# What are Were-Worms and did they actually exist?



## Council_of_Gondor (Nov 16, 2021)

Hello there fellow Tolkien fan! I recently covered an often overlooked topic about the Were-worms briefly mentioned by Bilbo in The Hobbit book and also (wrongfully according to me) depicted in The Hobbit film Trilogy. In the video I go through the quote by Bilbo and try to discuss what were-worms truly were by using drafts from Tolkien's early writings as well as quoting renowned Tolkien experts. What do you think? did Were-worms actually exist? or were they part of Hobbit folklore?


----------



## ZehnWaters (Nov 18, 2021)

Macbeth_of_Gondor said:


> Hello there fellow Tolkien fan! I recently covered an often overlooked topic about the Were-worms briefly mentioned by Bilbo in The Hobbit book and also (wrongfully according to me) depicted in The Hobbit film Trilogy. In the video I go through the quote by Bilbo and try to discuss what were-worms truly were by using drafts from Tolkien's early writings as well as quoting renowned Tolkien experts. What do you think? did Were-worms actually exist? or were they part of Hobbit folklore?


They actually matched the visual presented in the game Battle for Middle-Earth II.


----------



## Council_of_Gondor (Nov 18, 2021)

ZehnWaters said:


> They actually matched the visual presented in the game Battle for Middle-Earth II.


Yeah sorta, but not entirely. There's a few things I could point out. They didn't breathe fire in the films, not from what we are shown at least. I think the whole interpretation of worm=worm just proves they don't understand Tolkien's world


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 19, 2021)

Macbeth_of_Gondor said:


> I think the whole interpretation of worm=worm just proves they don't understand Tolkien's world


Nor that JRRT was a philologist of some repute.
Tom Shippey, in his "The Road to Middle-earth", chapter 3 "The Bourgeois Burglar" (page 89 in the 2003 revised and expanded 3rd edition), goes into the etymology of Smaug's name, which has some worm-like implications. And dragons are quite often called "worms", and also depicted as having worm-like bodies - worms with legs, almost. Some Chinese depictions go in this direction, as well as some of JRRT's own pictures.

But then I would think dragons by themseves would be frightening enough without any need to "uprate" them, so to speak, with the prefix "were-". And as to that, doesn't the prefix "wer(e)" usually imply a shape-shifter, with one of the shapes being human? Think of Beorn later on in "The Hobbit".


Macbeth_of_Gondor said:


> ... the Were-worms briefly mentioned by Bilbo in The Hobbit book ...


Having just checked out Bilbo's mention of them in the book, I would tend towards Hobbit folklore.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Nov 19, 2021)

Macbeth_of_Gondor said:


> Yeah sorta, but not entirely. There's a few things I could point out. They didn't breathe fire in the films, not from what we are shown at least. I think the whole interpretation of worm=worm just proves they don't understand Tolkien's world


Oh, that's true. But also true of BfME II. I hate when they spell it Wyrm too. Other settings, perhaps, but not here. The implication was that they were long and sinuous (something almost no artist gets right, TBH). Tolkien showed this in his own drawings.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Nov 19, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> Nor that JRRT was a philologist of some repute.
> Tom Shippey, in his "The Road to Middle-earth", chapter 3 "The Bourgeois Burglar" (page 89 in the 2003 revised and expanded 3rd edition), goes into the etymology of Smaug's name, which has some worm-like implications. And dragons are quite often called "worms", and also depicted as having worm-like bodies - worms with legs, almost. Some Chinese depictions go in this direction, as well as some of JRRT's own pictures.
> 
> But then I would think dragons by themseves would be frightening enough without any need to "uprate" them, so to speak, with the prefix "were-". And as to that, doesn't the prefix "wer(e)" usually imply a shape-shifter, with one of the shapes being human? Think of Beorn later on in "The Hobbit".


Correct, though it could mean they simply had a mannish shape to their dragon-form. So like Fin Fang Foom of Marvel Comics?

Speaking of China, the original writing of that chapter has Bilbo stating he'd go fight the wire worms of the Gobi desert so...it may just be Tolkien had a hard time letting go of his original wording and chose one similar but also related to monsters?


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 19, 2021)

ZehnWaters said:


> ... So like Fin Fang Foom of Marvel Comics?


I really thought you were kidding me with that name ...  ... Marvel has *really* left *no* stone unturned, it appears ... 🥴


----------



## ZehnWaters (Nov 19, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> I really thought you were kidding me with that name ...  ... Marvel has *really* left *no* stone unturned, it appears ... 🥴


Nope. He's a older character (1961), too, so this was before they plumbed the depths of their names.


----------



## Boffer Balsashield (Dec 9, 2021)

As I understand it, there was one (1) passing reference to them in _The Hobbit_, and from the way Bilbo mentions it they may very well have been simply legendary. Turning them into _deus ex machina_ tunnel borers for the orcs was a total head-slapper for me.


----------



## ZehnWaters (Dec 9, 2021)

Boffer Balsashield said:


> As I understand it, there was one (1) passing reference to them in _The Hobbit_, and from the way Bilbo mentions it they may very well have been simply legendary. Turning them into _deus ex machina_ tunnel borers for the orcs was a total head-slapper for me.


Yeah....It was odd.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Dec 9, 2021)

There's also this, from Gandalf, in LOTR:

_'Far, far below the deepest delvings of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he. Now I have walked there, but I will bring no report to darken the light of day .'_

You can take this how you like; I take it as a definite link to the passage in The Hobbit.

It has, BTW, been discussed in more detail before here, but I don't at the moment have the time to look for the relevant threads.

Edit: And so, of course, I went looking for them. There are several. Here's one:









"Riddles in the Dark" Creatures nosing about - Older than Orcs and Goblins?


So, this tidbit of information is both mystifying, satisfying (in a way) and already got me curious. So when Bilbo takes a plunge to Gollum's domain under the mountain, the narrator talks about creatures older than orcs in some corners of the mountain. Could these be the same "Nameless...




www.thetolkienforum.com


----------



## ZehnWaters (Dec 9, 2021)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> There's also this, from Gandalf, in LOTR:
> 
> _'Far, far below the deepest delvings of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he. Now I have walked there, but I will bring no report to darken the light of day .'_
> 
> You can take this how you like; I take it as a definite link to the passage in The Hobbit.


Oh, that's fair.


----------



## Bunny (Dec 9, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> Nor that JRRT was a philologist of some repute.
> Tom Shippey, in his "The Road to Middle-earth", chapter 3 "The Bourgeois Burglar" (page 89 in the 2003 revised and expanded 3rd edition), goes into the etymology of Smaug's name, which has some worm-like implications. And dragons are quite often called "worms", and also depicted as having worm-like bodies - worms with legs, almost. Some Chinese depictions go in this direction, as well as some of JRRT's own pictures.
> 
> But then I would think dragons by themseves would be frightening enough without any need to "uprate" them, so to speak, with the prefix "were-". And as to that, doesn't the prefix "wer(e)" usually imply a shape-shifter, with one of the shapes being human? Think of Beorn later on in "The Hobbit".
> ...


----------

