# Last Informative Thread About the Origins of the Third Age Easterlings



## norrinradd (Jun 29, 2020)

I want to clarify something, in the one thread, about that I found some information that *just the evil side Easterlings of the Third Age* (at least, almost) were relatives and of the same origin with the previous age Easterlings.

First of all; “_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.)

“_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..._” (Silmarillion, Akallabêth (Part: The Downfall of Númenor)
According to this passage; we understand that Easterlings of the First Age (not in the war, in the east) were already related to the evil Easterlings who fought in the War of Wrath and Nirnaeth Arnoediad even if their hearts were clean. As a result, the Easterlings lived in the First Age (they did not die; the evil survivors fled to the east, where their kinsfolk lived), and in the later ages, at least their kinsfolk should be continued to live.

“_More ominous were rumours from the further East: the Wild Men were restless. *Former servants *and worshippers of Sauron, they were released now from his tyranny, but not from the evil and darkness that he had set in their hearts._” (Unfinished Tales, Part 2, Ch 4, Appendix B, The History of Galadriel and Celeborn: The Sindarin Princes of the Silvan Elves)
First of all, we understand from here that the Easterlings (at least their descendants or kinsfolk) of the previous ages were still (during the Third Age) under Sauron's influence. Their kinsfolk continued because it is called "they were released but not from the evil and darkness that he had set in their hearts”.

“_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*._” (The Return of the King, LoTR Appendix A, Annals of the Kings and Rulers: Gondor and the Heirs of Anárion). What “before” is meant must be the Easterlings of the First and Second Ages. It is stated that they were stronger than their races (appearance stlyes) in the First and Second Ages.

“_In the meanwhile the Wainriders licked their wounds, and plotted their revenge. Beyond the reach of the arms of Gondor in lands east of the Sea of Rhûn from which no tidings came to its Kings, *their kinsfolk* spread and multiplied..._”(Unfinished Tales, Part 3, Ch 2, Cirion and Eorl and the Friendship of Gondor and Rohan: The Northmen and the Wainriders)
In other words, the Easterlings of the Third Age were already eastern tribes that spread around the Sea of Rhûn, and they were relatives with the Wainriders.

“_Balchoth: An Easterling people *akin* to the Wainriders whose invasion of Calenardhon in Third Age 2510 was crushed at the Battle of the Field of Celebrant._” (Unfinished Tales, INDEX)
We also understand that Balchoth and Wainriders were of the same origin.

If I am missing, please correct and add 🙏


----------



## Olorgando (Jun 30, 2020)

The term "Easterlings" is one given to "a people, or a confederacy of many peoples, that came from the East" by the Dúnedain of Gondor, not one these people used for themselves. Now Gondor has been compared, not the least by JRRT himself, to Rome of the western Empire; I say compared, not said to be anything like identical, as there were obviously many differences.

That brings me to my high school days in the US, during which I had Latin during 1970-73, starting inevitably with Julius Caesar's "De Bello Gallico". This is of interest for two reasons: the conquest of Celtic Gaul extended Roman rule to all areas west of the Rhine River (and later to some parts east of it), and was the first (slightly) closer look at some "Easterlings" which up to that time had only vaguely been known to the classical Greeks and Romans, basically anybody who lived between the Celtic Gauls in the west and the "Scythian" Sarmatians to the east. The Romans called them the "Germani".

As Wikipedia gives rather a huge list, I'll limit myself to just the larger tribes of the late west Roman era:

Alemanni, Burgundians, Franks, Goths, Lombards, Marcomanni, Saxons, Thuringians, Vandals; there are many other tribes named, many of which consolidated themselves to those larger tribes named above, and others like the Swabians and Bavarians, which are even larger conglomerates. All "Easterlings" from the viewpoint of a Roman legionary stationed on the Limes border of the Roman Empire with "Germania". Yes, they were all akin to each other in some fashion, but still there were enough differences between them for even the Romans to give them different names (and modern research has expanded this list rather massively; if you want a jaw-dropping experience, just go the the Wikipedia article "List of ancient Germanic peoples").

JRRT had mainly spent his time on differentiating the Three Houses of the Elves, a bit less on the Three Houses of Men in the First Age. For the enemies, he hardly did more than call them Easterlings or Southrons. I think the term to note is "confederacy of many peoples". Even the Easterlings of the First Age are highly unlikely to have been uniform. JRRT does write about the changes in Gondor and Arnor over the millennia. Something at least of the sort is very likely to also have taken place among the Easterlings and Southrons. So the Easterlings of the various ages will have been akin to each other in this loose sense.


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 30, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> The term "Easterlings" is one given to "a people, or a confederacy of many peoples, that came from the East" by the Dúnedain of Gondor, not one these people used for themselves. Now Gondor has been compared, not the least by JRRT himself, to Rome of the western Empire; I say compared, not said to be anything like identical, as there were obviously many differences.
> 
> That brings me to my high school days in the US, during which I had Latin during 1970-73, starting inevitably with Julius Caesar's "De Bello Gallico". This is of interest for two reasons: the conquest of Celtic Gaul extended Roman rule to all areas west of the Rhine River (and later to some parts east of it), and was the first (slightly) closer look at some "Easterlings" which up to that time had only vaguely been known to the classical Greeks and Romans, basically anybody who lived between the Celtic Gauls in the west and the "Scythian" Sarmatians to the east. The Romans called them the "Germani".
> 
> ...


