# Easterlings of the Third Age and First Age



## norrinradd (Jun 18, 2020)

Are the Easterlings known as *Swarthy Men *of the First Age and the Easterlings of the Third Age Men with the same culture? Therefore, can we call the Easterlings of the Third Age as *Swarthy Men*?
Or are the two Easterlings communities different communities? Thanks in advance


----------



## Hisoka Morrow (Jun 18, 2020)

Yes, they're^^
I'm pretty sure Toikien had mentioned the Easterlings are the heirs of Ugafan in the Simillarion. ^^Yet I forget the specific pages and what I read is the mandarin version. I'll provide the English version soon^^


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 23, 2020)

Hisoka Morrow said:


> Yes, they're^^
> I'm pretty sure Toikien had mentioned the Easterlings are the heirs of Ugafan in the Simillarion. ^^Yet I forget the specific pages and what I read is the mandarin version. I'll provide the English version soon^^


I did not find the related mention which was the Easterlings are the heirs of Ulfang (or Bor). Could you please find in the sources?


----------



## Olorgando (Jun 23, 2020)

norrinradd said:


> Are the Easterlings known as *Swarthy Men *of the First Age and the Easterlings of the Third Age Men with the same culture?


Going by the real world, that is utterly out of the question. The first mention of Easterling in the Third Age as per Appendix B in RoTK is given at 490 TA. Add to that the 3441 years of the Second Age, and that the First Age Easterlings first entered Beleriand after the Dagor Bragollach (Battle of Sudden Flame) in 455 First Age (so perhaps 145 years before the end of the First Age), we have 4000 years separating the first appearances of the Easterlings in their respective Ages. For that matter, the first Easterlings of the Third Age are separated by 2500 years from those of the War of The Ring! And the latter of course 6500 years from the "Uls" of First Age infamy.
Going back 4,000 years from today makes no sense, with the accelerated, if not exponential increase in the development of science and technology in the last 200, then 100, 50, 20 years. 1492 to 2500 BC is a bit better, except for the developments in artillery (and a lesser degree "portable" firearms) in Columbus's time. The Norman invasion of England in 1066 then drops us back to about 3000 BC. That's earliest Egypt and Sumer, and deep in legendary times for China.

But then, I have this feeling that the Noldor returning to Middle-earth at the first rising of the Moon and Sun (in the West!) comparing equipment with say Aragorn, 7000 years later, would not see much development. Rather unrealistic of JRRT, as finding more ingenious ways of killing each other has been a mainstay of human "development".

But perhaps the fact that those 490 TA invaders are called "Easterlings", those of 1851 TA "Wainriders", and those of the War of The Ring again just "Easterlings" seems to indicate some cultural differences arising in the Third Age. So going 4000 or even 6500 years back, to assume the same culture is most likely wrong.


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 23, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> Going by the real world, that is utterly out of the question. The first mention of Easterling in the Third Age as per Appendix B in RoTK is given at 490 TA. Add to that the 3441 years of the Second Age, and that the First Age Easterlings first entered Beleriand after the Dagor Bragollach (Battle of Sudden Flame) in 455 First Age (so perhaps 145 years before the end of the First Age), we have 4000 years separating the first appearances of the Easterlings in their respective Ages. For that matter, the first Easterlings of the Third Age are separated by 2500 years from those of the War of The Ring! And the latter of course 6500 years from the "Uls" of First Age infamy.
> Going back 4,000 years from today makes no sense, with the accelerated, if not exponential increase in the development of science and technology in the last 200, then 100, 50, 20 years. 1492 to 2500 BC is a bit better, except for the developments in artillery (and a lesser degree "portable" firearms) in Columbus's time. The Norman invasion of England in 1066 then drops us back to about 3000 BC. That's earliest Egypt and Sumer, and deep in legendary times for China.
> 
> But then, I have this feeling that the Noldor returning to Middle-earth at the first rising of the Moon and Sun (in the West!) comparing equipment with say Aragorn, 7000 years later, would not see much development. Rather unrealistic of JRRT, as finding more ingenious ways of killing each other has been a mainstay of human "development".
> ...


I think it is wrong to make the sample of years past according to the real world.

