daesul
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 17 Apr 2004
Joined: 28 Mar 2002
Posts: 352
|
Posted: Wed Feb 5, 2003 4:04 am |
     |
|
Let me prface this by saying I seem to have lost my copy of the Hobbit, and I haven't read it in many years. So I sincerely hope I'm remembering correctly and not calling on details from the cartoon!
When Thorin and Co. are captured by the goblins, they recognize the sword at his side as Orcrist (as Biter [or Beater] actually). And when Gandalf later effects a rescue, they also recognize Glamdring (whichever of Beater or Biter the other isn't  ). The question is how?
I reject the notion that orcs posess any level of immortality, so no goblin there had a personal memory of either sword. That said, it is possible both or either swords saw use against the goblins in recent history. We have no idea how long they lay in the cave of the trolls. But I find this explanation unsatisfactory, which means the orcs must have some knowledge of history. Just to recognize the swords as elvish (most likely due to the glow) requires a rudimentary understanding of the nature of some ancient elvish weapons. If we were to assume that only Glamdring and Orcrist react to orcs in that manner, it simlifies things a bit. But Sting immediately invalidates such an assumption. So the goblins had to have enough historical knowledge to identify, on sight, two swords from the first age. How?
They cannot have a written history of any sort because orcs are almost certainly illiterate. What we know of them suggests a severely limited intelligence (aside from an evil cunning), and everything about them implies they would have neither the time nor the inclination to read. Given the state of the book found in the Chamber of Mazarbul, they are unlikely to place any sort of value on reading or learning to do so. Besides, goblins have always been the thralls of a dark power. To allow them any sort of education would invite orcs to think for themselves, and that is surely not something Melkor or Sauron wanted.
That leaves an oral tradition; an oral tradition rich enough to allow the identification of Orcrist and Glamdring. Ultimately, however, this also seems unlikely. I'll admit I know little on the subject, but oral histories always seem to be great tales of heroes and accomplishments. I can't see a bunch of orcs sitting around reliving past glories. When we see them interacting in LotR, they are fractious and mean spirited; hardly the sort of people who care to sing the praises of fallen comrades. An oral history would also give them a sense of identity as a people, and this would be as dangerous as allowing them to read. On top of that, we are told in RotK that after Sauron's defeat, his creatures ran mindless or crawled into holes and died. If the orcs had an oral tradition, I think it would engender in them a sense of racial/cultural pride. And it seems unlikely such people would simply give up and run away or fade and die.
The only other possible option I can imagine comes from being somehow linked to Sauron (or Melkor previously). This is clearly meant to be the case at the end of the final battle. So perhaps that same overmind which was Sauron granted the orcs some strange insight into the tools of his enemies. But alas, I don't really like that answer either.
So what say you? Do orcs have some way of recording history?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Queen_Beruthiel
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Mordor
Last Visited: 14 Mar 2010
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 2870
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 5, 2003 4:50 am |
|
|
When we see them interacting in LotR, they are fractious and mean spirited; hardly the sort of people who care to sing the praises of fallen comrades.
Haven't got my books with me but I was looking over the "Uruk-hai" chapter the other night for some quotes on another thread and I noticed that the Moria orcs who joined up with Ugluk and Co said that they wanted to avenge their folk. I would say that this chapter and the two chapters which cover Cirith Ungol should give some idea of orc.. er... society. I'll look them over tonight and see if I can come up with anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mummpizz
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Saruman
Last Visited: 03 Jun 2005
Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 3049
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 5, 2003 8:04 am |
|
|
Several discussions around here have led to the conclusion that Orcs are, being of elvish origin, immortal - see the conversation between Shagrat and Gorbag in RotK, where its is clear that they speak of memories lying back about 2000 years at that moment. That's as close to immortality as it can be.
Another option for the Beater/Biter History is: these swords have been in recent use, maybe by Elves or Dunedain, who lost them to the Trolls just some days (weeks, years) before.
I disagree on the notion that Orcs are half-wits, only kept erect by the will of Sauron - just in "The Hobbit" Tolkien describes them as cunning, intelligent, but malicious, and keen on inventing explosives and war machinery. They definitely have their writing, as "Orc runes" are described in several places.
