# Breeding



## Goldilocks Gamgee (Aug 22, 2022)

So, orcs and humans can breed, at least for Saruman. Does this mean that human-dwarf, human-elf, and elf-dwarf hybrids are also possible? I've been wondering this for a while now.


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 22, 2022)

Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> So, orcs and humans can breed, at least for Saruman. Does this mean that human-dwarf, human-elf, and elf-dwarf hybrids are also possible? I've been wondering this for a while now.


Human-elf is definitely possible - Elrond, Elros, Arwen, etc.

Don't know about the rest, but Elf-Maia is also possible - Lúthien Tinúviel, anyone?


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 22, 2022)

I'd think Dwarf-anything would be out. But Saruman was apparently doing human-orc, so who knows?


----------



## Goldilocks Gamgee (Aug 22, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I'd think Dwarf-anything would be out.


Peter Jackson obviously disagrees.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 22, 2022)

Hmm. You're right-- that orc clearly finds Kili attractive. 🤔


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 22, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Hmm. You're right-- that orc clearly finds Kili attractive. 🤔





Goldilocks Gamgee said:


>



I found that scene beautiful - Tauriel's words about love hurting so much, acts as a direct contrast to Thranduil's earlier words that her love for Kili "isn't real". I daresay, Thranduil had a change of heart in the moment of Kili's fall, and after.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 22, 2022)




----------



## Ent (Aug 22, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Hmm. You're right-- that orc clearly finds Kili attractive. 🤔



which does not mean they could successfully breed. Of course - his dwarves overall are just a little too 'human' in a way.
Dwarves, made by Aule of earth and stone, are entirely different than the Elves and Men of Eru's creation.
One wonders.
Even of they could breed inter-species, would the offspring be sterile, much as the product of a horse and a donkey, who can produce hinnies or mules, but those offspring cannot reproduce any further?

THWACK. To the Great Halls with you, oh thoughts..!


----------



## Halasían (Aug 23, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> ... But Saruman was apparently doing human-orc, so who knows?


I had always interpreted Sarumann's bonding of Dunlanding and Orc was in various degrees of experimentation as he worked to perfect the Uruk-Hai. I'd think there would be more Orcish blends and more mannish blends, of which I thought that squint-eyed southerner at the Prancing pony was more mannish with orcish features. Just my head-canon on that.


----------



## Ent (Aug 23, 2022)

Halasían said:


> I had always interpreted Sarumann's bonding of Dunlanding and Orc was in various degrees of experimentation as he worked to perfect the Uruk-Hai. I'd think there would be more Orcish blends and more mannish blends, of which I thought that squint-eyed southerner at the Prancing pony was more mannish with orcish features. Just my head-canon on that.



Hum. From what I'm reading here, the original Uruk-hai were Sauron's and their name was given them by Sauron... "a new strain of Orcs bred by him in Mordor towards the end of the Third Age...created by the blending of the races of Orcs and Men."

"However, the Uruk-hai did not remain exclusively in Sauron’s service. By the time of the War of the Ring a great number formed the backbone of the Army of Isengard,"

"Saruman himself attempted further genetic experiments with this race of ‘Great Orcs’, with singularly unhappy results – creatures known as ‘Half-orcs’ which were said (by Saruman’s enemies) to be the result of cross-breeding between the Uruk-hai and certain degenerate Men in his service."

This is all from J.E.A. Tyler's "Complete Tolkien Companion" - which I don't know how reliable is.

If true, once again it shows all Saruman could manage was cheap copies - counterfeits of others' work. 

Anyway, I'll need to do a bunch of digging on Orcs now. 

(I think the wisdom of the Dúnedain is to bring others to think, and to work things out..! )


----------



## arivista (Aug 23, 2022)

Vilisse said:


> I found that scene beautiful - Tauriel's words about love hurting so much, acts as a direct contrast to Thranduil's earlier words that her love for Kili "isn't real". I daresay, Thranduil had a change of heart in the moment of Kili's fall, and after.


