Page 10 of 150 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 35 60 110 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 2999

Thread: Tolkien General Discussion II

  1. #181
    The Yogi's Avatar Kabe difendā
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    37
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Ngugi View Post
    A very common answer is that the reason is Blizzard with their Warcraft-series Dwarves speaking Scottish created the idea, and not heard any alternative story so far.
    I've kept digging on the net and found that a Poul Anderson novel, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_H...nd_Three_Lions from 1961 might be the origin of the convention. Apparently it was a MAJOR source of inspiration for the original D&D game and it featured a Dwarf speaking in an exagerated Scottish brouge. Old gamers from back then claim to have had Scottish-accented Dwarves in their RPG-campaigns well before the appeareance of "Warcraft".

  2. #182
    Macilrille's Avatar Pili Prior
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    2,306
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Might be true, in Denmark and England old-school gamers (pre 1990) call them "D&D Dwarves".

  3. #183
    Aikanár's Avatar yippee ki yay
    Artifex Vault Staff

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dante's other pocket
    Posts
    9,140
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Around where I'm from we had the guys with a strong bavarian accent play D&D dwarves in the 80's, whether that might indicate any similarities between bavarians and dwarves other than both tend to love beer is up to you


    Son of Louis Lux, brother of MaxMazi, father of Squeaks and Makrell, house of Siblesz

    Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.

  4. #184
    Δriël's Avatar Princeps Prior
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ponce, (Colony) of Puerto Rico
    Posts
    1,331
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Ngugi View Post
    @ smoesville
    Already at the end of the of the Third Age? Some perhaps, although I do not think all but Durin's would be lost at this time; however I follow your line of arguments, and will take it into my considerations

    The trait idea is interesting, will look into it


    @ 1st V'

    I deem the Witch-king to been a sorcerer before he became a Nazgûl. I am quite sure there is a quote to be found calling Wk for Sorcerer or even Sorcerer-king before he came to Angmar, which was the place where he earned the name Witch-king - and hardly just by mere chance.

    And there's difference between the nine Nazgûl, so if one (or more) is magician in difference to others, that's nothing odd. The WK was undoubtly most powerful as known, so it ought to be no more strange with him as a sorcerer in his own right than it is they were different in life when they became Ringwraiths, I presume;
    Not saying Sauron couldn't enhance his Nazgûls ability at need:


    EDIT: On Barrow-wigths
    Either they are maiar, or possibly weaker forms of themselves (wraiths) trough Morgul blade magic;
    Quote Originally Posted by muller227 View Post
    Their power is in terror or in the case of the Witch King sorcery as well. They remain but faded men though, the rings do not give them super human physical capabilities.
    Thanks Ngugi and all people.

    @muller227 - On the Ring's of Power of the Nazgûl while the ring's did not give them super human capabilities they must have to a lesser degree enhance what they know in the life as men and they Ring's must also serve as channels so that Sauron could send forth his malice into them. Like the Witch-King in the Siege of Gondor when he was at his full power.

  5. #185
    Mhaedros's Avatar Pudding-brain #1
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    6,895
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    If I may still cut in on the Dwarf-king discussion:

    I believe that even though the Firebeards and Broadbeams lived in Khazad-Dum and answered to Durin and his line as absolute monarchs, that they also had their own leaders, or kings. I think the term "king" in the dwarvish society is very much used, not only for actual kings, but also lords of their own holds and the leaders of the seven houses. This would explain who got the rings, ie the "Kings" of the Longbeards, Firebeards, Broadbeams, Stiffbeards, Blacklocks, Ironfists (?) and that last house, even though only 5 or less of these actually ruled a kingdom.


  6. #186
    Feanaro Curufinwe's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,859
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Mhaedros View Post
    If I may still cut in on the Dwarf-king discussion:

    I believe that even though the Firebeards and Broadbeams lived in Khazad-Dum and answered to Durin and his line as absolute monarchs, that they also had their own leaders, or kings. I think the term "king" in the dwarvish society is very much used, not only for actual kings, but also lords of their own holds and the leaders of the seven houses. This would explain who got the rings, ie the "Kings" of the Longbeards, Firebeards, Broadbeams, Stiffbeards, Blacklocks, Ironfists (?) and that last house, even though only 5 or less of these actually ruled a kingdom.
    The ones you forgot were the Stonefoots.

