Can Humans, 🧝Elves, and Dwarves Breed Together like 🧌Orcs and Humans?

[Áramandë Amaniel]

(Hobbits being human, technically).

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

 

[ZehnWaters]

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]

"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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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

 

[Ent]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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:

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/arent-the-dwarves-the-oldest.14622/

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/the-origin-of-dwarves.12011/

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/who-are-the-real-first-born-elves-balrogs-or-dwarves.905/

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/i-dont-understand-the-logic.14328/

 

[Ent]

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]

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]

Not from thin air. Peter Jackson is not Iluvatar.

 

[Ent]

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]

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

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

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]

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.