This is one of the most interesting points about the mixed band of Uruk-Hai, Mordor and Moria Orcs meeting at Parth Galen and abducting Merry and Pippin. The newly bred (probably mortal?) Uruk-hai are brutal and stupid oafs with an obvious lack of culture; the Mordor Orcs intelligent, sarcastic, cunning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
JestersTears
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 10 Jul 2009
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 225
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 5, 2003 8:41 am |
|
|
They are also clearly capable of glorifying and maintaining history which is important to them. This is demonstrated by the fact that they name the battering ram used in the seige of Minas Tirith after Morgoth's hammer Grond - when he defeated Fingolfin in the First Age.
|
|
|
|
|
|
wilko185
by stok other ston
Alliance: House of Finrod Felagund
Last Visited: 01 Apr 2010
Joined: 18 Nov 2001
Posts: 7880
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 5, 2003 11:34 am |
|
|
Tolkien's later writings on orc-mortality (HOME X) certainly tend to the view of them being short-lived. Nevertheless it is canonical that Bolg lived for some unknown time over 140 years (and did not die of old age), as he fought in the Battle of Five Armies (2941) and his father Azog was killed in the Battle of Nanduhirion (2799). So I wouldn't necessarily discount Orcs surviviing from the First to the Third Ages, however unlikely it may seem. (After Tolkien had rejected Elvish origins for Orcs, he did consider that some of the greater, long-lived Orcs could be inhabited by minor Maiar spirits).
Also, Orcs did indeed have writing of a sort, eg in Ithilien there are trees hewn down wantonly and left to die, with evil runes or the fell sign of the Eye cut in rude strokes on their bark. and on the statue at the cross-roadswere idle scrawls mixed with the foul symbols that the maggot-folk of Mordor used. [The true "solution" to this problem is probably that at the time of writing The Hobbit Tolkien was drawing on "Gondolin", "Elrond" etc to add colour and depth, rather than intending to fully integrate TH into his legendarium. The Second and Third Ages were unknown to him at this time].
|
|
 |
.. the very monsters and huge fishes of the sea, war not amongst themselves in their own kind: but believe me, man at man's hand receiveth most harm and mischief.
-- Pliny |
|
|
|
|
Queen_Beruthiel
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Mordor
Last Visited: 14 Mar 2010
Joined: 14 Apr 2002
Posts: 2870
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 5, 2003 12:27 pm |
|
|
Languages
Many Orcs are presented as speaking at least 2 languages (which is one more than me  ): the Black Speech and the Common Speech.
Literacy
Azog carved his name on Thror's brow in Dwarf-runes, boasting to Nar: "I wrote it!" There are also the runes and other marks wilko refers to.
History
Gorbag refers to "the bad old times... the Great Siege". Also, in Appendix A of LOTR, Tolkien refers to "the Battle of Azanulbizar... at the memory of which the Orcs still shudder..."
Make of all that what you will: it does point to a cultural history and identity of sorts. Sorry, can't help about Orcrist and Glamdring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
daesul
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 17 Apr 2004
Joined: 28 Mar 2002
Posts: 352
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 3:43 am |
|
|
I stand happily corrected on many points 
I was discussing this with a friend of mine off-line (strange as that may seem ) just last evening. She's just recently read TH, FotR, and finished TT just this past week, so her memory is quite a bit fresher than my own. She brought up the discussion between Shagrat and Gorbag wherein they're talking about the possibility of sneaking away to some quite little place of their own. And that certainly indicates a sense of self; an existance as more than 'cannon fodder' for Sauron.
Mummpizz, I'm aware that many people feel that orcs are immortal due to their possible elvish origin. I, for one, do not. As Wilko pointed out, there have certainly been some members of the race who lived very long lives. But I don't think that applies to the entire people. This is in large part due to the fact that I find the idea distasteful (as, apparently, did Tolkien).
It's obviously time for me to read the books again! I'd no idea orcs could read. Still, I wonder if they have an oral history as opposed to a written one.