When Easterlings were first mentioned in the first age, the fact that they were known as “Swarthy Men” does not change over the years.

If we go according to your logic; People living in Gondor, who went to Arnor after the fall of Numenor and still lives in the Third Age, are not from Numenor (A lot of time has passed, the origins of Numenor have disappeared, assimilated). But this is a wrong logic.

We do not have any source in order not to call the Easterlings of the Third Age “*swarthy*”. They were all called Easterlings and formerly (in the First Age) dark-skinned people. Very clear.

After 6500 years, the name of the eastern people does not change because all of them are Easterlings. As Tolkien describes every age, he doesn't have to say, "Their skin was swarthy." A reader with very little mind and logic can understand this.


----------



## Olorgando (Jun 23, 2020)

Just checking my lexicons, JRRT, besides calling the eastern invaders of 1851 TA "Wainriders", he also uses a different term for those invaders of 2510 (defeated with the unlooked-for help of the horsemen of the Éothéod, the future Rohirrim), the "Balchoth". I would take the use of both terms, especially "Wainriders", to indicate some cultural differences to the invaders of 490 Third Age, and never mind those of the First Age. Gondor had records going back to the time of Isildur (that scroll that Gandalf found concerning the One Ring), so they should have been able to notice differences. Including perhaps differences between the "Balchoth" and Sauron's eastern allies of 3019 TA.

I think it's just unrealistic to ignore developments in the real world, population shifts, the rise and fall of empires and secondary powers, and assume the Easterlings (and the Southrons) were static for 2500, or 4000, or 6500 years. JRRT does not describe what went on beyond the eastern and southern horizons (he had enough to do with the north-western part of Middle-earth!), but I doubt that he thought that the enemies were identical peoples over such long periods of time.
Especially if one assumes them to be warlike, a pretty safe assumption, there would have been wars between kingdoms, and occasional dynastic / civil wars, just as in the real world.


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 23, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> Just checking my lexicons, JRRT, besides calling the eastern invaders of 1851 TA "Wainriders", he also uses a different term for those invaders of 2510 (defeated with the unlooked-for help of the horsemen of the Éothéod, the future Rohirrim), the "Balchoth". I would take the use of both terms, especially "Wainriders", to indicate some cultural differences to the invaders of 490 Third Age, and never mind those of the First Age. Gondor had records going back to the time of Isildur (that scroll that Gandalf found concerning the One Ring), so they should have been able to notice differences. Including perhaps differences between the "Balchoth" and Sauron's eastern allies of 3019 TA.
> 
> I think it's just unrealistic to ignore developments in the real world, population shifts, the rise and fall of empires and secondary powers, and assume the Easterlings (and the Southrons) were static for 2500, or 4000, or 6500 years. JRRT does not describe what went on beyond the eastern and southern horizons (he had enough to do with the north-western part of Middle-earth!), but I doubt that he thought that the enemies were identical peoples over such long periods of time.
> Especially if one assumes them to be warlike, a pretty safe assumption, there would have been wars between kingdoms, and occasional dynastic / civil wars, just as in the real world.


So you say that the eastern people who came to Beleriand in the early ages can be called as swarthy men. However, the Easterlings of the Third Age may not be swarthy people, right?


----------



## Olorgando (Jun 23, 2020)

I have neither an idea nor an opinion either way (I think we've had this discussion before).
What we do *not* have is the following:
JRRT explicitly stating (confirming) that the Third Age Easterlings *are* swarthy.
JRRT explicitly stating that the Third Age Easterlings are *not* swarthy.
And I also do not care either way.


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 23, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> What we do *not* have is the following:
> JRRT explicitly stating (confirming) that the Third Age Easterlings *are* swarthy.
> JRRT explicitly stating that the Third Age Easterlings are *not* swarthy.


But we have is the following: JRRT explicitly stating that the First Age Easterlings are swarthy. And JRRT did not state the differences between the Easterlings of the Third Age and First Age. 

The Easterlings of the First Age came from the then-unknown lands east of the Blue Mountains. During the Third Age, the term (Easterlings) was applied to the various nations and tribes of Men living in the uncharted lands east of the Sea of Rhun. And also, Balchoth and Wainriders are the specific groups of Easterlings, not from different cultures. 

