Mandos wrote: The only text that supports this in any way as the origin of Orcs is VIII where we seem to have agreed it's a digression. Even there it's not possible after the fall of Utumno.
Maiar-orcs appear in VIII, IX, X; and I see no problem with the fact that in VIII the specific section on them could be called a digression. Nor do I see a problem concerning the Utumno statement (which indeed appears in text VIII).
Mandos wrote: I consider it much more likely that these were intended as Orc-captains, incarnating among Orcs already existing (as is also explicitly stated in the other texts).
Have I not already stated, or is it not clear enough from all the texts, that the Maiar-orcs are not intended to solve the question of regular Orcs (despite 'numerous' in IX) ? Who has argued that the origin of regular Orcs is the Maiar?
Mandos wrote: I see no problem with that as Maiar also incarnated as wolf-leaders, it likely involves the possession of an existing body.
It has also been made clear enough (though I could post more on it) that these Maiar could self-incarnate into Orcish shapes.
Mandos wrote: CT says in the beginning relative to all the texts "But the greatest problem is that there is very little firm indication of date external or relative: to order them into even an approximate sequence of composition seems impossible...". So this seems to be CT's "spin" on the matter,...
That's at the beginning of Myths Transformed as a whole. Had you quoted the rest of that, or the introduction to text X specifically, one would find Christopher Tolkien's more specific comments with respect to dating.
And with respect to dating, Christopher Tolkien thinks Orcs from Men appears to be Tolkien's 'final' view... but even if not, text X is still very arguably the best textual example between VIII, IX and X.
Mandos wrote: JRRT himself begins that text with "It is not here the place to debate the question of the origin of the Orcs...".
That's actually from Appendix C to Quendi And Eldar. But anyway, Tolkien still wrote text X; and the only reason he wrote this is because Appendix C to Quendi And Eldar is primarily concerned with etymology.
Tolkien had no problem with Maiar-orcs or Boldogs existing as part of the scenario (not to explain all the 'regular' Orcs).
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:19:24 PM
We know that some of the dreadful Wolf's of the north in the First Age and other creatures to were inhabited by dark spirits of Maiar race which Morgoth had perhaps in the hundreds in the beginning. Is it not possible that some of these spirits inhabited the bodies of the Orcs who became captains and chieftains? This would seem to support the idear that Orcs were formed from one of the two Children of Iluvatar (I favour Elves) and also support the Maiar theory.
Collecting some of the relevant Maiar-orcs quotes...
Text VIII
'Only the Valar and Maiar are intelligences that can assume forms of Arda at will.' JRRT
'In any case it it likely or possible that even the least of the Maiar would become Orcs? Yes; both outside Arda and in it, before the fall of Utumno.' JRRT
Text IX
' He (and all the 'spririts' of the 'First-created', according to their measure) could assume bodily shapes; ...' JRRT
'But always among them (as special serevants and spies of Melkor, and his leaders) there must have been numerous corrupted minor spririts who assumed similar bodily shapes. (these would exhibit terrifying and demonic characters).' JRRT
Quendi And Eldar Appendix C 'Elvish names for the Orcs'
'Some of these things may have been phantoms and delusions; but some were, no doubt, shapes taken by the servants of Melkor, mocking and degrading the very forms of the Children. For Melkor had in his service great numbers of the Maiar, who had the power, as had their Master, of taking visible and tangible shape in Arda.' JRRT
Text X
'For Morgoth had many servants, the oldest and most potent of whom were immortal, belonging indeed in their beginning to the Maiar; and these evil spirits like their Master could take on visible forms. Those whose business it was to direct the Orcs often took Orkish shapes, though they were greater and more terrible. Thus it was that the histories speak of Great Orcs or Orc-captains who were not slain, and who reappeared in battle through years far longer than the span of the lives of Men.' JRRT
Have I not already stated, or is it not clear enough from all the texts, that the Maiar-orcs are not intended to solve the question of regular Orcs (despite 'numerous' in IX) ? Who has argued that the origin of regular Orcs is the Maiar?
What is the point of bringing them up at all in that case, since this thread discusses the origin of the race of Orcs. Whether some Maiar took Orc-like shape prior to the fall of Utumno is not relevant to the issue (Text X also suggests than any such did not exist then "So far as can be gleaned from the legends come down to us from our earliest days, it would seem that the Quendi had never yet encountered any Orcs of this kind [procreating] before the coming of Orome to Cuivenen." The Elves only encounter "black riders", shadows etc. at Cuivenen).
From what I have understood you have argued that Tolkien's repeating mentioning of them would have led to him including them in an eventual solution to the problem of the origin of Orcs.
It has also been made clear enough (though I could post more on it) that these Maiar could self-incarnate into Orcish shapes.
I have been saying that this is a question of timing. "For Melkor had in his service great numbers of the Maiar, who had the power, as had their Master, of taking visible and tangible shape in Arda" says X. Their abilities mirror that of Melkor (who lost such abilities due to being "dispersed" into his creations). Prior to the fall of Utumno there were "monsters and fell creatures", alternatively "servants of Melkor", in Middle-Earth which were hunted by Orome. Also "..and the evil things that he had perverted walked abroad, and the dark and slumbering woods were haunted by monsters and shapes of dread". After the fall such variety disappears. That seems to be because they lost their initial forms in the battles and with that their initial abilities. (Tolkien also suggests that the reason the Valar won the war with Utumno was because they were able to take on Melkor piecemeal in his creations, so they deliberately hunted them. This is also suggested by the motive for the war, to make Middle-Earth safe for Elves.) So I do not agree that the reference to Utumno in VIII is not relevant.