_"You know, you convinced me, your feelings for this young hottie dwarf whom you've met couple of times and who made a dirty joke to you when you've first met - that was totes true love, no doubt about it!"_


----------



## Ent (Aug 23, 2022)

arivista said:


> _"You know, you convinced me, your feelings for this young hottie dwarf whom you've met couple of times and who made a dirty joke to you when you've first met - that was totes true love, no doubt about it!"_



Hey. It was clearly enough for her. 😁 

But I'm reminded of a quote in another move: "there is more of gravy than of grave about you." (Scrooge, George C. Scott version. Also in the book I think.)

Here we just have "there is more of lust than of love about you." 

It's the reason the divorce rate is so high in the world today (if people even bother getting married to begin with.)


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 23, 2022)

Halasían said:


> I thought that squint-eyed southerner at the Prancing pony was more mannish with orcish features.


Thanks. I can at least walk upright!


----------



## ZehnWaters (Aug 23, 2022)

Vilisse said:


> I found that scene beautiful - Tauriel's words about love hurting so much, acts as a direct contrast to Thranduil's earlier words that her love for Kili "isn't real". I daresay, Thranduil had a change of heart in the moment of Kili's fall, and after.


I honestly have no issues with this addition...per se. I actually liked these two. The chemistry was good and they were sweetly written. Should it have been in the film? Probably not. But I find it hard to believe that over the course of 6500+ years NO Dwarf and Elf fell in love. It's theoretically POSSIBLE.


Well-aged Enting said:


> But I'm reminded of a quote in another move: "there is more of gravy than of grave about you." (Scrooge, George C. Scott version. Also in the book I think.)


I think it was in the books as well since they say it in the Muppet version.


Well-aged Enting said:


> Here we just have "there is more of lust than of love about you."


To be fair, we know the Elves experience emotions more deeply than others. I think for these two it was more about the possibility the other represented than lust. One could argue, then, they were in love with the IDEA of the other person than with the person themselves. Which, to be fair, can be the beginning of love.



Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> So, orcs and humans can breed, at least for Saruman. Does this mean that human-dwarf, human-elf, and elf-dwarf hybrids are also possible? I've been wondering this for a while now.


Theoretically. It would depend on their genetic composition. I think Dwarves would be the ones least likely to be able to mate with the other races.


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 23, 2022)

arivista said:


> _"You know, you convinced me, your feelings for this young hottie dwarf whom you've met couple of times and who made a dirty joke to you when you've first met - that was totes true love, no doubt about it!"_


Well - that's a _very_ different way of putting it.


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 23, 2022)

ZehnWaters said:


> Theoretically. It would depend on their genetic composition. I think Dwarves would be the ones least likely to be able to mate with the other races.


I would agree - considering they were Aule's creation, not Eru's. Orcs were corrupted Eldar, but the Naugrim stood as a race of its own, different to the rest.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Aug 23, 2022)

Vilisse said:


> I would agree - considering they were Aule's creation, not Eru's. Orcs were corrupted Eldar, but the Naugrim stood as a race of its own, different to the rest.


Made in an entirely different manner and apart. Yes. Even the Orcs had, potentially (depending on WHEN Tolkien was writing) Elf ancestry, Human ancestry, or a mix of both. This leaves out only the Dwarves (Hobbits being human, technically).


----------



## Ent (Aug 23, 2022)

ZehnWaters said:


> To be fair, we know the Elves experience emotions more deeply than others. I think for these two it was more about the possibility the other represented than lust. One could argue, then, they were in love with the IDEA of the other person than with the person themselves. Which, to be fair, can be the beginning of love.



Well, Romeo and Juliet did have to be in there somewhere. 
(Which, for as much as Tolkien said he hated allegory, his works sure included a lot of.)
But this Romeo and Juliet were not of his invention of course.


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 23, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> Well, Romeo and Juliet did have to be in there somewhere.


Yet 'tis not fully such - one fell, the other possibly returned to Mirkwood.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Aug 23, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> Well, Romeo and Juliet did have to be in there somewhere.
> (Which, for as much as Tolkien said he hated allegory, his works sure included a lot of.)
> But this Romeo and Juliet were not of his invention of course.


lol true. While I understand the hatred for that storyline, I think the hatred is taken too far. They were sweet, if out of place.