It should be able to establish such a simple logic, an effort, a reader.


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 23, 2020)

A


Olorgando said:


> I have neither an idea nor an opinion either way (I think we've had this discussion before).
> What we do *not* have is the following:
> JRRT explicitly stating (confirming) that the Third Age Easterlings *are* swarthy.
> JRRT explicitly stating that the Third Age Easterlings are *not* swarthy.
> And I also do not care either way.


Additionally: “The Easterlings of the First Age were related to the Easterlings of the Third Age; during the deluge of Beleriand they fled to Rhun and were the ancestors of the Easterlings as they appear in The Lord of the Rings. (Karen Wynn Fonstad (1991), The Atlas of Middle-earth, p. 40-41).”


----------



## Alcuin (Jun 24, 2020)

norrinradd asked me to post in the thread, so out of respect for him, I will. 

“Easterlings” seems to be a phrase applied to anyone with whom the Dúnedain had or maintained contact across the plains north of Mordor. They weren’t related to the Dúnedain, so that distinguished them from the Corsairs of Umbar, who were Black Númenóreans (Kings’ Men of the Second Age) in their origins later joined by rebels from Gondor, or the various people of Harad south of Umbar, who were also Black Númenórean in origin. Faramir told Frodo that the Dúnedain of Gondor divided Men into the High Men, the Dúnedain themselves, the Middle Men, like the Rohirrim and their northern kin (such as the people of Dale or Vales of Anduin), and the Men of Darkness, allies of Sauron. The Black Númenóreans were, like the Men of Gondor, somewhere between High and Middle, but the Black Númenóreans were Men of Darkness because of their fealty to Sauron and enmity with Gondor. The unrelated Easterlings they considered Men of Darkness. 

Were the “Easterlings” of _The Silmarillion_ the same as the “Easterlings” of _LotR_? Most of the Men who participated in the War of Wrath were killed: the Edain (and Drúedain) ancestors of the Dúnedain were few in number, and they were on the winning side. The “Easterlings” of _The Silmarillion_ fought on both sides: the people of Bór remained faithful to the Eldar and Edain, while the people of Ulfang sided with Morgoth. But _Silmarillion_ does say that many Easterlings fled the Nirnaeth Arnoediad and returned over the Blue Mountains, so I guess these could be the ancestors of some Third Age Easterlings. 

The War of Wrath was a battle fought with armies of “gods” (angelic and demonic powers), Elves, Orcs, and Men. The Orcs were mostly slaughtered, and so, I expect, were most of the Men. Had there been any survivors of Bór’s folk, they would also have been invited to Númenor, for they were faithful allies of the Elves and Edain; but the tale seems to indicate that none remained. The Drúedain are specifically mentioned as surviving as only a few families that immigrated to Númenor: I think that since they were specifically mentioned, and it is specifically mentioned that survivors of the Haleth’s folk (the Second House of the Edain) were few in number, there were no survivors of Bór’s folk. Ulfang’s folk, if I remember correctly, were mostly moved to Hithlum, which sank beneath the waves in the ruin of Beleriand: I suppose there might have been survivors, but none are mentioned. 

Let’s put the question another way and consider how we might answer it: Are the Dunlendings of the late Third Age members of the Second House of the Edain? Are the Rohirrim members of the Third House? “No” in both instances: they are akin to the Edain in their origins, but they are definitely not the same people as their ancient kinsmen. The same is true of the Men of the Vales of Anduin and the Men of Dale: akin, but not the same. The Bree-folk always held that they were not Dúnedain. However, if we ask, are the Drúedain same? then our answer is a little different: Yes, I think some are. For one thing, some of the Drúedain survivors settled in the White Mountains (_Unfinished Tales_, “Drúedain”), others went to Númenor. The Númenórean Drúedain begged Tar-Aldarion not to sail to Middle-earth, and after that slowly returned to Middle-earth until the few remaining left soon after Sauron arrived. I suspect the ancestors of Ghân-buri-Ghân are among these emigrants who returned from Númenor, and that at first, the Kings and Dúnedain of Gondor recognized them as descendents of their First Age allies and perhaps even fellow Númenóreans, though that memory seems to have waned in the Third Age. 

