What are the differences between 🐺Wargs and Werewolves?

[Tyelkormo the Fair]

Is this mentioned anywhere? I know the werewolves in Middle Earth are different than the ones portrayed in other Fantasy universes like Harry Potter, Twilight,etc...but are they a different breed of creatures than Wargs we've seen in LOTR and The Hobbit?

 

[Vorondil]

I believe that werewolves are some sort of wolf (wargs maybe) that have an evil spirit trapped inside them. Whilst wargs are larger more intelligent, more evil wolves.

However I might be completely off.

 

[Glorfindel Goldtress]

There's speculation wargs are just wolves but a specific name for them. In FOTR, when the Fellowship are attacked by wolves at Caradhras, both "wolves" and "wargs" are used in the exchange.

However, Gandalf makes it seem otherwise when the morning dawns, and he says, "It is as I feared. These are no ordinary wolves." The wargs are referred to as wolves, however, for most of the exchange, and Gandalf earlier calls one "Hound of Sauron." He also cries, "Naur dan i ngaurhoth!", which means "Fire against the wolf-horde!", though the root gaur of course means werewolf.

This indicates wargs are under Sauron's command in two ways: Sauron was known as the "Lord of Werewolves", and the references above indicate Gandalf sees them as Sauron's "work". I don't think it means they are werewolves, but some speculate from Gandalf's language they are. This line of reasoning indicates wargs and werewolves are interchangeable, or at least wolves in this passage and werewolves are.

Conversely, it is also possible none of them are related, and Gandalf was using references to indicate these wargs were under Sauron's dominion and not necessarily to name them werewolves. So it could be simple as these wolves in particular were working for Sauron because they did not have the wills of normal wolves. The Hobbits who wrote this would see them as wolves, of course, having not the words to describe them otherwise. Wargs in this passage are mentioned once most likely from knowledge gained later. Or a term for clarifying these wolves were not ordinary.

Regardless, the wolves' coming in the passage in question were recognized by Gandalf as the hand of Sauron. This could either mean he saw these wolves as wolves of Sauron or werewolves (which could be interchangeable depending on how you read into Gandalf's wording)... And this is only speculation!

Either way, it seems clear wargs at least were wolves under Sauron's control. And werewolves seem to be evil in the same regard but speculated to be originated from fallen Maiar just like Huan has been speculated to be a Maia.

 

[Ent]

Yes, a very interesting subject. There are some other threads around here discussing this as well. An interesting study is to look at every mention of wolf, warg and/or werewolf through SIL, TH and LoTR... and see how many times they are referred to in the same sentence, passage, etc. remarking about the same animalia.
The key term at the end of the day is 'speculation' I think... as when I went through it all once before (though quickly) no clear delineation was really found... and no reference to any 'indwelling' was clearly made.

That said, we do know from Yavanna's song 'spirits from afar' (who we also have no clear definition of but among 'known creation' would almost certainly need to be maiar) would come to indwell both olvar and kelvar on the awakening of the Children. So... 'anything is possible'.

 

[Ent]

So I did a little re-reading, and browsed the information Foster puts in his Guide and Taylor in his Companion.

They are all said to be of the 'wolf-race'. Taylor makes a contradictory statement when he says the Wargs are phantasms and so can't abide the sun and daylight. He writes Carcaroth, offspring of Drauglin, as the wolf (also calls him a werewolf) taken to be bred to deal with Huan. Why is he being contradictory? Because we know the wargs in TH attacked the group in the daylight, and he doesn't cover off why they were able to do that. (I think he assumes it because the wargs attacking in LoTR 1 attacked at night, and the aftermath.)

Foster covers all this off by saying the wargs in Book 1 LoTR don't seem to be 'true wargs' because they 'were west of the Misty Mountains and weren't real.' I have no clue how or why he concludes they 'weren't real'. I'll need to read his referenced passage and figure it out but I suspect it's the ones encountered by the Company after the council of Elrond and before they reach the Moria gates.

But now we have: Wolves, Werewolves, real Wargs, and fake, unreal Wargs.
Conclusion from that: 3 are all from the wolf-family, and one isn't a true Warg anyway and 'isn't real' so we don't need to worry about it.
(For something 'not real' they certainly seem to have been effective. I suspect Foster used an unfortunate word choice there. not conveying his meaning well..!! Needed an editor.)