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Aug 23, 2022)

ZehnWaters said:


> (Hobbits being human, technically).


The Hobbits share in the Fate of the Edain, and the Gift of Men.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Aug 23, 2022)

Vilisse said:


> The Hobbits share in the Fate of the Edain, and the Gift of Men.


They ARE Human, or a branch of it, per Tolkien Letter 131:
"The Hobbits are, of course, really meant to be a branch of the specifically human race (not Elves or Dwarves) — hence the two kinds can dwell together (as at Bree), and are called just the Big Folk and Little Folk. They are entirely without non-human powers, but are represented as being more in touch with ‘nature’ (the soil and other living things, plants and animals), and abnormally, for humans, free from ambition or greed of wealth. They are made small (little more than half human stature, but dwindling as the years pass) partly to exhibit the pettiness of man, plain unimaginative parochial man..."


----------



## arivista (Aug 24, 2022)

arivista said:


> _"You know, you convinced me, your feelings for this young hottie dwarf whom you've met couple of times and who made a dirty joke to you when you've first met - that was totes true love, no doubt about it!"_


Well, that's how I feel about it. Their romance in the movies was forced and unconvincing. I saw no reason why those two were into each other, other then looks, and the script saying so.


ZehnWaters said:


> Made in an entirely different manner and apart. Yes. Even the Orcs had, potentially (depending on WHEN Tolkien was writing) Elf ancestry, Human ancestry, or a mix of both. This leaves out only the Dwarves (Hobbits being human, technically).


I know Tolkien later wanted to revise the Orcs origin, but I strongly prefer sticking to the Elves-version of the Legendarium, just for the sake of story integrity. Human origin of Orcs demands major changes in the timeline, which didn't happen, AFAIK (Orcs clearly existed before Men awoke in the Silmarillion), so utilising it necessarily leads to contradictions, I believe.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Aug 24, 2022)

arivista said:


> Well, that's how I feel about it. Their romance in the movies was forced and unconvincing. I saw no reason why those two were into each other, other then looks, and the script saying so.


I think it was more about what the other person represented. Kili was a chance for Tauriel to engage with something outside of her own realm when they had become increasingly isolated (per the movie, at least). Tauriel represented timeless beauty and someone Kili could engage with by himself, apart from his peers. Tauriel took him seriously when the others, perhaps, did not because of his age. Regardless of sex, it's also flattering to have someone find you interesting and attractive. It's the start of most relationships. Towards the end I think they also felt the longing of possilbiity and Tauriel had to mourn the loss of ALL of that possibility as their relationship was cut off at its very beginning.

TL;DR Both saw in the other a possibility for something new and more than what they'd always had. That both were attractive certainly didn't hurt but that's not all it was.


arivista said:


> I know Tolkien later wanted to revise the Orcs origin, but I strongly prefer sticking to the Elves-version of the Legendarium, just for the sake of story integrity. Human origin of Orcs demands major changes in the timeline, which didn't happen, AFAIK (Orcs clearly existed before Men awoke in the Silmarillion), so utilising it necessarily leads to contradictions, I believe.


I as well. Making them twisted men doesn't seem to line up with them being at the first battle of Belerian and the Dagor nuin Giliath. Still, I always assumed the orcs were mortal and how could Morgoth desecrate them such that they'd lose immortality. But, perhaps that's how they all seemed to breed so fast; they didn't die.


----------



## Wastrel (Sep 1, 2022)

Vilisse said:


> I would agree - considering they were Aule's creation, not Eru's. Orcs were corrupted Eldar, but the Naugrim stood as a race of its own, different to the rest.



Yes, Tolkien himself says in one of the appendices to "Lord of the Rings": "The Dwarves are a race apart."


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

That they are-- since Aule created them and then Iluvatar laid them to rest until the coming of the Firstborn.


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> That they are-- since Aule created them and then Iluvatar laid them to rest until the coming of the Firstborn.



So here's a question for you - and you all.