Mandos wrote: CT says in the beginning relative to all the texts "But the greatest problem is that there is very little firm indication of date external or relative: to order them into even an approximate sequence of composition seems impossible...". So this seems to be CT's "spin" on the matter,...
That's at the beginning of Myths Transformed as a whole. Had you quoted the rest of that, or the introduction to text X specifically, one would find Christopher Tolkien's more specific comments with respect to dating.
Yes but you suggested earlier the only problem left was the spelling of Orcs, and that there was no dating problem at all (for instance IX does not have any date at all, and the others are indirect). Relying on that this represents the "final view" seemed quite tenous to me, as even Tolkien suggests in the text some future resolution of the issue "It is unlikely, as a consideration of the ultimate origin of this race would make clearer,..." and the quote from it I showed earlier. It only appears to be "final" in CT's reconstruction.
Well any exact dating gets a bit hazy, though as I said, Christopher Tolkien thinks text X appears to represent his father's 'final' view on the origin of Orcs (despite two other notes that may or may not muddy that up). With respect to 'final' view he must mean he thinks it appears to be Tolkien's 'latest' recorded view, as finality with respect to publication is a different animal.
Treebeard's suggested 'timeline' was published of course, in the story, and the idea that Orcs were made in 'mockery' of Elves (not necessarily from Elves) was published too. Indeed it had been Tolkien's earlier idea that Morgoth 'made' Orcs in mockery of Elves but not made from Elves.
Text VIII
Found in a collection gathered in a newspaper of 1959, and was written on Merton College papers of 1955.
Text IX
No indication of date. Clearly after The Lord of the Rings had been published, and perhaps 'late 1950's' (if one refers to the 'general dating' at the beginning of Myths Transformed). In Christopher Tolkien's presentation of a '1969 or later' note (which follows the presentation of text X) he mentions. 'In the present essay, obviously later than text IX, it is spelt Orcs; but now in 1969 or later, he asserted again that it must be Orks.'. So here he appears to say that X is 'obviously later' than IX in any case.
Text X
'Stuff' preserved in a folded newspaper of March 1960 is concerned: Christopher Tolkien ultimately explains that there seems no reason to doubt that 'Orcs' (X) belongs also to 1959-60 -- and adds that no doubt his father was led by words in Quendi And Eldar ('fairly certainly' 1959-60) to write this 'consideration' of Orcs X
Yet again, the Maiar-orcs appear in all three texts anyway: three texts concerned with whether Elves, or beasts, or Men (or some mix) were going to be the source for 'regular' Orcs.
I will add that I have some doubts about the "pure Elf"-theory now, as I found in the same source mention that Tolkien had edited the typescript Annals of Aman "Alter this, Orcs are not Elvish." (the Eressea speculation). Some kind of cross-breed like in VIII seems possible too to me at least. Sauron was originally a disciple of Aule who had made the Dwarves, and he perfected the art later with the Olog-Hai (as is also mentioned in one of those texts) so maybe he could have had a role in the matter. I do not believe myself Sauron could have perverted humans alone to such a degree (he slunk away after Angband and could have done it again in that case).
Mandos wrote:What is the point of bringing them up at all in that case, since this thread discusses the origin of the race of Orcs.
It's related to the issue though. I merely added they provide, or could have provided, a decent way of getting some orcs in early (meaning in the chronology). Sorry for any confusion but I never meant that the Maiar should be the solution to regular Orcs in general.
Men provide that
Mandos wrote: (Text X also suggests than any such did not exist then "So far as can be gleaned from the legends come down to us from our earliest days, it would seem that the Quendi had never yet encountered any Orcs of this kind [procreating] before the coming of Orome to Cuivenen." The Elves only encounter "black riders", shadows etc. at Cuivenen).
Which seems to be contradicted in the Quendi And Eldar text -- written at about the same time. But I think not contradicted so much as JRRT is actually considering the Maiar-orcs in the scenario, where in text X he is talking about 'later' Orcs and doesn't even bring up the 'Boldogs' till later on.
Tolkien talks about the 'Orcs of the later Wars' in both examples (Q&E and X), the 'later, non-phantom, rapidly multiplying' kind. But the consideration in question is largely concerned with the awakening of Men; indeed an ultimate origin of Orcs, if Men as in text X, naturally includes the idea that Orcs bred from Men can only appear so early (even in a 'new' timeline).
The Boldogs can exist very early in the chronology, and could easily take 'corrupted-looking' or 'mocking' shapes before the awakening of Men.
I think Q&E speaks to this issue, and both texts together tell the fuller tale: some shapes were phantoms, some no doubt were Maiar-orcs as well, but these things were not the Orcs bred from Men however -- that is, before Orome arrived the Quendi would likely not have encountered the usual kind of Orcs from the later wars, specifically.
Mandos wrote: From what I have understood you have argued that Tolkien's repeating mentioning of them would have led to him including them in an eventual solution to the problem of the origin of Orcs.
Yes, part of the scenario. I also think the Maiar-orcs could have helped with chronology, but this leads to a bit of my personal speculation on how they could be used. And I think they well fit the Elder Days by being 'primitive' and etc. These could be very 'notable' First Age Orcs.