    Proud supporter and fan of Fourth Age: Total War
    No, TWC, I have no intention of joining any tournaments.


  7. #187
    k/t's Avatar Auxiliarius
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    6,409
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Stonefeet.





  8. #188
    Salah-ad-deen's Avatar Signifer
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    210
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by k/t View Post
    Stonefeet.




    Looool Good one .

  9. #189
    geppetto's Avatar Tiro
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    55
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Hi I have a general question about emblems of armies of middle earth. Why every good race have same symbolism that solar cross on death cult? Rohan, dwarves, dale, gondor and arnor all of them includes that emblem on their flank.

  10. #190
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acers - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    10,015
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Hi I have a general question about emblems of armies of middle earth. Why every good race have same symbolism that solar cross on death cult? Rohan, dwarves, dale, gondor and arnor all of them includes that emblem on their flank
    Perhaps you could elaborate a bit and be more clear if you are referencing films vs the Books or do you mean the game mod?

    Arnor for example has only one symbol in the Books a single many pointed star - no cross
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  11. #191
    Gr1m_4c3's Avatar Ashigaru
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    72
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Mhaedros View Post
    If I may still cut in on the Dwarf-king discussion:

    I believe that even though the Firebeards and Broadbeams lived in Khazad-Dum and answered to Durin and his line as absolute monarchs, that they also had their own leaders, or kings. I think the term "king" in the dwarvish society is very much used, not only for actual kings, but also lords of their own holds and the leaders of the seven houses. This would explain who got the rings, ie the "Kings" of the Longbeards, Firebeards, Broadbeams, Stiffbeards, Blacklocks, Ironfists (?) and that last house, even though only 5 or less of these actually ruled a kingdom.
    This seems like the most logical explanation to me. Family line pride and honour is a pretty big part of Dwarven society (and a lineology in general is a big theme in Tolkien's writings), and I doubt that the Dwarves would throw away their claims to their ancestry so readily. Also, slight tangent here but I think it's somewhat relevant; consider the scale of Khazad-Dum at the time, which takes roughly 3 days to get from west to east gate, by Gandalf's estimation. This might be a bit of an overreach in terms of estimation here, but considering the sheer scale of the kingdom compared to, for example Erebor or Nogrod, the line of Durin probably would have more then welcomed a king of the Firebeards and Broadbeams to help with the task of just keeping localized areas of the kingdoms operating rather then requiring a (roughly) two day return trip simply to touch base with the King. A localized administration of some sort would ultimately be more effective, and who better then the kings of two (albeit lesser) Dwarven houses?

    We've also got the fact that Dwarves tend to hold clan honour in high regard, and generally stick amongst their own kind, so alternatively the Kings of those lesser lines could serve as representatives of their race - another trait we see elsewhere in Tolkien's works - for example, electing representatives of the various families of Elves and subsequent crowning as leaders of their kind. Obviously, different cultures and whatnot, but recycling ideas like that isn't too far-fetched either.

    Three Dwarven rings being in Khazad-dum also does provide a convenient explanation for both why we don't hear about these rings or their owning kings in any form of specifics, why Khazad-Dum was so ridiculously wealthy even by Dwarven standards, and why (Speculation begins here) it attracted something so powerfully malevolent as a Balrog.

    I could be talking out of my rear end here as I haven't read the corresponding sections in a while, but there could be a possibility that Durin's Bane, after hiding in the Misty Mountains following the War of Wrath, was actually drawn to the depths under Khazad-Dum by the dark influence of the Rings. IIRC very little is known about Durin's Bane at the time, but it seems odd to have fled the war only to go into hiding directly under a kingdom of Dwarves that was already considerable in size and power. Being drawn to the area and then subsequently being discovered, at least to me, seems more logical. (End speculation)
    Last edited by Gr1m_4c3; January 10, 2013 at 02:24 AM.