Thank you all for your posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nár
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Durins Folk
Last Visited: 17 Jul 2010
Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 2770
Location: Banana Republic
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 4:20 am |
|
|
Queen_Beruthiel wrote:
"Languages
Many Orcs are presented as speaking at least 2 languages (which is one more than me ): the Black Speech and the Common Speech. "
Plus the various Orcish dialects...
"Literacy
Azog carved his name on Thror's brow in Dwarf-runes, boasting to Nar: "I wrote it!"
Yes, I remember this very well
"History
Gorbag refers to "the bad old times... the Great Siege". Also, in Appendix A of LOTR, Tolkien refers to "the Battle of Azanulbizar... at the memory of which the Orcs still shudder..."
Well said. You are forgetting a category though...
Art
Remember the orc-weapon ( a knife) found by Gimli, with the carven handle shaped like an hideous head. This proves that Orcs had developed even a form of art: a disgusting one, maybe, but we should praise their effort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mummpizz
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Saruman
Last Visited: 03 Jun 2005
Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 3049
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 4:22 am |
|
|
As Orcs are fictional, I do hope they enjoy an eternal fictional life, and find nothing distasteful with it - enjoying the discussion of fictional eternal life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nár
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Durins Folk
Last Visited: 17 Jul 2010
Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 2770
Location: Banana Republic
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 6:38 am |
|
|
Oh, I was forgetting...
Animal training
They train and ride Wargs.
Military tactics
Think about their cunning strategies during the battle of the five armies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ArPharazon
Mariner
Alliance: House of Beren
Last Visited: 29 Jan 2005
Joined: 13 Dec 2001
Posts: 6360
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 6:49 am |
|
|
The period about which Tolkien was an expert (Dark Ages) was at least in large part illiterate. It depended on an oral culture - with Bards and others retelling long epic poems and songs, and ordinary people retaining detailed memory of such things as complex family genealogies and inter-relationships.
In previous periods this was how long poems such as The Illiad were passed from generation to generation - interestingly it seems with very little loss of accuracy.
I see no reason why the orcs should not have had their own equivalent of this.
Sting glows when orcs are around - this in itself might have made such weapons and Sting and Glamdring distinctive. Their shapes might even have attained "iconic" level - as, for instance, we can spot a picture of James Dean or Marilyn Munro from even a fragment of it.
Tolkien, of course, as has been pointed out by Wilko, didn't have a clue as to the reasons, and complicated the logic even more by his own subsequent hesitancy regarding the origin and longevity of orcs.
But, on balance, I think a case can be made that recognition of certain famous weapons is not unrealistic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nár
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Durins Folk
Last Visited: 17 Jul 2010
Joined: 09 May 2002
Posts: 2770
Location: Banana Republic
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 7:04 am |
|
|
ArPharazon wrote:
"...I think a case can be made that recognition of certain famous weapons is not unrealistic. "
I agree.
BTW, from "The encyclopedia of Arda":
"What Did Glamdring Look Like?
We know much less about Glamdring's appearance than its history. It is consistently described as 'white' (in The Fellowship of the Ring II 5 The Bridge of Khazad-dûm). When enemies were near it 'shone with a pale light' (ibid). In the same circumstances, the Elven-knife Sting glittered along its edges, but in Glamdring's case, the entire blade seems to have glowed. Finally, we know from The Hobbit that both Glamdring and its mate Orcrist had runed blades, giving at least their names."
So both the blades had a quite peculiar appearance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
maerantha
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 19 Nov 2005
Joined: 05 Jan 2003
Posts: 239
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 6, 2003 11:13 am |
|
|
wilko wrote: "The true "solution" to this problem is probably that at the time of writing The Hobbit Tolkien was drawing on "Gondolin", "Elrond" etc to add colour and depth, rather than intending to fully integrate TH into his legendarium. The Second and Third Ages were unknown to him at this time]."
I agree with this, but I also agree with ArPharazon that oral history could preserve a memory of a legendary weapon, particularly if the weapon had reappeared at times during the 2nd and 3rd ages before coming to be in a troll nest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Rómestámo-
Ranger of the North
Alliance: default
Last Visited: 15 Oct 2004
Joined: 06 Mar 2002
Posts: 2947
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 8, 2003 4:56 pm |
|
|
Nár: What Did Glamdring Look Like?
