Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SeanF

Tolkien 3.0

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

North of the Wall is Permafrost.

The tundra starts far north of the Wall, and so presumably the permafrost layer is also far north of it. In the nearer regions that we have seen in the novels, there is no permafrost and there is active agriculture (turnips, carrots, grains).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

North of the Wall is Permafrost. Oak trees can't manage that.

No, it isn't. The permafrost starts north of Thenn, 600 miles north of the Wall, not at the Wall itself. The Wall isn't even on the Arctic Circle (which is likely ~300 miles north of the Wall).

Edited by Werthead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps farther off topic but the location of the arctic circle completely dependent on the seasonal tilt of the planet in question. Given that this planet has very dodgy seasonal cycle, how are you figuring out where the theoretical arctic circle is? 

On Tolkein and economics, how many humans are living in of Eriador? There's Bree, which seems to be a small outpost type settlement. To the east is wilderness until Rivendell. To the south is also wilderness until you get to the Dunlands. To the north, wilderness with a smattering of Rangers. Is that it? Why aren't there more humans around? And given that the Shire seems to be the largest population of anything around and that it's between the Grey Havens and the dwarf settlements in Ered Luin, why is the existence of hobbits so surprising to everyone? Surely the proximity to Shire is the only economic reason for Bree to exist so this isn't some Gondolin scenario. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Population and settlement during the Third Age is so sparse, from my understanding at least, as a direct result of Sauron and the many wars and conflicts. The North in particular after the fall of the Cardolan, Arthedain and Rhudaur would have been left pretty desolate. Before that, when the Kingdom of Arnor was thriving, i imagine it was much more populous and prosperous. 

A similar concept would likewise apply East of the Misty mountains I think, prior to the fall of Erebor and the spreading darkness of Dol Guldur.

As for hobbits, its not so much they are unknown as they are overlooked. They don’t as a general rule venture far from the Shire, particularly during the time of the War of the Ring. Their existence isn’t surprising, them stepping up and being the self-sacrificing heroes and great movers of the age is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t like that people are going to cash grab poor LOTR, it should be left alone and in peace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Vaughn said:

perhaps farther off topic but the location of the arctic circle completely dependent on the seasonal tilt of the planet in question. Given that this planet has very dodgy seasonal cycle, how are you figuring out where the theoretical arctic circle is? 

Look at the treeline - it only ends 500 miles north of the Wall.

Look at agriculture, even among the wildlings who live well north of the Wall.

Look at the day-night cycle in Summer at the Wall and even beyond the Wall. No permanent daylight as would be the case north of the Arctic circle. Not even close to it.

 

Edited by Free Northman Reborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Population and settlement during the Third Age is so sparse, from my understanding at least, as a direct result of Sauron and the many wars and conflicts. The North in particular after the fall of the Cardolan, Arthedain and Rhudaur would have been left pretty desolate. Before that, when the Kingdom of Arnor was thriving, i imagine it was much more populous and prosperous. 

A similar concept would likewise apply East of the Misty mountains I think, prior to the fall of Erebor and the spreading darkness of Dol Guldur.

As for hobbits, its not so much they are unknown as they are overlooked. They don’t as a general rule venture far from the Shire, particularly during the time of the War of the Ring. Their existence isn’t surprising, them stepping up and being the self-sacrificing heroes and great movers of the age is.

Agree with all of the above.  The collapse of Arnor and the following wars of succession left the land no longer under the aegis of the central monarchy in Fornost.  The internecine warfare coupled with the Angmar War did indeed heavily depopulate the region.

It's clear the absence of royal authority, and the concomitant lack of law enforcement / public security, in what was Arnor played a key factor in the region's sparse population.  When Aragorn became monarch of the Reunited Realms, of course his Northern Policy was to reestablish the king's seat at Fornost, restore stability and reintroduce migration to the region, although wild wolves were evidently still a problem well into the first century of the Fourth Age!.

As well, the Great Plague (particularly in southern Cardolan) of TA 1636 and flooding caused by the Fell Winter, TA 2911-12 (which was the death knell of Tharbad) further contributed to the desolation of Eriador.  The Plague was also devastating east of the Misty Mountains as Rhovanion lost 50% of its population during the outbreak.

The unfamiliarity of Hobbits, particularly in civilizations east of the Misty Mountains, clearly and profoundly underscores how inward-looking and effectively isolated those peoples had become.  The relentless wars against the Easterlings and Mordor had forced them to embrace martial virtues at the expense of lore.  I also think it's Tolkien's commentary on the shorter memories of men.  For example, in the five hundred years since the Eorlingas migrated to Calenardhon / Rohan, hobbits had faded into obscurity.  Proximity to a foreign culture, race or nation does not seem to be a factor either as the Rohirrim know almost nothing about Ents despite the fact Eomer wiped out a band of orcs practically under the eaves of Fangorn.