  12. #192
    Ngugi's Avatar TATW Local Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    6,969
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    @ Mhaedros & Gr1m'

    However appealing it might seem it has no support in lore. The only Dwarven kings are those who is a head of an entire House.
    Belegost, Nogrod and Khazad-dûm had a king, each the "capital" mansion of their House, and then after Khazad-dûm turned into Moria the only king among Durin's Folk is the same royal line while no king of either Friebeard or Broadbeams are recorded among their folks after their mansions fall.
    Nowhere any Dwarven lord or chieftain (and there are many of those) take up the title King unless they are the king of a House. Not even the "rogue" Petty Dwarves are hinted to ever had one.
    Last edited by Ngugi; January 10, 2013 at 02:58 AM. Reason: Typos



    DCI: Last Alliance
    - WIP Second Age mod
    | DCI: Tôl Acharn - mighty Dúnedain Counter Invasions |
    Additional Mercenary Minimod - more mercs; for TATW and DCI |Family Tree minimods - lore improvements | Remade Event Pictures - enhance cultures trough images |
    Recomended TATW compilations: MOS and Withwnars Submod Collection
    Developer of: The Sundering - a Warhammer Total War experience

    The Kong Commandments
    - 2nd TATW forum comics | van Gondor - a LotR + van Helsing parody | Who Moderates the Moderators? - 1st TATW forum comics

    Patron of Mank, Kiliç Alì, FireFreak111, MIKEGOLF & Arachir Galudirithon

  13. #193
    smoesville's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    2,792
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Even Thorin did not claim the title of king until he had a kingdom to rule (however briefly). I believe to dwarves a king is more than just a ruler unlike for Men, hence the fact Balin was Lord of Moria, it was probably inconceivable for him to usurp the god given title of king (though not mentioned i'm pretty sure the dwarves were as religious as the most pious in Númenore since they were taught how to work metal and stone by a god it was probably like a form of prayer in a way).
    That Which is Written, Survives|The Last Kingdom |Uí Néill Faction Submod

    Were there but a tree in this godforsaken place i would have hanged myself.

  14. #194
    Gr1m_4c3's Avatar Ashigaru
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    72
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Ngugi View Post
    @ Mhaedros & Gr1m'

    However appealing it might seem it has no support in lore. The only Dwarven kings are those who is a head of an entire House.
    Belegost, Nogrod and Khazad-dûm had a king, each the "capital" mansion of their House, and then after Khazad-dûm turned into Moria the only king among Durin's Folk is the same royal line while no king of either Friebeard or Broadbeams are recorded among their folks after their mansions fall.
    Nowhere any Dwarven lord or chieftain (and there are many of those) take up the title King unless they are the king of a House. Not even the "rogue" Petty Dwarves are hinted to ever had one.
    I guess the logic of such a role kind of depends on what you hold as true canon to Middle-Earth. If we go by the Seven Rings to Seven Kings rule, then strictly speaking there still needs to be kings for each house. If, however, we use seven Dwarf-Lords, then obviously the dynamic for who recieves the rings and why changes immensely.

    I probably didn't make myself clear on this point, but if (keyword) the rings were given to Dwarven kings, then yes, I would argue the Firebeards and Broadbeams still had a king of sorts, though it would be an honorific title of little consequence, and thus unworthy of mention in the history of Khazad-Dum.

  15. #195
    Ngugi's Avatar TATW Local Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    6,969
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    I concur on that, well put; the matter simply comse down to weither we should read that it was Kings who got the rings or lords, and that "kings" in such case is simply "an easy way of putting it" hehe.

    Perhaps the king of the Firebeards and the king of the Boradbeams was simply to unimportant, either themselves living in the realm of Durin's Folk or with their people doing so making them unimportant being reason tehy are not recorded in history; which on the other hand make it wierd that Sauron would given them a Ring, and mroe plausauble he'd given more Rings to more important royal families of otehr Houses, ironically ^^



    DCI: Last Alliance
    - WIP Second Age mod
    | DCI: Tôl Acharn - mighty Dúnedain Counter Invasions |
    Additional Mercenary Minimod - more mercs; for TATW and DCI |Family Tree minimods - lore improvements | Remade Event Pictures - enhance cultures trough images |
    Recomended TATW compilations: MOS and Withwnars Submod Collection
    Developer of: The Sundering - a Warhammer Total War experience