Both Glamdring and Orcrist had ornate (jewelled) hilts and distinctive scabbards. (It is surprising that the Encyclopaedia of Arda fails to mention these, less surprising that the movie-makers miss this detail)
There were lots of clothes, too, hanging on the walls--too small for trolls, I am afraid they belonged to victims--and among them were several swords of various makes, shapes, and sizes. Two caught their eyes particularly, because of their beautiful scabbards and jewelled hilts.
Gandalf and Thorin each took one of these;(...)
'These look like good blades,' said the wizard, half drawing them and looking at them curiously. 'They were not made by any troll, nor by any smith among men in these parts and days; but when we can read the runes on them, we shall know more about them.'
Roast Mutton
I contend that the scabbards and sword furniture (hilt, guard and pommel) are so distinctive that it is these that are identified by the goblins at first glimpse- they did not even need to see the glowing blades or mystic runes. When the Misty Mountains Goblins identify Orcrist it is from its hilt and scabbard as Thorin had had no opportunity to draw it. Its glow is not visible (as it was still in its sheath) as shown by the cavern plunging into darkness when Gandalf extinguishes the fire (and also by Gandalf's later instruction in the tunnel to 'Draw your sword Thorin!').
He held out the sword which Thorin had worn, the sword which came from the Troll's lair.
The Great Goblin gave a truly awful howl of rage when he looked at it, and all his soldiers gnashed their teeth, clashed their shields, and stamped. They knew the sword at once. It had killed hundreds of goblins in its time, when the fair elves of Gondolin hunted them in the hills or did battle before their walls. They had called it Orcrist, Goblin-cleaver, but the goblins called it simply Biter. They hated it and hated worse any one that carried it.
Over Hill and Under Hill
It is curious that these goblins can identify Orcrist at a glance, while Gandalf (with all his Lore) cannot. It is difficult to accept that oral traditions over so many thousands of years could allow for such accurate identification- perhaps the Orcs passed Enemy Recognition Charts down the generations !
However the solution to this conundrum is as wilko185 has said- 'The Hobbit' was not originally intended as part of the Legendarium.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Morelen
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Thranduil
Last Visited: 14 May 2004
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 274
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 8, 2003 5:48 pm |
|
|
I'm not sure where (perhaps the Silm?)but I distinctly remember reading that the Orcs, like the elves, did not die of old age and were fierce warriors. So there is a chance, albeit slim, that there may have existed Orcs old enough to remember Biter and Beater.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Morelen
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Thranduil
Last Visited: 14 May 2004
Joined: 30 Apr 2002
Posts: 274
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 8, 2003 5:49 pm |
|
|
Sorry, double post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
daesul
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 17 Apr 2004
Joined: 28 Mar 2002
Posts: 352
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 8, 2003 10:42 pm |
|
|
I'm sure Wilko came up with the most likely answer, but I think everyone on these boards suffers from a strange compulsion to explore aspects of the stories Tolkien never intended people to scrutinize so thoroughly. So on we go!
That's a very interesting point about Gandalf, Romestamo. We know that the Istari had only a hazy memory of their lives before coming to ME, but on second thought that really doesn't matter here. He was still in Valinor when Glamdring and Orcrist were used to defend Gondolin, so he wouldn't have a personal connection to them. The orcs, I suppose, would. It still doesn't really explain why he could not identify them by their markings, but perhaps he'd just never heard of them. Having potentially been out of service for a long time, the elves themselves may have almost forgotten about them. Then they wouldn't have sung songs or told stories of these great blades for quite some time. Elrond would surely know about them, but perhaps he assumed they were lost long ago and had no reason to mention them until they were brought to his table. Anyway, I'll stop beating that rather dead horse.