Mandos wrote: Yes but you suggested earlier the only problem left was the spelling of Orcs, and that there was no dating problem at all (for instance IX does not have any date at all, and the others are indirect).
Well I mentioned there were two notes (and gave one as example), but it wasn't my intention to suggest that there were no dating problems. I 'cut to the chase' and related what Christopher Tolkien wrote.
I've added more specifics about the dating, upon request, but as I say earlier I was just relating Christopher Tolkien's characterization (the 'final' statement). One might disagree with CT here, I guess, but there it was; and his opinion carries weight, even if one does disagree.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:24:04 PM
I think Galin you may rely a little too much on Tolkien's thoughts and quotes. This is clearly a question even he is not really sure about and is ever-changing his mind. No doubt if he had been alive for another 20 years he would have changed his mind again and again. Just becuase he may have said 'I think Orcs were Men originally' as the latest idear it certainly does not conclusively prove that that was his ultimate decision. He could have changed his mind a month later but that doesn't mean its in a letter waiting to be quoted.
-- Edited by Glorfindel1235 at 14:09, 2007-03-15
__________________
Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva!
The Boldogs can exist very early in the chronology, and could easily take 'corrupted-looking' or 'mocking' shapes before the awakening of Men.
As I said I already I disagree with that. It would instead imply large numbers of them survived the war on Utumno, which I think is unlikely. More likely that the strongest (such as Sauron and maybe some Balrogs) survived it by hiding somewhere. Tolkien says some "were dispersed" to the "waste places of the world", others hid beneath Angband and Utumno, and "Sauron they did not find". I find it more likely dragons could have been bred from these than that they would have been proto-Orcs. It doesn't fit the literaly style of Tolkien there (mythological and epic) to me either, it sounds like some kind of invention papering over difficulties. One alternative could be whatever beasts were used to breed with Men and maybe some Elves early as well. In the appendix the question of what was used for breeding the Olog-Hai is left open, but it's mentioned that Orcs and Trolls are not compatible at least.
Glorfindel1235:This is clearly a question even he is not really sure about and is ever-changing his mind. No doubt if he had been alive for another 20 years he would have changed his mind again and again. Just becuase he may have said 'I think Orcs were Men originally' as the latest idear it certainly does not conclusively prove that that was his ultimate decision.
For clarity I never said anything like that though (conclusively prove that Orcs from Men was Tolkien's ultimate decision). We cannot know Tolkien's ultimate decision, in this sense, with respect to various things. We have what JRRT 'left' us and the factors surrounding a given source (like published text versus 'unpublished' by Tolkien himself, just for example)
Glorfindel1235: He could have changed his mind a month later but that doesn't mean its in a letter waiting to be quoted.
Agreed, we cannot know what Tolkien would have done if he had published his legendarium (he possibly could have included variant traditions about Orcs even). I happen to prefer the idea of Orcs from Men incidentally, but even if not, in my opinion text X carries weight because of factors raised in this thread.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:06:56 PM
Galin wrote: The Boldogs can exist very early in the chronology, and could easily take 'corrupted-looking' or 'mocking' shapes before the awakening of Men. Mandos responded: As I said I already I disagree with that. It would instead imply large numbers of them survived the war on Utumno, which I think is unlikely.
But all this says is 'before the awakening of Men', and in context (referring to my earlier post) concerned what the Elves may or may not have seen before Orome arrived. And in Quendi And Eldar Tolkien includes the Maiar-orcs in that scenario (as Maiar did not have to await the awakening of Men to take 'mocking' or 'Orkish' shapes).
Also, looking at the whole passage from the constructed Silmarillion (with respect to Utumno).
'Nonetheless the Valar did not discover all the mighty vaults and caverns hidden with deceit far under the fortresses of Angband and Utumno. Many evil things still lingered there, and others were dispersed and fled into the dark and roamed in the waste places of the world, awaiting a more evil hour; and Sauron they did not find.' The Silmarillion
This doesn't seem very problematic to me. Back to the Orome issue: from the Q&E Appendix on Orcs regarding early contact with Maiar-orcs...
'It is unlikely... before their finding by Orome and the seperation of Eldar and Avari.
But it is known that Melkor had become aware of the Quendi before the Valar began their war against him, and the joy of the Elves in Middle-earth had already been darkened by shadows of fear. Dreadful shapes had begun to haunt the borders of their dwellings, and some of their people vanished into the darkness and were heard of no more. Some of these things may have been phantoms and delusions; but some were, no doubt, shapes taken by the servants of Melkor, mocking and degrading the very forms of the Children. For Melkor had in his service great numbers of the Maiar, who had the power, as had their Master, of taking visible and tangible shape in Arda.' JRRT Appendix C to Q&E Elvish names for Orcs
Words in this text lead to text X, as noted. OK, and what about 'later' in general...
'... indeed they appear to have been by nature short-lived compared with the span of Men of higher race, such as the Edain.
This last point was not well understood in the Elder Days. For Morgoth had many servants, the oldest and most potent of whom were immortal, belonging indeed in their beginning to the Maiar; and these evil spirits like their Master could take on visible forms. Those whose business it was to direct the Orcs often took Orkish shapes, though they were greater and more terrible. Thus it was that the histories speak of Great Orcs or Orc-captains who were not slain, and who reappeared in battle through years far longer than the span of the lives of Men.'*
*Author's footnote
Boldog, for instance, is a name that occurs many times in the tales of the War. But it is possible that Boldog was not a personal name, and either a title, or else the name of a kind of creature: the Orc-formed Maiar, only less formidable than the Balrogs.'