    The Kong Commandments
    - 2nd TATW forum comics | van Gondor - a LotR + van Helsing parody | Who Moderates the Moderators? - 1st TATW forum comics

    Patron of Mank, Kiliç Alì, FireFreak111, MIKEGOLF & Arachir Galudirithon

  16. #196
    smoesville's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    2,792
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    I can't recall but does it actually mention how many rings Sauron recovered of the Dwarves?I have the number three in my head but i don't know where it came from
    That Which is Written, Survives|The Last Kingdom |Uí Néill Faction Submod

    Were there but a tree in this godforsaken place i would have hanged myself.

  17. #197
    Ngugi's Avatar TATW Local Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    6,969
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    3, including Durin's, while 4 were destroyed



    DCI: Last Alliance
    - WIP Second Age mod
    | DCI: Tôl Acharn - mighty Dúnedain Counter Invasions |
    Additional Mercenary Minimod - more mercs; for TATW and DCI |Family Tree minimods - lore improvements | Remade Event Pictures - enhance cultures trough images |
    Recomended TATW compilations: MOS and Withwnars Submod Collection
    Developer of: The Sundering - a Warhammer Total War experience

    The Kong Commandments
    - 2nd TATW forum comics | van Gondor - a LotR + van Helsing parody | Who Moderates the Moderators? - 1st TATW forum comics

    Patron of Mank, Kiliç Alì, FireFreak111, MIKEGOLF & Arachir Galudirithon

  18. #198
    Feanaro Curufinwe's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,859
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by smoesville View Post
    I can't recall but does it actually mention how many rings Sauron recovered of the Dwarves?I have the number three in my head but i don't know where it came from
    It's from Gloin informing the Council of Elrond of Sauron's offer to Dain, most probably.

    Proud supporter and fan of Fourth Age: Total War
    No, TWC, I have no intention of joining any tournaments.


  19. #199
    smoesville's Avatar Pili Posterior
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    2,792
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    So it can be taken as given that some of those would have been from the East. I know it's probably not written but could all three be from the West? I really have problems reconciling the history we know and some of the facts about the dwarves. Is it possible that there are more kingdoms in the East (like the Iron Hills and the Lonely Mountain) and perhaps they are less precious of the title in the East.

    Mostly though i agree with Ngugi, it's poetic licence (Tolkien likes sevens) and likely as not it's the lords of each house rather than an actual king so in answer to your original question; give them the ring if you like, there really isn't any lore for or against though i think more than two rings for the dwarves might be a bit much. Since 4 of 7 were destroyed and there is no mention of any fire drakes except Smaug (who is not noted for consuming any rings) in the West then that would imply that all four rings that were destroyed were from the East.

    It makes a kind of sense though, those three rings were closer to Sauron so he would have had a better chance of saving them from dragons. On that note i think it likely that Scatha was one of the dragons that took a ring but because he wasn't a fire-wyrm he would not have been able to consume it so Saurons agents could have got hold of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanaro Curufinwe View Post
    It's from Gloin informing the Council of Elrond of Sauron's offer to Dain, most probably.
    It is i think, i just couldn't remember the exact wording off hand and if any other appendices etc. mentioned it in more depth then it's likely that someone here (Ngugi ) would know.
    Last edited by smoesville; January 10, 2013 at 07:27 AM.
    That Which is Written, Survives|The Last Kingdom |Uí Néill Faction Submod

    Were there but a tree in this godforsaken place i would have hanged myself.

  20. #200
    Gr1m_4c3's Avatar Ashigaru
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    72
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Tolkien General Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Ngugi View Post
    I concur on that, well put; the matter simply comse down to weither we should read that it was Kings who got the rings or lords, and that "kings" in such case is simply "an easy way of putting it" hehe.