The keeping of history among the orcs still has me curious, though. Arphy, I agree that there is no reason the orcs could not have had an oral tradition. While you all have proven that orcs were at least somewhat literate, I find it doubtful they would actually read or write more than was necessary. What orc runes we do see seem limited to graffiti. I'm sure they had other uses for them, but it seems unlikely that there was any great volume of orc literature. It's also hard to imagine an orc scholar or historian. A storyteller I can see. As far as battle goes, an oral history for the orcs wouldn't have been much different than the Greeks. I don't know, the Illiad and Beowulf (both of which I have read in part but never finished) just seem entirely beyond the capabilities of an orc. Ach, it looks like I am just determined to see orcs in the worst possible light. But who can blame me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
JestersTears
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 10 Jul 2009
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 225
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 11, 2003 11:20 pm |
|
|
Ok, firstly apologies for resurrecting this older debate, but I composed this post some days ago now at home but then my internet connection went a bit haywire. I've only just got this back into work to post.
The more this is debated, the more clear it is that Wilko is right… we do know that this was originally a tangent to the main mythology and Tolkien sensibly borrowed aspects from elsewhere to give it some depth but he did not intend for The Hobbit to become the “main part” of the mythology (amongst the public). Therefore we have some things which he thought probably didn’t need a lot of explanation but now we view everything in the whole we feel as though we should make everything fit together.
In a way this is a tribute to the Prof.
Because he took so much time to make most of the world work as a real place, we like to make all of it like that, something we probably don’t do with other writers, who perhaps spent even less time than Tolkien making things “fit” in such a meticulous way. So perhaps when we read something that’s not quite right in another book we just pass over it – whereas in Middle-earth we begin to say “wait a minute, that’s not right”. It’s like we treat this as a factual history, rather than a world where you need to suspend some disbelief for a while, hence the sort of debates we hold on here – which are at the same time meaningless (because it’s not a “real” world) and meaningful (because we care about this world).
So, lecture over and back to the debate with gusto!!!!
Rómestámo is I think right in that the orcs recognise the blades because they are so distinctive, and I think that you do them somewhat of a disservice Daesul when you see them in the worst light. I would go along with ArPhy here because an oral tradition would be very feasible (and even to an extent perhaps some written records – although oral is most likely).
The point about Gandalf not recognising the blades is much more difficult to explain though. Perhaps he was not aware of the fame of the blades (and this has been explained above so I’m prepared to go along with this). However, he did know Elvish runes and most ME languages so I don’t see how he couldn’t read them at the time of finding the swords. Some things defy rationalization I’m afraid and I think this is one of them.
This is another “mismatch” I think – Gandalf is not the important figure that he is in LOTR he’s almost a plot device to provide the link between safe English Bilbo (our own link into the story as someone we can identify with) and the fantastic, heroic dwarves (the “story”) – sort of in the same way that the necromancer is not Sauron at the time of writing but a plot device to remove Gandalf.
Unless someone has a good idea as to why Gandalf doesn’t recognize them (perhaps he chooses not to?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Rómestámo-
Ranger of the North
Alliance: default
Last Visited: 15 Oct 2004
Joined: 06 Mar 2002
Posts: 2947
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:41 am |
|
|
Gandalf's inability to immediately read the runes is easy enough to rationalize; it is likely that the runes were in an obsolete or obscure script unique to the Elves of Gondolin. As has been pointed out, the Istari did not appear in Middle-earth til after Third Age 1000, so it is highly likely that Gandalf had not encountered this particular form before. Appendix E tells us that the Cirth were devised first in Beleriand by the Sindar, and were later elaborated by the Noldor of Eregion to include runes for the representation of sounds not found in Sindarin. It is likely that the (Noldorin) Elves of Gondolin would have developed their own system to represent these sounds, and this system would have disappeared from common use after the fall of the city. No doubt, working from first principles Gandalf could have deciphered the runic inscriptions, but given that it was not immediately important and they were on their way to see a noted lore-master, he left it to Elrond to read them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mummpizz
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Saruman
Last Visited: 03 Jun 2005
Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 3049
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2003 6:45 am |
|
|
Gandalf isn't the know-it-all of ME (that would be Elrond). Gandalf admits he forgets things (like passwords of the Moria door) and does not want to know other things (like descriptions of herbs in Minas Tirith). He's not been there when Gondolin fell, and whether he partook in the battle of the Valar with Morgoth and the raze of Thangorodrim is not certain. So maybe he just did not care about all elven blades of fame, which must have been a higher number than rings of power, which he said being quite a few.