The Easterlings of the middle to late Third Age do recall the waves of nomadic people that ventured into Europe, raided, and many settled. The Wainriders and Balchoth of the Third Age seem to me to be two different groups of people, as different say as Turks and Huns (Magyars), but both “Easterlings” because both came from beyond the Sea of Rhûn. For example, to older Southerners in the United States, anyone who comes from a state that remained in the Union during the Civil War is a “Yankee”, whether he’s from New England, New York, Ohio, Iowa or Minnesota, even if his family immigrated in the twentieth century, long after the Civil War ended; but to folk in Colombia or Mexico, anyone from the United States is a _yanqui_, even if he comes from Hawaii; and when last I visited England, I was a “Yank” to everyone else. I think “Easterling” is a term of similar sort. 

Don’t overlook that Gondor identified people from Khand as a separate group distinct from Umbar, Harad, and the Easterlings, probably because they were next-door-neighbors of South Gondor, formerly firmly in Gondor’s territory, trading with (and occasionally fighting with!) Gondor for most of the Third Age. I don’t think the people of Khand were related to the people of Gondor (though they might have been related to the Black Númenóreans).

In “The Steward and the King” in _RotK_, Aragorn pardons “the Easterlings that had given themselves up, and sent them away free.” Maybe that’s one group of people, one culture or polity; but in the same sentence, “he made peace with the peoples of Harad,” indicating that they may be comprised of several polities (Umbar and others, certainly). Perhaps only one of Sauron’s allies east of Rhûn provided troops while several of his allies south of Umbar did. 

Finally, let’s consider one more group in the late Third Age, the Dúnedain themselves and their southern kinfolk, the Black Númenóreans. All are descendents of Númenórean settlers returned to Middle-earth; but the Black Númenóreans are more interrelated to the people who lived with and near them, while the Dúnedain of Gondor were less intermixed, and remnant of the Dúnedain of Arnor seem mostly to have held themselves aloof from intermarriage with others. The Dúnedain of Arnor and of Gondor recognized one another as close kin even after a few thousand years, but I think that was because they originally came from the same polity, the Kingdom of Elendil; still they also recognized distant kinship with the Black Númenóreans, such as the Corsairs of Umbar, many of whom were descendents of rebels from Gondor who were followers of Castamir the Usurper. There seems much less recognition of kinship with the “peoples of Harad” who were also distantly related descendents of the Kings’ Men of Númenor, though Queen Berúthiel was part of that folk.


----------



## Halasían (Jun 24, 2020)

Gando, you have a way of convoluting a question by saying a lot to finish with an "I don't care". 

As far as the Easterings of the Third Age, I for some reason had it in my mind based on what was written that the 'Easterlings' was a term that included all the peoples that resided east of Rhun. Balchoth was likely a specific clan (or 'house') of Easterlings, and the greater Easterling nation structured similarly, for example, to the Sioux Nation. You had the Yankton, the Dakota, and the Lakota, along with sub-tribes of each. 'Wainriders' I saw as a clan or clans of Easterlings who had perfected some sort of wheeled tech for warfare, not as a clan unto itself. Anyway, my 2¢ worth of a lot of nothing. 

_Edited to circumvent any misconception that may come up with my example. I am not implying that the Easterlings are anything at all like the Sioux. It was an example of the various clans and sub clans of a distinct people._


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 25, 2020)

Alcuin said:


> there were no survivors of Bór’s folk. Ulfang’s folk, if I remember correctly, were mostly moved to Hithlum, which sank beneath the waves in the ruin of Beleriand: I suppose there might have been survivors, but none are mentioned.




In the Silmarillion: “_And after the victory of the Lords of the West those of the evil Men who were not destroyed fled back into the east, where many of *their race* were still wandering in the unharvested lands, wild and lawless...”_

Additionally in the Return of the King, LoTR: “_The Wainriders were a people,_ _or a confederacy of many peoples, that came from the East; but they were stronger and better armed than any that had appeared before._” What “_before_” is meant must be the Easterlings of the First and Second Ages. It is stated that they were stronger than _*their races*_ in the First and Second Ages.


----------