Boldog appears in The Lay of Leithian as the name of an Orc-captain who led a raid into Doriath.
In these (related) texts Tolkien is referring to 'Boldogs' or Maiar-orcs appearing 'before Men awoke', as well as Great-orcs or captains who reappeared in battles through years far longer than the span of Men's lives. I note too that the name that arises is apparently 'connected to' an Orc that appeared in the verse tale of Beren and Lúthien, obviously well after Men had awoken; and the reference to the 'histories' seems wide open enough to me, for other examples.
As to possible numbers, I dunno. In any case I think Tolkien could have made great use of the Boldogs, beyond what he had put to paper I mean, once they entered his mind as a conception; once they 'existed' as part of the scenario.
And I think if indeed JRRT had 'pumped up the idea' so to speak, the Boldog's fit well in the mythology as First Age 'terrible' Orcs. Back then, or so the legends (could) seem to illustrate, there were some Orcs that might keep even the 'modern' Uruk-hai well in line!
Galin
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:28:09 PM
The best thing would be to post all the qiuotes you have in three different collums, 1 for Men being Orcs, 1 for Orcs being Elves and 1 Maiar. That way everyone can weight up which argument seems to support the most weight. It all seems to have got pretty messed up.
As I already said before, weight is not of any use Quantity of quotes supporting any of the theories is useless, since for Tolkien the matter clearly never was solved, and he passed away before having the chance to solve it.
Though this issue is quite cloudy and no one can know an ultimate answer, there are yet factors to consider with respect to the extant texts.
Edit: for (theoretical) example: a quick, hard to read scribble versus three long very polished essays written years later with a variant conclusion.
The idea in the former 'scribble' could indeed be the one Tolkien might 'ultimately' pick for his legendarium, but the latter has more textual weight in my opinion.
As to possible numbers, I dunno. In any case I think Tolkien could have made great use of the Boldogs, beyond what he had put to paper I mean, once they entered his mind as a conception; once they 'existed' as part of the scenario.
I think the supposition is that JRRT regarded himself as fiction writer, but it's also possible he at least to some extent regarded himself as a history writer. He mentions the LoTR came to him almost as a relevation(he says he knew nothing about Gandalf, hobbits etc. when he began writing it). So I do not believe he would have "doctored" his writings to make them add up but instead would have tried to find the "truth". And as I mentioned before he also considers but rejects the idea in VIII. In X he could be impersonating someone, since he cites Pengolodh as an historical source there (so the writing style doesn't tell much at least to me about his ultimate views on the issue).
Mandos wrote:I think the supposition is that JRRT regarded himself as fiction writer, but it's also possible he at least to some extent regarded himself as a history writer. He mentions the LoTR came to him almost as a relevation (he says he knew nothing about Gandalf, hobbits etc. when he began writing it). So I do not believe he would have "doctored" his writings to make them add up but instead would have tried to find the "truth".
I can put it into those terms: Tolkien 'realized' the true history of the First Age; he realized Boldogs were indeed part of that history, then how much. Or, Tolkien (the world class niggler) found out some Maiar became Balrogs, and some Maiar became terrible and early 'Orcs'. And the passage on Utumno allows for them later.
Seems easy enough to 'find out' in my opinion
Mandos wrote: And as I mentioned before he also considers but rejects the idea in VIII.
I'm not certain which idea you refer to here, but anyway the issue is larger than text VIII.
Mandos wrote: In X he could be impersonating someone, since he cites Pengolodh as an historical source there (so the writing style doesn't tell much at least to me about his ultimate views on the issue).
If indeed Orcs from Men (and some Maiar) was going to be Tolkien's only 'ultimate' idea, he probably is going to deliver it through a fictional writer of a given source.
Indeed the wise of Eressea theoried that Elves may have been the source of Orcs, not Tolkien himself. But obviously Tolkien is behind the appearance of such an idea, or a variant, in a given set of legends.
Mandos wrote:I think the supposition is that JRRT regarded himself as fiction writer, but it's also possible he at least to some extent regarded himself as a history writer. He mentions the LoTR came to him almost as a relevation (he says he knew nothing about Gandalf, hobbits etc. when he began writing it). So I do not believe he would have "doctored" his writings to make them add up but instead would have tried to find the "truth".
I can put it into those terms: Tolkien 'realized' the true history of the First Age; he realized Boldogs were indeed part of that history, then how much. Or, Tolkien (the world class niggler) found out some Maiar became Balrogs, and some Maiar became terrible and early 'Orcs'. And the passage on Utumno allows for them later.
Seems easy enough to 'find out' in my opinion
Mandos wrote: And as I mentioned before he also considers but rejects the idea in VIII.
I'm not certain which idea you refer to here, but anyway the issue is larger than text VIII.
You are obviously evading the issue here, as you seem to grasp the idea well enough above but not here. You insinuated before he would have adopted the idea if it had only entered his head. Also you seem to be driven by an emotional bias about Orcs rather than Tolkien's opinions, so I'm not interested in arguing with you.