Did the Dwarves come 'after the firstborn' but BEFORE the followers? (Man). 
OR did the Dwarves come before both.

My current conclusion, just so you know given what I've found, is that Dwarves came between Elves and Men.

Only the "Elves" were the "Firstborn". The Men were the "followers." 

I will re-locate the other text that somewhat cinched for me that the Dwarves came between them and provide it later.

(I'm sure you've all already thought of this, but thought I'd just put it out there to see how far off I may be.)

(And I believe All are called the "Children of Eru" - certainly the Elves and Men - but also the Dwarves, because Aule could not 'give them life'. Eru did that.)

Surely there's at least a dozen other threads on this as well by now too.. I've just not taken this topic up yet for further digging.


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> So here's a question for you - and you all.
> 
> Did the Dwarves come 'after the firstborn' but BEFORE the followers? (Man).
> OR did the Dwarves come before both.
> ...



Also note what Eru said regarding this:
"But I will not suffer this: that these should come before the *Firstborn* of my design, nor that thy impatience should be rewarded.".

He did NOT say he "would not suffer them to come before the ....'followers'...." in any way or at any time. (Nor "the Children of my thought" - which would include both.)


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

My agreement is with your conclusion entirely. The hroa of the Dwarves may have been crafted first, since such was wrought by the hand of Aule, and not by Iluvatar, and yet that which first had life and could breathe was certainly the Firstborn, the Elves, as they were named. And I believe afterwards this came to pass, 'twas that the Dwarves were. Indeed I believe Tolkien confirms this in The Silmarillion, for they are spoken of before the Race of Men, yes? As the Naugrim. I will have to check this once more, but I feel this is the order of events.

First were the Elves, the Firstborn, they rightly named, fondest to the Valar, most loving Elbereth.

Then, came the Dwarves, great craftsmen, Naugrim. They held closest the love of Aule, and indeed it was after his own likeness that they were, and yet Iluvatar gave them life, so dear did they hold him, as all Children of Iluvatar held him foremost.

Thirdly, the Followers. The Race of Men. A race prone to falling, yet a kind and deeply valiant race. They were most fond by Orome, I believe. Yet all loved them.

All of these were called the Children of Iluvatar, and dearly he held them so.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Sep 1, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> So here's a question for you - and you all.
> 
> Did the Dwarves come 'after the firstborn' but BEFORE the followers? (Man).
> OR did the Dwarves come before both.
> ...


I think that the Dwarves were made first but then put to sleep to wait for the other children ti come first. Below are the relevant passages that I could find in the Silmarillion:



> It is told that in their beginning the Dwarves were made by Aulë in the darkness of Middle-earth; for so greatly did Aulë desire the coming of the Children, to have learners to whom he could teach his lore and his crafts, that he was unwilling to await the fulfilment of the designs of Ilúvatar. And Aulë made the Dwarves even as they still are, because the forms of the Children who were to come were unclear to his mind, and because the power of Melkor was yet over the Earth; and he wished therefore that they should be strong and unyielding. But fearing that the other Valar might blame his work, he wrought in secret: and he made first the Seven Fathers of the Dwarves in a hall under the mountains in Middle-earth.
> ...
> But Ilúvatar spoke again and said: ‘Even as I gave being to the thoughts of the Ainur at the beginning of the World, so now I have taken up thy desire and given to it a place therein; but in no other way will I amend thy handiwork, and as thou hast made it, so shall it be. But I will not suffer this: that these should come before the Firstborn of my design, nor that thy impatience should be rewarded. They shall sleep now in the darkness under stone, and shall not come forth until the Firstborn have awakened upon Earth; and until that time thou and they shall wait, though long it seem. But when the time comes I will awaken them, and they shall be to thee as children; and often strife shall arise between thine and mine, the children of my adoption and the children of my choice.’
> Then Aulë took the Seven Fathers of the Dwarves, and laid them to rest in farsundered places; and he returned to Valinor, and waited while the long years
> lengthened.