What is obvious, as rightly mentioned, is that Hobbits and their potential to influence the course of Middle's Earth history was, to put it mildly, definitely unaccounted for by even the most learned and astute leaders, despite that they may have recognized their existence.  Neither Denethor, Boromir nor Faramir to our knowledge seem especially nonplussed by the mention of the "halfling" in the summoning dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I

11 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Population and settlement during the Third Age is so sparse, from my understanding at least, as a direct result of Sauron and the many wars and conflicts. The North in particular after the fall of the Cardolan, Arthedain and Rhudaur would have been left pretty desolate. Before that, when the Kingdom of Arnor was thriving, i imagine it was much more populous and prosperous. 

A similar concept would likewise apply East of the Misty mountains I think, prior to the fall of Erebor and the spreading darkness of Dol Guldur.

As for hobbits, its not so much they are unknown as they are overlooked. They don’t as a general rule venture far from the Shire, particularly during the time of the War of the Ring. Their existence isn’t surprising, them stepping up and being the self-sacrificing heroes and great movers of the age is.

Fair enough. Absent a plague type event, typically a war, even a terrible war wouldn't remove the majority of the population (30 years war was horrific but 'only' reduced the population of central Europe by what, 25%?) It's truly nitpicking a work I love but it was always weird that the result of the northern wars with Arnor was that the kingdom was gone but also that the enemies of Arnor were still held in check by a small band of rangers. If it was a suitable place for folks to live, which it is clearly was, along with Eriador, it doesn't really track that it wasn't repopulated pretty quickly or settled by others. Perhaps the fact there were seemingly no women in Middle Earth reduced the growth rate? (kidding) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Vaughn said:

I

Fair enough. Absent a plague type event, typically a war, even a terrible war wouldn't remove the majority of the population (30 years war was horrific but 'only' reduced the population of central Europe by what, 25%?) It's truly nitpicking a work I love but it was always weird that the result of the northern wars with Arnor was that the kingdom was gone but also that the enemies of Arnor were still held in check by a small band of rangers. If it was a suitable place for folks to live, which it is clearly was, along with Eriador, it doesn't really track that it wasn't repopulated pretty quickly or settled by others. Perhaps the fact there were seemingly no women in Middle Earth reduced the growth rate? (kidding) 

There was a plague event too....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently I need to spend more time in the appendix. 

Which one of you is Stephen Colbert anyways? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that while they are few that are still scattered human settlements about in what used to be Arnor, and Angmar itself was destroyed by the Gondorian/Elven alliance, and the Witch King left, leaving not much left. The plan was to destabilize the North, not to actually hold it, and it worked.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC, the Dunedain live in a region called the Angle.  I don't know how well-populated it is.  

In general, Eriador is very empty.  I could see that the downfall of Arnor, and the internecine wars would have caused the population to crash, as with post-Roman Britain, or Northern China in the Mongol invasions, but one would have expected some recovery over the course of hundreds of years.  The population centres seem to be the Shire, Lindon, Blue Mountains, the Angle, Breeland, Dunland, and a hunter-gatherer population in Enedwaith. 

Elsewhere the fringes of Mirkwood and the land of the Beornings seem quite well-populated with settlers, as is the Kingdom of Dale.     Presumably, there were a lot of men living all over the West during the Third Age, but it took the Battle of Five Armies, and the Death of Smaug, to start rebuilding political organisations in the region. One can see that those events were actually major blows against Sauron.

Rohan and Gondor must have substantial populations in order to sustain the armed forces that they have.  Rohan can muster in excess of twelve thousand riders (and presumably some foot), and Gondor's armies number at least 30,000, with a navy as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Presumably, there were a lot of men living all over the West during the Third Age, but it took the Battle of Five Armies, and the Death of Smaug, to start rebuilding political organisations in the region. One can see that those events were actually major blows against Sauron.

I don't think so. Bree to Rivendale - no-one. Rivendale to Hollin - no-one. Pretty much Bree to Isenguard - maybe some Dunderlings? Certainly no settlements. Whatever the plague was, it killed far more people even than the impact of smallpox of native Americans, which was devastating. Otherwise, people would have re-settled Eriagon, etc... 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Vaughn said:

I don't think so. Bree to Rivendale - no-one. Rivendale to Hollin - no-one. Pretty much Bree to Isenguard - maybe some Dunderlings? Certainly no settlements. Whatever the plague was, it killed far more people even than the impact of smallpox of native Americans, which was devastating. Otherwise, people would have re-settled Eriagon, etc... 
 

I should have clarified that I meant that part of the West which is East of the Misty Mountains.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A ring ... it begins with Rome and Venus, and concludes with Tolkien and the One Ring.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BloodyJollyRoger said:

Tolkien is a bad writer with great ideals.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion.  No matter how wrong you might be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

You are certainly entitled to that opinion.  No matter how wrong you might be.

When Lord Of The Rings books came out it received poor scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, BloodyJollyRoger said:

When Lord Of The Rings books came out it received poor scores.

Oh, I know I shouldn't feed this one, but I'm still going to  look this one up...

 

:P

 

Edit:.....are you Michael Moorcock by any chance?

Edited by Darth Richard II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...