Mandos wrote: And as I mentioned before he also considers but rejects the idea in VIII.Galin responded: I'm not certain which idea you refer to here, but anyway the issue is larger than text VIII. Mandos responded: You are obviously evading the issue here, as you seem to grasp the idea well enough above but not here.
I don't think I'm evading anything -- as I said I'm not certain about which idea you are referring to -- but actually I didn't give it much thought because you said you mentioned before that Tolkien considers but rejects 'the idea' in text VIII. So...
A) It had likely already been discussed.
B) I am not bound to only text VIII in any case, with respect to Maiar-orcs.
Mandos wrote: You insinuated before he would have adopted the idea if it had only entered his head.
If you're referring to what I said about Tolkien possibly using the Maiar-orcs to a greater degree than he had put to paper, I used the word could which I think fits in with my earlier thoughts...
Yes, part of the scenario. I also think the Maiar-orcs could have helped with chronology, but this leads to a bit of my personal speculation on how they could be used. And I think they well fit the Elder Days by being 'primitive' and etc. These could be very 'notable' First Age Orcs.Galin
Mandos wrote: Also you seem to be driven by an emotional bias about Orcs rather than Tolkien's opinions, so I'm not interested in arguing with you.
I think my opinions here have been very grounded in Tolkien's text.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:31:47 PM
The point is I think perhaps Galin you state Tolkien's own thoughts (of which he had many contradicting theories over one single topic) without giving us any insight into your opinion. If Tolkien wanted all the topics of his works to be so concrete set and absolute then I think he would have made a 'Frequently asked questions' chapter at the back of each books that gave us the absolute truth about most topics.
If, like in this instance, Tolkien is clearly undecided on the topic then its best to develop your own view which you think has the most evidence supporting it. And for this you must look at the evidence that lies in the work itself, rather than Tolkien's external opinion about the works.
mouth of sauron wrote: The point is I think perhaps Galin you state Tolkien's own thoughts (of which he had many contradicting theories over one single topic) without giving us any insight into your opinion.
I really didn't intend to join this thread in any major way actually; I gave what I considered a fairly innocuous opinion, especially considering what The Might and others had already posted before me (the various possibilities already being raised).
If you want something further from me specifically about some idea, I'll try to respond (but I don't imagine that you or anyone else does in the first place). Anyway, JRR Tolkien introduced Maiar-orcs into the equation of course, and I think I have touched upon, at least (and if lightly), why I like the idea. mouth of sauron wrote: If, like in this instance, Tolkien is clearly undecided on the topic then its best to develop your own view which you think has the most evidence supporting it. And for this you must look at the evidence that lies in the work itself, rather than Tolkien's external opinion about the works.
I think Tolkien's external opinion could be most important with respect to what he might have viewed as 'ultimate'. One can argue anyway, that JRRT's external opinion would very likely be reflected in an internal work.
But in any case I am using the work itself, or rather I can and would, because if pressed, today I would rely on text X (Orcs from Men & Maiar-orcs) which has a fictional, internal author. The author of text X is not supposed to be Tolkien himself (and as I say I prefer this theory in general).
Interestingly, Christopher Tolkien used one of his father's letters to decide at least one detail that went into the 1977 Silmarillion ('at least one' only in the sense that I can recall at least one at the moment anyway).
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:00:29 PM
Just to recount points already mentioned... Orcs : - could not have been given life by Melkor, and must have been other life forms corrupted by him - appear to predate the coming of men - have elvish characteristics, apparently including indefinite life span and ability to reproduce - originally all feared and hated the sun and moon (and everything else) - some strains appeared in the later third age which had no fear of light
Now, if you cross German Shepards with Chihuahuas, you will get small oddly shaped dogs, from which you will never again be able to breed a German Shepard - more's the pity. So if you took elves and bred them with evil and corrupt lesser powers, Maia whose embodied shapes were horrible and demonic, the result might very well fit the description of Orcs. And, it's hardly surprising if the offspring of such things would not be elves.
When Orcs appeared who were larger, stronger, and were not bothered by the light of day it was supposed that they had been bred with men, and that also seems likely enough. We are never told what Orcs are in certain terms; Melkor never published a recipe.
Tolkien certainly rethought his personal views regarding Melkor's and Sauron's dispensable servants over the years, but I conclude that he wouldn't want us to know the answers, if he ever ultimately decided for once and all. Isn't it better (at least for the stories) not to know what the monsters are.. especially if perhaps they were once us?
"It is a mark of evil things that came in the Great Darkness that they cannot abide the Sun; but Saruman's Orcs can endure it, even if they hate it. I wonder what he has done? Are they Men he has ruined, or has he blended the races of Orcs and Men? That would be a black evil!" LOTR, TTT
Clearly this quote suggests that if Saruman had blended Orcs and Men then it was a new thing and very evil. If the Uruk-Hai are ruined men as Treebeard first suggested then it appears Orcs and Men haven't been blended, if they are Orc-Men then it is clearly the first time such a thing has occured.
__________________
Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva!
Saruman did breed Orcs with Men but Tolkien does not refer to the result as Uruks or Uruk-hai. The Uruks came out of Mordor in any case (avoiding the nomenclature debate).
Saruman had 'many' Uruks in his service yes, but it's not said he created them. I think what he likely created was the half-orcs referred to by Merry and Aragorn, who were man-high and had goblin-faces.