My favorite option for the fame of Glamdring an Orcrist is this: two elves make their way from Rivendell to the grey havens, bearing those swords. They fight their way over the misty mountains, maybe slaying a considerable number of orcs. They get ambushed by the trolls and end up in their boiling-pot just two weeks before Bilbo and company make their way into the opposite direction (to Rivendell, not out of the boiling pot, that means).
I know this isn't so glorifying for swords and elves alike, but not completely without consideration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
.gif)
Shipwright*s_Apprentice
Shield Bearer
Alliance: default (female)
Last Visited: 19 Apr 2003
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 258
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2003 12:51 pm |
|
|
Thanks for the information about the runes. I can well believe that Elrond might be the greater expert in this case.
Besides, Gandalf never says that he can't read the runes. He half draws the blades inside the trolls' cave, where the light was very likely dim, and says, 'when we can read the runes on them, we shall know more about them'. We next encounter the blades in the House of Elrond. Who is to say that Gandalf didn't pull them out and study them in the meantime? It's easy to imagine that Gandalf knows more than he lets on. He has to walk a narrow line in helping the peoples of Middle Earth. His role is primarily to inspire them, not to do everything for them. He didn't want the dwarves' party to be too dependent on him. Their disappointment was great enough when he left them and they had to enter Mirkwood alone. He may have limited himself to offering only the help that was needed, and in this case Elrond could read the runes, so he didn't have to.
Great thread, everyone. Love those orcs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mummpizz
Ranger of the North
Alliance: Saruman
Last Visited: 03 Jun 2005
Joined: 02 Jan 2003
Posts: 3049
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 12:33 am |
|
|
Love those orcs.
Now that would be emotionally exaggerating ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
JestersTears
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 10 Jul 2009
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 225
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:35 am |
|
|
Besides, Gandalf never says that he can't read the runes... It's easy to imagine that Gandalf knows more than he lets on. He has to walk a narrow line in helping the peoples of Middle Earth... He may have limited himself to offering only the help that was needed, and in this case Elrond could read the runes, so he didn't have to.
I think that this is what I was getting at when I left my final comment on my post yesterday (ie.perhaps he chooses not to read the runes). Gandalf is a much more interesting character when some of his motivations are less easy to define and the point that his role is to steer and inspire is a good one.
In my mind this is a very likely explanation rather and although there is definately some (lengthy I think) mileage in Rómestámo's theory about the lost dialect of Gondolin, I much prefer this one. That Gandalf chose not to act here rather than was unable to read the "lost" runes (although Elrond was) seems more plausible, because Gandalf has clearly studied the Elves and elvish culture etc (he is specifically aligned to elves whereas Saruman is specifically more aligned to men). So I'm not sure I buy the lost elvish dialect theory but in any case it has much more of a Romantic and mysterious feel to it.
(BTW Rómestámo, now that you've beaten us at football, there's not much left for us is there? Tiddlywinks perhaps? )
In fact thinking more about it he actually says they are clearly elvish blades and so recognises the runes and design as elvish (and most likely the swords themselves too!)
Mumpizz, you make quite a reasonable case for the swords to be well known by orcs due to recent history. However, I am of the opinion that both swords have been off the scene for many many years - recent use would imply knowledge of this by at least Elrond and in addition that if elves had been using the swords recently (and been killed) I'm not sure that the heirs/family of the wielders would not want them back!!!!
Again it's more Romantic if they're lost for many years. Who knows how the trolls got hold of them - perhaps they have moved from plunder to plunder as thief steals from thief down through the Ages - only for a small hobbit and a rag tag bag of Dwarven exiles to uncover the lost and glorious past...
|
|
|
|
|
|
daesul
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 17 Apr 2004
Joined: 28 Mar 2002
Posts: 352
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:43 am |
|
|
I bow to the weight of so many good points and give up most of my prejudices against orcs . And yes I said most. I still wouldn't invite one into my house.