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> I think that the Dwarves were made first but then put to sleep to wait for the other children ti come first. Below are the relevant passages that I could find in the Silmarillion:



Oh this is absolutely certain. Sorry about the word "come before" used above - that was misleading. In the second case I even meant "come after both" rather than "come before both."

They were "made" before either of Eru's children came. This was Aule's great failure and fall.

They were even the first to 'have life' in a sense, as Eru made them 'have a life of their own' before his Children came - but then put them to sleep to wait, as you (and the text) say.

But the current question is:

Did they then "awaken" AFTER the Elves but BEFORE the Men, or did they awaken after both the Elves and the Men.

My contention is they were 'awakened' After the Elves, but before the Men - between the two of Eru's "children's" coming.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

I agree with you, EA. I think there is no question in that.

In my mind, the Dwarves awoke after the coming of the Elves but before the Followers.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Sep 1, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> Oh this is absolutely certain. Sorry about the word "come before" used above - that was misleading.
> They were "made" before either of Eru's children came.
> They were even the first to 'have life' in a sense, as Eru made them 'have a life of their own' before his Children came - but then put them to sleep to wait, as you (and the text) say.
> 
> ...


Ah, my apologies for misunderstanding your question. In The People's of Middle Earth, there's this passage:



> The references to the legends of the origin of the Dwarves of the kin known as Longbeards (Khuzdul Sigin-tarag, translated by Quenya Andafangar, Sindarin Anfangrim) and their renowned later 'mansions' in Khazad-dum (Moria) are too brief to make the linguistic situation clear. The 'deeps of time' do not refer (of course) to geological time - of which only the Eldar had legends, derived and transmuted from such information as their loremasters had received from the Valar. They refer to legends of the Ages of Awakening and the arising of the Speaking Peoples: *first the Elves, second the Dwarves (as they claimed), and third Men.*



If it helps, here are some older threads you're more than welcome to reply to regarding the origins of the Dwarves. They may have some better answers in them:









Aren't the Dwarves the Oldest?


I know this may seem silly, as most people will stand by the fact that the Elves are the oldest race in middle-earth, but I just want to suggest something. In the Silmarillion we are told of one of the Valar, Aule, creating the Dwarves out of a desire to have learners whom he could teach his...




www.thetolkienforum.com













The origin of dwarves


I was thinking about the origin of dwarves today, and I realized that the published Silmarillion only mentions the 7 fathers of dwarves. ....and he made first the Seven Fathers of the Dwarves in a hall under the mountains in Middle-earth....then Aulë took the Seven Fathers of the Dwarves, and...




www.thetolkienforum.com













Who are the real first born: Elves, Balrogs or Dwarves?


Ok Ok I already know that elves are "The first born" so don't panic Ijust want to specify something. There was a war before the first children of Ilùvatar came on Arda. A war between Melkor and his balrogs and the Valars and Maïars. Dwarves were created by Aulë when Melkor was really powerful in...




www.thetolkienforum.com













I don't understand the logic.


The date of Khazad-dûm's foundation is uncertain, but it probably predates the First Age. It was then deserted in III 1981. Just as an estimate dwarves inhabited Khazad-dum for roughly 6000 years. So for 6000 (my count) years the dwarves population numbers were increasing. Not to mention there...




www.thetolkienforum.com


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> Ah, my apologies for misunderstanding your question.


No need. A poorly crafted question deserves a response consistent with what it asks, rather than what it intends..!! 😁 
Thanks much for the additional information and input.

I do believe the PoME quote you gave is where I read what cynched my thinking... though the insertion of "(as they claimed)" was most curious - which led me to stick it on my list seeking further confirmation "some day". 

Overall I do think the evidence already at hand is 'compelling' as some say... but... but... well, there you have it.


----------



## Tuor Cassidy (Sep 1, 2022)

Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> Peter Jackson obviously disagrees.


Peter Jackson created that Elf from thin air, That never took place in the Hobbit, so who cares what Peter thinks!


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

Not from thin air. Peter Jackson is not Iluvatar.


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

[email protected] said:


> Peter Jackson created that Elf from thin air, That never took place in the Hobbit, so who cares what Peter thinks!