Noting:'It [the word uruk] referred, however, specially to the trained and disciplined Orcs of the regiments of Mordor.'JRRT Quendi And Eldar, WJ
Saruman had wolfriders, followed by two battalions of Uruks '...the fierce Uruks, heavily armed but trained to move at great speed for many miles.'
When, in the The Uruk-hai, the Northerners complain about running under the Sun, I note the response:'By the White Hand! What's the use of sending out mountain-maggots on a trip, only half-trained. Run, curse you!'
Good training marks an Uruk from Mordor it seems, and Saruman's Uruks are noted as trained to move at great speed. Saruman's Isengarders call the Northerners half-trained when they complain about running under the Sun.
Still 'regular orcs' can do well enough under the Sun if pushed: in the chapter The Uruk-hai Tolkien's regular Orcs run under the Sun for hours, despite what Treebeard says. They don't like it, but it seems to me that they can do it.
In The Battle Of The Pelennor Fields the Orcs of Mordor appear to fight on after the Sun shines (a great wind blew, and the rain went North). The hosts of Mordor, which I would say included Orcs (Orcs that are said, after Aragorn is revealed, to have hated the Sunlight), were actually enheartened by the Black Sails. Éomer's words include singing in the Sun as he prepared to face Mordor, and then Aragorn and Company are revealed and a dread falls upon the enemy.
Once again these Orcs do not like the Sun but appear quite ready to battle on when thinking that the ships contained enemies of the West.
Celebrindal, those are some points brought up about Orcs in that recount (not that you said 'all' of course). That Orcs appear to predate the coming of Men is not necessarily so for example, within the context that Orcs were bred from Men of course (though in this context the Maiar-orcs could predate Orcs bred from Men).
Regarding life-span...
Text VIII (Orcs from beasts)
'It remains therefore terribly possible there was an Elvish strain in Orcs. There may then even have been mated with beasts (sterile!) and later Men. Their life-span would be diminished. And dying they would go to Mandos and be held in prison till the end.'
Text X
'They could be slain, and they were subject to disease; but apart from these ills they died and were not immortal, even according to the manner of the Quendi; indeed they appear to have been by nature short-lived compared with the span of Men of higher race, such as the Edain.'
The matter is complicated, as often said
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:46:05 PM
But you havn't given your view on Glorfindel's quote Galin.
Here is a different quote I have found after checking on the one Glorfindel posted:
"Ho, hm, well, we could, you know! You do not know, perhaps, how strong we are. Maybe you have heard of Trolls? They are mighty strong. But Trolls are only counterfeits, made by the Enemy in the Great Darkness, in mockery of Ents, as Orcs were of Elves."
Are not these quotes pretty adamant that Orcs were at least by Melkor created using Elves?
Well, I think I have shown that Orcs can abide the Sun (in some measure anyway), if pushed. Or, in my opinion, if well-trained to endure it.
Regarding Saruman's nasties, Treebeard does not know, and is questioning: I wonder what he has done? Are they Men he has ruined, or has he blended the races of Orcs and Men? Treebeard is right in that Saruman has blended the races of Orcs and Men. But as I say these are not necessarily Uruks, but arguably the half-orcs described by Merry.
As far as mockery (the second quote): Orcs can be made in mockery of Elves without being made from Elves.
'These Orcs Morgoth made in envy and mockery of the Elves, and they were made of stone, but their hearts of hatred.' JRRT, Quenta Silmarillion
'In QS (...) the idea had already arisen that Orcs originated in mockery of the Elves, but not yet that the Orcs were in any other way associated with them: they were a 'creation' of Morgoth's own 'made of stone', and he brought them into being when he returned to Middle-earth. As AAm was first written (...) this view still held;... the word 'made' was used -- though not the words 'made of stone'. Christopher Tolkien, commentary on AAm (Annals of Aman)
This is not Tolkien's 'final' view of course, but it illustrates that at one point the Orcs were made in mockery of Elves but not further associated with them. The statement by Treebeard need not indicate a necessarily Elvish origin.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 12:48:16 PM
I think the quote you provided is meant to be interpreted differently. Its saying that although Orcs were bred from Elves (made in mockery) once they became Orcs they were in no way like the former selves and were wholly a new creation of Morgoth's if you understand me.
If Orcs were made in Mockery of Elves then why would Morgoth breed them out of Men? That doesn't make sense. Morgoth made of a mockery of Elves out of Orcs by torturing Men? No the only way it makes sense is if he torotured the Elves into something hideous. Then they are a mockery of Elves.
mouth of sauron wrote: I think the quote you provided is meant to be interpreted differently. Its saying that although Orcs were bred from Elves (made in mockery) once they became Orcs they were in no way like the former selves and were wholly a new creation of Morgoth's if you understand me.
But in the quote I provided Morgoth did not use Elves (or Men). This quote represents the old idea where Morgoth could create Orcs, where he could produce living things instead of needing to corrupt living things. Tolkien would alter this of course, but that's why I think this is a good example of Morgoth creating Orcs in mockery of Elves, but not from Elves.
From a letter written in April 1954 'Orcs (...) are nowhere clearly stated to be of any particular origin. But since they are servants of the Dark Power, and later of Sauron, neither of whom could, or would, produce living things, they must be 'corruptions'. JRRT Letters
MOS posted: If Orcs were made in Mockery of Elves then why would Morgoth breed them out of Men? That doesn't make sense. Morgoth made of a mockery of Elves out of Orcs by torturing Men? No the only way it makes sense is if he torotured the Elves into something hideous. Then they are a mockery of Elves.