It occurred to me the other night that part of the problem may be language. When we encounter dialogue in the books involving orcs, they are speaking a very low form of the common tongue. This makes them come across as crude and somewhat stupid. However, it is entirely possible that they are very well spoken when conversing in the Black Speech. Even the most eloquent of persons will not appear so in a language of which he has a rudimentary or to any degree lesser grasp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Rómestámo-
Ranger of the North
Alliance: default
Last Visited: 15 Oct 2004
Joined: 06 Mar 2002
Posts: 2947
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:12 am |
|
|
JestersTears, I am not referring to a lost 'dialect' but to a lost script. The Elves of Gondolin were predominantly Noldorin, yet the Cirth was a Sindarin script. We see from the Angerthas Moria that the Noldor of Eregion introduced new certar to represent sounds that were not found in pure Sindarin, and it is likely that the Noldor of Gondolin would have independently done the same. Thus the script would contain characters unique to the Gondolindrim. Given that Gandalf was such a late comer to Middle-earth, he would not have encountered this script as it would no longer be in circulation (almost none of their texts would have survived the fall of the City).
Gandalf does not recognise the blades as Elvish; he says 'These look like good blades,' said the wizard, half drawing them and looking at them curiously. 'They were not made by any troll, nor by any smith among men in these parts and days; Thus they could be made by Elves or old Númenóreans.
Gandalf 'choosing not to act' is an absurd justification... He refuses to identify the swords? What does that achieve? Elrond identifies them next chapter! While Gandalf's motivations and movements elsewhere in "The Hobbit" may remain shadowy, invoking this reason to explain his failure to read the runes is to my mind ridiculous and out of character. Gandalf is usually eager to share his knowledge, especially when there are no other matters of urgency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Rómestámo-
Ranger of the North
Alliance: default
Last Visited: 15 Oct 2004
Joined: 06 Mar 2002
Posts: 2947
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 6:57 am |
|
|
Daesul: When we encounter dialogue in the books involving orcs, they are speaking a very low form of the common tongue. This makes them come across as crude and somewhat stupid. However, it is entirely possible that they are very well spoken when conversing in the Black Speech.
JRRT in Appendix F tells us that:
The Orcs (...)had no language of their own, but took what they could of other tongues and perverted it to their own liking; yet they made only brutal jargons, scarcely sufficient even for their own needs, unless it were for curses and abuse. And these creatures, being filled with malice, hating even their own kind, quickly developed as many barbarous dialects as there were groups or settlements of their own race, so that their Orkish speech was of little use to them in intercourse between different tribes.
So it was that in the Third Age Orcs used for communication between breed and breed the Westron tongue; and many indeed of the older tribes, (...), had long used the Westron as their native language, though in such a fashion as to make it hardly less lovely than Orkish.
(...)
It is said that the Black Speech was devised by Sauron in the Dark Years, and that he had desired to make it the language of all those that served him, but he failed in that purpose.
He notes that words from the Black Speech passed into Orkish dialects, but only the Orcs of Barad-dûr, the Captains of Mordor and the Olog-hai used it as a language.
Thus, it is more likely that the examples we have of Orc Speech in Westron actually portrays them in a better light than if we had more of them (translated) speaking in their tribal tongues or Black Speech. Certainly the curse of the Mordor-Orc Uglúk u bagronk sha pushdug Saruman-glob búbhosh skai ("Uglúk to the cesspool, sha! the dungfilth; the great Saruman-fool, skai!" HOME XII) will not win any prizes for public speaking .
|
|
|
|
|
|
JestersTears
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 10 Jul 2009
Joined: 24 Dec 2002
Posts: 225
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 8:34 am |
|
|
Rómestámo - many apologies. I did mean writing when I said dialect - I guess this was a very poor choice of words. I like your theory about the blades being inscribed with a Gondolin based script, but I still like the idea that Gandalf might choose not to say anything. you are right in saying "OK so what's the point of that then?" but I think that's why I like it - who knows what motivates a wizard at all times?