His intention was not to recreate TH. It was to present a story BASED on Tolkien's work. I am thankful for every person who watched it, and came to places like this as a result, only to discover the other, broader, world that Tolkien really created.

And, frankly, I found much to admire in the work PJ did...including some of the 'creativity' he put into his own artwork.

Between you and me, here and there I find a little fault with Tolkien himself as well... especially in his complete misunderstanding and misapplication of the word "confusticate(ed)", used 3 times, and never correctly. Talk about 'unconscionable' - especially for a philologist and language master/teacher.

That said, his brilliance far outweighs his mistakes, so I have chosen to forgive him.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

I've never watched The Hobbit movies, but The Lord of the Rings movies were wonderful.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Sep 1, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> Between you and me, here and there I find a little fault with Tolkien himself as well... especially in his complete misunderstanding and misapplication of the word "confusticate(ed)", used 3 times, and never correctly. Talk about 'unconscionable' - especially for a philologist and language master/teacher.


I'm curious: in what way does he use it incorrectly?


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I'm curious: in what way does he use it incorrectly?



confusticate means ONLY 'to confuse, confound or perplex. To make obscure". 

Tolkien uses it as "counfound", which can mean EITHER the above, OR, when used as an exclamation, is "used to express anger or annoyance".

Note the word "confound" IS one of the meanings of 'confusticate'.. but only 'confound' as its definition of "confuse". 

Tolkien should have simply stuck with "confound". In all 3 cases, he's using confusticate as an exclamation meaning "to express anger or annoyance" - a meaning confusticate simply does not contain.


----------



## Ealdwyn (Sep 1, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> I've never watched The Hobbit movies,


I advise against it


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Ealdwyn said:


> I advise against it



I advocate for it. Let's have a fight. 😁


----------



## Ealdwyn (Sep 1, 2022)




----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Ealdwyn said:


> View attachment 15464



LOL. You win. (but I still advocate for it.)


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

I have intended to check it from the library eventually, but just have not had time, or have but have purposed that time inaccordingly.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Sep 1, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> I have intended to check it from the library eventually, but just have not had time, or have but have purposed that time inaccordingly.


A lot of US libraries have programs to steam movies as well in case you don't want it gave a disc player anymore. Mine uses hoopla.





__





Kanopy - Stream Classic Cinema, Indie Film and Top Documentaries


kui




www.kanopy.com







https://www.hoopladigital.com/



Your library's website should let you know which they use


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

Ah, good advice. I still use DVDs in some cases however.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Sep 1, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> confusticate means ONLY 'to confuse, confound or perplex. To make obscure".
> 
> Tolkien uses it as "counfound", which can mean EITHER the above, OR, when used as an exclamation, is "used to express anger or annoyance".
> 
> ...


Douglas A. Anderson has this note in _The Annotated Hobbit_:


> The word _confusticate _appears in the 1989 second edition of the _Oxford English Dictionary _, where it is described as a fantastic alteration of _confound _or _confuse_. Usage of the word is cited from as early as 1891, and in another example, it is described as schoolboy slang. Tolkien's own usage from _The Hobbit _is also cited.


I'd say
1) The usage in _The Hobbit _is similar to that in the imprecation "Confusion to our enemies!", attributed to people ranging from George Washington to Robert Oppenheimer;

2) Tolkien was using it it in the "schoolboy slang" sense noted above, with which his children would no doubt have been familiar; which leads to

3) It's not "Tolkien", strictly speaking, or even his Narrator, who is using the word, but Bilbo, in the first case, then Dori, and finally, all the Dwarves (apparently in chorus 😄).

I'm sure his children found all this highly amusing.


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Douglas A. Anderson has this note in _The Annotated Hobbit_:
> 
> I'd say
> 1) The usage in _The Hobbit _is similar to that in the imprecation "Confusion to our enemies!", attributed to people ranging from George Washington to Robert Oppenheimer;
> ...



Indeed it must have been amusing to them. And poor Mr. Anderson must not have put it in its context..! (though he was, of course, right there..!)