In my opinion Tolkien's view seems different when it comes to mocking. Another example comes from the beast-origin...
'The Orcs were beasts of humanized shape (to mock Men and Elves) deliberately preverted/ converted into a more close resemblance to Men.' JRRT, Orcs, Text VIII
Or the Maiar, who took on mocking shapes...
'Some of these things may have been phantoms and delusions; but some were, no doubt, shapes taken by the servants of Melkor, mocking and degrading the very forms of the Children. For Melkor had in his service great numbers of the Maiar, who had the power, as had their master, of taking visible and tangible shape in Arda.' JRRT, Morgoth's Ring
It need not only be about form: for example, in the Orcs from Men idea, Orcs can be said to be a mockery not only in form but with respect to subservience and general purpose -- the idea being that Orcs are created to serve Morgoth not God (though obviously others can serve Morgoth due to choice).
'Nonetheless, it was by the malice of Melkor that the Orcs arose, and plainly they were meant by him to be a mockery of the Children of Eru, being bred to be wholly subservient to his will and filled with unappeasable hatred of Elves and Men.' JRRT, Orcs from Men, Text X
With respect to form alone, even in the Orcs from Men concept Elves appear before Men, and they are the result of the design of God with respect to his Children (basically Men and Elves are similar in appearance of course). A person can mock the human form in clay for example, sculpting purposed imitations that are close but distorted, corruptions of the original design.
Basically one does not need to corrupt an actual Elf to mock the idea of Elves (or Men) as God's creation.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 01:12:15 PM
What quotes are there that actually state Orcs were orginally bred using Men? I have onbly seen ones saying that they were bred in after years using Men which can be attributed perhaps to Saruman.
__________________
Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë! Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva!
Glorfindel is right - I don't see any quotes saying that Orcs were bred out of men in the first place either in your first post The might or any post in the thread thereafter...
MOS posted a Mannish origin based quote with the note from Unfinished Tales (in the first post in the thread 'Doubtless Morgoth, since he can make no living thing, bred Orcs from various kinds of Men,...'). The Might refers to the idea in his first post, and I describe Text X (Morgoth's Ring) as being an 'Orcs from Men' idea. Anyway, about Text X...
'This then, as it may appear, was my father's final view of the question: Orcs were bred from Men, and if the conception in mind of the Orcs may go far back into the night of Melkor's thought it was Sauron who during the Ages of Melkor's captivity in Aman brought into being the black armies that were available to his Master when he returned.'
There's more to it than that, but this is Christopher Tolkien's summation.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 01:11:05 PM
It appears strange how you accept Christopher Tolkien's final conclusion in this topic yet refused it in the 'Himling' debate.
Your quote is either out dated or simply a mistake on Christopher Tolkien behalf:
Men awoke after Melkor returned from Valinor. Men awoke with the rising of the first Sun and when the Noldor came into Beleriand. Melkor was already back by then. How could Sauron have bred armies of Orcs from men whilst Melkor was in Valinor when the hadn't even awoken yet?????
Plus you may have forgotten or have never read the 'Tale of Adanel'. This tells how Morgoth was the first to walk amoung the newly awoken Men and ensnare them to his allegiance (which shows that he was already in Middle-earth when Men awoke, not in Valinor)
Basically according to the PUBLISHED Silmarillion (and Morgoth's Ring for that matter) the idear Orcs were bred from Men completely contradicts the text and history.
mouth of sauron wrote: It appears strange how you accept Christopher Tolkien's final conclusion in this topic yet refused it in the 'Himling' debate.
I think Christopher Tolkien's statements carry great authority, but I thought it might have been possible too that JRRT rejected Himling at some point after the first edition was published, and even his son might not have known about it (had Tolkien not told him, or written anything down). But that's just speculation and in any case I realize why CJRT has Himling in Unfinished Tales.
MOS: Your quote is either out dated or simply a mistake on Christopher Tolkien behalf: Men awoke after Melkor returned from Valinor. Men awoke with the rising of the first Sun and when the Noldor came into Beleriand. Melkor was already back by then. How could Sauron have bred armies of Orcs from men whilst Melkor was in Valinor when the hadn't even awoken yet?????
To my mind it's not outdated or a mistake but rather about internal chronology concerns (addressed in text X and elsewhere).
MOS: Plus you may have forgotten or have never read the 'Tale of Adanel'. This tells how Morgoth was the first to walk amoung the newly awoken Men and ensnare them to his allegiance (which shows that he was already in Middle-earth when Men awoke, not in Valinor). Basically according to the PUBLISHED Silmarillion (and Morgoth's Ring for that matter) the idear Orcs were bred from Men completely contradicts the text and history.
OK but Tolkien did not publish The Silmarillion, The Tale of Adanel, or any of the Orc texts in Morgoth's Ring.
Christopher's summation is about Text X specifically, and I would say he does not support the ideas within as final in any sense but external chronology -- Tolkien's probable last idea on paper with respect to external dating, or at least in such a finished form. And as I say, there's more to it anyway, as his remarks do not end there.
Christopher Tolkien does not present Text X as necessarily consistent with other texts or ideas.