I'm glad you picked up the ref from the Hobbit (I'm currently at work and not sure what the exact words were) which I think probably supports your explanation much more closely. From this phrase, I think it clearly leans to the fact that Gandalf recognises the blades as being Elvish influenced but does not quite recognise them for what they are. And there isn't a hint in this speech that he's holding back. Again it goes back to the time of writing when Gandalf is simply a wizard in a sideline story who interacts with some of the characters and events of the wider mythology.
Of course it could be that he simply forgot? (like the password for Moria - although I'm not sure if it's clear he ever "knew" that - or the way through the mines)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shipwright*s_Apprentice
Shield Bearer
Alliance: default (female)
Last Visited: 19 Apr 2003
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 258
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 12:31 pm |
|
|
IMO either scenario is possible: that Gandalf couldn't read the runes, or that he chose to let Elrond identify them. My original comments said so, but in the meantime Rómestámo posted a much more learned answer, so I deleted that part before I posted my reply. I had mentioned that runes may have symbolic as well as phonic meanings, and that the runes on the swords may have been put there to magically enhance the swords' properties, rather than to identify them, so their meanings might be somewhat cryptic. (They are unlikely to say anything as straightforward as 'This is the sword Orcrist, if found please return to Gondolin.) The information about ancient runes and languages was ably supplied by Rómestámo and is very convincing.
But IMO it's not absurd that Gandalf would chose to say nothing. Part of the 'back story' that Tolkien invented in order to fit The Hobbit into LoTR implies that Gandalf used his powers of inspiration to persuade Thorin to get the 'Smaug expedition' together and to convince Bilbo to go along. Gandalf's reason was that he knew Sauron was plotting war, and the north was weak and open for an attack.
I like the idea that Gandalf's mission is to work primarily by inspiring others, not only because it explains so much in LoTR, but because it's an elegant way of explaining Gandalf's role in The Hobbit.
Gandalf would have been a master at the subtle nuances needed to kindle and maintain the determination of Bilbo and the Dwarves. If he made himself seem totally indispensable to their quest, they might lose heart when he left them to face Mirkwood and the dragon alone. This is why IMO it's not implausible that he might sometimes appear to be a little less learned and a little less competent that he actually was.
But I still think he would puzzle quietly over the runes all the way to Rivendell, even if they were difficult. I could believe him being secretive if he had a reason, but never lacking in curiosity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shipwright*s_Apprentice
Shield Bearer
Alliance: default (female)
Last Visited: 19 Apr 2003
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 258
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2003 12:45 pm |
|
|
Orc speech: Here's another comment from Tolkien, from Appendix F, to add to Rómestámo's.
'But Orcs and Trolls spoke as they would, without love of words or things; and their language was actually more degraded and filthy than I have shown it. I do not suppose that any will wish for a closer rendering, though models are easy to find. Much the same sort of talk can still be heard among the orc-minded; dreary and repetitive with hatred and contempt, too long removed from good to retain even verbal vigour, save in the ears of those to whom only the squalid sounds strong.'
I think I was waiting in line behind a couple of these people at 7-11 last week. It's amazing how some people can construct complete sentences from variations on just two obscenities.
So daesul, I'm afraid the Orcs' talents don't include public speaking - or hygiene, for that matter.
Love those orcs. Upon reflection, I would like to retract this statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
daesul
Shield Bearer
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 17 Apr 2004
Joined: 28 Mar 2002
Posts: 352
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2003 4:39 am |
|
|
Ah ha! So it seems unlikely that the various orcish dialects would have the capacity to support a rich oral tradition. A language "...scarcely sufficient even for their own needs..." could not be used to pass on their history from one generation to the next. And if they spoke "...without love of words or things...", it seems unlikely they would even have the desire to compose, recite, or listen to epic poems and the like. So I think I'm back to wondering (regardless of the episode in The Hobbit) how the orcs kept their history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
  |
|
Goto:
|
|
| Goto page 1, 2 Next |
|
|
| The time now is Fri Sep 3, 2010 8:15 am ... All times are GMT - 8 Hours
|
|
| |
Give daesul a Premiere Membership!
