Bharper1066
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed 04 Aug 2021, 19:49

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Wed 04 Aug 2021, 19:55

Remember your history of Eriador! The goblin wars of 2740-2747 (only about 200 years in the past) wiped out almost the entire population of Eriador. If it hadn’t have been for The War of the Dwarves and Orcs in 2793, Eriador would likely have been overrun. So the people of Eriador have only had about 200 years to regain some population- plus the Fell Winter and all the deaths that it brought with it in 2911.

It’s because of the goblin wars (and the Fell Winter) Eriador has become so depopulated at the current time… just not enough time to recover yet
 
MDuckworth83
Topic Author
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue 06 Jul 2021, 03:32

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Thu 05 Aug 2021, 23:08

Remember your history of Eriador! The goblin wars of 2740-2747 (only about 200 years in the past) wiped out almost the entire population of Eriador. If it hadn’t have been for The War of the Dwarves and Orcs in 2793, Eriador would likely have been overrun. So the people of Eriador have only had about 200 years to regain some population- plus the Fell Winter and all the deaths that it brought with it in 2911.

It’s because of the goblin wars (and the Fell Winter) Eriador has become so depopulated at the current time… just not enough time to recover yet
Good observation! That’s plausible.
 
Tolwen
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun 19 Jul 2020, 10:39

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Thu 05 Aug 2021, 23:47

Good observation! That’s plausible.
And fully accounted for and developed in-depth in the previously mentioned article :)
Visit Other Minds Magazine - an international magazine for role-playing in Middle-earth.

Other Minds also on Facebook!
 
coniunctio
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu 09 Jul 2020, 00:09

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Mon 16 Aug 2021, 17:36

Another plausible and suitably 'evil' lingering influence is corruption on the land that effects child birth/mortality rates (some lingering effect of the plague)? Not that Tolkien would go into that in detail. There are certain factors that support large settlements and if you take one or two of these away then the fragile, inter-related conditions quickly lead to a decline. So, perhaps the larger parts of Eriadorian land being hard to farm and cultivate large crops with the exception perhaps of the Shire (formerly Suza) which they were 'granted as a rich and fertile but somewhat neglected land.' (I forget the exact quote).
 
Dunheved
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed 11 Mar 2020, 02:07
Location: UK

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Tue 17 Aug 2021, 11:11

Thanks to all for the reminders of the vast effort and time spent in the Other Minds Interpretations. These are all completely acceptable & reasoned to enormous detail.

( I also am reminded of the original Mirkwood in the William Morris stories. )
I wonder if the reason that Eriador is 'empty' is simply because there is no great centralising kingdom to describe and to interact with either Gondor or Arnor?
Taking the risk of using clues from our own limited histories, was the Teutoburg forest empty in the times of the Roman Empire? Obviously not, as poor old Varus (?) found out. Yet if that battle had not happened would we now believe that a few scattered Woodmen communities existed throughout old Germany? Or simply not bother to think about it at all?
A lack of Historical Evidence on our part (or Tolkiens!) does not mean a lack of history. Eriador is full of people and legends and all sorts of nasty stuff. Believe me, I've been there.
 
Tolwen
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun 19 Jul 2020, 10:39

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Thu 19 Aug 2021, 20:59

I wonder if the reason that Eriador is 'empty' is simply because there is no great centralising kingdom to describe and to interact with either Gondor or Arnor?
Taking the risk of using clues from our own limited histories, was the Teutoburg forest empty in the times of the Roman Empire? Obviously not, as poor old Varus (?) found out. [snip]
A lack of Historical Evidence on our part (or Tolkiens!) does not mean a lack of history. Eriador is full of people and legends and all sorts of nasty stuff. Believe me, I've been there.
For the first point, I'd rather say there is no central authority (e.g. a kingdom) to provide the security and support necessary for growth. There are probably scattered people around (outside Shire & Bree) in that "100 league" radius, but in scattered small hamlets or farms. These are alway in danger of being wiped out be several causes - and this happens (in the OM interpretation) regularly. Therefore, these small pockets come and go, without the ability to reach a stable and lasting existence.

Regarding Teutoburg, Arminius assembled his army from all over the place, not only this small place of the Teutoburg Forest. But you are right, that the supposedly "empty" Germania was full of warlike people. OTOH the Romans were aware of these warlike people from early on (Cimbri and Teutoni!) and tried to bring them under their rule by several means (not only military). So I am not sure whether the area was considered "empty". Sparsely settled sure, but not really "empty".

It is true that Tolkien wrote little on Eriador, but he made key statements that set the larger frame: Large parts of Eriador devoid of organised (and thus lasting) settlements of men. It is the job of the later sub-creators to fill this with interpreations to make this plausible :)
The point that there is no organised settlement in the designated area leaves room for temporary settlements that come and go quickly - either through emigration/movement or death by several means.
Last edited by Tolwen on Thu 19 Aug 2021, 23:56, edited 1 time in total.
Visit Other Minds Magazine - an international magazine for role-playing in Middle-earth.

Other Minds also on Facebook!
 
Otaku-sempai
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed 15 Apr 2020, 15:35
Location: Western New York
Contact:

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Thu 19 Aug 2021, 23:06

For the first point, I'd rather say there is central authority (e.g. a kingdom) to provide the security and support necessary for growth. There are probably scattered people around (outside Shire & Bree) in that "100 league" radius, but in scattered small hamlets or farms. These are alway in danger of being wiped out be several causes - and this happens (in the OM interpretation) regularly. Therefore, these small pockets come and go, without the ability to reach a stable and lasting existence.
.
Well, there's no central authority since the fall of Arthedain in T.A. 1974. Tharbad's influence did not seem to extend far and the city finally fell into ruin in or soon after 2912 (your homebrew may vary).
.
Regarding Teutoburg, Arminius assembled his army from all over the place, not only this small place of the Teutoburg Forest. But you are right, that the supposedly "empty" Germania was full of warlike people. OTOH the Romans were aware of these warlike people from early on (Cimbri and Teutoni!) and tried to bring them under their rule by several means (not only military). So I am not sure whether the area was considered "empty". Sparsely settled sure, but not really "empty".

It is true that Tolkien wrote little on Eriador, but he made key statements that set the larger frame: Large parts of Eriador devoid of organised (and thus lasting) settlements of men. It is the job of the later sub-creators to fill this with interpreations to make this plausible :)
The point that there is no organised settlement in the designated area leaves room for temporary settlements that come and go quickly - either through emigration/movement or death by several means.
.
It's not that Tolkien didn't write a fair amount about Eriador. It's just that almost all of it pertained mainly to Arthedain and the areas it formerly occupied. There is very little about the other North-kingdoms after the division of Arnor, mostly a handful of names and dates.
#FideltyToTolkien
 
Tolwen
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun 19 Jul 2020, 10:39

Re: Eriador and verisimilitude?

Thu 19 Aug 2021, 23:56

Well, there's no central authority since the fall of Arthedain in T.A. 1974.
You're right of course. In my original post I forgot to add the crucial "no" with respect to central authority. I'll fix that in that posting - else it doesn't make any sense at all!

Thanks :)

And the amount he wrote about Eriador (especially Arnor and its successor kingdoms) compared to the amount and level of detail we get for Gondor is indeed small IMO.
Visit Other Minds Magazine - an international magazine for role-playing in Middle-earth.

Other Minds also on Facebook!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Xelforp and 6 guests