I for one can't agree... the very philology of the word does not allow it.
And, when I put in context, I cannot see Bilbo or the Dwarves, in their circumstances when using it, meaning "confusion to our enemies". 

They're simply saying "drat these dwarves" or alternatively "drat that hobbit..!" 
This is not 'confusticate' I fear though it could be 'confound'.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

Since it was spoken not by "Tolkien" but by "Bilbo" and others, could it be an intended dispurpose? Just to give humor, and to show that Hobbits were not altogether the most brilliant, and Dwarves were more skilled in craft than words? 

If Gandalf had spoken it, I would agree wholeheartedly that it was a mistake on Tolkien's part, but is this conclusion possible?


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Elbereth Vala Varda said:


> Since it was spoken not by "Tolkien" but by "Bilbo" and others, could it be an intended dispurpose? Just to give humor, and to show that Hobbits were not altogether the most brilliant, and Dwarves were more skilled in craft than words?
> 
> If Gandalf had spoken it, I would agree wholeheartedly that it was a mistake on Tolkien's part, but is this conclusion possible?



Anything is possible. 
I've just an abhorrent tendency toward accuracy when it comes to words. 
(Even though I myself can't put a proper sentence together, quite frequently..!!)

We now have a flock of people misapplying 'confusticate'...
Yet who knows, Tolkien may be the driver that ultimately ends up adding the meaning "drat" or "confound" as an expression of exasperation to future dictionaries for it. And it will become part of the philology of the word. They (dictionaries) are always changing based on current usage....


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Sep 1, 2022)

All I can say is, I personally would hesitate to go against the man of whom T.A. Shippey said "he knew more about the English language than anyone then alive". 😀


----------



## Ent (Sep 1, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> All I can say is, I personally would hesitate to go against the man of whom T.A. Shippey said "he knew more about the English language than anyone then alive". 😀


Indeed. And I do not do it lightly, or without substantial research. (Though I will continue to seek it out as always.) It flies in the face of some aspects of 'reason'.

I've just not found yet anything in my pursuit of philological background or current usage that justifies it yet. When I do, I will promptly change my thinking.
I may approach the research from another direction now, and see if many others of his contemporaries were using it also in that same way.
If so, that may bring a justification, even if the dictionaries and philological dictionaries have not yet caught up with them.

Anyway, it's a trivial issue on which I most likely stand (almost) alone for now.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 1, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> Anyway, it's a trivial issue on which I most likely stand (almost) alone for now.


Sorry, but it is Tolkien....


----------



## ZehnWaters (Sep 2, 2022)

Regarding Dwarves, they seem to have been awake before the elves but weren't allowed to STAY awake until after the Elves awoke. We know they had contact with Thingol WELL before the men awake.


----------



## Ent (Sep 2, 2022)

ZehnWaters said:


> they seem to have been awake before the elves but weren't allowed to STAY awake



Indeed. They WERE awake - fully alive. Which begs the question:
"Why didn't Eru just tell Aule "they would be living in their proper time" ? Which would essentially have been the same nature of declaration and requirement for faith that was given when he said "Ea. Let these things BE."??

Was there a particular reason why he chose to actually let Aule SEE the Dwarves being living creatures before putting them to sleep, and having them put away?

Had he left them as Aule had 'made' them, they would not have needed to be put to sleep. They could have just been put away.

(This is a very speculative question. But there really is a reason I'm asking it.)


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Sep 2, 2022)

Well-aged Enting said:


> Was there a particular reason why he chose to actually let Aule SEE the Dwarves being living creatures before putting them to sleep, and having them put away?


I always saw that as, "anything you can do, I can do better" 😁


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 2, 2022)

Good questions. I don't have good answers. Sorry.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Sep 2, 2022)

Erestor Arcamen said:


> I always saw that as, "anything you can do, I can do better" 😁


"*I* can make them alive." That DOES seem to be the point as Aulë was about to destroy them.


----------



## Elbereth Vala Varda (Sep 2, 2022)

Yeah, Iluvatar was just kind of like "Cool, but can you make them breathe?" and Aule like: "No, I can't." And Iluvatar: "Right- but I CAN!"


----------