    Perhaps the king of the Firebeards and the king of the Boradbeams was simply to unimportant, either themselves living in the realm of Durin's Folk or with their people doing so making them unimportant being reason tehy are not recorded in history; which on the other hand make it wierd that Sauron would given them a Ring, and mroe plausauble he'd given more Rings to more important royal families of otehr Houses, ironically ^^
    Alright, next step then. Kings or Lords? (Feel free to raise a new argument if you want btw, I'm just finding this discussion really fascinating )

    Obviously the quotes boil down to the following two lines, both of which are from the very same chapter, no less:

    Quote Originally Posted by Fellowship of the Ring, The Shadow of the Past
    Seven the Dwarf-kings possessed, but three he has recovered, and the others the dragons have consumed - Gandalf
    Quote Originally Posted by Fellowship of the Ring, The Shadow of the Past
    Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their hall of stone,
    Now, at face value, the canonical value of these lines is difficult to argue. But, if we look at the context of these lines, it becomes a little more clear.

    Gandalf's quote is delivered as factual, expositional information. It's important to note that it is not delivered in a speculative matter , nor is it a fact that is disputed (to my knowledge) at any other point by anyone in the story. On the other hand, the Elven-verse in the Black Speech is rhythmic structure/meter - it's artistic language, in which creative liberties are taken. Obviously, repeating the word 'king' in two consecutive lines is kind of a no-no, so a bit of wordplay in that case seems convenient. Furthermore, consider the fact that there are seven Rings of Power given to the Dwarves, and seven distinct houses of the Dwarves. Is this a coincidence? It seems very convenient. Tolkien probably wanted to keep the number of the rings of power for each race an odd number, but why seven exactly? After all, there are no five rings (though the numerology is interesting, five Istari? Definately something worth looking into IMO).

    Of course we'd have to look back into the creative development of the Dwarven houses and the development of the lore surrounding the Rings of Power...and I don't have access to the expanded notes, so there's only so much input I can give on that. Still, it seems very convenient that there just so happens to be seven rings for the seven kings.

    Still, why Dwarf Kings and not Dwarf-lords? Surely a simple conflicting line isn't all we have to go on? Let's look at the other rings for a moment, where again we have somewhat conflicting information on the distribution of the Nine:

    Quote Originally Posted by The Silmarillion, of the Rings of Power and the Third Age
    ...Kings, sorcerers and warriors of old...
    Quote Originally Posted by Fellowship of the Ring, A Knife in the Dark
    ...te shapes became terribly clear. He was able to see beneath their black wrappings. There were five tall figures: two standing on the lip of the dell, three advancing. In their white faces burned keen and merciless eyes; under their mantles were long grey robes; upon their grey hairs were helms of silver; in their haggard hands were swords of steel...

    ..Two of the figures halted. The third was taller than the others: his hair was long and gleaming and on his helm was a crown.
    Again, I could be missing something (in fact I have a niggling suspicion that I've missed something in the appendices that will blow this argument apart entirely), but I quoted a Knife in the Dark for a very important reason - the Nazgul, save the Witch-King, do not wear crowns. This is important when you put it in relation with the quote from the Silmarillion, because suddenly there seems to be no conclusive evidence (despite the movies making us believe otherwise and playing a trick on our memories - and I admit it got me too ) that the Nine were given to only kings. If the Nine were given to kings only, then we could extrapolate that despite the prose, Sauron only gave rings of power to the kings each race, and thus the Seven would be distributed amongst the Seven Houses, as they would be the only dwarven kings to account for in Middle-Earth at the time (at least, that we can logically imagine based on Tolkien's writings)

    Instead, we have a clear picture that Sauron did not seek to corrupt only rulers, but perhaps instead he sought the greatest and strongest examples of each race that he could find, in which case of course he would ignore the crippled houses of the Firebeards and the Broadbeams in favour of mightier members of more prosperous houses. Remember as well that Sauron intended to corrupt the Dwarves in the same way as he did with Men but failed in that regard, producing only instead a lust for prosperity and wealth.

    Of course, the information I've given here is only what I could find on really short notice, so forgive me if I missed anything, or made too many logic leaps here, but ultimately the point of this is mainly to outline both sides of the discussions to establish a good jumping-off point for the inevitable response. Personal opinion? The numerology just seems incredibly convenient, and again, niggling suspicion that I missed something regarding the Nine being kings is really bothering me, so personally I'll put my vote down for the Seven being given to the head of each house of Dwarves.

    Which means I'll probably be wrong.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •