven society as equals, save for the fact that only the females are capable of childbearing and are thus viewed as literally holding the future of their people in their hands. It is for this reason that they traditionally refrain from going to war (although they are still trained in all the aspects of combat taught to male Elves), usually occupying themselves during wartime as healers. As the text itself states:


 * In all such things, not concerned with the bringing forth of children, the neri and nissi (that is, the men and women) of the Eldar are equal—unless it be in this (as they themselves say) that for the nissi the making of things new is for the most part shown in the forming of their children, so that invention and change is otherwise mostly brought about by the neri. There are, however, no matters which among the Eldar only a nér can think or do, or others with which only a nís is concerned. There are indeed some differences between the natural inclinations of neri and nissi, and other differences that have been established by custom (varying in place and in time, and in the several races of the Eldar). For instance, the arts of healing, and all that touches on the care of the body, are among the Eldar most practised by the nissi; whereas it was the elven-men who bore arms at need. And the Eldar deemed that the dealing of death, even when lawful or under necessity, diminished the power of healing, and that the virtue of the nissi in this matter was due rather to their abstaining from hunting or war than to any special power that went with their womanhood. Indeed in dire straits or desperate defence, the nissi fought valiantly, and there was less difference in strength or speed between elven-men and elven-women that had not borne child than is seen among mortals. On the other hand many elven-men were great healers and skilled in the lore of living bodies, though such men abstained from hunting, and went not to war until the last need.(Morgoth's Ring, "The Second Phase", Laws and Customs Among the Eldar).

However, this does not negate Tolkien's heavier emphasis on male characters and their actions in the particular work being adapted; thus, Arwen's greater visibility in the films is seen (or criticised) by some fans as an attempt to create gender balance for modern viewers.

Matt Deres (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Category
Anonymous user 99.192.64.235 has recently made two edits to add this article into the Fictional Princesses category. This isn't correct as she is at no point a princess. Rather than get into an edit war, I'm opening it up to wider discussions. Carl Sixsmith (talk) 07:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Royal titles are not used for Elrond or his family in Tolkien. Arwen does of course become Queen of Arnor and Gondor. -- Elphion (talk) 10:12, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Arwen may not have been a princess by title, but I can nevertheless see the justification in including her in a category of Fictional Princesses: whatever her actual title, her place in society is very much equivalent to that of a princess (is a 'czarevna' a princess?). In the end I should say it comes down to what is the purpose of the category in question. Troelsfo (talk) 13:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * A princess is the daughter of a king or queen and neither Elrond nor Celebrian did have such titles nor did they ever claim them. We should stick to the facts here, not what we think might fit into a category because it looks similar. De728631 (talk) 20:15, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The article on the two towers refer to Arwen as a princess. Her father may not have had the title, but he was technially a king. --99.192.53.47 (talk) 21:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * What is your source for calling him a king (technically or otherwise)? -- Elphion (talk) 22:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The article you are referring to is the one about the film version and that part might as well be corrected. But even if P. Jackson intended to portrait Arwen as a princess this article should not categorize her as such, because a) when in doubt, other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as a reference for factual matters and b) this article, as all other articles on primary Middle-earth content, deal with the book version of the story. As to Elrond being a formal king, it's true that he is still the eldest living male descendant of Turgon, albeit not in direct lineage. But he never claimed the title of High-King after Gil-galad's death and anything else is idle speculation. De728631 (talk) 01:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I see. I can take a hint. If you don't like me for what I said about Arwen being a princess that's your problem. *huff* --142.68.50.208 (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not you; it's the absence of reliable sources. The same criterion applies to all of us. -- Elphion (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I feel bullied by people who rebuke what I thought like that. It's like you think I'm trouble. That hurts. --142.68.50.208 (talk) 00:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't feel bullied; it's not a rebuke, rather a request for good refs. Editors must be prepared to back up their edits.  This winnowing process is what keeps Wikipedia reliable. -- Elphion (talk) 11:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Arwen's mortality
The text says: "as in the book, Arwen follows the choice of her ancestor Lúthien to become a mortal woman for the love of a mortal man."

Is that actually supported anywhere in the primary sources (ie. Tolkien)? I dont mean the nonsense movie. As far as I understood it, Luthien was the only elf that actually shared the fate of men in so far as her spirit left the world/Arda after her second death. Arwen could choose death, but only in the elvish sense, ie. her spirit would pass to Aman and into the Halls of Mandos. She would not actually turn into a mortal (again, the movie makes up completely other stuff). Most of my literature is sitting on a different continent right now, so I cannot look it up myself. Para-OZ (talk) 13:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Likewise away from my books, but consider the following points. (1) The parting of Elrond and Arwen was so bitter because Arwen's choice meant that their parting was permanent.  (2) In App A, Aragorn suggests that if Arwen regrets her choice, she might seek out the Havens and ask for passage to the Undying Lands, but Arwen replies that that choice is no longer available to her.  (3) Although Luthien is called the only elf who became mortal, Arwen is not an elf, but half-elven (similar to Elros, who also became mortal). -- Elphion (talk) 21:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Indeed, I forgot the half-elven part and the whole point of her opportunity for choice. A bit embarassing, thanks for the heads-up. Para-OZ (talk) 23:40, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Half-Elf
Arwen have elven parents and therefor, as far as I can tell, can't be a half elf? But how can she choose to be mortal then? MagicLizard (talk) 10:04, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Elrond is not an elf, he is half-elven. He chose the fate of the Elves, but the choice must also be made by his descendants children, as The Lord of the Rings recounts.  The book is not entirely consistent here:  Arwen is said to become mortal when she decides not to accompany Elrond to the Undying Lands, but her brothers also stay behind for a while and are not said to become mortal.  Also, the descendants of Elrond's twin brother Elros (who chose the fate of Men) were not afforded a choice at all. -- Elphion (talk) 14:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * To be fair, Elrond married a full Elf and his decendents where purer, Elros did not. GimliDotNet ( Speak to me,  Stuff I've done )  14:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but by an analogous argument, Elros married a mortal, so his children were more purely mortal. This doesn't explain why Elrond's children were required to make the choice, while Elros's were not even given the opportunity.  Perhaps a certain percentage of Elvish blood gives you a priori a passport to Eldamar, but Tolkien typically doesn't take such a quantitative approach! Arwen's children are presumably mortal too, but Eärendel, who was more mortal than not, (actually exactly half and half) ends up with an eternal assignment.  Why should Lúthien be allowed to become mortal to remain with Beren, while Aegnor cannot remain with Andreth?  My point is simply that we should not expect a "scientific" solution, but even the "mythological" criteria are not clearly stated. My guess is that Tolkien never worked them out to his satisfaction, as witness his late dithering over Elvish lineage in the house of Dol Amroth. -- Elphion (talk) 14:57, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

useless graph?
Is it just me or are the halves that chose the fate of x indistinguishable from the x's?

I see the same green/stripe pattern for (half)elves, and white square for (whatever)men.

kinda not helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:E8E2:9700:4164:2BAB:F07F:4F60 (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Image
What's wrong with fan art? Especially really good fan art that is used in the Wikipedias of at least ten languages? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The basic objection is that they are non-authoritative. You might want to discuss this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Middle-earth -- Elphion (talk) 04:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I reversed an image from the Jackson film, as it showed Arwen in a role contradicting Tolkien's literary vision. I take it that Tolkien's book defines the character more than Jackson's film. Does this have consensus? Thanks. IAC-62 (talk) 09:10, 4 May 2016 (UTC)