All to say: "anything is possible." Oh wait... I already said that above.

 

[Þráinn Þórhallsson]

Sadly this is one of those subject were Tolkien does not have a lost tale hidden in his old closet that could give he's writing in the Silmarillion more context.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Foster covers all this off by saying the wargs in Book 1 LoTR don't seem to be 'true wargs' because they 'were west of the Misty Mountains and weren't real.' I have ano clue how or why he concludes they 'weren't real'.

Possibly because they'd "vanished" when daylight came; the text is ambiguous, but I don't think it implies they "weren't real", and agree it's an odd conclusion to draw. As for the location, Aragorn explicitly says "The Wargs have come west of the Mountains!", and I'll trust his judgment on that.

"Werewolves" as such are in the Silmarillion texts, and "Wargs" of course appear in The Hobbit, though with a qualification:

. . . the wild Wargs (for so the evil wolves over the Edge of the Wild were named) . . .

Making it sound as if they aren't associated with anything supernatural, even though Tolkien did say in a letter that the incident was based in part on "The Battle of the Were-Wolves" in The Black Douglas.

He'd apparently changed his mind, by the time of writing LOTR, though still seeming to keep different categories:

'Not all his servants and chattels are wraiths! There are orcs and trolls, there are wargs and werewolves;'

So Gandalf, in "Many Meetings". That makes three, if you add "normal" wolves. I'm not sure if he was completely settled on the different concepts himself; he may have been trying to mediate between the more mythic-mode Silmarillion world and the "Romance" world of LOTR.

He also cries, "Naur dan i ngaurhoth!", which means "Fire against the wolf-horde!", though the root gaur of course means werewolf.

I have an old 60s-era button with that firemaking spell:

Can you decipher the rest? 😉

 

[Ent]

Thank you for the additions, @Squint-eyed Southerner . Lends a little more credence to my personal posture. "According to 'canon' (the canon I hold to anyway) they are most likely all just parts of the wolf-family twisted in various ways. No wraiths or phantasms among them... verifiably."

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Well, "maybe" . . .

Shippey goes into the etymologies of both warg and  wraith fairly extensively in his books; worth reading.

 

[Ent]

"maybe"

"Yes.. Or no. There is no 'maybe'." (From 'Twisting Yoda')

Ok, i'll look into Shippey. I have him at hand somewhere...

 

[Radaghast]

I'm still wondering why Tolkien, a renowned linguist, used the word 'werewolf'. The literal meaning of the word is "man wolf". 'Warg' is simply a derivative of Old Norse and Old English words, according to Wikipedia.

If I could ask the esteemed Professor one question, that would be it.

 

[Vorondil]

I'm still wondering why

Not for us to wonder why, but for us to do and die. Or rather: but for us to read and die.

 

[Ent]

If I could ask the esteemed Professor one question, that would be it.

what an interesting topic for a thread. "If you could ask....." (but do I recall we already had something close? the memory falters.)

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/3-questions-youd-ask-tolkien-if-you-had-a-chance.30457/

 

[Olorgando]

'Warg' is simply a derivative of Old Norse and Old English words, according to Wikipedia.

Hang on, here's a statement, and a quote, in Wikipedia that I failed to locate in the indexes to Shippey's books:

"The Tolkien scholar Tom Shippey states that Tolkien's spelling "warg" is a cross of Old Norse vargr and Old English wearh. He notes that the words embody a shift in meaning from "wolf" to "outlaw": vargr carries both meanings, while wearh means "outcast" or "outlaw", but has lost the sense of "wolf"."
The direct quote:
"Tolkien's word 'Warg' clearly splits the difference between Old Norse and Old English pronunciations, and his concept of them – wolves, but not just wolves, intelligent and malevolent wolves – combines the two ancient opinions."

 

[Radaghast]

what an interesting topic for a thread. "If you could ask....." (but do I recall we already had something close? the memory falters.)

Yeah, I remember that thread too (but too lazy to try to look for it).

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

No need. 😉

 

[Vorondil]

Old English wearh

Wearh is an alternative spelling of Wearg, which can mean:

• A criminal.
• A monster.
• An evil spirit.
• An evil vile malignant accursed human being.

Rather a useful word, I think I will start using it.

 

[Ent]

Rather a useful word, I think I will start using it.

I anticipate seeing it on frequent display in the '..Epic Chaoticness' thread.