I only clarified whether the Easterlings (evil Third Age Easterlings) who fought with Gondor (+in War of the Rings) in the 3rd Age, and who had evil in their hearts, were related to Easterlings of the First Age. I have justified italicly from many JRRT works, but I think you could not read or comprehend these reasons. I have shown 6 sources above. However, you couldn't think of many things written in other sources just by attaching to the word “Confederacy of many people from the East”.
I suggest you not just focus a point.

“Confederacy of Many people” from the east have been called for the Wainriders (you said for all Easterlings, but it is not). They were all from the same tribe (not confederacy of many _different_ people), and they were all related to Balchoth (Tolkien had wrote that). It was clearly stated, that the Wainriders and Balchot were related, in UT. If there were already more than one different culture in the Wainriders; they couldn't be directly related to Balchoth automatically.


----------



## Olorgando (Jun 30, 2020)

"Related", akin" and the rest are all very imprecise terms. You seem to want to see them far more narrowly than I do, and here I simply disagree with you.


norrinradd said:


> “Confederacy of Many people” from the east have been called for the Wainriders (you said for all Easterlings, but it is not). They were all from the same tribe ...


If the Wainriders had sufficient differences for them to be given a name distinguishing them from the more inclusive (and imprecise) term "Easterlings", and the same holds true for the Balchoth, then the Easterlings are a confederacy of many *more* peoples than the Wainriders and Bachoth were by themselves.

Your lumping them all into one *tribe* is simply a totally wrong use of the term tribe. Wikipedia's "List of ancient Germanic peoples" runs to over 300 names, of small groups to proto-nations. The nine "large tribes" I mentioned above are already confederations of many smaller units. The Bavarians and Swabians are even larger conglomerates including some of those nine. And the Roman term "Germani" is what corresponds to Easterlings. Calling the Easterlings a "tribe" is simply nonsense, as far as I am concerned. If you insist that the Easterlings can be called a "tribe", then I very definitely disagree with you.


----------



## norrinradd (Jun 30, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> "Related", akin" and the rest are all very imprecise terms. You seem to want to see them far more narrowly than I do, and here I simply disagree with you.
> 
> If the Wainriders had sufficient differences for them to be given a name distinguishing them from the more inclusive (and imprecise) term "Easterlings", and the same holds true for the Balchoth, then the Easterlings are a confederacy of many *more* peoples than the Wainriders and Bachoth were by themselves.
> 
> Your lumping them all into one *tribe* is simply a totally wrong use of the term tribe. Wikipedia's "List of ancient Germanic peoples" runs to over 300 names, of small groups to proto-nations. The nine "large tribes" I mentioned above are already confederations of many smaller units. The Bavarians and Swabians are even larger conglomerates including some of those nine. And the Roman term "Germani" is what corresponds to Easterlings. Calling the Easterlings a "tribe" is simply nonsense, as far as I am concerned. If you insist that the Easterlings can be called a "tribe", then I very definitely disagree with you.


CT clearly wrote "akin". You are still giving irrelevant examples like Germany and Wikipedia. When you look at the translation of the book into all languages, you can see that the word "akin" means kinsfolk or relatives. And there is still no reason to explain a minimum of 4 of my 6 reasons (sources given by me). As many say, you are just trying to be opposition.


----------



## norrinradd (Jul 6, 2020)

norrinradd said:


> I want to clarify something, in the one thread, about that I found some information that *just the evil side Easterlings of the Third Age* (at least, almost) were relatives and of the same origin with the previous age Easterlings.
> 
> First of all; “_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.)
> 
> ...


Additonally, in the Second Age: “_The Men of the Alliance were involved in war not only with Orks but with alien Men of evil sort. For Sauron had acquired dominion over many savage tribes in the East (*of old corrupted by Morgoth*), and he now urged them to seek land and booty in the West._”

It is reasonable to assume that those who served Sauron were related or descended from those who worshiped Morgoth because they already evil when Sauron became the new dark lord.


----------



## Deleted member 12094 (Jul 7, 2020)

Allow me to quote J. Tyler:

Easterlings – The name given among folk of Gondor and Rohan to the various races and peoples from the lands of Rhûn and beyond. Most notable of these were the BALCHOTH and the Wainriders, whose incursions into Western Lands during the latter part of the Third Age often threw Gondor and her allies into great danger.​


norrinradd said:


> They were all from the same tribe



I conclude that this eminent author does not agree with you either.



norrinradd said:


> As many say, you are just trying to be opposition.



As many say ? Who else say? 🤨


----------



## norrinradd (Jul 7, 2020)

Merroe said:


> I conclude that this eminent author does not agree with you either.


“_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.)
This eminent author (K.W. Fonstad) does not agree with an author which was given you.



Merroe said:


> As many say ? Who else say? 🤨


You can ask those on Tolkien Society, especially how he left 🙌


----------



## HonoredRohan (Jul 8, 2020)

norrinradd said:


> “_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.)



Is this source (Atlas of Middle Earth) reliable or solid ? Or not ?  Thanks


----------



## norrinradd (Jul 8, 2020)

HonoredRohan said:


> Is this source (Atlas of Middle Earth) reliable or solid ? Or not ?  Thanks


Of course reliable! 👍


----------



## HonoredRohan (Jul 8, 2020)

norrinradd said:


> Of course reliable! 👍


However, in the page 40-41 of Atlas of Middle-Earth: “_The Swarthy Men of the East who had, for the most part, served Morgoth, still lived in Dor-lómin. Those who survived the battle (War of Wrath) fled back to the kings; and in after years the hatred they passed on was the cause of many attacks on the Men of Gondor._” (Not directly as you mentioned above).


----------