OK, but nor am I
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 01:04:10 PM
So far we have numenrous quotes saying Orcs were thought to have been first bred from Elves in the Silmarillion, as well as elsewhere, we have the PUBLISHED history of the First Age making it immpossible for the Orcs to be first bred out of Men becuase they hadn't awoken yet and finally we have Treebeard quote saying that Orcs were bred in mockery of Elves and Glorfindel's quote saying how Saruman blended the race of Orc and Man - indicating that this was the first time it has been done.
None of these seem to have been answered with in deal of clarity. Only partially related text and alot of confused waffle seems to have been given in place.
Firstly you are saying you accept Christopher Tolkien 'final view' that JRR meant for Orcs to be bred from Men and then you disregard the actual PUBLISHED Silmarillion (published by Christopher) which completely contradicts this.
MOS posted: 'Firstly you are saying you accept Christopher Tolkien 'final view' that JRR meant for Orcs to be bred from Men and then you disregard the actual PUBLISHED Silmarillion (published by Christopher) which completely contradicts this.'
I would say I prefer JRR Tolkien's idea of Orcs from Men over his idea of Orcs from Elves.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 01:27:03 PM
I thought a closer look at the chronology details might be in order.
Tolkien was thinking of abandoning the detail that Men awoke at the rising of the Sun, and indeed that the Sun was a Tree-fruit in the first place -- or at least he considered that such notions, however poetic, should be seen as Mannish notions. JRRT came to think that the Eldarin legends '... should have a closer relation to the knowledge now possessed or at least the form of the Solar System (= Kindom of Arda)*; though it need not, of course, follow any 'scientific' theory of its making or development.
We can maybe see the transformation arising in his texts. From Text II Myths Transformed
'The making of the Sun and Moon must occur long before the coming of the Elves; and cannot be made to be after the death of the Two Trees -- if that occured in any connexion with the sojourn of the Noldor in Valinor.'
'The Sun should be coeval with earth, though its relative size need not be considered, while the apparent revolution of the Sun about the Earth will be accepted*.' JRRT Text II
So when do men awake?
'The March of the Eldar is through great Rains?
Men awake in an Isle amid the floods and therefore welcome the Sun which seems to come out of the East (...) The coming of Men therefore will be much further back *. This will be better, for a bare 400 years is quite inadequate to produce the variety, and the advancement (e. g. of the Edain) at the time of Felagund*.
Men must awake while Melkor is still in Arda? -- because of the Fall **. Therefore in some period during the Great March.' JRRT
Christopher Tolkien's footnote ** '...'Arda' must be an error for 'Middle-earth' (i.e. before his captivity in Aman).'
OK, here we are at Text II, and when we get to Text X, where Orcs are corrupted Men, Tolkien is not working with the chronology one finds elsewhere in his work -- he is not working with the specific chronology published in the 1977 Silmarillion for example. The variant chronology is a bit vague, but is basically revealed in the following...
'For though the time of the awakening of Men is not known, even the calculations of the loremasters that place it earliest do not assign it a date long before the Great March began*, certainly not long enough before it to allow for the corruption of Men into Orcs. On the other hand, it is plain that soon after his return Morgoth had at his command a great number of these creatures, (...)'
'This view of the origin of the Orcs thus meets with difficulties of chronology. But though Men may take comfort in this, the theory remains nonetheless the most probable. It accords with all that is known of Melkor, and of the nature and behaviour of Orcs -- and of Men.' JRRT Text X Orcs from Men
So here Tolkien has pushed back the awakening of Men... yet still finds difficulties of chronology within this idea -- but nevertheless has the writer conclude that Orcs from Men is the theory, and of course the text goes on in that vein. Christopher Tolkien notes the statement here concering the Great March, and states (at the end of note three):
'...Thus if the awakening of Men is placed even very late in the period of the Great March of the Eldar it will be set back by more than 3500 Years of the Sun. See further p. 430 note 5.' CT
And page 430 note 5 has to do with Text XI (follows Text X of course) and the relation to Valian Years and Sun Years that his father was thinking about... 'In notes not given in this book, in which my father was calculating on this basis the time of the awakening of Men, he expressly stated that 144 Sun Years = 1 Valian Year (...) Placing the event 'after or about the time of the sack of Utumno, Valian Year 1100' (see pp. 75, 80), a gigantic lapse of time could now be conceived between the 'arising' of Men and their first appearance in Beleriand.' Christopher Tolkien, note five to Text XI.
I'm not trying to revive the debate with MOS or anyone. I will agree to disagree regarding which version I prefer with respect to Orcs. My intent with this post is merely to elaborate on the variant chronology that I referred to only briefly, and to post it for those who don't have HME or don't care to sift through all the texts to try to find out what I was talking about earlier.
-- Edited by Galin on Friday 17th of April 2009 01:34:26 PM
Previous poll results (What is the 'Mightiest' weapon in Tolkiens myth?): Gurthang, blade of Turin - 28%, Narsil, sword of Elendil - 12%, Anduril, Sword of King Ellesar Aragorn - 23%, The Mace of the Witch King - 5%, Grond the dread hammer/hammer of the underworld -19%, Black axe of Gothmog - 4, Glamdring of Gandalf - 7%, Orcrist of Thorin - 1%
A NEW POLL HAS BEEN ADDED TO TOLKIEN FORUMS
Tolkien Forums - The Mythical world of J.R.R Tolkien
